could we sell off Clapham Junction's air rights?

[The Ham]

Fund it by building a load of shops and offices on top…….oh hang on…..

You could put Canary Wharf on top and it wouldn’t fund it!

BR did pretty well flogging air rights in the 80's basically paid for the new sliding door trains Chris Green bought for LSE.

Japan Railways also improved there solvency massively by developing air rights over Tokyo stations.

Plenty of acreage to use at C.Jcn but unless you can shift the North side abutment of St Johns Hill o/b over you can't get a faster alignment into the station and that will need property acquisition so thats five years before you start. Quickest fix at C.Jcn would be build another o/b up the london end to link platforms 7 to 19.

If (and this runs the risk of taking the thread off subject) we were looking to sell air rights at Clapham Junction, the "safest" in terms of allowing future changes would be use the space above the sidings.

Although not as close as above the platforms still a fairly large area.

Following the above, and to stop that thread going off subject.

Is it worth selling off the air rights at Clapham Junction and if so what parts?

 

[Bletchleyite]

You might get more from closing and selling the whole depot area and building one somewhere that isn't prime London real estate? See Old Oak, though that of course is part of a railway development.

 

[Ianno87]

You might get more from closing and selling the whole depot area and building one somewhere that isn't prime London real estate? See Old Oak, though that of course is part of a railway development.

Although it needs to be somewhere you can path trains to sensibly.

 

[pdeaves]

I think Network Rail is already on the case for this, hence why Clapham Junction became a 'major station'/'managed station' (ready for redevelopment).

Possibly not to the extent envisaged above, though.

 

[Welly]

Ugh! Not another railway station in a big dark hole! Don't give the fools-in-charge ideas please!

 

[Bald Rick]

Been looked at extensively. Capco have the deal with NR.

Clapham Junction redevelopment to take step forward | New Civil Engineer

The station is the busiest interchange station in the UK and plans for its redevelopment first emerged in January 2017. Should Crossrail 2 get the go

www.newcivilengineer.com

Mott Macdonald also had a try of their own. Less ambitious.

https://mottmac.azureedge.net/media-manager-uat/documents/822027?sv=2018-03-28&sr=b&sig=mxnultdM70PHubGbQGxjRrM1lieQhB0ETfFC9%2Bfjw%2FA%3D&se=2021-08-08T08%3A48%3A59Z&sp=r&rscd=attachment%3Bfilename%3DClapham%20Junction%20Redevelopment%20Brochure.pdf

 

[miklcct]

Ugh! Not another railway station in a big dark hole! Don't give the fools-in-charge ideas please!

Are you joking? Demand for London land is unlimited as everyone wants to move to London. Such property development is exactly how the MTR in Hong Kong makes profit.

Shenzhen, Taipei, etc., are all building underground national railway stations or moving existing national railways underground in order to have more land for development. London should do the same as well.

Also, the depot area is also a great place to have development on top of it as well, maybe a multi-storey shopping mall on top of the depot with a train station integrated into it such that people take the train for shopping.

 

[The Planner]

Are you joking? Demand for London land is unlimited as everyone wants to move to London. Such property development is exactly how the MTR in Hong Kong makes profit.

Shenzhen, Taipei, etc., are all building underground national railway stations or moving existing national railways underground in order to have more land for development. London should do the same as well.

Also, the depot area is also a great place to have development on top of it as well, maybe a multi-storey shopping mall on top of the depot with a train station integrated into it such that people take the train for shopping.

There have been stories that suggest the population of London will decrease due to COVID. Whether that continues or not is to be seen.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Surely there isn't going to be so much demand for office space in Zone 2 in the post-Covid world, that we seriously need to look at providing more, let alone doing so above Clapham Junction with all the negatives that over-site development entails?

Sorry, but this is a daft idea.

 

[miklcct]

Surely there isn't going to be so much demand for office space in Zone 2 in the post-Covid world, that we seriously need to look at providing more, let alone doing so above Clapham Junction with all the negatives that over-site development entails?

Sorry, but this is a daft idea.

This is just COVID recession. After it is over the need for office space will definitely grow again. A recession won't last forever.

 

[Bald Rick]

Demand for London land is unlimited

It isn’t. Especially now.

everyone wants to move to London

They don’t.

Such property development is exactly how the MTR in Hong Kong makes profit.

Typically on brownfield land, gifted to them for new lines. And, of course, land prices in HK are rather higher than in Clapham, and labour to build it rather cheaper.

 

[Royston Vasey]

They might get a shock at the valuation of air rights alone these days. Brick and mortar shopping malls and office buildings (particularly in Battersea) aren't exactly flavour of the month.

Total redevelopment of the site for housing maybe... but you'd have to run the trains somewhere

 

[Bald Rick]

The issue at Clapham is that not only is it a functioning railway, but the busiest stretch of railway in the country. If you are to build over it, you need to be absolutely sure what you want the railway to do underneath - number of tracks, number and size of platforms, etc. And the site is constrained - to build ‘air rights’ you have two choices:

1) integrate the design of the development with the track / station layout, meaning that the locations of the buildings foundations are fixed, and thus the location of the buildings, their size and time of construction is fixed (effectively for the long term).

2) build a transfer deck which effectively gives you a clean slate above the tracks to build whatever you want, where you want and when you want.

The second is more expensive - you are effectively casting a giant concrete slab across the lot - but provides much more flexibility for the development and therefore more value.

Looking at it, the potential scale of the development at Clapham is massive, but to make it pay will need height, and I wonder if the local authority is keen on that. No doubt local residents won’t be!

 

[Meerkat]

Is there any realistic alternative site for Clapham Yard? The only one I could see is as part of a redevelopment of New Covent Garden Market - but that land would be worth far more than Clapham!

 

[Class 170101]

This is just COVID recession. After it is over the need for office space will definitely grow again. A recession won't last forever.

Whilst the covid recession as you call it won't last for ever I'm inclined to agree with @Bald Rick where he says everyone doesn't want to move to London as an answer to a previous question above. You can get more space the further you move from city centres, especially London, for a fraction of the price and a better quality of environment.

Surely there isn't going to be so much demand for office space in Zone 2 in the post-Covid world, that we seriously need to look at providing more, let alone doing so above Clapham Junction with all the negatives that over-site development entails?

Sorry, but this is a daft idea.

Oversite development at Clapham Junction I agree is a bad idea but even if it wasn't I can't see it being easy to do. You only have to look at the wall that collapsed on the approaches to Waterloo at Christmas (I think it was) to see that building the foundations over Clapham Junction will prove challenging on structures some 150 years old. I suspect Option 2 as alluded to by @Bald Rick above will be the only practical way of doing it.

In terms of Zone 2 (even 3) developments I would be concerned for a London Docklands style decline of the 1960s / 1970s as businesses and retailers downsize the space they need as people work and order from home rather than go to offices and shops as they did pre March 2019.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The issue at Clapham is that not only is it a functioning railway, but the busiest stretch of railway in the country. If you are to build over it, you need to be absolutely sure what you want the railway to do underneath - number of tracks, number and size of platforms, etc. And the site is constrained - to build ‘air rights’ you have two choices:

1) integrate the design of the development with the track / station layout, meaning that the locations of the buildings foundations are fixed, and thus the location of the buildings, their size and time of construction is fixed (effectively for the long term).

2) build a transfer deck which effectively gives you a clean slate above the tracks to build whatever you want, where you want and when you want.

The second is more expensive - you are effectively casting a giant concrete slab across the lot - but provides much more flexibility for the development and therefore more value.

Looking at it, the potential scale of the development at Clapham is massive, but to make it pay will need height, and I wonder if the local authority is keen on that. No doubt local residents won’t be!

Yes thats very true they made that mistake at New Street 60 years ago.

Problem we have now is all bets are off on passenger demand and it will take another couple of years get some hard data about what the new norm is on commuting which is what drives support for a major investment in reorganising CJcn for the next 100 years before you put a lid over it.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

This is just COVID recession. After it is over the need for office space will definitely grow again. A recession won't last forever.

The "Remote Working" genie isn't going back in the bottle. Sure, there will still be a need for office space but it won't be at the pre-pandemic levels for a long time, if ever. Therefore the potential revenues from such a development won't be as high as they might have been, which reduces the value of the air rights in terms of an office development. Retail similarly would be a risky move, even more so with the shift to online shopping having been shoved into overdrive by you-know-what. There's also Westfield just a few stops away on the Overground.
Residential could work, particularly on a smaller scale which wouldn't have quite the negative effects seen at Birmingham New Street. I'm sure there's a few Oligarchs with some spare change.

 

[Bald Rick]

Residential could work, particularly on a smaller scale

To put this into context, a transfer deck over the whole of the Clapham Junction area (station, yard, approach tracks to the north) will cost multiples of billions, and completely demolishing and rebuilding all the rail infrastructure underneath would be similar. You need to do most of that before you can lay a single brick of any development above. Developers margins are in the region of 15-20%, and it is the margin which would pay for the transfer deck and railway works. Doing some quick maths, you would need a development that would be worth multiples of £10bn north to make it pay. Residential property valued at £10bn is 20,000 flats at £500k each....

 

[miklcct]

Residential property valued at £10bn is 20,000 flats at £500k each....

A multi-storey super shopping mall can make up most of the value.

The "Remote Working" genie isn't going back in the bottle. Sure, there will still be a need for office space but it won't be at the pre-pandemic levels for a long time, if ever. Therefore the potential revenues from such a development won't be as high as they might have been, which reduces the value of the air rights in terms of an office development. Retail similarly would be a risky move, even more so with the shift to online shopping having been shoved into overdrive by you-know-what. There's also Westfield just a few stops away on the Overground.
Residential could work, particularly on a smaller scale which wouldn't have quite the negative effects seen at Birmingham New Street. I'm sure there's a few Oligarchs with some spare change.

It will definitely return if the pandemic is no longer a pandemic (e.g. COVID becomes just another flu). As London land is limited but population growth is unlimited, the commercial value of these inner city areas will only ever increase in the long term.

A lot of products are difficult to shop online. Only products with standardised specifications are easily shopped online such as computer components, food ingredients, etc.

 

[Bald Rick]

A multi-storey super shopping mall can make up most of the value.

I don’t know how many shopping centre developers you’ve dealt with (I’ve dealt with most of the big ones), but it really can’t. In London, residential attracts the highest values outside the square mile itself.

Only products with standardised specifications are easily shopped online such as computer components, food ingredients, etc.

I mean, this really is nonsense. Clothes, shoes, food, electronics, cars, furniture, appliances, building materials, plants, sheds, you name it - all shopped on line and delivered to my front door.

 

[HSTEd]

Residential property valued at £10bn is 20,000 flats at £500k each....

Well 20,000 flats at ~150 square metres each is about 3 million square metres

Which is 8 Taipei 101s

That would be quite impressive.

 

[miklcct]

Clothes, shoes, food, electronics, cars, furniture, appliances, building materials, plants, sheds, you name it - all shopped on line and delivered to my front door.

A lot of these things are better tried in store, including clothes and shoes, or inspected in store, like plants.

I don't want to risk buying shoes which do not fit on my feet, have the wrong shape or bottom thickness, etc., and risk 2 weeks of round trip time and return postage to return and rebuy another pair.

 

[Ianno87]

A lot of these things are better tried in store, including clothes and shoes, or inspected in store, like plants.

I don't want to risk buying shoes which do not fit on my feet, have the wrong shape or bottom thickness, etc., and risk 2 weeks of round trip time and return postage to return and rebuy another pair.

One heck of a lot of people don't actually find this an issue, or are happy to live with it.

 

[HSTEd]

One heck of a lot of people don't actually find this an issue, or are happy to live with it.

And even for things where people want to buy in store (clothes, shoes etc), we are going to be enormously oversupplied with commercial space from the existing stock.

No need for more, indeed a lot will need rationalising away.

 

[JamesT]

And even for things where people want to buy in store (clothes, shoes etc), we are going to be enormously oversupplied with commercial space from the existing stock.

No need for more, indeed a lot will need rationalising away.

Apparently 14% was vacant in March, probably more by now. https://www.theweek.co.uk/business/retail/953608/repurposing-empty-shops-future-british-high-street

The distribution around the country is going to vary, but some people are suggesting we have 40% too much retail. https://theconversation.com/up-to-4...-needed-heres-what-can-be-done-with-it-148556

I’ve been seeing and hearing lots of adverts for Westgate Oxford recently, they’re trying to drive some footfall. Oxford’s High Street was already suffering in comparison, I think many areas would be trying to bolster what they have rather than trying to build new.

 

[telstarbox]

To put this into context, a transfer deck over the whole of the Clapham Junction area (station, yard, approach tracks to the north) will cost multiples of billions, and completely demolishing and rebuilding all the rail infrastructure underneath would be similar. You need to do most of that before you can lay a single brick of any development above. Developers margins are in the region of 15-20%, and it is the margin which would pay for the transfer deck and railway works. Doing some quick maths, you would need a development that would be worth multiples of £10bn north to make it pay. Residential property valued at £10bn is 20,000 flats at £500k each....

And you could get 20,000 flats for somewhat less than that using less challenging brownfield sites in Zone 2. Whether there will be demand for that level is another matter. Wandsworth already have a lot of recent high rise in the Vauxhall/Nine Elms/Battersea area so it will be interesting to see if that all gets taken up now.

 

[Starmill]

One heck of a lot of people don't actually find this an issue, or are happy to live with it.

The rise of 'Buy Now Pay Later' services makes this inconvenience almost totally go away too. Of course, online shopping delivery is a highly questionable use of resources for some things, especially with the sort of inefficient practice currently employed but convenience is king.

 

[Tio Terry]

Over the years, going back as far as the 1980's, I've been involved with at least 5 projects to exploit the space above Clapham Junction. All have failed. The time it would take to build a raft or transfer deck above the site whilst keeping the railway running runs into many years. This tends to frighten developers off because they are always looking to build quick so that they get a fast return on their investment. The other big issue, as others have said, is cost. With limited working time because of possession requirements rather than a full working day, every day, the cost is astronomical.

 

[Hadders]

I don't want to risk buying shoes which do not fit on my feet, have the wrong shape or bottom thickness, etc., and risk 2 weeks of round trip time and return postage to return and rebuy another pair.

You're doing it wrong. Increasingly you buy five different pairs of shoes (or whatever you're buying), keep the one that fits best and send the rest back.

 

[Brush 4]

Why should ugly decks only be built over stations, if air space is the thing and aesthetics clearly count for nothing, to developers? Why not build rafts over the main lines eg to Woking? There has been a small one at Wimbledon for years. Why not over roads? Motorways are a waste of valuable retail or housing space after all. There is one at Hatfield over the A1(M). If aesthetics count for nothing. just build rafts over peoples houses, which is just more wasted air space. An amazing lack of ethics, integrity and quality of life considerations. Moral bankruptcy at its best. Of course property developers don't even know what that type of bankruptcy means, being the moral and ethical vacuum that they are.