|
|
 |
| |
An artist’s impression of the planned redevelopment of land behind King’s Cross |
King’s Cross: Goliath wins
Bulldozers ready to move in after final bid to halt£2bn redevelopment fails
OVER the past two decades they have campaigned for a better deal for King’s Cross, giving up their spare time to take on one of the world’s biggest developers.
But, through the ups and downs, the rebels who cried foul over the £2 billion redevelopment of the railwaylands can have had few darker days than this.
A High Court judge blew away the opposition raised by the King’s Cross Think Again protest group on Friday, ruling that Camden Council had behaved properly when it gave planning permission to developer Argent Limited.
Mr Justice Sullivan’s verdict means that work can finally begin on the land behind King’s Cross and St Pancras stations – a scheme which represents Europe’s biggest construction project.
The objectors were re-grouping this week and coming to terms with a court order which leaves little further hope for halting the redevelopment.
They are now concentrating on the detailed designs for individual buildings planned for the site, which will come before the council’s planning committee.
Residents and conservationists argued that Argent’s blueprint involved the demolition of historically important architecture.
The listed Stanley building and landmark Culross block look vulnerable in the wake of the court ruling and could be demolished within weeks as the bulldozers get to work.
King’s Cross Think Again argued that Argent is not providing enough affordable housing on the 67-acre site, missing a golden opportunity to ease the huge demand for cheap homes. The council’s waiting list for properties has stretched beyond 10,000. The approved scheme will create 2,000 new residential properties but only 800 will be classed as “affordable” and a smaller percentage of those will be family-sized accommodation.
At one stage in discussions on the redevelopment, Holborn and St Pancras Labour MP Frank Dobson said he had hoped for at least 3,000 low-price homes for Camden’s most in need.
The campaigners argued in the High Court that the debate over affordable homes may have led councillors to reject the plans – but only if they had not been told by legal advisers that they were unable to vote down Argent’s proposals when they reached Camden’s planning committee for the final time in November last year.
A key plank of their case was that councillors appeared preoccupied with the concern that they were bound by a previous committee’s provisional approval of Argent’s blueprint – in fact, members had discretion to review the application afresh and reach a different judgement.
Significantly, the make-up of the first planning committee was different from the panel that gave final approval in November, due to the change of power at the council elections in May last year.
Vice-chairman Councillor David Abrahams, a Liberal Democrat who was not on the council when the plans were first discussed, said in November he had “sympathy” with a stream of deputations calling for more affordable housing.
But he felt he could not turn down Argent’s “package” because of advice spelt out by the Town Hall’s legal team.
Similar concerns were raised by Lib Dem councillor James King and Labour councillor Sue Vincent.
John Hobson QC, for the campaigners, told the court last week that councillors had been “unduly boxed in” and had raised their concerns about legal constraints in open discussions.
He said that councillors might have reached a different decision if they felt they genuinely had the power to review the scheme all over again.
Timothy Corner QC, for the council, said that “any further delay would be counterproductive not only to the interests of Camden but the strategic benefits of London as a whole”.
The claim that councillors were wrongly advised that they could not use their discretion to review the initial permission was “wholly wrong”.
Mr Justice Sullivan said that, although the second committee did have a legal discretion to review the plans and revoke Argent’s provisional permission, “in the real world, you would have to have a jolly good reason to turn it down otherwise you would get thumped in the inevitable inquiry”.
Camden had argued that turning down Argent at the later committee would have risked huge legal costs.
Michael Edwards, spokesman for King’s Cross Think Again, said after the court ruling: “We’re very disappointed we’ve failed to quash this scheme.
“We’ve campaigned for 20 years for real regeneration in King’s Cross, and Argent’s development falls far short of what the area needs. We are particularly sad that councillors won’t be able to consider increasing the amount of affordable housing on the site.
“And the needless destruction of heritage buildings will be a permanent loss to this unique part of London.”
He added: “The legal decision won’t stop our campaign. Much of the scheme is still only an outline and we shall be looking very carefully at detailed planning applications as they come forward.
“We shall carry on doing whatever we can with this development and any others in King’s Cross, to try and make it a better place for the people who live and work here.”
King’s Cross Think Again will now have to pick up a bill for £10,000 in fees paid out by the council to defend itself. Its own team was working on a no-win, no-fee basis.
At the Town Hall, party bosses were this week celebrating the High Court verdict.
Camden’s Liberal Democrat leader Councillor Keith Moffitt said: “Camden Council has worked extremely hard to make sure the planning process has been carried out correctly. We have set the highest standards during this process for its technical accuracy and professional assessment and carried out extensive consultation.”
Councillor Andrew Marshall, the Conservative deputy in the ruling coalition, added: “This decision means our vision for King’s Cross can become a reality, benefiting residents, businesses and London as a whole.”
Labour councillor Theo Blackwell, the party’s deputy leader, said: “We’ve been waiting over 20 years for the development to start and believe that in the circumstances a good deal was struck for local people. The planning gains should stand the test of time. The council should set up an all-party taskforce to ensure that what’s promised will be delivered.”
Argent said yesterday (Wednesday): “We are delighted with Friday’s decision in the High Court. We are now keen to press ahead with the long-awaited regeneration of King’s Cross.
“We want to deliver our vision for the site to provide nearly 2,000 homes – 40 per cent affordable – 20 new streets, 10 new major public spaces, the restoration of 20 historic buildings and structures, 750,000 square metres of mixed-use development, a new primary school, a children’s centre and primary health care centre.” |
 |
|
| |
| Your Comments: |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
