Oxford Street to be pedestrianised by 2020

[carlberry]

If we had trolleybuses I would suggest a bored tunnel underneath it

Like a tube?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If we had trolleybuses I would suggest a bored tunnel underneath it

Like the Tube and Crossrail?

 

[plcd1]

TfL consultation now open.

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/oxford-street/?cid=oxford-street

Which says very little of any substance. It is clearly designed to "float" ideas that are potentially controversial so as to trigger a response now. This will allow Westminster City Council (WCC), TfL and City Hall to judge likely opposition from the public / parties not already involved in the planning work that's been going on for years.

It's very clear that WCC are reluctant because of overspill risks to adjacent streets which will annoy residents and businesses. TfL is shackled because the Mayor wants pedestrianisation and therefore can't publicly put forward a "pro bus" argument. The result will be pedestrianisation with cycling allowed. Taxis will get special ranks and access as close to Oxford St as possible and the buses and coaches will all be booted out with no running down roads like Wigmore St or New Cavendish Street. Existing trunk routes will be curtailed, diverted well away or simply axed and merged into other routes. No one is putting forward a case for buses to retain a major public transport role in Zone 1 - it's all about Tube / Crossrail / bicycles and shank's pony. The general public will only twigg what's happening when it's too late.

 

[Busaholic]

Which says very little of any substance. It is clearly designed to "float" ideas that are potentially controversial so as to trigger a response now. This will allow Westminster City Council (WCC), TfL and City Hall to judge likely opposition from the public / parties not already involved in the planning work that's been going on for years.

It's very clear that WCC are reluctant because of overspill risks to adjacent streets which will annoy residents and businesses. TfL is shackled because the Mayor wants pedestrianisation and therefore can't publicly put forward a "pro bus" argument. The result will be pedestrianisation with cycling allowed. Taxis will get special ranks and access as close to Oxford St as possible and the buses and coaches will all be booted out with no running down roads like Wigmore St or New Cavendish Street. Existing trunk routes will be curtailed, diverted well away or simply axed and merged into other routes. No one is putting forward a case for buses to retain a major public transport role in Zone 1 - it's all about Tube / Crossrail / bicycles and shank's pony. The general public will only twigg what's happening when it's too late.

Sadiq Khan may be the son of a bus driver, but he is showing no awareness of the importance of buses in the public transport mix. I'd imagine he's listening far too much to Val Shawcross and her opinions on how bus routes should be structured. Allowing people to change buses in limited circumstances without extra charge is worse than provision of a 'through' service, and the bus will be abandoned in greater numbers than at any time since the 1958 Bus Strike forced changes to travel patterns which were just beginning to be rectified when the Congestion Charge took effect. All that good work, maybe not undone in a stroke but it could be perceived that way.

I'd also repeat something I've said on here many times over the last few months, that the security issues surrounding Oxford Street becoming pedestrianized are now immense. I cannot imagine the Met Police sanctioning such a policy.

 

[Antman]

Sadiq Khan may be the son of a bus driver, but he is showing no awareness of the importance of buses in the public transport mix. I'd imagine he's listening far too much to Val Shawcross and her opinions on how bus routes should be structured. Allowing people to change buses in limited circumstances without extra charge is worse than provision of a 'through' service, and the bus will be abandoned in greater numbers than at any time since the 1958 Bus Strike forced changes to travel patterns which were just beginning to be rectified when the Congestion Charge took effect. All that good work, maybe not undone in a stroke but it could be perceived that way.

I'd also repeat something I've said on here many times over the last few months, that the security issues surrounding Oxford Street becoming pedestrianized are now immense. I cannot imagine the Met Police sanctioning such a policy.

I'm not here to defend Sadiq Khan but he seems to be coming in for some totally misguided and irrational criticism here and what exactly are these security issues that the Met Police are unlikely to sanction?

 

[Mikey C]

If the consultation process is anything like that for the Oxford Street and surrounding area bus routes, then I wouldn't waste any effort in challenging the views being expressed. In the case of the bus routes, even before the consultation process was closed TfL had stated that Borismasters made surplus by changes to the 73 route etc were going to be used elsewhere. Lo and behold, all changes that were 'consulted' on are going ahead, apart from the one possible expansion (of the 23 to Wembley!)

Ditto the ones for the Finchley Road corridor which went ahead despite the negative public response...

 

[DynamicSpirit]

TfL is shackled because the Mayor wants pedestrianisation and therefore can't publicly put forward a "pro bus" argument. The result will be pedestrianisation with cycling allowed. Taxis will get special ranks and access as close to Oxford St as possible and the buses and coaches will all be booted out with no running down roads like Wigmore St or New Cavendish Street. Existing trunk routes will be curtailed, diverted well away or simply axed and merged into other routes. No one is putting forward a case for buses to retain a major public transport role in Zone 1 - it's all about Tube / Crossrail / bicycles and shank's pony. The general public will only twigg what's happening when it's too late.

That seems very cynical. Your suggestion of no running down Wigmore Steet, appears to be somewhat contradicted by this statement in the consultation:

We could divert some buses to a suitable alternative route such as Wigmore Street, which is not currently served by bus.

I also don't see any suggestion that, as you claim, bicycles are being promoted at the expense of buses. The consultation simply presents a number of options for restricting both cycles and buses (and also taxis and delivery vehicles) to varying degrees from accessing Oxford Street and directing them to alternative routes instead.

Incidentally on a separate note, this statement really stuck out for me:

That said, despite making up almost a third of the traffic, taxis account for only two per cent of trips on Oxford Street.

That really shows up how a tiny proportion of people using taxis (and I suspect, outside of Oxford Street itself, Uber cars) are completely clogging up the streets of central London for everyone else. To my mind that clearly demonstrates the urgency of removing taxis as far as possible from not just Oxford Street, but all of central London.

Personally, I do hope that a means will be found to completely pedestrianize Oxford Street (with the only possible exception being for delivery vehicles during restricted hours at night).

 

[plcd1]

That seems very cynical. Your suggestion of no running down Wigmore Steet, appears to be somewhat contradicted by this statement in the consultation:

I also don't see any suggestion that, as you claim, bicycles are being promoted at the expense of buses. The consultation simply presents a number of options for restricting both cycles and buses (and also taxis and delivery vehicles) to varying degrees from accessing Oxford Street and directing them to alternative routes instead.

That really shows up how a tiny proportion of people using taxis (and I suspect, outside of Oxford Street itself, Uber cars) are completely clogging up the streets of central London for everyone else. To my mind that clearly demonstrates the urgency of removing taxis as far as possible from not just Oxford Street, but all of central London.

Personally, I do hope that a means will be found to completely pedestrianize Oxford Street (with the only possible exception being for delivery vehicles during restricted hours at night).

Yes my comments are cynical. I disagree with the policy. I also disagree with the continued dismantling of Central London's bus network. I am hardly going to view these things in a positive light.

There are two points here.

1. Pedestrianisation of Oxford St is a Manifesto commitment. These are the things that get done. Things which are not do not garner support or are allowed to whither. Unsurprisingly protecting bus services in Central London does not feature in Mayor Khan's manifesto.

2. The things you quote from the consultation are things *known* to be controversial which is why they are being "floated" now. I have been reading comments about buses in Wigmore St for years and years. I know from a local resident that this is a deeply controversial issue for those who live there. They don't want it. The local councilors know it is not wanted. Mentioning it now is guaranteed to trigger a response. Ditto the proposed bans on taxis (the entire taxi trade hates TfL, the Mayor and many Assembly Members with a passion) and cycling (we all know the cycling lobby is very adept at generating opposition and applying political pressure).

As the consultation unexpectedly coincides with purdah I suspect it has been stripped of detailed proposals at the last minute and floated with "concepts" or "possibilities" to flush out opposition and responses. This is a very simple political tactic used to prepare the ground for the next stages of the process whereby "concessions" can be granted even though the idea was never serious in the first place. Work has been going on this scheme for several years now and I can't believe that there are not detailed plans with a wide variety of options prepared by WCC / TfL and other stakeholders. And yes that is *also* very cynical but we are dealing with an intensely political issue here.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sadiq Khan may be the son of a bus driver, but he is showing no awareness of the importance of buses in the public transport mix. I'd imagine he's listening far too much to Val Shawcross and her opinions on how bus routes should be structured. Allowing people to change buses in limited circumstances without extra charge is worse than provision of a 'through' service, and the bus will be abandoned in greater numbers than at any time since the 1958 Bus Strike forced changes to travel patterns which were just beginning to be rectified when the Congestion Charge took effect. All that good work, maybe not undone in a stroke but it could be perceived that way.

I'm less than convinced. The UK has an obsession with direct bus routes, which mainly has to do with the poor provision for interchange and ticketing that penalises it. London has reduced the latter and will eventually remove it, and is much better at the former than the provinces. So I don't see the problem. Particularly as changing is seen as the norm on the Tube - what's different? Changing buses is much easier, involving a short walk above ground rather than a much longer one below.

Buses are for connecting non-rail-served places to rail and providing services not provided by rail at all. Direct buses into city centres are wasteful and cause pollution. In London, of course, there is a need for added capacity - some of that along there will come from Crossrail, and the rest from a reduced range of simplified, more understandable routes.

Indeed, I'd go further - I'd like to see the German "Metrobus" concept applied to London, based primarily around interchange at quality locations. A good principle is one road, one route - or at most two.

I'd also repeat something I've said on here many times over the last few months, that the security issues surrounding Oxford Street becoming pedestrianized are now immense. I cannot imagine the Met Police sanctioning such a policy.

How? Almost every other town and city has a pedestrianised shopping arcade. And gates could be provided to allow Police access.

 

[Deerfold]

You'll then just have stops for Oxford Street East, West and Central and use the tram to connect them.

Where else is this tram going to go?

 

[telstarbox]

Where else is this tram going to go?

You could extend it west to Ealing and Ruislip, and east to Redbridge...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Where else is this tram going to go?

Pick the busiest bus route.

 

[Deerfold]

You could extend it west to Ealing and Ruislip, and east to Redbridge...

Sounds expensive as well as requiring another change for anyone going to Oxford Street.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sounds expensive as well as requiring another change for anyone going to Oxford Street.

Why are changes suddenly a problem on buses when they are not on the Tube?

 

[edwin_m]

Why are changes suddenly a problem on buses when they are not on the Tube?

Changes on the Tube require walking down a well-signed route and waiting only a few minutes on a platform, probably under cover the whole time.

Changes on buses involve deciphering a map (if there is one) to find the correct stop, walking along a crowded pavement and possibly across a busy road, and in wet weather getting soaked by the rain and/or splashes from passing vehicles. There is then an unpredictable interval before the next bus arrives (or sometimes several).

You were also usually charged an extra fare for your trouble, though that at least is being sorted out in London.

 

[Busaholic]

I'm not here to defend Sadiq Khan but he seems to be coming in for some totally misguided and irrational criticism here and what exactly are these security issues that the Met Police are unlikely to sanction?

I don't believe you're unaware of the latest tactics of ISIS supporters and others with grievances to target crowded open spaces in Europe with vehicles driven by people seeking, in their perverted thinking, martyrdom. Creating such an open space amid much publicity in our capital city would, imo, be tantamount to inviting carnage and, I believe, my view might well be shared by people whose views (unlike mine) count.

 

[Busaholic]

Yes my comments are cynical. I disagree with the policy. I also disagree with the continued dismantling of Central London's bus network. I am hardly going to view these things in a positive light.

There are two points here.

1. Pedestrianisation of Oxford St is a Manifesto commitment. These are the things that get done. Things which are not do not garner support or are allowed to whither. Unsurprisingly protecting bus services in Central London does not feature in Mayor Khan's manifesto.

2. The things you quote from the consultation are things *known* to be controversial which is why they are being "floated" now. I have been reading comments about buses in Wigmore St for years and years. I know from a local resident that this is a deeply controversial issue for those who live there. They don't want it. The local councilors know it is not wanted. Mentioning it now is guaranteed to trigger a response. Ditto the proposed bans on taxis (the entire taxi trade hates TfL, the Mayor and many Assembly Members with a passion) and cycling (we all know the cycling lobby is very adept at generating opposition and applying political pressure).

As the consultation unexpectedly coincides with purdah I suspect it has been stripped of detailed proposals at the last minute and floated with "concepts" or "possibilities" to flush out opposition and responses. This is a very simple political tactic used to prepare the ground for the next stages of the process whereby "concessions" can be granted even though the idea was never serious in the first place. Work has been going on this scheme for several years now and I can't believe that there are not detailed plans with a wide variety of options prepared by WCC / TfL and other stakeholders. And yes that is *also* very cynical but we are dealing with an intensely political issue here.

On the Wigmore Street side-issue, it was served by the 59 group of routes to West Hampstead from Regent Street via Oxford Circus (that's 59, 59A, 159 and 159A) and virtually no others from pre-Second World War until the 1970s: the modern equivalent would be the diversion of the 139 this way. This was helped by there never being an allocation of buses from North London garages to these routes, and no short journeys to Oxford Circus from the West Hampstead direction. When I was working in the Bus Schedules Dept in the early 1970s, it was found that an empty bus was needed around 5 p.m. to start from OC to go to WH. It presented a much bigger problem than might be imagined - in the end, a then-unprecedented solution was to run a bus from Streatham to OC, then switch it out of service to an Oxford Circus stand facing in the opposite direction, then continue it to WH. The TGW Union didn't like it, and I believe a 10 minute stand time had to be given, but London Transport were adamant that passengers from Wigmore Street must be assured of a through service to Regent Street and Trafalgar Square at all times, otherwise they would not be prepared to transfer their affections from Oxford Street. No transfer of other routes to Wigmore Street ever took place, and, in the end, Oxford Street was prioritised for buses and taxis and the buses on Wigmore bade farewell.

 

[carlberry]

Why are changes suddenly a problem on buses when they are not on the Tube?

They are a problem on the tube!
(i.e. if you have a choice of going direct somewhere, or changing half way, how many people choose the second?) Just because you foce people into doing something dosent actually mean they want to!

 

[Nym]

Changes on the Tube require walking down a well-signed route and waiting only a few minutes on a platform, probably under cover the whole time.

Changes on buses involve deciphering a map (if there is one) to find the correct stop, walking along a crowded pavement and possibly across a busy road, and in wet weather getting soaked by the rain and/or splashes from passing vehicles. There is then an unpredictable interval before the next bus arrives (or sometimes several).

You were also usually charged an extra fare for your trouble, though that at least is being sorted out in London.

Is something like a Bus Station such an alien concept to London?

 

[Bletchleyite]

They are a problem on the tube!

They're really not.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is something like a Bus Station such an alien concept to London?

London has loads of bus stations, far more than the provinces which are abandoning them due to cost.

 

[Antman]

I don't believe you're unaware of the latest tactics of ISIS supporters and others with grievances to target crowded open spaces in Europe with vehicles driven by people seeking, in their perverted thinking, martyrdom. Creating such an open space amid much publicity in our capital city would, imo, be tantamount to inviting carnage and, I believe, my view might well be shared by people whose views (unlike mine) count.

Oh come on that is just blatant scaremongering, indeed pedestrianisation would surely make that less likely to happen? There are plenty of other opportunities in Central London if somebody were so minded.

 

[edwin_m]

Is something like a Bus Station such an alien concept to London?

Never been any near Oxford Street as far as I know, and even if land became available and TfL could afford it, I doubt the relevant council would see that as the best use for it.

 

[Jordeh]

I don't believe you're unaware of the latest tactics of ISIS supporters and others with grievances to target crowded open spaces in Europe with vehicles driven by people seeking, in their perverted thinking, martyrdom. Creating such an open space amid much publicity in our capital city would, imo, be tantamount to inviting carnage and, I believe, my view might well be shared by people whose views (unlike mine) count.

This is rubbish, anti-vehicle bollards could be put at either end of Oxford Street to prevent vehicles coming into the area. These can already be found around at airports, the majority of landmarks and football stadiums in London.

If anything, pedestrianisation would make it far safer as at the moment a driver could mount the pavement.

 

[OneOffDave]

To my knowledge the security services considered the risk of vehicle attack on Oxford Street several years ago. Any pedestrianisation plan will include appropriate vehicle mitigation. There'll also most probably be dropping bollards for emergency service vehicle access too.

 

[philjo]

I don't see the point of the proposal to terminate route 73 at Oxford Circus and then divert 390 to Victoria instead. why not just drop route 390 ?

one of the routes could go via Piccadilly (though that is also full of buses) - route 14 used to link to Euston and Kings Cross via piccadilly to South Kensington.

route 30 could extend from Marble arch to Victoria to maintain another direct link victoria to kings cross (via Baker street).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, I must admit I found chopping the 73 an odd move, the 390 would have been a better choice to chop.

 

[317 forever]

I don't see the point of the proposal to terminate route 73 at Oxford Circus and then divert 390 to Victoria instead. why not just drop route 390 ?

one of the routes could go via Piccadilly (though that is also full of buses) - route 14 used to link to Euston and Kings Cross via piccadilly to South Kensington.

route 30 could extend from Marble arch to Victoria to maintain another direct link victoria to kings cross (via Baker street).

Furthermore, the Archway - King's Cross section of route 390 had previously been covered by single-deck route C11 or C12 and sometimes single-deck route 143. So, maybe they could have let route 73 continue to Victoria, re-extend route C11 (or 143) to King's Cross and withdraw route 390?

 

[matt_world2004]

Even if oxford street is pedestrianised. What is to say. All the north to south roads will be. These will just be crossing points in a pedestrianised street.