Interesting article on the M4 bus lane
here, which sheds some light on the real reasons it was introduced. It'll be interesting to see the results of its suspension during the trial period, and whether the decision to remove it actually survives following the Olympics.
There are sound reasons for bus priority schemes. If buses could get people into city centres more quickly than cars, more people would use them. And if a single, well-populated bus takes, say, 50+ cars off the road, that benefits everyone using the road (and living near it).
Once it was designated as such, the M4 bus lane was (obviously) never intended for use by local bus routes, but for express coaches travelling into London from Heathrow and beyond. Of course these passengers pay hundreds of pounds a year for their travel - do you really think it's a free service? It was probably easier to also allow taxis to use the lane as well than to introduce legislation specifically excluding them.
Valid points, and well made, however, I own the road, therefore, I do not want buses in my way
One particular example I like to cite regarding bus lanes is Newcastle City Centre (because I live there...). Take the High Level Bridge as an example. Robert Stephenson's beautiful double decked bridge was restored from 2005 to 2008 at huge public expense. Like any other city with a River through it, Newcastle has traffic problems at peak times, and no less than six road bridges and one pedestrian/cyclist bridge crossing it's River, that's not to mention the heavily congested Tyne Tunnel further East of the city.
When the bridge was re-opened in 2008, it was opened only Southbound, out of the city. Fine. Great for easing the 5pm rush hour.
It was opened as a giant, River spanning bus lane. Not fine.
It would be a superb idea, if all the buses leaving Newcastle heading Southbound were using it, but they aren't. Many of them still use the Tyne Bridge, and one of the approach roads to this bridge is actually a bus lane, heavily restricting traffic flow around it, as traffic has to head North then South so as not to breach the bus lane.
It's a great big waste of public money. The bridge took three years to restore as it's girders had become damaged by 100 or so years of vehicles driving over them. So why should the heaviest vehicles on the road only be allowed to use it? Surely this further shortens the life of this amazing bridge.
This isn't in relation to the M4 bus lane, on which, I have been subsequently educated, but still object to, but another valid (IMHO) point regarding unecessary bus lanes. Many of the emptier buses are heavily subsidised, and carry less thn five people at a time. A taxi would be more cost effective, if you want to go down the subsidy route. Of course, that wouldn't work in practice, though.
Since I passed my driving test I have been on ONE regular, public service bus. My old man is a bus driver, and gets free travel, he seldom uses this and prefers for the sake of speed, comfort and practicality, to use the car. I did, however, car share quite a lot when I first started my current job, not optional now due to the travel I now have to undertake.
