|
Post by COBO on Dec 13, 2023 0:59:40 GMT
6: withdrawn between Hyde Park Corner and Victoria. Diverted to Hammersmith via route 9. To link Marble Arch with Hammersmith and Kensington. 189: extended from Marble Arch to Victoria via route 6. Maintain links lost by the 6. SL12: new Superloop route runnImg between Victoria and Edgware via route 6 to Edgware Road Station, 98 to Kilburn and 32 to Edgware SL13: new Superloop route running between Marble Arch and Barnet Church via route 13 to North Finchley and 263 to Barnet Church.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Dec 26, 2023 0:32:43 GMT
6: withdraw the daytime service between Hyde Park Corner and Victoria. Diverted to Putney Bridge via route 414 to maintain links lost by the 414. 32: withdrawn between Cricklewood Bus Garage and Edgware. Diverted to Brent Cross West via route 316. Withdrawn between Kilburn and Kilburn Park. Diverted to Hammersmith via route 98 to Marble Arch, Park Lane, Hyde Park Corner, Knightsbridge and route 9 to Hammersmith. To link Marble Arch with Hammersmith. 189: extended from Marble Arch to Victoria via 6. To maintain links lost by the 6. 316: withdrawn between Cricklewood Bus Garage and Brent Cross West. Diverted to Edgware via route 32. Converted to double deck. Maintain links lost by the 32. 414: discontinued.
|
|
|
Post by britishguy54 on Mar 9, 2024 16:35:48 GMT
East London bus route changes if the Belvedere Bridge ever came to be:
401: Withdrawn between Thamesmead and Belvedere. Re-routed to serve towards Romford, via Elm Park and Rainham Road. 428: Extended from Erith towards Dagenham ASDA, via Belvedere and Beam Park. 475: New route between Thamesmead and Becontree Heath, via Belvedere, and Heathway.
|
|
|
Post by Dillon95 on Mar 9, 2024 17:01:45 GMT
East London bus route changes if the Belvedere Bridge ever came to be: 401: Withdrawn between Thamesmead and Belvedere. Re-routed to serve towards Romford, via Elm Park and Rainham Road. 428: Extended from Erith towards Dagenham ASDA, via Belvedere and Beam Park. 475: New route between Thamesmead and Becontree Heath, via Belvedere, and Heathway. I’d like the 401 to still carry on from Thamesmead to Bexleyheath, so Bexleyheath and Romford could be achieved. That would be brilliant.
|
|
|
Post by britishguy54 on Mar 12, 2024 18:49:30 GMT
East London bus route changes if the Belvedere Bridge ever came to be: 401: Withdrawn between Thamesmead and Belvedere. Re-routed to serve towards Romford, via Elm Park and Rainham Road. 428: Extended from Erith towards Dagenham ASDA, via Belvedere and Beam Park. 475: New route between Thamesmead and Becontree Heath, via Belvedere, and Heathway. I’d like the 401 to still carry on from Thamesmead to Bexleyheath, so Bexleyheath and Romford could be achieved. That would be brilliant. Good point. The 401 might be better off left alone. I was just worried not changing it may be too simple. Revised version: 428: Extended to Dagenham ASDA via Belvedere and Beam Park. 475: New route between Bexleyheath and Romford: via Long Lane King Harold’s Way Picardy Road Belvedere Station South Hornchurch Elm Park Station Upper Rainham Road Roneo Corner Queen’s Hospital Romford Station Romford Market I wanted the 475 to be a bit of a middle ground between following the 301 and 401, not overlapping too hard with either route. I routed it via Upper Rainham Road as I’ve heard TFL pondered on a quicker route between Romford and Elm Park for the 365 at one point. Speaking of the 365, I didn’t want to overlap with it also too much.
|
|
|
Post by britishguy54 on Mar 19, 2024 21:49:01 GMT
Dagenham Bus Route alterations, as I try to improve some of my previous ideas:
239: New route between Stratford and Dagenham, serving: Stratford Broadway Plaistow Station Barking Road East Ham, Newham Town Hall North Beckton Lodge Avenue Junction Chequers Corner (I am unsure on routing to terminate at New Road w/route 175, or at Dagenham ASDA w/145).
An alternative could be extending the 238 from Barking towards Upney Station and Dagenham.
287: Re-routed between Lodge Avenue and Chequers Corner onto Goresbrook Road. I am unsure if it needs to be rerouted.
Hornchurch Bus alterations:
348/EL5: New route. Core section between Dagenham and Hornchurch, serving: Chequers Corner Ballards Road Rainham Road Wood Lane Elm Park Station Suttons Avenue Hornchurch Town Centre (It could be extended on either side, being towards Upminster w/ route 248, or towards Barking Riverside via Choats Manor Way).
N66: New night route, between Leytonstone and Cranham, serving for routes 66 and 248.
I would appreciate some feedback (please try to be constructive).
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 20, 2024 14:44:49 GMT
Dagenham Bus Route alterations, as I try to improve some of my previous ideas: 239: New route between Stratford and Dagenham, serving: Stratford Broadway Plaistow Station Barking Road East Ham, Newham Town Hall North Beckton Lodge Avenue Junction Chequers Corner (I am unsure on routing to terminate at New Road w/route 175, or at Dagenham ASDA w/145). An alternative could be extending the 238 from Barking towards Upney Station and Dagenham. 287: Re-routed between Lodge Avenue and Chequers Corner onto Goresbrook Road. I am unsure if it needs to be rerouted. Hornchurch Bus alterations: 348/EL5: New route. Core section between Dagenham and Hornchurch, serving: Chequers Corner Ballards Road Rainham Road Wood Lane Elm Park Station Suttons Avenue Hornchurch Town Centre (It could be extended on either side, being towards Upminster w/ route 248, or towards Barking Riverside via Choats Manor Way). N66: New night route, between Leytonstone and Cranham, serving for routes 66 and 248. I would appreciate some feedback (please try to be constructive). I think the 104 could be extended to Dagenham instead, it would follow the current route to the Newham Way intersection, then the 173 to Dagenham, standing at the Asda with the 145. I don’t think the 287 could go onto Goresbrook Road though. 348/EL5 I agree with, looks like a useful route that serves some unserved roads. N66 also looks useful
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Mar 20, 2024 15:24:23 GMT
Dagenham Bus Route alterations, as I try to improve some of my previous ideas: 239: New route between Stratford and Dagenham, serving: Stratford Broadway Plaistow Station Barking Road East Ham, Newham Town Hall North Beckton Lodge Avenue Junction Chequers Corner (I am unsure on routing to terminate at New Road w/route 175, or at Dagenham ASDA w/145). An alternative could be extending the 238 from Barking towards Upney Station and Dagenham. 287: Re-routed between Lodge Avenue and Chequers Corner onto Goresbrook Road. I am unsure if it needs to be rerouted. Hornchurch Bus alterations: 348/EL5: New route. Core section between Dagenham and Hornchurch, serving: Chequers Corner Ballards Road Rainham Road Wood Lane Elm Park Station Suttons Avenue Hornchurch Town Centre (It could be extended on either side, being towards Upminster w/ route 248, or towards Barking Riverside via Choats Manor Way). N66: New night route, between Leytonstone and Cranham, serving for routes 66 and 248. I would appreciate some feedback (please try to be constructive). The EL5 doesn't make much sense. It doesn't actually go anywhere people need to go. It's been shown with the 497 for example that people aren't going to use routes which don't go where people want to go. You can link all sorts of random places but there's no reason why someone from Rainham Road or Chequers Corner will want to go to Elm Park when they would just go to Dagenham East or Dagenham Heathway. A lot of these places have links to Romford and therefore people aren't going to want a link to Hornchurch as Romford will be easier to get to. It's effectively why there's no route which crosses from Becontree Heath towards Hornchurch as not many people actually need to go down that way, the vast majority want Romford. The Dagenham and Beam Park areas have more than enough links to Romford which keeps the area going. The ELT network is also focussed on Barking Riverside so is unlikely to be classed as part of the East London Transit network. The 239 idea is also unlikely to drum up any big crowd unfortunately. The 238 has the section to East Ham covered while the 262 and 473 cover the bit to Plaistow, the 325 then captures the Plaistow to East Ham crowd with the 5 and 115 also present from Barking Road. Sending this route down the A13 would then do nothing but wreck reliability on a route that might not already be popular. The 173 manages perfectly fine along the A13 in terms of crowds ever since it went double decker in 2015 and another route paralleling it (and the 287) would be a huge overkill. There's no reason for the route to exist. I would also not touch the 238 in any way, TfL previously tinkered with the idea of sending it to Becontree Heath and decided against it. The 238s aim is to effectively tackle the dense flows between Barking and Stratford, which itself can be broken into the Barking-East Ham flow and the East Ham-Stratford flow, although there are a considerable number of e2e riders on the route. Any extension to the 238 would make it a route that becomes unreliable and when a route is carrying the crowds like it does (I believe figures wise it's not far off the W7 and EL1 for comparison) you need a route to be short, frequent and reliable which is what the 238 does. Dagenham despite what may seem like a bus desert to an outsider, isn't actually a bus desert when you look into it. Almost all houses and living areas have a bus within walking distance and these buses do the jobs of linking to the nearest town centre (Romford) and link all the houses to the nearest tube or rail station. People from Dagenham won't need to go Stratford if they need a major town centre as they will just go to Romford instead. People from Barking and Ilford will opt for Stratford as it's closer, but people from Dagenham won't. If someone from Dagenham desperately wants to get to Stratford they will use the District Line. As for night routes, I think more can be done with the N86 in the direction of Upminster. While Dagenham manages for day buses, the night network is very poor and the 174 really should be a 24 hour route. If it's 24 hour then the N86 can be cut back from Harold Hill to Romford, and probably routed towards Upminster via the 248 at night.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 20, 2024 16:04:55 GMT
Dagenham Bus Route alterations, as I try to improve some of my previous ideas: 239: New route between Stratford and Dagenham, serving: Stratford Broadway Plaistow Station Barking Road East Ham, Newham Town Hall North Beckton Lodge Avenue Junction Chequers Corner (I am unsure on routing to terminate at New Road w/route 175, or at Dagenham ASDA w/145). An alternative could be extending the 238 from Barking towards Upney Station and Dagenham. 287: Re-routed between Lodge Avenue and Chequers Corner onto Goresbrook Road. I am unsure if it needs to be rerouted. Hornchurch Bus alterations: 348/EL5: New route. Core section between Dagenham and Hornchurch, serving: Chequers Corner Ballards Road Rainham Road Wood Lane Elm Park Station Suttons Avenue Hornchurch Town Centre (It could be extended on either side, being towards Upminster w/ route 248, or towards Barking Riverside via Choats Manor Way). N66: New night route, between Leytonstone and Cranham, serving for routes 66 and 248. I would appreciate some feedback (please try to be constructive). The EL5 doesn't make much sense. It doesn't actually go anywhere people need to go. It's been shown with the 497 for example that people aren't going to use routes which don't go where people want to go. You can link all sorts of random places but there's no reason why someone from Rainham Road or Chequers Corner will want to go to Elm Park when they would just go to Dagenham East or Dagenham Heathway. A lot of these places have links to Romford and therefore people aren't going to want a link to Hornchurch as Romford will be easier to get to. It's effectively why there's no route which crosses from Becontree Heath towards Hornchurch as not many people actually need to go down that way, the vast majority want Romford. The Dagenham and Beam Park areas have more than enough links to Romford which keeps the area going. The ELT network is also focussed on Barking Riverside so is unlikely to be classed as part of the East London Transit network. The 239 idea is also unlikely to drum up any big crowd unfortunately. The 238 has the section to East Ham covered while the 262 and 473 cover the bit to Plaistow, the 325 then captures the Plaistow to East Ham crowd with the 5 and 115 also present from Barking Road. Sending this route down the A13 would then do nothing but wreck reliability on a route that might not already be popular. The 173 manages perfectly fine along the A13 in terms of crowds ever since it went double decker in 2015 and another route paralleling it (and the 287) would be a huge overkill. There's no reason for the route to exist. I would also not touch the 238 in any way, TfL previously tinkered with the idea of sending it to Becontree Heath and decided against it. The 238s aim is to effectively tackle the dense flows between Barking and Stratford, which itself can be broken into the Barking-East Ham flow and the East Ham-Stratford flow, although there are a considerable number of e2e riders on the route. Any extension to the 238 would make it a route that becomes unreliable and when a route is carrying the crowds like it does (I believe figures wise it's not far off the W7 and EL1 for comparison) you need a route to be short, frequent and reliable which is what the 238 does. Dagenham despite what may seem like a bus desert to an outsider, isn't actually a bus desert when you look into it. Almost all houses and living areas have a bus within walking distance and these buses do the jobs of linking to the nearest town centre (Romford) and link all the houses to the nearest tube or rail station. People from Dagenham won't need to go Stratford if they need a major town centre as they will just go to Romford instead. People from Barking and Ilford will opt for Stratford as it's closer, but people from Dagenham won't. If someone from Dagenham desperately wants to get to Stratford they will use the District Line. As for night routes, I think more can be done with the N86 in the direction of Upminster. While Dagenham manages for day buses, the night network is very poor and the 174 really should be a 24 hour route. If it's 24 hour then the N86 can be cut back from Harold Hill to Romford, and probably routed towards Upminster via the 248 at night. One option I came up with a while ago was extending the N238 to Rainham via Longbridge Road, 145 to the end of Church Lane, then the 103 to Rainham Station. I remember the 145 had a weekend night service & people around Dagenham objected to its removal, this extended N238 would patch up a large amount of service that the N145 used to run on. This also provides Rainham with a night service
|
|
|
Post by mb171 on Mar 29, 2024 14:50:31 GMT
Some fantasy routes that I'd love -
445 from Lewisham - Clapham Junction via Lewisham Way, Brockley Rise, Honor Oak, West Dulwich. This would create some new links from Lewisham - Clapham and I think it would work quite well if it were a real route. The only issue is that there is a low bridge around West Dulwich that would prevent Double decks but without that restriction, it could probably be a proper route.
451 from Woolwich and Foots Cray via Woolwich Common, Shooters Hill, Welling (will not serve the station but instead will turn right to serve Westwood Lane), Blackfen, Blendon, Bexley Village, Ruxley and Foots Cray.
454 from West Croydon to Eltham High Street via Elmers End, Beckenham, Downham, Grove Park, Mottingham. Would create great links from SE London to areas like Beckenham (the 162 covers that, but I think a more direct alternative would be good) - I feel like it'd be a tad bit too long but it could work.
457 from Penge - Wimbledon via Crystal Palace, Streatham, and Tooting - this would support the 57 between Wimbledon and Streatham, but would also provide direct from Crystal Palace area to areas further in SW.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Mar 29, 2024 15:17:12 GMT
Some fantasy routes that I'd love - 445 from Lewisham - Clapham Junction via Lewisham Way, Brockley Rise, Honor Oak, West Dulwich. This would create some new links from Lewisham - Clapham and I think it would work quite well if it were a real route. The only issue is that there is a low bridge around West Dulwich that would prevent Double decks but without that restriction, it could probably be a proper route. 451 from Woolwich and Foots Cray via Woolwich Common, Shooters Hill, Welling (will not serve the station but instead will turn right to serve Westwood Lane), Blackfen, Blendon, Bexley Village, Ruxley and Foots Cray. 454 from West Croydon to Eltham High Street via Elmers End, Beckenham, Downham, Grove Park, Mottingham. Would create great links from SE London to areas like Beckenham (the 162 covers that, but I think a more direct alternative would be good) - I feel like it'd be a tad bit too long but it could work. 457 from Penge - Wimbledon via Crystal Palace, Streatham, and Tooting - this would support the 57 between Wimbledon and Streatham, but would also provide direct from Crystal Palace area to areas further in SW. I know it’s a fantasy but the 457 just wouldn’t work. It would support the 57 on the wrong end where it doesn’t need it. Let’s be honest the Streatham end already has the 333 supporting it and it is the considerably quieter part of the 57. Really it only needs a minor frequency increase and even then it should be focused on the Kingston to Wimbledon stretch, as that is where the route is busiest, with short workings if TfL allowed them. Not to mention there is a severe lack of stand space in Wimbledon to support another route. Even now with a quick change in Crystal Palace and a short walk Penge to Streatham is quite doable. Even Penge to Tooting is quite doable with the same short walk in Crystal Palace and without even changing stop in Streatham.
|
|
|
Post by mb171 on Mar 29, 2024 15:29:05 GMT
Some fantasy routes that I'd love - 445 from Lewisham - Clapham Junction via Lewisham Way, Brockley Rise, Honor Oak, West Dulwich. This would create some new links from Lewisham - Clapham and I think it would work quite well if it were a real route. The only issue is that there is a low bridge around West Dulwich that would prevent Double decks but without that restriction, it could probably be a proper route. 451 from Woolwich and Foots Cray via Woolwich Common, Shooters Hill, Welling (will not serve the station but instead will turn right to serve Westwood Lane), Blackfen, Blendon, Bexley Village, Ruxley and Foots Cray. 454 from West Croydon to Eltham High Street via Elmers End, Beckenham, Downham, Grove Park, Mottingham. Would create great links from SE London to areas like Beckenham (the 162 covers that, but I think a more direct alternative would be good) - I feel like it'd be a tad bit too long but it could work. 457 from Penge - Wimbledon via Crystal Palace, Streatham, and Tooting - this would support the 57 between Wimbledon and Streatham, but would also provide direct from Crystal Palace area to areas further in SW. I know it’s a fantasy but the 457 just wouldn’t work. It would support the 57 on the wrong end where it doesn’t need it. Let’s be honest the Streatham end already has the 333 supporting it and it is the considerably quieter part of the 57. Really it only needs a minor frequency increase and even then it should be focused on the Kingston to Wimbledon stretch, as that is where the route is busiest, with short workings if TfL allowed them. Not to mention there is a severe lack of stand space in Wimbledon to support another route. Even now with a quick change in Crystal Palace and a short walk Penge to Streatham is quite doable. Even Penge to Tooting is quite doable with the same short walk in Crystal Palace and without even changing stop in Streatham. Ahh that's fair enough, I just realised that Crystal Palace and Tooting already has a link the 249, so the 457 probably isn't required.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 29, 2024 17:23:07 GMT
Some fantasy routes that I'd love - 445 from Lewisham - Clapham Junction via Lewisham Way, Brockley Rise, Honor Oak, West Dulwich. This would create some new links from Lewisham - Clapham and I think it would work quite well if it were a real route. The only issue is that there is a low bridge around West Dulwich that would prevent Double decks but without that restriction, it could probably be a proper route. 451 from Woolwich and Foots Cray via Woolwich Common, Shooters Hill, Welling (will not serve the station but instead will turn right to serve Westwood Lane), Blackfen, Blendon, Bexley Village, Ruxley and Foots Cray. 454 from West Croydon to Eltham High Street via Elmers End, Beckenham, Downham, Grove Park, Mottingham. Would create great links from SE London to areas like Beckenham (the 162 covers that, but I think a more direct alternative would be good) - I feel like it'd be a tad bit too long but it could work. 457 from Penge - Wimbledon via Crystal Palace, Streatham, and Tooting - this would support the 57 between Wimbledon and Streatham, but would also provide direct from Crystal Palace area to areas further in SW. I know it’s a fantasy but the 457 just wouldn’t work. It would support the 57 on the wrong end where it doesn’t need it. Let’s be honest the Streatham end already has the 333 supporting it and it is the considerably quieter part of the 57. Really it only needs a minor frequency increase and even then it should be focused on the Kingston to Wimbledon stretch, as that is where the route is busiest, with short workings if TfL allowed them. Not to mention there is a severe lack of stand space in Wimbledon to support another route. Even now with a quick change in Crystal Palace and a short walk Penge to Streatham is quite doable. Even Penge to Tooting is quite doable with the same short walk in Crystal Palace and without even changing stop in Streatham. TBH, most people in Penge are going towards Bromley or Crystal Palace and then onto Brixton or Central London at a push (if not already getting a train from Penge East). However, I do agree with part of his idea in that I do think there should be least another cross Palace link from Streatham towards Lewisham or Bromley
|
|
|
Post by YY13VKP on Apr 2, 2024 21:56:21 GMT
Now that we're a few weeks into the Croydon and Sutton changes, here's how I think some of the routes affected can be improved:
Firstly, Route 439:
Extend from Waddon Marsh to Beddington Asda via IKEA Croydon and Beddington Lane. At the other end, there are two options to extend the route from Whyteleafe South: Option 1: Extend the 439 to Caterham-on-the-Hill via Burntwood Lane, Whyteleafe Hill, Salmons Lane West, Ninehams Road, Caterham-on-the-Hill Tesco finishing at Westway Common. To help free up stand space at Westway Common and to provide a new TfL link, the 404 is extended to Caterham Station and runs round Caterham Village, replacing Metrobus route 411 which only serves Caterham Village during off peak times.
Option 2: Extend the 439 to Warlingham Sainsbury's via Succombs Hill, Westhall Road and Warlingham Green, following the 403 route to Warlingham Sainsbury's.
In both cases, rerouted between Whyteleafe and Kenley via the Godstone Road with the 434 reverting back to its original route between Whyteleafe and Kenley Station via Beverley Road.
PVR increased to 4 and frequency increased to every 20 minutes.
Whilst the 439 has started to gain traction and is rather well used, especially during peak hours, I still feel like the route could be a little more useful. Almost its entire route is duplicated by another with the exception of taking over the 434's routing between Whyteleafe and Purley to enable the 434 to eventually serve the top end of Kenley. The 439 was originally meant to go down the Godstone Road in the first place and was only re-routed when it was confirmed the 434's rerouting was going to be delayed. I think this was because TfL wanted to make it a little more cost effective than it would have been if it followed its original proposed route, so with these changes giving the 439 a little more independence, and given the amount of parked cars on Valley Road, it would make sense to swap the 434 and 439's routing between Whyteleafe and Kenley.
Extending the 439 to Beddington Asda would provide Whyteleafe, Kenley and Purley with a new direct bus link to Valley Park and IKEA Croydon as well as reintroducing the lost link between Purley and Beddington that the 455 used to give (though it went round the houses in doing so!). It would also free up space at Waddon Marsh which is too congested now that both the 439 and S4 terminate there. Keeping the S4 at Waddon Marsh in the meantime would retain the link between Wallington and West Croydon. There's also the possibility of terminating the 439 in Valley Park, either at the Franklin Way bus stop or within the retail park itself. It's almost a no brainer really if TfL want more patronage for the 439.
On the Whyteleafe end, I know that both of these routes fall into Surrey County Council territory and Whyteleafe to Caterham-on-the-Hill is not within the ULEZ zone, but if TfL want more people to use the bus in outer London area, these areas present a great opportunity to have a TfL route serve them. Potential customers would see a TfL bus as more affordable and therefore be more inclined to use it, especially once the £2 bus fare scheme ends for Metrobus routes. Personally, I'd prefer Option 1 as it gives these areas of Whyteleafe and Caterham a new direct bus link to Kenley, Purley and onwards to Waddon Marsh and Beddington. However, Option 2 overlaps with just the 403 and there's not currently a link between Warlingham and Kenley/Purley whereas option 1 follows the 409 almost all the way to Caterham Station and meets the 404 and 466, but clearly this didn't stop TfL from sending the 439 to Waddon Marsh, duplicating the 289 all the way from Purley and the infrequency of the 409 and 411 gives TfL more reason to extend it to Caterham-on-the-Hill.
Route 166 and 312: Swap routing between Swan and Sugar Loaf and Purley Cross, with the 166 reverting back to its original route via the Brighton Road and the 312 fully replacing the 455 between Old Lodge Lane and Purley by following the 455's old route from Warham Road to Purley Cross. Instead, the 166 could be re-routed to serve Croydon Old Town as TfL desired with the 407/443 in the original plans and terminate in Croydon Town Centre via Katharine Street. This could also be fulfilled by the 405.
I feel re-routing the 166 to replace the 455 rather than the 312 was a little unnecessary. Yes, maybe it was done with a vision that EMC's may have been used on the 312 so needed to pass South Croydon Garage in case they needed to be run in, but they're not around anymore so there's no reason why the 312 shouldn't have been re-routed via Warham Road and Pampisford Road into Purley. There's a lot of confusion caused by the 166 being re-routed too, so swapping the two makes sense. I also feel that the only change that could have been made to the 166 was to send it via Croydon Old Town instead of the 407/443 proposal, however this could also be done by the 405 which can loop back round to Croydon Town Centre so doesn't lose its link to the Whitgift Centre which would be lost if the 166 went round there.
Routes 403 and 407: 403 extended from West Croydon to Sutton Town Centre, PVR increased to 14. 407 withdrawn between West Croydon and Sutton Town Centre - for reasons I've previously mentioned on other threads. Simply I feel the 403 would be a more reliable route to extend to Sutton seeing as it barely gets held up by traffic between Warlingham and West Croydon when the 407 suffers badly, whilst continuing to supplement the SL7 between West Croydon and Sutton.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Apr 7, 2024 7:53:50 GMT
Now that we're a few weeks into the Croydon and Sutton changes, here's how I think some of the routes affected can be improved: Firstly, Route 439: Extend from Waddon Marsh to Beddington Asda via IKEA Croydon and Beddington Lane. At the other end, there are two options to extend the route from Whyteleafe South: Option 1: Extend the 439 to Caterham-on-the-Hill via Burntwood Lane, Whyteleafe Hill, Salmons Lane West, Ninehams Road, Caterham-on-the-Hill Tesco finishing at Westway Common. To help free up stand space at Westway Common and to provide a new TfL link, the 404 is extended to Caterham Station and runs round Caterham Village, replacing Metrobus route 411 which only serves Caterham Village during off peak times. Option 2: Extend the 439 to Warlingham Sainsbury's via Succombs Hill, Westhall Road and Warlingham Green, following the 403 route to Warlingham Sainsbury's. In both cases, rerouted between Whyteleafe and Kenley via the Godstone Road with the 434 reverting back to its original route between Whyteleafe and Kenley Station via Beverley Road. PVR increased to 4 and frequency increased to every 20 minutes. Whilst the 439 has started to gain traction and is rather well used, especially during peak hours, I still feel like the route could be a little more useful. Almost its entire route is duplicated by another with the exception of taking over the 434's routing between Whyteleafe and Purley to enable the 434 to eventually serve the top end of Kenley. The 439 was originally meant to go down the Godstone Road in the first place and was only re-routed when it was confirmed the 434's rerouting was going to be delayed. I think this was because TfL wanted to make it a little more cost effective than it would have been if it followed its original proposed route, so with these changes giving the 439 a little more independence, and given the amount of parked cars on Valley Road, it would make sense to swap the 434 and 439's routing between Whyteleafe and Kenley. Extending the 439 to Beddington Asda would provide Whyteleafe, Kenley and Purley with a new direct bus link to Valley Park and IKEA Croydon as well as reintroducing the lost link between Purley and Beddington that the 455 used to give (though it went round the houses in doing so!). It would also free up space at Waddon Marsh which is too congested now that both the 439 and S4 terminate there. Keeping the S4 at Waddon Marsh in the meantime would retain the link between Wallington and West Croydon. There's also the possibility of terminating the 439 in Valley Park, either at the Franklin Way bus stop or within the retail park itself. It's almost a no brainer really if TfL want more patronage for the 439. On the Whyteleafe end, I know that both of these routes fall into Surrey County Council territory and Whyteleafe to Caterham-on-the-Hill is not within the ULEZ zone, but if TfL want more people to use the bus in outer London area, these areas present a great opportunity to have a TfL route serve them. Potential customers would see a TfL bus as more affordable and therefore be more inclined to use it, especially once the £2 bus fare scheme ends for Metrobus routes. Personally, I'd prefer Option 1 as it gives these areas of Whyteleafe and Caterham a new direct bus link to Kenley, Purley and onwards to Waddon Marsh and Beddington. However, Option 2 overlaps with just the 403 and there's not currently a link between Warlingham and Kenley/Purley whereas option 1 follows the 409 almost all the way to Caterham Station and meets the 404 and 466, but clearly this didn't stop TfL from sending the 439 to Waddon Marsh, duplicating the 289 all the way from Purley and the infrequency of the 409 and 411 gives TfL more reason to extend it to Caterham-on-the-Hill. Route 166 and 312: Swap routing between Swan and Sugar Loaf and Purley Cross, with the 166 reverting back to its original route via the Brighton Road and the 312 fully replacing the 455 between Old Lodge Lane and Purley by following the 455's old route from Warham Road to Purley Cross. Instead, the 166 could be re-routed to serve Croydon Old Town as TfL desired with the 407/443 in the original plans and terminate in Croydon Town Centre via Katharine Street. This could also be fulfilled by the 405. I feel re-routing the 166 to replace the 455 rather than the 312 was a little unnecessary. Yes, maybe it was done with a vision that EMC's may have been used on the 312 so needed to pass South Croydon Garage in case they needed to be run in, but they're not around anymore so there's no reason why the 312 shouldn't have been re-routed via Warham Road and Pampisford Road into Purley. There's a lot of confusion caused by the 166 being re-routed too, so swapping the two makes sense. I also feel that the only change that could have been made to the 166 was to send it via Croydon Old Town instead of the 407/443 proposal, however this could also be done by the 405 which can loop back round to Croydon Town Centre so doesn't lose its link to the Whitgift Centre which would be lost if the 166 went round there. Routes 403 and 407: 403 extended from West Croydon to Sutton Town Centre, PVR increased to 14. 407 withdrawn between West Croydon and Sutton Town Centre - for reasons I've previously mentioned on other threads. Simply I feel the 403 would be a more reliable route to extend to Sutton seeing as it barely gets held up by traffic between Warlingham and West Croydon when the 407 suffers badly, whilst continuing to supplement the SL7 between West Croydon and Sutton. There’s a lot of routes in Croydon that you probably could split. The 466 might be the most beneficial one to split given that it definitely does not need an 8 min frequency on the Croydon-Addington Section. I think rerouting the 353 to Croydon after Addington via the 466 could be useful, the 353 has a much more reasonable frequency for that section & a Croydon-Orpington route could be potentially useful. The 314 could takeover the Forestdale section & the 433 extended to New Addington replacing the 314. On the Orpington end, I would curtail the 353 to the Walnuts Centre, divert the 61 to Ramsden Estate & introduce a new 361 to run between Orpington & Eltham. The 194 is another one that could possibly be split due to how indirect the route is.
|
|