論盡全港令你"O咀"的議員立場...

我記得我地區個區議員要求606行完柴斜就上東廊過海..

原帖由 LP1200 於 2010-6-13 21:52 發表
我記得我地區個區議員要求606行完柴斜就上東廊過海..

若果無紅小(觀柴)的話個建議仲有得諗諗... 606而家都唔知點搞好好...

原帖由 LP1200 於 2010-6-13 21:52 發表
我記得我地區個區議員要求606行完柴斜就上東廊過海..

唔跟694咁行都偷笑咯......

原帖由 偉文 於 2010-6-13 13:34 發表
另外板友話取消70要rethink?請可否提出你的立場rethink些什麼, 同你有什麼建議...(rather than問完又問) 我覺得只要有紅van補到, 取消70是ok的

Re-think :
1. Did the original rt. 70 passengers have enough room to express their real opinion and needs
when rt. 70 is going to be cancelled
(Don't rely on district counselors as
for them, rt. 70 is a tool for getting/ acquiring their own influence in council,
and they ignore the real needs of passengers)

2. Are the compensated services enough, i.e. catering the needs of most passengers
For instance, some passengers took  rt. 70 in mid-night,
especially after the last departure of East Rail Line
But after the closure of rt. 70, they need to take rt. N-series buses, red-van
they spent much more on travel expense.
Although they are not quite many, their needs should also be considered.

Also, there were quite a lot senior citizens taking rt. 70, From Tai Po to Sheung Shui
but after the closure, they cannot get on bus to Sheung Shui outside the new market (Wan Tau Street)
So, should KMB re-route rt. 73 or 73A, to serve the needs of these passengers
rather than imposing BBI only.

Suggestion
1. Re-arranging the operation hours of the routes in BBI Schemes
to fill the gap in services hours (for example rt. N281 and rt. 81C)

2. Catering the passengers having special needs, such as senior citizens
as they are most affected in the closure

3. In future, if there is cancellation of bus route, similar to rt. 70 ones
the government should give public consultation meetings before
Let the public understand tjhe proposal and express the needs, opinion

My Stand
If there are enough compensated services,
including the improvement in service hours of other routes
I do not oppose the closure of rt. 70

but up to now, the compensated services is still not enough
so I don't think it is good to cancel rt. 70

[ 本帖最後由 12A 於 2010-6-14 13:08 編輯 ]

原帖由 12A 於 2010-6-13 22:38 發表


Re-think :
1. Did the original rt. 70 passengers have enough room to express their real opinion and needs
when rt. 70 is going to be cancelled
(Don't rely on district counselors as
for them, rt. 7 ...

有部份我同意你的看法, 有部份不太同意的.

同意的是, 令我有點失望的是其他路線差不多原風不動, 我覺得起碼73或73A入運頭塘, 同埋其實最似70的路線是73A, 除了沙田以南一段以外. 而"12A"說的operation hour都有改善的空間. 延長時間等等.

但是以70的客量是不足以支撐一條線的. 好,若果你話有老人家要搭, 我覺得咪睇吓有多少呢類人, 唔可以話有10個, 同有200個同一辦法去處理. 如果需求低過某一個數, 除非政府貼錢, 或把70變成一條紅/綠VAN線, 否則是浪費社會資源, 大家都知多數時間70客量是極低的, 而且outdate的, 如果沒有270A同271的話, 我就明為何留70. 若要照顧老人家, 可叫73A加低地台, 但唔係唔取消70. (雖然我都感性上很掛住70, 我都好想有, 但我不可咁自私)

第三, 我都同意議員未必代表市民聲音, 而呢個就是我起這題目的原意之一. 但是純問有多條線好唔好, 係人都識話好, 無意思, 又跌入第二個TUM裡, 而家個問題係supposingly議員應對交通本身有了解, 但很多議員都唔及格. 同點樣改善"山頭主義".

原帖由 偉文 於 14/6/2010 00:57 發表

點樣改善"山頭主義"

擴大選區，改用比例代表制。

咁細個選區仲搞單議席單票制，唔山頭主義就假。

原帖由 偉文 於 2010-6-13 22:20 發表


若果無紅小(觀柴)的話個建議仲有得諗諗... 606而家都唔知點搞好好...

搞得掂耀東先講啦！

原帖由 LP1200 於 2010-6-13 21:52 發表
我記得我地區個區議員要求606行完柴斜就上東廊過海..

但606柴斜後上東廊，唔夠客喎(非繁係成車5個人之內包車離開柴斜架)。

原帖由 AVW28 於 2010-6-14 11:32 發表 但606柴斜後上東廊，唔夠客喎(非繁係成車5個人之內包車離開柴斜架)。

個人覺得606頂盡都只可以跟694咁行
(即係太安樓上東廊)
太早上根本唔夠客,咁搞法分分鐘連線都保唔住

原帖由 偉文 於 2010-6-14 00:57 發表
但是以70的客量是不足以支撐一條線的. 好,若果你話有老人家要搭, 我覺得咪睇吓有多少呢類人, 唔可以話有10個, 同有200個同一辦法去處理. 如果需求低過某一個數, 除非政府貼錢, 或把70變成一條紅/綠VAN線, 否則是浪費社會資源, 大家都知多數時間70客量是極低的, 而且outdate的, 如果沒有270A同271的話, 我就明為何留70. 若要照顧老人家, 可叫73A加低地台, 但唔係唔取消70. (雖然我都感性上很掛住70, 我都好想有, 但我不可咁自私)hkitalk.net0 B+ N5 ^3 a; R4 E# b
" ~" Y9 G- k% P) n8 D( A" x( @5 D
第三, 我都同意議員未必代表市民聲音, 而呢個就是我起這題目的原意之一. 但是純問有多條線好唔好, 係人都識話好, 無意思, 又跌入第二個TUM裡, 而家個問題係supposingly議員應對交通本身有了解, 但很多議員都唔及格. 同點樣改善"山頭主義".

Yes, I understand the scarce resource, but if rt. 73/73A do not re-route, i.e. via Wan Tau Tong
SLF cannot cater the needs of senior citizens who took rt. 70 in the past
and the compensation is absolutly not enough
(For going to Sheung Shui, most of the rt. 70's passengers come from Tai Po and the North
maybe a bus carries <10 passengers before reaching Tai Po, but over 30 passengers after so.
So although 70 gets a need to be cancelled, there is still a huge need to impose compensation for those
travelling between Tai Po and the North)

If ASB/ASC served KMB one year before, i.e. 2008, the ending of rt. 70 may change
maybe rt. 70 still serves us, but what we take most, is ASB/ASC, rather than double decker non-A/C bus

Using rt. 70 as an example again,
if the government and the bus company purposed the BBI to the public
before the announcement of the cancellation, i.e. before 24/11/2008
we may be aware of the shortness of such BBI,
such as problems of BBI routes (including operation hours and route)
thus demanding the bus company to make changes, even delaying the closure of rt. 70
And what we see now, the inadequate services/ compensation of BBI routes, can partly be prevented

[ 本帖最後由 12A 於 2010-6-14 14:26 編輯 ]

原帖由 JX9097 於 2010-6-14 12:36 發表


個人覺得606頂盡都只可以跟694咁行
(即係太安樓上東廊)
太早上根本唔夠客,咁搞法分分鐘連線都保唔住

同意。做好耀東特快算吧。
其他地方，MTR佔優。
頂多開606P滿足太古坊。