On 15.09.16 20:43, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
Well, at the end of the day TfL is a public sector body responsible for
spending vast amounts of taxpayers' cash, so it needs to do so as
efficiently as it can. If they can reduce costs and raise funds by
moving, I'd say they have a responsibility for doing so, however much I love the building.

It was never big enough for modern needs anyway - every department based
in there seemed to be constantly running out of space, and if you needed
to have a meeting with someone there was every chance they'd be based
miles away and you'd spend ages travelling. Getting IT equipment
installed and working was always a challenge too. If TfL have an
opportunity to centralise in a new, fit for purpose building, I think that's a good thing.

I'm sad about it because the time I spent working in there was happy and
satisfying, and there's no doubt in my mind that it's London Transport's
spiritual home. It represents everything good about an organisation with
a long and proud history. Whenever I see a classic of LT design, like the
38 Tube Stock or the Routemaster, it reminds me that it was effectively
born in the corridors of that great building.

At least it'll still be there, anyway.

It must be very unusual for a commercial organisation (which is what the
Underground was in the 1920s) to commission, design and occupy an office
block, leaving it little changed, for almost 90 years. It's never been
extended or significantly modified in all that time (unlike the
organisation occupying it). And its fine design has always been true to the
ethos of its owner.

This also reminds me of what one might call classic rolling stock. IIRC,
Paris RER has/had some rolling stock in what looked like art-deco style.
I believe that there are similar examples in Tokyo, though I don't know
that the term "art-deco" is applicable in that case.