David Boothroyd wrote:
In article
ews.net,
"JMUpton2000" securitynovels @ freeuk.com wrote:

Would someone mind explaining a mysterious phonomena that seems to
be striking random parts of random Underground stations across
Central London?

I refer to the mysterious case of the phantom panel nicker! There
does not appear to be a station left that does not have completely
random ceiling panels missing from ticket halls, corridors and
platforms.

I wondered about posting this when it happened a few weeks ago. I'm
a Westminster councillor and sit on one of the Planning
Sub-Committees.
One application we recently decided was from London Underground and
concerned Great Portland Street Station (a listed building: had it
not been, then there would have been no requirement to seek planning
permission). The application was for the removal and replacement of
the tiles throughout the station.

You've raised an entirely new topic here. This thread was originally
about ceiling panels, which are a comparatively recent feature of
station architecture, and nothing to do with mid-19th century listed
buildings.

For those interested in more detail of the Great Portland Street case,
there is a .pdf file at
http://tinyurl.com/s7m6u . English Heritage supported the application
but the 20th Century Society objected. (Some of the tiles date from the
1920s.)

The sub-committee looked at the application and decided that it
wasn't happy the case for getting rid of such a large amount of
original features. It decided to have a site visit. When this was
announced it was revealed to the committee that most of the tiles
had actually been removed the previous weekend.

We went on the site visit to be told that there had been a confusion
when the supervisor had been told "We're good to go" (meaning to the
committee), and assumed this meant it was good to go removing the
tiles. Although LUL had claimed that the original tiles were all
badly damaged, it was quite clear that the damage was not that
severe.

If most of the tiles had already been removed, how were you able to form
that judgement? In any case damage that's "not that severe" can still
look unsightly with small chips and crazing of the glaze. Tiles cannot
be refurbished in the same way that iron, stone and brick can.

When it came back to the committee we decided to refuse the
application.

As it is now not possible to put the original tiles back, this
normally means that whoever was responsible for removing them gets
prosecuted for damaging a listed building without permission.

And how would that help the travelling public - your electors? The
application was actually trying to recreate the original look of the
tiling, which is currently a mixture of original vitreous enamel and
later ceramic tiles, some quite modern. It would revitalise a "tired
public transport facility" in the words of your officers. Your decision
appears vindictive to me. What do you actually want LU and Metronet to
do now?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)