the draft london plan investment implications and their realism © 2003 tony travers
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The draft London Plan
Investment implications and their realism
© 2003 Tony Travers
![Page 2: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
The draft London Plan
“Forces driving change”
• Population
• Economy
• Environment
• Lifestyles
• Technology
• Social Justice
![Page 3: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
The draft London Plan
The need for a plan:• “The elimination of an elected government for
London in 1986 came at a particularly inappropriate moment for the capital. It came at the end of a planning legacy, which had at first encouraged, then presided over, the decentralisation of many of London’s key economic activities together with population dispersal”.
![Page 4: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
The draft London Plan
What occurred in the absence of a plan:• “Lacking its own strategic authority, London’s
economy developed and its population grew, without a clear vision of their place in the UK economy, without effective strategic planning, and without a clear assessment of the resources and policies required to deal with renewed growth….phenomenal growth….was not matched by sufficient investment”
![Page 5: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
The draft London Plan
The Draft London Plan states, therefore• earlier London planning had sought to
decentralise, reduce economic activity and cut the population
• decline stopped; growth resumed• the abolition of the GLC left the city unable
to grapple with the problems caused by growth
![Page 6: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
The draft London Plan
Thus……
• strategic planning was responsible for the decline in London’s population, economy and position within the UK
• this decline stopped for some (unstated) reason in the mid 1980s
• planning is now needed to cope with growth
![Page 7: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
The draft London Plan
The draft London Plan thus suggests:• London planning could be used to assist in
decentralisation, lowering economic activity, thinning-out population
• but, it could also be used to facilitiate a continuation of growth that spontaneously re-ignited in the 1980s
• the latter path has been chosen
![Page 8: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
The draft London Plan
Growth since the mid-1980s:
• Population up from 6.7/6.8 million to 7.2/7.3 million
• Employment up from 4.1 to 4.7 million– Concentrated in Centre, West
• Underground use at all-time record levels by 2001
![Page 9: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
The draft London Plan
• Infrastructure built between mid 1980s and 2002:
Transport
– Docklands Light Railway + extensions– Jubilee Line extension– Croydon Tramlink– Heathrow Express– Thameslink services– New rolling stock on Tube, commuter lines
![Page 10: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
The draft London Plan
• Infrastructure built between 1981 and 2001:Housing
– Total dwellings up from 2.682 million to 3.067 million (+14.3%)
Offices– Total office/industrial space up so as to
accommodate 600,000 additional workers• Canary Wharf alone = +10m sq ft
![Page 11: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
The draft London Plan
• Thus, London managed to develop new homes, offices, transport capacity in the period 1986 to 2000
• But, still a perception that planning is needed to allow the city to develop further
• Draft London Plan accepts population and job growth on a predict-and-provide basis
![Page 12: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
The draft London Plan
The Mayor’s draft plan accepts the following:• Population: up from 7.4 to 8.1 million
• Jobs: up from 4.5 to 5.1 million
• Households up from 3.1 to 3.4 million - an extra 450,000 homes
![Page 13: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
The draft London Plan
• Infrastructure planned to accommodate this growth:– Transport– Housing– Offices– Schools, hospitals– Waste Management
![Page 14: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
The draft London Plan
Transport
• East London line
• CrossRail 1 (East-West line)
• Thameslink 2000
• CrossRail 2 (Hackney – South West)
• OrbiRail
![Page 15: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
The draft London Plan
Housing• Target of 458,000 dwellings: 1997 to 2016• 23,000 per annum • Current average closer to 15,000 pa• Boroughs expected to ensure 35 to 50 per
cent are “affordable”• Planning permissions to demand affordable
units
![Page 16: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
The draft London Plan
Offices• Target of 463,000 office spaces: 2001 to
2016, of which,– Central 142,000– East 223,000– West 60,000– North 15,000– South 23,000
![Page 17: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
The draft London Plan
• Offices will be provided by private sector, though the London Plan would skew development heavily to the East
• Housing will depend on a rise in overall level of dwelling completions, and on willingness of developers to fund “affordable” stock
• Need for multi-billion £ rise in public subsidy
![Page 18: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
The draft London Plan
• Transport - costs– East London Line: c£1.5 billion– CrossRail 1: £4 to £8 billion (Options…)– Thameslink: £1 to £2 billion– CrossRail 2: £4 to £6 billion– OrbiRail: ?– Bus subsidy will need to rise from £250m to
£1bn per year…..
![Page 19: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
The draft London Plan
• Housing, transport infrastructure required by London Plan would be very costly
• Funding would be required for both, and for new schools, hospitals
• Central government funding for London has fallen from 16.5 to 16 per cent of UK total in past five years
![Page 20: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
The draft London Plan
• Tax resources available to the Mayor of London:– £0.55 billion (2002-03)
• Total council tax of Mayor and boroughs– £3.5 billion (2002-03)
• Treasury tax take:– UK: £400 billion– London only: c£60 billion
![Page 21: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
The draft London Plan
• Achievement of London Plan thus requires major Treasury investment in London– Olympics fiasco– Stalled Thameslink, CrossRail and East London
line projects• PPP for Tube delivers only from 2012 onwards
– No major rise in housing funding for 2003-04– Cuts in London’s RSG for 2003-04 and beyond– Chancellor not well disposed to London?
![Page 22: The draft London Plan Investment implications and their realism © 2003 Tony Travers](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051515/5517ff2455034693228b4b59/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
The draft London Plan
The London Plan problem• To achieve the Plan’s objectives, central
government will have to increase public expenditure on London
• No evidence this will happen• Either London will have to be given new
means to fund own investments, or….• The random, chaotic, development of the
1990s will continue