Davies wrote:Well its not like anyone needs to work, live or deliver stuff round here is it?
(Sarcasm)
turtmcfly wrote:They did.What they should have done is invited local workers and residents – as well as businesses and property owners – to submit their ideas for any changes.
James Hatts wrote:turtmcfly wrote:They did.What they should have done is invited local workers and residents – as well as businesses and property owners – to submit their ideas for any changes.
Obviously without more details on the practicalities of any suggested changes to traffic flows it's difficult to comment - but surely it's not such a bad thing to imagine a future where our public spaces are less dominated by motor cars?
James Hatts wrote:turtmcfly wrote:They did.What they should have done is invited local workers and residents – as well as businesses and property owners – to submit their ideas for any changes.
Obviously without more details on the practicalities of any suggested changes to traffic flows it's difficult to comment - but surely it's not such a bad thing to imagine a future where our public spaces are less dominated by motor cars?
johnnytee wrote:And I suspect the businesses behind these proposals are only concerned with making the area a profit generating theme park, call me a cynic.
johnnytee wrote:I blame Architects - <spits>
johnnytee wrote:There is half a car in image two, and a further 2.5 cars in image 4. A very 'nice' idea but probably not practical, and I'm sure nobody really thinks it will happen.James Hatts wrote:turtmcfly wrote:They did.What they should have done is invited local workers and residents – as well as businesses and property owners – to submit their ideas for any changes.
Obviously without more details on the practicalities of any suggested changes to traffic flows it's difficult to comment - but surely it's not such a bad thing to imagine a future where our public spaces are less dominated by motor cars?
I agree with your words completely, but there is an absurdity about the concept drawings article...
There is a *massive* difference between - being less dominated by motor vehicles - and - images with not a single motor car in sight on a main A road!. (Tooley and St Thomas are the A200).
And I suspect the businesses behind these proposals are only concerned with making the area a profit generating theme park, call me a cynic. I would suggest it is off the same page as the Garden Bridge and I blame Architects - <spits>! ;-)
For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.
7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?
Read the latest issue before signing up