House of Lords - Keeping the flame alive: the Olympic and Paralympic Legacy - Select Committee on Olympic and Paralympic Legacy

Keeping the flame alive: the Olympic and Paralympic Legacy - Select Committee on Olympic and Paralympic Legacy Contents

CHAPTER 6: THE EAST LONDON LEGACY

Introduction

259. The legacy of regeneration for East London was firmly emphasised in the 2005 bid to host the games. The bidding documents highlighted levels of deprivation in and around Stratford, but also set out the potential effect that significant investment might have on an area relatively close to the centre of London. This regeneration, coupled with the sporting inspiration described in earlier Chapters, formed the core of the legacy promises initially made in the London 2012 bid.

260. The Government's December 2010 Legacy Action Plan promised to ensure that "the Olympic Park can be developed after the Games as one of the principal drivers of regeneration in east London". Responsibility for taking forward this aim rested, until March 2012, with the Olympic Park Legacy Company. In April 2012 a Mayoral Development Corporation was formed, under the auspices of the Localism Act 2011. This corporation—the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC)—is now responsible for the development of the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park for legacy usage.

261. The London boroughs which played host to the Games—Greenwich, Hackney, Newham, Tower Hamlets and Waltham Forest—have, since 2005, worked together to seek to secure positive outcomes for their residents. These five boroughs were joined, in April 2011, by Barking and Dagenham. Before the Games, these boroughs were collectively known as the host boroughs; since the Games, they are typically called growth boroughs. Across a range of employment, health, income and skills indicators these boroughs have, historically, scored less than the London average. The principal aim of the growth boroughs is to see these measures improve over the course of twenty years, eventually meeting the London average. This aim, known as convergence, has received commitment and backing from Government and the Mayor.

262. During the course of our inquiry we were consistently told that much of the pre-Games infrastructure expenditure in East London was incurred on projects which would have taken place even if the Games had not happened, but that these projects would have been delivered over a much longer time scale. One 2012 legacy was therefore to have accelerated this investment. This also implies that the total incremental economic benefit of hosting the Games was considerably lower than the total benefit being attributed to the project; we received evidence to support this view.[106] We call on the Government to publish figures setting out the true net benefit of hosting the Olympic and Paralympic Games. (Recommendation 15)

The need for long-term vision and commitment

263. The challenges facing parts of East London are long-term and the solutions, necessarily, require long-term commitment and investment. They extend beyond the Park boundary controlled by LLDC; Ken Livingstone highlighted the "huge potential" of the land between the Thames and the Olympic Park.[107] A number of witnesses told us that the current position was, effectively, only the mid point in a fifty year programme of intervention and support. Lord Mawson told us that:

108

264. The Growth Boroughs stated that partners who had worked together to make the Olympics a success needed to continue to work together, with a shared commitment to convergence, to maximise the legacy of the Games. Without this long-term, shared, commitment and vision it was possible that "a true and lasting Olympic legacy will not be fully realised and East and South East London will continue to be a drain on the country's resources rather than becoming net contributors to UK GDP".[109]

265. We asked the Mayor of London where the responsibility should lie for setting out, and leading, the long-term 'vision' for East London:

The Chairman:

Boris Johnson:

110

266. The hosting of the Games required sustained commitment from a wide variety of national, regional and local partners, working towards a shared goal. The delivery of a successful regeneration legacy in East London will require the same cooperation and a sustained, consistent vision, but over a longer period of time. The office of the Mayor is best placed to provide ownership to this, and should have clear responsibility for setting out and leading this vision.

267. We urge all partners involved in delivering the legacy in East London to maintain the long-term commitment required to deliver positive change. We recommend that the office of the Mayor should produce an annual report setting out the extent to which partners are making progress in delivering the legacy for East London. This should be received and debated by the London Assembly. (Recommendation 16)

The Housing Legacy

THE EAST VILLAGE

268. During the games, the Olympic Village played host to over 11,000 athletes. It was always intended that the village would be converted into residential accommodation post-Games, with around 50% made available for affordable housing; this formed a central part of the legacy 'promise' made around the time of the bid. It was originally intended that the remaining half of the site would be made available for private sales.[111]

269. The Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) had responsibility for transforming the village, post-Games, into accommodation suitable for permanent residential use. In total, 2,818 properties will be available in a neighbourhood now known as the 'East Village'. The ODA agreed, in August 2011, to sell 51% of the site to a partnership of Qatari Diar and Delancey, with the housing to be marketed as private rental accommodation. The partnership, now known as Get Living London, is currently marketing the site. GLL told us that the legal commitment to rent these properties, rather than to sell them, expires in eight years.[112]

270. Get Living London also told us that they were not subject to any planning or contractual stipulation that required them to target local residents, but had always assumed that they would receive interest from people living locally. Whilst marketing was being conducted London-wide, around a third of applicants currently registering an interest in the homes were based in east London.[113]

271. The remaining 49% of the site will be made available as affordable housing. This element is being delivered through Triathlon Homes, a partnership between East Thames Group, Southern Housing and the urban development company First Base. Of these 1,379 properties, 675 are social housing, with local authority nomination rights on the vast majority; around two-thirds of these houses are now pre-allocated, via the relevant local authorities.[114] The remainder of this affordable housing element comprises intermediate rent and shared ownership homes.

272. Triathlon Homes made clear that the amount of affordable and social rented housing provided within this development was relatively high, and that this was in part due to both the timing, and the unique nature of the development.[115]Sir Robin Wales expressed high hopes for the village, outlining steps that were being taken to move working families into the village in order to seek the right "balance".[116]

273. It should not be assumed that the need for a 'legacy' requires that elements of the post-Games village be made available for affordable housing; there was no such provision in Sydney, and there will be no such provision after Rio 2016, where a developer will build the village, lease it to the organising committee and then, in the words of John Coates, "maximise the profit afterwards".[117]

274. We welcome the provision of a significant amount of affordable housing within the East Village. The measures that are being taken to make this housing available to local people are also welcome.

275. Buildings within the East Village are based around courtyards in an open square, known as plots. Each of these plots contains a mixture of private market, intermediate rent, shared ownership and social rented accommodation. These are typically separated into blocks, served by different lift shafts and staircases, but the blocks are intended to be 'tenure-blind' from the outside. Each courtyard therefore serves a mix of tenures.

276. Triathlon Homes and GLL explained that a mix of tenures, designed in this way, was not uncommon in other developments across the UK. To have this mix on such a large scale, however, is uncommon—we sought out comparable UK examples but were not provided with any.[118] The GLL portion of the development is the first UK private sector residential fund of more than 1,000 houses to be owned and directly managed as an investment.[119]

277. We recommend that Get Living London continue to monitor levels of local interest in private housing within the development, and should be prepared to report how much of this interest develops into long-term occupation. (Recommendation 17)

278. The village, when fully occupied, will comprise the first new residential community within the Park. We were told that both GLL and Triathlon will provide a visible on-site management presence as residents begin to move into the village. We welcome this move, and hope that active on-site management by the two landlords will be maintained in the longer-term.

279. The LLDC explained how the success of the East Village would have an impact upon the approaches local residents take to future neighbourhoods developed within the Park:

120

280. We note the ambitious measures that have been taken to secure an integrated mix of housing tenures within the village. It will be important for both landlords to continue to maintain a strong visible presence on-site. The success of the village will have a direct bearing on future developments within the Park, and beyond.

281. We recommend that Triathlon Homes, GLL and, where appropriate, the LLDC, monitor how this mix of tenures works when fully occupied, how this might evolve over time, and develop robust plans for overcoming any identified challenges. We recommend that the office of the Mayor, and the London Borough of Newham, should consider how well the village is working when fully occupied. (Recommendation 18)

New neighbourhoods within the Park

282. The East Village was built to meet the specifications of an Olympic Athletes Village. This brought design benefits, particularly in terms of security and accessibility. It also meant that the accommodation was delivered through a relatively unique set of funding arrangements, which have allowed affordable housing of a high quality to be provided. This funding regime will not be replicated in other new residential developments within the Park. Whilst accepting these constraints, we hope that the Village can act as an exemplar for the new neighbourhoods. It will be important for new housing within the Park, and within the wider regeneration of East London, to seek to meet the high standards set within the Village.

283. The Legacy Communities Scheme, developed in 2011, set out plans for five new, additional, housing neighbourhoods within the Park. Under this scheme, outline planning permission exists for a further 6,684 homes; the LLDC has a policy of bringing forward up to 35% affordable housing across the piece, split approximately into thirds of social housing, intermediate housing and shared ownership housing.[121]

284. The first of these neighbourhoods, Chobham Manor, which will deliver around 800 homes, is currently being developed by Chobham Manor LLP, a partnership of Taylor Wimpey and London and Quadrant Housing, and will comprise of affordable rent houses, shared ownership and outright sales properties. This development is less dense than the East Village, with smaller blocks and what London & Quadrant described as more "typical housing".[122] Around 70-75% of the properties will be family homes, with three bedrooms or more, across all types of tenure.

285. The precise definition of a 'family home', and the number of bedrooms required, is contentious. Many families in communities adjacent to the Park have large numbers; some are multi-generational. LLDC told us that, of the 6,684 homes set out in the Legacy Communities Scheme, it was currently envisaged that 570 would have 4 or more bedrooms. This may change when detailed designs are developed.[123]

286. London & Quadrant told us that they were providing a higher proportion of family homes within their development than would normally be the case; they were also looking at providing a small number of multi-generational homes, in which grandparents could live with extended family.[124] The Chief Executive of LLDC, whilst recognising the need for larger family homes, maintained that the Olympic Park alone could not solve the housing need of the whole of the area.[125]

287. The boroughs surrounding the Olympic Park have a relatively high number of families who require more than three bedrooms. It is vital that new housing within the Park is accessible to, and suitable for, local residents.

288. We recommend that the LLDC undertake a robust assessment of the level of such need within the area, and use this to require developers to make appropriate provision when bringing forward new housing within the Park. It is important that new housing reflects the needs of local people. (Recommendation 19)

289. The measures which were taken to promote sustainable construction in the design and build of the Olympic Park have attracted praise from a number of quarters.[126] The developments themselves followed Secured by Design principles. The running of the Games also operated to a relatively high sustainability standard; a new International Standard for event sustainability has been developed and approved in light of the experience of London 2012.[127]

290. Having set high standards before and during the Games, it is important that post-Games development within the Park continues to promote sustainable design, build and management. London and Quadrant told us that this was happening at Chobham Manor, with a link to the combined heat and power network, promotion of cycle use and higher levels of sustainability in terms of water and energy use. The LLDC told us that they were adopting the ODA's practices for construction and material re-use. New housing would meet the requirements of Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4, although LLDC committed to going further, towards Level 5.

291. Notwithstanding the LLDC's undertaking on levels of sustainability, there were general concerns within the written evidence received by the Committee that the innovative, exemplary approaches seen before the Games were not being promoted to the same extent in legacy. Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 was described as "increasingly common practice"; the iconic nature of the Olympic Park was cited as one reason for wishing to see new standards set, rather than existing standards maintained.[128]

292. We welcome the measures that are currently being taken to promote sustainable design, construction and energy use, and to follow Secured by Design principles, on the Olympic Park. The Park is, however, an iconic site and should be capable of setting an example in this regard.

293. We recommend that the LLDC and development partners should consider what further steps they could take to promote sustainability on the site and should seek to promote the highest possible standards in security and in efficient, viable, sustainable design and construction. The LLDC should seek to retain, wherever possible, the feel-good factor of naming roads, buildings and facilities with an association of the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games in mind. (Recommendation 20)

Sustainable communities

294. We were told about the measures that were being taken to develop and support an integrated, sustainable new residential community within the Park. A new school—Chobham Academy—has already opened, and further new schools are planned. Health and medical facilities are beginning to open and new retail outlets are also planned.[129]

295. Lord Mawson told us that, when it came to supporting the development of a sustainable community, the public sector could only do so much:

130

296. We asked the LLDC if they were confident that the plans for housing within the Park would create communities that were cohesive and sustainable in the longer-term. In the Chief Executive's view:

131

297. We do not believe that the creation of a new community on this scale is a wholly organic process. It will be important for the LLDC to continue to ensure the delivery of supporting social and community infrastructure within the Park. As one example, we would hope that the LLDC can work with the legacy operators of leisure facilities within the Park to ensure affordable, easy access for local residents.

298. The Olympic Park will eventually house over 10,000 new households. These residents will be living close to major sporting and leisure facilities and an emerging commercial and business centre. This is a new community, with no collective history. The LLDC should consider the long-term sustainability, security and cohesion of the community that they are creating to be amongst their highest priorities; ultimate responsibility for this lies with the office of the Mayor. (Recommendation 21)

299. The Mayor, in the annual report specified in Recommendation 16, should make clear the steps that are being taken to deliver supporting infrastructure within the Olympic Park. This social and community infrastructure should be capable of being sustained beyond the eventual winding-down of the LLDC itself. (Recommendation 22)

Housing challenges outside the Park

300. The boroughs which played host to the Olympics have, historically, had house prices which are lower than the London average. Elected representatives of these boroughs told us that the situation had already started to change, and that house prices were increasing, heightening issues of affordability. Cllr Robbins told us that :

132

301. We heard concerns that the "Olympic effect" would increase house prices still further in surrounding areas, leading to convergence being achieved through gentrification, rather than improved outcomes for current residents.[133] The Chief Executive of the LLDC outlined the difficulty of this issue, suggesting that, on one measure, increasing house prices could be seen as an outcome of successful regeneration. The LLDC was committed to working with local authorities to manage such impacts.[134]

302. One measure which could be taken partly to address this problem would be to bring forward additional housing supply in the areas concerned. We heard that 40% of the land holdings of the GLA are in one of the host boroughs, Barking and Dagenham. The local authority has long argued for additional development on these sites. The Riverside site in Barking and Dagenham—partially owned by the GLA—has planning consent for 11,000 dwellings but has seen fewer than 300 actually constructed. Cllr Rocky Gill, the Deputy Leader of the Borough told us that this was "ridiculous, bearing in mind the comments made about a shortage of housing in London".[135]

303. A similar picture was described in the Royal Borough of Greenwich, which also played host to 2012 events. There, the local authority has granted planning permission for over 32,000 homes since 2002, but only 12,900 have been built. Its Leader Cllr Chris Roberts told us that "Our major problem is land-banking".[136]

304. There is a risk that successful development of the Olympic Park will contribute to a further increase in house prices in the surrounding area. There is, however, potential for significant further housing development in other parts of the host boroughs. We believe it essential that the Mayor's office brings forward housing development on these sites, helping to facilitate supporting infrastructure where required. This is particularly the case for those sites that are owned, fully or in part, by the GLA itself. The developments on these sites should follow the same principles as set out in Recommendation 20.

The Employment and Skills Legacy

EMPLOYMENT FOR LOCAL RESIDENTS

305. The Government described convergence as:

137

Central to the goal of convergence is the ability to move residents of the host boroughs into employment. Whilst some of the indicators of convergence have seen improvement in recent years, unemployment within the host boroughs is still amongst the highest in the region; resident employment rates are currently 5.5% below the regional average.[138]

306. There is great potential for employment growth in the wider area around the Park. A 2011 report by Oxford Economics identified 20 major sites within the six host boroughs with planning permission and private sector partners. These sites could account for approximately £19billion of investment and, combined with increased activity in complementary industries, deliver an additional 190,400 jobs by 2030.[139]

307. We received a significant amount of evidence citing additional employment which had been generated by developments to date, and which would be generated by development in future. Over 10,000 new permanent jobs have been created at Westfield Stratford City, although this was planned before the Games.[140] The Stratford City development as a whole, of which Westfield forms part, will provide 30,000 jobs; many of these jobs will be existing roles within tenant organisations that move to the area, although some (including the construction roles) will be 'additional'.[141]

308. The Government's 2010 Legacy Plan outlined the expectation that the Park itself would support between 8,000 and 10,000 jobs on site. The Olympic Press and Broadcasting Centre has now been taken over by iCITY, which is seeking to create a centre housing creative and digital businesses of varying size and scale. iCITY promises to create 6,000 jobs (4,000 direct on site, with another 2,000 in the local area), and is already 40% let.[142] We visited iCITY, and the BT Sport studios contained within the facility, and were impressed by the speed at which jobs and economic activity had been delivered into the former Press and Broadcasting Centre.

309. It is apparent, therefore, that employment opportunities are being created in and around the Park, with the promise of significant further additional opportunities to be created in future. What is less clear, however, is the extent to which local residents are benefitting, or will stand to benefit, from these opportunities. Some schemes intended to serve this purpose, such as the GLA Employment Legacy Project, were scaled back after the Games, having failed to meet their initial targets.[143] The review of the GLA Employment and Skills Legacy Programme found that, where people had been helped into employment, the support required to sustain them in that employment was often not provided.[144]

310. We were told that, at the end of June 2013, 36% of construction phase jobs provided through the LLDC were being carried out by local people (against a target of 25%). 90% of LLDC apprentices are local. What is not clear, however, is the extent to which these figures include long-term residents of the boroughs, or whether they include those who have migrated to the host boroughs specifically to seek this employment. Sir Robin Wales told us that, before the Games, about one-third of the local residents employed by the ODA to build the Park had come from outside the area to take up the employment.[145]

311. We were told that iCITY is seeking to provide local people with opportunities by building local employment requirements into the tenancy agreements that it makes with creative and digital companies. Furthermore, almost a third of the 10,000 new jobs created at Westfield went to local, previously long-term unemployed people. The achievement of Westfield in this regard shows that opportunities can be extended to local residents.

312. There is a perception in local communities that they have received little benefit from the employment opportunities generated. When the Committee visited the Canning Town and Custom House Renewal Project to speak with local residents, the majority view was that employment opportunities in retail and construction had gone to people from outside the area; there was also a perception that the jobs which had been created were fewer and worse paid than expected. This perception is clearly felt elsewhere; the London School of Economics conducted research with Newham residents in early 2012 and found "general frustration over the difficulty of tapping into economic activity developed by the Olympics".[146]

313. It is clear, therefore, that more needs to be done to communicate the availability of new job opportunities created by and through the legacy programmes. The residents who we spoke to felt that it was not always clear how to go about applying for opportunities in and around the Park.

314. The Olympic venues themselves, when operating in 'legacy mode', should offer further employment opportunities. The first venue to open, the Copper Box, has a relatively small workforce of 52; 90% of these employees were recruited from the host boroughs. The remaining venues should offer more substantial employment opportunities, which must be made available to locals.

315. Developments within and around the Park will generate new job opportunities. We recommend that the LLDC, employers and the host boroughs do more to communicate the availability of these opportunities to local residents. These bodies should develop a coordinated programme through which employment opportunities at the venues within the Park are made available to local residents, with clear and targeted communications to support local employment. (Recommendation 23)

The skills challenge

316. In addition to communicating the availability of new opportunities to residents, it is also important to consider how local people can be supported to develop the skills needed to access new jobs. The Mayor of London described this as "one of the great challenges we face, particularly in London but in the country as a whole".[147]

317. We believe that a more concerted, long-term effort is required to provide local residents with the requisite skills to allow them to access these new opportunities. Such an effort will need to involve a multitude of local partners, and focus upon a number of emerging employment sectors within the area. The most obvious immediate opportunity is in the construction sector.

318. To develop the 20 major sites mentioned in paragraph x will clearly require a sustained period of construction activity across large parts of east London. In this context, the Olympic Park is only one small part of a much larger whole. These developments should deliver a significant number of construction jobs which, we hope, would be made available proactively to local residents. It does not seem to us, however, that long-term residents of the host boroughs have been significantly involved in the construction work that has taken place to date. Long-term unemployed locals will need targeted attention and help to compete for job opportunities, and can expect to face competition from mobile, proactive workers from outside the area.

319. We believe that efforts to provide staff to the major construction sites across East London would benefit from long-term additional investment in the skills base of the local population.

320. We recommend that the Mayor, the GLA, employers and the host boroughs work together to develop and invest in a construction skills programme through which a coordinated approach can be taken to making skilled staff available for the wide range of major development sites across the host boroughs. (Recommendation 24)

321. Construction is not the only sector in which new employment opportunities can be anticipated. The Prime Minister has spoken about his ambition to "bring together the creativity and energy of Shoreditch and the incredible possibilities of the Olympic Park to help make East London one of the world's great technology centres". It is possible to envisage significant new opportunities in the creative, digital and ICT sector in and around the Olympic Park in forthcoming years.

322. iCITY told the Committee that:

148

323. The shortage of skilled workers in this area could be met, in part, by the local population. Provision of the relevant training and learning opportunities should therefore be made a priority. Hackney Community College has recently committed to deliver a new digital apprenticeship, at iCITY, to students. We were told in evidence that "this must be hugely scaled up if we are to keep pace with the demands of these industries for skilled workers".[149]

324. A lack of access to skilled workers is currently restricting the growth of creative, digital and ICT businesses in the area around the Olympic Park. There are likely to be significant future employment opportunities available in these sectors.

325. We recommend that the Mayor, local authorities, educational institutions and employers work together to provide a coordinated response to meeting skills shortages in this area. (Recommendation 25)

326. New opportunities for employment in East London will not be limited solely to the two sectors that we have discussed above. A growing service economy in the area, coupled with major commercial investment that is likely to be attracted to the Olympic Park, will provide further, more diverse opportunities. These sectors will also require new, skilled workers. Local residents should be supported in developing the skills needed to access this employment.

327. Interventions to support local residents in developing the skills needed to access new jobs should not be limited to the two sectors that we have outlined above. Enhanced delivery of appropriate skills, education and training opportunities will be vital if the growth boroughs are to meet their convergence aims. We believe that the Mayor's office should demonstrate support for convergence by prioritising the skills challenge in the host Boroughs.

328. The office of the Mayor should work with local authorities and education providers to provide an ongoing structure for delivering targeted support, aimed at giving local residents the skills, confidence and aspirations needed to access jobs in those sectors that are most likely to deliver employment opportunities. These plans should be developed following consultation with local employers. (Recommendation 26)

The Transport Legacy

INVESTING IN INFRASTRUCTURE

329. Between 2005 and 2012 around £6.5 billion was invested into transport infrastructure, principally within London, to support the Games. Southeastern trains and TfL told us that many of the plans for this investment were already in place before the Games, but that the Olympics gave the plans an imperative and a level of focus.[150] The Deputy Chair of LLDC acknowledged that the full £6.5 billion investment was not all due to the Olympics, but stressed that the funding of some projects—such as work on the East London Line—was directly influenced by the Games.[151]

330. The major investment made into transport infrastructure in east London has significantly enhanced the connectivity of Stratford and the surrounding area. The LLDC are now marketing Stratford as the best connected station in London; it is currently the 6th busiest station in the UK. When Crossrail becomes operational in 2018, 17 million people will be within a 90 minute commute of Stratford.[152] This should have a significant catalytic effect on regeneration in the area.

331. One major success of the Games was the operation of the Javelin service, using Southeastern trains on the High Speed One line to take passengers from St Pancras to Stratford in 7 minutes. Southeastern told us that usage of this service exceeded their expectations.[153]

332. The travelcards issued with tickets for the Olympic and Paralympic games allowed passengers to travel on these high speed services; under normal circumstances the services are not available to regular users of TfL travelcards and Oystercards. TfL told us that they were: "really keen to have Oyster on the Javelin service, particularly when it is used during major events. If we want to provide a seamless journey for people, being able to use Oyster pay as you go is something we are strongly lobbying for".[154]

333. Southeastern trains told us that they were not opposing such a development, and were looking into how it could be made to work.[155] Their Chief Executive stated that:

156

334. The Javelin high speed train services were a major success story of the Games. We support efforts to make these services available to regular users of the London transport system, through travelcard and oystercard services.

335. We recommend that TfL, Southeastern trains and, where appropriate, the Department for Transport, work to bring about this positive change. (Recommendation 27)

336. Passengers travelling to the Games on these high speed services arrived at Stratford International station. Stratford International has received more than £1billion of public investment to equip it for high speed, international services. There is, however, no international service using the station at present. The station opened in 2009.

337. The Chief Executive of High Speed One (HS1) told us that "all of the big costs have been dealt with" and that "fitting out Stratford for trains to stop there will be … less than £10 million, so we are in small numbers versus the overall investment".[157] She made clear that her company had been involved in a number of discussions with potential international train operators, but that these had not yet come to fruition. The incumbent operator—Eurostar—places a heavy weighting on the speed of their journeys, and is of the view that any benefits accrued from stopping at Stratford are offset by delays to their journey times.[158]

338. Whilst we understand that HS1 are working upon this issue, the nature of support from national and regional Government is less clear. We were told that the Mayor has had discussions with potential operators[159]; the Mayor was confident that the situation would be resolved by 2016, when it is hoped that Deutsche Bahn will commence services.[160] We did not get the sense that there was any over-arching ownership or coordination of this issue within Government.

339. A substantial public investment has been made into Stratford International station but there are, as yet, no international services using this station. It is, in our view, vital that efforts to secure an international service at the station are intensified; whilst it is not essential that all trains stop there, it is essential that some trains begin to stop there.

340. We recommend that the Department for Transport take proper ownership of this issue, and give a higher level of priority to the need to secure a return on the substantial investment made at Stratford International. (Recommendation 28)

341. Although the eastern edge of the Park is well served by public transport, we were told that access to the western side of the Park was not as good.[161] The road network, which includes the A12, acts as a physical barrier to the Park, whilst the transport links in this area have not seen the same scale of investment.

342. iCITY, which will be a major employer within the Park, is located close to the western boundary. The Chief Executive of iCITY told us that, in his view, the London Overground station at Hackney Wick was the best route into that part of the Park.[162] Plans to redevelop the station are being drawn up; we believe that it is essential that these plans take full account of the likely intensification of usage resulting from the need to access this part of the Park.

343. The Chief Executive of the LLDC explained that they were also working on this issue, and were examining cycle routes into the western side of the Park, as well as potential pedestrian crossings over the A12. He made clear that financial investment—of under £10 million—would be required to improve the situation.[163]

344. The eastern end of the Olympic Park benefits from good connectivity and clear access points. This is not the case on the western side of the Park, which is to be the location of one of the major employment sites in the area.

345. We recommend that the LLDC, TfL and local authorities continue to work together to enhance access to the west of the Park. Resolving this issue is likely to require further investment. (Recommendation 29)

Maintaining Games-time improvements

346. The challenge of hosting the Games encouraged public transport providers to consider new ways of working together, and also instituted a wider range of improvements to signage and accessibility. Many of these improvements can be sustained in normal, everyday operation, at relatively little extra cost. This offers considerable benefits to London as a whole.

347. One such positive legacy is the Travel Demand Management Board, which consists of train operators in London, TfL and Network Rail coming together to coordinate services ahead of major challenges. Southeastern trains told us that the experience of joint working during the Games had been integral to the formation of this group, which was currently working to mitigate the effects upon passengers of work to deliver Thameslink.[164]

348. TfL explained that the Games had brought lessons in how best to use signage, particularly to help disabled service users. In light of lessons learnt, new signage was now being applied throughout stations.[165] Manual boarding ramps had also worked well during the Games; 16 were installed before the Games and provision was now being extended to a further 19 stations. Baroness Grey-Thompson told us that: "[a]round London one of the really great things about the Games was access to public transport and people being slightly more thoughtful about how things could work".[166]

349. The challenge of hosting the Games encouraged operators to think more creatively about how they could work together to manage demand. Greater attention was also paid to the needs of disabled users, and those who were not familiar with the transport network. Post-Games, we believe that it is essential that this focus is not lost. We urge TfL and other providers to continue to place a high emphasis on improving accessibility.

350. We welcome the fact that joint working between transport providers seen in the run up to the Games is now continuing. We recommend that transport providers continue to work together to mitigate against disruptions caused by major events and improvement works. (Recommendation 30)

106 University of East London. Back

107 Q 22. Back

108 Q 346 Back

109 London Borough of Newham. Back

110 Q 494 Back

111 Emma Boggis. Back

112 Q 370 Back

113 Q 359 Back

114 Ibid. Back

115 Ibid. Back

116 Q 196 Back

117 Q 367 Back