DOCSLIB.ORG

Thames Estuary Production Corridor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Thames Estuary Production Corridor Thames Estuary Production Corridor A framework for North Kent & South Essex FINAL REPORT Emma Wilcox Associates September 2018 CONTENTS Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................1 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................4 2 Creative Industries Production – an opportunity for growth for South East LEP .....................................6 2.1 Creative Industry Profile ..........................................................................................................................6 2.2 Strength, assets and potential in North Kent and South Essex ..................................................................7 2.3 Policy Context ..........................................................................................................................................9 2.4 Momentum ........................................................................................................................................... 10 2.5 Towards the Case for Investment ........................................................................................................... 10 3 A framework for South Essex and North Kent ....................................................................................... 11 3.1 Refining the PROPOSITIONS ................................................................................................................... 11 3.2 Identifying PLACES ................................................................................................................................. 13 3.3 Identifying and developing the PROPOSALS ........................................................................................... 14 3.4 Framework ............................................................................................................................................ 15 3.5 Projects.................................................................................................................................................. 16 3.6 Enablers and Drivers .............................................................................................................................. 21 4 Conclusion and next steps ..................................................................................................................... 23 4.1 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 23 4.2 Next Steps ............................................................................................................................................. 24 APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................................... 25 A1 Policy Context ........................................................................................................................................ 25 A2 How the work was delivered .................................................................................................................. 28 A3 Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................... 35 Executive Summary Since 2010, the number of creative businesses in the leisure and cultural offer. Creative entrepreneurs wider SELEP area has grown by 30.5%. The can utilise spaces that were abandoned by proportion of creative industries in the total SELEP traditional industries in decline. business base is growing as well, accounting for 9.6% of total businesses in 2015, compared to 8.5% Alongside the need for workspace and housing, a in 2010. skilled workforce will underpin success. 100,000 people work in creative jobs who live across the However, growth is below the national average, estuary, whilst the total number of creative jobs in suggesting that the SELEP region is failing to the estuary is 55,000. This provides a significant maximise its obvious potential given its proximity untapped workforce to draw on, gives confidence to and connectivity to London. The region risks missing investors and demonstrates significant creative and out to other high profile and well supported areas cultural potential. such as the Northern Powerhouse. TEPC offers an opportunity to establish the estuary The Creative Industries is the UK’s biggest growth as a globally significant super-cluster for creative sector. Over 1.3m people work in the creative and cultural production, building on existing economy across the South East alone, and it is strengths. It will enable emerging clusters of locally- estimated that 1.2 million new workers will be based creative entrepreneurs, to scale up, diversify needed in the sector over the next decade. and innovate to meet the needs of industry. However, the South East’s preeminent position as a world capital of creativity is under threat as TEPC will differentiate its offer to a range of creatives, artists and entrepreneurs lack appropriate constituents: infrastructure for expansion. § For policy makers - provide clear evidence of the Loss of workspace is a significant threat coupled value and importance of this sector and its with the increasing lack of affordable housing, specific requirements, highlight the policy particularly in London. Research by the GLA in 2014 barriers, propose and influence solutions. found that over 30% of current London studios § For creative industries and practitioners - would disappear within five years. support to access finance, be responsive and nimble, open doors and make the case, consider The Thames Estuary Production Corridor vision delivery vehicles for sustainable workspace. addresses this urgent need. § For investors - set out a clear, evidence based, compelling and engaging narrative, change The estuary offers competitive land and property mindsets about the estuary. Provide support to values, buildings ripe for repurposing, coupled with unlock difficult sites. the quality of life offered by its countryside, coast, 1 § For developers - give them confidence in the The draft framework: sector, demonstrate the benefits, show tangible results using case studies and exemplars. § Identifies PLACES where the most traction and § Refines the PROPOSITIONS which are specific to § For stakeholders - support wider ambitions for potential could be demonstrated. Basildon, South Essex and North Kent. Creative Enterprise. placemaking, economic growth and skills Chatham, Ebbsfleet, Margate, Southend and Innovation and skills for growth. Creative development. Align with broader policies and Purfleet demonstrate particular strengths Industries in placemaking objectives, bring creative solutions. § Is informed by testing and sifting PROPOSALS as § Initiates a PROJECT PIPELINE with close to 40 they emerged projects to support, test and develop further. TEPC aligns with national and regional spatial, economic and creative industry policy priorities; TEPC Vision: A world class centre for production – leading global innovation, developing talent and cultivating most recently the Thames Estuary 2050 Growth Commission’s final report endorsed the Thames world changing ideas Estuary Production Corridor. This alignment of national policy and local opportunities has Untapped Excellent World Class Local Talent Pool Placemaking Driving Growth accelerated buy-in, TEPC is supported by all 18 local Potential Connectivity Clusters authority Chief Executives in the Thames estuary area, recognising that it is a vital programme to: § Meet a national demand Innovation Creative Industries in § Continue to deliver international impact PROPOSITIONS: Creative Enterprise and skills placemaking § Contribute to rebalancing the economy for growth § Find new uses for old land § Strengthen and develop skills § Fulfil the region’s potential ACTIONS: § Tell a new story about the estuary § Attract long term investment § Plan strategically across geographies Strengthen and build clusters and networks DEVELOPING TEPC PROJECTS: § Create vibrant, energetic new places NORTH KENT AND SOUTH ESSEX The report presents a summary of findings, analysis and evaluation, moving towards a distinct vision for Support planned projects TEPC in South Essex and North Kent. It sets out what TEPC means for this region, bringing the vision to Identify future life for policy makers, creative businesses, opportunities stakeholders and future investors. It underpins and informs SELEP’s contribution to the Case for Investment, which consultants Regeneris are developing for the entire TEPC area. Clearly identified Places Locally informed Proposals 2 This report was commissioned by SELEP, Kent County Council and Thurrock Council, supported by a steering group comprising partners from SECEN, Essex County Council, Kent County Council, Thurrock Council, Thames Gateway Kent Partnership and Opportunity South Essex. The strength of the partnerships, working across the estuary between North Kent and South Essex and with London colleagues is vital to TEPC future success. 3 11 The Thames Estuary Production Corridor (TEPC) studios, fashion manufacturing hubs and music vision1, launched in 2017, set out a clear ambition production centres, there is a need for large, state Introduction for the Thames estuary to become a world class of the art facilities with high
Load more

Recommended publications
  • London Paramount Entertainment Resort
    London Paramount Entertainment Resort Public Consultation: Your Feedback from Stage Two London Resort Company Holdings January 2015 London Paramount Entertainment Resort Your Feedback from Stage Two January 2015 London Paramount Entertainment Resort Public Consultation: Your Feedback from Stage Two London Resort Company Holdings London Paramount Entertainment Resort Your Feedback from Stage Two Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 3 Overview of Stage Two of the Consultation ................................................................................... 4 Publicity ...................................................................................................................................... 5 Media .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Online ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Attendance ................................................................................................................................. 7 Analysis of feedback ....................................................................................................................... 9 Conclusion
    [Show full text]
  • Kent Rail Strategy 2021
    Kent Rail Strategy 2021 Public Consultation Report January 2021 Kent Rail Strategy 2021 Consultation Report Table of Contents 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 4 2. Consultation process................................................................................................................ 4 3. Consultation responses ............................................................................................................ 8 4. Kent Rail Strategy ambitions .................................................................................................. 10 5. Rail policy .............................................................................................................................. 15 6. Fares policy ........................................................................................................................... 20 7. Rail infrastructure enhancements ........................................................................................... 25 8. Rolling stock improvements ................................................................................................... 29 9. Passenger services ................................................................................................................ 33 10. Community Rail Partnerships (CRPs) ................................................................................. 37 11. Rail freight provision ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The River Thames Phosphate Mode
    HP NRA RIV NRA The River Thames Phosphate Mode/ Improvements on the River Colne model -* Investigation o f high decay rates -*■ Effects of phosphate stripping at STWs Gerrie Veldsink March 19% CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 THE NATIONAL RIVERS AUTHORITY AND WATER QUALITY PLANNING 2 2.1 The National River Authority 2.2 The water Quality Planning Section in the Thames Region 3 3 THE RIVER THAMES PHOSPHATE MODEL 4 3.1 Introduction 5 3.2 TOMCAT 6 4 COLNE MODEL IMPROVEMENTS 8 4.1 River Colne 8 4.2 Modelling the River Colne 9 4.2.1 Introduction 9 4.2.2 Data input 10 4.2.2.1 Flow upstream of the STWs 10 4.2.2.2 Flow downstream of the bifurcation 11 4.2.2.3 The accretional flow 11 4.2.2.4 The concentration of phosphate in the accretional flow 11 4.2.2.5 Flow and quality of discharge from STWs 11 4.2.2.6 Flow and quality of the River Misbourne 11 4.2.2.7 Sources of data and important files 12 4.2.2.8 Differences between the original model and the model in this study 13 4.2.3 Calibration (OctobeLl992 to October 1994) 14 4.2.4 Validation (lanuary 1982 to lanuary 1984) 15 4.2.5 Sensitivity ofJheXolne Mode\ 16 4.3 Conclusion 1 7 5 WORK ON THE RIVER THAMES MODEL 18 5.1 Introduction 18 5.2 Order of STW 18 5.3 High Decay Rates 18 5.3.1 Introduction 18 5.3.2 Reducing high decay rates 19 5.3 Effects of phosphate stripping at STWs 23 5.4 Conclusion 24‘ REFERENCE 25 APPENDICES Acknowledgement ACKNOWLEDGEMENT With great pleasure I fulfilled a three month practical period at the NRA Thames Region in Reading.
    [Show full text]
  • Whose River? London and the Thames Estuary, 1960-2014* Vanessa Taylor Univ
    This is a post-print version of an article which will appear The London Journal, 40(3) (2015), Special Issue: 'London's River? The Thames as a Contested Environmental Space'. Accepted 15 July 2015. Whose River? London and the Thames Estuary, 1960-2014* Vanessa Taylor Univ. of Greenwich, [email protected] I Introduction For the novelist A.P. Herbert in 1967 the problem with the Thames was simple. 'London River has so many mothers it doesn’t know what to do. ... What is needed is one wise, far- seeing grandmother.’1 Herbert had been campaigning for a barrage across the river to keep the tide out of the city, with little success. There were other, powerful claims on the river and numerous responsible agencies. And the Thames was not just ‘London River’: it runs for over 300 miles from Gloucestershire to the North Sea. The capital’s interdependent relationship with the Thames estuary highlights an important problem of governance. Rivers are complex, multi-functional entities that cut across land-based boundaries and create interdependencies between distant places. How do you govern a city that is connected by its river to other communities up and downstream? Who should decide what the river is for and how it should be managed? The River Thames provides a case study for exploring the challenges of governing a river in a context of changing political cultures. Many different stories could be told about the river, as a water source, drain, port, inland waterway, recreational amenity, riverside space, fishery, wildlife habitat or eco-system.
    [Show full text]
  • Tidal Thames
    1.0 Introduction The River Thames is probably the most recognised and best known river in the country and is often known as 'London's River' or 'Old Father Thames'. The River Thames was pivotal in the establishment of the city of London and people have lived along its banks for thousands of years. Today, over a fifth of the country’s population live within a few miles of it, and each day many thousands pass over, along and under it. The Thames is a transport route, a drain, a view, a site for redevelopment and, ever increasingly, a playground, classroom and wildlife corridor. Its habitats and species form an integral part of London’s identity and development. The tidal Thames of today is a good example of a recovering ecosystem and of great ecological importance not only to London, Kent and Essex but also to life in the North Sea and the upstream catchments of the upper Thames. Gravel foreshore, © Zoological Society of London The River Thames flows through Westminster with its high river embankments, overlooked by historic and modern buildings, crossed by seven bridges and overhung with hardy London Plane trees. In Westminster the river is tidal and exposes foreshore during low-tide over most of Tidal Thames this stretch. This foreshore is probably all that remains of the natural intertidal habitat that would have once extended The River Thames is probably the most recognised and best known river in the country and inland providing marsh and wetland areas. Within the Westminster tidal Thames plants, invertebrates and birds is often known as 'London's River' or 'Old Father Thames'.
    [Show full text]
  • A13 Riverside Tunnel Road to Regeneration the Tunnel Is Essential to East London and Thames Gateway’S Economic Success the A13 Riverside Tunnel Road to Regeneration
    The A13 Riverside Tunnel Road to Regeneration The tunnel is essential to East London and Thames Gateway’s economic success The A13 Riverside Tunnel Road to Regeneration Thank you for taking the trouble to find out more about the proposed A13 Riverside Tunnel. The tunnelling of a 1.3km stretch of the A13 will not only improve traffic flow along this key route, mitigating the two notorious bottlenecks at the Lodge Avenue and Renwick Road junctions, but will also transform a severely blighted area. As well as creating a new neighbourhood of over 5,000 homes called Castle Green, the tunnel will act as a catalyst for the building of another 28,300 homes in London Riverside, while creating over 1,200 jobs and unlocking significant business and commercial growth in the surrounding area. The tunnel is essential to east London and the Thames Gateway’s economic success and will stimulate growth along its route as well as easing congestion. It also signifies a new way of working in this country adapted from successful models from other European cities. A large proportion of the scheme could be self-financing, with the majority of the funding being generated by the tunnel itself, through the land value uplift and sale of the homes, the community infrastructure levy and new homes bonus. If the government also supports our proposal for stamp duty devolution in Castle Green, then this would mean further significant funding for the scheme could be secured. Cllr Darren Rodwell Cllr Roger Ramsey Leader of Barking and Dagenham Council Leader of Havering Council Road to Regeneration 03 About the A13 The A13 is one of the busiest arterial routes into the capital, connecting the county of Essex with central London.
    [Show full text]
  • A Description of London's Economy Aaron Girardi and Joel Marsden March 2017
    Working Paper 85 A description of London's economy Aaron Girardi and Joel Marsden March 2017 A description of London's economy Working Paper 85 copyright Greater London Authority March 2017 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queens Walk London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk Tel 020 7983 4922 Minicom 020 7983 4000 ISBN 978-1-84781-648-1 Cover photograph © London & Partners For more information about this publication, please contact: GLA Economics Tel 020 7983 4922 Email [email protected] GLA Economics provides expert advice and analysis on London’s economy and the economic issues facing the capital. Data and analysis from GLA Economics form a basis for the policy and investment decisions facing the Mayor of London and the GLA group. GLA Economics uses a wide range of information and data sourced from third party suppliers within its analysis and reports. GLA Economics cannot be held responsible for the accuracy or timeliness of this information and data. The GLA will not be liable for any losses suffered or liabilities incurred by a party as a result of that party relying in any way on the information contained in this report. A description of London's economy Working Paper 85 Contents Executive summary ...................................................................................................................... 2 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 3 2 The structure of London’s local economies .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 13.2 Marine Ecology and Biodiversity Baseline Conditions
    THE LONDON RESORT PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT Appendix 13.2 Marine Ecology and Biodiversity Baseline Conditions WATER QUALITY 13.2.1. The principal water quality data sources that have been used to inform this study are: • Environment Agency (EA) WFD classification status and reporting (e.g. EA 2015); and • EA long-term water quality monitoring data for the tidal Thames. Environment Agency WFD Classification Status 13.2.2. The tidal River Thames is divided into three transitional water bodies as part of the Thames River Basin Management Plan (EA 2015) (Thames Upper [ID GB530603911403], Thames Middle [ID GB53060391140] and Thames Lower [ID GB530603911401]. Each of these waterbodies are classified as heavily modified waterbodies (HMWBs). The most recent EA assessment carried out in 2016, confirms that all three of these water bodies are classified as being at Moderate ecological potential (EA 2018). 13.2.3. The Thames Estuary at the London Resort Project Site is located within the Thames Middle Transitional water body, which is a heavily modified water body on account of the following designated uses (Cycle 2 2015-2021): • Coastal protection; • Flood protection; and • Navigation. 13.2.4. The downstream extent of the Thames Middle transitional water body is located approximately 12 km downstream of the Kent Project Site and 8 km downstream of the Essex Project Site near Lower Hope Point. Downstream of this location is the Thames Lower water body which extends to the outer Thames Estuary. 13.2.5. A summary of the current Thames Middle water body WFD status is presented in Table A13.2.1, together with those supporting elements that do not currently meet at least Good status and their associated objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Structures for Development: Getting Them Right
    1 Please do not quote until published, Feb 2008 Edwards, M (2008) 'Structures for development in Thames Gateway: getting them right' in London's Turning: the prospect of Thames Gateway Eds. Phil Cohen and Mike Rustin. London, Ashgate. Details at https://www.ashgate.com/shopping/title.asp?key1=&key2=&orig=results&isbn=0%207546%207063%205 Chapter sixteen Structures for development: getting them right Michael Edwards, Bartlett School of Planning, UCL The Thames Gateway is an enormous undertaking. In many respects it resembles some of the earlier major projects of British town planning like the Milton Keynes generation of new towns or the London's Docklands development. Like them, it may come to be regarded by some as a great achievement of public policy and by others as a great disaster. The fact that positive and negative views can be taken of the same project does not (or does not merely) reflect alternative subjective perspectives: it stems from the fact that there are real conflicts in the society and thus different criteria for judging success. The Thames Gateway project poses daunting choices for those with the power to decide on the future development of South East England. Government and the Mayor of London both agree that much of the wider South East's growth should be concentrated in the Thames estuary (DCMS 2006; Mayor of London 2004). They share the intention that London will expand to the East, not to the West, and that the rationality of capitalist growth is the unquestionable way forward. This chapter explores aspects of this supposed rationality, arguing that the aspirations of 'sustainability' and 'community' cannot be achieved in the neo-liberal framework which is on offer.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Environmental Information Report Volume 1 – Main Text 19/02/18 Status: A1 Signed Off - Publication Document Ref: HE543917-ATK-EAC-RP-LM-000001.Docx
    Et12 Regional Investment Programme A2 Bean and Ebbsfleet Junction Improvements Preliminary Environmental Information Report Volume 1 – Main Text 19/02/18 Status: A1 Signed off - Publication Document Ref: HE543917-ATK-EAC-RP-LM-000001.docx Regional Investment Programme A2 Bean and Ebbsfleet Junction Improvements Preliminary Environmental Information Report Volume 1 – Main Text Notice This document and its contents have been prepared and are intended solely for Highways England’s information and use in relation to A2 Bean and Ebbsfleet Junction Improvement Atkins Limited assumes no responsibility to any other party in respect of or arising out of or in connection with this document and/or its contents. This document has 183 pages including the cover. Document history Job number: HE543917 Document ref: HE543917-ATK-EAC-RP-LM-000001 Purpose Revision Status Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date description Issue for C03 A1 AR LJB AMB CH 19/02/18 Consultation C02 B1 For HE 2nd Review AR LJB AMB AEM 16/02/18 For Initial Review & C01 A1 AR LJB AMB CH 26/01/18 Comment Client signoff Client Highways England Project A2 Bean Ebbsfleet Junction Improvements Document title Regional Investment Programme A2 Bean and Ebbsfleet Junction Job no. HE543917 Copy no. Document HE543917-ATK-EAC-RP-LM-000001 C03 reference Status A1 Signed off - Publication Revision C03 Page 2 of 183 Regional Investment Programme A2 Bean and Ebbsfleet Junction Improvements Preliminary Environmental Information Report Volume 1 – Main Text Table of contents Chapter Pages Volume 1 7 Chapter 1 - Introduction 8 1.1. Overview of project 8 1.2. Purpose of the Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR) 9 1.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Competition, Cooperation, Co-Opetition. a Conceptualization of the ‘Network Brand’
    Competition, Cooperation, Co-opetition. A conceptualization of the ‘Network Brand’ Cecilia Pasquinelli Istituto di Management, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna Abstract - Place branding relies on the assumption of inter-territorial competition which seems to be the overall approach to place management. Competition involves not only cities but also provinces, nations, states, villages and supra-national regions. However, there is room for sustaining that competition is not an exhaustive key for understanding regional development and, consequently, for interpreting place marketing and branding. Within the general frame of competition, regions and local areas may seek inter- territorial cooperation in order to enrich their offer and enhance their competitiveness. In this regard, a gap in place branding and marketing literature is identified and this paper contributes to filling it, by proposing a conceptualization of the “network brand”. Assuming cooperation/co-opetition as a way to face inter-territorial competition, this research is in charge of answering to the following research questions. Firstly, to what extent network and network brand building is a pragmatic process i.e. inspired by market principles, rather than being a political process i.e. highly related to power game emerging within and among the involved territories? Secondly, to what extent the network brand is a “post-modern” brand? A secondary research was carried out by reviewing 12 inter-territorial networking experiences in Europe and US. Concerning the first research question, evidence suggests that, beyond a surface of pragmatism, there might be a political process leading to the emergence of a network brand. Moreover, there is a chance that in some cases a pragmatic approach to networking tends to turn into a political process by means of institutional spillovers, turning the network into a political arena.
    [Show full text]
  • Growth Areas.Qxd
    WOULD YOU LIVE HERE? MAKING THE GROWTH AREAS COMMUNITIES OF CHOICE JIM BENNETT WITH DAVID HETHERINGTON, MAX NATHAN AND CHRIS URWIN i ippr The Institute for Public Policy Research (ippr) is the UK’s leading progressive think tank and was established in 1988. Its role is to bridge the political divide between the social democratic and liberal traditions, the intellectual divide between academia and the policy making establishment and the cultural divide between government and civil society. It is first and foremost a research institute, aiming to provide innovative and credible policy solutions. Its work, the questions its research poses and the methods it uses are driven by the belief that the journey to a good society is one that places social justice, democratic participation and economic and environmental sustainability at its core. For further information you can contact ippr’s external affairs department on [email protected], you can view our website at www.ippr.org and you can buy our books from Central Books on 0845 458 9910 or email [email protected]. Our trustees Chris Powell (Chairman) Chai Patel (Secretary) Jeremy Hardie (Treasurer) Professor Kumar Bhattacharyya Carey Oppenheim Lord Brooke Sir Michael Perry Lord Eatwell David Pitt-Watson Lord Gavron Dave Prentis Professor Anthony Giddens Lord Puttnam Lord Hollick Sir Martin Rees Jane Humphries Ed Sweeney Roger Jowell Baroness Williams Neil Kinnock Baroness Young of Old Scone Frances O’Grady © IPPR 2006 CONTENTS About the authors iv Acknowledgements iv List of abbreviations v Executive summary vi 1 Introduction 1 2 The policy context for housing growth 3 3 The Growth Areas and housing supply 6 4 The Growth Area communities 20 5 The Growth Area economies 29 6 Delivering growth: infrastructure and structures 45 7 Conclusions and recommendations 50 Appendix: Estimating the infrastructure costs of higher 56 housing growth targets References 59 About the authors Jim Bennett is a Senior Research Fellow at ippr.
    [Show full text]