|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Bus Lanes
|
Tulfes
Shipmate
# 18000
|
Posted
The jury is out on Liverpool City Council's decision to scrap bus lanes for 9months to ease congestion.
I do see the argument for bus lanes.
However, one thing puzzles me. Why are taxis allowed to use the bus lanes alongside buses and cyclists? A taxi is no more environmentally friendly than a private car or a commercial van.
Posts: 175 | Registered: Feb 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Because taxis are usually considered to be part of the "public transport mobility chain".
One taxi, used regularly throughout the day by many different passengers, is going to be less polluting in both the short and the long term than many individual cars used only occasionally, and sometimes simultaneously for the same journey.
I have also heard the statistic quoted, in a professional transport setting, that one car in three on the road in an urban environment is looking for a parking space, further pushing up pollution and congestion.
[ETA a source for that assertion, see also here]
[ 07. August 2014, 09:44: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
My experience in Liverpool, and elsewhere, is that many taxi journeys are taken with more than one passenger. The same is often not true of private cars. I would expect that on average the passengers/taxi is higher than people/private car. Though, I don't have any numbers on that (though if I had time to Google it I'll probably find some).
A second point is that taxi drivers income depends on them keeping their expenses down. So, with fuel costs rising, there is a strong incentive for them to drive more efficiently. As the vehicle fleet for taxis is renewed I expect there will be a higher uptake of vehicles with fuel saving features (eg: those that automatically cut out the engine when stationary) and hybrids among taxi drivers than the wider population.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tulfes
Shipmate
# 18000
|
Posted
In many cities and communities, the taxis are used by the local drug dealers to ferry themselves around on business. So the drug dealers sail along in the bus lanes while the van driver delivering legitimate supplies to the local pharmacy shops is held up in the normal lanes.
Posts: 175 | Registered: Feb 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Are you suggesting all modes of transport likely to be used by drug dealers are fitted with some sort of speed governor?
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrWaters
Shipmate
# 18171
|
Posted
I do not see the argument to scrap the bus lanes.
Just about every big city in the world has a problem with the congestion. One of the ways to go is to discourage people from using their own cars and use public transport instead. Bus lanes were designed to give an incentive to use buses. One would use bus because it would be faster than driving a car. Without the bus lanes, there is no incentive for the bus. This new policy hits two groups - poor people without cars and people which switched to buses because of this incentive.
All in all this change in policy seems to me as a stupid, short-sighted solution that will discourage people from public transport and make life for the poor even worse. In the end it will cause more traffic.
Taxis are generally acceptable on bus lanes because they almost always carry at least two people. It is just not economical for them to carry only one person during rush hours. It is then rational to expect a taxi driver to take at least one more person aboard. Taxis are easy to catalog, so it's easy to enforce the bus lane policies with registration scanners placed all over the town.
Posts: 80 | From: Aberdeen | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tulfes:
Why are taxis allowed to use the bus lanes alongside buses and cyclists?
They aren't always: certainly in this town there are "bus lanes" which are precisely that.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
I see that Liverpool has bought into the idea of "It is all about the rich. We don't know any ordinary people"
and "Buses are just a socialist plot anyway"
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tulfes:
In many cities and communities, the taxis are used by the local drug dealers to ferry themselves around on business.
I thought they were used by local authority members to deliver redundancy notices.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tulfes
Shipmate
# 18000
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Are you suggesting all modes of transport likely to be used by drug dealers are fitted with some sort of speed governor?
No. I suppose I was just pointing out an absurdity.
As I said in the OP, I'm not against bus lanes. As Baptist Trainfan points out, in some places these are for buses only (and presumably for cyclists too). Taxis should fight for space with everyone else.
Posts: 175 | Registered: Feb 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Well, I got Eutychus' joke. I suppose that these speed governors are some sort of e device to limit the extent to which the dealers can wizz around town. The idea probably goes right back to the days of horse cabs.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tulfes:
Taxis should fight for space with everyone else.
You have completely ignored my assertion that taxis are, for public transport planners, an integral part of the mobility chain.
See, for example:
Taxis: Sustainable mass transit needs sustainable micro transit from the website of the Union Internationale des Transports Publics, the international body for public transport
Taxis are part of the collective public transport chain, a recommendation of the EU public-private Smart Move High Level Group
What Taxis Add to Public Transit, an article linking to research offering statistical evidence that taxis are used as part of a multi-modal journey
and finish up with Global Taxi Schemes and their Integration in Sustainable Urban Transport Systems, an overview paper published on the UN's sustainable development knowledge programme website.
And for the avoidance of doubt, this is what I meant by a governor, also known as a speed limiter.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
in this town there are "bus lanes" which are precisely that.
The hardcore version of the humble bus lane is Bus Rapid Transit, featuring fully dedicated rights of way, often physically separated from other traffic, and especially popular in Latin America. Perhaps that might mollify Tulfes, although many European cities don't have much room for them.
[ 07. August 2014, 11:25: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
I see that Liverpool has bought into the idea of "It is all about the rich. We don't know any ordinary people"
and "Buses are just a socialist plot anyway"
I see you have never been to Liverpool. If they were indeed a socialist plot the denizens of Liverpool would be all for it - it is a famously left leaning city. The spat between the local government and the bus people is that the former thinks the latter are part of a capitalist plot to ever increase bus fares to make profits for shareholders whilst not improving the service. Getting rid of bus lanes is a rather blunt tool to get back at bus companies IMNSHO, but that seems to be the reasoning
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrWaters
Shipmate
# 18171
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
I see you have never been to Liverpool. If they were indeed a socialist plot the denizens of Liverpool would be all for it - it is a famously left leaning city. The spat between the local government and the bus people is that the former thinks the latter are part of a capitalist plot to ever increase bus fares to make profits for shareholders whilst not improving the service. Getting rid of bus lanes is a rather blunt tool to get back at bus companies IMNSHO, but that seems to be the reasoning
It feels stupid to me to abandon a long-term solution to congestion just because the bus system does not work as desired. This short-term solution discourages people from using public transport which is just ridiculous. I do not believe we can afford highways with 12 lanes in the city center and I suspect that is the only way to eliminate congestion in the world where everyone drives a car.
Posts: 80 | From: Aberdeen | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
There is only one long-term solution to road traffic (short of de-population) - non-road public transportation.
Sort of like the one that got scrapped in Liverpool:
Merseytram
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrWaters
Shipmate
# 18171
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
There is only one long-term solution to road traffic (short of de-population) - non-road public transportation.
Sort of like the one that got scrapped in Liverpool:
Merseytram
Worked great in Edinburgh. There is never a one simple solution to a complex problem. Traffic congestion can be only solved by a mixture of public transport means both road and non-road plus accessible bike routes. As little cars as possible is the idea. Bus lanes are crucial in this model.
Posts: 80 | From: Aberdeen | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mrWaters:
There is never a one simple solution to a complex problem. Traffic congestion can be only solved by a mixture of public transport means both road and non-road plus accessible bike routes. As little cars as possible is the idea. Bus lanes are crucial in this model.
I'm all for bus lanes, but I think Britain underinvests in the type of transport infrastructure that's necessary for the long-term. Light rails and trams should be part of the solution. Bike lanes don't help me get home from the airport with luggage, or get my two kids and elderly grandparents to various appointments around town.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
How old are your kids? Very impressed in Amsterdam a few years ago to see the school run being done with this kind of thing.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrWaters
Shipmate
# 18171
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
I'm all for bus lanes, but I think Britain underinvests in the type of transport infrastructure that's necessary for the long-term. Light rails and trams should be part of the solution. Bike lanes don't help me get home from the airport with luggage, or get my two kids and elderly grandparents to various appointments around town.
I dare to say that biggest traffic happens always when people go to work and get home from work. Bikes are great for that. Traffic on weekends is nothing like the Monday afternoon's traffic.
I'm not against the non-road means of transportation. However problem with trains and trams is that they are extremely expensive, and buses with bus lanes can do almost the same job for less. Plus one does not need to close half of the city to prepare for them.
Posts: 80 | From: Aberdeen | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Bike lanes would help if they were dedicated to bikes. If they are mixed with pedestrians then the latter are in danger from objects the same size moving at five times the speed, if they are on normal roads they are mixing it with vehicles many tikes theeir size. Niether is a good option.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mrWaters:
Traffic congestion can be only solved by a mixture of public transport means both road and non-road plus accessible bike routes. As little cars as possible is the idea. Bus lanes are crucial in this model.
And, actually, taxis are going to be part of such a solution too. Which probably means allowing them into bus lanes. If I was going to attend a meeting at Liverpool University I could drive down. Or, I could take the train. It's a short walk up the hill from Lime Street, but if it's pissing with rain (quite likely in Liverpool) and/or I'm carrying a lot of equipment or running a bit late then a taxi is the solution.
Of course, there isn't a dedicated bus/taxi lane up the hill to the university ... but, you get my point.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
How old are your kids? Very impressed in Amsterdam a few years ago to see the school run being done with this kind of thing.
They are theoretical kids, but I actually said kids and grandparents. My nan is not going to sit in a box in front of my bicycle.
The Netherlands has excellent train service, very easy to get around the country without a car.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrWaters
Shipmate
# 18171
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Bike lanes would help if they were dedicated to bikes. If they are mixed with pedestrians then the latter are in danger from objects the same size moving at five times the speed, if they are on normal roads they are mixing it with vehicles many tikes theeir size. Niether is a good option.
This is what I had in mind. However even this will do.
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
The Netherlands has excellent train service, very easy to get around the country without a car.
If you try building a train or tram service in a big and congested city, then you're likely get the same that happened in Edinburgh. I would love to have that in Aberdeen, however I know that well organized bus network, combined with numerous bike-specific lanes, and some taxis should do the trick. Aberdeen is far from that point but at least we still have the bus lanes with enforcement.
Posts: 80 | From: Aberdeen | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by mrWaters:
Traffic congestion can be only solved by a mixture of public transport means both road and non-road plus accessible bike routes. As little cars as possible is the idea. Bus lanes are crucial in this model.
And, actually, taxis are going to be part of such a solution too. Which probably means allowing them into bus lanes. If I was going to attend a meeting at Liverpool University I could drive down. Or, I could take the train. It's a short walk up the hill from Lime Street, but if it's pissing with rain (quite likely in Liverpool) and/or I'm carrying a lot of equipment or running a bit late then a taxi is the solution.
Of course, there isn't a dedicated bus/taxi lane up the hill to the university ... but, you get my point.
Bus lanes mixed with bikes are wrong. Better for cyclists would be mix with pedestrians. Busses are large and can't wait it seems to pass cyclists. Neither combination is sensible.
Bike lanes and bus lanes are more than marks on roadways. Proper infrastrucure costs money. Mostly cars have the clout in most places. There are exceptions as noted.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
I see that Liverpool has bought into the idea of "It is all about the rich. We don't know any ordinary people"
and "Buses are just a socialist plot anyway"
I see you have never been to Liverpool. If they were indeed a socialist plot the denizens of Liverpool would be all for it - it is a famously left leaning city. The spat between the local government and the bus people is that the former thinks the latter are part of a capitalist plot to ever increase bus fares to make profits for shareholders whilst not improving the service. Getting rid of bus lanes is a rather blunt tool to get back at bus companies IMNSHO, but that seems to be the reasoning
Not having privileged insight into the mind of our more-new-labour-than-socialist Mayor I find the decision perplexing. One of the problems is that although Liverpool has some fine wide boulevards (dating from the tramway age), some of the major routes into the centre are too narrow for consistent bus lanes anyway.
Another, which seems to me is more of a priority, is the chaotic deregulated bus system. The local transport authority (unlike Transport for London) has no power to decide routes and fares. Although there are county-wide discount and season tickets available on all buses and trains, the individual bus companies all offer in addition their own rival schemes. And unlike in central London, or in most continental cities, the driver also collects fares and gives change, which creates yet more congestion. We urgently need a unified system and something like the Oyster card (which was trailed here a few years ago but appears to have run up against opposition from the bus companies.)
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrWaters
Shipmate
# 18171
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by mrWaters:
[This is what I had in mind.
And what's that on the bridge in the distance...?
Photo is from Chicago, their rapid transport system started operating in 1892. It costs a fortune to build and buses with bus specific lanes can do almost the same job.
It costs money to build bike-specific lanes, however the productivity loss caused by congestion is a much greater cost. Plus lane like this can't cost a fortune, however it requires someone to plan the traffic carefully.
Posts: 80 | From: Aberdeen | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
MrWaters - just to be clear, are you opposed to any solutions outside of more buses/bus lanes, or bike lanes?
I'm saying a mix including light rail/tram along with suburban rail, cycling, etc. works in a lot of cities. I'm not sure what you object to in that point, but perhaps you don't object to it at all and we're speaking at cross purposes.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Because taxis are usually considered to be part of the "public transport mobility chain". ....
Unfortunately not. That's the reason for public consumption, but the actual reason is that tax-drivers are highly unionised, most large urban councils are under Labour Control, and Labour councillors do what taxi-drivers tell them.
That's also why the licensing arrangements give each local lot of taxi-drivers a monopoly of picking up within their own authority's area - notwithstanding that means that if the journey is into an adjoining authority's area, the journey back is always empty.
Keen though I am on trams, Seeking Sister, they aren't non-road public transportation.
Liverpool is the only UK city that ever had this - which is non-road. The Liver Building in the background proves it isn't Chicago. Am I the only shipmate who travelled on it?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrWaters
Shipmate
# 18171
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
MrWaters - just to be clear, are you opposed to any solutions outside of more buses/bus lanes, or bike lanes?
Considering the costs and how the current tram projects worked out. I do not believe that trains/trams are cost effective. Maybe at some point in the future, however right now the costs to the taxpayer and necessary road closures, make their construction undesirable. At the end trams work almost identically to buses (example is Warsaw with both means of transport).
Posts: 80 | From: Aberdeen | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tulfes
Shipmate
# 18000
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Because taxis are usually considered to be part of the "public transport mobility chain". ....
Unfortunately not. That's the reason for public consumption, but the actual reason is that tax-drivers are highly unionised, most large urban councils are under Labour Control, and Labour councillors do what taxi-drivers tell them.
That's also why the licensing arrangements give each local lot of taxi-drivers a monopoly of picking up within their own authority's area - notwithstanding that means that if the journey is into an adjoining authority's area, the journey back is always empty.
Keen though I am on trams, Seeking Sister, they aren't non-road public transportation.
Liverpool is the only UK city that ever had this - which is non-road. The Liver Building in the background proves it isn't Chicago. Am I the only shipmate who travelled on it?
In most, maybe all, large UK cities the taxi industry is in the control of organised crime: the drug runners, the gun runners, the people who run the city's prostitution business.
Posts: 175 | Registered: Feb 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
How old are your kids? Very impressed in Amsterdam a few years ago to see the school run being done with this kind of thing.
They are theoretical kids, but I actually said kids and grandparents. My nan is not going to sit in a box in front of my bicycle.
...
Well, no, you'd need a rickshaw for her and that'd be too much to ask, I agree. Buit presumably the grandmother and theoretical kids don't always go around together everywhere, do they? Hence the suggestion. What you could reasonably have pointed out, though, is that for cycling really to be the default urban transport choice that it should be, we need a huge cultural shift which would have to be expressed in (or as i would hope led by) some powerful shifts in both traffic engineering and traffic law- for example, establishing a presumption, as I believe they have ion the Netherlands, that in a collision between a motor vehicle and a cyclist the motor driver is at fault. (This would also help deal with my other bete noire, apart from drivers who don't think the road is the place for cyclists, which is cyclists who don't think the road is the place for cyclists.)
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tulfes:
In most, maybe all, large UK cities the taxi industry is in the control of organised crime: the drug runners, the gun runners, the people who run the city's prostitution business.
And your evidence for this remarkable statement is...?
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tulfes
Shipmate
# 18000
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by Tulfes:
In most, maybe all, large UK cities the taxi industry is in the control of organised crime: the drug runners, the gun runners, the people who run the city's prostitution business.
And your evidence for this remarkable statement is...?
I have spent the last 30 years working in law enforcement in a large UK city.
Posts: 175 | Registered: Feb 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Liverpool is the only UK city that ever had this - which is non-road.
Well, the Liverpool Overhead Railway was indeed unique - but there are lots of "ordinary" railway lines built on continuous viaducts (such as the London & Greenwich Railway, still open and the very first railway line in London).
Of course, you could always follow the example of Wuppertal in Germany - for much of its course the monorail is suspended over a river. It is for you to decide whether its utility and fascination outweigh its ugliness ...
[ 07. August 2014, 14:52: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Because taxis are usually considered to be part of the "public transport mobility chain". ....
Unfortunately not. That's the reason for public consumption, but the actual reason is that tax-drivers are highly unionised, most large urban councils are under Labour Control, and Labour councillors do what taxi-drivers tell them.
Your answer is UK-specific, and skips lightly over the international wodge of references I posted upthread. The world's international authority on public transport and a whole bunch of other people agree with me.
The issue of whether the taxi closed shop should give way to private-hire drivers hailed using smartphone apps is a vexed but separate one.
Similarly, Liverpool's astounding problems with deregulated bus companies have no bearing on whether, other things being equal, in public transport theory, taxis should use "bus lanes" that are anything other than fully dedicated rights of way for buses only, as in Bus Rapid Transit, which is perhaps best thought of as an aboveground metro system without rails.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tulfes:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by Tulfes:
In most, maybe all, large UK cities the taxi industry is in the control of organised crime: the drug runners, the gun runners, the people who run the city's prostitution business.
And your evidence for this remarkable statement is...?
I have spent the last 30 years working in law enforcement in a large UK city.
So my tongue-in-cheek comment upthread was not so wide of the mark, then?
If you frame the problem thus, the best thing to do would be to ban taxi services altogether, with the two-birds-with-one-stone benefit of removing organised crime's wheels and as a bonus, removing all those pesky taxis from bus lanes.
Seen thus, the issue of whether it makes sense to have taxis sharing bus lanes from a public transport theory point of view goes right out of the window.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Similarly, Liverpool's astounding problems with deregulated bus companies have no bearing on whether, other things being equal, in public transport theory, taxis should use "bus lanes" that are anything other than fully dedicated rights of way for buses only, as in Bus Rapid Transit, which is perhaps best thought of as an aboveground metro system without rails.
No, but the problems with deregulated bus companies (which may be 'astounding' but are no more so in Liverpool than anywhere else in the UK outside London) show up the basic problem of urban transport in the UK which is lack of co-ordination, lack of long-term vision, criminal neglect of resources. Liverpool has the potential for a comprehensive metro system; there are two disused rail tunnels which could revolutionise city transport at a fraction of the cost of Crossrail. But no-one is in a position to grasp the nettle except national politicians who can only see as far as the next election.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
But no-one is in a position to grasp the nettle except national politicians who can only see as far as the next election.
Or can't see further than the M25.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
London has trams from Wimbledon to East Croydon, and overhead railways for some of the DLR routes, and a cable car to cross the Thames, but the cycle routes are "interesting", the C2 is not a joy and a delight and I agree with no_prophet that joint bike and bus lanes are not wonderful.
(Sheffield and Nottingham also have trams, and the Nottingham tram service is being run out towards Derby, but is held up around HS2)
I'd also query the drug and prostitution racket assertion for taxi cabs in London having mentally reviewed the cabbies I know. It may be true for some, but I can't believe all taxis are tied into crime.
Isn't the deregulation of the buses another legacy of Thatcher?
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Isn't the deregulation of the buses another legacy of Thatcher?
There's a difference between deregulation in the sense of opening up to competition and a free-for-all.
In France most large town and city bus services are run by private operators (e.g. giants such as Keolis), but under the terms of their agreement they still have to comply with obligations such as designated routes, stops, etc. and agree a fare structure with the territory in which they operate. If this is markedly different in the UK, I'd be interested to see some evidence.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrWaters
Shipmate
# 18171
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Isn't the deregulation of the buses another legacy of Thatcher?
Yes it is (1985's Transport Act). Local bus operator from Aberdeen was privatized and gradually transformed into the First Group (a huge transport company). First buses are just awful right now, additionally public transport in Aberdeen as a whole is fairly bad.
Funnily enough there were trams in Aberdeen until 1958, when council retired all trams in a huge fire. Interesting way of doing things.
Posts: 80 | From: Aberdeen | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Poor though bus services are now, if it's possible to imagine such a thing, the situation before deregulation in 1985 was even worse.
The system was a stitch up. The unions supported it because it meant a stable job market for their members. The operators loved it. They were large, stodgy and complacent because they could keep anyone else from muscling in on their patches. The position on route licences was so rigid and antiquarian that they always had an answer to any of the public as to why nothing could ever be changed or improved.
The public meanwhile got a crud service because it wasn't being run for their benefit. They were the last group of people that anyone involved in the industry was in the least bit interested in - something which is still a fundamental problem.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
In France most large town and city bus services are run by private operators (e.g. giants such as Keolis), but under the terms of their agreement they still have to comply with obligations such as designated routes, stops, etc. and agree a fare structure with the territory in which they operate. If this is markedly different in the UK, I'd be interested to see some evidence.
It is very different, except for London, where TfL has the same sort of overall control as seems to be the case in France. Elsewhere you have the crazy system of rival companies running competing buses along the same routes, with different fares structures and incompatible tickets. Companies cherry pick the popular routes (our nearest bus stop has a bus every three minutes or so, mostly half-empty), while areas away from the major arteries have to make do with infrequent services funded by the limited amount the local authority has available for subsidy.
On the other hand, most rural small towns and many villages in England and Wales (not sure about Scotland) have at least some form of public transport. I get the impression that rural buses in France are as rare as hen's teeth.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tulfes:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by Tulfes:
In most, maybe all, large UK cities the taxi industry is in the control of organised crime: the drug runners, the gun runners, the people who run the city's prostitution business.
And your evidence for this remarkable statement is...?
I have spent the last 30 years working in law enforcement in a large UK city.
Well then, don't keep us in suspense - what's your evidence? With that much experience, you must have access to very convincing evidence indeed.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mrWaters:
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
MrWaters - just to be clear, are you opposed to any solutions outside of more buses/bus lanes, or bike lanes?
Considering the costs and how the current tram projects worked out. I do not believe that trains/trams are cost effective. Maybe at some point in the future, however right now the costs to the taxpayer and necessary road closures, make their construction undesirable. At the end trams work almost identically to buses (example is Warsaw with both means of transport).
See Toronto, Canada, and you will learn the difference between a bus and streetcars. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Streetcars (trams in other jurisdictions) have 2.5 times the passenger capacity of buses and twice the acceleration too. Electric motors accelerate faster than diesel engines do. Plus there is the advantage of the electric running (from nuclear and hydro in Ontario).
Of course, the limiting factor is traffic speed, but that's not an issue for streetcars as they are designed to run in medium-to-high density areas that need more capacity than buses but which don't merit a subway line.
Toronto has expanded its system (it never scrapped it in the first place, it's been in place for 120 years) in the last 20 years and the new services have been popular, well received and revenue-positive.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Macrina
Shipmate
# 8807
|
Posted
Despite the fact I am now very far from it I grew up in Nottingham and have always found their transport system to be integrated and well thought out. I can't imagine the nightmare that 4+ bus companies competing in the same area must cause for commuters.
On another note I am a cyclist, probably commute about 200km a month aside from little trips elsewhere. I really firmly believe in dedicated cycling infrastructure to reduce accidents between drivers and cyclists. I cycle up and down a bit of a blackspot for it every time I go to and from work and it can be a bit hairy. Christchurch has an awesome oppurtunity to put in some world class facilities. I hope it seizes it.
Posts: 535 | From: Christchurch, New Zealand | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Elsewhere you have the crazy system of rival companies running competing buses along the same routes, with different fares structures and incompatible tickets.
Who is this supposed to benefit, and why does it persist? Don't blame the EU, because we're in the EU here and don't have anything like that.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
