See Eligibility for further details, including how students enrolled on related courses and part-qualified individuals may participate. Inter-disciplinary collaboration is encouraged, as is collaboration between individuals and organisations of different size, expertise and experience, including those in the communication and other tech transfer sectors, even if they do not yet work in the rail industry.
The procurement process will be organised over three phases in order to encourage new thinking and the participation of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and organisations without particular experience of working within the highly regulated UK rail environment, while eventually allowing for the development of a range of final design solutions that are deliverable within the rail environment.
The first anonymous Open Design Contest phase (Phase 1) will be judged by a Judging Panel on the strength of the concept proposals and response to the challenges set by the Brief. Up to six winners identified from the Open Design Contest phase will move to a negotiation stage during which they will develop their design concepts in more detail (Phase 2), During this stage the winners may augment their team with additional technical resources in order to turn a design concept proposal into an output that addresses the more prescribed technical requirements of Phase 2 and the railway environment. It is the intention that up to three Preferred Bidders will then be selected to enter into contract with Network Rail for Phase 3, the ‘Developed Design’ phase relating to their scheme.
The process has been structured such that Network Rail (and/or others at its discretion) may also potentially, at some point in the future, appoint the authors of the respective developed designs to undertake technical design associated with delivery of site-specific solution(s). There will however be no obligation incumbent upon Network Rail (or others) to exercise such a call-off, nor for the authors of the respective developed designs to be required to undertake site-specific technical designs at some point in the future.
For details of how to Register for the Design Contest and be provided with supporting information please refer to the Registration page. Further details about the procurement process are provided in the Overview of the Procurement Process section and references therein.
Since the birth of the railways in Victorian Britain, railway architecture and station buildings have constituted a significant intervention in the landscape and evolving townscapes into which they were constructed. Railway pioneers such as Isambard Kingdom Brunel’s work for the Great Western Railway often sought to impose a unified design vocabulary for their railway infrastructure, at a time when “pattern books” were common for everything from furniture, cast-ironwork and houses to uniforms, livery and locomotives. Enduring examples of this work persist to this day and demonstrate that it is not uncommon for station buildings to last for many generations.
Traditionally the station has been treated as a singular ‘building’ containing operational interfaces that primarily serve the functions of ticket revenue collection, information and sometimes refreshment. There is generally a more-or-less strict control line that separates the wider community from the platforms and the trains themselves. Stations are also symbols of and gateways to the railway network, defining the moment of arrival or departure. The many books and films with pivotal scenes on or near railway platforms are testament to the power of this symbolism.
In spite of the significant growth in railway use and passenger numbers, changes in technology offer the potential to reduce or eliminate for most passengers the primary focus of stations on information and revenue collection. This may change the role of station staff to increasingly focus on support for the needs and wellbeing of passengers across the wider station environment.
Some interesting insights are also provided in the Tomorrow's Living Station study.
Of the circa 2,500 railway stations in-use across the UK National Rail network today, approximately 80% of these can be classified as either small or medium in size. This categorisation is based on the frequency of usage:
| Description (Station Category) | Number of Stations |
|---|---|
| Medium Staffed | 302 |
| Small Staffed | 675 |
| Small Unstaffed | 1,192 |
The Department for Transport (DfT) published a list of stations and their categories in 2009:
stations and their categories
Example of 1853 Brunel
GWR station building
Charlbury, Oxfordshire
Example of 1891
restored ticket office
Goostrey, Cheshire
Grade II listed ‘Pagoda’
waiting shelters & ticket office
Denham Golf Club, Buckinghamshire
Prototype LMS ‘Unit’
Station design being tested
Queens Park, London
Mod-X 1959
prefabricated station building
East Didsbury, Greater Manchester
Example of 1968 CLASP system
station building
Aylesham, Kent
Example of 1976 Design for the Seventies station building
Chelsfield, Greater London
Example of 1978 Neo-vernacular
Brick building
University, Birmingham
Example of 1989
‘VSB-90’ station
Headcorn, Kent
Example of late 1980/early 1990’s Adaptable Shelter
Hampton Wick Greater London
Example of 2008 Network Rail
Modular Station
Corby, Northamptonshire
Example of 2010 Macemain + Amstad modular prefabricated structure
Coulsdon Town, London
Some of the UK’s 2,000 plus small to medium stations will require replacement in the short-medium term. This ongoing programme is to better meet the required needs for accessibility, and the anticipated changes in behaviour, service offerings and the environmental challenges that will be required to support rail travellers in the 21st Century along with the communities they serve.
There are also a number of proposed or planned programmes of new build stations to accommodate the continued increase in passenger numbers, in many cases associated with proposed developments not served by existing facilities. Funding for the latter can come from a variety of different sources, including developers wishing to improve the experiential aspects of their project, and by improving site connectivity, ultimately driving up the value of a well-connected development in its community.
Given the challenging targets set out in the Government and industry’s joint strategy ‘Construction 2025’, modern methods of manufacture and construction are seen to offer key potential in the delivery of consistent high-quality station environments.
Some of the stations in need of future replacement relate to designs dating from the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s - and as outlined in the HUB photographic study - some relate to the introduction of previous standardised designs to the network (e.g. CLASP system buildings from the 1960’s).
Network Rail considers that a move towards standardised solutions for station environments could help to increase capacity, improve quality and reduce costs by moving away from bespoke products and solutions. A more standardised approach should also deliver environmental benefits and help to reduce the associated cost and time of the railway industry design approvals process.
Positively optimised design, and modern construction techniques can offer significant contributions to Network Rail’s responsibility to deliver cost-effective and low-carbon solutions which perform well for the taxpayer and Network Rail’s customers and staff. Fast and efficient methods of construction that enable reduced site time and parallel working to minimise operational disruption will be welcomed. Long service life with low maintenance will further help NR to reduce its overall operational expenditure, and its life-cycle energy consumption, and the choice of materials and technologies should reflect this. Stations should allow loose fit adaptability for future change.
Network Rail is seeking innovative approaches to re-imagine today’s station and its interfaces with local communities. Unified system approaches are being sought that would be capable of being adapted to site specific conditions and contexts to enable the efficient design and delivery of new sites and replacement facilities.
Design visions should be developed to challenge preconceptions - particularly in terms of the purpose and potential nature of UK railway ‘station’ provision in the future - and in doing so, significantly raise expectations for the quality of future designs.
The design process should re-appraise the role of the ‘station’ as a building that traditionally provides information and revenue protection, supported by a limited amount of railway-facing retailing. The proposals should consider the opportunities that arise from its unique interface between the railway network and the local community. Moving to and from the final destination via buses, cycles, car parks, streets, shops, parks and playgrounds all form part of our passengers’ experience. Imaginative solutions that make this an enjoyable and stress-free experience have the potential to significantly enhance the social value of our stations.
Consideration will also need to be given to moving towards a zero-carbon society, including efficiency, buildability (including potential use of modern methods of construction), embodied carbon, carbon in use, maintenance and whole-life costs. Rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, competitors will need to consider how their conceptual system could be tuned and adapted according to local circumstances, including context, the demographic being served, quantum of usage and functions to be accommodated now and in the future. Successful approaches will demonstrate how good unitised, modularised or systemised design can be deployed in different settings, with interpretational latitude allowing the built form to be translated to provide a strong relationship to place, whilst maintaining a clear familial identity that reflects Network Rail’s vision as the heartbeat of the nation’s transport system.
In developing their concept proposals, Competitors should embrace Network Rail’s Principles of Good Design and insights arising from the ThinkStation workshop programme as well as considering the following general requirements that any ‘station’ provision will need to address:
To assist Competitors some basic assumptions should be make for the initial Phase of the competition, as illustrated schematically in the technical parameter drawings:
Sketch summarising ‘operational zone’ and typical small-medium station footprint
Sketch summarising ‘operational zone’
Brief and Appendices
Download the PDF version of the Competition Brief which includes Appendices 1-5