On 10 Dec, 13:57, wrote:
In article
,





(MIG) wrote:
On 10 Dec, 09:49, wrote:
In article
,

(MIG) wrote:
On 10 Dec, 00:34, wrote:
In article
,
(MIG) wrote:
On 9 Dec, 22:48, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 16:22:23 -0600,
wrote:

Waterloo East (NR) - Embankment (LU) (30)
Waterloo *(NR) - Embankment (LU) (25)

A reasonable OSI for NR to Embankment I suppose, but why is
less time allowed from the main station than the slightly
closer Waterloo East?

I think I'd argue that Waterloo East is actually slightly
away further

More importantly, the main, and sometimes only, route to
Waterloo East is to go through Waterloo first. *It's the
walking route that matters; not the crowfly distance.

I thought there was a route via Waterloo Road (past the
Wellington)? That's the on I thought might be shorter. There's
not much in it either way, hence my surprise at there being a
difference.

That would involve more road crossing, and I'd agree with Paul that
it's still slightly further anyway.

I'd use the that other entrance, if you mean the one in Sandall
Street, if I was approaching from the east side of Waterloo Bridge,
but not from Embankment, which would lead me to the relatively
pedestrian-friendly route through Waterloo main.

It's also closed earlier, presumably to avoid the staircase being
filled with dossers or something. *(Not related to that thought, I
passed Tom Winsor on that staircase once.)

Maybe you're right. I suppose it's the routes we know. I always
thought the route from the main station to Hungerford Bridge was
badly messed about when walkways were added and removed or blocked
over the *years.

It has been messed about, but I think it's pretty good now.

You mean they've reopened the route through the Shell building?

Ah, no (as far as I know), but that's more a route from Jubilee
Gardens whotnot.

I was thinking straight down the northeastern side of Hungerford
Bridge and down some steps and come out opposite the pedestrian
crossings and into Waterloo.