In article , Mizter T wrote:

It's easy enough to look these things up, you know.

Inside MOD's tube station:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/inside-mods-tube-station

Disused tube station sells for £53 million:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/disused-tube-station-sells-for-53-million

The information you seek is all there.

Interesting links, thankyou

Nick
--
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

In message , at 21:48:17 on Tue, 4 Mar 2014,
Mizter T remarked:
What have they sold:

a) the whole site
b) just the ground floor (in whatever way it's currently fitted out)
and below.
c) just the "below ground".

ps I'm sort of assuming they haven't sold the platform area and other
parts immediately adjacent to the line, on that level.

It's easy enough to look these things up, you know.

Inside MOD's tube station:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/inside-mods-tube-station

Disused tube station sells for £53 million:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/disused-tube-station-sells-for-53-million

The information you seek is all there.

Taking those in reverse order, the £53m story confirms that some of the
ground floor has been sold (as well as some subsurface parts) but is no
clearer about whether it's just the ground floor. Interesting that there
are garages included though (that's why I asked a few days ago if there
was any other access to the site, because a large residential property
on a central site might well be developed to have underground parking).

The "inside" story talks about lift-shafts and "lower western passages".
Perhaps some of the site is actually outside the ground-level footprint.
What's the opposite of a "flying freehold"? It also partly answers the
question about first floor and above, as it has some inside shots taken
on the second floor.

Of course, the various cadets using the building at the moment have to
be found alternative accommodation, so it's not entirely disused at the
moment. I wonder if there's some costly maintenance being avoided here?
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 21:42:17 on Tue, 4 Mar 2014,
Mizter T remarked:

Far better had it been leased out at a peppercorn rate to a museum, who
could probably then get lottery money to refurbish and open it.

You might not have noticed, but HMG are doing a fair bit of selling off
of property that's deemed no longer necessary.

They are; there's an old barracks near me that's being sold off for
housing (somewhat delayed because of the sudden fall in demand for
building land because of the recession).

There's another barracks not far away that's been closed, and may well
be sold off. That one has caused a bit of bother because the locals used
to be allowed to use the sporting facilities, gym etc, but since it's
closed they've been evicted.

However, the Brompton Rd station is a bit of a special case.
--
Roland Perry

In message

, at 15:50:00 on Tue, 4 Mar 2014, Recliner
remarked:
You might not have noticed, but HMG are doing a fair bit of selling off
of property that's deemed no longer necessary.

Indeed, and apart from the sale proceeds, the activities involved in
constructing and occupying the new building will presumably generate
on-going tax proceeds (business rates, council tax, VAT, income tax,
corporation tax, etc). It will also provide more homes, though probably not
exactly "affordable" ones. Had it stayed in MoD ownership, it would have
needed maintenance and not generated any income.

I was suggesting a museum, which would not have required ongoing
MOD-funded maintenance; and would generate on-going proceeds from the
conversion and subsequent visitors as well.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
, at 15:50:00 on Tue, 4 Mar 2014, Recliner remarked:
You might not have noticed, but HMG are doing a fair bit of selling off
of property that's deemed no longer necessary.

Indeed, and apart from the sale proceeds, the activities involved in
constructing and occupying the new building will presumably generate
on-going tax proceeds (business rates, council tax, VAT, income tax,
corporation tax, etc). It will also provide more homes, though probably not
exactly "affordable" ones. Had it stayed in MoD ownership, it would have
needed maintenance and not generated any income.

I was suggesting a museum, which would not have required ongoing
MOD-funded maintenance; and would generate on-going proceeds from the
conversion and subsequent visitors as well.

London museums don't generate any net income. The major ones are free, and
even the ones that charge admission certainly don't even cover their
operating costs. And it would still be the public purse that was paying for
the building maintenance. Some might also suggest that London in general,
and the area near Brompton Rd in particular, are already over-served with
museums.

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:48:17 on Tue, 4 Mar 2014,
Mizter T remarked:
What have they sold:

a) the whole site
b) just the ground floor (in whatever way it's currently fitted out)
and below.
c) just the "below ground".

ps I'm sort of assuming they haven't sold the platform area and other
parts immediately adjacent to the line, on that level.

It's easy enough to look these things up, you know.

Inside MOD's tube station:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/inside-mods-tube-station

Disused tube station sells for £53 million:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/disused-tube-station-sells-for-53-million

The information you seek is all there.

Taking those in reverse order, the £53m story confirms that some of the
ground floor has been sold (as well as some subsurface parts) but is no
clearer about whether it's just the ground floor. Interesting that there
are garages included though (that's why I asked a few days ago if there
was any other access to the site, because a large residential property on
a central site might well be developed to have underground parking).

The "inside" story talks about lift-shafts and "lower western passages".
Perhaps some of the site is actually outside the ground-level footprint.
What's the opposite of a "flying freehold"? It also partly answers the
question about first floor and above, as it has some inside shots taken
on the second floor.

Of course, the various cadets using the building at the moment have to be
found alternative accommodation, so it's not entirely disused at the
moment. I wonder if there's some costly maintenance being avoided here?

Was it still in use at all?

In message

, at 02:04:07 on Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Recliner
remarked:
Of course, the various cadets using the building at the moment have to be
found alternative accommodation, so it's not entirely disused at the
moment. I wonder if there's some costly maintenance being avoided here?

Was it still in use at all?

The web pages referenced say that it was still in use by the cadets, and
alternative accommodation would be needed. I hope it doesn't cost them
£54m to find some!
--
Roland Perry

In message
,
at 02:03:36 on Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Recliner
remarked:

I was suggesting a museum, which would not have required ongoing
MOD-funded maintenance; and would generate on-going proceeds from the
conversion and subsequent visitors as well.

London museums don't generate any net income.

Even ones like the wartime museum along the road from the London
Dungeon?

In any case, residential property doesn't generate net income (other
than from the PAYE of cleaners and such, the same as you'd have at a
museum. Not even council tax, as central grants are normally required to
top that up by about 200% to get to the amount the councils spend.

The major ones are free, and even the ones that charge admission
certainly don't even cover their operating costs.

What's the position for the Covent Garden transport museum?

And it would still be the public purse that was paying for
the building maintenance.

Lottery Funds.

Some might also suggest that London in general, and the area near
Brompton Rd in particular, are already over-served with museums.

They seem to have missed the tube station museum off their tourist
guides. Where is it, again?
--
Roland Perry

On 05/03/2014 08:55, Roland Perry wrote:
In message
, at
02:03:36 on Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Recliner
remarked:

I was suggesting a museum, which would not have required ongoing
MOD-funded maintenance; and would generate on-going proceeds from the
conversion and subsequent visitors as well.

London museums don't generate any net income.

Even ones like the wartime museum along the road from the London Dungeon?

I think that's now shut. The only good things I ever heard about it were
from people who were actually talking about the Cabinet War Rooms.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 05/03/2014 08:55, Roland Perry wrote:
In message
,
at
02:03:36 on Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Recliner
remarked:

I was suggesting a museum, which would not have required ongoing
MOD-funded maintenance; and would generate on-going proceeds from the
conversion and subsequent visitors as well.

London museums don't generate any net income.

Even ones like the wartime museum along the road from the London Dungeon?

I think that's now shut. The only good things I ever heard about it were
from people who were actually talking about the Cabinet War Rooms.

Seems to have closed in 2013, although some confusion on Trip Advisor -
latest review is 28-2-14 and he's pretty clear it's not the Cabinet War
Rooms he's referring to.

http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attract...n_England.html

Went a few years ago. Not bad, think we had a half price voucher or some
such offer. Like quite a few London attractions, full price would have felt
very costly.

James