MT 95/86: Difference between revisions
From ArchiveWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
Add new header |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Subseries MT 95]][[Category:Ringways]] | [[Category:Subseries MT 95]][[Category:Ringways]] | ||
{ | {{Header | ||
| title = Ring roads 'A' and 'B' | |||
| daterange = 1945-1955 | |||
| nacatref = 2056488 | |||
| series = MT | |||
|Ring roads 'A' and 'B' | | subseries = 95 | ||
| | }} | ||
| | |||
| | |||
| | |||
==Context== | ==Context== | ||
Revision as of 20:16, 4 December 2009
Ring roads 'A' and 'B'
| Date range | 1945-1955 |
| Location | National Archives (see all files stored here) |
| Catalogue | See entry |
| File base | Series MT, subseries MT 95 |
Context
Much of this file deals with the Ministry's dithering over how it should try to implement the recommendations of the Greater London and County of London Plans. In particular it contains a slim report on whether Abercrombie's plan or the Ministry's plan should be carried out – the difference being which of the A and B rings should be arterial and which sub-arterial.
The report goes into great detail in describing all four proposals (ie. Arterial and non-arterial A and B rings), and also includes a schedule of all historic buildings and public amenities that would be destroyed or compromised for the road schemes.
Contents of note
- Report recommending that Abercrombie's plans be taken forward, with a less destructive A-Ring and an arterial standard B-ring.
- Diagrams of a building on Tavistock Square that was to contain a void in the basement for the A-Ring to pass beneath it.
People with camera copies
Chris Marshall has a partial copy, including the whole of the report.
