|
|
Post by aaron1 on Sept 8, 2021 15:06:56 GMT
Hi I am now starting to DD on the 316 outside the Notting Hill Carnival now but only far as North Kensington any one know why
|
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Sept 8, 2021 17:22:11 GMT
Hi I am now starting to DD on the 316 outside the Notting Hill Carnival now but only far as North Kensington any one know why Residents being a-holes |
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Sept 8, 2021 17:59:43 GMT
I saw a DD last Thursday on the 316, it was near Ladbroke Grove where it shares a few stops with the 7 in a residental area
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2021 11:54:05 GMT
I saw a DD last Thursday on the 316, it was near Ladbroke Grove where it shares a few stops with the 7 in a residental area Also the 316 DD I saw was curtailed to North Kensington |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Sept 13, 2021 13:58:47 GMT
I suspected that there would be more DDs appearing on the 316 because dds can’t be used on the 112 anymore so W no choice but to put them onto the 316 even it means that they can’t be used on the full route.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2021 14:08:46 GMT
I suspected that there would be more DDs appearing on the 316 because dds can’t be used on the 112 anymore so W no choice but to put them onto the 316 even it means that they can’t be used on the full route. They should put them on the whole route, who cares about resident objections. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 13, 2021 14:28:37 GMT
I suspected that there would be more DDs appearing on the 316 because dds can’t be used on the 112 anymore so W no choice but to put them onto the 316 even it means that they can’t be used on the full route. They should put them on the whole route, who cares about resident objections. The residents and quite often the councillors that represent them. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Sept 13, 2021 14:29:56 GMT
I suspected that there would be more DDs appearing on the 316 because dds can’t be used on the 112 anymore so W no choice but to put them onto the 316 even it means that they can’t be used on the full route. They should put them on the whole route, who cares about resident objections. I suspect there is a bit more to it than that. |
|
|
|
Post by aaron1 on Sept 13, 2021 16:19:35 GMT
What I find funny about resident objections that 295 is a DD have been running down for a long time what if the different about that
|
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Sept 13, 2021 16:26:57 GMT
What I find funny about resident objections that 295 is a DD have been running down for a long time what if the different about that I remember someone saying the residents would allow one of the 295/316 to be decked |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2021 16:29:52 GMT
They should put them on the whole route, who cares about resident objections. The residents and quite often the councillors that represent them. That's true but I reckon decking the 316 would benefit more people than it would disadvantage |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Sept 13, 2021 16:37:38 GMT
What I find funny about resident objections that 295 is a DD have been running down for a long time what if the different about that The 295 was already there, what residents objected to (rightly or wrongly) was more double deckers which can allegedly cause damage to property. Probably best to send a FOI request to find out the full story. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Sept 13, 2021 18:44:43 GMT
I suspected that there would be more DDs appearing on the 316 because dds can’t be used on the 112 anymore so W no choice but to put them onto the 316 even it means that they can’t be used on the full route. They should put them on the whole route, who cares about resident objections. The 316 and 228 swapping routings would be the next best option because I doubt the residents will change there minds at this rate. |
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Sept 13, 2021 20:04:20 GMT
They should put them on the whole route, who cares about resident objections. The 316 and 228 swapping routings would be the next best option because I doubt the residents will change there minds at this rate. The campaign against the 316 on Royal Crescent was effectively a joint campaign with those objecting against the 228 on Ladbroke Grove (southern end). I suspect that if you tried to send a DD route down that section of Ladbroke Grove you would run into the same level of objection and we'd be back to square one.
A lot of these resident objections do get quietly "forgotten" over time but clearly the Royal Crescent objectors have more clout than most, as the DD ban seems to be rigorously enforced to this day. Same goes for the 184 DD ban on Alexandra Park Road.
|
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Sept 13, 2021 22:39:47 GMT
The 316 and 228 swapping routings would be the next best option because I doubt the residents will change there minds at this rate. The campaign against the 316 on Royal Crescent was effectively a joint campaign with those objecting against the 228 on Ladbroke Grove (southern end). I suspect that if you tried to send a DD route down that section of Ladbroke Grove you would run into the same level of objection and we'd be back to square one.
A lot of these resident objections do get quietly "forgotten" over time but clearly the Royal Crescent objectors have more clout than most, as the DD ban seems to be rigorously enforced to this day. Same goes for the 184 DD ban on Alexandra Park Road.
Hmm maybe your right 🤔 I guess that the only option is to reroute the 316 to Notting Hill Gate via the 52 then via the 316. I could have sworn I have heard on here that dds went all the way on the 316 to White City but this was during a diversion via the 228. Like when Grenfall was on fire and another time there were roadworks and the 316 was diverted via the 228 I could have heard that dds went all way to White City on the 316 during the diversion and the dds on 295 also went via the 228. |
|
