BRTHandbook_2013_p01_Cover_BRTHandbook_p01 04/09/2013 12:23 Page 1

The Handbook A review of the key developments 2013/14

Published by: Supported by: Sponsored by: BRThandbook_2013_p02-03_Contents_BRThandbook_p02-03 04/09/2013 12:15 Page 2 BRThandbook_2013_p02-03_Contents_BRThandbook_p02-03 04/09/2013 12:15 Page 3

Introduction| 3

Two is company, the proverb says, but, when it comes to bus rapid transit, is three enough to justify using the term ‘crowd’? rogress is being made, there is no And thirdly, the Luton-Dunstable implemented. Which raises the key doubt of that. Cambridge has been busway , so long in development, appears question of ‘why?’ Have the manifest Pup and running for two years now finally to be ready to get under way. So difficulties in getting a BRT scheme and is continuing to produce ridership that’s two major BRT schemes that have approved, funded and, finally, actually built numbers that must gladden the heart of both come to fruition and also really, really been putting people off taking forward every BRT enthusiast in Britain (and, worked. And let’s hope that the Luton- comparable schemes in their own areas? indeed, elsewhere). The Eclipse BRT Dunstable scheme, despite its tortured and And, if they have, will the manifest success scheme in Hampshire, meanwhile, is also lengthy development, also works like a stories of Cambridge and Hampshire lead now both fully operational and, by charm when it opens later this month. them to dust off a few hitherto shelved seemingly achieving its primary aim of The key question is, of course, where BRT schemes? We like to think that they getting people out of their cars and onto does BRT go next, because there don’t will – because if anything these two the bus, doing exactly what its developers seem to be that many other major projects projects show us that, in the final analysis, wrote on the tin. that are serious close to being all of the hard work is worth it. Contents P5 P16 P26 Interesting times for BRT Bus Rapid Transit in the UK Legal obstacles to BRT The tide is now running in favour of BRT, We chart BRT schemes in operation and Bircham Dyson Bell explain what a BRT says Bob Tebb those that are in the planning stage scheme developer should expect around Britain P6 P18 Getting ready to roll BRT central to Manchester The Luton-Dunstable busway is, after In a congested conurbation, BRT can be many years in the making, nearly with us vital to an integrated transport offer

P28 Making buses a better choice Hampshire CC explains how its Eclipse BRT P14 P20 scheme is making a difference The connected journey BRT vs LRT: pros and cons No one likes to queue and, as Vix Do users prefer bus or light rail-based tran- explains, nowadays you don’t have to! sit systems, asks Steer Davies Gleave P22 Cambridge leading the way Two years after its launch, Cambridge’s BRT scheme remains a success story P24 P30 Getting the best use out of it Who’s who in BRT Has the Cambridge busway achieved BRTuk members, and some of the key what it was designed to achieve? consultants and suppliers

EDITORIAL OFFICES BRTuk SECRETARY ADVERTISING PRINT & DISTRIBUTION Brought to you by Landor Links, Apollo House, 359 David Eve, Daniel Simpson Hastings Printing Company Ltd, and Kennington Lane, London SE11 5QY Parsons Brinckerhoff E: [email protected] Drury Lane, St Leonards-on-Sea, c/o A Hopcroft, T: 0845 270 7861 East Sussex TN38 9BJ BRTuk MEMBERSHIP OFFICE 6 Devonshire Square, c/o Keith Gellaitry, London EC2M 4YE DESIGN & PRODUCTION © Landor LINKS Ltd & BRTuk Ltd 2013 Dundas & Wilson, Production Dept. Saltire Court, 20 Castle Terrace, E: [email protected] ISBN: 978-1-899650-73-6 Edinburgh EH1 2EN BRThandbook_2013_p04-05_Tebb intro_BRThandbook_p04-05 04/09/2013 12:09 Page 4 BRThandbook_2013_p04-05_Tebb intro_BRThandbook_p04-05 04/09/2013 12:09 Page 5

5 2013: BRT –|we live in| interesting times!|

– and indeed the coming months. Look now at the bus ‘humble’ bus – is sys tem in any city, major town or even a BRT currently receiving busy corridor anywhere, and you will see establishment capital support perhaps as evidence of BRT techniques being applied, never before. This is despite the poor initially to the solution of one or two local national economic situation over the past problems. Make those one or two into few months, which has seen passenger seven or eight, as is happening more and levels suffer and ongoing support fall. more frequently, and you have the makings Nevertheless, recovery is beginning to of a BRT corridor! Bob Tebb, Chair, BRTuk appear to bring passengers back to what is, Yet there is still something of a general in a growing number of cases, a very new perception that bus and BRT are different scheme, meanwhile, is now an accepted and delightful animal in bus product terms. species of animal, and that cross- part of bus transit in the area – with such BRTuk itself has been a demonstration fertilisation is impossible or even public acceptance demonstrating its that the tide is now running heavily in inadvisable. Nothing could be further from effectiveness. favour of bus transit; its own direct the truth! Several of the earlier BRT I am looking forward to the Luton- activities have, sadly, been somewhat schemes in the UK did exactly that – they Dunstable guided BRT scheme coming limited recently as its directors and officers developed a bus route (not even on-stream this year, and to the 2013 BRTuk have been so occupied in BRT and bus necessarily a good bus route!) into a BRT conference in Luton – look closely not just development progressions for their own one, either in stages or as a ‘grand slam’, at the excellent guideway elements but companies that they have had little time to thereby encouraging modal shift from also the dramatic route through the centre devote to progressing BRTuk as much as private to public transport and significantly of Luton, with its magnificent new bus they hoped! As an organization we can growing bus patronage. interchange sandwiched perfectly between only apologise for this! Those who a re shaking their heads that the railway station and the nearby town So, what IS happening nationally to all this is impossible should, perhaps, take centre. cause these levels of activity? a look at a certain public transport route This is a growing feature of BRT The first element is the very along the Fylde coast. From operating a schemes nationally; they are finally considerable technical capital funding characteristic ‘bus’ type service with achieving proper segregated penetration of support from central Government for frequent stops, pay-as-you-board vehicles town and city centres – giving consistent, greener buses in general; as BRT system of limited and erratic performance and fast and direct access to their shopping, vehicles tend to use the latest and most modernity, the identical route has been business, and social hearts. This is in progressive designs, these are at the transformed this year into an attractive, contrast to what had been h appening a forefront of such progress. I mentioned higher-performance rapid transit service decade or two earlier (and is still new fuels last year, and the pace here in with easy board ing at close level platforms, happening in some cities with out-dated such develop ment continues almost at less frequent – but well located – stops, car-dominated thoughts) as buses were exponentially – to the point where it is with short stop dwell times and modern, pushed further and further out from those becoming increasingly difficult to choose attractive, articulated vehicles. centres, denying customers access thereto. which way to go. Bus infrastructure funding For those suspicious of this description, Another long-awaited major scheme is is not being left behind in this. this route is of course not bus – or BRT – now in build; although long known as the Curiously, perhaps, as interest and but the development of the 125-plus year Leigh busway, its future strength will lie in activity in BRT grows almost equally old Blackpool traditional tramway into a part in its accessing, by more conventional rapidly, I see a ‘blurring’ of the technical, light rail route. The bus industry still seems means than guideways, the heart of visual and operational distinctions reluctant to learn from our light rail Manchester city centre – a city that is between BRT and bus. This is NOT a coll eagues, but I have always argued that dramatically putting public transport as the failing, nor a watering down of BRT – but a the simple message “THINK TRAM – DO keystone to its mobility through a mixture rise in the quality of product being BUS” is an essential part of the way to of transit modes. provided by that humble bus I mentioned achieve BRT progress in this country. I hope you find this latest, 2013, edition earlier as part of those investment That’s enough of the theory then. Let’s of the BRTuk Handbook once again processes. look at BRT on the ground. Cambridgeshire interesting and useful, as it demonstrates This growth in ‘better bus’ activity is busway, still the BRT ‘star’ in the UK, that you are part of a well-established, and itself causing something of a rethink within continues its growth and public now very definitely mainstream, transit BRTuk about how best to fulfill our acceptability, with through bus services industry. perceived BRT information exchange role ever further afield (try doing that with rail!) As I conclude each year – good luck for to the industry as a whole, and I hope we and even its doom -mongers seem quieter! the futur e – and please continue to support can report possible developments in the The Gosport-Fareham ‘Eclipse’ BRT BRTuk in the months ahead. n BRThandbook_2013_p06-13_Luton-Dunstable_BRThandbook_p06-13 04/09/2013 12:03 Page 6

Luton-Dunstable busway| gets ready to roll|

After many years on the drawing board, one of the UK’s he Luton-Dunstable-Houghton Regis conurbation is home to most high profile BRT schemes is finally close to being T257,000 people (205,200 in Luton) open for business living in just over 97,000 households. About 20% of households in Dunstable and Houghton Regis do not own a car, rising to 27% in Luton. The conurbation provides about 102,000 jobs, of which 80,100 are in Luton. About 60% of journeys to work are less than 10Km. The dominance of car travel and shortness of most journeys to work, combined with the limited “bridging points” over the M1 motorway and railway lines, leads to peak traffic congestion particularly on the east-west roads connecting the three towns. This has a severe impact on journey time reliability particularly for bus services. Since the mid 1990’s the conurbation’s economy has been vulnerable largely as a result of manufacturing job losses. There are ten ward s in the conurbation that have unemployment rates greater than the national average, contributing to higher BRThandbook_2013_p06-13_Luton-Dunstable_BRThandbook_p06-13 04/09/2013 12:03 Page 7

7

The Luton-Dunstable busway core route, stops, access points and nearby development sites

levels of deprivation. The focus of local economic policies to reduce this unemployment is on training and re- skilling the local workforce. The airport also plays an important transport and economic role, with around 8000 people employed on the airport campus. Passenger throughput has increased from 3.2 million passengers per annum (mppa) in 1997 to around 10mppa in 2011. A planning application submitted in late 2012, which is currently being assessed by the Council, would increase passenger throughput to 18 mppa.

The genesis of the Busway At the start of the scheme development process, five objectives were defined, consistent with both National and Local policy considerations. These were subsequently used to develop an outline system specification for the Busway and for the area. It is also capable of being reporting to Members at key stages in the also form the basis of the Evaluation Plan extended to serve potential development sites decision making process. Following the for monitoring its success: to the north of the conurbation included in the outcome of the Statutory Procedures, and emerging Central Bedfordshire Development to reflect Best Practice, in early 2007 the Objective 1 – Facilitate more reliable bus Plan. governance arrangements changed from travel, as an attractive alternative to car use the “scheme development and approvals” The guided Busway crosses main roads on An access track for use by emergency phase to a “construction and delivery” bridges and includes intermediate access and maintenance vehicles runs alongside phase to include a Project Board including points, allowing buses to bypass congested the Busway west of the M1, as this section the Directors of the two Councils routes in the Luton-Dunstable corridor and cannot be accessed from local roads. This responsible for Highways and Finance. facilitating bus priority measures around access track can also be used by Dunstable and Luton town centres. pedestrians and cyclists, contributing to Assessing the options the local walking and cycling networks in In recognition of the importance of the Objective 2 – Improve accessibility Dunstable and Houghton Regis. The corridor previously served by the railway, a The core Busway route enables buses to cycleway also continues east of the M1into number of studies were undertaken to connect residential areas in Dunstable, Luton. examine the public transport options for Houghton Regis and the west of Luton with The Luton-Dunstable railway closed to meeting the evolving transport needs and the three town centres and the airport. passenger traffic in 1963, but continued to objectives of the conurbation. These serve the Blue Circle cement works in included proposals to re-open the Luton Objective 3 – Improve personal safety Dunstable until the late 1980s. A review of Dunstable railway in Network South East’s The scheme incorporates improved passenger the Transport Strategy for the conurbation Plan published in May 1989 and two facilities both on the Busway and about 200 undertaken by MVA Consultancy for feasibility studies of heavy rail options on street stops, including real-time passenger Bedfordshire County Council started in between Luton and Dunstable information, CCTV, improved shelters and 1990; its key eleme nts included commissioned by Dunstable Town Council level boarding. improvements to public transport services in 1991 and 1993. and re-use of the disused railway line. The A more detailed technical evaluation of Objective 4 – Environmentally friendly development of the Busway scheme public transport options for the corridor Not only are buses a more environmentally followed the DfT’s four stage process of was carried out by MVA in 1993/94. In friendly form of transport, but the assessing and consulting on options, addition to the Busway, other options environmental credentials in developing the followed by development of a business considered included: scheme are also important as the entire case for the preferred option, carrying out disused railway corridor was classified as a the statutory procedures for the scheme, • A twin track light ra pid transit system on County Wildlife Site. and procuring the contractor to implement the same route as the Busway (excluding the scheme. bus loops around Dunstable and Luton Objective 5 – Supporting local planning and Throughout the proc ess the project town centres), but running on-road to regeneration policies management arrangements have involved the centre of Houghton Regis and up to The Busway passes close to a number of regular meetings between the project team the airport, including nine stops. More development sites identified in the Local Plans and the consultants, together with land-take is required for light rail than BRThandbook_2013_p06-13_Luton-Dunstable_BRThandbook_p06-13 04/09/2013 12:03 Page 8

Community preference for public transport options

resident complaining to the Advertising Standards Agency, resulting in a 6-9 mo nth period over which the Council had to defend its case. A Major Scheme Business Case (MSBC) was prepared to support a funding application to the DfT, which was submitted in September 2000. An independent assessment of the Business Case carried out by Atkins concluded that further work was required, particularly regarding the demand and revenue forecast modelling. The MSBC was updated and resubmitted to t he DfT in September 2001. the Busway due to the size of the stops, buses could join and leave the track at By that December, the Councils believed the need for a depot and the overhead access points. that initial funding approval could be power supply and substation The outputs from this study formed the forthcoming in the following spring and requirements. basis of public consultation undertaken by therefore in early 2002, the pre-order • A single track extension of Thameslink Bedfordshire in 1994/95. Public exhibitions consultation started. services terminating at Luton onto were held in November 1993 at various Letters were sent to all residents, Dunstable Park, behind the White Lion venues close to the proposed Busway landowners and owners/occupants of Retail Park in Dunstable. No corridor. A total of 2137 questionnaires commercial premises that were likely to be intermediate stations were planned. were returned, and people’s preferences most affected by the Busway proposals These services use the ‘slow’ lines on for the various options are summarised in which included plans and cross sections the east side of the track; the Dunstable the consultation results (see above). showing the de sign and proposed extension would need them to cross Despite the greater preference for the landscaping treatment in the vicinity of onto the ‘fast’ tracks. Various junction Busway, i n deciding which option to their premises. Ten groups of residents and options were considered, but the only progress, Members of the County Council thirty owners of commercial premises feasible one was a grade separated requested further consideration of the engaged in discussions with the project junction which would need to be located heavy rail options before deciding to team. As a result some amendments were to the south of Luton Airport Parkway support the Busway. Consequently it was made to the scheme design to address the station. only in 1996 that the County Council concerns raised, including reviewing the • A single track diesel shuttle rail service agreed the Busway as the preferred option. Busway and access track alignment in the between Dunstable Park and Luton areas around Dog Kennel Down and Blows station, with four intermediate stops at Getting under way Down Site of Special Scient ific Interest, Dunstable (Church Street), Skimpot When Luton became a Unitary Authority lowering the Busway alongside the (Stanton Road), Chaul End Lane and in April 1997, they took over the lead role in residential park homes site at Caddington Dunstable Road. Ini tial proposals were the project. After a review of previous Park, and reducing lateral clearances for two diesel shuttle services an hour wor k, consultants Mott MacDonald and alongside Luton Town Football Club. each way, although subsequently this CES (subsequently Faber Maunsell) were However the expected funding was upgraded to four trains/hour by respectively appointed in early 2000 to announcement was significantly delayed providing a passing loop halfway along undertake initial engineering and as Government was undertaking a review the route. Such a service could not be environmental design of the Busway of its “Green Book” appraisal methodology. operated without ongoing subsidy. scheme. A revised Business Case for the scheme By autumn 2000, sufficient work had was submitted to the DfT in September The environmental impacts of all these been carried out on these aspects for 2003, and on 18th Dece mber 2003 they options were similar in that they all used Luton and Bedfordshire Councils to consult announced “Programme Entry” status. the disused railway corridor between local people about the details of the On the same date, the Councils applied Luton and Dunstable, which was Busway. Whilst the consultation leaflet to the DfT for permission under the designated as a Co unty Wildlife Site. Given and exhibitions focussed on the Busway, Transport and Works Act (TWA) to that parts of the scheme run past houses, they did include some information about construct and operate the Busway it was also necessary to take into account the diesel shuttle alternative. In summer between Luton, Dunstable and Houghton the impacts of different options on air 2001, the Councils paid for an advert in the Regis. The TWA application comprised the quality, noise, and visual intrusion; the last local press that summarised the outcome Order and a list of other consents required, two of these areas are where heavy rail of the consultation. Some of the an Environmental Statement, Order plans options performed less well. However, the conclusions, in particular five comparators and Book of Reference, and an Application fundamental difference was that the between the Busway and heavy rail for Deemed Planning Permission. Busway provided greater flexibility as alternatives, were challenged by a local The TWA Rules require both Councils to BRThandbook_2013_p06-13_Luton-Dunstable_BRThandbook_p06-13 04/09/2013 12:03 Page 9

9

make resolutions before submitting the of the town centre. confirmed by the Executive Committees of TWA Order together with a confirmatory During the rest of that year further work Luton and Central Bedfordshire Council, resolution shortly after. Bedfordshire was undertaken in developing these the successor to Bedfordshire County County Council decided to withdraw various aspects, in particular taking further Council from 1st April 2009. support on 12th February 2004. Luton was advice on the m ost appropriate ways of Luton submitted the MSBC for Full due to take its confirmatory resolution a procuring the Design and Build contract for Approval to the DfT on 15th December week later but delayed taking this decision the Busway together with bus service 2009, and on 10th March DfT wrote to the until they had sought legal advice from the operations. The design was also amended Council confirming funding. BAMN’s DfT. In April Luton confirmed to progress to accommodate the above development Tender identified a Joint Venture (JV) of the scheme as a sole promoter, and an proposals, replacing the bridges at Church Arup and Parsons Brinkerhoff to undertake amendm ent to the Order was published Street and Kimpton Road with at-grade the design, together with specific sub- later that month. In June 2004, agreement junctions. This work informed the contractors to undertake particular was reached with Bedfordshire that they completion of the MSBC for the elements of the Works such as bridge would continue as a full supporting Conditional Approval, which was demolition, retaining wall construction, partner. submitted to the DfT on 29th February earthworks and landscaping. BAMN were A second objection period commenced 2008. appointed using a target price contract on 29th April 2004 and ended on 11th June with activity schedules under the NEC3; 2004. In total 383 objections were Securing funding the Tender target cost was £51,613,363. received over the two objection periods. On 3rd September the DfT wrote to Luton Under this form of contract, the target On 13th July 2004 the Secretary of State awarding Conditional Approval, and price can be adjusted up or down as announced his intention to hold an Inquiry setting out the Conditions under which Full Compensation Events resulting from into the applic ation for the proposed TWA Approval would be awarded, which changes to the Works Information that are Order. included confirmation that the scheme notified by either the client or contractor The Public Inquiry commenced on 15th remains unaltered; Confirmation of the as Early Warning Notices. February 2005 and closed on 1st August total scheme costs and the DfT/third party The BAMN contract was for the design 2005. During that time there was a 3 contributions; further details of the Project and construction of the Busway and month recess between the end of March Governance arrangements; details of the associated access track (including and early June, with shorter recess periods Tendering exercise and any resulting bridges/retaining walls, Busway up to the close of the Inquiry. The main changes ; and Confirmation that operators stops/Luton station interchange, access issues raised by objectors at this Inquiry are committed to provision of services points, and environmental mitigation). were consideration of heavy and light rail together with details of any contractual Because of the delays in awarding funding, options, together with issues raised by agreements that are either in place or the Council asked BAMN to clear the adjacent commercia l premises affected by being developed vegetation along the Busway corridor as a the Busway scheme. An OJEU notice was published in separate advance Contract. A second Inquiry into draft Section 19 February 2008, and that May the Project There were also separate contracts for certificates for replacement open space Board approved a shortlist of 3 contractors other on-street works (with the Councils’ was held on 1st and 2nd May 2006. On to be taken forward to the full tender stage. term maintenance Contractors) 2nd November 2006 the Secretaries of Early the following Spring, draft communications for Real Time Passenger State published their decision letters instructions for tendering, Site Information Information (RTPI) displays and CCTV following the two Public Inquiries. The (including topographical and geotechnical (through a sub-regional contract with Vix). TWA Order was subsequently made on surveys) and risk information was issued The two most important aspects of 13th December 2006. for comments to the shortlisted managing the contract are control of costs During 2006/2007 a financial review of contractors, which helped inform the final and the works programme . The Councils the Busway scheme was undertaken jointly tender documentation that was issued in contract Project Manager (PM) is backed by Grant Thornton supported by Jacobs. May 2009. There were regular meetings up by a team of engineers and quantity The results of that review were presented with tenderers during the tender period surveyors who advise the PM on the to Luton’s Scrutiny Committee in April including risk workshops to aid the acceptability of all aspects of the design 2007. The key findings of this review were development of an agreed tender/contract and construction, assisting him in that the scheme could be delivered within risk register. Tenders were returned on certifying BAMN’s monthly payment the budget; risks were ‘manageable’ but 23rd September and the assessment submissions. The client staff resources needed updating; a Design and Build process was undertaken over the following required to undertake this work should contract was most appropriate for weeks, with two separate teams initially therefore not be underestimated. Atkins implementing the scheme; Busway assessing the quality and price were appointed to assist the Council in this services should be delivered through a submissions. Workshops were held with role. Quality Partnership ag reement, and further each tenderer in mid October to seek work was required on maintenance and clarification on various matters relating to Ecological improvements other costs. The study also proposed a their submissions. Following this, the Given the entire disused railway corridor review of the Busway route in the context quality and financial panels met to confirm was classified as a County Wildlife Site, of the development proposals for the BAM Nuttall (BAMN) as the preferred extensive ecological surveys were former Vauxhall Motor Works site on bidder to be recommended to the Project undertaken. The Councils worked with the Kimpton Road and on the south-east side Board in November, and subsequently Wildlife Trust and local groups to develop BRThandbook_2013_p06-13_Luton-Dunstable_BRThandbook_p06-13 04/09/2013 12:03 Page 10

Bee orchids were among 160 plants translocated Over 1,500 slow worms were relocated

a biodiversity action plan for the Busway beam and four radii were planned to be water supply is obtained from the corridor. cast. A key element in the design was the underlying aquifer. Four areas of land were identified for ‘segmentation’ of the guideway alignment, Various problems with utilities were improvement to mitigate the impacts of which involves determining which type of experienced in constructing junctions and constructing the Busway These sites were beam should be positioned where along access points. These included uncharted either in public ownership but not currently the whole length. services and utilities companies altering actively managed or are in private The Works Information section of the the scope of works at a late stage, ngeedin ownership and not managed at all for contract specified design should be carried changes to the Busway design and biodiversity interest. The Councils have out in accordance with the Guided Busway construction, resulting in some delays. signed up to a 60 year agreement with the Design Handbook and the Design Manual The first beam was laid in December Wildlife Trust to manage these sites. for Roads and Bridges, including 2011, and the last one in May 2013. Bota nical, bird and invertebrate surveys consideration of the impact on ride quality The on-highway works have been have been carried out on all these sites as the bus moves from one beam to the delivered through the term contracts of the during the last 18 months by the Wildlife next. As part of the Value Engineering two Councils. Council engineers undertook Trust to provide us with baseline process, the requirement for meeting a review of the transition kerb design at information as to the conditions of the highway loadings was challenged. Load on-street stops to enable docking and level habitats. testing, backed up by structural boarding by vehicles fitted with Various flora and fauna were calculations, was undertaken to determine guidewheels. All stops have new footway translocated before construction started, if the central pads and brackets could be works and coloured surfaces, together with including : removed. This concluded that, with the bus shelters for many of the stops. In exception of those parts of the guideway addition to constructing the 180 on-street • Over 1500 slowworms were relocated to where buses brake on approaches to stops along the routes of the planned bus suitable new sites which had been Busway stops, junctions, and “burst services, the Council’s term contractors enhanced and will be managed in future throughs”, guideway construction with two also designed and built further on-street to sustain a healthy slowworm sets of pads and brackets would not have a measures; in particular these included population. detrimental impact on ride quality or easing radii at junctions in the Downside • Over 160 common spotted, bee and structural stability. area of Dunstable together with the pyramidal orchids were translocated to a ‘shared surface’ in Cour t Drive, also in donor site. Implementation Dunstable. • Badger activity was monitored and Work on demolishing and rebuilding The Councils are members of a sub- measures were put in place to close bridges has generally progressed well. regional consortium for the provision of setts where required. However earthworks were affected by RTPI; Vix currently provide this service. • Bat monitoring was undertaken unforeseen obstructions, including buried The project team engaged with Vix in throughout the scheme. As part of the sleepers and sections of retaining wall, order to determine the optimal solution to work with local schools a number of bat together with contamination east of Chaul provide RTPI and communications to the boxes were built and installed along the End Lane and two 21 metre deep wells near main bus stops along the Busway, key route. Station Road in Dunstable. These problems interchanges, other on-street bus stops • Topsoil and calcareous grassland were were not surprising given the Busway and on-bus displays. RTPI displays have moved to an adjacent site. occupies the disused rail corridor, together been included at all on-street stops, either with the fact that, as identified in the as a 3 line LCD display mounted in the The nuts and bolts Enviro nmental Statement, the old Laporte shelter (Shannon) or pole mounted (BAN). Each guideway beam is 6 metres long, chemical works (which closed in the early In addition all stops on the Busway and a supported on and bolted to a pad at each 1980s) was located between Chaul End few key on-street stops include the ability end together with a central pad; a straight Lane and Kingsway and that much of the to display advertising and community BRThandbook_2013_p06-13_Luton-Dunstable_BRThandbook_p06-13 04/09/2013 12:03 Page 11

11

Telford Way bridge was replaced

Bridge demolition… … and construction

Clearing vegetation and rails along the disused railway lines Setting out shutters for the pad bases

Laying beams and pads on the first track… … and on the second track BRThandbook_2013_p06-13_Luton-Dunstable_BRThandbook_p06-13 04/09/2013 12:03 Page 12

A help point A stop at the Luton rail station interchange

information. All of these RTPI displays technology) to the on-street stops, and support React 3 audible announcements Fibre optic cable with Last Mile Microwave activated by use of a key fob, as an aid for Wireless to the on-street stops. The passengers that are visually impaired. second of these options was agreed by the Three options were considered for the Project Board as the preferred solution as it digital communications needed to support was a lot cheaper to install despite the fact these enhanced stop facilities including there were some associated ongoing costs. help points and CCTV; Wireless mesh serving both the Busway and the on-street Bus operations stops; Fibre optic cable along the Busway Early in the scheme development, three All RTPI displays support audible announcements for the visually impaired with GPR S communications (SIM card key criteria were set for service operations on the Busway including a minimum frequency of 4 buses per hour in each direction; service operations between 06:00 and 23:00; and a minimum quality standard for buses. Several ways of procuring these levels and standards of service were considered, including licensing operators to use the guided Busway, commercial operation by bus companies through a Quality Partnership Scheme, contracts between the operator and the Councils, and Quality Contracts. The Quality Partnership was the preferred option. In May 2009 the Councils published an Expressions of Interest advert to operate bus services on all or part of the Busway.

Aerial view of the bus interchange at Luton rail station BRThandbook_2013_p06-13_Luton-Dunstable_BRThandbook_p06-13 04/09/2013 12:04 Page 13

13

Four operators responded, all of whom A Grant Palmer bus makes a operate local bus services. Following trial run and the view from further dialogue with each Operator, they the driver’s cab (inset) were asked to sign a Development Agreement with the Councils and invited to attend the monthly Bus Operations sub- group meetings and contribute to discussions about matters where their experience was relevant, in particular with BAMN or the Council’s term contractor about the design and specifica tion of stops and associated infrastructure, or about timetables and multi-operator ticketing. Arriva and Centrebus signed this agreement in Autumn 2009, and on the strength of such commitments, the Councils entered into contracts for the construction of the Busway and associated infrastructure. In late 2012 Grant Palmer also showed an interest in running services. Figure 9 shows the services using the Busway together with the on-street stops. In early 2011, the operators agreed to introduce a multi-operator ticket, Hip Hop. This has been available since July 2011 as a paper ticket, with revenue “sitting where it lies”. Since then the Councils have worked together the operators to develop the specification for Busway vehicles, implement Smartcard-enabled ticket machines on buses, and develop branding/ well as driving along it. The original manual to add to as required. In terms of marke ting principles. Work is also intention was that this manual would also emergency procedures, the only aspect underway to migrate the Hip Hop ticket to include details of emergency procedures that will be common to all three is the a Smartcard ticket in the next few years. and alternative routes to be followed in the removal of a ‘broken down’ bus, with all A Quality Partnership agreement has event of an incident on particu lar sections three operators agreeing to use been developed and the Councils and the of the Busway. Given that each of the three “Bedfordshire Recovery”. three operators have signed up to this, bus operators already have “established” The Busway will be formally opened on with service frequencies on the core emergency procedures, and the routes to 24th September by Norman Baker MP, Busway route between Dunstable and be followed in the event of closure of Minister for Transport. Full bus services Luton specified in a Qualifying Agreement. sections of the Busway will vary for will start the following day and will Various test runs along sections of the different operators, then each operator has comprise the four routes shown in the Busway have taken plac e since Spring been provided with the ‘framework’ of this diagram below. n 2012. Once the whole Busway was substantially completed, journey time trials took place in mid-June 2013, to provide each operator with information to prepare their bus timetables for submission to the Traffic Commissioners. The following month, tests of the turning moves at each access point took place using single deck, double deck and articulated buses; this was a requirement of the constructio n contract. A “bus operations and safety manual” has been prepared, that summarises the features of the scheme and includes advice for driving technique when entering and leaving the Busway at access points, as

The busway service plan BRThandbook_2013_p14-15_Vix_BRThandbook_p14-15 04/09/2013 11:46 Page 14

The connected journey| No one likes to queue to get on the bus. Fare collection specialist Vix Technology explains how, nowadays, you don’t have to

RT systems are intended to move 7. Reduce complexity of device institutions. This gives the passengers large numbers of commuters configuration management as no fare flexibility, choice and convenience. With Brapidly through the urban product business rules are used on the the inclusion of an optional integrated 2D environment. To facilitate this, the ingress devices barcode scanner the device is also able to and egress of passengers to and from the 8. Enable sophisticated cu stomer validate QR/Aztec-encoded tickets vehicle must be as fast as possible. To engagement as passengers no longer generated by mobile ticketing applications. reduce boarding times fare validators anonymous The validator shown below on the right should be placed at stops, either gated or 9. Improve reporting and analytics from is a ruggedised validator intended for un-gated, such that passenger flows onto the system. outdoor and unattended usage. This vehicles are not slowed by validation. As makes it suitable for use at BRT stops much as possible the BRT ticketing system Account-based systems offer the where the preference is to have the should be integrated with that of other following advantages to operators: validator at the stop rather than on the forms of public transport to enable 1. Increased convenience as no special bus. There is a companion device that can seamless interchange. transit card is required also support the full range of payment Operators of BRT systems wish to 2. No need to queue at ticket vending options with an optional integrated 2D reduce the TCO (total cost of ownership) machines or kiosks to purchase tickets barcode scanner intended for indoor of their fare collection system while 3. Instant ‘loading’ of purchased tickets – attended usage. For gated BRT stations the maintaining an efficient and effective no need to wait for purchase to access control gate can also be fitted with system. Passengers want a fare collection propagate to front end devices for a multi-protocol card validator and 2D system that is convenient and easy to use. loading onto card barcode scanner to ensure that, regardless When a BRT system is being deployed in 4.Additional information on usage and of the validator configuration selected, the an environment with an existing fare cost available to enable management of passenger always has the widest possible collection system then integration with travel usage and spend. payment options available to him. this system is a desirable goal. The software on the validator is modular The cost of the deployment and The ideal AFC system for new BRT to enable each validation mechanism to be operation of an AFC (automated fare systems in the UK would integrate the included or excluded from the system with collection) system can be reduced and existing ITSO smart ticketing scheme in a minimal impact on the overall system. customer convenience increased when city with an account-based open payment The Vix eO system is an account-based account-based open payment systems are AFC scheme that gives passengers choice open payments back office system that is deployed. Account-based systems remove as to the means they pay for their travel. able to process payments from payment the need for ticket data to be written to The single validation device can support sources and integrate with existing closed and read from the ticket media. The many ways to pay. The validator is EMV L1 loop payment schemes such as ITSO. systems maintain user accounts in a CRM and L2 certified and is able to perform The eO account-based open payment (customer relationship management) validation functions on the ISO14443 and system enables more ways to pay at the system and manage fares and ticket ISO15693 ranges of cards. As a result the validator without storing any transit products within the CRM. This enables device is able to validate the MiFare family specific data on the ticketing media and customers to register and use their of cards commonly used for ITSO cards, offloads much of the processing existing mobile devices or smartcards as perform fare payment validation on traditionally conducted on the validator to fare media in the AFC system. contactless EMV cards such as Visa the back office. This includes: Account-based systems offer the Paypass and Mastercard Paywave cards, • Tap processing, which groups validator following advantages to operators: and support validation using standard taps into trips and journeys 1. Reduce cost of deployment and access control proximity cards commonly • Fare calculation for trips and journeys operation issued by universities and other including transfers • Fare collection • Card management and issuance • Customer service including ticket kiosk 2. Open additional revenue opportunities • Advertising • Potential to increase ridership 3. Use existing security standards 4.Reduce fraud 5. Allow for partnering opportunities • City-wide initiatives • Existing issuers of access media A standard 6. Improve the passenger experience validator A ruggedised validator BRThandbook_2013_p14-15_Vix_BRThandbook_p14-15 04/09/2013 11:46 Page 15

15

• Processing and management of period Validator high level passes and carnet tickets software architecture • Processing of concessions • Processing of fare capping and other loyalty reward mechanisms.

This greatly simplifies the validation device software as most of the business logic is moved to the back office and also enables sophisticated fare calculations that would not be possible on a device. It also simplifies the on-going configuration management of the devices as there is no requirement to keep the business rules on the devices synchronised and up to date. more sophisticated loyalty schemes to be Our vision of travel is a world where a Customer engagement operated. This could include a system of commuter has all the information and In a traditional AFC system based on internal points-based loyalty schemes tools at their fingertips to make educated magnetic tickets or smartcards most where the travellers accumulate rewards travel decisions. The whole journey must passengers are anonymous in the system. points in the system through usage; the be treated as a single seamless The operator knows a ticket has been sold points can then be redeemed for discounts experience. We allow commuters to select and used but usually knows nothing about on future tickets. Alternatively the AFC the best transport mode at any point – the person buying and using the tickets. system could be integrated with an based on schedule, duration or cost; book Account-based systems that have more external loyalty programme such as the segments of their trip as they want; and detailed information about the passengers Nectar card system in the UK. Loyalty pay for them easily. enable entirely new ways for transit points are ‘purchased’ in the loyalty Once the trip is started, we provide operators to engage with their customers scheme by the operator and can be solutions that track their journey, to improve the passenger experience, and redeemed by the customer for rewards. informing them when things change – as increase ridership and revenue. The rewards can include discounts on they often do. Within an account-based system ticket products from the operator. The goal is to demystify the travel passengers can still chose to remain Other forms of incentive can be experience and help people to use more largely anonymous to the transit operator. provided to customers based on their sustainable transportation. This can be achieved by using a bank travel patterns. This can include location Vix provides the services to allow issued payment card for fare payment. The based vouchers/discounts at partner passengers to: operator knows the card has been used retailers such as discount coffee at a • Plan their journeys, making the best and that it is valid but has no other frequently visited station. choices available to them demographic or personally identifying Loyalty and incentive schemes are a • Pay for their journeys, giving people information about the user unless they mechanism to encourage passengers to access to more options to pay for their choose to register in the system. In order become account holders in the system. journeys to encourage more users to register in the With an active account operators are able • Navigate through their journey in real system the operator must provide to target marketing material to the time. incentives. customers based on their demographic We also provide solutions and services and travel profile. This could be upsell and to operators to allow them to better A question of loyalty special offers from the operator or offers manage their public transport systems, Traditional AFC systems have offered from partner organisations. The key is that and make their operations more efficient. immediate anonymous loyalty discounts done well the targeted marketing can The eO account based open payment based on upfront purchase of multiple increase customer satisfaction while AFC system is the first step towards the journeys. Period passes and carnet tickets simultaneously increasing the revenue of connected journey for BRT operators and offer discounts that usually increase with the operator. passengers. n the length of period or number of trips purchased. This encourages users to buy eO account-based system in parallel with ITSO system the longest pass that makes sense for their travel pattern and cash flow. More recently some AFC systems have introduced fare capping that caps the daily/weekly/monthly spend. This is a form of immediate fare-based loyalty discount that does not require an upfront purchase. Account-based AFC systems can provide the immediate fare based loyalty discounts of traditional systems but the additional data in a user’s account enables BRThandbook_2013_p16-17_Map_BRThandbook_p16-17 04/09/2013 11:42 Page 16

Bus Rapid Transit in the U PROPOSED SCHEMES The position in Se

SEStran, the South East Scotland Transport Partnership is working up proposals for an orbital BRT network to the south of EDINBURGH. The scheme will link park-and-ride sites around the south of the city and contribute to congestion reduction on the city bypass.

Scottish Ministers have approved £40m of funding for a new bus link along the banks of the River Clyde in Glasgow. The FASTLINK core route will run from Buchanan Street bus station to the new South Glasgow hospitals via Central and Queen Street stations and will be implemented in mid-2015.

Following approval of the Outline Business Case in 2012, the detailed design for the BELFAST Rapid Transit system is being developed. Initial infrastructure works, which will include bus priority measures and the provision of park-and-ride facilities, are due to commence in 2014.

LEEDS NGT is a planned 14.8km cross-city trolleybus scheme that is being developed by Metro (West Yorkshire PTE) and Leeds City Council. The DfT awarded Programme Entry Approval in July 2012 for the £250m project, which is being taken forward through a Transport and Works Act Order with a view to commencing construction in 2017 and being operational by 2020.

South Yorkshire PTE and local councils in ROTHERHAM & SHEFFIELD are developing BRT proposals to link the two centres. The £34m scheme has received Programme Entry from the DfT (£19.4m) and is also seeking funding from the European Regional Development (ERDF). The Bus Rapid Transit North scheme will include a new link under the M1 at junction 34.

PENNINE REACH is a BRT scheme aimed at improving public transport along the Accrington–Blackburn–Darwen corridors. The Final Approval bid is for £31.9m from the DfT, with £8m in total from the two local councils from a variety of local sources in the years 2013/14 through to 2015/16. If approved, work could start in late 2013 with completion expected in 2016.

TfGM is developing BRT schemes valued at £123m including the LEIGH-SALFORD GUIDED BUSWAY and a cross-city bus scheme. Included as part of the Leigh-Salford-Manchester project is a 7km guided busway due to open in 2015.

In BRISTOL, as a cross council West of England partnership project, the three MetroBus routes are progressing as one 50 km priority bus network with clear information, fast boarding and `smartcard’ ticketing. Forecast to carry over 25,000 passengers per day it connects the Temple Quarter Enterprise Zone and approx 20 local development sites. The three route sections, Ashton Vale to Temple Meads, South Bristol Link and North Fringe to Hengrove are scheduled to start construction in 2014 and 2015. Operations are scheduled to start autumn 2016.

FEATURED LAUNCH

The LUTON-DUNSTABLE BUSWAY won £89m in funding from the Department for Transport in March 2010. Most of the rail bridges were demolished in Autumn/Winter 2010/11, some of which were rebuilt the following year to accommodate the busway and the adjacent access track. The laying of the 4,500 beams on the 4.6 mile guideway between Dunstable and central London started in early 2012 and was completed in late May 2013. Two months later Luton took over the busway from BAM Nuttall to allow bus driver training and the completion of ancillary works. Busway services operated by Arriva, Centrebus and Grant Palmer are due to start running later this month (September).

Information as available at September 2013. BRTuk and LTT Ltd have compiled this list in good faith from published sources and are not liable fo BRThandbook_2013_p16-17_Map_BRThandbook_p16-17 04/09/2013 11:42 Page 17

17 e UK: Progress and Plans September 2013 OPERATING SYSTEMS

TYNE & WEAR features two smaller BRT schemes. Go North East operates the Centrelink service between Gateshead town centre and the Metrocentre shopping complex via a busway on the banks of the River Tyne. Meanwhile, in North Tyneside the operator’s Route19 service through the Cobalt Business Park uses a short stretch of guided busway.

BRADFORD’S Manchester Road Quality Bus Initiative includes 2.3km of dedicated guided busway and 1.2km of bus lanes. Metro, the West Yorkshire PTE, Bradford Council and bus operator First implemented the scheme.

Guided busways and extensive bus priority measures are a key feature of two corridors in LEEDS. The original A61 (Scott Hall Road) corridor scheme developed by bus operator Yorkshire Rider, Leeds City Council and Metro has four sections of guided busway totalling 1.5km. The A64 York Road/Selby Road ‘Elite’ scheme has a total of 2km of guided busway in three sections. Arriva joined First (successor to Yorkshire Rider) in funding the scheme with LCC and Metro.

RUNCORN’S Busway was opened in 1971 with seven miles of segregated roadway, later extended to 12 miles, forming a figure-of-eight around the developing new town. Housing estates were designed so that no point was more than 500m from a busway stop.

The CAMBRIDGESHIRE GUIDED BUSWAY continues to go from strength to strength with passenger numbers now hitting three million per annum. Stagecoach has increased its fleet by 55% since the busway’s opening in August 2011 and daytime frequencies are now every 7-8 minutes, with hourly extensions to Peterborough. Continued expansion is planned to coincide with 10,000 homes to be built at Northstowe.

A short 200m section of guided busway was opened in IPSWICH in January 1995. Operated by bus operator First, services using the guideway are branded as ‘Superoute 66’.

SWANSEA’S ftrmetro system came into operation in 2009. The scheme is a partnership between the City & County of Swansea and bus operator First Cymru. The cross-city route connects the city’s two hospitals and Swansea University.

Services on the East London Transit scheme between Ilford and Dagenham Dock via BARKING commenced in February 2010. The scheme uses a mixture of part-segregated busways and extensive bus priority measures. A second route via the Barking Riverside development was completed in 2013.

The KENT THAMESIDE Fastrack network is an extensive bus- based rapid transit network centred on Dartford, Gravesend and the vast Bluewater shopping centre.

Fastway links CRAWLEY with Gatwick Airport, Horley and Redhill using a combination of guided busways, extensive bus priority measures and bus lanes.

Hampshire County Council and Transport for South Hampshire are developing an extensive BRT network to link Gosport and Fareham with Portsmouth, Havant, Waterlooville and beyond. The initial phase, which opened in April 2012, connects FAREHAM & GOSPORT via a new, dedicated, high-specification bus route along a disused rail line between the two towns.

able for errors or omissions. Further information on new schemes or updating on existing will be welcomed and can be sent to [email protected] BRThandbook_2013_p18-19_PB_BRThandbook_p18-19 04/09/2013 11:40 Page 18

BRT is central to Manchester’s| transport ambitions|

under construction and is due to open in David Eve, programme manager on the Leigh-Salford- summer 2016. By 2016 Manchester will Manchester Busway project for Transport for Greater have the largest tram network in the UK. Most exciting is the planned 2nd City Manchester and BRT specialist at consultant Parsons Crossing which will provide a 2nd line Brinckerhoff, praises Manchester’s strategy across Manchester city centre from St Peter’s Square to Victoria station via the s programme manager on the Higher Folds currently lacks good public town hall (Albert Square). Once open this Leigh-Salford-Manchester Busway transport connections and also suffers from will relieve pressure on the single city Aproject, I may be biased, but I do one of the lowest car ownership levels in crossing line currently in operation. It is believe that the transport strategy being the country. intended to integrate the 2nd city crossing pursued by Transport for Greater Last but not least are Manchester’s with the LSM scheme at St Peter’s Square Manchester is an excellent example of the cycling aspirations which are integral to the which will improve the interchange between integrated possibilities in a highly LSM project. Notwithstanding the BRT service and the Metrolink network congested UK city/suburban area. Manchester’s recent award of £20 million once constructed. TfGM, like most passenger transport from government for its Velocity Cycling TfGM is also in the process of delivering authorities, has a responsibility to reduce city project – to invest in cycle 4 new interchange projects, providing the public’s reliance on the private car. It infrastructure across Greater Manchester improved passenger waiting environment also has an objective to connect people that and the surrounding areas – cycling features and integration between a variety of travel aren’t lucky enough to own a car, to heavily in the LSM project proposals. As modes between bus, rail and the Metrolink education, good healthcare and part of the route a high quality cycle way network in Bolton, Wythenshawe, employment opportunities, as well as social will be constructed alongside the LSM Altrincham, and Rochdale. and leisure pursuits. Further, TfGM has an project. Working in partnership with Wigan objective to encourage cycling, which helps and Salford City councils, the routes will So why choose a busway? in terms of congestion but also satisfies a seamlessly integrate into existing and Over the past 20 years, properly wider health improvement objective. proposed cycle networks currently being implemented Bus Rapid Transit has proven TfGM is committed to reducing funded by Local Sustainable Transport to provide similar benefits to rail based congestion – thus helping the environment Funding (LSTF) which helps to provide ‘last equivalent forms of transport with the – by providing the public with ‘smarter’ mile’ connectivity for commuters. advantage of being considerably cheaper to travel choices. This not only includes the Alongside the guided Busway, cycle implement and operate, as well as having building of new transport infrastructure but commuters will have a fully segregated 7km more operational flexibility once open. also introduces technology that makes cycleway, high quality railway style covered In the case of the LSM Busway scheme travel easier and more accessible, such as cycle parking stands at each of the stops there are a number of reasons why a the new ‘get me there’ smart card which and a new Cycle Hub at Leigh Bus station Busway was deemed more appropriate. In will allow seamless interchange between adjacent to the terminus for the guided terms of cost both a heavy rail and tram different modes for ‘single ticket’ journeys Busway service. The cycle hub is a secure alternative would have been prohibitively across multiple legs and across different facility accessed by a smart card. expensive and would not have returned operators. Cycling improvements are integral to sufficient benefits to justify that cost. A re- To achieve its aims, TfGM looked at the LSM. Along the Oxford Road corridor opening of the rail line would have meant overall network of public transport modes proposals include the introduction of Dutch that fewer passengers would be served by radiating out from the city centre including style cycle lanes which cut behind bus the system than the Busway. This was due Metrolink and Heavy Rail. In some cases, stops, reducing risk of conflict between to the fact that the system could only gaps in this network were and are currently buses and cyclist dramatically. include stops at Leigh and Tyldesley – 2 being filled by extensions to the Metrolink In addition to LSM a second BRT route stops over 7km – essentially penalising all network. In the case of the corridor out called ‘Cross City Bus Package, part funded catchment areas in between. This leads to a toward Wigan via Leigh, a BRT route was by the DfT will facilitate new services from low density of passenger numbers and deemed most suitable which included a Middleton to the north east of the worsens the economic outlook of the guided Busway on a disused railway Manchester city centre, along the A664 railway. Add to that the operational costs embankment between Leigh and Ellenbrook and connect with LSM at Oxford Road. As and complexities of heavy rail and it is in Salford, as well as more traditional on- above, there are major extensions to the without doubt a hugely uneconomic highway bus priority measures. Metrolink network underway. New lines solution. Beyond that there are significant Interestingly, the guided Busway will have recently opened to Rochdale, East engineering challenges with rail which serve the estate of Higher Folds which sits Didsbury and Droylsden via the Etihad would have been expensive and unpopular about half way along the 7km alignment. stadium. An airport link is also currently to achieve. BRThandbook_2013_p18-19_PB_BRThandbook_p18-19 04/09/2013 11:40 Page 19

19

tolerances seen with pre-cast forms of construction. This method of construction is far more flexible than the pre-cast alternative, provides more margin for error and thus delivers better value. In addition, elements such as superelevation (banked corners) can easily be introduced, improving the passenger experience further and allowing for tighter radii on bends if required. All of this should assist in delivering passenger ride quality to a similar standard. Construction started in July this year and the contractor is now carrying out bulk Bus stop design showing dutch-style cycle paths and pedestrian crossings earthworks. Construction of the concrete guided Busway will commence in early A tram is a slightly better solution than direction between Tyldesley and 2014 with the scheme opening in 2015. The heavy rail but also ends up being incredibly Manchester city centre. A580 East Lancashire Road section of the expensive and again, would have required The stated benefits of the LSM project LSM project will go out to tender later this the loss of homes. Unlike the guided include: year and is due to be delivered in parallel Busway the tram cannot simply join the with the guided Busway. This will complete existing road network at Ellenbrook, where • Increased reliability and consistency of the route to the city centre. the guided Busway leaves the disused journey times; The procurement process for an operator railway corridor. A tram system would have • Reduced journey time between Leigh, is ongoing with contract award scheduled required an extension of another 15 miles of Tyldesley, Salford and central for spring 2014. The minimum specification rail and overhead electrification along the Manchester. Between Leigh and of the buses has been set high and all A580 East Lancs Road. Whereas a bus lane Manchester this will be reduced to less operators have expressed their can easily be accommodated in the existing than 50 minutes – currently peak journey commitment to providing a ‘premium’ level road space and verge, without detriment to time is 60-80 minutes depending on bus fleet. Although as yet unconfirmed, the other traffic flows, a tram would time of day; system is likely to include items such as free undoubtedly have required the loss of a • The route will improve accessibility to the WiFi, leather seating etc. running lane for the entire length of the East public transport network in and around Other technology to be included on the Lancashire Road into Manchester. Further Greater Manchester – good opportunities Busway includes all the staple elements of to that the challenges of bringing rail track to connect into the rail network at Salford BRT, smart card ticketing, smart phone and overhead electrification into the Crescent; Salford Central; and apps, Real Time Passenger Information, western perimeter and through the city Manchester Oxford Road; Passenger Information Display points, help centre is far more complicated than a bus • Linear park including a path for points, PA systems, CCTV covering stops using the existing road network. Whereas pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders along and cycle shelters. simple priority measures can be introduced the guided part of the Busway. to provide reliability for the bus entering the It’s all about integration city centre, a tram requires significant The Busway will open up reliable public The transport strategy being pursued by engineering measures and land take to transport opportunities which currently TfGM is all about integration. For example achieve the same. don’t exist for some of the north west’s the recent announcement of Greater Faced with the above, and the knowledge most deprived areas. Further, it is hoped Manchester’s version of London’s Oyster that a BRT system can deliver close to the that, like other BRT schemes of its kind, the card, the ‘get me there’ card ensures that same benefits as a rail based alternative, Busway will generate a commuter corridor. the BRT system will be part of wider the decision is an easy one. The effect of this will be to bring property integrated ticketing network speculation further out from Manchester interchangeable between Bus, Rail and The vital statistics into some very affordable areas. cycling facilities. The overall bus priority route is 40km in The scheme is being delivered through The LSM route itself interchanges with length. 25km of which is the LSM Busway the Transport and Works Act, with the local bus services at Leigh Bus Station, the which runs from the town centres of Leigh Order made in 2005. The design and build new proposed Interchange at Tyldesley, at and Atherton, intersecting at Tyldesley to contract for the guided Busway went out to key junctions within Salford and Manchester City Centre along the A580 tender mid 2012 and was awarded to Manchester City Centre. It interchanges East Lancashire Road. 7km of the 25km is Balfour Beatty in May 2013. Although it was with heavy rail services at Salford Crescent, on disused railway line between Leigh town originally TfGM’s aspiration to follow the Salford Central and Manchester Oxford centre and Ellenbrook in Salford. Cambridgeshire and Luton examples of a Road and with Metrolink at St Peter’s As a minimum, the operational contract pre-cast Busway construction methodology, Square in the city. will specify at least four buses an hour in Balfour Beatty presented an innovative For me, this certainly ticks the boxes as each direction from Leigh and four buses an slipform and post grind solution that in an excellent example of the integrated hour in each direction from Atherton, tests to date has proved effective in possibilities in a highly congested UK combining to eight buses an hour in each delivering the required construction city/surburban area. n BRThandbook_2013_p20-21_SDG_BRThandbook_p20-21 04/09/2013 11:40 Page 20

Do passengers prefer BRT or LRT?|

John Swanson, an associate at Steer Davies Gleave, discusses the relative merits and faults of bus and rail-based transit system from an unusual viewpoint... that of the actual user!

uch is known about the relative the Bicloo cycle hire network, the Navibus costs of building and operating and many of the local bus services that MBRT and LRT, and some of this serve the city. People also liked the evidence has been published before by frequency of the services and the high BRTuk; by and large BRT is cheaper to build capacity of the trams compared to the and to operate than LRT. However less is busway. known about how passengers perceive the The focus groups generated a list of two systems, and whether they see one as attributes that contributed to the superior to the other. differences users perceived between This issue often arises in discussion with Tramway and Busway. This list was then cities here and abroad that are considering used to design a questionnaire for the next whet her to invest in one of the two phase, carried out with a larger sample. systems. Typically they would like to build LRT but can only afford BRT, and are The stated preference research worried that BRT will be less acceptable to Face-to-face interviews were carried out

potential users. INGOLF © PHOTO with 515 people who had recent experience Steer Davies Gleave runs an internally A view of Nantes busway line 4 of using Tramway and Busway. The funded research and innovation (R&I) were. There was potentially a l ong list of questionnaire began by exploring the list of programme that provides the opportunity factors that might affect users’ perceptions service attributes that had been identified to investigate issues like this. In 2011 an of one service versus the other, so this in the focus groups, asking people to rate R&I project was set up to investigate the interview stage was preceded by focus the relative performance of each system preferences of users of BRT and LRT in groups with experienced users in which we against each attribute on a five point scale. Nantes, a city where both systems are in explored their perceptions of the two As expected, Tramway did better on the operation. This gave us the opportunity to services and developed a list of the factors service level attributes, while Busway was talk to people with experience of both that appeared to distinguish most better on comfort, cleanliness and, systems and to explore how, in their view, significantly between Tramway and marginally, safety. Overall, Tramway was they compared. Busway. These factors were then tested rated better than Busway. Nantes is a regional capital in the west more fully in the interview programme. The differences are narrower when we of France, with a population of 290,000. People in the focus groups were positive look only at people who use both modes The city’s tram system, known as Tramway, about both Tramway and Busway but by frequently. The overall preferensce i was re-opened in 1985 after reconstruction and large the groups liked Busway more virtually zero, and while Tramway is still work and, following a series of extensions, than the tram. Common themes were that preferred on the service level attributes now consists of three lines with a total it was very comfortable, clean, had good and Busway on comfort, the magnitudes of track length of 41.4km. clear information on-board, offered a fast, the scores are mostly reduced. In November 2006 a BRT line was smooth journey with less risk of accidents, The stated preference questions were opened, under the name Busway, operating and was generally thought to be a newer designed to measure strength of from Porte de Vertou in the south east to and more modern mode of transport. Of preference for one mode versus another, Foch Cathédrale in the city centre, a course, Busway is the newest of the expressing the results in monetary values. distance of seven kilometres. For much of services, and so was likely to have a higher A very simple SP might show that Busway, its length the busway operates on rating on attributes related to newness. say, was preferred to Tramway to the value dedicated lanes in the centre of the road. The main area where Busway did less The aim of the research was to assess well was on the extent of the network, how users rated the two modes of which with only one line is less extensive transport rela tive to each other, and to than Tramway. There were also some identify which factors contributed to the suggestions that the buses in operation differences and by how much. This was were too small or over-crowded, while done using a mix of qualitative and there was a perception that service quantitative research. The primary method frequency was better on Tramway than on was a programme of face-to-face Busway. interviews with users to ask them in detail Consequently Tramway scored well on how they perceived the two services, and service levels, because of its three lines, to measure, using stated preference but also because it has interchanges with techniques, how strong those preferences the other tram/bus lines, the TER/TGV, The tramway and busway networks in Nantes (source: www.tan.fr) BRThandbook_2013_p20-21_SDG_BRThandbook_p20-21 04/09/2013 11:40 Page 21

21

Ratings for Tramway versus Busway (frequent users of both modes)

of so many cents per one-way trip, but our intention was to break down the overall preference among the service level attributes, to measure how much they contributed to the overall preference. There were too many attributes to treat them all individually in an SP exercise, but it was clear from the focus groups that there were two broad classes of attribute that differentiated between Busway and Tramway. They were:

• Service levels, a compound of the number of lines, length of track and service frequency; and • Comfort, a compound of seating, security and crowding. • Tramway’s comfort was poorer than for tram, but this was largely due to the Busway’s to the value of ¤0.08 per trip; better network coverage, and when this SP poses a series of realistic but and was taken into account the residual hypothetical choices, carefully constructed • Tramway’s service levels were better than preference was for Busway over tram. Even so that by using statistical modelling later Busway’s to the value of ¤0.28 per trip. when Busway’s better comfort level was it is possible to deduce how much allowed for there was still a residual influence each attribute has on the choices So if Busway’s service network was as preference for Busway. people make. In this case respondents extensive as Tramway’s, this would reduce were offered choices between alternative the overall preference for Tramway from What this means ways of undertaking a recent, actual, trip, ¤0.08 per trip to ¤0.08 - ¤0.28 = -¤0.20. Of course, these findings are specific to using Busway or Tramway, each with the This is negative, indicating that Busway is Nantes, deriving from the services compound attributes at one of two levels: now the preferred mode. implem ented there and the views of the as experienced now on the trams, or as If it was then possible to improve the local population and their attitudes experienced now on the Busway. Each trip overall comfort levels on Tramway to be towards public transport. In detail they also had a fare attached. the same as Busway, this would increase may not be transferable elsewhere. In this example the respondent is being the overall preference back towards However what can be said is that in asked to choose between the tram, on the Tramway, changing it to ¤0.08 - ¤0.28 + general there is no reason to suppose that left, with comfort levels as currently ¤0.08 = -¤0.12. This is still negative; the BRT is innately inferior to tram. On the experienced on Busway, b ut with a service preference for Busway is reduced, but is contrary, the research shows that a well- network as currently offered by the tram, still there. designed and operated BRT system can be and at a one-way fare of ¤1.50, and, on the This pattern was consistent when at least as attractive to passengers as tram, right, Busway, with comfort levels as different types of passenger were if not more so. n currently experienced on the tram, but examined: there was an overall preference An example of the SP choices with the current Busway service network and a one-way fare of ¤1.75. Each respondent was asked to make a series of such choices, with comfort, service levels and fares varying in each case. This structure allows us to measure the preference people have for Busway relative to Tramway, while capturing how much the different levels of comfort and service level contribute to that preference. Because money was also included in the choice tasks it was possible to express the strengths of preference in monetary terms, as Euros per trip. The finding was that the overall preference was for Tramway over Busway, to a value of eight cents per one-way trip. This is consistent with the overall rating scale. In addition: BRThandbook_2013_p22-23_Cambs1_BRThandbook_p22-23 04/09/2013 11:39 Page 22

Cambridge still leading the way|

Two years after its launch, Cambridgeshire’s BRT the car to access the rail network. The busway will also take rail users direct scheme remains the country’s most successful to to the new Cambridge Science Park Rail date, with passenger numbers still breaking records station that is due to open in 2015. The station will provide a huge boost for the local economy, and will kick start development and the creation of jobs by significantly improving accessibility. The new station will have fast trains to London every half hour, putting the Science Park Within an hour of Central London. The busway will be extended to run directly into the station with a dedicated stop and turning area. The interchange is planned around a station square reminiscent of a College Court, with cycle parking, busway In addition to its other claims to fame, Cambridge’s busway is the longest guided busway in the world terminal, car park, drop off area, taxi rank and the station entrance itself all arranged he Cambridge busway celebrated its Cambridgeshire County Council (and its around the square. second birthday on 7 August 2013 council tax payers) nothing to operate and The busway is now well established as a Twith passenger numbers still well run. success and the potential for expansion of ahead of forecast. The busway services The guided part of the network is in two the (physical) network is featuring in longer carried over three million passengers in its parts and is linked by on road running term planning. The county council is second year, 20% up on its first year, and through Cambridge. The network can be currently consulting on a new transport there is no sign of the growth tailing off. In viewed at: www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/ strategy for Cambridge and South its first year passenger numbers were transport/around/usingbusway/ Cambridgeshire to mesh with the city and +46% on the projected ridership and +20% buswayroutehuntingdon.htm districts plans for new development. The in the second year. This is fantastic news strategy proposes new busways: north to and demonstrates how well received the Boosting the economy serve a proposed new town at Waterbeach, busway has been. The busway links existing centres of west to serve existing and new The busway is the longest in the world population, education and training and developments in the St Neots corridor and and is providing real travel choice in the employment. Critically it is already in place south east to link up Addenbrooke's and Peterborough, Huntingdon and Cambridge to support the transport needs of residents Haverhill via the Babraham Research corridor. The busway opened in 2011 with in 25,000 new homes and the employees Institute and Granta Park Science park. All an initial service frequency of seven buses of the 15,000 new jobs that are being of these proposals will be supported by per hour throughout the day. From the start delivered within the corridor. It is critical in improved bus in the key transport corridors extra buses were needed at peak times. unlocking the development of the new town within Cambridge City. On a more local During 2012 the service frequency was at Northstowe (10,000 new homes and a level the boosting of visitor numbers to the increased to nine buses per hour. Between resident population of around 25,000 when market town of St Ives has been facilitated 7:30 and 8:30 there are now fifteen built out). The first phase of development by the busway. departures from St Ives towards Cambridge at Northstowe will provide 1,500 new The funding for the construction of the to meet demand. Before the busway homes and will be built adjacent to the busway was split 80:20 between opened there were just five buses heading Longstanton park-and-ride site. In future, Government grant and contributions from off down the heavily congested A14 for when the new town is complete, there will new development such as at Northstowe Cambridge in the same time. This early be a dedicated busway loop right through and the southern fringe of Cambridge city. success is underlined by the expansion of the town putting every house within easy Historically public transport infrastructure the St Ives park-and-ride site from 500 to reach of a stop. has often followed development, but 1,000 spaces within two years of the The benefits in journey time and Cambridgeshire County Council wanted to opening of the busway. reliability are attractive to the millions make sure that this important public The busway is operated by two already using the busway and will be key in transport infrastructure was in place as the operators: Stagecoach and local family firm attracting new customers form the start of the developments. Whippet. All the buses are run significant strategic development taking commercially and the operators pay an place in the CGB corridor. The busway Early investment access charge per bus that covers all the services serve two existing railway stations The council therefore committed to operating and maintenance costs of the at Huntingdon and Cambridge, providing borrowing ahead of the receipts from new busway. This means that the busway costs convenient and comfortable alternatives to development to ensure the busway was BRThandbook_2013_p22-23_Cambs1_BRThandbook_p22-23 04/09/2013 11:39 Page 23

23

delivered ahead of the strategic In its first year of operation the Cambridge development. Planning agreements (S106) busway carried 46% more passengers are in place to cover much of this £20m than had been forecast and further planning agreement are in the pipeline. The agreements also cover the cost of the prudential borrowing the county council has undertaken to forward fund the CGB delivery. Cambridgeshire County Council has taken a similar initiative to get the new Science Park Railway Station built and has committed to borrow the money to pay for the station. The council will be repaid by the train operators out of the extra revenue from the additional train passengers. The station is being planned by the same team who delivered the busway. A planning application was submitted in June and if all goes to plan a start on site will be made in 2014 with the station becoming operational at the end of 2015. Current thinking is that the station will be served by a new ten minute frequency service CGB service from either Northstowe or St. Ives. Detailed discussion was necessary to The busway uses a range of Earlier this year the new Medical ensure a design that complemented the technological innovations including Research Centre was opened by HM the aspiration to deliver new housing and smartcard ticketing, comprehensive real Queen at Addenbrooke's Hospital. We employment opportunities and not to time bus information and free-wi-fi on were very pleased that her majesty took the frustrate these opportunities. board the buses themselves. Smartphone quickest route from Cambridge station to The busway is heavily used by cyclists, technology also allows busway passengers the hospital and had her first ride on a pedestrians and equestrians. It accesses to see, in real time, the next service due at guided bus. The pharmaceutical company the picturesque Fen Drayton lakes, which is their local stop. Smartcard means quicker Astra Zeneca recently announced it was also a request stop for busway services. boarding and hassle-free journeys, whereas moving its headquarters to the The access to open space including when wi-fi on board allows commuters to use Addenbrooke's Medipark, citing the walking, running or cycling can be an laptop computers to catch up on e-mail and busway among its many reasons for important contributor to an individual’s well other tasks. choosing Cambridge. Since opening the being. An excellent start to the life of the busway has drawn a wide range of national The busway has three park-and-ride sites busway was capped in October 2012 when and international visitors including from at St Ives and Trumpington the (terminal the county council was awarded the winner China, Sweden and Germany. points of the system) and also at of the ‘Most Innovative Transport Project’ The busway scheme was widely Longstanton. All stops on the guided category for the Cambridgeshire Guided consulted upon prior to the submission of section have cycle parking and high Busway at the 2012 National Transport the application for a Transport and Works specification ticket machines. Awards. n Act Order. Over 2,200 questionnaires were completed and almost 1,800 people attended exhibitions to find out more. Some key design features were changed as a result of this thorough consultation; an excellent example is the reduction to a single track of the guided section in Trumpington to provide the cycleway linking the Trumpington park-and-ride site to Addenbrooke’s Hospital. The county council works tirelessly with a range of key partners in relation to the busway. Key partners include three district councils, the Environment Agency, Network Rail, Addenbrooke’s Hospital Cambridge and bus operators. It was crucial to work with key developers along the route of the busway. Land needed to be secured to Park-and-ride sites serving the allow the implementation of the scheme. busway have already been expanded BRThandbook_2013_p24-25_Cambs2_BRThandbook_p24-25 04/09/2013 11:38 Page 24

Getting the best use out of it|

Alan Brett, director, highways and transportation, Atkins, and Bob Menzies, head of major infrastructure delivery, Cambridgeshire County Council, examine how well the new busway has delivered against its design objectives

he Cambridgeshire Guided Busway Thus it is clear that the busway 85% for London bus users. Linked to the opened on 7 August 2011 with core patronage is significantly exceeding the age profile, 80% of passengers paid a Troutes between Huntingdon, St levels that were forecast. Of particular fare to use th e busway with only 20% Ives, Cambridge City Centre, interest is the immediacy of the travelling on concessionary passes. Addenbrooke’s Hospital and the patronage response upon the busway The income profile of busway users Trumpington park-and-ride site. opening. The on going high level (25%) of also differs markedly from national Cambridgeshire County Council and Atkins year-on-year growth should also be figures for bus users, with 28% of have jointly funded detailed research noted. These high levels of busway busway users who provided income data examining busway usage intended to find patronage should be viewed against a coming from households with a gross out the extent to which the busway has background of lower overall travel annual household income of under delivered the objectives established for the demand and less highway congestion £20,000, 51% from households with scheme. than originally forecast, as a result of the incomes of £20,000-50,000 and 21% The primary function of the busway is economic climate. from household incomes over £50,000. to support the continued economic In contrast to the National Travel Survey, growth of the Cambridge sub-region, the Economic growth, anyone? trip frequency for busway users increases fastest growing economic region in the The table below shows the proportions of with household income, with the highest UK. The busway was designed to enable busway users by the journey purposes of frequencies for those users with bus services to avoid the congestion on commuting, education, shopping and household income in excess of £40,000. the A14 between Huntingdon and other, together with equivalent figures These figures confirm that the busway is Cambridge and enable fast and reliable from the National Travel Survey (for both proving very attractive to users of services that would encourage use of bus and rail) and for bus use in London. working age and to those from the public transport for access to and from The ‘other’ category of trips includes highest income groups. Cambridge, reducing reliance on the car travel related to employers business, and imp roving access to work and leisure and personal business activity, Do car users like it? education. note that for rail the ‘other’ category is The majority of busway users (62%) dominated by business related travel. were found to have a car available for Yes, but is it working? The proportion of commuting trips is their journey, with 48% having a car The patronage forecasts presented at the almost double the proportion for bus available as a driver and 14% as a busway Public Inquiry were: travel nationally an d is similar to the passenger. 80% of users were from a proportion for commuter rail travel. Use household with a car available, compared • 1.75 million passengers in year 1; of the busway for education trips is to 20% for bus users nationally. This • 2.625 million passengers in year 2; relatively high, despite the figures demonstrates that the busway is • 3.5 million passengers in year 3. excluding under 16 year-olds who, for attractive to car users, with the majority legal reasons, were not interviewed. of busway users not being captive to the Monthly patronage for the system has Education trips will be influenced by the bus and thus having made a positive been monitored by Cambridgeshire, this concentration of sixth form education choice to travel using the busway rather has shown that: within Cambridge and the proximity of than by car. the busway to the Regional College. For respondents making the same • Patronage in the first full month of These figures demonstrate the journe y both before and after their use of operation (September 2011) was importance of the busway in economic the busway commenced, 24% reported 209,000 passe ngers; terms, with 60% of users travelling to that they had previously driven, with a • Patronage in year 1 exceeded 2.5 work or education, compared with a further 13% reporting that they car million passengers; national figure of less than 40% using shared or were given a lift. It should be • Patronage in the 12 months to end of the bus for these purposes. noted that multiple responses were June 2013 was more than 3 million The proportion of busway users of permitted as some users make the same passengers; and working age (16-64) is 83%, significantly journey using alternative modes, • Growth in monthly patronage from higher than the national figure of 72% for however the figures suggest that at least June 2012 to June 2013 was 25%. bus users and similar to the figure of 30% of busway users previously BRThandbook_2013_p24-25_Cambs2_BRThandbook_p24-25 04/09/2013 11:38 Page 25

25

travelled by car. A particularly surprising result of the research was that 74% of those car users who had transferred to the busway services and who had previously parked had free parking available at their destination. This car user segment (i.e. those with free parking) has traditionally been assumed to be highly resistant to changing mode away from the car. The detailed analysis of the research shows s ome significant differences between those users accessing the busway services at the halts on the guided busway sections and those at on- street stops. Users of busway stops are characterised by:

• A greater proportion of users in Bob Menzies and Alan Brett the higher income groups; • A greater proportion of • 85% agreed the experience is pleasant surprisingly, younger respondents commuters; because the bus doesn’t stop very particularly appreciated wifi, with 80% • Longer distances travelled to the often; of 16-25 year olds appreciating its stop; • 83% agreed the real-time information availability. • Greater use of car to access the is useful; busway services; and • 81% agreed the busway halts/stop s are In conclusion • Higher car availabili ty. pleasant places to wait; The survey of Cambridgeshire Guided • 78% agreed that the arrival time at Busway users has shown that the busway Whilst these differences will partly their destination is more reliable than has been very successful in achieving the reflect the more rural nature of the using the car; objectives that it was designed to deliver, busway halts, they do indicate that the • 74% agreed the busway is quicker than in particular: busway is helping to make bus travel using a car; more attractive to users in the rural part • 64% agreed the ability to drive and • It is attracting high levels of patronage of the corridor. The characteristics of the park their car at the busway is in excess of those originally forecast, users of the busway halts suggest a useful; and that patronage is continuing to profile that would be more typical of a • 63% agreed the ability to cycle/be grow at a high rate; rail service than a bus service. dropped off at the busway is useful; • The busway is contributing to • 60% agreed the availability of free wifi economic growth in the area by Do users like it? on the bus is useful; attracting high proportions of users The user research suggests positive • 60% agreed appreciated the ability to travelling to work or education; attitudes to the busway. Respondents productively use their time on the bus; • The busway services are proving were asked to state to whether they and attractive to users from the higher agreed or disagreed with a series of • 59% agreed car parking charges income groups, in contrast to national statements, with the following results: encouraged them to use the busway. bus usage; • The busway is attractive to car users, • 91% agreed the busway service is It should be noted that very high with the majority of users having a car comfortable; proportions of users agreed with the available for their journey, again in • 90% agreed the service frequency positive statements about the comfort contrast to national bus usage; suits their travel needs; and quality attributes of the busway. Not • The busway has resulted in significant mode transfer from car to bus, with the Busway journey purpose proportions majority of those users transferring from car having free parking at their Journey Busway services – Busway National travel National travel destination; London bus purpose all stops stops only survey (bus) survey (rail) • The busway halts are proving particularly attractive to the non- Commuting 40% 47% 21% 44% 49% traditional bus market and show a user profile more akin to a rail service; and Education 20% 23% 18% 7% 14% • The great majority of users appreciate Shopping 19% 10% 26% 7% 12% the comfort and quality attributes of the system in addition to the travel Other 21% 20% 35% 42% 25% time and reliability benefits. n BRThandbook_2013_p26-27_BDB_BRThandbook_p26-27 04/09/2013 11:38 Page 26

Legal obstacles to BRT schemes|

a guideway, a new station or a new bridge. Aaron Nelson, a senior associate at Bircham Dyson Bell, In addition to planning consent, a variety describes what lies in wait for a BRT scheme’s developer of other consents may be required. With larger schemes, these can easily involve 20 once he starts to put his vision into practice to 30 different statutory mechanisms – in the case of Cambridgeshire’s busway (in hether you are championing, agreements and/or resolutions by the respect of which we advise), for example, planning, developing or relevant local authority or authorities will the additional consents that had to be Wimplementing a BRT scheme, be needed if they are to be the promoter, addressed included consent for the you cannot escape the legal issues that will committing them to working together in temporary closure of a waterway, inevitably arise. Linear schemes by their progressing that BRT scheme. This is protected species licences, highway very nature necessarily have multiple particularly the case when the scheme diversions and road traffic orders. impacts on public and private rights and, to crosses local authority boundaries – for Assuming planning consent is required, an make matters more interesting, both the example, Bristol’s proposed BRT system, environmental impact assessment will also public highway generally and bus operation on which Bircham Dyson Bell advises, be required. Particularly sens itive issues in particular are highly regulated. So there involves four local authorities. Promoters that arise in the authorisation of BRT are lots of due process and compli ance should also consider how political support schemes are: issues to deal with. (at central and local government level) can be maintained given the lengthy gestation • Compulsory purchase and the need to The preliminaries periods of BRT schemes: the Leigh Busway, establish a compelling case in the public There are many different ways to view the on which we advise Transport for Greater interest legal issues that can arise on BRT schemes Manchester, was authorised in 2005, but • Impacts on open space, conservation but first we need to talk about three construction work did not start until this areas or listed buildings matters that, while not solely ‘legal’ issues, year. Remember that they say a week is a • ‘Fit’ with planning policy should be addressed at the outset of any long time in politics … • Highway and traffic impacts BRT scheme. The first is the need to define • Impacts on third parties, e.g. utilities, clearly what the BRT scheme is, which Authorisation Network Rail, landowners elements are included and excluded (for Once the BRT scheme is defined, funding • Route choice and appropriate example, does the scheme include urban identified (and secured so far as possible) consideration of alternatives realm improvement works?) and, in either and political support is in place, a promoter • Mode choice and appropriate case, why that is appropriate. For publicly- can turn to authorisation. Any BRT scheme consideration of alternatives, e.g. why a funded schemes, at least, this may involve is likely to need some land to be guided bus rather than a light rail, rounds of public consultation, with appropriated or acquired voluntarily or trolleybus or unguided bus? feedback appropriately considered and compulsorily. Even if all necessary land is • Environmental impacts, particularly taken into account. Failure to do so already available for the scheme, planning protected species and habitats, and appropriately exposes a promoter to the consent is likely to be needed for implementation of appropriate danger of legal challenge by way of judicial something, even if the BRT scheme does mitigation review. not involve a substantial development like • Operating powers. The second matter to be addressed is the need to establish a satisfactory Bircham Dyson Bell has provided legal advice to the developers of business case for the scheme, including the Cambridgeshire busway... identifying likely costs, sources of public funding, if required, and assessing future revenue. Funding sources are changing: the Department for Transport’s major scheme funding (the traditional source of funding for larger BRT schemes) has been substantially reduced, with other funding ‘pots’ devolved to local bodies, such as local transport bodies and local enter prise partnerships. Whatever the source, funding needs to be safeguarded or ring- fenced for the scheme so far as possible. The third requirement is the need for clear political support and ‘buy in’ for the developed BRT scheme: appropriate BRThandbook_2013_p26-27_BDB_BRThandbook_p26-27 04/09/2013 11:38 Page 27

27

This raises the additional (and sometimes vexed) question for promoters of whether to seek specific statutory authority for the proposed BRT scheme by obtaining an Order under the Transport and Works Act 1992 or to proceed with a ‘home-brew’ of separate consents: planning permission, compulsory purchase order, traffic regulations orders, listed building consent, etc. There is sometimes an element of mysti que about TWAOs, but it is really rather simple: there is no need to obtain special statutory authority by way of a TWAO or Private Act for a BRT scheme, any more than there is for a rail or light rail scheme. But it is often expedient to do so, particularly where there is a need for compulsory purchase or to over-ride existing (for example, railway) legislation or otherwise to seek special powers or to obtai n statutory protection against claims ... and also advised at the Public Inquiry into Bristol’s proposed BRT scheme in nuisance. The spectre of a public inquiry often looms large in any BRT development smaller highway improvement measures. frequency and fares be ensured? Will there process subject to a TWAO or contentious The nature of the works required will have be smart or joint ticketing arrangements? planning application. This can be a major a bearing on the form of contract that is Who is to be responsible for (and hold undertaking for any scheme promoter – the appropriate. The contract can be for a fixed intellectual property rights in respect of) Cambridgeshire busway inquiry ran for or variable price but, in any case, should branding and publicity? There are a nine weeks, Bristol’s Ashton Vale to specify carefully how any changes to the number of options available to promoters Temple Meads (AVTM) BRT inquiry scheme at the construction stage are to be in this regard, including voluntary (where BDB also advised) for about six dealt with and what impact, if any, that has partnership agreements, quality contracts weeks. However, with a fair wind and on the final price. The contractual dispute and the granting of a concession, and each assuming a sustainable case, a promoter that delayed the opening of has its own strengths and weaknesses. The should emerge with a favourable Cambridgeshire’s busway (on which we nature of the BRT scheme will dictate inspector’s report and, in due course, a are currently advising) highlights the some elements but not others. A bespoke shiny new Order containing all of the importance of getting these matters right. solution, as BDB developed for powers needed to implement the project. Cambridgeshire’s busway, may be Operation required. Procurement and construction The start of operations is the day everyone Once the authorisation process is looks forward to. It represents the fruition Success or failure? underway, the promoter will usually begin of a lot of hard work but, perhaps more Looking (as a lawyer must) at the glass to consider procurement and construction. importantly, also the commencement of a being half empty, BRT schemes, The first key issue here, where a public revenue stream as money starts to flow in particularly if promoted as public sector body is involved in its promotion, is the through the fare box. projects, are most at risk of failure for one potential application of the public But before we get there, there are a of the following reasons: procurement regime, both in respect of the number of legal issues that need to be construction of the system and in respect addressed. Some of these in fact need to • Insufficiently robust business or of its various operational components, for be addressed prior to authorisation when transportation case example, provision and maintenance of defining the BRT scheme itself. For • An inability to secure appropriate vehicles, running services, ticketing and example: how will exclusivity or priority for funding information, operating and maintaining any BRT vehicles over other traffic be ensured? • Disintegration of necessary central or park-and-ride facility, branding and other Will the BRT scheme use the public local government political support intellectual property. Public procurement highway or a private guideway? Will there • Unacceptable environmental impact has its own particular requirements, which be open or restricted access to the BRT • Procedural non-compliance at the must be considered and addressed routes and, if restricted, how will that be authorisation stage, including carefully to ensure compliance. enforced? Does that raise any competition inadequate consultation. Construction can be a major law issues as between operators for which undertaking, for example, construction of approval is required? These pitfalls can be avoided with the 25km of guideway, associated bridge Some operational aspects tend to be right advice and good BRT schemes can be works and park-and-rides in the case of addressed later. For example: how will the reali sed that not only meet but exceed Cambridgeshire’s busway, or a series of desired quality of vehicle, service their forecast patronage. n BRThandbook_2013_p28-29_Hants_BRThandbook_p28-29 04/09/2013 11:37 Page 28

Making buses a better choice|

Hampshire County Council explains how its Eclipse BRT scheme is getting people out of their cars and onto buses

in March 2012, ensuring that the busway would be well maintained for years to come and that the buses used would be less than five years old, conforming to a high specification. The brand surrounding the BRT was also agreed in partnership. Since the launch both parties have worked well together, jointly marketing the service. Gosport is a heavily populated town but its location at the end of a peninsula means that travel options to and from it are limited. Linked to Fareham by the congested A32, before the Eclipse BRT

Hampshire’s Eclipse BRT system opened all local bus services had to use the has been in operation for normal road network and were regularly almost 18 months now caught in traffic congestion. Travel to and he Eclipse Bus Rapid Transit network viable alternative to the congestion from Fareham and Gosport could be slow offers passengers a high quality encountered on the daily commute on the and unattractive. In a nutshell the existing Tpublic transport experience, A32. bus offered no benefit to those who had providing a fast, reliable link between To deliver the project, and provide local other choices. Gosport and Fareham, whilst avoiding the residents with an effective transport link, a The opening of Eclipse BRT has changed A32. Customers like what they see, and section of a disused former railway line was this. People can now use bus and rail passenger numbers have consistently been transformed into a busway connecting services more easily. Eclipse BRT runs high, proving that, when it comes to travel Redlands Way and Tichborne Way, and 12 between Gosport bus station and Fareham between Gosport and Fareham, the Eclipse high-specification vehicles were deployed bus station using a traffic-free road for part really is the best choice. on it. of the journey, and services connect directly In April 2012 phase one of the Eclipse Each Eclipse vehicle is fitted with First’s with Fareham railway station. Journey times BRT network was officially launched, DriveGreen system, which helps deliver are faster, more reliable and the commute is bringing together years of work aimed at better, smoother and more environmentally much simpler. What’s more the high improving public transport links in south sound journeys for customers by specification vehicles, free onboard wifi and Hampshire and encouraging more people encouraging the drivers to improve their infotainment screens offer the customer to make the shift out of their cars to try the driving techniques. The buses also have more – making the bus more attractive than bus. The aim had been to create a reliable, individual leather seats, wood effect the car. convenient and comfortably public flooring, under-seat lighting and For customers with access to a car, transport link between Gosport and infotainment screens. Customers can also Eclipse BRT now offers them something Fareham, providing local people with a access free wi-fi while they are travelling. extra, which makes the commute by bus The infrastructure on the busway is also of worthwhile. The journey is quick and cheap a very high standard, with brand new bus (the £19 First Week Ticket gives you stops with large shelters, comfortable unlimited travel for seven days) and the seating, plenty of lighting, real-time time on board allows them to read, surf the information screens, CCTV and audio web or catch up with the news via the announcements for people with visual onboard infotainment screens. It’s impairments. Other upgraded bus stops financially attractive too: a weekly ticket is along the rest of the route offer customers £6 cheaper than a week’s carpark pass at access to real-time information via QR Fareham railway station. codes within bus stops. Overall the In delivering the Eclipse BRT time was experience for customers using Eclipse is taken to ensure that the service was fully significantly better. accessible. The buses are super-low floor, Hampshire County Council and First offer space for one wheelchair, provide worked closely together to deliver this audio next-stop announcements, and Hampshire County Council project. To formalise the arrangement a shelters similarly offer improved worked with bus operator First to deliver the Eclipse scheme quality partnership agreement was signed accessibility and comfort. All the stops on BRThandbook_2013_p28-29_Hants_BRThandbook_p28-29 04/09/2013 11:37 Page 29

29

High quality information is key to Eclipse’s Eclipse has been designed to get people out of their cars success, Hampshire County Council says and into buses... or on their bikes!

the busway are designed to offer level unveiled all the time, with drivers now development of the scheme. Operator First access to the bus. In July 2013 the Eclipse empowered to resolve any issues on the has also recently nominated it for a UK Bus BRT service received an ‘Excellent Access’ spot, offering customers a free journey Award in the Making the Bus a Better award from the Gosport Access Group and there and then, if it’s needed. Choice category, and Hampshire County Disability Forum. Since its launch in April 2012, the Eclipse Council in partnership with First have been To monitor the effectiveness of Eclipse BRT has won a number of awards, including shortlisted for the National Transport BRT, Hampshire County Council undertook a CILT (Chartered Institute of Logistics and Awards Transport Team/Partnership of the a before and after travel survey to review Transport) Excellence Award for the Year award 2013. n people’s travel habits. This shows that more Eclipse is, its advocates people are using Eclipse BRT to commute say, “the best that public to work, that 88% of people surveyed transport can offer” believe that it’s helped to change the image of public transport, and that 14% of people have made a modal shift from car to the bus since the scheme was launched. Notably, of those surveyed on the bus, 24% of people stated they did have a car that they could have used for the journey, but had chosen not to. In addition to this, work has been done to look at passenger numbers on Eclipse BRT compared to the services it replaced. This shows an increase since the scheme was launched, with more than 1.3 million passenger journeys made as of 19 March. The number of people using public transport to travel between Gosport and Fareham has risen too, by 11.86% overall, while 64% more people now use the Eclipse BRT service than used the services that it replaced. Eclipse BRT is helping to transform perceptions of bus travel. Customers now experience the best that public transport can offer: comfortable, reliable, environmentally-friendly journeys in high- quality vehicles, which make the likelihood of switching from car to bus much more viable. Eclipse BRT has been a resounding success. New initiatives to further improve the customer service experience are being BRThandbook_2013_p30-32_Listings_BRThandbook_p30-32 04/09/2013 11:36 Page 30

Directory. Consultants, suppliers and specialists to the bus rapid transit industry

Aimsun Grant Thornton National Express www.aimsun.com www.grant-thornton.co.uk www.nationalexpress.com Arriva Halcrow Parsons Brinckerhoff www.arrivabus.co.uk www.halcrow.com www.pbworld.com Arup INIT Peter Brett Associates www.arup.com www.initag.com www.peterbrett.com Atkins Instarmac SKM Colin Buchanan www.atkinsglobal.co.uk www.instarmac.com www.globalskm.com Austin Analytics Integrated Transport Planning Stagecoach www.analytics.co.uk www.itpworld.net www.stagecoachbus.com BAM Nutall ITO World Steer Davies Gleave www.bamnuttall.co.uk www.itoworld.com www.steerdaviesgleave.com Bircham Dyson Bell Jacobs Engineering Transdev www.bdb-law.co.uk www.jacobs.com www.transdevplc.co.uk CJB Transport Consultancy Ltd Lothian Buses Trueform www.CJBTransportConsultancy.co.uk www.lothianbuses.com www.trueform.co.uk Cubic Mouchel Vix www.cubic.com www.mouchel.com www.vixtechnology.com Dublin Bus Mott MacDonald Wright Bus www.dublinbus.ie www.mottmac.com www.wrightbus.com First MRM Mclean Hazel www.firstgroup.com www.mrcmh.com To be listed here in future editions Frost & Sullivan MVA Consultancy please contact Daniel Simpson at: www.frost.com www.mvaconsultancy.com [email protected] BRTuk membership.. The following organisations are members of BRTuk. For more information about BRTuk membership visit www.brtuk.org/membership.html or email [email protected]

Advanced Public Transport Systems BV Hampshire County Council SKM Colin Buchanan AECOM Integrated Transport Planning Ltd South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Arriva Ipswi ch Buses Limited Executive Arup Jacobs Engineering UK Limited Stagecoach in Warwickshire Steer Davies Gleave Atkins JMP Consulting Strathclyde Partnershi p For Transport Austin Analytics Keolis (UK) Limited Transport for London Bedfordshire County Council Kizoom TIE Limited Bircham Dyson Bell LLP Lothian Buses Transdev plc Cambridgeshire County Council Luton Borough Council Translink Centro Metro Coventry City Council Transport for Greater Manchester Mott MacDonald Department for Regional Development: Travel West Midlands: National Express MRC Mclean Hazel Ltd Regional Planning and Transportation Group PLC Division MVA Consultancy Trueform Engineering Limited Dublin Bus Parsons Brinckerhoff TTC Transport Planning Elan PTC Peter Brett Associates University of Aberdeen First Reading Transport Limited University of Leeds Grant Thornton UK LLP SEStran Welsh Assembly Government Halcrow Group Ltd SK Transport Planning Ltd Wright Bus BRThandbook_2013_p30-32_Listings_BRThandbook_p30-32 04/09/2013 11:36 Page 31 BRThandbook_2013_p30-32_Listings_BRThandbook_p30-32 04/09/2013 11:36 Page 32