Peterborough North

[great northern]

5 minutes ago, landscapes said:

Hi Gilbert

A very nice angle, but my only comment would be to crop out some of the track work in the foreground.

 

As good as the trackwork is to me it just slightly dominates the photo.

 

This is a suggestion and in no way a criticism if your layout or photography skills.

 

Regards

 

David

Exactly what I considered before posting David, but I decided to show it as the camera saw it first, precisely to see what people thought. Here is the cropped version.

[St Enodoc]

5 minutes ago, great northern said:

Exactly what I considered before posting David, but I decided to show it as the camera saw it first, precisely to see what people thought. Here is the cropped version.

I prefer the uncropped version. It looks more balanced.

[Mallard60022]

17 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

I prefer the uncropped version. It looks more balanced.

Yup. Rule of 1/3rds and all that Jazz.

P

[landscapes]

15 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

I prefer the uncropped version. It looks more balanced.

Hi

You do have a point as Gilbert has just cropped the photo from the foreground area giving an elongated view.

 

The layout is that good with its trackwork and buildings I would crop from the right hand side and use the signal box as a focal point.

 

Either way both photos are very good.

 

Regards

 

David

[great northern]

Some early brightness this morning, but forecast not to last, and it didn't. However, I got going while it was available, and so here are a few shots showing Station Road as it now looks. It is all still far from finished of course, so please make allowance for the many imperfections revealed.

 

A path to rear yards. I like it, as it features a fence and wall I put together. Peter and I have been giving a lot of thought to surfaces, and decided that this would certainly not have been paved.

 

More discussions about walls and fences too. We think that originally these low walls had railings, which probably went during the war(s) to be converted into ammunition. They do not seem to have been replaced, but I may decree that one set at least was, hence the poory white tacked length. We can see from photos that the house to the left did have a fence rather than walls, so I acquired this one from Scale Link, which Peter thinks is a pretty good match.

 

 

 

[great northern]

10 minutes ago, landscapes said:

Hi

You do have a point as Gilbert has just cropped the photo from the foreground area giving an elongated view.

 

The layout is that good with its trackwork and buildings I would crop from the right hand side and use the signal box as a focal point.

 

Either way both photos are very good.

 

Regards

 

David

My other consideration when cropping was that this is one of the few angles from which I can show almost the whole length of a train, so I didn't want to take most of it out. On reflection, I too prefer the original.

[great northern]

On with Station Road, and a reverse angle. I photoshopped this one purely because it was such a quick job.

[great northern]

A look from the other end.

The black plasticard is the base for pathways, which have also caused much discussion. My memories of materials used in the 50s is vague, so I'm hoping that those of you with the requisite knowledge will be able to tell me more about what should be there. Apart from the ones at each end, these are not high status houses, so we don't think expensive paving is appropriate. There has to be something between lawns/ flower borders and the house walls though surely?

 

Close up of what in North Notts seems to be described a jennel.

and a look from the far end.

the slightly posher house at the end had a quite high hedge. As yet I haven't found a model equivalent which looks convincing, so this just gives a bit of the desired effect.

That really is nowhere near what is needed.

A path laid by me. You can tell the difference. The gate is deliberately just propped up, but won't stay vertical.

Another wall to finsh for now. Peter did this one, and the camera has dared to bend it.

 

Any suggestions/queries as to the accuracy of what I'm doing really would be very gratefully received.

[BMacdermott]

Hello Gilbert

 

Something of a sideline, but it would be a nice little project for someone to find out who lived at those houses through the years and, particularly, for your time period.

 

Or do you already know?

 

Brian

[Anthony]

I would have thought that, if they had pavements, they would probably have been laid with plain concrete paving stones, and laid close-butt jointed, i.e. without any mortar pointing, so nothing like the plasticard sheets with the deep grooves.  To scale, the joints would appear no thicker than a fine pencil line, and the paving was generally laid pretty level, and remained more or less so unless lifted by tree roots.  I think the stones were generally 3' x 2', and laid with offset joints along the pavement.  Don't forget a very gentle drainage fall towards the kerb.  They did get quite dirty here and there, so plenty of weathering opportunities.  Also manhole covers!

 

I imagine that the paths up to the houses might have been in probably fake terra-cotta tiles, or, being close to the brick-making industry, the beigey-grey-yellow tiles used a lot a little all around the area (mind you, we had them in our kitchen when we moved near to Huntingdon in 1952).  Either 6" or 9" square, usually.  Those trying to keep up with, or surpass, the Joneses, might have had red and black, and even in diamond pattern!

 

Sorry to sound a bit bossy, but I was a landscape gardener in an earlier life!

 

Anthony

[stewartingram]

I really don't know about this one, but...

There are houses in that row with different colour bricks. The one nearest the bridge is a little more grand so maybe correct to be different?

The others are perhaps more 'common'. But would there have been a similar wall (and particularly, a different colour) in front of the houses?  I accept that you may be correct with the styles (working from photos?) but what about colours (b/w pics?) And I can see you have only part painted some of it too. Not a criticism, just something that stood out to me.

[great northern]

8 hours ago, BMacdermott said:

Hello Gilbert

 

Something of a sideline, but it would be a nice little project for someone to find out who lived at those houses through the years and, particularly, for your time period.

 

Or do you already know?

 

Brian

I wish I did Brian, and I really wouldn't know how to start to find such information. It has all been gone for half a century, so there won't be many people still around who remember small details, I would think.

[great northern]

3 hours ago, Anthony said:

I would have thought that, if they had pavements, they would probably have been laid with plain concrete paving stones, and laid close-butt jointed, i.e. without any mortar pointing, so nothing like the plasticard sheets with the deep grooves.  To scale, the joints would appear no thicker than a fine pencil line, and the paving was generally laid pretty level, and remained more or less so unless lifted by tree roots.  I think the stones were generally 3' x 2', and laid with offset joints along the pavement.  Don't forget a very gentle drainage fall towards the kerb.  They did get quite dirty here and there, so plenty of weathering opportunities.  Also manhole covers!

 

I imagine that the paths up to the houses might have been in probably fake terra-cotta tiles, or, being close to the brick-making industry, the beigey-grey-yellow tiles used a lot a little all around the area (mind you, we had them in our kitchen when we moved near to Huntingdon in 1952).  Either 6" or 9" square, usually.  Those trying to keep up with, or surpass, the Joneses, might have had red and black, and even in diamond pattern!

 

Sorry to sound a bit bossy, but I was a landscape gardener in an earlier life!

 

Anthony

 You are just the kind of chap I need, so no need for apologies.  Tiles sound a bit fiddly, but I'll see if Peter has any ideas about how to do that. When landscape gardening, would you have allowed a design which allowed earth to butt right up to the walls of the house. Would that not create problems with damp?

[great northern]

1 hour ago, stewartingram said:

I really don't know about this one, but...

There are houses in that row with different colour bricks. The one nearest the bridge is a little more grand so maybe correct to be different?

The others are perhaps more 'common'. But would there have been a similar wall (and particularly, a different colour) in front of the houses?  I accept that you may be correct with the styles (working from photos?) but what about colours (b/w pics?) And I can see you have only part painted some of it too. Not a criticism, just something that stood out to me.

We have very few photos, and only in black and white, but Peter Leyland is well used to working from such things, and he says, and I agree, that the one nearest to the bridge is a bigger and more up market place than the rest. We both agree that was red brick too. Peter also reckons the front walls were red brick too, but there's a lot of guess work involved. It is all unfinished, and there is plenty more to be done by way of both painting and weathering. In the end, we will finish up just trying to make it look "right".

[great northern]

Just the one image tonight, but three locos to be seen, so that will have to suffice. I was back to artificial light again by this time, and doesn't it show?

[Anthony]

18 minutes ago, great northern said:

 You are just the kind of chap I need, so no need for apologies.  Tiles sound a bit fiddly, but I'll see if Peter has any ideas about how to do that. When landscape gardening, would you have allowed a design which allowed earth to butt right up to the walls of the house. Would that not create problems with damp?

Building Regs come to the fore here  They state that the soil level should be 6" (i.e. 2 brick courses) below the damp proof course (you would be amazed at the number of architects that make that impossible these days)  Back in the day the dpc would have been slate.  So no problem with soil touching the house as long as the rules were obeyed, and I suspect that in the good old days the buildings inspector would have been very rigid in interpretation, and would have certainly inspected.

 

How about gravel paths with a simple edging?  Probably by your timing not in great shape!  Front gardens full of old mangles etc.?

 

I slightly question the fence, which is using the type of fencing that is very temporary and usually with wire joins between the uprights and supplied in rolls.  I think that at your date there would be a picket-type fencing made probably of 2" or 3" x 1" with pointed tops and a similar cross-rail, posts every 6', probably looking pretty ropey by now.  If it were perfect, I would expect to see some sort of gardening effort, probably roses in keeping with what would be a better quality of resident!!!!  One or two of the other gardens might have made some effort, but I doubt whether many would have.

 

Do ask any other questions - much of this is inevitably an educated guess, as I am not quite old enough, but I did live not far away.  I remember the difference even then between urban lack of effort and village and countryside pride.

 

However, above all, it is coming together quite wonderfully.

 

 

[great northern]

Another view from the bridge, and one which firmly told me it should be black and white.

then back to ground level and B1 and D16 again. 

still cold, despite increasing colour balance as far as I dared.

[BMacdermott]

12 hours ago, great northern said:

I wish I did Brian, and I really wouldn't know how to start to find such information. It has all been gone for half a century, so there won't be many people still around who remember small details, I would think.

 

Hello Gilbert

 

I wasn't suggesting for you to do the research - rather someone already with the knowledge of how to undertake it via the relevant records offices.

 

Would make a good school project!

 

Brian

[great northern]

22 hours ago, Anthony said:

Building Regs come to the fore here  They state that the soil level should be 6" (i.e. 2 brick courses) below the damp proof course (you would be amazed at the number of architects that make that impossible these days)  Back in the day the dpc would have been slate.  So no problem with soil touching the house as long as the rules were obeyed, and I suspect that in the good old days the buildings inspector would have been very rigid in interpretation, and would have certainly inspected.

 

How about gravel paths with a simple edging?  Probably by your timing not in great shape!  Front gardens full of old mangles etc.?

 

I slightly question the fence, which is using the type of fencing that is very temporary and usually with wire joins between the uprights and supplied in rolls.  I think that at your date there would be a picket-type fencing made probably of 2" or 3" x 1" with pointed tops and a similar cross-rail, posts every 6', probably looking pretty ropey by now.  If it were perfect, I would expect to see some sort of gardening effort, probably roses in keeping with what would be a better quality of resident!!!!  One or two of the other gardens might have made some effort, but I doubt whether many would have.

 

Do ask any other questions - much of this is inevitably an educated guess, as I am not quite old enough, but I did live not far away.  I remember the difference even then between urban lack of effort and village and countryside pride.

 

However, above all, it is coming together quite wonderfully.

 

 

I must admit I did not expect to find myself searching for information about damp proof courses, but I did, and found to my surprise that they became compulsory in London as early as the 1870s. How much longer it may have taken for that to permeate down to the rest of the country is debatable, I suppose. I don't have much idea of the building dates for these five houses either, but They don't seem to be pre 1870s to me, which I suppose means that we don't have to surround every building with a path of some kind,

 

That fence is one of the few things that we can just about make out from photos, and it does look very much like the one we've used. Perhaps it was meant to be temporary, but turned out not to be? The aerial photo Steve@31A found for me suggests that most of the gardens were quite well kept, except for the terrace in the middle, one part of which looks as though it has just been left to nature, but again nothing I have allows me to be really certain. The one on the left, the one which is still there, was, I believe, originally the Stationmaster's residence, and the one at the other end is noticeably bigger than the others, so I shall assume that the gardens were cared for. The rest will allow me to use any artisitic inclinations I may find that I have.

[great northern]

Before the J11 went off to Boston an 02 crept along the slow beside it.

while on the Up, the 4.28 Doncaster-KX brought 36A based A1 Scottish Union.

 

[New Haven Neil]

On 26/01/2023 at 09:20, great northern said:

A plonk and a semi plonk* this morning, featuring the area which will see further development today. * A semi plonk is one where an engine partly intrudes. It will be popular on a small island, I pedict.

 

 

 

Just catching up - and Yes! Thank you.  :-)

[great northern]

At Little Bytham today, watching trains go by a lot more quickly than is the norm for me. At PN, Isinglass observes the 20mph PSR as it passes Station Road with the 4.52 KX-Leeds.

 

[great northern]

A very nice few hours as usual at Little Bytham, and sausages for lunch too. Then home to look again at the mysteries of the goods WTT, hoping to find a couple more fitted freights that I'd missed, but without success.

 

Isinglass features again tonight, at the North end now, and seen from both sides.

 

[great northern]

Close up of a rather run down A1.

And the 5.00pm KX-Newcastle, a Q train, which is required today, and will run into Platform 6, where it will dwell for quite a while.

[great northern]

A named train coming south, the White Rose with Grantham's newly double chimneyed A3 Prince of Wales. It will stop here.

It meets KX A4 Falcon, also very recently ex works, and bringing the Yorkshire Pullman through, no stop. Now we know why Silver Fox has been relegated to Platform 6, and a lengthy stop.