|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Nov 3, 2024 15:42:03 GMT
My Enfield Bus Review, 2024For those who remember a few years ago, I've posted my own bus review within the Enfield borough as well as within other areas locally on what I think could benefit from an improved network either coming from route restructurings or enhancing service patterns. Recently, time has been spent developing a revised review on the same principles with updates to the initial ideas placed. Most of the schemes I believe are cost effective and deliver a net benefit to users overall based on current financial standpoints and aligning with planning objectives from the Mayors transport policy and TfL's pledge to grow service usage. This updated review is of the Enfield borough, it does not contain ideas for the Upper Lea Valley corridor, however a separate review paper will be published dedicated specifically for the corridor. Other review papers in the pipeline include one for the Barnet and Waltham Forest boroughs. Below is the link for my Enfield Bus Review and would appreciate feedback if possible. docs.google.com/document/d/1hy1-WweriTvvt_tWePfVqEnoORj0TisrVmvzxvCKq9k/edit?usp=sharing This is a great piece of work, I'm not an Enfield local but am familiar to an extent with most of the locations / routes you mention; some observations if I may... 1) Have you thought about how and who (local MP, Councilors, other local stakeholders) you can present this to in order to gain sponsorship to make some of these changes reality? 2) What are the trade-offs you would consider to implement some of the changes? 3) I had reason a few months ago to be at Crews Hill Station, I thought it bizarre that the 456 doesn't terminate at the station...and that the final 'Crews Hill' bus stop is not walkable Thanks for the feedback. Most of the ideas layed out are mainly low cost or resource neutral. I of course don't expect TfL to implement every single of the ideas again at once. These are mainly aspirations on what could potentially be done for the borough. |
|
|
|
Post by YX18KVJ (DLE30221) on Nov 3, 2024 19:24:47 GMT
My Enfield Bus Review, 2024For those who remember a few years ago, I've posted my own bus review within the Enfield borough as well as within other areas locally on what I think could benefit from an improved network either coming from route restructurings or enhancing service patterns. Recently, time has been spent developing a revised review on the same principles with updates to the initial ideas placed. Most of the schemes I believe are cost effective and deliver a net benefit to users overall based on current financial standpoints and aligning with planning objectives from the Mayors transport policy and TfL's pledge to grow service usage. This updated review is of the Enfield borough, it does not contain ideas for the Upper Lea Valley corridor, however a separate review paper will be published dedicated specifically for the corridor. Other review papers in the pipeline include one for the Barnet and Waltham Forest boroughs. Below is the link for my Enfield Bus Review and would appreciate feedback if possible. docs.google.com/document/d/1hy1-WweriTvvt_tWePfVqEnoORj0TisrVmvzxvCKq9k/edit?usp=sharing Looking through the document, your proposed changes are well thought out and I fully support them. Though I would say that if it doesn’t make the route too unreliable, having the 43 extended to Beaconsfield Road may be worth a shout. There is an existing bus stand there if I’m not mistaken. Regarding the 456, would you suggest slightly longer buses (e.g 9.7m) to operate on the route instead of the small WSs? |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 3, 2024 20:24:15 GMT
A few central London changes ideas, mainly linked to Oxford Street pedestrianisation. I don't envy TfL planners.... 2 - diverted via Edgware Road to Marylebone and onto a suitable stand around the vicinity of Lords Cricket Ground/St John's Wood 6 - diverted at Hyde Park Corner to terminate at South Kensington via existing 414 LoR 7 - withdrawn between Marble Arch and Oxford Circus. Extended to Old Oak Common station when it opens. Rerouted to take existing 23 LoR between Westbourne Grove and Ladbroke Grove. N7 - extended to Victoria and Rayners Lane 9 - frequency increased to 8bph 13 - withdrawn between Portman Square and Victoria. Night service withdrawn. N13 - new route between Victoria and North Finchley via Edgware Road and 13 LoR 14 - diverted to Warren Street (unless British Museum pedestriansation is dropped) 22 - diverted to terminate at Piccadily Circus 23 - withdrawn between Marble Arch and Aldywch. Diverted via Chepstow Road to run directly to Westbourne Park station, then extended via Harrow Road and 18 LoR to Wembley Central. Frequency increased to 6bph. Night service withdrawn. N23 - new service between Westbourne Park and Liverpool Street via existing 23 (and 26) LoR. 2bph frequency all week long. 27 - withdrawn between Hammersmith Bus Station and Hammersmith Grove. Frequency increased to 8bph. N27 withdrawn and converted to 24hr. Diverted to run via Euston. 30 - withdrawn between Marble Arch and Euston 38 - withdrawn between Hackney Central and Clapton. Frequency reduced to 6bph. '38A' - new route between Piccadilly Circus and Clapton Pond via 38 LoR. Frequency of 6bph. 53 - frequency reduced to 6bph. N53 - extended to Oxford Circus 55 - withdrawn between Oxford Circus and Tottenham Court Road 59 - diverted to Russell Square. Frequency reduced to 6bph 73 - diverted at Tottenham Court Road to Trafalgar Square via 29 LoR 74 - diverted to Lancaster Gate 94 - diverted at Marble Arch via 23/139 LoR to Aldwych and Waterloo 98 - diverted to Victoria 109 - frequency reduced to 8bph 113 - withdrawn between Portman Square and Marble Arch 133 - reduced to 7bph 139 - after Baker Street, revised to run via 453 LoR to Elephant & Castle 172 - extended to St Bartholomew's Hospital 176 - diverted to Holborn 188 - withdrawn to Aldwych 189 - diverted via Wigmore Street to Oxford Circus 205 - diverted to Portman Square 274 - diverted via Wigmore Street to Oxford Circus 390 - diverted via Great Portland Street and 22 LoR 452 - diverted to Westbourne Park garage via 23 LoR 453 - withdrawn 468 - frequency reduced to 6bph Bakerloop - Oxford Circus to Lewisham, all stops via 453 LoR as far as Elephant & Castle, then limited stop to Lewisham via New Kent Road and 21 LoR. Frequency of 6bph SL'53' - Aldwych to Waterloo via 172 and 53 LoR, all stops as far as Elephant & Castle then limited stop to Woolwich. Frequency of 6bph. SL6 - restructured to run limited stop along existing route via Brixton. Frequency of 5bph. Extended to Euston when HS2 works allow SL'109' Elephant & Castle to Croydon via 35 and 109 LoRs. Frequency of 6bph. Interested to hear any feed back as always I stick to my local routes for this: 2 - I think your re-routing is fine though I don't think it should go up to Lords or St Johns Wood and would rather it end up at Baker Street via Marylebone, taking over the 74's stand as then all the current links would be retained 59 - I'm ok with the re-routing but not happy with the frequency decrease - the SL6 shouldn't affect it 109 - I can understand the frequency decrease on this given your Superloop idea further along however I have reservations over that particular Superloop idea 133 - I'm against the frequency decrease here as the SL6 shouldn't affect it and in fact, any frequency decrease should be targeted at the 35 instead if one is necessary SL6 - if it remains a Superloop route, then I'm ok with this change but I'd go even further with the restructure, however, I wouldn't continue beyond Russell Square SL109 - this is very conflicting. On the one hand, I get the proposal and what it's trying to achieve, however there are two holes for me with this route. The first is there are several bottlenecks that would slow down express buses - the A23 south of Streatham Hill has several of these bottlenecks alone and Walworth is another one which is why SL6's almost always run via Kennington & Brixton because it's mostly bus lane with no bottlenecks and the non bus lane section via Tulse Hill is light on traffic. The second is if the SL109 is implemented, what happens to the 118's extension beyond Brixton? I don't think it would make sense to have two hospital links when Clapham Park has lost it's one and whilst you could just simply not implement a stop on the Superloop route at Kings, it sort of defeats the point of implementing a Superloop route in the first place because Kings is a major stop |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Nov 3, 2024 20:36:57 GMT
My Enfield Bus Review, 2024For those who remember a few years ago, I've posted my own bus review within the Enfield borough as well as within other areas locally on what I think could benefit from an improved network either coming from route restructurings or enhancing service patterns. Recently, time has been spent developing a revised review on the same principles with updates to the initial ideas placed. Most of the schemes I believe are cost effective and deliver a net benefit to users overall based on current financial standpoints and aligning with planning objectives from the Mayors transport policy and TfL's pledge to grow service usage. This updated review is of the Enfield borough, it does not contain ideas for the Upper Lea Valley corridor, however a separate review paper will be published dedicated specifically for the corridor. Other review papers in the pipeline include one for the Barnet and Waltham Forest boroughs. Below is the link for my Enfield Bus Review and would appreciate feedback if possible. docs.google.com/document/d/1hy1-WweriTvvt_tWePfVqEnoORj0TisrVmvzxvCKq9k/edit?usp=sharing Looking through the document, your proposed changes are well thought out and I fully support them. Though I would say that if it doesn’t make the route too unreliable, having the 43 extended to Beaconsfield Road may be worth a shout. There is an existing bus stand there if I’m not mistaken. Regarding the 456, would you suggest slightly longer buses (e.g 9.7m) to operate on the route instead of the small WSs? I don't disagree on the idea of lengthening vehicles, however there's been some complaints by residents at Crews Hill, Rosewood Estate over blocking traffic, struggling to navigate tight turns etc. The route currently indeeds sees strays of SEe's on the route, though implementing it full time would likely require a form of risk assessment, unless ones already been conducted? |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 4, 2024 9:32:03 GMT
A few central London changes ideas, mainly linked to Oxford Street pedestrianisation. I don't envy TfL planners.... 2 - diverted via Edgware Road to Marylebone and onto a suitable stand around the vicinity of Lords Cricket Ground/St John's Wood 6 - diverted at Hyde Park Corner to terminate at South Kensington via existing 414 LoR 7 - withdrawn between Marble Arch and Oxford Circus. Extended to Old Oak Common station when it opens. Rerouted to take existing 23 LoR between Westbourne Grove and Ladbroke Grove. N7 - extended to Victoria and Rayners Lane 9 - frequency increased to 8bph 13 - withdrawn between Portman Square and Victoria. Night service withdrawn. N13 - new route between Victoria and North Finchley via Edgware Road and 13 LoR 14 - diverted to Warren Street (unless British Museum pedestriansation is dropped) 22 - diverted to terminate at Piccadily Circus 23 - withdrawn between Marble Arch and Aldywch. Diverted via Chepstow Road to run directly to Westbourne Park station, then extended via Harrow Road and 18 LoR to Wembley Central. Frequency increased to 6bph. Night service withdrawn. N23 - new service between Westbourne Park and Liverpool Street via existing 23 (and 26) LoR. 2bph frequency all week long. 27 - withdrawn between Hammersmith Bus Station and Hammersmith Grove. Frequency increased to 8bph. N27 withdrawn and converted to 24hr. Diverted to run via Euston. 30 - withdrawn between Marble Arch and Euston 38 - withdrawn between Hackney Central and Clapton. Frequency reduced to 6bph. '38A' - new route between Piccadilly Circus and Clapton Pond via 38 LoR. Frequency of 6bph. 53 - frequency reduced to 6bph. N53 - extended to Oxford Circus 55 - withdrawn between Oxford Circus and Tottenham Court Road 59 - diverted to Russell Square. Frequency reduced to 6bph 73 - diverted at Tottenham Court Road to Trafalgar Square via 29 LoR 74 - diverted to Lancaster Gate 94 - diverted at Marble Arch via 23/139 LoR to Aldwych and Waterloo 98 - diverted to Victoria 109 - frequency reduced to 8bph 113 - withdrawn between Portman Square and Marble Arch 133 - reduced to 7bph 139 - after Baker Street, revised to run via 453 LoR to Elephant & Castle 172 - extended to St Bartholomew's Hospital 176 - diverted to Holborn 188 - withdrawn to Aldwych 189 - diverted via Wigmore Street to Oxford Circus 205 - diverted to Portman Square 274 - diverted via Wigmore Street to Oxford Circus 390 - diverted via Great Portland Street and 22 LoR 452 - diverted to Westbourne Park garage via 23 LoR 453 - withdrawn 468 - frequency reduced to 6bph Bakerloop - Oxford Circus to Lewisham, all stops via 453 LoR as far as Elephant & Castle, then limited stop to Lewisham via New Kent Road and 21 LoR. Frequency of 6bph SL'53' - Aldwych to Waterloo via 172 and 53 LoR, all stops as far as Elephant & Castle then limited stop to Woolwich. Frequency of 6bph. SL6 - restructured to run limited stop along existing route via Brixton. Frequency of 5bph. Extended to Euston when HS2 works allow SL'109' Elephant & Castle to Croydon via 35 and 109 LoRs. Frequency of 6bph. Interested to hear any feed back as always It'll probably be something like this although I wonder if the 98 and 139 could use Wigmore Street and if some of the routes via Portman Square could use Seymour Street and Great Cumberland Place. I wouldn't be surprised if the 274 was withdrawn completely and replaced by changes to other routes. Maybe the 73 could be rerouted to Oxford Circus via Great Portland Street? I'm not sure about the 38/A idea, I think 12bph are still needed to and from Victoria or about the SL ideas. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Nov 4, 2024 12:49:47 GMT
My Enfield Bus Review, 2024For those who remember a few years ago, I've posted my own bus review within the Enfield borough as well as within other areas locally on what I think could benefit from an improved network either coming from route restructurings or enhancing service patterns. Recently, time has been spent developing a revised review on the same principles with updates to the initial ideas placed. Most of the schemes I believe are cost effective and deliver a net benefit to users overall based on current financial standpoints and aligning with planning objectives from the Mayors transport policy and TfL's pledge to grow service usage. This updated review is of the Enfield borough, it does not contain ideas for the Upper Lea Valley corridor, however a separate review paper will be published dedicated specifically for the corridor. Other review papers in the pipeline include one for the Barnet and Waltham Forest boroughs. Below is the link for my Enfield Bus Review and would appreciate feedback if possible. docs.google.com/document/d/1hy1-WweriTvvt_tWePfVqEnoORj0TisrVmvzxvCKq9k/edit?usp=sharing Looking through the document, your proposed changes are well thought out and I fully support them. Though I would say that if it doesn’t make the route too unreliable, having the 43 extended to Beaconsfield Road may be worth a shout. There is an existing bus stand there if I’m not mistaken. Regarding the 456, would you suggest slightly longer buses (e.g 9.7m) to operate on the route instead of the small WSs? A 43 extension to Beaconsfield Road would be completely useless and would cause more problems than it would solve. For starters, the 43 has a purpose-built stand at Halliwick Park and has had it for the last 20 years which ended the standing arrangement on Woodhouse Road near Summers Lane, a purpose-built stand which is able to handle many 43s on stand at once (nowadays you'll typically find 2 or 3, fewer than say 4 or 5 years ago but still) and the same could not be said for the stand at Betstyle Circus which can at best just about handle 2, but more often than not is probably only able to handle 1.
What about congestion along Woodhouse Road? Yes the junction between Colney Hatch Lane and Woodhouse Road can get congested, I'll admit it, but that's usually if you're coming from Summers Lane/Woodhouse Road and not Colney Hatch Lane, so in the grand scheme of things you don't encounter as much congestion from the Muswell Hill direction as you might from say North Finchley. But between Halliwick Park and Station Road (New Southgate) you would be plunging the 43 into an unnecessary traffic hotspot that doesn't solve any real issues relating to journeys made along Woodhouse Road.
I haven't read the review but I'm assuming the justification for this is the new houses built around Royal Drive. There's arguably an excess of capacity along that stretch of Woodhouse Road with the SL1 having been added, and the only places I can really see people from those houses using a bus towards would be either Arnos Grove or New Southgate to connect with rail services, or maybe North Finchley for some shopping. These are already covered by the 221/382/SL1. The 43 in contrast caters to a completely different market, it's a feeder service from Colney Hatch Lane through Muswell Hill etc. to transport passengers from Friern Barnet/Muswell Hill with the 134 to Highgate, a purpose which the two routes have done well for decades. Maybe there will be some passengers who would make use of a bus service to destinations served by the 43, sure, but the stand in Martock Gardens and bus stops along Colney Hatch Lane aren't exactly onerous for punters to reach from these new builds.
|
|
|
|
Post by n341bus on Nov 4, 2024 22:06:21 GMT
Here are all the changes of bus routes that I think should happen in Enfield (as well as changes to bus routes that go through Enfield.) I am a local here and have been so for the past 30 years.
1. Extend the 279 to Finsbury Park station. -Will provide better onwards connections west and south towards central London, far better than Manor House ever could
2. Create a new bus route from Waltham Cross right the way down to Tottenham Hale, all via the A1055. Via Enfield lock/Mollison Avenue, Brimsdown station, Ponders End station, Picketts Lock Centre, Meridian Water, Northumberland Park and Tottenham Hale/Seven Sisters - The Picketts Lock centre currently does not have any form of bus/train link northwards. I do NOT count Ponders End as it is simply too far away to be of any assistance (try walking the distance if u disagree with me!) Also helps travel connections easier for the likes of Finsbury Park, Holloway, etc. *DOUBLE DECK.* -Could call it the LV1 bus.
3. Make a new bus route from Waltham Cross to Chingford - no reason here, just think it’ll make good links. Could potentially be a single decker route (Could call it the LV2)
4. A new bus route from Tottenham Hale to Chingford via the A1055, then onto the A406 via meridian water then following the 444 bus route . -Again making new links. Could also take pressure of Victoria line and national rail (Could call this LV3)
|
|
|
|
Post by n341bus on Nov 4, 2024 22:06:33 GMT
Here are all the changes of bus routes that I think should happen in Enfield (as well as changes to bus routes that go through Enfield.) I am a local here and have been so for the past 30 years.
1. Extend the 279 to Finsbury Park station. -Will provide better onwards connections west and south towards central London, far better than Manor House ever could
2. Create a new bus route from Waltham Cross right the way down to Tottenham Hale, all via the A1055. Via Enfield lock/Mollison Avenue, Brimsdown station, Ponders End station, Picketts Lock Centre, Meridian Water, Northumberland Park and Tottenham Hale/Seven Sisters - The Picketts Lock centre currently does not have any form of bus/train link northwards. I do NOT count Ponders End as it is simply too far away to be of any assistance (try walking the distance if u disagree with me!) Also helps travel connections easier for the likes of Finsbury Park, Holloway, etc. *DOUBLE DECK.* -Could call it the LV1 bus.
3. Make a new bus route from Waltham Cross to Chingford - no reason here, just think it’ll make good links. Could potentially be a single decker route (Could call it the LV2)
4. A new bus route from Tottenham Hale to Chingford via the A1055, then onto the A406 via meridian water then following the 444 bus route . -Again making new links. Could also take pressure of Victoria line and national rail (Could call this LV3)
|
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Nov 4, 2024 22:40:24 GMT
Here are all the changes of bus routes that I think should happen in Enfield (as well as changes to bus routes that go through Enfield.) I am a local here and have been so for the past 30 years. 1. Extend the 279 to Finsbury Park station. -Will provide better onwards connections west and south towards central London, far better than Manor House ever could 2. Create a new bus route from Waltham Cross right the way down to Tottenham Hale, all via the A1055. Via Enfield lock/Mollison Avenue, Brimsdown station, Ponders End station, Picketts Lock Centre, Meridian Water, Northumberland Park and Tottenham Hale/Seven Sisters - The Picketts Lock centre currently does not have any form of bus/train link northwards. I do NOT count Ponders End as it is simply too far away to be of any assistance (try walking the distance if u disagree with me!) Also helps travel connections easier for the likes of Finsbury Park, Holloway, etc. *DOUBLE DECK.* -Could call it the LV1 bus. 3. Make a new bus route from Waltham Cross to Chingford - no reason here, just think it’ll make good links. Could potentially be a single decker route (Could call it the LV2) 4. A new bus route from Tottenham Hale to Chingford via the A1055, then onto the A406 via meridian water then following the 444 bus route . -Again making new links. Could also take pressure of Victoria line and national rail (Could call this LV3) I cannot see any gain sending the 279 to Finsbury Park. A lot of people get off these routes at Manor House, same with the 259. Just a pointless extension. What you fail to forget it mirrors the 259 from Edmonton Green, if someone really wanted to make the 4 more stops for a connection of the 19 or 4. Some of these destinations are available from Manor House or even Seven Sisters. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Nov 4, 2024 22:42:20 GMT
18: withdrawn between Harlesden High Street and Sudbury. Diverted to Wembley First Way via route 206 to First Way. Extended from Euston to Holborn via route 91 to Southampton Row, Theobalds Road and Red Lion Square. To link Acton Lane with Harrow Road.
118: a new route running between Sudbury and Paddington Basin via route 18 to Harlesden, Harrow Road, Kensal Green Station, Labroke Grove, route 52 to Notting Hill Gate, route 94 to Lancaster Gate, Lancaster Terrace, Susssx Gardens, Spring Street, Paddington, Eastbourne Terrace, route 46 to Harrow Road and North Wharf Road. Maintain links lost by the 18, to help out the 18 and to link Harlesden with Ladbroke Grove. Yes I know that their’s a 118 but I think that it will withdrawn in the favour of the 45 being extended to Morden)
|
|
ZiyQ
Conductor
I always end up saying too much - beware of the waffle posts taking up an entire thread’s page…
Posts: 113
|
Post by ZiyQ on Nov 4, 2024 23:26:45 GMT
Here are all the changes of bus routes that I think should happen in Enfield (as well as changes to bus routes that go through Enfield.) I am a local here and have been so for the past 30 years. 1. Extend the 279 to Finsbury Park station. -Will provide better onwards connections west and south towards central London, far better than Manor House ever could 2. Create a new bus route from Waltham Cross right the way down to Tottenham Hale, all via the A1055. Via Enfield lock/Mollison Avenue, Brimsdown station, Ponders End station, Picketts Lock Centre, Meridian Water, Northumberland Park and Tottenham Hale/Seven Sisters - The Picketts Lock centre currently does not have any form of bus/train link northwards. I do NOT count Ponders End as it is simply too far away to be of any assistance (try walking the distance if u disagree with me!) Also helps travel connections easier for the likes of Finsbury Park, Holloway, etc. *DOUBLE DECK.* -Could call it the LV1 bus. 3. Make a new bus route from Waltham Cross to Chingford - no reason here, just think it’ll make good links. Could potentially be a single decker route (Could call it the LV2) 4. A new bus route from Tottenham Hale to Chingford via the A1055, then onto the A406 via meridian water then following the 444 bus route . -Again making new links. Could also take pressure of Victoria line and national rail (Could call this LV3) I cannot see any gain sending the 279 to Finsbury Park. A lot of people get off these routes at Manor House, same with the 259. Just a pointless extension. What you fail to forget it mirrors the 259 from Edmonton Green, if someone really wanted to make the 4 more stops for a connection of the 19 or 4. Some of these destinations are available from Manor House or even Seven Sisters. Although the Manor House stand isn't at all ideal (I do wonder how the LTs manage around Manor House, as I thought the LTs were restricted because of the stand) - I could definitely still see a link to Finsbury Park being useful, and the fact that it stops just short of the large interchange that Finsbury Park is - with both the Northbound stops on the 210, W3 and W7, the Thameslink and Great Northern services, as well as the southbound routes towards Highbury and Islington. There's been a lot of times where I've personally wanted to use the 279 to Finsbury Park (though I might be in a relatively small minority of people going to Gatwick Airport from Finsbury Park here), and I don't see a 4 bus stop extension as being a waste of money if it would likely get a lot of demand. I think a fact that is sometimes overlooked is that despite the length of the route, there's still a lot of end-to-end journeys on it, and over my years of using the route, I've heard a lot of people just wanting to stay on the bus until Seven Sisters / Manor House, even if it duplicates the Overground and Victoria Line. I understand that the route would duplicate the 259 to Finsbury Park, but the route would bring much easier direct accessible connections from Northward destinations, and there would likely be high amounts of demand onwards from Manor House. Whilst Manor House is an okay interchange point, it's quite a long walk from the 279 stands to change onto the 29/141/341, and a Finsbury Park extension would achieve so many better onward links for a massive trunk route that the 279 is, especially considering that there is stand space available at Finsbury Park. A compromise could be to operate shorts to Manor House, as I believe there used to be before, and have half of the service extended to Finsbury Park - though I'm not sure how realistic this would be under TfL's current state. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Nov 4, 2024 23:40:17 GMT
I cannot see any gain sending the 279 to Finsbury Park. A lot of people get off these routes at Manor House, same with the 259. Just a pointless extension. What you fail to forget it mirrors the 259 from Edmonton Green, if someone really wanted to make the 4 more stops for a connection of the 19 or 4. Some of these destinations are available from Manor House or even Seven Sisters. Although the Manor House stand isn't at all ideal (I do wonder how the LTs manage around Manor House, as I thought the LTs were restricted because of the stand) - I could definitely still see a link to Finsbury Park being useful, and the fact that it stops just short of the large interchange that Finsbury Park is - with both the Northbound stops on the 210, W3 and W7, the Thameslink and Great Northern services, as well as the southbound routes towards Highbury and Islington. There's been a lot of times where I've personally wanted to use the 279 to Finsbury Park (though I might be in a relatively small minority of people going to Gatwick Airport from Finsbury Park here), and I don't see a 4 bus stop extension as being a waste of money if it would likely get a lot of demand. I think a fact that is sometimes overlooked is that despite the length of the route, there's still a lot of end-to-end journeys on it, and over my years of using the route, I've heard a lot of people just wanting to stay on the bus until Seven Sisters / Manor House, even if it duplicates the Overground and Victoria Line. I understand that the route would duplicate the 259 to Finsbury Park, but the route would bring much easier direct accessible connections from Northward destinations, and there would likely be high amounts of demand onwards from Manor House. Whilst Manor House is an okay interchange point, it's quite a long walk from the 279 stands to change onto the 29/141/341, and a Finsbury Park extension would achieve so many better onward links for a massive trunk route that the 279 is, especially considering that there is stand space available at Finsbury Park. A compromise could be to operate shorts to Manor House, as I believe there used to be before, and have half of the service extended to Finsbury Park - though I'm not sure how realistic this would be under TfL's current state. Why do people keep coming up with these things about LT's they are not some kind of t-rex that you cannot fit down the street. They do have good steering lock, the only problem is the length. It is a curtailment point for the 253, 254, 279 at Manor House which uses LT's. As I have said, I do not see people getting off the 279 to get a 253, 254, 279 to Finsbury Park to change for other buses. It is pointless and never saw hardly any complaints when the 279 was cut back to Manor House from Holloway around 2002. I have walked along the last stop at Manor House on the 279 to the 29 stop on Seven Sisters Rd and it does not take that long. Far more other stops on the network with further walks than that. |
|
ZiyQ
Conductor
I always end up saying too much - beware of the waffle posts taking up an entire thread’s page…
Posts: 113
|
Post by ZiyQ on Nov 4, 2024 23:58:40 GMT
Although the Manor House stand isn't at all ideal (I do wonder how the LTs manage around Manor House, as I thought the LTs were restricted because of the stand) - I could definitely still see a link to Finsbury Park being useful, and the fact that it stops just short of the large interchange that Finsbury Park is - with both the Northbound stops on the 210, W3 and W7, the Thameslink and Great Northern services, as well as the southbound routes towards Highbury and Islington. There's been a lot of times where I've personally wanted to use the 279 to Finsbury Park (though I might be in a relatively small minority of people going to Gatwick Airport from Finsbury Park here), and I don't see a 4 bus stop extension as being a waste of money if it would likely get a lot of demand. I think a fact that is sometimes overlooked is that despite the length of the route, there's still a lot of end-to-end journeys on it, and over my years of using the route, I've heard a lot of people just wanting to stay on the bus until Seven Sisters / Manor House, even if it duplicates the Overground and Victoria Line. I understand that the route would duplicate the 259 to Finsbury Park, but the route would bring much easier direct accessible connections from Northward destinations, and there would likely be high amounts of demand onwards from Manor House. Whilst Manor House is an okay interchange point, it's quite a long walk from the 279 stands to change onto the 29/141/341, and a Finsbury Park extension would achieve so many better onward links for a massive trunk route that the 279 is, especially considering that there is stand space available at Finsbury Park. A compromise could be to operate shorts to Manor House, as I believe there used to be before, and have half of the service extended to Finsbury Park - though I'm not sure how realistic this would be under TfL's current state. Why do people keep coming up with these things about LT's they are not some kind of t-rex that you cannot fit down the street. They do have good steering lock, the only problem is the length. It is a curtailment point for the 253, 254, 279 at Manor House which uses LT's. As I have said, I do not see people getting off the 279 to get a 253, 254, 279 to Finsbury Park to change for other buses. It is pointless and never saw hardly any complaints when the 279 was cut back to Manor House from Holloway around 2002. I have walked along the last stop at Manor House on the 279 to the 29 stop on Seven Sisters Rd and it does not take that long. Far more other stops on the network with further walks than that. I have heard some things being said about the LTs' length making them hard to regularly fit around the stand, but perhaps that may not be an issue. It's clear that you definitely have a lot more prior (and concrete) knowledge of the 279 (especially of its Holloway days) than me. It might still be a useful link to change onto a lot of other modes (a small factor may be the Thameslink core not being nearly as intense in 2002 as it now is) - but a lot of what I've said has come from what I've heard other people say and what I personally think as well. Thanks for giving a more balanced argument than me, at least  |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Nov 5, 2024 15:18:26 GMT
452: withdrawn between Ladbroke Grove Sainsbury’s and Notting Hill Gate. Diverted to Kensal Rise via Notting Hill Gate, Holland Park Avenue, Holland Park Avenue, Arial Way, route 228 to White City Station, 220 to Scrubbs Lane, Harrow Road, Ladbroke Grove, Kilburn Lane and Route 28 to Kensal Rise. To link Kensal Rise with Kensal Green, to link Harrow Road with White City and to link Holland Park Avenue with Kensington High Road.
|
|
|
|
Post by greg on Nov 5, 2024 17:03:35 GMT
18: withdrawn between Harlesden High Street and Sudbury. Diverted to Wembley First Way via route 206 to First Way. Extended from Euston to Holborn via route 91 to Southampton Row, Theobalds Road and Red Lion Square. To link Acton Lane with Harrow Road. 118: a new route running between Sudbury and Paddington Basin via route 18 to Harlesden, Harrow Road, Kensal Green Station, Labroke Grove, route 52 to Notting Hill Gate, route 94 to Lancaster Gate, Lancaster Terrace, Susssx Gardens, Spring Street, Paddington, Eastbourne Terrace, route 46 to Harrow Road and North Wharf Road. Maintain links lost by the 18, to help out the 18 and to link Harlesden with Ladbroke Grove. Yes I know that their’s a 118 but I think that it will withdrawn in the favour of the 45 being extended to Morden) These are some changes I can work with |
|
