Select Committee on Transport Written Evidence


APPENDIX 20

Memorandum submitted by the London Borough of Camden

  Any spectacular event needs planning and investment, but the Olympics sets two particular challenges—the scale of the investment and getting the wider, long term benefits for the capital as a whole. 2012 has to be seen in the round.

  In this submission, Camden has looked at both the planning and the investment with central London's future in mind. The key points we make here are wholly in line with the Transport Committee's timely remit, taking the whole travel experience as a starting point.

PUBLIC HIGHWAY AND URBAN REALM

  Camden and the other central London boroughs have been working in partnership for a number of years to deliver consistently high quality public spaces and streets that people can enjoy on foot and are already discussing integrated design standards.

  This aspiration is central to the Gehl Architects report "Towards a fine city for people" commissioned by the Central London Partnership and Transport for London, recognising the enormous economic and social benefits of achieving this. All the central London boroughs support this report. Significant levels of investment are required to achieve the step-change in the quality public realm in central London, recommended by the Gehl report.

  Central London borough's will work together with the Central London Partnership to produce a common standard for a high quality public realm in line with the aspirations in "Towards a fine city for people".

  Visitors will judge our transport facilities harshly if the areas surrounding the interchanges are poor in terms of the quality of the urban realm.

  Camden has a lot of experience in implementing high quality urban realm through the borough's Boulevard Project and the Council has given this a high priority for a number of years. This is also the case for other central London boroughs including Westminster and Kensington and Chelsea. These Councils can provide a significant supporting role in delivering the Games.

  Recommendation:   The Transport Committee is asked to stress in their report that the scale of costs involved in public realm improvement is small compared to the cost many public transport infrastructure projects but that the benefits are significant. That the Committee recommends to the Olympic Delivery Authority that improvement works are procured early to get "easy wins" for the image of the city and the Games—bearing in mind the huge pressures that will be on the Construction industry in the lead up to the Games.

  Recommendation:   It is crucial that the current transport-related statutory powers are retained by the Councils to support the Games most effectively and with the support of local communities.

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE

  The bid's success owes much to the ability of London & Continental Railways' new infrastructure to provide a high-speed link from central London to the Olympic venues. The King's Cross/St Pancras interchange will be easily accessible to London's airports and other train services, and will function as the most important gateway to visitors from Europe and beyond.

  That interchange is at risk. The CTRL international station will open as planned in 2007, but at this time there is continuing uncertainty about whether the vital connecting and supporting services will be delivered in time:

    —  Fitting out the new Thameslink station box under St Pancras is still being held up through lack of funding clarity. Indecision is making these works more costly as successive, easy construction windows are being missed

    —  The London Underground Northern Ticket Hall is delayed by design changes (although these are beneficial in themselves) and the apparent lack of a driving force towards faster completion

    —  Network Rail's new concourse to King's Cross Station will sit above the London Underground ticket hall but again progress is stalling as design, programme and funding decisions move very slowly. The current programme has the concourse operational but not finished by the Olympics

    —  The new regenerative development and high quality public realm around these projects has to wait for all these to be resolved

  All these works have been promised, planned and enabled for years, but the lead times for completion by 2012 have already started. We need to finish what has been started in time. The construction programmes offered by contractors look needlessly long. The DfT—as the main sponsor and funder—has been unable to provide the driving force all the stakeholders need.

  Recommendation:   the Transport Committee is asked to press the Transport Minister for action by his Department to ensure that the various King's Cross/St Pancras projects have certainty about their funding and are pushed ahead very rapidly, with particular attention to shortening the draft construction programmes. Further, that the Minister should act as or appoint a champion for these and London's other transport projects that are critical to 2012.

REGENERATION BENEFITS

  The Olympics should benefit all London's regeneration areas, including the King's Cross hinterland, for a long time to come. Good transport enables regeneration and rejuvenating development to underpin:

    —  High quality public realm.

    —  Improved access to jobs and housing.

    —  Creating the positive image needed for London's visitors and investors.

  The Olympics can help drive regeneration to those areas that need it, with transport as the medium.

  There will also be considerable construction activity and jobs, especially in transport construction. The training is in place to help Londoners take up these jobs, and there are clear advantages to completing as many works as possible early on.

  Recommendation:   the Transport Committee is asked to draw to the attention of the Olympic Delivery Authority

    —  The need to manage construction and contractors effectively from now on, to even the flow of works, and to reduce construction and traffic impacts across the city

    —  The opportunities to increase job training and take up in construction, using the training centres across the capital which recruit locally, as part of the contractor-procuring process

TRANSPORT AND PUBLIC REALM PLANS FOR INDIVIDUAL FACILITIES

  Camden believes that all venues and supporting facilities should have their own individual transport and public realm plans creating space for large numbers of people to enjoy safely and accessibly.

  Camden has already procured the Bloomsbury Study with the London Development Association and University College London from Sir Terry Farrell and Partners. This area will be the heart of the Olympic Media Village. Some of the sporting events in central London will largely utilise highway infrastructure: road cycling (all with the borough of Camden), triathlon and the marathon. Not only will the carriageway surface need to be maintained to the highest standards but also the footways to accommodate large numbers of spectators.

  In many ways there will be more pressure on existing highway infrastructure in Central Zone than in the Olympic Village Zone and River Zones, which will largely have bespoke infrastructure built for the Games.

  Recommendation:   That the Transport Committee recommends to the Olympic Delivery Authority that Transport and Public Realm plans are created for all facilities in partnership with the relevant borough Councils.

PARKING

  The central London boroughs are some of the most effective parking authorities and have the expertise to deal with huge parking pressures on the highway network. The Olympic bid stated that there would be no parking in the vicinity of Games venues.

  Recommendation:   That the Transport Committee recommends that Councils and other agencies work together to achieve this without creating problems on the rest of the network. Suitable parking arrangements of coaches will need to be identified.

September 2005





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 16 March 2006