dept transport bus priority systems

Bus priority: The way ahead (HTML version)

Table of contentsOverview Foreword Background Why help buses? Achieving success Securing the benefits More information Strategic options Establishing the vision Prevailing conditions Choosing the most appropriate measure Strategic options Bus corridors Whole route Park and ride Consultation Implementation & delivery Background The political challenge Operator involvement Implementation and evaluation process Maintaining the benefits Route management Traffic management Special initiatives Edinburgh Greenways London Bus Initiative West Midlands Showcase Leeds City Centre Oxford, Historic City Newport, Smaller Towns

- 1 -

Department for Transport - Bus priority: The way ahead (HTML version)

West Bromwich Town Centre Case studies Guide to case studies With-flow bus lanes Contra-flow bus lanes Green routes Bus gates and bus only links Rising bollards Guided busways Pre signals and bus advance areas Selective Vehicle Detection (SVD) Bus SCOOT Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) Mixed priority street Bus friendly traffic calming High occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes No-car lanes Bus park and ride The bus stop environment Other measures Performance indicators & monitoring Why do we need to monitor performance? Bus service improvements Improvements for passengers Effects on other traffic An example approach Frequently asked questions Residents Commerce Industry Signs & regulations Introduction Bibliography Glossary Contacts Overview Foreword Background Why help buses? Achieving success Securing the benefits More information Strategic options

- 2 -


Establishing the vision Prevailing conditions Choosing the most appropriate measure Strategic options Bus corridors Whole route Park and ride Consultation Implementation & delivery Background The political challenge Operator involvement Implementation and evaluation process Maintaining the benefits Route management Traffic management Special initiatives Edinburgh Greenways London Bus Initiative West Midlands Showcase Leeds City Centre Oxford, Historic City Newport, Smaller Towns West Bromwich Town Centre Case studies Guide to case studies With-flow bus lanes Contra-flow bus lanes Green routes Bus gates and bus only links Rising bollards Guided busways Pre signals and bus advance areas Selective Vehicle Detection (SVD) Bus SCOOT Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) Mixed priority street Bus friendly traffic calming High occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes No-car lanes Bus park and ride The bus stop environment Other measures

- 3 -


Performance indicators & monitoring Why do we need to monitor performance? Bus service improvements Improvements for passengers Effects on other traffic An example approach Frequently asked questions Residents Commerce Industry Signs & regulations Introduction Bibliography Glossary Contacts

Overview This resource pack will provide information on the Department for Transport’s policies and guidance onmeasures to give buses priority to enable bus travel to be more attractive and reliable.

Foreword

"I am delighted to see the publication of this, the Second Edition of the Bus Priority Resource Pack.

Government has consistently highlighted the important role that the bus plays in our towns and cities andwe are firmly committed to making the bus a more attractive travel option. We have worked with the busindustry and local authorities through the Bus Partnership Forum to create the conditions for encouraginggreater use of buses. Introducing measures that minimise delays and improve the reliability of bus servicesare a crucial part of achieving this.

While many successful measures have been introduced around the country, we fully recognise thatplanning and implementing a programme of priorities for buses is not a simple task. It is often thepractical details that make the difference between the success or failure of a scheme. I therefore welcomethis initiative from the Bus Partnership Forum, which provides best practice guidance, and shares thepractical experience gained by local authorities, Passenger Transport Executives and bus operators aroundthe country. I look forward to seeing more new and innovative measures, which provide real benefits topassengers, emerging as a result of it."

Charlotte Atkins MPParliamentary Under Secretary of State

- 4 -


Background

The road network needs to move people and goods efficiently if we are to ensure the social and economicwell being of our communities. Buses have a vital role to play in this as they can make excellent use oflimited road space, carrying many more passengers than a private car for a given amount of road space.However, the potential benefit of the bus can be stifled by traffic congestion. Local authorities and busoperators need to work in partnership to make buses a more attractive alternative to the car by releasingthem from the congestion delays experienced by other road users. This in turn will improve reliability andhelp make the bus an attractive choice for more car users as well as providing quicker journeys for bothbus and other road users.

Providing the right conditions for this to happen is not a simple task. This overview seeks to outline someof the ways in which local authorities can develop a successful bus strategy that will ensure that bus travelbecomes a realistic alternative to the private car.

What is being done?

The Government has consistently made it clear that the bus has a crucial part to play in present and futuretransport policy. In the short term, buses provide the best means of increasing public transport services.

Government, in partnership with local authorities and bus operators, is positively encouraging bus travelthrough a number of measures, including capital funding through the local transport plan process,concessionary fares schemes, the development of Quality Bus Partnerships, real time information andtimetable information systems.

Why help buses?

The challenge that we face

The challenge is, of course, well known and understood. Since 1950, car ownership in the UK has grownfrom 2 million cars to over 22 million and use of the car has grown commensurately. The capacity of ourroads has not increased at anything like this rate and this has led to severe traffic congestion, affecting theability of buses to deliver reliable services.

Who is affected?

Transport affects the economic and social well being of everyone. Well over 11 million bus journeys aremade in Great Britain every day. Better bus services in our towns and cities contribute towards theregeneration and revitalisation of both the business community and our living areas. An efficient, reliablebus service can be an attractive alternative to those who have access to a car. Furthermore, an efficient busservice ensures social inclusion by providing access to jobs, education, health, social and leisure servicesto those without access to a car. A wide variety of people use buses but many people, especially olderpeople, children, people with disabilities, women and the less well off, are often dependent upon having areliable bus service.

- 5 -


What do people want?

In almost every survey about bus services, reliability is one of the most important issues for bus users.Motorists cite reliable bus services as a pre-requisite for leaving their car at home. Bus priority measuresassist buses through traffic, with more consistent journey times helping deliver timetable reliability. Busescannot take short cuts to get around congestion; they need help to get through it.

What will more bus measures deliver?

Without priority measures bus services get caught up in general traffic congestion, especially in our townsand cities during peak periods. Experience from schemes around the country shows that bus lanes mayreduce bus travel times by up to 7 to 9 minutes along a 10 kilometre congested route and also improvetheir reliability. Reliability means buses operate in accordance with their timetables on every journeywhich is important to bus users. Measures to assist buses in one metropolitan city have halved thevariation in journey times that operators experienced in that corridor, enabling them to operate their busesmore efficiently.

By introducing bus priority with other improvements, services can become more attractive to potentialpassengers. For example, a comprehensive quality corridor initiative in a major conurbation delivered a 75per cent increase in bus passengers over 5 years, with 20 per cent being new customers.

What if we don’t do it?

With car ownership continuing to grow, traffic congestion will get worse. Large-scale road construction isnot a sustainable option and so greater use of public transport, along with more cycling and walking, mustprovide our main answers. Initiatives to assist buses must be seen to be part of the traffic congestionsolution, by providing more people with better and faster travel at the same time as reducing the need totravel by car.

Achieving success

Which strategy?

It is important to recognise that there is a range of strategies available and that there is not an ’off theshelf’ solution that will maximise the benefits to buses regardless of location. The most appropriatestrategy in any one area will depend upon the prevailing local conditions. In general, the reliability andjourney time benefits of bus initiatives tend to follow the maxim ’the whole is more than the sum of theparts’. A range of strategies can be adopted. These can include taking a full network approach where theentire bus network is considered or a whole route strategy where delays along the length of a particularroute are addressed. Alternatively, in a corridor strategy, important corridors within an area served by anumber of major routes are treated. Delays can also be treated on the basis of hot spots where specificpoints of delay located around the area are addressed.

- 6 -


Who should be involved?

It is vital for local authorities and bus operators to work in partnership at all stages of the initiative, fromdeveloping the strategy, to promoting completed measures to customers and the general public. To ensurethat full commitment is achieved for the implementation, a wider group of stakeholders should beinvolved in the development of the strategy. Experience has shown that opposition to measures can beminimised if early stakeholder involvement takes place.

Stakeholders, besides the local authority and the bus operators, are likely to include the highway authority(if different); neighbouring authorities; the passenger transport executives (PTEs); the police; signalauthorities; bus user organisations; residents’ organisations; cyclist groups; business and traderorganisations.

Who should be informed?

As well as those stakeholders directly affected by the measures, the wider public needs to be informed ofthe proposals and why they are happening. Remember that, to many, the measures will be unfamiliar andmisunderstood, and the benefits unclear. It may be beneficial to encourage local media to run stories onbus schemes as a general issue rather than wait until specific schemes are developed and oppositionentrenched.

What will be successful?

The most successful measures have been those which have been designed to meet the circumstances of aparticular route or corridor. It is crucial that these measures are developed as part of an overall roadmanagement strategy to improve bus services in the local area. An important part of a strategy is theefficient management and coordination of traffic schemes, maintenance and other roads works. Whenthese measures are complimented by enforcement and bus friendly traffic management, delays to alltraffic, including buses, can be significantly minimised. Under new powers local authorities can enforcebus lanes using CCTV cameras in order to maintain the benefits to bus services. Enforcement can alsotarget offences such as abandoned or untaxed vehicles.

How do we convince people of the benefits?

Early stakeholder involvement and well targeted information about the proposals is vital. Of at least equalimportance is the determination of councillors and senior officers to see the measures succeed. It can bedaunting to attempt to progress schemes when there is the presumption that there will be opposition tothem. There are, however, numerous examples of successful implementation. Many have achieved theiraims in full and still more have shown that disbenefits predicted by objectors have not occurred. Theresource pack that accompanies this overview tells you how this has been done.

Securing the benefits

- 7 -


Selecting appropriate measures

Bus schemes are often part of a comprehensive treatment of a road corridor with enhanced facilities for alltypes of travel. The most successful measures tend to feature an iterative design process that continuesthroughout the planning and implementation phase. In designing the most appropriate measure it isadvisable to consider the whole process, for example to:

establish the form of strategy to be adopted; identify problem areas consistent with that strategy; agree with stakeholders the nature of the problem; discuss possible solutions to specific problems; investigate the preferred solutions and compare benefits; assure benefits are achieved for bus users; monitor the measure before and after it is carried out; and make adjustments to measures if they would improve the benefits.

Enforcement and maintenance

It is essential to maintain the benefits of bus measures and to do this requires a positive approach toenforcement and highway maintenance. Basic design and maintenance procedures include ensuring thatbus priority measures are clearly seen and well maintained, and that the effects on buses are consideredwhen highways are maintained. Active enforcement should aim for total compliance; even if it leads todirect costs being incurred with no revenue stream. Specific actions to consider can include:

decriminalisation of parking enforcement to give control to local authorities; and camera enforcement or roving wardens/attendants.

More information

Resource pack

The resource pack provides decision makers with advice and guidance on how to make bus initiativessuccessful. It consists of a series of leaflets which provide evidence of successful implementation, andadvice on how to promote and manage the process. This illustrates the benefits achieved through a wholerange of experiences countrywide.

Web site

A web site dedicated to bus measures (http://www.dft.gov.uk/decmigration/localtrans/busprioritythewayahead/) contains all the information inthe resource pack.

- 8 -


http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/buses/bpf/busprioritythewayahead12/

Presentational CD ROM

Attached to this resource pack is a CD ROM that contains a range of presentational information. Thisinformation can be used to tailor presentations on bus initiatives to a range of audiences and can becustomised to suit each user.

Contacts

To get a free copy of the resource pack and overview, contact: DfT Free Literature, PO Box 236,WETHERBY, LS23 7NB. Tel: 0870 122 6236 Fax: 0870 122 6237 Please quote the following reference:03DFT005

The resource pack and overview can also be obtained through the web site: http://www.dft.gov.uk/decmigration/localtrans/busprioritythewayahead/.

All of the leaflets, along with other information on bus priority, can be accessed and downloaded, free ofcharge, from the bus priority web site.

To find out more about bus priority measures, contact: Department for Transport, Traffic ManagementDivision, 3/19 Great Minster House, 76 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DR. Tel: 0207 944 2599 Fax:0207 944 2211 Email: [email protected]

Strategic options

Establishing the vision

Legislation requires local authorities to prepare a bus strategy that sets out the vision for bus services intheir area and details the general policies to meet this vision. Local authorities are also given the powers toenter into quality partnerships with operators and establish quality contracts if these are felt to beappropriate to delivering the vision. The overarching bus strategy describes the scope of the bus servicesand the role of the local authorities in providing them. The bus priority strategy needs to show howservices can be improved.

Prevailing conditions

The first step is to review bus services based on a number of basic parameters, which will involve theidentification of the range of problems and opportunities including:

specific locations of delays; heavily-used corridors; and high frequency/high patronage routes.

- 9 -



Choosing the most appropriate measure

The various measures for achieving bus priority are outlined in the case study leaflets contained withinthis resource pack. The most appropriate solution in any one area will depend upon the:

prevailing conditions in the area; and objectives of the strategy.

However, in all cases the appropriate solution must be part of an effective traffic management regime.

Strategic options

Once a local authority has collated the basic information, it can then consider which of the variousstrategic approaches it will take. Examples of these approaches are given below.

Hot spots

The hot spot strategy involves reviewing the bus network and identifying where the major delays are.These delays can be caused by a number of factors, such as:

congestion; inappropriate parking; servicing activity; outdated signals; or poor interchange and boarding facilities.

It is advisable to mark the delay hot spots on a plan, as this can help in prioritising the measures needed totreat them. Prioritising can be based on factors such as the number of routes affected, total delays incurred,patronage levels and/or interchange arrangements.

The main advantage of the hot spot approach is that the places where there are real difficulties are tackledin a rational and programmed way. Very often a single bus priority measure will benefit a number ofroutes. For example, bus priority at traffic signals can help several routes. This is an effective way oftargeting funds to greatest effect across the whole bus network.

The disadvantage of dealing with only one location at a time on any particular route is that any benefitsgained there could easily be lost along other sections of the route and overall journey times might notdecrease. It could also spread funds too thinly across the whole bus network.

Bus corridors

An alternative to the hot spots approach is to promote integrated solutions for particular lengths of the busnetwork in a coordinated way. This typically means looking at heavily used bus corridors, oftenconnecting major town centres. This strategy aims to coordinate individual schemes into a managed route,often improving interchanges, passenger information, waiting facilities and even ticketing at the sametime.

- 10 -


The corridor approach has worked well in several parts of the country. It has been used to integrate buslanes with enforcement and urban traffic control (UTC) improvements. This has been achieved by, forexample, using selective vehicle detection (SVD) and traffic management software such as SCOOT,PROMPT, MOVA and SPRINT among many others.

In some areas, local authorities are considering dedicated maintenance regimes along these corridors, sothat the benefits of bus priority last as long as possible. For example, the Greater Manchester quality buscorridor programme aims to complete work on 19 corridors by 2006, and has involved over 20 keystakeholders. Many operators recognise the benefits of the corridor approach. Some have invested incorridor studies, such as that provided by GO (North East) on the A690 Durham Road to Sunderlandcorridor.

The corridor strategy is sometimes upgraded to cover a ’transport area’ or a ’transport quadrant’. Thisencompasses the wider corridor catchment area and includes measures such as improved walking routes tobus stops and wider traffic calming measures on surrounding roads.

The main advantage of this strategy is that it addresses problems where the need is greatest, to the benefitof several bus routes using the same corridor. The main disadvantage, however, is that this strategy doesnot necessarily encourage new bus users in more diverse areas. Also, delays can still happen off the maincorridor, reducing the effectiveness of the scheme.

Whole route

This approach applies the corridor strategy to a whole bus route from start to finish. The whole routeapproach inevitably overlaps with other bus routes, so spreading the benefits. Again, local authorities canuse a transport area approach as part of a whole route strategy.

The main advantage of the whole route approach is that the benefits it brings can be controlled andtherefore maintained. Journey times, reliability and route management are more easily dealt with. TheSuperoute proposals in Tyne and Wear link several urban areas and improve approximately 20 routes. Inthe capital, the London Bus Initiative (now known as BusPlus) has been developed on over 70 routes intwo main branches.

Whole route strategies are best suited to larger urban areas where routes are more likely to overlap. Themain disadvantage of the whole route approach is that it concentrates funding on a single route, benefitingother routes only where it overlaps with them.

Park and ride

The park and ride strategy is especially focussed on getting people to change to catching the bus instead ofusing their cars. However, the strategy relies heavily on there being enough space on the edge of towncentres to provide adequate parking facilities. Effective park and ride schemes need a high level of buspriority on the transfer route. Potential passengers must be able to see a clear benefit over the private car.The key attraction for motorists is likely to be a faster journey time, so bus priority measures such asreallocating road space will be needed to increase the benefit of park and ride buses over the private car.

- 11 -


Consultation

A strategic approach to consultation is essential if bus priority is to succeed. It is quite easy to introducebus priority where congestion is not severe and parking is not limited. Local authorities need to considercarefully whether it is worth introducing bus priority measures in that sort of location. Bus priority is mostuseful where congestion and parking are problems. However, these are the areas that tend to generate themost vocal opposition. Local authorities need to predict where opposition is likely to occur and be readyto explain what they are proposing to do and why.

That is why there must be a clear consultation strategy. The consultation must allow all parties to identifyand understand the key issues and prepare to work around any problems. This is more likely to happen ifall stakeholders are involved in the discussions to solve whatever problems arise. Key stakeholders mustfeel that they have ’ownership’ of bus priority measures.

Implementation & delivery

Background

Most local authorities have produced comprehensive bus strategies as part of their local transport plans(LTPs). These strategies are usually endorsed by everyone with an interest in sustainable travel and set outambitious objectives for developing bus travel as a viable alternative to the car.

However, very often the devil is in the detail. When local authorities try to turn their strategic vision into apractical programme, problems can appear. The difficulties may vary, but they are generally reduced to:

meeting the political challenge; getting bus operators actively involved; and implementing and evaluating the scheme.

The political challenge

Few people disagree with the vision of a transport system that is more accessible while cutting congestionand pollution. The political challenge is to develop actual transport schemes that clearly deliver thosebenefits. The skill needed then is the ability to persuade people that they would benefit from schemeswhich limit car use, even if they consider themselves to depend on their cars.

Council officers can provide many of the answers. But it is the local councillor who has to faceconstituents and give assurances on what could be controversial plans. What arguments can they use, andhow can they be persuaded themselves that bus policies are worth selling to their constituents?

This resource pack is intended to help councillors and council officers tackle these issues. In particular, itaims to draw on good practice in bus priority across the country and pass on information about thebenefits of successful schemes.

- 12 -


The resource pack contains facts about public transport to help users make the case for bus priority. Someof these facts are also included in Frequently asked questions or FAQs (section 9).

Given that typically around one third of the electorate does not have access to a car, it is worthemphasising the importance of bus users to the local economy. Buses allow people without access to a carto get to work, to the shops, or to leisure activities. It may be worth raising awareness of the needs of theless well-off. Information about travel choices and proof of the benefits of bus priority may also help, ascan effective marketing and positive reporting of successful schemes.

Effective and inclusive consultation is critical, both to gather and disseminate information. Consultationhelps to produce better bus schemes and makes the decision-making process more ’transparent’, but itcannot be a substitute for that process. Local authorities should involve councillors and stakeholders asearly as possible. Ideally, consultation should include bus operators and users, and people with concernsabout bus-related measures at a particular site.

It is important to begin with a re-statement of the strategic objectives when each proposal is put forward.Also, early discussion of areas that are causing concern has been proven to help create a sense of’ownership’ across the community and makes scheme implementation easier.

Operator involvement

It is important to recognise bus operators’ vital contribution to the aims of encouraging people to usebuses and increasing social inclusion. Bus operators bring a unique perspective. They deal directly withbus passengers and can provide useful information, including bus usage and other non-commerciallysensitive data. Operators need to be involved from the start in the design of effective measures to helpbuses.

There are many instances around the country of local authorities and bus operators working togethertowards a shared vision for public transport. And yet there are also examples of local authoritiesintroducing bus priority measures, only for the operator to withdraw the service that the priority measuresbenefited shortly afterwards.

Some local authorities have altered traffic management arrangements without telling local bus operators,who then found that their routes became much more congested, or in some cases even severed. It is notuncommon for developers to propose large housing projects with a road layout that is incapable ofaccommodating buses, even when car parking spaces are deliberately limited. Similarly, it has beenknown for local authorities not to consult bus operators on proposals to protect residential roads from ’ratrunning’ traffic, proposals which can displace traffic onto bus routes.

None of these circumstances benefit buses, but unfortunately they are not unusual. They are often theresult of poor communications between local authorities and bus operators. Most authorities have a publictransport liaison committee, or similar entity. But for it to be meaningful, all parties need to be open andhonest about their intentions.

Effective partnership working requires real operator involvement. This can include regular meetings atdifferent organisational levels, commissioning joint bus priority studies, and implementing joint marketingstrategies. But essentially it is about ensuring that buses become an important factor in planning andmanaging local authority infrastructure. Bus provision should be a priority when local authorities plan

- 13 -


briefs for development or consider traffic management schemes.

In turn, operators must see themselves as part of the local community and get involved in partnershipworking. They can explain and raise awareness of the role of buses through:

local strategic partnerships; economic partnerships; business forums; chambers of commerce; and resident and community associations.

Implementation and evaluation process

As a local authority develops a bus priority scheme, it needs to set up a process for getting the maximumbenefit for buses. All stakeholders should be involved in identifying problem areas and delay hot spots. Anumber of authorities have introduced joint inspection meetings (JIMs). At these, representatives of thebus operator, the local authority, the police and any other involved group travel along a bus corridorlooking for trouble spots that might affect buses. These locations can then be developed in line with theconsultation process.

Once a scheme is in place, it must be evaluated. This is so it can be modified if necessary, and so that thelocal authority can learn lessons for future schemes. Operators are often reluctant to release commerciallysensitive data on passenger volumes, so local authorities need to reassure them that they will maintaintheir confidentiality. But more fundamentally, the operator and the authority need to acknowledge thevalue of monitoring and evaluation in helping to design better schemes in the future. There is more advicein Performance indicators & monitoring (section 7).

Maintaining the benefits

Route management

Background

The most important aspect of bus priority is that buses are able to use effectively the measures introducedon bus routes. This may seem self evident, but bus operators constantly face the problem of bus prioritymeasures that they cannot physically use. They are prevented from getting the full benefit from them by:

illegal parking; traffic queues; unnotified roadworks; and defective road surfaces.

Bus priority measures are designed and introduced to help achieve easier and more consistent journeytimes through congested areas in our towns and cities. This is important to bus passengers, bus operators,other road users and the local community alike.

- 14 -


Better reliability is a currently a legal requirement for bus operators enforced by Traffic Commissioners inrespect of all local bus services. This legal requirement is that 95 per cent of journeys on a registeredservice should operate not more than one minute early or five minutes late compared with timings given inregistration documents. Better reliability is also a priority for bus users and an important factor inattracting new passengers. Motorists are more likely to transfer to reliable bus services and, the greater thetransfer, the less the congestion (and pollution) in urban areas. It is therefore important to maintain buspriority facilities and keep them free from physical obstructions. Buses are especially prone toobstructions, e.g. congestion or roadworks, because they are legally required to stay on route.

Maintenance and clearance of the route have a high priority on the rail network and motorways, butsometimes seem to have a lower priority on local roads.

There are three main activities on the public highway that can significantly affect the operation of busroutes:

enforcement; roadworks; and traffic management.

Traffic management issues are addressed separately in the following leaflet entitled Traffic management.

Enforcement

Enforcement is critical to the effectiveness of bus priority measures. For example, bus lanes help protectbuses from the worst traffic congestion, helping to make them more reliable and attractive. However,illegal parking or driving in bus lanes can seriously undermine their benefits. That is why they needprotecting through enforcement.

The problem is that the powers to enforce traffic orders (which make measures such as bus lanes possible)vary throughout the country, so approaches to enforcement are equally varied.

Most enforcement is associated with moving vehicles. Moving vehicle offences are usually defined ascriminal activities and only the police can enforce them. This is also true of parking offences in areaswhere decriminalised parking has not been introduced. Police resources are always under pressure, andbus lane enforcement has therefore been infrequent and sporadic.

London’s experience

London was the first area allowed to introduce decriminalised parking and bus lane enforcement. As aresult of new powers under the Local Authority Act 1996 (amended in 2000), London boroughs wereallowed to enforce parking and bus lanes using parking attendants and cameras.

The Act made the offence of driving in a bus lane a civil rather than a criminal offence. This meant thathighway authorities (in this case the London boroughs) could issue a penalty charge notice (PCN) tooffenders. The penalty charge was set at Â£80, and recently increased to Â£100.

- 15 -


In 1999, the Association of London Government (ALG) set up a trial of the new powers with the LondonBoroughs of Hammersmith and Fulham, Ealing, Newham, Croydon and the Corporation of London. Theboroughs used close circuit television (CCTV) cameras operated remotely from secure control centres tomonitor selected bus lanes.

The Act requires that any offences caught on CCTV should be recorded on a secure format and watchedby an operator. It is important to take account of the context of any offence. For example, a driver wouldnot be penalised for entering a bus lane in order to get out of the way of an emergency vehicle.

The aim was to make the trial self-funding through the issue of PCNs. The process for issuing a PCN is asfollows:

the CCTV operator reviews all recorded offences after the bus lane ceases operating for the day; the CCTV operator and a supervisor check each case to make sure an offence has occurred; the CCTV operator obtains registered keeper and vehicle details of each offender from DVLA; the CCTV operator checks the vehicle description against the CCTV image; a PCN should reach the registered keeper within 14 days of the offence; and the Transport Committee for London’s Parking Appeal Service deals with any appeals.

The results of the trial were dramatic. Following an initial publicity campaign when enforcement started,the number of PCNs declined significantly, by up to 80 per cent in some areas. Buses were able to travelfaster in bus lanes in the trial areas. But there was a limited effect on their overall reliability because thetrial areas were small and buses were affected by other factors such as traffic congestion and roadworks.

As Transport for London (TfL) sees enforcement as such an integral part of bus priority in London, it hasagreed enforcement strategies with each London borough. Under these agreements, the boroughs provideadditional parking attendants or cameras along London Bus Initiative (LBI) or BusPlus routes. These busroutes have been subject to ’whole route’ improvements and further details are provided in the LBI leafletin this resource pack. TfL underwrites all extra costs that cannot be met under PCN income. This gives theboroughs an incentive to achieve full compliance.

South Yorkshire’s experience

Bus operators First and Yorkshire Terrier set up an enforcement trial in Sheffield with South YorkshirePassenger Transport Executive (SYPTE). They paid for extra police motorcycle patrols during peakperiods and motorists were warned through a media campaign that driving in a bus lane would result in afixed penalty notice (FPN). The trial ran from April to June 2001.

The trial opened with very high levels of FPNs issued: a significantly greater number than for the sameperiod in the previous year. There was clearly a high level of non compliance with motorists perceivinglittle chance of being caught.

However, a very significant reduction took place over the trial period, with 82 per cent fewer ticketsissued in June than in April. Importantly, one operator reported that lost mileage fell by 60 per centoverall, with the other reporting a drop of 45 per cent. Lost mileage is defined as scheduled miles minusoperating miles. The latter is affected by traffic lost miles (e.g. congestion delays) and operating lost miles(e.g. driver shortage and vehicle breakdown). Both operators also found that they kept to scheduledjourney times better and more consistently.

- 16 -


The conclusions drawn from the trial were:

effective enforcement is essential to bus priority; the initial level of FPNs more than paid for the cost of additional policing, so in theory the trial wouldhave been self-funding. However, as more motorists comply with bus lanes, the rule of diminishingreturns applies; enforcement was essential during peak hours, but more enforcement was needed at other times of theday to maintain standards; and enforcement was perceived as fair to all road users.

South Yorkshire’s experience has been compiled with the assistance of SYPTE and BOSSY (BusOperators Serving South Yorkshire).

The Local Authority Act 2003 is currently being debated in Parliament and will extend the powers used inLondon across the whole country.

The Department for Transport (DfT) is keen to standardise enforcement following the lessons learnt inLondon, and has been taking advice from both TfL and the ALG. However, DfT intends to grantindividual approval to local authorities that have developed their own parking enforcement regimes and tothose that can show they have the correct systems already in place.

There is significant interest from metropolitan authorities and highways authorities for large towns andcities in introducing bus lane enforcement in a similar way to London.

Highways works

A common problem appears to be a lack of coordination between highways managers, who areresponsible for maintaining the highway, and transport managers, who oversee the running of busservices. Highways managers sometimes schedule maintenance work without informing bus operators,resulting in buses being diverted or even suspended. The same can happen when, for example, gas, wateror electricity companies carry out work on the roads, often as an emergency.

Highways managers should consult bus operators on the phasing of maintenance works to minimise theireffect on services. At worst, some highways managers have created diversion routes that buses cannot use.It has been suggested that highways managers should set up temporary bus priority measures, wherereasonable, when roadworks take place so that buses are not delayed.

Local authorities must also replace bus priority signing and marking as soon as possible after roadworkstake place. It is good practice to monitor and maintain the condition of signing and lining for bus prioritymeasures. If signs are missing or damaged, or lines are indistinct, the opportunity for enforcement isseverely reduced. Most authorities produce a Maintenance Plan which sets out relative priorities based onroute hierarchy and severity of problem. The importance of bus lane maintenance should be formallyrecognised in these Maintenance Plans.

Some authorities have highway liaison groups, which involve all stakeholders in the process of highwaymaintenance. These authorities often have fewer operational problems for both public transport andhighway maintenance. However, these liaison groups vary significantly between authorities and may beirregular and infrequent. Again, good practice demands regular liaison meetings involving the appropriate

- 17 -


level of staff and with a clear agenda.

Traffic management

Background

The previous leaflet, Route management, considers the effective management and operation of bus routeson a daily basis. This leaflet takes a more long-term, forward planning perspective and considers therelationship between traffic management and bus priority.

It is important to think broadly about the relationships between traffic management and bus priority.Traffic management should be carried out in a way which complements a local authority’s wider planningand transport policy objectives, including the delivery of the council’s integrated transport strategy andbus strategy.

Such strategies set out high-level policy objectives and targets for modal priorities (with priority given topublic transport, walking and cycling); the allocation of road space (through the creation of new roadspace or the reallocation of existing road space); and demand management initiatives. For example, buspriority measures can be both the ’carrot’ and ’stick’, making a contribution to the better management ofcongestion and helping towards the provision of faster and more reliable bus services.

Fundamentally, in taking decisions about the effective management of traffic in their area, localauthorities should consider the needs of all road users, including buses and their passengers. In doing so,local authorities and bus operators should liaise closely, with traffic management issues being high up onthe agenda.

Effective traffic management underpins bus priority: without this foundation the full benefits of any buspriority measure cannot be realised. Furthermore, good traffic management can assist buses withoutimpeding the general flow of traffic in the area.

Traffic management & buses

For these reasons traffic management, bus operations and bus priority measures need to be consideredtogether, not in isolation.

Local authorities should ensure that, as far as is practical, the introduction of traffic management measuresdoes not impede the effectiveness and reliability of local bus services.

For example, when local authorities introduce traffic management measures in residential areas toimprove road safety and the local environment, they need to consider the implications for bus operationsin that area and on nearby bus routes. Traffic management solutions developed without consideration ofbus routes have the potential to harm local bus operations. Using road humps for example as a trafficcalming measure is an inappropriate solution if the road in question has a bus service operating on it.More ’bus friendly’ traffic calming measures such as chicanes should be considered instead. Furthermore,as well as affecting bus operations in the area being ’calmed’, measures to prevent ’rat running’ onresidential streets, for example, can displace traffic back onto nearby bus routes.

- 18 -


The impact of such measures on bus routes should be considered, and wherever possible bus prioritymeasures should be introduced to minimise the disruption to bus services. In all circumstances, closeliaison with local bus service operators, as well as residents, etc., is essential.

In areas where bus services run infrequently and the case for bus priority may be relatively weak, theintroduction of well designed traffic management measures can improve the general flow of traffic, whichcan benefit buses too. This approach may best suit semi-rural areas and small to medium-sized towns,where there is often simply not enough available road space to introduce certain types of bus priority.

Improving bus journey times and service reliability for buses through the introduction of good trafficmanagement should be a main aim of a local authority. Relatively simple measures that assist buses moregenerally such as dispensing with bus laybys, other than at places where the service terminates, and theuse of yellow box markings to help buses at key junctions should be considered as part of this.

It is of course important to be aware of the risk that improvements in general traffic flow and reduced carjourney times could increase the attractiveness of car use and then any benefit to buses could be lost.

On-street waiting & loading

Where local authorities are considering more radical, innovative approaches to the regulation andmanagement of on-street waiting and loading restrictions on key bus routes, consultations need to be held.Key stakeholders that need to be consulted include local traders, delivery and distribution companies, thelocal chamber of commerce, as well as bus operators.

Deliveries in peak hours can raise issues that affect bus routes. Innovative waiting and loading schemes todeal with these issues need positive and effective enforcement. This benefits all road users, includingbuses.

Similarly it is very important for local authorities to liaise closely with bus operators during the design,consultation and implementation of area-wide controlled parking zone (CPZ) schemes. The accessrequirements of buses operating within areas for which on-street parking controls are being developedneed to be carefully considered. In this context, it is important to recognise the potential obstruction thatcan be caused by ’Blue Badge’ parking, taking advantage of the lesser restrictions afforded by loadingrestrictions, irrespective of single or double yellow line parking restrictions.

Special initiatives

Edinburgh Greenways

Description of need

Background

’Greenways’ are bus priority lanes, introduced as part of Edinburgh’s transport strategy, Moving Forward.A Traffic Regulation Order bans general traffic from Greenways, restricting access to buses, taxis andcycles. Greenways differ from conventional bus priority in a number of ways:

- 19 -


â¢ lanes are surfaced in green tarmac;

â¢ red lines prohibit stopping, replacing traditional yellow lines;

â¢ a dedicated team of wardens strictly enforces Greenways;

â¢ side streets off Greenways have traffic calming measures;

â¢ there is better provision for cyclists and pedestrians;

â¢ Greenways operate throughout the working day; and

â¢ there are better bus shelters with comprehensive bus information.

Problems

Greenways are an attempt to remedy a problem with traditional bus lanes. Although many were verysuccessful, buses still suffered congestion at a number of junctions that lacked yellow lines to preventon-street parking activity.

Objectives

The Greenways scheme aimed to:

â¢ improve bus reliability;

â¢ reduce bus journey times;

â¢ reduce car traffic growth by the year 2000;

â¢ reduce car traffic by 30 per cent by the year 2010; and

â¢ meet European guidelines on nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations in the air by 2000.

Scheme details

Description

This study looks at two Greenways corridors. The A8 is 6.7km long and 55 per cent of its length isinbound bus lane, whilst 54 per cent is outbound bus lane. The A900 is 2.2km long and 23 per cent of itslength is inbound bus lane, whilst 41 per cent is outbound bus lane. These two Greenways are comparedwith the A7/A701 corridor, which has conventional bus only lanes on both sides for most its 3km length.

Implementation date

The two Greenways in the study were introduced in 1999.

Costs

- 20 -


The scheme cost approximately Â£500,000/km. This compares with Â£110,000/km for the traditional buslane corridor.

Consultation

The local authority consulted with bus operators, residents and businesses in the core scheme area. Publicconsultation following experimental introduction of Greenways in 1999 showed strong support.

Bus operators

Lothian Region Transport and First Edinburgh operate buses along the two Greenways.

Bus frequency

The bus services run every 12 minutes.

Illustration of scheme


Before and after monitoring

Dates of surveys

The surveys were carried out in 1999.

Types of surveys

Types of surveys

Results

Traffic flows

3

Journey times

The surveys showed that, in most cases, both Greenways and conventional lanes protected buses from thecongestion that affected other traffic. Greenways that were lined with shops provided better protectionfrom congestion than the equivalent stretch of conventional bus lane. The introduction of Greenways onthe A8 corridor seems to have improved bus reliability. The conventional corridor did not show anyobvious changes over the same period.

Patronage

Surveys showed that there was an increase in bus use, with approximately 11 per cent of the sampleclaiming to use the bus more. However, 7 per cent of interviewees claimed to use the bus less. Henceoverall there was a 4 per cent increase in bus use.

- 21 -


http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/buses/bpf/busprioritythewayahead12/coll_busprioritythewayaheadhtmlv/dft_localtrans_612651-1.jpg



Other effects of the scheme

The count data for both Greenways corridors shows that traffic volumes have decreased slightly. It is notpossible to attribute any change in cycle use to Greenways from the data available.

Enforcement issues

Greenways are constantly patrolled but conventional lanes merely receive ’visits’ and these generally after08.00. An illegal parker is typically 15 times more likely to encounter a warden on a Greenway than on aconventional bus lane.

Possible scheme amendments

Greenways design could be improved by avoiding:

bus lanes which are carried straight through junctions without any setback; starting bus lanes immediately downstream of junctions as this can result in traffic being unwilling touse the inside lane, which also reduces capacity; and unnecessarily reducing the queuing space available and thus increasing the frequency with whichqueues block back to upstream junctions, causing more frequent congestion there. This is particularlyimportant at the start of the Greenway where upstream buses have no priority and therefore getcaught in the congestion.

Conclusions

The Edinburgh Greenways scheme is successful and has been extended.

References

Scottish Executive CRU, A Comparative Evaluation of Greenways and Conventional Bus Lanes, Reportnumber 83. Obtainable from: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/resfind.aspx?series=9

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the help of the Scottish Executive CRU, City of Edinburgh Council,Lothian Region Transport, and First Edinburgh. For further information contact the City of EdinburghCouncil City Development Department on: 0131 469 3630.

Other examples

With regard to other similar bus priority measures recently introduced, there are none directly comparablethat have all of the features of Greenways, particularly in terms of the level of enforcement and the use ofred lines. However, the London Bus Initiative (now known as Bus Plus) also features high levels ofenforcement, albeit under a different legislative regime.

- 22 -


Further information

Guidance and further information can be found in the following:

DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997. Seaman, D & Heggie N, Comparative evaluation of Greenways and bus priority lanes, TrafficManagement, Safety and Intelligent Transport Systems. Proceedings of Seminar D at the AETEuropean Transport Conference 1999, Vol. P432 0115-32.

London Bus Initiative

Description of need

Background

The London Bus Initiative Phase 1 (LBI1) was a 3 year fixed term initiative established in April 2000 andsupported with a Â£60m grant from Government, as a new partnership approach to improving busservices in the Capital. The partnership drew together the London Bus Priority Network (LBPN)Partnership of all 33 individual London local authorities, Transport for London’s (TfL) Bus Priority Teamand London Buses, bus operators and enforcement agencies. This collaborative feature was a strongelement of the initiative, which received a Merit commendation from the Institution of Civil Engineers in2003.

The vision for the initiative was "to deliver a step change enhancement of the actual and perceived qualityof London’s bus service" with the aim of making travel by bus more attractive and getting more people touse buses.

Challenges

27 high frequency bus routes across London were selected for treatment with the specific aim ofbenefiting the maximum numbers of passengers. Collectively they were identified as Bus Plus routes. Theroutes served areas where integrated transport services could be provided and where buses offered acompetitive alternative to the car. Some routes included heavily congested roads or passed through areaswhere improved bus transport could assist in regeneration. The LBI Partnership took 12 months to set up,plan and programme the project and a further two years to design, consult and implement.

Objectives

The LBI had four objectives: â¢ to promote a change in travel habits and get more people onto London’sbuses;

to deliver improvements on a ’whole route’ basis; to make buses more attractive for potential users; and to make buses the first choice of mode on LBI routes.

- 23 -


Constituent parts to the Whole Route approach


A key feature of the LBI was the whole journey approach to route improvements comprising ten mainelements of a whole route implementation plan. The diagram below shows the constituent parts to theWhole Route approach to route improvement.

Scheme details

Description

27 Bus Routes were selected for LBI Phase 1 and divided into three categories:

3 Quality Whole Routes +; 5 Quality Whole Routes; and 19 Whole Routes.

A wide range of measures were introduced across the whole of London with the QWR+ routes receivingthe highest levels of bus priority. Over 100 extra bus lanes, 50 new pedestrian crossings, 300 signalisedjunctions equipped with bus priority and 140 junction improvements were introduced on the 27 routes.The measures had a typical expected first year rate of return (FYRR) of 20 per cent.

Over 400km of roads were studied and received bus priority measures. These measures benefited all theBus Plus routes together with other bus services using these corridors. Improved enforcement wasdelivered through the installation of bus lane enforcement cameras, both on board the bus and at theroadside (CCTV) as well as the enhancement of borough enforcement programmes. Improved passengerinformation was provided at bus stops, together with real time passenger information and new bus interiorcleaning programmes. For drivers, a BTEC qualification was initiated and up to March 2003, 1,500drivers had completed this qualification.

Implementation

The Whole Route Implementation Plans (WRIPs) began in April 2000 with scheme implementationbeginning in late 2000 and continuing until the end of March 2003.

Costs

Enforcement Â£11m

Traffic engineering Â£28m

Bus operations Â£3.5m

Programme support Â£9m

Major projects Â£8.5m +

- 24 -



The total cost of the scheme was approximately Â£60m.

Consultation

Consultation was both broad and detailed, including individual schemes. Extensive use was made of thetechnical press, local radio and newspapers to disseminate information. A computerised simulationillustrating the LBI toolkit was produced on CD to aid consultation. As with many traffic related projects,a number of schemes attracted opposition and some schemes had to be amended or dropped from theprogramme.

Bus operators

Transport for London - London Buses, is the public transport provider for London and all bus services aretendered. Major bus operators include the First Group, Arriva and London United.


The three QWR+ routes were studied in detail with comprehensive before and after monitoringundertaken. The graphs below showing the Route 115 compare bus and car journey times before and afterthe introduction of the LBI measures together with a do-nothing scenario, which assumes a 2 per centdecrease in traffic speeds over the three years. The reliability of the bus route has improved over the threeyears.

The excess waiting times for passengers using the 115 has decreased by over 30 per cent following theintroduction of the LBI and service enhancements. The bus and car journey time variability has alsoconsiderably improved.

The bus priority and complimentary traffic engineering measures have delivered improved reliability andreduced journey times, by an average of 3 per cent throughout the day.

Journey times

Journey times were reduced on the QWR+ Route 115, but on the two remaining QWR+ routes, the 149and 185, the 149 journey times increased, and on the 185, there was little change. These changes must beviewed against a general deterioration in operating conditions on these routes and journey speeds wouldhave been much slower had the LBI improvements not been installed. Also a number of pedestrianfacilities were introduced and bus stop dwell times increased as additional bus passengers were attractedto the route.

R115 bus journey and car journey times

Patronage

Annual patronage on the 27 Bus Plus LBI routes rose from 165 million annually to 201 million over thelife of the project, an increase of 21.9 per cent. This compares with a network wide increase including LBIroutes of 18.8 per cent.

- 25 -



Potential project enhancements

Much was achieved through the LBI and the role and importance of bus services and bus prioritymeasures was raised significantly. However, some factors were not fully anticipated as follows:

the wide partnership approach was innovative and was a highly successful basis for building onco-operation. Establishing the partnership was made more difficult as it coincided with TfL’sformation in 2000; the whole route approach to improvements demanded intensive resources dedicated to traffic signaldesign. Skilled and experienced traffic signal engineers were in high demand and the frequency ofmaintaining and updating traffic signal junctions requires increased resources. This issue is now isbeing addressed by TfL through specialist training programmes; and schemes were identified through the Whole Route Implementation Plan (WRIP) process on the basisof need. However, not all schemes were subject to detailed design evaluation. Explicit justificationmay have helped prioritisation of schemes and better responses to local opposition, although this mayhave delayed the implementation of some schemes.

Conclusions

The LBI Phase 1 was highly successful and objectives were largely met. Passenger growth on the LBIroutes is now at its greatest for over 50 years and TfL is currently investing approximately Â£50m perannum in bus priority measures across London.

References

DETR, A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone, The Stationery Office, 1998.

DETR, From Workhorse to Thoroughbred. A Better Role for Bus Travel, 1999.

Greater London Authority, The Mayor’s Transport Strategy, GLA, July 2001.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet is based on documentation provided by Transport for London.

Other examples

There is no direct equivalent of the LBI owing to the unique statutory arrangements prevailing in theCapital. The West Midlands Bus Showcase and Edinburgh Greenways leaflets in this resource packprovide examples of other comprehensive initiatives outside of London.

Further information

Contact the TfL Bus Priority team on: 020 7027 9408 or email: [email protected]

Alternatively you can write to:

- 26 -


Bus Priority ProgrammeCustomer Service Centre4th Floor172 Buckingham Palace RoadLondonSW1W 9TN

Further information can also be obtained from the web site: http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk

West Midlands Showcase

Description of need

Background

The Centro (West Midlands PTE) Twenty Year Public Transport Strategy set out objectives for thedelivery of high quality public transport services and facilities across the West Midlands. The WestMidlands Bus Strategy and Public Transport Strategy combined to provide a framework for developmentof an integrated transport system that will continue to be dominated by the bus. The West Midlands AreaMulti-Modal Study (WMAMMS, 2001) placed strong emphasis on investment in bus priority to raise theshare of peak travel by bus from 20 per cent in 1999 to more than 30 per cent by 2031.

Problems

Severe peak period traffic congestion is experienced in many parts of the West Midlands. Traffic flowsare higher than in any area outside London and there is high growth in traffic and car ownership. It isestimated that congestion costs businesses in the West Midlands Â£2.5 billion each year.

Objectives

The West Midlands Bus Showcase concept was developed to deliver a radical improvement to busservices to make them attractive to new users, particularly to motorists, and to retain existing passengers.The objectives of Bus Showcase are:

to be more attractive to bus users and potential new users; to improve peak period bus speeds relative to the private car; to improve bus reliability; to reduce bus journey times; and to increase bus patronage.

Concept

The aim is to develop a Bus Showcase network on strategic routes where demand for bus travel is heavyand there is potential for growth in patronage. The high frequency of service on Showcase routes ensuresthat passengers can ’turn up and go’ without the need to seek timetable information before travelling. TheBus Showcase network complements local rail and Midland Metro through improved interchangeopportunities.

- 27 -


http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk/

Investment in priority and route infrastructure on strategic corridors is complemented by improvements toshelters, information, accessibility and safety in other areas served by Showcase routes.

A recent development is the ’core and spurs’ approach. Core corridors have the ’turn up and go’ level ofservice and the full range of Showcase investment. Spurs are sections of route with a lower frequency ofservice feeding into main corridors where investment is limited to access, accessibility, waitingenvironment and information.

The schemes

Key principles

The Showcase concept is based on three key principles:

Achieving a ’seamless’ journey by addressing the whole journey from home to final destination,including walk stages of the journey and providing passenger information. Effective partnership between highway authorities, Centro, bus operators and police. Comprehensive consultation.

Standard features

Every completed Showcase corridor will include:

accessible and safe pedestrian routes to/from bus stops; low floor buses serving bus stops with accessible kerbing; an attractive waiting environment at bus stops with high quality shelters provided where possible; frequent bus services allowing passengers to ’turn up and go’; bus priority, selective bus detection and other highway measures to improve bus speed and reliabilitywhere practical to do so; capability to provide real time information for bus passengers and automatic vehicle location forservice management by operators; commitment to service quality including frequent cleaning of buses and customer care training fordrivers; and comprehensive enforcement of highway measures.

Standards

A series of performance standards has been identified for Showcase routes. Some examples are givenbelow:

Network access: 100 per cent of built-up areas within 400 metres of a bus stop. Accessibility: 100 per cent stops with easy access kerbs, 100 per cent of buses with low floor. Peak frequency: Maximum interval of six minutes between buses from 07.00 to 20.00. Reliability: Compliance with standards set by the Traffic Commissioner. Journey times: All journey times to be the same as off-peak. Journey speed: A long term target of 95 per cent of car journey speeds in peak periods.

- 28 -


Delivery

Partnership

A protocol was agreed in advance of implementation of Line 33, the first Showcase route in the WestMidlands. More recent Showcase routes have been implemented on the basis of informal agreements.Consultation is taking place on a statutory Quality Bus Partnership for the Route 67 Corridor (LichfieldRoad/Tyburn Road) in Birmingham. The parties to the Agreement are the Passenger Transport Authority,Centro, Birmingham City Council, four bus operators and the West Midlands Police Authority. Theprincipal bus operator, Travel West Midands (TWM), supports the concept of statutory partnershipagreements provided that there is considerable input from all parties and close monitoring ofpost-implementation performance standards.

Consultation

Effective consultation is one of the key principles underlying the Bus Showcase concept.

The three stages of consultation are:

initial consultation on the preliminary design, including options where they are available; local consultation on shelter locations; and further consultation on detailed designs including Traffic Orders and any land acquisition.

Consultation methods include use of libraries, local halls, a low floor exhibition bus, road signs displayinga telephone ’hot line’ number, leaflet drops to all affected frontages, leaflets and posters on buses.

Marketing

Comprehensive marketing takes place in advance of the launch day for every new Showcase route. Atypical Showcase marketing campaign includes door-to-door delivery of timetable leaflets, advertising inthe local press and radio, information on Centro and bus operator web sites and a press release. Amarketing budget of approximately Â£25,000 is recommended.

Implementation

Line 33 Birmingham to Pheasey was the first Showcase scheme to be introduced in 1997. BirminghamCity Council and Centro spent Â£2.9 million on infrastructure and TWM invested Â£1.2 million in newbuses.

Three more routes have been completed at a combined capital cost to local authorities and Centro ofÂ£7.4 million, excluding operator contributions in the form of new buses. They are:

Primeline 20/40/48/50 Coventry to Bedworth. Superline 171/301 Walsall to Moseley. Route 559/560 Wolverhampton to Bloxwich.

- 29 -


A further five routes have been substantially completed at an estimated cost to local authorities and Centroof Â£16.3 million to date.

TWM has offered a contribution of up to Â£30 million to supplement public sector funding for businfrastructure in the West Midlands. By Summer 2003, more than Â£4 million had been spent orcommitted. For a project to qualify for a funding contribution there must be a business case showing abenefit to TWM. This means that the project will need to include radical bus priority measures at keycongestion ’hot spots’.

Enforcement

A trial of bus lane enforcement is planned as soon as the expected legislation is in place. Two of the sevendistricts in the West Midlands already have decriminalised parking powers in place enabling them to makeuse of the new enforcement powers.

Maintenance of standards

Maintenance of quality standards is essential for the continued success of each Showcase route. Thisinvolves maintenance of road signs and carriageway markings, speedy repair of damage to shelters,frequent cleaning of shelters and the interior and exterior of buses, keeping timetable displays up-to-date,100 per cent availability of branded buses, and cascading of older buses to lower profile services.Allocation of sufficient revenue funding to maintain quality is an essential part of the process.

Monitoring

Method

Comprehensive monitoring takes the form of bus and car journey time surveys, roadside bus reliabilitysurveys, automatic traffic counts and analysis of bus patronage information collected via electronic ticketmachines. Bus patronage data must be aggregated to avoid identifying passenger numbers on differentservices provided by different operators. Surveys of Showcase service users are undertaken to establishimpact on travel patterns and views on the service provided.

Impact

The impact of Bus Showcase on bus patronage and mode share varies between routes. Overall, completedShowcase routes have achieved an increase in bus patronage of between 10 and 30 per cent, and a modeshift of about 5 per cent from private car. The introduction of articulated buses on Route 67 contributed topatronage growth of 29 per cent.

The following table provides performance information for Line 33, Superline and Primeline:

- 30 -


Line 33 Superline Primeline

Percentage change in bus journey times:

AM peak inbound

PM peak outbound

-2

-6

+9

+4

+1

-2

Percentage change in total patronage +28.8 +22.5 +10.3

Former car users as percentage of patronage 7 13 6

Increased bus patronage and increased numbers of mobility impaired passengers has resulted in increasedbus boarding times which have the effect of reducing savings in bus journey times.

The future

Future initiatives will include pilot red route projects to keep traffic operating efficiently through bettermanagement of parking and loading, consideration of new branding proposals for the whole WestMidlands multi-modal public transport network and consideration of some form of bus rapid transitnetwork to provide an intermediate mode between Metro and Showcase.

Conclusions

Bus Showcase has been successful in a number of ways: the image of the bus has been raised, reliabilityhas been improved and there have been significant increases in bus patronage. On average, mode transferof 5 per cent has been achieved. The greatest impact was achieved when all elements of the Showcasescheme were implemented together.

References

Full information on the Showcase concept is given in the Bus Showcase Handbook published by Centro in2003. This can be downloaded at: www.centro.org.uk/handbook/index.htm

Periodic updates are planned.

Acknowledgements

This case study has been complied with the assistance of Centro, TWM and the West Midlands localauthorities.

Other Examples

BusPlus, London Bus Initiative.

Contact the TfL Bus Priority team on: 0207 960 6763.

- 31 -


Edinburgh Greenways.

Contact the Transport Projects Development Manager of the City Development Department at the City ofEdinburgh Council on:

0131 469 3630.

Further Information

Further information can be obtained from:

Centro

Centro House

20 Summer Lane

Birmingham

B19 3SD

0121 200 2787

http://www.centro.org.uk

Leeds City Centre

Description of need

Background

Bus priority measures in Leeds City Centre form part of Leeds City Council’s broader transport strategyfor the city centre which comprises four main elements:

Leeds Inner Ring Road; ’city centre loop’ provides a high capacity, one-way loop around the city centre designed toefficiently allow motorised traffic to travel around the city centre, with access to the city centre atstrategic points; ’public transport box’ sits within the city centre loop around which public transport and cyclists caneasily navigate providing good access to the main retail core; and pedestrianised retail core.

Problems

During the early 1990s Leeds city centre began to face increasing competition from out of town businessand shopping centres. At the same time traffic congestion and associated problems were makingincreasing demands on the limited road space available. These issues led to a fundamental re-think abouttraffic management, designed to address the traffic problems and at the same time revitalise the city centreenvironment for its users.

- 32 -


http://www.centro.org.uk/

Previously, most of the streets forming the box were one way and wide, up to four lanes, making itdifficult for pedestrians to cross. The one way traffic system caused confusion for bus passengers asinbound and outbound stops serving the same service were often some distance apart on different streets.

On Woodhouse Lane buses were subject to considerable disruption from other traffic, particularly on theinbound direction. Bus stops were regularly obstructed by cars waiting outside a popular supermarket.Also, buses requiring to make a right turn at the junction following the bus stop were required to cutacross a heavy traffic stream in a very short distance to access the offside lane.

Objectives

The objectives of the city centre transport strategy are to:

reduce traffic flows through the heart of the city, and thereby provide a more attractive and saferenvironment for pedestrians and cyclists; ensure that buses, taxis and cycles receive better priority in the core of the city centre; improve air quality in the city centre by reducing the volume of through traffic; create an attractive environment to encourage further retail and commercial development, byextending the pedestrianised zone in the city centre; and improve access to the city centre for disabled people and others with mobility difficulties.

Scheme details

Description

The public transport box is a priority route for buses, taxis and cycles, which runs around the pedestrianshopping centre via The Headrow, Vicar Lane, Boar Lane and Park Row. Cars and delivery vehicles canuse the individual sections of the box to get to car parks or businesses, but cannot travel around or go fromone section to another. At key points bus gates allow only buses, taxis and cycles through. The citycouncil has introduced Traffic Regulation Orders making it illegal for unauthorised vehicles (private cars)to drive through the bus gates. Special blue traffic signs and contrasting red road surfacing differentiatebus gates.

Key features of the scheme include:

a nearside bus gateway on West Gate which enables buses to go straight ahead whilst offside generaltraffic turn left onto the city centre loop; a bus gateway on New Market Street; a bus gateway on Vicar Lane at the junction with Eastgate; a bus gateway at the Duncan Street/New Market Street junction providing buses with an unimpededright turn; and improved circulation and control of traffic through Urban Traffic Management and Control (UTMC).

Since road space on the public transport box is so intensively used, buses can be seriously disrupted by theviolation of traffic and parking restrictions, therefore, continual enforcement of the measures is essentialto ensure smooth running of traffic.

- 33 -


In addition to the public transport box, a series of seven key public transport gateways were identified ascritical to providing a link between the main radial roads and the public transport box. Four of theseschemes have been implemented to date. The A660 Woodhouse Lane route to the north of the city was thefirst to be completed and is a typical example of the combination of measures used, although it employsthe innovative use of a centre of carriageway bus boarding point which is unique in Leeds.

Centre of carriageway bus boarding point Woodhouse Lane


The proposed Supertram would run along three sides of the public transport box. The futureimplementation of Supertram was taken into account in the design of the public transport box to minimisefuture disruptions.

Implementation date

The city centre loop and public transport box were completed in 1997. Changes were made to theoperation of Park Row, which forms the western vertical side of the public transport box, in May 2000.

Costs

The total cost of the Public Transport Box was Â£1.5 million.

The cost of the Woodhouse Lane Gateway including traffic management measures along the 1km routewas Â£1.2million.

Consultation

Public consultation on the measures was undertaken as part of the consultation exercise leading to thepublication of the City Transport Strategy in 1991 by a steering group involving, West YorkshirePassenger Transport Authority, West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive, Leeds City Council,Leeds Development Corporation and the Chamber of Commerce. Changes to traffic priorities and theclosure of streets to traffic were achieved using conventional Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) issued bythe city council.

As part of the process of implementing the TROs the city council’s City Management Team consultedbusinesses in the city centre.

Bus operators

The majority of services using the public transport box are operated by First Leeds, however, otherservices include those operated by Arriva, Black Prince Coaches, Keithley and District, YorkshireCoastliner, Yorkshire Traction and Harrogate & District Travel.

Bus frequency

There are approximately the following numbers of buses per hour in each direction on each of the sides ofthe public transport box:

- 34 -



80 buses per hour on the northern side along The Headrow; 65 buses per hour on the eastern side along Vicar Lane; 90 buses per hour on the southern side along Boar Lane; and 40 buses per hour on the western side along Park Road.

The A660 Woodhouse Lane gateway is used by 40 to 50 buses per hour in each direction.


Bus priority measures in Leeds City Centre



Extensive peak period traffic counts were undertaken in 1990 at key city centre junctions prior toconstruction of the first phase of the public transport box. These were repeated in 2001 to provide anindication of progress and to determine a new city centre base against which future traffic changes will beassessed. (These latter counts included separate counts of taxis and private hire vehicles for which accessrestrictions to the Loop have been relaxed). In addition, there is a permanent air quality monitoring stationlocated on New Market Street which was in place prior to the changes to traffic circulation in the citycentre.

It is the intention of Leeds City Council to continue to monitor the impact of the strategy on the citycentre. This will include surveys to determine the public response to the continuing efforts to improve thecity centre environment for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users.

Results

Air quality

Since the public transport box was introduced monitoring has recorded a general trend of improvements inair quality (NO2, PM10), part of which can be attributed to the success of the traffic managementmeasures reducing the amount of extraneous traffic within the inner ring road and enforcement in keepingtraffic moving efficiently.

Journey times

Monitoring of the Woodhouse Lane gateway has shown that inbound buses saved between 10 and 30 percent on previous journey times. In the outbound direction, the revised signal arrangements havecompensated for the removal of the previous bus lane without any detriment to journey times.

Traffic flows

The immediate measurable impact of the city centre loop and public transport box was the removal oftraffic from the major city centre streets as shown in the table below.

- 35 -



Location Cars & Taxis (Buses) AM Peak 08.00-09.00

1990 2001

Park Row 1500 (70) 51 (73)

Briggate 810 (123) 0 (0)

Vicar Lane 1650 (156) 160 (130)

Examination of the city centre counts in conjunction with counts across a regular river bridge screenlineindicate that the traffic removed from the centre has been ’absorbed’ on the network with no significantproblems arising elsewhere.

Accidents

Before the construction of the city centre loop and public transport box there were typically 173 personalroad injury accidents per year in the city centre. This has dropped to an average of 150 per year followingthe introduction of the city centre loop and public transport box. The most significant reduction in casualtynumbers has been to pedestrians where the annual total has fallen from 97 to 70 per year, a reduction of 28per cent.

Conclusions

Reallocating road space has been crucial to many of the commercial developments which have contributedto the growth and the revitalisation of the city centre (Leeds central shopping area was ranked 3rd in theUK in 2003). The improvements have therefore contributed to wider social and economic objectivesthrough the increased attractiveness of Leeds as a retail and business centre. The reduction of traffic in andaround the city centre has produced a more pleasant environment for pedestrians and cyclists.

The city centre measures have included a mix of established traffic management measures and innovationto make better use of road space. Therefore, the most important lesson to be learnt from these projects isthat measures have to be designed around local conditions.

The full benefits of the city centre loop and public transport box will not be finally realised until LeedsInner Ring Road Stage 7, the final element of the original 1990 city centre traffic management strategy, iscompleted. This will remove further extraneous traffic from the city centre. The road space reallocationbenefits will become fully apparent once the Leeds Supertram is introduced into the city centre.

Acknowledgements

This case study was produced with the assistance of Leeds City Council and Metro (West YorkshirePassenger Transport Executive) and First Leeds. Further Information on the Leeds city centre bus prioritymeasures can be obtained from:

Leeds City CouncilHighways and Transport DepartmentThe Leonardo Building,2 Rossington Street,

- 36 -


Leeds, LS2 8HB

0113 2477500 http://www.leeds.gov.uk

Other examples

The concept of the city centre loop and public transport box is unique. The priority bus gates wereindividually designed to suit the particular situations drawing on standard bus priority measures. However,there are good examples of priority bus gates in Wolverhampton City Centre.

Further information

Further information can be found in "Reallocating road space to buses and high occupancy vehicles inLeeds, Hall, A. W." published in Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Municipal Engineer145, March 2001, Issue 1.

Oxford, Historic City

Description of need

Background

In the 1970s Oxford rejected road building as the answer to the problem of increased demand for traveldue to the unacceptable environmental and property impacts and a desire to preserve the nature of the city.Instead the Balanced Transport Policy was developed, made up of a number of elements including parkand ride schemes, parking controls, pedestrianisation and bus priority on the main radial routes into thecity and city centre.

Twenty years later in 1993 the Oxford Transport Strategy (OTS) was developed as a continuation of theBalanced Transport Policy initiated in the early 1970s. This was also a response to pedestrian/bus conflictsin the city centre shopping streets. Again enhanced park and ride remained central to the strategy. Inassociation with this it was proposed to establish a bus priority route, enhance parking controls in the citycentre and discourage through traffic by introducing bus gates and restricting the use of more streetsthrough pedestrianisation, buses only and bus and access only in the city centre during the daytime.

Oxford is a regional centre for employment, shopping and entertainment serving a population of half amillion people as well as home to a large educational economy. The city is also a major tourist destinationattracting approximately two million visits each year. The historic road structure in the city centre,combined with the increased demand for travel, puts enormous pressure on the road and public transportnetworks. The adopted transport strategy allows the consequent considerable travel demands to besuccessfully accommodated on a largely medieval road network, whilst protecting the historicenvironment and supporting Oxford’s economy.

Objectives

- 37 -


http://www.leeds.gov.uk/

The Oxford Transport Strategy aimed to produce a step change in travel to and through the city centre, inorder to release space for buses diverted from the pedestrianised Cornmarket Street. By reducing the levelof private car traffic in the city it was hoped that conditions would improve for more sustainable modesincluding walking and cycling. It was also hoped that the continued development of bus priority andtraffic management schemes would stop traffic transferring to alternative routes in other parts of the citywithout increasing congestion or adding to environmental degradation.

Scheme details

Description

Before the city centre changes, allowing the pedestrainisation of the main shopping street and the daytimeexclusion of through traffic, were introduced a package of accommodation measures were put in place.These were aimed at encouraging further modal shift to more sustainable modes and accommodatingtraffic routes changes. The works included a series of bus gates creating bus and pedestrian zones onQueen Street and Broad Street, the full pedestrianisation of Cornmarket Street and areas that can be usedonly by buses and access vehicles on High Street, Park End Street and Norfolk Street. Access restrictionsapply 07.30 - 18.30 (10.00 - 18.00 on George Street).

There have been improvements to the railway station forecourt and its approach including a segregatedbus stopping area and signal controlled access to the station.

The improvements to radial routes included junction improvements to assist buses in entering the mainflow of traffic. One example is on Woodstock Road, where park and ride buses leaving the Pear Tree parkand ride site use a with-flow bus lane and a signal controlled bus gate to give buses priority over othertraffic when entering the main carriageway. Improvements were also made at the signalised junction to theRedbridge park and ride site on Abingdon Road and on Botley Road to assist buses from the Seacourtpark and ride.

Oxford City Centre bus priority measures


The Oxford Transport Strategy also involves the use of SCOOT traffic signal controls to give busespriority at signalised junctions. This measure has not fulfilled its full potential as the network is close tocapacity for much for the time and therefore it has not been possible to give a substantial benefit to buses.Oxfordshire County Council pioneered working in partnership with the Highways Agency to introducebus lanes on trunk roads between Thornhill and Pear Tree park and ride sites and the ring road.

Cost

The cost of the strategy measures implemented in the 1990s is estimated at Â£23 million. This included apackage of measures such as bus lane extensions, pedestrianisation, traffic management and capacityenhancements. However, park and ride facilities are not included in this total.

Bus operators

- 38 -



Oxford is in the unusual position of having two strongly competitive bus companies with local operationsof similar size. The Oxford Bus Company and Stagecoach in Oxfordshire match each other service forservice on most routes in the city. This has contributed to a spiral of success in terms of the quality ofservice and vehicles provided in the city. It is also reflected in the high frequency of services running inevenings and on Sundays, creating an environment where public transport is an attractive option for mostjourney purposes. For example, services combine to give a headway of four minutes between buses onCowley Road on Sunday mornings. This gives the population confidence in public transport as analternative to private car.

The Oxford Bus Company plans to introduce smartcards during autumn 2004. It is hoped this willimprove reliability and halve the average boarding time on their services, which currently stands at eightseconds per passenger.

Another initiative used in Oxford is route branding, with schemes such as the Brookes Bus, funded byOxford Brookes University, linking campuses and the city centre. This group of services was introducedprimarily for students, but they are well used by members of the public as well.


Monitoring of traffic levels within the city has been underway since the first wave of bus priority in the1970s. This monitoring was further developed to assess the impacts of the Oxford Transport Strategy,looking not just at traffic flows but at other transport indicators such as air quality, journey times andmodal shift:

Automatic traffic counters are used to monitor traffic flows and are positioned around the city centreand just inside the ring road to give continuous data. Surveys of bus journey times were carried out between October and November 1999 and the resultscompared with similar surveys in the previous year. Both of the main bus operators collect information on passenger numbers. Modal shift is analysed through annual classified surveys - the 1991 survey is used to give a pictureof Oxford before the Oxford Transport Strategy programme started. The air quality review was developed through European Union funding of a project calledEnvironmental Monitoring of Integrated Transport Strategies which aims to monitor air qualitychanges associated with changes in traffic levels. This examined amongst other things level of carbonmonoxide and nitrogen dioxide.

Results

Traffic flows

Cordon counts into the central area show that there has been no increase in traffic flows entering the citycentre since the early 1970s. A reduction in traffic flow by an average of 18 per cent was measuredbetween 1999 and 2002. The eastern radial corridors experienced the greatest impact with a reduction of30 per cent over Magdalen Bridge (on the eastern approach to the city), whilst the southern radials wereleast affected with a reduction of only 9 per cent.

- 39 -


The level of traffic on High Street after the bus gate was introduced reduced by 60 per cent between 1999and 2002 (12 hour average weekday).

Some routes have experienced an increase in traffic as vehicles are displaced from the central city streets.For example, Marston Ferry Road (north of Oxford centre) experienced a 12 per cent increase andDonnington Bridge (south east of Oxford centre) experienced an increase in the range 10 - 16 per cent inthe year following implementation.

Journey times

On a two km stretch of bus lane introduced in 1997 from Kidlington to Summertown, journey times werehalved from eight minutes to four minutes. Abingdon Road also experienced a reduction, with journeytimes being halved on the section from the ring road to the bus gate.

Bus patronage

Bus patronage has increased annually by 8-9 per cent since 1999. The modal share has also show a movefrom the use of private car towards bus.

Comparison of modal split between 1991 and 2002

Mode 1991 2002

Car Use 54 39

Bus Use 27 44

Other 19 17

Source: Oxfordshire County Council

Air quality

There has been a 75 per cent reduction in the levels of carbon monoxide at St Aldates and a 20 per centreduction in particulate matter on Cornmarket Street. The majority of air monitoring sites in the city showa reduction in the level of nitrogen dioxide.

Conclusions

Bus priority measures in Oxford have been effective as part of a package of measures includingpedestrianisation of central areas and park and ride to create a modal shift from private car to publictransport. Unlike many areas of the country, bus patronage has increased steadily with an 80 per centincrease between 1985 and 1998, in fact Oxfordshire has the second highest rate of bus use of the shirecounties and is one of the least car dependent cities in the country. The lengthy experience of bus priorityin the city has created an environment of acceptance of priority measures as part of the infrastructure ofthe city.

- 40 -


The city has a strong pro cycling image which has been reinforced by the reduction in traffic on centralstreets, as cyclists feel safer and more confident.

The future

Since implementation of the first bus priority schemes in the 1970s, the city has experienced considerablechange in travel patterns, partly reflecting the growth of towns and villages elsewhere in Oxfordshire.Given continual change, a number of corridors including Woodstock Road and Banbury Road are beingreviewed to assess the scope for strengthening bus priority. In particular, there is a need to determinewhether inbound or outbound bus priority will yield the greater benefit in locations where the carriagewayis only wide enough to allow a bus lane to be introduced in one direction.

There is increasing abuse of bus lanes and bus gates by moving vehicles. Advantage will be taken oflegislation to enable camera enforcement of bus lanes and bus gates.

Over the next ten years Oxfordshire County Council is planning to development a Premium RoutesNetwork to give buses priority and enhanced frequency on links between urban centres. There is also aproposal for a Guided Transit Express scheme to serve the Redbridge and Pear Tree park and ride sites,with possible extensions to Heyford Hill, Headington and along the A40 corridor to Witney.

References

Director of Environmental Services, Oxford Transport Strategy Working Party - 27 October 2000: Reviewof impact of the central area changes, October 2000.

Oxford City Council Transport in Oxford, Topic paper, December 2003.

Oxfordshire County Council Best Practice Guides, January 2003.

R Williams, Oxford’s park and ride system, Municipal Engineer 133 (p127-135), September 1999.

Acknowledgements

This document was produced with the assistance of Oxfordshire County Council, Oxford Bus Companyand Stagecoach in Oxfordshire. Further information on bus priority measures in Oxford can be obtainedfrom:

Oxfordshire County Council,

Speedwell House,

Speedwell Street,

Oxford ON1 1NE.

The Environment and Economy Department can be contacted on:

- 41 -


01865 815700 or visit http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk.

Other examples

York

Contact the main switchboard on: 01904 613161

Winchester


Further information

Oxfordshire County Council Best Practice Guide No 3 Urban Bus priority is available from OxfordshireCounty Council at the above address.

Newport, Smaller Towns

Description of need

Background

Newport, in South Wales, is the main hub of the regional bus network, with the majority of inter-urbanservices commencing/terminating at its bus station. Traffic levels in Newport have increased by 22%between 1990 and 2000; these are exacerbated by the riverside location of Newport, which restrictseast-west traffic to three main crossing points.

Market research, undertaken by the TIGER (Transport Integration in the Gwent Economic Region)Consortium in 2000, recorded that 97% of respondents rated bus service reliability as either ’important’ or’very important’.

A draft feasibility study, completed in March 2000, identified a number of locations where bus prioritymeasures could increase bus service reliability. Phase 1 - Between Chepstow Road /Harrow Road and OldGreen Roundabout was the main scheme and subject to the most comprehensive monitoring.

Problems

Rising congestion levels had increased bus journey times, and reduced the predictability of bus arrivaltimes. This led to a decline in patronage levels with an associated increase in car use, which waseconomically and environmentally unsustainable.

Objectives

The primary aims of the Newport bus priority scheme were ’to reduce journey times and improve thereliability of bus services on the main corridors radiating from Newport city centre, by creating a highwayinfrastructure designed to give priority to buses’.

- 42 -


http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/

The secondary aims of the scheme are to increase bus patronage and reduce dependence on the private car.

Scheme details

Phase 1:

Between Chepstow Road/Harrow Road and Old Green Roundabout

Description

A number of measures were carried out to improve bus priority as part of Phase 1:

â¢ Installation of westbound bus, cycle, motorbike and taxi lanes totalling 550 metres in length,operational between 07:00 and 19:00;

â¢ Relocation of existing eastbound bus stop at Crown Buildings to dedicated bus bay;

â¢ Town Bridge carriageway converted from substandard 4-lane carriageway to three standard lanes withan eastbound bus lane; and

â¢ New traffic signals operated under MOVA (Microprocessor Optimised Vehicle Actuation) controldesigned to minimise the impact on the Cenotaph.

Implementation date

Works began in September 2001 and were completed in December 2001.

Costs The Welsh Assembly supported the scheme through the Transport Grant funding. The total cost forPhase 1 and Phase 2 was Â£550,000.

Consultation

Consultation consisted of the following elements:

Public Consultation Exhibition (details per sample leaflet), advertised by press release, posters inshops, libraries and buses. Additional leaflet drop to all businesses/residents, whose property frontsthe scheme. Publication of Statutory public notices detailing proposed Traffic Regulation Order;

Bus operators and frequencies

During core hours (08:00 to 18:00) an average of 33 buses per hour utilise the Clarence Place/TownBridge section as detailed below:

Newport Transport operate 11 routes in this corridor, linking the east of the town with the town centre.

Stagecoach in South Wales operate three inter urban routes on this corridor, linking Newport with Magor,Caldicot, Caerwent, Chepstow and Gloucester.

- 43 -


Drakes Travel operate evening services for one route on the Newport to Chepstow Corridor.

Welcome Travel operate a single return journey between Caerwent and Newport.




Reliability

A series of surveys were undertaken to assess the impact of the bus corridor improvements on thereliability of services.

Dates and types of survey

Before and after surveys were undertaken at Newport Bus Station on two days (Tuesday and Friday)enabling a statistically robust sample size to be achieved, reflecting variability between reliability levelson different days of the week.

Samples were recorded between 07:00 and 19:00 to ensure that the majority of services were recorded andthat the effect of variations that occurred throughout the day were minimised.

Following collection of the data, the recorded arrival time for each service was compared to the scheduledarrival time and variations recorded.

Analysis and results

The Traffic Commissioners’ standards are that 95% of services should arrive no earlier than one minute orlater than five minutes compared with the registered timetable. The data was analysed to determine thepercentage of services that were more than five minutes late.

In addition data was also analysed to provide an indication of the average length of time services arrivedafter the scheduled arrival time.

The impact of measures is likely to be greater on local services than inter-urban routes, as the prioritymeasures account for a greater proportion of the local service journey length. To reflect this pattern,analysis was split between urban and inter-urban routes.

Tables 1 and 2 show before and after monitoring information for services using Chepstow Road.

Tables 1 and 2 show before and after monitoring information for services using Chepstow Road

Conclusions

In overall terms, the reliability of Chepstow Road services entering Newport bus station has increased.The percentage of services that met the Traffic Commissioner’s criterion has increased from 76% to 87%.In addition, the average lateness for all services has reduced by 31 seconds.

- 44 -



http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/buses/bpf/busprioritythewayahead12/coll_busprioritythewayaheadhtmlv/dft_localtrans_6126_ia4524f31000

Newport urban services have demonstrated an improvement in reliability, with 95% of the sampleentering the bus station within the Traffic Commissioner’s criterion. The quality of service has alsoimproved, with average lateness reducing by 45 seconds.

For inter-urban services there is a 10% improvement in services arriving within the TrafficCommissioner’s criterion. The greatest benefit has been a reduction in average lateness by 2 minutes and49 seconds. This is extremely significant as the average lateness now falls within the target set by theTraffic Commissioner.

While the scheme may only impact on the final stage of inter-urban services, this section is often the mostimportant for passengers, as it can be extremely frustrating to complete the majority of your journey, onlyto be delayed by congestion at the end.

In conclusion the scheme has resulted in a positive impact on reliability of bus services.

Bus patronage monitoring

Changes in the level of bus patronage provide a valuable measure of the impact of this scheme on travelhabits.

To determine the impact of this scheme on travel habits, Electronic Ticket Machine (ETM) data wascollected from the main regional bus operators before and after the works.


Annual surveys are undertaken to determine the number of passenger journeys completed on each sampleroute, over a 31-day sample period. Data collection commences on the Sunday nearest the 1st October ofeach sample year, to ensure collection of an equal number of peak and off-peak days.


To maintain operational confidentiality, results are recorded on an index, which illustrates relative trendsin travel, without determining the performance of an individual route or operator.

Analysis was undertaken on both local and inter urban services which utilise the scheme measures on theirroute.

Table 3: Scheme impact on bus patronage

Before After % Difference

Total 100 106.2 6.2%

The rise in patronage, as shown in Table 3, demonstrates the positive impact of the scheme in promotingincreased bus use. The increase in patronage has been achieved against a historical trend of declining buspatronage (Since 1996/97, bus patronage levels in South Wales have declined by nearly 11%).

- 45 -


Analysis of TIGER Package A - (Ebbw Vale/Brynmawr to Newport and Chepstow bus corridorimprovement scheme) indicated that on this corridor as a whole, patronage on inter-urban bus services hadincreased by 2.85% between 2000 (pre-scheme) and 2001 (post-scheme), compared to a 4.16% decline inpatronage in the region as a whole over the same period.

Conclusions

The increase in patronage by over 6% indicates the added value of the scheme in promoting additionaltravel on local services.

Operators’ comments

One of the main aims of the scheme is to enable the bus operators to provide reliable services that can beseen as a viable alternative to the private car.

While the data-monitoring programme has been designed to analyse the various impacts of the scheme(such as journey time and reliability), these only provide a snapshot of the impact during the sampleperiod. By contrast operational experience has been gained on a daily basis, therefore the importance ofthis method of monitoring cannot be over emphasised.

The impact of the scheme on their bus services will vary between operators, depending on their servicepatterns. For example the greatest impact was anticipated to be on Newport Transport services, given thatthey operate a number of high frequency bus services, with the scheme accounting of a quarter of theroute length. By contrast Stagecoach services are long distance, with a lower frequency, of which thescheme will only account for a low percentage of the total route length, albeit this section has experiencedthe greatest delays with a detrimental effect on operational reliability.


To assess the impact, interviews were held with the managers of each of the three main bus-operatingcompanies. These identified a number of common benefits and issues.

The positive impact of the scheme is summarised with the following quote from the major regionaloperator in respect of bus priority measures currently being planned on Malpas Road:

’We support any measures to give buses priority at a time when the general trend is for increasing busjourney times due to ever increasing congestion and on street parking. I sincerely hope that any pressure toreduce the benefits of these proposals are resisted and that the good work already achieved elsewhere inNewport (on Chepstow Road) can also be applied in this area’.

The main benefits of the various bus priority measures identified by the operators are:

Increased journey time reliability; Reduction of lost/cancelled service; More efficient fleet utilisation; Reduced journey times through the ability to by-pass congestion; Service enhancements increased frequency without additional vehicles; More effective route planning;

- 46 -


Increased operational efficiency; Increased customer satisfaction; Improved working environment for driver aiding recruitment and retention; and Publicity benefits.

One of the main benefits identified by operators is the ability to run a reliable service. In particular, thereduction of journey times along the scheme enables companies to make up time ’lost’ along morecongested sections of the route. This provides benefits to passengers as the increased stability of thenetwork results in fewer services being cancelled or rescheduled at short notice. This also enables servicesto operate consistently within the guidelines set by the Traffic Commissioner.

Despite concerns about enforcement, negative publicity and congestion on untreated sections of the routenegating scheme benefits, the bus priority scheme has provided a range of benefits to the operators, whichenable service enhancements to the travelling public, encouraging increased bus use.

Acknowledgements

This was produced with the assistance of Newport City Council and Capita Symonds.

Further information

Further information on this special initiative can be obtained from:

Glyn Stickler, Newport City Council, Civic Centre, Newport, NP9 4UR http://www.newport.gov.uk

Other examples

In addition to this scheme there are two further schemes in the Newport area:

A48 Cardiff Road Bus priority measures: Physical work completed, however re-phasing of traffic lightsongoing to optimise traffic flows. In addition, on going construction of Newport Strategic DistributorRoad, has resulted in traffic diverting along Cardiff road, preventing accurate scheme monitoring.

Malpas Road Bus Priority measures: Physical work on Malpas Road was completed in June 2004 and isnow fully operational.

Newport Intelligent Traffic Signals: Implementation of traffic signal priority for buses throughtransponder activation. Transport Grant funding application approved by Welsh Assembly Government.Work due to commence in next financial year.

West Bromwich Town Centre

Description of need

Background

- 47 -


http://www.newport.gov.uk/

During 2001 a new traffic management scheme was introduced in West Bromwich to tackle trafficcongestion, discourage through traffic and improve conditions for buses and pedestrians. The schemeincluded several bus priority measures. In 2002 a new bus station was introduced to provide increasedcapacity, improve accessibility and enhance interchange with Midland Metro.

A vision to regenerate the town centre emerged from a master planning exercise. The main elements of thetransport strategy were conversion of the West Bromwich Ringway from a one-way gyratory to a two-waycarriageway with bus priority and a bus gate to discourage through traffic, reduce peak period congestion,allow all cross-town bus services to call at the bus station and improve conditions for pedestrians.Relocation of the bus station released land to accommodate a new town square and a centre linking art andthe creative use of technology.

Midland Metro Line 1 was opened in 1999 and passes to the south of West Bromwich town centre. Oneobjective of the strategy was to encourage use of Midland Metro by discouraging through traffic in WestBromwich town centre. It was hoped that this would also be of benefit to Showcase Route 404 (Walsall -West Bromwich - Blackheath).

Problems

The West Bromwich Ringway acted as a large gyratory system carrying all traffic around the town centrein a clockwise direction. Buses were delayed in peak period traffic congestion on the Ringway and theroads approaching junctions on the Ringway. In free-flow conditions traffic speeds were high. Pedestriansrelied on unattractive subways to cross the Ringway to the retail core and bus station. The old bus stationwas not fully accessible, did not present an attractive environment and lacked capacity. Not all busservices could use the old bus station - cross-town services routed via High Street on both sides of thetown centre did not call to avoid the need to make a complete circuit of the Ringway before resuming theirroute. The old bus station was remote from the West Bromwich Central tram stop and therefore did notcater for bus/tram interchange.



Objectives

The Transport Strategy for the town centre included the following objectives:

Moving the Bus Station to a site closer to the Midland Metro tram stop to encourage bus/traminterchange; Ensuring that all bus services could use call at the new Bus Station without the need to followcircuitous routes; Removing bus stops on the Ringway thereby reducing the need for bus users to cross the Ringway; Providing priority for buses, taxis and cyclists on the Ringway; Providing an element of traffic restraint by discouraging through traffic; Imposing parking charges in the town centre; and Improving safety and the environment for pedestrians by replacing subways under the Ringway withtraffic signal controlled crossings.

- 48 -



Scheme details

Description

West Bromwich Ringway was converted from a one-way gyratory to a two-way road. Traffic signalcontrol with SCOOT was implemented at all main junctions on the Ringway. It was anticipated that thenumber of traffic signal installations on the Ringway would help to discourage through traffic.

A new bus station was built on the south side of the retail core, releasing the site of the former bus stationfor other uses. A bus gate was provided on the western side of the Ringway to improve conditions forbuses and pedestrians, and to reduce the level of traffic using the western side of the Ringway. Aninbound with-flow bus lane was provided on High Street to give priority to buses, taxis and cyclists.Traffic signal control was provided at the new bus station entry/exit on the south side of the Ringway, abuses only right turn lane was provided to assist westbound buses enter the bus station, and a surfacepedestrian route was provided to West Bromwich Central tram stop with a traffic signal crossing of theRingway.

Traffic calming works were undertaken in a number of streets to prevent traffic avoiding the Ringway byusing alternative routes around the town centre.

The new West Bromwich bus station has 22 stands and is capable of handling up to 220 departures anhour. It is fully accessible with raised kerbs at all stands; there is a fully enclosed passenger area withbus-operated doors at all stands; and it includes CCTV surveillance and electronic passenger informationdisplays.

Implementation date

West Bromwich Ringway was converted from a one-way gyratory to two-way carriageway in August2001. The with-flow bus lane on High Street, the bus gate on New Street, the buses only right turn onCronehills Linkway and side road traffic calming were all introduced at this time. The new bus stationopened in April 2002.

Costs

The main element of the funding package was a major Local Transport Plan bid submitted to governmentjointly by Sandwell Council and Centro. The total cost of the project was Â£11.3 million of which thenew bus station accounted nearly 50 per cent.

Planning context and consultation

The master plan for West Bromwich town centre was subjected to public consultation during May andJune 1998. The strategy for traffic management and public transport was an integral part of the masterplan. Consultation took the form of a public exhibition in the Queen Square retail area of the town centre,written consultation with all town centre businesses and distribution of 10,000 explanatory leaflets. Themaster plan was adopted as an Interim Planning Statement in 1999 and now forms part of the SandwellUnitary Development Plan Review adopted by the Borough Council in April 2004.

- 49 -


Further consultation focusing on the proposals for traffic management and public transport took place in1999 and included written consultation with all town centre businesses and discussions with the owners ofproperties affected by the scheme. There was also a statutory process of consultation associated with aCompulsory Purchase Order and Traffic Regulation Orders.

Bus operators

Travel West Midlands is the principal bus operator serving West Bromwich. The only other operator ofsubstantial size is Pete’s Travel. Both companies operate buses on Showcase Route 404 linking Walsalland West Bromwich.

Bus frequency

During a typical weekday inter-peak hour there are 141 departures from West Bromwich bus station, 27inbound buses using the bus lane on High Street and a two-way total of 124 buses using the bus gate onNew Street.


Dates and type of surveys

A biennial roadside cordon survey is undertaken at locations on all approaches to West Bromwich towncentre as part of the Local Transport Plan monitoring process. Public transport counts are taken at thesame time. Data collection takes place in late March each year.

Data for the year 2000 represents the before situation and precedes the commencement of works. Datacollected in 2002 represents the situation after completion of the traffic management and bus prioritymeasures. The new bus station was not opened until April 2002, after completion of the 2002 surveys.

Type of surveys

Three types of information were collected: â¢ Automatic Traffic Count (ATC) data was collected on allapproaches to the town centre.

Manual classified counts were carried out at four of the survey sites to provide assessments of modalsplit and vehicle occupancy. A bus cordon survey provided counts of bus passenger numbers.

Results

In comparing ’before and after’ traffic and public transport data for West Bromwich it is necessary to beaware that Midland Metro Line 1 opened in May 1999 and patronage continued to build up in the period2000-2002. This makes it difficult to isolate the impact of the changes to the West Bromwich Ringwayand the accompanying bus priority measures.

The key findings of a comparison of data for 2000 and 2002 are summarised below:

- 50 -


The number of car trips crossing the cordon around West Bromwich town centre has decreased. The mode share accounted for by public transport has increased and now accounts for 32.2% of alltrips in West Bromwich.

Table 1 shows the reduction in the number of vehicles crossing the town centre cordon during differentperiods of the day. Some substantial reductions were recorded between 2000 and 2002 - 16 per cent in themorning peak period, 12.5 per cent in the afternoon peak period and 12.5 per cent in a 12 hour day (07.00- 19.00).

Table 1 shows the reduction in the number of vehicles crossing the town centre cordon during differentperiods of the day

Implementation of the scheme provides a number of benefits for bus operators: it establishes aninterchange that can be served by all bus services and the location of the new bus station catered forbus/tram interchange. The time savings from reduced peak period traffic congestion and avoidance of theneed for circuitous routes around the Ringway were used to improve reliability rather than to reducescheduled journey times.

Monitoring data indicates an increase in the annual number of bus passengers using West Bromwich busstation from 5.83 million before the scheme to a current level of 6.27 million representing an increase of 7per cent. It is estimated that opening of the new bus station resulted in a 1 per cent transfer from car to busequating to an annual reduction of 62,600 car trips.

Table 2 shows the change in mode share crossing the West Bromwich town centre cordon in the period1998 - 2002.

Table 2 shows the change in mode share crossing the West Bromwich town centre cordon in the period1998 - 2002

Future developments

A Tesco-led retail development on the north side of the town centre will result in diversion of theRingway to the north of the proposed development. This will enable realisation of the ’town square’concept with better operating conditions for buses and further improvement to the environment forpedestrians.

All traffic signal installations in the Ringway are under SCOOT control and the controllers are set up forselective vehicle detection using GPS technology. This system will be activated once equipment is fittedto buses operating on services in the area.

The Council intends to take advantage of the expected legislation permitting the use of cameras for thedetection of moving vehicle infringements of bus lanes and the New Street bus gate in order to controlincreasing abuse by general traffic.

- 51 -






Conclusions

The reduction in traffic crossing the West Bromwich town centre cordon between 2000 and 2002 suggeststhat there has been a reduction in through traffic resulting from the restraint imposed by the New Streetbus gate and the number of sets of traffic signals to be passed on the Ringway. The future introduction ofselective bus detection and the ability to use camera enforcement should make the bus priority measuresmore effective.

Relocation of the bus station, the introduction of two-way traffic on the Ringway and the provision of awith-flow bus lane on High Street permitted the concentration of all bus services in the bus stationimproving access to the retail core and encouraging bus/tram interchange.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council, Centro andTravel West Midlands.

Other examples

Leeds city centre

Further information from Leeds City Council

(or see the case study in this resource pack)

Wolverhampton (use of bus gates in city centre)

Wolverhampton City Council

Regeneration & Transportation

Heatun House

Salop Street

Wolverhampton

WV3 0SQ

01902 555745

http://www.wolverhampton.gov.uk

Further information

Further information on the West Bromwich scheme can be obtained from:

- 52 -


http://www.wolverhampton.gov.uk/

Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council

Department of Planning and Development Services

Development House

Lombard Street

West Bromwich

B70 8RU

0121 569 4136 http://www.sandwell.gov.uk

Centro Centro House

20 Summer Lane

Birmingham

B19 3SD

0121 200 2787 http://www.centro.org.uk

Case studies

Guide to case studies

Introduction

This section of the resource pack contains a series of case studies by type of bus priority measureproviding practical information drawn from experience of successful bus priority schemes implementedaround the country.

The case studies are designed to demonstrate the range of possible measures and also give some indicationof under what conditions they might be suitable for consideration. It is important to remember that thereisn’t an ’off the shelf’ solution that will maximise the benefits to buses regardless of location. The mostappropriate measure in any one location will depend upon the local conditions prevailing in that area.Traffic levels, the number and frequency of bus services, available carriageway width and the types ofproperties fronting onto the road are some of the factors that need to be taken into account whenconsidering the most appropriate bus priority measure for that location.

- 53 -


http://www.sandwell.gov.uk/


The case studies

Groups of measures are colour-coded to assist navigation of the case studies in this section.

The first group covers with-flow and contra-flow bus lanes (light purple). These measures mark out a laneof the carriageway for use by buses. They require sufficient carriageway width to enable them to beinstalled. With-flow lanes are amongst the most commonly adopted physical bus priority measures in thiscountry. Contra-flow bus lanes, where the buses travel in the opposite direction to the main flow ofvehicles, are less common but can be useful for example by providing a more direct route to a town centrethan is available for general traffic. They also tend to be self enforcing. Further development of theconventional with-flow bus lane can include more comprehensive corridor/whole route treatments such asgreen routes (dark purple).

Bus gates and rising bollards (dark blue) tend to be considered when access to a particular street is to berestricted to buses (and any other designated vehicle e.g. taxi or cycle). Bus gates can be traffic signals,actuated by the buses or simply signs restricting access to buses. Rising bollards provide a physical barrierthat lowers out of the way when actuated by the bus. They can be particularly useful in enabling directaccess by bus to areas where it is desirable to prevent other vehicles entering, such as shopping streets intown and city centres.

Guided busways (blue) are a method for obtaining complete physical segregation of buses from other roadtraffic. As the name implies, a guided bus is one that travels on its own dedicated carriageway or trackwhich ’guides’ the steering of the bus. Higher speeds can be achieved in the guideway and the presence ofthe guideway infrastructure can help impart the impression that guided busways offer some of theattributes of a light rail scheme. They are, also by their design, self enforcing.

The five case studies on pre signals and bus advance areas, Selective Vehicle Detection (SVD), MOVA,Bus SCOOT and Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) (light green) are examples of different technologybased solutions to providing bus priority. Pre signals and bus advance areas enable the bus to get to thefront of other traffic at junctions. The other four are sometimes referred to as ’virtual’ bus priority in thatthey do not require any physical space to implement them. In contrast to measures requiring physical useof road space, these measures use various methods of communication to detect the presence of buses andactivate traffic lights to give priority to buses at junctions. The various technologies described in thesecase studies range from those which detect when a bus arrives at the traffic lights and then seeks to turnthe lights green for the bus as soon as possible, through to technologies which can detect the location of abus as it passes along its route and seek to set the lights ahead to provide priority to the bus.

Mixed priority street and bus friendly traffic calming (green) are traffic management techniques that allowbuses to operate in street environments which are more sympathetic to pedestrians and cyclists whilst alsoaffording some priority to buses. Traffic calming measures may be suitable in areas where bus servicesrun infrequently and the case for bus priority may be relatively weak. The introduction of well designedtraffic management measures can improve the general flow of traffic, which benefits buses too. Thisapproach may best suit semi-rural areas and small to medium-sized towns, where there is often simply notenough available road space to introduce certain types of bus priority.

- 54 -


The group which includes High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes and no-car lanes (yellow) are variantson the bus lane approach but differ in their designation of the type of vehicle allowed into the prioritylane. HOV lanes can be suitable where there are insufficient bus services to justify a full bus lane, butthere is a desire to give priority to vehicles with more than just one person on board. No car lanes aresometimes considered in town centres where the authority also wishes to give assistance to delivery lorriesand to motorcycles.

Park and ride (orange) focuses on getting people to use the bus instead of their cars, for the final leg oftheir inward journey. It requires sufficient space on the edge of town centres to provide adequate parkingfacilities. Park and ride schemes will also usually incorporate a high level of bus priority on the transferroute so that potential passengers can see a clear benefit over the private car.

All of the measures described in these case studies should be supported by complementary measures (red).Measures to improve the bus stop environment can help improve boarding times and speed up services.Other measures such as prepaid ticketing can also assist this process. These final two case study leafletsprovide a number of different examples of complementary measures.

With-flow bus lanes

Description of need

Background

A strategic transport study carried out in 1995 predicted traffic and pollution problems that centralLeicestershire would face in the next ten years. The research showed that radical measures would beneeded to reduce car use, congestion and pollution.

Longer-term measures would need to include:

congestion charging; park and ride facilities; and better public transport.

The first park and ride scheme was introduced in 1997 for the west of the city. The local authorityintroduced extensive with-flow bus lanes for all public bus services as well as the park and ride services.

Problems

The key predictions from the transport study for central Leicestershire were:

the total number of journeys will increase by 11 per cent; the proportion of trips made by car will increase and car travel will account for 81 per cent of persontrip miles; there will be greater pressure on city centre parking; walking, cycling and bus use will all decline; road traffic accidents will increase by 19 per cent; and emissions of COÂ² and other pollutants will increase by 15 to 20 per cent.

- 55 -


Objectives

As part of Leicester’s park and ride strategy, the bus initiative aimed to:

make the city centre more accessible; provide high quality bus services to and from the city centre from surrounding areas; increase the number of people using the bus for all journeys; reduce the number of car journeys into the city centre; reduce pressure on city centre parking; and help cut pollution and improve the environment.

Scheme details

Description

The project included the following elements:

24 hour bus lanes (permitting cyclists, and taxis as of 1999); red surfacing of bus lanes; and minor junction improvements.

In total, 4.5km of bus lanes were introduced over a total road length of 6km. Entering the city (inbound),bus lanes are usually continuous and provide a high level of priority for local and park and ride buses.However, leaving the city (outbound), bus lanes were only introduced at major hot spots due to thenarrowness of the road.

Owing to the considerable length of the bus lanes along Hinckley Road, there are a number of differentfrontage types. Industrial, retail and residential land uses are all found alongside the bus lanes, residentialbeing the most prevalent.

Implementation date

The scheme was completed in August 1997.

Costs

The total cost of the bus priority measures was Â£1.2 million.

Consultation

Public exhibitions were held along with roadside and household questionnaires. The police were alsoconsulted. They requested that bus lanes that permitted shared use with cyclists should be at least 3.5metres wide. The width of bus lane on Hinckley Road varies between 3.0 and 3.5 metres; this is largelydependent on the available carriageway width.

Bus operators

- 56 -


The main bus operators running services along the Hinckley Road corridor are First Leicester and ArrivaMidland. Less frequent services are operated by Stagecoach Midland Red and Centrebus.

Bus frequency

Park and ride buses on this corridor operate four buses an hour at peak times. Frequencies of otherservices on Hinckley Road vary between 1 and 6 per hour, with a combined total of at least 30 buses perhour operating over the Glenfield Street to St Nicholas Circle section of the bus lane.




Dates of surveys

The scheme corridor was monitored before implementation in 1997 and after implementation, in January1998.

Types of surveys

As part of the project, the effects on general traffic and bus passengers were monitored. The main surveyareas were bus and car journey times, traffic flows into the city and park and ride use.

Results

Traffic flows

Traffic flow was recorded on Leicester’s principal routes during the project. The county council’sautomatic traffic counters on the A47 Hinckley Road recorded similar levels of traffic before and after theinitiative. Weekday inbound flows increased by 6 per cent between October 1997 and May 1998, whileoutbound flows reduced by 2 per cent.

However, during the morning inbound peak hour, the Hinckley Road corridor saw a 17 per cent reductionin vehicles, from 1,100 to 910. There was a similar reduction of 150 vehicles during the afternoonoutbound peak.

Journey times

Comparisons of bus and car journey times on Hinckley Road following the introduction of bus prioritymeasures show a significant reduction for buses and little change for cars.

Bus journey times during the morning inbound peak were cut from 23 to 18 minutes: a 22 per centreduction. During the afternoon outbound peak, they dropped by 23 per cent. Bus priority measures had aminimal effect on car journey times. During the morning inbound peak they dropped by 5 per cent andduring the afternoon outbound peak they increased by 2 per cent.

- 57 -



The bus lane had an even greater effect on the new park and ride buses. The average journey time on thepark and ride service was 12 minutes: nearly one and a half minutes faster than the average journey timefor cars. Taking account of the additional time it would take a motorist to park in the city centre, there is aclear time benefit to bus users.

Importantly, the difference between journey times for cars and buses narrowed considerably as a result ofthe new bus lanes. Before the bus lanes were introduced, afternoon outbound peak bus journeys wereseven minutes slower than car journeys. Afterwards, the difference was reduced to less than two minutes.

Bus and car journey times at peak periods


Reliability

Journey time surveys on Hinckley Road showed that the bus lanes greatly improved the reliability ofservices. As a result of the scheme, unreliability has been halved to just two and a half minutes in themorning inbound peak.

Conclusions

Following the bus priority measures, bus services to and from the city were much faster. During thebusiest times, local bus services are now about 22 per cent faster than before, and only slightly slower thancar journeys. Park and ride buses can cover the distance to and from the city centre nearly one and a halfminutes faster than cars. When parking times are taken into account, bus journeys are at best faster and atworst much the same as car journeys.

The reduction in peak hour traffic flows, faster bus journey times and bus reliability improvements are allindicative that the project has successfully met its objectives.

References

LERTS, Leicester environmental road tolling scheme, 1999.

Acknowledgements

This document was produced with the assistance of the Environment, Regeneration and DevelopmentDepartment at Leicester City Council. For further information, contact the ERD Department on: 01162526339 or email: [email protected]

Other examples

Kingsway, Bedford

Contact the Traffic Management Department at Bedfordshire County Council for more details on: 01234228686.

- 58 -



King Street ,Dudley

Contact Traffic Management and Development at Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council for more detailsat: [email protected]

Further information

The following documents offer guidance for the implementation of with-flow bus lanes:

DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997. London Bus Priority Network Design Brief, LTB, 1994. The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, The Stationery Office, 2002.

Further information may also be sought from:

Hounsell NB and McDonald M, Evaluation of Bus Lanes, CR87 Transport Research Laboratory,1985 - 93. Traffic Advisory Leaflet 6/01, Bus Priority, Traffic Advisory Unit, 2001.

Contra-flow bus lanes

Description of need

Background

Rotherham Interchange is situated on the northern fringe of Rotherham town centre. It is the focal pointfor local bus services in the Rotherham area. Corporation Street is a road extending south through thetown centre from the Interchange.

Corporation Street used to be a one-way street carrying northbound traffic. It formed part of the routethrough the town centre to the Interchange for bus services from the south of the town. It is a secondaryshopping street at the eastern end of the central retail area. Northbound traffic is moderate and much of thepedestrian activity is focused on the bus stops and taxi rank.

Location plan showing before and after routes

Problems

Buses leaving Rotherham Interchange used to follow a circuitous route via Bridge Street, College Road,Centenary Way and Main Street to gain access to roads to the south west of the town centre. Buses leavingthe Interchange experienced substantial delays in joining the ring road at the roundabout junction ofCollege Road and Centenary Way. In peak periods buses were also delayed at the Masbrough Streetroundabout on the ring road.

Objectives

- 59 -



The scheme has been designed to:

improve penetration of the town centre by bus services; improve reliability and reduce variability of journey time by avoiding delay at the Centenary Way/College Road roundabout; provide a more direct route and reduce bus journey times; improve safety and the environment for pedestrians on Corporation Street; and increase bus patronage by encouraging transfer from private car.

Scheme details

Description

The scheme consists of a southbound contra-flow bus lane extending for 280 metres between the BridgeStreet exit from the Interchange and Market Square (the junction of Market Place, High Street andWestgate). There are two bus stops in the contra-flow bus lane and another two bus stops with bus stopclearway protection in the northbound general traffic lane. There is a short 24 hour bus lane in the centreof the carriageway at the north end of Corporation Street to provide access to Rotherham Interchange fornorthbound buses.

Some carriageway widening was necessary to cater for two-way operation and provide enough room forbus stops, loading bays, parking spaces for disabled people and a taxi rank. Modifications were made tothe signal-controlled junctions at both ends of Corporation Street and a Pelican crossing was upgraded to aPuffin. Three ramped pedestrian crossing areas were provided to ensure vehicle speeds were kept down.

Buses are the only category of vehicle permitted to use both the contra-flow bus lane and the shortnorthbound bus lane that provides access to the Interchange. The contra-flow bus lane varies in width witha minimum of about 3.0 metres over a distance of about 30 metres.

Implementation date Work on site commenced in May 2002 and the contra-flow bus lane was opened inlate October 2002.

Detailed scheme layout


Costs

The scheme cost Â£450,000 of which Â£250,000 was attributable to the contra-flow bus lane andÂ£200,000 to environmental improvements. The works funded included replacement of two signalisedjunctions, upgrading of a Pelican to a Puffin crossing, and green surfacing of the full length of the buslane. Other improvements included level footways through vehicle crossings, new flags and block pavingat vehicle crossings, new lighting columns, and new litter bins, bollards and railings.

Consultation

- 60 -



A small exhibition was held in Rotherham town centre to gauge public feeling towards the proposals.During conceptual design, meetings were held with owners and occupiers of frontage properties onCorporation Street and other premises affected by the proposals. The intention was to identify and resolvepotential problems with deliveries and access. Further meetings with owners and occupiers took placebefore scheme design was finalised. Comprehensive consultation ensured that only one objection wasreceived when the proposals were advertised.

Extensive consultation with bus operators took place throughout the project and covered schemedevelopment, programming and accommodation works. Quality Bus Corridor meetings arranged by SouthYorkshire PTE provided the opportunity for discussion.

The Council’s Access Officer was involved in design work to ensure that the needs of elderly and disabledpeople were fully met.

Before work started, owners and occupiers of frontage properties were visited to agree accessarrangements during construction. During the week prior to opening of the contra-flow bus lane, leafletswere handed out to pedestrians on Corporation Street to ensure awareness of the new road layout andtwo-way operation on Corporation Street.

Bus operators

First in South Yorkshire operate virtually all services on Corporation Street. One other company operatesa few journeys.

Bus frequency

Provision of the new contra-flow bus lane allowed the diversion of eight southbound bus services viaCorporation Street. They have a combined frequency of 24 to 25 buses per hour in daytime on weekdays.



’Before’ bus journey time and bus occupancy surveys were undertaken during May and June 1999. SouthYorkshire PTE is to carry out ’after’ surveys following implementation of other schemes on the Sheffield- Rotherham - Doncaster Quality Bus Corridor.

Cordon counts of traffic entering Rotherham town centre are undertaken during the first two weeks ofOctober every year. ’Before’ traffic count data are available for 2002 and ’after’ traffic count data will beavailable in October 2003.

Results

Information supplied by First in South Yorkshire identifies benefits to the operation of bus servicesresulting from implementation of the contra-flow bus lane:

- 61 -


Services bound for Canklow Road: Distance operated per trip was reduced by 0.8km. On Services130/132 (6 per hour) running time to Canklow was reduced from 10 to 8 minutes. As running timeallowed to Canklow on longer distance services 13/29/264 (1 to 2 per hour) was only 7 minutes, thebenefit took the form of improved reliability. Services bound for Sheffield Road (5 per hour): Distance operated per trip was reduced by 0.8km.Running time was not reduced because the scheduled time to the next timing point was considered tobe tight. Benefits took the form of improved reliability. Services bound for Masbrough Street (12 per hour): There was no saving in distance operated as theold and new routes were similar in length. At first, running time was reduced because delay wasavoided at the junction of College Way and Centenary Way. This proved to be optimistic and thereduction in running time was removed.

The scheme allowed the introduction of a new and more convenient bus stop serving the main shoppingarea. There is anecdotal evidence that the increased pedestrian activity around the new bus stops hashelped to regenerate the area.

South Yorkshire Police insist that buses should not cross the central white line in the road unlessauthorised by a police officer. An emergency plan has been drawn up for alternative routes and provisionof a recovery vehicle to deal with vehicle breakdowns in the contra-flow bus lane. All street works areplanned and alternative routes agreed in advance with bus operators via South Yorkshire PTE.

Traffic Flows

No adverse impact was experienced by general traffic using Corporation Street in the northbounddirection. Although ’after’ traffic count data is not yet available, observation suggests no noticeablechange in traffic volume.

Conclusions

Introduction of the contra-flow bus lane provided a more direct route through the town centre for anumber of bus services. It also allowed the introduction of more convenient outbound bus stops servingthe town centre. Reduced journey times were achieved on some services. On others, the reduction injourney time was used to improve reliability.

Acknowledgements

This was produced with the assistance of Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, South YorkshirePassenger Transport Executive and First in South Yorkshire.

Other Examples

Russell Square, London WC1

Contact the London Borough of Camden on: 020 7278 4444 (main switchboard). Ask for the TeamManager of the Transportation and Engineering Department.

- 62 -


North Lane, Leeds

Contact Leeds City Council Highways and Transport Department on: 0113 247 7500.

Further Information

Further information on the Corporation Street contra-flow bus lane can be obtained from:

Rotherham Metropolitan District Council,

Planning, Transportation and Tourism Service,

Bailey House,

Rawmarsh Road,

Rotherham

S60 1TD

01709 822958 http://www.rotherham.gov.uk

South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive

PO Box 801,

Exchange Street,

Sheffield

S2 5YT

0113 276 7575 http://www.sypte.co.uk

Other general guidance on the implementation of schemes such as this can be found in the following:

DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997. The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, The Stationery Office, 2002.

Green routes

Description of need

Background

- 63 -


http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/

http://www.sypte.co.uk/

Hertfordshire’s Green Routes form part of the strategy for delivering the bus policy set out in the LocalTransport Plan. In particular, Green Routes are intended to help to deliver improved reliability throughbus priority, enhanced service levels, better quality buses, a more accessible bus network and betterfacilities and information for passengers.

The A412 St. Albans Road is located to the north of Watford and connects the town centre to the A405Kingsway North Orbital Road. The overall aim of the scheme was to make use of road space on St.Albans Road, released by the opening of a new parallel road, in order to provide priority for buses andencourage modal shift to buses.

Problems

The numerous bus services using St. Albans Road suffered from poor reliability as buses were delayed bytraffic congestion.

Objectives

The overall objectives of Green Routes in Hertfordshire are to provide a more reliable service, anincreased level of service, accessible buses and bus stops, better facilities for passengers at bus stops andhigh quality information through partnership between the County Council and bus operators.

The aims specific to the St. Albans Road Green Route project were to provide a more reliable andattractive bus service, encourage modal shift in favour of the bus, improve overall access to the town andassist people with restricted mobility. The five specific objectives are as follows:

to improve bus operations and passenger facilities with extra priority for buses; to discourage cars and commercial vehicles from using the A412 St. Albans Road in favour of theparallel A4008 Stephenson Way; to encourage a modal shift towards the bus whilst improving overall access to the town and assistingpeople with restricted mobility; to introduce safe and convenient routes for pedestrians and cyclists; and to encourage Heavy Goods Vehicles to use St. Albans Road for access only.


St. Albans Road Green Route


Scheme details

Description

The scheme extends northwards along the A412 St. Albans Road from Watford Junction in the south to apoint close to the junction with the A405(T) Kingsway North Orbital Road. The opening of the A4008Stephenson Way connecting Watford with the M1 and A41 (T) in 1993 created the opportunity tointroduce priority for buses on the A412 utilising road space released by traffic transferring to StephensonWay.

- 64 -



Priority for buses was provided by the designation of with-flow bus lanes totalling 885 metres in length,installation of pre signals at three junctions and introduction of selective vehicle detection in an enhancedversion of SCOOT. Accessibility was improved by the introduction of low floor buses and the installationof easy access kerbs at bus stops. Improvements were made to facilities for passengers through theinstallation of new shelters and provision of improved seating, street lighting and timetable displays.Measures were also introduced to increase pedestrian safety through improvement works at a pedestriancrossing and the introduction of signal controlled pedestrian crossing facilities at two locations.

The overriding need to manage traffic entering and leaving the A41(T) at the Dome Roundabout limitedthe scope for developing effective bus priority measures on the St. Albans Road approaches to thejunction.

Conditions for cyclists were improved by permitting shared use of bus lanes, introducing several lengthsof cycle lane and providing advance stop lines at several traffic signal controlled junctions. Ancillarymeasures included provision of loading bays and a small number of ’pay and display’ car parking spaces,footway resurfacing, improvements to pedestrian crossing points and replacement of pedestrian guard rail.

Implementation date

The scheme was implemented in three phases following an initial UTC upgrade in 1996. Phase 1construction works began in January 1998; the following phases were opened in June 1998, November1998 and August 1999. Selective detection of buses became operational in February 2000 and somefurther small-scale improvement works were also implemented at Station Road, Watford during 2000.

Cost

The overall cost of the scheme was Â£1.76 million (2000 prices). The total cost is broken down asfollows:

Activity Cost (Â£million)

Statutory undertakers diversions 0.11

UTC upgrades (1996) 0.42

Phase 1 construction (January to June 1998) 0.52

Phase 2 construction (August to November 1998) 0.50

Phase 3 construction (February to August 1999) 0.06

Selective vehicle detection, active bus priority 0.01

Post implementation modification (works at Station Road) 0.14

Total 1.76

Source: Hertfordshire County Council

- 65 -


In addition, Arriva expenditure on new easy access, low floor buses in the Watford area totalled Â£4.7million in the period 1997 to 2000. This included the acquisition of 11 gas powered buses.

Consultation

A number of public exhibitions detailing proposals for the scheme were held

in Autumn 1995. A leaflet was produced outlining proposals and inviting members of the public to theexhibitions; the leaflets were distributed to all households in the area. Comments on the proposals werecollected using a questionnaire at the exhibitions. These comments were taken on board and changes weremade to the proposals including shortening the bus lanes in places and toning down the parkingrestrictions. The second set of proposals were displayed in a second round of public exhibitions duringFebruary 1997; this coincided with advertising of the TROs.

Bus operator

The great majority of bus services on the St. Albans Road corridor are operated by Arriva The Shires andEssex. The operator was closely involved in development of the proposed scheme in accordance with thevoluntary Quality Bus Partnership and made contributions through deployment of new low floor busesand by undertaking a bus user survey as a contribution to scheme monitoring.

Bus frequency

The A412 St. Albans Road Corridor in Watford carries the highest density of bus services of any road inHertfordshire. During the weekday inter-peak period there are 16 buses per hour in each direction withadditional journeys operating at peak times.


Types and dates of surveys

Extensive before and after monitoring has taken place to establish the impact of the Green Route project:

automatic and manual classified traffic counts: manual counts in 1996 and 2000; bus journey time surveys (on-bus and roadside): 1994, 1996, 1998, 1999 (before) and June 2000(after); car journey time surveys: 1994, 1999 and 2000; bus occupancy surveys: March 1996 and July 2000; perception survey of bus users: May/June 2000; and interview survey of local residents and postal questionnaire to properties fronting on to St. AlbansRoad: 2001.

Results

Traffic flows

- 66 -


Analysis of automatic traffic count data for 1996 and 1999 indicates that traffic flows on the A412 St.Albans Road decreased by 11 per cent south of the A41(T) junction and by 6 per cent to the north of thejunction. In the same period, traffic flow on the A4008 Stephenson Way increased by 20 per centindicating the diversion of traffic from the A412 to the parallel A4008. In comparison, traffic in theWatford area grew by 5 per cent during the same time period.

Manual traffic counts undertaken at a number of points along the A412 indicate an overall reduction of 14per cent in weekday two-way traffic flow over a period of 12 hours. There was also a reduction of up to 15per cent in traffic levels on side roads.

Journey times

Average southbound bus journey times on the southern part of the St. Albans Road Green Route betweenthe A41(T) at the Dome Roundabout and Station Road, Watford decreased by 2.5 minutes (12 per cent) inthe AM peak period between February 1996 and June 2000 but were unchanged in the inter-peak and PMpeak periods. In the northbound direction the average journey time reduction over all three time periodswas more than 1.5 minutes (17 per cent).

Car journey times southbound between Garston and Watford Junction Station at the northern and southernends of the Green Route increased by 7.5 minutes in the AM peak and 3.0 minutes in the inter-peak periodbetween 1994 and 2000. There were no significant changes in car journey times southbound in the PMpeak and northbound in all three time periods.

Analysis of vehicle queuing counts indicates an overall increase in queuing at junctions on St. AlbansRoad between 1996 and 2000 reflecting the loss of stacking space following the introduction of bus lanesand pre signals. In developing the scheme it had been anticipated that increased queuing and car journeytimes on St. Albans Road would encourage general traffic to divert to the A4008 Stephenson Way.

Reliability

A survey of bus arrival times in Watford town centre undertaken by Arriva indicated an improvement of65 per cent in bus reliability.

Bus occupancy and modal share

A comparison of bus occupancy in March 1996 and July 2000 showed increases in the number of peopletravelling by bus of 17 per cent in the AM peak, 18 per cent off-peak and 11 per cent in the PM peak. Busmode share increased by 5 per cent in the same period. A comparison of 1999 and 2000 patronage data fortwo key bus services using St. Albans Road showed an increase of 1.8 per cent compared with a fall of 6.1per cent on the remainder of the local network.

Local opinion

A bus passenger interview survey commissioned by Arriva in May 2000 included 387 completedinterviews. The majority of respondents thought that buses were normally on time (67 per cent), busjourney time had stayed the same or improved since completion of the Green Route (82 per cent) and thatthe quality of passenger shelters had improved (53 per cent). Issues of concern to respondents includeddelays to buses at locations beyond the Green Route and the frequency of bus services using the corridor.

- 67 -


Market research of the views of local businesses and occupiers of frontage properties indicated thatimproved access to shops, loading bays and parking facilities were the most positive elements of theGreen Route project whilst the least satisfactory aspects were disruption to trade during construction anddecrease in traffic speed.

Air quality

Emissions by buses were reduced as a result of investment by Arriva in new low floor diesel andgas-powered buses. The gas-powered buses were effective in reducing emissions but problems wereencountered with fuel consumption and range on a full tank of fuel. Consequently, the fleet of gas buseshas now been converted to operate on diesel fuel.

Conclusions

Hertfordshire County Council considers that the St. Albans Road Green Route has achieved its objectivesof reducing bus journey times, improving reliability and increasing bus patronage and mode share. Thestrategic objective of displacing traffic onto a more suitable parallel route (A4008 Stephenson Way) hasalso been achieved without any increase in ’rat running’.

References

Green Route Scrutiny, Report by Transport Panel, Hertfordshire County Council, December 2001.

St. Albans Road Green Route Project Before and After Report, Hertfordshire County Council, August2000.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Hertfordshire County Council.

Other examples

Other examples can be found in this resource pack, including:

Durham Road Super Route, Sunderland. Chepstow Road, Newport.

Further information

Further information on the St. Albans Road Green Route can be obtained from:

Hertfordshire County Council

Highways House

41-45 Broadwater Road

- 68 -


Welwyn Garden City

Herts

AL10 8YD

01707 356560 http://www.hertsdirect.org

Bus gates and bus only links

Introduction

Bus gates and bus only links are short lengths of bus only street intended to allow buses to travel on directroutes that are prohibited to all other traffic. They are used to keep unwanted traffic out of an area whilstallowing the operation of a bus service on a direct route that is attractive to passengers.

In its simplest form a bus gate or bus only link is a short section of road where a Traffic Regulation Orderis in place restricting access to buses. Signs are the only protection against violation. In such cases, abuseof the restriction by other categories of traffic is common.

Local authorities have adopted a variety of approaches to make bus gates more effective or self-enforcing.Measures used include application of a different colour or surface treatment to the gate, carriagewaynarrowing (sometimes complemented by traffic calming or a physical obstruction), and protection bybus-activated traffic signals or rising bollards.

Bus gates or bus only links can be used in a variety of different situations:

as part of a toolkit of measures used to restrict access for general traffic and allow buses to operate intown and city centres; to enable buses to bypass congested junctions; to allow buses to penetrate residential areas, industrial areas and business parks whilst preventing theroute becoming an attractive short-cut for unwanted through traffic; and to maintain bus routes where a traffic management scheme has been implemented or a new road hasbeen built.

Enforcement

Bus gates are particularly susceptible to violation unless measures are taken to make them less attractiveto motorists and more self-enforcing. This can be done in a number of ways:

by narrowing the carriageway in the bus gate to the minimum necessary to accommodate a bus; by installing traffic signals with bus detection; by installing rising bollards that are activated by transponders on buses (see case study of BridgeStreet rising bollards, Cambridge); and by using a different colour or surface treatment for the bus gate or installing traffic calming (e.g. aspeed cushion) in the gate (see case study of bus friendly traffic calming, Hull).

- 69 -


http://www.hertsdirect.org/

In a few locations local authorities have utilised physical obstructions that can be crossed by buses, but notby cars, as an alternative to installing a speed cushion in a bus gate. The difficulty with a physicalobstruction such as a sunken area in the middle of the carriageway is that it may preclude use of the busgate by emergency vehicles, minibuses and some midibuses.

The priority access point on Northgate Street in Bath City Centre was introduced by Bath and North EastSomerset Council in 2001 with the objectives of reducing the volume of traffic in the city centre,providing an opportunity to improve public transport services, reducing noise and air pollution in the citycentre, improving the pedestrian environment for city centre users and thereby encouraging investment inthe central area. Alternative routes were available for displaced traffic - A367 Green Park/Charles Streetand A36 Bathwick Street/Cleveland Place. The diagram below illustrates the strategic location of the busgate.

The priority access point takes the form of a short length of road with access controlled by a set oftransponder-activated traffic signals. From initial implementation, the bus gate operated between 08.30and 18.30 on all days of the week. This time period was chosen following consultation with the police,emergency services, city centre traders and bus operators. Following a review of the hours of operation, itis proposed to revise the hours to 10.00 to 18.00 during 2004/05 in order to ease constraints on servicingpremises in the city centre.

This scheme is part of the city’s wider traffic management system that has been introduced with the aim ofimproving the environment in central Bath and creating a more pleasant area for all users.

The priority access point is used by 14-15 southbound buses per hour in peak hours reducing to 12-13buses per hour in the inter-peak. In addition the bus gate can be used by taxis, private hire vehicles,emergency vehicles and cycles.

Monitoring has shown reduced bus journey times, increased reliability and reduced traffic levels on thestreets leading to the priority access point of up to 70 per cent after implementation.

Strathmore Street bus gate, Perth

A with-flow bus lane and bus gate were installed on Strathmore Street in Perth in order to enable buses tobypass queuing traffic. The bus gate at the end of the bus lane is intended to allow buses to re-enter thetraffic lane safely at a pinch point where the carriageway can accommodate only two lanes. Buses leavingthe bus stop at the end of the bus lane trigger the traffic signals at the bus gate to create a gap in the traffic.A hurry call is also sent to downstream traffic signals. The downstream section of the route is heavilycongested and the traffic signals at the bus gate can be used to control traffic flow. Limited localisedcarriageway widening was necessary over a length of 35 metres to enable construction of the bus gate.The maximum depth of widening was 2.0 metres.

The scheme is one of several measures introduced in Perth to improve reliability on Stagecoach service 7.The combined effect of a doubling of daytime frequency, the introduction of new buses and the reliabilitybenefits of bus priority has seen an increase of more than 50 per cent in patronage.

Strathmore Street bus priority

- 70 -




Ilminster Road bus gate, Taunton

The bus gate on Old Ilminster Road in Taunton has been in operation since 1996 and has broughtsignificant journey time and distance savings for bus services travelling into the centre of Taunton. A planis provided to illustrate the scheme and shows the new route taken by buses alongside the route usedbefore the bus gate was installed.

Before the installation of the bus gate in 1996, buses travelled the same route as general traffic, from themotorway junction and along the dual carriageway (A358) before entering the town centre, a journey ofaround 3 kilometres. Since the bus gate has been introduced buses now avoid congestion at junctions onthis busy dual carriageway and as a result the journey distance has dropped to around 1.6 kilometres andsaves around 15 minutes during peak hours.

As the photo shows, the bus gate is enforced with a rising bollard, which is activated by transponders onthe bus. Fire service vehicles can also use this bus gate; they are fitted with tags which are enabled bytheir emergency lights. The tag activates the bollard and allows them to pass through.

Old Ilminster Road bus route


Guided bus link, Kesgrave, Ipswich

The Kesgrave guided busway on Superoute 66 in Ipswich is an example of a fully self-enforcing bus link.The purpose of the 200 metre length of guided busway is to allow buses to take a direct route between twoneighbouring residential areas without providing a through route for cars avoiding main road trafficcongestion.

The route taken by the Superoute 66 service is shown on the above plan with the yellow line representingthe guided bus link. By using this guided bus link around one and a half minutes is saved on eachSuperoute journey; selective vehicle detection (SVD) used at two junctions further along this route alsohelps to ensure that this service runs to schedule.


Superoute 66

The service also incorporates Real Time Passenger Information technology at some stops providingpassengers with information about the next bus expected at the stop.

The Superoute 66 has been a success and the frequency of the service has altered to reflect this. When theservice started buses ran every 20 minutes, however, due to its success the service has been increased tooperate on a 24-hour basis with the bus running at 15 minute intervals with a 10 minute frequency in thepeak hours and hourly overnight. In addition vehicle type has been changed from short single-deckvehicles, through long single-deck buses to double-deck vehicles.

- 71 -




Derriford Road, Plymouth

Stage 2 of bus priority works in the Derriford Road area of Plymouth began in March 2004. The work,which incorporated the installation of a signal controlled bus gate, was completed in August 2004 as partof a wider package of bus priority measures which are in place on Derriford Road.

The works carried out on Derriford Road have extended the existing bus lane and added new measures toencourage the use of bus over the private car. The installation of the most recent bus gate in this area isused as an example here.

The bus gate was installed with the help of developer funding. It allows southbound buses travelling onthe A386 access to Derriford Hospital without having to use Derriford roundabout. This means that busescan bypass busy sections of road and make journey time savings.

The Derriford Road bus priority scheme


Pemros Road, Plymouth

The Pemros Road bus gate and bus only link in Plymouth have been in place for many years. Thepresence of the bus gate and bus only link prevents general traffic from using a road which goes through aresidential area to get to the Tamar Bridge.

The bus only link carries bus services wanting to cross the busy Tamar Bridge and allows them to traveleasily avoiding general traffic congestion. The bus gate is open to taxis as well as buses and is enforcedwith a camera.

The Tamar Bridge has also been fitted with a tagging system that detects buses travelling eastwards fromSaltash and closes the toll lane barriers. This prevents general traffic travelling up the A38. While generaltraffic is being held, buses are then free to turn right from the left hand lane to reach the Pemros Road busgate.

Conclusions

The bus gates and bus only links discussed have all been implemented as part of a wider package of buspriority measures which have had significant effects on either bus patronage or bus journey times. Theexamples used all show different technologies and enforcement measures which can be used wheninstalling a bus gate with each of them having some success in their installation. The use of a bus gate orbus only link however, should be considered with regards to local conditions to ensure that they areappropriate. Consultation is also an important part of the process and should not be overlooked.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Bath and North East Somerset Council, Perth and KinrossCouncil, Somerset County Council, Suffolk County Council and Plymouth City Council.

- 72 -



Other examples

A number of examples of bus gates are to be found in case studies elsewhere in this resource pack:

Leeds City Centre: A number of bus gates provide priority access for buses to the central area ’publictransport box’ whilst encouraging other vehicles to use the ’city centre loop’ road to make cross-citytrips; Oxford City Centre: Several bus gates have been installed to control access to the city centre publictransport route as part of the Oxford Transport Strategy; and Cambridge City Centre: The Bridge Street bus gate in Cambridge is made self-enforcing by the useof rising bollards.

References

Guidelines for Planning for Public Transport in Developments, The Institution of Highways andTransportation, 1999.

Local Transport Note 1/97 Keeping Buses Moving, 1997.

Further information

For further information on the case studies identified in this leaflet contact:

Barbara Selby, Traffic and Transportation Manager (Transportation and Highways), Bath and NorthEast Somerset Council on 01225 395386. Scott Denyer (Urban Traffic Control), Perth and Kinross Council on 01738 476517. Keith Jennings, Traffic Signals Manager, Somerset County Council on 01823 358233 or email:[email protected] Ian Gray, Transport Co-ordination Manager, Suffolk County Council on 01473 265049. Philip Heseltine, Senior Engineer (Transportation), Plymouth City Council on 01752 307942.

Rising bollards

Description of need

Background

The Cambridge Core Traffic Scheme (CCTS) is an important part of the city’s overall transport strategy,developed to cut congestion in the centre. Both the local city plan and the county structure plan recognisethe need to reduce traffic in the relatively compact central area, as this would improve safety, air qualityand the general environment.

CCTS involves restricting through traffic to the city centre at key entry points using rising bollards. Localbuses, taxis and bicycles are exempt from the restrictions.

- 73 -


Residents and businesses in the city centre were canvassed on which routes should be restricted, and theygave their strongest support to Bridge Street, just north of the city centre.

Problems

The main problem in Cambridge was perceived as the high traffic levels in a relatively compact city. This,in turn, resulted in a range of adverse impacts such as poor pedestrian safety, air quality concerns anddelays to public transport.

Objectives

The overall objective of CCTS is to ’encourage greater use of walking, cycling and public transport anddiscourage dependency on the private motor car’. CCTS also meets both national and regional objectiveson traffic reduction and improved air quality. The local objectives are to:

stop cars driving into the city centre; maintain access to city centre properties; maintain public transport and cycle access; improve pedestrian safety; enhance the environment; improve air quality; and achieve an overall improvement.

Scheme details

Description

Traffic restraint via rising bollards acting as a bus gate. One side of Bridge Street is occupied by collegebuildings and the other is retail, mainly pubs and restaurants.

Implementation date

The closure scheme began on 22 January 1997.

Costs

Funding for the CCTS came from the Government as part of public transport allocations. Â£150,000 wasspent on the experiment. Although maintenance is handled under a single contract covering all bollardsystems in the city, annual maintenance costs have been estimated at Â£5,000.

Consultation

Stakeholders, residents and business within the central core area were consulted on the scheme. Publicconsultation in March 1998 followed the experimental introduction and showed good support.

Bus operator

- 74 -


Stagecoach Cambus.

Bus frequency

Park and ride services have a 10 minute frequency, as do many of the other services that run inCambridge. More rural services operate on a lower frequency of 30 minutes to an hour.




Dates of surveys

Cambridge City Council carried out monitoring surveys in both the summer and autumn of 1996, beforeimplementing the scheme; ’after’ surveys were carried out in autumn 1997.

Types of surveys

The surveys looked at a range of variables, including:

traffic flows; vehicle speeds; journey times; cycle and pedestrian flows; and air quality.

The local authority chose monitoring sites on main roads where it could expect traffic flows to increase.

Manual classified counts were carried out on main roads. These took place on both weekdays andSaturdays between 07.00 and 19.00. Peak hour traffic surveys were carried out elsewhere.

Journey time surveys were carried out in both directions on the inner ring road during the morning andevening peaks and at off-peak times. Similar surveys were also carried out on four radial routes, whichwere either used by park and ride buses, or gave access to the north west of the city.

The city council made the results of this extensive monitoring available in January 1998. The mainfindings are summarised below.

Results

Traffic flows

The city’s radial routes and inner ring road showed collectively little change after the scheme wasintroduced. But some individual roads experienced increases in traffic, whilst others experienceddecreases as a result of the scheme.

- 75 -



On Bridge Street itself, traffic was physically prevented from entering, so obviously it was significantlyreduced: by up to 85 per cent on weekdays.

Evaluation of the scheme concluded that overall, ’significant traffic reductions have been achieved on theclosure route without causing unexpected increases on other roads’.

Journey times

Journey time savings for general traffic showed a ’mixed bag’ of results. However, there was a generalimprovement on the inner ring during peak periods and deterioration in off peak journey times. The tablebelow summarises changes to journey times.

Summary of journey times on the ring road

Clockwise BEFORE (min:sec)

AFTER (min:sec)

Anti-clockwise BEFORE (min:sec)

AFTER (min:sec)

AM Peak 18:17 17:19 AM Peak 23:58 18:51

Off Peak 17:24 19:47 Off Peak 15:26 17:10

PM Peak 41:49 35:42 PM Peak 23:17 25:18

(Data based on 85th percentile of journey time runs per time period)

Air quality

Cambridge City Council monitored nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels before and after implementation of thescheme. Nitrogen dioxide is one of the air pollutants most closely associated with traffic and is a usefulindicator of traffic-related pollution.

Air quality monitoring indicates that NO2 levels have improved or stayed the same at 16 out of 18 sitesacross the city centre. Air quality has only deteriorated at two sites. Overall, the scheme seems to have hada positive effect.

System performance

During the scheme’s early days, the number of hours that the bollards operated was disappointing. Thiswas largely because unauthorised vehicles tried to get through the Bridge Street bollards immediatelybehind buses and taxis and, in doing so, damaged the bollards.

The council improved the performance of the bollards by introducing flashing warning signs, changing theclosure point layout and improving the detection system for unauthorised vehicles. The bollards nowoperate effectively for around 95 per cent of the time.

- 76 -


Conclusions

The rising bollards in Bridge Street have given significant priority to local buses, taxis and cyclistsentering Cambridge city centre. Traffic flows have been significantly reduced on the closure route withoutcausing an unexpected increase in traffic on other roads. The scheme has also improved local air quality.

References

Cambridgeshire County Council, Cambridge Core Traffic Scheme: Stage 1 - Bridge Street ExperimentalRoad Closure, Environment and Transport Committee, 1998.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the help of the Environment and Transport Department at CambridgeshireCounty Council. For further information contact the Cambridge Project Team on: 01223 717780.

Other examples

Stonebow, York

Contact The City of York Council, Network Management Section (Traffic unit) on: 01904 613161 ext:1450.

High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire

Contact Buckingham County Council for more details: [email protected] or the Wycombe AreaOffice on: 01494 475315.

Further information

Assistance with the implementation of rising bollards is offered in the following document â¢ TrafficAdvisory Leaflet 4/97, Rising Bollards, DETR, April 1997.

DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997.

The Local Authority Rising Bollard User Group (LARBUG) intends to publish advice on the use of risingbollards in due course.

Guided busways

Description of need

Background

The A641 Manchester Road in Bradford is the main route south from the city centre to the M606motorway and the towns of Brighouse and Huddersfield. Before the guided bus scheme, there was nopriority for buses on the Bradford section of this corridor. Traffic congestion meant long journey timesand poor reliability.

- 77 -


In 1998, the City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (MDC), West Yorkshire Passenger TransportExecutive (Metro) and bus operator First commissioned two studies. These recommended thedevelopment of a guided bus scheme as part of the South Bradford Quality Bus initiative. This would giveManchester Road a high level of bus priority.

City of Bradford MDC, Metro and First formed a public/private sector partnership to develop a guided busscheme. They refined their proposals in 1999, so the final scheme consisted of a mix of guided busway,with-flow bus lanes and priority at signal controlled junctions. Construction began in November 2000 andthe scheme opened in February 2002.

Map of the Bradford area

Problems

Before the guided busway opened, congestion delayed buses in both directions during peak hours.Timetables included an additional 10 minutes to allow for delays. Congestion on Manchester Roadaffected the reliability of cross-city services on the Shipley and Leeds corridors.

Surveys in 1998 - 99 highlighted reliability and punctuality as bus users’ greatest concerns. Motorists alsoidentified reliability and punctuality of buses as the most important factor influencing their willingness toswitch to bus. The city council was concerned about the way that the dual carriageway cut South Bradfordin two for pedestrians, forcing them to rely on footbridges and subways.

Objectives

The scheme aimed to:



â¢ increase passenger confidence; and

â¢ encourage motorists to switch to the bus.

Scheme details

Description

The guided busway required the reallocation of 2.3 kilometres of road space on the dual carriageway’scentral reservation. The scheme also involved the introduction of conventional near-side with-flow buslanes for 1.1 kilometres of the route. These are available to buses and cyclists.

In some places the number of lanes available for general traffic was cut from three to two in eachdirection. The objective was to provide two lanes for through traffic over the full length of the scheme.Three lanes were retained at junctions to cater for turning traffic. The speed limit was also lowered from40 to 30 mph. The City Council installed signal-controlled pedestrian crossings at 11 locations to servebus stops on the central guided busway and at kerbside bus stops. These additional crossings greatlyimproved pedestrian links between communities on opposite sides of Manchester Road.

- 78 -



The Council also raised the kerb at stops on Manchester Road and elsewhere along the corridor to giveclose and level boarding. New bus shelters were also part of the scheme, including three landmark ’supershelters’. These are three times the size of normal shelters and fitted with wind turbines to power heatedseats or an information display.

As well as helping to pay for some of the infrastructure, First also provided new, accessible, low sulphuremission buses. They trained drivers to a higher standard in customer care and introduced a ’customerpromise’ to guarantee service standards.

Construction work was close enough to completion to allow driver training to begin in July 2001. Servicesbegan to operate along the guided busway on 31 January 2002.

Costs

The scheme cost Â£12 million at 2001 prices, including the cost of the new buses. Highway works costÂ£4.7 million, noise insulation Â£600,000 and diversions to statutory services Â£1 million.

Consultation In summer 1999, the city council delivered a colour leaflet explaining the scheme toproperties along the corridor. The leaflet included a short post-paid questionnaire. The council exhibiteddetailed plans at two locations in Bradford city centre and on a bus ’roadshow’ at a supermarket close tothe corridor. Council officers answered questions on the scheme at a number of Neighbourhood Forums.Eight newsletters were issued to provide information on progress and explain the impact of constructionworks on traffic.

Bus operators

First in Bradford provides the majority of bus services on Manchester Road, including all those on theguided busway. Two Arriva Yorkshire services operate along sections of Manchester Road, but do not useany of the guided busways.

Bus frequency

During daytime on Mondays to Fridays there are 22 buses an hour in each direction on Manchester Roadbetween Odsal and Bradford city centre.




Dates of surveys

’Before’ data was collected in May and June 2000. ’After’ surveys took place in May and June 2002.

Types of surveys

- 79 -



The ’before’ and ’after’ monitoring programme consisted of:

car and bus journey time registration surveys; bus occupancy counts; automatic traffic counts; and manual classified traffic counts.

A survey of attitudes among 240 bus passengers carried out in April 2002 showed that over 60 per centranked the service as good or very good on a range of 16 indicators.

Results

City of Bradford MDC has produced a comprehensive evaluation of the effects of the scheme. Here is asummary of the results.

Traffic flows

The principal finding was a clear fall in peak traffic using Manchester Road.

Inbound traffic on Manchester Road fell by 14 per cent in the morning peak (07.30 to 09.30) and 13 percent in the evening peak (16.00 to 18.00). Outbound traffic on Manchester Road fell by 17 per cent in themorning peak (07.30 to 09.30) and 7 per cent in the evening peak (16.00 to 18.00). The effect was notrestricted to peak periods. Total weekday traffic using Manchester Road fell by about 11 per cent, mostlyswitching to other routes in and out of the city.

Total inbound traffic on six radial routes to the south of the city centre including Manchester Roadreduced by 6 per cent in the morning peak and 9 per cent in the evening peak. Total outbound traffic onthe six radial routes fell by 4 per cent in the morning peak, but increased by 3 per cent in the evening peak.

There is evidence that some traffic switched to other routes: into the city centre via Wakefield Road andoutbound via both Little Horton Lane and Wakefield Road.

Journey times

The installation of 11 new signal-controlled pedestrian crossings was an essential component of thescheme but had an adverse effect on bus and car journey times.

Inbound

Scheduled bus journey time between Odsal Top and Bradford Interchange is 15 minutes in the morningpeak and 13 minutes at other times. The express bus service is about three minutes quicker.

Average journey times for inbound stopping bus services reduced by one minute in the morning peakperiod (7 per cent), but journey times for the express service did not improve. In the morning peak hourthe average time saving increased to two minutes (13 per cent). Inbound car journey times increased inboth periods by between one and two minutes.

- 80 -


Before the scheme began, peak inbound car journeys were five minutes faster than stopping bus servicesand similar to express bus times. After implementation, inbound car journeys took as long as stoppingbuses and the average express bus was three minutes faster than the car.

In the morning inter-peak period, journey times increased for both buses and cars. The net effect was toincrease the difference in journey times between stopping buses and cars from four to five minutes.

In the morning peak, the scheme improved bus reliability by reducing variability in express and stoppingbus journey times. At the same time, variability in journey times by car increased.

Outbound

Scheduled bus journey time between Bradford Interchange and Odsal Top is 14 minutes in the eveningpeak and 12 minutes at other times. The express bus service is about three minutes quicker.

Average journey times for outbound stopping services fell by more than one minute in the evening peakperiod (10 per cent) and by more than two minutes (16 per cent) in the evening peak hour. The expressservice achieved a slightly greater improvement, whereas average outbound car journey times werelargely unchanged. Variability in bus and car journey times declined in the evening peak period. Therewere insubstantial changes to average times for outbound buses and cars in the inter-peak.

Differences between journey times by car and bus have been reduced. However, stopping buses remainmore than two minutes slower in the peak and five minutes slower in the inter-peak.

Although there is no direct evidence, the new signal controlled pedestrian crossings and speed limitchanges are likely to have increased journey times for all forms of transport.

Bus patronage

In August 2001, First launched its ’Overground’ network in Bradford. This boosted bus use and madecomparison of the ’before’ and ’after’ figures difficult. The analysis was based on electronic ticketmachine (ETM) data and on bus occupancy counts. The number of passengers boarding buses on thelength of the corridor directly affected by the scheme between Odsal and the city centre grew by between7 and 10 per cent: more than on other corridors into Bradford. Both data sources indicate modest growthin the morning peak and inter-peak periods. There was growth of about 20 per cent in the afternooninter-peak and of 10 per cent in the evening peak.

Reduced delays

Most inbound time savings in the morning peak hour were achieved in two locations on the corridor.These were the guided busway approach to the Mayo Avenue junction, where one minute was saved, andthe right turn into Croft Street at the ’city’ end of the corridor, which saved 30 seconds. Together theseaccounted for 10 per cent of scheduled bus journey time between Odsal Top and Bradford Interchange.

The majority of outbound evening peak time savings were achieved by the guided busway north of MayoAvenue on the approach to the Mayo Avenue roundabout, with a saving of one and a half minutes or 12per cent of scheduled bus running time from the city centre to Odsal Top.

- 81 -


Conclusions

Implementation of the Manchester Road guided busway scheme as part of the South Bradford Quality BusInitiative resulted in increased bus patronage, reduced delays to buses, reduced peak bus journey timesand reduced peak traffic flows.

Acknowledgements

This was produced with the assistance of City of Bradford MDC, Metro and First. Further information canbe obtained from the City of Bradford MDC Transportation, Design and Planning Department on: 01274437418.

Other examples

A61 Scott Hall Road Corridor, Leeds.Contact Leeds City Council Highways and Transport Department on: 0113 247 7500. A64 York Road / A63 Selby Road, Leeds.Contact Leeds City Council Highways and Transport Department on: 0113 247 7500. Kesgrave Connection, Ipswich.Contact Suffolk County Council, Environment and Transport on: 01473 583305. Fastway (Crawley/Gatwick/Horley)phased opening Summer 2003 to Summer 2005.

Contact West Sussex Highways and Transport Department on: 01243 777273. Alternatively, informationcan be obtained from the following web site: www.fastway.info/

Further information

The Transport and Works Act provides guidance on the need for an Order.

The Transport and Works Act was not used for the Bradford scheme. However, as all the works werewithin the highway boundary, it was possible to rely on Traffic Regulation Orders for authorisation.

There is no formal published design guidance for guided busways. The Buses and Taxis Division of theDepartment of Transport issued a Briefing Note on Guided Buses in 1995 and numerous articles haveappeared in the technical press.

The following documents may also be of interest:

Daugherty GG and Balcombe RJ, Leeds Guided Bus way Study, Transport Research Laboratory,1999. DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997.

- 82 -


Pre signals and bus advance areas

Bus priority at traffic signals, whilst maintaining junction capacity, is often a contentious issue. The use ofpre signals or bus advance areas is an emerging bus priority measure, which has proved successful atvarious locations around the UK.

Traditionally, the end of a bus lane has been set back a short distance from a junction to enable buses tomove between lanes, to cater for left turning traffic and allow for the maximum throughput of all vehiclesthrough the junction. This traditional arrangement is shown below.

Traditional bus lane set back



Pre signals work by holding general traffic at traffic signals set back a short distance from the junction,usually at the end of a designated bus lane. This creates a bus advance area where, while general traffic isheld back at these signals, buses are given a green signal allowing them to proceed to the main junctionand take whichever lane they need. Pre signals placed at the end of a bus lane also allow buses to bypassqueues and have priority at main junctions.

Pre signals junction layout



To ensure junction capacity loss is minimised, pre signals are synchronised with the main signals. Thismeans that traffic is released from the pre signals just before the main signals turn green ensuring that fulluse is made of the green signal. The use of vehicle detection technologies at pre signals is also an optionfor minimising delays to general traffic in the absence of vehicles in the bus lane. This kind of systemwould stop general traffic at the pre signals only if a bus was approaching.

Advantages of pre signals over unsignalled setbacks

The two main advantages are as follows:

prevents abuse of the bus lane; and useful where buses need to weave into an outside lane to turn right.

Disadvantages of pre signals

There are a number of disadvantages associated with the use of pre signals:

bus delays off-peak; buses that arrive during vehicle green may have a choice between using the traffic lane and gettinggreen or using the pre signal and waiting a cycle;

- 83 -




a bus stop in the wrong place may make it hard to achieve benefit i.e. if a bus stop is placed justbefore the signals then it is not possible to avoid the bus stopping at a red signal; and pedestrians may be tempted to cross in the wrong place if there are signals and an island in place.

Some of the above disadvantages can, however, be overcome with good design and vehicle detection.

Types of bus pre signals

The University of Southampton’s Transport Research Group have identified three main categories of presignals that can be used to provide priority to buses at busy junctions:

Category A

Category A pre signals are described as those where buses are not controlled by a pre signal, whereasgeneral traffic is. This means that while traffic is held at the pre signals, buses can proceed straight to themain junction uncontrolled. However when the general traffic has a green signal, buses will have to giveway to the main traffic flow.

Category B

With category B pre signals buses are controlled in the same way as general traffic, so buses have prioritywhen general traffic is held at a red pre signal and vice versa.

Category C

Category C pre signals are defined as those that use vehicle detection to activate the pre signals and givepriority to approaching buses. This would mean that delays to general traffic may be minimised as theyare only stopped if an approaching bus is detected. Once a bus is detected and the general traffic has beenstopped at the pre signals, the bus can then proceed to the main junction without delay.

Bus advance areas at roundabouts

Bus priority at roundabouts can be given through creating bus advance areas incorporating pre signalsbefore the give way line at the entry point to the roundabout.

As with pre signals, general traffic is held at the end of a bus lane by pre signals while buses can proceedto the roundabout give way line without delay. This system gives buses time to position themselves in thecorrect lane to complete their required manoeuvre when entering the roundabout.

The type of pre signals that may be used in any particular area are subject to local conditions as not allcategories are suitable in all situations. The cost implications and available technologies need to beconsidered as part of a package of bus priority measures. The following case studies provide examples ofdifferent pre signals schemes, differing in technology and complexity.

- 84 -


Case study: Shepherd’s Bush

This is an early example of the use of pre signals as part of a package of bus priority measures aimed atreducing congestion and the negative environmental impact of heavy traffic flows.

Pre signals were installed in 1993 at the end of a 24-hour bus lane on the south side of Shepherd’s BushCommon. These signals stop general traffic and allow buses to carry on to the main junction and positionthemselves in the correct lane. This is particularly useful for buses needing to make a right turn at themain signals. When the pre signals are red, buses are free to move ahead of the general traffic. However,once the pre signal is green any buses emerging from the bus lane will have to give way to the main trafficflow.

The timing of the pre signals is such that general traffic is released shortly before the main signal turnsgreen and return to red just before the main signal to ensure that the bus advance area is clear for the busesduring the next cycle.

A study carried out by TRL involved before and after surveys of the scheme to identify the effects of theoverall package of measures on buses travelling through Shepherd’s Bush.

Shepherd’s Bush bus priority measures.

Shepherd’s Bush bus priority measures. Reproduced with the permission from the London Borough ofHammersmith and Fulham

The previous diagram shows the area and the bus priority measures implemented in 1993.

The results of the before and after surveys carried out by TRL are given in the table below. It showschanges in bus journey times (seconds) for buses travelling between points A and B on the above diagram,incorporating both the bus lane and pre signals.

The results of the before and after surveys carried out by TRL

The results show a considerable reduction in journey times for buses along this stretch after theimplementation of the bus priority measures. It is not possible to attribute a specific time saving to the presignals as the timesavings are as a result of a combination of measures, however, it is considered that thepre signals do contribute considerably.

Case study: York

Hull Road pre signals Inbound pre signals, Hull Road, York


As a Centre of Excellence for Integrated Transport Planning, the City of York has a range of bus prioritymeasures in place to reduce bus journey times. Pre signals are one of the measures used to achieve this.

- 85 -





Pre signals on A1079 Hull Road were introduced in 1997 as part of a package of measures linked to theopening of a park and ride site at Grimston Bar. These signals were installed to give priority to buses atthe end of a bus lane, allowing them to re-enter the carriageway where it is reduced from a double to asingle carriageway on the way into the city centre.

The pre signals here are connected to the city’s UTC system and can be used to regulate traffic flow andease congestion on this busy route by holding the pre signals on green for buses. This therefore acts as aqueue management system.

The bus priority measures on this stretch of road have had a positive impact on bus journey times. On theGrimston Bar park and ride route for example, buses have a peak hour advantage of between 4 and 12minutes over cars as a result of the package of priority measures. This facility has the potential to be usedas a gate to hold traffic out of the more congested parts of the A1079 into the city. This facility is used atinbound peak times. The overall effect on car traffic should be negligible, as the increase in delay at thepre signals should be offset by the increased efficiency at the signalised junctions upstream.

Case study: Perth

In 2000, a number of bus priority measures were installed as part of corridor improvements on theStagecoach route number 7 in Perth. These improvements included the installation of bus lanes, bus onlystreets and selective vehicle detection (SVD) at traffic signals.

Pre signals were installed on Glasgow Road bus lane to allow buses to bypass queuing traffic on this busyroad. The pre signals enable buses to re-enter the general traffic flow at the end of the bus lane and alsocontrols access to the bus advance area at the main signals.

Glasgow Road pre signals

Glasgow Road pre signals. Reproduced with the permission from Perth and Kinross Council

Buses leaving the bus stop near the bottom of the bus lane are detected through SVD technology and thepre signals are triggered stopping general traffic and allowing buses to enter the bus advance area.

Bus reliability has improved and patronage has increased by over 50 per cent due to the introduction ofthese measures and the new and improved bus services.

This scheme has been further developed and the extension of the bus lane is an ongoing project.

Case study: Leeds

The East Leeds Quality Bus Initiative incorporates the use of pre signals with a guided busway to givepriority to buses approaching the city centre along the A64. The guided bus scheme involves a centralreservation bus guideway between two busy signalised junctions on the inbound route which brings busesinto conflict with general traffic when they cross from the central reservation to the general traffic flowand then cross back over again to a bus lane. Pre signals are used here to facilitate this cross over andensure the safety of all road users. Being signals associated with a bus guideway, special white ’arrow’aspects were authorised by DfT to replace the normal green aspects for buses.

- 86 -



General traffic along this route is stopped only at the pre signals, to give buses priority, and not at themain signals further along the route with which the pre signals are coordinated. This is sensible from asafety point of view as this is a busy 40 mph road and it would be less safe to have a number ofunexpected signal changes.

A64 Pre signals

A64 Pre signals

The signals here are coordinated by SPRUCE, a software based Bus and Tram Priority tool that wasdeveloped by Leeds City Council as part of a Government sponsored initiative. This system works withinthe city’s UTC system and allows for the selective detection of priority vehicles. Once a priority vehiclehas been detected approaching a junction, SPRUCE adjusts the fixed time signal cycle to allow the bus topass through the junction and then returns to the fixed time cycle. This is achieved by using differentstrategies depending on the bus arrival time.

The use of SPRUCE gives an advantage to buses at all times of day, but it is particularly advantageous inoff-peak hours when it might otherwise be quicker for buses to use the general traffic lanes. The averagedelay to buses in the off-peak, resulting from this signal priority, was reduced from 32 seconds to 8seconds.

It has been noted that the use of dynamic priority (using priority vehicle detection to alter signal timings)can be far preferable to static priority (timings not responsive at all times of day), because buses can moreoften be granted higher priority with less effect on general traffic.

Pre signals are used in other areas of Leeds, for example they are used at the end of the A647 StanningleyRoad High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane, which is used as the case study for the HOV leaflet.

References

High performance bus/tram signal priority, JCT Symposium 2004. Local Transport Note 1/97 KeepingBuses Moving, 1997.

Miscellaneous Bus Priority System Investigations, Final Report to the Traffic Control Systems UnitCorporation of London, Transportation Research Group, University of Southampton, 1995.

Performance of Bus Priority Measures in Shepherds Bush, TRL Report 140, 1995.

Wu, J and Hounsell, NB, Bus Priority Using Pre-Signals, University of Southampton, 1998.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgement is given for the assistance provided by the London Borough of Hammersmith andFulham, City of York Council, Perth and Kinross Council and Leeds City Council.

- 87 -



Further information

For further information on the case studies contained in this leaflet contact:

Mike Gilroy, London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham on 020 8753 3050 (Shepherd’s Bush). Darren Capes (Network Management), City of York Council on 01904 551651. Scott Denyer (Urban Traffic Control) Perth and Kinross Council on 01738 476517. Mervyn Hallworth (Urban Traffic Management & Control), Leeds City Council on 0113 2476750 [email protected]

Selective Vehicle Detection (SVD)

Background

Bus operation is becoming more sophisticated. Methods of providing priority to buses at traffic signalshave been available at isolated junctions for many years; one of the first trials was in Swansea in the late1970s. More recently, priority to individual vehicles has been provided for coordinated traffic signalcontrol in SCOOT, a control strategy for traffic signals in urban areas.

Bus management systems allow operators to track and monitor their buses against the timetable orscheduled headway. Information from the systems can be provided to the public in the form of real timepassenger information, through various means:

bus stop displays; SMS messages to individual subscribers; and web sites etc.

Such sophisticated systems provide opportunities for better services to the travelling public. In the case ofbus priority systems, as well as reducing passengers’ travel times, the quicker bus journeys may lead tooperational savings for the operator or the ability to increase service frequencies with the same number ofvehicles.

This leaflet describes the technologies that are available to enable bus priority and bus management andinformation systems.

Bus location

To provide priority at traffic signals to individual vehicles, the controller needs to know that the vehicle isapproaching the signals. Usually the selected individual vehicles will be buses, but other vehicles such astrams and emergency vehicles also require priority at traffic signals. Similarly, real time passengerinformation systems need to know the location of vehicles. There are two basic ways of providing theinformation about vehicle location: 1. Selectively detect vehicles at particular points on the road network,often requiring communication between equipment on the vehicle and at the roadside.

2. The vehicle has an on-board means of locating its position and reports it to a vehicle managementsystem.

- 88 -


The first method is commonly referred to as Selective Vehicle Detection (SVD), and the second asAutomatic Vehicle Location (AVL).

The objective of SVD and AVL systems is to provide vehicle location information as required by the buspriority and bus management and information systems that are in use. Each system has its own advantagesand disadvantages.

SVD technologies

There are several technologies that can provide selective vehicle detection:

long vehicle inductive loops; vehicle inductive loop detector signal processing; video image processing; infra-red transmitter and receiver; microwave transmitter and receiver; and inductive loop and transponder.

The first three methods are all passive; there is no active participation in the detection process by thevehicle or equipment on it. Passive detection is attractive as it eliminates the need to equip a large fleet ofvehicles. The first method using long loops can be made to detect full-size buses reliably, but it will detectother long vehicles and will not detect smaller buses. Historically the method has been rejected on thesegrounds.

In mixed traffic, two new intelligent vehicle detectors PRISM and FOOTPRINT, work by processing thesignal from an inductive loop detector to recognise a specific vehicle. The technology is suitable forgiving the same level of priority to all vehicles of the same type, but it cannot provide different levels ofpriority to a particular bus, for example - only to late-running buses. It also cannot provide information onindividual vehicles for information and management purposes. The technique would be particularlyappropriate at isolated bus only facilities, such as the entrance or exit of a park and ride site, where theexpense of on-vehicle equipment on all buses that might be used on the service would be hard to justifyfor use at a very few sites. No independent verification of the performance of the detectors is known.

Video image processing would require considerable development to provide a reliable system to workunder all urban conditions. No-one has so far undertaken the necessary investment to develop acommercial system for bus detection in urban areas.

Infra-red equipment is allowed to transmit continuously as it is not subject to radio transmissionregulations and a transmitter on a bus could continuously transmit its presence to be detected by suitableroadside receivers. Unfortunately, the infra-red communication requires line-of sight transmission and astudy in London in the 1980s concluded that to provide reliable detection would require many highmounted receivers. The cost of regularly cleaning them, to maintain reliable operation, would beprohibitive because of the difficulty of access.

Infra-red detectors are used in North America for both bus priority and signal pre-emption for emergencyvehicles, where a high degree of priority is required, however there has been considerable disquietrecently about the use of un-encoded infra-red and the sale to private motorists of signal pre-emptiontransmitters.

- 89 -


Microwave transmitters and receivers have similar problems with mounting to avoid obscuration; thissystem can also be problematic as mobile microwave equipment is not allowed to transmit continuously.The bus equipment would, therefore, have to be a transponder and only transmit in response to a signalfrom the roadside.

Vehicle mounted transponders that work with inductive loops have been available for a long time; but aswith all loop detectors, the loop and feeder are susceptible to damage. Despite the vulnerability of theloops, inductive loop transponder systems are the SVD technology used in the majority of bus prioritynetworks in the UK. Self contained transponders with a unique ID number do not need connecting to thevehicle electrical system and so are quick and cheap to install. To obtain information about the service thatthe vehicle is running on, however, requires connection to the vehicle systems, usually the electronicticketing machine. Both types are available.

AVL technologies

The technologies available for in-vehicle units in AVL systems are:

Global Positioning System (GPS) General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Fixed reference points Odometer (milometer) Door open and close indicator

Many of the commercial AVL systems currently operational in the UK use GPS for their location. A GPStracking device on the bus communicates by private mobile radio to the central system and a link to theelectronic ticketing machine can provide additional information on the current route.

However, until 2000, accuracy of the positioning without correction of the deliberate error in the systemwas a problem. The error has since been removed and commercial GPS is now accurate to Â± 3 metres.

Where GPS reception is poor, it may be supplemented with a reading from the odometer. In addition, it ispossible to take an input from the door operating mechanism to indicate when a bus has arrived at a stopand when it has left it. For bus priority, a second communication channel is usually provided for directtransmission of bus priority requests to traffic signal controllers.

Global Packet Radio Service (GPRS) is a wireless communication service for data using the mobile phonenetwork. It is used alongside GPS technology to provide accurate vehicle location data and instantcommunication between the vehicle and the real time information system, by allowing faster access to busservice information.

AVL systems can also use fixed reference points, such as bus stop indicators or special beacons, routemaps and dead reckoning from the odometer.

The complexity of the system will be reflected in the cost of the system.

- 90 -


Requirements for bus priority

The basic requirement for bus priority is that the location system should provide accurate informationwhen a bus is at the specified point where bus priority is requested. This point will normally be 10 to 15seconds bus journey time before the junction, unless there is an intermediate bus stop. Where there is abus stop close to the junction, the priority request point will be immediately after that bus stop.

If the location is subject to error, then the priority request point will have to be moved sufficientlydownstream of the bus stop to ensure that the bus will actually have left the stop when the AVL says thatit is at the priority request point. The benefits of the bus priority will be degraded if the priority requestpoint has to be moved too close to the junction.

Requirements for bus management and information

Locational information is required at a sufficient frequency to provide good bus management andpassenger information. The exact requirement will depend on the user, but the minimum is likely to bearrival and/or departure from each bus stop to an accuracy of better than one minute.

Capabilities of SVD and AVL


Common disadvantages

The main disadvantage of any system that uses on-bus equipment is that operators move buses betweenroutes, between towns and between regions. If different highway authorities use different systems, theSVD or AVL equipment on a bus may not be compatible with the system to which the bus has beenre-assigned. This can also be a particular problem with longer distance inter-urban services that cross oneor more highway authority boundary. Problems of inter-operability are being addressed for AVL. When astandard is produced it will be important to follow it.

Applications

The bus priority case study on non AVL Bus SCOOT in this series gives a good example of theapplication of SVD. Similarly the case study on Bus SCOOT with AVL in Cardiff provides an example ofthe use of AVL technology.

Another good example is the system started in Brighton in 2001. This is a joint project between Brighton& Hove Bus Company, who run 250 buses, and Brighton & Hove City Council, and was the first in theUK to equip an entire fleet, rather than just selected routes.

The system uses a combination of the odometer reading and the door mechanism, supplemented by GPSto ensure the accuracy of information relayed to the 100 real time signs throughout the City.

The benefit for the Bus Company’s controllers in being able to see the location of every bus has beenenormous; they can now make much more informed decisions about maintaining service frequenciesduring traffic delays. Messages can be sent to the real time information signs to inform passengers abouttraffic problems, and this is regularly used to very good effect. The system stores historic data which

- 91 -



compares how buses performed in reality compared with their timetable; this enables timetables to beadjusted to further improve reliability.

The City Council is now building on the system; a website showing real time bus information will be inoperation this autumn and a real time mobile phone text messaging service will begin in early 2005.

Useful sources of information

Bowen, GT, Bus Priority in SCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory, TRL Report 255, Crowthorne, 1997.

Bus passenger information system in London: www.transportforlondon.gov.uk

Chandler, MJH and Cook, DJ, Traffic control studies in London: SCOOT and bus detection, 13th PTRCSummer Annual Meeting, PTRC Education and Research Services, July 1985.

Cooper, BR, Vincent, RA and Wood, K, Bus-actuated traffic signals - initial assessment of part of theSwansea bus priority scheme, TRL Laboratory Report LR925, Crowthorne, 1980.

Hill, R, Maxwell, A and Bretherton, D, Real time passenger information and bus priority in Cardiff: buspriority trial, Proceedings of the AET European Transport Conference, PTRC Education and ResearchServices, 2001.

Review of current data requirements and detector technologies and the implications for UTMC.Deliverable 2 from the UTMC26 project: Increasing the value of road and roadside detectors. Availablefrom: http://www.utmc.gov.uk/utmc26/pdf/d2v9d.pdf

Testing of Different Bus Detectors for Traffic Signal Priority in Helsinki:www.hel.fi/ksv/entire/repBusDetectors.htm

Use of TIRIS transponders for bus priority: http://www.its.leeds.ac.uk/projects/primavera/tiris.html

MOVA

Description of need

Background

MOVA stands for Microprocessor Optimised Vehicle Actuation. It is a signal control strategy that alterstraffic signal timings in response to actual traffic conditions at isolated junctions. Inductive loops on theapproach to the signals allow MOVA to allocate the optimum green time to the different trafficmovements. The system can be programmed to reduce the waiting time of the priority vehicle.

MOVA is used by almost all authorities having responsibility for traffic signals and it is a requirement onnew signal installations and major refurbishment of trunk roads. Approximately 600 junctions in the UKuse MOVA and the installation rate is over 100 per year. Emergency and priority vehicle signal control isimplemented fully within MOVA.

- 92 -


http://www.utmc.gov.uk/utmc26/pdf/d2v9d.pdf

http://www.its.leeds.ac.uk/projects/primavera/tiris.html

The trials at Winchester were carried out as part of the MOVA Developments project, carried out by TRLLimited under contract to the Traffic Management Division of the DfT.

Problems

The park and ride car park site is located off a busy road fed from the nearby M3 motorway exit.Additional traffic as a result of the park and ride site has caused congestion in the vicinity of the junctionand caused delay to the buses.

Objectives

The main objective of the scheme is to reduce delays to park and ride buses whilst keeping delays togeneral traffic to a minimum.

Scheme details

Description

MOVA Bus Priority was implemented by using Selective Vehicle Detectors (SVDs) of the long loop typewhich distinguish buses from most other vehicles.

Implementation date

September 1997.

Cost

Â£5,000 including the MOVA control unit and labour for cutting the detector loops.

Consultation

The DfT initiated the project with TRL to implement bus priority using MOVA. TRL consulted with anumber of authorities to find suitable sites and Hampshire County Council identified Bar End Road as apossibility. Hampshire County Council agreed to fit MOVA at the site and for TRL to carry out the study.

Bus operator

Stagecoach.

Bus frequency

Average bus frequency is approximately every 7Â½ minutes.



- 93 -




Dates of surveys

Before and after surveys were carried out during 1997.

Types of surveys

Journey times of buses travelling through the junction were recorded over a two day period, both with andwithout the priority control operating for comparative purposes. Bus arrival and departure times wererecorded at the Bar End Road approaches and exits.

Results

Results

Traffic flows

No change in traffic flows occurred with the introduction of the MOVA Bus Priority scheme.

Journey times

The best result occurred in the morning peak when bus delays were reduced by 24.1 seconds (a 54 percent benefit), with smaller but still significant benefits at other times.

System performance

Over all the sites assessed in the project, Bus Priority within MOVA has been shown to work effectivelywithout necessarily introducing major delays to other traffic. At Bar End Road the results were consideredto be good. However, benefits at other locations will depend on specific site characteristics, particularlythe position of bus stops in relation to the junction and whether or not conflicting signal stages have busroutes with high bus flows.


The Park and ride scheme is being extended to involve another junction and MOVA will be replaced byan extension to the Urban Traffic Control system.

Conclusions

The scheme has been operating very successfully for over two years proving that, in certaincircumstances, MOVA Bus Priority offers features needed both to give priority to buses and to preventexcessive disruption to other traffic.

- 94 -



References

Vincent, RA, MOVA Developments: Final Report, Transport Research Laboratory, Laboratory ReportPR/TT/001/99, Crowthorne, 1999.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of the MOVA Development Group and Mr A Gray of theEnvironment Department of Hampshire County Council, who arranged for the installation and operationof the trial bus priority site at Bar End Road.

Other examples

Hanworth, South West LondonContact the traffic team on: [email protected] Merton, South LondonContact Transport Services (Environmental Services Department) on: 020 8545 4794.

Further information

Department for Transport, Highways Agency, Installation Guide for MOVA, MCH 1542 Issue C, May2003.

Bus SCOOT

Description of need

Background

The ’split cycle offset optimisation technique’ - or SCOOT - is an urban traffic control (UTC) system. TheTransport Research Laboratory (TRL) developed SCOOT in collaboration with UK traffic systemsuppliers. Today, TRL, Peek Traffic and Siemens Traffic Control jointly own SCOOT.

SCOOT responds automatically to traffic fluctuations, so expensive signal plans are unnecessary. Thismakes SCOOT an efficient tool for managing traffic on roads that use traffic signals. Over 170 towns andcities in the UK now use SCOOT.

Bus SCOOT is a facility incorporated into SCOOT to give priority to buses. To use Bus SCOOT anauthority must install devices for letting SCOOT know where the buses are e.g. loops or detectors.

The Uxbridge Road is a strategically significant radial road running from Uxbridge town centre toShepherds Bush in west London. It is 22km long and runs through three London boroughs. A bus routeruns the entire length of the Uxbridge Road in two overlapping sections, and there is also a limited stopexpress route. At peak times there are over 20 buses an hour in each direction on these two routes, andover 60,000 people travel on them every day.

- 95 -


Problems

The Uxbridge Road suffers from severe traffic congestion throughout its length. Physical bus prioritymeasures were introduced as part of a demonstration project from 1993 to 1996. These measures gave afour minute reduction in bus journey times. Bus patronage also increased considerably during this timeperiod. However buses still suffered delays from traffic signals, and therefore further measures wereneeded to alleviate this.

Objectives

The Uxbridge Road scheme was part of the London field trials, which also included schemes forTwickenham and Edgware Road. The trials aimed to evaluate a number of integrated strategies at thethree test sites.

London Buses initiated the scheme with the Traffic Control Systems Unit (TCSU): now TrafficTechnology Systems (TTS) of Transport for London. The Transportation Research Group, the Universityof Southampton and TRL Limited subsequently joined the study.

Scheme details

Description

The scheme tested was Bus SCOOT (as incorporated in SCOOT 4.1), running on the Uxbridge Road. Itdid not use automatic vehicle location (AVL).

Implementation date

The scheme was introduced in 1998.

Costs

The estimated cost of the scheme is Â£80,000 a year. It has the potential to save Â£200,000 a year.

Consultation

As these were field trials, a public consultation exercise was not carried out.

Bus operators

London Buses operates services along the Uxbridge Road.

Bus frequency

An average of 23 buses an hour run along the route.

- 96 -





Dates of surveys

On-street trials were carried out on the Uxbridge Road over a five week period in May and June 1998.

Types of surveys

The trials tested the following strategies for one week each:

SCOOT; Bus SCOOT with extensions only; Bus SCOOT with extensions and low degree of saturation recall; and Bus SCOOT with extensions and high degree of saturation recall.

The strategies - an explanation of terms Extensions only - if traffic signals are on green when a busarrives, the time the signals are on green is extended to allow the bus to proceed.

Extensions and low/high degree of saturation recall - if traffic signals are on red when a bus arrives, BusSCOOT looks at the other signal arms and decides whether to recall the green for the bus. Whether thegreen is recalled depends on the priority (low or high) assigned for this to occur.

A low degree of saturation recall means that a low priority is given to the green recall for the bus overother signal arms. Conversely, a high degree of saturation recall means that a high priority is given to thegreen recall for the bus over other signal arms.

Automatic data collection facilities were backed up by on-street measurement where necessary. Thecomprehensive database compiled as a result included most or all of the following for each strategy:

automatic recording of bus identities and detection times, using palmtop computers installed in trafficsignal controllers; automatic recording of traffic flows, delays and congestion using the ASTRID database, whichautomatically collects and stores traffic information from SCOOT for display or analysis; automatic recording of signal status and strategy actions i.e. bus priority to confirm that the system isworking properly and to provide core data to explain what effect the system has on buses and generaltraffic; automatic traffic counts providing data for twelve main roads and side road links; manual recording of registration numbers for buses and a sample of cars at each end of the corridor,to provide journey times; queue length and traffic flow measurements on key side roads; and data on events such as system failures.

- 97 -



Results

Results

Traffic flows

The introduction of Bus SCOOT had no effect on traffic flows.

Journey times

Automatic recording logged some 25,000 bus journeys. The results indicate statistically significantsavings in average bus delay and in delay variability of up to 20 per cent and 11 per cent respectively.

System performance

Bus SCOOT worked effectively during the demonstration project, as it had in previous surveys. Thescheme did not record details of bus patronage and there were no issues regarding enforcement. Nor werethere any effects of the scheme other than those recorded.

One possible change to the scheme would be the use of automatic vehicle detection systems.

Conclusions

Network capacity

The bus priority strategies used on the Uxbridge Road are expected to have an insignificant effect on thenetwork’s overall capacity. None of the strategies involve any physical measures or reallocation of roadspace.

Bus SCOOT temporarily changes capacity at individual signal junctions when bus priority is in operation.However, with no stage skipping (stages run through in numerical order), and with green timecompensation to non-priority stages, (stages not giving priority to buses are compensated for any loss ofgreen time while priority is given to the link with priority), the average length of each stage (and hencecapacity) remains largely unchanged.

Travel time and delay

All the priority strategies evaluated here have mainly affected travel time and delay. Buses operating withBus SCOOT experience average delay savings of between 7 and 20 per cent between sites in London,with no significant effect on other traffic.

Reliability and regularity

All of the priority strategies in London have produced a saving in bus journey time reliability, expressedby the standard deviation of the journey times. The different strategies have recorded savings of between 4and 13 per cent.

- 98 -



References

Bretherton, RD & Harrison, MEJ, Evaluation of SCOOT Bus Priority Field Trials, Transport ResearchLaboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/036/99, Crowthorne, 1999.

Acknowledgements

This was produced with the assistance of the University of Southampton, London Transport Buses andTransport for London. For further information contact TfL Bus Priority team on: 020 7960 6763.

Other examples

The SCOOT web site contains references to other successful implementations of SCOOT. The webaddress is: www.scoot-utc.com

Further information

To use Bus SCOOT on a network SCOOT 4.1 must installed and in use. Other information and guidancecan be found in:

DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997. DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 7/99, SCOOT URBAN CONTROL SYSTEM. DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 8/00, Bus Priority in SCOOT. DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 6/01, Bus Priority. Bowen GT, Bus Priority in SCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory, TRL Report 255, Crowthorne,1997. Bretherton RD, Bowen GT, Harrison MEJ and Langford SL, Scope for Enhancing Bus Priority inSCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/197/96, Crowthorne, 1996. Bretherton RD and Wall GT, Review of Bus Priority in SCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory,Laboratory Report PT/TT/121/95, Crowthorne, 1995. Bretherton RD, Baker KA and Harrison MEJ, Public Transport Priority in SCOOT, TransportResearch Laboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/039/99, Crowthorne, 1999. Bretherton RD and Harrison MEJ, Evaluation of SCOOT Bus Priority Field Trials, TransportResearch Laboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/036/99, Crowthorne, 1999. Gardener K and Metzger D, Uxbridge Road bus priority demonstration project, Proceedings ofSeminar K (Traffic Management & Road Safety), pp. 63 - 74, 25th PTRC European TransportForum, 1997. PROMPT: Field Trial and simulation results of bus priority in SCOOT, 8th International Conference(IEE) on Road Traffic Monitoring & Control, pp. 90 - 94, 1996.

Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL)

- 99 -


http://www.scoot-utc.com/

Description of need

Background

The ’split cycle offset optimisation technique’ - or SCOOT - is an urban traffic control (UTC) system thatthe Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) developed in collaboration with UK traffic system suppliers.

SCOOT responds automatically to traffic conditions, altering signal settings to optimise junction operationso expensive updating of fixed time signal plans is unnecessary. This makes SCOOT an efficient tool formanagingtraffic on roads that use traffic signals. Over 170 towns and cities in the UK now use SCOOT.

Bus SCOOT is a facility incorporated into SCOOT to give priority to buses. In order for priority to begiven, SCOOT must be informed about the location of buses. One means of doing this is usinginformation from an Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) system. There are two ways of providing AVL:the first is by using differential Global Positioning System (GPS) technology, and the second by using abeacon based system. Cardiff uses GPS technology.

Most bus AVL systems in the UK allow the location of a bus to be compared against a schedule and, inthis way, priority can be provided depending on a bus’s adherence to schedule. In the Cardiff system, forinstance, it is possible to give priority only to those buses that are running behind schedule.

Problems

In common with many other cities, Cardiff has seen significant growth in the use of the private car withtraffic levels increasing by over 55 per cent since 1987. With only limited road capacity available, this isresulting in delays to all vehicles and consequent congestion and gaseous pollution.

Objectives

The overall aim in Cardiff is to secure a move to multimodal transport with an emphasis on publictransport.

The specific objectives of the Cardiff trial were to:

â¢ reduce the delays to buses and improve their adherence to schedule using the SCOOT bus priorityfacility interfaced to an AVL system; and

â¢ Test and evaluate the provision of priority only to buses running behind schedule.

Scheme details

Description

The scheme tested was Bus SCOOT using AVL to inform SCOOT about the location of buses. The AVLfacility was part of a real-time passenger information system that makes use of GPS technology. Anon-board computer and GPS receiver tracks the bus’s location and a bus priority request is transmitted toSCOOT from the bus when a predefined location, stored in the on-board computer, is reached.

- 100 -


The SCOOT AVL system in Cardiff concentrated on the northern corridor of the city and is the largestGPS based bus priority and real time passenger information system to be installed in the UK. 25 per centof the city’s buses and 49 signalised junctions were included in the initial scheme.

Implementation date


Cost

The cost of the system depends on the method of bus detection. If there is an existing (AVL) systemwhich is used for bus management and passenger information purposes (as in Cardiff), the additional costof providing the information to SCOOT can be small (dependent on the type of AVL system). If there isno AVL system then there is an additional infrastructure cost for detection (for example - all busesequipped with transponders plus a bus loop installed on each approach where bus priority is required).

Consultation

Extensive consultation took place between Cardiff County Council and the main bus operator, CardiffBus, regarding planning and implementation of the scheme.

Bus operator

The main bus operator is Cardiff Bus.

Bus frequency

There were average bus flows of between 16 and 40 buses per hour through the junctions in the scheme.


The survey area covered the ’Northern Corridor’ from just south of Caerphilly Road/Beulah Road in theNorth, to just past High Street/Castle Street in the South.



Dates of surveys

Trials were carried out by TRL over an eight week period in Autumn 2000. Due to some technicalproblems the amount of data collected was lower than planned. Consequently further trials were held overan eleven week period in Spring 2001.

The strategies monitored were alternated on a weekly basis.

Types of surveys

- 101 -



Three strategies were surveyed:

SCOOT without bus priority; SCOOT with priority enabled for all buses; and SCOOT with priority enabled only for buses running more than one minute behind schedule.

Results

Evaluation was significantly affected by events and technical problems encountered during the trial.

In the AM peak when priority was given to all buses there was an average reduction in delay to buses of 4seconds per bus per junction and an average reduction in lateness of 70 seconds. With priority given toonly those buses behind schedule there was a reduction in delay to buses of 3 seconds per bus per junctionand a reduction in lateness of 92 seconds. These results are in line with the benefits normally expected tobe provided by Bus SCOOT.

Providing priority only to buses behind schedule reduced the number of priority events and hence thenumber of times that general traffic was disrupted.

Traffic flows

Despite the advantages to bus operations, no decrease or increase in traffic flows was noted due to theintroduction of this scheme.

System performance

The Cardiff system demonstrated that active priority can be provided to buses on-street using the SCOOTbus priority facility interfaced with an AVL system. However, while the functionality of the SCOOT/AVL interface has been shown, the potential benefits of bus priority in this particular instance weresignificantly affected by operational and technical problems. These problems were mostly due to: the highlevel of co-ordination required between different stakeholders; the number of interfaces between differentsystems; a lack of formal monitoring procedures; and the complexity of the systems combined with therelatively new use of the technology.

Measures to reduce the impact of these factors are required for the successful implementation of an AVLbus priority system. These include: providing value adding facilities for the bus companies; training andinformation for drivers; and formal performance and fault monitoring procedures, all of which have beenimproved in Cardiff since the completion of the trial.

Conclusions

The success of the scheme has meant that 90 to 95 per cent of the city’s buses are now equipped with buspriority technology. The scheme has been expanded to cover 120 junctions.

- 102 -


References


Bretherton, RD, Bowen, GT, Harrison, MEJ & Langford, SL, Scope for Enhancing Bus Priority inSCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/197/96, Crowthorne, 1996.

Bretherton, RD & Wall, GT, Review of Bus Priority in SCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory,Laboratory Report PT/TT/121/95, Crowthorne, 1995.

Bretherton, RD, Baker, KA & Harrison, MEJ, Public Transport Priority in SCOOT, Transport ResearchLaboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/039/99, Crowthorne,1999.


Bretherton, RD, Maxwell, A & Wood, K, Provision of differential priority within SCOOT: Final Report,Transport Research Laboratory, Laboratory Report PR/T/025/03, Crowthorne, 2003.

Acknowledgements

This document was produced with the assistance of Cardiff County Council, ACIS, and Cardiff Bus. Inparticular, Reg Hill, Bill Cokeley, Graham Morris, and David Kinnaird of Cardiff County Council, CraigGulliford of ACIS, and Geoff Blewden of Cardiff Bus.

For further information, contact Dave Bretherton: [email protected], or Keith Wood:[email protected]

For further information regarding Cardiff Bus, contact [email protected] or go towww.cardiffbus.com

Other examples

The SCOOT web site contains references to other successful implementations of SCOOT, the web addressis: www.scoot-utc.com

Further information

To use Bus SCOOT on a network, SCOOT V3.1 (or more recent version) must be installed and in use.Other information and guidance can be found in:

DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 7/99, SCOOT Urban Control System. DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 8/00, Bus Priority in SCOOT. DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 6/01, Bus Priority.

- 103 -



Mixed priority street

Description of need

Background

Rusholme is located approximately one mile from the centre of Manchester and is the largest and one ofthe busiest district centres in Manchester. There is a concentration of local retail activity, student facilities,visitor attractions and ethnic minority enterprise and employment in the centre. It is the most successfulretail centre in Manchester outside the city centre and is the location for over 150 ethnic minoritybusinesses. Rusholme is considered culturally vital to Asian communities in Manchester and the NorthWest of England. Activity is not confined to daytime on weekdays; the district centre is also busy inevenings and at weekends.

Wilmslow Road runs southwards from Manchester City Centre to the northern boundary with Stockportlinking South Manchester and Manchester Airport with the city centre. Frontage properties include retail,residential, commercial and light industrial land uses. Closer to the city centre, Wilmslow Road alsoserves Manchester Royal Infirmary, St Mary’s Hospital, Whitworth Art Gallery and the city’s highereducation precinct.

Problems

Before implementation of the improvements, Wilmslow Road was a single carriageway road with twolanes in each direction. The success of Rusholme district centre combined with limited opportunities foroff-street parking and rear servicing of retail and commercial properties resulted in high levels of on-streetparking and servicing on Wilmslow Road. Indiscriminate and illegal parking was common creatinghazards for pedestrians and cyclists, impeding traffic flow, creating congestion and contributing to delayand unreliability for buses.

The area became hazardous for pedestrians forced to cross between parked vehicles, particularly as thehigh level of pedestrian activity continues late into the night in Rusholme. Analysis of accident data for aperiod of three years before implementation of the scheme showed 136 reported injury accidents involving178 personal injuries. Unusually, 44 per cent of accidents occurred during the hours of darkness andaccounted for more than half of all the injuries to pedestrians.

Wilmslow Road is one of the busiest bus routes in Greater Manchester. The high volume of traffic and theextensive on-street parking/servicing contributed to traffic congestion that, in turn, led to delay to buses,considerable variability in bus journey times and a negative perception of the reliability of public transporton the Wilmslow Road Corridor. Journey times for buses on the corridor have been increasingyear-on-year for a number of years with the result that additional buses have had to be deployed tomaintain reliability and punctuality.

Wilmslow Road also has the largest volume of cyclists in the North West. The concentration of vulnerableusers on Wilmslow Road led to casualty numbers steadily increasing from 47 in 1998 to 81 in 2000. TheManchester Universities jointly expressed their concern on behalf of students on the campus just to thenorth of Rusholme.

- 104 -


Meetings between the Rusholme Traders Association and the City Council indicated that the existingtraffic management in place in the area was not satisfactory and the situation was negatively affecting theperceptions of those visiting and driving through the area.

Objectives

The Rusholme scheme is about encouraging the vitality of Rusholme district centre, improving safety andmaking better use of the carriageway space available. The objectives include: â¢ reducing accidents;

increasing safety for pedestrians and cyclists; managing parking; managing servicing for local businesses; improve reliability of bus services by reducing journey time variability; encourage the vibrant business activity in the area enhancing local trading viability; reducing congestion and the associated negative environmental consequences; and improving visitor perceptions of the area.

Scheme details

Description

The scheme on Wilmslow Road reduced the four lane carriageway through the

district centre to a single mixed use lane in each direction between Hathersage Road and Dickenson Roadin order to allow the provision of defined servicing bays, parking bays and bus stops. The traffic lanes arenarrow in order to inhibit inconsiderate parking. The remaining carriageway space was used to introducehorizontal alignment changes to reduce vehicle speeds and provide improvements for pedestrians, cyclistsand bus passengers. The natural curvature of the road was exaggerated to encourage drivers to reduce theirspeed appropriately.

Short unconnected sections of bus lane were removed from the core area and replaced by with-flow buslanes with a minimum width of 4.0 metres on the northern and southern approaches to the core areaterminating at transponder controlled signalised bus gates. This is the element of the scheme that isintended to provide priority for buses.

The scheme embodies principles of traffic metering and queue relocation. The traffic signal installations atjunctions at both ends of the district centre can be used to manage the flow of traffic through the centre.Peak period traffic queues on the northern and southern approaches to the district centre can be bypassedby buses using the bus lanes and bus gates.

Bus stops were relocated to align with crossing facilities and areas with appropriate footpath space. Otheradditional measures included:

raised kerbs and improvements to the bus stop environment to aid boarding; bus stops with shallow saw-tooth bus bays, conventional bus bays and bus boarders protected by redcordon markings and clearway orders; removal of short and discontinuous lengths of with-flow bus lane on Wilmslow Road in the districtcentre and implementation of longer lengths of with-flow bus lane terminating in bus gates on the

- 105 -


northern and southern approaches to the district centre; footway widening to allow a pedestrian clearway free of obstruction by street furniture; introduction of continuous full time cycle lanes; and a number of measures to enhance the character of the area including ’street art’ to reinforce thecultural identity of Rusholme, upgraded street furniture and improved street lighting.

Three illustrations are provided - Figure 1 provides an overview of the scheme; Figure 2 provides a sketchlayout of an area at the southern end of the scheme; and Figure 3 illustrates the layout on a section ofWilmslow Road in the district centre.

Implementation date

The mixed priority scheme on the section of Wilmslow Road between Hathersage Road at the northernend of the district centre and Platt Lane at the southern end was completed in September 2004. Thewith-flow bus lanes on the northern and southern approaches to the city centre were implemented shortlyafterwards.

39

40

41

Costs

Total scheme implementation cost was Â£2.0 million. The scheme was designated as a Safety SchemeDemonstration Project and attracted funding of Â£1.0 million from DETR (DfT) following a competitivebidding process. The balance of Â£1.0 million was funded from local resources.

Consultation

Initial informal consultation with ward members and officers of the Local Regeneration Partnership tookplace before consultation with the public and stakeholders. Advance consultation also took place betweenManchester City Council, Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive and Greater ManchesterPolice.

A combination of methods of consultation with the public was used including:

distribution of explanatory leaflets to all properties on Wilmslow Road with a contact facility for atranslated version of the leaflet for non-English speaking residents; public exhibitions were held and included models and artists impressions of the scheme; a telephone hotline to receive comments; this was staffed and was not just an answer phone service; dissemination of information through the local media; and meetings with the emergency services to discuss traffic management issues.

A joint representative working party and steering committee was formed to oversee the implementation ofthe proposals.

- 106 -





Bus operators

Wilmslow Road has the highest number of registered bus services on any road in Greater Manchesteroperated by Stagecoach Manchester including services provided under the Magic Bus brand name. Otheroperators providing local bus services on Wilmslow Road include First Manchester, Arriva North West,Finglands and five smaller independent companies.

Bus frequency

In the inter-peak period on weekdays there is a total hourly two-way flow of 110 buses on WilmslowRoad through the district centre. The hourly two-way flow increases to 136 on the section of WilmslowRoad to the north of the district centre where the southbound with-flow bus lane is located. Bus flows aresubstantially higher during weekday peak periods.

Scheme impact

Post implementation monitoring of the impact of the scheme has not yet taken place, but it is anticipatedthat it will deliver the following outcomes:

an improvement in the street environment making the district centre more attractive for shoppers andvisitors; a reduction in indiscriminate and illegal parking. The initial view of the bus operator is that a similarscheme in nearby Withington has been more effective in eliminating problem parking because thetraffic lanes are narrower and there is less opportunity to park without completely blocking traffic; a reduction in the high numbers of pedestrian casualties achieved through the provision of additionalpedestrian crossing facilities, speed reduction measures and better management of on-street parkingand servicing of frontage businesses; a reduction in the number of accidents involving cyclists achieved by providing cycle lanes andadvanced stop lines; a more attractive environment and full accessibility at bus stops; and improvements in reliability, and particularly a reduction in the variability of bus journey times, as aresult of implementation of bus priority measures on the approaches to the district centre, queuerelocation and the metering of traffic through the mixed priority section of Wilmslow Road.

Conclusions

This mixed priority scheme has improved conditions for pedestrians and cyclists, reduced speeds, andallowed better management of parking and servicing in Rusholme district centre. The specific elements ofthe scheme that benefit buses are the two bus lanes and bus gates on the approaches to the district centre.They allow buses to overtake other traffic, provide journey time and reliability benefits, and helpoutbound right-turning buses on the northern approach to the district centre. The mixed priority measuresimplemented in the district centre are thought to have had a broadly neutral effect on buses; benefits frombetter control of parking and servicing being offset by the impact of additional pedestrian crossingfacilities.

- 107 -


Acknowledgements

Acknowledgement is given for the assistance provided by Greater Manchester Passenger TransportExecutive, Manchester City Council and Stagecoach Manchester during preparation of this case study.

Other examples

There are similar examples of mixed priority routes elsewhere in Greater Manchester including the districtcentres of Levenshulme and Withington.

Further information

For further information contact the bus priority team at Greater Manchester Passenger TransportExecutive on 0161 242 6000 or write to:

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive19 Portland StreetPiccadilly GardensManchester M60 1HX

Bus friendly traffic calming

Description of need

Background

The first traffic calming scheme with road humps was introduced in Hull in 1993. Since then Hull CityCouncil has achieved substantial reduction in road accident casualties. Central to the success of Hull’straffic calming policy has been the introduction of 20 mph zones throughout the city, the first of whichwas introduced in 1995. The idea of 20 mph zones was introduced in the UK to address the problem ofchild pedestrian accidents. DfT guidance on 20 mph zones suggests that the risk of a child being involvedin an accident drops by two thirds with the introduction of a 20 mph zone (TRL analysed 250 zones whichindicated that child accidents fell by 67 per cent and the overall number of accidents fell by 60 per cent).

illustration of scheme

By 1998 Hull City Council had developed fifty 20 mph zones, including zones on a number of bus routes.These were a mixture of high and low frequency routes with some calmed roads having as many as 14buses per hour each way. A further development in 1998 was the acceptance of agreed standards betweenthe City Council, bus operators and emergency services in Hull for bus and ambulance friendly trafficcalming. Currently in Hull there are just under 17 kilometres of traffic calming on bus routes in the city, 9kilometres of which is on bus routes with a frequency of 10 minutes or greater.

Objectives

The agreed standards for traffic calming were introduced in Hull in order to minimise the impact of trafficcalming on bus routes and ambulances responding to emergency calls, whilst still reducing mean speedsand achieving the targeted casualty reductions. In general, where traffic calming is not carefully consulted

- 108 -



on at the design stage, the impact upon public transport can result in services being withdrawn due toadditional time added to the service and wear and tear on vehicles making a route not commerciallyviable. There are also cases in some parts of the country where bus drivers have complained that poorlydesigned traffic calming has resulted in injuries through repeated driving over humps.

Additional objectives of traffic calming include reducing average traffic speeds, increasing the number ofpeople walking and cycling, improving the environment for those who live work or travel along the routeand providing a safer route to school for local children.

Scheme details

Description

The agreed standards between Hull City Council and the bus operator included:

all vertical traffic calming measures to be a maximum 75 millimetres high; all speed cushions to be 2.1 metres wide, 3 metres long with 550 millimetres side slopes; speed table/flat top humps to have 1800 millimetres long ramps with a minimum 9 metre longplateau; all traffic calming schemes to include minimum number of measures to achieve objectives; minimum 15 metre length of waiting restrictions to protect each side of speed cushion; and regular traffic calming meetings between city council, bus operators and emergency services.

Traffic calming measures on Shannon Road


The dimensions of the traffic calming measures were agreed to take advantage of the wider wheel base ofthe buses.

The waiting restrictions surrounding traffic calming measures prevent cars from parking on the approachto speed cushions, ensuring that buses are able to approach the traffic calming at the correct angle,allowing a more comfortable journey for the passenger.

Hull now has over one hundred 20 mph zones throughout the city. An example of one of these schemescan be seen on Shannon Road. This scheme was introduced in April 1998 in response to a previous highlevel of injury accidents, especially involving child pedestrians and cyclists. Shannon Road is a localdistributor route carrying around 5,000 vehicles per day and services a large estate to the east of the citycentre. A frequent bus service exists and there are numerous shops and a school on the route.

The scheme consists of speed cushions throughout its length and a short section of 20 mph zone to protectthe school and major shopping area. The 20 mph zone includes road narrowing and priority working toenforce the 20 mph limit.

The signs positioned at the entrance to all zones in Hull have been designed by local children, helping toemphasise local ownership of the scheme.

- 109 -



Cost

The overall contribution to the implementation of the 20 mph zones in Hull is Â£5.5 million to date. Thishas been met from a variety of different sources both from corporate capital and transport capital funding.

Consultation

Decisions on the choice of traffic calming measures to use at any particular location in Hull is based onexperience that has been built up in the area and on extensive consultation with the bus operators,emergency services and the public. All the 20 mph zones went through consultation including leaflets,questionnaires, public exhibitions and meetings of ward forums and residential committees.

Owing to the current scale of traffic calming in Hull there is a high level of community awarenesssurrounding traffic calming and communities are well aware of the positive results from other local areas.In fact much of the demand for the schemes has come from within the local communities.

Bus operators

Bus operators are now actively involved in the design of traffic calming in Hull, this includes consultationon issues such as spacing and positioning of cushions in relation to bus stops. The scheme on NewlandAvenue (a national road safety demonstration project) is an example of a scheme where the council andbus operator have worked closely together in designing the layout of the carriageway, negotiating theoptimum position for cushions, bus stops and crossing facilities to reduce delay experienced by busservices on the route and minimise any discomfort which may be experience by the passenger as a resultof traffic calming measures.

One issue raised by operators is the effect of traffic calming on services which are operated by mini andmidi bus services. Because of their shorter wheel base they are unable to avoid the effects of the trafficcalming even with the agreed measures. This produces a ’wobble’ effect for the passengers and exertsadditional pressure on the inner wheel of the vehicle, as the vehicle is not able to get both wheels on theslopes of the cushion. The solution to this has been to increase the width of the cushion allowing the minibuses to get both wheels on the side slopes of the cushions. The additional problem here is that anymeasures introduced to mitigate the effects on mini and midi buses will also be effective for small vans,reducing the overall effectiveness of the traffic calming scheme.

The operators enforce the 20 mph zone through driver instruction and by the use of sporadic speed gunchecks, particularly in areas where there have been complaints about buses allegedly speeding.

Bus operators have realised a hidden saving from the extensive traffic calming and introduction of 20 mphzones. Where accidents occur on high frequency routes the bus operator still needs to provide the samefrequency of service although buses will become caught up in the delay associated with the accident. Thisdelay can be as much as 15 minutes which means an additional bus is required on the route to maintain thecorrect frequency. The reduction in accidents through the implementation of traffic calming thereforeresults in a saving to the operators as there are fewer occasions where they need to provide the extra bus.This kind of saving is only applicable to areas where there is extensive traffic calming. The reduction inaccidents also improves the reliability of services across the whole network particularly for cross cityservices.

- 110 -



A number of monitoring studies have been undertaken in areas where bus friendly traffic calming hasbeen introduced. In Hull accident data for the city has been collated for three years before each schemeand three years after each scheme. In addition, the Institute for Public Policy Research conducted researchinto child pedestrian safety using Hull as one of its case studies.

TRL have undertaken a study of 20 mph zones, including analysis of the impact of 20 mph zones ontraffic flows in treated areas and surrounding areas which may be affected by traffic transferring to otherstreets. Whilst bus operators monitor journey times, reliability and patronage levels these figures can bemisleading indicators as they tend to be affected by other factors such bus priority measures in other partsof the city.

Results

Traffic flows

The TRL report ’Review of Traffic Calming in 20 mph Zones’ suggests that traffic flow was reduced by27 per cent within 20 mph zones, whereas the roads surrounding the 20 mph zones experienced anincrease of 12 per cent.

Traffic flows were monitored at two sites in the Shannon Road safety scheme. The results showed thattraffic had been reduced by over a quarter in the 20 mph zone in the afternoon peak (28.6 per centbetween 15.30 and 16.30).

Journey times

Bus operators have taken the view that traffic calming has only had a negligible effect on bus journeytimes. In most cases the bus routes where traffic calming has been implemented were already slow routeswith numerous stops and high patronage, resulting in average speeds of around 10 mph for buses evenbefore traffic calming. Thus the reduction in general traffic flow experienced on these routes as a result oftraffic calming may have a positive effect on bus journey times.

Casualty reduction

Accident data collated by Hull City Council for three years before and after the implementation of trafficcalming on bus routes (18 schemes in total) revealed that the number of accidents has dropped from 315 inthe three years before traffic calmed zones were implemented to 156 in the three years afterimplementation. This equates to a reduction of 53 accidents per year and 4.3 less accidents per kilometreper year.

Overall:

fatal and serious injury accidents have been reduced by 64 per cent; injury accidents involving children have been reduced by 60 per cent; injury accidents involving pedestrians have been reduced by 60 per cent; injury accidents involving child pedestrians have been reduced by 71 per cent; injury accidents involving cyclists have been reduced by 28 per cent; and

- 111 -


injury accidents involving child cyclists have been reduced by 32 per cent.

Looking at this data on a scheme by scheme basis Shannon Road saw a reduction in accidents in the threeyears proceeding traffic calming of 71 per cent, with accidents per year falling from 9.3 to 2.7 between1995 and 2000. Greatest changes were seen in accidents involving pedestrians which saw a reduction of93 per cent and accidents during darkness which saw a reduction of 85 per cent.

An Institute for Public Policy Research study estimated that since 1994 Hull’s programme of 20 mphzones has already saved about 200 serious injuries and about 1000 minor injuries. In accounting termsthese savings are worth well over Â£40 million.

Total number of crashes in 20 mph zones has fallen by 56 per cent and the number of crashes resulting indeaths or serious injuries has been cut by 90 per cent.

This reduction in accidents on the city’s roads is also felt to have a positive impact on the reliability of busservices; an accident can cause in the region of 15 minutes delay to a service, having a serious impact onpassengers’ perceptions of reliability and punctuality. This is particularly an issue if a bus route is affectedby an accident hotspot and is consequently experiencing regular delays.

Average vehicle speeds

At Shannon Road the scheme was introduced incrementally. The 20 mph signs were introduced followedby speed roundels and finally the main scheme was introduced. Vehicle speeds were monitored throughthis phasing and the results can be seen in the table below:

Summary of traffic speed


The results show that the largest reduction occurred when the full scheme was implemented with averagespeeds being reduced by up to a third, although a noticeable reduction in speed occurred with theintroduction of the signs and roundels.

Conclusions

The key to bus friendly traffic calming is extensive consultation between the bus operators and councilrepresentatives. This is highlighted in Hull where the Council and bus operators have been workingtogether on traffic calming schemes for ten years.

Traffic calming has been able to improve bus reliability through a number of indirect routes including areduction in the number of accidents on the network reducing the delay experienced by bus services andthrough a reduction in traffic flows on traffic calmed routes resulting in buses experiencing lesscongestion related delays in these areas.

A number of issues remain unresolved with regards to public transport and traffic calming including thefact that priority seats on buses for the elderly and those with mobility impairments tend to be positionedat the front of the bus over the front wheels. This is where the ’wobble effect’ created by speed cushions isgreatest and has led to a number of complaints about the discomfort of the journey and incidents whereshopping has fallen over.

- 112 -



There is also the issue of services which operate using mini and midi buses as the dimensions for trafficcalming measures agreed between the city council and bus operators does not accommodate the shorterwheel base of these vehicles.

The future

Currently 26 per cent of the 730 kilometres of road are covered by a 20 mph limit and further areas areunder consideration. Some 60 per cent of roads in Hull are suitable for 20 mph zones, although the greatmajority of these will be in residential areas away from the main bus routes.

European approach

A number of bus friendly traffic calming measures from mainland Europe are discussed in ’CivilisedStreets a guide to traffic calming’. One example of this is the combi hump used in Denmark. The designincludes two humps one for cars (in the middle) and two for buses (either side of the hump for cars), thehump for cars being more severe than that for buses, taking advantage of the difference in wheel baselengths between buses and cars.

Sweden has developed a traffic calming measure using a depression in the road (used in Stockholm andVÃ¤steras). The depressions are wide enough that cars must drive through them but buses are able tostraddle them, this has led to support from bus operators for this measure. There are three areas of concernwith using depressions as a traffic calming measure, firstly they are less visible than a hump, secondlythere have been some drainage issues and finally the cost of this measure is approximately four times thatof installing humps.

A further example can be found in Denmark which combines depressions and humps. This is know as thebus sluis and comprises a hump in the normal carriage way with a separate section of carriage way forbuses. This separate section has a depression with a ramp leading up to it which buses can straddle andcars can not; the disadvantage with this measure is the amount of carriage way width required.

References

Brightwell, Sarah, Hull reaps road safety rewards from slowing the city’s traffic, Local Transport Today,15/05/04.

Carmen Hass Klau et al, Civilised Streets a guide to traffic calming, Environmental and TransportPlanning, 1992.

Traffic Advisory Leaflet 09/99, 20 mph speed limits and zones, DfT, 1999.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Hull City Council and East Yorkshire Motor ServicesLimited.

- 113 -


Other examples

Telford & Wrekin Council.

Contact the Network Management and Development Department on: 01952 202100 (main switchboard).

Further information

Further information on traffic calming in Hull can be obtained from:

Traffic Projects Manager Traffic Services

Kingston upon Hull City Council

Kingston House

Bond Street

Hull

HU1 3ER

01482 612095

High occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes

Description of need

Background

High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) or ’2 Plus’ lanes were introduced on the A647 Stanningley Road andStanningley By-Pass as Leeds City Council’s contribution to the ICARO (Increasing CAR Occupancy)research project.

Stanningley Road and Stanningley By-Pass form the principal radial route to the west of Leeds city centreand are part of the route linking Leeds and Bradford.

Problems

The part of Stanningley Road and Stanningley By-Pass chosen for the HOV lane is a dual two lanecarriageway. In January 1997, journey times in free-flow traffic conditions were little more than 5 minutesfor 2.0km whereas, in the morning peak period, journey times were typically more than 10 minutes.

Objectives

Leeds City Council saw the primary objective of the scheme to be to provide priority for the majority ofpeople travelling towards Leeds on the A647 in peak periods. It was expected that the scheme wouldresult in an increase in car occupancy.

- 114 -


ICARO objectives were broader in scope. The aims were:

to increase car occupancy by encouraging car sharing; and to demonstrate the feasibility of providing a lane for shared use by buses, other high occupancyvehicles, motorcycles and cycles.

Scheme details

Description

The HOV lane is available to buses, coaches, other vehicles carrying 2 or more people, motorcycles andpedal cycles. Goods vehicles over 7.5T are not permitted to use the 2+ lane.

There are two lengths of inbound HOV or 2+ lane extending for a total of 1.5km along 2.0km of dualcarriageway. The HOV lanes operate in the morning and evening peak periods (07:00 - 10:00, 16:00 -19:00) on Mondays to Fridays. Advance signing is provided on the approaches to the HOV lanes.Half-width laybys are provided to ensure that buses can serve bus stops without obstructing the flow ofother permitted categories of traffic.

Traffic signal control is provided at the end of the HOV lane to manage merging of traffic from the HOVand non-HOV traffic lanes. At first these signals operated for fixed time periods. They have been modifiedto respond to different traffic conditions before and after the end of the HOV lanes. The signals can alsoswitch on and off in response to traffic conditions.

The scheme included police enforcement laybys, speed cameras, improved street lighting, improvementsat bus stops, pelican crossings with tactile paving, anti-skid surfacing and changes to traffic circulation onside roads.

Implementation date

The HOV lane was opened under an experimental Traffic Regulation Order on 11 May 1998 and madepermanent on 8 November 1999.

Costs

Scheme implementation cost was Â£585,000 at 1998 prices.

Illustratin of scheme

Consultation

The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 authorises local authorities to introduce experimental TROswithout prior consultation. In this case, although there was no formal public consultation, there wassubstantial consultation with elected members, the emergency services, bus operators, cycling groups,groups representing the disabled community, motoring organisations and local community groups beforeimplementation. Further consultation took place with residents, the police and bus operators afterimplementation resulting in minor changes to the initial scheme.

- 115 -



Bus operators

The majority of bus services on Stanningley Road are operated by First, but some services are provided byBlack Prince Coaches.

Bus frequency

There are 8 buses an hour in each direction using the first section of HOV lane on Stanningley Bypass.This increases to 17 buses an hour in each direction between the junction of Stanningley Bypass andStanningley Road in Bramley and Armley.


Dates of surveys

’Before’ surveys were undertaken in May and June 1997. ’After’ surveys took place in May and June1999. Analysis of further surveys undertaken in September 2002 is nearing completion.

Types of surveys

Data collected included traffic counts in the morning and evening peak periods, vehicle occupancy,journey times and queue lengths. In addition, analysis was undertaken of records of personal injuryaccidents and police enforcement. Information on public attitudes and driver behaviour was obtained fromhousehold and roadside interview surveys. An environmental monitoring station on Stanningley Roadprovided information on air quality.

Results

An evaluation of scheme impacts has been undertaken by Leeds City Council.

Morning peak traffic flows: Immediately after opening there was significant driver avoidance of the A647and traffic flow fell by 20 per cent. By late 1999, traffic flows had returned to 1997 levels in both the peakhour and the operational period.

Evening peak traffic flows: Traffic flow in the operational period (16:00 to 19:00) fell by 10 per cent atscheme inception, but returned to the ’before’ level by June 1999. By June 2002 traffic flow had increasedby a further 14 per cent in the three hour period.

Occupancy: In 1997, 30 per cent of cars carried two or more occupants. One third of vehicles (includingbuses) carried two-thirds of people travelling in the corridor in the morning peak period. The number ofhigh occupancy vehicles using the A647 in the period 07:00 to 10:00 increased by 5 per cent between1997 and 1999. Given that 1997 and 1999 flows were similar, the implication is that there was anexchange of HOV and non-HOV traffic between the A647 and parallel routes.

Average car occupancy rose from 1.35 in May 1997 to 1.43 by June 1999 and 1.51 in 2002.

- 116 -


Bus patronage increased by one per cent in the first year of operation of the HOV lanes. There areindications of further growth in bus patronage since 1998, but the recent introduction by First of an’Overground’ network inhibits robust conclusions.

Journey times: Morning peak journey time savings for buses and other high occupancy vehicles were 4minutes comparing June 1997 and June 1999 data. Over the same period there was a reduction of 1Â½minutes in non-HOV journey times.

Accidents: There was reduction of 30 per cent in casualties in a period of three years after schemeimplementation in May 1998.

Enforcement: Lane violation levels were low in the months following implementation as a result of dailypolice enforcement. In 2002 lane violation levels were still less than 6 per cent despite a relaxation ofenforcement. This can be attributed to the level of enforcement agreed between the city council and thepolice.

Public attitudes: Roadside interviews in February 1999 showed HOV driver support for the lane to be only66 per cent. This is low considering the journey time benefits of the scheme. The reason may be that HOVdrivers also made peak period journeys as non-HOV drivers and, when doing so, did not benefit from thejourney time savings observed.

Air quality: There has been little change in air quality on the A647 as a result of the introduction of theHOV lane. The relatively small improvement can be attributed to reduced vehicle emissions rather than tothe impact of the HOV lane.

Conclusions

The HOV lanes scheme on the A647 Stanningley Road and Stanningley By-Pass has resulted in:

a reduction in inbound journey times for buses and other high occupancy vehicles of 4 minutes in themorning peak; a reduction in inbound non-HOV journey times of 1Â½ minutes in the morning peak; increases in bus patronage and average car occupancy; a reduction in the number of accident casualties; and a low level of violation.

Following the success of the scheme on the A647, Leeds City Council is now planning to introduce HOVlanes on the proposed East Leeds Link Road.

Leeds City Council is now participating in the HOV Monitoring (HOVMON) project to developautomated camera enforcement techniques to determine car occupancy.

Acknowledgements

This case study was produced with the assistance of Leeds City Council and Metro (West YorkshirePassenger Transport Executive).

- 117 -


Other examples

A4174 Avon Ring Road westbound (A432 to M32), Hambrook, South Gloucestershire (in the NorthFringe of Bristol).

Contact South Gloucestershire Council, Planning Transportation and Strategic Environment Departmenton 01454 868686.

Further information

Further information on the A647 Stanningley Road HOV lane can be obtained from:

Leeds City Council

Highways and Transport Department

The Leonardo Building,

2 Rossington Street,

Leeds

LS2 8HB

0113 247 7500

http://www.leeds.gov.uk

The publicity leaflet ’Priority Lane for High Occupancy Vehicles’ (1999) is available from Leeds CityCouncil at the above address.

No-car lanes

Description of need

Background

Superoutes, first proposed in 1998, offered a new approach to bus travel within the Tyne and Wear region.The 35 superoutes within the region are the product of informal quality bus partnerships etween localcouncils, bus operators and Nexus with the aim of delivering frequent, high quality services along keypublic transport routes.

The superoutes aim to;

provide modern buses and infrastructure; provide better travel information, lighting and security at bus stops; implement bus priority and highway improvements to enable quicker journeys; ensure frequent, more reliable journeys; improve interconnection between services in the region;

- 118 -



provide Euro 11 emissions compliant vehicles; and increase bus patronage across the region.

Several of the superoutes within the Sunderland area run along A690 Durham Road.

The City of Sunderland Council developed proposals for providing priority for buses and upgradingpassenger facilities and information on the A690 Durham Road following an assessment of the potentialbenefits of providing ’Green Route’ treatment on a number of corridors in the city. Green corridors areroutes that have been upgraded to give priority to vulnerable users such as pedestrians and cyclists andpublic transport vehicles.

Measures to benefit buses and bus users on the Durham Road Corridor were implemented in severalstages and promoted as the Durham Road Superoute. Bus services in the corridor also benefited frominvestment in Park Lane Interchange in the city centre and the designation of a special parking area toaddress illegal parking.

No-car lanes are a relatively new concept in the re-allocation of highway space. The concept whichevolved from that of the bus lane is based on use of the lane by buses and some other vehicles, but theprevention of car use in the designated lane. These lanes have been introduced to Newcastle City Centreand it is hoped that the success can be repeated across the region. It is now proposed to designate the buslanes on Durham Road as no-car lanes.

Problems

Bus priority and green corridor measures were proposed along the high frequency bus route along DurhamRoad in response to the following problems:

delay to buses caused by traffic congestion at key junctions in the city centre; delay to buses on Durham Road in the direction of peak flow on the approaches to major junctions onthe corridor; obstructions to traffic caused by right turning traffic and legitimate and illegal on-street parking; difficulty in emerging into heavy free-flowing traffic and queuing traffic from bus lay-bys; and difficulties for buses entering Durham Road from side roads.

The problems were predominantly experienced in peak periods.

Objectives

The objectives of the superoute bus priority proposals were to:

make the city centre more accessible; provide high quality bus services to the city centre by improving reliability and reducing variabilityof journey times; achieve modal shift from car to bus; and improve the surrounding environment.

- 119 -


The overall objective was to raise the profile and quality of bus services in the City of Sunderland throughthe application of Green Route treatment.

Scheme Details

Description

The Durham Road Superoute was formally launched in April 1998 and was at the time the mostcomprehensive corridor approach to improving bus travel in Tyne & Wear. The scheme comprised 1630metres of bus lanes, new bus shelters, improved passenger information and 21 new low floor buses (withramps for wheelchair access, grant aided by Nexus). This superoute is the first scheme introduced under aQuality Partnership for the City of Sunderland. Stagecoach Busways, Go Wear (Go Ahead Group), City ofSunderland and Nexus were all involved in the scheme.

Costs

The cost of introducing the superoute scheme was Â£250,000, including design and monitoring.

The estimated cost of implementing no-car lanes on Durham Road is Â£50,000, including design andmonitoring.

Consultation

The emergency services, bus operators and ward members were all consulted in addition to face-to-faceinterviews with residents as part of the evaluation procedure.

Bus operators

The two main bus operators running services along the A690 Durham Road Superoute corridor areStagecoach and GO North-East. Arriva also operate a bus service along Durham Road.

Bus frequency

The Durham Road Superoute extends from Sunderland City Centre to the city boundary to the west of thejunction of the A690 Durham Road with the A19 at East Herrington. The number of buses per hour usingthe superoute increases eastwards as routes from residential suburbs join Durham Road. Weekday peakperiod frequency rises from 6 buses per hour in each direction at the A19 intersection to 22 buses per hourclose to the city centre. The five superoutes serving the corridor account for the majority of this number.



A comprehensive programme of before and after scheme monitoring has been undertaken on the DurhamRoad Superoute. Journey times (including time at bus stops allowing passengers to board and alight) havebeen recorded by the moving observer method, initially with survey staff on buses and more recentlythrough roadside surveys. The most recent surveys were undertaken in 2002 and it is from these that thefollowing results are taken.

- 120 -


Before and after comparisons are difficult as in 1997 and 1998 buses operated to and from the central busstation in Sunderland and from May 1999, Park Lane Interchange opened and services were then diverted.In the future bus journey time monitoring will move away from manual recording to automated datacollection, enabling a more complete analysis of the impacts of schemes.

A series of household attitudinal surveys were posted in the vicinity of the superoute; 335 residentsresponded. In addition to this, user attitudinal surveys were also carried out in the form of face-to-faceinterviews on buses and at bus stops.

Results

Traffic flows

General traffic flows on the corridor have decreased by 6 per cent at the outer cordon and 16 per cent inthe inner cordon. Flows on alternative routes have increased by 6 per cent, on both Chester Road andSilksworth Lane. Traffic delay surveys have revealed increased journey times for traffic, particularlyoutbound during the evening peak.

Journey times and reliability

The moving observer surveys comparing bus journey times for November 1997 to November 1998 revealboth benefits and disbenefits. The introduction of bus priority measures has produced more consistentjourney times and reduced the large variation identified in the 1997 survey.

However, there are now delays at traffic signal controlled junctions on the route where there is no buspriority and outbound on the approach to the Barnes Gyratory. Average measured journey times along thecorridor are in the range of 9 to 11 minutes compared with the scheduled journey time of 15 minutes.

More recent figures reveal a rise in journey times which can be attributed to the increase in traffic on theperiphery of the city centre and longer times accessing and egressing the Interchange.

Patronage

Continuous monitoring of bus services has shown a 6 per cent patronage increase on Durham Road EasyAccess bus services and a slight increase in travel on other bus services on Durham Road. Both aremeasured in comparison to other bus services in Sunderland. Easy Access bus services account for 55 percent of passengers travelling on the corridor.

Safety

The transformation of the A690 Durham Road to the superoute has seen a reduction in accidents along thecorridor. In 1998 the number of fatal and serious accidents fell to 28 in comparison to the 40 recorded theprevious year. In the same time period slight accidents fell from 257 to 231.

System performance

- 121 -


The household attitudinal surveys revealed the following: â¢ 93 per cent agreed that ease of getting on andoff buses is now good or very good;

92 per cent of respondents said that general quality of low floor buses is good or very good; 36 per cent revealed that the superoute has improved bus travel; and 19 per cent revealed they use the route more often now than they did a year ago.

The face-to-face interviews provided the following results: â¢ 81 per cent of respondents listed access forwheelchairs and prams as the main factor that has improved since the introduction of bus lanes and lowfloor buses, with 96 per cent agreeing that accessibility for wheelchair and prams is good;

over 80 per cent of those interviewed thought that information, frequency of service, punctuality,vehicle quality and attitude of drivers is good; and 73 per cent agreed that the provision of bus lanes had improved the service.

The evolution of no-car lanes

Bus lanes assist the movement of buses around congested city centres by reducing journey time andimproving reliability, but in many cases no-car lanes have proven to be a more effective use of road space.The Government White Paper recognised that congestion and unreliability of journeys adds to the cost ofbusinesses, undermining competitiveness in our towns and cities. No-car lanes give priority for essentialvehicles facilitating the movement of goods as well as people in congested urban centres.

In addition to helping the movement of buses and goods vehicles, no-car lanes can increase road capacityin some cases by segregating wider vehicles from standard vehicle lanes. Another major benefit is thereduction of lorry traffic on alternative routes. No-car lanes are probably best utilised in situations wherebus flows are too low to justify a lane exclusively for buses.

Newcastle City Council has led the way in the implementation of no-car lanes. In Newcastle city centrethere are many existing or planned no-car lanes, for example on Barras Bridge, New Bridge Street,Westgate Road, Sandyford Road, John Dobson Street, Barrack Road, Percy Street and Great North Road.No data has been produced to evaluate the schemes but feedback from user groups has been positive sofar. The previous examples are all successful schemes in Tyne and Wear; it is therefore feasible that thesuccess of these schemes could be translated to Sunderland with the implementation of/conversion tono-car lanes on the A690 Durham Road Superoute.

Conclusions

The introduction of a bus lane on Durham Road has provided a more direct route to Sunderland citycentre, which can be seen in the reduction in journey times. There have also been significant decreases intraffic flows. Durham Road Easy Access bus services have also seen a patronage increase of 6 per centwith household and user attitudinal surveys revealing positive feedback. The results show that thesuperoute has successfully met its objectives.

However the success of no-car lanes in nearby Newcastle shows that lanes need not be exclusive to busesin order to relieve urban congestion and that in the future a conversion of some or all of the A690 DurhamRoad to a no-car lane may be a more viable option.

- 122 -


Acknowledgements

This document was produced with the assistance of the City of Sunderland Council and Nexus.

Further information


City of Sunderland Council

Development and Regeneration Directorate

City Centre

Burdon Road

Sunderland

SR2 7DN

0191 5531000

http://www.sunderland.gov.uk

Newcastle City Council

Planning and Transport Section


Civic Centre

Barras Bridge

Newcastle upon Tyne

NE99 1RD

http://www.newcastle.gov.uk

Nexus

Nexus House

St James Boulevard

Newcastle upon Tyne

- 123 -


http://www.sunderland.gov.uk/

http://www.newcastle.gov.uk/

NE1 4AX

0191 2033333

http://www.nexus.co.uk

Further information on superoute can be obtained at: www.superoute.com

Bus park and ride

Description of need

Background

The UK’s longest-running park and ride site was established in Oxford during the early 1970s. This aspart of a comprehensive transport strategy designed to discourage traffic from entering the city because ofits adverse effect on the city’s historic fabric. A number of other cities experimented with ark and rideincluding Nottingham and Leicester. A lull in park and ride development followed, as traffic growthpredictions were not borne out in reality.

A new phase of park and ride schemes were implemented in the mid 1980s in a bid to alleviate city centrecongestion. This phase included schemes in Bath, Cambridge and Chester. The introduction of new parkand ride sites continued into the mid 1990s. The 1990s also saw existing sites begin to expand toaccommodate the needs of changing demand.

The Government’s 10-Year Plan of July 2000 promised, "high quality park and ride schemes so thatpeople do not have to drive into congested town centres", setting a target for the development of "up to100 new park and ride schemes" by 2010. Since 2000 there has been a net increase of 26 sites, and plansare being developed for further significant expansion.

Site location

The target market for park and ride is existing car users who would otherwise drive into the town centre.Sites are usually located on radial routes on the edge of the urban area to intercept inbound motorists.However, it is important to consider the potential impacts on local bus services. Abstraction of patronagefrom local services to park and ride also reduces the capacity of the service.

In a survey of all the bus based park and ride schemes in the UK, the average distance from the city for apark and ride site was two to three miles. This analysis also revealed that all but one of the sites over 4miles away had been built since 2000. The table overleaf illustrates the distance of park and ride sitesfrom the urban centres.

Park and ride in Great Britain

- 124 -


http://www.nexus.co.uk/

Distance from the centre (miles) Number of sites

Up to 0.5 1

0.5 to 1 9

1 to 1.5 19

1.5 to 2 16

2 to 3 30

3 to 4 18

4 to 5 3

6 to 7 1

Over 10 miles 2

Source: TAS (2003)

Key elements

Park and ride schemes form part of an overall transport strategy. This can include a package of measuresconstraining traffic in the city centre that includes; reducing parking spaces, applying appropriatecharging, extending traffic free zones, encouraging walking and cycling. Parking controls in the citycentre are an integral part of park and ride strategies. Those park and ride sites with the highest utilisationlevels tend to offer a huge discount in cost of parking compared with town centre parking (18-19 per centof the town centre rate at peak times). In some towns the popularity of the park and ride scheme has beenadversely affected by the reluctance to introduce on-street parking management in the city centre. Theprimary reason for this is fear of inducing a transfer of retail trade to other nearby centres.

Park and ride car parks have the advantage that they tend to have larger spaces and are therefore easier topark in, due to value of land being lower on these edges of urban area locations. Urban centre parking isoften multi-storey to maximise the floor space available, many drivers dislike multi-storey car parks dueto associated safety concerns.

Frequent and reliable bus services are crucial to the success of park and ride schemes. A service frequencyof broadly ten minutes off-peak and seven to eight minutes in peak times is suggested by ’Bus-Based Parkand Ride: A Good Practice Guide, 2000’. In addition to this it is imperative that park and ride sites areable to offer comparable journey times with private car, though where combined with bus lanes, bus gatesand conveniently located town or city centre bus stops it is possible for park and ride services to offer adistinct journey time advantage over the private car. Public transport priority measures can also assistregular services along the route.

The service must provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the morning and afternoon peaks in demand,but a key criticism of park and ride is the wasted capacity as patronage tends to be concentrated in peakperiods and primarily in one direction. A number of schemes have sought to combat this, in Oxfordservices traverse the city and, as such, cross-city journeys are possible by park and ride. Recent evidence

- 125 -


suggests that cross-city journeys make up 10 - 15 per cent of park and ride patronage. In York acontra-flow is provided by students using the services to access York College, which is located oppositethe Askham Bar site. This car park site also has a dual use as the site was funded as part of a land sale toTesco for the development of a superstore. A further way to combat this wasted capacity is to tap into offpeak markets such as tourists or shoppers; this can be achieved through partnerships with town centres topromote park and ride use for leisure trips.

There are three possible ways of charging for park and ride: charge for bus journey, charge for parking orboth. Approximately 70 sites in the UK have chosen the bus fare option while 11 sites charge for carparking. Three cities charge for both. The table below illustrates the costs and benefits for the differentcharging structures.

Costs and benefits of alternative charging structures


Problems

Park and ride schemes have been introduced mainly in answer to access issues in congested centres.

Air pollution is also a concern in congested central areas and it is felt that park and ride may go some wayto addressing these concerns through reducing the volume of traffic entering the central area. However, itis argued by some that park and ride reduces city centre mileage at the expense of additional mileage inrural and suburban areas, although this gives lesser concentrations of kerb-side pollution because of thedispersed nature of any additional traffic movements.

Monitoring

Due to the length of time some of the schemes have been running, comprehensive before and aftermonitoring is not always possible. Monitoring of more recent schemes looks at traffic flows on roadsadjacent to the park and ride sites to establish the level of abstraction from the private car. Journey timesare also monitored for both bus and private car. A number of schemes have conducted market research ofpark and ride users, to establish user profiles and areas for improving.

Scheme details

Case study 1: Leicester

Description

In 1997 Leicester introduced a park and ride site at Meynell’s Gorse to the west of Leicester, withcomprehensive bus priorities in an inbound direction. The central objectives of this scheme were:

increasing accessibility to the city centre; reducing peak hour journeys; reducing air pollution; and encouraging modal shift from cars to buses

- 126 -



Meynell’s Gorse could originally accommodate just over 300 cars and was operating at capacity withinthree months of opening. The number of spaces has increased to 500, but the site still operates close tocapacity.

To prevent the car park being filled by commuters to the exclusion of shoppers and to reduce abstractionfrom local services in the off peak, two different methods of charging are employed. Up to 09.30 a returnticket costs Â£1.75 per person. An alternative charge of Â£2.20 per car is available after 09.30. This isalso a reflection of high long stay parking costs and low car occupancy at peak times. The service runsevery 10 minutes during peak hours and every 15 minutes in the off peak period. Normally hours ofservice are between 07.00 to 19.00 Monday to Saturday.

Security is addressed at the site through the presence of an attendant for part of the day and the area iscovered by CCTV.

The bus route from the park and ride site to the city centre is direct. Private cars are able to access the citycentre at the point where passengers from the park and ride bus alight; however the route by private car isslower and incurs higher parking charges.

Cost

The park and ride site is jointly funded by Leicestershire County Council and Leicester City Council(approximately 33 per cent to 67 per cent respectively). The city council manages the car park, while thecounty council manages the bus services contract.

Bus operator

The service is operated by Arriva.

Monitoring results

Although no scheme specific data was collected before implementation, comparisons have been madewith pre-study traffic flow data and data from monitoring conducted in 1998, after implementation. Themost significant observations are as follows:

190 fewer cars were entering the city in the morning peak along the A47. Previously 900 cars perhour were entering the city along this route; park and ride buses were able to complete the journey quicker than the private car. Bus journey timesimproved by approximately 5 minutes while car journey times remained the same; the reliability of journeys by bus improved with the standard deviation of journey times droppingfrom 4.9 to 2.7 minutes for the inbound journey and 6 to 2.6 minutes in the outbound journey; 63 per cent of park and ride users previously made their journey by car; a quarter of respondents usedpark and ride 2 - 4 days per week while just under a quarter (23 per cent) used park and ride on adaily basis; 34 per cent of park and ride users were making more journeys to Leicester since the introduction ofpark and ride. This supports the argument that park and ride schemes reduce the generalised cost oftravel for some users and as a consequence generate extra trips to the centre; and 65 per cent of users were female.

- 127 -


A comparison of patronage over time is not possible due to the two systems of charging operating in thepeak and off peak. However an analysis of revenue reveals patronage increased on bus services in thecorridor which is illustrated in the table below:

Year 1999 2000 2001 2002

% Increase in patronage 49 10 -2 4

Source: TAS (2003)

The reduction in growth shown in the table is thought to be a reflection of the site nearing capacity.

Scheme details

Case study 2: Chester

Description

Chester’s first park and ride site opened in 1983 with the original objective of reducing congestion incentral Chester. A later transport study identified three further objectives, which are to: ensure that there isno increase in city centre parking facilities; encourage long stay and commuter parking to use park andride sites; and continue the policy of expanding park and ride sites, aiming for an extra 1,000-1,500 spacesby 2011.

The Chester scheme includes four sites; Broughton Heath, Sealand Road, Upton and Wrexham Road. Allare staffed by an attendant throughout the day, with the presence of automated ticket issuing machines. Allsites are also monitored using CCTV. The site charges for the bus journey rather than the parking, thusavoiding VAT complications. This has the added advantage of marketing the sites as having ’freeparking’. Also, there are faster loading times and a reduced security risk for the driver because ticketing isoff-bus.

The park and ride bus route allows access to the city centre by the most direct route, which is not availableto those accessing the centre by private car. This is combined with bus priority measures on radial routesto ensure that bus journey times are at least as quick as travelling by private car. There are a number ofdrop off and pick up points in Chester city allowing the services to achieve maximum city centrepenetration.

Bus operator

The emergence of a series of tender options allowed a single operator to bid for all four site contractstogether. Whilst this was not a specific aim, it has proved to have some advantages. Chester CityTransport has been appointed as the operator.

There has been little evidence of park and ride services abstracting passengers from local services,although there is anecdotal evidence that a small number of local residents are walking to the site andusing the service.

- 128 -


Monitoring results

The increase in usage of park and ride in Chester is illustrated in the table below. It is noticeable that againgrowth rates have reduced as the car parks have neared capacity. Park and ride now accounts for 44 percent of car parking in Chester (excluding on street parking, office parking and non council controlled carparks).

Results

Conclusions

Discussion points connected with the development of park and ride sites include the use of green fieldland for the parking facilities. This often generates concern about environmental impact, which should beset against the beneficial impact of reducing pollution from traffic into the town/city centre.

There is also debate as to whether a park and ride site results in a greater or lesser use of non park and ridepublic transport services. Abstraction rates can range from 10 to 28 per cent, depending upon a number offactors, including the quality and frequency of the local service.

A number of schemes have failed to produce any decongestion benefits. This may be a result of previouslysuppressed demand that has refilled road space made available by the park and ride scheme. Park and ridesites may also have a negative impact by attracting people who previously made the whole journey bypublic transport. This might create capacity for other new journeys within the urban area, whilstconversely reducing patronage on marginal rural bus services.

Although commercial viability tends not to be a key objective in park and ride strategy at the outset, anumber of schemes have progressed over time into commercially run services. Park and ride generallyrequires frequent investment with vehicles tending to be replaced midlife. One of the incidental benefits ofthis is that these higher quality vehicles which were introduced to attract the private car user have nowbeen transferred to local services.

The future

Many existing park and ride sites are looking to combine with more radical bus priority measures. In thecase of Oxford this is the Expressway - a guided bus route and in Nottingham two park and ride siteswhich were originally bus based are now part of the rapid transit system.

More recently established schemes are looking at potential for new sites and ways of increasing thecapacity of the original network. Leicester, for example, is currently looking to add three new sites (2,500car parking spaces) on routes into the city with associated bus lanes and signal priority.

References

English Historic Towns Forum, Bus-based park and ride - A Good Practice Guide, 2000.

Oxfordshire County Council Good Practice Guides: www.oxfordshire.gov.uk.

- 129 -



Parkhurst, G, Environmental cost - benefit of bus based park and ride systems, University of LondonCentre for Transport Studies, ESRC Transport Studies Unit, 1999.

TAS, Park and Ride Great Britain 2003, TAS Publications and Events Ltd, 2003.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Cheshire County Council, Chester City Council, LeicesterCity Council, Oxfordshire County Council, York City Council and TAS.

Other examples

NottinghamContact the Parking department at Nottingham City Council for further information on: 01159155555. OxfordContact the Environment and Economy department for further information on: 01865 815700. YorkContact the Environment and Development Services department for further information on: 01904613161.

Further information

Further information on park and ride in Chester can be obtained from:

Environment and Sustainability Department

Cheshire County Council

County Hall

Chester

Cheshire

CH1 1SF

0845 113331

Further information on park and ride in Leicester can be obtained from the Public Transport Co-ordinatorat Leicester City Council on: 0116 2232111.

The bus stop environment

- 130 -


Description of need

Background

Traffic congestion is not the only cause of delay to buses. The length of time that buses stand at bus stopscan be a substantial component of overall journey time. Dwell time at bus stops has two main components- the time taken for passengers to board and alight, and delay in re-entering the flow of traffic where buseshave stopped in lay-bys or at bus stops where the traffic stream can overtake with ease. Any measure thatreduces delay and time spent at bus stops, or improves the environment for people waiting at bus stops,will make the bus a more attractive travel choice.

This is the first of two case studies in which consideration is given to measures that complement buspriority. In this case study consideration is given to measures designed to help buses rejoin the mainstream of traffic and to make the bus stop environment more attractive to users.

Objectives

The primary objective of the measures considered in this case study is to help to make travel by bus moreattractive. A scheme to enable buses to move away from a bus stop and back into the traffic stream willcontribute towards reducing journey times and improving reliability. Improvements to the environment atbus stops can contribute in a variety of ways; by making the waiting area safer and more attractive and byimproving accessibility, for example. Implementation of complementary measures at bus stops will add tothe impact of schemes to provide priority for buses.

Infrastructure measures

Problems

Over time, many bus stops have been located in bus bays to enable other traffic to overtake safely busespicking up or setting down passengers at bus stops. Whilst this is a valid objective, it does result in delayto buses attempting to emerge from lay-bys and rejoin the main traffic stream because drivers of othervehicles are commonly reluctant to give way to buses. It is a particular problem in congested conditions.

This problem has also led some bus drivers to avoid stopping at the kerb at bus stops in bus bays in orderto make it easier to re-enter the traffic stream. This, in turn, led to problems of accessibility for elderly anddisabled people because of the need to step down into the carriageway and step up on to the platform orfirst step of the bus. It also has the effect of increasing bus boarding and alighting times.

Solutions

Filled bus lay-bys

One approach is to pave or infill the bus bay in order to re-create a flush kerb at which the bus stops in thenearside traffic lane. This is intended to enable the bus to resume its route without delay. An ancillaryadvantage is that this may provide more space for improved waiting facilities at the bus stop, includingbetter quality shelters and seating. This does carry the possibility of delay to other traffic, particularly ifthe traffic lane is not wide enough to permit overtaking or if a second lane is not available. However, thebus is able to keep its place in the traffic stream and it helps to ensure that bus journey times are

- 131 -


comparable with car.

It is important to consider safety and operational issues, such as, is the stop to be used as a layover pointor service terminus, which may result in unnecessary delay to other vehicles.

Before and after surveys were undertaken by TRL in London during 2002 and 2003 using video surveysand automatic traffic counts to monitor traffic flows, journey times and vehicle delays. The effect offilling lay-bys was to reduce passenger boarding times by between 0.5 and 1 second per passenger. Delayat the bus stops decreased by between 2 seconds on a road operating at 50 per cent of capacity and 4seconds on a road at 70 per cent of capacity. Traffic delays increased by up to 11 seconds per vehicle on aone-lane road and 2 seconds on a two-lane road, but economic assessments based on the ’Bus JourneyTime Savings’ spreadsheet produced by Transport for London (TfL) showed that the overall benefits tobus passengers outweighed the disadvantage to other road users by a ratio of more than 5 to 1.

Bus lay-bys in bus lanes

One situation where bus lay-bys are still being implemented is on bus lanes. This is particularly relevant ina bus lane with high frequency services running on it or where not all services call at all stops. Astationary bus in the bus lane waiting for passengers to board and alight would cause delays to servicesbehind it that do not need to stop. If the bus were to be able to pull into a lay-by other services would beable to continue their journeys unimpeded. In such circumstances, the problem of pulling away from thebus stop is minimised because the bus is pulling out into a bus lane.

Bus boarders

Unrestricted or illegal parking often prevents buses reaching stops or aligning correctly with the kerb toensure close and level boarding. Extending the footway out into the nearside lane to create a boarding andalighting platform, a bus boarder, may help to remove these sources of delay and to improve safety forpassengers. Provision of a raised kerb at a bus boarder can be a further deterrent to obstructive car parkingor stopping to pick up or set down passengers. Other vehicles may park in the lee of the boarder, but theposition of the bus in the main flow is maintained and passengers may have easier access to the bus.Clearly, road width needs to be sufficient to permit the construction of a boarder without the possibility ofa stopped bus blocking the passage of oncoming vehicles or without causing unacceptable delay tofollowing traffic.

The Department for Transport document "Inclusive Mobility" outlines that there are two types of busboarder available:

full width protruding into the carriage so that the bus avoids parked vehicles (approximately 1800millimetres); and half width between 500 millimetres and 1500 millimetres wide providing a compromise between afull boarder and no boarder at all. These are appropriate for use where a full boarder would causeunacceptable delay to other vehicles or where the bus is too close to traffic coming in the oppositedirection on the carriageway.

Before and after surveys were undertaken by TRL in London in conjunction with TfL throughout 2003 forbus boarders including daytime video surveys and automatic traffic counts to monitor journey times andvehicle delays. On average, bus delays fell by between 1.3 seconds on a road operating at 50 per cent of

- 132 -


capacity and 1.8 seconds on a road at 70 per cent of capacity. Delays behind the bus increased by up to anaverage of 4.2 seconds per vehicle. Economic assessments based on ’Bus Journey Time Savings’ in thiscase indicated that bus boarders had a positive effect on low flow roads, but that benefit might becancelled out by the delay to other traffic on high flow roads.

It was estimated that roads operating at more than about 50 per cent of capacity might suffer adisadvantageous effect, while wider roads could potentially reduce the delay to other vehicles because ofthe greater possibility of passing the bus. However, note should also be taken of the width of the road andaccessibility benefits to passengers. Increased accessibility to the bus was probably undervalued because,while reductions in stop time as a result of reduced boarding times were noticeable, no account was takenof the effects of increased accessibility for disabled passengers.

Raised kerbs

Improvements in accessibility at stops by installing raised kerbs and enabling the bus to kerb correctly notonly addresses the issues of social exclusion by providing access for those with mobility impairments, butalso enables quicker loading times to be achieved. Wheelchair users maybe able to board buses directlywithout using a ramp.

The Department for Transport document "Inclusive Mobility" states that standard kerb heights range from125 millimetres to 140 millimetres. Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive in the "Bus StopDesign Guidelines" suggests a kerb height of 160 millimetres provides the best compromise betweenaccessibility while minimising damage to buses.

The Greater Manchester design guidelines also outlines the minimum lengths for raised kerbs dependingupon the number and frequency of services using the stop, they are as follows:

4 metres for a lightly used bus stops or stops that are only used for alighting; 7 metres for a single bus stop where only one bus will arrive at any one time; 16 metres at a double bus stop; 26 metres at a double bus stops used by standard 12 metres length buses and articulated buses; and the recommended length of raised kerb at bus boarders is 6 metres.

Hull City Council has introduced raised kerbs at a number of its stops. However rather than installing acontinuous length of raised kerb, double or triple boarders have been installed where two or more busescould be at the stop at the same time. Sections of raised kerb are separated by lengths of kerb ofconventional height. Two or three buses are able to park close to the kerb providing full accessibility andloading simultaneously, whereas before the second or third bus would have had to wait for the previousbus to leave or not be able to pull in close to the kerb to stop.

Case study: Manchester bus stop treatment

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE) consider bus stop design an integral part ofany bus priority scheme. This includes the layout of the street furniture, street lighting, quality of thepaving, information available at the stops and carriageway markings. The positioning of the stops is alsoimportant, the introduction of bus priority measures and quality bus corridors are an ideal time to reviewthe location of stops on a route.

- 133 -


GMPTE have produced design guidelines for bus stops on ’Quality Bus Corridors’. The guidelinesinclude details of consultation and covers recommended minimum standards for elements such as footwaylayout and carriageway markings at bus stops.

The recommended footway layout includes:

a band of coloured and textured surface along the kerb edge; a rectangular block of colour at the boarding point; a band of coloured and textured surface at the end of each bus stop at right angles to the kerb; and remaining areas within the stop boundaries to be surfaced in a contrasting coloured textured material.

In order to protect the bus stop area from illegal parking and allow the bus to access the stop unimpeded,GMPTE recommend bus stops are covered by a bus clearway order and 300 millimetres wide yellow boxmarkings are applied around the bus stop clearway carriageway marking. In addition to this a red cordonis marked around the yellow box, this measure has been effective in highlighting the bus stop area andpreventing indiscriminate parking.

Carriageway markings, based on Design Guidelines for bus stops


Conclusions

This leaflet has explored a number of improvement measures at bus stops that, in isolation, may onlyachieve a marginal benefit but, if implemented with new bus priority measures as part of a comprehensivescheme, can add to the impact of the overall scheme. A number of authorities including GMPTE haveembraced a holistic approach to bus priority in which improvements to bus stop environment, layout andinformation provision are an integral part of a bus priority scheme.

References

DfT, Inclusive Mobility, November 2002.

GMPTE, Design Guidelines for Bus Stops on Quality Bus Corridors in Greater Manchester, January 2002.

TAS Partnership, Quality Bus Infrastructure a manual and guide, Landor Publishing and the TASPartnership Ltd, June 2000.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Transport for London, TRL, Hull City Council andGreater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive.

- 134 -



Other examples

Holistic approach: West Midlands Bus Showcase (see special initiative case study in this pack). Norwich Western Corridor Quality Bus Partnership; contact Norfolk County Council on 01603222205.

Further information

Further information on issues covered in this leaflet can be obtained from:

TfL: [email protected] GMPTE Quality Bus Corridor team on 0161 2426000 (switchboard).

Other measures

This is the second of two case studies in which consideration is given to measures that complement buspriority. In this case study, the matters addressed are: the importance of complementary measures;ticketing initiatives to reduce bus boarding times; the operation of buses in pedestrian priority areas; issuerelating to pedestrian crossings and the benefits of working in partnership.

The importance of complementary measures

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE) carried out research on the impact of arange of different measures that could be implemented to complement bus priority measures. Interviewswere carried out on three corridors which had been treated holistically and on three control corridors notincluded in the Quality Bus Corridor programme.

Respondents were asked to rate whether they felt various aspects of their service had got better, stayed thesame or got worse since they started using the bus. The biggest difference was in faster journey timeswhere 25 per cent of those questioned on treated routes felt that this aspect was improved compared with 8per cent on routes which had not been treated. A greater proportion of respondents on treated routes alsofelt that the reliability of bus services had improved (22 per cent) compared with 11 per cent of those onnon-treated routes.

The responses are summarised below:

Responses to research on the impact of a range of different measures that could be implemented tocomplement bus priority measures

Ticketing strategies

The problem

On busy bus services a substantial proportion of bus journey time can be spent waiting at bus stops aspassengers board or alight, purchase tickets and/or show their travel passes. At peak times on many urbanroutes buses can spend as long standing at bus stops as they do in congested traffic. This is a particularproblem on Monday mornings in places where weekly tickets can be bought from the bus driver.

- 135 -




Passengers paying with cash can take twice as long as those passengers with pre-paid tickets creatingdelays for passengers already on the bus and those waiting to board. Additional work is created for thedriver who has to operate the ticket machine and dispense change where necessary; this creates trainingissues for the operator and security issues for the driver.

The solution

Traditional methods of reducing time spent at bus stops include flat or exact fare policies or thedeployment of conductors on buses or at busy bus stops (queue conductors).

There are several other ways in which bus boarding times can be reduced: â¢ promotion of pre-paidoff-bus ticket sales;

provision of ticket issuing machines at some or all bus stops; and application of smartcard technology to all passengers or to particular categories of passengers (e.g.schoolchildren, elderly/disabled pass holders).

The Oxford Bus Company anticipates a 50 per cent reduction in bus boarding times through theintroduction of smartcards in Autumn 2004.

Case study: Bradford Firstcard

First Bradford introduced a smartcard known as Firstcard on all first services in Bradford in April 2000.The scheme proved popular and achieved its first 10,000 users by August 2000. Passengers simply placethe card on the ticket machine reader and tell the driver where they are alighting; they are then issued witha ticket which tells them the value remaining on their smart card. The success of the scheme wasrecognised at The Bus Industry Awards in 2000 where First received a runners up award for the projectand its aim to provide an easier and more convenient method of payment for bus travel in Bradford.

The tickets can be ordered over the telephone or on the internet and can be loaded or renewed at Metrotravel centres or at the First office.

BusMiles operates as a loyalty scheme in connection with Firstcard to encourage passengers to use thecard.

Case study: Ticketing initiatives in London

Transport for London (TfL) has gone one step further and introduced cashless buses in the area boundedby Paddington, Kings Cross, Waterloo and Victoria. Passengers must purchase their ticket from a machineat the stop or have a travel card, bus pass, freedom pass or saver ticket. By removing cash transactions onthe bus it was felt significant reductions could be made in dwell time at stops. This initiative is alsocombined with the introduction of ’bendy buses’ which are able to carry up to 140 people and have threeboarding doors. Eventually it is expected that the scheme will be rolled out to suburban areas.

TfL has also launched a smartcard known as the Oyster card which is a card the size of a credit card with amicrochip. The card can be ordered on line and recharged on line, by telephone or at a tube station. Thetechnology has been fitted to 6,000 buses, 255 underground stations and 28 national railway stationsserved by the underground.

- 136 -


The aims of the scheme are to:

improve customer service; provide better information about customers travel patterns; and reduce opportunities for fraud.

The tickets have the added advantage of allowing faster movement through ticket gates and on to buses,speeding up the journey time. The ticket does not have to be removed from its wallet to be used;passengers simply press the card against the reader, which reads it within a fraction of a second. Inmid-2004 there were approximately 1.9 million active Oyster cards and take-up of the cards is expected toincrease as further Oyster products and discounts are introduced.

Bus access to pedestrian priority areas

The redevelopment and regeneration of many high streets has involved the exclusion of vehicles with theintention of creating safe and pleasant pedestrian priority areas (PPAs). However, in order to maintaingood public access without generating extra peripheral car traffic, exceptions have been made in manyPPAs to allow buses and taxis and, in some places, trams to enter the zone. This allows public transportpenetration of urban centres with central bus stops providing a realistic alternative to city centre parking.

The design of PPAs and the extent to which a roadway has been maintained is highly variable. The flowof public transport and delivery vehicles may determine pedestrians’ perception of safety and theirconsequent tendency to wander freely throughout the PPA, rather than maintaining their conventionalposition on the footways. Allowing buses into a PPA needs very careful consideration to avoid damagingthe environment that shoppers expect. Quality of the shopping environment can affect the choice ofshopping centre, especially when there are nearby competing centres, and length of stay; both of which areimportant in maintaining the shopping street’s vitality and viability.

Zebra, pelican & puffin crossings

The provision of safe crossing facilities close to bus stops is a vital component of traffic management,road safety and bus priority schemes. It is generally accepted that pedestrians require assistance whencrossing busy roads in safety and the zebra crossing has been a successful means of reconciling theconflicting demands of vehicular traffic and pedestrians for many years. However, where pedestrian flowsare heavy or traffic speeds are high, zebra crossings may either impose inconvenient delay on vehicles,including buses, or become unsafe for pedestrians.

Pelican crossings were designed to address this situation and to maintain traffic movements whileproviding extra protection for pedestrians. Puffin crossings are a refinement that seeks to minimise thepotential delay to vehicles of a pelican crossing by reacting to the presence of a pedestrian on the crossingrather than holding traffic at a red signal when no pedestrians are present.

Signalised crossings protect pedestrians more effectively than zebras, while minimising the delay tovehicles and hence assisting buses to maintain their schedules. Where possible, bus stops should bedownstream of pedestrian crossings to reduce the amount of delay experienced by bus passengers.

- 137 -


Before and after surveys were conducted during 2002 and 2003 by TRL in London. Overall traffic delaysdecreased when a pelican crossing was introduced at three study sites with the lowest pedestrian flow, butincreased at the fourth site where flows were higher. Modelling indicated that vehicles were delayed lessat pelicans then zebras when pedestrian flows were less than 60 per hour. However traffic delays appearedshorter at zebra crossings with medium pedestrian flows.

Holistic approach - quality partnerships

Quality Bus Partnerships (QBPs) are formal or informal agreements between local authorities, busoperators and other relevant parties to provide an agreed level of quality of service and infrastructurealong a certain route or routes. Alternatively, they may be a more general agreement relating to thegeneral service or infrastructure provision. QBPs are an efficient way of achieving strategic objectives ofall those involved as they result in co-ordination of actions between relevant organisations and theexchange of information.

Partnership working is essential where a holistic approach is proposed in order to ensure co-ordination ofimprovements to maximise impact. In some cases it may be possible to deliver all of the components of ascheme at once but, where schemes are complex and involve substantial investment in bus priority androute infrastructure phased implementation may be necessary.

The local authority role in a Partnership is to deliver bus priority and traffic management schemessupported by complementary measures including accessibility at bus stops, improvements to the waitingenvironment and more comprehensive information for passengers. Local authorities also have the leadrole in consultation during scheme development and implementation.

The role of the bus operator is to invest in new high quality buses and in upgrading the quality or level ofservice. The level of improvement in reliability and journey times that can be achieved is governed, to aconsiderable extent, by the time savings that can be delivered by bus priority, traffic management andcomplementary measures. Marketing, promotion and monitoring are commonly joint responsibilities oflocal authorities and operators.

References



Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Transport for London (TfL), TRL, Greater ManchesterPassenger Transport Executive and First Bradford.

- 138 -


Other examples

Ticketing strategies: Cheshire County Council Smartcard. Holistic approach: West Midlands Bus Showcase (see special initiative case study in this pack). Norwich Western Corridor Quality Bus Partnership; contact Norfolk County Council on: 01603222205.

Further information

Further information on issues raised in this leaflet can be obtained from:

TfL at [email protected]

Performance indicators & monitoring

Why do we need to monitor performance?

Bus priority is central to improving the speed and reliability of services. Different techniques have beenused across the country. We have to evaluate them to see how they:

benefit bus operators and passengers; affect other road users; operate effectively; may need improving; and give value for money.

It is important to test whether bus priority schemes have met their stated objectives, firstly to ensure localaccountability, and secondly to see whether the same type of scheme would work in similar circumstanceselsewhere. This is particularly important where innovative bus priority measures are being tried for thefirst time.

Performance indicators assess important aspects of a new scheme. They allow us to judge whether it hasbenefited bus users or whether the scheme needs to be modified. Performance indicators from differentschemes can also provide stakeholders with evidence of what works. This will help with the continueddevelopment of bus priority.

Monitoring statistics should be straightforward and easy to collect, and should form the basis of usefulperformance indicators. Monitoring resources should be proportionate to the overall cost of the scheme.They should also be built into the scheme costs early in the planning and appraisal stage. ’Before’ and’after’ monitoring may necessarily be limited for smaller schemes. More complex schemes may need awider programme of monitoring.

Bus priority performance indicators and monitoring

- 139 -




Different types of bus priority scheme require specific monitoring methods. The full range of monitoringparameters and performance indicators is shown below. These can be used to assess different bus priorityschemes, although only a subset of them would be required to investigate any given scheme. In generalthe scale and type of monitoring should relate to what a particular measure aims to achieve.

Core and additional monitoring parameters


We can distinguish between core and additional monitoring parameters and performance indicators. Coreindicators are the minimum that should be collected, and additional indicators are those that could helpexplain further how the scheme is performing. Six core indicators are described below.

Bus service improvements

Bus journey times

Buses can be timed along a section of a route both before and after schemes are implemented. Bus journeytimes are likely to reduce as a result of bus priority measures. Sample sizes will depend on the variabilityof the bus journey time and the expected benefit.

Reliability

One of the main factors in passenger perception of bus services is reliability. This performance indicatorrecords the difference between timetabled and actual arrival times at one or more points in the scheme onlow frequency routes. This shows any improvements in reliability. On higher frequency routes, thevariation in headways (the interval between consecutive buses travelling on a route) can be used.

Improvements for passengers

Bus use trends

Better bus services can attract people from other forms of transport or encourage people to use the bus fortrips they might otherwise not have taken. This increases bus patronage. Any changes need to be seen incontext with the underlying trends in the area.

The most appropriate way to assess the effect of bus priority schemes on patronage is by carrying out’before’ and ’after’ surveys. For smaller schemes, it may be enough to simply compare ticket sales on aroute that has benefited from bus priority measures with sales on one that hasn’t.

Bus stop waiting times

The time it takes to pick up and drop off passengers is a significant proportion of the total journey time.Clearly this will relate to the number of passengers getting on and off. So if bus passenger numbersincrease, buses are likely to spend longer at bus stops. As a result, some journey time saving from buspriority measures may not be fully realised.

- 140 -



Effects on other traffic

Car journey times

Car journey times can be measured to see whether bus priority has caused any significant delays. Themain technique for this is matching the number plates of vehicles travelling in a corridor between two ormore fixed points.

Car, lorry and cycle counts

We can measure the levels of different types of traffic such as cars, heavy goods vehicles (HGVs), lightgoods vehicles (LGVs), buses and cycles.

Traffic flows can reveal whether vehicles are switching to alternative routes and, in some cases, the extentto which motorists are switching to buses. However, only detailed surveys can reveal the underlyingreasons for any change.

An example approach

Bus priority strategy

Improve bus service reliability. Improve bus speeds. Increase patronage. Reduce car dependency. Improve bus services. Provide value for money.

Targets (5 Years)

Improve reliability 15 per cent. Faster bus speeds 10 per cent. Increase patronage 20 per cent. Reduce congestion 20 per cent. Implement three quality corridors.

Action plan

Introduce on-street bus priority (with-flow bus lanes). Innovative methods (contra-flow bus lanes). Innovative methods (traffic signal priority). New wheelchair accessible buses. High quality bus stop facilities. Enhanced pedestrian facilities to access bus stops.

- 141 -


Monitoring

Bus/car journey times. Car journey times on parallel routes. Queue length surveys. Bus reliability surveys. Traffic counts for area. Number of bus passengers. Bus stop dwell times.

Results

Two corridors implemented, third delayed by longer than anticipated consultation process. Reliability, journey time and patronage targets on the two implemented corridors met or exceeded. Congestion targets not met: revisions made to signal timings on parallel routes.

Frequently asked questions The following questions are typical of those that people frequently ask during public consultation on buspriority measures. You could adapt the questions and suggested answers to suit your own publicconsultation.

Remember that this is not a definitive list of questions and it obviously cannot deal with specific schemes.You may need to add information about your proposed scheme and it may also be useful to include detailsof the number of buses using different routes, and the numbers of passengers that they carry.

Residents

Why should residents like me care about bus priority?

Bus priority would bring welcome benefits to you, your neighbours and your community as a whole. Buspriority helps make buses faster and more reliable, so more people are likely to use them. This in turn willlead to less congestion and pollution in your area. You may even choose to use the bus, avoiding thestresses of driving and parking.

There is no need for a bus lane at this location. I drive along this road everyday and there are rarely anydelays. Why can’t you leave things as they are?

Buses are used most during the morning and afternoon peak hours, which is not necessarily when localresidents use the roads. Before we develop proposals for bus priority, we carry out traffic surveys to findwhere delays occur and how severe they are. Delays often reduce the interval between buses, causingthem to ’bunch’. Then several arrive at once after a long wait for people at the bus stop.

You are planning to install a bus lane near my house. I am concerned about the loss of resident parking inthe area. Where am I going to park?

- 142 -


We will balance the need for resident parking with the operating hours of the bus lane. If the bus priorityimprovements affect parking facilities in your area, we will do everything practical to provide alternatives.

You are planning to install a bus lane outside my house. The road is already very congested and will yourproposals not make the problem worse?

We hope the bus lane will make the situation better. You are right to be concerned about congestion and,if we do nothing, the problem will certainly get worse: traffic is predicted to increase by another 30 percent over the next 10 years. We can’t widen your road (and we’re sure you wouldn’t want us to) so a buslane is the best way to cut congestion.

I live on a side street next to where the bus lane is proposed. I am concerned that it will make it difficultand possibly dangerous to turn into my street.

Any bus lanes we introduce will be designed to allow traffic to continue making any manoeuvres andturns that they make at the moment. What’s more, all bus lanes are designed according to stringentGovernment guidelines which have been fully vetted for safety. Independent safety experts also carefullyexamine all bus lane proposals before they are implemented. So any safety concerns will be fullyinvestigated before any work begins.

I regularly use the road where you propose putting a bus lane and I see far fewer buses than other typesof vehicle. Why should traffic be further delayed for the low number of buses that use the road?

On average, a typical double decker bus can carry as many people as 55 cars. It therefore makes sense togive buses greater priority to complete their journeys faster and more reliably. This will help make busesmore attractive and encourage people to switch from car to bus. More bus use and less car use will helpcut congestion and pollution in your area.

You are planning to install a bus lane near where I live. Will this turn my road into a ’rat run’ for cars?

If it seems likely that your road will become a ’rat run’ for cars, then we will look at introducingappropriate traffic management measures in consultation with your local community to prevent this.

Which vehicles are allowed to use bus lanes and when?

Bus lanes need to be clearly signed to help people understand who can legally use them and when. Signsare required at the start of a bus lane, after each junction and at intervals along sections of road wherethere are no junctions. These signs show which vehicles can use a bus lane. Typically buses and cyclistsonly can use bus lanes. Taxis are frequently allowed to use them too. The signs also give the bus lane’shours of operation. This might be during the weekday (Monday to Friday) peak hours only (e.g. 7.00am to10.00am) or for a longer period (e.g. 7.00am to 7.00pm). Where there is a need to do so, 24 hour bus lanescan be introduced. During the hours of operation only vehicles identified on the signs can use a bus lane.Outside of these hours, all traffic can use a bus lane.

Buses are large, noisy vehicles. Does the bus lane mean that I must look forward to an increase in heavytraffic, noises and emissions near my house?

- 143 -


Buses come in a range of shapes and sizes. They range from small hopper buses up to large double deckerbuses to meet high demand on busy routes. New buses today are much quieter than they were ten yearsago as a result of legislation limiting noise levels. Buses are increasingly fuel-efficient and ’green andclean’. European legislation is imposing increasingly strict limits on vehicle emissions. Most busoperators have more new buses that produce lower levels of noise and pollution. New quieter andless-polluting buses are usually introduced where local councils and bus operators set up Quality BusPartnerships to give priority to buses. Bus priority measures, such as bus lanes, help deliver faster, morereliable bus services. More attractive bus services encourage people to switch from car to bus use and this,in turn, will help reduce congestion in your local area.

Commerce

Why should local companies care about bus priority?

Bus priority helps to make local bus services faster and more reliable, which will make them moreattractive to both your employees and customers. More bus use and less car use will result in lesscongestion and leave more road space for transporting goods and services.

Your company may wish to develop a travel plan for your employees to encourage them to catch the busor use other forms of sustainable transport (e.g. cycle). An effective travel plan has real benefits: a lessproblematic, stressful journey to work; improvements in health for employees who walk and/or cyclemore and the opportunity to reuse space in the workplace currently used for staff car parking.

There is no need for a bus lane here. Why can’t you leave things as they are?

If we do nothing, it is estimated that traffic volumes nationally will increase by 28 per cent by the year2011, and by 60 per cent by the year 2031. It is also estimated that congestion costs companies thattransport freight approximately Â£1.2 billion a year. Clearly we have to do something. Encouragingpeople to leave the car at home and catch the bus is one practical solution.

Before we develop any proposals for bus priority, we survey the traffic along the route to see where delaysoccur and how severe they are. Local bus operators also provide crucial information on delays to theirservices. If there is evidence that buses are being held up by congestion, then bus priority measures arelikely to be needed.

You are planning to install a bus lane near our company. I am concerned about the loss of parking in thearea. Where are our employees going to park?

The bus lane’s operating hours will be balanced with the local need for parking. If bus priority measuresaffect parking facilities in your area, we will look at providing alternative arrangements. However, wehope that by making bus services more reliable, more people will choose to use them to travel to and fromwork, including your employees. This will clearly solve some local parking problems and help reduce theconflicts that can occur when people park on residential roads while they are at work.

I am in charge of arranging deliveries for my company. How am I going to arrange deliveries when a buslane will mean extra loading restrictions?

- 144 -


We will do everything we can to maintain loading facilities in your area to support local businesses. Thebus lane restrictions are likely to permit loading in the middle of the day, outside the peak hours.Alternatively, we will do what we can to replace existing loading areas with alternative facilities in yourarea. However, as the demand for road space continues to grow, it may be necessary for deliveries to bemade outside normal working hours.

Industry

Why should local industry care about bus priority?

If we do nothing, it is estimated that traffic volumes nationally will increase by 28 per cent by the year2011, and by 60 per cent by the year 2031. It is also estimated that congestion costs companies thattransport freight approximately Â£1.2 billion a year. Clearly we have to do something. Encouragingpeople to leave the car at home and catch the bus is one practical response.


Your company may wish to develop a travel plan for your employees to encourage them to catch the busor use other forms of sustainable transport (e.g. cycle). An effective travel plan has real benefits: a lessproblematic, stressful journey to work; improvements in health for employees who walk and/or cyclemore and the opportunity to re-use space in the workplace currently used for staff car parking.

There is no need for a bus lane here. Why can’t you leave things how as are?


I am the human resources manager at a large warehouse. How will the bus lane proposals affectemployee parking in the area?

The bus lane’s operating hours will be balanced with the local need for parking. If bus priority measuresaffect parking facilities in your area, we will look at providing alternative arrangements. However, wehope that by making bus services more reliable, more people will choose to use them to travel to and fromwork, including your employees. This will clearly solve some local parking problems and help reduce theconflicts that can happen when people park on residential roads while they are at work.

There is also a business case for reducing the number of car parking spaces. Each parking space isestimated to cost Â£500 a year, before taking into account the loss of that space for a more productive use.This is why companies like Pfizer, GlaxoSmithkline and Boots have developed effective travel planswhich aim to reduce their employees’ reliance on the car and make best possible use of their sites.

- 145 -


Signs & regulations

Introduction

Road markings and signs serve an important function in conveying clear and consistent information andrequirements to all road users. They must be used in combination and in line with current guidance inorder to promote road safety and efficient traffic flow.

Use of the most appropriate signs and markings will also improve the streetscape, minimising street clutterand encouraging adherence to regulations.

This leaflet identifies enforceable signs and markings for bus lanes. Information on both with-flow andcontra-flow lanes are provided, including examples of signs and road markings for a range of commondesign scenarios.

The content of this document is based upon The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002and is correct at the time of publishing. It is essential that the latest version of this, and the Traffic SignsManual, is referred to in order to ensure that schemes are developed in accordance with currentregulations.

With-flow bus lanes

With-flow bus lanes, where buses travel in the same direction as the traffic in the adjacent lane is the mostcommon bus priority measure. A with-flow bus lane is normally placed on the near side of the road.

The diagram to the below shows a layout (without pedestrian crossings) for a with-flow lane reserved forbuses and cycles, showing both the signing and the road markings.

With-flow bus lanes

Signing

If a with-flow bus lane which is also used by pedal cycles and can be used by taxis, is located ahead, thesign to diagram 958 should be used, varied as appropriate (ie to include or not "taxi"). It is located 30metres in advance of the taper when the 85th percentile approach speed does not exceed 30mph, and 45metres when this speed exceeds 30mph. The sign needs to be sited so it is clearly visible from 30 metresfor the lower speed, and 45 metres for higher speeds.

The sign to diagram 959 should be used in conjunction with the road marking ’BUS LANE’. The signshould appear at the commencement of the bus lane and at intervals not exceeding 300 metres alonguninterrupted lengths of the lane. It is also used after each junction that the bus lane breaks for.

If there is a junction ahead where the left hand lane is dedicated to buses only and left turning vehiclesneed to use the lane, then the sign to diagram 877 should be used. On primary routes the backgroundcolour of the sign should be varied to green with white symbols and borders.

- 146 -



For the end of a bus lane, the sign shown to diagram 964 should be used.

Diagram 962 should be placed on side roads from which traffic may emerge. The arrow indicates whichdirection the bus lane is flowing. When there are bus lanes in both directions the arrow is removed and"lane" varied to "lanes".

The bus symbol may be varied to the local bus symbol on all signs with blue background.

Road markings

Bus lanes are separated from the main carriageway by a marking to diagram 1049. The width of thesemarkings is either 250 or 300mm depending on the site conditions. The start of the bus lane is markedwith diagram 1010 at the same width as 1049, and laid at a taper no sharper than 1:10.

The road marking ’BUS LANE’ to diagram 1048 should appear at the commencement of the bus lane andat intervals not exceeding 300 metres along uninterrupted lengths of the lane. It should also be used wherethe bus lane continues after a junction.

The deflection arrows to diagram 1014 should be placed at two positions (15m and 30m) upstream of thetaper.

When the bus lane passes a junction with a major left turn into a side road, the boundary line of the buslane should be replaced with a broken line to diagram 1010. This should commence 30m in advance of thejunction. The broken line should be accompanied by the advisory direction arrow (diagram 1050) variedto show a left turn.

At other junctions, the boundary line (diagram 1049) marking should be terminated approximately 10mbefore the junction and recommence beyond the junction in combination with a marking to diagram 1010.


Contra-flow bus lanes allow buses to travel against the main direction of traffic flow.

Cyclists may be allowed to use contra-flow bus lanes. If cyclists are allowed to use a particularcontra-flow bus lane, then the cycle symbol must be shown on both the appropriate signs and the lanemarkings.

The figure here shows an example of a contra-flow layout, showing both the signing and lane markingsfor buses only.


Signing

On the approach to a contra-flow bus lane, the sign to diagram 877 should be used to advise all othervehicles that there is no entry to the bus lane ahead.

- 147 -



The start of a contra-flow lane is signed by using the sign to diagram 953 (with or without a cycle symbol,as appropriate) and diagram 953.2. These signs are repeated after every break in the bus lane and atjunctions.

The sign to diagram 960 should be located so that it can be viewed by traffic travelling in the oppositedirection to the contra-flow bus lane. This is also repeated at every break in the bus lane for junctions. Awhite cycle symbol may be added below the bus symbol and the downward pointing arrow moved acrossto the right (see DfT working drawing P960). The bus symbol may be varied to the local bus symbol onall signs with a blue background.

Advance information should always be given to traffic entering from side roads, using the sign to diagram962 along with diagram 609. At the junction of side roads the sign to diagram 606 is used. If buses areexempt from the left only turn then both diagram 609 and diagram 606 are supplemented with a sign todiagram 954, 954.2 or 954.3

At pedestrian crossing places, ’BUS LANE LOOK LEFT / LOOK RIGHT’ signs to diagram 963 shouldbe used. These are pedestrian signs and therefore face the footways.

Road markings

The road markings for a contra-flow lane reserved for buses are shown here.

The bus lane is separated from the rest of the carriageway by the continuous line prescribed in diagram1049. The marking should be discontinued where it passes traffic islands and angled to guide vehiclesfrom each direction to pass the obstruction.

At junctions on the near side of the road, the bus lane should be discontinued. However, a broken line isnot necessary on the approach to a junction since there will be no left turning traffic, except possiblybuses.

Bus lane markings (either diagram 1048.1 or 1048) together with direction arrows to diagram 1038 shouldappear at both ends of the lane so that they can be read by drivers approaching the contra-flow lane.

The direction of possible traffic movements at the end of a bus lane is indicated by diagram 1050.

Coloured road surfaces

Bus lanes may be surfaced in coloured material in order to emphasise their presence and discourageencroachment by other vehicles. However, coloured surfacing has no legal significance; it is theprescribed traffic signs and road markings which establish the legal status of a bus lane.

Traffic signs

Bus lanes at pedestrian crossings

Not all authorities seem to be aware that bus lane markings are not permitted within the controlled area ofa pedestrian crossing. A bus lane must be terminated at the start of the ziz-zags and may pick up again atthe end of the zig-zags on the far side of the crossing. If the road surface is coloured for the bus lane, thismay be continued through the controlled area (marked with zig-zags). If a coloured surface has been used

- 148 -



for a bus lane, this may be continued through the controlled area (although not through the crossing itself).

24 hour Bus Lanes

For most 24 hour bus lanes the signs to diagrams 958 and 959 do not require time plates. The time platesare only used where a 24 hour bus lane is not far from another lane that shows times of operation less than24 hours.

Bus gates

Bus gates restrict entry at one end of a street to buses only. The entrance to a bus gate should be markedwith diagram 1048.3 BUS ONLY or 1048.4 BUS AND (cycle symbol) ONLY (permitted variant is of1048.4 is to include "Taxi").

Waiting and loading restrictions

The order creating a bus lane will prohibit waiting during its operational hours. Yellow lines are necessaryonly if the waiting restrictions cover some period when the bus lane is not in operation. Loading andunloading is permitted unless it is specifically prohibited, in which case kerb marks and correspondingupright signs are required.

Common problems and mistakes in bus priority signing

A common mistake is to put a cycle symbol in the marking for a with-flow bus lane. This is unlawful, asdiagram 1048.1 may only be used in contra-flow lanes in order to indicate those where cyclists areadmitted.

Cyclists are always allowed to use with-flow bus lanes as indicated on diagram 958 / 959. It is consideredto be dangerous to keep them outside between buses and other traffic.

If a bus lane is placed on the right hand side of the road, or anywhere other than the near side of the road,signs will require special authorisation.

Prohibited combinations of plates with no entry sign

The combination of the no entry sign (diagram 616) with any of the plates to diagrams 954.3, 954.6 or954.7 as shown here, is prohibited in the Regulations (TSRGD, 2002) and must not be used.


References

LTN1 / 97 Keeping Buses Moving. (ISBN 0-11-551914-9), TSO, 1997.

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions. 2002 SI 2002 No. 3113, TSO, 2002.

- 149 -



Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 5, TSO, 2003.


Bibliography Astrop AJ, Balcombe RJ and Daugherty GG (1997 not published).The Performance of Bus Priority Measures in Brighton. PR/TT/024/97. Transport Research Laboratory,Crowthorne.

Astrop AJ and Balcombe RJ (1995).Performance of Bus Priority Measures in Shepherds Bush. TRL140. Transport Research Laboratory,Crowthorne.

Balcombe R and York I (1999).Bus Priority: Monitoring and Evaluation. TRL Annual Research Review 1998pp. 18 - 23. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Bowen GT (1997).Bus Priority in SCOOT. TRL Report 255. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Bus Priority and Traffic Unit (1999).

Bus Priority Measures. Annual Review 1999. DETR.

CENTRO (1994).Bus Priority Monitoring Report: Appraisal Section. CENTRO, Birmingham.

Cleveland County Council (1995).

Bus Priority Measures in Central Middlesborough - Effects of the New Traffic Arrangements. Departmentof Environment, Development and Transportation, Cleveland County Council.

Cloke J and Hopkin J (TRL); Hounsell NB and Lyons G (Southampton University) (2000).Monitoring and Evaluation of the ENTRANCE Project in Hampshire - Summary Report. TRL Report415. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, 2000.

Commission for Integrated Transport (2002).Public Attitudes to Transport in England. A survey carried out by MORI.

Daugherty GG and Balcombe RJ (1999).Leeds Guided Busway Study. TRL410. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Daugherty GG, Balcombe RJ and Astrop AJ (1999).A Comparative Assessment of Major Bus Priority Schemes in Great Britain. TRL Report 409. TransportResearch Laboratory, Crowthorne.

- 150 -


DETR (March 2003).Traffic Advisory Leaflet 5/03. Public Transport Priority. Traffic Advisory Unit.

DETR (April 2001).Traffic Advisory Leaflet 6/01. Bus Priority. Traffic Advisory Unit.

DETR (December 2000).Traffic Advisory Leaflet 8/00. Bus Priority in SCOOT. Traffic Advisory Unit.

DETR (1999).From Workhorse to Thoroughbred. A Better Role for Bus Travel. DETR.

DETR (April 1997).Traffic Advisory Leaflet 4/97. Rising Bollards. Traffic Advisory Unit.

DETR (January 1997).Local Transport Note 1/97. Keeping Buses Moving: A Guide to Traffic Management to Assist Buses inUrban Areas. The Stationery Office.

English Historic Towns Forum (May 2000).Bus-based Park and Ride. English Historic Towns Forum.

Gardner K and Cobain P (1997).Bus Priorities: A Solution to Urban Congestion? Transport, Proceedings of the Institution of CivilEngineers, v.123 n.4, November 1997, pp. 205 - 212.

Gardener K and Metzger D (1997).Uxbridge Road bus priority demonstration project. Proceedings of Seminar K (Traffic Management andRoad Safety), 25th PTRC European Transport Forum, pp. 63 - 74.

Greater London Authority (June 2001).Improving London’s Bus Services: An Assembly investigation into the quality and performance ofLondon’s Buses. GLA.

Hounsell NB and McLeod F et al (2000).Headway-based bus priority in London using AVL - First results. 10th International Conference - RoadTransport Information & Control, 4 - 6 April 2000, pp. 205 - 208.

Hounsell NB and McLeod F et al (1996).PROMPT: Field Trial and simulation results of bus priority in SCOOT. 8th International Conference(IEE) on Road Traffic Monitoring and Control, 1996, pp. 90 - 94.

Hounsell NB and McDonald M (1985 - 93).Evaluation of Bus Lanes. CR87. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Institution of Highways and Transportation (1997).Transport in the Urban Environment. Institution of Highways and Transportation.Chapter 24 Measures to Assist Public Transport, pp. 329 - 348.

- 151 -


JMP Consultants Ltd. (2000).London Bus Priority Network. South West Sector, Bus Priority Study. Route 93 Monitoring Study. FinalReport. London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames.

JMP Consultants Ltd. (1999).London Bus Priority Network. South West Sector, Bus Priority Study. Route 65 Monitoring Study.London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames.

King GN (London Transport Buses) (1998).Roads as "people movers": The Real Case for Bus Priority. Traffic Management and Safety. Proceedingsof seminars J and K at the European Transport Conference, 1998 vol. p. 428.

London Bus Initiative Partnership (2000).London Bus Initiative - Framework Document. London Bus Initiative Partnership.

London Bus Initiative Partnership (2000).Bus Priority Literature Review. London Bus Initiative Partnership.

London Bus Initiative Partnership (2000).Bus Stop Layouts for Low Floor Bus Accessibility. Transport for London.

London Bus Initiative Partnership (2000).Bus Stop Layouts for Articulated Buses. Transport for London.

Oakes JAJ, Thellmann AM and Kelly IT (1994).Innovative Bus Priority Measures. PTRC 22nd Summer Annual Meeting, Seminar J, 1994, pp. 301 - 312.

Seaman D and Heggie N (1999).Comparative Evaluation of Greenways and Bus Priority Lanes. Traffic Management, Safety andIntelligent Transport Systems. Proceedings of Seminar D at the AET European Transport Conference1999, Vol. P432 0115 - 32.

TEN (1998).Bus Priority and Traffic Management. Television Education Network, Session Guide. TEN.

The TAS Partnership (2001).Quality Bus Partnership. Good Practice Guide. DETR - The TAS Partnership.

Transport for London (2001).Bus Lane Enforcement. Transport for London.

TRL Limited (2002).Bus Priority Measures Update 2000 - 2002. TRL Information Centre, Current topics in transport no. 19.3.Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

TRL, University of Southampton and University of Portsmouth (1999).Monitoring and Evaluation of a Public Transport Priority Scheme in Southampton. TRL413. TransportResearch Laboratory, Crowthorne, 1999.

- 152 -


WS Atkins (East Anglia 1997).A1309 Milton Road Bus Lanes - Before and After Survey Study. Final report. Cambridgeshire CountyCouncil.

Wu J and Hounsell NB (1998).Bus Priority Using Pre-Signals. Transportation Research (Southampton Institute), Part A.

York I (1999).The Potential of Bus Priority. RR/TT/132/99. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

York I (1998).Comparison of Bus Service Improvements. PR/TT/049/98. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Glossary

Expression Explanation

ASTRID database ASTRID - Automatic SCOOT TRaffic Information Database. The ASTRIDdatabase system ‘has been developed to use information from SCOOT (seebelow) to provide a historical background of traffic conditions. The systemcontinuously monitors and stores traffic conditions for later retrieval andanalysis. The system can also act as a reference against which to comparecurrent traffic conditions.

Attitudinal surveys Survey of attitudes, perceptions and views, in this context concerning opinionson bus priority measures.

Automatic TrafficCount (ATC)

An automated counting device that counts the number of vehicles that passthrough/over a sensor planted in or near a road.

Automatic VehicleLocation (AVL)

Automatic Vehicle Location is the next step up from SVD (see below) andallows operators to be able to locate individual buses within the fleet. Combinedwith a two-way system of communication, AVL technology can relayemergency and status information to individual vehicles and/or their controlcentres, contributing to better management and deployment of vehicles.

Bus advance area The area between the bus pre-signal (see below) and the main junction.

Bus bays Area of carriageway created by realigning the kerb.

Bus boarders An extension of the footway into the carriageway in the vicinity of a bus stop.Enables the bus to easily access the kerb and pick up/drop off passengers atlocations where there is a high demand from other vehicles for kerb side access.

Bus gate Bus gates are located at the point(s) of access to bus only lanes. The purpose ofthese is to ensure the compliance of other vehicle users. Bus gates can be trafficsignals, actuated by the buses, or physical barriers surmountable only by buses,for example, rising bollards. Bus gates could also be signs such as ’No EntryExcept Local Buses’.

- 153 -


Bus lane An area of carriageway reserved, using a Traffic Regulation Order (or a TrafficManagement Order in London), for the use of buses and other permittedvehicles where indicated.

Bus lane setback The distance between the end of the bus lane and a downstream junction.

Bus pre-signals Traffic signals at the end of a bus lane that allow buses to enter the bus advancearea in front of other traffic.

Bus priority Bus priority measures cover a number of techniques and schemes that areconcerned with improving bus operation with the aim of improving service,reliability and/or reducing bus journey times.

Bus signal aspects A traffic signal aspect that specifically applies to buses which is a bus symbol.

Bus stop cage Road markings indicating the area on the carriageway used by buses toapproach, stop and exit at bus stops to allow safe boarding and alighting bypassengers.

Bus stop clearway A regime introduced by a Traffic Regulation Order that prohibits stoppingwithin a bus cage by all vehicles with the exemptions of buses during set times(e.g. at all times, or 07.00 to midnight Monday to Saturday).

Contra-flow bus lane

Buses in this bus lane travel in the opposite direction to traffic in adjacent lanes.

Countdown Dot matrix display installed at bus stops to provide customers with real timeinformation (see below) regarding bus arrivals.

Cycle time The time taken to complete a unique series of signal stages.

Drop kerbs Sections of kerbline provided at the same level as the carriageway allowingmobility impaired pedestrians access between the footway and the carriageway.

Dwell time Time that a bus spends stationary at a stop.

Footprint An intelligent vehicle detector which is laid in the road surface. This is a passivedetection method since the technology doesn’t rely on vehicle basedcommunication. PRISM can recognise different vehicle types from their signalas they pass over the inductive loop.

Guided bus A bus that travels on its own dedicated carriageway or track which ’guides’ thesteering of the bus.

Headway The interval between consecutive buses travelling on a route.

Hot spots Sites where major delay is experienced on the bus network.

Inductive loops A cable embedded in the highway used to record the presence or passage of avehicle on or across that section of the highway.

- 154 -


Intergreen Time period between traffic signal stages in which no vehicles or pedestriansreceive a green aspect.

LINSIG Computer programme used to design traffic signal stages and their sequence andduration at an isolated signal.

Location beacons Roadside infrastructure which detects the presence of buses as they pass adefined location. Used in conjunction with real time information systems.

London Bus Priority Network

The 33 local authorities in London, together with London Transport, theDepartment for Transport and the Government Office for London aredeveloping a London wide Bus Priority Network with the aim of improvingreliability, travel times and the convenience of bus services. The London BusPriority Network consists of about 540 miles of routes and its development andimplementation is being coordinated by the London Borough of Bromley.

Manual classifiedtraffic counts

Manual counts are undertaken by an operative located near the road with amanual hand held counting device or video recording equipment.

MicroprocessorOptimised VehicleActuation (MOVA)

Allows flexible control of traffic signals at isolated junctions.

Park and ride Park and ride is a system where cars are parked in a car park outside of the towncentre and access is provided to the town centre by a frequent dedicated busservice operating between the park and ride facility and locations within thetown. The purpose of this parking strategy is to alleviate traffic congestion onroads in and around the town centre.

Passenger TransportExecutives (PTEs)

Passenger Transport Executives (PTEs) are the professional and executive armsof the six metropolitan Passenger Transport Authorities (PTAs). They areresponsible for implementing the policies set down by their PTAs both on theirown initiative (using public money raised by the PTAs from a levy on local taxpayers) and in partnership with others.

Person trip miles Also known as passenger miles, this measure indicates distances undertaken bypassengers on different modes of transport.

Phase Traffic movement(s) which is controlled by a single signal aspect. This caninclude pedestrians, cycles or general traffic.

Priority vehicle lane An area of carriageway reserved, using a Traffic Regulation Order, for the useof buses, bicycles, goods vehicles and taxis.

Prism An intelligent vehicle detector which is laid in the road surface. This is a passivedetection method since the technology doesn’t rely on vehicle basedcommunication. PRISM can recognise different vehicle types from their signalas they pass over the inductive loop.

- 155 -


PROMPT Acronym for EC Drive 2 Project ’PRiority and infOrMatics in Public Transport’which developed the active bus priority facility now available within SCOOT(see below). The term is now used as a reference to this facility, particularly inLondon.

Quality Bus Partnerships

A partnership between local highways authorities and bus operators designed toimprove the quality and reliability of the bus services.

Rat running Rat running is the term used to describe traffic that uses alternative, oftenresidential, routes to avoid congested roads to get to their destination. This leadsto a build up of often fast moving traffic on roads ill equipped to accommodatecommuter traffic and can be hazardous and unpleasant for residents.

Real time information

A system providing information as it occurs. Increasingly used to provide up todate information at bus stops on the expected arrival time of a particular bus.

Red Route Red Routes have been introduced in London (now called Transport for LondonRoad Network or TLRN). One of the primary aims is eliminating illegal orinappropriate parking on bus routes through: the implementation of double redlines; improved signage of existing car parks; better provision for parking andfor loading and unloading; in addition to better enforcement of parkingrestrictions.

Rising bollards Rising bollards are a type of bus gate that prohibit access for other vehicles tobus only lanes.

Saturation flow The maximum rate of traffic discharge from a continuous queue at a stopline.

SCOOT SCOOT is a tool for managing and controlling traffic signals in urban areas. It isan adaptive system that responds automatically to fluctuations in traffic flowthrough the use of on-street detectors embedded in the road. Bus Scoot is afacility incorporated into SCOOT to give priority to buses.

Stage Part of the traffic signal cycle during which a particular set of phases receivesgreen.

Stakeholder Stakeholders can be defined as individuals or organisations that have investedresources, whether they be financial or personal inputs, i.e. time and experience,into a project. Examples of stakeholders in bus priority projects are busoperators, local highway authorities, bus passengers, local resident groups andlocal businesses (involvement dependent on specific measure).

Statutory undertakers

Public utility companies covering gas, water, electricity and telephone, etc suchas Transco, British Telecom, NTL.

Selective VehicleDetection (SVD)

Enables buses to be detected separately from other vehicles through the use offitted transponders, thus allowing them priority at signal controlled junctions.

- 156 -


TIRIS Texas Instruments Registration and Identification System (TIRIS) is a radiofrequency identification (RFID) system based on low frequency FMtransmission techniques. The three major parts of the system are thetransponder, antenna and reader. This approach has good resistance tobroadband noise whilst being very cost effective to implement.

TIRIS transponders The Texas Instruments Registration and Identification System (TIRIS) is a radiofrequency identification system based on low frequency FM transmissiontechniques. The core of the system is a small transponder or tag in the buses. Tointerrogate the tag, a reader in the road sends out a radio signal to thetransponder via an antenna. The transponder then returns a signal that carries thedata that it is storing. The messages produced by this system have beenintegrated into the SCOOT UTC system.

Traffic calming Measures employed to reduce excessive speeds on roads with a poor safetyrecord.

Traffic management Traffic management is concerned with maximising the efficiency of existingtransport systems. Measures utilised to fulfil this aim are varied, but generallytend to avoid reliance on new road building schemes. Measures applicable fall into a variety of categories and these include: physical measures (e.g. trafficcalming); legal or regulatory measures (e.g. bus-only lanes); technical measures(e.g. intelligent transport systems); financial measures (e.g. road- use pricing)and social measures (e.g. car sharing).

Transponders Electrical devices fitted to buses to transmit vehicle specification information tolocal beacons.

TransportArea/Quadrant Approach

In the context of this series of leaflets the Transport Area/Quadrant refers to buscorridors encompassing a wider service area and including improving aspects ofthe built environment that encourage and facilitate bus travel, such as improvedwalking routes to bus stops etc.

TRANSYT TRAffic Network StudY Tool is a traffic signal analysis computer programmefor traffic signal networks.

Variable MessageSigns (VMS)

Matrix displays providing drivers with mandatory and/or advisory information,at the roadside, relating to situations ahead or in the immediate vicinity.

Wayfarer Electronic ticketing machines on buses providing operating data at a route level.

With-flow bus lane Buses in this lane travel in the same direction as traffic in adjacent lanes.

Acronym Expression

ALG Association of London Government

ATC Automatic traffic counts

- 157 -


ATCO Association of Transport Coordinating Officers

ASTRID Automatic SCOOT TRaffic Information Database

AVL Automatic Vehicle Location

CBI Confederation of British Industry

CCTV Closed Circuit Television

CO Carbon Monoxide

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

CPT Confederation of Passenger Transport UK

DfT Department for Transport

DPE Decriminalised parking enforcement

DPTAC Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee

DVLA Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

ETM Electronic Ticket Machine

FPN Fixed Penalty Notice

GOL Government Office for London

GPS Global Positioning Systems

JIMs Joint Inspection Meetings

LBI / BusPlus London Bus Initiative

LBPN London Bus Priority Network

LTP Local Transport Plan

MOVA Microprocessor Optimised Vehicle Actuation

NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide

ODPM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

PCN Penalty Charge Notice

PROMPT PRiority and InfOrMatics in Public Transport

PTA Public Transport Authority

PTE Passenger Transport Executive

QWR (+) Quality Whole Route (Plus)

- 158 -


SCOOT Split Cycle Offset Optimisation Technique

SPRINT Selective Priority Network Technique

SVD Selective Vehicle Detection

TfL Transport for London

TMO Traffic Management Order

TRANSYT TRaffic Network StudY Tool

TRO Traffic Regulation Order

TRL Transport Research Laboratory

TSRGD The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002

UT(M)C Urban Traffic (Management) Control

VMS Variable Message Signs

Contacts Arriva plcAdmiral WayDoxford International Business ParkSunderlandSR3 3XP

Tel: 0191 520 4000Fax: 0191 520 4001 http://www.arriva.co.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Association of London Government (ALG)59Â½ Southwark StreetLondonSE1 0AL

Tel: 020 7934 9999E-mail: [email protected] http://www.alg.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Association of Police AuthoritiesLocal Government HouseSmith Square

- 159 -


http://www.arriva.co.uk/

http://www.alg.gov.uk/

LondonSW1P 3HZ

Tel: 020 7664 3168Fax: 020 7664 3191 http://www.apa.police.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Association of Transport Coordinating Officers (ATCO)3 Pine WayGloucesterGL4 4AE

Tel: 01492 411491 http://www.atco.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Centro (West Midlands PTE)16 Summer LaneBirminghamB19 3SD

Tel: 0121 200 2787 http://www.centro.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Confederation of British Industry (CBI)Centre Point103 New Oxford StreetLondonWC1A 1DU

Tel: 020 7395 8125Fax: 020 7379 0945 http://www.cbi.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commission for Integrated Transport (CfIT)5th Floor, Romney HouseTufton StreetLondonSW1P 3RA

- 160 -


http://www.apa.police.uk/

http://www.atco.org.uk/


http://www.cbi.org.uk/

E-mail: [email protected] http://www.cfit.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Confederation of Passenger Transport UK (CPT)Imperial House15 - 19 KingswayLondonWC2B 6UN

Tel: 020 7240 3131Fax: 020 7240 6565E-mail: [email protected] http://www.cpt-uk.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CTC (UK national cyclist organisation)Cotterell House69 MeadrowGodalmingSurreyGU7 3HS

Tel: 0870 873 0060Fax: 0870 873 0064E-mail: [email protected] http://www.ctc.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Department for Transport (DfT)Traffic Management Division3/19 Great Minster House76 Marsham StreetLondonSW1P 4DR

Tel: 020 7944 2599Fax: 020 7944 2211E-mail: [email protected] http://www.dft.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- 161 -


http://www.cfit.gov.uk/

http://www.cpt-uk.org/

http://www.ctc.org.uk/

http://www.dft.gov.uk/

Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC)Zone 1/14Great Minster House76 Marsham StreetLondonSW1P 4DR

Tel: 020 7944 8011Fax: 020 7944 6998E-mail: [email protected] http://www.dptac.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First Group Plc395 King StreetAberdeenAB24 5RP

Tel: 01224 650100Fax: 01224 650140 http://www.firstgroup.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Freight Transport AssociationHermes HouseSt John’s RoadTunbridge WellsKentTN4 9UZ

Tel: 01892 526171Fax: 01892 534989 http://www.fta.co.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Go-Ahead Group plc3rd Floor41 - 51 Grey StreetNewcastle upon TyneNE1 6EE

Tel: 0191 232 3123Fax: 0191 221 0315 http://www.go-ahead.com

- 162 -


http://www.dptac.gov.uk/

http://www.firstgroup.com/

http://www.fta.co.uk/

http://www.go-ahead.com/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Government Office for London (GoL)Riverwalk House157 - 161 MillbankLondonSW1P 4RR

Tel: 020 7217 3328Fax: 020 7217 3450E-mail: [email protected] http://www.gos.gov.uk/gol/?a=42496

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GMPTE (Greater Manchester PTE)9 Portland StreetPiccadilly GardensManchesterM60 1HX

Tel: 0161 242 6000E-mail: [email protected] http://www.gmpte.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Highways AgencyRomney House43 Marsham StreetLondonSW1P 3HW

Tel: 08459 55 65 75E-mail: [email protected] http://www.highways.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

London Bus Initiative (LBI / BusPlus)BusPlus ProgrammeCustomer Service Centre4th Floor172 Buckingham Palace RoadLondonSW1W 9TN

- 163 -


http://www.gos.gov.uk/gol/?a=42496

http://www.gmpte.com/

http://www.highways.gov.uk/

Tel: 020 7918 4300E-mail: [email protected] http://www.tfl.gov.uk/streets/bp_making_your_bus_service_better.shtml

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

London Transport Users Committee (LTUC)6 Middle StreetLondonEC1A 7JA

Tel: 020 7505 9000Fax: 020 7505 9003 http://www.ltuc.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Merseytravel (Merseyside PTE)24 Hatton GardenLiverpoolL3 2AN

Tel: 0151 227 5181Fax: 0151 236 2457 http://www.merseytravel.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Metro (West Yorkshire PTE)Wellington House40 - 50 Wellington StreetLeedsLS1 2DE

Tel: 0113 251 7272 http://www.wymetro.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MetrolineHygeia House66 College RoadHarrowMiddlesexHA1 1BE

- 164 -


http://www.tfl.gov.uk/streets/bp_making_your_bus_service_better.shtml

http://www.ltuc.org.uk/

http://www.merseytravel.gov.uk/

http://www.wymetro.com/

Tel: 020 8218 8888Fax: 020 8218 8899E-mail: [email protected] http://www.metroline.co.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

National Federation of Bus UsersPO Box 320PortsmouthPO5 3SD

Tel: 023 9281 4493Fax: 023 9286 3080E-mail: [email protected] http://www.nfbu.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nexus (Tyne and Wear PTE)Nexus HouseSt. James’ BoulevardNewcastle upon TyneNE1 4AX

Tel: 0191 203 3333Fax: 0191 203 3180 http://www.nexus.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM)26 WhitehallLondonSW1A 2WH

Tel: 020 7944 4400http://www.odpm.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stagecoach Group10 Dunkeld RoadPerthPH1 5TW

- 165 -


http://www.metroline.co.uk/

http://www.nfbu.org/

http://www.nexus.org.uk/

Tel: 01738 442111Fax: 01738 580407 http://www.stagecoachplc.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Strathclyde Passenger TransportConsort House12 West George StreetGlasgowG2 1HN

Tel: 0141 332 6811E-mail: [email protected] http://www.strathclyde-pte.co.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SYPTE (South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive)PO Box 801Exchange StreetSheffieldSouth YorkshireS2 5YT

Tel: 0114 221 1333Fax: 01226 772877E-mail: [email protected] http://www.sypte.co.uk

Overview This resource pack will provide information on the Department for Transport’s policies and guidance onmeasures to give buses priority to enable bus travel to be more attractive and reliable.

Foreword

"I am delighted to see the publication of this, the Second Edition of the Bus Priority Resource Pack.

Government has consistently highlighted the important role that the bus plays in our towns and cities andwe are firmly committed to making the bus a more attractive travel option. We have worked with the busindustry and local authorities through the Bus Partnership Forum to create the conditions for encouraginggreater use of buses. Introducing measures that minimise delays and improve the reliability of bus servicesare a crucial part of achieving this.

- 166 -


http://www.stagecoachplc.com/

http://www.strathclyde-pte.co.uk/


While many successful measures have been introduced around the country, we fully recognise thatplanning and implementing a programme of priorities for buses is not a simple task. It is often thepractical details that make the difference between the success or failure of a scheme. I therefore welcomethis initiative from the Bus Partnership Forum, which provides best practice guidance, and shares thepractical experience gained by local authorities, Passenger Transport Executives and bus operators aroundthe country. I look forward to seeing more new and innovative measures, which provide real benefits topassengers, emerging as a result of it."

Charlotte Atkins MPParliamentary Under Secretary of State

Background

The road network needs to move people and goods efficiently if we are to ensure the social and economicwell being of our communities. Buses have a vital role to play in this as they can make excellent use oflimited road space, carrying many more passengers than a private car for a given amount of road space.However, the potential benefit of the bus can be stifled by traffic congestion. Local authorities and busoperators need to work in partnership to make buses a more attractive alternative to the car by releasingthem from the congestion delays experienced by other road users. This in turn will improve reliability andhelp make the bus an attractive choice for more car users as well as providing quicker journeys for bothbus and other road users.

Providing the right conditions for this to happen is not a simple task. This overview seeks to outline someof the ways in which local authorities can develop a successful bus strategy that will ensure that bus travelbecomes a realistic alternative to the private car.

What is being done?

The Government has consistently made it clear that the bus has a crucial part to play in present and futuretransport policy. In the short term, buses provide the best means of increasing public transport services.

Government, in partnership with local authorities and bus operators, is positively encouraging bus travelthrough a number of measures, including capital funding through the local transport plan process,concessionary fares schemes, the development of Quality Bus Partnerships, real time information andtimetable information systems.

Why help buses?

The challenge that we face

The challenge is, of course, well known and understood. Since 1950, car ownership in the UK has grownfrom 2 million cars to over 22 million and use of the car has grown commensurately. The capacity of ourroads has not increased at anything like this rate and this has led to severe traffic congestion, affecting theability of buses to deliver reliable services.

- 167 -


Who is affected?

Transport affects the economic and social well being of everyone. Well over 11 million bus journeys aremade in Great Britain every day. Better bus services in our towns and cities contribute towards theregeneration and revitalisation of both the business community and our living areas. An efficient, reliablebus service can be an attractive alternative to those who have access to a car. Furthermore, an efficient busservice ensures social inclusion by providing access to jobs, education, health, social and leisure servicesto those without access to a car. A wide variety of people use buses but many people, especially olderpeople, children, people with disabilities, women and the less well off, are often dependent upon having areliable bus service.

What do people want?

In almost every survey about bus services, reliability is one of the most important issues for bus users.Motorists cite reliable bus services as a pre-requisite for leaving their car at home. Bus priority measuresassist buses through traffic, with more consistent journey times helping deliver timetable reliability. Busescannot take short cuts to get around congestion; they need help to get through it.

What will more bus measures deliver?

Without priority measures bus services get caught up in general traffic congestion, especially in our townsand cities during peak periods. Experience from schemes around the country shows that bus lanes mayreduce bus travel times by up to 7 to 9 minutes along a 10 kilometre congested route and also improvetheir reliability. Reliability means buses operate in accordance with their timetables on every journeywhich is important to bus users. Measures to assist buses in one metropolitan city have halved thevariation in journey times that operators experienced in that corridor, enabling them to operate their busesmore efficiently.

By introducing bus priority with other improvements, services can become more attractive to potentialpassengers. For example, a comprehensive quality corridor initiative in a major conurbation delivered a 75per cent increase in bus passengers over 5 years, with 20 per cent being new customers.

What if we don’t do it?

With car ownership continuing to grow, traffic congestion will get worse. Large-scale road construction isnot a sustainable option and so greater use of public transport, along with more cycling and walking, mustprovide our main answers. Initiatives to assist buses must be seen to be part of the traffic congestionsolution, by providing more people with better and faster travel at the same time as reducing the need totravel by car.

Achieving success

- 168 -


Which strategy?

It is important to recognise that there is a range of strategies available and that there is not an ’off theshelf’ solution that will maximise the benefits to buses regardless of location. The most appropriatestrategy in any one area will depend upon the prevailing local conditions. In general, the reliability andjourney time benefits of bus initiatives tend to follow the maxim ’the whole is more than the sum of theparts’. A range of strategies can be adopted. These can include taking a full network approach where theentire bus network is considered or a whole route strategy where delays along the length of a particularroute are addressed. Alternatively, in a corridor strategy, important corridors within an area served by anumber of major routes are treated. Delays can also be treated on the basis of hot spots where specificpoints of delay located around the area are addressed.

Who should be involved?

It is vital for local authorities and bus operators to work in partnership at all stages of the initiative, fromdeveloping the strategy, to promoting completed measures to customers and the general public. To ensurethat full commitment is achieved for the implementation, a wider group of stakeholders should beinvolved in the development of the strategy. Experience has shown that opposition to measures can beminimised if early stakeholder involvement takes place.

Stakeholders, besides the local authority and the bus operators, are likely to include the highway authority(if different); neighbouring authorities; the passenger transport executives (PTEs); the police; signalauthorities; bus user organisations; residents’ organisations; cyclist groups; business and traderorganisations.

Who should be informed?

As well as those stakeholders directly affected by the measures, the wider public needs to be informed ofthe proposals and why they are happening. Remember that, to many, the measures will be unfamiliar andmisunderstood, and the benefits unclear. It may be beneficial to encourage local media to run stories onbus schemes as a general issue rather than wait until specific schemes are developed and oppositionentrenched.

What will be successful?

The most successful measures have been those which have been designed to meet the circumstances of aparticular route or corridor. It is crucial that these measures are developed as part of an overall roadmanagement strategy to improve bus services in the local area. An important part of a strategy is theefficient management and coordination of traffic schemes, maintenance and other roads works. Whenthese measures are complimented by enforcement and bus friendly traffic management, delays to alltraffic, including buses, can be significantly minimised. Under new powers local authorities can enforcebus lanes using CCTV cameras in order to maintain the benefits to bus services. Enforcement can alsotarget offences such as abandoned or untaxed vehicles.

- 169 -


How do we convince people of the benefits?

Early stakeholder involvement and well targeted information about the proposals is vital. Of at least equalimportance is the determination of councillors and senior officers to see the measures succeed. It can bedaunting to attempt to progress schemes when there is the presumption that there will be opposition tothem. There are, however, numerous examples of successful implementation. Many have achieved theiraims in full and still more have shown that disbenefits predicted by objectors have not occurred. Theresource pack that accompanies this overview tells you how this has been done.

Securing the benefits

Selecting appropriate measures

Bus schemes are often part of a comprehensive treatment of a road corridor with enhanced facilities for alltypes of travel. The most successful measures tend to feature an iterative design process that continuesthroughout the planning and implementation phase. In designing the most appropriate measure it isadvisable to consider the whole process, for example to:

establish the form of strategy to be adopted; identify problem areas consistent with that strategy; agree with stakeholders the nature of the problem; discuss possible solutions to specific problems; investigate the preferred solutions and compare benefits; assure benefits are achieved for bus users; monitor the measure before and after it is carried out; and make adjustments to measures if they would improve the benefits.

Enforcement and maintenance

It is essential to maintain the benefits of bus measures and to do this requires a positive approach toenforcement and highway maintenance. Basic design and maintenance procedures include ensuring thatbus priority measures are clearly seen and well maintained, and that the effects on buses are consideredwhen highways are maintained. Active enforcement should aim for total compliance; even if it leads todirect costs being incurred with no revenue stream. Specific actions to consider can include:

decriminalisation of parking enforcement to give control to local authorities; and camera enforcement or roving wardens/attendants.

More information

Resource pack

The resource pack provides decision makers with advice and guidance on how to make bus initiativessuccessful. It consists of a series of leaflets which provide evidence of successful implementation, andadvice on how to promote and manage the process. This illustrates the benefits achieved through a wholerange of experiences countrywide.

- 170 -


Web site

A web site dedicated to bus measures (http://www.dft.gov.uk/decmigration/localtrans/busprioritythewayahead/) contains all the information inthe resource pack.

Presentational CD ROM

Attached to this resource pack is a CD ROM that contains a range of presentational information. Thisinformation can be used to tailor presentations on bus initiatives to a range of audiences and can becustomised to suit each user.

Contacts

To get a free copy of the resource pack and overview, contact: DfT Free Literature, PO Box 236,WETHERBY, LS23 7NB. Tel: 0870 122 6236 Fax: 0870 122 6237 Please quote the following reference:03DFT005

The resource pack and overview can also be obtained through the web site: http://www.dft.gov.uk/decmigration/localtrans/busprioritythewayahead/.

All of the leaflets, along with other information on bus priority, can be accessed and downloaded, free ofcharge, from the bus priority web site.

To find out more about bus priority measures, contact: Department for Transport, Traffic ManagementDivision, 3/19 Great Minster House, 76 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DR. Tel: 0207 944 2599 Fax:0207 944 2211 Email: [email protected]

Strategic options

Establishing the vision

Legislation requires local authorities to prepare a bus strategy that sets out the vision for bus services intheir area and details the general policies to meet this vision. Local authorities are also given the powers toenter into quality partnerships with operators and establish quality contracts if these are felt to beappropriate to delivering the vision. The overarching bus strategy describes the scope of the bus servicesand the role of the local authorities in providing them. The bus priority strategy needs to show howservices can be improved.

Prevailing conditions

The first step is to review bus services based on a number of basic parameters, which will involve theidentification of the range of problems and opportunities including:

- 171 -




specific locations of delays; heavily-used corridors; and high frequency/high patronage routes.

Choosing the most appropriate measure

The various measures for achieving bus priority are outlined in the case study leaflets contained withinthis resource pack. The most appropriate solution in any one area will depend upon the:

prevailing conditions in the area; and objectives of the strategy.

However, in all cases the appropriate solution must be part of an effective traffic management regime.

Strategic options

Once a local authority has collated the basic information, it can then consider which of the variousstrategic approaches it will take. Examples of these approaches are given below.

Hot spots

The hot spot strategy involves reviewing the bus network and identifying where the major delays are.These delays can be caused by a number of factors, such as:

congestion; inappropriate parking; servicing activity; outdated signals; or poor interchange and boarding facilities.

It is advisable to mark the delay hot spots on a plan, as this can help in prioritising the measures needed totreat them. Prioritising can be based on factors such as the number of routes affected, total delays incurred,patronage levels and/or interchange arrangements.

The main advantage of the hot spot approach is that the places where there are real difficulties are tackledin a rational and programmed way. Very often a single bus priority measure will benefit a number ofroutes. For example, bus priority at traffic signals can help several routes. This is an effective way oftargeting funds to greatest effect across the whole bus network.

The disadvantage of dealing with only one location at a time on any particular route is that any benefitsgained there could easily be lost along other sections of the route and overall journey times might notdecrease. It could also spread funds too thinly across the whole bus network.

- 172 -


Bus corridors

An alternative to the hot spots approach is to promote integrated solutions for particular lengths of the busnetwork in a coordinated way. This typically means looking at heavily used bus corridors, oftenconnecting major town centres. This strategy aims to coordinate individual schemes into a managed route,often improving interchanges, passenger information, waiting facilities and even ticketing at the sametime.

The corridor approach has worked well in several parts of the country. It has been used to integrate buslanes with enforcement and urban traffic control (UTC) improvements. This has been achieved by, forexample, using selective vehicle detection (SVD) and traffic management software such as SCOOT,PROMPT, MOVA and SPRINT among many others.

In some areas, local authorities are considering dedicated maintenance regimes along these corridors, sothat the benefits of bus priority last as long as possible. For example, the Greater Manchester quality buscorridor programme aims to complete work on 19 corridors by 2006, and has involved over 20 keystakeholders. Many operators recognise the benefits of the corridor approach. Some have invested incorridor studies, such as that provided by GO (North East) on the A690 Durham Road to Sunderlandcorridor.

The corridor strategy is sometimes upgraded to cover a ’transport area’ or a ’transport quadrant’. Thisencompasses the wider corridor catchment area and includes measures such as improved walking routes tobus stops and wider traffic calming measures on surrounding roads.

The main advantage of this strategy is that it addresses problems where the need is greatest, to the benefitof several bus routes using the same corridor. The main disadvantage, however, is that this strategy doesnot necessarily encourage new bus users in more diverse areas. Also, delays can still happen off the maincorridor, reducing the effectiveness of the scheme.

Whole route

This approach applies the corridor strategy to a whole bus route from start to finish. The whole routeapproach inevitably overlaps with other bus routes, so spreading the benefits. Again, local authorities canuse a transport area approach as part of a whole route strategy.

The main advantage of the whole route approach is that the benefits it brings can be controlled andtherefore maintained. Journey times, reliability and route management are more easily dealt with. TheSuperoute proposals in Tyne and Wear link several urban areas and improve approximately 20 routes. Inthe capital, the London Bus Initiative (now known as BusPlus) has been developed on over 70 routes intwo main branches.

Whole route strategies are best suited to larger urban areas where routes are more likely to overlap. Themain disadvantage of the whole route approach is that it concentrates funding on a single route, benefitingother routes only where it overlaps with them.

- 173 -


Park and ride

The park and ride strategy is especially focussed on getting people to change to catching the bus instead ofusing their cars. However, the strategy relies heavily on there being enough space on the edge of towncentres to provide adequate parking facilities. Effective park and ride schemes need a high level of buspriority on the transfer route. Potential passengers must be able to see a clear benefit over the private car.The key attraction for motorists is likely to be a faster journey time, so bus priority measures such asreallocating road space will be needed to increase the benefit of park and ride buses over the private car.

Consultation

A strategic approach to consultation is essential if bus priority is to succeed. It is quite easy to introducebus priority where congestion is not severe and parking is not limited. Local authorities need to considercarefully whether it is worth introducing bus priority measures in that sort of location. Bus priority is mostuseful where congestion and parking are problems. However, these are the areas that tend to generate themost vocal opposition. Local authorities need to predict where opposition is likely to occur and be readyto explain what they are proposing to do and why.

That is why there must be a clear consultation strategy. The consultation must allow all parties to identifyand understand the key issues and prepare to work around any problems. This is more likely to happen ifall stakeholders are involved in the discussions to solve whatever problems arise. Key stakeholders mustfeel that they have ’ownership’ of bus priority measures.

Implementation & delivery

Background

Most local authorities have produced comprehensive bus strategies as part of their local transport plans(LTPs). These strategies are usually endorsed by everyone with an interest in sustainable travel and set outambitious objectives for developing bus travel as a viable alternative to the car.

However, very often the devil is in the detail. When local authorities try to turn their strategic vision into apractical programme, problems can appear. The difficulties may vary, but they are generally reduced to:

meeting the political challenge; getting bus operators actively involved; and implementing and evaluating the scheme.

The political challenge

Few people disagree with the vision of a transport system that is more accessible while cutting congestionand pollution. The political challenge is to develop actual transport schemes that clearly deliver thosebenefits. The skill needed then is the ability to persuade people that they would benefit from schemeswhich limit car use, even if they consider themselves to depend on their cars.

- 174 -


Council officers can provide many of the answers. But it is the local councillor who has to faceconstituents and give assurances on what could be controversial plans. What arguments can they use, andhow can they be persuaded themselves that bus policies are worth selling to their constituents?

This resource pack is intended to help councillors and council officers tackle these issues. In particular, itaims to draw on good practice in bus priority across the country and pass on information about thebenefits of successful schemes.

The resource pack contains facts about public transport to help users make the case for bus priority. Someof these facts are also included in Frequently asked questions or FAQs (section 9).

Given that typically around one third of the electorate does not have access to a car, it is worthemphasising the importance of bus users to the local economy. Buses allow people without access to a carto get to work, to the shops, or to leisure activities. It may be worth raising awareness of the needs of theless well-off. Information about travel choices and proof of the benefits of bus priority may also help, ascan effective marketing and positive reporting of successful schemes.

Effective and inclusive consultation is critical, both to gather and disseminate information. Consultationhelps to produce better bus schemes and makes the decision-making process more ’transparent’, but itcannot be a substitute for that process. Local authorities should involve councillors and stakeholders asearly as possible. Ideally, consultation should include bus operators and users, and people with concernsabout bus-related measures at a particular site.

It is important to begin with a re-statement of the strategic objectives when each proposal is put forward.Also, early discussion of areas that are causing concern has been proven to help create a sense of’ownership’ across the community and makes scheme implementation easier.

Operator involvement

It is important to recognise bus operators’ vital contribution to the aims of encouraging people to usebuses and increasing social inclusion. Bus operators bring a unique perspective. They deal directly withbus passengers and can provide useful information, including bus usage and other non-commerciallysensitive data. Operators need to be involved from the start in the design of effective measures to helpbuses.

There are many instances around the country of local authorities and bus operators working togethertowards a shared vision for public transport. And yet there are also examples of local authoritiesintroducing bus priority measures, only for the operator to withdraw the service that the priority measuresbenefited shortly afterwards.

Some local authorities have altered traffic management arrangements without telling local bus operators,who then found that their routes became much more congested, or in some cases even severed. It is notuncommon for developers to propose large housing projects with a road layout that is incapable ofaccommodating buses, even when car parking spaces are deliberately limited. Similarly, it has beenknown for local authorities not to consult bus operators on proposals to protect residential roads from ’ratrunning’ traffic, proposals which can displace traffic onto bus routes.

- 175 -


None of these circumstances benefit buses, but unfortunately they are not unusual. They are often theresult of poor communications between local authorities and bus operators. Most authorities have a publictransport liaison committee, or similar entity. But for it to be meaningful, all parties need to be open andhonest about their intentions.

Effective partnership working requires real operator involvement. This can include regular meetings atdifferent organisational levels, commissioning joint bus priority studies, and implementing joint marketingstrategies. But essentially it is about ensuring that buses become an important factor in planning andmanaging local authority infrastructure. Bus provision should be a priority when local authorities planbriefs for development or consider traffic management schemes.

In turn, operators must see themselves as part of the local community and get involved in partnershipworking. They can explain and raise awareness of the role of buses through:

local strategic partnerships; economic partnerships; business forums; chambers of commerce; and resident and community associations.

Implementation and evaluation process

As a local authority develops a bus priority scheme, it needs to set up a process for getting the maximumbenefit for buses. All stakeholders should be involved in identifying problem areas and delay hot spots. Anumber of authorities have introduced joint inspection meetings (JIMs). At these, representatives of thebus operator, the local authority, the police and any other involved group travel along a bus corridorlooking for trouble spots that might affect buses. These locations can then be developed in line with theconsultation process.

Once a scheme is in place, it must be evaluated. This is so it can be modified if necessary, and so that thelocal authority can learn lessons for future schemes. Operators are often reluctant to release commerciallysensitive data on passenger volumes, so local authorities need to reassure them that they will maintaintheir confidentiality. But more fundamentally, the operator and the authority need to acknowledge thevalue of monitoring and evaluation in helping to design better schemes in the future. There is more advicein Performance indicators & monitoring (section 7).

Maintaining the benefits

Route management

Background

The most important aspect of bus priority is that buses are able to use effectively the measures introducedon bus routes. This may seem self evident, but bus operators constantly face the problem of bus prioritymeasures that they cannot physically use. They are prevented from getting the full benefit from them by:

- 176 -


illegal parking; traffic queues; unnotified roadworks; and defective road surfaces.

Bus priority measures are designed and introduced to help achieve easier and more consistent journeytimes through congested areas in our towns and cities. This is important to bus passengers, bus operators,other road users and the local community alike.

Better reliability is a currently a legal requirement for bus operators enforced by Traffic Commissioners inrespect of all local bus services. This legal requirement is that 95 per cent of journeys on a registeredservice should operate not more than one minute early or five minutes late compared with timings given inregistration documents. Better reliability is also a priority for bus users and an important factor inattracting new passengers. Motorists are more likely to transfer to reliable bus services and, the greater thetransfer, the less the congestion (and pollution) in urban areas. It is therefore important to maintain buspriority facilities and keep them free from physical obstructions. Buses are especially prone toobstructions, e.g. congestion or roadworks, because they are legally required to stay on route.

Maintenance and clearance of the route have a high priority on the rail network and motorways, butsometimes seem to have a lower priority on local roads.

There are three main activities on the public highway that can significantly affect the operation of busroutes:

enforcement; roadworks; and traffic management.

Traffic management issues are addressed separately in the following leaflet entitled Traffic management.

Enforcement

Enforcement is critical to the effectiveness of bus priority measures. For example, bus lanes help protectbuses from the worst traffic congestion, helping to make them more reliable and attractive. However,illegal parking or driving in bus lanes can seriously undermine their benefits. That is why they needprotecting through enforcement.

The problem is that the powers to enforce traffic orders (which make measures such as bus lanes possible)vary throughout the country, so approaches to enforcement are equally varied.

Most enforcement is associated with moving vehicles. Moving vehicle offences are usually defined ascriminal activities and only the police can enforce them. This is also true of parking offences in areaswhere decriminalised parking has not been introduced. Police resources are always under pressure, andbus lane enforcement has therefore been infrequent and sporadic.

- 177 -


London’s experience

London was the first area allowed to introduce decriminalised parking and bus lane enforcement. As aresult of new powers under the Local Authority Act 1996 (amended in 2000), London boroughs wereallowed to enforce parking and bus lanes using parking attendants and cameras.

The Act made the offence of driving in a bus lane a civil rather than a criminal offence. This meant thathighway authorities (in this case the London boroughs) could issue a penalty charge notice (PCN) tooffenders. The penalty charge was set at Â£80, and recently increased to Â£100.

In 1999, the Association of London Government (ALG) set up a trial of the new powers with the LondonBoroughs of Hammersmith and Fulham, Ealing, Newham, Croydon and the Corporation of London. Theboroughs used close circuit television (CCTV) cameras operated remotely from secure control centres tomonitor selected bus lanes.

The Act requires that any offences caught on CCTV should be recorded on a secure format and watchedby an operator. It is important to take account of the context of any offence. For example, a driver wouldnot be penalised for entering a bus lane in order to get out of the way of an emergency vehicle.

The aim was to make the trial self-funding through the issue of PCNs. The process for issuing a PCN is asfollows:

the CCTV operator reviews all recorded offences after the bus lane ceases operating for the day; the CCTV operator and a supervisor check each case to make sure an offence has occurred; the CCTV operator obtains registered keeper and vehicle details of each offender from DVLA; the CCTV operator checks the vehicle description against the CCTV image; a PCN should reach the registered keeper within 14 days of the offence; and the Transport Committee for London’s Parking Appeal Service deals with any appeals.

The results of the trial were dramatic. Following an initial publicity campaign when enforcement started,the number of PCNs declined significantly, by up to 80 per cent in some areas. Buses were able to travelfaster in bus lanes in the trial areas. But there was a limited effect on their overall reliability because thetrial areas were small and buses were affected by other factors such as traffic congestion and roadworks.

As Transport for London (TfL) sees enforcement as such an integral part of bus priority in London, it hasagreed enforcement strategies with each London borough. Under these agreements, the boroughs provideadditional parking attendants or cameras along London Bus Initiative (LBI) or BusPlus routes. These busroutes have been subject to ’whole route’ improvements and further details are provided in the LBI leafletin this resource pack. TfL underwrites all extra costs that cannot be met under PCN income. This gives theboroughs an incentive to achieve full compliance.

South Yorkshire’s experience

Bus operators First and Yorkshire Terrier set up an enforcement trial in Sheffield with South YorkshirePassenger Transport Executive (SYPTE). They paid for extra police motorcycle patrols during peakperiods and motorists were warned through a media campaign that driving in a bus lane would result in afixed penalty notice (FPN). The trial ran from April to June 2001.

- 178 -


The trial opened with very high levels of FPNs issued: a significantly greater number than for the sameperiod in the previous year. There was clearly a high level of non compliance with motorists perceivinglittle chance of being caught.

However, a very significant reduction took place over the trial period, with 82 per cent fewer ticketsissued in June than in April. Importantly, one operator reported that lost mileage fell by 60 per centoverall, with the other reporting a drop of 45 per cent. Lost mileage is defined as scheduled miles minusoperating miles. The latter is affected by traffic lost miles (e.g. congestion delays) and operating lost miles(e.g. driver shortage and vehicle breakdown). Both operators also found that they kept to scheduledjourney times better and more consistently.

The conclusions drawn from the trial were:

effective enforcement is essential to bus priority; the initial level of FPNs more than paid for the cost of additional policing, so in theory the trial wouldhave been self-funding. However, as more motorists comply with bus lanes, the rule of diminishingreturns applies; enforcement was essential during peak hours, but more enforcement was needed at other times of theday to maintain standards; and enforcement was perceived as fair to all road users.

South Yorkshire’s experience has been compiled with the assistance of SYPTE and BOSSY (BusOperators Serving South Yorkshire).

The Local Authority Act 2003 is currently being debated in Parliament and will extend the powers used inLondon across the whole country.

The Department for Transport (DfT) is keen to standardise enforcement following the lessons learnt inLondon, and has been taking advice from both TfL and the ALG. However, DfT intends to grantindividual approval to local authorities that have developed their own parking enforcement regimes and tothose that can show they have the correct systems already in place.

There is significant interest from metropolitan authorities and highways authorities for large towns andcities in introducing bus lane enforcement in a similar way to London.

Highways works

A common problem appears to be a lack of coordination between highways managers, who areresponsible for maintaining the highway, and transport managers, who oversee the running of busservices. Highways managers sometimes schedule maintenance work without informing bus operators,resulting in buses being diverted or even suspended. The same can happen when, for example, gas, wateror electricity companies carry out work on the roads, often as an emergency.

Highways managers should consult bus operators on the phasing of maintenance works to minimise theireffect on services. At worst, some highways managers have created diversion routes that buses cannot use.It has been suggested that highways managers should set up temporary bus priority measures, wherereasonable, when roadworks take place so that buses are not delayed.

- 179 -


Local authorities must also replace bus priority signing and marking as soon as possible after roadworkstake place. It is good practice to monitor and maintain the condition of signing and lining for bus prioritymeasures. If signs are missing or damaged, or lines are indistinct, the opportunity for enforcement isseverely reduced. Most authorities produce a Maintenance Plan which sets out relative priorities based onroute hierarchy and severity of problem. The importance of bus lane maintenance should be formallyrecognised in these Maintenance Plans.

Some authorities have highway liaison groups, which involve all stakeholders in the process of highwaymaintenance. These authorities often have fewer operational problems for both public transport andhighway maintenance. However, these liaison groups vary significantly between authorities and may beirregular and infrequent. Again, good practice demands regular liaison meetings involving the appropriatelevel of staff and with a clear agenda.

Traffic management

Background

The previous leaflet, Route management, considers the effective management and operation of bus routeson a daily basis. This leaflet takes a more long-term, forward planning perspective and considers therelationship between traffic management and bus priority.

It is important to think broadly about the relationships between traffic management and bus priority.Traffic management should be carried out in a way which complements a local authority’s wider planningand transport policy objectives, including the delivery of the council’s integrated transport strategy andbus strategy.

Such strategies set out high-level policy objectives and targets for modal priorities (with priority given topublic transport, walking and cycling); the allocation of road space (through the creation of new roadspace or the reallocation of existing road space); and demand management initiatives. For example, buspriority measures can be both the ’carrot’ and ’stick’, making a contribution to the better management ofcongestion and helping towards the provision of faster and more reliable bus services.

Fundamentally, in taking decisions about the effective management of traffic in their area, localauthorities should consider the needs of all road users, including buses and their passengers. In doing so,local authorities and bus operators should liaise closely, with traffic management issues being high up onthe agenda.

Effective traffic management underpins bus priority: without this foundation the full benefits of any buspriority measure cannot be realised. Furthermore, good traffic management can assist buses withoutimpeding the general flow of traffic in the area.

Traffic management & buses

For these reasons traffic management, bus operations and bus priority measures need to be consideredtogether, not in isolation.

- 180 -


Local authorities should ensure that, as far as is practical, the introduction of traffic management measuresdoes not impede the effectiveness and reliability of local bus services.

For example, when local authorities introduce traffic management measures in residential areas toimprove road safety and the local environment, they need to consider the implications for bus operationsin that area and on nearby bus routes. Traffic management solutions developed without consideration ofbus routes have the potential to harm local bus operations. Using road humps for example as a trafficcalming measure is an inappropriate solution if the road in question has a bus service operating on it.More ’bus friendly’ traffic calming measures such as chicanes should be considered instead. Furthermore,as well as affecting bus operations in the area being ’calmed’, measures to prevent ’rat running’ onresidential streets, for example, can displace traffic back onto nearby bus routes.

The impact of such measures on bus routes should be considered, and wherever possible bus prioritymeasures should be introduced to minimise the disruption to bus services. In all circumstances, closeliaison with local bus service operators, as well as residents, etc., is essential.

In areas where bus services run infrequently and the case for bus priority may be relatively weak, theintroduction of well designed traffic management measures can improve the general flow of traffic, whichcan benefit buses too. This approach may best suit semi-rural areas and small to medium-sized towns,where there is often simply not enough available road space to introduce certain types of bus priority.

Improving bus journey times and service reliability for buses through the introduction of good trafficmanagement should be a main aim of a local authority. Relatively simple measures that assist buses moregenerally such as dispensing with bus laybys, other than at places where the service terminates, and theuse of yellow box markings to help buses at key junctions should be considered as part of this.

It is of course important to be aware of the risk that improvements in general traffic flow and reduced carjourney times could increase the attractiveness of car use and then any benefit to buses could be lost.

On-street waiting & loading

Where local authorities are considering more radical, innovative approaches to the regulation andmanagement of on-street waiting and loading restrictions on key bus routes, consultations need to be held.Key stakeholders that need to be consulted include local traders, delivery and distribution companies, thelocal chamber of commerce, as well as bus operators.

Deliveries in peak hours can raise issues that affect bus routes. Innovative waiting and loading schemes todeal with these issues need positive and effective enforcement. This benefits all road users, includingbuses.

Similarly it is very important for local authorities to liaise closely with bus operators during the design,consultation and implementation of area-wide controlled parking zone (CPZ) schemes. The accessrequirements of buses operating within areas for which on-street parking controls are being developedneed to be carefully considered. In this context, it is important to recognise the potential obstruction thatcan be caused by ’Blue Badge’ parking, taking advantage of the lesser restrictions afforded by loadingrestrictions, irrespective of single or double yellow line parking restrictions.

- 181 -


Special initiatives

Edinburgh Greenways

Description of need

Background

’Greenways’ are bus priority lanes, introduced as part of Edinburgh’s transport strategy, Moving Forward.A Traffic Regulation Order bans general traffic from Greenways, restricting access to buses, taxis andcycles. Greenways differ from conventional bus priority in a number of ways:

â¢ lanes are surfaced in green tarmac;

â¢ red lines prohibit stopping, replacing traditional yellow lines;

â¢ a dedicated team of wardens strictly enforces Greenways;

â¢ side streets off Greenways have traffic calming measures;

â¢ there is better provision for cyclists and pedestrians;

â¢ Greenways operate throughout the working day; and

â¢ there are better bus shelters with comprehensive bus information.

Problems

Greenways are an attempt to remedy a problem with traditional bus lanes. Although many were verysuccessful, buses still suffered congestion at a number of junctions that lacked yellow lines to preventon-street parking activity.

Objectives

The Greenways scheme aimed to:



â¢ reduce car traffic growth by the year 2000;

â¢ reduce car traffic by 30 per cent by the year 2010; and

â¢ meet European guidelines on nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations in the air by 2000.

- 182 -


Scheme details

Description

This study looks at two Greenways corridors. The A8 is 6.7km long and 55 per cent of its length isinbound bus lane, whilst 54 per cent is outbound bus lane. The A900 is 2.2km long and 23 per cent of itslength is inbound bus lane, whilst 41 per cent is outbound bus lane. These two Greenways are comparedwith the A7/A701 corridor, which has conventional bus only lanes on both sides for most its 3km length.

Implementation date

The two Greenways in the study were introduced in 1999.

Costs

The scheme cost approximately Â£500,000/km. This compares with Â£110,000/km for the traditional buslane corridor.

Consultation

The local authority consulted with bus operators, residents and businesses in the core scheme area. Publicconsultation following experimental introduction of Greenways in 1999 showed strong support.

Bus operators

Lothian Region Transport and First Edinburgh operate buses along the two Greenways.

Bus frequency

The bus services run every 12 minutes.




Dates of surveys

The surveys were carried out in 1999.

Types of surveys

Types of surveys

Results

- 183 -




Traffic flows

3

Journey times

The surveys showed that, in most cases, both Greenways and conventional lanes protected buses from thecongestion that affected other traffic. Greenways that were lined with shops provided better protectionfrom congestion than the equivalent stretch of conventional bus lane. The introduction of Greenways onthe A8 corridor seems to have improved bus reliability. The conventional corridor did not show anyobvious changes over the same period.

Patronage

Surveys showed that there was an increase in bus use, with approximately 11 per cent of the sampleclaiming to use the bus more. However, 7 per cent of interviewees claimed to use the bus less. Henceoverall there was a 4 per cent increase in bus use.

Other effects of the scheme

The count data for both Greenways corridors shows that traffic volumes have decreased slightly. It is notpossible to attribute any change in cycle use to Greenways from the data available.

Enforcement issues

Greenways are constantly patrolled but conventional lanes merely receive ’visits’ and these generally after08.00. An illegal parker is typically 15 times more likely to encounter a warden on a Greenway than on aconventional bus lane.


Greenways design could be improved by avoiding:

bus lanes which are carried straight through junctions without any setback; starting bus lanes immediately downstream of junctions as this can result in traffic being unwilling touse the inside lane, which also reduces capacity; and unnecessarily reducing the queuing space available and thus increasing the frequency with whichqueues block back to upstream junctions, causing more frequent congestion there. This is particularlyimportant at the start of the Greenway where upstream buses have no priority and therefore getcaught in the congestion.

Conclusions

The Edinburgh Greenways scheme is successful and has been extended.

- 184 -



References

Scottish Executive CRU, A Comparative Evaluation of Greenways and Conventional Bus Lanes, Reportnumber 83. Obtainable from: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/resfind.aspx?series=9

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the help of the Scottish Executive CRU, City of Edinburgh Council,Lothian Region Transport, and First Edinburgh. For further information contact the City of EdinburghCouncil City Development Department on: 0131 469 3630.

Other examples

With regard to other similar bus priority measures recently introduced, there are none directly comparablethat have all of the features of Greenways, particularly in terms of the level of enforcement and the use ofred lines. However, the London Bus Initiative (now known as Bus Plus) also features high levels ofenforcement, albeit under a different legislative regime.

Further information

Guidance and further information can be found in the following:

DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997. Seaman, D & Heggie N, Comparative evaluation of Greenways and bus priority lanes, TrafficManagement, Safety and Intelligent Transport Systems. Proceedings of Seminar D at the AETEuropean Transport Conference 1999, Vol. P432 0115-32.

London Bus Initiative

Description of need

Background

The London Bus Initiative Phase 1 (LBI1) was a 3 year fixed term initiative established in April 2000 andsupported with a Â£60m grant from Government, as a new partnership approach to improving busservices in the Capital. The partnership drew together the London Bus Priority Network (LBPN)Partnership of all 33 individual London local authorities, Transport for London’s (TfL) Bus Priority Teamand London Buses, bus operators and enforcement agencies. This collaborative feature was a strongelement of the initiative, which received a Merit commendation from the Institution of Civil Engineers in2003.

The vision for the initiative was "to deliver a step change enhancement of the actual and perceived qualityof London’s bus service" with the aim of making travel by bus more attractive and getting more people touse buses.

- 185 -


Challenges

27 high frequency bus routes across London were selected for treatment with the specific aim ofbenefiting the maximum numbers of passengers. Collectively they were identified as Bus Plus routes. Theroutes served areas where integrated transport services could be provided and where buses offered acompetitive alternative to the car. Some routes included heavily congested roads or passed through areaswhere improved bus transport could assist in regeneration. The LBI Partnership took 12 months to set up,plan and programme the project and a further two years to design, consult and implement.

Objectives

The LBI had four objectives: â¢ to promote a change in travel habits and get more people onto London’sbuses;

to deliver improvements on a ’whole route’ basis; to make buses more attractive for potential users; and to make buses the first choice of mode on LBI routes.



A key feature of the LBI was the whole journey approach to route improvements comprising ten mainelements of a whole route implementation plan. The diagram below shows the constituent parts to theWhole Route approach to route improvement.

Scheme details

Description

27 Bus Routes were selected for LBI Phase 1 and divided into three categories:

3 Quality Whole Routes +; 5 Quality Whole Routes; and 19 Whole Routes.

A wide range of measures were introduced across the whole of London with the QWR+ routes receivingthe highest levels of bus priority. Over 100 extra bus lanes, 50 new pedestrian crossings, 300 signalisedjunctions equipped with bus priority and 140 junction improvements were introduced on the 27 routes.The measures had a typical expected first year rate of return (FYRR) of 20 per cent.

Over 400km of roads were studied and received bus priority measures. These measures benefited all theBus Plus routes together with other bus services using these corridors. Improved enforcement wasdelivered through the installation of bus lane enforcement cameras, both on board the bus and at theroadside (CCTV) as well as the enhancement of borough enforcement programmes. Improved passengerinformation was provided at bus stops, together with real time passenger information and new bus interiorcleaning programmes. For drivers, a BTEC qualification was initiated and up to March 2003, 1,500drivers had completed this qualification.

- 186 -



Implementation

The Whole Route Implementation Plans (WRIPs) began in April 2000 with scheme implementationbeginning in late 2000 and continuing until the end of March 2003.

Costs

Enforcement Â£11m

Traffic engineering Â£28m

Bus operations Â£3.5m

Programme support Â£9m

Major projects Â£8.5m +

The total cost of the scheme was approximately Â£60m.

Consultation

Consultation was both broad and detailed, including individual schemes. Extensive use was made of thetechnical press, local radio and newspapers to disseminate information. A computerised simulationillustrating the LBI toolkit was produced on CD to aid consultation. As with many traffic related projects,a number of schemes attracted opposition and some schemes had to be amended or dropped from theprogramme.

Bus operators

Transport for London - London Buses, is the public transport provider for London and all bus services aretendered. Major bus operators include the First Group, Arriva and London United.


The three QWR+ routes were studied in detail with comprehensive before and after monitoringundertaken. The graphs below showing the Route 115 compare bus and car journey times before and afterthe introduction of the LBI measures together with a do-nothing scenario, which assumes a 2 per centdecrease in traffic speeds over the three years. The reliability of the bus route has improved over the threeyears.

The excess waiting times for passengers using the 115 has decreased by over 30 per cent following theintroduction of the LBI and service enhancements. The bus and car journey time variability has alsoconsiderably improved.

The bus priority and complimentary traffic engineering measures have delivered improved reliability andreduced journey times, by an average of 3 per cent throughout the day.

- 187 -


Journey times

Journey times were reduced on the QWR+ Route 115, but on the two remaining QWR+ routes, the 149and 185, the 149 journey times increased, and on the 185, there was little change. These changes must beviewed against a general deterioration in operating conditions on these routes and journey speeds wouldhave been much slower had the LBI improvements not been installed. Also a number of pedestrianfacilities were introduced and bus stop dwell times increased as additional bus passengers were attractedto the route.

R115 bus journey and car journey times

Patronage

Annual patronage on the 27 Bus Plus LBI routes rose from 165 million annually to 201 million over thelife of the project, an increase of 21.9 per cent. This compares with a network wide increase including LBIroutes of 18.8 per cent.

Potential project enhancements

Much was achieved through the LBI and the role and importance of bus services and bus prioritymeasures was raised significantly. However, some factors were not fully anticipated as follows:

the wide partnership approach was innovative and was a highly successful basis for building onco-operation. Establishing the partnership was made more difficult as it coincided with TfL’sformation in 2000; the whole route approach to improvements demanded intensive resources dedicated to traffic signaldesign. Skilled and experienced traffic signal engineers were in high demand and the frequency ofmaintaining and updating traffic signal junctions requires increased resources. This issue is now isbeing addressed by TfL through specialist training programmes; and schemes were identified through the Whole Route Implementation Plan (WRIP) process on the basisof need. However, not all schemes were subject to detailed design evaluation. Explicit justificationmay have helped prioritisation of schemes and better responses to local opposition, although this mayhave delayed the implementation of some schemes.

Conclusions

The LBI Phase 1 was highly successful and objectives were largely met. Passenger growth on the LBIroutes is now at its greatest for over 50 years and TfL is currently investing approximately Â£50m perannum in bus priority measures across London.

References

DETR, A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone, The Stationery Office, 1998.

DETR, From Workhorse to Thoroughbred. A Better Role for Bus Travel, 1999.

- 188 -



Greater London Authority, The Mayor’s Transport Strategy, GLA, July 2001.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet is based on documentation provided by Transport for London.

Other examples

There is no direct equivalent of the LBI owing to the unique statutory arrangements prevailing in theCapital. The West Midlands Bus Showcase and Edinburgh Greenways leaflets in this resource packprovide examples of other comprehensive initiatives outside of London.

Further information

Contact the TfL Bus Priority team on: 020 7027 9408 or email: [email protected]

Alternatively you can write to:

Bus Priority ProgrammeCustomer Service Centre4th Floor172 Buckingham Palace RoadLondonSW1W 9TN

Further information can also be obtained from the web site: http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk

West Midlands Showcase

Description of need

Background

The Centro (West Midlands PTE) Twenty Year Public Transport Strategy set out objectives for thedelivery of high quality public transport services and facilities across the West Midlands. The WestMidlands Bus Strategy and Public Transport Strategy combined to provide a framework for developmentof an integrated transport system that will continue to be dominated by the bus. The West Midlands AreaMulti-Modal Study (WMAMMS, 2001) placed strong emphasis on investment in bus priority to raise theshare of peak travel by bus from 20 per cent in 1999 to more than 30 per cent by 2031.

Problems

Severe peak period traffic congestion is experienced in many parts of the West Midlands. Traffic flowsare higher than in any area outside London and there is high growth in traffic and car ownership. It isestimated that congestion costs businesses in the West Midlands Â£2.5 billion each year.

- 189 -


http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk/

Objectives

The West Midlands Bus Showcase concept was developed to deliver a radical improvement to busservices to make them attractive to new users, particularly to motorists, and to retain existing passengers.The objectives of Bus Showcase are:

to be more attractive to bus users and potential new users; to improve peak period bus speeds relative to the private car; to improve bus reliability; to reduce bus journey times; and to increase bus patronage.

Concept

The aim is to develop a Bus Showcase network on strategic routes where demand for bus travel is heavyand there is potential for growth in patronage. The high frequency of service on Showcase routes ensuresthat passengers can ’turn up and go’ without the need to seek timetable information before travelling. TheBus Showcase network complements local rail and Midland Metro through improved interchangeopportunities.

Investment in priority and route infrastructure on strategic corridors is complemented by improvements toshelters, information, accessibility and safety in other areas served by Showcase routes.

A recent development is the ’core and spurs’ approach. Core corridors have the ’turn up and go’ level ofservice and the full range of Showcase investment. Spurs are sections of route with a lower frequency ofservice feeding into main corridors where investment is limited to access, accessibility, waitingenvironment and information.

The schemes

Key principles

The Showcase concept is based on three key principles:

Achieving a ’seamless’ journey by addressing the whole journey from home to final destination,including walk stages of the journey and providing passenger information. Effective partnership between highway authorities, Centro, bus operators and police. Comprehensive consultation.

Standard features

Every completed Showcase corridor will include:

accessible and safe pedestrian routes to/from bus stops; low floor buses serving bus stops with accessible kerbing; an attractive waiting environment at bus stops with high quality shelters provided where possible; frequent bus services allowing passengers to ’turn up and go’; bus priority, selective bus detection and other highway measures to improve bus speed and reliability

- 190 -


where practical to do so; capability to provide real time information for bus passengers and automatic vehicle location forservice management by operators; commitment to service quality including frequent cleaning of buses and customer care training fordrivers; and comprehensive enforcement of highway measures.

Standards

A series of performance standards has been identified for Showcase routes. Some examples are givenbelow:

Network access: 100 per cent of built-up areas within 400 metres of a bus stop. Accessibility: 100 per cent stops with easy access kerbs, 100 per cent of buses with low floor. Peak frequency: Maximum interval of six minutes between buses from 07.00 to 20.00. Reliability: Compliance with standards set by the Traffic Commissioner. Journey times: All journey times to be the same as off-peak. Journey speed: A long term target of 95 per cent of car journey speeds in peak periods.

Delivery

Partnership

A protocol was agreed in advance of implementation of Line 33, the first Showcase route in the WestMidlands. More recent Showcase routes have been implemented on the basis of informal agreements.Consultation is taking place on a statutory Quality Bus Partnership for the Route 67 Corridor (LichfieldRoad/Tyburn Road) in Birmingham. The parties to the Agreement are the Passenger Transport Authority,Centro, Birmingham City Council, four bus operators and the West Midlands Police Authority. Theprincipal bus operator, Travel West Midands (TWM), supports the concept of statutory partnershipagreements provided that there is considerable input from all parties and close monitoring ofpost-implementation performance standards.

Consultation

Effective consultation is one of the key principles underlying the Bus Showcase concept.

The three stages of consultation are:

initial consultation on the preliminary design, including options where they are available; local consultation on shelter locations; and further consultation on detailed designs including Traffic Orders and any land acquisition.

Consultation methods include use of libraries, local halls, a low floor exhibition bus, road signs displayinga telephone ’hot line’ number, leaflet drops to all affected frontages, leaflets and posters on buses.

- 191 -


Marketing

Comprehensive marketing takes place in advance of the launch day for every new Showcase route. Atypical Showcase marketing campaign includes door-to-door delivery of timetable leaflets, advertising inthe local press and radio, information on Centro and bus operator web sites and a press release. Amarketing budget of approximately Â£25,000 is recommended.

Implementation

Line 33 Birmingham to Pheasey was the first Showcase scheme to be introduced in 1997. BirminghamCity Council and Centro spent Â£2.9 million on infrastructure and TWM invested Â£1.2 million in newbuses.

Three more routes have been completed at a combined capital cost to local authorities and Centro ofÂ£7.4 million, excluding operator contributions in the form of new buses. They are:

Primeline 20/40/48/50 Coventry to Bedworth. Superline 171/301 Walsall to Moseley. Route 559/560 Wolverhampton to Bloxwich.

A further five routes have been substantially completed at an estimated cost to local authorities and Centroof Â£16.3 million to date.

TWM has offered a contribution of up to Â£30 million to supplement public sector funding for businfrastructure in the West Midlands. By Summer 2003, more than Â£4 million had been spent orcommitted. For a project to qualify for a funding contribution there must be a business case showing abenefit to TWM. This means that the project will need to include radical bus priority measures at keycongestion ’hot spots’.

Enforcement

A trial of bus lane enforcement is planned as soon as the expected legislation is in place. Two of the sevendistricts in the West Midlands already have decriminalised parking powers in place enabling them to makeuse of the new enforcement powers.

Maintenance of standards

Maintenance of quality standards is essential for the continued success of each Showcase route. Thisinvolves maintenance of road signs and carriageway markings, speedy repair of damage to shelters,frequent cleaning of shelters and the interior and exterior of buses, keeping timetable displays up-to-date,100 per cent availability of branded buses, and cascading of older buses to lower profile services.Allocation of sufficient revenue funding to maintain quality is an essential part of the process.

- 192 -


Monitoring

Method

Comprehensive monitoring takes the form of bus and car journey time surveys, roadside bus reliabilitysurveys, automatic traffic counts and analysis of bus patronage information collected via electronic ticketmachines. Bus patronage data must be aggregated to avoid identifying passenger numbers on differentservices provided by different operators. Surveys of Showcase service users are undertaken to establishimpact on travel patterns and views on the service provided.

Impact

The impact of Bus Showcase on bus patronage and mode share varies between routes. Overall, completedShowcase routes have achieved an increase in bus patronage of between 10 and 30 per cent, and a modeshift of about 5 per cent from private car. The introduction of articulated buses on Route 67 contributed topatronage growth of 29 per cent.

The following table provides performance information for Line 33, Superline and Primeline:

Line 33 Superline Primeline

Percentage change in bus journey times:

AM peak inbound

PM peak outbound

-2

-6

+9

+4

+1

-2

Percentage change in total patronage +28.8 +22.5 +10.3

Former car users as percentage of patronage 7 13 6

Increased bus patronage and increased numbers of mobility impaired passengers has resulted in increasedbus boarding times which have the effect of reducing savings in bus journey times.

The future

Future initiatives will include pilot red route projects to keep traffic operating efficiently through bettermanagement of parking and loading, consideration of new branding proposals for the whole WestMidlands multi-modal public transport network and consideration of some form of bus rapid transitnetwork to provide an intermediate mode between Metro and Showcase.

Conclusions

Bus Showcase has been successful in a number of ways: the image of the bus has been raised, reliabilityhas been improved and there have been significant increases in bus patronage. On average, mode transferof 5 per cent has been achieved. The greatest impact was achieved when all elements of the Showcasescheme were implemented together.

- 193 -


References

Full information on the Showcase concept is given in the Bus Showcase Handbook published by Centro in2003. This can be downloaded at: www.centro.org.uk/handbook/index.htm

Periodic updates are planned.

Acknowledgements

This case study has been complied with the assistance of Centro, TWM and the West Midlands localauthorities.

Other Examples

BusPlus, London Bus Initiative.

Contact the TfL Bus Priority team on: 0207 960 6763.

Edinburgh Greenways.

Contact the Transport Projects Development Manager of the City Development Department at the City ofEdinburgh Council on:

0131 469 3630.

Further Information


Centro

Centro House

20 Summer Lane

Birmingham

B19 3SD

0121 200 2787

http://www.centro.org.uk

Leeds City Centre

- 194 -



Description of need

Background

Bus priority measures in Leeds City Centre form part of Leeds City Council’s broader transport strategyfor the city centre which comprises four main elements:

Leeds Inner Ring Road; ’city centre loop’ provides a high capacity, one-way loop around the city centre designed toefficiently allow motorised traffic to travel around the city centre, with access to the city centre atstrategic points; ’public transport box’ sits within the city centre loop around which public transport and cyclists caneasily navigate providing good access to the main retail core; and pedestrianised retail core.

Problems

During the early 1990s Leeds city centre began to face increasing competition from out of town businessand shopping centres. At the same time traffic congestion and associated problems were makingincreasing demands on the limited road space available. These issues led to a fundamental re-think abouttraffic management, designed to address the traffic problems and at the same time revitalise the city centreenvironment for its users.

Previously, most of the streets forming the box were one way and wide, up to four lanes, making itdifficult for pedestrians to cross. The one way traffic system caused confusion for bus passengers asinbound and outbound stops serving the same service were often some distance apart on different streets.

On Woodhouse Lane buses were subject to considerable disruption from other traffic, particularly on theinbound direction. Bus stops were regularly obstructed by cars waiting outside a popular supermarket.Also, buses requiring to make a right turn at the junction following the bus stop were required to cutacross a heavy traffic stream in a very short distance to access the offside lane.

Objectives

The objectives of the city centre transport strategy are to:

reduce traffic flows through the heart of the city, and thereby provide a more attractive and saferenvironment for pedestrians and cyclists; ensure that buses, taxis and cycles receive better priority in the core of the city centre; improve air quality in the city centre by reducing the volume of through traffic; create an attractive environment to encourage further retail and commercial development, byextending the pedestrianised zone in the city centre; and improve access to the city centre for disabled people and others with mobility difficulties.

- 195 -


Scheme details

Description

The public transport box is a priority route for buses, taxis and cycles, which runs around the pedestrianshopping centre via The Headrow, Vicar Lane, Boar Lane and Park Row. Cars and delivery vehicles canuse the individual sections of the box to get to car parks or businesses, but cannot travel around or go fromone section to another. At key points bus gates allow only buses, taxis and cycles through. The citycouncil has introduced Traffic Regulation Orders making it illegal for unauthorised vehicles (private cars)to drive through the bus gates. Special blue traffic signs and contrasting red road surfacing differentiatebus gates.

Key features of the scheme include:

a nearside bus gateway on West Gate which enables buses to go straight ahead whilst offside generaltraffic turn left onto the city centre loop; a bus gateway on New Market Street; a bus gateway on Vicar Lane at the junction with Eastgate; a bus gateway at the Duncan Street/New Market Street junction providing buses with an unimpededright turn; and improved circulation and control of traffic through Urban Traffic Management and Control (UTMC).

Since road space on the public transport box is so intensively used, buses can be seriously disrupted by theviolation of traffic and parking restrictions, therefore, continual enforcement of the measures is essentialto ensure smooth running of traffic.

In addition to the public transport box, a series of seven key public transport gateways were identified ascritical to providing a link between the main radial roads and the public transport box. Four of theseschemes have been implemented to date. The A660 Woodhouse Lane route to the north of the city was thefirst to be completed and is a typical example of the combination of measures used, although it employsthe innovative use of a centre of carriageway bus boarding point which is unique in Leeds.



The proposed Supertram would run along three sides of the public transport box. The futureimplementation of Supertram was taken into account in the design of the public transport box to minimisefuture disruptions.

Implementation date

The city centre loop and public transport box were completed in 1997. Changes were made to theoperation of Park Row, which forms the western vertical side of the public transport box, in May 2000.

Costs

- 196 -



The total cost of the Public Transport Box was Â£1.5 million.

The cost of the Woodhouse Lane Gateway including traffic management measures along the 1km routewas Â£1.2million.

Consultation

Public consultation on the measures was undertaken as part of the consultation exercise leading to thepublication of the City Transport Strategy in 1991 by a steering group involving, West YorkshirePassenger Transport Authority, West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive, Leeds City Council,Leeds Development Corporation and the Chamber of Commerce. Changes to traffic priorities and theclosure of streets to traffic were achieved using conventional Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) issued bythe city council.

As part of the process of implementing the TROs the city council’s City Management Team consultedbusinesses in the city centre.

Bus operators

The majority of services using the public transport box are operated by First Leeds, however, otherservices include those operated by Arriva, Black Prince Coaches, Keithley and District, YorkshireCoastliner, Yorkshire Traction and Harrogate & District Travel.

Bus frequency

There are approximately the following numbers of buses per hour in each direction on each of the sides ofthe public transport box:

80 buses per hour on the northern side along The Headrow; 65 buses per hour on the eastern side along Vicar Lane; 90 buses per hour on the southern side along Boar Lane; and 40 buses per hour on the western side along Park Road.

The A660 Woodhouse Lane gateway is used by 40 to 50 buses per hour in each direction.





Extensive peak period traffic counts were undertaken in 1990 at key city centre junctions prior toconstruction of the first phase of the public transport box. These were repeated in 2001 to provide anindication of progress and to determine a new city centre base against which future traffic changes will beassessed. (These latter counts included separate counts of taxis and private hire vehicles for which accessrestrictions to the Loop have been relaxed). In addition, there is a permanent air quality monitoring stationlocated on New Market Street which was in place prior to the changes to traffic circulation in the city

- 197 -



centre.

It is the intention of Leeds City Council to continue to monitor the impact of the strategy on the citycentre. This will include surveys to determine the public response to the continuing efforts to improve thecity centre environment for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users.

Results

Air quality

Since the public transport box was introduced monitoring has recorded a general trend of improvements inair quality (NO2, PM10), part of which can be attributed to the success of the traffic managementmeasures reducing the amount of extraneous traffic within the inner ring road and enforcement in keepingtraffic moving efficiently.

Journey times

Monitoring of the Woodhouse Lane gateway has shown that inbound buses saved between 10 and 30 percent on previous journey times. In the outbound direction, the revised signal arrangements havecompensated for the removal of the previous bus lane without any detriment to journey times.

Traffic flows

The immediate measurable impact of the city centre loop and public transport box was the removal oftraffic from the major city centre streets as shown in the table below.

Location Cars & Taxis (Buses) AM Peak 08.00-09.00

1990 2001

Park Row 1500 (70) 51 (73)

Briggate 810 (123) 0 (0)

Vicar Lane 1650 (156) 160 (130)

Examination of the city centre counts in conjunction with counts across a regular river bridge screenlineindicate that the traffic removed from the centre has been ’absorbed’ on the network with no significantproblems arising elsewhere.

Accidents

Before the construction of the city centre loop and public transport box there were typically 173 personalroad injury accidents per year in the city centre. This has dropped to an average of 150 per year followingthe introduction of the city centre loop and public transport box. The most significant reduction in casualtynumbers has been to pedestrians where the annual total has fallen from 97 to 70 per year, a reduction of 28per cent.

- 198 -


Conclusions

Reallocating road space has been crucial to many of the commercial developments which have contributedto the growth and the revitalisation of the city centre (Leeds central shopping area was ranked 3rd in theUK in 2003). The improvements have therefore contributed to wider social and economic objectivesthrough the increased attractiveness of Leeds as a retail and business centre. The reduction of traffic in andaround the city centre has produced a more pleasant environment for pedestrians and cyclists.

The city centre measures have included a mix of established traffic management measures and innovationto make better use of road space. Therefore, the most important lesson to be learnt from these projects isthat measures have to be designed around local conditions.

The full benefits of the city centre loop and public transport box will not be finally realised until LeedsInner Ring Road Stage 7, the final element of the original 1990 city centre traffic management strategy, iscompleted. This will remove further extraneous traffic from the city centre. The road space reallocationbenefits will become fully apparent once the Leeds Supertram is introduced into the city centre.

Acknowledgements

This case study was produced with the assistance of Leeds City Council and Metro (West YorkshirePassenger Transport Executive) and First Leeds. Further Information on the Leeds city centre bus prioritymeasures can be obtained from:

Leeds City CouncilHighways and Transport DepartmentThe Leonardo Building,2 Rossington Street,Leeds, LS2 8HB

0113 2477500 http://www.leeds.gov.uk

Other examples

The concept of the city centre loop and public transport box is unique. The priority bus gates wereindividually designed to suit the particular situations drawing on standard bus priority measures. However,there are good examples of priority bus gates in Wolverhampton City Centre.

Further information

Further information can be found in "Reallocating road space to buses and high occupancy vehicles inLeeds, Hall, A. W." published in Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Municipal Engineer145, March 2001, Issue 1.

- 199 -



Oxford, Historic City

Description of need

Background

In the 1970s Oxford rejected road building as the answer to the problem of increased demand for traveldue to the unacceptable environmental and property impacts and a desire to preserve the nature of the city.Instead the Balanced Transport Policy was developed, made up of a number of elements including parkand ride schemes, parking controls, pedestrianisation and bus priority on the main radial routes into thecity and city centre.

Twenty years later in 1993 the Oxford Transport Strategy (OTS) was developed as a continuation of theBalanced Transport Policy initiated in the early 1970s. This was also a response to pedestrian/bus conflictsin the city centre shopping streets. Again enhanced park and ride remained central to the strategy. Inassociation with this it was proposed to establish a bus priority route, enhance parking controls in the citycentre and discourage through traffic by introducing bus gates and restricting the use of more streetsthrough pedestrianisation, buses only and bus and access only in the city centre during the daytime.

Oxford is a regional centre for employment, shopping and entertainment serving a population of half amillion people as well as home to a large educational economy. The city is also a major tourist destinationattracting approximately two million visits each year. The historic road structure in the city centre,combined with the increased demand for travel, puts enormous pressure on the road and public transportnetworks. The adopted transport strategy allows the consequent considerable travel demands to besuccessfully accommodated on a largely medieval road network, whilst protecting the historicenvironment and supporting Oxford’s economy.

Objectives

The Oxford Transport Strategy aimed to produce a step change in travel to and through the city centre, inorder to release space for buses diverted from the pedestrianised Cornmarket Street. By reducing the levelof private car traffic in the city it was hoped that conditions would improve for more sustainable modesincluding walking and cycling. It was also hoped that the continued development of bus priority andtraffic management schemes would stop traffic transferring to alternative routes in other parts of the citywithout increasing congestion or adding to environmental degradation.

Scheme details

Description

Before the city centre changes, allowing the pedestrainisation of the main shopping street and the daytimeexclusion of through traffic, were introduced a package of accommodation measures were put in place.These were aimed at encouraging further modal shift to more sustainable modes and accommodatingtraffic routes changes. The works included a series of bus gates creating bus and pedestrian zones onQueen Street and Broad Street, the full pedestrianisation of Cornmarket Street and areas that can be usedonly by buses and access vehicles on High Street, Park End Street and Norfolk Street. Access restrictionsapply 07.30 - 18.30 (10.00 - 18.00 on George Street).

- 200 -


There have been improvements to the railway station forecourt and its approach including a segregatedbus stopping area and signal controlled access to the station.

The improvements to radial routes included junction improvements to assist buses in entering the mainflow of traffic. One example is on Woodstock Road, where park and ride buses leaving the Pear Tree parkand ride site use a with-flow bus lane and a signal controlled bus gate to give buses priority over othertraffic when entering the main carriageway. Improvements were also made at the signalised junction to theRedbridge park and ride site on Abingdon Road and on Botley Road to assist buses from the Seacourtpark and ride.



The Oxford Transport Strategy also involves the use of SCOOT traffic signal controls to give busespriority at signalised junctions. This measure has not fulfilled its full potential as the network is close tocapacity for much for the time and therefore it has not been possible to give a substantial benefit to buses.Oxfordshire County Council pioneered working in partnership with the Highways Agency to introducebus lanes on trunk roads between Thornhill and Pear Tree park and ride sites and the ring road.

Cost

The cost of the strategy measures implemented in the 1990s is estimated at Â£23 million. This included apackage of measures such as bus lane extensions, pedestrianisation, traffic management and capacityenhancements. However, park and ride facilities are not included in this total.

Bus operators

Oxford is in the unusual position of having two strongly competitive bus companies with local operationsof similar size. The Oxford Bus Company and Stagecoach in Oxfordshire match each other service forservice on most routes in the city. This has contributed to a spiral of success in terms of the quality ofservice and vehicles provided in the city. It is also reflected in the high frequency of services running inevenings and on Sundays, creating an environment where public transport is an attractive option for mostjourney purposes. For example, services combine to give a headway of four minutes between buses onCowley Road on Sunday mornings. This gives the population confidence in public transport as analternative to private car.

The Oxford Bus Company plans to introduce smartcards during autumn 2004. It is hoped this willimprove reliability and halve the average boarding time on their services, which currently stands at eightseconds per passenger.

Another initiative used in Oxford is route branding, with schemes such as the Brookes Bus, funded byOxford Brookes University, linking campuses and the city centre. This group of services was introducedprimarily for students, but they are well used by members of the public as well.

- 201 -




Monitoring of traffic levels within the city has been underway since the first wave of bus priority in the1970s. This monitoring was further developed to assess the impacts of the Oxford Transport Strategy,looking not just at traffic flows but at other transport indicators such as air quality, journey times andmodal shift:

Automatic traffic counters are used to monitor traffic flows and are positioned around the city centreand just inside the ring road to give continuous data. Surveys of bus journey times were carried out between October and November 1999 and the resultscompared with similar surveys in the previous year. Both of the main bus operators collect information on passenger numbers. Modal shift is analysed through annual classified surveys - the 1991 survey is used to give a pictureof Oxford before the Oxford Transport Strategy programme started. The air quality review was developed through European Union funding of a project calledEnvironmental Monitoring of Integrated Transport Strategies which aims to monitor air qualitychanges associated with changes in traffic levels. This examined amongst other things level of carbonmonoxide and nitrogen dioxide.

Results

Traffic flows

Cordon counts into the central area show that there has been no increase in traffic flows entering the citycentre since the early 1970s. A reduction in traffic flow by an average of 18 per cent was measuredbetween 1999 and 2002. The eastern radial corridors experienced the greatest impact with a reduction of30 per cent over Magdalen Bridge (on the eastern approach to the city), whilst the southern radials wereleast affected with a reduction of only 9 per cent.

The level of traffic on High Street after the bus gate was introduced reduced by 60 per cent between 1999and 2002 (12 hour average weekday).

Some routes have experienced an increase in traffic as vehicles are displaced from the central city streets.For example, Marston Ferry Road (north of Oxford centre) experienced a 12 per cent increase andDonnington Bridge (south east of Oxford centre) experienced an increase in the range 10 - 16 per cent inthe year following implementation.

Journey times

On a two km stretch of bus lane introduced in 1997 from Kidlington to Summertown, journey times werehalved from eight minutes to four minutes. Abingdon Road also experienced a reduction, with journeytimes being halved on the section from the ring road to the bus gate.

Bus patronage

- 202 -


Bus patronage has increased annually by 8-9 per cent since 1999. The modal share has also show a movefrom the use of private car towards bus.

Comparison of modal split between 1991 and 2002

Mode 1991 2002

Car Use 54 39

Bus Use 27 44

Other 19 17

Source: Oxfordshire County Council

Air quality

There has been a 75 per cent reduction in the levels of carbon monoxide at St Aldates and a 20 per centreduction in particulate matter on Cornmarket Street. The majority of air monitoring sites in the city showa reduction in the level of nitrogen dioxide.

Conclusions

Bus priority measures in Oxford have been effective as part of a package of measures includingpedestrianisation of central areas and park and ride to create a modal shift from private car to publictransport. Unlike many areas of the country, bus patronage has increased steadily with an 80 per centincrease between 1985 and 1998, in fact Oxfordshire has the second highest rate of bus use of the shirecounties and is one of the least car dependent cities in the country. The lengthy experience of bus priorityin the city has created an environment of acceptance of priority measures as part of the infrastructure ofthe city.

The city has a strong pro cycling image which has been reinforced by the reduction in traffic on centralstreets, as cyclists feel safer and more confident.

The future

Since implementation of the first bus priority schemes in the 1970s, the city has experienced considerablechange in travel patterns, partly reflecting the growth of towns and villages elsewhere in Oxfordshire.Given continual change, a number of corridors including Woodstock Road and Banbury Road are beingreviewed to assess the scope for strengthening bus priority. In particular, there is a need to determinewhether inbound or outbound bus priority will yield the greater benefit in locations where the carriagewayis only wide enough to allow a bus lane to be introduced in one direction.

There is increasing abuse of bus lanes and bus gates by moving vehicles. Advantage will be taken oflegislation to enable camera enforcement of bus lanes and bus gates.

- 203 -


Over the next ten years Oxfordshire County Council is planning to development a Premium RoutesNetwork to give buses priority and enhanced frequency on links between urban centres. There is also aproposal for a Guided Transit Express scheme to serve the Redbridge and Pear Tree park and ride sites,with possible extensions to Heyford Hill, Headington and along the A40 corridor to Witney.

References

Director of Environmental Services, Oxford Transport Strategy Working Party - 27 October 2000: Reviewof impact of the central area changes, October 2000.

Oxford City Council Transport in Oxford, Topic paper, December 2003.

Oxfordshire County Council Best Practice Guides, January 2003.

R Williams, Oxford’s park and ride system, Municipal Engineer 133 (p127-135), September 1999.

Acknowledgements

This document was produced with the assistance of Oxfordshire County Council, Oxford Bus Companyand Stagecoach in Oxfordshire. Further information on bus priority measures in Oxford can be obtainedfrom:

Oxfordshire County Council,

Speedwell House,

Speedwell Street,

Oxford ON1 1NE.

The Environment and Economy Department can be contacted on:

01865 815700 or visit http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk.

Other examples

York


Winchester


Further information

Oxfordshire County Council Best Practice Guide No 3 Urban Bus priority is available from OxfordshireCounty Council at the above address.

- 204 -


http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/

Newport, Smaller Towns

Description of need

Background

Newport, in South Wales, is the main hub of the regional bus network, with the majority of inter-urbanservices commencing/terminating at its bus station. Traffic levels in Newport have increased by 22%between 1990 and 2000; these are exacerbated by the riverside location of Newport, which restrictseast-west traffic to three main crossing points.

Market research, undertaken by the TIGER (Transport Integration in the Gwent Economic Region)Consortium in 2000, recorded that 97% of respondents rated bus service reliability as either ’important’ or’very important’.

A draft feasibility study, completed in March 2000, identified a number of locations where bus prioritymeasures could increase bus service reliability. Phase 1 - Between Chepstow Road /Harrow Road and OldGreen Roundabout was the main scheme and subject to the most comprehensive monitoring.

Problems

Rising congestion levels had increased bus journey times, and reduced the predictability of bus arrivaltimes. This led to a decline in patronage levels with an associated increase in car use, which waseconomically and environmentally unsustainable.

Objectives

The primary aims of the Newport bus priority scheme were ’to reduce journey times and improve thereliability of bus services on the main corridors radiating from Newport city centre, by creating a highwayinfrastructure designed to give priority to buses’.

The secondary aims of the scheme are to increase bus patronage and reduce dependence on the private car.

Scheme details

Phase 1:

Between Chepstow Road/Harrow Road and Old Green Roundabout

Description

A number of measures were carried out to improve bus priority as part of Phase 1:

â¢ Installation of westbound bus, cycle, motorbike and taxi lanes totalling 550 metres in length,operational between 07:00 and 19:00;

- 205 -


â¢ Relocation of existing eastbound bus stop at Crown Buildings to dedicated bus bay;

â¢ Town Bridge carriageway converted from substandard 4-lane carriageway to three standard lanes withan eastbound bus lane; and

â¢ New traffic signals operated under MOVA (Microprocessor Optimised Vehicle Actuation) controldesigned to minimise the impact on the Cenotaph.

Implementation date

Works began in September 2001 and were completed in December 2001.

Costs The Welsh Assembly supported the scheme through the Transport Grant funding. The total cost forPhase 1 and Phase 2 was Â£550,000.

Consultation

Consultation consisted of the following elements:

Public Consultation Exhibition (details per sample leaflet), advertised by press release, posters inshops, libraries and buses. Additional leaflet drop to all businesses/residents, whose property frontsthe scheme. Publication of Statutory public notices detailing proposed Traffic Regulation Order;

Bus operators and frequencies

During core hours (08:00 to 18:00) an average of 33 buses per hour utilise the Clarence Place/TownBridge section as detailed below:

Newport Transport operate 11 routes in this corridor, linking the east of the town with the town centre.

Stagecoach in South Wales operate three inter urban routes on this corridor, linking Newport with Magor,Caldicot, Caerwent, Chepstow and Gloucester.

Drakes Travel operate evening services for one route on the Newport to Chepstow Corridor.

Welcome Travel operate a single return journey between Caerwent and Newport.




Reliability

A series of surveys were undertaken to assess the impact of the bus corridor improvements on thereliability of services.

- 206 -




Before and after surveys were undertaken at Newport Bus Station on two days (Tuesday and Friday)enabling a statistically robust sample size to be achieved, reflecting variability between reliability levelson different days of the week.

Samples were recorded between 07:00 and 19:00 to ensure that the majority of services were recorded andthat the effect of variations that occurred throughout the day were minimised.

Following collection of the data, the recorded arrival time for each service was compared to the scheduledarrival time and variations recorded.


The Traffic Commissioners’ standards are that 95% of services should arrive no earlier than one minute orlater than five minutes compared with the registered timetable. The data was analysed to determine thepercentage of services that were more than five minutes late.

In addition data was also analysed to provide an indication of the average length of time services arrivedafter the scheduled arrival time.

The impact of measures is likely to be greater on local services than inter-urban routes, as the prioritymeasures account for a greater proportion of the local service journey length. To reflect this pattern,analysis was split between urban and inter-urban routes.

Tables 1 and 2 show before and after monitoring information for services using Chepstow Road.

Tables 1 and 2 show before and after monitoring information for services using Chepstow Road

Conclusions

In overall terms, the reliability of Chepstow Road services entering Newport bus station has increased.The percentage of services that met the Traffic Commissioner’s criterion has increased from 76% to 87%.In addition, the average lateness for all services has reduced by 31 seconds.

Newport urban services have demonstrated an improvement in reliability, with 95% of the sampleentering the bus station within the Traffic Commissioner’s criterion. The quality of service has alsoimproved, with average lateness reducing by 45 seconds.

For inter-urban services there is a 10% improvement in services arriving within the TrafficCommissioner’s criterion. The greatest benefit has been a reduction in average lateness by 2 minutes and49 seconds. This is extremely significant as the average lateness now falls within the target set by theTraffic Commissioner.

While the scheme may only impact on the final stage of inter-urban services, this section is often the mostimportant for passengers, as it can be extremely frustrating to complete the majority of your journey, onlyto be delayed by congestion at the end.

- 207 -



In conclusion the scheme has resulted in a positive impact on reliability of bus services.

Bus patronage monitoring

Changes in the level of bus patronage provide a valuable measure of the impact of this scheme on travelhabits.

To determine the impact of this scheme on travel habits, Electronic Ticket Machine (ETM) data wascollected from the main regional bus operators before and after the works.


Annual surveys are undertaken to determine the number of passenger journeys completed on each sampleroute, over a 31-day sample period. Data collection commences on the Sunday nearest the 1st October ofeach sample year, to ensure collection of an equal number of peak and off-peak days.


To maintain operational confidentiality, results are recorded on an index, which illustrates relative trendsin travel, without determining the performance of an individual route or operator.

Analysis was undertaken on both local and inter urban services which utilise the scheme measures on theirroute.

Table 3: Scheme impact on bus patronage

Before After % Difference

Total 100 106.2 6.2%

The rise in patronage, as shown in Table 3, demonstrates the positive impact of the scheme in promotingincreased bus use. The increase in patronage has been achieved against a historical trend of declining buspatronage (Since 1996/97, bus patronage levels in South Wales have declined by nearly 11%).

Analysis of TIGER Package A - (Ebbw Vale/Brynmawr to Newport and Chepstow bus corridorimprovement scheme) indicated that on this corridor as a whole, patronage on inter-urban bus services hadincreased by 2.85% between 2000 (pre-scheme) and 2001 (post-scheme), compared to a 4.16% decline inpatronage in the region as a whole over the same period.

Conclusions

The increase in patronage by over 6% indicates the added value of the scheme in promoting additionaltravel on local services.

Operators’ comments

- 208 -


One of the main aims of the scheme is to enable the bus operators to provide reliable services that can beseen as a viable alternative to the private car.

While the data-monitoring programme has been designed to analyse the various impacts of the scheme(such as journey time and reliability), these only provide a snapshot of the impact during the sampleperiod. By contrast operational experience has been gained on a daily basis, therefore the importance ofthis method of monitoring cannot be over emphasised.

The impact of the scheme on their bus services will vary between operators, depending on their servicepatterns. For example the greatest impact was anticipated to be on Newport Transport services, given thatthey operate a number of high frequency bus services, with the scheme accounting of a quarter of theroute length. By contrast Stagecoach services are long distance, with a lower frequency, of which thescheme will only account for a low percentage of the total route length, albeit this section has experiencedthe greatest delays with a detrimental effect on operational reliability.


To assess the impact, interviews were held with the managers of each of the three main bus-operatingcompanies. These identified a number of common benefits and issues.

The positive impact of the scheme is summarised with the following quote from the major regionaloperator in respect of bus priority measures currently being planned on Malpas Road:

’We support any measures to give buses priority at a time when the general trend is for increasing busjourney times due to ever increasing congestion and on street parking. I sincerely hope that any pressure toreduce the benefits of these proposals are resisted and that the good work already achieved elsewhere inNewport (on Chepstow Road) can also be applied in this area’.

The main benefits of the various bus priority measures identified by the operators are:

Increased journey time reliability; Reduction of lost/cancelled service; More efficient fleet utilisation; Reduced journey times through the ability to by-pass congestion; Service enhancements increased frequency without additional vehicles; More effective route planning; Increased operational efficiency; Increased customer satisfaction; Improved working environment for driver aiding recruitment and retention; and Publicity benefits.

One of the main benefits identified by operators is the ability to run a reliable service. In particular, thereduction of journey times along the scheme enables companies to make up time ’lost’ along morecongested sections of the route. This provides benefits to passengers as the increased stability of thenetwork results in fewer services being cancelled or rescheduled at short notice. This also enables servicesto operate consistently within the guidelines set by the Traffic Commissioner.

- 209 -


Despite concerns about enforcement, negative publicity and congestion on untreated sections of the routenegating scheme benefits, the bus priority scheme has provided a range of benefits to the operators, whichenable service enhancements to the travelling public, encouraging increased bus use.

Acknowledgements

This was produced with the assistance of Newport City Council and Capita Symonds.

Further information

Further information on this special initiative can be obtained from:

Glyn Stickler, Newport City Council, Civic Centre, Newport, NP9 4UR http://www.newport.gov.uk

Other examples

In addition to this scheme there are two further schemes in the Newport area:

A48 Cardiff Road Bus priority measures: Physical work completed, however re-phasing of traffic lightsongoing to optimise traffic flows. In addition, on going construction of Newport Strategic DistributorRoad, has resulted in traffic diverting along Cardiff road, preventing accurate scheme monitoring.

Malpas Road Bus Priority measures: Physical work on Malpas Road was completed in June 2004 and isnow fully operational.

Newport Intelligent Traffic Signals: Implementation of traffic signal priority for buses throughtransponder activation. Transport Grant funding application approved by Welsh Assembly Government.Work due to commence in next financial year.


Description of need

Background

During 2001 a new traffic management scheme was introduced in West Bromwich to tackle trafficcongestion, discourage through traffic and improve conditions for buses and pedestrians. The schemeincluded several bus priority measures. In 2002 a new bus station was introduced to provide increasedcapacity, improve accessibility and enhance interchange with Midland Metro.

A vision to regenerate the town centre emerged from a master planning exercise. The main elements of thetransport strategy were conversion of the West Bromwich Ringway from a one-way gyratory to a two-waycarriageway with bus priority and a bus gate to discourage through traffic, reduce peak period congestion,allow all cross-town bus services to call at the bus station and improve conditions for pedestrians.Relocation of the bus station released land to accommodate a new town square and a centre linking art andthe creative use of technology.

- 210 -


http://www.newport.gov.uk/

Midland Metro Line 1 was opened in 1999 and passes to the south of West Bromwich town centre. Oneobjective of the strategy was to encourage use of Midland Metro by discouraging through traffic in WestBromwich town centre. It was hoped that this would also be of benefit to Showcase Route 404 (Walsall -West Bromwich - Blackheath).

Problems

The West Bromwich Ringway acted as a large gyratory system carrying all traffic around the town centrein a clockwise direction. Buses were delayed in peak period traffic congestion on the Ringway and theroads approaching junctions on the Ringway. In free-flow conditions traffic speeds were high. Pedestriansrelied on unattractive subways to cross the Ringway to the retail core and bus station. The old bus stationwas not fully accessible, did not present an attractive environment and lacked capacity. Not all busservices could use the old bus station - cross-town services routed via High Street on both sides of thetown centre did not call to avoid the need to make a complete circuit of the Ringway before resuming theirroute. The old bus station was remote from the West Bromwich Central tram stop and therefore did notcater for bus/tram interchange.



Objectives

The Transport Strategy for the town centre included the following objectives:

Moving the Bus Station to a site closer to the Midland Metro tram stop to encourage bus/traminterchange; Ensuring that all bus services could use call at the new Bus Station without the need to followcircuitous routes; Removing bus stops on the Ringway thereby reducing the need for bus users to cross the Ringway; Providing priority for buses, taxis and cyclists on the Ringway; Providing an element of traffic restraint by discouraging through traffic; Imposing parking charges in the town centre; and Improving safety and the environment for pedestrians by replacing subways under the Ringway withtraffic signal controlled crossings.

Scheme details

Description

West Bromwich Ringway was converted from a one-way gyratory to a two-way road. Traffic signalcontrol with SCOOT was implemented at all main junctions on the Ringway. It was anticipated that thenumber of traffic signal installations on the Ringway would help to discourage through traffic.

A new bus station was built on the south side of the retail core, releasing the site of the former bus stationfor other uses. A bus gate was provided on the western side of the Ringway to improve conditions forbuses and pedestrians, and to reduce the level of traffic using the western side of the Ringway. Aninbound with-flow bus lane was provided on High Street to give priority to buses, taxis and cyclists.

- 211 -



Traffic signal control was provided at the new bus station entry/exit on the south side of the Ringway, abuses only right turn lane was provided to assist westbound buses enter the bus station, and a surfacepedestrian route was provided to West Bromwich Central tram stop with a traffic signal crossing of theRingway.

Traffic calming works were undertaken in a number of streets to prevent traffic avoiding the Ringway byusing alternative routes around the town centre.

The new West Bromwich bus station has 22 stands and is capable of handling up to 220 departures anhour. It is fully accessible with raised kerbs at all stands; there is a fully enclosed passenger area withbus-operated doors at all stands; and it includes CCTV surveillance and electronic passenger informationdisplays.

Implementation date

West Bromwich Ringway was converted from a one-way gyratory to two-way carriageway in August2001. The with-flow bus lane on High Street, the bus gate on New Street, the buses only right turn onCronehills Linkway and side road traffic calming were all introduced at this time. The new bus stationopened in April 2002.

Costs

The main element of the funding package was a major Local Transport Plan bid submitted to governmentjointly by Sandwell Council and Centro. The total cost of the project was Â£11.3 million of which thenew bus station accounted nearly 50 per cent.

Planning context and consultation

The master plan for West Bromwich town centre was subjected to public consultation during May andJune 1998. The strategy for traffic management and public transport was an integral part of the masterplan. Consultation took the form of a public exhibition in the Queen Square retail area of the town centre,written consultation with all town centre businesses and distribution of 10,000 explanatory leaflets. Themaster plan was adopted as an Interim Planning Statement in 1999 and now forms part of the SandwellUnitary Development Plan Review adopted by the Borough Council in April 2004.

Further consultation focusing on the proposals for traffic management and public transport took place in1999 and included written consultation with all town centre businesses and discussions with the owners ofproperties affected by the scheme. There was also a statutory process of consultation associated with aCompulsory Purchase Order and Traffic Regulation Orders.

Bus operators

Travel West Midlands is the principal bus operator serving West Bromwich. The only other operator ofsubstantial size is Pete’s Travel. Both companies operate buses on Showcase Route 404 linking Walsalland West Bromwich.

- 212 -


Bus frequency

During a typical weekday inter-peak hour there are 141 departures from West Bromwich bus station, 27inbound buses using the bus lane on High Street and a two-way total of 124 buses using the bus gate onNew Street.


Dates and type of surveys

A biennial roadside cordon survey is undertaken at locations on all approaches to West Bromwich towncentre as part of the Local Transport Plan monitoring process. Public transport counts are taken at thesame time. Data collection takes place in late March each year.

Data for the year 2000 represents the before situation and precedes the commencement of works. Datacollected in 2002 represents the situation after completion of the traffic management and bus prioritymeasures. The new bus station was not opened until April 2002, after completion of the 2002 surveys.

Type of surveys

Three types of information were collected: â¢ Automatic Traffic Count (ATC) data was collected on allapproaches to the town centre.

Manual classified counts were carried out at four of the survey sites to provide assessments of modalsplit and vehicle occupancy. A bus cordon survey provided counts of bus passenger numbers.

Results

In comparing ’before and after’ traffic and public transport data for West Bromwich it is necessary to beaware that Midland Metro Line 1 opened in May 1999 and patronage continued to build up in the period2000-2002. This makes it difficult to isolate the impact of the changes to the West Bromwich Ringwayand the accompanying bus priority measures.

The key findings of a comparison of data for 2000 and 2002 are summarised below:

The number of car trips crossing the cordon around West Bromwich town centre has decreased. The mode share accounted for by public transport has increased and now accounts for 32.2% of alltrips in West Bromwich.

Table 1 shows the reduction in the number of vehicles crossing the town centre cordon during differentperiods of the day. Some substantial reductions were recorded between 2000 and 2002 - 16 per cent in themorning peak period, 12.5 per cent in the afternoon peak period and 12.5 per cent in a 12 hour day (07.00- 19.00).

Table 1 shows the reduction in the number of vehicles crossing the town centre cordon during differentperiods of the day

- 213 -




Implementation of the scheme provides a number of benefits for bus operators: it establishes aninterchange that can be served by all bus services and the location of the new bus station catered forbus/tram interchange. The time savings from reduced peak period traffic congestion and avoidance of theneed for circuitous routes around the Ringway were used to improve reliability rather than to reducescheduled journey times.

Monitoring data indicates an increase in the annual number of bus passengers using West Bromwich busstation from 5.83 million before the scheme to a current level of 6.27 million representing an increase of 7per cent. It is estimated that opening of the new bus station resulted in a 1 per cent transfer from car to busequating to an annual reduction of 62,600 car trips.

Table 2 shows the change in mode share crossing the West Bromwich town centre cordon in the period1998 - 2002.

Table 2 shows the change in mode share crossing the West Bromwich town centre cordon in the period1998 - 2002

Future developments

A Tesco-led retail development on the north side of the town centre will result in diversion of theRingway to the north of the proposed development. This will enable realisation of the ’town square’concept with better operating conditions for buses and further improvement to the environment forpedestrians.

All traffic signal installations in the Ringway are under SCOOT control and the controllers are set up forselective vehicle detection using GPS technology. This system will be activated once equipment is fittedto buses operating on services in the area.

The Council intends to take advantage of the expected legislation permitting the use of cameras for thedetection of moving vehicle infringements of bus lanes and the New Street bus gate in order to controlincreasing abuse by general traffic.

Conclusions

The reduction in traffic crossing the West Bromwich town centre cordon between 2000 and 2002 suggeststhat there has been a reduction in through traffic resulting from the restraint imposed by the New Streetbus gate and the number of sets of traffic signals to be passed on the Ringway. The future introduction ofselective bus detection and the ability to use camera enforcement should make the bus priority measuresmore effective.

Relocation of the bus station, the introduction of two-way traffic on the Ringway and the provision of awith-flow bus lane on High Street permitted the concentration of all bus services in the bus stationimproving access to the retail core and encouraging bus/tram interchange.

- 214 -




Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council, Centro andTravel West Midlands.

Other examples

Leeds city centre

Further information from Leeds City Council

(or see the case study in this resource pack)

Wolverhampton (use of bus gates in city centre)

Wolverhampton City Council

Regeneration & Transportation

Heatun House

Salop Street

Wolverhampton

WV3 0SQ

01902 555745

http://www.wolverhampton.gov.uk

Further information

Further information on the West Bromwich scheme can be obtained from:

Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council

Department of Planning and Development Services

Development House

Lombard Street

West Bromwich

B70 8RU

0121 569 4136 http://www.sandwell.gov.uk

- 215 -


http://www.wolverhampton.gov.uk/

http://www.sandwell.gov.uk/

Centro Centro House

20 Summer Lane

Birmingham

B19 3SD

0121 200 2787 http://www.centro.org.uk

Case studies

Guide to case studies

Introduction

This section of the resource pack contains a series of case studies by type of bus priority measureproviding practical information drawn from experience of successful bus priority schemes implementedaround the country.

The case studies are designed to demonstrate the range of possible measures and also give some indicationof under what conditions they might be suitable for consideration. It is important to remember that thereisn’t an ’off the shelf’ solution that will maximise the benefits to buses regardless of location. The mostappropriate measure in any one location will depend upon the local conditions prevailing in that area.Traffic levels, the number and frequency of bus services, available carriageway width and the types ofproperties fronting onto the road are some of the factors that need to be taken into account whenconsidering the most appropriate bus priority measure for that location.

The case studies

Groups of measures are colour-coded to assist navigation of the case studies in this section.

The first group covers with-flow and contra-flow bus lanes (light purple). These measures mark out a laneof the carriageway for use by buses. They require sufficient carriageway width to enable them to beinstalled. With-flow lanes are amongst the most commonly adopted physical bus priority measures in thiscountry. Contra-flow bus lanes, where the buses travel in the opposite direction to the main flow ofvehicles, are less common but can be useful for example by providing a more direct route to a town centrethan is available for general traffic. They also tend to be self enforcing. Further development of theconventional with-flow bus lane can include more comprehensive corridor/whole route treatments such asgreen routes (dark purple).

Bus gates and rising bollards (dark blue) tend to be considered when access to a particular street is to berestricted to buses (and any other designated vehicle e.g. taxi or cycle). Bus gates can be traffic signals,actuated by the buses or simply signs restricting access to buses. Rising bollards provide a physical barrierthat lowers out of the way when actuated by the bus. They can be particularly useful in enabling directaccess by bus to areas where it is desirable to prevent other vehicles entering, such as shopping streets in

- 216 -



town and city centres.

Guided busways (blue) are a method for obtaining complete physical segregation of buses from other roadtraffic. As the name implies, a guided bus is one that travels on its own dedicated carriageway or trackwhich ’guides’ the steering of the bus. Higher speeds can be achieved in the guideway and the presence ofthe guideway infrastructure can help impart the impression that guided busways offer some of theattributes of a light rail scheme. They are, also by their design, self enforcing.

The five case studies on pre signals and bus advance areas, Selective Vehicle Detection (SVD), MOVA,Bus SCOOT and Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) (light green) are examples of different technologybased solutions to providing bus priority. Pre signals and bus advance areas enable the bus to get to thefront of other traffic at junctions. The other four are sometimes referred to as ’virtual’ bus priority in thatthey do not require any physical space to implement them. In contrast to measures requiring physical useof road space, these measures use various methods of communication to detect the presence of buses andactivate traffic lights to give priority to buses at junctions. The various technologies described in thesecase studies range from those which detect when a bus arrives at the traffic lights and then seeks to turnthe lights green for the bus as soon as possible, through to technologies which can detect the location of abus as it passes along its route and seek to set the lights ahead to provide priority to the bus.

Mixed priority street and bus friendly traffic calming (green) are traffic management techniques that allowbuses to operate in street environments which are more sympathetic to pedestrians and cyclists whilst alsoaffording some priority to buses. Traffic calming measures may be suitable in areas where bus servicesrun infrequently and the case for bus priority may be relatively weak. The introduction of well designedtraffic management measures can improve the general flow of traffic, which benefits buses too. Thisapproach may best suit semi-rural areas and small to medium-sized towns, where there is often simply notenough available road space to introduce certain types of bus priority.

The group which includes High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes and no-car lanes (yellow) are variantson the bus lane approach but differ in their designation of the type of vehicle allowed into the prioritylane. HOV lanes can be suitable where there are insufficient bus services to justify a full bus lane, butthere is a desire to give priority to vehicles with more than just one person on board. No car lanes aresometimes considered in town centres where the authority also wishes to give assistance to delivery lorriesand to motorcycles.

Park and ride (orange) focuses on getting people to use the bus instead of their cars, for the final leg oftheir inward journey. It requires sufficient space on the edge of town centres to provide adequate parkingfacilities. Park and ride schemes will also usually incorporate a high level of bus priority on the transferroute so that potential passengers can see a clear benefit over the private car.

All of the measures described in these case studies should be supported by complementary measures (red).Measures to improve the bus stop environment can help improve boarding times and speed up services.Other measures such as prepaid ticketing can also assist this process. These final two case study leafletsprovide a number of different examples of complementary measures.

- 217 -


With-flow bus lanes

Description of need

Background

A strategic transport study carried out in 1995 predicted traffic and pollution problems that centralLeicestershire would face in the next ten years. The research showed that radical measures would beneeded to reduce car use, congestion and pollution.

Longer-term measures would need to include:

congestion charging; park and ride facilities; and better public transport.

The first park and ride scheme was introduced in 1997 for the west of the city. The local authorityintroduced extensive with-flow bus lanes for all public bus services as well as the park and ride services.

Problems

The key predictions from the transport study for central Leicestershire were:

the total number of journeys will increase by 11 per cent; the proportion of trips made by car will increase and car travel will account for 81 per cent of persontrip miles; there will be greater pressure on city centre parking; walking, cycling and bus use will all decline; road traffic accidents will increase by 19 per cent; and emissions of COÂ² and other pollutants will increase by 15 to 20 per cent.

Objectives

As part of Leicester’s park and ride strategy, the bus initiative aimed to:

make the city centre more accessible; provide high quality bus services to and from the city centre from surrounding areas; increase the number of people using the bus for all journeys; reduce the number of car journeys into the city centre; reduce pressure on city centre parking; and help cut pollution and improve the environment.

Scheme details

Description

- 218 -


The project included the following elements:

24 hour bus lanes (permitting cyclists, and taxis as of 1999); red surfacing of bus lanes; and minor junction improvements.

In total, 4.5km of bus lanes were introduced over a total road length of 6km. Entering the city (inbound),bus lanes are usually continuous and provide a high level of priority for local and park and ride buses.However, leaving the city (outbound), bus lanes were only introduced at major hot spots due to thenarrowness of the road.

Owing to the considerable length of the bus lanes along Hinckley Road, there are a number of differentfrontage types. Industrial, retail and residential land uses are all found alongside the bus lanes, residentialbeing the most prevalent.

Implementation date

The scheme was completed in August 1997.

Costs

The total cost of the bus priority measures was Â£1.2 million.

Consultation

Public exhibitions were held along with roadside and household questionnaires. The police were alsoconsulted. They requested that bus lanes that permitted shared use with cyclists should be at least 3.5metres wide. The width of bus lane on Hinckley Road varies between 3.0 and 3.5 metres; this is largelydependent on the available carriageway width.

Bus operators

The main bus operators running services along the Hinckley Road corridor are First Leicester and ArrivaMidland. Less frequent services are operated by Stagecoach Midland Red and Centrebus.

Bus frequency

Park and ride buses on this corridor operate four buses an hour at peak times. Frequencies of otherservices on Hinckley Road vary between 1 and 6 per hour, with a combined total of at least 30 buses perhour operating over the Glenfield Street to St Nicholas Circle section of the bus lane.




- 219 -



Dates of surveys

The scheme corridor was monitored before implementation in 1997 and after implementation, in January1998.

Types of surveys

As part of the project, the effects on general traffic and bus passengers were monitored. The main surveyareas were bus and car journey times, traffic flows into the city and park and ride use.

Results

Traffic flows

Traffic flow was recorded on Leicester’s principal routes during the project. The county council’sautomatic traffic counters on the A47 Hinckley Road recorded similar levels of traffic before and after theinitiative. Weekday inbound flows increased by 6 per cent between October 1997 and May 1998, whileoutbound flows reduced by 2 per cent.

However, during the morning inbound peak hour, the Hinckley Road corridor saw a 17 per cent reductionin vehicles, from 1,100 to 910. There was a similar reduction of 150 vehicles during the afternoonoutbound peak.

Journey times

Comparisons of bus and car journey times on Hinckley Road following the introduction of bus prioritymeasures show a significant reduction for buses and little change for cars.

Bus journey times during the morning inbound peak were cut from 23 to 18 minutes: a 22 per centreduction. During the afternoon outbound peak, they dropped by 23 per cent. Bus priority measures had aminimal effect on car journey times. During the morning inbound peak they dropped by 5 per cent andduring the afternoon outbound peak they increased by 2 per cent.

The bus lane had an even greater effect on the new park and ride buses. The average journey time on thepark and ride service was 12 minutes: nearly one and a half minutes faster than the average journey timefor cars. Taking account of the additional time it would take a motorist to park in the city centre, there is aclear time benefit to bus users.

Importantly, the difference between journey times for cars and buses narrowed considerably as a result ofthe new bus lanes. Before the bus lanes were introduced, afternoon outbound peak bus journeys wereseven minutes slower than car journeys. Afterwards, the difference was reduced to less than two minutes.



Reliability

- 220 -



Journey time surveys on Hinckley Road showed that the bus lanes greatly improved the reliability ofservices. As a result of the scheme, unreliability has been halved to just two and a half minutes in themorning inbound peak.

Conclusions

Following the bus priority measures, bus services to and from the city were much faster. During thebusiest times, local bus services are now about 22 per cent faster than before, and only slightly slower thancar journeys. Park and ride buses can cover the distance to and from the city centre nearly one and a halfminutes faster than cars. When parking times are taken into account, bus journeys are at best faster and atworst much the same as car journeys.

The reduction in peak hour traffic flows, faster bus journey times and bus reliability improvements are allindicative that the project has successfully met its objectives.

References

LERTS, Leicester environmental road tolling scheme, 1999.

Acknowledgements

This document was produced with the assistance of the Environment, Regeneration and DevelopmentDepartment at Leicester City Council. For further information, contact the ERD Department on: 01162526339 or email: [email protected]

Other examples

Kingsway, Bedford

Contact the Traffic Management Department at Bedfordshire County Council for more details on: 01234228686.

King Street ,Dudley

Contact Traffic Management and Development at Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council for more detailsat: [email protected]

Further information

The following documents offer guidance for the implementation of with-flow bus lanes:

DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997. London Bus Priority Network Design Brief, LTB, 1994. The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, The Stationery Office, 2002.

Further information may also be sought from:

- 221 -


Hounsell NB and McDonald M, Evaluation of Bus Lanes, CR87 Transport Research Laboratory,1985 - 93. Traffic Advisory Leaflet 6/01, Bus Priority, Traffic Advisory Unit, 2001.


Description of need

Background

Rotherham Interchange is situated on the northern fringe of Rotherham town centre. It is the focal pointfor local bus services in the Rotherham area. Corporation Street is a road extending south through thetown centre from the Interchange.

Corporation Street used to be a one-way street carrying northbound traffic. It formed part of the routethrough the town centre to the Interchange for bus services from the south of the town. It is a secondaryshopping street at the eastern end of the central retail area. Northbound traffic is moderate and much of thepedestrian activity is focused on the bus stops and taxi rank.

Location plan showing before and after routes

Problems

Buses leaving Rotherham Interchange used to follow a circuitous route via Bridge Street, College Road,Centenary Way and Main Street to gain access to roads to the south west of the town centre. Buses leavingthe Interchange experienced substantial delays in joining the ring road at the roundabout junction ofCollege Road and Centenary Way. In peak periods buses were also delayed at the Masbrough Streetroundabout on the ring road.

Objectives

The scheme has been designed to:

improve penetration of the town centre by bus services; improve reliability and reduce variability of journey time by avoiding delay at the Centenary Way/College Road roundabout; provide a more direct route and reduce bus journey times; improve safety and the environment for pedestrians on Corporation Street; and increase bus patronage by encouraging transfer from private car.

Scheme details

Description

The scheme consists of a southbound contra-flow bus lane extending for 280 metres between the BridgeStreet exit from the Interchange and Market Square (the junction of Market Place, High Street andWestgate). There are two bus stops in the contra-flow bus lane and another two bus stops with bus stopclearway protection in the northbound general traffic lane. There is a short 24 hour bus lane in the centre

- 222 -



of the carriageway at the north end of Corporation Street to provide access to Rotherham Interchange fornorthbound buses.

Some carriageway widening was necessary to cater for two-way operation and provide enough room forbus stops, loading bays, parking spaces for disabled people and a taxi rank. Modifications were made tothe signal-controlled junctions at both ends of Corporation Street and a Pelican crossing was upgraded to aPuffin. Three ramped pedestrian crossing areas were provided to ensure vehicle speeds were kept down.

Buses are the only category of vehicle permitted to use both the contra-flow bus lane and the shortnorthbound bus lane that provides access to the Interchange. The contra-flow bus lane varies in width witha minimum of about 3.0 metres over a distance of about 30 metres.

Implementation date Work on site commenced in May 2002 and the contra-flow bus lane was opened inlate October 2002.



Costs

The scheme cost Â£450,000 of which Â£250,000 was attributable to the contra-flow bus lane andÂ£200,000 to environmental improvements. The works funded included replacement of two signalisedjunctions, upgrading of a Pelican to a Puffin crossing, and green surfacing of the full length of the buslane. Other improvements included level footways through vehicle crossings, new flags and block pavingat vehicle crossings, new lighting columns, and new litter bins, bollards and railings.

Consultation

A small exhibition was held in Rotherham town centre to gauge public feeling towards the proposals.During conceptual design, meetings were held with owners and occupiers of frontage properties onCorporation Street and other premises affected by the proposals. The intention was to identify and resolvepotential problems with deliveries and access. Further meetings with owners and occupiers took placebefore scheme design was finalised. Comprehensive consultation ensured that only one objection wasreceived when the proposals were advertised.

Extensive consultation with bus operators took place throughout the project and covered schemedevelopment, programming and accommodation works. Quality Bus Corridor meetings arranged by SouthYorkshire PTE provided the opportunity for discussion.

The Council’s Access Officer was involved in design work to ensure that the needs of elderly and disabledpeople were fully met.

Before work started, owners and occupiers of frontage properties were visited to agree accessarrangements during construction. During the week prior to opening of the contra-flow bus lane, leafletswere handed out to pedestrians on Corporation Street to ensure awareness of the new road layout andtwo-way operation on Corporation Street.

- 223 -



Bus operators

First in South Yorkshire operate virtually all services on Corporation Street. One other company operatesa few journeys.

Bus frequency

Provision of the new contra-flow bus lane allowed the diversion of eight southbound bus services viaCorporation Street. They have a combined frequency of 24 to 25 buses per hour in daytime on weekdays.



’Before’ bus journey time and bus occupancy surveys were undertaken during May and June 1999. SouthYorkshire PTE is to carry out ’after’ surveys following implementation of other schemes on the Sheffield- Rotherham - Doncaster Quality Bus Corridor.

Cordon counts of traffic entering Rotherham town centre are undertaken during the first two weeks ofOctober every year. ’Before’ traffic count data are available for 2002 and ’after’ traffic count data will beavailable in October 2003.

Results

Information supplied by First in South Yorkshire identifies benefits to the operation of bus servicesresulting from implementation of the contra-flow bus lane:

Services bound for Canklow Road: Distance operated per trip was reduced by 0.8km. On Services130/132 (6 per hour) running time to Canklow was reduced from 10 to 8 minutes. As running timeallowed to Canklow on longer distance services 13/29/264 (1 to 2 per hour) was only 7 minutes, thebenefit took the form of improved reliability. Services bound for Sheffield Road (5 per hour): Distance operated per trip was reduced by 0.8km.Running time was not reduced because the scheduled time to the next timing point was considered tobe tight. Benefits took the form of improved reliability. Services bound for Masbrough Street (12 per hour): There was no saving in distance operated as theold and new routes were similar in length. At first, running time was reduced because delay wasavoided at the junction of College Way and Centenary Way. This proved to be optimistic and thereduction in running time was removed.

The scheme allowed the introduction of a new and more convenient bus stop serving the main shoppingarea. There is anecdotal evidence that the increased pedestrian activity around the new bus stops hashelped to regenerate the area.

South Yorkshire Police insist that buses should not cross the central white line in the road unlessauthorised by a police officer. An emergency plan has been drawn up for alternative routes and provisionof a recovery vehicle to deal with vehicle breakdowns in the contra-flow bus lane. All street works areplanned and alternative routes agreed in advance with bus operators via South Yorkshire PTE.

- 224 -


Traffic Flows

No adverse impact was experienced by general traffic using Corporation Street in the northbounddirection. Although ’after’ traffic count data is not yet available, observation suggests no noticeablechange in traffic volume.

Conclusions

Introduction of the contra-flow bus lane provided a more direct route through the town centre for anumber of bus services. It also allowed the introduction of more convenient outbound bus stops servingthe town centre. Reduced journey times were achieved on some services. On others, the reduction injourney time was used to improve reliability.

Acknowledgements

This was produced with the assistance of Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, South YorkshirePassenger Transport Executive and First in South Yorkshire.

Other Examples

Russell Square, London WC1

Contact the London Borough of Camden on: 020 7278 4444 (main switchboard). Ask for the TeamManager of the Transportation and Engineering Department.

North Lane, Leeds

Contact Leeds City Council Highways and Transport Department on: 0113 247 7500.

Further Information

Further information on the Corporation Street contra-flow bus lane can be obtained from:

Rotherham Metropolitan District Council,

Planning, Transportation and Tourism Service,

Bailey House,

Rawmarsh Road,

Rotherham

S60 1TD

01709 822958 http://www.rotherham.gov.uk

- 225 -


http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/

South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive

PO Box 801,

Exchange Street,

Sheffield

S2 5YT

0113 276 7575 http://www.sypte.co.uk

Other general guidance on the implementation of schemes such as this can be found in the following:

DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997. The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, The Stationery Office, 2002.

Green routes

Description of need

Background

Hertfordshire’s Green Routes form part of the strategy for delivering the bus policy set out in the LocalTransport Plan. In particular, Green Routes are intended to help to deliver improved reliability throughbus priority, enhanced service levels, better quality buses, a more accessible bus network and betterfacilities and information for passengers.

The A412 St. Albans Road is located to the north of Watford and connects the town centre to the A405Kingsway North Orbital Road. The overall aim of the scheme was to make use of road space on St.Albans Road, released by the opening of a new parallel road, in order to provide priority for buses andencourage modal shift to buses.

Problems

The numerous bus services using St. Albans Road suffered from poor reliability as buses were delayed bytraffic congestion.

Objectives

The overall objectives of Green Routes in Hertfordshire are to provide a more reliable service, anincreased level of service, accessible buses and bus stops, better facilities for passengers at bus stops andhigh quality information through partnership between the County Council and bus operators.

The aims specific to the St. Albans Road Green Route project were to provide a more reliable andattractive bus service, encourage modal shift in favour of the bus, improve overall access to the town andassist people with restricted mobility. The five specific objectives are as follows:

- 226 -



to improve bus operations and passenger facilities with extra priority for buses; to discourage cars and commercial vehicles from using the A412 St. Albans Road in favour of theparallel A4008 Stephenson Way; to encourage a modal shift towards the bus whilst improving overall access to the town and assistingpeople with restricted mobility; to introduce safe and convenient routes for pedestrians and cyclists; and to encourage Heavy Goods Vehicles to use St. Albans Road for access only.




Scheme details

Description

The scheme extends northwards along the A412 St. Albans Road from Watford Junction in the south to apoint close to the junction with the A405(T) Kingsway North Orbital Road. The opening of the A4008Stephenson Way connecting Watford with the M1 and A41 (T) in 1993 created the opportunity tointroduce priority for buses on the A412 utilising road space released by traffic transferring to StephensonWay.

Priority for buses was provided by the designation of with-flow bus lanes totalling 885 metres in length,installation of pre signals at three junctions and introduction of selective vehicle detection in an enhancedversion of SCOOT. Accessibility was improved by the introduction of low floor buses and the installationof easy access kerbs at bus stops. Improvements were made to facilities for passengers through theinstallation of new shelters and provision of improved seating, street lighting and timetable displays.Measures were also introduced to increase pedestrian safety through improvement works at a pedestriancrossing and the introduction of signal controlled pedestrian crossing facilities at two locations.

The overriding need to manage traffic entering and leaving the A41(T) at the Dome Roundabout limitedthe scope for developing effective bus priority measures on the St. Albans Road approaches to thejunction.

Conditions for cyclists were improved by permitting shared use of bus lanes, introducing several lengthsof cycle lane and providing advance stop lines at several traffic signal controlled junctions. Ancillarymeasures included provision of loading bays and a small number of ’pay and display’ car parking spaces,footway resurfacing, improvements to pedestrian crossing points and replacement of pedestrian guard rail.

Implementation date

The scheme was implemented in three phases following an initial UTC upgrade in 1996. Phase 1construction works began in January 1998; the following phases were opened in June 1998, November1998 and August 1999. Selective detection of buses became operational in February 2000 and somefurther small-scale improvement works were also implemented at Station Road, Watford during 2000.

- 227 -



Cost

The overall cost of the scheme was Â£1.76 million (2000 prices). The total cost is broken down asfollows:

Activity Cost (Â£million)

Statutory undertakers diversions 0.11

UTC upgrades (1996) 0.42

Phase 1 construction (January to June 1998) 0.52

Phase 2 construction (August to November 1998) 0.50

Phase 3 construction (February to August 1999) 0.06

Selective vehicle detection, active bus priority 0.01

Post implementation modification (works at Station Road) 0.14

Total 1.76

Source: Hertfordshire County Council

In addition, Arriva expenditure on new easy access, low floor buses in the Watford area totalled Â£4.7million in the period 1997 to 2000. This included the acquisition of 11 gas powered buses.

Consultation

A number of public exhibitions detailing proposals for the scheme were held

in Autumn 1995. A leaflet was produced outlining proposals and inviting members of the public to theexhibitions; the leaflets were distributed to all households in the area. Comments on the proposals werecollected using a questionnaire at the exhibitions. These comments were taken on board and changes weremade to the proposals including shortening the bus lanes in places and toning down the parkingrestrictions. The second set of proposals were displayed in a second round of public exhibitions duringFebruary 1997; this coincided with advertising of the TROs.

Bus operator

The great majority of bus services on the St. Albans Road corridor are operated by Arriva The Shires andEssex. The operator was closely involved in development of the proposed scheme in accordance with thevoluntary Quality Bus Partnership and made contributions through deployment of new low floor busesand by undertaking a bus user survey as a contribution to scheme monitoring.

Bus frequency

- 228 -


The A412 St. Albans Road Corridor in Watford carries the highest density of bus services of any road inHertfordshire. During the weekday inter-peak period there are 16 buses per hour in each direction withadditional journeys operating at peak times.


Types and dates of surveys

Extensive before and after monitoring has taken place to establish the impact of the Green Route project:

automatic and manual classified traffic counts: manual counts in 1996 and 2000; bus journey time surveys (on-bus and roadside): 1994, 1996, 1998, 1999 (before) and June 2000(after); car journey time surveys: 1994, 1999 and 2000; bus occupancy surveys: March 1996 and July 2000; perception survey of bus users: May/June 2000; and interview survey of local residents and postal questionnaire to properties fronting on to St. AlbansRoad: 2001.

Results

Traffic flows

Analysis of automatic traffic count data for 1996 and 1999 indicates that traffic flows on the A412 St.Albans Road decreased by 11 per cent south of the A41(T) junction and by 6 per cent to the north of thejunction. In the same period, traffic flow on the A4008 Stephenson Way increased by 20 per centindicating the diversion of traffic from the A412 to the parallel A4008. In comparison, traffic in theWatford area grew by 5 per cent during the same time period.

Manual traffic counts undertaken at a number of points along the A412 indicate an overall reduction of 14per cent in weekday two-way traffic flow over a period of 12 hours. There was also a reduction of up to 15per cent in traffic levels on side roads.

Journey times

Average southbound bus journey times on the southern part of the St. Albans Road Green Route betweenthe A41(T) at the Dome Roundabout and Station Road, Watford decreased by 2.5 minutes (12 per cent) inthe AM peak period between February 1996 and June 2000 but were unchanged in the inter-peak and PMpeak periods. In the northbound direction the average journey time reduction over all three time periodswas more than 1.5 minutes (17 per cent).

Car journey times southbound between Garston and Watford Junction Station at the northern and southernends of the Green Route increased by 7.5 minutes in the AM peak and 3.0 minutes in the inter-peak periodbetween 1994 and 2000. There were no significant changes in car journey times southbound in the PMpeak and northbound in all three time periods.

- 229 -


Analysis of vehicle queuing counts indicates an overall increase in queuing at junctions on St. AlbansRoad between 1996 and 2000 reflecting the loss of stacking space following the introduction of bus lanesand pre signals. In developing the scheme it had been anticipated that increased queuing and car journeytimes on St. Albans Road would encourage general traffic to divert to the A4008 Stephenson Way.

Reliability

A survey of bus arrival times in Watford town centre undertaken by Arriva indicated an improvement of65 per cent in bus reliability.

Bus occupancy and modal share

A comparison of bus occupancy in March 1996 and July 2000 showed increases in the number of peopletravelling by bus of 17 per cent in the AM peak, 18 per cent off-peak and 11 per cent in the PM peak. Busmode share increased by 5 per cent in the same period. A comparison of 1999 and 2000 patronage data fortwo key bus services using St. Albans Road showed an increase of 1.8 per cent compared with a fall of 6.1per cent on the remainder of the local network.

Local opinion

A bus passenger interview survey commissioned by Arriva in May 2000 included 387 completedinterviews. The majority of respondents thought that buses were normally on time (67 per cent), busjourney time had stayed the same or improved since completion of the Green Route (82 per cent) and thatthe quality of passenger shelters had improved (53 per cent). Issues of concern to respondents includeddelays to buses at locations beyond the Green Route and the frequency of bus services using the corridor.

Market research of the views of local businesses and occupiers of frontage properties indicated thatimproved access to shops, loading bays and parking facilities were the most positive elements of theGreen Route project whilst the least satisfactory aspects were disruption to trade during construction anddecrease in traffic speed.

Air quality

Emissions by buses were reduced as a result of investment by Arriva in new low floor diesel andgas-powered buses. The gas-powered buses were effective in reducing emissions but problems wereencountered with fuel consumption and range on a full tank of fuel. Consequently, the fleet of gas buseshas now been converted to operate on diesel fuel.

Conclusions

Hertfordshire County Council considers that the St. Albans Road Green Route has achieved its objectivesof reducing bus journey times, improving reliability and increasing bus patronage and mode share. Thestrategic objective of displacing traffic onto a more suitable parallel route (A4008 Stephenson Way) hasalso been achieved without any increase in ’rat running’.

- 230 -


References

Green Route Scrutiny, Report by Transport Panel, Hertfordshire County Council, December 2001.

St. Albans Road Green Route Project Before and After Report, Hertfordshire County Council, August2000.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Hertfordshire County Council.

Other examples

Other examples can be found in this resource pack, including:

Durham Road Super Route, Sunderland. Chepstow Road, Newport.

Further information

Further information on the St. Albans Road Green Route can be obtained from:

Hertfordshire County Council

Highways House

41-45 Broadwater Road

Welwyn Garden City

Herts

AL10 8YD

01707 356560 http://www.hertsdirect.org

Bus gates and bus only links

Introduction

Bus gates and bus only links are short lengths of bus only street intended to allow buses to travel on directroutes that are prohibited to all other traffic. They are used to keep unwanted traffic out of an area whilstallowing the operation of a bus service on a direct route that is attractive to passengers.

In its simplest form a bus gate or bus only link is a short section of road where a Traffic Regulation Orderis in place restricting access to buses. Signs are the only protection against violation. In such cases, abuseof the restriction by other categories of traffic is common.

- 231 -


http://www.hertsdirect.org/

Local authorities have adopted a variety of approaches to make bus gates more effective or self-enforcing.Measures used include application of a different colour or surface treatment to the gate, carriagewaynarrowing (sometimes complemented by traffic calming or a physical obstruction), and protection bybus-activated traffic signals or rising bollards.

Bus gates or bus only links can be used in a variety of different situations:

as part of a toolkit of measures used to restrict access for general traffic and allow buses to operate intown and city centres; to enable buses to bypass congested junctions; to allow buses to penetrate residential areas, industrial areas and business parks whilst preventing theroute becoming an attractive short-cut for unwanted through traffic; and to maintain bus routes where a traffic management scheme has been implemented or a new road hasbeen built.

Enforcement

Bus gates are particularly susceptible to violation unless measures are taken to make them less attractiveto motorists and more self-enforcing. This can be done in a number of ways:

by narrowing the carriageway in the bus gate to the minimum necessary to accommodate a bus; by installing traffic signals with bus detection; by installing rising bollards that are activated by transponders on buses (see case study of BridgeStreet rising bollards, Cambridge); and by using a different colour or surface treatment for the bus gate or installing traffic calming (e.g. aspeed cushion) in the gate (see case study of bus friendly traffic calming, Hull).

In a few locations local authorities have utilised physical obstructions that can be crossed by buses, but notby cars, as an alternative to installing a speed cushion in a bus gate. The difficulty with a physicalobstruction such as a sunken area in the middle of the carriageway is that it may preclude use of the busgate by emergency vehicles, minibuses and some midibuses.

The priority access point on Northgate Street in Bath City Centre was introduced by Bath and North EastSomerset Council in 2001 with the objectives of reducing the volume of traffic in the city centre,providing an opportunity to improve public transport services, reducing noise and air pollution in the citycentre, improving the pedestrian environment for city centre users and thereby encouraging investment inthe central area. Alternative routes were available for displaced traffic - A367 Green Park/Charles Streetand A36 Bathwick Street/Cleveland Place. The diagram below illustrates the strategic location of the busgate.

The priority access point takes the form of a short length of road with access controlled by a set oftransponder-activated traffic signals. From initial implementation, the bus gate operated between 08.30and 18.30 on all days of the week. This time period was chosen following consultation with the police,emergency services, city centre traders and bus operators. Following a review of the hours of operation, itis proposed to revise the hours to 10.00 to 18.00 during 2004/05 in order to ease constraints on servicingpremises in the city centre.

- 232 -


This scheme is part of the city’s wider traffic management system that has been introduced with the aim ofimproving the environment in central Bath and creating a more pleasant area for all users.

The priority access point is used by 14-15 southbound buses per hour in peak hours reducing to 12-13buses per hour in the inter-peak. In addition the bus gate can be used by taxis, private hire vehicles,emergency vehicles and cycles.

Monitoring has shown reduced bus journey times, increased reliability and reduced traffic levels on thestreets leading to the priority access point of up to 70 per cent after implementation.

Strathmore Street bus gate, Perth

A with-flow bus lane and bus gate were installed on Strathmore Street in Perth in order to enable buses tobypass queuing traffic. The bus gate at the end of the bus lane is intended to allow buses to re-enter thetraffic lane safely at a pinch point where the carriageway can accommodate only two lanes. Buses leavingthe bus stop at the end of the bus lane trigger the traffic signals at the bus gate to create a gap in the traffic.A hurry call is also sent to downstream traffic signals. The downstream section of the route is heavilycongested and the traffic signals at the bus gate can be used to control traffic flow. Limited localisedcarriageway widening was necessary over a length of 35 metres to enable construction of the bus gate.The maximum depth of widening was 2.0 metres.

The scheme is one of several measures introduced in Perth to improve reliability on Stagecoach service 7.The combined effect of a doubling of daytime frequency, the introduction of new buses and the reliabilitybenefits of bus priority has seen an increase of more than 50 per cent in patronage.



Ilminster Road bus gate, Taunton

The bus gate on Old Ilminster Road in Taunton has been in operation since 1996 and has broughtsignificant journey time and distance savings for bus services travelling into the centre of Taunton. A planis provided to illustrate the scheme and shows the new route taken by buses alongside the route usedbefore the bus gate was installed.

Before the installation of the bus gate in 1996, buses travelled the same route as general traffic, from themotorway junction and along the dual carriageway (A358) before entering the town centre, a journey ofaround 3 kilometres. Since the bus gate has been introduced buses now avoid congestion at junctions onthis busy dual carriageway and as a result the journey distance has dropped to around 1.6 kilometres andsaves around 15 minutes during peak hours.

As the photo shows, the bus gate is enforced with a rising bollard, which is activated by transponders onthe bus. Fire service vehicles can also use this bus gate; they are fitted with tags which are enabled bytheir emergency lights. The tag activates the bollard and allows them to pass through.

- 233 -






The Kesgrave guided busway on Superoute 66 in Ipswich is an example of a fully self-enforcing bus link.The purpose of the 200 metre length of guided busway is to allow buses to take a direct route between twoneighbouring residential areas without providing a through route for cars avoiding main road trafficcongestion.

The route taken by the Superoute 66 service is shown on the above plan with the yellow line representingthe guided bus link. By using this guided bus link around one and a half minutes is saved on eachSuperoute journey; selective vehicle detection (SVD) used at two junctions further along this route alsohelps to ensure that this service runs to schedule.


Superoute 66

The service also incorporates Real Time Passenger Information technology at some stops providingpassengers with information about the next bus expected at the stop.

The Superoute 66 has been a success and the frequency of the service has altered to reflect this. When theservice started buses ran every 20 minutes, however, due to its success the service has been increased tooperate on a 24-hour basis with the bus running at 15 minute intervals with a 10 minute frequency in thepeak hours and hourly overnight. In addition vehicle type has been changed from short single-deckvehicles, through long single-deck buses to double-deck vehicles.

Derriford Road, Plymouth

Stage 2 of bus priority works in the Derriford Road area of Plymouth began in March 2004. The work,which incorporated the installation of a signal controlled bus gate, was completed in August 2004 as partof a wider package of bus priority measures which are in place on Derriford Road.

The works carried out on Derriford Road have extended the existing bus lane and added new measures toencourage the use of bus over the private car. The installation of the most recent bus gate in this area isused as an example here.

The bus gate was installed with the help of developer funding. It allows southbound buses travelling onthe A386 access to Derriford Hospital without having to use Derriford roundabout. This means that busescan bypass busy sections of road and make journey time savings.



- 234 -





Pemros Road, Plymouth

The Pemros Road bus gate and bus only link in Plymouth have been in place for many years. Thepresence of the bus gate and bus only link prevents general traffic from using a road which goes through aresidential area to get to the Tamar Bridge.

The bus only link carries bus services wanting to cross the busy Tamar Bridge and allows them to traveleasily avoiding general traffic congestion. The bus gate is open to taxis as well as buses and is enforcedwith a camera.

The Tamar Bridge has also been fitted with a tagging system that detects buses travelling eastwards fromSaltash and closes the toll lane barriers. This prevents general traffic travelling up the A38. While generaltraffic is being held, buses are then free to turn right from the left hand lane to reach the Pemros Road busgate.

Conclusions

The bus gates and bus only links discussed have all been implemented as part of a wider package of buspriority measures which have had significant effects on either bus patronage or bus journey times. Theexamples used all show different technologies and enforcement measures which can be used wheninstalling a bus gate with each of them having some success in their installation. The use of a bus gate orbus only link however, should be considered with regards to local conditions to ensure that they areappropriate. Consultation is also an important part of the process and should not be overlooked.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Bath and North East Somerset Council, Perth and KinrossCouncil, Somerset County Council, Suffolk County Council and Plymouth City Council.

Other examples

A number of examples of bus gates are to be found in case studies elsewhere in this resource pack:

Leeds City Centre: A number of bus gates provide priority access for buses to the central area ’publictransport box’ whilst encouraging other vehicles to use the ’city centre loop’ road to make cross-citytrips; Oxford City Centre: Several bus gates have been installed to control access to the city centre publictransport route as part of the Oxford Transport Strategy; and Cambridge City Centre: The Bridge Street bus gate in Cambridge is made self-enforcing by the useof rising bollards.

References

Guidelines for Planning for Public Transport in Developments, The Institution of Highways andTransportation, 1999.

- 235 -


Local Transport Note 1/97 Keeping Buses Moving, 1997.

Further information

For further information on the case studies identified in this leaflet contact:

Barbara Selby, Traffic and Transportation Manager (Transportation and Highways), Bath and NorthEast Somerset Council on 01225 395386. Scott Denyer (Urban Traffic Control), Perth and Kinross Council on 01738 476517. Keith Jennings, Traffic Signals Manager, Somerset County Council on 01823 358233 or email:[email protected] Ian Gray, Transport Co-ordination Manager, Suffolk County Council on 01473 265049. Philip Heseltine, Senior Engineer (Transportation), Plymouth City Council on 01752 307942.

Rising bollards

Description of need

Background

The Cambridge Core Traffic Scheme (CCTS) is an important part of the city’s overall transport strategy,developed to cut congestion in the centre. Both the local city plan and the county structure plan recognisethe need to reduce traffic in the relatively compact central area, as this would improve safety, air qualityand the general environment.

CCTS involves restricting through traffic to the city centre at key entry points using rising bollards. Localbuses, taxis and bicycles are exempt from the restrictions.

Residents and businesses in the city centre were canvassed on which routes should be restricted, and theygave their strongest support to Bridge Street, just north of the city centre.

Problems

The main problem in Cambridge was perceived as the high traffic levels in a relatively compact city. This,in turn, resulted in a range of adverse impacts such as poor pedestrian safety, air quality concerns anddelays to public transport.

Objectives

The overall objective of CCTS is to ’encourage greater use of walking, cycling and public transport anddiscourage dependency on the private motor car’. CCTS also meets both national and regional objectiveson traffic reduction and improved air quality. The local objectives are to:

stop cars driving into the city centre; maintain access to city centre properties; maintain public transport and cycle access; improve pedestrian safety; enhance the environment;

- 236 -


improve air quality; and achieve an overall improvement.

Scheme details

Description

Traffic restraint via rising bollards acting as a bus gate. One side of Bridge Street is occupied by collegebuildings and the other is retail, mainly pubs and restaurants.

Implementation date

The closure scheme began on 22 January 1997.

Costs

Funding for the CCTS came from the Government as part of public transport allocations. Â£150,000 wasspent on the experiment. Although maintenance is handled under a single contract covering all bollardsystems in the city, annual maintenance costs have been estimated at Â£5,000.

Consultation

Stakeholders, residents and business within the central core area were consulted on the scheme. Publicconsultation in March 1998 followed the experimental introduction and showed good support.

Bus operator

Stagecoach Cambus.

Bus frequency

Park and ride services have a 10 minute frequency, as do many of the other services that run inCambridge. More rural services operate on a lower frequency of 30 minutes to an hour.




Dates of surveys

Cambridge City Council carried out monitoring surveys in both the summer and autumn of 1996, beforeimplementing the scheme; ’after’ surveys were carried out in autumn 1997.

Types of surveys

- 237 -



The surveys looked at a range of variables, including:

traffic flows; vehicle speeds; journey times; cycle and pedestrian flows; and air quality.

The local authority chose monitoring sites on main roads where it could expect traffic flows to increase.

Manual classified counts were carried out on main roads. These took place on both weekdays andSaturdays between 07.00 and 19.00. Peak hour traffic surveys were carried out elsewhere.

Journey time surveys were carried out in both directions on the inner ring road during the morning andevening peaks and at off-peak times. Similar surveys were also carried out on four radial routes, whichwere either used by park and ride buses, or gave access to the north west of the city.

The city council made the results of this extensive monitoring available in January 1998. The mainfindings are summarised below.

Results

Traffic flows

The city’s radial routes and inner ring road showed collectively little change after the scheme wasintroduced. But some individual roads experienced increases in traffic, whilst others experienceddecreases as a result of the scheme.

On Bridge Street itself, traffic was physically prevented from entering, so obviously it was significantlyreduced: by up to 85 per cent on weekdays.

Evaluation of the scheme concluded that overall, ’significant traffic reductions have been achieved on theclosure route without causing unexpected increases on other roads’.

Journey times

Journey time savings for general traffic showed a ’mixed bag’ of results. However, there was a generalimprovement on the inner ring during peak periods and deterioration in off peak journey times. The tablebelow summarises changes to journey times.

Summary of journey times on the ring road

- 238 -


Clockwise BEFORE (min:sec)

AFTER (min:sec)

Anti-clockwise BEFORE (min:sec)

AFTER (min:sec)

AM Peak 18:17 17:19 AM Peak 23:58 18:51

Off Peak 17:24 19:47 Off Peak 15:26 17:10

PM Peak 41:49 35:42 PM Peak 23:17 25:18

(Data based on 85th percentile of journey time runs per time period)

Air quality

Cambridge City Council monitored nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels before and after implementation of thescheme. Nitrogen dioxide is one of the air pollutants most closely associated with traffic and is a usefulindicator of traffic-related pollution.

Air quality monitoring indicates that NO2 levels have improved or stayed the same at 16 out of 18 sitesacross the city centre. Air quality has only deteriorated at two sites. Overall, the scheme seems to have hada positive effect.

System performance

During the scheme’s early days, the number of hours that the bollards operated was disappointing. Thiswas largely because unauthorised vehicles tried to get through the Bridge Street bollards immediatelybehind buses and taxis and, in doing so, damaged the bollards.

The council improved the performance of the bollards by introducing flashing warning signs, changing theclosure point layout and improving the detection system for unauthorised vehicles. The bollards nowoperate effectively for around 95 per cent of the time.

Conclusions

The rising bollards in Bridge Street have given significant priority to local buses, taxis and cyclistsentering Cambridge city centre. Traffic flows have been significantly reduced on the closure route withoutcausing an unexpected increase in traffic on other roads. The scheme has also improved local air quality.

References

Cambridgeshire County Council, Cambridge Core Traffic Scheme: Stage 1 - Bridge Street ExperimentalRoad Closure, Environment and Transport Committee, 1998.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the help of the Environment and Transport Department at CambridgeshireCounty Council. For further information contact the Cambridge Project Team on: 01223 717780.

- 239 -


Other examples

Stonebow, York

Contact The City of York Council, Network Management Section (Traffic unit) on: 01904 613161 ext:1450.

High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire

Contact Buckingham County Council for more details: [email protected] or the Wycombe AreaOffice on: 01494 475315.

Further information

Assistance with the implementation of rising bollards is offered in the following document â¢ TrafficAdvisory Leaflet 4/97, Rising Bollards, DETR, April 1997.

DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997.

The Local Authority Rising Bollard User Group (LARBUG) intends to publish advice on the use of risingbollards in due course.

Guided busways

Description of need

Background

The A641 Manchester Road in Bradford is the main route south from the city centre to the M606motorway and the towns of Brighouse and Huddersfield. Before the guided bus scheme, there was nopriority for buses on the Bradford section of this corridor. Traffic congestion meant long journey timesand poor reliability.

In 1998, the City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (MDC), West Yorkshire Passenger TransportExecutive (Metro) and bus operator First commissioned two studies. These recommended thedevelopment of a guided bus scheme as part of the South Bradford Quality Bus initiative. This would giveManchester Road a high level of bus priority.

City of Bradford MDC, Metro and First formed a public/private sector partnership to develop a guided busscheme. They refined their proposals in 1999, so the final scheme consisted of a mix of guided busway,with-flow bus lanes and priority at signal controlled junctions. Construction began in November 2000 andthe scheme opened in February 2002.

Map of the Bradford area

Problems

- 240 -



Before the guided busway opened, congestion delayed buses in both directions during peak hours.Timetables included an additional 10 minutes to allow for delays. Congestion on Manchester Roadaffected the reliability of cross-city services on the Shipley and Leeds corridors.

Surveys in 1998 - 99 highlighted reliability and punctuality as bus users’ greatest concerns. Motorists alsoidentified reliability and punctuality of buses as the most important factor influencing their willingness toswitch to bus. The city council was concerned about the way that the dual carriageway cut South Bradfordin two for pedestrians, forcing them to rely on footbridges and subways.

Objectives

The scheme aimed to:



â¢ increase passenger confidence; and

â¢ encourage motorists to switch to the bus.

Scheme details

Description

The guided busway required the reallocation of 2.3 kilometres of road space on the dual carriageway’scentral reservation. The scheme also involved the introduction of conventional near-side with-flow buslanes for 1.1 kilometres of the route. These are available to buses and cyclists.

In some places the number of lanes available for general traffic was cut from three to two in eachdirection. The objective was to provide two lanes for through traffic over the full length of the scheme.Three lanes were retained at junctions to cater for turning traffic. The speed limit was also lowered from40 to 30 mph. The City Council installed signal-controlled pedestrian crossings at 11 locations to servebus stops on the central guided busway and at kerbside bus stops. These additional crossings greatlyimproved pedestrian links between communities on opposite sides of Manchester Road.

The Council also raised the kerb at stops on Manchester Road and elsewhere along the corridor to giveclose and level boarding. New bus shelters were also part of the scheme, including three landmark ’supershelters’. These are three times the size of normal shelters and fitted with wind turbines to power heatedseats or an information display.

As well as helping to pay for some of the infrastructure, First also provided new, accessible, low sulphuremission buses. They trained drivers to a higher standard in customer care and introduced a ’customerpromise’ to guarantee service standards.

Construction work was close enough to completion to allow driver training to begin in July 2001. Servicesbegan to operate along the guided busway on 31 January 2002.

- 241 -


Costs

The scheme cost Â£12 million at 2001 prices, including the cost of the new buses. Highway works costÂ£4.7 million, noise insulation Â£600,000 and diversions to statutory services Â£1 million.

Consultation In summer 1999, the city council delivered a colour leaflet explaining the scheme toproperties along the corridor. The leaflet included a short post-paid questionnaire. The council exhibiteddetailed plans at two locations in Bradford city centre and on a bus ’roadshow’ at a supermarket close tothe corridor. Council officers answered questions on the scheme at a number of Neighbourhood Forums.Eight newsletters were issued to provide information on progress and explain the impact of constructionworks on traffic.

Bus operators

First in Bradford provides the majority of bus services on Manchester Road, including all those on theguided busway. Two Arriva Yorkshire services operate along sections of Manchester Road, but do not useany of the guided busways.

Bus frequency

During daytime on Mondays to Fridays there are 22 buses an hour in each direction on Manchester Roadbetween Odsal and Bradford city centre.




Dates of surveys

’Before’ data was collected in May and June 2000. ’After’ surveys took place in May and June 2002.

Types of surveys

The ’before’ and ’after’ monitoring programme consisted of:

car and bus journey time registration surveys; bus occupancy counts; automatic traffic counts; and manual classified traffic counts.

A survey of attitudes among 240 bus passengers carried out in April 2002 showed that over 60 per centranked the service as good or very good on a range of 16 indicators.

- 242 -



Results

City of Bradford MDC has produced a comprehensive evaluation of the effects of the scheme. Here is asummary of the results.

Traffic flows

The principal finding was a clear fall in peak traffic using Manchester Road.

Inbound traffic on Manchester Road fell by 14 per cent in the morning peak (07.30 to 09.30) and 13 percent in the evening peak (16.00 to 18.00). Outbound traffic on Manchester Road fell by 17 per cent in themorning peak (07.30 to 09.30) and 7 per cent in the evening peak (16.00 to 18.00). The effect was notrestricted to peak periods. Total weekday traffic using Manchester Road fell by about 11 per cent, mostlyswitching to other routes in and out of the city.

Total inbound traffic on six radial routes to the south of the city centre including Manchester Roadreduced by 6 per cent in the morning peak and 9 per cent in the evening peak. Total outbound traffic onthe six radial routes fell by 4 per cent in the morning peak, but increased by 3 per cent in the evening peak.

There is evidence that some traffic switched to other routes: into the city centre via Wakefield Road andoutbound via both Little Horton Lane and Wakefield Road.

Journey times

The installation of 11 new signal-controlled pedestrian crossings was an essential component of thescheme but had an adverse effect on bus and car journey times.

Inbound

Scheduled bus journey time between Odsal Top and Bradford Interchange is 15 minutes in the morningpeak and 13 minutes at other times. The express bus service is about three minutes quicker.

Average journey times for inbound stopping bus services reduced by one minute in the morning peakperiod (7 per cent), but journey times for the express service did not improve. In the morning peak hourthe average time saving increased to two minutes (13 per cent). Inbound car journey times increased inboth periods by between one and two minutes.

Before the scheme began, peak inbound car journeys were five minutes faster than stopping bus servicesand similar to express bus times. After implementation, inbound car journeys took as long as stoppingbuses and the average express bus was three minutes faster than the car.

In the morning inter-peak period, journey times increased for both buses and cars. The net effect was toincrease the difference in journey times between stopping buses and cars from four to five minutes.

In the morning peak, the scheme improved bus reliability by reducing variability in express and stoppingbus journey times. At the same time, variability in journey times by car increased.

- 243 -


Outbound

Scheduled bus journey time between Bradford Interchange and Odsal Top is 14 minutes in the eveningpeak and 12 minutes at other times. The express bus service is about three minutes quicker.

Average journey times for outbound stopping services fell by more than one minute in the evening peakperiod (10 per cent) and by more than two minutes (16 per cent) in the evening peak hour. The expressservice achieved a slightly greater improvement, whereas average outbound car journey times werelargely unchanged. Variability in bus and car journey times declined in the evening peak period. Therewere insubstantial changes to average times for outbound buses and cars in the inter-peak.

Differences between journey times by car and bus have been reduced. However, stopping buses remainmore than two minutes slower in the peak and five minutes slower in the inter-peak.

Although there is no direct evidence, the new signal controlled pedestrian crossings and speed limitchanges are likely to have increased journey times for all forms of transport.

Bus patronage

In August 2001, First launched its ’Overground’ network in Bradford. This boosted bus use and madecomparison of the ’before’ and ’after’ figures difficult. The analysis was based on electronic ticketmachine (ETM) data and on bus occupancy counts. The number of passengers boarding buses on thelength of the corridor directly affected by the scheme between Odsal and the city centre grew by between7 and 10 per cent: more than on other corridors into Bradford. Both data sources indicate modest growthin the morning peak and inter-peak periods. There was growth of about 20 per cent in the afternooninter-peak and of 10 per cent in the evening peak.

Reduced delays

Most inbound time savings in the morning peak hour were achieved in two locations on the corridor.These were the guided busway approach to the Mayo Avenue junction, where one minute was saved, andthe right turn into Croft Street at the ’city’ end of the corridor, which saved 30 seconds. Together theseaccounted for 10 per cent of scheduled bus journey time between Odsal Top and Bradford Interchange.

The majority of outbound evening peak time savings were achieved by the guided busway north of MayoAvenue on the approach to the Mayo Avenue roundabout, with a saving of one and a half minutes or 12per cent of scheduled bus running time from the city centre to Odsal Top.

Conclusions

Implementation of the Manchester Road guided busway scheme as part of the South Bradford Quality BusInitiative resulted in increased bus patronage, reduced delays to buses, reduced peak bus journey timesand reduced peak traffic flows.

- 244 -


Acknowledgements

This was produced with the assistance of City of Bradford MDC, Metro and First. Further information canbe obtained from the City of Bradford MDC Transportation, Design and Planning Department on: 01274437418.

Other examples

A61 Scott Hall Road Corridor, Leeds.Contact Leeds City Council Highways and Transport Department on: 0113 247 7500. A64 York Road / A63 Selby Road, Leeds.Contact Leeds City Council Highways and Transport Department on: 0113 247 7500. Kesgrave Connection, Ipswich.Contact Suffolk County Council, Environment and Transport on: 01473 583305. Fastway (Crawley/Gatwick/Horley)phased opening Summer 2003 to Summer 2005.

Contact West Sussex Highways and Transport Department on: 01243 777273. Alternatively, informationcan be obtained from the following web site: www.fastway.info/

Further information

The Transport and Works Act provides guidance on the need for an Order.

The Transport and Works Act was not used for the Bradford scheme. However, as all the works werewithin the highway boundary, it was possible to rely on Traffic Regulation Orders for authorisation.

There is no formal published design guidance for guided busways. The Buses and Taxis Division of theDepartment of Transport issued a Briefing Note on Guided Buses in 1995 and numerous articles haveappeared in the technical press.

The following documents may also be of interest:

Daugherty GG and Balcombe RJ, Leeds Guided Bus way Study, Transport Research Laboratory,1999. DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997.

Pre signals and bus advance areas

Bus priority at traffic signals, whilst maintaining junction capacity, is often a contentious issue. The use ofpre signals or bus advance areas is an emerging bus priority measure, which has proved successful atvarious locations around the UK.

Traditionally, the end of a bus lane has been set back a short distance from a junction to enable buses tomove between lanes, to cater for left turning traffic and allow for the maximum throughput of all vehiclesthrough the junction. This traditional arrangement is shown below.

- 245 -





Pre signals work by holding general traffic at traffic signals set back a short distance from the junction,usually at the end of a designated bus lane. This creates a bus advance area where, while general traffic isheld back at these signals, buses are given a green signal allowing them to proceed to the main junctionand take whichever lane they need. Pre signals placed at the end of a bus lane also allow buses to bypassqueues and have priority at main junctions.




To ensure junction capacity loss is minimised, pre signals are synchronised with the main signals. Thismeans that traffic is released from the pre signals just before the main signals turn green ensuring that fulluse is made of the green signal. The use of vehicle detection technologies at pre signals is also an optionfor minimising delays to general traffic in the absence of vehicles in the bus lane. This kind of systemwould stop general traffic at the pre signals only if a bus was approaching.

Advantages of pre signals over unsignalled setbacks

The two main advantages are as follows:

prevents abuse of the bus lane; and useful where buses need to weave into an outside lane to turn right.

Disadvantages of pre signals

There are a number of disadvantages associated with the use of pre signals:

bus delays off-peak; buses that arrive during vehicle green may have a choice between using the traffic lane and gettinggreen or using the pre signal and waiting a cycle; a bus stop in the wrong place may make it hard to achieve benefit i.e. if a bus stop is placed justbefore the signals then it is not possible to avoid the bus stopping at a red signal; and pedestrians may be tempted to cross in the wrong place if there are signals and an island in place.

Some of the above disadvantages can, however, be overcome with good design and vehicle detection.

- 246 -




Types of bus pre signals

The University of Southampton’s Transport Research Group have identified three main categories of presignals that can be used to provide priority to buses at busy junctions:

Category A

Category A pre signals are described as those where buses are not controlled by a pre signal, whereasgeneral traffic is. This means that while traffic is held at the pre signals, buses can proceed straight to themain junction uncontrolled. However when the general traffic has a green signal, buses will have to giveway to the main traffic flow.

Category B

With category B pre signals buses are controlled in the same way as general traffic, so buses have prioritywhen general traffic is held at a red pre signal and vice versa.

Category C

Category C pre signals are defined as those that use vehicle detection to activate the pre signals and givepriority to approaching buses. This would mean that delays to general traffic may be minimised as theyare only stopped if an approaching bus is detected. Once a bus is detected and the general traffic has beenstopped at the pre signals, the bus can then proceed to the main junction without delay.

Bus advance areas at roundabouts

Bus priority at roundabouts can be given through creating bus advance areas incorporating pre signalsbefore the give way line at the entry point to the roundabout.

As with pre signals, general traffic is held at the end of a bus lane by pre signals while buses can proceedto the roundabout give way line without delay. This system gives buses time to position themselves in thecorrect lane to complete their required manoeuvre when entering the roundabout.

The type of pre signals that may be used in any particular area are subject to local conditions as not allcategories are suitable in all situations. The cost implications and available technologies need to beconsidered as part of a package of bus priority measures. The following case studies provide examples ofdifferent pre signals schemes, differing in technology and complexity.

Case study: Shepherd’s Bush

This is an early example of the use of pre signals as part of a package of bus priority measures aimed atreducing congestion and the negative environmental impact of heavy traffic flows.

Pre signals were installed in 1993 at the end of a 24-hour bus lane on the south side of Shepherd’s BushCommon. These signals stop general traffic and allow buses to carry on to the main junction and positionthemselves in the correct lane. This is particularly useful for buses needing to make a right turn at themain signals. When the pre signals are red, buses are free to move ahead of the general traffic. However,once the pre signal is green any buses emerging from the bus lane will have to give way to the main traffic

- 247 -


flow.

The timing of the pre signals is such that general traffic is released shortly before the main signal turnsgreen and return to red just before the main signal to ensure that the bus advance area is clear for the busesduring the next cycle.

A study carried out by TRL involved before and after surveys of the scheme to identify the effects of theoverall package of measures on buses travelling through Shepherd’s Bush.

Shepherd’s Bush bus priority measures.

Shepherd’s Bush bus priority measures. Reproduced with the permission from the London Borough ofHammersmith and Fulham

The previous diagram shows the area and the bus priority measures implemented in 1993.

The results of the before and after surveys carried out by TRL are given in the table below. It showschanges in bus journey times (seconds) for buses travelling between points A and B on the above diagram,incorporating both the bus lane and pre signals.

The results of the before and after surveys carried out by TRL

The results show a considerable reduction in journey times for buses along this stretch after theimplementation of the bus priority measures. It is not possible to attribute a specific time saving to the presignals as the timesavings are as a result of a combination of measures, however, it is considered that thepre signals do contribute considerably.

Case study: York



As a Centre of Excellence for Integrated Transport Planning, the City of York has a range of bus prioritymeasures in place to reduce bus journey times. Pre signals are one of the measures used to achieve this.

Pre signals on A1079 Hull Road were introduced in 1997 as part of a package of measures linked to theopening of a park and ride site at Grimston Bar. These signals were installed to give priority to buses atthe end of a bus lane, allowing them to re-enter the carriageway where it is reduced from a double to asingle carriageway on the way into the city centre.

The pre signals here are connected to the city’s UTC system and can be used to regulate traffic flow andease congestion on this busy route by holding the pre signals on green for buses. This therefore acts as aqueue management system.

The bus priority measures on this stretch of road have had a positive impact on bus journey times. On theGrimston Bar park and ride route for example, buses have a peak hour advantage of between 4 and 12minutes over cars as a result of the package of priority measures. This facility has the potential to be usedas a gate to hold traffic out of the more congested parts of the A1079 into the city. This facility is used at

- 248 -





inbound peak times. The overall effect on car traffic should be negligible, as the increase in delay at thepre signals should be offset by the increased efficiency at the signalised junctions upstream.

Case study: Perth

In 2000, a number of bus priority measures were installed as part of corridor improvements on theStagecoach route number 7 in Perth. These improvements included the installation of bus lanes, bus onlystreets and selective vehicle detection (SVD) at traffic signals.

Pre signals were installed on Glasgow Road bus lane to allow buses to bypass queuing traffic on this busyroad. The pre signals enable buses to re-enter the general traffic flow at the end of the bus lane and alsocontrols access to the bus advance area at the main signals.

Glasgow Road pre signals

Glasgow Road pre signals. Reproduced with the permission from Perth and Kinross Council

Buses leaving the bus stop near the bottom of the bus lane are detected through SVD technology and thepre signals are triggered stopping general traffic and allowing buses to enter the bus advance area.

Bus reliability has improved and patronage has increased by over 50 per cent due to the introduction ofthese measures and the new and improved bus services.

This scheme has been further developed and the extension of the bus lane is an ongoing project.

Case study: Leeds

The East Leeds Quality Bus Initiative incorporates the use of pre signals with a guided busway to givepriority to buses approaching the city centre along the A64. The guided bus scheme involves a centralreservation bus guideway between two busy signalised junctions on the inbound route which brings busesinto conflict with general traffic when they cross from the central reservation to the general traffic flowand then cross back over again to a bus lane. Pre signals are used here to facilitate this cross over andensure the safety of all road users. Being signals associated with a bus guideway, special white ’arrow’aspects were authorised by DfT to replace the normal green aspects for buses.

General traffic along this route is stopped only at the pre signals, to give buses priority, and not at themain signals further along the route with which the pre signals are coordinated. This is sensible from asafety point of view as this is a busy 40 mph road and it would be less safe to have a number ofunexpected signal changes.

A64 Pre signals

A64 Pre signals

The signals here are coordinated by SPRUCE, a software based Bus and Tram Priority tool that wasdeveloped by Leeds City Council as part of a Government sponsored initiative. This system works withinthe city’s UTC system and allows for the selective detection of priority vehicles. Once a priority vehiclehas been detected approaching a junction, SPRUCE adjusts the fixed time signal cycle to allow the bus topass through the junction and then returns to the fixed time cycle. This is achieved by using different

- 249 -




strategies depending on the bus arrival time.

The use of SPRUCE gives an advantage to buses at all times of day, but it is particularly advantageous inoff-peak hours when it might otherwise be quicker for buses to use the general traffic lanes. The averagedelay to buses in the off-peak, resulting from this signal priority, was reduced from 32 seconds to 8seconds.

It has been noted that the use of dynamic priority (using priority vehicle detection to alter signal timings)can be far preferable to static priority (timings not responsive at all times of day), because buses can moreoften be granted higher priority with less effect on general traffic.

Pre signals are used in other areas of Leeds, for example they are used at the end of the A647 StanningleyRoad High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane, which is used as the case study for the HOV leaflet.

References

High performance bus/tram signal priority, JCT Symposium 2004. Local Transport Note 1/97 KeepingBuses Moving, 1997.

Miscellaneous Bus Priority System Investigations, Final Report to the Traffic Control Systems UnitCorporation of London, Transportation Research Group, University of Southampton, 1995.

Performance of Bus Priority Measures in Shepherds Bush, TRL Report 140, 1995.

Wu, J and Hounsell, NB, Bus Priority Using Pre-Signals, University of Southampton, 1998.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgement is given for the assistance provided by the London Borough of Hammersmith andFulham, City of York Council, Perth and Kinross Council and Leeds City Council.

Further information

For further information on the case studies contained in this leaflet contact:

Mike Gilroy, London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham on 020 8753 3050 (Shepherd’s Bush). Darren Capes (Network Management), City of York Council on 01904 551651. Scott Denyer (Urban Traffic Control) Perth and Kinross Council on 01738 476517. Mervyn Hallworth (Urban Traffic Management & Control), Leeds City Council on 0113 2476750 [email protected]

Selective Vehicle Detection (SVD)

- 250 -


Background

Bus operation is becoming more sophisticated. Methods of providing priority to buses at traffic signalshave been available at isolated junctions for many years; one of the first trials was in Swansea in the late1970s. More recently, priority to individual vehicles has been provided for coordinated traffic signalcontrol in SCOOT, a control strategy for traffic signals in urban areas.

Bus management systems allow operators to track and monitor their buses against the timetable orscheduled headway. Information from the systems can be provided to the public in the form of real timepassenger information, through various means:

bus stop displays; SMS messages to individual subscribers; and web sites etc.

Such sophisticated systems provide opportunities for better services to the travelling public. In the case ofbus priority systems, as well as reducing passengers’ travel times, the quicker bus journeys may lead tooperational savings for the operator or the ability to increase service frequencies with the same number ofvehicles.

This leaflet describes the technologies that are available to enable bus priority and bus management andinformation systems.

Bus location

To provide priority at traffic signals to individual vehicles, the controller needs to know that the vehicle isapproaching the signals. Usually the selected individual vehicles will be buses, but other vehicles such astrams and emergency vehicles also require priority at traffic signals. Similarly, real time passengerinformation systems need to know the location of vehicles. There are two basic ways of providing theinformation about vehicle location: 1. Selectively detect vehicles at particular points on the road network,often requiring communication between equipment on the vehicle and at the roadside.

2. The vehicle has an on-board means of locating its position and reports it to a vehicle managementsystem.

The first method is commonly referred to as Selective Vehicle Detection (SVD), and the second asAutomatic Vehicle Location (AVL).

The objective of SVD and AVL systems is to provide vehicle location information as required by the buspriority and bus management and information systems that are in use. Each system has its own advantagesand disadvantages.

SVD technologies

There are several technologies that can provide selective vehicle detection:

- 251 -


long vehicle inductive loops; vehicle inductive loop detector signal processing; video image processing; infra-red transmitter and receiver; microwave transmitter and receiver; and inductive loop and transponder.

The first three methods are all passive; there is no active participation in the detection process by thevehicle or equipment on it. Passive detection is attractive as it eliminates the need to equip a large fleet ofvehicles. The first method using long loops can be made to detect full-size buses reliably, but it will detectother long vehicles and will not detect smaller buses. Historically the method has been rejected on thesegrounds.

In mixed traffic, two new intelligent vehicle detectors PRISM and FOOTPRINT, work by processing thesignal from an inductive loop detector to recognise a specific vehicle. The technology is suitable forgiving the same level of priority to all vehicles of the same type, but it cannot provide different levels ofpriority to a particular bus, for example - only to late-running buses. It also cannot provide information onindividual vehicles for information and management purposes. The technique would be particularlyappropriate at isolated bus only facilities, such as the entrance or exit of a park and ride site, where theexpense of on-vehicle equipment on all buses that might be used on the service would be hard to justifyfor use at a very few sites. No independent verification of the performance of the detectors is known.

Video image processing would require considerable development to provide a reliable system to workunder all urban conditions. No-one has so far undertaken the necessary investment to develop acommercial system for bus detection in urban areas.

Infra-red equipment is allowed to transmit continuously as it is not subject to radio transmissionregulations and a transmitter on a bus could continuously transmit its presence to be detected by suitableroadside receivers. Unfortunately, the infra-red communication requires line-of sight transmission and astudy in London in the 1980s concluded that to provide reliable detection would require many highmounted receivers. The cost of regularly cleaning them, to maintain reliable operation, would beprohibitive because of the difficulty of access.

Infra-red detectors are used in North America for both bus priority and signal pre-emption for emergencyvehicles, where a high degree of priority is required, however there has been considerable disquietrecently about the use of un-encoded infra-red and the sale to private motorists of signal pre-emptiontransmitters.

Microwave transmitters and receivers have similar problems with mounting to avoid obscuration; thissystem can also be problematic as mobile microwave equipment is not allowed to transmit continuously.The bus equipment would, therefore, have to be a transponder and only transmit in response to a signalfrom the roadside.

Vehicle mounted transponders that work with inductive loops have been available for a long time; but aswith all loop detectors, the loop and feeder are susceptible to damage. Despite the vulnerability of theloops, inductive loop transponder systems are the SVD technology used in the majority of bus prioritynetworks in the UK. Self contained transponders with a unique ID number do not need connecting to the

- 252 -


vehicle electrical system and so are quick and cheap to install. To obtain information about the service thatthe vehicle is running on, however, requires connection to the vehicle systems, usually the electronicticketing machine. Both types are available.

AVL technologies

The technologies available for in-vehicle units in AVL systems are:

Global Positioning System (GPS) General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Fixed reference points Odometer (milometer) Door open and close indicator

Many of the commercial AVL systems currently operational in the UK use GPS for their location. A GPStracking device on the bus communicates by private mobile radio to the central system and a link to theelectronic ticketing machine can provide additional information on the current route.

However, until 2000, accuracy of the positioning without correction of the deliberate error in the systemwas a problem. The error has since been removed and commercial GPS is now accurate to Â± 3 metres.

Where GPS reception is poor, it may be supplemented with a reading from the odometer. In addition, it ispossible to take an input from the door operating mechanism to indicate when a bus has arrived at a stopand when it has left it. For bus priority, a second communication channel is usually provided for directtransmission of bus priority requests to traffic signal controllers.

Global Packet Radio Service (GPRS) is a wireless communication service for data using the mobile phonenetwork. It is used alongside GPS technology to provide accurate vehicle location data and instantcommunication between the vehicle and the real time information system, by allowing faster access to busservice information.

AVL systems can also use fixed reference points, such as bus stop indicators or special beacons, routemaps and dead reckoning from the odometer.

The complexity of the system will be reflected in the cost of the system.

Requirements for bus priority

The basic requirement for bus priority is that the location system should provide accurate informationwhen a bus is at the specified point where bus priority is requested. This point will normally be 10 to 15seconds bus journey time before the junction, unless there is an intermediate bus stop. Where there is abus stop close to the junction, the priority request point will be immediately after that bus stop.

If the location is subject to error, then the priority request point will have to be moved sufficientlydownstream of the bus stop to ensure that the bus will actually have left the stop when the AVL says thatit is at the priority request point. The benefits of the bus priority will be degraded if the priority requestpoint has to be moved too close to the junction.

- 253 -


Requirements for bus management and information

Locational information is required at a sufficient frequency to provide good bus management andpassenger information. The exact requirement will depend on the user, but the minimum is likely to bearrival and/or departure from each bus stop to an accuracy of better than one minute.



Common disadvantages

The main disadvantage of any system that uses on-bus equipment is that operators move buses betweenroutes, between towns and between regions. If different highway authorities use different systems, theSVD or AVL equipment on a bus may not be compatible with the system to which the bus has beenre-assigned. This can also be a particular problem with longer distance inter-urban services that cross oneor more highway authority boundary. Problems of inter-operability are being addressed for AVL. When astandard is produced it will be important to follow it.

Applications

The bus priority case study on non AVL Bus SCOOT in this series gives a good example of theapplication of SVD. Similarly the case study on Bus SCOOT with AVL in Cardiff provides an example ofthe use of AVL technology.

Another good example is the system started in Brighton in 2001. This is a joint project between Brighton& Hove Bus Company, who run 250 buses, and Brighton & Hove City Council, and was the first in theUK to equip an entire fleet, rather than just selected routes.

The system uses a combination of the odometer reading and the door mechanism, supplemented by GPSto ensure the accuracy of information relayed to the 100 real time signs throughout the City.

The benefit for the Bus Company’s controllers in being able to see the location of every bus has beenenormous; they can now make much more informed decisions about maintaining service frequenciesduring traffic delays. Messages can be sent to the real time information signs to inform passengers abouttraffic problems, and this is regularly used to very good effect. The system stores historic data whichcompares how buses performed in reality compared with their timetable; this enables timetables to beadjusted to further improve reliability.

The City Council is now building on the system; a website showing real time bus information will be inoperation this autumn and a real time mobile phone text messaging service will begin in early 2005.

Useful sources of information


- 254 -



Bus passenger information system in London: www.transportforlondon.gov.uk

Chandler, MJH and Cook, DJ, Traffic control studies in London: SCOOT and bus detection, 13th PTRCSummer Annual Meeting, PTRC Education and Research Services, July 1985.

Cooper, BR, Vincent, RA and Wood, K, Bus-actuated traffic signals - initial assessment of part of theSwansea bus priority scheme, TRL Laboratory Report LR925, Crowthorne, 1980.

Hill, R, Maxwell, A and Bretherton, D, Real time passenger information and bus priority in Cardiff: buspriority trial, Proceedings of the AET European Transport Conference, PTRC Education and ResearchServices, 2001.

Review of current data requirements and detector technologies and the implications for UTMC.Deliverable 2 from the UTMC26 project: Increasing the value of road and roadside detectors. Availablefrom: http://www.utmc.gov.uk/utmc26/pdf/d2v9d.pdf

Testing of Different Bus Detectors for Traffic Signal Priority in Helsinki:www.hel.fi/ksv/entire/repBusDetectors.htm

Use of TIRIS transponders for bus priority: http://www.its.leeds.ac.uk/projects/primavera/tiris.html

MOVA

Description of need

Background

MOVA stands for Microprocessor Optimised Vehicle Actuation. It is a signal control strategy that alterstraffic signal timings in response to actual traffic conditions at isolated junctions. Inductive loops on theapproach to the signals allow MOVA to allocate the optimum green time to the different trafficmovements. The system can be programmed to reduce the waiting time of the priority vehicle.

MOVA is used by almost all authorities having responsibility for traffic signals and it is a requirement onnew signal installations and major refurbishment of trunk roads. Approximately 600 junctions in the UKuse MOVA and the installation rate is over 100 per year. Emergency and priority vehicle signal control isimplemented fully within MOVA.

The trials at Winchester were carried out as part of the MOVA Developments project, carried out by TRLLimited under contract to the Traffic Management Division of the DfT.

Problems

The park and ride car park site is located off a busy road fed from the nearby M3 motorway exit.Additional traffic as a result of the park and ride site has caused congestion in the vicinity of the junctionand caused delay to the buses.

- 255 -


http://www.utmc.gov.uk/utmc26/pdf/d2v9d.pdf

http://www.its.leeds.ac.uk/projects/primavera/tiris.html

Objectives

The main objective of the scheme is to reduce delays to park and ride buses whilst keeping delays togeneral traffic to a minimum.

Scheme details

Description

MOVA Bus Priority was implemented by using Selective Vehicle Detectors (SVDs) of the long loop typewhich distinguish buses from most other vehicles.

Implementation date

September 1997.

Cost

Â£5,000 including the MOVA control unit and labour for cutting the detector loops.

Consultation

The DfT initiated the project with TRL to implement bus priority using MOVA. TRL consulted with anumber of authorities to find suitable sites and Hampshire County Council identified Bar End Road as apossibility. Hampshire County Council agreed to fit MOVA at the site and for TRL to carry out the study.

Bus operator

Stagecoach.

Bus frequency

Average bus frequency is approximately every 7Â½ minutes.




Dates of surveys

Before and after surveys were carried out during 1997.

Types of surveys

Journey times of buses travelling through the junction were recorded over a two day period, both with andwithout the priority control operating for comparative purposes. Bus arrival and departure times wererecorded at the Bar End Road approaches and exits.

- 256 -



Results

Results

Traffic flows

No change in traffic flows occurred with the introduction of the MOVA Bus Priority scheme.

Journey times

The best result occurred in the morning peak when bus delays were reduced by 24.1 seconds (a 54 percent benefit), with smaller but still significant benefits at other times.

System performance

Over all the sites assessed in the project, Bus Priority within MOVA has been shown to work effectivelywithout necessarily introducing major delays to other traffic. At Bar End Road the results were consideredto be good. However, benefits at other locations will depend on specific site characteristics, particularlythe position of bus stops in relation to the junction and whether or not conflicting signal stages have busroutes with high bus flows.


The Park and ride scheme is being extended to involve another junction and MOVA will be replaced byan extension to the Urban Traffic Control system.

Conclusions

The scheme has been operating very successfully for over two years proving that, in certaincircumstances, MOVA Bus Priority offers features needed both to give priority to buses and to preventexcessive disruption to other traffic.

References

Vincent, RA, MOVA Developments: Final Report, Transport Research Laboratory, Laboratory ReportPR/TT/001/99, Crowthorne, 1999.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of the MOVA Development Group and Mr A Gray of theEnvironment Department of Hampshire County Council, who arranged for the installation and operationof the trial bus priority site at Bar End Road.

Other examples

Hanworth, South West LondonContact the traffic team on: [email protected] Merton, South London

- 257 -



Contact Transport Services (Environmental Services Department) on: 020 8545 4794.

Further information

Department for Transport, Highways Agency, Installation Guide for MOVA, MCH 1542 Issue C, May2003.

Bus SCOOT

Description of need

Background

The ’split cycle offset optimisation technique’ - or SCOOT - is an urban traffic control (UTC) system. TheTransport Research Laboratory (TRL) developed SCOOT in collaboration with UK traffic systemsuppliers. Today, TRL, Peek Traffic and Siemens Traffic Control jointly own SCOOT.

SCOOT responds automatically to traffic fluctuations, so expensive signal plans are unnecessary. Thismakes SCOOT an efficient tool for managing traffic on roads that use traffic signals. Over 170 towns andcities in the UK now use SCOOT.

Bus SCOOT is a facility incorporated into SCOOT to give priority to buses. To use Bus SCOOT anauthority must install devices for letting SCOOT know where the buses are e.g. loops or detectors.

The Uxbridge Road is a strategically significant radial road running from Uxbridge town centre toShepherds Bush in west London. It is 22km long and runs through three London boroughs. A bus routeruns the entire length of the Uxbridge Road in two overlapping sections, and there is also a limited stopexpress route. At peak times there are over 20 buses an hour in each direction on these two routes, andover 60,000 people travel on them every day.

Problems

The Uxbridge Road suffers from severe traffic congestion throughout its length. Physical bus prioritymeasures were introduced as part of a demonstration project from 1993 to 1996. These measures gave afour minute reduction in bus journey times. Bus patronage also increased considerably during this timeperiod. However buses still suffered delays from traffic signals, and therefore further measures wereneeded to alleviate this.

Objectives

The Uxbridge Road scheme was part of the London field trials, which also included schemes forTwickenham and Edgware Road. The trials aimed to evaluate a number of integrated strategies at thethree test sites.

London Buses initiated the scheme with the Traffic Control Systems Unit (TCSU): now TrafficTechnology Systems (TTS) of Transport for London. The Transportation Research Group, the Universityof Southampton and TRL Limited subsequently joined the study.

- 258 -


Scheme details

Description

The scheme tested was Bus SCOOT (as incorporated in SCOOT 4.1), running on the Uxbridge Road. Itdid not use automatic vehicle location (AVL).

Implementation date


Costs

The estimated cost of the scheme is Â£80,000 a year. It has the potential to save Â£200,000 a year.

Consultation

As these were field trials, a public consultation exercise was not carried out.

Bus operators

London Buses operates services along the Uxbridge Road.

Bus frequency

An average of 23 buses an hour run along the route.




Dates of surveys

On-street trials were carried out on the Uxbridge Road over a five week period in May and June 1998.

Types of surveys

The trials tested the following strategies for one week each:

SCOOT; Bus SCOOT with extensions only; Bus SCOOT with extensions and low degree of saturation recall; and Bus SCOOT with extensions and high degree of saturation recall.

The strategies - an explanation of terms Extensions only - if traffic signals are on green when a busarrives, the time the signals are on green is extended to allow the bus to proceed.

- 259 -



Extensions and low/high degree of saturation recall - if traffic signals are on red when a bus arrives, BusSCOOT looks at the other signal arms and decides whether to recall the green for the bus. Whether thegreen is recalled depends on the priority (low or high) assigned for this to occur.

A low degree of saturation recall means that a low priority is given to the green recall for the bus overother signal arms. Conversely, a high degree of saturation recall means that a high priority is given to thegreen recall for the bus over other signal arms.

Automatic data collection facilities were backed up by on-street measurement where necessary. Thecomprehensive database compiled as a result included most or all of the following for each strategy:

automatic recording of bus identities and detection times, using palmtop computers installed in trafficsignal controllers; automatic recording of traffic flows, delays and congestion using the ASTRID database, whichautomatically collects and stores traffic information from SCOOT for display or analysis; automatic recording of signal status and strategy actions i.e. bus priority to confirm that the system isworking properly and to provide core data to explain what effect the system has on buses and generaltraffic; automatic traffic counts providing data for twelve main roads and side road links; manual recording of registration numbers for buses and a sample of cars at each end of the corridor,to provide journey times; queue length and traffic flow measurements on key side roads; and data on events such as system failures.

Results

Results

Traffic flows

The introduction of Bus SCOOT had no effect on traffic flows.

Journey times

Automatic recording logged some 25,000 bus journeys. The results indicate statistically significantsavings in average bus delay and in delay variability of up to 20 per cent and 11 per cent respectively.

System performance

Bus SCOOT worked effectively during the demonstration project, as it had in previous surveys. Thescheme did not record details of bus patronage and there were no issues regarding enforcement. Nor werethere any effects of the scheme other than those recorded.

One possible change to the scheme would be the use of automatic vehicle detection systems.

- 260 -



Conclusions

Network capacity

The bus priority strategies used on the Uxbridge Road are expected to have an insignificant effect on thenetwork’s overall capacity. None of the strategies involve any physical measures or reallocation of roadspace.

Bus SCOOT temporarily changes capacity at individual signal junctions when bus priority is in operation.However, with no stage skipping (stages run through in numerical order), and with green timecompensation to non-priority stages, (stages not giving priority to buses are compensated for any loss ofgreen time while priority is given to the link with priority), the average length of each stage (and hencecapacity) remains largely unchanged.

Travel time and delay

All the priority strategies evaluated here have mainly affected travel time and delay. Buses operating withBus SCOOT experience average delay savings of between 7 and 20 per cent between sites in London,with no significant effect on other traffic.

Reliability and regularity

All of the priority strategies in London have produced a saving in bus journey time reliability, expressedby the standard deviation of the journey times. The different strategies have recorded savings of between 4and 13 per cent.

References


Acknowledgements

This was produced with the assistance of the University of Southampton, London Transport Buses andTransport for London. For further information contact TfL Bus Priority team on: 020 7960 6763.

Other examples

The SCOOT web site contains references to other successful implementations of SCOOT. The webaddress is: www.scoot-utc.com

Further information

To use Bus SCOOT on a network SCOOT 4.1 must installed and in use. Other information and guidancecan be found in:

- 261 -



DETR Local Transport Note 1/97, Keeping Buses Moving, The Stationery Office, January 1997. DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 7/99, SCOOT URBAN CONTROL SYSTEM. DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 8/00, Bus Priority in SCOOT. DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 6/01, Bus Priority. Bowen GT, Bus Priority in SCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory, TRL Report 255, Crowthorne,1997. Bretherton RD, Bowen GT, Harrison MEJ and Langford SL, Scope for Enhancing Bus Priority inSCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/197/96, Crowthorne, 1996. Bretherton RD and Wall GT, Review of Bus Priority in SCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory,Laboratory Report PT/TT/121/95, Crowthorne, 1995. Bretherton RD, Baker KA and Harrison MEJ, Public Transport Priority in SCOOT, TransportResearch Laboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/039/99, Crowthorne, 1999. Bretherton RD and Harrison MEJ, Evaluation of SCOOT Bus Priority Field Trials, TransportResearch Laboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/036/99, Crowthorne, 1999. Gardener K and Metzger D, Uxbridge Road bus priority demonstration project, Proceedings ofSeminar K (Traffic Management & Road Safety), pp. 63 - 74, 25th PTRC European TransportForum, 1997. PROMPT: Field Trial and simulation results of bus priority in SCOOT, 8th International Conference(IEE) on Road Traffic Monitoring & Control, pp. 90 - 94, 1996.

Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL)

Description of need

Background

The ’split cycle offset optimisation technique’ - or SCOOT - is an urban traffic control (UTC) system thatthe Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) developed in collaboration with UK traffic system suppliers.

SCOOT responds automatically to traffic conditions, altering signal settings to optimise junction operationso expensive updating of fixed time signal plans is unnecessary. This makes SCOOT an efficient tool formanagingtraffic on roads that use traffic signals. Over 170 towns and cities in the UK now use SCOOT.

Bus SCOOT is a facility incorporated into SCOOT to give priority to buses. In order for priority to begiven, SCOOT must be informed about the location of buses. One means of doing this is usinginformation from an Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) system. There are two ways of providing AVL:the first is by using differential Global Positioning System (GPS) technology, and the second by using abeacon based system. Cardiff uses GPS technology.

Most bus AVL systems in the UK allow the location of a bus to be compared against a schedule and, inthis way, priority can be provided depending on a bus’s adherence to schedule. In the Cardiff system, forinstance, it is possible to give priority only to those buses that are running behind schedule.

Problems

- 262 -


In common with many other cities, Cardiff has seen significant growth in the use of the private car withtraffic levels increasing by over 55 per cent since 1987. With only limited road capacity available, this isresulting in delays to all vehicles and consequent congestion and gaseous pollution.

Objectives

The overall aim in Cardiff is to secure a move to multimodal transport with an emphasis on publictransport.

The specific objectives of the Cardiff trial were to:

â¢ reduce the delays to buses and improve their adherence to schedule using the SCOOT bus priorityfacility interfaced to an AVL system; and

â¢ Test and evaluate the provision of priority only to buses running behind schedule.

Scheme details

Description

The scheme tested was Bus SCOOT using AVL to inform SCOOT about the location of buses. The AVLfacility was part of a real-time passenger information system that makes use of GPS technology. Anon-board computer and GPS receiver tracks the bus’s location and a bus priority request is transmitted toSCOOT from the bus when a predefined location, stored in the on-board computer, is reached.

The SCOOT AVL system in Cardiff concentrated on the northern corridor of the city and is the largestGPS based bus priority and real time passenger information system to be installed in the UK. 25 per centof the city’s buses and 49 signalised junctions were included in the initial scheme.

Implementation date


Cost

The cost of the system depends on the method of bus detection. If there is an existing (AVL) systemwhich is used for bus management and passenger information purposes (as in Cardiff), the additional costof providing the information to SCOOT can be small (dependent on the type of AVL system). If there isno AVL system then there is an additional infrastructure cost for detection (for example - all busesequipped with transponders plus a bus loop installed on each approach where bus priority is required).

Consultation

Extensive consultation took place between Cardiff County Council and the main bus operator, CardiffBus, regarding planning and implementation of the scheme.

Bus operator

- 263 -


The main bus operator is Cardiff Bus.

Bus frequency

There were average bus flows of between 16 and 40 buses per hour through the junctions in the scheme.


The survey area covered the ’Northern Corridor’ from just south of Caerphilly Road/Beulah Road in theNorth, to just past High Street/Castle Street in the South.



Dates of surveys

Trials were carried out by TRL over an eight week period in Autumn 2000. Due to some technicalproblems the amount of data collected was lower than planned. Consequently further trials were held overan eleven week period in Spring 2001.

The strategies monitored were alternated on a weekly basis.

Types of surveys

Three strategies were surveyed:

SCOOT without bus priority; SCOOT with priority enabled for all buses; and SCOOT with priority enabled only for buses running more than one minute behind schedule.

Results

Evaluation was significantly affected by events and technical problems encountered during the trial.

In the AM peak when priority was given to all buses there was an average reduction in delay to buses of 4seconds per bus per junction and an average reduction in lateness of 70 seconds. With priority given toonly those buses behind schedule there was a reduction in delay to buses of 3 seconds per bus per junctionand a reduction in lateness of 92 seconds. These results are in line with the benefits normally expected tobe provided by Bus SCOOT.

Providing priority only to buses behind schedule reduced the number of priority events and hence thenumber of times that general traffic was disrupted.

Traffic flows

Despite the advantages to bus operations, no decrease or increase in traffic flows was noted due to theintroduction of this scheme.

- 264 -



System performance

The Cardiff system demonstrated that active priority can be provided to buses on-street using the SCOOTbus priority facility interfaced with an AVL system. However, while the functionality of the SCOOT/AVL interface has been shown, the potential benefits of bus priority in this particular instance weresignificantly affected by operational and technical problems. These problems were mostly due to: the highlevel of co-ordination required between different stakeholders; the number of interfaces between differentsystems; a lack of formal monitoring procedures; and the complexity of the systems combined with therelatively new use of the technology.

Measures to reduce the impact of these factors are required for the successful implementation of an AVLbus priority system. These include: providing value adding facilities for the bus companies; training andinformation for drivers; and formal performance and fault monitoring procedures, all of which have beenimproved in Cardiff since the completion of the trial.

Conclusions

The success of the scheme has meant that 90 to 95 per cent of the city’s buses are now equipped with buspriority technology. The scheme has been expanded to cover 120 junctions.

References


Bretherton, RD, Bowen, GT, Harrison, MEJ & Langford, SL, Scope for Enhancing Bus Priority inSCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/197/96, Crowthorne, 1996.

Bretherton, RD & Wall, GT, Review of Bus Priority in SCOOT, Transport Research Laboratory,Laboratory Report PT/TT/121/95, Crowthorne, 1995.

Bretherton, RD, Baker, KA & Harrison, MEJ, Public Transport Priority in SCOOT, Transport ResearchLaboratory, Laboratory Report PT/TT/039/99, Crowthorne,1999.


Bretherton, RD, Maxwell, A & Wood, K, Provision of differential priority within SCOOT: Final Report,Transport Research Laboratory, Laboratory Report PR/T/025/03, Crowthorne, 2003.

Acknowledgements

This document was produced with the assistance of Cardiff County Council, ACIS, and Cardiff Bus. Inparticular, Reg Hill, Bill Cokeley, Graham Morris, and David Kinnaird of Cardiff County Council, CraigGulliford of ACIS, and Geoff Blewden of Cardiff Bus.

For further information, contact Dave Bretherton: [email protected], or Keith Wood:[email protected]

- 265 -


For further information regarding Cardiff Bus, contact [email protected] or go towww.cardiffbus.com

Other examples

The SCOOT web site contains references to other successful implementations of SCOOT, the web addressis: www.scoot-utc.com

Further information

To use Bus SCOOT on a network, SCOOT V3.1 (or more recent version) must be installed and in use.Other information and guidance can be found in:

DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 7/99, SCOOT Urban Control System. DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 8/00, Bus Priority in SCOOT. DETR, Traffic Advisory Leaflet 6/01, Bus Priority.

Mixed priority street

Description of need

Background

Rusholme is located approximately one mile from the centre of Manchester and is the largest and one ofthe busiest district centres in Manchester. There is a concentration of local retail activity, student facilities,visitor attractions and ethnic minority enterprise and employment in the centre. It is the most successfulretail centre in Manchester outside the city centre and is the location for over 150 ethnic minoritybusinesses. Rusholme is considered culturally vital to Asian communities in Manchester and the NorthWest of England. Activity is not confined to daytime on weekdays; the district centre is also busy inevenings and at weekends.

Wilmslow Road runs southwards from Manchester City Centre to the northern boundary with Stockportlinking South Manchester and Manchester Airport with the city centre. Frontage properties include retail,residential, commercial and light industrial land uses. Closer to the city centre, Wilmslow Road alsoserves Manchester Royal Infirmary, St Mary’s Hospital, Whitworth Art Gallery and the city’s highereducation precinct.

Problems

Before implementation of the improvements, Wilmslow Road was a single carriageway road with twolanes in each direction. The success of Rusholme district centre combined with limited opportunities foroff-street parking and rear servicing of retail and commercial properties resulted in high levels of on-streetparking and servicing on Wilmslow Road. Indiscriminate and illegal parking was common creatinghazards for pedestrians and cyclists, impeding traffic flow, creating congestion and contributing to delayand unreliability for buses.

- 266 -



The area became hazardous for pedestrians forced to cross between parked vehicles, particularly as thehigh level of pedestrian activity continues late into the night in Rusholme. Analysis of accident data for aperiod of three years before implementation of the scheme showed 136 reported injury accidents involving178 personal injuries. Unusually, 44 per cent of accidents occurred during the hours of darkness andaccounted for more than half of all the injuries to pedestrians.

Wilmslow Road is one of the busiest bus routes in Greater Manchester. The high volume of traffic and theextensive on-street parking/servicing contributed to traffic congestion that, in turn, led to delay to buses,considerable variability in bus journey times and a negative perception of the reliability of public transporton the Wilmslow Road Corridor. Journey times for buses on the corridor have been increasingyear-on-year for a number of years with the result that additional buses have had to be deployed tomaintain reliability and punctuality.

Wilmslow Road also has the largest volume of cyclists in the North West. The concentration of vulnerableusers on Wilmslow Road led to casualty numbers steadily increasing from 47 in 1998 to 81 in 2000. TheManchester Universities jointly expressed their concern on behalf of students on the campus just to thenorth of Rusholme.

Meetings between the Rusholme Traders Association and the City Council indicated that the existingtraffic management in place in the area was not satisfactory and the situation was negatively affecting theperceptions of those visiting and driving through the area.

Objectives

The Rusholme scheme is about encouraging the vitality of Rusholme district centre, improving safety andmaking better use of the carriageway space available. The objectives include: â¢ reducing accidents;

increasing safety for pedestrians and cyclists; managing parking; managing servicing for local businesses; improve reliability of bus services by reducing journey time variability; encourage the vibrant business activity in the area enhancing local trading viability; reducing congestion and the associated negative environmental consequences; and improving visitor perceptions of the area.

Scheme details

Description

The scheme on Wilmslow Road reduced the four lane carriageway through the

district centre to a single mixed use lane in each direction between Hathersage Road and Dickenson Roadin order to allow the provision of defined servicing bays, parking bays and bus stops. The traffic lanes arenarrow in order to inhibit inconsiderate parking. The remaining carriageway space was used to introducehorizontal alignment changes to reduce vehicle speeds and provide improvements for pedestrians, cyclistsand bus passengers. The natural curvature of the road was exaggerated to encourage drivers to reduce theirspeed appropriately.

- 267 -


Short unconnected sections of bus lane were removed from the core area and replaced by with-flow buslanes with a minimum width of 4.0 metres on the northern and southern approaches to the core areaterminating at transponder controlled signalised bus gates. This is the element of the scheme that isintended to provide priority for buses.

The scheme embodies principles of traffic metering and queue relocation. The traffic signal installations atjunctions at both ends of the district centre can be used to manage the flow of traffic through the centre.Peak period traffic queues on the northern and southern approaches to the district centre can be bypassedby buses using the bus lanes and bus gates.

Bus stops were relocated to align with crossing facilities and areas with appropriate footpath space. Otheradditional measures included:

raised kerbs and improvements to the bus stop environment to aid boarding; bus stops with shallow saw-tooth bus bays, conventional bus bays and bus boarders protected by redcordon markings and clearway orders; removal of short and discontinuous lengths of with-flow bus lane on Wilmslow Road in the districtcentre and implementation of longer lengths of with-flow bus lane terminating in bus gates on thenorthern and southern approaches to the district centre; footway widening to allow a pedestrian clearway free of obstruction by street furniture; introduction of continuous full time cycle lanes; and a number of measures to enhance the character of the area including ’street art’ to reinforce thecultural identity of Rusholme, upgraded street furniture and improved street lighting.

Three illustrations are provided - Figure 1 provides an overview of the scheme; Figure 2 provides a sketchlayout of an area at the southern end of the scheme; and Figure 3 illustrates the layout on a section ofWilmslow Road in the district centre.

Implementation date

The mixed priority scheme on the section of Wilmslow Road between Hathersage Road at the northernend of the district centre and Platt Lane at the southern end was completed in September 2004. Thewith-flow bus lanes on the northern and southern approaches to the city centre were implemented shortlyafterwards.

39

40

41

Costs

Total scheme implementation cost was Â£2.0 million. The scheme was designated as a Safety SchemeDemonstration Project and attracted funding of Â£1.0 million from DETR (DfT) following a competitivebidding process. The balance of Â£1.0 million was funded from local resources.

- 268 -





Consultation

Initial informal consultation with ward members and officers of the Local Regeneration Partnership tookplace before consultation with the public and stakeholders. Advance consultation also took place betweenManchester City Council, Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive and Greater ManchesterPolice.

A combination of methods of consultation with the public was used including:

distribution of explanatory leaflets to all properties on Wilmslow Road with a contact facility for atranslated version of the leaflet for non-English speaking residents; public exhibitions were held and included models and artists impressions of the scheme; a telephone hotline to receive comments; this was staffed and was not just an answer phone service; dissemination of information through the local media; and meetings with the emergency services to discuss traffic management issues.

A joint representative working party and steering committee was formed to oversee the implementation ofthe proposals.

Bus operators

Wilmslow Road has the highest number of registered bus services on any road in Greater Manchesteroperated by Stagecoach Manchester including services provided under the Magic Bus brand name. Otheroperators providing local bus services on Wilmslow Road include First Manchester, Arriva North West,Finglands and five smaller independent companies.

Bus frequency

In the inter-peak period on weekdays there is a total hourly two-way flow of 110 buses on WilmslowRoad through the district centre. The hourly two-way flow increases to 136 on the section of WilmslowRoad to the north of the district centre where the southbound with-flow bus lane is located. Bus flows aresubstantially higher during weekday peak periods.

Scheme impact

Post implementation monitoring of the impact of the scheme has not yet taken place, but it is anticipatedthat it will deliver the following outcomes:

an improvement in the street environment making the district centre more attractive for shoppers andvisitors; a reduction in indiscriminate and illegal parking. The initial view of the bus operator is that a similarscheme in nearby Withington has been more effective in eliminating problem parking because thetraffic lanes are narrower and there is less opportunity to park without completely blocking traffic; a reduction in the high numbers of pedestrian casualties achieved through the provision of additionalpedestrian crossing facilities, speed reduction measures and better management of on-street parkingand servicing of frontage businesses; a reduction in the number of accidents involving cyclists achieved by providing cycle lanes andadvanced stop lines;

- 269 -


a more attractive environment and full accessibility at bus stops; and improvements in reliability, and particularly a reduction in the variability of bus journey times, as aresult of implementation of bus priority measures on the approaches to the district centre, queue relocationand the metering of traffic through the mixed priority section of Wilmslow Road.

Conclusions

This mixed priority scheme has improved conditions for pedestrians and cyclists, reduced speeds, andallowed better management of parking and servicing in Rusholme district centre. The specific elements ofthe scheme that benefit buses are the two bus lanes and bus gates on the approaches to the district centre.They allow buses to overtake other traffic, provide journey time and reliability benefits, and helpoutbound right-turning buses on the northern approach to the district centre. The mixed priority measuresimplemented in the district centre are thought to have had a broadly neutral effect on buses; benefits frombetter control of parking and servicing being offset by the impact of additional pedestrian crossingfacilities.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgement is given for the assistance provided by Greater Manchester Passenger TransportExecutive, Manchester City Council and Stagecoach Manchester during preparation of this case study.

Other examples

There are similar examples of mixed priority routes elsewhere in Greater Manchester including the districtcentres of Levenshulme and Withington.

Further information

For further information contact the bus priority team at Greater Manchester Passenger TransportExecutive on 0161 242 6000 or write to:

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive19 Portland StreetPiccadilly GardensManchester M60 1HX

Bus friendly traffic calming

Description of need

Background

The first traffic calming scheme with road humps was introduced in Hull in 1993. Since then Hull CityCouncil has achieved substantial reduction in road accident casualties. Central to the success of Hull’straffic calming policy has been the introduction of 20 mph zones throughout the city, the first of whichwas introduced in 1995. The idea of 20 mph zones was introduced in the UK to address the problem ofchild pedestrian accidents. DfT guidance on 20 mph zones suggests that the risk of a child being involved

- 270 -


in an accident drops by two thirds with the introduction of a 20 mph zone (TRL analysed 250 zones whichindicated that child accidents fell by 67 per cent and the overall number of accidents fell by 60 per cent).

illustration of scheme

By 1998 Hull City Council had developed fifty 20 mph zones, including zones on a number of bus routes.These were a mixture of high and low frequency routes with some calmed roads having as many as 14buses per hour each way. A further development in 1998 was the acceptance of agreed standards betweenthe City Council, bus operators and emergency services in Hull for bus and ambulance friendly trafficcalming. Currently in Hull there are just under 17 kilometres of traffic calming on bus routes in the city, 9kilometres of which is on bus routes with a frequency of 10 minutes or greater.

Objectives

The agreed standards for traffic calming were introduced in Hull in order to minimise the impact of trafficcalming on bus routes and ambulances responding to emergency calls, whilst still reducing mean speedsand achieving the targeted casualty reductions. In general, where traffic calming is not carefully consultedon at the design stage, the impact upon public transport can result in services being withdrawn due toadditional time added to the service and wear and tear on vehicles making a route not commerciallyviable. There are also cases in some parts of the country where bus drivers have complained that poorlydesigned traffic calming has resulted in injuries through repeated driving over humps.

Additional objectives of traffic calming include reducing average traffic speeds, increasing the number ofpeople walking and cycling, improving the environment for those who live work or travel along the routeand providing a safer route to school for local children.

Scheme details

Description

The agreed standards between Hull City Council and the bus operator included:

all vertical traffic calming measures to be a maximum 75 millimetres high; all speed cushions to be 2.1 metres wide, 3 metres long with 550 millimetres side slopes; speed table/flat top humps to have 1800 millimetres long ramps with a minimum 9 metre longplateau; all traffic calming schemes to include minimum number of measures to achieve objectives; minimum 15 metre length of waiting restrictions to protect each side of speed cushion; and regular traffic calming meetings between city council, bus operators and emergency services.



The dimensions of the traffic calming measures were agreed to take advantage of the wider wheel base ofthe buses.

- 271 -




The waiting restrictions surrounding traffic calming measures prevent cars from parking on the approachto speed cushions, ensuring that buses are able to approach the traffic calming at the correct angle,allowing a more comfortable journey for the passenger.

Hull now has over one hundred 20 mph zones throughout the city. An example of one of these schemescan be seen on Shannon Road. This scheme was introduced in April 1998 in response to a previous highlevel of injury accidents, especially involving child pedestrians and cyclists. Shannon Road is a localdistributor route carrying around 5,000 vehicles per day and services a large estate to the east of the citycentre. A frequent bus service exists and there are numerous shops and a school on the route.

The scheme consists of speed cushions throughout its length and a short section of 20 mph zone to protectthe school and major shopping area. The 20 mph zone includes road narrowing and priority working toenforce the 20 mph limit.

The signs positioned at the entrance to all zones in Hull have been designed by local children, helping toemphasise local ownership of the scheme.

Cost

The overall contribution to the implementation of the 20 mph zones in Hull is Â£5.5 million to date. Thishas been met from a variety of different sources both from corporate capital and transport capital funding.

Consultation

Decisions on the choice of traffic calming measures to use at any particular location in Hull is based onexperience that has been built up in the area and on extensive consultation with the bus operators,emergency services and the public. All the 20 mph zones went through consultation including leaflets,questionnaires, public exhibitions and meetings of ward forums and residential committees.

Owing to the current scale of traffic calming in Hull there is a high level of community awarenesssurrounding traffic calming and communities are well aware of the positive results from other local areas.In fact much of the demand for the schemes has come from within the local communities.

Bus operators

Bus operators are now actively involved in the design of traffic calming in Hull, this includes consultationon issues such as spacing and positioning of cushions in relation to bus stops. The scheme on NewlandAvenue (a national road safety demonstration project) is an example of a scheme where the council andbus operator have worked closely together in designing the layout of the carriageway, negotiating theoptimum position for cushions, bus stops and crossing facilities to reduce delay experienced by busservices on the route and minimise any discomfort which may be experience by the passenger as a resultof traffic calming measures.

One issue raised by operators is the effect of traffic calming on services which are operated by mini andmidi bus services. Because of their shorter wheel base they are unable to avoid the effects of the trafficcalming even with the agreed measures. This produces a ’wobble’ effect for the passengers and exertsadditional pressure on the inner wheel of the vehicle, as the vehicle is not able to get both wheels on theslopes of the cushion. The solution to this has been to increase the width of the cushion allowing the mini

- 272 -


buses to get both wheels on the side slopes of the cushions. The additional problem here is that anymeasures introduced to mitigate the effects on mini and midi buses will also be effective for small vans,reducing the overall effectiveness of the traffic calming scheme.

The operators enforce the 20 mph zone through driver instruction and by the use of sporadic speed gunchecks, particularly in areas where there have been complaints about buses allegedly speeding.

Bus operators have realised a hidden saving from the extensive traffic calming and introduction of 20 mphzones. Where accidents occur on high frequency routes the bus operator still needs to provide the samefrequency of service although buses will become caught up in the delay associated with the accident. Thisdelay can be as much as 15 minutes which means an additional bus is required on the route to maintain thecorrect frequency. The reduction in accidents through the implementation of traffic calming thereforeresults in a saving to the operators as there are fewer occasions where they need to provide the extra bus.This kind of saving is only applicable to areas where there is extensive traffic calming. The reduction inaccidents also improves the reliability of services across the whole network particularly for cross cityservices.


A number of monitoring studies have been undertaken in areas where bus friendly traffic calming hasbeen introduced. In Hull accident data for the city has been collated for three years before each schemeand three years after each scheme. In addition, the Institute for Public Policy Research conducted researchinto child pedestrian safety using Hull as one of its case studies.

TRL have undertaken a study of 20 mph zones, including analysis of the impact of 20 mph zones ontraffic flows in treated areas and surrounding areas which may be affected by traffic transferring to otherstreets. Whilst bus operators monitor journey times, reliability and patronage levels these figures can bemisleading indicators as they tend to be affected by other factors such bus priority measures in other partsof the city.

Results

Traffic flows

The TRL report ’Review of Traffic Calming in 20 mph Zones’ suggests that traffic flow was reduced by27 per cent within 20 mph zones, whereas the roads surrounding the 20 mph zones experienced anincrease of 12 per cent.

Traffic flows were monitored at two sites in the Shannon Road safety scheme. The results showed thattraffic had been reduced by over a quarter in the 20 mph zone in the afternoon peak (28.6 per centbetween 15.30 and 16.30).

Journey times

Bus operators have taken the view that traffic calming has only had a negligible effect on bus journeytimes. In most cases the bus routes where traffic calming has been implemented were already slow routeswith numerous stops and high patronage, resulting in average speeds of around 10 mph for buses evenbefore traffic calming. Thus the reduction in general traffic flow experienced on these routes as a result of

- 273 -


traffic calming may have a positive effect on bus journey times.

Casualty reduction

Accident data collated by Hull City Council for three years before and after the implementation of trafficcalming on bus routes (18 schemes in total) revealed that the number of accidents has dropped from 315 inthe three years before traffic calmed zones were implemented to 156 in the three years afterimplementation. This equates to a reduction of 53 accidents per year and 4.3 less accidents per kilometreper year.

Overall:

fatal and serious injury accidents have been reduced by 64 per cent; injury accidents involving children have been reduced by 60 per cent; injury accidents involving pedestrians have been reduced by 60 per cent; injury accidents involving child pedestrians have been reduced by 71 per cent; injury accidents involving cyclists have been reduced by 28 per cent; and injury accidents involving child cyclists have been reduced by 32 per cent.

Looking at this data on a scheme by scheme basis Shannon Road saw a reduction in accidents in the threeyears proceeding traffic calming of 71 per cent, with accidents per year falling from 9.3 to 2.7 between1995 and 2000. Greatest changes were seen in accidents involving pedestrians which saw a reduction of93 per cent and accidents during darkness which saw a reduction of 85 per cent.

An Institute for Public Policy Research study estimated that since 1994 Hull’s programme of 20 mphzones has already saved about 200 serious injuries and about 1000 minor injuries. In accounting termsthese savings are worth well over Â£40 million.

Total number of crashes in 20 mph zones has fallen by 56 per cent and the number of crashes resulting indeaths or serious injuries has been cut by 90 per cent.

This reduction in accidents on the city’s roads is also felt to have a positive impact on the reliability of busservices; an accident can cause in the region of 15 minutes delay to a service, having a serious impact onpassengers’ perceptions of reliability and punctuality. This is particularly an issue if a bus route is affectedby an accident hotspot and is consequently experiencing regular delays.

Average vehicle speeds

At Shannon Road the scheme was introduced incrementally. The 20 mph signs were introduced followedby speed roundels and finally the main scheme was introduced. Vehicle speeds were monitored throughthis phasing and the results can be seen in the table below:



- 274 -



The results show that the largest reduction occurred when the full scheme was implemented with averagespeeds being reduced by up to a third, although a noticeable reduction in speed occurred with theintroduction of the signs and roundels.

Conclusions

The key to bus friendly traffic calming is extensive consultation between the bus operators and councilrepresentatives. This is highlighted in Hull where the Council and bus operators have been workingtogether on traffic calming schemes for ten years.

Traffic calming has been able to improve bus reliability through a number of indirect routes including areduction in the number of accidents on the network reducing the delay experienced by bus services andthrough a reduction in traffic flows on traffic calmed routes resulting in buses experiencing lesscongestion related delays in these areas.

A number of issues remain unresolved with regards to public transport and traffic calming including thefact that priority seats on buses for the elderly and those with mobility impairments tend to be positionedat the front of the bus over the front wheels. This is where the ’wobble effect’ created by speed cushions isgreatest and has led to a number of complaints about the discomfort of the journey and incidents whereshopping has fallen over.

There is also the issue of services which operate using mini and midi buses as the dimensions for trafficcalming measures agreed between the city council and bus operators does not accommodate the shorterwheel base of these vehicles.

The future

Currently 26 per cent of the 730 kilometres of road are covered by a 20 mph limit and further areas areunder consideration. Some 60 per cent of roads in Hull are suitable for 20 mph zones, although the greatmajority of these will be in residential areas away from the main bus routes.

European approach

A number of bus friendly traffic calming measures from mainland Europe are discussed in ’CivilisedStreets a guide to traffic calming’. One example of this is the combi hump used in Denmark. The designincludes two humps one for cars (in the middle) and two for buses (either side of the hump for cars), thehump for cars being more severe than that for buses, taking advantage of the difference in wheel baselengths between buses and cars.

Sweden has developed a traffic calming measure using a depression in the road (used in Stockholm andVÃ¤steras). The depressions are wide enough that cars must drive through them but buses are able tostraddle them, this has led to support from bus operators for this measure. There are three areas of concernwith using depressions as a traffic calming measure, firstly they are less visible than a hump, secondlythere have been some drainage issues and finally the cost of this measure is approximately four times thatof installing humps.

- 275 -


A further example can be found in Denmark which combines depressions and humps. This is know as thebus sluis and comprises a hump in the normal carriage way with a separate section of carriage way forbuses. This separate section has a depression with a ramp leading up to it which buses can straddle andcars can not; the disadvantage with this measure is the amount of carriage way width required.

References

Brightwell, Sarah, Hull reaps road safety rewards from slowing the city’s traffic, Local Transport Today,15/05/04.

Carmen Hass Klau et al, Civilised Streets a guide to traffic calming, Environmental and TransportPlanning, 1992.

Traffic Advisory Leaflet 09/99, 20 mph speed limits and zones, DfT, 1999.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Hull City Council and East Yorkshire Motor ServicesLimited.

Other examples

Telford & Wrekin Council.

Contact the Network Management and Development Department on: 01952 202100 (main switchboard).

Further information

Further information on traffic calming in Hull can be obtained from:

Traffic Projects Manager Traffic Services

Kingston upon Hull City Council

Kingston House

Bond Street

Hull

HU1 3ER

01482 612095

- 276 -


High occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes

Description of need

Background

High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) or ’2 Plus’ lanes were introduced on the A647 Stanningley Road andStanningley By-Pass as Leeds City Council’s contribution to the ICARO (Increasing CAR Occupancy)research project.

Stanningley Road and Stanningley By-Pass form the principal radial route to the west of Leeds city centreand are part of the route linking Leeds and Bradford.

Problems

The part of Stanningley Road and Stanningley By-Pass chosen for the HOV lane is a dual two lanecarriageway. In January 1997, journey times in free-flow traffic conditions were little more than 5 minutesfor 2.0km whereas, in the morning peak period, journey times were typically more than 10 minutes.

Objectives

Leeds City Council saw the primary objective of the scheme to be to provide priority for the majority ofpeople travelling towards Leeds on the A647 in peak periods. It was expected that the scheme wouldresult in an increase in car occupancy.

ICARO objectives were broader in scope. The aims were:

to increase car occupancy by encouraging car sharing; and to demonstrate the feasibility of providing a lane for shared use by buses, other high occupancyvehicles, motorcycles and cycles.

Scheme details

Description

The HOV lane is available to buses, coaches, other vehicles carrying 2 or more people, motorcycles andpedal cycles. Goods vehicles over 7.5T are not permitted to use the 2+ lane.

There are two lengths of inbound HOV or 2+ lane extending for a total of 1.5km along 2.0km of dualcarriageway. The HOV lanes operate in the morning and evening peak periods (07:00 - 10:00, 16:00 -19:00) on Mondays to Fridays. Advance signing is provided on the approaches to the HOV lanes.Half-width laybys are provided to ensure that buses can serve bus stops without obstructing the flow ofother permitted categories of traffic.

Traffic signal control is provided at the end of the HOV lane to manage merging of traffic from the HOVand non-HOV traffic lanes. At first these signals operated for fixed time periods. They have been modifiedto respond to different traffic conditions before and after the end of the HOV lanes. The signals can alsoswitch on and off in response to traffic conditions.

- 277 -


The scheme included police enforcement laybys, speed cameras, improved street lighting, improvementsat bus stops, pelican crossings with tactile paving, anti-skid surfacing and changes to traffic circulation onside roads.

Implementation date

The HOV lane was opened under an experimental Traffic Regulation Order on 11 May 1998 and madepermanent on 8 November 1999.

Costs

Scheme implementation cost was Â£585,000 at 1998 prices.

Illustratin of scheme

Consultation

The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 authorises local authorities to introduce experimental TROswithout prior consultation. In this case, although there was no formal public consultation, there wassubstantial consultation with elected members, the emergency services, bus operators, cycling groups,groups representing the disabled community, motoring organisations and local community groups beforeimplementation. Further consultation took place with residents, the police and bus operators afterimplementation resulting in minor changes to the initial scheme.

Bus operators

The majority of bus services on Stanningley Road are operated by First, but some services are provided byBlack Prince Coaches.

Bus frequency

There are 8 buses an hour in each direction using the first section of HOV lane on Stanningley Bypass.This increases to 17 buses an hour in each direction between the junction of Stanningley Bypass andStanningley Road in Bramley and Armley.


Dates of surveys

’Before’ surveys were undertaken in May and June 1997. ’After’ surveys took place in May and June1999. Analysis of further surveys undertaken in September 2002 is nearing completion.

Types of surveys

Data collected included traffic counts in the morning and evening peak periods, vehicle occupancy,journey times and queue lengths. In addition, analysis was undertaken of records of personal injuryaccidents and police enforcement. Information on public attitudes and driver behaviour was obtained fromhousehold and roadside interview surveys. An environmental monitoring station on Stanningley Roadprovided information on air quality.

- 278 -



Results

An evaluation of scheme impacts has been undertaken by Leeds City Council.

Morning peak traffic flows: Immediately after opening there was significant driver avoidance of the A647and traffic flow fell by 20 per cent. By late 1999, traffic flows had returned to 1997 levels in both the peakhour and the operational period.

Evening peak traffic flows: Traffic flow in the operational period (16:00 to 19:00) fell by 10 per cent atscheme inception, but returned to the ’before’ level by June 1999. By June 2002 traffic flow had increasedby a further 14 per cent in the three hour period.

Occupancy: In 1997, 30 per cent of cars carried two or more occupants. One third of vehicles (includingbuses) carried two-thirds of people travelling in the corridor in the morning peak period. The number ofhigh occupancy vehicles using the A647 in the period 07:00 to 10:00 increased by 5 per cent between1997 and 1999. Given that 1997 and 1999 flows were similar, the implication is that there was anexchange of HOV and non-HOV traffic between the A647 and parallel routes.

Average car occupancy rose from 1.35 in May 1997 to 1.43 by June 1999 and 1.51 in 2002.

Bus patronage increased by one per cent in the first year of operation of the HOV lanes. There areindications of further growth in bus patronage since 1998, but the recent introduction by First of an’Overground’ network inhibits robust conclusions.

Journey times: Morning peak journey time savings for buses and other high occupancy vehicles were 4minutes comparing June 1997 and June 1999 data. Over the same period there was a reduction of 1Â½minutes in non-HOV journey times.

Accidents: There was reduction of 30 per cent in casualties in a period of three years after schemeimplementation in May 1998.

Enforcement: Lane violation levels were low in the months following implementation as a result of dailypolice enforcement. In 2002 lane violation levels were still less than 6 per cent despite a relaxation ofenforcement. This can be attributed to the level of enforcement agreed between the city council and thepolice.

Public attitudes: Roadside interviews in February 1999 showed HOV driver support for the lane to be only66 per cent. This is low considering the journey time benefits of the scheme. The reason may be that HOVdrivers also made peak period journeys as non-HOV drivers and, when doing so, did not benefit from thejourney time savings observed.

Air quality: There has been little change in air quality on the A647 as a result of the introduction of theHOV lane. The relatively small improvement can be attributed to reduced vehicle emissions rather than tothe impact of the HOV lane.

- 279 -


Conclusions

The HOV lanes scheme on the A647 Stanningley Road and Stanningley By-Pass has resulted in:

a reduction in inbound journey times for buses and other high occupancy vehicles of 4 minutes in themorning peak; a reduction in inbound non-HOV journey times of 1Â½ minutes in the morning peak; increases in bus patronage and average car occupancy; a reduction in the number of accident casualties; and a low level of violation.

Following the success of the scheme on the A647, Leeds City Council is now planning to introduce HOVlanes on the proposed East Leeds Link Road.

Leeds City Council is now participating in the HOV Monitoring (HOVMON) project to developautomated camera enforcement techniques to determine car occupancy.

Acknowledgements

This case study was produced with the assistance of Leeds City Council and Metro (West YorkshirePassenger Transport Executive).

Other examples

A4174 Avon Ring Road westbound (A432 to M32), Hambrook, South Gloucestershire (in the NorthFringe of Bristol).

Contact South Gloucestershire Council, Planning Transportation and Strategic Environment Departmenton 01454 868686.

Further information

Further information on the A647 Stanningley Road HOV lane can be obtained from:

Leeds City Council

Highways and Transport Department

The Leonardo Building,

2 Rossington Street,

Leeds

LS2 8HB

- 280 -


0113 247 7500

http://www.leeds.gov.uk

The publicity leaflet ’Priority Lane for High Occupancy Vehicles’ (1999) is available from Leeds CityCouncil at the above address.

No-car lanes

Description of need

Background

Superoutes, first proposed in 1998, offered a new approach to bus travel within the Tyne and Wear region.The 35 superoutes within the region are the product of informal quality bus partnerships etween localcouncils, bus operators and Nexus with the aim of delivering frequent, high quality services along keypublic transport routes.

The superoutes aim to;

provide modern buses and infrastructure; provide better travel information, lighting and security at bus stops; implement bus priority and highway improvements to enable quicker journeys; ensure frequent, more reliable journeys; improve interconnection between services in the region; provide Euro 11 emissions compliant vehicles; and increase bus patronage across the region.

Several of the superoutes within the Sunderland area run along A690 Durham Road.

The City of Sunderland Council developed proposals for providing priority for buses and upgradingpassenger facilities and information on the A690 Durham Road following an assessment of the potentialbenefits of providing ’Green Route’ treatment on a number of corridors in the city. Green corridors areroutes that have been upgraded to give priority to vulnerable users such as pedestrians and cyclists andpublic transport vehicles.

Measures to benefit buses and bus users on the Durham Road Corridor were implemented in severalstages and promoted as the Durham Road Superoute. Bus services in the corridor also benefited frominvestment in Park Lane Interchange in the city centre and the designation of a special parking area toaddress illegal parking.

No-car lanes are a relatively new concept in the re-allocation of highway space. The concept whichevolved from that of the bus lane is based on use of the lane by buses and some other vehicles, but theprevention of car use in the designated lane. These lanes have been introduced to Newcastle City Centreand it is hoped that the success can be repeated across the region. It is now proposed to designate the buslanes on Durham Road as no-car lanes.

- 281 -



Problems

Bus priority and green corridor measures were proposed along the high frequency bus route along DurhamRoad in response to the following problems:

delay to buses caused by traffic congestion at key junctions in the city centre; delay to buses on Durham Road in the direction of peak flow on the approaches to major junctions onthe corridor; obstructions to traffic caused by right turning traffic and legitimate and illegal on-street parking; difficulty in emerging into heavy free-flowing traffic and queuing traffic from bus lay-bys; and difficulties for buses entering Durham Road from side roads.

The problems were predominantly experienced in peak periods.

Objectives

The objectives of the superoute bus priority proposals were to:

make the city centre more accessible; provide high quality bus services to the city centre by improving reliability and reducing variabilityof journey times; achieve modal shift from car to bus; and improve the surrounding environment.

The overall objective was to raise the profile and quality of bus services in the City of Sunderland throughthe application of Green Route treatment.

Scheme Details

Description

The Durham Road Superoute was formally launched in April 1998 and was at the time the mostcomprehensive corridor approach to improving bus travel in Tyne & Wear. The scheme comprised 1630metres of bus lanes, new bus shelters, improved passenger information and 21 new low floor buses (withramps for wheelchair access, grant aided by Nexus). This superoute is the first scheme introduced under aQuality Partnership for the City of Sunderland. Stagecoach Busways, Go Wear (Go Ahead Group), City ofSunderland and Nexus were all involved in the scheme.

Costs

The cost of introducing the superoute scheme was Â£250,000, including design and monitoring.

The estimated cost of implementing no-car lanes on Durham Road is Â£50,000, including design andmonitoring.

Consultation

- 282 -


The emergency services, bus operators and ward members were all consulted in addition to face-to-faceinterviews with residents as part of the evaluation procedure.

Bus operators

The two main bus operators running services along the A690 Durham Road Superoute corridor areStagecoach and GO North-East. Arriva also operate a bus service along Durham Road.

Bus frequency

The Durham Road Superoute extends from Sunderland City Centre to the city boundary to the west of thejunction of the A690 Durham Road with the A19 at East Herrington. The number of buses per hour usingthe superoute increases eastwards as routes from residential suburbs join Durham Road. Weekday peakperiod frequency rises from 6 buses per hour in each direction at the A19 intersection to 22 buses per hourclose to the city centre. The five superoutes serving the corridor account for the majority of this number.



A comprehensive programme of before and after scheme monitoring has been undertaken on the DurhamRoad Superoute. Journey times (including time at bus stops allowing passengers to board and alight) havebeen recorded by the moving observer method, initially with survey staff on buses and more recentlythrough roadside surveys. The most recent surveys were undertaken in 2002 and it is from these that thefollowing results are taken.

Before and after comparisons are difficult as in 1997 and 1998 buses operated to and from the central busstation in Sunderland and from May 1999, Park Lane Interchange opened and services were then diverted.In the future bus journey time monitoring will move away from manual recording to automated datacollection, enabling a more complete analysis of the impacts of schemes.

A series of household attitudinal surveys were posted in the vicinity of the superoute; 335 residentsresponded. In addition to this, user attitudinal surveys were also carried out in the form of face-to-faceinterviews on buses and at bus stops.

Results

Traffic flows

General traffic flows on the corridor have decreased by 6 per cent at the outer cordon and 16 per cent inthe inner cordon. Flows on alternative routes have increased by 6 per cent, on both Chester Road andSilksworth Lane. Traffic delay surveys have revealed increased journey times for traffic, particularlyoutbound during the evening peak.

Journey times and reliability

- 283 -


The moving observer surveys comparing bus journey times for November 1997 to November 1998 revealboth benefits and disbenefits. The introduction of bus priority measures has produced more consistentjourney times and reduced the large variation identified in the 1997 survey.

However, there are now delays at traffic signal controlled junctions on the route where there is no buspriority and outbound on the approach to the Barnes Gyratory. Average measured journey times along thecorridor are in the range of 9 to 11 minutes compared with the scheduled journey time of 15 minutes.

More recent figures reveal a rise in journey times which can be attributed to the increase in traffic on theperiphery of the city centre and longer times accessing and egressing the Interchange.

Patronage

Continuous monitoring of bus services has shown a 6 per cent patronage increase on Durham Road EasyAccess bus services and a slight increase in travel on other bus services on Durham Road. Both aremeasured in comparison to other bus services in Sunderland. Easy Access bus services account for 55 percent of passengers travelling on the corridor.

Safety

The transformation of the A690 Durham Road to the superoute has seen a reduction in accidents along thecorridor. In 1998 the number of fatal and serious accidents fell to 28 in comparison to the 40 recorded theprevious year. In the same time period slight accidents fell from 257 to 231.

System performance

The household attitudinal surveys revealed the following: â¢ 93 per cent agreed that ease of getting on andoff buses is now good or very good;

92 per cent of respondents said that general quality of low floor buses is good or very good; 36 per cent revealed that the superoute has improved bus travel; and 19 per cent revealed they use the route more often now than they did a year ago.

The face-to-face interviews provided the following results: â¢ 81 per cent of respondents listed access forwheelchairs and prams as the main factor that has improved since the introduction of bus lanes and lowfloor buses, with 96 per cent agreeing that accessibility for wheelchair and prams is good;

over 80 per cent of those interviewed thought that information, frequency of service, punctuality,vehicle quality and attitude of drivers is good; and 73 per cent agreed that the provision of bus lanes had improved the service.

The evolution of no-car lanes

Bus lanes assist the movement of buses around congested city centres by reducing journey time andimproving reliability, but in many cases no-car lanes have proven to be a more effective use of road space.The Government White Paper recognised that congestion and unreliability of journeys adds to the cost ofbusinesses, undermining competitiveness in our towns and cities. No-car lanes give priority for essentialvehicles facilitating the movement of goods as well as people in congested urban centres.

- 284 -


In addition to helping the movement of buses and goods vehicles, no-car lanes can increase road capacityin some cases by segregating wider vehicles from standard vehicle lanes. Another major benefit is thereduction of lorry traffic on alternative routes. No-car lanes are probably best utilised in situations wherebus flows are too low to justify a lane exclusively for buses.

Newcastle City Council has led the way in the implementation of no-car lanes. In Newcastle city centrethere are many existing or planned no-car lanes, for example on Barras Bridge, New Bridge Street,Westgate Road, Sandyford Road, John Dobson Street, Barrack Road, Percy Street and Great North Road.No data has been produced to evaluate the schemes but feedback from user groups has been positive sofar. The previous examples are all successful schemes in Tyne and Wear; it is therefore feasible that thesuccess of these schemes could be translated to Sunderland with the implementation of/conversion tono-car lanes on the A690 Durham Road Superoute.

Conclusions

The introduction of a bus lane on Durham Road has provided a more direct route to Sunderland citycentre, which can be seen in the reduction in journey times. There have also been significant decreases intraffic flows. Durham Road Easy Access bus services have also seen a patronage increase of 6 per centwith household and user attitudinal surveys revealing positive feedback. The results show that thesuperoute has successfully met its objectives.

However the success of no-car lanes in nearby Newcastle shows that lanes need not be exclusive to busesin order to relieve urban congestion and that in the future a conversion of some or all of the A690 DurhamRoad to a no-car lane may be a more viable option.

Acknowledgements

This document was produced with the assistance of the City of Sunderland Council and Nexus.

Further information


City of Sunderland Council

Development and Regeneration Directorate

City Centre

Burdon Road

Sunderland

SR2 7DN

0191 5531000

- 285 -


http://www.sunderland.gov.uk


Planning and Transport Section


Civic Centre

Barras Bridge

Newcastle upon Tyne

NE99 1RD

http://www.newcastle.gov.uk

Nexus

Nexus House

St James Boulevard

Newcastle upon Tyne

NE1 4AX

0191 2033333

http://www.nexus.co.uk

Further information on superoute can be obtained at: www.superoute.com

Bus park and ride

Description of need

Background

The UK’s longest-running park and ride site was established in Oxford during the early 1970s. This aspart of a comprehensive transport strategy designed to discourage traffic from entering the city because ofits adverse effect on the city’s historic fabric. A number of other cities experimented with ark and rideincluding Nottingham and Leicester. A lull in park and ride development followed, as traffic growthpredictions were not borne out in reality.

A new phase of park and ride schemes were implemented in the mid 1980s in a bid to alleviate city centrecongestion. This phase included schemes in Bath, Cambridge and Chester. The introduction of new parkand ride sites continued into the mid 1990s. The 1990s also saw existing sites begin to expand toaccommodate the needs of changing demand.

- 286 -


http://www.sunderland.gov.uk/

http://www.newcastle.gov.uk/

http://www.nexus.co.uk/

The Government’s 10-Year Plan of July 2000 promised, "high quality park and ride schemes so thatpeople do not have to drive into congested town centres", setting a target for the development of "up to100 new park and ride schemes" by 2010. Since 2000 there has been a net increase of 26 sites, and plansare being developed for further significant expansion.

Site location

The target market for park and ride is existing car users who would otherwise drive into the town centre.Sites are usually located on radial routes on the edge of the urban area to intercept inbound motorists.However, it is important to consider the potential impacts on local bus services. Abstraction of patronagefrom local services to park and ride also reduces the capacity of the service.

In a survey of all the bus based park and ride schemes in the UK, the average distance from the city for apark and ride site was two to three miles. This analysis also revealed that all but one of the sites over 4miles away had been built since 2000. The table overleaf illustrates the distance of park and ride sitesfrom the urban centres.

Park and ride in Great Britain

Distance from the centre (miles) Number of sites

Up to 0.5 1

0.5 to 1 9

1 to 1.5 19

1.5 to 2 16

2 to 3 30

3 to 4 18

4 to 5 3

6 to 7 1

Over 10 miles 2

Source: TAS (2003)

Key elements

Park and ride schemes form part of an overall transport strategy. This can include a package of measuresconstraining traffic in the city centre that includes; reducing parking spaces, applying appropriatecharging, extending traffic free zones, encouraging walking and cycling. Parking controls in the citycentre are an integral part of park and ride strategies. Those park and ride sites with the highest utilisationlevels tend to offer a huge discount in cost of parking compared with town centre parking (18-19 per centof the town centre rate at peak times). In some towns the popularity of the park and ride scheme has beenadversely affected by the reluctance to introduce on-street parking management in the city centre. The

- 287 -


primary reason for this is fear of inducing a transfer of retail trade to other nearby centres.

Park and ride car parks have the advantage that they tend to have larger spaces and are therefore easier topark in, due to value of land being lower on these edges of urban area locations. Urban centre parking isoften multi-storey to maximise the floor space available, many drivers dislike multi-storey car parks dueto associated safety concerns.

Frequent and reliable bus services are crucial to the success of park and ride schemes. A service frequencyof broadly ten minutes off-peak and seven to eight minutes in peak times is suggested by ’Bus-Based Parkand Ride: A Good Practice Guide, 2000’. In addition to this it is imperative that park and ride sites areable to offer comparable journey times with private car, though where combined with bus lanes, bus gatesand conveniently located town or city centre bus stops it is possible for park and ride services to offer adistinct journey time advantage over the private car. Public transport priority measures can also assistregular services along the route.

The service must provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the morning and afternoon peaks in demand,but a key criticism of park and ride is the wasted capacity as patronage tends to be concentrated in peakperiods and primarily in one direction. A number of schemes have sought to combat this, in Oxfordservices traverse the city and, as such, cross-city journeys are possible by park and ride. Recent evidencesuggests that cross-city journeys make up 10 - 15 per cent of park and ride patronage. In York acontra-flow is provided by students using the services to access York College, which is located oppositethe Askham Bar site. This car park site also has a dual use as the site was funded as part of a land sale toTesco for the development of a superstore. A further way to combat this wasted capacity is to tap into offpeak markets such as tourists or shoppers; this can be achieved through partnerships with town centres topromote park and ride use for leisure trips.

There are three possible ways of charging for park and ride: charge for bus journey, charge for parking orboth. Approximately 70 sites in the UK have chosen the bus fare option while 11 sites charge for carparking. Three cities charge for both. The table below illustrates the costs and benefits for the differentcharging structures.



Problems

Park and ride schemes have been introduced mainly in answer to access issues in congested centres.

Air pollution is also a concern in congested central areas and it is felt that park and ride may go some wayto addressing these concerns through reducing the volume of traffic entering the central area. However, itis argued by some that park and ride reduces city centre mileage at the expense of additional mileage inrural and suburban areas, although this gives lesser concentrations of kerb-side pollution because of thedispersed nature of any additional traffic movements.

Monitoring

- 288 -



Due to the length of time some of the schemes have been running, comprehensive before and aftermonitoring is not always possible. Monitoring of more recent schemes looks at traffic flows on roadsadjacent to the park and ride sites to establish the level of abstraction from the private car. Journey timesare also monitored for both bus and private car. A number of schemes have conducted market research ofpark and ride users, to establish user profiles and areas for improving.

Scheme details

Case study 1: Leicester

Description

In 1997 Leicester introduced a park and ride site at Meynell’s Gorse to the west of Leicester, withcomprehensive bus priorities in an inbound direction. The central objectives of this scheme were:

increasing accessibility to the city centre; reducing peak hour journeys; reducing air pollution; and encouraging modal shift from cars to buses

Meynell’s Gorse could originally accommodate just over 300 cars and was operating at capacity withinthree months of opening. The number of spaces has increased to 500, but the site still operates close tocapacity.

To prevent the car park being filled by commuters to the exclusion of shoppers and to reduce abstractionfrom local services in the off peak, two different methods of charging are employed. Up to 09.30 a returnticket costs Â£1.75 per person. An alternative charge of Â£2.20 per car is available after 09.30. This isalso a reflection of high long stay parking costs and low car occupancy at peak times. The service runsevery 10 minutes during peak hours and every 15 minutes in the off peak period. Normally hours ofservice are between 07.00 to 19.00 Monday to Saturday.

Security is addressed at the site through the presence of an attendant for part of the day and the area iscovered by CCTV.

The bus route from the park and ride site to the city centre is direct. Private cars are able to access the citycentre at the point where passengers from the park and ride bus alight; however the route by private car isslower and incurs higher parking charges.

Cost

The park and ride site is jointly funded by Leicestershire County Council and Leicester City Council(approximately 33 per cent to 67 per cent respectively). The city council manages the car park, while thecounty council manages the bus services contract.

Bus operator

- 289 -


The service is operated by Arriva.

Monitoring results

Although no scheme specific data was collected before implementation, comparisons have been madewith pre-study traffic flow data and data from monitoring conducted in 1998, after implementation. Themost significant observations are as follows:

190 fewer cars were entering the city in the morning peak along the A47. Previously 900 cars perhour were entering the city along this route; park and ride buses were able to complete the journey quicker than the private car. Bus journey timesimproved by approximately 5 minutes while car journey times remained the same; the reliability of journeys by bus improved with the standard deviation of journey times droppingfrom 4.9 to 2.7 minutes for the inbound journey and 6 to 2.6 minutes in the outbound journey; 63 per cent of park and ride users previously made their journey by car; a quarter of respondents usedpark and ride 2 - 4 days per week while just under a quarter (23 per cent) used park and ride on adaily basis; 34 per cent of park and ride users were making more journeys to Leicester since the introduction ofpark and ride. This supports the argument that park and ride schemes reduce the generalised cost oftravel for some users and as a consequence generate extra trips to the centre; and 65 per cent of users were female.

A comparison of patronage over time is not possible due to the two systems of charging operating in thepeak and off peak. However an analysis of revenue reveals patronage increased on bus services in thecorridor which is illustrated in the table below:

Year 1999 2000 2001 2002

% Increase in patronage 49 10 -2 4

Source: TAS (2003)

The reduction in growth shown in the table is thought to be a reflection of the site nearing capacity.

Scheme details

Case study 2: Chester

Description

Chester’s first park and ride site opened in 1983 with the original objective of reducing congestion incentral Chester. A later transport study identified three further objectives, which are to: ensure that there isno increase in city centre parking facilities; encourage long stay and commuter parking to use park andride sites; and continue the policy of expanding park and ride sites, aiming for an extra 1,000-1,500 spacesby 2011.

- 290 -


The Chester scheme includes four sites; Broughton Heath, Sealand Road, Upton and Wrexham Road. Allare staffed by an attendant throughout the day, with the presence of automated ticket issuing machines. Allsites are also monitored using CCTV. The site charges for the bus journey rather than the parking, thusavoiding VAT complications. This has the added advantage of marketing the sites as having ’freeparking’. Also, there are faster loading times and a reduced security risk for the driver because ticketing isoff-bus.

The park and ride bus route allows access to the city centre by the most direct route, which is not availableto those accessing the centre by private car. This is combined with bus priority measures on radial routesto ensure that bus journey times are at least as quick as travelling by private car. There are a number ofdrop off and pick up points in Chester city allowing the services to achieve maximum city centrepenetration.

Bus operator

The emergence of a series of tender options allowed a single operator to bid for all four site contractstogether. Whilst this was not a specific aim, it has proved to have some advantages. Chester CityTransport has been appointed as the operator.

There has been little evidence of park and ride services abstracting passengers from local services,although there is anecdotal evidence that a small number of local residents are walking to the site andusing the service.

Monitoring results

The increase in usage of park and ride in Chester is illustrated in the table below. It is noticeable that againgrowth rates have reduced as the car parks have neared capacity. Park and ride now accounts for 44 percent of car parking in Chester (excluding on street parking, office parking and non council controlled carparks).

Results

Conclusions

Discussion points connected with the development of park and ride sites include the use of green fieldland for the parking facilities. This often generates concern about environmental impact, which should beset against the beneficial impact of reducing pollution from traffic into the town/city centre.

There is also debate as to whether a park and ride site results in a greater or lesser use of non park and ridepublic transport services. Abstraction rates can range from 10 to 28 per cent, depending upon a number offactors, including the quality and frequency of the local service.

A number of schemes have failed to produce any decongestion benefits. This may be a result of previouslysuppressed demand that has refilled road space made available by the park and ride scheme. Park and ridesites may also have a negative impact by attracting people who previously made the whole journey bypublic transport. This might create capacity for other new journeys within the urban area, whilstconversely reducing patronage on marginal rural bus services.

- 291 -



Although commercial viability tends not to be a key objective in park and ride strategy at the outset, anumber of schemes have progressed over time into commercially run services. Park and ride generallyrequires frequent investment with vehicles tending to be replaced midlife. One of the incidental benefits ofthis is that these higher quality vehicles which were introduced to attract the private car user have nowbeen transferred to local services.

The future

Many existing park and ride sites are looking to combine with more radical bus priority measures. In thecase of Oxford this is the Expressway - a guided bus route and in Nottingham two park and ride siteswhich were originally bus based are now part of the rapid transit system.

More recently established schemes are looking at potential for new sites and ways of increasing thecapacity of the original network. Leicester, for example, is currently looking to add three new sites (2,500car parking spaces) on routes into the city with associated bus lanes and signal priority.

References

English Historic Towns Forum, Bus-based park and ride - A Good Practice Guide, 2000.

Oxfordshire County Council Good Practice Guides: www.oxfordshire.gov.uk.

Parkhurst, G, Environmental cost - benefit of bus based park and ride systems, University of LondonCentre for Transport Studies, ESRC Transport Studies Unit, 1999.

TAS, Park and Ride Great Britain 2003, TAS Publications and Events Ltd, 2003.

Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Cheshire County Council, Chester City Council, LeicesterCity Council, Oxfordshire County Council, York City Council and TAS.

Other examples

NottinghamContact the Parking department at Nottingham City Council for further information on: 01159155555. OxfordContact the Environment and Economy department for further information on: 01865 815700. YorkContact the Environment and Development Services department for further information on: 01904613161.

- 292 -


Further information

Further information on park and ride in Chester can be obtained from:

Environment and Sustainability Department

Cheshire County Council

County Hall

Chester

Cheshire

CH1 1SF

0845 113331

Further information on park and ride in Leicester can be obtained from the Public Transport Co-ordinatorat Leicester City Council on: 0116 2232111.

The bus stop environment

Description of need

Background

Traffic congestion is not the only cause of delay to buses. The length of time that buses stand at bus stopscan be a substantial component of overall journey time. Dwell time at bus stops has two main components- the time taken for passengers to board and alight, and delay in re-entering the flow of traffic where buseshave stopped in lay-bys or at bus stops where the traffic stream can overtake with ease. Any measure thatreduces delay and time spent at bus stops, or improves the environment for people waiting at bus stops,will make the bus a more attractive travel choice.

This is the first of two case studies in which consideration is given to measures that complement buspriority. In this case study consideration is given to measures designed to help buses rejoin the mainstream of traffic and to make the bus stop environment more attractive to users.

Objectives

The primary objective of the measures considered in this case study is to help to make travel by bus moreattractive. A scheme to enable buses to move away from a bus stop and back into the traffic stream willcontribute towards reducing journey times and improving reliability. Improvements to the environment atbus stops can contribute in a variety of ways; by making the waiting area safer and more attractive and byimproving accessibility, for example. Implementation of complementary measures at bus stops will add tothe impact of schemes to provide priority for buses.

- 293 -


Infrastructure measures

Problems

Over time, many bus stops have been located in bus bays to enable other traffic to overtake safely busespicking up or setting down passengers at bus stops. Whilst this is a valid objective, it does result in delayto buses attempting to emerge from lay-bys and rejoin the main traffic stream because drivers of othervehicles are commonly reluctant to give way to buses. It is a particular problem in congested conditions.

This problem has also led some bus drivers to avoid stopping at the kerb at bus stops in bus bays in orderto make it easier to re-enter the traffic stream. This, in turn, led to problems of accessibility for elderly anddisabled people because of the need to step down into the carriageway and step up on to the platform orfirst step of the bus. It also has the effect of increasing bus boarding and alighting times.

Solutions

Filled bus lay-bys

One approach is to pave or infill the bus bay in order to re-create a flush kerb at which the bus stops in thenearside traffic lane. This is intended to enable the bus to resume its route without delay. An ancillaryadvantage is that this may provide more space for improved waiting facilities at the bus stop, includingbetter quality shelters and seating. This does carry the possibility of delay to other traffic, particularly ifthe traffic lane is not wide enough to permit overtaking or if a second lane is not available. However, thebus is able to keep its place in the traffic stream and it helps to ensure that bus journey times arecomparable with car.

It is important to consider safety and operational issues, such as, is the stop to be used as a layover pointor service terminus, which may result in unnecessary delay to other vehicles.

Before and after surveys were undertaken by TRL in London during 2002 and 2003 using video surveysand automatic traffic counts to monitor traffic flows, journey times and vehicle delays. The effect offilling lay-bys was to reduce passenger boarding times by between 0.5 and 1 second per passenger. Delayat the bus stops decreased by between 2 seconds on a road operating at 50 per cent of capacity and 4seconds on a road at 70 per cent of capacity. Traffic delays increased by up to 11 seconds per vehicle on aone-lane road and 2 seconds on a two-lane road, but economic assessments based on the ’Bus JourneyTime Savings’ spreadsheet produced by Transport for London (TfL) showed that the overall benefits tobus passengers outweighed the disadvantage to other road users by a ratio of more than 5 to 1.

Bus lay-bys in bus lanes

One situation where bus lay-bys are still being implemented is on bus lanes. This is particularly relevant ina bus lane with high frequency services running on it or where not all services call at all stops. Astationary bus in the bus lane waiting for passengers to board and alight would cause delays to servicesbehind it that do not need to stop. If the bus were to be able to pull into a lay-by other services would beable to continue their journeys unimpeded. In such circumstances, the problem of pulling away from thebus stop is minimised because the bus is pulling out into a bus lane.

- 294 -


Bus boarders

Unrestricted or illegal parking often prevents buses reaching stops or aligning correctly with the kerb toensure close and level boarding. Extending the footway out into the nearside lane to create a boarding andalighting platform, a bus boarder, may help to remove these sources of delay and to improve safety forpassengers. Provision of a raised kerb at a bus boarder can be a further deterrent to obstructive car parkingor stopping to pick up or set down passengers. Other vehicles may park in the lee of the boarder, but theposition of the bus in the main flow is maintained and passengers may have easier access to the bus.Clearly, road width needs to be sufficient to permit the construction of a boarder without the possibility ofa stopped bus blocking the passage of oncoming vehicles or without causing unacceptable delay tofollowing traffic.

The Department for Transport document "Inclusive Mobility" outlines that there are two types of busboarder available:

full width protruding into the carriage so that the bus avoids parked vehicles (approximately 1800millimetres); and half width between 500 millimetres and 1500 millimetres wide providing a compromise between afull boarder and no boarder at all. These are appropriate for use where a full boarder would causeunacceptable delay to other vehicles or where the bus is too close to traffic coming in the oppositedirection on the carriageway.

Before and after surveys were undertaken by TRL in London in conjunction with TfL throughout 2003 forbus boarders including daytime video surveys and automatic traffic counts to monitor journey times andvehicle delays. On average, bus delays fell by between 1.3 seconds on a road operating at 50 per cent ofcapacity and 1.8 seconds on a road at 70 per cent of capacity. Delays behind the bus increased by up to anaverage of 4.2 seconds per vehicle. Economic assessments based on ’Bus Journey Time Savings’ in thiscase indicated that bus boarders had a positive effect on low flow roads, but that benefit might becancelled out by the delay to other traffic on high flow roads.

It was estimated that roads operating at more than about 50 per cent of capacity might suffer adisadvantageous effect, while wider roads could potentially reduce the delay to other vehicles because ofthe greater possibility of passing the bus. However, note should also be taken of the width of the road andaccessibility benefits to passengers. Increased accessibility to the bus was probably undervalued because,while reductions in stop time as a result of reduced boarding times were noticeable, no account was takenof the effects of increased accessibility for disabled passengers.

Raised kerbs

Improvements in accessibility at stops by installing raised kerbs and enabling the bus to kerb correctly notonly addresses the issues of social exclusion by providing access for those with mobility impairments, butalso enables quicker loading times to be achieved. Wheelchair users maybe able to board buses directlywithout using a ramp.

The Department for Transport document "Inclusive Mobility" states that standard kerb heights range from125 millimetres to 140 millimetres. Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive in the "Bus StopDesign Guidelines" suggests a kerb height of 160 millimetres provides the best compromise betweenaccessibility while minimising damage to buses.

- 295 -


The Greater Manchester design guidelines also outlines the minimum lengths for raised kerbs dependingupon the number and frequency of services using the stop, they are as follows:

4 metres for a lightly used bus stops or stops that are only used for alighting; 7 metres for a single bus stop where only one bus will arrive at any one time; 16 metres at a double bus stop; 26 metres at a double bus stops used by standard 12 metres length buses and articulated buses; and the recommended length of raised kerb at bus boarders is 6 metres.

Hull City Council has introduced raised kerbs at a number of its stops. However rather than installing acontinuous length of raised kerb, double or triple boarders have been installed where two or more busescould be at the stop at the same time. Sections of raised kerb are separated by lengths of kerb ofconventional height. Two or three buses are able to park close to the kerb providing full accessibility andloading simultaneously, whereas before the second or third bus would have had to wait for the previousbus to leave or not be able to pull in close to the kerb to stop.

Case study: Manchester bus stop treatment

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE) consider bus stop design an integral part ofany bus priority scheme. This includes the layout of the street furniture, street lighting, quality of thepaving, information available at the stops and carriageway markings. The positioning of the stops is alsoimportant, the introduction of bus priority measures and quality bus corridors are an ideal time to reviewthe location of stops on a route.

GMPTE have produced design guidelines for bus stops on ’Quality Bus Corridors’. The guidelinesinclude details of consultation and covers recommended minimum standards for elements such as footwaylayout and carriageway markings at bus stops.

The recommended footway layout includes:

a band of coloured and textured surface along the kerb edge; a rectangular block of colour at the boarding point; a band of coloured and textured surface at the end of each bus stop at right angles to the kerb; and remaining areas within the stop boundaries to be surfaced in a contrasting coloured textured material.

In order to protect the bus stop area from illegal parking and allow the bus to access the stop unimpeded,GMPTE recommend bus stops are covered by a bus clearway order and 300 millimetres wide yellow boxmarkings are applied around the bus stop clearway carriageway marking. In addition to this a red cordonis marked around the yellow box, this measure has been effective in highlighting the bus stop area andpreventing indiscriminate parking.



- 296 -



Conclusions

This leaflet has explored a number of improvement measures at bus stops that, in isolation, may onlyachieve a marginal benefit but, if implemented with new bus priority measures as part of a comprehensivescheme, can add to the impact of the overall scheme. A number of authorities including GMPTE haveembraced a holistic approach to bus priority in which improvements to bus stop environment, layout andinformation provision are an integral part of a bus priority scheme.

References


GMPTE, Design Guidelines for Bus Stops on Quality Bus Corridors in Greater Manchester, January 2002.


Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Transport for London, TRL, Hull City Council andGreater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive.

Other examples

Holistic approach: West Midlands Bus Showcase (see special initiative case study in this pack). Norwich Western Corridor Quality Bus Partnership; contact Norfolk County Council on 01603222205.

Further information

Further information on issues covered in this leaflet can be obtained from:

TfL: [email protected] GMPTE Quality Bus Corridor team on 0161 2426000 (switchboard).

Other measures

This is the second of two case studies in which consideration is given to measures that complement buspriority. In this case study, the matters addressed are: the importance of complementary measures;ticketing initiatives to reduce bus boarding times; the operation of buses in pedestrian priority areas; issuerelating to pedestrian crossings and the benefits of working in partnership.

The importance of complementary measures

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE) carried out research on the impact of arange of different measures that could be implemented to complement bus priority measures. Interviewswere carried out on three corridors which had been treated holistically and on three control corridors notincluded in the Quality Bus Corridor programme.

- 297 -


Respondents were asked to rate whether they felt various aspects of their service had got better, stayed thesame or got worse since they started using the bus. The biggest difference was in faster journey timeswhere 25 per cent of those questioned on treated routes felt that this aspect was improved compared with 8per cent on routes which had not been treated. A greater proportion of respondents on treated routes alsofelt that the reliability of bus services had improved (22 per cent) compared with 11 per cent of those onnon-treated routes.

The responses are summarised below:

Responses to research on the impact of a range of different measures that could be implemented tocomplement bus priority measures

Ticketing strategies

The problem

On busy bus services a substantial proportion of bus journey time can be spent waiting at bus stops aspassengers board or alight, purchase tickets and/or show their travel passes. At peak times on many urbanroutes buses can spend as long standing at bus stops as they do in congested traffic. This is a particularproblem on Monday mornings in places where weekly tickets can be bought from the bus driver.

Passengers paying with cash can take twice as long as those passengers with pre-paid tickets creatingdelays for passengers already on the bus and those waiting to board. Additional work is created for thedriver who has to operate the ticket machine and dispense change where necessary; this creates trainingissues for the operator and security issues for the driver.

The solution

Traditional methods of reducing time spent at bus stops include flat or exact fare policies or thedeployment of conductors on buses or at busy bus stops (queue conductors).

There are several other ways in which bus boarding times can be reduced: â¢ promotion of pre-paidoff-bus ticket sales;

provision of ticket issuing machines at some or all bus stops; and application of smartcard technology to all passengers or to particular categories of passengers (e.g.schoolchildren, elderly/disabled pass holders).

The Oxford Bus Company anticipates a 50 per cent reduction in bus boarding times through theintroduction of smartcards in Autumn 2004.

Case study: Bradford Firstcard

First Bradford introduced a smartcard known as Firstcard on all first services in Bradford in April 2000.The scheme proved popular and achieved its first 10,000 users by August 2000. Passengers simply placethe card on the ticket machine reader and tell the driver where they are alighting; they are then issued witha ticket which tells them the value remaining on their smart card. The success of the scheme wasrecognised at The Bus Industry Awards in 2000 where First received a runners up award for the projectand its aim to provide an easier and more convenient method of payment for bus travel in Bradford.

- 298 -




The tickets can be ordered over the telephone or on the internet and can be loaded or renewed at Metrotravel centres or at the First office.

BusMiles operates as a loyalty scheme in connection with Firstcard to encourage passengers to use thecard.

Case study: Ticketing initiatives in London

Transport for London (TfL) has gone one step further and introduced cashless buses in the area boundedby Paddington, Kings Cross, Waterloo and Victoria. Passengers must purchase their ticket from a machineat the stop or have a travel card, bus pass, freedom pass or saver ticket. By removing cash transactions onthe bus it was felt significant reductions could be made in dwell time at stops. This initiative is alsocombined with the introduction of ’bendy buses’ which are able to carry up to 140 people and have threeboarding doors. Eventually it is expected that the scheme will be rolled out to suburban areas.

TfL has also launched a smartcard known as the Oyster card which is a card the size of a credit card with amicrochip. The card can be ordered on line and recharged on line, by telephone or at a tube station. Thetechnology has been fitted to 6,000 buses, 255 underground stations and 28 national railway stationsserved by the underground.

The aims of the scheme are to:

improve customer service; provide better information about customers travel patterns; and reduce opportunities for fraud.

The tickets have the added advantage of allowing faster movement through ticket gates and on to buses,speeding up the journey time. The ticket does not have to be removed from its wallet to be used;passengers simply press the card against the reader, which reads it within a fraction of a second. Inmid-2004 there were approximately 1.9 million active Oyster cards and take-up of the cards is expected toincrease as further Oyster products and discounts are introduced.

Bus access to pedestrian priority areas

The redevelopment and regeneration of many high streets has involved the exclusion of vehicles with theintention of creating safe and pleasant pedestrian priority areas (PPAs). However, in order to maintaingood public access without generating extra peripheral car traffic, exceptions have been made in manyPPAs to allow buses and taxis and, in some places, trams to enter the zone. This allows public transportpenetration of urban centres with central bus stops providing a realistic alternative to city centre parking.

The design of PPAs and the extent to which a roadway has been maintained is highly variable. The flowof public transport and delivery vehicles may determine pedestrians’ perception of safety and theirconsequent tendency to wander freely throughout the PPA, rather than maintaining their conventionalposition on the footways. Allowing buses into a PPA needs very careful consideration to avoid damagingthe environment that shoppers expect. Quality of the shopping environment can affect the choice ofshopping centre, especially when there are nearby competing centres, and length of stay; both of which areimportant in maintaining the shopping street’s vitality and viability.

- 299 -


Zebra, pelican & puffin crossings

The provision of safe crossing facilities close to bus stops is a vital component of traffic management,road safety and bus priority schemes. It is generally accepted that pedestrians require assistance whencrossing busy roads in safety and the zebra crossing has been a successful means of reconciling theconflicting demands of vehicular traffic and pedestrians for many years. However, where pedestrian flowsare heavy or traffic speeds are high, zebra crossings may either impose inconvenient delay on vehicles,including buses, or become unsafe for pedestrians.

Pelican crossings were designed to address this situation and to maintain traffic movements whileproviding extra protection for pedestrians. Puffin crossings are a refinement that seeks to minimise thepotential delay to vehicles of a pelican crossing by reacting to the presence of a pedestrian on the crossingrather than holding traffic at a red signal when no pedestrians are present.

Signalised crossings protect pedestrians more effectively than zebras, while minimising the delay tovehicles and hence assisting buses to maintain their schedules. Where possible, bus stops should bedownstream of pedestrian crossings to reduce the amount of delay experienced by bus passengers.

Before and after surveys were conducted during 2002 and 2003 by TRL in London. Overall traffic delaysdecreased when a pelican crossing was introduced at three study sites with the lowest pedestrian flow, butincreased at the fourth site where flows were higher. Modelling indicated that vehicles were delayed lessat pelicans then zebras when pedestrian flows were less than 60 per hour. However traffic delays appearedshorter at zebra crossings with medium pedestrian flows.

Holistic approach - quality partnerships

Quality Bus Partnerships (QBPs) are formal or informal agreements between local authorities, busoperators and other relevant parties to provide an agreed level of quality of service and infrastructurealong a certain route or routes. Alternatively, they may be a more general agreement relating to thegeneral service or infrastructure provision. QBPs are an efficient way of achieving strategic objectives ofall those involved as they result in co-ordination of actions between relevant organisations and theexchange of information.

Partnership working is essential where a holistic approach is proposed in order to ensure co-ordination ofimprovements to maximise impact. In some cases it may be possible to deliver all of the components of ascheme at once but, where schemes are complex and involve substantial investment in bus priority androute infrastructure phased implementation may be necessary.

The local authority role in a Partnership is to deliver bus priority and traffic management schemessupported by complementary measures including accessibility at bus stops, improvements to the waitingenvironment and more comprehensive information for passengers. Local authorities also have the leadrole in consultation during scheme development and implementation.

The role of the bus operator is to invest in new high quality buses and in upgrading the quality or level ofservice. The level of improvement in reliability and journey times that can be achieved is governed, to aconsiderable extent, by the time savings that can be delivered by bus priority, traffic management andcomplementary measures. Marketing, promotion and monitoring are commonly joint responsibilities oflocal authorities and operators.

- 300 -


References



Acknowledgements

This leaflet was produced with the assistance of Transport for London (TfL), TRL, Greater ManchesterPassenger Transport Executive and First Bradford.

Other examples

Ticketing strategies: Cheshire County Council Smartcard. Holistic approach: West Midlands Bus Showcase (see special initiative case study in this pack). Norwich Western Corridor Quality Bus Partnership; contact Norfolk County Council on: 01603222205.

Further information

Further information on issues raised in this leaflet can be obtained from:

TfL at [email protected]

Performance indicators & monitoring

Why do we need to monitor performance?

Bus priority is central to improving the speed and reliability of services. Different techniques have beenused across the country. We have to evaluate them to see how they:

benefit bus operators and passengers; affect other road users; operate effectively; may need improving; and give value for money.

It is important to test whether bus priority schemes have met their stated objectives, firstly to ensure localaccountability, and secondly to see whether the same type of scheme would work in similar circumstanceselsewhere. This is particularly important where innovative bus priority measures are being tried for thefirst time.

Performance indicators assess important aspects of a new scheme. They allow us to judge whether it hasbenefited bus users or whether the scheme needs to be modified. Performance indicators from differentschemes can also provide stakeholders with evidence of what works. This will help with the continueddevelopment of bus priority.

- 301 -


Monitoring statistics should be straightforward and easy to collect, and should form the basis of usefulperformance indicators. Monitoring resources should be proportionate to the overall cost of the scheme.They should also be built into the scheme costs early in the planning and appraisal stage. ’Before’ and’after’ monitoring may necessarily be limited for smaller schemes. More complex schemes may need awider programme of monitoring.



Different types of bus priority scheme require specific monitoring methods. The full range of monitoringparameters and performance indicators is shown below. These can be used to assess different bus priorityschemes, although only a subset of them would be required to investigate any given scheme. In generalthe scale and type of monitoring should relate to what a particular measure aims to achieve.



We can distinguish between core and additional monitoring parameters and performance indicators. Coreindicators are the minimum that should be collected, and additional indicators are those that could helpexplain further how the scheme is performing. Six core indicators are described below.

Bus service improvements

Bus journey times

Buses can be timed along a section of a route both before and after schemes are implemented. Bus journeytimes are likely to reduce as a result of bus priority measures. Sample sizes will depend on the variabilityof the bus journey time and the expected benefit.

Reliability

One of the main factors in passenger perception of bus services is reliability. This performance indicatorrecords the difference between timetabled and actual arrival times at one or more points in the scheme onlow frequency routes. This shows any improvements in reliability. On higher frequency routes, thevariation in headways (the interval between consecutive buses travelling on a route) can be used.

Improvements for passengers

Bus use trends

Better bus services can attract people from other forms of transport or encourage people to use the bus fortrips they might otherwise not have taken. This increases bus patronage. Any changes need to be seen incontext with the underlying trends in the area.

- 302 -




The most appropriate way to assess the effect of bus priority schemes on patronage is by carrying out’before’ and ’after’ surveys. For smaller schemes, it may be enough to simply compare ticket sales on aroute that has benefited from bus priority measures with sales on one that hasn’t.

Bus stop waiting times

The time it takes to pick up and drop off passengers is a significant proportion of the total journey time.Clearly this will relate to the number of passengers getting on and off. So if bus passenger numbersincrease, buses are likely to spend longer at bus stops. As a result, some journey time saving from buspriority measures may not be fully realised.

Effects on other traffic

Car journey times

Car journey times can be measured to see whether bus priority has caused any significant delays. Themain technique for this is matching the number plates of vehicles travelling in a corridor between two ormore fixed points.

Car, lorry and cycle counts

We can measure the levels of different types of traffic such as cars, heavy goods vehicles (HGVs), lightgoods vehicles (LGVs), buses and cycles.

Traffic flows can reveal whether vehicles are switching to alternative routes and, in some cases, the extentto which motorists are switching to buses. However, only detailed surveys can reveal the underlyingreasons for any change.

An example approach

Bus priority strategy

Improve bus service reliability. Improve bus speeds. Increase patronage. Reduce car dependency. Improve bus services. Provide value for money.

Targets (5 Years)

Improve reliability 15 per cent. Faster bus speeds 10 per cent. Increase patronage 20 per cent. Reduce congestion 20 per cent. Implement three quality corridors.

- 303 -


Action plan

Introduce on-street bus priority (with-flow bus lanes). Innovative methods (contra-flow bus lanes). Innovative methods (traffic signal priority). New wheelchair accessible buses. High quality bus stop facilities. Enhanced pedestrian facilities to access bus stops.

Monitoring

Bus/car journey times. Car journey times on parallel routes. Queue length surveys. Bus reliability surveys. Traffic counts for area. Number of bus passengers. Bus stop dwell times.

Results

Two corridors implemented, third delayed by longer than anticipated consultation process. Reliability, journey time and patronage targets on the two implemented corridors met or exceeded. Congestion targets not met: revisions made to signal timings on parallel routes.

Frequently asked questions The following questions are typical of those that people frequently ask during public consultation on buspriority measures. You could adapt the questions and suggested answers to suit your own publicconsultation.

Remember that this is not a definitive list of questions and it obviously cannot deal with specific schemes.You may need to add information about your proposed scheme and it may also be useful to include detailsof the number of buses using different routes, and the numbers of passengers that they carry.

Residents

Why should residents like me care about bus priority?

Bus priority would bring welcome benefits to you, your neighbours and your community as a whole. Buspriority helps make buses faster and more reliable, so more people are likely to use them. This in turn willlead to less congestion and pollution in your area. You may even choose to use the bus, avoiding thestresses of driving and parking.

- 304 -


There is no need for a bus lane at this location. I drive along this road everyday and there are rarely anydelays. Why can’t you leave things as they are?

Buses are used most during the morning and afternoon peak hours, which is not necessarily when localresidents use the roads. Before we develop proposals for bus priority, we carry out traffic surveys to findwhere delays occur and how severe they are. Delays often reduce the interval between buses, causingthem to ’bunch’. Then several arrive at once after a long wait for people at the bus stop.

You are planning to install a bus lane near my house. I am concerned about the loss of resident parking inthe area. Where am I going to park?

We will balance the need for resident parking with the operating hours of the bus lane. If the bus priorityimprovements affect parking facilities in your area, we will do everything practical to provide alternatives.

You are planning to install a bus lane outside my house. The road is already very congested and will yourproposals not make the problem worse?

We hope the bus lane will make the situation better. You are right to be concerned about congestion and,if we do nothing, the problem will certainly get worse: traffic is predicted to increase by another 30 percent over the next 10 years. We can’t widen your road (and we’re sure you wouldn’t want us to) so a buslane is the best way to cut congestion.

I live on a side street next to where the bus lane is proposed. I am concerned that it will make it difficultand possibly dangerous to turn into my street.

Any bus lanes we introduce will be designed to allow traffic to continue making any manoeuvres andturns that they make at the moment. What’s more, all bus lanes are designed according to stringentGovernment guidelines which have been fully vetted for safety. Independent safety experts also carefullyexamine all bus lane proposals before they are implemented. So any safety concerns will be fullyinvestigated before any work begins.

I regularly use the road where you propose putting a bus lane and I see far fewer buses than other typesof vehicle. Why should traffic be further delayed for the low number of buses that use the road?

On average, a typical double decker bus can carry as many people as 55 cars. It therefore makes sense togive buses greater priority to complete their journeys faster and more reliably. This will help make busesmore attractive and encourage people to switch from car to bus. More bus use and less car use will helpcut congestion and pollution in your area.

You are planning to install a bus lane near where I live. Will this turn my road into a ’rat run’ for cars?

If it seems likely that your road will become a ’rat run’ for cars, then we will look at introducingappropriate traffic management measures in consultation with your local community to prevent this.

Which vehicles are allowed to use bus lanes and when?

- 305 -


Bus lanes need to be clearly signed to help people understand who can legally use them and when. Signsare required at the start of a bus lane, after each junction and at intervals along sections of road wherethere are no junctions. These signs show which vehicles can use a bus lane. Typically buses and cyclistsonly can use bus lanes. Taxis are frequently allowed to use them too. The signs also give the bus lane’shours of operation. This might be during the weekday (Monday to Friday) peak hours only (e.g. 7.00am to10.00am) or for a longer period (e.g. 7.00am to 7.00pm). Where there is a need to do so, 24 hour bus lanescan be introduced. During the hours of operation only vehicles identified on the signs can use a bus lane.Outside of these hours, all traffic can use a bus lane.

Buses are large, noisy vehicles. Does the bus lane mean that I must look forward to an increase in heavytraffic, noises and emissions near my house?

Buses come in a range of shapes and sizes. They range from small hopper buses up to large double deckerbuses to meet high demand on busy routes. New buses today are much quieter than they were ten yearsago as a result of legislation limiting noise levels. Buses are increasingly fuel-efficient and ’green andclean’. European legislation is imposing increasingly strict limits on vehicle emissions. Most busoperators have more new buses that produce lower levels of noise and pollution. New quieter andless-polluting buses are usually introduced where local councils and bus operators set up Quality BusPartnerships to give priority to buses. Bus priority measures, such as bus lanes, help deliver faster, morereliable bus services. More attractive bus services encourage people to switch from car to bus use and this,in turn, will help reduce congestion in your local area.

Commerce

Why should local companies care about bus priority?


Your company may wish to develop a travel plan for your employees to encourage them to catch the busor use other forms of sustainable transport (e.g. cycle). An effective travel plan has real benefits: a lessproblematic, stressful journey to work; improvements in health for employees who walk and/or cyclemore and the opportunity to reuse space in the workplace currently used for staff car parking.

There is no need for a bus lane here. Why can’t you leave things as they are?

If we do nothing, it is estimated that traffic volumes nationally will increase by 28 per cent by the year2011, and by 60 per cent by the year 2031. It is also estimated that congestion costs companies thattransport freight approximately Â£1.2 billion a year. Clearly we have to do something. Encouragingpeople to leave the car at home and catch the bus is one practical solution.


- 306 -


You are planning to install a bus lane near our company. I am concerned about the loss of parking in thearea. Where are our employees going to park?

The bus lane’s operating hours will be balanced with the local need for parking. If bus priority measuresaffect parking facilities in your area, we will look at providing alternative arrangements. However, wehope that by making bus services more reliable, more people will choose to use them to travel to and fromwork, including your employees. This will clearly solve some local parking problems and help reduce theconflicts that can occur when people park on residential roads while they are at work.

I am in charge of arranging deliveries for my company. How am I going to arrange deliveries when a buslane will mean extra loading restrictions?

We will do everything we can to maintain loading facilities in your area to support local businesses. Thebus lane restrictions are likely to permit loading in the middle of the day, outside the peak hours.Alternatively, we will do what we can to replace existing loading areas with alternative facilities in yourarea. However, as the demand for road space continues to grow, it may be necessary for deliveries to bemade outside normal working hours.

Industry

Why should local industry care about bus priority?

If we do nothing, it is estimated that traffic volumes nationally will increase by 28 per cent by the year2011, and by 60 per cent by the year 2031. It is also estimated that congestion costs companies thattransport freight approximately Â£1.2 billion a year. Clearly we have to do something. Encouragingpeople to leave the car at home and catch the bus is one practical response.


Your company may wish to develop a travel plan for your employees to encourage them to catch the busor use other forms of sustainable transport (e.g. cycle). An effective travel plan has real benefits: a lessproblematic, stressful journey to work; improvements in health for employees who walk and/or cyclemore and the opportunity to re-use space in the workplace currently used for staff car parking.

There is no need for a bus lane here. Why can’t you leave things how as are?


I am the human resources manager at a large warehouse. How will the bus lane proposals affectemployee parking in the area?

- 307 -


The bus lane’s operating hours will be balanced with the local need for parking. If bus priority measuresaffect parking facilities in your area, we will look at providing alternative arrangements. However, wehope that by making bus services more reliable, more people will choose to use them to travel to and fromwork, including your employees. This will clearly solve some local parking problems and help reduce theconflicts that can happen when people park on residential roads while they are at work.

There is also a business case for reducing the number of car parking spaces. Each parking space isestimated to cost Â£500 a year, before taking into account the loss of that space for a more productive use.This is why companies like Pfizer, GlaxoSmithkline and Boots have developed effective travel planswhich aim to reduce their employees’ reliance on the car and make best possible use of their sites.

Signs & regulations

Introduction

Road markings and signs serve an important function in conveying clear and consistent information andrequirements to all road users. They must be used in combination and in line with current guidance inorder to promote road safety and efficient traffic flow.

Use of the most appropriate signs and markings will also improve the streetscape, minimising street clutterand encouraging adherence to regulations.

This leaflet identifies enforceable signs and markings for bus lanes. Information on both with-flow andcontra-flow lanes are provided, including examples of signs and road markings for a range of commondesign scenarios.

The content of this document is based upon The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002and is correct at the time of publishing. It is essential that the latest version of this, and the Traffic SignsManual, is referred to in order to ensure that schemes are developed in accordance with currentregulations.

With-flow bus lanes

With-flow bus lanes, where buses travel in the same direction as the traffic in the adjacent lane is the mostcommon bus priority measure. A with-flow bus lane is normally placed on the near side of the road.

The diagram to the below shows a layout (without pedestrian crossings) for a with-flow lane reserved forbuses and cycles, showing both the signing and the road markings.

With-flow bus lanes

Signing

If a with-flow bus lane which is also used by pedal cycles and can be used by taxis, is located ahead, thesign to diagram 958 should be used, varied as appropriate (ie to include or not "taxi"). It is located 30metres in advance of the taper when the 85th percentile approach speed does not exceed 30mph, and 45metres when this speed exceeds 30mph. The sign needs to be sited so it is clearly visible from 30 metres

- 308 -



for the lower speed, and 45 metres for higher speeds.

The sign to diagram 959 should be used in conjunction with the road marking ’BUS LANE’. The signshould appear at the commencement of the bus lane and at intervals not exceeding 300 metres alonguninterrupted lengths of the lane. It is also used after each junction that the bus lane breaks for.

If there is a junction ahead where the left hand lane is dedicated to buses only and left turning vehiclesneed to use the lane, then the sign to diagram 877 should be used. On primary routes the backgroundcolour of the sign should be varied to green with white symbols and borders.

For the end of a bus lane, the sign shown to diagram 964 should be used.

Diagram 962 should be placed on side roads from which traffic may emerge. The arrow indicates whichdirection the bus lane is flowing. When there are bus lanes in both directions the arrow is removed and"lane" varied to "lanes".

The bus symbol may be varied to the local bus symbol on all signs with blue background.

Road markings

Bus lanes are separated from the main carriageway by a marking to diagram 1049. The width of thesemarkings is either 250 or 300mm depending on the site conditions. The start of the bus lane is markedwith diagram 1010 at the same width as 1049, and laid at a taper no sharper than 1:10.

The road marking ’BUS LANE’ to diagram 1048 should appear at the commencement of the bus lane andat intervals not exceeding 300 metres along uninterrupted lengths of the lane. It should also be used wherethe bus lane continues after a junction.

The deflection arrows to diagram 1014 should be placed at two positions (15m and 30m) upstream of thetaper.

When the bus lane passes a junction with a major left turn into a side road, the boundary line of the buslane should be replaced with a broken line to diagram 1010. This should commence 30m in advance of thejunction. The broken line should be accompanied by the advisory direction arrow (diagram 1050) variedto show a left turn.

At other junctions, the boundary line (diagram 1049) marking should be terminated approximately 10mbefore the junction and recommence beyond the junction in combination with a marking to diagram 1010.


Contra-flow bus lanes allow buses to travel against the main direction of traffic flow.

Cyclists may be allowed to use contra-flow bus lanes. If cyclists are allowed to use a particularcontra-flow bus lane, then the cycle symbol must be shown on both the appropriate signs and the lanemarkings.

- 309 -


The figure here shows an example of a contra-flow layout, showing both the signing and lane markingsfor buses only.


Signing

On the approach to a contra-flow bus lane, the sign to diagram 877 should be used to advise all othervehicles that there is no entry to the bus lane ahead.

The start of a contra-flow lane is signed by using the sign to diagram 953 (with or without a cycle symbol,as appropriate) and diagram 953.2. These signs are repeated after every break in the bus lane and atjunctions.

The sign to diagram 960 should be located so that it can be viewed by traffic travelling in the oppositedirection to the contra-flow bus lane. This is also repeated at every break in the bus lane for junctions. Awhite cycle symbol may be added below the bus symbol and the downward pointing arrow moved acrossto the right (see DfT working drawing P960). The bus symbol may be varied to the local bus symbol onall signs with a blue background.

Advance information should always be given to traffic entering from side roads, using the sign to diagram962 along with diagram 609. At the junction of side roads the sign to diagram 606 is used. If buses areexempt from the left only turn then both diagram 609 and diagram 606 are supplemented with a sign todiagram 954, 954.2 or 954.3

At pedestrian crossing places, ’BUS LANE LOOK LEFT / LOOK RIGHT’ signs to diagram 963 shouldbe used. These are pedestrian signs and therefore face the footways.

Road markings

The road markings for a contra-flow lane reserved for buses are shown here.

The bus lane is separated from the rest of the carriageway by the continuous line prescribed in diagram1049. The marking should be discontinued where it passes traffic islands and angled to guide vehiclesfrom each direction to pass the obstruction.

At junctions on the near side of the road, the bus lane should be discontinued. However, a broken line isnot necessary on the approach to a junction since there will be no left turning traffic, except possiblybuses.

Bus lane markings (either diagram 1048.1 or 1048) together with direction arrows to diagram 1038 shouldappear at both ends of the lane so that they can be read by drivers approaching the contra-flow lane.

The direction of possible traffic movements at the end of a bus lane is indicated by diagram 1050.

- 310 -



Coloured road surfaces

Bus lanes may be surfaced in coloured material in order to emphasise their presence and discourageencroachment by other vehicles. However, coloured surfacing has no legal significance; it is theprescribed traffic signs and road markings which establish the legal status of a bus lane.

Traffic signs

Bus lanes at pedestrian crossings

Not all authorities seem to be aware that bus lane markings are not permitted within the controlled area ofa pedestrian crossing. A bus lane must be terminated at the start of the ziz-zags and may pick up again atthe end of the zig-zags on the far side of the crossing. If the road surface is coloured for the bus lane, thismay be continued through the controlled area (marked with zig-zags). If a coloured surface has been usedfor a bus lane, this may be continued through the controlled area (although not through the crossing itself).

24 hour Bus Lanes

For most 24 hour bus lanes the signs to diagrams 958 and 959 do not require time plates. The time platesare only used where a 24 hour bus lane is not far from another lane that shows times of operation less than24 hours.

Bus gates

Bus gates restrict entry at one end of a street to buses only. The entrance to a bus gate should be markedwith diagram 1048.3 BUS ONLY or 1048.4 BUS AND (cycle symbol) ONLY (permitted variant is of1048.4 is to include "Taxi").

Waiting and loading restrictions

The order creating a bus lane will prohibit waiting during its operational hours. Yellow lines are necessaryonly if the waiting restrictions cover some period when the bus lane is not in operation. Loading andunloading is permitted unless it is specifically prohibited, in which case kerb marks and correspondingupright signs are required.

Common problems and mistakes in bus priority signing

A common mistake is to put a cycle symbol in the marking for a with-flow bus lane. This is unlawful, asdiagram 1048.1 may only be used in contra-flow lanes in order to indicate those where cyclists areadmitted.

Cyclists are always allowed to use with-flow bus lanes as indicated on diagram 958 / 959. It is consideredto be dangerous to keep them outside between buses and other traffic.

If a bus lane is placed on the right hand side of the road, or anywhere other than the near side of the road,signs will require special authorisation.

- 311 -




The combination of the no entry sign (diagram 616) with any of the plates to diagrams 954.3, 954.6 or954.7 as shown here, is prohibited in the Regulations (TSRGD, 2002) and must not be used.


References

LTN1 / 97 Keeping Buses Moving. (ISBN 0-11-551914-9), TSO, 1997.

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions. 2002 SI 2002 No. 3113, TSO, 2002.



Bibliography Astrop AJ, Balcombe RJ and Daugherty GG (1997 not published).The Performance of Bus Priority Measures in Brighton. PR/TT/024/97. Transport Research Laboratory,Crowthorne.

Astrop AJ and Balcombe RJ (1995).Performance of Bus Priority Measures in Shepherds Bush. TRL140. Transport Research Laboratory,Crowthorne.

Balcombe R and York I (1999).Bus Priority: Monitoring and Evaluation. TRL Annual Research Review 1998pp. 18 - 23. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Bowen GT (1997).Bus Priority in SCOOT. TRL Report 255. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Bus Priority and Traffic Unit (1999).

Bus Priority Measures. Annual Review 1999. DETR.

CENTRO (1994).Bus Priority Monitoring Report: Appraisal Section. CENTRO, Birmingham.

Cleveland County Council (1995).

Bus Priority Measures in Central Middlesborough - Effects of the New Traffic Arrangements. Departmentof Environment, Development and Transportation, Cleveland County Council.

- 312 -



Cloke J and Hopkin J (TRL); Hounsell NB and Lyons G (Southampton University) (2000).Monitoring and Evaluation of the ENTRANCE Project in Hampshire - Summary Report. TRL Report415. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, 2000.

Commission for Integrated Transport (2002).Public Attitudes to Transport in England. A survey carried out by MORI.

Daugherty GG and Balcombe RJ (1999).Leeds Guided Busway Study. TRL410. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Daugherty GG, Balcombe RJ and Astrop AJ (1999).A Comparative Assessment of Major Bus Priority Schemes in Great Britain. TRL Report 409. TransportResearch Laboratory, Crowthorne.

DETR (March 2003).Traffic Advisory Leaflet 5/03. Public Transport Priority. Traffic Advisory Unit.

DETR (April 2001).Traffic Advisory Leaflet 6/01. Bus Priority. Traffic Advisory Unit.

DETR (December 2000).Traffic Advisory Leaflet 8/00. Bus Priority in SCOOT. Traffic Advisory Unit.

DETR (1999).From Workhorse to Thoroughbred. A Better Role for Bus Travel. DETR.

DETR (April 1997).Traffic Advisory Leaflet 4/97. Rising Bollards. Traffic Advisory Unit.

DETR (January 1997).Local Transport Note 1/97. Keeping Buses Moving: A Guide to Traffic Management to Assist Buses inUrban Areas. The Stationery Office.

English Historic Towns Forum (May 2000).Bus-based Park and Ride. English Historic Towns Forum.

Gardner K and Cobain P (1997).Bus Priorities: A Solution to Urban Congestion? Transport, Proceedings of the Institution of CivilEngineers, v.123 n.4, November 1997, pp. 205 - 212.

Gardener K and Metzger D (1997).Uxbridge Road bus priority demonstration project. Proceedings of Seminar K (Traffic Management andRoad Safety), 25th PTRC European Transport Forum, pp. 63 - 74.

Greater London Authority (June 2001).Improving London’s Bus Services: An Assembly investigation into the quality and performance ofLondon’s Buses. GLA.

- 313 -


Hounsell NB and McLeod F et al (2000).Headway-based bus priority in London using AVL - First results. 10th International Conference - RoadTransport Information & Control, 4 - 6 April 2000, pp. 205 - 208.

Hounsell NB and McLeod F et al (1996).PROMPT: Field Trial and simulation results of bus priority in SCOOT. 8th International Conference(IEE) on Road Traffic Monitoring and Control, 1996, pp. 90 - 94.

Hounsell NB and McDonald M (1985 - 93).Evaluation of Bus Lanes. CR87. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Institution of Highways and Transportation (1997).Transport in the Urban Environment. Institution of Highways and Transportation.Chapter 24 Measures to Assist Public Transport, pp. 329 - 348.

JMP Consultants Ltd. (2000).London Bus Priority Network. South West Sector, Bus Priority Study. Route 93 Monitoring Study. FinalReport. London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames.

JMP Consultants Ltd. (1999).London Bus Priority Network. South West Sector, Bus Priority Study. Route 65 Monitoring Study.London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames.

King GN (London Transport Buses) (1998).Roads as "people movers": The Real Case for Bus Priority. Traffic Management and Safety. Proceedingsof seminars J and K at the European Transport Conference, 1998 vol. p. 428.

London Bus Initiative Partnership (2000).London Bus Initiative - Framework Document. London Bus Initiative Partnership.

London Bus Initiative Partnership (2000).Bus Priority Literature Review. London Bus Initiative Partnership.

London Bus Initiative Partnership (2000).Bus Stop Layouts for Low Floor Bus Accessibility. Transport for London.

London Bus Initiative Partnership (2000).Bus Stop Layouts for Articulated Buses. Transport for London.

Oakes JAJ, Thellmann AM and Kelly IT (1994).Innovative Bus Priority Measures. PTRC 22nd Summer Annual Meeting, Seminar J, 1994, pp. 301 - 312.

Seaman D and Heggie N (1999).Comparative Evaluation of Greenways and Bus Priority Lanes. Traffic Management, Safety andIntelligent Transport Systems. Proceedings of Seminar D at the AET European Transport Conference1999, Vol. P432 0115 - 32.

- 314 -


TEN (1998).Bus Priority and Traffic Management. Television Education Network, Session Guide. TEN.

The TAS Partnership (2001).Quality Bus Partnership. Good Practice Guide. DETR - The TAS Partnership.

Transport for London (2001).Bus Lane Enforcement. Transport for London.

TRL Limited (2002).Bus Priority Measures Update 2000 - 2002. TRL Information Centre, Current topics in transport no. 19.3.Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

TRL, University of Southampton and University of Portsmouth (1999).Monitoring and Evaluation of a Public Transport Priority Scheme in Southampton. TRL413. TransportResearch Laboratory, Crowthorne, 1999.

WS Atkins (East Anglia 1997).A1309 Milton Road Bus Lanes - Before and After Survey Study. Final report. Cambridgeshire CountyCouncil.

Wu J and Hounsell NB (1998).Bus Priority Using Pre-Signals. Transportation Research (Southampton Institute), Part A.

York I (1999).The Potential of Bus Priority. RR/TT/132/99. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

York I (1998).Comparison of Bus Service Improvements. PR/TT/049/98. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Glossary

Expression Explanation

ASTRID database ASTRID - Automatic SCOOT TRaffic Information Database. The ASTRIDdatabase system ‘has been developed to use information from SCOOT (seebelow) to provide a historical background of traffic conditions. The systemcontinuously monitors and stores traffic conditions for later retrieval andanalysis. The system can also act as a reference against which to comparecurrent traffic conditions.

Attitudinal surveys Survey of attitudes, perceptions and views, in this context concerning opinionson bus priority measures.

Automatic TrafficCount (ATC)

An automated counting device that counts the number of vehicles that passthrough/over a sensor planted in or near a road.

- 315 -


Automatic VehicleLocation (AVL)

Automatic Vehicle Location is the next step up from SVD (see below) andallows operators to be able to locate individual buses within the fleet. Combinedwith a two-way system of communication, AVL technology can relayemergency and status information to individual vehicles and/or their controlcentres, contributing to better management and deployment of vehicles.

Bus advance area The area between the bus pre-signal (see below) and the main junction.

Bus bays Area of carriageway created by realigning the kerb.

Bus boarders An extension of the footway into the carriageway in the vicinity of a bus stop.Enables the bus to easily access the kerb and pick up/drop off passengers atlocations where there is a high demand from other vehicles for kerb side access.

Bus gate Bus gates are located at the point(s) of access to bus only lanes. The purpose ofthese is to ensure the compliance of other vehicle users. Bus gates can be trafficsignals, actuated by the buses, or physical barriers surmountable only by buses,for example, rising bollards. Bus gates could also be signs such as ’No EntryExcept Local Buses’.

Bus lane An area of carriageway reserved, using a Traffic Regulation Order (or a TrafficManagement Order in London), for the use of buses and other permittedvehicles where indicated.

Bus lane setback The distance between the end of the bus lane and a downstream junction.

Bus pre-signals Traffic signals at the end of a bus lane that allow buses to enter the bus advancearea in front of other traffic.

Bus priority Bus priority measures cover a number of techniques and schemes that areconcerned with improving bus operation with the aim of improving service,reliability and/or reducing bus journey times.

Bus signal aspects A traffic signal aspect that specifically applies to buses which is a bus symbol.

Bus stop cage Road markings indicating the area on the carriageway used by buses toapproach, stop and exit at bus stops to allow safe boarding and alighting bypassengers.

Bus stop clearway A regime introduced by a Traffic Regulation Order that prohibits stoppingwithin a bus cage by all vehicles with the exemptions of buses during set times(e.g. at all times, or 07.00 to midnight Monday to Saturday).

Contra-flow bus lane

Buses in this bus lane travel in the opposite direction to traffic in adjacent lanes.

Countdown Dot matrix display installed at bus stops to provide customers with real timeinformation (see below) regarding bus arrivals.

Cycle time The time taken to complete a unique series of signal stages.

- 316 -


Drop kerbs Sections of kerbline provided at the same level as the carriageway allowingmobility impaired pedestrians access between the footway and the carriageway.

Dwell time Time that a bus spends stationary at a stop.

Footprint An intelligent vehicle detector which is laid in the road surface. This is a passivedetection method since the technology doesn’t rely on vehicle basedcommunication. PRISM can recognise different vehicle types from their signalas they pass over the inductive loop.

Guided bus A bus that travels on its own dedicated carriageway or track which ’guides’ thesteering of the bus.

Headway The interval between consecutive buses travelling on a route.

Hot spots Sites where major delay is experienced on the bus network.

Inductive loops A cable embedded in the highway used to record the presence or passage of avehicle on or across that section of the highway.

Intergreen Time period between traffic signal stages in which no vehicles or pedestriansreceive a green aspect.

LINSIG Computer programme used to design traffic signal stages and their sequence andduration at an isolated signal.

Location beacons Roadside infrastructure which detects the presence of buses as they pass adefined location. Used in conjunction with real time information systems.

London Bus Priority Network

The 33 local authorities in London, together with London Transport, theDepartment for Transport and the Government Office for London aredeveloping a London wide Bus Priority Network with the aim of improvingreliability, travel times and the convenience of bus services. The London BusPriority Network consists of about 540 miles of routes and its development andimplementation is being coordinated by the London Borough of Bromley.

Manual classifiedtraffic counts

Manual counts are undertaken by an operative located near the road with amanual hand held counting device or video recording equipment.

MicroprocessorOptimised VehicleActuation (MOVA)

Allows flexible control of traffic signals at isolated junctions.

Park and ride Park and ride is a system where cars are parked in a car park outside of the towncentre and access is provided to the town centre by a frequent dedicated busservice operating between the park and ride facility and locations within thetown. The purpose of this parking strategy is to alleviate traffic congestion onroads in and around the town centre.

- 317 -


Passenger TransportExecutives (PTEs)

Passenger Transport Executives (PTEs) are the professional and executive armsof the six metropolitan Passenger Transport Authorities (PTAs). They areresponsible for implementing the policies set down by their PTAs both on theirown initiative (using public money raised by the PTAs from a levy on local taxpayers) and in partnership with others.

Person trip miles Also known as passenger miles, this measure indicates distances undertaken bypassengers on different modes of transport.

Phase Traffic movement(s) which is controlled by a single signal aspect. This caninclude pedestrians, cycles or general traffic.

Priority vehicle lane An area of carriageway reserved, using a Traffic Regulation Order, for the useof buses, bicycles, goods vehicles and taxis.

Prism An intelligent vehicle detector which is laid in the road surface. This is a passivedetection method since the technology doesn’t rely on vehicle basedcommunication. PRISM can recognise different vehicle types from their signalas they pass over the inductive loop.

PROMPT Acronym for EC Drive 2 Project ’PRiority and infOrMatics in Public Transport’which developed the active bus priority facility now available within SCOOT(see below). The term is now used as a reference to this facility, particularly inLondon.

Quality Bus Partnerships

A partnership between local highways authorities and bus operators designed toimprove the quality and reliability of the bus services.

Rat running Rat running is the term used to describe traffic that uses alternative, oftenresidential, routes to avoid congested roads to get to their destination. This leadsto a build up of often fast moving traffic on roads ill equipped to accommodatecommuter traffic and can be hazardous and unpleasant for residents.

Real time information

A system providing information as it occurs. Increasingly used to provide up todate information at bus stops on the expected arrival time of a particular bus.

Red Route Red Routes have been introduced in London (now called Transport for LondonRoad Network or TLRN). One of the primary aims is eliminating illegal orinappropriate parking on bus routes through: the implementation of double redlines; improved signage of existing car parks; better provision for parking andfor loading and unloading; in addition to better enforcement of parkingrestrictions.

Rising bollards Rising bollards are a type of bus gate that prohibit access for other vehicles tobus only lanes.

Saturation flow The maximum rate of traffic discharge from a continuous queue at a stopline.

- 318 -


SCOOT SCOOT is a tool for managing and controlling traffic signals in urban areas. It isan adaptive system that responds automatically to fluctuations in traffic flowthrough the use of on-street detectors embedded in the road. Bus Scoot is afacility incorporated into SCOOT to give priority to buses.

Stage Part of the traffic signal cycle during which a particular set of phases receivesgreen.

Stakeholder Stakeholders can be defined as individuals or organisations that have investedresources, whether they be financial or personal inputs, i.e. time and experience,into a project. Examples of stakeholders in bus priority projects are busoperators, local highway authorities, bus passengers, local resident groups andlocal businesses (involvement dependent on specific measure).

Statutory undertakers

Public utility companies covering gas, water, electricity and telephone, etc suchas Transco, British Telecom, NTL.

Selective VehicleDetection (SVD)

Enables buses to be detected separately from other vehicles through the use offitted transponders, thus allowing them priority at signal controlled junctions.

TIRIS Texas Instruments Registration and Identification System (TIRIS) is a radiofrequency identification (RFID) system based on low frequency FMtransmission techniques. The three major parts of the system are thetransponder, antenna and reader. This approach has good resistance tobroadband noise whilst being very cost effective to implement.

TIRIS transponders The Texas Instruments Registration and Identification System (TIRIS) is a radiofrequency identification system based on low frequency FM transmissiontechniques. The core of the system is a small transponder or tag in the buses. Tointerrogate the tag, a reader in the road sends out a radio signal to thetransponder via an antenna. The transponder then returns a signal that carries thedata that it is storing. The messages produced by this system have beenintegrated into the SCOOT UTC system.

Traffic calming Measures employed to reduce excessive speeds on roads with a poor safetyrecord.

Traffic management Traffic management is concerned with maximising the efficiency of existingtransport systems. Measures utilised to fulfil this aim are varied, but generallytend to avoid reliance on new road building schemes. Measures applicable fall into a variety of categories and these include: physical measures (e.g. trafficcalming); legal or regulatory measures (e.g. bus-only lanes); technical measures(e.g. intelligent transport systems); financial measures (e.g. road- use pricing)and social measures (e.g. car sharing).

Transponders Electrical devices fitted to buses to transmit vehicle specification information tolocal beacons.

- 319 -


TransportArea/Quadrant Approach

In the context of this series of leaflets the Transport Area/Quadrant refers to buscorridors encompassing a wider service area and including improving aspects ofthe built environment that encourage and facilitate bus travel, such as improvedwalking routes to bus stops etc.

TRANSYT TRAffic Network StudY Tool is a traffic signal analysis computer programmefor traffic signal networks.

Variable MessageSigns (VMS)

Matrix displays providing drivers with mandatory and/or advisory information,at the roadside, relating to situations ahead or in the immediate vicinity.

Wayfarer Electronic ticketing machines on buses providing operating data at a route level.

With-flow bus lane Buses in this lane travel in the same direction as traffic in adjacent lanes.

Acronym Expression

ALG Association of London Government

ATC Automatic traffic counts

ATCO Association of Transport Coordinating Officers

ASTRID Automatic SCOOT TRaffic Information Database

AVL Automatic Vehicle Location

CBI Confederation of British Industry

CCTV Closed Circuit Television

CO Carbon Monoxide

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

CPT Confederation of Passenger Transport UK

DfT Department for Transport

DPE Decriminalised parking enforcement

DPTAC Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee

DVLA Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

ETM Electronic Ticket Machine

FPN Fixed Penalty Notice

GOL Government Office for London

GPS Global Positioning Systems

- 320 -


JIMs Joint Inspection Meetings

LBI / BusPlus London Bus Initiative

LBPN London Bus Priority Network

LTP Local Transport Plan

MOVA Microprocessor Optimised Vehicle Actuation

NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide

ODPM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

PCN Penalty Charge Notice

PROMPT PRiority and InfOrMatics in Public Transport

PTA Public Transport Authority

PTE Passenger Transport Executive

QWR (+) Quality Whole Route (Plus)

SCOOT Split Cycle Offset Optimisation Technique

SPRINT Selective Priority Network Technique

SVD Selective Vehicle Detection

TfL Transport for London

TMO Traffic Management Order

TRANSYT TRaffic Network StudY Tool

TRO Traffic Regulation Order

TRL Transport Research Laboratory

TSRGD The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002

UT(M)C Urban Traffic (Management) Control

VMS Variable Message Signs

Contacts Arriva plcAdmiral WayDoxford International Business ParkSunderlandSR3 3XP

- 321 -


Tel: 0191 520 4000Fax: 0191 520 4001 http://www.arriva.co.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Association of London Government (ALG)59Â½ Southwark StreetLondonSE1 0AL

Tel: 020 7934 9999E-mail: [email protected] http://www.alg.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Association of Police AuthoritiesLocal Government HouseSmith SquareLondonSW1P 3HZ

Tel: 020 7664 3168Fax: 020 7664 3191 http://www.apa.police.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Association of Transport Coordinating Officers (ATCO)3 Pine WayGloucesterGL4 4AE

Tel: 01492 411491 http://www.atco.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Centro (West Midlands PTE)16 Summer LaneBirminghamB19 3SD

Tel: 0121 200 2787 http://www.centro.org.uk

- 322 -


http://www.arriva.co.uk/

http://www.alg.gov.uk/

http://www.apa.police.uk/

http://www.atco.org.uk/


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Confederation of British Industry (CBI)Centre Point103 New Oxford StreetLondonWC1A 1DU

Tel: 020 7395 8125Fax: 020 7379 0945 http://www.cbi.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commission for Integrated Transport (CfIT)5th Floor, Romney HouseTufton StreetLondonSW1P 3RA

E-mail: [email protected] http://www.cfit.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Confederation of Passenger Transport UK (CPT)Imperial House15 - 19 KingswayLondonWC2B 6UN

Tel: 020 7240 3131Fax: 020 7240 6565E-mail: [email protected] http://www.cpt-uk.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CTC (UK national cyclist organisation)Cotterell House69 MeadrowGodalmingSurreyGU7 3HS

Tel: 0870 873 0060Fax: 0870 873 0064E-mail: [email protected]

- 323 -


http://www.cbi.org.uk/

http://www.cfit.gov.uk/

http://www.cpt-uk.org/

http://www.ctc.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Department for Transport (DfT)Traffic Management Division3/19 Great Minster House76 Marsham StreetLondonSW1P 4DR

Tel: 020 7944 2599Fax: 020 7944 2211E-mail: [email protected] http://www.dft.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC)Zone 1/14Great Minster House76 Marsham StreetLondonSW1P 4DR

Tel: 020 7944 8011Fax: 020 7944 6998E-mail: [email protected] http://www.dptac.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First Group Plc395 King StreetAberdeenAB24 5RP

Tel: 01224 650100Fax: 01224 650140 http://www.firstgroup.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Freight Transport AssociationHermes HouseSt John’s RoadTunbridge WellsKent

- 324 -


http://www.ctc.org.uk/

http://www.dft.gov.uk/

http://www.dptac.gov.uk/

http://www.firstgroup.com/

TN4 9UZ

Tel: 01892 526171Fax: 01892 534989 http://www.fta.co.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Go-Ahead Group plc3rd Floor41 - 51 Grey StreetNewcastle upon TyneNE1 6EE

Tel: 0191 232 3123Fax: 0191 221 0315 http://www.go-ahead.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Government Office for London (GoL)Riverwalk House157 - 161 MillbankLondonSW1P 4RR

Tel: 020 7217 3328Fax: 020 7217 3450E-mail: [email protected] http://www.gos.gov.uk/gol/?a=42496

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GMPTE (Greater Manchester PTE)9 Portland StreetPiccadilly GardensManchesterM60 1HX

Tel: 0161 242 6000E-mail: [email protected] http://www.gmpte.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Highways AgencyRomney House43 Marsham StreetLondon

- 325 -


http://www.fta.co.uk/

http://www.go-ahead.com/

http://www.gos.gov.uk/gol/?a=42496

http://www.gmpte.com/

SW1P 3HW

Tel: 08459 55 65 75E-mail: [email protected] http://www.highways.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

London Bus Initiative (LBI / BusPlus)BusPlus ProgrammeCustomer Service Centre4th Floor172 Buckingham Palace RoadLondonSW1W 9TN

Tel: 020 7918 4300E-mail: [email protected] http://www.tfl.gov.uk/streets/bp_making_your_bus_service_better.shtml

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

London Transport Users Committee (LTUC)6 Middle StreetLondonEC1A 7JA

Tel: 020 7505 9000Fax: 020 7505 9003 http://www.ltuc.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Merseytravel (Merseyside PTE)24 Hatton GardenLiverpoolL3 2AN

Tel: 0151 227 5181Fax: 0151 236 2457 http://www.merseytravel.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Metro (West Yorkshire PTE)Wellington House40 - 50 Wellington StreetLeedsLS1 2DE

- 326 -


http://www.highways.gov.uk/

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/streets/bp_making_your_bus_service_better.shtml

http://www.ltuc.org.uk/

http://www.merseytravel.gov.uk/

Tel: 0113 251 7272 http://www.wymetro.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MetrolineHygeia House66 College RoadHarrowMiddlesexHA1 1BE

Tel: 020 8218 8888Fax: 020 8218 8899E-mail: [email protected] http://www.metroline.co.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

National Federation of Bus UsersPO Box 320PortsmouthPO5 3SD

Tel: 023 9281 4493Fax: 023 9286 3080E-mail: [email protected] http://www.nfbu.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nexus (Tyne and Wear PTE)Nexus HouseSt. James’ BoulevardNewcastle upon TyneNE1 4AX

Tel: 0191 203 3333Fax: 0191 203 3180 http://www.nexus.org.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM)26 WhitehallLondonSW1A 2WH

- 327 -


http://www.wymetro.com/

http://www.metroline.co.uk/

http://www.nfbu.org/

http://www.nexus.org.uk/

Tel: 020 7944 4400http://www.odpm.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stagecoach Group10 Dunkeld RoadPerthPH1 5TW

Tel: 01738 442111Fax: 01738 580407 http://www.stagecoachplc.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Strathclyde Passenger TransportConsort House12 West George StreetGlasgowG2 1HN

Tel: 0141 332 6811E-mail: [email protected] http://www.strathclyde-pte.co.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SYPTE (South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive)PO Box 801Exchange StreetSheffieldSouth YorkshireS2 5YT

Tel: 0114 221 1333Fax: 01226 772877E-mail: [email protected] http://www.sypte.co.uk

- 328 -


http://www.stagecoachplc.com/

http://www.strathclyde-pte.co.uk/


dept transport bus priority systems

Documents