User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#45223
Latest from South Cambridgeshire. No to the new railway because they'll want to build houses near the stations. Seriously, that's it.

Plus some nonsense that journey times (much improved to lots of places) don't take into account waiting for the trains. Because of course nobody now waits for buses that spend ages doing those journeys.


User avatar
By Yug
#45290
Actually, the issue in Bedford is not one of building more houses, rather that, after much hedging and obfuscation, EWR have finally decided on the six-track option, meaning people who thought they were safe now face having their houses compulsorily purchased and demolished. There was general acceptance of the four-track line as originally planned.
By Youngian
#45302
East-West road and rail links are dire unless you’re going via Scotch Corner. Car journeys are unpleasant and it’s quicker via London by train to reach the North West and Midlands.
There was a fancy plan in the Wilson Heath era to build a causeway across the Wash like the IJsselmeer in Holland. Norfolk didn’t like the sound of these new fangled motorways hurtling through Swaffham.
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#45305
Yug wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 5:06 pm Actually, the issue in Bedford is not one of building more houses, rather that, after much hedging and obfuscation, EWR have finally decided on the six-track option, meaning people who thought they were safe now face having their houses compulsorily purchased and demolished. There was general acceptance of the four-track line as originally planned.
Ah, that's useful context.

But higher capacity railway is good, isn't it?
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#47068
Railways now have to bring direct benefits to every village they go near, apparently. Combined population of these three villages is barely 3,000, far too small to justify a station. This is "why doesn't high speed rail stop in Amersham?" stuff. Does nobody in these villages work in Cambridge? Kind of good for Cambridge to have better transport links, you'd think.

Some great concerned faces too.

User avatar
By Yug
#47073
That is NIMBYism writ large. "If it doesn't benefit me directly I don't want it anywhere near me."

As far as these people are concerned, Thatcher was right. "There's no such thing as society ".
kreuzberger, Dalem Lake liked this
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#47094
Sadly, I think the political strategy is probably very solid.

Even when they did their very best, they made sure they knew that they couldn't win much with nice Charles Kennedy stuff. They did what they needed to locally to get the headbangers, attacking the Tories as selling out to Europe on the Common Fisheries Policy, that sort of thing. These voters cleared off once they had a better offer, from UKIP and then Bozo.

Getting nimbies isn't a bad substitute.
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#47106
The Greens won in my council seat by miles. I voted for them to stick it to the Tories (who held it before), and didn't ask them any awkward questions. But there is a "controversial" housing development happening- the road isn't very good, but on the other hand it's walking distance from a rail station and lots of people want to live here, and everywhere else in Herefordshire is getting lots of new houses. I'm in favour, but lots aren't, and I would be surprised if the Greens didn't at least make some nimby noises on this on doorsteps. Though in fairness, I can't find them being strident on it anywhere. I guess that's as good as you get in local politics.
long long title how many chars? lets see 123 ok more? yes 60

We have created lots of YouTube videos just so you can achieve [...]

Another post test yes yes yes or no, maybe ni? :-/

The best flat phpBB theme around. Period. Fine craftmanship and [...]

Do you need a super MOD? Well here it is. chew on this

All you need is right here. Content tag, SEO, listing, Pizza and spaghetti [...]

Lasagna on me this time ok? I got plenty of cash

this should be fantastic. but what about links,images, bbcodes etc etc? [...]