The Mayor’s Outer London Commission Final Report

The Mayor’s Outer London
Commission:
Final Report

Purpose of the Outer London Commission
• find out the extent to which outer London has potential to
contribute to the economic success of London as a whole,
• identify the factors which are holding it back from making that
contribution, and
• make recommendations on policies and mechanisms which will
enable it to do so.

…..and more particularly to:
•identify the scope to ‘grow’ the outer London economy on a sustainable basis:
removing barriers to growth for competitive, established sectors and to attracting new
ones
•explore the potential contribution of a few large ‘growth-hubs’ eg Stratford, Croydon,
Brent Cross, Heathrow area
•secure the wider rejuvenation of outer London’s town centres and other business
locations
•enhance the ‘quality of life’: business and residential environments
•examine the relationship between demographic, housing and economic growth

On the basis of existing evidence how much
employment growth might be expected in Outer
London?
Scenario 1: continuation of 1989 – 2006/7 historic trends in London employment and no
change in outer London’s share of this = 4,600 more jobs pa (in context of 22,000 more jobs
pa across London as a whole): a static view of how employment might change, taking no account of
the changing importance of different sectors in the future
Scenario 2: 2008 London Plan forecast based on a triangulation of now dated historic
trends, estimates of development capacity and improvements to public transport accessibility
= 10,000 more jobs pa: takes account of changing relationships between different sectors but does not
reflect the most up-to-date information on economic trends
Scenario 3: Oxford Economics 2009 forecast = 10,500 more jobs pa: an up-to-date, top-down,
macro-economic view but does not reflect local infrastructure investment and development capacity
New London Plan forecast based on new employment, development capacity and public
transport capacity data: work in progress….. But could be 6,000 – 8,000 more jobs pa, perhaps
spread across almost all outer London boroughs.
Conclusion: forecasts taking account a range of factors all suggest growth
above historic trend

Consultation Messages: Economy
•OL competes only to a limited degree with Inner London (IL) and much more directly
with the Outer Metropolitan Area (OMA)
•Concern that the “growth hub” concept could undermine and/or lead to neglect of other
parts of outer London
•Link a more ‘organic’ type of growth to an improving town centre network
•Need to re-invent, re-brand and market parts of outer London and its distinct offers
•Outer London needs to improve skills to reinforce its new offer, e.g. HE/FE
•Potential for growth in “green” industries, creative industries, logistics, servicing the
residential population, public sector & knowledge sectors
•Must recognise the wider economic base of OL, seek to enhance its strengths and so
provide greater economic resilience for London as a whole

Consultation Messages: Transport
•‘Outer London regions and boroughs have very different
transport needs – there is not a “one size fits all” solution
•Very strong concern to improve orbital connectivity
•“Make it Sweat” - maximise the use of existing infrastructure with limited funds available
•The car will continue to play an important role in outer London
•Improve quality and connectivity of inter-changes, publicise orbital connectivity more clearly

Consultation Messages: Quality of Life
•Quality and affordable homes for families are
needed to retain people
•The character of the suburbs should not be lost due to economic and
residential growth
•Town centres need a mixture of jobs, shops and services to remain viable,
including a managed night-time economy
•Need a high quality public realm to compete with out of town shopping
•Protection of the Green belt and green spaces should remain sacrosanct

Employment structure: different parts of outer London
Heathrow
Croydon
Thames Gateway
Western Wedge
Wandle Valley
M1 Corridor
Stansted Corridor
Eastern London
South Eastern London
South Western London
Western London
Northern London
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Financial services Professional services Creative activities
Goods retail Leisure activities Schools and hospitals
Local activities Passenger transport, freight and storage Wholesale
Manufacturing (excl publishing)
•Heathrow almost all transport,
freight and storage jobs
•Outer urban areas: larger
proportions in local activities,
schools, hospitals
•Greatest shares of financial
jobs in Croydon and SE
•Manufacturing most important
to Thames Gateway
•Overall, greatest growth
expected in office based jobs
especially Business Services

Broad views on sources of future employment growth in
outer London:
‘Endogenous’ or existing sources i.e. those
which have contributed to the existing,
underlying trends BUTwhich might perform
more effectively if constraints on performance/
competitiveness are addressed.
Testing being finalised on:
PLUS
•Office based private sectors
•Retail
•Leisure/tourism
•Local/central government
•Other public sector eg health, security
•Industry/logistics
•Other sectors eg construction, media
•Residential based growth
•Commuting/reverse commuting – bringing
more wealth to OL
•Multiplier effects
Exogenous sources: either strategically
significant step changes from endogenous
sources OR strategically significant new sources
of employment, if constraints can be removed on
competitive attractions of OL - but must be
realistic.
Testing being finalised on:
PLUS
•Central government – similar to Home office at
Croydon
•Para-statal organisations eg EC related
•New national/wider regional transport investment
eg High Speed Rail terminus
•‘Green’ industries – especially above the trend
which might be expected from pro rata distribution
of national growth
•New national/wider regional level HE, health,
security
•Outer Metropolitan Area offices: a step change in
London’s competitive position
•Multiplier effects

New spatial structures considered by the Commission which might
help realise the economic potential of outer London
(1)
Super-hubs’: very large scale expansion of a few already successful business locations
to develop their ‘greater than sub-regional offer’ to provide further agglomeration
economies and to justify the substantial infrastructure investment necessary to support
them, but without compromising existing business locations.
Rejected: private office demand on this scale unlikely; strong opposition from many
stakeholders because compromise prospects of other business locations
Substantial Green Belt/MOL based urban extensions.
Rejected in principle: substantial development capacity and greater scope to make
use of transport capacity within the urban envelope, BUT do consider if can be
accomplished with no net loss of Green Belt/Metropolitan Open Land and has potential
for significant growth.
Also, explore the economic potential of outer London’s farms and other uses
compatible with open land designations.

New spatial structures considered by the Commission which might
help realise the economic potential of outer London
(2)
Strategic Outer London Development Centres: existing business and other locations
with greater than sub regional reach in one or more strategic functions and particular
attractions for ‘exogenous’ growth based on capacity to enhance existing strategic success
Support as a more realistic and viable type of hub - more appropriate to accommodating
the scale and nature of growth likely to come forward, to minimise need to travel and to
complement existing structures.
Recommend testing potential locations eg
•Leisure/tourism: Wembley/and parts of Greenwich/Richmond/ Hillingdon/Wandle
•Media: White City; Park Royal (media, food related);
•Logistics: parts of Bexley/B&D/Havering/ Hillingdon/Hounslow
•Other transport: Hillingdon/Royal Docks-City airport/Biggin Hill
•Strategic office: Croydon/Stratford
•HE/FE: Uxbridge/Kingston/Greenwich and possibly Croydon/Stratford/Romford
•Industry: Upper Lee Valley, Bexley Riverside
•Retail: Brent X

More generally, the development of outer London should be based upon a “star
and cluster” approach making particular use of the existing town centre
network, and also recognising other strategic business locations
Source: Farrells

More effective existing spatial structures supported
by the OLC
Town Centres
•A ‘constellation’ of the single most important business locations outside central London
•Focus on enhancing access to competitive choice of goods and services, especially by ‘sustainable modes
•Need for targeted regeneration – increase town centre residential density
Opportunity Areas and Areas of Intensification
•Support general concepts – scope for new Areas
•Need for greater certainty and coordination in LDA, HCA and other public investment
•Improve social and environmental infrastructure to secure their attractiveness as places to live and work
Industrial Land
•Secure capacity for relatively low value but essential functions
•More emphasis on quality especially access
•Explore economic role of farms within outer London
Growth Corridors:
•Historically the potential of these has not been realised
•Need for much more active cross border working/coordination, especially on transport
•Practical joint planning arrangements
•Focus on the nodes within corridors not the spaces between

London’s Growth Corridors
Source: GLA

It may be possible to use higher education/further
education institutions as a focus of regeneration . . .
Source: Farrells

Other recommendations supported
by the OLC: Demography and Housing
Demography and Housing
•Population growth should not be pursued just because it creates jobs, though
coincidentally it does, even if residents work beyond outer London (230 new local jobs
per 1000 new residents)
•Growth must be sensitive to the quality of local neighbourhoods
•Emphasis on ‘place shaping’, mixed use and capacity building at local level
•Greater recognition of needs of smaller households, but need for new affordable family
housing
•Maintain and enhance outer London as a place to live for all ages
•Ring fence S106 contributions to accumulate investment
•Seek higher quality provision of housing across all tenures

Other recommendations supported
by the OLC: Economy
Offices
•Give appropriate recognition to strategic economic
needs when considering local and environmental concerns
•Allow some development where greater economic potential exists
•Focus on most competitive locations for future growth
•Stronger reflection of potential for mixed use ‘swaps in competitive locations
Knowledge-based industries
•Clearly define ‘knowledge’, ‘media’, ‘creative’ based industries and specify how can
best address specific needs
•Clarify whether OL suffers from a lack of e-infrastructure and whether public
sector/planning can help address this
•Develop business support services for home-working
•More active public intervention may be required to develop science/innovation parks if
viable markets can be identified – backed by long term brand management

Other recommendations supported
by the OLC: Economy
Offices
•Give appropriate recognition to strategic economic
needs when considering local and environmental concerns
•Allow some development where greater economic potential exists
•Focus on most competitive locations for future growth
•Stronger reflection of potential for mixed use ‘swaps in competitive locations
Knowledge-based industries
•Clearly define ‘knowledge’, ‘media’, ‘creative’ based industries and specify how can best
address specific needs
•Clarify whether OL suffers from a lack of e-infrastructure and whether public
sector/planning can help address this
•Develop business support services for home-working
•More active public intervention may be required to develop science/innovation parks if
viable markets can be identified – backed by long term brand management

Other recommendations supported
by the OLC: Economy
Leisure, Arts, Culture and Tourism
•Most funding for cultural facilities goes to central
London, even though one third of the approximately 3,500 facilities are in outer
London
•More positive marketing of outer London’s distinct attractions – especially where
‘clustered’
•More proactive approach to the ‘cultural quarter’ concept and outer London cultural
assets to foster local regeneration
•More effective strategic and local coordination and marketing of accessible clusters
of local outer London attractions
•Explore potential for very large scale commercial leisure with
regional/national/international offer
•Positive promotion and tighter management of night time economy clusters
•Explore scope for rejuvenation of medium sized theatres eg art house movie function

London’s cultural facilities

Other recommendations supported
by the OLC: Transport
Broad Conclusions - OLC is charged with producing
realistic recommendations
•Recognise TfL cannot make investment decisions
without a strong business case – this has been a key OLC consideration
•The scale, massing, distribution and nature of outer London are critical to this
•The reality is that TfL and national transport budgets will be limited
•Investment in transport should be considered across the city region
•Outer London specific investments should not be neglected, recognising that it also it also benefits from
pan London radial transport improvements
•The Commission support the approach set out in the MTS Statement of Intent for a more transparent,
outcome focused method of assessing investment options for both TfL and the boroughs
•A high-speed contiguous orbital public transport system is unlikely to address outer London needs
•The ‘star and cluster’ concept offers a more effective and practical model to meet the constellation of
business locations outlined above
“Star and cluster”
approach

Other recommendations supported
by the OLC: Transport
•Car Parking
•Parking policy is not a “one size fits” all inner London approach
•A blanket liberalization of parking policy across outer London
would not be appropriate
•There may be a case for selective review of some aspects of
parking policy in particular to rejuvenate the outer London office sector
•The most liberal outer London standard (1 space/100 sq m) is more than three times
more stringent than neighbouring OMA (commonly 30 sq m)
•TfL advised to examine, taking account of possibility of graduating standards,
apportionment of revised capacity to incentivise lower CO 2 emitting vehicles, car sharing
and car clubs and to accommodate disability parking as part of Travel Plans for new
development
•Review town centre policies which appear to favour out-of-centre developments
•A much stronger commitment to introducing a level playing field with OMA on parking
policy and out-of-centre development
•Explore the implications of a more liberal/flexible approach to parking policy in
centres strategically identified as in particular need of regeneration

Other recommendations supported
by the OLC: Labour Market
•Skills are a key challenge for London as a whole
•Outer London outperforms inner London at
school-age
•Younger higher skilled workers from the rest of the UK and abroad are attracted to live and
work in London
•Outer London residents enjoy higher rates of employment and lower rates of worklessness
than inner London residents
•Skills investment driven by need (i.e. tackling priority issues, skills associated with Crossrail),
not geography – concern that this may miss distinct skill needs of OL which not fall within broad
metropolitan categories.
•The LDA move towards a commissioning approach will provide further opportunities for locally
driven responses to the delivery of strategic outcomes

Summary OLC conclusions
•Outer London does have potential to contribute more strongly to growth of London and
the wider city region – but this needs to be considered in terms of its residential and
environmental as well as its economic functions
•Outer London is not homogeneous and requires specific spatial policies – and flexibility to
apply them locally : ‘fuzzy’ boundaries
•Holistic approach needed – closer integration of strategic transport, economic
development, spatial and other strategies and associated investment, as well as local
plans including Community Strategies
•Constellation of centres/hubs is a sounder basis for fostering OL’s broadly based and
varied contributions to London’s growth rather than a few very large scale growth hubs
•Improvements to connectivity and movement within regions is crucial – but realism
needed over large scale investment capacity - considerable potential in smaller scale
improvements
•OL competes with OL only to a limited degree, but much more directly with OMA
•Town centres need to become stronger focus for their communities
•Current residential patterns/densities considered a key component of quality of life – but
need not be compromised by growth provided this is accommodated sensitively
•Effective mechanisms to ensure social infrastructure to support this growth and maintain
QoL are essential

Purpose of the Recalled Outer London Commission
• Focus on a few key issues
• Produce guidance to assist local implementation of strategic
policy

Key Issues For Guidance
• Measures and priorities to enhance the viability of:-
- town centres
- perhaps also other locations which have benefited less
from strategic infrastructure investment
• Criteria for allocation of new Town Centres Renewal/Outer
London Fund
• Car parking standards in town centres and other office locations
• Strategic Outer London Development Centre concept
• Dispersal of Government Offices from central London
• Housing density and design

Anticipated Outcome of the Commission’s
Recommendations
• Feed into the new Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG)
• SPG devolves from the Replacement London Plan
• Subject to consultation this summer
• Interim conclusions by early June
• Final recommendations later

Other Potential Mayoral Initiatives
• Enterprise Zone status for Royal Docks (potential as opportunity area)
• Mayoral Development Corporation(s) to promote strategic locations e.g.:-
i) Olympic Legacy
ii) North East London corridor

Allocation Criteria Considerations
• Which areas receive least benefit from Crossrail & the Olympics
• Assess how regeneration schemes contribute to the Mayor’s aims
• Prioritisation of criteria
• Practicality of criteria
• Issues regarding Fund administration
• Resource Issues (bidding criteria?)
• Speed of implementation

Potential Bidding Criteria
• Place-making/shaping
• Accessibility and connectivity
• Economic development
• Promotion
• Additionality
• Renewal and refitting
• Phasing
• Process
• Market failure’ or ’Tipping Point’