|
Post by mondraker275 on Apr 25, 2017 8:19:14 GMT
I dont want some half measures here. Its got to be full on pedestrianised, fill in the road, add benches, trees, the whole works. Otherwise, absolutely no point in this.
Taxis- 1/3 of traffic, 2% of trips. Get rid. Although, I am bit curious of the stats used on the consultation. The 2% of trips mentioned for the taxi is said to be made 'ON' Oxford as instead of 'TO'. Similarly, the buses are quoted for accounting for 40% of trips 'ON' Oxford Street, Pedestrians 56% WITHIN Oxford Street. They dont seem to consider the importance of modes getting people TO places. Like if I came from the Eastside and got off the bus at a shop on the westside I am accounted for in these stats?
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 25, 2017 8:33:34 GMT
I dont want some half measures here. Its got to be full on pedestrianised, fill in the road, add benches, trees, the whole works. Otherwise, absolutely no point in this. Taxis- 1/3 of traffic, 2% of trips. Get rid. Although, I am bit curious of the stats used on the consultation. The 2% of trips mentioned for the taxi is said to be made 'ON' Oxford as instead of 'TO'. Similarly, the buses are quoted for accounting for 40% of trips 'ON' Oxford Street, Pedestrians 56% WITHIN Oxford Street. They dont seem to consider the importance of modes getting people TO places. Like if I came from the Eastside and got off the bus at a shop on the westside I am accounted for in these stats? I very much agree that it's got to be a full on pedestrianisation which will create a far more pleasant environment for everybody and allow more street entertainment. These two are awesome m.youtube.com/watch?v=jR_J6WjV8OwFound this on twitter this morning www.mayorwatch.co.uk/taxis-and-cyclists-could-be-banned-from-oxford-street-as-tfl-publishes-plans-to-reduce-traffic-levels/
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Apr 25, 2017 10:37:12 GMT
Give it a few years, and I fear it won't just be Oxford Street without buses. Regent Street from Oxo to Piccadilly Circus, Shaftesbury Avenue between Piccadilly and Cambridge Circuses, all those may well go pedestrian only, I feel. The bus has zero influential friends in Central London, and lots of highly influential enemies. Sad, but true. Well said, it isn't even any point of a consultation. All it is these days is to tell you what they are going to do no matter what, they would not listen.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Apr 25, 2017 10:42:51 GMT
And why do you imagine this tentative first round of consultation mentions the use of Wigmore St? To guarantee an incendiary response from local residents, businesses, the taxi trade, delivery firms and Uncle Tom Cobbly and all. As vjaska says this means there will be zero chance of buses going that way because the local councillors will be far too terrified of losing the votes of residents. You need only look at the way WCC backed off on a lot of the traffic restraint measures on the Baker St gyratory removal plans to see the influence of the locals. It's all about money, influence and being able to pull strings to get your voice heard. The same tactic has been used to suggest the banning of taxis and cycles from Oxford St - guaranteed to generate an angry response now so that City Hall and TfL can judge the weight of opposition. This stuff really is from the "Infant School book of Politics". The needs of bus passengers are a long way down the list already. Look at how the consultation contrasts 41% of arrivals by bus with 56% being pedestrians using the area. Not comparable facts but presented in a way to suggest they are and which makes it very clear which one City Hall favours - yep pedestrians. Pardon my cynicism but this is all rather childish after years of debating the issue behind closed doors. The key parties - WCC, TfL and City Hall - must know what the concerns are and almost certainly have their own positions well defined and agreed but they just won't publish them *yet*. One of the problems in 2017 is that TfL has burgeoned to become such a large organisation trying to satisfy the interests of various groups, some of whom are extremely vocal. Things were much easier in the days of the former London Transport when they jealously protected bus and tube interests. They did not always get their way but at least they would vigorously fight their corner. If councils proposed one way schemes or changes to road layouts, the former Planning and Liaison Department would soon be entering into correspondence about the disbenefits to passengers and negative effects on operating costs. Many a time LTs case was rejected but at least they did not just roll over. I think your analysis is spot on. The way things are going with the planned drastic filleting of Central London bus services maybe the old 'flying polo mint' logo used by the former London Country Bus Services could be revived and become the new symbol for London Buses in 2017, as those in authority seem determined to create a big hole in the centre of the bus network. lmao at flying mint polo logo - that is spot on. They are going to rip the heart out of the bus network, this is one of many changes to come, RIP London Buses
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Apr 25, 2017 11:03:56 GMT
If you can't walk far, Oxford St is probably not first choice for a shopping district. Disagree a bit. If you want to shop in 2 or 3 big name stores then you can currently almost certainly get a bus to or from the front door of all of them. Better still you can get a bus *between* some of the big shops even if it is only 1 stop down the road e.g. Selfridges to John Lewis. Loads of people, myself included, used to hop 1-2 stops along Oxford St. The constant refrain of people asking "does this bus go to Marble Arch / Oxford Circus / Selfridges / TCR". When it's all pedestrianised you won't be able to do this so why, if you're a bit wobbly on your pins, would you ever go back to Oxford St if you have no means of getting between stores. If WCC / TfL end up having to provide a fleet of electric trikes or buggies to transport people up and down why on earth bother? More cost, more faff when we already have a means of accessible transport that operates 24/7 364 days a year. You can forget about the tube or Crossrail for a hop down Oxford St. It'll take a fit person 5-10 mins from street to platform at each end, an older person going slowly and waiting for / finding lifts will probably take 3 to 4 times longer than a fit person given the massive scale of the stations and limited positions for lift shafts. Who in their right mind is going to waste 20-30 mins to then ride a train for 2-3 mins and then have another 20 mins to exit? No one. People will do it once and then say "bleep this for a game of soldiers" and never do it again. The whole thing is just bonkers. I can't even begin to imagine the sort of utter claptrap that must be being said in the stakeholder meetings about pedestrianising Oxford St. Probably bad enough for me to replicate that sketch where someone opens the window in a highrise office block and steps out of the window to leave the meeting. Exactly - go somewhere like Westfield for your shopping and you'll probably end up walking a lot more than you'd think. Of course the "advantage" of Westfield is that it's designed so that people who are tired of walking between shops have ample opportunities to sit down, so long as they're spending more money in cafes etc., whereas on Oxford Street if you're tired of walking you can just hop on a bus - which doesn't make any money for anyone (except maybe a few pennies for TfL). I agree that pedestrianisation is going to make things more difficult for people who are wobbly on their pins. But people who are wobbly on their pins never feature very highly in the minds of the retailers and developers - their "visions" usually only feature bright, fit young things easily strolling down a sunny street. Not a zimmer-frame in sight! Surely some of the cannier retailers on Oxford Street - the department stores in particular - must realise that being a bit wobbly on your pins doesn't mean you haven't got money to spend. Not saying that I'm completely against pedestrianisation, but I'm not convinced that the issue of accessibility is being given enough consideration.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Apr 25, 2017 11:26:15 GMT
I dont want some half measures here. Its got to be full on pedestrianised, fill in the road, add benches, trees, the whole works. Otherwise, absolutely no point in this. Taxis- 1/3 of traffic, 2% of trips. Get rid. Although, I am bit curious of the stats used on the consultation. The 2% of trips mentioned for the taxi is said to be made 'ON' Oxford as instead of 'TO'. Similarly, the buses are quoted for accounting for 40% of trips 'ON' Oxford Street, Pedestrians 56% WITHIN Oxford Street. They dont seem to consider the importance of modes getting people TO places. Like if I came from the Eastside and got off the bus at a shop on the westside I am accounted for in these stats? I'd be surprised if full on pedestrianisation with the whole works can be achieved. If you building a shopping street today, it wouldn't be like Oxford Street. There are few little problems in the way of the 'full works', in particular the lack of back street access which means it will still need to be possible to get vehicles down the street because :-
- How would a fire engine gain access to put out a fire?
- Ambulance access is required. Are the paramedics really going to be expected to carry someone on a stretcher to the nearest side street where the ambulance is? The loss of time in doing this could actually lead to someone's death
- Many shops have no back street access, meaning all deliveries have to come in via Oxford Street. Whilst this could be done at night, the street layout would still need to permit vehicular access, so you can't just put trees, benches, pop up coffee shops etc everywhere.
As for accessibility, as others have said that another whole ball game.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Apr 25, 2017 15:37:55 GMT
So TfL state their aims and why doing anything different will lessen the effect, before going ahead with changes as planned. Another "consultation" I won't be responding too
I think Oxford Street would be nicer fully pedestrianised. There would still need to be provision for emergency vehicles to access Oxford Street and there is a question mark over cyclists. I think a designated cycle lane is perfectly reasonable but crossings would be needed and cyclists would need to give way to pedestrians - can cyclists be trusted to obey crossing rules? Buses will go via Wigmore or be terminated elsewhere. I don't think TfL mind either way. If buses terminate short of current destinations, TfL will save money by lowering PVR's on cut routes. Stand space will be a major issue, but no buses on Wigmore isn't a disaster for TfL. It would be bad for passengers though. I wonder what the impact would be on traffic along Park Lane/Edgware Road/Euston Rd/Piccadilly/Regent Street once this is done?
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Apr 25, 2017 15:45:45 GMT
I dont want some half measures here. Its got to be full on pedestrianised, fill in the road, add benches, trees, the whole works. Otherwise, absolutely no point in this. Taxis- 1/3 of traffic, 2% of trips. Get rid. Although, I am bit curious of the stats used on the consultation. The 2% of trips mentioned for the taxi is said to be made 'ON' Oxford as instead of 'TO'. Similarly, the buses are quoted for accounting for 40% of trips 'ON' Oxford Street, Pedestrians 56% WITHIN Oxford Street. They dont seem to consider the importance of modes getting people TO places. Like if I came from the Eastside and got off the bus at a shop on the westside I am accounted for in these stats? I'd be surprised if full on pedestrianisation with the whole works can be achieved. If you building a shopping street today, it wouldn't be like Oxford Street. There are few little problems in the way of the 'full works', in particular the lack of back street access which means it will still need to be possible to get vehicles down the street because :-
- How would a fire engine gain access to put out a fire?
- Ambulance access is required. Are the paramedics really going to be expected to carry someone on a stretcher to the nearest side street where the ambulance is? The loss of time in doing this could actually lead to someone's death
- Many shops have no back street access, meaning all deliveries have to come in via Oxford Street. Whilst this could be done at night, the street layout would still need to permit vehicular access, so you can't just put trees, benches, pop up coffee shops etc everywhere.
As for accessibility, as others have said that another whole ball game.
I was more emphasizing the 'fully' pedestrianised. I am not in favour of it but if they do any changes it I would not want a single bus, taxi or cyclist. It would operate like any main shopping street like Walthamstow High Street, Ilford, East Ham etc. During nights and early mornings you have deliveries, rubbish collection ONLY etc and during the day you have no vehicles at all, only for emergencies. The road has to be filled in IMO, does not mean vehicles cant access. Obviously you will have more space for trees and benches, which will be needed, you will place them appropriately.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 25, 2017 16:16:20 GMT
So TfL state their aims and why doing anything different will lessen the effect, before going ahead with changes as planned. Another "consultation" I won't be responding too I think Oxford Street would be nicer fully pedestrianised. There would still need to be provision for emergency vehicles to access Oxford Street and there is a question mark over cyclists. I think a designated cycle lane is perfectly reasonable but crossings would be needed and cyclists would need to give way to pedestrians - can cyclists be trusted to obey crossing rules? Buses will go via Wigmore or be terminated elsewhere. I don't think TfL mind either way. If buses terminate short of current destinations, TfL will save money by lowering PVR's on cut routes. Stand space will be a major issue, but no buses on Wigmore isn't a disaster for TfL. It would be bad for passengers though. I wonder what the impact would be on traffic along Park Lane/Edgware Road/Euston Rd/Piccadilly/Regent Street once this is done? Cyclists generally travel via Wigmore Street currently so if full pedestrianisation occurs, cyclists should be banned from Oxford Street because it will cause accidents. That would pretty much strike a further dagger into trying to run buses along Wigmore Street because the cycling community will argue that it would be dangerous, etc. If Portman Street & Orchard Place do indeed become no through roads onto a pedestrianised Oxford Street, Edgware Road & Portland Place/Regent Street will most definitely see increased traffic especially Edgware Road & Marble Arch where no doubt pollution levels will massively increase as a result. I'm expecting a lot of opposition to pedestrianising that part of Oxford Street.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 25, 2017 16:51:45 GMT
Obviously you will have more space for trees and benches, which will be needed, you will place them appropriately. Westminster are notorious for not providing seats and benches for people. More maintenance costs and increased likelihood of rough sleepers using them so WCC avoid providing them. Try and find somewhere to rest your legs that is not a park or a bus shelter or a commercial business where you have to pay to be in the premises and sitting down in WCC's area. You'll really struggle. Don't imagine for a second that Oxford Street is going to be an oasis for sitting and watching the world go by. It's all about making massive amounts of money for as many hours in the day that they can get away with. Why else is the "New West End Company" (representing all the retailers) so very keen on evicting all the road transport?
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Apr 25, 2017 17:10:27 GMT
Obviously you will have more space for trees and benches, which will be needed, you will place them appropriately. Westminster are notorious for not providing seats and benches for people. More maintenance costs and increased likelihood of rough sleepers using them so WCC avoid providing them. Try and find somewhere to rest your legs that is not a park or a bus shelter or a commercial business where you have to pay to be in the premises and sitting down in WCC's area. You'll really struggle. Don't imagine for a second that Oxford Street is going to be an oasis for sitting and watching the world go by. It's all about making massive amounts of money for as many hours in the day that they can get away with. Why else is the "New West End Company" (representing all the retailers) so very keen on evicting all the road transport? They may become a little less keen if as a result of fewer or no buses, the retailers lose customers. There are plenty of other places to shop that people might think are easier to get to.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 25, 2017 17:18:31 GMT
They may become a little less keen if as a result of fewer or no buses, the retailers lose customers. There are plenty of other places to shop that people might think are easier to get to. "Everyone will come on shiny new Crossrail. Buses are so "yesterday"." said a spokesperson (allegedly). They don't care. They want Oxford St to be even more like every dull, identikit pedestrianised town centre in Britain and they don't care what the wider cost to London is because they aren't paying the cost. It's just corporate selfishness writ large.
|
|
|
Post by northken on Apr 25, 2017 18:38:51 GMT
Cyclists generally travel via Wigmore Street currently so if full pedestrianisation occurs, cyclists should be banned from Oxford Street because it will cause accidents. That would pretty much strike a further dagger into trying to run buses along Wigmore Street because the cycling community will argue that it would be dangerous, etc. If Portman Street & Orchard Place do indeed become no through roads onto a pedestrianised Oxford Street, Edgware Road & Portland Place/Regent Street will most definitely see increased traffic especially Edgware Road & Marble Arch where no doubt pollution levels will massively increase as a result. I'm expecting a lot of opposition to pedestrianising that part of Oxford Street. The cycle community would probably have no problem with buses running along Wigmore Street provided that there is full segregation and the route is quick and accessible i.e. of the same quality as CS3 along Embankment. There is the argument going round that banning cycles from Oxford Street may discriminate against people who use them as mobility aids.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 25, 2017 19:29:08 GMT
Westminster are notorious for not providing seats and benches for people. More maintenance costs and increased likelihood of rough sleepers using them so WCC avoid providing them. Try and find somewhere to rest your legs that is not a park or a bus shelter or a commercial business where you have to pay to be in the premises and sitting down in WCC's area. You'll really struggle. Don't imagine for a second that Oxford Street is going to be an oasis for sitting and watching the world go by. It's all about making massive amounts of money for as many hours in the day that they can get away with. Why else is the "New West End Company" (representing all the retailers) so very keen on evicting all the road transport? They may become a little less keen if as a result of fewer or no buses, the retailers lose customers. There are plenty of other places to shop that people might think are easier to get to. Do you really think that is going to happen? I think business will boom once Oxford Street becomes a more pleasant environment in which to shop.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 25, 2017 21:37:33 GMT
They may become a little less keen if as a result of fewer or no buses, the retailers lose customers. There are plenty of other places to shop that people might think are easier to get to. Do you really think that is going to happen? I think business will boom once Oxford Street becomes a more pleasant environment in which to shop. Business is already booming unless I'm missing something?
|
|