In article ,
tim... wrote:
tenants don't benefit from the increase in value of the property

No, but they presumably benefit from better access to transport.

--
Regards,
John Levine, , Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

"John Levine" wrote in message
news
In article ,
tim... wrote:
tenants don't benefit from the increase in value of the property

No, but they presumably benefit from better access to transport.

probably not from any stations south of Wimbledon

aren't they just going to keep the service frequency that they have now

tim... wrote:


"John Levine" wrote in message
news
In article ,
tim... wrote:
tenants don't benefit from the increase in value of the property

No, but they presumably benefit from better access to transport.

probably not from any stations south of Wimbledon

aren't they just going to keep the service frequency that they have now

It's not clear from the report whether this funding charge would extend to
distant stations whose existing services would simply be diverted through
the tunnel. Arguably, they would still get some benefit, but much less
than people who get a new station with a new high frequency service.

Also, it would be possible to increase services on the peripheral branches,
should there be the demand, as more services could pass through the tunnel
than can terminate and reverse at Waterloo. For example, Crossrail will be
providing 6 tph to Heathrow compared to the 2 tph HCon service it replaces.