|
Post by M1104 on May 31, 2009 21:07:01 GMT
Just thought I'd add that double deck route 77 has proper full width speed bumps along Earlsfield Road. Same with Bensham Manor Road in Thornton Heath, it's not an official bus route, but the 50 and 468 are using that road as a diversion route due to roadworks along Whitehorse Road. Have they fixed the streetlights along that section of road yet? I know they've got new lamps erected next to the old 1960's version, but none of them (1960s or 2009) were working for quite a few days. It was even darker in Bensham Manor Road.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 1, 2009 0:10:43 GMT
Same with Bensham Manor Road in Thornton Heath, it's not an official bus route, but the 50 and 468 are using that road as a diversion route due to roadworks along Whitehorse Road. Have they fixed the streetlights along that section of road yet? I know they've got new lamps erected next to the old 1960's version, but none of them were working for quite a few days. It was even darker in Bensham Manor Road. Those 1960's street lights are a lot better than the new ones IMO. The ones I miss are the old Lambeth ones where some were painted and white and blue and some red and blue. Most were painted black now and being replaced by new monstrosities. Sorry for going off topic.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jun 1, 2009 9:24:24 GMT
Have they fixed the streetlights along that section of road yet? I know they've got new lamps erected next to the old 1960's version, but none of them were working for quite a few days. It was even darker in Bensham Manor Road. Those 1960's street lights are a lot better than the new ones IMO. The ones I miss are the old Lambeth ones where some were painted and white and blue and some red and blue. Most were painted black now and being replaced by new monstrosities. Sorry for going off topic. Sorry for going off topic myself, but I agree with you on all fronts regarding the new lamps. Although they're energy savers, the new black ones within Lambeth don't shine that bright in comparison. As for the Croydon ones I like the old design and their silver livery which kinda gives a positive atmosphere (at a subconscious level). I seem to remember them all being dark green back in the 70s, similar to the ones now within the borough of Merton. Old Couslden have a few that are still green, not to mention some of the old contrete ones you'd see in 1950/60's films. Have you ever noticed that the silver ones in Croydon all turn on and off at the same time, side streets in all? Linking the lamps with the buses now, have you also noticed that lamps are now black within many other boroughs, just like how most London bus companies are around 90% red. Makes you wonder if some sort of unified GLC will take form in years to come.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2009 9:46:06 GMT
Those 1960's street lights are a lot better than the new ones IMO. The ones I miss are the old Lambeth ones where some were painted and white and blue and some red and blue. Most were painted black now and being replaced by new monstrosities. Sorry for going off topic. Sorry for going off topic myself, but I agree with you on all fronts regarding the new lamps. Although they're energy savers, the new black ones within Lambeth don't shine that bright in comparison. As for the Croydon ones I like the old design and their silver livery which kinda gives a positive atmosphere (at a subconscious level). I seem to remember them all being dark green back in the 70s, similar to the ones within the borough of Merton. Old Couslden have a few that are still green, not to mention some of the old contrete ones you'd see in old British 1950/60's films. Have you ever noticed that the silver ones in Croydon all turn on and off at the same time, side streets in all? Linking the lamps with the buses now, have you also noticed that lamps are now black within many other boroughs, just like how most London bus companies are around 90% red. Makes you wonder if some sort of unified GLC will take form in years to come. The provision (and cost) of street lighting is attributable to the local council. Look at your last council tax bill. On main (trunk) roads, these are the responsibility of the Deparment for Transport, but are usually sub-contracted to the local authority in London for day to day maintenance matters. So it is unlikely that TfL or the GLA directly will ever have any overriding control of lighting provision in London.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2009 20:34:11 GMT
Only just noticed today that Thornton Avenue has a few full width speed bumps on it anyway. Oops!
|
|
|
Post by dla389 on Aug 5, 2009 18:37:29 GMT
Apologies for resurrecting an over-two month old thread - I thought creating a new one may be unnecessary as we already have this one based under the same subject. But having passed through radbourne road this morning, I realised it is NOT suitable for buses!
Here are my reasons..
Having observed the width of this road and the amount of cars parked along both sides, I do not think it is even necessary for buses to run along this stretch - it is far too narrow and unsafe to accommodate them. I noticed it is a very residential area with quite a few primary schools about, so running average to high frequency buses only put these young children at a risk espcially when the schools kick off. Not helped by the fact many residents will loose their parking spaces due to the proposed changes to road/parking layouts.
To be honest I just do not understand TfL and their ridiculous thinking these days. Some of their ideas have no logic in them. Just like when they introduced route 452 and thought it would be wise to terminate it south in the middle of nowhere. Regarding the 255 extension, personally I think it would be better to do either of the following -
1.) From streatham hill, follow route 50 along sternhold avenue and thornton avenue as planned, but instead of turning into emmanuel road to radbourne road it can run straight ahead into thornton road - up to the mini roadabout in-between atkins road. From this point onwards, buses can then use wier road to balham. Residents of radbourne road should have no problems walking to thornton road if they wished to use the 255. Should not be any longer than ten minutes.
OR..
2.) Run via the 50 route all the way to kings avenue/poynders road (the part where the 45/57 terminate) from streatham hill, then take the left into atkins road through to wier road towards balham. Either way I believe option no.1 should be the better option as it does not duplicate much of the 50 route in this part of the area.
Feel free to disagree with any of the above ideas.
And funnily enough, thornton road is only a street behind radbourne road yet it is much wider in comparison and easier for the single deckers to run through! Which is why I think my first idea above (no.1) would be better. In the long run, it should be a thousand times safer to use the roundabout on atkins road instead of the tight crossroad between radbourne road and hydethorpe road. Unfortunately now that the consultation feedback on the TfL site is now closed, I am unable to share my thoughts with them! Is there any alternative ways of getting through to TfL in response to this proposal before the results come in this autumn?
|
|
|
Post by Steve80 on Aug 6, 2009 17:54:46 GMT
When I first heard about the 255 extension I thought they would extend it via cavendish road and old devonshire road or via atkins road and weir road. They could even divert it via emmanuel road and cavendish road perhaps? I surprised that they are extending it via radbourne road and I'm not surprised about your comment about the parked cars.
So I do agree with your first proposal. I see no reason for tfl to divert the route along radbourne road which is more difficult for buses to pass through
As for sending your ideas to tfl, yes the consultation has closed but you should just email them anyway?
|
|
|
Post by dla389 on Aug 6, 2009 18:12:27 GMT
When I first heard about the 255 extension I thought they would extend it via cavendish road and old devonshire road or via atkins road and weir road. They could even divert it via emmanuel road and cavendish road perhaps? I surprised that they are extending it via radbourne road and I'm not surprised about your comment about the parked cars. So I do agree with your first proposal. I see no reason for tfl to divert the route along radbourne road which is more difficult for buses to pass through As for sending your ideas to tfl, yes the consultation has closed but you should just email them anyway? Thank you steve. Good to see somebody also agree with me. I will send them an email now regarding this and hope they get back to me soon. I will post my response here as soon as I receive it.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 6, 2009 23:07:57 GMT
Diverting it via Emmanual Road, Cavendish Road and Old Devonshire wouldn't affect the residents of the Weir Estate who would still be easily in reach of it.
|
|
|
Post by dla389 on Aug 7, 2009 0:29:39 GMT
Diverting it via Emmanual Road, Cavendish Road and Old Devonshire wouldn't affect the residents of the Weir Estate who would still be easily in reach of it. Personally I wouldnt have the route divert along emmanuel road having balham station a three minute drive from that end. Though I would suggest thornton road - weir road - old devonshie road. This covers the whole section of weir road and meets the core purpose of this extention as to provide a bus service along the estates of this road.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 7, 2009 1:01:20 GMT
Diverting it via Emmanual Road, Cavendish Road and Old Devonshire wouldn't affect the residents of the Weir Estate who would still be easily in reach of it. Personally I wouldnt have the route divert along emmanuel road having balham station a three minute drive from that end. Though I would suggest thornton road - weir road - old devonshie road. This covers the whole section of weir road and meets the core purpose of this extention as to provide a bus service along the estates of this road. On second thoughts, having looked at how close Emmanual Road is to both Streatham and Balham, your way sounds much more adequate for the primary purpose.
|
|
|
Post by dla389 on Aug 19, 2009 11:45:40 GMT
I will post my response here as soon as I receive it. Just got a response from TfL. Seems radbourne road is suitable for buses after all. This is what they had to say - "Thank you for your email dated 7 August.
The public consultation for route 255 closed on 17 July and our stakeholder engagement team are currently considering the feedback from this before making their final decision about the route.
The routing along Radbourne Road has been chosen to best serve the needs of the local community. As well as serving the Weir Estate this routing provides a bus service to those on the roads west of Radbourne Road (Cambray Road, Midmoor Road, Burnbury Road etc.) which do not have direct access to a bus and do not have easy access to Thornton Road.
You mention the primary schools in the area, and this bus will in part be used to carry pupils to and from these schools. Many bus routes in London run past or near schools and we do not consider this an undue safety risk, in fact we feel that a bus route provides a secure way for children to get to school.
As regards Radbourne Road itself, the road has been assessed and deemed suitable for buses. You are right that there are parked cars on both sides, but these are in marked bays and the road itself is wide enough for buses to negotiate safely. It is our aim to make the London bus network as comprehensive as possible, and this inevitably means running routes on residential roads.
Thank you again for your correspondence. Please contact me if I can be of further assistance."
|
|
|
Post by Steve80 on Aug 22, 2009 3:13:48 GMT
Fair enough reply. Whatever road they extend the route to, I think the extension of the 255 to balham would be good thing
|
|
|
Post by dla389 on Feb 14, 2010 16:26:50 GMT
I apologise for resurrecting a thread almost a year old, as I didn't want to make a whole new thread under the same subject - but does anyone here have the original consultation documents outlining the proposed routing, maps and information for the extension? Unfortunately I deleted them by accident last night, along with many other important documents - and the links for them seem to have been removed from TfL's website.
Anyone with the PDF's should kindly PM me, I will give you my email address for you to send them through.
Thanks in advance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2010 12:12:17 GMT
|
|