LONDON BOROUGH OF TOWER HAMLETSdemocracy.towerhamlets.gov.uk/Data/Accessible Transport... · LONDON BOROUGH OF TOWER HAMLETS ... Joyce Mamode;& Ashrafia Choudhury. ... he thought

C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator.SUPERTED\Desktop\Tower Hamlets\Accessible Transport Consultative Forum\20040916\Minutes\Minutes0.doc

LONDON BOROUGH OF TOWER HAMLETS

ACCESSIBLE TRANSPORT CONSULTATIVE FORUM

Notes of a meeting held on Thursday 15th July 2004 in the Wheelchair Centre, Mile End Hospital, Bancroft Road, London E1 @ 10.30 a.m. PRESENT : Mr Nigel Huxted Chair: Independent member Ms Mary Browning Vice Chair: Independent Member Mr John Per Independent Cllr M Shahab Uddin LBTH Lead Member Living Well Scrutiny Cllr A A Sardar LBTH Lead Member Living Safely scrutiny Mr A McDonald Computer Cabs Mr Tony Davis LBTH Transportation Mr Simon Rouse LBTH Community Transport Ms Libby Bradshaw Tower Hamlets PCT Ms Faryal Velmi DART Ms Janice Hadley LBTH Mobility Support Ms Alison Lloyd GLA Mr P Bradley TfL / London Buses 1. Apologies for Absence

Received on behalf of Councillors Uz-Zaman, Islam & Miah; Lewis Wight; Joyce Mamode;& Ashrafia Choudhury. The Clerk proposed and members Agreed that formal thanks be recorded to the Chair and Vice Chair 2003/04 for their work on behalf of the Forum.

2. Election of Chair & Vice Chair from the Service User representatives

The Clerk advised members that as the three Independent members were prepared to continue in their current roles it was proposed that the Chair and Vice Chair be re-elected. Members present Agreed that:-

Mr Nigel Huxted be re-elected Chair for 2004/05 and that Ms Mary Browning be re-elected vice Chair for 2004/05.

2 C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator.SUPERTED\Desktop\Tower Hamlets\Accessible Transport Consultative Forum\20040916\Minutes\Minutes0.doc

3. Declarations of Interest

None

4. i) Notes of Meeting held on 18 March 2004

Agreed ii) Notes of informal meeting held on 20 May 2004 Agreed: subject to inclusion of Mr Per’s Apologies.

5. Matters Arising from 20 May

Tony Davis advised that unfortunately due to a re-organisation TfL’s Equalities and Inclusion Unit could not be present. It was hoped that a representative would attend the next meeting to advise on the significance of their re-organisation and contribute to further discussion re. Accessible / Mobility Buses and answer queries in respect of the Rough Guide to Accessing London. Peter Bradley confirmed the Forum would be advised when Pip Hesketh’s [TfL Equalities and Inclusion Unit ] permanent successor was appointed. Tony Davis reminded members that London Underground currently had their own Equalities arrangements which would need to be integrated in this process.

6. Spotlight on Local Bus Services

Peter Bradley [TfL / London Buses] thanked the Forum for inviting him back to hear their views and to provide the opportunity for explanation of issues of concern to users. He had found the feedback he had previously obtained from the Forum to be most helpful and informative. Tony Davis referred all present to the issues and concerns raised in the last Meeting notes and his subsequent email dated 24/05/04. He then circulated a written response recently received from TfL – attached. Peter Bradley requested members to indicate issues they wished to raise and which he would either note or try to respond. Tony Davis ‘flagged’ up the initial response to the introduction of Bendy Buses on Route 25; the need for visual impairment facilities at bus stops; and the reducing Mobility Bus service. John Per referred to the difficulty for wheelchair users on Accessible routes having to compete with others for one wheelchair space per bus which is often occupied or full of buggies. Nigel Huxted referred to the problems caused by drivers not lowering their ramp in correct alignment with the kerb, and at Bus Stations - particularly the new Walthamstow station and Stratford- parking too


far from any facilities e.g. handrails/ ramps thus making getting off and access to exits very difficult. Mary Browning drew attention to Route 100 where only 1 in 3 of the buses was ever actually Accessible. Libby Bradshaw highlighted the positioning of ticket machines which blocked the view of approaching buses for those sitting at bus stops – could they not be repositioned on the other side? Peter Bradley commenced with reference to two major changes on routes within the borough. The introduction of the larger high capacity articulated [Bendy] buses on Route 25 to meet passenger demand as welcomed by the Local Authority. Such a significant vehicle change required consequential works eg to bus stops and Termini and realignment of street furniture to accommodate their length. He hoped this introduction had and would continue to meet the problems of capacity on the route that had been raised. He was interested to hear the views of users and the Authority so far, also regarding the introduction of Accessible Double Deckers on Route 8 , as similarly requested by the Forum. He hoped both routes had helped improve bus services in the borough. He then advised that from the end of the month drivers would not be permitted to leave the depot without a working ramp. This was a significant change in policy which at last recognised the ramp as an integral part of the bus and not an ‘add on’ facility. It would in future be considered as a mechanical failure of the bus if not working. If the ramp failed whilst in service the driver would radio through the fault but, it was expected, would have to continue until an appropriate opportunity for repair or replacement. To withdraw such vehicles immediately would of course cause gaps in the service if no replacements were available - this aspect of the policy was still being considered / reviewed. There would be a spot check audit during August to ensure Operators were complying with the new policy - specifically to check if buses were leaving with no working ramps which were subsequently reported as in service failures. There would be penalties for any Operator non-compliance, with this being considered as mechanical lost mileage. Passengers would also be encouraged to report ramp failure. This was a further significant change by TfL which would be monitored and reviewed and higher maintenance and reliability standards sought from Operators. In response to Councillor Sardar he undertook to ensure that the monitoring reports, which he thought were six monthly, were made available to the Transport Forums. Regarding the lack of accessible buses on Route 100 he undertook to investigate as this was unacceptable. Across London 91% of buses were now Accessible, either articulated or the new Double Deckers, with the gradual phasing out of all remaining Routemasters on main routes during 2005. He noted the general concerns regarding parking and access at Bus Stations, and suggested that with regard to Walthamstow perhaps a site visit with Engineers might be arranged. Faryal Velmi queried whether the Disabled Toilets at Walthamstow were yet working – Peter Bradley undertook to investigate. She then referred to the necessity for driver training in appropriate use of the ramp and in the Disability


Equalities reasons for its need. Also for a general public awareness publicity campaign to explain and accept the accessibility changes now taking place. Tony Davis agreed the need to improve the quality of driving, particularly in regard to acceleration and breaking. Alison Lloyd commented on the complaints received in regard to thoughtless driving eg sudden unbalancing jerkiness, especially when moving off; not pulling up close enough to kerbs. Tony Davis stated that the changes on Route 25 had seemed quite positive so far to the Authority, which hoped they would be sustained. The Authority had wanted measures introduced to address increased demand and would only start to support this if the consequential reduction in seating to increase overall capacity was acceptable to residents. If not then more seating capacity would be sought. He commented that the ‘door closing’ warning signs on these articulated buses in fact reflected immediate closure, not actual warning of its happening. Also that compressed air release noise, unrelated to door closure, confused passengers into thinking there was closure and made them rush. Libby Bradshaw commented that on Route 25 the lack of seating at all times of the day was a major problem for some users forced to stand for entire journeys, often because children were occupying all the seats. She was aware of much passenger complaint about seating. However there was also the more general problem of the lack of consideration for others! Another practical problem was the lack of any dedicated space for luggage or bags on these Bendy buses. Peter Bradley thanked members for their useful and informative comments. He fully accepted the need for improved driver training by Operators to improve awareness of passenger need and ensure smoother operation. He explained that in fact as an important first step all drivers would in due course attend a B/Tec training course on Customer Care. In response to Tony Davis he confirmed that although it was the responsibility of the Operators to ensure all drivers were trained TfL would monitor the Operators through Mystery Traveller surveys etc. He also accepted the need to consider what might be done to raise Public Awareness but confirmed there was a greater social aspect to some issues eg mutual consideration. Posters and notices might be introduced but only as part of a current wider policy to reduce the number of notices displayed in buses, in order to increase their effectiveness. At this point the Vice Chair took over as the Chair had to leave the meeting for another engagement. Peter Bradley then summarised TfL’s tabled paper in response to the Forum’s concerns re. the Mobility Service. He explained that even at its ‘height’ the service had not been heavily used. Now however all new buses and routes were fully Accessible. As a consequence the Mobility buses were inevitably less used than before. Publicity leaflets and information had to date failed to bring any significant increase in use. John Per commented however that in terms of Mobility use even a small % increase was actually significant to those users who had through ‘mobility’


improved their quality of life. He disputed that the new services were fully accessible. He for one felt more comfortable on a Mobility bus. He could not accept the service should be lost because other services had become more accessible. Mary Browning stated that as publicity had been insignificant and of such poor quality and availability it was no wonder service use had not grown. Tony Davis advised that the Council had misgivings about the changing bus service leading to the end of the Mobility network in the borough by end 2005. There was no evidence of any attempt to revitalise the service eg emphasising that use of mobility services was available to all passengers as a means of increasing use. If following a vigorous publicity campaign use still dropped then the Council might be more convinced by the argument. Rather it seemed cuts had followed cuts with loss becoming inevitable. Peter Bradley, noting these points, stated that there had been no specific intent to remove Mobility services, but it had been found that their use had dropped as accessibility on the main network increased. Mobility services had always had problems regarding frequency and restrictions arising from their scheduled timing. Inevitably many potential users did not live near a Mobility route. Accessibility of the main networks had removed many of these problems. TfL was committed to supporting additional, alternative, more flexible Door to door transport services to try to meet any gaps in service arising from loss of Mobility. Some Authorities were accepting the necessary reduction of Mobility services. Faryal Velmi commented that such alternative services were not a substitute for the loss of the Mobility service. Alison Lloyd advised that there was a general feeling that Mobility services were being wound down due to less use, but conversely also concern whether the network was truly fully accessible. Although Mobility services were somewhat ‘rigid’, their loyal users appreciated the time and care the drivers were able to give to their needs. Peter Bradley then clarified that within the borough it was only a proposal to withdraw the 903 Route. He stated that TfL was willing to work with the Council to see whether improved publicity etc could regain use levels, in which case the service might not need to end. In response to Faryal Velmi he stated that TfL would not end any service until it had been assessed whether improved publicity and marketing had made a difference. In conclusion he asked whether there were any modifications needed to the existing Mobility service. Mary Browning advised that there was some wish for the service to be extended to Morrisons Supermarket at Chingford. He undertook to consider this proposal within an autumn campaign with the Council to improve awareness of the service. The Vice Chair thanked Mr Bradley for his contribution to the Forum.


7. Draft Londonwide Taxicard Application Form

As there was again no one to formally present the item it was agreed that it should be deferred until the next meeting. It was believed that there might now be a more recent draft document available. The general feeling amongst members that the draft form [as presented] seemed rather long and overly complex was reaffirmed.

8. Any Other Business

a. Computer Cab – ‘double swipe’. Alan McDonald advised that when there was no cab near proximity one would be called in from further afield – at no further expense to the client. The client would however be required to make two swipes with their card – but only their one ride would be charged against it. He confirmed that there would be a need for some explanatory reassurance to users about this new scheme.

b. Community Transport. Mary Browning on behalf of Simon Rouse who had had to leave, advised members of a successful Urban Bus Challenge Grant award which would provide new accessible vehicles and driver training.

9. Date of Next Meeting – Thursday 16th September 2004 :10.30am @ The Wheelchair Centre, Mile End Hospital, Bancroft Road, E1

The meeting ended at 12.20 pm

____________________________________ Mary Browning, Chair

Accessible Transport Consultative Forum
