Consultation on possible changes to bus routes 424 …...via its current routeing as far as Fulham...

Consultation on possible changes to bus routes 424 and 485 Consultation Report July 2016

2

Consultation on possible bus changes to bus routes 424 and 485 Consultation Report

Contents

1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1

2 The consultation ............................................................................................................. 1

3 Responses from members of the public ......................................................................... 4

4 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders ............................................ 16

Appendices

Appendix A - All public comments about the scheme ......................................................... 20

Appendix B - List of stakeholders consulted ....................................................................... 25

Appendix C – Consultation materials .................................................................................. 28

1

1 Introduction

We recently consulted stakeholders and the public on a proposal to restructure routes 424 and 485. The consultation ran from 27 November 2015 until 31 January 2016 The planned changes would enable a bus service to serve the new residential development at Wandsworth Riverside Quarter, while improving services for the new developments planned for the Hurlingham area of Fulham and allowing for future growth Route 424 currently operates between Fulham, Cannons Leisure Centre and Putney Heath, Green Man. Under the proposals, it would run from the Cannons Leisure Centre via its current routeing as far as Fulham Broadway and then via New Kings Road, Peterborough Road, Wandsworth Bridge Road, Old York Road, Wandsworth, Putney Bridge Road to a new stand at Wandsworth Riverside. The frequency of route 424 would increase, with buses every 20 minutes (instead of about every 30 minutes) during the day Monday to Saturday. Route 485 currently operates between Hammersmith Bus Station and Wandsworth, Ram Street. It would be diverted via Putney High Street to Putney Heath, Green Man via the current route 424 southern routeing. It would no longer serve Putney Bridge Road or Wandsworth town centre. The 485 would continue to run at the same frequencies as now, with buses about every 30 minutes during the day on Monday to Saturday, but with a full evening service on those days.

2 The consultation

The consultation was designed to enable us to understand stakeholder and public opinion about proposed changes to routes 424 and 485. The potential outcomes of the consultation were:

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

2.1 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

2.2 Who we consulted The public consultation intended to seek the views of the general public using the services, stakeholders (including Wandsworth and Hammersmith & Fulham councils), London TravelWatch, and Members of Parliament. The list of the stakeholders that we consulted is shown in Appendix C. The summary of their responses is given in Section 4. We were particularly keen to get views from residents of Sands End in Fulham, which would lose the 424 service, and of the Wandsworth Riverside Quarter, which would be newly served.

2.3 Consultation material, distribution and publicity The consultation was published online at https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/424-485. We advised stakeholders of the link by email. We also emailed over 12,000 members of the public who are registered on our customer database. In addition, we emailed 2,500 Freedom Pass holders. Publicity was placed at all bus stops along both routes and letters were delivered to residences in Sands End, Fulham and in Wandsworth Riverside Quarter. We explained the background to the proposal and asked for any comments that people may have. We invited people to respond online using the consultation tool. There were four closed questions, and two open questions about the proposal. The following questions specifically asked respondents about the scheme: Question 1 – How often do you use route 424? Question 2 – Do you support the changes to route 424? Question 3 – Do you have any comments about the changes to route 424? Question 4 – How often do you use route 485? Question 5 – Do you support the changes to route 485? Question 6 – Do you have any comments about the changes to route 485? We also asked six questions about the respondents and quality of the consultation.

2.4 Meetings and site visits We held a meeting on Friday 11 December at Manor Court sheltered housing, 23 Bagleys Lane, Fulham. We also held public drop-in exhibitions in Wandsworth and Fulham on:

Thursday 14 January 2016, 18:00 – 21:00, at The Sales Gallery, Milliners House, Eastfields Avenue, SW18 1LP

Tuesday 19 January 2016, 18:00 – 21:00 at Langford Primary School, Gilstead Road, Fulham, SW6 2LG

Venue Attendees

Manor Court, Fulham

33 local residents Cllr Homan (Cabinet Member for Housing) Chris Bainbridge - Principal Transport Planner (Hammersmith and Fulham) Jane Martin - Housing Department (Hammersmith and

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/424-485

3

Fulham) Keith Elliot – TfL Consultation Richard Shirley – TfL Consultation Joyce Mamode – TfL Dial-a-Ride

The Sales Gallery, Wandsworth Riverside Quarter

12 local residents (including representatives of the Riverside Quarter Committee) David Tidley, Group Planner, Transportation at Wandsworth Council Keith Elliot – TfL Consultation Heather Preen – TfL Consultation

Langford Primary School, Fulham

70+ local residents Cllr Steve Hamilton (Hammersmith and Fulham) Chris Bainbridge - Principal Transport Planner (Hammersmith and Fulham) Keith Elliott – TfL Consultation Amy Thompson – TfL Consultation Jim Drennan – TfL Consultation

4

3 Responses from members of the public

We received 576 responses from members of the public. There were 380 responses via our website and 196 responses by post, email or consultation form.

3.1 Petitions We also received a petition via Greg Hands MP, signed by approximately 2,500 residents, requesting that we should: “…retain the existing 424 bus route and not exclude Sands End and Putney Bridge/Putney High Street from the route.” The petition further stated that: “These changes would impact on many in the local community (particularly the vulnerable; elderly, disabled and families and children) who rely on this service for transport to vital amenities, e.g. GP surgeries, hospitals, schools and shopping centres, as well as links to other bus and rail facilities.” A separate petition on Change.org asked us to reconsider the changes to the 424 and gained 270 signatures. It was titled ‘Say NO to the changes to the 424 Bus route’.

3.2 Public consultation results for route 424

To help us understand more about those who replied and their thoughts on the routes and proposals, we asked a number of questions;

OnlineBy post, email orconsultation form

Total

Number of responses 380 196 576

(%) of responses 66% 34% 100%

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Response type

5

We asked respondents how often they used route 424.

We asked respondents whether they were in favour of our overall proposal for route 424.

5 ormoredaysper

week

3 or 4daysper

week

1 or 2daysper

week

Lessthanonceper

week

NeverNo

answerTotal

Number of responses 90 58 54 56 113 205 576

(% of responses) 16% 10% 9% 10% 20% 36% 100%

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Q1. How often do you use route 424?

Yes No Partially Not sureNo

opinionNo

answerTotal

Number ofresponses

81 297 30 11 76 81 576

(% of responses) 14% 52% 5% 2% 13% 14% 100%

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Q2. Are you in favour of our proposals for route 424?

6

Of the respondents who expressed an opinion about route 424 there were 81 (14 per cent) individuals who were in favour of the proposals while there were 297 (52 per cent) who were not in favour of the proposals. There were 30 (5per cent) respondents partially in favour of the proposal, 11 (2 per cent) who were not sure, 76 (13 per cent) who had no opinion on the matter and 81 (14 per cent) who did not answer. Although those 14per cent did not answer the specific question, the tone of the responses was generally negative, which is reflected in the high number of negative comments in table 3a later in the report. The Yes and No responses were mapped according to the postcode of the respondent and this is shown in Figure 3.1. Figure 3.1

There was a high density of responses from a number of locations. Figure 3.2 shows the responses received from the Sands End and Riverside Quarter area. The Sands End and Peterborough Road locations show an overwhelming negative response to the question of whether individuals were in favour of the changes to route 424 while there is a more mixed response from the Riverside Quarter. Figure 3.3 shows the responses from Putney Heath which has generally positive support while there is mixed support around the Chartfield Avenue and Carslake Road section just north of Putney Heath.

7

Figure 3.2

Figure 3.3

8

Question 3 asked if respondents had any further views about the overall proposals for route 424. There were 334 additional comments (positive and negative) and suggestions in response to this question. Table 3a below summarises the key comments/issues (the full list is available in appendix A), and a separate document will respond to the main points raised by respondents.

Table 3a – comments about route 424 proposals

Comments for the scheme Number of comments

Increased frequency to every 20 minutes 22

General Support 12

Supportive IF 485 route changes go ahead 8

Good for Riverside residents 3

Benefit the local area 3

Extra transport option 3

Creates a good link from Fulham Football Club to Wandsworth 2

Wandsworth Riverside given a valuable connection to Fulham/New Kings Rd 2

Comments against the scheme

Changes adversely affect elderly, disabled and vulnerable customers 160

Maintain existing 424 route 119

Route is only direct bus between south Fulham and Putney 77

424 only route covering Fulham to Townmead Rd Sainsbury’s/local amenities/ employment /GP surgery 73

Riverside Qtr. already have good access to a range of buses 33

424 is the only access to Fulham from centre of Sands End 31

Would adversely affect school routes 29

The proposed changes will increase journey time and cost 27

Riverside Qtr. resident wants to go to Clapham not Fulham 16

New residential and business developments in Sands End area 12

Riverside Qtr. residents will not use bus and prefer alternative modes of transport 11

The majority of comments relating to this question were considered to be negative with 705 comments falling in to this category while there were 68 comments that were considered to be positive. The highest comment was that this re-route would adversely affect elderly, disabled and vulnerable customers with 160 individuals mentioning this. It is worth noting that the predominant number of these comments referred to the Sands End and Peterborough Road areas in Fulham. The next top level negative comments mostly refer to how the re-routing of the 424 would cut off access to services and destinations from the Sands End area with 77 individuals claiming it was the only direct bus between south Fulham and Putney. 73 individuals claimed it would cut off access to Sainsbury’s on Townmead Road, local amenities, employment and GP surgeries and 31 individuals claimed it was the only direct route from the centre of Sands End to Fulham. The positive comments included 22 individuals welcoming the increase in frequency to every 20 minutes, 12 comments of general support, and 8 individuals saying they would support it if the 485 re-route goes ahead.

9

Other top level comments from different categories included a concern that residents would lose a bus which has a strong community feel to it with good relations between the driver and passengers and there were suggestions that the route should introduce a Sunday service and evening service.

3.3 Public consultation results for route 485

We asked respondents how often they used route 485.

5 or moredays per

week

3 or 4days per

week

1 or 2days per

week

Less thanonce per

weekNever

Noanswer

Total


(% of responses) 7% 7% 8% 11% 34% 33% 100%

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Q4. How often do you use route 485?

10

We asked respondents whether they were in favour of our overall proposal for route 485.

Of the respondents who expressed an opinion about route 485 there were 121 (21per cent) individuals who were in favour of the proposals while there were 147 (26 per cent) who were not in favour of the proposals. There were 32 (6 per cent) respondents partially in favour of the proposal, 19 (3 per cent) who were not sure, 141 (24 per cent) who had no opinion on the matter and 116 (20%) who did not answer. The Yes and No responses were mapped according to the postcode of the respondent and this is shown in Figure 3.4.

Yes No Partially Not sureNo

opinionNo

answerTotal


(% of responses) 21% 26% 6% 3% 24% 20% 100%

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Q5. Are you in favour of our proposals for route 485?

11

Figure 3.4

Opinion on the proposals for changes to route 485 varied by location with a positive reception to the proposals in the Putney Heath area as can be seen at the bottom of Figure 3.4. Figure 3.5 shows the responses from Barnes, which are generally positive, and from west Putney, which are mixed. Figure 3.6 shows a negative response from the Sands End area, while there is a mixed reception in the Riverside Quarter and a generally negative response from the greater Wandsworth area.

12

Figure 3.5

Figure 3.6

13

Question 6 asked if respondents had any further views about the overall proposals for route 485. There were 241 additional comments (positive and negative) and suggestions in response to this question. The table below summarises the key comments/issues, and a separate document will respond to the main points raised by respondents. Table 3b - comments about route 485 proposals

Comments for the scheme Number of comments

Introduction of evening service 40

General support 37

Links Putney Heath to Lower Richmond Rd and Barnes 27

Would improve school route 24

Link Putney Heath to Hammersmith 8

Will save time and money by removing the need to change connections 7

Re-route will encourage people to use buses not private vehicles 6


Increase in journey time and cost 37

Lose only direct link between Barnes and Wandsworth 31

Maintain 485 - links Hammersmith, Barnes, Putney and Wandsworth 30

Putney Heath area is already well served 18

Increased congestion on Putney High St will increase delays and pollution 12

Vulnerable and elderly people use this route to access Wandsworth 8

Would affect school route 6

485 should continue to start in Wandsworth 6

General negative comment 5

Would have to walk further to reach alternative routes 5

220 and 270 also no longer stop at Putney cinema/will lose valuable connections 4

No longer serves Putney Bridge Rd 4

For this open question there were 176 comments that were adjudged to be comments against the scheme and 156 that were positive. The most common comment, with 76 mentions, was a suggestion to increase the frequency of the 485 to every 20 or 15 minutes or at peak times. There were 40 comments supporting the introduction of the evening service, 27 positive comments regarding the connection made between Putney Heath and Lower Richmond Road and Barnes and 24 comments stating that it would improve a school route.

The top level negative comments included 37 responses stating that it would increase their journey time and cost, 31 responses stating that the 485 is the only direct bus between Barnes and Wandsworth and 30 responses stating that the 485 should be maintained as it links Hammersmith, Barnes, Putney and Wandsworth. Question 13 asked individuals to tell us what they thought of the quality of this consultation (for example, the information we have provided, any printed material you have received, any maps or plans, the website and questionnaire etc.). There were 227 additional comments (positive and negative) and suggestions in response to this

14

question. The table below summarises the key comments/issues, and a separate document will respond to the main points raised by respondents.

Table 3c - comments about the consultation

Comments for the consultation Number of comments

General positive comment 78

Good content 48

Detailed plans 34

Good communication 12

Informative 6

Pleased to be consulted 5

Helpful maps 4

Comments against the consultation

Not adequately advertised among local bus using population 36

Not contacted by TfL/no materials seen 29


Maps not clear - before and after would be better 12

Bus stop advertising not clear/too small 8

More information needed on proposed re-routes 5

Many people not aware of consultation 5

Online information not accessible to elderly 3

More info on first and last bus times and bus frequency 3

For question 13 there were 189 comments that were adjudged to be positive and 127 that were negative. The top level positive comments included 78 comments that were generally positive, 48 comments that said the consultation had good content and 34 comments that stated the plans were detailed. The top level negative comment was that the consultation was not adequately advertised amongst the local bus using population with 36 individuals stating this. 29 individuals stated they were not contacted by TfL or that they had seen no materials while 12 individuals stated that the maps were not clear and that a before and after would be better. There was also concern that consultations were not listened to and there were questions over the rationale and justification for the proposals.

15

We asked members of the public how they found out about the consultation.

Email Letter PressTfL

websiteSocialmedia

OtherNo

answerTotal

(%) 15% 4% 2% 4% 9% 24% 41% 100%

Responses 88 25 13 24 51 141 234 576

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Q12. How did you hear about this consultation?

16

4 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders

There were 12 responses from key stakeholders and stakeholder groups and these are summarised below.

Greg Hands MP - Chelsea and Fulham Opposes the proposals to change the route of the 424. Specifically stating that he believes it is essential for residents in Sands End to continue having a direct bus service, and that the route should still reach Putney High Street. He raises the issue that this bus is the only bus to serve the centre of Sands End, in particular Bagleys Lane, Broughton Road, and Townmead Road where there are a large number of elderly residents and individuals living in sheltered housing who would struggle to gain access to local amenities including the local Sainsbury’s supermarket. He notes that there is a strong community feel to this Hail and Ride bus route with customers of all ages and social groups able to mix and interact. He quotes a constituent who states that the bus is an important community bus that allows elderly and less able passengers to access local amenities and claims that this bus is a lifeline to these individuals. There is population growth in the area around Imperial Wharf and the potential for a Crossrail 2 station that suggests more rather than less public transport capacity will be needed in the area in the future. The proposed route is already served by the 28, 295 and C3 bus routes. The level of demand at the proposed Wandsworth site will be very little and should not gain a bus route at the expense of Sands End. Concern was raised over the consultation on process with issues arising regarding the lack of advertising of the consultation particularly to those with limited or no online access. Alleged lack of information leaflets at the consultation meetings and individuals disputing the validity of the consultation process. It’s alleged that Sainsbury’s had not originally been on the list of stakeholder’s and were not contacted by TfL. Justine Greening MP - Putney, Roehampton and Southfields

She welcomes the increase in frequency of the 424 to every 20 minutes although she notes that Riverside Quarter residents are disappointed that the route does not connect them to Putney or to Clapham Junction as requested. She welcomes the proposed changes to the 485 especially the introduction of the full evening service to the Green Man on Putney heath. She is concerned that Barnes and Wandsworth are no longer connected and so access to Wandsworth Town Centre and to Southside shopping centre is no longer available. General concern regarding the pollution on Putney High Street caused by buses and states more low emission buses are required to fight the problem.

17

Sainsbury’s Stores Ltd

Concerned the proposals would impact on customers who do not have access to a car and impact colleagues who rely on the service for travel to and from work. The store was recently redeveloped and 463 homes have been added to the area, during this process the bus stop locations were revised in order to be more accommodating to those working at the store, customers and residents. The proposal will significantly increase walking distance and Sainsbury’s ask that the re-routing proposal be reconsidered. Attached response to proposals for routes 424 and 485 undertaken by Vectos on behalf of Sainsbury’s: Current route provides an attractive alternative to the car due to proximity of bus stops to the store. Survey from 2015 states 13% of staff and 6% of customers travelled to/from the store by bus although which routes were used was not identified. Entrance to the new store is closer than previously making travel by bus a more attractive option. The new stops for the 424 will be over 650m away from the entrance of the store. Acknowledged that it would be possible to interchange with the C3 bus route which serves the stops outside the store on Townmead Road but states that it would be unlikely for this to occur due to the inconvenience. Individuals could travel by car or would otherwise have to find alternative method of transport. 424 would cease to serve residential area north of the store and could mean that these residents may not be able to access the store if alternative methods of transport are not provided and might decide to shop elsewhere. London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham Welcome proposed increase in frequency of the 424 to every 20 minutes. Vehemently opposed to the re-routing of the 424 as residents in Broughton Road and Pearscroft Road will no longer have a bus service. Many residents live in sheltered housing and would be required to walk further to reach alternative bus routes. Direct bus from Sands End to Putney would be lost and replaced by service to Wandsworth. There are already multiple services that cover the route between Sands End and Wandsworth including the 28 and 295. Residents in Peterborough Road, which also has sheltered housing, would lose important link to Sainsbury’s and medical centre on Broughton road. Notes that the re-routing of the 424 would not be able to terminate at Riverside Quarter until 2018 due to road layout alterations so there is no point making the proposed changes currently. Changes to 485 would not affect Hammersmith and Fulham.

London Borough of Wandsworth Welcome the proposal to serve Riverside Quarter with a new bus route. The area is isolated from the bus network and the Council has collected a substantial sum from developers to support the provision of a new bus service. Lack of a current bus route has meant the introduction of a peak hour minibus service from Riverside Quarter to Putney Stations that is well used. New TfL bus route should therefore link the Riverside Quarter to Putney Town Centre which the proposals do not

18

do. Assumed new route would be provided by adjusting route 485 to serve Riverside Quarter and cannot recall asking for a service to Fulham. Suggest a bus service along southern side of the River to link together all the new developments in this area, which have poor public transport links, to Clapham Junction. Linking Riverside Quarter to Clapham Junction would be a more appropriate solution as Wandsworth Town Station is congested during the morning peak as trains are already full. Request link between Trinity Road Area and Fulham Broadway via Wandsworth Bridge which could be delivered by route 424. Increase frequency of route 485 during peak times. 485 provides important link between Wandsworth and multiple schools to the west of Putney High Street. Riverside Quarter proposals not possible until 2018 due to road layout issues, consider “three point turn” termination to allow early implementation. Welcome increase in frequency of the route 424 and evening service to Putney Heath but do not want services re-routed and believe Riverside Quarter service should be additional to these. Unlikely that the Council will be able to use developer funding to support proposal for the Riverside Quarter and would need to consider alternative bus service improvements. Robert Largan – Councillor for Sands End (London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham) Would remove direct bus route from Sands End and remove service to Sainsbury’s. Would remove link between south Fulham and Putney High Street which is important for shopping. Would affect elderly, disabled or limited mobility residents. Sands End to Wandsworth is well served by the 28 and 295. Riverside Quarter has few full time residents, has a small population and they are less likely to use public transport. Proposals ignore new developments in the Sands End. Over 2,500 individuals signed a petition to keep the current route and this proposal should be abandoned. Rosemary Torrington – Councillor for Thamesfield (London Borough of Wandsworth) Residents in Riverside Quarter want to go to Clapham Junction as it provides a far greater number of links for onward travel. Removing the 485 which takes them to Putney and replacing it with route 424 to Fulham is not helpful. A bus to Wandsworth Town is of little use as the station is too busy and very hard to get a train from. There is an imminent growth in population density along the southern side of the river due to new developments and there are very limited existing public transport options. A new service should link the Riverside Quarter and new developments to Clapham Junction. There was an expectation during the planning stages of the Riverside Quarter that a new bus service would link it with East Putney Tube and Putney mainline station. Multiple schools are situated west of Putney High Street, including a new school on Putney Common. The current 485 provides a direct link to hundreds of pupils living in Wandsworth to schools in Putney, Barnes and Hammersmith.

19

Mike Ryder – Councillor for Thamesfield (London Borough of Wandsworth) Endorses the points made by Cllr Torrington about the need for a bus linking the Riverside Quarter to Clapham Junction. The current proposals seem illogical and will not meet the demands for the 4,000 residents in the Riverside Quarter. Jim Maddan OBE – Councillor for Thamesfield (London Borough of Wandsworth) Supports the points that Cllr Torrington and Cllr Ryder have made. Notes that the proposals would adversely impact on elderly and disabled residents. Has yet to see a valid rationale for the proposal, wants to know who is driving the proposal and asks what is wrong with the existing services. Riverside Quarter Residents Association Extend route 220 to Clapham Junction, not terminating at Wandsworth Plain. Manor Court The 424 has been around a long time and provides a service to all that live in Manor Court. Believes route is being changed as it does not make enough money. Vote Roehampton They believe it doesn’t make sense to provide a bus service to Riverside Quarter when there are new developments occurring in Sands End. Current thinking seems to be to connect Riverside Quarter with any bus route rather than considering where residents want to travel to or from. Riverside Quarter residents are more likely to want to travel to Putney or Clapham Junction rather than indirect route to Fulham while Hurlingham Park residents would prefer to travel to Townmead Road, Fulham Broadway or King’s Road rather than Wandsworth Town. Recognises that the 424 may not be the most financially viable route and if this is the case it would be better to return to square one with the route rather than adapt it to the point it makes no sense. Sands End is an isolated and dependent community with areas of both low public transport accessibility and low car ownership. Other high frequency buses are not close to central areas of Sands End. Return to orbital route of the C4 that preceded the 424 to serve Peterborough road and Sands End. Suggestion for route 424 to start at Parsons Green station go to Peterborough Road, Townmead Road, Bagleys Lane, Fulham Broadway continue along existing route to Fulham Football Club and return on old C4 route to Bishops Park estate, Putney Bridge, Putney Heath and maybe Roehampton. Extend the 485 along Putney Bridge Road via Riverside Quarter and along York Road to Falcon Road and then to Clapham Junction. Importance of connecting remote areas, maintain route through west Putney back streets.

20

Appendix A - All public comments about the scheme

Comments about route 424 proposals

Comments for the scheme

Increased frequency to every 20 minutes 22

General Support 12

Supportive IF 485 route changes go ahead 8

Good for Riverside residents 3

Benefit the local area 3

Extra transport option 3

Creates a good link from Fulham Football Club to Wandsworth 2

Wandsworth Riverside given a valuable connection to Fulham/New Kings Rd 2

Hail and Ride is dangerous for other vulnerable road users 1

Infrequent user 1

New bus route to serve Riverside Qtr. 1

Current roads used are too narrow and endanger other road users 1

Supportive only IF Ashburton Estate/Carslake Rd/Chartfield Ave continue to have a bus service 1

Weekend service for Putney Heath residents 1


Changes adversely affect elderly, disabled and vulnerable customers 160

Maintain existing 424 route 119

Route is only direct bus between south Fulham and Putney 77

424 only route covering Fulham to Townmead Rd Sainsbury’s/local amenities/ employment /GP surgery 73

Riverside Qtr. already have good access to a range of buses 33

424 is the only access to Fulham from centre of Sands End 31

Would adversely affect school routes 29

The proposed changes will increase journey time and cost 27

Riverside Qtr. resident wants to go to Clapham not Fulham 16

New residential and business developments in Sands End area 12

Riverside Qtr. residents will not use bus and prefer alternative modes of transport 11

Putney Heath/Carslake Rd/Westleigh Ave/Chartfield Ave need bus service 9


Would increase car usage/carbon emissions/congestion 7

Wandsworth Rd extremely congested and will increase journey times 7


Only bus to serve Sands End 6

Vital that remote areas, Putney Heath/Ashburton Estate, are connected 6

Does not link Riverside Qtr. to Putney/Putney East tube 6

Important route for Peterborough Rd to Putney and Sands End 5

Riverside Qtr. residents unlikely to use this route 5

Sands End petition 5

Abandoning social housing in preference of affluent Riverside Qtr. 4

Important link to Charing Cross Hospital 3

Putney Heath to Fulham route is needed 3

Riverside Qtr. may not be completed until 2018 3

424 only route covering west to east Fulham 2

Riverside Qtr. residents do not want bus route through their area 2

21

Riverside Qtr. residents are able to walk to Wandsworth for further transport links 2

Sands End to Wandsworth already well connected 2

Wandsworth Town station is too busy, better to go to Putney 2

424 should not terminate at Wandsworth Riverside 1

Does not link with Wandsworth Riverside Qtr. pier 1

Highway layout modified recently to improve access to Sainsbury's for 424 1

Maintain link between Sands End and Munster Rd other routes have heavy congestion 1

New frequency will be less punctual 1

Not enough buses currently 1

Not proposing alternatives 1

Parsons Green residents unhappy at losing route 1

Proposal is biased in favour of Wandsworth 1

Concern

Multiple new developments on south side of river which need dedicated bus route 3

Does not take road conditions into account 1

Single level buses easier to board than double-deckers 1

Concern: Lack of information

Will buses run in both directions? 1

Concern: Route

Do not want to lose a community bus which has good relations between passengers and drivers 8

Riverside Qtr./Hurlingham Park should be well connected this re-route does not serve them correctly 6

Congestion at junction between Point Pleasant and Putney Bridge Rd 2

Point Pleasant too narrow for buses 2

Turning at Carnwath Rd to Wandsworth Bridge is dangerous/congested 2

Concerned that development will take place on Peterborough Road. 1

Important connection to rail services 1

Important connection between north and south London 1

Larger 485 buses will have difficulties around Putney Heath roads 1

Maintain bus frequency where 485 replaces 424 1

Maintain current bus stops along Peterborough Rd 1

Negative effect on Hurlingham development 1

Concern: Schedule

424 is frequently late and unreliable 1

Suggestions: Other bus routes

28 could serve the new destination more efficiently 5

C3 to have a stop on Broughton Rd 1

Suggestions: Promotion

Ensure that elderly and vulnerable users are aware of changes using non internet methods 1

Suggestions: Route

Bagleys Ln, Broughton Rd, Townmead Rd to proposed Wandsworth route then Putney Bridge Rd 5

Extend to Hammersmith 3

Putney Bridge Rd direct to Wandsworth Southside shopping centre 2

Access to Wandsworth not necessary and will not be used 2

Amend the route but keep Putney Heath as part of it 2

22

Replace aging buses 2

Extend 424 to Trinity Rd rather than Riverside Qtr. 1

Extend route to Putney Bridge Rd-Oxford Rd-East Putney 1

Extend to Tooting Broadway 1

Maintain 424 route during peak hours 1

Move start point from Fulham Football Ground to Putney Bridge 1

Parsons Green-Peterborough Rd-Townmead Rd-Bagleys Lane-Fulham Broadway-Bishops Park Estate-Putney Heath 1

Serve at least lower half of Putney High St as route 22 not adequate alternative 1

Suggestions: Schedule

Introduce Sunday service 6

Introduce evening service 4

Other

Other: Out of context for this consultation 2

Misunderstanding/Route

The part of the route being removed will be replaced by 485 5

Route will not serve Stevenage Road/Craven Cottage terminus 1

Comments about route 485 proposals

Comments for the scheme

Introduction of evening service 40

General support 37

Links Putney Heath to Lower Richmond Rd and Barnes 27

Would improve school route 24

Link Putney Heath to Hammersmith 8

Will save time and money by removing the need to change connections 7

Re-route will encourage people to use buses not private vehicles 6

Not using congested Putney Bridge Rd will reduce journey time 4

Welcome the extension up the High St to Green Man bus stop 2

Connects west Putney with Putney Station 1


Increase in journey time and cost 37

Lose only direct link between Barnes and Wandsworth 31

Maintain 485 - links Hammersmith, Barnes, Putney and Wandsworth 30

Putney Heath area is already well served 18

Increased congestion on Putney High St will increase delays and pollution 12

Vulnerable and elderly people use this route to access Wandsworth 8

Would affect school route 6

485 should continue to start in Wandsworth 6



220 and 270 also no longer stop at Putney cinema/will lose valuable connections 4

No longer serves Putney Bridge Rd 4

Increase use of private vehicles as losing bus route to west Putney school 3

Keep a service for new development at Carlton House/Deodar Road 1

Lack of communication from TfL 1

Low frequency of 485 means fewer users between Hammersmith and Putney/waste of TfL resources 1

Much needed link between Lower Richmond Rd and Barnes/Hammersmith 1

23

Neither 485 or 424 serve Peterborough Road 1

Putney Heath to Barnes will not be used 1

Services won't be able to cope with demand - 485 commuter route and 424 shoppers/leisure route 1

Concern

Route: Important connection to Wandsworth shopping centre 7

More Information needed: How often will new service run? 3

Route: Good relationship between drivers and customers 1

More information needed: Where would it terminate in Putney Heath? 1

General: Route already unreliable and does not run to schedule 1

Suggestions

Increase frequency to every 20 or 15 mins or at peak times 76

Sunday service - hourly 24

Re-route 485 from Wandsworth Town via Riverside Qtr. 24

Putney Bridge Rd-Riverside Qtr.-Wandsworth Gyratory-York Rd-Falcon Rd-Clapham Jct-Northcote Rd 3

Go directly up Putney Hill to Green Man stop 2

Putney Pier to Parsons Green via existing 424 route back onto New Kings Rd Westbound 2

Extend 485 to Wimbledon/Southfields to alleviate 93 bus 2

Longer running daily service to Barnes and Hammersmith needed 2

West Putney should still have bus service to Wandsworth 2

Serve Riverside Qtr. with bus route 14 or other Central London route instead 2

Please put cycling parking facilities on bus site opposite Green Man 1

Putney Pier to Putney Heath 1

Additional stop between Commondale and Station Rd 1

Connect Barnes to Fulham 1

Extend 485 to Fulham Football Club in place of 424 1

Extend to Hammersmith and Shepherd's Bush/alleviate pressure on 72 1

Extend to Richmond 1

Low-emission buses introduced for Putney High Street 1

Maintain Hail and Ride section at Putney Heath 1

Putney Bridge Rd - South Circular Rd - Carlton Drive - Putney Heath 1

Remain connected with Wandsworth and extend along 170 route 1

Withdraw service between Hammersmith and Putney Bridge and improve other bus routes that are used more 1

Other bus routes

485 preferred to 220 between Hammersmith and Wandsworth 3

220 should be extended to Clapham Jct for Riverside Qtr. residents 2

220 and 270 frequency should be increased 2

Extend 14 to Telegraph Rd to serve Putney Village 2

Extend route C3 across bridge in Wandsworth 1

283 should be extended to Putney Common to serve new school 1

265 frequency should be increased 1

Introduce shuttle bus between Putney Heath and Putney Bridge St 1

Extend 22 to Barnes from Putney 1

Extend 74 to Putney Heath as a more direct route to Hammersmith 1

Extend route 28 1

Other

24

Same content as Q3 7

Out of scope for this consultation 2

Comments about the consultation

Comments for the consultation

General positive comment 78

Good content 48

Detailed plans 34

Good communication 12

Informative 6

Pleased to be consulted 5

Helpful maps 4

Good timescale 1

Scheme would help growth in the area 1

Comments against the consultation

Not adequately advertised among local bus using population 36

Not contacted by TfL/no materials seen 29


Maps not clear - before and after would be better 12

Bus stop advertising not clear/too small 8

More information needed on proposed re-routes 5

Many people not aware of consultation 5

Online information not accessible to elderly 3

More info on first and last bus times and bus frequency 3

More info on bus stop locations 2

Important stakeholders not contacted 2

Lack of material and forms at consultation 2

Lack of internal communication as Wandsworth road changes assumes 485 will run there 1

Timings of drop in sessions made it hard for certain demographics to reach 1

Size of 485 buses impacts on positive or negative opinion of changes 1

Consultation is confusing due to two different routes/communities 1

Incorrect information material is an indicator planners don't know or understand the route 1

Link broken for bus stop information 1

Short consultation period 1

Concern

Are consultations listened to? 8

Rationale and justifications for re-route proposals 7

Door to door leaflets not sufficient to ensure full local knowledge of proposal 4

Would like to see more open ended questions to discuss other possible re-routes 4

Route 424:No justification given for the removed part of the route 3

Route 424:What replaces Bagley's Ln to Townmead Rd 1

Length of consultation too long 1

Consultation kept quite in order to proceed with changes without opposition 1

Suggestions

Advertising on buses 1

25

Appendix B - List of stakeholders consulted

London TravelWatch

Elected Members

Andrew Boff AM

Caroline Pidgeon AM

Darren Johnson AM

Fiona Twycross AM

Gareth Bacon AM

Jenny Jones AM

Joanne McCartney

Kit Malthouse AM

Murad Qureshi AM

Nicky Gavron AM

Richard Tracey AM

Stephen Knight AM

Tom Copley AM

Tony Arbour AM

Valerie Shawcross AM

Andrew Slaughter MP

Greg Hands MP

James Berry MP

Jane Ellison MP

Justine Greening MP

Siobhain McDonagh MP

Stephen Hammond MP

Rosemary Torrington – Councillor for Thamesfield

Mike Ryder – Councillor for Thamesfield

Jim Maddan OBE – Councillor for Thamesfield

Robert Largan – Councillor for Sands End

Local Authorities

London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham

London Borough of Richmond

London Borough of Wandsworth

Police & Health Authorities

Metropolitan Police

London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority

London Ambulance Service

CCG NHS Central London

26

Transport Groups

AA Motoring Trust

Association of British Drivers

Association of Car Fleet Operators

British Motorcyclists Federation

Campaign for Better Transport

CTC, the national cycling charity

Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee

Freight Transport Association

Green Flag Group

Licenced Taxi Drivers Association

London Cycling Campaign

London Omnibus Traction Society

Motorcycle Action Group

Motorcycle Industry Association

RAC Foundation for Motoring

Road Haulage Association

Transport for All

Barnes Community Association

Hammersmith & Fulham Action on Disability

Hammersmith & Fulham Safer Transport Team

London Cycling Campaign (Hammersmith and Fulham)

London Cycling Campaign (Wandsworth)

Putney Town Centre Manager

Putney Traffic Transport and Parking Working Group

Raynes Park & West Barnes Residents' Association

Richmond Safer Transport Team

Wandsworth Access Association

Wandsworth Safer Transport Team

Other Stakeholders

Action on Hearing Loss (formerly RNID)

Age Concern London

Age UK London

Alzheimer's Society

Asian Peoples Disabilities Alliance

Campaign for Better Transport

Council for Disabled Children

Disability Alliance

Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee

Federation of Small Businesses (FSB)

Freight Transport Association (FTA)

Greater London Forum for the Elderly

Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

Joint Committee on Mobility of Blind and Partially Sighted People (JCMBPS)

Living Streets

27

London Older People's Strategy Group

MENCAP

Metropolitan Police Service

Multiple Sclerosis Society

Muscular Dystrophy Campaign

National Autistic Society

Parkinson's UK

Royal London Society for the Blind (RLSB)

Royal Mail

SCOPE

Transport Focus

28

Appendix C – Consultation materials

Copy of website text

32

Bus stop publicity / drop-in session display

33

Feedback form for drop-in sessions

Consultation on possible changes to bus routes 424 …...via its current routeing as far as Fulham...

Documents

Transcript of Consultation on possible changes to bus routes 424 …...via its current routeing as far as Fulham...