On May 25, 7:49*am, lonelytraveller
wrote:
[long discussion about rebuilding Bank station]

Because it doesn't involve building any concourse that wouldn't
already be built in some form, and doesn't involve building an
entirely new northern line concourse, it may well actually save money,
rather than cost it.

I can't see why you think it has disadvantages?

I was extremely sceptical when I read your first post. I'm still
sceptical but now I see where you're going.

I think the key point is that IF the DLR extension to Charing Cross
happens, then these other side benefits get unlocked. And I think
that's true.

But it's far from clear that the gradient profile of the Northern
would permit one tunnel to be put under the other at Bank -- it may,
but it's a lot more complex than just moving a tunnel sideways, as
they did at Angel and London Bridge. It should be fine at the northern
end given that one tunnel dives under the other there anyway (so you
just connect the lower tunnel to the one that dives under) but the
southern end may be trickier, especially as you'd be messing with
tunnels under the Thames.