|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 16, 2016 11:20:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Feb 16, 2016 14:31:47 GMT
He's taken a bit of flak on Twitter for being a member of the Government complaining about TfL bus cuts when TfL has had it's funding reduced: leaving aside any political affliations, I felt this was a bit unfair. He's simply responded to TfL with a cogent argument on behalf of his constituents about a possibly flawed consultation. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 16, 2016 14:59:50 GMT
He's taken a bit of flak on Twitter for being a member of the Government complaining about TfL bus cuts when TfL has had it's funding reduced: leaving aside any political affliations, I felt this was a bit unfair. He's simply responded to TfL with a cogent argument on behalf of his constituents about a possibly flawed consultation. Yes I saw that and responded to some of it. The problem isn't Mr Hands' intervention nor his role at the Treasury. This isn't a scheme that cuts services - it is changing them in a way that a lot of people don't like / don't want. If TfL were withdrawing the service entirely or cutting its frequency / hours of operation then a jibe might have been justified but even then the funding cuts only kick in from April this year and this scheme is being taken through in the current financial year. It's a daft scheme as I think almost everyone here thinks (based on past comments) and I'd be surprised if TfL proceed with it. If they do then the next Mayor is really going to get it in the neck because the issue won't go away. |
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on May 19, 2016 17:04:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on May 19, 2016 17:13:51 GMT
Ugh, could be tomorrow...could be by the end of September  I at least hope they attend to the 436/452 consultation soon... |
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on May 19, 2016 17:23:51 GMT
Ugh, could be tomorrow...could be by the end of September I at least hope they attend to the 436/452 consultation soon... My suspicions is TfL will release this consultation information in June as they a similar date to release the Abbey Road and Finchley Road document. If it doesn't come by the first two weeks of June then I'd assume that it'd come in September, as I don't think a lot of departments are open through the summer months |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2016 0:50:59 GMT
I used to use the 424 to my secondary school in Fulham from Sands End when it was the C4. It's sad that TfL plan to remove a bus service from here.
I haven't lived there for years now but I remember the roads being tight for even the minibuses they used back then. They've tweaked the routeing since then but in general a bus stopping on these hail and ride sections would almost certainly have to stop away from the kerb and hold up traffic due to parked cars etc.
However I feel sorry for the elderly people who I imagine are still users of the route. It was a handy service.
As for the consultation, I agree with many sentiments here... the riverside development is a stone's throw from Putney Bridge Road, so not sure why a bus is required to serve the grounds. I see no reason to touch the 424 at all when they could simply tweak the 485.
|
|
misty
Conductor
9518 in Battersea with shattered windcsreen and damaged nearside front wing. Showing 344 on the back
Posts: 103
|
Post by misty on Jul 5, 2016 11:47:16 GMT
Hammersmith & Fulham Council announced today that they have saved the 424 bus route, after TFL scrapped its plans to change the 424 BUS. There is no mention with regards to route 485
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 5, 2016 11:55:58 GMT
Hammersmith & Fulham Council announced today that they have saved the 424 bus route, after TFL scrapped its plans to change the 424 BUS. There is no mention with regards to route 485 There is no update on the relevant TfL consultation page yet. I assume TfL have done the sensible thing of diverting the 485 round the new loop at Wandsworth. The other main query is whether there will be changes to frequencies or hours of operation as those were proposed as part of the consultation plans. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 5, 2016 13:27:07 GMT
Hammersmith & Fulham Council announced today that they have saved the 424 bus route, after TFL scrapped its plans to change the 424 BUS. There is no mention with regards to route 485 Good to hear that they got the result they wanted. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2016 13:36:21 GMT
Good news, mainly for the people of Sands End. This was always an odd consultation, substantially changing two bus routes in the main for a development on the back of the Thames, couldn't they just double run the 485?
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 5, 2016 13:58:40 GMT
Good news, mainly for the people of Sands End. This was always an odd consultation, substantially changing two bus routes in the main for a development on the back of the Thames, couldn't they just double run the 485? Well I suspect that is what will happen. However there were a couple of other benefits and we must wait to see if they will be implemented or not - a later service for Putney Heath was one as was a more frequent 485 service. Other than the disastrous mess of the core proposal the other major missing thing for me, and I haven't used either route, was the absence of a Sunday service proposal. I can understand rural bits of Orpington not having Sunday buses but parts of Putney, Fulham and Barnes not even having a shopping hours service on a Sunday? - Bonkers. Perhaps residential parking on Sundays makes it impossible to get buses down some of the local roads? Interesting that Labour run Hammersmith and Fulham have jumped in to claim victory before the Tory MP Greg Hands has had chance to update his website! I checked earlier and no updates there. Obviously a bit of a local battle to see who has "won" the better battle over the 424 bus. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2016 15:08:34 GMT
Well I suspect that is what will happen. However there were a couple of other benefits and we must wait to see if they will be implemented or not - a later service for Putney Heath was one as was a more frequent 485 service. Other than the disastrous mess of the core proposal the other major missing thing for me, and I haven't used either route, was the absence of a Sunday service proposal. I can understand rural bits of Orpington not having Sunday buses but parts of Putney, Fulham and Barnes not even having a shopping hours service on a Sunday? - Bonkers. Perhaps residential parking on Sundays makes it impossible to get buses down some of the local roads? Interesting that Labour run Hammersmith and Fulham have jumped in to claim victory before the Tory MP Greg Hands has had chance to update his website! I checked earlier and no updates there. Obviously a bit of a local battle to see who has "won" the better battle over the 424 bus. The 424 started out as a restructuring of the C4, withdrawn between Craven Cottage and Putney Pier via Fulham Palace Road and extended beyond Sullivan Court in Hurlingham to Putney Heath via Parsons Green and Putney Bridge & High Street. The C4 was generally lightly used back then and although I'm not frequent enough in Fulham to understand how busy the 424 is generally, I've never seen it particularly busy when I have visited. It would be interesting to know if people are put off by the frequencies and use other more frequent nearby routes instead. The roads in Sands End are quite narrow. I can therefore see why TfL haven't looked at a Sunday service. I suspect if they did they would be reluctant to offer anything more than a one hour frequency which even then wouldn't be justified considering other route options, even if it required a change of bus. I don't care about the politics, to me it this consultation just seemed like an attempt by TfL to send another bus to Wandsworth, which baffles me considering the headways the 424 offers. The 485 should definitely have a Sunday service, considering the town centres it serves. It does duplicate often but not on long sections of other routes and therefore provides better and more direct links. It's also a very short route compared to most, so double running in the development should not cause reliability issues. The idea to run it to Putney Heath was daft, there are enough routes going there already from Putney High Street. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 5, 2016 18:02:29 GMT
Well I suspect that is what will happen. However there were a couple of other benefits and we must wait to see if they will be implemented or not - a later service for Putney Heath was one as was a more frequent 485 service. Other than the disastrous mess of the core proposal the other major missing thing for me, and I haven't used either route, was the absence of a Sunday service proposal. I can understand rural bits of Orpington not having Sunday buses but parts of Putney, Fulham and Barnes not even having a shopping hours service on a Sunday? - Bonkers. Perhaps residential parking on Sundays makes it impossible to get buses down some of the local roads? Interesting that Labour run Hammersmith and Fulham have jumped in to claim victory before the Tory MP Greg Hands has had chance to update his website! I checked earlier and no updates there. Obviously a bit of a local battle to see who has "won" the better battle over the 424 bus. The 424 started out as a restructuring of the C4, withdrawn between Craven Cottage and Putney Pier via Fulham Palace Road and extended beyond Sullivan Court in Hurlingham to Putney Heath via Parsons Green and Putney Bridge & High Street. The C4 was generally lightly used back then and although I'm not frequent enough in Fulham to understand how busy the 424 is generally, I've never seen it particularly busy when I have visited. It would be interesting to know if people are put off by the frequencies and use other more frequent nearby routes instead. The roads in Sands End are quite narrow. I can therefore see why TfL haven't looked at a Sunday service. I suspect if they did they would be reluctant to offer anything more than a one hour frequency which even then wouldn't be justified considering other route options, even if it required a change of bus. I don't care about the politics, to me it this consultation just seemed like an attempt by TfL to send another bus to Wandsworth, which baffles me considering the headways the 424 offers. The 485 should definitely have a Sunday service, considering the town centres it serves. It does duplicate often but not on long sections of other routes and therefore provides better and more direct links. It's also a very short route compared to most, so double running in the development should not cause reliability issues. The idea to run it to Putney Heath was daft, there are enough routes going there already from Putney High Street. Shame the 485 won't get a short but useful extension into Wandsworth Town Centre to terminate at Southside like the 28 & 220 do. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 5, 2016 21:46:36 GMT
I could never really work out the purpose of these proposals. If anything wuth the DD conversion of 72 and likely the 33 I'd have thought the Hammersmith section could have easily gone but tfl still planned to keep yet remove the 424 from sad end which was no buses. Maybe would have made more sense to divert the 424 at putney bridge to run to the new Wandsworth development and simply withdrawn the 485 to save money.
|
|
I at least hope they attend to the 436/452 consultation soon...
