|
|
Post by TB123 on Apr 23, 2020 11:19:30 GMT
content.tfl.gov.uk/croydon-bus-study.pdfThis has just dropped on the TfL website. Interesting reading - and confirms the rumoured 166/312/455 changes are indeed being developed. As is the long-rumoured plan to extend the 433 to West Croydon via Roman Way. The heavily lobbied 312 extension to Crystal Palace also mentioned. 359 extended to Waddon Marsh is a consideration, as is diverting the 434 via Higher Drive. Some interesting bits within it. The 197/410 rerouting I was told about over a year ago appears to have been dismissed due to broken links.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Apr 23, 2020 11:23:39 GMT
content.tfl.gov.uk/croydon-bus-study.pdf This has just dropped on the TfL website. Interesting reading - and confirms the rumoured 166/312/455 changes are indeed being developed. As is the long-rumoured plan to extend the 433 to West Croydon via Roman Way. The heavily lobbied 312 extension to Crystal Palace also mentioned. That link doesn't seem to work |
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Apr 23, 2020 11:25:54 GMT
Link should now work
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 23, 2020 11:46:25 GMT
The 166/312/455 seem to be soon to go to consultation.
Anything else is based on future growth (312 to CP and 363 down to Norwood Junction) so basically no funds at the moment to move them forward.
No mention of the 455/S4 to whether the 455 will just run Wallington to West Croydon or will be extended to the Royal Marsden at a later date who knows. Or axed altogether and replaced with the S4.
|
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Apr 23, 2020 11:50:15 GMT
The 166/312/455 seem to be soon to go to consultation. Anything else is based on future growth (312 to CP and 363 down to Norwood Junction) so basically no funds at the moment to move them forward. No mention of the 455/S4 to whether the 455 will just run Wallington to West Croydon or will be extended to the Royal Marsden at a later date who knows. Or axed altogether and replaced with the S4. I was thinking about the 455/S4 thing. The S4 has just been reawarded to Abellio with the same service structure so clearly that plan isn't moving forward. 455 obviously continuing to just do Wallington to West Croydon instead of the S4 as envisaged. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Apr 23, 2020 11:50:53 GMT
Interesting and the 312 extension to Crystal Palace would be useful but extending the 363 to Norwood Junction to free up stand space would be wasteful. The 197/410 proposal is a bit bizarre, presumably the thinking was to get double decker capacity on part of the current 410 route. If the 433 proposal happens the blind display would have to emphasis the long route from East to West Croydon.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 23, 2020 12:07:38 GMT
If stand space is available at Norwood Junction then maybe the 432 could divert at CP to Norwood Junction. Again thou does Church Road really need another route alongside it as well as South Norwood Hill?
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 23, 2020 12:47:54 GMT
If stand space is available at Norwood Junction then maybe the 432 could divert at CP to Norwood Junction. Again thou does Church Road really need another route alongside it as well as South Norwood Hill? I think the 312 extension is the best fit - for starters, your breaking the cross Palace link that the 432 provides from Anerley to Central Hill & beyond (something I've used countless times) & the 363 is not only expensive but has its own job to do between Elephant & Palace. The 312 in comparison will be single deck due to the two low bridges it will subsequently run under so will be far less overkill overall and might take pressure off the very busy 410 as it's more direct. Had to laugh about lack of stand space at Palace - it didn't stop them moving the 3 & 227 to stand on the parade so can't see why it suddenly prohibits the 312 from doing the same |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 23, 2020 12:55:33 GMT
Yes I think you could fit another route to stand at Crystal Palace on the parade. I totally agree the 363 shouldn't be extended. My suggestion for the 432 was merely a way of getting around the perceived problem of stand space at Palace for the 312.
|
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Apr 23, 2020 13:09:53 GMT
Yes I think you could fit another route to stand at Crystal Palace on the parade. I totally agree the 363 shouldn't be extended. My suggestion for the 432 was merely a way of getting around the perceived problem of stand space at Palace for the 312. Apart from the 432 does not terminate at the Parade, rather Anerley Station |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Apr 23, 2020 13:33:44 GMT
Clearly the thinking was for the 312 and 363 to swap stands, nice idea on paper but horrendously wasteful. Presumably the 363 would go via the 157 route to avoid the low bridge? May as well extend the 363 to Croydon instead and just run the 157 between Croydon and Morden but then more stand space will be needed in Croydon and so it goes on.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 23, 2020 13:37:24 GMT
I know. I was thinking the 432 could be extended to Norwood Junction instead of bringing the 312 up. Kind or instead of bringing a route up from NJ but a route down from CP.
Tbh I can see the proposal for the 312 in the proposals that didn't go ahead due to costs.
|
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Apr 23, 2020 14:25:17 GMT
I know. I was thinking the 432 could be extended to Norwood Junction instead of bringing the 312 up. Kind or instead of bringing a route up from NJ but a route down from CP. Tbh I can see the proposal for the 312 in the proposals that didn't go ahead due to costs. But that won't satisfy the stated aim of a Woodside to Crystal Palace link. Anyhow it is in the 'Idea not currently feasible' heading so is most unlikely to ever come to fruition. |
|
|
|
Post by YY13VKP on Apr 23, 2020 15:00:12 GMT
The 359 being extended to Waddon Marsh would unnecessarily elongate it unless its withdrawn around the Monks Hill estate which in my view is ill advised. The 312 running between Old Lodge Lane and Crystal Palace would also be overkill, unless both are separate proposals.
These are just ideas for the moment but will be interesting to see if any of these come to fruition. Would love to see the proposed new route between Kenley and Waddon Marsh receive approval. It mentions that this is subject to a route test and it would be interesting to see a route up the top of Kenley. Rerouting the 434 away from its current area though would leave Northwood Avenue and Oaks way, as well as Kenley Road unserved by a bus route and would defeat the objective of the whole study which is trying to improve the current bus provision around these areas, and the 359 being extended to Waddon Marsh whilst retaining its current route structure has the potential to cause the same reliability issues that the 455 currently faces.
However with COVID-19 currently impacting TfL and its finances, these changes will be years off yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Apr 23, 2020 15:02:55 GMT
The 359 being extended to Waddon Marsh would unnecessarily elongate it unless its withdrawn around the Monks Hill estate which in my view is ill advised. The 312 running between Old Lodge Lane and Crystal Palace would also be overkill, unless both are separate proposals. These are just ideas for the moment but will be interesting to see if any of these come to fruition. Would love to see the proposed new route between Kenley and Waddon Marsh receive approval. It mentions that this is subject to a route test and it would be interesting to see a route up the top of Kenley. Rerouting the 434 away from its current area though would leave Northwood Avenue and Oaks way, as well as Kenley Road unserved by a bus route and would defeat the objective of the whole study which is trying to improve the current bus provision around these areas, and the 359 being extended to Waddon Marsh whilst retaining its current route structure has the potential to cause the same reliability issues that the 455 currently faces. The 359 being extended to Waddon Marsh would only require one extra bus - it would have a 2hr cycle trip time with a decent amount of recovery time. At the moment most 359s get about 25 minutes recovery time at Purley. I think it's quite a neat little idea. Far cheaper than introducing a new link from somewhere like Kenley which would probably require a 2 or 3 PVR. Not to mention the 359 providing stronger links. Many of these changes are probably as much as 10 years off - most of it depends not on TfL's situation but how the property market plays out after this crisis. Most of the changes proposed are subject to S106 funding from the developers of the 40,000 new homes proposed (Mostly in the south) of Croydon borough over the next 17 years. Purley Way is proposed to have 12,000 new homes and other commercial units built between now and 2031 - that will require a big boost in bus services and infrastructure given there's no realistic chance of any tram extension. |
|
