[Reposted] Brian Coleman, Ten Years Ago

(And we welcome Hammerson's chums
with their renewed interest in this post.)

---

Mayor's answers (from 2001)

Brent Cross Shopping Centre

Question number	0031/2001
Meeting date	24/01/2001

Question 1 by Brian Coleman

"Would the Mayor accept that the proposed extension to Brent Cross Shopping Centre will bring improvements to Public transport?

For example:

 - A significantly improved new bus station

 - A new bus route filling a major gap in the network between Brent Cross and Queensbury Underground Station

 - Installation of Countdown signs (showing how long passengers have to wait for the next bus) at the bus station and 112 local bus stops

 - £22.5 million over fifteen years to contribute towards the cost of implementing a sustainable transport policy for the Centre through an innovative transport forum including representatives from the Centre's owners, the Council and Transport for London.

 - And that car journeys to Brent Cross would reduce by 3%."

Answer by Ken Livingstone (1st Term)

"I fully support proposals to improve public transport services at Brent Cross. I urge the shopping centre's owners to work with TfL and others to make those improvements without delay. I reject the notion that such improvements depend on a massive extension to the shopping centre.

The extension to Brent Cross would not reduce car trips by 3%. There would be a modal shift of 3% from car to public transport. This has to be seen in the context of an overall increase in all trips, including an increase in the actual number of car trips " albeit a reduced proportion."

---

Mayor answers to London

Brent Cross car parking

Question number	0032/2001
Meeting date	24/01/2001

Question 2 by Brian Coleman

"Would the Mayor accept the proposed extension to Brent Cross would introduce a charging policy for extensive areas of car parking that is currently free of charge and that his objection to the extension is therefore contrary to his expressed views on car usage?"

Answer by Ken Livingstone (1st Term)

"Free car parking in large out of town shopping centres such as Brent Cross are clearly attractive to car borne shoppers, rather than using other more sustainable means of transport. Charges at Brent Cross or any other large regional shopping centre would be welcomed in principle providing that these were set at an appropriate level to deter car use, whilst at the same time alternatives to the car were improved, particularly public transport. This would also have to be taken in the context of the overall impact of the proposals, the transport package and the negative impact on the surrounding area and road network arising from the increased attractiveness of an expanded shopping centre. The charges proposed for car parking were one of the positive elements and a step in the right direction for improving the sustainability for out of centre shopping development in line with my views. However, on their own they were not sufficient to overcome the serious harm that would be caused by the extension in generating increased traffic volumes. My objection is therefore to the wider strategic impact and the conflict with strategic planning and transport policies."

---

Mayor answers to London

Brent Cross multi-storey car park

Question number	0033/2001
Meeting date	24/01/2001

Question 3 by Brian Coleman

"As the Mayor supports the Secretary of States original decision on Brent Cross does this include the Secretary of States granting of Planning permission for a new multi-storey car park?"

Answer by Ken Livingstone (1st Term)

"I supported the principle [sic] objection to the scheme to reject the retail extension. I did not support the approval of the car park. The Secretary of State's approval of the car park but rejection of the shopping centre extension may at first sight seem perverse. However, I understand the Secretary of State considered that the new car park would involve the reallocation of existing car parking spaces and improved layout and circulation, rather than any overall increase in parking numbers. On this basis he found the car park proposals acceptable and granted permission."

---

Mayor answers to London

Brent Cross - jobs

Question number	0034/2001
Meeting date	24/01/2001

Question 4 by Brian Coleman

"Does the Mayor accept that the extension to Brent Cross will secure 1000 jobs in the most deprived part of the Borough of Barnet?"

Answer by Ken Livingstone (1st Term)

"The jobs impact of a major retail development at Brent Cross would go far beyond the immediate area of the borough. Any significant development on this scale will obviously create jobs from construction work, although this is a temporary employment benefit to the area. I do not necessarily accept that 1000 new jobs in the long term would be secured for Barnet or this part of North West London. There was clear evidence pointing to a detrimental impact on other nearby town centres including those beyond Barnet's boundary, such as Kilburn and Wembley. Real jobs in the retail trade and other areas of regeneration could be lost as shops close and businesses move out due to the improved attractiveness to shoppers relocating to Brent Cross at the expense of these other centres which are in more need of regeneration and investment."

---

Mayor answers to London

Brent Cross consultation

Question number	0035/2001
Meeting date	24/01/2001

Question 5 by Brian Coleman

"What consultation has the Mayor had with the London Borough of Barnet on his approach to Brent Cross Shopping Centre extension?"

Answer by Ken Livingstone (1st Term)

"My officers met with Barnet Council in the autumn of last year following comments I made to the Barnet Unitary development Plan (UDP). Discussions took place on various policies including the approach to Brent Cross. The Deputy Mayor is also meeting a Barnet delegation, including the Leader of the Council, this week to discuss the Barnet UDP and no doubt Brent Cross, will be on the agenda."

---

Answers (it's now 2002)

Preservation of the Suburbs' uniqueness

[Supplementary question]

Question number	0678/2002
Meeting date	23/10/2002

 

Question by Brian Coleman

"As the Mayor will be aware, up there in the London Borough of Barnet, green and pleasant land, we are trying to create a new suburb in Cricklewood. Would he accept that his attitude thus far has been less than helpful? What Barnet is aiming for is a balanced community up in Cricklewood. What many residents of Barnet and politicians have concerns on is his support for a 44-storey tower on this site, which many of us consider totally inappropriate in a borough such as Barnet. Will he assure me that Cricklewood is not going to turn into another King's Cross saga, which, I fear, will see out both his and my political careers?"

 

Answer by Ken Livingstone (1st Term)

"Hopefully, it will not turn into another King's Cross saga because there are not going to be any tall buildings there at all because it is almost all in the viewing corridor. On this site, which I live within spitting distance of so I know it quite well, we are talking about a major new small town, in a sense. It is important to get the balance right but there are huge problems. That new small town is bisected by the North Circular and it will need a particularly imaginative bridge over that, which is not just a bridge that kids can drop rocks onto the North Circular traffic, but will actually be a bridge with shops so that it is a living bridge; you are not even aware you are on a bridge that actually connects the expanded Brent Cross with the railway lines to the South.
I can think of very few places in London where it is more appropriate to have a 40-storey office complex than exactly at the junction of Staples Corner, where it looks down on the North Circular, the A1 and the M1. It is hardly overlooking someone's back garden. It would be a huge and dramatic landmark building as people coming from everywhere else in the country actually arrive at that Staples Corner junction. Therefore, there will be a mixture of tall buildings as well as low-rise development."

---

Mayor answers to London

Mayor's attitutde [sic] towards Cricklewood development

Question number	0682/2002
Meeting date	23/10/2002

 

Question by Brian Coleman

"Does the Mayor accept that his attitude towards the Cricklewood development has thus far been less than helpful to this major project?"

 

Answer by Ken Livingstone (1st Term)

"No, in fact the reverse is true. My intervention has been much more than merely helpful, it has resulted in the transformation of the original unimaginative and unacceptable proposals into an emerging masterplan that is much more in line with sustainable development in London. I continue to oppose the unacceptable stand-alone extension to the Brent Cross Shopping Centre, which was previously opposed by LPAC, Brent, Haringey and Harrow Councils. Barnet Council, which previously supported the proposal, has now joined me in opposing it and seeking a better solution. I also opposed the stand-alone proposal for a huge car-based out-of-centre retail and leisure centre by Railtrack and Pillar on former railway land at Cricklewood, and am pleased to note that this application has now been withdrawn. Instead, I have encouraged Hammerson/Standard Life (who own Brent Cross) and Railtrack/Pillar (who own Cricklewood sidings) to work together, with my own planning team, Barnet Council and TfL, to prepare a planning framework and masterplan for Cricklewood/Brent Cross. This will be based on a new railway station on the Thameslink 2000 line, new additional public transport facilities, and a mix of retail, office, housing, hotel, community and other uses to form a genuine town centre on the railway lands and Brent Cross. The private sector interests have offered to fund an international competition to design the crucial `high street" link over the North Circular Road to unite the two sides. I am delighted that Barnet Council has decided to alter its UDP to facilitate this masterplan approach, and I look forward to joining Barnet in adopting the planning framework/masterplan in the New Year. I am excited by this constructive and successful joint working, and look forward to the benefits to Barnet, North West London and London generally in terms of new jobs, homes, a new urban centre and regeneration."

---

 

Answers (it's now 2004)

LDA Funding of Suburban Areas

Question number	0805/2004
Meeting date	24/06/2004

 

Question by Brian Coleman

"Will the Mayor be seeking to direct LDA funds to re-generate suburban areas such as the space between B&Q and Cricklewood Lane in my constituency?"

 

Answer by Ken Livingstone (2nd Term)

"The LDA is responsible for furthering the economic development and regeneration of the Greater London region. Since March 2000, the LDA has invested over £1.3billion and since March 2002 it has created and safeguarded over 15,761 jobs, created over 30,201 learning opportunities, supported over 1,443 businesses and reclaimed/redeveloped over 83 hectares of derelict land. The LDA does not distribute funds in a vacuum, but is guided by its statutory framework and my Economic Development Strategy. Barnet is considered to be a comparatively affluent borough, although containing small pockets of deprivation. Barnet has received a variety of funds from the LDA to support regeneration and economic development across the Borough. Barnet has benefited from the pan regional economic planning that the LDA has led and the borough will shortly benefit from the development of a sub regional economic strategy. Such planning supports the plans in the Cricklewood/Brent Cross Opportunity area."

---

 

Now 2006, with Darren Johnson

Parking at Large Developments

[Supplementary question]

Question number	0846/2006
Meeting date	17/05/2006

 

Question by Darren Johnson

"... However, it is a different picture with some of these big retail developments and the large residential developments. Was it not a consideration both with Stratford and with King¿s Cross that both of these areas breach European Union (EU) air quality limits already, and was it really responsible to provide for more car-parking provision, increasing more traffic, bringing more cars into the area, when we are already breaching EU air quality limits in these two areas?"

 

Answer by Ken Livingstone (2nd Term)

"As I say, King's Cross is well below, Stratford is above. The Stratford shopping development is slightly larger than Bluewater and will be competing with Lakeside and with Bluewater. As there 10 rail lines going there, there will be many more people commuting to shop at Stratford than the rivals, which just are not well served by public transport, but we got to the point, after a lot of intense negotiation that the development was not going to go ahead unless the level of car parking was going to be sufficiently attractive to the people taking the retail units. It actually came down to being a deal-breaker. It was not going to happen if we did not agree that and therefore, reluctantly, we went along with it.
This problem is that these great sorts of centres that started with Brent Cross is that they have been a disaster in environmental terms because they are totally dependent on car use. The way to tackle this is not to pick on the new ones coming up, but to have an overall strategy of reducing car use in the city. We are the only city in the world that has seen a shift from car to bus, and I think you basically need London-wide measures to tackle that and we are working on some new ones to come along to encourage people to shift from car use, and particularly the more polluting cars, into public transport."

---

Back with Brian Coleman

Cricklewood Station

Question number	1729/2006
Meeting date	12/07/2006

 

Question by Brian Coleman

"What is the latest on the future of Cricklewood Station? Will it be closed permanently, and what are the transport plans for the development at Brent Cross?"

 

Answer by Ken Livingstone (2nd Term)

"TfL are not aware of any proposals to close Cricklewood station. Network Rail has applied to the Office of Rail Regulation for consent to dispose of railway lands to facilitate the development. Although the proposal for a new station is close to the existing station, the application explicitly states that the new facility is intended to serve the development and not as a replacement for the existing Cricklewood Station."

---

It's 2008, with Murad Qureshi

DLR at Brent Cross

Question number	0353/2008
Meeting date	20/02/2008

 

Question by Murad Qureshi

"What is the likelihood of a finalised Brent Cross Development including a DLR style Brent Cross Railway?"

 

Answer by Ken Livingstone (2nd Term)

"The development framework adopted by LB Barnet makes reference to a Rapid Transport System at Brent Cross and Cricklewood. It is envisaged that this will be based on an expansion of the existing bus network and there are currently no proposals to develop a DLR style of transit system at this site.
TfL does give consideration to innovative ways of providing new means of transportation and if the developer proposed funding for a DLR type system then it would be considered in terms of its value for money, affordability, and public acceptability."

---

Link to HOME (see all posts).