|
Post by DT 11 on Apr 2, 2013 16:50:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 2, 2013 23:27:22 GMT
I hope you don't mind if I can give people more detail about it consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/cotClapham Old Town Overview The London bus network is kept under regular review. As part of this, we develop proposals for changes to bus services. Why We Are ConsultingClapham Old TownWe are proposing changes to bus routes 88, 249, 322 and 417 in the Clapham Old Town area. All bus stops in the area will be made fully accessible allowing buses to pull level with the kerb for easy boarding and alighting. Routes 88 and 417We are proposing that the last bus stop for passengers on routes 88 and 417 is in Old Town (west) near to Orlando Road. The first bus stop for passengers would be in Old Town (east) near to Grafton Square (south). The bus stand located between Old Town (west) and Old Town (east) will be reduced in size so that buses from only two routes use it. Routes 249 and 322We are proposing that buses on routes 249 and 322 use new stands on Clapham Common North Side and The Pavement. The last bus stop for passengers would be bus stop ‘W’ on the North Side. The first bus stop for passengers would be at the eastern end of The Pavement, opposite the Cock Pond paddling pool. The current bus stand adjacent to The Polygon on The Pavement would be moved to be just before the new bus stop.
|
|
|
Post by Connor on Apr 2, 2013 23:33:57 GMT
Apart from creating a stop for the 249 at Old Town (good for interchange with route 137), I don't think the changes are needed. I like the current bus station layout, where you walk over to where the bus is standing, rather than the other way round!
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 2, 2013 23:37:22 GMT
Apart from creating a stop for the 249 at Old Town (good for interchange with route 137), I don't think the changes are needed. I like the current bus station layout, where you walk over to where the bus is standing, rather than the other way round! The thing is though, the Old Town is a dangerous place to board the bus unless the lane that serves the stop is free. It also inaccesible to wheelchair users and I welcome the changes suggested. Like with Richmond Bus Station, I agree with TfL on this one .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 11:27:49 GMT
Apart from creating a stop for the 249 at Old Town (good for interchange with route 137), I don't think the changes are needed. I like the current bus station layout, where you walk over to where the bus is standing, rather than the other way round! The thing is though, the Old Town is a dangerous place to board the bus unless the lane that serves the stop is free. It also inaccesible to wheelchair users and I welcome the changes suggested. Like with Richmond Bus Station, I agree with TfL on this one . So how does removing the stop help? Wheelchair users still won't be able to board there, the only difference is that nobody else will be able too either. What sense does that make?
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 3, 2013 13:38:55 GMT
The thing is though, the Old Town is a dangerous place to board the bus unless the lane that serves the stop is free. It also inaccesible to wheelchair users and I welcome the changes suggested. Like with Richmond Bus Station, I agree with TfL on this one . So how does removing the stop help? Wheelchair users still won't be able to board there, the only difference is that nobody else will be able too either. What sense does that make? If you look at the map, you'll notice that the new first stop is 100 yards at best down the road from the current one. Furthermore, you do not have to cross the road to reach the new stop, minimizing the danger to passengers so I don't see no problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 15:40:08 GMT
So how does removing the stop help? Wheelchair users still won't be able to board there, the only difference is that nobody else will be able too either. What sense does that make? If you look at the map, you'll notice that the new first stop is 100 yards at best down the road from the current one. Furthermore, you do not have to cross the road to reach the new stop, minimizing the danger to passengers so I don't see no problem. So thats 100 yards people have to walk, even worse for disabled people . Why not pick up at the stand and the new stop? I just don't understand the logic (as with Richmond) that if a stop is deemed unsuitable for wheelchairs that nobody else should be able to use it either. I also don't see what is dangerous about the current arrangements, busy stops with far too many buses trying to converge on it and buses often stopping in the middle of the road are really dangerous but I won't hold my breath on anything being done about that. The 249 change is an improvement but other than that its just the old 'civil service' logic of inventing problems so they can justify their jobs by 'solving' them
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 3, 2013 18:05:34 GMT
If you look at the map, you'll notice that the new first stop is 100 yards at best down the road from the current one. Furthermore, you do not have to cross the road to reach the new stop, minimizing the danger to passengers so I don't see no problem. So thats 100 yards people have to walk, even worse for disabled people . Why not pick up at the stand and the new stop? I just don't understand the logic (as with Richmond) that if a stop is deemed unsuitable for wheelchairs that nobody else should be able to use it either. I also don't see what is dangerous about the current arrangements, busy stops with far too many buses trying to converge on it and buses often stopping in the middle of the road are really dangerous but I won't hold my breath on anything being done about that. The 249 change is an improvement but other than that its just the old 'civil service' logic of inventing problems so they can justify their jobs by 'solving' them How would you expect people to get to the current stop then? It's the same principle, only this time, not only do people avoid crossing the road but a stop is created that everyone can use. In the case of the removed stop at Richmond Bus Station, not only was that stop inaccessible to disabled users but it also was extremely under used. I've used that bus station many times and you were lucky if there was one other person waiting with you for a bus. In contrast, the bus stop opposite the bus station is used a lot. The only trick TfL missed with that change is to move the 337 to the road outside the bus station to allow better interchange with the through routes. The current arrangement is dangerous if your bus is not parked in the lane next to the one stop at the Old Town. Usually, you have to walk around the buses in the middle of road which is very dangerous. Also, the next stop from the Old Town is at Clapham Common which is a good walk for a disabled person seeing as they can't a bus in the middle of the road.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 21:24:59 GMT
Sorry but I cannot accept the argument about stops being under used. Passengers have boarded at the Old Town stand for years but it has suddenly become dangerous? Hmmmm!
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 3, 2013 22:39:10 GMT
Sorry but I cannot accept the argument about stops being under used. Passengers have boarded at the Old Town stand for years but it has suddenly become dangerous? Hmmmm! I stated for Richmond Bus Station that the stop was under used, not the Old Town. The Old Town stand hasn't suddenly become dangerous, it's been dangerous for years with nothing being done. Anyway, I respect your opinion even if it differs with my own
|
|
|
Post by Connor on Apr 4, 2013 0:04:18 GMT
Sorry but I cannot accept the argument about stops being under used. Passengers have boarded at the Old Town stand for years but it has suddenly become dangerous? Hmmmm! I stated for Richmond Bus Station that the stop was under used, not the Old Town. The Old Town stand hasn't suddenly become dangerous, it's been dangerous for years with nothing being done. Anyway, I respect your opinion even if it differs with my own I feel that there might have been an exaggeration on how dangerous the stop actually is. I've never seen anyone have trouble boarding the buses there, even the 417 which tends to stand further away from the stop. Drivers there won't open the doors if there are buses moving arout within the stand.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 4, 2013 2:30:52 GMT
I stated for Richmond Bus Station that the stop was under used, not the Old Town. The Old Town stand hasn't suddenly become dangerous, it's been dangerous for years with nothing being done. Anyway, I respect your opinion even if it differs with my own I feel that there might have been an exaggeration on how dangerous the stop actually is. I've never seen anyone have trouble boarding the buses there, even the 417 which tends to stand further away from the stop. Drivers there won't open the doors if there are buses moving arout within the stand. No exaggeration at all, it's a dangerous place to board a bus. I'm afraid on plenty of occasions that I've seen drivers have opened their doors whilst other buses are moving about.
|
|
|
Post by Steve80 on Apr 4, 2013 5:13:24 GMT
Well I think its about time they changed the current arrangements at clapham common. I find it strange that you can have a bus stand yet passengers can board anywhere in the stand. Apart from the fact that some of the passengers have trouble alighting from the buses there due to the big step from the bus to the road, others do have trouble boarding. There been various times when passegners have waited at the stop not realising that their particular bus is on the other side of the stand (with their view obstructed by other buses parked there). There was one incident when three 88s were parked there and one passenger came up to one of them asking when the driver is leaving. All of a sudden, the 88 next to it departs leaving the passenger slightly upset. Last sunday evening while on the 322, I was at the stand when a passenger asks when im leaving. I say 15 minutes so she goes away. Just as im about to leave, another 322 pulls up and she comes back and gets on that 322 believing that 322 is departing. I was ready to leave so I could have left her there but I waited till she realised. Another time, I caught up with my leader and we both got to the stand but we parked at two different sections of the stand. I parked closest to the stop so the passengers came next to my bus. My leader departs two minutes later and then the passengers start knocking on my door asking when am I leaving? I asked them why they didn't get on that bus and they replied that they didn't know it was there Anyway, the only bad thing I see with this new arrangement is that the 88 and 322 will no longer share the same stop. You do get a few passengers boarding there wishing to go along clapham high street or clapham north.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2013 12:06:10 GMT
Sorry but I cannot accept the argument about stops being under used. Passengers have boarded at the Old Town stand for years but it has suddenly become dangerous? Hmmmm! I stated for Richmond Bus Station that the stop was under used, not the Old Town. The Old Town stand hasn't suddenly become dangerous, it's been dangerous for years with nothing being done. Anyway, I respect your opinion even if it differs with my own Yes I realise you meant Richmond, I just didn't think that justifies its removal and I don't agree that the Old Town stand is dangerous but we'll just have to beg to differ
|
|
|
Post by westhamgeezer on Apr 5, 2013 15:39:17 GMT
I 100% agree with antman. I cannot for the life of me understand why the richmond bus stn stop had to be removed. Im sure that there are plenty more stops in outlying areas that are less well used, and also inaccessible to wheelchairs....shall we remove those also? The point is that this change has benefited no one, those in wheelchairs still cant board there and those who are not disabled or maybe have mobility problems but are not in Wheelchairs now have to trek down to George Street. How can this be of any benefit??
To my mind, all the only purpose of these changes are to increase the number of "accessible" stops with no regard for the actual passengers. Why dont we just remove every "inaccessible" stop, then we can claim that we have 100% accessibility ;-)
|
|