View Single Post
  #29   Report Post  
Old October 12th 07, 06:03 PM posted to uk.transport.london
THC THC is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Feb 2006
Posts: 50
Default Shepherd's Bush WLL

On 12 Oct, 18:02, Mizter T wrote:
On 12 Oct, 13:16, THC wrote:
On Oct 10, 11:58 pm, "John Rowland"
wrote:
It's not obvious why the posts are there at all. Wouldn't fixing the lamps to the
wall solve the problem?


There hasn't really been any suggestion that the lamps are the problem
- it would seem that the platform width, regardless of the lamps, is
at fault.

That is by far the most cost-effective and sensible solution to the
problem. Expect to see the "wall" torn down at a cost of £xx million
instead...


Balls to that. If the developer is required to deliver a new station
as part of the agreement to gain planning permission, then they should
deliver a new station to the requirements. If they bodged it up they
should sort it out - and it would appear that this is exactly what is
going to happen.


As a SheBu resident I'd actually quite like to see this station open
in my lifetime (I'm 36) and so would be happy to see it open with the
minor modifications suggested by John rather than the major rebuild
you favour. I don't have access to the demand forecasts but, as a
regular WLL user, do have local knowledge and so I'd imagine that the
southbound origin passenger flows will be significantly heavier than
northbound origin flows, especially as Southern services to Watford
Junction will not serve the station. Widening the platform by
eighteen whole inches would therefore IMV seem to be a waste of money,
especially given the sum involved.

THC