...and if they have heard of it, it will be because of the modern prison there, not the railway...
Most of the depots of old were inevitably doomed when diesel and electric traction replaced steam (which needed a small army of people to service it) and freight traffic declined. That's why most of the major 'freight' depots that were attached to major sorting yards have gone - they were in the wrong place for current traffic flows. Modern locos have bigger fuel tanks and are more reliable/need less maintenance, so small single-road inspection/light maintenance sheds and 'man-in-van' roving fitters/technicians are all the FOC's seem to need these days. Anything beyond that can be contracted out to Progress Rail etc. if necessary.
I would agree that steam needed a lot more people than diesel traction, but I would question that diesel is "more reliable" than steam. Steam locos did sometimes - rarely - have total failures, but often, if a problem occurred, they could limp on at reduced speed, and eventually reach their destination, albeit rather late.
Modern traction - particularly those afflicted with computers and connected sensors - seem much more prone to becoming total failures. If the computer decrees that there is a problem, it seems to stop the job completely. I experienced something like that last week on a new Class 195. Computer seemingly refused to believe that the doors were closed. Crew could not solve problem. Train cancelled.
During several years of steam era commuting, I never experienced a cancellation of a steam-hauled train due to failure. Yes we were sometimes late, but we always got to our intended destination without causing punctuality problems (at Uni.)
I doubt that I could expect the same level of reliability if I had to make a similar commute now.