Does Kings Cross need a second tube station?

York Way. Image: Ewan Munro/Wikipedia Commons.

King’s Cross Central is one of the larger re-development projects currently underway in in central London. A decade in, the area now plays host to the Guardian’s London offices, the Central St. Martin’s art school and an obnoxiously large branch of Waitrose. Only last month, indeed, King’s Cross Central played host to the greatest share of events for the Lumiere light festival. All very prestigious – enough, indeed, to earn the area a shiny new postcode, N1C.

What it hasn’t earned it is a new tube station. Okay, there’s King’s Cross St. Pancras itself, at the area’s southern tip, but the northern end of the development zone is as much as 1km from there. And the rebranding of Nine Elms and Battersea to house the new American Embassy, remember, merited the development of two additional stops and an entirely new branch of the Northern Line.

The partnership behind King’s Cross Central presumably thought that the existing – admittedly, rather large – station would be more than enough. But what if it’s not? King’s Cross is a very busy and congested station, especially at rush hour, when people will be traveling to and from the majority of developments in King’s Cross Central. Buses are an option too, of course – but only one bus stop serves the northern fringe of the development, the 390’s stop on York Way.

This is where abandoned stations come into the mix. Inquisitive visitors to King’s Cross Central might have noticed the Leslie Green-esque building on York Way, in the north-eastern corner of the N1C area. That’s the old York Road tube station, where Piccadilly line trains used to stop between King’s Cross St. Pancras and Caledonian Road. It opened in 1906, but closed, due to lack of use, in 1932.

A map showing the two abandoned stations.

Various entities, from councils to contractors, have proposed re-opening the station as a solution to the area’s transport needs. But it wouldn’t come cheap, and anyway, it would increase journey times on the line as a whole. The result, Transport for London thinks, would be an economic cost that outstrips the benefits of a decongested Piccadilly Line platform.

There is another option. Maiden Lane station once lay between Camden Road and Caledonian Road & Barnsbury stations on what is now the London Overground. Little modern trace exists, but re-opening the station would be far, far cheaper than re-opening York Road (an estimated £8m, rather than £40m). That makes it a far more plausible option to serve the northern end of Kings Cross.


But why should we be choosing between Maiden Lane and York Road? Why not go the full hog, and open both?

A combined Maiden Lane/York Road Piccadilly/Overground interchange would offer a number of advantages compared to the less ambitious alternatives. To the west, Camden Town station is up for redevelopment, in part to improve interchange with Camden Road. Once complete, the stations might well become a popular interchange between the Overground and the Northern Line. To the east, Highbury and Islington already is a popular interchange between NR, Overground and Victoria lines.

That would leave the Piccadilly line as the only tube line in this area without interchange with the Overground. True, Caledonian Road & Barnsbury already offers a rarely used out-of-station interchange (OSI) with Caledonian Road; but it’s an inconvenient walk through an inconvenient location, unappealing to travellers.

If TfL reopened a new York Way station, designed to provide an interchange between Picadilly and Overground, travellers looking to change to the northbound Victoria or Northern lines could take the Overground at York Way to H&I or Camden Town respectively, instead of continuing on to King’s Cross. This would reduce congestion at KGX by reducing the number of journeys using it as an interchange, by offering a new route along the North London branch of the Overground.

Such behaviour could be encouraged by placing York Way in Zone 2, compensating the inconvenience of an extra change with a reduced fare. This would vastly increase the utility of a station at York Way, allowing it to become a hub for commuters looking to avoid the congestion and costs of travel through Zone 1.

A mock-up of what York Way might look like on the Tube Map. Image: TfL/Citymetric.

Finally, the area between York Way and Caledonian Road, lying just opposite the King’s Cross Central development, is currently classified as being among the most socially deprived areas in England. The development as it stands arguably offers very little real benefits to those living literally across the road.

A new station on their doorstep could be transformative in this respect. While the York Road station analysis argued this impact would be minimal, a station serving both Overground and Underground – going above and beyond to connect the local area – would likely be even more effective.

So, there you are. One day soon, King’s Cross St. Pancras might need a hand. And who better to lend one than its old friend from just up the road?


 

 
 
 
 

What’s killing northerners?

The Angel of the North. Image: Getty.

There is a stark disparity in wealth and health between people in the north and south of England, commonly referred to as England’s “north-south divide”. The causes of this inequality are complex; it’s influenced by the environment, jobs, migration and lifestyle factors – as well as the long-term political power imbalances, which have concentrated resources and investment in the south, especially in and around London.

Life expectancy is also lower in the north, mainly because the region is more deprived. But new analysis of national mortality data highlights a shockingly large mortality gap between young adults, aged 25 to 44, living in the north and south of England. This gap first emerged in the late 1990s, and seems to have been growing ever since.

In 1995, there were 2% more deaths among northerners aged 25 to 34 than southerners (in other words, 2% “excess mortality”). But by 2015, northerners in this age group were 29% more likely to die than their southern counterparts. Likewise, in the 35 to 44 age group, there was 3% difference in mortality between northerners and southerners in 1995. But by 2015, there were 49% more deaths among northerners than southerners in this age group.

Excess mortality in the north compared with south of England by age groups, from 1965 to 2015. Follow the lines to see that people born around 1980 are the ones most affected around 2015.

While mortality increased among northerners aged 25 to 34, and plateaued among 35 to 44-year-olds, southern mortality mainly declined across both age groups. Overall, between 2014 and 2016, northerners aged 25 to 44 were 41% more likely to die than southerners in the same age group. In real terms, this means that between 2014 and 2016, 1,881 more women and 3,530 more men aged between 25 and 44 years died in the north, than in the south.

What’s killing northerners?

To understand what’s driving this mortality gap among young adults, our team of researchers looked at the causes of death from 2014 to 2016, and sorted them into eight groups: accidents, alcohol related, cardiovascular related (heart conditions, diabetes, obesity and so on), suicide, drug related, breast cancer, other cancers and other causes.

Controlling for the age and sex of the population in the north and the south, we found that it was mostly the deaths of northern men contributing to the difference in mortality – and these deaths were caused mainly by cardiovascular conditions, alcohol and drug misuse. Accidents (for men) and cancer (for women) also played important roles.

From 2014 to 2016, northerners were 47% more likely to die for cardiovascular reasons, 109% for alcohol misuse and 60% for drug misuse, across both men and women aged 25 to 44 years old. Although the national rate of death from cardiovascular reasons has dropped since 1981, the longstanding gap between north and south remains.

Death and deprivation

The gap in life expectancy between north and south is usually put down to socioeconomic deprivation. We considered further data for 2016, to find out if this held true for deaths among young people. We found that, while two thirds of the gap were explained by the fact that people lived in deprived areas, the remaining one third could be caused by some unmeasured form of deprivation, or by differences in culture, infrastructure, migration or extreme weather.

Mortality for people aged 25 to 44 years in 2016, at small area geographical level for the whole of England.

Northern men faced a higher risk of dying young than northern women – partly because overall mortality rates are higher for men than for women, pretty much at every age, but also because men tend to be more susceptible to socioeconomic pressures. Although anachronistic, the expectation to have a job and be able to sustain a family weighs more on men. Accidents, alcohol misuse, drug misuse and suicide are all strongly associated with low socioeconomic status.

Suicide risk is twice as high among the most deprived men, compared to the most affluent. Suicide risk has also been associated with unemployment, and substantial increases in suicide have been observed during periods of recession – especially among men. Further evidence tells us that unskilled men between ages 25 and 39 are between ten and 20 times more likely to die from alcohol-related causes, compared to professionals.

Alcohol underpins the steep increase in liver cirrhosis deaths in Britain from the 1990s – which is when the north-south divide in mortality between people aged 25 to 44 also started to emerge. Previous research has shown that men in this age group, who live in the most deprived areas, are five times more likely to die from alcohol-related diseases than those in the most affluent areas. For women in deprived areas, the risk is four times greater.


It’s also widely known that mortality rates for cancer are higher in more deprived areas, and people have worse survival rates in places where smoking and alcohol abuse is more prevalent. Heroin and crack cocaine addiction and deaths from drug overdoses are also strongly associated with deprivation.

The greater number of deaths from accidents in the north should be considered in the context of transport infrastructure investment, which is heavily skewed towards the south – especially London, which enjoys the lowest mortality in the country. What’s more, if reliable and affordable public transport is not available, people will drive more and expose themselves to higher risk of an accident.

Deaths for young adults in the north of England have been increasing compared to those in the south since the late 1990s, creating new health divides between England’s regions. It seems that persistent social, economic and health inequalities are responsible for a growing trend of psychological distress, despair and risk taking among young northerners. Without major changes, the extreme concentration of power, wealth and opportunity in the south will continue to damage people’s health, and worsen the north-south divide.

The Conversation

Evangelos Kontopantelis, Professor in Data Science and Health Services Research, University of Manchester

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.