Northern 'committed' to filling Sunderland station's shops
Transport bosses say they remain committed to securing tenants at a railway station dubbed "an empty, dirty glass box". Sunderland's redeveloped facility opened in December 2023 with a new front entrance costing £27m, but several shop units have not been filled.It is understood the local authority has offered informal support to Northern, which is responsible for running the site, in an effort to let the retail space.The rail firm said it had local and national agents acting on its behalf "to generate interest".
The southern concourse, at Market Square, has faced several issues.Public toilets have been put out of action several times due to vandalism, while the station's lifts have been damaged.The issue of empty shops was raised during councillors' questions at the most recent meeting of Sunderland City Council, with Conservative Dominic McDonough describing the station as an "empty, dirty glass box".Council leader Michael Mordey, of Labour, has previously stressed the station is "not the responsibility of the council" as it is owned by Network Rail and operated by Northern.
A spokesperson for Northern said: "We remain committed to securing tenants for the retail units at Sunderland Station and have both local and national agents acting on our behalf to generate interest."Unfortunately, despite the offer of flexible letting terms we have been unable to get a short or long-term deal over the line."We will continue to work with Sunderland City Council and our letting agents to attract suitable retailers to the station."Typical lease terms are between three and six years, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, although longer or shorter terms are possible.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Holiday let owners face tax ‘triple whammy'
Airbnb owners are set to face a triple whammy of taxes as the Government increasingly treats them as 'walking ATMs,' a senior Tory MP has warned. Kevin Hollinrake, the shadow housing minister, criticised ministers for hitting short-term let owners with little-known licensing fees when they are already paying double council tax. From April 1, all English councils were given the powers to charge a 100pc council tax premium on second home owners. More than 230 chose to implement the charge – which The Telegraph is campaigning to be cut or abolished. But the new legislation included scope for the Government to introduce a registration scheme to regulate holiday lets and ensure they are recorded with councils. This is expected to involve a licensing charge, which experts estimated would be around £100 per year – though Labour has failed to provide a timeframe for when this will be introduced. The result could be that owners are saddled with paying double council tax bills, plus an annual licensing fee. A similar fee for short-term lets already exists in Scotland. Mr Hollinrake has argued that the double council tax bill should cover the cost of an owner registering a short-term let. In a written parliamentary question, he asked the Government whether it 'will ensure that homes subject to a second homes council tax premium by local authorities are not charged additional registration fees'. But Chris Bryant, the culture minister, refused to confirm the exemption in his response. He added that the 'scope of the scheme is still being determined'. A loophole in the business rates system means some households could avoid the double tax altogether. Mr Hollinrake told The Telegraph: 'Labour's thirst for tax cannot be quenched, and people may now be hit by a triple whammy of council charges – two lots of council tax, and a licensing fee on top if they ever want to rent it out. 'Such licensing charges are especially pointless, as councils already know the property is being used as a second home by virtue of the council tax surcharge. 'Local taxpayers deserve better than being treated like walking ATMs by this punishing Labour government.' Andy Fenner, head of the Short Term Accommodation Association (STAA), said: 'This appears to be purely a revenue-generating exercise rather than a genuine policy need. Short-term rental tourism provides vital investment and supports thousands of jobs and businesses throughout our communities. Alistair Handyside, of the Professional Association of Self-Caterers UK, said it was supportive of the scheme but concerned about 'the amount of other interventions such as the council tax premiums, the abolition of the furnished holiday lets tax regime and the new EPC standards, these are closing businesses at a very fast rate'. The second home council tax premium was originally brought in by the Tories. However, Labour has come under criticism for refusing to monitor the impact of the policy on housing, tourism and local economies. Ministers said it was up to individual councils to decide if the double tax is 'effective'. But The Telegraph revealed earlier this month that eight in 10 local authorities who charge the premium failed to carry out impact assessments before introducing it. If a property is let out for 70 nights a year, it qualifies for business rates and is therefore exempt from council tax. Many second home owners will qualify for small business rates relief, which offers up to 100pc relief, if the property is the only one they let. This loophole will cost local authorities £334m this year in missed revenue, a figure which politicians said proved the premium was backfiring. If a property is not let for 70 days, however, it will still be on the hook for all three charges. A government spokesman said: 'A registration scheme will help local authorities across England identify the short-term lets in their area so they can address any community impacts. We will set out more details on how the scheme will work in due course.' AirBnb was also approached for comment.
Scotsman
3 hours ago
- Scotsman
It's becoming obvious how little Reform understands Scotland
Reform UK has suggested the Barnett Formula and block funding grant from Westminster should go to be replaced with more tax powers for the Scottish Parliament We'll know early tomorrow morning who has won the Hamilton by-election, but during the campaign we have learned a lot more about Reform in Scotland, and it's becoming more obvious how little its leadership understands Scotland. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Even with defecting opportunist councillors hoping to win a seat in the Scottish Parliament – the latest jumping from Labour – it looks like we'll have to wait for anything resembling a coherent plan, and First Minister John Swinney's so-called special summit just gave them a credibility they didn't deserve. The only party benefitting from the rise of Reform is the SNP and in their usual haste to virtue signal, Labour and the Lib Dems were suckered into trooping along for what was just a promotional vehicle for John Swinney. That being said, the Reform attack on Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar was unwarranted, and no one who knows him thinks his main goal is to increase Muslim influence. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But it was Nigel Farage's declaration that the Barnett Formula should go, and with it the block grant from Westminster, made up by devolving more taxation powers to Holyrood, which really exposed how little he understands, or cares, about Scotland. The Barnett Formula is not some financial sleight of hand designed to rip off English taxpayers, but a means to ensure the distinct needs of country in which a tenth of the UK population scattered across a third of the landmass are properly met. Scrapping the formula is not the same as arguing for more efficient spending, and there is no shortage of examples of how the SNP squanders public money, the botched ferries being symbolic. But whoever told Nigel Farage that telling Scottish people they should receive less money was a vote winner needs to be kept away from sharp implements. And his suggestion that Holyrood's taxraising powers should be increased could only come from someone who has not studied what has happened with the extensive powers devolved after the 2014 referendum. Maybe more financial power could be contemplated if it meant lower taxes, but the chances of that happening are slim to non-existent, certainly not from Reform which says it supports higher welfare spending. Reducing personal taxation through more efficient services and the use of artificial intelligence, freeing up resources for infrastructure investment, and cutting the burden on businesses are all goals which plenty of people would agree with, but the back-of-Nigel's-fag-packet Reform approach would be disastrous for us all. What has been confirmed in the space of only a few days is that Reform is not really about reform at all, but con artists telling people what they want to hear; increase benefits but cut tax, give Holyrood more power but slash its budget. Get Royal Marines to stop the boats? What, by opening fire? It's all hokum designed to fool, and like a fairground charlatan, Nigel Farage doesn't care. The 'plague on all your houses' motivation for voting Reform is all very well, but like Labour's do-good MPs voting for Jeremy Corbyn to create a contest they thought he had no chance of winning, people need to be very careful what they wish for. The last thing those voting Reform want is an SNP victory, but I strongly suspect when the good folk of Hamilton wake up tomorrow that's what they'll get. Sue Webber is a Scottish Conservative MSP for Lothian
Scotsman
3 hours ago
- Scotsman
Sheriffhall junction upgrade no further forward
An artist's impression of the proposed Sheriffhall roundabout flyover It's only seven years since the Edinburgh City Region deal was signed, with the support of all the local authorities and both the Scottish and UK governments. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Now worth £1.6 billion, the agreement should accelerate economic growth and prosperity, and one element was upgrading the Sheriffhall junction on the City Bypass, with long jams now virtually round the clock. Designs for a much-needed flyover are available, funding was in place, but in seven years we are no further forward, because both the Scottish Government and Edinburgh City Council are in such a thrall to the Green Party's anti-car agenda. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A review of the project was ordered in 2020, when Edinburgh's SNP-Labour administration was drunk with power during lockdown, blocking streets and narrowing roads in a hidden agenda to make driving as difficult as possible. Having already accepted the need for the improvement in the City Deal, the SNP Scottish Government then bent to the Green Party's will by agreeing to a public inquiry in 2023. The resulting report was delivered to SNP minsters a year ago and since then, nothing. Except we now know some £6.4 million has been spent on consultants to produce designs. My colleague Miles Briggs has launched an online petition for work to start without further delay, and I hope it persuades transport secretary Fiona Hyslop to get a move on. She's only got a year left in Holyrood, so it would be a nice way to sign off by delivering something of genuine benefit to the Lothians. Sue Webber is a Scottish Conservative MSP for Lothian
