|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Dec 21, 2022 21:09:09 GMT
Is there any stand space left at North Middlesex Hospital? I don't think Gloucester Road can take anymore buses with the fact that's it's pretty tight The existing stand the 456 uses on Bridport Road has space to expand to accommodate at least two more buses. I'd imagine that will be used if new or extended services started from there. Don't forget TfL are also exploring re-routing services meaning extended routes may not happen. Will be interesting to see what routes will come out of this |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Dec 21, 2022 21:12:53 GMT
The existing stand the 456 uses on Bridport Road has space to expand to accommodate at least two more buses. I'd imagine that will be used if new or extended services started from there. Don't forget TfL are also exploring re-routing services meaning extended routes may not happen. Will be interesting to see what routes will come out of this If its anything like the Sutton one then I'd expect to see them materialise in the latter half of the century. |
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Dec 21, 2022 21:14:15 GMT
Will be interesting to see what routes will come out of this If its anything like the Sutton one then I'd expect to see them materialise in the latter half of the century. Wouldn't put it past you |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Mar 1, 2023 14:06:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Mar 1, 2023 14:15:52 GMT
Thanks for posting, been keeping an eye out for this |
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Mar 1, 2023 15:56:48 GMT
One thing I wonder is why they just didn't extend the W10 to North Middlesex rather than introducing the 456 |
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Mar 1, 2023 15:57:42 GMT
Will be interesting to see what routes will come out of this If its anything like the Sutton one then I'd expect to see them materialise in the latter half of the century.Really? That's almost 30 years away! |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Mar 1, 2023 18:12:30 GMT
A evaluation was conducted on a possibility of extending the route to Crews Hill station and is not considered at present time on grounds of cost and limited forcasted demand. Quite disappointed on this statement from TfL themselves and shows one of the planning flaws they have imo and is not a way forward if we are to attract people away from cars to alternative modes. |
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Mar 1, 2023 19:37:17 GMT
A evaluation was conducted on a possibility of extending the route to Crews Hill station and is not considered at present time on grounds of cost and limited forcasted demand. Quite disappointed on this statement from TfL themselves and shows one of the planning flaws they have imo and is not a way forward if we are to attract people away from cars to alternative modes. I don’t think the fault solely lies with TfL here. If the local authority (and to a slightly lesser extent, the train operator) have no solid plans on stand facilities for the 456, then it does not really make sense at this stage for TfL to pursue an extension. I’m not to sure that Crews Hill would really become an interchange point for Great Northern users with the addition of a 456 extension. In terms of attracting people away from cars I totally agree but think that orbital express routes are what will do that. In this part of town a bus route between Chingford and Edgware (mainly via the A110) would be good |
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Mar 1, 2023 20:16:21 GMT
A evaluation was conducted on a possibility of extending the route to Crews Hill station and is not considered at present time on grounds of cost and limited forcasted demand. Quite disappointed on this statement from TfL themselves and shows one of the planning flaws they have imo and is not a way forward if we are to attract people away from cars to alternative modes. I don’t think the fault solely lies with TfL here. If the local authority (and to a slightly lesser extent, the train operator) have no solid plans on stand facilities for the 456, then it does not really make sense at this stage for TfL to pursue an extension. I’m not to sure that Crews Hill would really become an interchange point for Great Northern users with the addition of a 456 extension. In terms of attracting people away from cars I totally agree but think that orbital express routes are what will do that. In this part of town a bus route between Chingford and Edgware (mainly via the A110) would be good I agree that I don't see much of a merit to extend the 456 to Crews Hill station, apart from for Crews Hill residents, since most on the train would get out at Enfield Chase and interchange there, Chingford to Edgware may be too much for one bus route, but I could see the merit of a Chingford to Barnet route, perhaps in the form of an 'X307' and possibly a 377 extension to Cockfosters station to provide Cockfosters with a direct link to Enfield Town. I think the 384 needs reviewing with the former 384 being resurrected, and perhaps curtailing the current 384 to New Barnet in addition (as the old 384 would mostly replace the withdrawn section) The 383 should also be extended further north at least to Hadley Green (preferably Potters Bar) now that the 84 has gone More Cross Lea Valley links would be helpful in the Enfield area, like extending the W6 to Chingford Mount, via Fore Street, North Circular Road and 444 from there to Chingford Mount |
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Mar 1, 2023 20:24:45 GMT
A evaluation was conducted on a possibility of extending the route to Crews Hill station and is not considered at present time on grounds of cost and limited forcasted demand. Quite disappointed on this statement from TfL themselves and shows one of the planning flaws they have imo and is not a way forward if we are to attract people away from cars to alternative modes. I don’t think the fault solely lies with TfL here. If the local authority (and to a slightly lesser extent, the train operator) have no solid plans on stand facilities for the 456, then it does not really make sense at this stage for TfL to pursue an extension. I’m not to sure that Crews Hill would really become an interchange point for Great Northern users with the addition of a 456 extension. In terms of attracting people away from cars I totally agree but think that orbital express routes are what will do that. In this part of town a bus route between Chingford and Edgware (mainly via the A110) would be good It should go to Cuffley via Crews Hill like it used to, but we already know TfL thinks there are sharks that devour red buses as soon as they cross the London boundary. The other option is via Crews Hill to Chase Farm Hospital, Hadley Wood, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Mar 1, 2023 20:30:11 GMT
I don’t think the fault solely lies with TfL here. If the local authority (and to a slightly lesser extent, the train operator) have no solid plans on stand facilities for the 456, then it does not really make sense at this stage for TfL to pursue an extension. I’m not to sure that Crews Hill would really become an interchange point for Great Northern users with the addition of a 456 extension. In terms of attracting people away from cars I totally agree but think that orbital express routes are what will do that. In this part of town a bus route between Chingford and Edgware (mainly via the A110) would be good It should go to Cuffley via Crews Hill like it used to, but we already know TfL thinks there are sharks that devour red buses as soon as they cross the London boundary. The other option is via Crews Hill to Chase Farm Hospital, Hadley Wood, etc. There's very little in terms of housing on Ferny Road/Hadley Road, so I can't see Tfl implementing a route there (to connect Hadley Wood to Chase Farm Hospital), besides Hadley Wood has the 399 (I know the frequency is poor) to Barnet, and from there connecting buses to Barnet Hospital, although I think it deserves a proper half hourly bus route linking it to Barnet Hospital. |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Mar 1, 2023 20:34:27 GMT
A evaluation was conducted on a possibility of extending the route to Crews Hill station and is not considered at present time on grounds of cost and limited forcasted demand. Quite disappointed on this statement from TfL themselves and shows one of the planning flaws they have imo and is not a way forward if we are to attract people away from cars to alternative modes. I don’t think the fault solely lies with TfL here. If the local authority (and to a slightly lesser extent, the train operator) have no solid plans on stand facilities for the 456, then it does not really make sense at this stage for TfL to pursue an extension. I’m not to sure that Crews Hill would really become an interchange point for Great Northern users with the addition of a 456 extension. In terms of attracting people away from cars I totally agree but think that orbital express routes are what will do that. In this part of town a bus route between Chingford and Edgware (mainly via the A110) would be good TfL is a transport authority for London and should be the organisation responsible for provisioning services. Whilst Network rail are the ones that own the land at Crews Hill station, it's not really competent or strategic to leave the local council and other organisations to manage the situation. |
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Mar 1, 2023 20:56:44 GMT
I don’t think the fault solely lies with TfL here. If the local authority (and to a slightly lesser extent, the train operator) have no solid plans on stand facilities for the 456, then it does not really make sense at this stage for TfL to pursue an extension. I’m not to sure that Crews Hill would really become an interchange point for Great Northern users with the addition of a 456 extension. In terms of attracting people away from cars I totally agree but think that orbital express routes are what will do that. In this part of town a bus route between Chingford and Edgware (mainly via the A110) would be good I agree that I don't see much of a merit to extend the 456 to Crews Hill station, apart from for Crews Hill residents, since most on the train would get out at Enfield Chase and interchange there, Chingford to Edgware may be too much for one bus route, but I could see the merit of a Chingford to Barnet route, perhaps in the form of an 'X307' and possibly a 377 extension to Cockfosters station to provide Cockfosters with a direct link to Enfield Town. I think the 384 needs reviewing with the former 384 being resurrected, and perhaps curtailing the current 384 to New Barnet in addition (as the old 384 would mostly replace the withdrawn section) The 383 should also be extended further north at least to Hadley Green (preferably Potters Bar) now that the 84 has gone More Cross Lea Valley links would be helpful in the Enfield area, like extending the W6 to Chingford Mount, via Fore Street, North Circular Road and 444 from there to Chingford Mount (Without me going to off topic) With enough bus priority along the route, I feel Chingford to Edgware could be done by one route. It is approx 28km route via A110, which is still less operational km than the X26 for comparison. Maybe it is a bit fanatical, I don’t know, but when a route like the X26 exists, it does make you think a lot can be possible. Nonetheless judging by the demand on the 384, something should done there to unlock more longer journeys across outer North London. A 377 extension to Cockfosters is worth more investigation imo than the 456 extension. |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Mar 1, 2023 21:03:12 GMT
I don’t think the fault solely lies with TfL here. If the local authority (and to a slightly lesser extent, the train operator) have no solid plans on stand facilities for the 456, then it does not really make sense at this stage for TfL to pursue an extension. I’m not to sure that Crews Hill would really become an interchange point for Great Northern users with the addition of a 456 extension. In terms of attracting people away from cars I totally agree but think that orbital express routes are what will do that. In this part of town a bus route between Chingford and Edgware (mainly via the A110) would be good I agree that I don't see much of a merit to extend the 456 to Crews Hill station, apart from for Crews Hill residents, since most on the train would get out at Enfield Chase and interchange there, Chingford to Edgware may be too much for one bus route, but I could see the merit of a Chingford to Barnet route, perhaps in the form of an 'X307' and possibly a 377 extension to Cockfosters station to provide Cockfosters with a direct link to Enfield Town. I think the 384 needs reviewing with the former 384 being resurrected, and perhaps curtailing the current 384 to New Barnet in addition (as the old 384 would mostly replace the withdrawn section) The 383 should also be extended further north at least to Hadley Green (preferably Potters Bar) now that the 84 has gone More Cross Lea Valley links would be helpful in the Enfield area, like extending the W6 to Chingford Mount, via Fore Street, North Circular Road and 444 from there to Chingford MountIf your view that not providing a basic comprehensive network of linking to users needs are not worth it, then I think we should look at why London's bus network isn't living to it's potential. This is an organisation that justify half-hourly services are adequate and wonder why bus usage is declining. "No demand" are common words used. Demand comes when you establish a service and a link. I have said this before, the current planning policy used is not effective and really misses the essentials for user benefits. |
|
