Speeding up slow journeys between London boroughs

[miklcct]

London is a global player when it comes to public transport connectivity, but the issue with cities of its size is that away from the mainline corridors, everywhere takes so long to get to. For example Epsom Downs is only 10 miles from Clapham Junction as the crow flies, but it takes longer to get there than it does from Basingstoke, at least 30 miles further away. Moreover, Sutton to Stratford (London) is a quarter of the distance of Waterloo to Southampton but the journey takes just as long due to the stopping nature of cross-London rail services.

It's because the rail service is circuitous. A faster journey can theoretically be done by changing at Sutton for a service via Mitcham, but unfortunately the failure of our privatised rail network means that companies aren't willing to invest in such improvements, and the DfT bows over political pressure too easily (e.g. in the case of the proposal trying to terminate the Sutton loop at Blackfriars in exchange for a reliable 4 tph around the loop - and now the service is basically unusable at the first sign of disruption).

Therefore, TfL wishes to take over the suburban railways in South London to make them achieve the full potential.

What you have mentioned is the exact reason I have been put off living in South London where my social circle is, and I am missing out them. There isn't simply a way to travel between, e.g. Croydon and Streatham, in a reasonable time on a high-frequency service.

As for buses, they can be so slow that it becomes quicker to run the route from end to end. Using another real world example, me and my sister (both currently training for a half marathon) ran the Wandle Trail between Carshalton and Wandsworth today. We did pretty well with a time of 1hr 45 mins, but the bus route back (270 to Mitcham, 280 to Rosehill, 154 to Carshalton) was impacted by road closures in Tooting, with the entire return leg taking a whopping 2 hours! I understand there’s not a lot you can do to alleviate this sort of disruption when you haven’t got room to build additional infrastructure, but it does highlight how it can take an age just to get between boroughs in a bustling metropolis.

I really don't understand why the roads are so narrow in London, compared to cities in continental Europe. Buses and trams normally achieve average speeds of around 20 km/h or above, or even 30 km/h in the outer regions. Apart from their pedestrianised town centre, roads are generally wide and straight, with tram tracks on a seperate right of way in the centre.

Hong Kong invested in an extensive motorway network during the 1980s and 1990s which linked the outer suburbs, including a circular highway as well, and upgraded the majority of trunk roads to be intersection free by building flyovers and underpasses (back in the British colonial era), and it continues tunneling under the urban areas today. The number of traffic lights on numbered roads in Hong Kong can be counted with 2 hands. Of course building new roads attract cars, but it also attract buses as well which can slow down the growth of rail overcrowding. In Hong Kong, if you want to go between suburbs which are not directly connected by rail, it is always faster to take bus(es). Bus travel between suburbs can usually achieve an average of 40 km/h or even more. However, in London, it is usually faster to take a train into central London and back out, causing overcrowding in Zone 1 as a result. On the first day SL1 began operation, I tried to travel from Meridian Water back to Willesden Green by using two buses, SL1 to North Finchley and 460 to Willesden Green, but the buses were so slow that they couldn't even reach 15 km/h on average, that it would be faster if I took the trains on a route which crosses the Thames 4 times!

If all the London ring roads were built, there would be more express buses going round and round London right now, connecting to various rail mainlines. There is effectively only less than half a ring in London which meets the criteria of segregated, traffic light free high thoroughput trunk road, which is the North Circular, and the M25 is too far out for a journey inside London, so we are effectively paying the price of the NIMBYism back then.

We have Superloop now for the outermost transport links which don’t have a parallel rail route, and this is an excellent step forward for transport in London, but should TfL be considering running more express style bus routes, building new tram lines and relief lines on Tube/Overground routes to make journeys faster between a wider range of London boroughs?

In North London, I think that TfL should run a lot more express buses non-stop along the North Circular, and along the major dual carriageway A roads. For example, I think that an X112 would be a good idea, which duplicates the 112 but only calls at Ealing Broadway, Hanger Lane, Stonebridge Park (Harrow Road), Neasden, Brent Cross until Henlys Corner, then continue along the circular and calls at Finchley High Road, Bounds Green Road, and go onto the A10 to Enfield such that it can connect seamlessly with SL1 for a continuation on the circular.

 

[MPW]

TfL's tram man said many years ago that there no way a tram could be got past St Leonards Church in Streatham.

What would be so difficult about going past that church? There roads in each direction are 3-4 lanes wide.

I understand if this bit gets snipped by admins: but I think a solution to the current road congestion through streatham could be a tram from streatham station to brixton. From brixton it could use the unutilised curve towards blackfriars bay. That would need some serious work but the project could at the same time add platforms for SLL through brixton and improved connection to tube. At the other end, it could take over the sutton loop services into streatham, getting to street level vi's the site of aldi and jobcentre. Sutton loop passengers could be compensated with higher frequency and better local connections, and the trams could run on croydon tramlink tracks for depot/maintenance. Thameslink then removes its conflicts at tulse Hill, herne hill, and blackfriars approach.

This also makes a station in camberwell and even Walworth more viable as tram-trains would not need as big of a station. Assuming frequency is enough to handle capacity and some passengers. Also the "streatham interchange" could be built with shorter platforms to connect to streatham common services.

 

[30907]

In answer to your comment about London street widths
(1) the picture is much more mixed - just look at Bromley High Street, half narrow (the historic town centre, partly pedestrianised now) and half broad (the late C19th development towards South station);
(2) that's because London grew fast in the C19th and swallowed up existing town/village centres in a way that no European city did. The number of "planned" cities with wide boulevards "within the walls" is relatively few (Paris is an obvious example).
(3) your wide streets with tram routes serving suburbs are typically post-WW2, and in some areas this was helped by very efficient demolition carried out in 1944-5

 

[stuu]

I really don't understand why the roads are so narrow in London, compared to cities in continental Europe. Buses and trams normally achieve average speeds of around 20 km/h or above, or even 30 km/h in the outer regions. Apart from their pedestrianised town centre, roads are generally wide and straight, with tram tracks on a seperate right of way in the centre.

Three reasons: history, both the lack of land wars since 1649 compared to much of Europe, and the earlier industrialisation/suburbanisation compared to other countries. Secondly, the far more laissez-faire approach to planning and development meant there has historically been far less large scale planning and rules

 

[PTR 444]

Three reasons: history, both the lack of land wars since 1649 compared to much of Europe, and the earlier industrialisation/suburbanisation compared to other countries. Secondly, the far more laissez-faire approach to planning and development meant there has historically been far less large scale planning and rules

This. It’s a real shame that a network of arterial and radial boulevard-style roads never came to fruition in London, as they would have been really good for shifting traffic while providing room for buses and cyclists.

In fact I’d make it a policy that any future planned town/city must come with wide boulevard-style roads for getting in and out. While good for easing congestion, they can also help alleviate car journeys in the first place as boulevards are well-suited for high density terraces and dedicated lanes for public transport. It’s a shame that London never realised this in the mid-20th century.

 

[MontyP]

This. It’s a real shame that a network of arterial and radial boulevard-style roads never came to fruition in London, as they would have been really good for shifting traffic while providing room for buses and cyclists.

In fact I’d make it a policy that any future planned town/city must come with wide boulevard-style roads for getting in and out. While good for easing congestion, they can also help alleviate car journeys in the first place as boulevards are well-suited for high density terraces and dedicated lanes for public transport. It’s a shame that London never realised this in the mid-20th century.

A real shame???!!! Have you looked at the plans for the ringways that were proposed in the 60s? They would have involved massive destruction in South London and turned it into a dysfunctional car-dependent hellhole

 

[renegademaster]

What you have mentioned is the exact reason I have been put off living in South London where my social circle is, and I am missing out them. There isn't simply a way to travel between, e.g. Croydon and Streatham, in a reasonable time on a high-frequency service

You can get a half hourly train that takes 20 minutes or you 3 different busses that come every 5 minutes that will get you there in 45 minutes max. It's not ideal but hardly the end of the world

 

[30907]

Tulse Hill/Streatham to Croydon is a particularly difficult flow to serve, because of the number of possible routes (5 - of which London Br-Wimbledon isn’t served post-Covid) in relation to traffic levels coming from London, and the lack of capacity at the Croydon end.

 

[PTR 444]

A real shame???!!! Have you looked at the plans for the ringways that were proposed in the 60s? They would have involved massive destruction in South London and turned it into a dysfunctional car-dependent hellhole

I wasn’t suggesting full-blown motorways, but more Paris-style boulevard roads with tree-lined central reservations, bus lanes and high density terraced properties fronting it. There’s quite a difference between the two - motorways divide communities while boulevards bring them together.

The closest example I can think of is the A4 between Chiswick and Kensington.

 

[PGAT]

I wasn’t suggesting full-blown motorways, but more Paris-style boulevard roads with tree-lined central reservations, bus lanes and high density terraced properties fronting it. There’s quite a difference between the two - motorways divide communities while boulevards bring them together.

The closest example I can think of is the A4 between Chiswick and Kensington.

I don't understand how that brings communities together. It's still fundamentally a wide road that can't easily be crossed

 

[MontyP]

I wasn’t suggesting full-blown motorways, but more Paris-style boulevard roads with tree-lined central reservations, bus lanes and high density terraced properties fronting it. There’s quite a difference between the two - motorways divide communities while boulevards bring them together.

The closest example I can think of is the A4 between Chiswick and Kensington.

I can't see much similarity between a tree-lined Paris boulevard and the Cromwell Road to be honest.

 

[CarrotPie]

I don't understand how that brings communities together. It's still fundamentally a wide road that can't easily be crossed

*upvote*

Boulevards are good when you have to build a road, but otherwise, no.

 

[Mountain Man]

Maybe rather than Crossrail 2 or some other 'grand scheme' maybe London would be better off with some smaller scale projects, in South London Bakerloo and Victoria line exentions would be top of my list. In west London create some rail connectivity into Heathrow from the south (as in from the SR lines).

It isnt maybe, they have to politically.

One of the unintended consequences of the HS2 cancellation is that politically it can't be seen that a major Northern infrastructure project was unaffordable but Southern ones are.

The reality is HS2 has changed the political landscape for infrastructure investment for a generation. The fact they are unconnected is irrelevant, we live in a headline driven world, so perception mattters