|
Post by JUNIOR26 on Mar 6, 2023 11:42:14 GMT
It says that, these changes would be introduced in the 2023/2024 financial year, so these changes could happen from 30th September 2023, when the 346 contract commences. Honestly, TFL shouldn't have awarded the 346 contract in the first place if they were planning to withdraw the route. I thought as much when I suggested this last night. I assume the extra buses needed will be the buses that were going to be used on the 346. Yeah, there's enough of the 339s E200s around.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Mar 6, 2023 12:02:47 GMT
It says that, these changes would be introduced in the 2023/2024 financial year, so these changes could happen from 30th September 2023, when the 346 contract commences. Honestly, TFL shouldn't have awarded the 346 contract in the first place if they were planning to withdraw the route. Overall it is not a big thing really as the 346 will soon be going to Stagecoach. The new route whenever it begins and depending on the frequency the PVR will probably be roughly the same as both routes together I can imagine. Smart move awarding it to Stagecoach with existing buses without the need to purchase anymore vehicles. To go back to the beginning. The proposal could have just been to extend the 346 in the first place and the 497 would not exist.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Mar 6, 2023 12:08:59 GMT
Looking at the map on the consultation the removal of these routes forces people to use the 248 & 370.
Is there any unique sections on the 347?
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Mar 6, 2023 12:27:30 GMT
Looking at the map on the consultation the removal of these routes forces people to use the 248 & 370. Is there any unique sections on the 347? Yes, between Harold Wood Neighbourhood Centre & Hall Lane/Avon Road junction that is being replaced by the 497 and between St Marys Lane/Front Lane & Clay Tye Road/Ockendon Road which is going to be largely unserved with the exception to the bits that is served by NIBSbuses operated 269.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Mar 6, 2023 12:29:24 GMT
I can't see how anyone loses out. A few people lose the direct link to Romford provided by the very infrequent 347 and that's about it.
Even better if the extended 497 gets the Sunday service that is being considered.
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Mar 6, 2023 12:30:05 GMT
I can't see how anyone loses out. A few people lose the direct link to Romford provided by the very infrequent 347 and that's about it. Even better if the extended 497 gets the Sunday service that is being considered. The 346 users have their bus to the town from the estate halved in frequency for a start
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 6, 2023 12:42:49 GMT
I can't see how anyone loses out. A few people lose the direct link to Romford provided by the very infrequent 347 and that's about it. Even better if the extended 497 gets the Sunday service that is being considered. The 346 users have their bus to the town from the estate halved in frequency for a start For me, the 346 changes are the worst bit of it - frequency decrease and and seemingly a non understanding of what it was designed for. I see more positives, despite the Ockendon link going, in merging the 347 into the 497
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Mar 6, 2023 12:44:37 GMT
It's worrying that TfL's preferred routing for the 497 is to serve Upminster Park Estate first before Upminster station. That doesn't really scream "direct north-south route" and all it would do is create a passenger exodus to the 248 once the 497 turns off Hall Lane.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Mar 6, 2023 13:16:40 GMT
I can't see how anyone loses out. A few people lose the direct link to Romford provided by the very infrequent 347 and that's about it. Even better if the extended 497 gets the Sunday service that is being considered. The 346 users have their bus to the town from the estate halved in frequency for a start Ah, I didn't spot that. That's disappointing, I would have expected the extended 497 to have a 20-minute daytime frequency.
|
|
|
Post by lundnah on Mar 6, 2023 14:48:56 GMT
It's worrying that TfL's preferred routing for the 497 is to serve Upminster Park Estate first before Upminster station. That doesn't really scream "direct north-south route" and all it would do is create a passenger exodus to the 248 once the 497 turns off Hall Lane. They have an alternative faster option in the consultation, but with a big BUT.
An alternative routeing whereby the 497 continues on Hall Lane and serves Upminster station first, before then going to Upminster Park Estate and terminating at Waycross Road. This option would mean travelling from the north to Upminster would be more direct. However, it would also mean highway changes at Waycross Road to make space for both the 497 and the 248, and the installation of driver toilets. Highway changes would be subject to agreement and would require permission from the London Borough of Havering.
|
|
|
Post by joefrombow on Mar 6, 2023 15:12:06 GMT
I can't see how anyone loses out. A few people lose the direct link to Romford provided by the very infrequent 347 and that's about it. Even better if the extended 497 gets the Sunday service that is being considered. The 346 users have their bus to the town from the estate halved in frequency for a start Not really they can just use the more frequent 248 to get to Upminster and Romford , i think the main purpose of the 346 is to serve Front Lane and St Mary's Lane . It would be better to have a direct link from Harold Wood to Upminster then via the current 346 but let's be real the NIMBYS are not going to want a bus stand and a TARDIS outside their houses and tfl know this hence the "this would require toilets to be built" As for the 347 quite a lot of section will be left unserved after Front Lane but I'm guessing the route is hardly used due to the infrequent nature of it I believe it was formed to replace the old Capital Citybus commercial 348 ? It probably has just a few freedom pass users going in to Romford there is a review here which was done quite a while back but I'm guessing the logic is the London Sections will largely be replaced londonist.com/london/transport/bus-247-route-ockendon-romford
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Mar 6, 2023 17:28:33 GMT
The 346 users have their bus to the town from the estate halved in frequency for a start Not really they can just use the more frequent 248 to get to Upminster and Romford , i think the main purpose of the 346 is to serve Front Lane and St Mary's Lane . It would be better to have a direct link from Harold Wood to Upminster then via the current 346 but let's be real the NIMBYS are not going to want a bus stand and a TARDIS outside their houses and tfl know this hence the "this would require toilets to be built" As for the 347 quite a lot of section will be left unserved after Front Lane but I'm guessing the route is hardly used due to the infrequent nature of it I believe it was formed to replace the old Capital Citybus commercial 348 ? It probably has just a few freedom pass users going in to Romford there is a review here which was done quite a while back but I'm guessing the logic is the London Sections will largely be replaced londonist.com/london/transport/bus-247-route-ockendon-romfordSome houses within Greater London will end up more than 400 metres from an alternative bus stop/route if the 347 is withdrawn. The main losers will be residents towards the north-east corner of the "Cathedrals" estate in Upminster (the roads are names after cathedral cities). Beyond this point the route runs through Green Belt land and the stops serve mostly small clusters of cottages. The East View Kennels and Clay Tye Farm stops on Clay Tye Road are also served by a non-TfL service 269 although this does not offer links to Upminster and Romford. Franks Cottages on St Mary's Lane will not have an alternative service. I know this approach is not favoured by TfL, but could an occasional 370 be renumbered 371 and diverted this way?
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 6, 2023 18:48:25 GMT
Not really they can just use the more frequent 248 to get to Upminster and Romford , i think the main purpose of the 346 is to serve Front Lane and St Mary's Lane . It would be better to have a direct link from Harold Wood to Upminster then via the current 346 but let's be real the NIMBYS are not going to want a bus stand and a TARDIS outside their houses and tfl know this hence the "this would require toilets to be built" As for the 347 quite a lot of section will be left unserved after Front Lane but I'm guessing the route is hardly used due to the infrequent nature of it I believe it was formed to replace the old Capital Citybus commercial 348 ? It probably has just a few freedom pass users going in to Romford there is a review here which was done quite a while back but I'm guessing the logic is the London Sections will largely be replaced londonist.com/london/transport/bus-247-route-ockendon-romfordSome houses within Greater London will end up more than 400 metres from an alternative bus stop/route if the 347 is withdrawn. The main losers will be residents towards the north-east corner of the "Cathedrals" estate in Upminster (the roads are names after cathedral cities). Beyond this point the route runs through Green Belt land and the stops serve mostly small clusters of cottages. The East View Kennels and Clay Tye Farm stops on Clay Tye Road are also served by a non-TfL service 269 although this does not offer links to Upminster and Romford. Franks Cottages on St Mary's Lane will not have an alternative service. I know this approach is not favoured by TfL, but could an occasional 370 be renumbered 371 and diverted this way? Or simply leave the 346 as it is and extend the 497 directly to Upminster, Cranham Lane where the low bridge is (not serving Upminster Eatate) with one an hour continuing to Ockendon.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 6, 2023 19:01:25 GMT
Some houses within Greater London will end up more than 400 metres from an alternative bus stop/route if the 347 is withdrawn. The main losers will be residents towards the north-east corner of the "Cathedrals" estate in Upminster (the roads are names after cathedral cities). Beyond this point the route runs through Green Belt land and the stops serve mostly small clusters of cottages. The East View Kennels and Clay Tye Farm stops on Clay Tye Road are also served by a non-TfL service 269 although this does not offer links to Upminster and Romford. Franks Cottages on St Mary's Lane will not have an alternative service. I know this approach is not favoured by TfL, but could an occasional 370 be renumbered 371 and diverted this way? Or simply leave the 346 as it is and extend the 497 directly to Upminster, Cranham Lane where the low bridge is (not serving Upminster Eatate) with one an hour continuing to Ockendon. I think whilst Khan wants the glory of extra services (it's already in today's Standards about how much these will help with the ULEZ) in reality he needs the running costs from the 346 and 347 to fund the 497.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 6, 2023 19:06:20 GMT
Or simply leave the 346 as it is and extend the 497 directly to Upminster, Cranham Lane where the low bridge is (not serving Upminster Eatate) with one an hour continuing to Ockendon. I think whilst Khan wants the glory of extra services (it's already in today's Standards about how much these will help with the ULEZ) in reality he needs the running costs from the 346 and 347 to fund the 497. I don’t disagree that view given how little these consultations seems to relate to the ULEZ changes but money was meant to be coming from savings and unnecessary cuts made areas in & around me. I can’t see axing the 346 as well saving a lot of money in the long run
|
|