|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 8, 2020 19:19:56 GMT
When the contract for the 94 was extended and the route was potentially going to be reviewed along with the 228 tfl may have wanted to keep the option open for extending the 148 to Acton Green had they decided to remove the 94 altogether. As it turned out the 94 was re tendered with no changes made to it thou the PVR was open ended no doubt as it hadn't been decided if it would cut to Marble Arch. Extending the 148 to Acton Green or even Turnham Green Church via Chiswick Park Station, would be interesting. However, the 94 provides a West end link that the 148 doesn't and the 94 helps stabilise the 139 between Selfridges and Picadilly Circus, and the 139 could potentially struggle without the 94. If it became where the 94 was cut to Marble Arch, I still wouldn't extend the 148 to Acton Green, it would be very long and could be very prone to traffic and overcrowding. Keep the routes separate.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 8, 2020 19:49:58 GMT
Yes I agree. The 31 would be a better choice. As it stands I think the 94 will survive in its current form. Ofcourse once Crossrail opens who knows what tfl will do.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 13, 2020 9:17:30 GMT
Yes I agree. The 31 would be a better choice. As it stands I think the 94 will survive in its current form. Ofcourse once Crossrail opens who knows what tfl will do. I think meddling with the 94 wouldn't be a good idea at all. I can only see the 31 being removed from Holland Park Avenue, which would be a shame as it would stop short of a major objective in Shepherd's Bush where it does often pick up healthy loads and I find the 31 quite a useful route because I can connect to it at Shepherd's Bush. The 390's old stand is still vacant should the 31 be cutback.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 13, 2020 10:23:11 GMT
Pre 2002 there was only the 94 down Holland Park Avenue then the 148 joined aswell. Then in 2004 the 148 was upped in frequency before the 31 was extended and the 228 from Holland Park Station to Shepherds Bush.
Had/still the cycle superhighway gone ahead down there i think the 31 would have undoubtedly been cut back to NHG. Again I know people will hit straight back at me but 4 routes along a road that from 1994 to 2002 only had 1 is maybe a bit excessive.
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Apr 13, 2020 10:45:59 GMT
Pre 2002 there was only the 94 down Holland Park Avenue then the 148 joined aswell. Then in 2004 the 148 was upped in frequency before the 31 was extended and the 228 from Holland Park Station to Shepherds Bush. Had/still the cycle superhighway gone ahead down there i think the 31 would have undoubtedly been cut back to NHG. Again I know people will hit straight back at me but 4 routes along a road that from 1994 to 2002 only had 1 is maybe a bit excessive. If you go back to the 1950's, there were three red routes(12,17 & 88), plus four Greenline routes along the same strech of road.(Not forgetting the 289 night route)
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 13, 2020 10:59:25 GMT
Maybe but that was a different time. I think the 94, 148 and 228 would suffice now.
I think the 148 was probably the greatest success story of a new route over the past 20 years. Many new routes were just split off ends of established routes (363, 390 etc) or created to provide some extra cacapcity with maybe 1 new link like the 414 but the 148 just looks like a route that has always been around. Probably the only other one to have a major impact on many new links would be the 493.
|
|
|
Post by londonboy71 on Apr 13, 2020 11:12:07 GMT
Yes I agree. The 31 would be a better choice. As it stands I think the 94 will survive in its current form. Ofcourse once Crossrail opens who knows what tfl will do. I think meddling with the 94 wouldn't be a good idea at all. I can only see the 31 being removed from Holland Park Avenue, which would be a shame as it would stop short of a major objective in Shepherd's Bush where it does often pick up healthy loads and I find the 31 quite a useful route because I can connect to it at Shepherd's Bush. The 390's old stand is still vacant should the 31 be cutback. Whenever Crossrail.opens which seems a very long way away
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 13, 2020 12:38:23 GMT
Maybe but that was a different time. I think the 94, 148 and 228 would suffice now. I think the 148 was probably the greatest success story of a new route over the past 20 years. Many new routes were just split off ends of established routes (363, 390 etc) or created to provide some extra cacapcity with maybe 1 new link like the 414 but the 148 just looks like a route that has always been around. Probably the only other one to have a major impact on many new links would be the 493. I agree, the creation of the 148 was a masterstroke and whilst it does maintain links formerly provided by the 12 to Westminster, Elephant and Camberwell, I like how instead of just following thr routing the 12 did it instead goes via Victoria. This makes the route far more useful than it would be if it went down Oxford Street as Bayswater Road used to have both the 12 and 88 doing so.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 13, 2020 13:01:20 GMT
Same with how the 12 and 94 both went from NHG to Piccadilly. In that respect the 390 to Tottenham court Road and then Euston and Kings Cross was more useful then 2 routes to Piccadilly Circus, particularly when the 148 was providing a quicker link to Westminster, Elephant and Camberwell.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 13, 2020 13:46:42 GMT
Pre 2002 there was only the 94 down Holland Park Avenue then the 148 joined aswell. Then in 2004 the 148 was upped in frequency before the 31 was extended and the 228 from Holland Park Station to Shepherds Bush. Had/still the cycle superhighway gone ahead down there i think the 31 would have undoubtedly been cut back to NHG. Again I know people will hit straight back at me but 4 routes along a road that from 1994 to 2002 only had 1 is maybe a bit excessive. Cutting the 31 short of Shepherds Bush makes little sense and could cause further damage to it’s patronage - this is exactly the type of change that sees people desert the network. Furthermore, why 1 route became 4 routes was because patronage soared after 2000 so obviously extra capacity was needed.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 13, 2020 14:02:28 GMT
Sorry Yes again my eyes must not be working as I clearly haven't seen every 31, 94 and 148 carry good loads down Holland Park Avenue that you have!
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 13, 2020 16:56:02 GMT
Sorry Yes again my eyes must not be working as I clearly haven't seen every 31, 94 and 148 carry good loads down Holland Park Avenue that you have! Didn’t say nothing about good loads and merely gave an opinion just like yourself - I can only note what I see and I’ve said on more than one occasion it’s not my area anyway. It is true however that Shepherds Bush is a major boarding point on the 31 being a tube, Overground & bus interchange as well as serving a busy shopping centre in Westfield and obviously if you take the 31 away, it will have an effect on the route. Another thing that was true was an explosion in patronage after 2000 across London hence why it was likely 1 route turned into 4.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Apr 14, 2020 5:49:28 GMT
Sorry Yes again my eyes must not be working as I clearly haven't seen every 31, 94 and 148 carry good loads down Holland Park Avenue that you have! I've not seen heavy loads on that section either in recent years and as you suggested previously four routes are a bit excessive. One option which I think has been suggested before would be to reroute the 31 between Maida Hill and Holland Park via the 228 route and withdraw the 228 east of Shepherd's Bush. I think there has been a significant shift from bus to train travel in the area in recent years with improvements on LO/LU and the £1.50 off peak fare in zone 2-6 and there is likely to be a further shift when Crossrail eventually opens. In the long term I wouldn't be surprised to see the 148 curtailed at NHG where the former 390 stand is still available.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 14, 2020 11:08:49 GMT
Sorry Yes again my eyes must not be working as I clearly haven't seen every 31, 94 and 148 carry good loads down Holland Park Avenue that you have! I've not seen heavy loads on that section either in recent years and as you suggested previously four routes are a bit excessive. One option which I think has been suggested before would be to reroute the 31 between Maida Hill and Holland Park via the 228 route and withdraw the 228 east of Shepherd's Bush. I think there has been a significant shift from bus to train travel in the area in recent years with improvements on LO/LU and the £1.50 off peak fare in zone 2-6 and there is likely to be a further shift when Crossrail eventually opens. In the long term I wouldn't be surprised to see the 148 curtailed at NHG where the former 390 stand is still available. What I would say is that your idea of rerouting the 31 via the 228 may not be too bad an idea as a solution if TfL in future decide that Notting Hill Gate-Maida Hill is overbussed with the 28, 31 and 328 - I know others on the forum have also said they feel there's excess capacity on this section too. If there is a greater shift to the Central Line in the future it is possible that this could lead to TfL seeking to reduce duplication between the 94 and 148 - if the 148 moved to another operator then TfL may be less hesitant to chop it back from the Shepherds Bush end but I'd hope that both are left in tact as it seems to me the 31 is the vulnerable route along there.
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Apr 16, 2020 17:04:11 GMT
MY 12 APRIL EMAIL TO ANDREW DISMORE REGARDING TEMPORARY EXTENTSION OF ROUTE N20 TO BARNET HOPSITAL, PLUS DISCUSSING ROUTE 384 CONSULTATION:
"Further to your post on Twitter that TfL has temporarily extended night bus route N20 from Barnet Church to terminate at Barnet Hospital, for the benefit of the increasing number of hospital workers working night shifts at the moment, this is good news.
"I wanted to ask if you might be able to ask TfL to consider making this extension of route N20 to Barnet Hospital permanent? As well as not serving the hospital, the N20 doesn't really penetrate High Barnet properly by terminating at Barnet Church, so a permanent extension to the hospital would also bring a wider residential area of High Barnet within walking distance of the night bus network.
"The 307 runs as far as the hospital but only runs 24 hours on Friday and Saturday nights, and all weekend-only night services are currently suspended, including the 307. It would be good therefore, for the N20 to provide a night link between central London and Barnet Hospital and residential areas of High Barnet and during weeknights when the 307 does not run, and also to link with the night tube on weekends (once it resumes) as people would then be able to catch the N20 between High Barnet tube station and all stops as far as Barnet Hospital.
"Also, I don't suppose you've heard anything more about the 384 route consultation, as the online consultation page has not produced any updates for over a year? I think this matter has rather got tied into the redevelopment of High Barnet station and the potential movement of the northbound Barnet Hill bus stop to make access from the station easier, which are still at the design stage. I know right now is obviously not the right time, but it would be good if you could perhaps ask TfL to update at some point regarding the 384 and pass this information on. I shall then be able to update everyone on the 'Save the 384 bus' Facebook page.
"I am also planning to write some comments on the inconclusive consultation report for the 384 that came out in February 2019, as well as about the redevelopment proposals for High Barnet tube station.
"For example, although easier access to northbound buses from the station is welcome, I think that it would be better to keep the existing northbound bus stop as well as adding a new bus stop further down the hill closer to the station access road, as otherwise there would be a very long gap between stops until Barnet Church, and the current northbound bus stop is also useful for people connecting with QE Girls' School and the surrounding roads. Prioritising the pedestrian crossing across Barnet Hill more in favour of pedestrians is also needed, as the lights take far too long to turn red currently.
"I also think the designers are missing a trick by not planning to configure the road layout in the station grounds to allow at least one bus route to serve the station grounds themselves (the 384 northbound would be ideal for this as it is the only route that goes on to serve all the key destinations of Barnet High Street, The Spires and Barnet Hospital). Perhaps once I've written my comments on these matters I could share them with you, in case they would be useful in your discussions with TfL, etc?"
|
|