Additional late July MQT answers
Poor performance of bus route 13
Question No: 2018/1553
Andrew Dismore
I continue to receive complaints about the poor performance of bus route 13 which has been problematic since the buses were reorganised and cut around this route a year ago. In the lengthy so called “2016 consultation” there does not seem to be any mention about 13’s “stopping short”, which is now affecting passengers travelling to the north end of the route in particular; 13s now seem to be stopping at Church End leaving many passengers dumped at Church End. When will Transport for London get a grip on this woefully underperforming route?
Written response from the Mayor
I understand how frustrating it can be for customers when buses are turned short of their destinations. This measure is only applied as a last resort to keep frequencies reliable on the leg of the route with the most affected passengers.
When an operator fails to provide operated mileage owing to factors within its control, it is penalised with reduced income and missed bonuses. In the case of this route, most lost mileage has been for traffic reasons beyond its control.
There was a short spell where performance improved as roadworks abated and performance improvement measures took effect. However, this was followed by a week-long gathering of Commonwealth Leaders in Park Lane, roadworks in Baker Street with four-way temporary traffic lights, the England-Pakistan cricket test at Lords, a march and rally in W1, and delays at Henley Corner following the eastbound closure of the A406.
Transport for London and the operator, Tower Transit, will continue to review the route’s schedule in response to traffic conditions along the route in order to minimise the effect on passengers.
Waste collection in Barnet [1]
Question No: 2018/1582
Andrew Dismore
Barnet Council is considering scrapping food waste collections and stopping green waste collections for 3 months a year, breaking the administration’s only pledge in their recent election.
The London Environmental Strategy (Policy 7.2.1) states a minimum level of service to households: 1) six main dry recycling materials collected from all properties 2) separate food waste collections, including from flats where practical and cost effective 3) focus on improving performance from flats.
Do you regard this scheme as being compliant with your environmental policies? If not, will you challenge the Council’s decision?
Written response from the Mayor
Following the LB Barnet’s decision on the 5th of June to withdraw the food waste collection service, I formally wrote to the Leader of the council, on the 19th of June, and again on the 27th of June, expressing my profound concern at the decision and conveying my intention to direct the authority to stop the implementation of its decision for an initial six-week period.
The purpose of this being to set aside a period within which we could seek additional information, data and evidence from the authority that it had used to support its decision and to see if a resolution can be found.
The Leader of the authority, Cllr Richard Cornelius, responded to that letter on the 28th of June and agreed voluntarily to set aside a six-week period to engage in dialogue and consultation.
We are currently within that six-week period and the authority is fully cooperating in providing a range of information and data. It would not be appropriate for me to say more at this point.
Hampstead Heath Overground station
Question No: 2018/1786
Andrew Dismore
Part of Hampstead has been left with no ATM, after Barclays Bank’s “lease” on their ATM position expired. A suitable replacement position would be the Hampstead Heath Overground station which is close by. There are staff on site most of the time and it is used throughout the day and night so it would be in a fairly well monitored area. Will Transport for London include this site in their review of siting ATMs in their premises?
Written response from the Mayor
Transport for London (TfL) is looking at how it can increase the number of ATMs on its network. Traditional hole in the wall ATMs require a large, dedicated secure space, which often limits where ATMs can be placed. TfL is therefore also reviewing the various designs of ATMs to see if there are any which require less space.
All ATMs on TfL’s network are installed and managed by a contract provider, and any additional sites like the one suggested at Hampstead Heath would be subject to customer demand and agreement from the provider.
Tube noise [3]
Question No: 2018/1867
Andrew Dismore
We are told by a Transport for London (TfL) press release that ‘state-of-the-art technology’ will increase the lifespan of the Elizabeth line with a rail milling train and two multi-purpose engineering trains, with delivery to London later this year. TfL says:
‘The 48 metre long rail milling train is the first of its kind to be used in the UK rail industry. It is able to scan the rails using electromagnetic crack detection, looking for any defects. If it identifies any issues with the track, it can mill the surface of the rail to remove defects and cracks, reducing wear on the new Elizabeth line train wheels and the tracks’.
If this can be done for the Elizabeth Line, why cannot such a machine be purchased for the Northern Line, to reduce the noise from corrugated rails that is causing such misery to so many people living near the Northern Line: should they not have priority over a track that has not even been used yet?
Written response from the Mayor
Transport for London (TfL) has rail grinding machines that operate on the Northern line. They manage rail defects on the line, as the milling train will on the Elizabeth line. Both rail grinding and milling remove material from the rail head to smooth the rails. These London Underground grinding machines use ultrasonic technology to measure rail cracks, which are then addressed by rail grinding.
Rail grinding and milling are not effective long-term methods for reducing noise and vibration. Both methods are predominantly used to maximise rail life and reduce the risk of rail defects.
Baker St and Gloucester Place
Question No: 2018/1869
Andrew Dismore
With the pedestrianisation of Oxford Street now not happening, is there any point in continuing with the conversion of Baker Street and Gloucester Place into a two way street?
Written response from the Mayor
Yes. The Baker Street project will introduce two-way working on Baker Street and Gloucester Place to improve the public realm, walking routes, cycle routes, road safety, and directness of bus services.
The Baker Street project commenced design before the latest Oxford Street plans had begun and has its own business case, independent of whether or not Oxford Street is pedestrianised. The project also provides an opportunity to rebalance road space and traffic signal times for the benefit of pedestrians and cyclists, while maintaining appropriate levels of traffic and discouraging high vehicle speeds.
