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.
>
> 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.
>
>> It was obvious even
>> in the late 60's that oil was exhaustable and that railways would
>> come back into their own.
>
> For certain limited purposes (and certainly to a limited extent), that
> has happened. Whether it was at all obvious in the late 1960s that it
> would ever happen is rather doubtful.
>
>> Instead of being anal about people building
>> sustainable homes "outside the permitted devlopment boundary" (and
>> who the hell set that boundary anyway?)
>
> Politicians did, following the Town and Country Planning Acts and the
> DoE guidance circulars.
>
>> perhaps it would have been a good
>> thing if they'd been anal about destroying the track beds.
>
> I said "politicians", not railway enthusiasts.
>
>> 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.
>
> If it were not for building and development control, the South Coast
> would be probably built up in an unbroken line from Dover to Land's
> End.
>> People flock to see Cotswold villages and fill up
>> the tea rooms on a daily basis.
>
> So give a nod of thanks to the "planners".
>
>> Where are the coach trips to Milton Keynes?
>
> There are some, just in case you thought there aren't any. Mainly for
> shopping, AIUI.
>
>> QED I think.
>
> I'm not sure that you understand what you are saying.
>
>> The best thinkg that could happen is to tear up the
>> planning laws, sack all the planners, and let creativity get back to
>> work.
>
> And then the Devon coast would look like Milton Keynes.
>
>> A planner from East Devon once told me "We've studied planning at
>> University, so we know best". Shithead.
>
> Well, as unimaginative as some town "planners" can be, they serve a
> very useful purpose, in preventing the triumph of those (like your
> good self) who think they should be allowed to just as they like.
>
> And isn't it peculiar that you think that the planners should have
> protected old redundant railway lines (over which they have no powers)
> and should not have protected conervation areas and beautiful villages
> (which is their job)?
Indeed the local government town planners had no control over what happedned
to railway land until after it ceased to be railway land. However, the
national government did and could have indulged in some strategic thinking
(hollow laugh) and kept ownership of the trackbed etc.
