Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
 21/11/2018 - First Bath Bus panel
21/11/2018 - Consultation end - Angel Road
26/11/2018 - TransWilts Board and Members
26/11/2018 - Bath Clean Air consult ends
28/11/2018 - Melksham RUG
28/11/2018 - WECA Scrutiny
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
November 19, 2018, 09:46:25 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[97] Network Rail to abolish station toilet charges in 2019
[60] Four track for Filton Bank - ongoing discussion
[56] Something rather special - near Bristol - 16th Feb 2018
[46] Waterloo closed by engineering over run
[37] Drinking water at stations
[32] Melksham to Oxford - suggestions for the Didcot change
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14]
  Print  
Author Topic: Cambridge Guided Busway - ongoing discussion and updates (merged topic)  (Read 60115 times)
CyclingSid
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 226


View Profile
« Reply #195 on: November 06, 2018, 11:00:19 am »

Presumably like the Fareham - Gosport busway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_East_Hampshire_Bus_Rapid_Transit.

Buses and bicycles only along the old Gosport branch, nice and straight with few crossings. They have to barrier it off at night to keep the racers off.

The used a specific section in the Highways (?) regs so that there can be no services underneath it, so no digging it up. Can't remember which section, could be used elsewhere, although a lot of the Sustrans routes have fibre underneath them to offset the original cost.
Logged
Red Squirrel
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2305



View Profile
« Reply #196 on: November 06, 2018, 11:20:50 am »

It is a funny old game - as this is a busway, albeit an unguided one, it's OK for it to have a level crossing: https://goo.gl/maps/4BkLGz52hn82

A railway, with trains carrying the same number of passengers at the same speed, would presumably require a bridge here costing maybe of £100,000,000. I'm sure this makes sense to someone...
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1619


View Profile
« Reply #197 on: November 06, 2018, 12:50:11 pm »

It's a back to front level crossing though; the barriers close off the busway, not the open-to-all road. And there are standard traffic lights at the junction. Presumably these are the anti-racers barriers that Cycling Sid mentioned.
Logged

Day return to Infinity, please.
Red Squirrel
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2305



View Profile
« Reply #198 on: November 06, 2018, 01:15:08 pm »

...there are standard traffic lights at the junction. Presumably these are the anti-racers barriers that Cycling Sid mentioned.

One would assume so - so the barriers are not part of the 'level crossing' (which, as you say, is controlled by traffic signals) but rather they purport to secure the busway when it is closed.
Logged
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 150


View Profile
« Reply #199 on: November 06, 2018, 07:13:06 pm »

Quote
The used a specific section in the Highways (?) regs so that there can be no services underneath it, so no digging it up. Can't remember which section, could be used elsewhere, although a lot of the Sustrans routes have fibre underneath them to offset the original cost.

From my experience, they get around what is known as the Street Works Code  (the legislation which permits utility undertakers to dig up roads and lay services in them) applying to "non-guided" busways by specifically not making them part of the public highway, but holding them as land assets or leaving them in the ownership of developers subject to rights. One of the consequences is wrangling between the parties as to whether they should be available for use by emergency services.
Logged
CyclingSid
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 226


View Profile
« Reply #200 on: November 07, 2018, 08:28:08 am »

It might be clearer to look at the start of the busway, https://goo.gl/maps/EYD6XCFEQbJ2 although the road signs are confusing. I seem to remember the signs being the same as the previous StreetView image, not having realised they were changeable signs (to busy avoiding being squashed on the Brompton).
The point about them not being part of the public highway might explain why it is not well marked on internet mapping, Google or Bing, and it also took a long time to get on the OS mapping data.
A view of how it related to the old railway line, and the new NCN 224 can be seen at https://wtp2.appspot.com/wheresthepath.htm?lat=50.844928&lon=-1.186316&lz=15&rz=16&lt=Old%2025K&rt=satellite&lov=OSM%20Cycle&rov=None&lgrat=None&rgrat=None.
Logged
froome
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 326


View Profile Email
« Reply #201 on: November 07, 2018, 12:24:01 pm »

Quote
The used a specific section in the Highways (?) regs so that there can be no services underneath it, so no digging it up. Can't remember which section, could be used elsewhere, although a lot of the Sustrans routes have fibre underneath them to offset the original cost.

From my experience, they get around what is known as the Street Works Code  (the legislation which permits utility undertakers to dig up roads and lay services in them) applying to "non-guided" busways by specifically not making them part of the public highway, but holding them as land assets or leaving them in the ownership of developers subject to rights. One of the consequences is wrangling between the parties as to whether they should be available for use by emergency services.

Yes this is the case. If it is created as part of the public highway, utilities have the right to lay their cables or pipes underneath.
Logged
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3035


View Profile
« Reply #202 on: November 08, 2018, 10:38:59 pm »

If it is created as part of the public highway, utilities have the right to lay their cables or pipes underneath.

Its not quite that simple I am afraid.

The right to lay services in a 'street' (not a highway) comes from various Acts, but is regulated by Part 2 of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991.

Section 48 of that Act defines what is meant by a 'street'.  Although a highway is a street but the definition is wider:

Quote
(a)any highway, road, lane, footway, alley or passage,
(b)any square or court, and
(c)any land laid out as a way whether it is for the time being formed as a way or not.

Whether this includes busway I do not know without further research. 
Logged
CyclingSid
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 226


View Profile
« Reply #203 on: November 09, 2018, 09:08:36 am »

There was a specific section quoted on Hantsweb (Hants CC web site) for the original documentation for the busway (presumably since archived), which apparently prevented the laying of services under it. Have tried to find again without success, only that they are extending the busway another mile towards Gosport.
Logged
rogerw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 494



View Profile
« Reply #204 on: November 09, 2018, 09:21:33 am »

There must be a section in the Highways Act which enables highway authorities to prevent the laying of SU's equipment under the carriageway, although I can't recall it off hand.  After all, we don't see BT digging up the M4 (under statutory undertakers are available)
Logged

I like to travel.  It lets me feel I'm getting somewhere.
Red Squirrel
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2305



View Profile
« Reply #205 on: November 09, 2018, 09:55:01 am »

There must be a section in the Highways Act which enables highway authorities to prevent the laying of SU's equipment under the carriageway, although I can't recall it off hand.  After all, we don't see BT digging up the M4 (under statutory undertakers are available)

The M4, like all other motorways and one or two other cases, is a special road as defined by the Special Roads Act of 1949, now part of the Highways Act. Different rules apply.
Logged
Clan Line
Full Member
***
Posts: 97



View Profile
« Reply #206 on: November 09, 2018, 11:28:17 am »

Presumably like the Fareham - Gosport busway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_East_Hampshire_Bus_Rapid_Transit.

The bus seats look nice and comfy !!
Logged
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3035


View Profile
« Reply #207 on: November 09, 2018, 08:57:58 pm »

There must be a section in the Highways Act which enables highway authorities to prevent the laying of SU's equipment under the carriageway, although I can't recall it off hand.  After all, we don't see BT digging up the M4 (under statutory undertakers are available)

The M4, like all other motorways and one or two other cases, is a special road as defined by the Special Roads Act of 1949, now part of the Highways Act. Different rules apply.

Yes they are 'Protected Streets' under Section 61 of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991:

Quote
(a)any highway or proposed highway which is a special road in accordance with section 16 of the Highways Act 1980, and
(b)any street designated by the street authority as protected.

However the Secretary of State can prescribe criteria thatstreet authorities must use in deciding whether to designate a protected street (Section 62)

The guidance in the Code of Practice for the Co-ordination of Street Works and Works for Road Purposes and Related Matters
States that:

Quote
Streets may be designated as protected, only if they serve, or will serve, a specific strategic traffic need, with high and constant traffic flows, and there is a reasonable alternative route in which undertakers can place the equipment, which would otherwise lawfully have been placed in the protected street. This includes services to existing or proposed properties in the street, or trunk supply routes passing through the street.

This also identifies that various features can be protected by other legislation including:

Quote
Priority lanes
These include cycle routes and bus lanes. The Special Designation Description indicates the type of priority lane.

Quote
Transport authority critical apparatus
This is apparatus used, or owned, by a Transport Authority that is critical to the operations of the Transport Authority and if damaged or interrupted could
disrupt or temporarily stop services; for instance damage to high voltage cables supplying power to a rail network would cause its closure and severe inconvenience to their passengers.


However, Section 91 of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 defines a transport authority as:

Quote
(1)In this Part—
(a)“transport authority” means the authority, body or person having the control or management of a transport undertaking; and
(b)“transport undertaking” means a railway, tramway, dock, harbour, pier, canal or inland navigation undertaking of which the activities, or some of the activities, are carried on under statutory authority.


So I am not clear that a busway is a 'transport undertaking'

Logged
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 150


View Profile
« Reply #208 on: November 09, 2018, 11:07:02 pm »

Quote
So I am not clear that a busway is a 'transport undertaking'

Don't worry - I have sat in meetings with staff from Cambridgeshire County Council's highways department and their solicitors discussing a proposed bus link and they have not been certain about its status and how to deal with laying services, and they must be the keenest "bus laners" in the country!
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants