|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 18, 2020 22:10:31 GMT
It would be sensible for the 337 and 493 to share the same first stop at Richmond Bus Station given they both go down the Upper Richmond Road but sadly that wouldn't be possible. I know I'm kind of repeating the same message but in my opinion removing the 337 stop at Richmond bus station is hardly a bad thing as to be honest that stop is not that well used anyway. The biggest loss is the 493 not serving Richmond Station as this is a popular stop that's why I think the 493 should use the Pools in the pond stand with 490 cut back to the bus station but with it now using the 337 stop so it can pick passengers up from there. If both routes could use Pools in the Park then this would be the best option. Coming from that direction, I use it and I've seen people use it before on many occasions when I have come back from Richmond. The reason it was created was because it provides a direct connection between the other routes that serve Richmond Bus Station and is more wheelchair friendly than the old one which allowed any route to stop but with the position of the stands, buses generally ended up picking up away from the kerb. |
|
|
|
Post by george on Jun 18, 2020 22:25:09 GMT
I know I'm kind of repeating the same message but in my opinion removing the 337 stop at Richmond bus station is hardly a bad thing as to be honest that stop is not that well used anyway. The biggest loss is the 493 not serving Richmond Station as this is a popular stop that's why I think the 493 should use the Pools in the pond stand with 490 cut back to the bus station but with it now using the 337 stop so it can pick passengers up from there. If both routes could use Pools in the Park then this would be the best option. Coming from that direction, I use it and I've seen people use it before on many occasions when I have come back from Richmond. The reason it was created was because it provides a direct connection between the other routes that serve Richmond Bus Station and is more wheelchair friendly than the old one which allowed any route to stop but with the position of the stands, buses generally ended up picking up away from the kerb. Guessing your talking about the 337 here? not suggesting it's not used just think that removing the 493 link from Richmond train station is worse than removing the 337 stop from the bus station that's just my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by george on Jun 18, 2020 23:05:22 GMT
Here is the report consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/bus-changes-richmond/user_uploads/richmond-bus-consultation-report.pdfThe proposals are planned to be revised as follows • Reroute the 110 between Whitton and Richmond via the originally proposed rerouteing of the 419. Extend it from Richmond to Hammersmith via route 391 Extending the 110 to Hammersmith via route 391 is more suitable than extending it via route 419 as it will operate every 15 mins and have a slightly shorter run time. • Withdraw route 391 • Abandon the extension of the 419 • Cut route 493 back to Richmond Bus Station – as original proposal • Cut route H22 back to Twickenham – as original proposal – but also extend it from Twickenham to West Middlesex Hospital. Extending route H22 from Twickenham to West Middlesex Hospital will retain many of the links that are broken by the withdrawal of route 110. It also creates new links for the centre of Whitton. • Reduce frequencies on route H37 – as original proposal • Introduce two journeys in each peak on route 490 to provide sufficient capacity on Staines Road These changes help to address concerns raised in response to the consultation on the original scheme. They take into consideration changes to the network that took place as a result of the long term closure of Hammersmith Bridge. They also give higher frequencies to West Middlesex Hospital and removes excess capacity in the Richmond and Twickenham areas to release resource that can be deployed more effectively elsewhere. As the 391 contract ends in December, I am assuming the changes will take place on same date according to the report the 190 and 371 provide a link between Twickenham and Richmond. |
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jun 19, 2020 8:10:06 GMT
Coming from that direction, I use it and I've seen people use it before on many occasions when I have come back from Richmond. The reason it was created was because it provides a direct connection between the other routes that serve Richmond Bus Station and is more wheelchair friendly than the old one which allowed any route to stop but with the position of the stands, buses generally ended up picking up away from the kerb. Guessing your talking about the 337 here? not suggesting it's not used just think that removing the 493 link from Richmond train station is worse than removing the 337 stop from the bus station that's just my opinion. I don’t think the 337 is used by many boarders at Richmond Bus Station. The 493 does get used by some commuters from Richmond Station towards Sheen, but more often than not ends up stuck in a traffic jam on The Quadrant. Walking around to Waitrose is often a better option as from that stop there is a more frequent service towards Sheen on routes 33 and 337. I guess hard choices have to be made in the current financial climate and I could live with this one. You can’t have a direct bus route from everywhere to everywhere else. Plus it has the advantage of providing a common stop in George Street for all routes towards Sheen with a high level of combined frequency. |
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jun 19, 2020 8:14:43 GMT
Here is the report consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/bus-changes-richmond/user_uploads/richmond-bus-consultation-report.pdfThe proposals are planned to be revised as follows • Reroute the 110 between Whitton and Richmond via the originally proposed rerouteing of the 419. Extend it from Richmond to Hammersmith via route 391 Extending the 110 to Hammersmith via route 391 is more suitable than extending it via route 419 as it will operate every 15 mins and have a slightly shorter run time. • Withdraw route 391 • Abandon the extension of the 419 • Cut route 493 back to Richmond Bus Station – as original proposal • Cut route H22 back to Twickenham – as original proposal – but also extend it from Twickenham to West Middlesex Hospital. Extending route H22 from Twickenham to West Middlesex Hospital will retain many of the links that are broken by the withdrawal of route 110. It also creates new links for the centre of Whitton. • Reduce frequencies on route H37 – as original proposal • Introduce two journeys in each peak on route 490 to provide sufficient capacity on Staines Road These changes help to address concerns raised in response to the consultation on the original scheme. They take into consideration changes to the network that took place as a result of the long term closure of Hammersmith Bridge. They also give higher frequencies to West Middlesex Hospital and removes excess capacity in the Richmond and Twickenham areas to release resource that can be deployed more effectively elsewhere. As the 391 contract ends in December, I am assuming the changes will take place on same date according to the report the 190 and 371 provide a link between Twickenham and Richmond. The proposals have changed so much they should be subject to a new consultation. I very much doubt that the proposals are in response to any consultation feedback received, rather for operational convenience. I still don’t understand where the H22 being extended to West Middlesex Hospital comes from, it will be carrying a lot of fresh air. A better proposal would have been to run the extension via Whitton Road and the Ivybridge Estate to give more links to the Tesco store. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2020 8:46:19 GMT
according to the report the 190 and 371 provide a link between Twickenham and Richmond. The proposals have changed so much they should be subject to a new consultation. I very much doubt that the proposals are in response to any consultation feedback received, rather for operational convenience. I still don’t understand where the H22 being extended to West Middlesex Hospital comes from, it will be carrying a lot of fresh air. A better proposal would have been to run the extension via Whitton Road and the Ivybridge Estate to give more links to the Tesco store. I didn’t agree with the loss of the H22 between Twickenham and Richmond. However, it will now serve Twickenham Station directly and Whitton residents for Richmond can use the 110. Staines Road will be a problem for the 490. A sensible redeployment of any spare Abellio DDs now identified ! The 110 every 15 mins is welcome although that will be a very hard route to run as low frequency. It will need larger recovery time to enable a good result on leaving on time stats. Historically, the new 110 serves in part, some of the former 27 road beyond Richmond into Hounslow. First time a route will cross Kew and Richmond Bridge since the AV garage jnys on the 27. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Jun 19, 2020 9:04:05 GMT
according to the report the 190 and 371 provide a link between Twickenham and Richmond. The proposals have changed so much they should be subject to a new consultation. I very much doubt that the proposals are in response to any consultation feedback received, rather for operational convenience. I still don’t understand where the H22 being extended to West Middlesex Hospital comes from, it will be carrying a lot of fresh air. A better proposal would have been to run the extension via Whitton Road and the Ivybridge Estate to give more links to the Tesco store. Jesus, it's taken two years to produce these results, if they can't be happy they are doing the best thing available after all this time, what is the point of having a consultation team/process? |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jun 19, 2020 9:35:37 GMT
according to the report the 190 and 371 provide a link between Twickenham and Richmond. The proposals have changed so much they should be subject to a new consultation. I very much doubt that the proposals are in response to any consultation feedback received, rather for operational convenience. I still don’t understand where the H22 being extended to West Middlesex Hospital comes from, it will be carrying a lot of fresh air. A better proposal would have been to run the extension via Whitton Road and the Ivybridge Estate to give more links to the Tesco store. The link to the hospital seems to have been due to consultation responses, although the reason to duplicate 267 isn't that clear to me As more local Tesco stores open, the argument for running buses to a bigger branch becomes weak, especially as now an Asda at Ivybridge. There is also a new supermarket at Fulwell (where Wickes formerly Focus) used to be. These days not many gaps in supermarket network that justify running a bus to it. |
|
|
|
Post by george on Jun 19, 2020 9:58:52 GMT
The proposals have changed so much they should be subject to a new consultation. I very much doubt that the proposals are in response to any consultation feedback received, rather for operational convenience. I still don’t understand where the H22 being extended to West Middlesex Hospital comes from, it will be carrying a lot of fresh air. A better proposal would have been to run the extension via Whitton Road and the Ivybridge Estate to give more links to the Tesco store. I didn’t agree with the loss of the H22 between Twickenham and Richmond. However, it will now serve Twickenham Station directly and Whitton residents for Richmond can use the 110. Staines Road will be a problem for the 490. A sensible redeployment of any spare Abellio DDs now identified ! The 110 every 15 mins is welcome although that will be a very hard route to run as low frequency. It will need larger recovery time to enable a good result on leaving on time stats. Historically, the new 110 serves in part, some of the former 27 road beyond Richmond into Hounslow. First time a route will cross Kew and Richmond Bridge since the AV garage jnys on the 27. Richmond Bridge will know have 4 routes that cross the river Thames twice. N33,N22,R68,110. |
|
|
|
Post by george on Jun 19, 2020 10:02:08 GMT
Guessing your talking about the 337 here? not suggesting it's not used just think that removing the 493 link from Richmond train station is worse than removing the 337 stop from the bus station that's just my opinion. I don’t think the 337 is used by many boarders at Richmond Bus Station. The 493 does get used by some commuters from Richmond Station towards Sheen, but more often than not ends up stuck in a traffic jam on The Quadrant. Walking around to Waitrose is often a better option as from that stop there is a more frequent service towards Sheen on routes 33 and 337. I guess hard choices have to be made in the current financial climate and I could live with this one. You can’t have a direct bus route from everywhere to everywhere else. Plus it has the advantage of providing a common stop in George Street for all routes towards Sheen with a high level of combined frequency. I fully appreciate that there can't be a direct link everywhere to everywhere, at the end of the day it's not the worst thing in the world and it should hopefully improve the reliability which can only be a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jun 19, 2020 10:17:39 GMT
Merging the 110 and the 391 is a better idea than merging with the 419. Nice to have a Hammersmith - Hounslow Town Centre link in the day time by bus. Opportunity too to double-deck the route and increase frequency slightly to 5bph as it'll provide some unique and useful links. I disagree with H37 proposal though especially as it has been downgraded to smaller buses - the 110 isn't as direct. If the 110 is DD and more frequent, then I might be on the fence. If the H22 is being cut does the 493 really need to be cut so it doesn't serve the station? Any space at Pools on the Park which is closer? I might be wrong, especially as there isn’t a map of the updated changes, but doesn’t the revised 110 run via the low bridge in St Margarets which would make it unsuitable for deckers? All in all the changes aren’t a surprise and IMHO are quite reasonable in light of the Hammersmith Bridge fiasco and TfLs financial scenario. The H22 extension is good for local residents in the borough of Hounslow, but I was hoping that stand space would be available for a short extension of the 195. Ealing borough patients have been waiting too long for a direct link and the E8 extension via the hospital never materialised. I would have thought consideration would have been given to decking the 490 especially as we will probably still need to socially distance on buses at that time, not to mention the loss of capacity at the Richmond end and usual demands on the current route. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2020 10:29:57 GMT
Merging the 110 and the 391 is a better idea than merging with the 419. Nice to have a Hammersmith - Hounslow Town Centre link in the day time by bus. Opportunity too to double-deck the route and increase frequency slightly to 5bph as it'll provide some unique and useful links. I disagree with H37 proposal though especially as it has been downgraded to smaller buses - the 110 isn't as direct. If the 110 is DD and more frequent, then I might be on the fence. If the H22 is being cut does the 493 really need to be cut so it doesn't serve the station? Any space at Pools on the Park which is closer? I might be wrong, especially as there isn’t a map of the updated changes, but doesn’t the revised 110 run via the low bridge in St Margarets which would make it unsuitable for deckers? All in all the changes aren’t a surprise and IMHO are quite reasonable in light of the Hammersmith Bridge fiasco and TfLs financial scenario. The H22 extension is good for local residents in the borough of Hounslow, but I was hoping that stand space would be available for a short extension of the 195. Ealing borough patients have been waiting too long for a direct link and the E8 extension via the hospital never materialised. I would have thought consideration would have been given to decking the 490 especially as we will probably still need to socially distance on buses at that time, not to mention the loss of capacity at the Richmond end and usual demands on the current route. Revised 110 takes it via Whitton High Street, Warren Road, past RFU Twickenham, Whitton Road, A316 to St Margarets then via H37 to Richmond , so no low bridge. Quite a long route. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 19, 2020 11:24:24 GMT
Merging the 110 and the 391 is a better idea than merging with the 419. Nice to have a Hammersmith - Hounslow Town Centre link in the day time by bus. Opportunity too to double-deck the route and increase frequency slightly to 5bph as it'll provide some unique and useful links. I disagree with H37 proposal though especially as it has been downgraded to smaller buses - the 110 isn't as direct. If the 110 is DD and more frequent, then I might be on the fence. If the H22 is being cut does the 493 really need to be cut so it doesn't serve the station? Any space at Pools on the Park which is closer? I might be wrong, especially as there isn’t a map of the updated changes, but doesn’t the revised 110 run via the low bridge in St Margarets which would make it unsuitable for deckers? All in all the changes aren’t a surprise and IMHO are quite reasonable in light of the Hammersmith Bridge fiasco and TfLs financial scenario. The H22 extension is good for local residents in the borough of Hounslow, but I was hoping that stand space would be available for a short extension of the 195. Ealing borough patients have been waiting too long for a direct link and the E8 extension via the hospital never materialised. I would have thought consideration would have been given to decking the 490 especially as we will probably still need to socially distance on buses at that time, not to mention the loss of capacity at the Richmond end and usual demands on the current route. Not sure I’d call the changes reasonable - a longer & unreliable 110, unnecessary cut to the busy H37, 493 no longer serving Richmond Station - I accept that finances aren’t good but if we carry ignoring public transport & passengers concerns which are the last to be thought about, people will not bother using it and the poor, young & vulnerable will be left behind as per usual. |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jun 19, 2020 11:41:02 GMT
Merging the 110 and the 391 is a better idea than merging with the 419. Nice to have a Hammersmith - Hounslow Town Centre link in the day time by bus. Opportunity too to double-deck the route and increase frequency slightly to 5bph as it'll provide some unique and useful links. I disagree with H37 proposal though especially as it has been downgraded to smaller buses - the 110 isn't as direct. If the 110 is DD and more frequent, then I might be on the fence. If the H22 is being cut does the 493 really need to be cut so it doesn't serve the station? Any space at Pools on the Park which is closer? The H22 extension is good for local residents in the borough of Hounslow, but I was hoping that stand space would be available for a short extension of the 195. Ealing borough patients have been waiting too long for a direct link and the E8 extension via the hospital never materialised. I would have thought consideration would have been given to decking the 490 especially as we will probably still need to socially distance on buses at that time, not to mention the loss of capacity at the Richmond end and usual demands on the current route. Its such a shame we've never had that bus link to West Middlesex Hospital as it would be so useful for those of us in the borough who get referrals there as I have had in the past. Having to change to the 267 with its poor frequency is a pain and even though I like the E8 extension I do think it would be better off terminating at West Mids than Hounslow as that would provide a unique link whilst London Road has the 235 and 237 - which can have frequency increases if needed to cover the loss of the E8. |
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jun 19, 2020 12:35:00 GMT
I might be wrong, especially as there isn’t a map of the updated changes, but doesn’t the revised 110 run via the low bridge in St Margarets which would make it unsuitable for deckers? All in all the changes aren’t a surprise and IMHO are quite reasonable in light of the Hammersmith Bridge fiasco and TfLs financial scenario. The H22 extension is good for local residents in the borough of Hounslow, but I was hoping that stand space would be available for a short extension of the 195. Ealing borough patients have been waiting too long for a direct link and the E8 extension via the hospital never materialised. I would have thought consideration would have been given to decking the 490 especially as we will probably still need to socially distance on buses at that time, not to mention the loss of capacity at the Richmond end and usual demands on the current route. Revised 110 takes it via Whitton High Street, Warren Road, past RFU Twickenham, Whitton Road, A316 to St Margarets then via H37 to Richmond , so no low bridge. Quite a long route. Thanks! I was getting Isleworth Station confused with St Margarets 🤦♂️ |
|
