It is interesting and I find it hard to disagree with much of what he says. And that's coming from a North-West resident!
But it's not 100% factual; there's a fair amount of opinion in there, and of course, only one side of the story is given. Costs regarding the sale of TV Centre vs the costs of the Salford move do not take into account the future ongoing costs of both. And it's hard to argue with the fact that a lot of the studios at TVC were sitting derelict, and not just after they decided to sell.
Don't get me wrong, I'm against what has happened to TVC. But we can't just take everything he says as gospel.
Oh, and Jimmy Saville was NOT from Salford! Do Londoners not know the difference between Salford and Leeds?!??
Oh, and Jimmy Saville was NOT from Salford! Do Londoners not know the difference between Salford and Leeds?!??
I had to check the detail as to why Roger made this comment as at face value it is wrong. Apparently Savile lived in Salford for around 10 years from the mid 50s to the mid 60s....hence Rogers "throw away" tongue in cheek comment.
Going back to the original question though, as the BB house is to be "National Trusted", should TVC also be considered?
Part is covered by English Heritage although if the BB house is worthy, should not the venue for 50 years of TV heritage also be worthy of the same?
Oh, and Jimmy Saville was NOT from Salford! Do Londoners not know the difference between Salford and Leeds?!??
I had to check the detail as to why Roger made this comment as at face value it is wrong. Apparently Savile lived in Salford for around 10 years from the mid 50s to the mid 60s....hence Rogers "throw away" tongue in cheek comment.
Going back to the original question though, as the BB house is to be "National Trusted", should TVC also be considered?
Part is covered by English Heritage although if the BB house is worthy, should not the venue for 50 years of TV heritage also be worthy of the same?
Is Tvc not a grade 2 listed building which means it can't be knocked down or major work done without going through a lot of red tape. I'm sure I read somewhere that the original BBC logo has to be placed back on the building once they moved out as it had been listed
The interior of TVC certainly isn't listed, as if it was, they wouldn't have allowed Top Gear to cause all that damage with the motorbike, with nowhere off limits.
The interior of TVC certainly isn't listed, as if it was, they wouldn't have allowed Top Gear to cause all that damage with the motorbike, with nowhere off limits.
Some elements of the interior are listed I believe - particularly the mosaic in Stage Door (formerly Main Reception prior to Stage VI)
Many fine points - but sadly the horse bolted a long time ago. I think probably around the time the decision was made to make the move to Salford.
The BBC really is its own worst enemy sometimes. See also its decision to outsource the World Service control rooms, and some maintenance departments - which it's now taking back in house. I've heard scurrilous rumours that they're not going to be the last bits of insourcing.
Salford is made out to be the bad boy in the story but the redevelopment of BH and the buildings down the road around White City took away probably more of TV Centre's work.
The article makes some good points (although most have been made many many times before) but is a little out in a few areas. It's worth remembering that TV Centre as it is now isn't the perfect masterpiece of architecture that some make it out to be. The studios are good of course, and that's what gets the attention, but for every studio there's lots of substandard offices and other outdated areas. His point about CCA is a partially irrelevant one as it would probably have had to have had a massive upgrade whatever happened to the building, possibly a move too - some related functions moved out of London years ago.
As he points out, the centre was built to be adaptable and extendable, but that's also what has sealed it's fate... extensions and other features that were added for particular and very specific reasons. The centre was continuously made fit for purpose but now most of that purpose has now disappeared for all sorts of reasons.
If the BBC don't want it or need it then no-one else is going to - whatever happened it would have had to have had major reconstruction to streamline the site and bring everything up to spec. Which I assume is why the price was so low for a building of that size (remember just the building was sold, not the land) - very little of the many buildings is actually of any use as it is. The BBC place in Salford (which of course isn't actually a BBC building) isn't iconic but when they move out of it in 30 years time it will be a lot more desirable for a new tennant