Local news for Wapping E1W and Tower Hamlets

TfL 100 bus route consultation results combined to fix final result

By on February 22, 2017 in Data Stories, Tower Hamlets, Transport

Analysis of the published results of the Transport for London (TfL) consultation into proposed changes of the 100 and 388 bus routes show that TfL is ignoring its own data and ignoring the wishes of Wapping residents.

In the published consultation results TfL has combined the results of feedback on both the 100 and the 388 bus routes in an attempt to justify their own wishes above that of their customers. This is despite there being little if no similarities between the two routes apart from the desire of TfL to combine parts of them. We asked TfL to provide us with the separated data but they refused so we did the work ourselves.

The TfL conclusion to the official consultation is as follows:

“After considering all of the responses, we have concluded that there have not been any issues raised that were not considered in the planning of the proposal and we therefore plan to go ahead with the changes to routes 100 and 388 as proposed, with a new bus stand for route 100 located at the Museum of London on the Rotunda.”

Roughly translated this means “We had to do a consultation but we did not like the responses so we combined both sets of data into one to try and confuse people and make it easy for us to ignore what people think.”

Not so fast TfL.

You can see a simple bar chart of our results below. This work was undertaken by Love Wapping to split out consultation responses to the change in the 100 bus route and the 388 bus route in contrast to the TfL results which combine the two.

TfL Bus Route Consultation Analysis

You do not need to be a data scientist to work out residents views on the proposed changes to the 100 route.

Here is the headline data used to create the chart. Full data table further down.

Response Type Amount Route 100 Amount Route 388
Positive 69 6% 69 32%
Negative 926 78% 114 53%
Other 112 9% 28 13%
General 82.5 7% 5.5 3%
Total Response 1189.5 216.5

Both our councillors objected to the proposed changes.

Cllr Julia Dockerill, our Conservative councillor for St Katharine’s & Wapping Ward submitted this:

Has collected residents concerns about the proposals. Felt that route 100 is an important bus link in the ward due to Wapping’ relative geographical isolation, the problems accessing the Overground for those with mobility issues, and the changes to route D3 which mean it no longer serves the Isle of Dogs. Believed that journey times and costs will increase if customers have to change buses to complete their journey.

Also commented that Wapping’s population is about to expand with the addition of new homes at the London Dock, and the working population is set to increase with new businesses at Royal Mint Court, London Dock and Thomas More Square.

Suggested that having to change at London Wall will make it more difficult for those travelling to St Bartholemew’s Hospital. Felt that London Wall is an isolated area, where it is unpleasant to wait at night. Commented that it would no longer be possible for customers to travel from other parts of Central London and transfer to route 100 at St Pauls, which tends to be a safe, busy area.

Noted that route 100 serves Blackfriars station which links people to Gatwick Airport and up to other Thameslink routes.

Cllr. Denise Jones of St Katharine’s and Wapping Labour Party made the following comments:

  • Route 100 provides a lifeline for those with mobility issues or with a buggy as Wapping station has no disabled access
  • Easy access to Liverpool Street Station is important to older people and those with mobility difficulties
  • Requiring people to break their journey puts additional pressure on an already disadvantaged section of the population
  • Breaking at London Wall is a poor option as it’s badly lit, isolated and unsafe at Blackfriars or St Pauls would be better
  • It is difficult to access route 100 from Tower Hill and it would be impossible to do in a wheelchair
  • Traffic volume is a problem across the city, but disruption is often caused by badly coordinated TfL works
  • Recently, the intervals between route 100 buses has increased to 20 minutes with frequent early terminations

These objections were ignored in the same way that individual residents and users of the 100 bus were ignored.

It took the LW Data Science Team (Adding Up Group) about three hours to extract the data from the published TfL reports, import them into Excel and then separate out the responses to the 100 route changes from the 388 route changes.

You can see the full results table below.

Appendix B: Main issues raised

 
Question 3: What do you think about our overall proposals for route 100? Number of responses
Positive comments
Current route: Great route with useful links 31
Shortening of route 10
Conditional support: As long as frequency is not affected 8
General or both routes
Generally supportive 9
Support rationalising services within London 5
Support reducing the bus gridlock around Bank 4
Support having two buses running from Museum of London to Moorgate 2
Sub-Total 69
Concerns / Negative comments
Museum of London/London Wall: poor terminus /remote with poor transport connections 114
Inconvenient for wheelchair users/people with reduced mobility & the elderly 96
Maintain existing route/not in favour of shortening route 91
Increased demand from new development/growing population in Wapping 85
Longer wait at bus stops/longer walk to other bus stops 60
Loss of direct connection to Blackfriars Station for connection to Gatwick Airport/other Thameslink routes 60
Changing buses will make the journey longer 58
Changing buses is inconvenient 49
Difficulty getting to St Bart’s Hospital 47
Difficulty getting to St Katherine’s Dock Waitrose and other supermarkets 46
Major disruption/no benefit to Wapping area residents 31
Loss of direct to direct access to shopping facilities of No1 New Change & other amenities in Cheapside 22
Broken journey from Wapping to Elephant & Castle 5
Journey to local Schools will be more difficult 3
No benefit to bus route 100 passengers 3
Sub-Total 770
General/both routes
Wapping is already a poorly connected & this will lead to isolation 93
Safety concern: Lone women waiting/walking longer 29.5
Multiple bus changes will be costly 10.5
Generally opposed 2
Multiple bus changes will be costly 10.5
Generally opposed 10.5
Sub-Total 926
Other comments / Suggestions
Terminate at St Paul’s 56
Terminate 100 at Blackfriars 33
Divert 100 back into Liverpool Street bus station 12
Terminate at St Bartholomew’s Hospital 5
Use double deck buses 3
Terminate at Moorgate station 3
Sub-Total 112
General suggestions
Platforms in Wapping Station only accessible via steep set of stairs 70
More bus services needed in Wapping, not less 7
Reroute to destination not on proposal 3.5
Do not reduce the frequency of both routes 2
Sub-Total 82.5
Positive comments total 69
Concerns / Negative comments total 926
Other comments total 112
General suggestion total 82.5
Overall response total 1189.5
Note: Where it is not known which route a comment applies to a mean average has been used.

You couldn’t make it up – but they tried anyway

Some of the responses that TfL combined into consultation responses for both routes were absurd.

Under the heading ‘General / both routes’ the response ‘Wapping is already a poorly connected & this will lead to isolation’ was made by 93 people. How can this be a response to both routes when the 388 goes nowhere near Wapping? For our data analysis we removed these responses from the 388 response figures.

‘General Suggestions’ included 70 people saying that platforms in Wapping Station are only accessible via a steep set of stairs and seven saying that more bus services needed in Wapping, not less. It is reasonable to think that the current problem with the stairs at Wapping Station is a reason against changing the 100 route – not a general suggestion.

96  responses  were that the proposed 100 change was inconvenient for wheelchair users/people with reduced mobility and the elderly.

LW Comment

We will be sending our analysis to TfL for comment.  Residents are tired of organisations paying lip service to the notion of consultation without any interest in what their customers really think.

Our view is that this consultation and its conclusions is invalid.

It would be very interesting to know how many other consultations this technique of conflating results has been used by TfL to get the result they want, not the result that is best for Londoners.


Tags:

Subscribe

If you enjoyed this article, subscribe now to receive more just like it.

Comments are closed.

Top