Difference between revisions of "Ringways References"

From ArchiveWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(New page: Category:Ringways This is an experiment into how references might be collated and published for the Ringways articles. The references will not be placed on the pages themselves, to avo...)
 
 
(169 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
This is an experiment into how references might be collated and published for the Ringways articles. The references will not be placed on the pages themselves, to avoid it becoming too academic and even less readable, but instead will be collated here, with each key point in the text married up with its source.
This is an experiment into how references might be collated and published for the Ringways articles. The references will not be placed on the pages themselves, to avoid it becoming too academic and even less readable, but instead will be collated here, with each key point in the text married up with its source.


Wish me luck!
----
==[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/background/ Background]==
 
===[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/background/earlyplans.shtml Early plans]===
 
{{Col-begin}}
{{Col-2}}
 
;New Road opened ca. 1756
;Royal Commission on London Traffic
:[[SJ 16]]
 
;Rees Jeffreys' ring road proposal
:[[SJ 16]] has outline only
{{Col-2}}
 
;Traffic Board for London
:[[SJ 16]]
 
;Arterial Routes built by 1930s
 
;Highway Development Survey 1937
:[[SJ 16]] has outline
{{Col-end}}
 
----
 
===[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/background/wartimeplans.shtml Wartime plans]===
 
{{Col-begin}}
{{Col-2}}
 
;The County of London Plan, 1943
:See [[County of London Plan (1943)]]
 
{{Col-2}}
 
;The Greater London Plan, 1944
:See [[Greater London Plan (1944)]]
{{Col-end}}
 
----
 
===[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/background/postwar.shtml Post-war and beyond]===
 
{{Col-begin}}
{{Col-2}}
 
;Proposal to reverse roles of A and B rings
:[[MT 95/86]] discusses little else
 
;Land for road construction not protected
 
;M1 to terminate near Marble Arch
:[[MT 112/67]] & [[SJ 15]]
 
;Motorway Box replaces A- and B-rings
 
;Eastern side was pre-existing road proposal
 
;LCC plans and omission of Motorway Box
 
;West Cross Route planning status in 1962
:[[West Cross Route: Interim Report on Stage I (1962)]] - document is dated April 1962
 
{{Col-2}}
;GLC purpose included planning of road network
 
;Consultants brought in to assist GLC with planning
:Letter from GLC to MoT (London Highways Division), 3 September 1968, held at [[MT 106/299]]
 
;GLC unhappy with use of Abercrombie terminology
 
;GLC's overall plan and timescale
:[[HLG 159/572]] has full timescale, and costs the scheme at £1.7bn
 
;Evening Standard report with incorrect cost and rehousing numbers
:''Evening Standard'' 26/05/66, "That motorway box 'could cost £3000m'"
 
;Camden suggesting higher capacity on North Cross Route
{{Col-end}}
 
----
 
===[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/background/epilogue.shtml Epilogue]===
 
{{Col-begin}}
{{Col-2}}
 
;Correspondence between Ministry and GLC
:[[T 319/1842]] has memos in 1969 asking about "killing the whole project"
 
;Estimate of cost at 1970
:[[T 319/1842]] has the GLC estimating £1,700m
 
;GLDP as biggest inquiry in British history
 
;Protest groups set up in South West London
:''The Borough News'' 16/10/70; p. 16 "Putney Motorway Action Group formed"
:Further items to be added to this list.
 
;Grove Park Group's analysis and report
 
;Coalition of South London councils
:''Clapham Observer'' 11/02/72; "Councils combine to fight M-way 'madness'"
 
;Barnes Motorway Action Group newspaper spread
:''Putney and Roehampton Herald'' 02/07/70 (held at [[Wandsworth Local History Service]])
 
;Layfield Report decision on Ringway 1
:[[HLG 159/626]] has the full decision on transport
 
{{Col-2}}
;DoE memo to Treasury recommending Layfield's proposals
:[[T 319/2655]]
 
;Government policy on Motorway Box
:[[T 319/2655]]
 
;Leaks in Sunday Times and Private Eye
:[[T 319/2655]] has details - specific editions are:
::''Sunday Times'' 11/02/1973; "The Motor Car Wins its Biggest Victory"
::''Sunday Times'' 18/02/1973; "Full Cabinet approves London's Motorway Box"
::''Private Eye'' 23/02/1973
 
;Treasury memo puts Ringway 1 "out of the question"
:[[T 319/2655]] includes memo dated 20/02/1973 from Diana Seammen to Mr Howard, stating "the Inner Motorway Box will never be implemented"
 
;MoT merges R3 and R4 to form M25
 
;GLC cancels R2 plans in favour of M25
 
;A102(M), A40(M), M41 open to traffic by 1973
 
;Motorways within Greater London downgraded
{{Col-end}}
 
----
 
==[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/ringway1/ Ringway 1]==
 
See [[:Category:Ringway 1]].
 
==[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/ringway2/ Ringway 2]==
 
See [[:Category:Ringway 2]].


==[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/ringway3/ Ringway 3]==
==[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/ringway3/ Ringway 3]==


===[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/ringway3/west.shtml Western Section]===
See [[:Category:Ringway 3]].
 
==[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/ringway4/ Ringway 4]==
 
See [[:Category:Ringway 4]].
 
==[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/northern/ Northern Radials]==
 
See [[:Category:Radials North]].
 
==[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/western/ Western Radials]==
 
See [[:Category:Radials West]].


;Route: Thames - M3
==[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/southern/ Southern Radials]==
;Route: M3 - M4 - Yeading
;Route: options at Yeading
;Route: MoT option Yeading - South Oxhey
;Route: GLC option Yeading - South Oxhey


;R3 connecting to M3 junction 1
See [[:Category:Radials South]].
;R3 connecting to M3 at new junction at Upper Halliford (inc. reserved land and property dispute)
;Cost comparison of Ministry and GLC route options
;Previous plans for D-Ring and to link M1 and Heathrow by dual carriageway
;Memo indicating urban or rural motorway standard
;File suggesting route number M16

Latest revision as of 19:19, 10 March 2011

This is an experiment into how references might be collated and published for the Ringways articles. The references will not be placed on the pages themselves, to avoid it becoming too academic and even less readable, but instead will be collated here, with each key point in the text married up with its source.


Background

Early plans

New Road opened ca. 1756
Royal Commission on London Traffic
SJ 16
Rees Jeffreys' ring road proposal
SJ 16 has outline only

Traffic Board for London
SJ 16
Arterial Routes built by 1930s
Highway Development Survey 1937
SJ 16 has outline


Wartime plans

The County of London Plan, 1943
See County of London Plan (1943)

The Greater London Plan, 1944
See Greater London Plan (1944)


Post-war and beyond

Proposal to reverse roles of A and B rings
MT 95/86 discusses little else
Land for road construction not protected
M1 to terminate near Marble Arch
MT 112/67 & SJ 15
Motorway Box replaces A- and B-rings
Eastern side was pre-existing road proposal
LCC plans and omission of Motorway Box
West Cross Route planning status in 1962
West Cross Route: Interim Report on Stage I (1962) - document is dated April 1962

GLC purpose included planning of road network
Consultants brought in to assist GLC with planning
Letter from GLC to MoT (London Highways Division), 3 September 1968, held at MT 106/299
GLC unhappy with use of Abercrombie terminology
GLC's overall plan and timescale
HLG 159/572 has full timescale, and costs the scheme at £1.7bn
Evening Standard report with incorrect cost and rehousing numbers
Evening Standard 26/05/66, "That motorway box 'could cost £3000m'"
Camden suggesting higher capacity on North Cross Route


Epilogue

Correspondence between Ministry and GLC
T 319/1842 has memos in 1969 asking about "killing the whole project"
Estimate of cost at 1970
T 319/1842 has the GLC estimating £1,700m
GLDP as biggest inquiry in British history
Protest groups set up in South West London
The Borough News 16/10/70; p. 16 "Putney Motorway Action Group formed"
Further items to be added to this list.
Grove Park Group's analysis and report
Coalition of South London councils
Clapham Observer 11/02/72; "Councils combine to fight M-way 'madness'"
Barnes Motorway Action Group newspaper spread
Putney and Roehampton Herald 02/07/70 (held at Wandsworth Local History Service)
Layfield Report decision on Ringway 1
HLG 159/626 has the full decision on transport

DoE memo to Treasury recommending Layfield's proposals
T 319/2655
Government policy on Motorway Box
T 319/2655
Leaks in Sunday Times and Private Eye
T 319/2655 has details - specific editions are:
Sunday Times 11/02/1973; "The Motor Car Wins its Biggest Victory"
Sunday Times 18/02/1973; "Full Cabinet approves London's Motorway Box"
Private Eye 23/02/1973
Treasury memo puts Ringway 1 "out of the question"
T 319/2655 includes memo dated 20/02/1973 from Diana Seammen to Mr Howard, stating "the Inner Motorway Box will never be implemented"
MoT merges R3 and R4 to form M25
GLC cancels R2 plans in favour of M25
A102(M), A40(M), M41 open to traffic by 1973
Motorways within Greater London downgraded


Ringway 1

See Category:Ringway 1.

Ringway 2

See Category:Ringway 2.

Ringway 3

See Category:Ringway 3.

Ringway 4

See Category:Ringway 4.

Northern Radials

See Category:Radials North.

Western Radials

See Category:Radials West.

Southern Radials

See Category:Radials South.