CAPITAL WATCH

Rail and suburbs The impact of the Metropolitan Railway on London’s urban form cannot be understated – both in terms of how housing was developed, and then subsequently marketed. A lack of regulation regarding development of greenfield land saw several private companies develop rail links into London hinterlands, buying up surrounding land at the same time. The Metropolitan Railway was particularly profitable, primarily due to income from housing developed and then sold around its stations in London’s emerging suburbs. But Londoners were not won over by good transport connectivity alone. Rather, “Metroland”, a term devised by the Metropolitan publicity team in 1915, offered the perfect blend of rural and urban – green spaces for white-collar workers, immortalised by poet John Betjeman as “the home of the gnome and the ordinary citizen”. Urban densification While Metroland enabled the extension of London outwards, public transport provision in inner London has allowed the city to expand without jeopardising physical proximity. This is an urban form often referred to as the “compact city” – an approach pioneered by architect Richard Rogers in the late 1990s. Through publications such as the Urban Taskforce, the principle of density-driven sustainable development was increasingly translated into policy – for example by linking the density of new developments to public transport accessibility, or prioritising the regeneration of brownfield land in well-connected urban locations. Rail has shaped development in the City as much as in the suburbs – albeit on a different timescale and mostly for the purposes of commercial rather than residential development. The majority of development that has taken place above and around stations in London has been driven by operational and financial demands. Rail operators were not required to turn a profit until the 1960s, and a change in governance structures provided a keen incentive to make the most out of railway property. Faced with falling tube passenger numbers, the British Railway Board found itself entering into a range of deals with developers to capitalise on London’s office construction boom. Resulting projects included Cannon Street, Euston, Broadgate and later on, Ludgate and Charing Cross. Jubilee line extension? Looking ahead, London’s rail network is likely to continue under strain. Major employment growth and increased housing costs mean suburban rail is increasingly crowded. Changes to government funding mean that Transport for London continues to focus on obtaining value from both non-operational property assets and investment in new operational infrastructure (e.g., through land value capture). Road While London’s built form has been less heavily influenced by mass motorisation than other cities – especially those in the US – car use has had a major impact on the capital’s development, and particularly its public realm. While public transport tends to both require and enable urban density, private car use requires space, and so frequency leads to sprawl. Again, London is something of an exception in this regard, due both to the limitation on sprawl imposed by the green belt and the policy of developing New Towns outside the capital – many of the latter becoming commuter towns for those working in London. The self-driving car may still be some distance away, but advances in autonomous vehicle technology – alongside mounting concerns about the impact of congestion and air pollution – are set to change not only how we navigate our cities, but also how we build them. London’s transport network faces a number of challenges, many of which are shared by other global cities. Vehicle journey times have risen by an average of 12 per cent. Air pollution frequently exceeds legal limits. What distinguishes London, however, is the dominance of an ancient and largely immutable road network. Side streets and alleys may appeal to the flaneur on foot, but for the most part have proved hard to adapt to the infrastructure demands of a modern city. And where Londoners cannot simply build more infrastructure, we must learn to share. Looking ahead The way we move around our cities is constantly changing. Alongside a number of other UK cities, London has seen its city core densify, with developers paying increased attention to demands for walkable and bikeable destinations. Uber did not have a licence to operate in London until 2012. By 2016, 30,000 Londoners each week were downloading and using Uber for the first time. Bike hire is no longer the preserve of the public sector, and new private operators including Ofo and Mobike are rolling out dockless bike schemes across London boroughs. Citymapper – now one of the greatest sources of data on how Londoners get around – is attempting to use its knowledge of transport demand to provide its own bus services. The line between public and private transport continues to blur. Alongside new technologies and funding mechanisms, these new models are changing the role of every part of the city’s infrastructure – from the Underground to multi-storey car parks. Which means that – once this tech-driven revolution fully arrives – London’s transport network might transform into something completely different. Where Londoners cannot simply buildmore infrastructure, we must learn to share Rail has shaped development in the City as much as in the suburbs – albeit on a different timescale and mostly for the purposes of commercial rather than residential development CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD 20 TRANSPORT: WHAT'S NEXT 21 TRANSPORT: WHAT'S NEXT