|
Post by routew15 on Jun 14, 2016 12:02:10 GMT
THis is not a drill! Repeat this is not a drill! TfL has launched a consultation today to make changes to route w11 in the Walthamstow area w11 consultation page -source: TfL consultation page Changes could come in in March alongside the new contract I will make my verdict later today Consultation closes Monday 15 August 2016
|
|
|
Post by T.R. on Jun 14, 2016 12:44:09 GMT
Finally! (although I'd have preferred W15 instead) *awaits response from Mr Snoggle*
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 14, 2016 12:45:05 GMT
Grump grump grump - wrong proposal, wrong proposal, wrong proposal. The only sensible aspect is the improved Sunday evening service. The junction at Blackhorse Road is due to be rebuilt as is Forest Road for cycle lanes. The reliability of the W11 has collapsed of late because of problems on Palmerston Road and Selborne Road. I've now had to stop using it to the supermarket as 20-30 minute waits at South Countess Rd are unacceptable. The bus drivers are fed up with it. This will make things far, far worse - it took 5 minutes for the 123 I was on to get through the lights at Blackhorse Rd yesterday. There were only 8 vehicles in the queue! The revised stop arrangements at Blackhorse Road (for the 158 / 230) now cause blocking back across the junction because cars cannot get past. Putting the W11 through there will worsen the jams. As the aim of the junction redesign is to add cycle priority moves the phasing for vehicles will inevitable reduce. Obviously I am biased as I want the W11 to run via the Bell Corner. I don't begrudge people the link that the W15 temporarily provided *but* the W11 is already packed solid in the peaks. Journey times via Blackhorse Rd and St James St will be much longer for people wanting the Central and the link to the High St will be lost. Unless TfL add at least 2, possibly 3, extra buses the reliability of the W11 will collapse. It already cannot cope with schools traffic - the headways collapse every morning and afternoon. Sorry TfL but you need to do something more comprehensive than this, including a new route and extending the 397, to meet all the needs of people in the area.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Jun 14, 2016 17:33:11 GMT
Unfortunately, I think these proposals could easily go through (should there be no further political/ activist intervention) unless many existing W11 passengers make opposition which foresee, I'd like to see TfLs response to issues raised on extended journey times. Already looking forward to trying to spot Snoggle's comments in the consultation document. I'm not the biggest fan of these proposals as I think it is a lazy attempt at fixing a big problem in the borough. The stagnation of the W15 will only continue if there is no development or changes made to the route, this scheme should of offered more for the W15 as well. One thing that is even more irrating is the fact that TfL could could not of come up with this consultation before the bridge on Palmerston Road reopened ..?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 14, 2016 19:01:14 GMT
Unfortunately, I think these proposals could easily go through (should there be no further political/ activist intervention) unless many existing W11 passengers make opposition which foresee, I'd like to see TfLs response to issues raised on extended journey times. Already looking forward to trying to spot Snoggle's comments in the consultation document. I'm not the biggest fan of these proposals as I think it is a lazy attempt at fixing a big problem in the borough. The stagnation of the W15 will only continue if there is no development or changes made to the route, this scheme should of offered more for the W15 as well. One thing that is even more irrating is the fact that TfL could could not of come up with this consultation before the bridge on Palmerston Road reopened ..?
We only change routes when they come up for retender / we review the routes in an area prior to retendering. Your point about longer journey times for a lot of people raises a key issue. All this does is create peak time overloading and mean longer journeys for anyone travelling from the Central to Priory Court and beyond. Noteworthy that there is no business case information with this consultation - probably because the disbenefits are far too large. I suspect this may require wider "involvement" in order to get the issues properly addressed.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Jun 15, 2016 19:21:03 GMT
There's an expletives filter on here so I'll keep it simple. The previous W11 diversion via Bell corner proved popular; that doesn't mean sending it via Blackhorse Road will get the same reaction. Apples & oranges.
The 158 either needs a frequency boost for the impending housing build or a new route altogether. The W15 if left alone on Palmerston Road, would most likely see an extra 1 or 2 buses anyway if demand on that section proves too much for the W15 to handle.
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Jun 16, 2016 10:38:09 GMT
What developments are they talking about on Blackhorse ROad? Do they mean the South Grove or the Billet Road ones? I dont any due on Blackhorse Road.
Anyway, when I read a W11 consultation, I thought it could be
A) We plan to put some fixed stops on the Hail and Ride Section. (I will mention this on the consultation response, Please support by adding this) B) We are putting the W11 back to serve bus stop E as Walthamstow Central Bus station.(Dont know how my opinion changes on this)
Instead, we have some sort of solution to help out the 158 (which probably is the bulk of complaints they refer to).
The W11 is probably the common sense choice looking at resources and reliability, but I dont think a change was needed, I think many would be disadvantaged than gain from this proposal. Whereas sort out A and B above, everyone is a winner.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 16, 2016 14:46:49 GMT
What developments are they talking about on Blackhorse ROad? Do they mean the South Grove or the Billet Road ones? I dont any due on Blackhorse Road. Anyway, when I read a W11 consultation, I thought it could be A) We plan to put some fixed stops on the Hail and Ride Section. (I will mention this on the consultation response, Please support by adding this) B) We are putting the W11 back to serve bus stop E as Walthamstow Central Bus station.(Dont know how my opinion changes on this) Instead, we have some sort of solution to help out the 158 (which probably is the bulk of complaints they refer to). The W11 is probably the common sense choice looking at resources and reliability, but I dont think a change was needed, I think many would be disadvantaged than gain from this proposal. Whereas sort out A and B above, everyone is a winner. We have the Stadium development, then the one beside Walthamstow Academy on Billet Road and then they are steadily demolishing the Ferry Lane industrial estate plus old factories on Blackhorse Lane - all for new housing. There is also the South Grove / Old Brewery site which will come on stream in a few years. It's really only the first two that generate any commuter traffic to / from the Tube or Overground. It is now fashionable to say every transport change is supporting "housing and growth" even when it's a load of b*ll*cks. The W15 was popular via Blackhorse Road because it provided a shed load of new links on a direct bus and relieved the dire performance of the 158 / 230. Higham Hill Road has vastly more demand than the W11 has via Priory Court. It's little wonder that a new link from Higham Hill to Blackhorse Road / St James St was popular. I am sceptical that the same demand exists on the W11 purely because so few change off a W11 to a 123 to reach Blackhorse Rd. There were always more people changing from the W15 by the Fire Station - used to see it regularly. Therefore this proposal fixes nothing and most likely wrecks the service on the W11 for a decent proportion of people (lots of people use it for shopping). I had to wait 20+ mins for one this afternoon despite it setting it off from the bus station just after 1400.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Jun 17, 2016 12:37:10 GMT
There's an expletives filter on here so I'll keep it simple. The previous W11 diversion via Bell corner proved popular; that doesn't mean sending it via Blackhorse Road will get the same reaction. Apples & oranges. The 158 either needs a frequency boost for the impending housing build or a new route altogether. The W15 if left alone on Palmerston Road, would most likely see an extra 1 or 2 buses anyway if demand on that section proves too much for the W15 to handle.Highly doubt that. It's clear that TfL do not want to add any more buses to increase the frequency they're trying reduce cost and this would counter that.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Jun 18, 2016 8:25:06 GMT
What developments are they talking about on Blackhorse ROad? Do they mean the South Grove or the Billet Road ones? I dont any due on Blackhorse Road. Anyway, when I read a W11 consultation, I thought it could be A) We plan to put some fixed stops on the Hail and Ride Section. (I will mention this on the consultation response, Please support by adding this) B) We are putting the W11 back to serve bus stop E as Walthamstow Central Bus station.(Dont know how my opinion changes on this) Instead, we have some sort of solution to help out the 158 (which probably is the bulk of complaints they refer to). The W11 is probably the common sense choice looking at resources and reliability, but I dont think a change was needed, I think many would be disadvantaged than gain from this proposal. Whereas sort out A and B above, everyone is a winner. We have the Stadium development, then the one beside Walthamstow Academy on Billet Road and then they are steadily demolishing the Ferry Lane industrial estate plus old factories on Blackhorse Lane - all for new housing. There is also the South Grove / Old Brewery site which will come on stream in a few years. It's really only the first two that generate any commuter traffic to / from the Tube or Overground. It is now fashionable to say every transport change is supporting "housing and growth" even when it's a load of b*ll*cks. The W15 was popular via Blackhorse Road because it provided a shed load of new links on a direct bus and relieved the dire performance of the 158 / 230. Higham Hill Road has vastly more demand than the W11 has via Priory Court. It's little wonder that a new link from Higham Hill to Blackhorse Road / St James St was popular. I am sceptical that the same demand exists on the W11 purely because so few change off a W11 to a 123 to reach Blackhorse Rd. There were always more people changing from the W15 by the Fire Station - used to see it regularly. Therefore this proposal fixes nothing and most likely wrecks the service on the W11 for a decent proportion of people (lots of people use it for shopping). I had to wait 20+ mins for one this afternoon despite it setting it off from the bus station just after 1400. Couldn't agree more. The W15 was well suited to the Blackhorse Road section. The only reason I can see for the W15 not being suggested to serve the routing is because it couldn't run well with no Mini Holland in place and certainly wouldn't be able to run well with mini Holland in place. Waltham Forest does not have particularly long buses routes most routes that start in the borough and end again inside of it or not to far from the boundary. LBWF and TfL need to knock there heads together and look at the problem they have — relatively short routes running unreliably and disgruntled passengers who want a better service. I don't think there is a strong enough pull from Mini Holland to attract bus passengers that commute, leisure or shop. Nonetheless they spent all this money on encouraging cycling reversing it would be even more of a waste, but ensuring that shared bus and cycle schemes are introduced is something that is encouraging. There needs to be priority roads (or sections of roads) for buses and cycles only, first few that springs to mind is Selbourne Road, Leyton Green Road, Fulbourne Road, Church Road (Leyton) and The Green (Chingford) these roads would be the start to helping some routes run reliablely. One thing that I really hope comes up in this consultation is mentionings of bring back the 558
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 22, 2016 20:01:15 GMT
Spoke to one of the regular drivers on the W11 today. He asked if I'd seen the consultation - I said yes. Quite clear he thought the proposal was a stupid idea and feels the W11 should run via the Bell Corner as he said lots of people had asked for that. I agreed but said I was obviously "biased" given where I live. He has apparently given TfL the benefit of this opinion already! Must admit it hadn't crossed my mind that drivers on a route might comment on a consultation about the route they drive. As a side comment he said the route was getting a new schedule from 2 July 2016 with, apparently, a 8th bus added on Saturdays. That's at odds with the TfL Digital blog which suggests the headway is being widened. Presently the round trip time is 70 mins M-S but with a x11 headway it clearly goes to 77 mins. If a 8th bus is added (at x10 freq) then it goes to 80 mins meaning a 14% increase in RTT mostly down to diabolical traffic conditions in the Town Centre.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 2, 2016 17:01:24 GMT
As a side comment he said the route was getting a new schedule from 2 July 2016 with, apparently, a 8th bus added on Saturdays. That's at odds with the TfL Digital blog which suggests the headway is being widened. Presently the round trip time is 70 mins M-S but with a x11 headway it clearly goes to 77 mins. If a 8th bus is added (at x10 freq) then it goes to 80 mins meaning a 14% increase in RTT mostly down to diabolical traffic conditions in the Town Centre. Well it seems an extra bus has been added to the W11's PVR plus a widened headway meaning the round trip time has gone up by 18 mins (previously 7 buses x10 mins, now 8 buses x11 mins). That's a 26% increase in RTT.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 15, 2016 11:32:48 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2016 21:48:16 GMT
There's an expletives filter on here so I'll keep it simple. The previous W11 diversion via Bell corner proved popular; that doesn't mean sending it via Blackhorse Road will get the same reaction. Apples & oranges. The 158 either needs a frequency boost for the impending housing build or a new route altogether. The W15 if left alone on Palmerston Road, would most likely see an extra 1 or 2 buses anyway if demand on that section proves too much for the W15 to handle. [bring As already mentioned the W11 is a busy route when it was diverted via hoe street and in its present form. The two key issues I see is the development of Higham Hill and the reduction of bus routes serving Palmerston road. What frustrates me is that they could have used other routes that are short or have spare capacity. For example the W12 has a 20 minute frequency and it runs on a tight schedule as I have seen it arrive and depart straight from Wanstead on many occasions. This route could have been extended to crooked billet or Higham hill to support the W15 to and from Whipps cross and even raise the frequency to every 15 mins. Another idea would be to use the 20 to go to crooked billet via hoe street, forest road and blackhorse lane or re-route the 215 or 357. TFL could have looked at the possibility of using the W19 because it supports the main core of the W15. There is capacity and other options and I feel that the W11 is not the right route to change at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Sept 23, 2016 22:09:53 GMT
There's an expletives filter on here so I'll keep it simple. The previous W11 diversion via Bell corner proved popular; that doesn't mean sending it via Blackhorse Road will get the same reaction. Apples & oranges. The 158 either needs a frequency boost for the impending housing build or a new route altogether. The W15 if left alone on Palmerston Road, would most likely see an extra 1 or 2 buses anyway if demand on that section proves too much for the W15 to handle. [bring As already mentioned the W11 is a busy route when it was diverted via hoe street and in its present form. The two key issues I see is the development of Higham Hill and the reduction of bus routes serving Palmerston road. What frustrates me is that they could have used other routes that are short or have spare capacity. For example the W12 has a 20 minute frequency and it runs on a tight schedule as I have seen it arrive and depart straight from Wanstead on many occasions. This route could have been extended to crooked billet or Higham hill to support the W15 to and from Whipps cross and even raise the frequency to every 15 mins. Another idea would be to use the 20 to go to crooked billet via hoe street, forest road and blackhorse lane or re-route the 215 or 357. TFL could have looked at the possibility of using the W19 because it supports the main core of the W15. There is capacity and other options and I feel that the W11 is not the right route to change at the moment. I see what you mean but I think the W12 is best left as it is. To put it on the routing via Blackhorse Road would cause capacity issues as the buses the W12 uses are not high capacity at all. during the peaks they can barely manage with the existing demand of the route. The 20 mins frequency seems to suffice during most operating hours of theW12. Chingford Road routes are good as they are demand will definately pick up there with the new "Feel Good Centre" and Walthamstow Stadium development that's without mentioning existing popular route demands. (Trying not to play the same broken record) the best option without introducing a new route altogether looks to be the 397 extension.
|
|