Cambridgeshire Bus Franchising?

[eldomtom2]

Jarrett Walker, the consultant who designed the new map previously discussed (and who led Dublin's bus network redesign in 2017-18), has shared some thoughts on Cambridgeshire buses on his blog.

Bus Service in England: The Need for Clearer Maps — Human Transit

It’s a time of rapid change for urban bus services in England.[1] Since Margaret Thatcher’s privatization reforms of 1985, these services have been subsidized but not really controlled by government. I wrote here about Thatcher’s vision for privatized public transport, including why it has...

humantransit.org

It’s a time of rapid change for urban bus services in England. Since Margaret Thatcher’s privatization reforms of 1985, these services have been subsidized but not really controlled by government. I wrote here about Thatcher’s vision for privatized public transport, including why it has been teetering for some time and is now being swept away.

Now, all over England, governments at the county or shire level have been looking at whether and how to take control of their public transport, so that they can offer coherent networks and fares, integrate public transport planning with town planning, and ensure accountability to the public. Right now, most of these conversations are happening at a procedural level, but now it’s time to look at maps, and try to figure out what an improved and integrated network would actually look like geographically.

[...]

As we have wandered the transport websites of the UK, we’ve found maps by operating companies, showing only their services, but a shortage of good maps done by governments showing how all the services interact. So we drew one, as an example, and a lot can be learned about England’s challenge by staring at it for a bit.

On my tour of the UK last summer, I spent a day in Cambridge, site of one of the UK’s most elite universities. I was fortunate to be hosted by Andrew Highfield, an assistant director at the Cambridgeshire-Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA), which manages transport for Cambridgeshire and its cities. If he hadn’t been showing me around, the service would have been incomprehensible. Many operating companies, trained to see each other as competitors, intersect here and cover different parts of the shire. They have their own signs and shelters, each advertising their own services, and each draw maps of just their own services, if they draw maps at all.

After my visit, the CPCA commissioned us to draft a map for them. Our mapping style focuses on what matters to the customer and not what matters to anyone else. Instead of highlighting operator brands, we highlight frequency, the single most important variable about a service that is not always shown on maps. We use hot colors for high frequencies so that these jump out visually against the background complexity of lower frequency services.

[...]

Since I’m now going to make some observations about the network, I should first announce my ignorance. I can’t claim to know Cambridge that well. I’ve spent a day there, and haven’t explored the shire around it at all, though of course I’ve poked around in aerial maps and Street View. So nothing I say here should be taken as a recommendation. Only at the end of long study of the network, and many conversations with local people, would we be in the position to do that.

However, this map should be useful for people in Cambridgeshire to understand what they have, and to think about how well it fits with the demands of the communities that they know well. So the most important point of this article is: Every local authority should have a map like this!

What can we see?

[...]

One of the first things I look for in a network is heavy overlap of low-frequency services, because this means there’s enough service to deliver a higher frequency if the service were organised differently. So looking at our map of Cambridge, my eye immediately went to Histon Road in the northwest part of the city, served by A, 8, 8A, and T2

There’s enough service here to deliver a frequency of every 10 minutes or better, but instead there are four blue or purple lines, indicating less frequent services overlapping. This means long gaps at some times and a pile of buses running together at other times, even when everything is running on time. These routes look like they were drawn separately, by different people at different times with different goals, which is not what you do when you’re trying to build an integrated and efficient network.

[...]

What Histon Rooad has now, in return for low frequency and uneven spacing of buses, is direct buses to lots of places. Is that better or worse? In most cases, higher frequency, even requiring connections, delivers better access to opportunity. But an actual network plan would be the chance for the community to consider these tradeoffs and figure out what they want.

Cambridge’s Park-and-Ride structure is also interesting. [...] What’s unusual is that the Park-and-Ride facilities have their own dedicated direct routes, with numbers starting with “PR” that run frequently all day. Other local routes may duplicate them for a long distance, such as Routes 3 and PR2. These routes can easily be described as being different services with different markets, but we usually get the best public transport for everyone by maximizing the diversity of people on any one vehicle. So it’s more common to serve Park-and-Rides with peak-hour services to provide high capacity where demand is high, but to provide a more basic service at other times, one that serves other markets along the way. (For example, should those intercity buses, 12 and T5, stop at the P&R to contribute to a total frequency product with less duplication? Maybe.) Again, I am not making a recommendation here! That would only come after much more study of demand and some public conversations about goals. But this may be an example of over-specialized service, one whose market is too narrowly targeted to justify being served with these nonstop links.

[...]

It’s rare to see 10-minute frequency on a long intercity link, but there’s one here, formed by A and B from St Ives into Cambridge, running in the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway.

But as it approaches Cambridge in the lower right corner of this map, it splits into two purple (every 20 minutes) branches, which later rejoin in the city centre. So there’s frequent service along the rural link, and to central Cambridge, but not to anywhere in northern Cambridge. This makes some sense from a commute perspective, since there are commute destinations on both branches, but when you’re trying to organise service within a city, the key is to build up simple patterns of high frequency rather than piles of different routes. So it’s awkward to have the frequency go down, because of the branching, right as the line from St Ives reaches the area of highest demand. Maybe this is the right pattern, but it deserves a closer look.

(This is not the full blog post but what I think are the most important sections.)

 

[TheDavibob]

Yes, agreed. You're either nervous about making the connection, or you go early and then spend ages handing around a P&R site in the middle of nowhere with nothing to do. Plus the P&R buses in Cambridge still finish too early - admittedly not as early as the 9, which nowadays isn't even useful insurance for getting me home when the railway falls to pieces (as it has done twice in the last two months) as the last bus leaves Cambridge at 1730!

Yes, a bizarre side effect of the T1 is that there is now a bus stopping on Milton Road that leaves town after 2000, which is convenient for me (and probably not that many other people). The bonkers early finish of the PR5 (acting as a P&R bus rather than a local bus, even though it fills both roles) isn't great.

 

[Magdalia]

This is not the full blog post but what I think are the most important sections

Thanks for sharing this. The author does seem to be missing a crucial point about both the Park and Ride and Busway services. Within Cambridge both are mostly limited stop, reflecting the markets that they serve.

The author looks at Newmarket Road served by the 3 and the PR2, but the PR2 has only 4 intermediate stops: near the Grafton Centre, near the retail park and Tesco, outside the football ground, and near the airport. The purpose of the PR2 is to serve the Newmarket Road Park and Ride users, and only stops where there are destinations for them to go. The 3 provides the service at the intermediate stops, and serves Abbey, currently it is only 4bph because of driver shortages and traffic congestion, before the pandemic it was 6bph.

The author also looks at Histon Road, served by the 8, 8A, A and now T2. But the A only stops once in Histon Road, at Akeman Street, where the shops are. The prime purpose of the A is to serve busway users, linking the northern and southern sections of the busway, and serving a few key intermediate destinations in Cambridge. The 8 and 8A provide the service at the intermediate stops. I think that the 8A was a post pandemic innovation to serve Orchard Park, I have a vague recollection that the 8A started with 3bph, fitting between the 3bph on the 8, but is now only 2bph. It is also important to remember that, for the Gilbert Road-Kings Hedges Road part of Histon Road, anyone on the Arbury side can also walk to Carlton Way/Mere Way to get the 1, which is currently 5bph, but like the 3, was 6bph before the pandemic.

The author did not look at Hills Road. This is the most important arterial route in Cambridge, linking the old city, the old railway station and the hospital. The 1 provides the basic service, but it is supplemented by various others. One of these is the PR4 to from Babraham Road Park and Ride, which only stops intermediately at the railway station, the VIth Form College and the hospital. The PR4 is another route that was reduced from 6bph to 5bph because of traffic congestion.

In an ideal world, without driver shortages and traffic congestion, I suspect that Stagecoach would be running 6bph on all of 1, 3 and 8+8A, so all three arteries would have a bus every 10 minutes just from those routes.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jul 2025 ==

Some interesting data on Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA) bus support funding here:

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough authority look into £180 bus route

Several other bus routes cost more than £50 per passenger to run last year.

www.bbc.co.uk

An authority is looking into reasons why a rural bus route cost £180.32 per passenger to run last year.
The number 15 between Haslingfield, Cambridgeshire and Royston, Hertfordshire, cost £50,668.61 in the year to April 2025 and carried 281 passengers.
The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA) published the data ahead of a meeting looking into ways to fund its Tiger Pass discounted scheme for young people.
The authority is planning on ending a cap on local bus fares early to extend £1 bus travel for under-25s, which it said "without action ... will cease".
Six bus routes in Cambridgeshire cost more than £50 per passenger to run last year, according to a report, external being presented to the CPCA on Tuesday

 

[greenline712]

• These comments are from the bbc article:
• The 8A between March and Cottenham (£100.33 per passenger)
• The 13B between Nosterfield End and Linton (£98.47 per passenger)
• The 31 between Cambridge and Fowlmere (£76.89 per passenger)
• The 26 between Royston and Cambridge (£71.76 per passenger)
• And 68 between St Ives bus station and Boxworth (£59.48 per passenger)

An additional three on-demand routes launched in January, which meant data did not cover the full year, cost £180.11 per passenger in South Cambridgeshire, £74.11 in East Cambridgeshire and £65.68 in Fenland.

The report said it was also investigating why annual passenger numbers on the once-weekly number 15 bus had dropped from 400 to 281 in a year.

I have no problem with trialling "innovative" rural bus services . . . but there should always be a process of evaluation, and a clear "exit strategy" . . . in the olden days, this would be summarised as "use it or lose it". We don't know, for example, how many passengers use the 8A each week . . . I'd estimate less than 10, so under 2 per day, which for a service that runs 6 days a week, is pretty low!! This route should have been on a six-month trial, with a clear progression of passenger usage to aim for. If the route failed to meet these targets, then it should have been closed . . . and all would have said "well, at least they tried".

I'm surprised that the subsidy per passenger on Route 26 is so high . . . but with 4+ trains each hour from Royston to Cambridge, even with a walk at Cambridge . . . perhaps the route has simply come to the end?

And "investigating" why annual numbers on the once-weekly route 15 had fallen from 7.7 per day to 5.4 per day . . . try riding on the bus (shock horror) and asking the remaining passengers!! I'll tell you the answers . . . Mrs Scroggins has died, and Mrs Clutterbuck has moved into a care home.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jul 2025 ==

I went for a ride on the T4 and T5 routes last Friday.

The T5 first, which luckily was running 18 minutes late (the 1100 ex Cambridge) . . . luckily because I didn't arrive at Drummer Street until 1103! A duuble deck turned up, which surprised me . . . it transpired that the other bus on the route was also a 'decker! Around 15 passengers alighted, which seemed pretty good, until you consider that this route has (at the Cambridge end) been around for about 100 years!
We departed with 8 passengers on board, and proceeded to drop these off along the route as far as Burwell, after which I was on my own. No passengers were picked up along the route, which didn't surprise me . . . the villages were pretty deserted!
I'd thought originally that 59 minutes running time was pretty heroic . . . but we arrived in Soham only 3 minutes late! I complemented the driver on his timekeeping, as we hadn't omitted any sections of route . . . he replied that he'd driven the route for Stagecoach many times, and "knew where to put his foot down!". Quite why the inbound bus was delayed, and the other bus was also about 10 minutes late, I've no idea . . . there were no significant roadworks to be seen.

At Drummer Street, the standard of the publicity was truly appalling . . . the Stephenson's timetable still included the withdrawn Route 11; there was no visible publicity for the T5 route, and many of the e-screens were defective. I'd also just mention the reaction of the passengers waiting for the T5 . . . all praised the Stephenson's operation, and couldn't understand why the new route wasn't publicised anywhere.

At Soham Station, there was absolutely no evidence of route T5 . . . nothing; nada; zilch!! However, in Soham High Street, there were panel timetables for the T5!! Although nothing for the Stephenson's 112; just QR codes which didn't work.

My next bus was the 1220 to Newmarket (Route 112), which eventually turned up 15 minutes late, driven by a driver who looked about 8 or 9 years old. . . but who proceeded to drive smoothly but hesitantly . . . just qualified, maybe? No matter, we got to Newmarket only about 10 minutes late for the next trip. As behoves a long-established route, the bus was decently loaded, with passengers boarding and alighting along the route, although most heading to Newmarket.

Lunch was taken at Newmarket, during which I observed two Stephenson's deckers parked up . . . presumably awaiting their next schools trips. A route 12 bus arrived from Cambridge, changed to a 16 to Bury St Edmonds, changed drivers and departed. Only a handful alighted, but around 12 boarded . . . decent enough, I suppose.

And then the main event . . . the T4 to Addenbrokes! This has 20 minutes stand time at Newmarket, and arrived on time, but with no passengers alighting. Departure was on time (at 1340), with around 10 passengers on board, and was another 'decker (as were the other two buses on the route!). The driver was heard to comment that passengers were still complaining about the lack of a bus via Studlands Park . . . I have to say that my random observations over some years were that loadings were of 1s or 2s over this section, but maybe I'm just unlucky?

The full route was followed, via Reach not Lode, and run time seemend to be pretty close, with a brief wait for time only at Lode road end. Loadings were surprisingly good, with 5 passengers picked up along the route, almost all of which went to Addenbrokes (including two from Newmarket, one of which was trying the route out with a view to commuting that way!). I have a suspicion, though, that their final destination may not have been the Hospital . . . myself and one another boarded a route 7 bus to head into Cambridge, and two girls remained on the bus at Addenbrokes (the return journey runs via Cherry Hinton on a loop). Timings were pretty good, although we arrived at Addenbrokes about 8 minutes early . . . an example of timetable padding, as departure from Fulbourn was on time.

I assume that Route T4 is effectively the first regular bus route via the Wilbrahims for many years (if ever?). I'd be surprised if many new passengers are to be found there. Again . . . no significant publicity along the route, although I did espy a couple of new panel timetables where timetable frames were still fitted.

I know this comment has been made before, but just in case anyone at the Combined Authority reads this . . . come on chaps! It's a month after the routes started; the period for a soft launch is over. Why aren't all bus stops and shelters festooned with big, bright, brash posters now? Why still no timetable leaflets? Anonymous buses in dealer white or fleet livery isn't the way to promote anything. Why is there nothing at Soham Station? Not even a flag or bus stop cage? And don't give me the guff about "Network Rail" land . . . these routes have been registered for around 100 days now . . . plenty of time to talk to NR and the local authority.

 

[markymark2000]

Thank you @greenline712 for that post. It's very insightful.
I always find it funny that those who are pushing for franchising and more public control, are often those which are already failing at the basics. If authorities can't get the basics right now for supported services, what hope is there for a publicly operated network. Of all of the areas, Cambs is the most worrying for public control given their supported network is just constantly throwing good money after bad (and arguably to some extents, it's mismanagement of public funds the amount that keeps being wasted) and then you look at the infrastructure and marketing and it's shocking. And these same people sit in offices twiddling their thumbs wondering why buses aren't used as much as they were years ago. The mind boggles.

 

[158756]

• These comments are from the bbc article:
• The 8A between March and Cottenham (£100.33 per passenger)
• The 13B between Nosterfield End and Linton (£98.47 per passenger)
• The 31 between Cambridge and Fowlmere (£76.89 per passenger)
• The 26 between Royston and Cambridge (£71.76 per passenger)
• And 68 between St Ives bus station and Boxworth (£59.48 per passenger)

An additional three on-demand routes launched in January, which meant data did not cover the full year, cost £180.11 per passenger in South Cambridgeshire, £74.11 in East Cambridgeshire and £65.68 in Fenland.

The report said it was also investigating why annual passenger numbers on the once-weekly number 15 bus had dropped from 400 to 281 in a year.

I have no problem with trialling "innovative" rural bus services . . . but there should always be a process of evaluation, and a clear "exit strategy" . . . in the olden days, this would be summarised as "use it or lose it". We don't know, for example, how many passengers use the 8A each week . . . I'd estimate less than 10, so under 2 per day, which for a service that runs 6 days a week, is pretty low!! This route should have been on a six-month trial, with a clear progression of passenger usage to aim for. If the route failed to meet these targets, then it should have been closed . . . and all would have said "well, at least they tried".

I'm surprised that the subsidy per passenger on Route 26 is so high . . . but with 4+ trains each hour from Royston to Cambridge, even with a walk at Cambridge . . . perhaps the route has simply come to the end?

And "investigating" why annual numbers on the once-weekly route 15 had fallen from 7.7 per day to 5.4 per day . . . try riding on the bus (shock horror) and asking the remaining passengers!! I'll tell you the answers . . . Mrs Scroggins has died, and Mrs Clutterbuck has moved into a care home.

Usage of the 26/31 (have these merged at some point, I can't find any 31?) does seem very low, but with the rail line, and the alternative option of the park and ride, combined with South Cambridgeshire generally being a wealthy area where few people lack access to a car, what market is there for such an infrequent service?

As for the other services listed - what is the point of a bus that runs once a day? The 8A doesn't end at any sort of destination, I suppose you could connect to the P&R, but no one is ever going to rely on a connection involving a bus that runs once a day. The 13B is somehow worse, running in one direction only, arriving at the metropolis of Linton at 7am. (Tbf you can make a return journey using the 19 (subsidy £33.33 per passenger)). The 68 also only runs once a day, but part of the route looks like it provides an earlier/later bus for places that have other services - but evidently few people want to arrive in St Ives at 7am.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jul 2025 ==

Another story about buses in Cambridgeshire recently - Stagecoach will withdraw the 31 between Peterborough and Ramsey beyond Whittlesey. Currently every 2 hours, reportedly to be replaced by another useless twice a day shoppers service.

Bus service connecting Ramsey to Peterborough to stop

People living in Ramsey say they will be cut off from Peterborough when the service stops in August.

www.bbc.co.uk

The combined authority are quoted blaming deregulation. But if you read the report for their recent meeting https://democracy.cambridgeshirepet...cuments/s4519/Bus Network Service Options.pdf

the section of the 31 to be withdrawn is already contracted. The report says as well as budget the combined authority must also consider the precedent of replacing services a commercial operator chooses not to run. This thinking seems totally bizarre given the route is already contracted.

They say it would cost £8.40 per passenger to continue, which on the one hand seems quite a lot, but then we know what CPCA are spending on other routes.

 

[johncrossley]

The main point of franchising is to improve services that are currently operated commercially, so existing supported services are largely irrelevant in that respect.

 

[Magdalia]

the 26/31 (have these merged at some point, I can't find any 31?)

The 26 still runs, and now goes via Fowlmere.

The 31 seems to have been combined with the old Guilden Morden-Royston route 127, and running as route 17.

Both are operated by A2B.

 

[Teds]

The 8A was a partial replacement for a Stagecoach 8A which was an extension of a 8 North of Cottenham - one journey each way. As a through route,it would probably have had more passengers. The replacement had the unpredictability of the connections plus a tortuous journey through Histon and Cottenham. The new 8A has moved the southern terminal to Milton Park and Ride which has a more frequent and faster service into Cambridge. It might pick up a few more people. The Cottenham version was operated by Stephensons whose services after a few problems were very reliable as the post above suggests.
I agree about the lack of publicity. In addition to no printed timetables on bus stops, where provided the real time information displays show the new services but mostly not in real time because only Stagecoach and Whippet vehicles track on the system that they use. You can see the other operators buses tracking on bustimes.org so their systems work. It has been like it for years but no one does anything about it.

 

[Magdalia]

I assume that Route T4 is effectively the first regular bus route via the Wilbrahims for many years (if ever?).

In the 1960s Eastern Counties route 110 ran between Cambridge and the Wilbrahams.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

The main point of franchising is to improve services that are currently operated commercially, so existing supported services are largely irrelevant in that respect.

I think you have misrepresented what @markymark2000 said, assuming that was who you were referencing?

He clearly said that if an authority can't get the relatively simple aspect of commissioning and managing supported services (as they do at the moment), then what hope have they got of managing franchising effectively?

The 8A was a partial replacement for a Stagecoach 8A which was an extension of a 8 North of Cottenham - one journey each way. As a through route,it would probably have had more passengers. The replacement had the unpredictability of the connections plus a tortuous journey through Histon and Cottenham. The new 8A has moved the southern terminal to Milton Park and Ride which has a more frequent and faster service into Cambridge. It might pick up a few more people. The Cottenham version was operated by Stephensons whose services after a few problems were very reliable as the post above suggests.
I agree about the lack of publicity. In addition to no printed timetables on bus stops, where provided the real time information displays show the new services but mostly not in real time because only Stagecoach and Whippet vehicles track on the system that they use. You can see the other operators buses tracking on bustimes.org so their systems work. It has been like it for years but no one does anything about it.

That was my recollection that it was a single journey from March of a morning that ran through to Cambridge that was tagged onto the main Cottenham service. I think it was a remnant from the old days of the X8 and X9 (?) until the 2000s.

Terminating at Milton P&R will make the changing more resilient/more convenient arguably but it's a bit of a dead duck. The whole Peterborough - Whittlesey corridor is something where CPCA should be focussing their money (incl. saving the Ramsey route) and not on ridiculous stuff in Chatteris.

 

[Julia]

The 68 is the same bus as does the 67 (St Ives - St Neots) in between, and is effectively a "short" 67 not really a route in its own right, though funding arrangements may be different. The 67 isn't exactly busy either.

 

[markymark2000]

Terminating at Milton P&R will make the changing more resilient/more convenient arguably but it's a bit of a dead duck. The whole Peterborough - Whittlesey corridor is something where CPCA should be focussing their money (incl. saving the Ramsey route) and not on ridiculous stuff in Chatteris.

As much as I think we can all agree the 8A is a bit silly, could extending it to Cambridge North Station do anything for it? It gives the routes a USP as it links to the train station (which the 8 doesnt), and it gives it a new use case (as those wanting to get the train would currently have to faff around changing buses multiple times). For the sake of the extra 1.5 mile extension, it shouldn't cost much but could it get just the extra 1 or 2 people onboard? Or will it forever be a 'dead duck' and nothing could change it's fate?

 

[greenline712]

As much as I think we can all agree the 8A is a bit silly, could extending it to Cambridge North Station do anything for it? It gives the routes a USP as it links to the train station (which the 8 doesnt), and it gives it a new use case (as those wanting to get the train would currently have to faff around changing buses multiple times). For the sake of the extra 1.5 mile extension, it shouldn't cost much but could it get just the extra 1 or 2 people onboard? Or will it forever be a 'dead duck' and nothing could change it's fate?

At over £100 subsidy per passenger .... I think it's a dead duck!! The subsidy can be better used elsewhere.

 

[Magdalia]

It is very easy to sit a long way away and decree that high levels of support per passenger for buses serving Chatteris is a poor use of subsidy.

But locally, it is not so easy for the CPCA, the County Council, or local politicians to do the same. For them, the question is a different one.

Chatteris is quite a large town by local standards, roughly the same size as Soham or (just over the border in Norfolk) Downham Market. But around here we would describe Chatteris as being "in the back of beyond": it lost its railway service in 1967 and since then has had very limited links with the outside world. It now has reasonably decent roads to March, Ely and Huntingdon, but what it doesn't have is good links to either Cambridge or Peterborough. That matters a lot more now because most of the local economic growth is in Cambridge and Peterborough, and Cambridgeshire is becoming an increasingly unequal place as towns and villages not linked into Cambridge or Peterborough get left further and further behind.

Before the pandemic, Chatteris had 2 bus links to Cambridge for workers and students, giving the people of Chatteris access to the jobs market and learning opportunities in Cambridge. One was the extension of route 8: this ran as the X8 in the morning, taking a faster route through Histon, but in the evening was just a normal route 8 service extended beyond Cottenham. The other was an extension of route A on the busway, giving a Chatteris-St Ives-Cambridge-Trumpington bus in the morning with the reverse in the evening.

The busway extension never reappeared after the pandemic, the route 8 extension was part of the Stagecoach autumn 2022 cutbacks, when Chatteris almost became completely isolated from the bus network.

So, for the CPCA, the County Council, and the local politicians, the question is how to keep Chatteris connected to Cambridge. The subsidy is buying that connectivity, not the individual journeys. The current 8A may not be the best way of doing that, but the CPCA, the County Council, and the local politicians will not be giving up on Chatteris-Cambridge completely.

Finally, it is important to look forward, not just at the present situation. Not very far into the future is the new station at Waterbeach: when that opens then Chatteris-Waterbeach might be a better solution. Further into the future the fortunes of Chatteris have prospects for improvement if the new reservoir goes ahead (and Cambridge is in trouble if it doesn't).

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It is very easy to sit a long way away and decree that high levels of support per passenger for buses serving Chatteris is a poor use of subsidy.

But locally, it is not so easy for the CPCA, the County Council, or local politicians to do the same. For them, the question is a different one.

Chatteris is quite a large town by local standards, roughly the same size as Soham or (just over the border in Norfolk) Downham Market. But around here we would describe Chatteris as being "in the back of beyond": it lost its railway service in 1967 and since then has had very limited links with the outside world. It now has reasonably decent roads to March, Ely and Huntingdon, but what it doesn't have is good links to either Cambridge or Peterborough. That matters a lot more now because most of the local economic growth is in Cambridge and Peterborough, and Cambridgeshire is becoming an increasingly unequal place as towns and villages not linked into Cambridge or Peterborough get left further and further behind.

Before the pandemic, Chatteris had 2 bus links to Cambridge for workers and students, giving the people of Chatteris access to the jobs market and learning opportunities in Cambridge. One was the extension of route 8: this ran as the X8 in the morning, taking a faster route through Histon, but in the evening was just a normal route 8 service extended beyond Cottenham. The other was an extension of route A on the busway, giving a Chatteris-St Ives-Cambridge-Trumpington bus in the morning with the reverse in the evening.

The busway extension never reappeared after the pandemic, the route 8 extension was part of the Stagecoach autumn 2022 cutbacks, when Chatteris almost became completely isolated from the bus network.

So, for the CPCA, the County Council, and the local politicians, the question is how to keep Chatteris connected to Cambridge. The subsidy is buying that connectivity, not the individual journeys. The current 8A may not be the best way of doing that, but the CPCA, the County Council, and the local politicians will not be giving up on Chatteris-Cambridge completely.

Finally, it is important to look forward, not just at the present situation. Not very far into the future is the new station at Waterbeach: when that opens then Chatteris-Waterbeach might be a better solution. Further into the future the fortunes of Chatteris have prospects for improvement if the new reservoir goes ahead (and Cambridge is in trouble if it doesn't).

All that you say is very laudable about connecting Chatteris (and March) with Cambridge. However, when you look at the figures, it's £197k p.a. for the benefit of 1969 passengers per year (or 6/7 passengers a day). And that figure has declined by 12.5% over the previous year, from 2252. £197k is the third highest individual tender price on that list and the other two (56 and 301) are all day services.

Chatteris (but not March) does have an earlier link at 0620 into St Ives on the 302 so that could allow a connection into the Busway. You could try to make it later (closer to the 0655 departure time) though I suspect that the interworking that is intrinsic in the duties means any change to that will have implications with other routes.

 

[greenline712]

As @TheGrandWazoo says . . . laudable indeed; it's the price that hurts! One does rather question whether Chatteris, like Soham, actually looks toward Cambridge for employment. Even by car it's a long way to travel.

These are, of course, the Stephenson's contract prices from 2022 (?), when AFAIK they were the only bidder for the Cambridgeshire network that Stagecoach pulled away from. There was also a cost, that the CPCA will have had to meet, of Stephenson's setting up a new operation, with depot space to rent and new overheads to meet . . . that would have been priced in as well.

I'm not entirely certain that the quoted price of Route 8A is correct . . . almost £200K pa for one PVR and two half duties seems very high indeed. I don't know enough about the contract structures, but does that price include any other work; the Ely town service, for example?

I note that the route extension to Milton Park is a requirement of the new (A2B) contract . . . it would be interesting to know the price of that new contract.

I understand that the station at Waterbeach is to be renewed (it is there already) . . . so I don't quite understand the reference to a Chatteris - Waterbeach link.

Finally . . . yes, by all means look into the future, but temper that with a glance into the past and considering the present . . . it is far better to build on an existing link that is tolerably well used than start from scratch . . . my report (post #214 above) comments that Soham has an hourly bus service already, seemingly well used. What about doubling the service frequency there? Of course, it'll never happen, however sensible, because Newmarket is in Suffolk!!

And to stir the pot even more . . . what about an East of England travel authority, with the power and the vision to overlook outdated County boundaries??
I'll get me tin hat . . .

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

As @TheGrandWazoo says . . . laudable indeed; it's the price that hurts! One does rather question whether Chatteris, like Soham, actually looks toward Cambridge for employment. Even by car it's a long way to travel.

These are, of course, the Stephenson's contract prices from 2022 (?), when AFAIK they were the only bidder for the Cambridgeshire network that Stagecoach pulled away from. There was also a cost, that the CPCA will have had to meet, of Stephenson's setting up a new operation, with depot space to rent and new overheads to meet . . . that would have been priced in as well.

I'm not entirely certain that the quoted price of Route 8A is correct . . . almost £200K pa for one PVR and two half duties seems very high indeed. I don't know enough about the contract structures, but does that price include any other work; the Ely town service, for example?

I note that the route extension to Milton Park is a requirement of the new (A2B) contract . . . it would be interesting to know the price of that new contract.

I understand that the station at Waterbeach is to be renewed (it is there already) . . . so I don't quite understand the reference to a Chatteris - Waterbeach link.

Finally . . . yes, by all means look into the future, but temper that with a glance into the past and considering the present . . . it is far better to build on an existing link that is tolerably well used than start from scratch . . . my report (post #214 above) comments that Soham has an hourly bus service already, seemingly well used. What about doubling the service frequency there? Of course, it'll never happen, however sensible, because Newmarket is in Suffolk!!

And to stir the pot even more . . . what about an East of England travel authority, with the power and the vision to overlook outdated County boundaries??
I'll get me tin hat . . .

I have to say that the £197k cost for that facility struck me as high. Whilst I'm a bit off on full 6 day vehicle costings, that looks like best part of a full vehicle costed for what is a peak hour service.

Certainly, developing from what is already there makes much more sense, with established travel patterns. That was my point in terms of Whittlesey to Peterborough - rejuvenating an existing link (that has been much reduced in recent years) would seem a better bet to spend money on rather than something new. A Kickstart for a new generation, perhaps?

IIRC, Waterbeach station is to be relocated and improved as part of the development of major housing development on the old air base/barracks. However, will the creation of a revised 8A into there transform its fortunes... I'm not convinced.

 

[paulmch]

I did my usual running route through the new development at Waterbeach Barracks yesterday and a Central Connect bus passed me. They've been a common sight in Waterbeach for a little while as part of the shuttle bus from the NHS accommodation on the barracks to Papworth Hospital, but unusually it had a 100 in the rear display. I looked it up when I got home and sure enough, there's a new route 100 running twice an hour until 2330 from Waterbeach to Drummer Street via Waterbeach station, Fen Ditton and Newmarket Road! It's a significant improvement on what Stagecoach are offering on the PR5 - given that the route seems to be funded by Urban & Civic (S109 money?) it really wouldn't surprise me if the PR5 is curtailed to Milton P&R, but in the meantime the village can enjoy what's likely the best bus service it's ever had!

https://www.central-connect.co.uk/east-of-england-all-aboard-the-hundred

 

[Magdalia]

One does rather question whether Chatteris, like Soham, actually looks toward Cambridge for employment. Even by car it's a long way to travel.

IIRC, Waterbeach station is to be relocated and improved as part of the development of major housing development on the old air base/barracks. However, will the creation of a revised 8A into there transform its fortunes... I'm not convinced.

The lack of decent travel to work data from the 2021 census doesn't help here.

If the traffic for recent years includes students then there will be significant turnover from year to year and a lot of volatility in the numbers travelling.

The Waterbeach station is relocating. The current location is unsuitable for a bus/rail link being on a single carriageway road with a half barrier level crossing, but the new station will have a transport interchange, see here:

Work to relocate Waterbeach railway station held up

Planners hope the station will open next year, despite the need for more preparatory work.

www.bbc.co.uk

Work to relocate a station has been delayed, but those behind the project say they hope it will still be completed by next year.

Network Rail wants to carry out additional survey work that will slightly delay the completion of the Waterbeach Station move.

Moving the station is a key part of the Cambridgeshire town's development, external.

I'm also not convinced that Chatteris-Waterbeach would work, but it is a different option that only becomes available when the station is relocated.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Jul 2025 ==

And to stir the pot even more . . . what about an East of England travel authority, with the power and the vision to overlook outdated County boundaries??

The current devolution proposals include a single mayor for Norfolk and Suffolk. It is going to be interesting to see to what extent they will collaborate with the mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.

 

[158756]

The fastest way to get from Chatteris to Cambridge or Peterborough by public transport would be to change to the train at Ely or March. Obviously that doesn't fit with the UK approach to integration (or lack of it), but the connections in this area seem particularly bad.

The "Zip" buses from Chatteris to Ely omit the stops nearest the station at the times most likely to be useful for commuters. And all buses from Chatteris to March terminate in the town centre, rather than continuing to the station further north. And of course all the buses have low frequencies and finish very early.

It also surprises me that there is no direct bus from Chatteris to Wisbech via March. It would be a fair bit faster than the new T7 avoiding March, and would go past the station as a bonus. All the buses between these towns are funded by the council, so there's no issue of getting the bus companies to do anything, if the council wanted they could arrange the buses to connect with the trains. And for the money being spent on the T7 they could have done a lot to upgrade the existing Wisbech-March-Chatteris-Ely routes.

 

[Magdalia]

Another story about buses in Cambridgeshire recently - Stagecoach will withdraw the 31 between Peterborough and Ramsey beyond Whittlesey. Currently every 2 hours, reportedly to be replaced by another useless twice a day shoppers service.

Bus service connecting Ramsey to Peterborough to stop

People living in Ramsey say they will be cut off from Peterborough when the service stops in August.

www.bbc.co.uk

The combined authority are quoted blaming deregulation. But if you read the report for their recent meeting https://democracy.cambridgeshirepet...cuments/s4519/Bus Network Service Options.pdf

the section of the 31 to be withdrawn is already contracted. The report says as well as budget the combined authority must also consider the precedent of replacing services a commercial operator chooses not to run. This thinking seems totally bizarre given the route is already contracted.

BBC are running a further story on this, concentrating on the impact on students:

We have many bus stops, but zero buses, says student from Bury

New bus stops are being installed in around Bury but the main bus service is due to end in August.

www.bbc.co.uk

People have voiced concerns that recently installed bus stops around their village will be redundant when a bus service ends next month.
Bury, Cambridgeshire, currently has three bus stops for the 31 bus route, operated by Stagecoach, which connects the village with Ramsey, Whittlesey and Peterborough.
The full service will stop running in Bury on 31 August, but the 31 route will continue to serve Whittlesey and Peterborough, Stagecoach said.
"Bury will be the place with so many bus stops, but zero buses servicing it," said 16-year-old student Harriet Copley, who will college in Peterborough from September.
"My younger brother attends a college in Whittlesey, they don't have a school bus service so he won't be able to get there," she added.

Usage of the 26/31 (have these merged at some point, I can't find any 31?)

The 26 still runs, and now goes via Fowlmere.

The 31 seems to have been combined with the old Guilden Morden-Royston route 127, and running as route 17.

Both are operated by A2B.

I have now found that this is a very recent change, it started on 30 June.

 

[700720]

Anonymous buses in dealer white or fleet livery isn't the way to promote anything.

It’s good to see that Stagecoach East are (finally) now applying Tiger livery to their E400s operating their Tiger routes (T2, T3, T4). Stagecoach East Midlands had already liveried their E200s operating on the T7.

Additionally, Whippet have just introduced 2 EvoSetis for the T1, currently in plain white livery. I assume these will now have the Tiger livery applied.

A2B have already applied Tiger livery to their E400s on the T5 and the minibus on the T12. So hopefully soon all Tiger routes will have Tiger branded buses!

 

[Magdalia]

You wait ages for a BBC news story about Cambridgeshire buses, then two come at once.

Mayor hopes Cambridgeshire buses can be saved by cutting others

A proposal will be put to the combined authority on Tuesday, the mayor says.

www.bbc.co.uk

Two "key" bus routes at risk of being cut by an operator could be saved by stopping three lesser used services, said a Conservative mayor.
Stagecoach East is due to stop its route nine bus service, which links Littleport to Ely and Cambridge, and the 31 route from Ramsey to Whittlesey.
Passengers told the BBC cuts to the services would have a negative effect on people living in the area.
An alternative proposal, external from Paul Bristow, the Mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, suggested stopping the south Cambridgeshire Tiger On Demand public transport service and the bus routes number 15 and 8A.
The proposal will be put forward to the combined authority on 22 July, external and was estimated to save about £531,000 a year, Bristow said.

Tiger Pass vote to take place on continuing £1 youth bus fares

There are plans for the popular Tiger Pass scheme to continue until April.

www.bbc.co.uk

A vote is set to take place on extending a scheme offering young people cut-price bus journeys.

The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA) board, which involves the mayor and council leaders, is set to agree on extending the Tiger Pass scheme until the end of March.

The passes have been used for more than one million journeys since May 2024 and give under-25s access to £1 fares on a single bus journey.

A report, external being presented to the board's meeting on Tuesday has recommended including bus journeys that cross county borders and discusses ways to make the scheme permanent.

 

[Camb]

A very interesting analysis of route 15 and a few other CPCA bits has been published by Roger French on his excellent blog; https://busandtrainuser.com/2025/07/17/busandtrainuser-verify-14/

 

[Magdalia]

Update on the outcome of the board meeting of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority:

Tiger bus pass in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough is extended

Local politicians agree to keep the £1 fare scheme for under-25s until the end of March 2026.

www.bbc.co.uk

Young people will continue to receive cut-price bus fares after a popular scheme was extended.
Members of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA) board agreed to keep Tiger passes until 31 March 2026.
They gave under-25s access to £1 bus journeys and have been used for about 1.8 million trips since May 2024, but concerns had been raised about funding them.
CPCA mayor Paul Bristow said it was "exactly the kind of scheme we should be prioritising" at a meeting on Tuesday.
However, it was agreed the local fare cap - which prices single journeys for older riders at £2.50 - would end on 31 October to free up £1.4m to fund the extension.

During the meeting, members also decided to begin procurement of bus services on the number nine from Littleport to Cambridge and 31 from Ramsey to Peterborough.

They would be funded by scrapping the South Cambridgeshire DRT, number 15 Haslingfield to Royston and number 8A March to Cottenham.

 

[MikeWM]

The 9A 'Ely Circular' appears to have transferred to A2B from Stephensons - though I can't say I'd seen any publicity or information or news about this until I saw the 9A number on an A2B bus in the centre of Ely earlier today.

The timetable on A2B's website is marked as 'from 30th June' so maybe that's when the change occurred. The route unfortunately looks the same as before (getting nowhere near the railway station or the supermarkets on Lisle Lane) though it now runs every *35* minutes, which may be more realistic than the previous 30 minutes but therefore loses its clockface timings. It still finishes around 4pm as well, far too early to be of use to many who may otherwise consider using it.

Certainly there's no information about a new operator or a change of timetable on my local bus stop, which has a Stagecoach flag telling us to download the Stagecoach app (even though nothing from Stagecoach has stopped there for years) and no other information whatever. Or at my second nearest stop which also has a Stagecoach flag (ditto) and a single piece of laminated paper with a QR code for Stephensons (who also no longer stop there). In other words - if you don't have a mobile phone or don't want to use an app or a QR code (and much of the potential market in Ely will not) then hard luck finding out a timetable or even what the bus number is that stops there. But even if you do have a mobile phone and download the Stagecoach app and/or scan the Stephensons QR code, then that's not going to be any help at all either as neither of them actually serve the stops anymore, and there is no information whatever about the company that does.

As I've said before, it almost seems like this route is being made to deliberately fail so it can then be claimed there is no demand for bus services in the outskirts of Ely. It is unfortunate, as with a tweaked route and expanded hours I think it could actually be rather useful.

 

[Teds]

The 9A 'Ely Circular' appears to have transferred to A2B from Stephensons - though I can't say I'd seen any publicity or information or news about this until I saw the 9A number on an A2B bus in the centre of Ely earlier today.

The timetable on A2B's website is marked as 'from 30th June' so maybe that's when the change occurred. The route unfortunately looks the same as before (getting nowhere near the railway station or the supermarkets on Lisle Lane) though it now runs every *35* minutes, which may be more realistic than the previous 30 minutes but therefore loses its clockface timings. It still finishes around 4pm as well, far too early to be of use to many who may otherwise consider using it.

Certainly there's no information about a new operator or a change of timetable on my local bus stop, which has a Stagecoach flag telling us to download the Stagecoach app (even though nothing from Stagecoach has stopped there for years) and no other information whatever. Or at my second nearest stop which also has a Stagecoach flag (ditto) and a single piece of laminated paper with a QR code for Stephensons (who also no longer stop there). In other words - if you don't have a mobile phone or don't want to use an app or a QR code (and much of the potential market in Ely will not) then hard luck finding out a timetable or even what the bus number is that stops there. But even if you do have a mobile phone and download the Stagecoach app and/or scan the Stephensons QR code, then that's not going to be any help at all either as neither of them actually serve the stops anymore, and there is no information whatever about the company that does.

As I've said before, it almost seems like this route is being made to deliberately fail so it can then be claimed there is no demand for bus services in the outskirts of Ely. It is unfortunate, as with a tweaked route and expanded hours I think it could actually be rather useful.

The contract for the 9A and the doomed 8A transferred on 30 June. The only source of the timetable on that day was bus open data.

The timetable appeared on BusTimes.org and the AtoB website after the new timetable had started. The lack of timetables is true of all the council contracts unless the operator puts them up themselves. Dews do in some places but Stephensons used those QR codes which I always thought were fairly useless. If you had a phone to read a QR code, the odds are you would use bustimes.org or similar to find out the information.

Printed timetables for all Ely services are available from the Tourist Information Centre. The staff will also try to help with other bus servies in Cambridgeshire.

The 35 minutes round trip is awful. No one gave it any thought. It would be best to reduce the route to achieve a round trip in 30 minutes or decrease the frequency to hourly and use the 'spare' 25 minutes to serve another part of the city - probably, as suggested, the station and the supermarkets.

 

[MikeWM]

The contract for the 9A and the doomed 8A transferred on 30 June. The only source of the timetable on that day was bus open data.

Thanks - that'll be why I was having trouble finding it when we discussed this last, coincidentally on 30 June!

The lack of timetables is true of all the council contracts unless the operator puts them up themselves.

Hmm. As I said above, there doesn't seem to be much interest in making a success of these services, at the least the council could tell the operator to make an effort with information so people may actually be able to get the buses (...that we're paying for via our council tax).

Printed timetables for all Ely services are available from the Tourist Information Centre. The staff will also try to help with other bus servies in Cambridgeshire.

Never really thought about that, given I live here I suppose I should take another look in the library sometime and see if there is anything there, though the last time I asked for a bus timetable in a library I was looked at as if I'd just landed from Mars! (admittedly that was a different library)

The 35 minutes round trip is awful. No one gave it any thought. It would be best to reduce the route to achieve a round trip in 30 minutes or decrease the frequency to hourly and use the 'spare' 25 minutes to serve another part of the city - probably, as suggested, the station and the supermarkets.

Yes - especially given they haven't made it easy to consult a timetable. At least if the service is clock-face you can probably remember when it is supposed to arrive, without having to dig around on the internet.

 

[greenline712]

A little more information here:

CPCA cuts reduced fare cap early to save Tiger Pass - CBW

A decision to end its reduced fare cap early means fare increases for passengers in the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough area, reports Steven Knight Bus passengers across the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough region face a second fare [...]

cbwmagazine.com