|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 12, 2020 7:14:48 GMT
Route 436: Withdrawn between Battersea Park & Vauxhall and rerouted to Whitehall, Horse Guards via Route 77 to County Hall and route 453 to Whitehall. New links created: Giving Lewisham a link to the west end. Connects New Cross to Trafalgar Square, Westminster and Lambeth Bridge. Gives Lambeth Palace a link to near Trafalgar Square. I think this would be a better option than Battersea Park and could bring patronage. Thoughts? I've often wondered about swapping the southern termini of the 21 and 453 to give Lewisham a direct link to Westminster and the West End. Interesting - as I was thinking the same! However, I think we'd have to renumber the N21 then. If the N21 was to be rerouted to Foots Cray it would function better as N321.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 12, 2020 7:27:10 GMT
I don't think it's impossible to have a route from Hampstead Heath to Canada water. Both are in zone 2 and journey time would be shorter then the 88 plus others. The 47 alone is given as 85 mins and the 55 as 97 mins. They are allowing the 112 extension to go ahead when the route is 85% North Circular and that's gridlock in peaks and as you said, the 88. The 168 to Canada Water would be a bit of a stretch, I'd much prefer a route like the 45 to do the honours of that.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 12, 2020 7:36:27 GMT
Clapham Park to Canada water. Nice link but I think from CW and Southwark Pk Rd people would prefer a Waterloo/Aldwych link.
Obviously not when snarled up but off peak and weekends im always surprised how quickly you can get from Euston to Aldwych via Kingsway.
If not the 1 is the 172 a bit shorter. Could do Hampstead Heath to Brockley Rise. Atleast there is the 171 to support if buses get curtailed to NX. That would only remove a route between Aldwych and Elephant where's I still see TFL wanting to take something out of Euston and Holborn aswell.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 12, 2020 7:45:34 GMT
I've often wondered about swapping the southern termini of the 21 and 453 to give Lewisham a direct link to Westminster and the West End. Interesting - as I was thinking the same! However, I think we'd have to renumber the N21 then. If the N21 was to be rerouted to Foots Cray it would function better as N321. That would break the Deptford west end link thou. Had the 53 still run to Whitehall or better still been extended to Cockspur Street then would have been a good idea. Thou the 21 does serve LB and Bank which the 47 already does from Deptford. That said do like the idea of a west end link. Could be harsh the extend the 453 to Lewisham via Brookmill Road and cut the 47 with other routes left to TL.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 12, 2020 7:58:23 GMT
I fully agree with you about the 218 and 440, it makes far more sense to have a double decker route from Hammersmith to Wembley going via the current 218 routing between Hammersmith and Acton, the 266 routing between Acton and North Acton and the 440 routing between North Acton and Wembley, meanwhile the route via West Acton should just be a Turnham Green-Central Middlesex Hospital route. The 218 isn't going via the 440, that's where the 23 is going. The 218 is going via the 206 & 83. The 440 should stay at Stonebridge Park. And if residents were wanting, route 440 could be withdrawn between Sutton Lane North and Turnham Green Church, rerouted via the 272 to Fishers Lane, sent up Fishers Lane and terminating in Acton Green on the 94 stands, the 94 could be extended to Turnham Green Church and give Chiswick Park Station a bus route. Or the 440 is withdrawn between Sutton Lane North and Turnham Green Church and extended to Acton Green via Chiswick Park Station, meaning that local residents have a bus route to Westfield & Central London that is interchangeable at Chiswick Park Station, the tube, the link to Chiswick High Road and the massive Sainsbury's. This is a much better idea than what is currently advertised by Sadiq. Also, the 94 would serve the 440s old stop if extended and the 440 would terminate on the 94s old stands. Question would be if Acton Green would be a curtail Destination for the 94. And if both the 94 & 440 were serving Chiswick Park Station, for residents on Bollo Lane who were affected by the slicing of the 440, would be close to both routes either at the Chiswick Business Park end of Bollo Lane or Chiswick Park Station end of Bollo Lane. I think its a very goo idea to reroute to the 440 at the southern end to Acton Green to try to repair some of the damage caused by the meddling to the route. I also think that the 391 should be diverted via Wellesley Road instead as the 440 doesn't offer much in the way of connections to the road and its usage along there has fallen dramatically since the rerouting.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 12, 2020 8:09:24 GMT
The 440 change was the classic example of run a bus along a road but dosent matter where it goes. Wellesley Road is crying out for a link to Hammersmith again and probably Richmond aswell due to them being the most popular shopping/leisure destinations in the area.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 12, 2020 8:09:49 GMT
I don't think the 23 would work at Lancaster Gate purely due to the lack of links it would create. I'd much rather it started on Marble Arch, North Row where the proposed 94 stands were to give a remote link to the West End. The 332 would be a better candidate to go to Lancaster Gate because of the links created, and I'd send it through St Mary's Hospital in both directions instead of via Bishops Bridge. Adding onto the 23, the 440 should be withdrew between Wembley Stadium and Stonebridge Park, with the 23 going via route 18 to Wembley Stadium, 182 to Wembley Arena and then down Fulton Road and stand on Rutherford Way with the return towards Marble Arch using Engineers Way. The 206 would be sent away from Rutherford Way, and routed via Fulton Road instead of Rutherford Way & Engineers Way in both directions. If you wanted the 218 to go to Wembley Stadium or wherever, I would first swap the 218 & 440 routings in Acton. Then I'd send it up the 266 to Harlesden and then the 206 to the junction with First Way in Wembley Stadium, send it down South Way, then route 83 to Wembley Central with the route gaining the 23s DNHs. I proposed rerouting the 23 via Lancaster Gate was to reduce the amount of routes on Edgware Road. The route could go to Marble Arch via Lancaster Gate.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 12, 2020 8:41:48 GMT
The 218 isn't going via the 440, that's where the 23 is going. The 218 is going via the 206 & 83. The 440 should stay at Stonebridge Park. And if residents were wanting, route 440 could be withdrawn between Sutton Lane North and Turnham Green Church, rerouted via the 272 to Fishers Lane, sent up Fishers Lane and terminating in Acton Green on the 94 stands, the 94 could be extended to Turnham Green Church and give Chiswick Park Station a bus route. Or the 440 is withdrawn between Sutton Lane North and Turnham Green Church and extended to Acton Green via Chiswick Park Station, meaning that local residents have a bus route to Westfield & Central London that is interchangeable at Chiswick Park Station, the tube, the link to Chiswick High Road and the massive Sainsbury's. This is a much better idea than what is currently advertised by Sadiq. Also, the 94 would serve the 440s old stop if extended and the 440 would terminate on the 94s old stands. Question would be if Acton Green would be a curtail Destination for the 94. And if both the 94 & 440 were serving Chiswick Park Station, for residents on Bollo Lane who were affected by the slicing of the 440, would be close to both routes either at the Chiswick Business Park end of Bollo Lane or Chiswick Park Station end of Bollo Lane. I think its a very goo idea to reroute to the 440 at the southern end to Acton Green to try to repair some of the damage caused by the meddling to the route. I also think that the 391 should be diverted via Wellesley Road instead as the 440 doesn't offer much in the way of connections to the road and its usage along there has fallen dramatically since the rerouting. What you suggest to the 391 I fully agree on. The 391 continues along Wellesley Road (bus would turn off near Brentford Fountain), then onto Turnham Green Church and then into its normal line of route. Another change that i would do to whatever left there is of the 391 is giving Munster Road a bus route. I would extend the 391 along the 211 to Fulham Cross, then the 391 serves Munster Road, then takes Route 414 to Fulham Broadway Station where it could terminate. Buses may be a problem, however with the 391 I believe up for tender very soon, hopefully there should be no problems if gained by another operator. My 440 point, the 440 would either still run down Oxford Road N and Wellesley Road and then turn off at Sutton Lane North and go up to Acton Green. The 391 would be rerouted between Brentford Fountain & Turnham Green Church to serve Wellesley Road & Heathfield Terrace. OR Route 440 no longer serves Oxford Road N and Wellesley Road and instead serves Chiswick Road bus stops in both directions and then head towards Acton Green directly instead of fiddling around Wellesley Road & Sutton Lane.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 12, 2020 9:09:13 GMT
I think its a very goo idea to reroute to the 440 at the southern end to Acton Green to try to repair some of the damage caused by the meddling to the route. I also think that the 391 should be diverted via Wellesley Road instead as the 440 doesn't offer much in the way of connections to the road and its usage along there has fallen dramatically since the rerouting. What you suggest to the 391 I fully agree on. The 391 continues along Wellesley Road (bus would turn off near Brentford Fountain), then onto Turnham Green Church and then into its normal line of route. Another change that i would do to whatever left there is of the 391 is giving Munster Road a bus route. I would extend the 391 along the 211 to Fulham Cross, then the 391 serves Munster Road, then takes Route 414 to Fulham Broadway Station where it could terminate. Buses may be a problem, however with the 391 I believe up for tender very soon, hopefully there should be no problems if gained by another operator. My 440 point, the 440 would either still run down Oxford Road N and Wellesley Road and then turn off at Sutton Lane North and go up to Acton Green. The 391 would be rerouted between Brentford Fountain & Turnham Green Church to serve Wellesley Road & Heathfield Terrace. OR Route 440 no longer serves Oxford Road N and Wellesley Road and instead serves Chiswick Road bus stops in both directions and then head towards Acton Green directly instead of fiddling around Wellesley Road & Sutton Lane. Is there enough stand space for the 391 at Fulham Broadway? I wonder if the 11's stand has enough space to accommodate the 11 and 391 sharing the stand. On your 440 point, I support the latter option, my bright hope would be a double run via the Sainsbury's to reduce the walk to the bus stop especially for people less able to walk potentially uphill to a bus stop, but I don't think the car park is big enough to accommodate the 440 serving it and parking spaces would have to be removed to make space for a bus stop sadly its not got the space that Sainsbury's in East Dulwich for instance does hence why its only my bright hope.
|
|
|
Post by aaron1 on Apr 12, 2020 9:24:59 GMT
New Night Route N210 Brent Cross to Leytonstone the route will run via the day 210 before Finsbury Park it will go via Hornsey Road to aviode the Low brige than via Highbury Barn, Grosvenor Avenue, Mildmay Grove, King Henry's Walk, Crossway, Shacklegate Lane, St Marks Rise, Ridley Road, Dalston Lane, Queensbridge Road, Albion Drive, Landsdowne Drive, Westgate Street, King Edward Road, Fremont Street, Victoria Park Road , Hackney Wick, Ruckholt Road, Grove Green Road
This will make new night link for the night tube and other night buses
So what do you think about this route
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 12, 2020 9:26:35 GMT
New Night Route N210 Brent Cross to Leytonstone the route will run via the day 210 before Finsbury Park it will go via Hornsey Road to aviode the Low brige than via Highbury Barn, Grosvenor Avenue, Mildmay Grove, King Henry's Walk, Crossway, Shacklegate Lane, St Marks Rise, Ridley Road, Dalston Lane, Queensbridge Road, Albion Drive, Landsdowne Drive, Westgate Street, King Edward Road, Fremont Street, Victoria Park Road , Hackney Wick, Ruckholt Road, Grove Green Road This will make new night link for the night tube and other night buses So what do you think about this route Not good.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 12, 2020 9:27:11 GMT
Sadly I think the days of tfl creating new night links are probably over or atleast on hold new. Any new night routes will probably just be maintain link if there are changes to day routes ie the N25, N83.
Ride hailing services have taken away night demand and TFL know it.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 12, 2020 9:36:44 GMT
What you suggest to the 391 I fully agree on. The 391 continues along Wellesley Road (bus would turn off near Brentford Fountain), then onto Turnham Green Church and then into its normal line of route. Another change that i would do to whatever left there is of the 391 is giving Munster Road a bus route. I would extend the 391 along the 211 to Fulham Cross, then the 391 serves Munster Road, then takes Route 414 to Fulham Broadway Station where it could terminate. Buses may be a problem, however with the 391 I believe up for tender very soon, hopefully there should be no problems if gained by another operator. My 440 point, the 440 would either still run down Oxford Road N and Wellesley Road and then turn off at Sutton Lane North and go up to Acton Green. The 391 would be rerouted between Brentford Fountain & Turnham Green Church to serve Wellesley Road & Heathfield Terrace. OR Route 440 no longer serves Oxford Road N and Wellesley Road and instead serves Chiswick Road bus stops in both directions and then head towards Acton Green directly instead of fiddling around Wellesley Road & Sutton Lane. Is there enough stand space for the 391 at Fulham Broadway? I wonder if the 11's stand has enough space to accommodate the 11 and 391 sharing the stand. On your 440 point, I support the latter option, my bright hope would be a double run via the Sainsbury's to reduce the walk to the bus stop especially for people less able to walk potentially uphill to a bus stop, but I don't think the car park is big enough to accommodate the 440 serving it and parking spaces would have to be removed to make space for a bus stop sadly its not got the space that Sainsbury's in East Dulwich for instance does hence why its only my bright hope. I was unsure about stand space. Hopefully the 94 & 440s Chiswick Park Station stop would be opposite Yuma Sushi so it wouldn't be far to the Sainsbury's. My only other concern about sending the 440 away from Wellsley Road is would residents want a connection to the Sainsbury's? The 440 would be close to Oxford Road North but it does make me question whether the 391 should serve Sutton Lane North & Chiswick High Road or Heathfield Terrace. Chiswick High Road would be in reach of the 94 if extended to Turnham Green Church, and they'd have a common stop on Sutton Lane North. Residents would be in walking distance of the Sainsbury's and Chiswick Park Station. So I think SLN and then CHR is better than HT. The 27 was a fairly different affair but when the 27 was at Turnham Green Church did it pick up passengers on stand as was it's last stop the stand?
|
|
|
Post by greg on Apr 12, 2020 13:03:30 GMT
Another set of fancy, I do not live in the area but I have basically been brought up there. If you know East London, particularly Aldgate and Whitechapel its part bengal🇧🇩 homeland.
Anyways heres some things I thought could go well:
New route 10 to run between Romford and Aldgate (Liverpool Street) via route 86 and 25. This would be a high frequency route with a PVR of 33??
Cant tell which terminus is better, Aldgate seems a destination where the route will empty, but if it run just a litrle further to Liverpool Street (Appold Street) it could serve a big harbour area and also get loads more links to other buses and a busy tourist hotspot, rail station and also similar to TFL Rail and if any rail closures, will be very busy.
New route N10 to run between Harold Hill and Oxford Circus via routes N86 and N25??
Routes 25/N25 and 86/N86 withdrawn.
Route 115 extended to Oxford Circus via route N25 from Aldgate. Planned route 10 would be WAYYY too long and the 115 isnt the longest and has half the PVR of existing route 25 and would be a good link from Oxford. It also replaces the day 25 as far as City Thameslink and rightfully supports route 8.
Extra: Good changes but not 100% needed
205: Extended to Stratford via route 25. This would be amazing for a link to Westfield from more central areas like Euston, Kings Cross. Me personally if the 205 would be slightly extended it would save trouble switching on the 25 from Whitechapel. It may become a little long. but wont save too much trouble and it could be extended to Stratford City via its current N205 and become 24 hours. Ive heard the least busiest section of the N205 is between Leyton and Stratford anyway.
100: Rerouted at Aldgate to Mile End Bus Station via route 205. My reasons for this are I think this would be a very good connection for the local areas and well 🇧🇩 markets etc. There is no good links between Shadwell, Wapping to Mile End and I think this is 100% needed. It would become like a local hopper electric route. Section between Aldgate and S’t Paul’s is very unused.
78: Rerouted from Aldgate to S’t Paul’s via route 100. The 78 seems the least used compared to the 42 between Tower Bridge and Liverpool Street and doesnt serve many hotspots except Peckham.
42: Extended to Shoreditch via route 78. Creates space for route 10 at Appold Street, and replaces the mini section around Shoreditch that the 78 serves.
(Im not sure which route is best, but a rerouting to S’t Paul’s either on route 42 or 78)
242: Extend to City Hall via Fenchurch Street (ex-40) and London Bridge. Replaces old links and if the 10 were to start/end at Aldgate gives space for high frequency route 10.
Withdrawn: 25, 86, N25, N86, N205, (N242?)
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 12, 2020 13:09:10 GMT
Clapham Park to Canada water. Nice link but I think from CW and Southwark Pk Rd people would prefer a Waterloo/Aldwych link. Obviously not when snarled up but off peak and weekends im always surprised how quickly you can get from Euston to Aldwych via Kingsway. If not the 1 is the 172 a bit shorter. Could do Hampstead Heath to Brockley Rise. Atleast there is the 171 to support if buses get curtailed to NX. That would only remove a route between Aldwych and Elephant where's I still see TFL wanting to take something out of Euston and Holborn aswell. Hampstead Heath to Brockley Rise would be far lengthier than the 172 was before its cut and would bring a worse level of service overall. The 45 could be easily be extended to Canada Water and could easily be done without a route being removed at all.
|
|