|
|
 |
| |
A historic decision to guard our future
• This week we may be witness to landmark decisions
made by the council to proceed with a lamentable scheme in King’s
Cross that will leave future generations open-jawed.
For example, the death certificate on the attractive and
structurally sound 1891 Culross Buildings could be signed by
the time you read this.
Creating 25,000 office jobs for long distance commuters when
Camden’s overarching desperate need is for affordable housing
and local employment is really not regeneration.
The high rise, high density Office City proposed for south of
the canal is woefully lacking in creativity and sensitivity.
It doesn’t come anywhere close to meeting contemporary
expectations on sustainable energy.
There is derisory provision for transport infrastructure, which
should at minimum provide funding for a new rail/bus interchange
at Maiden Lane, opening up access for pedestrians and cyclists
to the north.
Whilst the plan does have many elements that are laudable, such
as retention of the Granary and goods shed buildings and the
triplet of gas-holders etc, the concessions are dwarfed by the
Gordon Gekko like greed-driven proposals for bland offices.
Fifty-metre high tower blocks will dwarf and block sunlight
over the canal and the Camley Nature Reserve.
If the plan proceeds, hundreds of millions of pounds will be
added overnight to the value for landowners London and Continental,
thus helping the mooted take-over by Sir Adrian Montague and
oiling the City’s wheels.
The Development Control sub-committee carries a heavy burden
this week. Let us hope they will stand up for their residents
and send the scheme back to change the balance towards more
family housing and fewer offices, to ensuring much more substantial
planning gain on community facilities and transport and insist
that it must be truly green.
Paul Braithwaite
Bartholmew Villas, NW5
• We in Camden have a fabulous opportunity to build
a compelling vision of a sustainable future into the King’s
Cross development but our Labour council seem quite uninterested.
Or, more likely, they’ve been sat on by the Blair government
and its big money developer friends. The 10 per cent renewable
energy component that Camden are “trying” to build
in to the project is pathetic enough, but when they say they’ll
“use best endeavours” over the 15 to 20 year build
to get to 10 per cent by switching from gas to bio-mass (fuel
made from crops), that’s just downright insulting.
We should be making much more of an effort to make this a green
build
Woking has even disconnected itself from the national grid because
it’s been so successful at encouraging renewable energy
generation. What is proposed for King’s Cross is laughable
– a mere 14 rooftop wind turbines, some symbolic solar
panels and, possibly, a demonstration combined heat and power
plant.
Alexis Rowell
Primrose Gardens, NW3
• In reference to the comments made by Roger Madeline
that thousands people in King’s Cross and Somers Town are
backing the plan.
In Somers Town it seems to me that most of us believe that
the whole scheme has been willed upon us by Argent and could
sound the death bell of our community.
For these reasons I thank our former councillor Ernest James
and his fellow campaigners for what they are doing.
Dave Hoefling
Werrington Street, NW1
|
| |
|
|
|
