Ron Oatham writes:
I’ve just been in contact with First Bus Essex and they confirm that the No 24 service will be withdrawn from the 3rd of April from our area Unfortunately despite attempts to obtain a subsidy from Essex CC in the past this route is unsubsidised and the bus company have taken the commercial decision to withdraw it as it does not pay.
It does make a mockery of the governments attempts to get us to stop using our cars!!
I am sorry for the people that use this service, but as someone who has lived opposite the bus stop for years, this news has made my day 🙂
Ron Oatham, we need your help.
I believe that this service is profitable but only from Rayleigh to Southchurch. I use it regularly from Priory Chase to Leigh-on Sea and it starts to fill up after Rayleigh station.
So now we only have the No.3 service run by Regal Busways which is a two hourly service and not practical if you want to pop into Rayliegh for a short period and back within the hour.
Regal Busways staff are always far more friendly to passengers than the First Bus drivers, miserable lot in most cases, and I would be more than happy if they would consider increasing their service to an hourly one, thus picking up on trade which First Bus cannot be bothered with. The No.3 bus currently takes a very similar route to the N0.24 from Rawreth Lane to Southend via Hadleigh, which is good.
I’m sure a lot of people will be inconvenienced by the loss of the No.24 so Ron, would you be prepared to take this up with Regal Busways on our behalf. AJS.
As a local resident inconvenienced regularly by the inconsiderate and arrogant number 24 bus drivers I celebrate this decision.
Priory Chaae is simply not suitable for a bus terminus (as has been discussed at length on this forum on many an occasion) The buses regularly block Priory Chase and are also unable to safely negotiate the mini roundabout at the junction with Temple Way – on one memorable occasion recently the driver parked across the Temple Way junction (i.e. Across the roundabout) blocking my exit and preventing me from moving my vehicle. He stated that it was not his scheduled time to depart so he had no intention of moving!! He wasn’t even at the temporary “bus stop” he was parked across the mini roundabout so he wasn’t in a safe position to take passengers on board anyway!! On other occasions they also park up on the pavement at the “bus stop” and abuse residents that are lawfully parked outside their homes on Priory Chase – as we all know the double yellow lines are a cynical ASDA addition to the road which are not enforceable.
I agree that the number 3 bus should be more frequent for those residents that rely
on a regular bus service – and Rawreth Lane is far more suitable for a bus stop.
As much as I appreciate the problems that residents of Temple Way/Priory Chase have had to put up with not all residents in Rawreth have access to a private car or can afford to pay for a taxi currently £7.00 (including tip) each way from my home to the rank in Rayleigh High Street. With the loss of the No.24 service I will be unable to get into Rayleigh, Southend or Basildon as often as I would like which in turn affects the income of traders in those towns as I and others like myself will not be spending as much money in each of those places.
I also agree that the No.3 bus should be more frequent or alternatively could not the No.24 instead of terminating outside ASDA continue on to Battlesbridge Rail Station and terminate there giving residents of both the top end of Rawreth and Battlesbridge a better bus service especially if the two companies can get their acts together and run each service at different times (ie. every 30minutes apart) and not at the same time?
We have emailed Regal and hope for a response and a possible face-to-face meeting. Will keep you updated !
Why can’t people walk to the shops at Hambro and jump on the number 20 bus ? Surely the residents of Priory Chase / Temple Way have suffered enough.
Rayleigh Resident, there are elderly people living west of Priory Chase who can just about walk that distance let alone walk the mile to Hambro Parade and back again. Don’t be so selfish! You have got your way. The No.24 is no longer a problem to you.
I am advocating that the No.3 service is increased to hourly and that will in no way affect you. Perhaps you should be positive for a change and support this action.
This is not good news for residents of the Coppice Gate development, there are a number people, who use the bus in the morning in order to get to the station, to then commute to London, on occasions I walk, particularly in the evenings. Priory Chase and TWR you seem to be the only people, who were not aware that a huge superstore was to be constructed opposite where you live? your bitterness has carried over from there to the football pitches, the bus, the leisure centre, the list is endless. Its ridiculous that two of Rayleigh’s biggest amenities (the Leisure Centre & Asda) are only accesible if you have a car. And another point to PCR & TWR, Priory Chase’s biggest problem is the number of people who park their cars along the kerbside (all day and night) – I should know I see it everyday, this problem is then amplified by the lorries, the bus, traffic to and from the Leisure Centre. But I can assure you, if a road is limited to half it’s capacity, due to residents not using off street parking, then no wonder we have so many traffic problems in Priory Chase! interupting your beautiful view of Asda! traffic flow is not the cause of your problems, traffic obstructions are.
Kris I think you need to go back and look at previous discussions/ comments regarding Asda/leisure centre etc (all the things you mentioned) and then you’ll have a better understanding of why this news is good for me and TWR.
I was not told about Asda being built and I was one of the first ones on site. I have no problem with it being there. I have a problem with a bus stop being put in a road totally unsuitable for it and especially when there is an existing bus stop at the beginning of the road.
Also why shouldn’t I be allowed to park outside my home? It’s not illegal. Have you seen the parking areas? Unless you have I don’t think you can comment about parking off road. Before you say I should have known about parking areas before I moved in – I bought the house when the whole area was just mud.
Like I said in my previous comment I am sorry for people that use this service. There have been some good ideas about a different bus service running to Asda and they can use the perfectly good bus stop at the beginning of the road.
This, like the Asda decision in the first place is all about money. Now saving money! Maybe the powers that be should sit down with the management of Asda, make them see that they will lose a lot of business from this and get them to donate or part fund the 24 Bus. They could also accomodate the bus stop in that waste of land at the front (although that is probably sold already for more retail!).
PC your argument is completely floored, because its about one person and that is you! the reason you shouldn’t park outside your house is because you have allocated parking and by doing so are causing more aggrevation to other road users and residents than you suffer from seeing the infrequent Number 24 bus parked outside. When are you there to actually see the bus? it runs a light service during the week, an even lighter service on Saturday and not at all on Sundays. Back to the parking, if you wanted to enjoy ‘off street parking’ outside your house you should have purchased a house with a driveway! The parking of the residents of Priory Chase is a huge problem for the rest of the estate.
As for Asda I have lived in Rayleigh for a number of years, I only sometimes keep an eye on local news, but I was aware plans were afoot long ago before I bought my 3rd house in Rayleigh! Tescos was rumoured to be interested in the plot as well. Some more advice when you next purchase a house do some research into the local area otherwise wherever you end up will then have you trying to change and alter the infrastucture to suit your own ends.
If you had any conviction in your views both you and Temple Way Resident wouldn’t hide behind the name of your street as your blogging name. Pair of curtain twithcers!
Admin note: people are welcome to use their own names or a distinctive blogging name.
Wow never been called a ‘curtain twitcher’ before!
I don’t come on this website for arguments or to be called names. I have an opinion which I have given and should be respected.
This is our first house and we have learnt alot of do’s and don’t’s for next time. One of which will be making sure a bus stop/ supermarket is not outside our front door!
For the record – I don’t use my name for a very valid reason but I have spoken out in public meetings and ChrisBlack has visited my home and knows my identity.
The developer of this estate was far from honest with prospective home buyers and many of us were informed that the shop would be no bigger than a Tesco Metro type store I.e. VERY small and would be on a samll parade of shops similar to Hambro, so yes ASDA and the size of the store was an utter shock to me as my Solicitors searches did not contradict the hosing developers information. If you are a regular to this site the “waste” ground already has planning permission for social housing (flats) and retail units with minimal residents parking.
Local residents have the right to park outside of their own homes as the developer only allocated 1 parking space per home in many cases. Most householders appear to have at least two cars aground here and then where are visitors supposed tp park.
ASDA very cynically painted the unauthorised double yellow lines on both sides of Priory Crescent (up to the mini roundabout) to ensure access for their HGV’s and in an attempt to discourage residents and visitors from parking outside of their homes. There was no consolation process and again potential purchasers wer not informed of this intention – but then the inadequate width of the estate roads were also not made clear and this problem should have been picked up at the planning stage so RDC are partly culpable for this problem.
The number 24 bus terminus was unauthorised and unmarked and although ASDA’s HGV’s are not too much of a problem these days as they have been instructed not to wait on the road, the main cause of road safety problems on Priory Chase has been the 24 bus.
I sincerely hope that Regal see sense and increase the valuable number 3 service along Rawreth Lane but please, please no more buses on Priory Chase!
Apologies for the shocking spelling in a rush to catch the bus on Rawreth Lane! 😉
We have had an email back from Regal and hope to hear some more newxt week.
Fingers crossed, but don’t get your hopes too high!
Dear Geenbelt – for your information I am not affected by whatever goes on in Priory Chase so the selfish accusation does not apply. However I am sick & fed up with those people who shout the loudest when it comes to wanting community “facilities” but do not live anywhere near, or are affected by them. And if the residents of Priory Chase think it’s bad now just wait until the Football Pitches open on the 23rd March…….wall to wall traffic and noise for all those living within 1/4 mile of the place every weekend. But hey – it’s OK – most people don’t live near it and can just drive off afterwards so anybody who objects is a miserable g*t and obviously anti-kids.
RR. I do not see where you are coming from!. Your post of 28 Feb certainly made it appear that you were affected by the problems in Priory Chase. Also, if you are referring to me as one of those people who shout the loudest, I live within 200 metres of Priory Chase so working on your prediction I will be affected by the football pitches. I can also tell you that I have resided here for 28 years and have certainly been affected by the development of more than 600 properties off Rawreth Lane during my time here. Most of the newcomers don’t have a clue how things have changed for the worse here!
Rayleigh resident;Your potential problems with the football pitches are nothing to what is already happening at the chichester pitches with eleven pitches and associated noise ,litter,parking problems,contrary to what was promised by the “considerate” management of the football club.There may be fewer residents affected but heh thats o.k out of mind out of sight.
RR, the pitches I believe will be mini soccer pitches (7-aside football) for children up to the age of 10 years old. I believe there will be 3 of them. I’m not sure about wall to wall noise, we’re not speaking og crowds of 50,000 here! I probably live closer to the pitches than most and I’m not worried. Why would I? Children enjoying themselves playing football, how could anyone oppose that? parking maybe an issue, but would have been so different if the council would have allowed a local club to manage the area so there was a degree of control. Thats not an option now Rayleigh Boys have the Chichester and other clubs will have lost interest. The irony is this was discussed a few years ago and some of the usual ‘anti everything brigade’ on this site didn’t think about the bigger picture and you will suffer more now as a result… For the record I welcome Greenbelts liberal views which have been demonstrated on numerous occasions on this site..
Mmm! Last I heard about the football pitches was that the planning application was for 3 x Junior mini soccer pitches for 10’s and under in addition to 2 x “11 a-side pitches” for youths 18 and under?? These were supposed to start being used a year ago! Plus there was supposed to be planting of indigenous trees – no sign of those so far either!
Has there been a change in plan for these pitches? When are they going to start using them. Parking is going to be the main issue as users of the Leisure Centre already park on Priory Chase even if there is space in the carpark.
The sports pitches are due to be opened on March 23rd.
The passionate comments show just how difficult it is to locate amenities in places where no-one will object. Probably the most difficult planning applications that councillors have to deal with are ones which provide an overall community benefit but have objections from existing neighbours.
When the Coppice Gate site was being planned and developed, the opportunity to design things carefully was squandered…. in so many ways.
A road with a primary school, sports pitches, leisure centre and supermarket should of course be served by a bus route. (If not in the road itself, at least running frequently along Rawreth Lane).
But then of course the District Council shoudln’t have rushed through the planning permission for the Priory Chase road design when there were concerns even then that it was inadequate. So the road is hardly suitable….
TPR, you maybe right as the plan changed a numnber of times over (initial plans were to replant what were then sapplings adjacent to the Sweyne Park Extension, but this was scprapped as cost of replanting them was considerable) when I had a vested interest (my club were trying to secure the land) I spoke to Jeremy Bourne at RDC, who was handling the planning application, he told me 3 mini pitches was all there was room for. 2 Junior 11 asides could possibly be squeezed in and I mean squeezed, but as a guide the age of teams able to use that size pitch would be no older than Under 13, even that would be too small, so worst case it would not be for adults.
There have been some saplings planted as a screening, again this screening (which will be useful) has reduced the available space for the pitches.
As for parking, as far as I can tell its not the general leisure centre visitors, but the Martial Arts (Karate) club parents, who dont use the more than adequate car park for drop offs and pick ups. The best angle to address this would be to perhaps discuss with the Chairman of this club as well as the Manager of the Leisure Centre, Kat I believe her name is. It wont completely eliminate the problem but it will help.
Admin, any suggestions?
We have very good relations with the club, we will see what we can do…
Let’s wait and see if the right on liberal brigade are so fond of the pitches after a year or so….who knows,you might feel like A Matthews…and for the record I’m not affected in anyway by what goes on in the Priory Chase area.
Kris, thank you for the kind comment.
I noticed the grass was looking in good condition as I ran past the other day, I wonder how long that will last after the summer and a full season of use.
The new trees will take a few years to provide any screening as long as they last long enough to grow.
It looks a lot better than the rough scrub that was growing there before.
Admin. How have we got to this situation debating football pitches? The heading above is “No.24 BUS SERVICE BEING WITHDRAWN FROM OUR AREA”. In actual fact only ten of the postings above are related to the bus problem and most of the rest as I say,are football related.
Can we please keep to the subject in hand and filter out all non related comments??
We are losing sight of the initial problem as it is being swallowed up by other matters.
Greenbelt. Yes we have wandered off the subject.
We (Chris and Ron) saw Cllrs Terry Cutmore and Keith Hudson, together with Shaun Scrutton , on Wednesday and discussed this. We’re not particularly optimistic, but have emphasised the importance of this.
Hopefully we’ll have some news next week from Regal and when we do we’ll post it as a new item and ask people to keep their comments focussed on the bus issue.
Don’t forget the lessons from the NO7 bus cut in Hockley 2-3 years ago. Residents had to undertake their own usage survey to disprove the passenger volumes stated by Arriva. Good luck.
Sorry Greenbelt I may have slipped it in .The bus situation should never have happened but seemed to be a cynical ploy by the multinational against the smaller local business who tried to fill the gap with the number 3 .Who withdrew the bus along Rawreth lane ?The same multinational who tried and failed with the number 24 .We really must support the number 3 as the resources are not there to carry on at a lose .The suggestion that Christine made some time ago and my thoughts to try and integrate the service with the station at Battlesbridge to connect with the increased frequency provided recently with trains at 40 minute intervals instead of hourly ,should be encouraged .