|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 12, 2020 18:44:43 GMT
Does the old 3/15 stand when they terminated at Regent Street Still exist? I walked down Regent Street a couple of weeks ago, I think its just a bus stop now for route 22, assuming it's the stand on Conduit Street you were referring to. The bus stand markings are still there but it's a 22 stop now. |
|
|
|
Post by greg on Nov 14, 2020 15:33:19 GMT
I think the 55 stand was moved because footpath was increased and the shape of the footpath is kind of curvy so not suitable especially for LTs. The 25 have moved out ages ago hence it now stands past onto Holles Street with the 73.
The C2 stand at Regent Street is now a stop for the 22.
Also to note the ex-137 stand is now used a lot by the 7 which use to stand on the side but they stand at both, makes sense since the 7’s stand no buses behind can go infront
All seen yesterday
|
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Nov 14, 2020 15:39:50 GMT
I think the 55 stand was moved because footpath was increased and the shape of the footpath is kind of curvy so not suitable especially for LTs. The 25 have moved out ages ago hence it now stands past onto Holles Street with the 73. The C2 stand at Regent Street is now a stop for the 22. Also to note the ex-137 stand is now used a lot by the 7 which use to stand on the side but they stand at both, makes sense since the 7’s stand no buses behind can go infront All seen yesterday The LTs on the 55 always used to stand there perfectly fine, when the 25 was removed almost immediately the 55 stand was removed and the 55 sent to stand at Holles Street. There was no issue with the 55s old stand. |
|
|
|
Post by greg on Nov 14, 2020 15:45:23 GMT
I think the 55 stand was moved because footpath was increased and the shape of the footpath is kind of curvy so not suitable especially for LTs. The 25 have moved out ages ago hence it now stands past onto Holles Street with the 73. The C2 stand at Regent Street is now a stop for the 22. Also to note the ex-137 stand is now used a lot by the 7 which use to stand on the side but they stand at both, makes sense since the 7’s stand no buses behind can go infront All seen yesterday The LTs on the 55 always used to stand there perfectly fine, when the 25 was removed almost immediately the 55 stand was removed and the 55 sent to stand at Holles Street. There was no issue with the 55s old stand. Are you sure? You are definitely right in saying the 55 stand was removed when the 25 was gone, but this was just about 2-3 weeks after, the 55 would still occasionaly stand by McDonalds. But the old stand which is longer in place (55) can definitely no longer be used because the footpath has been widened by Subway to one lane instead of one lane and the 55 stand, and can cause a lot of congestion actually. |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Nov 14, 2020 19:50:28 GMT
I heard Marble Arch is full, so i see 4 options to make space for 414: * Cut 30 to Baker Street Station/Portman Square * Extend 137 back to Oxford Circus (Probably everyone would like this) * Cut 159 to Oxofrd Circus * Cut 189 to Baker Street Station/Portman Square (Highly unlikely) As route 30 is the only link between Marble Arch and Great Portland Street it is a valuable link best retained. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 14, 2020 20:03:59 GMT
I'd say the 74 was a more likely route to cut back with the 2 and 13 maintaining the link from Hyde Park Corner to Baker Street
|
|
|
|
Post by Trafalgax on Nov 14, 2020 20:28:24 GMT
I heard Marble Arch is full, so i see 4 options to make space for 414: * Cut 30 to Baker Street Station/Portman Square * Extend 137 back to Oxford Circus (Probably everyone would like this) * Cut 159 to Oxofrd Circus * Cut 189 to Baker Street Station/Portman Square (Highly unlikely) As route 30 is the only link between Marble Arch and Great Portland Street it is a valuable link best retained. But then you have 390 from Warren Street which isn’t too far away from Great Portland Street, so it can be a possibility. |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Nov 14, 2020 21:59:41 GMT
As route 30 is the only link between Marble Arch and Great Portland Street it is a valuable link best retained. But then you have 390 from Warren Street which isn’t too far away from Great Portland Street, so it can be a possibility. Route 30 is still the only round the corner route linking east and south of Baker Street station, which would not be served by route 390 going via Oxford Circus. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Dec 14, 2020 1:07:01 GMT
After thinking 🤔 about it I would would rather TfL chopped the other end of the 414 I.e the South Kensington to Putney Bridge section rather than the Marble Arch to Maida Hill section. Because the Maida Hill to South Kensington section provides a unique link whereas the Putney Bridge to South Kensington isn’t and is duplicated by the 414. So I would rather TFL withdraw the 414 between South Kensington and Putney Bridge or discontinue the 414 entirely and reroute the 6 to South Kensington in my humble opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Dec 15, 2020 16:09:19 GMT
After thinking 🤔 about it I would would rather TfL chopped the other end of the 414 I.e the South Kensington to Putney Bridge section rather than the Marble Arch to Maida Hill section. Because the Maida Hill to South Kensington section provides a unique link whereas the Putney Bridge to South Kensington isn’t and is duplicated by the 414. So I would rather TFL withdraw the 414 between South Kensington and Putney Bridge or discontinue the 414 entirely and reroute the 6 to South Kensington in my humble opinion. I can see why you said that but the 74 already provides a link from South Kensington to Marble Arch - I'm sceptical if there's really enough demand for that round the corner link at Hyde Park Corner to justify having the 414 too and I'm also sceptical over whether there's enough demand on the 414 north of Marble Arch to justify the link to South Kensington. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think TfL should look at diverting the northern end of the 414 to Paddington Basin with Crossrail coming to improve onward connections from Paddington but this would form part of a wider package of changes I've thought of which would involve 23 to Wembley as I don't think both the 23 and 414 between Edgware Road and Knightsbridge can be justified. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Dec 15, 2020 16:53:29 GMT
After thinking 🤔 about it I would would rather TfL chopped the other end of the 414 I.e the South Kensington to Putney Bridge section rather than the Marble Arch to Maida Hill section. Because the Maida Hill to South Kensington section provides a unique link whereas the Putney Bridge to South Kensington isn’t and is duplicated by the 414. So I would rather TFL withdraw the 414 between South Kensington and Putney Bridge or discontinue the 414 entirely and reroute the 6 to South Kensington in my humble opinion. I can see why you said that but the 74 already provides a link from South Kensington to Marble Arch - I'm sceptical if there's really enough demand for that round the corner link at Hyde Park Corner to justify having the 414 too and I'm also sceptical over whether there's enough demand on the 414 north of Marble Arch to justify the link to South Kensington. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think TfL should look at diverting the northern end of the 414 to Paddington Basin with Crossrail coming to improve onward connections from Paddington but this would form part of a wider package of changes I've thought of which would involve 23 to Wembley as I don't think both the 23 and 414 between Edgware Road and Knightsbridge can be justified. You have a point another unique link there is that I have just realised is the Fulham to Maida Hill link so I think that the Fulham to Maida Hill link should be kept or have the 6 rerouted to Fulham and people between Maida Hill and Edgware Road can link with the 345 and 49 at South Kensington |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Dec 15, 2020 17:12:09 GMT
Tbh London's bus history it littered with broken unique links that the Fulham to Maida Hill will just be another one along with Mitcham to Clapham Common (88/355) Crystal Palace to Clapham Junction (49) Manor Park to Holborn Station (25) etc etc etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2020 23:05:51 GMT
My PREDICTIONS for what I think will happen with these changes:
Route 414 curtailment to Marble Arch- Gets the go ahead as originally consulted on and commences on the same date as the new contract which is 20th November 2021.
Route 94- Gets cutback to Marble Arch with the N94 continuing to Piccadilly Circus, this change will happen on the same day as the 414 change.
Route 159- Gets cutback to Oxford Circus, with the night service of route 159 being withdrawn and the N109 being extended to Marble Arch (TFL shall consult on this or probably won't as route 159 duplicates the N109), this will happen on the same day as the 414 change.
Route 113- No change and will continue to Oxford Circus.
|
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Dec 24, 2020 23:42:26 GMT
My PREDICTIONS for what I think will happen with these changes: Route 414 curtailment to Marble Arch- Gets the go ahead as originally consulted on and commences on the same date as the new contract which is 20th November 2021. Route 94- Gets cutback to Marble Arch with the N94 continuing to Piccadilly Circus, this change will happen on the same day as the 414 change. Route 159- Gets cutback to Oxford Circus, with the night service of route 159 being withdrawn and the N109 being extended to Marble Arch (TFL shall consult on this or probably won't as route 159 duplicates the N109), this will happen on the same day as the 414 change. Route 113- No change and will continue to Oxford Circus. See I have a problem with that and that is the 113 shouldn't continue to Oxford Circus whereas the 94, which is much shorter gets cutback to Marble Arch. The 113 is very long and although I wouldn't mind it if the 113 was diverted via Wigmore Street - same with the 159 |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Dec 24, 2020 23:53:36 GMT
My PREDICTIONS for what I think will happen with these changes: Route 414 curtailment to Marble Arch- Gets the go ahead as originally consulted on and commences on the same date as the new contract which is 20th November 2021. Route 94- Gets cutback to Marble Arch with the N94 continuing to Piccadilly Circus, this change will happen on the same day as the 414 change. Route 159- Gets cutback to Oxford Circus, with the night service of route 159 being withdrawn and the N109 being extended to Marble Arch (TFL shall consult on this or probably won't as route 159 duplicates the N109), this will happen on the same day as the 414 change. Route 113- No change and will continue to Oxford Circus. See I have a problem with that and that is the 113 shouldn't continue to Oxford Circus whereas the 94, which is much shorter gets cutback to Marble Arch. The 113 is very long and although I wouldn't mind it if the 113 was diverted via Wigmore Street - same with the 159 I agree with this, I know I should probably appreciate this even goes down Oxford Street but this is another route that's wasting stand space at Oxford Circus. Back pre-Covid when I'd go Oxford Street pretty much everyday, weekday and weekend the 113 would be barely used down the road with the 139 taking the Lions Share towards Baker Street. I might even go as far as suggesting the 113 could probably be cut back to Baker Street as it will probably have minimal impact and the 189 should be restored to Oxford Circus to use the 113 stand space. Cutting the 94 would be the worst decision since cutting the 25 away from Oxford Street so I really think it ought to stay down Oxford Street, it's certainly the most popular route down the West of Oxford Street. I would like the 159 to stay down Oxford Street too as it provides a really valuable link down Whitehall and towards Westminster. |
|
