DURING the past month I attended two major presentations laid on by Network Rail – one about plans to revamp Reading station and its surrounding track layouts, and the other to witness the unveiling of the final design for reconstructing Birmingham New Street station.
The contrast between the two could hardly be greater.
At Reading, the station frontage will remain little altered, because it is Grade II listed. But behind this everything will change, including a 50 per cent increase in platform and track capacity. The track layout will also alter radically to enable more trains to operate without getting in each others way, with construction of flyovers to the west and an underpass to the east of the station.
By contrast, New Street Station in Birmingham is going to get what protagonists refer to as a “stunning” new look at the upper level but others say is no more than “cosmetic”.
Certainly down below at rail level, while platforms will be brightened up and many more escalators and lifts will be introduced, there will no additional track capacity – unlike the plans for Reading.
Network Rail’s route director Peter Strachan stressed that the aim of the Birmingham Gateway Project is to increase passenger flow and pedestrian capacity. He dismissed suggestions that deep-level tunnels were planned under the station to increase capacity.
However, I don’t know any professional rail operator who believes that Birmingham New Street can continue to function into the longer term with its present track layout.
The station is already handling twice as many trains as it was designed for, and up to 35 million passengers a year.
The “stunning” new design at the upper level is supposed to be capable of handling up to 52 million passengers a year, but it is not clear where all the trains needed to carry them are going to operate.
Parliament’s Transport Select Committee had similar concerns in its report published in July. “We are not convinced that the current project is adequate,” it said.
“The government must address the issue of whether Birmingham New Street is ever going to be able to accommodate the throughput of trains required in two or three decades, when the number of services might have doubled. If the station cannot be adapted to such throughputs, then the government must look for alternative solutions now,” said the committee
However, ministers clearly know better and Liam Byrne, the West Midlands Minister, has rejected this criticism and said New Street can soldier on for another 30 years.
Concern in Birmingham seems always to be about the visual impression New Street station makes on visitors, not about how it can cope with more trains.
When the new design was announced, the Leader of Birmingham City Council, Mike Whitby, was most concerned to stress Birmingham’s claim to be a world-class city.
“With the world looking on, this breathtaking design firmly places Birmingham on the international map for very high quality, daring design,” he said.
“The design “symbolises Birmingham’s arrival over the last few years as a globally relevant city looking to its future, as a connected international hub, to the advantage of citizen and investor alike. The Gateway project will enrich the continuing regeneration of Birmingham, and enhance our reputation as a truly world class city.”
Mr Whitby said Gateway was “a crucial, catalytic project, which will be an internationally recognised landmark for the city” and part of a 25-year master plan for Birmingham.
Advantage West Midlands, the regional development agency pouring £100 million into the project, says it will be an “iconic gateway” that will create up to 10,000 new jobs. But it is not all clear where these will be, as the commercial development has disappeared from the latest scheme – as has any mention of £200 million investment by the private sector.
So the ‘£600 million project’ is now only supported by public funds, of which just £128m will come from Network Rail. The other contributions will be from Birmingham City Council (£168m), the regional development fund (£100m), and £10m from the Passenger Transport Executive – £406m in total.
It would appear, then, that Birmingham has so far failed to attract the planned £200m private sector investment – despite Gateway being a focal point in what Councillor Whitby described to Gordon Brown and the Cabinet, when they held a meeting there last month, as “Britain’s pre-eminent city outside of the capital”.
By comparison, 100 miles south, Reading can look forward to a 50 per cent increase in station and track capacity in a project which is estimated by Network Rail to cost £425m.
It will include provision for many additional services, including Cross-rail if it gets extended from Maidenhead, and Airtrack if it gets built from Heathrow Airport via Staines. There will also be new train maintenance depots for First Great Western, and for the trains planned to replace the present HSTs.
And, while Birmingham New Street currently lacks any private sector backing, in Reading a development company has already come forward with plans for a £400 million project to rejuvenate the adjacent site – more than twice the private sector funding not yet obtained for Birmingham New Street.
Some critics of the Birmingham Gateway scheme have described it as ‘all smoke and mirrors’. The mirrors will certainly be evident as, according to its architect, “the new station will be covered in reflective sheets of carefully crafted and finished metal”.
Perhaps the last word should go to ‘railwayeye.blogspot.com’: “Lovely! But a hole is still a hole, even if you cover it with a pretty tent!”