Lothian Buses and ECB Discussion

[overthewater]

That will never happen, sadly.

 

[VioletEclipse]

they should stop cars using waverly bridge - st david street jn as this could alter the times of the lights and increase traffic flow

Banning cars from most city centre streets would ease a lot of congestion.

 

[VioletEclipse]

That will never happen, sadly.

Well who knows, the council seem more likely to do that kind of thing than they have in quite a long time.

 

[Auld reekie]

Banning cars from most city centre streets would ease a lot of congestion.

Exactly.

 

[Andyh82]

I notice that pretty much all buses from the West travel all the way to the east of the city centre and vica versa. Could ECB terminate at St Andrew Square? Could LCB/First terminate somewhere less easterly? Could they ban private coaches, cars etc from Princes Street?

To be fair, the street runs pretty smoothly mid morning, it’s only in the afternoon when things start to snarl up. The number of buses is quite similar with only the X services being extra, but of course there are many more private vehicles, taxis stopping all over, pedestrians crossing when the green man isn’t showing etc.

 

[overthewater]

Cars are already banned from Princes street, another problem is the traffic from The mound traveling north on to Havonor street and ive seen it a few time, traffic backs up the lights go red the public cross the road and cars are stuck blocking princes street Eastbound.

 

[ScotRail158725]

I notice that pretty much all buses from the West travel all the way to the east of the city centre and vica versa. Could ECB terminate at St Andrew Square? Could LCB/First terminate somewhere less easterly? Could they ban private coaches, cars etc from Princes Street?

To be fair, the street runs pretty smoothly mid morning, it’s only in the afternoon when things start to snarl up. The number of buses is quite similar with only the X services being extra, but of course there are many more private vehicles, taxis stopping all over, pedestrians crossing when the green man isn’t showing etc.

the reason they do east to west is to pick up/drop off passengers on princess street, this why the EX1/2 dont reach full pontential due to not serving princess street, also for LCB to go from terminating at regent road to Haymarket or Tollcross, especially now, would give first the upper hand on edinburgh routes


Banning private coaches/taxis would be a good solution

another possibility they could do imo is for the council to change the stops, the 3/30/33/31/37 have different stops on princess street but they both go south across the briges, why dont they move stagecoach to stop at one of their stops and move all the 3/30/33/31/37 to the same stop. this would only work at the west stop due to rhe congestion at the east ones at peak times

 

[TheEastCoaster]

48 terminates outside like 400
21: if it was shorter this wouldnt be bad but the route is too long
30: needs higher frequency not less along Fort - Musselburgh
48: bit of a long extension, as far as portobello would do
49: not bad idea tbh
140: not along Seafield road as it has too much congestion especially at peak

21 maybe could benefit with sticking to its currently diversion route via Eastfield and Brunstane and have it serving all the stops instead, providing Leith/Niddrie with direct links to East Portobello and Edinburgh College.

140 would work going to Ocean Terminal if it copied the old 129 route, Seafield and Portobello are so close but so far connected and the lack of bus link is very unsettling, if you get the right service like the 140 which serves both East and Midlothian and connect it to the shopping centre of Ocean Terminal you have a more direct service and less changing over in town.

It’s like the 500 suggestion, for those who want to go to the gyle from Penicuik, certain cross city services (21/38/400) have good links and connect very well but certain areas do deserve better services, the 400 (18) has only gotten better and improved over the years in terms of later journeys and frequency’s, if they can dedicate all the money and effort for a service that connects Niddrie-Gilmerton-Oxgangs and Wester Hailes, then I’m sure they could do the same for a Musselburgh-Portobello-Seafield-Ocean Terminal service and a Wallyford-Bonnyrigg-Bypass-Gyle-Airport service

 

[TheEastCoaster]

The right turn from Princes St to mound (and left turn from Mound to Princes St) were removed because of the Tram stop.


..... I use the 300 every day (Sighthill to Southside) I'm very happy with the fact it misses the bridges, princes St and West end .... my only grumble is in the afternoons (2-6pm) buses can be full to the gunnels, even from Newington/Southside, a 15 min frequency, rather than the cut 25 min frequency (4-5 ish from) Southside would be better or even some short workings Nicholson Sq to Airport would help....

The service does very well and can only get better over time, I still think they could extend it down to the Royal to connect with the 21/400 a

 

[ScotRail158725]

21 maybe could benefit with sticking to its currently diversion route via Eastfield and Brunstane and have it serving all the stops instead, providing Leith/Niddrie with direct links to East Portobello and Edinburgh College.

140 would work going to Ocean Terminal if it copied the old 129 route, Seafield and Portobello are so close but so far connected and the lack of bus link is very unsettling, if you get the right service like the 140 which serves both East and Midlothian and connect it to the shopping centre of Ocean Terminal you have a more direct service and less changing over in town.

It’s like the 500 suggestion, for those who want to go to the gyle from Penicuik, certain cross city services (21/38/400) have good links and connect very well but certain areas do deserve better services, the 400 (18) has only gotten better and improved over the years in terms of later journeys and frequency’s, if they can dedicate all the money and effort for a service that connects Niddrie-Gilmerton-Oxgangs and Wester Hailes, then I’m sure they could do the same for a Musselburgh-Portobello-Seafield-Ocean Terminal service and a Wallyford-Bonnyrigg-Bypass-Gyle-Airport service

the reason seafield and portobello arent connected is simply down to the congestion along seafield road

 

[Edirim]

Cars being banned would be great.
Most of the issue at the Mound stems from the fact that the lights at the market street and rose street aren't synched up to when the traffic is crossing the Mound and so cars can't see there is nowhere to go until...there is nowhere to go.

You will have trouble combining the South Bridge routes on Princes street...clearly haven't seen the number of buses that run along that corridor at evening peak. Split stops for those services works so why change it?

Someone picked up on the coaches stopping at Scott Monument and blocking the junction there...the XLBs have been doing the same. Perhaps lothian could bring back the helpful staff and double load buses at evening peak like thye did a few years ago? That worked very well.

Buses from East need to go to the West and vice versa because of the work hubs at either end so it would be counter intuative to have them terminate outof the city at Haymarket or Regent and not go across the city.


No point removing the 33...clearly not noticed it has the ERI and SHerifhall P&R on the route and Dalkeith and Danderhall are expanding...I would think divert the 3 via Laurieston and increase the 33 and move it to extend to Dalkeith Heights and folk will be happy.

EX2 must be doing very well today with the trains up el duff. Certainly noticed a number of X/38s at capacity.

The 140 really should just get extended sooner or later...its great having a link from Midlothian to the Fort but East Lothian and Midlothian would benefit from a link to OT (think someone said that though already so apologies for the likeminded thinking but glad someone else agrees with me).

The 400 is great but at peak times it is damn slow. If the council/roads folk sorted out the orbital route again you could perhaps get the 500 going Wallyford to Airport but ideally you then would have a proper network (like what was outlined in the documents from years ago so buses would stretch from
Ferrytoll right across to Wallyford but going to Dalkeith / Penicuik and Bonnyrigg etc on a varierty of overlapping routes .... will try and dig out the documents as they were very interesting.

Sorry big long reply

 

[scotrail158713]

140 would work going to Ocean Terminal if it copied the old 129 route, Seafield and Portobello are so close but so far connected and the lack of bus link is very unsettling, if you get the right service like the 140 which serves both East and Midlothian and connect it to the shopping centre of Ocean Terminal you have a more direct service and less changing over in town.

This kind of route is badly needed. I know that Seafield Road is slow at busy times but so is that long road in Niddrie that I can’t remember the name of, and it still has plenty of buses along it. I also know that many people in East Lothian frequently go to OT, even just for the cinema, who drive as there is no bus. If a service ran I’m sure it would do very well.

On the note of a Wallyford-Midlothian-Gyle service, I’d like it to work as East and Midlothian to the Gyle area is a pain of a journey but I think the City Bypass comes to a standstill to frequently for it to be reliable - especially if it was extended to the Airport and people then relied on it for flights.

 

[overthewater]

This kind of route is badly needed. I know that Seafield Road is slow at busy times but so is that long road in Niddrie that I can’t remember the name of, and it still has plenty of buses along it. I also know that many people in East Lothian frequently go to OT, even just for the cinema, who drive as there is no bus. If a service ran I’m sure it would do very well.

On the note of a Wallyford-Midlothian-Gyle service, I’d like it to work as East and Midlothian to the Gyle area is a pain of a journey but I think the City Bypass comes to a standstill to frequently for it to be reliable - especially if it was extended to the Airport and people then relied on it for flights.

That is the Southern Obrital route, and has been in the works for 10 years... but its never been forthcoming.

 

[Siemens Trains]

Banning cars from most city centre streets would ease a lot of congestion.

Well, ordinarily you'd think so. But I'm not convinced that Princes St, where cars are now banned, suffers less congestion now than when all vehicle types were allowed to use the road. Admittedly there were three lanes for each direction in those days (one of them a bus lane), but the number of buses using Princes Street must be fewer now than we had immediately following deregulation. Of course we do have the tram nowadays, and some more traffic lights.

 

[VioletEclipse]

Well, ordinarily you'd think so. But I'm not convinced that Princes St, where cars are now banned, suffers less congestion now than when all vehicle types were allowed to use the road. Admittedly there were three lanes for each direction in those days (one of them a bus lane), but the number of buses using Princes Street must be fewer now than we had immediately following deregulation. Of course we do have the tram nowadays, and some more traffic lights.

I think Princes Street would be a LOT busier if private cars were still aloud on it. Just look at the traffic jams on The Mound.

 

[Siemens Trains]

I think Princes Street would be a LOT busier if private cars were still aloud on it. Just look at the traffic jams on The Mound.

Yes, I do agree. But what I don't understand is why it doesn't flow significantly better than it used to. The late 1980s might not be a good comparison, as stop dwell times were quite long in those days and buses could queue for ages at some stops. But I don't remember the street being so congested.

 

[tbtc]

i would say axing the 33 and defiantely up the 3s frequency, the 3 is my local route and is usually always at least half full coming in and out the city (south end) especailly during the festival/peak times where its always full and standing, the same can be said for the 31/37

Something else to consider is how services that go to the city centre but dont touch princes street dont get large loadings, the 35/300 never really get busy. the only services that dont touch princess street that do well for passengers are the 21 & 400

I wonder if the 33 could be for the chop soon - revised 30 at the eastern end and extended 24 and/or 300 at the southern end (especially if the 30 if replaced by two variants (e.g. one version running "fast" from Newcraighall into Musselburgh and the other going round the houses, would tie up with two versions at the eastern end).

You're right about the Princes Street services. Back in my day there were lots of reasonably frequent cross city corridors that didn't along Princes Street (or didn't run along much of it). You had the 1/6 via the Royal Mile, the 34/35 skirting the city centre at Charlotte Square in one direction and the Royal Mile in the other direction, the 17/47/28/29 running via the Mound, the 42/46 running via the Mound, Dean Bridge services like the 18/40/41 and the 81 (and all Fife services) running via George Street. And then the East Lothian services were extended along to Haymarket too, making things even busier. Remember when most of the Penicuik services terminated at St Andrew Square?

You can maybe blame Eastern Scottish for part of this, since they cottoned onto the fact that passengers would prefer a direct bus to the main shopping area and ran routes like the C5 along Princes Street (so Lochend passengers had a more attractive service than the 34/35/42/46 which didn't go as close to most of the shops). Same with other parts of the city (Easter Road passengers getting the C55 along Princes Street instead of the 1/6 up the Royal Mile. LRT/ Lothian's retaliation meant running services to copy the Eastern/SMT ones (e.g. the 30 replaced part of the 28/29 from Muirhouse to Wester Hailes but ran along Princes Street rather than up the Mound).

At the moment there's at least a couple of buses a minute scheduled down most of Princes Street (on top of trams, tours etc), so it's busier than it's ever been.

But who should lose out? You could tag a few North Bridge services to Leith Street services, and Lothian Road services to Dean Bridge services (e.g. run the 37 through to Easter Road/ Leith Links and the 1 through to Muirhouse but then there'd be plenty of complaints from Angry Of Penicuik unhappy that their service now runs down Leith Street instead of going through the centre of the city centre (and equivalent gripes from people in the western side of Edinburgh, unhappy with a routing from Lothian Road straight to Dean Bridge).

Imagine the outcry if East Coast Buses services didn't go west of St Andrew Square?

As for the 140.. I don't get it. I'm all for some improvements between Leith and Portobello - seems like Ocean Terminal to central Portobello is one of the few missing links on the Lothian Buses map - I can see the logic in chopping up the long 21 - I could see a plan involving the 21/30/48/49/106/400... but I can't see any logic in the massive dog-leg that an extended 140 would be (and if the traffic through Seafield is bad then running a Penicuik - Musselburgh - Leith service is going to be a recipe for disaster.

 

[SpeedbirdA350]

But who should lose out? You could tag a few North Bridge services to Leith Street services, and Lothian Road services to Dean Bridge services (e.g. run the 37 through to Easter Road/ Leith Links and the 1 through to Muirhouse but then there'd be plenty of complaints from Angry Of Penicuik unhappy that their service now runs down Leith Street instead of going through the centre of the city centre (and equivalent gripes from people in the western side of Edinburgh, unhappy with a routing from Lothian Road straight to Dean Bridge).

In my opinion, they should take a radical look and change some routes. We have many that mirror each other for a large portion of the journey 3 and 33 from Calder Road to Southside, and 25, 3, 33 from Calder Road to North Bridge). 37 & 47 from Straiton Road (7 from Kaimes Crossroads) to Surgeons Hall (37& 7 to South Bridge). 10 & 27 from Craiglochart Road/Colinton Road to Home Street.

If LB planned routes from a fresh, rather than adapt what is there, then yes, it might hard to get used to at first but they might improve not just timings but service too.

They won't though. I just think about 2005 (I think it was 2005 when they made a large number of changes).

 

[Acfb]

In my opinion, they should take a radical look and change some routes. We have many that mirror each other for a large portion of the journey 3 and 33 from Calder Road to Southside, and 25, 3, 33 from Calder Road to North Bridge). 37 & 47 from Straiton Road (7 from Kaimes Crossroads) to Surgeons Hall (37& 7 to South Bridge). 10 & 27 from Craiglochart Road/Colinton Road to Home Street.

If LB planned routes from a fresh, rather than adapt what is there, then yes, it might hard to get used to at first but they might improve not just timings but service too.

They won't though. I just think about 2005 (I think it was 2005 when they made a large number of changes).

I think combined routes work well when there is an integrated frequency such as the 10 and the 27, especially on Evenings and Sundays.

The Penicuik routes are a bit messy but I thought the 47 could maybe be increased to every 20 minutes on a Saturday since the 15 was taken off but may still not take pressure of the 37 if people want to go to Princes St.

 

[lothian14]

One of the major issues clogging up Princes Street is the fact that, because passengers are only allowed on when the bus has reached the front of the queue, there are often four or five buses queueing up at the one stop. Surely if passengers boarded the bus anywhere in the queue it would reduce the amount of time buses were stopped and causing congestion?

 

[SpeedbirdA350]

One of the major issues clogging up Princes Street is the fact that, because passengers are only allowed on when the bus has reached the front of the queue, there are often four or five buses queueing up at the one stop. Surely if passengers boarded the bus anywhere in the queue it would reduce the amount of time buses were stopped and causing congestion?

The board at the flag policy might not help some, but it helps those who are disabled or infirm. Often, these people are the ones who would be overtaken by 20 or so people to the bus and be left either standing or missing the bus. I do think theres too many buses at some stops and not enough at others, so that needs sorted out. Just look at stops PA and PD for an example

Welcome to the forum

 

[ScotRail158725]

PK has too many and usually causes a tailback of 4 or 5 buses wich blocks PJ and then buses for PJ block in buses at PH waiting to get away from the stop, this is peak only though

 

[Jordan Adam]

The board at the flag policy might not help some, but it helps those who are disabled or infirm. Often, these people are the ones who would be overtaken by 20 or so people to the bus and be left either standing or missing the bus. I do think theres too many buses at some stops and not enough at others, so that needs sorted out. Just look at stops PA and PD for an example

I disagree there, the board at the flag policy imo is frankly stupid and does nothing but slow everyone down. We don't have it here and the disabled or infirm manage with it fine. Most times people will wait at the door of the bus for them to get up to the bus and let them on first.

 

[Tom B]

There are arguments both sides for whether to have fewer similar routes and expect more people to have to change, or more similar routes perhaps at a lower frequency. TfL have recently made several changes on the grounds that their new hopper fare system does not penalise a passenger who needs to make more than one journey.

 

[lothian14]

The board at the flag policy might not help some, but it helps those who are disabled or infirm. Often, these people are the ones who would be overtaken by 20 or so people to the bus and be left either standing or missing the bus. I do think theres too many buses at some stops and not enough at others, so that needs sorted out. Just look at stops PA and PD for an example

Welcome to the forum

Thanks for your welcome

I understand there are pros and cons of the board at flag policy, with the main advantage of it being that it helps the elderly and disabled. With this being the case is there not some scope for some kind of hybrid solution? Eg with passengers being able to board the bus at any point, but the bus still waiting until it was at the front of the stop and picking up infirm passengers there? Whilst buses would still be queued back this would still significantly reduce the amount of time that buses were waiting at stops and help lessen some of the traffic.

 

[wlbusser]

Thanks for your welcome

I understand there are pros and cons of the board at flag policy, with the main advantage of it being that it helps the elderly and disabled. With this being the case is there not some scope for some kind of hybrid solution? Eg with passengers being able to board the bus at any point, but the bus still waiting until it was at the front of the stop and picking up infirm passengers there? Whilst buses would still be queued back this would still significantly reduce the amount of time that buses were waiting at stops and help lessen some of the traffic.

As a First bus passenger who regularly commutes to and from Edinburgh for work, I've noticed serval things with them relating to this.
Mostly with First buses as that's what I get 99% of the time, but maybe probably also occurred with Lothian but I don't remember.

I mainly use stop SD on Shandwick place and have noticed that if an Airlink bus is picking up many passengers and a First bus arrives, the First bus will on occasions open its doors to let people in but then not leave till it's passed the stop and made sure all passengers that want to board are on.
This is not always the case and some drivers will just direct you back to the stop, with the opposite being that in the past I've had several drivers pull up behind a bus, then after a few seconds pull out and drive on without waiting to see if anyone at the stop wants on.
Also, I've noticed that with some buses, the driver will pull up behind a bus or buses, let people off, close their door then wait till they're at the actual stop before letting others on.

The above depends on the drivers and it's a bit hit and miss as to what happens, with no set rules, except the driving off occurring less often these days which is welcomed as I've missed many a bus because of that.

 

[Andyh82]

I don’t think I’ve known this policy anywhere except in Edinburgh?

Anywhere else, if you aren’t flagging down the second bus within a few seconds, it’d be round the first bus and away.

 

[SpeedbirdA350]

Is there any indications on how todays vote with unite is going? I know they said they want staff to accept the deal, but unite urged staff to accept deal last time and they never.

 

[SpeedbirdA350]

I've noticed that with some buses, the driver will pull up behind a bus or buses, let people off, close their door then wait till they're at the actual stop before letting others on.

The above depends on the drivers and it's a bit hit and miss as to what happens, with no set rules, except the driving off occurring less often these days which is welcomed as I've missed many a bus because of that.

I have seen it happen countless times in many places, ie Glasgow, where the bus will open the doors 5 buses down, collect passangers and either pull out of the queue and drive on leaving people behind, or the bus becomes full and told to wait for the next one when some were not waiting for a fraction of the time as others who missed it. Some like it, some hate it but I am personally on the like it band. What grinds my gears however is people who wait until they have boarded the bus, to fidget through their bags and pockets for their ridacard or change. HOPEFULLY now we have contactless payments, this will be less of an issue.

Welcome to the forum

 

[scotrail158713]

Also, I've noticed that with some buses, the driver will pull up behind a bus or buses, let people off, close their door then wait till they're at the actual stop before letting others on.

I find this is the best system to use as it saves some time but makes sure that nobody at the stop misses the bus. It’s annoying when you sometimes get a driver who will only let you off at the stop though, even if you’re stuck behind other buses waiting. I think it’s just a case of some drivers sticking to the only-stop-at-bus-stops rule more strictly than others.

P.S. Welcome to the forum