dg comments

please empty your brain below

I’m surprised and relived that in my area of zone 4 North East London there are no proposed cuts or changes at all.

Why are these proposed cuts so brutal in some areas but non-existent in others?

dg writes: It's a 'Central London Bus Review'.

Dan | 02.06.22 - 7:07 a.m. | #

So depressing. One reason bus usage is falling is because buses are so slow: extending journey times by enforced change of bus will make this even worse. The replacement of the 521 western section by the 59 will also be a lot slower - the 521 nips under the river through the old tram tunnel, while the 59 queues to go across the Strand junction and to turn left from Aldrich into Kingsway.

Artie | 02.06.22 - 8:07 a.m. | #

6 weeks is far too short as a consultation, there will be loads of users completely unaware of these changes, who don't read local papers or blogs.

It does feel like someone playing "fantasy bus" on their computer, chopping bits of routes, and redirecting others elsewhere. Leaving aside the government's involvement in this and the stupid political games being played by the former Mayor, TfL have shown little interest in buses for years. I'm sure there are people at TfL who see buses as those annoying vehicles getting in the way of cycle lanes.

Mikey C | 02.06.22 - 8:17 a.m. | #

Thanks for sharing this! A great summary of the routes proposed for withdrawal.

I can't help think that another factor in the reduction of popularity of inner London bus routes is the blanket 20 MPH zones which make journey times longer and the launch of the Elizabeth line is likely to make the train the winner for even more journeys from now on with its super fast, comfortable new connections. Slower buses also mean you need more vehicles and staff to maintain the same frequency.

All that said, I'm quite excited by the prospect of direct buses from my very local stop to Mile End, Victoria Park and Dalston. And it's interesting to see that people on Manchester Road will be able to get a bus from either side of the road towards Canary Wharf if things go ahead as proposed.

JP | 02.06.22 - 8:17 a.m. | #

So many thoughts on all of this, but my old 'home' stretch of Seven Sisters Road losing a route and half of it's service seems unnecessarily brutal. Buses from Manor House towards Tottenham load very heavily from about 3:30pm until 8-9pm - I don't think one 8bph route will cope with that.

Note: the 259 would run on to Ponders End to assist the 279 up the Hertford Road.

dg writes: updated, thanks.

Nico | 02.06.22 - 8:35 a.m. | #

I agree the consultation is positively confusing. In fact it has confused you. You mention the 211 diversion to Battersea Power Station. It's Battersea instead of Waterloo rather than abandoning Hammersmith.

dg writes: updated, thanks.

Randomly the 211 is on the map of East London changes as part of the Fleet Street area plans ( it doesn't even go there!) when really it should be part of the Waterloo changes. Surprisingly its diversion from Waterloo to Battersea seems to get no mention in the Waterloo proposals.

ap | 02.06.22 - 8:51 a.m. | #

I can't imagine if Peter Hendy or Leon Daniels were still at TfL they would be scrapping historic bus numbers. Eg why wouldn't you switch the 148 for the 12? One wonders if it is being done to get more negative media coverage.

kerspatula | 02.06.22 - 9:03 a.m. | #

Just discovered that in the changes linked to the loss of the 74 that TfL considers South Kensington to be west of West Brompton. Passengers affected by the diversion of the 430 are given confusing interchange information as a result. Cleary another document that TfL didn't allow anyone who knew the areas affected to proof read.

dg writes: Clearly.

ap | 02.06.22 - 9:11 a.m. | #

Uber and the like will be very happy. With split routes people will have to wait twice for the bus, maybe in the rain.Some will pick up the phone and order a cab. More congestion, more pollution.

coffin dodger | 02.06.22 - 9:18 a.m. | #

It seems that the 'levelling down' policy is well under way. Confuse and anger enough people to stop using the buses and come back year after year to prune back further.
Lots of people, especially the lower paid, have planned where they work because of bus routes (just like they do the rail routes), they cant just hang around hoping they will fit on another bus halfway through their journey.

John G | 02.06.22 - 9:20 a.m. | #

This is very tricky, as any bright ideas for adjustments to the proposals that I have involve further knock-on affects that would lead to crayon meltdown.

I often wonder if the central area routes could be rationalised to the point of being more like a Tube system grid that would be easy to map and comprehend, fed by the existing route numbers from the surrounding inner areas, and ensuring the interchange points are high quality.

There is also the question of the important role that buses play for people with reduced mobility who find it hard to cope with train and tube stations, and dare I say the long walks at some Elizabeth stations. Making people change buses impacts more seriously due to the faff of getting on and off, finding a near-by stop, an extra wait etc. It also impacts disproportionately on convenience for those unwilling/able to pay more for rail-based trips.

Along with the lack of network mapping, another long-running factor has made buses harder to use. During my childhood, all the buses displayed the calling points on the back of the vehicle which meant that by looking at the bus in front we automatically learned where all the other routes along the way went. A few years back I was with a visitor from abroad and said 'let's change onto that one' after which she asked how I knew where it was going. I just said it's always gone there! A thing of the past.

NickW | 02.06.22 - 9:31 a.m. | #

Kerspatula makes a valid point about keeping lower route numbers in favour of higher numbers. Whilst to many of us, historic route numbers, such as the 11, 12 and 24, resonate strongly, to the occupants of TfL Towers, many of whom will have no such connections, a number is just a number, and easily discarded.

Stuart R | 02.06.22 - 9:34 a.m. | #

The 349 was introduced in 2004 to cover the section of the 149 (Enfield - Edmonton) that could not be served by the bendibuses operating at the time due to tight turns and not being able to utilise Enfield Bus Garage.

Les Savine | Homepage | 02.06.22 - 9:40 a.m. | #

I’ve also read and commented on these proposals which are so complicated that the average bus passenger will have no idea of what route to take when this happens. It seems to be that the recent changes in south east and east London were a dress rehearsal for this. Let’s hope the details of the changes will be better set out when they eventually happen. I’m not holding my breath on that though.

Dave B | 02.06.22 - 9:50 a.m. | #

Let us not forget that Mike Harris produces an excellent bus map.

Barry Coppock | 02.06.22 - 10:07 a.m. | #

I think the 14 used to go from Putney to Caledonian Road. In the days of the Red Rover my dad and I got on it to see where it went. It was a long journey as I can recall.

Cornish Monkey | 02.06.22 - 10:18 a.m. | #

Congratulations on summarising the documents.

Couple of initial thoughts.

I feel some of the decisions are designed for headlines, for example swapping the numbers for the 24/88 change makes more sense and less confusion for passengers because the Hampstead - Westminster section of the 24 stays the same whereas the 88 is extensively altered north of Westminster but still serves Camden.

27/328/C3 - in my view the 328 has a weak southern terminus and the C3 a weak northern one, the revised 27 has improved links.

Still Anon | 02.06.22 - 10:19 a.m. | #

It might be less complicated, and therefore less unfriendly to paying customers, simply to keep the routes as they are but reduce frequencies.

Ian | 02.06.22 - 10:44 a.m. | #

Cornish Monkey - the 14 used to run as far north as Crouch End! I'm pretty sure the current 91 replicates that route.

Leo | 02.06.22 - 10:56 a.m. | #

A lot of the withdrawable routes are 'BorisBus' operated (eg 11, 12, 16, 24), making over 60 of them redundant. Road restrictions on some of their replacement routes will mean those 11m vehicles will have to be shifted around yet again.

Some of the consultation document language is ambiguous, even misleading. Note differences between "some passengers" and a given percentage being affected. A lot about new links being offered - despite no proof of viable unserved demand.

The consultation lacks data to back up the intended changes, only 'suiting capacity to demand', which ignores the future.

The overwhelming impression is of a purely money-saving exercise, the first of possibly many. London's population is growing again, albeit slowly, and this leaves no resilience for the future. Cutbacks may encourage bus garage closures, which we will never have back when more buses are needed, creating more and longer 'dead runs'...

Buses are vulnerable because they're easy to take off the road - under-served Underground routes will still have the same frequencies because it's too expensive to have trains sitting idle in depots.

Bus fares are cheaper than any type of rail fare, so forcing passengers on to rail will cost them more in many cases. Bus users are often low-income needing these services - the Hopper hour fare will not work on some forced changes, also adding to costs.

Night bus enforced changes will add up to half an hour for some journeys, not exactly user-friendly. This is a terrible way to lubricate the transport of a capital city.

Joel | 02.06.22 - 10:56 a.m. | #

The bus stop Information alterations will be take months to get right when all this happens.

scrumpy | 02.06.22 - 10:57 a.m. | #

TFL needs to decide if it is a commercial transport service, or a social service, hopefully subsidised by central government.
Having spent umpteen millions building cycleways to persuade the younger and fitter of us to cycle, it finds bus usage declining.
The bus passengers get the cuts.
Any cycleways closing ?

grumblysticks | 02.06.22 - 11:06 a.m. | #

Some of the numbering choices seem perverse, or maybe they've been done on purpose to highlight to the powers that be that cuts are happening - the disappearance of familiar routes 3, 11, 12 and 24 from Whitehall might be noticed.

More logical numbering perhaps:
11 instead of 507
12 instead of 148
14 instaed of 414
24 instead of 214
31 instead of 113

Timbo | 02.06.22 - 11:06 a.m. | #

grumblysticks - politicians love capital expenditure but they hate operating expenditure. It makes no logical sense to me but its been the story for years.

Surprised about the 205, that has always been the option down Euston Road for people who can't use stairs on the Circle line.

Herned | 02.06.22 - 12:00 p.m. | #

I wonder what % of TfL employees regularly use buses.

Anonymous | 02.06.22 - 12:10 p.m. | #

Artie - The Strand underpass doesn't go under the river - the 521 goes over Waterloo Bridge and then dives under the Strand junction to emerge on Kingsway. Unless they convert the 59 to single deckers that will no longer be an option.

Timbo | 02.06.22 - 12:36 p.m. | #

I had been on the 12 and 14 but not 11, and did not know the 11 was the route for tourists. I guess I simply walked or tubed my way when I was in the area.

Patrickov | 02.06.22 - 12:54 p.m. | #

This must be the biggest round of bus cuts since November 1982.

And while many of these "proposed" changes seem, at best, illogical (joining together bits of routes that don't belong together while cutting useful and well-used links), that earlier round of cuts was characterised by the widespread withdrawal of evening and Sunday (and in some cases Saturday) services. Which at least is not hte case here. Yet.

Dominic H | 02.06.22 - 1:02 p.m. | #

Still 20% fewer passengers using London's buses compared to pre-Covid (same for the rest of England too, according to Dept for Transport statistics, and where emergency funding runs out in early October).

If this is only reducing services by 4%, expect much more to follow.

Man of Kent | 02.06.22 - 1:35 p.m. | #

I have mostly taken buses to/from the nearest tube station, but many of these are familiar, even if I used them for one or two stops at a time.
I liked the 521, it was fast, frequent and spacious - and you could touch in at the middle door.

Greg S | 02.06.22 - 2:12 p.m. | #

The only crumb of comfort is that if (when?) TfL gets more funding it will be relatively easy to put on more buses and increase usage - Livingstone did it so a future mayor could do the same.

The hopper fare could be extended to 90 minutes to mitigate the effects of having to change buses - I don't suppose anyone wants to spend over an hour on their commute but at least the cost could be kept down.

If I still worked in South Kensington then the change to the 49 route would be good for me so I imagine that there are people who will benefit from some of the changes.

The young people I know just use Citymapper or similar to find their way around so not having maps or up to date info at bus stops won't affect them (but I don't know what proportion of the bus using public they form).

Steve Rochford | 02.06.22 - 5:58 p.m. | #

When the consultation's over I expect they'll end up renumbering the stupid numbered routes, then triumphantly claim they've 'saved the 11, 12 and 14', then impose all the anticipated cuts and changes anyway.

Mr Mason | 03.06.22 - 12:19 a.m. | #

No! Not the dirty one! (31)

As featured in To The World's End (Scenes and characters on a London bus route) before it was truncated and then extended again, this time to Shepherd's Bush.

tops | 03.06.22 - 7:01 a.m. | #

Mike Harris, the man who still publishes London bus maps now that TfL can't be bothered, has come up with a new map showing what the network will like if all these changes happen. It may help you if you're planning on responding to the consultation.
[pdf]

dg writes: That is so good, thanks Mike.

ap | 03.06.22 - 2:29 p.m. | #

It seems the withdrawal of the 48 was just a precursor. A massive bunch of proposals seemingly drawn up to antagonise by a bunch of hapless TFL amateurs. Fools are not suffered gladly!

Glad to see the rerouting of the ludicrous 23 but how does one travel by bus from Kensington High Street and Knightsbridge to Oxford Street and Oxford Circus, once the very busy domain of the 73 and 10?

The 236 of course has been to Archway before when on Sundays in 1970 it was extended via the 210 to Golders Green.

winsleigh | 03.06.22 - 7:11 p.m. | #

Parliamentary Petition to stop the 4% Bus mileage cut in London (Bus Review, mandated by Central Government)

MilesT | 10.06.22 - 9:31 a.m. | #

Updated URL for Parliamentary Petition to stop the bus cuts

(Petition is now fully live, hoping for 100,000 signatures to trigger a debate in Parliament)

MilesT | 17.06.22 - 5:59 p.m. | #

Just 99,979 signatures to go.

Also the petition risks two 'surely's.
It doesn't stand a chance.

diamond geezer | Homepage | 17.06.22 - 6:17 p.m. | #

TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy