Prince Charles: Let's kill off the cul-de-sac


Blackleaf
Avatar
#1
"Cul-de-sac" is a French term meaning "arse/ass of a bag", although the cul-de-sac is a British invention.

A cul-de-sac is a dead-end street - usually with houses - with only one inlet/outlet.

Now Prince Charles wants to get rid of them.......


February 11, 2007


Charles: let’s kill off the cul-de-sac

Prince persuades developers to curb ‘menace’ of suburban closes

Robert Booth


It's a dead-end for the dead-end: Prince Charles wants to rid Britain of the cul-de-sac




BRITAIN’S cul-de-sacs, long the butt of metropolitan snobbery, are now being targeted by the Prince of Wales as an environmental menace that foster crime, car dependence and obesity.

Prince Charles has persuaded Britain’s biggest housebuilders, including Barratt, George Wimpey and Bovis Homes, to halt the postwar spread of suburban closes, a boom reflected by the Channel 4 soap Brookside.

Under new guidelines, they will bring back higher density housing in Victorian-style grids, to encourage people to exercise by placing shops and amenities within walking distance.

Charles’s adviser, Hank Dittmar, director of the Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment, which is drawing up the code, said the sprawling and looping design of cul-de-sacs forces people into their cars.

Dittmar claimed that many people routinely burn a litre of petrol on a shopping trip for a pint of milk. The new code states that every home should be within a five-minute walk of a shop selling basic foodstuffs.

“If you live at the end of a cul-de-sac in a housing estate, you have to drive to a collector road, then to a main road, to another collector road, to another cul-de-sac to the shop,” he said. “If you live on a set of interconnected blocks you can walk there.”

Research from Dr Richard Jackson, the American public health expert, shows that people in car-based communities weigh on average 6lb more than those in traditional towns.

The prince’s case looks set to be backed by new government policy that will make it harder for housebuilders to win planning permission for cul-de-sacs.

A draft of the Department for Transport’s Manual for Streets, released next month, says cul-de-sacs are “a deadend road system of ‘loops and lollipops’,” that “suffer from layouts that make orientation difficult, create left-over and ill-defined spaces . . . and are inconvenient for pedestrians, cyclists and buses”.

Charles told an audience of housebuilders, in an unreported speech, earlier this month: “The car has been at the centre of the design process for quite a long time. Now we need to put the pedestrian at the centre again.”

He said a return to higher-density housing would also help promote a “low carbon lifestyle”.

“Popular wisdom is that cities produce more emissions than their ‘greener’ suburbs, but in a recent US study, households living in the centre of Los Angeles, San Francisco and Chicago only produced about a quarter of the carbon emissions of the suburban neighbours,” he said.

“This was because people chose foundation and the Home Builders Federation, whose members construct 80% of all new homes, will also seek to harness architecture to fight crime by encouraging a benign form of “curtain twitching”, with front doors facing onto the street and living rooms at the front of the house.

However, the benefits of a ban on cul-de-sacs are disputed. Dave Stubbs, crime prevention adviser at Thames Valley police, said: “Cul-de-sacs which are fully sealed are much safer and less likely to suffer burglary and car crime. It’s like in the Wild West when they used to draw the wagons into a circle at night to create defensible space. More permeability is inexorably linked to higher crime.”

However, research by London University academics has shown that if cul-de-sacs are connected by footpaths, enabling criminals to make their getaway, the chance of being burgled can be five times higher than in an open street.

History of the dead end

Cul-de-sac is a French word, but a British invention that became popular in the early 20th century.

Houses in “garden cities” could be exposed to light and air while remaining closely grouped together, writes Tom Baird.

Letchworth Garden City in Hertfordshire, founded in 1903, contained a pioneering cul-de-sac called Rushby Walk.

Sir Edwin Lutyens and M H Baillie Scott helped to design Hampstead Garden Suburb, which benefited from the first statute to permit the creation of cul-de-sacs with narrow entrances to deter cars.

A government report published in 2006 quoted American research showing that people who live in “car oriented developments” weigh 6lb on average more than those who live in towns with a “connected street network”.

People living in cul-de-sacs are 30% more likely to be burgled according to research published last year by the Space Syntax Laboratory, University College London.

Downing Street, a cul-de-sac, has been associated with the prime minister’s office since 1730.

The market town of Newent in Gloucestershire is home to the largest cul-de-sac in Europe — Foley Road.

timesonline.co.uk
 
sanctus
Avatar
#2
I rather admire Prince Charles and his views on historic architecture and beauty in buildings. A forgotten thing in today's modern world! I suspect His Royal Highness is fighting a losing battle, but God bless him for the effort.
 
Libra Girl
Avatar
#3
If Charles has seen, or ever ventured into a 'cul de sac,' I'll walk barefoot across hot coals! Where I live the nearest 7/11 store is 5 miles down the road, via a motorway, and the nearest supermaket 12 miles the other way.. no buses, no cul de sacs and no potential crime. Bliss!
 
csanopal
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by Libra GirlView Post

If Charles has seen, or ever ventured into a 'cul de sac,' I'll walk barefoot across hot coals! Where I live the nearest 7/11 store is 5 miles down the road, via a motorway, and the nearest supermaket 12 miles the other way.. no buses, no cul de sacs and no potential crime. Bliss!


That would drive me crazy being so far from anything...
 
dude1981
#5
Well, if you got lots of money that was taken from normal people, don't have a real job and live off the taxpayers, you have time to form all kinds of opinions. I can't get why the British, or us for that matter, still let these morons run around with their little titles. Put him and his old lady on a cul de sac!
 
canadarocks
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by dude1981View Post

Well, if you got lots of money that was taken from normal people, don't have a real job and live off the taxpayers, you have time to form all kinds of opinions. I can't get why the British, or us for that matter, still let these morons run around with their little titles. Put him and his old lady on a cul de sac!


Can you imagine Liz as a neighbour??? Too funny a picture..I'd be calling the police about her legion of dogs...
 
Zzarchov
Avatar
#7
The Royalty don't really need taxpayer money, they do own alot...alot alot. If they were abolished tommorow they would still live the same old lifestyle. Those are THEIR castles don't forget, unless your going to start requisitioning private property because its nice...that could backfire though when the town you live in decides your home would make a nice yarn museum.
 
Libra Girl
Avatar
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by csanopalView Post

That would drive me crazy being so far from anything...

Each to her/his own, I guess.. I love it, and so do my dogs, but I can see how some people would feel isolated.
 
hermanntrude
Avatar
#9
prince charles has said some very stupid and scaremongering things about nanotechnology, and his massive televised display of ignorance on the matter has made me dislike him intensely
 
karrie
Avatar
#10
Ah, how lovely, having someone else decide what sorts of neighborhoods you should to shouldn't be able to bring your kids up in. Personally, the cul de sac is the best type of neighborhood to let little toddlers grow up in. When your kids get old enough to ride their first bicycle, you WANT them to be in a cul de sac. It is 100% possible to still allow builders to put some of these developments into a neighborhood that still puts amenities within walking distance.

I've just come back from a househunting trip to Edmonton. Found a place, after three hellish months of trying to find something. And one of the key decisions in where we would buy was the ability of my children to play in the neighborhood. Being in a neighborhood where a__ h___'s can't get up to 70k/h on your street is important to me.
 
marygaspe
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Ah, how lovely, having someone else decide what sorts of neighborhoods you should to shouldn't be able to bring your kids up in. Personally, the cul de sac is the best type of neighborhood to let little toddlers grow up in. When your kids get old enough to ride their first bicycle, you WANT them to be in a cul de sac. It is 100% possible to still allow builders to put some of these developments into a neighborhood that still puts amenities within walking distance.

I've just come back from a househunting trip to Edmonton. Found a place, after three hellish months of trying to find something. And one of the key decisions in where we would buy was the ability of my children to play in the neighborhood. Being in a neighborhood where a__ h___'s can't get up to 70k/h on your street is important to me.

Our house is on a cul de sac. It was great to raise the kids in. Prince Charles is in no position to decide how we "commoners" should live, unless he plans to fork out the cash for homes for us that he finds pleasing..otherwise..someone should tell him to go back to the palace and mind his own business.
 
hermanntrude
Avatar
#12
personally when i read the title of this thread i thought the cul-de-sac WAS prince charles and someone was suggesting we killed him off. That'd make more sense to me.
 
marygaspe
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrudeView Post

personally when i read the title of this thread i thought the cul-de-sac WAS prince charles and someone was suggesting we killed him off. That'd make more sense to me.

INDEED! But seriously, nothing galls me more than a rich, pampered and privledged person who will be King one day making pompous statements about people's homes.
 
ottawabill
Avatar
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by marygaspeView Post

INDEED! But seriously, nothing galls me more than a rich, pampered and privledged person who will be King one day making pompous statements about people's homes.

hooray!!!! the idle rich..with idle comments!!! What is it any of his busness if streets go through or end duh!!! don't we have enough government let alone have a figure head meddling in affairs...

I can only hope we forget this foriegn head of stateafter the Queenie goes!!! Don't think I could stand seeing his profile on every piece of money I own aarrggghh
 
hermanntrude
Avatar
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by marygaspeView Post

INDEED! But seriously, nothing galls me more than a rich, pampered and privledged person who will be King one day making pompous statements about people's homes.

it bothers me too. His mother must be ashamed. She's always been a dedicated and generally good monarch. She understands she is a servant as well as a leader.
 
marygaspe
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by ottawabillView Post

hooray!!!! the idle rich..with idle comments!!! What is it any of his busness if streets go through or end duh!!! don't we have enough government let alone have a figure head meddling in affairs...

I can only hope we forget this foriegn head of stateafter the Queenie goes!!! Don't think I could stand seeing his profile on every piece of money I own aarrggghh

Absolutely! Or, if we must have a monarch, take an idea Sanctus proposed somewhere and set up an at home Royal Family living in Rideau Hall. I believe he suggested bringing Prince Andrew over and starting a valid, Canadian monarchy.
 
marygaspe
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrudeView Post

it bothers me too. His mother must be ashamed. She's always been a dedicated and generally good monarch. She understands she is a servant as well as a leader.

Everybody likes the Queen, but outside of her personally, i very much dislike the notion of us retaining this foreign family as our Head of state.
 
hermanntrude
Avatar
#18
I spose that's understandable, but when u got someone like stephie in power u gotta have somewhere else to look, eh?
 
canadarocks
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrudeView Post

I spose that's understandable, but when u got someone like stephie in power u gotta have somewhere else to look, eh?

"Stephie"???? i'm with ottawabill and marygaspe, dump the monarchy. Useless bunch of spoiled and inbred twits.
 
Libra Girl
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by canadarocksView Post

"Stephie"???? i'm with ottawabill and marygaspe, dump the monarchy. Useless bunch of spoiled and inbred twits.

Count me in!
 
ottawabill
Avatar
#21
A better place to look would be an elected senate!!! Atleast we would have something accountable there.... What btw does Steven Harper's likablilty have anything to do with the monarchy??
 
hermanntrude
Avatar
#22
i was just saying when u have a leader who isnt too good, it's nice to remember the monarch is also there. If things get really bad in the UK she can step in and tell the PM to bugger off
 
ottawabill
Avatar
#23
yes but you are forgetting that as much as Canada may have traditional ties to England , it is only tradition, there would be an uproar here if a UK citizen i.e. the Queen actually stuck her nose in Canadian affairs...

People here have generally a health respect for the Queen but I wouldn't test that by crossing lines...btw as it stands right now as much as people are not that happy with Steven Harper, they are no more happy with Stephane Dion, an election now would give us the same returns as we have right now...Possible the Liberals would win but as well have a minority.

We need better leadership, not figure heads
 
hermanntrude
Avatar
#24
I know the monacrhy seem useless but i think their effect is usually very subtle. I admit the richness and giant amounts of money that go to them is unfair, but a figurehead can be very useful in times of crisis
 
#juan
Avatar
#25
Other than contributing to "urban spread", I don't see what is wrong with a cul de sac. When our kids were young it was nice to live on a street where the only vehicle traffic was people who lived there. Sure you'd get the odd car that strayed into the cul de sac by accident but for the most part, the traffic was neighbors. We had stores and shopping within walking distance. I think Charles is being a bit anal.laughing7:
 
eh1eh
Avatar
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrudeView Post

personally when i read the title of this thread i thought the cul-de-sac WAS prince charles and someone was suggesting we killed him off. That'd make more sense to me.

Since I learned 'cul de sac' means 'a bag of ass' I can see your confusion.
 
hermanntrude
Avatar
#27
yeah he's an idiot. I grew up in a cul-de-sac and it was a good thing. It wasnt middle-class, it wasnt overly posh or snobby, and it was the perfect place to learn to ride a bike and play football
 
hermanntrude
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by eh1ehView Post

Since I learned 'cul de sac' means 'a bag of ass' I can see your confusion.


hehehehe

surely cul just means end though, really?
 
mapleleafgirl
Avatar
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrudeView Post

I know the monacrhy seem useless but i think their effect is usually very subtle. I admit the richness and giant amounts of money that go to them is unfair, but a figurehead can be very useful in times of crisis


they are so totally useless and an insult to our people. so many people are starving and like we need them why? i dont like the queen, her family or the whole system.i keep asking, but no one tells me, what exactly has the queen ever done for canada that makes it worth having her as our head of state????
 
hermanntrude
Avatar
#30
You're right. we'd be better off giving the starving kids the money. BUT the royal family wouldnt like that very much, and they are rather powerful. basically what i'm saying is your suggestion is unrealistic, whereas enjoying what they CAN give us, ie morale boosts, a great deal of charity work and someone to wave the union jack at, is probably the only realistic option anyway.
 

Similar Threads

1
Prince Charles, the Frog Prince
by Blackleaf | Jun 20th, 2009
7
Prince Charles
by retired2 | May 23rd, 2009
3
Prince Charles attacks McDonald's
by Blackleaf | Feb 28th, 2007
no new posts