|
Post by vjaska on Jul 21, 2014 10:32:28 GMT
The ELS's currently on the 42 have had their day and it is ridiculous that such a busy route is restricted to single deckers, couldn't it just be extended the short distance to Herne Hill as Sunray Avenue isn't an ideal terminus anyway, various residential issues? Or an extension via Dulwich Village to Crystal Palace would be even better!! If it was to get deckers, I doubt you could route it through Dulwich Village as there may be issues with residents not want deckers through there - that said, the 37 diverted through there roughly 14 years ago when the bridge at North Dulwich needed strengthening.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 21, 2014 10:33:47 GMT
Until they clear the trees on Sunray Avenue, it won't be getting deckers. It is a shame though. When did this tree problem start exactly? I remember seeing a couple of DDs from the 1 work on the 42, but its been ages since that happened. The problem has been there a while despite it using deckers on many occasions. IIRC, it failed a route test which is why no decker sightings happen anymore.
|
|
|
Post by sw11simon on Jul 29, 2014 7:00:18 GMT
When I was at Camberwell the route used to regularly use a double decker or two as the ELS fleet was so unreliable. There was no issue with trees then but there was an issue with complaints from local residents... it is one of those "don't want people in a double decker peering into my bedroom" roads... A spell of regularly using double decks would generally result in a complaint or two from Sunray Avenue. I would suggest if double decks are no longer seen (I'm never in that area now) it will be either that complaint has been raised at a higher level or a double deck had an incident with a tree. TfL can give in to residential complaints... the 37 stands was moved in Putney a few years ago following years of constant complaints from residents in St John's Avenue (led by the man who lived by the bus stand.)
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jul 29, 2014 7:46:03 GMT
How often do resident's views get collected? Don't opinions often change?
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jul 29, 2014 8:34:13 GMT
When I was at Camberwell the route used to regularly use a double decker or two as the ELS fleet was so unreliable. There was no issue with trees then but there was an issue with complaints from local residents... it is one of those "don't want people in a double decker peering into my bedroom" roads... A spell of regularly using double decks would generally result in a complaint or two from Sunray Avenue. I would suggest if double decks are no longer seen (I'm never in that area now) it will be either that complaint has been raised at a higher level or a double deck had an incident with a tree. TfL can give in to residential complaints... the 37 stands was moved in Putney a few years ago following years of constant complaints from residents in St John's Avenue (led by the man who lived by the bus stand.) It was a similar situation with the route 11 bus stand at Fulham Broadway, where buses had to go to the Brompton stand from the evenings. This was due to constant complaints from a resident who lived right by the stand and would call in his complaint if a bus engine was still idling for more than 30 seconds after parking.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 29, 2014 9:22:28 GMT
How often do resident's views get collected? Don't opinions often change? I doubt TfL go out and specifically ask for views where it knows there's an issue. It will depend entirely on TfL receiving complaints. The problem with all of this is that those who complain shout louder than those who are probably not the least bit bothered about a double deck bus on the 42 or those who use the 42 and wish there were double decks because it's go busy. I can perhaps understand people being annoyed if they live by a bus stand and drivers don't switch engines off when they're supposed to. The only time TfL actively canvasses opinion is when there is a consultation and that process runs the risk of being hijacked by "moaners" rather than people who'd benefit. The classic example was route 324 - a service long demanded by people but where there was a vociferous local campaign in Belmont that alleged cars would be damaged, houses would fall down, children would be slain by marauding buses and the world would end [1] if buses ran down a local road not far from Stanmore. Thankfully their nonsense was outweighed by a big positive response by people who took the time to actually say "yes we want this new bus route". Last time I looked the world had not ended and there was not daily chaos in NW London resulting from the operation of route 324. [1] I might be exaggerating very slightly.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 29, 2014 9:38:36 GMT
There has to be a bit of give and take in these situations, some complaints are justified and it has to be said that stands in residential areas are often not ideal outside of 'daytime hours' but clearly there are people who just complain for the sake of it.
The Sunray Avenue stand isn't ideal but if the 42 was cut back to Camberwell Green then the link to Kings College Hospital would be lost, an extension to Herne Hill would seem to be the only other option.
I don't know if it has been mentioned but the 42 is moving back to Q when MW take on the 100.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jul 29, 2014 9:55:49 GMT
How often do resident's views get collected? Don't opinions often change? I doubt TfL go out and specifically ask for views where it knows there's an issue. It will depend entirely on TfL receiving complaints. The problem with all of this is that those who complain shout louder than those who are probably not the least bit bothered about a double deck bus on the 42 or those who use the 42 and wish there were double decks because it's go busy. I can perhaps understand people being annoyed if they live by a bus stand and drivers don't switch engines off when they're supposed to. The only time TfL actively canvasses opinion is when there is a consultation and that process runs the risk of being hijacked by "moaners" rather than people who'd benefit. The classic example was route 324 - a service long demanded by people but where there was a vociferous local campaign in Belmont that alleged cars would be damaged, houses would fall down, children would be slain by marauding buses and the world would end [1] if buses ran down a local road not far from Stanmore. Thankfully their nonsense was outweighed by a big positive response by people who took the time to actually say "yes we want this new bus route". Last time I looked the world had not ended and there was not daily chaos in NW London resulting from the operation of route 324. [1] I might be exaggerating very slightly. Funny, I was only wondering the other day whatever happened to Mr Rudolph?... I think the Sunray Avenue thing is a red herring. I thought it had previously been established that the problem was with trees on Red Post Hill. My memory may be at fault but it wasn't that they needed cutting back but they were growing at a slight angle, leading to a perceived risk of a double decker hitting one. The answer was to build out the kerb at those points but there were problems over cost, doing the work, loss of parking etc.
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Jul 29, 2014 9:57:00 GMT
Does anyone remember a campaign to extend the 42 to East Dulwich Sainsburys via North Dulwich Station and East Dulwich Grove? Sainsburys even added an additional bus shelter for the route, but it didn't get the go ahead.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jul 29, 2014 10:32:02 GMT
There has to be a bit of give and take in these situations, some complaints are justified and it has to be said that stands in residential areas are often not ideal outside of 'daytime hours' but clearly there are people who just complain for the sake of it. The Sunray Avenue stand isn't ideal but if the 42 was cut back to Camberwell Green then the link to Kings College Hospital would be lost, an extension to Herne Hill would seem to be the only other option. Is it possible for the 42 to terminate inside Kings College Hospital via Coldharbor Lane? I don't know what the road layout is within those confines.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on Jul 29, 2014 10:52:17 GMT
When I was at Camberwell the route used to regularly use a double decker or two as the ELS fleet was so unreliable. There was no issue with trees then but there was an issue with complaints from local residents... it is one of those "don't want people in a double decker peering into my bedroom" roads... A spell of regularly using double decks would generally result in a complaint or two from Sunray Avenue. I would suggest if double decks are no longer seen (I'm never in that area now) it will be either that complaint has been raised at a higher level or a double deck had an incident with a tree. TfL can give in to residential complaints... the 37 stands was moved in Putney a few years ago following years of constant complaints from residents in St John's Avenue (led by the man who lived by the bus stand.) Seriously, hasn't anyone heard of curtains? These kind of complaints tend to annoy me a little.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jul 29, 2014 12:00:09 GMT
Further to my earlier post, a quick search brings up the following from beaver14uk last year:
Sunray Avenue/Red Post Hill It was agreed that when cars are not parked along the nearside then there is the potential for a bus to hit a tree at several locations on these two streets. LB Southwark said that there is no likelihood of any of the larger boughs being removed from the trees as it is a conservation area and there are tree preservation orders. An alternative solution would be to install kerb build-outs at the bottom of each tree. This would necessitate removing parking spaces. This will be investigated further.
Conclusion Double deck buses are not currently suitable for operation on route 42 due to overhanging trees at Sunray Avenue and Red Post Hill.
|
|
|
Route 42
Jul 29, 2014 13:34:42 GMT
via mobile
Post by vjaska on Jul 29, 2014 13:34:42 GMT
There has to be a bit of give and take in these situations, some complaints are justified and it has to be said that stands in residential areas are often not ideal outside of 'daytime hours' but clearly there are people who just complain for the sake of it. The Sunray Avenue stand isn't ideal but if the 42 was cut back to Camberwell Green then the link to Kings College Hospital would be lost, an extension to Herne Hill would seem to be the only other option. Is it possible for the 42 to terminate inside Kings College Hospital via Coldharbor Lane? I don't know what the road layout is within those confines. The road layout is a one way system using Caldecot Road, Bessemer Road & Cutcombe Road to serve & leave the Hospital. The roads are quite narrow but you might be able to remove a few parking spaces on nearby Bavent Road so as to serve the Hospital in both directions. I'd prefer the 484 to terminate inside rather than the 42 though.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 29, 2014 14:18:24 GMT
When I was at Camberwell the route used to regularly use a double decker or two as the ELS fleet was so unreliable. There was no issue with trees then but there was an issue with complaints from local residents... it is one of those "don't want people in a double decker peering into my bedroom" roads... A spell of regularly using double decks would generally result in a complaint or two from Sunray Avenue. I would suggest if double decks are no longer seen (I'm never in that area now) it will be either that complaint has been raised at a higher level or a double deck had an incident with a tree. TfL can give in to residential complaints... the 37 stands was moved in Putney a few years ago following years of constant complaints from residents in St John's Avenue (led by the man who lived by the bus stand.) Seriously, hasn't anyone heard of curtains? These kind of complaints tend to annoy me a little. There is often a bit more too it than that, top deck passengers able to see over fences etc. Most of the complaints are ridiculous but we live in a democracy. One of the more ridiculous ones is the 316 which is restricted to single deckers even though all but a very short section of the route is covered by other double deck routes, some sort of agreement about no more deckers on the section served by the 295 is apparently the reason for it.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 29, 2014 14:21:00 GMT
Is it possible for the 42 to terminate inside Kings College Hospital via Coldharbor Lane? I don't know what the road layout is within those confines. The road layout is a one way system using Caldecot Road, Bessemer Road & Cutcombe Road to serve & leave the Hospital. The roads are quite narrow but you might be able to remove a few parking spaces on nearby Bavent Road so as to serve the Hospital in both directions. I'd prefer the 484 to terminate inside rather than the 42 though. But then the 484 would fall short of Camberwell Green. I think rerouting the 42 to East Dulwich Sainsburys is probably the best idea, I don't know why it didn't happen when it was originally proposed?
|
|