|
Post by mark on Mar 11, 2024 13:04:25 GMT
Incoming controversial opinion - I think this is a shame. I thought these proposals, namely the R1/R2/R3 swap were good especially as they'd have meant a big uplift in service for Biggin Hill Valley. I notice the R2, R8 and R11 awarded today both have an extra PVR added so let's hope there is something in the way of increased service on both of those routes instead although I'm sure extra recovery and running time wouldn't go amiss on some of these outer Lodnon routes. The B14/R6 proposals also made sense I thought. I wouldn't be surprised to see those go through. I do think the Biggin Hill area would warrant inclusion in the Superloop network - it’s not served by the rail network and is a bit cut off from the rest of Greater London. Perhaps an extension of either the SL4 or SL5. The latter would probably make more sense as it’s a relatively short route at present although it may need to perform a loop through the town centre to maintain connections with the SL3.
|
|
|
Post by mark on Mar 11, 2024 13:17:15 GMT
I'm sure this is a great relief to the "properties on and within a 200-metre radius of roads currently served by routes 346, 347 and 497" that were sent leaflets about the plans (see page 7 of the report).
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Mar 11, 2024 13:25:11 GMT
Incoming controversial opinion - I think this is a shame. I thought these proposals, namely the R1/R2/R3 swap were good especially as they'd have meant a big uplift in service for Biggin Hill Valley. I notice the R2, R8 and R11 awarded today both have an extra PVR added so let's hope there is something in the way of increased service on both of those routes instead although I'm sure extra recovery and running time wouldn't go amiss on some of these outer Lodnon routes. The B14/R6 proposals also made sense I thought. I wouldn't be surprised to see those go through. I do think the Biggin Hill area would warrant inclusion in the Superloop network - it’s not served by the rail network and is a bit cut off from the rest of Greater London. Perhaps an extension of either the SL4 or SL5. The latter would probably make more sense as it’s a relatively short route at present although it may need to perform a loop through the town centre to maintain connections with the SL3. The 320 is pretty much an express from Biggin Hill to Bromley Common anyways hardly stops at any stops inbetween. No need for a SL Route.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Mar 11, 2024 13:49:44 GMT
I think there's a question for TfL about how they conduct these consultations. It's obvious from reading the response that in this case a lot of people simply didn't understand that withdrawing a particular route didn't mean they were losing their service. Other responses seemed to be crayonista enthusiast stuff or the anti-bus-stop-near-my-house brigade. All of which seems to have been entirely pointless as the sums didn't add up.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 11, 2024 16:32:28 GMT
I really didn't see much sense in the R1/2/3 proposals anyway, I think the B14/R6 proposal has some merit though.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Mar 11, 2024 16:43:03 GMT
I really didn't see much sense in the R1/2/3 proposals anyway, I think the B14/R6 proposal has some merit though. I agree, the only savings that would be made with the R1/R2/R3 is the short section between Orpington Station and Orpington Town Centre. The B14/R6 changes would be worth going ahead with though, since the R11 largely parallels the B14 between Orpington and Sidcup. Plus the B14 isn't that direct so I doubt many passengers would travel along the full route. If there is any demand for a direct Bexleyheath-Orpington route, I think this would be best achieved by splitting the 51. This could also tie in well with some other changes around the Bromley area that have often been suggested recently, particularly around the 61/161 and 162/269.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 11, 2024 17:02:38 GMT
I really didn't see much sense in the R1/2/3 proposals anyway, I think the B14/R6 proposal has some merit though. I agree, the only savings that would be made with the R1/R2/R3 is the short section between Orpington Station and Orpington Town Centre. The B14/R6 changes would be worth going ahead with though, since the R11 largely parallels the B14 between Orpington and Sidcup. Plus the B14 isn't that direct so I doubt many passengers would travel along the full route. If there is any demand for a direct Bexleyheath-Orpington route, I think this would be best achieved by splitting the 51. This could also tie in well with some other changes around the Bromley area that have often been suggested recently, particularly around the 61/161 and 162/269. I'd be reluctant to tamper with the 51 and whilst a more direct Orpington to Bexleyheath service via North Cray Road would be nice to have it is a fairly simple change of bus at Sidcup.
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Mar 11, 2024 18:13:04 GMT
I think there's a question for TfL about how they conduct these consultations. It's obvious from reading the response that in this case a lot of people simply didn't understand that withdrawing a particular route didn't mean they were losing their service. Other responses seemed to be crayonista enthusiast stuff or the anti-bus-stop-near-my-house brigade. All of which seems to have been entirely pointless as the sums didn't add up. It would help if they could word their proposals better and produce more legible maps. Same with their actual service change notices (I have the 1/168/188 change in mind -- they didn't go the simple route of just telling people that you'd be most likely able to take the 1 instead for example).
|
|