Christian Hansen wrote:
On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:25:52 -0000, "A H" wrote:


Is it just me or does anyone else think this expensive new 'bus station'
doesn't live up the hype made during the planning stages?

I now find I have to walk from one end to the other when alighting from a 44
or 344 bus to reach the tube, quite a long way really (i.e. further than

from the old 'temporary' stop outside the hideous St George Wharf

development).


Worse than that. My gym is at Vauxhall and I live at the Elephant. I used to
have to wait in front of the St. George buildings where I had the choice of a
322 or a 344 at the same stop.

Now I have the choice of waiting at one stop in the interchange for the 322,
or waiting at another two stops further back on the other side of the
interchange for a 344. I could wait in betwen the two, I suppose, and run for
whichever gets there first.

It's typical of transit planners here that they do not take such things into
consideration when designing infrastructure.

As for beauty, or design, well, I'd trade that for an ordinary interchange
that worked and was convenient.

I think the design at Vauxhall is quite interesting; I like that TfL
make an effort to produce interesting buildings. Design is all
subjective anyway.

As for functionality, Hammersmith bus station seems to work pretty well
for me, as do grouped bus stops on Kensington High Street and at Hyde
Park Corner. South Kensington also has extremely convenient bus
interchange which is let down by the one-way system (slows down buses
heavily) and by narrow pavements.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - transport projects in London

In message , Dave Arquati
writes
As for functionality, Hammersmith bus station seems to work pretty well
for me,

But not for me, going in a Richmond/Twickenham direction. 33 & 267 both
go there, but stop on either side of the bus-station. Have to keep your
eyes peeled and hover a'midships.

Nor, I imagine, is it easy for people wanting the 27, with both
directions served by adjacent stops.

--
Martin @ Strawberry Hill

Robin May wrote to uk.transport.london on Thu, 23 Dec 2004:

(Mait001) wrote the following in:


I think there are a couple of issues. One is a laudable desire to
provide some nicely designed "different" buildings

Why is this laudable

This is meant to be a convenient transpoprt interchange, not a
Tracy Emin-style work of art.

There's nothing wrong with a convenient transport interchange also
being a nicely designed and pleasant to look at transport interchange.

No, there isn't - but this one is neither especially convenient, nor is
it particularly pleasant to look at!
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 18 December 2004

"Mrs Redboots" wrote in message
...

but this one is neither especially convenient,
nor is it particularly pleasant to look at!

Indeed, for some reason it reminds me of the unpleasant parts of Munich. (I
never found any pleasant parts of Munich!)

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
"Mrs Redboots" wrote in message
...

but this one is neither especially convenient,
nor is it particularly pleasant to look at!

Indeed, for some reason it reminds me of the unpleasant parts of Munich.
(I
never found any pleasant parts of Munich!)

You didn't look very hard then...
--
Cheers, Steve.
Change from jealous to sad to reply.

John Rowland wrote to uk.transport.london on Tue, 28 Dec 2004:

"Mrs Redboots" wrote in message
...

but this one is neither especially convenient,
nor is it particularly pleasant to look at!

Indeed, for some reason it reminds me of the unpleasant parts of Munich. (I
never found any pleasant parts of Munich!)

Oh, come on, John - what about that lovely main square with the clock?
Beautiful!
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 18 December 2004

In message , John Rowland
writes

but this one is neither especially convenient,
nor is it particularly pleasant to look at!

Indeed, for some reason it reminds me of the unpleasant parts of Munich. (I
never found any pleasant parts of Munich!)

Ah, now there's a problem as it has been recommended be certain people
about these parts as being a 'good place to visit'. And I'm hoping to
visit it soon.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

A H wrote:
Is it just me or does anyone else think this expensive new 'bus station'
doesn't live up the hype made during the planning stages?
(snip)

I visited it for the first time on New Year's Eve. I have to say that I
like the design - I think it's very striking. The glowing roundel is an
interesting touch. However, I can understand the usability concerns of
some posters to this group, as the stops seem to be arranged in a very
odd fashion, considering how easy access is for buses to the station!

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...
A H wrote:
Is it just me or does anyone else think this expensive new 'bus station'
doesn't live up the hype made during the planning stages?
(snip)

I visited it for the first time on New Year's Eve. I have to say that I
like the design - I think it's very striking. The glowing roundel is an
interesting touch. However, I can understand the usability concerns of
some posters to this group, as the stops seem to be arranged in a very
odd fashion, considering how easy access is for buses to the station!

I emerged from the tube at Vauxhall tonight (in the rain and wind) and had
to walk to the far end of the 'new, improved Vauxhall interchange' to catch
a bus. There isn't a lot of protection from the elements, especially when
there's a driving wind and horizontal rain, and many people now have to walk
a lot further than before, so what was the point in spending so much on an
'interchange' that involves cold and wet walks from one end to the other and
walks up and down stairs to the tube or overground when you get there?
Meanwhile, the former entrance ramp down to the tube at the other end of
Bondway, opposite the 44/344 bus stop, is now permanently closed off - hence
the long walk now, for many people, to enter the tube opposite the entrance
to the rail station.

The new interchange was supposed to link up rail/tube/bus by covered
walkways and escalators *to make it a proper interchange*. The ski slope
with a silver mobile home parked under it has failed to do this and it has
been a big, expensive disappointment for many....

Andy

Dave Arquati wrote:
A H wrote:

Is it just me or does anyone else think this expensive new 'bus station'
doesn't live up the hype made during the planning stages?

(snip)

I visited it for the first time on New Year's Eve. I have to say that I
like the design - I think it's very striking. The glowing roundel is an
interesting touch. However, I can understand the usability concerns of
some posters to this group, as the stops seem to be arranged in a very
odd fashion, considering how easy access is for buses to the station!

Having better things to do but avoiding them, I had a look at the logic
behind the location of stops at bus station at Vauxhall. I've come to
understand some decisions like the location of terminating 44 and 156
services at the far end from the Tube station (the way the other stops
are best arranged unfortunately subjects interchange passengers to this
long walk, although the closure of the Tube entrance at that end of the
bus station is inexplicable).

However, the current stop groupings fall down on services to a number of
locations where services to those locations could be better grouped by
making use of adjacent stops or the same stops. These a
- Brixton and Stockwell services. I presume TfL consider interchange
traffic at Vauxhall to these services to be low; however, I believe they
could all run from the same stop (I'd plump for F).
- the Elephant. The current arrangement with services departing for the
Elephant from diagonally opposite stops is very odd. There must be
reasonable traffic to this destination, so I'd group all Elephant
services onto stop G, with the 77A departing from adjacent stop J so
that anyone travelling along the Albert Embankment isn't too disadvantaged.
- Lavender Hill, Clapham Jcn, Earlsfield, Wandsworth. Currently services
depart from G and E which are theoreticall adjacent but annoyingly
distant from each other thanks to the access from Wandsworth Road. These
services could depart from stops C and E, bringing them closer to the
Tube station and to more adjacent stops.

Under my cunning plan, passengers to all destinations with multiple
services would be slightly better off with the exception of the northern
part of Wandsworth Road (down to Lansdowne Road), which would have
services departing from diagonally opposite stops E (77, 77A) and F
(322), rather than single stop G as at present. This would hopefully be
outweighed by the advantage of having Stockwell and Brixton services
depart from the same stop (2, 88, 322 at F).

Comments are welcome, unless you've already fallen asleep.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London