|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 29, 2014 10:37:03 GMT
Val Shawcross, Labour dep chair of the London Assembly Transport Committee, has published a report about access to transport services (PTALs) and deprivation. Report LinkAs you would expect there is a distinct political slant to the report and numerous opportunities are taken to "slap the current Mayor round the chops". Nonetheless the basic topic is quite interesting as are the numerous case studies about poor access by bus services and how it might be improved. I have to say I don't agree with all of it as I think some of the ideas are impractical and probably unaffordable even if we had more generous funding. Some of the statistical analysis is also not clear or is not entirely under Labour's tenure vs Boris's tenure. I find that rather odd as the change of Mayor is a very clear cut off point. Some of the recommendations are also a repeat of what has gone before - again the "repeat, repeat, repeat" tactic so beloved of politicians. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 29, 2014 14:57:53 GMT
I've only skimmed through it but a lot of it seems just moaning for the sake of it, extend the 208 to Ramsden? Well the 353 doesn't seem very well used so what justification is there for another route? Maybe the R9 should go a bit further afield?
|
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Aug 30, 2014 12:36:16 GMT
I've only skimmed through it but a lot of it seems just moaning for the sake of it, extend the 208 to Ramsden? Well the 353 doesn't seem very well used so what justification is there for another route? Maybe the R9 should go a bit further afield? I've also had a quick zoom through it. It's an interesting document that I found a bit unconvincing, certainly in so far as some of the proposed solutions. Some of these seemed like overkill to say the least and many seemed just a way of saying 'Ken would have done this'. I couldn't see an obvious routeing for buses around the Sutton Estate for example that wouldn't run into trouble, physically or from potential NIMBYism. As for Ramsden, I did once come up with a scheme that would have sent the 353 to Chislehurst over the 61 and the 261 extended to Ramsden in its place (with the 61 disappearing). However the long term works in Lewisham would raise reliabiliy questions for me over running the 208 or 261 there. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 30, 2014 18:24:31 GMT
I've only skimmed through it but a lot of it seems just moaning for the sake of it, extend the 208 to Ramsden? Well the 353 doesn't seem very well used so what justification is there for another route? Maybe the R9 should go a bit further afield? I've also had a quick zoom through it. It's an interesting document that I found a bit unconvincing, certainly in so far as some of the proposed solutions. Some of these seemed like overkill to say the least and many seemed just a way of saying 'Ken would have done this'. I couldn't see an obvious routeing for buses around the Sutton Estate for example that wouldn't run into trouble, physically or from potential NIMBYism. As for Ramsden, I did once come up with a scheme that would have sent the 353 to Chislehurst over the 61 and the 261 extended to Ramsden in its place (with the 61 disappearing). However the long term works in Lewisham would raise reliabiliy questions for me over running the 208 or 261 there. I like that idea and the loss of the 61 would justify extending the 199 to PRU and the 320 could be cut back to Bromley North |
|
|
|
Post by Mokujin on Aug 30, 2014 19:25:18 GMT
I like that idea and the loss of the 61 would justify extending the 199 to PRU and the 320 could be cut back to Bromley North Extending 199 to PRU would make the route long and unreliable and 199's reliability is currently good. Surely extending 261 to Ramsden would mean it can still continue to serve PRU? |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 30, 2014 19:54:15 GMT
I like that idea and the loss of the 61 would justify extending the 199 to PRU and the 320 could be cut back to Bromley North Extending 199 to PRU would make the route long and unreliable and 199's reliability is currently good. Surely extending 261 to Ramsden would mean it can still continue to serve PRU? Yes the 261 can still serve PRU but there would be a reduction along the A21 with the 61 removed. I think extending the 199 to PRU would be much better than the current 208/320 arrangement |
|
|
|
Post by Mokujin on Aug 30, 2014 20:09:35 GMT
Extending 199 to PRU would make the route long and unreliable and 199's reliability is currently good. Surely extending 261 to Ramsden would mean it can still continue to serve PRU? Yes the 261 can still serve PRU but there would be a reduction along the A21 with the 61 removed. I think extending the 199 to PRU would be much better than the current 208/320 arrangement I personally think that the 320 is useful as it helps the 208 with passenger loadings between Catford and Bromley and 208 is overcrowded most of the time. Maybe 320 could also do with being converted to either 10.2 or 10.8m single deckers. However, I don't see any justification for 199 to go to Locksbottom. |
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Aug 30, 2014 20:25:00 GMT
Went through the 9 case studies here's what I think of each of them:
• North Peckham case study - Good proposals
• Sutton Estate case study - Disagree with these proposals
• White City Estate case study - Disagree with these proposals
• Beavers Farm Estate case study - the 423 should be diverted in both directions via Chinchilla Drive, Vincent Road and Basildene Road, but looking at Google Street View this can only happen if there stricter parking restrictions on Chinchilla Drive. However I have to disagree with the 237 proposals they seem far fetched.
• Ivybridge Estate case study - Good proposals especially for the 481. However I don't think a new bus route is needed.
• Alton East Estate case study - I agree that southbound access into Roehampton should be modified but I don't think the 22 needs to be extended beyond Putney Common. The 430 goes from Roehampton to South Kensington and connects with several routes that go further into the City (14, 22, 74, etc.)
• Plowman Close case study - an Extension of the W4 sounds good (although modification would need to be made at Wilbury Way/ Great Cambridge Road junction to allow vehicles to turn right. The proposals for the 491 are not clear no specific destination.
• Thamesmead case study - there own proposals concerning the across rail feeder route fail to address the issue raised. The Gallions Reach bridge bus route (focusing on the South side) should serve Western Way, Central Way, Thamesmead Town Centre, Carlyle Road, Crossway, Summerton Way, Fairway Drive with a terminus constructed adjacent to Thamesview Golf Centre. Although a DLR extension may be faster to construct I think the Extension of the London Overground from Barking Riverside to Thamesmead would have more long term benefits and could link into the vision for a Outer London Metro.
• Ramsden Estate case study - Disagree with these proposals
There is nothing ethical TfL can do to stop buses from increases in ridership. Even with the big changes to roads and the big investment into the tube, buses will still play a big role in moving people around. Although I'm glad there was good research into these cases I feel some of these proposals didn't go far enough. Most of these changes will most probably be shelved, even though some seem to be quite simple to set up. The current mayor has solely focused on improving everything but Buses in my opinion (and the New Bus for London project is not him investing in the bus network because there are more pressing matters than buses with "3 ways to board just like an aeroplane") more needs to be done by the next Mayor.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Aug 30, 2014 21:00:00 GMT
I like that idea and the loss of the 61 would justify extending the 199 to PRU and the 320 could be cut back to Bromley North Extending 199 to PRU would make the route long and unreliable and 199's reliability is currently good I don't think it would. Between TL and the PRU the only traffic the 199 would encounter would be in Bromley and along Bromley Common in the peaks The only problem I foresee with these proposals is that the loss of the 61 wouldn't generate enough money to extend three routes to cover it |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Aug 31, 2014 20:19:24 GMT
Looks to me like a bit of a moan-a-thon...
The three areas that I have significant interest in are Ramsden, North Peckham and Thamesmead, seeing as others have covered Ramsden and there surely can't be much more to say about North Peckham's bus service that hasn't been said, so I will look at Thamesmead.
I don't think Val's been to Thamesmead...otherwise she'd know her concern area is also well within reach of the 177, 229 and 401. The problem with diverting something down Carlyle Road, as she'd like, is that service to a great many other residents would be diluted, so realistically the only solution is extending something else, and I don't see that as being a good way to spend scarce money, until Crossrail arrives at Abbey Wood : then, maybe an extended 428 from Erith via Upper Belvedere, Heron Hill, Abbey Wood, Harrow Manor Way, Carlyle Road to Thamesmead Town Centre may work.
There is little point in discussing bus options for any river crossing until it's confirmed that one will actually be built!
|
|
|
|
Post by metrobusfan on Sept 1, 2014 7:42:57 GMT
I've only skimmed through it but a lot of it seems just moaning for the sake of it, extend the 208 to Ramsden? Well the 353 doesn't seem very well used so what justification is there for another route? Maybe the R9 should go a bit further afield? The only good thing with extending the 208 to ramsden is it would free up space on the road at perry hall road |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 4:31:30 GMT
Ramsden & St Mary Cray do need a link to Bromley rather than just Orpington and infrequently to Bexleyheath. The 336 could be better suited to that job ?
Ivybridge is actually well served by the H20. Crowding issues on that route come further down around "South Hounslow". Bigger buses on this route would be better option. The 481 could go to half hourly , loadings dont justify though really.
Sutton Estate , the loop road around it is unsuitable for any buses in its present form. If a new road was built into the Old Oak Common proposed rail hub site then options would open , perhaps a re-route of the 228 & an extension of the 283 would be better.
Beavers Farm. I would suggest, that an extension of the 237 via the 423 but only to Green Lane and into Heathrow Corporation Park.
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 3, 2014 7:03:33 GMT
Ramsden & St Mary Cray do need a link to Bromley rather than just Orpington and infrequently to Bexleyheath. The 336 could be better suited to that job ? Ivybridge is actually well served by the H20. Crowding issues on that route come further down around "South Hounslow". Bigger buses on this route would be better option. The 481 could go to half hourly , loadings dont justify though really. Sutton Estate , the loop road around it is unsuitable for any buses in its present form. If a new road was built into the Old Oak Common proposed rail hub site then options would open , perhaps a re-route of the 228 & an extension of the 283 would be better. Beavers Farm. I would suggest, that an extension of the 237 via the 423 but only to Green Lane and into Heathrow Corporation Park. I understand your thinking but St Mary Cray to Bromley South is 5-10 minutes on the train. I think danorak has the best idea for Ramsden. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 15:04:57 GMT
Ramsden & St Mary Cray do need a link to Bromley rather than just Orpington and infrequently to Bexleyheath. The 336 could be better suited to that job ? Ivybridge is actually well served by the H20. Crowding issues on that route come further down around "South Hounslow". Bigger buses on this route would be better option. The 481 could go to half hourly , loadings dont justify though really. Sutton Estate , the loop road around it is unsuitable for any buses in its present form. If a new road was built into the Old Oak Common proposed rail hub site then options would open , perhaps a re-route of the 228 & an extension of the 283 would be better. Beavers Farm. I would suggest, that an extension of the 237 via the 423 but only to Green Lane and into Heathrow Corporation Park. I understand your thinking but St Mary Cray to Bromley South is 5-10 minutes on the train. I think danorak has the best idea for Ramsden. St Mary Cray station is quite some distance from Ramsden area. There are high levels of fare evasion between here and Bromley ( Shortlands station is used by dodgers as no gates there ) That area is the only part of Bromley borough that ironically doesn't have a direct bus link to Bromley. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 3, 2014 16:08:57 GMT
I understand your thinking but St Mary Cray to Bromley South is 5-10 minutes on the train. I think danorak has the best idea for Ramsden. St Mary Cray station is quite some distance from Ramsden area. There are high levels of fare evasion between here and Bromley ( Shortlands station is used by dodgers as no gates there ) That area is the only part of Bromley borough that ironically doesn't have a direct bus link to Bromley. And the gates at Bromley South are often left open, danoraks 261 idea for Ramsden |
|
