One on going debate that has rumbled on for some time has been the state of the lineside and the appearance of the railway in general. I was wondering if with the advent of NR's recycling yard at March and a higher concentration on value for money is there now a greater emphasis on collecting redundant materials as there is a monetary value which can be reclaimed and has the regulation of worksites improved to stop the waste of materials.
On a more general not has there been more attention paid by NR to how the railway does appear to the public? I know with regards to stations much more time and money is now invested to ensure buildings etc have some aesthetic appeal rather than just a 1960's pragmatism which resulted in brutalism galore.
Lastly with regards to graffiti, rubbish and general dilapidation does it matter if the railway doesn't look its best so long as it works? Do people care? I know Tfl have a zero policy on graffiti but should NR spend cash on these kinds of issues?
On a more general not has there been more attention paid by NR to how the railway does appear to the public? I know with regards to stations much more time and money is now invested to ensure buildings etc have some aesthetic appeal rather than just a 1960's pragmatism which resulted in brutalism galore.
Lastly with regards to graffiti, rubbish and general dilapidation does it matter if the railway doesn't look its best so long as it works? Do people care? I know Tfl have a zero policy on graffiti but should NR spend cash on these kinds of issues?
