All about infrastructure
The big London story last week was the government green light for the £1.7 billion extension of the Docklands Light Railway to Thamesmead, a scheme which could “unlock” some 25,000 new homes.
It wasn’t exactly unexpected; TfL issuing preliminary tender documents earlier this month was a pretty big clue. But it’s certainly positive news, for the city’s housing targets and wider economy - and also for that other big city priority, tackling climate change.
That was the theme for this year’s Centre for London annual conference on 10 November, which I covered for On London here. Despite recent political shifts, London mayor Sir Sadiq Khan is sticking to his challenging net zero by 2030 target, his business deputy Howard Dawber told the conference. Khan had after all just told the world mayors summit in Brazil that we are in an “existential fight” against the “climate wreckers”, with now “not the time to run down the clock, but to up the pace”.
But London needed to adapt to climate change as well as continuing efforts to reduce harmful emissions, the conference heard. The capital was becoming hotter and wetter, requiring more investment in infrastructure; protection against increasing heat and flooding, more tree planting, and better public transport too.
Congestion increasing
That’s the context for mayor Khan’s confirmation of a £3 hike in the congestion charge to £18 a day from January, along with reduced discounts for cleaner vehicles, which I covered here.
As well as reducing vehicle numbers in central London, the charging regime has always sought to incentivise the switch to greener vehicles, currently via a 100 per cent discount for electric vehicles (EVs). But there are now more than 116,000 of them in the zone every day, compared to 20,000 when the exemption was introduced in 2019.
With those numbers only set to rise, Khan planned to end the discount next year. But after growing opposition, he will now phase it out more gradually. Good for EV advocates, but also blunting the effectiveness of the charge; 1,700 fewer vehicles a day in the zone by 2035, down on current numbers by less than two per cent, only just about keeping a lid on city centre congestion.
Meanwhile car numbers overall are increasing, in outer London particularly, hitting the economy as well as harming the environment and public health. London was recently named the most congested city in Europe. With intervention in the centre perhaps at its peak, is it now time for wider action?
Recent Centre for London polling suggests residents are getting keener on ‘pay per mile’ charging, mooted as far back as the government’s Smeed Report in 1964. But the lesson from the original congestion charge in 2003, introduced along with significant bus service improvements, is the need to offer the carrot of attractive alternatives to the car too.
Back to infrastructure - “rail in all its forms” as former department of transport chief scientist David Metz told London Assembly members last month: “If one can keep building rail, extending the Bakerloo line, and so on, that is taking us in the right direction.”
The DLR extension is a start, but with other big schemes still on the shelf - the Bakerloo extension, the West London Orbital, and erstwhile top priority, Crossrail 2 - a lot more is required if London is to become the sustainable city we want, and need.
Talking of traffic…
…Nick Maini’s essay on Hammersmith Bridge, looking at how we reached the point where fixing the bridge for motor traffic looks increasingly unlikely, and what the way forward might be, is a comprehensive and insightful read.
The grim consequences anticipated for traffic and the economy when the stricken bridge closed haven’t materialised, Maini notes. 9.000 of the 25,000 daily journeys over the bridge have simply evaporated, while the local economy has adapted, air quality has improved, and overall traffic congestion has lessened. There’s a pertinent conclusion:
“It is not necessarily the case that closing bridges improves transport; but it is undeniably true that people and places adapt when given alternatives. Infrastructure shapes behaviour.”
Crews Hill new town?
The mainly green/grey belt Enfield site was one of the three highlighted by the government as “particularly promising” when its New Town task force came up with a dozen possibles a couple of months ago. Thamesmead Waterfront was also on the list, but subject to the DLR extension going ahead.
Sir Sadiq always seemed keener on Thamesmead, and with the DLR hurdle cleared, the ‘new town’ designation will presumably follow. Will that put Crews Hill, earmarked for 21,000 new homes by the task force, out of new town contention?
That would be welcomed by many in the suburban borough, including perhaps the Labour council, facing a tough battle in next year’s local election against Tory opponents going big on “concreting over the green belt”.
The council’s Local Plan still proposes some 9,000 homes on the site though, a proposal bolstered by last week’s government announcement that housebuilding near “well-connected train stations”, like Crews Hill, should receive a “default yes”. An acceptable compromise? The report of the planning inspector currently considering the local Plan is set to be a key moment in this long-running debate.
And finally…
The aim of this substack is to highlight my recent work for Dave Hill’s website On London, with a comment or two on London news more generally. If this is of interest, please do consider supporting On London here, or via Dave’s substack