Read the peer reviews for this feature
For over a century the railway station was the life-blood of every settlement that had one. Then they rather fell out of favour, certainly regionally. Today, stations in many of the world’s largest towns and cities are regaining a pivotal position in the way urban areas are being reconfigured for a future that cannot cope with (or accept) road-based transport solutions. Climate change, intolerable levels of pollution and a desire for more visually and environmentally attractive cities are driving change.
In Britain, these trends - albeit slower than many believe necessary - are combining with a series of crises to focus attention on railway estate, and its potential to alleviate them. Britain has a housing crisis, while air pollution in the UK is a “public health emergency”, according to a cross-party committee of MPs.
Combine these with the need for £1.8 billion of Network Rail asset sales announced in November 2015 by NR Chairman Sir Peter Hendy for the modernisation programme to continue, and a wider debate has been opened up about the use we make of railway land and stations.
There is clearly pressure from Government (and the Treasury in particular) for fast results, to reduce the call on the Exchequer to fund rail modernisation schemes and to slow the increase in NR debt, which currently stands at £38bn. This has led to an agreement between NR and the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) to identify potential sites for development.
“The Government recognises the benefits of encouraging and facilitating development around stations,” says HCA Head of Land Ian Piper.
“At the heart of the National Planning and Policy Framework is the objective of reducing the need for travel and to develop around transport hubs. Over the last six months NR and HCA have been looking at the potential for housing sites in these locations. This hits several policy drivers: more homes on brownfield land; sustainable development; and improving the passenger experience at stations.
“We are working closely with local authorities to maximise a site’s potential, whichever of the three parties owns it. The HCA has plenty of experience in putting these framework deals in place. Land can be released by the more efficient use of surface car-parking - NR and train operating companies are looking at multi-decking solutions to intensify use of an area. We haven’t considered developing air rights over stations yet, but they are not ruled out, subject to regulatory acceptability.
“The other Government priority is to secure new starter homes, so we are looking at development opportunities that will incorporate them, although the mix of development must be appropriate for the site. City centre sites are increasingly attractive to young buyers, and help to revitalise city centres that have suffered from a decline in retailing.”
Just how realistic is the expectation that £1.8bn can be realised in short order?
It is understood that NR is focusing on three areas: freight land; arches; and passenger train maintenance depots.
The most obvious reaction to the sales strategy is that much of the family silver has already gone. In a single year (1966) the British Rail’s Estate Department put £24 million into BR’s coffers, largely derived from London property sales. The peak year for sales was 1983, on the back of the hotel disposals (reaching £71m). Equally, thousands of large and small schemes have resulted in goods yards being converted to car parks, sold to tenants, or redeveloped - from supermarkets at Hull Priory, Keighley and Windermere to office blocks at Birmingham Central Goods and Henley-on-Thames.
For many of the nationalised years, there was a tension between the short-term demands of Government and Treasury for quick sales and an awareness that this policy lost the railway not only a continuing source of income, but also the chance to benefit from rising capital values. The same holds true today.
LONG-TERM PARTNERSHIPS
Stephen Joseph, chief executive of the Campaign for Better Transport, believes that some schemes would be much more beneficial for the railway if they were treated as long-term partnerships: “Fire sales for immediate funds won’t generate as much benefit as long-term deals. Sales also increase the danger of ransom strips and need for compulsory powers. The draft alterations to the National Planning Policy Framework have put in a presumption for high-density development around stations and public transport hubs. That should carry weight, and make it easier to resist short-term development that would impede that.”
It seems perverse that at the very moment when planning is increasingly being seen as a means of achieving economic goals, rather than as ‘the enemy’ or an obstacle, anything should be done to prevent partnerships being formed that would allow the railway and/or local authorities to share with developers the benefits of state-built infrastructure.
