Consultation Report November 2018

Proposed Changes to bus routes 224 and 440

Consultation report November 2018

Contents

Executive summary ...... 4 Summary of issues raised during consultation……………………………………………3

Next steps …………………………………………………………………………………….3.

1 About the proposals...... 5 1.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………4

1.2 Purpose…………………………………………………………………………………………..4

1.3 Detailed description ……………………………………………………………………………5

1.3.1 Route 440 extension to Wembley……………………………………………………….5

1.3.2 Route 224 …………………………………………………………………………………..6

1.3.3 Map of proposed changes…………………………………………………………………6

2 About the consultation ...... 8 2.1 Purpose………………………………………………………………………………………….7

2.2 Potential outcome………………………………………………………………………………7

2.3 Who we consulted and how………………………………………………………………….7

2.4 Dates and duration ………………………………………………………………………………7

2.5 What we asked ………………………………………………………………………………….8

2.6 Methods of responding ………………………………………………………………………….8

2.7 Consultation material and publicity ……………………………………………………………...8

2.7.1 Website………………………………………………………………………………………..8

2.7.2 Letters and/or leaflets ………………………………………………………………………8

2.7.3 Emails to public………………………………………………………………………………9

2.7.4 Emails to stakeholders………………………………………………………………………9

2.7.5 On-site advertising ………………………………………………………………………….9

2.8 Analysis of consultation responses……………………………………………………………..9

3 About the respondents………………………………………………………………………9

3.1 Number of responses ………………………………………………………………………….9

3.2 How respondents heard about the consultation……………………………………………..9

3.3 How respondents identified themselves………………………………………………………10

4 Overview of responses ...... 12 4.1 Responses from stakeholders ………………………………………………………………12

5 Summary and conclusion ...... 14 Appendix A – List of stakeholders consulted ...... 15 Local groups and stakeholders ...... 16 Appendix B - Consultation material ...... 20 Appendix C - Responses to issues commonly raised ...... 25

Executive summary Between 2 July and 12 August 2018, a consultation was carried out on the proposed changes to bus routes 224 and 440. These involved plans to curtail route 224 at Alperton station while extending route 440 to serve the Wembley Stadium area.

The objectives of these proposals were to appropriately match bus service capacity to passenger demand along these routes as well as supporting the extensive residential development currently underway around Wembley Stadium.

We received 80 responses to the consultation, including three from stakeholders. 50% were in favour of the proposals to change route 224, compared to 25% who opposed or strongly opposed the plans. 67.5% of respondents supported the proposal to extend route 440.

Summary of issues raised during consultation

 Curtailing the 224 will be detrimental to students and older people travelling to local shops and amenities.  There will be a loss of direct link from Wembley to Central Middlesex hospital.  Interchange between routes at Alperton involves crossing a busy road and the facilities are not adequate.

Next steps

We have reviewed all of the consultation responses and intend to proceed with the scheme as proposed in early 2019.

1 About the proposals

1.1 Introduction

In 2017 we consulted on proposed changes to a number of bus routes in west London, as part of our plans for the Elizabeth line. Since then we have carried out further work to improve the bus network in the area.

We have now developed a new set of proposals for route 440 that would:

 Provide new links from Stonebridge Park Station entrance to Wembley Stadium area where a large number of homes, shops and employment is being delivered.  Provide new links from Tokyngton to Wembley Stadium, Park Royal, Acton, Chiswick and the Elizabeth line at Acton Main Line.  Provide extra capacity around development sites at Wembley, Park Royal, North Acton and South Acton. A higher frequency route 440 running every 12 minutes during Monday to Saturday day times and every 15 minutes during Sunday day times and all evenings.  Meet the Mayor’s Transport Strategy vision of improving orbital bus service links in outer London.

Our review of bus services serving west London also revealed a number of routes that were running with a lot of spare capacity i.e. buses that are not full. We are therefore proposing the followings changes to route 224:

 Make route 224 more reliable by shortening the route  Removing excess capacity along Ealing Road  Some passengers will need to change bus at Alperton Station to continue their journey.

We have proposed these changes to bus routes 440 and 224, to better match capacity with demand on these routes and to complement service changes required to accommodate the forthcoming introduction of the Elizabeth line in December 2019.

As part of the original Elizabeth line consultation in 2017, further changes to route 440 were proposed around Chiswick, West Acton and Park Royal ASDA. This would result in a more direct route that could be extended to Wembley. After feedback from this consultation, we have asked for your views on modified proposals for route 440 in the Chiswick area. These proposals were consulted on separately at: consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/routes-27-and- 440/.

1.2 Purpose

Route 224

We constantly review our bus services to ensure we have enough busses to meet passenger demand. Our review of bus services serving west London also revealed a number of routes that were running with a lot of spare capacity i.e. buses that are not full. We are therefore proposing the followings changes to route 224:

 Make route 224 more reliable by shortening the route  Removing excess capacity along Ealing Road  Some passengers will need to change bus at Alperton Station to continue their journey.

Route 440

We listened to the feedback we received during last year’s consultation and have developed new proposals for route 440 that aim to:

 provide a new direct bus link between Stonebridge Park to Wembley.  improve bus links into Chiswick Business Park from South Acton Estate  a direct link between stops at the northern end of Chiswick Business Park and Gunnersbury station

1.3 Detailed description

1.3.1 Route 440 extension to Wembley

Under our proposals route 440 would be extended between Stonebridge Park station and Wembley Industrial Estate via Harrow Road. Travelling northbound it would follow its existing line of route to the North Circular Road before serving stop B (currently used by route 112) instead of stop F at Stonebridge Park station. Then it would turn left on to Harrow Road serving the Tokyngton area following route 18 before running along Wembley Hill Road, Empire Way, Engineers Way, Fifth Way, Fourth Way, South Way and terminating at First Way. A new bus stand is proposed at First Way to accommodate route 440.

It would return southbound from First Way turning left onto Engineers Way before serving Empire Way, Wembley Hill Road, Harrow Road, Point Place and Argenta Way. At Stonebridge Park station it would serve the same southbound stop A as it does at the moment before continuing on existing line of route.

A link to the original Elizabeth line bus consultation and proposed changes to route 440 at West Acton and Park Royal ASDA are available here: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/74970d79/#Acton Main Line

1.3.2 Route 224

Alongside the enhancements to route 440 and in response to the recent introduction of the new route 483, we are proposing to cut route 224 between Alperton Sainsbury’s and Wembley Stadium.

Under the proposals route 224 buses would no longer run between Alperton Sainsbury’s and Wembley Stadium. It would continue to run from St. Raphael’s Estate to Alperton Sainsbury’s terminating at stop H. It would return towards St. Raphael’s Estate picking up at stop H. This would affect around 700 passengers a day by no longer serving central Wembley. Passengers would still be able to complete the journey to central Wembley by bus with a single change at Alperton Station onto route 79, 83, 297 or the new route 483 (introduced in 2016). The Hopper fare means this is free of charge. For many passengers this would be quicker as using the current route 224 requires a longer journey via Alperton Sainsbury’s.

1.3.3 Map of proposed changes

2 About the consultation

2.1 Purpose The objectives of the consultation were:  To give stakeholders and the public easily-understandable information about the proposals and allow them to respond  To understand the level of support or opposition for the change  To understand any issues that might affect the proposal of which we were not previously aware  To understand concerns and objections  To allow respondents to make suggestions

2.2 Potential outcomes The potential outcomes of the consultation are:  We decide the consultation raises no issues that should prevent us from proceeding with the changes as originally planned  We modify the proposals in response to issues raised in consultation  We abandon some or all of the changes as a result of issues raised in the consultation

Our conclusion and next steps are set out in section 5.

2.3 Who we consulted and how

 We wanted to understand the views of bus passengers using these services, plus those living and working near to where the changes would have impact. We sent over 200 emails about the consultation to stakeholders, businesses in the area and registered Oyster card users using the bus routes. We also sent an additional 30 letters to stakeholders without email addresses.

 A list of stakeholders we contacted is shown in Appendix A. A copy of the email and letter sent to stakeholders are shown in Appendix B.

 Attendees at a meeting of the Brent Council Public Transport Liaison Meeting were also advised that the consultation would be taking place at their meeting on 27 June 2018.

2.4 Dates and duration

 The consultation was published online on our consultation website between the  2 July and 12 August 2018. The consultation was also promoted through TfL social media Twitter and several tweets were made.

2.5 What we asked The questionnaire asked a series of generic questions relating to name, email address, postcode, organisation name (if responding on behalf of a business, stakeholder or organisation), how they had heard about the consultation, and views on the quality of the consultation (respondents were also asked questions on the quality: to rate in a scale from very good to very poor; and to provide any comments).

There were four questions specific to the consultation:

 Which of these buses do you use and how often do you use them? (Respondents were given a choice of six answers: Daily, 2-3 days a week, once a week, 1-2 times a month, rarely, never)  What do you think about our proposals for route 224? (The choices for respondents were strongly support, support, neither support or oppose, oppose, strongly oppose, not applicable, I don’t use this route)  What do you think about our proposals for route 440? (The choices for respondents were strongly support, support, neither support or oppose, oppose, strongly oppose, not applicable, I don’t use this route)  Do you have any comments? (there was a free text box for respondents to provide comments)

2.6 Methods of responding People were invited to respond to the consultation using a variety of methods. They could respond by accessing the online questionnaire; by using our freepost address at FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS; or by emailing [email protected]

2.7 Consultation materials and publicity We sent out emails to registered customers who use routes 224 and 440. We also consulted stakeholders including the London Borough of Brent, London Borough of Harrow, Transport for All, Age UK, local politicians, and local resident and community groups. We displayed notices at bus stops along the routes concerned where space was available.

2.7.1 Website The consultation was published online via the TfL consultation website at https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/routes-224-and-440

2.7.2 Letters and/or leaflets Letters were sent to stakeholders identified along either route who did not have an email address. See Appendix B.

2.7.3 Emails to public We sent an email with a link to the online consultation to registered users of routes 224, 27 (which was being consulted on at the same time) and 440 (in both Chiswick and Wembley). In total, 27,931 emails were sent out. See Appendix A.

2.7.4 Emails to stakeholders An email about the consultation was sent to stakeholders including the London Borough of Brent and London Borough of Harrow, Transport for All, Age UK, local politicians, and local resident and community groups. See Appendix B.

A separate email was sent to 529 respondents of 2017’s consultation on proposed changes to buses in West London for the opening of the Elizabeth line, inviting them to comment and giving them the option of opting out.

2.7.5 On-site advertising Notices about the proposals were placed at 83 bus stops along routes 224 and 440. See Appendix A.

2.8 Analysis of consultation responses Analysis of the consultation responses was carried out in-house by TfL.

There were two “open” questions (one seeking comments about the proposals and one on the quality of the consultation). One person conducted the tagging exercise; a draft coding frame was developed for responses to these questions, which was finalised following review by another member of the team. Responses received by letter or email were coded using the same framework.

3 About the respondents

3.1 Number of respondents In total we received 80 responses to the consultation.

3.2 How respondents heard about the consultation

How respondents heard about Number of Percentage consultation respondents Received an email from TfL 33 40.74% Received a letter from TfL 1 1.23% Read about in the press 1 1.23% Saw it on the TfL website 16 19.75% Social media 7 8.64% Other 9 11.11% Not Answered 14 17.28%

3.3 How respondents identified themselves

The majority of respondents identified themselves as local residents or employed locally.

How respondents identified Number of Percentage themselves respondents

A Local Resident 53 65.43% A local business owner 1 1.23% Employed locally 13 16.05% A visitor to the area 5 6.17% A Commuter to the area 13 16.05% A taxi/private hire vehicle driver 0 0% Not local but interested in the scheme 7 8.64% Other (Please specify) 2 2.47% Not Answered 8 9.88%

4 Overview of responses We asked two questions relating to the two different sections of the proposals. The following tables detail the responses to each question. Q2. What do you think of our proposed changes to route 224?

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Not Strongly Strongly applicable Not Support Neutral Oppose Support oppose (don't use answered the route) Number of responses 24 16 8 6 14 8 4

Q3. What do you think of our proposed changes to route 440?

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Not Strongly Strongly applicable Not Support Neutral Oppose Support oppose (don't use answered the route) Number of responses 36 18 4 1 7 10 4

Number of Main comments raised by respondents comments

Extension of 440 will be beneficial. 9 Curtailing the 224 will be detrimental to students and older people travelling to local shops and amenities. 4 Loss of direct link from Wembley to Central Middlesex Hospital 3 224 should become more frequent 3 There needs to be better links created between Beresford Avenue and local amenities 2 Interchange between routes at Alperton involves crossing a busy road/interchange facilities are not ideal 2

4.1 Responses from Stakeholders

Brent Council Brent Council support the extension of the 440 to Wembley as this will support the extensive development taking place there.

However, they oppose the changes to route 244 for the following reasons:  The facilities for interchange at Alperton involve a narrow pavement area and therefore are not ideal.  The likelihood of passengers having to wait for more than ten minutes to change buses is high and there are concerns that extended waits might impact on the option to enjoy the benefit of the Hopper fare.  The area affected by the proposed removal of the 224 suffers from social exclusion and therefore willingness to change buses to access destinations is considered lower than in other areas. This could lead to further exclusion amongst these communities.  There are no reasonable direct alternative services for passengers in the affected areas.

Quintain Quintain are responsible for the extensive development in the Wembley area. They support the extension of the 440 to Wembley as it will enhance services in Wembley Park and provides new access to Stonebridge Park, Old Oak Common and Acton stations.

Quintain opposes the curtailment of route 224 for the following reasons:  Although alternative buses are available between Wembley and Alperton, this will involve changing buses and is therefore less attractive to travellers.  The 224 is the only direct link to from Wembley to Central Middlesex Hospital.  Quintain are delivering 8,000 new homes and 1million sq. footage of commercial development at Wembley – although currently only 700 passengers would be

affected by the reduction in the 224, demand for this bus link is likely to increase as the developments come on line.  Curtailing the 224 diminishes the positive impact of extending the 440.

London TravelWatch Although noting the curtailment of the 224 will affect 700 passengers a day, Travelwatch recognise the benefit of not turning the bus at Sainsbury's and then returning via the same route. They consider that there are sufficient buses to interchange with for passengers to complete journeys to or from Wembley Stadium. Therefore, Travelwatch support this proposal. Additional comment: the walking route between stops could be improved substantially with a proper pavement in front of Alperton station.

Travelwatch are happy to support the extension of route 440.

5 Summary and conclusion  We received 80 responses to consultation.  50% of responses were supportive or strongly supportive of our proposals for route 224.  67.5% of responses were supportive or strongly supportive of our proposals for route 440.  We therefore propose to go ahead with these proposed changes.  Our response to issues commonly raised in consultation is shown in Appendix C.

Appendix A – List of stakeholders consulted

General/Londonwide Stakeholders Action on Hearing Loss (formerly RNID) Age Concern London Age UK Asian Peoples Disabilities Alliance BT Campaign for Better Transport Confederation of British Industry (CBI) CTC, The national cycling charity Disability Alliance Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee EDF Energy Greater London Forum for the Elderly Guide Dogs for the Blind Association Joint Committee on Mobility of Blind and Partially Sighted People (JCMBPS) Joint Mobility Unit Living Streets London Cycling Campaign London Older People's Strategy Group London Travelwatch MIND National Children's Bureau National Grid RADAR London Access Forum RNIB Royal Mail London TravelWatch Sense Sixty Plus Stroke Association Thames Water The British Dyslexia Association West London Alliance

Political/Government Stakeholders

Mohammed Butt Tokyngton ward councillor (and Leader of Brent Council) Orleen Hylton Tokyngton ward councillor Ketan Sheth Tokington ward councillor Wilhelmina Mitchell Murray Wembley Central ward councillor Luke Patterson Wembley Central ward councillor Wembley Central ward councillor (also cabinet member Krupa Sheth for environment) Abdi Aden Stonebridge ward councillor Ernest Ezeajughi Stonebridge ward councillor 15

Promise Knight Stonebridge ward councillor Sharma Tatler Cabinet Member for Regeneration Dawm Butler MP MP for Brent Central Navin Shah AM London Assembly Member for Brent & Harrow Rachel Best Head of Transport Planning, London Borough of Brent Head of Highways and Infrastructure, London Borough of Tony Kennedy Brent Carolyn Downs Chief Executive, London Borough of Brent Caroline Pidgeon Chair, London Assembly Transport Committee Florence Eshalomi Deputy Chair, London Assembly Transport Committee Sean Bailey Member, London Assembly Transport Committee Tom Copley Member, London Assembly Transport Committee David Kurten Member, London Assembly Transport Committee Joanne McCartney Member, London Assembly Transport Committee Steve O’Connell Member, London Assembly Transport Committee Keith Prince Member, London Assembly Transport Committee Caroline Russell Member, London Assembly Transport Committee Tim Steer Head of Transport, Greater London Authority Claire Hamilton Transport Manager, Greater London Authority Neil Nerva Chair, Brent Public Transport Liaison Forum

Local groups and stakeholders 23rd Wembley (Sahabah) Scout Group 24/7 Assured Care Services Ltd 2nd Wembley Boys' Brigade Abundance Arts Adal Global Training and Recruitment Ltd Advance Education Centre (London) AlexZ Educational Allied Healthcare Alperton Community School Ansar Youth Project ARK Elvin Academy Asian People's Disability Alliance BAPS Shri Swaminarayan Hindu Mandir Bathshan Foundation Be That Man (BTM) Life Light Benny Hinn Ministries Ltd Betty King International Ministries Bharatiya Gyan Deep BHeard Service Users Group Blesses Breathe Easy Brent (British Lung Foundation) Brent Active Citizens Brent Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses Brent Family Support Project 16

Brent for Jesus Missions Brent Indian Association Brent Ladies Football Club Brent Muslim Association Brent Parent Carer Forum Brent Sickle Cell Patient Support Group Brent Young Advisors Brent Youth Parliament Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre British Gurkha Nepalese Association Brook Women and Girls Network Carib Theatre Company Church of God Evangelism Church of God in Wembley Church of the Five Precious Wounds City and County Healthcare Community Systems Cross Fellowship London (Cross Ministries) Cultural Health and Science Initiatives Enterprise (CHSIE) CVS Brent Danes and Empire Courts Residents Association Daniel's Den Daniel's Den Dar Al Huda Supplementary School Destiny House International Dimensions Dirre Development Association EACH Counselling and Support Ealing Road Methodist Church Eelapatheeswarar Aalayam Shiva Temple Elan Arts Encee Arts Eritrean Youth and Community in Brent Eternal Life Ministries Explore Learning Faith and Victory Church Faith Regen Foundation Federation of Patidar Associations Fire Cadets Fly Girls Running Community Friends of Brent River Park German Football Academy Gibbons Wreckers Youth FC Grey Panthers of Pan Harvest Church Healthwatch Brent Hillcroft Crescent Residents Association Hillside Islamic Cultural Centre Hilltop FC 17

Horn of Africa Refugee Welfare Group Horn of Africa Welfare Association Horn Stars I Serve Impact Youth Club Ingeus International Centre for Integration and Cohesion Iraqi Welfare Association Islamic Cultural Centre Jason Roberts Foundation Kalaniketan Keep Wembley Tidy Kenshukai Karate (Stonebridge) Kicks (Stonebridge) Kicks (Wembley) Linking Lives Brent London Care London Elders Group London Natarajar Temple (Sivayogam) London Stonebridge Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses London Tamil North Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses LSA Training Mandhata Youth and Community Association McCarthy O'Rourke Academy of Irish Dance McDonalds, Wembley MiHomecare Mount Carmel Church of God New Challenge New Life Christian Centre International New Life Prayer Centre Nu-Life Church Oakington Manor Primary School Park Lane Methodist Church Park Lawn Residents Association Patidar Senior Citizen Club Place2Be PLIAS Resettlement Positive Directions Potters Palace Ministries Prayer Deliverance Ministries Quintain Rotary Club of Wembey Safe Start Foundation SAMEC Trust (Service Access to Minority Ethnic Communities) Shaw Trust Shree Sanatan Hindu Mandir Shree Shakti Mandir Shri Shirdi Sai Baba Temple Association of London (SHITAL) Shri Vallabh Nidhi UK 18

Skills Training UK Southcroft Tenants Association St John’s Catholic Primary School St Joseph's Catholic Church St Michael and All Angels Church St Michael the Archangel Church St Patrick’s Catholic Church St Raphael’s Football Club Stonebridge Boxing Club Stonebridge Centre (The Hub) Stonebridge Evangelical Church Stonebridge Older Persons Forum Stonebridge Somali Centre Stonebridge Sports Pavilion Sufra NW London Sunwar Taekwondo The Urban Family Tokyngton Harvest Football Club Track Academy Victim Support Vishwa Hindu Parishad (Wembley Branch) Volunteering Brent Volunteering Matters Wembley (Brent) Lions Club Wembley Central and Alperton Residents Association Wembley Central Mosque Wembley Crime Prevention Wembley Futures Wembley Hill Residents Association Wembley Park Residents Association Wembley Spiritualist Church Wembley Writers West Indian Self Effort (WISE) Wildfire Urban Key Woodheyes Community Centre Work Rights Centre Yellow Pavilion Young Brent Foundation Your Voice

Appendix B - Consultation material The text of the letter and email sent out to stakeholders are included here.

Stakeholder email Dear Sir/Madam

Last year we consulted on proposed changes to a number of bus routes in west London, as part of preparations for the opening of the Elizabeth line. Since then we have carried out further work designed to improve the bus network in the area.

We have now developed a new set of proposals to extend route 440 to Wembley Stadium that would:

 Provide new links from Stonebridge Park Station entrance to the Wembley Stadium area where a large number of homes, shops and employment are being delivered.  Provide new links from Tokyngton to Wembley Stadium, Park Royal, Acton, Chiswick, and the Elizabeth line at Acton Main Line.  Provide extra capacity around development sites at Wembley, Park Royal, North Acton and South Acton. A higher frequency route 440 running every 12 minutes during Monday to Saturday day times and every 15 minutes during Sunday day times and all evenings.  Meet the Mayor’s Transport Strategy vision of improving orbital bus service links in outer London.

Our review of bus services serving west London also revealed a number of routes that were running with spare capacity i.e. buses that are not full. We are therefore proposing the followings changes to route 224. In order to make the most efficient use of our limited resources, we are therefore proposing to terminate route 224 at Alperton Sainsbury’s, rather than at Wembley Stadium. This would mean that:

 A shorter route will make the 224 more reliable  Excess capacity along Ealing Road will be removed  Some passengers would need to change bus at Alperton Station to continue their journey using routes 79, 83, 297 or 483. Although this may be less convenient, the new Hopper fare does mean that this will not incur further fares to continue this journey.

Full details of these proposals can be found on our consultation website: tfl.gov.uk/routes- 224-440

We are also proposing to provide a new direct bus link between Gunnersbury, Acton and the planned new Elizabeth line station at Acton Main Line and to make route 27 more reliable by terminating it at Hammersmith Grove. These proposals are being consulted on separately: tfl.gov.uk/routes-27-440

We are keen to hear your views about either or both of our proposals. If you have any comments you can:  Visit the website using the individual links above and respond to the questionnaires  Email [email protected]  Write to Transport for London, FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS

We are inviting anyone who is interested in the proposals to ask questions or provide comments by Sunday 12 August 2018.

Subject to the feedback we receive, we plan to implement these changes in autumn 2018.

Yours sincerely

Nisha Durgacharan Local Communities & Partnerships Transport for London

Copy of bus stop notice:

Appendix C - Responses to issues commonly raised

We have summarised the main issues raised during the consultation and provided our response to those issues below.

Number of Main comments raised by respondents comments

Extension of 440 will be beneficial.

Yes, the main benefits would be providing new links between Chiswick, Acton, Park Royal, Stonebridge Park and the Elizabeth line to Tokyngton and Wembley. It would also provide extra capacity and new connectivity within the Wembley Stadium development area. 9

Curtailing the 224 will be detrimental to students and older people travelling to local shops and amenities.

Some passengers would need to change buses at Alperton station to continue their journeys. This would require crossing Ealing Road where there is a signalised pedestrian crossing is available underneath the rail bridge. Passengers can change for free using the ‘Hopper Fare’. Routes 79, 83, 297, 483 are available for interchange to Wembley and have more than enough capacity to meet demand. 4

Loss of direct link from Wembley to Central Middlesex Hospital

Extension of route 440 would reprovide a direct link from Wembley Stadium area / eastern end of Wembley High Street to Central Middlesex Hospital. It would run at a higher frequency and a more direct route with quicker journey times. Passengers travelling from the western end of Wembley would need to use one of the many alternative routes that run across Wembley town centre to access route 440 at Wembley Stadium station. 3

224 should become more frequent

Usage on the route does not currently justify more than a 3 buses per hour service to meet demand. 3

There needs to be better links created between Beresford Avenue and local amenities

Currently, usage is low on Beresford Avenue and therefore additional provision for route 224 cannot be justified at present. However, development is planned along this road that is forecast to substantially add demand for bus services. When this happens options for additional services will be looked at 2 such as extending route 83 between Alperton and Stonebridge Park station 25

(this was referred to within the consultation).

Interchange between routes at Alperton involves crossing a busy road/interchange facilities are not ideal

It is recognised that Ealing Road is busy and interchange would require crossing it. However, a signalised pedestrian crossing is available underneath the rail bridge immediately to the west of the stops and Alperton station entrance. This provides a dedicated pedestrian phase for bus passengers to cross the road and interchange between buses. 2