|
Post by greenboy on Jul 17, 2023 6:44:04 GMT
On the topic of buses in Bromley, bromley really needs a new bus station where buses from both the North (126,227,269,354,SL3) and the South (61, 119, 138,146, 246, 352, SL5)can terminate. Perhaps the whole of Elmfield Road could be made buses only and widened to make room for stands, and a roundabout put in at the Eastern End so buses can turn around? Elmfield Road is already bus only at the junction of Kentish Way and access is needed to The Glades delivery area and other off street premises. The stand area at Bromley North could possibly be extended but other than that?
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jul 17, 2023 8:52:21 GMT
On the topic of buses in Bromley, bromley really needs a new bus station where buses from both the North (126,227,269,354,SL3) and the South (61, 119, 138,146, 246, 352, SL5)can terminate. Perhaps the whole of Elmfield Road could be made buses only and widened to make room for stands, and a roundabout put in at the Eastern End so buses can turn around? Elmfield Road is already bus only at the junction of Kentish Way and access is needed to The Glades delivery area and other off street premises. The stand area at Bromley North could possibly be extended but other than that? That would involve using up some of the Car Park at Bromley North. Cannot see that happening. SL3 & SL5 will probably stand at Bromley North. Routes terminating at Bromley North would be very unpopular if curtailed to the South. The only suggestion to make space I would say is to divert the 269 to Bromley South. Curtailing the 126 to Bromley North is a no no would force everyone to use the 261 which is already busy. I would say the same for the 146 uses 1 bus. There is a bus stand on Simpsons Road at the new development which should be for the 126 the Ringers Road stand was only meant to be temporary. Overall I wouldn’t be shocked if there is something going to be done for example the 352 & 354 are changed and then upset residents. 138 diverted to Lower Sydenham replacing the 352 and the Coney Hall loop replaced by an existing route such as the 146. 162 merged with the 354 with the Bromley to Beckenham Junction section of the 162 replaced by an existing route.
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Jul 17, 2023 9:04:39 GMT
Elmfield Road is already bus only at the junction of Kentish Way and access is needed to The Glades delivery area and other off street premises. The stand area at Bromley North could possibly be extended but other than that? That would involve using up some of the Car Park at Bromley North. Cannot see that happening. SL3 & SL5 will probably stand at Bromley North. Routes terminating at Bromley North would be very unpopular if curtailed to the South. The only suggestion to make space I would say is to divert the 269 to Bromley South. Curtailing the 126 to Bromley North is a no no would force everyone to use the 261 which is already busy. I would say the same for the 146 uses 1 bus. There is a bus stand on Simpsons Road at the new development which should be for the 126 the Ringers Road stand was only meant to be temporary. Overall I wouldn’t be shocked if there is something going to be done for example the 352 & 354 are changed and then upset residents. 138 diverted to Lower Sydenham replacing the 352 and the Coney Hall loop replaced by an existing route such as the 146. 162 merged with the 354 with the Bromley to Beckenham Junction section of the 162 replaced by an existing route. think they should look at merging some routes across the town centre - perhaps 269 to Beckenham Jcn, 162 to Coney Hall replacing the 138. Each section would have more capacity and some of the 162 links would be retained. I think SL3 would be a good one to terminate at Simpson Road as it allows it to serve Bromley South which is arguably a more comprehensive interchange.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 17, 2023 9:17:45 GMT
Elmfield Road is already bus only at the junction of Kentish Way and access is needed to The Glades delivery area and other off street premises. The stand area at Bromley North could possibly be extended but other than that? That would involve using up some of the Car Park at Bromley North. Cannot see that happening. SL3 & SL5 will probably stand at Bromley North. Routes terminating at Bromley North would be very unpopular if curtailed to the South. The only suggestion to make space I would say is to divert the 269 to Bromley South. Curtailing the 126 to Bromley North is a no no would force everyone to use the 261 which is already busy. I would say the same for the 146 uses 1 bus. There is a bus stand on Simpsons Road at the new development which should be for the 126 the Ringers Road stand was only meant to be temporary. Overall I wouldn’t be shocked if there is something going to be done for example the 352 & 354 are changed and then upset residents. 138 diverted to Lower Sydenham replacing the 352 and the Coney Hall loop replaced by an existing route such as the 146. 162 merged with the 354 with the Bromley to Beckenham Junction section of the 162 replaced by an existing route. I agree it's unlikely and terminating the 126 at Bromley North would be terrible. It seems the stand at the new development in Simpsons Road never going to be used and the only real option is to merge a few routes to free up some stand space.
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Jul 17, 2023 12:37:35 GMT
Elmfield Road is already bus only at the junction of Kentish Way and access is needed to The Glades delivery area and other off street premises. The stand area at Bromley North could possibly be extended but other than that? That would involve using up some of the Car Park at Bromley North. Cannot see that happening. SL3 & SL5 will probably stand at Bromley North Certainly not with what I heard Network Rail quoted for selling the car park to TfL! The two new routes are probably scheduled to use Bromley North but it’s going to make things extremely tight in there I did hear that the whole site could be redeveloped with Tesco interested in putting a new supermarket there and the bus stand shifted westwards where there is currently a car park but I’m not sure how concrete those rumours are
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jul 17, 2023 13:15:11 GMT
That would involve using up some of the Car Park at Bromley North. Cannot see that happening. SL3 & SL5 will probably stand at Bromley North Certainly not with what I heard Network Rail quoted for selling the car park to TfL! The two new routes are probably scheduled to use Bromley North but it’s going to make things extremely tight in there I did hear that the whole site could be redeveloped with Tesco interested in putting a new supermarket there and the bus stand shifted westwards where there is currently a car park but I’m not sure how concrete those rumours are Sounds like a ridiculous price TFL are not willing to pay the end result looks like some route alterations. I do not blame Network Rail with all this ULEZ foolishness money grabbing TFL are doing…
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 17, 2023 16:23:59 GMT
Certainly not with what I heard Network Rail quoted for selling the car park to TfL! The two new routes are probably scheduled to use Bromley North but it’s going to make things extremely tight in there I did hear that the whole site could be redeveloped with Tesco interested in putting a new supermarket there and the bus stand shifted westwards where there is currently a car park but I’m not sure how concrete those rumours are Sounds like a ridiculous price TFL are not willing to pay the end result looks like some route alterations. I do not blame Network Rail with all this ULEZ foolishness money grabbing TFL are doing… I seem to recall hearing all those years ago that there was some land that TFL were using expand the bus stand at Bromley North when the 199 was going to extend there.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jul 17, 2023 17:55:44 GMT
That would involve using up some of the Car Park at Bromley North. Cannot see that happening. SL3 & SL5 will probably stand at Bromley North. Routes terminating at Bromley North would be very unpopular if curtailed to the South. The only suggestion to make space I would say is to divert the 269 to Bromley South. Curtailing the 126 to Bromley North is a no no would force everyone to use the 261 which is already busy. I would say the same for the 146 uses 1 bus. There is a bus stand on Simpsons Road at the new development which should be for the 126 the Ringers Road stand was only meant to be temporary. Overall I wouldn’t be shocked if there is something going to be done for example the 352 & 354 are changed and then upset residents. 138 diverted to Lower Sydenham replacing the 352 and the Coney Hall loop replaced by an existing route such as the 146. 162 merged with the 354 with the Bromley to Beckenham Junction section of the 162 replaced by an existing route. I agree it's unlikely and terminating the 126 at Bromley North would be terrible. It seems the stand at the new development in Simpsons Road never going to be used and the only real option is to merge a few routes to free up some stand space. I'm still not entirely clear what the issue is with the Simpsons Road stand. Certainly the building looks rather low for a double decker on Google Maps although there is no signage to suggest a clearance issue.
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Jul 17, 2023 18:34:17 GMT
I agree it's unlikely and terminating the 126 at Bromley North would be terrible. It seems the stand at the new development in Simpsons Road never going to be used and the only real option is to merge a few routes to free up some stand space. I'm still not entirely clear what the issue is with the Simpsons Road stand. Certainly the building looks rather low for a double decker on Google Maps although there is no signage to suggest a clearance issue. A sign has recently appeared at the entrance to Simpsons Road giving the clearance at over 16ft and warning of an overhanging building - if I remember then I’ll check exactly what it says tomorrow. Curiously, the 261 route record lists Simpsons Road as the Bromley South turning point - I’m unaware if it’s ever been used though. I wouldn’t have thought it would be an issue for single deckers though
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Jul 18, 2023 9:01:37 GMT
I agree it's unlikely and terminating the 126 at Bromley North would be terrible. It seems the stand at the new development in Simpsons Road never going to be used and the only real option is to merge a few routes to free up some stand space. I'm still not entirely clear what the issue is with the Simpsons Road stand. Certainly the building looks rather low for a double decker on Google Maps although there is no signage to suggest a clearance issue. My apologies for quoting you again but I have checked this morning and the warning triangle lists the clearance at 5.1m or 16ft 8in with a sign underneath warning of an ‘overhanging structure.’ Obviously 16’8” is more than enough for a double decker but the overhanging structure does look lower than that. I suspect there are other issues at play in preventing the 126 going back to Simpsons Road
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 18, 2023 10:04:49 GMT
I'm still not entirely clear what the issue is with the Simpsons Road stand. Certainly the building looks rather low for a double decker on Google Maps although there is no signage to suggest a clearance issue. My apologies for quoting you again but I have checked this morning and the warning triangle lists the clearance at 5.1m or 16ft 8in with a sign underneath warning of an ‘overhanging structure.’ Obviously 16’8” is more than enough for a double decker but the overhanging structure does look lower than that. I suspect there are other issues at play in preventing the 126 going back to Simpsons Road I can only guess that it's H&S concerns for drivers, lack of toilets and no proper footpath?
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Jul 18, 2023 15:41:08 GMT
My apologies for quoting you again but I have checked this morning and the warning triangle lists the clearance at 5.1m or 16ft 8in with a sign underneath warning of an ‘overhanging structure.’ Obviously 16’8” is more than enough for a double decker but the overhanging structure does look lower than that. I suspect there are other issues at play in preventing the 126 going back to Simpsons Road I can only guess that it's H&S concerns for drivers, lack of toilets and no proper footpath? I can only go by what Google Maps shows but it doesn’t look like a particularly pleasant place for a bus stand. Unless there are footpaths elsewhere it’s a long old walk to any amenities whatsoever. That said, there aren’t any toilets on the Ringers Road stand either
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 18, 2023 16:16:55 GMT
I can only guess that it's H&S concerns for drivers, lack of toilets and no proper footpath? I can only go by what Google Maps shows but it doesn’t look like a particularly pleasant place for a bus stand. Unless there are footpaths elsewhere it’s a long old walk to any amenities whatsoever. That said, there aren’t any toilets on the Ringers Road stand either I think drivers on the 126 generally use the KFC toilets across the road.
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Jul 19, 2023 14:19:23 GMT
My apologies for quoting you again but I have checked this morning and the warning triangle lists the clearance at 5.1m or 16ft 8in with a sign underneath warning of an ‘overhanging structure.’ Obviously 16’8” is more than enough for a double decker but the overhanging structure does look lower than that. I suspect there are other issues at play in preventing the 126 going back to Simpsons Road I can only guess that it's H&S concerns for drivers, lack of toilets and no proper footpath? I spoke to one of TB’s garage supervisors today and he believes it’s resident concerns about fumes that is preventing buses using the Simpsons Road stand
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 19, 2023 14:42:04 GMT
I can only guess that it's H&S concerns for drivers, lack of toilets and no proper footpath? I spoke to one of TB’s garage supervisors today and he believes it’s resident concerns about fumes that is preventing buses using the Simpsons Road stand So.....electric buses on the 126 and problem solved 🤣
|
|