|
Post by routew15 on Sept 7, 2015 19:16:05 GMT
The page is saying currently unavailable again...? Update:
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Mar 9, 2016 17:20:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 9, 2016 17:34:39 GMT
DOUBLE THUD!! Another consultation idea NOT going ahead. Anyone would think there was an election coming up. I suspect the influence of Diamond Geezer's reporting of all things Bow might have had an effect here as his blog will have raised awareness of the issue way beyond what would normally happen. I assume the planned frequency increase by running via the flyover is also dead.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Mar 9, 2016 18:04:52 GMT
DOUBLE THUD!! Another consultation idea NOT going ahead. Anyone would think there was an election coming up. I suspect the influence of Diamond Geezer's reporting of all things Bow might have had an effect here as his blog will have raised awareness of the issue way beyond what would normally happen. I assume the planned frequency increase by running via the flyover is also dead. What will be interesting to see is if consultations that are tied to bus route contract changes get the same amount of public opposition, will those changes be amended / cancelled or will they still go ahead...
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 9, 2016 18:28:31 GMT
Massive shame - so the 25 will return to sitting in traffic and serving a very quiet bus stop.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2016 18:50:46 GMT
WHAT THE HECK? WHAT IS SO BAD ABOUT THE 25 GOING OVER THE FLYOVER, WITH THE CUT JOURNEY TIMES AND LESS DELAYS?
Like Snoggle, I read Diamond Geezer's blog, I find some of it very interesting, but when he made a post about this consultation, it did wind me up a bit, but this is the only time he has done that!
One thing I find annoying is that on the reply to concerns document, there is no mention now to the people who supported the proposal, and now I'm concerned at it continuing on.
A few years ago on the cashless consultation, most people disagreed with that, which I did, so why did they go-ahead with this or vice versa with this consultation? They have probably lost revenue with buses being cashless.
I know TFL don't like prefixes, but could the Bank / Mile End journeys be renumbered 25A and they go round the roundabout, and then the Oxford Circus journeys keeping the number 25 and they go up to Flyover?
But even if they did reroute the 25 over the Flyover, it wouldn't last long if TFL are planning to remove it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2016 20:29:51 GMT
Massive shame - so the 25 will return to sitting in traffic and serving a very quiet bus stop. Does make you wonder who these 79% are seems a lot of people to complain about fairly quiet stops.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Mar 9, 2016 20:38:00 GMT
I suspect Diamond Geezer's blog did have some impact on the totals but the local borough, MP and London Travel Watch were also opposed.
|
|
|
Post by romfordbuses on Mar 9, 2016 21:41:16 GMT
Stupid not going ahead, You can easily save 10 minutes using the flyover...All for serving a stop that hardly anyone uses!
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Mar 9, 2016 21:43:03 GMT
WHAT THE HECK? WHAT IS SO BAD ABOUT THE 25 GOING OVER THE FLYOVER, WITH THE CUT JOURNEY TIMES AND LESS DELAYS? Like Snoggle, I read Diamond Geezer's blog, I find some of it very interesting, but when he made a post about this consultation, it did wind me up a bit, but this is the only time he has done that! One thing I find annoying is that on the reply to concerns document, there is no mention now to the people who supported the proposal, and now I'm concerned at it continuing on. A few years ago on the cashless consultation, most people disagreed with that, which I did, so why did they go-ahead with this or vice versa with this consultation? They have probably lost revenue with buses being cashless. I know TFL don't like prefixes, but could the Bank / Mile End journeys be renumbered 25A and they go round the roundabout, and then the Oxford Circus journeys keeping the number 25 and they go up to Flyover? But even if they did reroute the 25 over the Flyover, it wouldn't last long if TFL are planning to remove it. I was originally pro- this scheme however I now think the better solution would of been for peak hour only use of the flyover. The response to issues raised normally only handles queries that get a lot of mentions, this tends to be comments opposed to the project. If you're looking for a 'pro-flyover' response everything you'd need would be on the consultation page, outside of that TfL wouldn't come up with reasons the scheme should still take place after confirming their concluding stance on the matter. The cashless scheme is quite controversial, it seemed bad to me at the time but overall it has been quite successful, this seems to be because contactless payment covered / ironed out most problems. I can't prove but I highly doubt revenue is being lost due to cashless buses, one of the reason for the gap in revenue is due to the increase in buses that use open boarding. Any lost revenue has most probably been recouped or even increase with contactless. it may not be long for the removal of the flyover but it is clearly long enough for locals. I think TfL have stopped these plans as it creates a noticeable example that the Bow Road can be 'business as usual' once the cycle superhighway works are over. If the route continued to serve the flyover it could show that the delays to the 25 were not only caused due to the construction of the CS2 but because enivitable *lose of road space that project had planned from the get go*
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 9, 2016 22:52:19 GMT
I can't fathom how the majority oppose the proposal and the minority agree with it, I am led to believe that the minority are logical locals who are actually aware of how beneficial this proposal would've been to the 25 if it went ahead, the rest on the other hand clearly don't give a crap about the 25's reliability and are willing to oppose this proposal just for the sake of serving a stop that is lightly used.
|
|
|
Post by RT3062 on Mar 9, 2016 23:06:04 GMT
I can't fathom how the majority oppose the proposal and the minority agree with it, I am led to believe that the minority are logical locals who are actually aware of how beneficial this proposal would've been to the 25 if it went ahead, the rest on the other hand clearly don't give a crap about the 25's reliability and are willing to oppose this proposal just for the sake of serving a stop that is lightly used. doesnt make any sense.it would surely help with the time keeping and the fact its a very lightly used stop
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Mar 10, 2016 10:52:09 GMT
WARNING The following contains items that may be deemed a rant to readers.
Stunned. Utterly stunned. There is no way any of the 1000 people who were negative about the proposal travel THROUGH the roundabout on the 25. This should have been a no brainer.
Some key stats: 252 heard about the consultation through email. These are likely to be non-locals who probably travel through on the 25. 234 were positive. I think most of these were from those emailed, and travel through. 388 heard about the consultation through 'other sources' - i.e. The Blog from Diamond Geezer
Some other nonsense: At least have some good reasons. Oh, some people have to walk a bit. Well, it makes no difference, where the bus stop is when your bus is moving 1 mph. 37- people said that in rush hour the buses are empty. I mean come on, their brains are empty IMO. Tower Hamlets- 'Does not match the Visions of the removal of the flyover in the future'. Are Tower Hamlets fearing a day when the flyover over is removed the 25 will be broken up into 2 services Ilford - Bow, Bow -Oxford Circus. I have news for you TH, the 25 will probably go back using the normal routing. Newham - Do they even have anyone working there? Do they ever respond to anything. MPs- Where are these 'MPs' when bus stops are moved/closed/joined OR when bus lanes are being removed. Oh, by the way, buses are similar to taxi's, but are bigger and red.
Finally I completely blame TfL for the way this has ended. A) Poor explanation of the benefits B) Not mitigating the bus stop by moving it further down, especially when they did the seg-cy lane works on Stratford High Street.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 10, 2016 13:13:38 GMT
WARNING The following contains items that may be deemed a rant to readers. Stunned. Utterly stunned. There is no way any of the 1000 people who were negative about the proposal travel THROUGH the roundabout on the 25. This should have been a no brainer. Some key stats: 252 heard about the consultation through email. These are likely to be non-locals who probably travel through on the 25. 234 were positive. I think most of these were from those emailed, and travel through. 388 heard about the consultation through 'other sources' - i.e. The Blog from Diamond Geezer Some other nonsense: At least have some good reasons. Oh, some people have to walk a bit. Well, it makes no difference, where the bus stop is when your bus is moving 1 mph. 37- people said that in rush hour the buses are empty. I mean come on, their brains are empty IMO. Tower Hamlets- 'Does not match the Visions of the removal of the flyover in the future'. Are Tower Hamlets fearing a day when the flyover over is removed the 25 will be broken up into 2 services Ilford - Bow, Bow -Oxford Circus. I have news for you TH, the 25 will probably go back using the normal routing. Newham - Do they even have anyone working there? Do they ever respond to anything. MPs- Where are these 'MPs' when bus stops are moved/closed/joined OR when bus lanes are being removed. Oh, by the way, buses are similar to taxi's, but are bigger and red. Finally I completely blame TfL for the way this has ended. A) Poor explanation of the benefits B) Not mitigating the bus stop by moving it further down, especially when they did the seg-cy lane works on Stratford High Street. LOL, love this post, especially the bit about Newham even have anyone working for the council - I completely agree with the above.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Mar 10, 2016 13:42:30 GMT
I'm slightly amused that TfL get criticized for consultations that people think are a fait-accompli, then they get slaughtered for taking account of responses to another!
|
|