|
Post by jack97 on Jun 20, 2017 11:36:23 GMT 1
Does anyone know about new number 17 route from first leeds around the yeadon area?
There was a meeting held at yeadon town hall last night about changes to 97 and this new route
|
|
69340
Forum Member
Posts: 459
|
Post by 69340 on Jun 20, 2017 22:42:04 GMT 1
Does anyone know about new number 17 route from first leeds around the yeadon area? There was a meeting held at yeadon town hall last night about changes to 97 and this new route When I go to the next one I will post them all
|
|
|
Post by leedsbusman on Jun 20, 2017 23:36:12 GMT 1
Does anyone know about new number 17 route from first leeds around the yeadon area? There was a meeting held at yeadon town hall last night about changes to 97 and this new route Details will be online soon but the proposals include an alternative route to the 97 via Queenswood Drive and the 19/A route to Leeds under the number 17.
|
|
69340
Forum Member
Posts: 459
|
Post by 69340 on Jun 23, 2017 15:48:14 GMT 1
Does anyone know about new number 17 route from first leeds around the yeadon area? There was a meeting held at yeadon town hall last night about changes to 97 and this new route When I go to the next one I will post them all On first website Yeadon and Guiseley Route 97 Customers gave a wide range of feedback for route 97. Most wanted the service to be more reliable, some suggested alternative routes instead of via Headingley Centre and some wanted a faster journey. We would like your views on four options: Option 1 No change to the route or frequency of service 97 – but with a new timetable to improve reliability Option 2 A 30 minute daytime frequency on service 97 – this would allow us to improve reliability as buses would have more time to complete their journeys Option 3 The 97 would run between Leeds and Yeadon only on the same frequency as currently - this would allow us to improve reliability as buses would have more time to complete their journeys Option 4 A new route 17, instead of the 97, running from Guiseley to Leeds via the 97 route as far as West Park then via Queenswood Drive, Headingley Stadium, Cardigan Road and Burley Road to the City Centre – this would give a faster journey and avoid some of the congestion on the A660.
|
|
|
Post by Craig on Jun 28, 2017 15:17:44 GMT 1
First have also posted some details about changes to the X84. They are considering adding an extra bus into the cycle for reliability reasons, which would also allow one bus per hour to be diverted via Pool. Some changes to the evening journeys including a later departure from Leeds are also being suggested. The changes being discussed at these consultations are planned for September/October time. www.firstgroup.com/leeds/more/have-your-say-our-services-north-west-leeds
|
|
|
Post by Burnside on Jun 28, 2017 22:27:50 GMT 1
I like the idea of rerouting the 97 away from Headingley centre as that may improve reliabilty.
As for the X84, i presume they mean an extra bus added to the PVR rather than an increase in frequency? I think 1 journey going via Pool is a good idea though.
|
|
A1YBG
Forum Member
METRO Here to get you there. Arriva Buses Here to get you there. Arriva need to get original slogans
Posts: 1,935
|
Post by A1YBG on Jun 29, 2017 7:12:04 GMT 1
I like the idea of rerouting the 97 away from Headingley centre as that may improve reliabilty. As for the X84, i presume they mean an extra bus added to the PVR rather than an increase in frequency? I think 1 journey going via Pool is a good idea though. similar to what arriva have done with the mon to Friday daytime service 229. So more layover time at end of the routes
|
|
deerfold
Forum Member
Posts: 2,293
Member is Online
|
Post by deerfold on Jun 29, 2017 11:18:16 GMT 1
I like the idea of rerouting the 97 away from Headingley centre as that may improve reliabilty. As for the X84, i presume they mean an extra bus added to the PVR rather than an increase in frequency? I think 1 journey going via Pool is a good idea though. So, like the old X82?
|
|
|
Post by 1071 on Jun 29, 2017 15:32:25 GMT 1
I like the idea of rerouting the 97 away from Headingley centre as that may improve reliabilty. As for the X84, i presume they mean an extra bus added to the PVR rather than an increase in frequency? I think 1 journey going via Pool is a good idea though. It'll be a test which bus does better up pool bank flying tigers E200MMC or first Leeds E400MMC
|
|
|
Post by biroguy on Jun 30, 2017 10:06:31 GMT 1
Moving the 97 off Otley Road is a bad idea, it denies people in Yeadon/Guiseley direct links to Hyde Park/University also Cardigan Road is snarled up with traffic and has convoys of 56`s already. Extra bus lanes on the A660 would speed up the 97 and these are being looked at.
|
|
A1YBG
Forum Member
METRO Here to get you there. Arriva Buses Here to get you there. Arriva need to get original slogans
Posts: 1,935
|
Post by A1YBG on Jun 30, 2017 17:06:54 GMT 1
Moving the 97 off Otley Road is a bad idea, it denies people in Yeadon/Guiseley direct links to Hyde Park/University also Cardigan Road is snarled up with traffic and has convoys of 56`s already. Extra bus lanes on the A660 would speed up the 97 and these are being looked at. Maybe one 97 an hour and one 17 an hour?
|
|
deerfold
Forum Member
Posts: 2,293
Member is Online
|
Post by deerfold on Jun 30, 2017 19:13:30 GMT 1
Moving the 97 off Otley Road is a bad idea, it denies people in Yeadon/Guiseley direct links to Hyde Park/University also Cardigan Road is snarled up with traffic and has convoys of 56`s already. Extra bus lanes on the A660 would speed up the 97 and these are being looked at. Maybe one 97 an hour and one 17 an hour? That doesn't sound like a good swap for 3 97s an hour.
|
|
kendall17
Forum Member
Justice for the 96!
Posts: 4,505
|
Post by kendall17 on Jun 30, 2017 22:06:33 GMT 1
Moving the 97 off Otley Road is a bad idea, it denies people in Yeadon/Guiseley direct links to Hyde Park/University also Cardigan Road is snarled up with traffic and has convoys of 56`s already. Extra bus lanes on the A660 would speed up the 97 and these are being looked at. Only time Cardigan Road is a problem is when the Rugby is on. For which I always follow the 56 route in the car as it's quicker.
|
|
|
Post by rossbailey on Jun 30, 2017 23:31:10 GMT 1
Moving the 97 off Otley Road is really bad for some. I know quite a few people whom use it to commute between Horsforth & Headingley especially at off peak. I use 97 myself quite a bit from Yeadon down to Headingley Arndale Center at weekends. Told a friend of mine whom lives up Horsforth, (Broadgate Lane) He uses 97 on a daily basis to get down to Far Headingleyfor work and he said he had no idea about the proposed changes until I mentioned it to him. Another Friend of mine whom works in one of the establishments on Otley Road also uses it to get to work from Butcherhill, and even she didn't know about it.
|
|
|
Post by www.buseireann.ie on Jul 1, 2017 7:36:54 GMT 1
To be fair though it's not that dramatic a diversion, you could still walk from North Lane where it will turn off to Headingley Arndale in 10 minutes, and 15 minutes to places up Far Headingley where the church is. If anyone needs Leeds Beckett they could still alight on Queenswood Drive and cut through the back way, although I'm unsure where the cut through is. For places up West Park, again it's not that dramatic a walk from where it will turn from Butcher Hill to head to Queenswood Drive, probably no more than 15 minutes to Otley Road.
|
|
|
Post by nic on Jul 1, 2017 16:09:50 GMT 1
I will post my comments on the 97 later on however here are my comments on the X84:
First of all; why are they diverting only 1 bus an hour into pool? Why not 2 an hour? First bus really need to see what the potential market that they could tap into in Pool and Otley as there is absolutely no competition from Train service. It would be new 36 for first in Leeds. 2 services an hour into Pool and 2 direct to Otley. 4 services an hour Leeds to Otley. Maybe they are testing the market first but i would of thought once an hour is not going to get much of a market.
I would even, Peak times only, suggest a Leeds-Otley direct, pick up Leeds, University and Headingley ONLY service. X83 or something.
Secondly why on earth are they suddenly proposing to change the service to match a half hourly train/bus combo Leeds-Ilkley? Why not increase the service to every half hour on an evening (1 via Pool) and have it so that the Leeds-Ilkley bus service is half hour after the train? The 33/33a, long route to Otley, has half hourly service so why doesn't the quicker route also have this?
Completely agree with option 3.
|
|
|
Post by tractorned on Jul 1, 2017 17:29:05 GMT 1
My option would be
2 Buses per hours like the old X82 route via pool to Otley, they extend a few peak journeys to the Weston estate
X84 2 buses per hour to Ilkley, 1 per hour to Skipton.
|
|
Steve Macz403
Forum Member
Waits at the bus stop for his bus, 2 days later bus turns up :D
Posts: 1,670
|
Post by Steve Macz403 on Jul 1, 2017 20:44:55 GMT 1
How about sending this new 17 turning off Cardigan Road, whole Length of Victoria Road to Hyde Park Corner and Carry on the A660 to Leeds.
Leeds Uni still served, (headingley missed out). Don't know how if it could work with the turn ,Because a right turn from Victoria Road to jump onto A660 is a pain in a car. Ive done it. It's spot gap, Foot down on accelerator scenario.
|
|
|
Post by biroguy on Jul 2, 2017 8:52:34 GMT 1
Moving the 97 off Otley Road is a bad idea, it denies people in Yeadon/Guiseley direct links to Hyde Park/University also Cardigan Road is snarled up with traffic and has convoys of 56`s already. Extra bus lanes on the A660 would speed up the 97 and these are being looked at. Only time Cardigan Road is a problem is when the Rugby is on. For which I always follow the 56 route in the car as it's quicker. Not quite, I use Cardigan road to get to and from work and the queues of traffic can be horrendous, when the students return in September it is gridlocked in the peaks, this results in the 56 often bunching with three turning up at once. The rugby and cricket adds to the problem, if I lived in Guiseley I`d ditch the 97 /17 if it used this new route. Queenswood Drive is full of traffic in the peaks with no bus priority whatsoever, the 97 currently uses bus lanes from West Park to Headingley to speed its journey. I tried catching the 19 home from work to Headingley and it took ages to get up Cardigan road.
|
|
|
Post by nic on Jul 2, 2017 11:46:49 GMT 1
97/17 options:
Option 1 that they've proposed; may work with a new timetable to improve reliability but they risk adding journey times SIMPLY to make the journey reliable. An extra bus or 2 maybe thrown into the PVR with a buffer time at both Leeds and Guiseley may work. For example they arrive at 52 and depart at 58 during the morning off peak. Why not arrival at 03 with a 15 minute buffer at Guiseley. Investing into the amount of vehicles will improve the service; improve the service increase the ridership. Increase the ridership increase profits.
Option 2 is like going back to the 90's and early 00's. I don't think reducing to every half hour is good enough from every 20 mins and it won't improve the reliability of the service UNLESS they buffer the time at Guiseley and Leeds; increased the VR overall.
Option 3 is quite a compromising and good option. It avoids the battleground of Guiseley roads which are ALWAYS jam packed especially Friday's. But again they would have to do as the above; increase VR and ensure there is sufficient buffer time in Yeadon to ensure reliability is kept. What will replace the 3 buses an hour between Yeadon and Guiseley though?
Option 4. Doesn't work in my opinion. Trinity students will be completely left without a link to Leeds Uni. First should have data from the 19/56 which indicates at peak times cardigan road is just avoid central. Alongside that there are 6 sets of traffic lights within 3/4 of a mile of each other which doesn't help. I don't feel like the 17 would do anything for the route or improving reliability without increased VR and buffer times at either end. What replaces the 3 journeys an hour on the A660? Where do those customers go? Onto the other services. Makes them unreliable as more customers are on them services slowing their journey times down.
Couple of my options; Why not move the 97 to go on to the ring road between woodside and lawnswood school? Avoids the bottleneck that is Spen Lane/Butcher hill junction. Further get the 97 up Low Lane, Station road and then onto route. Get the 50 services to then cover the 97 route. I know then long row would loose a bus service but couldn't they compromise. Introduce a 50 service; 50, 50a, 50b all to do with the horsforth end? Give a limited stopping option; similar to the X84; between Woodside and Leeds - pick up only, drop off only. Avoids Headingleys students and should effectively improve journey times as minimal people are been picked up etc! Introduce a peak time service trying to avoid all the crucial areas that go around the estate. Maybe that will assist with peak time journeys.
|
|
|
Post by nic on Jul 2, 2017 12:43:38 GMT 1
How about sending this new 17 turning off Cardigan Road, whole Length of Victoria Road to Hyde Park Corner and Carry on the A660 to Leeds. Leeds Uni still served, (headingley missed out). Don't know how if it could work with the turn ,Because a right turn from Victoria Road to jump onto A660 is a pain in a car. Ive done it. It's spot gap, Foot down on accelerator scenario. Good Suggestion; But until Victoria Road/Hyde Park Corner junction is regulated by traffic lights it would be a nightmare for ALL Guiseley-Leeds Journeys.
|
|
Steve Macz403
Forum Member
Waits at the bus stop for his bus, 2 days later bus turns up :D
Posts: 1,670
|
Post by Steve Macz403 on Jul 2, 2017 18:49:32 GMT 1
97/17 options: Option 1 that they've proposed; may work with a new timetable to improve reliability but they risk adding journey times SIMPLY to make the journey reliable. An extra bus or 2 maybe thrown into the PVR with a buffer time at both Leeds and Guiseley may work. For example they arrive at 52 and depart at 58 during the morning off peak. Why not arrival at 03 with a 15 minute buffer at Guiseley. Investing into the amount of vehicles will improve the service; improve the service increase the ridership. Increase the ridership increase profits. Option 2 is like going back to the 90's and early 00's. I don't think reducing to every half hour is good enough from every 20 mins and it won't improve the reliability of the service UNLESS they buffer the time at Guiseley and Leeds; increased the VR overall. Option 3 is quite a compromising and good option. It avoids the battleground of Guiseley roads which are ALWAYS jam packed especially Friday's. But again they would have to do as the above; increase VR and ensure there is sufficient buffer time in Yeadon to ensure reliability is kept. What will replace the 3 buses an hour between Yeadon and Guiseley though? Option 4. Doesn't work in my opinion. Trinity students will be completely left without a link to Leeds Uni. First should have data from the 19/56 which indicates at peak times cardigan road is just avoid central. Alongside that there are 6 sets of traffic lights within 3/4 of a mile of each other which doesn't help. I don't feel like the 17 would do anything for the route or improving reliability without increased VR and buffer times at either end. What replaces the 3 journeys an hour on the A660? Where do those customers go? Onto the other services. Makes them unreliable as more customers are on them services slowing their journey times down. Couple of my options; Why not move the 97 to go on to the ring road between woodside and lawnswood school? Avoids the bottleneck that is Spen Lane/Butcher hill junction. Further get the 97 up Low Lane, Station road and then onto route. Get the 50 services to then cover the 97 route. I know then long row would loose a bus service but couldn't they compromise. Introduce a 50 service; 50, 50a, 50b all to do with the horsforth end? Give a limited stopping option; similar to the X84; between Woodside and Leeds - pick up only, drop off only. Avoids Headingleys students and should effectively improve journey times as minimal people are been picked up etc! Introduce a peak time service trying to avoid all the crucial areas that go around the estate. Maybe that will assist with peak time journeys. Making the 97 limited stop as X97 could work out quite well. It could be limited stop to Headingley Arndale. Stopping patterns like the X84. That may improve some reliability. How does the X84 cope with Headlingley Delays? Does it require the same time, as the 1/6/28/97
|
|
|
Post by nic on Jul 2, 2017 19:07:11 GMT 1
Struggles to Andale and then, excuse the pun, flies to Lawnwsood.
It avoids the constant let down pick up though which makes it a little easier and bearable to be on.
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Jul 3, 2017 22:05:06 GMT 1
First of all; why are they diverting only 1 bus an hour into pool? Why not 2 an hour? First bus really need to see what the potential market that they could tap into in Pool and Otley as there is absolutely no competition from Train service. It would be new 36 for first in Leeds. 2 services an hour into Pool and 2 direct to Otley. 4 services an hour Leeds to Otley. Maybe they are testing the market first but i would of thought once an hour is not going to get much of a market. Secondly why on earth are they suddenly proposing to change the service to match a half hourly train/bus combo Leeds-Ilkley? Why not increase the service to every half hour on an evening (1 via Pool) and have it so that the Leeds-Ilkley bus service is half hour after the train? The 33/33a, long route to Otley, has half hourly service so why doesn't the quicker route also have this? They have in the not-too-distant past run a 15-minute frequency between Leeds and Otley, but they then reverted back to every 20 minutes – presumably they will know from this what passenger levels they need to be getting now in order to merit increasing the frequency. Pool is a small village, only one-sixth the size of Otley, so it's fair to assume it will only generate a small number of passengers. But diverting buses via Pool will add ~5 minutes to the journey time, and if journey times are extended then you are likely to lose some passengers from Otley, Burley, Ilkley and Skipton – that's a trade-off that is worth making on one bus (particularly if it is the one that only runs to/from Otley) but extending the journey time on more buses for very little potential gain is unlikely to pay off. The 33/33A runs more frequently because there is more demand along the route. It runs through heavily urban areas all the way between Leeds and Otley, so there is more potential for intermediate travel. Think of it as a half-hourly service to Guiseley that can be extended to Otley quite cheaply, rather than a dedicated Leeds—Otley route, and it makes more sense. It is entirely likely that a route with a 20-minute daytime frequency can only justify an hourly evening service – there are plenty of similar routes that don't even have that good a ratio.
|
|
|
Post by nic on Jul 11, 2017 15:47:18 GMT 1
|
|