Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 10:57:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 21, 2020 14:02:05 GMT
If your going to do this then journey times allowed for each journey need to drop aswell to avoid slack running times with buses crawling along bus lanes otherwise they will not win back any passengers.
|
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jul 21, 2020 15:59:40 GMT
This is an interesting consultation in a couple of ways. Firstly in the sense that it doesn’t seek to record feedback from individuals. Instead it asks individuals to email them directly. I think this is better as it avoids the farcical situation where TfL engineer questions to get the responses they are looking for and if the responses are unfavourable they go ahead and do what they want anyway. Best to get on with changes and only consult with individuals and groups that will actually influence the implementation.
The second and most interesting aspect is the long forgotten idea of buses and bicycles co-existing. Under Mike Brown we saw buses being referred to as little more than a source of road danger and a menace to cyclists. This consultation positions 24hr bus lanes and the resulting removal of car parking as beneficial for cycling as well as for buses. Could this be a sign of changes to come under Andy Byford? I certainly hope so. If we are to remove cars from the road we can’t do that with bikes and trains alone. A fast, reliable and comfortable bus network has an important role to play.
|
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Jul 21, 2020 16:54:00 GMT
Who in their right mind would bother responding to any TfL consultation any more? We all know they do what they've already decided to do anyway - the consultation process is just an annoying hurdle to them.
Just don't respond and waste your time and effort. They hold their users and our views in contempt, so why should we play their game? If people just stop engaging with them maybe they'll realise how little respect their organisation/business commands now.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 21, 2020 18:28:15 GMT
This is an interesting consultation in a couple of ways. Firstly in the sense that it doesn’t seek to record feedback from individuals. Instead it asks individuals to email them directly. I think this is better as it avoids the farcical situation where TfL engineer questions to get the responses they are looking for and if the responses are unfavourable they go ahead and do what they want anyway. Best to get on with changes and only consult with individuals and groups that will actually influence the implementation. The second and most interesting aspect is the long forgotten idea of buses and bicycles co-existing. Under Mike Brown we saw buses being referred to as little more than a source of road danger and a menace to cyclists. This consultation positions 24hr bus lanes and the resulting removal of car parking as beneficial for cycling as well as for buses. Could this be a sign of changes to come under Andy Byford? I certainly hope so. If we are to remove cars from the road we can’t do that with bikes and trains alone. A fast, reliable and comfortable bus network has an important role to play. It's certainly a good start but it's a little tame for me - it's not going to solve roads that have seen increases in usage as a result of closing off short cuts which has dumped extra traffic onto main roads causing delays to buses just trying to reach a bus lane |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 21, 2020 18:42:34 GMT
Not to mention the changes to roundabouts that put 2 lanes of single direction traffic into single lane due to part of the roundabout being closed (Elephant and Castle, Highbury corner being just two)
|
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jul 21, 2020 22:30:43 GMT
In one west London Borough bus lanes have been taken out of use to create dedicated temporary cycle lanes marked out by plastic barriers. A handful of cyclists use them. The bus gets stuck in the single lane for all traffic. Not much sense to it.
Always thought that bus lanes should be 24/7 as default, so this is good and gives greater protection to cyclists using them.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 21, 2020 22:45:09 GMT
In one west London Borough bus lanes have been taken out of use to create dedicated temporary cycle lanes marked out by plastic barriers. A handful of cyclists use them. The bus gets stuck in the single lane for all traffic. Not much sense to it. Always thought that bus lanes should be 24/7 as default, so this is good and gives greater protection to cyclists using them. We had a bus lane doubled in width just before the pandemic to allow cyclists to overtake buses whilst they were stopped at Brixton Station - they then ruined this arrangement when they extended the pavement over half of the bus lane to aid social distancing, something which hasn't been adhered to by people and which the opposite side of the road actually has the narrower pavement. This seems to be a permanent arrangement as well so what a waste of money they undertook in extending the bus lane width and moving one bus stop only to have removed it during the pandemic. |
|
|
|
Post by ian on Jul 23, 2020 10:24:47 GMT
Some of the bus lanes on the A41 and A406 would definitely benefit from longer hours of operation as there are often traffic jams well beyond their hours of operation. So I welcome the initial consultation and what comes out of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on Jul 23, 2020 11:40:12 GMT
Who in their right mind would bother responding to any TfL consultation any more? We all know they do what they've already decided to do anyway - the consultation process is just an annoying hurdle to them. Just don't respond and waste your time and effort. They hold their users and our views in contempt, so why should we play their game? If people just stop engaging with them maybe they'll realise how little respect their organisation/business commands now. TfL do read consultation responses and quite a few proposals have been altered or abandoned as a result of the consultation responses. There is evidence of this on their website! |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 23, 2020 11:52:50 GMT
The 11/19 certainly was listened to plus the (N)271 along with amendments to the H22 and 490. That's whys I find so hard to see why they dont just accept the 384 needs a couple or extra buses then planned to run from Cockfosters to Edgware abd keep the back street routings.
|
|
|
|
Post by ian on Jul 24, 2020 1:05:04 GMT
With all due respect, they have addressed that specific point a number of times: they believe (rightly or wrongly) that the current extra journey time between Cockfosters and Barnet of about 10 minutes to serve the back streets makes the route very unattractive for through journeys and that reducing journey times by removing those bits of the route will consequently attract more passengers to the route, which is currently not very well used. They predict the package of changes will lead to 30% more patronage for the same cost. There has to be a distinction drawn between not agreeing with what TfL do or what points they make and accepting that they have considered these issues and simply rejected the arguments that have been made.
Incidentally, the 186 continuing to serve Northwick Park Hospital was another significant change in NW London that arose directly from public consultation.
Anyway, moving back to the topic, it'd be interesting to hear what other bus lanes people would like to see 24 hour. A41 and A406 are my nominations. In my dreams I would like to see an A41 bus lane extended northwards from Childs Hill to at least Brent X.
|
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Jul 24, 2020 1:54:35 GMT
With all due respect, they have addressed that specific point a number of times: they believe (rightly or wrongly) that the current extra journey time between Cockfosters and Barnet of about 10 minutes to serve the back streets makes the route very unattractive for through journeys and that reducing journey times by removing those bits of the route will consequently attract more passengers to the route, which is currently not very well used. They predict the package of changes will lead to 30% more patronage for the same cost. There has to be a distinction drawn between not agreeing with what TfL do or what points they make and accepting that they have considered these issues and simply rejected the arguments that have been made. Incidentally, the 186 continuing to serve Northwick Park Hospital was another significant change in NW London that arose directly from public consultation. Anyway, moving back to the topic, it'd be interesting to hear what other bus lanes people would like to see 24 hour. A41 and A406 are my nominations. In my dreams I would like to see an A41 bus lane extended northwards from Childs Hill to at least Brent X. I've already explained in multiple other posts why the 384 consultation and other TfL consultations are conducted in bad faith, on the basis of false information (eg no one being more than 450m from a bus), and are practically always a foregone conclusion which ends with them doing (or not doing) what they always intended. If you want to waste your time indulging their contempt for the people they are forced to engage with, that's fine. Maybe this one will be better because it's more general, but I'm sure they've already decided where they want to put these bus lanes. |
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on Jul 24, 2020 2:35:25 GMT
I've already explained in multiple other posts why the 384 consultation and other TfL consultations are conducted in bad faith, on the basis of false information (eg no one being more than 450m from a bus), and are practically always a foregone conclusion which ends with them doing (or not doing) what they always intended. If you want to waste your time indulging their contempt for the people they are forced to engage with, that's fine. Maybe this one will be better because it's more general, but I'm sure they've already decided where they want to put these bus lanes. It is worth remembering that a consultation is not intended to be a vote on whether or not a proposal should go ahead. It is made clear that there are three potential outcomes - proceeding with the proposed scheme, proceeding with a revised version of the scheme or not proceeding with the scheme. All three outcomes have happened in the past - which is evidence in itself that the outcome is not a foregone conclusion. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 24, 2020 2:43:07 GMT
With all due respect, they have addressed that specific point a number of times: they believe (rightly or wrongly) that the current extra journey time between Cockfosters and Barnet of about 10 minutes to serve the back streets makes the route very unattractive for through journeys and that reducing journey times by removing those bits of the route will consequently attract more passengers to the route, which is currently not very well used. They predict the package of changes will lead to 30% more patronage for the same cost. There has to be a distinction drawn between not agreeing with what TfL do or what points they make and accepting that they have considered these issues and simply rejected the arguments that have been made. Incidentally, the 186 continuing to serve Northwick Park Hospital was another significant change in NW London that arose directly from public consultation. Anyway, moving back to the topic, it'd be interesting to hear what other bus lanes people would like to see 24 hour. A41 and A406 are my nominations. In my dreams I would like to see an A41 bus lane extended northwards from Childs Hill to at least Brent X. The problem is though that the consultation used guidelines that no other consultation before or after has used such as distance between bus stop and homes where all of a sudden, a figure of 450m turned up as apposed to the 400m figure which has been used every time before & after. This creates a perfectly reasonable image for people that TfL have simply moved the goalposts to get the proposal through and also creates the view expressed by uakari which is why I can see exactly where he is coming from even if I only agree to a certain point. The other issue you have is the consultation report clearly shows people are opposed to the 384 proposal and they also make it clear the changes to the 384 affect their journey. The only thing that they're not too concerned about is the relocation of the bus stop at High Barnet - where does the time come when these views are taken in account? You also mention it's currently not well used - it's patronage stats for 2016-17 (I don't have the most recent ones at hand) show it at just under 800,000 which, if I use a local example in the form of the 315, is higher by roughly 200,000 and I can tell you for a fact that the 315 is used well. EDIT: I've found the newer statistics - the 384 has dropped by 100,000 over 2 years although the majority of the drop happened between 2017-18 & 2018-19 so whilst that is obviously concerning, it also fit's with the current trend of the network in general and it's still pulling in more people than a number of other routes that do have good usage and is still above the 315 but only by 2,000. I don't think looking at removing the 384's residential sections will solve this issue either - it's certainly plausible that other factors might be at play. |
|
