|
|
Post by abellion on Mar 5, 2023 16:16:04 GMT
No they don’t - things called blinds & curtains exist. It’s just another example of nimbys at play People do have a right to privacy and shouldn’t have to live in the dark constantly to avoid people staring through their windows. It’s not impossible to get a blind which lets light in and doesn’t let anybody look in and people on the 295 will be doing all the looking in anyway… plenty of people live with DDs along their roads perfectly fine. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 5, 2023 16:30:36 GMT
I can't speak for many of these but the 371 is fine as it is. It recently had a capacity boost with 60 capacity SDs introduced at the beginning of the new contract. A lot of the journeys taken on route 371 are short journeys, with a lot of elderly people using it to get up Richmond Hill, who would not use the upper deck. The schedules have been cleverly constructed so that the 2 allocated double decks accommodate both the school journeys and the commuters who board buses at about 6pm at Richmond Station. As is the 164. It can be busy but the route isn’t overwhelmed. The thing I find with the 164 is it fills up at Wimbledon Station and just empties out to Morden, fills up again and empties out all the way to Sutton. There aren’t many passengers who board at the intermediary stops. The journeys towards Wimbledon are busier as people tend to head towards Morden for the tube but the Morden to Wimbledon section isn’t as busy. It would be nice to have double deckers but they just aren’t needed on a full time basis. Arguably the 163 is the same aswell. Busy from Morden as far the Beverly, loads again along Grand Drive then empties at Raynes Park Station then loads a bit more from the Wimbledon Chase area to Wimbledon. |
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Mar 5, 2023 16:37:55 GMT
No they don’t - things called blinds & curtains exist. It’s just another example of nimbys at play People do have a right to privacy and shouldn’t have to live in the dark constantly to avoid people staring through their windows. I have lived along a bus route for over 30 years and people can see in my place if they choose too. I would say it is very rare for people to even bother looking. Maybe I’m missing something but there must be 1000s of roads where there is housing and double decker buses travel along them. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Mar 5, 2023 16:40:35 GMT
People do have a right to privacy and shouldn’t have to live in the dark constantly to avoid people staring through their windows. I have lived along a bus route for over 30 years and people can see in my place if they choose too. I would say it is very rare for people to even bother looking. Maybe I’m missing something but there must be 1000s of roads where there is housing and double decker buses travel along them. . Some people feel like they want more security and if they are prepared to fight they should be listened to. I myself have faced my own battle in recent times with a new supermarket across the street that installed an illuminated sign. Fought it and they don’t ever switch it on expect for testing once or twice a year. So I understand where these people are coming from in terms of invasive street objects. |
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Mar 5, 2023 16:42:06 GMT
I have lived along a bus route for over 30 years and people can see in my place if they choose too. I would say it is very rare for people to even bother looking. Maybe I’m missing something but there must be 1000s of roads where there is housing and double decker buses travel along them. . Some people feel like they want more security and if they are prepared to fight they should be listened to. I myself have faced my own battle in recent times with a new supermarket across the street that installed an illuminated sign. Fought it and they don’t ever switch it on expect for testing once or twice a year. So I understand where these people are coming from in terms of invasive street objects. What's wrong with having an illuminated sign? |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Mar 5, 2023 16:57:45 GMT
Some people feel like they want more security and if they are prepared to fight they should be listened to. I myself have faced my own battle in recent times with a new supermarket across the street that installed an illuminated sign. Fought it and they don’t ever switch it on expect for testing once or twice a year. So I understand where these people are coming from in terms of invasive street objects. What's wrong with having an illuminated sign? When it’s across a very narrow street and right in your windows creating a sickly jaundice glow in your bedroom even with blackout blinds let me know what it’s like. Just to clarify I was here first so I am well within my rights to complain, I wouldn’t have if I’d been fully aware of it when I moved in but it was a very different shop then. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2023 17:36:56 GMT
A few DDs sneak their way onto the 286, but I wish they all were. It’s always busy.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 5, 2023 17:39:44 GMT
I think the point is that there are a number of SD routes which have seen DD strays before (therefore no issues with height, residents etc), and need the extra capacity - yet continue to be retendered with SDs. For example, the 164, 371 or D6. However, TFL should also be pushing to resolve any potential minor issues to allow other busy SD routes (which have not seen DD strays) to convert, such as the 143, 195, 201, 316 or 490. And similarly for routes which just need slightly longer SDs. I can't speak for many of these but the 371 is fine as it is. It recently had a capacity boost with 60 capacity SDs introduced at the beginning of the new contract. A lot of the journeys taken on route 371 are short journeys, with a lot of elderly people using it to get up Richmond Hill, who would not use the upper deck. The schedules have been cleverly constructed so that the 2 allocated double decks accommodate both the school journeys and the commuters who board buses at about 6pm at Richmond Station. I agree completely about the 371 and there are a few routes that are perfectly fine with single deckers, people are unlikely to go upstairs for short journeys and much quicker dwell times at stops. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 5, 2023 17:45:51 GMT
Just looked at the route and the only stretch that is currently SD only is a 0.3 mile stretch of Barlby Road in Notting Hill that's served by the 70 & 316...so this must be the 'problem' (correct?). Just had a quick look on Google streetview and there really aren't many dwellings...it's all rather strange but then I don't live there... The problem is with DDs on residential roads is that some residents get annoyed at people in the upper deck looking into their first floor windows. They have a fair point Not only looking through first floor windows but over fences and into gardens and other private areas. The general rule is what was there first? If someone moves into a house knowing that double deckers buses pass by they haven't got much room for complaint but if double deckers are subsequently forced upon them they are perfectly entitled to object. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 5, 2023 20:28:00 GMT
I have lived along a bus route for over 30 years and people can see in my place if they choose too. I would say it is very rare for people to even bother looking. Maybe I’m missing something but there must be 1000s of roads where there is housing and double decker buses travel along them. . Some people feel like they want more security and if they are prepared to fight they should be listened to. I myself have faced my own battle in recent times with a new supermarket across the street that installed an illuminated sign. Fought it and they don’t ever switch it on expect for testing once or twice a year. So I understand where these people are coming from in terms of invasive street objects. A bus isn't an invasive street object unlike a light - it's a tool used in public transport. Burglars do not sit on double deck buses all day looking for their next target otherwise every house on a double deck route would be a hot spot for burglars when this isn't the case. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Mar 5, 2023 20:49:47 GMT
Some people feel like they want more security and if they are prepared to fight they should be listened to. I myself have faced my own battle in recent times with a new supermarket across the street that installed an illuminated sign. Fought it and they don’t ever switch it on expect for testing once or twice a year. So I understand where these people are coming from in terms of invasive street objects. A bus isn't an invasive street object unlike a light - it's a tool used in public transport. Burglars do not sit on double deck buses all day looking for their next target otherwise every house on a double deck route would be a hot spot for burglars when this isn't the case. No, but some people do have a credible aversion to having a double decker stop a feet from your window. It doesn’t really bother me, note there are 8 double decker routes that pass my window and honestly depending on the time of the morning you might see me wandering around in a towel. How I haven’t been done for indecent exposure is a miracle especially as the windows are 3/4 of the street facing wall, but that is my choice. I just don’t think people’s concerns should be invalidated just because it’s a public transport tool. But there are caveats, for example if they bought a house where double deckers are established they have no reason to complain but if it converts at a later date then those residents have the right to complain and challenge TfL if they don’t want them regardless of how it affects the rest of the route. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 5, 2023 20:52:39 GMT
A bus isn't an invasive street object unlike a light - it's a tool used in public transport. Burglars do not sit on double deck buses all day looking for their next target otherwise every house on a double deck route would be a hot spot for burglars when this isn't the case. No, but some people do have a credible aversion to having a double decker stop a feet from your window. It doesn’t really bother me, note there are 8 double decker routes that pass my window and honestly depending on the time of the morning you might see me wandering around in a towel. How I haven’t been done for indecent exposure is a miracle especially as the windows are 3/4 of the street facing wall, but that is my choice. I just don’t think people’s concerns should be invalidated just because it’s a public transport tool. But there are caveats, for example if they bought a house where double deckers are established they have no reason to complain but if it converts at a later date then those residents have the right to complain and challenge TfL if they don’t want them regardless of how it affects the rest of the route. Nor does it bother me but there is no concern around the issue because there is no issue to begin with so no concern is being invalidated - a lot of these people just look for reasons to block stuff. As long as the relevant bodies follow the correct procedures, that's all that should matter |
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Mar 6, 2023 1:29:31 GMT
The problem is with DDs on residential roads is that some residents get annoyed at people in the upper deck looking into their first floor windows. They have a fair point Not only looking through first floor windows but over fences and into gardens and other private areas. The general rule is what was there first? If someone moves into a house knowing that double deckers buses pass by they haven't got much room for complaint but if double deckers are subsequently forced upon them they are perfectly entitled to object. Nothing would ever get double decked if residents got their way with this reasoning! |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 6, 2023 6:50:59 GMT
Not only looking through first floor windows but over fences and into gardens and other private areas. The general rule is what was there first? If someone moves into a house knowing that double deckers buses pass by they haven't got much room for complaint but if double deckers are subsequently forced upon them they are perfectly entitled to object. Nothing would ever get double decked if residents got their way with this reasoning! Well that’s how it is, we live in a democracy and people are entitled to voice their opinions. |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Mar 6, 2023 7:28:06 GMT
Not only looking through first floor windows but over fences and into gardens and other private areas. The general rule is what was there first? If someone moves into a house knowing that double deckers buses pass by they haven't got much room for complaint but if double deckers are subsequently forced upon them they are perfectly entitled to object. Nothing would ever get double decked if residents got their way with this reasoning! Not sure what some people's obsession with double decks is. It is well known that 30% of passengers won't or can't due to mobility problems go upstairs, the stairs take the place of many non step seats. Most surburban routes where the looking into upstairs windows debates happen, can take longer single decks anyway. And if somewhere like Richmond with its old horse and cart street layout could take 12m buses on H37 then I suspect it is a myth that 12m buses won't fit in most of London. There is also a new argument, if you have a single deck electric bus fleet, much easier to develop a garage with over site development than to build a garage capable of taking double deck hybrid or diesel buses. Because no neighbour will want noisy or polluting bus starting up before 7am. (7am is normally deemed children's sleep time on planning applications) |
|
