|
Post by rift on Feb 28, 2024 3:22:34 GMT
I live in the local area - the 417 is very much needed in it's current form regardless. The 417 provides the most direct link between Crystal Palace & Clapham Common and has end to end usage as a result. Any 431 introduction should not be at the cost of my area's existing links which would remain far important to locals. Crystal Palace is already linked to Clapham Junction via train and in any instance, extending the 417 to Clapham Junction would be best achieved via the 35 & 37 and not via the A205 through Clapham South. I'm very aware about the 355 - I've wrote to TfL about it's capacity in the past and have used it from Brixton during the busy periods South London relies heavily on it's bus network due to the unreliability of National Rail and the lack of tube coverage in comparison to other parts. I think there are quite a few gaps in the network in south London which make things tricky As an example - i now need to go to Peckham intermittently every week with my 1 year old. It’s less than 5 miles, in a car I can do in 20-30 min. In contrast in a bus it will take almost an hour. I have the following choices: - 286 followed by 177 - 286/335 followed by 53 and then 36/136/436/171 - 89/178 followed by 136/436 - 132/335 to North Greenwich, then jubilee to Canada Water, then overground to queens road Peckham, then 36/136/436/171. With a park one is slower owing to the wait for lifts etc Similarly no link between Blackheath and Charlton retail parks (although it’s an easier change). Or North Greenwich and Bromley for example Now I know you can’t link every place but there are some crucially missing ones which make one very dependent on using a car. The link between Blackheath and the Sainsbury’s was offered to be entirely paid for by the developers, but TFL refused.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Feb 28, 2024 8:57:59 GMT
I think there are quite a few gaps in the network in south London which make things tricky As an example - i now need to go to Peckham intermittently every week with my 1 year old. It’s less than 5 miles, in a car I can do in 20-30 min. In contrast in a bus it will take almost an hour. I have the following choices: - 286 followed by 177 - 286/335 followed by 53 and then 36/136/436/171 - 89/178 followed by 136/436 - 132/335 to North Greenwich, then jubilee to Canada Water, then overground to queens road Peckham, then 36/136/436/171. With a park one is slower owing to the wait for lifts etc Similarly no link between Blackheath and Charlton retail parks (although it’s an easier change). Or North Greenwich and Bromley for example Now I know you can’t link every place but there are some crucially missing ones which make one very dependent on using a car. The link between Blackheath and the Sainsbury’s was offered to be entirely paid for by the developers, but TFL refused. I wonder if it would have been better divert the 180 to Blackheath rather than North Greenwich to have a Blackheath-Charlton link. A 202 extension to North Greenwich might be beneficial as well.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Feb 28, 2024 9:48:50 GMT
The link between Blackheath and the Sainsbury’s was offered to be entirely paid for by the developers, but TFL refused. I wonder if it would have been better divert the 180 to Blackheath rather than North Greenwich to have a Blackheath-Charlton link. A 202 extension to North Greenwich might be beneficial as well. But then if you divert the 180 you lose the link to the underground at North Greenwich which I expect is far better used than a Blackheath-Charlton link would be. It needs a local bus link. Totally agree with you on the 202 to North Greenwich though, apart from possible stand capacity I cannot see why it hasn't been done.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Feb 28, 2024 10:33:34 GMT
I wonder if it would have been better divert the 180 to Blackheath rather than North Greenwich to have a Blackheath-Charlton link. A 202 extension to North Greenwich might be beneficial as well. But then if you divert the 180 you lose the link to the underground at North Greenwich which I expect is far better used than a Blackheath-Charlton link would be. It needs a local bus link. Totally agree with you on the 202 to North Greenwich though, apart from possible stand capacity I cannot see why it hasn't been done. Perhaps when the Silvertown Tunnel opens the 129 will move out to create more stand space, then the extended 202 will basically be a stopping version of the SL4.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Feb 28, 2024 16:10:08 GMT
I live in the local area - the 417 is very much needed in it's current form regardless. The 417 provides the most direct link between Crystal Palace & Clapham Common and has end to end usage as a result. Any 431 introduction should not be at the cost of my area's existing links which would remain far important to locals. Crystal Palace is already linked to Clapham Junction via train and in any instance, extending the 417 to Clapham Junction would be best achieved via the 35 & 37 and not via the A205 through Clapham South. I'm very aware about the 355 - I've wrote to TfL about it's capacity in the past and have used it from Brixton during the busy periods South London relies heavily on it's bus network due to the unreliability of National Rail and the lack of tube coverage in comparison to other parts. I think there are quite a few gaps in the network in south London which make things tricky As an example - i now need to go to Peckham intermittently every week with my 1 year old. It’s less than 5 miles, in a car I can do in 20-30 min. In contrast in a bus it will take almost an hour. I have the following choices: - 286 followed by 177 - 286/335 followed by 53 and then 36/136/436/171 - 89/178 followed by 136/436 - 132/335 to North Greenwich, then jubilee to Canada Water, then overground to queens road Peckham, then 36/136/436/171. With a park one is slower owing to the wait for lifts etc Similarly no link between Blackheath and Charlton retail parks (although it’s an easier change). Or North Greenwich and Bromley for example Now I know you can’t link every place but there are some crucially missing ones which make one very dependent on using a car. Another one is Hayes to Beckenham, barely ten minutes in the car but no direct bus link.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Feb 28, 2024 16:38:03 GMT
I think there are quite a few gaps in the network in south London which make things tricky As an example - i now need to go to Peckham intermittently every week with my 1 year old. It’s less than 5 miles, in a car I can do in 20-30 min. In contrast in a bus it will take almost an hour. I have the following choices: - 286 followed by 177 - 286/335 followed by 53 and then 36/136/436/171 - 89/178 followed by 136/436 - 132/335 to North Greenwich, then jubilee to Canada Water, then overground to queens road Peckham, then 36/136/436/171. With a park one is slower owing to the wait for lifts etc Similarly no link between Blackheath and Charlton retail parks (although it’s an easier change). Or North Greenwich and Bromley for example Now I know you can’t link every place but there are some crucially missing ones which make one very dependent on using a car. Another one is Hayes to Beckenham, barely ten minutes in the car but no direct bus link. The 352 runs relatively close to Hayes & through Beckenham. Some people towards the Pickhurst area will be in walking distance from that route.
|
|
|
Post by mkay315 on Feb 29, 2024 4:27:33 GMT
But then if you divert the 180 you lose the link to the underground at North Greenwich which I expect is far better used than a Blackheath-Charlton link would be. It needs a local bus link. Totally agree with you on the 202 to North Greenwich though, apart from possible stand capacity I cannot see why it hasn't been done. Perhaps when the Silvertown Tunnel opens the 129 will move out to create more stand space, then the extended 202 will basically be a stopping version of the SL4. But then if the 202 was to be extended to North Greenwich you would have a few things to contend with. The SCR for starters can go down very easily, along with the Blackwall Tunnel. The tailbacks on the SCR can stretch a little. I've seen some 202s having to short their route to Catford or Lee Green because of delays.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Feb 29, 2024 9:02:20 GMT
Perhaps when the Silvertown Tunnel opens the 129 will move out to create more stand space, then the extended 202 will basically be a stopping version of the SL4. But then if the 202 was to be extended to North Greenwich you would have a few things to contend with. The SCR for starters can go down very easily, along with the Blackwall Tunnel. The tailbacks on the SCR can stretch a little. I've seen some 202s having to short their route to Catford or Lee Green because of delays. The extended 202 would be about the same length as the 122, which also has its own traffic problems in Forest Hill & Lewisham.
|
|
|
Post by mkay315 on Feb 29, 2024 10:01:31 GMT
But then if the 202 was to be extended to North Greenwich you would have a few things to contend with. The SCR for starters can go down very easily, along with the Blackwall Tunnel. The tailbacks on the SCR can stretch a little. I've seen some 202s having to short their route to Catford or Lee Green because of delays. The extended 202 would be about the same length as the 122, which also has its own traffic problems in Forest Hill & Lewisham. It's one thing for a route to be the same length as another route but it's another thing to ensure it can be achievable.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Feb 29, 2024 10:33:35 GMT
Another one is Hayes to Beckenham, barely ten minutes in the car but no direct bus link. The 352 runs relatively close to Hayes & through Beckenham. Some people towards the Pickhurst area will be in walking distance from that route. I think the 352 is stretching it a bit and I've often wondered about extending one of the R routes from PRU via the 353 to Hayes and then via Chinese Garage to Beckenham and the 353 could return to the direct route across Hayes Common.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Feb 29, 2024 10:56:12 GMT
The extended 202 would be about the same length as the 122, which also has its own traffic problems in Forest Hill & Lewisham. It's one thing for a route to be the same length as another route but it's another thing to ensure it can be achievable. I think Crystal Palace-North Greenwich on the 202 might just about work. Bear in mind the Silvertown tunnel opening will relieve some of the traffic from the Blackwall tunnel. Plus it would create a plethora of new links from North Greenwich towards Lee & Catford, in the past it has been suggested the 129 be extended to Catford which would have been more viable if it wasn’t being extended through the tunnel as well. Even Blackheath Village needs some support towards North Greenwich due how both busy & unreliable the 108 is
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Feb 29, 2024 11:28:35 GMT
It's one thing for a route to be the same length as another route but it's another thing to ensure it can be achievable. I think Crystal Palace-North Greenwich on the 202 might just about work. Bear in mind the Silvertown tunnel opening will relieve some of the traffic from the Blackwall tunnel. Plus it would create a plethora of new links from North Greenwich towards Lee & Catford, in the past it has been suggested the 129 be extended to Catford which would have been more viable if it wasn’t being extended through the tunnel as well. Even Blackheath Village needs some support towards North Greenwich due how both busy & unreliable the 108 is I would agree with the route (selfishly gives me another link to North Greenwich!). But I refuse to believe that the opening of the Silvertown tunnel will alleviate traffic in the Blackwall tunnel - don’t forget it’s the same approach so might attract more traffic! Plus Greenwich council in their infinite wisdom are about to introduce LTNs in both east and west Greenwich; so the A102, already carrying traffic for both tunnels, will also need to shoulder the traffic to access the A206 as the next crossing west of it will be Greenwich south street!
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Feb 29, 2024 12:36:08 GMT
Ok so here are my crayon attempts at plugging some gaps I have observed. Frankly difficult in the current environment but would be good to have. Please feel free to critique - I know my part of London but admittedly will not know enough about every bit!
239: Charlton riverside to OKR Tesco (using DDs)
Starts at a new stand on Gallions Road - Woolwich road - anchor and hope lane - Bugsby’s way - peartree way - ikea - commercial way - southern way - John Harrison way - Blackwall lane - Vanbrugh hill - Westcombe Park road - westcombe hill - Blackheath royal standard - stratheden road - prince of wales road - Montpelier row - tranquil vale - hail and ride through either hare and billet road and wat Tyler road or goffers road - Shooter’s Hill road - Blackheath hill - Blackheath road - Greenwich high road - Norman road - creek road - Deptford high street and Edward street (westbound) / arklow road and abinger road (eastbound) - pagnell street - New Cross gyratory - New Cross road - Pepys road (westbound) / jermingham road + Musgrove road + trout beck road (eastbound) - drakefell road (although might be tricky given parked cars!) - gellaty road - evelina road - st Mary’s road - queens road - peckham high street - Peckham bus station - Peckham hill street - willowbrook road - sumner road - St George’s way (will need removal of the council flower pots) - wells way - Albany road - old 168 stand at OKR Tesco
Questions to be addressed / alternatives: - potential overbussing of Vanbrugh hill: can either have the 386 use Maze Hill or alternatively the 239 can serve Trafalgar road and Maze Hill. But will increase journey times. Also not sure about maze hills’s ability to take DDs - at royal standard, instead of stratheden road, can have the 239 use old Dover road and then Shooter’s Hill road / sun-in-the-sands roundabout. But this will increase journey times, too much overlap with the 386 and of cours r increased journey times - this plugs the gap near North Greenwich will occur once the 188 is diverted away to use tunnel avenue
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Feb 29, 2024 18:43:38 GMT
It's one thing for a route to be the same length as another route but it's another thing to ensure it can be achievable. I think Crystal Palace-North Greenwich on the 202 might just about work. Bear in mind the Silvertown tunnel opening will relieve some of the traffic from the Blackwall tunnel. Plus it would create a plethora of new links from North Greenwich towards Lee & Catford, in the past it has been suggested the 129 be extended to Catford which would have been more viable if it wasn’t being extended through the tunnel as well. Even Blackheath Village needs some support towards North Greenwich due how both busy & unreliable the 108 is I'm still not convinced by TFL's current proposals for the Silvertown Tunnel. I can't see the SL4 being significantly well used, particularly with such a high frequency, since it avoids some useful destinations along the non-stop section. Maybe there will be some demand in the peaks for travel to/from Canary Wharf, but perhaps not so much in the off-peak. Even then, I suspect many passengers around Blackheath, Lee and Grove Park would still choose to take a bus/train to Lewisham, then the DLR to Canary Wharf. The extended 129 may provide some useful links, but the frequency increase does seem excessive. I think it would be a much better use of resources to keep the 129 at around every 10-15 minutes, and introduce one or two other routes alongside through the tunnel, which combined would cover a much wider range of destinations across the river. Really though, the priority with the tunnel should be to work with the established interchange hubs at both North Greenwich and Canning Town, allowing passengers from various places to change onto a cross-river connection. This would include a frequent Canary Wharf to North Greenwich service (could also continue onwards to Crossharbour and Charlton), allowing passengers to easily access Canary Wharf from various areas in SE London. And the SL4's links south of Blackheath could alternatively be covered by extending the 335 to Grove Park. Though if an express route needs to go through the tunnel, maybe something along the 108 corridor might be more useful, as an already established busy route? The 108 could even then split into two routes, allowing passengers making shorter journey to have a more reliable service - with the new limited stop route maintaining cross-river links? One route could operate from North Greenwich to Lewisham, then continue further south to link to places like Catford, without having to make the 202 any longer? Overall, the combined network of routes through both the Blackwall and Silvertown tunnels should ideally all serve North Greenwich to the south (or at least most of them), and to the north also cover the Barking Road corridor and the Isle of Dogs, in addition to the areas served by the 108/129. I also think it's important that Canary Wharf, Canning Town and North Greenwich all have a direct bus service between each of them. Canary Wharf to Canning Town could be covered by just a short extension of the D3?
|
|
|
Post by britishguy54 on Feb 29, 2024 19:19:35 GMT
I think Crystal Palace-North Greenwich on the 202 might just about work. Bear in mind the Silvertown tunnel opening will relieve some of the traffic from the Blackwall tunnel. Plus it would create a plethora of new links from North Greenwich towards Lee & Catford, in the past it has been suggested the 129 be extended to Catford which would have been more viable if it wasn’t being extended through the tunnel as well. Even Blackheath Village needs some support towards North Greenwich due how both busy & unreliable the 108 is I'm still not convinced by TFL's current proposals for the Silvertown Tunnel. I can't see the SL4 being significantly well used, particularly with such a high frequency, since it avoids some useful destinations along the non-stop section. Maybe there will be some demand in the peaks for travel to/from Canary Wharf, but perhaps not so much in the off-peak. Even then, I suspect many passengers around Blackheath, Lee and Grove Park would still choose to take a bus/train to Lewisham, then the DLR to Canary Wharf. The extended 129 may provide some useful links, but the frequency increase does seem excessive. I think it would be a much better use of resources to keep the 129 at around every 10-15 minutes, and introduce one or two other routes alongside through the tunnel, which combined would cover a much wider range of destinations across the river. Really though, the priority with the tunnel should be to work with the established interchange hubs at both North Greenwich and Canning Town, allowing passengers from various places to change onto a cross-river connection. This would include a frequent Canary Wharf to North Greenwich service (could also continue onwards to Crossharbour and Charlton), allowing passengers to easily access Canary Wharf from various areas in SE London. And the SL4's links south of Blackheath could alternatively be covered by extending the 335 to Grove Park. Though if an express route needs to go through the tunnel, maybe something along the 108 corridor might be more useful, as an already established busy route? The 108 could even then split into two routes, allowing passengers making shorter journey to have a more reliable service - with the new limited stop route maintaining cross-river links? One route could operate from North Greenwich to Lewisham, then continue further south to link to places like Catford, without having to make the 202 any longer? Overall, the combined network of routes through both the Blackwall and Silvertown tunnels should ideally all serve North Greenwich to the south (or at least most of them), and to the north also cover the Barking Road corridor and the Isle of Dogs, in addition to the areas served by the 108/129. I also think it's important that Canary Wharf, Canning Town and North Greenwich all have a direct bus service between each of them. Canary Wharf to Canning Town could be covered by just a short extension of the D3? Perhaps a route such as the 241 could be a decent candidate to extend across the Silvertown Tunnel towards North Greenwich. I don’t know if messing with the 304 could be an alternative.
|
|