“To think that how things were 60 years ago would somehow solve today's transport challenges....well, would only seem options in Bath."

Another of your straw men, I see.

--”

“....and few, if any, British towns had them before the 1950s...."

Chipnum has outlined well why several bus stops clustered here and there wouldn't work. Even in London's busy places, residents often complain when empty buses trundle past their houses to turn a corner at a 'non-bus station' terminus.

To think that how things were 60 years ago would somehow solve today's transport challenges....well, would only seem options in Bath.”

“Probably best not to consult an American traffic consultant, though.”

“It is true that before the 1960s Bath did not have a bus station. Country services terminated in various central area streets. Services from the Chippenham/Corsham/Trowbridge etc terminated on Grand Parade, services from Bristol terminated in Queen Square. Of course in those days there was less traffic so buses terminating on street did not cause much obstruction to traffic flow. Today it would not be a practicable.

A central bus station is by far a better proposition for passengers than stops dispersed over a wide area. It facilitates interchange with other country routes, scheduled coaches, and local city bus services. There is a central information point, a proper waiting area, toilets and refreshments, plus bus crews can sign on and off duty.

Bath is also favoured by having a central bus station in close proximity to its rail station, something that is not so common in other cities with bus stations (Bristol for example), it is truly a transport interchange. The lunacy was in allowing a major shopping development to be built with 800+ parking spaces accessed from the same street as the bus station. A new bridge over the river directly into the bus station for buses might work, add to Bath Package anyone? However buses would still emerge into the maelstrom that is Bath traffic, so until car use is discouraged properly it would probably not prove beneficial.

There are only three proven ways of solving congestion according to US Transport consultant Jarrett Walker:

1. Economic collapse - fewer people have jobs to commute to, or money to spend on discretionary travel.

2. Reduce road capacity - Take out a road and surrounding roads will remain congested but the traffic displaced from the closed road can't all switch to alternative routes as there just isn't room.

3. Road Pricing - It could be argued that congestion is a result of under pricing. Jarrett goes on to say:

"If you give away 500 free concert tickets to the first 500 people in line, you'll get 500 people standing in line, some of them overnight. These people are paying time to save money. Current prevailing road pricing policy requires all motorists to act like these frugal concertgoers. Motorists are required to pay for road use in time, rather than in money, even though some would rather do the opposite and our cities would be safer and more efficient if they could. Current road pricing policy requires motorists to save money, a renewable resource, by expending time, the least renewable resource of all".

His article "What does transit do about traffic congestion" makes for interesting reading, relevant to the Bath transport debate:

http://tinyurl.com/38odtbq”

“Indeed. And before it had a bus station Bath had several termini, including at Kingsmead Square and Queens Parade. Bus stations are an almost entirely post-war phenomenon and few, if any, British towns had them before the 1950s.”

“Actually no, Rogerh3. I spent a lot of time in Bath. Some of its characteristics are bound rub off. No puerile insults intended, just mentioning things that are glossed over. Presumably, Aquae Sulis sounded better than Lavatorium.

Unlike the great city, Bath is just a cowpat on an otherwise pleasant meadow. In the capital, most major stations are interchanges, but then the real value of public transport has always been recognised here; currently to the tune of 4bn per year. I don't have to think twice about travelling a distance of 23km by public transport at any time of day or night here. In bath, it worked on an hourly frequency and was possible if your journey finished by 18:30. For a 'heritage' city, that's pretty yokel, don't you think?”

“Birmingham doesn't have a bus station but it does have several terminuses - Colmore Row, Moor/Bull Street and New Street come to mind, also it has three central rail stations including Snow Hill and New Street.”

“Yes, well done. That was the point being made - that a central bus station was no more necessary in Bath than in London or Birmingham. (Not too bad on the condescension yourself, are you? Or the puerile insults.)”

“"Comprehension is not your strong point, is it?"

Seems like a condescending attitude is your strong point and typical Bath head-up-own-backsideness...

Why would London need a central bus station? It's a vast city where buses run everywhere, not a transport-backward, glorified, once communal lavatory like bath. At least half, or more of London's bus routes don't serve the city's centre.

Having a bus station centrally wouldn't help anyone other than yokels from bath, who would find it difficult to understand - based on their own limited experience - that buses can run to all parts of the capital without ever having to go through its centre. Tell me, do Bath people still stop a no 14 bus to ask the driver when the next 319 is due?”

“Rossiter Road. It is not beyond the wit of man to change a bus route"

Of course you can change a bus route (and there may be a case for re-routing services such as the National Express coaches which don't pick-up in town). However pedestrianising Dorchester Street would cause massive disruption, delays and inconvenience for people (not to mention congestion elsewhere).

--”