I think there are a couple of issues. One is a laudable desire to
provide some nicely designed "different" buildings

Why is this laudable

This is meant to be a convenient transpoprt interchange, not a Tracy
Emin-style
work of art.

Simply because LT (as was) had a good record of commissioning high
quality architecture and design. I think there is nothing wrong in TfL
wishing to carry on that tradition.

There is nothing high-quality about this Vauxhall carbuncle, whicvh is why I
said "Tracy Emin" as opposed to "John Constable".

This is fine
provided you don't spend huge sums achieving it

Yes, the fare-payers' and tax payers' money!

Not in every case. Developer contributions can also provide a source of
revenue or can deliver enhanced transport facilities.

Patently, from what has already been written, the "enhancements" here are
somewhat debatable.

As usual, all form and no substance - but in this case eventhe form is
doubtful!

I haven't seen the finished article so can't comment.

I have: it is unspeakably ugly (from all angles) and, for example, the 36 going
Southbound must have had added at least 5 minutes to its journey time whilst
it negotiates both the structure and the the bendybuses clogging up the area.

Marc.