Discussion:
Barking Reach
(too old to reply)
Basil Jet
2021-05-30 23:20:29 UTC
Permalink
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
Recliner
2021-05-30 23:38:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
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.
Robin
2021-05-31 07:27:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
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
M***@alnyn6p1i4h.com
2021-05-31 11:39:05 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 31 May 2021 08:27:29 +0100
Post by Robin
Post by Basil Jet
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.
Basil Jet
2021-05-31 13:21:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@alnyn6p1i4h.com
On Mon, 31 May 2021 08:27:29 +0100
Post by Robin
Post by Basil Jet
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
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
1999 - My Midnight - Steve Wynn
M***@3ff_8wqrqrhpe.gov.uk
2021-05-31 19:30:26 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 31 May 2021 14:21:31 +0100
Post by Basil Jet
Post by M***@alnyn6p1i4h.com
On Mon, 31 May 2021 08:27:29 +0100
Post by Robin
Post by Basil Jet
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.
tim...
2021-05-31 18:29:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
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
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2021-06-05 18:08:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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
Roland Perry
2021-06-06 06:21:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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
M***@70z8.ac.uk
2021-06-06 14:24:25 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 6 Jun 2021 07:21:02 +0100
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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.
tim...
2021-06-08 06:15:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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
Roland Perry
2021-06-08 12:38:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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
tim...
2021-06-08 14:26:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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)
Roland Perry
2021-06-09 06:22:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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
Basil Jet
2021-06-09 08:10:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
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
Clive D.W. Feather
2021-09-30 12:50:29 UTC
Permalink
In article <s9n1tv$2ji$***@dont-email.me>, tim... <***@gmail.com>
writes
Post by tim...
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
releasing the land above a railway for building domestic property
Elephant & Castle, Edgware Road, and St.John's Wood tube stations, to
name but three.
--
Clive D.W. Feather
Guy Gorton
2021-06-06 16:29:31 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:08:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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
Graeme Wall
2021-06-06 18:42:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Guy Gorton
On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:08:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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.
Guy Gorton
2021-06-08 18:39:20 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 6 Jun 2021 19:42:28 +0100, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Guy Gorton
On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:08:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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
Graeme Wall
2021-06-08 18:57:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Guy Gorton
On Sun, 6 Jun 2021 19:42:28 +0100, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Guy Gorton
On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:08:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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.
tim...
2021-06-08 06:11:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
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?
Loading...