Cambridge Busway - 1 year on

[Deerfold]

This article (http://www.busandcoach.com/newspage.aspx?id=7182&categoryid=0) would suggest that despite huge problems during construction, and dire predictions about how well it would do, the Cambridge Busway is performing ahead of expectations and persuading a good few people out of their cars.

In their first year of operation services on the Cambridge busway carried 2,5 million people, 750,000 more than forecast. Thirty-seven per cent of users have switched from car to bus, and 80 per cent have access to a car, but chose to travel by bus.

The figures come from a survey commissioned by Cambridgeshire county council and consultants Atkins, which also shows nearly half the passengers are using the service daily. Also popular with passengers are the quality of the buses – provided by Stagecoach and Whippet – the smooth ride and the free wi-fi. Three-quarters of users say the busway services are quicker than travelling by car.

Cambridgeshire council's cabinet member for planning, Ian Bates, says: “Since the busway opened it has proved a great success. What is particularly pleasing is that so many people are choosing to leave their car at home and take the bus instead.”

 

[jopsuk]

Aye, it does seem to be performing pretty well. Still not convinced tht it was the right choice, and there's other niggles such as:
Why, with huge developments going up along the southern route, were the corners cut to leave the southern section only able to take single deckers?

The cycle/footway- if this had been planned from the start, rather than being an afterthought, it could have been a world class facility, rather than a pretty good one.

 

[Ivo]

This article (http://www.busandcoach.com/newspage.aspx?id=7182&categoryid=0) would suggest that despite huge problems during construction, and dire predictions about how well it would do, the Cambridge Busway is performing ahead of expectations and persuading a good few people out of their cars.

I still believe they made the wrong choice and will probably continue to hold this view for some time to come. However, any such project running ahead of its predicted patronage as early as the first year is doing well, although there is another side to that - novelty value. I think Year 2 or even Year 3 will give us a better impression of how this overly-ambitious scheme is holding up.

Three-quarters of users say the busway services are quicker than travelling by car.

That might also have something to do with Cambridge not being car-friendly? :roll:

 

[tbtc]

Good news.

I doubt that this evidence will change many enthusiasts' minds as they tend to dislike anything that isn't rail based, even when rail isn't a realistic option.

However hopefully it will encourage planners to see guided buses as one tool to tackle demand (as well as trains, trams and buses) now that we have a long established busway (rather than the short sections in Leeds/ Bradford etc which are more about avoiding traffic lights on busy roads than offering a whole new alternative route).

(Cue moans about why this wouldn't work in Leigh, Gosport etc)

 

[MidnightFlyer]

tbtc - You say 'even when rail isn't a realistic option' - are you including what is now the Cambs Guided Busway in such a statement?

 

[tbtc]

tbtc - You say 'even when rail isn't a realistic option' - are you including what is now the Cambs Guided Busway in such a statement?

From my understanding of the Cambridgeshire situation, rail was an option, but a much more expensive one.

For all the comments on here (and elsewhere) about "misguided busways" (ho ho ho), it's nice to see evidence of sucess. Not just the numbers (estimated to be 1,750,000, got 2,500,000) but also the type of passengers (most of whom had access to a car, over a third of whom have given up the car), when you consider all the comments about people not wanting to trade down to a bus.

Obviously it's only one sucess story - in the way that people shouldn't take the one success of passenger numbers on Alloa trains to justify re-opening every forgotten branch line, nor should this be used to justify hundreds of guided busways - but it is proof that these can work in the UK.

Maybe Edinburgh are wishing they'd followed suit now?

 

[Buttsy]

From my understanding of the Cambridgeshire situation, rail was an option, but a much more expensive one.

My understanding of the figures were that rail would cost around £50m and the busway £54m when originally considered. I understand that Cambs CC were able to get a significant grant from HM Government for trialling the busway, and so looked less expensive to Cambs residents.

While inflation is not taken into account, the overall cost of the busway came in at £181m and there was a severe over-run in construction.

Taking this into consideration, and potential over-run cost on a new railway, I would wager that the busway has come in approx £60m more expensive than the railway, allowing for a deduction of £36m off the final figure for the southern busway, which would not have been built had a railway to St Ives been built instead.

If anyone has more detailed figures as to the cost of various sections, I'd be interested in them.

I agree that a busway may be suitable in certain circumstances, but I feel that the conversion of an extant railway into a guided busway has lost potential 'network' benefits of a railway and also lost residents along the route possible through trains south to London and intermediate points.

It is clear that there will be pros and cons to each system.

 

[kylemore]

Maybe Edinburgh are wishing they'd followed suit now?

I drove buses on the Edinburgh guided busway before it was closed for conversion to tramway.
The edging of the concrete guide sections was deteriorating and the ride was not comfortable over about 25 mph.
In all but peak conditions using the parallel road in normal traffic was just as fast and closer to where people actually wanted to go.
It was a gimmick.

 

[bluenoxid]

From my understanding of the Cambridgeshire situation, rail was an option, but a much more expensive one.

For all the comments on here (and elsewhere) about "misguided busways" (ho ho ho), it's nice to see evidence of sucess. Not just the numbers (estimated to be 1,750,000, got 2,500,000) but also the type of passengers (most of whom had access to a car, over a third of whom have given up the car), when you consider all the comments about people not wanting to trade down to a bus.

Obviously it's only one sucess story - in the way that people shouldn't take the one success of passenger numbers on Alloa trains to justify re-opening every forgotten branch line, nor should this be used to justify hundreds of guided busways - but it is proof that these can work in the UK.

Maybe Edinburgh are wishing they'd followed suit now?

I have to admit, I was disappointed to see the Busway option chosen for this particular route because there was a lot of potential for this route as a railway.

However, good quality bus services will win passengers over.

 

[overthewater]

Im not so sure it was a gimmick, reason being the peak passengers, sky rocketed thus more journeys needed to be added. This must be proff of the demand. Mr Car driver not going to get on some gimmick to get to work...

 

[yorksrob]

Good news.

I doubt that this evidence will change many enthusiasts' minds as they tend to dislike anything that isn't rail based, even when rail isn't a realistic option.

However hopefully it will encourage planners to see guided buses as one tool to tackle demand (as well as trains, trams and buses) now that we have a long established busway (rather than the short sections in Leeds/ Bradford etc which are more about avoiding traffic lights on busy roads than offering a whole new alternative route).

(Cue moans about why this wouldn't work in Leigh, Gosport etc)

I'm not sure it is good news - particularly if it eggs on other areas to go for these instead of re-opening.

Don't forget, St I'ves was a viable rail reopening (and would have been even more so had it taken place during the 80's - 90's when schemes such as Oxford - Bicester went ahead, rather than trying to do it now with our cinderella system for running railways).

You still can't work on a bus, use a lap-top on a bus, eat or drink on a bus, carry luggage on a bus (at least not if everyone else is), they rarely operate to a recognisable timetable and so don't tend to link into the national railway network.

Maybe good news for the "anything but re-opening a railway" brigade at least.

 

[Deerfold]

You still can't work on a bus, use a lap-top on a bus, eat or drink on a bus, carry luggage on a bus (at least not if everyone else is), they rarely operate to a recognisable timetable and so don't tend to link into the national railway network.

Maybe good news for the "anything but re-opening a railway" brigade at least.

I quite happily used my laptop on the buses Stagecoach now run on the Guided Bus system. The power points and wi-fi rather helped. A table would have been better - but I found it as good an experience as using a laptop on a non-table seat on a train.

A major point of the busway is that these services which were extremely unreliable now do manage to operate to the timetable (when I used the service for a week a couple of months before the busway opened my journeys vary in how long they took from one day to the next by 20 minutes which was entirely down to how long the bus sat in jams).

As for buses generally, the 6 an hour past my house on various routes operate very closely to the timetable - they're very rarely as much as 5 minutes late. Your experience may be coloured (as is mine) by your local buses.

I carry a full sized suitcase on a journey involving a bus, 2 trains and another bus every week, returning later that week. True, it would be a problem if everyone on the journey had that amount of luggage, but as on my local trains they generally don't.

 

[button_boxer]

I drove buses on the Edinburgh guided busway before it was closed for conversion to tramway.
The edging of the concrete guide sections was deteriorating and the ride was not comfortable over about 25 mph.
In all but peak conditions using the parallel road in normal traffic was just as fast and closer to where people actually wanted to go.

And what makes the planners think it'll be any closer to where people want to go if they convert it to a tramway...

 

[MCR247]

My understanding of the figures were that rail would cost around £50m and the busway £54m when originally considered. I understand that Cambs CC were able to get a significant grant from HM Government for trialling the busway, and so looked less expensive to Cambs residents.

While inflation is not taken into account, the overall cost of the busway came in at £181m and there was a severe over-run in construction.

Taking this into consideration, and potential over-run cost on a new railway, I would wager that the busway has come in approx £60m more expensive than the railway, allowing for a deduction of £36m off the final figure for the southern busway, which would not have been built had a railway to St Ives been built instead.

If anyone has more detailed figures as to the cost of various sections, I'd be interested in them.

I agree that a busway may be suitable in certain circumstances, but I feel that the conversion of an extant railway into a guided busway has lost potential 'network' benefits of a railway and also lost residents along the route possible through trains south to London and intermediate points.

It is clear that there will be pros and cons to each system.

Do these include new stock for rail?

 

[Nym]

Do these include new stock for rail?

Did it include the new buses?

 

[Deerfold]

Did it include the new buses?

These were paid for by the private operators.

 

[bb21]

It is encouraging to see the system performing ahead of its forecast, however I still believe that guided busways are pointless white elephants. They are an expensive way to get some segregated bus lanes and the money can be better spent elsewhere improving the whole network with provisions for bus lanes and other priority measures.

 

[yorksrob]

I quite happily used my laptop on the buses Stagecoach now run on the Guided Bus system. The power points and wi-fi rather helped. A table would have been better - but I found it as good an experience as using a laptop on a non-table seat on a train.

A major point of the busway is that these services which were extremely unreliable now do manage to operate to the timetable (when I used the service for a week a couple of months before the busway opened my journeys vary in how long they took from one day to the next by 20 minutes which was entirely down to how long the bus sat in jams).

As for buses generally, the 6 an hour past my house on various routes operate very closely to the timetable - they're very rarely as much as 5 minutes late. Your experience may be coloured (as is mine) by your local buses.

I carry a full sized suitcase on a journey involving a bus, 2 trains and another bus every week, returning later that week. True, it would be a problem if everyone on the journey had that amount of luggage, but as on my local trains they generally don't.

I can manage reading on one but that's about it.

I wonder if there'll be more announced on the strength of this.

 

[D365]

I don't like it, the top floor on Stagecoach double-decks is too low!

In all seriousness, a rail metro/PPM tram or anything would have cost the same price and done so much more! The Barmy Nutters (BAM Nutall, original contractors) screwed our MisGuided Bustway around so much.

 

[tbtc]

I'm not sure it is good news - particularly if it eggs on other areas to go for these instead of re-opening.

Don't forget, St I'ves was a viable rail reopening (and would have been even more so had it taken place during the 80's - 90's when schemes such as Oxford - Bicester went ahead, rather than trying to do it now with our cinderella system for running railways).

You still can't work on a bus, use a lap-top on a bus, eat or drink on a bus, carry luggage on a bus (at least not if everyone else is), they rarely operate to a recognisable timetable and so don't tend to link into the national railway network.

Maybe good news for the "anything but re-opening a railway" brigade at least.

So even when there's evidence that the Cambridgeshire scheme has been significantly successful, there's still complaints (especially if this encourages other places to have successful guided busways - perish the thought!).

We need to get away from the "rail good, bus bad" mentality.

And, really, buses don't run to recognisable timetables whilst all trains have plenty of luggage space?

My understanding of the figures were that rail would cost around £50m and the busway £54m when originally considered. I understand that Cambs CC were able to get a significant grant from HM Government for trialling the busway, and so looked less expensive to Cambs residents.

While inflation is not taken into account, the overall cost of the busway came in at £181m and there was a severe over-run in construction.

Taking this into consideration, and potential over-run cost on a new railway, I would wager that the busway has come in approx £60m more expensive than the railway, allowing for a deduction of £36m off the final figure for the southern busway, which would not have been built had a railway to St Ives been built instead.

If anyone has more detailed figures as to the cost of various sections, I'd be interested in them.

I agree that a busway may be suitable in certain circumstances, but I feel that the conversion of an extant railway into a guided busway has lost potential 'network' benefits of a railway and also lost residents along the route possible through trains south to London and intermediate points.

It is clear that there will be pros and cons to each system.

The problems with construction were down to a badly run project (AFAIR the contractor tried to cut corners, which meant delays as the council forced them to deliver what was promised?), and nothing specific to guided busways.

There are plenty of rail based schemes that went horribly over budget/ were delayed, yet we never see these being used as reasons why other rail schemes can't go ahead?

And are your costs comparing "like with like"? e.g. all new vehicles and infrastructure?

 

[starrymarkb]

It is encouraging to see the system performing ahead of its forecast, however I still believe that guided busways are pointless white elephants. They are an expensive way to get some segregated bus lanes and the money can be better spent elsewhere improving the whole network with provisions for bus lanes and other priority measures.

I have to agree that guiding buses just seem pointless, given the width of the formation (including maintainance/cycleway) wouldn't it have been better to build it as a normal single carriageway with bollards (either using Tags or ANPR) to control access (ie Buses Cycles and a footpath). Gosport's is unguided as is the successful Fast Track system in Kent.

 

[yorksrob]

So even when there's evidence that the Cambridgeshire scheme has been significantly successful, there's still complaints (especially if this encourages other places to have successful guided busways - perish the thought!).

Yep, well this is a railway forum.

We need to get away from the "rail good, bus bad" mentality.

And, really, buses don't run to recognisable timetables whilst all trains have plenty of luggage space?

I'm not against buses. Buses generally do a different job to trains. Buses tend to operate in the local sphere whereas trains form a quality link to the national railway network. If you have a town that already has buses but doesn't have trains, then obviously I would rather they put in the railway line so that that town can have the transport option that's missing.

With regard to luggage space, even the lowliest pacers - the ones that annoy me because they only have a rack down one side of the carriage, even they have more luggage space than a bus. In my experience, buses aspire to timetables.

 

[Buttsy]

And are your costs comparing "like with like"? e.g. all new vehicles and infrastructure?

My quote was purely infrastructure. I would have suspected that as there are a number of trains that split at Cambridge, the diagramming of services would have meant that existing assets were sweated further. Alternatively, perhaps the 317s now in storage could have been used...

 

[D365]

The 317/7s wouldn't be suitable, the amount of stops on the system basically makes it a metro. I think one of the issues for rail was how to get from St. Ives to Huntingdon station - probably via Godmanchester, but where?

 

[jopsuk]

ome route would be, well, the old route... new bridges yes and some demolition, but it is quite obvious from above
As for stock, of course you wouldn't use the /7s for the service, but if you put the /7s onto London-Cambridge services, that would free up a small number of /5s and /8s that would be suitable. After all, there's only a couple of stops on the northern busway that weren't railway stations orginally- the Milton Road junction one, the CRC one and the nature reserve one.

 

[D365]

Possibly... Although however nice it would be to have rail back, it isn't going to happen.

 

[jopsuk]

indeed. Would actually at this point be a fairly good idea, I reckon, to extend along the old railway route from St Ives to connect to Huntigdon direct- it'll be extended atthe Cambridge end to the new railway station there.

 

[D365]

Although the A1096 bypass has been built on the former embankments, frequently held up by buses crossing into St. Ives town centre. Plus, there's hardly any space to get over the Great Ouse into Huntingdon. Oh well, we can dream, can't we!

On the Cambridge side, it will be extended to "Cambridge Science Park". Another flat crossing on its way...

 

[34D]

I have to agree that guiding buses just seem pointless, given the width of the formation (including maintainance/cycleway) wouldn't it have been better to build it as a normal single carriageway with bollards (either using Tags or ANPR) to control access (ie Buses Cycles and a footpath). Gosport's is unguided as is the successful Fast Track system in Kent.

To be fair, Cambridge is the first UK system (to my knowledge) to bother with maintenance lanes. It wouldn't have been that complicated to equip a towtruck and a couple of vans with guidewheels, for any maintenance that is needed.