|
|
Post by stuckonthe486 on Mar 11, 2021 13:17:15 GMT
But why exactly should London taxpayers pay for a route like the 465 or the 406 when the money to keep the 148 running, or the 25 running to Oxford Circus, or to increase the frequency on the 18 can't be found? I really doubt that the 465 and 406 are of more importance than the 25 and 18. Anything funded for by the relevant council should remain, that's fine. They fund it so they can have it, but anything not funded really should be removed or reduced until TfL can sort out the area they actually should be serving before trying to branch out to areas elsewhere. There are probably some exceptions such as the 96, 428, 492, 370, 372, 142 and 258 which are probably good enough to keep due to their benefits to Londoners. Something that should probably be explored is a lot more 96 style arrangements, where the route effectively runs express as soon as it leaves the London boundary, serving areas important to Londoners and leaving people in the provinces to use their local routes. The 96 for example serves Dartford Station and Daren't Valley Hospital where Londoners are likely to want to travel, but doesn't serve all the stops in-between. All border crossing routes provide value to Londoners though including the aforementioned 107 & 292 - the 292 was a route I purposefully used every Saturday for a period and the demand from Edgware to Borehamwood was strong whilst any removal of the 107 would see no link between Barnet & Borehamwood. The 406 & 465 have their value too hence the backlash to the 465’s cut which wasn’t just from Surrey residents. The problem here isn’t the border routes but actually the lack of investment into the network in the first place which is now seeing bus routes essentially squaring off against each other as if it’s a world heavyweight clash. TfL have no care for Inner London hence many of my routes receiving cuts but it’s not justifiable for me to take it out on those cross border routes which are an easy target as we saw with the 167 cutback which hasn’t been kind to the 20 as a result And, of course, the lack of any meaningful public transport policy in England-outside-London for decades, compounded by austerity, which has seen the old green bus networks scattered to the winds, leaving TfL to pick up the slack/ lumbered with some anomalies. In a more sensible world, there'd be excitement on another thread because Transport for the South East had just announced that Go-Ahead had won the tender for the Erith-Dartford-Bluewater-Gravesend 480. |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Mar 11, 2021 13:21:41 GMT
TfL also has a responsibility to businesses in outer London areas - a good bus service from border towns like Dartford helps drum up trade for businesses in Bexleyheath, gets staff to work and contributes to cutting congestion. Leatherhead to Dorking is an anomaly, sure (though one you could defend as it helps Londoners reach Box Hill and other popular leisure spots), but I expect Chessington World of Adventures and the businesses that depend on it appreciate the presence of the 465. Indeed, with talk - however hypothetical - of a border charge for cars, you could argue that cross-border services should be strengthened, not weakened. It was mentioned in the Bexleybus thread that Bexleyheath to Swanley is an omission, for example, and Erith's poor bus connections to the east can't help its economy. If there is a strong case for cross border services then make them commercial like every other part of the country. If there is not a strong case, is it worth them being provided? The harsh facts of outside of London, is to pay fares to cover the service providers costs, if you don't, you don't get a service. That's not the case where I live, many routes in Devon are supported by the County Council, and its the same with Plymouth City Council (although not to such an extent) and Cornwall Council. Even Torbay Council, which ended discretionary funding support for bus services some years ago, has allocated £150,000 to support services in 2021/2022 and is to conduct a review of service need to ensure the money is targeted where it will provide the most benefit. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2021 13:37:41 GMT
Because they are a sensible distance outside of the Greater London border for TFL buses to leave Bexley Borough to serve Dartford/Darent Valley Hospital/Bluewater for example. They are neighbouring towns or facilities to Greater London towns. Many people in Gravesend, Medway, Maidstone, Tonbridge etc may work in Greater London, but they are further away.. OK so why should someone working in Redhill benefit from a TfL service when those working in Reigate or Godstone don't. There is no justification. Then there is Dorking! Because people from towns in Croydon Borough (such as Croydon it’s self, Purley and Coulsdon) are more likely to need to cross the border into Surrey to get to Redhill than for Reigate. It has a bigger town centre for example. Godstone isn’t served by a London bus because Caterham is the logical end point of the 407, it’s just over the border and is a town with a population of 21,000. Godstone is further into Surrey and is a country village with a population of just shy of 6,000. Dorking is the omission to the rule being so deep into Surrey. If it wasn’t for SCC putting their hands in their pockets the 465 would have just left Kingston Borough and dipped into Leatherhead. |
|
|
|
Post by stuckonthe486 on Mar 11, 2021 13:47:04 GMT
OK so why should someone working in Redhill benefit from a TfL service when those working in Reigate or Godstone don't. There is no justification. Then there is Dorking! Because people from towns in Croydon Borough (such as Croydon it’s self, Purley and Coulsdon) are more likely to need to cross the border into Surrey to get to Redhill than for Reigate. It has a bigger town centre for example. Godstone isn’t served by a London bus because Caterham is the logical end point of the 407, it’s just over the border and is a town with a population of 21,000. Godstone is further into Surrey and is a country village with a population of just shy of 6,000. Dorking is the omission to the rule being so deep into Surrey. If it wasn’t for SCC putting their hands in their pockets the 465 would have just left Kingston Borough and dipped into Leatherhead. Hate to labour the point, just as importantly, it's the businesses in Croydon, a major centre in its own right, that will also benefit from the 403, 405, 407, etc, for custom and bringing staff into work. The people of Croydon also benefit because fewer people from Caterham will be driving into Croydon to work and shop. It's not just about "I live in X, I want to go to Y over a border" - there are a whole range of issues at play here. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Mar 11, 2021 13:59:47 GMT
If there is a strong case for cross border services then make them commercial like every other part of the country. If there is not a strong case, is it worth them being provided? The harsh facts of outside of London, is to pay fares to cover the service providers costs, if you don't, you don't get a service. That's not the case where I live, many routes in Devon are supported by the County Council, and its the same with Plymouth City Council (although not to such an extent) and Cornwall Council. Even Torbay Council, which ended discretionary funding support for bus services some years ago, has allocated £150,000 to support services in 2021/2022 and is to conduct a review of service need to ensure the money is targeted where it will provide the most benefit. Exactly, the 150k figure will pay for a few school routes, that is about it. Single routes cost multi-millions to run per year, so in reality it is just like that and nothing like London. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Mar 11, 2021 14:02:36 GMT
OK so why should someone working in Redhill benefit from a TfL service when those working in Reigate or Godstone don't. There is no justification. Then there is Dorking! Because people from towns in Croydon Borough (such as Croydon it’s self, Purley and Coulsdon) are more likely to need to cross the border into Surrey to get to Redhill than for Reigate. It has a bigger town centre for example. Godstone isn’t served by a London bus because Caterham is the logical end point of the 407, it’s just over the border and is a town with a population of 21,000. Godstone is further into Surrey and is a country village with a population of just shy of 6,000. Dorking is the omission to the rule being so deep into Surrey. If it wasn’t for SCC putting their hands in their pockets the 465 would have just left Kingston Borough and dipped into Leatherhead. lThose 3 places are all linked to Redhill via public transport via rail ... so the ability to travel is there without the 405 I would also dispute that Redhill has a bigger town centre than Reigate, the latter has a bigger population if that is how you are defining criteria. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2021 14:15:33 GMT
Because people from towns in Croydon Borough (such as Croydon it’s self, Purley and Coulsdon) are more likely to need to cross the border into Surrey to get to Redhill than for Reigate. It has a bigger town centre for example. Godstone isn’t served by a London bus because Caterham is the logical end point of the 407, it’s just over the border and is a town with a population of 21,000. Godstone is further into Surrey and is a country village with a population of just shy of 6,000. Dorking is the omission to the rule being so deep into Surrey. If it wasn’t for SCC putting their hands in their pockets the 465 would have just left Kingston Borough and dipped into Leatherhead. lThose 3 places are all linked to Redhill via public transport via rail ... so the ability to travel is there without the 405 Sorry but unless you live on top of the station you still need bus services to feed people to stations. These services are vital to commuters and help passengers who work or go to school on the borders without the need for expensive commercial bus services or cars. Services like the 293 for example are important as there is a huge number of kids on route who go to school beyond the Sutton border, how would they get to school of there parents are working or don’t drive. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2021 14:48:08 GMT
Because people from towns in Croydon Borough (such as Croydon it’s self, Purley and Coulsdon) are more likely to need to cross the border into Surrey to get to Redhill than for Reigate. It has a bigger town centre for example. Godstone isn’t served by a London bus because Caterham is the logical end point of the 407, it’s just over the border and is a town with a population of 21,000. Godstone is further into Surrey and is a country village with a population of just shy of 6,000. Dorking is the omission to the rule being so deep into Surrey. If it wasn’t for SCC putting their hands in their pockets the 465 would have just left Kingston Borough and dipped into Leatherhead. Hate to labour the point, just as importantly, it's the businesses in Croydon, a major centre in its own right, that will also benefit from the 403, 405, 407, etc, for custom and bringing staff into work. The people of Croydon also benefit because fewer people from Caterham will be driving into Croydon to work and shop. It's not just about "I live in X, I want to go to Y over a border" - there are a whole range of issues at play here. Yeah I agree. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 11, 2021 14:56:57 GMT
Because people from towns in Croydon Borough (such as Croydon it’s self, Purley and Coulsdon) are more likely to need to cross the border into Surrey to get to Redhill than for Reigate. It has a bigger town centre for example. Godstone isn’t served by a London bus because Caterham is the logical end point of the 407, it’s just over the border and is a town with a population of 21,000. Godstone is further into Surrey and is a country village with a population of just shy of 6,000. Dorking is the omission to the rule being so deep into Surrey. If it wasn’t for SCC putting their hands in their pockets the 465 would have just left Kingston Borough and dipped into Leatherhead. lThose 3 places are all linked to Redhill via public transport via rail ... so the ability to travel is there without the 405 I would also dispute that Redhill has a bigger town centre than Reigate, the latter has a bigger population if that is how you are defining criteria. And yet, numerous people still take the 405 across the border be they Londoners or not so regardless of the ability to travel by train, it's clear the bus has good demand from both sides of the border. Also, the Southern service is hardly reliable and the fare between Coulsdon & Redhill for example is not far off double the bus fare so I assume your suggesting Londoners should pay a higher fare to cross the border just because you have a non issue with Surrey residents coming into London for work, leisure and other things that bring benefits to London including financial ones. The 100 runs from Redhill to Crawley via Gatwick Airport also alongside the line - are you suggesting Surrey/Metrobus should withdraw this because the ability to travel is there without it given it crosses it's own border into Sussex? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2021 14:59:26 GMT
Because people from towns in Croydon Borough (such as Croydon it’s self, Purley and Coulsdon) are more likely to need to cross the border into Surrey to get to Redhill than for Reigate. It has a bigger town centre for example. Godstone isn’t served by a London bus because Caterham is the logical end point of the 407, it’s just over the border and is a town with a population of 21,000. Godstone is further into Surrey and is a country village with a population of just shy of 6,000. Dorking is the omission to the rule being so deep into Surrey. If it wasn’t for SCC putting their hands in their pockets the 465 would have just left Kingston Borough and dipped into Leatherhead. lThose 3 places are all linked to Redhill via public transport via rail ... so the ability to travel is there without the 405 I would also dispute that Redhill has a bigger town centre than Reigate, the latter has a bigger population if that is how you are defining criteria. Not everyone can afford the luxury of expensive rail fares. If someone lives in Redhill and works in Croydon, or vice versa, they currently pay £3 a day on bus fares via the 405. If they work 5 days per week they are currently paying £15 per week. If you scrap the 405 so that it only runs as far as the Greater London border, say Coulsdon South Station as an example; they are then given no alternative but to fork out rail fares. They are then forced to pay £5.50 each way during the peak, £11 per day which is £55 per week! That’s using contactless. So £40 per week increase, that’s £160 extra per month on getting to and from work. Where is that money coming from? Rent or food.. Cross boundary routes are needed. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Mar 11, 2021 15:09:37 GMT
Those 3 places are all linked to Redhill via public transport via rail ... so the ability to travel is there without the 405 I would also dispute that Redhill has a bigger town centre than Reigate, the latter has a bigger population if that is how you are defining criteria. Not everyone can afford the luxury of expensive rail fares. If someone lives in Redhill and works in Croydon, or vice versa, they currently pay £3 a day on bus fares via the 405. If they work 5 days per week they are currently paying £15 per week. If you scrap the 405 so that it only runs as far as the Greater London border, say Coulsdon South Station as an example; they are then given no alternative but to fork out rail fares. They are then forced to pay £5.50 each way during the peak, £11 per day which is £55 per week! That’s using contactless. So £40 per week increase, that’s £160 extra per month on getting to and from work. Where is that money coming from? Rent or food.. Cross boundary routes are needed. So we end up subsidising Redhill residents. Travel is part of life ... if you can not afford it, you are in the wrong job, travel is part of the package, and if you do the same job 5 days a week, you have to be stupid to buy daily tickets. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2021 15:12:35 GMT
Not everyone can afford the luxury of expensive rail fares. If someone lives in Redhill and works in Croydon, or vice versa, they currently pay £3 a day on bus fares via the 405. If they work 5 days per week they are currently paying £15 per week. If you scrap the 405 so that it only runs as far as the Greater London border, say Coulsdon South Station as an example; they are then given no alternative but to fork out rail fares. They are then forced to pay £5.50 each way during the peak, £11 per day which is £55 per week! That’s using contactless. So £40 per week increase, that’s £160 extra per month on getting to and from work. Where is that money coming from? Rent or food.. Cross boundary routes are needed. So we end up subsidising Redhill residents. Travel is part of life ... if you can not afford it, you are in the wrong job, travel is part of the package, and if you do the same job 5 days a week, you have to be stupid to buy daily tickets. They can afford the 405 bus service. So we cut all TFL bus services to the Greater London border. How does one get from say Sidcup to their job at Asda in Swanley, a simple 15 minute/3 mile or so journey without the 233? How does someone that lives in Westerham get home from their job in the Glades in Bromley without the 246? They are needed end of. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2021 15:21:54 GMT
Not everyone can afford the luxury of expensive rail fares. If someone lives in Redhill and works in Croydon, or vice versa, they currently pay £3 a day on bus fares via the 405. If they work 5 days per week they are currently paying £15 per week. If you scrap the 405 so that it only runs as far as the Greater London border, say Coulsdon South Station as an example; they are then given no alternative but to fork out rail fares. They are then forced to pay £5.50 each way during the peak, £11 per day which is £55 per week! That’s using contactless. So £40 per week increase, that’s £160 extra per month on getting to and from work. Where is that money coming from? Rent or food.. Cross boundary routes are needed. So we end up subsidising Redhill residents. Travel is part of life ... if you can not afford it, you are in the wrong job, travel is part of the package, and if you do the same job 5 days a week, you have to be stupid to buy daily tickets. That’s such a narrow minded view to take, so people shouldn’t take jobs if they can’t afford the travel? |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Mar 11, 2021 15:32:26 GMT
So people living in TfL territory do not use buses for work and leisure activities outside the London boundary? That’s just daft. In my neck of the woods we have people using buses to get to work, shops, schools, medical appointments, places of worship, friends and family outside the London boundary. Why should we be penalised? We pay GLA tax too, so why should we subsidise those living in zones 1-3 whilst we suck up the cuts? Before TfL make any further cuts to cross boundary services, they should look at making it easier and more attractive for private operators in neighbouring authorities to run such services. But why exactly should London taxpayers pay for a route like the 465 or the 406 when the money to keep the 148 running, or the 25 running to Oxford Circus, or to increase the frequency on the 18 can't be found? I really doubt that the 465 and 406 are of more importance than the 25 and 18. Anything funded for by the relevant council should remain, that's fine. They fund it so they can have it, but anything not funded really should be removed or reduced until TfL can sort out the area they actually should be serving before trying to branch out to areas elsewhere. There are probably some exceptions such as the 96, 428, 492, 370, 372, 142 and 258 which are probably good enough to keep due to their benefits to Londoners. Something that should probably be explored is a lot more 96 style arrangements, where the route effectively runs express as soon as it leaves the London boundary, serving areas important to Londoners and leaving people in the provinces to use their local routes. The 96 for example serves Dartford Station and Daren't Valley Hospital where Londoners are likely to want to travel, but doesn't serve all the stops in-between. I find that absolutely stupid to run services non stop when they leave London as a sizeable amount of money would be lost and as for services like that of the 298 & 313 they in effect run non stop between the M25 and Chase Farm/Cockfosters (though you may find people get on at Hadley Wood) and whenever I have used the 298/313 residents north of the M25 have been appreciative of a service and whenever I use them you always find people getting on them - we can have routes like the 18/25/148 with funded cross border services but TFL needs to put more pressure on councils to start funding them - certainly shouldn't be an issue for Hertfordshire with all the routes going to Waltham Cross given they only go into the borough for 200 yards or so. I'm not directing this at you specifically but what does seem rather odd is the same who criticise cross border services have also been people in favour of reducing the London network |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 11, 2021 15:37:32 GMT
So we end up subsidising Redhill residents. Travel is part of life ... if you can not afford it, you are in the wrong job, travel is part of the package, and if you do the same job 5 days a week, you have to be stupid to buy daily tickets. That’s such a narrow minded view to take, so people shouldn’t take jobs if they can’t afford the travel? Not only narrow minded but offensive to myself and so many and I don't even take public transport to work. It's an elitist view I'd expect from a Tory, not from someone who once lived in Croydon which contains many such people struggling to afford an acceptable living through many reasons, usually not of their own making although I suspect someone will come along and argue it's that their fault  |
|
