Cambridge Guided Busway - ongoing discussion and updates (merged topic)

[whole diary]

[CyclingSid]

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.

[Red Squirrel]

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...

[Bmblbzzz]

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.

[Red Squirrel]

...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.

[eightonedee]

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.

[CyclingSid]

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^▸ (Ordnance Survey) 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.

[froome]

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.

[ellendune]

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:

(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. 

[CyclingSid]

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.

[rogerw]

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)

[Red Squirrel]

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.

[Clan Line]

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

The bus seats look nice and comfy !!

[ellendune]

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:

(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:

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:

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

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:

(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'

[eightonedee]

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!

[Umberleigh]

I finally got to travel along th infamous mis-guided busway from Cambridge to St Ives in September 2017. I had previously worked contracts in the area during 2004-6 and so I had some background as to how contentious losing the existing mothballed railway was.

On the plus side, the service was cheap, very frequent and ran until midnight, (probably not something a rail operator would have offered if we are honest).

On the negative side, the bus seating was cramped and the bus itself so low down that you could see precious little of the surrounding countryside.

But what most puzzled me was the need for the hugely expensive guidance system, given that we travelled through flat and broad countryside. A new road with a central barrier would have suited just fine, as would an enforced speed limit of 60mph