How could bus and railway stations be better integrated going forward?

[johncrossley]

We are not in this utopia where everything was designed in the Victorian age to make connections perfect. We are in this world we have now. Unless you have any concrete proposals for how to address the issue, to say any more will simply be going round in circles.

mods note - split from this thread

There's nothing that can be done now, but we can't use it as an excuse for not following an integrated transport model common in similar big cities outside the UK.

Stockport was really just a single example though, and not really my main point. There are now lots of tram stops with frequent service that can be used for connections. But people seem to be even having reservations about that.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

When making comparisons of the siting of bus stations and railway stations, the geography of both Todmorden and Stockport show a great difference in height levels between the bus station and the railway station and both have a high-level railway viaduct that crosses the town centre.

 

[Statto]

Most people using buses to/from Stockport are going to the Town Centre not the rail station, the bus station is convenient for the Town Centre, as it's right in the Town Centre were as the station isn't, & yes i've used both.

 

[johncrossley]

Most people using buses to/from Stockport are going to the Town Centre not the rail station, the bus station is convenient for the Town Centre, as it's right in the Town Centre were as the station isn't, & yes i've used both.

Buses could serve both town centre and railway station. That's how it works in many places.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Buses could serve both town centre and railway station. That's how it works in many places.

If that be the case, why was the new Stockport bus station constructed in its present location by the relevant transport authority, being fully mindful of the fact that the A6 road runs through the town centre of Stockport. What other transport authorities choose to do over such matters is up to them to decide to meet their own particular transport needs.

Within Greater Manchester, the railway stations of large towns such as Rochdale and Wigan are other constituent bodies whose railway stations are quite some distance away from their bus stations and Bolton is like Stockport in being connected by a new connection walkway.

 

[johncrossley]

If that be the case, why was the new Stockport bus station constructed in its present location by the relevant transport authority, being fully mindful of the fact that the A6 road runs through the town centre of Stockport. What other transport authorities choose to do over such matters is up to them to decide to meet their own particular transport needs.

Within Greater Manchester, the railway stations of large towns such as Rochdale and Wigan are other constituent bodies whose railway stations are quite some distance away from their bus stations and Bolton is like Stockport in being connected by a new connection walkway.

The reasons why public transport isn't integrated in the UK are well known and Greater Manchester is no different. There is a long history of buses and trains competing instead of cooperating. Obviously that was most obvious during the deregulation era but even before then, there wasn't a huge amount of cooperation, even when buses and trains were both state owned and operated.

A railway station being far away from the town centre doesn't prevent buses using the railway station as a hub in some other countries. Whereas in the UK a railway station far from the town centre will only have buses that happens to pass it along the way.

The lack on integration inevitably means that fewer people change between modes and as a result fewer people use public transport overall compared to cities abroad where integration is routine.

 

[Bevan Price]

Liverpool managed to make things worse a couple of years ago. As part of a road disimprovement scheme, they removed the well-used bus stops outside Lime Street station.

 

[NCT]

It's not uncommon for the main bus hub to not be the railway station in continental European cities. Bielefield comes to mind. In Dresden only a selection of trams and buses (though a good selection of trams) go to Hbr. Zwickau Hbf is actually rather poorly connected to the centre. Not all Salzburg trolleybuses serve the Hbf either.

 

[johncrossley]

It's not uncommon for the main bus hub to not be the railway station in continental European cities. Bielefield comes to mind. In Dresden only a selection of trams and buses (though a good selection of trams) go to Hbr. Zwickau Hbf is actually rather poorly connected to the centre. Not all Salzburg trolleybuses serve the Hbf either.

In the biggest cities that are served by metros and S-Bahns etc. you might not have many buses serving the city centre at all, which is again opposite to what you get in British cities like Manchester. I was mainly talking about small to medium sized towns and suburbs of big cities.

 

[NCT]

I didn't know Bielefeld or Zwickau were the biggest cities.

And of course Solingen - Mitte is served by a good number of routes (by no means all), Hbf only 2.

 

[johncrossley]

I didn't know Bielefeld or Zwickau were the biggest cities.

And of course Solingen - Mitte is served by a good number of routes (by no means all), Hbf only 2.

Bielefeld has a metro like underground tram network and all four lines go to the Hbf. For such a small city, Zwickau has a surprisingly dense tram network which also serves the Hbf. The general principle of having good local public transport access to the station applies in both cases. They are clearly different to the typical UK situation.

There's no shortage of classic examples of small to medium sized towns where the local public transport is exclusively by standard bus where most or all buses go to the railway station. If there are some outliers, that doesn't mean that the common standard becomes worthless.

 

[NCT]

Bielefeld has a metro like underground tram network and all four lines go to the Hbf. For such a small city, Zwickau has a surprisingly dense tram network which also serves the Hbf. The general principle of having good local public transport access to the station applies in both cases. They are clearly different to the typical UK situation.

There's no shortage of classic examples of small to medium sized towns where the local public transport is exclusively by standard bus where most or all buses go to the railway station. If there are some outliers, that doesn't mean that the common standard becomes worthless.

Bielefeld has plenty of bus dependent areas and for a lot of them getting to Hbf requires a change. Zwickau's tram doesn't go to Hbf.

For what it's worth GM's bus station placements are mostly very good. Oldham, Bury, Bolton, Altrincham and Ashton all have modern interchanges. The vast majority of Wigan buses have stops on Wallgate itself or King Street. In Stockport's case Google satellite imagery isn't up-to-date, but it seems if there's room for improvement it's a direct walking route between Station Road and Exchange Street, which is easily done in the grand scheme of things. That just leaves Rochdale, and the solution is an urban realm scheme between Oldham Road and the railway station (accepting currently both the High Level Road and Hare Street / Miall Street are a bit cr@p).

Everything has a range, nowhere is universally perfect. The range of interchange quality in GM is in line with the continental European range.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Preston is one of the worst. The bus station is as far as it could be from the railway station without being in the suburbs.

Yes, it is an impressive listed building but I'd have repurposed it and built a new one by the railway station. It could be smaller if it only handled terminating regional buses - Preston Bus could move to cross city running which would be better for all really. The present drop off car park could handle that plus Hackney taxis fine, with private cars moving to the frontage ramp by the booking office.

 

[NCT]

And of course Aachen and Liege, two cities where he main stations are fairly out of the way.

When my Aachen - Maastricht RE18 train was cancelled I had to walk into the town interchange to catch the 350.

Liege's actual centre is St Lambert (and St Lamberts has a terrible train frequency). Even then, the terrain means that Place St Lamberts (the tram and bus stops) is a bit of a trek from the rail station. Stockport has it better.

Continental cities are far more pragmatic than one might think.

 

[johncrossley]

Bielefeld has plenty of bus dependent areas and for a lot of them getting to Hbf requires a change.

That's how integrated urban transport works where you have a metro or a metro-like system. You expect to need to make connections between bus and metro. So that it entirely in line with normal practice outside the UK.

I don't see what is to be gained by focussing on exceptions. I think we both know the general principles but there may be some people reading this who will take away from this discussion that what *normally* happens in the UK is little different to what *normally* happens in places where integration is taken more seriously.

 

[NCT]

That's how integrated urban transport works where you have a metro or a metro-like system. You expect to need to make connections between bus and metro. So that it entirely in line with normal practice outside the UK.

So not everything needs to directly serve the Hbf. short-hopping via U-bahn in Bielefeld is no different to shopping hopping via the Green Line City Loop or the tram in Nottingham.

I don't see what is to be gained by focussing on exceptions. I think we both know the general principles but there may be some people reading this who will take away from this discussion that what *normally* happens in the UK is little different to what *normally* happens in places where integration is taken more seriously.

I'm not focusing on exceptions. I'm demonstrating there's a range both home and abroad. Once you again you are taking a rose tinted view of a notion of perfection that doesn't actually exist.

 

[johncrossley]

So not everything needs to directly serve the Hbf. short-hopping via U-bahn in Bielefeld is no different to shopping hopping via the Green Line City Loop or the tram in Nottingham.

It is normal for bigger cities outside the UK to have an urban core dominated by trams and metros with buses serving less of a role in the centre. Buses often feed off metro and tram stops in the suburbs.

I'm not focusing on exceptions. I'm demonstrating there's a range both home and abroad. Once you again you are taking a rose tinted view of a notion of perfection that doesn't actually exist.

In the countries particularly noted for integration it can be seen clearly in the vast majority of towns. For example in Switzerland. Whereas in the UK it is clearly far more variable. Integration generally happens only where it is relatively easy. Even if the railway station is near the bus station you often have to cross busy roads to get to it. There are few cases in the UK where many buses go to the railway station if it is inconveniently sited for the town centre. Bournemouth might be the best example, as the railway station has its own bus and coach station, although it still only has a relatively small proportion of town centre buses.

 

[WTT Gremlin]

mods note - split from this thread

There's nothing that can be done now, but we can't use it as an excuse for not following an integrated transport model common in similar big cities outside the UK.

Stockport was really just a single example though, and not really my main point. There are now lots of tram stops with frequent service that can be used for connections. But people seem to be even having reservations about that.

If the intention is having a better 'integration' of a multi-modal transport system then the bus and railway stations are no more than data points to start with, and and changes would be informed by what the multi-modal system requires.

A far better starting point would be asking, what is each modal currently available doing? what does it do well/badly? and what does the whole system need to provide the area?

In the instance of a truly integrated system there is absolutely no reason why the principal bus and rail stations should be linked, or even close to each other. The modes would serve different purposes and have different strengths, and should have networks (network links) based on said purposes and strengths.

As a small bit of historical context, examples of metropolitan areas having properly integrated transports systems in Great Britain are few and far between. And even where they have existed they still had to work around the fact that the vast amount of rail based transport had little to no macro strategic planning, and for specifically heavy rail, in large part considered passengers at best secondary, and often an inconvenience.

 

[Djgr]

Liverpool managed to make things worse a couple of years ago. As part of a road disimprovement scheme, they removed the well-used bus stops outside Lime Street station.

Not really the case. Leaving Lime Street via the St. George's Hall exit takes you to about 100 metres from Queen Square Bus Station.

 

[RT4038]

I think one needs to consider the history of railways and buses to get an understanding of why we are where we are in this country:

• When the railway was built, there were no bus services to speak of - those that may have existed were very infrequent horse drawn conveyances mainly catering for the better off. (as of course passenger trains were too)
• In most of our towns and cities, after the railway station was built, fairly intensive development soon sprang up adjacent.
• When motor bus services started, their main purpose was to bring people into the town centres - in the case of rural services, these soon out competed local passenger trains on the basis of frequency and convenience - railway stations often not being close to homes and often not directly in town centres. These local train services were eventually withdrawn. Town and city services were focused on town centres and industrial areas. This left the railways at that time with mainly longer distance passengers - many of whom only made the journey irregularly and/or infrequently
• We have always expected bus services to pay their way or (lately) operate on the barest minimum of subsidy. Bus companies soon realised that the % of customers interlining between road and rail services was very small, and extending or diverting services to and from railway stations (esp where to do so inconveniences the majority of the riders) did not cover the additional costs of providing such services. This principle is no different now.
• After WW2 Government, through bus fare regulation and other constraints followed a low wage policy for bus staff, resulting in staff shortages and unreliable services in many areas, resulting in commuters finding alternative means of reaching railway stations, further reducing the amount of interlining passengers.
• At many stations the developments of the Victorian period have left narrow streets, constricted layouts and buildings to make bus access problematic and bus stations impractical without demolition. The very presence of the railway often constricts the road traffic of the area, through a few narrow and low bridges, or no bridge at all.
• The original motor bus services usually terminated on the streets in town centres, which caused congestion both in the highway and on the pavements. In some places bus companies bought property to establish a bus terminal (often with catering facility etc), but these tended to get outgrown by increased services and larger vehicles. Most municipal bus stations were established to relieve these problems for shops and businesses with buses parked outside and the increasing private motor vehicle congestion in the area, rather than any great integrationalist ideas. The land value of these bus stations has, in the last 25 years, often seen them sold and redeveloped and bus services relegated to side streets again. (There being no intrinsic value to bus services now).

So, for better integration now, the following is required:
(a) Increased funding for bus services to pay for extensions or diversions to, from or via railway stations (at £200k per bus per annum - in my town of residence you won't get much change from £1m pa. - multiply that up by the number of towns and cities across the land.......)
(b) Ensure that both the Local Authorities and Network Rail have the capital funds to purchase/ repurpose land for bus stations outside rail stations, improve road access, deal with substandard bridges, build new bridges etc etc.
I'll give you a few locations to think of how you'd do that - Rugby, Darlington, Salisbury, Winchester, Durham, Lancaster for instance, or say Northampton where service extension would come at a huge cost.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Rugby, Darlington, Salisbury, Winchester, Durham, Lancaster for instance, or say Northampton where service extension would come at a huge cost.

Lancaster bus station is utterly pointless. It's in the wrong place, not only away from the station but also away from the main shopping area too, it harks back to National Bus Company days and an attitude of "we need a bus station, here's some land, put it here then". The best thing to do with that would be to move a few services where it makes sense to cross-city operation to reduce layovers and make the stops on Common Garden St the main "bus station", this being a suitably short walk from the railway station and the closest you could sensibly get a big enough facility to it. It's a small city and doesn't need a large bus station, and it isn't even that nice due to vandalism etc. Sell it off and have a student accommodation block built there instead - that way you get some money from it rather than it being a constant and pointless drain on the taxpayer to maintain it. If Common Garden St wasn't enough you could add a few more stops/layover bays on Spring Garden St, it's wide enough.

The rest of your list are interesting as they're ones where the railway station is notably out of town which is always going to be an issue. I think I'd suggest with these that getting as many services to cross-city as possible is the best you can do where the local railway station is particularly inconveniently located.

But there are plenty of places where the railway station is central, and so not having a combined facility is tantamount to vandalism against integration. Preston is about the best example of such gross stupidity - not only are the railway and bus stations something like a mile apart, but the bus station is less central than the railway station. The redevelopment was a prime opportunity to make the bus station a public event space and create a new smaller one (for regional services only) by the railway station. Planning gain as part of the Fishergate Centre redevelopment would be another great chance to get it for nowt.

Milton Keynes is an example of somewhere that never really needed one - cross city running along the Midsummer Boulevard spine with two smaller facilities, as it is now, made much more sense than the central bus station which was inconvenient for the shopping centre. Interestingly regarding my Preston comments MK Central Bus Station (the building is still there) is now to be extended and turned into...an event space.

There are also cases where (and this was done years ago) you can make a slightly awkwardly located railway station and a more central bus station link up OK, e.g. by dedicated paths, e.g. at Ormskirk.

Chester is another one where the railway station is inconveniently located so wouldn't make a good bus station, but the actual bus station is also inconveniently located. I suspect there most people board/alight buses at the stops on Foregate St. It basically serves no real purpose and might as well be redeveloped; if you need layover space you could send them down to the railway station.

 

[The exile]

There's no shortage of classic examples of small to medium sized towns where the local public transport is exclusively by standard bus where most or all buses go to the railway station. If there are some outliers, that doesn't mean that the common standard becomes worthless.

I’ll raise you Lueneburg - the bus station is next to the railway station, which is on the eastern edge of the town centre. Buses from the east call at the bus station (of course) but actually terminate in the town centre; those from other directions mostly do town centre first - though I don’t think all town services go on to the bus station. (At least that’s how it used to be).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I’ll raise you Lueneburg - the bus station is next to the railway station, which is on the eastern edge of the town centre. Buses from the east call at the bus station (of course) but actually terminate in the town centre; those from other directions mostly do town centre first - though I don’t think all town services go on to the bus station. (At least that’s how it used to be).

Of course if you can work cross city you avoid paying for the extensions as you have more buses that will go that way anyway. You also save on the cost of land for a central bus station. That only leaves you needing to terminate regional buses.

 

[johncrossley]

Rugby

I'm pretty sure Rugby station would be a hub for buses in some other countries, especially given its prominence on the National Rail network. From where we are now it still could be redeveloped to include numerous bus stops and the surroundings are not exactly prime real estate if you wanted to demolish stuff. The distance from the town centre is not very different to, say, Haarlem. According to openstreetmap.org, the distance between the station (where all buses stop) and the Centrum bus stop is 1.1 km on foot.

 

[Tetchytyke]

In day to day usage, how many people travelling into a town or a city centre are doing so in order to catch a train?

This is the issue that always gets forgotten in these discussions. Most people using Stockport bus station, for instance, are not heading to Stockport railway station. They're heading to the Merseyway shopping centre or they're heading towards the Market Place. You could have built a new bus station at Grand Central instead but that would be further away from the shops and bars which most bus users are heading to.

Bradford Interchange has always been a bit of a white elephant for this very reason. Most people don't catch the bus from the Interchange, they catch it from the city centre. It's only busy for the routes which don't go into the city centre.

Durham was mentioned before. There used to be regular buses up to the railway station- the 20 and 50 used to go up there and terminate at the turning circle at the south side of the station. Nobody used them so the bus companies stopped sending the buses up there.

Liverpool managed to make things worse a couple of years ago. As part of a road disimprovement scheme, they removed the well-used bus stops outside Lime Street station.

I've just looked on Google Maps and it is 150m from Liverpool Lime Street station entrance to Queens Square bus station. It's about half that to the bus stops at Elliott Street/Great Charlotte Street. And it's a lot safer to cross the roads there now the cars and buses are gone.

Preston is about the best example of such gross stupidity - not only are the railway and bus stations something like a mile apart, but the bus station is less central than the railway station.

The bus station is just as central as the railway station, more so if you take Market Square as the centre of the centre.

 

[Djgr]

Lancaster bus station is utterly pointless. It's in the wrong place, not only away from the station but also away from the main shopping area too, it harks back to National Bus Company days and an attitude of "we need a bus station, here's some land, put it here then". The best thing to do with that would be to move a few services where it makes sense to cross-city operation to reduce layovers and make the stops on Common Garden St the main "bus station", this being a suitably short walk from the railway station and the closest you could sensibly get a big enough facility to it. It's a small city and doesn't need a large bus station, and it isn't even that nice due to vandalism etc. Sell it off and have a student accommodation block built there instead. If Common Garden St wasn't enough you could add a few more stops/layover bays on Spring Garden St, it's wide enough.

The rest of your list are interesting as they're ones where the railway station is notably out of town which is always going to be an issue. I think I'd suggest with these that getting as many services to cross-city as possible is the best you can do where the local railway station is particularly inconveniently located.

But there are plenty of places where the railway station is central, and so not having a combined facility is tantamount to vandalism against integration. Preston is about the best example of such gross stupidity - not only are the railway and bus stations something like a mile apart, but the bus station is less central than the railway station. The redevelopment was a prime opportunity to make the bus station a public event space and create a new smaller one (for regional services only) by the railway station. Planning gain as part of the Fishergate Centre redevelopment would be another great chance to get it for nowt.

Milton Keynes is an example of somewhere that never really needed one - cross city running along the Midsummer Boulevard spine with two smaller facilities, as it is now, made much more sense than the central bus station which was inconvenient for the shopping centre. Interestingly regarding my Preston comments MK Central Bus Station (the building is still there) is now to be extended and turned into...an event space.

There are also cases where (and this was done years ago) you can make a slightly awkwardly located railway station and a more central bus station link up OK, e.g. by dedicated paths, e.g. at Ormskirk.

Chester is another one where the railway station is inconveniently located so wouldn't make a good bus station, but the actual bus station is also inconveniently located. I suspect there most people board/alight buses at the stops on Foregate St. It basically serves no real purpose and might as well be redeveloped; if you need layover space you could send them down to the railway station.

Chester bus station is in its third location in my memory! However it is much closer to the start of the shopping area than you make out (100 metres?)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Chester bus station is in its third location in my memory! However it is much closer to the start of the shopping area than you make out (100 metres?)

It's not as close as the stops on Foregate St (which are IN the shopping area), as a result of which those stops are very popular. It's closer than the railway station by a fair margin though, but I question the utility of it really. It's another small city where most services running cross city and serving Foregate St is the best bet.

The bus station is just as central as the railway station, more so if you take Market Square as the centre of the centre.

(Preston)

I would personally consider it, at least historically, the middle of Fishergate, e.g. where M&S is, which is kind of equidistant from both. Though the Fishergate Centre used to be the prime shopping destination (and the St Georges Centre was also quite "prime" back then and still is to a fair extent despite looking rather run down from the outside) so I think it has shifted east a bit. That said, having them at opposite ends is just stupid and never made any sense at all.

 

[johncrossley]

In day to day usage, how many people travelling into a town or a city centre are doing so in order to catch a train?

This is the issue that always gets forgotten in these discussions. Most people using Stockport bus station, for instance, are not heading to Stockport railway station. They're heading to the Merseyway shopping centre or they're heading towards the Market Place. You could have built a new bus station at Grand Central instead but that would be further away from the shops and bars which most bus users are heading to.

Nobody is suggesting removing buses from the town centre. The suggestion is to serve the railway station as well. It is very common for buses to serve both the town centre and railway station in some other countries.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've just looked on Google Maps and it is 150m from Liverpool Lime Street station entrance to Queens Square bus station. It's about half that to the bus stops at Elliott Street/Great Charlotte Street. And it's a lot safer to cross the roads there now the cars and buses are gone.

I've always considered those quite close, but really a large city like Liverpool should be moving back away, now buses are being re-regulated, from the idea that we should have lots of buses running into the centre duplicating rail routes and towards the idea of smaller interchanges at suburban railway stations, using the bus for what it's good at, connecting people to rapid transit rail. I think we will see progress here in Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham, probably (bar London) the only three cities in England large enough and with developed enough rail networks to actually do this, though Sheffield might also benefit from a bit of it it's probably too small for such interchange to provide competitive journey times with direct buses.

London is about the only large UK city that does this properly, and while a fair few bus routes do still penetrate the centre for various reasons (partly because of the poor wheelchair accessibility of most of the Tube) there is no London "central bus station" as such because most users take the bus to the Tube and then the Tube into London, which is how it should be in a large city. Though the lack of full fares integration in London always boggled my mind.

 

[johncrossley]

I think we will see progress here in Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham, probably (bar London) the only three cities in England large enough and with developed enough rail networks to actually do this

I know you said England here, but Glasgow has to be another prime candidate for European-style big city bus/rail integration using feeder buses and surely this has to be part of Strathclyde's bus franchising plans.