|
Post by riverside on Aug 2, 2015 9:11:11 GMT
The politicians in Hammersmith and Fulham do not appear to take a principled stand with regard to public transport. The completely opposite reactions to the 424 and C1 proposals do not show them in a good light and indeed help to breed cynicism towards local/national representatives.
There is still a need for a service along Blythe Road. There is nothing in the configuration of the roads that would present problems to Enviro 200s. A particular hotbed of opposition to the C1 proposals came from the residents of Dewhurst Road. This is a one way street that the C1 would have had to use to access Shepherds Bush Road on the way to White City.
The really annoying thing about the wholesale cancellation of the proposals was that there existed an alternative that would have given residents in the Addison Ward area a much improved access to the bus system. If the residents of Blythe Road could not be convinced that the passing of buses on the C1 was not really the end of the world, then instead the C1 could have been routed via Sinclair Road, Sinclair Gardens, Richmond Way, Charecroft Way and Rockley Road to reach Shepherds Bush Green.
It is going to be interesting to watch the reactions by local politicians to the 424/485 proposals over the coming months.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 15, 2015 17:24:11 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Route 485
Sept 18, 2015 11:29:48 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2015 11:29:48 GMT
This area has a good history of having toffs who own very large " Chelsea Cruisers" objecting to buses. The 272 routing between Acton Green and Acton Vale springs to mind with idiots laying in the road in front of buses. Didn't the 228 have issues as well amongst the higher classes of Ladbroke Grove ? I believe bus stops outside ones houses dents their rather large equities.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 18, 2015 13:13:38 GMT
This area has a good history of having toffs who own very large " Chelsea Cruisers" objecting to buses. The 272 routing between Acton Green and Acton Vale springs to mind with idiots laying in the road in front of buses. Didn't the 228 have issues as well amongst the higher classes of Ladbroke Grove ? I believe bus stops outside ones houses dents their rather large equities. Wasn't it Holland Park being used by the 228 that caused Sir Malcolm "I'm not really a crook because other MPs said so" Rifkind to get somewhat annoyed? It's the hypocrisy I can't stand. Posh people with loud gobs shout and moan because they can while people who aren't so well off and need to use buses to get around are deprived of decent services closer to their homes. That's what struck me forcibly about the C1 extension issue - whole estates of people having to traipse to the main road in order to get anywhere.
|
|
|
Route 485
Sept 20, 2015 17:46:03 GMT
via mobile
Post by bn12cny on Sept 20, 2015 17:46:03 GMT
Everyone I think you are missing the trick is for the 485, let me start with the 485 new route proposal.
Wandsworth same route to Putney, over Putney Bridge, turn at Bus Station then follow the 424 route to Green Man, then 85 route to Asda, turn at Asda, 265 route to Roehampton Lane, left and then serve Clarence Lane Roehampton, where no bus serve, right into upper Richmond road, left Barnes station, left into mill hill road then same route to Hammersmith. This will give the route a lifeline to the elderly and will serve many useful links, any suggestions?
|
|
|
Route 485
Sept 20, 2015 17:48:06 GMT
via mobile
Post by bn12cny on Sept 20, 2015 17:48:06 GMT
Bus every 20 minutes, with a evening service at 30 minutes and 30 Sunday
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 20, 2015 18:10:30 GMT
Everyone I think you are missing the trick is for the 485, let me start with the 485 new route proposal. Wandsworth same route to Putney, over Putney Bridge, turn at Bus Station then follow the 424 route to Green Man, then 85 route to Asda, turn at Asda, 265 route to Roehampton Lane, left and then serve Clarence Lane Roehampton, where no bus serve, right into upper Richmond road, left Barnes station, left into mill hill road then same route to Hammersmith. This will give the route a lifeline to the elderly and will serve many useful links, any suggestions? Bus every 20 minutes, with a evening service at 30 minutes and 30 Sunday I assume you mean it will serve Clarence Lane and Priory Lane in Roehampton? Well it strikes me that if you've set out what TfL are planning to consult on then on one level it's OK but the service level will be proved inadequate within a few months. The route will also need significant cooperation from Wandsworth Council because highway works will be needed to remove width restrictions and to provide space for accessible bus stops on newly served roads. Unless that's all planned then there may well be delays of months while the highway works are done. Given the "back roads" the amended service has to squash down near Putney Heath that means single door, short Darts which is ridiculously unsuitable for a route that will give much more access to Roehampton and Roehampton University. It'll create links from Hammersmith, Barnes Station and Putney / Putney Bridge stations meaning it's likely to be very well used indeed. Give it a few months and it'll be leaving people behind with only a 20 min headway at peak times. The mystery is why this 485 proposal is causing such a messing around with the back streets routing in Fulham. It should be possible to retain that without any great issue unless I'm being very dense. They could retain the 424 and make it terminate at Putney Garage thus retaining the links in Fulham and access to shops at Putney High Street. I'd expect a half hourly 424 service to be able to get in and out of Putney Garage without too much grief.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Sept 20, 2015 19:17:06 GMT
This area has a good history of having toffs who own very large " Chelsea Cruisers" objecting to buses. The 272 routing between Acton Green and Acton Vale springs to mind with idiots laying in the road in front of buses. Didn't the 228 have issues as well amongst the higher classes of Ladbroke Grove ? I believe bus stops outside ones houses dents their rather large equities. Wasn't it Holland Park being used by the 228 that caused Sir Malcolm "I'm not really a crook because other MPs said so" Rifkind to get somewhat annoyed? It's the hypocrisy I can't stand. Posh people with loud gobs shout and moan because they can while people who aren't so well off and need to use buses to get around are deprived of decent services closer to their homes. That's what struck me forcibly about the C1 extension issue - whole estates of people having to traipse to the main road in order to get anywhere. I well remember the campaign got up along Emlyn Road to stop the introduction of the 272. Loads of houses had posters and stickers saying '272 No Thank You'. Despite their opposition the route was introduced and thrives. Similarly with the 228. Among the notables actively opposing the running of buses along the southern section of Ladbroke Grove was the author Sebastian Faulks. Such people might not want to use buses and that is their choice but what is totally unacceptable is them attempting to deny others legitimate convenient access to public transport. Hopefully TfL will revive plans for a bus route to serve the Blythe Road area at some time in the future. The C1 is well established along Holland Road now, so maybe one of Snoggle's suggested extensions could be explored. Over 40 years ago some local political activists did help to establish new bus links. The Edward Woods Estate has always been isolated by the West London Railway Line from the rest of the borough of Hammersmith and Fulham to which it belongs. In the early 1970s the local Young Liberals used to hire a coach on Saturday mornings to take residents of the estate to the shops in Shepherds Bush. As a result LT eventually diverted the 295 over new roads to Ladbroke Grove to give a regular service to the area. Ironically by doing this the 295 no longer went to East Acton. The route had only been introduced in June 1967 between Hammersmith and East Acton as a result of pressure from the local council and residents of Westway, when on the withdrawal of the 71 north of Brook Green and the subsequent diversion of the 72 via Du Cane Road, Westway lost its long established direct connection to Hammersmith. The residents of Royal Crescent have always been well heeled and have a long history of opposing buses that started in 1966 and continues to this day. In 1966 the full length of Holland Road was made one way. As a result of this buses on routes 49 and 207A heading towards Kensington were rerouted via Holland Park Avenue and Addison Road. However there was a banned right turn from Holland Park Avenue into Addison Road except in the evenings and all day Sunday, as a result of which the 49 and 207A had to use Royal Crescent for the bulk of the week. The 207A always went via Royal Crescent as it did not operate over this section in the evenings or at all on Sundays. Even in those days Royal Crescent residents had political clout because by 1970 Holland Road was returned to two way working except at its southern ending. This was some victory as unlike today when one way schemes are being scrapped, this was still a time where they were seen as the future of traffic management. Having got rid of the 49 and 207A you can imagine their annoyance at the appearance of the 295 especially as it would enable people from the Edward Woods council estate to travel on double deckers on THEIR road. As time has shown the 295 came to stay and in recent years has been joined by the 316. The battles of Royal Crescent have been an interesting sport to watch over the years and it looks like the buses have won!
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Sept 20, 2015 19:22:04 GMT
Everyone I think you are missing the trick is for the 485, let me start with the 485 new route proposal. Wandsworth same route to Putney, over Putney Bridge, turn at Bus Station then follow the 424 route to Green Man, then 85 route to Asda, turn at Asda, 265 route to Roehampton Lane, left and then serve Clarence Lane Roehampton, where no bus serve, right into upper Richmond road, left Barnes station, left into mill hill road then same route to Hammersmith. This will give the route a lifeline to the elderly and will serve many useful links, any suggestions? Is this the actual proposal for the 485 or is this your own suggestion? I thought that we are still waiting to see what TfL actually want to do to the 424 and 485.
|
|
|
Post by westhamgeezer on Sept 22, 2015 11:07:21 GMT
Everyone I think you are missing the trick is for the 485, let me start with the 485 new route proposal. Wandsworth same route to Putney, over Putney Bridge, turn at Bus Station then follow the 424 route to Green Man, then 85 route to Asda, turn at Asda, 265 route to Roehampton Lane, left and then serve Clarence Lane Roehampton, where no bus serve, right into upper Richmond road, left Barnes station, left into mill hill road then same route to Hammersmith. This will give the route a lifeline to the elderly and will serve many useful links, any suggestions? Is this the actual proposal for the 485 or is this your own suggestion? I thought that we are still waiting to see what TfL actually want to do to the 424 and 485. TfL are still considering, I dont expect this to proceed.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 22, 2015 11:44:23 GMT
Is this the actual proposal for the 485 or is this your own suggestion? I thought that we are still waiting to see what TfL actually want to do to the 424 and 485. TfL are still considering, I dont expect this to proceed. Surely there's an easy answer to this? You don't muck around with the 424 in Fulham / Sands End and retain a link to Putney High Street. That kills off all the political and local opposition but may mean little or no financial saving to fund the 485's improvements. If the recent post about the 485 is representative of TfL's intentions with the 485 then there's not much of an issue with the routing apart from the double run to Putney Bridge. It makes sense to do it but the bridge is very busy at times so that could add quite a lot of running time to the route. I've already expressed my concerns about the suggested frequency of the revised 485 but TfL are unlikely to be bolder in the short term.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Nov 13, 2015 15:56:00 GMT
At present there seems to be a flurry of route proposals from TfL. The E9, 436/452 and 110/E8/H28 are all out to official consultation, whilst the enthusiast grapevine has flagged up changes relating to the the 83/483 and new 239. Yet still there seems to be no official consultation about changes to the 424/485. I wonder why TfL is stalling for so long. Are any changes in temporary abeyance or have they been abandoned? As both routes are relatively minor have TfL prioritised consulting on more major changes? I know patience is a virtue but this is a long wait.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Route 485
Nov 13, 2015 16:14:54 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2015 16:14:54 GMT
At present there seems to be a flurry of route proposals from TfL. The E9, 436/452 and 110/E8/H28 are all out to official consultation, whilst the enthusiast grapevine has flagged up changes relating to the the 83/483 and new 239. Yet still there seems to be no official consultation about changes to the 424/485. I wonder why TfL is stalling for so long. Are any changes in temporary abeyance or have they been abandoned? As both routes are relatively minor have TfL prioritised consulting on more major changes? I know patience is a virtue but this is a long wait. Might it now be in some way connected with the 72-239 changes ?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 13, 2015 18:26:06 GMT
At present there seems to be a flurry of route proposals from TfL. The E9, 436/452 and 110/E8/H28 are all out to official consultation, whilst the enthusiast grapevine has flagged up changes relating to the the 83/483 and new 239. Yet still there seems to be no official consultation about changes to the 424/485. I wonder why TfL is stalling for so long. Are any changes in temporary abeyance or have they been abandoned? As both routes are relatively minor have TfL prioritised consulting on more major changes? I know patience is a virtue but this is a long wait. Well I've been waiting to see what happens so I share your frustration but I'm not a user of the services so it's not critical to me. I suspect TfL have underestimated the opposition to the 424 proposals and where it has come from - users, the MP who is a government minister and one of the affected councils. Without sight of the overall plan and what was intended and why, it's hard to know how interlinked the 424 ideas are with those for the 485. If TfL are having to unravel with Sands End elements of the 424 proposals then there may be consequences for the improved 485 plan. There is little point in TfL going to public consultation with reworked ideas if they've not got through the advance stakeholder consultation with local politicians. I'm not holding my breath for the consultation to come forth even though I'm really curious to know what's proposed!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 2, 2016 12:26:23 GMT
People may be bemused that the issue of buses serving Blythe Road has apparently sprung back to life. This is despite nothing being said or proposed by TfL! In the most recent minutes from the full H&F Council meeting is this.
Seems there is still a battle royal going on in the neighbourhood around Blythe Road and having a bus service.
|
|