See forum guidelines.
Rule 1: Be polite and friendly.
A friendly reminder
See forum guidelines.
Rule 1: Be polite and friendly.
yes I agree. I am in my fifties but still remember what my dad told me as a kid. So Waterways if you ignore the ****** he will soon get bored and go pick on someone else. LETS just have constructive posts!
What the idiot does most of the time is just repsond to me. It is clear he trying a wind up, troll - provocation by childish foolish remarks. This is oulawed by all ISPs. He is not that bright, that is certain. It is just that he is a nuisance noise and people like this just irritate the forum members. They add no value at all.Originally Posted by liver
Returning to the topic...
Having read this thread it appears to me that the retention of the West Waterloo Dock (if that is what is desired) and the development of the canal link are not mutually exclusive. I read somewhere that this would be the most expensive stretch of canal ever built in the UK and I have no doubt that the argument ultimately comes down to money. These people don't want to develop anything unless they see a good profit in it and if they see more money to be made by infilling the dock then that is what they will want to do if they can get away with it.
Shall we review your posts Watership ? your anti-working class posts ....
And Liver your a couple of years older than me lad .
Its seems to me you all want to PROTECT heritage, but not OUR working class heritage .
Are not the docks and canals both part of our industrial heritage?
So was the wash-house so was tate and lyles , so were terraced streets ... etc etc
Hey and so were tenaments, so were the ald courts... if we want a city thats a museum...lets get it right eh ?
I think the wash houses best consigned to history (excepting the sense of community surrounding them). Tate & Lyles was a victim of the collapse of Liverpool's branch plant economy under Thatcherite monetarist policy. And the demolition of victorian terraces so favoured by John Prescott as the only solution to a multiplicity of problems is a mistake - it may be part of the solution. But lets keep this thread on topic which if I remember was the infill of the West Waterloo Dock.
Right...........so for whose benifit is a duckpond ?
They are totally mutually exclusive. The canal was to be cut into the infilled Trafalgar Dock and open out into West Waterloo Dock. Leaving the dock alone does not affect the canal in any way shape or form.
Because of the cut across the Pier Head.I read somewhere that this would be the most expensive stretch of canal ever built in the UK
They would make 4 million on the filling in of the dock. Read above. They are now filling in Princes half tide dock, which is against the pact with UNESCO. West Waterloo is in the buffer zone so that too should be left alone.and I have no doubt that the argument ultimately comes down to money. These people don't want to develop anything unless they see a good profit in it and if they see more money to be made by infilling the dock then that is what they will want to do if they can get away with it.
The West Waterloo Dock is filled in to give a depth of a bout 3 foot.
The sooner Manchester owned Peel piss off the better. They do not value our heritage or history.
Last edited by Waterways; 08-22-2006 at 03:18 PM.
Its all about the view from your new expensive apartment eh? Tory
Click here for a brief history of Waterloo Dock.
Save Liverpool Docks
First draft of web site:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/watercity/
Domain name is:
http://www.saveliverpooldocks.co.uk (will take 24 hrs to be active)
Only sensible Comments welcome.
Bookmarks