Would it make a difference if an accident resulted because of construction of a basement car park for the poor (yes, they do exist)?
And how is basement parking anti-social. If anything, removing stationary cars from the external built environment is a more social thing. On non-through routes this opens up the streetscape for children to play (I fondly remember playing in the road with my friends) and for informal movement of residents around the area. On through routes this reduces congestion and allows more space for cyclists.
If the end result of the construction is an improvement to the area for society, can the presence of construciton traffic really be considered anti-social? Afterall, if smaller vehicles were bought in to transport materials and waste, the additional number of vehicles would have major traffic implications that would have a negative impact on the safety of other road users, including cyclists.
It's fair and appropriate that trucks enter our communities. What needs to be properly focussed on is expectations of behaviour and proper design for safety.
cars are very expensive to run. and as such the poorer people cannot afford to run cars.
cars and other mpv's make a lot of noise (and cause danger (sometimes resulting in death)). so yes i consider them to be anti social.
those people that live on so called main roads are adversely affected by this road noise. because the properties that abut the main road tend to be blighted in this way they tend to be the cheaper properties thereby occupied by the poorer people in the community. for example most people would prefer to live off the so called main road. and those that can afford to (the richer in the community) usually do so.
but the rich continue to drive their car from one car park to another. and thereby blighting other peoples properties and lives.
so yes i consider building basement car parks, cars, roads and all that stuff to be innapropriate development. not to mention the associated waste of scarce resources (oil, gas, uranium etc).
and also with muck away and concrete in they generate a lot of truck movements and it is these truck movements that are killing cyclists, pedestrians, residents etc (it is possible that the 26 yo cyclist that was killed on wednesday could not afford to run a car - in this country about £4k a year).
cars are very expensive to run. and as such the poorer people cannot afford to run cars.
cars and other mpv's make a lot of noise (and cause danger (sometimes resulting in death)). so yes i consider them to be anti social.
those people that live on so called main roads are adversely affected by this road noise. because the properties that abut the main road tend to be blighted in this way they tend to be the cheaper properties thereby occupied by the poorer people in the community. for example most people would prefer to live off the so called main road. and those that can afford to (the richer in the community) usually do so.
but the rich continue to drive their car from one car park to another. and thereby blighting other peoples properties and lives.
so yes i consider building basement car parks, cars, roads and all that stuff to be innapropriate development. not to mention the associated waste of scarce resources (oil, gas, uranium etc).
and also with muck away and concrete in they generate a lot of truck movements and it is these truck movements that are killing cyclists, pedestrians, residents etc (it is possible that the 26 yo cyclist that was killed on wednesday could not afford to run a car - in this country about £4k a year).
i hope i have managed to explain my thinking. ;-)