Glasgow First Bus
Mr Anderson posted on the 24/03/2015 2:39:53 PM
If anyone wasn't aware, then they don't need to search through their wallets/purses/pockets for change for 1.95 anymore for the bus. The price of the buses has gone up to 2.00 (and various other price increases), which I guess is about a 2.5% increase?
I would imagine that First Bus would argue that this increase to 2.00 makes it easier for people to pay on buses.
With the price of fuel dropping, and inflation being announced as 0% today, I'm not sure how that can be merited.
The announcement seems to be on the buses only. I cannot find anything on the first bus website.
Apparently they're announcing season ticket increases in a few weeks, which will be nice.
- 12 Replies :
#12 - resident replied on the 28/03/2015 5:56:06 PM
'happily cuddling'? Thanks, autocorrect. I meant 'happily cycling', of course.
Anyway, the point is that Fiona is completely correct that cyclists are already 'regulated'. Indeed, they're comprehensively marginalised by poor road design that prioritises car use (before we even get to the issue of the behaviour of those car users).
One hopes that the new NextBike station will be well-used, and we will be one tiny step closer to provision of a comprehensive fit for purpose cycling network, rather than a short-term PR exercise that's expected to survive long-term despite pitiful general infrastructure provision.
As to the issue of the buses - I agree that there is no justification for the price rises, bearing in mind fuel and inflation. Especially when compared to rail prices. But it comes back to that word 'regulation' again.
FirstBus have openly and publicly stated that if a route is not profitable, they're not interested in running it. Which is a perfectly valid thing for a profit-driven company to say.
The question must then be 'Why is control of public transport not fully in the hands of a public body?'. The answer would appear to be fairly simple (and not dissimilar to the reasons for the poor cycling infrastructure): cowardly short-termism for political gain, to the detriment of our collective long-term benefit. See also PFI-funded millstones-round-our-neck.
And none of this will change so long as enough of us just shrug and accept that 'that's just the way it is - there's nothing we can do to change it'.
#11 - resident replied on the 28/03/2015 2:38:46 PM
There are bad drivers and there are bad cyclists. And there are bad pedestrians. Many cyclists are drivers. Virtually every cyclist is a pedestrian. Let's not fall into the trap of treating pedestrians/cyclists/drivers as homogenous groups in competition with one another.
I'm all three.
There's little or no excuse for me being a bad driver - the whole road network is overwhelmingly car-centric. And as long as I don't step into moving traffic (which is highly undesirable to me as a pedestrian, for obvious reasons) then it's fairly difficult to cause any real upset as a pedestrian.
But as a cyclist, it's very easy to raise the ire of either pedestrians and/or drivers. It's easy to see why cycling on a footpath would annoy and potentially (but not necessarily endanger) cyclists - so it's not something that's generally advocated (either explicitly, by designated shared routes with signage, or implicitly in the case of very small children cycling at little more than walking pace). Shared ped/cycle routes are a classic example of where 'bad pedestrians' pop up - but it's really the end of the world, so let's not dwell on that.
Let's take a look at 'bad cyclists' on the road. A frequently cited problem. Jumping red lights is an obvious no-no. There's no real excuse for it. I'm not going to claim otherwise. But let's not pretend that all junctions are designed logically, and that the need for a cyclist to stop at a junction is as pressing as it is for a vehicle.
For example, the Wishart Street/Duke Street junction, just south of Drygate. With minimal amendments, there could be a dedicated cycle lane to allow continuous cycle traffic going east-west into town, even when traffic is turning right, from Wishart Street into Duke Street. The benefit of that would be to all traffic, as it would remove the need for the advance stop line box for cyclists. Speaking of which...
Ah... those green boxes of danger... they raise the big question: To use, or not to use? First, you're encouraged to get to it via that narrow green strip (filter 'lane') which requires you to undertake vehicles - not a good habit to get into. A passenger was exiting a car without looking as I was about to enter one those filter 'lanes' last week. Took me off my bike. I was only mildly injured, but it could have been so much worse if I hadn't already been half anticipating the chance of it happening. The car was apparently queuing at a red light, with vehicles in front and behind, and was also alongside double yellows. Without doing anything wrong, and by following the traffic management in place, the cyclist came off worse.
But let's say I got through the filter 'lane' and into the green box at the junction. Well, that presumes that there isn't a car sitting in it. Which there very very frequently is. Because the psychology of the driver means that you instinctively pull up alongside the red light, which is set alongside the cyclist stop line rather than car stop line. More poor road design.
Anyway, let's say I got through the filter 'lane' and into the green box at the junction, and there wasn't a vehicle in it. Do I meekly remain in a position tight against the kerb, where the vehicle behind me will inevitably squeeze past me at the earliest opportunity. Or do I take up the invitation of the green box and take the centre of the vehicle lane, asserting my position and safety, but enduring the revving of the engine of the vehicle at the stop line which has a driver that feels aggrieved that I've 'jumped the queue' (simply by following the directions of the road markings).
Or maybe the cyclist doesn't even get to the box - not because of a passenger getting out of a car without looking, but because a car is simply encroaching too far into the filter 'lane', or maybe the light turns green before the cyclist gets to the green box, and then has to merge back into traffic pulling away.
Well... all that presumes that there is an advance stop line and a box for cyclists at the end of the filter 'lane'. The junction at the top of Bellgrove Street was mentioned up the page. Travelling into town, east to west, it doesn't have an advance stop line box for cyclists. Which has become particularly dangerous since the phasing sequence of the lights changed. A cyclist is now invited to use a green filter 'lane' between two lanes of queuing traffic. Not great. But it didn't use to be a major problem when both lanes went green at the same time. But now the left lane gets a green light before the right lane. So a cyclist is expected to stand waiting whilst traffic on the left squeezes through, with fingers crossed, hoping that they don't get their leg clipped by a car straying ever so slightly to the right or whacked on the head by a bus mirror as it passes.
I'm a pretty confident cyclist, but that junction is not fit for purpose. So I'll just queue in traffic and take up the space of a full vehicle, as it's the only reasonably safe way to negotiate it. Again, as a reasonably able cyclist, I tend to be able to pull away and get through the junction without impeding the progress of the vehicles behind. Less confident cyclists have my sincere sympathies.
So... we're through that junction, onto Duke Street, past Lidl, happily cuddling in the cycle/taxi/bus lane. Happy days until we get to that other badly designed junction at Wishart Street. Right? Er, no. A vehicle wants to turn left toward Morrisons. The cyclist better hope that the driver has a decent perception of relative speeds, otherwise it'll be another case of getting cut up by the vehicle needing to cross the cycle/taxi/bus lane to make the turn.
You get the picture...
#10 - The Mentalist replied on the 26/03/2015 10:07:53 AM
Fiona, I saw a cyclist sitting behind a bus in this lane last week not realising it was left turn but also because the bus had decided to idle at the bus stop without indicating or putting on hazards. I think it's about being respectful of ALL road users.
#9 - Fiona replied on the 25/03/2015 2:07:49 PM
Stephen - that's good about nextbike coming out to Duke Street, I saw that they were planning more stations. It's a shame there's not a cycling path along Duke Street but I can't see that that would be feasible at all.
The Duke Street junction with Bellgrove street is tricky for inexperienced cyclists now that they've installed the left turn light - means that you have to stay in the right hand lane to continue straight to town and move away quickly with the traffic when that light goes, which new cyclists aren't always so keen about doing.
#8 - Fiona replied on the 25/03/2015 2:06:00 PM
The Mentalist - it's far from cyclists being the only problem - I've been hit twice by cars turning right on top of me into a minor road whilst I've had the right of way cycling straight along the main road. The excuses - 'o I didn't see you' (despite flourescent gear)and 'I didn't expect you to be going so fast'!! At least on both of those occasions they paid up for the damage they caused to my bike. And don't get me started about people who just open car doors without checking for vehicles first, so many accidents for cyclists are caused that way.
Couldn't agree more that cyclists should be regulated in the same way that cars are (and the fact is they are, when the police are about, in the same way cars get away with bad behaviour until the police are about) Bad cyclists will give you a fright, they might even scratch or dent your car; bad drivers on the other hand can hospitalise or kill a cyclist.
#7 - Dennistoun Community Council replied on the 25/03/2015 11:16:51 AM
Fiona / All,
Opportunities to cycle into town will soon be increased via installation of a nextbike station at Duke Street/Whitehill Street.
This is expected to launch in the coming weeks and follows DCC representations to Glasgow City Council.
Stephen
#6 - Mr Anderson replied on the 25/03/2015 9:56:05 AM
I'd love to be able to travel by train to my work, but there's no train service close to my work.
#5 - anon replied on the 25/03/2015 9:55:11 AM
I saw that NextBike (the free/low cost bike hire scheme) will soon be coming to Dennistoun.
I won't be using the bus again thankfully.
Dreadful service and dreadful price.
They lost me when they removed all the cross town routes which forced you to buy two single tickets to get anywhere west of George Sq.
#4 - The Mentalist replied on the 25/03/2015 9:54:19 AM
"I cycle into town." A female cyclist turned right in front of me the other day, I was driving into town and she was coming from town turning into Armadale Street. No hand signals. Just as well I had my wits about me. When are the powers that be going to regular cyclists?
As for First Bus, gave up on them ages ago. Dirty buses, grumpy travellers and too expensive. The squashing of more and more people on the bus makes for a most unpleasant experience.
#3 - Fiona replied on the 24/03/2015 10:58:18 PM
Ridiculous prices for an unimpressive service. I cycle into town - takes 10 minutes, no waiting for buses and no charge.
#2 - anon_l replied on the 24/03/2015 10:57:40 PM
Unless you travel before 9am (i think) and its £2.30 return but i certainly would chose the train over the bus any day!
#1 - curiouscat replied on the 24/03/2015 3:02:20 PM
Travel by train! It's way cheaper, quicker and often more convenient. :) £1.80 return from Duke Street to Queen Street in 6 minutes....
You can reply to the post Glasgow First Bus by completing the form. No registration required. The forum is moderated in order that messages adhere to the editorial integrity of Dennistoun Online. Please read the guidelines before you submit to the forum. If you believe that we have missed a message that contravenes these guidelines then please contact us and we will either edit or remove it.
