tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7432323264902617108.post970475373779124592..comments2024-03-25T22:17:35.616+00:00Comments on Public Transport Experience: Partnership in Practice [1]fatbusblokehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06833340546527596517noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7432323264902617108.post-16981197373777647842012-11-26T22:26:14.580+00:002012-11-26T22:26:14.580+00:00But it had always been uninhabited and lightly use...But it had always been uninhabited and lightly used. Arguably, with free (reduced fare?) travel for pensioners it was becoming more heavily used. There was, I believe, financial pressure from the City Council to reduce costs and remove services which needed a subsidy - well hidden in the days before commercialisation.fatbusblokehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06833340546527596517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7432323264902617108.post-10147461357865511472012-11-26T20:59:36.474+00:002012-11-26T20:59:36.474+00:00Surely the main reason for the 1970 change was tha...Surely the main reason for the 1970 change was that the abandoned section was largely uninhabited and lightly used- it was covered by the 54 on a reduced frequency. It was a lovely journey though!Dennis Dratnoreply@blogger.com