|
Post by John tuthill on Mar 4, 2014 21:32:43 GMT
If the 7 and 23 are busy or running slow I think most people might end up using the underground instead. Which means they would be spending more on travel. Maybe that's TFLs "cunning plan."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2014 21:54:33 GMT
It is quite clear the consultation was futile and they had already made their decision when they are going ahead with it even though only 25% of the responses received supported the decision.
Pretty disgraceful from TfL, but also from Lambeth council who did not even bother to respond even though it is one of the major routes through the borough and the only link to Paddington and the west end from central Streatham. The 159 extension was a very useful new link for an area that does not have tube access and will receive no benefit from Crossrail.
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Mar 4, 2014 22:09:29 GMT
Not in relation to the consultation, I honestly do believe Route N159 should be re-extended to New Addington. I still do not understand why the N109 had to be created. I prefer how it is now. First there is now more support in relation to the West End to South London places like Brixton and Streatham. N159 was unreliable and was always packed. There is a replacement for N159's New Addington section which comes in the form of N64 if you did not know.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 4, 2014 22:54:05 GMT
Not in relation to the consultation, I honestly do believe Route N159 should be re-extended to New Addington. I still do not understand why the N109 had to be created. I prefer how it is now. First there is now more support in relation to the West End to South London places like Brixton and Streatham. N159 was unreliable and was always packed. There is a replacement for N159's New Addington section which comes in the form of N64 if you did not know. Personally, I'd have the N159 back. The N159 wasn't unreliable but I do agree that was always packed. However, the N109 is not a great replacement - it's always running early which is why I always avoid it as do many others as it's mostly empty and it's no more reliable than the N159 was. Also, residents beyond Croydon have no night link to Central London.
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Mar 4, 2014 23:02:25 GMT
I prefer how it is now. First there is now more support in relation to the West End to South London places like Brixton and Streatham. N159 was unreliable and was always packed. There is a replacement for N159's New Addington section which comes in the form of N64 if you did not know. Personally, I'd have the N159 back. The N159 wasn't unreliable but I do agree that was always packed. However, the N109 is not a great replacement - it's always running early which is why I always avoid it as do many others as it's mostly empty and it's no more reliable than the N159 was. Also, residents beyond Croydon have no night link to Central London. N68 is still around. My experiences were that N159 were unreliable, N109 is much better for me anyway although it too has an overcrowding issue like its daytime equivalent! On another point, I would argue that the majority of customers from Central London taking the N109 are going to Croydon not beyond there. N64 which I have used seems to be lightly used.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 4, 2014 23:02:29 GMT
I'm very skeptical about this consultation - the only reason I can see the withdrawal of the extension is to allow NBfL's to operate. I totally agree with you! There is definitely a need for this link especially with all the development that is happening at the basfin. Also, asides for LTs on the 159 could this also be an agenda to get people to use the underground/crossrail (when it opens). If Paddington is to lose the number 7 in 2018..this would mean the 23 would be the only link from Oxford Circus. The problem TfL face is that the fares differential is so great between bus and rail in Zone 1 that it cannot force people on to rail modes. There would have to be a radical change to the fares structure to make that feasible and unless you're going to make the tube fare the same as the bus then it's pointless. A fair number of people will stick with the bus rather than slog down umpteen escalators to reach Crossrail and then do the same thing at the other end. TfL cannot afford to reduce tube fares in Zone 1 because demand would soar even more making many journeys untenable due to congestion and overcrowding. It would also lose an enormous amount of money as Travelcard prices would have to be reduced and that's where they make the money. Nonetheless the other big problem is that the tube is packed to capacity and will remain so and Crossrail is forecast to be full within months of opening. Therefore there is no point in TfL stripping out oodles of bus capacity in the West End or at Paddington just because of Crossrail. This is where the ravings of the megalomanic shop keepers on Oxford St go wrong - they think everyone will catch Crossrail to reach Oxford St or to travel along it. Wrong, wrong, wrong. I cannot believe that Paddington, as a destination, could work with just one bus service (the 23) to link it to the West End. No matter which way you frame it that is simply bonkers. What no one seems to be noticing is that TfL is slowly but surely dismantling parts of Zone 1's bus network. If they carry on like this then we'll lose all sorts of links whereas we should be providing more links.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Mar 4, 2014 23:25:14 GMT
If the 159 is being cut more for an NB4L service from the west end to South London why not simply convert parallel route 3 instead? The 159 can still use hybrids, but of the HV class and thus remain as Streatham to Paddington.
If TfL want the Boris bus to reach the Streatham area there is still the 137 to play with.
|
|
|
Post by LX09FBJ on Mar 4, 2014 23:47:54 GMT
If the 159 is being cut more for an NB4L service from the west end to South London why not simply convert parallel route 3 instead? The 159 can still use hybrids, but of the HV class and thus remain as Streatham to Paddington. If TfL want the Boris bus to reach the Streatham area there is still the 137 to play with. Or the 57 lol! (well they've gotta go somewhere)
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 5, 2014 0:02:42 GMT
Personally, I'd have the N159 back. The N159 wasn't unreliable but I do agree that was always packed. However, the N109 is not a great replacement - it's always running early which is why I always avoid it as do many others as it's mostly empty and it's no more reliable than the N159 was. Also, residents beyond Croydon have no night link to Central London. N68 is still around. My experiences were that N159 were unreliable, N109 is much better for me anyway although it too has an overcrowding issue like its daytime equivalent! On another point, I would argue that the majority of customers from Central London taking the N109 are going to Croydon not beyond there. N64 which I have used seems to be lightly used. N109 overcrowded? Lol, of all the words, overcrowded would be the last word. Anytime I use it, there is around 5-10 aboard whereas the 159 & N133 are busier. The N109 is always driven at a snails space which is diabolical for a night route that encounters little, if any, traffic. The N68, I've found to be unreliable and would only serves south of Croydon - I don't see that area to be any different in having a link to London than east of Croydon. But that's my take on it anyway lol. The N64 may be lightly used because of the routing it takes, which is different to what the N159 took, though I'm unsure if that's the actual reason as to why the N64 is lightly used.
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Mar 5, 2014 6:48:47 GMT
If the 159 is being cut more for an NB4L service from the west end to South London why not simply convert parallel route 3 instead? The 159 can still use hybrids, but of the HV class and thus remain as Streatham to Paddington. If TfL want the Boris bus to reach the Streatham area there is still the 137 to play with. Lol an LT going up and down the very steep and tight College Road hill. Sounds like an accident waiting to happen. I can imagine route 159 will be now the next route to be announced. I expect a late summer/autumn conversion for the route. As for route 137 I think it will convert in the future. Probs next year the earliest.
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Mar 5, 2014 9:20:42 GMT
TfL make a proposal, consult on it (because they have to) and then keep the original proposals. Surprise! Surprise!
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on Mar 5, 2014 9:53:29 GMT
How many people actually regularly used the N159 for trips crossing the central Croydon area?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2014 9:59:27 GMT
Interesting to compare this decision with the 255 extension to Balham.
In the original May 2009 consultation, 69% of people supported the extension of the 255 yet the consultation period alone still continued for over four years. But with only 25% support for the curtailing of the 159 it will happen just four months after being proposed.
The consultation period for the 255 extension actually lasted longer (May 22, 2009 - September 20, 2013) than the 159 service to Paddington (August 28, 2010 - March 28, 2014). It just proves what a sham consultation this was.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Mar 5, 2014 10:08:27 GMT
What is the point of consultation when TFL are determined to press on with their proposals regardless? Better not to go through a charade and waste public money. It seems to me that TFL were going to curtail the 159 come what may.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 5, 2014 10:14:42 GMT
If the 159 is being cut more for an NB4L service from the west end to South London why not simply convert parallel route 3 instead? The 159 can still use hybrids, but of the HV class and thus remain as Streatham to Paddington. If TfL want the Boris bus to reach the Streatham area there is still the 137 to play with. Lol an LT going up and down the very steep and tight College Road hill. Sounds like an accident waiting to happen. I can imagine route 159 will be now the next route to be announced. I expect a late summer/autumn conversion for the route. As for route 137 I think it will convert in the future. Probs next year the earliest. Problem with converting BN routes is the space. Whilst they can transfer 1 BN route to N, I doubt they could transfer another out. The 137 also has the turn at Kings Avenue into Clapham Park Road which may hopefully prevents it from getting NBfL's.
|
|