Beeching's Folly

Infrastructure: Stuff that nobody cares about until it affects them.

In the story of ‘Great’ Britain the railway as a communication system was exported all around the world, the question is: why would a nation that gave birth to the railway and build a vast integrated network over 100 years choose to destroy it? That is exactly what happened in the UK. At its height there were 120 railway companies operating in the UK, eventually that became 4 that were brought together under government control during WWII. After six years of being worked to destruction, they were in desperate need of renewal and the four companies were on the verge of bankruptcy.

The 1947 general election was a landslide for the Labour party, who set about an ambitious programme of social reform to rebuild the nation, these reforms included the creation of the welfare state, that National Health Service and the nationalization of much of the infrastructure, from power generation, manufacturing to transportation. In terms of transportation it was not just the railways that were nationalised, but road transport, docks and inland waterways along with the railways to create an integrated transport system.

In terms of what this has to do with architecture or urban planning, it is about the events that occur that are beyond the control of any planner, as is often the case in British politics, the Labour Party lost the next election to the Conservatives. With such an ambitious social reform and infrastructure programme, more than one term in government is needed to see the economic benefit of the policies being implemented.

The response was to commission a report under the chairmanship of British Railways, Dr. Richard Beeching, a much reviled figure in railway history and largely blamed for the decline of the nation. A scientist and engineer, not a railway operator and assessed the operation of the railways as an accountant, only looking at the income and expenditure over a three year period. The report takes no account of the investment made in the infrastructure, or the investments already committed based on the current network and demand. 

The report ‘The Reshaping of Britain’s Railways, recommended the closure of one third of the network simply because it was not profitable. The plan was implemented, and became known as the Beeching Axe, and the effects were devastating. Entire communities were cut off, , freight traffic decreased dramatically, and locomotive fleets that were newly built very quickly became redundant, some steam locomotives only seeing 5 years in service, some diesels only 8. Which when designed for 30 years of service, was bound not to pay for the cost of building them in the first place. 

As a result Locomotive works closed, depots, stations, hotels along with the supporting industries, placing countless men and women out of work. Unemployed. Not earning, not paying taxes, not contributing to the economy. The nation started a long cycle of decline. In terms of the urban fabric, railway stations became derelict, the tracks ripped up so the rails could be sold for scrap, dead zones appeared alongside railway cuttings that no longer carried trains, warehouses became disused, whole sections of the built environment suffered from decay. What this process demonstrates is that the social context was not understood by those making the decisions, Beeching,whose plan devastated the infrastructure of a nation and brought with it economic and social deprivation, whose sole purpose was to save money, seemingly unaware of the consequences. 

As the journey continues it explores some of these environments from 2015, where after decades of neglect, city centres are seeing a revival, as the strategies that were implemented following the Beeching Plan in some are being reversed at great expense. In urban terms this sequence demonstrates how short term cost cutting can cost far more in the long run and in terms of infrastructure planning, cost cutting is not an option, the investment needs to be made at the appropriate level and to plan for future growth with a degree of flexibility to responds to changing circumstances. 

Ongoing work on 'Is Architecture enough?' The follow up to 'Do We Need ARCHITECTS? A Journey Beneath the Surface of Architecture. ' Available on Amazon, Barnes and Noble published by Xlibris.

On the journey: 'Is Architecture Enough?'

Is Architecture Enough? 2017

In beginning to address the question the story explores some of the challenges facing the professions of Architecture, Urban Design and Planning. To some these are mutually exclusive fields, to others they are one and the same depending on the scale of the project. In reality it is all about developing what becomes the architecture of a place, and the recognition that each place is unique due to a number of factors that fall outside the realm of making buildings including climatic conditions and human behaviour specific to the region, meaning that what may work in one place is not necessarily transferable to another.

This is demonstrated in working on projects in Pakistan, Qatar, UAE, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, as well as exploring places visited along the way. In many places it is the infrastructure that is being upgraded, considered by many to be outside the realm of architecture, until considering the impact that it has on the built environment and more importantly the impact that the lack of it has on the living environment. From exploring the Dubai Metro and new tram at the Dubai Marina, to London where the first tangible evidence of the world’s largest, probably most complex infrastructure project Crossrail, is becoming part of the public realm. Birmingham undergoing significant change, Manchester is in a similar state as public transport infrastructure is being upgraded in the city centre.

In terms of the notion of the master plan, Liverpool is experienced for the first time, where recent trends have been reversed to create a vibrant city centre. Bahrain is continuing to evolve as more elements of the masterplan set out in 2030 vision emerge from the sand. The start of the journey is reassessed in my home town on the English Riviera now being viewed not through the eyes of a child growing up in the town, but after being involved in significant urban development projects and viewing as an not only as an architect, but as an urban designer and planner, giving a view of the impact that planning strategies and government policy can have on a place, emphasising that in many cases the big decisions have been made before designers get involved in the process. Some of these can be national or regional strategies, some can be client decisions associated with land ownership such as site location for a proposed project, in many cases the project is part of a master plan developed by others that is ongoing and many of the opportunities to maximise the potential positive environmental impact of a project have already gone.

So what can we do? In university or Architecture School, a large component of the project is about how we respond to context and how we address issues associated with that context. In the real world that context can be determined by property developers whose sole aim of a projects is about building to make money. The problem with this is that many of our clients are those very people. Some architects talk about working with enlightened clients but we cannot all be so lucky.

Ongoing  work on 'Is Architecture enough?' The follow up to 'Do We Need ARCHITECTS? A Journey Beneath the Surface of Architecture. ' Available on Amazon, Barnes and Noble published by Xlibris.