Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Below I have attempted to pick out bus routes which will most affect SE15, SE22 and SE23, please read and share.


This is something I feel cross party and borough councillors from both Southwark and Lewisham need to work together on.


Don't forget TfL's motto "Every journey matters", it sure don't feel like that from these proposals that not only include losing the No. 12 bus service but also the 78.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-61660409


[haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk]


[haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk]


[www.cityam.com]


[ehq-production-europe.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com]


[ehq-production-europe.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com]


[ehq-production-europe.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com]


[ehq-production-europe.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com]


[ehq-production-europe.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com]


[ehq-production-europe.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com]


[ehq-production-europe.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com]


Routes 1 (Tottenham Court Road-Canada Water) and 168 (Hampstead Heath-Old Kent Road) would be axed, although a new route would run from Hampstead Heath to Canada Water using most of the 1 and 168 routeing would be introduced. The new route is 'provisionally numbered' 1 but its actual number will be defined after the consultation


Route 188 (Russell Square-North Greenwich) would be changed to start from Tottenham Court Road instead of Russell Square

No need to mock cycling. There is no other solution to the traffic crisis. Cutting buses will force people to cycle, thus reducing the amount of traffic on the road and the emissions. There is no need for buses in East Dulwich.

CPR Dave Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Seems sensible

>

> Need to get more traffic off the road and get

everyone riding bicycles.


What about Elderly and Disabled People.


Do you expect them to ride bicycles.


I'm Elderly and recovering from Hip Surgery.


Think before you post


DulwichFox

Cutting buses won't force people to cycle. They'll just stop going in to Central London and work from home instead. It's a shame for a lot of people who rely on physical work in town like waiters and cleaners etc, but if there is no transport there will be no business in central London.


the whole city will decline from the middle outwards, just like Detroit did. And the poorest will be hit hardest by that sadly.

CPR Dave Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Cutting buses won't force people to cycle. They'll

> just stop going in to Central London and work from

> home instead. It's a shame for a lot of people who

> rely on physical work in town like waiters and

> cleaners etc, but if there is no transport there

> will be no business in central London.

>

> the whole city will decline from the middle

> outwards, just like Detroit did. And the poorest

> will be hit hardest by that sadly.


I've hit the virtual like button on this post as it makes so much sense

I lived in a town with 20-min bus services. The bus co reduced the frequency to 30 mins. The number of passengers consequently declined so they reduced the frequency to 60 mins. After you've just missed a bus and had to wait 59 mins for the next one, you vow never to take the bus again and you drive into the town centre.


The point is that the bus co took one bus an hour off the service to save a few quid, and it completely decimated it. This is exactly what has been happening in London and will continue to happen until the services are as unreliable as they were 15-20 years ago.

You'd think this would have been a golden opportunity for TfL to take money off Soutehrn rail when overground services were also being reduced.


For people stuck at ED waiting 30 minutes for the next train they could have offered a ?1 bus service into London Bridge on number 40. Would take the same time and many people would then spend money getting on the tube.

weasely Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No need to mock cycling. There is no other

> solution to the traffic crisis. Cutting buses will

> force people to cycle, thus reducing the amount of

> traffic on the road and the emissions. There is no

> need for buses in East Dulwich.


That's poor trolling there.

Well let?s hope the government sorts out funding and supporting our vital transport service.


TFL are right to reduce number of buses, it means that journeys will be faster as less traffic.

If one route is proposed to be cut and it will have consequences, you need to tell them.

Chick Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You are one stop beyond East Ham.

>

>

> CPR Dave Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Seems sensible

> >

> > Need to get more traffic off the road and get

> > everyone riding bicycles.



Woof woof 😂

CPR Dave Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Seems sensible

>

> Need to get more traffic off the road and get

> everyone riding bicycles.


Not everyone CAN ride bicycles!!!

I'd love to but I'm 63 years old and have hip and knee problems and am unable to start learning to ride a bike despite my physical issues.

What a ridiculous statement!

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> CPR Dave Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Seems sensible

> >

> > Need to get more traffic off the road and get

> everyone riding bicycles.

>

> What about Elderly and Disabled People.

>

> Do you expect them to ride bicycles.

>

> I'm Elderly and recovering from Hip Surgery.

>

> Think before you post

>

> DulwichFox


Exactly this!

thank you.

NewWave Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> CPR Dave Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Seems sensible

> >

> > Need to get more traffic off the road and get

> > everyone riding bicycles.

>

> Not everyone CAN ride bicycles!!!

> I'd love to but I'm 63 years old and have hip and

> knee problems and am unable to start learning to

> ride a bike despite my physical issues.

> What a ridiculous statement!


It turns out the difference between someone (CPR Dave) being ironically stupid and merely stupid is nothing...

Didn't Labour Councillors make some sort of pledge to tackle rail services locally? Cannot remember if this extended to bus services too? Either way, what exactly are they now doing re rail services? Even more important if local bus services are being decimated.

Angelina Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If we?re talking about trains? how about reducing

> obscene profits from ticket prices? National rail

> travel is outrageously expensive.



We are not talking about National rail here (and yes I agree with you the prices are indeed crazy).

This is about TFL and cutting of local services.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps. 
    • Niko 07818 607 583 has been doing jobs for us for several years, he is reliable, always there for us, highly recommended! 
    • I am keeping my fingers crossed the next few days are not so loud. I honestly think it is the private, back garden displays that are most problematic as, in general, there is no way of knowing when and where they might happen. For those letting off a few bangers in the garden I get it is tempting to think what's the harm in a few minutes of 'fun', but it is the absolute randomness of sudden bangs that can do irreparable damage to people and animals. With organised events that are well advertised there is some forewarning at least, and the hope is that organisers of such events can be persuaded to adopt and make a virtue of using only low noise displays in future.
    • There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda and far more across their briefs than any minister I've seen in years. The consensus was that Labour are so unpopular and untrusted by the electorate already, as are the Conservatives, that breaking the manifesto pledge on income tax wouldn't drive their approval ratings any lower, so they should, and I quote, 'Roll The Dice', hope for the best and see where we are in a couple of years time. As a strategy, i don't know whether I find that quite worrying or just an honest appraisal of what most governments actually do in practice.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...