Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I don't usually use it but may have to tomorrow. I saw on my bus app that buses were being diverted due to 'works'. Does anyone know if that's the case how close the bus goes to the station? In the event of dropping someone off by car, can that be done? Thanks.
The stop outside the Wetherspoon's is closed so going south you should be OK but it is always busy and the forecourt of the station is busy also. If you could speedily pull up and drop off near the Sainsbury's, that would be your best bet, but you would probably be in a bus lane....Honor Oak Park may be easier if it works for your trip.

Hope this helps copied from SE23.com


https://www.se23.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=13593


"There will be changes in our bus services from Monday 29 January until mid-March . This is due to the closure of Dartmouth Road while London Borough of Lewisham carries out renewal works.


Bus route 122 will be diverted in both directions via London Road, Sydenham Rise, Sydenham Hill and Kirkdale, not serving Dartmouth Road.


Bus routes 176 and 197 will be diverted in both directions via Sydenham Hill and Kirkdale, not serving London Road (east of Sydenham Hill), Forest Hill station or Dartmouth Road. Customers for National Rail or London Overground can change at Sydenham station instead of Forest Hill station. Customers going to the town centre can change at Lordship Lane to / from route 185 or in Kirkdale to / from route 356.


We are posting notices at the bus stops in Dartmouth Road, directing customers to alternative stops."

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So the buses are diverted from quite a way before

> Forest Hill. Thanks.


Only the buses which turn right onto Dartmouth Road - if you hop on the 185 it's still going past Forest Hill station.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
    • My view is that any party that welcomes a self-declared Marxist would merit a negative point. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...