Who else could have come up with that name other than our illustrious Conservative council leader?
For the third time the Geazett has reprinted Peter Callow’s wish for the banishment of traffic from St. John’s Square.
In today’s episode, he quotes a little story about a blind man that contacted him about it and how Kensington city council they were facing a legal challenge in relation to shared space. I don’t know about you but I said a little “Ahhh” to myself after that story.
Then I woke up from my 100 year sleep and realised that Peter Callow is myopia personified. Never did the phrase “blind leading the blind” appear more fitting.
Forget the stupid names and the Princess Diana-esque People’s this and People’s that. Shared space works when it’s properly designed and there is actually space to be shared. The majority of the new space in St. Johns used to be the road. Prior to this project, there wasn’t really any space at all. This is the fucking problem, always has been and always will be unless they bulldoze St. Johns Church or the Winter Gardens.
So why did it take a blind man to contact Mr Callow about this scheme? The rest of us with full use of our eyes could see from the off that unless they were going to actually sink a road into this pedestrian area and make it obvious, it was going to be highly dangerous. But if they did that, what would’ve been the point in pedestrianising it?
The way it is now is like saying hey, there’s a road here but it’s invisible and we’re not going to give you any clues where it is, so please take a seat at our new £5million piazza and enjoy some continental cuisine. You’d soon realise where it was when a 30 year old, 13-ton bus comes up your arse and belches diesel fumes into your face whilst you try and enjoy your cinnamon latte in the pissing rain.
loading…
I’ve seen plenty of cars (none taxi) use it as well.
On another front, I’m hearing a rumour and it’s not confirmed that we have lost the court case to the Nimby Filth Lords about the building of the Star Gate Tram depot and the construction will have to stop and planning permission be resubmitted.
loading...
I am one of the objectors to the carbuncle tram sheds that were proposed for Squires gate. Why do you refer to me as a “nimby filth lord” or “nimby scum” in the gasjet? I do not live anywhere near the proposed site and have actually proposed siting the tram sheds yards away from property I do own so I can hardly be called a nimby can I? I also consider myself a bit more clued up about this than you are. I cannot say any more at this stage without revealing scources but I can tell you not to believe a word BTS says. The same goes for Blackpool Council but everyone already knows not to believe a word from either Councillors or officers.
loading...
I agree Troobloo, councils ram through plans, we have the same problem in wyre, the sitiing of this depot does raise issues, on the sea front???
For Fucks sake!
loading...
Seems a bit pointless because we all know they’ll build it anyway, perhaps scaled down a bit.
I must admit it does seem a bit of a mad place to build it if it’s right across from the houses, particularly when Pontins would have been a perfect place to build.
loading...
Spot on about Pontins, thats the ideal site Phil!
The council will blame “Nimbys” but this is the councils fault, not them.
Fuck this council.
loading...
lol what useless farts that council is!!
loading...
TrooBloo I refer to the people for stopping this as Nimby scum because they are putting the heritage fleet at risk.
If this new depot isn’t built when the 16 new trams arrive and they end up being stored at the existing depot, what do you think will happen to the old trams? A vital part of Blackpool’s history will be lost because a collection of Nimby’s wanted to keep their sea view?
As regards storing the trams a few yards from where you are, I assume you mean the Blundell street site, where the hoteliers in that area complained about the loss of street parking. If you don’t mean the Blundell street site any other site would require a Transport and Works Act as it would involve track crossing a public highway and that is not going to happen without time and costs increasing substantially.
So I stand by my opinion of those rich people here putting their sea views before the moto of Blackpool which is Progress.
loading...
There would be absolutely no issues with using the Blundell Street site. This would also then allow Rigby Road to be used as a working transport museum. However, I wasn’t referring to Blundell St but to another site. As I intimated earlier I am privy to certain information which I cannot reveal at present but let me assure you that the vast majority of objections do not come from those overlooking the Squires Gate site.
I appreciate your concerns about the “classic” trams, indeed , without the classic trams the tramway makes no sense whatsoever. However, the new supertrams will be great, but they will not be able to jump over the “classic” trams so what sort of future do you really think BTS and the council have for the classic trams. Think about it!!!! The Squires Gate Depot is a complete and utter whitewash. Watch this space………….
True Blackpudlian knows where some of the bodies are buried on this issue.
loading...
As someone privy to no information on this other than the stuff I’m seeing here and on the Gasjet, I’m baffled as to the interest of people that don’t even live near Starr Gate.
Is it more “please build on my land” than “not in my back yard” ?
As you may know I’m not a fan of the trams as they are or as they will be, due to the pointlessness of them and the fact that I’d never need nor want to use them, however, are you suggesting that the Starr Gate thing is to become said tram museum full of “classic” trams, or have I gone the wrong way on this one?
loading...
I don’t quite follow, what do I know about this?
loading...
You are Peter Callow!!!
loading...
Oh shite I have been rumbled, I hoped my selection of colourful ties and arms folded expression would divert people’s attention from my true plans. Just kidding
Seriously though what am I supposed to know, I like Phil know nothing more about anything on these issues than what you can read in the Gazette.
loading...
sorry TB put wrong name in there!
loading...
To be honest I’m not all that sure about the future of the trams. They’ve been losing money hand over fist for years. And are they that special? Zim obviously thinks so, but to be honest they were in every town in the country not all that long ago and more modern alternatives are available. If we were talking a heritage tourist attraction that only ran part of the year, being put in storage the rest – it might well work as a tourist attraction. But the age of the trams, the lack of space for having things like shopping on your knee – or even fitting in the seats at all for the many really obese people around – they just don’t work as public transport.
What I’d personally like to see in Blackpool is at least one park and ride scheme with genuine security. Parking is a nightmare but internal transport schemes seem at present to ignore the problems people have getting to the town in the first place.
Back on the post subject, I have to agree the shared space phenomenom sounds like an absolute nightmare scenario no matter how you are getting around.
The Kensington Queensway application is at inquiry at the moment. I was there all yesterday and I’ll be putting bits up on my blog.
loading...