Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 7:21:40 GMT
The 209's predecessor was the 9A which did indeed run every other bus to Kensington Queens Gate. When I used to use it the demand was always at its peak between Hammersmith and Mortlake. The current service in Barnes and Mortlake are well suited to travel needs I think, but I would love to see the double deck 9 one day be restored to Mortlake. The short lived double deck 609 Express between Mortlake and Bank never proved popular. Shame, because it was a great idea. Yes it must be the 9A that I am thinking of. If the weight restriction is ever removed on Hammersmith Bridge I would expect the 9 to return to Mortlake. Running alternate buses to Kensington could probably be justified now rather than make everyone change at Hammersmith with other journeys going to Shepherds Bush via Blythe Road and and numbered 239? Yes the 609 was a great innovation, I've wondered about extending the 22 to Mortlake which should take some pressure off the 209? I believe TfL have repeatedly been asked to extend the 22 to either Roehampton or Mortlake and its always bouncer back on cost grounds. Blythe Road has the insurgency anti bus lobby so that is probably , unfortunately, unlikely to ever happen. |
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Oct 1, 2015 9:29:50 GMT
An extension of the 22 to Mortlake would give more choice to residents of Barnes. If TfL would be less stringent about running all bus route journeys end to end costs would reduce. Every other 22 running to Mortlake and terminating by the side of the brewery should be sufficient.
It would be good to reintroduce a Barnes - Kensington link but one problem would be the location of the bus stations at Hammersmith. All buses travelling back to Barnes/Mortlake would from Hammermith Road have to do a complete circuit of the Broadway gyratory system to serve the common bus stops in the Lower Bus Station. The amount of time lost when the Broadway clogs up would be unacceptable.
Along Castelnau the route that does not seem to fully play its part is the 283. It often seems to have plenty of spare capacity. Maybe the planners need to see if this route could be used to help meet perceived needs in the area. The route could be extended via Church Road, Barnes High Street, The Terrace, White Hart Lane, Priests Bridge, Upper Richmond Road West, Priory Lane, Clarence Lane, Roehampton Lane to terminate at what used to be the old Earl Spencer stand. Useful new links would be created and it would provide more support for the 209. Drawbacks would be that I don't think you would need the whole service on the extension and as I said earlier TfL are loath to have short working buses. Another issue would be the Wetlands Centre. Would that be served as a bifurcation in both directions or could the 485 assume the responsibility for serving that attraction? It does not appear to generate anything like the number of passengers that justify the current frequency of the 283.
Extending the 485 to Shepherds Bush via Blythe or Sinclair Roads should be considered. In the Minder TV programme Arthur Daley's car lot was situated on the corner of Augustine Road and Dewhurst Road where they meet Blythe Road. As far as I'm aware not everybody in the area bought one of his motors and so people round there still have public transport needs despite what the newer cash rich residents might think!
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 1, 2015 10:14:54 GMT
An extension of the 22 to Mortlake would give more choice to residents of Barnes. If TfL would be less stringent about running all bus route journeys end to end costs would reduce. Every other 22 running to Mortlake and terminating by the side of the brewery should be sufficient. It would be good to reintroduce a Barnes - Kensington link but one problem would be the location of the bus stations at Hammersmith. All buses travelling back to Barnes/Mortlake would from Hammermith Road have to do a complete circuit of the Broadway gyratory system to serve the common bus stops in the Lower Bus Station. The amount of time lost when the Broadway clogs up would be unacceptable. Along Castelnau the route that does not seem to fully play its part is the 283. It often seems to have plenty of spare capacity. Maybe the planners need to see if this route could be used to help meet perceived needs in the area. The route could be extended via Church Road, Barnes High Street, The Terrace, White Hart Lane, Priests Bridge, Upper Richmond Road West, Priory Lane, Clarence Lane, Roehampton Lane to terminate at what used to be the old Earl Spencer stand. Useful new links would be created and it would provide more support for the 209. Drawbacks would be that I don't think you would need the whole service on the extension and as I said earlier TfL are loath to have short working buses. Another issue would be the Wetlands Centre. Would that be served as a bifurcation in both directions or could the 485 assume the responsibility for serving that attraction? It does not appear to generate anything like the number of passengers that justify the current frequency of the 283. Extending the 485 to Shepherds Bush via Blythe or Sinclair Roads should be considered. In the Minder TV programme Arthur Daley's car lot was situated on the corner of Augustine Road and Dewhurst Road where they meet Blythe Road. As far as I'm aware not everybody in the area bought one of his motors and so people round there still have public transport needs despite what the newer cash rich residents might think! Except where money and circumstances dictate that short workings are an appropriate answer - e.g. route 25. The other answer, although a little more costly, is to have two route numbers to deal with the bifurcation although I do like your 283 to Roehampton idea. The only issue is that it seems to overlap with the suggested changes to the 485 so it seems to be a case of "shifting sands" in that area and what will end up going where. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 1, 2015 12:31:51 GMT
The 209's predecessor was the 9A which did indeed run every other bus to Kensington Queens Gate. When I used to use it the demand was always at its peak between Hammersmith and Mortlake. The current service in Barnes and Mortlake are well suited to travel needs I think, but I would love to see the double deck 9 one day be restored to Mortlake. The short lived double deck 609 Express between Mortlake and Bank never proved popular. Shame, because it was a great idea. Yes it must be the 9A that I am thinking of. If the weight restriction is ever removed on Hammersmith Bridge I would expect the 9 to return to Mortlake. Running alternate buses to Kensington could probably be justified now rather than make everyone change at Hammersmith with other journeys going to Shepherds Bush via Blythe Road and and numbered 239? Yes the 609 was a great innovation, I've wondered about extending the 22 to Mortlake which should take some pressure off the 209? I think there are better extensions for the 9 such as to London Bridge rather than removing a short, frequent route that works very well for the sake of it. An extended 9 to Mortlake could be detrimental to current 209 users as the 9 battles through traffic in Central London, Kensington & the Hammersmith Gyratory system whereas the 209 only has Hammersmith to deal with. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Oct 1, 2015 12:42:00 GMT
Yes it must be the 9A that I am thinking of. If the weight restriction is ever removed on Hammersmith Bridge I would expect the 9 to return to Mortlake. Running alternate buses to Kensington could probably be justified now rather than make everyone change at Hammersmith with other journeys going to Shepherds Bush via Blythe Road and and numbered 239? Yes the 609 was a great innovation, I've wondered about extending the 22 to Mortlake which should take some pressure off the 209? I think there are better extensions for the 9 such as to London Bridge rather than removing a short, frequent route that works very well for the sake of it. An extended 9 to Mortlake could be detrimental to current 209 users as the 9 battles through traffic in Central London, Kensington & the Hammersmith Gyratory system whereas the 209 only has Hammersmith to deal with. I suspect Mortlake bus users would want the number 9 back? Shame we can't have Mortlake bus garage back as well  |
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Oct 1, 2015 13:51:33 GMT
I think there are better extensions for the 9 such as to London Bridge rather than removing a short, frequent route that works very well for the sake of it. An extended 9 to Mortlake could be detrimental to current 209 users as the 9 battles through traffic in Central London, Kensington & the Hammersmith Gyratory system whereas the 209 only has Hammersmith to deal with. I suspect Mortlake bus users would want the number 9 back? Shame we can't have Mortlake bus garage back as well If only for the quality of the way they turned out their vehicles  Attachment Deleted |
|
|
|
Post by l1group on Oct 3, 2015 7:31:57 GMT
I think that the 209 could be molded together with the 419 to create a Richmond to Hammersmith super link. It always bugs me why the 209 is so short The 209 works as it is which is to link Mortlake and the bottom of Avondale Road which sees a lot of use by passengers with Hammersmith - why does Richmond need yet another route to Hammersmith when there is already the 33, 190, 391 & 419? Just because a route is short, doesn't mean it automatically needs an extension! I retract my statement about extending the 209! I know it's literally busy just across the bridge. Richmond, no matter the amount of bus services, the quickest route to get there is probably the 190. Just coincidentally the least frequent route is either the 190 or the 419. Remember the Tube exists, even though the service is less than impressive at times (some don't!). There isn't many options to relieve the 209, so leave it as it is. A bus link to Putney Bridge - 22, but costs are too detrimental. So we are left in this stagnant point. Only possible thought would be to increase the Hounslow Loop train frequency, but that's pushing it as the Windsor lines are getting quite crowded as the line into Waterloo from Clapham is 2 track (well, three sometimes). And it isn't warranted for most of the time (we need a better than hourly service on Sundays, please!). Also there is the junction conflict after Barnes. So capacity is restricted there too. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2015 6:33:52 GMT
The 209 works as it is which is to link Mortlake and the bottom of Avondale Road which sees a lot of use by passengers with Hammersmith - why does Richmond need yet another route to Hammersmith when there is already the 33, 190, 391 & 419? Just because a route is short, doesn't mean it automatically needs an extension! I retract my statement about extending the 209! I know it's literally busy just across the bridge. Richmond, no matter the amount of bus services, the quickest route to get there is probably the 190. Just coincidentally the least frequent route is either the 190 or the 419. Remember the Tube exists, even though the service is less than impressive at times (some don't!). There isn't many options to relieve the 209, so leave it as it is. A bus link to Putney Bridge - 22, but costs are too detrimental. So we are left in this stagnant point. Only possible thought would be to increase the Hounslow Loop train frequency, but that's pushing it as the Windsor lines are getting quite crowded as the line into Waterloo from Clapham is 2 track (well, three sometimes). And it isn't warranted for most of the time (we need a better than hourly service on Sundays, please!). Also there is the junction conflict after Barnes. So capacity is restricted there too. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2015 6:55:33 GMT
Just a few points.I don't think it necessary to extend the 22 from putney to mortlake as the 485 goes right into Barnes where you can connect with the 209 at Barnes pond,also I know in Barnes /Roehampton area there was a campaign to extend the 22 to Roehampton but again is it required cause the 85 430 link putney bridge and putney to Roehampton also via putney common the 265 goes to Roehampton then a couple of stops ahead at Barnes station the very frequent 72 then one stop further at Barnes common rosslyn park the 493.I still believe the 72 should b extended to asda,cause it seems strange it stopping short of the superstore. I think the 209 should b diverted to omit avondale Rd in mortlake and extend a couple of stops further down mortlake high street to sheen lane,bringing the service closer to east sheen could turn around and park outside the brewery-maybe a consideration once the brewery is redeveloped.I believe the latest target date to close hammersmith bridge for a year for strengthening is next spring.for those not aware it was tfl who requested the strengthening of the bridge to enable double deck buses to return to the bridge. If this does happen I guess the 33 72 609 and possibly 283 would convert to double deck buses. But I reckon the 209 419 485 have sufficient capacity to remain single Decker.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 4, 2015 12:18:14 GMT
Just a few points.I don't think it necessary to extend the 22 from putney to mortlake as the 485 goes right into Barnes where you can connect with the 209 at Barnes pond,also I know in Barnes /Roehampton area there was a campaign to extend the 22 to Roehampton but again is it required cause the 85 430 link putney bridge and putney to Roehampton also via putney common the 265 goes to Roehampton then a couple of stops ahead at Barnes station the very frequent 72 then one stop further at Barnes common rosslyn park the 493.I still believe the 72 should b extended to asda,cause it seems strange it stopping short of the superstore. I think the 209 should b diverted to omit avondale Rd in mortlake and extend a couple of stops further down mortlake high street to sheen lane,bringing the service closer to east sheen could turn around and park outside the brewery-maybe a consideration once the brewery is redeveloped.I believe the latest target date to close hammersmith bridge for a year for strengthening is next spring.for those not aware it was tfl who requested the strengthening of the bridge to enable double deck buses to return to the bridge. If this does happen I guess the 33 72 609 and possibly 283 would convert to double deck buses. But I reckon the 209 419 485 have sufficient capacity to remain single Decker. Like I said before, the 72 to ASDA is a good idea but there isn't stand space there - you could use my idea of sending the 72 into the estate next to ASDA which would meet your requirement of serving ASDA and it also gives the estate a direct service to other places. Extending the 209 means Avondale Road loses its bus service and many people get off at the fake bus station in Mortlake - I really think it should left alone to do the excellent job it is. |
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Oct 4, 2015 18:45:17 GMT
Just a few points.I don't think it necessary to extend the 22 from putney to mortlake as the 485 goes right into Barnes where you can connect with the 209 at Barnes pond,also I know in Barnes /Roehampton area there was a campaign to extend the 22 to Roehampton but again is it required cause the 85 430 link putney bridge and putney to Roehampton also via putney common the 265 goes to Roehampton then a couple of stops ahead at Barnes station the very frequent 72 then one stop further at Barnes common rosslyn park the 493.I still believe the 72 should b extended to asda,cause it seems strange it stopping short of the superstore. I think the 209 should b diverted to omit avondale Rd in mortlake and extend a couple of stops further down mortlake high street to sheen lane,bringing the service closer to east sheen could turn around and park outside the brewery-maybe a consideration once the brewery is redeveloped.I believe the latest target date to close hammersmith bridge for a year for strengthening is next spring.for those not aware it was tfl who requested the strengthening of the bridge to enable double deck buses to return to the bridge. If this does happen I guess the 33 72 609 and possibly 283 would convert to double deck buses. But I reckon the 209 419 485 have sufficient capacity to remain single Decker. There is a significant problem in extending the 72 to the Asda at Roehampton Vale. To get there, like the 265 the 72 would have to do a circuit of the Alton East estate, then go back to Roehampton Lane, turn left and return to the centre of Roehampton Village(where it would have been many minutes before), circle the monument in the middle of the road, then serve a stop for the second time before proceeding to Asda. The 265 shares a common route with the 72 from the middle of Barnes Common and provides more than enough capacity for potential shoppers. North of Barnes Common there are many routes to take shoppers to the retail outlets of Hammersmith. The 72 and 283 pass the large Tesco at Brook Green. The wealthy residents of Castelnau are probably going to take their car to shop and are more likely to shop at Waitrose or M and S Food than Asda. There does not appear to be any pent up demand to extend the 72. I am unaware of capacity issues on this section of the 265. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Oct 5, 2015 7:14:35 GMT
Just a few points.I don't think it necessary to extend the 22 from putney to mortlake as the 485 goes right into Barnes where you can connect with the 209 at Barnes pond,also I know in Barnes /Roehampton area there was a campaign to extend the 22 to Roehampton but again is it required cause the 85 430 link putney bridge and putney to Roehampton also via putney common the 265 goes to Roehampton then a couple of stops ahead at Barnes station the very frequent 72 then one stop further at Barnes common rosslyn park the 493.I still believe the 72 should b extended to asda,cause it seems strange it stopping short of the superstore. I think the 209 should b diverted to omit avondale Rd in mortlake and extend a couple of stops further down mortlake high street to sheen lane,bringing the service closer to east sheen could turn around and park outside the brewery-maybe a consideration once the brewery is redeveloped.I believe the latest target date to close hammersmith bridge for a year for strengthening is next spring.for those not aware it was tfl who requested the strengthening of the bridge to enable double deck buses to return to the bridge. If this does happen I guess the 33 72 609 and possibly 283 would convert to double deck buses. But I reckon the 209 419 485 have sufficient capacity to remain single Decker. The main point of extending the 22 is a direct link to central London from Mortlake which will take some pressure off the 209, the 430 could be withdrawn and replaced by extending the 74 to Roehampton as suggested in another thread and the buses saved there used for the 22 extension. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2015 17:57:03 GMT
Living on the 209 bus route I feel extending it to richmond via the 419 from Barnes bridge would be to high in frequency to richmond. I say double deck the 391.I do notice that the 209 is forever bunching.sometimes as much as 4 buses at one time going through Barnes YES PLEASE!!! The 391 NEEDS to be double decker because it needs the extra space because it is such an important route!!! |
|
|
|
Post by planesandtrains on Oct 5, 2015 18:11:37 GMT
YES PLEASE!!! The 391 NEEDS to be double decker because it needs the extra space because it is such an important route!!! The 391 already has Double Decks allocated to the route. I would rather think that the 490 needs some sought of Double Deck workings in peak hours because the buses are packed full right up to the front door at these times. People often have to wait multiple buses till they can squeeze themselves on. I know that the H22 can't be double decked due to some height restriction down the route and it dosen't really get full at all during off peak times. But the 490 has no excuse. It has no restrictions in place to allow DD workings, however TF don't have any. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2015 18:45:03 GMT
YES PLEASE!!! The 391 NEEDS to be double decker because it needs the extra space because it is such an important route!!! The 391 already has Double Decks allocated to the route. I would rather think that the 490 needs some sought of Double Deck workings in peak hours because the buses are packed full right up to the front door at these times. People often have to wait multiple buses till they can squeeze themselves on. I know that the H22 can't be double decked due to some height restriction down the route and it dosen't really get full at all during off peak times. But the 490 has no excuse. It has no restrictions in place to allow DD workings, however TF don't have any. I also think the 490 should go 24/7 along with the 235 which should be double decked as well. |
|
