Bus review

[snoggle]

Val Shawcross this morning confirmed that there will be a review of London's bus network starting this Autumn. She did not have a full brief for the review with her but the following things were said.

- a desire to "rebalance" the network between inner and outer London
- aim is to deal with growing demand where it exists
- to work with the boroughs and other politicians to identify problem areas and concerns and missing links.
- to ensure there are effective bus services to essential public services / health facilities
- to ensure development areas have bus links *in advance* of developments being finished and occupied. Sounds horribly European!
- to ensure clean buses are deployed on corridors and in areas with poor air quality
- to deal with the issues raised by the proposed expansion of the ULEZ.

She also said the Hopper ticket should allow better utilisation of the bus network, raise its efficiency and allow people not to be stuck waiting for one through bus but to change en route. Some interesting possible ramifications there especially on what could be termed second tier routes that "go round the houses".

Now that sounds like an almighty piece of work that could have very big ramifications. There was no timescale given for how long the review will take but I doubt it could take longer than 1 year otherwise there will be no time to deal with the air quality ramifications.

[snoggle]

Just been listening to some more of the Transport Cttee webcast with Val Shawcross. Seems the Mayor is determined to achieve pedestrianisation of Oxford St. Apparently being looked at in 3 phases.

TCR - Oxford Circus
Oxford Circus - Selfridges
Selfridges - Marble Arch

The last of the above may not happen before 2020 as it is much more difficult to do.

Val said that she felt that TfL "had got stuck in a rut" over bus service planning and the ramifications for Central London if you have very frequent and overlapping radial services all trying to get to / through Zone 1. Seems a massive process is now underway to "comb out" (her words) the radial routes to rationalise them, reducing resources on them, reroute them and cut them short of Zone 1. This will be done *before* Crossrail opens in 2018 so expect massive, seismic changes to remove a lot of buses from Zone 1 and its approaches. Consultation is expected by end 2016 on the bus changes. It is also clear that there is no intention to simply reroute services down side / parallel roads. The Hopper ticket was also cited as now giving TfL additional options on service planning with far more enforced interchange for people making what are now direct journeys.

She also said that the NB4Ls will not be scrapped early. They will run for their full term of service. It's clear she's not enthusiastic about them but recognises there's little can be done. She doesn't see the point in ever having the public sector fund the R&D cost for bespoke vehicles when the supply market makes perfectly reasonable alternative buses with better technologies. She also confirmed she agreed the removal of the customer assistants - "best to take these cost savings decisions early and quickly when you're getting very little benefit for a lot of cost".

The other really important thing she said was that TfL are being forced by City Hall to "very rapidly" speed up the renewal of the bus fleet to get cleaner, more modern buses into service quickly. I expect this is going to cause havoc with the tendering process in the short term. If you like older buses then enjoy them now because it looks like big changes coming in under a year.

[sid]

Rebalancing the network between inner and outer London just sounds like reducing buses in the central area.

I do agree about overlapping routes clogging up the central area but the 36/436 is ok as it is with the outer ends being the quietest.

Clearly the LT is going to be around for many years to come, whatever people might think of them they do the job.

Sad to see some old favourite types on their way out but air quality has to be a top priority.

[Nathan]

I wonder if 'speeding up' the process of introducing cleaner buses will involve not offering contract extensions to operators who operate routes in or around Central London. Although who knows...maybe operators will be given the option to introduce hybrids for 2 year contract extensions then retain the route for a further 5 years.

[ServerKing]

Jul 13, 2016 18:11:12 GMT sid said:

Sad to see some old favourite types on their way out but air quality has to be a top priority.

I will miss those B9TL's on the 18 They have to sort out pollution on Edgware Road, along the Euston Road as well. I think all the routes have to thought of again, we have gaps in the numbering sequence - the E8 spends more of its route in Hounslow borough but has an Ealing prefix It will be interesting to see what and how they do this, if they embark on this in the Autumn. I would get rid of the 349 and run the 149 back to Enfield Garage and increase the PVR, some of the routes chopped in half have not really had the greatest of impacts. If you get a 427/207/607 generally you're still subjected to loads of traffic so cannot really see the benefit of so many routes down one road

If anything I'd standardise blinds and make them either all DayGlo or WOB, without the baffling array we have at the moment. Even though I liked the LED route, I think presentation is key and I wouldn't allow any bus into service if the blinds were not working or legible / descriptive enough for Joe Public to read

[snoggle]

Jul 13, 2016 18:42:38 GMT Nathan said:

I wonder if 'speeding up' the process of introducing cleaner buses will involve not offering contract extensions to operators who operate routes in or around Central London. Although who knows...maybe operators will be given the option to introduce hybrids for 2 year contract extensions then retain the route for a further 5 years.

I think the thing we will need to get into our heads is that the conventional route structure to and thru Z1 is going to go. Buses that are currently on high PVR routes will not be on those routes because the routes may no longer exist or will be vastly reduced. One big implication here is that NB4Ls will end up on more / different routes than at present. Just consider how many are deployed on the 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 38, 73 and 390. I expect many of those routes will see quite radical changes even though some of them go nowhere near Oxford St. We are undoubtedly headed towards something like a "core route" concept in Central London as you see on some commercial networks outside London.

I think operators are going to have a tough few years because they are going to face huge changes and a likely loss of work. They may also find they have garage space in the wrong place. This also springs back on TfL because routes may become less efficient to operate and more costly. Changes in the route structure and usage will also cause TfL problems because they won't have reliable data on which to base business cases for further changes. The ramifications from all this could run on for years and years.

[snowman]

Jul 13, 2016 18:42:38 GMT Nathan said:

I wonder if 'speeding up' the process of introducing cleaner buses will involve not offering contract extensions to operators who operate routes in or around Central London. Although who knows...maybe operators will be given the option to introduce hybrids for 2 year contract extensions then retain the route for a further 5 years.

If I was a leasing company I would be panicking. Any Operator with half a brain is going to be returning leased diesel buses at earliest free break point and taking euroVI hybrids instead. The mayor is suggesting upgrading upto 3000 buses, but TfL won't be keen to upgrade a bus that isn't owned by a London Operator.


The big problems are going to be the euroIV single decks, there are quite large numbers (having replaced the late 1990s early low floor buses). Unlike the double decks or newer euroV buses, their capital value is so low that upgrading to euroVI ULEZ compatibility is probably going to cost more than bus is worth. Many of them have just started a second contract so will be interesting to see how they get replaced by September 2020 (or year earlier). (Revised ULEZ is proposed London wide for buses, but only NCR+SCR for cars)

[Deleted]

Clearly some firms have more to lose than others. The big three must be quite concerned.

[danorak]

This sounds like a very elaborate way of saying 'cuts' to me. I'm also not entirely sure what she means about being 'stuck in a rut'. Never underestimate how much passengers dislike change and being forced to change. Look at the furore caused by trying to change the 13 and she wants to reproduce that in all directions across zone 1? We all enjoy playing at planning on here but a stable network is known to encourage travel - this could be very damaging.

[snoggle]

Jul 13, 2016 23:23:06 GMT danorak said:

This sounds like a very elaborate way of saying 'cuts' to me. I'm also not entirely sure what she means about being 'stuck in a rut'. Never underestimate how much passengers dislike change and being forced to change. Look at the furore caused by trying to change the 13 and she wants to reproduce that in all directions across zone 1? We all enjoy playing at planning on here but a stable network is known to encourage travel - this could be very damaging.

And therein lies the risk. This is one of those classic cases where people go "ooh yes I'd love a pedestrianised Oxford St" and then when presented with the consequences go "oh no you can't do *that* to my bus service". As I have said for a very long time this is going to be very involved, complicated and will probably end up not at all as anyone expected.

I think Mrs Shawcross's remarks were along the lines that TfL's approach to Zone 1 buses has been to maintain a historical core pattern of routes and links. That's the mindset and it's been there for decades - way before TfL existed. Therefore forcing people out of their comfort zone and long established thinking is difficult (it is - BTDTGTTS!). When we consider how long it has taken to turn round some recent consultations covering 1 or 2 routes can you imagine the time it is going to take to turn round several consultations for Zone 1 changes plus all the ones related to Crossrail? It's going to take at up to a year - especially if there are a lot of responses as I suspect there will be because there will be a lot of publicity.

I agree that the Finchley Rd changes show what can happen and I expect TfL and City Hall will be fire fighting a lot of issues but that's what they are there for. To be fair I think Mrs Shawcross knows it's a huge challenge and that there are loads of issues to deal with. However the priority is, as you would expect, to deliver the manifesto commitments on Oxford St. The bus changes are a consequence not a direct manifesto issue.

[Deleted]

In reply to snoggle 's second post on this thread, I could foresee all of this coming, and I'm not exactly an expert... I really should be overseeing the bus network myself!! (Before you all jump in and say 'I saw this coming too', let a guy have his moment!)

Regards to Oxford Street, I would've loved to see a tram run through it (sadly there are many reasons why it's impractical, not least restricting pedestrian flows by installing barriers, lack of storage/maintenance space and the fare and fare enforcement issue when TfL are trying to save money)

What they need to think of, BEFORE they start planning to remove buses from the central area, is the extent to which Crossrail would affect bus patronage. I hate to sound sceptical, but to me the Elizabeth line looks like Central line Mark II, I can't see it taking passengers off north-south trips through London. Routes like 94 I can understand, but if their plan is to force people to change buses there will be too many 'pinch points' at key locations, making some places look like a tube strike daily.

[sid]

Jul 13, 2016 19:00:32 GMT ServerKing said:

Jul 13, 2016 18:11:12 GMT sid said:

Sad to see some old favourite types on their way out but air quality has to be a top priority.

I will miss those B9TL's on the 18 They have to sort out pollution on Edgware Road, along the Euston Road as well. I think all the routes have to thought of again, we have gaps in the numbering sequence - the E8 spends more of its route in Hounslow borough but has an Ealing prefix It will be interesting to see what and how they do this, if they embark on this in the Autumn. I would get rid of the 349 and run the 149 back to Enfield Garage and increase the PVR, some of the routes chopped in half have not really had the greatest of impacts. If you get a 427/207/607 generally you're still subjected to loads of traffic so cannot really see the benefit of so many routes down one road

If anything I'd standardise blinds and make them either all DayGlo or WOB, without the baffling array we have at the moment. Even though I liked the LED route, I think presentation is key and I wouldn't allow any bus into service if the blinds were not working or legible / descriptive enough for Joe Public to read

I think prefixes are ok for local networks like Orpington but once a route starts going further afield like the E8 has it deserves a number of its own.

I think the 149/349 change was only ever implemented to allow the former to convert to bendybus.

The 74 or 430 are another candidate for reductions, there really is no need for both routes between Putney and South Kensington.

I'd have to say in hindsight the withdrawl of the 13 is perhaps not as crazy as I first thought, there does seem to be quite a bit of spare capacity south of Finchley Road station, maybe just extend the 240 to Finchley Road Stn in part replacement?

[Deleted]

Jul 13, 2016 23:47:47 GMT snoggle said:

Jul 13, 2016 23:23:06 GMT danorak said:

This sounds like a very elaborate way of saying 'cuts' to me. I'm also not entirely sure what she means about being 'stuck in a rut'. Never underestimate how much passengers dislike change and being forced to change. Look at the furore caused by trying to change the 13 and she wants to reproduce that in all directions across zone 1? We all enjoy playing at planning on here but a stable network is known to encourage travel - this could be very damaging.

And therein lies the risk. This is one of those classic cases where people go "ooh yes I'd love a pedestrianised Oxford St" and then when presented with the consequences go "oh no you can't do *that* to my bus service". As I have said for a very long time this is going to be very involved, complicated and will probably end up not at all as anyone expected.

I think Mrs Shawcross's remarks were along the lines that TfL's approach to Zone 1 buses has been to maintain a historical core pattern of routes and links. That's the mindset and it's been there for decades - way before TfL existed. Therefore forcing people out of their comfort zone and long established thinking is difficult (it is - BTDTGTTS!). When we consider how long it has taken to turn round some recent consultations covering 1 or 2 routes can you imagine the time it is going to take to turn round several consultations for Zone 1 changes plus all the ones related to Crossrail? It's going to take at up to a year - especially if there are a lot of responses as I suspect there will be because there will be a lot of publicity.

I agree that the Finchley Rd changes show what can happen and I expect TfL and City Hall will be fire fighting a lot of issues but that's what they are there for. To be fair I think Mrs Shawcross knows it's a huge challenge and that there are loads of issues to deal with. However the priority is, as you would expect, to deliver the manifesto commitments on Oxford St. The bus changes are a consequence not a direct manifesto issue.

The point is though thousands of passengers could be affected indirectly due to the promise or whatever you want to call it, to pedestrianise Oxford Street. Look at where those buses go when they leave Central London.... Straight into Labour strong holds. It's no use saying to residents of Lambeth that the 159 (for example) is being withdrawn from going anywhere near Oxford Street, but hey you can get the Victoria Line instead. Many people use the bus because it's cheaper, and the tube is at capacity.

Having said that, one only has to look at the empty top decks of buses going around Trafalgar Square between the peaks to see evidence of over bussing. On the other hand, one can head to Lady Margaret Road in Southall and try their luck boarding a 120 & being lucky enough to find a seat.

[sid]

Jul 14, 2016 6:33:11 GMT @rgd976 said:

Jul 13, 2016 23:47:47 GMT snoggle said:

And therein lies the risk. This is one of those classic cases where people go "ooh yes I'd love a pedestrianised Oxford St" and then when presented with the consequences go "oh no you can't do *that* to my bus service". As I have said for a very long time this is going to be very involved, complicated and will probably end up not at all as anyone expected.

I think Mrs Shawcross's remarks were along the lines that TfL's approach to Zone 1 buses has been to maintain a historical core pattern of routes and links. That's the mindset and it's been there for decades - way before TfL existed. Therefore forcing people out of their comfort zone and long established thinking is difficult (it is - BTDTGTTS!). When we consider how long it has taken to turn round some recent consultations covering 1 or 2 routes can you imagine the time it is going to take to turn round several consultations for Zone 1 changes plus all the ones related to Crossrail? It's going to take at up to a year - especially if there are a lot of responses as I suspect there will be because there will be a lot of publicity.

I agree that the Finchley Rd changes show what can happen and I expect TfL and City Hall will be fire fighting a lot of issues but that's what they are there for. To be fair I think Mrs Shawcross knows it's a huge challenge and that there are loads of issues to deal with. However the priority is, as you would expect, to deliver the manifesto commitments on Oxford St. The bus changes are a consequence not a direct manifesto issue.

The point is though thousands of passengers could be affected indirectly due to the promise or whatever you want to call it, to pedestrianise Oxford Street. Look at where those buses go when they leave Central London.... Straight into Labour strong holds. It's no use saying to residents of Lambeth that the 159 (for example) is being withdrawn from going anywhere near Oxford Street, but hey you can get the Victoria Line instead. Many people use the bus because it's cheaper, and the tube is at capacity.

Having said that, one only has to look at the empty top decks of buses going around Trafalgar Square between the peaks to see evidence of over bussing. On the other hand, one can head to Lady Margaret Road in Southall and try their luck boarding a 120 & being lucky enough to find a seat.

I would imagine the 159 will still go to Oxford Circus?

There are numerous examples of over provision in Central London and inadequate levels of service in suburban areas.

[sid]

Jul 13, 2016 23:23:06 GMT danorak said:

This sounds like a very elaborate way of saying 'cuts' to me. I'm also not entirely sure what she means about being 'stuck in a rut'. Never underestimate how much passengers dislike change and being forced to change. Look at the furore caused by trying to change the 13 and she wants to reproduce that in all directions across zone 1? We all enjoy playing at planning on here but a stable network is known to encourage travel - this could be very damaging.

A stable network is a good thing up to a point but it also needs to be able to adapt to changes such as crossrail.

I have no objection to reductions where justified if the resources saved are going to be put to better use elsewhere