On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:43:59 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, Alan (in Brussels) wrote:
Brian Coleman, Camden and Barnet member of the London Assembly, slammed
the decision.

He said: "It's an absolute betrayal by the government of users of the
Northern Line.

"This is the end of the project. We needed that new station, now the
users of the Northern Line face decades of misery."

Good to see society's intellectually challenged are being given good homes
in the London Assembly. Does he think LU are just going to give up on
Camden? Surely all they have to do is tone the plans down so they don't
completely destroy the town centre, and they'll be accepted.

But the plans can't be "toned down" too much or else you'll build
something that is not big enough and which will not comply with today's
safety and capacity requirements. While not fully familiar with the
desired level of capacity for the site the only other options are to dig
a new station that is largely underground thus reducing the surface
property issues. The issue with that is that it will (probably) cost so
much that there is no business case for proceeding. I think it is that
paradox that Mr Coleman might be referring to.

How about rebuilding the station above ground, demolishing what's there,
but replacing it with new buildings with the same or similar use? Markets,
venues, public spaces, not shops and flats or whatever. I think that would
address most of the objection.

Or is it that LU can only afford to rebuild if they can recoup some of the
costs through making money off property?

tom

--
Why do we do it? - Exactly!