The controversial plans to redevelop Liverpool Street station have been given the go-ahead by the City of London.
(c) Network Rail / ACME
Supporters say the scheme is intended to deliver a fully accessible, modernised railway station capable of handling dramatic growth in passenger numbers. The plans include a larger concourse, step-free access to every mainline and Underground platform, and a substantial expansion of passenger facilities such as lifts, escalators, ticket gates and toilets.
Network Rail says that Liverpool Street station currently connects 118 million people a year within London, East Anglia and the east of England. With annual passenger numbers forecast to grow by 35% to 158 million by 2041, the approved plans will ensure the station is ready to accommodate more than 200 million people in the decades ahead.
However, the project has been controversial from the outset.
Heritage groups, campaigners and some politicians have repeatedly raised concerns about the scale of redevelopment proposed above and around the station, arguing that earlier designs risked overwhelming Liverpool Street’s historic fabric and damaging one of London’s most important railway interiors. Critics also questioned whether the balance between transport improvements and new commercial development had tilted too far towards office space.
In response to sustained opposition, the developers and the City of London Corporation say the scheme has been revised to place greater emphasis on the station’s historic entrances and architecture. Public routes through the site have been reworked, and new pedestrian- and cycle-friendly spaces, along with landscaping and greening, have been added to soften the redevelopment’s impact.
However, it’s undeniable that objectors were not placated and continued to object to the very last minute.
Responding to the news, Griff Rhys Jones, President of the Victorian Society and of the Liverpool Street Station Campaign (LISSCA) said: “This is sad day for the City of London. A disfiguring billion pound office block on top of a major heritage asset is not essential to the City’s development plans, it is doubtful whether it will easily provide the profit to “improve” the concourse, and can only realise a small amount of extra space for the passenger. Its focus is retail opportunities which the commuter doesn’t need. It will destroy an existing conservation area. It demolishes listed buildings. It is harmful to the surrounding historic fabric. It has been proposed on a false PR-led assertion that Network Rail is “under instruction” to build on top of its London Stations. It is not. Any advantages to disabled access are a statutory duty and should not require twenty storeys of office block and ten years of disruption to achieve. By ignoring all these considerations, the Corporation planning committee have bowed to developer ambitions, set a bad precedent for London and ignore the user. The City of London deserves better than this for its station – one of the busiest and therefore most important in Britain.”
Even with planning approval now granted, the redevelopment is not yet guaranteed to proceed, and Network Rail could still come back later with a revised scheme if they want to.