|
Post by southlondon413 on Apr 21, 2024 23:18:09 GMT
The 690 is one of a couple of school services which really should run all day (and it did in a past life in the form of the 189), although I'm not sure which extension at the western end of the route would be the most useful, so would appreciate anyone's opinions on the best option: OPTION 1 - 489 Wandsworth to West Norwood (4bph DD) Follows the 690 between West Norwood and Burntwood School, then runs to Wandsworth via the rest of Burntwood Lane and Garratt Lane. Stands on Ram Street, with the 485 extended to Southside. OPTION 2 - 489 Wimbledon to West Norwood (4bph DD) Follows the 690 between West Norwood and Burntwood School, then runs to Wimbledon via the rest of Burntwood Lane, Garratt Lane, Summerstown, Plough Lane, Haydons Road and Queens Road. Stands on Francis Grove, with the 219 extended to Wimbledon War Memorial. Option 2 is better but I wouldn’t extend the 219, Wimbledon War Memorial is actually quite far from Wimbledon Station and the 219 would ultimately need a frequency increase to cope with the length and traffic delays that often occur coming down from the village in the peaks. Instead I would requisition the two EV car charging bays on St George’s Road and convert them into a two vehicle bus stand.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 22, 2024 11:36:22 GMT
The 690 is one of a couple of school services which really should run all day (and it did in a past life in the form of the 189), although I'm not sure which extension at the western end of the route would be the most useful, so would appreciate anyone's opinions on the best option: OPTION 1 - 489 Wandsworth to West Norwood (4bph DD) Follows the 690 between West Norwood and Burntwood School, then runs to Wandsworth via the rest of Burntwood Lane and Garratt Lane. Stands on Ram Street, with the 485 extended to Southside. OPTION 2 - 489 Wimbledon to West Norwood (4bph DD) Follows the 690 between West Norwood and Burntwood School, then runs to Wimbledon via the rest of Burntwood Lane, Garratt Lane, Summerstown, Plough Lane, Haydons Road and Queens Road. Stands on Francis Grove, with the 219 extended to Wimbledon War Memorial. Option 1 is an idea I’ve previously proposed so I’d go with that as it would open up brand new links to access Wandsworth from Trinity Road & Wandsworth Common (Trinity Road is linked to Wimbledon by the aforementioned 219). Wimbledon would be a unique link for us lot at the eastern end of the route however
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Apr 22, 2024 11:45:12 GMT
The 690 is one of a couple of school services which really should run all day (and it did in a past life in the form of the 189), although I'm not sure which extension at the western end of the route would be the most useful, so would appreciate anyone's opinions on the best option: OPTION 1 - 489 Wandsworth to West Norwood (4bph DD) Follows the 690 between West Norwood and Burntwood School, then runs to Wandsworth via the rest of Burntwood Lane and Garratt Lane. Stands on Ram Street, with the 485 extended to Southside. OPTION 2 - 489 Wimbledon to West Norwood (4bph DD) Follows the 690 between West Norwood and Burntwood School, then runs to Wimbledon via the rest of Burntwood Lane, Garratt Lane, Summerstown, Plough Lane, Haydons Road and Queens Road. Stands on Francis Grove, with the 219 extended to Wimbledon War Memorial. Option 1 is an idea I’ve previously proposed so I’d go with that as it would open up brand new links to access Wandsworth from Trinity Road & Wandsworth Common (Trinity Road is linked to Wimbledon by the aforementioned 219). Wimbledon would be a unique link for us lot at the eastern end of the route however Do you know how well used the Norwood/Brixton end of the 690 is? I wouldn’t expect Burntwood students to be coming all the way from Norwood but I’m not sure if it conveniently serves any other schools and have never observed 690s around that end.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 22, 2024 11:51:00 GMT
Option 1 is an idea I’ve previously proposed so I’d go with that as it would open up brand new links to access Wandsworth from Trinity Road & Wandsworth Common (Trinity Road is linked to Wimbledon by the aforementioned 219). Wimbledon would be a unique link for us lot at the eastern end of the route however Do you know how well used the Norwood/Brixton end of the 690 is? I wouldn’t expect Burntwood students to be coming all the way from Norwood but I’m not sure if it conveniently serves any other schools and have never observed 690s around that end. It has relatively small usage as a school route despite being one since the 80’s - buses are rarely more than half busy, presumably most have departed by Clapham Common. I’ve seen the odd journeys busy but it’s more on the rare side and I feel the 690 has untapped potential in being a route for everyone rather than a school route not even designed for the Brixton & West Norwood end
|
|
|
Post by Unorm on Apr 22, 2024 12:20:11 GMT
Option 1 is an idea I’ve previously proposed so I’d go with that as it would open up brand new links to access Wandsworth from Trinity Road & Wandsworth Common (Trinity Road is linked to Wimbledon by the aforementioned 219). Wimbledon would be a unique link for us lot at the eastern end of the route however Do you know how well used the Norwood/Brixton end of the 690 is? I wouldn’t expect Burntwood students to be coming all the way from Norwood but I’m not sure if it conveniently serves any other schools and have never observed 690s around that end. Interestingly there's always been a handful of students at the Norwood end. The last time I've conveniently coincided with a 690 in Brixton (VLA56/57 era) the bus offloaded a lot of people, though it's been a long time since that observation unlike my accidental run ins more recent and more local.
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Apr 22, 2024 19:20:38 GMT
I usually avoid this thread but been thinking about the 474 and seeing empty buses daily around Keir Hardie got me thinking. I wonder if the 304 and 474 could swap terminals? The 304 could be extended to Canning Town Hermit Road. This would duplicate the 147 from Canning Town Station to Prince Regent Lane / Glen Road but would provide support for the very busy corridor. The 474 is a very around the houses route and suffers a lot of congestion so pulling this back to Custom House would make the route more reliable and give the rather short 304 some purpose. Go do your worse and rip my idea to bits
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Apr 22, 2024 19:30:53 GMT
Saw the proposal for a route which looks similar to the H91 and this is how I'd have done it:
XH91 (Hammersmith, Bus Station to Heathrow, Terminal 5) Via A219, A4, Great West Road, Bath Road, Western Perimeter Road, Wallis Road, Heathrow T5
Stopping at: Hammersmith Bus Station -a few stops on the A4 (if possible)- Chiswick Roundabout / Gunnersbury Boston Manor Road Osterley Station Lampton Road Waye Avenue Harlington Corner Heathrow Terminal 5
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Apr 22, 2024 19:37:07 GMT
I usually avoid this thread but been thinking about the 474 and seeing empty buses daily around Keir Hardie got me thinking. I wonder if the 304 and 474 could swap terminals? The 304 could be extended to Canning Town Hermit Road. This would duplicate the 147 from Canning Town Station to Prince Regent Lane / Glen Road but would provide support for the very busy corridor. The 474 is a very around the houses route and suffers a lot of congestion so pulling this back to Custom House would make the route more reliable and give the rather short 304 some purpose. Go do your worse and rip my idea to bits I actually see little point in the 304 tbh, I would just divert the 101 to Custom House & withdraw the 304 entirely. I’d much prefer to have the 474 back on its old route, which provided more useful links to City Airport, while the 330 is terminating in the middle of nowhere. The 330 however could be a good candidate to extend via the Silvertown Tunnel once that opens.
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Apr 22, 2024 21:25:04 GMT
I usually avoid this thread but been thinking about the 474 and seeing empty buses daily around Keir Hardie got me thinking. I wonder if the 304 and 474 could swap terminals? The 304 could be extended to Canning Town Hermit Road. This would duplicate the 147 from Canning Town Station to Prince Regent Lane / Glen Road but would provide support for the very busy corridor. The 474 is a very around the houses route and suffers a lot of congestion so pulling this back to Custom House would make the route more reliable and give the rather short 304 some purpose. Go do your worse and rip my idea to bits I actually see little point in the 304 tbh, I would just divert the 101 to Custom House & withdraw the 304 entirely. I’d much prefer to have the 474 back on its old route, which provided more useful links to City Airport, while the 330 is terminating in the middle of nowhere. The 330 however could be a good candidate to extend via the Silvertown Tunnel once that opens. The 304 is needed to provide capacity along the East Ham to Manor Park corridor.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Apr 22, 2024 21:29:11 GMT
Saw the proposal for a route which looks similar to the H91 and this is how I'd have done it: XH91 (Hammersmith, Bus Station to Heathrow, Terminal 5) Via A219, A4, Great West Road, Bath Road, Western Perimeter Road, Wallis Road, Heathrow T5 Stopping at: Hammersmith Bus Station -a few stops on the A4 (if possible)- Chiswick Roundabout / Gunnersbury Boston Manor Road Osterley Station Lampton Road Waye Avenue Harlington Corner Heathrow Terminal 5 I would still question how many passengers would use such a route when the Piccadilly line exists. I don't think Heathrow needs any more express routes. It has good rail links to the east, and existing limited stop routes A10/SL7/SL9 fill in the gaps to the north and south.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Apr 23, 2024 8:13:16 GMT
I actually see little point in the 304 tbh, I would just divert the 101 to Custom House & withdraw the 304 entirely. I’d much prefer to have the 474 back on its old route, which provided more useful links to City Airport, while the 330 is terminating in the middle of nowhere. The 330 however could be a good candidate to extend via the Silvertown Tunnel once that opens. The 304 is needed to provide capacity along the East Ham to Manor Park corridor. I’d actually prefer to remove buses off that corridor purely because of how narrow the roads are & traffic easily builds up there because the traffic light at High St North allows 1 vehicle to pass at a time.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 23, 2024 11:45:14 GMT
The 304 is needed to provide capacity along the East Ham to Manor Park corridor. I’d actually prefer to remove buses off that corridor purely because of how narrow the roads are & traffic easily builds up there because the traffic light at High St North allows 1 vehicle to pass at a time. You’re hardly going to solve traffic problems by removing buses - I do think people need to move away from the obsession of cutting buses. If your worried about narrow roads, have a look at the 12m single deckers running down narrow country lanes with almost no passing room
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Apr 23, 2024 14:48:46 GMT
The 304 is needed to provide capacity along the East Ham to Manor Park corridor. I’d actually prefer to remove buses off that corridor purely because of how narrow the roads are & traffic easily builds up there because the traffic light at High St North allows 1 vehicle to pass at a time. Narrow roads where? The section that needs the three routes is mainly High Street North and High Street South. Good luck trying to remove buses in this busy part of east London!
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Apr 23, 2024 15:49:08 GMT
I’d actually prefer to remove buses off that corridor purely because of how narrow the roads are & traffic easily builds up there because the traffic light at High St North allows 1 vehicle to pass at a time. Narrow roads where? The section that needs the three routes is mainly High Street North and High Street South. Good luck trying to remove buses in this busy part of east London! High St North is extremely narrow, not helped by the fact that you have other vehicles coming out of roads bordering that. So is the 147’s section through Little Ilford, though I wouldn’t remove that because that gets very busy going towards Ilford. I wonder if it would be better to send everything via Ron Leighton Way in both directions because that road is wider.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 23, 2024 16:53:19 GMT
Narrow roads where? The section that needs the three routes is mainly High Street North and High Street South. Good luck trying to remove buses in this busy part of east London! High St North is extremely narrow, not helped by the fact that you have other vehicles coming out of roads bordering that. So is the 147’s section through Little Ilford, though I wouldn’t remove that because that gets very busy going towards Ilford. I wonder if it would be better to send everything via Ron Leighton Way in both directions because that road is wider. That would mean passengers having to cross two directions of traffic to get to northbound buses, not ideal for the less able.
|
|