|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Nov 14, 2018 21:33:28 GMT
 The increase in the station figures speak for themselves and those West Croydon LO services are always very busy. The Southern services off-peak are quieter than pre May 2010 when they operated 6tph between London Bridge and Sydenham (4tph to Norwood Junction of which 2tph as now call at Penge West and Anerley). The interchange for tube lines at Canada Water, Whitechapel and Highbury & Islington are more of an advantage than the London Bridge terminus. If you want to get to most of what might be called Central London i.e. the West End, Holborn and a lot of the City of London, not forgetting London Bridge itself and the Southbank, the Overground route should be almost irrelevant except in an emergency. I well remember, shortly after the announcement on the extension of the East London Line to Croydon and Crystal Palace, how house prices in Brockley were the fastest rising in London, and probably the whole country, because of the new links, great if you wanted Canary Wharf and Docklands, maybe a small part of the City near Shoreditch too. I don't think it was ever stated implicitly that all London Bridge services would be retained (indeed, it was doubtful the logistics would allow it) but it was certainly inferred. I had friends (non-Londoners) whose daughter was contemplating buying a flat in Brockley, and asked me about the area, as I lived in S.E. London for 40 years, and its transport. I couldn't comment on the former, as it had changed so much since I knew it last, but I was able to give an opinion on the rail situation, knowing that Overground didn't operate anywhere near her work place. I do remember saying, don't necessarily expect so many London Bridge services in the future, especially as some current users will switch to East London Line but also (presciently? ) if ELL gets over-subscribed there'll be no way either extra carriages or extra trains can be provided for a few years at least. The point is that the ELL allows easier connections to tube lines at Canada Water and Whitechapel, it'll also have connections with the Elizabeth line when it eventually opens. It's not just designed for a day trip to Hoxton or Dalston. I regularly use the Overground from Forest Hill which is a much busier station than it was pre 2010 as a Southern only station to London Bridge. Since it opened, I've been able to travel around a lot more faster to places such as Romford, Uxbridge, Stratford and the West End etc without having to change at London Bridge or being charged the premium in Zone 1 for changing between Southern and TfL modes. For those of us who actually have used Southern into London Bridge since the 'improvements' to the station and the unwinding of the lines to allow Thameslink to operate independently, who use the stopper services, the time it takes to get from New Cross Gate to LBG has actually doubled. In any case, those who really use West Croydon to get to London Bridge should consider changing at Norwood Junction where there are fast services to London Bridge, while the rest of the travelling public have switched to LO for cheaper fares and easier connections with other TfL modes. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Nov 14, 2018 18:36:07 GMT
They replaced the 2tph Southern stopper service which used to run on the slow lines between London Bridge and Sutton via Forest Hill. There's still a 2tph off-peak Southern slow service to Coulsdon Town which calls at Penge West and Anerley in addition to those Overground services which run via East Croydon. The 197 runs pretty close to Forest Hill, Sydenham, Penge West, Norwood Junction and East Croydon. I suspect the northern end of the route between Forest Hill and Peckham keeps that route viable at it's current frequency, while the Overground and Tramlink has reduced usage at the other end. When the off-peak fare on LO is the same as the long winded 197, it's a no brainer which mode you'll use. So we lost 2 trains per hour to London Bridge which is where most people want to go and replaced my 4tph on East London line ... not sure I classify that as an improvement really ... especially when they are 5-car which replaced 8-car trains The increase in the station figures speak for themselves and those West Croydon LO services are always very busy. The Southern services off-peak are quieter than pre May 2010 when they operated 6tph between London Bridge and Sydenham (4tph to Norwood Junction of which 2tph as now call at Penge West and Anerley). The interchange for tube lines at Canada Water, Whitechapel and Highbury & Islington are more of an advantage than the London Bridge terminus. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Nov 14, 2018 12:39:28 GMT
The LO must have taken some bus demand away I'd have thought especially with the large amount to train to Norwood Junction and the 4 LO tph to Penge west, Sydenham and Forest Hill. Also since Tramlink actually opened there hasn't been any reductions in conjunction hence why now the 130/466 is being reviewed and maybe a bus reduction to Elmers End (289,194 and 367). Also southern local train fares can be lower then people think so there could have been a switch to trains from Purley and Coulsdon South. LO really just replaced the slow Southern Services from the Croydon area .... So gain at this end was minimal .... whilst sacrificing London Bridge services ... Now if you live Sydenham or north of it you get 8tph on LO .... But only 4tph South of there. They replaced the 2tph Southern stopper service which used to run on the slow lines between London Bridge and Sutton via Forest Hill. There's still a 2tph off-peak Southern slow service to Coulsdon Town which calls at Penge West and Anerley in addition to those Overground services which run via East Croydon. The 197 runs pretty close to Forest Hill, Sydenham, Penge West, Norwood Junction and East Croydon. I suspect the northern end of the route between Forest Hill and Peckham keeps that route viable at it's current frequency, while the Overground and Tramlink has reduced usage at the other end. When the off-peak fare on LO is the same as the long winded 197, it's a no brainer which mode you'll use. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Nov 14, 2018 0:26:04 GMT
But people want to go shopping in their cars .... making town centres inaccessible and hard to park is what is killing them .... you only need to see the queues for retail parks to realise what the public wants. If I go shopping I do not want to lug heavy shopping bags around town, on a bus they maybe packed, and then a further walk at the other end And those that don't go to retail parks generally shop online. The decline in footfall, to use the modern terminology, in Croydon town centre is very noticeable and obviously bus usage has declined as a result although Tramlink is generally busy. If this new all singing and all dancing Westfield development is going ahead it's one hell of a risk in the current climate. And where are the shoppers going instead? On Tramlink to Waddon Marsh or Ampere Way for the out of town stores. It's no surprise how busy the Wimbledon section is because of it. I'd imagine Centrale (which I wouldn't be surprised if renamed Westfield after the works are completed) will see an increase once Westfield opens, currently it's quiet for such a central station. IKEA on Saturday afternoon was busier than North End. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Oct 29, 2018 13:20:58 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Oct 13, 2018 11:53:08 GMT
I'd prefer that the P4 terminates at the stop closer to the tube station, but overall it looks a good idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Oct 1, 2018 11:42:19 GMT
There would still be the 354 between Anerley and Penge. The 197 goes right into Lawrie Park Rd and heads into Sydenham so cant replace the 227. It could by going up CPPR, then double back at the roundabout and down Westwood Hill to Sydenham. Lawrie Park Road would still be served by the 176. This would give a direct bus service to Sydenham for the first time as well as Croydon, South Norwood, Peckham, Forest Hill and Dulwich. Currently they have that one single route to Palace and Bromley/Beckenham. Connections to Bromley would be from Penge or Palace. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Oct 1, 2018 0:02:22 GMT
Re the 358, where do you envisage the cut?Penge, Elmers End, Beckenham? You can’t cut the southern end, as it would leave Farnborough Village with no services at all. The 261 could be (re)extended to Orpington via Farnborough and the 358 reduced to Crystal Palace to Bromley. I'm not advocating that but it's a possibility? What I would suggest is making the 358 a bit more direct by rerouting it between Elmers End and Anerley via Birkbeck. The 194 covers the existing route. Another issue is there would be no direct connection from Anerley to Penge by bus. If there was extra stand space in Penge, I'd extend the 432. An option could be to re-route the 227 via the 358 between Penge and Anerley with the 197 diverted via Crystal Palace Park Road to serve that part of the current 227. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Sept 29, 2018 21:32:48 GMT
To be fair, the Walworth Road area does need quite a load of services running through it. Walworth Road is home to East Street Market, which sees thousands of people per day. Walworth Road also doesn’t see any local train or tube services serving it. Buses are often the only mode of transport along Walworth Road. Probably it may be slightly overbussed, but I do think most services along there are justified. More importantly, if you were to start removing services from a Walworth Road, where would you send them? I’ve seen in the past that you’ve suggested that curtailing routes at Camberwell Green would be the best option, but there simply isn’t the space at Camberwell and surrounding local areas. I suggested curtailing the 468 at Camberwell Green rather than reduce the frequency although I realise stand space might be a problem. The easiest way would probably be to withdraw the 45 as suggested, I can't see much justification for running it just between Elephant & Castle and Clapham Park. I suspect improved train services from Denmark Hill have had an effect, a lot of people getting off buses from the Dulwich direction there in the morning peak. I agree there's certainly been a London Overground/Thameslink effect at Denmark Hill. Even off-peak, there's a fair amount of passengers coming off those buses for the trains, despite going into central London. Certainly since 2010 where I live, there's a lot of passengers travelling between Dulwich Library and Forest Hill for the Overground there as well in the morning peak and from FH in the evening peak. Two of those three routes that go to Forest Hill from Dulwich start from Central London, in essence being feeder services. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Sept 28, 2018 22:29:59 GMT
Interesting consultation 343 to Aldgate? The 343 is dead from Elephant & Castle to Ciry Hall. So use the 343 to compensate the 40? What were they thinking. Agreed! They'd also be three routes crossing the Tower Bridge from somewhat the same areas of South East London. With the 45 to be curtailed back to Elephant, perhaps that could be extended via the 343 and Tower Bridge to Aldgate... allowing the 343 to be rerouted elsewhere to another terminus. The Aylesbury Estate will have TWO routes serving Tower Bridge with the 42 and the 343, although the City Hall terminus already is a short walk to Tower Bridge. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Sept 28, 2018 21:48:16 GMT
The 853 blog let the cat out of the bag already, but these changes will do nothing to attract people to the bus network. Obviously TfL need to make cost savings, which is highlighted in their analysis of each cut, but the irony is that the hopper fare has made these cuts possible and the fare freeze has made the cuts deeper than if TfL were able to increase fares. Thank you Sadiq 👍 What's to say that a Tory Mayor wouldn't have the same issues as Sadiq has? TfL has lost funding from central Government, fares freeze and hopper fare or not, something had to give. The congestion charge no longer works, considering how bad traffic is in Zone 1, passengers by their own choice have switched to rail modes as standing on a cramped tube or train is preferable to sitting in a traffic jam to go a mile down the road for 25-30 minutes. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Sept 28, 2018 20:51:24 GMT
We all knew this was coming, and after sitting on a 9 for an hour between Trafalgar Square and Kensington recently, because of traffic, the mayor needs can pat himself on the back. Because Central London is the slowest I can ever remember. Oh it's really bad. I now have to commute once a week on the 176 to Tottenham Court Road. A 'quick' journey from just past Dulwich Library to TCR during the workday now takes 75 minutes (it's timetabled for 77 minutes from my stop) with huge padding between Trafalgar Square and TCR of 15 minutes to go along the Charing Cross Road. Last week, it took me 95 mins to get to TCR at lunchtime with 25 mins of that stuck on Charing Cross Road. I remember when it'd take 45 mins to get to Trafalgar Square during the daytime and 50 to TCR. The 20mph speed limits have a lot to answer for. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Sept 28, 2018 14:58:02 GMT
Some thoughts: 40 - Cuts bus connections between East Dulwich and London Bridge/City. Hopper fare relives the pain, but a change at Camberwell or Elephant will become the norm. East Dulwich has a direct train service to London Bridge. New connection to Blackfriars for the 'improved' Thameslink service may dull the pain. 53 - Considering this is an important trunk route into central London from Woolwich and Plumstead, this is a bad move. However, passengers can change at Deptford Bridge for the 453. 171 - Makes sense. The route is shadowed by 172 between New Cross and Brockley Rise which will ensure passengers still have connections to Waterloo and Aldwych. Reliability should be improved along the southern end of the route. Peckham loses a direct bus to Waterloo and Aldwych, which will require changing at Camberwell Green or the Elephant. I think the 40 may as well stay as it is and reroute the 343 to Clerkenwell Green?
There really is no need for the 68 and 171 between Holborn and Camberwell off peak but there may well be a case for the 171 still going to Holborn at peak times? Obviously goes against TfL' s standardisation policy.
It'd make more sense for the 40 and 343 to swap. I don't fancy the reliability of the service once the 343 goes over Tower Bridge. However, it could be argued that the good people of the Aylesbury Estate will still have the 136 to relieve the 343 when it inevitably goes tits up. Camberwell to Aldwych should be fine with the 68 and 176 serving the corridor. There's also the 1, 168, 172 and 188 between Elephant and Holborn. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Sept 28, 2018 13:36:29 GMT
Some thoughts:
40 - Cuts bus connections between East Dulwich and London Bridge/City. Hopper fare relives the pain, but a change at Camberwell or Elephant will become the norm. East Dulwich has a direct train service to London Bridge. New connection to Blackfriars for the 'improved' Thameslink service may dull the pain.
53 - Considering this is an important trunk route into central London from Woolwich and Plumstead, this is a bad move. However, passengers can change at Deptford Bridge for the 453.
171 - Makes sense. The route is shadowed by 172 between New Cross and Brockley Rise which will ensure passengers still have connections to Waterloo and Aldwych. Reliability should be improved along the southern end of the route. Peckham loses a direct bus to Waterloo and Aldwych, which will require changing at Camberwell Green or the Elephant.
|
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Sept 22, 2018 19:21:30 GMT
The 1988 changes were pretty significant. This saw the loss of Route 12 south of Dulwich Library, the 176 extended to Penge and the 78 to Forest Hill to replace lost bph by Route 12 and a direct link to central London between Dulwich and Penge.
|
|
The increase in the station figures speak for themselves and those West Croydon LO services are always very busy. The Southern services off-peak are quieter than pre May 2010 when they operated 6tph between London Bridge and Sydenham (4tph to Norwood Junction of which 2tph as now call at Penge West and Anerley). The interchange for tube lines at Canada Water, Whitechapel and Highbury & Islington are more of an advantage than the London Bridge terminus.
