Blackwall Tunnel Closures
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Overtaking at roundabouts
Next: Saab sold to Spyker
From: The Medway Handyman on 25 Jan 2010 16:12 Doug wrote: > On 25 Jan, 06:46, Tom Crispin <kije.rem...(a)this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> > wrote: >> On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:39:50 +0000, JMS <jmsmith2...(a)live.co.uk > >> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 08:21:56 +0000, Tom Crispin >>> <kije.rem...(a)this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote: >> >>> <snip> >> >>>> The really good news is that the Blackwall Tunnel is to be tolled >>>> and this may provide the funds to build cyclists their much needed >>>> Thames Bridge. >> >>> What on earth makes you think that the money from the tolls will be >>> spent on such a thing? >> >>> Is that some official policy - or just wishful thinking? >> >> With the first of London's network of cycling superhighways, based on >> the Copenhagen model, to open this year, Boris seems very keen to >> provide quality cycling facilities for cyclists. Funding a fully >> cycleable Thames Crossing downstream of Tower Bridge makes good >> sense. >> Using toll money from the Blackwall Tunnel is a fair redistribution >> after motorists acquired the Blackwall Tunnel from other road users. >> >> Personally I would prefer a second bore at the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, >> like the Tyne Foot Tunnel, the last photo in this slide >> show.www.britishschoolofcycling.com/tunnel/stairs >> >> However the essence of your question is correct. It is a wish. >> > No a second bore would still involve dismounting and lifts. Far better > and fairer to have a cycle bridge as a companion to the 'drivers only' > Blackwall Tunnel. Surely, if cyclists are expected to comply with the > same rules of the road as drivers they should have the same privileges > as drivers? And they should pay the same as drivers. -- Dave - the small piece of 14th century armour used to protect the armpit.
From: The Medway Handyman on 25 Jan 2010 16:15 NM wrote: > On 25 Jan, 13:36, "mileburner" <milebur...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: >> "�i�ardo" <h...(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >> >> news:Sge7n.31114$u23.16344(a)newsfe05.ams2... >> >> >> >>> Fine, as long as cyclists are prepared to pay for using the roads. >> >> Why? No one else does... > > You know full well they do, so many times explained. You must enjoy > looking like a cretin? Please stop being mean to cretins. -- Dave - the small piece of 14th century armour used to protect the armpit.
From: The Medway Handyman on 25 Jan 2010 16:17 mileburner wrote: > NM wrote: >> On 25 Jan, 13:36, "mileburner" <milebur...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: >>> "�i�ardo" <h...(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >>> >>> news:Sge7n.31114$u23.16344(a)newsfe05.ams2... >>> >>> >>> >>>> Fine, as long as cyclists are prepared to pay for using the roads. >>> >>> Why? No one else does... >> >> You know full well they do, so many times explained. You must enjoy >> looking like a cretin? <WRIGGLE ALERT> > > No-one pays to use the roads. <WRIGGLE ALERT> > > Registered keepers of motor vehicles pay VED to allow vehicles to be > used on the roads but: <WRIGGLE ALERT> > > No-one pays to use the roads. > -- Dave - the small piece of 14th century armour used to protect the armpit.
From: mileburner on 25 Jan 2010 16:21 NM wrote: > On 25 Jan, 19:01, "mileburner" <milebur...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: >> NM wrote: >>> On 25 Jan, 13:36, "mileburner" <milebur...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: >>>> "�i�ardo" <h...(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >> >>>> news:Sge7n.31114$u23.16344(a)newsfe05.ams2... >> >>>>> Fine, as long as cyclists are prepared to pay for using the roads. >> >>>> Why? No one else does... >> >>> You know full well they do, so many times explained. You must enjoy >>> looking like a cretin? >> >> No-one pays to use the roads. >> >> Registered keepers of motor vehicles pay VED to allow vehicles to be >> used on the roads but: >> >> No-one pays to use the roads. >> >> HTH (but it probably wont :-( ) > > As you well know that is semantics and bollox. You might call it semantics, I would call it the fact of the matter.
From: mileburner on 25 Jan 2010 16:29
The Medway Handyman wrote: > mileburner wrote: > <WRIGGLE ALERT> >> >> No-one pays to use the roads. > > <WRIGGLE ALERT> >> >> Registered keepers of motor vehicles pay VED to allow vehicles to be >> used on the roads but: > > <WRIGGLE ALERT> >> >> No-one pays to use the roads. And you point is exactly? You be telling us next that "drivers" pay "Road Tax" [sic] The only "Road Tax" [sic] I pay is as the registered keeper of vehicles. You'll be telling us soon that "cyclists" dont pay it. If that's the case, I should get a refund huh? |