London Councils Transport and
Environment Committee
London Bus Priority Network Item No: 12
Report by: Gordon Hayward Job title: Director of Environmental &
Leisure Services, LB Bromley
Date: 15 March 2007
Contact Officer: Nick Lester
Telephone: 020 7934 9905 Email: nick.lester@londoncouncils.gov.uk
Summary: The agreed TEC Transport Expenditure Priorities state that "London
Buses' criteria for providing bus services need better public
understanding and buy-in".
This report looks at how boroughs could work with London Buses and TfL
as a Partnership to achieve this objective and how such a Partnership
could help form a Strategic Policy for the movement of people throughout
the Capital for the next ten years.
The report also sets out how boroughs’ have dealt with improvement
measures for buses through the London Bus Priority Network (LBPN), its
achievements over the past 12 years as well as its future role as the
leading Partnership for scheme delivery in London.
Committee are recommended to agree that discussions take place with
Recommendations:
TfL/London Buses to review the Terms of Reference of the Bus Priority
Partnership so that the new Partnership would:
1. assist London Buses' criteria for providing bus services to acquire
a better public understanding and buy-in;
2. develop an Action Plan for the delivery of improved infrastructure
along the Bus Corridors;
3. agree minimum standards for buses using these facilities.
London Bus Priority Network London Councils TEC - 15 March 2007
Agenda Item 12, Page 1 of 6
Background
1. Outside London, Government wishes to give Passenger Transport Authority and
Executives (PTEs) more say over local bus services with the formation of Bus Quality
Partnerships. However, the first Statutory Quality Partnership Scheme to be made in
England under the powers given by the Transport Act 2000 has only recently been
introduced by the South Yorkshire PTE. This Partnership follows the expected pattern
whereby the Council and the Transport Executive/Authority provide new infrastructure
facilities such as bus lanes and accessible bus stops and in return, the Transport
Executive and Council specify minimum standards for buses using these facilities. These
would include CCTV cameras for passenger safety, high standards of presentation and
cleanliness within the buses. This is seen as a way forward to deliver better bus
services.
2. However, the situation in London is very different to the rest of the UK. The GLA Act sets
a clear statutory framework regarding bus service provision and there are well
established mechanisms for bringing this about. These mechanisms include statutory
consultation and dialogue with key stakeholders such as the boroughs on local needs
and aspirations. There is also a statutory framework governing the provision of bus
priority measures which have their genesis in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy and
Borough LIPs.
3. What appears to be missing is an overarching governance that that brings the
stakeholders together so that London can better work together to form a Strategic Policy
and delivery process for the movement of people throughout the Capital for the next ten
years.
4. Over the past twelve years, London boroughs have provided improvements to the
infrastructure through the London Bus Priority Network (LBPN). In some areas there
have been attempts to introduce minimum standards for buses using these facilities but
these have been as a result of other programmes within London Buses rather than an
agreed partnership arrangement.
5. There is a view in some boroughs that TfL and London Buses’ Network Planners are
extremely reluctant to listen to requests for bus services to be extended and/or altered to
take account of local needs.
6. If there is to be a move towards a “better public understanding and buy-in" then there
has to be an increased involvement by the boroughs in the development of bus routes
and bus policy in general.
The LBPN
7. The LBPN was the first technical subject with a single agenda to be taken on by all 33
London boroughs on a pan London basis. This allowed a co-ordinated approach to bus
priority and provided a London-wide strategy that all boroughs could follow.
8. A management structure was put in place that allowed the boroughs to retain their
independence but at the same time provide a co-ordinated approach and effective
working on the project.
London Bus Priority Network London Councils TEC - 15 March 2007
Agenda Item 12, Page 2 of 6
9. It was agreed that one borough – Bromley – should lead the project for the whole of
London but for ease of management, London should be divided into five sectors – each
with a co-ordinating "lead" authority – Newham in the North East, Barnet in the North
West, The City in the Centre, Bromley in the South East and Richmond in the South
West.
10. The project was allocated a total of £2.5 million for study and design work during
1994/95. Since that time an annual package bid produced and submitted by Bromley on
behalf of all 33 boroughs has resulted in around £180 million.
11. By the end of March 2001, 100% of the 865km network had been studied and it was
agreed that the LBPN should be extended to cover all the borough roads where buses
travel.
12. Work on whole bus routes began in 2000, bringing together all the agencies involved
with bus priority in an attempt to co-ordinate their programmes to provide holistic
approach.
13. This meant looking at pedestrian crossing points, bus shelters, cleanliness of the bus
and stops, safety, pre-journey information, access to bus stops and any other aspect
that would make the bus journey more attractive.
14. A total of 60 key bus routes were selected for detailed examination to bring bus priority
on these routes.
Achievements
15. On these selected routes and by the end of March 2003 108 new bus lanes were
installed, 84 existing bus lanes were extended in length and a further 40 had an increase
in their hours of operation. 370 signal junction received signal timings revisions and
improvements of which 146 received substantial physical modifications with over 50
junctions receiving pedestrian safety improvements. 25 of the routes had low-floor fully
accessible buses. 1800 bus stops have shelters and 981 have Countdown real time
information signs.
16. The annual total passenger journeys on these routes from May 1999 to April 2000 were
165 million. By the end of March 2003 this had increased to 201 million.
17. By the end of March 2006 over 5,000 bus priority schemes have been introduced on
borough roads through the LBPN Partnership.
London Bus Priority Network London Councils TEC - 15 March 2007
Agenda Item 12, Page 3 of 6
Current Position
18. The LBPN continues to deliver bus priority schemes across London and for 2006/2007 a
programme of about £20 million of schemes is well under way. For 2007/08 a further £20
million has been allocated. All of these schemes have been developed by the boroughs
to meet local needs but with the confidence that the LBPN Partnership provides to bring
about a strategic impact on bus services in London.
The Next 10 Years
19. There is a need now to look at how the LBPN should develop over the next 10 years
taking account of predictions in travel demand as well as growth in both population and
employment.
20. Forecasts show that by 2016:
population will increase by 11% - 1,000,000 extra residents
employment will increase by 14% - 800,000 additional jobs
21. In the past 10 years, travel demand and distance travelled in London has risen. This
growth has been mainly in the contra peak, outside peak hours, during the evening and
spreading to local roads.
22. Forecasts show that by 2016:
car trips will increase by 5%
public transport trips will increase by 25%
vehicle delay will increase by 28%
23. Currently over 6 million trips are made each weekday on London’s 700 bus routes. By
2016 this figure is expected to rise to 7 million.
24. During the next 10 years there will be no major rail improvement that will meet these
demands and therefore the bus will be expected to meet this demand.
25. From all the passenger surveys undertaken the two most important issues for bus
passengers is the bus journey time and the time waiting for the bus. In wider terms this
means bus reliability. Traffic congestion is one of the major factors that affect bus
reliability and the burden of providing measures that will accommodate these increased
travel demands will be for the highway authorities.
26. If boroughs are expected to provide the improvements necessary to accommodate these
demands there needs to be a change in emphasis away from attempting to move
vehicles along major corridors and instead seek solutions that move people along them.
London Bus Priority Network London Councils TEC - 15 March 2007
Agenda Item 12, Page 4 of 6
Bus Corridor Management
27. Busy Bus Routes were defined in the LIP guidance and were intended to show those
routes that carry 15 or more buses per hour. Further work has been carried out to refine
this broad statement and a total of 68 routes with greater than 15 buses per hour have
been studied. Of these, 18 routes have been chosen for further development to establish
a Bus Priority Corridor Management Plan for use on each of these routes. The prime
consideration will be to determine the best and most appropriate method of moving
people along these Corridors over the next 10 year period, taking account of all available
forecast predictions on growth and demand.
28. If boroughs are to provide the infrastructure, then TfL/London Buses/boroughs need to
be able to work together with agreed objectives on the various aspects of bus facilities.
29. In February 2002, the Bus Priority Partnership, was created to deliver an improvement to
bus services in accordance with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. The partnership, which
includes Boroughs, Association of London Government, Transport for London, police
and bus operators, was set up with the following objectives:
1. To recommend allocation of funds to all parties for bus priority measures.
2. To develop and agree longer term Action Plan programmes for bus priority works
to deliver the Mayor’s Transport Strategy.
3. To review programmes, outputs and outcomes for ALL activities leading to
improvement on bus services (LBPN; LBI & Enforcement; Sub-Regionals;
London Buses (AVL; Countdown)).
4. To monitor progress and expenditure incurred towards overall aims and
objectives.
5. To link with other transport schemes and initiatives e.g. interchanges and town
centre improvements.
6. To guide and support innovative measures to improve the travelling experience
as perceived by the passengers.
30. It would seem that the Terms of Reference of the Bus Priority Partnership should be
reviewed and its governance clearly set out so that it brings the stakeholders together to
form a Strategic Policy and delivery process for the movement of people throughout the
Capital not only on the major bus route corridors but also to look at local service
provision.
Financial Implications
31. None.
Legal Implications
32. None.
London Bus Priority Network London Councils TEC - 15 March 2007
Agenda Item 12, Page 5 of 6
Equalities Implications
33. None.
Recommendations
34. Committee are recommended to agree that discussions take place with TfL/London
Buses to review the Terms of Reference of the Bus Priority Partnership so that the new
Partnership would:
1. assist London Buses' criteria for providing bus services to acquire a better public
understanding and buy-in;
2. develop an Action Plan for the delivery of improved infrastructure along the Bus
Corridors;
3. agree minimum standards for buses using these facilities.
Appendices
35. There are no appendices with this report.
London Bus Priority Network London Councils TEC - 15 March 2007
Agenda Item 12, Page 6 of 6