|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 14, 2024 10:29:07 GMT
Yes it would be longer than the 233’s current route via Maidstone Road, especially those heading towards Swanley due to the right turn out of the Tesco being banned. Not that much longer to be honest probably about 3 minutes longer… Yes I am aware of the right turn ban… go read the original post properly. Whole reason for the suggestion is that the 233 it is one the way whereas the R11 was a double run. Anyways I doubt it would be much benefit as the R11 did which shouldn’t have been removed. Ik that you were aware of the right turn ban, that doesn’t change the fact that the 233 would take unnecessarily longer than its current routing. Since the 233 is the only route to run to Swanley, I think it’s a bigger priority that Swanley gets to have direct links towards Foots Cray/Sidcup/Eltham. Reinstating the R11 double run is a much better idea overall. The 233 reroute also doesn’t benefit residents of Sidcup/Eltham as the 321 parallels the 233 for most of its route between Foots Cray & Eltham. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 14, 2024 10:46:32 GMT
I think what is really missed is something going to Foots Cray Tesco from the south. Maybe something could be done to extend the R1 - I wonder if it could even be terminated in a back street off the North Cray Road - I don’t particularly know those streets well - I usually just zip by on a 492! The R6 would be perfect instead of scrapping it. Possibly one option could be to keep the R6, but extend it over the B14’s current route to Sidcup, with a double run to severe Foots Cray Tesco introduced, then have it terminate in Sidcup Station, then cut the B14 back to terminate at Foots Cray Tesco, this reintroduces the link from Orpington/St Mary’s Cray to Foots Cray Tesco, & also introduces links from the Albany Park & Blendon areas to Foots Cray Tesco, & provides much more unique links than rerouting the 233. |
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Mar 14, 2024 10:50:16 GMT
The R6 would be perfect instead of scrapping it. Possibly one option could be to keep the R6, but extend it over the B14’s current route to Sidcup, with a double run to severe Foots Cray Tesco introduced, then have it terminate in Sidcup Station, then cut the B14 back to terminate at Foots Cray Tesco, this reintroduces the link from Orpington/St Mary’s Cray to Foots Cray Tesco, & also introduces links from the Albany Park & Blendon areas to Foots Cray Tesco, & provides much more unique links than rerouting the 233. No need it can stand in Foots Cray Tesco. No need to go any further. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 14, 2024 11:08:46 GMT
Possibly one option could be to keep the R6, but extend it over the B14’s current route to Sidcup, with a double run to severe Foots Cray Tesco introduced, then have it terminate in Sidcup Station, then cut the B14 back to terminate at Foots Cray Tesco, this reintroduces the link from Orpington/St Mary’s Cray to Foots Cray Tesco, & also introduces links from the Albany Park & Blendon areas to Foots Cray Tesco, & provides much more unique links than rerouting the 233. No need it can stand in Foots Cray Tesco. No need to go any further. How many buses can the 321’s stand take? Depends on whether the stand would be able to take in the B14 & R6 alongside the existing 321. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 14, 2024 11:13:05 GMT
No need it can stand in Foots Cray Tesco. No need to go any further. How many buses can the 321’s stand take? Depends on whether the stand would be able to take in the B14 & R6 alongside the existing 321. It can get congested there with delivery vehicles as well, I think the only route that needs to be extended there is the R1 from Grovelands. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 14, 2024 12:48:44 GMT
No need it can stand in Foots Cray Tesco. No need to go any further. How many buses can the 321’s stand take? Depends on whether the stand would be able to take in the B14 & R6 alongside the existing 321. That stand can get congested with multiple 321’s and even delivery trucks so should only be something passing through like the reinstatement of the R11 double run which was needlessly withdrawn. The 233 double run idea also looks decent - if it only takes 3 minutes, it really isn’t going to affect the 233 that much and would give the solo section away from the 321 a link to the Tesco superstore which people would far more likely use than the express store in Sidcup which really is for people in the locale of the Tesco Express itself |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 14, 2024 14:37:15 GMT
How many buses can the 321’s stand take? Depends on whether the stand would be able to take in the B14 & R6 alongside the existing 321. That stand can get congested with multiple 321’s and even delivery trucks so should only be something passing through like the reinstatement of the R11 double run which was needlessly withdrawn. The 233 double run idea also looks decent - if it only takes 3 minutes, it really isn’t going to affect the 233 that much and would give the solo section away from the 321 a link to the Tesco superstore which people would far more likely use than the express store in Sidcup which really is for people in the locale of the Tesco Express itself Personally, I would run a consultation first to see if residents in Swanley particularly want a link to the Foots Cray Tesco, considering that there would be longer journey times towards Sidcup & Eltham. If they do very much want that link then I would reroute the 233 as proposed. The small bit that is off the 321 route is also where that other Tesco is & the people who are there are likely to opt for that local Tesco that is much closer than the Foots Cray Tesco. Ideally I would avoid standing too much else in the Tesco as well due to crowding issues, which is part of the reason why I extended the R6 all the way to Sidcup Station (I don’t think Queen Mary’s has anymore space). The B14 standing there shouldn’t cause too much impact though, the B14’s buses are quite small & likely only 1 would needed to be standing there at a time. It’s also not the worst idea to give Albany Park & Blendon a link to the Tesco. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 14, 2024 14:53:38 GMT
That stand can get congested with multiple 321’s and even delivery trucks so should only be something passing through like the reinstatement of the R11 double run which was needlessly withdrawn. The 233 double run idea also looks decent - if it only takes 3 minutes, it really isn’t going to affect the 233 that much and would give the solo section away from the 321 a link to the Tesco superstore which people would far more likely use than the express store in Sidcup which really is for people in the locale of the Tesco Express itself Personally, I would run a consultation first to see if residents in Swanley particularly want a link to the Foots Cray Tesco, considering that there would be longer journey times towards Sidcup & Eltham. If they do very much want that link then I would reroute the 233 as proposed. The small bit that is off the 321 route is also where that other Tesco is & the people who are there are likely to opt for that local Tesco that is much closer than the Foots Cray Tesco. Ideally I would avoid standing too much else in the Tesco as well due to crowding issues, which is part of the reason why I extended the R6 all the way to Sidcup Station (I don’t think Queen Mary’s has anymore space). The B14 standing there shouldn’t cause too much impact though, the B14’s buses are quite small & likely only 1 would needed to be standing there at a time. It’s also not the worst idea to give Albany Park & Blendon a link to the Tesco. Local stores tend to have very restrictive stock ranges and even sometimes, more expensive prices so outside of picking up the odd item like milk or bread, most will opt for a bigger store instead. For me, I'd go the extra distance to the superstore if it means I can get more and at a better price. Of course, there is a Morrisons at Sidcup but some people are wedded to certain supermarkets like football teams. I'm not saying the 233 should absolutely be re-instated but just I don't think it was a bad suggestion and for me, much more preferable then seeing route X cut or Routes Y & Z merged together. The B14 standing there would cause problems IMO - I've waited for a R11 at Foots Cray Tesco and multiple 321's plus delivery vehicles were all piled up making anything else wanting to access the stop extremely difficult, let alone another bus to stand. The R11 double run being re-instated for me makes the most sense even with the issue of accessing the stop. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 14, 2024 15:09:02 GMT
Personally, I would run a consultation first to see if residents in Swanley particularly want a link to the Foots Cray Tesco, considering that there would be longer journey times towards Sidcup & Eltham. If they do very much want that link then I would reroute the 233 as proposed. The small bit that is off the 321 route is also where that other Tesco is & the people who are there are likely to opt for that local Tesco that is much closer than the Foots Cray Tesco. Ideally I would avoid standing too much else in the Tesco as well due to crowding issues, which is part of the reason why I extended the R6 all the way to Sidcup Station (I don’t think Queen Mary’s has anymore space). The B14 standing there shouldn’t cause too much impact though, the B14’s buses are quite small & likely only 1 would needed to be standing there at a time. It’s also not the worst idea to give Albany Park & Blendon a link to the Tesco. Local stores tend to have very restrictive stock ranges and even sometimes, more expensive prices so outside of picking up the odd item like milk or bread, most will opt for a bigger store instead. For me, I'd go the extra distance to the superstore if it means I can get more and at a better price. Of course, there is a Morrisons at Sidcup but some people are wedded to certain supermarkets like football teams. I'm not saying the 233 should absolutely be re-instated but just I don't think it was a bad suggestion and for me, much more preferable then seeing route X cut or Routes Y & Z merged together. The B14 standing there would cause problems IMO - I've waited for a R11 at Foots Cray Tesco and multiple 321's plus delivery vehicles were all piled up making anything else wanting to access the stop extremely difficult, let alone another bus to stand. The R11 double run being re-instated for me makes the most sense even with the issue of accessing the stop. Is the N199 stand used during the day? If not you could keep the R6 as it is, then cut the B14 back to St Mary’s Cray Station & introduce a double run to serve Foots Cray Tesco, requiring nothing to stand in the Tesco. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 14, 2024 15:09:20 GMT
That stand can get congested with multiple 321’s and even delivery trucks so should only be something passing through like the reinstatement of the R11 double run which was needlessly withdrawn. The 233 double run idea also looks decent - if it only takes 3 minutes, it really isn’t going to affect the 233 that much and would give the solo section away from the 321 a link to the Tesco superstore which people would far more likely use than the express store in Sidcup which really is for people in the locale of the Tesco Express itself Personally, I would run a consultation first to see if residents in Swanley particularly want a link to the Foots Cray Tesco, considering that there would be longer journey times towards Sidcup & Eltham. If they do very much want that link then I would reroute the 233 as proposed. The small bit that is off the 321 route is also where that other Tesco is & the people who are there are likely to opt for that local Tesco that is much closer than the Foots Cray Tesco. Ideally I would avoid standing too much else in the Tesco as well due to crowding issues, which is part of the reason why I extended the R6 all the way to Sidcup Station (I don’t think Queen Mary’s has anymore space). The B14 standing there shouldn’t cause too much impact though, the B14’s buses are quite small & likely only 1 would needed to be standing there at a time. It’s also not the worst idea to give Albany Park & Blendon a link to the Tesco. I doubt if many people would be in favour of rerouting the 233 via Foots Cray Tesco and the extended journey times that would result, there's a big Asda in Swanley and the Tesco Express near Sidcup Station. The R1 I think should be extended to Tesco though. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Mar 14, 2024 18:19:09 GMT
How about keeping the R6 and B14 as they are now but extending the R6 from St Mary Cray Station down Sevenoaks Way and into Midfield Way and then into the Grovelands area taking over that section of the R1. The R1 can then bypass Grovelands and go straight down Midfield Way and on to terminate at Tesco. This would eliminate the need for the R1 to double run via Grovelands
|
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Mar 15, 2024 0:00:37 GMT
I wonder whether the loss of the R11 double run is as big an issue as we've made it out to be now that things have settled down.
If it was still a major concern, I'd have expected it to be mentioned often in the recent consultation on the R1. In fact, only one person seems to have raised it and local councillors did not appear to be calling for any kind of replacement. Maybe TfL got this one right overall.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 15, 2024 5:46:22 GMT
I wonder whether the loss of the R11 double run is as big an issue as we've made it out to be now that things have settled down. If it was still a major concern, I'd have expected it to be mentioned often in the recent consultation on the R1. In fact, only one person seems to have raised it and local councillors did not appear to be calling for any kind of replacement. Maybe TfL got this one right overall. I'm not sure how TfL have got it right by cutting a large residential area off from the nearest supermarket in fact I'd say they've dropped an almighty clanger. It's not just shoppers there's also staff and Paul has mentioned the difficulty his wife now has getting to and from work. Whilst the R11 double run wasn't ideal I don't think extending the x20mins R1 service five minutes or so up the road is exactly going to break the bank. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 15, 2024 7:22:14 GMT
I wonder whether the loss of the R11 double run is as big an issue as we've made it out to be now that things have settled down. If it was still a major concern, I'd have expected it to be mentioned often in the recent consultation on the R1. In fact, only one person seems to have raised it and local councillors did not appear to be calling for any kind of replacement. Maybe TfL got this one right overall. I'm not sure how TfL have got it right by cutting a large residential area off from the nearest supermarket in fact I'd say they've dropped an almighty clanger. It's not just shoppers there's also staff and Paul has mentioned the difficulty his wife now has getting to and from work. Whilst the R11 double run wasn't ideal I don't think extending the x20mins R1 service five minutes or so up the road is exactly going to break the bank. I think extending the R1 on paper is fine & wouldn’t affect it’s reliability too much but vjaska has pointed out that the stands at Foots Cray can get very crowded with both 321’s which often have at least 2-3 buses standing there as well as delivery lorries. Ideally if a route went via the Tesco it would need to double run it & not terminate there. Thinking about it now there are 2 ways that this can be done: 1. Reinstating the R11 double run. 2. Cutting the B14 back to St Mary’s Cray (with the R6 to remain as it is) & having the B14 double run to serve the Tesco. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Mar 15, 2024 8:14:13 GMT
I wonder whether the loss of the R11 double run is as big an issue as we've made it out to be now that things have settled down. If it was still a major concern, I'd have expected it to be mentioned often in the recent consultation on the R1. In fact, only one person seems to have raised it and local councillors did not appear to be calling for any kind of replacement. Maybe TfL got this one right overall. I'm not sure how TfL have got it right by cutting a large residential area off from the nearest supermarket in fact I'd say they've dropped an almighty clanger. It's not just shoppers there's also staff and Paul has mentioned the difficulty his wife now has getting to and from work. Whilst the R11 double run wasn't ideal I don't think extending the x20mins R1 service five minutes or so up the road is exactly going to break the bank. Cutting St Pauls Cray off from its nearest large supermarket was a foolish move then and is still a foolish situation now. It’s still a concern amongst a number of Tesco staff who are now obliged to make awkward connections at Crittals Corner and are obliged to have to cross dangerously fast roads. Cray Road and Sidcup Hill have also been dug up on a ridiculously regular basis meaning connections have to be made in Sidcup. Surely everyone can see the insanity of a journey from Foots Cray Tesco to St Pauls Cray having to go via Sidcup?! Just because there isn’t a fuss being made doesn’t mean it’s not still causing issues. In the greater scheme of things the R11 double run didn’t cause that many issues. Through passengers from Orpington would be using the 51 and through passengers from the Crays would use the B14 - both of which reach Sidcup quicker than the R11 with or without the double run It’s just short-sightedness from TfL but they’ll never admit they were wrong and restore a service between Tesco and the Crays either with the R11 double run or extension to the R1 as easy as either option would be |
|
