|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Oct 24, 2021 11:25:20 GMT
I agree about the 215 to Whipps Cross and the W11 could perhaps be extended to Chingford Hatch with a Chingford Hall Estate being a double run? I think it might be better to withdraw the 13 between Marble Arch and Victoria rather than reducing the frequency throughout, although no doubt usage has fallen because of the poor service under TT. I'm not sure about reducing the 133, I think it might be better to axe the 415 and extend the 155 or 333 to Old Kent Road Tesco. Once again your showing you have no idea about routes in my area. The 133 can cope with a frequency cut given how frequent it is in the first place - removing the 415 however breaks particular local links that neither the 155 or 333 can address and gives assistance to the 2 & 432 from Brixton This is why I prefer layering frequencies like a cake rather than having for example a high frequency on the 2 (instead of the 415) to cope with Tulse Hill loadings whilst it would then overbus the rest of the route.
|
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Jan 10, 2022 21:46:50 GMT
Yes it’s only a short distance but that begs the question of why the 205 needs to run down there in the first place, other than the fact there is a bus stand at Drapers Field. The N205 runs there to provide the East Village with a link to Central London, a link which is not needed in the daytime. Hello? Stratford City. It would be useful to help control overcrowding. If you wanted to control overcrowding you might as well send it to Stratford or the 8 to Stratford via the 25. I must say even the 388 is busy on the Stratford end, so I imagine the eastern section shouldn't be reduced like someone suggested.
Also regarding overcrowding, one suggestion I might have would be withdrawing the 357, extending the 215 to Whipps Cross & then increasing the 97 slightly. That would stay relatively cost neutral.
|
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Jan 10, 2022 22:07:55 GMT
Hello? Stratford City. It would be useful to help control overcrowding. If you wanted to control overcrowding you might as well send it to Stratford or the 8 to Stratford via the 25. I must say even the 388 is busy on the Stratford end, so I imagine the eastern section shouldn't be reduced like someone suggested.
Also regarding overcrowding, one suggestion I might have would be withdrawing the 357, extending the 215 to Whipps Cross & then increasing the 97 slightly. That would stay relatively cost neutral.
388 busy on the Stratford end? I have yet to see a busy 388! |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Jan 10, 2022 22:11:55 GMT
If you wanted to control overcrowding you might as well send it to Stratford or the 8 to Stratford via the 25. I must say even the 388 is busy on the Stratford end, so I imagine the eastern section shouldn't be reduced like someone suggested.
Also regarding overcrowding, one suggestion I might have would be withdrawing the 357, extending the 215 to Whipps Cross & then increasing the 97 slightly. That would stay relatively cost neutral.
388 busy on the Stratford end? I have yet to see a busy 388! I was in Stratford recently about the middle of the day and had gone to Stratford City and saw quite busy 388s although this was in the run up to Christmas. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Jan 12, 2022 6:31:40 GMT
The 357 and 388 both have a lot of duplication with other routes and in these times of cuts it could be argued those passengers can use other routes and the hopper fare. That doesn't mean we just remove them however - I mean the 357 has a hospital link which wouldn't be a great look when TfL themselves have been prioritising such links. Just because a route has duplication with other routes doesn't mean it should be on the chopping block otherwise you may as well completely remove 50% of the network overnight. In regards to the 357 (and this is coming from a backseat POV) we I suppose have two answers to the debate & for some they believe the 215 should replace the 357 to Whipps Cross with the 357 done away with & in the case of the late snoggle & yourself keeping the 357 as is. Unfortunately we will come to no conclusive answer anytime soon but TBH I wouldn’t be surprised if it was looked at. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2022 7:34:33 GMT
215 extension to Waltham Cross via Waltham Abbey. It would connect Chingford and Walthamstow very well and I see passengers using this extension.
|
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Jan 12, 2022 7:50:40 GMT
215 extension to Waltham Cross via Waltham Abbey. It would connect Chingford and Walthamstow very well and I see passengers using this extension. If Hertfordshire or Essex county councils paid for it, then sure. But completely inappropriate for TfL, ie London taxpayers, to subsidise a service outside the area of little use to them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2022 8:42:06 GMT
215 extension to Waltham Cross via Waltham Abbey. It would connect Chingford and Walthamstow very well and I see passengers using this extension. If Hertfordshire or Essex county councils paid for it, then sure. But completely inappropriate for TfL, ie London taxpayers, to subsidise a service outside the area of little use to them. This should've happened years ago but now TFL don't want to fund crossborder routes  |
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Jan 12, 2022 8:51:05 GMT
If Hertfordshire or Essex county councils paid for it, then sure. But completely inappropriate for TfL, ie London taxpayers, to subsidise a service outside the area of little use to them. This should've happened years ago but now TFL don't want to fund crossborder routes They've only ever funded cross border routes that reach a traffic objective of value to the London taxpayer, otherwise such services have been funded by home county authorities. Rightfully. As I say, the 215 is not of enough value to London residents to warrant extension |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Mar 1, 2022 22:57:36 GMT
82 - New route from Stratford-Wood Green via Stratford Int’l, Hackney Marshes, Lea Bridge, Clapton, Stamford Hill, and either (St. Ann’s Road and Turnpike Lane) or (South Tottenham, Seven Sisters and Lordship Lane) then Wood Green. Links Stratford with North East London. The St Ann’s route could also allow for a 67 withdrawal as the route parallel for a long amount. Think LondonNorthern makes good points regarding the northern section of the route, as for the southern, the existence of Lea Bridge Station means bus ridership will undoubtedly be lighter into Stratford from that area (which isn't densely populated as is). I assume your routing would be going down Orient Way, an industrial stretch that I imagine has little demand, and the section south of New Spitalfields just duplicates the 308. Yes that’s a very good take on it although I believe the 215 was eyed up for an extension to Orient Way in some form. Not too sure on what demand will be created although at a guess perhaps housing development? I think a North London to Stratford service would be great as a bus service although I think it was a missed opportunity back in the early noughties. Perhaps if the 25 was split in 1999 (which IIRC First had considered in tendering) then you could perhaps have had a 25 running between Oxford Circus with the support of the 8/242/521 at the time at an 8 minute frequency, a 6 minute frequency 425 running between Aldgate & Ilford (the demand is clearly higher to Ilford although so would warrant a higher frequency although especially under Bendy days the 25 would have very high loadings in and out of the city) and perhaps then have a 445 running between Tottenham & Stratford over the current 425 to Clapton Pond, 253 to Stamford Hill & then a 149 to Tottenham Bus Garage would have maybe been a sensible idea although the disadvantage would have been the 205 would’ve never made it to Bow most likely. I imagine the 445 might’ve been a good idea back in 2000 because the 253 I believe used to run at some ridiculous frequency like every 2-3 minutes (indicating heavy demand through Hackney & Stamford Hill) and that was with the 279 having run through to Holloway and the support of the 29/106/259. As for Lea Bridge Station, perhaps someone like capitalomnibus can correct me but I wonder whether with how Lea Bridge Road is now dominated by cycle lanes leading to increased congestion that users of the then 48, and present 55/56 had instead opted to feed into Lea Bridge, perhaps catch a GA into Stratford & then for those working in the city, then choosing to catch a GA/TFL Rail into town from there, or for London Bridge, the Jubilee Line? Could be talking absolute waffle here but I wonder whether with the reopening of Lea Bridge whether that changed quite a few travel patterns. |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Jul 31, 2022 11:00:43 GMT
Ideas for Chingford's bus network
The aims and objectives of these proposals are aimed to enchant connectivity and services whilst simplifying the bus network at the same time.
Changes to routes 215, 357 and the 385
There is a opportunity to simplify the Chingford Road bus corridor (A112) by merging the 357 with the 215 route. This will result in the 215 increased in its peak frequency to 4bph and 3bph on Sunday and Evenings. Routings to Chingford Hatch and Whipps Cross will not be replaced by the 215. Potential benefits of this merger is enhanced service provision is utilized to the Yardly Lane and Sewardstone Roads.
To retain direct hospital links to Whipps Cross from the Chingford areas, Route 385 could restructure into a 7 day half hourly service by diverting via New Road, Winchester Road and Wood Street before reaching Whipps Cross Hospital. This will not only retain links to Whipps Cross, but will create new journeys at the same time from Highams Park and Waltham Way to Whipps Cross. Rerouting via Cherrydown Avenue and Maida Avenue could take place at the same time alongside this to serve new roads within the bus network as what TfL are recently proposing for the route. Services will use the current 357 standing space at Whipps Cross Hospital. Evening and Sunday services will also run every half hourly.
New service running between Ponders End and South Woodford
The new service will run on Lea Valley Road, Sewardstone Road, New Road, Chingford Lane, Broadmead Road, St Barnabas Road, Chigwell Road and George Lane. Monday to Saturday frequency running 3bph and every half hourly on Sunday and Evenings with single deck vehicles. The route will also turn around at Enfield Bus Garage and has a option to extend to Enfield Retail Park if new demand justifies.
No current direct connections are in place between the Chingford Mount and the Woodford areas daily with the existing 657 school route only providing those links currently. Those links could convert to a daily service with a potential new service connecting to the Woodford and South Woodford areas directly from Chingford Mount creating new journeys directly to Chingford Mount town centre. New journeys from St Barnabas Road could also be created with new links to Woodford New Road.
The new service connecting to Ponders End could plug in a current connectivity gap as current links to the Enfield borough are limited with the existing 444 service only linking to Edmonton and North Middlesex Hospital rather than linking to the northern parts of the Enfield borough. Ponders End and the Southbury areas are currently experiencing population growth as part of the Upper Lea Valley Opportunity area with new homes and units being developed. New direct links to Chingford Mount will provide a new town centre link from Ponders End aswell plugging in a connectivity gap at the same time.
24 hour night services linking to Higham Hill
Higham Hill is currently within inaccessible distance to the daily night bus network despite the area being served with frequent London Overground services. There is a opportunity this accessibility gap could be plugged in by extending one of the existing night services to the area. The following two routes are in consideration:
Option 1: Diverting Route N73 to Higham Hill via Forest Road and Winchester Road. This service offers direct links to Central London such as Angel and London's West End during the night hours where economical centres are operating within the city.
Option 2: Extending Route N69 to Higham Hill via Church Hill, Forest Road and Winchester Road. This service offers night links aswell to a developed economic centre such as Stratford where users could benefit from this new link. Links aswell to a trunk road such as Hoe Street.
Both services will continue running on its existing frequency. They will also use the existing stand space at Jubilee Avenue before picking up at stop WG for Highams Park station.
|
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Sept 17, 2022 10:51:40 GMT
58/158 merged into one route, from East Ham to Chingford Mount, then extended to Chingford station. To link Chingford with Forest Gate and East Ham. Route takes the 58 LOR to St James's Street then the 158 route to Chingford Mount then to Chingford via route 97. To be numbered 58 and the 158 withdrawn. This also gives Blackhorse Road and Higham Hill a direct link to Chingford
215 extended to Stratford via route 158. To replace lost links on route 158
|
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Sept 17, 2022 10:55:17 GMT
58/158 merged into one route, from East Ham to Chingford Mount, then extended to Chingford station. To link Chingford with Forest Gate and East Ham. Route takes the 58 LOR to St James's Street then the 158 route to Chingford Mount then to Chingford via route 97. To be numbered 58 and the 158 withdrawn. This also gives Blackhorse Road and Higham Hill a direct link to Chingford 215 extended to Stratford via route 158. To replace lost links on route 158 Another absurd idea that would waste resources and make the bus network worse despite being more expensive. Suggest you go to Stratford station at peaks. You'll see why the 158 runs there at such a high frequency. The idea of replacing that with a every 20 minute 215 is laughable. All whilst cutting capacity on the core overlap 58/158 section and overbussing East Ham and Chingford. |
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Sept 17, 2022 10:58:59 GMT
58/158 merged into one route, from East Ham to Chingford Mount, then extended to Chingford station. To link Chingford with Forest Gate and East Ham. Route takes the 58 LOR to St James's Street then the 158 route to Chingford Mount then to Chingford via route 97. To be numbered 58 and the 158 withdrawn. This also gives Blackhorse Road and Higham Hill a direct link to Chingford 215 extended to Stratford via route 158. To replace lost links on route 158 The 58 already suffers lots of congestion around Green Street and Leyton, extending the route would make it unreliable! |
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Sept 17, 2022 11:04:11 GMT
58/158 merged into one route, from East Ham to Chingford Mount, then extended to Chingford station. To link Chingford with Forest Gate and East Ham. Route takes the 58 LOR to St James's Street then the 158 route to Chingford Mount then to Chingford via route 97. To be numbered 58 and the 158 withdrawn. This also gives Blackhorse Road and Higham Hill a direct link to Chingford 215 extended to Stratford via route 158. To replace lost links on route 158 Another absurd idea that would waste resources and make the bus network worse despite being more expensive. Suggest you go to Stratford station at peaks. You'll see why the 158 runs there at such a high frequency. The idea of replacing that with a every 20 minute 215 is laughable. All whilst cutting capacity on the core overlap 58/158 section and overbussing East Ham and Chingford. Double the frequency of the 215 then have Chingford Mount or Chingford station shorts (every other bus) Otherwise extend the 212 to Stratford and possibly cut the 58 to Chingford Mount |
|
