|
|
Post by ronnie on Apr 11, 2021 19:18:21 GMT
As someone said in another thread a long time back, buses starting from Canning Town do a “Tour de Newham” and all end up in East Ham (5, 115, 147, 300, 474). The only routes heading west from newham are the 115 and 25; everything else goes north or is infra-borough. The destinations are all very repetitive (from Stratford all routes go to Walthamstow Central or Chingford; the 108/276 add some variety but the rest all stay within the borough in a fairly circuitous fashion. Think it was me and will get worse especially from Custom House you will have the 147,300,304,325 and 474 all heading to East Ham via different routes - I am sure East Ham as demand but this is a joke. As you mention we only have the 115 heading west from Canning Town with the majority of routes terminating there.
I think in newham every route is designed to feed people to the tube - Stratford, Canning Town, East Ham / various district line routes and certain dlr stations |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Apr 11, 2021 19:23:35 GMT
As someone said in another thread a long time back, buses starting from Canning Town do a “Tour de Newham” and all end up in East Ham (5, 115, 147, 300, 474). The only routes heading west from newham are the 115 and 25; everything else goes north or is infra-borough. The destinations are all very repetitive (from Stratford all routes go to Walthamstow Central or Chingford; the 108/276 add some variety but the rest all stay within the borough in a fairly circuitous fashion. Think it was me and will get worse especially from Custom House you will have the 147,300,304,325 and 474 all heading to East Ham via different routes - I am sure East Ham as demand but this is a joke. As you mention we only have the 115 heading west from Canning Town with the majority of routes terminating there.
Canning Town is just funny as just to head over to Poplar which is literally 3 stops away you literally only have one route. It surely can't hurt just sending the D7 or 300 over. The D7 would also sort out a much needed Canary Wharf link. You have buses from Canary Wharf to all sorts of places like Dalston Junction and Ash Grove but you don't have a bus just heading around the corner to Canning Town. With East Ham, the place has so much routes going to the same place I'm glad I'm local to the area to know which ones to avoid. Even just heading to Beckton which is down the road you could make the mistake of getting a 376 or 300 which take longer routes around. I think East in general has extremely poor links with routes that head west, which is what eventually translates into the inferior links into Central bus wise. It's no surprise the 5, 86 and 25 make up some of the busiest routes in London, with the 238 and 104 making into the among the highest pax/mile ratio when you're really struggling for links. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 11, 2021 19:29:27 GMT
As someone said in another thread a long time back, buses starting from Canning Town do a “Tour de Newham” and all end up in East Ham (5, 115, 147, 300, 474). The only routes heading west from newham are the 115 and 25; everything else goes north or is infra-borough. The destinations are all very repetitive (from Stratford all routes go to Walthamstow Central or Chingford; the 108/276 add some variety but the rest all stay within the borough in a fairly circuitous fashion. Think it was me and will get worse especially from Custom House you will have the 147,300,304,325 and 474 all heading to East Ham via different routes - I am sure East Ham as demand but this is a joke. As you mention we only have the 115 heading west from Canning Town with the majority of routes terminating there.
I also find it rather weird how Leamouth doesn't have a link to Canning Town despite it being a few minutes away and for a new development it is a bit disappointing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2021 19:40:57 GMT
Think it was me and will get worse especially from Custom House you will have the 147,300,304,325 and 474 all heading to East Ham via different routes - I am sure East Ham as demand but this is a joke. As you mention we only have the 115 heading west from Canning Town with the majority of routes terminating there.
I also find it rather weird how Leamouth doesn't have a link to Canning Town despite it being a few minutes away and for a new development it is a bit disappointing. Leamouth has the DLR at East India and Blackwall plus the footbridge from City Island to Canning Town Station. If anything I would extend the D3 towards Excel via the Lower Lea Crossing. |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Apr 11, 2021 19:54:00 GMT
My Borough of Enfield does has many holes in them that some of them are overlooked. Here are the issues with Enfield : . Generally poor links to the West of Enfield from Edmonton Green which to me is very overlooked with the W6 having capacity issues and has a long journey time of up to 40 minutes during peak hours. . Poor accessibility to Hospitals from North East Enfield such as Turkey Street and Enfield Lock and North West Enfield such as Haldey Wood, Cockfosters and Oakwood. . Southgate lacks direct connections to Barnet. . Poor connections to Walthamstow from the centre of the borough despite Walthamstow being a close distance. . The only opportunity zone ( Upper Lea Valley ) with a existing poor bus network which means drastic changes could happen once developments take place such as Meridian Water. . The Ponders End to Edmonton Green corridor having capacity issues with the 279 and the 349 having overcrowding's pre covid and not being enough for the capacity needed. Have you addressed any of this as I know you are a representative for buses in enfield (I believe you have said you are some sort of spokesperson).
The 279/349 situation is really annoying, however I could see some ways where if the 149 was reduced slightly (I think there would be more likely options on the route being the 242 thou) the 349 could then be increased slightly so hopefully it could make up some shortcomings capacity wise north of Edmonton. The 279 is certainly busy from Manor House as well - perhaps due to zoning of the tube map and fares.
I could explain the whats going on, I did have some formal discussions with them regarding the capacity issue at Ponders End with the 279 and 349. I did not know the issue until they told me about it. The 349 frequency increase will create excess capacity at Tottenham leaving other routes to support the capacity. There are two options we are assessing. The first one is to extend 259 to Ponders End, this will give extra capacity and suite historical times as the 259 used to serve Ponders End until 2004, but may not be popular as there is existing links to Tottenham High Road from the existing 279 and 349. The second option is to extend the 144 to Ponders End, this one is preferred to me as the 144 is more unique as it connects directly to Wood Green and other destinations. We haven't got to a final decision yet, but there are still discussions to do. I have raised issues especially the poor West Enfield to Edmonton connections with a 125 extension to Edmonton. They like the idea as it will support the W6 with extra capacity and allow more direct link to West Enfield, but Im a bit surprised they did not relies the issue until I have raised it. The current situation with TFL means we can't push for a whole list of schemes. We separated our proposals from the ones for the short term and the ones for the long term. The short term phase that are a priority such as the Upper Lea Valley Opportunity Zone and other priorities or resource neutral schemes for the first phase. The long term phase are the ones that could form new routes or improved connections for the long term. We won't push for new routes or hospital connections yet as we have the new 456 introduced which is enough for now, but of course its not going to be the last new route as there are still some parts of the borough that could form a new route. Once the final document for the short term phase is ready, I could put it here so we can all discuss on it or give comments. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 11, 2021 19:56:24 GMT
I also find it rather weird how Leamouth doesn't have a link to Canning Town despite it being a few minutes away and for a new development it is a bit disappointing. Leamouth has the DLR at East India and Blackwall plusthe footbridge from City Island to Canning Town Station. If anything I would extend the D3 towards Excel via the Lower Lea Crossing. I never knew there was a footbridge - would there be demand perhaps to the shops on Barking Road from Leamouth? The D3 extension to the Custom House area seems interesting as it would link the development to Crossrail. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 11, 2021 20:00:36 GMT
Have you addressed any of this as I know you are a representative for buses in enfield (I believe you have said you are some sort of spokesperson). The 279/349 situation is really annoying, however I could see some ways where if the 149 was reduced slightly (I think there would be more likely options on the route being the 242 thou) the 349 could then be increased slightly so hopefully it could make up some shortcomings capacity wise north of Edmonton. The 279 is certainly busy from Manor House as well - perhaps due to zoning of the tube map and fares.
I could explain the whats going on, I did have some formal discussions with them regarding the capacity issue at Ponders End with the 279 and 349. I did not know the issue until they told me about it. The 349 frequency increase will create excess capacity at Tottenham leaving other routes to support the capacity. There are two options we are assessing. The first one is to extend 259 to Ponders End, this will give extra capacity and suite historical times as the 259 used to serve Ponders End until 2004, but may not be popular as there is existing links to Tottenham High Road from the existing 279 and 349. The second option is to extend the 144 to Ponders End, this one is preferred to me as the 144 is more unique as it connects directly to Wood Green and other destinations. We haven't got to a final decision yet, but there are still discussions to do. I have raised issues especially the poor West Enfield to Edmonton connections with a 125 extension to Edmonton. They like the idea as it will support the W6 with extra capacity and allow more direct link to West Enfield, but Im a bit surprised they did not relies the issue until I have raised it. The current situation with TFL means we can't push for a whole list of schemes. We separated our proposals from the ones for the short term and the ones for the long term. The short term phase that are a priority such as the Upper Lea Valley Opportunity Zone and other priorities or resource neutral schemes for the first phase. The long term phase are the ones that could form new routes or improved connections for the long term. We won't push for new routes or hospital connections yet as we have the new 456 introduced which is enough for now, but of course its not going to be the last new route as there are still some parts of the borough that could form a new route. Once the final document for the short term phase is ready, I could put it here so we can all discuss on it or give comments. So basically increasing the 349 to cope with demand on the last mile would effectively be inefficient as the rest of the route doesn't suffer with the same capacity issues. In the past there would have been some shorts over the busiest section of the 279/349. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 11, 2021 20:00:48 GMT
Have you addressed any of this as I know you are a representative for buses in enfield (I believe you have said you are some sort of spokesperson).
The 279/349 situation is really annoying, however I could see some ways where if the 149 was reduced slightly (I think there would be more likely options on the route being the 242 thou) the 349 could then be increased slightly so hopefully it could make up some shortcomings capacity wise north of Edmonton. The 279 is certainly busy from Manor House as well - perhaps due to zoning of the tube map and fares.
I could explain the whats going on, I did have some formal discussions with them regarding the capacity issue at Ponders End with the 279 and 349. I did not know the issue until they told me about it. The 349 frequency increase will create excess capacity at Tottenham leaving other routes to support the capacity. There are two options we are assessing. The first one is to extend 259 to Ponders End, this will give extra capacity and suite historical times as the 259 used to serve Ponders End until 2004, but may not be popular as there is existing links to Tottenham High Road from the existing 279 and 349. The second option is to extend the 144 to Ponders End, this one is preferred to me as the 144 is more unique as it connects directly to Wood Green and other destinations. We haven't got to a final decision yet, but there are still discussions to do. I have raised issues especially the poor West Enfield to Edmonton connections with a 125 extension to Edmonton. They like the idea as it will support the W6 with extra capacity and allow more direct link to West Enfield, but Im a bit surprised they did not relies the issue until I have raised it. The current situation with TFL means we can't push for a whole list of schemes. We separated our proposals from the ones for the short term and the ones for the long term. The short term phase that are a priority such as the Upper Lea Valley Opportunity Zone and other priorities or resource neutral schemes for the first phase. The long term phase are the ones that could form new routes or improved connections for the long term. We won't push for new routes or hospital connections yet as we have the new 456 introduced which is enough for now, but of course its not going to be the last new route as there are still some parts of the borough that could form a new route. Once the final document for the short term phase is ready, I could put it here so we can all discuss on it or give comments. You may have slightly misread my post but no worries - under TFLs current plan to reduce buses into Central London I wonder whether the 149 could be involved and if it was to get a small reduction I would say that could be scope for increasing the 349 a bit and there would be no excess capacity going up Tottenham High Road as the 349 would go up a bit (which would add more capacity between Ponders End and Edmonton) and the 149 would go down a bit. Though this is hypothetical. The 144 proposal may not be a good idea and I say that as despite the routes length it can encounter traffic hotspots such as Turnpike Lane to Wood Green traffic, tailbacks between Mayes Road and Turnpike Lane Station and the Great Cambridge Road so I would wonder if reliability would be impacted under such a change. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2021 20:17:54 GMT
It might be cheating a bit but I’ll go with the areas that are on the border of Bexley and Greenwich. I think it’s really weird that you can’t get from Eltham or Welling to Abbey Wood or Thamesmead without changing at Bexleyheath or Woolwich/Plumstead. Welling to Abbey Wood is a simple 3 mile/10 minute drive.
|
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Apr 11, 2021 20:27:08 GMT
I could explain the whats going on, I did have some formal discussions with them regarding the capacity issue at Ponders End with the 279 and 349. I did not know the issue until they told me about it. The 349 frequency increase will create excess capacity at Tottenham leaving other routes to support the capacity. There are two options we are assessing. The first one is to extend 259 to Ponders End, this will give extra capacity and suite historical times as the 259 used to serve Ponders End until 2004, but may not be popular as there is existing links to Tottenham High Road from the existing 279 and 349. The second option is to extend the 144 to Ponders End, this one is preferred to me as the 144 is more unique as it connects directly to Wood Green and other destinations. We haven't got to a final decision yet, but there are still discussions to do. I have raised issues especially the poor West Enfield to Edmonton connections with a 125 extension to Edmonton. They like the idea as it will support the W6 with extra capacity and allow more direct link to West Enfield, but Im a bit surprised they did not relies the issue until I have raised it. The current situation with TFL means we can't push for a whole list of schemes. We separated our proposals from the ones for the short term and the ones for the long term. The short term phase that are a priority such as the Upper Lea Valley Opportunity Zone and other priorities or resource neutral schemes for the first phase. The long term phase are the ones that could form new routes or improved connections for the long term. We won't push for new routes or hospital connections yet as we have the new 456 introduced which is enough for now, but of course its not going to be the last new route as there are still some parts of the borough that could form a new route. Once the final document for the short term phase is ready, I could put it here so we can all discuss on it or give comments. You may have slightly misread my post but no worries - under TFLs current plan to reduce buses into Central London I wonder whether the 149 could be involved and if it was to get a small reduction I would say that could be scope for increasing the 349 a bit and there would be no excess capacity going up Tottenham High Road as the 349 would go up a bit (which would add more capacity between Ponders End and Edmonton) and the 149 would go down a bit. Though this is hypothetical. The 144 proposal may not be a good idea and I say that as despite the routes length it can encounter traffic hotspots such as Turnpike Lane to Wood Green traffic, tailbacks between Mayes Road and Turnpike Lane Station and the Great Cambridge Road so I would wonder if reliability would be impacted under such a change. You are right on the fact the 144 has traffic hotspots, its one of the negatives you pointed out. It could be reliable if the traffic levels are the same as Wood Green's, but its not true as the 349 or the 279 does not have reliability issues as they have bus lanes at Tottenham high Road. For the 259, does it have traffic hotspots between Manor House and Kings Cross? |
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Apr 11, 2021 20:34:15 GMT
I think Ealing is one of the boroughs where the bus network isn't too bad. It is home to quite a few trunk corridors: the 207,427,607, N207, the 140,X140 and 140, the 218,266,306,N266, the 65, N65 etc. but also has a balance of several local routes, such as the E-network.
There is also a decent balance between N-S and W-E corridors in the borough, with key routes such as the 195 and the E3. The one thing that I would advocate to fix is that the 195 should be double decked, as it's packed, even during the pandemic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Apr 11, 2021 21:05:33 GMT
Haringey has decent bus links. Routes like 121, 221 and W3 (even W4) get decent loads even during COVID. Also has plenty of routes heading into Central London (29,76,91,141,149,243,341 just to name a few); however we don’t have enough North-East links. We have only the 123 which is pretty lengthy, the 444 and the 67 (which can be extended further north due to its curtailment at Dalston Junction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2021 21:31:23 GMT
I would say Hillingdon isn’t brilliant. Quite restricted night links at present, with Heathrow being the main centre for nights , followed by Uxbridge, which has a 30 min N207 and 24/7 222. No night tube (I’m excluding Heathrow and Hatton Cross). No night route serves Hillingdon Hospital.
I’d like to see TfL take over the Slough to Uxbridge routes, a route from Uxbridge to Harrow via Hillingdon Hospital which could be 24/7 . Hopefully one day the Met Line will run all night to at least Harrow on the Hill, this could be years away though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2021 21:36:45 GMT
I think Ealing is one of the boroughs where the bus network isn't too bad. It is home to quite a few trunk corridors: the 207,427,607, N207, the 140,X140 and 140, the 218,266,306,N266, the 65, N65 etc. but also has a balance of several local routes, such as the E-network. There is also a decent balance between N-S and W-E corridors in the borough, with key routes such as the 195 and the E3. The one thing that I would advocate to fix is that the 195 should be double decked, as it's packed, even during the pandemic. Yes I like Ealing. Shame they’ve lost the on demand network there, it was picking up before covid hit. Decent night bus links too with the N7,N11,N65,N83, N207, 297 and very late trips and early starts on many other day routes. The 195 should be decked I agree. Some gaps I think around North Acton and Park Royal. The 95 should have been decked as well. Southall is always an encouraging place to visit to see lots of people using buses. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 11, 2021 22:13:31 GMT
I'd suggest Lambeth has one of the best networks around due to the superb access to Central London as well the brilliant connections when travelling north to south though even then, it still isn't perfect and the lack of east to west links outside either starting or crossing through the borough into other boroughs has always severely been lacking. A main direct link between Clapham & West Norwood (no the 322 isn't such a thing) has always been odd given they are the next biggest places after Brixton & Streatham
|
|
