AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Buses Against the Traffic Flow

23rd August 1963, Page 58
23rd August 1963
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 58, 23rd August 1963 — Buses Against the Traffic Flow
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

By F. K. MOSES

0 NE hears constant references in bus operating circles of the need for priority to be given to the bus in our city streets. Yet what is being done about it in practical measures? The answer, alas, is—precious little! Haggling goes on between the operators and traffic engineering departments, one-way street systems are introduced which take passengers miles out of their way, and the delays to services continue to grow.

Mr. C. T. Humpidge, speaking at the Public Transport Association conference this year, said: "We must constantly present the case for priority to be given to public transport; buses should in some cases be allowed to go where cars are forbidden, or run against the normal flow of traffic. or thcy alone should be allowed to make right-hand turns." Mr. Humpidge cited the example of the Piccadilly diversion in London, where west-bound buses now take an extra two minutes on their journey, drop passengers out of their way. and cost London Transport an extra £60.000 a year. He then went on to mention the one-way scheme in the Bond Street area, where

north-bound buses on two services are allowed to turn left from Piccadilly into Berkeley Street, which is one-way only for south-bound traffic at this point.

However, the lead in this direction is being given by America and some of the Continental countries. As far back as 1956 a transit (or reserved) lane for buses was introduced in Nashville, Tennessee, and, following the success of this experiment, an experimental lane was introduced on Washington Street, Chicago, in the summer of the same year. The cities of Hamburg, Milan and Rome also employ reserved lanes for buses, Milan having a total of approximately two miles. 750 yards. Most of these lanes are in the same direction as the traffic, but some of the lanes in Milan and all those in Rome are against the traffic, while Milan also allows taxis to use the special lanes.

Research at Chicago has provided some interesting figures. During the 12-hour period of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on a typical weekday, approximately 15,000 vehicles enter the central business area of Chicago via Washington Street. Of these vehicles, 757 are buses carrying approximately 19.300 passengers. Ninety buses an hour pass along this street during the peak period. Since the introduction of the reserved lane. an improvement of two minutes running time has been achieved between Wacker Drive and State Street (the first six blocks of the transit lane section) amounting to a saving of three vehicle hours during the peak hour.

The transit lane in Chicago has been reserved in the centre of the carriageway, and special loading platforms erected for passengers at the main stops. This means that all passengers have to cross part of ad to reach the bus stop, a return to the position in tram The argument in favour of this is the same one put rd by the tram defenders—namely, if passengers are set at the kerb, 50 per cent of them will probably cross the width of the road to reach their ultimate destination, as t 100 per cent crossing half the road, so that the risk is ally increased with centre-road operation.

cre a one-way street system is employed, however, as is ase in Washington Street, there is the opportunity of ig the buses in a kerbside lane against the traffic flow, 1y allowing buses to set down at the kerb. This system ployed in Rome, and also in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. laltimore. Objections to such a system would obviously from the owners of business premises along the route, would virtually be excluded from parking outside their ses. It then becomes a question of priorities, the loaded :oring on numbers alone. Wheniew developments are made to :ss areas, there must always be :ess from the rear with adequate ig space to leave the highway which would materially assist traffic schemes.

haps the boldest experiment so rah special lanes is one now ting in Brooklyn (Livingstone ) and Staten Island (Victory , New York. where three years king led to the establishment of a reserved kerb-side lane for buses only from May 20, this year. Whilst the lane is only reserved during the rush hour (between 7 and 9 a.m., and the opposite side of the road from 4 to 7 p.m.) the strictest measures are enforced at these times. Any vehicle parked in the special lane during these hours will be towed away (minimum " charge " for this "

service" is approximately £3) and the driver will receive a stiff fine, and licence endorsement. Anyone caught driving in the reserved lane will also receive a traffic summons, again leading to a stiff fine and licence endorsement. Under the new British regulations one would only need to be caught three times to be disqualified from driving.

British bus operators would do well to watch the results of this American experiment. If it is successful it will be extended to some of the more congested transit streets of New

York. Incidentally, it is a " tit-for-tat " experiment, and buses are not allowed to leave the special lanes during restricted hours, except to pass a disabled vehicle.

It may be argued that the New York measures are too drastic. The answer to this is that priority has again been taken into consideration. The numbers of passengers entering the downtown area, irrespective of type of conveyance, have been taken into consideration, and of course the bus scores "hands down." As soon as the passengers per hour in one form of transport reaches 1,500, that form is allowed priority. And that form of transport is, of course, the public service vehicle. One has the feeling that there is a definite form of class distinction in this country, and that the motorist is a class above the bus passenger, which is all wrong.

Now let us consider the Berkeley Street venture. When I first went down there to observe the London experiment, I rather expected to find a bold yellow or white line down the centre of the road, with the north-bound side clearly marked "buses only ", and a "cross this line if you dare" attitude, as in New York. Instead I found that the actual reserved bus lane is separated from the south-bound traffic by three temporary pyramids with " keep left signs on. each side, and a flashing beacon on the top to warn motorists coming down the street that something is happening. The pyramids leave room for two lanes of south-bound traffic—a slight squeeze, especially with the inevitable kerb-side parking just outside the lane, which, surprisingly, is legal at this point.

There is room on the opposite side of the road for two northbound bus lanes, A bus stop is situated in the reserved section, and serves routes 25 and 32. There is room for a bus which need not wait to pass another at the stop and this proved an

advantage the evening I was there when four No. 25 buses arrived within half a minute.

The only notification of a reserved bus lane is the appendix in very small letters attached to the "No Left Turn" sign in Piccadilly which reads "Except Buses" and the similar, and even smaller, afterthought across the "No Entry" sign at the entrance to the street. Ail other traffic wishing to turn north at this point uses the L-shaped Stratton Street, emerging into Berkeley Street about half-way along.

Furthermore, local traffic is, allowed to come south along Berkeley Street, and then turn right across the exit from the special bus lane into Mayfair Place to set down passengers. This reduces the length of the actual bus lane to less than 100 yards, and leads to alarming incidents where cars intending to turn right are confronted by a bus emerging from the lane. A taxi-rank has been retained in the centre of the road just north of Mayfair Place, which further complicates the issue. Despite "No Waiting", "No Loading" and " No Unloading" signs on the hoods over now defunct parking-meters, cars and taxis continue blithely to swing over to the wrong side of Berkeley Street, blocking the proper exit from the bus lane.

During two hours in the afternoon peak period, I observed three taxis stop on the wrong side of the street whilst buses were loading at the stop. On one occasion a bus pulling away from the stop met a taxi parked outside Cooks, just north of Mayfair Place, and a second taxi parked in the aforementioned central rank prevented the bus from swinging to the right. The bus driver pulled straight ahead and stopped about six inches away from the front of the offending taxi, which then had to reverse. Again the decision to be made is the one of priority—individuals in cars and taxis, or a bus-load of peakperiod passengers returning home from work. And the decision must be made soon.

I understand that the whole experiment in Berkeley Street depended on taxis being able to stop and set down there. Does the paying of a high fare to travel by taxi buy the privilege of being set down at the door of one's destination, irrespective of all other road users? Apparently it does, and so the motorist will claim the right to stop at the door as well because he has paid his 115 for a road-fund licence. The continuance of the southward right-turn into Mayfair Place should justify a complete prohibition of parking, however briefly, in the block adjacent to Cooks. It is a very brief walk from Mayfair Place to the point where taxis and cars persisted in stopping.

On several occasions the vehicle outside Cooks was a private car, with no sign of the owner. Almost throughout the time a42 I was present, there was a car double-bunked opposite the entrance to Mayfair Place, which led to bunching of the southbound traffic. Obviously stricter measures are required on the part of the police and traffic departments, and should be enforced, if only to give the experiment a fair trial.

Despite all the drawbacks, however, London Transport feels that the experiment has been a success. A two-day census and observation showed that 7,500 passengers a day were being carried over this experimental section. As for the effect on motorists of buses turning left at a " No Left Turn" sign, only one car followed a bus round the turn in two days.

It should be remembered also that this is not the first privilege turn for buses in London. Buses have for some time been able to turn left at Victoria to reach the bus station on the railway station forecourt. All other traffic here moves in the opposite direction. A similar movement is in Birmingham, outside Snow Hill railway station, where buses on the joint services from Dudley and West Bromwich have inherited from the trams the loading space in front of the station. Again they move opposite to the flow of other traffic, as can be seen in the illustration at the foot of page 56.

Obviously the layout of many towns and cities precludes the operation of bus lanes on the scale of Chicago, but where such opportunities do exist, they are not being taken. It is not beyond the imagination of road traffic engineers to design one-way systems in parallel streets so that buses can operate the opposite way. The Chicago experiment illustrates the saving in time which accrues from such schemes, helping the flow of other traffic as well by keeping important bus stops outside the normal traffic stream. The movement is growing.

Meanwhile, the London experiment illustrates what can be done in a smaller way when traffic diversions are introduced. If buses had followed the remaining traffic along Stratton Street the first convenient place for a bus stop would be Berkeley Square, which is, in fact, the second stop after leaving Piccadilly. The lesson of the Piccadilly one-way scheme and the extended diversion of west-bound buses has led London Transport to fight for other priorities such as Berkeley Street. When a lengthy traffic diversion in Ilford comes into operation shortly, buses will be allowed a right-turn excluded to other traffic, to prevent passengers being taken out of their way. If the bus does not take passengers where they want to be, they will find other means, car owners taking their vehicle to add further to the congestion.

Finally, to return to the New York experiment. Even if the reserving of complete lengths of kerbside lanes for buses is considered too drastic, surely it is not asking too much to reserve stopping places, excluded to all other traffic, at least at peak periods, and preferably, all day. Only about half of the local authorities in the London area agree to the marking of bus stops on the road at all—let alone the prohibition of other traffic from stopping places. The bus must be given the priority entitled to it.


comments powered by Disqus