PaulH
Conductor
Posts: 61
|
Post by PaulH on Feb 15, 2017 23:06:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 15, 2017 23:17:27 GMT
"TfL confirmed they are to launch a consultation on route 465 in the next few weeks". Well that means it will be cut back to Leatherhead.
|
|
PaulH
Conductor
Posts: 61
|
Post by PaulH on Feb 15, 2017 23:22:05 GMT
"TfL confirmed they are to launch a consultation on route 465 in the next few weeks". Well that means it will be cut back to Leatherhead. My thoughts exactly.
|
|
|
Post by planesandtrains on Feb 15, 2017 23:31:39 GMT
Maybe if they kick up a huge storm like the NBQ residents did.... Oh wait it's Cash Strapped SCC + Cash strapped TFL which = disaster. I will oppose any such changes, it was bad enough when it was cut between FW and Kingston.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 16, 2017 0:08:11 GMT
Maybe if they kick up a huge storm like the NBQ residents did.... Oh wait it's Cash Strapped SCC + Cash strapped TFL which = disaster. I will oppose any such changes, it was bad enough when it was cut between FW and Kingston. Well as the newspaper article makes clear there is no point in having a petition of 2,100 signatures when TfL considers that as 1 statement not 2,100. Those people will need to respond to the consultation but I am left wondering how many of them regularly use the service.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Feb 16, 2017 0:15:04 GMT
For sentimental reasons I would be sad to see this route shortened, but in the current climate I can't see that TfL have much choice. Unless SCC stump up some cash, then it looks like the route will be cut back to Leatherhead.
|
|
|
Route 465
Feb 16, 2017 2:46:02 GMT
via mobile
Post by vjaska on Feb 16, 2017 2:46:02 GMT
Fingers crossed that section isn't lost - some of the loveliest scenery to be found in London is beyond Leatherhead not to mention the route has good usage.
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Feb 16, 2017 9:35:11 GMT
Well at least this will save resources that can help in supporting those central London routes and capacity... or are the central London changes supposed to give resources to outer London routes. Hard to keep up.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Feb 16, 2017 11:25:12 GMT
I'm not sure how many of the journeys cited in that article are in any way the responsibility of TfL. Local journeys over the Leatherhead to Dorking stretch are a matter for Surrey. Surely it's only for TfL when the journey brings people to & from London, and even Leatherhead itself is over the boundary.
Of course, the MP in nearby Epsom & Ewell may see this as evidence that out-county services are not safe in TfL's hands....
|
|
|
Post by ben on Feb 16, 2017 16:42:19 GMT
Its just the symptom of the current 'thinking' within politics - everybody wants a service yet everybody votes for people who arent prepared to pay for it.
Perhaps TfL should start treating its cross border routes on a commercial basis, at least outside London. Or, using the oyster back-office system, charge a £1 premium for everyone boarding past the GLA boundary to make up for the lack of council tax support.
|
|
|
Post by ben on Feb 16, 2017 16:57:15 GMT
Says it all that SCC havent replied to comment. Must be tough when your entire ideology is based on underfunding public services because you believe in minimising costs and underplaying the existence of social value, but you also want to keep a bus service you dont want to pay for....
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Feb 16, 2017 18:23:44 GMT
To me the issue is with SCC and the residents of Surrey need to be lobbying them rather then TFL. I don't support TFL running the route to Dorking without any support from SCC.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 16, 2017 19:17:09 GMT
Says it all that SCC havent replied to comment. Must be tough when your entire ideology is based on underfunding public services because you believe in minimising costs and underplaying the existence of social value, but you also want to keep a bus service you dont want to pay for.... I don't think that's terribly fair. All local authorities are being hammered financially. Even as a Tory led Council SCC have hardly toed the party line and have been openly critical of cuts to government funding for councils. If SCC were really underfunding public transport they would have withdrawn all funding and all socially necessary services would have gone by now. That they have not done so is actually to their credit given the fairly low usage of buses in Surrey. The fact the county has a pretty comprehensive rail network is also a factor - it would be interesting to see how many former bus passengers now use trains for at least some of their trips. The other thing worth noting is that Val Shawcross and TfL are meeting with SCC shortly to discuss the future of cross boundary services. I suspect that will not be an easy meeting because it boils down to money and let's be brutally honest here TfL are in difficulties already and it is going to be a monumental crisis in 2-3 years time because the fares freeze is undeliverable. All the soothing words are, IMO, pointless when the direct result is that you are getting less service but spending more money to get it. That is exactly what is planned to happen with the bus network. There will be far more difficult decisions to take than cutting the 167, 298 and 465. Sunday and evening services *within Greater London* are next after the great massacre of Zone 1 goes through the 2 phases no doubt planned to follow the upcoming Phase 1 massacre.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Feb 16, 2017 22:46:16 GMT
I can see that SCC would see a daily 30 min service such as the 465 being quite a generous service to fund as in Surrey a Monday to Saturday hourly service is more the norm so maybe a compromise and the 465 could drop to every hour between Leatherhead and Dorking like the 166 to Epsom.
|
|
|
Post by planesandtrains on Feb 20, 2017 22:44:52 GMT
I can see that SCC would see a daily 30 min service such as the 465 being quite a generous service to fund as in Surrey a Monday to Saturday hourly service is more the norm so maybe a compromise and the 465 could drop to every hour between Leatherhead and Dorking like the 166 to Epsom. That would be the best way to save money, cutting it completely and leaving the Leatherhead - Dorking section to SCC would be bad for the local economy, as the convenience of TFL services (Oyster etc) is what keeps patronage high on the route.
|
|