|
Post by rif153 on Jan 21, 2023 20:41:11 GMT
The changes to the 3 and C10 just about cover the 507 and a seven day a week service is justified serving a residential area, the 521 though has always been mainly a commuter service and with the move towards WFH I guess it's just no longer viable? It's strange how the 16 change is going ahead yet more obvious ones like the Putney routes have been deferred. Wouldn't it have been simpler for the 16 to be Victoria to Brent Park and withdraw the 332? The round the corner link to Paddington doesn't seem particularly well used and the 46 offers some alternative as well as the Bakerloo Line from Kilburn Park. I was thinking the same really especially when removing the Kilburn/Maida Vale link wasn't technically consulted on as it was going to be maintained by 98. I'd have thought the 14 would have made more sense with the 74 remaining and the change being disguisted a bit by renumbering the 414 to 14 like with the 332. Or even do what was rumoured to be proposed early last year with the 14 becoming Putney to Piccadilly Circus and the 414 axed with the 74 remaining to Marble Arch/Baker Street and removing a Piccadilly to TCR route (left to just the 19 and 38). As I said with the fare increase there's little sustainability been announced with money just being found to prop things up which will slowly have to be increased again with higher tender costs and an ageing population. People in Kilburn and Cricklewood really are getting a raw deal with the 16/332 changes. The Victoria link is important and replacing it wit( t(E 6 which doesn’t go nearly as far up the A5 is poor. Have to agree about the Putney routes, the wasteful levels of duplication are very hard to justify.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jan 22, 2023 13:06:06 GMT
507 is chalk and cheese; it can be very busy at peak times (not by any means confined to just a couple of hours morning and evening) and very quiet otherwise. The 521 has improved of late but is somewhat indirect - as indeed were its predecessors between Waterloo and the City. The public transport link through the Kingsway Tram Tunnel / Aldwych underpass finally ceases. To make best use of those vehicles It should have been possible to roster most drivers to peak-time duties and offer just a 20-minute headway mid-day. There is no need for evening / weekend services on those routes. Victoria - Waterloo is covered by the 211 (will be the 11) albeit not by exactly the same route. There remain some curious decisions. It becomes harder to travel northwards from Victoria in the direction of the Edgware Road. I'm not sure of the all-day demand for such trips these days but I see 16s leaving Victoria quite well loaded. Demand patterns change over time so we have to expect change. Victoria has already lost the 25 and several other trunk routes over the past years. How many more? The changes to the 3 and C10 just about cover the 507 and a seven day a week service is justified serving a residential area, the 521 though has always been mainly a commuter service and with the move towards WFH I guess it's just no longer viable? It's strange how the 16 change is going ahead yet more obvious ones like the Putney routes have been deferred. Wouldn't it have been simpler for the 16 to be Victoria to Brent Park and withdraw the 332? The round the corner link to Paddington doesn't seem particularly well used and the 46 offers some alternative as well as the Bakerloo Line from Kilburn Park. The irony being that the Mon-Fri 521 is being replaced by two double deck daily high frequency trunk routes with a long overlap between Holborn and St Bart’s. I’d love to see the saving, if any, from that.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 22, 2023 13:12:43 GMT
The changes to the 3 and C10 just about cover the 507 and a seven day a week service is justified serving a residential area, the 521 though has always been mainly a commuter service and with the move towards WFH I guess it's just no longer viable? It's strange how the 16 change is going ahead yet more obvious ones like the Putney routes have been deferred. Wouldn't it have been simpler for the 16 to be Victoria to Brent Park and withdraw the 332? The round the corner link to Paddington doesn't seem particularly well used and the 46 offers some alternative as well as the Bakerloo Line from Kilburn Park. The irony being that the Mon-Fri 521 is being replaced by two double deck daily high frequency trunk routes with a long overlap between Holborn and St Bart’s. I’d love to see the saving, if any, from that. Remember the costing for operating the 59 and 133 will largely remain the same as they are diversions rather then extensions so pretty much whatever the 521 cost to run each year will be saved.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 22, 2023 13:15:05 GMT
The changes to the 3 and C10 just about cover the 507 and a seven day a week service is justified serving a residential area, the 521 though has always been mainly a commuter service and with the move towards WFH I guess it's just no longer viable? It's strange how the 16 change is going ahead yet more obvious ones like the Putney routes have been deferred. Wouldn't it have been simpler for the 16 to be Victoria to Brent Park and withdraw the 332? The round the corner link to Paddington doesn't seem particularly well used and the 46 offers some alternative as well as the Bakerloo Line from Kilburn Park. The irony being that the Mon-Fri 521 is being replaced by two double deck daily high frequency trunk routes with a long overlap between Holborn and St Bart’s. I’d love to see the saving, if any, from that. It’s such a terrible change overall - as you say, your replacing one high frequency single decker route with two high frequency double decker routes and on top, reducing their usefulness within the centre of town by diverting them to places that the usual patronage on each route has no interest in going to (59 passengers want Russell Square & Euston whilst 133 passengers want Liverpool Street)
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 22, 2023 13:18:02 GMT
The irony being that the Mon-Fri 521 is being replaced by two double deck daily high frequency trunk routes with a long overlap between Holborn and St Bart’s. I’d love to see the saving, if any, from that. Remember the costing for operating the 59 and 133 will largely remain the same as they are diversions rather then extensions so pretty much whatever the 521 cost to run each year will be saved. But ironically, according to others, your overbussing a section that people complained about and wanted the 521 axed - 521 is getting axed and the section will have even more capacity because of a needless diversion of two double decker routes that are more useful in their current guises
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jan 22, 2023 14:19:43 GMT
The changes to the 3 and C10 just about cover the 507 and a seven day a week service is justified serving a residential area, the 521 though has always been mainly a commuter service and with the move towards WFH I guess it's just no longer viable? It's strange how the 16 change is going ahead yet more obvious ones like the Putney routes have been deferred. Wouldn't it have been simpler for the 16 to be Victoria to Brent Park and withdraw the 332? The round the corner link to Paddington doesn't seem particularly well used and the 46 offers some alternative as well as the Bakerloo Line from Kilburn Park. The irony being that the Mon-Fri 521 is being replaced by two double deck daily high frequency trunk routes with a long overlap between Holborn and St Bart’s. I’d love to see the saving, if any, from that. Yes I don’t really agree with the 59 change, although it would probably have been withdrawn between Holborn and Euston anyway, but rerouting the 133 to Holborn is ridiculous. The best suggestion I've heard is to reroute the 8 to Waterloo and extend the 98 to London Bridge which will also provide the often suggested link between London Bridge and the West End.
|
|
|
Post by greg on Jan 22, 2023 14:45:11 GMT
The irony being that the Mon-Fri 521 is being replaced by two double deck daily high frequency trunk routes with a long overlap between Holborn and St Bart’s. I’d love to see the saving, if any, from that. Yes I don’t really agree with the 59 change, although it would probably have been withdrawn between Holborn and Euston anyway, but rerouting the 133 to Holborn is ridiculous. The best suggestion I've heard is to reroute the 8 to Waterloo and extend the 98 to London Bridge which will also provide the often suggested link between London Bridge and the West End. I reckon if the 59 wasnt touched and with the 188 planned to divert to TCR would have seen a hefty cut on the 68 to E&C. The 59 is the only route down Kennington from Holborn/Waterloo whereas there is a huge overlap of buses at Holborn to E&C. If the were ever to revise it, the 68 would have been the better route to divert to Barts instead, as the 1(168) still serves E&C from Euston and 59 to Kennington with 91. As you said, the 8/98 changes sound much better.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 22, 2023 15:09:22 GMT
Yes I don’t really agree with the 59 change, although it would probably have been withdrawn between Holborn and Euston anyway, but rerouting the 133 to Holborn is ridiculous. The best suggestion I've heard is to reroute the 8 to Waterloo and extend the 98 to London Bridge which will also provide the often suggested link between London Bridge and the West End. I reckon if the 59 wasnt touched and with the 188 planned to divert to TCR would have seen a hefty cut on the 68 to E&C. The 59 is the only route down Kennington from Holborn/Waterloo whereas there is a huge overlap of buses at Holborn to E&C. If the were ever to revise it, the 68 would have been the better route to divert to Barts instead, as the 1(168) still serves E&C from Euston and 59 to Kennington with 91. As you said, the 8/98 changes sound much better. The 68 would of been in the same boat as the 59 if diverted to Bart’s - it’s not required for people from South London who instead use the three major hospitals of Kings, Guys & Tommies - St Bart’s is part of the East London catchment area which is why the 56 runs there. The 188 is personally the route that could be argued to be cut back due to the long nature of it making it easier to depend on at the North Greenwich end - 68 should remain as is IMO
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Jan 22, 2023 15:23:09 GMT
I reckon if the 59 wasnt touched and with the 188 planned to divert to TCR would have seen a hefty cut on the 68 to E&C. The 59 is the only route down Kennington from Holborn/Waterloo whereas there is a huge overlap of buses at Holborn to E&C. If the were ever to revise it, the 68 would have been the better route to divert to Barts instead, as the 1(168) still serves E&C from Euston and 59 to Kennington with 91. As you said, the 8/98 changes sound much better. The 68 would of been in the same boat as the 59 if diverted to Bart’s - it’s not required for people from South London who instead use the three major hospitals of Kings, Guys & Tommies - St Bart’s is part of the East London catchment area which is why the 56 runs there. The 188 is personally the route that could be argued to be cut back due to the long nature of it making it easier to depend on at the North Greenwich end - 68 should remain as is IMO Whilst I'm not a fan of the 59 being pulled from Euston as there's strong patronage between Kennington and Euston, something still needs to replace the 521. Everyone believes that passengers displaced from the 25 west of Holborn Circus are all using the Tube. The 8 is not enough on its own to operate along High Holborn.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 22, 2023 16:13:35 GMT
The 68 would of been in the same boat as the 59 if diverted to Bart’s - it’s not required for people from South London who instead use the three major hospitals of Kings, Guys & Tommies - St Bart’s is part of the East London catchment area which is why the 56 runs there. The 188 is personally the route that could be argued to be cut back due to the long nature of it making it easier to depend on at the North Greenwich end - 68 should remain as is IMO Whilst I'm not a fan of the 59 being pulled from Euston as there's strong patronage between Kennington and Euston, something still needs to replace the 521. Everyone believes that passengers displaced from the 25 west of Holborn Circus are all using the Tube. The 8 is not enough on its own to operate along High Holborn. Not suggesting nothing should replace the 521, just that one or two double decker routes coming from South London isn’t the answer
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Jan 23, 2023 10:09:44 GMT
Re the 521 there isn’t really many buses that can be extended from the east. The 26 is going to Victoria now, the 242 was cut back years ago. The 8 get’s rammed heading to Tottenham Court Road and you still get passengers on the 25 all the way to City Thames Link who then want to head further west. The 59 and 133 are not going to really help passengers heading past Holborn towards Oxford Street which is where most are heading, the stops between Chancery Lane and Holborn are usually always busy.
I guess the only other option would have been extending a route from the north.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 23, 2023 10:24:38 GMT
Re the 521 there isn’t really many buses that can be extended from the east. The 26 is going to Victoria now, the 242 was cut back years ago. The 8 get’s rammed heading to Tottenham Court Road and you still get passengers on the 25 all the way to City Thames Link who then want to head further west. The 59 and 133 are not going to really help passengers heading past Holborn towards Oxford Street which is where most are heading, the stops between Chancery Lane and Holborn are usually always busy. I guess the only other option would have been extending a route from the north. I'm not sure if extending the 25 to Holborn would help as I guess it would still cut short of TCR and the 133 will now do the same. Perhaps the 26 could have diverted off at Bank to follow the 521 to Waterloo via Holborn Station and the 11 remain as the Liverpool Street to Aldwych link and the 211 staying as it is to Waterloo. That would have removed some capacity as planned along Fleet Street. Then the 59 could have diverted to TCR in place of the 1 and the 188 pulled back to Waterloo using the 521 stand past the station to help reliability.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jan 23, 2023 10:49:39 GMT
From other comments, it seems the main issue with the 521 withdrawal is not the links to the south of the river, but the capacity lost between Holborn and St Pauls (and therefore more pressure on the 8).
Surely the easiest solution to this would be to simply extend the 25 to Holborn?
Alternatively for a wider restructure, I think a new link from Euston to London Bridge via Holborn, St Pauls and the City could be quite useful:
So lets say a new route from Hampstead Heath to Canada Water, via the 168 to Holborn, 521 to London Bridge and 47 to Canada Water. Then revise the 1 to operate as present from Tottenham Court Road to Surrey Quays, then taking over the 188 to North Greenwich (with the 188 withdrawn). And if needed, divert the 47 to Elephant & Castle via the 188?
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Jan 23, 2023 10:58:48 GMT
Re the 521 there isn’t really many buses that can be extended from the east. The 26 is going to Victoria now, the 242 was cut back years ago. The 8 get’s rammed heading to Tottenham Court Road and you still get passengers on the 25 all the way to City Thames Link who then want to head further west. The 59 and 133 are not going to really help passengers heading past Holborn towards Oxford Street which is where most are heading, the stops between Chancery Lane and Holborn are usually always busy. I guess the only other option would have been extending a route from the north. I'm not sure if extending the 25 to Holborn would help as I guess it would still cut short of TCR and the 133 will now do the same. Perhaps the 26 could have diverted off at Bank to follow the 521 to Waterloo via Holborn Station and the 11 remain as the Liverpool Street to Aldwych link and the 211 staying as it is to Waterloo. That would have removed some capacity as planned along Fleet Street. Then the 59 could have diverted to TCR in place of the 1 and the 188 pulled back to Waterloo using the 521 stand past the station to help reliability. Ideally the 25 should have been cut to Tottenham Court Road but can’t ever see it returning there sadly! It would still make the route long and added another 15 mins or more onto the route on a good day.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jan 23, 2023 11:23:37 GMT
Re the 521 there isn’t really many buses that can be extended from the east. The 26 is going to Victoria now, the 242 was cut back years ago. The 8 get’s rammed heading to Tottenham Court Road and you still get passengers on the 25 all the way to City Thames Link who then want to head further west. The 59 and 133 are not going to really help passengers heading past Holborn towards Oxford Street which is where most are heading, the stops between Chancery Lane and Holborn are usually always busy. I guess the only other option would have been extending a route from the north. I'm not sure if extending the 25 to Holborn would help as I guess it would still cut short of TCR and the 133 will now do the same. Perhaps the 26 could have diverted off at Bank to follow the 521 to Waterloo via Holborn Station and the 11 remain as the Liverpool Street to Aldwych link and the 211 staying as it is to Waterloo. That would have removed some capacity as planned along Fleet Street. Then the 59 could have diverted to TCR in place of the 1 and the 188 pulled back to Waterloo using the 521 stand past the station to help reliability. I really can't see the 133 extension being much of a success. The 521 is popular with commuters spilling out of London Bridge who can hop straight on to take them into the City. The 133 stops on Borough High Street so less incentive for commuters coming from the main line station to walk there (I know its only a short distance) and the 521's frequency used to have a very high frequency, 133's isn't as high. It makes far more sense to improve links to the east from Holborn by re-extending the 25 there, I'm sceptical there's demand for a link southwards especially given there are faster alternatives like the 17 anyway.
|
|