Prev: it seemed like a good idea at the time
Next: Why are there so many haters here?
From: JNugent on 21 May 2010 11:14
ChelseaTractorMan wrote:
> On Thu, 20 May 2010 18:05:22 +0100, JNugent
> <JN(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote:
>
>> Bluewater, rather like its older "twin", Lakeside, doesn't actually sell
>> groceries.
>
> wrong, I go to the John Lewis food Hall there (Waitrose in all but
> name)

There's a M%S food section as well.

No competition for Asda and Tesco there, eh?

>> For that reason both Lakeside and Bluewater are analagous to an old-fashioned
>> city centre (catering for what geographers call "high-order shopping"),
>> rather than to inner-suburban high streets ("low-order shopping" - especially
>> groceries etc).

> wrong, they are not in centres of population like a city centre, they
> are not at the hub of the PT network, you have to drive there. I've
> tried Bluewater PT, it stops before the cimema complex closes.

No, you are wrong in saying "wrong", because I did not make the claims you
attribute to me. I agree that PT at Lakeside and Bluewater is less than
optimal. Just like it is everywhere else, in fact (with the possible
exception of central London). Did you miss the word "analagous", or just its
meaning?

Those centres were designed for the car-borne customer. They are successful
because (among other things), families in cars are treated abominably by
local authorities.

The bus facilities (etc) are just a sop to the PC crowd. I agree with you:
no-one takes them seriously.




From: JNugent on 21 May 2010 11:14
Brimstone wrote:
> "JNugent" <JN(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote in message
> news:zvOdnbAnROkSWWjWnZ2dnUVZ8mGdnZ2d(a)pipex.net...
>> Dave Plowman wrote:
>>
>>> JNugent <JN(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote:
>>
>> [in response to:]
>>>>> I have a decent size Waitrose and Sainsbury within walking distance -
>>>>> both on the high street. There's no real reason they have to be 'out
>>>>> of town'.
>>
>>>> Yes, there is.
>>>> They are more convenient, in more ways, to more people, on the edge of
>>>> town than they are in the centre or in the inner suburbs.
>>
>>> I'm sure it is if you love driving miles for groceries.
>>
>>>> That's why they do it.
>>
>>> They do it because the sites are cheaper and people are stupid.
>>
>> People are stupid to appreciate convenience, speed, choice, low
>> (compared to corner shops) prices, easy free parking and a general
>> atmosphere of welcome, are they?
>
> What is convenient about having to drive miles to buy a few groceries?

Since no-one has to, the question has no obvious sensible answer.
From: JNugent on 21 May 2010 11:15
ChelseaTractorMan wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 2010 00:23:59 +0100, JNugent
> <JN(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote:
>
>> People are stupid to appreciate convenience, speed, choice, low (compared to
>> corner shops) prices, easy free parking and a general atmosphere of welcome,
>> are they?
>
> Central London is a great place to shop, you go by train. Bluewater is
> souless, you have to worry about drink driving if you do more than
> shop. Sadly all our bigger shops have decamped to Bluewater so the
> local high streets are dying. Then when it comes to bank holidays and
> pre Christmas the motorways round the two places gridlock with
> shoppers. I understand the centres of many US cities have died due to
> the out of town mall.

Over the last few decades, do you think councils have handled car-borne
shoppers as well as they should have?
From: Adrian on 21 May 2010 11:27
Halmyre <no.spam(a)this.address> gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

> In article <ht65v8$1vj$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>,
> mileburner(a)btinternet.com says...
>>
>> "ChelseaTractorMan" <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:vjucv5hpufncv3vectvv6lgmgidq7vfsje(a)4ax.com...
>> > On Fri, 21 May 2010 11:57:03 +0100, "mileburner"
>> > <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>I don't deny that the car can be the most sensible and practical
>> >>choice, but
>> >>that is considerably different to "having" to drive because I "have"
>> >>to.
>> >
>> > I dont know anybody who thinks like that.
>>
>> It usually manifests itself in the notion "I have to drive to work, as
>> it's the only way I can get there" or "I live in the country and I
>> cannot get around by any other means". What these people seem to
>> overlook is that they could work somewhere else, or live somewhere
>> else.
>>
>>
>>
> Some people don't have that level of choice. Some people's workplace
> locations might not be practical places to live; e.g. forestry workers.

Plus, of course, the fluidity in people's careers.

In the time I've lived in this relatively immediate area, my "normal
place of work" has been in <thinks> at least seven different places,
across a radius of about 40 miles, in several different directions.

'erself has been based in a similar number, mostly in one (easily PT
commutable) direction.

I'd love to know how that particular circle should be squared.
From: JNugent on 21 May 2010 11:29
ChelseaTractorMan wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:51:16 +0100, ChelseaTractorMan
> <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> Central London is a great place to shop
>>> No, it isn't. It's hell on earth.
>> wonderful place.
>
> I'm very much a country lover but you miss out on a lot if you ignore
> the great things in the centre of most world class cities, the
> restaurants, the art, the dance, music, galleries, opera and ballet,
> the streetlife, the specialist shops, Borough markets, some great pubs
> and architecture. People try and claim all those things exist away
> from the big city elsewhere but they are at thier best in Central
> London.

Agreed.

But try getting home 40+ miles by PT at 23:30.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Prev: it seemed like a good idea at the time
Next: Why are there so many haters here?