|
Post by busman on Nov 15, 2018 20:41:19 GMT
Having spent part of my childhood growing up in that neck of the woods, this consultation is nonsense. Windmill Park is within a short walk of the 207 and 427 via footpaths through the estate. TfL are actually taking a bus away from hospital grounds which are located up a steep hill and in use 24/7 to serve an area that will be deserted outside of business hours. This move inconveniences the least mobile passengers, it’s is an absolute joke. What a pointless diversion. I guess if Abelio end up running the 483 it will have some minor operational efficiencies. I suspect that something else is afoot. It’s almost as if making space at Ealing Hospital for another route to terminate is taking precedent over passenger convenience. Maybe the 427 will be cut back to Ealing Hospital ahead of Crossrail opening. Wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to run it to Windmill Lane during business hours and terminate at the hospital at other times? Obviously it goes against TfL standardisation policy. That would be the sensible thing for this route and many others too, where more frequent services over busier parts of the route would better meet demand. TfL’s uniform approach sometimes ties their hands. I can tell you for a fact that the residents of Navigator Drive do not need a decker every 12 minutes or a night bus service beyond the N207. The rationale seems highly dubious to me and I think there are other motives behind this change.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 15, 2018 22:43:38 GMT
Wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to run it to Windmill Lane during business hours and terminate at the hospital at other times? Obviously it goes against TfL standardisation policy. That would be the sensible thing for this route and many others too, where more frequent services over busier parts of the route would better meet demand. TfL’s uniform approach sometimes ties their hands. I can tell you for a fact that the residents of Navigator Drive do not need a decker every 12 minutes or a night bus service beyond the N207. The rationale seems highly dubious to me and I think there are other motives behind this change. Thank goodness those days have gone - personally, standardisation is very good as it reduces any confusion to passengers on where buses go - I mean we all know what people are like in London. As for the 483, it should remain terminating at the hospital and that’s that - if they want a new link to penetrate the area, then create a new route but we all know that won’t happen.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Nov 15, 2018 23:26:38 GMT
Maybe if the strengthening of Hammersmith Bridge goes ahead and is a successful. Maybe the strengthening of the Three Bridge should be looked into. It will never be touched because of its historical importance. The greater likelihood is that traffic would be banned from using it permanently to extend its life. What about building a new stronger bridge next to the Three Bridges?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 15, 2018 23:46:33 GMT
It will never be touched because of its historical importance. The greater likelihood is that traffic would be banned from using it permanently to extend its life. What about building a new stronger bridge next to the Three Bridges? I can only go from Streetview images but the area looks rather constrained in terms of space. I doubt it's feasible. And I would not be shocked if there are other aspects of both the railway and canal at that point that are also historically noteworthy. It is also worth considering that the local authority may not actually want a modern bridge there because of the likely vast increase in traffic on local roads. I know you want a bus service but the fact nothing has been done and no one, AFAIK, is campaigning locally for a better bridge suggests to me that locals are quite content to be a little "cut off" from the wider world and don't want more traffic than they already have. Obviously I'm guessing - someone on the forum may have a more informed view of local feeling. Plenty of parts of London like that which is why there are fairly large holes in parts of the bus network - inaccessible roads, too many car owners, no space for fixed bus stops, width and weight restrictions to keep large vehicles out.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Nov 15, 2018 23:50:22 GMT
What about building a new stronger bridge next to the Three Bridges? I can only go from Streetview images but the area looks rather constrained in terms of space. I doubt it's feasible. And I would not be shocked if there are other aspects of both the railway and canal at that point that are also historically noteworthy. It is also worth considering that the local authority may not actually want a modern bridge there because of the likely vast increase in traffic on local roads. I know you want a bus service but the fact nothing has been done and no one, AFAIK, is campaigning locally for a better bridge suggests to me that locals are quite content to be a little "cut off" from the wider world and don't want more traffic than they already have. Obviously I'm guessing - someone on the forum may have a more informed view of local feeling. Plenty of parts of London like that which is why there are fairly large holes in parts of the bus network - inaccessible roads, too many car owners, no space for fixed bus stops, width and weight restrictions to keep large vehicles out. Well it was worth a shot.
|
|
|
Post by lundnah on Nov 15, 2018 23:54:37 GMT
It will never be touched because of its historical importance. The greater likelihood is that traffic would be banned from using it permanently to extend its life. What about building a new stronger bridge next to the Three Bridges? Because then it'd be Four Bridges. Seriously, one does not simply build a new bridge alongside Isambard Kingdom Brunel's final engineering marvel, and a scheduled Ancient Monument, purely for the sake of a fantasy bus route.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Nov 16, 2018 1:14:03 GMT
What about building a new stronger bridge next to the Three Bridges? Because then it'd be Four Bridges. Seriously, one does not simply build a new bridge alongside Isambard Kingdom Brunel's final engineering marvel, and a scheduled Ancient Monument, purely for the sake of a fantasy bus route.
Even if the said fantasy bus route was useful.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Nov 16, 2018 11:34:23 GMT
Wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to run it to Windmill Lane during business hours and terminate at the hospital at other times? Obviously it goes against TfL standardisation policy. That would be the sensible thing for this route and many others too, where more frequent services over busier parts of the route would better meet demand. TfL’s uniform approach sometimes ties their hands. I can tell you for a fact that the residents of Navigator Drive do not need a decker every 12 minutes or a night bus service beyond the N207. The rationale seems highly dubious to me and I think there are other motives behind this change. Exactly TfL just causing problems for themselves, funny how such arrangements seem to work fine everywhere else. It did cross my mind that maybe there is some ulterior motive here and TfL have plans to use the Ealing Hospital stand space for something else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2018 13:34:31 GMT
This is a done deal. You all know what a TfL consultation means...
|
|
|
Post by busman on Nov 16, 2018 13:58:42 GMT
That’s the truth. I didn’t even bother reviewing the survey questions as this is a done deal, bar some outrage from local MP’s and councillors. I’m hoping that this isn’t a precursor to cuts to either the 207 or 427, but I fear the worst as TfL feel that the Southall to Acton corridor will be over-bussed once Crossrail opens.
My hope is that they create a link to West Middlesex Hospital by extending the H28 down the Great West Road then via Boston Road to Ealing Hospital. They could then terminate the 195 at Ealing Hospital as well. If they kept the frequencies the same for both routes, that would be one way for to TfL to make cuts whilst creating useful new links.
|
|
|
Post by met120 on Nov 16, 2018 18:31:33 GMT
This is one of those hit and miss extensions. It could be helpful for those on the lower part of Tentelow Lane or the Glade Lane canalside.
I’m worried about the other routes on the Uxbridge Road. TFL seem to be missing the mark on some of them.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jan 17, 2020 5:34:46 GMT
I wonder when we will get the results of this extension.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2020 17:39:30 GMT
According to the Safety, Sustainability and Human Resources Panel meeting, on page 157, it seems that a toilet facility has been installed at Windmill Lane for the 483 extension so I assume this extension is going ahead just don't know when
|
|
|
Post by BusesInLondon on Feb 12, 2020 21:34:47 GMT
Interesting, that it ends right outside the new Abellio Garage!
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Mar 12, 2020 13:24:55 GMT
|
|