|
|
 |
| |
King's Cross
plan is good for everybody
• Camden Council last week gave the go-ahead
for the regeneration of King’s Cross. This decision means
we will create 25,000 jobs, a third of which are for local people,
and more than 1,900 homes, more than 40 per cent of which are
affordable.
The regeneration will also provide a wide range of public
leisure facilities and public open spaces. On balance, this
is a better choice for local people than your paper’s option
of ‘saving’ 67 acres of derelict, brown field land
(Save Our King’s Cross! March 9).
Although your article focused on some groups’ criticisms
of the redevelopment, the regeneration that Camden Council will
achieve actually reflects many of the local views received during
our extensive consultation over the last five years.
As a result, the council has secured an exciting regeneration
package that has more affordable housing, green open space and
health and community facilities than originally proposed by
the developer. It has also prioritised the highest urban design
principles and ambitious requirements to meet high environmental
and sustainability standards.
The redevelopment will provide new community sports, leisure
and retail facilities, including: a pre-school children’s
centre and nursery; play facilities; primary school; two health
care centres; a public leisure centre with a 25-metre swimming
pool; indoor sports hall; multi use games area; community centre,
employment and training centres; three new green public spaces,
plus new landscaped squares and well-designed and accessible
streets, forming almost 40 per cent of the site.
It also means that much of the area’s unique architectural
heritage will be preserved, including restoring landmark buildings
to new uses, and that the redevelopment is leading the way in
terms of creating a sustainable and attractive future environment.
Now it is time to look to the future: King’s Cross has
the best transport links in the city, of huge significance to
Londoners and the South East, as well as for the 2012 Olympics.
Our strong negotiations have delivered a regeneration development
for King’s Cross that crucially balances its wider importance
with the needs of local residents and businesses.
Cllr Raj Chada
Leader, Camden Council
• The King’s Cross campaigners are obviously well-meaning,
but their fantasies of viewing towers in gas holders and ‘Regent’s
Park-sized’ open spaces are hopelessly naïve.
Why do they automatically demonize single professionals
in favour of families?
Every morning we pick up the rubbish dumped outside our neighbouring
council property, while arguing to get them more trees and cleaner
streets.
Nobody wants another Canary Wharf, but balance is everything,
and the campaigners should recognise that professional-power
in King’s Cross makes civic contributions too.
Christopher Fowler
Albert Dock
King’s Cross N1
• The Town Hall meetings I witnessed last week to decide
on the future of King’s Cross resulted in a betrayal of
the residents.
The vote to approve developers Argent’s plan will,
in my opinion, emerge in years to come as the most infamous
final act of this Labour council.
Half of the 10-strong council executive along with the ex-Leader,
Dame Jane Roberts, were amongst those responsible for approving
in outline a ghastly soulless Office City shrine to Mammon.
How could a Labour council be so obviously in thrall to developers?
“It’s all or nothing” Argent said – and
they won the day.
Liberal Democrat councillor Flick Rea hit the spot symbolically
on the green issue when she said that, rather than promise to
“use best endeavours” to achieve a meagre 10 per cent
sustainable energy target over 15 years, we should set our sights
far, far higher, to European expectations.
To the councillors who voted yes to Argent’s scheme, I
say this: “Shame on you.”
Paul Braithwaite
Bartholomew Villas, NW5
• I’ve never written to the CNJ before, despite
being a Camden resident for 40 years – but your headline
on the King’s Cross development has prompted me to contact
you.
Campaigners have claimed that they want to “Save King’s
Cross” by retaining a derelict old building and thus preventing
the regeneration of the area at the back of the station. The
back of the station has, for many years, been a total eye sore
and such a waste when this borough has such a desperate need
for social housing.
I personally am delighted that councillors had the intelligence
to approve the planning application for this site. Far too may
people claimed that they wanted to retain old useless buildings.
Whenever I have heard them quoted it makes them sound as if
they were just entirely opposed to the development – and
they should have been more honest about this.
To the councillors who opposed the King’s Cross development
– I say shame on you. This scheme will create local jobs,
houses, a new school and so many things that the area needs.
It is interesting to hear that the councillors that voted against
the scheme were mostly Conservative’s representing far
flung parts of the borough.
So I offer a hearty to congratulations to the councillors who
supported this development. They have clearly listened to the
public. For this, we owe them a debt of gratitude.
Rita Hayes
Harmood St, NW1
|
|
|
|
