|
Post by LondonNorthern on Dec 27, 2021 13:42:10 GMT
My Brent Cross & Cricklewood Bus Study I have been reviewing the site of Brent Cross on how the bus network could respond to large scale developments taking place within the site. There were delays in posting this due to uncertainties of TFL's financial situation. In the meantime I will try and get other study reviews done back on schedule to be posted. Once again comments and feedback will be useful. Link : drive.google.com/file/d/1Iga5pY2wCgZXYyktSGW_vRP3ZvGiSeti/view?usp=sharing Really a fan of your 143 proposals and if you were to increase it to x8 you could probably do away with the SDO journeys whilst providing adequate capacity. Yes I do think the 143 would be good to terminate at Brent Cross West as it would provide a link to Staples Corner.
The 102 I wouldn't divert to Brent Cross West however, it's a really long service already and with the 143 already continuing links from the Ossulton Way/East Finchley area I don't see the need. The 210 is a more logical option and it would link in Highgate Village which could potentially be a lost link from the 143 if the planned diversion goes ahead and would link in massive hubs like Crouch End and Finsbury Park. I'd also tighten the running time a bit, it seems really slow off peak and even during the peaks.
The C11 makes sense to increase to x8 and I've been an advocate of it, I found it ridiculous that and the 31 & 236 were planned for reductions (even though the Overground especially on the 236 is probably mooted as a direct alternative).
The 16 proposal makes sense but I do wonder perhaps coupled in with either a double decker conversion or a freq increase the 316 is instead extended there linking in Queens Park & Ladbroke Grove, whereas the 189 covers quite a lot of links of the 16s.
I'm really open minded about your Wembley Central to Millbrook Park proposal, there is a weight restriction on Cool Oak Lane and it being too narrow and I do worry that might hamper buses being used on it as a whole, but I on the whole really like the proposal and I think Millbrook Park residents would probably prefer a link into Hendon, Brent Cross and Wembley rather than the Finchley Lido on the 382 and linking Cool Oak Lane into the network where there are some new builds. I agree with a Mill Hill East link into Brent Cross & also gives some support to the 240 and providing a higher frequency between Brent Cross Station and the shopping centre. The 182 is also quite indirect between Brent Cross & Wembley so this would ultimately provide faster connections.
I don't know about the 324 proposal as it does then disconnect Brent Cross Tesco from the network, the 326 could always be an alternative to Brent Cross Tesco but I do wonder whether with the loss of Toys'R'Us in recent years that demand has perhaps decreased between the Tesco & the Shopping Centre for it to justify longer buses but also a higher frequency. I would agree in terms of it having a higher frequency but I'm not so sure as to whether the Elstree extension was funded by TFL or HCC and as a result that might hamper an increased frequency coming to fruition.
The 232 split sounds okay, I do wonder how many people on the Eastern Section do journeys that cross Staples Corner ultimately because of its indirect nature weaving through Gladstone Park and with the 112 now extended to North Finchley (thank goodness that's now linked into Brent Cross!) people might've seen that as a more direct alternative. I do agree with a DD conversion on the Eastern Section.
The Friday/Saturday night service of the 182 I'm not too sure about north of Wembley, I can see merit on the eastern section because Gladstone Park currently does not have a night service but I do wonder with the N18/N140 whether it is worth having an N182. Ultimately if there are capacity problems north of Sudbury on the N18 the answer would probably be sending more journeys through to Harrow Weald and maybe have the N140 extended to Oxhey Lane. Not sure whether especially north of Harrow Weald a night service is justified.
All in all a really good set of proposals.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Dec 27, 2021 18:57:04 GMT
How does 308 to Ilford and 425 to Wanstead sound? 425 barely carries anyone from Bow Church to Ilford so maybe more people would be interested in going to Wanstead from Bow and Mile End. No point, far quicker to get the 145 to Ilford from Wanstead. The 108 used to go to Wanstead from Bow, the 257 had an increase IIRC to compensate for the 108 being withdrawn between Leytonstone Green Man and Stratford.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Dec 27, 2021 19:07:17 GMT
My Brent Cross & Cricklewood Bus Study I have been reviewing the site of Brent Cross on how the bus network could respond to large scale developments taking place within the site. There were delays in posting this due to uncertainties of TFL's financial situation. In the meantime I will try and get other study reviews done back on schedule to be posted. Once again comments and feedback will be useful. Link : drive.google.com/file/d/1Iga5pY2wCgZXYyktSGW_vRP3ZvGiSeti/view?usp=sharing Really a fan of your 143 proposals and if you were to increase it to x8 you could probably do away with the SDO journeys whilst providing adequate capacity. Yes I do think the 143 would be good to terminate at Brent Cross West as it would provide a link to Staples Corner.
The 102 I wouldn't divert to Brent Cross West however, it's a really long service already and with the 143 already continuing links from the Ossulton Way/East Finchley area I don't see the need. The 210 is a more logical option and it would link in Highgate Village which could potentially be a lost link from the 143 if the planned diversion goes ahead and would link in massive hubs like Crouch End and Finsbury Park. I'd also tighten the running time a bit, it seems really slow off peak and even during the peaks.
The C11 makes sense to increase to x8 and I've been an advocate of it, I found it ridiculous that and the 31 & 236 were planned for reductions (even though the Overground especially on the 236 is probably mooted as a direct alternative).
The 16 proposal makes sense but I do wonder perhaps coupled in with either a double decker conversion or a freq increase the 316 is instead extended there linking in Queens Park & Ladbroke Grove, whereas the 189 covers quite a lot of links of the 16s.
I'm really open minded about your Wembley Central to Millbrook Park proposal, there is a weight restriction on Cool Oak Lane and it being too narrow and I do worry that might hamper buses being used on it as a whole, but I on the whole really like the proposal and I think Millbrook Park residents would probably prefer a link into Hendon, Brent Cross and Wembley rather than the Finchley Lido on the 382 and linking Cool Oak Lane into the network where there are some new builds. I agree with a Mill Hill East link into Brent Cross & also gives some support to the 240 and providing a higher frequency between Brent Cross Station and the shopping centre. The 182 is also quite indirect between Brent Cross & Wembley so this would ultimately provide faster connections.
I don't know about the 324 proposal as it does then disconnect Brent Cross Tesco from the network, the 326 could always be an alternative to Brent Cross Tesco but I do wonder whether with the loss of Toys'R'Us in recent years that demand has perhaps decreased between the Tesco & the Shopping Centre for it to justify longer buses but also a higher frequency. I would agree in terms of it having a higher frequency but I'm not so sure as to whether the Elstree extension was funded by TFL or HCC and as a result that might hamper an increased frequency coming to fruition.
The 232 split sounds okay, I do wonder how many people on the Eastern Section do journeys that cross Staples Corner ultimately because of its indirect nature weaving through Gladstone Park and with the 112 now extended to North Finchley (thank goodness that's now linked into Brent Cross!) people might've seen that as a more direct alternative. I do agree with a DD conversion on the Eastern Section.
The Friday/Saturday night service of the 182 I'm not too sure about north of Wembley, I can see merit on the eastern section because Gladstone Park currently does not have a night service but I do wonder with the N18/N140 whether it is worth having an N182. Ultimately if there are capacity problems north of Sudbury on the N18 the answer would probably be sending more journeys through to Harrow Weald and maybe have the N140 extended to Oxhey Lane. Not sure whether especially north of Harrow Weald a night service is justified.
All in all a really good set of proposals.
The 102 is under review at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Dec 27, 2021 19:32:55 GMT
Really a fan of your 143 proposals and if you were to increase it to x8 you could probably do away with the SDO journeys whilst providing adequate capacity. Yes I do think the 143 would be good to terminate at Brent Cross West as it would provide a link to Staples Corner.
The 102 I wouldn't divert to Brent Cross West however, it's a really long service already and with the 143 already continuing links from the Ossulton Way/East Finchley area I don't see the need. The 210 is a more logical option and it would link in Highgate Village which could potentially be a lost link from the 143 if the planned diversion goes ahead and would link in massive hubs like Crouch End and Finsbury Park. I'd also tighten the running time a bit, it seems really slow off peak and even during the peaks.
The C11 makes sense to increase to x8 and I've been an advocate of it, I found it ridiculous that and the 31 & 236 were planned for reductions (even though the Overground especially on the 236 is probably mooted as a direct alternative).
The 16 proposal makes sense but I do wonder perhaps coupled in with either a double decker conversion or a freq increase the 316 is instead extended there linking in Queens Park & Ladbroke Grove, whereas the 189 covers quite a lot of links of the 16s.
I'm really open minded about your Wembley Central to Millbrook Park proposal, there is a weight restriction on Cool Oak Lane and it being too narrow and I do worry that might hamper buses being used on it as a whole, but I on the whole really like the proposal and I think Millbrook Park residents would probably prefer a link into Hendon, Brent Cross and Wembley rather than the Finchley Lido on the 382 and linking Cool Oak Lane into the network where there are some new builds. I agree with a Mill Hill East link into Brent Cross & also gives some support to the 240 and providing a higher frequency between Brent Cross Station and the shopping centre. The 182 is also quite indirect between Brent Cross & Wembley so this would ultimately provide faster connections.
Â
I don't know about the 324 proposal as it does then disconnect Brent Cross Tesco from the network, the 326 could always be an alternative to Brent Cross Tesco but I do wonder whether with the loss of Toys'R'Us in recent years that demand has perhaps decreased between the Tesco & the Shopping Centre for it to justify longer buses but also a higher frequency. I would agree in terms of it having a higher frequency but I'm not so sure as to whether the Elstree extension was funded by TFL or HCC and as a result that might hamper an increased frequency coming to fruition.
The 232 split sounds okay, I do wonder how many people on the Eastern Section do journeys that cross Staples Corner ultimately because of its indirect nature weaving through Gladstone Park and with the 112 now extended to North Finchley (thank goodness that's now linked into Brent Cross!) people might've seen that as a more direct alternative. I do agree with a DD conversion on the Eastern Section.
The Friday/Saturday night service of the 182 I'm not too sure about north of Wembley, I can see merit on the eastern section because Gladstone Park currently does not have a night service but I do wonder with the N18/N140 whether it is worth having an N182. Ultimately if there are capacity problems north of Sudbury on the N18 the answer would probably be sending more journeys through to Harrow Weald and maybe have the N140 extended to Oxhey Lane. Not sure whether especially north of Harrow Weald a night service is justified.
All in all a really good set of proposals.
The 102 is under review at the moment. Yes, I'd heard that too. Also the 144 route as well - apparently a bit of a review centred on Highgate/Muswell Hill.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Dec 27, 2021 19:38:25 GMT
The 102 is under review at the moment. Yes, I'd heard that too. Also the 144 route as well - apparently a bit of a review centred on Highgate/Muswell Hill. From a bit of gossip a few years back I believe it might be the intention to swap the 102/144 routings between Muswell Hill & Silver Street.
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Dec 27, 2021 20:04:37 GMT
The 102 is under review at the moment. Yes, I'd heard that too. Also the 144 route as well - apparently a bit of a review centred on Highgate/Muswell Hill. I only heard Routes 24 and 603 were involved and looked at on the recent Highgate review. The FOI request this person did confirm no recent works were conducted on Routes 102 or Route 144. However this was from an internal review response : www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/hampstead_bus_review#incoming-1930755
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Dec 27, 2021 20:37:06 GMT
Yes, I'd heard that too. Also the 144 route as well - apparently a bit of a review centred on Highgate/Muswell Hill. From a bit of gossip a few years back I believe it might be the intention to swap the 102/144 routings between Muswell Hill & Silver Street. Why?
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Dec 27, 2021 20:48:17 GMT
From a bit of gossip a few years back I believe it might be the intention to swap the 102/144 routings between Muswell Hill & Silver Street. Why? Don't personally know but seems somewhat a sensible idea.
|
|
|
Post by YX10FFN on Dec 27, 2021 21:16:46 GMT
Don't personally know but seems somewhat a sensible idea. Not local but wouldn't plunging the 102 into Wood Green decrease its reliability?
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Dec 27, 2021 21:56:35 GMT
Don't personally know but seems somewhat a sensible idea. Not local but wouldn't plunging the 102 into Wood Green decrease its reliability? Yes it would but (and capitalomnibus can correct me on this) Bounds Green/Palmers Green/Durnsford Road especially during peak hours can be traffic filled anyway so it might make a slight improvement in that regard however as you have mentioned Wood Green can be quite congested especially at the junction with the A105 off the A504 and also the A10 can be quite chocabloc as well but then there were concerns about the 144s status quo service in terms of reliability so it's a two way street. However this would provide handy links across North London to Wood Green, Turnpike Lane, Hornsey etc.
I do wonder whether the other rather controversial option would be cutting the 102 back to GG but then having something replacing it to Brent Cross. Though I initially disagreed with a user on this when they suggested a slightly weird proposal, I would question whether the introduction of the 112 & hopper fare has meant people are now interchanging from a 102 at the same stop by Henlys Corner to then complete their journey to Brent X rather than going the convoluted way via North Cricklewood. What would have replaced it would be a different story and I don't think any route in Brent Cross would be able to furfill the role nor any in GG.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Dec 27, 2021 22:36:41 GMT
Yes, I'd heard that too. Also the 144 route as well - apparently a bit of a review centred on Highgate/Muswell Hill. From a bit of gossip a few years back I believe it might be the intention to swap the 102/144 routings between Muswell Hill & Silver Street. Rather then swapping the routings between Muswell Hill and Edmonton Green, surely it would be easier to explain it as the 144 extended from M Hill to Brent Cross and route 102 withdrawn between M Hill and Brent Cross.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Dec 27, 2021 23:18:45 GMT
From a bit of gossip a few years back I believe it might be the intention to swap the 102/144 routings between Muswell Hill & Silver Street. Rather then swapping the routings between Muswell Hill and Edmonton Green, surely it would be easier to explain it as the 144 extended from M Hill to Brent Cross and route 102 withdrawn between M Hill and Brent Cross. But that isn't the same thing. I presume if the two routes do swap their routings between Muswell Hill & Great Cambridge Road Roundabout, it's to do with some sort of reliability measure most likely because of the A406 on Brownlow Road and the fact the 144 is half the length of the 102 and it's routing is less intense between Muswell Hill & Great Cambridge Road Roundabout in comparison.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Dec 27, 2021 23:45:28 GMT
Rather then swapping the routings between Muswell Hill and Edmonton Green, surely it would be easier to explain it as the 144 extended from M Hill to Brent Cross and route 102 withdrawn between M Hill and Brent Cross. But that isn't the same thing. I presume if the two routes do swap their routings between Muswell Hill & Great Cambridge Road Roundabout, it's to do with some sort of reliability measure most likely because of the A406 on Brownlow Road and the fact the 144 is half the length of the 102 and it's routing is less intense between Muswell Hill & Great Cambridge Road Roundabout in comparison. Not just that but the clogged up junction from the B106 onto Colney Hatch Lane. I do think it would be sensible to keep the 102s routing to a local service because of the congestion yes.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Dec 28, 2021 8:09:43 GMT
But that isn't the same thing. I presume if the two routes do swap their routings between Muswell Hill & Great Cambridge Road Roundabout, it's to do with some sort of reliability measure most likely because of the A406 on Brownlow Road and the fact the 144 is half the length of the 102 and it's routing is less intense between Muswell Hill & Great Cambridge Road Roundabout in comparison. Not just that but the clogged up junction from the B106 onto Colney Hatch Lane. I do think it would be sensible to keep the 102s routing to a local service because of the congestion yes. Ofcourse it's the same. The 144 would become Brent Cross to Edmonton Green via Wood Green and the 102 simply shortened like has happend to many routes.
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Dec 28, 2021 8:52:22 GMT
But that isn't the same thing. I presume if the two routes do swap their routings between Muswell Hill & Great Cambridge Road Roundabout, it's to do with some sort of reliability measure most likely because of the A406 on Brownlow Road and the fact the 144 is half the length of the 102 and it's routing is less intense between Muswell Hill & Great Cambridge Road Roundabout in comparison. Not just that but the clogged up junction from the B106 onto Colney Hatch Lane. I do think it would be sensible to keep the 102s routing to a local service because of the congestion yes. I know this was about ten years ago but I definitely went to Brent Cross from Palmers Green on the 102 (starting near AD) in 2 and a bit hours. Return including half an hour shopping. The journey would've been less than an hour. I know it was the 102 as it was DD and Arriva moquette. I know traffic conditions could have worsened and this was in the middle of the day (I can't remember the day of the week) but still.
|
|