Southern Birmingham + Solihull Bus Route Consultation

[Kevin]

Interesting to see the way they've done it, detailing the problems and suggested changes from the word go instead of asking the public for ideas

[Stu]

Interesting to see the way they've done it, detailing the problems and suggested changes from the word go instead of asking the public for ideas

I agree, presumably the proposals have been drafted based on customer feedback already received, now the consultation allows for people to comment on these proposals and submit their own ideas based on these, especially those who may not have already contacted Centro / NXWM previously.

[Matt.N0056]

If they were to increase the number of 60s, it would be nice if some could run as maybe a 60A to the Arden Oak, to replace the old 58, rather than having them all run to the Cranes Park terminus.

[Rob H]

If they were to increase the number of 60s, it would be nice if some could run as maybe a 60A to the Arden Oak, to replace the old 58, rather than having them all run to the Cranes Park terminus.

That would be good :) but I don't think that will happen but I will be surprised if they do :)

[:D]

Their suggestions seem to be pretty good if anything its somewhat unusual since they're more focusing on outer suburbs and reliability this time, but I think there's needs to be a balance between timekeeping/reliability and usability. Nobody wants to go to town having to change bus once or twice.

Here's my suggestions:

Suggestion for bus service 3 seems to be pretty good (Diverting to Yardley and then to city centre) since it would replace reduced bus services between Yardley and Hay Mills while making it a faster service.

8A/C - Double decker perhaps? I don't know if there's clearance issues with this route.

Chop the 49 in half, I doubt there would be a demand for passengers to travel the route in full length.

As for 60, 59, 58... If they can increase frequency of the 60 (Some of it terminating at Yardley like on Sundays) to 7 minute frequency then their suggestion is fine.

[Kevin_Brum12]

The proposals are a mixed bag.  Some are very sensible (e.g. reviewing the 8 "Inner Circle" service), some are unacceptable (curtailing the 98 in Selly Oak) and some are bonkers (trying to get an express route up the Stratford Road).

Without bus priority, it is nigh on impossible to get any express bus routes running on main corridors.   The ones we have only operate because there are dive unders, dual carriageways and the A38M available to them.   If Centro, Birmingham City Council and NXWM are serious that we should have express bus services there needs to be some serious investment in bus lanes and bus priority, together with proactive enforcement of them.   Otherwise they will go no faster than a conventional bus.   Also, when are the council going to actually pro-actively enforce the Red Route on the Stratford Road to keep traffic moving?

The plans for the 2 and 3 to be diverted via Moseley are pushing the problems from the Stratford Road to the Alcester Road.  Whilst it might make it a bit easier for people on Wake Green Road to have a bus to Moseley the additional running time would not save that much than going down Stratford Road.  Being cynical, it allows Centro to get rid of another subsidised service (the 650) although getting the quality operator (sic) VIP to run it must be a nail in its coffin.

Sending the 8 via Heartlands Hospital is sensible, as a good portion of the area it covers is within its catchment.  However, sending it to City Hospital would add to running time, and in most cases it is easier to cross Birmingham and change buses in the city centre if you are heading to City Hospital.   Also City Hospital will be relocating from its current site in a few years time.

The 98.  Who in their right mind is seriously thinking of bringing back the X62, which was such a commercial success (not).   This sounds like a Reiss suggestion and should be filed accordingly.  ;D  Rather than inconvencing bus passengers and making them change buses on Bristol Road to get to the Q.E., NXWM should get the council to sort out the junction on Islington Row Middleway to give priority to buses to "fly" over the road there, and make the service avoid the long loop around Five Ways Island which is one of the cause of peak hour delays.  But of course, it is easier for the ptegosaurus at Centro and the city council to make life harder for bus users rather than motorists.

What Centros document also does not tell you is that patronage on the 98 is around 40% up on the old X62 (which I've heard from a source at NXWM), and many buses are now full in peak times in both directions between Q.E. and City.  So that is more evidence that they ought to be pushing for infrarstructure to help buses which are proving to be commercially sucessful, rather than hinder them and continue Centro's apparent strategy to drive down patronage.

[Kevin]

The plans for the 2 and 3 to be diverted via Moseley are pushing the problems from the Stratford Road to the Alcester Road.  Whilst it might make it a bit easier for people on Wake Green Road to have a bus to Moseley the additional running time would not save that much than going down Stratford Road.  Being cynical, it allows Centro to get rid of another subsidised service (the 650) although getting the quality operator (sic) VIP to run it must be a nail in its coffin.

Personal opinion, but I think routing one of them via Moseley would work quite well, but then I'd actually always thought a route along the 50 to Kings Heath then as per the 27 through Yardley Wood and Warstock would work quite well aswell, other people bound to disagree with me..

Sending the 8 via Heartlands Hospital is sensible, as a good portion of the area it covers is within its catchment.  However, sending it to City Hospital would add to running time, and in most cases it is easier to cross Birmingham and change buses in the city centre if you are heading to City Hospital.   Also City Hospital will be relocating from its current site in a few years time.

I'd agree, I think Heartlands hospital in general could do with better links, hence I like the proposal for the 73 effectively reverting back to the old 169. City hospital already has links to most areas within its catchment thanks to the 11 and the 80, if anything rerouting the 101 would help that more than the 8. The link to the QE intrigues me, as by definition it would also link with the University and as such provide some much more useful links to both.

The main problem with the 8 is that it's now not used anywhere near as much as it used to be and hence is not a great frequency, the traffic issues don't help and to be honest can't really be avoided thanks to the nature of crossing every major artery so close to the city centre. Perhaps the only hope for it would be to route it away from the worst / easiest to avoid junctions, such as the turning from Golden Hillock Road towards Sparkbrook (where no one ever seems to let a bus pull out)

The 98.  Who in their right mind is seriously thinking of bringing back the X62, which was such a commercial success (not).   This sounds like a Reiss suggestion and should be filed accordingly.  ;D  Rather than inconvencing bus passengers and making them change buses on Bristol Road to get to the Q.E., NXWM should get the council to sort out the junction on Islington Row Middleway to give priority to buses to "fly" over the road there, and make the service avoid the long loop around Five Ways Island which is one of the cause of peak hour delays.  But of course, it is easier for the ptegosaurus at Centro and the city council to make life harder for bus users rather than motorists.

What Centros document also does not tell you is that patronage on the 98 is around 40% up on the old X62 (which I've heard from a source at NXWM), and many buses are now full in peak times in both directions between Q.E. and City.  So that is more evidence that they ought to be pushing for infrarstructure to help buses which are proving to be commercially sucessful, rather than hinder them and continue Centro's apparent strategy to drive down patronage.

Can't argue with the numbers, but personally I'd say the link from those areas of south Birmingham to the QE could still be maintained if a service existed that just terminated there (same with the 99 in my opinion), and the old 62 brought back to supplement the Bristol Road as that seems to need more buses. Yes the city - QE section obviously needs to be retained by some sort of service, and I have to say I think after all the tinkering with the 21/44/20/636 etc... they've finally got a route that works there.

[Liverpool Street]

The plans for the 2 and 3 to be diverted via Moseley are pushing the problems from the Stratford Road to the Alcester Road.  Whilst it might make it a bit easier for people on Wake Green Road to have a bus to Moseley the additional running time would not save that much than going down Stratford Road.  Being cynical, it allows Centro to get rid of another subsidised service (the 650) although getting the quality operator (sic) VIP to run it must be a nail in its coffin.

Personal opinion, but I think routing one of them via Moseley would work quite well, but then I'd actually always thought a route along the 50 to Kings Heath then as per the 27 through Yardley Wood and Warstock would work quite well aswell, other people bound to disagree with me..

Sending the 8 via Heartlands Hospital is sensible, as a good portion of the area it covers is within its catchment.  However, sending it to City Hospital would add to running time, and in most cases it is easier to cross Birmingham and change buses in the city centre if you are heading to City Hospital.   Also City Hospital will be relocating from its current site in a few years time.

I'd agree, I think Heartlands hospital in general could do with better links, hence I like the proposal for the 73 effectively reverting back to the old 169. City hospital already has links to most areas within its catchment thanks to the 11 and the 80, if anything rerouting the 101 would help that more than the 8. The link to the QE intrigues me, as by definition it would also link with the University and as such provide some much more useful links to both.

The main problem with the 8 is that it's now not used anywhere near as much as it used to be and hence is not a great frequency, the traffic issues don't help and to be honest can't really be avoided thanks to the nature of crossing every major artery so close to the city centre. Perhaps the only hope for it would be to route it away from the worst / easiest to avoid junctions, such as the turning from Golden Hillock Road towards Sparkbrook (where no one ever seems to let a bus pull out)

The 98.  Who in their right mind is seriously thinking of bringing back the X62, which was such a commercial success (not).   This sounds like a Reiss suggestion and should be filed accordingly.  ;D  Rather than inconvencing bus passengers and making them change buses on Bristol Road to get to the Q.E., NXWM should get the council to sort out the junction on Islington Row Middleway to give priority to buses to "fly" over the road there, and make the service avoid the long loop around Five Ways Island which is one of the cause of peak hour delays.  But of course, it is easier for the ptegosaurus at Centro and the city council to make life harder for bus users rather than motorists.

What Centros document also does not tell you is that patronage on the 98 is around 40% up on the old X62 (which I've heard from a source at NXWM), and many buses are now full in peak times in both directions between Q.E. and City.  So that is more evidence that they ought to be pushing for infrarstructure to help buses which are proving to be commercially sucessful, rather than hinder them and continue Centro's apparent strategy to drive down patronage.

Can't argue with the numbers, but personally I'd say the link from those areas of south Birmingham to the QE could still be maintained if a service existed that just terminated there (same with the 99 in my opinion), and the old 62 brought back to supplement the Bristol Road as that seems to need more buses. Yes the city - QE section obviously needs to be retained by some sort of service, and I have to say I think after all the tinkering with the 21/44/20/636 etc... they've finally got a route that works there.

Interesting comments there Kevin's.

And he said the 8 would serve City Hospital not the Q.E.

What would your opinion be of a shuttle bus between Q.E. and Town, and curtail the 98/99 to the Q.E? Or just leave it well enough alone as there doesn't seem a need, or rather - I can't see the need, to touch the 98/99.

(The thing I would do is run the 98 to Bristol Road, Edgebaston Park Road, then keep right onto the Selly Oak bypass, up to the Q.E. then u turn and normal line of route up by the side of the Battery Park, Chapel Lane. It'll avoid most of Selly Oak traffic in addition there is usually little traffic on the bypass so shouldn't be a problem. also, it'll provide a different link to the Q.E.) I'm all for a Bristol Road service to serve the Q.E. as that hospital is really too close to the Bristol Road to not be served by a service which doesn't touch it until Selly Oak...

[Sh4318]

The plans for the 2 and 3 to be diverted via Moseley are pushing the problems from the Stratford Road to the Alcester Road.  Whilst it might make it a bit easier for people on Wake Green Road to have a bus to Moseley the additional running time would not save that much than going down Stratford Road.  Being cynical, it allows Centro to get rid of another subsidised service (the 650) although getting the quality operator (sic) VIP to run it must be a nail in its coffin.

Personal opinion, but I think routing one of them via Moseley would work quite well, but then I'd actually always thought a route along the 50 to Kings Heath then as per the 27 through Yardley Wood and Warstock would work quite well aswell, other people bound to disagree with me..

Sending the 8 via Heartlands Hospital is sensible, as a good portion of the area it covers is within its catchment.  However, sending it to City Hospital would add to running time, and in most cases it is easier to cross Birmingham and change buses in the city centre if you are heading to City Hospital.   Also City Hospital will be relocating from its current site in a few years time.

I'd agree, I think Heartlands hospital in general could do with better links, hence I like the proposal for the 73 effectively reverting back to the old 169. City hospital already has links to most areas within its catchment thanks to the 11 and the 80, if anything rerouting the 101 would help that more than the 8. The link to the QE intrigues me, as by definition it would also link with the University and as such provide some much more useful links to both.

The main problem with the 8 is that it's now not used anywhere near as much as it used to be and hence is not a great frequency, the traffic issues don't help and to be honest can't really be avoided thanks to the nature of crossing every major artery so close to the city centre. Perhaps the only hope for it would be to route it away from the worst / easiest to avoid junctions, such as the turning from Golden Hillock Road towards Sparkbrook (where no one ever seems to let a bus pull out)

The 98.  Who in their right mind is seriously thinking of bringing back the X62, which was such a commercial success (not).   This sounds like a Reiss suggestion and should be filed accordingly.  ;D  Rather than inconvencing bus passengers and making them change buses on Bristol Road to get to the Q.E., NXWM should get the council to sort out the junction on Islington Row Middleway to give priority to buses to "fly" over the road there, and make the service avoid the long loop around Five Ways Island which is one of the cause of peak hour delays.  But of course, it is easier for the ptegosaurus at Centro and the city council to make life harder for bus users rather than motorists.

What Centros document also does not tell you is that patronage on the 98 is around 40% up on the old X62 (which I've heard from a source at NXWM), and many buses are now full in peak times in both directions between Q.E. and City.  So that is more evidence that they ought to be pushing for infrarstructure to help buses which are proving to be commercially sucessful, rather than hinder them and continue Centro's apparent strategy to drive down patronage.

Can't argue with the numbers, but personally I'd say the link from those areas of south Birmingham to the QE could still be maintained if a service existed that just terminated there (same with the 99 in my opinion), and the old 62 brought back to supplement the Bristol Road as that seems to need more buses. Yes the city - QE section obviously needs to be retained by some sort of service, and I have to say I think after all the tinkering with the 21/44/20/636 etc... they've finally got a route that works there.

(The thing I would do is run the 98 to Bristol Road, Edgebaston Park Road, then keep right onto the Selly Oak bypass, up to the Q.E. then u turn and normal line of route up by the side of the Battery Park, Chapel Lane. It'll avoid most of Selly Oak traffic in addition there is usually little traffic on the bypass so shouldn't be a problem. also, it'll provide a different link to the Q.E.) I'm all for a Bristol Road service to serve the Q.E. as that hospital is really too close to the Bristol Road to not be served by a service which doesn't touch it until Selly Oak...

Agreed! I don't see much point of the 98 serving Birmingham via Five Ways and Holloway Head when the 99 already does.

[Sh4318]

I would like to see the 2/3 serve Moseley rather than Sparkbrook, I'm sure passengers would much prefer the direct link to Moseley. Also, the 3 should revert back to serving Solihull to re-introduce the link between Yardley Wood & Solihull, and maybe revert the 31 back to its Shirley station terminus to introduce the link between Acocks Green and Shirley station.

I would also like to see the 101 serve City Hospital as I think this would serve as a good link for both the Jewellery Quarter and Handsworth

[trident4370]

Yes I'd quite like to see those changes to the 2/3 implemented, I think it would work nicely assuming the proposed Solihull changes to the 3 were also introduced. As for the 98/99 I don't really see a need to mess with them, as the recent changes in the city centre seem to have proved once you have a route that works leave it alone!

[Sh4318]

As for the 98/99 I don't really see a need to mess with them, as the recent changes in the city centre seem to have proved once you have a route that works leave it alone!

I think there should be some form of direct route between the Bristol Road (before Selly Oak) and QE, if the 'x'64 wasn't an express service, I would nominate that route to use the Selly Oak bypass serve the QE and then rejoin the Bristol Road, and as for the 49... Something seriously needs to be done about that route, very useful, but ridiculously unreliable

[trident4370]

Green bus tried that not so long ago with the 64 though and despite the £1 flat fares it didn't take off. Maybe NX could make it work, maybe not. I do agree about the 49 though.

[Kevin]

And he said the 8 would serve City Hospital not the Q.E.

The document from NWM mentions the suggestion for the 8 to connect to Heartlands, City and QE hospitals

[jnl1984]

98 - I cant see a reason to change this. Perhaps the only suggestion i would have is to alter the route out of the city... Along the Bristol Road, along the new bypass, up new Fosse way and then the usual line of route to its destination. Is there any real need for both 98 and the 99 to serve the same route from Bham to the QE?

29 / 29A - There is a need for better reliability, especially when leaving Birmingham of an evening. Perhaps the option of changing the route of either the 29 or 29A once it gets to the top of Harborne Hill and placing this on the old 21 route to the QE and then perhaps going this way to Weoley Castle, then onwards on its current route. I don't see the need for 75% of this route to be served by both the 29/29A.

99 - If it aint broke, don't fix it... if there was to be one change, i would suggest splitting this route and curtailing it at the QE. Perhaps a 99B (Birmingham to the QE) current line of route and a 99H (Halesowen to QE)...
or --- why not a complete deviation from the current QE - Halesowen section and send a 99H from the QE, down Metchely Lane, Quinton Road, Northfield Road,  Stonehouse Lane, Clapgate lane, Carters Lane, Kent Road and then the usual line of route - this would require a new service to serve the Welsh House Farm estate and that area... why not re-introduce the 20 and alter the route to serve the estate and terminate at somewhere like Four dwellings?