How would you change the LT network with anunlimited budget?

[rjbarrett5]

This is purely fantasy; imagine we were not in a global pandemic and we had unlimited funds to spend on completely restructuring the London Transport network, how would you do it?
For me:
1-99 Central London Routes Only
Have 100-199 routes which correspond to the Central London routes connect and take the Central routes further out northwards
Same with the 200-299 routes out southwards and the 300-399 routes with the 400-499 routes taking passengers to the outskirts of London
Prefix routes (if needed) being feeder routes
X1-X99 taking routes from the end of the 100-199 routes to the 200-299 routes
Example:
36 from Queen’s Park to New Cross Gate as normal
136 from Marble Arch to Willesden Bus Garage
236 from Victoria to Lewisham
336 from Kensal Rise to Mill Hill Broadway
436 from Lewisham to Orpington
C36 from Catford to Locksbottom
X36 from Willesden to Lewisham (limited stop)
Once again this is purely fantasy

[vjaska]

I'd simply make sure the current network survives first by securing the current network's future as well as spending money speeding up buses and the corresponding infrastructure and making them more attractive. Once the decline is reversed, start investigating new routes, extensions, double deck conversions, orbital express routes if possible and frequency changes. There wouldn't be any change to how routes are numbered

[wirewiper]

Jun 8, 2022 16:29:40 GMT vjaska said:

I'd simply make sure the current network survives first by securing the current network's future as well as spending money speeding up buses and the corresponding infrastructure and making them more attractive. Once the decline is reversed, start investigating new routes, extensions, double deck conversions, orbital express routes if possible and frequency changes. There wouldn't be any change to how routes are numbered

I agree; secure the existing network then develop new opportunities. One thing I would do with an unlimited budget is to collaborate with neighbouring Local Travel Authorities on developing cross-border routes, with TfL ideally given the responsibility of procuring these services. 

[rift]

Assuming unlimited budget means unlimited money;

Have a new tram network that replaces the ELT and the 472 with a bridge at Thamesmead/Beckton

Build the Bakerloo line extension and have a branch to Bromley South as well as Hayes

Get the 318 some new buses which is way overdue

Make every route on the network every 5 minutes with a 15 minute night service

Extend the Jubilee line to Thamesmead from a branch at North Greenwich which stops at Charlton, Woolwich and areas in Thamesmead

Withdraw the 54, 75, 68/458, 109 and 197 and replace them with Tramlink extensions through their LOR

Unfortunately none of this is possible, but maybe in a parallel world they’ve already been implemented for ages 🤣

[londonbuses]

Jun 9, 2022 13:04:11 GMT rift said:

Withdraw the 54, 75, 68/458, 109 and 197 and replace them with Tramlink extensions through their LOR.

With completely unlimited money, I'd add the 65, 71, 85, 93, 119 (Collonades to West Wickham), 131, 151 (Worcester Park to St Helier), 154 (Carshalton to Croydon), 164 (Sutton to Morden), 213, 227 (Beckenham to Bromley), 280, 281 (Kingston to Tolworth), 407 (Sutton to Carshalton), 419 (Roehampton to Hammersmith Bridge), and more.

Obviously these would not follow the exact LORs, but I would roughly follow these routes.

[Deleted]

If I'm working at TFL and they had an unlimited budget, straight away I'm introducing new route 475 to run between Aldborough Hatch and North Woolwich via Seven Kings, Barking, Beckton and Cyprus to provide Aldborough residents to an efficient Elizabeth line connection at Seven Kings and new shopping links from Seven Kings to Barking and Beckton.
I'm also making routes 95 and 325 double deck to improve capacity.
Rerouting the 263 to Dalston Junction to improve shopping links between Holloway and Dalston.
Finally, I'm extending the Jubilee Line to Thamesmead with the new branch starting at North Greenwich using the platform where some Jubilee Line trains terminate stopping at Charlton (or New Charlton), Woolwich (or Woolwich Arsenal), Belmarsh and Thamesmead. 

[ronnie]

I would do a route from seven kings to seven sisters

Also LO extended to thamesmead from barking riverside

[wirewiper]

Jun 9, 2022 13:04:11 GMT rift said:

Assuming unlimited budget means unlimited money;

Have a new tram network that replaces the ELT and the 472 with a bridge at Thamesmead/Beckton

Build the Bakerloo line extension and have a branch to Bromley South as well as Hayes

Get the 318 some new buses which is way overdue

Make every route on the network every 5 minutes with a 15 minute night service

Extend the Jubilee line to Thamesmead from a branch at North Greenwich which stops at Charlton, Woolwich and areas in Thamesmead

Withdraw the 54, 75, 68/458, 109 and 197 and replace them with Tramlink extensions through their LOR

Unfortunately none of this is possible, but maybe in a parallel world they’ve already been implemented for ages 🤣

For a vision of such a parallel world you wouldn't need to look further than Paris. When you compare how many RER lines (the Paris equivalent of Crossrail - they have five), new Métro lines and extensions and tram routes they have built since 1960. 

[danorak]

I'm not sure I would do an awful lot differently to how things were until recent years.

My first priority would be sorting out the fare anomalies between the tube and National Rail, which make some journeys - particularly in South East London - more expensive than they should be.

I would introduce "Roundabout" style services in some fringe areas, using smaller vehicles. The standard modern bus has grown too large again for some routes. In some places these might run on a DRT basis. Where possible I would restore services to clockface frequencies and certainly the 75 minute gaps would go back to at least hourly.

London is a seven-day city now so all routes would run everyday. Equally, bus lanes and other traffic measures would now apply on Sundays. Frequencies would be also be increased on Sunday services.

The hierarchy would be changed to put pedestrians and bus users at the top (or to put it another way, me 😁). Cycle routes would be removed from most main roads and diverted via parallel back streets. 'Bus stop by-passes' would be removed and a prohibition placed on their installation.

Because it is impossible to provide a direct service from everywhere to everywhere else, some interchange will always be needed. Therefore, places like the Elephant and Woolwich would receive massive upgrades to provide safe, sheltered facilities. Passengers need to feel safe using the network.

Publicity material would be returned to the highest standards with clear bus maps and accurate blinds. Information about any changes would be widely disseminated. No-one should be able to say they were unaware of the services in their area. The Tube map would be redrawn and reworked to reflect how the network has changed. Countdown would be refreshed and installed at more stops.

A renewal programme for bus garages would take place. Sites across London, particularly where housing is booming, would be safeguarded to allow for future growth. The designs would be kept relatively simple without too many flourishes to avoid the mistakes of the 80s and more recently West Ham.

The London bus livery would be refreshed. Buses would still be red, and there would be a standard livery on all services, but a dash of contrasting colour would be added. It would incorporate route branding on the main services and network branding for local services where appropriate.

And finally, there would be regular 'celebrations of the London bus' akin to the Year of the Bus. Running day events targeted at the general public with vehicles of all generations. Go on the Bromley running day and you'll see the public do engage.

Right, when do I need to get my papers in for the Mayoral election again?

[wirewiper]

I would bring back the London Local Service Agreement, whereby non-London operators are paid to accept TfL passes within Greater London and also charge TfL fares. Given that electronic ticketing systems and contactless payments are now normal on UK buses and Oyster card use is declining, it should be easy to administer.

LLSA would be "opt in" but could be used to encourage, say, Arriva to operate the 310 into Enfield Town again, and Sullivan Buses to extend the 84 back to New Barnet. The LLSA would also specify service levels and require that the operator provides evening and Sunday services if appropriate, again which TfL would pay for. TfL fares and conditions could be applied beyond the Greater London Boundary, to a sensible point where it didn't compete with or detract from commercial or locally-contracted routes - so for instance the 310 would only operate to TfL conditions between Enfield Town and Waltham Cross Bus Station, but the 84 could have TfL conditions between New Barnet and Potters Bar Station, or even South Mimms. 

Where TfL cannot encourage an operator to provide a cross-border service, it would have the option of establishing one itself. So for instance if no operator could be found to operate a reinstated 402 between Bromley and Sevenoaks, or a 505 between Chingford and Waltham Abbey (even better, a Walthamstow-Waltham Cross route) TfL could provide it.

[SILENCED]

Jun 14, 2022 10:56:03 GMT wirewiper said:

I would bring back the London Local Service Agreement, whereby non-London operators are paid to accept TfL passes within Greater London and also charge TfL fares. Given that electronic ticketing systems and contactless payments are now normal on UK buses and Oyster card use is declining, it should be easy to administer.

LLSA would be "opt in" but could be used to encourage, say, Arriva to operate the 310 into Enfield Town again, and Sullivan Buses to extend the 84 back to New Barnet. The LLSA would also specify service levels and require that the operator provides evening and Sunday services if appropriate, again which TfL would pay for. TfL fares and conditions could be applied beyond the Greater London Boundary, to a sensible point where it didn't compete with or detract from commercial or locally-contracted routes - so for instance the 310 would only operate to TfL conditions between Enfield Town and Waltham Cross Bus Station, but the 84 could have TfL conditions between New Barnet and Potters Bar Station, or even South Mimms. 

Where TfL cannot encourage an operator to provide a cross-border service, it would have the option of establishing one itself. So for instance if no operator could be found to operate a reinstated 402 between Bromley and Sevenoaks, or a 505 between Chingford and Waltham Abbey (even better, a Walthamstow-Waltham Cross route) TfL could provide it.

Wonder how LSA would work in practice.  How would an operator send a payment to TfL and not their own payments system. Would it count to caps?

[wirewiper]

Jun 14, 2022 12:50:17 GMT SILENCED said:

Jun 14, 2022 10:56:03 GMT wirewiper said:

I would bring back the London Local Service Agreement, whereby non-London operators are paid to accept TfL passes within Greater London and also charge TfL fares. Given that electronic ticketing systems and contactless payments are now normal on UK buses and Oyster card use is declining, it should be easy to administer.

LLSA would be "opt in" but could be used to encourage, say, Arriva to operate the 310 into Enfield Town again, and Sullivan Buses to extend the 84 back to New Barnet. The LLSA would also specify service levels and require that the operator provides evening and Sunday services if appropriate, again which TfL would pay for. TfL fares and conditions could be applied beyond the Greater London Boundary, to a sensible point where it didn't compete with or detract from commercial or locally-contracted routes - so for instance the 310 would only operate to TfL conditions between Enfield Town and Waltham Cross Bus Station, but the 84 could have TfL conditions between New Barnet and Potters Bar Station, or even South Mimms. 

Where TfL cannot encourage an operator to provide a cross-border service, it would have the option of establishing one itself. So for instance if no operator could be found to operate a reinstated 402 between Bromley and Sevenoaks, or a 505 between Chingford and Waltham Abbey (even better, a Walthamstow-Waltham Cross route) TfL could provide it.

Wonder how LSA would work in practice.  How would an operator send a payment to TfL and not their own payments system. Would it count to caps?

I haven't thought through the details (and after all, this is a "fantasy" thread working on the premise that unlimited funding is available!). However in theory the operator would agree a price which TfL would pay them for operating the section under TfL conditions, and pays all revenue for journeys wholly within that ps section back to TfL. For journeys which are partly outside the TfL conditions, either the operator keeps all the money, keeps part and pays a portion to TfL, or has an arrangement whereby the operator keeps all fares for journeys starting outside the TfL area, and TfL keeps all the revenue for journeys that start in the TfL area. 

For the majority of cross-boundary routes this would be moot anyway as they are already full TfL routes and would remain so. And operators would not be obliged to enter into a LLSA if they did not want to. And I would be clear that TfL cannot set up new routes that compete with an existing commercial service. 

[uakari]

Jun 14, 2022 10:56:03 GMT wirewiper said:

I would bring back the London Local Service Agreement, whereby non-London operators are paid to accept TfL passes within Greater London and also charge TfL fares. Given that electronic ticketing systems and contactless payments are now normal on UK buses and Oyster card use is declining, it should be easy to administer.

LLSA would be "opt in" but could be used to encourage, say, Arriva to operate the 310 into Enfield Town again, and Sullivan Buses to extend the 84 back to New Barnet. The LLSA would also specify service levels and require that the operator provides evening and Sunday services if appropriate, again which TfL would pay for. TfL fares and conditions could be applied beyond the Greater London Boundary, to a sensible point where it didn't compete with or detract from commercial or locally-contracted routes - so for instance the 310 would only operate to TfL conditions between Enfield Town and Waltham Cross Bus Station, but the 84 could have TfL conditions between New Barnet and Potters Bar Station, or even South Mimms. 

Where TfL cannot encourage an operator to provide a cross-border service, it would have the option of establishing one itself. So for instance if no operator could be found to operate a reinstated 402 between Bromley and Sevenoaks, or a 505 between Chingford and Waltham Abbey (even better, a Walthamstow-Waltham Cross route) TfL could provide it.

Better yet, make it policy that TfL provide bus services linking the first town inside London to the first town outside it, so as not to unfairly disadvantage GLA levy payers just inside London. Or even extend their remit to the all of the old Network Southeast area, seeing as this is an unlimited budget.

Make zonal fares simple and consistent (no 'special fares apply') and bring back cheaper options like zones 2-6 travelcard.

Make it that wherever possible, all households have to be within 300m of a high frequency bus route and within 500m of a night route.

Build orbital express bus routes and tram lines linking the outer stations and termini of each tube line with each other - concentric circles going out beyond the NLL.

Redevelop all tube stations and car parks so that buses to all the surrounding destinations stop as close as possible to the station exit for maximum accessibility (eg by creating new bus stations in place of car parks, which people won't need because the buses will be so frequent and comprehensive).

Ban executive bonuses and salaries over £50k and put all this money back into the service. All bus routes to be brought back in-house.

[LondonNorthern]

Jun 14, 2022 18:01:56 GMT uakari said:

Jun 14, 2022 10:56:03 GMT wirewiper said:

I would bring back the London Local Service Agreement, whereby non-London operators are paid to accept TfL passes within Greater London and also charge TfL fares. Given that electronic ticketing systems and contactless payments are now normal on UK buses and Oyster card use is declining, it should be easy to administer.

LLSA would be "opt in" but could be used to encourage, say, Arriva to operate the 310 into Enfield Town again, and Sullivan Buses to extend the 84 back to New Barnet. The LLSA would also specify service levels and require that the operator provides evening and Sunday services if appropriate, again which TfL would pay for. TfL fares and conditions could be applied beyond the Greater London Boundary, to a sensible point where it didn't compete with or detract from commercial or locally-contracted routes - so for instance the 310 would only operate to TfL conditions between Enfield Town and Waltham Cross Bus Station, but the 84 could have TfL conditions between New Barnet and Potters Bar Station, or even South Mimms. 

Where TfL cannot encourage an operator to provide a cross-border service, it would have the option of establishing one itself. So for instance if no operator could be found to operate a reinstated 402 between Bromley and Sevenoaks, or a 505 between Chingford and Waltham Abbey (even better, a Walthamstow-Waltham Cross route) TfL could provide it.

Better yet, make it policy that TfL provide bus services linking the first town inside London to the first town outside it, so as not to unfairly disadvantage GLA levy payers just inside London. Or even extend their remit to the all of the old Network Southeast area, seeing as this is an unlimited budget.

Make zonal fares simple and consistent (no 'special fares apply') and bring back cheaper options like zones 2-6 travelcard.

Make it that wherever possible, all households have to be within 300m of a high frequency bus route and within 500m of a night route.

Build orbital express bus routes and tram lines linking the outer stations and termini of each tube line with each other - concentric circles going out beyond the NLL.

Redevelop all tube stations and car parks so that buses to all the surrounding destinations stop as close as possible to the station exit for maximum accessibility (eg by creating new bus stations in place of car parks, which people won't need because the buses will be so frequent and comprehensive).

Ban executive bonuses and salaries over £50k and put all this money back into the service. All bus routes to be brought back in-house.

On an unlimited budget probably looking at converting routes perhaps with patronage above 6 million to tram operation wouldn’t be a bad idea. It happens in Europe quite a lot

[Dillon95]

I’d launch a lot more cross boundary routes for sure, and solve the annoying problems of obvious missing links. Eltham and Welling not having any routes to Abbey Wood and Thamesmead for example. I’d love to be in charge editing routes etc. I’d also have London Overground take over all of the National Rail suburban metro routes, and give them official line names and colour code them on the tube map rather than all being orange.