New London Bridge Station

[stimarco]

Originally Posted by mouldss@hotmail.co.u

When I look at the station building it brightens up my day, I think what great potential.
If the buildings roof was fully clad in glass as it might have been in the past with light streaming in and white washed iron work. I am sure you would not be depressed but the opposite.

A new austerity era building/station would probably depress me.

A new building need not be an "austerity" design. But even if it was, LB is no stranger to rebuilds. It's had more rebuilds than most stations have platforms! To me, this is a far more important aspect of the South London rail network's history: its constant changes. There isn't a single station serving these lines that is exactly the same today as when it was originally opened.

Even Victoria has a very different feel now thanks in large part to the holes knocked through the dividing walls. Right up until the 1950s, passengers had to walk all the way outside one half of the station to then re-enter the other half: you were under no illusions that Victoria was anything other than two separate stations built alongside each other. For commuters, the original user experience was dire: interchanges were poor even with the District Line station, which originally required a walk through what is now the bus station, exposed to the weather. Today, it's a vastly improved user experience, and all the better for it. even with the shopping centre built over a big chunk of the LB&SCR station.

The core Thameslink route has seen the appearance and demolition of Holborn Viaduct, Ludgate Hill, Snow Hill (a.k.a. "Holborn Viaduct (Low Level)") and its transformation and realignment to create the present route. The new Blackfriars station will be a genuinely unique piece of architecture, fitting into London's skyline with far more grace and subtlety than the overrated mess at St. Pancras. In the meantime, King's Cross Thameslink sits in the wan sunlight, decaying quietly to itself as the trains pass through its four empty platforms, sleeping away the days between occasional visits by journalists doing nostalgia stories on slow news days.

The true spirit of London was never founded in stasis and nostalgia, but in progress and change. London Bridge, as (according to most sources) the oldest mainline terminus in London, has never stood still. It's come a long, long way from its tiny ancestor. Now, it's time for it to be reborn once more. I do not agree that the 1850s roof should be a part of this renewal. It's an anachronism: it was never a particularly impressive roof to begin with (it wasn't fully glazed even back then), and there are far better examples of the "railway cathedral" school of architecture at Paddington, Liverpool Street and even nearby Waterloo. We don't need to add this minor mediocrity to the list when it hasn't a hope of competing with its peers—never mind that it physically won't fit any more!

If it's any consolation, the roof won't be thrown away. According to Network Rail's own website, the intention is to put the dismantled components into storage. Perhaps we'll see it reassembled elsewhere as part of a heritage railway—perhaps the NRM in York, or possibly London Underground's Acton Depot, might be interested in it as a way to extend their facilities without having to build a boring giant tin shed.