BRUSSELS – LILLE – LONDON

A Critical Analysis of Spatial Planning for Stations along the High Speed Rail Link

May 2011

Pablo Alejandro Abrecht

~ 2 ~

~ 3 ~

Contents

I. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 4

II. High Speed Rail Stations - Synergy at the Space of Flows .................................................... 5

III. High Speed Rail Stations along the Cross-channel Link ....................................................... 8

IV. Spatial Planning at the Space of Places .............................................................................. 19

V. Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 28

Bibliography ............................................................................................................................ 29

~ 4 ~

I. Introduction

The rationale behind high-speed rail (HSR) appears to be simple if there is a need for

additional capacity to meet increasing demand, as was the case of the overcrowded railway

between Tokyo and Osaka in Japan (Chen and Hall, 2010). But current European Union (EU)

‘spatial development perspectives’ focusing on Trans-European Transport Networks (TEN-T),

appear to rely more on connectivity and competitiveness than in the economic rationale for

the construction of new HSR (Peyrony, 2011a). As argued by de Rus and Nombela (2007, 4),

“HSR projects are often justified by strategic and political arguments, usually related to

regional development objectives”.

Stations along the HSR link have major spatial planning implications given the potential of this

outstanding infrastructure to attract an influx of inter-metropolitan passengers, new

businesses, urban tourism and varied events, as well as to generate large urban

redevelopment projects which stimulate the modernization of the city centres with new

residential, office, commercial and leisure areas (Ureña et al, 2009).

This critique will first look into the synergy generated around HSR stations and the role of the

EU in promoting HSR, to then briefly focus on the five railway stations along the Brussels-Lille-

London HSR link. The reflection will finally turn to institutional responses and spatial planning

considerations facing the areas around the HSR stations, highlighting implications observed at

the different locations.

~ 5 ~

II. High Speed Rail Stations – Synergy at the Space of Flows

Extensive research provides substantial insight on the relation between railway station area

development and urban dynamics, showing that “accessibility improvements and proximity to

railway stations have important impacts on job accessibility, public transport user benefits,

office location attractiveness, and real estate values” (Bruinsma, 2008, 119).

But most importantly, when considering spatial planning implications, HSR stations turn out

to be ‘city gates’ (Garmendia et al, 2008, 250). The picture below (figure 1) shows the project

commissioned by the Belgian Railway Company (SNCB) to Eurostation for Gare du Midi’s ‘gate

to Europe’, envisioning a glass V-shape building connecting the station and the city

(Eurostation, 2011).

Figure 1 – HSR station project for Brussels’ Gare du Midi (Demol, 2011)

As noticeable in Lille, King’s Cross and Stratford, urban redevelopment projects of railway

plots and un-built land in relatively central areas of big cities “can stimulate the

modernization of their city centres with an appropriate mixture of residential, office,

commercial and leisure areas [and] …enable them to better compete for the attraction of

high-level tertiary sector activities” (Ureña et al, 2009, 278). In that same line, the

Department for Transport in the UK supports the Government's strategy for the proposed

second high speed rail line (HS2) from London to the West Midlands which “would enable the

UK’s key urban economies to improve their productivity, attract new businesses, […] access

more directly the economic strength of London and the South East, […] and contribute to

major regeneration programs in Britain’s inner cities” (DFT, 2011).

~ 6 ~

Portrayed in sketches below (figure 2), railway stations have the potential to become new

‘city centres’, although as argued by early researchers “transport is a necessary but not

sufficient condition [and] …an auxiliary strategy must be developed to capture the

development opportunities” (Chen and Hall, 2010, 15).

Figure 2 – Functional changes in passenger stations (European Commission, 2010)

On the other hand, Albrechts & Coppens (2003, 215) highlight the concern that “the space of

flow often wipes out and replaces the space of places [and] a new financial and managerial

elite is installed at the cost of the local population”. Additionally, several inconsistencies may

arise in the conception and execution of large-scale and complex developments around HSR

stations, as will be further analyzed in this critique.

Role of the European Union in promoting HSR

The common European market became a key incentive to rethink the competitive positions of

major cities in the European infrastructure networks, and “optimal internal and external

accessibility had become [an] … opportunity for national governments to give their major

urban conurbations a competitive boost” (Vreeker et al in Bruinsma, 2008, 107).

Initially, the EU was mainly charged with economic and social cohesion, although not spatial

planning in specific. With the adoption of a ‘territorial agenda’ in 2007, cohesion policies were

implemented to also address EU spatial development (Peyrony, 2011a). Therefore, the EU

plays a decisive role in the promotion of HSR, since according to the agreed TEN-T, the core

network shall “be multimodal and coherent, spanning the entire Community, be made up of

nodes and links of high strategic importance, and reflect the main long distance/international

~ 7 ~

traffic flows” (Peyrony, 2011b). The map below (figure 3) shows the envisioned main

economic integration areas, including linking cities and networks.

Figure 3 – Europe 2030 ‘image’ with economic integration areas, linking cities and networks

(Peyrony, 2011a)

~ 8 ~

III. High Speed Rail Stations along the Cross-channel Link

Eurostar is the high speed rail service linking the UK to France and Belgium via the Channel

Tunnel. The link (figure 4) has reduced journey times significantly, with trains from London

reaching Paris and Brussels in less than 2 hours (Eurostar, 2011).

Figure 4 – Eurostar cross-channel route and stations (HS1, 2011)

The five Eurostar HSR stations addressed here have enriching comparison potential given

their different development stages, context, stakeholders and several other particularities.

The table below (figure 5) succinctly highlights key operators and players at these locations.

Figure 5 – Key operators and players in stations along the cross-channel link (Student, 2011)

~ 9 ~

As also summarized in table below (figure 6), stations are state-owned and managed in

France by SNCF (Société Nationale de Chemins de Fer Français) and in Belgium by SNCB

(Société Nationale de Chemins de Fer Belges), versus privately owned and managed in

England by HS1 (High Speed 1). HS1 holds the concession from government to operate,

manage and maintain the high-speed railway infrastructure until December 2040, and is the

owner of the stations along the route (HS1, 2011).

Figure 6 – Basic comparison of the five stations and nodes (Student, 2011)

In relation to node development, private investment is a key driver, although partnerships

with government institutions (Stratford) and local authorities (Lille) appear to be crucial for

continued support. Mostly private developer-driven projects like Ebbsfleet Valley

(LandSecurities) and King’s Cross Central (Argent) seem increasingly challenged by uncertainty

and lack of investment, mainly due to the economic recession. As argued by Newman and

Thornley (1995, 239), “it may be the case that competition between European cities is less for

private investment and more for national government and EU funds”.

King’s Cross Central, Euralille, development around Gare du Midi and the newly planned

Stratford City appear to be centred on one of the strongest competitive advantages, given

their valuable transport connections and central city location.

~ 10 ~

Gare du Midi in Belgium

Brussels’ Gare du Midi (figures 7 and 8) is centrally located with the very heart of town just 5

minutes away by metro (Eurostar, 2011).

Figures 7 & 8 – HSR Gare du Midi and transport connectivity (Eurostar, 2011)

As a main consideration: Is Brussels’ Gare du Midi a derailed opportunity? It appears that

previous destruction of the urban heritage in Quartier Nord, added to the current economic

recession and the complexity of the multilevel, multi-stake planning system mentioned before,

including fragmented project ownership and leadership (Albrechts & Coppens, 2003), are

considerably challenging the project. On the other hand, the focus on Brussels as Capital of

Europe, the central location of the station, the potential of HSR and transport connectivity for

urban redevelopment, and the interest shown by developers (figures 9 and 10) and local

authorities, should sooner or later bring the project back to rail.

Figures 9 & 10 – Projects for Gare du Midi (Euro Immo Star, 2011)

~ 11 ~

Gare Lille Europe in France

Gare Lille Europe in the heart of Lille is just a short walk from Flanders regional station and

the old town (figures 11 and 12).

Figures 11 & 12 – HSR Gare Lille Europe and transport connectivity (Eurostar, 2011)

As a main consideration: Is Lille a successful benchmark? Gare Lille Europe, embedded in

“strong leadership, integrated levels of government, and powerful technical elites” (Newman

& Thornley, 1995, 244), allowed the project to run expediently. The pragmatic synergy

between ‘partnership, leadership, continuity and participation’ provided a key learning

experience, and the challenge is now to develop ‘real’ neighbourhoods (figure 13) with

shopping areas and the right proportion of the population (Baert, 2011).

As summarized by Ureña et al (2009, 278): “Agreements which involve different types and

levels of investment, public authorities and participants, and which include a new high-quality

transport system, private-public cooperation and regional planning, have proved to have

excellent results”.

~ 12 ~

Figure 13 – Euralille’s sectors and new neighbourhoods (SAEM Euralille, 2010)

~ 13 ~

Ebbsfleet International Station in the UK

Ebbsfleet International (figures 14 and 15) is situated on the Thames Gateway, just 17

minutes away from St. Pancras International on HS1. It has the potential to considerably

stimulate local development and regeneration, as well as opening up new travel opportunities

in north Kent (HS1, 2011).

Figures 14 & 15 –Ebbsfleet HSR station and transport connectivity (Eurostar, 2011)

As a main consideration: Is Ebbsfleet another ‘failed new town’? As argued by Kathryn

Anderson, appointed by the French Government in 2009 to guide their nationwide ‘eco-cités’

project, the ‘eco-towns’ in Britain showed a flawed process from the outset since proposals

were sought from the private sector, including relaxed planning process in exchange for

investment and innovation, while by contrast, the French Government sees eco-cités as a

collective civic responsibility (Barton Willmore, 2010, 12).

In the case of this location, most of the land by the station and to the west is owned by

LandSecurities, the private developer that envisions Ebbsfleet Valley as one of the largest

urban development projects in the UK (figure 16). Construction is currently on hold given the

current economic recession and lack of government support (Ebbsfleet Valley, 2011).

~ 14 ~

Figure 16 – Ebbsfleet Valley master-plan (Ebbsfleet Valley, 2011)

Stratford International Station in the UK

Stratford International (figure 17) is key to the London 2012 Olympics as well as a massive

new development called Stratford City to be created around the International station, “the

largest single mixed-use urban regeneration project in Europe” (HS1, 2011)..

Figure 17 – Stratford HSR station project (Building, 2011)

~ 15 ~

As a main consideration: Will Stratford City become an after Olympics’ mammoth? According

to the Local Authority, a key aspiration is that “Stratford Metropolitan Centre will be seen as

London’s future Third City after the City and Westminster” (London Borough of Newham,

2011). Monumental projects like the 2012 Olympics, centred on massive single-time events,

usually struggle to integrate spaces ‘back to normal’. Even though some of the facilities will

afterwards be dismantled (Legacy Company, 2011), the size of the development (figure 18)

and the after Olympics’ investment need, seem once again to be challenged by the poor

economic perspective.

Figure 18 – Map of Stratford City with HSR station, Olympic Park and new neighbourhoods

(Legacy Company, 2011)

~ 16 ~

St. Pancras International in the UK

St. Pancras International (figures 19 and 20) together with King's Cross is Europe's largest

passenger interchange. Over 50 million passengers will pass through these sites every year,

on a par with London's busiest airports (HS1, 2011).

Figures 19 & 20 – St. Pancras HSR station and transport connectivity (Eurostar, 2011)

St. Pancras international is already an outstanding regeneration project, including the

following three landmarks:

The magnificent Victorian-era Barlow train shed (figures 21 and 22)

The former Midland Grand Hotel, the ornate face of St. Pancras designed by Sir George

Gilbert Scott, and now reopened as the St Pancras Renaissance London Hotel (figures 23,

24, 25 and 26)

The Granary, designed by Lewis Cubitt, now the new home of the Central Saint Martins

University of the Arts London building (figures 27 and 28)

The careful conservation of these landmarks provides strong character and attraction to an

urban development project, differentiating both the space of flows and the space of places

from other locations.

~ 17 ~

Figures 21 & 22 – Restored Victorian-era Barlow train shed (BBC, 2011 and KCC, 2011)

Figures 23, 24, 25 & 26 – Reopened St. Pancras Renaissance London Hotel (Marriott, 2011)

Figures 27 & 28 – Regenerated Granary by the University of the Arts London (CSM, 2011)

~ 18 ~

As a main consideration: Will King’s Cross Central become an isolated and disconnected piece

of London? Even though the project’s marketing positioning is centred on transport

connectivity, the project’s master-plan seems disconnected from the city, with few narrow

streets accessing mostly eastern areas of the development (figure 29). Accessibility is a key to

functionality, although potential dwellers and activities may deliberately choose this specific

enclosed particularity. A promissory start might be the appealing University of the Arts

London (UAL) facility in final stage of construction, which is planned to open to 4,500 students

and staff in September 2011 (Argent, 2011). A worrying aspect of the project appears to be

the over-reliance on the provision of office space, since the project assumes the development

of 4.9 million square feet of office space in the currently oversupplied office market in London.

Figure 29 – King’s Cross Central master-plan (Word Press, 2011)

~ 19 ~

IV. Spatial Planning at the Space of Places

As highlighted before, substantial investment in railway station infrastructure, added to large-

scale railways station area development, significantly impact the urban landscape and

dynamics. Success stories provide valuable learning experiences. As argued by Jason Prior,

Chief Executive of Planning, Design and Development for AECOM at the 2012 Olympics’ site,

in order to find solutions and replicate ideas, he ‘goes to places where things work’ (Prior,

2011). On the other hand, urban development projects around HSR stations seem to also face

strategic and planning inconsistencies, including complex planning challenges and demanding

governance arrangements.

1. RENT PRODUCTION

Focusing on the implications of the neoliberal project in spatio-temporal relations, Harvey

(1989) stresses the transformation in urban governance from a ‘managerial approach’

based on local provision of services, facilities and benefits for urban populations during

the 1960s, to an ‘entrepreneurial approach’ in the 1980s, mainly generated by inter-urban

competition and the quest for local development and employment. As a key critical

debate, this entrepreneurial-driven urbanization generated a new physical and social

landscape. In this same line van Criekingen (2011) argues that there is a “persistent

politics of rent production”.

Figures 30 & 31 – Quartier Nord before and after ‘redevelopment’ (van Criekingen, 2011)

~ 20 ~

One side of the overemphasis in rent production is the potential destruction of valuable

urban heritage. As an example (figures 30 and 31), the city of Brussels underwent a

traumatic experience with a development project and commercial failure in Quartier Nord

in the early 1960s (van Criekingen, 2011).

An additional consequence of overemphasis in rent production is the potential disruption

of local communities. Quartier Nord also exemplifies of the challenges to the social

landscape in the area, as portrayed by a local community poster rejecting the destruction

of local neighbourhoods around Gare du Midi (figure 32). Looking at the distributive

consequences of ‘urban entrepreneurialism’, once again Harvey (1989, 12-13) argues that

it usually generates greater polarization, since investment “amounts to a subsidy for

affluent consumers, corporations, and powerful command functions to stay in town at the

expense of local collective consumption, [designing] urban fragments rather than

comprehensive urban planning”.

Figure 32 – Local community poster (van Criekingen, 2011)

A third implication of rent production is related to density considerations. In contrast to

the name assigned to the green ‘Bois Habité’ neighbourhood in Lille, pictures below

(figures 33 and 34) show no forest (except for a painted wall), but massive high-density

concrete towers. Planning’s involvement is crucial to balancing issues related to density,

the protection of urban landscape, and the inclusion of the local community in planning

decisions.

~ 21 ~

Figures 33 & 34 – Bois Habité new neighbourhood in Lille (Student, 2011)

2. SPACE SUPPLY

Related also to private sector’s investment, most of the HSR nodes show oversupply of

office space with apparent little planning guidance on office space concentration and

location. Such is the case in Brussels (figure 35) with an already saturated supply of office

space (van Criekingen, 2011).

Figure 35 – Office space stock in Brussels (van Criekingen, 2011)

~ 22 ~

Similarly, the five office towers in Euralille (figure 36) were said ‘not to have the expected

success’ (Baert, 2011), while at the same time additional space is under construction or in

planning stage in the surrounding area. Once again, strategic spatial planning can play a

decisive role in the coherent distribution of uses and spaces.

Figures 36 – Euralille office towers across the railways (Student, 2011)

3. URBAN DESIGN

One key aspect of urban design is related to scale. In Brussels “since about 2000 there is

an apparent ‘resurrection’ of the large-scale urban projects as prime planning models”

(van Criekingen, 2011). In many instances, although subjective, these large-scale

modernistic structures appear to be out of place and proportion, considerably impacting

the urban landscape, such as the proposed urban project Loi in the European Quarter of

Brussels (figure 37).

~ 23 ~

Figures 37 – Selected large-scale urban project Loi in Brussels (van Criekingen, 2011)

Similarly, Euralille’s massive shopping centre and towers seem to portray a modern

‘Titanic’ arriving at historic down-town Lille (figures 38 and 39), arguably disturbing the

sense of place.

Figures 38 & 39 – Historic Lille Flanders station and old-town, across modernistic HSR

station (Student, 2011)

~ 24 ~

4. PLANNING POLICY

The challenge imposed by these large-scale urban development projects is hardly

considered in current national planning systems, which usually complicates a

comprehensive project execution. In Lille and Stratford, most of these challenges were

circumvented by the establishment of parallel partnerships and institutions which avoid

more democratic and regulatory procedures (Newman and Thornley, 1995).

Aware of these challenges, the EU recently highlighted that there is a “need for

metropolitan governance and planning” (Peyrony, 2011a), since as argued by Albrechts &

Coppens (2003, 218), “the development of mega-corridors became trapped between the

global and the local scale: between the European policy for an efficient, fast and reliable

communication system and local policies aimed at enhancing the quality of the

environment and the protection of resources”.

With Brussels’ particular multi-level, multi-stake planning system (figure 40), the recently

established Agency for Territorial Development (ADT) seems to be paving this way,

although, as stated in their presentation, they are not supposed to be “an additional level

of power, a subsidising actor, a project owner, a delivery authority”, but an agency that

“identifies the actors, coordinates the projects, ensures that budgets are available, alerts

government in case of difficulty, proposes operational structures, and communicates”

(Rouyet, 2011). The complexity required a ‘facilitator’, although this appears again not to

be enough.

Figure 40 – Guide to Brussels’ particular planning system (AATL, 2011)

~ 25 ~

5. URBAN GOVERNANCE

Related to complex planning systems are the increasing urban governance challenges. The

clearest example is again evident in Brussels (figure 41), where “many specific

competencies needed to conceive a coherent policy related to HST are scattered across

European (basic decisions on the lines), federal (national railway company or SNCB),

regional (construction of roads) and local/municipal level (building permits)” (Albrechts &

Coppens, 2003, 219).

Figure 41 – Brussels’ governance challenge (Rouyet, 2011)

Looking at the governance arrangements of the Thames Gateway, Allmendinger and

Haughton (2009, 618) argue that there is “an intriguing usage of strategic and delivery

interventions at scales other than those of the statutory planning system (local and

regional), as planning activities necessarily learn to work within complex multilayered,

fluid, and sometimes fuzzy scales of policy and governance arrangements”.

Therefore, Albrechts & Coppens (2003, 223) propose what they describe as an alternative,

open, fair and transparent approach, where this type of “controversies must be seen as

political problems and not as mere technical/rational management and economic

problems. This demands a governance structure that allows the local level – within a clear

temporal and budgetary framework – to influence how these programs and projects are

realized.”

~ 26 ~

6. LOCAL LEADERSHIP

Effective leadership reflected in an individual role or expressed by cohesive teamwork

make a difference in the execution of ambitious projects. As stressed by Newman and

Thornley (1995, 237), in the case of Lille “the strong political and technical leadership of

the project and its institutional form contribute[d] to its success in attracting development

resources and international prestige”.

On the other hand, coordinated and pragmatic teamwork in London seem to have

released the right forces for the timely execution of Stratford’s 2012 site (Prior, 2011),

with “less reliance on the leadership role of an individual and different relationships with

central government” (Newman and Thornley, 1995, 244).

7. PROJECT PROMOTION

Verpraet (1992) argued that the primary role for the public sector in this sort of large

urban development projects is promotion, since an active institutional and government

role provides solid backing and opens doors to powerful and successful relationships. In

the case of Lille “architectural prestige, the support of experts in the ‘quality circle’ and

the nominal shareholding of foreign banks were all important in presenting Euralille as an

exemplary development (Newman and Thornley, 1995, 241).

Figure 42 – Initial rendering by Rem Koolhaas to promote Lille (OMA, 1990)

~ 27 ~

A salient trend associated to the promotion of these large-scale urban regeneration

developments is the selection of architects with renown to lend prestige to the project. In

the case of Lille, “one of the first actions of the political leadership was to secure an

architect with an international reputation” (Newman and Thornley, 1995, 241), and the

choice was Rem Koolhaas (figure 42). Eurostation chose Jean Nouvel for the HSR Gare du

Midi project (Quartier Midi, 2011).

8. ECONOMIC SYNERGY

The economic rationale for the construction of new HSR is mainly based on the expected

volume of demand, but according to de Rus and Nombela (2007, 21), “HSR investment is

difficult to justify when the expected first year demand is below 8-10 million passengers

for a line of 500 km”. In spite of this conclusion, and as highlighted previously, the weight

is being proactively placed in competitiveness and growth, since “infrastructure and

accessibility are, together, considered as a conditio sine qua non to survive in a world

economy that is more dominated by global flows and international transactions”

(Albrechts & Coppens, 2003, 217).

Although regional development growth and multiplying effects seem evident, there

appears to be a risk of HSR network over-expansion to financially unsustainable and

strategically questionable areas such as the Spanish countryside, the French ski resorts

(figure 42), and some British intermediate stops.

Figure 43 – Eurostar line reaching French ski resorts (Direct Rail, 2011)

~ 28 ~

V. Conclusion

HSR stations are an extraordinary infrastructure at the space of flows with the potential to

considerably enrich and advance urban landscape and dynamics at the space of places. EU

spatial perspectives, oriented towards a more strategic and political rationale, envision HSR

stations not only as ways to enhance connectivity and competitiveness, but also as an

economic growth opportunity based on large-scale urban redevelopment with powerful

multiplying effects and strong long-term benefits.

As portrayed in this essay, varied strategies have been envisioned and implemented to

capture these development opportunities. In Brussels, Lille, Stratford, St. Pancras and even

Ebbsfleet, HSR stations consolidated their status as city gateways. This on the other hand

gives place to major spatial planning implications related to the protection of urban heritage,

the consideration of adequate density, scale, urban design, and land-use distribution, and the

need for metropolitan governance and planning.

In spite of these challenges, fascinating transformations can be achieved with the sometimes

rare balance and synergy between empowering and solid planning policies that promote

initiative and manage entrepreneurial excesses, democratic and enriching governance

structures that involve the local level, decisive and consistent leadership that effectively

achieves project execution and promotion, and proactive and pragmatic partnerships that

boost project promotion and investment.

Figure 44 – Envisioned skyscrapers around the HSR station in Lille (SkyscraperCity, 2011)

~ 29 ~

Bibliography

AATL (Department of Spatial Planning and Housing) (2011), Town Planning in the Brussels-Capital Region, Ministry of the Brussels-Capital Region, Brussels

Albrechts, L. and Coppens, T. (2003), ‘Megacorridors: striking a balance between the space of flows and the space of places’, Journal of Transport Geography, 11, 215–224

Allmendinger, P. and Haughton, G. (2009), ‘Soft spaces, fuzzy boundaries and metagovernance: the new spatial planning in the Thames Gateway’, Environment and Planning, 41, 617-633

Argent (2011), King’s Cross is ready for business, Argent, London

Baert, T. (2011), ‘Euralille’, presentation offered at ADU Lille Metropole, Lille, France, 5 Apr.

Barton Willmore (2010), Ecotown or Ecocité, Barton Willmore Update, Issue 5, London

BBC (2011), St. Pancras International Station, BBC, http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44209000/jpg/_44209617_clock416.jpg – accessed 25 Apr. 11

Bruinsma, F. (2008), ‘The Impact of Railway Station Development on Urban Dynamics: A Review of the Amsterdam South Axis Project’, Built Environment, 35 (1), 107-121

Building (2011), Stratford International Station, http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/m/j/b/STRATFORD-BIRD-PRINTA3-902.jpg – accessed 25 Apr. 11

Chen, C. and Hall, P. (2010), ‘The impacts of high-speed trains on British economic geography: a study of the UK’s InterCity 125/225 and its effects’, Journal of Transport Geography, IN PRESS

CSM (Central Saint Martins) (2011), Freshers Festival 2010, University of the Arts London, http://www.csm.arts.ac.uk/docs/freshers-10.pdf – accessed 25 Apr. 11

De Rus, G. and Nombela, G. (2007) ‘Is Investment in High Speed Rail Socially Profitable?’, Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 41 (1), 3–23

De Salle, P. (2011), ‘Midi – Studies in Progress’, presentation offered at ADT-ADO, Brussels, Belgium, 4 Apr.

Demol, P. (2011), ‘La Gare du Midi et ses Abords …’, presentation offered at ADT-ADO, Brussels, Belgium, 4 Apr.

DFT (Department for Transport) (2011), High Speed Rail: Investing in Britain’s Future, Department for Transport, www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedrail/ – accessed 27 Apr. 11

Direct Rail (2011), Eurostar Route Map, Direct Rail, www.directrail.com/eurostar.aspx – accessed 30 Apr. 11

~ 30 ~

Ebbsfleet Valley (2011), Master-plan, LandSecurities, www.ebbsfleetvalley.co.uk/ – accessed 27 Apr. 11

Euro Immo Star (2011), ‘Bruxelles-Midi: Un nouveau point de repére’,

www.euroimmostar.be/fr/bruxelles-midi.html – accessed 27 Apr. 11

European Commission (2010), ‘High-speed Europe: A sustainable link between citizens’, Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, http://ec.europa.eu/transport/infrastructure/studies/doc/2010_high_speed_rail_en.pdf – accessed 25 Apr. 11

Eurostar (2011), Stations, www.eurostar.com/UK/uk/leisure/travel_information/at_the_station/stations.jsp – accessed 25 Apr. 11

Eurostation (2011), ‘La Gare du Midi’, presentation offered at Eurostation, Brussels, Belgium, 4 Apr.

Garmendia, M., Ureña, J. M., Ribalaygua, C., Leal, J. and Coronado, J. M. (2008), ‘Urban residential development in isolated small cities that are partially integrated in metropolitan areas by high-speed train’, European Urban and Regional Studies, 15 (3), 249-264

Harvey, D. (1989), ‘From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation in urban governance in late capitalism’, Geografiska Annaler, B 71(1), 3-19

HS1 (2011), Stations, High Speed 1, www.highspeed1.com/stations/ – accessed 25 Apr. 11

KCC (2011), St. Pancras International, King’s Cross Central,

www.kingscrosscentral.com/img/cache/b – accessed 25 Apr. 11

Legacy Company (2011), Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, Olympic Park Legacy Company,

London

Lille Métropole (2011), Euralille I, Lille Métropole, www.lillemetropole.fr:8080/index.php?p=793&art_id=14630

London Borough of Newham (2011), Stratford Metropolitan Masterplan: Executive Summary, London Borough of Newham, London

Marriott (2011), St. Pancras Renaissance London Hotel, Marriott, www.marriott.co.uk/hotels/hotel-photos/lonpr-st-pancras-renaissance-london-hotel/ – accessed 25 Apr. 11

Newman, P. and Thornley, A. (1995), ‘Euralille: ‘Boosterism’ at the Centre of Europe’, European Urban & Regional Studies, 2 (3), 237-246

OMA (1990), Congrexpo: Dossiers Euralille en Lille Grand Palais, Office for Metropolitan Architecture, www.nai.nl/mmbase/attachments/206803/OMAR_EUR_inv.pdf – accessed 4 May 11

~ 31 ~

Peyrony, J. (2011a), ‘EU spatial development perspective’, presentation offered at the European Commission, Brussels, Belgium, 4 Apr.

Peyrony, J. (2011b), ‘TEN-T Review’, presentation offered at the European Commission, Brussels, Belgium, 4 Apr.

Prior, J. (2011), ‘AECOM and the 2012 Olympic Park’, presentation offered at OLPC Offices, Stratford, UK, 8 Apr.

Quartier Midi (2011), Des images de la future gare du Midi?, Quartier Midi, www.quartier-

midi.be/ – accessed 25 Apr. 11

Rouyet, Y. (2011), ‘The Agency for Territorial Development’, presentation offered at ADT-ADO, Brussels, Belgium, 4 Apr.

SAEM Euralille (2010), Euralille, la ville continue: Enquéte habitants 2009, Agence d’Urbanisme de Lille Metropole, Lille, France

SkyscraperCity (2011), Lille: Projects & Construction, SkyscraperCity,

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=575525 – accessed 25 Apr. 11

Ureña J. M., Menerault P., Garmendia M. (2009), ‘The High Speed Rail Challenge for Big Intermediate Cities: A National, Regional and Local Perspective’, Cities, 26 (2009), 266-279

Van Criekingen, M. (2011), ‘Brussels South’, presentation offered at Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium, 5 Apr.

Verpraet, G. (1999), ‘The impacts of partnership on urban governance: Conclusions from recent European research’, Regional Studies, 33 (5), 487-491

Word Press (2011), Argent Developments, Word Press, http://kxdf.wordpress.com/kings-

cross-central/ – accessed 25 Apr. 11

References for Pictures (second page)

Picture 1 – Project for Gare du Midi in Brussels (Pierre de Salle ADT, 2011)

Picture 2 – Gare Lille Europe (Lille Métropole, 2011)

Picture 3 – Ebbsfleet HSR station (HS1, 2011)

Picture 4 – Stratford HSR station (HS1, 2011)

Picture 5 – St. Pancras HSR station (HS1, 2011)