|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: MeMe Date: Apr 28, 2008 08:11
Always gets the blame.
"The report was commissioned by a Conservative government with strong
ties to the road construction lobby. However, the report's findings were
enthusiastically endorsed and implemented by the subsequent Labour
administrations which were heavily dependent for funds from unions
associated with road industry associations." [Wikipedia]
To my mind the *real* crime was been the actions of subsequent
generations of planners who allowed the track beds to be destroyed, thus
making restoration extremely difficult. This doesn't surprise me, as the
*planners* seem to do very little planning, or they'd have kept the beds
intact.
Still, there are going to be quite a few people whose houses will have
to be demolished or who will suddenly find trains running through what
used to be their back gardens.
|
| |
|
| | 26 Comments |
|
|
Author: David HansenDavid Hansen Date: Apr 28, 2008 09:34
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:11:29 +0100 someone who may be Me
tiscali.co.uk> wrote this:-
>To my mind the *real* crime was been the actions of subsequent
>generations of planners who allowed the track beds to be destroyed, thus
>making restoration extremely difficult. This doesn't surprise me, as the
>*planners* seem to do very little planning, or they'd have kept the beds
>intact.
One of the railway lines the planners did a reasonable job of
keeping the trackbed of intact is the Waverley Route. Some farmers
appropriated the line for field extensions, buildings or roads. They
then whined when restoration of the railway was proposed. The
planners built a road a bit too close in one of the towns (I can't
be bothered to reach for the book with the details of which town it
is), though they left space for the railway. The intact nature of
the trackbed there is tribute to planners in the borders.
|
| Show full article (1.46Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: MeMe Date: Apr 28, 2008 09:51
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:11:29 +0100 someone who may be Me
> tiscali.co.uk> wrote this:-
>
> One of the railway lines the planners did a reasonable job of
> keeping the trackbed of intact is the Waverley Route. Some farmers
> appropriated the line for field extensions, buildings or roads. They
> then whined when restoration of the railway was proposed. The
> planners built a road a bit too close in one of the towns (I can't
> be bothered to reach for the book with the details of which town it
> is), though they left space for the railway. The intact nature of
> the trackbed there is tribute to planners in the borders.
>
> The greatest obstruction to the trackbed was undertaken by what was
> then Lothian Regional Council. Despite the objection of many groups
> they arrogantly built a large road directly across the trackbed on
> the outskirts of Edinburgh. This will be expensive to overcome. The
> leading light in the decision to block the railway line was someone
> called Alastair Darling. I wonder what became of him. ...
|
| Show full article (2.34Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: JNugentJNugent Date: Apr 28, 2008 12:46
David Hansen wrote:
> Me tiscali.co.uk> wrote this:->> To my mind the *real* crime was been the actions of subsequent
>> generations of planners who allowed the track beds to be destroyed, thus
>> making restoration extremely difficult. This doesn't surprise me, as the
>> *planners* seem to do very little planning, or they'd have kept the beds
>> intact.
> One of the railway lines the planners did a reasonable job of
> keeping the trackbed of intact is the Waverley Route. Some farmers
> appropriated the line for field extensions, buildings or roads. They
> then whined when restoration of the railway was proposed. The
> planners built a road a bit too close in one of the towns (I can't
> be bothered to reach for the book with the details of which town it
> is), though they left space for the railway. The intact nature of
> the trackbed there is tribute to planners in the borders.
|
| Show full article (1.66Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: MeMe Date: Apr 28, 2008 13:42
> David Hansen wrote:
>
>> Me tiscali.co.uk> wrote this:->
> What legislation - and what authority (local, national) would enable the
> historic routes of railways built in the mid nineteenth century to be
> "preserved" when there are alternative competing uses for scarce
> respources like the land over which these redundant routes once ran?
>
> IOW, who has fallen down on the job, and what do you say the job was?
>
Well, to my mind Planning means, well, er, planning. It was obvious even
in the late 60's that oil was exhaustable and that railways would come
back into their own. Instead of being anal about people building
sustainable homes "outside the permitted devlopment boundary" (and who
the hell set...
|
| Show full article (1.38Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: JNugentJNugent Date: Apr 28, 2008 14:28
Me wrote:
>> David Hansen wrote:
>>> Me tiscali.co.uk> wrote this:->> What legislation - and what authority (local, national) would enable the
>> historic routes of railways built in the mid nineteenth century to be
>> "preserved" when there are alternative competing uses for scarce
>> respources like the land over which these redundant routes once ran?
>> IOW, who has fallen down on the job, and what do you say the job was?
> Well, to my mind Planning means, well, er, planning.
It may well do.
But "planning" is a misnomer for what "town planners" do. They don't
"plan" things on the basis you seem to think they do, and even when
there is a "plan" of sorts, it is local and rarely strays beyond a
single county. There is no power for a district, county or regional
authority to "plan" to nationalise land in order to build (or rebuild) a
railway.
|
| Show full article (3.00Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: BrimstoneBrimstone Date: Apr 28, 2008 14:33
JNugent wrote:
> Me wrote:
>
>>> David Hansen wrote:
>>>> Me tiscali.co.uk> wrote this:->
>>> What legislation - and what authority (local, national) would
>>> enable the historic routes of railways built in the mid nineteenth
>>> century to be "preserved" when there are alternative competing uses
>>> for scarce respources like the land over which these redundant
>>> routes once ran?
>
>>> IOW, who has fallen down on the job, and what do you say the job
>>> was?
>
>> Well, to my mind Planning means, well, er, planning.
>
> It may well do.
> ...
|
| Show full article (3.39Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: MeMe Date: Apr 29, 2008 10:39
>> It is a self-evident fact that out most beautiful towns were built long
>> before Planning Laws
>
> ...and are only *kept* beautiful by those "planning" laws.
Nice try. There is a great difference between preserving something
beautiful and preventing something beautiful being created. It CERTAINLY
isn't happening now. I had a conversation with a Swindon planner about
why they were persecuting Jack Everett's wonderful home. He said "it was
on a greenfield site" (it is an old quarry). I asked how many pound-shop
plastic non-sustainable homes had been built on greenfield sites. He
refused to answer. I asked how many developments of note had been built.
He refused to answer. Again, QED I think.
> If it were not for building and development control, the South Coast
|
| Show full article (1.25Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: David HansenDavid Hansen Date: Apr 29, 2008 11:29
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:39:37 +0100 someone who may be Me
tiscali.co.uk> wrote this:-
>I had a conversation with a Swindon planner about
>why they were persecuting Jack Everett's wonderful home. He said "it was
>on a greenfield site" (it is an old quarry). I asked how many pound-shop
>plastic non-sustainable homes had been built on greenfield sites. He
>refused to answer. I asked how many developments of note had been built.
>He refused to answer. Again, QED I think.
You should ask them in public, via the new
< http://www.whatdotheyknow.com>, brought to you by the people behind
< http://www.theyworkforyou.com>. That might be mildly therapeutic.
Similar planning stuff meant that although the Earthship at
< http://www.sci-scotland.org.uk/index.shtml> was built to standards
suitable for living in, it cannot be lived in. However, the building
has demonstrated to the building control people and others the
soundness of the design and the principle has now been accepted as a
standard building method.
|
| Show full article (2.27Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Sir JeremySir Jeremy Date: Apr 29, 2008 14:47
On 28 Apr, 17:51, Me tiscali.co.uk> wrote:> In article <5jub1459fs37frbblol7p62as6k0e7i...@ 4ax.com>,
> SENDdavidNOhS...@ spidacom.co.uk says...
>
>
> >> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:11:29 +0100 someone who may be Me
>> tiscali.co.uk> wrote this:->
>> One of the railway lines the planners did a reasonable job of
>> keeping the trackbed of intact is the Waverley Route. Some farmers
>> appropriated the line for field extensions, buildings or roads. They
>> then whined when restoration of the railway was proposed. The
>> planners built a road a bit too close in one of the towns (I can't
>> be bothered to reach for the book with the details of which town it
>> is), though they left space for the railway. The intact nature of
>> the trackbed there is tribute to planners in the borders.
>
>> The greatest obstruction to the trackbed was undertaken by what was
>> then Lothian Regional Council. Despite the objection of many groups ...
|
| Show full article (2.77Kb) |
| no comments |
|
RELATED THREADS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
