Examination of Witnesses (Questions 940
- 959)
940. If we go back to your document 11, I am
not going to ask you to read it out, but you have put a red box
round the reference to the eastern City fringe. Is that right?
(Mr Penfold) I have, yes.
941. In terms of the number of jobs anticipated
by the Mayor of London, is there any indication—I think
I have skipped a page, so go back to page 17—as to the number
of office-based jobs which are anticipated in London for the period
to 2016?
(Mr Penfold) The London Plan, where you can
see for yourselves on page 17, refers to the potential capacity
to accommodate around 560,000 office-based jobs by 2016. It might
be worth saying as well that those two figures, 14,000 jobs in
the Whitechapel/Aldgate opportunity area and 16,000 in the Bishopsgate/South
Shoreditch area, if you put those together that is about the number
of people who work at Broadgate today—about 30,000 people.
942. Is there any other part of the London Plan
that you wish to look at at this stage, or can we turn on to Tab
4 of the Mayor's Transport Strategy?
(Mr Penfold) I am happy to move on.
943. In terms of the Mayor's Transport Strategy,
you have got document 12, page 21, the critical issues identified
by the Mayor. Are any of those critical issues relevant to this
Committee's deliberations?
(Mr Penfold) The first two bullets are: meeting
the challenge of economic and demographic growth by investing
to deliver the necessary additional public transport capacity
and reliability. That goes back to the London Plan and the growth
that has been identified in the London Plan, both for housing
and employment. The second bullet is meeting the challenge of
supporting London's world city functions which are key to its
continuing economic growth, by tackling traffic congestion, improving
public transport and improving the City's international links.
944. If we turn over to page 22, document 13,
we can see the Mayor's encouragement to supporting London's world
city functions. In terms of the Mayor of London, and indeed businesses
like yours, seeking to attract tenants, who are you competing
with? Other international cities or other cities in the UK?
(Mr Penfold) The sorts of occupiers I was talking
about at the beginning of my proof are really the sorts of occupiers
that will locate in London in one or two, possibly three, locations
in London or else not at all in the UK—their headquarters.
They may go into other cities in the UK, other types of offices,
more backroom-type functions, but their main function will be
located here in London in the City, possibly Canary Wharf, and
that is about it. Otherwise they will look to other major European
cities, the two key ones being Paris and Frankfurt.
945. I would like to skip on a few pages in
this document. The Committee has it before them. Can we go on
to document 16 on page 28. At first glance, the paragraph you
have highlighted would not appear to be relevant in that it refers
to "redevelopment of national railway stations". Why
have you highlighted 4E.40?
(Mr Penfold) I think the criteria should be
appropriate. The Committee will make up their own minds on this,
but it seems to me that they are sensible criteria. This is not
a redevelopment but it is the adding on of a new railway station
to an existing railway station. I do not see much reason why the
criteria should be any different. So that "reducing overcrowding,
improving safety, passenger movements and interchange, achieve
integration between rail and other modes and improve access to
the stations"—those seem to me to be good tests for
any major proposals for change to an existing or building a new
railway station in London.
946. Turning to Crossrail in particular, if
you go to document 17, page 29—it goes on to page 30—what
is it that the Mayor of London envisages that Crossrail will provide
for areas such as the City, City fringe, the area around Liverpool
Street station?
(Mr Penfold) It will significantly reduce overcrowding
on several Underground lines and, also, reduce congestion to a
number of busy stations. This is set in the context of meeting
the urgent demands of the City, and business and supporting London's
world city role.
947. In the light of the policy that you agree,
as British Land, with the Mayor's approach, would Crossrail have
received so much support from you and others if it had thought
that the approach was: "If a particular station suffers from
a degree of congestion that is something that people will have
to live with, or measures can be taken like changing signage,
and the like", as was discussed this morning. Is that what
you were envisaging from Crossrail?
(Mr Penfold) No, it is not, and I think anyone
reading those policies, and indeed reading the objectives of the
Crossrail project itself, would be expecting rather more than
that. I think, if one looks at the public transport infrastructure
that has been provided in London recently, particularly the Jubilee
line stations, you get a sense of something which is important
to London and which people care about and want to make work. I
do not think that one could describe the proposals that are presently
in front of us as fulfilling that role.
948. If you go on to page 31 in your bundle,
document 18, you have put your red box round paragraph 4Q.13.
Why is it, as far as you understand, that the Mayor draws attention
to the fact that Crossrail will serve Liverpool Street, and there
is a specific reference to Bishopsgate Goods Yard? What indication
does that give to you?
(Mr Penfold) It suggests to me that it is seen
as important to the delivery of those opportunity areas, particularly
that Bishopsgate/South Shoreditch opportunity area. The Bishopsgate
Goods Yard is by far the largest and most important site in that
opportunity area and it will depend for it success on a very good
public transport infrastructure, and that is, I believe, recognised
in paragraph 4Q.13.
949. So the line of questioning that was put
by Ms Lieven this morning, that certain elements were not attributable
to Crossrail but to business growth, in terms of your understanding
of the Mayor's policy, what is Crossrail's role in relation to
business growth in opportunity areas such as Bishopsgate Goods
Yard?
(Mr Penfold) It has a direct role in facilitating
that business growth. The two are completely—to my mind
anyway—interconnected and it is one of the key objectives
of Crossrail to serve that business growth.
950. Turning on from the Mayor's Transport Strategy,
I think we go to your tab 5 and we come across further extracts
from the London Plan. If you go to document 19 at page 35, you
have highlighted part at the top. What does the Mayor, in the
London Plan, see as the policy towards improving public transport
capacity, particularly in relation to the central activity zone
and opportunity areas?
(Mr Penfold) The policy states that the Mayor
will work with Transport for London, the Strategic Rail Authority,
government boroughs and other partners to ensure the integration
of transport... by "encouraging patterns and forms of development
that reduce the need to travel, especially by car... " I
will not read it all but it then goes on to then draw the link
between public transport capacity and accessibility and those
growth areas, Thames Gateway, in this case, the central activity
zone and the opportunity areas—areas for intensification,
which is another policy allocation, which is not directly relevant
to this area, although there is an area of intensification further
to the west, at Farringdon. Town centres it refers to as well.
951. If we turn on to tab 6 we have yet another
policy document produced by the Mayor. This is the draft sub-regional
development framework for East London. Without wishing to over-burden
the Committee with all these policy documents, what I would like
you to identify is what indication these documents give to developers
and others wishing to provide opportunities for job-creating development
to take place? Where is it being directed to—this development?
If you go to document 22—I am sorry, I am taking it rather
quickly than anticipated.
(Mr Penfold) This covers a wider area of East
London. The City of London is incorporated into that East London
area, along with nine London boroughs. It refers, at paragraph
47, which is on your document 22, to employment growth in East
London of 249,000 in the London Plan; 90% of those jobs expected
to be in the office sector; almost all of them in the City, the
City fringe and the Isle of Dogs. The figure of 93,000 for the
City has been derived from that. I heard Mr Rees speak of that
in his evidence.
952. The approach to opportunity areas?
(Mr Penfold) It draws a distinction at page
44.
953. I think that may be one of the few pages
we have not put in. Perhaps you could—
(Mr Penfold) In paragraphs 135 and 137 (and
perhaps we could have those circulated afterwards), the approach
to the opportunity areas is refined by drawing a distinction between
those which are seen as being integral parts of the central London
office market and those which are not. It is quite clear that
the City fringe opportunity areas that I have already spoken about
are identified as playing an important role in the provision of
office space.
954. As one might expect, if we go on to tab
7, we have another document from the Mayor of London.
955. Sir Peter Soulsby: If I might interject
for a moment, I think it is very helpful to the Committee to understand
the planning policy framework in which we are considering this
particular scheme, and it was also helpful earlier to be reminded
of the importance of the City in the wider context of London.
I think it is going to be of more interest to the Committee to
focus on precisely why British Land feels the need to Petition
against the Bill rather than, perhaps, as much detail as you are
providing us with at the moment of the planning framework within
which we are operating here. If I can encourage you, perhaps,
to move on to what I hope is the main issue.
956. Mr Cameron: Thank you, sir, for
that helpful steer. I think what I would like to do, please, Mr
Penfold, is take this more quickly. Sir, I hope that I am not
departing from the guidance you have just given me if I ask Mr
Penfold about the approach taken by the neighbouring authorities.
When you heard from Mr Rees, you heard from him about the development
taking place in the City but his evidence stopped at the City
boundaries. Unless you tell me, sir, that you are not going to
find it helpful, I would like, not going through all the policies—
957. Sir Peter Soulsby: That is fine,
Mr Cameron. This was the issue you raised in questions last week
and, briefly, yes, by all means, take us through this.
958. Mr Cameron: What I am going to do,
Mr Penfold, if I can, is to take you to your exhibit 5 in the
A3 bundle. On exhibit 5 you have marked out the local authority
boundaries. Then if you go to your exhibit 10, you have got policy
allocations. Those are policy allocations outside the City of
London. Is that right?
(Mr Penfold) They are, yes.
959. In terms of the signals that those boroughs
are giving to developers, without going to the specific policies,
can you just take us to the number of opportunities that arise
in Islington, then Hackney and then Tower Hamlets, and their relationship
with Liverpool Street station. Hopefully, that will—
|
