Route 485

[riverside]

The January edition of TLB states that London General have acquired five 8.9m E200s from Metroline via Ensign Bus. These are to cover a +1pvr on route 424 and a rerouting of route 485 over a restricted section that cannot take 10.2m buses. What is this proposed rerouting of the 485? I am not aware of any proposals to alter the route.

[vjaska]

Jan 23, 2015 15:51:09 GMT riverside said:

The January edition of TLB states that London General have acquired five 8.9m E200s from Metroline via Ensign Bus. These are to cover a +1pvr on route 424 and a rerouting of route 485 over a restricted section that cannot take 10.2m buses. What is this proposed rerouting of the 485? I am not aware of any proposals to alter the route.

TBH, only heard this info published in LOTS like you mentioned above. What does annoy me is TfL haven't bothered to consider extending the route in Wandsworth to stand with the 28 & 220 at Southside as there is plenty of space there and 485 passengers would not need to cross Wandsworth High Street to use Sainsbury's and have a shorter walk to reach the Cineworld end of the Southside Centre (or Arndale as it was called).

[riverside]

Jan 23, 2015 16:04:18 GMT vjaska said:

Jan 23, 2015 15:51:09 GMT riverside said:

The January edition of TLB states that London General have acquired five 8.9m E200s from Metroline via Ensign Bus. These are to cover a +1pvr on route 424 and a rerouting of route 485 over a restricted section that cannot take 10.2m buses. What is this proposed rerouting of the 485? I am not aware of any proposals to alter the route.

TBH, only heard this info published in LOTS like you mentioned above. What does annoy me is TfL haven't bothered to consider extending the route in Wandsworth to stand with the 28 & 220 at Southside as there is plenty of space there and 485 passengers would not need to cross Wandsworth High Street to use Sainsbury's and have a shorter walk to reach the Cineworld end of the Southside Centre (or Arndale as it was called).

[riverside]

Sorry Vjaska about the 'ghost' post, I pressed the wrong buttons! I fully agree that the 485 could easily serve Wandsworth Southside as it has fifteen minutes stand time. This short extension would as you say be useful for many shoppers, especially on a cold January day. An alternative could be to extend the 485 up the hill to the St. John's Health Centre, thereby creating a few new liks.

[vjaska]

Jan 23, 2015 17:22:31 GMT riverside said:

Sorry Vjaska about the 'ghost' post, I pressed the wrong buttons! I fully agree that the 485 could easily serve Wandsworth Southside as it has fifteen minutes stand time. This short extension would as you say be useful for many shoppers, especially on a cold January day. An alternative could be to extend the 485 up the hill to the St. John's Health Centre, thereby creating a few new liks.

No worries mate - that's a good idea as well, never thought of that.

[routew15]

I'm not to sure of the new line of route for the 485 but this is a 12 year old quote from 'Bob Kiley and Tim O'Toole written answers' to the then (2003) London Assembly 

In light of these representations London Buses is investigating whether there are other routeing options that would continue to provide satisfactory access to the bus services for those who wish to use it. This review is also exploring options to meet requests from (1) LB Richmond for a link between Barnes and Putney and (2) local residents petitioning for route 485 to be extended to Roehampton Vale ASDA. London Buses will be in a position to provide an update on this work later this summer.

To read the document fully use think link and scroll down to 195/03 Bus Route 419 & 485 in Barnes
Written Answers 11 June 2003

I personally think the route will be diverted to serve Barnes Station. If the present changes has anything to do with this 2003 review then it will be very disappointing to know it took 12 years for something to happen.

[snoggle]

Jan 23, 2015 23:09:40 GMT routew15 said:

I'm not to sure of the new line of route for the 485 but this is a 12 year old quote from 'Bob Kiley and Tim O'Toole written answers' to the then (2003) London Assembly 

In light of these representations London Buses is investigating whether there are other routeing options that would continue to provide satisfactory access to the bus services for those who wish to use it. This review is also exploring options to meet requests from (1) LB Richmond for a link between Barnes and Putney and (2) local residents petitioning for route 485 to be extended to Roehampton Vale ASDA. London Buses will be in a position to provide an update on this work later this summer.

To read the document fully use think link and scroll down to 195/03 Bus Route 419 & 485 in Barnes
Written Answers 11 June 2003

I personally think the route will be diverted to serve Barnes Station. If the present changes has anything to do with this 2003 review then it will be very disappointing to know it took 12 years for something to happen.

I'd be surprised if it did. That's because the 485 was fundamentally restructured back in the 2000s more than once. It's linked all sorts of places over the years.

www.londonbuses.co.uk/routes/485.html

[riverside]

Jan 23, 2015 23:09:40 GMT routew15 said:

I'm not to sure of the new line of route for the 485 but this is a 12 year old quote from 'Bob Kiley and Tim O'Toole written answers' to the then (2003) London Assembly 

In light of these representations London Buses is investigating whether there are other routeing options that would continue to provide satisfactory access to the bus services for those who wish to use it. This review is also exploring options to meet requests from (1) LB Richmond for a link between Barnes and Putney and (2) local residents petitioning for route 485 to be extended to Roehampton Vale ASDA. London Buses will be in a position to provide an update on this work later this summer.

To read the document fully use think link and scroll down to 195/03 Bus Route 419 & 485 in Barnes
Written Answers 11 June 2003

I personally think the route will be diverted to serve Barnes Station. If the present changes has anything to do with this 2003 review then it will be very disappointing to know it took 12 years for something to happen.

Thanks for going to the trouble of digging out that information. It seems strange that London General have gone to the trouble to source a new allocation of buses to the 485 but TfL has not initiated any consultation process about changes to the route.

[vjaska]

Jan 23, 2015 23:09:40 GMT routew15 said:

I'm not to sure of the new line of route for the 485 but this is a 12 year old quote from 'Bob Kiley and Tim O'Toole written answers' to the then (2003) London Assembly 

In light of these representations London Buses is investigating whether there are other routeing options that would continue to provide satisfactory access to the bus services for those who wish to use it. This review is also exploring options to meet requests from (1) LB Richmond for a link between Barnes and Putney and (2) local residents petitioning for route 485 to be extended to Roehampton Vale ASDA. London Buses will be in a position to provide an update on this work later this summer.

To read the document fully use think link and scroll down to 195/03 Bus Route 419 & 485 in Barnes
Written Answers 11 June 2003

I personally think the route will be diverted to serve Barnes Station. If the present changes has anything to do with this 2003 review then it will be very disappointing to know it took 12 years for something to happen.

Interesting - I've worked out a route through that might lead to using small buses than the current 10.2m LDP's. Between Mill Hill Road and Station Road, it could run via Rocks Lane (serving Barnes Station), Upper Richmond Road & Vine Road. Vine Road is quite narrow in places and the turn from Vine Road into Station Road looks tight too.

[fg49]

I think the 485's going to run between Roehampton and Barnes via Danebury Avenue and Priory Lane, a route Wandsworth borough have been looking to introduce for a year or so now. 

[snoggle]

Jan 25, 2015 16:23:13 GMT fg49 said:

I think the 485's going to run between Roehampton and Barnes via Danebury Avenue and Priory Lane, a route Wandsworth borough have been looking to introduce for a year or so now. 

Sorry to be thick but can you expand on that a bit? What will be the start and end points for the route and where will it run? Have there been highway adjustments at Danebury Avenue as the last time (a few months back) I looked at Google Streetview the road was blocked to stop rat running? I agree that running via Priory Lane looks like a good idea and a cross Roehampton link could be useful too. The other road that would be usable is Clarence Lane which is clear apart from a 7' width restricton right at Priory Lane. I wonder when the consultation will appear?

[fg49]

Jan 25, 2015 22:37:14 GMT snoggle said:

Jan 25, 2015 16:23:13 GMT fg49 said:

I think the 485's going to run between Roehampton and Barnes via Danebury Avenue and Priory Lane, a route Wandsworth borough have been looking to introduce for a year or so now. 

Sorry to be thick but can you expand on that a bit? What will be the start and end points for the route and where will it run? Have there been highway adjustments at Danebury Avenue as the last time (a few months back) I looked at Google Streetview the road was blocked to stop rat running? I agree that running via Priory Lane looks like a good idea and a cross Roehampton link could be useful too. The other road that would be usable is Clarence Lane which is clear apart from a 7' width restricton right at Priory Lane. I wonder when the consultation will appear?

No, sorry, that was my fault, I should've been more clear. I think the 485's re-routeing is going to have it running between Roehampton and Barnes via Danebury Avenue and Priory Lane, whether it still goes to Hammersmith or Wandsworth, I don't know, but I don't think its end points will be Roehampton and Barnes. No, not that I know of but I'm sure there would be adjustments if Wandsworth really want the route to run through Danebury Avenue. Hopefully in the next month or so, I'll ask around to see if any of my close friends have got a notice through their doors!

[moz]

Jan 23, 2015 23:22:34 GMT snoggle said:

Jan 23, 2015 23:09:40 GMT routew15 said:

I'm not to sure of the new line of route for the 485 but this is a 12 year old quote from 'Bob Kiley and Tim O'Toole written answers' to the then (2003) London Assembly 

To read the document fully use think link and scroll down to 195/03 Bus Route 419 & 485 in Barnes
Written Answers 11 June 2003

I personally think the route will be diverted to serve Barnes Station. If the present changes has anything to do with this 2003 review then it will be very disappointing to know it took 12 years for something to happen.

I'd be surprised if it did. That's because the 485 was fundamentally restructured back in the 2000s more than once. It's linked all sorts of places over the years.

www.londonbuses.co.uk/routes/485.html

Yup, certainly an interesting route as in its' current form it no longer serves any of the roads it did upon introduction. I think the only other London route to have this claim to fame is the 122.

Moz

[riverside]

Thanks for all your responses. The mystery still remains. I'm wondering if some people have asked for a short diversion via Station Road so that the 485 directly connects with Barnes Station. The road is narrow so probably would need shorter buses.
The real question behind this thread is consistency in the TfL consultation process. As others have stated in other threads things seem to be unraveling. Routes in Central London are arbitrarily being cut back. Whether the changes are temporary or permanent people are not sure, however, we do know that the 7 will never return to Russell Square. Snoggle is at present challenging TfL about changes to the W11 and W15 resulting from the end of a diversion. Other members have stated that similar long term diversions have gone out to consultation about rejigging routes as a result of data collected during the implementation of the diversion.
The interesting thing about the 485 changes is that if the news in TLB is to be believed then Go-Ahead London General have already sourced replacement buses for the route without any of the public(including the informed membership of this forum!) knowing anything about it. A short diversion via Station Road would serve virtually a rural environment and maybe because such a change would not affect residents, would lead to a very marginal increase in journey times for through passengers and would not need a PVR increase, then TfL feels there is no need to consult.

[snoggle]

Jan 26, 2015 12:56:07 GMT riverside said:

Thanks for all your responses. The mystery still remains. I'm wondering if some people have asked for a short diversion via Station Road so that the 485 directly connects with Barnes Station. The road is narrow so probably would need shorter buses.
The real question behind this thread is consistency in the TfL consultation process. As others have stated in other threads things seem to be unraveling. Routes in Central London are arbitrarily being cut back. Whether the changes are temporary or permanent people are not sure, however, we do know that the 7 will never return to Russell Square. Snoggle is at present challenging TfL about changes to the W11 and W15 resulting from the end of a diversion. Other members have stated that similar long term diversions have gone out to consultation about rejigging routes as a result of data collected during the implementation of the diversion.
The interesting thing about the 485 changes is that if the news in TLB is to be believed then Go-Ahead London General have already sourced replacement buses for the route without any of the public(including the informed membership of this forum!) knowing anything about it. A short diversion via Station Road would serve virtually a rural environment and maybe because such a change would not affect residents, would lead to a very marginal increase in journey times for through passengers and would not need a PVR increase, then TfL feels there is no need to consult.

Not quite sure I'm "challenging" TfL. I've just asked them a couple of questions related to what they themselves had previously said. I had relied on those statements to be able to put forward a view to TfL about a route I found very useful for my local journeys. I now have to walk - not a huge hardship but not very helpful either. There are also all the people who used the route on the diversion who no longer have the service. I've no illusions about whether my view would have helped sway TfL in any way. However there is a principle here about consultation and about offering passengers (those silly people who pay!) a fair chance to say what they think.