|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Jul 9, 2024 10:41:42 GMT
BARNET/ISLINGTON BUS CHANGES153: Liverpool Street - Harringay Superstores 274: Lancaster Gate - Highbury Barn (via MacKenzie Road & Liverpool Road ,withdrawn between Caledonian Road and Angel) 263 (24hr): Liverpool Street - North Finchley 394: Homerton Hospital - Kentish Town (via Caledonian Road, Market Road, Camden Park Road, Torriano Avenue & Leighton Road) 460: Willesden Bus Garage - Barnet Hospital Don’t really like pulling the 263 back to North Finchley, I feel like that route needs to be left as it is to keep the links from Barnet towards East Finchley/Archway/Holloway intact. |
|
kaya
Cleaner
Posts: 17
|
Post by kaya on Jul 9, 2024 16:23:13 GMT
BARNET/ISLINGTON BUS CHANGES153: Liverpool Street - Harringay Superstores 274: Lancaster Gate - Highbury Barn (via MacKenzie Road & Liverpool Road ,withdrawn between Caledonian Road and Angel) 263 (24hr): Liverpool Street - North Finchley 394: Homerton Hospital - Kentish Town (via Caledonian Road, Market Road, Camden Park Road, Torriano Avenue & Leighton Road) 460: Willesden Bus Garage - Barnet Hospital My views and opinions on this proposal: 153: I don't think I have any opinions on this, but it would be interesting to see a route serve Upper Tollington Park and Lancaster/Scarborough Road 274: This would pretty much be a bad idea as this would leave Hemingford Road (towards both Islington and Lancaster Gate) without a route to serve it, I would probably advise you to at least suggest a route that's going to replace that particular section and then that could be fine. Other than that, I have no comment on this. This would (probably) mean that 274 could reroute to unserved streets but it is pretty much still an issue with withdrawing the Islington and Barnsbury Estate section. I don't speak for the Islington area but most people from Angel Islington would've taken this bus to go either ZSL or Camden. Another note is that 4 could take you from Angel to Highbury Barn quicker imo. 263: Can you please explain why 263 is a 24-hour service? It has both N20 and N271 as its running night services. I don't know why the route is being withdrawn from Barnet Hospital and Whetstone, I would say keep the Hospital terminus as it is pretty much important to locals to travel to the nearest Hospital destination. Extending the route to Liverpool Street just feels so uncanny and weird imo, It already provides a useful link from Whetstone towards Archway. 394: This proposal is unique but strange for this route, and could serve some ''purpose'' providing links between Barnsbury and Kentish Town (being an alternative to 214 to be exact except it avoids the Estates between Barnsbury and Market Estate) 460: Same with 263, feels odd to extend it to High Barnet. Would've been okay to extend/curtail the route past Frien Barnet Please at least give the reasons for chopping/extending the routes  |
|
|
|
Post by sdaniel on Jul 9, 2024 19:57:38 GMT
BARNET/ISLINGTON BUS CHANGES153: Liverpool Street - Harringay Superstores 274: Lancaster Gate - Highbury Barn (via MacKenzie Road & Liverpool Road ,withdrawn between Caledonian Road and Angel) 263 (24hr): Liverpool Street - North Finchley 394: Homerton Hospital - Kentish Town (via Caledonian Road, Market Road, Camden Park Road, Torriano Avenue & Leighton Road) 460: Willesden Bus Garage - Barnet Hospital My views and opinions on this proposal: 153: I don't think I have any opinions on this, but it would be interesting to see a route serve Upper Tollington Park and Lancaster/Scarborough Road 274: This would pretty much be a bad idea as this would leave Hemingford Road (towards both Islington and Lancaster Gate) without a route to serve it, I would probably advise you to at least suggest a route that's going to replace that particular section and then that could be fine. Other than that, I have no comment on this. This would (probably) mean that 274 could reroute to unserved streets but it is pretty much still an issue with withdrawing the Islington and Barnsbury Estate section. I don't speak for the Islington area but most people from Angel Islington would've taken this bus to go either ZSL or Camden. Another note is that 4 could take you from Angel to Highbury Barn quicker imo. 263: Can you please explain why 263 is a 24-hour service? It has both N20 and N271 as its running night services. I don't know why the route is being withdrawn from Barnet Hospital and Whetstone, I would say keep the Hospital terminus as it is pretty much important to locals to travel to the nearest Hospital destination. Extending the route to Liverpool Street just feels so uncanny and weird imo, It already provides a useful link from Whetstone towards Archway. 394: This proposal is unique but strange for this route, and could serve some ''purpose'' providing links between Barnsbury and Kentish Town (being an alternative to 214 to be exact except it avoids the Estates between Barnsbury and Market Estate) 460: Same with 263, feels odd to extend it to High Barnet. Would've been okay to extend/curtail the route past Frien Barnet Please at least give the reasons for chopping/extending the routes Basically the 394’s extension to Kentish Town will cover 274’s withdrawn section between Angel Station and York Way Estate. I forgot to add that the N271 should be withdrawn if this 24hour 263 bus route runs from North Finchley to Liverpool Street. With the 460 extended to Barnet, there will be new direct links created such as Cricklewood, Golders Green & Whetstone, Barnet. From East Finchley or even Archway people can take the 234 up to Whetstone or Barnet, plus I don’t think anybody from Highgate Village would be going anywhere beyond North Finchley. |
|
kaya
Cleaner
Posts: 17
|
Post by kaya on Jul 9, 2024 20:27:59 GMT
My views and opinions on this proposal: 153: I don't think I have any opinions on this, but it would be interesting to see a route serve Upper Tollington Park and Lancaster/Scarborough Road 274: This would pretty much be a bad idea as this would leave Hemingford Road (towards both Islington and Lancaster Gate) without a route to serve it, I would probably advise you to at least suggest a route that's going to replace that particular section and then that could be fine. Other than that, I have no comment on this. This would (probably) mean that 274 could reroute to unserved streets but it is pretty much still an issue with withdrawing the Islington and Barnsbury Estate section. I don't speak for the Islington area but most people from Angel Islington would've taken this bus to go either ZSL or Camden. Another note is that 4 could take you from Angel to Highbury Barn quicker imo. 263: Can you please explain why 263 is a 24-hour service? It has both N20 and N271 as its running night services. I don't know why the route is being withdrawn from Barnet Hospital and Whetstone, I would say keep the Hospital terminus as it is pretty much important to locals to travel to the nearest Hospital destination. Extending the route to Liverpool Street just feels so uncanny and weird imo, It already provides a useful link from Whetstone towards Archway. 394: This proposal is unique but strange for this route, and could serve some ''purpose'' providing links between Barnsbury and Kentish Town (being an alternative to 214 to be exact except it avoids the Estates between Barnsbury and Market Estate) 460: Same with 263, feels odd to extend it to High Barnet. Would've been okay to extend/curtail the route past Frien Barnet Please at least give the reasons for chopping/extending the routes Basically the 394’s extension to Kentish Town will cover 274’s withdrawn section between Angel Station and York Way Estate. I forgot to add that the N271 should be withdrawn if this 24hour 263 bus route runs from North Finchley to Liverpool Street. With the 460 extended to Barnet, there will be new direct links created such as Cricklewood, Golders Green & Whetstone, Barnet. From East Finchley or even Archway people can take the 234 up to Whetstone or Barnet, plus I don’t think anybody from Highgate Village would be going anywhere beyond North Finchley. Alright, I agree with the statement that people from Highgate Village wouldn't be even going anywhere beyond Finchley. Other than that, thank you for explaining about 263 and N271/N20. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 12, 2024 8:11:46 GMT
I think this has been suggested before, the 36 is overbussed between Paddington and Queens Park but underbussed between Paddington and Vauxhall.
36... Reduced to 6bph, see 436.
185... Withdrawn between Vauxhall and Victoria and rerouted to Battersea Park Station.
436... Rerouted back to Paddington and increased to 6bph.
The loss of the link to Victoria from the Dulwich area might cause some consternation but it's a pretty easy change at Vauxhall.
|
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Jul 12, 2024 9:38:37 GMT
I think this has been suggested before, the 36 is overbussed between Paddington and Queens Park but underbussed between Paddington and Vauxhall. 36... Reduced to 6bph, see 436. 185... Withdrawn between Vauxhall and Victoria and rerouted to Battersea Park Station. 436... Rerouted back to Paddington and increased to 6bph. The loss of the link to Victoria from the Dulwich area might cause some consternation but it's a pretty easy change at Vauxhall. Pretty overall good changes, could just keep the 185 as it is & extend the 211 to Vauxhall instead. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Jul 12, 2024 9:51:56 GMT
I think this has been suggested before, the 36 is overbussed between Paddington and Queens Park but underbussed between Paddington and Vauxhall. 36... Reduced to 6bph, see 436. 185... Withdrawn between Vauxhall and Victoria and rerouted to Battersea Park Station. 436... Rerouted back to Paddington and increased to 6bph. The loss of the link to Victoria from the Dulwich area might cause some consternation but it's a pretty easy change at Vauxhall. It is also worth mentioning the 36’s PVR is going to increase by 2 upon being retained, so may allow for a small frequency increase. |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jul 12, 2024 10:03:51 GMT
I think this has been suggested before, the 36 is overbussed between Paddington and Queens Park but underbussed between Paddington and Vauxhall. 36... Reduced to 6bph, see 436. 185... Withdrawn between Vauxhall and Victoria and rerouted to Battersea Park Station. 436... Rerouted back to Paddington and increased to 6bph. The loss of the link to Victoria from the Dulwich area might cause some consternation but it's a pretty easy change at Vauxhall. Pretty overall good changes, could just keep the 185 as it is & extend the 211 to Vauxhall instead. I believe the 211 at Battersea is to have the trend there of a bus route starting from the same point and roughly the same direction the tube ends, eg 154 beyond Morden, 432 beyond Brixton, 363 beyond Elephant, etc being some of many examples. This is baring in mind the Northern Line is said to be future proofed for the direction of Clapham Junction, the overrun tunnels ending underneath Battersea Park. Should the 211 be extended to Vauxhall another route could ideally be extended to Battersea Power Station, eg the 219¹ or 417 ¹ - double decked |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Jul 12, 2024 10:28:52 GMT
Pretty overall good changes, could just keep the 185 as it is & extend the 211 to Vauxhall instead. I believe the 211 at Battersea is to have the trend there of a bus route starting from the same point and roughly the same direction the tube ends, eg 154 beyond Morden, 432 beyond Brixton, 363 beyond Elephant, etc being some of many examples. This is baring in mind the Northern Line is said to be future proofed for the direction of Clapham Junction, the overrun tunnels ending underneath Battersea Park. Should the 211 be extended to Vauxhall another route could ideally be extended to Battersea Power Station, eg the 219¹ or 417 ¹ - double decked I remember the 417 was previously proposed to be extended to Waterloo via Battersea Power Station, which never ended up happening. |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jul 12, 2024 10:42:26 GMT
I remember the 417 was previously proposed to be extended to Waterloo via Battersea Power Station, which never ended up happening. I heard something about Battersea Power station but didn't realize the route was proposed all the way to Waterloo |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Jul 12, 2024 10:51:32 GMT
I remember the 417 was previously proposed to be extended to Waterloo via Battersea Power Station, which never ended up happening. I heard something about Battersea Power station but didn't realize the route was proposed all the way to Waterloo Yeah these were all the proposals. The 417 extension listed in the same set of proposals as the 452 extension to Vauxhall. The P5 extension to Battersea Power Station would be useful if it went ahead: content.tfl.gov.uk/future-bus-demand-in-the-vauxhall-nine-elms-battersea-opportunity-area.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 12, 2024 11:00:44 GMT
I remember the 417 was previously proposed to be extended to Waterloo via Battersea Power Station, which never ended up happening. I heard something about Battersea Power station but didn't realize the route was proposed all the way to Waterloo I thought it was only Vauxhall via Queenstown Road that was propsoed not to Waterloo. It was the same time it was first mentioned about the 452 extending to Vauxhall which did obviously happen. It was also propsoed to go up to every 8 mins to Waterloo. Really the Northern line extension probably killed any need for a Waterloo to the Power station link really. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Jul 12, 2024 11:10:49 GMT
I heard something about Battersea Power station but didn't realize the route was proposed all the way to Waterloo I thought it was only Vauxhall via Queenstown Road that was propsoed not to Waterloo. It was the same time it was first mentioned about the 452 extending to Vauxhall which did obviously happen. It was also propsoed to go up to every 8 mins to Waterloo. Really the Northern line extension probably killed any need for a Waterloo to the Power station link really. I think that have might been because the 77/87 were struggling to cope during peak times, but that has since been changed. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 12, 2024 11:37:19 GMT
I think this has been suggested before, the 36 is overbussed between Paddington and Queens Park but underbussed between Paddington and Vauxhall. 36... Reduced to 6bph, see 436. 185... Withdrawn between Vauxhall and Victoria and rerouted to Battersea Park Station. 436... Rerouted back to Paddington and increased to 6bph. The loss of the link to Victoria from the Dulwich area might cause some consternation but it's a pretty easy change at Vauxhall. Pretty overall good changes, could just keep the 185 as it is & extend the 211 to Vauxhall instead. That would be a lot better than diverting the 185 as that wouldn’t break any links from south of Camberwell Green |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 12, 2024 11:41:47 GMT
The 417 proposal wasn’t thought out properly and was good it never got off the ground. I supported the P5 extension as it would have opened up links to Battersea Power Station and Nine Elms from the south in general. |
|
