|
|
Post by Paul on Nov 3, 2020 14:58:41 GMT
There are other essential workers who might use buses late at night, such as police, hospital workers and so on. Indeed although I don't think he was suggesting it was a one fits all policy across every route but rather a case by case basis Case by case indeed, although the emergency services tend to have similar shift change patterns and are not usually travelling to and from work at 11 or 12 o’clock at night |
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Nov 3, 2020 20:25:42 GMT
I wonder if TfL will stop insisting that all new bus tenders must be electric or hybrid, given the costs for required infrastructure, or if they can finally ditch traditional blinds (with long lead times, and expensive to make) for the now proven LEDs? Something tells me this bailout money will go in the blink of an eye before 6 months is up, especially if theres an extension of Lockdown  I see on BBC London last night that TfL also need to fund a ferry across the Thames at Hammersmith too as part of the deal! That won't be cheap! All a way to force Sadiq Khan to admit TfL cannot be run in its current form. He won't want to lose his highly-paid colleagues, or upset tube drivers on 60 bags a year. There's no infrastructure or space to be built for a ferry (generous parking / waiting bays at Woolwich for instance, queuing traffic would cause chaos for A4 / M4 towards Chiswick). Bailout runs just long enough to run out by the Mayoral elections, so whoever wins may be doing so without overall control of TfL. We won't even notice it as Coronavirus will continue to make the headlines... latest being massaged COVID death rates from "The Science", but that's another story  As for Ferry boats, big bucks. I know they had a go at rebuilding the bridge, but it is past it's design life and needs replacement. Can't they build a modern replica, or just a new one? Traffic in SW London is bad enough without jams either side of the river. The well heeled folk in Castelnau won't want further traffic caused by traffic wanting to use the Ferry. Perhaps the government will sub contract it out to a company who don't have any boats, they have form for these sort of blunders  Though the bridge saga may rumble on for years. Arriva could put in a cheeky existing bus bid for the 533 using the ex Stagecoach ENLs  |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 4, 2020 6:44:55 GMT
The bridge cant be replaced as it's a listed structure. Back in around 2012? I believe very strong, fairly attractive bridge was built at Walton on Thames for £32 million give or take which effectively replaced a long saga of war damaged bridges, temporary bridges etc. Seems cheap compared with what has been spent just on evaluation work of Hammersmith Bridge.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 4, 2020 6:51:16 GMT
The bridge cant be replaced as it's a listed structure. Back in around 2012? I believe very strong, fairly attractive bridge was built at Walton on Thames for £32 million give or take which effectively replaced a long saga of war damaged bridges, temporary bridges etc. Seems cheap compared with what has been spent just on evaluation work of Hammersmith Bridge. Another bridge has been ruled out at Hammersmith. |
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Nov 4, 2020 9:09:08 GMT
The bridge cant be replaced as it's a listed structure. Back in around 2012? I believe very strong, fairly attractive bridge was built at Walton on Thames for £32 million give or take which effectively replaced a long saga of war damaged bridges, temporary bridges etc. Seems cheap compared with what has been spent just on evaluation work of Hammersmith Bridge. I've been saying that for yonks! |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 4, 2020 12:37:27 GMT
The bridge cant be replaced as it's a listed structure. Back in around 2012? I believe very strong, fairly attractive bridge was built at Walton on Thames for £32 million give or take which effectively replaced a long saga of war damaged bridges, temporary bridges etc. Seems cheap compared with what has been spent just on evaluation work of Hammersmith Bridge. AFAIK, there is nothing stopping anyone replacing that bridge providing the new one matches the listed status requirements. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 4, 2020 12:57:03 GMT
The bridge cant be replaced as it's a listed structure. Back in around 2012? I believe very strong, fairly attractive bridge was built at Walton on Thames for £32 million give or take which effectively replaced a long saga of war damaged bridges, temporary bridges etc. Seems cheap compared with what has been spent just on evaluation work of Hammersmith Bridge. AFAIK, there is nothing stopping anyone replacing that bridge providing the new one matches the listed status requirements. Not sure how you can replace one of the earliest examples of a modern suspension bridge from Victorian times, as soon as you replace it it is no longer applicable |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Nov 4, 2020 13:04:26 GMT
The bridge cant be replaced as it's a listed structure. Back in around 2012? I believe very strong, fairly attractive bridge was built at Walton on Thames for £32 million give or take which effectively replaced a long saga of war damaged bridges, temporary bridges etc. Seems cheap compared with what has been spent just on evaluation work of Hammersmith Bridge. AFAIK, there is nothing stopping anyone replacing that bridge providing the new one matches the listed status requirements. And in theory, can apply to have it de-listed Goes through stages, consultation, and ultimately goes to Secretary of State for ratification I’m not sure what it’s listing actual states, or if applies to whole bridge, but there has been many listed buildings where modern strengthening has been inserted, or parts replaced with lookalikes using newer stronger materials. Ultimately most inspectors want the building to look best for decades to come, not become a shabby useless place. |
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Nov 4, 2020 19:58:53 GMT
AFAIK, there is nothing stopping anyone replacing that bridge providing the new one matches the listed status requirements. And in theory, can apply to have it de-listed Goes through stages, consultation, and ultimately goes to Secretary of State for ratification I’m not sure what it’s listing actual states, or if applies to whole bridge, but there has been many listed buildings where modern strengthening has been inserted, or parts replaced with lookalikes using newer stronger materials. Ultimately most inspectors want the building to look best for decades to come, not become a shabby useless place. Of course the way things are going (and please don't think I wish for this to happen - I most certainly don't), the bridge may continue to crumble and could then collapse into the water. Then all bets would be off!! |
|
|
|
Post by busman on Nov 5, 2020 10:35:36 GMT
Coming back round to TfL funding, how do you all feel about a tourism tax applied at a set percentage of the room cost per night for hotels, B&B’s and home sharing platforms like AirBnB?
Personally I think its fair to expect tourists to contribute, as TfL infrastructure massively benefits tourists and helps the capital to cope with the sheer volume of visitors we see each year. A tourism tax isn’t out of step with most other countries - its the normal rather than the exception. Such a tax wouldn’t bring in billions, but an £50M-100M a year for TfL isn’t to be sniffed at.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2020 10:51:36 GMT
Coming back round to TfL funding, how do you all feel about a tourism tax applied at a set percentage of the room cost per night for hotels, B&B’s and home sharing platforms like AirBnB? Personally I think its fair to except tourists to contribute as TfL infrastructure massively benefits tourists and helps the capital to cope with the sheer volume of visitors we see each year. A tourism tax isn’t out of step with most other countries - its the normal rather than the exception. Such a tax wouldn’t bring in billions, but an £50M-100M a year for TfL isn’t to be sniffed at. I would agree to that, it’s fairly common on the continent to apply a city tax to hotel rooms for tourists. If you are there for business it’s not always added. Like you said it doesn’t bring in a huge amount but helps provide cities with a further steady income. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 5, 2020 11:05:25 GMT
Coming back round to TfL funding, how do you all feel about a tourism tax applied at a set percentage of the room cost per night for hotels, B&B’s and home sharing platforms like AirBnB? Personally I think its fair to except tourists to contribute as TfL infrastructure massively benefits tourists and helps the capital to cope with the sheer volume of visitors we see each year. A tourism tax isn’t out of step with most other countries - its the normal rather than the exception. Such a tax wouldn’t bring in billions, but an £50M-100M a year for TfL isn’t to be sniffed at. Trouble you have is London hotels are already horrendously expensive .... you would have balance it up with how much damage it would do to the tourism industry |
|
|
|
Post by busman on Nov 5, 2020 12:00:25 GMT
Coming back round to TfL funding, how do you all feel about a tourism tax applied at a set percentage of the room cost per night for hotels, B&B’s and home sharing platforms like AirBnB? Personally I think its fair to except tourists to contribute as TfL infrastructure massively benefits tourists and helps the capital to cope with the sheer volume of visitors we see each year. A tourism tax isn’t out of step with most other countries - its the normal rather than the exception. Such a tax wouldn’t bring in billions, but an £50M-100M a year for TfL isn’t to be sniffed at. Trouble you have is London hotels are already horrendously expensive .... you would have balance it up with how much damage it would do to the tourism industry For example, would a charge of 2-5% per night with some kind of cap based on maximum amount and number of days stay really prevent a significant amount of people from visiting London? To the extent that it costs the capital more in terms of employment, wages, tourism spend etc? If that were the case, surely other cities in Europe would have long abandoned such a tax. Paris hotels are even more expensive than London, but a tourism tax doesn’t seem to make it a less attractive destination. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Nov 5, 2020 12:09:39 GMT
Trouble you have is London hotels are already horrendously expensive .... you would have balance it up with how much damage it would do to the tourism industry For example, would a charge of 2-5% per night with some kind of cap based on maximum amount and number of days stay really prevent a significant amount of people from visiting London? To the extent that it costs the capital more in terms of employment, wages, tourism spend etc? If that were the case, surely other cities in Europe would have long abandoned such a tax. Paris hotels are even more expensive than London, but a tourism tax doesn’t seem to make it a less attractive destination. I think this idea could work well on the condition it remains below 5%. London is a bit lucky in the respect that it's a quite inelastic destination in terms of tourism. While costs are high there's always going to be demand for London simply because it's London. It's got the "wow" factor like Paris, New York, Dubai, Singapore, SanFran etc. |
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Nov 10, 2020 3:10:37 GMT
For example, would a charge of 2-5% per night with some kind of cap based on maximum amount and number of days stay really prevent a significant amount of people from visiting London? To the extent that it costs the capital more in terms of employment, wages, tourism spend etc? If that were the case, surely other cities in Europe would have long abandoned such a tax. Paris hotels are even more expensive than London, but a tourism tax doesn’t seem to make it a less attractive destination. I think this idea could work well on the condition it remains below 5%. London is a bit lucky in the respect that it's a quite inelastic destination in terms of tourism. While costs are high there's always going to be demand for London simply because it's London. It's got the "wow" factor like Paris, New York, Dubai, Singapore, SanFran etc. Certain politicians aren't too keen on TfL's "wow" factor m.youtube.com/watch?v=F7sR8bfM1sYThis latest bailout is just a sticking plaster, there will be more money required in a few months time... |
|
