Random Leeds related questions

[Craig]

A few questions that have puzzled me for a while relating to First Leeds routes (in numerical order no less), if anyone has answers or wishes to throw other items of discussion into the pot.

The 2B always has a good loading on the peak time run (which justifies its existence) - but I have never seen the two later morning workings and wondered if there is any necessity for them?

Is there any need for the early morning extensions of the 16 to Limewood Approach - I know this service harks back for years but does it actually get used e.g. for early morning shift workers, and if so why do they not need a bus at other times?

Why did the 42 get diverted to run along Easterly Road?

Do First get a subsidy for the 44/44A extensions to Owlcotes, and if so is it paid by Metro or the owners of the centre?

Does Monkswood Gate really need a 10-minute frequency?

Did the 96 ever really need to be extended to Holt Park?

Why does the 98A only go to (but not from) Thorp Arch, do people use this section of the route (perhaps Thorp Arch Industrial Estate has a macabre "you'll never leave" feel to it, much like Royston Vasey).

And other questions I probably can't think of right now.

[nick]

96 was extended because they wanted to withdraw the 96A and let one service cover the whole of the route and they choose Holt Park becuase it covers both the 96/96A route aswell as having a sensible turn around point.

[mattyr88]

May 23, 2008 7:51:41 GMT 1 @nick said:

96 was extended because they wanted to withdraw the 96A and let one service cover the whole of the route and they choose Holt Park becuase it covers both the 96/96A route aswell as having a sensible turn around point.

the 96 extension to holt park is not necceary. the bus pretty much a complete circle meeting back on itself before heading down to asda. the 96 and the 96a or even the 93 was a much better service. u can walk to asda quicker then getting the bus. im not suggesting cuttting of service to hol park completely but have a less frequent service like what the 780 used to do.

[nick]

^It is far quicker to walk from tinshill top to holt park but for those who are less able to do so the 96 provides the service to holt park as the 32 is only every 2 hours!!

[dougie]

I guess the 96 is to provide a link to ASDA from Cookridge etc, rather than a direct bus to the City Centre/ Headingly (which the 1 provides better). And, as pointed out, it's a handy place to terminate/ turn/ wait etc.

One "random" question I'd like to ask is why the northern end of the 46 (previously the 25) hasn't been withdrawn yet (it could easily be replaced by a beefed up Scot Hall service to Shadwell etc, and there's plenty other Moortown buses)...

[Craig]

I understand the 96 is not designed to link Holt Park with Leeds city centre. However my main point was that I'm not sure why a bus every 10 minutes to Tinshill/Cookridge is necessary. This link was always provided by an hourly service each on the 81 or 82, admittedly the 3 or so daytime journeys at 2-hourly intervals now provided by the 31/32 is pretty rubbish.

I think the 96 would be best running as a one-way circular around Tinshill and Cookridge (or vice versa) and then direct back to City. The only drawback here would be if there is much local passenger traffic between Tinshill and Cookridge.

The 46 has been previously discussed but with no agreed outcome! I only presume the 46 exists to maintain a connection between Chapeltown Road and Shadwell Lane, although I question the necessity of this link.

[T101VWU]

there are quite a lot of people who live in tinshill/cookridge area myself included who catch the 96 to get to asda to shop or to get to work there and there are a lot of elderly people who cant walk very far and who catch this bus every day and basically stops outside most peoples houses.