Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Also, I am sure you are familiar with the "build it and they will come" concept.
The Go 3 between Orpington and Sevenoaks is poorly utilised because there are only 3 buses a day, none in the late afternoons/evenings, none on weekends, and it's not connected to the TFL Oysters/monthly pass system.
I do believe that a TFL bus, reliable, with an hourly frequency, weekends included to the likes of Biggin Hill or Orpington would eventually change some mentalities and attract users. I will repeat, there are a number of commuters into Sevenoaks that work in the care and hospitality sector (those are far from rich and on mega wages).
FYI, the monthly cost of a season ticket between Orpington and Sevenoaks is £201 vs a monthly TFL bus pass of £94. A TFL link would benefit those Londoners.
Why would TfL subsidise a service that is outside their area? There are TfL buses from Biggin Hill to Bromley and Orpington (and indeed Westerham) - why would they want to subsidise a route going the other way?
Chatting to older neighbours, some did protest and recall some meetings and protests when the 402 to Bromley was withdrawn a few years ago, so clearly there were residents in Sevenoaks and the areas it connected to, who valued the 402 to Bromley.
The Go Bus 3 is, I believe, commercial, probably utilising a bus between school runs. It probably cannot be enhanced without additional cost / risk.
Why would TfL subsidise a service that is outside their area? There are TfL buses from Biggin Hill to Bromley and Orpington (and indeed Westerham) - why would they want to subsidise a route going the other way?
How often did these older neighbours use the 402? Being disappointed in seeing a service discontinued is not the same as a pledge to use it regularly.
Enjoying the exchange but we have different points of view and opinions. I was under the impression that most of us here were pro-buses and favourable to further expansion and adoption of the bus as a public transport.
I will stop the "off-topic" on my side as this thread is about London buses. Thanks.
Tell me how many trains per hour there are between Sevenoaks and Biggin Hill? Also, a bus serves a different purpose to a train, you are forgetting locations in between (Polhill Centre, Knockholt village which is far from the train station and Green street Green)
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
It's not just the locals.. It would bring people from other areas, in particular Greater London to potentially shop in Sevenoaks (the high street is struggling).
And you forget those that live in Greater London and work in Sevenoaks, in the care or hospitality sector. Those would welcome the opportunity to use the bus as TFL bus pass is cheaper.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I am a recent arrival to the area but the road where I live has a couple of care homes and talking to a couple of staff, they would welcome a regular bus to Orpington or Biggin Hill.
TFL monthly bus pass is cheaper than the train.
There are people commuting from Greater London to Sevenoaks to work in the care, hospitality and local shops...
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I used Lewisham as an example...
You forget those travelling the other way, the ones commuting from Greater London to Sevenoaks. I can tell you that a high percentage of those working in the care homes dotted around Sevenoaks live in London.
A TFL bus pass would work out a lot cheaper for those.
A TfL bus pass is cheaper because it is subsidised. The London bus network only covers about two-thirds of its costs.
TfL is highly unlikely to fund any new cross-boundary bus services unless the authority into which they operate is prepared to support them financially. The chances of a Reform led Kent County Council doing so is, I would suggest, zero.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
But like my family, there are also other recently arrived families and people from London, who have a different outlook regarding buses and public transport in general.
I'm afraid this is a common occurrence: they may do, but they also chose to move somewhere where there isn't a red bus costing £1.75 on the doorstep every 8 minutes. Not in all cases, but in many cases that is a deliberate choice.
I am. It had been built for a long time, and they didn't come. It's going to take a lot of persuasion for anyone to give it back to them. I presume you've heard of the "use it or lose it" concept...
The Go 3 between Orpington and Sevenoaks is poorly utilised because there are only 3 buses a day, none in the late afternoons/evenings, none on weekends, and it's not connected to the TFL Oysters/monthly pass system.
I do believe that a TFL bus, reliable, with an hourly frequency, weekends included to the likes of Biggin Hill or Orpington would eventually change some mentalities and attract users. I will repeat, there are a number of commuters into Sevenoaks that work in the care and hospitality sector (those are far from rich and on mega wages).
FYI, the monthly cost of a season ticket between Orpington and Sevenoaks is £201 vs a monthly TFL bus pass of £94. A TFL link would benefit those Londoners.
Have you suggested this to TfL? Bear in mind, though, that if you read the other messages on this thread and others suggesting TfL extend services beyond London (there have been rather a lot recently...), you'll see that TfL largely require shire councils to fund the costs. As Kent County Council has enough of a budget problem as it is, and Reform-KCC and Labour-Mayor are unlikely to play nicely with each other, it simply isn't going to happen. I give the same advice as I have to others: you need to do a lot of the leg-work... it's all very well saying "it would help", but if you want one, you need to be organising petitions, doing sample costings, working out a sensible timetable... "I think" will go in the recycling; "I have a petition of 1500 signatures saying they'll use the bus every day" may get you some vague interest.
P.S - There is a big Tesco in Riverhead/Dunton Green area and a big Sainsburys in Bat & Ball, so not quite sure what you mean by Tesco closing down. Lidl is quite popular here.
There was a Tesco Metro in the High Street, just north of Boots. Visible on Streetview if you go back to 2018. A short staggering distance to the bus station
Enjoying the exchange but we have different points of view and opinions. I was under the impression that most of us here were pro-buses and favourable to further expansion and adoption of the bus as a public transport.
Another common comment from relatively new members when they find people don't necessarily agree with their every whim. We are, but as you spend longer here, you'll realise there are many people here who are, or were, involved across the bus industry, from local authorities to bus companies, including one or two well-hidden company MDs - and TfL staff. They aren't saying "no" just to be obstinate. They're saying no because they know their business.
Enjoying the exchange but we have different points of view and opinions. I was under the impression that most of us here were pro-buses and favourable to further expansion and adoption of the bus as a public transport.
Your impression is correct. People on this forum are undoubtedly pro-bus, and indeed, pro-public transport. We're the sort of people who actively look to travel on public transport as a matter of course and enjoyment. We are also minded to try to expand public transport usage, being aware of the social benefits it can bring. However...
We are not typical of the general public. Most people don't use public transport regularly.
Most people, if asked, would be say that public transport should be better...but wouldn't give up their car, wouldn't want their "rights" as a car owner to be compromised, and wouldn't want to pay any more tax
People have to be realistic about where we are today (not where we should be if x hadn't happen in 1986)
In specific relation to TfL, they are already massively in trouble with the bus network - passenger numbers are falling (in contrast to the rest of the UK) whilst costs are going up exponentially - they are in a £1bn hole anyway (subsidising buses with tube revenue... what about investing in the tube network?) and that is getting worse. They aren't going to pay for buses into Kent (or anywhere else) whilst cutting core London services, and it's unlikely that Kent would pay especially as the stipulations that TfL impose make the run rate more expensive than a provincial operator - sure @greenline712 can confirm that.
Therefore, it's not a case of being obstructive or pessimistic or a lack of ambition - it's pragmatism.
Enjoying the exchange but we have different points of view and opinions. I was under the impression that most of us here were pro-buses and favourable to further expansion and adoption of the bus as a public transport.
I will stop the "off-topic" on my side as this thread is about London buses. Thanks.
Likewise hearing different views. However, what we would like and what we get are two different things, especially when there are cost implications. Go-Bus does seem to be quite enterprising, and if they thought there was money in a Biggin Hill route, they would probably go for it. The fact they don't speaks volumes.
Tell me how many trains per hour there are between Sevenoaks and Biggin Hill? Also, a bus serves a different purpose to a train, you are forgetting locations in between (Polhill Centre, Knockholt village which is far from the train station and Green street Green)
Out of all the potential destinations that people might travel to by bus, a garden centre seems pretty low down the list.
I don't know what kind of circuitous route you are planning that takes in Knockholt but whatever it is won't attract any end-to-end passengers – and anyway, Knockholt already has a TfL service to Orpington with 13bpd (about every 70–80 minutes) which seems pretty generous for a tiny village.
How much demand do you seriously think there is for travel between Biggin Hill and Sevenoaks? There's a half-hourly bus from Biggin Hill to Westerham and then about an hourly service between Westerham and Sevenoaks, following the same route that any through bus would be likely to take, so passengers can make the journey now if they want to.
Likewise hearing different views. However, what we would like and what we get are two different things, especially when there are cost implications. Go-Bus does seem to be quite enterprising, and if they thought there was money in a Biggin Hill route, they would probably go for it. The fact they don't speaks volumes.
Biggin Hill actually has pretty good bus links - particularly to the sort of places that people are actually likely to go. Bromley - for onward rail connections - and Addington for Tramlink to Croydon. Both are also significant employment centres. There is also still a bus to Westerham (although I doubt many residents use it). Fifty years ago the choice was between the 410 (Bromley - Westerham - Godstone - Redhill - Reigate) or Green Line 705.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I’ll throw a little weight behind some of what I’m saying.
I grew up in and around the North Weald for over a decade. I moved up north at 18, got involved in the bus industry and reached a not insignificant level within 3 years. None of that is particularly ancient history given I still qualify for a 16-25 railcard. I was involved in commercial decisions for one of the big bus companies. I can tell you right now Sevenoaks has zero chance of washing its face commercially.
School buses would & do pay for themselves, but there isn’t enough school traffic to cross-subsidise what I would class as a minimum acceptable bus service (At least 0600-2100, hourly frequency at minimum). OAP passes pay pennies per trip. You’d need a double decker full and standing of free passes to even come close to breaking even.
I used to use the northern end of the 402 as an option of getting to school. It was rarely more than a handful on outside of the school run. The R5/R10 circulars from Orpington to Knockholt village rarely ever had more than a handful on.
Sevenoaks just isn’t bus territory. I’d love to be able to say that a 4bph Biggin Hill - Westerham - Sevenoaks service would be successful, a 2tph Sevenoaks - Bromley/Orpington etc. but they just wouldn’t. Not in today’s financial climate
I'm afraid this is a common occurrence: they may do, but they also chose to move somewhere where there isn't a red bus costing £1.75 on the doorstep every 8 minutes. Not in all cases, but in many cases that is a deliberate choice.
Have you suggested this to TfL? Bear in mind, though, that if you read the other messages on this thread and others suggesting TfL extend services beyond London (there have been rather a lot recently...)
A lot of Londoners have had to move further out due to high rent costs and high cost of living and this has been happening for many years now. Those with more limited income, often have no choice of where we live at all. A lot of us are completely unaware how quickly public transport drops off until we are here, it comes as a shock especially if its a town that is virtually indistinguishable from its counterpart in London.
No one expects a bus every 8 minutes in the fringes but what is reasonable to expect is an all day service from early morning to late at night (at least 16 to 18 hours a day) and for each town within a 5 to 10 mile radius to get a direct bus, especially if no railway exists. Anything below a half hourly or hourly frequency is borderline unusable. Also, each town that didn't make the rail station an interchange failed in planning in my book.
To me it is very telling, that buses in Inner and Central London may be hollowed out over the next 3 years as for a number of years, that part of London has hollowed out big time. Seems like whole parts of Inner London lack young people now, which is bizarre. Where are people going? Outer London and the areas next to London blurring the city region completely. The housing crisis is causing rifts between London boroughs and Home Counties councils. Bad enough Greater London isn't the same as the London Built Up Area but transport is really held back by being stuck with those same boundaries.
London Overground improvements and the Elizabeth Line likely have impacted bus ridership a lot in zones 1 and 2 though.
I also think along with the movement of people priced out of London, the expansion of contactless still ongoing and the potential transfer of Great Northern Inners to London Overground alongside other potential developments, people are more conscious of what is possible to change. Local government reorganisation has awaken a debate too. These things aren't in a vacuum, so if trains can expand in London, buses are logical to expect too. I really think closer working together on development and transport is essential if TFL is running trains deep into Hertfordshire.
@HeadSouth makes a good point about people who commute in the opposite direction too (another growing trend), who are barely considered by public transport currently. A big part of why congestion is much worse now.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Reimbursement, as far as I know TfL don't reimburse non-TfL operators for Oyster acceptance or price matching whilst TfGM do reimburse non-Bee Network operators for accepting their tickets and participating in their local fare cap. You would have to ask TfL why it is so disinterested in working with operators outside London to integrate these cross boundary services into their provision in this manner but it has been a long time since they have shown any great interest in working with such routes. This has been quoted by several operators, whether entirely fair or not, as one of the reasons why they withdrew cross-boundary routes - that to be able to participate in these non-statutory revenue streams you had to comply with certain London centric requirements that were unreasonable for a non-urban service (how much depended on which revenue streams you were trying to access but the suggestion was to get full acceptance you had to run London spec dual-door vehicles with no tip ups and so low seating and high standing capacity that is unattractive for a longer distance country bus service - I have seen this denied by someone who worked for TfL at a mid-level but it was never clear how much involvement they had in these sort of discussions but there is a hell of a lot of smoke for their to be no fire there).
Thanks for explaining, seems like a massive failing on TFL's part as a big city region like London relies on people travelling in and out for its prosperity.
The double door requirement seems like a double standard (sorry about the pun!) as a small number of TFL routes (mainly residential) use single door buses themselves. 377 in Enfield is one such route. W12 was another I can think of.
Good Manchester is doing what it's doing and hopefully other franchised areas copy them instead of TFL.
We need standards, but there needs to be tit for tat as well. Even something as simple as updating bus stops to include a non-TFL route eg 243 in Barnet on the stops flag as well as timetable information was shockingly slow to provide on TFL's part. And that's basic stuff compared to making cross-boundary routes easier to provide, either TFL running them all themselves or coming to some arrangement with the neighbouring County Council and a private provider. It really shouldn't be hard. They undermine their own goals.
That wouldn't be as bad as the time someone bought a freezer onto the SL7 I was on
As others have mentioned though, going to the garden centre is seen as a day out for many people, with them often having cafes and kids play areas, as opposed to somewhere where you'd just go to stock up on gardening essentials.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The 116 was withdrawn between Ashford Hospital and Staines in 1995. At the time users were directed towards the 203 and 216. Today White Bus 446 and Carlone’s 442 also provide links on this section.
Of the TfL services to Staines the 117 is very busy and would benefit from either a frequency uplift or double decking (but would need to be rerouted to avoid the rail bridge in Isleworth). Now it’s been double decked the capacity in the 203 probably matches demand pretty well. Some journeys on the 290 at school start / finish times run full but for most of the day the current service level is fine. The 216 doesn’t need any more capacity.
Extending the 116 isn't anything to do with intermediate links, its about providing a fast, frequent Hounslow to Staines service that genuinely encourages modal shift, and benefits Londoners, as well as slightly relieving the 117 and 203. Staines is a good "natural" cut off point for TfL services, I wouldn't recommend any TfL routes continuing onwards (except for maybe some sort of seasonal link to Thorpe Park) as that would probably be a waste of money.
I roughly agree with your analysis of the existing Staines routes (though the 203 does still struggle at times in my experience), particularly your comment on the 216 which, just looking at the section within London, is probably the only route in Kingston that doesn't suffer from chronic overcrowding.
Arguably, if a significant level of extra capacity was added on the Hounslow to Feltham corridor within London, you could probably reduce the frequency of the 235, which would then allow improvements to the 116 and 117 to take place without their being any increase in the overall spending on services on the "wrong" side of the border.
A lot of Londoners have had to move further out due to high rent costs and high cost of living and this has been happening for many years now. Those with more limited income, often have no choice of where we live at all. A lot of us are completely unaware how quickly public transport drops off until we are here, it comes as a shock especially if its a town that is virtually indistinguishable from its counterpart in London.
No one expects a bus every 8 minutes in the fringes but what is reasonable to expect is an all day service from early morning to late at night (at least 16 to 18 hours a day) and for each town within a 5 to 10 mile radius to get a direct bus, especially if no railway exists. Anything below a half hourly or hourly frequency is borderline unusable. Also, each town that didn't make the rail station an interchange failed in planning in my book.
I’d say it varies with each town. Potters Bar is a good example of an Hertfordshire town with reasonable links into London. Both train and bus. Both the 313 and 298 run out there with at least 30 minute frequencies on each!
Watford is another example that hasn’t been mentioned on here. Incredible links to London by train and by having routes 142 and 258 respectively.
Another example could be with Redhill and the 405 running there. Dartford too, with its many red buses and and impeccable train service.
Uxbridge is the opposite; it is served by many non-TfL buses providing links outside of London, which is great as there isn’t a direct railway line in the town doing so.
Meanwhile Cheshunt and Waltham Abbey have absolutely nothing. With the former having a completely unconnected station, and the latter not even having a rail station at all.
I also think along with the movement of people priced out of London, the expansion of contactless still ongoing and the potential transfer of Great Northern Inners to London Overground alongside other potential developments, people are more conscious of what is possible to change. Local government reorganisation has awaken a debate too. These things aren't in a vacuum, so if trains can expand in London, buses are logical to expect too. I really think closer working together on development and transport is essential if TFL is running trains deep into Hertfordshire.
The double door requirement seems like a double standard (sorry about the pun!) as a small number of TFL routes (mainly residential) use single door buses themselves. 377 in Enfield is one such route. W12 was another I can think of.
Not all roads can fit bigger buses though. For instance the 192 can only use tiny hoppas, which is why the overcrowding on the southern section has gotten so bad they are eventually going to replace it with the W8.
The 377‘s criminally low frequency (and lack of Sunday service) needs to be addressed before talk of bigger buses though.
We need standards, but there needs to be tit for tat as well. Even something as simple as updating bus stops to include a non-TFL route eg 243 in Barnet on the stops flag as well as timetable information was shockingly slow to provide on TFL's part. And that's basic stuff compared to making cross-boundary routes easier to provide, either TFL running them all themselves or coming to some arrangement with the neighbouring County Council and a private provider. It really shouldn't be hard. They undermine their own goals.
The new UNO 243 bus is a nice addition, although I wish it was a regular hourly/half hourly timetable instead of having buses depart at different times during the peaks.
I wonder how many people get this route confused with the 243 in North London?
These days garden centres sell a hell of a lot of pretty random stuff to make it a 12 month of the year business, e.g. Craft beer and (masses of) Christmas decorations...followed by a nice meal!
I’d say it varies with each town. Potters Bar is a good example of an Hertfordshire town with reasonable links into London. Both train and bus. Both the 313 and 298 run out there with at least 30 minute frequencies on each!
Watford is another example that hasn’t been mentioned on here. Incredible links to London by train and by having routes 142 and 258 respectively.
Another example could be with Redhill and the 405 running there. Dartford too, with its many red buses and and impeccable train service.
Uxbridge is the opposite; it is served by many non-TfL buses providing links outside of London, which is great as there isn’t a direct railway line in the town doing so.
Meanwhile Cheshunt and Waltham Abbey have absolutely nothing. With the former having a completely unconnected station, and the latter not even having a rail station at all.
Yeah I agree with this. Potters Bar's TFL provision is what Cheshunt should be getting too, 2 buses every 20 minutes in the daytime and then half hourly late evenings and Sundays. Arriva broadly provides this in the daytime but it's the late end of the day and a lack of direct bus to the rail station where its sorely lacking. Reliability is a big problem too. 298 and 313 become half hourly Monday to Friday around 8pm, the 310 by contrast becomes hourly and 251 just ceases to exist! Waltham Cross is no Enfield or Southgate either. The bus station is very constrained in Waltham Cross too.
Watford appears good on paper but a lot of the town has poor public transport, those near the 142 and 258 are seen as the lucky ones! The Croxley Link would've transformed Watford if it had happened.
Uxbridge is what the bus network should be like in every Outer London town centre. Seems very well connected to outside London from there.
Waltham Abbey - is one town I really hope is used as a case study of how NOT to build a town out when we start seeing any new towns built. Sunday - 1 bus an hour for the whole town, despite a lack of rail station! It once got London bus route N90 alongside the daytime buses you'd expect! It is seriously cut off from the wider area now, which is a big shame as I think Waltham Abbey could have good tourist potential if the buses were invested in properly.
Cheshunt is very frustrating as the train service is brilliant, 2 stops to Liverpool Street, which makes the bus service even more galling and as a result traffic is awful here. The lack of joined up thinking is baffling.
Following the bus changes in the past few years, it's clear London does one thing and Herts/ Essex does another. In the last couple years, Cheshunt has gained a direct bus to Stevenage and Hatfield, which is great but we really need improvements the other way too. The borough of Broxbourne suffered some of the deepest bus cuts in the south of England. It's a very long way to go to improve things. If TFL treated places equally, at least 1 route would be extended out here again. The constant dead running from Potters Bar Garage to Waltham Cross suggests Cheshunt really wouldn't be hard for them to serve, especially with a ridiculously short route like the 327!
I'd argue a TFL bus to Cuffley would be needed again too since the Overground would be running every train for that village. Every station from Cuffley to Watton at Stone would be Overground only services.
Not all roads can fit bigger buses though. For instance the 192 can only use tiny hoppas, which is why the overcrowding on the southern section has gotten so bad they are eventually going to replace it with the W8.
The 377‘s criminally low frequency (and lack of Sunday service) needs to be addressed before talk of bigger buses though.
I agree. On the main routes, Enfield is very well served but a handful of routes in specific parts are very limited. 456 is another one, just hourly on Sundays, no service after 8pm.
The new UNO 243 bus is a nice addition, although I wish it was a regular hourly/half hourly timetable instead of having buses depart at different times during the peaks.
I wonder how many people get this route confused with the 243 in North London?
I wish it was half hourly as it doesn't time very well with the 242 in either direction. Also Barnet is quite far away from Wood Green, so I doubt people get confused at all.
And to some this may be off topic but goes to show how blurry things are around the edges of London!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
It certainly is puzzling that TFL run buses to Staines but then no further when Egham, Royal Holloway and Thorpe Park are all only up the road from there. I'd say the northern parts of Elmbridge are much the same as Spelthorne and of course Epsom and Ewell. Almost impossible to tell when London becomes Surrey anyway as the leafy suburban look is seen across much of SW London, just seems to go on forever.
It certainly is puzzling that TFL run buses to Staines but then no further when Egham, Royal Holloway and Thorpe Park are all only up the road from there. I'd say the northern parts of Elmbridge are much the same as Spelthorne and of course Epsom and Ewell. Almost impossible to tell when London becomes Surrey anyway as the leafy suburban look is seen across much of SW London, just seems to go on forever.
TfL’s policy is to run to the first town after the boundary. Whilst an argument could be made for turning the 290 at Sunbury Cross this has never been suggested. The 216 was due to be curtailed at Ashford Hospital some years ago but SCC stepped in with some funding to maintain the link with Staines.
There is no point in TfL running to Egham or Thorpe Park even if funding was no object. There are at least four buses an hour from Staines to each location on weekdays and both are also linked by direct buses to Heathrow. I doubt there is can’t demand at all for a bus link to annywhere else in Greater London.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Actually the council tax for a band D property (including the GLA precept) is less in all the adjoining London boroughs than it is in Spelthorne. The borough is the only part of Surrey north of the river and was historically part of Middlesex of course. There were more crossing points between East and West Berlin than there are between Spelthorne and the rest of Surrey and it’s impossible to get from Stanwell Moor to anywhere else in the borough without passing through Greater London!
TfL’s policy is to run to the first town after the boundary. Whilst an argument could be made for turning the 290 at Sunbury Cross this has never been suggested. The 216 was due to be curtailed at Ashford Hospital some years ago but SCC stepped in with some funding to maintain the link with Staines.
There is no point in TfL running to Egham or Thorpe Park even if funding was no object. There are at least four buses an hour from Staines to each location on weekdays and both are also linked by direct buses to Heathrow. I doubt there is can’t demand at all for a bus link to annywhere else in Greater London.
This policy has been explained many, many times. TfL take the view (generally) to run to the first town over the boundary OR to a logical traffic objective which is why parts of SE London get links to Bluewater; there are still some legacy services too that appear anomalous or, in the 465 example, another local authority is prepared to pay.
It's not a policy that will change any time soon. TfL's bus network is becoming more and more financially strained; Go Ahead has just relinquished £34m of TfL contracts and you can be assured that replacing on a like for like basis will be nearer £40m, and this is a pattern across the network as contracts come up for renewal.
This policy has been explained many, many times. TfL take the view (generally) to run to the first town over the boundary OR to a logical traffic objective which is why parts of SE London get links to Bluewater; there are still some legacy services too that appear anomalous or, in the 465 example, another local authority is prepared to pay.
It’s good to point this out.
Though I do think Bluewater is an anomaly. I am surprised they are not curtailed at Dartford, instead all three TfL routes continue to Bluewater, with no contribution from Kent County Council I believe. It’s great they they do this (as well as linking areas of SE London to the Darent Valley Hospital), but I doubt this would be introduced if Bluewater was built in more recent times.
It’s good to point this out.
Though I do think Bluewater is an anomaly. I am surprised they are not curtailed at Dartford, instead all three TfL routes continue to Bluewater, with no contribution from Kent County Council I believe. It’s great they they do this (as well as linking areas of SE London to the Darent Valley Hospital), but I doubt this would be introduced if Bluewater was built in more recent times.
There was a consultation out some years ago, possibly just after Covid, to limit at least one of the three services to Dartford. In a rare change of heat from TfL, the reaction was so negative that it all went very quiet.
I think they also get a reasonable number of passengers from Dartford to Bluewater with Oyster cards, especially on the non-stop 96.
TfL’s policy is to run to the first town after the boundary. Whilst an argument could be made for turning the 290 at Sunbury Cross this has never been suggested. The 216 was due to be curtailed at Ashford Hospital some years ago but SCC stepped in with some funding to maintain the link with Staines.
There is no point in TfL running to Egham or Thorpe Park even if funding was no object. There are at least four buses an hour from Staines to each location on weekdays and both are also linked by direct buses to Heathrow. I doubt there is can’t demand at all for a bus link to annywhere else in Greater London.
I get it but I think the policy is outdated and a bit short sighted given the movement outwards of people priced out which in turn puts pressure on councils on the edge of London to build even more. TFL should run buses everywhere where it is continuously built up. Debden is one of the few places they get that right, even though you could argue a daily bus service to Epping and North Weald would also make sense, especially the latter as it has become more built up. The way I see it is if their buses are dead running from a garage through an area with no or little service, just turn it into a regular route! Potters Bar is one example where they could suddenly massively improve the surrounding areas buses.
As for Thorpe Park, the size of its parking lot suggests it should be apart of the transport system of the city it is next too. It would at least raise the profile of the existing service. I don't see how it's that different from them serving Lakeside.
As I know all too well, traffic doesn't neatly follow boundaries, it surpasses them on a daily basis.
I get it but I think the policy is outdated and a bit short sighted given the movement outwards of people priced out which in turn puts pressure on councils on the edge of London to build even more. TFL should run buses everywhere where it is continuously built up. Debden is one of the few places they get that right, even though you could argue a daily bus service to Epping and North Weald would also make sense, especially the latter as it has become more built up. The way I see it is if their buses are dead running from a garage through an area with no or little service, just turn it into a regular route! Potters Bar is one example where they could suddenly massively improve the surrounding areas buses.
As for Thorpe Park, the size of its parking lot suggests it should be apart of the transport system of the city it is next too. It would at least raise the profile of the existing service. I don't see how it's that different from them serving Lakeside.
As I know all too well, traffic doesn't neatly follow boundaries, it surpasses them on a daily basis.
The only way this could work is if the London boroughs boundaries are redrawn. I thought there was a move somewhere in Essex to try to transfer to London.
And for that, we get regular buses on multiple routes from at least 5am to 1am, roads that are maintained far more often and are laid with better quality materials, street lighting that stays on overnight and rail travel free at the point of use for over 60s+ and qualifying disabled people and free buses for school children. There may be other benefits too. But sounds like a lot back for the cost.
That's assuming every council surrounding London has lower council tax, others said at least Spelthorne has higher council tax and you get a lot less back. All I know is mine, Broxbourne regularly brags about low council tax and we get barely anything back for it. Makes more sense for a bit of council tax to cover the public services we need to live life, including transport.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The only way this could work is if the London boroughs boundaries are redrawn. I thought there was a move somewhere in Essex to try to transfer to London.
This has been said before on here, but I still don't understand why boundaries need to be redrawn just to extend some buses where it would be logical to do so. We just need the different authorities to ensure we can get from theirs to the neighbours authorities effectively, that's it.
Also Thurrock was reportedly considering joining London until the government said no, while the Romford MP wants his cake and to eat it by going back to Essex and maintaining the Freedom Pass somehow. Concessions I can understand having boundaries to qualify but the transport services themselves, it has to be looser.
Broxbourne regularly brags about low council tax and we get barely anything back for it. Makes more sense for a bit of council tax to cover the public services we need to live life, including transport.
If the residents of a place consistently vote for a party that promises lower taxes, that's what they'll get.
You personally may not have voted that way, but democracy means that not everyone does get what they want.
If better public services are a priority for the people of Broxbourne then they need to vote accordingly.
If the residents of a place consistently vote for a party that promises lower taxes, that's what they'll get.
You personally may not have voted that way, but democracy means that not everyone does get what they want.
If better public services are a priority for the people of Broxbourne then they need to vote accordingly.
What they don't tell people though is a sizable amount of the borough isn't managed by them anyway. Under the surface, a lot of the south of the borough is managed by Enfield instead as the land in the estates is owned by Enfield not Broxbourne, not just the property but the land too. When combined with the 2 tier system, it leads to a ton of local confusion, even down to specific patches of grass being disputed! It may not reduce this part of the friction but I really can't wait until we get a unitary. The scale should iron some things out and hopefully reduce the postcode lottery for things like transport. Which even on the London side next to us, you could argue is hit negatively as buses don't go where they need to go always. Regardless of politics, Waltham Cross is not a good terminus.
This has been said before on here, but I still don't understand why boundaries need to be redrawn just to extend some buses where it would be logical to do so. We just need the different authorities to ensure we can get from theirs to the neighbours authorities effectively, that's it.
If the outside London boroughs decline to subsidise cross boundary routes, then by moving that town into a London Borough means that they are then covered by TfL. Residents would pay precepts to TfL, in return for which, they might get an improved bus service.
Yes, in an ideal world all Councils would play nicely together, but when you have Councils outside of London of a different political persuasion to London, with different priorities and policies, then you will get bus routes on the boundaries which are less than ideal.
If the outside London boroughs decline to subsidise cross boundary routes, then by moving that town into a London Borough means that they are then covered by TfL. Residents would pay precepts to TfL, in return for which, they might get an improved bus service.
Yes, in an ideal world all Councils would play nicely together, but when you have Councils outside of London of a different political persuasion to London, with different priorities and policies, then you will get bus routes on the boundaries which are less than ideal.
In short, the counties surrounding London don't have the funds to invest in public transport - Hertfordshire spends 71% of its entire budget on social care and SEND requirements, and Herts is one of the best at living within its means - only a £4.2m deficit in the last FY. Kent's financial situation is pretty awful. Stuff like Surrey's 465 support is very much the exception. So they can't afford it.
As I've already mentioned, TfL is also financially compromised. They've got sucked into a bad position where they are increasingly taking money from the tube (and that's being reflected in declining standards there) to support a bus network where the PVR has fallen (despite slower road speeds - it's been achieved by wholesale cuts and reductions) and passenger figures are also falling in contrast to the rest of the UK. Moreover, we are seeing substantial uplifts in prices for new contracts. TfL are having to pay much more for the same...so expect more cuts. In that light, they aren't going to expand the level of cross border services whilst cutting existing facilities.
We would all believe that public transport investment is laudable.... well, we would on this forum. However, we'd also like to see investment in the NHS, a removal of NHS dentistry deserts, increasing defence spending, the rebuilding of RAAC riddled schools and every other perfectly understandable and altruistically minded aspiration. Unfortunately, we have a demographic challenge - more NEETs, more pensioners (more pensions and greater strain on NHS) and a tax burden shouldered by fewer workers. Other than some sort of Logan's Run type society, or forced labour, it's a challenge to raise enough funds and not alienate much of the population.
The reality is that TfL's remit being expanded, significant money to local authorities. or a redrawing of boundaries isn't going to happen any time soon because the country's finances and politics won't allow.
It’s good to point this out.
Though I do think Bluewater is an anomaly. I am surprised they are not curtailed at Dartford, instead all three TfL routes continue to Bluewater, with no contribution from Kent County Council I believe. It’s great they they do this (as well as linking areas of SE London to the Darent Valley Hospital), but I doubt this would be introduced if Bluewater was built in more recent times.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
![Political control: The first elections to the council were held in 1973, initially acting as a shadow authority until the new arrangements took effect on 1 April 1974. The Conservatives have held a majority of the seats on the council since 1974: Party in control / Years Conservative 1974–present Leadership The role of mayor is largely ceremonial in Broxbourne, and is usually held by a different councillor each year. Political leadership is instead provided by the leader of the council. The leaders since 2010 have been: Councillor Party From To Paul Mason[11] Conservative 2010 May 2014 Mark Mills-Bishop[12][13] Conservative 2014 14 May 2019 Lewis Cocking[13][14] Conservative 14 May 2019 May 2024 Mark Mills-Bishop[15][16] Conservative 14 May 2024 May 2025 Corina Gander[16] Conservative 13 May 2025 Composition Following the 2024 election and changes of allegiance up to March 2025, the composition of the council was as follows:[17][18] Party Councillors Conservative 25 Labour 3 Reform 2 Total 30](https://www.railforums.co.uk/data/attachments/192/192773-8404bc2680976d0c369ea1c911951106.jpg "Political control: The first elections to the council were held in 1973, initially acting as a shadow authority until the new arrangements took effect on 1 April 1974. The Conservatives have held a majority of the seats on the council since 1974: Party in control / Years Conservative 1974–present Leadership The role of mayor is largely ceremonial in Broxbourne, and is usually held by a different councillor each year. Political leadership is instead provided by the leader of the council. The leaders since 2010 have been: Councillor Party From To Paul Mason[11] Conservative 2010 May 2014 Mark Mills-Bishop[12][13] Conservative 2014 14 May 2019 Lewis Cocking[13][14] Conservative 14 May 2019 May 2024 Mark Mills-Bishop[15][16] Conservative 14 May 2024 May 2025 Corina Gander[16] Conservative 13 May 2025 Composition Following the 2024 election and changes of allegiance up to March 2025, the composition of the council was as follows:[17][18] Party Councillors Conservative 25 Labour 3 Reform 2 Total 30")
