Barking Reach
According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. -- Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to 2020 - Pain Olympics - Crack Cloud |
Barking Reach
Basil Jet wrote:
According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. It would still be in danger of flooding. |
Barking Reach
On 31/05/2021 00:20, Basil Jet wrote:
According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. If you mean "the plan here is for the A13 dual carriageway to be moved underground to make space for new housing" I don't think that's new or firm. The 2 boroughs have lobbied for it for some years. They claimed they have TfL's support in principle. But last I heard was their seeking funding in the 2020 spending review for £m5 for detailed planning. So a long way off a firm, fund project. -- Robin reply-to address is (intended to be) valid |
Barking Reach
On Mon, 31 May 2021 08:27:29 +0100
Robin wrote: On 31/05/2021 00:20, Basil Jet wrote: According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. If you mean "the plan here is for the A13 dual carriageway to be moved underground to make space for new housing" I don't think that's new or firm. The 2 boroughs have lobbied for it for some years. They claimed they have TfL's support in principle. But last I heard was their seeking funding in the 2020 spending review for £m5 for detailed planning. So a long way off a firm, fund project. Given that one of the benefits of brexit is that 1.3 million EU migrants have cleared off there seems to be a lot of debate in the papers about whether all this new housing is required now. |
Barking Reach
"Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of |
Barking Reach
On Mon, 31 May 2021 14:21:31 +0100
Basil Jet wrote: On 31/05/2021 12:39, wrote: On Mon, 31 May 2021 08:27:29 +0100 Robin wrote: On 31/05/2021 00:20, Basil Jet wrote: According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. If you mean "the plan here is for the A13 dual carriageway to be moved underground to make space for new housing" I don't think that's new or firm. The 2 boroughs have lobbied for it for some years. They claimed they have TfL's support in principle. But last I heard was their seeking funding in the 2020 spending review for £m5 for detailed planning. So a long way off a firm, fund project. Given that one of the benefits of brexit is that 1.3 million EU migrants have cleared off there seems to be a lot of debate in the papers about whether all this new housing is required now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong Not one of Boris's smartest decisions, but hopefully most of them will go to Singapore, Aus or somewhere else closer in distance and culture to HK than the UK. So far there doesn't seem to be a mass exodus anyway. |
Barking Reach
tim... wrote:
"Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Anna Noyd-Dryver |
Barking Reach
In message , at 18:08:07 on Sat, 5 Jun 2021,
Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked: tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Several London stations, of which Victoria and Liverpool St are probably the best known. Birmingham New St? -- Roland Perry |
Barking Reach
On Sun, 6 Jun 2021 07:21:02 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 18:08:07 on Sat, 5 Jun 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked: tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Several London stations, of which Victoria and Liverpool St are probably the best known. Birmingham New St? Dalston Junction has a 10-ish story block of flats on top of it now along with a lot of other housing. |
Barking Reach
On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:08:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
wrote: tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Anna Noyd-Dryver GX my home territory. Just in case anyone does not know all about it, there is lots of stuff on my website at www.meadwaypark.co.uk. I apologise for its technical simplicity, which I have been told about by many experts. Guy Gorton |
Barking Reach
On 06/06/2021 17:29, Guy Gorton wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:08:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Anna Noyd-Dryver GX my home territory. Just in case anyone does not know all about it, there is lots of stuff on my website at www.meadwaypark.co.uk. I apologise for its technical simplicity, which I have been told about by many experts. Does the job! My only comment is that one shot on the west side of Packhorse Road is the wrong aspect ratio, the one of Brox. -- Graeme Wall This account not read. |
Barking Reach
"Anna Noyd-Dryver" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Yes I know that there's *one" example If it's such a cost effective idea, why aren't there others? |
Barking Reach
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 18:08:07 on Sat, 5 Jun 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked: tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Several London stations, of which Victoria and Liverpool St are probably the best known. Birmingham New St? I don't think that the building of shops above a railway station concourse (or even above the tracks), which are commercially enhanced by the value of the footfall through the station, creates a valid economic comparison with: releasing the land above a railway for building domestic property |
Barking Reach
In message , at 07:15:26 on Tue, 8 Jun 2021,
tim... remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 18:08:07 on Sat, 5 Jun 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked: tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Several London stations, of which Victoria and Liverpool St are probably the best known. Birmingham New St? I don't think that the building of shops above a railway station concourse (or even above the tracks), which are commercially enhanced by the value of the footfall through the station, You may have forgotten that the developments above London Victoria, Liverpool St and Cannon St, to name but a few, are mainly offices. -- Roland Perry |
Barking Reach
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 07:15:26 on Tue, 8 Jun 2021, tim... remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 18:08:07 on Sat, 5 Jun 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked: tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Several London stations, of which Victoria and Liverpool St are probably the best known. Birmingham New St? I don't think that the building of shops above a railway station concourse (or even above the tracks), which are commercially enhanced by the value of the footfall through the station, You may have forgotten that the developments above London Victoria, Liverpool St and Cannon St, to name but a few, are mainly offices. Central London termini are still a fringe condition compared with suburban rail lines (and roads, which is where we started) |
Barking Reach
On Sun, 6 Jun 2021 19:42:28 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote: On 06/06/2021 17:29, Guy Gorton wrote: On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:08:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Anna Noyd-Dryver GX my home territory. Just in case anyone does not know all about it, there is lots of stuff on my website at www.meadwaypark.co.uk. I apologise for its technical simplicity, which I have been told about by many experts. Does the job! My only comment is that one shot on the west side of Packhorse Road is the wrong aspect ratio, the one of Brox. How right you are. Definitely compressed horizontally. Sorry about that. Why does Brox excite you ? Guy Gorton |
Barking Reach
On 08/06/2021 19:39, Guy Gorton wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jun 2021 19:42:28 +0100, Graeme Wall wrote: On 06/06/2021 17:29, Guy Gorton wrote: On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:08:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Anna Noyd-Dryver GX my home territory. Just in case anyone does not know all about it, there is lots of stuff on my website at www.meadwaypark.co.uk. I apologise for its technical simplicity, which I have been told about by many experts. Does the job! My only comment is that one shot on the west side of Packhorse Road is the wrong aspect ratio, the one of Brox. How right you are. Definitely compressed horizontally. Sorry about that. Why does Brox excite you ? Not at all :-0 just happened to notice the aspect ratio, professional interest. -- Graeme Wall This account not read. |
Barking Reach
In message , at 15:26:21 on Tue, 8 Jun 2021,
tim... remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message news:BflpGsSGT2vgF ... In message , at 07:15:26 on Tue, 8 Jun 2021, tim... remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message news:8v3mqASOlGv ... In message , at 18:08:07 on Sat, 5 Jun 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked: tim... wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... According to the new Modern Railways, the existing A13 is going to be buried as it goes near Barking Reach to create room for more housing. Meanwhile, the entire new railway to Barking Reach is built on a viaduct. They say that the water table is pretty high there, but while that would create problems for tunnelling, I don't think it would be too much of a problem for cut and cover. I find it incredible that someone thinks that putting a restricted access highway in a tunnel is a cost effective way of releasing land for housing if it was every restricted access road in London could be so re-sited. But I don't see anyone suggesting that we do this with other roads. Or even with us putting railways in tunnels so that they can be built on top of Gerrard's Cross? Several London stations, of which Victoria and Liverpool St are probably the best known. Birmingham New St? I don't think that the building of shops above a railway station concourse (or even above the tracks), which are commercially enhanced by the value of the footfall through the station, You may have forgotten that the developments above London Victoria, Liverpool St and Cannon St, to name but a few, are mainly offices. Central London termini are still a fringe condition compared with suburban rail lines (and roads, which is where we started) Although the project has been mis-represented (or at very least mis-understood). The new houses are "adjacent" to the tunnel, and the main reason for the tunnel isn't to merely gain some square footage (for 5,000 homes initially, and another 28,000 later) but mainly to segregate the long distance traffic from the local neighbourhood which is currently "severed". Therefore your incredulity (expressed above) concerns something that's not even the gist of the proposal. "Routing the A13 underground will remove a significant physical barrier to people moving between the north and south of the borough. This will make other brownfield sites in the borough more attractive to developers, including Barking Riverside (10,800 homes), Creekmouth (3,000 homes), Thames Road (2,000 homes), Barking town centre (5,000 homes) and Beam Park and Ford Stamping Plant (3,500 homes). The tunnel would also act as a catalyst for regeneration across the whole of this part of east London, including the potential for 4,000 homes at Beam Park and Rainham in Havering" -- Roland Perry |
Barking Reach
On 09/06/2021 07:22, Roland Perry wrote:
Although the project has been mis-represented (or at very least mis-understood). The new houses are "adjacent" to the tunnel, and the main reason for the tunnel isn't to merely gain some square footage (for 5,000 homes initially, and another 28,000 later) but mainly to segregate the long distance traffic from the local neighbourhood which is currently "severed". Therefore your incredulity (expressed above) concerns something that's not even the gist of the proposal. "Routing the A13 underground will remove a significant physical barrier to people moving between the north and south of the borough. This will make other brownfield sites in the borough more attractive to developers, including Barking Riverside (10,800 homes), Creekmouth (3,000 homes), Thames Road (2,000 homes), Barking town centre (5,000 homes) and Beam Park and Ford Stamping Plant (3,500 homes). The tunnel would also act as a catalyst for regeneration across the whole of this part of east London, including the potential for 4,000 homes at Beam Park and Rainham in Havering" A tunnel under the Thames would do all of that a lot better! -- Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to 1991 - Laughter & Lust - Joe Jackson |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:48 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk