|
Post by vjaska on Oct 29, 2019 14:15:17 GMT
Either if it takes on the W10 contract or if a new award is made to Go Ahead NP then the SEs from the 100 could be an option for it. The SE’s from the 100 are going to Plymouth.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 29, 2019 16:36:28 GMT
That's a shame. Will probably be diesel like with the K1.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2020 12:17:46 GMT
Results Updated 23 Apr 2020 We recently consulted on proposals for a new bus route between Crews Hill and North Middlesex Hospital.
We have now published our consultation report, which summarises how we sought views and ideas from the areas affected. The report includes our responses to the most common issues we received during the consultation.
We received 513 responses. The majority of respondents felt the bus would improve their journeys.
There was a range of opinions over the new streets which the bus would use. We agree that there would need to be modifications made to the roads at several locations.
Following our analysis and consideration of all the consultation responses, we have decided to proceed with our proposals. We will aim to introduce new route 456 in autumn 2020, subject to the road changes above.
Our consultation report can be found below.
Route 456 consultation report (PDF 1.43MB)
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 23, 2020 12:27:29 GMT
That's good. Will it continue the current W10 contract and use some spare WS off the 192 or will be tendered quickly.
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Apr 23, 2020 12:29:47 GMT
That's good. Will it continue the current W10 contract and use some spare WS off the 192 or will be tendered quickly. It will be tendered in tranche 702
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Apr 27, 2020 19:41:41 GMT
As per my own response to this consultation:
- It is a pity about the replacement of the hail-and-ride sections towards Crews Hill with fixed stops, but TfL seems to be firmly against hail-and-ride these days.
- I'm pleased that the 'long-term ambition' is to serve Crews Hill station again, to provide this important link to the station and the garden centres, and I hope this is not left languishing. Also, if they position bus stops in the Golf Ride loop wisely and the bus serves this loop both towards Crews Hill station and towards North Middlesex Hospital, this will mean passengers at different parts of the loop will be able to board and alight at the stop most convenient to them, which will reduce walking times vs Golf Ride itself being the terminus.
- However, I think it is a missed opportunity not either to re-extend the route to Cuffley, or via Cattlegate Road, East Lodge Lane and The Ridgeway to terminate at Chase Farm Hospital (also giving an inter-hospital link).
- I can't see anything in the report about whether the existing hail-and-ride arrangements (I believe this section is hail-and-ride) along Bincote Road / World's End Lane (already served by the 377) will be maintained, or whether this section will be converted to fixed stops once the 456 also serves this section. But I imagine that the precise workings of this and the precise locations of fixed bus stops along the new 456 route have yet to be determined.
- It seems all the more bizarre and inconsistent that existing and new residential roads in the borough of Enfield are getting an upgraded/new bus service, yet in the same breath TfL plan to leave residential roads in Barnet with no bus service at all, in some cases meaning a walk of up to 800m (384 route consultation results).
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on May 7, 2020 17:44:35 GMT
A rarity in that a consultation with a lot of good in it but there are a few concerns: Lack of extension to Crews Hill Station which is literally by bus, an extra 1-2 minutes more but a slightly awkward walk where crossing a busy road is required due to the pavement abruptly ending on one side. A stand could be placed beyond the railway bridge with it turning around at the junction with East Lodge Lane. Crews Hill as well as the stretch of road up to that junction is surprisingly part of Enfield The lack of a reason for why the W10 has to be renumbered - what is beneficial about spending money to change all the tiles (timetables & maps have to be altered) on affected bus stops? Why is this as well as the Coulsdon consultation quoting 400 metres in terms of the distance people are from the bus network when an entirely new number was used for the 384 consultation? Not a local but I'd highly doubt there'd be demand for the station - it is one of London's least used and is within walking distance. The Garden Centre may have demand but again, it's within walking distance. I doubt you can turn around on East Lodge Lane - seen it on Google maps and it's one of those triangle junctions which is incredibly hard to turn around on even with short SDs. There is also no residences up to East Lodge Lane and let alone around Crews Hill Stn I do agree - the W10 shouldn't be renumbered however we can only see if this is going to stay post COVID as a decision like this would be smarter to keep the number than need to waste money on new tiles as you say
|
|
|
Post by uakari on May 7, 2020 18:04:22 GMT
A rarity in that a consultation with a lot of good in it but there are a few concerns: Lack of extension to Crews Hill Station which is literally by bus, an extra 1-2 minutes more but a slightly awkward walk where crossing a busy road is required due to the pavement abruptly ending on one side. A stand could be placed beyond the railway bridge with it turning around at the junction with East Lodge Lane. Crews Hill as well as the stretch of road up to that junction is surprisingly part of Enfield The lack of a reason for why the W10 has to be renumbered - what is beneficial about spending money to change all the tiles (timetables & maps have to be altered) on affected bus stops? Why is this as well as the Coulsdon consultation quoting 400 metres in terms of the distance people are from the bus network when an entirely new number was used for the 384 consultation? Not a local but I'd highly doubt there'd be demand for the station - it is one of London's least used and is within walking distance. The Garden Centre may have demand but again, it's within walking distance. I doubt you can turn around on East Lodge Lane - seen it on Google maps and it's one of those triangle junctions which is incredibly hard to turn around on even with short SDs. There is also no residences up to East Lodge Lane and let alone around Crews Hill Stn I do agree - the W10 shouldn't be renumbered however we can only see if this is going to stay post COVID as a decision like this would be smarter to keep the number than need to waste money on new tiles as you say The W10 used to turn around within Crews Hill station grounds themselves, until Network Rail or Great Northern or whoever own the station took it upon themselves expand the car park and cut off bus access - great integrated transport planning there. If there is demand for at least three trains per hour to call at Crews Hill, I'm pretty sure there's demand for a bus service to it as well. It's also the local station for the large residential area that is the Rosewood Drive - Golf Ride loop. I think there's a dimly-lit footpath connecting the western part of that loop to the station, but I wouldn't like to use that in the hours of darkness in particular. That's why I suggested in the consultation re-extending the bus to Cuffley, where it used to terminate, or else going via Cattlegate Road, East Lodge Lane and The Ridgeway to give that residential area a link to Chase Farm Hospital and also an inter-hospital link from North Middlesex Hospital. Hopefully, once the 456 is extended to Crews Hill station again, TfL will at least make an attempt to coordinate its timetable with the that of trains to and from the station. But I suppose they would have to be sensible to do that, so it may be asking too much.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on May 7, 2020 18:13:24 GMT
Not a local but I'd highly doubt there'd be demand for the station - it is one of London's least used and is within walking distance. The Garden Centre may have demand but again, it's within walking distance. I doubt you can turn around on East Lodge Lane - seen it on Google maps and it's one of those triangle junctions which is incredibly hard to turn around on even with short SDs. There is also no residences up to East Lodge Lane and let alone around Crews Hill Stn I do agree - the W10 shouldn't be renumbered however we can only see if this is going to stay post COVID as a decision like this would be smarter to keep the number than need to waste money on new tiles as you say The W10 used to turn around within Crews Hill station grounds themselves, until Network Rail or Great Northern or whoever own the station took it upon themselves expand the car park and cut off bus access - great integrated transport planning there. If there is demand for at least three trains per hour to call at Crews Hill, I'm pretty sure there's demand for a bus service to it as well. It's also the local station for the large residential area that is the Rosewood Drive - Golf Ride loop. I think there's a dimly-lit footpath connecting the western part of that loop to the station, but I wouldn't like to use that in the hours of darkness in particular. That's why I suggested in the consultation re-extending the bus to Cuffley, where it used to terminate, or else going via Cattlegate Road, East Lodge Lane and The Ridgeway to give that residential area a link to Chase Farm Hospital and also an inter-hospital link from North Middlesex Hospital. As much as I'd like it to go to Cuffley it was cut so clearly tfl didn't see need for it to go there. If Cuffley as a whole wanted a link to Enfield I think there could be a reason send the 456 up there however there is GN. I'm not a local - but judging on the distance to Potters Bar from Cuffley, I'd presume residents might prefer a link to Potters Bar than travelling quite far to Enfield when there is a fast GN to Enfield Chase.
|
|
|
Post by uakari on May 7, 2020 18:35:40 GMT
The W10 used to turn around within Crews Hill station grounds themselves, until Network Rail or Great Northern or whoever own the station took it upon themselves expand the car park and cut off bus access - great integrated transport planning there. If there is demand for at least three trains per hour to call at Crews Hill, I'm pretty sure there's demand for a bus service to it as well. It's also the local station for the large residential area that is the Rosewood Drive - Golf Ride loop. I think there's a dimly-lit footpath connecting the western part of that loop to the station, but I wouldn't like to use that in the hours of darkness in particular. That's why I suggested in the consultation re-extending the bus to Cuffley, where it used to terminate, or else going via Cattlegate Road, East Lodge Lane and The Ridgeway to give that residential area a link to Chase Farm Hospital and also an inter-hospital link from North Middlesex Hospital. As much as I'd like it to go to Cuffley it was cut so clearly tfl didn't see need for it to go there. If Cuffley as a whole wanted a link to Enfield I think there could be a reason send the 456 up there however there is GN. I'm not a local - but judging on the distance to Potters Bar from Cuffley, I'd presume residents might prefer a link to Potters Bar than travelling quite far to Enfield when there is a fast GN to Enfield Chase. I just meant in terms of an Enfield/Crews Hill to Cuffley link that didn't involve a train. But I think that my suggestion for the 456 to go past Crews Hill station and then on to loop back south and terminate at Chase Farm Hospital could perhaps be the more useful of the two suggestions I made. Commercial Metroline bus route 242 links Cuffley and Potters Bar.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 7, 2020 21:47:57 GMT
A rarity in that a consultation with a lot of good in it but there are a few concerns: Lack of extension to Crews Hill Station which is literally by bus, an extra 1-2 minutes more but a slightly awkward walk where crossing a busy road is required due to the pavement abruptly ending on one side. A stand could be placed beyond the railway bridge with it turning around at the junction with East Lodge Lane. Crews Hill as well as the stretch of road up to that junction is surprisingly part of Enfield The lack of a reason for why the W10 has to be renumbered - what is beneficial about spending money to change all the tiles (timetables & maps have to be altered) on affected bus stops? Why is this as well as the Coulsdon consultation quoting 400 metres in terms of the distance people are from the bus network when an entirely new number was used for the 384 consultation? Not a local but I'd highly doubt there'd be demand for the station - it is one of London's least used and is within walking distance. The Garden Centre may have demand but again, it's within walking distance. I doubt you can turn around on East Lodge Lane - seen it on Google maps and it's one of those triangle junctions which is incredibly hard to turn around on even with short SDs. There is also no residences up to East Lodge Lane and let alone around Crews Hill Stn I do agree - the W10 shouldn't be renumbered however we can only see if this is going to stay post COVID as a decision like this would be smarter to keep the number than need to waste money on new tiles as you say If there wasn't demand, there wouldn't be a station so can't really agree with that point. As for East Lodge Lane, I've looked on Google a number of times and a short single decker could quite easily make that junction as there is enough room for a bus to U-turn and especially considering the junction isn't busy at all as well. I also never mentioned anything about running down East Lodge Lane, merely just turning around at the top end and running back to the station if the car park was not allowed for buses to turn around.
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on May 7, 2020 22:22:04 GMT
As much as I'd like it to go to Cuffley it was cut so clearly tfl didn't see need for it to go there. If Cuffley as a whole wanted a link to Enfield I think there could be a reason send the 456 up there however there is GN. I'm not a local - but judging on the distance to Potters Bar from Cuffley, I'd presume residents might prefer a link to Potters Bar than travelling quite far to Enfield when there is a fast GN to Enfield Chase. I just meant in terms of an Enfield/Crews Hill to Cuffley link that didn't involve a train. But I think that my suggestion for the 456 to go past Crews Hill station and then on to loop back south and terminate at Chase Farm Hospital could perhaps be the more useful of the two suggestions I made. Commercial Metroline bus route 242 links Cuffley and Potters Bar. The 242 is now focused on the Waltham Cross to Brookfield Centre section with some journeys extended to Cuffley. The link between Cuffley and Potters Bar is now very limited. It’s currently running a Saturday timetable so between Potters Bar and Cuffley, it’s only live garage journeys so it’s 2 in the morning FROM Potters Bar and 2 in the evening TO Potters Bar so it’s not much use at all for those wanting to use Potters Bar for onward rail travel. When it reverts back to Mon-Fri timetable, it isn’t much better. It gets an extra AM and PM return journey but it’s more for the Dame Alice Owen students and the school day journeys doesn’t serve the station forecourt at all.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on May 8, 2020 8:45:03 GMT
As much as I'd like it to go to Cuffley it was cut so clearly tfl didn't see need for it to go there. If Cuffley as a whole wanted a link to Enfield I think there could be a reason send the 456 up there however there is GN. I'm not a local - but judging on the distance to Potters Bar from Cuffley, I'd presume residents might prefer a link to Potters Bar than travelling quite far to Enfield when there is a fast GN to Enfield Chase. I just meant in terms of an Enfield/Crews Hill to Cuffley link that didn't involve a train. But I think that my suggestion for the 456 to go past Crews Hill station and then on to loop back south and terminate at Chase Farm Hospital could perhaps be the more useful of the two suggestions I made. Commercial Metroline bus route 242 links Cuffley and Potters Bar. Chase farm Hospital sounds like a great idea but I'm not in favour of it terminating at Cuffley
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on May 8, 2020 8:47:00 GMT
It's been a while since I was last at Crews Hill Station but from what I can remember there's nothing there apart from the garden centre which is virtually next door. There's a Geoff Marshall video....... youtu.be/6t9gDj1Ub00
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 8, 2020 10:24:02 GMT
It's been a while since I was last at Crews Hill Station but from what I can remember there's nothing there apart from the garden centre which is virtually next door. There's a Geoff Marshall video....... youtu.be/6t9gDj1Ub00There's a residential area to the south of the station where the W10 terminates.
|
|