|
Post by ibus246 on Jan 26, 2016 16:06:13 GMT
Well, a response has been submitted and as expected it is generic. Although I want them to expand further on the answer to question one regarding the tendering of the route. What is the 'official' way to say that the route has already been tendered and awarded? I want them to justify how they can tender and award before consulting. Does the launch of the route depend on the consultation? If so it seems this system allows for TfL to submit whatever they want; it should be consulted on before being tendered and awarded. www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/changes_to_route_83You clearly asked for the proposed 483 timetable and you got links to the 83 and were told that true info is already public! What a shambles!!!
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jan 29, 2016 10:15:32 GMT
Maybe it's TfL approach to give the public a 'voice' in something that they actually don't have a voice in. Personally, I think the 83 should only be cut to Ealing Broadway and reduced in frequency slightly with the 483 being introduced anyway, also at a reduced frequency as the 83 would still serve Ealing town centre. Perhaps an extension of the 297 to Ealing Hospital might also be useful for linking Wembley to Ealing Hospital, particularly at night. I'm not sure which route is quicker between Golders Green and Ealing, think the 83 is a more direct route. Personally, my only issue with the change is the fact the 112 will continue to struggle on regardless of whether the 83 or 483 will run through Hanger Lane down to Ealing. Personally, I'd extend the 79 down to Ealing Broadway and run the 483 to Harrow via the 487 instead which gives that route a much needed helping hand. Personally, my only issue with the change is the fact the 112 will continue to struggle on regardless of whether the 83 or 483 will run through Hanger Lane down to Ealing. Personally, I'd extend the 79 down to Ealing Broadway and run the 483 to Harrow via the 487 instead which gives that route a much needed helping hand. Also regarding the 487, I would extend the 187 from CMH to Alperton via the 487 to support it between Harlesden and Alperton. I would also run the 187 directly via Acton Lane instead of serving Asda, North Acton Road and Minerva Road/Standard Road to make the route more direct. You might as well just withdraw the 487 if both of your ideas was used.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 29, 2016 11:31:15 GMT
Personally, my only issue with the change is the fact the 112 will continue to struggle on regardless of whether the 83 or 483 will run through Hanger Lane down to Ealing. Personally, I'd extend the 79 down to Ealing Broadway and run the 483 to Harrow via the 487 instead which gives that route a much needed helping hand. Also regarding the 487, I would extend the 187 from CMH to Alperton via the 487 to support it between Harlesden and Alperton. I would also run the 187 directly via Acton Lane instead of serving Asda, North Acton Road and Minerva Road/Standard Road to make the route more direct. You might as well just withdraw the 487 if both of your ideas was used. No because what me and 'rmz19' were trying to achieve was to support the 487 due to the heavy loadings and the fact a decker conversion has been surprisingly ignored. The 487 would continue to run regardless.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jan 29, 2016 11:53:55 GMT
You might as well just withdraw the 487 if both of your ideas was used. No because what me and 'rmz19' were trying to achieve was to support the 487 due to the heavy loadings and the fact a decker conversion has been surprisingly ignored. The 487 would continue to run regardless. I understand that and I think that both of your ideas are great but with the 483 and 187 both high frequency routes won't it over bus the sections shared with the 487.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Jan 29, 2016 12:59:04 GMT
No because what me and 'rmz19' were trying to achieve was to support the 487 due to the heavy loadings and the fact a decker conversion has been surprisingly ignored. The 487 would continue to run regardless. I understand that and I think that both of your ideas are great but with the 483 and 187 both high frequency routes won't it over bus the sections shared with the 487. I don't think extending the 187 to Alperton via the 487 would overbus the overlapping section, it's a fairly short distance from CMH to Alperton so it should be fine. Even if both of our ideas were to be implemented, the 487 would still have its exclusive link between Willesden Junction/Harlesden/CMH and Sudbury/South Harrow. Although I do understand your point regarding the 483, vjaska perhaps rerouting the 483 via the 487 might not be wise because of the large overlap? The 483's proposed route to Harrow seems fine especially as it will cover the unique section of Wembley Hill.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2016 8:36:52 GMT
Hi all, I wonder why 483 has to be taken via the painful process of going via Ealing road from Alperton to Wembley central. If it goes via Bridgewater Road, then takes a turn to wembley central, it does not add to the traffic congestion woes between Alperton-Wembley while serving the same purpose as it did.Currently only 245 goes via Bridgewater road and there is not bus from Alperton to Wembley central via t that road. It will thus serve more purpose than it does now. I have been travelling by buses in this area for more than a decade, thus I believe its a better route.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 3, 2016 10:43:18 GMT
Hi all, I wonder why 483 has to be taken via the painful process of going via Ealing road from Alperton to Wembley central. If it goes via Bridgewater Road, then takes a turn to wembley central, it does not add to the traffic congestion woes between Alperton-Wembley while serving the same purpose as it did.Currently only 245 goes via Bridgewater road and there is not bus from Alperton to Wembley central via t that road. It will thus serve more purpose than it does now. I have been travelling by buses in this area for more than a decade, thus I believe its a better route. TfL are doing a "drop in" session today, 3/2, at Ealing Hospital and at Northwick Park Hosp in a week's time so you could pop along and ask / tell them directly. If I was to guess then the major issue with your proposal is that there would be NO overlap between the 83 and 483. People would not have any "same stop" interchanges and would, instead, face having to navigate a not terribly nice or convenient road junction to walk between stops. I suspect that may not be acceptable for a lot of people. I'd also say, from limited observation as I don't get to Alperton very often, that Ealing Road is the obvious road to use simply because it is busy, has lots of shops and generates a lot of journeys. It makes sense to put the overlap along there because you'll also get a lot of passengers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2016 13:21:09 GMT
Also regarding the 487, I would extend the 187 from CMH to Alperton via the 487 to support it between Harlesden and Alperton. I would also run the 187 directly via Acton Lane instead of serving Asda, North Acton Road and Minerva Road/Standard Road to make the route more direct.Why? Every other route in the area does this, running via Acton Lane to Central Middlesex Hospital. What all the people living on North Acton and in the streets running off it? Have you ever been at Asda observing the 187 loading and the number of people getting off at the North Acton Road stop and the Wesley Avenue stop. People appreciate the service which saves them a long walk from the Waxlow Road stop on Acton Lane, down to the junction with North Acton Road and then a trek down North Actonh Road itself - something you don't need after a long day at work when there is a bus route serving North Acton Road. Running the 187 in the way you suggest would make the Willesden County Court-Central Middlesex Hospital part of the route totally unneccesary with four other routes serving exactly the same route and stops.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Feb 3, 2016 15:59:49 GMT
Also regarding the 487, I would extend the 187 from CMH to Alperton via the 487 to support it between Harlesden and Alperton. I would also run the 187 directly via Acton Lane instead of serving Asda, North Acton Road and Minerva Road/Standard Road to make the route more direct.Why? Every other route in the area does this, running via Acton Lane to Central Middlesex Hospital. What all the people living on North Acton and in the streets running off it? Have you ever been at Asda observing the 187 loading and the number of people getting off at the North Acton Road stop and the Wesley Avenue stop. People appreciate the service which saves them a long walk from the Waxlow Road stop on Acton Lane, down to the junction with North Acton Road and then a trek down North Actonh Road itself - something you don't need after a long day at work when there is a bus route serving North Acton Road. Running the 187 in the way you suggest would make the Willesden County Court-Central Middlesex Hospital part of the route totally unneccesary with four other routes serving exactly the same route and stops. I use the 187 regularly so I'm aware of how the section between CMH and Harlesden is used. While the 187 is used along North Acton Lane and Minerva Road/Standard Road, these sections are lightly used the majority of the time. Plus my suggestion wouldn't make sense if its current route remained and still serves CMH and support the 487 to and from Alperton due to the unnecessary double runs, hence why I suggested this section to be withdrawn. To save any inconvenience, the 228 could run along this section instead. TBF Asda is only served by the e/b 187, it's a very short walk to Park Royal Road for the other bus routes therefore my suggestion would be fine in that respect. If needs must, e/b 187s could still serve Asda without issue if my proposal went ahead, I just suggested this to make the route more direct.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2016 13:26:37 GMT
Thanks Snoggle. I understand the iinterchange bit. But if that's the case then either the 83 can end at Sainsburys and 483 takes a left from glacier way go about sainsburys roundabout and then proceed to Bridgewater road or 483 takes a turn ro Alperton station and a u turn fro Alperton station to proceed towards Bridgewater road. However there is an option to Ealing hospital via 297 from Alperton, why does it need to be via 483 if I may ask. I wish to participate in the tfl open house but all timings are during business hours and unsuitable for me or most commuters....the real stakeholders
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 6, 2016 13:49:13 GMT
Thanks Snoggle. I understand the iinterchange bit. But if that's the case then either the 83 can end at Sainsburys and 483 takes a left from glacier way go about sainsburys roundabout and then proceed to Bridgewater road or 483 takes a turn ro Alperton station and a u turn fro Alperton station to proceed towards Bridgewater road. However there is an option to Ealing hospital via 297 from Alperton, why does it need to be via 483 if I may ask. I wish to participate in the tfl open house but all timings are during business hours and unsuitable for me or most commuters....the real stakeholders I suspect running via Sainsburys would cost extra vehicles for negligible benefit and cause even more congestion than already exists. I've only been through there a couple of times recently. The 224 took 6 or 7 traffic light phases to get out which nearly made me explode with apoplexy. Can you imagine being on a 483 and suffering that? The other factor here must be the location of Alperton garage. I suspect that TfL would terminate the 79 and 245 at the garage if Sainsburys didn't exist - it's just a big bus stand round the corner. I can't answer your questions in any detail because TfL haven't provided detailed loadings over the relevant sections. I can't see the point of removing the 83 or 483 entirely between Alperton and Ealing Hospital. My extremely limited use of the 83 at the western end tells me people use it a lot. People were popping out of nowhere when I used the 83 recently. It wasn't peak time but we picked up and set down all the way along. I doubt the 207 / 427 could cope on their own and the E8 loadings will undoubtedly go bonkers when it extends to Hounslow. I've not used the 297 at all so don't know how that copes or how busy it is. Let's be honest here - Ealing is getting two new substantive links to neighbouring district centres. Yes there is some disruption and change but I suspect the revised trunk services will do very well once they get going. I'm less convinced by the changes to local routes in Hounslow but that's another thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2016 17:39:09 GMT
Now this probably has nothing to do with this but i was on a site today (I believe its called Transport wkia) and it said drivers get one break at Ealing well that's wrong if you include about two 83 buses at Golders Green one usually goes out straight away and the other stays for I don't how long which I guess is the drivers Coffee, Toilet Break.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 29, 2016 20:19:37 GMT
I'm sure H37 was also segment for 37 and 337, as I remember 37 originally went to Hounslow.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Jun 7, 2016 19:07:05 GMT
UpdateFollowing the consultation in Jan / Feb of this year TfL have decided to proceed with the changes to be introduced as of 10 September 2016 (start date of the new contract) A large 77 per cent of respondents supported or partially supported the 483 but only 47% gave full support to the curtailment of the 83 Just when you thought the 226 was not going to be mentioned, it is made to be an alternative to an indirect route when it is no more direct itself Ohhh and look out for the 'Bus Hoppers' first appearance (mention) in TfL documentation.
|
|
|
Post by thewintersoldier on Jun 8, 2016 2:56:39 GMT
Someone suggested the route be extended to Wandsworth......
|
|