Heritage Charity Labels Revised Liverpool Street Station Redevelopment Plan ‘Unacceptable’

A heritage charity has stated that a recently introduced proposal for the redevelopment of Liverpool Street Station fails to address concerns previously voiced regarding its predecessor. The development of these updated plans followed numerous public objections, numbering in the thousands, to the initial proposals, with Westminster Council and Historic England among the objectors. The Victorian Society expressed its view, stating it “cannot accept that this is the best way forward”. Network Rail, however, contended that the charity has overlooked the advantages of its scheme, which entails the partial demolition of the historic structure to generate office and retail areas intended to finance the undertaking. For this project, Network Rail replaced its principal architect, transitioning from the Swiss firm Herzog & De Meuron to Acme, which is based in London. The previous architect, Herzog & de Meuron, had put forward a design featuring a sequence of futuristic, white arches spanning the station’s concourse. In contrast, Acme’s designs adopt a Victorian aesthetic, and their concept for the contentious office block incorporates a reduced height and a green facade. Nevertheless, the initial planning application has not yet seemingly been retracted and continues to be reviewed by the City of London authorities. Network Rail stated on the project’s official website that its revised proposals are designed to alleviate congestion, shorten queues, and enhance the station’s accessibility. It further declared that the “overall look and feel has been completely reimagined,” and added: “We’ve spent time talking and listening; our latest plans embrace Victorian features including the original train shed and the Great Eastern Hotel.” Conversely, the Victorian Society characterized the plans as still being “perverse”. The society remarked, “Other London stations like King’s Cross and St Pancras have adapted to the 21st Century. They revealed their original Railway Age splendour,” it said. It continued, “It seems perverse that the proposals at Liverpool Street should still go in the opposite direction.” The organization implored Network Rail “to stop looking at this handsome station as a development site” and instead to acknowledge its status as a historic artefact. In a formal statement, Network Rail commented: “We’re disappointed that following our meetings with the Victorian Society, they don’t currently appear to recognise the substantial beneficial changes that we have made to the design. We would encourage them to continue their dialogue with us.” It further noted that Liverpool Street continues to be Britain’s busiest station, and consequently, it “must plan for this,” adding: “The current station needs significant improvement.” The statement continued: “We listened to concerns from the previous application; we’ve reduced the height of the structure, and our plans no longer interfere with the Grade II* listed former Great Eastern Hotel.” It concluded this point by stating: “And the new office building is the way of funding these station improvements.” Network Rail’s statement proceeded: “Our stations are not artefacts. We want to invest in them, for them to be used and enjoyed by all.” It emphasized: “They’re working buildings, responsible for transporting over 700m people each year for work, to visit family and friends, and to travel.”