|
Post by mondraker275 on Jun 15, 2024 15:28:24 GMT
How would swapping the 35 and 45 southern termini work do you think? And with that cutting the 35 back to 6bph? (although ideally we should keeping routes as frequent as possible) You'd maintain most links in some form, except for north of Elephant to Clapham Junction. I personally quite liked the idea of the 45 taking over the Clerkenwell section of the 40, with the 40 replacing the 176 north of Elephant. Another thing I also thought was a good shout for that area was merging the 415 and 432 into a 6bph route from Anerley to OKR, with perhaps the P4 being extended to Tulse Hill to replace any lost capacity. The swapping of the terminals would be a reasonable compromise so I’m open to that. Whilst I agree that routes should be kept as frequent as possible, it hasn’t worked out well for the 35 and seems to have been an exception to the rule so to speak. The 37 in comparison is far more deserving of a frequency increase The P4 is too unreliable to be relied on in regards to any extension to Tulse Hill due to the A205 and in all honesty, I think the 415 has gone from strength to strength since the Old Kent Road extension and I’d like to see it further penetrate into the boroughs of Southwark or Lewisham with the 432 extended down to Elmers End Maybe on the side where the 35/37 come together but 35 frequency is very much needed for the E&C and Liverpool Street link (via London Bridge). Very few options that go across conveniently. There has always been that oddity where several buses coming from the north terminate at London Bridge and several buses coming from the south terminate at E&C and you end up always changing even multiple times to get across.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 15, 2024 21:33:03 GMT
The swapping of the terminals would be a reasonable compromise so I’m open to that. Whilst I agree that routes should be kept as frequent as possible, it hasn’t worked out well for the 35 and seems to have been an exception to the rule so to speak. The 37 in comparison is far more deserving of a frequency increase The P4 is too unreliable to be relied on in regards to any extension to Tulse Hill due to the A205 and in all honesty, I think the 415 has gone from strength to strength since the Old Kent Road extension and I’d like to see it further penetrate into the boroughs of Southwark or Lewisham with the 432 extended down to Elmers End Maybe on the side where the 35/37 come together but 35 frequency is very much needed for the E&C and Liverpool Street link (via London Bridge). Very few options that go across conveniently. There has always been that oddity where several buses coming from the north terminate at London Bridge and several buses coming from the south terminate at E&C and you end up always changing even multiple times to get across. That could be easily rectified by reversing the 35, 40 & 45 changes and going back to pre 2019 - that way, the section from Elephant onwards would have enough capacity and the southern part would not full of bunched 35's that are running with excess capacity and/or being turned daily at Brixton & Clapham Common. The 37 has always been far more deserving of a frequency increase - the Brixton to Peckham portion is one of the few east to west links across South London and probably the most reliable out of the lot despite it's own issues with congestion and this section is mainly left to the 37 running solely by itself.
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Jun 15, 2024 22:07:44 GMT
Maybe on the side where the 35/37 come together but 35 frequency is very much needed for the E&C and Liverpool Street link (via London Bridge). Very few options that go across conveniently. There has always been that oddity where several buses coming from the north terminate at London Bridge and several buses coming from the south terminate at E&C and you end up always changing even multiple times to get across. That could be easily rectified by reversing the 35, 40 & 45 changes and going back to pre 2019 - that way, the section from Elephant onwards would have enough capacity and the southern part would not full of bunched 35's that are running with excess capacity and/or being turned daily at Brixton & Clapham Common. The 37 has always been far more deserving of a frequency increase - the Brixton to Peckham portion is one of the few east to west links across South London and probably the most reliable out of the lot despite it's own issues with congestion and this section is mainly left to the 37 running solely by itself. Would this work to sort out the 35/45 issues? 35 Shoreditch to Clapham Junction (5bph DD) Frequency decreased from 7.5bph to 5bph. 45 Shoreditch to Clapham Park (5bph DD) Extended from Elephant & Castle to Shoreditch via route 35. Frequency decreased from 6bph to 5bph. 35/45 operated on a joint contract with equal 6 minute intervals between Shoreditch and Brixton (with headway maintained as if they were one route). 37 Peckham to Putney Heath (8bph DD) Frequency increased from 6bph to 8bph.
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Jun 16, 2024 0:18:08 GMT
It's worth re-iterating that the 94 to Piccadilly Circus is safe (for now), TfL has formally dropped the proposal to curtail it to Marble Arch now that Oxford Street is not going to be pedestrianised. Yes absolutely. Would have been the end for 94 had it been cut to Marble Arch tbh. At most now it would probably only be cut to Oxford Circus and share the terminal arrangements with the 7. The diversion via the backstreets is likely to encourage people to jump off at John Lewis and walk to Regent Street for the shops. The upcoming Regent Street Vision is a big question mark for it too. One to watch in the medium-term.
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Jun 16, 2024 7:36:44 GMT
That could be easily rectified by reversing the 35, 40 & 45 changes and going back to pre 2019 - that way, the section from Elephant onwards would have enough capacity and the southern part would not full of bunched 35's that are running with excess capacity and/or being turned daily at Brixton & Clapham Common. The 37 has always been far more deserving of a frequency increase - the Brixton to Peckham portion is one of the few east to west links across South London and probably the most reliable out of the lot despite it's own issues with congestion and this section is mainly left to the 37 running solely by itself. Would this work to sort out the 35/45 issues? 35 Shoreditch to Clapham Junction (5bph DD) Frequency decreased from 7.5bph to 5bph. 45 Shoreditch to Clapham Park (5bph DD) Extended from Elephant & Castle to Shoreditch via route 35. Frequency decreased from 6bph to 5bph. 35/45 operated on a joint contract with equal 6 minute intervals between Shoreditch and Brixton (with headway maintained as if they were one route). 37 Peckham to Putney Heath (8bph DD) Frequency increased from 6bph to 8bph. I do like that (as a non-local), at least all links are maintained and, from what I've read on here, matches capacity to demand a bit better than the current structure does.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jun 16, 2024 7:38:58 GMT
Yes absolutely. Would have been the end for 94 had it been cut to Marble Arch tbh. At most now it would probably only be cut to Oxford Circus and share the terminal arrangements with the 7. The diversion via the backstreets is likely to encourage people to jump off at John Lewis and walk to Regent Street for the shops. The upcoming Regent Street Vision is a big question mark for it too. One to watch in the medium-term. Let's face it most plans for central London tend to be detrimental to buses. As suggested bottom end of Regent Street could end up 2 way with the other road predestinaised , outside the British Museum aswell. Central London really is becoming a walking, cycling and underground area now and I wouldn't be surprised to see a further drop in usage. Throw in most Saturdays the 12/159 curtailed to Lambeth North due to a protest or something again meaning people lose confidence in being able to get to their destination.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jun 16, 2024 7:40:13 GMT
That could be easily rectified by reversing the 35, 40 & 45 changes and going back to pre 2019 - that way, the section from Elephant onwards would have enough capacity and the southern part would not full of bunched 35's that are running with excess capacity and/or being turned daily at Brixton & Clapham Common. The 37 has always been far more deserving of a frequency increase - the Brixton to Peckham portion is one of the few east to west links across South London and probably the most reliable out of the lot despite it's own issues with congestion and this section is mainly left to the 37 running solely by itself. Would this work to sort out the 35/45 issues? 35 Shoreditch to Clapham Junction (5bph DD) Frequency decreased from 7.5bph to 5bph. 45 Shoreditch to Clapham Park (5bph DD) Extended from Elephant & Castle to Shoreditch via route 35. Frequency decreased from 6bph to 5bph. 35/45 operated on a joint contract with equal 6 minute intervals between Shoreditch and Brixton (with headway maintained as if they were one route). 37 Peckham to Putney Heath (8bph DD) Frequency increased from 6bph to 8bph. That would make sense tbh. Only different thing I would do is have the 45 only to Liverpool Street. Shoreditch to L Pool St already has plenty of support.
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Jul 7, 2024 16:28:44 GMT
Could be a busy week or two on the consultation front. I hope TfL dont hold back and release like 4 in the next two weeks.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 7, 2024 20:39:16 GMT
Could be a busy week or two on the consultation front. I hope TfL dont hold back and release like 4 in the next two weeks. Certainly the 414 doesn't have long left on its contract so will have to be released fairly soon. The SL5 and SL7 aswell will need their tender specs ready soon aswell.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Jul 7, 2024 20:49:43 GMT
Could be a busy week or two on the consultation front. I hope TfL dont hold back and release like 4 in the next two weeks. Certainly the 414 doesn't have long left on its contract so will have to be released fairly soon. The SL5 and SL7 aswell will need their tender specs ready soon aswell. I’d imagine the tender specs for the SL5/7 already include requirements for bids based on the proposed changes and remaining as-is. TfL have done it before in the past as option A and B for example.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jul 7, 2024 21:00:10 GMT
Could be a busy week or two on the consultation front. I hope TfL dont hold back and release like 4 in the next two weeks. I think it will come down to how ready the consultations are now, and whether a change in government might have any sort of effect from the treasury (although I imagine it'd be minimal if at all). From what it seems the 414 one and SL5/7 one at least were pretty much ready to go right until Sunak called the election, but the other notable point is that the 241 consultation still got released during Purdah so what is in the consultations that made both of them red flags to release and whether any of that obviously could have influenced government policy and as a result could potentially need some form of change. If I was being extremely cynical I'd not even put it past Khan to green light consultations that would cause uproar like the 414 (say whatever you like about it, but Fulham residents will oppose it) just to sweep in and save them where they run through non-Labour constituencies such as Fulham and the South West.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 7, 2024 21:14:07 GMT
Could be a busy week or two on the consultation front. I hope TfL dont hold back and release like 4 in the next two weeks. I think it will come down to how ready the consultations are now, and whether a change in government might have any sort of effect from the treasury (although I imagine it'd be minimal if at all). From what it seems the 414 one and SL5/7 one at least were pretty much ready to go right until Sunak called the election, but the other notable point is that the 241 consultation still got released during Purdah so what is in the consultations that made both of them red flags to release and whether any of that obviously could have influenced government policy and as a result could potentially need some form of change. If I was being extremely cynical I'd not even put it past Khan to green light consultations that would cause uproar like the 414 (say whatever you like about it, but Fulham residents will oppose it) just to sweep in and save them where they run through non-Labour constituencies such as Fulham and the South West. Not Fulham (by only 152 votes) is a Labour seat I'd imagine the consultation will still go ahead. As people have said and its true, there are now bigger things that needs funding like the Bakerloo Line trains, new trams and Hammersmith Bridge that any money for London will have to go on them as in effective there is no Government to blame now. However the new Government will still not necessarily make any big spends for TFL when all Metro Mayors will be asking.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jul 7, 2024 21:21:00 GMT
I think it will come down to how ready the consultations are now, and whether a change in government might have any sort of effect from the treasury (although I imagine it'd be minimal if at all). From what it seems the 414 one and SL5/7 one at least were pretty much ready to go right until Sunak called the election, but the other notable point is that the 241 consultation still got released during Purdah so what is in the consultations that made both of them red flags to release and whether any of that obviously could have influenced government policy and as a result could potentially need some form of change. If I was being extremely cynical I'd not even put it past Khan to green light consultations that would cause uproar like the 414 (say whatever you like about it, but Fulham residents will oppose it) just to sweep in and save them where they run through non-Labour constituencies such as Fulham and the South West. Not Fulham (by only 152 votes) is a Labour seat I'd imagine the consultation will still go ahead. As people have said and its true, there are now bigger things that needs funding like the Bakerloo Line trains, new trams and Hammersmith Bridge that any money for London will have to go on them as in effective there is no Government to blame now. However the new Government will still not necessarily make any big spends for TFL when all Metro Mayors will be asking. Although at the time of the planning of the consultation Fulham wasn't a Labour constituency so could have been a tactical move. I think London should get its fair share of funding, although Reeves has publicly said she'll hold all mayors to account regardless of their party when they ask for money so I can't see Khan having an easy run, at least initially but I also can't see the deadlock we had last time either.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 7, 2024 21:38:54 GMT
Not Fulham (by only 152 votes) is a Labour seat I'd imagine the consultation will still go ahead. As people have said and its true, there are now bigger things that needs funding like the Bakerloo Line trains, new trams and Hammersmith Bridge that any money for London will have to go on them as in effective there is no Government to blame now. However the new Government will still not necessarily make any big spends for TFL when all Metro Mayors will be asking. Although at the time of the planning of the consultation Fulham wasn't a Labour constituency so could have been a tactical move. I think London should get its fair share of funding, although Reeves has publicly said she'll hold all mayors to account regardless of their party when they ask for money so I can't see Khan having an easy run, at least initially but I also can't see the deadlock we had last time either. I certainly think there will be money much easily given for instructure for new trains, trams etc but I think the day to day will still be scrutinised with questions asked over how day to day money will be spent.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jul 7, 2024 21:44:05 GMT
Why? The 148 and 484 both turn around there. I'm sure stands can be adjusted accordingly. Whilst I might be against the cutting back of the 45, there wouldn’t be any issues in a truncated 45 or extended 118 standing in Q or WL. The 484 has done this for decades without issues and on top, various buses have official turns to Camberwell Green Catching up on this thread, but thought it was worth taking a look at what the tender specs for the 484 said, given that it approaches Camberwell Green from the south. The latest document on Ian Armstrong's site dates back to 2011 but assumes a stand in Q or WL will not be available. It asks bidders to assume instead that a stand will be created up to 5 mins running time from the destination point. Other routes from the south use Medlar Road to turn but it's important to note that they are not allowed to stand. A fair assumption might be that TfL will look to find a standing space on this loop if the proposals emerge as people predict.
|
|