|
Post by abellion on Sept 22, 2022 16:21:47 GMT
Regarding the 306 I'd like to see it extended on both ends - on the south end to Wandsworth - this would give Imperial Wharf a link to Wandsworth. Then on the north end I'd extend to Acton High Street or North Acton via the 266, this retains the direct link from North Acton to Hammersmith. However I think 3 routes on Horn Lane is excessive, so I'd reroute the 440 via West Acton (returning their Chiswick and Park Royal link), and withdrawn the 218 between Acton and North Acton (3 routes between Acton and North Acton are enough). Then it would extend to Putney High Street to support the 220, and this also allows the 218 to be decked. For stand space the 427 will be cut back to Ealing Broadway/Common. In summary: 306 North Acton to Wandsworth 218 Acton to Putney 440 diverted via West Acton 427 Uxbridge to Ealing If you extend the 218 to Putney via 220. The 74 is already cut on Fulham Palace Road. So would it need another double decker? Fulham Palace Road has nothing to do with the changes. From my observations the 14, 22, 74, 414 and 430 all going the same way with 100000bph is unfair when nearby routes are rammed and have no help. No doubt that they’re all busy routes but throughout the day there are so many near empty buses on the Putney-Central corridors but rarely on the 85, 93 or 220 which provide unique links.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Sept 22, 2022 17:51:26 GMT
Ideally I'd send the 218 to Roehampton over the 72 between Hammersmith and Roehampton but that's not possible due to the bridge closure. An Acton - Roehampton link would provide some decent links across the river on both sides, but feel like it would be more for short journeys. Alternatively the old 419 could merge with part of the 218 to create an Acton - Richmond link but I feel if there was demand between Acton and Richmond it would be better via the E3, North Circular road and 65 to Richmond The 440 changes in Chiswick have been a disaster and it would make more sense to utillise that routing through the business park to provide an orbital connection, the route isn't well used south of Bollo Lane anymore - the 110 or H91 could be diverted via Wellesley Road to compensate. I think an Acton-Brentford link would be more useful as there's already the Overground for Acton-Richmond journeys. On the point about Roehampton I'd like to see the 430 extended to restore some of the links the 72 used to provide as well as support the 220. The 49 could then be left alone. Perhaps the following restructure could happen: 72 withdrawn 110 rerouted between Gunnersbury and Turnham Green via Wellesley Road 283 extended to Hammersmith Bridge 306 extended to Wembley via existing 440 routing 430 withdrawn between Fulham Palace Road and South Kensington. Extended to East Acton via routes 190/211/220/295 and route 72. 440 withdrawn between Wembley and Central Middlesex Hospital. Rerouted between Gyspy Corner and Steyne Road via West Acton. Withdrawn between Gunnersbury station and Turnham Green Church, extended to Brentford County Court via routes 237 and 267. What would happen to the 218, still run via West Acton?
|
|
|
Post by Green Kitten on Sept 23, 2022 6:25:01 GMT
I’m surprised they didn’t just combine the 74 and 430 as they’ve done with the 78/388, 12/148, 135/242… (a la 388 you can scrap the Marble Arch to Baker Street bit)
Leave the 14 as is… then dump the 414 and 430…
and renumber the 507 to 11
|
|
|
Post by aaron1 on Sept 23, 2022 7:34:16 GMT
I’m surprised they didn’t just combine the 74 and 430 as they’ve done with the 78/388, 12/148, 135/242… (a la 388 you can scrap the Marble Arch to Baker Street bit) Leave the 14 as is… then dump the 414 and 430… and renumber the 507 to 11Yes, I prefer they just With Withdrawn 148, 332, 414, 430 and 507 Keep the lower Numbers like extend 74 to Roehampton via N74 430 withdrawn replace by 74 likes in the old days
Have 414 withdrawn replace by 14 and same time extend 14 to King's Cross
12 extend back to Shepherd Bush ever via Victoria or Westminster
148 withdrawn replace by 12
16 extend to Brent Park via 332
332 withdrawn replace by 16
11 cut back to Victoria as the old plan have 311 come in
but what to do with 507 like merge it with 311 or keep it as it is
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Sept 23, 2022 8:36:57 GMT
I’m surprised they didn’t just combine the 74 and 430 as they’ve done with the 78/388, 12/148, 135/242… (a la 388 you can scrap the Marble Arch to Baker Street bit) Leave the 14 as is… then dump the 414 and 430… and renumber the 507 to 11Yes, I prefer they just With Withdrawn 148, 332, 414, 430 and 507 Keep the lower Numbers like extend 74 to Roehampton via N74 430 withdrawn replace by 74 likes in the old days
Have 414 withdrawn replace by 14 and same time extend 14 to King's Cross
12 extend back to Shepherd Bush ever via Victoria or Westminster
148 withdrawn replace by 12
16 extend to Brent Park via 332
332 withdrawn replace by 16
11 cut back to Victoria as the old plan have 311 come in
but what to do with 507 like merge it with 311 or keep it as it is Keep the 507 as it is. Funny how tfl want to withdraw the 521 but not the 507 (but turn it into a worse route)
|
|
|
Post by Green Kitten on Sept 23, 2022 8:50:40 GMT
I’m surprised they didn’t just combine the 74 and 430 as they’ve done with the 78/388, 12/148, 135/242… (a la 388 you can scrap the Marble Arch to Baker Street bit) Leave the 14 as is… then dump the 414 and 430… and renumber the 507 to 11Yes, I prefer they just With Withdrawn 148, 332, 414, 430 and 507 Keep the lower Numbers like extend 74 to Roehampton via N74 430 withdrawn replace by 74 likes in the old days
Have 414 withdrawn replace by 14 and same time extend 14 to King's Cross
12 extend back to Shepherd Bush ever via Victoria or Westminster
148 withdrawn replace by 12
16 extend to Brent Park via 332
332 withdrawn replace by 16
11 cut back to Victoria as the old plan have 311 come in
but what to do with 507 like merge it with 311 or keep it as it is A Victoria to Liverpool Street route is just a waste of time. I fully disagreed with that proposal and was glad it wasn't implemented. The proposed 26 route is a much better use of resources...
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Sept 23, 2022 10:21:08 GMT
I’m surprised they didn’t just combine the 74 and 430 as they’ve done with the 78/388, 12/148, 135/242… (a la 388 you can scrap the Marble Arch to Baker Street bit) Leave the 14 as is… then dump the 414 and 430… and renumber the 507 to 11Yes, I prefer they just With Withdrawn 148, 332, 414, 430 and 507 Keep the lower Numbers like extend 74 to Roehampton via N74 430 withdrawn replace by 74 likes in the old days
Have 414 withdrawn replace by 14 and same time extend 14 to King's Cross
12 extend back to Shepherd Bush ever via Victoria or Westminster
148 withdrawn replace by 12
16 extend to Brent Park via 332
332 withdrawn replace by 16
11 cut back to Victoria as the old plan have 311 come in
but what to do with 507 like merge it with 311 or keep it as it is I agree about keeping the 74 number for South Kensington to Roehampton but rerouting the 12 to replace the 148 would just cause confusion. I can't see any point in keeping the 507 if it's being withdrawn from Horseferry Road and replaced by changes to the 3 and C10, just keep the 211 as it is and reroute the 306 from Fulham Broadway to Battersea PS, no need for the 311 if TfL have decided one route is sufficient between Sloane Square, Victoria and Westminster. I agree about the 16 to Brent Park replacing the 332.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 23, 2022 12:06:59 GMT
The 440 changes in Chiswick have been a disaster and it would make more sense to utillise that routing through the business park to provide an orbital connection, the route isn't well used south of Bollo Lane anymore - the 110 or H91 could be diverted via Wellesley Road to compensate. I think an Acton-Brentford link would be more useful as there's already the Overground for Acton-Richmond journeys. On the point about Roehampton I'd like to see the 430 extended to restore some of the links the 72 used to provide as well as support the 220. The 49 could then be left alone. Perhaps the following restructure could happen: 72 withdrawn 110 rerouted between Gunnersbury and Turnham Green via Wellesley Road 283 extended to Hammersmith Bridge 306 extended to Wembley via existing 440 routing 430 withdrawn between Fulham Palace Road and South Kensington. Extended to East Acton via routes 190/211/220/295 and route 72. 440 withdrawn between Wembley and Central Middlesex Hospital. Rerouted between Gyspy Corner and Steyne Road via West Acton. Withdrawn between Gunnersbury station and Turnham Green Church, extended to Brentford County Court via routes 237 and 267. What would happen to the 218, still run via West Acton? The 218 would be withdrawn as two routes via West Acton is overkill. I sometimes use the 218 to get from Twyford Avenue to Hammersmith and find it quite useful but I realise residents in West Acton need a link to Central Middlesex Hopsital and Park Royal ASDA more than they need a link to Askew Road and Hammersmith. The 218 would be fine supplementing the 306 if the 306 continued into the heart of Acton but at the moment it seems a bit of a botched job - buses get absolutely swamped on King Street when it arrives before the 306.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 23, 2022 12:13:32 GMT
Yes, I prefer they just With Withdrawn 148, 332, 414, 430 and 507 Keep the lower Numbers like extend 74 to Roehampton via N74 430 withdrawn replace by 74 likes in the old days
Have 414 withdrawn replace by 14 and same time extend 14 to King's Cross
12 extend back to Shepherd Bush ever via Victoria or Westminster
148 withdrawn replace by 12
16 extend to Brent Park via 332
332 withdrawn replace by 16
11 cut back to Victoria as the old plan have 311 come in
but what to do with 507 like merge it with 311 or keep it as it is Keep the 507 as it is. Funny how tfl want to withdraw the 521 but not the 507 (but turn it into a worse route) Its a real shame the nifty links the 507 provides are going to be lost which with the 3 and C10 being unnecessary meddled with. The motive is clearly to reduce buses over Lambeth Bridge, not in itself a bad thing. I'd like to see the 211 continue to Waterloo but rerouted between Waterloo and Victoria via the 507 - I feel Victoria Street would be able to cope with three routes. The 11 could perhaps then continue as far as Whitehall rather than being diverted to Waterloo. This achieves TFL's goal of reducing bus flow on Westminster Bridge without withdrawing the 12. The 148 could either be trimmed back to Elephant or diverted to Waterloo if TFL are hell bent on PVR saving and reducing duplication between the 12/148.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 23, 2022 12:17:26 GMT
Yes, I prefer they just With Withdrawn 148, 332, 414, 430 and 507 Keep the lower Numbers like extend 74 to Roehampton via N74 430 withdrawn replace by 74 likes in the old days
Have 414 withdrawn replace by 14 and same time extend 14 to King's Cross
12 extend back to Shepherd Bush ever via Victoria or Westminster
148 withdrawn replace by 12
16 extend to Brent Park via 332
332 withdrawn replace by 16
11 cut back to Victoria as the old plan have 311 come in
but what to do with 507 like merge it with 311 or keep it as it is I agree about keeping the 74 number for South Kensington to Roehampton but rerouting the 12 to replace the 148 would just cause confusion. I can't see any point in keeping the 507 if it's being withdrawn from Horseferry Road and replaced by changes to the 3 and C10, just keep the 211 as it is and reroute the 306 from Fulham Broadway to Battersea PS, no need for the 311 if TfL have decided one route is sufficient between Sloane Square, Victoria and Westminster. I agree about the 16 to Brent Park replacing the 332. Getting a bit sick of this fixation with numbers on here, yes it may not look pretty to no longer have lower numbers like the 11, 12, 14, 24 alongside already not having a 10 but what's far more important are the links the routes provide. I see no point in renumbering the 148 the 12 if it isn't going to serve the West End - which is what the 12 has done for decades and in my view should continue to do.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Sept 23, 2022 12:24:48 GMT
I agree about keeping the 74 number for South Kensington to Roehampton but rerouting the 12 to replace the 148 would just cause confusion. I can't see any point in keeping the 507 if it's being withdrawn from Horseferry Road and replaced by changes to the 3 and C10, just keep the 211 as it is and reroute the 306 from Fulham Broadway to Battersea PS, no need for the 311 if TfL have decided one route is sufficient between Sloane Square, Victoria and Westminster. I agree about the 16 to Brent Park replacing the 332. Getting a bit sick of this fixation with numbers on here, yes it may not look pretty to no longer have lower numbers like the 11, 12, 14, 24 alongside already not having a 10 but what's far more important are the links the routes provide. I see no point in renumbering the 148 the 12 if it isn't going to serve the West End - which is what the 12 has done for decades and in my view should continue to do. That was exactly my point about renumbering the 148 the 12, all it's going to do is cause confusion.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 23, 2022 12:30:18 GMT
Getting a bit sick of this fixation with numbers on here, yes it may not look pretty to no longer have lower numbers like the 11, 12, 14, 24 alongside already not having a 10 but what's far more important are the links the routes provide. I see no point in renumbering the 148 the 12 if it isn't going to serve the West End - which is what the 12 has done for decades and in my view should continue to do. That was exactly my point about renumbering the 148 the 12, all it's going to do is cause confusion. Yes sorry that post wasn't directed at you I just quoted it as I strongly agree.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Sept 23, 2022 17:30:03 GMT
I agree about keeping the 74 number for South Kensington to Roehampton but rerouting the 12 to replace the 148 would just cause confusion. I can't see any point in keeping the 507 if it's being withdrawn from Horseferry Road and replaced by changes to the 3 and C10, just keep the 211 as it is and reroute the 306 from Fulham Broadway to Battersea PS, no need for the 311 if TfL have decided one route is sufficient between Sloane Square, Victoria and Westminster. I agree about the 16 to Brent Park replacing the 332. Getting a bit sick of this fixation with numbers on here, yes it may not look pretty to no longer have lower numbers like the 11, 12, 14, 24 alongside already not having a 10 but what's far more important are the links the routes provide. I see no point in renumbering the 148 the 12 if it isn't going to serve the West End - which is what the 12 has done for decades and in my view should continue to do. I agree that the 12-148 should be numbered 148 as it goes via Victoria, but for the 11, 14 and 74 they are all historically significant numbers and the proposed routes are running along the roads they’ve been using for decades.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 23, 2022 21:21:22 GMT
Getting a bit sick of this fixation with numbers on here, yes it may not look pretty to no longer have lower numbers like the 11, 12, 14, 24 alongside already not having a 10 but what's far more important are the links the routes provide. I see no point in renumbering the 148 the 12 if it isn't going to serve the West End - which is what the 12 has done for decades and in my view should continue to do. I agree that the 12-148 should be numbered 148 as it goes via Victoria, but for the 11, 14 and 74 they are all historically significant numbers and the proposed routes are running along the roads they’ve been using for decades. Personally, far too much attention is being played to the numbers rather than the damage being done by these changes - I don't think many are bothered at all by the number and before the 13 was mentioned, people in the area were more concerned with the lost link to the West End rather than the actual number 13 disappearing.
|
|
|
Post by transportizm on Sept 25, 2022 13:06:21 GMT
I think that the 306 should be extended to cover another bit of distance, in the first plcae why did TfL just make the 306 North Acton to Fulham Sands End that would have given customers between North Acton and Hammersmith a double decker because the 218 can always get very full.
|
|