|
|
Post by uakari on Nov 8, 2021 23:01:40 GMT
I personally think the 274 serves a useful function as an inner north London orbital and I would want to keep a route at least from Angel to Baker Street via the same roads.
|
|
|
|
Post by greg on Nov 9, 2021 18:02:48 GMT
A new bus route replacing the current 274 but changed in many aspects: 274: Notting Hill Gate to Parliament Hill Fields Notting Hill Gate Queensway Lancaster Gate Marble Arch Gloucester Road (Portman Street) BOTHWAYS * Marylebone Square = London Business School & London Central Mosque (Park Road) Eamont Street & Avenue Road London Zoo Camden Town station Kentish Town Road Lady Somerset Road Parliament Hill Fields * - This is the section that routes 2, 30 and 74 currently serve towards Baker Street but serve bothways which is currently has no bus link in the Marble Arch direction = - This is the section that all bus routes previously served towards North West London by the junction of Melcombe Street before the two way rerouting other bus changes: 476: rerouted at Upper Street to Mornington Crescent Station via route 274 to Pratt Street and then Plender Street to Mornington Crescent Station. Bringing new links to North London from Camden and better linkages from the area. Remains a Sainsburys link from Camden Road and Islington estates. Reduces overbussing on Pentonville Road with routes 73/476. 134: rerouted at Pratt Street to Oxford Circus via Albany Street and Great Portland Street. Brings a bus route serving further North which is the common link down Great Portland Street and faster journeys. 88: rerouted between Camden Town and Oxford Circus via Mornington Crescent and Warren Street. serving more hotspots which is partly the main purpose of the 88, and supporting route 27. Withdrawn between Camden Town and Parliament Hill Fields and diverted to Chalk Farm to bring a new link from Oxford/Regent Street and Piccadilly Circus to Camden & Stables Market. 27: extended to Hampstead Heath via route 168 from Chalk Farm Road. 168: rerouted to Hampstead Heath via route 24 from Chalk Farm Road. 24: withdrawn between Chalk Farm Road and Hampstead Heath, diverted to Archway via route 134, to support route 134 and bring new links and remain the UCLH to Kentish Town link. Reduces buses running down Baker Street, on the new 274 by now serving unused roads and can have faster journeys. FYI: I live in the area and all the changes I suggested even the small ones (27/168 etc) could benefit for the area and passenger links, and bus timetables etc. For example, people from Queens Crescent would rather benefit a link to Euston and people from Belsize Park to Baker Street. 476 coming to Camden Town will benefit a lot of passengers north of the area, rather than the 274 going into London Zoo which is separated from another route coming west. The 88/134/274 is to simply bring new links and improve reliability on the 88/134. Hampstead Road which is always shut means the 134 is often curtailed to Mornington Crescent, the 24 running inbetween and further south/north means that they can have a stable bus link at all times and passengers heading north from Oxo can have the 134 which goes further than PHF. I disagree with you on the 274s western section, if there were any significant problems regarding capacity between Lancaster Gate & Notting Hill Gate it would be best to re-increase the 148. I don't know whether I'd agree with you on the 134, that would make the route longer than it currently is so I don't know whether it could do with an extension that long but I do rather like the idea of Oxford Circus, I certainly think it's better than Warren Street, ideally I'd have said return it to Tottenham Court Road however that's got little chance of happening. I can't see the 24 proposal happening, the 135 was removed years ago and the 134 has seen subsequent increases over the years. The 88 proposals I can agree with. Does the 27 really need support? I do like the 476 idea but Camden would be better to terminate it at or even London Zoo with the 74 extended to Camden The 274 comment you made makes sense. I thought an extra push to NHG may be beneficial especially from Baker Street, seems like a handy link and much quicker than the 27. Lancaster Gate really does seem a dead place to terminate the route, perhaps Marble Arch? The 134 rerouted to Oxo, would probably take the same time on journey when it ran to TCR, only reason it was cut back was to reduce buses during the two way if im not mistaken (similar to Euston with 59/476(this case the 14/134)). It would also be rather handy and probably the best route to North even before the 88/C2 days. Also as the 134 is quite a residental route, people from Hampstead Road do not go further than Kentish Town regardless. The 24 change was merely to bring back the UCLH to North London link beyond Kentish Town, and since the 274 was serving PHF already, best place was down Archway which would firstly remain the existing 134 link even to TCR, and support the 390 despite going a different way (similar to how the 109/250 run). The 134 can be heavily jampacked during the peaks too. Id say 27 can be the busiest route down Marylebone Road and the stretch of Euston Road it serves during the peaks, it is defo needing some support. Limited space at Camden Town for the 476 and furthermore Mornington Crescent has a huge office building which can benefit passengers from the North, and has huge stands especially during LOR. I disagree with London Zoo, zero demand from the north and most demand from central and west london, the 476 would be useless imo. Looking back at my feedback, perhaps the 24 to PHF and the 274 to Archway instead may be more beneficial |
|
|
|
Post by greg on Nov 9, 2021 18:06:43 GMT
I personally think the 274 serves a useful function as an inner north London orbital and I would want to keep a route at least from Angel to Baker Street via the same roads. I see why however as the roads are quiet and luxurious, the orbital seems to just not work. Its like passengers are split onto different sections of the route. Angel to Camden Town Sainsburys Camden High Street to Lancaster Gate Reckon very little of the 274’s commuters cross inbetween those two splits. Most people move to the 30 or 205/390 closeby instead as it is more “direct”. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 9, 2021 18:36:12 GMT
I personally think the 274 serves a useful function as an inner north London orbital and I would want to keep a route at least from Angel to Baker Street via the same roads. I see why however as the roads are quiet and luxurious, the orbital seems to just not work. Its like passengers are split onto different sections of the route. Angel to Camden Town Sainsburys Camden High Street to Lancaster Gate Reckon very little of the 274’s commuters cross inbetween those two splits. Most people move to the 30 or 205/390 closeby instead as it is more “direct”. I'd imagine the most used sections are Islington via Barnsbury to Camden Town and people loading up at either Camden Town or Baker Street stations to head back to the Primrose Hill area. I could see it being Extended to NHG which would give a useful selfridges link along the Bayswater Road and the 94 scaled down if it did get cut to Marble Arch. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Nov 9, 2021 18:50:30 GMT
I disagree with you on the 274s western section, if there were any significant problems regarding capacity between Lancaster Gate & Notting Hill Gate it would be best to re-increase the 148. I don't know whether I'd agree with you on the 134, that would make the route longer than it currently is so I don't know whether it could do with an extension that long but I do rather like the idea of Oxford Circus, I certainly think it's better than Warren Street, ideally I'd have said return it to Tottenham Court Road however that's got little chance of happening. I can't see the 24 proposal happening, the 135 was removed years ago and the 134 has seen subsequent increases over the years. The 88 proposals I can agree with. Does the 27 really need support? I do like the 476 idea but Camden would be better to terminate it at or even London Zoo with the 74 extended to Camden The 274 comment you made makes sense. I thought an extra push to NHG may be beneficial especially from Baker Street, seems like a handy link and much quicker than the 27. Lancaster Gate really does seem a dead place to terminate the route, perhaps Marble Arch? The 134 rerouted to Oxo, would probably take the same time on journey when it ran to TCR, only reason it was cut back was to reduce buses during the two way if im not mistaken (similar to Euston with 59/476(this case the 14/134)). It would also be rather handy and probably the best route to North even before the 88/C2 days. Also as the 134 is quite a residental route, people from Hampstead Road do not go further than Kentish Town regardless. The 24 change was merely to bring back the UCLH to North London link beyond Kentish Town, and since the 274 was serving PHF already, best place was down Archway which would firstly remain the existing 134 link even to TCR, and support the 390 despite going a different way (similar to how the 109/250 run). The 134 can be heavily jampacked during the peaks too. Id say 27 can be the busiest route down Marylebone Road and the stretch of Euston Road it serves during the peaks, it is defo needing some support. Limited space at Camden Town for the 476 and furthermore Mornington Crescent has a huge office building which can benefit passengers from the North, and has huge stands especially during LOR. I disagree with London Zoo, zero demand from the north and most demand from central and west london, the 476 would be useless imo. Looking back at my feedback, perhaps the 24 to PHF and the 274 to Archway instead may be more beneficial The 134 I can't say is the worst idea but I don't know whether it would be as handy as when it was at Tottenham Court Road. I imagine the West End link is all that it would have going for it, and as I've said the previous 135 (Oxford Circus - Archway) was scaled away with the 134 increased so I don't know if there's demand for Albany Street/Marylebone from North London.
The 24 wouldn't be any help because whilst the 134 does get busy the 24 gets caught up in nasty Central London congestion and the 43 has been scaled back in regards to frequency so in order to maintain capacity on the busy Highgate to Friern Barnet feeder corridor you could increase the 134. I don't know whether Archway to Kentish Town needs a second route. I get the UCLH to Kentish Town link would be lost but that would unfortunately be the price to pay for these changes (and I doubt that would be popular politically), if something was absolutely needed as a solution (co existing with the 88 changes) withdraw the 393 between Chalk Farm & Kentish Town and divert it to Warren Street, Camden/UCLH might be more useful than Chalk Farm especially with the Morrisons now closed but the estates in the area might lose valuable local links so I'd probably disagree (especially as Nags Head seems to be a popular shopping destination). I also wonder whether the constant Hampstead Road roadworks have completely put people off using it to the hospital, the 134 seems pretty dead down to Warren Street nowadays and ideally it should return to TCR but that doesn't seem possible.
I think the 18/205 are the busiest down the Marylebone Road but I'll be open minded and take your word for that.
Only reason why I suggested London Zoo was for leisure purposes and also retaining the link from the Market Road/Barnsbury/Angel areas. |
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Nov 9, 2021 21:15:01 GMT
I personally think the 274 serves a useful function as an inner north London orbital and I would want to keep a route at least from Angel to Baker Street via the same roads. I see why however as the roads are quiet and luxurious, the orbital seems to just not work. Its like passengers are split onto different sections of the route. Angel to Camden Town Sainsburys Camden High Street to Lancaster Gate Reckon very little of the 274’s commuters cross inbetween those two splits. Most people move to the 30 or 205/390 closeby instead as it is more “direct”. I'm guessing you mean round St John's Wood and Primrose Hill, as it would be a bit of a stretch to describe Agar Grove or Caledonian Road as 'luxurious'! My experience is that passengers do travel between those areas and Regent's Park, London Zoo and Baker Street, although all the way to Lancaster Gate isn't the most direct. The 274 can sometimes beat the 390 between Oxford Street and York Way, depending on traffic. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Nov 9, 2021 21:40:15 GMT
I see why however as the roads are quiet and luxurious, the orbital seems to just not work. Its like passengers are split onto different sections of the route. Angel to Camden Town Sainsburys Camden High Street to Lancaster Gate Reckon very little of the 274’s commuters cross inbetween those two splits. Most people move to the 30 or 205/390 closeby instead as it is more “direct”. I'm guessing you mean round St John's Wood and Primrose Hill, as it would be a bit of a stretch to describe Agar Grove or Caledonian Road as 'luxurious'! My experience is that passengers do travel between those areas and Regent's Park, London Zoo and Baker Street, although all the way to Lancaster Gate isn't the most direct. The 274 can sometimes beat the 390 between Oxford Street and York Way, depending on traffic. Now you mention that it does make sense. The cycle lanes on York Way & roadworks made the 390 a nightmare to use when I last used it. |
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Nov 9, 2021 21:47:30 GMT
I'm guessing you mean round St John's Wood and Primrose Hill, as it would be a bit of a stretch to describe Agar Grove or Caledonian Road as 'luxurious'! My experience is that passengers do travel between those areas and Regent's Park, London Zoo and Baker Street, although all the way to Lancaster Gate isn't the most direct. The 274 can sometimes beat the 390 between Oxford Street and York Way, depending on traffic. Now you mention that it does make sense. The cycle lanes on York Way & roadworks made the 390 a nightmare to use when I last used it. Oxford Street is still hellish so it's good to have an alternative for that journey. Euston Road can get pretty bad too. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Nov 9, 2021 22:32:50 GMT
Regarding the suggestions made around the Camden area, the 274 is probably best left as it is, even if most passenger flows are separated either side of Camden - the service level generally matches demand. It is more difficult to split and replace than you might think, as many of the other routes in the area that could potentially be extended over part of the 274 are more frequent. There's also not many options at the Angel end that could extend towards Camden - perhaps the 135 from Old Street, though that could end up being too long.
I think the best way of replacing the 274, if needed, might be to extend route 31 from Camden to Angel - offering perhaps a more useful orbital link via Swiss Cottage rather than Primrose Hill and St Johns Wood - if this could be operated reliably. Then maybe extend the shortened 414 to Camden via London Zoo, with the 74 cut back to Marble Arch.
I agree with most of the suggestions to swap around some of the north-south routes through Camden Town, particularly to make the 134 more useful than Warren Street, and improve reliability on the 88 again. Though rather than rerouteing to parallel the 134 to Archway, I would instead suggest for the 24 to go to Parliament Hill to replace the 88, maintaining a link from there to the West End. Then extend the 27 to Hampstead Heath - the 168 should be sufficient as a link further into Central London.
|
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Nov 10, 2021 22:12:17 GMT
If there were concerns regarding overcrowding on the 390 then here goes:
Route 73: Extended to Victoria via current Route 390. This was vastly more popular into Islington than the 390 is into York Way/Torriano Estate.
Route 390: Withdrawn between Oxford Circus but revised to run every 5 minutes during the AM & PM peak (if the residential section is where demand is).
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Nov 10, 2021 23:07:21 GMT
If there were concerns regarding overcrowding on the 390 then here goes: Route 73: Extended to Victoria via current Route 390. This was vastly more popular into Islington than the 390 is into York Way/Torriano Estate. Route 390: Withdrawn between Oxford Circus but revised to run every 5 minutes during the AM & PM peak (if the residential section is where demand is). Thoughts? Pointless, never going to happen in this climate. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 10, 2021 23:08:09 GMT
If there were concerns regarding overcrowding on the 390 then here goes: Route 73: Extended to Victoria via current Route 390. This was vastly more popular into Islington than the 390 is into York Way/Torriano Estate. Route 390: Withdrawn between Oxford Circus but revised to run every 5 minutes during the AM & PM peak (if the residential section is where demand is). Thoughts? As far as I'm aware there haven't been any overcrowding issues. I see the 390 regularly along the full length of Oxford Street and its not exactly rammed. It become more frequent between Kings X and Archway then pre 2017 and it still have the 73 from Oxo to help I was on Shaftesbury Avenue and Piccadilly tonight between 5.30 and 6ish I guess and I have to say I was quite shocked by how empty the 38s are now. I know people on here never want to acknowledge it but I genuinely was shocked by just how many I saw in either direction with little more then a handful on each, some probably with 3 people. 19s similar aswell if running behind a 38. Also on Piccadilly in the direction of Russell Square literally empty 14s in convoy which admittedly against the flow at that time but even heading away from the town the 14s and 22s were light is best to describe it. Half the seats maybe taken upstairs and some downstairs but no standing. Hard to belive in the original Routemaster days, which did hold less I know, but would be heaving at these times back to Victoria, Putney etc. Really quite a surprise and either shows quite how bad the decline is and what a mountain to get some back or how work from home really has taken hold. Sad really. |
|
|
|
Post by Trafalgax on Nov 10, 2021 23:28:13 GMT
Does 390 actually have that much demand between Archway and Kings Cross for it to be every 5 mins peak hours?
|
|
|
|
Post by YX10FFN on Nov 10, 2021 23:31:13 GMT
If there were concerns regarding overcrowding on the 390 then here goes: Route 73: Extended to Victoria via current Route 390. This was vastly more popular into Islington than the 390 is into York Way/Torriano Estate. Route 390: Withdrawn between Oxford Circus but revised to run every 5 minutes during the AM & PM peak (if the residential section is where demand is). Thoughts? As far as I'm aware there haven't been any overcrowding issues. I see the 390 regularly along the full length of Oxford Street and its not exactly rammed. It become more frequent between Kings X and Archway then pre 2017 and it still have the 73 from Oxo to help I was on Shaftesbury Avenue and Piccadilly tonight between 5.30 and 6ish I guess and I have to say I was quite shocked by how empty the 38s are now. I know people on here never want to acknowledge it but I genuinely was shocked by just how many I saw in either direction with little more then a handful on each, some probably with 3 people. 19s similar aswell if running behind a 38. Also on Piccadilly in the direction of Russell Square literally empty 14s in convoy which admittedly against the flow at that time but even heading away from the town the 14s and 22s were light is best to describe it. Half the seats maybe taken upstairs and some downstairs but no standing. Hard to belive in the original Routemaster days, which did hold less I know, but would be heaving at these times back to Victoria, Putney etc. Really quite a surprise and either shows quite how bad the decline is and what a mountain to get some back or how work from home really has taken hold. Sad really. Went on a 38 from Hackney into town during the PM peak and my bus was more busy than any that were coming the other way. Really strange. Although should mention the westbound 9 I got on at Piccadilly Circus was rammed. Bus commuting from Central London still exists but far less than pre covid or even 10-15 years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 10, 2021 23:39:41 GMT
As far as I'm aware there haven't been any overcrowding issues. I see the 390 regularly along the full length of Oxford Street and its not exactly rammed. It become more frequent between Kings X and Archway then pre 2017 and it still have the 73 from Oxo to help I was on Shaftesbury Avenue and Piccadilly tonight between 5.30 and 6ish I guess and I have to say I was quite shocked by how empty the 38s are now. I know people on here never want to acknowledge it but I genuinely was shocked by just how many I saw in either direction with little more then a handful on each, some probably with 3 people. 19s similar aswell if running behind a 38. Also on Piccadilly in the direction of Russell Square literally empty 14s in convoy which admittedly against the flow at that time but even heading away from the town the 14s and 22s were light is best to describe it. Half the seats maybe taken upstairs and some downstairs but no standing. Hard to belive in the original Routemaster days, which did hold less I know, but would be heaving at these times back to Victoria, Putney etc. Really quite a surprise and either shows quite how bad the decline is and what a mountain to get some back or how work from home really has taken hold. Sad really. Went on a 38 from Hackney into town during the PM peak and my bus was more busy than any that were coming the other way. Really strange. Although should mention the westbound 9 I got on at Piccadilly Circus was rammed. Bus commuting from Central London still exists but far less than pre covid or even 10-15 years ago. Well far less is what tfl are either addressing through the 63 trial or through their proposed service changes/cutbacks for inner/central London. Whatever wins out the experience/network could be different in a couple of years time. |
|
