Hermann, Lisa, Tobias and I met with
Kevin Golding-Williams,
Living Streets' new public affairs manager, at St Pancras International for our latest walking meeting on Sunday 7 April.
We met at Sourced Market. After a brief introduction to our activities and campaigns over the last few years, and a (mental) bird's eye view of the complex developments in King's Cross over recent years, at the Parcel Yard, we then toured the restored King's Cross Station and then walked around the area, from Granary Square, along the canal towpath to Thornhill Bridge, Caledonian Road and Northdown Streets, to St Chad's Place (passing St Chad's Well) and via our plantings at Euro Car Parks Brittania Street to Argyle Square and to the Crick Centre site.
The main findings were
1. The long awaited 20mph limits in
Camden, already in place in Islington, east of York Way and Kings Cross Road, would be an
achievement. Kings Cross Square would be a boon when complete. The highway environment for pedestrians on Euston Road and the public realm of the gyratory system remains a problem for liveability for local people (including residents, and people working, shopping or visiting).
2. Collaboration between Camden, Islington and TfL would be essential to work for liveable and viable streets where people want to walk. Travel plans and walking plans for publicly owned and publicly accessible places would need to be continually developed to enable and encourage walking.
3. Walking links north of Euston Road; Battle Bridge / Google Bridge (across King's Cross Station tracks) and the Crick Centre walkway (between St Pancras and Euston Stations) were two important public highways which are currently obstructed (Cllr Brayshaw's ward).
4. We analysed Caledonian Road at Vaultex Cash Handling and further south on the gyratory one-way system, and found the street diverse but cluttered for pedestrians, uncomfortable to cross, and with many vacant shops (Cllr Convery's ward).
5. We walked in Wicklow and Britannia Streets, the latter has major building work cluttering the street, and we saw our guerilla planted bulbs coming out there and in Argyle Street (Cllr Hayward's ward).
6. At the congested corner of Midland Road and Euston Road, we noticed the planters on the footway under the canopy of Gilbert Scott Restaurant, which constrict the public highway (Cllr Brayshaw's ward).
The weather was pleasant and we were pleased to have caught up with various news on Hackney and Harringay councils, on
Sustrans and Living Streets, on
Somerstown Neighbourhood Forum's Big Local grant and the
Neighbourhood Forum for King's Cross meeting,
Friends of Argyle Square's campaign for building height restriction at the Town Hall annexe,
Friends of Regents Canal and
Thornhill Bridge Community Gardeners, the
Canal Trust Cycling Plan,
King's Cross Development Forum and the
Kings Cross Gyratory Review, each through various different members in the group.
It was agreed the
Deputy Mayor Transport Isabel Dedring through Living Streets ought to be advised again about the local significance to King's Cross people of neglected public realm quality, neglected street (as opposed to 'road') environments, and local air quality in Kings Cross, in respect of the walking environment, especially that outside the Kings Cross Central Development area.
GC
Posts
Thanks for the contributions. Jackie, I am glad that what I said resonated with your experience.
Since this conversation was about the CLG meeting on "NP and research", I thought it would be good to share some feedback. Unfortunately I left soon mid-afternoon, so can only comment on the early part of the day. A few "take-outs" from me (James can give a fuller picture):
1) ACADEMIC VS OTHER RESEARCH
To be clear: this was only about academic research, rather than commercial, academic, policy and research to support FORUMS in their work.
As a former LSE academic, I was reasonably sympathetic. However, it may have been more productive to have a broader focus. So much research is needed to support the process - and at a fast pace - that it seems unwise to narrow the remit to academia. Academic contributions are invaluable for their objectivity and depth, but they do not help much to support good implementation in the short to medium term.
Essentially, the purposes of the meeting were for CLG to know what kind of research academics are currently doing on NP, to share with them research that CLG is currently doing, and to identify evidence gaps and try to fill them - in the context of CLG not funding any research.
2) KEY RESEARCH THEMES
The main research questions addressed, as far as I could see, are to do with:
a) the intended aims of localism and decentralisation, and how positive/negative, genuinely innovative, democratic or empowering this is;
b) how NP is actually being delivered: detailed case study analyses of NPs at different stages in their implementation and with different profiles. This seeks to answer questions such as: who gets involved / who is left out, what are the barriers/ how they can be overcome, what capacity of required and who has it or not, what is the impact of NP on the culture of LPAs, what type and amount of support LPAs provide to NFs, etc.
c) whether current implementation meets the intended aims of the policy.
3) RESEARCH FINDINGS
It is early days. However, the findings of Dr Andrew Wallace and Paul Watt (Lincoln University) from studies in London confirm what I expected:
- geographical clustering in central / North London
- uneven capacity - with severe lack in some places
- uneven response to NP from local authorities
- dominance of middle class professionals in Forums
- aspiration to adopt a "responsible" response to planning
- contestation of neighbourhood boundaries
- preoccupation with neighbourhood "quality" and "aesthetics"
- relatively little focus on "structural" matters: welfare, equality, employment provisions...
- uncertainty / skepticism about policy efficacy and impact
They conclude (and I concur) that "marginal" populations need to be better integrated in the NP process, that most FORUMS are unwilling or unable to engage with welfare questions (e.g. housing, services, employment, transport, access to health), that there is a need to improve relationships between LPAs and Forums, and that the perspectives of relevant "outsiders" to a particular plan should be sought.
4) EXPERTISE / OUTSIDE HELP
Another recurrent theme was the lack of capacity in relation to certain issues (e.g. consultation, welfare, structural matters, equality, etc) and the need to bring in outside expertise. There is plenty of expertise available strictly on planning matters, but little on other issues. Most forum participants think in terms of their personal experience - what they like or dislike - but very few have the social policy knowledge necessary to think about the underlying factors that help create better neighbourhoods for all.
I believe that summary does justice to the discussions I attended. James, take it away for the overview of the late afternoon session!
Marie-Claude