kingscrossaccess

Let’s bridge the tracks

The campaign for a crossing over the railway tracks at the immediate rear of King’s Cross Station, replacing the old Battlebridge Road, scored a major success on 14 December 2010 when the Mayor’s Planning and Housing Committee visited the site of both the station and the King’s Cross Central development. As Conservative GLA Member Andrew Boff explained, “We are here as part of an investigation into public access to effectively privatised spaces”.

Chair of the Committee, Nicky Gavron described our missing bridge as, “absolutely impossible and needs to be overcome. So many people live on the east side and yet cannot have the access they used to have to the station, to the tube station and the front and they have to go all the way round. There was a bridge in the original planning application but nobody is following through on it. There’s a very easy solution to this but somebody’s got to take responsibility”.

We look forward to seeing the results of the Committee’s visit, watch this space. Meanwhile the Network Rail team behind the station redevelopment will be on hand to answer questions from Monday 17^th January to Friday 21^st January between 7am and 7pm when a public exhibition will open at King’s Cross Station.

If you would like to ask them to provide the much needed bridge, do go along and put your points to the team. And of course, let us know how you get on and what their response is by emailing us.

 

King's Cross Station - community campaign whitewashed out by DfT and Network Rail

Phillip Hammond, the new Secretary of State for Transport was whisked to Kings Cross in his first few days in the job to ‘open’ the new Platform Zero on 20 May.  Platform Zero and the Eastern Range offices have become infamous in the area for gross overspending and have featured in the trade press.  

The briefing released by DfT and Network Rail apparently provided for the Secretary of State is a hymn of praise for the Kings Cross project and doesn’t mention at all Network Rail's overspending.  Even though arguably the greatest challenge for the new Transport Secretary and his officials is to bring Network Rails’ expenditure under control.

Also apparently whitewashed out is the long, principled and hard fought community campaign opposed to the way Network Rail chose to develop Platform Zero and their own offices – in particular the loss without replacement of a historic access route for pedestrians, prams, wheelchairs etc into the North of the station forcing a huge detour round the outside of the station. 

Tipped off by the construction trade press, 'Kings Cross job doubles its costs' a campaign by this website forced DfT to reveal that Network Rail had overspent by tens of millions on the rebuilding of their own offices and Platform Zero. I also notice that the Kings Cross budget, that used to be hazily stated as £400million has now risen to 'Network Rail's £500m King's Cross redevelopment'.  But I am told by DfT that we can't know the precise number lest it reduces Network Rail's leverage with its contractors.

I thought it was odd that the Secretary of State’s first rail ‘visit’ was to a project notorious for over spend – normally you would send a minister to something unambiguously good for their first trip out of the office. 

Local activists weren’t invited to the launch we were told there ‘wasn’t enough room’ - on a train platform over 100 metres long – although we were invited to all the Eurostar festivities despite a long running campaign and behaved ourselves.  Smelling a rat, I put in an FOI request for the Secretary of State’s briefing to see what was being said about the overspend on the development and the community campaign. Why would a new Secretary of State agree to his first rail bit of PR be endorsing and overspent project unpopular with the community?

The documents released under FOI - appear to be the entire briefing  supplied by DfT and Network Rail officials to the Secretary of State – DfT does not say that any documents were withheld under FOI exemptions.

Briefing on an event is intended to give a Minister the full picture warts and all so that they can decide whether to go or not and to inform them of any pitfalls – policy or reputational. The briefing documents DfT have released omit to mention overspend and also omit the strong grass roots campaigns against the development.  This is particularly poor given the new government’s emphasis on spending control and the big society – citizens in control of their neighbourhood.

We know that DfT officials involved in station refurbishment programmes are painfully aware of the issues around Platform Zero and the Eastern Range - because they have agonised in pulling together FOI requests setting it out, which I appealed for internal review at senior level.  

My sources tell me that Network Rail still gets hot under the collar when the Kings Cross affair is mentioned – they certainly haven’t forgotten the fiasco that their lack of community engagement caused.

I don’t have a bone to pick with Philip Hammond but there is something strange in how his officials and Network Rail apparently don't mention in his briefing the severe financial overspend and community unhappiness about the Eastern Range and Platform Zero.  Instead they send him there to endorse the project.

So I am sending a copy of this article to Robert Devereux, the Permanent Secretary at DfT, who is in charge of the officials for his comments.  If anyone else involved in the project has any further documents or information I'd be happy to publish them here.

Thanks to Will Perrin for this article, see the original here.

Is this true?

Got a strange email: New platform at King’s Cross station opened tomorrow by Philip Hammond Secretary of State for Transport at 10.30

Is this true?

Why is this bridge important for Islington and Camden?

Click here to see a short but detailed presentation showing the reasons this campaign exists.

Click here to see a short but detailed presentation showing the reasons this campaign exists.

Highspeed 1 says NO!

July 23 2009

To Highspeed 1, St Pancras:

I am involved with a locally based campaign covering King's Cross and Somers Town calling for provision of a pedestrian and cyclist bridge across the rear of the tracks immediately outside the King's Cross Station building. There was a bridge at exactly that point until the 1920s when it was an extension of Battlebridge Road joining with the junction with York Way and Wharfdale Road. Once it was removed, pedestrians retained access to King's Cross St Pancras via an entrance at the same junction. This was closed earlier this year. The local business, commuting and residential communities that regularly use the stations are calling for a new, smaller bridge to replace our lost entrance.

Such a bridge would have great benefits to High Speed 1, linking St Pancras directly to south Islington, making use of both the international and domestic parts of the station much more accessible for tens of thousands of people. 

The bridge campaign has the support of all the major political parties at local and regional levels. It was supposed to have been the subject of a feasibility study carried out by Arup on behalf of Network Rail; the requirement of a Section 106 condition to the original planning application. Unfortunately that feasibility study looked at other options, not the bridge that was being called for. Nonetheless LB Camden planning officers allowed the incorrect Arup study to fulfil Network Rail's S106 commitment, hence planning was fully approved without any north eastern access to King's Cross St Pancras.

Full details about the campaign and the reasons behind it can be seen on our website at  [www.kingscrossaccess.com]. Following a highly successful public meeting held last summer, we maybe holding a further public meeting later this year. Part of the aim of that meeting would be to look at potential schemes drafted on a pro bono basis for the campaign by a locally based company. High Speed 1 will of course be invited should such a meeting take place.

I understand that High Speed 1 may feel that such a bridge would be beneficial. If that is the case, it would be very helpful to know if we could publicise that support as it would strengthen the case we are currently making. We would of course welcome any comments on the bridge campaign that High Speed 1 may wish to make.

30 July 2009

From Highspeed 1:

Thank you for your email updating us on the topic of access to/through King's Cross station from York Way. Whilst we were aware of some of the issues as the King's Cross Station design emerged and gained consent, any additional access that may be possible at King's Cross will not have a significant beneficial impact on St. Pancras International. Given that we already have excellent accessibility for our customers, we are surprised to learn that someone may have thought that we would need additional facilities.  

Throughout the construction of High Speed 1 and the refurbishment and extension of St Pancras we have always worked very closely with the community, however we do not feel that we can add any value to or gain anything from this debate and as railway operators ourselves we see this as a practical matter for the facility owner, Network Rail, and any interested parties.

30 July 2009

Draft response not yet sent...

Thankyou so much for your prompt and well considered reply. You clearly have a thorough understanding of all the points made in my email and I do appreciate your detailed response to each of them. It is always heartening to see that issues such as this one are taken so seriously by all concerned; local democracy is, as ever, thriving when companies such as yours and Network Rail lead the way by actively engaging with the various communities of interest on whose daily lives your services and infrastructure have such a fundamental impact. 

NOT!

Why are we campaigning for a bridge?

Click here to see a short but detailed presentation showing the reasons this campaign exists.

Click here to see a short but detailed presentation showing the reasons this campaign exists.

Now, does anyone have Banksy's mobile number?!

Click on the image below to enlarge this excellent letter from Cllr Paul Braithwaite of LB Camden to the Islington Tribune.

Emily of Islington spearheads community concerns

Emily Thornberry, MP for Islington South and Finsbury, has taken the case made by community campaigners against the so-called business case study for Battlebridge Crossing (aka the Wharfdale Road bridge) directly to LB Islington.

In a letter to the Islington and Camden press campaigners put the case that the study, commissioned by LB Islington, was contracted to a transport consultancy (Colin Buchanan) with a vested interest in its outcome. Further, the study was of such a poor standard that it should never have seen the light of day, let alone having been funded from the public purse.

Emily Thornberry has taken up the cause with LB Islington Chief Executive John Foster; she says:

"I agree that any piece of work commissioned with public money should provide good value and I share concerns that this exercise may have been flawed. I would be grateful for your comments."

At present LB islington plans to discuss the flawed report with Network Rail at September's West Area Planning Committee. We have asked whether this discussion should go ahead at all. 

Until a real business case is made for the bridge, using the increasing number of red herring type reports and studies can only assist developers with their refusal to fund a much needed business and community asset for Camden, Islington, Transport for London, Network Rail, Eurostar, the Government.... (the list goes on).

Final closure of the north eastern entrance to King's Cross Station

Join us on a short vigil to mark the end of over 150 years of access to and across the station at the junction of Wharfdale Road and York Way. Network Rail are to permanently remove this access on Friday. We will meet at 1.30pm on 24 April at the entrance, bring friends and colleagues.

Chaos and complexity rules for traffic in King’s Cross

Tens of thousands of local people, hundreds of local businesses and increasing numbers of visitors from the north and across Europe remain at the mercy of the lethal poor design and dangerous emissions health hazard that is the King’s Cross gyratory– a one way system including Euston Road, York Way, Wharfdale Road, Caledonian Road, Pentonville Road, King’s Cross Bridge and Gray’s Inn Road. Complete lack of access across the immediate rear of King’s Cross Station forces pedestrian and cycle traffic to mingle with buses, heavy goods vehicles, cars and vans adding to their distress, discomfort and high risk of accident.

This campaign is calling for a pedestrian and cycle bridge, one that has been promised by developers and authorities for many years. This promise is being reneged on. As time slips by, the planning deadline for the bridge, 2012, creeps closer. Unless construction of the bridge starts by 2012 it will be forever lost. The bridge is an essential element of any solution to the King’s Cross gyratory nightmare. Other elements include:

• a complete overhaul of the one-way system, particularly removing one-way traffic from the entire length of York Way;  
• improvements to traffic flow to prioritise pedestrians and cyclists over traffic;
• removal of sheep pens at crossings;
• increased crossing times for pedestrians;
• crossings and pedestrian traffic flows that take disabled people and families into account; and
• safer cycle lanes.

In the hands of a strategic authority with a clear remit governing development of the gyratory even this long list of improvements should be possible. But King’s Cross has no such strategic body. It isn’t just the complex road layout that gives us sleepless nights, it’s the incomprehensible list of planners, developers and traffic management bodies commissioning an ever increasing number of studies, surveys, reports and strategies.

A senior transport planner at Islington Council explains:

“The borough boundary between Camden and Islington runs through the middle of York Way, Pentonville Road and King’s Cross Road.  Pentonville Road, Euston Road and King’s Cross Road are part of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) and thus maintained by Transport for London.  For borough boundary roads that are not part of  the TLRN there is a maintenance agreement between the two boroughs: one of the two boroughs maintains the road.  In this instance York Way is maintained by Camden Council.  Wharfdale Road and Caledonian Road are local roads that fall fully in Islington, and are therefore maintained by Islington.”

Important to note that despite being responsible for maintaining the York Way section of the gyratory, Camden has no voters on this side of the station; as a result it is not directly democratically accountable for its actions there. 

On top of this, Network Rail, St Pancras International and Argent King’s Cross as key developers in the area are all having a massive influence in the way traffic of all kinds moves about. Both Argent and Network Rail have publicly supported pedestrian and cycle friendly initiatives such as the Battlebridge Crossing the local community is calling for. But Network Rail refuses to fund the bridge and behind closed doors Argent’s view is very different to the one they espouse in public.

At a recent meeting of the Camden Square Neighbourhood Association, Argent boss Roger Madelin was asked about the footbridge and he made it clear there was zero support from Argent.  This maybe because any access at the Wharfdale Road level would mess up their plans to have a continuous row of high rise offices buildings all along the south west aspect of the track. Madelin indicated that by looking at the case for the bridge Islington Council were indulging a folly, wasting tax payers money on re-investigating the business case for the bridge because it would be of no benefit to the users/residents of the "think Canary Wharf" King’s Cross Central redevelopment. 

Meanwhile, community activists asked Islington Council to produce a document mapping all of the studies into traffic issues currently taking place in and around King’s Cross. The result makes spaghetti junction look sane:

There are calls for a new strategic look at King’s Cross, seen to be more important now that private investment is tailing off and the London Development Agency’s programme from King’s Cross to Finsbury Park has ended. Cllr Paul Convery explains:

“There is some enthusiasm for this from the bodies involved. I have also asked senior officials within Islington to start thinking about a new vehicle to renew the drive for an integrated economic, social and environmental approach to King’s Cross”.

It is this strategic body taking a sustainable stance that is missing. Without it King’s Cross will remain a hotch potch of bad traffic management design. Unfortunately the need for this is urgent and the ability of Camden and Islington Councils, Transport for London, the Greater London Assembly and the Mayor’s Office to move fast and in a similar direction is questionable. King’s Cross needs taking in hand and it needs that right now.