David Bradley wrote:
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 10:34:06 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
wrote:

David Bradley wrote:
On Thu, 3 Nov 2005 22:09:27 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
wrote:

David Bradley wrote:
On Thu, 3 Nov 2005 00:58:36 -0000, "Marratxi"
wrote:


"R.C. Payne" wrote in message
...

HUGE SNIP

Indeed, memory suggests that in parts of the US (Philadelphia
spring to mind) they are sometimes called "trackless trolleys"
where "trolley" is a common synonym for "streetcar" or "tram"
(for those of us brought up that side of the atlantic in the
last 40
years, we all remember Mr. Rogers' Trolley).
Robin

When, as a kid in the 1940s and 50s, I visited my grandmothers in
Bradford the trolleybuses were always referred to as tracklesses.
Baz


This thread has prompted me to produce a web site on the 'issues'.
Please have a look at www.tfwl.co.uk

I note you still haven't told us which "unique shopping outlets and
generally architecturally interesting and sound buildings" are
kikely to be demolished.


I have now by putting up a page at http://www.tfwl.org.uk/lido1.html

So why put your response in a place where no one can react? You site
doesn't even include photos of the building you claim will be
affected to allow people to make their own judgement.

Building of architectural interest are eligible for listing by
English Heritage. Are any of the buildings you claim will be
demolished so listed?
If not will you be making a listing application?


You must be looking at a different page to the URL given above.
Pictures of the retail outlets affected *ARE* on this page and the
row of icons at the bottom of the page includes a link to provide any
feedback.

I couldn't see a picture that provided a view of the fronts of the building
between Northfield Ave and Chapel Road.


The text on the page mentions that none of these buildings are
'listed', although it is felt that there is merit in retaining some
of these heritage buildings. Lots of other people may also believe
this to be the case, so why does it have to be me to make a listed
application? I could spend my lifetime dealing with such
applications and then miss a few through such a crusade.

It doesn't "have" to be you, apart from the fact that you are the one here
arguing for their retention in the face of a much needed improvement.

As for the web page I don't know what more I really can do to satisfy
your obsession of criticism you have on our beliefs that it is
totally wrong to destroy a vibrant collection of retail outlets that
serves the local community well, just for the sake of pushing a
tramway through the neighbourhood. It is not proven to me that the
same benefits that a tramway provides can not be equally, and less
destructively, be provided by a trolleybus scheme.

There is one very simple reason why a tram will fare better than your
proposal. People don't like buses, they do however like trams and trains.

You appear to be someone who is proposing a solution because of a personal
preference rather than because it would truly be of benefit to the
community.


I have, however, given you one concession by adding text that gives
information on how you can provide your feedback.

However, that is not where the discussion started, this is. Why do you want
to move it?