Scr South Yorkshire Bus Review

[1295galaxy 20]

BBC Radio Sheffield announced this morning,after the review of the Bus Service in South Yorkshire 60% of people are not pleased how the Bus Service is run,and something needs to be done to Improve it at Last,We have been saying this for ages,but nothing ever changed,Will we finally see something changed to Improve it or not?

Edited June 18, 2020 by Groose

[max 13]

Only if there's money in it for the private companies who run our services.

[Michael_N 36]

Bus companies will be rubbing their hands together. Getting paid to run the service (as in London) rather than taking financial risk themselves. They will make even more money from it being run/governed by the local authorities. Yet we will have folk out even more as there will need to be increased taxes to cover the costs of the operation!

[RollingJ 1,999]

Yep, and if these political pipe dreams become reality, stand by for monthly (or even faster) service changes as the operators don't get the returns they expect and pull out, as happens in London now.

 

Then you'll have cause to complain.

[Andy C 85]

This has now been published. https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Bus-Review-Report-June-2020.pdf

 

A few themes of its findings:

- frequency

- reliability issues caused by congestion and slow journey times

- buses need to play a bigger part in reducing road transport emissions and tackling climate change

- buses are not integrated into crucial associated policy areas such as housing development and spatial planning

- inadequate connectivity between different modes of transport

- handling of service changes

- ticket choice overwhelming, not always confident of getting best value option

- varying quality of experience in bus stop infrastructure, information, accessibility, ticket sales and vehicles themselves

- local authorities showing lack of leadership and accountability along with inadequate public funding from the government

 

 

[RollingJ 1,999]

21 minutes ago, Andy C said:

This has now been published. https://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Bus-Review-Report-June-2020.pdf

 

A few themes of its findings:

- frequency

- reliability issues caused by congestion and slow journey times

- buses need to play a bigger part in reducing road transport emissions and tackling climate change

- buses are not integrated into crucial associated policy areas such as housing development and spatial planning

- inadequate connectivity between different modes of transport

- handling of service changes

- ticket choice overwhelming, not always confident of getting best value option

- varying quality of experience in bus stop infrastructure, information, accessibility, ticket sales and vehicles themselves

- local authorities showing lack of leadership and accountability along with inadequate public funding from the government

 

 

How long did it take the geniuses to come up with so much twaddle? I could have told them all of that (minus the real rubbish) in a one-page report on an A5 sheet.

[sheffbag 227]

4 hours ago, 1295galaxy said:

BBC Radio Sheffield announced this morning,after the review of the Bus Service in South Yorkshire 60% of people are not pleased how the Bus Service is run,and something needs to be done to Improve it at Last,We have been saying this for ages,but nothing ever changed,Will we finally see something changed to Improve it or not?

OK i'll bite 

Considering "We've" (by that i presume you mean you are part of the "We") been saying this for ages. How would you improve it? Whats your ideas that would benefit all of SY not just Sheffield.

 

consider that you are dealing with private companies. If you want it all back under public control who's going to pay to buy out the operators and how would it then be funded. If you are keeping it private then how do you improve it?

[RollingJ 1,999]

@sheffbag -

[Phili Buster 10]

Perhaps they could get round to addressing the problem where there are two destinations for a route (specifically 52 and 52a) when both are running in tandem, one pulls up but the one you require goes merrily on its way even though there are potential passengers stood in the middle of the road attempting to flag it down.

[Michael_N 36]

Bus companies will be rubbing their hands together. Getting paid to run the service (as in London) rather than taking financial risk themselves. They will make even more money from it being run/governed by the local authorities. Yet we will have folk out even more as there will need to be increased taxes to cover the costs of the operation!

[Andy C 85]

48 minutes ago, Michael_N said:

Bus companies will be rubbing their hands together. Getting paid to run the service (as in London) rather than taking financial risk themselves. They will make even more money from it being run/governed by the local authorities. Yet we will have folk out even more as there will need to be increased taxes to cover the costs of the operation!

If you've read the document you will have seen the point that the likes of First are losing a lot of money in South Yorkshire, not making money, and if the public sector took over then it would be the taxpayer rather than shareholders funding that loss!

 

There is a lot in there aimed at the local authorities rather than bus companies such as

 

- poor reliability is caused by congestion and there are examples of bus priority measures not being enforced (such as parking in bus lanes).

- with SYPTE looking after public transport implementation, the councils have used that as an excuse to take no responsibility

- allowing planning permission for new housing estates and business parks to be built without any public transport infrastructure

- repeated funding cuts meaning less tendered socially necessary bus services, closure of travel shops, reduced quality information, reduced infrastructure maintenance etc

- railway stations without convenient bus connections

- promoting car parks rather than public transport

 

[Annie Bynnol 612]

6 hours ago, Phili Buster said:

Perhaps they could get round to addressing the problem where there are two destinations for a route (specifically 52 and 52a) when both are running in tandem, one pulls up but the one you require goes merrily on its way even though there are potential passengers stood in the middle of the road attempting to flag it down.

The 52 route has always had regular multiple destinations particularly in the east. Darnall, Ballifield, Handsworth and Woodhouse would appear on short workings on the route daily.

The introduction of the 52 a reflected the shared core but different routes near the ends. While the 120 does not.