HLG 159/321: Difference between revisions
Trial of new info table |
Trial of slightly different style |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Subseries HLG 159]][[Category:Ringways]] | [[Category:Subseries HLG 159]][[Category:Ringways]] | ||
<table class="toc colour"> | <table class="toc colour"> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
<td | <td style="background: white; border:1px solid #AFA3BF; color: black}; font-size:12pt; padding:8px; font-weight: bold;" colspan="2">Ringway No.3 (North-West London), report by Colin Buchanan and Partners, comments</td> | ||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
<td>'''Date range'''</td> | <td style="padding-left:9px;">'''Date range'''</td> | ||
<td>1971</td> | <td>1971</td> | ||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
<td>'''Location'''</td> | <td style="padding-left:9px;">'''Location'''</td> | ||
<td>[[National Archives]] ([http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=6&CATID=8296542 See catalogue entry])</td> | <td>[[National Archives]] ([http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=6&CATID=8296542 See catalogue entry])</td> | ||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
<td>''' | <td style="padding-left:9px;">'''File location'''</td> | ||
<td>[[:Category:Series HLG|Series HLG]]; [[:Category:Subseries HLG 159|Subseries HLG 159]]</td> | <td>[[:Category:Series HLG|Series HLG]]; [[:Category:Subseries HLG 159|Subseries HLG 159]]</td> | ||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
Revision as of 13:24, 29 November 2009
| Ringway No.3 (North-West London), report by Colin Buchanan and Partners, comments | |
| Date range | 1971 |
| Location | National Archives (See catalogue entry) |
| File location | Series HLG; Subseries HLG 159 |
Context
As part of the colossal public inquiry into the GLC's Greater London Development Plan, the line of Ringway 3 in the north-west of London was investigated by the engineering consultants Colin Buchanan and Partners.
Their report outlined the need for the GLC's proposed line for Ringway 3, how it would affect development in its surrounding areas, how it would relate to local traffic problems and what alternatives existed. One alternative which was probably preferred by whoever demanded this investigation was a Ministry of Transport line for the motorway which went around the outside of the built-up area, avoiding the massive property demolition that would be required for the GLC's line.
Contents of note
- Easy to read summary of the report's conclusions, which surmises that the most destructive line for the motorway (the GLC's preferred "B" route) was the most suitable. The consultants were, however, working to the criteria that the GLC used to select motorway lines so this isn't too surprising.
- Responses from five affected London Boroughs, which is a grudging acceptance that the road is needed without actually approving the report's findings.
People with camera copies
Chris Marshall has a complete copy. Yes - that's all three pages!
