|
|
Post by sid on Feb 10, 2018 19:15:11 GMT
I don't know about vital but the 250 serves a different function. You could also question whether four routes are needed between Sydenham and Croydon but again they all serve different functions. I suppose we could go back to the 159 going to Thornton Heath Clock Tower and put another route along Brigstock Road (the 64?) but I don't think Green Lane and Parchmore Road passengers would want to lose their direct link to Croydon. Probably best leaving things as they are in this instance. The 250 is vital because in breaking that through link in Thornton Heath, you run a massive risk of heaping further pressure onto the 109 and the 250 sees end to end journeys as well as the 109 so I don’t see the merits in extending the 159 to Thornton Heath especially as there isn’t much room for something so frequent to terminate nor do I see why you’d duplicate the 198 between Thornton Heath & East Croydon. Well no I suggested leaving the 250 as it is but I just wouldn't use the word vital. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2018 19:18:25 GMT
199 and 47 could merge and the bit between Deptford (a2209) and Deptford Bridge could be a re routed 225. 124 and 284 could very easily be combined. so much so that I might suggest it to TfL in all seriousness. The fact that Catford has fifteen routes and other areas like Wembley and Wood Green have less is testament the fact that it is over bussed. the merges of the 199/47 and 124/284 would mean that there are 13 routes which is a bit better in my opnion. I'm not sure the 124 and 284 are easily combined. Which would you leave unserved - Verdant Lane or Torridon Road and the Excalibur Estate? Both are densely populated and generate enough demand to warrant their own service. Sacrifice the 284's routing and you have 8.9m single door buses running out of Lewisham to a substantial freehold area of Ladywell. You'd also need to signficantly boost the frequency of the route to cope with demand in the Catford East area (Sangley Road alone warranted a siphoning of the 160 from the South Circ) and that would mean increasing the traffic conflict problems in the North Downham area. You can't sacrifice the 124's routing because of the hardship it would cause. Some of the area surrounding Torridon Road is already well over a 5 minute walk from a bus stop. Even so, the 124 is a lifeline to the people living there. Ah yes, the Verdant Lane section: i would re route the 181 to carry straight along Verdant Lane and not run into Catford or to Lower Sydenham. to cover, the 171 would follow the N171 from Catford to Hither Green or maybe the 225 extended from Hither Green to Catford Bridge/St Dunstans college (where the 124 ends now). And, the Southend Lane section could be covered by a rerouted 194 to end a Catford Garage. That just leaves a hole between Downham and Lower Sydenham but as a local resident i reckon people would manage without that. And back to the your other point, the 284 could fully follow the 124 route along Torridon road to the estate then back out at Whitefoot lane/Verdant Lane and onward. so basically It would eb the withdrawal of the 124 and the modifcation and extension of the 284. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Feb 10, 2018 19:25:16 GMT
I'm not sure the 124 and 284 are easily combined. Which would you leave unserved - Verdant Lane or Torridon Road and the Excalibur Estate? Both are densely populated and generate enough demand to warrant their own service. Sacrifice the 284's routing and you have 8.9m single door buses running out of Lewisham to a substantial freehold area of Ladywell. You'd also need to signficantly boost the frequency of the route to cope with demand in the Catford East area (Sangley Road alone warranted a siphoning of the 160 from the South Circ) and that would mean increasing the traffic conflict problems in the North Downham area. You can't sacrifice the 124's routing because of the hardship it would cause. Some of the area surrounding Torridon Road is already well over a 5 minute walk from a bus stop. Even so, the 124 is a lifeline to the people living there. Ah yes, the Verdant Lane section: i would re route the 181 to carry straight along Verdant Lane and not run into Catford or to Lower Sydenham. to cover, the 171 would follow the N171 from Catford to Hither Green or maybe the 225 extended from Hither Green to Catford Bridge/St Dunstans college (where the 124 ends now). And, the Southend Lane section could be covered by a rerouted 194 to end a Catford Garage. That just leaves a hole between Downham and Lower Sydenham but as a local resident i reckon people would manage without that. And back to the your other point, the 284 could fully follow the 124 route along Torridon road to the estate then back out at Whitefoot lane/Verdant Lane and onward. so basically It would eb the withdrawal of the 124 and the modifcation and extension of the 284. The low bridge on Southend Lane stops the 194 from running down there. |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Feb 10, 2018 21:13:44 GMT
199 and 47 could merge and the bit between Deptford (a2209) and Deptford Bridge could be a re routed 225. 124 and 284 could very easily be combined. so much so that I might suggest it to TfL in all seriousness. The fact that Catford has fifteen routes and other areas like Wembley and Wood Green have less is testament the fact that it is over bussed. the merges of the 199/47 and 124/284 would mean that there are 13 routes which is a bit better in my opnion. Wood Green has one less route than Catford (14 daytime routes) whilst Wembley (if by Wembley, you mean specifically Wembley Park & Wembley Central has two less routes (13 daytime routes) so hardly overbussed now. Let's not forget that Catford is a busy place especially the corridor between Catford & Lewisham which is why so many routes run along there in the first place - if you combine the 47 & 199, the route that survives would struggle as a result of more strain being placed onto it. As for the 124 & 284 merger, both routes operate at different frequencies and use different sized buses for good reason - as 6HP502C mentioned, you also end up loosing one section as a result which wouldn't be ideal. I wonder what this recent obsession about how many bus routes serve any given area is all about. It's not a subject that's really ever seriously been considered in the past, especially with trying to compare disparate areas e.g. Wembley to Wood Green to Catford, etc etc. The shopping area at Wood Green has an Underground station at each end of the High Road, giving many trains per hour from two different directions. Catford and Catford Bridge stations can hardly be compared! If the bus demand is there it has to be met: only the likes of Val Shawcross think it's acceptable to only have one bus route per stretch of road, with passengers changing at every intersection i.e. the attitude of someone who never uses buses for their daily grind. |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Feb 10, 2018 21:26:11 GMT
Are two Croydon to Brixton routes really vital? Beware the error of comparing origin and destination and not considering intermediate points served. Brixton and Streatham have extremely high levels of bus usage so it is no surprise there are multiple routes and overlaps. Croydon is also a major transport hub and an employment centre. Again no surprise that it is served by several routes across multiple corridors. London's suburbs aren't the equivalent of some provincial little town where one or two core routes with no service down side roads or into different areas will suffice. Absolutely agree, while also pointing out that even the most dedicated rail fanatic couldn't suggest that travelling to Brixton by that mode from Croydon, Norbury, Streatham etc would be possible by anyone not with (a) far too much time on their hands or (b) serious masochistic tendencies. The 109 used to provide a 2 minute peak hour headway from South Croydon to Kennington (and not so much less frequent at other times on weekdays) for a very good reason! |
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Feb 10, 2018 21:53:02 GMT
Are two Croydon to Brixton routes really vital? There can be as many bus routes that share the same termini as can be, this does not matter, it's the routing that counts. In the case of the 109 and 250, despite sharing the same termini they have different routings that serve different purposes, therefore they should remain as they are. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 10, 2018 22:01:41 GMT
Absolutely agree, while also pointing out that even the most dedicated rail fanatic couldn't suggest that travelling to Brixton by that mode from Croydon, Norbury, Streatham etc would be possible by anyone not with (a) far too much time on their hands or (b) serious masochistic tendencies. The 109 used to provide a 2 minute peak hour headway from South Croydon to Kennington (and not so much less frequent at other times on weekdays) for a very good reason! And in a saner world with consistent transport policies there would have been a tube line built between London, Brixton, Streatham and Croydon a long time ago. As it is no such plan exists now and there is no prospect of one within 50 years. Such is the lack of imagination of both politicians and planners. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Feb 10, 2018 22:05:38 GMT
Absolutely agree, while also pointing out that even the most dedicated rail fanatic couldn't suggest that travelling to Brixton by that mode from Croydon, Norbury, Streatham etc would be possible by anyone not with (a) far too much time on their hands or (b) serious masochistic tendencies. The 109 used to provide a 2 minute peak hour headway from South Croydon to Kennington (and not so much less frequent at other times on weekdays) for a very good reason! And in a saner world with consistent transport policies there would have been a tube line built between London, Brixton, Streatham and Croydon a long time ago. As it is no such plan exists now and there is no prospect of one within 50 years. Such is the lack of imagination of both politicians and planners. I know this is off topic, but wasn’t the Victoria line initially planned to go that way? As it is, the Brixton terminal now points the wrong way to head for Streatham. |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Feb 10, 2018 23:57:01 GMT
I know this is off topic, but wasn’t the Victoria line initially planned to go that way? As it is, the Brixton terminal now points the wrong way to head for Streatham. I believe the overrun tunnels end near Herne Hill which could still have made it possible for the line to serve Streatham and Croydon, perhaps by including a tube station at Tulse Hill. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2018 0:07:00 GMT
Wood Green has one less route than Catford (14 daytime routes) whilst Wembley (if by Wembley, you mean specifically Wembley Park & Wembley Central has two less routes (13 daytime routes) so hardly overbussed now. Let's not forget that Catford is a busy place especially the corridor between Catford & Lewisham which is why so many routes run along there in the first place - if you combine the 47 & 199, the route that survives would struggle as a result of more strain being placed onto it. As for the 124 & 284 merger, both routes operate at different frequencies and use different sized buses for good reason - as 6HP502C mentioned, you also end up loosing one section as a result which wouldn't be ideal. I wonder what this recent obsession about how many bus routes serve any given area is all about. It's not a subject that's really ever seriously been considered in the past, especially with trying to compare disparate areas e.g. Wembley to Wood Green to Catford, etc etc. The shopping area at Wood Green has an Underground station at each end of the High Road, giving many trains per hour from two different directions. Catford and Catford Bridge stations can hardly be compared! If the bus demand is there it has to be met: only the likes of Val Shawcross think it's acceptable to only have one bus route per stretch of road, with passengers changing at every intersection i.e. the attitude of someone who never uses buses for their daily grind. True enough to both peoples points. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Feb 11, 2018 1:41:18 GMT
I know this is off topic, but wasn’t the Victoria line initially planned to go that way? As it is, the Brixton terminal now points the wrong way to head for Streatham. I believe the overrun tunnels end near Herne Hill which could still have made it possible for the line to serve Streatham and Croydon, perhaps by including a tube station at Tulse Hill. Indeed they end about half away between Brixton & Herne Hill IIRC - I'd hazard a guess that they follow Railton Road for a little bit meaning it could indeed carry on to Tulse Hill, Streatham & Croydon  |
|
|
|
Post by Arriva London Explorer on Feb 11, 2018 9:00:45 GMT
Right, let's try one for Brixton though I must stress, I do not want these to happen at all: 2 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 10 minutes, Sunday frequency reduced to every 12 minutes whilst evenings remain every 12 minutes 3 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 10 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings remain every 12 minutes. Curtailed permanently to Trafalgar Square (with some actual Trafalgar Square blinds fitted) 35 - Leave as it is 37 - Leave as it is 45 - Leave as it is 59 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 8 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings remain every 12 minutes 109 - Leave as it is 118 - Leave as it is 133 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 10 minutes, Sundays remain every 12 minutes whilst evening frequency is every 12 minutes throughout the entire evening (currently early evenings is every 8 minutes) 159 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 8 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings remain every 12 minutes 196 - Leave as it is 250 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 10 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings remain every 12 minutes 322 - Leave as it is 333 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 12 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings reduced to every 15 minutes 345 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 10 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings remain every 12 minutes 355 - Leave as it is 415 - Withdrawn completely (not something I took lightly, believe me) 432 - Extended to Old Kent Road, Tesco in place of the 415. Monday-Friday frequency increased to every 10 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings increased to every 12 minutes P4 - Leave as it is P5 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 20 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings reduced to every 30 minutes. Sunday hours restricted to 8:00am to 18:00pm but longer dual door buses introduced daily. 690 - Withdrawn without replacement N2 - Weekend frequency reduced to every 30 minutes N3 - Weekend frequency reduced to every 30 minutes 35 Night - Leave as it is 37 Night - Leave as it is N109 - Weekend frequency reduced to every 30 minutes N133 - Frequency reduced Monday-Sunday to every 30 minutes 159 Night - Frequency reduced Monday-Sunday to every 30 minutes 250 Night - Leave as it is 345 Night - Leave as it is I agree with 415 merging into 432 as your reducing cuts and no routes are lost and still provide links |
|
|
|
Post by Arriva London Explorer on Feb 11, 2018 9:05:47 GMT
It can take 30min+ sometimes to just get from the Hospital to the A12 so if you do that to the 296 you'd completely destroy its usability. It's the whole reason the 396 exists in the first place, personally I'd extend the 396 to Seven Kings however TfL's budget is a comedy show at the moment. Extend the EL3* to Newbury Park as there's could be space for a bus stand at Newbury Park shelter and withdrawn 396 complete and 296 should have Enviro 400 or single decker electric bus permanently |
|
|
|
Post by john on Feb 11, 2018 9:11:49 GMT
Extend the EL3* to Newbury Park as there's could be space for a bus stand at Newbury Park shelter and withdrawn 396 complete and 296 should have Enviro 400 or single decker electric bus permanently EL3 idea, not bad but possibly liable to massive problems if there are problems around Barking. How about adding a double run onto the 66? It could be done |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Feb 11, 2018 9:58:29 GMT
Right, let's try one for Brixton though I must stress, I do not want these to happen at all: 2 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 10 minutes, Sunday frequency reduced to every 12 minutes whilst evenings remain every 12 minutes 3 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 10 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings remain every 12 minutes. Curtailed permanently to Trafalgar Square (with some actual Trafalgar Square blinds fitted) 35 - Leave as it is 37 - Leave as it is 45 - Leave as it is 59 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 8 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings remain every 12 minutes 109 - Leave as it is 118 - Leave as it is 133 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 10 minutes, Sundays remain every 12 minutes whilst evening frequency is every 12 minutes throughout the entire evening (currently early evenings is every 8 minutes) 159 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 8 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings remain every 12 minutes 196 - Leave as it is 250 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 10 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings remain every 12 minutes 322 - Leave as it is 333 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 12 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings reduced to every 15 minutes 345 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 10 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings remain every 12 minutes 355 - Leave as it is 415 - Withdrawn completely (not something I took lightly, believe me) 432 - Extended to Old Kent Road, Tesco in place of the 415. Monday-Friday frequency increased to every 10 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings increased to every 12 minutes P4 - Leave as it is P5 - Monday-Friday frequency reduced to every 20 minutes whilst Sundays & evenings reduced to every 30 minutes. Sunday hours restricted to 8:00am to 18:00pm but longer dual door buses introduced daily. 690 - Withdrawn without replacement N2 - Weekend frequency reduced to every 30 minutes N3 - Weekend frequency reduced to every 30 minutes 35 Night - Leave as it is 37 Night - Leave as it is N109 - Weekend frequency reduced to every 30 minutes N133 - Frequency reduced Monday-Sunday to every 30 minutes 159 Night - Frequency reduced Monday-Sunday to every 30 minutes 250 Night - Leave as it is 345 Night - Leave as it is I agree with 415 merging into 432 as your reducing cuts and no routes are lost and still provide links That was the main criticism of the 415's introduction, an extension of the 432 could have achieved the same thing without the unnecessary overlap on the Tulse Hill section. Peak hour short workings between Brixton and Norwood Garage would suffice rather than another all day route. I seem to recall that as part of the same package the 333 was rerouted via Stockwell which caused needles confusion, why couldn't the 333 have been left as it was and the 432 extended to E&C via Stockwell? On the N3 I would suggest withdrawing it north of Brixton on Friday and Saturday nights when the night tube is running with an increased service between Brixton and Bromley. |
|
