NGT Report

Reginal Perrin · Post by **Reginal Perrin** » Wed 20 May, 2009 10:47 am

chameleon wrote: Reginal Perrin wrote: I still cannot understand the concept of having a mass transport system that does not benefit the major council tax paying commuter suburbs. I was born in Hunslet and I love the place but it aint a major centre for medium to high earning homeowners who will foot this bill. Any system needs to service the areas that do not currently enjoy a train staion such as Rothwell (I'm sure there are others but the likes of Garforth, Morley, Cross Gates and Horsforth do have train stations already). Get this one Regi - a senior Government Minister during a recent visit to Leeds implored the Council to concentrate public transport in 'Less affluent areas of the city where people are less likely to be able to afford a car' Laudible yes but, where did the Green Policy (reducing car travel) go to? That's staggering. Were I to still live in Hunslet I woud not have a problem hopping on the bus the two miles or so into town, buses from Wakefield, Cas / Ponte and Rothwell converge through there so they are about every 30 seconds or so and are on dual carriageways.Rothwell for instance you can be backed up on any number of single cariageway roads of of the village before you hit Leeds / Wakefield Road which is also single track and they want to put a multi-zilllion pound mass transport system in from Hunslet to Leeds? It's just not necessary.I would propose a light rail system that hooks up to old and existing branch lines Whana new road is built they lay lines down it. Instead of pointless cycle lanes they build tracks down the centre of roads used city bound in the AM and suburb bound in the PM. Let bikes go on the pavement, they do anyway and bikes and people can get along fine.Every suburb should have this service. And it should be corporation run, not in private hands. No fare should be more than £1.

Keg · Post by **Keg** » Wed 20 May, 2009 2:06 pm

It's a great idea, but woudl require subsidy to keep all prices under £1.00, and that can only come from local taxes ( or increased local taxes). Remember that this policy nearly bankrupted Sheffield in teh 80s.As a city, we still seem to be hung up on Supertram, despite Guided Buses being the better option. They have a cheaper infrstructure, quiker to build, but more importantly, at the end of each line they can come off the guided busway, go round the estates, pick everyone up then go back on again. Where are the issues there?.It might just be me but i get the impression that the city wanted trams because it was " Cosmopolitan & European". I am proud to be a loiner, but Paris or Prague we are not. Lets get something that does what we need rather than what looks good.

Reginal Perrin · Post by **Reginal Perrin** » Wed 20 May, 2009 2:35 pm

Keg wrote: It's a great idea, but woudl require subsidy to keep all prices under £1.00, and that can only come from local taxes ( or increased local taxes). Remember that this policy nearly bankrupted Sheffield in teh 80s.As a city, we still seem to be hung up on Supertram, despite Guided Buses being the better option. They have a cheaper infrstructure, quiker to build, but more importantly, at the end of each line they can come off the guided busway, go round the estates, pick everyone up then go back on again. Where are the issues there?.It might just be me but i get the impression that the city wanted trams because it was " Cosmopolitan & European". I am proud to be a loiner, but Paris or Prague we are not. Lets get something that does what we need rather than what looks good. We probably subsidise First and Arriva and shouldn't a "service" be subsidised anyway? First and Arriva make a profit so strip that out and we are getting closer to what I propose anyway.Getting people into work in the City is important and prices and poor service is putting people off using public transport. They could built some new shiny service but if they wanted any more in fares then people will still drive. If I were asked to drive from Rothwell to Hunslet (in term of time about 80% of the journey time already and then pay £2 to be driven into town on a big electric / deisel bus then I'm sitting there thinking I've been robbed. I pay for my nice shiny car which I'm now leaving in an area I woul not normally leave it for any length of time and having to pay to go a distance I could easily walk.It's unworkable and unless suburbs are part of the proposal then it will fall flat on it's [edited for content].

PJ · Post by PJ » Wed 20 May, 2009 2:45 pm

I like the cut of your jib Reggie.

Reginal Perrin · Post by **Reginal Perrin** » Wed 20 May, 2009 3:51 pm

Cheers PJ. This whole thing is becoming in danger of totally missing the purpose of the project. Providing a bespoke public transport system from areas which are already well served and close to town is totally pointless.I'd Build more train stations and run links to branch lines, then build two or three mini station in town, one up near the uni, one off Whitehall Road, one near the bus station and one at the airport. Connected, integrated, affordable travel, that's what's needed.I don't think it should cost £5 a day to get on the bus to work, I think that is outrageous.

drapesy · Post by **drapesy** » Wed 20 May, 2009 11:42 pm

PJ wrote: I like the cut of your jib Reggie. I didn't get where I am today without liking the cut of jibs like yours Reggie.

Post by **cnosni** » Thu 21 May, 2009 12:47 am

drapesy wrote: PJ wrote: I like the cut of your jib Reggie. I didn't get where I am today without liking the look of jibs like yours Reggie. Ha ha ha ha ha ha.On a serious note,i wonder if any of you remember how this NGT consultation came about in the first place.It happened because the government were dangling a couple of million to each local authority to put out feelers (through these consultations) to see how people would respond to a "C" charge.Now Andrew Carter stated that Leeds council would not introduce such a scheme unless there was a viable mass transit system such as Supertram to encourage car drivers to leave their cars at home.When asked why the council had decided to do this consultation,even though there was no chance of a "C" charge whilst there was no Supertram Andrew Carter said"Well for two reasons,firstly the "C" charge keeps rearing its head within the DFT every now and then so the council wanted to be able to say that they had consulted the public over such an option and that it was rejected,and secondly (i like this bit) the government were offering £2M to any local authority to carry out a consultation.Who were Leeds Council to turn down a couple of million?"OK,maybe not word for word quote,but thats the reason behind the consultation.If you werent on the Headrow when it took place then you missed out.I guess a fancy caravan outside the library and a handful of well meaning chaps with clip boards wont have cost that much for a few days,certainly not a £2M.As for guided bus lanes,well they are pants.The whole idea of them is to have a dedicated bus lane that can be utilised by the driver being able to drive non handed whilst taking fares.Well call me old fashioned,but wouldnt a conductor be far better.Passengers could get on quickly,the driver can shut the door and move off,whilst the conductor does the fares.No need for the guided bus lanes with a conductor,but you can have a painted bus lanes which can then be used by all vehicles outside rush hour times.

Reginal Perrin · Post by **Reginal Perrin** » Thu 21 May, 2009 10:25 am

drapesy wrote: PJ wrote: I like the cut of your jib Reggie. I didn't get where I am today without liking the look of jibs like yours Reggie. Mrs CJ always liked a well cut jib. Can't watch that lad on the new Perrin. Not his fault, he's just not CJ.

Reginal Perrin · Post by **Reginal Perrin** » Thu 21 May, 2009 10:30 am

cnosni wrote: drapesy wrote: PJ wrote: I like the cut of your jib Reggie. I didn't get where I am today without liking the look of jibs like yours Reggie. Ha ha ha ha ha ha.On a serious note,i wonder if any of you remember how this NGT consultation came about in the first place.It happened because the government were dangling a couple of million to each local authority to put out feelers (through these consultations) to see how people would respond to a "C" charge.Now Andrew Carter stated that Leeds council would not introduce such a scheme unless there was a viable mass transit system such as Supertram to encourage car drivers to leave their cars at home.When asked why the council had decided to do this consultation,even though there was no chance of a "C" charge whilst there was no Supertram Andrew Carter said"Well for two reasons,firstly the "C" charge keeps rearing its head within the DFT every now and then so the council wanted to be able to say that they had consulted the public over such an option and that it was rejected,and secondly (i like this bit) the government were offering £2M to any local authority to carry out a consultation.Who were Leeds Council to turn down a couple of million?"OK,maybe not word for word quote,but thats the reason behind the consultation.If you werent on the Headrow when it took place then you missed out.I guess a fancy caravan outside the library and a handful of well meaning chaps with clip boards wont have cost that much for a few days,certainly not a £2M.As for guided bus lanes,well they are pants.The whole idea of them is to have a dedicated bus lane that can be utilised by the driver being able to drive non handed whilst taking fares.Well call me old fashioned,but wouldnt a conductor be far better.Passengers could get on quickly,the driver can shut the door and move off,whilst the conductor does the fares.No need for the guided bus lanes with a conductor,but you can have a painted bus lanes which can then be used by all vehicles outside rush hour times. That's it Cnosni. Very well cut jib indeed. Green Corporation Routemasters and conductors. The future lies in the past. All new buses to be double door versions and an actual conductor or Customer Service Executive like on the purple slugs. All bus lanes to be camera'd up and 100% detection for transgressors. The white line dividing normal carriage ways to be raised and have rumble strips in them so no "I didn't realise" defences could apply.

Post by **chameleon** » Thu 21 May, 2009 11:23 am

cnosni wrote: drapesy wrote: PJ wrote: I like the cut of your jib Reggie. I didn't get where I am today without liking the look of jibs like yours Reggie. Ha ha ha ha ha ha.On a serious note,i wonder if any of you remember how this NGT consultation came about in the first place.It happened because the government were dangling a couple of million to each local authority to put out feelers (through these consultations) to see how people would respond to a "C" charge.Now Andrew Carter stated that Leeds council would not introduce such a scheme unless there was a viable mass transit system such as Supertram to encourage car drivers to leave their cars at home.When asked why the council had decided to do this consultation,even though there was no chance of a "C" charge whilst there was no Supertram Andrew Carter said"Well for two reasons,firstly the "C" charge keeps rearing its head within the DFT every now and then so the council wanted to be able to say that they had consulted the public over such an option and that it was rejected,and secondly (i like this bit) the government were offering £2M to any local authority to carry out a consultation.Who were Leeds Council to turn down a couple of million?"OK,maybe not word for word quote,but thats the reason behind the consultation.If you werent on the Headrow when it took place then you missed out.I guess a fancy caravan outside the library and a handful of well meaning chaps with clip boards wont have cost that much for a few days,certainly not a £2M.As for guided bus lanes,well they are pants.The whole idea of them is to have a dedicated bus lane that can be utilised by the driver being able to drive non handed whilst taking fares.Well call me old fashioned,but wouldnt a conductor be far better.Passengers could get on quickly,the driver can shut the door and move off,whilst the conductor does the fares.No need for the guided bus lanes with a conductor,but you can have a painted bus lanes which can then be used by all vehicles outside rush hour times. Isn't this just part of atwo-year research project? The intenetion is said to be investigate all problems, needs and solutions to support a case (well thought out proposal???) for funding for what ever is decided.Of course we need things to improve - in whatever form that might take - but forgive my cynicism if I suspect that the opportunity will be taken to extract more money from the travelling public.A good example is the recent changes at LBA. The drop-off point was closed as we know for security reasons and people then allowed 10 minutes in the the short stay carpark for this purpose. This has been reduced to 5 minutes - that is 5 minutes from entering, stopping, unloading and waiting in any queue to exit the place - nie on impossible during anything but the quietest times; £2.50 then please to get out, those unexpectedly discovering this then take time to complete the process holding up those behind who perhaps would not otherwise have incurred a charge.The Authority say it's part of a £2 million upgrade to, wait for it, 'Improve things for the public'! Taking advantage of a captive audience to line a privatised pocket is the blatant reality.