Consultation on Possible Changes to Bus Route 159
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Consultation on possible changes to bus route 159 Consultation Report February 2014 1 Consultation on possible changes to bus route 159 Consultation Report Contents 1 Introduction........................................................................................................... 2 2 The consultation................................................................................................... 2 3 Responses from members of the public............................................................... 4 4 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders................................. 6 Appendices Appendix A – List of stakeholders consulted............................................................. 10 Appendix B – List of questions asked........................................................................ 11 Appendix C - Copy of consultation notice displayed at bus stops............................. 12 1 1 Introduction We consulted stakeholders about our proposals to improve the reliability of route 159. We proposed a change to the central London terminus. Buses would run between Streatham and Marble Arch and no longer serve Paddington or Paddington Basin. The consultation took place between 13 November and 13 December 2013. This report explains the background to the scheme and the consultation and summarises the responses. The impact of roadworks and heavy traffic means the route does not run as reliably as we would like. Quite often some journeys are cut short of their final destination to prevent long gaps in service on busier parts of the route. There has also been a reduction in bus travel between Paddington and Marble Arch in recent years. The stop in Paddington Basin (in North Wharf Road) is not served by any other route. However it is relatively poorly used with about 160 passengers boarding or alighting each weekday. Since the introduction of a bus service here other transport options have improved, including the new entrance to Paddington (Hammersmith & City) Station. Stops on Bishop’s Bridge Road would continue to be served by routes 46 and 332. Stops at Paddington in Praed Street will continue to be served by a wide range of routes. Routes 7 and 23 would continue to provide a 24-hour service between the West End and Paddington. Together they offer enough space for all passengers going to or from Paddington. Our proposal would help improve the service for 28,000 passengers per weekday using route 159 between Marble Arch and Streatham. The service would continue to run to the same frequencies as now. Buses run every five to six minutes Monday to Saturday, every twelve minutes on Sundays and all evenings, and every 20 minutes through the night. 2 The consultation The consultation was designed to enable us to understand opinion about the proposed change to route 159 and help inform our final decision making. The potential outcomes of the consultation are: We decide the consultation raises no issues that should prevent us from proceeding with the scheme as originally planned We modify the scheme in response to issues raised in consultation We abandon the scheme as a result of issues raised in the consultation 2 2.1 Consultation objectives The objectives of the consultation were: To give stakeholders and the public easy to understand information about the proposals and allow them to respond To understand the level of support or opposition for the change To understand any issues that might affect the proposal of which we were not previously aware To understand concerns and objections To allow respondents to make suggestions 2.2 Who we consulted The consultation was open to the public. We have also sought the views of relevant stakeholders such as affected Councils, traffic police, London TravelWatch, Members of Parliament, Assembly Members and local interest groups. A list of the stakeholders we consulted is shown in Appendix A. Their responses are shown in Section 4. To allow us to better understand the views of key local stakeholders and to raise awareness of the consultation, we attended a meeting on 4 November 2013. We met key representatives of the local community and an officer from City of Westminster. 2.3 Consultation material, distribution and publicity The consultation was published online. The dedicated webpage explained the background to the proposal. We invited people to respond by answering two questions and leaving comments. We raised awareness of the consultation by sending an email to registered Oyster Card holders, who have used route 159 and to key stakeholders. We also put up posters at bus stops served by the route. A copy of the questions asked and the consultation material is available in appendix B. 2.4 General response There were 619 responses in total. Of these, 614 were from members of the public and five from stakeholders. There were 252 responses (41%) which were generally opposed to the proposals, and 151 (25%) responses which were generally supportive. 3 3 Responses from members of the public There were 614 responses from members of the public. 3.1 Public consultation results To help us understand more about who replied we asked two questions. We asked respondents whether they use route 159 and if so how often. Question one Do you use route 159? 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Yes No Not answered Total Number of replies 582 17 15 614 Question two How often do you use route 159? 250 200 150 100 50 0 More than Once a Once a Once a Not once a Total month week day Answered day Number of replies 217 117 98 77 105 614 4 We asked respondents whether they had any comments about our proposal. Of the 619 responses, 618 provided comments. The table below summarises the views and suggestions made. A separate document will respond to the main points raised by respondents. Number of times Issue issue raised Generally against proposal 252 Generally support proposal 151 Generally neutral or no comment 92 Positive / Support Only if improve the reliability 37 Would improve the service 19 Negative / Against Double fares for many passengers 36 Inconvenient for mobility impaired people or the elderly 30 159 is only 24h link to Paddington from South London 22 Alternatives too far away from Paddington Central 14 Alternative service needs to be provided 13 Extra capacity needed at Paddington, not less. 4 Affects night service 2 Neutral No comment 48 Neutral opinion 44 Travel to Paddington 98 Do not normally travel beyond Marble Arch 79 Doesn't directly affect me 36 Access to Heathrow via Paddington Station 20 Travel to West End 16 Extend route 332 to Basin 11 Use Tube as alternative to Paddington (more dependable) 9 Commute or visit St Mary's hospital 8 Extend route 15 to replace 4 Improve reliability, don't cut route back 4 Not Answered 3 Change routeing 2 Express service 2 Timed tickets 2 Alternatives more reliable 1 Lots of new development for the area planned 1 5 4 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders There were five responses from stakeholders, shown below. London TravelWatch Thank you for consulting with London TravelWatch on these proposals and inviting our views. We also appreciated meeting with you to talk this through. Whilst this proposal will disbenefit a small number of passengers and reduce the capacity along the section of the route between Paddington and Marble Arch, we accept that overall this is outweighed by the benefits in terms of the better use funds available to TfL and the improvements that will be made in the reliability of route 159. We also note that the new entrance into Paddington station allows a short cut for pedestrians to be able to reach Praed Street and the bus routes there. As you know we are keen that passengers using this route are consulted. Can you please tell us if TfL has emailed passengers via their Oyster accounts to elicit their views? We also want TfL to explain more fully the pros and cons of the changes that are being made. You told us when we met that less than 50 passengers a day use the stop which will no longer be served. We would welcome this statistic (rather than just a percentage) being included in both the consultation information and the eventual decision notice if you choose to implement the proposal. It would also be helpful to tell those consulted how often the service has been terminated in the recent past and the cost savings that will be made compared to the financial support the route gets from TfL. Also passengers would want to know how these savings might be re-invested to support other services providing better value for money. Can consideration be given to ensuring the change occurs after the reopening of Edgware Road station as the 159 currently provides an alternative service from this station? Can TfL monitor crowding levels on the remaining bus routes on the Paddington to Oxford Street corridor once the change has taken place? Westminster City Council This is Westminster City Council’s response to TfL’s consultation on the proposal to withdraw bus route 159 between Marble Arch and Paddington Basin, meaning that Edgware Road and Paddington Station would no longer be served by route 159. The proposal would also result in the removal of all bus services from North Wharf Road at Paddington Basin. The City Council objects to the proposal. Route 159 provides an important link between Paddington Basin and the West End and is used by local residents and workers and visitors to the Paddington area. It is also used by residents in the area to the north of Harrow Road who use recently improved pedestrian crossing facilities to and from North Wharf Road. A number of new developments in the Paddington Basin area, including Merchant Square and the North Westminster Community School site, are likely to lead to a potential increase in demand for bus route 159 in 6 the relatively near future and its withdrawal is therefore considered premature. The current patronage of route 159 is also likely to have been affected by the diversions and delays have occurred as a result of the current Crossrail construction works in Eastbourne Terrace which are programmed to be completed in approximately 2 months.