TFL & "Managed Decline"

[urbophile]

Mostly maybe but there are still notably busy routes to town like the 3, 8, 18, 38 or 73, especially where there are no tubes, and some longish orbital ones which are the only way to avoid journeys in and out of zone one on the tube. Really long ones have been cut into two in some cases e.g. 6 / 26, 14 /91 so you can come into the centre from one side but not cross it on the same bus.

I was replying to the post which was about bus routes paralleling tube ones. Obviously where that is not the case bus routes will need to go further into the centre.

 

[AlbertBeale]

I was replying to the post which was about bus routes paralleling tube ones. Obviously where that is not the case bus routes will need to go further into the centre.

But there are no places in London that I can think of where a tube line could replace a parallel bus route - for many people the much greater distance to their nearest station, as opposed to their nearest bus stop, would mean that the withdrawal of the bus route would inhibit their ability to use public transport easily. Added to that is the much greater difficulty, and greater walking distance - in many cases - in order to access a train even when you've got to the station. (And even for people who can manage the longer distance, it would slow down their overall journey.) And with its fewer stops, compared with the tube, and the quarter-mile-long platforms, Crossrail in inner/central London is even less of an alternative to parallel bus routes for many of those who most need to use public transport. The ridiculous idea that Crossrail can be an excuse to do away with bus routes can only come from people who have no understanding of the needs of many public transport users, including the most vulnerable ones.

 

[43066]

But there are no places in London that I can think of where a tube line could replace a parallel bus route - for many people the much greater distance to their nearest station, as opposed to their nearest bus stop, would mean that the withdrawal of the bus route would inhibit their ability to use public transport easily. Added to that is the much greater difficulty, and greater walking distance - in many cases - in order to access a train even when you've got to the station. (And even for people who can manage the longer distance, it would slow down their overall journey.) And with its fewer stops, compared with the tube, and the quarter-mile-long platforms, Crossrail in inner/central London is even less of an alternative to parallel bus routes for many of those who most need to use public transport. The ridiculous idea that Crossrail can be an excuse to do away with bus routes can only come from people who have no understanding of the needs of many public transport users, including the most vulnerable ones.

Tubes replacing buses does sound rather like the brainchild of people who don’t actually live in London!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Tubes replacing buses does sound rather like the brainchild of people who don’t actually live in London!

I don't live in London, no, but going there frequently I have seen lots of ridiculous examples of duplication. Oxford St is for example a disgrace. In pretty much every other UK city*, comparable streets have been pedestrianised, creating a space for people rather than vehicles. In London, it's full of stinking diesel buses and taxis when there are three Tube stations along the way.

* Except Edinburgh for some reason. Princes St is as bad.

 

[bramling]

I don't live in London, no, but going there frequently I have seen lots of ridiculous examples of duplication. Oxford St is for example a disgrace. In pretty much every other UK city*, comparable streets have been pedestrianised, creating a space for people rather than vehicles. In London, it's full of stinking diesel buses and taxis when there are three Tube stations along the way.

* Except Edinburgh for some reason. Princes St is as bad.

There’s certainly an over supply of buses in certain areas, and I’d certainly agree over the Oxford St situation.

 

[RuddA]

I always used the tube when visiting London and avoided the buses until I had children in buggies with me, and then it became nearly the opposite. Was very glad busses duplicated the deep tube routes, especially the central line.

 

[Horizon22]

I don't live in London, no, but going there frequently I have seen lots of ridiculous examples of duplication. Oxford St is for example a disgrace. In pretty much every other UK city*, comparable streets have been pedestrianised, creating a space for people rather than vehicles. In London, it's full of stinking diesel buses and taxis when there are three Tube stations along the way.

* Except Edinburgh for some reason. Princes St is as bad.

Oxford St is an issue certainly but C.London doesn’t really have a true “bus terminal” like other cities do. Perhaps more routes when they instantly route around, but not sure how feasible that is. There are certainly some locations, but as per much London infrastructure, it’s a hodge-podge of what has come before.

 

[bramling]

I always used the tube when visiting London and avoided the buses until I had children in buggies with me, and then it became nearly the opposite. Was very glad busses duplicated the deep tube routes, especially the central line.

The thing with duplication is buses will fill in what can be some quite long gaps between stations. Just looking at the top end of the Northern Line, you have Barnet high street which is some walk up the hill from High Barnet, then there’s a long section from Totteridge to High Barnet, then there’s North Finchley which the Northern Line misses. Then another long gap from Finchley Central to East Finchley.

All that said, there’s a lot of bus overprovision.

 

[Acton1991]

In West London, a very good example is the Uxbridge Road, where the 207, 427 and 607 travel along near enough the same route through Ealing and onto Shep Bush, passing many tube/Crossrail stations along the way.

 

[Dstock7080]

Mayor outlines details of TfL fare changes from March 2022

The increase of RPI+1 is in line with conditions placed on continued short-term funding agreements by the Government.

www.london.gov.uk

Fares on TfL services will rise by RPI+1 (4.8 per cent) overall on 1 March 2022 to help TfL reach financial sustainability.
· The increase is in line with conditions placed on continued short-term funding agreements by the Government.
· Tube pay as you go fares within Zone 1 will increase by 10p – their first increase since 2016.
· Bus and tram ‘Hopper’ fare - introduced by the Mayor and allowing unlimited journeys within an hour - will increase by 10p to £1.65.

 

[urbophile]

Tubes replacing buses does sound rather like the brainchild of people who don’t actually live in London!

I don't live in London now but I did. It seems to me that tubes and buses are complementary and as others have said, buses fill in the gaps between stations. As indeed the parallel Merseyrail and bus route where I now live does. We need both. What we don't (or central London in particular doesn't) need, are city centre streets clogged up with buses that have travelled miles in from the suburbs and now travel at snails pace. The Oxford Street problem could be solved with a couple of routes running a shuttle service, for the use of hop on hop off passengers between stations; outer routes could terminate away from the central core and feed into tube lines.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't live in London now but I did. It seems to me that tubes and buses are complementary and as others have said, buses fill in the gaps between stations. As indeed the parallel Merseyrail and bus route where I now live does. We need both. What we don't (or central London in particular doesn't) need, are city centre streets clogged up with buses that have travelled miles in from the suburbs and now travel at snails pace. The Oxford Street problem could be solved with a couple of routes running a shuttle service, for the use of hop on hop off passengers between stations; outer routes could terminate away from the central core and feed into tube lines.

Oxford St does not need any buses or indeed taxis, and definitely not those irritating pedicabs. The pedestrianised shopping centres of every other city bar Edinburgh don't have them. Shopmobility schemes (plus peoples' own electric wheelchairs and mobility buggies) provide for the small number of people who wish to shop but can't walk a short distance.

The buses can terminate at Marble Arch and Tottenham Court Road (or elsewhere), with a few crossing it via the other roads. Taxi ranks can also be provided at those locations.

 

[Wolfie]

I don't live in London, no, but going there frequently I have seen lots of ridiculous examples of duplication. Oxford St is for example a disgrace. In pretty much every other UK city*, comparable streets have been pedestrianised, creating a space for people rather than vehicles. In London, it's full of stinking diesel buses and taxis when there are three Tube stations along the way.

* Except Edinburgh for some reason. Princes St is as bad.

Buses in London are now all accessible. The tube is still a very long way from being so. Your proposals would far from do many disabled people any favours.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Buses in London are now all accessible. The tube is still a very long way from being so. Your proposals would far from do many disabled people any favours.

Running full sized buses for their capacity of one wheelchair (usual number on board 0) is far from being the most efficient manner to provide for wheelchair users, and quite possibly not even the most convenient for them.

 

[Wolfie]

Running full sized buses for their capacity of one wheelchair (usual number on board 0) is far from being the most efficient manner to provide for wheelchair users, and quite possibly not even the most convenient for them.

You assume that only wheelchair users have accessibility issues.

 

[Horizon22]

Fares will be going up - 10p for buses.

Sadiq Khan announces biggest Tube and bus fare hike in a decade

More cost of living pain for Londoners as public transport prices to rise

www.standard.co.uk

Tube and bus fares will rise by an average of almost five per cent in a fortnight, Sadiq Khan announced on Monday. The hike, which matches the current rate of inflation, is the biggest annual jump in Transport for London fares in a decade and will mean passengers paying an estimated £151m more to travel this year.

Single Tube fares using Oyster or Contactless tickets will increase by 10p in zone one and between 10p to 30p across the rest of the Underground network.

Bus fares will rise by 10p to £1.65 – an increase of almost 6.5 per cent, meaning bus passengers, who are typically on lower incomes, will suffer a bigger proportionate rise than those using the Tube.

The increases are on top of already announced changes, such as premium Heathrow Tube fares throughout the day and the ban on free travel for over 60s before 9am, that will generate a further £60m to £80m a year.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Good start.

It's very notable that the single bus fare was £2.00 at the end of cash, though some will have used Saver tickets in my experience most didn't, so it has actually even with this increase gone down not just in real terms but in numbers terms too!

 

[bramling]

Good start.

It's very notable that the single bus fare was £2.00 at the end of cash, though some will have used Saver tickets in my experience most didn't, so it has actually even with this increase gone down not just in real terms but in numbers terms too!

I don't have an issue with TfL fares rising. If TfL needs extra income, then it seems very fair for some of this to be funded by ... TfL users. It also doesn't discriminate between those living within the mayor area and those outside, as everyone pays.

If Khan wants to charge a boundary charge for motorists then I expect Londoners to pay a charge to drive through my town!

 

[endicomark69@g]

Running full sized buses for their capacity of one wheelchair (usual number on board 0) is far from being the most efficient manner to provide for wheelchair users, and quite possibly not even the most convenient for them.

It's precisely this "not efficient" view that penalises those that need this provision. Buses don't book journeys like a Cab so Operators don't have the luxury of that much forward planning - they just know they have to make provision as the Law requires.

Catering to those that have accessibility issues isn't "efficient" full stop, but it has to be done. Does anyone truly believe things should be otherwise?

As to "over-provision" of Buses in London......I'm still waiting. There's about five or six heavily trafficked areas in the entire City that have a huge Bus interchange that agin isn't efficient (Oxford St, Victoria and approaches, Euston/Kings X, Croydon and Turnpike Lane) mainly because the road layouts are NEVER going to have the money spent on them to facilitate "efficiency" - but the actual Services going in/out of them could in no way be viewed as superfluous because there's an Underground.

As others have mentioned, this tends to be the view of anyone looking at a balance sheet and a Map alone, not anyone that actually uses or needs the Services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's precisely this "not efficient" view that penalises those that need this provision. Buses don't book journeys like a Cab so Operators don't have the luxury of that much forward planning - they just know they have to make provision as the Law requires.

Catering to those that have accessibility issues isn't "efficient" full stop, but it has to be done. Does anyone truly believe things should be otherwise?

I don't believe bus routes should exist solely for the occasional wheelchair user, no. If the bus route is justified as a whole, run it, and if it does run on that basis it must be accessible. But if you want to provide exclusively for wheelchair users, it would be cheaper, and better for them, to offer free taxi journeys on demand.

Edit: I get that some wheelchair users prefer a bus. Well, I prefer a train than a bus, but unfortunately there is no railway station outside my front door. In urban transport systems, the concept is that the mode used is the most efficient one for that need, not the one of the passenger's choice.

 

[bramling]

It's precisely this "not efficient" view that penalises those that need this provision. Buses don't book journeys like a Cab so Operators don't have the luxury of that much forward planning - they just know they have to make provision as the Law requires.

Catering to those that have accessibility issues isn't "efficient" full stop, but it has to be done. Does anyone truly believe things should be otherwise?

As to "over-provision" of Buses in London......I'm still waiting. There's about five or six heavily trafficked areas in the entire City that have a huge Bus interchange that agin isn't efficient (Oxford St, Victoria and approaches, Euston/Kings X, Croydon and Turnpike Lane) mainly because the road layouts are NEVER going to have the money spent on them to facilitate "efficiency" - but the actual Services going in/out of them could in no way be viewed as superfluous because there's an Underground.

As others have mentioned, this tends to be the view of anyone looking at a balance sheet and a Map alone, not anyone that actually uses or needs the Services.

In terms of over-provision, I was more thinking about frequency. I see a lot of buses driving around with pretty poor loadings, and I find it hard to justify both the operating cost and pollution.

 

[43066]

I don't live in London, no, but going there frequently I have seen lots of ridiculous examples of duplication. Oxford St is for example a disgrace. In pretty much every other UK city*, comparable streets have been pedestrianised, creating a space for people rather than vehicles. In London, it's full of stinking diesel buses and taxis when there are three Tube stations along the way.

* Except Edinburgh for some reason. Princes St is as bad.

Oxford St is bad (actually awful), but ultimately it’s right in the heart of the west end and lots of bus routes start and finish there.

I wouldn’t personally be at all opposed to pedestrianisation. One good solution would be a partial pedestrianisation but with a surface level tram running up and down (as I believe was proposed some years ago) which would deal with the mobility issues mentioned above.

Absent that, no doubt we’ll be stuck with the current arrangement, but with the buses and taxis at least being increasingly hybridised or fully electric.

 

[Horizon22]

In terms of over-provision, I was more thinking about frequency. I see a lot of buses driving around with pretty poor loadings, and I find it hard to justify both the operating cost and pollution.

There are a few and some have recently been cut. Things are still in flux though with passenger loadings and - much like the railway - I'm sure it will be a few more months until everything settles.

 

[urbophile]

You assume that only wheelchair users have accessibility issues.

It's not that, but people who need to use buses along a corridor like Oxford Street are in a minority, whether wheelchair users or not, and they could be accommodated in smaller and more suitable vehicles.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's not that, but people who need to use buses along a corridor like Oxford Street are in a minority, whether wheelchair users or not, and they could be accommodated in smaller and more suitable vehicles.

A decent Shopmobility scheme as found in many towns and cities would provide for the vast majority. You could run a golf buggy up and down it for the remaining few!

Wheelchair users may well prefer it being pedestrianised, as presently it is so crowded, due to the narrow pavements, that wheelchair use must be incredibly difficult and unpleasant at busy times.

 

[Wolfie]

It's not that, but people who need to use buses along a corridor like Oxford Street are in a minority, whether wheelchair users or not, and they could be accommodated in smaller and more suitable vehicles.

True enough. You are, l assume, aware that there is major and sustained resistance from those living in neighbouring streets to any concept of pedestrianising Oxford Street and that Westminster City Council are opposed.

 

[AlbertBeale]

True enough. You are, l assume, aware that there is major and sustained resistance from those living in neighbouring streets to any concept of pedestrianising Oxford Street and that Westminster City Council are opposed.

Yes - local residents object to public transport being shifted from Oxford Street to other roads within reach (which would need to happen to keep access to the street for shoppers). Partly it's because it would mean vehicles were moved from streets with commercial frontages to ones with residential frontages. Though given the changes of use of much of what was once housing in central London, this argument has less and less traction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

True enough. You are, l assume, aware that there is major and sustained resistance from those living in neighbouring streets to any concept of pedestrianising Oxford Street and that Westminster City Council are opposed.

I'm aware that they object to it because it'll make their roads busier. This objection is not necessarily a reason not to do it.

 

[AlbertBeale]

I'm aware that they object to it because it'll make their roads busier. This objection is not necessarily a reason not to do it.

In this case, perhaps not - though the idea of traffic being diverted from roads with commercial frontages to run down genuinely residential roads is (usually) to be opposed. In my area of London, that has happened so as to produce a pattern of road use which looks nice on paper to Council planners, but has meant that some poor basement dwellers can no longer open their windows in the summer.

 

[bicbasher]

I did see that yes and appreciated it.

My post was borne out of conversations I’ve had with the lowest paid workers at the large corporate building I work in. They really struggle.

. I think the issue in London is that much of the discounted or free travel concessions already exist.

Disabled freedom pass
Oyster 60 plus
Job seekers
Zip cards
18+ student
Apprentice

etc.

I can’t remember them all!

The beauty of the system in London is that at 1.55 no one is priced off. It’s simple. It’s fair. No one needs to apply for a product.
And pre Covid it worked well and I believe TfL was in surplus.
It may well be again as numbers rise abc perhaps the tourists come back.

I worry about anything being linked to universal credit or having to apply. Or having to rely on central government’s whims of whatever hue.

What would be good is if the 1.55 target was the desire and achievement of other cities.

Don’t aim for race to bottom. Aim high.

The gov are already chasing huge rises to fares so to see others doing the same saddens me, that’s all.

Bus & Tram Photocard (means tested)
Veterans.
Gold Card Discount.