On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 13:53:49 +0000, Paul Weaver
wrote:

On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 13:39:01 +0000, Niklas Karlsson wrote:
(From the CIA World Factbook website)

The anti-car brigade here don't believe in the CIA factbook

Its all part of a giant conspiracy doncha know.


greg

--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 15:02:52 +0000, Greg Hennessy wrote:

On 2 Nov 2003 11:32:26 GMT, (Huge) wrote:



Less than 3% of this country is built on *in* *total*. And most of that
is housing.

And around 15% of the area within 1 hours commute from central London. Of
course if one was to believe the CPRE nimbys, one would think that all of
the SE was like downtown Hong Kong.

I heard/read an interesting Fact on one of ken's propaganda things that
London was about 40% green area. Is that true?

On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 15:47:09 +0000, Paul Weaver
wrote:



I heard/read an interesting Fact on one of ken's propaganda things that
London was about 40% green area. Is that true?

I could well believe it. What the luftwaffe didn't get round to flattening,
post war idiocy in the name of 'progress' surely did.

While the rest of europe rebuilt its cities street by street to the way
they were on 1st sept 1939. Here we had the deliberate destruction of whole
communities to make way for tower blocks.

Take a wander round the centre of Plymouth sometime, or gaze upon the ****
hole that is Stevenage to see what policy that gave us.

What's worse are the worthies who demand that such monstrosities be
'listed'.


greg
--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

In message , Chris Jones
writes
Surely new roads giving people new possibilities to travel, meet
friends and relatives, and go for days out should be celebrated? After
all, that means our standard of living has increased, surely.

New roads promise the idea of emancipation, when they really only offer
a new version of hell.
1. Any new road is quickly filled by drivers doing exactly what you're
doing; taking advantage of a supposedly easier way to travel from 'here'
to 'there'.

2. New roads cost. Not just the building cost, but all those other
factors: loss of trade to local shops, loss of views, communities cut
off from each other, and my favourite bete-noire - the bloody noise!
There are vast areas of Southern England where it's now impossible to
get away from the sound of cars and motor-bikes screaming along at top
speed (a jam on the M25 now provides a gentle respite for the
communities alongside it - say anywhere up to 3 miles away).

3. Older road-planing cost us loads. The way roads are/were costed was
to value the land, meaning it was always cheaper to go though areas
which weren't farmland or housing. Trouble was, in these over-crowded
islands, that meant the areas that were cheapest were also the areas
that benefited least from roads: common land, woodland, SSI, etc. Still,
it gives a nice view from the car, doesn't it?


--
Martin @ Strawberry Hill

Usenet wrote:
In message , Chris Jones
writes
Surely new roads giving people new possibilities to travel, meet
friends and relatives, and go for days out should be celebrated?
After all, that means our standard of living has increased, surely.

New roads promise the idea of emancipation, when they really only
offer a new version of hell.
1. Any new road is quickly filled by drivers doing exactly what you're
doing; taking advantage of a supposedly easier way to travel from
'here' to 'there'.

2. New roads cost. Not just the building cost, but all those other
factors: loss of trade to local shops, loss of views, communities cut
off from each other, and my favourite bete-noire - the bloody noise!
There are vast areas of Southern England where it's now impossible to
get away from the sound of cars and motor-bikes screaming along at top
speed (a jam on the M25 now provides a gentle respite for the
communities alongside it - say anywhere up to 3 miles away).

3. Older road-planing cost us loads. The way roads are/were costed was
to value the land, meaning it was always cheaper to go though areas
which weren't farmland or housing. Trouble was, in these over-crowded
islands, that meant the areas that were cheapest were also the areas
that benefited least from roads: common land, woodland, SSI, etc.
Still, it gives a nice view from the car, doesn't it?

Please state the roads that you believe shouldn't have been built.

Then propose the idea to the residents of the towns that have been bypassed.

I can say with confidence that you will not get an enthusiastic reception.

--
http://www.speedlimit.org.uk
"If laws are to be respected, they must be worthy of respect."

"iantheengineer" wrote in message
...



To continue to build roads will continue the problem. The answer is puvblic
transport, but public transport cannot cater for all journeys and therefore
over time journeys will need to become more corridored. For example go into
any city during the am peak and the tidality of the flow is there to be
seen. IF we were to get all of the people from their cars onto public
transport, or even better living nearer to the workplace, the congestion
would be far less.

cars. Without cars on the urban road network public transport would be
faster and more reliable.

How fast would urban public transport be with no cars
on the road? (and no vans, cycles, taxis etc. if that helps).

"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
news

I heard/read an interesting Fact on one of ken's propaganda things that
London was about 40% green area. Is that true?

If you keep a good watch on the approach to Heathrow from the east, you will
see a surprising amount of green areas, even near the centre.
--
Terry Harper
http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 10:32:48 +0000, iantheengineer wrote:
Out of this sprang the unions who fought for rights that the blues now
take
for granted. Without struggle pain and suffereing on the shoulders of
others
they would not have their nice cushly lifestyles now. However they seem
to
believe that this would have happened anyway, from what catalyst???

You dont get it do you. Don't like your job or conditions? Hand in your
notice and LEVAE. If everyone did that (of their own free will) then
companies have to change. If they don't then they have no employees to run
the business, and the recently departed can start their own business.

Unions force the majority to bow to the whims of the minority by
intimidation - something that should be illegal.

Okay I wish I was so deluded

On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 19:12:28 +0000, (Steve
Firth) wrote:

derek wrote:

[,,,,]

Dunkerque, not Sangatte.

Bari: = 20 hours

Rimini: = 14 hours

I start from between these two. It takes 11 hours of driving. But
usually I'm not in a rush so I stop overnight for a break on the way
back. It sounds like Sony route planner is umm ****e.

It came free with a box of Sony floppies


What route did it give?


Rimini Bologna Milano Como Luzern Strasbourg Metz Reims
Arras Sangatte. 1433 Km.

DG

"cookie" wrote in message
...

"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 12:46:18 +0000, Chris Jones wrote:

It took 15 years of Hell before Junction 8 on the M62 was finished. The
Trafford Centre fares better, however the metro doesn't go there.

The Trafford Centre only received planning permission on the basis that the
Greater Manchester LRT System (Metrolink) would reach the Dumplington
complex *before* the centre opened, in order to reduce the traffic chaos.

Either they've broken the rules (perhaps this was changed after the public
inquiry) or they widened the M63/M60 instead?

They certainly didn't widen the motorway, just the roundabouts
- the Stretford stretch is now being widened, but that was the
last remaining original 2-lane section of M62 anyway.

Metrolink going to Dumplington is basically over Manchester
councils' dead bodies, even when Peel Developments has
tens of million of pounds to put towards it. How can they
hope to attract business and shops Like Harvey Nicks to
the City Centre when there is a huge shopping mall in Trafford?