London Banter
Page 11 of 11 « First 45678910 11
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

London Banter (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/forum.php)
-   London Transport (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/)
-   -   Edgware Road: The interchange from hell (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/10177-edgware-road-interchange-hell.html)

Michael R N Dolbear January 1st 10 06:53 PM
Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 
wrote in article

(Michael Dolbear) wrote:

If you look carefully at the boundary between Surrey and Middlesex
(now
between Elmbridge or Runnymede and Spelthorne) you will see the
boundary is not the river Thames but where the river Thames used to
be.
So it's "recent", but more geologically "recent" than
geographically so.

As that anomaly appears to affect what look like inhabited properties
I'm
surprised that's not been tidied up in the last 46 years.

And at least one hotel, Shepperton Moat House (or whatever it is called
this week).

I assume everyone thought that losing the minor inconveniences wasn't
worth the disruption. There is also an area round Walton Bridge which
is "Surrey side" but part of Spelthorne. Not only that but the land is
owned by Elmbridge. On the whole Elmbridge not being able to give
themselves planning permissions is probably a good thing.

--
Mike D

[email protected] January 1st 10 09:18 PM
Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 
In article 01ca8b1a$5b8a95e0$LocalHost@default, (Michael
R N Dolbear) wrote:

 wrote in article

(Michael Dolbear) wrote:

If you look carefully at the boundary between Surrey and Middlesex
(now between Elmbridge or Runnymede and Spelthorne) you will see the
boundary is not the river Thames but where the river Thames used to
be. So it's "recent", but more geologically "recent" than
geographically so.

As that anomaly appears to affect what look like inhabited properties
I'm surprised that's not been tidied up in the last 46 years.

And at least one hotel, Shepperton Moat House (or whatever it is called
this week).

I assume everyone thought that losing the minor inconveniences wasn't
worth the disruption. There is also an area round Walton Bridge which
is "Surrey side" but part of Spelthorne. Not only that but the land is
owned by Elmbridge. On the whole Elmbridge not being able to give
themselves planning permissions is probably a good thing.

Other anomalous boundaries have been tidied up in the same period so I
doubt that's the reason. I think the Greater London boundary has had two
revisions in the time, including around Heathrow (the London boundary used
to go through the middle of the airport).

--
Colin Rosenstiel


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:12 AM.
Page 11 of 11 « First 45678910 11
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk