|
Post by capitalomnibus on Sept 11, 2019 18:10:26 GMT
A lot of angry people about this as nothing was put out on the stops in Barkingside or Clayhall, bus just on some stops around Romford. A lot of people who use it to have less of a walk to Brewery, Mawney Rd, London Rd would now have to change buses. This offers now real benefit to the public other than a saving of one bus. Now the 5, 175 and 128 would mirror each other from Becontree Heath.
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Sept 11, 2019 18:41:23 GMT
A lot of angry people about this as nothing was put out on the stops in Barkingside or Clayhall, bus just on some stops around Romford. A lot of people who use it to have less of a walk to Brewery, Mawney Rd, London Rd would now have to change buses. This offers now real benefit to the public other than a saving of one bus. Now the 5, 175 and 128 would mirror each other from Becontree Heath. I did see the poster along various stops along the 128 back in June/July and that includes the stops in Ilford, Gants Hill, Barkingside and Clayhall.
Normally I'm the last person on here that would criticise TfL, seeing the recent increases on the 66, 175 & 296 all which added two extra buses to each route I think its ridiculous to have this sort of change to the 128 in Romford as that will break some direct links in Romford especially to The Brewery. Anyway a full compliant to TfL (in addition the main consultation)from me is coming up and should be done by end of the day if not tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 11, 2019 18:46:26 GMT
Now the 5, 175 and 128 would mirror each other from Becontree Heath. Scope to cut the 128 back further to Becontree Heath in future perhaps? I hope this isn't the case, as Becontree Heath means buses are stopping short of a major traffic objective in Romford Town Centre. Furthermore, the 128 would then be paralleled by the 150 for its entirety bar the Clayhall to Barkingside section.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 11, 2019 18:57:28 GMT
Now the 5, 175 and 128 would mirror each other from Becontree Heath. Scope to cut the 128 back further to Becontree Heath in future perhaps? I hope this isn't the case, as Becontree Heath means buses are stopping short of a major traffic objective in Romford Town Centre. Furthermore, the 128 would then be paralleled by the 150 for its entirety bar the Clayhall to Barkingside section. I don't think that's on the cards, it'll require a whole new stand to be erected somewhere for it and I don't think TfL will want to bother with all those issues. Not to mention then it'll just follow the 150 everywhere. I imagine the cut is just to shave a bus off the PVR to help TfL save some money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2019 19:36:09 GMT
A lot of angry people about this as nothing was put out on the stops in Barkingside or Clayhall, bus just on some stops around Romford. A lot of people who use it to have less of a walk to Brewery, Mawney Rd, London Rd would now have to change buses. This offers now real benefit to the public other than a saving of one bus. Now the 5, 175 and 128 would mirror each other from Becontree Heath. "Every Journey Matters" do TfL still use this ?
Expect the usual Hopper Fare excuse once this goes ahead.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Sept 11, 2019 20:22:09 GMT
A lot of angry people about this as nothing was put out on the stops in Barkingside or Clayhall, bus just on some stops around Romford. A lot of people who use it to have less of a walk to Brewery, Mawney Rd, London Rd would now have to change buses. This offers now real benefit to the public other than a saving of one bus. Now the 5, 175 and 128 would mirror each other from Becontree Heath. The Brewery is pretty much the only thing that validates the circuitous routing the 128 has in Romford, seeing as it's pretty well used and the only westbound bus within a reasonably short walk. TfL knew flipping the loop & having the 128 go through the station first to the Market would be a waste of time and resources as it's a straight up parallel of the 5 to Becontree Heath. It's a shame cause after the 3 or 4 times I've gone specifically to the Brewery for leisurely purposes, I've always used the 128 to go home. Wasn't fussed to walk to the 86 stop when I lived in Forest Gate, and wasn't bothered to walk for the 5 when I moved to Barking. It's not hard to see fall in patronage after this change, and TfL lining up another route to bypass Romford either completely or double run to the station and bypass the Market. My guess is the 175.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 11, 2019 21:08:06 GMT
A lot of angry people about this as nothing was put out on the stops in Barkingside or Clayhall, bus just on some stops around Romford. A lot of people who use it to have less of a walk to Brewery, Mawney Rd, London Rd would now have to change buses. This offers now real benefit to the public other than a saving of one bus. Now the 5, 175 and 128 would mirror each other from Becontree Heath. The Brewery is pretty much the only thing that validates the circuitous routing the 128 has in Romford, seeing as it's pretty well used and the only westbound bus within a reasonably short walk. TfL knew flipping the loop & having the 128 go through the station first to the Market would be a waste of time and resources as it's a straight up parallel of the 5 to Becontree Heath. It's a shame cause after the 3 or 4 times I've gone specifically to the Brewery for leisurely purposes, I've always used the 128 to go home. Wasn't fussed to walk to the 86 stop when I lived in Forest Gate, and wasn't bothered to walk for the 5 when I moved to Barking. It's not hard to see fall in patronage after this change, and TfL lining up another route to bypass Romford either completely or double run to the station and bypass the Market. My guess is the 175. I actually think that it works quite well having the 5 provide the direct link to Romford Station and onto the Market with the 128 going the other way around the loop. The current sitation means people who want to travel directly between Romford Station and Becontree Heath can just use the 5. However the 5 is a very bus route, and unlike some of the other routes in Romford picks up strong loadings just at Romford Station. On the 128 there is little demand for the station, presumably because many punters just opt for the 5 to reach the station. Therefore the current situation by where the 128 serves the Market then the Station with the 5 doing the reverse works quite well. It means that people going to the Market have a choice of routes thus splitting up passengers to avoid overcrowding, whilst to go directly to the station punters can jump on the 5.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 11, 2019 21:18:12 GMT
The Brewery is pretty much the only thing that validates the circuitous routing the 128 has in Romford, seeing as it's pretty well used and the only westbound bus within a reasonably short walk. TfL knew flipping the loop & having the 128 go through the station first to the Market would be a waste of time and resources as it's a straight up parallel of the 5 to Becontree Heath. It's a shame cause after the 3 or 4 times I've gone specifically to the Brewery for leisurely purposes, I've always used the 128 to go home. Wasn't fussed to walk to the 86 stop when I lived in Forest Gate, and wasn't bothered to walk for the 5 when I moved to Barking. It's not hard to see fall in patronage after this change, and TfL lining up another route to bypass Romford either completely or double run to the station and bypass the Market. My guess is the 175. I actually think that it works quite well having the 5 provide the direct link to Romford Station and onto the Market with the 128 going the other way around the loop. The current sitation means people who want to travel directly between Romford Station and Becontree Heath can just use the 5. However the 5 is a very bus route, and unlike some of the other routes in Romford picks up strong loadings just at Romford Station. On the 128 there is little demand for the station, presumably because many punters just opt for the 5 to reach the station. Therefore the current situation by where the 128 serves the Market then the Station with the 5 doing the reverse works quite well. It means that people going to the Market have a choice of routes thus splitting up passengers to avoid overcrowding, whilst to go directly to the station punters can jump on the 5. This does raise an interesting point actually, the 128 if it terminates Romford Station from the South will not be able to provide common stops with the 5 and 175. If that isn't provided nobody will opt for the 128 unless they have to, giving the 5 even more work to potentially do.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Sept 11, 2019 22:30:12 GMT
I actually think that it works quite well having the 5 provide the direct link to Romford Station and onto the Market with the 128 going the other way around the loop. The current sitation means people who want to travel directly between Romford Station and Becontree Heath can just use the 5. However the 5 is a very bus route, and unlike some of the other routes in Romford picks up strong loadings just at Romford Station. On the 128 there is little demand for the station, presumably because many punters just opt for the 5 to reach the station. Therefore the current situation by where the 128 serves the Market then the Station with the 5 doing the reverse works quite well. It means that people going to the Market have a choice of routes thus splitting up passengers to avoid overcrowding, whilst to go directly to the station punters can jump on the 5. This does raise an interesting point actually, the 128 if it terminates Romford Station from the South will not be able to provide common stops with the 5 and 175. If that isn't provided nobody will opt for the 128 unless they have to, giving the 5 even more work to potentially do. In the good old days of proper planning from TfL, they would have proposed in this consultation to have the 5 and 175 move from stop T to stop Y to have a common stop with the 128. If they can't publish official documents without any grammatical errors (which I'm still surprised this is a problem tbh), then there's no hope for the 128 having a common stop. As I touched on in my former post, if the loss of passengers from the reroute isn't imminent for the 128 then the lack of a common stop at Romford Station will definitely represent investment in the outer London bus network.
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Sept 12, 2019 7:38:14 GMT
This does raise an interesting point actually, the 128 if it terminates Romford Station from the South will not be able to provide common stops with the 5 and 175. If that isn't provided nobody will opt for the 128 unless they have to, giving the 5 even more work to potentially do. In the good old days of proper planning from TfL, they would have proposed in this consultation to have the 5 and 175 move from stop T to stop Y to have a common stop with the 128. If they can't publish official documents without any grammatical errors (which I'm still surprised this is a problem tbh), then there's no hope for the 128 having a common stop. As I touched on in my former post, if the loss of passengers from the reroute isn't imminent for the 128 then the lack of a common stop at Romford Station will definitely represent investment in the outer London bus network. That proposed first stop in Romford for the 128 stop Y (used by the buses to Brentwood Road and eastern part of Roneo Corner) is already awful as it cannot take more than 2 buses at a time which is already a busy stop used by 6 different routes and the stop already used by live driver changeovers on the 248, 252 & 365 doesn't help either to the point its often difficult serving that stop if one bus is having a changeover there.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Sept 12, 2019 13:31:12 GMT
In the good old days of proper planning from TfL, they would have proposed in this consultation to have the 5 and 175 move from stop T to stop Y to have a common stop with the 128. If they can't publish official documents without any grammatical errors (which I'm still surprised this is a problem tbh), then there's no hope for the 128 having a common stop. As I touched on in my former post, if the loss of passengers from the reroute isn't imminent for the 128 then the lack of a common stop at Romford Station will definitely represent investment in the outer London bus network. That proposed first stop in Romford for the 128 stop Y (used by the buses to Brentwood Road and eastern part of Roneo Corner) is already awful as it cannot take more than 2 buses at a time which is already a busy stop used by 6 different routes and the stop already used by live driver changeovers on the 248, 252 & 365 doesn't help either to the point its often difficult serving that stop if one bus is having a changeover there. I was suggesting a reshuffle of some routes to facilitate the 5/128/175 at stop Y; perhaps turfing the 248 and 252 to stop T?
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Sept 12, 2019 13:53:58 GMT
That proposed first stop in Romford for the 128 stop Y (used by the buses to Brentwood Road and eastern part of Roneo Corner) is already awful as it cannot take more than 2 buses at a time which is already a busy stop used by 6 different routes and the stop already used by live driver changeovers on the 248, 252 & 365 doesn't help either to the point its often difficult serving that stop if one bus is having a changeover there. I was suggesting a reshuffle of some routes to facilitate the 5/128/175 at stop Y; perhaps turfing the 248 and 252 to stop T? I'm also thinking on that as well about swapping the routes severing stop T and stop Y as you mentioned to allow a common stop with the 5/103/128/175 if change takes places
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Sept 23, 2019 10:40:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Sept 23, 2019 10:57:36 GMT
Well TfL backtracked slightly on the 11, 19, 22 and 311 changes although the rest of the consultation was shoved through largely without change. And it’s looking like they’ve backtracked on the 207/607 consultation. I’ve jinxed it now it’ll probably appear tomorrow
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 23, 2019 12:42:47 GMT
And the (N)271 and 434 divserion away from Rickman Hill.
|
|