London Buses Discussion

[Statto]

There are about 10 buses an hour between Greenhithe Station and Bluewater on Kent Fastrack routes A and F and the hourly X80.

The nearest bus stop with a TfL service is Waterstone Park which has the half-hourly 492 TfL service.

What with the £3 fare cap were on TFL buses it's £1.75, it can be cheaper going to Dartford for Bluewater than changing at Greenhithe.

 

[Thirteen]

Could there be a situation where GAL retains the routes they terminated early on better terms? I can't see them wanting to lose some of the legacy routes like the 93.

 

[cnjb8]

Could there be a situation where GAL retains the routes they terminated early on better terms? I can't see them wanting to lose some of the legacy routes like the 93.

Can see GAL retaining some of the Sutton routes, not many other garages in the area that can accommodate the routes or are close enough especially since the closure of RATPs Epsom depot

 

[MotCO]

Can see GAL retaining some of the Sutton routes, not many other garages in the area that can accommodate the routes or are close enough especially since the closure of RATPs Epsom depot

Agree up to a point. First have a new depot at Wandsworth (Tootbus) which could operate the 93, Arriva have a depot in Croydon and Transport UK have depots in Battersea and Bedlington.

 

[Bishopstone]

Could there be a situation where GAL retains the routes they terminated early on better terms? I can't see them wanting to lose some of the legacy routes like the 93.

That's the point of exercising their break clause. They're not walking away from the London bus market - despite some media coverage implying this - and will, I'm sure, expect to win most of the surrendered routes back, on terms more viable for GAL.

Even if they lose some work, it was loss-making for them on the original terms, and exiting from a loss-making situation is a reasonable end in itself.

 

[Thirteen]

Agree up to a point. First have a new depot at Wandsworth (Tootbus) which could operate the 93, Arriva have a depot in Croydon and Transport UK have depots in Battersea and Bedlington.

I think First would probably want the 39 rather than the 93 although that's not going to be available anytime soon.

 

[alex397]

What with the £3 fare cap were on TFL buses it's £1.75, it can be cheaper going to Dartford for Bluewater than changing at Greenhithe.

The £3 fare cap doesn’t mean they’re arn’t cheaper fares - Greenhithe to Bluewater costs £2 on the Fastrack.
But yes it would be cheaper to get off a train at Dartford then get a fast TfL bus to Bluewater. Though it would take longer.

One thing I’ve noticed when looking at the routes recently, the 96 is allowed to use the Fastrack busway, from Watling Street (near the Darent Valley Hospital) down into Bluewater. But the 428 is not allowed, and has to negotiate the two big roundabouts at Bean , which can be very congested. I assumed both TfL routes that come from that way could use it.

 

[londonbridge]

SL7 seems to be diverting along the 213 route between New Malden Fountain Roundabout and Kingston Station. According to the TfL website this is for “local borough works” and is ongoing until 24th January 2027. However the 131 doesn’t seem to be affected and is following its usual route along Kingston Road, so I see no reason why the SL7 has to divert?

Attached image is a screenshot from the TFL website detailing the diversion.

 

[Mattplans]

On Saturday route B15 changes operator from Arriva to GoAhead.

I think the route currently has some of the oldest buses in London, being mainly operated with ENX class enviro 200s from 2009 (and couple of 2011-2012 buses)

You wouldn’t believe that the some of the (older) buses on the route even have USB ports. I was extremely shocked to see this a couple weeis back. Should’ve taken a photo

 

[MotCO]

SL7 seems to be diverting along the 213 route between New Malden Fountain Roundabout and Kingston Station. According to the TfL website this is for “local borough works” and is ongoing until 24th January 2027. However the 131 doesn’t seem to be affected and is following its usual route along Kingston Road, so I see no reason why the SL7 has to divert?

Attached image is a screenshot from the TFL website detailing the diversion.View attachment 197761

I saw the buses diverting yesterday - seemed strange to see them in New Malden High Street. I assume there are no missing stops along the original route except for the Fountain (Kingston Road). Possibly on diversion to avoid traffic delays on the normal route? In which case, is this a first?

 

[700007]

I saw the buses diverting yesterday - seemed strange to see them in New Malden High Street. I assume there are no missing stops along the original route except for the Fountain (Kingston Road). Possibly on diversion to avoid traffic delays on the normal route? In which case, is this a first?

This is indeed correct, a decision was made by TfL and Go-Ahead to divert the route away from the temporary lights to protect service delivery from expected heavy traffic delays.

 

[Instinct04]

Why are you acting like where I live is so far away, that a London bus to Cheshunt is somehow impossible? I have walked back from Waltham Cross after taking the night bus many times, it's 2 miles and built up the whole way, it's not comparable to Harlow or Sevenoaks and it's not a village. I want Cheshunt to get the same treatment as it's neighbours in Herts and Essex, that's it. In fact, Borehamwood's London bus provision hasn't changed in 40 years, so there should not be a difference.

London buses dead run within a 15 to 20 minute walk of where I live, to/ from Potters Bar Garage every day which suggests to me, a revision of the network in Enfield/ Waltham Cross is possible. As said before, the Crews Hill development will force that change and because it's on the very edge of Greater London, will have to include something to the likes of Cheshunt. Would be a lot easier if they tended garage by garage with a clear radius of routes, rather do each route separately. The likes of Potters Bar is going nowhere though.

Some of the cross-boundary gaps in provision are laughable.

Barnet Spires to Potters Bar (now covered by 243 despite Potters Bar Garage housing some suitable routes for this section like 263) - 2.8 miles
Lea Valley Campsite to Sun Street, Waltham Abbey (no service) - 2.3 miles - Another 1.5 miles to Waltham Cross
Waltham Cross to Brookfield Centre (242) - 3.3 miles as it goes via Bury Green

Waltham Cross Bus Station to Potters Bar Garage is about 8 miles and buses dead run this! They never use the M25 to go to the garage.

I've walked all these (except the last one) numerous times and know these distances are inconsequential to any organisation the size of TFL. It's something that bothers me as these sections (minus Brookfield as it didn't exist till the 80s) were served by London buses and for many decades. The way I see is TFL extending a bus or 2 is nothing to them but would be life changing to people on these sections and further afield and maybe even add capacity to the busiest routes on the network, as travel patterns adjust.

I would get your point if I was arguing for the 375 to be extended from Passingford Bridge to Ongar, where there really is nothing on the way.

It shouldn't be about politics or voters or whatever, it should be about adding 2 and 2 together with transport and development and ensuring the wider region succeeds together. Not sure they are doing this with Superloop either, some of the changes seem blind. The way London is governed seems unfit for purpose and a bit behind other city regions too.

A bit of flexibility on all sides but especially TFL's side is needed. Like why does every route have to run the full route or have the same terminus? In practice they don't follow this themselves, it's not just a handful of routes with different end points but all the times they chuck everyone off with no warning and sometimes at random to turn around. Even had that happen a few times when there was no traffic anywhere!

Aron, I agree with every point you have made here.

Cheshunt is not at all far from the TFL border, and it absolutely deserves a better bus service to the likes of Waltham Cross, Waltham Abbey and Enfield.

I think that some of the folks on here don't live in your area and the issues that you have highlighted do not affect them, hence, they do not care. Some of the points they have made are valid though.

Basically, I see it as this:

TFL are strapped for cash enough as it is. They will only fund routes that come under Greater London and will only run to borders where they see fit and where it makes sense, or unless the county across the border helps to pay for the route as well (e.g 465 to Dorking.)

Unfortunately, however, Cheshunt, Waltham Cross and Waltham Abbey are out of TFL boundaries. I agree that they absolutely should be serving all of these towns. It would make for much easier local trips, access to leisure destinations and so on. But in this current financial climate I don't think it can happen.

These towns therefore have higher car usage, and then the demand for local public transport decreases further, so it is very much a catch 22.

The question that nobody on here seems to be asking is why Hertfordshire council aren't doing anything to improve Cheshunt's bus links?

Arriva's 310 bus route comes to mind immediately. Running from Waltham Cross to Hertford, I think it is ripe for a turn up and go 15-minute service throughout the week, except evenings when it should go down to 3bph.

However it only has this frequency Monday to Friday daytimes. On Saturdays it seems to be every 20 minutes, down to every 30 minutes on Sundays.

Why?

This route is an essential link through Waltham Cross, Cheshunt, Broxbourne, Ware and Hertford. If this route was every 15 minutes, and was actually reliable, then maybe locals residents like Aron here wouldn't be complaining.

 

[aron2smith]

Basically, I see it as this:

TFL are strapped for cash enough as it is. They will only fund routes that come under Greater London and will only run to borders where they see fit and where it makes sense, or unless the county across the border helps to pay for the route as well (e.g 465 to Dorking.)

Unfortunately, however, Cheshunt, Waltham Cross and Waltham Abbey are out of TFL boundaries. I agree that they absolutely should be serving all of these towns. It would make for much easier local trips, access to leisure destinations and so on. But in this current financial climate I don't think it can happen.

These towns therefore have higher car usage, and then the demand for local public transport decreases further, so it is very much a catch 22.

This is why I point out the future developments on here again and again. Enfield side you have Chase Park and Crews Hill, Cheshunt you have Brookfield, the station area and Rosedale, Waltham Abbey and Potters Bar also have their own planned expansions. This is even more of a given under this government, who have just denied Three Rivers (also bordering London) claiming their local plan doesn't have enough housing, so the expectation's there and I think they mean it this time. Today's traffic problems as well as the locations of the proposed developments means business can't go on as usual with transport. We urgently need more housing but we desperately need better infrastructure and services. Our MP pandering to the NIMBYs doesn't solve today's or our future's problems.

I agree TFL is in a hard place, but it also can't properly achieve its objectives without expanding bus services lacking them and Superloop isn't enough, it needs to include genuinely new routes and connections. I find it mad that TFL would cut buses anywhere on the Hertford Road Corridor when in reality, it's always so busy, it needs alternate routes to take the pressure off of the 279. Extending the 215 to Waltham Cross would help.

The question that nobody on here seems to be asking is why Hertfordshire council aren't doing anything to improve Cheshunt's bus links?

Arriva's 310 bus route comes to mind immediately. Running from Waltham Cross to Hertford, I think it is ripe for a turn up and go 15-minute service throughout the week, except evenings when it should go down to 3bph.

However it only has this frequency Monday to Friday daytimes. On Saturdays it seems to be every 20 minutes, down to every 30 minutes on Sundays.

Why?

This route is an essential link through Waltham Cross, Cheshunt, Broxbourne, Ware and Hertford. If this route was every 15 minutes, and was actually reliable, then maybe locals residents like Aron here wouldn't be complaining.

I really do get the impression that if it isn't Hertford, Ware, Stevenage, Welwyn, Hatfield, St Albans, Hemel or Watford, HCC doesn't care. On the Essex side, if it isn't South Essex, Chelmsford or Colchester, the same thing. Anyone on the edges, seems like it's tough and yet the Tories really don't like it when you suggest a town like Cheshunt should change counties!

I do wonder what Essex would do if TFL decided to ever pull out of Loughton and Debden? The 20 route 7 days a week runs until after Midnight, every 15 minutes daytime, every 30 - evenings and Sundays. A big contrast to either the 66 or 310.

You are right the huge drop in frequency is a big problem, but so is the more limited operating hours. On the TFL side, bus frequencies drop of course but it's more managed. 279 drops from every 6 to 10, 217 drops from every 12 to 20 and 317 and 491 drops from every 20 to 30 as examples. A reduced service but still very usable. Dropping from every 15 to 60 is too much.

Does seem in Cheshunt, we are stuck next to areas with less demand for buses. The 251 seems designed to deal with less demand at Hammond Street, 242 - Cuffley and 310 - Turnford/ Broxbourne. It really doesn't help that the nearest garages to Cheshunt don't have routes serving Cheshunt. The garages in Southbury and Potters Bar would logically serve here, instead the buses come from Ware and Hatfield, much further away! Again dictating the level of service we get and meaning we get less services. It don't add up.

 

[Intro298]

You wouldn’t believe that the some of the (older) buses on the route even have USB ports. I was extremely shocked to see this a couple weeis back. Should’ve taken a photo

ENX10 (LJ12 BYT) has USB ports, as it's an ex-SL5 bus.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

TFL are strapped for cash enough as it is. They will only fund routes that come under Greater London and will only run to borders where they see fit and where it makes sense, or unless the county across the border helps to pay for the route as well (e.g 465 to Dorking.)

Unfortunately, however, Cheshunt, Waltham Cross and Waltham Abbey are out of TFL boundaries. I agree that they absolutely should be serving all of these towns. It would make for much easier local trips, access to leisure destinations and so on. But in this current financial climate I don't think it can happen.

These towns therefore have higher car usage, and then the demand for local public transport decreases further, so it is very much a catch 22.

TfL are more than strapped for cash; the bus network is costing more and is increasingly being propped up by the tube, and hence the cuts which then leads to reduced ridership. So whilst it is all very laudable to want TfL levels of bus provision in the provinces, they have enough trying to provide what they can to the actual residents who vote for the mayor and pay the money.

One thing I would say is that whilst Cheshunt, Waltham Cross and Waltham Abbey have higher car usage, don't ignore the fact that these are (in many ways) dormitory towns. They have quick and ready access to the M25 and that is also a significant factor!

The question that nobody on here seems to be asking is why Hertfordshire council aren't doing anything to improve Cheshunt's bus links?

Well, they have in that they introduced the 907 to Stevenage using BSIP funds. However, the main reason is that they are equally financially challenged. The total budget for Herts is just over £1.2bn - not much more than the entire TfL bus subsidy!

Like most local authorities, they have an increasing burden of social care and SEND costs, and to quote the extracts from their budget summary released in January:

This budget has been set in an extremely challenging financial context with demand for services, complexity of cases and costs continuing to increase.

We are among the worst affected by the Government’s new funding formula for councils which cuts our funding and takes away over £40 million in grant funding a year by 2028/29.

To reduce the burden placed on taxpayers, we will continue to innovate and ensure we're working as efficiently as possible to reduce costs and provide good value for money. We will deliver a further £55m in savings on top of the £42 million delivered this financial year and grow our income by £12 million

Current proposals put forward present a headline budget that requires the use of £5m of reserves in addition to having to raise Council Tax by 2.99 per cent plus 2 per cent to support Adult Social Care in April. https://www.hertfordshire.gov.uk/about-the-council/news/news-archive/26-27-draft-budget-published

So the main areas where they're spending extra money

• £21 million extra for residential care to meet rising demand and costs of care workers’ pay (increasing to £42 million and then £62 million by the third year).
  £23 million extra for community car (increasing to £45 million and then £67 million by the third year) to recruit extra and retain people into the adult care workforce
• £16 million to support the children in our care and children with disabilities through adversity by creating stable homes for them
• £1.4 million increase in fostering allowances
• £6.3 million for children and young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) by recruiting more Educational Psychologists and staff

Arguably, they are more important to most people and hence they're more focussed on those areas (which are also statutory responsibilities) than bus services.

 

[aron2smith]

TfL are more than strapped for cash; the bus network is costing more and is increasingly being propped up by the tube, and hence the cuts which then leads to reduced ridership. So whilst it is all very laudable to want TfL levels of bus provision in the provinces, they have enough trying to provide what they can to the actual residents who vote for the mayor and pay the money.

One thing I would say is that whilst Cheshunt, Waltham Cross and Waltham Abbey have higher car usage, don't ignore the fact that these are (in many ways) dormitory towns. They have quick and ready access to the M25 and that is also a significant factor!

As I said before they are running buses through the area out of service. Potters Bar Garage could easily cover this area if they wanted to. If garages had catchment areas, Southbury and maybe even Edmonton would too.

And at least you agree induced demand is a thing. Problem is that stretch of A10 is notorious. What is a 5 minute drive when the road is empty, can easily take 30+ minutes, often longer in rush hour. The A10 can't be widened as houses are all along it so any capacity improvements are limited. That proposed hamburger junction will fill up quickly with all the planned developments in the area. Found out last night they are building on one of the last nurseries in Hammond Street, an area with poor bus services and no local amenities. This piecemeal development needs to stop and instead plan at a scale where service improvements are guaranteed and centre development around public transport.

A couple times a month the wider area grinds to a halt suggesting there is no capacity for any more cars. That leaves public transport as the only real solution, but Herts and TFL need to bridge the gap. Seems like something councillors are actually aware of but few signs of any action.

Also saw a fair few dormitory towns while riding the buses around London, they are well used precisely because they exist. Orpington and Biggin Hill, New Addington, all the residential parts around Bromley, Sutton etc. Chingford, Harold Wood, Hainault, much of NW London, loads of places like it that appear quieter but because of the bus service are busier than you'd think. Induced demand. People will use them if they can get home as easily as they could get to their destination. Part of why ending almost all buses by 7:30pm is no good and very limiting. If anything, dormitory towns are precisely the places that need the bus improvements most, as most have significant residential areas away from rail or tube.

Well, they have in that they introduced the 907 to Stevenage using BSIP funds. However, the main reason is that they are equally financially challenged. The total budget for Herts is just over £1.2bn - not much more than the entire TfL bus subsidy!

Like most local authorities, they have an increasing burden of social care and SEND costs, and to quote the extracts from their budget summary released in January:

I appreciate the 907 but would like the other way to be improved too, it's supposed to be a network. It's either enhance the services from Brookfield to Waltham Cross or extend a TFL route out here.

The government will be funding SEND provision in a couple years and in the meantime are essentially resetting the system as 90% of council debts from SEND are being written off completely. Just leaves Social Care as the main issue then. Hopefully we'll hear plans soon.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

As I said before they are running buses through the area out of service. Potters Bar Garage could easily cover this area if they wanted to. If garages had catchment areas, Southbury and maybe even Edmonton would too.

Yes and better people than me have explained this on more than one occasion. The location of the depots is irrelevant - placement journeys are limited and are subject to tender results and still have to be funded.

The government will be funding SEND provision in a couple years and in the meantime are essentially resetting the system as 90% of council debts from SEND are being written off completely. Just leaves Social Care as the main issue then. Hopefully we'll hear plans soon.

Even with SEND being funded centrally, the social care burden is huge. As I posted above, that includes

• £21 million extra for residential care to meet rising demand and costs of care workers’ pay (increasing to £42 million and then £62 million by the third year).
  £23 million extra for community care (increasing to £45 million and then £67 million by the third year) to recruit extra and retain people into the adult care workforce
• £16 million to support the children in our care and children with disabilities through adversity by creating stable homes for them
• £1.4 million increase in fostering allowances

So whilst SEND is an important area, in % terms, it is far from being the main spending area and, if you read the statement, Herts are also cutting services AND are taking £5m out of reserves to balance the books.

And at least you agree induced demand is a thing.

I never said it wasn't, and anyone who does is clearly wrong. It was one of the first things I learnt in my Transport and Logistics degree. However, bus patronage is derived demand, unless you're out for a jolly.

As for the propensity for car usage, it is clearly driven by the provision of good road links. The reality is that much of the A10 traffic is heading to the M25. It's what is fuelling development. Increasing bus provision isn't really tackling that. As for the mention of how popular bus travel is around certain areas... I had a look at the 320 (main route out of Biggin Hill). It has, on average, 463 passengers from the stops in the town across an average 80 journeys on a typical day. It's not a huge number.

Sadly, even whilst the idea of additional cross border links is very laudable, they will require substantial funding and neither TfL nor the provinces have got the cash.

 

[Deerfold]

As I said before they are running buses through the area out of service. Potters Bar Garage could easily cover this area if they wanted to. If garages had catchment areas, Southbury and maybe even Edmonton would too.

So now you're just wanting to completely change the way buses are franchised in London?

 

[Snow1964]

Yes and better people than me have explained this on more than one occasion.

Also, it’s not a case of where the depots are - it’s funding!!!!

And a mayor that has set fares at £1.75 when in most of England fares are £3, so fares revenue per passenger is 40% short.

Of course the other side of the equation is costs, and running large expensive double decks late into evening with token number of passengers, or at high frequencies midday is going to run up the costs

 

[700007]

As I said before they are running buses through the area out of service. Potters Bar Garage could easily cover this area if they wanted to. If garages had catchment areas, Southbury and maybe even Edmonton would too.

And at least you agree induced demand is a thing. Problem is that stretch of A10 is notorious. What is a 5 minute drive when the road is empty, can easily take 30+ minutes, often longer in rush hour. The A10 can't be widened as houses are all along it so any capacity improvements are limited. That proposed hamburger junction will fill up quickly with all the planned developments in the area. Found out last night they are building on one of the last nurseries in Hammond Street, an area with poor bus services and no local amenities. This piecemeal development needs to stop and instead plan at a scale where service improvements are guaranteed and centre development around public transport.

A couple times a month the wider area grinds to a halt suggesting there is no capacity for any more cars. That leaves public transport as the only real solution, but Herts and TFL need to bridge the gap. Seems like something councillors are actually aware of but few signs of any action.

Also saw a fair few dormitory towns while riding the buses around London, they are well used precisely because they exist. Orpington and Biggin Hill, New Addington, all the residential parts around Bromley, Sutton etc. Chingford, Harold Wood, Hainault, much of NW London, loads of places like it that appear quieter but because of the bus service are busier than you'd think. Induced demand. People will use them if they can get home as easily as they could get to their destination. Part of why ending almost all buses by 7:30pm is no good and very limiting. If anything, dormitory towns are precisely the places that need the bus improvements most, as most have significant residential areas away from rail or tube.

I appreciate the 907 but would like the other way to be improved too, it's supposed to be a network. It's either enhance the services from Brookfield to Waltham Cross or extend a TFL route out here.

The government will be funding SEND provision in a couple years and in the meantime are essentially resetting the system as 90% of council debts from SEND are being written off completely. Just leaves Social Care as the main issue then. Hopefully we'll hear plans soon.

The issue is as explained before the buses running out of service to Potters Bar garage are only because Metroline hold the tender for relevant routes that dead run that way to and from Barnet. If they lose a route (such as the 34, 125 and 307 in recent years) then less buses are needed to go dead between the two places. Also the logistics of interweaving these workings is very difficult without it impacting on service punctuality or driving hours. The vehicle type - it being TfL land - would need to be consistent. It can't be a VWH as the first bus and then a DEM from the second bus.

I think you speak of a wider policy ill in the Hertfordshire area. It notoriously is one of the hardest and worst places to run commercial bus services in the UK let alone the home counties. There's a multitude of factors that contribute to this. The first is that TfL services really don't get far beyond the border because there just happens to be convenient places to terminate buses (such as Waltham Cross, in this instance). There's also unusually no overlap between TfL services going into Herts and Herts services going into London as you would see in other areas such as Surrey (think Kingston) or Berkshire/Buckinghamshire (think Uxbridge). You are effectively forced to change in a bus station that's not really conveniently placed to anything else including local rail services or much of the actual housing or shops in the town centre, to continue your journey across the border.

Hertfordshire also has a wider issue with the fact that the major towns are so far apart and there is barely any infill in between them. Waltham Cross is not near Watford, nor is it near Hatfield or Stevenage. It means running mileage intensive services but most people just want to make hyper-local journeys to the Tesco or train station or something like that. That's why services are so poor as it's difficult to commercially ramp up services without costs spiralling out of control and revenue not quite matching up.

 

[aron2smith]

Only because TfL took so long to get buses with USB ports.

So now you're just wanting to completely change the way buses are franchised in London?

Yes. A garage should have a set list of routes based on its capacity and like how a rail franchise runs, the company runs everything as listed. The routes shouldn't move from garage to garage at all. TFL should aim to own the garages again and plan its network on that basis, could tie it into development then which I argue is essential. So Potters Bar currently has 16 routes including school routes, I'm sure of the routes make sense but ideally it would include the routes to Barnet and Waltham Cross from there. It quite rightly runs routes in Enfield and Barnet at least.

I think the way Sullivans went the other year and now the current hiccups with Go Ahead in and around Sutton/ Merton suggests some major reforms are needed to London buses.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Feb 2026 ==

Sadly, even whilst the idea of additional cross border links is very laudable, they will require substantial funding and neither TfL nor the provinces have got the cash.

Tonight again, major traffic jams in the area so the bus didn't turn up and had to walk 40 minutes and saw no buses until near the end. Not enough money is not good enough a reason to me, transport just doesn't work here and more people will be moving in, in the coming years. How much does that indirectly cost? There's no confidence in using what exists. It shouldn't be like this just outside London.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Yes. A garage should have a set list of routes based on its capacity and like how a rail franchise runs, the company runs everything as listed. The routes shouldn't move from garage to garage at all. TFL should aim to own the garages again and plan its network on that basis, could tie it into development then which I argue is essential. So Potters Bar currently has 16 routes including school routes, I'm sure of the routes make sense but ideally it would include the routes to Barnet and Waltham Cross from there. It quite rightly runs routes in Enfield and Barnet at least.

This is a misnomer and let's not get distracted.

Whichever depot runs whatever route, the fact is that any significant increase to cross border services would require extensive funding and that is the one thing that is in short supply.

 

[aron2smith]

I think you speak of a wider policy ill in the Hertfordshire area. It notoriously is one of the hardest and worst places to run commercial bus services in the UK let alone the home counties. There's a multitude of factors that contribute to this. The first is that TfL services really don't get far beyond the border because there just happens to be convenient places to terminate buses (such as Waltham Cross, in this instance). There's also unusually no overlap between TfL services going into Herts and Herts services going into London as you would see in other areas such as Surrey (think Kingston) or Berkshire/Buckinghamshire (think Uxbridge). You are effectively forced to change in a bus station that's not really conveniently placed to anything else including local rail services or much of the actual housing or shops in the town centre, to continue your journey across the border.

Interesting points and Kingston and Uxbridge are where the services clearly work well. Heathrow may help but a lot of non-TFL routes don't go that far. If it was like that in Cheshunt, I wouldn't complain.

Hertfordshire also has a wider issue with the fact that the major towns are so far apart and there is barely any infill in between them. Waltham Cross is not near Watford, nor is it near Hatfield or Stevenage. It means running mileage intensive services but most people just want to make hyper-local journeys to the Tesco or train station or something like that. That's why services are so poor as it's difficult to commercially ramp up services without costs spiralling out of control and revenue not quite matching up.

They are really not that far apart. Every couple miles is another town. Was quite shocked how built up Herts was from the plane. It's the east and north that I would agree with you on. I agree things don't match up here but I would argue that is because the shape and boundaries don't add up. Significantly different towns and villages are thrown together and councils cut across and fragment natural travel patterns. I wouldn't complain if it was like Borehamwood (mostly TFL) or Bishop's Stortford alike (non-TFL) if an interchange existed directly at the station here in Cheshunt too. Even neighbouring Cuffley does a far better job and despite the trains, still has some demand for buses. Just a more social need, which is still demand.

The question is why do they have to be commercial in the first place? Just run an appropriate and stable service that covers all different times of day based on local needs and typically run some journeys later than this to cover all bases.

Other than traffic why are buses such a problem in Hertfordshire? Seems like any other county with a similar urban rural geography doesn't have this issue. Maybe because of the lack of 1 dominant town, but London has no 1 really dominant area either, difference is the gaps are mostly filled in with development.

 

[Instinct04]

Aron, I agree with every point you have made here.

Cheshunt is not at all far from the TFL border, and it absolutely deserves a better bus service to the likes of Waltham Cross, Waltham Abbey and Enfield.

I now join you on this forum, my brother! Right, anyways...

I wouldn't complain if it was like Borehamwood (mostly TFL) or Bishop's Stortford alike (non-TFL) if an interchange existed directly at the station here in Cheshunt too.

So, you want more buses at Cheshunt - fine. Where would they turn around? The car park is as tight as it is. Any expansion to build a bus turning circle would require demolition of nearby homes. NIMBY's and other objections would almost instantly put blocks on this.

 

[Instinct04]

I now join you on this forum, my brother! Right, anyways...



So, you want more buses at Cheshunt - fine. Where would they turn around? The car park is as tight as it is. Any expansion to build a bus turning circle would require demolition of nearby homes. NIMBY's and other objections would almost instantly put blocks on this.

Fancy seeing you here lol.

Weren’t there recent development plans that included putting in a new road, thus allowing buses to serve the area around the station easier? @aron2smith can shed some light on this I believe.

 

[Thirteen]

I saw the buses diverting yesterday - seemed strange to see them in New Malden High Street. I assume there are no missing stops along the original route except for the Fountain (Kingston Road). Possibly on diversion to avoid traffic delays on the normal route? In which case, is this a first?

So they've temporarily moved the bus stop location for SL7 from the Fountain to the bus stop around the corner? I wonder if they might move the Superloop thingy to the new location so that passengers are aware of the new temporary bus stop?

 

[Mark L]

Interesting points and Kingston and Uxbridge are where the services clearly work well. Heathrow may help but a lot of non-TFL routes don't go that far.

Kingston and Uxbridge are probably atypical as they are both relatively close to the boundary so the issues that make running a commercial service along roads also served by TfL are less significant. By contrast Croydon, Bromley and Romford have all lost their non-TfL links and, in most cases the replacements only just cross the boundary.

How many more non-TfL routes would you run to Heathrow? There are already around 20 (I say “around” as it depends on whether the Railair service, night-time services and the H21/H30 which don’t leave Greater London are included) routes to the airport from most towns in an arc from north to south within an hour or so (and which, crucially, are home to large numbers of airport workers). In practice it would actually be almost impossible to fit any more buses into the main terminal points on the airport - CBS, HX or T5 as the bus stations there are at (or occasionally beyond) capacity. There are also regular (and in many cases frequent) coach services to destinations farther afield.

 

[Mikey C]

The issue is as explained before the buses running out of service to Potters Bar garage are only because Metroline hold the tender for relevant routes that dead run that way to and from Barnet. If they lose a route (such as the 34, 125 and 307 in recent years) then less buses are needed to go dead between the two places. Also the logistics of interweaving these workings is very difficult without it impacting on service punctuality or driving hours. The vehicle type - it being TfL land - would need to be consistent. It can't be a VWH as the first bus and then a DEM from the second bus.

And buses run out of service at irregular times of the day. During the heart of the morning and evening rush hours, I imagine NO buses run to and from the garage.

I have taken a Metroline 82 (now the 13 run by First) to Potters Bar many years ago, as I overslept on a bus and the driver didn't notice I was there. I woke up just before the garage

 

[Mark L]

And buses run out of service at irregular times of the day. During the heart of the morning and evening rush hours, I imagine NO buses run to and from the garage.

I have taken a Metroline 82 (now the 13 run by First) to Potters Bar many years ago, as I overslept on a bus and the driver didn't notice I was there. I woke up just before the garage

…and out of service buses won’t necessarily follow the same route at all times.

 

[duncombec]

@aron2smith is probably well aware that TfL schedules are available online as part of their regular online publications. He could tell us exactly which garage journeys he thinks would would be useful. PB has a PVR of 124, so surely there must be some?

Taking the 317 as an example, a service to actually serve Waltham Cross, on Mondays to Fridays the vehicles run from Potters Bar Garage to Waltham Cross at 0410, 0510, 0622 and 0650, with the peak fifth vehicle restarting at 1431. The return at 1018 (peak working), 1939, 0055 and 0125. There are other workings to Enfield (one AM, then an evening swap of four back and 2 back out).

Is there a secret nightlife in Waltham Cross that requires a 0125 return journey?