Prospects for the Thames Gateway

Michael Ward

CEO Kent Thameside

LSE London Seminar Feb 19th 2007

1: Contents

• Map

• Context

• The Thames Gateway Interim Plan

• Delivery

• Kent Thameside

• Conclusions

1: Contents

1: Contents2: Thames Gateway Map

1: Contents

Despite the regional policies of successive governments, London and the South East just keep on growing…

• Barlow (1940)• Distribution of Industry Act (1944)• South East Study (1963)• National Plan (1965)

But – increasingly difficult to operate anything like old regional policies in service based economy

3: Context I : Regional Policy

1: Contents

“the London region has embarked on a huge experiment of quite breathtaking audacity. It is to become the financial and - in some respects - the economic capital of the world…It is driven entirely by market forces, forces that can be resisted but which if successfully accommodated will bring vast benefits to these islands.”

Hamish McRae, “The Independent”, June 7th 2006

4: Context II: London

1: Contents

Planned decentralisation:

• County of London Plan (1943)

• First wave New Towns

• Greater London Development Plan (1972/1976)

Importance of London Plan (2000 and subsequently)

• Explicit rejection of planned decentralisation

• Population and jobs growing – invest to cope with growth

• Powers delegated to London

5: Context III: London

1: Contents

“…since London cannot accommodate its own natural increase, the whole of the population growth of 3½ million will have to be found homes elsewhere – a population increase of well over a third for the area outside London.” (SE Study, 1963)

“In the Greater South East, many cannot afford to purchase a home and there are very severe shortages of homes to rent for those on low and moderate incomes… As the largest growth area, the Gateway is now playing a prime role in meeting needs in the Greater South East and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.” (Thames Gateway Interim Plan, 2006)

6: Context IV: Housing

1: Contents

• “ a strategic framework for the Gateway as a distinctive social and economic unit, there to shape and guide investment, decisions and actions. A framework which joins up development funding and recurrent expenditure. A framework which integrates economic, public service and housing development.”

• David Miliband, 23 November 2005

7: Interim Plan I: Purpose

1: Contents

• Demand for economic rationale• Comparison with Northern Way• Despite commitment to sustainable

communities, concern that programme driven by housing numbers

• Comprehensive Spending Review• Olympics• Need to move from aspirational targets to

hard forecasts

8: Interim Plan II: Background

1: Contents

Four “Transformational Economic Opportunities”:

• Canary Wharf – jobs to grow from 82000 to 200000;

• Gateway Port Cluster – Tilbury, Purfleet, Thamesport and Sheppey + Shellhaven;

• Ebbsfleet Valley – new commercial centre;

• Stratford City & Olympics

9: Interim Plan III: Economic

1: Contents10: Interim Plan IV: Economic Map

1: Contents

• Skills: guarantee of progression from level 3 to level 4; new HE & FE;

• Ambitious green commitments: parklands; low carbon development;

• 160,000 homes (2001-16) – up from 120,000 – increase mostly in London;

• Further transport investment.

11: Interim Plan V: Commitments

1: Contents

• Preparation of costed plan for April 2007;

• No firm commitments till spending review – July 2007

12: Interim Plan VI: Next Steps

2: The Delivery Bodies• 7 local regeneration partnerships/LDVs• 2 urban development corporations• 1 Olympic Delivery Agency• 3 sub regional partnerships• 3 regional development agencies• 3 Government Offices• 2 Regional Assemblies• 1 Mayor of London/GLA• 2 County Councils• London Borough/Unitary and Shire District Councils• The Department of Communities and Local Government• Other government departments, the Housing Corporation, English

Partnerships, the Highways Agency , the Environment Agency, the Countryside Agency and Natural England

• And the Thames Gateway Strategic Partnership

13: Delivery I : Agencies

3: The Delivery Bodies: Map14: Delivery II: Map

5: Why the different structures?

Thames Gateway is asymmetric:

• Circumstances vary from place to place;

• Circumstances dictate nature and pace of development

“One size fits all” model not appropriate

16: Delivery III: Why?

17: Delivery IV: Local Differences

Some examples:• The nature of the development opportunity (e.g.

Olympics, CTRL, Port)• Patterns of land ownership – is there a public

sector land assembly role?• The structure of local government 3 different systems: - London - 2 tier - unitary

1: Contents18: Kent Thameside I: Map

19: Kent Thameside II: The Golden Triangle

3 clusters of development:

• New community and office centre at Ebbsfleet

• Renewal of historic centres of Dartford and Gravesend

• 9 miles of Thames waterfront

….. And Bluewater

20: Kent Thameside III: The Opportunity

• Channel Tunnel Rail Link;• Huge reserves of brownfield land;• Target of 30000 homes and 50000 jobs• Public Transport Oriented Development- Fastrack• Acknowledged in draft Strategic Framework as 1 of 4

key Thames Gateway economic transformers

Sustainability: if you want to build new homes in the

South East without concreting over the countryside, this is the sort of place to do it.

21: Kent Thameside IV - Land Ownership

• Former quarries and cement works;

• Major sites in and beyond central area in possession of Lafarge/Land Securities

• No major public sector land assembly role in Ebbsfleet ( though significant SEEDA role in support of districts in town centres and elsewhere)

22: Kent Thameside V: Local Government Structure

2 tier, 2 districts, 2 local planning authorities

3 local authorities:

• Kent County Council

• Dartford Borough Council

• Gravesham Borough Council

1: Contents

23: Kent Thameside VI: Homes and Roads The Problem

• Planning process for Eastern Quarry and other major sites stalled

• Highways Agency view that capacity of road network inadequate to support level of planned new housing development

• Article 14 - enables HA to intervene in planning process to prevent approval

• Stalemate for over two years; risk of loss of investor and developer confidence, loss of momentum, and loss of credibility for gateway project

1: Contents

• Effective partnership working between public sector partners, and with private sector

• Package of measures – demand management/public transport/roads;

• Funded by public & private sectors;• Developer contribution via a tariff;• Still a need for a major contribution from

Government

24: Kent Thameside VII: Homes and Roads The Potential Solution

25: Kent Thameside VIII: prospects

• Fastrack buses started March 30 2006; passenger nos well ahead of forecast; second route summer 2007; some evidence of people moving from car to bus

• CTRL Ebbsfleet Station finished summer 2006• International trains November 2007• Domestic trains 2009 – 17 minutes to St Pancras• Consent for 4.5m sq ft of offices• Prospect of 16000 jobs at Ebbsfleet by 2016• Administrative and business centre for Thames Gateway• An office centre to compete in M25 ring• First Ebbsfleet housing starts Feb 2007

1: Contents

• Can the Gateway make a major contribution to increasing housing supply in the South East?

• Can the area’s long-standing low growth rates be increased?

• Can these aims be achieved while also satisfying the environmental and social aspirations of the Interim Plan?

26: Thames Gateway: The Challenges

1: Contents

Positive:

• Clear vision – with Interim Plan

• Improved structure – with appointment of CEO

• Commitment to major infrastructure investment – CTRL/A2/ Olympic Park

• Ambitious homes and jobs targets

But – all depends on CSR!

27: Thames Gateway: The Prospects