|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Aug 31, 2023 11:36:07 GMT
Have seen a post and will delete if not true of course. Tfl bus updates starting from 9th September R68 will no longer be going to kew Retail Park, and the route bus journey will be from Hampton to Twickenham only. The R70 bus will be replacing the R68 and will not be finishing at its usual last bus stop at Manor Circus as building works will be starting for the new flats. Not saying you're wrong but when was this consulted on? |
|
|
|
Post by george on Aug 31, 2023 11:40:07 GMT
Have seen a post and will delete if not true of course. Tfl bus updates starting from 9th September R68 will no longer be going to kew Retail Park, and the route bus journey will be from Hampton to Twickenham only. The R70 bus will be replacing the R68 and will not be finishing at its usual last bus stop at Manor Circus as building works will be starting for the new flats. TfL are moving quickly without consultation these days!🤔🧐 Please don't shoot the messenger. I think I'm well respected on the forum now and not here to spread fake news I just saw this post on a local forum. If it turns out to be fake I will delete it. |
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Aug 31, 2023 11:41:03 GMT
TfL are moving quickly without consultation these days!🤔🧐 Please don't shoot the messenger. I think I'm well respected on the forum now and not here to spread fake news I just saw this post on a local forum. If it turns out to be fake I will delete it. Not shooting messenger, just seems a bit quick that's all and purposely have posted it in a jokey sort of manner:) |
|
|
|
Post by george on Aug 31, 2023 11:42:22 GMT
Please don't shoot the messenger. I think I'm well respected on the forum now and not here to spread fake news I just saw this post on a local forum. If it turns out to be fake I will delete it. Not shooting messenger, just seems a bit quick that's all and purposely have posted it in a jokey sort of manner:) I have asked poster for clarification on this. May get a quicker response on here. |
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Aug 31, 2023 12:02:36 GMT
We questioned why this wasn't announced online and was told TFL has not updated this information. Talking of this, I wonder why there hasn't been any updates to the TfL bus changes page for weeks - everything on the page is now outdated, and there may well be changes occurring in 2 days (on Saturday 2nd September) that aren't publicised yet. |
|
|
|
Post by RT3062 on Aug 31, 2023 12:10:23 GMT
TfL are moving quickly without consultation these days!🤔🧐 Please don't shoot the messenger. I think I'm well respected on the forum now and not here to spread fake news I just saw this post on a local forum. If it turns out to be fake I will delete it. I can confirm this is 100% true |
|
|
|
Post by gwiwer on Aug 31, 2023 12:45:08 GMT
Have seen a post and will delete if not true of course. Tfl bus updates starting from 9th September R68 will no longer be going to kew Retail Park, and the route bus journey will be from Hampton to Twickenham only. The R70 bus will be replacing the R68 and will not be finishing at its usual last bus stop at Manor Circus as building works will be starting for the new flats. That would be another cut to buses between Twickenham and Richmond which has already lost the H22. All buses on that axis are single-deck with a very few exceptions on school-time 33s which makes for capacity issues and overcrowding now without removing another route. On the other hand Manor Circus roadside stand was already crowded before the current roadworks and there is no space on the supermarket stands to accommodate any more buses. It's hard to find stand space for a bus in Richmond these days, the exchange of the Kew Retail Park leg between R68 and R70 was mooted some time ago but this should not be at the expense of a significant further cut to an important local link. |
|
|
|
Post by cardinal on Aug 31, 2023 17:51:40 GMT
That does seem an odd thing to plan, that really isn’t going to down to well locally. Strawberry Vale gets a stub of a route.
Maybe the R70 could be given double decks. Having said that Fearnely Crescent could be an issue.
Given what they did to the 110 why don’t they extend the 190 via the R68 and just withdraw it altogether ?
|
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Aug 31, 2023 17:56:49 GMT
That does seem an odd thing to plan, that really isn’t going to down to well locally. Strawberry Vale gets a stub of a route. Maybe the R70 could be given double decks. Having said that Fearnely Crescent could be an issue. Given what they did to the 110 why don’t they extend the 190 via the R68 and just withdraw it altogether ? Extend the 190 seriously? That's a heck of a long route if you do |
|
|
|
Post by commanderturtle on Aug 31, 2023 18:21:27 GMT
That does seem an odd thing to plan, that really isn’t going to down to well locally. Strawberry Vale gets a stub of a route. Maybe the R70 could be given double decks. Having said that Fearnely Crescent could be an issue. Given what they did to the 110 why don’t they extend the 190 via the R68 and just withdraw it altogether ? Actually, I believe (?) the R70 used to have very occasional double decker workings until about 2005, so decking the route should be a possibility. |
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Aug 31, 2023 18:27:30 GMT
That does seem an odd thing to plan, that really isn’t going to down to well locally. Strawberry Vale gets a stub of a route. Maybe the R70 could be given double decks. Having said that Fearnely Crescent could be an issue. Given what they did to the 110 why don’t they extend the 190 via the R68 and just withdraw it altogether ? This could make the pending tender result for routes R68/70 be an interesting one. If route R68 is being withdrawn from Richmond and Kew Retail Park on a permanent basis then route R70 will most definitely need double decks for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Aug 31, 2023 18:36:43 GMT
My two-pence worth on the R68/R70: I don't think it's that bad a set of changes. Route R68 is currently very long and unreliable, cutting the Kew Retail Park section off would be enough though. Route R70 is a much shorter route, especially considering it doesn't serve Teddington, but not standing at Nurserylands and using a one bus stand at Kew (being a 6bph route) might be unwise. The Kew section of the R68 does see a lot of traffic so do hope that the reliability of the route isn't going to deteriorate. Maybe the Fir Road stand could be used at Nurserylands? I understand that would involve a complicated rerouting but I do think that it could be worthwhile. Responding to gwiwer's post, I do think that the Richmond-Twickenham corridor is where these changes could really fall apart though. In the past 3 years that corridor has lost the H22, plus cuts to the number of trains which use the line that parallels the bus routes. Without increasing capacity on at least one of the 3 routes serving that corridor, I doubt that it could cope. I don't think that the R70 is the right one to deck, I would go for the 33 in that case. Could the 490 take 12m SDs; I would think it could? Regarding cardinal's post, the broken Strawberry Vale to Richmond link could present an issue. Again, I think that removing the R68 from Richmond isn't a good idea, but to merge it with the 190 would be even worse. |
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Aug 31, 2023 18:41:43 GMT
That does seem an odd thing to plan, that really isn’t going to down to well locally. Strawberry Vale gets a stub of a route. Maybe the R70 could be given double decks. Having said that Fearnely Crescent could be an issue. Given what they did to the 110 why don’t they extend the 190 via the R68 and just withdraw it altogether ? This could make the pending tender result for routes R68/70 be an interesting one. If route R68 is being withdrawn from Richmond and Kew Retail Park on a permanent basis then route R70 will most definitely need double decks for sure. I agree, one needs to be decked, but imo the R70 wouldn't be the best choice. I don't think it's overcrowded at the Nurserylands end, and the Kew end is already getting a frequency increase as the R70 is 6bph compared to the R68's 4bph (on a good day). The 33 would be my one of choice as it would also be the sole Teddington-Richmond link, is busy at the Sheen end and it would be the only route to have a same stop interchange with the R68 going towards Strawberry Vale and Teddington Lock. The 490 would be a good shout if removed from Pools on the Park; but the R68 would then need to be retained to serve Pools on the Park, thereby rendering the entire discussion moot. |
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Aug 31, 2023 18:49:29 GMT
My two-pence worth on the R68/R70: I don't think it's that bad a set of changes. Route R68 is currently very long and unreliable, cutting the Kew Retail Park section off would be enough though. Route R70 is a much shorter route, especially considering it doesn't serve Teddington, but not standing at Nurserylands and using a one bus stand at Kew (being a 6bph route) might be unwise. The Kew section of the R68 does see a lot of traffic so do hope that the reliability of the route isn't going to deteriorate. Maybe the Fir Road stand could be used at Nurserylands? I understand that would involve a complicated rerouting but I do think that it could be worthwhile. Responding to gwiwer's post, I do think that the Richmond-Twickenham corridor is where these changes could really fall apart though. In the past 3 years that corridor has lost the H22, plus cuts to the number of trains which use the line that parallels the bus routes. Without increasing capacity on at least one of the 3 routes serving that corridor, I doubt that it could cope. I don't think that the R70 is the right one to deck, I would go for the 33 in that case. Could the 490 take 12m SDs; I would think it could? Regarding cardinal's post, the broken Strawberry Vale to Richmond link could present an issue. Again, I think that removing the R68 from Richmond isn't a good idea, but to merge it with the 190 would be even worse. Care to expand on your thoughts on why you would prefer route 33 to be decked than route R70? I'm just interested to hear them. EDIT: you just did above my post haha  . I would personally prefer route R70 to be decked due to Richmond Station bus stop being a huge passenger catchment area for passengers heading into Twickenham, Fulwell, Hampton etc. In contrast, Route 33 misses out Richmond Station. Richmond Station passengers have already lost route H22 and now they are due to lose route R68. Another point is when (/if) Hammersmith Bridge reopens again in the coming years, single deck buses will only be permitted to cross the bridge. All in all, I think route R70 is the right candidate to convert to a double deck operation. |
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Aug 31, 2023 18:50:04 GMT
That does seem an odd thing to plan, that really isn’t going to down to well locally. Strawberry Vale gets a stub of a route. Maybe the R70 could be given double decks. Having said that Fearnely Crescent could be an issue. Given what they did to the 110 why don’t they extend the 190 via the R68 and just withdraw it altogether ? Actually, I believe (?) the R70 used to have very occasional double decker workings until about 2005, so decking the route should be a possibility. Yes it did. TA256 M1336 VA54Maybe it will end up decked upon retender? |
|
.