| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
In article ,
Martin Underwood writes You'd think that it would make sense for the boundaries between one "county" and another to be moved from time to time to take account of any urban sprawl of a city on the boundary, so as always to avoid splitting that city. The conurbation of Reading is split between Reading, West Berkshire and Wokingham, when it would be much better for the boundary to be moved so it runs through sparsely-populated areas between Reading and the surrounding villages. Likewise for London - though where you (literally!) draw the line between London and its surroundings is a more difficult one! This happened in Reading about a century ago. The Berks/Oxon boundary used to be the Thames, then Caversham - the Reading suburb north of the Thames - was moved into Berks, and into Reading. -- Thoss |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
thoss wrote:
: This happened in Reading about a century ago. The Berks/Oxon boundary used to be the Thames, then Caversham - the Reading suburb north of the Thames - was moved into Berks, and into Reading. We used to live in Appleton, Cheshire, in the early 70's. When the GPO decided Warrington was to be our postal district, we rebelled and used to put "Appleton, Warrington, Cheshire" on our letters, which the GPO didn't like because Warrington was in Lancashire (north of the Mersey). Letters often arrived with Cheshire scribbled out and Lancashire added. The situation was finally resolved when the moved the whole of Warrington into Cheshire in 1974 having invented Greater Manchester and Merseyside. (Actually, I think they moved the county boundaries, as it was easier than moving the town :-) |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
On 13/11/05 21:13, "matt" wrote:
We used to live in Appleton, Cheshire, in the early 70's. When the GPO decided Warrington was to be our postal district, we rebelled and used to put "Appleton, Warrington, Cheshire" on our letters, Why? |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Stimpy wrote:
On 13/11/05 21:13, "matt" wrote: We used to live in Appleton, Cheshire, in the early 70's. When the GPO decided Warrington was to be our postal district, we rebelled and used to put "Appleton, Warrington, Cheshire" on our letters, Why? 'cos we didn't live in Lancashire, but if we didn't put Warrington on our letters, they ended up in Oxford. Or possibly Wisconsin. (oh all right then, it was just snobbery :-) |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Martin Underwood wrote:
You'd think that it would make sense for the boundaries between one "county" and another to be moved from time to time They are. Repeatedly. And it always causes arguments and wastes a lot of time and money. The problem is that as soon as a line is drawn on a map to enclose some particular area or not, people notice that generally it is advantageous to develop just outside that boundary because land or local taxes are cheaper. Thus the sprawl develops. The only way this will stop is to return to the days of greenbelt policy, and make the belts sufficiently wide and well protected. Fat chance. -- http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p14486547.html (37 073 at Wolverhampton, 1985) |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 19:05:44 -0000, "TKD" wrote:
"TKD" wrote in message ... You'd think that it would make sense for the boundaries between one "county" and another to be moved from time to time to take account of any urban sprawl of a city on the boundary, so as always to avoid splitting that city. The conurbation of Reading is split between Reading, West Berkshire and Wokingham, when it would be much better for the boundary to be moved so it runs through sparsely-populated areas between Reading and the surrounding villages. Likewise for London - though where you (literally!) draw the line between London and its surroundings is a more difficult one! Ken Livingstone has suggested aligning the London boundary to the M25. Initially Epsom, and several other peripheral districts, were intended to be part of Greater London. Ken has had some daft ideas but I'm with him on this one. But will it entitle all those domiciled within the M25 to have a vote in the election for London mayor? Somehow I doubt it. What makes you say that? If the London regional boundary is realigned to the M25 then everyone in that boundary will have the right to vote for the Mayor and a London Assembly candidate. In fact some minor realignment to the M25 has already taken place, although the number of affected population gaining (or loosing) that right has been in single figures or zero. An example: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1993/Uksi_19931218_en_1.htm Another example: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1993/Uksi_19930441_en_1.htm I was thinking of large parts of Surrey, namely Weybridge, Walton on Thames etc, and the likes of Watford and Denham, all of which fall inside the M25. Not all of these can be described as having a net effect of zero........... G |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
"Gavin Hamilton" wrote in message ... On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 19:05:44 -0000, "TKD" wrote: "TKD" wrote in message ... You'd think that it would make sense for the boundaries between one "county" and another to be moved from time to time to take account of any urban sprawl of a city on the boundary, so as always to avoid splitting that city. The conurbation of Reading is split between Reading, West Berkshire and Wokingham, when it would be much better for the boundary to be moved so it runs through sparsely-populated areas between Reading and the surrounding villages. Likewise for London - though where you (literally!) draw the line between London and its surroundings is a more difficult one! Ken Livingstone has suggested aligning the London boundary to the M25. Initially Epsom, and several other peripheral districts, were intended to be part of Greater London. Ken has had some daft ideas but I'm with him on this one. But will it entitle all those domiciled within the M25 to have a vote in the election for London mayor? Somehow I doubt it. What makes you say that? If the London regional boundary is realigned to the M25 then everyone in that boundary will have the right to vote for the Mayor and a London Assembly candidate. In fact some minor realignment to the M25 has already taken place, although the number of affected population gaining (or loosing) that right has been in single figures or zero. An example: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1993/Uksi_19931218_en_1.htm Another example: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1993/Uksi_19930441_en_1.htm I was thinking of large parts of Surrey, namely Weybridge, Walton on Thames etc, and the likes of Watford and Denham, all of which fall inside the M25. Not all of these can be described as having a net effect of zero........... I still don't see how or why those places could move from the South East England or East of England regions to the London region without giving the residents the same voting rights as those already in the London region? There isn't any argument, benefit or precedent to support such a thing. |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:46:55 -0000, "TKD" wrote:
"Gavin Hamilton" wrote in message .. . I was thinking of large parts of Surrey, namely Weybridge, Walton on Thames etc, and the likes of Watford and Denham, all of which fall inside the M25. Not all of these can be described as having a net effect of zero........... I still don't see how or why those places could move from the South East England or East of England regions to the London region without giving the residents the same voting rights as those already in the London region? There isn't any argument, benefit or precedent to support such a thing. If Ken wants Greater London to use the M25 as THE boundary he will have to include those areas and, I suspect, the political forces will not want upset the current cosy voting pattern - god forbid that the blue rinses of Walton & Weybridge should have a say in the election of the Greater London assembly and the mayor of London. I can just imagine some candidate saying (to paraphrase Patrica Hughit - patronising old bag) "this electorate is too middle class". File under "good idea - not politically acceptable". G |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
I was thinking of large parts of Surrey, namely Weybridge, Walton on Thames etc, and the likes of Watford and Denham, all of which fall inside the M25. Not all of these can be described as having a net effect of zero........... I still don't see how or why those places could move from the South East England or East of England regions to the London region without giving the residents the same voting rights as those already in the London region? There isn't any argument, benefit or precedent to support such a thing. If Ken wants Greater London to use the M25 as THE boundary he will have to include those areas and, I suspect, the political forces will not want upset the current cosy voting pattern - god forbid that the blue rinses of Walton & Weybridge should have a say in the election of the Greater London assembly and the mayor of London. I can just imagine some candidate saying (to paraphrase Patrica Hughit - patronising old bag) "this electorate is too middle class". File under "good idea - not politically acceptable". For a start it will not be his decision, it will be made at Westminster level. I'm not entirely sure why he wants to extend the border as it doesn't make much political sense for him personally as most of the newly added London electorate would be unlikely to vote for him, preferring a low-tax, low-spend, "everyone have as many cars as you like" Tory mayor. The other problem will be the local government districts which will need to be redrawn. There will be small chunks left of districts outside the M25 that will need to absorbed into some other entity. Which perhaps uncovers his real intention. If the boundary is extended the existing London Boroughs will need to be reformed and he has already suggested larger "super boroughs". The intention is possibly to eliminate such thorns in his side as the City of Westminster London Borough Council. Statue of Mandela anyone? |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Gavin Hamilton wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:46:55 -0000, "TKD" wrote: "Gavin Hamilton" wrote in message . .. I was thinking of large parts of Surrey, namely Weybridge, Walton on Thames etc, and the likes of Watford and Denham, all of which fall inside the M25. Not all of these can be described as having a net effect of zero........... I still don't see how or why those places could move from the South East England or East of England regions to the London region without giving the residents the same voting rights as those already in the London region? There isn't any argument, benefit or precedent to support such a thing. If Ken wants Greater London to use the M25 as THE boundary he will have to include those areas and, I suspect, the political forces will not want upset the current cosy voting pattern - god forbid that the blue rinses of Walton & Weybridge should have a say in the election of the Greater London assembly and the mayor of London. I can just imagine some candidate saying (to paraphrase Patrica Hughit - patronising old bag) "this electorate is too middle class". File under "good idea - not politically acceptable". Maybe if they did, Ken could extend the Congestion Charge Zone to everything within the M25 ? (and maybe include the anti-clockwise carriageway of the M25 :-) |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
On 10 Nov 2005 13:11:43 -0800, "Mizter T" wrote:
[originally posted to uk.transport.london ] [ommitted to cross-post this to uk.railway ] [pls reply to *this* post- sorry for the mess] I'm surprised that no-one has referred to this yet, though it doesn't seem to appear anywhere on the Southern (or any other) website(s). I've seen a poster at a Southern station, which has been there at least a week, that states that from 2 January 2006, when new fares are introduced, the London's Zone 6 will be extended to include the following stations to the south of Croydon and Sutton: Banstead and Epsom Downs Chipstead, Kingswood, Tadworth and Tattenham Corner Whyteleafe, Whyteleaf South and Caterham Upper Wharlingham Does this mean that passengers from these stations can no longer get railcard discounts on (off peak) travel cards and other journeys within the zones? If so, they will notice a significant fare increase. -- Peter Lawrence |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
"Peter Lawrence" wrote Banstead and Epsom Downs Chipstead, Kingswood, Tadworth and Tattenham Corner Whyteleafe, Whyteleaf South and Caterham Upper Wharlingham Does this mean that passengers from these stations can no longer get railcard discounts on (off peak) travel cards and other journeys within the zones? If so, they will notice a significant fare increase. No, I don't think so. Why should it mean that? Are you suggesting that railcard discounts are not available within the zones? |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
John Salmon wrote:
"Peter Lawrence" wrote Banstead and Epsom Downs Chipstead, Kingswood, Tadworth and Tattenham Corner Whyteleafe, Whyteleaf South and Caterham Upper Wharlingham Does this mean that passengers from these stations can no longer get railcard discounts on (off peak) travel cards and other journeys within the zones? If so, they will notice a significant fare increase. No, I don't think so. Why should it mean that? Are you suggesting that railcard discounts are not available within the zones? IIRC not on Oyster. -- Paul |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
DERWENT Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Wed, 16 Nov 2005 08:59:18 GMT, "Peter Lawrence" On 10 Nov 2005 13:11:43 -0800, "Mizter T" wrote: [originally posted to uk.transport.london ] [ommitted to cross-post this to uk.railway ] [pls reply to *this* post- sorry for the mess] I'm surprised that no-one has referred to this yet, though it doesn't seem to appear anywhere on the Southern (or any other) website(s). I've seen a poster at a Southern station, which has been there at least a week, that states that from 2 January 2006, when new fares are introduced, the London's Zone 6 will be extended to include the following stations to the south of Croydon and Sutton: Banstead and Epsom Downs Chipstead, Kingswood, Tadworth and Tattenham Corner Whyteleafe, Whyteleaf South and Caterham Upper Wharlingham Does this mean that passengers from these stations can no longer get railcard discounts on (off peak) travel cards and other journeys within the zones? If so, they will notice a significant fare increase. No. Railcards still apply, and the majority of people will see ticket prices reduced (unless the January price rises are more than 20%). PRAR -- http://www.i.am/prar/ and http://prar.fotopic.net/ As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. --Dick Cavett Please reply to the newsgroup. That is why it exists. NB Anti-spam measures in force - If you must email me use the Reply to address and not |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
DERWENT Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:47:35 +0000, Paul John Salmon wrote: "Peter Lawrence" wrote Banstead and Epsom Downs Chipstead, Kingswood, Tadworth and Tattenham Corner Whyteleafe, Whyteleaf South and Caterham Upper Wharlingham Does this mean that passengers from these stations can no longer get railcard discounts on (off peak) travel cards and other journeys within the zones? If so, they will notice a significant fare increase. No, I don't think so. Why should it mean that? Are you suggesting that railcard discounts are not available within the zones? IIRC not on Oyster. Oyster is a waste of time on NR at the moment. PRAR -- http://www.i.am/prar/ and http://prar.fotopic.net/ As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. --Dick Cavett Please reply to the newsgroup. That is why it exists. NB Anti-spam measures in force - If you must email me use the Reply to address and not |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 21:12:44 -0000, "TKD" wrote:
If Ken wants Greater London to use the M25 as THE boundary he will have to include those areas and, I suspect, the political forces will not want upset the current cosy voting pattern - god forbid that the blue rinses of Walton & Weybridge should have a say in the election of the Greater London assembly and the mayor of London. I can just imagine some candidate saying (to paraphrase Patrica Hughit - patronising old bag) "this electorate is too middle class". File under "good idea - not politically acceptable". For a start it will not be his decision, it will be made at Westminster level. I'm not entirely sure why he wants to extend the border as it doesn't make much political sense for him personally as most of the newly added London electorate would be unlikely to vote for him, preferring a low-tax, low-spend, "everyone have as many cars as you like" Tory mayor. The other problem will be the local government districts which will need to be redrawn. There will be small chunks left of districts outside the M25 that will need to absorbed into some other entity. Which perhaps uncovers his real intention. If the boundary is extended the existing London Boroughs will need to be reformed and he has already suggested larger "super boroughs". The intention is possibly to eliminate such thorns in his side as the City of Westminster London Borough Council. Statue of Mandela anyone? Which is more or less what I said............... G |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 21:42:33 +0000 (UTC), matt
wrote: Gavin Hamilton wrote: On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:46:55 -0000, "TKD" wrote: "Gavin Hamilton" wrote in message ... I was thinking of large parts of Surrey, namely Weybridge, Walton on Thames etc, and the likes of Watford and Denham, all of which fall inside the M25. Not all of these can be described as having a net effect of zero........... I still don't see how or why those places could move from the South East England or East of England regions to the London region without giving the residents the same voting rights as those already in the London region? There isn't any argument, benefit or precedent to support such a thing. If Ken wants Greater London to use the M25 as THE boundary he will have to include those areas and, I suspect, the political forces will not want upset the current cosy voting pattern - god forbid that the blue rinses of Walton & Weybridge should have a say in the election of the Greater London assembly and the mayor of London. I can just imagine some candidate saying (to paraphrase Patrica Hughit - patronising old bag) "this electorate is too middle class". File under "good idea - not politically acceptable". Maybe if they did, Ken could extend the Congestion Charge Zone to everything within the M25 ? (and maybe include the anti-clockwise carriageway of the M25 :-) I was under the impression that the M25 was already subject to parking charges already :-) Actually, although I only live 40ish miles from London I haven't been inside the M25 for about 18 months. G |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
In article , Gavin Hamilton
writes If Ken wants Greater London to use the M25 as THE boundary he will have to include those areas and, I suspect, the political forces will not want upset the current cosy voting pattern - god forbid that the blue rinses of Walton & Weybridge should have a say in the election of the Greater London assembly and the mayor of London. I can just imagine some candidate saying (to paraphrase Patrica Hughit - patronising old bag) "this electorate is too middle class". Um, the whole *idea* of the GLC was to bring lots of Tory areas into the voting of the London County Council and thus eliminate this Labour stronghold. I'm sure Ken knows just how bad an idea *that* was. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Home: Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations
Mizter T wrote:
I'm surprised that no-one has referred to this yet, though it doesn't seem to appear anywhere on the Southern (or any other) website(s). I've only just seen this, despite having been to Sutton station twice in the last week. I've seen a poster at a Southern station, which has been there at least a week, that states that from 2 January 2006, when new fares are introduced, the London's Zone 6 will be extended to include the following stations to the south of Croydon and Sutton: Banstead and Epsom Downs Chipstead, Kingswood, Tadworth and Tattenham Corner One of the side effects is that a Travelcard holder can now go for a walk on Epsom Downs and go between the two terminuses. From a personal point of view I *think* Epsom Downs is the closer station to my parents home, but it's not entirely clear (not least because there's quite a bit of doubling back to get to the station itself at the end of the estate) but I've hardly ever used it, taking Epsom instead. (Also I recall that the Epsom-Sutton fare is or was cheaper than the Epsom Downs-Sutton fare.) Now that Epsom Downs doesn't require a ticket extension on my travelcard this may well change my travel pattern when visiting. I wonder also if this will lead to others using Epsom Downs more for visiting the College end of Epsom. I've grouped them together for ease of reference. They all appear on the London Connections map [1], and (logically) they're all outside the Greater London boundary in the county of Surrey. Have the district councils had any input on this? Despite the name, the Epsom Downs line is pretty much in Reigate & Banstead (okay it's the border in places). |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Chris Read wrote:
Banstead and Epsom Downs Chipstead, Kingswood, Tadworth and Tattenham Corner What's the logic in extending Z6 to Epsom Downs and Tattenham Corner, but not to Epsom? Are there particular difficulties caused by Southern 'sharing the flow' from Epsom with SWT? Not sure but there's also a different district council involved which *might* be a factor. |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Chris Read
I think it must have been. IIRC, the zones for NLL stations were fiddled some time ago to ensure that it was necessary to hold a 2-zone ticket (Zones 2 and 3) for most journeys - even so, if there are any commuters between North Woolwich and Kew Gardens they get a bargain, as long as they don't decamp at West Ham and go the rest of tHe way by LUL District Line. If there are any commuters between North Woolwich and Kew Gardens, they deserve a medal as well as a bargain. Seventy minutes commuting could get them from London to Grantham, Chippenham or Ipswich, rather than 20 miles through the back gardens of the less salubrious bits of north London. It's not quite North Greenwich, but when I go to the PRO I often use Stratford-Kew Gardens. Can I apply? ;-) |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
matt wrote:
If Ken wants Greater London to use the M25 as THE boundary he will have to include those areas and, I suspect, the political forces will not want upset the current cosy voting pattern - god forbid that the blue rinses of Walton & Weybridge should have a say in the election of the Greater London assembly and the mayor of London. I can just imagine some candidate saying (to paraphrase Patrica Hughit - patronising old bag) "this electorate is too middle class". File under "good idea - not politically acceptable". Maybe if they did, Ken could extend the Congestion Charge Zone to everything within the M25 ? (and maybe include the anti-clockwise carriageway of the M25 :-) I can just see Ashtead and Leatherhead jumping for the joy at this prospect! At the moment there is a real concern that any Greater London wide congestion charge could cause problems in Surrey, not least for Epsom & Ewell as a lot of roads cross the bit of Kingston that sticks out. Forcing traversing motorists to go round on roads that aren't designed for rat runs would be a nightmare. |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
|
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
Banstead and Epsom Downs Chipstead, Kingswood, Tadworth and Tattenham Corner What's the logic in extending Z6 to Epsom Downs and Tattenham Corner, but not to Epsom? Are there particular difficulties caused by Southern 'sharing the flow' from Epsom with SWT? Not sure but there's also a different district council involved which *might* be a factor. Hardly so. The Public Transport authority will be Surrey County Council. True formally, though the fears some in Epsom & Ewell, including but not just borough councillors, hold about anything that looks like the next step towards incorporating Epsom into Greater London should not be underestimated. One other point is that never to my recollection have Epsom and Epsom Downs been treated as "Epsom stations" with tickets valid for either and they really can't be used as an interchange in any meaningful sense (unlike, say, Canterburys East & West). Epsom Downs serves a combination of semi-rural suburbs and a school and has always had separate fares from Epsom. Also just Southern extending Zone 6 to Epsom would create the problem that one Ewell station would be within the zone and the other wouldn't - and I think there has been a "Ewell stations" use in fares. Plus it's debatable as to whether Epsom alone on the South West Trains network should be incorporated - what about some parts of the Cobham line or Shepperton? - and equally should the zone stop at Epsom or carry on to Ashtead (still in the M25), Leatherhead (occasional terminus) or even Dorking?! This is of a different order to two backwater branches. |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 17:04:40 -0000, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote: I can just see Ashtead and Leatherhead jumping for the joy at this prospect! Well, Leatherhead is already served by TfL bus 465 with London fares applying. |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
Colin Rosenstiel wrote: Banstead and Epsom Downs Chipstead, Kingswood, Tadworth and Tattenham Corner What's the logic in extending Z6 to Epsom Downs and Tattenham Corner, but not to Epsom? Are there particular difficulties caused by Southern 'sharing the flow' from Epsom with SWT? Not sure but there's also a different district council involved which *might* be a factor. Hardly so. The Public Transport authority will be Surrey County Council. True formally, though the fears some in Epsom & Ewell, including but not just borough councillors, hold about anything that looks like the next step towards incorporating Epsom into Greater London should not be underestimated. One other point is that never to my recollection have Epsom and Epsom Downs been treated as "Epsom stations" with tickets valid for either and they really can't be used as an interchange in any meaningful sense (unlike, say, Canterburys East & West). Epsom Downs serves a combination of semi-rural suburbs and a school and has always had separate fares from Epsom. Also just Southern extending Zone 6 to Epsom would create the problem that one Ewell station would be within the zone and the other wouldn't - and I think there has been a "Ewell stations" use in fares. How long has this been the case? I once tried to get to Ewell East but never made it there, as the line was closed between Croydon and Sutton because of trackwork (and because Connex had lost SouthCentral they failed to mention it on their information poster and map...) The next day I went there via Ewell West, and the fare was much higher. Plus it's debatable as to whether Epsom alone on the South West Trains network should be incorporated - what about some parts of the Cobham line or Shepperton? - and equally should the zone stop at Epsom or carry on to Ashtead (still in the M25), Leatherhead (occasional terminus) or even Dorking?! This is of a different order to two backwater branches. AFAIK there's no final goal - just zones that occasionally incorporate other places. Shepperton may get incorporated in the next round of expansion. Meanwhile you can get a bus if you want to travel to Leatherhead (or even Dorking) on a travelcard. |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Aidan Stanger wrote:
One other point is that never to my recollection have Epsom and Epsom Downs been treated as "Epsom stations" with tickets valid for either and they really can't be used as an interchange in any meaningful sense (unlike, say, Canterburys East & West). Epsom Downs serves a combination of semi-rural suburbs and a school and has always had separate fares from Epsom. Also just Southern extending Zone 6 to Epsom would create the problem that one Ewell station would be within the zone and the other wouldn't - and I think there has been a "Ewell stations" use in fares. How long has this been the case? I once tried to get to Ewell East but never made it there, as the line was closed between Croydon and Sutton because of trackwork (and because Connex had lost SouthCentral they failed to mention it on their information poster and map...) The next day I went there via Ewell West, and the fare was much higher. I honestly don't know as I've never bought a ticket for either - on the few occasions I've got off there it's been on a season ticket. Though wasn't the Hackbridge line running as an alternative? Plus it's debatable as to whether Epsom alone on the South West Trains network should be incorporated - what about some parts of the Cobham line or Shepperton? - and equally should the zone stop at Epsom or carry on to Ashtead (still in the M25), Leatherhead (occasional terminus) or even Dorking?! This is of a different order to two backwater branches. AFAIK there's no final goal - just zones that occasionally incorporate other places. Shepperton may get incorporated in the next round of expansion. Meanwhile you can get a bus if you want to travel to Leatherhead (or even Dorking) on a travelcard. Which route is this and from where? I always shunned buses |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
Aidan Stanger wrote: How long has this been the case? I once tried to get to Ewell East but never made it there, as the line was closed between Croydon and Sutton because of trackwork (and because Connex had lost SouthCentral they failed to mention it on their information poster and map...) The next day I went there via Ewell West, and the fare was much higher. I honestly don't know as I've never bought a ticket for either - on the few occasions I've got off there it's been on a season ticket. Though wasn't the Hackbridge line running as an alternative? Yes it was, but I didn't notice the problem until I'd got to Croydon and just missed a 726 express bus. Plus it's debatable as to whether Epsom alone on the South West Trains network should be incorporated - what about some parts of the Cobham line or Shepperton? - and equally should the zone stop at Epsom or carry on to Ashtead (still in the M25), Leatherhead (occasional terminus) or even Dorking?! This is of a different order to two backwater branches. AFAIK there's no final goal - just zones that occasionally incorporate other places. Shepperton may get incorporated in the next round of expansion. Meanwhile you can get a bus if you want to travel to Leatherhead (or even Dorking) on a travelcard. Which route is this and from where? I always shunned buses 465. I got it from Chessington South, but I thought it started at Kingston. However, I the bus map I've just looked at shows it starting at Fulwell (though it may have changed, as the map is old). -- Aidan Stanger http://www.bettercrossrail.co.uk |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
In message , Aidan Stanger
writes 465. I got it from Chessington South, but I thought it started at Kingston. However, I the bus map I've just looked at shows it starting at Fulwell (though it may have changed, as the map is old). The 465 is currently Fulwell to Dorking, but it is to be cut back to run from Kingston to Dorking as from next May (with a new route covering much of the Fulwell-Kingston part). I think the route proved too long for reliability, especially with the congestion at the northern end - the change follows Tellings Golden Miller selling their bus division to National Express. -- Paul Terry |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations
Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
Mizter T wrote: I've seen a poster at a Southern station, which has been there at least a week, that states that from 2 January 2006, when new fares are introduced, the London's Zone 6 will be extended to include the following stations to the south of Croydon and Sutton: Banstead and Epsom Downs Chipstead, Kingswood, Tadworth and Tattenham Corner One of the side effects is that a Travelcard holder can now go for a walk on Epsom Downs and go between the two terminuses. And for those that don't have a period Travelcard such an outing is still possible for those south of the river with the purchase of the somewhat underrated Zone 2-6 Day Travelcard, which now costs £4.30. I don't think I've been walking down that way, so I may check it out one sunday. |
Zone 6 conquers ten further Southern stations...
Thanks for this info.
I've offered wanted to explore this area, but short or getting two singles at great expenses there didn't seem to be a way. I shall splash out on a 'doughnut' 2-6 travelcard. Robert |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:10 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk