DOCSLIB.ORG

7.8.2 Regeneration and Development Impact Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
7.8.2 Regeneration and Development Impact Assessment 7 Volume 7.8.2 Regeneration and Development Impact Assessment TR010021 APFP Regulation 5(2)(q) Revision 0 Planning Act 2008 Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 April 2016 Page 1 of 197 Silvertown Tunnel Regeneration and Development Impact Assessment Document Reference: 7.8.2 THIS PAGE HAS INTENTIONALLY BEEN LEFT BLANK Page 2 of 197 Silvertown Tunnel Regeneration and Development Impact Assessment Document Reference: 7.8.2 Silvertown Tunnel Regeneration and Development Impact Assessment 7.8.2 Planning Act 2008 Infrastructure Planning The Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 Document Reference: 7.8.2 Internal Code: ST150030-PLN-ZZZ-ZZ-DSD-ZZ-0124 Regulation Number: 5(2)(q) Author: Transport for London Rev. Date Approved By Signature Description 0 29/04/2016 David Rowe (TfL For DCO Lead Sponsor) Application Page 3 of 197 Silvertown Tunnel Regeneration and Development Impact Assessment Document Reference: 7.8.2 Contents List of Abbreviations .............................................................................................. 11 Glossary of Terms .................................................................................................. 21 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 35 1.1 Purpose of the report .................................................................................. 35 1.2 London’s economic potential ....................................................................... 35 1.3 East London’s economic potential ............................................................... 36 1.4 Transport problems at the Blackwall crossing and their economic consequences ...................................................................................................... 37 1.5 The Silvertown Tunnel Scheme .................................................................. 39 1.6 Structure of the report ................................................................................. 39 2. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................ 41 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 41 2.2 Scenarios .................................................................................................... 42 2.3 Regeneration area definition ....................................................................... 43 3. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRANSPORT AND DEVELOPMENT ........... 47 3.1 Summary ..................................................................................................... 47 3.2 Introduction ................................................................................................. 48 3.3 Relationship between transport improvements and economic growth ........ 48 3.4 Case studies – river crossings generally ..................................................... 52 3.5 Case study – London Docklands ................................................................. 53 3.6 Case study – Tyne Tunnel .......................................................................... 53 4. BASELINE SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND LAND USE CONDITIONS .............. 59 4.1 Summary ..................................................................................................... 59 4.2 Introduction ................................................................................................. 60 4.3 Population and demand for housing ............................................................ 60 4.4 Employment growth .................................................................................... 64 4.5 Labour market profile .................................................................................. 69 4.6 Car ownership ............................................................................................. 72 Page 4 of 197 Silvertown Tunnel Regeneration and Development Impact Assessment Document Reference: 7.8.2 5. BARRIERS AND CONSTRAINTS TO ECONOMIC ACTIVITY AND GROWTH ................................................................................................................. 74 5.1 Summary ..................................................................................................... 74 5.2 Introduction ................................................................................................. 74 5.3 Importance of roads to London ................................................................... 75 5.4 Impact of congestion ................................................................................... 75 5.5 Effects on the freight industry ...................................................................... 76 5.6 Journey time reliability issues ...................................................................... 77 5.7 Access to labour market .............................................................................. 77 5.8 Access to customers and suppliers ............................................................. 82 5.9 Summary of transport constraints ............................................................... 83 5.10 Impacts of transport constraints on business location decisions and property markets ................................................................................................................ 83 5.11 Non-transport constraints to economic activity ............................................ 85 6. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL .................................................................... 89 6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 89 6.2 Development projections and capacity ........................................................ 89 6.3 Developer views of the impact of the Scheme on development sites .......... 94 7. SCHEME IMPACTS .................................................................................... 97 7.1 Summary ..................................................................................................... 97 7.2 Introduction ................................................................................................. 98 7.3 Congestion .................................................................................................. 99 7.4 Reliability ..................................................................................................... 99 7.5 Economic impact of improvements to congestion and reliability ............... 100 7.6 Public transport links ................................................................................. 101 7.7 Change in cross-river people movements ................................................. 103 7.8 Summary of impacts on accessibility ........................................................ 106 7.9 Job creation facilitated by the Scheme ...................................................... 117 7.10 Changes in the number of Regeneration Area residents employed as a result of the Scheme .......................................................................................... 120 Page 5 of 197 Silvertown Tunnel Regeneration and Development Impact Assessment Document Reference: 7.8.2 7.11 The potential for increased levels of development facilitated by the Scheme 122 Appendix A. ACCESSIBILITY ANALYSIS ....................................................... 125 Figure A.1: Change in number of jobs accessible from the regeneration area by car, business users, generalised time, AM peak ................................................ 128 Appendix B. LONDON BOROUGH PROFILES ............................................... 156 Appendix C. LAND-USE AND TRANSPORT INTERACTION MODELLING OVERVIEW 182 Page 6 of 197 Silvertown Tunnel Regeneration and Development Impact Assessment Document Reference: 7.8.2 List of Tables Table 3-1: Commuting flows by mode into Isle of Dogs ........................................... 53 Table 3-2: Number of businesses in Tyneside compared with North East ............... 56 Table 3-3: Employment rate (%) in Tyneside compared with North East ................. 57 Table 3-4: Unemployment rate (%) in Tyneside compared with North East ............. 57 Table 4-1: Annual housing targets, 2015-2025 ........................................................ 63 Table 4-2: House prices 2005 - 2014 ....................................................................... 63 Table 4-3: Workplace jobs, 2013 and growth over decade ...................................... 64 Table 4-4: Change in office-serving employment sectors 2003-2013 ...................... 65 Table 4-5: Change in road dependent employment sectors 2003-2013 ................... 66 Table 4-6 Employment growth in the Regeneration Area ......................................... 67 Table 4-7: GLA employment projection for Greater London (2011-2036), sectors ... 68 Table 4-8: Employment by sector by borough (%) – 2013 ....................................... 69 Table 4-9: Claimant count, change 2006-2015 ........................................................ 70 Table 4-10: NVQs by borough and change between 2005 and 2014 (1) ................. 71 Table 4-11: NVQs by borough and change between 2005 and 2014 (2) ................. 72 Table 4-12: Car ownership by borough .................................................................... 72 Table 5-1: Retail centre catchment sizes, average accessible population ‘000s within 45 minute drive time
Load more

Recommended publications
  • London, a World-Class City an Introduction to the Berkeley Group
    LONDON, A WORLD-CLASS CITY AN INTRODUCTION TO THE BERKELEY GROUP Our ambition on every site is to create a beautiful, successful place. TONY PIDGLEY, CBE CHAIRMAN, THE BERKELEY GROUP 2 LONDON, A WORLD-CLASS CITY London is an extraordinary city, a magnet for people I believe it’s the talent of our architects and the and a hub of creativity and enterprise. Its architecture clients who commission them that keeps London and public spaces play a huge part in this appeal. fresh. Together they continually create places that They define the ‘picture postcard’ view that makes flex to the changing needs of our workforce, our London such a big draw for visitors. education, and our lifestyles. Yet it is the city’s ability to refresh and renew itself, The best new development has a great sense of respect blending contemporary buildings and public realm for London’s neighbourhoods. Despite all the pressures with the historic fabric, that is so intrinsic to its that come with growth, it recognizes that we are drawn success. International headquarters sit alongside to beautiful, sociable spaces. Places that feel authentic Elizabethan pubs and modern homes. You find arts and truly designed for people. venues forged from heritage buildings to make Today, neighbourhoods throughout London are set space for our contemporary creative spirit. to change, driven by the urgency of providing more Above all, London remains a collection of villages. homes for everyone within a finite footprint. The quality Neighbourhood shops and restaurants, local parks and of architecture and new development always matters. attractions, all produce a global world city and yet still But perhaps now more than ever, it seems to me feel intimate, local and familiar at the same time.
    [Show full text]
  • Opportunity and Intensification Areas – 2009 Compared with 2008 London Plan
    Opportunity and Intensification Areas – 2009 compared with 2008 London Plan Opportunity Areas – Policy Comparison The policies for the Opportunity and Intensification Areas are broadly similar for both the 2008 and 2009 London Plans. The differences are as follows: In the 2008 plan the areas are structured and broken down into the relevant sub-regional areas and form part of sub-regional policy, whereas in the updated plan there is a single table provided which covers all of the areas. The 2009 London Plan omits references to, “deliver good design, including public realm, open space and where appropriate, tall buildings.” In the 2008 Plan authorities should “seek to exceed” minimum housing targets for relevant sites whereas the 2009 Plan refers to “optimizing density” and “contributing to meeting the minimum guidelines”. This change of approach may account for some of the alterations in housing projections for some of the sites, both upwards and downwards. Map of Opportunity and Intensification Areas – 2009 London Plan Map of Opportunity and Intensification Areas – 2008 London Plan Comparison of Targets for Employment and Housing in Intensification Areas, 2008 versus 2009 London Plan Area 2008 London Plan 2009 London Plan Change Housing Housing Minimum Minimum Homes 2001 - 2026 Canada Water/Surrey Quays 2000 2500 +500 Dalston N/A 1700 +1700 Farringdon/Smithfield 100 1000 +900 Haringey Heartlands/Wood Green 1700 1000 -700 Harrow and Wealdstone N/A 1500 +1500 Holborn 200 200 0 Kidbrooke 2400 4400 +2000 Mill Hill East 3500 2100 -1400
    [Show full text]
  • The Corniche Completes the St James Trio of Buildings at the Albert Embankment Plaza
    Located in the heart of London, on the banks of the River Thames. THE PENTHOUSE • TOWER ONE Welcome to the Albert Embankment Plaza The Corniche completes the St James trio of buildings at the Albert Embankment Plaza. Discover London's new riverfront address with direct views of the Palace of Westminster, London Eye, the City and beyond. Computer Generated Image of the Albert Embankment Plaza. 4 OXFORD CIRCUS Bank of London Stock England Exchange BOND STREET PADDINGTON COVENT GARDEN Covent Garden St Paul’s Opera House CITY OF BAYSWATER SOHO C OVENT GARDEN LONDON BAYSWATER 20 Fenchurch Street LEICESTER SQUARE King’s College London Chinatown QUEENSWAY MAYFAIR PICCADILLY CIRCUS Savoy Hotel Trafalgar Square National Gallery Tower of London KENSINGTON GARDENS Royal Academy The Dorchester of Arts CHARING CROSS HYDE PARK EMBANKMENT Shakespeare’s Globe Tate Modern Perfectly Located GREEN PARK The Ritz Royal Festival Hall ON THE BANK OF THE RIVER THAMES Kensington Palace Horse Guards Parade The Shard GREEN PARK LONDON BRIDGE London Stock LONDON Serpentine Gallery WATERLOO Exchange Tower Bridge HYDE PARK 10 Downing Street London Eye Experience life on this exclusive curve of the River COVENT CORNER KNIGHTSBRIDGE ST JAMES’S PARK WESTMINSTER SOUTHWARK Thames within the Capital’s most refined new riverfront Harvey Bank of HIGH STREET KENSINGTON GARDEN Nichols district - a stone’s throw from the culturally diverse and Covent Garden England Opera House Buckingham Palae London Stock thrilling South Bank. This unrivalled central London oasis is KNIGHTSBRIDGE St Paul’s Exchange Royal Albert Hall perfectly positioned to enjoy the richly diverse offerings Cathedral COVENT WEST BERMONDSEY of one of the most cosmopolitan cities in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Relationship Between Transport and Development in the Thames Gateway
    Relationship between transport and development in the Thames Gateway Contents Front cover......................................................................................................................2 Strategic overview and summary..................................................................................3 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................8 2. The scope of the Thames Gateway in 2003 ............................................................11 3. Transport analysis....................................................................................................30 4. Potential scale of development ................................................................................34 5. Transport and development interaction ................................................................48 6. Strategic focus in the Thames Gateway .................................................................62 7. Phasing of transport and development...................................................................66 8. Conclusions ...............................................................................................................69 9. Appendix A: Travel characteristics and capacities...............................................72 10. Appendix B: Planning aspiration forecasts for SE sub areas ............................86 11. Appendix C: Examples from the Netherlands.....................................................89 12. Appendix
    [Show full text]
  • New-Build `Gentrification' and London's Riverside Renaissance
    Environment and Planning A 2005, volume 37, pages 1165 ^ 1190 DOI:10.1068/a3739 New-build `gentrification' and London's riverside renaissance Mark Davidson, Loretta Lees Department of Geography, King's College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, England; e-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Received 3 February 2004; in revised form 5 August 2004 Abstract. In a recent conference paper Lambert and Boddy (2002) questioned whether new-build residential developments in UK city centres were examples of gentrification. They concluded that this stretched the term too far and coined `residentialisation' as an alternative term. In contrast, we argue in this paper that new-build residential developments in city centres are examples of gentrification. We argue that new-build gentrification is part and parcel of the maturation and mutation of the gentrification process during the post-recession era. We outline the conceptual cases for and against new-build `gentrification', then, using the case of London's riverside renaissance, we find in favour of the case for. ``In the last decade the designer apartment blocks built by corporate developers for elite consumption have become as characteristic of gentrified landscapes as streetscapes of lovingly restored Victorian terraces. As gentrification continues to progress and exhibit new forms and patterns, it seems unnecessary to confine the concept to residential rehabilitation.'' Shaw (2002, page 44) 1 Introduction Recent gentrification research has begun to highlight the challenges that current waves of gentrification pose towards its conceptualisation (Lees, 2003a; Slater, 2004). In the last decade gentrification has matured and its processes are operating in a new economic, cultural, social, and political environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Loyola University New Orleans Study Abroad
    For further information contact: University of East London International Office Tel: +44 (0)20 8223 3333 Email: [email protected] Visit: uel.ac.uk/international Docklands Campus University Way London E16 2RD uel.ac.uk/international Study Abroad uel.ac.uk/international Contents Page 1 Contents Page 2 – 3 Welcome Page 4 – 5 Life in London Page 6 – 9 Docklands Campus Page 10 – 11 Docklands Page 12 – 15 Stratford Campus Page 16 – 17 Stratford Page 18 – 19 London Map Page 20 – 21 Life at UEL Page 23 Study Abroad Options Page 25 – 27 Academic School Profiles Page 28 – 29 Practicalities Page 30 – 31 Accommodation Page 32 Module Choices ©2011 University of East London Welcome This is an exciting time for UEL, and especially for our students. With 2012 on the horizon there is an unprecedented buzz about East London. Alongside a major regeneration programme for the region, UEL has also been transformed. Our £170 million campus development programme has brought a range of new facilities, from 24/7 multimedia libraries and state-of-the-art clinics,to purpose-built student accommodation and, for 2011, a major new sports complex. That is why I am passionate about our potential to deliver outstanding opportunities to all of our students. Opportunities for learning, for achieving, and for building the basis for your future career success. With our unique location, our record of excellence in teaching and research, the dynamism and diversity provided by our multinational student community and our outstanding graduate employment record, UEL is a university with energy and vision. I hope you’ll like what you see in this guide and that you will want to become part of our thriving community.
    [Show full text]
  • Conran Building 22 Shad Thames London SE1 a Vacant Freehold Residential, Office and Showroom Investment
    Conran Building 22 Shad Thames London SE1 A vacant freehold residential, office and showroom investment. Investment Summary – An attractive freehold building with views over the River Thames; – Located in the heart of Southwark, one of the most desirable places in central London to both live and work; – Constructed in 1991 the property comprises 16,405 sq ft (1,524 sq m) of residential, office, showroom and ancillary accommodation arranged over lower ground, ground and 5 upper floors; – To the 4th and 5th floors is an outstanding split level penthouse apartment measuring approximately 4,357 sq ft (404.7 sq m), benefiting from two panoramic terraces with views across the River Thames and London’s iconic skyline; – The property will be sold with full vacant possession provided by no later than Q1 2020; – A unique opportunity for investors or owner occupiers; – Offers are invited in excess of£11.0 million which reflects a low capital value of£671 per sq ft, subject to contract and exclusive of VAT. 2 3 The Shard London Bridge St Paul’s Cathedral One Tower Bridge City Hall Shad Thames Butler’s Wharf Conran Building Tower Bridge A rare opportuntity to acquire City of London a freehold river facing building. Tower of London Providence Square St Katharine Docks 4 5 Conran Building occupies a prominent position on St Saviour’s Dock, a small Conran Building is inlet on the bank of the River Thames. To the west of the property is More located in the heart of London Estate, home to City Hall. The area has attracted major local occupiers including PwC, Ernst & Young, Norton Southwark, one of the Rose Fulbright, HG Capital, Montagu Private Equity, News International and most desirable places Zoopla.
    [Show full text]
  • East London River Crossings: Assessment of Options
    TRANSPORT FOR LONDON RIVER CROSSINGS: SILVERTOWN TUNNEL SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION This report is part of a wider EAST LONDON RIVER suite of documents which CROSSINGS: outline our approach to traffic, environmental, optioneering ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS and engineering disciplines, amongst others. We would Transport for London like to know if you have any December 2012 comments on our approach to this work. To give us your This report focuses on the proposals for views, please respond to our river crossings, namely the progression consultation at of new crossing infrastructure for road www.tfl.gov.uk/silvertown- traffic between east and south east tunnel London, in the form of fixed links (bridges or tunnels), or vehicle ferries. Please note that consultation on the Silvertown Tunnel is running from October – December 2014 East London River Crossings: Assessment of Options Date: December 2012 1 TfL Planning River crossings: Assessment of options Review of River Crossings: report series A. Assessment of need B. Assessment of options this report 2 TfL Planning River crossings: Assessment of options CONTENTS 1. Strategic context ............................................................................................................. 4 2. Assessing river crossing options ..................................................................................... 9 3. Do nothing (Option A) .................................................................................................... 16 4. Demand management and maximising public transport
    [Show full text]
  • The London Riverside School 12
    Free Schools in 2013 Application form Mainstream and 16-19 Free Schools Completing your application Before completing your application, please ensure that you have read the ‘How to Apply’guidance carefully (which can be found here) and can provide all the information and documentation we have asked for –failure to do so may mean that we are unable to consider your application. The Free School application is made up of nine sections as follows: Section A: Applicant details and declaration Section B: Outline of the school Section C: Education vision Section D: Education plan Section E: Evidence of demand and marketing Section F: Capacity and capability Section G: Initial costs and financial viability Section H: Premises Section I: Due diligence and other checks In Sections A-H we are asking you to tell us about you and the school you want to establish and this template has been designed for this purpose. The boxes provided in each section will expand as you type. Section G requires you to provide two financial plans. To achieve this you must fill out and submit the templates provided here. Section I is about your suitability to run a Free School. There is a separate downloadable form for this information. This is available here You need to submit all the information requested in order for your application to be assessed. Sections A-H and the financial plans need to be submitted to the Department for Education by the application deadline. You need to submit one copy (of each) by email to:[email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • THE NATURAL LANDSCAPE 2.72 the River Thames Is London's Best Known Natural Feature. It Twists and Turns Through London, Changi
    THE NATURAL LANDSCAPE 2.72 The River Thames is London’s best known natural feature. It twists and turns through London, changing from a large freshwater river at Hampton into a saline estuary in the east. The river forms a continuous green corridor stretching through London, between the countryside and the sea. 2.73 The nature conservation importance of the linear features of the river channel, mudfl ats and banks cannot be separated from the land in the river corridor. The stretch between Hampton and Kew has Access to the river is particulary the largest expanse of land designated with Site of Special Scientifi c good along the Arcadian Thames Interest status in London. 2.74 For centuries, people have been fascinated by the River Thames, and it continues to attract and inspire local residents and visitors from central London and abroad. Part of the great attraction of the river is the accessible experience of tranquil nature among the concrete and asphalt of the city - the fl ash of a kingfi sher, the bright colour of a wildfl ower or a sudden cloud of butterfl ies have a special resonance in the urban setting. One of the main aims of the Strategy is to ensure the continued balance between wildlife conservation and public access and enjoyment. The Thames is London’s best outdoor classroom 2.75 Over the centuries, the land and the river have been infl uenced by man’s activities. No habitat in London is truly natural which means that we have a particular responsibility to continue to manage the area in ways that conserve a mosaic of attractive habitats and to take special care of rarities.
    [Show full text]
  • London Riverside Opportunity Area Planning Framework
    LONDON RIVERSIDE OPPORTUNITY AREA PLANNING FRAMEWORK ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2015 Copyright Acknowledgements Greater London Authority September 2015 Greater London Authority Colin Wilson Published by Darren Richards Greater London Authority Yogesh Patil City Hall Natalie Gentry The Queen’s Walk Martin Scholar More London Tava Walton London SE1 2AA Matt Christie Louise Johnson Contact Levent Kerimol Enquiries 020 7983 4100 Minicom 020 7983 4458 Transport for London Website Alex Williams www.london.gov.uk Bobbie Bailey Julia Bray Cover photo: Edward Rhys-Thomas Barking Riverside Ltd. Maeve Clements Marcus Adams Barking and Dagenham Council Jeremy Grint Rachel Hogger Naomi Pomfret Daniel Pope Havering Council Christopher Barter Martyn Thomas Tom Dobrashian Andrew Blake-Herbert Environment Agency Jenny Schofield Barking Riverside Ltd Matthew Carpen With thanks also to John Allen who commissioned the first draft on behalf of the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation (LTGDC). Far more people than it is possible to thank individually have contributed to the production of this framework. They include major landowners and their planning, transport and design teams; local residents and businesses; officers at the Greater London Authority, Design for London, Transport for London, and the local Councils. Without whom, neither the framework nor the progress that has already been made towards its implementation would have been possible. LONDON RIVERSIDE OPPORTUNITY AREA PLANNING FRAMEWORK Adopted September 2015 Well! These are tales of mystery! And many a darkly woven lie With men will easy credence gain; Wile truth, calm truth, may speak in vain, For eloquence, whose honey’d sway, Our mortal wits obey, Can honour give to actions ill, And faith to deeds incredible; And bitter blame, and praises high, Fall truest from posterity.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft London Riverside Opportunity Area Planning Framework for a Period of Eight Weeks from 9 February to 7 April 2015
    London Riverside Opportunity Area Planning Framework Public Consultation Report September 2015 Overview In accordance with the Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007, the Greater London Authority (GLA) undertook a public consultation on the draft London Riverside Opportunity Area Planning Framework for a period of eight weeks from 9 February to 7 April 2015. This report presents a summary of the results of the public consultation. It is presented in a table format and includes a summary of the comment received, an officer response on the issue raised and an action (where applicable) as to how the document has been altered to take account of the issue. The responses represent the collected views of the organisations involved in the preparation of the OAPF, including the GLA, Transport for London (TfL) and officers from Havering and Barking and Dagenham Councils. It should be noted that the table is not exhaustive and does not include every comment made by those that responded to the consultation. General comments and comments of support that did not raise issue with the document or its strategies have been omitted from the table, which focusses only on areas of disagreement or suggested changes. Consultation letters or e-mails were sent to 45 companies, authorities or individuals, including land owners, developers, amenity and business groups, utility providers and public authorities. A total of 32 responses were received from a broad range of sectors as indicated below. Generally the responses were positive and supportive, recognising the potential of London Riverside. Ref Response from Subject Comment GLA/TfL/LBBD/LBH comment Actions arising 1 Barking & General Where will the people in the new homes work and The number of jobs calculation is None Dagenham how will they get there? based on the development capacity Chamber of The strategy of creating a huge imbalance study in Chapter 7, using broad job Commerce between the number of homes and the number of densities and site area.
    [Show full text]