World Cities

Millionaire Cities, Megacities and World Cities

Millionaire city: 1 million+ popMegacity: 10 million+ pop, 2,000 persons/km², one or two places mergedWorld City: Major area which doesn’t just serve area, but world, normally multinational

These are all interlinked in a pattern, usually by train. Also they started mainly in MEDC’s, but have slowly appeared more in LEDC’s.

Contemporary Urbanisation Processes

Urbanisation: the movement and growth of proportion of people living in urban areas.

Characteristics: Since the 1950’s, urbanisation has started rapidly to increase in LEDC’s. the main two reasons for this are population growth and migration.

Push factors

Poor infrastructure Unemployment Poverty/Famine Natural Disasters Civil War Desertification

Pull factors

Better Jobs Better Education City life ‘Bright Life’ Better Social life Higher pay Financial Aid Better Healthcare

- Urbanisation in the UK: Started with the Industrial Revolution in the 1800’s

Economic Social - -Push Factor 1. Unemployment from mechanisation

2. Little pay1. Poorer education2. Poorer social life3. Poorer healthcare

- -

Pull Factor 1. More and better quality jobs2. Better pay

1. Better education2. Better social life3. Better healthcare4. Increased social status5. Better transport

- -

Effects: The results were an increase in pollution, more employment in the secondary industry over primary, new land use in the city, lots of denser terraced housing and economic growth of major cities.

The UK is still urbanised, but its population is slowly moving to more rural areas (counter urbanisation).From the 1960’s onwards, all walks of life seem to be reducing in urbanisation.

Case Study: Dharavi, Mumbai, India (Urbanisation LEDC)

Background: Not capital city, but it is the biggest with a population of 14,500,000 India’s financial centre, a major port and home of ‘Bollywood’ movie industry Typical fast growing city which it can’t cope with from migration and population growth Used to be small place full of fishing villages and encouraged development, but failed British colonial peoples set it all up and when they left, the place had a boom in

development Becoming a world city Now heavily overcrowded, drawing in people from all over India who are uneducated and

unskilled, this has led to cheap suburbs being created, transport overcrowding and slums being made at the outskirts of the city for the poorest of the poor

One partially successful attempt for control was to move the money making centres to Navi Mumbai to the east, but it still left a lot of people in Mumbai and hasn’t stopped growing, with the main concern being Dharavi

The Problem: Most likely the biggest slum in Asia with 600,000 people Makes around $40 million a year but takes up the area which rich Mumbai should be

moving to as the city grows with valuable land Dharavi lies across a narrow part of the peninsula and can’t move, causing conflict

between the developers and residents.

The Solution: Governments of Mumbai etc. want to destroy the housing in stages, giving temporary

accommodation, make proper housing and seven storey buildings, then re-enter the population if they have been living there since 1995, therefore they can use more of the expensive land

The rest of the land will be sold or made into an open market BUT they need the agreement of the majority of Dharavi population for the go-ahead,

which some residents worry that once it does finally go ahead, that some of their land will go even more to business through dirty tactics, reducing the size for a population there.

Suburbanisation: from the centre of the city to the suburbs or rural-urban fringe. This is usually in MEDC’s because of technological advances, better transport and to live in a more pleasant environment.

Characteristics: Happened around 1920-1960’s, race has played an important part of suburbanisation, especially as immigrants like to live closely together for social and economic support. Suburbanisation couldn’t have happened without improvements to the transport infrastructure such as railways and roads – London underground very important. As the trains improved and reduced in fare price the rich kept moving further out and so did the poorer groups, which is called ‘Succession and Invasion’. This increased the business of small businesses buying cheaper land. It also created ‘edge cities’. Although many people believe that suburbanisation is a bad thing as it causes urban sprawl and inner-city decay. Some places have incorporated ‘green-belt’ policies which limit the growth to stop inner-city and city decay.

Causes:Economic Social Environmental Demographical

Push Factor 1. Hard to get jobs 1. Congestion and population density2. Better QOL3. Succession and Invasion

1. Pollution from industry and traffic

1. Worse education for kids so young families move

Pull Factor 1. Lower price of land2. More job opportunities3. Transport affordable by rich 4. New out-of-town development by government

1. Correct social mix

1. More space and nature

1. Better education for kids so young families move

Effects:

Suburbs

Suburb land prices rose Increase in office jobs Pressure on green belt Congestion spread Increased retail demand Increased recreational demand Better housing and range Better QOL and SOL

Whole City

City growth Developed transport More housing and jobs More dispersed pollution More open spaces Outer city traffic Greater segregation

Inner City

More transport aimed at suburb area

More pollution from transport

Clearance for more buildings

Environmental improvement

Less crowding

Mini Case Study: Manchester (MEDC Suburbanisation)

Mid 19th century, ¾ of people in the city centre where there were factories producing cotton.

Suburbs were only 1km away from city centre leading to the poor surrounding the rich Late 19th century, a new act was passed which made housing much more spacious The transport improved along with trains, reaching 6km out from the city centre In the 20th century, the transport kept thriving and the population kept growing, although

the River Mersey proved hard to build around due to flooding

Mini Case Study: Los Angeles (MEDC Suburbanisation)

Huge difference between development in inner-city and suburbs Uniform, large, medium density, small ½ store buildings, started around 1945, port, trade,

short commute, racial segregation between inner suburbs with the blacks, while whites on outer suburbs, who were richer with higher statuses, larger less dense housing and up to 60km from CBD but have own shopping malls

Therefore, they didn’t have inner city redeveloped, but kept building out and so, much further from CBD with few transport links (mainly car)

Counter-Urbanisation: population from the city moves out from the rural-urban fringe for a quieter, easier life.

Characteristics: Happened around 1980’s, people retiring from the urbanisation and suburbanisation to go live in countryside, transport even more developed allowing further distances from work, families moving away from cities, some able to afford 2nd home in countryside.

Causes: Economic Social Environmental Demographical

Push Factor 1. expensive living costs including congestion charge

1. overcrowding2. higher crime rate

1. Pollution, especially children’s health risk2. Little greenery3. Higher vandalism4. Eye-sore

1. Loud population

Pull Factor 1. lower cost of living2. Accessibility with transport3. Ability to work at home4. retirement migration5. Out-of-town shopping6. Greenfield site developments

1. communities2. more space and parks and separate housing (quieter and better for children)3. More leisure facilities4. Perceived better education

1. Better views/green area2. Cleaner air3. Quiter

1. Quiet population

Case Study: St. Ives, Cambridgeshire (Counter-Urbanisation MEDC)

Location: Small town in Cambridgeshire, 100km north of London, just off A14 and East Coast railway making London very accessible

Pull Factors: 15th century Georgian and Victorian housing Lots of Greenland Affordable housing Good accessibility including transport to 100km way London Plenty of space Variety of housing Quiet and clean Higher than average income

Effects:

Demographic Effects:

Old people left for retirement Young families escaping to the quiet and

cheap Population of out-of-town workers grows

Social Effects:

Shops and services stay High status estate agents and restaurants Secondary school numbers increase 25% commute to London

Re-urbanisation: movement of people back to city after redevelopment, mainly young people looking for a better life.

Characteristics: From the 1980’s, many development schemes started to get involved, some private, some governmental and some local authority. They took over the old areas which had out-of-date housing and factories which were no longer fit for purpose, which were mainly abandoned or had few people living/working there. These schemes then made use of the brown field sites by creating better housing, more jobs, bringing in younger talent, training people for new skills in new jobs, encourage private-sector investment, improve social activities and the quality of environment.

Causes:Economic Social Environmental Demographical

Push Factor 1. Little professional jobs for young people

1. Little social activities for young in rural areas

- 1. Area for old people and families

Pull Factor 1. More jobs2. Train new skills3. Money being pumped into the area

1. Modern housing, possibly increased social status2. More social stuffs

- 1. Young, exciting people

Effects: A number of initiative schemes were set up.

Urban Development Corporations (UDC’s, 1980’s – 1990’s) – regenerate large areas of derelict land. They did the London Docklands and 10 other schemes in the 1980’s-1990’s. They cleared the land then got private investment in. It did bring in economic development, but found it ignores locals, but they are now trying harder to take in locals accounts.

Enterprise Zones (EZ’s, 1980’s) – Reducing tax to businesses to increase employment. Not many new businesses set up, just existing businesses moved for the tax break.

Inner-City Task Force (1987) – Temporary scheme to provide training opportunities, approx. 500,000 jobs made.

Single Generation Budgets (SGB, 1997) – At change of government, local authorities had to bid for regeneration budgets for rundown housing areas, more power to the people.

English Partnerships => National Regeneration Agency – Lots of partnerships working together from government to locals for housing.

Case Study: London Docklands (Re-urbanisation MEDC)

Location: East of the Tower Bridge, East London and majority north of the Thames

Reasons: All of the docks shut, the last one shutting in 1981 because it was too small Port industry shut, so people were moving out ‘Vicious Circle of Poverty’ Male unemployment at 24%, twice the national average Schools and hospitals old and it had thin and twisty roads Potential to use River Thames as an attractive environment Huge area with pubs and warehouses which could be removed Close to central London

Aims: Private investment to increase economy Physically regenerate the environment Improve living conditions + prospects of the community of the DocklandsPositives:

Negatives: 80% of new house prices are too expensive for locals, by 1995 only 4% of locals own

homes there 30,000 new jobs created, but 20,000 of them were just transfers 45,000 local people unemployed due to lacking business skills Most newcomers are only young and rich Transport isn’t big enough for the future

Case Study: Singapore (Re-urbanisation LEDC)

Background (1960’s): Very dense population – 1700p/ha Poor basic amenities and infrastructure e.g. lack of good sewage system and electricity

within buildings Buildings densely put together and dilapidated Street congestion

Economic: DLR built (1987) Infrastructure improved including

roads Attracted new offices (Canary

Wharf + London Arena) Airport for light aircraft Jubilee expansion (trains) 600/1000 ha reclaimed Job no’s increased £30 spent of training projects For every £1 spent on the project,

£10’s was given in investment Flagships like Canary Wharf

brought in even more investment

Physical: City formed Parks and

walkways developed

£300 spent improving facilities

Social: Home owners rose

from 5% to 45% in 8 years

Cleaned water and cleaned area

8,000 old houses improved and 50,000 new ones built

More shops

Problems: Limited space for building (small island) Few resources Re-housing everyone is very troublesome

Recent Positive Outcomes:Positives

Economic Promoted land for transnational companies Grown economically 10% each year Worlds 4th largest foreign exchange centre Worlds 3rd best oil refiner In top economic league table One of the biggest ship repairers in the world Very high income

Social More people speak English State of the art transport system within city Huge shopping centres and high quality companies Developed huge container port and airport Centres for every nation/culture

Housing: Skyline area, 9/10 people live in high rise buildings Made and rented by the Housing Development Board (HDB) High-density still, but space for greenery Equal buildings with no separate segregation (quotas of different ethnic groups) Only lease flats to married couples, not single mothers (rent private or stay with family) Paid by pensions - 1/5 salary into state account Local services for each estate

Special Design Features: Void Deck – empty ground floor for flooding, circulation of air, communal area for social

functions, reduced crime, least desirable place to live Aesthetics – different rooflines and minimal building design changes Access – easy access such as elevator maintenance, 30 min call out time Waste – Automatic waste disposal systems + incinerators Cleanliness – Public areas are monitored by CCTV – fines (minimum £130), shaming

culprits in newspapers, wee detecting floors

Outcomes:Positives Negatives

Economic Eradicated slums Attracted investment and other

people All income families catered for

Singles not allowed flats Little room for private

development

Social Cleanliness Less ghettos and poverty

stricken areas Reduction in ability for

spreading diseases

Strict control of country (Human Rights fail)

Lack of original architecture Singles not allowed flats

Environmental More greenery and space

Urban Decline and Regeneration within Urban Areas

Characteristics: Mainly found in inner-city areas or outer city council estates. They usually feature deindustrialization, depopulation or changing population, abandoned buildings, high local unemployment, single families, political rejection and high crime rates.

Causes:

Reasons for Inner-City Decline

Economic Social Environmental Political/Demographical

1. Millions of jobs dismissed due to technology/unemployment2. Service job growth didn’t compensate manufacturing job loss3. More jobs in rural areas rose4. Deindustrialisation5. Lack of capital investment

1. Left for better employment opportunities2. Counter-urbanisation3. Poor image of inner-city compared to suburbs/rural4. Access to jobs with transport and other job growth5. Rising crime rates/riots

1. Poor low quality derelict housing and area2. High vandalism and graffiti 3. Few parks, play areas and space4. Loud and concrete surrounding5. Slum-like area6. Pollution

1. People feel rejected by government2. Government isn’t actually working hard on them3. Political extremism4. Ageing popultion

Reasons for Outer-City Council Estates Decline

Economic Social Environmental Political1. Unskilled people for the jobs in the nearby area2. Lack of transport to inner-city

1. Poor quality housing2. Lack of strong community3. ‘Hidden’ places led to criminal activity

1. Slum-like area2. High vandalism and graffiti

1. People feel rejected by government2. Government isn’t actually working hard on them

Housing: Slums/favelas. These used to be bulldozed down such as that in Rio de Janeiro, but finally allowed to stay; they were also slowly integrated into the city and given living essentials. They slowly start building up by the Favela Bairro Project:

Paved roads Water supplies and drainage systems Crèches, leisure and sports facilities Relocation of families in dangerous

areas Channelled rivers

Second phase after first phase: Encourage employment Increase education standards Construction materials

$600 million loaned, $240 million aid, given a prize for success.

Gentrification: Renewal of a deteriorated neighbourhood by new residents who are wealthier than the locals. This can cause an increase in house prices and lead to displacement of locals. It is small scale done by individual people. It is accompanied by landscape and street furniture improvements. Started off by locals.

Case Study: Notting Hill, Centre West London (Gentrification MEDC)

Location: West of central London within M25 near the end of the River Thames, below the A1, edge of the inner city, east of M4. Followed the northern line in the late 1980’s sweeping towards Surrey. Houses in these areas have double in the last two years with many new services causing the multiplier affect – businesses moving, house prices go up.

Background: Used to be a stopping point for highwaymen in the mid 18th century, unpopular tollgate gave the main road its name which was then followed by workers from industrialisation from the countryside with landlords building small terraced houses for the poor. It used to be a rough working class area and by the 1950’s it was known for slum landlords and inner city deprivation. In 1958 it was scene of race riots after tensions arose between the newly arrived Afro Caribbean community and the teddy boys of the fascist British Union. A second riot took place during the infamous Notting Hill Carnival of 1976.

Present: In the past 30 years there has been a swarm of gentrification with estate agents coining names like Hillgate Village for previously working class neighbourhoods sending property prices rocketing. Houses can cost more here than in ultra upmarket Mayfair. Notting Hill secluded communal gardens sandwiched between the rows of houses and scarcely visible from the street, make it London’s most desirable area for families.

Reason: Notting Hill movie popularised area, many famous actors and rock singers and fashion designers flooded into area, Sainsbury’s supposed to be best place in London to spot celebrities. Close to centre of London. Leisure activities on the River Thames. In need of renewal. Very nice area with Victoria architecture, large houses and gardens. Many upmarket services then joined the area.

Trellick Tower: Britain’s largest apartment block built in 1973. Epitomised everything that was wrong with modern high rise buildings. Stories of women being raped in lifts, children being attacked by heroin addicts and squatters setting fire to flats. Since the installation of a concierge and extra security the tower’s reputation has been transformed, it is now something of a style icon becoming a grade II building in 1998. It is considered a trendy address.

Portabello Road: One of the world’s most famous street markets dating back from 1837. The market serves up three experiences, antiques to the south, fruit and veg in the middle and second hand clothing and bits and bobs to the north.

Notting Hill Carnival: Large Caribbean population leading to a three day carnival over the last Bank Holiday weekend of August. Largest street festival outside Rio de Janeiro attended by over 1m people. Revellers are drawn in by the colour, people, food, huge sound systems, dancing and all day street partying with grand parade floats.

Outcome: It has received many good and bad reviews.

Positives NegativesEconomic stabilisation of declining areas

increased property values speculative property price

increases

Social reduced vacancy rates increase social mix decrease crime

displacement of locals through rent/price increases

community resentment and conflict

loss of affordable housing homelessness changes to local services

Environmental reduction of urban sprawl refurbishment of properties

Property Led Regeneration Scheme

Case Study: London Docklands Regeneration, LDDC (MEDC)

Problems: counter-urbanisation, suburbanisation, segregation, deindustrialisation and cumulative causation. These led to: 1 million people leave the inner city between 1961 – 1981, 243,000 jobs lost between

1961 - 1971 Leaving because of slum clearance, decentralisation, improved public and private

transport, cheaper housing, better quality of life, reduced unemployment. Many ethnic groups such as Africans and Pakistanis came in around that period and took

the abandoned area

Phase 1 (Mid 1940’s – Mid 1960’s): Tackle bomb damage from WW2, Eastenders show asked to move, tower blocks being set up and being found it be failing

Phase 2 (Mid 1960’s – Mid 1970’s): Experimentation of ideas found to be only working for outsiders and well off

Phase 3 (Mid 1970’s – late 1970’s): Docklands became partnership area, giving it more money to work with, but only little progress being made

Phase 4 (Late 1970’s – Mid 1990’s): London Docklands Development Corporation set up. 21km² land, 40,000 residents in Newham, Tower Hamlets and Southwark. They said with £440 million, they made £4,400 million of private investment. Throughout this time, there was a recession, followed by a small boom, and then another period of Dockland retraction.

Flagship projects: Canadian developers Olympia and York invest £3,700 million in 24 super scale office buildings for 50,000 people; they also made the 2nd largest skyscraper in Europe at 800ft - @ Canada Square

Catalyst Schemes: Docklands Light Railway at a cost of £73 million – success – doing Dubai metro now London City airport for small planes Tube extension to Jubilee line from Bank to Canary Wharf

Successes Failures

Docklands 3rd most popular place to visit in London

Thousands of new jobs created Environment now accessible and has

little derelict land Reversed population decline

Local people suffered a bit and had no input

Too expensive housing Local industry squeezed out In architectural opinion, it is a

disappointing urban landscape Social segregation of yuppies (young

urban professionals) and dinkies (double income couple, no kids)

Partnership schemes between local and national governments and the private sector

Case Study: City Challenge, Hulme, Manchester (MEDC)

City challenge: Inner city regeneration scheme It started in 1991 11 places first round, 20 areas second round Differences to UDC are that you had to bid, everyone had to work together, smaller scale,

bottom up approach

Background: Redeveloped in the 1960’s as part of a slum clearance programme and a number of high rise flats were built. Of the 5,500 dwellings, 98% were council owned. Many of these had very poor design features such as being damp, having thin walls, lack of security, broken lifts and poor access. This led to low levels of families and children with a disproportionate number of single person households from university students. There was also a high number of single parents and other people with social difficulties. There was some evidence to suggest the local authorities had used the area to dump some of its more unfortunate residents.

Redevelopment: In 1992 under the Hulme City Challenge Partnership, plans were drawn up to build 3,000 new homes, with new shopping centres, roads and community facilities. A more traditional pattern of housing development was designed with streets, squares, two storey houses and low rise flats. By 1955, 50 hectares of land had been reclaimed, with the majority of it being land from the demolished high rise flats. The main shopping area was totally refurbished including the Asda supermarket. A new community centre including creche facilities and other social provision and the Zion Arts Centre was also constructed. Crime in the area had been greatly reduced and there was more of a social mix with the appearance of Hulme being altered radically. Green areas were made with office development housing companies coming strongly into the area. One significant part of the 1970’s Hulme that still exists is the Moss Side Sports and Leisure Complex. Upgraded for the 2002 Commonwealth Games. This has become a popular place to live particularly for university students. A symbol of the regeneration is the Hulme Arch which provides a local landmark.

Partners: Guinness Trust and Bellway Homes worked closely together with the Manchester City Council. The Manchester Airport also funded money for the project. Hulme is a good example of how the public and private sectors work together to improve a declining area.

Retailing and Other Services

Causes:

Increased Mobility: High % of pop. have access to a car. In the CBD there is limited parking which can be pricey, whereas out-of-town shopping centres have lots of parking space and it’s usually free. Locations of shopping centres near motorway for quick and easy access.

Changing Nature of Shopping Habits: Freezers, female employment and ‘read-made’ meals have changed over the decades.

Changing Expectations of Shopping Habits: Shopping has become more family friendly and led to restaurants and entertainment areas. For example, Bluewater has a coffee shop within every 100 metres.

Changing Nature of Retailing: Less competition since very large companies dominate and monopoly the market.

Case Study: Merry Hill, West Midlands (Out-of-town Retailing)

Background: Located west of Birmingham, 10/15km from central Birmingham, south of Dudley Hill Main section built from 1984-89 and is still ongoing extensions Touchwood shopping centre made from competition 50ha, 10 screen cinema, 2 floors, car park – 10,000 spaces 185 shops and kiosks, two supermarkets, 24 catering outlets – 2,200 seats e.g. M&S 3rd largest centre after Bluewater and The biggest Metro Centre 21 million customer visits a year in a catchment area of 3 million Bus station en route to many places e.g. Birmingham and Wolverhampton Waterfront building opposite overviews canal with bars and restaurants Previously railway underneath, failed due to safety and problems over ownership Enterprise zone in 1980’s made planning easy The area it was built on was over the steelwork industry factory and Merry Hill farm and

wildlife area, even though it received many complaints and protests The building was so big that the canal was shut off for a while due to safety concerns

Reasons: Close to highly populated cities (conurbation) Easy access from M5 motorway with buses and A roads One of the enterprise zones and people took advantage of planning conditions Need for jobs and business in the area Plenty of space, including both Brownfield and Greenfield No other shopping centres in the West

Impact:

Positives Negatives

Many new easy jobs made Large area for eating shopping and for

entertainment Unique and larger shops led to the

multiplier effect Friendly and cheap Variety of shops in one place Dry, warm, clean Policed well Over 4,000 new jobs compared to

1,200 at steelworks Compacted area reduced sprawl All types of people can shop there,

including elderly and disabled Free parking

Destroyed Merry Hill farm, the steelworks, wildlife and green space

Temporary access restriction on canal Many people protested Many stores in surrounding area knocked

out of business e.g. 70% of Dudley, whole M&S left and moved to Merry Hill

Increased pollution and traffic, especially in that area

Mainly accessible by car Loss of jobs at certain areas Cycle of Decline around

Trying to turn more eco-friendly now High streets and other businesses

trying harder for work

Recent and Planned Developments: Forced to integrate with outside business due to complaints Merry Hill and Brierley Hill interconnected with walkway and tram system by 2011,

which made Dudley Canal rerouted and a few houses and flats built around the area. Replacement cinema with bowling alley, comedy club, outdoor performing area, more

bars and a casino made on vacant land Apparently the first shopping centre to receive BREEAM accreditation, meaning its all

eco and shiz Local factors thinking of closing and selling their land for housing and other businessesBox Malls (Greenbridge Retail and Leisure Park): They are box-shaped retail outlets, often specialised in furniture, DIY materials, electronic goods and computers. Tend not to specialise in comparison goods, but are close by to shopping malls or leisure attractions.

Case Study: Touchwood, Solihull (Urban Centre Redevelopment)

Background: Shopping centre on the south-east of the West Midlands conurbation – opposite side from

Dudley On redeveloped land in the town centre, close to bus and railway stations, with it’s own

multi-storey car park Prosperous area National Exhibition Centre and Birmingham airport Less derelict land than Dudley and has far more employment in growing sectors of the

economy Touchwood was becoming old fashioned in the 90’s, and therefore refurbished itself 60,000m² space, opened in Sept 2001, modern theme Won UK Retail Destination of the year and Best major new shopping centre, also in the

top 50 shopping centre destinations Created 2,000 retail jobs 80 stores, 20 restaurants, 9-screen cinema, 6,000 parking spaces Links to M42 Architecture reflects Solihull very well and looks very pretty Largest arcade centre and most courtyard gardens and open spaces in the UK for a centre 2 internal courtyards 3 special arcade rooms 4 new gardens

Contemporary Sustainability Issues in Urban Areas

Waste Management: EU and UK government have produced targets for all local authorities to reduce the waste buried in their landfill sites and to increase the amount which is recycled. If they go over, then they have to pay a fine. Also, government suggested that local authorities should consider charging households which throw away more than average without recycling,

although this was challenged by press claims so they backed down for the while at least. However, the problem is not seizing to go away.

Case Study: Mucking, London (Landfill) + Nairobi

Landfill facts: 1956 Clean Air Act meant no more burning of rubbish for health reasons and smog 70% of London’s rubbish goes to landfills in Essex now – from 2007 to 2010 4 landfills closing a week on average Plan to half methane output by ½ by 2020. Nairobi people scavenge and re-use e.g. glass bottles for refilling, washing machine doors

for bowls and storage, food for pets, tin cans for lamps

Short Term Positives Short Term Negatives

1. Quick2. Cheap3. Easiest solution

1. Build up of disease and rats2. Unpleasant smell3. Releases poisonous methane gas4. Lots of traffic caused nearby

Long Term Positives Long Term Negatives

1. Burn it or plant grass over it once finished with2. Use the methane gas as energy to heat homes

1. Unpleasant to live near2. Will get full at some point3. Long decaying time4. Chemical waste and leeching of chemicals into soil which is unsafe5. Contributes to global warming6. Tax on landfill site

Curitiba

Case Study: Chelmsford, Essex (Recycling) + Rio

Recycling facts: In 2006, 18% of waste was recycled in the UK, 26% in Chelmsford. Chelmsford added more to routine at cost of £750,000 with double amount of workers,

but still relies heavily on residents to help. 30% target by 2010, 38% for Chelmsford, but only 18% for tower Hamlets because of

difficulty of recycling in city.

Short Term Positives Short Term Negatives

1. More jobs as collectors2. Sell or re-use recycled material

1. Expensive and time consuming2. Difficult to sort materials3. Rely on people to sort their rubbish out4. Reliant on market and price5. Difficult to collect in inner-city e.g. high-rise flats

Long Term Positives Long Term Negatives

1. Better for environment2. Less global warming3. Meet EU targets

1. Expensive and will continue to be expensive2. Increased transport cost and harm to environment

Case Study: Rivenhall, Central Essex (Incineration) + Singapore

Incineration facts: 0.5 million tonnes incinerated each year Incinerator to last around 30 years Below A120, Bradwell, old airfield, brownfield near Braintree, good access

Short Term Positives Short Term Negatives

1. Quick and effective2. Jobs through transport3. Reduces landfill and actually rids waste

1. Pollution from transport and gases given off – health risk2. Residents close-by have view of tall tower3. Early morning smoke and fog

Long Term Positives Long Term Negatives

1. Receive power through burning2. Use of brownfield site3. Paid by others to take their rubbish

1. Increases transport and busy motorway2. Incineration plants can become huge and lower quality of area, especially countryside3. Health worries from dioxins

Transport Management:

Local National Curitiba (case study)Public Transport

1. Boris Bikes for London2. Park + Pay in Chelmsford3. Oyster Card in London4. Bus routes and lanes5. Cycle lanes

1. Free buses for elderly2. Cycle lanes

Huge buses transporting same as London underground each day using bus only routes and large motorways500x cheaper than London Underground, bus driver doesn’t take fees; saving 1/3 of the time, cheap for low income earners, low air pollution and lots of people use it

Vehicle Transport

1. Red routes for no stopping in London2. Changing road surface to slow vehicles down3. Congestion charge4. Park + Pay in Chelmsford5. Widening of M25 and other motorways6. A12 accident patrols

1. Bridge Tolls2. Speed bumps + cameras3. Speed warning signs

Pollution Control

1. Low-emission zone in London2. Electric and zero carbon cars finally promoted3. Faster lane for cars with more than one person

1. Tax on fuel Singapore (case study)

Pay on public transport per mile and need certificate showing you can use it

Rio (case study)Bus at only $0.5, little pollution, very chap, slum people using illegal vans too – but they are congesting and polluting more, trains coming in at $0.66 and expanding, but

Pricing Mechanism

1. Congestion charge2. Tax on carbon emissions3. Road tolls for town centres (Manchester rejected idea because of rejecting business)

1. Tax on fuel2. Park + Pay in Chelmsford3. Congestion charge

no other public transport.

Case Study: The Manchester Metro Link (MEDC Transport)

Opened in 1992 Some additions to track made, such as to Salford Quays Making it serve 18 stations, 6 above ground Planning on linking it to Rochdale, airport, Trafford centre, Stockport Every 5 minutes in busy periods, 12-15 less busy 32 vehicles, 52,000 journeys a day Saved 3.5 million rips in the car a year