TfL consults on route 498, 499 and B12

[snoggle]

There are some new TfL consultations on bus service changes.

Route B12 to get a Sunday service

consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/route-b12

Route 498 to get an increased frequency and an extension to Queens Hospital. Route 499 to be diverted via Queens Hospital.

consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/routes-498-and-499

Being my cynical self it's interesting to note that only Boris voting areas get these improvements. The 499 will have had two improvements in a short period of time if this change is implemented.

[IanF]

B12 on Sundays has been needed for a while.

[Deleted]

Interesting.

Why not the 375 which one of the GLA members been asking.

[vjaska]

Apparently, the 498 extension has already been agreed.

[VPL630]

498 Agreed subject to change, PVR5, frequency to every 20 mins, afternoon school bus still runs AFAIK from 27th of April

[snoggle]

Mar 14, 2013 13:15:08 GMT @freebbc said:

Interesting.

Why not the 375 which one of the GLA members been asking.

The 375 "demand" was very recent. It will take months before anything changes which it hopefully will not. An outrageous waste of money.

TfL have been fiddling about in the background with routes 498 and 499 for a long time. Frequency increases and extensions were proposed over 2 years ago but the residents on the proposed extensions told TfL to "go away". Therefore TfL have presumably looked again and come up with something that delivers the core bits of the previoius proposals.

These "consultations" often only get published when there is a "done deal" on the table which others posts in this thread suggest is the case for the 498. By doing this it makes the whole consultation process *with the public* a complete farce because the decision to make the change has already been taken.

[Deleted]

Or why not combine the 375 with the 498.

Here is the map

i.imgur.com/MmpeK9i.png

Map from www.openstreetmap.org/

[LX09FBJ]

Mar 14, 2013 12:23:52 GMT snoggle said:

Being my cynical self it's interesting to note that only Boris voting areas get these improvements. The 499 will have had two improvements in a short period of time if this change is implemented.

Indeed, Boris Johnson has given East London a wealth of improvements, such as better links, more frequent buses etc. However, Labour areas (mainly Hounslow, Harrow and Ealing) have had less improvments. Surprised to see the lack of improvements in areas such as Kingston and Richmond, which are typically Conservative areas have few improvements.

For instance, take the 482 as an example. It runs from Southall via Hounslow West to Hatton Cross and then Heathrow Terminal 5, and it's the only link between Southall and the latter two destinations. It runs at every 20 minutes Monday-Saturday, and half hourly on Sundays.

Also, the list of single deck services with double deck potential is endless. They include AT LEAST: 90, 190 (loads of surplus TPs are available), 203, 216, 235 (busiest single deck route outside Central London potentially), 285, 290, 371 (although subs are regular), 423 (again, subs are regular), 490, H22, R68 and R70, as well as others.

Additionally, there are also obvious links missing. From Romford, you can get to almost anywhere in East London, but from Hounslow you can't get to other places (the only 'northern' places you can get to from Hounslow is Southall, Uxbridge, Slough and Northolt)

One 'gem' I can find in my area is the 81, which runs with double decks and has a decent frequency, which leaves London (goes to Slough). Maybe it could be extended to Isleworth (there's a free stand, the space saved by the 81, could be used for an E2 and/or E8 extension.)

[Deleted]

Mar 14, 2013 17:06:42 GMT LX09FBJ said:

Mar 14, 2013 12:23:52 GMT snoggle said:

Being my cynical self it's interesting to note that only Boris voting areas get these improvements. The 499 will have had two improvements in a short period of time if this change is implemented.

Indeed, Boris Johnson has given East London a wealth of improvements, such as better links, more frequent buses etc. However, Labour areas (mainly Hounslow, Harrow and Ealing) have had less improvments. Surprised to see the lack of improvements in areas such as Kingston and Richmond, which are typically Conservative areas have few improvements.

For instance, take the 482 as an example. It runs from Southall via Hounslow West to Hatton Cross and then Heathrow Terminal 5, and it's the only link between Southall and the latter two destinations. It runs at every 20 minutes Monday-Saturday, and half hourly on Sundays.

Also, the list of single deck services with double deck potential is endless. They include AT LEAST: 90, 190 (loads of surplus TPs are available), 203, 216, 235 (busiest single deck route outside Central London potentially), 285, 290, 371 (although subs are regular), 423 (again, subs are regular), 490, H22, R68 and R70, as well as others.

Additionally, there are also obvious links missing. From Romford, you can get to almost anywhere in East London, but from Hounslow you can't get to other places (the only 'northern' places you can get to from Hounslow is Southall, Uxbridge, Slough and Northolt)

One 'gem' I can find in my area is the 81, which runs with double decks and has a decent frequency, which leaves London (goes to Slough). Maybe it could be extended to Isleworth (there's a free stand, the space saved by the 81, could be used for an E2 and/or E8 extension.)

Care to explain the "wealth of improvements" East London has had? Worth noting East London is generally a very Labour area - only the outer Essex fringe that's more Conservative. You seem to be very biased against East London, and I'm not quite sure why - just about every area of London has the same transport problems as SW London, despite what you might think.

[LX09FBJ]

Mar 14, 2013 17:23:55 GMT @mredd said:

Mar 14, 2013 17:06:42 GMT LX09FBJ said:

Indeed, Boris Johnson has given East London a wealth of improvements, such as better links, more frequent buses etc. However, Labour areas (mainly Hounslow, Harrow and Ealing) have had less improvments. Surprised to see the lack of improvements in areas such as Kingston and Richmond, which are typically Conservative areas have few improvements.

For instance, take the 482 as an example. It runs from Southall via Hounslow West to Hatton Cross and then Heathrow Terminal 5, and it's the only link between Southall and the latter two destinations. It runs at every 20 minutes Monday-Saturday, and half hourly on Sundays.

Also, the list of single deck services with double deck potential is endless. They include AT LEAST: 90, 190 (loads of surplus TPs are available), 203, 216, 235 (busiest single deck route outside Central London potentially), 285, 290, 371 (although subs are regular), 423 (again, subs are regular), 490, H22, R68 and R70, as well as others.

Additionally, there are also obvious links missing. From Romford, you can get to almost anywhere in East London, but from Hounslow you can't get to other places (the only 'northern' places you can get to from Hounslow is Southall, Uxbridge, Slough and Northolt)

One 'gem' I can find in my area is the 81, which runs with double decks and has a decent frequency, which leaves London (goes to Slough). Maybe it could be extended to Isleworth (there's a free stand, the space saved by the 81, could be used for an E2 and/or E8 extension.)

Care to explain the "wealth of improvements" East London has had? Worth noting East London is generally a very Labour area - only the outer Essex fringe that's more Conservative. You seem to be very biased against East London, and I'm not quite sure why - just about every area of London has the same transport problems as SW London, despite what you might think.

It could be the problems in the south west are just worse.

Also, as I live in the south west, I use the buses there more often. Indeed, we do have some routes (on paper at least) which are good. For instance in Kingston we have 24 hour buses to Putney, Tooting, Hounslow, Ealing and Tolworth and a decent night link to Central London, and we also have buses every 15 minutes to Epsom too. Like with all things, when you're not in the area, you only see the good things, and not the bad ones.

SE, NW and NE have a 'major trunk' link to Central London (the 53, 113 and 25 respectively)

[Deleted]

Mar 14, 2013 18:41:18 GMT LX09FBJ said:

Mar 14, 2013 17:23:55 GMT @mredd said:

Care to explain the "wealth of improvements" East London has had? Worth noting East London is generally a very Labour area - only the outer Essex fringe that's more Conservative. You seem to be very biased against East London, and I'm not quite sure why - just about every area of London has the same transport problems as SW London, despite what you might think.

It could be the problems in the south west are just worse.

Also, as I live in the south west, I use the buses there more often. Indeed, we do have some routes (on paper at least) which are good. For instance in Kingston we have 24 hour buses to Putney, Tooting, Hounslow, Ealing and Tolworth and a decent night link to Central London, and we also have buses every 15 minutes to Epsom too. Like with all things, when you're not in the area, you only see the good things, and not the bad ones.

SE, NW and NE have a 'major trunk' link to Central London (the 53, 113 and 25 respectively)

It is fair to say that a major trunk to Central London doesn't really exist in the SW, though the 53 has been rather cut back in its current form. The 188 also serves as a similar role I suppose though only stretches to Zone 3.

I do agree there are problems everywhere though. As I said, I used to think East London's transport looked wonderful compared to the various crowded single-deck routes in SE London, though it seems like I was mistaken! Admittedly, the transport in the SW does seem to be held together by mostly patchy smaller links rather than the usual major trunk routes, though the 25 is rather than an anomaly in East London and if you go outside of the area that serves, suddenly the service provision trunk-route-wise is rather poor. I suppose this is why the service is so popular. A shame the 237 couldn't run a bit further afield, really - even if it only touched the edge (such as Piccadilly Circus). North London seems to have retained the most Central London trunk routes, with the 29, 73 (admittedly cut), 141, 149, etc., though that lacks a lot of the smaller routes that link areas together - SW London seems to have the opposite situation! No area is perfect it seems.

[LX09FBJ]

Mar 14, 2013 18:59:01 GMT @mredd said:

Mar 14, 2013 18:41:18 GMT LX09FBJ said:

It could be the problems in the south west are just worse.

Also, as I live in the south west, I use the buses there more often. Indeed, we do have some routes (on paper at least) which are good. For instance in Kingston we have 24 hour buses to Putney, Tooting, Hounslow, Ealing and Tolworth and a decent night link to Central London, and we also have buses every 15 minutes to Epsom too. Like with all things, when you're not in the area, you only see the good things, and not the bad ones.

SE, NW and NE have a 'major trunk' link to Central London (the 53, 113 and 25 respectively)

It is fair to say that a major trunk to Central London doesn't really exist in the SW, though the 53 has been rather cut back in its current form. The 188 also serves as a similar role I suppose though only stretches to Zone 3.

I do agree there are problems everywhere though. As I said, I used to think East London's transport looked wonderful compared to the various crowded single-deck routes in SE London, though it seems like I was mistaken! Admittedly, the transport in the SW does seem to be held together by mostly patchy smaller links rather than the usual major trunk routes, though the 25 is rather than an anomaly in East London and if you go outside of the area that serves, suddenly the service provision trunk-route-wise is rather poor. I suppose this is why the service is so popular. A shame the 237 couldn't run a bit further afield, really - even if it only touched the edge (such as Piccadilly Circus). North London seems to have retained the most Central London trunk routes, with the 29, 73 (admittedly cut), 141, 149, etc., though that lacks a lot of the smaller routes that link areas together - SW London seems to have the opposite situation! No area is perfect it seems.

The best bet would be the 44 and 77 from Tooting, or the 14/22/74/170 from the Putney area. Additionally, the 33, 237 and 267 serve Zone 2, the 190 (desperately in need a frequency increase and double decking) and the 391 (stupidly retained with single deckers) touch the Zone 1 border

[Deleted]

Mar 14, 2013 19:32:14 GMT LX09FBJ said:

Mar 14, 2013 18:59:01 GMT @mredd said:

It is fair to say that a major trunk to Central London doesn't really exist in the SW, though the 53 has been rather cut back in its current form. The 188 also serves as a similar role I suppose though only stretches to Zone 3.

I do agree there are problems everywhere though. As I said, I used to think East London's transport looked wonderful compared to the various crowded single-deck routes in SE London, though it seems like I was mistaken! Admittedly, the transport in the SW does seem to be held together by mostly patchy smaller links rather than the usual major trunk routes, though the 25 is rather than an anomaly in East London and if you go outside of the area that serves, suddenly the service provision trunk-route-wise is rather poor. I suppose this is why the service is so popular. A shame the 237 couldn't run a bit further afield, really - even if it only touched the edge (such as Piccadilly Circus). North London seems to have retained the most Central London trunk routes, with the 29, 73 (admittedly cut), 141, 149, etc., though that lacks a lot of the smaller routes that link areas together - SW London seems to have the opposite situation! No area is perfect it seems.

The best bet would be the 44 and 77 from Tooting, or the 14/22/74/170 from the Putney area. Additionally, the 33, 237 and 267 serve Zone 2, the 190 (desperately in need a frequency increase and double decking) and the 391 (stupidly retained with single deckers) touch the Zone 1 border

I also questioned why the 391 was retained with single-deckers, as when I've occasionally used the route it's been packed! I suggested that it was probably only because they wanted to trial the Metrocity on there, but then I got shouted down for having an opinion on a route not near me Considering the 391 appears to be quite a trunk route, I don't see why a decker would go amiss anyway even if they're "unnecessary" as was suggested.

[Trident]

Mar 14, 2013 16:44:54 GMT @freebbc said:

Or why not combine the 375 with the 498.

Here is the map

i.imgur.com/MmpeK9i.png

Map from www.openstreetmap.org/

And what are you trying to achieve my doing this?

[Deleted]

Mredd, i can testify that the 391 needs double deckers. I back you on that having seen it packed like sardines with those ugly things.