Forum Topic

Chiswick Bus Death Spiral

It is really disappointing to see yet more reductions in bus services on Chiswick High Road. The number of buses on the High Road is already down 30% from its peak before this change and it will make the service even more crowded an unreliable than it already is.I'm surprise the 267 is the one to be culled and at such short notice. My own experience is that I often have to let this service pass because it is too crowded whereas other routes will have more space. The reason why buses are being cut must in part be due to slower speeds and missed schedules meaning people are opting for other modes of transport. This is why I really think people should get behind the proposals for Cycleway 9 because they will help in this regard.Why the 267? We can guess but possibly it is because the Routemaster Boris Buses are being phased out or transferred to other routes where TfL wants to introduce a low emission fleet. Chiswick has a double problem of being a low emission zone for buses which means provision is more expensive and slowing journey times mean services are getting more reliable.Hopefully this will be a nadir for the service - with the electrification of the Stamford Brook garage combined with the Cycleway 9 changes and possibly some reintroduction of bus lanes, there is some hope for future improvement but in the short term things are going to get worse.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 4d25 Comments

and the 94 route being cut short, many weekends the district line is not running and now the upcoming tube strikes

Isabel Martin ● 4d

The data does confirm that usage of the 267 has been falling and its usage numbers are well below the 267.  Work from home may be a factor as well as slow rates of progress particularly on Chiswick High Road.

Mark Evans ● 3d

"..usage of the 267 has been falling and its usage numbers are well below the 267"Eh ?

Richard Greenhough ● 3d

Well below the 237

Mark Evans ● 3d

I did a quick comparison of usage of numbered bus routes that existed in both 2018/2019 and 2025/2026.  This is 499 different bus routes.  It doesn't include bus routes with letters like H91.The overall reduction for all these bus routes between 2018/2019 and 2025/2026 was -15.9% so at -15.1%, the decline of 267 usage is almost the same as the London average.This doesn't look at changes there have been to individual bus routes. Overall bus km operated has declined by -6.4% reflecting combination of reduced frequencies and shorter routes.As well as WFH, there are more alternatives like Ubers and cycling.

Michael Robinson ● 3d

A triumph for Operation Chis-Choke. Freedom of movement now seriously curtailed, freedom of speech next!

Davey Harris ● 3d

"there are more alternatives like Ubers"So Mike is now advocating for cars on the road.How funny.

David Lesniak ● 3d

Despite bus lanes, bus travel is extremely slow in no part due to the various cycleways that have been introduced. This coupled to the fact that many routes have been curtailed  as is the case with the 94. This means changing buses and often with a wait. I remember the days when you could get an 88 all the way to the Tate Gsllery. While I like the introduction of electric buses, in many other areas the service has declined a great deal.

Christopher Hunter ● 2d

So what cycle lanes have been installed along the 94 bus route?

Michael Robinson ● 2d

Michael, Christopher didn't say that the 94 had been slowed by cycle lanes. He said it had been curtailed.

The evidence points to a very significant slowing of buses along the route of the cycleway since it was installed.

The chart below, posted on X by @ChiswickWheelie shows ata obtained via FOI for the relevant section of Chiswick High Road between British Grove and Turnham Green Church shows the clear impact of #Cycleway9 - a 26% average increase in bus journey times between 7am and 7pm.

This is the death spiral in action, slower buses means fewer people using them, fewer people using them means TfL cuts services, fewer buses means longer journey times and fewer people using them, fewer people using them means TfL cuts services.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 2d

If you look at *all* bus routes in London, usage is down on average by 15%.  The decline in 267 usage is just the London average.Given cycle lanes occupy a tiny proportion of roads in London, you are going to have to find another explanation why usage has decreased everywhere.

Michael Robinson ● 2d

Just to add, I've compared the change in usage of 639 London bus routes that existed in both 2018/2019 and 2015/2026 and the usage across all has declined by 15.5%.As I've said, the decline in the usage of the 267 at 15.9% is just the London average.

Michael Robinson ● 2d

So how are you now finding out where people want to go to as this must change as working patterns and destinations change?  I remember there once being a website called fixmytravel which was easy to use and on which you could mention new workplaces and venues and have discussions on how to travel there.A lot of people now have much more flexible working hours and ways of working.

Philippa Bond ● 2d

So how are you now finding out where people want to go to as this must change as working patterns and destinations change?  I remember there once being a website called fixmytravel which was easy to use and on which you could mention new workplaces and venues and have discussions on how to travel there.  Where do people have to go to make these suggestions and have those discussions now?A lot of people now have much more flexible working hours and ways of working.

Philippa Bond ● 2d

The figures supplied earlier show a 17.7% decline in 267 usage and only go up to 2024/25 and the trend suggests they would have fallen further. In addition the service should have seen a boost in usage from the withdrawal of the 27. TfL's decision to cut the schedule suggests that on their analysis the fall has been well above the average.

How much of that is down to the increase in journey times through the centre of Chiswick is hard to say but the increases are very marked. If they were accompanied by smaller rises on the rest of the route it could have meant the service was essentially unusable at certain times of day including the morning rush. This has to be a key reason why TfL is rushing through changes to the cycleway.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1d

Bus usage data is on the TfL website including the 25/26 financial year.  As I have said, the decline  in 267 usage from 2018/19 to 2025/26 is almost the same as the decline in bus services for all London.  You can check this for yourself.Did C9 along Chiswick High Rd impact 638 other bus services across London as well as the 267?Or do you think there could be other factors which are more important to explain the decline in bus usage.  Such as more people working from home.  Or more people cycling.

Michael Robinson ● 1d

The picture provide by data will be influenced by when you choose to start and end. You say the statistics you have found show that the decline in the 267 is not out of the norm. The ones that have been published in this thread suggest it is seeing a much bigger drop than the average. Nobody is saying that there isn't a general decline in bus usage and bus speeds across London and the 267 isn't the only route to have a schedule reduction this year. However, the data we have does show a very large increase in wait times for the service over the last few years along Chiswick High Road. This isn't solely down to the cycle lane but removing bus lanes and creating more pinch points would inevitably have resulted in slower moving traffic. 

All traffic, including buses, cannot move forward when a bus is stopped at the two westbound stops in the centre of Chiswick which means that one option that TfL has to make buses go more quickly is to have fewer buses. Hopefully this is just a stopgap and when the changes proposed between Heathfield Terrace and Dukes Avenue are complete, there will be some restoration of service.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1d

You won't notice the shops, pubs and restaurants and other facilities on the street if you just whizz by!

Philippa Bond ● 1d

Every cloud has a silver lining!

Andrew Jones ● 1d

" The ones that have been published in this thread suggest it is seeing a much bigger drop than the average."No it doesn't.  Comparing 18/19 to 24/25, the fall in 267 usage is slightly more than the average for those range of years.  Comparing 18/19 to 25/26, the fall in 267 usage is slightly less than the average for those range of years.Picking different starting and ending years will give slightly different results but there is nothing to indicate changes in 267 usage are significantly different from the overall average.Same for the 237.  The decline in usage is also within a % or two of the average.On the other hand, the H91 which also goes along CHR is different.  Usage has declined by only 3.7% between 18/19 to 25/26 compared to the average decline of 15.1%.  Perhaps this is because there is simply less choice for alternatives given its route along the A4.

Michael Robinson ● 1d

“ there are more alternatives like Ubers and cycling.”That’s such a moronic statement. There are many people who can’t afford Ubers or even have the ability to use the Uber App and there are many, many people who are unable to cycle!!! However, if I understand it correctly, the 267 service is only being reduced reduced from every 10 minutes to 12 minutes early on weekday mornings. Surely that’s not such a big deal? 

Steve Taylor ● 1d

If you want to be picky there is also the option of walking or running if you are early enough and the pavements are clear enough!

Philippa Bond ● 1d

"However, if I understand it correctly, the 267 service is only being reduced reduced from every 10 minutes to 12 minutes early on weekday mornings."Surely that’s not such a big deal? I guess it depends how full the buses are in the morning and what proportion of time the buses spend between stops and what proportion of time they spend at stops letting passengers on and off. If you have an average of 5 people getting on at a bus stop when the buses run every 10 minutes, that will go up to an average of 6 people if the buses run every 12 minutes. I wouldn't have thought it was such a big deal either, but I have next to no experience of using the 267, and certainly not any experience in the morning rush hour!

Andrew Jones ● 1d

We have DfT traffic speed data from 2019 to 2025 for three segments of the High Road between the junctions, east to west, Goldhawk Road, Chiswick Lane, Heathfield Terrace and Chiswick Roundabout. That allows us to separate out speed changes over each year, both on (the first two segments) and off the route of C9.The biggest drop in traffic speeds along the route of C9 was from 2019 to 2020, before C9 opened.  There was a further smaller drop from 2020 to 2021. On the last segment, the situation is reversed. I'm a little surprised that the largest drop occurred on those first two segments during COVID before C9 opened, but the two segments give similar results.So while just looking at changes in speed from 2019 to 2024 might suggest C9 opening was associated with a drop in speeds along the High Road, a more detailed analysis suggests speeds were dropping fastest on that stretch before it opened, and the segment of the High Road that saw the biggest drop in 2021 when C9 opened was beyond C9.Michael is correct, you shouldn't pin blame on the 267 service reduction on one short segment of the route when the general picture of reduced ridership across London is very similar, and the 267 is just one of four services along the High Road. What we do know is that along the High Road motor traffic and pollution have dropped while cycling, footfall and retail spend is up. Of course there are multiple factors that have contributed to these changes, but might it be possible C9 is one of them? In any case, the High Road cannot be described as in any kind of death spiral!

Tom Pike ● 1d

The reduction in the service is not just in the morning — it is all day. Steve seems to have got confused by the complicated terminology used — am and pm. If you look at it the way that TfL presents is — a 6 minute wait time as opposed to a 5 minute wait time, it does seem marginal but you get a better grasp of how negative the changes if you look at the percentage decrease in the number of buses — 16.67% Schedules are great when they are operating but the reality is that there are slippages due to traffic and 6 minutes is usually not the likely wait but the minimum. Once you get to ten at a busy time, the bus will arrive full. Buses on Chiswick High Road in the morning and evening are already crowded and my impression was the overloading on the 267 was among the worst. The inevitable outcome is fewer people will use buses and that will give the excuse for TfL to reduce services further.

Mark Evans ● 4h