I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. 
Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is 
it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

One of the current lanes I believe.
Just another step towrds becoming a city state.
I will just buy a bus to get round the problem.

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
from the bridge.

-- 
!Speedy Gonzales!

Remove the SPAMTRAP to reply

> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
sholder would then become the bus lane.

At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.

  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
nearly £60m under the plans.

  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass

  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
is not fair."


Smithy

In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> 
> From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> from the bridge.
> 
> 

Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
nose to tail in the other two lanes.

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
nospam@this.address says...
> In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
> speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> > "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> > news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> > >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> > >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> > >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> > 
> > From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> > the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> > from the bridge.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
> nose to tail in the other two lanes.
> 
> 
Can I use it with my bike?
-- 
Cheers
the.Mark

On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:

> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
> sholder would then become the bus lane.

Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so 
emergency vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the 
car cult people).

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:23:24 GMT someone who may be Halmyre
<nospam@this.address> wrote this:-

>Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
>nose to tail in the other two lanes.

It will lie empty, other than when it is being used by those in
priority vehicles.

The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:
> 
>> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The 
>> hard
>> sholder would then become the bus lane.
> 
> Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so emergency 
> vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the car cult 
> people).
> 
Maybe the plan is to park up empty busses during the off-peak hours to 
help justify trams as folks stand waiting at the city stops.

As always Cui bono, if you want to see what this is about just follow the money. 
People eventually become quite influential and wealthy, David Begg is but one 
example, able to push policy for without the need for election which benefits 
his activities as a company director.

http://www.firstgroup.com/corpfirst/investor/board.php

It will be curious to see who benefits, appears on the BBC as independent 
advisers, turns up on company, qango and other boards, who gains the honorary 
degrees etc.


"Smithy"  wrote in message 
news:XlOVh.4059$Ro3.542@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
>> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
>> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
>
> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
> sholder would then become the bus lane.
>
> At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
> and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
> Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.
>
> http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
>  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
> would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.
>
>  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
> routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
> nearly £60m under the plans.
>
>  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass
>
>  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
> commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
> is not fair."
>
>
> Smithy
>
>

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:
> 
>> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The 
>> hard
>> sholder would then become the bus lane.
> 
> Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so emergency 
> vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the car cult 
> people).
> 

Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
emergency vehicles will be unhindered?

Jim

On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:

> Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
> emergency vehicles will be unhindered?

It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.

Tim Bradshaw  writes:

> On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> 
> > Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the
> > emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> 
> It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.

And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.

-- 
It's just like being alive, only more beige

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> 
>> Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
>> emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> 
> It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.
> 

Hmm. I see your point.
They should have a lane for each of the emergency services.
In addition a spare one, only to be used if each other emergency lane is 
blocked.

Jim

On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:

> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.

Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive around 
quite often.  So by using the lane for busses you dramatically increase 
the likelyhood of it being blocked at any given time.  Statistics, you 
see.

It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.

"Tim Bradshaw"  wrote in message 
news:f0aeg5$lb9$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:
>
>> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
>
> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive around 
> quite often.  So by using the lane for busses you dramatically increase 
> the likelyhood of it being blocked at any given time.  Statistics, you 
> see.
>
> It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.
>

Is this one of those situations where the statistical analysis is counter 
intuitive - like the number of people you need to gather together before 
there's a better than fifty fifty chance of two of them sharing a birthday 
being only 23?

Tom.

In article , august@kororaa.com 
says...
> Tim Bradshaw  writes:
> 
> > On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> > 
> > > Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the
> > > emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> > 
> > It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.
> 
> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
> 
> 

Or a broken-down bus, like the one that broke down on the A90 some weeks 
ago but didn't have the good grace to break down in the bus lane, oh no, 
it waited until it was out among the regular traffic and *then* it broke 
down, causing a queue to form which didn't quite go all the way back to 
the FRB, so there was no indication of said queue until it was too 
bloody late.

-- 
Halmyre

Tim Bradshaw  writes:

> On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:
> 
> > And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
> 
> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive
> around quite often.

Each individual car, maybe. When I was travelling up and down the M6
from Einburgh to Cambdrige, I'd see at least one brokemdown car each
trip.

> It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.

Patronsing git.

-- 
can't stand up for falling down

August West wrote:

>> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive
>> around quite often.
> 
> Each individual car, maybe. When I was travelling up and down the M6
> from Einburgh to Cambdrige, I'd see at least one brokemdown car each
> trip.

Edinburgh to Cambridge is about 350 miles. Considering that the businest 
parts of the M6 (from memory) were carrying about 200,000 cars a day, 
that's not actually a very bad average at all.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

David Hansen  wrote:
 
> The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
> non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.

How?  Was it because they weren't stuck behind the buses?

-- 
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 16:07:33 +0100 someone who may be Jeremy C B
Nicoll  wrote this:-

>David Hansen  wrote:
> 
>> The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
>> non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.
>
>How?

By smoothing out the flow of cars via things like virtual bus lanes.

>Was it because they weren't stuck behind the buses?

No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen wrote:

> No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
> delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.

Duh yes. That and the deaths of seal pups as well, I am told.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Marvin wrote:
> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. 
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is 
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
	
On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday) 
to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling 
beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a 
busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by 
definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that 
the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a 
factor of more than two.

Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in 
town?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

>> No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
>> delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.
> Duh yes. That and the deaths of seal pups as well, I am told.

This is glaringly obvious if you actually *use* a bus regularly.

Coming in from Midlothian, my journey time increases by 50% on
school days.  The difference is all the dumb fucks taking their
kids to school by car.

==============  j-c  ======  @  ======  purr . demon . co . uk  ==============
Jack Campin:  11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/>   for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557

On 22 Apr, 18:35, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Marvin wrote:
> > I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> > Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> > it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
>
> On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday)
> to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling
> beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a
> busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by
> definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> factor of more than two.
>
> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> town?
>
> --
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
from registered disabled drivers!

"Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"

In article ,
   Alan  wrote:
> On 22 Apr, 18:35, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> > Marvin wrote:
> > > I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> > > Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> > > it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> >
> > On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday)
> > to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling
> > beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a
> > busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by
> > definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> > the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> > factor of more than two.
> >
> > Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> > town?
> >
> > --
> > Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
> from registered disabled drivers!

> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"

No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have no
car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but that's
another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in "disabled"
spaces without any badge at all.

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

Halmyre <nospam@this.address> writes:

>Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
>nose to tail in the other two lanes.

Well stop stopping to rubberneck a wreck on the opposite carriageway.

Graham

charles wrote:

>>> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
>>> town?
> 
>> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
>> from registered disabled drivers!
> 
>> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
>> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"
> 
> No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have no
> car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but that's
> another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in "disabled"
> spaces without any badge at all.

Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In article ,
   Mike Dickson  wrote:
> charles wrote:

> >>> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> >>> town?
> > 
> >> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
> >> from registered disabled drivers!
> > 
> >> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
> >> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"
> > 
> > No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have
> > no car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but
> > that's another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in
> > "disabled" spaces without any badge at all.

> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
really that many disabled parking spaces?

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

charles wrote:

>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
> 
> That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
> really that many disabled parking spaces?

Charles - of course it's an exaggeration. This is Usenet. The idea of 
objectivity and the omission of hyperbole are *dangerous concepts* round 
here.

My casual observation is that there appears to be an inordinate (and 
growing) number of disabled spaces in the city centre. It's not based on 
anything like actual figures or the likes, but it is very noticeable if 
you live here.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
> charles wrote:

>>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
>> 
>> That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
>> really that many disabled parking spaces?

> Charles - of course it's an exaggeration. This is Usenet. The idea of 
> objectivity and the omission of hyperbole are *dangerous concepts* round 
> here.

> My casual observation is that there appears to be an inordinate (and 
> growing) number of disabled spaces in the city centre. It's not based on 
> anything like actual figures or the likes, but it is very noticeable if 
> you live here.

I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
before it gets any worse.

-- 
Chris Malcolm        cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk              DoD #205
IPAB,  Informatics,  JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Chris Malcolm wrote:

> I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
> then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
> in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
> the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
> know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
> centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
> before it gets any worse.

I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it 
gets. Well done, Chris.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:

> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> 
>> I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
>> then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
>> in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
>> the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
>> know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
>> centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
>> before it gets any worse.
> 
> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
> gets. Well done, Chris.

You're being uncharacteristically tactful, Mike.

To return to your argument based on proportionality, I think that's
the wrong basis on which to estimate how many disabled parking spaces
there should be.  The idea is that since disabled drivers/passengers,
particularly in town, are presumably going to be visiting shops or
offices which are randomly distributed, there ought to be provision
for them within reasonably short distances of, well, basically
everywhere.  I would therefore expect at least one or two spaces per
street segment.

I don't know how many there actually are, but I must say I don't see
the need for any spaces specifically for the disabled.  Unless the rules
have changed, one of the purposes of yellow lines is for the disabled
to park on.  And there are enough of those.

Ronald Raygun wrote:

>> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
>> gets. Well done, Chris.
> 
> You're being uncharacteristically tactful, Mike.

Those are my middle names.

> To return to your argument based on proportionality, I think that's
> the wrong basis on which to estimate how many disabled parking spaces
> there should be.  The idea is that since disabled drivers/passengers,
> particularly in town, are presumably going to be visiting shops or
> offices which are randomly distributed, there ought to be provision
> for them within reasonably short distances of, well, basically
> everywhere.  I would therefore expect at least one or two spaces per
> street segment.

Perhaps so. A casual glance along George Street and environs would soon 
dispel such a weird notion.

> I don't know how many there actually are, but I must say I don't see
> the need for any spaces specifically for the disabled.  Unless the rules
> have changed, one of the purposes of yellow lines is for the disabled
> to park on.  And there are enough of those.

If you live round *this* way you'd be convinced that pavements and 
street corners were there for the same purpose, and that Orange Badges 
were some sort of invisibility device that rendered the vehicle immune 
to ticketing. It's certainly obvious that the good wardens of this burgh 
need some help in knowing what they should and should not be troubling; 
disability badges give you *some concessions* but does not allow you to 
park (say) right in the middle of Cambridge Street on the roadway behind 
a line of cars waiting to get past you. The bitter irony of all of this 
is that many of the disabled spaces in the area are empty when this sort 
of thing goes on. No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?

However, there is no way on Planet Zog that the council will think of 
making any changes to this. I should imagine that the only way to start 
to get the number of disabled spaces reduced would be to show that they 
are never being used, and I suppose that short of renaming them from 
DISABLED to something like GIMPS I'm not sure how this could be done.

-- 
Mike 'Now Characteristically Tactless' Dickson, Edinburgh

"Mike Dickson"  wrote in message 
news:595gonF2i7aniU1@mid.individual.net...

<snipped>
> However, there is no way on Planet Zog that the council will think of 
> making any changes to this. I should imagine that the only way to start to 
> get the number of disabled spaces reduced would be to show that they are 
> never being used, and I suppose that short of renaming them from DISABLED 
> to something like GIMPS I'm not sure how this could be done.
>
> -- 
> Mike 'Now Characteristically Tactless' Dickson, Edinburgh

I think it is a question of proportion. Not that you're getting things out 
of proportion Mike but the proportion of drivers who have blue badges. The 
most accurate figures on the proportion of the population with disabilities 
in the city are probably those reported to the director of Health and Social 
Care by researchers in Directorate Support. They estimate the number of 
people likely to fall within ten categories of disability over the next five 
years. Services are planned accordingly (within H&SC). The Roads department 
are certainly not working with such accuracy.

Tom.

>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
> >> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
> >> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
disabled
> >> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
> >> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
space, and 2 disabled spaces.

My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
near the visitors parking spaces.

Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.

Smithy

In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:

> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
> people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?

Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
the bannister was something of an experience.

FoFP

Smithy wrote:
>  >> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
>>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
>>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
> disabled
>>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
>>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
> 
> Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
> space, and 2 disabled spaces.
> 
> My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
> staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
> Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
> near the visitors parking spaces.
> 
> Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
> never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.
> 
> Smithy
> 
> 
I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

On Apr 23, 9:21 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> > I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
> > then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
> > in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
> > the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
> > know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
> > centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
> > before it gets any worse.
>
> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
> gets. Well done, Chris.
>
> --
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

That post is so Mike Dickson.

TTH

On Apr 24, 11:48 am, David Liddle  wrote:
> Smithy wrote:
> >  >> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
> >>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
> >>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
> > disabled
> >>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
> >>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
>
> > Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
> > space, and 2 disabled spaces.
>
> > My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
> > staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
> > Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
> > near the visitors parking spaces.
>
> > Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
> > never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.
>
> > Smithy
>
> I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

I don't think they use those to mark out the spaces......

TTH

M Holmes wrote:
> In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
> 
>> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
>> people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?
> 
> Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
> prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
> Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
> the bannister was something of an experience.

That's the primary reason why there are works outside and around the 
Usher Hall, as well as some extensive landscaping of the area around the 
west end of Grindlay Street and the Lothian Road clock. The works will 
go on (they tell us) for about 18 months.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

David Liddle wrote:
> I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

About a year ago there was a story about someone in Dundee who forged a 
tax disc using **newsprint paper and felt pens**. The technology 
revolution hadn't quite reached them at that stage.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:
> M Holmes wrote:
>> In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
>>
>>> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these people. I 
>>> wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?
>>
>> Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
>> prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
>> Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
>> the bannister was something of an experience.
> 
> That's the primary reason why there are works outside and around the 
> Usher Hall, as well as some extensive landscaping of the area around the 
> west end of Grindlay Street and the Lothian Road clock. The works will 
> go on (they tell us) for about 18 months.
> 

Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the level 
of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?

David Liddle wrote:
> Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the level 
> of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?

Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will probably 
be twice as fast as the trams.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On Apr 22, 6:35 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> factor of more than two.
>
> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> town?

Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.

I used to have a scheme for getting a digital camera and taking a
large number of pictures of people (I use the term loosely) doing this
to post on the web in the hope of embarrassing them.  But now I have
the means, well, I don't think people who behave like this really do
embarrassment, do they? Probably a modified scheme involving a
shoulder-launched anti-tank weapon & video camera would be more
effective - it would prevent at least one of them (and their foul
offspring) from doing it again, and the others might get the message
that more than shame was at stake.

--tim

Tim Bradshaw wrote:

> Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.

Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these spaces. 
The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and children' or 
'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either Those Who have 
Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It strikes me as a 
complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

> Probably a modified scheme involving a
> shoulder-launched anti-tank weapon & video camera would be more
> effective - it would prevent at least one of them (and their foul
> offspring) from doing it again, and the others might get the message
> that more than shame was at stake.

You've been drinking again, haven't you, Tim?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-26 21:39:51 +0100, Mike Dickson  said:

> You've been drinking again, haven't you, Tim?

It's all that keeps me going.

Mike Dickson wrote:
>(I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's 
extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set 
up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal 
space but there's an obvious problem with that. The spaces could be 
further away than disabled spaces, and generally are - however, as the 
sizes of disabled bays and parent & child bays are roughly the same it's 
easier to put them next to each other (and makes it easy to adjust the 
ratios later).

I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
there are times when the ability to get them into and, more importantly, 
out of the store in the quickest possible time are quite definitely in 
the best interests of everybody shopping in the store - and quite 
possibly the next two stores over.

-- 
Angus G Rae                        Science & Engineering Support Team
                                                    Computing Services
                                               University of Edinburgh
The above opinions are mine, and Edinburgh University can't have them

Angus Rae wrote:

> Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's 
> extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set 
> up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal 
> space but there's an obvious problem with that. 

Not if you shut the kid in the boot.

> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 

Isn't that what the plastic carrier bags are for?

-- 
Mike 'Child Friendly' Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-27, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
>> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
>
> Isn't that what the plastic carrier bags are for?

No, get a proper Baby Bag (tm)
http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/92q4/airbaby.html

C

Mike Dickson  writes:

> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> 
> > Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> > spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> > give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> > supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> > circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> > in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.
> 
> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these
> spaces. The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and
> children' or 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either
> Those Who have Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It
> strikes me as a complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only
> drag their children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the
> buggers into a pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

Speaking from my own experience, I'd say that lack of use of these
spaces is through indecision. The fact that I have children is my main
disability, so which space am I supposed to use?

Choobs

-- 
Sir Chewbury Gubbins 
http://www.nelefa.org

Abu the Monkey was never naughty.

Mike Dickson wrote:
> David Liddle wrote:
>> Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the 
>> level of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?
> 
> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will probably 
> be twice as fast as the trams.
> 
Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?

Mike Dickson  writes:

> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these
> spaces. The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and
> children' or 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either
> Those Who have Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It
> strikes me as a complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should
> only drag their children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap
> the buggers into a pushchair or whatever then what is the
> difference?)

Look at them again: mostly they have larger spaces between them, so
that car doors can be opened fully, to allow getting the little
buggers out easily.

This also goes for disabled spaces, too: my brother needs a good
car-width beside his car to be able to fully open his door, and get
his wheelchair alongside. If that's not available, he can't just sidle
out through the narrow space between his car and the next, so he just
has to go home.

-- 
far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere

In ed.general Tim Bradshaw <tfb+google@tfeb.org> wrote:

> Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> give a shit about anyone but themselves

I was reading yesterday that 13 US states, including of course California,
had introduced limits on carbon dioxide output by cars which would
restrict future sales of SUV's, mainly because it's hard to make them
qualify. This has upset the yank manufacturers, in the month which
Toyota finally took pole position as world's biggest carmaker, because
they've seemingly gone down the route of providing giant SUV's just at
the point where due to bunnyhugging feelings and the cost of petrol, the
customers don't want them.

Interesting times...

FoFP

-- 
"I was 14 in communist Hungary when I wasn't allowed to continue my
further education because my parents were middle class. I never doubted
that history repeats itself, but who would have thought that it would do
do so here and within a generation?"  -- Kate Colleran (Grauniad Letters)

In ed.general Angus Rae  wrote:

> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
> there are times when the ability to get them into and, more importantly, 
> out of the store in the quickest possible time are quite definitely in 
> the best interests of everybody shopping in the store - and quite 
> possibly the next two stores over.

Hmmmm. Perhaps a smaller version of those ball'n'gag bondage outfits
with furry cuffs and whatnot could be sold to assist parents in keeping
their brats quiet on shopping trips?

Heh. I'm off to Dragon's Den...

FoFP

David Liddle wrote:

>> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will 
>> probably be twice as fast as the trams.
>>
> Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?

To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be 
doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and 
grass and that sort of organic green stuff. And to be fair to the 
contractors they keep us all informed by letter as to the progress being 
made.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-27 11:54:23 +0100, M Holmes  said:

> in the month which
> Toyota finally took pole position as world's biggest carmaker, because
> they've seemingly gone down the route of providing giant SUV's just at
> the point where due to bunnyhugging feelings and the cost of petrol, the
> customers don't want them.

When I rule the world, one of the first laws I will pass will be to 
make killing people who drive SUVs (and a selection of other car makes 
& types to e chosen somewhat arbitrarily by me) and offence punished by 
a small tax break.  Not, you understand, because of some possible 
damage to the environment they may cause (I will, of course, pass other 
laws encouraging the hammering of nails into the heads of people who 
scar the landscape by erecting noisy, expensive and ineffective wind 
turbines rather than nuclear power stations which might actually do 
some good), but because the people who drive such things just deserve 
death, as should be obvious to anyone with a brain.

--tim

"Tim Bradshaw"  wrote in message 
news:f0tk7j$rpd$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> On 2007-04-27 11:54:23 +0100, M Holmes  said:
>
<snipped>
> but because the people who drive such things just deserve death, as should 
> be obvious to anyone with a brain.
>
> --tim
>

And today I worked out why more cars sit with their engines running at 
Dunsapie Loch in midsummer than in midwinter. We seem to be okay in this 
country dealing with the cold but it's the heat that really gets to us.

Tom.

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:

> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> grass and that sort of organic green stuff.

And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
- to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
Hall.

Ian

On Apr 26, 9:39 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> > Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> > spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> > give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> > supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> > circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> > in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.
>
> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these spaces.
> The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and children' or
> 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either Those Who have
> Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It strikes me as a
> complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

I'm always quite happy to have other folks children herded away from
my car. I don't mind walking a bit further for that.

TTH

Ian Johnston  writes:

> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
> 
> > To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> > doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> > grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
> 
> And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
> - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
> Hall.

There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?

Apart from Bristo Square, obviously (skateboarders don't matter).

-- 
what a waste!

On Apr 27, 6:57 am, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Angus Rae wrote:
> > Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's
> > extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set
> > up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal
> > space but there's an obvious problem with that.
>
> Not if you shut the kid in the boot.

That what happened to you ? Might explain a alot.

TTH

August West wrote:
> Ian Johnston  writes:
> 
>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
>>> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
>>> grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
>> And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
>> - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
>> Hall.
> 
> There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
> depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?
> 
> Apart from Bristo Square, obviously (skateboarders don't matter).
> 
There used to be a decent fountain outside the Sheraton - then some 
arsehole decided that rather than fix the water and clean the place up 
an 'art installation' should happen - if i remember the scheme was only 
250k and at the time the 'News talked of a continental park with boule.
What we got is a disgrace. Just another urban improvement project under 
the name of job creation

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:27:56 +0000, David Liddle wrote:

> What we got is a disgrace. Just another urban improvement project..

"improvement"?

Ian

In article , august@kororaa.com 
says...
> Ian Johnston  writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
> > 
> > > To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> > > doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> > > grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
> > 
> > And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
> > - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
> > Hall.
> 
> There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
> depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?
> 

Multrees Walk (not strictly civic space, I suppose).

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
mike@blackcat.demon.co.uk says...
> David Liddle wrote:
> 
> >> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will 
> >> probably be twice as fast as the trams.
> >>
> > Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?
> 
> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be 
> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and 
> grass and that sort of organic green stuff. And to be fair to the 
> contractors they keep us all informed by letter as to the progress being 
> made.
> 
> 

How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down his 
pen and picked up a shovel? And with the saving they make on stationery 
and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.

-- 
Halmyre

Halmyre wrote:

> How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down his 
> pen and picked up a shovel? 

The letters are signed by someone with the forename 'Caroline', so I 
suspect that the correct answer to your question may be an unpopular one 
in these days of sexual equality.

 > And with the saving they make on stationery
> and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.

They don't mail them - they hand deliver them.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

the_tattie_howker wrote:

> On Apr 27, 6:57 am, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> Angus Rae wrote:
>>> Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's
>>> extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set
>>> up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal
>>> space but there's an obvious problem with that.
>> Not if you shut the kid in the boot.
> 
> That what happened to you ? Might explain a alot.

Or even 'a lot', you dim loser.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:
> Halmyre wrote:
> 
>> How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down 
>> his pen and picked up a shovel? 
> 
> The letters are signed by someone with the forename 'Caroline', so I 
> suspect that the correct answer to your question may be an unpopular one 
> in these days of sexual equality.
> 
>  > And with the saving they make on stationery
>> and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.
> 
> They don't mail them - they hand deliver them.
> 
Re-cycled green electrons

In article ,
 Mike Dickson  wrote:

> ... (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

We don't need to be told you don't do that kind of thing, do we?

Sam

Sam Wilson wrote:

>> ... (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
>> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
>> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)
> 
> We don't need to be told you don't do that kind of thing, do we?

In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In article ,
Mike Dickson   wrote:

>In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
>incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.

Finally, confirmation that evolution will ensure there are no more
Mike Dicksons.

-- Richard
-- 
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

Richard Tobin wrote:

>> In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
>> incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.
> 
> Finally, confirmation that evolution will ensure there are no more
> Mike Dicksons.

Evolution has nothing to do with it; I made up my own mind about thirty 
years ago!

-- 
Mike 'One And Only' Dickson, Edinburgh

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

One of the current lanes I believe.
Just another step towrds becoming a city state.
I will just buy a bus to get round the problem.

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
from the bridge.

-- 
!Speedy Gonzales!

Remove the SPAMTRAP to reply

> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
sholder would then become the bus lane.

At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.

  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
nearly £60m under the plans.

  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass

  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
is not fair."


Smithy

In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> 
> From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> from the bridge.
> 
> 

Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
nose to tail in the other two lanes.

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
nospam@this.address says...
> In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
> speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> > "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> > news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> > >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> > >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> > >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> > 
> > From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> > the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> > from the bridge.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
> nose to tail in the other two lanes.
> 
> 
Can I use it with my bike?
-- 
Cheers
the.Mark

On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:

> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
> sholder would then become the bus lane.

Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so 
emergency vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the 
car cult people).

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:23:24 GMT someone who may be Halmyre
<nospam@this.address> wrote this:-

>Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
>nose to tail in the other two lanes.

It will lie empty, other than when it is being used by those in
priority vehicles.

The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:
> 
>> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The 
>> hard
>> sholder would then become the bus lane.
> 
> Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so emergency 
> vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the car cult 
> people).
> 
Maybe the plan is to park up empty busses during the off-peak hours to 
help justify trams as folks stand waiting at the city stops.

As always Cui bono, if you want to see what this is about just follow the money. 
People eventually become quite influential and wealthy, David Begg is but one 
example, able to push policy for without the need for election which benefits 
his activities as a company director.

http://www.firstgroup.com/corpfirst/investor/board.php

It will be curious to see who benefits, appears on the BBC as independent 
advisers, turns up on company, qango and other boards, who gains the honorary 
degrees etc.


"Smithy"  wrote in message 
news:XlOVh.4059$Ro3.542@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
>> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
>> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
>
> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
> sholder would then become the bus lane.
>
> At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
> and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
> Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.
>
> http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
>  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
> would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.
>
>  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
> routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
> nearly £60m under the plans.
>
>  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass
>
>  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
> commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
> is not fair."
>
>
> Smithy
>
>

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:
> 
>> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The 
>> hard
>> sholder would then become the bus lane.
> 
> Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so emergency 
> vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the car cult 
> people).
> 

Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
emergency vehicles will be unhindered?

Jim

On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:

> Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
> emergency vehicles will be unhindered?

It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.

Tim Bradshaw  writes:

> On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> 
> > Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the
> > emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> 
> It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.

And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.

-- 
It's just like being alive, only more beige

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> 
>> Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
>> emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> 
> It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.
> 

Hmm. I see your point.
They should have a lane for each of the emergency services.
In addition a spare one, only to be used if each other emergency lane is 
blocked.

Jim

On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:

> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.

Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive around 
quite often.  So by using the lane for busses you dramatically increase 
the likelyhood of it being blocked at any given time.  Statistics, you 
see.

It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.

"Tim Bradshaw"  wrote in message 
news:f0aeg5$lb9$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:
>
>> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
>
> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive around 
> quite often.  So by using the lane for busses you dramatically increase 
> the likelyhood of it being blocked at any given time.  Statistics, you 
> see.
>
> It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.
>

Is this one of those situations where the statistical analysis is counter 
intuitive - like the number of people you need to gather together before 
there's a better than fifty fifty chance of two of them sharing a birthday 
being only 23?

Tom.

In article , august@kororaa.com 
says...
> Tim Bradshaw  writes:
> 
> > On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> > 
> > > Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the
> > > emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> > 
> > It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.
> 
> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
> 
> 

Or a broken-down bus, like the one that broke down on the A90 some weeks 
ago but didn't have the good grace to break down in the bus lane, oh no, 
it waited until it was out among the regular traffic and *then* it broke 
down, causing a queue to form which didn't quite go all the way back to 
the FRB, so there was no indication of said queue until it was too 
bloody late.

-- 
Halmyre

Tim Bradshaw  writes:

> On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:
> 
> > And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
> 
> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive
> around quite often.

Each individual car, maybe. When I was travelling up and down the M6
from Einburgh to Cambdrige, I'd see at least one brokemdown car each
trip.

> It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.

Patronsing git.

-- 
can't stand up for falling down

August West wrote:

>> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive
>> around quite often.
> 
> Each individual car, maybe. When I was travelling up and down the M6
> from Einburgh to Cambdrige, I'd see at least one brokemdown car each
> trip.

Edinburgh to Cambridge is about 350 miles. Considering that the businest 
parts of the M6 (from memory) were carrying about 200,000 cars a day, 
that's not actually a very bad average at all.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

David Hansen  wrote:
 
> The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
> non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.

How?  Was it because they weren't stuck behind the buses?

-- 
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 16:07:33 +0100 someone who may be Jeremy C B
Nicoll  wrote this:-

>David Hansen  wrote:
> 
>> The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
>> non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.
>
>How?

By smoothing out the flow of cars via things like virtual bus lanes.

>Was it because they weren't stuck behind the buses?

No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen wrote:

> No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
> delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.

Duh yes. That and the deaths of seal pups as well, I am told.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Marvin wrote:
> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. 
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is 
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
	
On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday) 
to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling 
beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a 
busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by 
definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that 
the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a 
factor of more than two.

Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in 
town?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

>> No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
>> delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.
> Duh yes. That and the deaths of seal pups as well, I am told.

This is glaringly obvious if you actually *use* a bus regularly.

Coming in from Midlothian, my journey time increases by 50% on
school days.  The difference is all the dumb fucks taking their
kids to school by car.

==============  j-c  ======  @  ======  purr . demon . co . uk  ==============
Jack Campin:  11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/>   for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557

On 22 Apr, 18:35, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Marvin wrote:
> > I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> > Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> > it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
>
> On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday)
> to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling
> beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a
> busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by
> definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> factor of more than two.
>
> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> town?
>
> --
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
from registered disabled drivers!

"Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"

In article ,
   Alan  wrote:
> On 22 Apr, 18:35, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> > Marvin wrote:
> > > I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> > > Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> > > it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> >
> > On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday)
> > to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling
> > beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a
> > busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by
> > definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> > the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> > factor of more than two.
> >
> > Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> > town?
> >
> > --
> > Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
> from registered disabled drivers!

> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"

No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have no
car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but that's
another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in "disabled"
spaces without any badge at all.

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

Halmyre <nospam@this.address> writes:

>Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
>nose to tail in the other two lanes.

Well stop stopping to rubberneck a wreck on the opposite carriageway.

Graham

charles wrote:

>>> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
>>> town?
> 
>> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
>> from registered disabled drivers!
> 
>> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
>> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"
> 
> No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have no
> car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but that's
> another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in "disabled"
> spaces without any badge at all.

Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In article ,
   Mike Dickson  wrote:
> charles wrote:

> >>> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> >>> town?
> > 
> >> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
> >> from registered disabled drivers!
> > 
> >> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
> >> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"
> > 
> > No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have
> > no car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but
> > that's another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in
> > "disabled" spaces without any badge at all.

> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
really that many disabled parking spaces?

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

charles wrote:

>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
> 
> That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
> really that many disabled parking spaces?

Charles - of course it's an exaggeration. This is Usenet. The idea of 
objectivity and the omission of hyperbole are *dangerous concepts* round 
here.

My casual observation is that there appears to be an inordinate (and 
growing) number of disabled spaces in the city centre. It's not based on 
anything like actual figures or the likes, but it is very noticeable if 
you live here.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
> charles wrote:

>>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
>> 
>> That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
>> really that many disabled parking spaces?

> Charles - of course it's an exaggeration. This is Usenet. The idea of 
> objectivity and the omission of hyperbole are *dangerous concepts* round 
> here.

> My casual observation is that there appears to be an inordinate (and 
> growing) number of disabled spaces in the city centre. It's not based on 
> anything like actual figures or the likes, but it is very noticeable if 
> you live here.

I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
before it gets any worse.

-- 
Chris Malcolm        cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk              DoD #205
IPAB,  Informatics,  JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Chris Malcolm wrote:

> I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
> then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
> in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
> the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
> know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
> centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
> before it gets any worse.

I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it 
gets. Well done, Chris.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:

> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> 
>> I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
>> then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
>> in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
>> the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
>> know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
>> centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
>> before it gets any worse.
> 
> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
> gets. Well done, Chris.

You're being uncharacteristically tactful, Mike.

To return to your argument based on proportionality, I think that's
the wrong basis on which to estimate how many disabled parking spaces
there should be.  The idea is that since disabled drivers/passengers,
particularly in town, are presumably going to be visiting shops or
offices which are randomly distributed, there ought to be provision
for them within reasonably short distances of, well, basically
everywhere.  I would therefore expect at least one or two spaces per
street segment.

I don't know how many there actually are, but I must say I don't see
the need for any spaces specifically for the disabled.  Unless the rules
have changed, one of the purposes of yellow lines is for the disabled
to park on.  And there are enough of those.

Ronald Raygun wrote:

>> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
>> gets. Well done, Chris.
> 
> You're being uncharacteristically tactful, Mike.

Those are my middle names.

> To return to your argument based on proportionality, I think that's
> the wrong basis on which to estimate how many disabled parking spaces
> there should be.  The idea is that since disabled drivers/passengers,
> particularly in town, are presumably going to be visiting shops or
> offices which are randomly distributed, there ought to be provision
> for them within reasonably short distances of, well, basically
> everywhere.  I would therefore expect at least one or two spaces per
> street segment.

Perhaps so. A casual glance along George Street and environs would soon 
dispel such a weird notion.

> I don't know how many there actually are, but I must say I don't see
> the need for any spaces specifically for the disabled.  Unless the rules
> have changed, one of the purposes of yellow lines is for the disabled
> to park on.  And there are enough of those.

If you live round *this* way you'd be convinced that pavements and 
street corners were there for the same purpose, and that Orange Badges 
were some sort of invisibility device that rendered the vehicle immune 
to ticketing. It's certainly obvious that the good wardens of this burgh 
need some help in knowing what they should and should not be troubling; 
disability badges give you *some concessions* but does not allow you to 
park (say) right in the middle of Cambridge Street on the roadway behind 
a line of cars waiting to get past you. The bitter irony of all of this 
is that many of the disabled spaces in the area are empty when this sort 
of thing goes on. No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?

However, there is no way on Planet Zog that the council will think of 
making any changes to this. I should imagine that the only way to start 
to get the number of disabled spaces reduced would be to show that they 
are never being used, and I suppose that short of renaming them from 
DISABLED to something like GIMPS I'm not sure how this could be done.

-- 
Mike 'Now Characteristically Tactless' Dickson, Edinburgh

"Mike Dickson"  wrote in message 
news:595gonF2i7aniU1@mid.individual.net...

<snipped>
> However, there is no way on Planet Zog that the council will think of 
> making any changes to this. I should imagine that the only way to start to 
> get the number of disabled spaces reduced would be to show that they are 
> never being used, and I suppose that short of renaming them from DISABLED 
> to something like GIMPS I'm not sure how this could be done.
>
> -- 
> Mike 'Now Characteristically Tactless' Dickson, Edinburgh

I think it is a question of proportion. Not that you're getting things out 
of proportion Mike but the proportion of drivers who have blue badges. The 
most accurate figures on the proportion of the population with disabilities 
in the city are probably those reported to the director of Health and Social 
Care by researchers in Directorate Support. They estimate the number of 
people likely to fall within ten categories of disability over the next five 
years. Services are planned accordingly (within H&SC). The Roads department 
are certainly not working with such accuracy.

Tom.

>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
> >> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
> >> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
disabled
> >> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
> >> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
space, and 2 disabled spaces.

My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
near the visitors parking spaces.

Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.

Smithy

In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:

> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
> people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?

Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
the bannister was something of an experience.

FoFP

Smithy wrote:
>  >> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
>>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
>>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
> disabled
>>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
>>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
> 
> Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
> space, and 2 disabled spaces.
> 
> My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
> staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
> Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
> near the visitors parking spaces.
> 
> Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
> never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.
> 
> Smithy
> 
> 
I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

On Apr 23, 9:21 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> > I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
> > then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
> > in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
> > the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
> > know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
> > centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
> > before it gets any worse.
>
> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
> gets. Well done, Chris.
>
> --
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

That post is so Mike Dickson.

TTH

On Apr 24, 11:48 am, David Liddle  wrote:
> Smithy wrote:
> >  >> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
> >>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
> >>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
> > disabled
> >>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
> >>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
>
> > Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
> > space, and 2 disabled spaces.
>
> > My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
> > staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
> > Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
> > near the visitors parking spaces.
>
> > Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
> > never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.
>
> > Smithy
>
> I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

I don't think they use those to mark out the spaces......

TTH

M Holmes wrote:
> In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
> 
>> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
>> people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?
> 
> Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
> prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
> Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
> the bannister was something of an experience.

That's the primary reason why there are works outside and around the 
Usher Hall, as well as some extensive landscaping of the area around the 
west end of Grindlay Street and the Lothian Road clock. The works will 
go on (they tell us) for about 18 months.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

David Liddle wrote:
> I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

About a year ago there was a story about someone in Dundee who forged a 
tax disc using **newsprint paper and felt pens**. The technology 
revolution hadn't quite reached them at that stage.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:
> M Holmes wrote:
>> In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
>>
>>> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these people. I 
>>> wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?
>>
>> Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
>> prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
>> Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
>> the bannister was something of an experience.
> 
> That's the primary reason why there are works outside and around the 
> Usher Hall, as well as some extensive landscaping of the area around the 
> west end of Grindlay Street and the Lothian Road clock. The works will 
> go on (they tell us) for about 18 months.
> 

Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the level 
of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?

David Liddle wrote:
> Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the level 
> of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?

Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will probably 
be twice as fast as the trams.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On Apr 22, 6:35 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> factor of more than two.
>
> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> town?

Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.

I used to have a scheme for getting a digital camera and taking a
large number of pictures of people (I use the term loosely) doing this
to post on the web in the hope of embarrassing them.  But now I have
the means, well, I don't think people who behave like this really do
embarrassment, do they? Probably a modified scheme involving a
shoulder-launched anti-tank weapon & video camera would be more
effective - it would prevent at least one of them (and their foul
offspring) from doing it again, and the others might get the message
that more than shame was at stake.

--tim

Tim Bradshaw wrote:

> Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.

Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these spaces. 
The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and children' or 
'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either Those Who have 
Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It strikes me as a 
complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

> Probably a modified scheme involving a
> shoulder-launched anti-tank weapon & video camera would be more
> effective - it would prevent at least one of them (and their foul
> offspring) from doing it again, and the others might get the message
> that more than shame was at stake.

You've been drinking again, haven't you, Tim?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-26 21:39:51 +0100, Mike Dickson  said:

> You've been drinking again, haven't you, Tim?

It's all that keeps me going.

Mike Dickson wrote:
>(I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's 
extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set 
up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal 
space but there's an obvious problem with that. The spaces could be 
further away than disabled spaces, and generally are - however, as the 
sizes of disabled bays and parent & child bays are roughly the same it's 
easier to put them next to each other (and makes it easy to adjust the 
ratios later).

I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
there are times when the ability to get them into and, more importantly, 
out of the store in the quickest possible time are quite definitely in 
the best interests of everybody shopping in the store - and quite 
possibly the next two stores over.

-- 
Angus G Rae                        Science & Engineering Support Team
                                                    Computing Services
                                               University of Edinburgh
The above opinions are mine, and Edinburgh University can't have them

Angus Rae wrote:

> Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's 
> extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set 
> up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal 
> space but there's an obvious problem with that. 

Not if you shut the kid in the boot.

> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 

Isn't that what the plastic carrier bags are for?

-- 
Mike 'Child Friendly' Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-27, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
>> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
>
> Isn't that what the plastic carrier bags are for?

No, get a proper Baby Bag (tm)
http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/92q4/airbaby.html

C

Mike Dickson  writes:

> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> 
> > Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> > spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> > give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> > supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> > circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> > in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.
> 
> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these
> spaces. The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and
> children' or 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either
> Those Who have Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It
> strikes me as a complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only
> drag their children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the
> buggers into a pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

Speaking from my own experience, I'd say that lack of use of these
spaces is through indecision. The fact that I have children is my main
disability, so which space am I supposed to use?

Choobs

-- 
Sir Chewbury Gubbins 
http://www.nelefa.org

Abu the Monkey was never naughty.

Mike Dickson wrote:
> David Liddle wrote:
>> Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the 
>> level of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?
> 
> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will probably 
> be twice as fast as the trams.
> 
Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?

Mike Dickson  writes:

> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these
> spaces. The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and
> children' or 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either
> Those Who have Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It
> strikes me as a complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should
> only drag their children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap
> the buggers into a pushchair or whatever then what is the
> difference?)

Look at them again: mostly they have larger spaces between them, so
that car doors can be opened fully, to allow getting the little
buggers out easily.

This also goes for disabled spaces, too: my brother needs a good
car-width beside his car to be able to fully open his door, and get
his wheelchair alongside. If that's not available, he can't just sidle
out through the narrow space between his car and the next, so he just
has to go home.

-- 
far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere

In ed.general Tim Bradshaw <tfb+google@tfeb.org> wrote:

> Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> give a shit about anyone but themselves

I was reading yesterday that 13 US states, including of course California,
had introduced limits on carbon dioxide output by cars which would
restrict future sales of SUV's, mainly because it's hard to make them
qualify. This has upset the yank manufacturers, in the month which
Toyota finally took pole position as world's biggest carmaker, because
they've seemingly gone down the route of providing giant SUV's just at
the point where due to bunnyhugging feelings and the cost of petrol, the
customers don't want them.

Interesting times...

FoFP

-- 
"I was 14 in communist Hungary when I wasn't allowed to continue my
further education because my parents were middle class. I never doubted
that history repeats itself, but who would have thought that it would do
do so here and within a generation?"  -- Kate Colleran (Grauniad Letters)

In ed.general Angus Rae  wrote:

> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
> there are times when the ability to get them into and, more importantly, 
> out of the store in the quickest possible time are quite definitely in 
> the best interests of everybody shopping in the store - and quite 
> possibly the next two stores over.

Hmmmm. Perhaps a smaller version of those ball'n'gag bondage outfits
with furry cuffs and whatnot could be sold to assist parents in keeping
their brats quiet on shopping trips?

Heh. I'm off to Dragon's Den...

FoFP

David Liddle wrote:

>> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will 
>> probably be twice as fast as the trams.
>>
> Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?

To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be 
doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and 
grass and that sort of organic green stuff. And to be fair to the 
contractors they keep us all informed by letter as to the progress being 
made.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-27 11:54:23 +0100, M Holmes  said:

> in the month which
> Toyota finally took pole position as world's biggest carmaker, because
> they've seemingly gone down the route of providing giant SUV's just at
> the point where due to bunnyhugging feelings and the cost of petrol, the
> customers don't want them.

When I rule the world, one of the first laws I will pass will be to 
make killing people who drive SUVs (and a selection of other car makes 
& types to e chosen somewhat arbitrarily by me) and offence punished by 
a small tax break.  Not, you understand, because of some possible 
damage to the environment they may cause (I will, of course, pass other 
laws encouraging the hammering of nails into the heads of people who 
scar the landscape by erecting noisy, expensive and ineffective wind 
turbines rather than nuclear power stations which might actually do 
some good), but because the people who drive such things just deserve 
death, as should be obvious to anyone with a brain.

--tim

"Tim Bradshaw"  wrote in message 
news:f0tk7j$rpd$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> On 2007-04-27 11:54:23 +0100, M Holmes  said:
>
<snipped>
> but because the people who drive such things just deserve death, as should 
> be obvious to anyone with a brain.
>
> --tim
>

And today I worked out why more cars sit with their engines running at 
Dunsapie Loch in midsummer than in midwinter. We seem to be okay in this 
country dealing with the cold but it's the heat that really gets to us.

Tom.

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:

> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> grass and that sort of organic green stuff.

And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
- to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
Hall.

Ian

On Apr 26, 9:39 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> > Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> > spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> > give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> > supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> > circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> > in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.
>
> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these spaces.
> The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and children' or
> 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either Those Who have
> Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It strikes me as a
> complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

I'm always quite happy to have other folks children herded away from
my car. I don't mind walking a bit further for that.

TTH

Ian Johnston  writes:

> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
> 
> > To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> > doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> > grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
> 
> And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
> - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
> Hall.

There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?

Apart from Bristo Square, obviously (skateboarders don't matter).

-- 
what a waste!

On Apr 27, 6:57 am, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Angus Rae wrote:
> > Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's
> > extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set
> > up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal
> > space but there's an obvious problem with that.
>
> Not if you shut the kid in the boot.

That what happened to you ? Might explain a alot.

TTH

August West wrote:
> Ian Johnston  writes:
> 
>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
>>> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
>>> grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
>> And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
>> - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
>> Hall.
> 
> There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
> depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?
> 
> Apart from Bristo Square, obviously (skateboarders don't matter).
> 
There used to be a decent fountain outside the Sheraton - then some 
arsehole decided that rather than fix the water and clean the place up 
an 'art installation' should happen - if i remember the scheme was only 
250k and at the time the 'News talked of a continental park with boule.
What we got is a disgrace. Just another urban improvement project under 
the name of job creation

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:27:56 +0000, David Liddle wrote:

> What we got is a disgrace. Just another urban improvement project..

"improvement"?

Ian

In article , august@kororaa.com 
says...
> Ian Johnston  writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
> > 
> > > To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> > > doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> > > grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
> > 
> > And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
> > - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
> > Hall.
> 
> There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
> depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?
> 

Multrees Walk (not strictly civic space, I suppose).

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
mike@blackcat.demon.co.uk says...
> David Liddle wrote:
> 
> >> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will 
> >> probably be twice as fast as the trams.
> >>
> > Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?
> 
> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be 
> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and 
> grass and that sort of organic green stuff. And to be fair to the 
> contractors they keep us all informed by letter as to the progress being 
> made.
> 
> 

How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down his 
pen and picked up a shovel? And with the saving they make on stationery 
and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.

-- 
Halmyre

Halmyre wrote:

> How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down his 
> pen and picked up a shovel? 

The letters are signed by someone with the forename 'Caroline', so I 
suspect that the correct answer to your question may be an unpopular one 
in these days of sexual equality.

 > And with the saving they make on stationery
> and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.

They don't mail them - they hand deliver them.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

the_tattie_howker wrote:

> On Apr 27, 6:57 am, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> Angus Rae wrote:
>>> Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's
>>> extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set
>>> up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal
>>> space but there's an obvious problem with that.
>> Not if you shut the kid in the boot.
> 
> That what happened to you ? Might explain a alot.

Or even 'a lot', you dim loser.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:
> Halmyre wrote:
> 
>> How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down 
>> his pen and picked up a shovel? 
> 
> The letters are signed by someone with the forename 'Caroline', so I 
> suspect that the correct answer to your question may be an unpopular one 
> in these days of sexual equality.
> 
>  > And with the saving they make on stationery
>> and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.
> 
> They don't mail them - they hand deliver them.
> 
Re-cycled green electrons

In article ,
 Mike Dickson  wrote:

> ... (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

We don't need to be told you don't do that kind of thing, do we?

Sam

Sam Wilson wrote:

>> ... (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
>> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
>> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)
> 
> We don't need to be told you don't do that kind of thing, do we?

In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In article ,
Mike Dickson   wrote:

>In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
>incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.

Finally, confirmation that evolution will ensure there are no more
Mike Dicksons.

-- Richard
-- 
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

Richard Tobin wrote:

>> In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
>> incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.
> 
> Finally, confirmation that evolution will ensure there are no more
> Mike Dicksons.

Evolution has nothing to do with it; I made up my own mind about thirty 
years ago!

-- 
Mike 'One And Only' Dickson, Edinburgh

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

One of the current lanes I believe.
Just another step towrds becoming a city state.
I will just buy a bus to get round the problem.

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
from the bridge.

-- 
!Speedy Gonzales!

Remove the SPAMTRAP to reply

> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
sholder would then become the bus lane.

At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.

  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
nearly £60m under the plans.

  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass

  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
is not fair."


Smithy

In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> 
> From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> from the bridge.
> 
> 

Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
nose to tail in the other two lanes.

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
nospam@this.address says...
> In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
> speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> > "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> > news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> > >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> > >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> > >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> > 
> > From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> > the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> > from the bridge.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
> nose to tail in the other two lanes.
> 
> 
Can I use it with my bike?
-- 
Cheers
the.Mark

On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:

> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
> sholder would then become the bus lane.

Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so 
emergency vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the 
car cult people).

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:23:24 GMT someone who may be Halmyre
<nospam@this.address> wrote this:-

>Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
>nose to tail in the other two lanes.

It will lie empty, other than when it is being used by those in
priority vehicles.

The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:
> 
>> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The 
>> hard
>> sholder would then become the bus lane.
> 
> Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so emergency 
> vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the car cult 
> people).
> 
Maybe the plan is to park up empty busses during the off-peak hours to 
help justify trams as folks stand waiting at the city stops.

As always Cui bono, if you want to see what this is about just follow the money. 
People eventually become quite influential and wealthy, David Begg is but one 
example, able to push policy for without the need for election which benefits 
his activities as a company director.

http://www.firstgroup.com/corpfirst/investor/board.php

It will be curious to see who benefits, appears on the BBC as independent 
advisers, turns up on company, qango and other boards, who gains the honorary 
degrees etc.


"Smithy"  wrote in message 
news:XlOVh.4059$Ro3.542@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
>> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
>> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
>
> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
> sholder would then become the bus lane.
>
> At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
> and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
> Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.
>
> http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
>  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
> would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.
>
>  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
> routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
> nearly £60m under the plans.
>
>  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass
>
>  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
> commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
> is not fair."
>
>
> Smithy
>
>

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:
> 
>> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The 
>> hard
>> sholder would then become the bus lane.
> 
> Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so emergency 
> vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the car cult 
> people).
> 

Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
emergency vehicles will be unhindered?

Jim

On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:

> Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
> emergency vehicles will be unhindered?

It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.

Tim Bradshaw  writes:

> On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> 
> > Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the
> > emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> 
> It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.

And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.

-- 
It's just like being alive, only more beige

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> 
>> Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
>> emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> 
> It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.
> 

Hmm. I see your point.
They should have a lane for each of the emergency services.
In addition a spare one, only to be used if each other emergency lane is 
blocked.

Jim

On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:

> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.

Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive around 
quite often.  So by using the lane for busses you dramatically increase 
the likelyhood of it being blocked at any given time.  Statistics, you 
see.

It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.

"Tim Bradshaw"  wrote in message 
news:f0aeg5$lb9$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:
>
>> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
>
> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive around 
> quite often.  So by using the lane for busses you dramatically increase 
> the likelyhood of it being blocked at any given time.  Statistics, you 
> see.
>
> It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.
>

Is this one of those situations where the statistical analysis is counter 
intuitive - like the number of people you need to gather together before 
there's a better than fifty fifty chance of two of them sharing a birthday 
being only 23?

Tom.

In article , august@kororaa.com 
says...
> Tim Bradshaw  writes:
> 
> > On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> > 
> > > Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the
> > > emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> > 
> > It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.
> 
> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
> 
> 

Or a broken-down bus, like the one that broke down on the A90 some weeks 
ago but didn't have the good grace to break down in the bus lane, oh no, 
it waited until it was out among the regular traffic and *then* it broke 
down, causing a queue to form which didn't quite go all the way back to 
the FRB, so there was no indication of said queue until it was too 
bloody late.

-- 
Halmyre

Tim Bradshaw  writes:

> On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:
> 
> > And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
> 
> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive
> around quite often.

Each individual car, maybe. When I was travelling up and down the M6
from Einburgh to Cambdrige, I'd see at least one brokemdown car each
trip.

> It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.

Patronsing git.

-- 
can't stand up for falling down

August West wrote:

>> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive
>> around quite often.
> 
> Each individual car, maybe. When I was travelling up and down the M6
> from Einburgh to Cambdrige, I'd see at least one brokemdown car each
> trip.

Edinburgh to Cambridge is about 350 miles. Considering that the businest 
parts of the M6 (from memory) were carrying about 200,000 cars a day, 
that's not actually a very bad average at all.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

David Hansen  wrote:
 
> The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
> non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.

How?  Was it because they weren't stuck behind the buses?

-- 
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 16:07:33 +0100 someone who may be Jeremy C B
Nicoll  wrote this:-

>David Hansen  wrote:
> 
>> The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
>> non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.
>
>How?

By smoothing out the flow of cars via things like virtual bus lanes.

>Was it because they weren't stuck behind the buses?

No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen wrote:

> No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
> delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.

Duh yes. That and the deaths of seal pups as well, I am told.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Marvin wrote:
> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. 
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is 
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
	
On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday) 
to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling 
beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a 
busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by 
definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that 
the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a 
factor of more than two.

Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in 
town?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

>> No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
>> delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.
> Duh yes. That and the deaths of seal pups as well, I am told.

This is glaringly obvious if you actually *use* a bus regularly.

Coming in from Midlothian, my journey time increases by 50% on
school days.  The difference is all the dumb fucks taking their
kids to school by car.

==============  j-c  ======  @  ======  purr . demon . co . uk  ==============
Jack Campin:  11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/>   for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557

On 22 Apr, 18:35, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Marvin wrote:
> > I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> > Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> > it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
>
> On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday)
> to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling
> beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a
> busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by
> definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> factor of more than two.
>
> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> town?
>
> --
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
from registered disabled drivers!

"Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"

In article ,
   Alan  wrote:
> On 22 Apr, 18:35, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> > Marvin wrote:
> > > I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> > > Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> > > it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> >
> > On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday)
> > to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling
> > beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a
> > busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by
> > definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> > the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> > factor of more than two.
> >
> > Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> > town?
> >
> > --
> > Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
> from registered disabled drivers!

> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"

No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have no
car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but that's
another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in "disabled"
spaces without any badge at all.

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

Halmyre <nospam@this.address> writes:

>Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
>nose to tail in the other two lanes.

Well stop stopping to rubberneck a wreck on the opposite carriageway.

Graham

charles wrote:

>>> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
>>> town?
> 
>> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
>> from registered disabled drivers!
> 
>> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
>> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"
> 
> No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have no
> car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but that's
> another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in "disabled"
> spaces without any badge at all.

Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In article ,
   Mike Dickson  wrote:
> charles wrote:

> >>> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> >>> town?
> > 
> >> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
> >> from registered disabled drivers!
> > 
> >> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
> >> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"
> > 
> > No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have
> > no car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but
> > that's another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in
> > "disabled" spaces without any badge at all.

> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
really that many disabled parking spaces?

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

charles wrote:

>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
> 
> That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
> really that many disabled parking spaces?

Charles - of course it's an exaggeration. This is Usenet. The idea of 
objectivity and the omission of hyperbole are *dangerous concepts* round 
here.

My casual observation is that there appears to be an inordinate (and 
growing) number of disabled spaces in the city centre. It's not based on 
anything like actual figures or the likes, but it is very noticeable if 
you live here.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
> charles wrote:

>>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
>> 
>> That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
>> really that many disabled parking spaces?

> Charles - of course it's an exaggeration. This is Usenet. The idea of 
> objectivity and the omission of hyperbole are *dangerous concepts* round 
> here.

> My casual observation is that there appears to be an inordinate (and 
> growing) number of disabled spaces in the city centre. It's not based on 
> anything like actual figures or the likes, but it is very noticeable if 
> you live here.

I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
before it gets any worse.

-- 
Chris Malcolm        cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk              DoD #205
IPAB,  Informatics,  JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Chris Malcolm wrote:

> I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
> then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
> in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
> the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
> know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
> centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
> before it gets any worse.

I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it 
gets. Well done, Chris.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:

> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> 
>> I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
>> then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
>> in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
>> the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
>> know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
>> centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
>> before it gets any worse.
> 
> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
> gets. Well done, Chris.

You're being uncharacteristically tactful, Mike.

To return to your argument based on proportionality, I think that's
the wrong basis on which to estimate how many disabled parking spaces
there should be.  The idea is that since disabled drivers/passengers,
particularly in town, are presumably going to be visiting shops or
offices which are randomly distributed, there ought to be provision
for them within reasonably short distances of, well, basically
everywhere.  I would therefore expect at least one or two spaces per
street segment.

I don't know how many there actually are, but I must say I don't see
the need for any spaces specifically for the disabled.  Unless the rules
have changed, one of the purposes of yellow lines is for the disabled
to park on.  And there are enough of those.

Ronald Raygun wrote:

>> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
>> gets. Well done, Chris.
> 
> You're being uncharacteristically tactful, Mike.

Those are my middle names.

> To return to your argument based on proportionality, I think that's
> the wrong basis on which to estimate how many disabled parking spaces
> there should be.  The idea is that since disabled drivers/passengers,
> particularly in town, are presumably going to be visiting shops or
> offices which are randomly distributed, there ought to be provision
> for them within reasonably short distances of, well, basically
> everywhere.  I would therefore expect at least one or two spaces per
> street segment.

Perhaps so. A casual glance along George Street and environs would soon 
dispel such a weird notion.

> I don't know how many there actually are, but I must say I don't see
> the need for any spaces specifically for the disabled.  Unless the rules
> have changed, one of the purposes of yellow lines is for the disabled
> to park on.  And there are enough of those.

If you live round *this* way you'd be convinced that pavements and 
street corners were there for the same purpose, and that Orange Badges 
were some sort of invisibility device that rendered the vehicle immune 
to ticketing. It's certainly obvious that the good wardens of this burgh 
need some help in knowing what they should and should not be troubling; 
disability badges give you *some concessions* but does not allow you to 
park (say) right in the middle of Cambridge Street on the roadway behind 
a line of cars waiting to get past you. The bitter irony of all of this 
is that many of the disabled spaces in the area are empty when this sort 
of thing goes on. No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?

However, there is no way on Planet Zog that the council will think of 
making any changes to this. I should imagine that the only way to start 
to get the number of disabled spaces reduced would be to show that they 
are never being used, and I suppose that short of renaming them from 
DISABLED to something like GIMPS I'm not sure how this could be done.

-- 
Mike 'Now Characteristically Tactless' Dickson, Edinburgh

"Mike Dickson"  wrote in message 
news:595gonF2i7aniU1@mid.individual.net...

<snipped>
> However, there is no way on Planet Zog that the council will think of 
> making any changes to this. I should imagine that the only way to start to 
> get the number of disabled spaces reduced would be to show that they are 
> never being used, and I suppose that short of renaming them from DISABLED 
> to something like GIMPS I'm not sure how this could be done.
>
> -- 
> Mike 'Now Characteristically Tactless' Dickson, Edinburgh

I think it is a question of proportion. Not that you're getting things out 
of proportion Mike but the proportion of drivers who have blue badges. The 
most accurate figures on the proportion of the population with disabilities 
in the city are probably those reported to the director of Health and Social 
Care by researchers in Directorate Support. They estimate the number of 
people likely to fall within ten categories of disability over the next five 
years. Services are planned accordingly (within H&SC). The Roads department 
are certainly not working with such accuracy.

Tom.

>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
> >> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
> >> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
disabled
> >> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
> >> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
space, and 2 disabled spaces.

My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
near the visitors parking spaces.

Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.

Smithy

In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:

> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
> people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?

Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
the bannister was something of an experience.

FoFP

Smithy wrote:
>  >> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
>>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
>>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
> disabled
>>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
>>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
> 
> Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
> space, and 2 disabled spaces.
> 
> My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
> staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
> Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
> near the visitors parking spaces.
> 
> Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
> never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.
> 
> Smithy
> 
> 
I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

On Apr 23, 9:21 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> > I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
> > then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
> > in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
> > the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
> > know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
> > centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
> > before it gets any worse.
>
> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
> gets. Well done, Chris.
>
> --
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

That post is so Mike Dickson.

TTH

On Apr 24, 11:48 am, David Liddle  wrote:
> Smithy wrote:
> >  >> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
> >>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
> >>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
> > disabled
> >>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
> >>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
>
> > Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
> > space, and 2 disabled spaces.
>
> > My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
> > staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
> > Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
> > near the visitors parking spaces.
>
> > Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
> > never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.
>
> > Smithy
>
> I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

I don't think they use those to mark out the spaces......

TTH

M Holmes wrote:
> In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
> 
>> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
>> people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?
> 
> Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
> prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
> Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
> the bannister was something of an experience.

That's the primary reason why there are works outside and around the 
Usher Hall, as well as some extensive landscaping of the area around the 
west end of Grindlay Street and the Lothian Road clock. The works will 
go on (they tell us) for about 18 months.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

David Liddle wrote:
> I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

About a year ago there was a story about someone in Dundee who forged a 
tax disc using **newsprint paper and felt pens**. The technology 
revolution hadn't quite reached them at that stage.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:
> M Holmes wrote:
>> In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
>>
>>> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these people. I 
>>> wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?
>>
>> Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
>> prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
>> Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
>> the bannister was something of an experience.
> 
> That's the primary reason why there are works outside and around the 
> Usher Hall, as well as some extensive landscaping of the area around the 
> west end of Grindlay Street and the Lothian Road clock. The works will 
> go on (they tell us) for about 18 months.
> 

Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the level 
of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?

David Liddle wrote:
> Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the level 
> of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?

Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will probably 
be twice as fast as the trams.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On Apr 22, 6:35 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> factor of more than two.
>
> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> town?

Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.

I used to have a scheme for getting a digital camera and taking a
large number of pictures of people (I use the term loosely) doing this
to post on the web in the hope of embarrassing them.  But now I have
the means, well, I don't think people who behave like this really do
embarrassment, do they? Probably a modified scheme involving a
shoulder-launched anti-tank weapon & video camera would be more
effective - it would prevent at least one of them (and their foul
offspring) from doing it again, and the others might get the message
that more than shame was at stake.

--tim

Tim Bradshaw wrote:

> Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.

Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these spaces. 
The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and children' or 
'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either Those Who have 
Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It strikes me as a 
complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

> Probably a modified scheme involving a
> shoulder-launched anti-tank weapon & video camera would be more
> effective - it would prevent at least one of them (and their foul
> offspring) from doing it again, and the others might get the message
> that more than shame was at stake.

You've been drinking again, haven't you, Tim?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-26 21:39:51 +0100, Mike Dickson  said:

> You've been drinking again, haven't you, Tim?

It's all that keeps me going.

Mike Dickson wrote:
>(I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's 
extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set 
up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal 
space but there's an obvious problem with that. The spaces could be 
further away than disabled spaces, and generally are - however, as the 
sizes of disabled bays and parent & child bays are roughly the same it's 
easier to put them next to each other (and makes it easy to adjust the 
ratios later).

I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
there are times when the ability to get them into and, more importantly, 
out of the store in the quickest possible time are quite definitely in 
the best interests of everybody shopping in the store - and quite 
possibly the next two stores over.

-- 
Angus G Rae                        Science & Engineering Support Team
                                                    Computing Services
                                               University of Edinburgh
The above opinions are mine, and Edinburgh University can't have them

Angus Rae wrote:

> Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's 
> extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set 
> up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal 
> space but there's an obvious problem with that. 

Not if you shut the kid in the boot.

> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 

Isn't that what the plastic carrier bags are for?

-- 
Mike 'Child Friendly' Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-27, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
>> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
>
> Isn't that what the plastic carrier bags are for?

No, get a proper Baby Bag (tm)
http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/92q4/airbaby.html

C

Mike Dickson  writes:

> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> 
> > Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> > spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> > give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> > supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> > circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> > in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.
> 
> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these
> spaces. The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and
> children' or 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either
> Those Who have Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It
> strikes me as a complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only
> drag their children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the
> buggers into a pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

Speaking from my own experience, I'd say that lack of use of these
spaces is through indecision. The fact that I have children is my main
disability, so which space am I supposed to use?

Choobs

-- 
Sir Chewbury Gubbins 
http://www.nelefa.org

Abu the Monkey was never naughty.

Mike Dickson wrote:
> David Liddle wrote:
>> Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the 
>> level of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?
> 
> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will probably 
> be twice as fast as the trams.
> 
Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?

Mike Dickson  writes:

> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these
> spaces. The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and
> children' or 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either
> Those Who have Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It
> strikes me as a complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should
> only drag their children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap
> the buggers into a pushchair or whatever then what is the
> difference?)

Look at them again: mostly they have larger spaces between them, so
that car doors can be opened fully, to allow getting the little
buggers out easily.

This also goes for disabled spaces, too: my brother needs a good
car-width beside his car to be able to fully open his door, and get
his wheelchair alongside. If that's not available, he can't just sidle
out through the narrow space between his car and the next, so he just
has to go home.

-- 
far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere

In ed.general Tim Bradshaw <tfb+google@tfeb.org> wrote:

> Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> give a shit about anyone but themselves

I was reading yesterday that 13 US states, including of course California,
had introduced limits on carbon dioxide output by cars which would
restrict future sales of SUV's, mainly because it's hard to make them
qualify. This has upset the yank manufacturers, in the month which
Toyota finally took pole position as world's biggest carmaker, because
they've seemingly gone down the route of providing giant SUV's just at
the point where due to bunnyhugging feelings and the cost of petrol, the
customers don't want them.

Interesting times...

FoFP

-- 
"I was 14 in communist Hungary when I wasn't allowed to continue my
further education because my parents were middle class. I never doubted
that history repeats itself, but who would have thought that it would do
do so here and within a generation?"  -- Kate Colleran (Grauniad Letters)

In ed.general Angus Rae  wrote:

> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
> there are times when the ability to get them into and, more importantly, 
> out of the store in the quickest possible time are quite definitely in 
> the best interests of everybody shopping in the store - and quite 
> possibly the next two stores over.

Hmmmm. Perhaps a smaller version of those ball'n'gag bondage outfits
with furry cuffs and whatnot could be sold to assist parents in keeping
their brats quiet on shopping trips?

Heh. I'm off to Dragon's Den...

FoFP

David Liddle wrote:

>> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will 
>> probably be twice as fast as the trams.
>>
> Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?

To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be 
doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and 
grass and that sort of organic green stuff. And to be fair to the 
contractors they keep us all informed by letter as to the progress being 
made.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-27 11:54:23 +0100, M Holmes  said:

> in the month which
> Toyota finally took pole position as world's biggest carmaker, because
> they've seemingly gone down the route of providing giant SUV's just at
> the point where due to bunnyhugging feelings and the cost of petrol, the
> customers don't want them.

When I rule the world, one of the first laws I will pass will be to 
make killing people who drive SUVs (and a selection of other car makes 
& types to e chosen somewhat arbitrarily by me) and offence punished by 
a small tax break.  Not, you understand, because of some possible 
damage to the environment they may cause (I will, of course, pass other 
laws encouraging the hammering of nails into the heads of people who 
scar the landscape by erecting noisy, expensive and ineffective wind 
turbines rather than nuclear power stations which might actually do 
some good), but because the people who drive such things just deserve 
death, as should be obvious to anyone with a brain.

--tim

"Tim Bradshaw"  wrote in message 
news:f0tk7j$rpd$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> On 2007-04-27 11:54:23 +0100, M Holmes  said:
>
<snipped>
> but because the people who drive such things just deserve death, as should 
> be obvious to anyone with a brain.
>
> --tim
>

And today I worked out why more cars sit with their engines running at 
Dunsapie Loch in midsummer than in midwinter. We seem to be okay in this 
country dealing with the cold but it's the heat that really gets to us.

Tom.

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:

> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> grass and that sort of organic green stuff.

And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
- to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
Hall.

Ian

On Apr 26, 9:39 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> > Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> > spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> > give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> > supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> > circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> > in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.
>
> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these spaces.
> The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and children' or
> 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either Those Who have
> Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It strikes me as a
> complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

I'm always quite happy to have other folks children herded away from
my car. I don't mind walking a bit further for that.

TTH

Ian Johnston  writes:

> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
> 
> > To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> > doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> > grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
> 
> And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
> - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
> Hall.

There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?

Apart from Bristo Square, obviously (skateboarders don't matter).

-- 
what a waste!

On Apr 27, 6:57 am, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Angus Rae wrote:
> > Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's
> > extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set
> > up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal
> > space but there's an obvious problem with that.
>
> Not if you shut the kid in the boot.

That what happened to you ? Might explain a alot.

TTH

August West wrote:
> Ian Johnston  writes:
> 
>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
>>> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
>>> grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
>> And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
>> - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
>> Hall.
> 
> There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
> depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?
> 
> Apart from Bristo Square, obviously (skateboarders don't matter).
> 
There used to be a decent fountain outside the Sheraton - then some 
arsehole decided that rather than fix the water and clean the place up 
an 'art installation' should happen - if i remember the scheme was only 
250k and at the time the 'News talked of a continental park with boule.
What we got is a disgrace. Just another urban improvement project under 
the name of job creation

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:27:56 +0000, David Liddle wrote:

> What we got is a disgrace. Just another urban improvement project..

"improvement"?

Ian

In article , august@kororaa.com 
says...
> Ian Johnston  writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
> > 
> > > To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> > > doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> > > grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
> > 
> > And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
> > - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
> > Hall.
> 
> There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
> depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?
> 

Multrees Walk (not strictly civic space, I suppose).

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
mike@blackcat.demon.co.uk says...
> David Liddle wrote:
> 
> >> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will 
> >> probably be twice as fast as the trams.
> >>
> > Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?
> 
> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be 
> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and 
> grass and that sort of organic green stuff. And to be fair to the 
> contractors they keep us all informed by letter as to the progress being 
> made.
> 
> 

How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down his 
pen and picked up a shovel? And with the saving they make on stationery 
and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.

-- 
Halmyre

Halmyre wrote:

> How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down his 
> pen and picked up a shovel? 

The letters are signed by someone with the forename 'Caroline', so I 
suspect that the correct answer to your question may be an unpopular one 
in these days of sexual equality.

 > And with the saving they make on stationery
> and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.

They don't mail them - they hand deliver them.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

the_tattie_howker wrote:

> On Apr 27, 6:57 am, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> Angus Rae wrote:
>>> Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's
>>> extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set
>>> up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal
>>> space but there's an obvious problem with that.
>> Not if you shut the kid in the boot.
> 
> That what happened to you ? Might explain a alot.

Or even 'a lot', you dim loser.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:
> Halmyre wrote:
> 
>> How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down 
>> his pen and picked up a shovel? 
> 
> The letters are signed by someone with the forename 'Caroline', so I 
> suspect that the correct answer to your question may be an unpopular one 
> in these days of sexual equality.
> 
>  > And with the saving they make on stationery
>> and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.
> 
> They don't mail them - they hand deliver them.
> 
Re-cycled green electrons

In article ,
 Mike Dickson  wrote:

> ... (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

We don't need to be told you don't do that kind of thing, do we?

Sam

Sam Wilson wrote:

>> ... (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
>> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
>> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)
> 
> We don't need to be told you don't do that kind of thing, do we?

In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In article ,
Mike Dickson   wrote:

>In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
>incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.

Finally, confirmation that evolution will ensure there are no more
Mike Dicksons.

-- Richard
-- 
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

Richard Tobin wrote:

>> In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
>> incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.
> 
> Finally, confirmation that evolution will ensure there are no more
> Mike Dicksons.

Evolution has nothing to do with it; I made up my own mind about thirty 
years ago!

-- 
Mike 'One And Only' Dickson, Edinburgh

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

One of the current lanes I believe.
Just another step towrds becoming a city state.
I will just buy a bus to get round the problem.

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
from the bridge.

-- 
!Speedy Gonzales!

Remove the SPAMTRAP to reply

> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
sholder would then become the bus lane.

At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.

  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
nearly £60m under the plans.

  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass

  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
is not fair."


Smithy

In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> 
> From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> from the bridge.
> 
> 

Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
nose to tail in the other two lanes.

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
nospam@this.address says...
> In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
> speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> > "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> > news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> > >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> > >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> > >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> > 
> > From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> > the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> > from the bridge.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
> nose to tail in the other two lanes.
> 
> 
Can I use it with my bike?
-- 
Cheers
the.Mark

On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:

> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
> sholder would then become the bus lane.

Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so 
emergency vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the 
car cult people).

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:23:24 GMT someone who may be Halmyre
<nospam@this.address> wrote this:-

>Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
>nose to tail in the other two lanes.

It will lie empty, other than when it is being used by those in
priority vehicles.

The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:
> 
>> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The 
>> hard
>> sholder would then become the bus lane.
> 
> Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so emergency 
> vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the car cult 
> people).
> 
Maybe the plan is to park up empty busses during the off-peak hours to 
help justify trams as folks stand waiting at the city stops.

As always Cui bono, if you want to see what this is about just follow the money. 
People eventually become quite influential and wealthy, David Begg is but one 
example, able to push policy for without the need for election which benefits 
his activities as a company director.

http://www.firstgroup.com/corpfirst/investor/board.php

It will be curious to see who benefits, appears on the BBC as independent 
advisers, turns up on company, qango and other boards, who gains the honorary 
degrees etc.


"Smithy"  wrote in message 
news:XlOVh.4059$Ro3.542@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
>> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
>> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
>
> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
> sholder would then become the bus lane.
>
> At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
> and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
> Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.
>
> http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
>  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
> would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.
>
>  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
> routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
> nearly £60m under the plans.
>
>  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass
>
>  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
> commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
> is not fair."
>
>
> Smithy
>
>

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:
> 
>> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The 
>> hard
>> sholder would then become the bus lane.
> 
> Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so emergency 
> vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the car cult 
> people).
> 

Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
emergency vehicles will be unhindered?

Jim

On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:

> Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
> emergency vehicles will be unhindered?

It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.

Tim Bradshaw  writes:

> On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> 
> > Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the
> > emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> 
> It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.

And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.

-- 
It's just like being alive, only more beige

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> 
>> Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
>> emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> 
> It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.
> 

Hmm. I see your point.
They should have a lane for each of the emergency services.
In addition a spare one, only to be used if each other emergency lane is 
blocked.

Jim

On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:

> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.

Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive around 
quite often.  So by using the lane for busses you dramatically increase 
the likelyhood of it being blocked at any given time.  Statistics, you 
see.

It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.

"Tim Bradshaw"  wrote in message 
news:f0aeg5$lb9$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:
>
>> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
>
> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive around 
> quite often.  So by using the lane for busses you dramatically increase 
> the likelyhood of it being blocked at any given time.  Statistics, you 
> see.
>
> It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.
>

Is this one of those situations where the statistical analysis is counter 
intuitive - like the number of people you need to gather together before 
there's a better than fifty fifty chance of two of them sharing a birthday 
being only 23?

Tom.

In article , august@kororaa.com 
says...
> Tim Bradshaw  writes:
> 
> > On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> > 
> > > Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the
> > > emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> > 
> > It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.
> 
> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
> 
> 

Or a broken-down bus, like the one that broke down on the A90 some weeks 
ago but didn't have the good grace to break down in the bus lane, oh no, 
it waited until it was out among the regular traffic and *then* it broke 
down, causing a queue to form which didn't quite go all the way back to 
the FRB, so there was no indication of said queue until it was too 
bloody late.

-- 
Halmyre

Tim Bradshaw  writes:

> On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:
> 
> > And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
> 
> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive
> around quite often.

Each individual car, maybe. When I was travelling up and down the M6
from Einburgh to Cambdrige, I'd see at least one brokemdown car each
trip.

> It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.

Patronsing git.

-- 
can't stand up for falling down

August West wrote:

>> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive
>> around quite often.
> 
> Each individual car, maybe. When I was travelling up and down the M6
> from Einburgh to Cambdrige, I'd see at least one brokemdown car each
> trip.

Edinburgh to Cambridge is about 350 miles. Considering that the businest 
parts of the M6 (from memory) were carrying about 200,000 cars a day, 
that's not actually a very bad average at all.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

David Hansen  wrote:
 
> The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
> non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.

How?  Was it because they weren't stuck behind the buses?

-- 
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 16:07:33 +0100 someone who may be Jeremy C B
Nicoll  wrote this:-

>David Hansen  wrote:
> 
>> The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
>> non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.
>
>How?

By smoothing out the flow of cars via things like virtual bus lanes.

>Was it because they weren't stuck behind the buses?

No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen wrote:

> No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
> delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.

Duh yes. That and the deaths of seal pups as well, I am told.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Marvin wrote:
> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. 
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is 
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
	
On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday) 
to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling 
beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a 
busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by 
definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that 
the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a 
factor of more than two.

Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in 
town?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

>> No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
>> delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.
> Duh yes. That and the deaths of seal pups as well, I am told.

This is glaringly obvious if you actually *use* a bus regularly.

Coming in from Midlothian, my journey time increases by 50% on
school days.  The difference is all the dumb fucks taking their
kids to school by car.

==============  j-c  ======  @  ======  purr . demon . co . uk  ==============
Jack Campin:  11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/>   for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557

On 22 Apr, 18:35, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Marvin wrote:
> > I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> > Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> > it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
>
> On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday)
> to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling
> beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a
> busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by
> definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> factor of more than two.
>
> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> town?
>
> --
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
from registered disabled drivers!

"Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"

In article ,
   Alan  wrote:
> On 22 Apr, 18:35, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> > Marvin wrote:
> > > I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> > > Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> > > it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> >
> > On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday)
> > to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling
> > beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a
> > busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by
> > definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> > the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> > factor of more than two.
> >
> > Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> > town?
> >
> > --
> > Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
> from registered disabled drivers!

> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"

No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have no
car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but that's
another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in "disabled"
spaces without any badge at all.

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

Halmyre <nospam@this.address> writes:

>Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
>nose to tail in the other two lanes.

Well stop stopping to rubberneck a wreck on the opposite carriageway.

Graham

charles wrote:

>>> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
>>> town?
> 
>> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
>> from registered disabled drivers!
> 
>> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
>> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"
> 
> No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have no
> car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but that's
> another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in "disabled"
> spaces without any badge at all.

Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In article ,
   Mike Dickson  wrote:
> charles wrote:

> >>> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> >>> town?
> > 
> >> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
> >> from registered disabled drivers!
> > 
> >> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
> >> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"
> > 
> > No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have
> > no car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but
> > that's another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in
> > "disabled" spaces without any badge at all.

> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
really that many disabled parking spaces?

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

charles wrote:

>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
> 
> That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
> really that many disabled parking spaces?

Charles - of course it's an exaggeration. This is Usenet. The idea of 
objectivity and the omission of hyperbole are *dangerous concepts* round 
here.

My casual observation is that there appears to be an inordinate (and 
growing) number of disabled spaces in the city centre. It's not based on 
anything like actual figures or the likes, but it is very noticeable if 
you live here.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
> charles wrote:

>>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
>> 
>> That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
>> really that many disabled parking spaces?

> Charles - of course it's an exaggeration. This is Usenet. The idea of 
> objectivity and the omission of hyperbole are *dangerous concepts* round 
> here.

> My casual observation is that there appears to be an inordinate (and 
> growing) number of disabled spaces in the city centre. It's not based on 
> anything like actual figures or the likes, but it is very noticeable if 
> you live here.

I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
before it gets any worse.

-- 
Chris Malcolm        cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk              DoD #205
IPAB,  Informatics,  JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Chris Malcolm wrote:

> I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
> then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
> in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
> the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
> know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
> centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
> before it gets any worse.

I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it 
gets. Well done, Chris.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:

> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> 
>> I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
>> then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
>> in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
>> the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
>> know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
>> centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
>> before it gets any worse.
> 
> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
> gets. Well done, Chris.

You're being uncharacteristically tactful, Mike.

To return to your argument based on proportionality, I think that's
the wrong basis on which to estimate how many disabled parking spaces
there should be.  The idea is that since disabled drivers/passengers,
particularly in town, are presumably going to be visiting shops or
offices which are randomly distributed, there ought to be provision
for them within reasonably short distances of, well, basically
everywhere.  I would therefore expect at least one or two spaces per
street segment.

I don't know how many there actually are, but I must say I don't see
the need for any spaces specifically for the disabled.  Unless the rules
have changed, one of the purposes of yellow lines is for the disabled
to park on.  And there are enough of those.

Ronald Raygun wrote:

>> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
>> gets. Well done, Chris.
> 
> You're being uncharacteristically tactful, Mike.

Those are my middle names.

> To return to your argument based on proportionality, I think that's
> the wrong basis on which to estimate how many disabled parking spaces
> there should be.  The idea is that since disabled drivers/passengers,
> particularly in town, are presumably going to be visiting shops or
> offices which are randomly distributed, there ought to be provision
> for them within reasonably short distances of, well, basically
> everywhere.  I would therefore expect at least one or two spaces per
> street segment.

Perhaps so. A casual glance along George Street and environs would soon 
dispel such a weird notion.

> I don't know how many there actually are, but I must say I don't see
> the need for any spaces specifically for the disabled.  Unless the rules
> have changed, one of the purposes of yellow lines is for the disabled
> to park on.  And there are enough of those.

If you live round *this* way you'd be convinced that pavements and 
street corners were there for the same purpose, and that Orange Badges 
were some sort of invisibility device that rendered the vehicle immune 
to ticketing. It's certainly obvious that the good wardens of this burgh 
need some help in knowing what they should and should not be troubling; 
disability badges give you *some concessions* but does not allow you to 
park (say) right in the middle of Cambridge Street on the roadway behind 
a line of cars waiting to get past you. The bitter irony of all of this 
is that many of the disabled spaces in the area are empty when this sort 
of thing goes on. No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?

However, there is no way on Planet Zog that the council will think of 
making any changes to this. I should imagine that the only way to start 
to get the number of disabled spaces reduced would be to show that they 
are never being used, and I suppose that short of renaming them from 
DISABLED to something like GIMPS I'm not sure how this could be done.

-- 
Mike 'Now Characteristically Tactless' Dickson, Edinburgh

"Mike Dickson"  wrote in message 
news:595gonF2i7aniU1@mid.individual.net...

<snipped>
> However, there is no way on Planet Zog that the council will think of 
> making any changes to this. I should imagine that the only way to start to 
> get the number of disabled spaces reduced would be to show that they are 
> never being used, and I suppose that short of renaming them from DISABLED 
> to something like GIMPS I'm not sure how this could be done.
>
> -- 
> Mike 'Now Characteristically Tactless' Dickson, Edinburgh

I think it is a question of proportion. Not that you're getting things out 
of proportion Mike but the proportion of drivers who have blue badges. The 
most accurate figures on the proportion of the population with disabilities 
in the city are probably those reported to the director of Health and Social 
Care by researchers in Directorate Support. They estimate the number of 
people likely to fall within ten categories of disability over the next five 
years. Services are planned accordingly (within H&SC). The Roads department 
are certainly not working with such accuracy.

Tom.

>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
> >> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
> >> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
disabled
> >> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
> >> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
space, and 2 disabled spaces.

My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
near the visitors parking spaces.

Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.

Smithy

In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:

> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
> people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?

Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
the bannister was something of an experience.

FoFP

Smithy wrote:
>  >> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
>>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
>>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
> disabled
>>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
>>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
> 
> Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
> space, and 2 disabled spaces.
> 
> My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
> staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
> Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
> near the visitors parking spaces.
> 
> Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
> never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.
> 
> Smithy
> 
> 
I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

On Apr 23, 9:21 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> > I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
> > then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
> > in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
> > the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
> > know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
> > centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
> > before it gets any worse.
>
> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
> gets. Well done, Chris.
>
> --
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

That post is so Mike Dickson.

TTH

On Apr 24, 11:48 am, David Liddle  wrote:
> Smithy wrote:
> >  >> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
> >>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
> >>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
> > disabled
> >>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
> >>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
>
> > Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
> > space, and 2 disabled spaces.
>
> > My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
> > staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
> > Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
> > near the visitors parking spaces.
>
> > Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
> > never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.
>
> > Smithy
>
> I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

I don't think they use those to mark out the spaces......

TTH

M Holmes wrote:
> In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
> 
>> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
>> people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?
> 
> Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
> prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
> Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
> the bannister was something of an experience.

That's the primary reason why there are works outside and around the 
Usher Hall, as well as some extensive landscaping of the area around the 
west end of Grindlay Street and the Lothian Road clock. The works will 
go on (they tell us) for about 18 months.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

David Liddle wrote:
> I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

About a year ago there was a story about someone in Dundee who forged a 
tax disc using **newsprint paper and felt pens**. The technology 
revolution hadn't quite reached them at that stage.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:
> M Holmes wrote:
>> In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
>>
>>> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these people. I 
>>> wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?
>>
>> Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
>> prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
>> Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
>> the bannister was something of an experience.
> 
> That's the primary reason why there are works outside and around the 
> Usher Hall, as well as some extensive landscaping of the area around the 
> west end of Grindlay Street and the Lothian Road clock. The works will 
> go on (they tell us) for about 18 months.
> 

Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the level 
of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?

David Liddle wrote:
> Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the level 
> of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?

Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will probably 
be twice as fast as the trams.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On Apr 22, 6:35 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> factor of more than two.
>
> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> town?

Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.

I used to have a scheme for getting a digital camera and taking a
large number of pictures of people (I use the term loosely) doing this
to post on the web in the hope of embarrassing them.  But now I have
the means, well, I don't think people who behave like this really do
embarrassment, do they? Probably a modified scheme involving a
shoulder-launched anti-tank weapon & video camera would be more
effective - it would prevent at least one of them (and their foul
offspring) from doing it again, and the others might get the message
that more than shame was at stake.

--tim

Tim Bradshaw wrote:

> Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.

Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these spaces. 
The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and children' or 
'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either Those Who have 
Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It strikes me as a 
complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

> Probably a modified scheme involving a
> shoulder-launched anti-tank weapon & video camera would be more
> effective - it would prevent at least one of them (and their foul
> offspring) from doing it again, and the others might get the message
> that more than shame was at stake.

You've been drinking again, haven't you, Tim?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-26 21:39:51 +0100, Mike Dickson  said:

> You've been drinking again, haven't you, Tim?

It's all that keeps me going.

Mike Dickson wrote:
>(I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's 
extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set 
up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal 
space but there's an obvious problem with that. The spaces could be 
further away than disabled spaces, and generally are - however, as the 
sizes of disabled bays and parent & child bays are roughly the same it's 
easier to put them next to each other (and makes it easy to adjust the 
ratios later).

I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
there are times when the ability to get them into and, more importantly, 
out of the store in the quickest possible time are quite definitely in 
the best interests of everybody shopping in the store - and quite 
possibly the next two stores over.

-- 
Angus G Rae                        Science & Engineering Support Team
                                                    Computing Services
                                               University of Edinburgh
The above opinions are mine, and Edinburgh University can't have them

Angus Rae wrote:

> Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's 
> extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set 
> up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal 
> space but there's an obvious problem with that. 

Not if you shut the kid in the boot.

> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 

Isn't that what the plastic carrier bags are for?

-- 
Mike 'Child Friendly' Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-27, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
>> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
>
> Isn't that what the plastic carrier bags are for?

No, get a proper Baby Bag (tm)
http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/92q4/airbaby.html

C

Mike Dickson  writes:

> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> 
> > Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> > spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> > give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> > supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> > circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> > in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.
> 
> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these
> spaces. The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and
> children' or 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either
> Those Who have Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It
> strikes me as a complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only
> drag their children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the
> buggers into a pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

Speaking from my own experience, I'd say that lack of use of these
spaces is through indecision. The fact that I have children is my main
disability, so which space am I supposed to use?

Choobs

-- 
Sir Chewbury Gubbins 
http://www.nelefa.org

Abu the Monkey was never naughty.

Mike Dickson wrote:
> David Liddle wrote:
>> Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the 
>> level of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?
> 
> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will probably 
> be twice as fast as the trams.
> 
Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?

Mike Dickson  writes:

> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these
> spaces. The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and
> children' or 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either
> Those Who have Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It
> strikes me as a complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should
> only drag their children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap
> the buggers into a pushchair or whatever then what is the
> difference?)

Look at them again: mostly they have larger spaces between them, so
that car doors can be opened fully, to allow getting the little
buggers out easily.

This also goes for disabled spaces, too: my brother needs a good
car-width beside his car to be able to fully open his door, and get
his wheelchair alongside. If that's not available, he can't just sidle
out through the narrow space between his car and the next, so he just
has to go home.

-- 
far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere

In ed.general Tim Bradshaw <tfb+google@tfeb.org> wrote:

> Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> give a shit about anyone but themselves

I was reading yesterday that 13 US states, including of course California,
had introduced limits on carbon dioxide output by cars which would
restrict future sales of SUV's, mainly because it's hard to make them
qualify. This has upset the yank manufacturers, in the month which
Toyota finally took pole position as world's biggest carmaker, because
they've seemingly gone down the route of providing giant SUV's just at
the point where due to bunnyhugging feelings and the cost of petrol, the
customers don't want them.

Interesting times...

FoFP

-- 
"I was 14 in communist Hungary when I wasn't allowed to continue my
further education because my parents were middle class. I never doubted
that history repeats itself, but who would have thought that it would do
do so here and within a generation?"  -- Kate Colleran (Grauniad Letters)

In ed.general Angus Rae  wrote:

> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
> there are times when the ability to get them into and, more importantly, 
> out of the store in the quickest possible time are quite definitely in 
> the best interests of everybody shopping in the store - and quite 
> possibly the next two stores over.

Hmmmm. Perhaps a smaller version of those ball'n'gag bondage outfits
with furry cuffs and whatnot could be sold to assist parents in keeping
their brats quiet on shopping trips?

Heh. I'm off to Dragon's Den...

FoFP

David Liddle wrote:

>> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will 
>> probably be twice as fast as the trams.
>>
> Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?

To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be 
doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and 
grass and that sort of organic green stuff. And to be fair to the 
contractors they keep us all informed by letter as to the progress being 
made.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-27 11:54:23 +0100, M Holmes  said:

> in the month which
> Toyota finally took pole position as world's biggest carmaker, because
> they've seemingly gone down the route of providing giant SUV's just at
> the point where due to bunnyhugging feelings and the cost of petrol, the
> customers don't want them.

When I rule the world, one of the first laws I will pass will be to 
make killing people who drive SUVs (and a selection of other car makes 
& types to e chosen somewhat arbitrarily by me) and offence punished by 
a small tax break.  Not, you understand, because of some possible 
damage to the environment they may cause (I will, of course, pass other 
laws encouraging the hammering of nails into the heads of people who 
scar the landscape by erecting noisy, expensive and ineffective wind 
turbines rather than nuclear power stations which might actually do 
some good), but because the people who drive such things just deserve 
death, as should be obvious to anyone with a brain.

--tim

"Tim Bradshaw"  wrote in message 
news:f0tk7j$rpd$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> On 2007-04-27 11:54:23 +0100, M Holmes  said:
>
<snipped>
> but because the people who drive such things just deserve death, as should 
> be obvious to anyone with a brain.
>
> --tim
>

And today I worked out why more cars sit with their engines running at 
Dunsapie Loch in midsummer than in midwinter. We seem to be okay in this 
country dealing with the cold but it's the heat that really gets to us.

Tom.

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:

> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> grass and that sort of organic green stuff.

And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
- to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
Hall.

Ian

On Apr 26, 9:39 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> > Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> > spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> > give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> > supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> > circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> > in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.
>
> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these spaces.
> The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and children' or
> 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either Those Who have
> Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It strikes me as a
> complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

I'm always quite happy to have other folks children herded away from
my car. I don't mind walking a bit further for that.

TTH

Ian Johnston  writes:

> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
> 
> > To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> > doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> > grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
> 
> And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
> - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
> Hall.

There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?

Apart from Bristo Square, obviously (skateboarders don't matter).

-- 
what a waste!

On Apr 27, 6:57 am, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Angus Rae wrote:
> > Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's
> > extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set
> > up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal
> > space but there's an obvious problem with that.
>
> Not if you shut the kid in the boot.

That what happened to you ? Might explain a alot.

TTH

August West wrote:
> Ian Johnston  writes:
> 
>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
>>> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
>>> grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
>> And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
>> - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
>> Hall.
> 
> There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
> depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?
> 
> Apart from Bristo Square, obviously (skateboarders don't matter).
> 
There used to be a decent fountain outside the Sheraton - then some 
arsehole decided that rather than fix the water and clean the place up 
an 'art installation' should happen - if i remember the scheme was only 
250k and at the time the 'News talked of a continental park with boule.
What we got is a disgrace. Just another urban improvement project under 
the name of job creation

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:27:56 +0000, David Liddle wrote:

> What we got is a disgrace. Just another urban improvement project..

"improvement"?

Ian

In article , august@kororaa.com 
says...
> Ian Johnston  writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
> > 
> > > To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> > > doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> > > grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
> > 
> > And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
> > - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
> > Hall.
> 
> There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
> depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?
> 

Multrees Walk (not strictly civic space, I suppose).

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
mike@blackcat.demon.co.uk says...
> David Liddle wrote:
> 
> >> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will 
> >> probably be twice as fast as the trams.
> >>
> > Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?
> 
> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be 
> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and 
> grass and that sort of organic green stuff. And to be fair to the 
> contractors they keep us all informed by letter as to the progress being 
> made.
> 
> 

How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down his 
pen and picked up a shovel? And with the saving they make on stationery 
and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.

-- 
Halmyre

Halmyre wrote:

> How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down his 
> pen and picked up a shovel? 

The letters are signed by someone with the forename 'Caroline', so I 
suspect that the correct answer to your question may be an unpopular one 
in these days of sexual equality.

 > And with the saving they make on stationery
> and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.

They don't mail them - they hand deliver them.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

the_tattie_howker wrote:

> On Apr 27, 6:57 am, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> Angus Rae wrote:
>>> Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's
>>> extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set
>>> up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal
>>> space but there's an obvious problem with that.
>> Not if you shut the kid in the boot.
> 
> That what happened to you ? Might explain a alot.

Or even 'a lot', you dim loser.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:
> Halmyre wrote:
> 
>> How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down 
>> his pen and picked up a shovel? 
> 
> The letters are signed by someone with the forename 'Caroline', so I 
> suspect that the correct answer to your question may be an unpopular one 
> in these days of sexual equality.
> 
>  > And with the saving they make on stationery
>> and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.
> 
> They don't mail them - they hand deliver them.
> 
Re-cycled green electrons

In article ,
 Mike Dickson  wrote:

> ... (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

We don't need to be told you don't do that kind of thing, do we?

Sam

Sam Wilson wrote:

>> ... (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
>> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
>> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)
> 
> We don't need to be told you don't do that kind of thing, do we?

In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In article ,
Mike Dickson   wrote:

>In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
>incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.

Finally, confirmation that evolution will ensure there are no more
Mike Dicksons.

-- Richard
-- 
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

Richard Tobin wrote:

>> In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
>> incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.
> 
> Finally, confirmation that evolution will ensure there are no more
> Mike Dicksons.

Evolution has nothing to do with it; I made up my own mind about thirty 
years ago!

-- 
Mike 'One And Only' Dickson, Edinburgh

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

One of the current lanes I believe.
Just another step towrds becoming a city state.
I will just buy a bus to get round the problem.

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
from the bridge.

-- 
!Speedy Gonzales!

Remove the SPAMTRAP to reply

> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
sholder would then become the bus lane.

At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.

  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
nearly £60m under the plans.

  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass

  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
is not fair."


Smithy

In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> 
> From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> from the bridge.
> 
> 

Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
nose to tail in the other two lanes.

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
nospam@this.address says...
> In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
> speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> > "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> > news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> > >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> > >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> > >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> > 
> > From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> > the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> > from the bridge.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
> nose to tail in the other two lanes.
> 
> 
Can I use it with my bike?
-- 
Cheers
the.Mark

On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:

> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
> sholder would then become the bus lane.

Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so 
emergency vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the 
car cult people).

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:23:24 GMT someone who may be Halmyre
<nospam@this.address> wrote this:-

>Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
>nose to tail in the other two lanes.

It will lie empty, other than when it is being used by those in
priority vehicles.

The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:
> 
>> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The 
>> hard
>> sholder would then become the bus lane.
> 
> Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so emergency 
> vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the car cult 
> people).
> 
Maybe the plan is to park up empty busses during the off-peak hours to 
help justify trams as folks stand waiting at the city stops.

As always Cui bono, if you want to see what this is about just follow the money. 
People eventually become quite influential and wealthy, David Begg is but one 
example, able to push policy for without the need for election which benefits 
his activities as a company director.

http://www.firstgroup.com/corpfirst/investor/board.php

It will be curious to see who benefits, appears on the BBC as independent 
advisers, turns up on company, qango and other boards, who gains the honorary 
degrees etc.


"Smithy"  wrote in message 
news:XlOVh.4059$Ro3.542@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
>> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
>> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
>
> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
> sholder would then become the bus lane.
>
> At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
> and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
> Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.
>
> http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
>  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
> would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.
>
>  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
> routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
> nearly £60m under the plans.
>
>  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass
>
>  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
> commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
> is not fair."
>
>
> Smithy
>
>

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-19 19:16:23 +0100, "Smithy"  said:
> 
>> Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The 
>> hard
>> sholder would then become the bus lane.
> 
> Aren't hard shoulders there for at least partly for safety, so emergency 
> vehicles can get to people?  (not that I want to support the car cult 
> people).
> 

Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
emergency vehicles will be unhindered?

Jim

On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:

> Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
> emergency vehicles will be unhindered?

It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.

Tim Bradshaw  writes:

> On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> 
> > Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the
> > emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> 
> It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.

And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.

-- 
It's just like being alive, only more beige

Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> 
>> Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the 
>> emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> 
> It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.
> 

Hmm. I see your point.
They should have a lane for each of the emergency services.
In addition a spare one, only to be used if each other emergency lane is 
blocked.

Jim

On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:

> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.

Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive around 
quite often.  So by using the lane for busses you dramatically increase 
the likelyhood of it being blocked at any given time.  Statistics, you 
see.

It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.

"Tim Bradshaw"  wrote in message 
news:f0aeg5$lb9$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:
>
>> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
>
> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive around 
> quite often.  So by using the lane for busses you dramatically increase 
> the likelyhood of it being blocked at any given time.  Statistics, you 
> see.
>
> It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.
>

Is this one of those situations where the statistical analysis is counter 
intuitive - like the number of people you need to gather together before 
there's a better than fifty fifty chance of two of them sharing a birthday 
being only 23?

Tom.

In article , august@kororaa.com 
says...
> Tim Bradshaw  writes:
> 
> > On 2007-04-20 10:53:31 +0100, Jim O'D  said:
> > 
> > > Well then if the lane is mostly empty as people suggest then the
> > > emergency vehicles will be unhindered?
> > 
> > It only takes one bus in the way to stop an emergency vehicle.
> 
> And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
> 
> 

Or a broken-down bus, like the one that broke down on the A90 some weeks 
ago but didn't have the good grace to break down in the bus lane, oh no, 
it waited until it was out among the regular traffic and *then* it broke 
down, causing a queue to form which didn't quite go all the way back to 
the FRB, so there was no indication of said queue until it was too 
bloody late.

-- 
Halmyre

Tim Bradshaw  writes:

> On 2007-04-20 12:35:54 +0100, August West  said:
> 
> > And one broken-down car to stop the one bus.
> 
> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive
> around quite often.

Each individual car, maybe. When I was travelling up and down the M6
from Einburgh to Cambdrige, I'd see at least one brokemdown car each
trip.

> It's tragic that I feel I have to explain this.

Patronsing git.

-- 
can't stand up for falling down

August West wrote:

>> Cars don't actually break down very often, while busses do drive
>> around quite often.
> 
> Each individual car, maybe. When I was travelling up and down the M6
> from Einburgh to Cambdrige, I'd see at least one brokemdown car each
> trip.

Edinburgh to Cambridge is about 350 miles. Considering that the businest 
parts of the M6 (from memory) were carrying about 200,000 cars a day, 
that's not actually a very bad average at all.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

David Hansen  wrote:
 
> The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
> non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.

How?  Was it because they weren't stuck behind the buses?

-- 
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 16:07:33 +0100 someone who may be Jeremy C B
Nicoll  wrote this:-

>David Hansen  wrote:
> 
>> The A90 bus priority measures speeded up journeys for those in
>> non-priority vehicles, but only by a minute or two.
>
>How?

By smoothing out the flow of cars via things like virtual bus lanes.

>Was it because they weren't stuck behind the buses?

No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen wrote:

> No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
> delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.

Duh yes. That and the deaths of seal pups as well, I am told.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Marvin wrote:
> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. 
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is 
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
	
On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday) 
to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling 
beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a 
busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by 
definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that 
the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a 
factor of more than two.

Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in 
town?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

>> No. The relatively small number of buses don't cause any great
>> delays. Delays are largely caused by the large number of cars.
> Duh yes. That and the deaths of seal pups as well, I am told.

This is glaringly obvious if you actually *use* a bus regularly.

Coming in from Midlothian, my journey time increases by 50% on
school days.  The difference is all the dumb fucks taking their
kids to school by car.

==============  j-c  ======  @  ======  purr . demon . co . uk  ==============
Jack Campin:  11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/>   for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557

On 22 Apr, 18:35, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Marvin wrote:
> > I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> > Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> > it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
>
> On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday)
> to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling
> beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a
> busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by
> definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> factor of more than two.
>
> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> town?
>
> --
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
from registered disabled drivers!

"Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"

In article ,
   Alan  wrote:
> On 22 Apr, 18:35, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> > Marvin wrote:
> > > I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> > > Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> > > it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> >
> > On the same subject - sort of - I was in town in the car today (Sunday)
> > to buy some things from a shop in George Street and was struggling
> > beyond all reason to find a parking space. Now I know that this is a
> > busy part of town and that parking spots in Edinburgh are *by
> > definition* hard to find, but what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> > the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> > factor of more than two.
> >
> > Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> > town?
> >
> > --
> > Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
> from registered disabled drivers!

> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"

No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have no
car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but that's
another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in "disabled"
spaces without any badge at all.

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

Halmyre <nospam@this.address> writes:

>Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
>nose to tail in the other two lanes.

Well stop stopping to rubberneck a wreck on the opposite carriageway.

Graham

charles wrote:

>>> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
>>> town?
> 
>> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
>> from registered disabled drivers!
> 
>> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
>> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"
> 
> No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have no
> car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but that's
> another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in "disabled"
> spaces without any badge at all.

Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In article ,
   Mike Dickson  wrote:
> charles wrote:

> >>> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> >>> town?
> > 
> >> Do you mean registered blue badge holders - quite a different thing
> >> from registered disabled drivers!
> > 
> >> "Oh, but I take my mother to the shops once a week, can I have a blue
> >> badge that I'll then abuse whenever I can?"
> > 
> > No.  The Blue badge is issued to the disabled person even if they have
> > no car.  Their driver may well abuse the badge loaned to them, but
> > that's another story - but very common.  But then so is parking in
> > "disabled" spaces without any badge at all.

> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
really that many disabled parking spaces?

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

charles wrote:

>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
> 
> That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
> really that many disabled parking spaces?

Charles - of course it's an exaggeration. This is Usenet. The idea of 
objectivity and the omission of hyperbole are *dangerous concepts* round 
here.

My casual observation is that there appears to be an inordinate (and 
growing) number of disabled spaces in the city centre. It's not based on 
anything like actual figures or the likes, but it is very noticeable if 
you live here.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
> charles wrote:

>>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled 
>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be 
>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for disabled 
>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually 
>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
>> 
>> That seems a bit of an exaggeration.  Population about 500,000. Are there
>> really that many disabled parking spaces?

> Charles - of course it's an exaggeration. This is Usenet. The idea of 
> objectivity and the omission of hyperbole are *dangerous concepts* round 
> here.

> My casual observation is that there appears to be an inordinate (and 
> growing) number of disabled spaces in the city centre. It's not based on 
> anything like actual figures or the likes, but it is very noticeable if 
> you live here.

I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
before it gets any worse.

-- 
Chris Malcolm        cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk              DoD #205
IPAB,  Informatics,  JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Chris Malcolm wrote:

> I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
> then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
> in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
> the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
> know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
> centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
> before it gets any worse.

I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it 
gets. Well done, Chris.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:

> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> 
>> I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
>> then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
>> in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
>> the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
>> know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
>> centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
>> before it gets any worse.
> 
> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
> gets. Well done, Chris.

You're being uncharacteristically tactful, Mike.

To return to your argument based on proportionality, I think that's
the wrong basis on which to estimate how many disabled parking spaces
there should be.  The idea is that since disabled drivers/passengers,
particularly in town, are presumably going to be visiting shops or
offices which are randomly distributed, there ought to be provision
for them within reasonably short distances of, well, basically
everywhere.  I would therefore expect at least one or two spaces per
street segment.

I don't know how many there actually are, but I must say I don't see
the need for any spaces specifically for the disabled.  Unless the rules
have changed, one of the purposes of yellow lines is for the disabled
to park on.  And there are enough of those.

Ronald Raygun wrote:

>> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
>> gets. Well done, Chris.
> 
> You're being uncharacteristically tactful, Mike.

Those are my middle names.

> To return to your argument based on proportionality, I think that's
> the wrong basis on which to estimate how many disabled parking spaces
> there should be.  The idea is that since disabled drivers/passengers,
> particularly in town, are presumably going to be visiting shops or
> offices which are randomly distributed, there ought to be provision
> for them within reasonably short distances of, well, basically
> everywhere.  I would therefore expect at least one or two spaces per
> street segment.

Perhaps so. A casual glance along George Street and environs would soon 
dispel such a weird notion.

> I don't know how many there actually are, but I must say I don't see
> the need for any spaces specifically for the disabled.  Unless the rules
> have changed, one of the purposes of yellow lines is for the disabled
> to park on.  And there are enough of those.

If you live round *this* way you'd be convinced that pavements and 
street corners were there for the same purpose, and that Orange Badges 
were some sort of invisibility device that rendered the vehicle immune 
to ticketing. It's certainly obvious that the good wardens of this burgh 
need some help in knowing what they should and should not be troubling; 
disability badges give you *some concessions* but does not allow you to 
park (say) right in the middle of Cambridge Street on the roadway behind 
a line of cars waiting to get past you. The bitter irony of all of this 
is that many of the disabled spaces in the area are empty when this sort 
of thing goes on. No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?

However, there is no way on Planet Zog that the council will think of 
making any changes to this. I should imagine that the only way to start 
to get the number of disabled spaces reduced would be to show that they 
are never being used, and I suppose that short of renaming them from 
DISABLED to something like GIMPS I'm not sure how this could be done.

-- 
Mike 'Now Characteristically Tactless' Dickson, Edinburgh

"Mike Dickson"  wrote in message 
news:595gonF2i7aniU1@mid.individual.net...

<snipped>
> However, there is no way on Planet Zog that the council will think of 
> making any changes to this. I should imagine that the only way to start to 
> get the number of disabled spaces reduced would be to show that they are 
> never being used, and I suppose that short of renaming them from DISABLED 
> to something like GIMPS I'm not sure how this could be done.
>
> -- 
> Mike 'Now Characteristically Tactless' Dickson, Edinburgh

I think it is a question of proportion. Not that you're getting things out 
of proportion Mike but the proportion of drivers who have blue badges. The 
most accurate figures on the proportion of the population with disabilities 
in the city are probably those reported to the director of Health and Social 
Care by researchers in Directorate Support. They estimate the number of 
people likely to fall within ten categories of disability over the next five 
years. Services are planned accordingly (within H&SC). The Roads department 
are certainly not working with such accuracy.

Tom.

>> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
> >> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
> >> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
disabled
> >> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
> >> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.

Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
space, and 2 disabled spaces.

My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
near the visitors parking spaces.

Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.

Smithy

In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:

> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
> people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?

Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
the bannister was something of an experience.

FoFP

Smithy wrote:
>  >> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
>>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
>>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
> disabled
>>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
>>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
> 
> Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
> space, and 2 disabled spaces.
> 
> My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
> staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
> Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
> near the visitors parking spaces.
> 
> Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
> never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.
> 
> Smithy
> 
> 
I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

On Apr 23, 9:21 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> > I must take a more careful look, since I haven't noticed any yet. But
> > then I don't drive round looking for a parking space. I have observed
> > in those that do so that driving round looking for parking spaces in
> > the city centre often produces dysphoric delusional paranoia. I do
> > know that the council is trying to discourage car traffic in the city
> > centre. I think it might be a good idea to give in and be discouraged
> > before it gets any worse.
>
> I'd just like to say that this response is about as ed.general as it
> gets. Well done, Chris.
>
> --
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

That post is so Mike Dickson.

TTH

On Apr 24, 11:48 am, David Liddle  wrote:
> Smithy wrote:
> >  >> Well, I really only mean the number of people who can occupy a disabled
> >>>> parking space with their car. I don't know how disabled you have to be
> >>>> to get the privilege, but if the number of spaces available for
> > disabled
> >>>> people is commensurate with the number of people who are actually
> >>>> disabled then the residents of this city must be all but immobile.
>
> > Just back from the post office depot in Russel Road.  It has 1 visitors
> > space, and 2 disabled spaces.
>
> > My work has 6 disabled spaces out of 120, but only one disabled member of
> > staff.  The spaces lie empty while staff park on surounding streets.
> > Disabled visitors wouldn't know where the spaces are as they're no where
> > near the visitors parking spaces.
>
> > Street opposite my flat has 3 disabled parking spaces marked out.  I have
> > never seen a disabled person getting into a car in 2 of the spaces.
>
> > Smithy
>
> I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

I don't think they use those to mark out the spaces......

TTH

M Holmes wrote:
> In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
> 
>> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these 
>> people. I wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?
> 
> Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
> prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
> Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
> the bannister was something of an experience.

That's the primary reason why there are works outside and around the 
Usher Hall, as well as some extensive landscaping of the area around the 
west end of Grindlay Street and the Lothian Road clock. The works will 
go on (they tell us) for about 18 months.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

David Liddle wrote:
> I blame photoshop, scanners and photoquality printers...

About a year ago there was a story about someone in Dundee who forged a 
tax disc using **newsprint paper and felt pens**. The technology 
revolution hadn't quite reached them at that stage.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:
> M Holmes wrote:
>> In ed.general Mike Dickson  wrote:
>>
>>> No doubt the extra ten feet is life and death to these people. I 
>>> wonder how they managed to get around inside the Usher Hall?
>>
>> Not easily I suspect. I did in my knee recently (most unfortunately
>> prior to ski season) and had occasion to see something at the Usher
>> Hall. There are no lifts and so getting up and down stairs clinging to
>> the bannister was something of an experience.
> 
> That's the primary reason why there are works outside and around the 
> Usher Hall, as well as some extensive landscaping of the area around the 
> west end of Grindlay Street and the Lothian Road clock. The works will 
> go on (they tell us) for about 18 months.
> 

Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the level 
of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?

David Liddle wrote:
> Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the level 
> of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?

Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will probably 
be twice as fast as the trams.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On Apr 22, 6:35 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> what makes it doubly hard is the fact that
> the number of disabled parking spaces appears to have gone up by a
> factor of more than two.
>
> Does anyone know just how many registered disabled drivers there are in
> town?

Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.

I used to have a scheme for getting a digital camera and taking a
large number of pictures of people (I use the term loosely) doing this
to post on the web in the hope of embarrassing them.  But now I have
the means, well, I don't think people who behave like this really do
embarrassment, do they? Probably a modified scheme involving a
shoulder-launched anti-tank weapon & video camera would be more
effective - it would prevent at least one of them (and their foul
offspring) from doing it again, and the others might get the message
that more than shame was at stake.

--tim

Tim Bradshaw wrote:

> Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.

Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these spaces. 
The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and children' or 
'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either Those Who have 
Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It strikes me as a 
complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

> Probably a modified scheme involving a
> shoulder-launched anti-tank weapon & video camera would be more
> effective - it would prevent at least one of them (and their foul
> offspring) from doing it again, and the others might get the message
> that more than shame was at stake.

You've been drinking again, haven't you, Tim?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-26 21:39:51 +0100, Mike Dickson  said:

> You've been drinking again, haven't you, Tim?

It's all that keeps me going.

Mike Dickson wrote:
>(I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's 
extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set 
up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal 
space but there's an obvious problem with that. The spaces could be 
further away than disabled spaces, and generally are - however, as the 
sizes of disabled bays and parent & child bays are roughly the same it's 
easier to put them next to each other (and makes it easy to adjust the 
ratios later).

I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
there are times when the ability to get them into and, more importantly, 
out of the store in the quickest possible time are quite definitely in 
the best interests of everybody shopping in the store - and quite 
possibly the next two stores over.

-- 
Angus G Rae                        Science & Engineering Support Team
                                                    Computing Services
                                               University of Edinburgh
The above opinions are mine, and Edinburgh University can't have them

Angus Rae wrote:

> Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's 
> extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set 
> up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal 
> space but there's an obvious problem with that. 

Not if you shut the kid in the boot.

> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 

Isn't that what the plastic carrier bags are for?

-- 
Mike 'Child Friendly' Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-27, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
>> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
>
> Isn't that what the plastic carrier bags are for?

No, get a proper Baby Bag (tm)
http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/92q4/airbaby.html

C

Mike Dickson  writes:

> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> 
> > Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> > spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> > give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> > supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> > circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> > in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.
> 
> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these
> spaces. The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and
> children' or 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either
> Those Who have Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It
> strikes me as a complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only
> drag their children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the
> buggers into a pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

Speaking from my own experience, I'd say that lack of use of these
spaces is through indecision. The fact that I have children is my main
disability, so which space am I supposed to use?

Choobs

-- 
Sir Chewbury Gubbins 
http://www.nelefa.org

Abu the Monkey was never naughty.

Mike Dickson wrote:
> David Liddle wrote:
>> Why on earth does it take 18 months to build a ramp? If thats the 
>> level of working in Edinburgh what chance the trams thing?
> 
> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will probably 
> be twice as fast as the trams.
> 
Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?

Mike Dickson  writes:

> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these
> spaces. The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and
> children' or 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either
> Those Who have Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It
> strikes me as a complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should
> only drag their children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap
> the buggers into a pushchair or whatever then what is the
> difference?)

Look at them again: mostly they have larger spaces between them, so
that car doors can be opened fully, to allow getting the little
buggers out easily.

This also goes for disabled spaces, too: my brother needs a good
car-width beside his car to be able to fully open his door, and get
his wheelchair alongside. If that's not available, he can't just sidle
out through the narrow space between his car and the next, so he just
has to go home.

-- 
far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere

In ed.general Tim Bradshaw <tfb+google@tfeb.org> wrote:

> Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> give a shit about anyone but themselves

I was reading yesterday that 13 US states, including of course California,
had introduced limits on carbon dioxide output by cars which would
restrict future sales of SUV's, mainly because it's hard to make them
qualify. This has upset the yank manufacturers, in the month which
Toyota finally took pole position as world's biggest carmaker, because
they've seemingly gone down the route of providing giant SUV's just at
the point where due to bunnyhugging feelings and the cost of petrol, the
customers don't want them.

Interesting times...

FoFP

-- 
"I was 14 in communist Hungary when I wasn't allowed to continue my
further education because my parents were middle class. I never doubted
that history repeats itself, but who would have thought that it would do
do so here and within a generation?"  -- Kate Colleran (Grauniad Letters)

In ed.general Angus Rae  wrote:

> I suspect you've never pushed a pushchair (it's a lot more effort than 
> you imagine) or tried to keep a toddler entertained on a shopping trip; 
> there are times when the ability to get them into and, more importantly, 
> out of the store in the quickest possible time are quite definitely in 
> the best interests of everybody shopping in the store - and quite 
> possibly the next two stores over.

Hmmmm. Perhaps a smaller version of those ball'n'gag bondage outfits
with furry cuffs and whatnot could be sold to assist parents in keeping
their brats quiet on shopping trips?

Heh. I'm off to Dragon's Den...

FoFP

David Liddle wrote:

>> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will 
>> probably be twice as fast as the trams.
>>
> Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?

To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be 
doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and 
grass and that sort of organic green stuff. And to be fair to the 
contractors they keep us all informed by letter as to the progress being 
made.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 2007-04-27 11:54:23 +0100, M Holmes  said:

> in the month which
> Toyota finally took pole position as world's biggest carmaker, because
> they've seemingly gone down the route of providing giant SUV's just at
> the point where due to bunnyhugging feelings and the cost of petrol, the
> customers don't want them.

When I rule the world, one of the first laws I will pass will be to 
make killing people who drive SUVs (and a selection of other car makes 
& types to e chosen somewhat arbitrarily by me) and offence punished by 
a small tax break.  Not, you understand, because of some possible 
damage to the environment they may cause (I will, of course, pass other 
laws encouraging the hammering of nails into the heads of people who 
scar the landscape by erecting noisy, expensive and ineffective wind 
turbines rather than nuclear power stations which might actually do 
some good), but because the people who drive such things just deserve 
death, as should be obvious to anyone with a brain.

--tim

"Tim Bradshaw"  wrote in message 
news:f0tk7j$rpd$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> On 2007-04-27 11:54:23 +0100, M Holmes  said:
>
<snipped>
> but because the people who drive such things just deserve death, as should 
> be obvious to anyone with a brain.
>
> --tim
>

And today I worked out why more cars sit with their engines running at 
Dunsapie Loch in midsummer than in midwinter. We seem to be okay in this 
country dealing with the cold but it's the heat that really gets to us.

Tom.

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:

> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> grass and that sort of organic green stuff.

And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
- to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
Hall.

Ian

On Apr 26, 9:39 pm, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> > Presumably the problem is that if you provide n disabled parking
> > spaces they will immediately be filled by people in SUVs who don't
> > give a shit about anyone but themselves (sit in the car-park at any
> > supermarket for a few minutes and watch).  So you end up in a vicious
> > circle of providing more, which then get filled by more latent-dogfood
> > in their expensive tin-cans, and so on.
>
> Perhaps, but I am not all that bothered if people *do* use these spaces.
> The spaces at supermarkets designated for 'parents and children' or
> 'disabled' are generally completely devoid of either Those Who have
> Spawned or anyone who looks even faintly disabled. It strikes me as a
> complete waste. (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

I'm always quite happy to have other folks children herded away from
my car. I don't mind walking a bit further for that.

TTH

Ian Johnston  writes:

> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
> 
> > To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> > doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> > grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
> 
> And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
> - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
> Hall.

There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?

Apart from Bristo Square, obviously (skateboarders don't matter).

-- 
what a waste!

On Apr 27, 6:57 am, Mike Dickson  wrote:
> Angus Rae wrote:
> > Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's
> > extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set
> > up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal
> > space but there's an obvious problem with that.
>
> Not if you shut the kid in the boot.

That what happened to you ? Might explain a alot.

TTH

August West wrote:
> Ian Johnston  writes:
> 
>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
>>> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
>>> grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
>> And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
>> - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
>> Hall.
> 
> There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
> depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?
> 
> Apart from Bristo Square, obviously (skateboarders don't matter).
> 
There used to be a decent fountain outside the Sheraton - then some 
arsehole decided that rather than fix the water and clean the place up 
an 'art installation' should happen - if i remember the scheme was only 
250k and at the time the 'News talked of a continental park with boule.
What we got is a disgrace. Just another urban improvement project under 
the name of job creation

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:27:56 +0000, David Liddle wrote:

> What we got is a disgrace. Just another urban improvement project..

"improvement"?

Ian

In article , august@kororaa.com 
says...
> Ian Johnston  writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:03:23 +0100, Mike Dickson wrote:
> > 
> > > To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be
> > > doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and
> > > grass and that sort of organic green stuff.
> > 
> > And it only took - what was it, eighteen months and four million pounds? 
> > - to plant a dozen trees and lay some paving slabs opposite the Usher 
> > Hall.
> 
> There are trees? Was ever been a more unattractive, empty, wind-blown,
> depressing and unused bit of "civic space" that Festival Square?
> 

Multrees Walk (not strictly civic space, I suppose).

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
mike@blackcat.demon.co.uk says...
> David Liddle wrote:
> 
> >> Lifts are also a part of the deal at the Usher Hall. They will 
> >> probably be twice as fast as the trams.
> >>
> > Why does it take 18 months to build a ramp AND a lift? Did anyone ask Otis?
> 
> To be fair to the shiftless fuckers on the site, they *are* going to be 
> doing some kind of 'street landscaping' as well involving trees and 
> grass and that sort of organic green stuff. And to be fair to the 
> contractors they keep us all informed by letter as to the progress being 
> made.
> 
> 

How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down his 
pen and picked up a shovel? And with the saving they make on stationery 
and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.

-- 
Halmyre

Halmyre wrote:

> How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down his 
> pen and picked up a shovel? 

The letters are signed by someone with the forename 'Caroline', so I 
suspect that the correct answer to your question may be an unpopular one 
in these days of sexual equality.

 > And with the saving they make on stationery
> and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.

They don't mail them - they hand deliver them.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

the_tattie_howker wrote:

> On Apr 27, 6:57 am, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> Angus Rae wrote:
>>> Generally it's not distance in the case of parent & child spaces; it's
>>> extra space to the side of the car to allow pushchairs & prams to be set
>>> up and loaded. This could, of course, be done behind the car in a normal
>>> space but there's an obvious problem with that.
>> Not if you shut the kid in the boot.
> 
> That what happened to you ? Might explain a alot.

Or even 'a lot', you dim loser.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

Mike Dickson wrote:
> Halmyre wrote:
> 
>> How much faster might progress be made if the letter writer put down 
>> his pen and picked up a shovel? 
> 
> The letters are signed by someone with the forename 'Caroline', so I 
> suspect that the correct answer to your question may be an unpopular one 
> in these days of sexual equality.
> 
>  > And with the saving they make on stationery
>> and stamps they might then be able to employ some more shovel-wielders.
> 
> They don't mail them - they hand deliver them.
> 
Re-cycled green electrons

In article ,
 Mike Dickson  wrote:

> ... (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)

We don't need to be told you don't do that kind of thing, do we?

Sam

Sam Wilson wrote:

>> ... (I'm not sure why parents should only drag their 
>> children a shorter distance anyway. Once you strap the buggers into a 
>> pushchair or whatever then what is the difference?)
> 
> We don't need to be told you don't do that kind of thing, do we?

In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

In article ,
Mike Dickson   wrote:

>In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
>incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.

Finally, confirmation that evolution will ensure there are no more
Mike Dicksons.

-- Richard
-- 
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

Richard Tobin wrote:

>> In the sense that I have never felt the selfish and completely 
>> incomprehensible desire to breed that afflicts so many people, no.
> 
> Finally, confirmation that evolution will ensure there are no more
> Mike Dicksons.

Evolution has nothing to do with it; I made up my own mind about thirty 
years ago!

-- 
Mike 'One And Only' Dickson, Edinburgh

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

One of the current lanes I believe.
Just another step towrds becoming a city state.
I will just buy a bus to get round the problem.

"Marvin"  wrote in message 
news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
>I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
>this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
>completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
from the bridge.

-- 
!Speedy Gonzales!

Remove the SPAMTRAP to reply

> I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass.
> Is this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is
> it a completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?

Plan is to extend the hard sholder round the entire city bypass.  The hard
sholder would then become the bus lane.

At the moment there are no scheduled busses that travel round the bypass,
and only one route is in the planning stage.  This is the one to link St
Johns Hospital and the Royal infirmary.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=519632007
  At least 15 new bus lanes and dozens of signal priority schemes for buses
would be installed on some of the city's busiest routes under the plans.

  Dedicated bus lanes and signals that give priority to buses on busy
routes, including Dundas Street, Ferry Road and Inverleith Row, would cost
nearly £60m under the plans.

  An ambitious £100m scheme to create bus lanes on the city bypass

  Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for the Association of British Drivers,
commented: "The obvious intention is to squeeze drivers off the road and it
is not fair."


Smithy

In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> 
> From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> from the bridge.
> 
> 

Great, another stretch of road to lie empty while cars and lorries queue 
nose to tail in the other two lanes.

-- 
Halmyre

In article , 
nospam@this.address says...
> In article <CkOVh.4058$Ro3.2090@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, 
> speedygonzales@SPAMTRAPblueyonder.co.uk says...
> > "Marvin"  wrote in message 
> > news:qcudndke0odtBrrbRVnyjwA@bt.com...
> > >I read recently that councillors are planning a bus lane on the bypass. Is 
> > >this going to be an extra lane alongside the two there already or is it a 
> > >completely hairbrained abduction of one of the current lanes?
> > 
> > From what I gathered from the EEN, it looked like they were planning to use 
> > the hard shoulder, similar to what they have done on the A90 heading South 
> > fro