|
|
Post by thelondonthing on Feb 22, 2019 7:59:38 GMT
My apologies if this has been posted already (I did search the site, though I found no mention), but I thought this would be of interest. If I've overlooked mention of it somewhere else, I trust that this thread will be shredded by the admin gods. Attachment DeletedOn 18 December 2018, TfL submitted a planning application to Kingston Council outlining key details of its plans to fully redevelop Cromwell Road Bus Station (that's the one closest to the railway station, for those who aren't sure). The submission states that the project will include: According to documentation from 2017 - which seems to be when TfL initially invited tender applications for the project - the current Cromwell Road Bus Station "is used by 12 000 passengers a day which is twice the number of passengers that the station was originally built for". That documentation also elaborates on the scope of work in the planned redevelopment: Further details, including plans and elevation diagrams, can be found on the Kingston Council website. I have no idea what implications this planned destruction/rebuild of Cromwell Road Bus Station would have for bus movements across the rest of Kingston - and not just in terms of the disruption that a lengthy closure would wreak on terminating and through services. There's also the question of plans for broader changes to stopping and terminus arrangements elsewhere in Kingston - but it's been almost two years since those proposals (and rumors) were last discussed here... Also, one detail I spotted in the application paperwork: one of the documented "constraints" on TfL in its redevelopment works at Cromwell Road is that the site is an official "Area of Archaeological Significance" (!).
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 22, 2019 10:53:40 GMT
So 4 parking bays for buses, 12 saw tooth stands and 6 through service stops. I think the current bus stn has public toilets - none shown on the new plan so that's a loss of public amenities straight away. I know public toilets have an operational cost but it strikes me as particularly penny pinching not to keep providing them. There are plenty of older people who use buses in Kingston and they tend to need to use the loo more often. That reference to "archaeological interest" should be ringing enormous alarm bells with someone. I guess it depends how far down they dig but I can picture a horrible scenario where the works take 3 times longer than planned because something of interest is found on the site.  |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Feb 22, 2019 22:09:36 GMT
So 4 parking bays for buses, 12 saw tooth stands and 6 through service stops. I think the current bus stn has public toilets - none shown on the new plan so that's a loss of public amenities straight away. I know public toilets have an operational cost but it strikes me as particularly penny pinching not to keep providing them. There are plenty of older people who use buses in Kingston and they tend to need to use the loo more often. That reference to "archaeological interest" should be ringing enormous alarm bells with someone. I guess it depends how far down they dig but I can picture a horrible scenario where the works take 3 times longer than planned because something of interest is found on the site. Maybe under where the Epsom buses stand they'll find an ancestor of Grayling still with an intact brain - that would be more than of archaeological interest.  |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Feb 23, 2019 11:14:09 GMT
So 4 parking bays for buses, 12 saw tooth stands and 6 through service stops. I think the current bus stn has public toilets - none shown on the new plan so that's a loss of public amenities straight away. I know public toilets have an operational cost but it strikes me as particularly penny pinching not to keep providing them. There are plenty of older people who use buses in Kingston and they tend to need to use the loo more often. That reference to "archaeological interest" should be ringing enormous alarm bells with someone. I guess it depends how far down they dig but I can picture a horrible scenario where the works take 3 times longer than planned because something of interest is found on the site. Maybe under where the Epsom buses stand they'll find an ancestor of Grayling still with an intact brain - that would be more than of archaeological interest. Does Mr Grayling have anything to do with the proposed demolition of Kingston bus station? |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Feb 23, 2019 15:14:23 GMT
Maybe under where the Epsom buses stand they'll find an ancestor of Grayling still with an intact brain - that would be more than of archaeological interest. Does Mr Grayling have anything to do with the proposed demolition of Kingston bus station? If he were Ernest Marples, he'd have made sure of it. |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Feb 23, 2019 16:00:13 GMT
Tfl missed a trick 4 years ago when Quebec House (an old small office block, between the rail station and bus station) was demolished and replaced by block of upmarket student flats.
Now have rather pointless rebuild on same footprint instead of extended bus station with student flats above over combined site. All the congestion is on the through stands (not helped by permitting driver changes on stops shared by multiple routes), which causes queues back blocking one way system.
To me, a waste of money as it doesn't sort the problems completely, just varies them.
|
|
|
|
Post by thelondonthing on Feb 23, 2019 17:08:41 GMT
So 4 parking bays for buses, 12 saw tooth stands and 6 through service stops. I think the current bus stn has public toilets - none shown on the new plan so that's a loss of public amenities straight away. I know public toilets have an operational cost but it strikes me as particularly penny pinching not to keep providing them. There are plenty of older people who use buses in Kingston and they tend to need to use the loo more often. That reference to "archaeological interest" should be ringing enormous alarm bells with someone. I guess it depends how far down they dig but I can picture a horrible scenario where the works take 3 times longer than planned because something of interest is found on the site. Indeed, your point about public toilets is an important one. But are there toilets at the nearby Kingston Station? There are certainly loos at the Rotunda centre across the road. If TfL has indeed decided to remove toilets in its new Cromwell Road build, it may have decided that it wasn't worth duplicating facilities available closeby (although I'm sure there'll still be a private loo hidden well away for drivers and bus station staff). Some town centres (such as Richmond, I believe) also operate schemes in which local businesses let people use their loos due to the absence of public conveniences - is there anything similar in Kingston? As far as the archaeological aspect goes, I would guess - though I'm often wrong - that TfL is already well aware of those issues from the original build of Cromwell Road Bus Station. As long as TfL's contractors don't start poking around in the ground and foundations below what was already dug out and disturbed when constructing the existing bus station, I would be very surprised if the issue of archaeological concerns even comes up during the new build. My greatest concern comes from the potential disruption that the project will cause to services, not least because of limited available options for standing terminating services in and around Kingston town centre. There are options - for example: - Kingston Hall Road: Already used to stand some services. This stand appears to have room for around 7 or 8 buses safely, but the proximity of the stand to Kingston Police Station's vehicle access gate may present problems in standing more routes beyond those that already terminate here - St James Street: A long, but not especially wide, road that joins Kingston Hall Road at its south end. Proximity to Kingston County Court isn't ideal - there could be an argument for needing to keep the road outside the court clear, for example - but it may be possible to stand one or more low-frequency 'country' routes here - Sainsbury's superstore: Previously used to stand the now-dead 965 to Riverhill, this stand is currently vacant - but space is limited - Birkenhead Avenue: Possible stand space at the more 'industrial' east end of the road, with opportunity to loop back into the town centre relatively quickly via London Road junction - Penrhyn Road: There's a long bus lane that could be used for standing - but buses would have to take a long deviation off route to join back of stand, and the loss of the bus lane during rush hour would be severely problematic There may well be other options that I've missed - but the options are limited. Many roads aren't wide enough to stand buses and allow other traffic to safely operate. On some roads that appear suitable, the only way to stand buses would be to abolish on-street parking - but given that the disruption will likely last a year or more, it's not a practical solution to displace residents' parking in favor of parking buses in front of their homes. TfL also has to balance the need to find suitable stand space with the need to avoid adding significant time/mileage to any route. For example, if TfL loses its collective mind and decides that the 111 has to navigate the entire town centre and then push even further south to stand on Penrhyn Road, that's going to be a significant addition to its journey time. If it takes a 111 twenty minutes in rush hour just to get through Kingston and cross the bridge en route to Heathrow, there's no way London United will be able to maintain the current timetable. The 111 might be best to stand instead at Birkenhead Avenue (representing only a minor deviation from its usual line-of-route). But whatever TfL decides, there could be a need for temporary timetables for those routes temporarily displaced from Cromwell Road, and perhaps even additional buses on some routes. Let's not forget, too, that the construction effort will create its own disruption - with trucks/plant machinery coming and going, and inevitable lane closures closest to the site - and that this will affect not just the displaced routes, but it will also create knock-on congestion effects that will impact all other routes entering Kingston. This is going to be one hot mess. |
|
|
|
Post by thelondonthing on Feb 23, 2019 17:49:22 GMT
Tfl missed a trick 4 years ago when Quebec House (an old small office block, between the rail station and bus station) was demolished and replaced by block of upmarket student flats. Now have rather pointless rebuild on same footprint instead of extended bus station with student flats above over combined site. All the congestion is on the through stands (not helped by permitting driver changes on stops shared by multiple routes), which causes queues back blocking one way system. To me, a waste of money as it doesn't sort the problems completely, just varies them. I still miss the old rail/bus enthusiasts' book and model shop in that building - 'The Smokebox', I think it was called? It's an interesting point you make about the potential for a combined development, but I'm not sure how much more TfL could have gained from expanding the bus station towards/under a rebuilt Quebec House. There still has to be a safe place for traffic on Cromwell Road to stop, in order to let buses exit from the bus station, and given that road traffic coming around the one-way system is emerging up a ramp and around a 90-degree corner, you can't position that 'safe stopping place' too close to the corner before it stops being safe. Realistically, I can't see TfL being able to have gained more than a few dozen square feet in usable space compared with how things are now. That's perhaps enough to accommodate one more terminating bay, but I personally never got the impression that there's a great shortage of bays - I've never once seen Cromwell Road close to capacity in that respect. I think the biggest problem for Cromwell Road is the catastrophic traffic and passenger thunderfart that ensues when three 65s, a pair of 281s, a 285 or two, and a couple of 111s all arrive at the same time, followed quickly by every other route under the sun - and, like some others here, I'm unclear on how the new bus station will fix that. But it's okay, because that scenario only plays out literally every single day. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 23, 2019 18:12:32 GMT
Indeed, your point about public toilets is an important one. But are there toilets at the nearby Kingston Station? There are certainly loos at the Rotunda centre across the road. If TfL has indeed decided to remove toilets in its new Cromwell Road build, it may have decided that it wasn't worth duplicating facilities available closeby (although I'm sure there'll still be a private loo hidden well away for drivers and bus station staff). Some town centres (such as Richmond, I believe) also operate schemes in which local businesses let people use their loos due to the absence of public conveniences - is there anything similar in Kingston? Well as a non local I wouldn't know about the alternatives. I would also be loathe to drag myself across multiple crossings to find a loo if I was actually waiting for a bus. Kingston's one of those few places where some routes run on fairly low frequencies so having a loo close to the stops without having to cross what are nightmarish roads is a bonus. I also trust TfL a bit more about having toilets open for longer hours than I do SWR or the owners of a centre. The plans for the driver's mess area show toilets in that building. I also find that borough "loo" schemes tend only to be known by the locals (we have one in Waltham Forest) and even then they are very badly advertised. You'd never know which buildings in Walthamstow are in the scheme. I agree that there will be disruption to services while the Bus Stn is rebuilt but it sort of depends how they do it. The rebuild doesn't look very radical to me but I may be misreading the plans. The existing site envelope seems to be retained. The number of sawtooth bays is not changing nor is the number of separate parking bays so the work could be phased thus reducing the need to move services out. I also suspect that the through stops could be largely maintained during the works but it all depends on the actual scope and work phasing. Makes me wonder why they're bothering given the end result is little different. |
|
|
|
Post by thelondonthing on Feb 23, 2019 18:37:37 GMT
Indeed, your point about public toilets is an important one. But are there toilets at the nearby Kingston Station? There are certainly loos at the Rotunda centre across the road. If TfL has indeed decided to remove toilets in its new Cromwell Road build, it may have decided that it wasn't worth duplicating facilities available closeby (although I'm sure there'll still be a private loo hidden well away for drivers and bus station staff). Some town centres (such as Richmond, I believe) also operate schemes in which local businesses let people use their loos due to the absence of public conveniences - is there anything similar in Kingston? Well as a non local I wouldn't know about the alternatives. I would also be loathe to drag myself across multiple crossings to find a loo if I was actually waiting for a bus. Kingston's one of those few places where some routes run on fairly low frequencies so having a loo close to the stops without having to cross what are nightmarish roads is a bonus. I also trust TfL a bit more about having toilets open for longer hours than I do SWR or the owners of a centre. The plans for the driver's mess area show toilets in that building. I also find that borough "loo" schemes tend only to be known by the locals (we have one in Waltham Forest) and even then they are very badly advertised. You'd never know which buildings in Walthamstow are in the scheme. I agree that there will be disruption to services while the Bus Stn is rebuilt but it sort of depends how they do it. The rebuild doesn't look very radical to me but I may be misreading the plans. The existing site envelope seems to be retained. The number of sawtooth bays is not changing nor is the number of separate parking bays so the work could be phased thus reducing the need to move services out. I also suspect that the through stops could be largely maintained during the works but it all depends on the actual scope and work phasing. Makes me wonder why they're bothering given the end result is little different. I agree with your loo points; but I do fear the on-site toilets may be a victim of these penny-pinching times in which we live. It seems these days that almost any opportunity to save is one that must be seized, even if that results in inconvenience or discomfort for some. Your last point, I think, is the most important question of all: given how similar the new bus station will be to what we've already got, what's the point? |
|
|
|
Post by beaver14uk on Feb 23, 2019 21:22:23 GMT
The last I heard this was on hold. Toilets would be placed in the retail units on site as happened at West Croydon Bus Station.
|
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Feb 24, 2019 2:06:37 GMT
Maybe under where the Epsom buses stand they'll find an ancestor of Grayling still with an intact brain - that would be more than of archaeological interest. Does Mr Grayling have anything to do with the proposed demolition of Kingston bus station? He might have something to do with what happens to Kingston - Epsom routes, as he's the MP for Epsom & Ewell.   |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Feb 24, 2019 8:16:40 GMT
Indeed, your point about public toilets is an important one. But are there toilets at the nearby Kingston Station? There are certainly loos at the Rotunda centre across the road. If TfL has indeed decided to remove toilets in its new Cromwell Road build, it may have decided that it wasn't worth duplicating facilities available closeby (although I'm sure there'll still be a private loo hidden well away for drivers and bus station staff). Some town centres (such as Richmond, I believe) also operate schemes in which local businesses let people use their loos due to the absence of public conveniences - is there anything similar in Kingston? Well as a non local I wouldn't know about the alternatives. I would also be loathe to drag myself across multiple crossings to find a loo if I was actually waiting for a bus. Kingston's one of those few places where some routes run on fairly low frequencies so having a loo close to the stops without having to cross what are nightmarish roads is a bonus. I also trust TfL a bit more about having toilets open for longer hours than I do SWR or the owners of a centre. The plans for the driver's mess area show toilets in that building. I also find that borough "loo" schemes tend only to be known by the locals (we have one in Waltham Forest) and even then they are very badly advertised. You'd never know which buildings in Walthamstow are in the scheme. I agree that there will be disruption to services while the Bus Stn is rebuilt but it sort of depends how they do it. The rebuild doesn't look very radical to me but I may be misreading the plans. The existing site envelope seems to be retained. The number of sawtooth bays is not changing nor is the number of separate parking bays so the work could be phased thus reducing the need to move services out. I also suspect that the through stops could be largely maintained during the works but it all depends on the actual scope and work phasing. Makes me wonder why they're bothering given the end result is little different. As a local, yes there are toilets, but not easy to get to Kingston station has them on the platforms (so other side of gateline) Rotunda has them in the various cafes etc, but none in the foyer (and it only opens mid morning) There are toilets in shopping centres (when open) If you needed to change bus during morning peak hour would be no toilets within few hundred metres The only way to get more circulation space would be to slightly shorten the sawtooth bays, but cant tell from the plan if kerb Line is moved very slightly. Waste of money to gain a few centimetres. More practically the current canopy is a poor design as it has far too many poles and their positioning tends to stop pedestrians getting past if others are waiting for buses (yes, someone must have done current design based on assuming no one would queue for buses). There is also the oddity of a separate boarding point for wheelchairs (at exit from sawtooth area) as the sawtooth sides don’t reach middle doors. This also means buses for these stands have to offload elsewhere as exit doors cannot be used. Effectively have 12 stands which are used as 12 parking bays where passengers (except wheelchairs) are permitted to board in last few seconds before departure, Not sure it has any advantage over having some pick up points at exit from bus station. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 24, 2019 8:25:03 GMT
As a local, yes there are toilets, but not easy to get to Kingston station has them on the platforms (so other side of gateline) Rotunda has them in the various cafes etc, but none in the foyer (and it only opens mid morning) There are toilets in shopping centres (when open) If you needed to change bus during morning peak hour would be no toilets within few hundred metres The only way to get more circulation space would be to slightly shorten the sawtooth bays, but cant tell from the plan if kerb Line is moved very slightly. Waste of money to gain a few centimetres. More practically the current canopy is a poor design as it has far too many poles and their positioning tends to stop pedestrians getting past if others are waiting for buses (yes, someone must have done current design based on assuming no one would queue for buses). There is also the oddity of a separate boarding point for wheelchairs (at exit from sawtooth area) as the sawtooth sides don’t reach middle doors. This also means buses for these stands have to offload elsewhere as exit doors cannot be used. Effectively have 12 stands which are used as 12 parking bays where passengers (except wheelchairs) are permitted to board in last few seconds before departure, Not sure it has any advantage over having some pick up points at exit from bus station. Ah that answers a couple of questions. I had wondered how the sawtooth thing worked given TfL usually have wheelchair ramps at the centre door. Slough bus station has a specially adapted sawtooth for the 81 which has room for centre door wheelchair entry and egress. I didn't know there was a separate boarding board at Cromwell Rd but it's the only way the current design can work. The Cromwell Road site lacks depth otherwise TfL could do their usual "central island" trick with stops around the island but stands to the north. They'd lose capacity if they did that as there simply isn't room. Shame that Kingston Council insists on there being a racetrack past the bus station. Reducing the number of lanes could give TfL more space but obviously never going to happen in such a car centric part of town. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2019 15:45:10 GMT
The toilets here are not public
|
|
