I saw a tweet recently which was promoting a competition run by the UK’s rail infrastructure operator. Critics of the tweet implied that it would be better for the organisation to focus on its core activities, rather than any, as they saw it, distracting PR opportunities. A response to this suggested that running the UK’s rail infrastructure (so NOT operating a train service on the railtracks) isn’t a zero-sum game and anything being done to improve the network should be applauded.
I was caught in two minds about this counter-argument. Let me explain why, and how I think it’s relevant to my newsletter about building passions.
I agree that you have to make wise economic choices to run businesses and nations effectively. Some of these are inevitably politicised, as not everyone agrees on the best investment and growth policies and how they should be applied. Investing in a decent rail network certainly seems to me a worthwhile objective, if only to encourage the use of public transport, which in itself contributes to wider growth and net-zero environmental goals.
The big question is how you fund the maintenance of this vast public infrastucture. One method adopted by the UK Government (largely to reduce the burden on taxpayers) is to attract private investment. I agree that this can be helpful as long it is properly regulated. My concern is that in some cases the priority becomes one of maximising income at whatever cost, even if this has wider side effects.
Which brings me to the ongoing plans to build 10 and 15 storeys into the airspace above historic Liverpool Street Rail Station (operated by Network Rail) and the adjoining Andaz Liverpool Street Hotel, both in London. Is doing this a zero-sum game? No, because it will clearly impact on the much older structures underneath. A UK Government Minister is currently deciding on whether this is acceptable building practice. That things have got this far is significant and already implies that many people have taken issue with the overall approach, whatever the nuances around the economic benefits to the rail infrastructure from additional, non-public finances. This ignores any environmental consequences.
My interest is specifically in the hotel, because I wrote about it in my book ‘Building Passions’, so it has a special interest to me. It is a Grade II* protected building and I’ve used the below photo from its official listing (taken by Nigel Cox, 06/11/2007). It was originally designed in the 19th century by the grandson of Sir Charles Barry, one of Britain’s most famous architects.
Whether or not you like the building, just try to imagine how it will appear with 15 storeys of modern structure sitting on top of it. Sometimes architects and their clients just get carried away …
Network Rail has just announced today that it will replace the scheme! This is a victory for campaigning and common sense. Congratulations to the organisations that collaborated to object to the original proposals.
The full proposals for the works are available on the City of London Corporation website (ref 23/00453/FULEIA) and objections can be submitted online. I was incorrect in suggesting that a Minister was reviewing them at this stage, but I'm pretty sure it will happen eventually. For more background to the campaign against the development see news items on the Victorian Society's website and a piece by its President Griff Rhys Jones: https://www.victoriansociety.org.uk. You can also donate to the campaign if you wish - just £5-10 would help.