|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 14, 2014 22:49:05 GMT
Just fallen across this article about a change to the 315 bus to serve the Peabody Estate between Herne Hill and Tulse Hill. Pity it's going to take months and months to sort out. Looking at how the 315 runs today this seems quite a dogleg for the bus to make unless it is going to be removed from West Norwood and diverted to terminate at the Peabody Estate or run to Herne Hill instead. I suppose you could divert via the 322 (Robson Rd) and a long run along Rosendale Road and serve the Peabody Est and then back up Norwood Rd to York Hill. It'd be a long loop but so much of Rosendale Road is unserved that I suspect a bus along it would be rather popular. Hmmm - looking some more I wonder if it's actually Peabody Hill that is the area proposed for the bus rather than the old Peabody Estate further north. The description of stop positions makes more sense for Peabody Hill. I guess the 315 might be looped round the Tulse Hill gyratory, Thurlow Park Rd and Birkbeck Hill. V happy to be corrected in my ramblings by those who know the area better than I do. I've just done a quick look with Google Streetview. |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Sept 14, 2014 22:58:38 GMT
Just fallen across this article about a change to the 315 bus to serve the Peabody Estate between Herne Hill and Tulse Hill. Pity it's going to take months and months to sort out. Looking at how the 315 runs today this seems quite a dogleg for the bus to make unless it is going to be removed from West Norwood and diverted to terminate at the Peabody Estate or run to Herne Hill instead. I suppose you could divert via the 322 (Robson Rd) and a long run along Rosendale Road and serve the Peabody Est and then back up Norwood Rd to York Hill. It'd be a long loop but so much of Rosendale Road is unserved that I suspect a bus along it would be rather popular. V happy to be corrected in my ramblings by those who know the area better than I do. I've just done a quick look with Google Streetview. I have a vague memory of this coming up before - I think there may have been a Mayor's question on a service to the Peabody Estate and there had been vehicle tests done. I can only assume the 315 would be diverted away from West Norwood to terminate there, as a through service would need a double run and this wouldn't appear to require additional resources. Over a year seems a long time to wait though. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2014 23:40:00 GMT
How is the Peabody Estate poorly served when it is just off Norwood Road and a short distance from Croxted Road, both with several major high frequency routes? Most residential streets and estates are further from bus routes than they are.
I would have thought a more logical service to divert would be the 201 as it is a single decker route which already passes closed by so would only need a short detour between Croxted Road and Norwood Road. It also provides a link into Herne Hill, which is surely more important that Tulse Hill (also served by the 201) or West Norwood.
I only hope they are not proposing turning the 315 away from West Norwood station at York Hill. It provides a useful connection with the X68 where the first/last stop is by the Tesco Express/Sainsburys Local, as well as allowing it to serve the main shopping section of West Norwood.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 15, 2014 2:38:16 GMT
How is the Peabody Estate poorly served when it is just off Norwood Road and a short distance from Croxted Road, both with several major high frequency routes? Most residential streets and estates are further from bus routes than they are. I would have thought a more logical service to divert would be the 201 as it is a single decker route which already passes closed by so would only need a short detour between Croxted Road and Norwood Road. It also provides a link into Herne Hill, which is surely more important that Tulse Hill (also served by the 201) or West Norwood. I only hope they are not proposing turning the 315 away from West Norwood station at York Hill. It provides a useful connection with the X68 where the first/last stop is by the Tesco Express/Sainsburys Local, as well as allowing it to serve the main shopping section of West Norwood. Completely agree with this - the main purpose of the 315 is to link West Norwood with Streatham & Balham and if turned towards the direction of Tulse Hill, it would in-convene many people in West Norwood. Also agree with re-routing the 201 into the estate - would add very little time onto the existing route and would give the estate more coverage of Streatham than the 315. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 15, 2014 9:13:09 GMT
How is the Peabody Estate poorly served when it is just off Norwood Road and a short distance from Croxted Road, both with several major high frequency routes? Most residential streets and estates are further from bus routes than they are. I would have thought a more logical service to divert would be the 201 as it is a single decker route which already passes closed by so would only need a short detour between Croxted Road and Norwood Road. It also provides a link into Herne Hill, which is surely more important that Tulse Hill (also served by the 201) or West Norwood. I only hope they are not proposing turning the 315 away from West Norwood station at York Hill. It provides a useful connection with the X68 where the first/last stop is by the Tesco Express/Sainsburys Local, as well as allowing it to serve the main shopping section of West Norwood. I did amend my post as I may have got it wrong as there is an area / road called Peabody Hill which does look fairly remote from a bus service. It's penned in by allotments and railway lines with no obvious quick walking route to a main route. I do agree that there is no obvious way to serve Peabody Hill and serve West Norwood without some crazy doubling back. I've never used the 315 and don't know the travel patterns but I assume people use it to reach the shops in West Norwood so a rerouting would break that link. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 15, 2014 10:29:46 GMT
How is the Peabody Estate poorly served when it is just off Norwood Road and a short distance from Croxted Road, both with several major high frequency routes? Most residential streets and estates are further from bus routes than they are. I would have thought a more logical service to divert would be the 201 as it is a single decker route which already passes closed by so would only need a short detour between Croxted Road and Norwood Road. It also provides a link into Herne Hill, which is surely more important that Tulse Hill (also served by the 201) or West Norwood. I only hope they are not proposing turning the 315 away from West Norwood station at York Hill. It provides a useful connection with the X68 where the first/last stop is by the Tesco Express/Sainsburys Local, as well as allowing it to serve the main shopping section of West Norwood. I did amend my post as I may have got it wrong as there is an area / road called Peabody Hill which does look fairly remote from a bus service. It's penned in by allotments and railway lines with no obvious quick walking route to a main route. I do agree that there is no obvious way to serve Peabody Hill and serve West Norwood without some crazy doubling back. I've never used the 315 and don't know the travel patterns but I assume people use it to reach the shops in West Norwood so a rerouting would break that link. Indeed, it used to get to the shopping area of West Norwood and for school kids to interchange with other buses. A better option to serve Peabody Hill (which is the Upper Peabody Hill estate if people are confused) would be to divert the 322 at Tulse Hill up to Peabody Hill and then serve Rosendale Road between Thurlow Park Road & Norwood Road before rejoining the current route. You'd only miss three bus stops on Norwood Road and Peabody Hill would have a link to Herne Hill, Tulse Hill & West Norwood. Only disadvantage would be the 322 would have to use the Tulse Hill gyratory system towards Peabody Estate. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2014 10:32:55 GMT
I think you are right, as your linked page calls it the "Upper" Peabody estate. Quite misleading though when the whole estate is called Peabody Hill, the community centre mention is the Peabody Hill Community Centre, and there there is an actual Peabody Estate in the same ward. Even searching their name on Google only finds a few mentions by Labour politicians, so it was an obvious misunderstanding to make as they seem to have their own private name for it!
Incidentally, before the creation of the county of London, Peabody Hill was an exclave of Streatham within Surrey, surrounded by Lambeth (which included Brixton and Norwood divisions) to the west and Camberwell to the east.
But a bus service there would make more sense as it is somewhat isolated, and being uphill makes it a more difficult walk from Thurlow Park Road for various people.
The main use of the 315 is for short journeys into the nearest town centre, Balham, Streatham, or West Norwood. For that reason I would have thought most of the interest from Peabody Hill would be to West Norwood, but it still seems anything other than rerouting it from York Hill would be convoluted. Although not ideal, adding a loop on the 201 or 322 would still seem more suitable. The 322 would not only connect with West Norwood but also Brixton, which is the major centre that area radiates to. I would be surprised if there is much demand to get to Streatham
|
|
|
|
Post by Unorm on Sept 15, 2014 16:32:34 GMT
Just fallen across this article about a change to the 315 bus to serve the Peabody Estate between Herne Hill and Tulse Hill. Pity it's going to take months and months to sort out. Looking at how the 315 runs today this seems quite a dogleg for the bus to make unless it is going to be removed from West Norwood and diverted to terminate at the Peabody Estate or run to Herne Hill instead. I suppose you could divert via the 322 (Robson Rd) and a long run along Rosendale Road and serve the Peabody Est and then back up Norwood Rd to York Hill. It'd be a long loop but so much of Rosendale Road is unserved that I suspect a bus along it would be rather popular. Hmmm - looking some more I wonder if it's actually Peabody Hill that is the area proposed for the bus rather than the old Peabody Estate further north. The description of stop positions makes more sense for Peabody Hill. I guess the 315 might be looped round the Tulse Hill gyratory, Thurlow Park Rd and Birkbeck Hill. V happy to be corrected in my ramblings by those who know the area better than I do. I've just done a quick look with Google Streetview. It would have been good but the northbound direction towards Herne Hill when Rosendale Road intersects Turney Road, that would be a bit of a pain for a 10.2m bus but should be do-able for an MPD. The other direction (southbound) is fine though. Possibly rerouteing 201 via Hawarden Grove or Guernsey Grove or both or even in different directions using both roads could solve the problem maybe with an extension to Brixton? An extension to Brixton let alone serving the estate would relieve a bit off the 3 along Croxted Road's northern leg for passengers waiting for 3 which is a little less in the peaks. And in PM peaks from Brixton would definitely relieve some bit anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 15, 2014 18:19:17 GMT
Just fallen across this article about a change to the 315 bus to serve the Peabody Estate between Herne Hill and Tulse Hill. Pity it's going to take months and months to sort out. Looking at how the 315 runs today this seems quite a dogleg for the bus to make unless it is going to be removed from West Norwood and diverted to terminate at the Peabody Estate or run to Herne Hill instead. I suppose you could divert via the 322 (Robson Rd) and a long run along Rosendale Road and serve the Peabody Est and then back up Norwood Rd to York Hill. It'd be a long loop but so much of Rosendale Road is unserved that I suspect a bus along it would be rather popular. Hmmm - looking some more I wonder if it's actually Peabody Hill that is the area proposed for the bus rather than the old Peabody Estate further north. The description of stop positions makes more sense for Peabody Hill. I guess the 315 might be looped round the Tulse Hill gyratory, Thurlow Park Rd and Birkbeck Hill. V happy to be corrected in my ramblings by those who know the area better than I do. I've just done a quick look with Google Streetview. It would have been good but the northbound direction towards Herne Hill when Rosendale Road intersects Turney Road, that would be a bit of a pain for a 10.2m bus but should be do-able for an MPD. The other direction (southbound) is fine though. Possibly rerouteing 201 via Hawarden Grove or Guernsey Grove or both or even in different directions using both roads could solve the problem maybe with an extension to Brixton? An extension to Brixton let alone serving the estate would relieve a bit off the 3 along Croxted Road's northern leg for passengers waiting for 3 which is a little less in the peaks. And in PM peaks from Brixton would definitely relieve some bit anyway. An extension to Brixton on the 201 is nice but most likely too much for the route given it's already lengthy. |
|
|
|
Post by Unorm on Sept 15, 2014 18:54:33 GMT
It would have been good but the northbound direction towards Herne Hill when Rosendale Road intersects Turney Road, that would be a bit of a pain for a 10.2m bus but should be do-able for an MPD. The other direction (southbound) is fine though. Possibly rerouteing 201 via Hawarden Grove or Guernsey Grove or both or even in different directions using both roads could solve the problem maybe with an extension to Brixton? An extension to Brixton let alone serving the estate would relieve a bit off the 3 along Croxted Road's northern leg for passengers waiting for 3 which is a little less in the peaks. And in PM peaks from Brixton would definitely relieve some bit anyway. An extension to Brixton on the 201 is nice but most likely too much for the route given it's already lengthy. It's no harm really, it'll be around 9 or 10 miles, basically nearly as long as 3  lol. Yeah it's lengthy, but would benefit something. As for Peabody Estate, there would be no way on 315 to be 10.2m if it goes directly across Rosendale Road but that would be really fine for them. Only thing matters is a broken link in service. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 15, 2014 19:37:35 GMT
An extension to Brixton on the 201 is nice but most likely too much for the route given it's already lengthy. It's no harm really, it'll be around 9 or 10 miles, basically nearly as long as 3 lol. Yeah it's lengthy, but would benefit something. As for Peabody Estate, there would be no way on 315 to be 10.2m if it goes directly across Rosendale Road but that would be really fine for them. Only thing matters is a broken link in service. You have remember that Brixton is prone to traffic at the St. Matthews Triangle so wouldn't really help the route which hits many pinch points. Having no 10.2m buses on the 315 isn't a big worry, the MPD's just about cope fine anyway. Maybe some 9.6m buses could be specified on the next contract. |
|
|
|
Post by moz on Sept 16, 2014 0:01:58 GMT
If it were to be rerouted at West Norwood down Robson Road, Rosendale Road, Lovelace Road and Thurlow Hill to Peabody Hill/Estate it would open a lot of new roads up to buses. There seems to be a fair bit of space at the far (north) end of the estate to place a Bus Stand too.
Moz
|
|
|
|
Post by Unorm on Sept 16, 2014 16:19:01 GMT
If it were to be rerouted at West Norwood down Robson Road, Rosendale Road, Lovelace Road and Thurlow Hill to Peabody Hill/Estate it would open a lot of new roads up to buses. There seems to be a fair bit of space at the far (north) end of the estate to place a Bus Stand too. Moz That seems like a good idea, making it enter from the back round and not the front bit I see |
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on Oct 13, 2014 2:13:02 GMT
I visited the Peabody Hill estate around 11pm a few nights ago. I was was surprised at the car ownership levels - it was quite tight getting around for the sheer volume of parked vehicles and I was only driving a SUV. Going up Thurlow Hill, I had to wait at the bottom for oncoming traffic to pass. I can't see buses getting around that loop safely without the council removing some of the parking spaces, which might not be popular with some residents. As it is, a lot of vehicles have to park on the pavement just to allow enough room for passing traffic. That said, I am pleased with the "can do" attitude being displayed here - for those without cars, a bus service is indeed necessary for this unfortunately situated development. Realistically, any route that enters this estate would have to terminate there, as it would create a tedious detour and an undesirable doubleback for through passengers of alternatives such as the 322 or P13 otherwise. Not only would there be a time penalty (which has an associated cost), but there'd almost certainly be extra buses required and risk of time consuming conflicts as already alluded to. Vehicle size is also a factor - given the parking issues, I wouldn't expect anything longer than a 9.4m bus to go around that estate safely at all times. That further limits the possibility of vaguely imaginable alterations to existing routes such as the 201, 227 or 355. Though with tweaks to the infrastructure and parking controls, it wouldn't be insurmountable. To that end, I can see why something is to be done with the 315. I don't know a lot about that route, it's quite elusive to me. I do know that it gives locals a link to a supermarket in West Norwood - as far as I know, the only other one served is at the extreme end of the route at Balham which is quite a way at around 20 minutes for people at the West Norwood end of the back streets served. It hasn't yet been announced what the routing will be - will the 315 continue to provide useful links to shops and West Norwood station? At Tulse Hill, will it access the estate via Thurlow Park Road, or Norwood Road and Rosendale Road? If via Thurlow Park Road, that right turn from the contraflow bus lane on the Tulse Hill Gyratory onto Thurlow Park Road could be unbanned. There would be a time penalty involved for oncoming traffic. There is another problem - the infamous right turn onto a busy carriageway without signal controls. On the return from the estate, getting back onto the Thurlow Park Road could prove to be time consuming and unsafe, unless signal controls are put into place. A similar problem exists for route 265 coming out of the Alton Estate onto Roehampton Lane. To avoid this situation, the route performs a bizarre manoeuvre where it turns left onto Roehampton Lane then spins around at the nearest safe turning point. Not a feasible option available for the 315 though. However, if routed along Birkbeck Hill, this would give residents the quickest access to the local shops. If via Rosendale Road, well a couple of months ago I took a 9.9m Olympian along Thurlow Park Road then down Rosendale Road to Norwood Road. The mini roundabout caused me unforseen grief as it has been designed to prevent large vehicles from turning left to continue along Rosendale Road - Google Maps image. It's impossible to take the corner wide enough to avoid touching the kerb. I expect an 8.8m bus would just about make it, but a route test would be required. It's quite a roundabout route as far as access to shops goes. There is also the option of retaining the route as far as Robson Road shops, then running via Robson Road and Rosendale Road all the way to Lovelace Lane and into the estate. This would remove any unregulated conflict with the South Circular and avoid the traffic hotspot at Tulse Hill gyratory. However, it's quite a way to the nearest shops for the residents of the Peabody Hill estate. On reflection, there wouldn't be much time penalty compared to the alternatives - the first route means battling onto the South Circular, then sitting in the traffic on the approach to Tulse Hill and the second one is circuitous. I'm not a betting man but if I was, I'd say this is probably most likely to happen. The 315 isn't perfect, but short of introducing a route specifically designed to serve the estate, it is the next best option. It's a very interesting logistical challenge - the estate is difficult to serve and I expect Bus Infrastructure might have some work on their hands to deal with the physical constraints, whichever route it takes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2014 10:11:12 GMT
I do know that it gives locals a link to a supermarket in West Norwood - as far as I know, the only other one served is at the extreme end of the route at Balham which is quite a way at around 20 minutes for people at the West Norwood end of the back streets served. West Norwood does not have a supermarket, only convenience stores. By St Luke's there is a Sainsbury's Local opposite a Co-Op a few doors down from a Tesco Express. The co-op is only a little larger than the others, but they are the same size (and with the premium prices) as the corner shop versions you increasingly get in residential areas all over London. There is also an average-sized Iceland. Those, and the railway station, would all all be missed out if the 315 is diverted north from York Hill so I cannot see that being considered. Westbound the St Leonard's stop on Streatham High Road serves the Morissons, which is about equally as close to that as the Streatham Station one outside Tesco Extra. But because of the one-way system on Stanthorpe Road it does not serve the opposite stop towards West Norwood. Instead you need to walk back to St Leonard's to catch it at the top of Gleneldon Road, although it is no further than in many places where you have to cross a big car park from a main road stop to the supermarket entrance. |
|
lol. Yeah it's lengthy, but would benefit something. 
