|
Post by vjaska on Oct 12, 2015 0:15:09 GMT
I wasn't on about new buildings (most look horrible and are built to standard - the 7 year old house I live in is a good example) but more that Barking & Dagenham council don't seem to care about the area they cover. It looks very dull in places, the road system in the town centre is horrific, the roads themselves don't seem to have been resurfaced in years & whilst the council replaced their streetlights on the main roads, the actual columns they sit are in a dreadful state with the majority consisting of replaced covers where the electrics are housed and paint either missing, pealing or both. Parts of inner North London are the same but not as drastically horrible - too many built up areas. Lambeth is many things but at least it looks like someone cares about the place - a lot of the main roads were resurfaced, the streetlighting stock is kept in a good order, older buildings are spruced up without losing character and the town centre is easy to navigate. Just hopefully the market finally has a canopy fitted along Electric Avenue that resembled the one fitted years ago to bring some historic class back. +1 Although Lambeth has over zealous traffic wardens, I will say some of the nicest parts of London I have been in is there, lovely houses in West Norwood for instance. Had a trip back to Haringey this evening and there is still tons of work to do, I would have put street cleaning ahead of a disastrous £87,000 're brand' that looks like a 9 year old's effort using Microsoft Paint and a mouse with a seized trackball in it Hounslow's nice, but their litter collection is antiquated, but in general the area is clean. Barking and Dagenham suffer from trying to escape from it's industrial past, but it could be smartened up a bit. But when I think of lots of areas like Harlesden, or the tatty chaos that is Ilford, Barking doesn't seem so bad Now that the work has finished at Harlesden, it's more bearable but still not a nice place. Hounslow is a nice borough, just a shame it's riddled with ugly LED's but I do like how there is so many open spaces in the area and the roads are decent too. I find Haringey a mixture of good and bad, parts are very built up and pretty dull but over towards the Muswell Hill & Archway areas, they are quite nice. Ilford is a just a big mess and is probably the only bit of Redbridge I dislike - Wanstead, Barkingside & Woodford are nice areas. Still, even Barking is better than Peckham - where's the bulldozer
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Oct 12, 2015 6:03:23 GMT
+1 Although Lambeth has over zealous traffic wardens, I will say some of the nicest parts of London I have been in is there, lovely houses in West Norwood for instance. Had a trip back to Haringey this evening and there is still tons of work to do, I would have put street cleaning ahead of a disastrous £87,000 're brand' that looks like a 9 year old's effort using Microsoft Paint and a mouse with a seized trackball in it Hounslow's nice, but their litter collection is antiquated, but in general the area is clean. Barking and Dagenham suffer from trying to escape from it's industrial past, but it could be smartened up a bit. But when I think of lots of areas like Harlesden, or the tatty chaos that is Ilford, Barking doesn't seem so bad Now that the work has finished at Harlesden, it's more bearable but still not a nice place. Hounslow is a nice borough, just a shame it's riddled with ugly LED's but I do like how there is so many open spaces in the area and the roads are decent too. I find Haringey a mixture of good and bad, parts are very built up and pretty dull but over towards the Muswell Hill & Archway areas, they are quite nice. Ilford is a just a big mess and is probably the only bit of Redbridge I dislike - Wanstead, Barkingside & Woodford are nice areas. Still, even Barking is better than Peckham - where's the bulldozer The bulldozer must be busy in Barking, clearing space for all those flimsy homes to be built in the middle of nowhere by the river Hounslow's nice, though the lighting in some parts has been missed. Chunks of Brentford escaped the LED lights and still have the sodium bulbs, such as the Half Acre and surrounding streets, in parts of Isleworth the streets are so dark because of inadequate / failed lights it's dangerous. Dark streets can attract theft from vehicle crime. As for Harlesden, it's always been dicey, with Stonebridge Park just up the road, leading into the urban hell of Wembley and Alperton. I can't forgive Haringey for that new logo, there's so much that needs to be done on a social and basic level before trying to blind people with BS... they are not an 'attitude', they are the worst borough in northeast London
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Dec 1, 2015 17:19:47 GMT
Here We Go Again! TfL has launched the third in the series of consultations for the Barking Riverside Extension Barking Riverside consultation page Attachment Deleted-Renwick Road view of the proposed bridge (source TfL consultation page) (Hope the EL2 can go under that ) -the Barking Riverside Masterplan (source TfL consultation page)Not sure if it's been noticed but I'm very pro-public consultation etc. But the amount of consultations this 4 km extension has had is ridiculous and excessive. Also I note that the extension to Thamesmead will defo have to be using a bridge as the station will still be built on a viaduct. I also note that there is an extremely small gap which the London Overground has to squeeze through in order to get to Thamesmead. Consultation closes Sunday 24th January 2016
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 17, 2016 17:09:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 8, 2016 11:41:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 26, 2016 21:01:48 GMT
Seems the TWAO public enquiry was held a few days ago. A decision by the Secretary of State upon the Inspector's findings is expected in 2017. From TfL's consultation website TWAO docs are at tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/barking-riverside-extensionFull enquiry papers are at barking-riverside.persona-pi.com/There are some very interesting plans of the scheme and track layout. Also worth reading some of the letters from the Mayor and TfL about possible extensions under the Thames and their likelihood (not at all high), relationship with the possible DLR extension to Thamesmead and options for a Renwick Rd station also being served by C2C. I'm sure there loads of other stuff but that's what I've spotted from a quick rummage around plus links on another blog.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Dec 15, 2016 10:18:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 8, 2017 18:57:33 GMT
An interesting little snippet from a recent Mayor's Answer about the Barking Riverside extension. I had not spotted that the extension is effectively capped at 4 tph because of capacity constraints on the C2C line from Barking. This also means that if 5 tph were adopted on the GOBLIN 1 tph would have to turn at Barking giving an uneven headway to / from Riverside or else an odd headway from Barking to Gospel Oak with the fifth train squashed between a regular 4 tph pattern. How silly.
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Mar 8, 2017 20:43:05 GMT
An interesting little snippet from a recent Mayor's Answer about the Barking Riverside extension. I had not spotted that the extension is effectively capped at 4 tph because of capacity constraints on the C2C line from Barking. This also means that if 5 tph were adopted on the GOBLIN 1 tph would have to turn at Barking giving an uneven headway to / from Riverside or else an odd headway from Barking to Gospel Oak with the fifth train squashed between a regular 4 tph pattern. How silly. I think part of the problem is the amount of freight traffic on the line between Barking and Box Lane/Dagenham/Tilbury. However, the DLR extension to Barking Riverside and Dagenham Dock is still a possibility in the future.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 4, 2017 11:31:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 6, 2017 11:24:51 GMT
Paper to next week's Programmes and Investment Cttee is seeking approval for extra class 710 EMUs. TfL want to order 9 more units to cover the extras needed for the Riverside Extension plus more to allow the ELL service to increase to 20 tph. There would be 3 extra 4 car units for GOBLIN and 6 5 car units for the ELL. content.tfl.gov.uk/pic-20171013-agenda-item11.pdfThe order has to be placed by 26 Oct to ensure best price and leasing terms. The paper even talks about the trains being "spot hired" in the short term to other operators given they won't be needed immediately (assuming they turn up in 2019) or to use on a supplementary service on the WLL. Looks like TfL are bidding for extra funding to allow signalling and infrastructure improvements at Norwood Junction and elsewhere. The preferred option in the paper involves some juggling of existing and new stock. a
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Feb 20, 2018 11:06:29 GMT
£500m agreement for new station, land for 7 schools, 65 sq metres of commercial/shopping etc. at Barking Riverside Link
|
|
|
Post by busman on Feb 20, 2018 22:17:26 GMT
“The Section 106 agreement, reached with the Barking and Dagenham Council and Transport for London, means the project has secured funding for: A new TfL Overground station connecting to central London in 22 minutes”
Great news. I assume the 22 minutes into central London bit is a reference to the connection at Barking?
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Feb 20, 2018 22:46:27 GMT
“The Section 106 agreement, reached with the Barking and Dagenham Council and Transport for London, means the project has secured funding for: A new TfL Overground station connecting to central London in 22 minutes” Great news. I assume the 22 minutes into central London bit is a reference to the connection at Barking? Yes, currently c2c trains are scheduled 15-18 minutes between Barking and Fenchurch Street, I'm taking the assumption the figure is also adjusted to allow for the minimal time a c2c is scheduled to take instead of the average time it's scheduled to take, implying the extension to the Riverside will add about 4-7 minutes onto the Goblin. I really do hope that they upgrade Barking Station before this kicks in because I can't imagine the station being able to deal with masses of people piling off one platform and running to another safely. Not to mention c2c is already suffering capacity wise so the last thing it needs is more people. Personally I think a tunnelled extension of the Hammersmith and City Line would have been more beneficial, despite taking longer into Central London the flow of people won't be strained onto one station. However then you have the issue of the H&C tracks needing to dive pretty deep underground to avoid interfering with HS1 and Barking Station would need a lot of construction done to it, so probably a lot more hassle than it's worth
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 21, 2018 0:13:45 GMT
“The Section 106 agreement, reached with the Barking and Dagenham Council and Transport for London, means the project has secured funding for: A new TfL Overground station connecting to central London in 22 minutes” Great news. I assume the 22 minutes into central London bit is a reference to the connection at Barking? I am very dubious about this announcement about a "new Overground Stn". When TfL presented evidence to the planning enquiry it said all of the funding was in place for the extension including Barking Riverside station. There were press releases to this effect. Now we get another announcement saying it's been funded for a second time - well that's the implication of this latest S106 deal which has only just been signed off apparently. Someone, somewhere is not telling the truth.
|
|