Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2021 18:51:40 GMT
Orpington would be a decent area for demand responsive service. Personally think that these should be used by TfL.
|
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jul 17, 2021 19:28:35 GMT
But anyway, back on thread topic, I think this is one of those routes being the R7 that west of Orpington would be better off run commercially if TFL were to pursue this or the R5/R8/R10 take on the loop round Chelsfield. There are certain routes in rural countryside across the country that serve different parts of areas only for a few journeys in a day (which I think is fair looking at this loop from a very armchair perspective and that the loop gets roughly 40 passengers) so perhaps a commercial company could maybe do justice round that loop like Go Coach for example. Perhaps they could've incorporated that into their DRT scheme when it was running in the summer last year if this consultation was a year in the past. I always found since the Roundabout consultation back in 2017 as I call it quite weird that Knockholt Station has no buses whatsoever, the only 2 it has are school services (S31/33) operated by Go Coach so perhaps when writing the consultation response someone could throw in the Knockholt Station suggestion. Sounds reasonable to me as that could be of use. Is there a requirement under better accessibility to places of healthcare to serve Private Healthcare? If so Chelsfield Park Hospital would no longer be served and would be almost 650 metres from the nearest bus stop and I can't imagine that being popular politically. Passengers have tended to go to Orpington rather than Knockholt Station at least in part because it's cheaper and served by more trains. The R7 west of Orpington is a pretty bog standard suburban local bus. If you mean east of Orpington, those figures do not suggest that this is in any way a commercial proposition. As the Chelsfield loop is in the TfL area, it would be bizarre to leave it 'to the market' when Knockholt Pound and Halstead, which are not, would be unaffected. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 17, 2021 19:54:37 GMT
But anyway, back on thread topic, I think this is one of those routes being the R7 that west of Orpington would be better off run commercially if TFL were to pursue this or the R5/R8/R10 take on the loop round Chelsfield. There are certain routes in rural countryside across the country that serve different parts of areas only for a few journeys in a day (which I think is fair looking at this loop from a very armchair perspective and that the loop gets roughly 40 passengers) so perhaps a commercial company could maybe do justice round that loop like Go Coach for example. Perhaps they could've incorporated that into their DRT scheme when it was running in the summer last year if this consultation was a year in the past. I always found since the Roundabout consultation back in 2017 as I call it quite weird that Knockholt Station has no buses whatsoever, the only 2 it has are school services (S31/33) operated by Go Coach so perhaps when writing the consultation response someone could throw in the Knockholt Station suggestion. Sounds reasonable to me as that could be of use. Is there a requirement under better accessibility to places of healthcare to serve Private Healthcare? If so Chelsfield Park Hospital would no longer be served and would be almost 650 metres from the nearest bus stop and I can't imagine that being popular politically. Passengers have tended to go to Orpington rather than Knockholt Station at least in part because it's cheaper and served by more trains. The R7 west of Orpington is a pretty bog standard suburban local bus. If you mean east of Orpington, those figures do not suggest that this is in any way a commercial proposition. As the Chelsfield loop is in the TfL area, it would be bizarre to leave it 'to the market' when Knockholt Pound and Halstead, which are not, would be unaffected. Especially when Go Coach's own scheme no longer extends into Greater London nor does the old route it had that ran from Orpington after the 402 was cutback. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Jul 18, 2021 7:11:10 GMT
Orpington would be a decent area for demand responsive service. Personally think that these should be used by TfL. Some areas in Barnet would not be too shabby for DRT either. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 18, 2021 11:14:27 GMT
Orpington would be a decent area for demand responsive service. Personally think that these should be used by TfL. Some areas in Barnet would not be too shabby for DRT either. Problem with DRT is it will become an excuse to start messing with established bus routes when really DRT in London should compliment the existing network by being employed in hard to reach areas normally no go to regular buses |
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Jul 21, 2021 13:43:07 GMT
Some areas in Barnet would not be too shabby for DRT either. Problem with DRT is it will become an excuse to start messing with established bus routes when really DRT in London should compliment the existing network by being employed in hard to reach areas normally no go to regular buses I disagree - in Barnet and Orpington there are lots of low frequency short routes connecting places like Chelsfield or Hadley Wood to the local town. For these DRT would work well to replace parts of the existing routes for example a Barnet Local DRT stretching to Finchley could see:142 cut back to Burnt Oak or Colindale Superstores326 reduced to every 30 minutesNew DD route Barnet to Brent Cross via 107 Barnet to Stirling Corner, 384 to Edgware and 142 to Brent Cross383 withdrawn384 withdrawn389 withdrawn399 withdrawnAn Orpington Local DRT stretching to Sidcup and Biggin Hill could see:353 cut to OrpingtonR7 cut back to Orpington from Chelsfield and extended to run in a loop around Ramsden EstateR1 withdrawnR3 withdrawnR4 withdrawnR5 withdrawnR6 withdrawnR8 withdrawnR9 withdrawnR10 withdrawnR11 withdrawnIn other areas this wouldn't work so well.I've been really daft. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Jul 21, 2021 14:05:12 GMT
An Orpington Local DRT stretching to Sidcup and Biggin Hill could see: 353 cut to Orpington R7 cut back to Orpington from Chelsfield and extended to run in a loop around Ramsden Estate R1 withdrawn R3 withdrawn R4 withdrawn R5 withdrawn R6 withdrawn R8 withdrawn R9 withdrawn R10 withdrawn R11 withdrawn In other areas this wouldn't work so well. Do you actually seriously consider that this is a good idea? The loss of the R1, R3, R4, R6, R9 and R11 to DRT would be an unmitigated disaster, and I presume you’d also do away with the B14 south of Sidcup too, which would also be a disaster. Very clearly, you do not know the area at all. |
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Jul 21, 2021 14:07:59 GMT
An Orpington Local DRT stretching to Sidcup and Biggin Hill could see: 353 cut to Orpington R7 cut back to Orpington from Chelsfield and extended to run in a loop around Ramsden Estate R1 withdrawn R3 withdrawn R4 withdrawn R5 withdrawn R6 withdrawn R8 withdrawn R9 withdrawn R10 withdrawn R11 withdrawn In other areas this wouldn't work so well. Do you actually seriously consider that this is a good idea? The loss of the R1, R3, R4, R6, R9 and R11 to DRT would be an unmitigated disaster, and I presume you’d also do away with the B14 south of Sidcup too, which would also be a disaster. Very clearly, you do not know the area at all. You're right, I don't know east of Peckham very well. |
|
|
|
Post by galwhv69 on Jul 21, 2021 14:09:32 GMT
An Orpington Local DRT stretching to Sidcup and Biggin Hill could see: 353 cut to Orpington R7 cut back to Orpington from Chelsfield and extended to run in a loop around Ramsden Estate R1 withdrawn R3 withdrawn R4 withdrawn R5 withdrawn R6 withdrawn R8 withdrawn R9 withdrawn R10 withdrawn R11 withdrawn In other areas this wouldn't work so well. Do you actually seriously consider that this is a good idea? The loss of the R1, R3, R4, R6, R9 and R11 to DRT would be an unmitigated disaster, and I presume you’d also do away with the B14 south of Sidcup too, which would also be a disaster. Very clearly, you do not know the area at all. I travel to the area around once a week at the moment, so even though I'm not local I also agree that it's too much. I would suggest R5/8/10 if such a scheme was to be put in place, maybe the R3 as well |
|
|
|
Post by bustavane on Jul 21, 2021 14:22:27 GMT
An Orpington Local DRT stretching to Sidcup and Biggin Hill could see: 353 cut to Orpington R7 cut back to Orpington from Chelsfield and extended to run in a loop around Ramsden Estate R1 withdrawn R3 withdrawn R4 withdrawn R5 withdrawn R6 withdrawn R8 withdrawn R9 withdrawn R10 withdrawn R11 withdrawn In other areas this wouldn't work so well. Do you actually seriously consider that this is a good idea? The loss of the R1, R3, R4, R6, R9 and R11 to DRT would be an unmitigated disaster, and I presume you’d also do away with the B14 south of Sidcup too, which would also be a disaster. Very clearly, you do not know the area at all. I understood the purpose of DRT was to grow bus usage, and not a cheaper cost-cutting exercise. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Jul 21, 2021 14:34:38 GMT
Do you actually seriously consider that this is a good idea? The loss of the R1, R3, R4, R6, R9 and R11 to DRT would be an unmitigated disaster, and I presume you’d also do away with the B14 south of Sidcup too, which would also be a disaster. Very clearly, you do not know the area at all. You're right, I don't know east of Peckham very well. A half an hour 326 would be an absolute disaster south of Finchley where the 125/143 can have very full loadings.
Also the 384 has proved extremely popular in terms of links from Arkley to Edgware. I've noticed North London is where many people go to war on buses when their ideas from S/W/E London run out.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 21, 2021 15:12:00 GMT
Do you actually seriously consider that this is a good idea? The loss of the R1, R3, R4, R6, R9 and R11 to DRT would be an unmitigated disaster, and I presume you’d also do away with the B14 south of Sidcup too, which would also be a disaster. Very clearly, you do not know the area at all. I understood the purpose of DRT was to grow bus usage, and not a cheaper cost-cutting exercise. More so grow usage in an area(s) where it's harder for standard buses to penetrate such as very tight residential areas away from the main network but yes, certainly not to be used as an excuse to cut stuff. Hopefully one day, people will finally understand how incredibly useful those small, little and round the houses type routes really are to the wider network. |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jul 21, 2021 15:38:32 GMT
Problem with DRT is it will become an excuse to start messing with established bus routes when really DRT in London should compliment the existing network by being employed in hard to reach areas normally no go to regular buses I disagree - in Barnet and Orpington there are lots of low frequency short routes connecting places like Chelsfield or Hadley Wood to the local town. For these DRT would work well to replace parts of the existing routes for example a Barnet Local DRT stretching to Finchley could see: 142 cut back to Burnt Oak or Colindale Superstores 326 reduced to every 30 minutes New DD route Barnet to Brent Cross via 107 Barnet to Stirling Corner, 384 to Edgware and 142 to Brent Cross 383 withdrawn 384 withdrawn 389 withdrawn 399 withdrawn An Orpington Local DRT stretching to Sidcup and Biggin Hill could see: 353 cut to Orpington R7 cut back to Orpington from Chelsfield and extended to run in a loop around Ramsden Estate R1 withdrawn R3 withdrawn R4 withdrawn R5 withdrawn R6 withdrawn R8 withdrawn R9 withdrawn R10 withdrawn R11 withdrawn In other areas this wouldn't work so well. Don't want to pile on but that Orpington scheme would be calamitous. There's a bit of a misconception that Orpington is all rolling glades and green fields. A lot of it is urban with considerable pockets of social housing. Have a virtual stroll on Google Maps around St Mary Cray. There's a big difference between Chelsfield and Chelsfield Village. You could make an argument for DRT with smaller vehicles on the most rural parts of the R5/7/8 & 10 but I'm not sure the overheads would lead to any greater benefits than some clever timetabling would. |
|
|
|
Post by rugbyref on Jul 21, 2021 16:55:17 GMT
Problem with DRT is it will become an excuse to start messing with established bus routes when really DRT in London should compliment the existing network by being employed in hard to reach areas normally no go to regular buses I disagree - in Barnet and Orpington there are lots of low frequency short routes connecting places like Chelsfield or Hadley Wood to the local town. For these DRT would work well to replace parts of the existing routes for example a Barnet Local DRT stretching to Finchley could see: 142 cut back to Burnt Oak or Colindale Superstores 326 reduced to every 30 minutes New DD route Barnet to Brent Cross via 107 Barnet to Stirling Corner, 384 to Edgware and 142 to Brent Cross 383 withdrawn 384 withdrawn 389 withdrawn 399 withdrawn An Orpington Local DRT stretching to Sidcup and Biggin Hill could see: 353 cut to Orpington R7 cut back to Orpington from Chelsfield and extended to run in a loop around Ramsden Estate R1 withdrawn R3 withdrawn R4 withdrawn R5 withdrawn R6 withdrawn R8 withdrawn R9 withdrawn R10 withdrawn R11 withdrawn In other areas this wouldn't work so well. I trust that your tongue was firmly in your cheek! |
|
|
|
Post by thekbq14 on Jul 21, 2021 17:08:45 GMT
All round the houses routes are very important as they give Elderly people, young people, any disabled and those who don't or can't afford car. Which is especially more common as people are getting priced out of London and are moving out to the suburbs like places in Orpington, especially which is where they are needed and allows passengers to more easily do there shopping or transfer to there local stations or interchange with other buses otherwise they'd be more stranded as it's hard for your average person to walk from Chelsfield to Orpington, not just the distance but due to it not being as built up as other places in London. These all around the houses give these opportunities, otherwise people will be forced into cars which will increase congestion and pollution which London as a city is trying to cut down case closed. Shouldn't be seen that a route is small or if a route has a low frequency or a route is not direct etc. it should be cut, doesn't work like that. Every route has there purpose. And not all routes are going to be heaving especially in a place like Orpington which has a lower population compared to a Brixton and one that has a high driving population again compared to a place like a Brixton. Instead should encourage people to use public transport more and with buses best way is to increase there accessibility and fastness which this and other consultations haven't been doing. Don't think the local R Network should be sacrificed at that.
|
|
