On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 22:09:19 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 20 Feb 2009 12:03:15 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 07:14:50 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 20 Feb 2009 01:08:37 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>Edgware Road, then, because it's the first move that came to mind and
>>>>I had a long couple of days. :-)
>>> 
>>> So I see by your posting time.
>>
>>And that was actually an early night for me.  :-)  But when the boss is
>>in town, it makes sense to "be seen", which means 90 minutes driving
>>(round-trip).  At least I don't have to do it in NYC traffic. :-)
>>
>>
> Too true, or 90 minutes in central London.

Yeah, based on my experience walking in central London, that's what, 
about 3 blocks? ;-)

>>> Widdershins on the circle to South Kensington.
>>
>>Ah, well, very clearly then my next move should be Hounslow West.
>>
> Your obviously either lost or want to go home :)
> 
> Heathrow Terminal 5

Well, if there's a place where both could be done, LHR Terminal 5 would 
be it.  But I want to keep my bags!

Gatwick is the next logical stop, then.  Or possibly Stansted.  I'll take 
the latter. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 20 Feb 2009 17:41:46 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>> Too true, or 90 minutes in central London.
>
>Yeah, based on my experience walking in central London, that's what, 
>about 3 blocks? ;-)
>

:) Walking in central London can be quicker than using overground transport. If you
stay off the main roads. Our blocks are smaller than your about 150 yards or less. 
When I was last in the states I could not believe the size of the blocks, but
then land is cheap. ;)

>>>> Widdershins on the circle to South Kensington.
>>>
>>>Ah, well, very clearly then my next move should be Hounslow West.
>>>
>> Your obviously either lost or want to go home :)
>> 
>> Heathrow Terminal 5
>
>Well, if there's a place where both could be done, LHR Terminal 5 would 
>be it.  But I want to keep my bags!
>
>Gatwick is the next logical stop, then.  Or possibly Stansted.  I'll take 
>the latter. :-)

Since it is the weekend let's divert and go to the "The Lost Gardens of Heligan"

http://www.mevagissey.net/heligan.htm
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> :) Walking in central London can be quicker than using overground transport. If you
stay off the main roads. Our blocks are smaller than your about 150 yards or less. 
> When I was last in the states I could not believe the size of the blocks, but
> then land is cheap. ;)

Most of the east coast cities have city blocks 1/10th of a mile on the long 
side, and (IIRC) 1/5th of 1/10th of a mile on the short side. It makes it 
convenient for knowing how far you have to go - it's 2 miles from 13th 
street to 33rd street.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 11:37:12 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 20 Feb 2009 17:41:46 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>> Too true, or 90 minutes in central London.
>>
>>Yeah, based on my experience walking in central London, that's what,
>>about 3 blocks? ;-)
>>
>>
> :) Walking in central London can be quicker than using overground
> transport. If you stay off the main roads. Our blocks are smaller than
> your about 150 yards or less. When I was last in the states I could not
> believe the size of the blocks, but then land is cheap. ;)

Heh, you should see the size of the blocks here in Salt Lake City - much 
larger than in most cities, especially in the central part of the city.

>>>>> Widdershins on the circle to South Kensington.
>>>>
>>>>Ah, well, very clearly then my next move should be Hounslow West.
>>>>
>>> Your obviously either lost or want to go home :)
>>> 
>>> Heathrow Terminal 5
>>
>>Well, if there's a place where both could be done, LHR Terminal 5 would
>>be it.  But I want to keep my bags!
>>
>>Gatwick is the next logical stop, then.  Or possibly Stansted.  I'll
>>take the latter. :-)
> 
> Since it is the weekend let's divert and go to the "The Lost Gardens of
> Heligan"
> 
> http://www.mevagissey.net/heligan.htm

Nice; it looks vaguely like the David Austin gardens we visited (but 
obviously very different), might have to add that to our itinerary on our 
next trip.

Along with Kew Gardens, which will be my next move.  My wife and stepson 
tried to take the train there last time we were there, but there was a 
problem that kept the train from Amersham from getting into town.

I think the best we saw, though, were the gardens at Hill House.  It was 
a nice, slightly rainy day when we were there.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 08:23:39 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:

>Most of the east coast cities have city blocks 1/10th of a mile on the long 
>side, and (IIRC) 1/5th of 1/10th of a mile on the short side. It makes it 
>convenient for knowing how far you have to go - it's 2 miles from 13th 
>street to 33rd street.

Thanks, I did not know that. My vague memories of Miami and Pittsburgh were of
much larger blocks. 
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 08:23:39 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> 
>> Most of the east coast cities have city blocks 1/10th of a mile on the long 
>> side, and (IIRC) 1/5th of 1/10th of a mile on the short side. It makes it 
>> convenient for knowing how far you have to go - it's 2 miles from 13th 
>> street to 33rd street.
> 
> Thanks, I did not know that. My vague memories of Miami and Pittsburgh were of
> much larger blocks. 

Well, I'm speaking of the ones where most of the layout was before 
automobiles - NYC, Philadelphia, etc.  Obviously it's not going to hold 
across the board, but in the "old" cities, it's not too uncommon. (Assuming 
they were planned at all, of course. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

On 21 Feb 2009 12:40:49 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>Heh, you should see the size of the blocks here in Salt Lake City - much 
>larger than in most cities, especially in the central part of the city.
>

My blocks are bigger than your blocks or even Darren's :)

>Nice; it looks vaguely like the David Austin gardens we visited (but 
>obviously very different), might have to add that to our itinerary on our 
>next trip.
>
>Along with Kew Gardens, which will be my next move.  My wife and stepson 
>tried to take the train there last time we were there, but there was a 
>problem that kept the train from Amersham from getting into town.
>
>I think the best we saw, though, were the gardens at Hill House.  It was 
>a nice, slightly rainy day when we were there.


Hampton Court Palace
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 08:37:07 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 08:23:39 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> 
>>> Most of the east coast cities have city blocks 1/10th of a mile on the long 
>>> side, and (IIRC) 1/5th of 1/10th of a mile on the short side. It makes it 
>>> convenient for knowing how far you have to go - it's 2 miles from 13th 
>>> street to 33rd street.
>> 
>> Thanks, I did not know that. My vague memories of Miami and Pittsburgh were of
>> much larger blocks. 
>
>Well, I'm speaking of the ones where most of the layout was before 
>automobiles - NYC, Philadelphia, etc.  Obviously it's not going to hold 
>across the board, but in the "old" cities, it's not too uncommon. (Assuming 
>they were planned at all, of course. :-)

That makes sense of course. It's just that I grew up in a place that the only
planning was to go up when there was a hill and down in a valley ;)
There are lots of strange shaped intersections and areas called "the new town"
because they were built only 200 years ago. :P
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 22:04:50 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 21 Feb 2009 12:40:49 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>Heh, you should see the size of the blocks here in Salt Lake City - much
>>larger than in most cities, especially in the central part of the city.
>>
>>
> My blocks are bigger than your blocks or even Darren's :)

How big are your blocks? ;-)

>>Nice; it looks vaguely like the David Austin gardens we visited (but
>>obviously very different), might have to add that to our itinerary on
>>our next trip.
>>
>>Along with Kew Gardens, which will be my next move.  My wife and stepson
>>tried to take the train there last time we were there, but there was a
>>problem that kept the train from Amersham from getting into town.
>>
>>I think the best we saw, though, were the gardens at Hill House.  It was
>>a nice, slightly rainy day when we were there.
> 
> 
> Hampton Court Palace

Really?

Hounslow Central, then.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 22 Feb 2009 18:06:46 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>>>Heh, you should see the size of the blocks here in Salt Lake City - much
>>>larger than in most cities, especially in the central part of the city.
>>>
>>>
>> My blocks are bigger than your blocks or even Darren's :)
>
>How big are your blocks? ;-)
>

No, I was speaking for you. :)
Our blocks are too irregular to say. Just looking on a local map they range from
60 ft to 350 yards


>> 
>> Hampton Court Palace
>
>Really?
>
>Hounslow Central, then.

Yes

Brentford, then.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message