Does TfL (or anyone else) try to estimate the value of bus lanes before
installing them? If so, what criteria do they use?

Am I right in thinking London's most expensive bus lane so far was the
one on the M4? Am I right in thinking the consensus now is that it's a
white elephant?

Are there any other very expensive bus lanes in the London area? Have
any been rejected on grounds of cost?

Apart from the £40m they plan to waste putting bus lanes on the
Thames Gateway Bridge, are any multimillion pound bus lanes planned?

Many people have said that the bus lane in Welling was causing traffic
jams so bad that the buses were being delayed. Did they ever do anything
about it?

Has letting left turning traffic use bus lanes been considered? If so,
did they find any good reason not to do so?

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Aidan Stanger wrote:

Does TfL (or anyone else) try to estimate the value of bus lanes before
installing them? If so, what criteria do they use?

I don't know what TfL did, but usually the criteria is passenger
throughput--passengers per mile per hour. Even carpool lanes can, in
certain situations, get much better throughput than an ordinary lane, even
though they might look "empty" to others.
--
Michael Hoffman

Aidan Stanger wrote:

Does TfL (or anyone else) try to estimate the value of bus lanes before
installing them? If so, what criteria do they use?

Am I right in thinking London's most expensive bus lane so far was the
one on the M4? Am I right in thinking the consensus now is that it's a
white elephant?

That's not what studies of this lanes say:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1120542.stm

"It has now been given the government's seal of approval after a case
study showed it had cut rush-hour journey times for both cars and
buses."

AND

http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/pro...lane/index.htm

"Conclusions
The bus lane scheme has met its primary aim set out before the scheme
was installed. The scheme has resulted in time savings during peak
periods for all types of vehicles. On average, each bus is saving 3.5
minutes and each car is saving 1 minute during each peak period.

The general public has a perception that not enough vehicles use the bus
lane. The reasons for the restriction in numbers could be included in
further publicity. The number of vehicles using the bus lane influences
the benefits of the bus lane scheme. If too many vehicles were to use
the bus lane, a bottleneck might reappear where the three lanes are
reduced to two. Therefore, large numbers of other potentially eligible
vehicle types should not be allowed to use the bus lane without careful
study."

There is also a site:
http://www.buspriority.org
which has some case studies.

I happen to know that a LONG time ago when Maggie was King that a
Minister of Transport requested an urgent review of bus lanes in London
because they apparently slowed down his ministerial car.

The person who conducted this review knew that producing the required
answer would mean rapid promotion, but his moral standing meant he
didn't fiddle the statistics and had to wait longer for a promotion.

Jim Chisholm

J. Chisholm wrote:
Aidan Stanger wrote:

Does TfL (or anyone else) try to estimate the value of bus lanes
before installing them? If so, what criteria do they use?

Am I right in thinking London's most expensive bus lane so far was
the one on the M4? Am I right in thinking the consensus now is
that it's a white elephant?

That's not what studies of this lanes say:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1120542.stm

"It has now been given the government's seal of approval after a
case study showed it had cut rush-hour journey times for both cars
and buses."

But what that study (or at least the news report based on it) failed to
answer was how much of the benefit has arisen from changing the speed
limits. Before the bus lane was introduced, the limit was 70 mph on the
3-lane section, then 50 mph on the elevated section. When the bus lane
was introduced, the limit changed to 50 mph (now 60), and 40 on the
elevated section. I suspect that much of the benefit has arisen from
the lower speed limits, for the same reasons that the variable speed
limits on the M25 have improved journey times.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In message , J. Chisholm
writes
Aidan Stanger wrote:

Does TfL (or anyone else) try to estimate the value of bus lanes before
installing them? If so, what criteria do they use?

Am I right in thinking London's most expensive bus lane so far was the
one on the M4? Am I right in thinking the consensus now is that it's a
white elephant?

That's not what studies of this lanes say:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1120542.stm

"It has now been given the government's seal of approval after a case
study showed it had cut rush-hour journey times for both cars and
buses."

As a London taxi driver I think the M4 bus lane is marvellous :-) and so
do most of the overseas visitors and business people using Heathrow, an
important consideration for many companies in deciding to do business in
the Greater London area.

I have to agree the initial idea of starting the lane further along the
M4 was, to say the least, flawed. What happens now is that the old
bottleneck of the 3 in to 2 lanes now moves further back, which gives
some drivers the opportunity to use alternative routes before committing
themselves to the M4. Of course what effect this has on the surrounding
traffic has also to to taken in to consideration.

Mike

--
Mike Hughes
A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England

In message , Aidan Stanger
writes

Are there any other very expensive bus lanes in the London area?

Well, the Kew Bridge bus lane was a total waste of money, and was
removed last year. Rather uniquely, it slowed up the buses as well as
all other road users.

--
Paul Terry

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 17:13:42 +0100, Paul Terry
wrote:

In message , Aidan Stanger
writes

Are there any other very expensive bus lanes in the London area?

Well, the Kew Bridge bus lane was a total waste of money, and was
removed last year. Rather uniquely, it slowed up the buses as well as
all other road users.

But has traffic got faster since it came out?


Rob.
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk

In message , Robert Woolley
writes

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 17:13:42 +0100, Paul Terry
wrote:

Well, the Kew Bridge bus lane was a total waste of money, and was
removed last year. Rather uniquely, it slowed up the buses as well as
all other road users.

But has traffic got faster since it came out?

I don't think the official figures have been released yet, but for those
of us who live in the area there is no doubt that it has.

--
Paul Terry

Rob,

One was built down the hill (westbound) on Streatham Common Northside and
seemed to stuff up all the cars and the buses.
It has now been removed. From my observations off-peak, at least the cars
move quicker now.
Martin J.

"Robert Woolley" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 17:13:42 +0100, Paul Terry
wrote:

In message , Aidan Stanger
writes

Are there any other very expensive bus lanes in the London area?

Well, the Kew Bridge bus lane was a total waste of money, and was
removed last year. Rather uniquely, it slowed up the buses as well as
all other road users.

But has traffic got faster since it came out?


Rob.
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk