ITC completes national HSR workshop series

The Independent Transport Commission (ITC) has been running a major work stream investigating the spatial effects of High Speed Rail (HSR), and the opportunities that an extended network might bring to the UK’s cities and regions. Public and media perceptions of the potential of High Speed Rail have been strongly focused on the speed of the journey, rather than on the benefits it could generate in terms of improved connectivity, increased capacity across the system, convenience, and economic synergies. Following a Call for Evidence in late 2012, which drew a strong response and raised wide-ranging connectivity and impact issues, the next stage of the project is fostering the exploration of these issues and improving collaboration at the city-region level through a series of workshops in key regions during the Spring and Summer of 2013.

The workshops all involved a number of leading stakeholders, including representatives from the combined authority and local government, academics, business leaders, transport specialists, and experts who had responded to the ITC’s Call for Evidence. The format of the evening workshops involved short presentations on submissions to the Call for Evidence, followed by a structured discussion of the likely spatial effects of HSR chaired by ITC Commissioner John Worthington.


Birmingham city-region

Birmingham workshop

The first of these workshops took place in Birmingham on the evening of 18th April, and was kindly hosted by Glenn Howells Architects in their splendid meeting room with views over the city and the site of the proposed new HSR station. Representatives from Network Rail, the Department for Transport (DfT) and Birmingham City Council were in attendance alongside more regionally focused organisations such as local architectural practices, the local airport authority and surrounding municipality local authorities.

  • There were local concerns that the
    Black Country might become excluded
    from the benefits HSR can bring to
    the region. The importance of
    regional co-operation and good
    governance was a recurring theme:
    this was seen as essential if the
    spatial benefits of HSR were to be
    fully captured. A number of
    participants argued for stronger
    regional leadership and greater
    clarity about the purpose and
    identity of the wider city-region.
  • Airports are an important aspect of
    capturing the spatial effects of HSR.
    In Birmingham there is an excellent
    opportunity to create a travel hub at
    Birmingham Airport and make better
    use of its spare capacity.
  • To
    capture the spatial benefits of HSR
    additional investment is required in
    local small-scale connections which
    were often vital. This should be
    seen in the context of reform of our
    planning systems, perhaps giving
    greater autonomy to city regions in
    decision-making so that we counteract
    the deep-seated attachment to
    centralized control of such
    decisions, and take into account
    local aspirations. In addition,
    better communication was necessary so
    that the local business community
    understood the spatial benefits that
    such infrastructure could bring.
  • The need to identify small projects
    that can begin soon in order to
    improve the chances of success once
    HSR is built. For example, Birmingham
    could improve connections under the
    current raised rail line so that the
    proposed station does not become a
    barrier. In addition, Network Rail
    replaces half its infrastructure
    every 20 years – by the time HSR is
    built there is a great opportunity to
    ensure that the local rail network is
    well-positioned to capture the
    connectivity advantages of the High
    Speed line.
  • The need to speed up
    innovative thinking and bypass
    entrenched viewpoints by stimulating
    local co-operation and developing a
    regional vision for the places HSR
    will serve. Such networks and
    political/social engagement will be
    vital if city-regions such as
    Birmingham can capture the spatial
    benefits of HSR.

Leeds and Yorkshire region

Leeds workshop

The second of these workshops was held on the evening of 7th May for the Leeds and Yorkshire region. This was kindly hosted by Carlsberg UK at Tetley House with excellent views across Leeds South bank redevelopment area and the site of the city’s proposed new HSR station. Attendees included representatives from local councils within the Leeds City Region as well as local groups such as Leeds Sustainable Development Group, SusTrans, Yorkshire for HS3 and HS2 Ltd.

  • We should consider carefully the
    impact of HSR on second-tier,
    peripheral towns in the wider region
    such as Hull and Middlesbrough. Such
    places could see disbenefits as
    investment shifted towards first-tier
    cities with HSR connections. Other
    experts disagreed, and pointed to
    benefits that HSR could generate for
    such towns, including more frequent
    standard rail services as a result of
    released capacity, and the economic
    advantages of being plugged into a
    more successful regional hub city.
  • A recurring theme was the need to
    address the sustainability impacts of
    HSR. A number argued that
    developments around HSR nodes should
    be designed so that they create
    compact, livable and higher density
    sustainable communities. Others
    warned that in car- friendly cities,
    such as Leeds, without reappraising
    the paradigm of urban living, HSR
    could result in additional car travel
    and congestion as users drive to the
    station.
  • Many participants noted
    that it would take 20 years for HSR
    to begin serving Leeds, and the
    region should respond appropriately
    to this long wait. Some expressed
    concern that areas such as Leeds
    south bank would be blighted for
    decades as developers waited for HSR
    to arrive before investing. As a
    result, it was even more important in
    the meantime to identify actions and
    investment in the region that would
    strengthen connectivity and enhance
    the quality of place.
  • Create a
    positive and pro-active approach,
    bringing together the public,
    business and civic communities to
    collaborate across the regions in
    order to establish a vision for each
    city’s own future. The evidence
    presented by the Leeds Sustainable
    Development group (LSDG) highlighted
    the role of civic society and the
    catalytic role HSR could have in
    bringing together the public, as well
    as business and civic sectors around
    a common aim of improving livelihoods
    and making better places.
  • Cities
    and regions must develop a strong
    case for rail investment based on
    their own economic needs and
    strengths. For example, Tees Valley’s
    strengths are in petrochemical
    industries and its ports: as a result
    additional freight capacity is a key
    need. The resulting narrative for HSR
    must be clear about the economic
    advantages of the project in terms of
    jobs and business investment.
  • The
    development of local and national
    networks will be important for
    preparing the ground for HSR so that
    it fully benefits the North of
    England and could contribute to the
    rebalancing of the UK economy in
    favour of the North. Local groups
    should ensure they submit high
    quality submissions to forthcoming
    consultations, including the Phase 2
    HSR consultation, and the Network
    Rail market studies (which are
    currently open for consultation).
    Local/regional interest groups should
    also start preparing their case for
    rail investment and understand any
    current or potential capacity
    constraints ahead of the next Rail
    HLOS that is due to be completed in
    2017.

Manchester city-region

Manchester workshop

The third workshop in the series on the 23rd May in Manchester for the North-West region, kindly hosted by Bruntwood in City Tower with superb views across the region and the site of the proposed HSR city centre station. Attendees included representatives from AECOM, Network Rail and Transport for Greater Manchester, alongside local authorities, property developers and image consultants.

  • Important benefits to the North-West region could arise from improved rail capacity for both freight and passenger services on the national network, better local and international connectivity, additional inward investment as a result of that connectivity, and the catalytic effects of HSR on local and regional regeneration.
  • High Speed Rail stations have the potential to become gateways into the region, both nationally and internationally (when connected to Airports). This makes it particularly important that HSR stations are well designed and well connected to local transport services. Several delegates noted that it would be critical to provide good connections to second-tier cities such as Oldham and Bolton if they also were to benefit from the HSR hubs at Manchester Airport and Manchester city. It was added that the Northern Hub is a pathway for this, putting in place the local connectivity in advance of HSR. Others pointed out that station design would be important at a local level in order that the stations could encourage regeneration and do not become a barrier to pedestrians. At Manchester Airport delegates warned that the station should not ‘sit in a field’ but be plugged into local redevelopment.
  • The special governance structure in Greater Manchester, whereby the city, surrounding districts, and transport executive worked together as the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) was thought to be an advantage in terms of preparing for the opportunities that HSR would bring. The Authority and the LEP also shared the same boundaries and this was expected to help in the formation of a common agenda to prepare for HSR.
  • Business leaders highlighted the benefits of HSR for local enterprise and employment. These benefits included a greater catchment area for employment, the ability to attract a wider pool of talented people, and the improved links that HSR would provide to mainland Europe. A participant from the creative sector stressed the potential impact HSR could have on Manchester’s identity as a leading European centre of creativity and innovation.
  • Messages have to be made relevant to the experiences of ordinary citizens. Current initiatives by local transport user groups to map and make more legible the connectivity between various modes of transport should be supported.
  • A regional partnership should be developed in order to promote a connected and positive vision of the benefits of HSR for the region. It was agreed that Manchester and the North-West had a strong brand which had international appeal. The mood of the workshop was of a city region confident and optimistic about its aspirations and expectations for the future. The Government and HS2 Ltd were encouraged to invest in such a partnership in order to bolster regional support for the project.
  • Enhanced investment in local and national transport would be critical. The ‘Northern Hub’ rail upgrade and associated schemes were deemed a prerequisite for making the most of the benefits of HSR. Others argued that the prospect of HSR should be used as a catalyst to stimulate this transport investment, much of which should take place regardless of the HS2 scheme. Awareness of the way HSR would change the geography of the North would also be important, recognising the combined strength of the Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield City Regions.

London and South-East mega-city region

The fourth workshop in the series on the 25th June was held in London for the Greater London and South- East region, kindly hosted by Grosvenor in their auditorium in Mayfair. Attendees included representatives from transport providers such as Transport for London, Network Rail and Siemens, alongside property developers, engineering firms, academic institutions, and private consultancies.

  • HSR must be part of an integrated
    transport system, including road
    transport, the national rail network
    and airports. In the London region
    this will require careful thought,
    especially around the proposed
    interchange stations and the link
    with High Speed 1. Old Oak Common
    could become a transport super-hub if
    properly connected with Heathrow, and
    the site is more accessible than
    Euston within the Greater London
    area. Crossrail 2 will, nonetheless,
    be an essential step towards
    improving Euston’s accessibility. The
    legacy of poor station access can be
    extremely costly, so a strong vision
    for urban and transport integration
    at each site will be critical.
  • There are major economic benefits
    arising from major transport
    infrastructure projects, and HSR
    plans should be used to capture this
    opportunity. In London, good examples
    exist of the potential of major
    transport projects to unlock local
    growth, and lessons can be learned
    from experience with Crossrail and
    the Jubilee Line Extension. The
    transport capacity benefits for the
    London region arising from HSR and
    Crossrail could be significant, and
    have the potential to boost economic
    and population growth.
  • In order to
    capture the benefits of HSR a grand
    plan is needed for integrating it
    into the nation’s infrastructure. A
    special delivery vehicle such as a
    National Networks Policy Statement,
    might also be necessary to provide
    confidence for private sector
    businesses and developers.
  • HSR has
    the potential to spread the wealth of
    London and the South-East to the
    regions. Plans for HSR must build in
    good connectivity if the project is
    to rebalance the UK economy. A major
    challenge will be how our cities can
    act collaboratively in order to
    realize gains.
  • When planning HSR
    we should learn from the experience
    of High Speed 1 in building a broad
    base of support. Delegates heard
    examples of how communities in Kent
    had been won over by the convenience
    of HSR services to and from Europe
    and London. Careful thought should be
    devoted to engaging those who are
    negative or unwilling to participate
    in the project, and inter-regional
    HSR stations similar to Ashford
    should be reconsidered.
  • Transitional projects can be set in
    motion even where certainty does not
    exist about the final timescale and
    shape of the HSR network.
    Establishing a UK High Speed Rail
    network is a generational project
    with many associated projects
    required to maximize its value. The
    commitment to HSR could stimulate
    such projects to happen. Crossrail at
    St Giles Circus was a catalyst to
    bring the different planning
    authorities together and stimulate
    fresh solutions to movement and land
    use.
  • At Kings Cross/St Pancras
    during the twenty years of
    negotiation, interim uses of the site
    and in the surrounding areas
    established a vibrancy and changed
    perceptions of the area. We were
    reminded by the developer that
    development is unpredictable: ‘you
    need to believe and act, with the
    ability to adapt to changing
    circumstances’.

Concluding Symposium

To conclude the series, and review the findings, we hosted a Symposium on 23rd July This event, to be held at the Alan Baxter Gallery near Farringdon Station (map attached) in central London, was designed to bring together all the invitees and participants in the series so far, and tease out conclusions from the workshop series. The Symposium opened with a number of short presentations from leading experts on HSR, including David Prout of DtF, Sir Peter Hall of UCL, and Dominique Laousse of SNCF. This was followed by a structured discussion in small groups about the key issues arising from the workshop series, and ended with feedback and conclusions. Unlike our regional workshops, the Symposium was a larger event and national in focus, affording the opportunity for all to participate in the discussion.

Professor Sir Peter Hall

Prof Sir Peter Hall of University College London (UCL) drew on the French example of HSR. He stressed that HS2 must be combined with regional regeneration and that it has the danger of failing to connect with regional networks if not done correctly – it is critical to integrate the regions. Citing two French examples (Lille and Montpellier), Hall praised the French model for HSR and noted that the key to their success has been through creating good public transport feeder links to integrate all the networks. Hall emphasised that France exhibited a more interventionist methodology to their transport policy.

David Prout

David Prout, Director General of HS2 for the Department for Transport, explained the difference between the two phases of HS2: that phase one to Birmingham is about capacity, and that phase two (the Northern extensions) are concerned with greater connectivity and linking up with the other parts of the country. He notes that new construction via HS2 is the only feasible option to release capacity for more long-distance passenger services on the West Coast Main Line. He suggested HS2 will greatly improve links to Manchester, Leeds and beyond.

Dominique Laousse

Dominique Laousse, Head of Foresight and Innovation at SNCF, France’s leading rail provider, took a slightly more technical approach to HSR, suggesting that we need to shift from the traditional ‘productivist’ transport economic model of limiting design principles to a new ‘collective progress’ mobility economics model that incorporates new design logic and allows transport to act as an incubation platform.

Focused Discussion Groups

During the second half of the evening, the delegates were broken into seven themed discussion groups that covered varying perspectives: place shapers, transit providers and operators, places of connection, policymakers, spatial overview, economic success, and learning from experience. Each group was asked to discuss a series of questions surrounding governance, connectivity, and other issues in relation to HSR and HS2 in Britain. Each group was asked to come up with headline points that emerged from their discussion and feed them back into the group. The key issues that emerged from the group discussions are:

  • It was suggested that the DfT’s
    criteria for funding are an obstacle
    to the successful development of HS2.
    Their criteria is highly focused on
    speed but a slower interchange may be
    the better option than HSR. The other
    criteria that DfT outline are not
    tangible enough and the question on
    how to evaluate them still stands.
    The place-shapers in particular were
    concerned that there is more value in
    human interaction around stations
    than in the speed of the rail, which
    the DfT criteria do not address.
  • The place-shapers thought that HS2
    is happening in a vacuum of regional
    planning, which is very much in
    contrast to France, for example, who
    had the advantage of a strong public
    planning system. It was thought the
    LEP’s could play a role in the
    development of HS2, but they have no
    funding available. Although
    Manchester has a strong
    city/region-wide leadership and
    capacity that has built up over time,
    Birmingham and Leeds are behind.
    Indeed, a strong national leadership
    is required for the successful
    development of HS2, combined with
    significant local input. However, the
    example of Christchurch in New
    Zealand demonstrates that too much
    local action can be disruptive to
    strategic development, and that
    continuation of a team is important
    for the successful development of any
    major project.
  • The main question
    that arose was: is transport the
    answer to connectivity? The train is
    the means to the end. It’s more than
    just a train. In order to properly
    assess the connectivity benefits, we
    need to consider the way our
    lifestyles and travel patterns are
    changing. Will we use the train less
    for commuting in the future, and see
    it more as a place to work? We need
    to recognize that travel time is the
    least important benefit of HSR,
    whereas jobs and increased
    productivity are key components.
  • We
    need to rethink the way we do
    transport appraisal in Britain. We
    are wedded to an economistic
    approach, but not all benefits are
    quantifiable. In France a much wider
    concept of the benefits from HSR are
    used, including issues relating to
    quality of life and integrated
    transport. To improve the UK approach
    will require knowledge and ideas from
    other sectors.
  • Look at the big
    picture so the public understands the
    benefits. It is clear we can’t solve
    everyone’s problems, but if you think
    of them as part of the wider picture
    it may contribute to a better
    understanding. Public confidence is
    essential to get HSR built.
  • There
    is a need for integration of systems
    in the regions with connections
    between city centres. This requires
    long-term planning and it specific to
    each city yet also requires cities to
    work together. There is a need to
    challenge how we operate and think as
    a country. Additionally, There is a
    need to connect HS2 with other rail
    as well, such as HS1. Overall, we
    need better coordination between
    various forms of transport
    development (ie. Crossrail, aviation,
    HS2) to make the system more
    resilient for the future.
  • The right
    delivery structure for HSR is
    critical. To avoid the problems
    experienced by Ebbsfleet on the High
    Speed One line, we should look at
    creating a Single Purpose Agency to
    deliver HSR projects and have
    compulsory purchase powers in the
    Hybrid Bill. Without such leadership
    projects will flounder from a lack of
    ambition and a loss of confidence
    from the private sector.