Kings Cross Development Forum

Development Forum received a presentation on 14 June from Steve Sanham of Argent (Kings Cross Central) a fresh planning application coming forward shortly – not merely a ‘reserved matters’ application under the Outline permission already granted - for a proposed block T6 intended to create a massive climax to the long curve of Zone T that follows the shape of the High Speed rail line and backs on to it. The overall accommodation (some of it 13-storey and some 26-storeys high) is intended for 657 students grouped mainly in sets of five or six bedrooms (mostly ensuite). Mr Sanham was accompanied by two representatives from Urbanest – the student housing operator who would develop, own and manage the building (see www.urbanest.co.uk). Forum members put many questions about the appearance of the tall tower at the eastern end of T Zone, close to York Way, sound and sunlight, ground-level external features and the lack of needed amenities in the early years when this will be one of the few buildings occupied on Kings Cross Central and somewhat remote from the busy Kings Cross – Euston Road end of the redevelopment area. 

Forum also heard a report from a recent meeting of Construction Impact Group, of which the main feature was the promised ’period of pain’ to last 16 months when Goods Way is being given a new profile and services linked to the North of the site over the new canal bridge. The road will only be available for westbound traffic throughout the work.

Forum  made arrangements to access finance for future admin support and fixed its annual review meeting date for 30th September.

Chair Geoffrey Roper reported on his appearance at the planning inquiry into four London underground structures soutk of Kings Cross station, bringing the Forum’s objections to their design and appearance.

Good buildings, mediocre public realm

Forum members received a presentation on the five applications  now before Camden. A number felt the dead straight alignment of three major blocks alongside the Boulevard would be wrong: they ought to follow the curve of that road. This was not, however a unanimous view. Member organisations may wish to submit their opinions directly to Camden. The different views are mentioned in the following summary from the Planning Response Team which will be submitted:-

The Forum’s Planning Response Team (PRT) were disappointed at the handling of public realm at the heart of the new development. Hopes raised when the developers presented materials supporting the Outline application have not been fulfilled in this conventional proposal – we hoped for something really special.

King’s Cross March 2010 applications package                                               31-Mar-10

The Forum has been invited to comment on a daunting assembly of documents dealing with the ‘reserved matters’ of the outline planning approvals for blocks B2, B4, B6, and the areas surrounding and beneath them. The blocks run parallel with King’s Cross Station and back onto the new Pancras Square. All ground floors provide commercial units. It appears that the designers of each block were required to coordinate with each other – this shows in the handling of the ground plane and underground facilities.

The package presents: worked up plans and elevations for each block; evidence on ground conditions – soil, services, contamination etc; accessibility; energy; landscaping; and much more. It details the background needed to be assured that the buildings will stand up as designed and that their users will enjoy 21^st century conditions.

A well attended, subsequent, presentation gave a clear picture of  the proposals in the context of the King’s Cross development site and offered an opportunity to voice matters of concern.

Bearing in mind how earlier observations have been received the Kings Cross Development Forum is limiting comment to issues that it believes, with minimal adjustment, could improve the urban feel of the project and users’ amenity.

Commentary

The way the Turnhalle and Pancras Squares are shaping up was very much liked. They promise to be something special, being pleasant spaces to be in and hopefully becoming focii for a range of ‘happenings’. The Forum awaits early consultation on the remaining blocks bounding the Squares. Their modelling and over-shading of the public spaces will particularly be scrutinised. It was difficult to perceive the handling of changes in level and how these will break down what appear to be large hard places. The Forum urges Camden to ensure (through conditions) that seating in the streets and squares is actually provided and actually retained.

The soft handling of the Squares is in contrast to the rigidity of the alignment of the three blocks to the Boulevard. Opinion varied on whether the buildings ought to be lined up or staggered on this side. Some strongly felt that a subtle shift away from the alignment as shown would heighten the contrast between the distinctive facades of each block – as indeed is already proposed on the Pancras Square side. Further a shift would, in urban terms, more happily reflect the asymmetric alignment of the Boulevard to the blocks. It was observed that these issues will come more into focus when the opposite blocks (by the side of King’s Cross station) come up for consideration.

The fact that two of the blocks have access from both their Boulevard and Square sides and the third only has access from one side  seems to underscore an indecisiveness about how preferred pedestrian routes will evolve around the buildings.

.

Summary of applications

 2010/0864/P Block B2  Architects: Chipperfield – very good reputation internationally

Efficient floor plans; entrances from both sides; Underground subway entrance;  photo-voltaic array over 2/3rds of roof; cast iron half columns will give the block an industrial look

2010/0868/P Block B4    Architects: Allies & Morrison – Urban planners for whole scheme, also very good reputation within the profession

Efficient floor plans; single entrance from Boulevard – shades of ‘Sainsburys’ building (R2), wide ramp off narrow pavement; roof level terraces partially planted; chunky gridded elevations – reconstituted stone columns and beams and anodised aluminium windows + gold anodised reveals!; drawings package 4 shows elevations of all three blocks – good reference.

2010/0870/P  Block B6   Architects: Porphyrios Associates – sound, reputation for being different.

Unexceptional floor plans; 2 entrances; highly modelled facade, an Egyptian feel – as expected from this practice; elevations worked up in medley of materials – brick panels of domestic scale, variations on bronze for column plaster, metal windows and panels, and up-turned cap; top 3 floors interesting – 8^th floor has a surrounding loggia, 9^th a part terrace, and top ½ landscaped ‘brown roof’; all in contrast to the other two blocks with clipped tops.

2010/0872/P   Public Realm

Deals with  spaces in and around blocks and Pancras Square; We’ve been here before when commenting on the Boulevard – more of the same; the Square promised to be something slightly special – not normal designers’ Square – lozenge shape dictated by being between blocks parallel to stations and therefore skewed; well handled the Square could become a focus for a range of ‘happenings’ – a meeting place, small market etc; the soft surround of the Square is in contrast to the rigidity of the alignment of the three blocks to the Boulevard – a subtle shifting of these in relation to the Station could improve matters; the facades of the blocks differ significantly a shift in their alignment to each other would heighten this contrast.

2010/0862/P   Zone B Basement   Engineers: Arup

This sets out an underground ring road serving the 7 blocks around Pancras Square; an exemplary piece of linked planning; single access is from Pancras Road; takes large lorries; provides minimal amount of parking – 1 or 2 disabled places for each block; includes subway to tube station.

Four major planning applications for the buildings at the heart of the Kings Cross Central site that have been submitted by Argent (Kings Cross) were open for public comment up to 1 April. Late comments may still be effective for a few more days. You can see all the documents on Camden Planning website.

Two ten-storey office buildings – B4 and B6 – and one nine-storey office building – B2 – with shopping or refreshment uses on the ground floor of each are applied for, along with basement detail, delivery vehicle route and entry/exit ramp as well as public realm for the whole section lying just north of the German Gym.

Building B2 – application 2010/0864/P

Building B4 – application 2010/0868/P

Building B6 – application 2010/0870/P

Building B6 (Porphyrios and Partners). Main picture is view across Goodsway from the North. The small (triangular) space between Goodsway and the building is named ‘Canal Square”. The street on the left is the Boulevard, running south down towards King’s Cross ticket hall and the Euston Road.  Building B4 is beyond B6.

Public realm – application 2010/0872/P

Basements and vehicle access/ramp – application 2010/0862/P

A new name – Turnhalle Square – appears along with the existing working titles ‘Pancras Square’ and ‘Canal Square’ (all provisional and not the final names).

Kings Cross Development Forum studied these proposals. The response from our Planning Response Team is:

King’s Cross March 2010 applications package                                                  2-Apr-10

The Forum has been invited to comment on a daunting assembly of documents dealing with the ‘reserved matters’ of the outline planning approvals for blocks B2, B4, B6, and the areas surrounding and beneath them. The blocks run parallel with King’s Cross Station and back onto the new Pancras Square. All ground floors provide commercial units. It appears that the designers of each block were required to coordinate with each other – this shows in the handling of the ground plane and underground facilities.

The package presents: worked up plans and elevations for each block; evidence on ground conditions – soil, services, contamination etc; accessibility; energy; landscaping; and much more. It details the background needed to be assured that the buildings will stand up as designed and that their users will enjoy 21^st century conditions.

A well attended, subsequent, presentation gave a clear picture of  the proposals in the context of the King’s Cross development site and offered an opportunity to voice matters of concern.

Bearing in mind how earlier observations have been received The Forum is limiting comment to issues that it believes, with minimal adjustment, could improve the urban feel of the project and users’ amenity.

Commentary

The way the Turnhalle and Pancras Squares are shaping up was very much liked. They promise to be something special, being pleasant spaces to be in and hopefully becoming focii for a range of ‘happenings’. The Forum awaits early consultation on the remaining blocks bounding the Squares. Their modelling and overshading of the public spaces will particularly be scrutinised. It was difficult to perceive the handling of changes in level and how these will break down what appear to be large hard places. The Forum urges Camden to ensure (through conditions) that seating in the streets and squares is actually provided and actually retained.

The soft handling of the Squares is in contrast to the rigidity of the alignment of the three blocks to the Boulevard. Opinion varied on whether the buildings ought to be lined up or staggered on this side. Some strongly felt that a subtle shift away from the alignment as shown would heighten the contrast between the distinctive facades of each block – as indeed is already proposed on the Pancras Square side. Further a shift would, in urban terms, more happily reflect the asymmetric alignment of the Boulevard to the blocks. It was observed that these issues will come more into focus when the opposite blocks (by the side of King’s Cross station) come up for consideration.

The fact that two of the blocks have access from both their Boulevard and Square sides and the third only has access from one seems to underscore an indecisiveness about how preferred pedestrian routes will evolve around the buildings.

On another page the Forum’s planning response team comments on the application for Site R4 on the North East of the Kings Cross central site are given in full.  If you want to support them or make a comment of your own there is a short time to get it in. While the Forum generally welcomed this mixed housing proposal with shops on the ground floor, supported housing at a lower level and a ‘garden in the sky’ for the intermediate housing residents – comments say the scheme could have been better with more amenity space better access and connections for the supported housing, more flats with balconies and readier access to cycle stores and wheelie bins. There is also a concern that the imaginative proposal to substitute something like a Skate Boarding area where there was a road in the original plan, it should be locked at night to save nuisance to residents.

Argent (Kings Cross) director Robert Evans gave Forum members a picture of successive improvements to the York Way environment over the next two to three years as various plots are built on and road junctions developed in accordance with the illustrative transport plan issued 5 years ago. Road safety enhancement as well as tree planting and landscaping will make York Way a more pleasant border road.

Less hopeful was the news that no improvements to bus services can be expected in the near future. Trigger points leading to funding for buses would not be reached for some time yet. They are written into the Section 106 agreement for Kings Cross Central and depend on amounts of floor area built – delayed development because of economic circumstances will mean later achievement of these stages (differently for the portions south and north of Regents Canal).

The ‘powers that be’ did not send speakers to the Forum meeting  on February 11. Forum members wanted to engage with Camden and Transport for London, and would have been glad to see representation from the neighbouring borough of Islington about improving the desolate and dangerous pedestrian experience along York Way, the eastern border of Kings Cross Central development and boundary between the two boroughs. We want better transport along York Way and inside the site from first occupation.

London Borough of Camden provide this statement:

You will be pleased to know that we have been working closely with Argent, Network Rail, TfL and Islington Council to try and improve York Way.

 Looking at the northern section of York Way that you have highlighted as being of concern one possible solution would be to consider a possible new crossing point here.  Unfortunately Camden does not currently have funding to undertake such a crossing  but we will continue to try and see whether funding can be identified in the future. As the Argent scheme is built out additional improvements along the east side of York Way including new junctions, crossings, landscaping, lighting and planting will be delivered.

Argent are committed, to improving the junction at Goods Way with York Way with an improved junction with a “green man” on all arms.  However it is unlikely that this junction will be constructed before 2011.  In the meanwhile Camden has recently improved the north-south crossing facility here and made it safer.   

We are currently working with Islington and TfL to develop proposals to improve the southern end of York Way, which includes both the eastern and western sides of York Way.  There is also developer funding from Network Rail to improve York Way south of Wharfdale Road. These environmental improvements may include: widened and better paved footways; better street lighting; enhanced crossing points at the Wharfdale Road and Pentonville Road junctions, and minor changes to the location of bus stops and stands. Consultation on this is expected to commence during summer 2010.         [ends]

Transport for London provide the following statement and map in response to our request for more and better bus services along York Way north of Wharfdale Road and service to University of the Arts (London) from October 2011:

 Future plans for bus services at Kings Cross are stipulated within the S106 agreement for the Kings Cross area, which include a number of changes to the network to ensure adequate provision for the forecast increased demand within the Kings Cross Central development site. The changes include the 390 service moving to serve the centre of the site and two terminating services will penetrate the northern end of the Argent site to cater for the new demand created by the residential development.

At present there are no plans to replace the 390 in York Way; however, once the triggers for the release of the S106 near a full review an evaluation of these plans will be undertaken to assess whether this new service pattern is still appropriate. Please note these plans should be treated as fairly conceptual at present, this work was undertaken to gain an insight into the potential future network requirements and subsequently was in part a S106 mitigation and master planning exercise.

In addition please see the attached map which outlines the proposed service changes”  - It has not been possible to upload the map attachment to this website but copies were available at Forum. The possible changes to routes showed route 45 doing a short circuit from the Boulevard and terminating in York Way without crossing the canal;  46 and 214 going through the southern Boulevard before leaving eastwards to resume their current routes; 390 crossing the canal and using the northern Boulevard before rejoining York Way opposite Copenhagen Street; bus 63 penetrating the whole site to a loop around the tallest residential buildings next to the Eurostar embankment and 394 coming from Copenhagen Street to the same loop. Forum members were disappointed to see even less provision for part of York Way (with its only bus, the390, diverted into the development site). A detailed comment was prepared on the routes in each direction which could advantageously be looped into Kings Cross Central. A further message from Transport for London showed that no specific changes to the bus network planned for the opening of  University of the Arts (London) on-site in autumn 2011. Bus route 390 is due for review in the next couple of months as part of the bus tendering programme, but TfL would argue the existing route is not infrequent because it runs at 7.5 buses per hour, Monday to Saturday, therefore they classify it as a high frequency service.

Camden borough planners have received Argent’s application to develop Block R4 in Kings Cross Central, a sloping site between York Way and the future ‘East Street’ and ‘East Lane’ (not their eventual names). The Forum had a presentation on the design for this block in the autumn. Now the final planning application is out for consultation. Click on this link  http://planningonline.camden.gov.uk/MULTIWAM/showCaseFile.do?appType=Planning&appNumber=2010%2F0389%2FP to go to the architects’ drawings and other application documents. 

The application is to erect a 15 storey building within Development Zone R4 to be used for residential purposes from upper ground level to level 14 (comprising 117 units in total, consisting of 78 general needs social rented, 24 shared ownership and 15 mental health supporting housing), internal cycle parking and services area at lower ground floor level and retail/café /bar/takeaway uses (classes A1-A5), office (Class B1) and/or potential community and leisure uses (Classes D1-D2) at ground floor level on the York Way frontage, together with adjacent public realm and new road junctions. Application number is 2010/0389/P.

Development Forum met 11 hoping to discuss with Transport for London, Camden  and Argent their approach to the environment of Kings Cross Central over the period of development, elongated as it is likely to be. The special concern was where the development site impinges on people’s lives – the Eastern border along York Way and its likely state over the next few years.

TfL 

From Transport for London we would have liked to hear about the transport links they plan for York Way and Kings Cross Central in the course of the next few (say five) years. At present York Way is only served by the rather infrequent 390 bus. Will one of the other buses serving Kings Cross (e.g.17, 91, 259 or, slightly differently, 274) be diverted to run along a greater section of York Way? No such luck. We were offered a plan worked out a few years ago to route some buses through the site when fully developed but even less bus provision on York Way section between Wharfdale Road and Randalls Road.

Forum wanted a greater frequency of buses to be provided on York Way, noting the existing demand and increased demand through University of the Arts (London) – opening October 2011 – and accommodation proposed to be provided in Block R4 soon after.

LBC

From the London borough of Camden we most wanted to hear the borough’s approach to landscaping, lighting, planting and pedestrian crossing facilities to the North of Copenhagen Street. It could not be right for York Way to be such an unfriendly environment for those on foot over an extended period.

 Argent

We would like Argent (Kings Cross) to reconsider whether any temporary uses may be made of land which has been cleared and reserved for development when not actually required for contractors’ operations; We asked them to bring forward eventual landscape treatments so as to give people passing along York Way a more cheerful environment over the extended period before final completion – and were encouraged to hear some of these improvements are nearer than we feared since most of the plots to be developed in the next 2-3 years are along the York Way boundary.

•  We would also have been glad to hear from Camden how they think the undeveloped parts of Kings Cross Central should be over the long period of its development, now things are taking longer because economic crunch
• We would have liked to hear from Camden how they are going to use Section 106 moneys 
• We would also have been interested to hear more about the Borough’s approach to the use of Network Rail’s contribution for York Way environmental improvements to the South of and up to Copenhagen Street.