DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 Introduction The Role of the UK Development Industry in Brownfield Regeneration Research funded by EPSRC as part of the SUBR:IM Programme (Sustainable Urban Brownfield Regeneration: Integrated Management) (Grant No: GR/S148809/01). Stage 2 Report Volume 2 (of 3): Sub-regional context (Thames Gateway and Greater Manchester) September 2005 Tim Dixon, Director of Research Yasmin Pocock, Research Officer Mike Waters, Research Assistant Funded by: No part of this report may be quoted without the permission of the lead author. With support from The RICS Research Foundation Published September 2005 By the College of Estate Management No responsibility for any loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any material included in this publication can be accepted by the authors or the publishers. ISBN 1-904388-49-3 © College of Estate Management, Reading (except NLUD data which is Crown Copyright and reproduced with permission) The role of the UK development industry in brownfield regeneration: Stage 2, Volume 2 Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 2 Thames Gateway................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Introduction................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Background................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Key policies and organisations ..................................................................... 5 2.3.1 Policies .................................................................................................. 5 2.3.2 Organisational framework.................................................................... 12 2.4 Delivering regeneration in the Thames Gateway........................................ 14 2.5 Thames Gateway........................................................................................ 18 2.5.1 Demographic and economic overviews............................................... 18 2.5.2 Brownfield land.................................................................................... 21 2.5.3 Housing ............................................................................................... 25 2.6 Barking and Dagenham.............................................................................. 32 2.6.1 Demographic and economic overviews............................................... 32 2.6.2 Historical land use and contaminated land.......................................... 33 2.6.3 Local development plan....................................................................... 34 2.6.4 Brownfield land.................................................................................... 36 2.6.5 Housing ............................................................................................... 40 2.7 Conclusions ................................................................................................ 42 3 The North, North West and Greater Manchester ............................................... 44 3.1 Introduction................................................................................................. 44 3.2 The regional context: The North and Northern Way ................................... 44 3.2.1 Background ......................................................................................... 44 3.2.2 Organisational framework.................................................................... 46 3.2.3 Delivering regeneration: The Northern Way ........................................ 57 3.2.4 Housing market renewal and decent homes ....................................... 58 3.2.5 Affordable housing: provisions in the North......................................... 61 3.3 The North West........................................................................................... 62 3.3.1 Introduction.......................................................................................... 62 3.3.2 The North West’s Housing Market....................................................... 64 3.3.3 Affordability in the North West’s housing market................................. 68 3.3.4 Regional Planning Guidance 13: ‘Moratorium in the North West’ ....... 68 3.3.5 Brownfield land.................................................................................... 69 3.4 Greater Manchester.................................................................................... 71 3.4.1 Demographic and economic overview................................................. 71 3.4.2 Brownfield land.................................................................................... 75 3.5 Manchester and Salford.............................................................................. 82 3.5.1 Historical development and legacy of contaminated land ................... 82 3.5.2 Brownfield land.................................................................................... 84 3.5.3 The Housing Market in Manchester and Salford ................................. 87 3.5.4 Residential development in the Manchester City Region .................... 88 3.5.5 Housing market weaknesses............................................................... 89 3.5.6 Local Development Plan (UDP)........................................................... 95 3.5.7 Regeneration in Manchester and Salford ............................................ 99 3.5.8 Manchester and Salford: Pathfinder.................................................. 103 3.6 The future and conclusions....................................................................... 106 Manchester PDL vacant and derelict 1998-2003............................................. 119 Salford PDL vacant and derelict 1998-2003 .................................................... 121 References……………………………………………………………………………….. 109 Appendices……………………………………………………………………………… ..114 4 The role of the UK development industry in brownfield regeneration: Stage 2, Volume 2 Tables Table 2.1 The Thames Gateway Partnerships (member organisations)..................... 3 Table 2.2 Policies/Guidance for Thames Gateway..................................................... 7 Table 2.3 Demographic and economic summaries of Thames Gateway.................. 20 Table 2.4 Brownfield land in Thames Gateway......................................................... 21 Table 2.5 Housing stock in Thames Gateway........................................................... 26 Table 2.6 Thames Gateway: housing opportunities from brownfield land ................ 30 Table 2.7 Thames Gateway: Housing scenario in strategic development locations . 31 Table 2.8 Proposed regeneration sites ..................................................................... 35 Table 2.9 Barking & Dagenham: PDL vacant and derelict 1998-2003...................... 39 Table 2.10 Planning applications for housing development schemes ...................... 42 Table 3.1 Challenges and ODPM policy guidance for the NW (source: summarised from (ODPM, 2003c))......................................................................................... 45 Table 3.2 Key policies............................................................................................... 48 Table 3.3 Economic productivity in the Northern regions.......................................... 56 Table 3.4 Recent changes to the UK residential property values. ............................ 68 Table 3.5 Socio-economic indicators for Greater Manchester .................................. 73 Table 3.6 Housing data (Greater Manchester).......................................................... 74 Table 3.7 Previously developed land in Greater Manchester (Source: NLUD 2004a) ........................................................................................................................... 75 Table 3.8 Recent trends (2000 – 2005) in residential market values in Manchester and Salford......................................................................................................... 88 Table 3.9 Regeneration initiatives across Manchester ............................................. 96 Table 3.10 HMR investment in Manchester and Salford (Source: HMR Progress Report, 2003/04).............................................................................................. 104 Figures Figure 2.1 Thames Gateway Partnerships – local authority boundaries..................... 4 Figure 2.2 Thames Gateway Scenario: Transport (source: ODPM, 2005c) ............... 6 Figure 2.3 Thames Gateway Scenario: Dwellings (source: ODPM, 2005g) ............... 6 Figure 2.4 Thames Gateway key stakeholders......................................................... 12 Figure 2.5 Thames Gateway stakeholders’ engagement (Source: Ross, 2004)....... 13 Figure 2.6 Government funding in Thames Gateway (Total: £6bn) .......................... 16 Figure 2.7 Thames Gateway Programme Fund (Total: £475m) ............................... 16 Figure 2.8 Thames Gateway: PDL by land type 2003 .............................................. 22 Figure 2.9 Thames Gateway: PDL by ownership 2003............................................. 23 Figure 2.10 Thames Gateway: PDL by proposed use 2003 ..................................... 23 Figure 2.11 Thames Gateway: PDL vacant and derelict 1998-2003 ........................ 24 Figure 2.12 Homes by ownership 2001 ...................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • London Plan 2008
    The London Plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London Consolidated with Alterations since 2004 February 2008 www.london.gov.uk/thelondonplan The London Plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London Consolidated with Alterations since 2004 February 2008 www.london.gov.uk/thelondonplan The London Plan Copyright Greater London Authority February 2008 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk More London London SE1 2AA Enquiries 020 7983 4100 Minicom 020 7983 4458 www.london.gov.uk ISBN: 978 1 84781 129 5 Cover photograph © Adam Hinton Acknowledgements The Mayor would like to thank everyone who contributed to this new version of the plan, including the Independent Panel, all participants at the Examination in Public and everyone else who responded to the public consultation. Most of all the Mayor thanks all the staff at City Hall who helped put the original plan together and who have contributed to the alterations over the past two years, especially Drew Stevenson, Robin Thompson, Debbie McMullen, Eleanor Young, Alex Bax and Dan Hawthorn. This document is printed on 80 per cent recycled paper, 20 per cent from sustainable forest management The London Plan Mayor of London iii table of Contents Preamble vii ‘My Vision for London’ xi Introduction vi The Mayor’s objectives xi Chapter 1 Positioning London 1 1 London’s place in the world 15 2 London – past and present 22 3 Forces driving change in London 26 Chapter 2 The broad development strategy 39 2A The overall strategy 39 1 Sustainable development 39
    [Show full text]
  • Air Quality Action Plan Consultation Report
    London Borough of Newham Air Quality Action Plan Consultation Report Submitted by: London Borough of Newham Alice Billings House 2-12 West Ham Lane Stratford London E15 4SF Contact: Robin Whitehouse (LEHO) – 020 8430 3792 [email protected] Submission date of Report: 28th March 2003 Overview Under the National Air Quality Strategy (NAQS), Newham Council is required to assess the air quality within the borough. The NAQS provides objectives and target dates for various pollutants, which the council must achieve. Where it is unlikely that these objectives will be met the council must declare an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA). Under section 84(2) of the Environment Act 1995, where an AQMA is declared Newham Council must agree an Action Plan to work towards the objectives given. Newham Council has been reviewing its air quality since 1998 and has just completed stage IV of this review and assessment process. Stage III identified that Newham Council will not meet the objectives for PM10 (24hr rolling mean) and nitrogen dioxide (annual average) and so the council declared an AQMA in March 2002. As road traffic is the primary source of pollution, the AQMA falls along major roads in the borough. Government Guidelines (2000) state that air quality action plans (AQAP) should be in place 12 to18 months following an AQMA designation. This Action Plan has been produced using guidance from the National Society for Clean Air and Environment (NSCA), the London Mayors Air Quality Strategy (MAQS) and the Action Plan Appraisal checklist developed by Casella-Stanger (acting on behalf of DEFRA).
    [Show full text]
  • Creating Sustainable Communities Delivering the Thames Gateway Contents
    Creating sustainable communities Delivering the Thames Gateway Contents Thames Gateway – our commitment 1 Development and renewal 9 Environment 22 Transport 27 Sustainable homes 32 Tackling disadvantage 37 Health 42 Education, skills and employment 47 Delivering the Gateway 52 Annex A – The planning framework 62 Annex B – Contacts and glossary 64 Thames Gateway – our commitment Introduction by the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister When we flew over the Thames Gateway The Thames Gateway is a project of such eighteen months ago, we saw Europe's scale and complexity that it can only be largest regeneration opportunity, a huge delivered with the full commitment of the area of brownfield land on the doorstep Government as a whole. That’s why we of London. From the City of London to are already spending £6 billion across Southend and Sheppey, the Gateway Government to create high quality encompasses areas of affluence as sustainable communities in the Gateway. well as pockets of disadvantage. And our spending is unlocking billions of pounds of investment by the private sector For decades, successive Governments and our partners in local authorities. have looked to the East of London and pondered how to make the most of Together, we are providing the transport We are greening the Gateway so that the opportunity to regenerate land and infrastructure, schools and hospitals, we actually enhance the environmental renew existing communities. It's only so that we create communities rather amenity of the area with new parks, now, with the Government's Sustainable than soulless housing estates and nature reserves and sporting facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Finance Committee Agenda and Papers 08.03.07
    FINANCE COMMITTEE (No 33) OPEN Session to be held on Thursday 8 March 2007 In the Boardroom, 14th Floor, Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0TL Commencing at 0900 hours AGENDA 09.00 1. Apologies for Absence 2. Approval of Minutes of the Previous Meeting held on 18 January 2007 3. Matters Arising and Outstanding Items Business Items Report Sponsor 4. 2007/2008 Budget Stephen Allen, Interim MD Finance & Planning 5. Project Monitoring and Approvals Stephen Critchley 6. Transfer of the Woolwich Ferry Richard Webster 7. Any Other Business. Date of Next Meeting: Thursday 10 May 2007 TRANSPORT FOR LONDON MINUTES of the Finance Committee Meeting (No. 32) held in the Boardroom, 14th Floor, Windsor House, Victoria Street, London at 0900hrs on Thursday 18 January 2007 Present: Sir Mike Hodgkinson Chair Stephen Glaister Judith Hunt Eva Lindholm In Attendance: Stephen Allen Director of Corporate Finance Richard Browning Director of Group Business Planning & Performance Howard Carter General Counsel Naomi Connell Director of Finance (LUL) Stephen Critchley Chief Finance Officer Mary Hardy Director of Inernal Audit Gareth John Director of Legal and Compliance Jeff Pipe Corporate Governance Adviser Jay Walder Managing Director Finance & Planning Secretary: Ronnie Warner Secretary ACTION: 01/01/07 Apologies for Absence Apologies for absence were received from Honor Chapman and Richard Webster. Declaration of Interests There were no interests declared. 02/01/07 Minutes of the Previous Meetings held on 15 November and 7 December 2006 The minutes of the meetings held on 15 November and 7 December 2006 were APPROVED as a correct record of the meeting and were signed by the Chair.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Outline Business Case
    Gallions Reach and Belvedere River Crossings Strategic Outline Business Case Date: November 2015 Version: Final 2 CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary ....................................................................................... 4 2. The approach to the business case ................................................................. 19 3. The Strategic Case ...................................................................................... 23 4. The Economic Case ..................................................................................... 95 5. The Financial Case ..................................................................................... 136 6. The Commercial Case ................................................................................. 141 7. The Management Case ................................................................................ 144 8. Conclusion ............................................................................................... 151 3 1. Executive Summary 1.1. The proposed scheme and purpose of this document 1.1.1. The East of Silvertown project is proposed to be two fixed link highway crossings in east London – one at Gallions Reach, connecting Thamesmead and Beckton, and the other linking Belvedere and Rainham. 1.1.2. The Gallions Reach crossing would link the A2016 Western Way in Thamesmead with the A1020 Royal Docks Road in the north, which in turn links to the A13 and A406 North Circular Road. The Belvedere crossing would link the A2016 Bronze Age Way in Belvedere with the
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Rapid Transit Powers Ahead a Review of the Key Developments 2012/13
    BRT Handbook Ads_P01, 02,04,06,14,16,32,34-36 12/09/2012 13:20 Page 1 Bus Rapid Transit Powers Ahead A review of the key developments 2012/13 Reviewing key bus rapid transit developments I Hampshire’s Eclipse brightens things up I Time for the BRT trolleybus? I What Toronto teaches us I The buses from Brazil The Handbook Published by: Supported by: Sponsored by: BRT Handbook Ads_P01, 02,04,06,14,16,32,34-36 12/09/2012 13:20 Page 2 BRT-Contents_P03 12/09/2012 13:30 Page 3 Introduction. 3 Last year it was Cambridgeshire, this year it is Hampshire’s ‘Eclipse’ scheme that is winning all the plaudits; it looks like BRT is here to stay, says Rik Thomas ne universal problem faced by any that it can be a highly efficient and cost running. And both are producing passenger innovative new transport idea effective means of mass transit people have numbers that are very healthy indeed. O(although BRT, of course, is to be persuaded to build schemes, but it is So we now know that BRT works. anything but new) is that nobody wants to hard to do this unless there are already Well, actually, we knew this before, but now be first; no matter how good the idea looks successful schemes to use as exemplars. we have the hard evidence to convince even on paper people are, entirely Which, in turn, means that every the most sceptical. 14 new BRT schemes are understandably, very cautious about successful BRT scheme has an effect that in the pipeline in the UK, apparently – and spending significant amounts of money on a extends far beyond its immediate the term ‘critical mass’ springs to mind.
    [Show full text]
  • Rights of Way Imrovement Plan 2010-2020
    Appendix C Rights of Way Improvement Plan 2010 - 2020 1 Forward This is the Rights of Way Improvement Plan (RoWIP) for the London Borough of Redbridge 2010 – 2020. It sets out how we intend to improve our public rights of way, namely footpaths, bridleways and byways, for the benefit of all current and future users. Where possible these improvements are linked to proposals outlined in existing borough policy documents which will also work toward meeting a number of objectives set out in the overarching London strategies. The Plan has been prepared by consultants working on our behalf and has been approved by Members. I would like to thank all those who have assisted with the preparation of this document. Dave Renvoize Chief Highways and Engineering Officer Contents The Vision Page 1. Introduction 1 2. Aims of the Rights of Way Plan 1 2.1 Requirements 1 2.2 Guidance 2 2.3 Assessment 3 2.4 Scope and Objectives 3 2.5 Benefits of public rights of way 4 3. About Redbridge 4 3.1 Geography 4 3.2 Demographics 6 3.3 Open Spaces and the Countryside 6 3.3.1 Open Spaces 7 3.3.2 Traditional Parks 9 4. Current Policies and Strategy 10 4.1 London wide 11 4.2 Borough wide 15 5. The Definitive Map and Statement (DMS) 21 5.1 Statutory duty 21 5.2 History of the Definitive Map and Statement (DMS) for Redbridge 22 5.3 The public rights of way network 22 5.4 Maintenance of the public rights of way network 23 5.5 Review of the current network – Ease of Use survey 23 5.6 Current provision 25 5.7 Changes to the public rights of way network 26 5.8 Future review of the PRoW network 28 5.9 Promoted routes 28 5.9.1 Walking 28 5.9.2 Cycling 29 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Outline Business Case
    Gallions Reach and Belvedere River Crossings Strategic Outline Business Case Date: November 2015 Version: Final 2 CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary ....................................................................................... 4 2. The approach to the business case ................................................................. 19 3. The Strategic Case ...................................................................................... 23 4. The Economic Case ..................................................................................... 95 5. The Financial Case ..................................................................................... 136 6. The Commercial Case ................................................................................. 141 7. The Management Case ................................................................................ 144 8. Conclusion ............................................................................................... 151 3 1. Executive Summary 1.1. The proposed scheme and purpose of this document 1.1.1. The East of Silvertown project is proposed to be two fixed link highway crossings in east London – one at Gallions Reach, connecting Thamesmead and Beckton, and the other linking Belvedere and Rainham. 1.1.2. The Gallions Reach crossing would link the A2016 Western Way in Thamesmead with the A1020 Royal Docks Road in the north, which in turn links to the A13 and A406 North Circular Road. The Belvedere crossing would link the A2016 Bronze Age Way in Belvedere with the
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3: Borough Policy Statement
    Chapter 3: Borough Policy Statement Contents Page Number Introduction 61 Area Analysis 61 London Riverside 62 Barking Town Centre 62 Rest of the Borough/Residential Neighbourhoods 62 Other 63 Policy Framework 63 National Policies 63 Regional Policies 65 Sub-Regional Policies 67 Local Policies 70 LIP Transport Objectives and Policies 73 Transport Objectives 73 Transport Policies 75 Strategic Transport Schemes 91 Other Local Policies 92 Thames Gateway London Partnership Common Statement 93 London Thames Gateway Development Corporation Regeneration 93 Framework Supporting the Mayor’s Transport Strategy 94 Chapter 3: Borough Policy Statement 59 List of Tables Page Number Table 3.1: Strategic Transport Schemes 91 Chapter 3: Borough Policy Statement 60 Introduction 3.1 The main purpose of this chapter is to describe the local transport policies adopted by the Council which will further the implementation of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) at the borough level. This includes policies not only encompassed within the Local Implementation Plan (LIP) itself, but also those of relevance to be found in other key Council documents, particularly the Community Strategy and Unitary Development Plan. 3.2 The Chapter also describes major strategic transport schemes necessary to meet local needs and aspirations. Variously these are particularly relevant to meeting regeneration, development and environmental objectives. 3.3 It is a legislative requirement that the environmental effects of the LIP are assessed. This process is called Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). The environmental effects of the policies have been assessed and changes have been incorporated into the LIP to ensure that the policies will not have significant adverse effect on the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • LONDON ASSEMBLY Transport Committee Parallel Lines
    LONDON ASSEMBLY Transport Committee Parallel Lines The London Assembly Transport Committee's review of the East London and Greenwich Waterfront Transit schemes December 2006 The Transport Committee Geoff Pope - Chair (Liberal Democrat) Roger Evans - Deputy Chair (Conservative) John Biggs - Labour Angie Bray - Conservative Elizabeth Howlett - Conservative Peter Hulme Cross - One London Darren Johnson - Green Murad Qureshi - Labour Graham Tope - Liberal Democrat The Transport Committee’s general terms of reference are to examine and report on transport matters of importance to Greater London and the transport strategies, policies and actions of the Mayor, Transport for London, and the other Functional Bodies where appropriate. In particular, the Transport Committee is also required to examine and report to the Assembly from time to time on the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, in particular its implementation and revision. The Transport Committee agreed the following terms of reference for this review on 8 June 2006. • Examine the potential of the both schemes to regenerate the communities which the ELT and GWT will serve • Examine the current routes proposed for the first phases of both the East London and Greenwich Waterfront Transit –including frequency of buses and stops, vehicle capacity and the methods by which road space will be dedicated to the services • Examine the mode of vehicle which will serve the routes and the long term ability of TFL to adapt these routes to other potential modes • Examine the deliverability of the timetables for both schemes outlined in TfL’s fiver year business plan and the mid-longer aspirations for other proposed branches and extensions of both routes • Examine the viability of the both schemes should the Thames Gateway Bridge not be built though excluding an assessment of the suitability of the Bridge itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    LONDON ASSEMBLY Transport Committee Parallel Lines The London Assembly Transport Committee's review of the East London and Greenwich Waterfront Transit schemes December 2006 The Transport Committee Geoff Pope - Chair (Liberal Democrat) Roger Evans - Deputy Chair (Conservative) John Biggs - Labour Angie Bray - Conservative Elizabeth Howlett - Conservative Peter Hulme Cross - One London Darren Johnson - Green Murad Qureshi - Labour Graham Tope - Liberal Democrat The Transport Committee’s general terms of reference are to examine and report on transport matters of importance to Greater London and the transport strategies, policies and actions of the Mayor, Transport for London, and the other Functional Bodies where appropriate. In particular, the Transport Committee is also required to examine and report to the Assembly from time to time on the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, in particular its implementation and revision. The Transport Committee agreed the following terms of reference for this review on 8 June 2006. • Examine the potential of the both schemes to regenerate the communities which the ELT and GWT will serve • Examine the current routes proposed for the first phases of both the East London and Greenwich Waterfront Transit –including frequency of buses and stops, vehicle capacity and the methods by which road space will be dedicated to the services • Examine the mode of vehicle which will serve the routes and the long term ability of TFL to adapt these routes to other potential modes • Examine the deliverability of the timetables for both schemes outlined in TfL’s fiver year business plan and the mid-longer aspirations for other proposed branches and extensions of both routes • Examine the viability of the both schemes should the Thames Gateway Bridge not be built though excluding an assessment of the suitability of the Bridge itself.
    [Show full text]
  • East London and Greenwich Waterfront Transit
    Appendix B Transcript of Item 6 – East London and Greenwich Waterfront Transit Geoff Pope (Chair): We move now to the East London and Greenwich Waterfront Transit scrutiny. As you know we have had question and answer sessions with Transport for London and we have also received written evidence from a number of boroughs and we welcome you here today. I believe you are going to be kicking off to summarise in presentation form some of the issues from the boroughs on both of the schemes. We will then be asking questions to try to get complete clarity on what you think is good and what is not good and why and what could be better. Stephen Joseph (Deputy Chief Executive: Strategy, Thames Gateway London Partnership): Thank you very much for inviting us to speak today. Before I introduce our team, I am just going to point to you on our covering slide why that covering slide. It is not a picture of a transit as one might; it is an aerial photograph of the regeneration area in progress. In fact, as you see, because this aerial photograph was taken in 1999, events have moved on. The regeneration agenda is speeding up and one has to look at this proposal as part of that process. Indeed, if you look very carefully, ExCel is not on this map and clearly it is part of the regeneration agenda. In fact, they are hosting, with the Mayor, our annual supper next week, so that regeneration bit exists. Other bits of regeneration are moving along very quickly.
    [Show full text]