|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 14, 2017 11:46:44 GMT
Interesting comments about Hillingdon Hospital contained, with the aspiration to provide direct links to Southall and Ealing hospital. Or just extend the U7 along the Uxbridge Road to Ealing Hospital, which was my first thought. Extending the U7 at its present frequencies would be the cheapest option in terms of extra resource. However it would sit rather uncomfortably alongside the withdrawal of the 427 east of Southall. You either do or do not need the capacity and the link. To pick up on what others have said this hospital link won't be consulted on now because there isn't the money for it. I suspect TfL really do not want to be doing this given the Hopper ticket and two links (U2 and U7) off the Uxbridge Road. |
|
|
|
Post by TA1 on Jul 14, 2017 12:03:47 GMT
I wonder how they will connect North Middlesex Hospital to Winchmore Hill and Enfield 🤔🤔 New Route or re-route an existing one? Subject to stand space you could extend the W6 on from Edmonton Green or more bizarrely send it in a loop off Silver Street and back to line of route to do the Winchmore Hill link. Neither would be especially cheap tho. Linking Enfield is more difficult given the 349 doesn't reach Enfield Town to give a connection with the 491. It would be too cumbersome to reroute the 231 via the hospital. Unfortunately the W8 doesn't really cover Winchmore Hill very well otherwise it could be diverted to N Midx Hospital and the W6 extended to Picketts Lock - swap over of end of routes. IIRC there was some sort of linking route proposed by Enfield Council in their mad caps schemes from a few years ago. A half hourly midibus route with limited hours (no early mornings or late evenings) might do the trick but it would still be quite a financial burden as new routes don't come cheap. You could extend the W10 over the W9 to Winchmore Hill Station Road, the 329 and then down the W6 to the Cambridge Roundabout and then whichever way is best to reach the hospital. You run the Crews Hill journeys as projections off the end of the route (contrary to TfL preference I know). I can't see that extending the 318 northwards would work as it already struggles on its existing route. When talking about extending a route from Winchmore Hill, I would extend the 125 from its current stand along Green Lanes, left along Hedge Lane [1], ahead Great Cambridge Roundabout, Great Cambridge Road, Left Wilbury Way, left Bull Lane. Stand on Bull Lane if no additional stand space can be found on the hospital grounds itself; upon returning towards North Finchley,ahead Bull Lane, Left slip road of A406 Stirling Way, ahead Great Cambridge Roundabout, circumnavigate Hedge Lane, Reverse LOR. [1] provides the W6 additional capacity along Hedge Lane, if the 125 was extended I would also add fixed bus stops along Hedge Lane and remove H&R. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 14, 2017 12:59:02 GMT
When talking about extending a route from Winchmore Hill, I would extend the 125 from its current stand along Green Lanes, left along Hedge Lane [1], ahead Great Cambridge Roundabout, Great Cambridge Road, Left Wilbury Way, left Bull Lane. Stand on Bull Lane if no additional stand space can be found on the hospital grounds itself; upon returning towards North Finchley,ahead Bull Lane, Left slip road of A406 Stirling Way, ahead Great Cambridge Roundabout, circumnavigate Hedge Lane, Reverse LOR. [1] provides the W6 additional capacity along Hedge Lane, if the 125 was extended I would also add fixed bus stops along Hedge Lane and remove H&R. I avoided touching the 125 because of the planned extension from Finchley to Colindale. I suspect a double extension would cause reliability issues given the queues at peak times to get from Hedge Lane onto the Cambridge roundabout. If the western extension wasn't planned then your proposal certainly has merit. |
|
|
|
Post by bottomless on Jul 19, 2017 19:58:49 GMT
Why not extend route 481 to Kingston Hospital as this would provide a link from Hampton Wick and Teddington as well as linking West Middlesex Hospital, and would free up stand space at Cromwell Road for the K2?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2017 8:10:34 GMT
Well this is an interesting find. This Mayoral Press release is about the review of bus service access to hospitals. www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/bold-vision-to-boost-bus-services-to-hospitalsThe interesting thing is that it actually commits TfL to extending a number of services including the 5 to Queens Hospital, the 470 to Epsom Hospital, 96 to Darent Valley Hospital in the next year. Other proposals are also being pursued. Have to say I'm somewhat surprised. The 470 serves quite a high density area north of Sutton . Having taken a trip on it recently , it morphs into a packed bus from Sutton after having collected quite a few end up end passengers at peak times, probably taking advantage of a much lower fare to work places around Epsom which probably include the hospital. Should have a Sunday service and a frequency increase. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 16, 2017 9:08:47 GMT
Well this is an interesting find. This Mayoral Press release is about the review of bus service access to hospitals. www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/bold-vision-to-boost-bus-services-to-hospitalsThe interesting thing is that it actually commits TfL to extending a number of services including the 5 to Queens Hospital, the 470 to Epsom Hospital, 96 to Darent Valley Hospital in the next year. Other proposals are also being pursued. Have to say I'm somewhat surprised. The 470 serves quite a high density area north of Sutton . Having taken a trip on it recently , it morphs into a packed bus from Sutton after having collected quite a few end up end passengers at peak times, probably taking advantage of a much lower fare to work places around Epsom which probably include the hospital. Should have a Sunday service and a frequency increase. There was a previous suggestion on here to withdraw the 151 from Worcester Park and reroute 2 or 3bph from Cheam to Epsom to increase capacity, also makes for a more direct route to Sutton. The 470 could either be curtailed at Cheam or rerouted to Worcester Park. Whilst on the subject of the 470 I'd suggest withdrawing the Morden to Colliers Wood section, extending the 163 to Hackbridge Reynolds Close and rerouting the 80 to Tooting Broadway if The Mitre stand is still available. Improves links to St George's, staying on the hospital theme. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 16, 2017 9:21:15 GMT
The 470 serves quite a high density area north of Sutton . Having taken a trip on it recently , it morphs into a packed bus from Sutton after having collected quite a few end up end passengers at peak times, probably taking advantage of a much lower fare to work places around Epsom which probably include the hospital. Should have a Sunday service and a frequency increase. I imagine TfL are not overly enamoured at having to improve the 470. I've not used it but your report isn't the first I've read about it loading heavily at times. looking at the magic spreadsheet shows the demand to be very close to the capacity which would be a reasonable pointer to a number of daytime / peak trips being really overloaded given there's no early morning service nor a late evening one nor a Sunday service. It's one of those routes where TfL has to decide whether to struggle on as now or make a step change in provision. It seems a little bit similar to what happened with the W19 and look what happened there although Sutton doesn't seem quite as heavy a bus use area as parts of East London. I suspect TfL won't be able to get any funding from SCC for the hospital extension so they'll have to carry the cost themselves which they won't like given how many cross boundary services are being cut. Getting the 470 extended has been a campaign issue for Tony Arbour, AM for a long long while but Boris would never commit to doing it. Mr Arbour also wants another hospital in Surrey to have a TfL bus link - {checks} ah yes St Peters at Chertsey. He's been banging on about that for nearly 15 years. EDIT - I see the 470 starts a new contract in November. Probably when the extension will start - if TfL have found the money. I assume they had the extension as a defined contract option for the bidders to price. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Aug 16, 2017 9:37:48 GMT
Mr Arbour also wants another hospital in Surrey to have a TfL bus link - {checks} ah yes St Peters at Chertsey. He's been banging on about that for nearly 15 years. He'll be lucky : Epsom has a number of TfL area people referred to it, St. Peter's tends to be Surrey exclusive. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 16, 2017 11:33:46 GMT
The 470 serves quite a high density area north of Sutton . Having taken a trip on it recently , it morphs into a packed bus from Sutton after having collected quite a few end up end passengers at peak times, probably taking advantage of a much lower fare to work places around Epsom which probably include the hospital. Should have a Sunday service and a frequency increase. There was a previous suggestion on here to withdraw the 151 from Worcester Park and reroute 2 or 3bph from Cheam to Epsom to increase capacity, also makes for a more direct route to Sutton. The 470 could either be curtailed at Cheam or rerouted to Worcester Park. Whilst on the subject of the 470 I'd suggest withdrawing the Morden to Colliers Wood section, extending the 163 to Hackbridge Reynolds Close and rerouting the 80 to Tooting Broadway if The Mitre stand is still available. Improves links to St George's, staying on the hospital theme. Or better still, just leave the 151 & 470 as they are - the 470 is busy from Morden to Epsom so would require a frequency increase rather than an alternating service with little benefits. As for improving St. George's Hospital links, none of the above does this. The hospital is quite far back from the main road so your 80 idea above, which ironically I agree with (the 80 would have to go double decker otherwise forget it), would need to run via the hospital like the 155, 264 & 280 (I'm ignoring the 493 & G1 on purpose). The issue you then run into is if you extend the 80 there, people will then want the 131 diverted in there and then the 333 extended there so it's a difficult decision really. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 16, 2017 11:55:50 GMT
There was a previous suggestion on here to withdraw the 151 from Worcester Park and reroute 2 or 3bph from Cheam to Epsom to increase capacity, also makes for a more direct route to Sutton. The 470 could either be curtailed at Cheam or rerouted to Worcester Park. Whilst on the subject of the 470 I'd suggest withdrawing the Morden to Colliers Wood section, extending the 163 to Hackbridge Reynolds Close and rerouting the 80 to Tooting Broadway if The Mitre stand is still available. Improves links to St George's, staying on the hospital theme. Or better still, just leave the 151 & 470 as they are - the 470 is busy from Morden to Epsom so would require a frequency increase rather than an alternating service with little benefits. As for improving St. George's Hospital links, none of the above does this. The hospital is quite far back from the main road so your 80 idea above, which ironically I agree with (the 80 would have to go double decker otherwise forget it), would need to run via the hospital like the 155, 264 & 280 (I'm ignoring the 493 & G1 on purpose). The issue you then run into is if you extend the 80 there, people will then want the 131 diverted in there and then the 333 extended there so it's a difficult decision really. Just leave the 151 carrying fresh air to and from Worcester Park you mean? The obvious benefit of the 151 to Epsom is a double deck service rather than a single decker and a more direct route between Epsom and Sutton.
You acknowledge the 80 extension would be well used by saying double deckers would be needed (and I agree there) but then seem to object to the idea? The 80 would go close to St Georges Hospital (it doesn't have to go through it) and there would other benefits other than the hospital link.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 16, 2017 12:04:53 GMT
There was a previous suggestion on here to withdraw the 151 from Worcester Park and reroute 2 or 3bph from Cheam to Epsom to increase capacity, also makes for a more direct route to Sutton. The 470 could either be curtailed at Cheam or rerouted to Worcester Park. Whilst on the subject of the 470 I'd suggest withdrawing the Morden to Colliers Wood section, extending the 163 to Hackbridge Reynolds Close and rerouting the 80 to Tooting Broadway if The Mitre stand is still available. Improves links to St George's, staying on the hospital theme. Or better still, just leave the 151 & 470 as they are - the 470 is busy from Morden to Epsom so would require a frequency increase rather than an alternating service with little benefits. As for improving St. George's Hospital links, none of the above does this. The hospital is quite far back from the main road so your 80 idea above, which ironically I agree with (the 80 would have to go double decker otherwise forget it), would need to run via the hospital like the 155, 264 & 280 (I'm ignoring the 493 & G1 on purpose). The issue you then run into is if you extend the 80 there, people will then want the 131 diverted in there and then the 333 extended there so it's a difficult decision really. I'd imagine the issue is that there is no stand space whatsoever left. There are already three high frequency double decker routes. Adding a fourth would be impossible. There are already moans from locals about the noise and fumes from the buses IIRC. Ironically I could see a tiny bit of merit in running the 470 on to St George's as its low frequency might enable stand space to be found plus it would link a number of places that don't have a bus to that part of Tooting. Furthermore, unless you walk from Tooting High St, there are no buses from the south of Tooting that go into the hospital. A change at the Broadway is required. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 16, 2017 13:11:05 GMT
Or better still, just leave the 151 & 470 as they are - the 470 is busy from Morden to Epsom so would require a frequency increase rather than an alternating service with little benefits. As for improving St. George's Hospital links, none of the above does this. The hospital is quite far back from the main road so your 80 idea above, which ironically I agree with (the 80 would have to go double decker otherwise forget it), would need to run via the hospital like the 155, 264 & 280 (I'm ignoring the 493 & G1 on purpose). The issue you then run into is if you extend the 80 there, people will then want the 131 diverted in there and then the 333 extended there so it's a difficult decision really. Just leave the 151 carrying fresh air to and from Worcester Park you mean? The obvious benefit of the 151 to Epsom is a double deck service rather than a single decker and a more direct route between Epsom and Sutton.
You acknowledge the 80 extension would be well used by saying double deckers would be needed (and I agree there) but then seem to object to the idea? The 80 would go close to St Georges Hospital (it doesn't have to go through it) and there would other benefits other than the hospital link.
Your original post wasn't clear as to what's happening with the 151 & 470 so thanks for clearing that up. I see what the benefits are but I think double deckers is a bit much - the 470 Morden to Epsom is busy but it's not so busy to require a decker route. I get the whole thing about the 151 but I've not seen it carrying fresh air myself (maybe I'm lucky) and I'd only remove it if the X26 ever increased to every 20 minutes myself. As for the part about the 80, clearly you never read my post properly which isn't the first time either - I said I like your 80 idea but it would need to run via the hospital not via the main road. It's a fair old walk for those who are elderly or infirm which generally make up a lot of people visiting a hospital. I also never said it would go through it hence me not mentioning the 493 or G1 - it would run similar to the 155, 264 & 280 but in both directions. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 16, 2017 13:17:07 GMT
Or better still, just leave the 151 & 470 as they are - the 470 is busy from Morden to Epsom so would require a frequency increase rather than an alternating service with little benefits. As for improving St. George's Hospital links, none of the above does this. The hospital is quite far back from the main road so your 80 idea above, which ironically I agree with (the 80 would have to go double decker otherwise forget it), would need to run via the hospital like the 155, 264 & 280 (I'm ignoring the 493 & G1 on purpose). The issue you then run into is if you extend the 80 there, people will then want the 131 diverted in there and then the 333 extended there so it's a difficult decision really. I'd imagine the issue is that there is no stand space whatsoever left. There are already three high frequency double decker routes. Adding a fourth would be impossible. There are already moans from locals about the noise and fumes from the buses IIRC. Ironically I could see a tiny bit of merit in running the 470 on to St George's as its low frequency might enable stand space to be found plus it would link a number of places that don't have a bus to that part of Tooting. Furthermore, unless you walk from Tooting High St, there are no buses from the south of Tooting that go into the hospital. A change at the Broadway is required. One other option I thought was swap the 264 & 333 terminus so that the 333 terminates at the hospital and the 264 terminates at the Broadway - the 280 already provides a hospital link from Mitcham and the 333 would bring other parts of Tooting with a direct link so the hospital links would be more equally shared out (the 57 goes near but doesn't serve the hospital directly). |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 16, 2017 13:18:56 GMT
Just leave the 151 carrying fresh air to and from Worcester Park you mean? The obvious benefit of the 151 to Epsom is a double deck service rather than a single decker and a more direct route between Epsom and Sutton.
You acknowledge the 80 extension would be well used by saying double deckers would be needed (and I agree there) but then seem to object to the idea? The 80 would go close to St Georges Hospital (it doesn't have to go through it) and there would other benefits other than the hospital link.
Your original post wasn't clear as to what's happening with the 151 & 470 so thanks for clearing that up. I see what the benefits are but I think double deckers is a bit much - the 470 Morden to Epsom is busy but it's not so busy to require a decker route. I get the whole thing about the 151 but I've not seen it carrying fresh air myself (maybe I'm lucky) and I'd only remove it if the X26 ever increased to every 20 minutes myself. As for the part about the 80, clearly you never read my post properly which isn't the first time either - I said I like your 80 idea but it would need to run via the hospital not via the main road. It's a fair old walk for those who are elderly or infirm which generally make up a lot of people visiting a hospital. I also never said it would go through it hence me not mentioning the 493 or G1 - it would run similar to the 155, 264 & 280 but in both directions. The 151/470 idea was actually somebody elses idea so I won't take any credit for that, I just happened to think it was a very good one. As for the 80 to Tooting Broadway, I just happened to think the Morden/Colliers Wood link deserves a bit more than a half hourly 470 even if it does shadow the Northern Line. I don't think it would be practical for the 80 to go via the hospital but better going near it than not at all. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 16, 2017 13:24:03 GMT
Your original post wasn't clear as to what's happening with the 151 & 470 so thanks for clearing that up. I see what the benefits are but I think double deckers is a bit much - the 470 Morden to Epsom is busy but it's not so busy to require a decker route. I get the whole thing about the 151 but I've not seen it carrying fresh air myself (maybe I'm lucky) and I'd only remove it if the X26 ever increased to every 20 minutes myself. As for the part about the 80, clearly you never read my post properly which isn't the first time either - I said I like your 80 idea but it would need to run via the hospital not via the main road. It's a fair old walk for those who are elderly or infirm which generally make up a lot of people visiting a hospital. I also never said it would go through it hence me not mentioning the 493 or G1 - it would run similar to the 155, 264 & 280 but in both directions. The 151/470 idea was actually somebody elses idea so I won't take any credit for that, I just happened to think it was a very good one. As for the 80 to Tooting Broadway, I just happened to think the Morden/Colliers Wood link deserves a bit more than a half hourly 470 even if it does shadow the Northern Line. I don't think it would be practical for the 80 to go via the hospital but better going near it than not at all. I don't understand why it wouldn't be practical to directly serve the hospital? |
|
