Should bus companies be more responsive to changes in travel patterns?

[markymark2000]

Mod note: Posts #1-8 were moved from the First West Yorkshire thread

it may seem ridiculous, but as previously stated the Ticketer machines are producing huge amounts of data some of which has not previously been available. and to be fair the operators are going to use this data to their advantage and map and forecast current and future passenger usage and ditch anything that either doesn't turn a profit or at least cover its costs.. i use the bus network around Leeds virtually everyday, and outside of the peak/school times passenger numbers are minimal on a vast amount of routes outside of the Headingley corridoor (even service groups such as the "Dewsbury Roads" 2/3/3A/12/13/13A that were once big money makers are struggling for patronage). unfortunately With the rise of home working /internet shopping this situation is not going to change, unless the bus industry can come up with a new unique selling point or some how create/capture a new very sizable leisure market many many more routes country wide will sadly disappear.

Sadly, where the people go, buses don't. As workplaces have moved out of town to office parks or large warehouses, buses haven't moved with that. Similarly many retail parks aren't served. Middlebrook, the largest retail park in the UK with 12 million visitors per year, has a dismal bus service. 1 bus running hourly and 1 bus running a few times per day. I know there has been some previous attempts at a service but certainly nothing meaningful and promoted!

The warehouses, most of them aren't served by buses. Given they work off shifts, they are surely the easiest ones to have buses for as everyone finishes at the same time. 95% of bus operators will not go near shift work unless they are subsidised for it which is bonkers when the shift times don't tend to link with school times so 1 bus can do schools and shift workers versus the old way of working to accommodate 9-5 where the morning would be a struggle with students and workers all trying to get to towns on the same bus. Where warehouse buses exist, they are on closed door services often meaning staff have to get to the meeting point rather than being able to travel from closer to home (I will use Amazon LBA9 for example. If the 14 was made more use of and instead passengers pushed onto that rather than the restricted closed door bus which only stops on Sovereign Street, workers would be able to get closer to home and travel on a single bus journey, as far as Pudsey or have a better, more central choice of stops within Leeds City Centre. Instead no, the 14 runs at different times to the shifts (based off comparing the Amazon bus times against the 14) so workers would have to sit around forever).

Thorpe Park, a growing area which is building itself up, what happens, the buses get cut and are now useless to everyone so anyone starting to shop or work here will be using their car and you can't persuade people out of their car.

In short, while I agree with you the passenger demand has changed, I think the issue is in part that bus operators refuse to try the new demand areas without huge subsidy. They plod on with the same old and keep winding that down slowly. The definition of insanity is keep doing the same thing but expect a different result. That is what First are doing. They need to adapt to the new demand points rather than expecting passengers to follow where First Bus want them to go.

But the £2 fares surely render much of the data as useless? There is no benefit to tapping out so lots of journeys ending at intermediate points are registered as ending at the terminus point.

I know my local Stagecoach killed off what was a busy uni service back in September. The uni had been in 2.5 years of being more remote and now they started to come back and yet Stagecoach used the 2020-2022 data to reduce the service. The uni has since brought back more in person learning for the 2022/23 year but it was too late, Stagecoach already ruined the bus service. They had to revert the changes back in January because of local opposition and the fact the routes no longer suited the university.

The point being that they based the service off current data and didn't take into account the usage of the route. This is one of the issues with ticket machine data. You can follow it religiously but if you don't look at the demographics and actual uses for the route, you will not make good changes. Also think retiming a service by a few minutes can make it busier for example to serve shifts. Ticket machine data won't show that, only customer feedback would and given how shocking central customer service often is, many people are giving up on contacting bus operators as nothing is being done with the feedback.

 

[Ken H]

Sadly, where the people go, buses don't. As workplaces have moved out of town to office parks or large warehouses, buses haven't moved with that. Similarly many retail parks aren't served. Middlebrook, the largest retail park in the UK with 12 million visitors per year, has a dismal bus service. 1 bus running hourly and 1 bus running a few times per day. I know there has been some previous attempts at a service but certainly nothing meaningful and promoted!

The warehouses, most of them aren't served by buses. Given they work off shifts, they are surely the easiest ones to have buses for as everyone finishes at the same time. 95% of bus operators will not go near shift work unless they are subsidised for it which is bonkers when the shift times don't tend to link with school times so 1 bus can do schools and shift workers versus the old way of working to accommodate 9-5 where the morning would be a struggle with students and workers all trying to get to towns on the same bus. Where warehouse buses exist, they are on closed door services often meaning staff have to get to the meeting point rather than being able to travel from closer to home (I will use Amazon LBA9 for example. If the 14 was made more use of and instead passengers pushed onto that rather than the restricted closed door bus which only stops on Sovereign Street, workers would be able to get closer to home and travel on a single bus journey, as far as Pudsey or have a better, more central choice of stops within Leeds City Centre. Instead no, the 14 runs at different times to the shifts (based off comparing the Amazon bus times against the 14) so workers would have to sit around forever).

Thorpe Park, a growing area which is building itself up, what happens, the buses get cut and are now useless to everyone so anyone starting to shop or work here will be using their car and you can't persuade people out of their car.

In short, while I agree with you the passenger demand has changed, I think the issue is in part that bus operators refuse to try the new demand areas without huge subsidy. They plod on with the same old and keep winding that down slowly. The definition of insanity is keep doing the same thing but expect a different result. That is what First are doing. They need to adapt to the new demand points rather than expecting passengers to follow where First Bus want them to go.



I know my local Stagecoach killed off what was a busy uni service back in September. The uni had been in 2.5 years of being more remote and now they started to come back and yet Stagecoach used the 2020-2022 data to reduce the service. The uni has since brought back more in person learning for the 2022/23 year but it was too late, Stagecoach already ruined the bus service. They had to revert the changes back in January because of local opposition and the fact the routes no longer suited the university.

The point being that they based the service off current data and didn't take into account the usage of the route. This is one of the issues with ticket machine data. You can follow it religiously but if you don't look at the demographics and actual uses for the route, you will not make good changes. Also think retiming a service by a few minutes can make it busier for example to serve shifts. Ticket machine data won't show that, only customer feedback would and given how shocking central customer service often is, many people are giving up on contacting bus operators as nothing is being done with the feedback.

And of course the ticketing software does nothing to record lost sales.

 

[WibbleWobble]

Middlebrook has never been good bus territory, even when it first opened buses were sent there in droves and most routes never lasted long.

Horwich used to have several services linking the town and the retail park, with buses routed to run either direct (and on to Blackrod) or via the estates. Bolton was similar, with buses running direct via Chorley New Road or via outer areas like Westhoughton and Deane (Timeline's 539, which was run with branded buses).

Retail Parks have always been problem bus territory, in my opinion. Filled with supermarkets and big box stores selling furniture, carpets and appliances, people aren't going to use the bus because they're not wanting to lug a week's food shop or a microwave onto the bus. And because of the nature of the stores, they're not going to appeal to youngsters who want to have a mooch in their favourite stores with their mates.

Middlebrook ought to do better because bus routes can double up as a rail link (Horwich Parkway), but even having peak enhancements has never worked. I guess the Trafford Centre being 20 minutes down the motorway and having a football stadium next door also don't help matters.

 

[noddingdonkey]

But for how long can we carry fresh air around in double deckers with the odd passenger paying pennies?
The large town/city centres are dying. People are goIng to out of town shopping centres and smaller towns.

That's valid, but you can either have ambitions to reduce car usage and get people into public transport or you can cut the public transport service back to the bare bones. You can't do both.

If getting people out of cars onto buses is a serious ambition that may well require running a service which is over specified for the current demand until the service gets a reputation for reliability, punctuality, and convenience.

If they're not prepared to do that, that's a perfectly valid choice but it has to be an end to all anti-car policies.

 

[markymark2000]

furniture, carpets and appliances

These stores, it's useless providing buses. I agree. Footfall isn't there and especially if buying for on the day, the items are too big for buses. We are however seeing a lot more normal shops going to our of town. Discount, clothing and grocery stores all moving there.

people aren't going to use the bus because they're not wanting to lug a week's food shop or a microwave onto the bus.

People have done this for years on buses. Sadly buses have started moving further and further away from the shops though. Whether that be bus stations moving, town centres pedestrianising or stores moving more out of town.

And because of the nature of the stores, they're not going to appeal to youngsters who want to have a mooch in their favourite stores with their mates

Youngsters tend to enjoy more outlet stores and larger all in 1 shopping centres. The same ones which are poorly served due to poor planning or bus operators not persuing it. Even Cheshire Oaks buses are a shadow of their former self because the promotion of the service stopped and they made it too slow to get there.

 

[WAB]

That's valid, but you can either have ambitions to reduce car usage and get people into public transport or you can cut the public transport service back to the bare bones. You can't do both.

If getting people out of cars onto buses is a serious ambition that may well require running a service which is over specified for the current demand until the service gets a reputation for reliability, punctuality, and convenience.

If they're not prepared to do that, that's a perfectly valid choice but it has to be an end to all anti-car policies.

Yes, I don't think provision needed to match demand in the long run as long as it provides a network. That is of course until money comes into the equation at which point you start making bus travel a massive pain in the neck (or even unusable in many cases) compared to the car.

 

[Leeds1970]

But the £2 fares surely render much of the data as useless? There is no benefit to tapping out so lots of journeys ending at intermediate points are registered as ending at the terminus point.

the Ticketer machines are set up to count off - as the bus pulls up to a stop to set down the driver registers the amount so if the bus is empty at the terminus the data will show as empty - the fare is irrelevant. There are lots of computer programmes at work in the backrooms, but to see it in its simplest form is to go on the Firstbus app choose a bus watch it count down to your chosen location and you can watch the capacity rise and fall at the same time. The tap on tap off is purely to give you the best fare option for your travel needs.

 

[SCH117X]

the Ticketer machines are set up to count off - as the bus pulls up to a stop to set down the driver registers the amount so if the bus is empty at the terminus the data will show as empty - the fare is irrelevant. There are lots of computer programmes at work in the backrooms, but to see it in its simplest form is to go on the Firstbus app choose a bus watch it count down to your chosen location and you can watch the capacity rise and fall at the same time. The tap on tap off is purely to give you the best fare option for your travel needs.

And surely the data is needed for the renumeration

 

[PaulMc7]

I've always said to myself that being more responsive to travel patterns would benefit the companies so much more because they could allocate resources when they're actually required more and avoid carrying fresh air.

Constantly being open to feedback from passengers would also help this too. Making changes with no public consultation is one thing that really needs to stop.

 

[Simon75]

In Stoke-on-Trent the main gripe is that where most distribution centres are, they have very poor services serving them

 

[Soundwave]

The issue is that passenger levels are at 80℅ of pre covid levels. While not great, that's still millions of people using the networks as they currently are. if that was at 30 or 40%, then i'd say scrap failing networks and rebuild afresh.

However, if that were to happen at current passenger levels, operators and local authorities would get nothing done as the backlash to reallocating resource would be huge.

Of course what is needed is extra money, drivers and operators/local authorities with the ability to design new services while still catering for current 'legacy' passengers and their needs.

 

[158756]

Middlebrook has never been good bus territory, even when it first opened buses were sent there in droves and most routes never lasted long.

Horwich used to have several services linking the town and the retail park, with buses routed to run either direct (and on to Blackrod) or via the estates. Bolton was similar, with buses running direct via Chorley New Road or via outer areas like Westhoughton and Deane (Timeline's 539, which was run with branded buses).

Retail Parks have always been problem bus territory, in my opinion. Filled with supermarkets and big box stores selling furniture, carpets and appliances, people aren't going to use the bus because they're not wanting to lug a week's food shop or a microwave onto the bus. And because of the nature of the stores, they're not going to appeal to youngsters who want to have a mooch in their favourite stores with their mates.

Middlebrook ought to do better because bus routes can double up as a rail link (Horwich Parkway), but even having peak enhancements has never worked. I guess the Trafford Centre being 20 minutes down the motorway and having a football stadium next door also don't help matters.

I think there are a range of problems with serving Middlebrook, not least that it has such good access via the motorway that buses cannot replicate. Plus it's so far out of Bolton so unlike most smaller retail parks there probably isn't one main town you could run a bus to to cater for most of the potential demand. That end of Bolton not being particularly densely populated won't help either, and the lack of any decent bus services between the smaller towns around there means there's nothing which could potentially be diverted except the main Horwich to Bolton service, and presumably the existing customers do not want that.

Middlebrook isn't all about the furniture and carpets though, though it does have that sort of thing. There is an Asda, Tesco, M&S, your basic high street staples such as Poundland, Home Bargains, Boots, Wilko, a range of clothing stores, plus a cinema and bowling alley as well as the arena, football stadium and railway station. Basically a decent sized town centre. It is not sensible for all of these to have no decent bus service, but that is the result of privatised bus services and car-centric planning.

 

[gc4946]

These stores, it's useless providing buses. I agree. Footfall isn't there and especially if buying for on the day, the items are too big for buses. We are however seeing a lot more normal shops going to our of town. Discount, clothing and grocery stores all moving there.


People have done this for years on buses. Sadly buses have started moving further and further away from the shops though. Whether that be bus stations moving, town centres pedestrianising or stores moving more out of town.


Youngsters tend to enjoy more outlet stores and larger all in 1 shopping centres. The same ones which are poorly served due to poor planning or bus operators not persuing it. Even Cheshire Oaks buses are a shadow of their former self because the promotion of the service stopped and they made it too slow to get there.

I've noticed plenty of people boarding and alighting at the bus stop for Junction 32 designer outlet and Xscape attraction located between Castleford and Pontefract. There's also a railway station built specially for the complex named Glasshoughton.
The only thing wrong with the bus routes serving the complex is that buses get caught up in the huge volume of car traffic particularly at weekends.

When Thorpe Park's retail and leisure complex on the outskirts of Leeds opened in 2018 (NB offices were built there several years beforehand)
First LeedsCity provided two dedicated limited stop services X26 and X27 to/from Leeds city centre. They no longer run and people now have to use the much slower regular buses to get there and walk much further to get to their destinations within Thorpe Park.

Often the only way buses serve out of town retail parks or office complexes is via conditions attached to planning permission, usually a section 106 planning agreement. However once agreements expire, there's no obligation on the bus operators to continue providing a service to the location.

 

[Stan Drews]

The issue is that passenger levels are at 80℅ of pre covid levels. While not great, that's still millions of people using the networks as they currently are. if that was at 30 or 40%, then i'd say scrap failing networks and rebuild afresh.

However, if that were to happen at current passenger levels, operators and local authorities would get nothing done as the backlash to reallocating resource would be huge.

Of course what is needed is extra money, drivers and operators/local authorities with the ability to design new services while still catering for current 'legacy' passengers and their needs.

Yes, passenger levels are generally between 80-90% of pre-covid, whilst the costs are about 125%, so there is a massive gap that needs to be closed. No public consultation is going to approve/agree multi-million pound cuts!

 

[markymark2000]

I've noticed plenty of people boarding and alighting at the bus stop for Junction 32 designer outlet and Xscape attraction located between Castleford and Pontefract. There's also a railway station built specially for the complex named Glasshoughton.
The only thing wrong with the bus routes serving the complex is that buses get caught up in the huge volume of car traffic particularly at weekends.

Buses to Junction 32 have reduced as well haven't they over the years. Plus the withdrawal of the X62 didn't help matters. The bus stops don't seem to help either as it forces buses to go past Glasshoughton Train Station and do loop to serve the site rather than simply having buses go both ways via Tomahawk Trail and missing out Glasshoughton Train Station. Even then though, the roads clearly aren't built for having buses pass through.

When Thorpe Park's retail and leisure complex on the outskirts of Leeds opened in 2018 (NB offices were built there several years beforehand)
First LeedsCity provided two dedicated limited stop services X26 and X27 to/from Leeds city centre. They no longer run and people now have to use the much slower regular buses to get there and walk much further to get to their destinations within Thorpe Park.

The diversion to serve the site is quite a big time penalty too which isn't ideal and then combine that with the fact the adjacent routes are long standing routes and the operator, understandably, doesn't want to upset the existing passengers too much. If the bus stop was positioned on the Centuary Way/Park Avenue roundabout (so passengers could walk off the bus, straight to River Island basically), this would cut the time penalty down by around 2 minutes so the overall time penalty would be around 3 minutes for buses to serve Thorpe Park. That's it. The poor bus stop positioning though means that to serve the retail part, buses have to plod around the outside of the shopping centre and get needlessly delayed. This is the fault of planners for being car centric and then the dismal council planning teams for not pushing for better bus access and treating bus passengers to be 2nd class citizens.

Often the only way buses serve out of town retail parks or office complexes is via conditions attached to planning permission, usually a section 106 planning agreement. However once agreements expire, there's no obligation on the bus operators to continue providing a service to the location.

The issue with developer funded buses is often that the developer nor the bus operator does anything to make the services succeed past the funding stage. It's a case of 'Put a bus in to shut up the authorities and make it so that no one uses the service so when the funding ends, the service ceases and as no one used it, no one complains'. Sadly, it's the wrong attitude from operators and developers and all it is doing is leading to huge new developments having a dismal bus service. Ebbsfleet is a huge example. No normal local bus and the bus link to Bluewater is going to be the last thing introduced in the development and until that link is in place, the time penalty to serve the development is too big and so people there simply have no bus. Woodford Garden Village, around 1,000 homes but the bus only stops at the entrance to the site, it doesn't go into the site and the bus got cut around a year ago down to hourly so now a growing housing development has less buses. The development only has the 42B which goes basically straight into Manchester. Has no links to the rest of Cheshire East.
Bishopton in Renfrewshire. A development which will have 4,000 homes. A development of that size you'd expect to have a half decent bus service. The new development has zilch. The largest independent operator in the UK has a large depot literally 5 minutes away. They won't touch it without funding.
Northwich, Winnington Village. Rather large development but no one had the brain cells to think about installing bus stops as the development was being built. The bus got diverted after a very long time of not serving the site. The council then put up bus stop poles and the residents kicked off that there was a bus stop outside their house. Now the council has had to do a planning application to put the bus stops in and I kid you not, one of the comments is 'You can't put a bus stop here because it would cause huge disruption to parking for residents as they will have no where to park' (as people have bought a house with too few parking spaces and ended up overflowing into visitor spaces and just generally dumping their cars on the road because it's easier than parking in the allocated spaces One comment to the planning application suggests 1 house can often have 7 vehicles parked there at any one time).
It's not just housing developments or retail parks but warehouses. Warehouses have the easiest money. a few hundred people going to or from a site at the same time. Most warehouses work off shift patterns too which work around school times (6am-2pm-10pm) so you can serve these sites without increasing PVR. Again, bus operators won't touch these areas without funding. Warringtons Omega park is a great example. The B52 to Warrington started with Howards Travel with funding. That service has grown and now runs without funding but the B52 is the only local bus to serve the site still and that isn't promoted online for some bizzare reason. It's not on Traveline nor do they comply with bus open data. Other than this, it's closed door services with Amazon having buses to Liverpool and Evri having buses to Liverpool and Manchester. No links to nearby St Helens or Widnes to provide a bus for those areas. Again, 'no proven demand', no one will touch it. Arguebly though, it's the easiest one to trial. Buses to fit shift times is easy, especially outside of school times. It's not running services 18 hours of the day every 30 minutes just trying to build demand, it's running 3 round trips per day (more if you want to match more shift times). To throw an easy example out there, First Leeds 14. It serves the Amazon site but doesn't serve the site at the same time the staff bus does (the staff bus would be timed for the connections of course). If the 14 properly linked with the shift times, there wouldn't be a need for the dedicated staff bus. Either way, it's the same price but the 14 would of course drop people off at more stops in the city and/or even take people closer to their home if they live in Pudsey for example. Theres a lot of benefits for staff to use the 14 but instead, First don't time it to work with the shifts and are now withdrawing it from the area. If it was retimed to suit the shifts, it could be significantly busier. That is without working with Amazon. Imagine the difference that could be made if they worked with Amazon to remove the staff bus and transfer staff onto the 14 instead. It's absolutely ludicrous.


What I am getting at here is that the whole system is wrong. Developers making it intentionally difficult for buses to serve sites and where sites are there, bus operators won't touch them without funding because 'there is no proven demand'. There is never going to be proven demand until a half useful bus service is introduced which meets the needs of the people who live or work there.

 

[duncombec]

Ebbsfleet is a huge example. No normal local bus and the bus link to Bluewater is going to be the last thing introduced in the development and until that link is in place, the time penalty to serve the development is too big and so people there simply have no bus.

I've chopped out most of that humongous paragraph as it's not areas I know, and in any case your thoughts on buses to schools and warehouses have been covered in other threads, but I did have to pick up on this one.

The Fastrack A service was introduced just as you suggest, before the houses were built. It involved running a bus on top frequency, every 6 minutes, around roads with no houses on them, carrying fresh air and the driver. Even after the houses were built and moved in (I seem to remember some even had smart technology with bus departures built into the fridge, or something - vague memories of a local TV report of that ilk) the service simply wasn't viable at that frequency.

I don't know where in "Ebbsfleet" you mean, as it is an area of significant housing growth and the place seems to change every time I go past, but the B service has already been extended to serve numerous housing developments, and it's come at the expense of relatively quick journey times for through passengers, discouraging use of the service. In the words of one local, 'after a 10-hour shift at Darent Valley, I want to get home, not go bouncing over speedbumps and over cobblestones around a housing estate to pick up one person'. Assuming you mean what Kent County Council (KCC) call "Ebssfleet Quarry - which isn't really in Ebbsfleet, but never mind - the website states that the cost was estimated to be £13m before inflationary pressures, etc., so construction is on hold. That's rather different to it intentionally being the last thing in the development, especially for a local authority rather short of cash. Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) funding is focussed, I believe, on electrifying the existing network and the Dover scheme, rather than trying to introduce more routes in the existing area.

I'm afraid the reality of the situation is that if you can afford a new-build house or apartment, with all the fees and charges that come with it, you really aren't the sort of person who is going to throw away the car, dig up the driveway and get the bus. More generally, I had a very interesting conversation with a housing developer a few months ago. Whilst I still think the houses are in the wrong place, it did give me the other side of the story to the usual "developers are evil" portrayed in the local press - perhaps try it!

 

[nw1]

That's valid, but you can either have ambitions to reduce car usage and get people into public transport or you can cut the public transport service back to the bare bones. You can't do both.

In my experience, the large town and city centres are definitely not dying. To give one example, Southampton city centre is busy 7 days a week, and particularly Saturdays (and to some degree Sundays also; arguably enough to increase the Sunday service to something approaching that of weekdays).

 

[Bletchleyite]

In my experience, the large town and city centres are definitely not dying. To give one example, Southampton city centre is busy 7 days a week, and particularly Saturdays (and to some degree Sundays also; arguably enough to increase the Sunday service to something approaching that of weekdays).

I think what's happening is that retail parks and supermarkets are progressively killing small town centres (places like Ormskirk, which is predominantly hospitality, charity shops and the likes now, and probably would be very little were it not for the student market for the former and wasn't helped by the main supermarket actually, unusually, being in the centre so you can park, do your supermarket shop then go for a wander round town) but bigger city centres are doing OK because it's easy and cheap to get to them from those smaller towns. Why would one go clothes shopping in the tiny number of small shops in Ormskirk when a train to Liverpool and back is about a fiver, there's far more variety and it's a nice day out?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I think what's happening is that retail parks and supermarkets are progressively killing small town centres (places like Ormskirk, which is predominantly hospitality, charity shops and the likes now, and probably would be very little were it not for the student market for the former and wasn't helped by the main supermarket actually, unusually, being in the centre so you can park, do your supermarket shop then go for a wander round town) but bigger city centres are doing OK because it's easy and cheap to get to them from those smaller towns. Why would one go clothes shopping in the tiny number of small shops in Ormskirk when a train to Liverpool and back is about a fiver, there's far more variety and it's a nice day out?

You're right that it isn't the bigger cities like Southampton that are as badly affected. They still have a relative size and scale to pull people in.

Also, there's a real North/South divide in terms of the overall financial health of an area. I was in Middlesbrough a few weeks ago and can recall that it was a vibrant town centre in the 1990s, but on a Saturday afternoon, it was desolate with hardly anyone there. Same as a visit to Darlington last year... I walked through the town centre on a Monday morning (historically market day) and it was like a Sunday in the early 90s.

That was a pattern that I saw in West Yorkshire just before Christmas. Go to places like Leeds and they seem economically buoyant. However, you don't have to go far and end up in places like Dewsbury to see a real weakening of the traditional high street.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That was a pattern that I saw in West Yorkshire just before Christmas. Go to places like Leeds and they seem economically buoyant. However, you don't have to go far and end up in places like Dewsbury to see a real weakening of the traditional high street.

Dewsbury, while about three times the size of Ormskirk, is probably in a similar position - a trip into Leeds is an easy, cheap and quick day out, so why shop more locally for things like clothes where more choice is a real virtue? Plus it doesn't have the student population Ormskirk does to keep hospitality in the centre going.

There'll be lots of others, e.g. Bolton vs Manchester, or even Lancaster vs Manchester (but again the students help a bit). Or even Northampton vs. Milton Keynes or London.

Of course none of this really helps the bus companies, unless I suppose they serve the station for such trips.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Dewsbury, while about three times the size of Ormskirk, is probably in a similar position - a trip into Leeds is an easy, cheap and quick day out, so why shop more locally for things like clothes where more choice is a real virtue? Plus it doesn't have the student population Ormskirk does to keep hospitality in the centre going.

There'll be lots of others, e.g. Bolton vs Manchester, or even Lancaster vs Manchester (but again the students help a bit). Or even Northampton vs. Milton Keynes or London.

Of course none of this really helps the bus companies, unless I suppose they serve the station for such trips.

It's a mix

Smaller towns have a lack of critical mass so certain shops are just not sustainable. That means not just the loss of shoppers, but also those staff who work in them. Whilst some people may be attracted into the bigger city centres, the impact of online sales has decimated the whole retail market whilst "serving the station" might glean the odd punter, it's not enough to begin to offset the challenge that are facing smaller towns.

 

[markymark2000]

The Fastrack A service was introduced just as you suggest, before the houses were built. It involved running a bus on top frequency, every 6 minutes, around roads with no houses on them, carrying fresh air and the driver. Even after the houses were built and moved in (I seem to remember some even had smart technology with bus departures built into the fridge, or something - vague memories of a local TV report of that ilk) the service simply wasn't viable at that frequency.

You've got to be sensible when introducing buses. Certainly no bus should be in place (except a worker bus) until houses are being moved into and even then, you have to be sensible with the frequencies so that it matches potential demand.

I don't know where in "Ebbsfleet" you mean, as it is an area of significant housing growth and the place seems to change every time I go past, but the B service has already been extended to serve numerous housing developments, and it's come at the expense of relatively quick journey times for through passengers, discouraging use of the service. In the words of one local, 'after a 10-hour shift at Darent Valley, I want to get home, not go bouncing over speedbumps and over cobblestones around a housing estate to pick up one person'.

It shouldn't be made uncomfortable for buses to go through the estates. The frequency has to of course match demand and not prove to be too detrimental to existing passengers. This is one example where it's proving detrimental, there are plenty of other examples where it would make zero effect on current passengers journeys (such as Saighton Camp in Chester where Stagecoach refuse to extend the 5 by around 2 minutes to go into the development and because they are trying to save money, they have created a hash of a timetable).

Assuming you mean what Kent County Council (KCC) call "Ebssfleet Quarry - which isn't really in Ebbsfleet, but never mind - the website states that the cost was estimated to be £13m before inflationary pressures, etc., so construction is on hold. That's rather different to it intentionally being the last thing in the development, especially for a local authority rather short of cash. Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) funding is focussed, I believe, on electrifying the existing network and the Dover scheme, rather than trying to introduce more routes in the existing area.

Yes, that's the development. There is half a busway literally built there, yet no proper bus service until 2,000 homes occupied and the supposed specs for that will be a 24/7 services (half hourly 22:00-06:00, every 12 minutes 06:00-22:00). Just like some other developments, completely nonesensical. 2,000 homes before a proper bus comes in and it's going to start up as 24/7. What a waste of money. Should start a less frequent bus from around 1,000 homes and expand the service as the site grows. The transport for the site should be done via S106 (developer funding) and so would make no difference to the council.

I'm afraid the reality of the situation is that if you can afford a new-build house or apartment, with all the fees and charges that come with it, you really aren't the sort of person who is going to throw away the car, dig up the driveway and get the bus. More generally, I had a very interesting conversation with a housing developer a few months ago. Whilst I still think the houses are in the wrong place, it did give me the other side of the story to the usual "developers are evil" portrayed in the local press - perhaps try it!

People do it in London and many other large cities. If the transport is there, people can make use of it. Developers I think are trying to target a specific market, that market being people with a bit more money. Buses are a bit of an eyesore and meant for the poor people, build it for cars as that is what many prefer. Accommodating buses costs money, whether it be wider roads or bus stop infrastructure. From their perspective, It makes some sense but at the same time, if transport isn't provided, people won't use it and as a number of cities and developments are proving, a proper bus service can reduce car dependency and help to reduce congestion from the developments.

 

[158756]

It shouldn't be made uncomfortable for buses to go through the estates. The frequency has to of course match demand and not prove to be too detrimental to existing passengers. This is one example where it's proving detrimental, there are plenty of other examples where it would make zero effect on current passengers journeys (such as Saighton Camp in Chester where Stagecoach refuse to extend the 5 by around 2 minutes to go into the development and because they are trying to save money, they have created a hash of a timetable).

This is because of bad planning policy. Councils and developers don't want new estates to have any through roads, and the roads that are built are narrow, twisty and littered with speed bumps. This is supposed to be better for pedestrians and cyclists, but is very bad for buses. And any infrastructure which is designed for buses is usually the very last thing to be built.

So unless an estate is sufficiently large enough to have a dedicated service (which Ebbsfleet should be several times over by the time it's finished) serving it will always mean a slow and uncomfortable diversion for other passengers. The bus industry should have made more effort to have input into these plans, but operators usually have no interest in serving new developments.

People who move into new houses are probably in general wealthier and more likely to own a car than the general population, but the level of car usage is not fixed. To some degree people will be influenced in their choice of housing by the available transport links, if you design estates for the best possible car access and have no public transport then you are going to get more cars. Even if a household owns one car that doesn't mean they need two, or that the kids need a car as soon as they turn 17 because there's no other way to get anywhere. Big developments like Ebbsfleet are going to have to build a decent number of "affordable" houses as well, and probably some provision for older and disabled people, plus large numbers of the houses for sale will end up in the private rented sector - many large modern developments are far from uniformly well-to-do.

 

[Fleetmaster]

Lothian certainly seems to love having retail parks as major interchanges.

Perhaps only to give drivers somewhere to pee?!?!

I certainly never understood why every single person catching the inter-urban bus from one very distant town to my own, had to endure a 20 mph crawl through the maze that was my estate, as the last leg of their hour+ journey. And my estate wasn't exactly small, but nor was it the most deprived areas of the town.

It could only have been because In doubling the frequency (there also being a local service) it made both the estate service and the inter-urban profitable.

We had wide roads and good sightlines, but with absolutely no reason for any other kind of commercial vehicles to use those streets, but the inter-urban being a hulking double decker often driven aggressively by obviously annoyed drivers, it felt very scary to us kids. Even when the local was a double-decker, you could tell the driver was less stressed and being more careful.

Lasted like that for decades I think, well after dereg, but has now curiously changed to the urban bypassing the estate on the dual carriageway, but the local not being increased. If anything, it looks to be no more than an OAP get out and about bus now, literally one inbound service before 9.45, at 7.45, for a fifteen minute journey (swear it was ten in my day). Clearly the next generation of schoolkids are being driven everywhere. Spoilt brats.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think it's fair to say that serving retail parks well is a good example of adapting to the market as per the thread title.

 

[duncombec]

Yes, that's the development. There is half a busway literally built there, yet no proper bus service until 2,000 homes occupied and the supposed specs for that will be a 24/7 services (half hourly 22:00-06:00, every 12 minutes 06:00-22:00). Just like some other developments, completely nonesensical. 2,000 homes before a proper bus comes in and it's going to start up as 24/7. What a waste of money. Should start a less frequent bus from around 1,000 homes and expand the service as the site grows. The transport for the site should be done via S106 (developer funding) and so would make no difference to the council.

Before I reply in full, do you mind if I ask your source? I've searched pretty extensively, and most of what I'm coming across is dated pre-pandemic, and implies exactly what you suggest was planned, but home-builder spending has bounced back faster than local authority spending can.

The estimated cost of the tunnels, pre-inflation, was £13.8m. How much S.106 funding do you think or know there is available, especially as it's not transport specific?

 

[markymark2000]

This is because of bad planning policy. Councils and developers don't want new estates to have any through roads, and the roads that are built are narrow, twisty and littered with speed bumps. This is supposed to be better for pedestrians and cyclists, but is very bad for buses. And any infrastructure which is designed for buses is usually the very last thing to be built.

A big issue with planning policy this. I think it can be safer for cyclists to have calmer roads but at the same time, it makes it harder for buses and generally makes bus journeys longer so you rob peter to pay paul so to speak.

As for your last point, I fully agree. Councils planning teams need to start demanding bus infrastructure is put in place sooner. Some developments that I have seen are fully built and the developer is being extremely slow on the bus gate so the development is completely unserved and the bus route now diverted away from the development. Had the bus gate been in place, they'd have had a half hourly bus service by now. It's not hard to do but sadly bus gates or bus stops don't make money for anyone. Houses make money for developers and councils.


To give a really bad example. Sittingbourne Great Easthall Way has a new development but the bus gate isn't adopted so still under the control of the developer. Arriva stopped going down there due to 'intimidation from drivers trying to get through the lane' and so, they have closed the bus gate because it was being abused by cars cutting through rather than cameras to fine cars. It's a stupid layout anyway and should never has been approved but similarly it should never have been closed due to cars, it should have had action taken against the cars.

So unless an estate is sufficiently large enough to have a dedicated service (which Ebbsfleet should be several times over by the time it's finished) serving it will always mean a slow and uncomfortable diversion for other passengers. The bus industry should have made more effort to have input into these plans, but operators usually have no interest in serving new developments.

One very big issue! Bus operators won't touch it without funding and no one will fund it as no one stands up for buses or their passengers.

People who move into new houses are probably in general wealthier and more likely to own a car than the general population, but the level of car usage is not fixed. To some degree people will be influenced in their choice of housing by the available transport links, if you design estates for the best possible car access and have no public transport then you are going to get more cars. Even if a household owns one car that doesn't mean they need two, or that the kids need a car as soon as they turn 17 because there's no other way to get anywhere. Big developments like Ebbsfleet are going to have to build a decent number of "affordable" houses as well, and probably some provision for older and disabled people, plus large numbers of the houses for sale will end up in the private rented sector - many large modern developments are far from uniformly well-to-do.

If you provide no alternative, of course people are going to opt for the car. If people are given the choice, some people start to travel more sustainably.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Mar 2023 ==

Before I reply in full, do you mind if I ask your source? I've searched pretty extensively, and most of what I'm coming across is dated pre-pandemic, and implies exactly what you suggest was planned, but home-builder spending has bounced back faster than local authority spending can.

The document that I found was dated Nov 2022 but still has a references to pre covid deadlines.
This planning application. If you then go into documents and download the Nov 2022 Transport Plan

EDC/21/0223 | Submission of the Public Transport Plan required pursuant to the s. 106 Agreement associated with outline planning permission reference no EDC/17/0048 |

applications.ebbsfleetdc.org.uk

The estimated cost of the tunnels, pre-inflation, was £13.8m. How much S.106 funding do you think or know there is available, especially as it's not transport specific?

Even if they can't do the tunnel, there is an 'emergency route' in the plans for the bus to use Longhoughton Ave and Bluewater Parkway.

£13.8m is a lot to ask for for S106 funding for the tunnel but the council should also be putting money towards that. Sadly Kent is seemingly very anti bus and really do not want buses to succeed within the county.

 

[Fleetmaster]

It's madness even serving estates with buses. They should absolutely be designed for light traffic running at slow speeds.

Ideally as just a nested series of cul-de-sacs. These should be maximum widths of these things, some of which resemble small towns these days in sheer size, and if they need to be larger that's where you put a feeder road with perhaps a bus gate, so that nobody is ever more than 2 minutes walk from their front door to a bus road.

Obviously these days there needs to be way more provision for pedestrians and bikes, and of course scooters, but that's as easy as just whacking a few straight corridors right through it, or route the paths in the non-road side gaps between the rows of houses.

These have been feature of some estates for years. And estates will be with us forever, now that plug in cars are a thing. Nobody who can afford it wants to schlep to a far off car pool only to find they forgot to leave the car plugged in overnight.

Up my way they bizarrely seem to think bicycle provision is simply to add an (admittedly very wide and safe looking) cycle way to the main roads bordering the new estate. But in the estate, it's the same old footpaths lining narrow twisting tarmacced roads, with the car having absolute priority.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's madness even serving estates with buses. They should absolutely be designed for light traffic running at slow speeds.

Ideally what you want is a Runcorn like arrangement - a cul-de-sac/Radburn design with a busway (and even better a trunk cycleway alongside it) running through it. Otherwise you need very small estates. It is generally reckoned that 500m is the absolute most people will walk to a bus stop, and even that is a bit far. It worked in the original Milton Keynes estates to have an estate 1km square, and stops at the midpoint and corner on the main roads at the sides (and as a result those estates mostly aren't penetrated by buses), but once you got onto much bigger estates (Furzton, the biggest before the grid concept was part-abandoned, is about 2km square) there's no option but to run through them.

 

[markymark2000]

Ideally what you want is a Runcorn like arrangement - a cul-de-sac/Radburn design with a busway (and even better a trunk cycleway alongside it) running through it. Otherwise you need very small estates. It is generally reckoned that 500m is the absolute most people will walk to a bus stop, and even that is a bit far. It worked in the original Milton Keynes estates to have an estate 1km square, and stops at the midpoint and corner on the main roads at the sides (and as a result those estates mostly aren't penetrated by buses), but once you got onto much bigger estates (Furzton, the biggest before the grid concept was part-abandoned, is about 2km square) there's no option but to run through them.

400m is the government guidance for how far people will walk. Sadly almost all developers do this on an 'as the crow flies' basis rather than actual walking distance and I've seen endless cases of this being from the site entrance so while the site entrance may be within 400m walking distance of a bus stop, anyone further back in the site will be well over and if you take into account actual walking distance, the numbers will again be significantly higher. council's don't hold developers accountable for this and let them get away with murder.

The grid layout works in some ways but not in others. As is seen in America, the grid layout often means buses don't turn a lot and so to get around, people tend to need to change buses a lot more in comparison to our current road style.

Estates in a loop always tend to do ok or even just a conveniently placed, decent sized roundabout mid way into the estate. Tewkesbury Wheatpieces has 2 interesting examples. 2 side by side, new developments. No bus link through them (down side) and one is quite narrow (down side) but just it does have bus stops conveniently placed in a roughly central location so most of the estate it within 400m walking. As the estate expands, I hope the buses better serve the site though.