TFL consultation about Elephant and Castle

[BrandNewGuy]

TFL are looking for comments on their proposals for the Elephant. As it potentially affects a lot of ED commuters, I thought it relevant. The consultation closes April 30th. Here's the link:

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/elephant-and-castle

[PeckhamRose]

I did look at this before hand.

They have to ask us for comments.

They have to 'consult'.

They HAVE already made up their minds what they're going to do and indeed have already started....

"Cynic from Peckham"

[MissKing]

There's two options to consider and vote for - its not just an empty exercise.

[Loz]

If there are dedicated off-road cycle lanes, will cycles be banned form the road for the areas where they exist? I'm betting not.

[cle]

A few things there - firstly, no mention of the NR station at all, which is dire and terribly connected. They need to incorporate that a bit better, although I appreciate that is probably tied to the fortunes of the shopping centre.

I do like the idea of making the crossings easier, especially to reach the Bakerloo. Would wonder about traffic levels with the roundabout gone though.

Moving the bus stop for all Camberwell buses to Walworth Road is a bit of a pain - it's very handy currently from the NR/Northern line stations currently but is a little bit of carnage I suppose.

The new stops would be easily accessible from the horrid HR exit and turning right - again not publicised. Shame they can't do something decent along those arches. The pavement surface is terrible too.

They need to address the amount of buses - too many routes, half of which are empty and duplicative. The 40 and 45 don't need to exist, simply beef up the 176 and 35 and consolidate a bit. Same with 68/468. Traffic around Camberwell, Denmark Hill and up to Elephant is all down to too many buses.

Cycling options look good, option B especially.

[James Barber]

Hi cld,

The number 40 bus goes an internally different route to the no.35 at our end.

You've just suggested cancelling a third of the buses along Lordship Lane. Do you not like East Dulwich or buses?

[cle]

I meant the 40 and 176, and 35 and 40. Mainly thinking the Walworth Road stretch and the London ends. No need for so many buses from Elephant to London Bridge or Waterloo.

I do like ED and I am fine with buses. I'm glad they exist for those who use them, anyway. I would rather less routes, with higher frequency (35 and 176).

Do you like the volume of buses down the Walworth Road and what it does to traffic levels, speed, cyclist safety, the visual environment and air quality?

[Sue]

I use buses a lot, and getting rid of the 40 would be a real pain.

It is the only bus which goes from ED to Borough/London Bridge.

The 35 does not go up Lordship Lane, it goes from Camberwell Green to Brixton.

And I don't see what the 176 has to do with it - it goes to Tottenham Court Road.

Do you want us all to have to keep changing buses to get to our final destination? It's bad enough having to wait for one :))

[lane lover]

cle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I meant the 40 and 176, and 35 and 40. Mainly

> thinking the Walworth Road stretch and the London

> ends. No need for so many buses from Elephant to

> London Bridge or Waterloo.

>

> I do like ED and I am fine with buses. I'm glad

> they exist for those who use them, anyway. I would

> rather less routes, with higher frequency (35 and

> 176).

>

> Do you like the volume of buses down the Walworth

> Road and what it does to traffic levels, speed,

> cyclist safety, the visual environment and air

> quality?

Without a tube, SE London is more reliant on buses than most other parts of London.

Whats the difference in volume between more frequent 176 buses to having 40s as well. Wouldnt that still be alot of buses ??

You make absolutely no sense whatsoever ...

[cle]

Not all buses are full or equal in demand. I wouldn't replace them 1:1 either.

And I never brought up Lordship Lane - this thread is about Elephant and I was talking about the duplication of buses down Walworth Road. I grouped the buses together in similarity, hence 40/176, 68/468 and 35/45. I know where they go.

But there's an expectation that buses are like taxis and should go from everywhere to everywhere in one ride. Although I do concede that transfers shuold be free, like on the tube, but the fact is that buses are running empty on a lot of routes and oversubscribed. Go look at Oxford Street for example. Walworth Road can be similar.

[Bic Basher]

Axe the 40 and passengers from between Dulwich Library and Denmark Hill simply won't be able to board a bus in the peaks. The whole reason for the route in this area is to relieve the already crowded 176 and 185.

Regarding Walworth Road's supposed over bussed capacity. If we had an alternative, such as the Bakerloo line extension, then we can talk about cutting the frequency of buses or routes altogether. The current capacity between Camberwell and Elephant is required.

I'm not happy about the move of the 12/40/176 bus stop to Walworth Road. It'll mean more passengers either using London Road or Newington Causeway.

[edcam]

The idea of cancelling bus routes is ridiculous.

[KalamityKel]

cle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not all buses are full or equal in demand. I

> wouldn't replace them 1:1 either.

>

> And I never brought up Lordship Lane - this thread

> is about Elephant and I was talking about the

> duplication of buses down Walworth Road. I grouped

> the buses together in similarity, hence 40/176,

> 68/468 and 35/45. I know where they go.

>

> But there's an expectation that buses are like

> taxis and should go from everywhere to everywhere

> in one ride. Although I do concede that transfers

> shuold be free, like on the tube, but the fact is

> that buses are running empty on a lot of routes

> and oversubscribed. Go look at Oxford Street for

> example. Walworth Road can be similar.

I think you seriously need to open your eyes a little, a tiny stretch over long routes that you feel are "empty" does not justify cancelling or altering the route. What time of day are you making this judgment? I travel at all times of day/evening and find those routes well used. Go find yourself some proper statistics before coming out with that kind of rubbish.

You are, perhaps, suggesting a cut in the middle of a route - how do you suggest commuters needing to travel the whole destination make their journey with the bit you'd cut?

If the tube was available you can't assume everyone would want to or indeed should use the tube.

Fail cle.

[cle]

As I said, buses aren't taxis or dial-a-rides. Hence the term network.

[Nigello]

It's fair to say that some buses after the peak hours run at less than full capacity, sometimes considerably so, so I can understand it when some people say capacity should be cut. If companies had different sized vehicles for different times, that would be a boon, but I'm really not sure how it pans out.

FYI, and re another post, I am writing to the GLA and CCing Tessa Jowell about the idea of express versions of the 176 and others, or at least some way of increasing capacity at peak times. I'll keep you posted.

[Penguin68]

Often buses can run quite empty one way (as do tubes or trains) and quite full back - they have to do a relatively empty 'out' route to cope for 'back' passengers (or vice-versa). On the longer routes I have noticed that buses can fill and empty along the way, as different populations are served - and of course as buses near their terminal (assuming that it is not a natural 'destination' spot like bits of central London) they will again empty.

I very much doubt if TFL run pointless bus routes, or at least not for very long (assuming a sudden change in travel patterns along a particular route).

[Jeremy]

I've also been frustrated by apparently empty buses (usually when I'm stuck behind one!)... but you have to trust that TfL have guys working on this who know a little about bus scheduling and routing than you and I.

The idea of reducing the number of routes (therefore forcing people to make more changes) seems like a bad idea to me... more people getting on and off at each stop would lead to lengthier stops, therefore more delays on the road for everyone.

[the-e-dealer]

yes brilliant idea moving the bus stops away from the Shopping Centre. Really clever and counter intuitive.

[JDB]

What is meant by 'simply beefing up' the 176 and the 35 buses?! As someone has previously stated, the 40 and the 45 have very different beginnings and endings to the 176 and 35. Why you would include the 176 as a comparative beggars belief! I occasionally use the 40 and the removal of this service would be rather annoying.

I live on Camberwell Road and admittedly there are a lot of buses but there's no alternative as this is a main artery. An idea to muse would be to restrict 'general traffic' on this road or absurdly toll it (bad idea) but this would only move congestion elsewhere. I think we have to be pragmatic and hope that Camberwell Green may one day be the home of a tube station en route to East Dulwich.

I'm a cyclist, queue abuse, and I'm an Option B advocate.

Why can't buses operate the tap in/tap out service like the Tube? I suppose TFL consider the system as it is a good earner.

[Bic Basher]

JDB Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Why can't buses operate the tap in/tap out service

> like the Tube? I suppose TFL consider the system

> as it is a good earner.

Oyster works differently on the bus by operating a fixed fare system for pay as you go users. To ask passengers to touch out on a bus would slow down the exiting of passengers and overall make journeys slower as a consequence.

[the-e-dealer]

There was a plan to make oyster bus a term ticket like tube tickets. Up to a hours travel for example however Boris wanted the revenue from broken journeys.

[Jennys]

Surely the more convenient and varied the local bus routes are, the more people will choose to use the bus for their journey instead of driving. Not everybody is fit enough or brave enough to cycle and a bus has got to be the next best thing, environmentally. And yes, buses are sometimes fairly empty for the early part of the route, especially out of the rush hour, but they always seem to be very full by the time they have gone a short way along the route.

[Sue]

the-e-dealer Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> yes brilliant idea moving the bus stops away from

> the Shopping Centre. Really clever and counter

> intuitive.

xxxxxx

Is this going to be all bus stops, or just some of them?

Because at the moment, at peak times, it is a nightmare with so many bus stops and buses outside the Shopping Centre, and hard to see whether the bus you are waiting for is somewhere in the line of buses ....

[KalamityKel]

Sue i think the current problem is simply bad planning. Theres too many buses stopping in that one place.

I could never understand why it was thought a good idea or even safe.

[philosophie]

No-one is allowed to take away my 40! I use it on a daily basis and it's the only bus that I can actually get on in the mornings...