Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2020 13:03:34 GMT
Lillie Road has three routes directed towards Hammersmith, 190, 211 and 295. Adding the 430 on top of the 220 would massively over-bus Fulham Palace Road beyond Lillie Road and would massively reduce capacity towards South Kensington. Right now it is fairly balanced on that side and would be unnecessary when there are other issues to address nearby. Maybe extending the 209/378 would address the balance if there becomes a problem but removing the 430 would be taking from one hand to not provide much to the other. I would suggest that the 'massive over bussing' is on the current 74/430...... meanwhile there is currently no link between Putney High Street and Hammersmith not to mention the additional problems caused by the bridge closure. I disagree with you entirely so let’s just leave it. I think you’re wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 15, 2020 15:34:46 GMT
The 190 already goes along Lillie Road so it wouldn't be addingt a fourth route. Why has Lillie Road got two routes going to Putney not to mention the District Line from West Brompton? Hammersmith is more deserving of two routes to Putney and the 220 doesn't serve the High Street at all. Lillie Road has three routes directed towards Hammersmith, 190, 211 and 295. Adding the 430 on top of the 220 would massively over-bus Fulham Palace Road beyond Lillie Road and would massively reduce capacity towards South Kensington. Right now it is fairly balanced on that side and would be unnecessary when there are other issues to address nearby. Maybe extending the 209/378 would address the balance if there becomes a problem but removing the 430 would be taking from one hand to not provide much to the other. I do think the 220 could do with a hand along Fulham Palace Road though I don't think re-routing the 430 is the answer myself but I'm not local so it doesn't matter what I think  |
|
|
|
Post by george on Aug 15, 2020 15:37:16 GMT
Lillie Road has three routes directed towards Hammersmith, 190, 211 and 295. Adding the 430 on top of the 220 would massively over-bus Fulham Palace Road beyond Lillie Road and would massively reduce capacity towards South Kensington. Right now it is fairly balanced on that side and would be unnecessary when there are other issues to address nearby. Maybe extending the 209/378 would address the balance if there becomes a problem but removing the 430 would be taking from one hand to not provide much to the other. I do think the 220 could do with a hand along Fulham Palace Road though I don't think re-routing the 430 is the answer myself but I'm not local so it doesn't matter what I think Even though you're not a local I think you've got this spot on 😉 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2020 16:38:18 GMT
I think Putney to South Kensington is more than adequate (14-74-414-430)
I personally wouldn’t add the Putney area routes to the problem caused by Hammersmith. The only thing we now likely , is the 533 will become permanent.
Re introduce the 609 non stop ( or limited stop ) Hammersmith to Harrodian School. RATP have capacity at V.
A more interesting facility could be an extension of the 272 from Grove Hotel to Castlenau and a withdrawal of the 209.
|
|
|
|
Post by galwhv69 on Aug 15, 2020 23:09:35 GMT
I would think that extending the 209 or 378 to Hammersmith could work to relieve the 220 and also give the routes a better use  Agree with vjaska that the 430 should be left alone, no need to change it (if anything, it could do with an increase between Roehamtpon & Putney) |
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Aug 15, 2020 23:34:18 GMT
I find it absolutely incredible that major London bridge crossing the Thames has been closed due to safety concerns. What is this country coming to? The UK is the world's sixth largest economy, a top first world country, yet we have a major bridge in the capital city potentially at risk of collapse and its repair is being argued about! How on earth did we ever get into this mess? There was a horrendous bridge collapse in Genoa Italy two years ago, yet already the collapsed section has been repaired. In the UK its well over year since Hammersmith Bridge was closed to traffic and all the politicians are doing is arguing. Shame on all you politicians, local, central, left and right, it is simply not good enough. I say just stop arguing and get it fixed!!!
As for the cracks on Hammersmith Bridge, how on earth were they ever allowed to develop in the first place? In the past it carried double deck buses and has been re-furbished, so how was it allowed to deteriorate into this state? Surely you would have thought proper maintenance would have prevented this? I am sure I read and I have no idea how true it is that the cracks originated because part of the bridge's natural plate movement had seized and so wasn't able to move freely. If this is correct, was it down to maintenance? I am not making accusations, I don't know the validity of this, but to a lay person such as myself I am struggling to understand how such cracks ever originated and I think we are owed a proper explanation.
If the hot weather comes back is the bridge going to collapse into the river? I can see no easy fix to this given the damage, but hopefully the engineers have some tricks up their sleeve which at least will allow river traffic again, if not allow pedestrians / cyclist to cross the bridge.
As for the funding come on politicians, are we seriously saying the country has no money for it? We are spending £50 billion on HS2, yet can't find £200 million to repair Hammersmith Bridge? The cost of repairing the bridge is like a rounding error in terms on the cost of Crossrail. The government talks of 'shovel ready' infrastructure projects, well here there really is one which will help the economy overall. It isn't a case of 'can't do', it's 'won't do', so let's have that changed to 'can do' and 'how can we repair the bridge'. You could always charge a toll fee of £1 per vehicle to pay for the cost if that were really the issue. The bridge should be fully repaired so double deck buses can cross it, it's what people on both sides of the river deserve.
As for a temporary bridge, I am not particularly in favour as resources both engineering and financial should be concentrated on the repairs. My suggestion is a boat service to take pedestrians and cyclists across the river until the bridge can be repaired. Perhaps use one of the Thames Clippers for this that are currently not being used. Another possibility might be to use one of the old Woolwich ferries if they still exist. Sure you might need to do a little work and a boarding pier on each side, but that's a lot less than a temporary bridge.
Sorry for the rant, but enough is enough, get the bridge fixed!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Aug 16, 2020 0:34:20 GMT
I find it absolutely incredible that major London bridge crossing the Thames has been closed due to safety concerns. What is this country coming to? The UK is the world's sixth largest economy, a top first world country, yet we have a major bridge in the capital city potentially at risk of collapse and its repair is being argued about! How on earth did we ever get into this mess? There was a horrendous bridge collapse in Genoa Italy two years ago, yet already the collapsed section has been repaired. In the UK its well over year since Hammersmith Bridge was closed to traffic and all the politicians are doing is arguing. Shame on all you politicians, local, central, left and right, it is simply not good enough. I say just stop arguing and get it fixed!!! As for the cracks on Hammersmith Bridge, how on earth were they ever allowed to develop in the first place? In the past it carried double deck buses and has been re-furbished, so how was it allowed to deteriorate into this state? Surely you would have thought proper maintenance would have prevented this? I am sure I read and I have no idea how true it is that the cracks originated because part of the bridge's natural plate movement had seized and so wasn't able to move freely. If this is correct, was it down to maintenance? I am not making accusations, I don't know the validity of this, but to a lay person such as myself I am struggling to understand how such cracks ever originated and I think we are owed a proper explanation. If the hot weather comes back is the bridge going to collapse into the river? I can see no easy fix to this given the damage, but hopefully the engineers have some tricks up their sleeve which at least will allow river traffic again, if not allow pedestrians / cyclist to cross the bridge. As for the funding come on politicians, are we seriously saying the country has no money for it? We are spending £50 billion on HS2, yet can't find £200 million to repair Hammersmith Bridge? The cost of repairing the bridge is like a rounding error in terms on the cost of Crossrail. The government talks of 'shovel ready' infrastructure projects, well here there really is one which will help the economy overall. It isn't a case of 'can't do', it's 'won't do', so let's have that changed to 'can do' and 'how can we repair the bridge'. You could always charge a toll fee of £1 per vehicle to pay for the cost if that were really the issue. The bridge should be fully repaired so double deck buses can cross it, it's what people on both sides of the river deserve. As for a temporary bridge, I am not particularly in favour as resources both engineering and financial should be concentrated on the repairs. My suggestion is a boat service to take pedestrians and cyclists across the river until the bridge can be repaired. Perhaps use one of the Thames Clippers for this that are currently not being used. Another possibility might be to use one of the old Woolwich ferries if they still exist. Sure you might need to do a little work and a boarding pier on each side, but that's a lot less than a temporary bridge. Sorry for the rant, but enough is enough, get the bridge fixed!!!! As bridge owners, it is totally the responsibility of H&F. They have been lucky in the past that TfL have paid for plasters to plaster over the cracks. If that was a good move not 100% sure. However as an owner of something, you need to budget for repairs and renewals, something H&F seem to have completely overlooked, so extreme negligence on my eyes on their part. |
|
|
|
Post by bn12cny on Aug 16, 2020 0:51:30 GMT
So Hammersmith Bridge is closed to Pedestrians?
This would be my solution:
Renumber 209 as follows:
209A: Mortlake to Mortlake via current route to Castelnau then 419 route back to Mortlake) runs every 30 minutes
209B: Mortlake to Mortlake reverses direction Lonsdale Road - Castelnau - Church Road (every 30 minutes
533 - every 10 minutes but free bus because Barnes is like a island now and welfare/safeguarding issues because a lot of people goes to Hammersmith for weekly shopping etc
419 - Roehampton - Queens Ride - Circumnavigate Putney Common for route 22, Lower Richmond Road, Barnes Pond, Richmond
I remember when growing up in Barnes route 419 being R69 running infrequently last bus around 15:30 this route used to cater for old people on the back streets of Barnes to go shopping in Richmond or Hammersmith
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 16, 2020 2:49:21 GMT
So Hammersmith Bridge is closed to Pedestrians? This would be my solution: Renumber 209 as follows: 209A: Mortlake to Mortlake via current route to Castelnau then 419 route back to Mortlake) runs every 30 minutes 209B: Mortlake to Mortlake reverses direction Lonsdale Road - Castelnau - Church Road (every 30 minutes 533 - every 10 minutes but free bus because Barnes is like a island now and welfare/safeguarding issues because a lot of people goes to Hammersmith for weekly shopping etc 419 - Roehampton - Queens Ride - Circumnavigate Putney Common for route 22, Lower Richmond Road, Barnes Pond, Richmond I remember when growing up in Barnes route 419 being R69 running infrequently last bus around 15:30 this route used to cater for old people on the back streets of Barnes to go shopping in Richmond or Hammersmith Hammersmith Bridge is closed to everything including boats passing underneath as there are fears it could possibly collapse as a result of existing cracks expanding during the recent hot weather. Any solution wouldn't be renumbered using suffixes, one would be 209 and the other another regular number. |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Aug 16, 2020 5:40:47 GMT
I find it absolutely incredible that major London bridge crossing the Thames has been closed due to safety concerns. What is this country coming to? The UK is the world's sixth largest economy, a top first world country, yet we have a major bridge in the capital city potentially at risk of collapse and its repair is being argued about! How on earth did we ever get into this mess? There was a horrendous bridge collapse in Genoa Italy two years ago, yet already the collapsed section has been repaired. In the UK its well over year since Hammersmith Bridge was closed to traffic and all the politicians are doing is arguing. Shame on all you politicians, local, central, left and right, it is simply not good enough. I say just stop arguing and get it fixed!!! As for the cracks on Hammersmith Bridge, how on earth were they ever allowed to develop in the first place? In the past it carried double deck buses and has been re-furbished, so how was it allowed to deteriorate into this state? Surely you would have thought proper maintenance would have prevented this? I am sure I read and I have no idea how true it is that the cracks originated because part of the bridge's natural plate movement had seized and so wasn't able to move freely. If this is correct, was it down to maintenance? I am not making accusations, I don't know the validity of this, but to a lay person such as myself I am struggling to understand how such cracks ever originated and I think we are owed a proper explanation. If the hot weather comes back is the bridge going to collapse into the river? I can see no easy fix to this given the damage, but hopefully the engineers have some tricks up their sleeve which at least will allow river traffic again, if not allow pedestrians / cyclist to cross the bridge. As for the funding come on politicians, are we seriously saying the country has no money for it? We are spending £50 billion on HS2, yet can't find £200 million to repair Hammersmith Bridge? The cost of repairing the bridge is like a rounding error in terms on the cost of Crossrail. The government talks of 'shovel ready' infrastructure projects, well here there really is one which will help the economy overall. It isn't a case of 'can't do', it's 'won't do', so let's have that changed to 'can do' and 'how can we repair the bridge'. You could always charge a toll fee of £1 per vehicle to pay for the cost if that were really the issue. The bridge should be fully repaired so double deck buses can cross it, it's what people on both sides of the river deserve. As for a temporary bridge, I am not particularly in favour as resources both engineering and financial should be concentrated on the repairs. My suggestion is a boat service to take pedestrians and cyclists across the river until the bridge can be repaired. Perhaps use one of the Thames Clippers for this that are currently not being used. Another possibility might be to use one of the old Woolwich ferries if they still exist. Sure you might need to do a little work and a boarding pier on each side, but that's a lot less than a temporary bridge. Sorry for the rant, but enough is enough, get the bridge fixed!!!! As bridge owners, it is totally the responsibility of H&F. They have been lucky in the past that TfL have paid for plasters to plaster over the cracks. If that was a good move not 100% sure. However as an owner of something, you need to budget for repairs and renewals, something H&F seem to have completely overlooked, so extreme negligence on my eyes on their part. It’s quite simple, maintenance should have been greasing and oiling at intervals the chain pins and expansion links. But seems this basic maintenance wasn’t done, so some rusted solid. Guess what a rusted expansion joint can’t expand on a hot day so pushes the masonary and cracks it. It’s the old saying a stitch in time saves nine So now not only do they need to fully replace the rusted joints, but got to sort the cracked masonary, rather more expensive than applying few tins of oil and grease periodically On blessing of shutting to river traffic is will probably force action to quickly remove it and eventually build a replacement as cannot block navigation for ever. The cynic in me wonders if this was cheaper fix rather than trying to keep it as a listed building |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Aug 16, 2020 8:31:01 GMT
As bridge owners, it is totally the responsibility of H&F. They have been lucky in the past that TfL have paid for plasters to plaster over the cracks. If that was a good move not 100% sure. However as an owner of something, you need to budget for repairs and renewals, something H&F seem to have completely overlooked, so extreme negligence on my eyes on their part. It’s quite simple, maintenance should have been greasing and oiling at intervals the chain pins and expansion links. But seems this basic maintenance wasn’t done, so some rusted solid. Guess what a rusted expansion joint can’t expand on a hot day so pushes the masonary and cracks it. It’s the old saying a stitch in time saves nine So now not only do they need to fully replace the rusted joints, but got to sort the cracked masonary, rather more expensive than applying few tins of oil and grease periodically On blessing of shutting to river traffic is will probably force action to quickly remove it and eventually build a replacement as cannot block navigation for ever. The cynic in me wonders if this was cheaper fix rather than trying to keep it as a listed building Trouble is it will probably end up in the courts for years if they ever propose to dismantle it. EDIT ... It seems the ban on river vessels only applied to the northern side, vessels can still pass under the bridge on the southern side. www.richmond.gov.uk/hammersmith_bridge |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Aug 16, 2020 9:48:08 GMT
I would think that extending the 209 or 378 to Hammersmith could work to relieve the 220 and also give the routes a better use Agree with vjaska that the 430 should be left alone, no need to change it (if anything, it could do with an increase between Roehamtpon & Putney) There are three routes along Fulham Palace Road from Putney so if Hammersmith and West Brompton get one route each...... who should get the extra one? I doubt if a fourth route will be added. |
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Aug 18, 2020 13:00:48 GMT
Apparently TfL have sent out an email to local Oyster card users advising that further changes to local bus routes are now proposed/being planned. Any further information?
|
|
|
|
Post by galwhv69 on Aug 18, 2020 14:40:02 GMT
Apparently TfL have sent out an email to local Oyster card users advising that further changes to local bus routes are now proposed/being planned. Any further information? Do you have a copy of the email? Haven't recieved one myself |
|
|
|
Post by george on Aug 19, 2020 14:51:21 GMT
|
|
