|
Post by redbus on Jan 20, 2019 19:14:36 GMT
Surely if TfL do something completely different with the 48 to either what the route is today or what they propose (ie axing), they would need to consult again? Don't count on it. I am expecting to see some "sleight of hand" go on with some of these consultations. Note how that consultations that took place 18 months ago when things were different or planned to be different were used as justification for still doing the 10/23 change when any rational transport organisation would have stopped the changes because circumstances were vastly different. Note also the mess with route 3 which has been curtailed at T Square without consultation and the plan for the Russell Square extension dropped without subsequent consultation. This is one of the aspects of what TfL do that most enrages me as they are appallingly inconsistent in how they apply the rules / adhere to their decisions. Their actions betray their real feelings - they'd rather not consult at all. All that bothersome cost and all those dreadful people who think they know better than TfL do. I suspect the Commissioner, who resembles Scrooge more and more each time he speaks in public, would love to bin the entire process and sack all the staff involved in it. I suppose there is always that difference between what should happen (new consultation) and what does happen.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 20, 2019 19:36:41 GMT
Could be that the 48 is saved and diverted to Oxford Circus and the 55 withdrawn.
|
|
|
Post by dennistas on Jan 20, 2019 20:01:27 GMT
Could be that the 48 is saved and diverted to Oxford Circus and the 55 withdrawn. I really much doubt that happening as the consultation stated the 48 being withdrawn and the 55 extended. Also, it would be the same thing if the 55 was withdrawn and 48 diverted to Oxford Circus.
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Jan 20, 2019 20:17:50 GMT
Don't count on it. I am expecting to see some "sleight of hand" go on with some of these consultations. Note how that consultations that took place 18 months ago when things were different or planned to be different were used as justification for still doing the 10/23 change when any rational transport organisation would have stopped the changes because circumstances were vastly different. Note also the mess with route 3 which has been curtailed at T Square without consultation and the plan for the Russell Square extension dropped without subsequent consultation. This is one of the aspects of what TfL do that most enrages me as they are appallingly inconsistent in how they apply the rules / adhere to their decisions. Their actions betray their real feelings - they'd rather not consult at all. All that bothersome cost and all those dreadful people who think they know better than TfL do. I suspect the Commissioner, who resembles Scrooge more and more each time he speaks in public, would love to bin the entire process and sack all the staff involved in it. I suppose there is always that difference between what should happen (new consultation) and what does happen.
It looks to me like even TfL have conceded there physically isn’t enough capacity to withdraw the 48. The 55 is ridiculously busy enough as is, it can’t take the Walthamstow 48 passengers too. Get rid of the 48 and you’ll get the Walthamstow passengers on the 55 all the way to Central London and then a 343 situation (before the 136 got extended to assist) in the middle of the route. To cope the 55 will need a significant increase in frequency which will probably negate the 48’s saving. Also as snoggle touched on a few days ago the 48-axe (I’d say that more noticeable than most route alterations in the consultation as it’s an entire route withdrawal) wouldn’t do any favours in the mayoral elections.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 20, 2019 22:06:36 GMT
But TFL do still need to make their £375 million savings so I can still see them doing all they can to make a significant savings in regards to the 40, 48 and 388.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 20, 2019 23:31:32 GMT
But TFL do still need to make their £375 million savings so I can still see them doing all they can to make a significant savings in regards to the 40, 48 and 388. Doesn’t mean it’s right that they should do so - TfL should be looking at increasing patronage or at least appearing to try & do so rather than awful cuts which only makes the situation worse.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 20, 2019 23:35:09 GMT
I suppose there is always that difference between what should happen (new consultation) and what does happen. Well yes BUT it all depends on how the intent behind the legislation is considered. I think the narrowest definition is used because it minimises effort and cost. Given passengers have very little real say over TfL's bus network then it is actually important that consultation is done broadly and effectively and is genuinely responsive. It's not as if passengers have much sway via the farebox nor any other means. You can be relaxed about consultation when things are going well and the network is seen to be performing well in all respects and is responding to growth. For the first time since 2000 we are in the reverse situation - things are going badly and economies apparently have to be made to save money but also to facilitate wider policy objectives. This makes consultation all the more important as is TfL's response when people tell it things it doesn't want to hear such as 72% of respondents objecting to the loss of the 27 to Chiswick. That TfL feels it can ignore that scale of opposition is a very bad sign and it isn't the first such sign nor will it be the last. I expect there will be very considerable opposition to almost all of the Central London consultation changes and that TfL will (probably) ignore all of it. The other hidden aspect is the very long list of unmet demands accumulated over many years for new services, extensions, double deck conversions and other improvements that politicians, councils, developers and others have been asking of TfL for at least a decade. Even recognising limited funding and some issues over operating capacity in some parts of London a decade of rejected proposals and ideas is a very poor record for any organisation. Add on top the current environment surrounding the consultation process and it gets a lot worse. All that happens is that resentment is built up which will eventually turn into demands for structural reform or abolition of TfL because people will change their opinions based on how they are treated. It can be a very dangerous game to play if you misjudge how you respond to people who either have influence now or may gain it in the future.
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Jan 20, 2019 23:37:46 GMT
I suppose there is always that difference between what should happen (new consultation) and what does happen.
It looks to me like even TfL have conceded there physically isn’t enough capacity to withdraw the 48. The 55 is ridiculously busy enough as is, it can’t take the Walthamstow 48 passengers too. Get rid of the 48 and you’ll get the Walthamstow passengers on the 55 all the way to Central London and then a 343 situation (before the 136 got extended to assist) in the middle of the route. To cope the 55 will need a significant increase in frequency which will probably negate the 48’s saving. Also as snoggle touched on a few days ago the 48-axe (I’d say that more noticeable than most route alterations in the consultation as it’s an entire route withdrawal) wouldn’t do any favours in the mayoral elections. Out of curiosity, what was the situation with the 343?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 20, 2019 23:43:03 GMT
But TFL do still need to make their £375 million savings so I can still see them doing all they can to make a significant savings in regards to the 40, 48 and 388. Clearly not because the latest business plan has scrapped plans to take out another 15m kms. That has disappeared from the plan - I assume because City Hall has taken fright at the political fall out in an election year. There is also a "new" view that the bus network has to live within an overall budget of around £750m net subsidy for the next few years. Clearly as bus contract costs rise (as they always go because costs increase) that brings a pressure in and of itself. TfL have also for very unclear reasons opted to forecast an ongoing decline in bus usage for the next five years. That is in complete contrast to their view a year which was of massive cuts to network kilometrage being able to sustain a considerable *increase* in usage. I think TfL have swung violently in the opposite direction simply to give themselves an easier life in respect of future targets. If patronage doesn't fall to the budgeted levels things are going "well" in comparison. Call me an old cynic but it's the easiest trick in the book - provided you can make it work within the overall budget.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 20, 2019 23:53:20 GMT
It looks to me like even TfL have conceded there physically isn’t enough capacity to withdraw the 48. The 55 is ridiculously busy enough as is, it can’t take the Walthamstow 48 passengers too. Get rid of the 48 and you’ll get the Walthamstow passengers on the 55 all the way to Central London and then a 343 situation (before the 136 got extended to assist) in the middle of the route. To cope the 55 will need a significant increase in frequency which will probably negate the 48’s saving. Also as snoggle touched on a few days ago the 48-axe (I’d say that more noticeable than most route alterations in the consultation as it’s an entire route withdrawal) wouldn’t do any favours in the mayoral elections. Out of curiosity, what was the situation with the 343? Persistent overcrowding over a long period which saw the 136 eventually extended.
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Jan 20, 2019 23:57:44 GMT
It looks to me like even TfL have conceded there physically isn’t enough capacity to withdraw the 48. The 55 is ridiculously busy enough as is, it can’t take the Walthamstow 48 passengers too. Get rid of the 48 and you’ll get the Walthamstow passengers on the 55 all the way to Central London and then a 343 situation (before the 136 got extended to assist) in the middle of the route. To cope the 55 will need a significant increase in frequency which will probably negate the 48’s saving. Also as snoggle touched on a few days ago the 48-axe (I’d say that more noticeable than most route alterations in the consultation as it’s an entire route withdrawal) wouldn’t do any favours in the mayoral elections. Out of curiosity, what was the situation with the 343? Probably some of the worst overcrowding on the whole bus network, it was so bad it made it onto a TV documentary. Basically there was a large section in between Peckham and E&C to only be served by the 343, with no rail or other public transport alternative, so that was the only link. As a result 343’s were impossible for commuters to board (in the peaks) in the middle of this corridor as they were already completely full with commuters from the Peckham end going to presumably E&C. The situation got so bad that (I think it was Val Shawcross) the matter got taken to City Hall and demanded something was done as it was completely unacceptable. As a result the 136 got extended to E&C along the 343’s lone section so there was far more capacity and people in the middle of the corridor could actually board the route. hope I’ve explained that correctly/well enough Here was the document demanding the change www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/gla_migrate_files_destination/Site%20visits%20and%20survey%20results_0.pdf
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 21, 2019 0:23:30 GMT
Out of curiosity, what was the situation with the 343? Watch this video - from the Route Masters Running London series. The relevant bit about the 343 is about 40 mins in from the start. For some weird reason the video image is reversed but is still watchable. It does show how horribly under pressure the 343 was.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Jan 21, 2019 12:22:28 GMT
Out of curiosity, what was the situation with the 343? Watch this video - from the Route Masters Running London series. The relevant bit about the 343 is about 40 mins in from the start. For some weird reason the video image is reversed but is still watchable. It does show how horribly under pressure the 343 was. Just to add that of the Top Ten of complaints registered by TfL about London bus routes around that time nine served S.E. London, the sole exception being the 38.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 21, 2019 23:19:53 GMT
Looks like the curtailment of the 428, once said to commence 26 January, has been deferred to September. Source: Londonbusroutes.net As has the double decker conversion - shame the curtailment can't be permanently dropped and just convert the route to double decker. I think the 428 should be axed altogether and replaced by a short extension of the 469 to Crayford. Both routes are operated out of DT which might make this change easier to implement.
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Jan 24, 2019 16:35:32 GMT
Received an email from TfL confirming that any changes to the 386 in Woolwich will go to consultation later in the year.
Not sure who at London Buses removed the route 386 e tiles from the first 4 stops on the routes earlier in the month.
Have requested they are put back and contacted a councillor to apply more pressure.
|
|