Cambridge Guided Busway - ongoing discussion and updates (merged topic)

[whole diary]

[stuving]

Do it "cheap", do it twice, they say. Edinburgh (hardly the exemplar) has now "trammed" over its busway. Leeds original guided busway has been abandoned by some of its operators because it is slower than just running buses in the traditional sense parallel to the route, and needs none of the adaptations to the buses. Nantes, BTW^▸ (by the way), had a huge turn-out to see its third tramline open, so much that the tram could merely inch its way into town. The trolleybus opening was more muted.

Tram-train will save us all.

In the case of Nantes, the Busway being a lower-cost implementation of a tram line was explicit. The passenger numbers predicted didn't support the cost of trams - and this was after there already were three tram lines and they were popular. I don't know whether conversion to trams if numbers justified it was actually envisaged by the planners or not, but people did keep asking why they had to put up with much of the same disruption just for buses. These are big articulated buses, fitted out like trams, with similar road crossings, so it should be possible to increase the service level either with buses or trams.

I guess you didn't really mean "trolleybus", if that was meant to apply to Nantes. 

And as for tram-trains - they should solve problems of limited track capacity in some parts of cities. But the two lines at Nantes don't really do that. One never runs on a road, so it is a light-weight EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) with a mismatched floor level. The other is the same most of the way, but has a few tram-like road crossings.

[TonyK]

Having used the Cambridge busway a few times now, I fail to see the benefit of it being "guided".  It costs more to build than a road, special buses are required and problems are created when the buses break down.

My opinion is that a bus only road (with rising bollards or similar to prevent unauthorised use) running along the same route would do as a good a job.

I think the point of the guidance was so the driver could take it easy, and as a means to prevent accidents.

At least five so far...

[grahame]

I think the point of the guidance was ...

As I recall, the benefits 'sold' over a road were that (a) vehicles could pass each other very closely without slowing down and (b) it insured that a future political regime couldn't open it to regular / normal road traffic.   Benefits sold over a train were that the vehicles could fan out at the end of the tracked section to cover a wide variety of destinations where railway would not be practical.

There's a further link at http://www.britpave.org.uk/GBWhyBuild.ink  which confirms what I recall, and adds in some other reasons ...

[grahame]

Construction of an extension to Cambridge^s guided busway ^ the first step towards the opening of the city^s second railway station ^ is under way.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Cambridge/PICTURES-First-step-towards-opening-of-Cambridges-second-railway-station-as-work-starts-on-guided-busway-extension-20140723132812.htm?

[Red Squirrel]

The county council decided to build the Government-funded busway extension as a 600m-long road, not a guided route, after being told this was less risky.

...and so much more flexible - with no pesky concrete in the way, presumably it would be possible for cars to use it?

[TonyK]

...and so much more flexible - with no pesky concrete in the way, presumably it would be possible for cars to use it?

It could be sold to a gullible public as an unguided busway, also availbale for use by other vehicles. What we in Bristol, before the advent of Bust Rabid Transit, called a "road".

[eightf48544]

Had they built a railway instead of the guided bus way they wouldn't have had to build the road and the trains or tram/trains could have served the new station from it's opening.

But that would have been far too logical!

[stuving]

Had they built a railway instead of the guided bus way they wouldn't have had to build the road and the trains or tram/trains could have served the new station from it's opening.

Surely in that case the new station would be on this St Ives branch line, and actually at the Science Park (which it won't be).

[Brucey]

The new transport options in North Cambridge are much needed.  I live in West Chesterton and see the congestion on a daily basis: long traffic queues on the A14 and buses that are totally full between the station and science park.

At least they've realised a non-guided road is clearly the best option.  I'm still yet to be convinced of the benefits for a guided road vs a bus only road.

[grahame]

The new transport options in North Cambridge are much needed.  I live in West Chesterton and see the congestion on a daily basis: long traffic queues on the A14 and buses that are totally full between the station and science park.

At least they've realised a non-guided road is clearly the best option.  I'm still yet to be convinced of the benefits for a guided road vs a bus only road.

Yes, more options are much needed.   On my course last week, I had a delegate who works on the business park and lives about 20 miles north, near the line between Ely and March.   He could get a train from home that goes to 100 yards from hs place of work ... problem at the moment is that is doesn't stop until it gets to Cambridge Station which is about 3 miles further along the line.    From where he has an awkward ride back on the guide bus though the unguided streets of the city of Cambridge.   Result - he drives.

I know someone who live up near St. Ives who often goes to London.  He could get the guided bus through to the Science park, and carry on with it though the streets of Cambridge and connect there into the train. But the bit through Cambridge is slow. Result - he drives

I often give courses on the science or business parks.  Often I go by train to Cambridge, then a taxi to a hotel (if I have heavy equipment) and another taxi / bus / walk in the morning to where I'm training.  But sometimes I don't like the hassle and drive all the way.

Taking the guided bus though, unguided, to a rail interchange is sensible and gives options.  Adding a station on the main line at the business park give lots more options including people walking to and from that station, and also for regular buses.

[Brucey]

He could get the guided bus through to the Science park, and carry on with it though the streets of Cambridge and connect there into the train. But the bit through Cambridge is slow. Result - he drives

The other issue with the guided buses is that they "miss out" stops on the unguided sections.  The stop nearest me is served only by the number 9 and C, despite the more regular A and P&R^▸ (Park and Ride) services passing through.  The nearest stop for the A is over a mile away.  I have a friend who lives in St. Ives and works at the science park.  The busway is great, until she wants to go somewhere else, like round my house.  Result: drives often.

I know someone who live up near St. Ives who often goes to London.  He could get the guided bus through to the Science park, and carry on with it though the streets of Cambridge and connect there into the train. But the bit through Cambridge is slow. Result - he drives

And the last bus is well before the last train.  Final service from London is at 00:04 from King's Cross (on a weekday; there is a later 00:31 on Saturday morning) arriving at 01:25.....but the final bus is at 20:29.  Result: I always* drive to/from the station if there is any chance of arriving back in the evening.  Hopefully the new Chesterton station will relieve these problems for a large part of the city.

* = except last time, when I "accidentally" had a few too many St Austell Tributes from the buffet and ended up walking 3 miles home failing to find a taxi at 02:00 on Saturday morning (my train was delayed, else FGW^▸ (First Great Western) would've been forking out a PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-CBG taxi as their service was also delayed).

[TonyK]

I know someone who live up near St. Ives who often goes to London.  He could get the guided bus through to the Science park, and carry on with it though the streets of Cambridge and connect there into the train. But the bit through Cambridge is slow. Result - he drives

And the last bus is well before the last train.  Final service from London is at 00:04 from King's Cross (on a weekday; there is a later 00:31 on Saturday morning) arriving at 01:25.....but the final bus is at 20:29.  Result: I always* drive to/from the station if there is any chance of arriving back in the evening.  Hopefully the new Chesterton station will relieve these problems for a large part of the city.

* = except last time, when I "accidentally" had a few too many St Austell Tributes from the buffet and ended up walking 3 miles home failing to find a taxi at 02:00 on Saturday morning (my train was delayed, else FGW^▸ (First Great Western) would've been forking out a PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-CBG taxi as their service was also delayed).

I pay Tribute to Brucey for highlighting a problem that affects many of us gentlemen of a certain age.

[grahame]

The other issue with the guided buses is that they "miss out" stops on the unguided sections.  ... Result: drives often.

And the last bus is well before the last train.

I simply mentioned three flows I know of ... but I am NOT a Cambridge expert and there are other too such as these.    I too have been caught by the A not stopping at (m)any stops from the Science Park to the City, but it does of course stop a number of times on a typical run at traffic lights and in traffic.    At present, the last train from Cambridge north (via Ely) is at 00:10 ... so that still wouldn't be your way if you caught the last train from London unless that was extended (they could well do that ...)

Some flows could be met / improved with rather less than a new bus road and station, but together they give an awful lot of answers.   I'll admit to being one who would have preferred to see rail rather than guided bus to St. Ives, but the guided bus is streets (or guides) ahead of everyone relying on a car or on buses on the city streets and A14, and I hope it works in well with the new station, which is also very welcome indeed, and being on the double track main line will be able to be served by a lot of trains.  Let's hope that does happen, and we end up something with the activity of Haymarket rather than Ardwick!

[Btline]

This MISguided busway has got to be one of the worst mistakes in modern UK^▸ (United Kingdom) travel planning.
The entire route should be ripped up immediately and turned back into a railway.

At the same time, the A14 - a botch job done on the cheap - needs to be converted into dual 3 lane trunk road (plus hard shoulder).

Of course, the government have also used the busway to allow greedy developers to build a new town on a greenfield site outside Cambridge, leading to unacceptable urban sprawl.

This is on a par with the bungled attempt to reintroduce trams in Greater Birmingam, where a perfectly good rail route (which could have eased the pressure on the clogged up New Street) has been irreversibly converted into a pointless tram at a cost of millions.

[TonyK]

This MISguided busway has got to be one of the worst mistakes in modern UK^▸ (United Kingdom) travel planning.
The entire route should be ripped up immediately and turned back into a railway.

At the same time, the A14 - a botch job done on the cheap - needs to be converted into dual 3 lane trunk road (plus hard shoulder).

Of course, the government have also used the busway to allow greedy developers to build a new town on a greenfield site outside Cambridge, leading to unacceptable urban sprawl.

This is on a par with the bungled attempt to reintroduce trams in Greater Birmingam, where a perfectly good rail route (which could have eased the pressure on the clogged up New Street) has been irreversibly converted into a pointless tram at a cost of millions.

I agree with one quarter of what Btline says, which is a new Commonwealth record. The winner is his view on the misguided busway.

On the simple measure of passenger numbers, it is a big success. But a reinstated railway, with reasonable bus connections at the other end, would have been equally successful, and less of a problem in a number of other ways.

From an engineering point of view, it has been a disaster. The problems of putting concrete where rail used to be were clearly not appreciated before this scheme began. There were flooding issues, especially affecting a bridge, that stalled work for a time. And now, only three years later, the structure is falling apart. BAM Nuttall say the predicted ^20 million cost of repair is maintenance, Cambridge County Council think otherwise. Having "lost"* one costly court battle with BAM Nuttall, they are threatening a return to the courts. Time will tell.

On a safety level, it has seriously underperformed against rail, with at least 5 serious accidents, the worst being one bus driving into the rear of another at speed. One involved the bus missing the guideway after a junction, the others mainly involve people who shouldn't have been there.

On an expansion level, it could be said that the new bit to the science park could indeed have been done by rail rather than road, but all this involves imagination and foresight. Busways became the flavour of the month around 2005, as Alistair Darling set about scrapping plans for tram systems. Already, they are beginning to look like some of the awful short-term decisions made in the early 1960s. The biggest symbol of this in Bristol, for me, is the rise and fall of the Magistrates Court in Nelson Street, designed in the 60s, built in the 70s, demolished 2014, so affording better views of 14th century St Johns Chapel.

To use the King James Version of Proverbs 26:11:

As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

I am not so sold on turning the A14 into a motorway, especially not if it had a railway running alongside. If Cambridgeshire CC asked the government for the money, they would get short shrift because
a) We're not building roads
b) You've just had a magnificent new Misguided Bust Way
c) It's not in London.

And a railway would have allowed either greedy developers to develop a new town on a greenfield site, or sympathetic developers to build much-needed affordable housing where it is needed to expand the economy [/hint of sarcasm]. The busway is not entirely relevant to the building. It may be the other way around, that the business case for the busway relied on the housing. (Like the business case for Bristol's busway relied on the now cancelled plan for housing in Long Ashton. Pah!)

I'm no Brummie, but I believe the tram route is far from pointless. AIUI^▸ (as I understand it), Centro realised they would not get approval and funding for a "big bang" expansion a la Manchester Metrolink Phase 3, so decided on a "bite size chunk" approach. This particular mouthful is arguably the most complex on the local wish list. It will connect Snow Hill to the city centre, but is strategically more important as a piece of the future network. The renaissance of Curzon Street will provide the obvious next step.