http://www.nwda.co.uk/pdf/MERSEY%20BELT%20STUDY%20FINAL%20REPORT by Northwest Regional Development Agency

Mersey Belt Study A report by DTZ Pieda Consulting in association with JMP Consultants Ltd and Regeneris Consulting to the Northwest Development Agency and Steering Group Members

May 2002

Steering Group Members Cheshire County Council Chester City Council Ellesmere Port and Neston Borough Council Government Office for the North West Highways Agency Halton Borough Council Liverpool City Council (representing the Merseyside Authorities) Macclesfield Borough Council Manchester City Council Northwest Development Agency North West Regional Assembly Salford City Council (representing the Greater Manchester Authorities) Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council Trafford Borough Council Vale Royal Borough Council Warrington Borough Council

Contents Page SECTION Preface Acknowledgements Glossary Executive Summary 1.

Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Overview of Southern Crescent and Metropolitan Axis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Sites Meeting the Requirements of the Target Sectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

Transport Priorities to Support the Target Sectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

Lessons from Elsewhere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57

Policy Recommendations for the Mersey Belt Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61

APPENDICES A.

Mersey Belt Area Ward Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71

Employment and Housing Land Supply Analysis Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79

List of Consultees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95

Economic Trends: Supporting Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .101

Capacity of Housing Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107

Mersey Belt Area Journey to Work Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111

Data Dateline Note that the data dateline for this study was June 2001 and the policy dateline was March 2002

Preface: The Mersey Belt Study and North West Regional Planning Guidance Work on the Mersey Belt Study commenced in November 2000 and was informed by a Steering Group, chaired by the Northwest Development Agency and comprising representatives of local authorities in the study area, the Government Office for the North West, the Highways Agency and the North West Regional Assembly. The draft Mersey Belt Study report was made available to the Agency in December 2001. In parallel with work on the study, two other relevant exercises were underway: Draft Regional Planning Guidance (RPG), published by the North West Regional Assembly in July 2000, was the subject of a public examination in February 2001; and In July 2001 the Northwest Development Agency consulted regional partners on proposals to extend the list of strategic regional sites and, in December 2001, agreed to designate a further 14 sites in addition to the original 11 in the Regional Strategy. Initial work on the Mersey Belt Study enabled the Agency to make some interim submissions to the Panel carrying out the Examination in Public on draft RPG. The Report of the Panel for draft RPG was produced in July 2001 and so the Panel was not able to take the findings of the complete Mersey Belt Study into account. However, there is now an opportunity for the Secretary of State to give due consideration to the study findings in producing his proposed changes to draft RPG. While the Panel came out against splitting the Mersey Belt into the Southern Crescent and the Metropolitan Axis for planning purposes, it did say that: “It is not for us to say whether the Southern Crescent concept should be amended in, or deleted from, the Regional Strategy. As part of the iterative process, the Strategy will no doubt take account of RPG as it emerges. The exploration of the Southern Crescent concept has been beneficial and the Mersey Belt Study will provide valuable information and ideas. The study can inform the guidance for both the Mersey Belt and northern Cheshire.” Now that the Mersey Belt Study is complete it will be possible for final judgement to be made on the validity of the Southern Crescent/Metropolitan Axis concept – that is to say the recognition of a sensitive but highly successful largely non-metropolitan area to the south of the River Mersey which has seen a large proportion of the region’s growth in the target knowledge–based industries, together with the recognition of a Regeneration Priority Area for future investment and growth (in the same industries) in the form of the Metropolitan areas largely to the north of the Mersey. At the beginning of the Study the consultants were open-minded about the usefulness of the Southern Crescent concept. Certainly there was at the time some resistance to the terminology from some local authorities on the Steering Group. However, as the study has progressed and has been seen to be actively promoting growth and investment related to the knowledge-based industries in the Metropolitan areas this resistance has diminished. The Study has very much concentrated on how the success factors of the Southern Crescent can be recreated in the Metropolitan Axis, including the concept of strategic corridors which would spread the positive effect northwards and eastwards (into

Mersey Belt Study

Greater East Manchester). The study consultants believe that the concepts of the Southern Crescent and Metropolitan Axis of the Mersey Belt have and should continue to be very useful in positively planning for growth in the Metropolitan areas – it is important to know ‘why the Southern Crescent has been so successful and to learn from this’. Equally, having the concepts established allows the recommended policy of constraint (without turning the tap off) in the Southern Crescent easy to understand. The recommendations of the Mersey Belt Study can only be implemented in two main ways: Through the planning policy of the local planning authorities as embodied in Development Plans and Supplementary Planning Guidance and as guided by RPG Through the investment policy of local, sub-regional and regional partners including the Northwest Development Agency The study consultants are already convinced of the value of the Study to the second of these aims and investment policy could continue to be linked to the Regional Strategy. However the study recommendations would have greatest impact if they could also be reflected in planning policy. This could be done either by the Study having some status linked to RPG or by its individual geographic/site recommendations being incorporated into development plans. The distinction between the two parts of the Mersey Belt – the Southern Crescent and the Metropolitan Axis supports the understanding and integrity of the guidance that the Study provides. It should be noted that the Mersey Belt Study is essentially concerned with macro level issues and aggregate statistics related to land supply and transport issues and the Regional Strategy target sectors. The study does not generally consider the specific micro level requirements of individual target sectors, sub sectors and clusters. However in certain instances we do make sectorally specific recommendations, where in our view, there is a particular issue (e.g. cancer research facilities at Clatterbridge Hospital). Whilst the recommended locational priorities in the Study are likely to be key to the important concentration of resources for investment in the less ‘market-attractive’ part of the Metropolitan Axis, in the more prosperous areas (of the Southern Crescent) there is likely to be no market failure and therefore the main means of intervention (to either encourage or discourage development) will be planning policy. The Study is available to guide this. The Study also provides a valuable database, in its own right, by indicating just how much land is allocated for employment use both in the Southern Crescent and in the Metropolitan Axis (but also by showing how much of it does not perform well on market suitability and/or sustainability). The Regional Strategy submitted to Government in October 1999 contained a list of 11 strategic regional sites. The Strategy also contained a commitment by the Northwest Development Agency to develop a fuller list of such sites to ensure that there is a continuous supply of the right type of land and property, particularly for the target sectors in the right locations. 14 additional sites were identified and in July 2001 the Agency initiated a consultation with regional partners. In December 2001 the Agency agreed to designate these 14 sites and considers that the delivery of all 25 sites over the next 20 years is critical to the effective implementation of the Regional Strategy. These 25 sites will, where necessary, have priority for implementation in the Corporate Plan in terms of all the Northwest Development Agency resources and in Agency support in bids for other resources.

Mersey Belt Study

The Agency will now work with local authorities and other partners to achieve the development of these 25 sites and this will include a review of issues such as marketing, financial and other support. Other than any exceptional candidates which may emerge from the Boardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s consideration of the Mersey Belt Study, no additions will be made to the list until the second review of the Regional Strategy in 2004/05. In designating these strategic regional sites, the Agency is not taking any land use planning decisions, but establishing its own position and policy direction as the basis for its future involvement in relevant planning issues and decisions.

Mersey Belt Study

Acknowledgements DTZ Pieda Consulting would like to thank all those that have assisted us in undertaking the Mersey Belt Study. Our thanks goes to all the Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s represented on the Steering Group and Technical Sub Groups and the local authority officers who provided us with statistics and information about employment, housing and investment within their authorities. Steering Group Members Cheshire County Council Chester City Council Ellesmere Port and Neston Borough Council Government Office for the North West Highways Agency Halton Borough Council Liverpool City Council (representing the Merseyside Authorities) Macclesfield Borough Council Manchester City Council Northwest Development Agency North West Regional Assembly Salford City Council (representing the Greater Manchester Authorities) Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council Trafford Borough Council Vale Royal Borough Council Warrington Borough Council Technical Sub Group Members Cheshire County Council Chester City Council Halton Borough Council Liverpool City Council (representing the Merseyside Authorities) Northwest Development Agency North West Regional Assembly Salford City Council (representing the Greater Manchester Authorities)

Mersey Belt Study

Glossary Mersey Belt Study Area Comprises all or parts of the following districts: Chester, Ellesmere Port and Neston, Macclesfield, Vale Royal, Knowsley, Liverpool, Sefton, St Helens, Wirral, Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside, Trafford, Wigan, Halton and Warrington. Southern Crescent (Core) Wards within Chester, Ellesmere Port, Vale Royal, Macclesfield and the wards of Halton, Warrington, Manchester, Trafford and Stockport which lie to the south of the River Mersey and the M60 motorway. Where reference is made to the Southern Crescent it refers to the core area unless specified as the Fringe Area. Southern Crescent Fringe Area Southern Crescent Core area plus the following wards of Barnton, Cogshall, Cuddington & Oakmere, Davenham & Moulton, Hartford & Whitegate, Leftwich & Kingsmead, Lostock & Wincham, Northwich & Castle, Northwich & Winnington, Northwich Witton, Rudheath & South Witton, Shakerley, Weaverham, Winsford Dene, Winsford Gravel, Winsford Over, Winsford Swanlow, Winsford Verdin and Winsford Wharton. Metropolitan Axis (Core) Comprises wards within Bolton, Bury, Knowsley, Liverpool, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Sefton, St Helens, Tameside, Wigan and Wirral and the wards of Halton, Warrington, Manchester, Trafford and Stockport which lie to the north of the River Mersey and the M60 motorway. Target Sectors Environmental technology (manufacturing and consultancy), life sciences (biotechnology and pharmaceuticals), medical equipment and technology (linked closely to life sciences), financial and professional services, computer software and services/internet-based services and creative industries, media, advertising and public relations. It was agreed that we would not focus on the seventh growth sector â&#x20AC;&#x201C; tourism â&#x20AC;&#x201C; in this study because of the distinctively different characteristics of its locational drivers. Greater East Manchester Area around East Manchester and Tameside which has the potential following significant investment, to accommodate investment in the Target Sectors. Regional Strategic Sites 25 priority sites identified by Northwest Development Agency (NWDA) of regional importance to be delivered over the next 20 years to support the implementation of the Regional Strategy. Suitability Sites were tested by applying macro (district) and micro (site) level tests to assess the attractiveness to the Target Sectors (detailed explanation provided in Appendix B). Sustainability Those sites which scored medium or high suitability were assessed for their sustainability in terms of being brownfield or greenfield and accessibility by public transport now and in the future (detailed explanation provided in Appendix B).

Mersey Belt Study

Category A Key Sites Key sites to meet the requirements of the Target Sector that require all round investment in particular to improve accessibility, infrastructure and image. Category B Key Sites Sites which are not priority sites for all round investment largely because they are already successful or need little intervention. Public investment is likely to be confined to public transport access. A number of sector specific sites are identified under this category as sites which could benefit from regional initiatives to support specific sectors. Strategic Corridors Corridors which seek to spread the positive effects of the characteristics of the Southern Crescent northwards to encourage investment from the Target Sectors into the Metropolitan Axis.

Mersey Belt Study

Executive Summary The main objectives of the study were to promote an integrated approach to future planning which: identified the steps needed to manage better all assets within the Mersey Belt Southern Crescent, so that economic potential could be encouraged and realised creatively, without compromising the principles of sustainable development. supported and complemented regeneration in the Metropolitan Axis, by identifying realistic and sustainable opportunities to accommodate and deflect development pressures from the south to the north of the River Mersey, in the short and long term. Through the study the Northwest Development Agency aimed to ensure that the Mersey Belt Area, and the region as a whole, had a realistic strategy for stimulating both indigenous and inward investment in the Target Sectors1 which are crucial to its economic survival. It aimed to refine and develop the points raised in the Regional Strategy, act as the vehicle for an important debate in the context of the RPG review process and inform policy development by the Agency. The study is available to Government Office North West and the Secretary of State in their finalisation of Regional Planning Guidance. Unfortunately the work of the Regional Planning Guidance Panel took place in parallel to the Study and was not able to benefit from its findings. The Southern Crescent area of the Mersey Belt Study Area (as defined by all of the nine local authority districts) saw a net employment growth of 56,000 jobs between 1991 and 1998. During the same period the overall net employment growth in the North West region was 84,000 jobs. The more tightly defined Core Southern Crescent2 area contains 80% of the Mersey Belt Study Area jobs in life sciences, 60% in computing and 40% in the other four Growth Sectors. Manchester City Centre and also Liverpool City Centre have continued to be important for jobs in the wider financial and business services sector. An important output of the Study is that it represents the first comprehensive analysis of all major employment allocations in the Mersey Belt Sub-Region and also higher priced housing land. In the Southern Crescent area we found over 900 hectares of employment land allocated in development plans, of which some 400 hectares were considered highly suitable for knowledge-based industries. Only 34ha of this was considered both highly suitable and sustainable (i.e. having good public transport potential on brownfield land), although 149ha was considered to be of at least medium suitability and sustainable. In the Metropolitan Axis (the Regeneration Priority Areas) we found over 3,200 hectares of allocated and potential employment land, of which only some 280 hectares was considered highly suitable for knowledge-based industries. About 200 hectares was considered both highly suitable and sustainable. The Southern Crescent has a constrained supply of housing land (about 5 years supply). In the Metropolitan Axis only about 30% of the total housing allocations are suitable for ÂŁ100,000+ houses (likely to be attractive to the higher paid knowledge workers). There are some notable gaps in the Metropolitan Axis with no houses in this price range. 1 Environmental technology (manufacturing and consultancy), life sciences (biotechnology and pharmaceuticals), medical equipment and technology (linked closely to life sciences), financial and professional services, computer software and services/internet-based services and creative industries, media, advertising and public relations 2 Relates only to districts/parts of the nine districts which lie to the south of the River Mersey. See Glossary and Appendix A for detailed explanation

Mersey Belt Study

Having assessed all sites within the Mersey Belt Area we have identified the following sites as being the most suitable to meet the needs of the Target Sectors: A number of priority sites/locations (Category A Sites) for the Target Sectors for all-round investment including: Greater East Manchester3 (including Strategic Regional Sites at Ashton Moss, Waterside Park Tameside and North Manchester Business Park) Liverpool City Centre sites (Strategic Regional Sites) Wavertree Technology Park, Liverpool (Strategic Regional Sites) Omega, Warrington (Strategic Regional Site) Hooton and Capenhurst The Estuary, Liverpool (Speke Garston) (Strategic Regional Site) These sites/locations typically correspond with corridors â&#x20AC;&#x201C; frequently extending from the Southern Crescent into the Metropolitan Axis Other key sites (Category B Sites) which are not priority sites for all-round investment largely because they are already successful or need little intervention. Public investment is likely to be confined to public transport access. These sites include a number of sector specific sites which could benefit from regional initiatives to support specific sectors. These are: Clatterbridge Hospital, Wirral (life sciences) Salford University Business Park and Blackfriars, Salford (cultural industries) Middlebrook, Bolton (medical technology) Daresbury Laboratory Science Park (life sciences and medical technology) There is also a prima facie case for an incubator in environmental technology in the Warrington Area. There are several other important allocated sites suitable to knowledge-based industry but where there is less need for additional intervention. We believe there is a particular gap in sites in the area north of Warrington (including St Helens and Wigan). We make related but separate proposals for development plan policy including the recommendation that a number of existing sites in the Southern Crescent are reserved for investments that would otherwise be lost to the region. These include Davenport Green in Trafford and a new site on the south side of Warrington. In the Metropolitan Axis we distinguish between targeting only a small number of sites for public investment and permitting knowledge-based industry on a wider number of sites (those considered of at least medium suitability). However we also suggest that there are excess amounts of employment land some of which might be converted to housing use thus supporting a more sustainable development pattern in the long term by minimising journeys to work. We draw specific conclusions about development policy at Manchester Airport and in relation to the important Research and Development function in Macclesfield District (life sciences). 3 See Glossary

Mersey Belt Study

We suggest that the Use Classes Order should be revised as part of the Government’s comprehensive review of the planning system in order to better define ‘knowledge-based’ or ‘high-tech’ employment, so that sites can be confined to this use. We draw attention to the importance of broadband width connectivity and to each site having its own local employment strategy – especially in the Metropolitan Axis. In the short term we see a scenario of Metropolitan Axis key sites for Regional Target Sectors drawing in higher skilled commuters often from some distance. However, if a sustainable development pattern is to be established then efforts must be made to provide sufficient quality and higher priced housing near to these locations so that in the longer term the higher income, knowledge workers can live closer to their work (whether these workers are incomers or the indigenous residents of a particular Regeneration Priority Area). Our transport recommendations do not involve an agenda which is very different from the current Regional Transport Priorities, but they do give particular emphasis to some of these priorities (not all of which are fundable at present). We define seven packages of transport schemes. We give new emphasis to a package of ‘orbital’ public transport improvements between South Manchester (the Airport) and Greater East Manchester. We recommend detailed investigations into the feasibility of better south-north cross town public transport in Warrington and into park and ride schemes for Manchester’s southern corridor. Finally, by looking into the question of what other English regions are doing, the study concludes that it would be unwise not to encourage some type of Target Sector development in the Southern Crescent (including some on greenfield land). This is because the prosperous competing regions of both the South East and East seem to be still allowing development in their most desired areas. A policy of switching the Southern Crescent effects to the Metropolitan Axis to benefit the Regeneration Priority Areas needs to be carefully balanced with a measured delivery of larger existing and some new sites in the Southern Crescent itself.

Mersey Belt Study

iii

1. Purpose of the Study The Mersey Belt Concept 1.1

The concept of the Mersey Belt has featured centrally in all strategies for the North West for more than 25 years. The North West Regional Strategy (RS) recommend that the draft RPG should review and update the concept of the Mersey Belt, taking account of the contrasts between the north (the Metropolitan Axis) and south (the Southern Crescent).

1.2

The main objectives of the Mersey Belt Study were to promote an integrated approach to the future planning of and investment in the Regional Target Sectors within two broad areas as follows: North of the river (the Metropolitan Axis) the main issues are securing regeneration, investing in a physical environment which is often degraded, and building on major assets which include: two major city centres major infrastructure for the arts, sports and culture well developed rail and bus networks several leading universities highly developed road and motorway networks substantial capacity especially in land supply a major international port South of the river – within the ‘Southern Crescent’ – the main issues are to release potential creatively without compromising the principles of sustainable development, helping to secure effective regeneration of urban priority areas north of the river and developing integrated transport solutions. The ‘Southern Crescent’ stretches from North Wales and Chester across to Macclesfield District and South Manchester. It is an area of great economic potential, especially in the sunrise and knowledge-based industries and includes: significant concentrations of employment in our target sectors nationally important concentrations of research and development a pool of highly skilled technical and professional labour an international airport remaining capacity within two former new towns an aerospace and high technology base in North Wales and South Manchester a quality lifestyle and attractive environment, including world class heritage and retail facilities motorway access good access to markets, suppliers and services in two major conurbation’s

1.3

In its final response to the RS, the Government said that the Strategy contained some imaginative proposals to develop the Mersey Belt and asked for the views of regional partners to be sought on the sustainability, environmental, transport and planning consequences of these proposals. The Study has sought to respond to this request.

Mersey Belt Study

Purpose of the Mersey Belt Study Report 1.4

1.5

This study has sought to: i

identify the steps needed to manage better all assets within the Mersey Belt Southern Crescent so that its economic potential can be encouraged and creatively realised without compromising the principles of sustainable development; and

support and complement regeneration in the Mersey Belt Metropolitan Axis, by identifying realistic and sustainable opportunities to accommodate and deflect development pressures from the south to the north of the River Mersey, in the short and long term.

Through the Study the NWDA aims to ensure that the Mersey Belt, and the region as a whole, has a realistic strategy for stimulating both indigenous and inward investment in the high level knowledge-based activities which are crucial to its economic future. The Study focuses on six of the seven Target Sectors identified in the RS: Environmental technology (manufacturing and consultancy) Life sciences (biotechnology and pharmaceuticals) Medical equipment and technology (linked closely to life sciences) Financial and professional services Computer software and services/internet-based services Creative industries, media, advertising and public relations4.

1.6

The study which took place over the period November 2000 to June 2001 has involved a considerable amount of analysis of data down to ward level for the 20 local authority districts which make up the Mersey Belt Study Area.

Mersey Belt Study Area Boundary 1.7

For the purposes of the Study the Mersey Belt Study Area (see Figure 1.1) was broadly defined as the following districts: Cheshire Chester Ellesmere Port and Neston Macclesfield Vale Royal Merseyside Knowsley Liverpool Sefton St Helens Wirral

Greater Manchester Bolton Bury Manchester Oldham Rochdale Salford Stockport Tameside Trafford Wigan

Unitary Authorities Halton Warrington

4 It was agreed that we would not focus on the seventh growth sector - tourism - in this study because of the distinctively different characteristics of its locational drivers.

Mersey Belt Study

1.8

For the economic analysis and employment/housing land analysis detailed Core Areas for the two parts have been defined as follows: Southern Crescent: Wards within Chester, Ellesmere Port, Vale Royal, Macclesfield and the wards of Halton, Warrington, Manchester, Trafford and Stockport which lie to the south of the River Mersey and the M60 motorway. Metropolitan Axis: Wards within Bolton, Bury, Knowsley, Liverpool, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Sefton, St Helens, Tameside, Wigan and Wirral and the wards of Halton, Warrington, Manchester, Trafford and Stockport which lie to the north of the River Mersey and the M60 motorway.

1.9

A full list of the wards classified as the Southern Crescent and the Metropolitan Axis is listed in Appendix A.

Employment and Housing Land Analysis Methodology EMPLOYMENT LAND 1.10 Each local authority within the whole of the Mersey Belt Study Area was asked to supply information about the scale of recent employment land completions and levels of investor enquiries and the extent to which these enquiries were from the Target Sectors. This provides a context within which to assess the employment land supply. 1.11 Each District was also subject to a series of macro level tests to assess its attractiveness to the Target Sectors. The macro level tests were skills availability, cluster effect, access to markets, proximity to HEIs/R&D and image. 1.12 In the case of the Southern Crescent, all sites were assessed in terms of their suitability to the Target Sectors by two micro level tests and awarded a ranking of low, medium or high. The key tests were accessibility by road and image (immediate environment). Given the sheer number of sites in the Metropolitan Axis, local authorities were asked to assess their own sites in terms of key locational criteria and these were then independently tested by DTZ Pieda Consulting in terms of the macro and micro tests to increase the efficiency and manageability of the data collection procedure. 1.13 The macro and micro rankings were aggregated to give an overall ranking for each site. Those sites which were considered suitable (i.e. scored medium or high) to the needs of the Target Sectors were then subject to two sustainability tests â&#x20AC;&#x201C; brownfield/greenfield and accessibility by public transport both now and in the future (low, medium or high). 1.14 The analysis was then refined to consider only those sites which were highly suitable (high or medium/high) to the Target Sectors together with their sustainability.

Mersey Belt Study

HOUSING LAND 1.15 Authorities within the Southern Crescent were asked to supply details of housing completions over the past 5 years, allocations and potential supply to 2021, including an allowance for windfalls. Housing land was then tested in terms of brownfield/greenfield and accessibility by public transport – now and in the future – to take account of proposed changes to public transport services. Due to the large number of sites it was unfeasible to test each site individually for public transport access within the timescale and budget. The tests were therefore carried out at a ward level. 1.16 It was assumed that the majority of housing within the Southern Crescent would be suitable to workers from the knowledge-based industries. This is not the case in the Metropolitan Axis. It was therefore decided to apply a filter to the analysis of housing that higher paid knowledgebased workers would want to live in if they were to work in the Metropolitan Axis. Within the Metropolitan Axis, local authorities were asked to identify those sites which they considered were suitable to accommodate highly qualified and high earning workers from the Target Sectors. The proxy used was those sites which could accommodate housing of at least £100,000 in price. The identified list was then tested for sustainability in the same way as the Southern Crescent. 1.17 More detailed methodology statements are provided in Appendix B.

Local Authority and Other Key Stakeholders’ Input into the Study 1.18 The study has only been possible due to the efforts of the local authority officers and other stakeholders in providing technical data (about employment land, investment enquiries, housing land and transport issues). These participants have also played a crucial role in providing views and comments on the emerging findings at each stage of the study. 1.19 This has been achieved through the following: Meetings throughout the study to discuss the emerging findings with the Study Technical Sub Group and Study Steering Group – made up of senior representatives from a selection of local authorities within the Mersey Belt Study Area plus representatives from Government Office, North West Regional Assembly and the Highways Agency Meetings with key local authority officers (including planners and economic development officers) Meetings with other key stakeholders. 1.20 A list of all participants is set out in Appendix C.

Mersey Belt Study

WALES

Wirral

Liverpool

Knowsley

Chester

Ellesmere Port and Neston

Sefton

West Lancashire

Halton

St Helens

Vale Royal

Warrington

Salford

Bury

Figure 1.1

Stockport

Tameside

Oldham

THE STUDY AREA

Macclesfield

Manchester

Congleton

is B o und ary Ax n nt B o un d a r y ita o l es ce p r o Trafford Met r n C r e h S ou t

Wigan

Bolton

Rochdale

Figure 1.1 THE STUDY AREA

Mersey Belt Study

1.21 The Report is structured in the following way: Section 2 – Overview of Southern Crescent and Metropolitan Axis Section 3 – Sites meeting the requirements of the target sectors Section 4 – Transport Priorities to support the Target Sectors Section 5 – Lessons from Elsewhere Section 6 – Policy Recommendations for the Mersey Belt Area

Mersey Belt Study

2. Overview of Southern Crescent and Metropolitan Axis Economic Trends 5

SOUTHERN CRESCENT 2.1

The Southern Crescent of the Mersey Belt, as loosely defined by nine local authority districts, has seen a concentration of recent economic growth compared with the North West as a whole. Between 1991 and 1998 there was a net employment growth of 56,000 jobs in the nine districts covering the Southern Crescent6. During the same period the overall net employment growth in the North West Region was 84,000 jobs. Business formation and GDP growth have also been significantly higher than in the North West as a whole.

2.2

The Southern Crescent’s relative success has been substantially founded on the concentration of the knowledge-based industries there. There is a high concentration of six of the seven target sectors in the RS7.

2.3

There is a fairly consistent pattern where the strongest growth and economic performance in the Southern Crescent has been. This is in the districts of Macclesfield, Stockport, Trafford (South), Warrington and Chester.

2.4

The core Southern Crescent Area8 contains around half of the Target Sector jobs in the nine Southern Crescent districts (56,000 out of 124,000 at 1998). Specifically it includes: 80% of the jobs in life sciences 60% of the jobs in computing Only 40% of the other four sectors – largely because Manchester City Centre (located within the Metropolitan Axis) is a major employment location for the Financial/Business Services sector and the Creative/Media sector.

2.5

Within the Southern Crescent area particular sectoral concentrations are as follows: Environmental Technology – Warrington Life Sciences – Macclesfield Computing – Stockport, Trafford (South) and Wilmslow Financial/Professional Services – Chester, Warrington, Altrincham and Wilmslow

5 The analysis of economic trends was undertaken in January 2000 for the Southern Crescent and June 2000 for the Metropolitan Axis. The most up-to-date data was analysed which would allow comparison of the findings of the two areas. 6 Includes all the wards in the nine districts 7 Environmental technology (manufacturing and consultancy),Life sciences (biotechnology and pharmaceuticals), Medical equipment and technology (linked closely to life sciences), Financial and professional services, Computer software and services/internet-based services and Creative industries, media, advertising and public relations. Note established sectors are excluded. 8 Relates to the more tightly defined area derived from parts of the districts to the south of the River Mersey. See Glossary and Appendix A for exact area.

Mersey Belt Study

2.6 The success factors of the Southern Crescent can be summarised as: High numbers of graduates – leading to business clustering (a self fulfilling chain reaction – an attractive environment to live attracts graduates which then attracts new businesses which in turn attracts more graduates) An attractive environment, including business property and housing (less expensive to graduates than the South East) Accessibility – Manchester Airport and motorways Near to cities for leisure, shopping, culture and higher education (Manchester, Liverpool and Chester). METROPOLITAN AXIS 2.7

Overall employment increased by 1.1% (+15,568 jobs) between 1991-98 in the full Metropolitan Axis. This rate of growth is below the national (+10%), regional (+3.0%) and Southern Crescent (+7%) growth rates.

2.8

There were wide variations in economic performance across the Metropolitan Axis, with some real hotspots of growth. Salford (+22%), Rochdale (+13%) and St Helens (+8.1%) all enjoyed employment growth in excess of the Southern Crescent average. The district level analysis masks differences across component wards. In Salford, for example, the overall increase in employment of 21% disguises the fact that a third of wards experienced a fall in employment (this data further reinforces the role of Salford Quays as an employment hotspot). Other hotspot wards in employment terms include around the Rochdale/Oldham border; the eastern side of St Helens where the district adjoins the M6 spine – Haydock; and Liverpool City Centre.

2.9

Within the Metropolitan Axis, Manchester has the highest concentration of growth sector employment (Location Quotient of 1.77). The only other district that has a concentration of growth sector employment approaching the Southern Crescent average is Liverpool (LQ of 1.31). Whilst Sefton (LQ of 1.00) has a concentration of growth sector employment in line with the Regional average, all other Metropolitan Axis districts have a below average concentration of growth sector employment.

2.10 Between 1991 and 1998 – growth sector employment in the reduced9 Metropolitan Axis grew by 8.0% (+6,400 jobs). Over the same period in the Southern Crescent area, employment in the growth sectors grew by 23% (+23,000 jobs). 2.11 In the Southern Crescent all bar two of the component districts (Ellesmere Port/Neston & Vale Royal) enjoyed some degree of growth sector specialisation (measured by an ‘above average’ LQ). In comparison, six of the 13 component districts in the Metropolitan Axis were without any growth sector concentration, and a further four had a concentration of employment in just one of the five growth sectors.

9 Full Metropolitan Axis minus Manchester district.

Mersey Belt Study

2.12 Within the Metropolitan Axis area, particular sectoral concentrations are as follows: Environmental Technologies – Largest cluster in Manchester. Other secondary clusters in, Liverpool, Wirral, Wigan and St Helens Life sciences – Only noticeable concentration in Liverpool (around the University, Wavertree Technology Park and Speke Garston). Embryonic biotechnology cluster in Manchester Financial & Professional Services – Manchester is a key international player in several market areas. The venture capital sector in the region is concentrated in Manchester. Liverpool does not have this international foothold except in certain specialist niche markets – particular examples being private client investment, broking and maritime insurance Computer Software – Apparent cluster in Sefton but largely based on one or two large firms. Concentration of firms in Salford (around Salford Quays) Creative and Media – both Liverpool and Manchester have significant concentrations. Cluster in Manchester slightly maturer than in Liverpool. 2.13 In the Southern Crescent all bar two of the component LADs (Ellesmere Port/Neston & Vale Royal) enjoyed some degree of growth sector specialisation (measured by an ‘above average’ LQ). In comparison, six of the 13 component LADs in the Metropolitan Axis were without any growth sector concentration, and a further four had a concentration of employment in just one of the five growth sectors (see Table 2.1). 2.14 The Metropolitan Axis’s locational assets that could potentially form the basis of further development of growth sector employment include: Access to high-level skills (notably in Manchester, Liverpool, Salford and Wirral) linked to the presence of universities in Manchester, Liverpool and Salford. Established clusters of growth sector firms in both Liverpool and Manchester (across a number of Target Sectors) and the established computer software/IT concentration around Salford Quays The high profile business environment and image of Liverpool and Manchester city centres, but also Salford Quays and Speke Garston and Quality housing in selected locations particularly in City Centres and South Liverpool. 2.15 Supporting information in respect of the economic trends is provided in Appendix D.

Mersey Belt Study

Table 2.1 Degree of Different Area Specialisations1 SOUTHERN CRESCENT

Chester

Environmental Technologies

Life Sciences

Finance and professional

Computing and Software

Creative and Media

●

●●●●●

●

●●●

●

Halton

●●●

●

●●●

●

Macclesfield

●●●

●●●●●

●●●

Manchester

●●●

●●●●●

●

●●●●●

Ellesmere Port/Neston

●

●●●●●

●

●●●

●

●●●●●

●●●

Vale Royal

●

Warrington

●●●●●

●●●

●

27.0

5.3

64.7

15.8

10.7

● (but largest absolute concentration)

●●●●●

Stockport Trafford

Total employment (000s) 1998

METROPOLITAN AXIS ●●●

●●●●●

Liverpool

●●●●●

●●●

Salford

●

●●●

●

Sefton

●●●

Bolton

●

Wirral

●●●

Wigan

●●●

Manchester

Oldham

●

Tameside

●

St Helens

●●●

●

Rochdale

X ●

Bury

●

Knowsley

27.6

4.7

79.0

12.6

12.3

Total Employment (000s) 1998

1: Degree of specialisation/clustering. The measure is not of the scale of employment but degree of concentration relative to total employment 2: Based purely on shares of total employment in life sciences, including pharmaceuticals, Manchester has a relatively low share. This does not pick up the concentration of smaller bio-tech firms in Manchester

Well below average = X (LQ under 0.75) Above average = ● ● ● (LQ 1.1 to 1.99) Below average to average = ● (LQ 0.75 to 1.1) Well above average = ● ● ● ● ● (LQ over 2.0)

Mersey Belt Study

Employment Land Supply 2.16 We believe that an important achievement of the study is that it has for the first time quantified all significant employment land in the Mersey Belt Study Area. SOUTHERN CRESCENT (CORE) 2.17 Table 2.2 summarises the analysis of employment land in the Southern Crescent in terms of recent completions, allocated supply and potential future supply, supply of highly suitable sites and sustainable sites. 2.18 In the past five years some 144ha of employment land has been taken up in the core Southern Crescent. 64% of this has been in Halton, Stockport and Chester. Relatively low take up in Manchester South (13ha) and Macclesfield (13ha) could be explained by the phenomenon of ‘landless job growth’ and also the contribution of small sites (below 0.5ha) in town and city centres. 2.19 In the Southern Crescent area we identified 907ha of employment land allocated in development plans plus at least 232ha additional ‘potential’ land. This would represent 40 years supply for all allocated employment land (allocated and potential) at recent rates of take up – a plentiful supply. 37% of the supply (419ha) is located in Ellesmere Port. 2.20 We found 38% of the total employment land supply (434ha) to be highly suitable for knowledge-based industries. Only 7% of Ellesmere Port’s large supply was found to be highly suitable (but this still amounts to 28ha). Only 83ha (19%) of the highly suitable employment land in the Southern Crescent is considered sustainable in terms of public transport now. This equates to five years development for all employment uses. This rises to 81% (350ha) if future public transport plans are taken into account – but there is significantly more greenfield land than brownfield land in this category. However only 34ha are both highly suitable and environmentally sustainable (accessible by public transport and on brownfield). Although this is a relatively small amount it should be noted that 149ha was identified as scoring medium, high/medium or high suitability and sustainable. 2.21 It should also be remembered that it is possible for employment growth, particularly in the knowledge-based industries, to take place without any new land take (through change of use, refurbishment, intensification, home working etc). METROPOLITAN AXIS 2.22 Table 2.3 summarises the analysis of employment land in the Metropolitan Axis in terms of recent completions, allocated supply and potential future supply, supply of highly suitable sites and sustainable sites. 2.23 In the past five years some 843ha of employment land has been taken up in the Metropolitan Axis this compares to 144ha in the core Southern Crescent. 37% of this has been in Knowsley, Liverpool and Wigan. 2.24 The Metropolitan Axis authorities identified 3,191ha of employment land (allocated and potential) compared to 1,139 ha in the Southern Crescent. This equated to 19 years supply based on past take-up in the Metropolitan Axis.

Mersey Belt Study

2.25 Only 9% (281ha) of the total employment supply within the Metropolitan Axis is considered to be highly suitable now rising to 19% (602ha) in the future. Within the Southern Crescent 38% of the total employment land supply was considered to be suitable for knowledge-based industries. Only 6 of the 17 districts within the Metropolitan Axis have any sites identified as highly suitable now and 8 in the future. 69% of the highly suitable land available now is in Liverpool. Of the current highly suitable supply 76% (213ha) is brownfield increasing to 81% (489) in the future. 2.26 Of the large supply of employment land identified as allocated or potential (3,191ha) only 6% (202ha) is highly suitable and environmentally sustainable (brownfield and accessible by public transport taking account of future public transport plans). This compares with 34ha (3%) in the Southern Crescent.

Housing Land Supply 2.27 We looked at housing land supply to gauge what effect it might have on the distribution of knowledge-based workers, of the firmsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; locational decisions and on the sustainability of commuting patterns. SOUTHERN CRESCENT (CORE) 2.28 We looked into housing land supply in the Southern Crescent as the potential supply can be checked with employment potential to see if there is a balance or imbalance. Employment allocations can be argued to be more sustainable if there is adequate local housing supply. A shortage of suitable housing supply could lead to outward commuting from the Southern Crescent (not undesirable in the short term to encourage investment in the Metropolitan Axis) or else to a shortage of skilled workforce (undesirable). 2.29 Table 2.4 summarises the analysis of housing land in the Southern Crescent in terms of recent completions, allocated supply, potential supply and sustainability of supply in terms of brownfield/greenfield allocations and accessibility by public transport (assessed on a ward basis). 2.30 We found that some 510ha of housing land is allocated in development plans in the core Southern Crescent Area â&#x20AC;&#x201C; almost the same amount as was developed in the past five years. Housing land supply is therefore much more constrained than employment land supply and is consistent with planning policy in the Southern Crescent at both regional and local level. Although it should be recognised that there is no evidence in Cheshire that there is insufficient housing land allocated at present. It is acknowledged that the supply of housing land in the future will not reflect previous take-up rates and will aim to deflect demand into the Metropolitan Axis in order to support regeneration objectives and restrict greenfield development. A shortage of housing supply could lead to outward commuting from the Southern Crescent (not undesirable in the short term to encourage investment in the Metropolitan Axis) or else to a shortage of skilled workforce (undesirable). Housing land supply is spread quite evenly across the Southern Crescent but with peaks at Ellesmere Port, Halton (Runcorn) and Warrington (south).

Mersey Belt Study

2.31 Only 34% (239ha) of the housing land supply (allocated and potential) in the Southern Crescent is brownfield. Brownfield land makes up at least 60% (the Government’s target) in all districts except Trafford (53%), Vale Royal (42%), Warrington (20%), Ellesmere Port (7%) and Halton South (4%). Over half (404ha) of the housing land (allocated and potential) has been assessed as being sustainable by public transport now. This rises to 63% (444ha) in the future – the affect of planned public transport in increasing the sustainability of sites is not as marked as is the case with employment land. METROPOLITAN AXIS 2.32 The Metropolitan Axis area has a future capacity of 4,429 ha (2,474ha allocated and 1,955ha potential). At past take up rates, this represents an 11 year supply compared to about 8 years in the Southern Crescent. There is considerable diversity in the distribution of this supply with Manchester, Salford and Wigan in particular having a very large supply and other areas such as Oldham, Sefton, Stockport and Wirral (all less than 100ha). 2.33 Our assessment of housing land in the Metropolitan Axis has focused on testing the supply of housing land which has the potential to accommodate housing for workers from the Target Sectors. To do this local authorities were asked to identify sites they considered to be capable of accommodating houses over £100,000 in value. The amount identified (1,329ha) represents 30% of the total supply. The most extensive supply of suitable land is in Halton, Salford, Warrington and Manchester. Districts with low amounts include Oldham (29 ha), Sefton (19ha) and Knowsley (18ha). A shortage of suitable accommodation would encourage unsustainable commuting by Target Sector workers. We therefore recommend that these districts review the availability of housing land which has the potential to accommodate workers in the Target Sectors. 2.34 In terms of public transport accessibility, 803ha of suitable housing land (18% of the total supply) is accessible now and in the future by public transport. 60% of the suitable supply in the Metropolitan Axis has been assessed as being sustainable in public transport terms to the knowledge-based workers. Areas with large amounts of suitable and sustainable housing land are in Manchester and Salford. 2.35 Appendix E provides any analysis of the capacity of the housing sites to accommodate workers.

Transport Issues 2.36 Transport is a key importance to the Target Sectors not in terms of moving goods but primarily in terms of getting their workers (their vital asset) to and from the workplace. SOUTHERN CRESCENT 2.37 The majority of motorway links suffer peak period congestion (up to 300 hours a year). The M56/A5103 junction experiences greater than peak period congestion. West of the M6, the M56 is subject to less frequent congestion except for the Chester/Runcorn peak period. Peak congestion is experienced on many local roads. Hotspots include the A34 Gateley, Chester City Centre, Warrington, Runcorn Bridge and routes south of Stockport.

Mersey Belt Study

2.38 In the future all motorways in the Southern Crescent will suffer from peak period congestion and congestion will spread to other parts of the day e.g. at the Manchester Airport M56 spur. Without investment there is likely to be a similar picture on the local road network. A number of important rail and road transport plans are in the pipeline/being considered. If workers are to be encouraged to use public transport these will need to be high quality, efficient and reliable. 2.39 The rail network in the Southern Crescent is operating within capacity overall but at two nodes in particular â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Central Manchester and Manchester Airport â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is experiencing capacity problems. Services through Warrington are also approaching capacity. No detailed work appears to have been undertaken on the extent of future rail congestion and this is of some concern. METROPOLITAN AXIS 2.40 The north west quadrant of the M60 Manchester orbital motorway experiences some of the most significant congestion in the Region with between 300 and 600 hours of congestion per year. Some relief to this has been seen since the opening of the eastern section of the orbital motorway but congestion both during peak and off peak periods persists. A major strategic study is now underway examining conditions on the M60 between junctions 12 and 16. This multimodal study, commonly referred to as the JETS Study seeks solutions to address congestion on the motorway and adjoining local roads. 2.41 Elsewhere on the network levels of congestion are generally between 10 and 300 hours a year which can be considered as representing roads at or near capacity during peak periods. The section of the M62 to the west of the M6, and sections of the M53, M57 and M61 experience less than 10 hours of congestion per year and can be considered to be generally operating satisfactorily even during peak periods. 2.42 Congestion is also experienced on many local roads in the Metropolitan Axis. In the main this is limited to concentrated peaks of demand in the morning and evening but in some locations, notably the Edge Lane approach to Liverpool City Centre and Manchester City Centre congestion extends into off peak periods. The existing Runcorn Bridge is also a congested location. 2.43 Under general traffic growth, the congestion of the road network will increase. The Highways Agency predictions suggest that many sections of the network will experience congestion extending into off peak periods. Sections of the M62, M57, M53 and the north eastern section of the M60 will however continue to operate satisfactorily. 2.44 The most critical rail congestion node in the whole of the Region is Manchester City Centre. This congestion affects services throughout the Metropolitan Axis (and the Southern Crescent) but probably most significantly on the Liverpool to Manchester Piccadilly Line through Warrington. Services on this line, particularly local services are at capacity. The approach to Lime Street in Liverpool is at times approaching capacity although this is not yet having a significant impact on service provision within Merseyside. 2.45 It is considered that the capacity of the West Coast Mainline will be stretched and the future capacity on the approach to Lime Street is likely to impact on potential service improvements in the future. The capacity restraints on the Manchester Piccadilly to Liverpool line will be exacerbated.

Mersey Belt Study

BF = Brownfield GF = Greenfield

1050

143

907

144

145

254

115

All Allocated Employment (Ha)

232

165

All Potential1 Employment (Ha)

31%

398

32%

369

135

26%

333

28%

316

135

Highly Suitable & Sustainable (by Transport) (ha) Now Now and Future

Environmentally Sustainable Brownfield & Accessible (Now or Future)Ha)

2 Southern Crescent Fringe Area. See Glossary for definition.

1 Potential sites include sites proposed in unadopted/revised development plans and any sites are those notified to us by the Local Authority as having potential to contribute to employment land supply beyond the development plan date.

Highly Suitable Now and Future (Ha)

* Figures relate only to employment land within wards in the Southern Crescent. Remaining wards are covered in the Metropolitan Axis

Note: All figures are gross.

(% of Total Supply)

152

Vale Royal (including Northwich)

Total inc Fringe Area2

144

Total (Core Southern Crescent)

% of Total Supply

Trafford (South of Mersey) *

Stockport (South of Mersey) *

Warrington (South of Mersey) *

Manchester (South of Mersey) *

Vale Royal (North Core)

Ellesmere Port (exc Neston)

Chester

Macclesfield

District

Halton (Runcorn) *

Completed Last 5 Yrs (Ha)

SOUTHERN CRESCENT EMPLOYMENT LAND ANALYSIS â&#x20AC;&#x201C; High or High/Medium Suitability to the Regional Target Sectors

Table 2.2

Table 2.2 SOUTHERN CRESCENT EMPLOYMENT LAND ANALYSIS

Mersey Belt Study

Mersey Belt Study 58 55 27 3 43 12 74 100 57 843

St Helens

Salford

Sefton

Stockport (North of Mersey) *

Tameside

Trafford (North of Mersey)*

Warrington (North of Mersey)

Wigan

Wirral

Total

2,561

272

293

125

103

222

147

150

261

459

107

122

All Allocated Employment Land (Ha)

630

189

All Potential1 Employment Land (Ha)

213

132

15%

489

205

132

113

Highly Suitable Now & Future (Ha) BF GF

181

118

0.2%

Now (Ha)

202

118

Now and Future (Ha) BF GF

Sustainable (by Public Transport)

Source: DTZ Pieda Consulting Survey of Local Authorities 2001

3 Total supply = Allocated + Potential

2 Liverpool – Take-up based on 1996-2000 and includes business mixed-use and industrial. All other take-ups related to 5 year – Allocated land includes business, industrial and mixed-use

202

118

Suitable & Sustainable – Brownfield & Accessible by Public Transport (Now and Future) (Ha)

1 Potential sites include sites proposed in unadopted/revised developed plans and any sites notified to us by the Local Authority as housing potential to contribute to employment land supply beyond the development plan date.

*Figures relate only to employment land within the wards in the Metropolitan Axis. Remaining wards are covered in the Southern Crescent.

Notes: All types are gross. BF = Brownfield GF = Greenfield

(% of Total Supply3)

44 55

Manchester (North of Mersey) *

Rochdale

102

Liverpool2

Oldham

Bury

112

Bolton

Knowsley

District

Halton (Widnes) *

Completed Last 5 Yrs (Ha)

Highly Suitable Now (Ha) BF GF

METROPOLITAN AXIS EMPLOYMENT LAND ANALYSIS – High or High/Medium Suitability

Table 2.3

Table 2.3 METROPOLITAN AXIS EMPLOYMENT LAND ANALYSIS

74 45 12 5 65 480

Manchester (South of Mersey) *

Stockport (South of Mersey) *

Trafford (South of Mersey) *

Vale Royal (North Core)

Warrington (South of Mersey) *

Total (Core Southern Crescent)

Total (inc Fringe Area)

610

100

510

Land Allocated (Ha)

246

195

Unallocated but Potential to 2021 (Ha)

Source: DTZ Pieda Consulting Survey of Local Authorities 2001

1 Southern Crescent Fringe Area. See Glossary and Appendix A for definition.

* Figures relate only to housing land within wards in the Southern Crescent. Remaining wards are covered in the Metropolitan Axis.

Notes:

50 530

Vale Royal

Southern Crescent Fringe Area1

75 135

Macclesfield

Ellesmere Port (exc Neston)

Halton (Runcorn) *

33 36

Chester

Completed Last 5 Years (Ha)

HOUSING LAND IN THE SOUTHERN CRESCENT

Table 2.4

301

239

Brownfield (Ha)

556

468

131

164

Greenfield (Ha)

470

404

Sustainability by Public Transport Now (Ha)

510

444

130

Sustainability by Public Transport Now & Future (Ha)

Table 2.4 HOUSING LAND IN THE SOUTHERN CRESCENT

Mersey Belt Study

Mersey Belt Study 2 79 10 101 258 101 1,998

Tameside

Trafford (North of Mersey) *

Warrington (North of Mersey) *

Wigan

Wirral

Total

2,474

495

136

106

107

230

133

386

213

196

105

Land Allocated (Ha)

1,955

141

462

728

136

119

Unallocated but Potential to 20211 (Ha)

788

115

156

121

541

185

Suitable Supply to accommodate £100,000+ houses Brownfield Greenfield (Ha) (Ha)

687

173

131

Accessible by Public Transport Now (Ha)

Source: DTZ Pieda Consulting Survey of Local Authorities 2001

* Figures relate only to housing land within the wards in the Metropolitan Axis. Remaining wards are covered in the Southern Crescent.

803

172

131

109

Accessible by Public Transport Now & Future (Ha)

1 Potential includes sites proposed in unadopted revised development plans and any sites that the local authorities have identified as having potential to contribute to employment land supply beyond the development plan date.

Note:

Rochdale

Stockport (North of Mersey) *

111

Oldham

Sefton

109

Manchester (North of Mersey) *

214

Liverpool

125

245

Knowsley

Salford

120

Halton (Widnes) *

St Helens

84 123

Bury

160

Bolton

Completed Last 5 Years (Ha)

HOUSING LAND ANALYSIS – METROPOLITAN AXIS

Table 2.5

Table 2.5 HOUSING LAND ANALYSIS – METROPOLITAN AXIS

3. Sites Meeting the Requirements of the Target Sectors 3.1

This section identifies the key locations and sites in the Mersey Belt Study Area which hold the greatest potential for accommodating the Target Sectors identified in the Regional Strategy.

3.2

The emphasis on this section is on where to target investment. In Section 6 we present our recommendations in a different way â&#x20AC;&#x201C; in terms of how planning policy should be focused.

Guiding Principles 3.3

In making our recommendations, a strong aim has been the identification of priority sites for investment in the Metropolitan Axis to support and facilitate the creation of a similar set of winning characteristics to the Southern Crescent such as an attractive area to live. We have however identified all key sites with a high level of suitability to the Target Sectors across the whole of the Mersey Belt Study Area (Southern Crescent and Metropolitan Axis).

3.4

In the Southern Crescent, apart from recognising the importance of existing sites, our recommendations are mainly to do with making the sites more sustainable and particularly with investing in public transport schemes and encouraging high quality design. We do however introduce a small number of new sites for specific purposes. The study does not generally recommend changing the Green Belt boundaries for new development, although one or two recommendations do relate to development within Green Belt in exceptional circumstances.

3.5

In identifying the most suitable sites we have highlighted those sites which not only hold the potential to meet the requirements of the Target Sectors but can do this in a sustainable way. By this, we mean predominantly brownfield sites that are easily accessible, now or in the future, by public transport.

3.6

A strong principle is the aim to connect the best sites to people with the right skills living within a sustainable journey to work, concentrating on areas of unemployment and underemployment mainly in the Metropolitan Axis. Initially this may mean highly qualified knowledge-based workers commuting to priority sites in the Metropolitan Axis. In the longer term the aim would be to create the necessary housing and living conditions nearer to these sites.

3.7

At the end of this section we analyse the spatial pattern that has emerged, including the identification of Strategic â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;corridorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. We believe the emerging spatial pattern, whilst not driving the study, is a helpful way to understand the big picture and even to market the strategy to attract Target Sector growth in the Mersey Belt Study Area. This concept is considered in more detail at the end of this section.

3.8

In considering the identified sites it should be remembered that within the Mersey Belt Study Area there is a large portfolio of other sites that to a lesser extent meet the requirements (scored medium in our assessment) of the Target Sectors and/or meet the wider requirements of other sectors. These other sites have a very important role to play in the wellbeing of the regional economy. The fact that they have not been identified as specialist and sub-regional sites for the Target Sectors in this Study does not undermine the important role they can play in meeting the requirements of other sectors of the economy including general office, distribution and manufacturing activities. Mersey Belt Study

Recommended Priorities 3.9

Our recommendations can be divided into two categories as follows: Key sites (Category A) – locations for all-round investment in particular to improve accessibility, infrastructure and image Key sites (Category B) – which are not priority sites for all-round investment largely because they are already successful or need little intervention. Public investment is likely to be confined to public transport access. A number of sector specific sites are identified under this category as sites which could benefit from regional initiatives to support specific sectors. KEY SITES – CATEGORY A

3.10 The sites identified under this category are those sites within the Metropolitan Axis which have the greatest potential to attract the Target Sectors if public investment continues to be made, especially in terms of improving accessibility, infrastructure and image. These sites are: Greater East Manchester – key sites in East Manchester (including North Manchester Business Park – Strategic Regional Sites – Oldham Road Corridor, Northern Quarter and Eastlands) and in Tameside (including Ashton Moss, Waterside Park – Strategic Regional Sites and Denton). Very major investment is needed to create employment locations linked to the City Centre by Metrolink and to the Southern Crescent by the M60 and possibly a Manchester Airport Remote CheckIn/Airport Village (see para 3.46) with a rail link. Also to create quality housing locations for highly qualified workers. Significant investment is already taking place in Greater East Manchester Liverpool City Centre sites – particularly around Liverpool University – Strategic Regional Site – on underused land, scope to create an incubator centre featuring the biotechnology sector and enhancing links to the creative industries Wavertree Technology Park (Liverpool) – Strategic Regional Site – to support the expansion of this successful employment area seeking to connect it better to the motorway entrance to the City Centre. A masterplan is being prepared so that the Wavertree Technology Park can be successfully expanded and integrated with the surrounding areas Omega (Warrington) – Strategic Regional Site – seeking to enhance public transport accessibility to the site, especially from the north (Knowsley, St Helens and Wigan) and south (south Warrington and Halton). Hooton Employment Area (Ellesmere Port) and Capenhurst (Chester) – important sites in their own right but also with the potential to create alternative rail connected locations for investment not able to be accommodated in and around Chester. Both sites are accessible by rail to residents in Cheshire and Merseyside The Estuary, Liverpool (Speke Garston) – Strategic Regional Site – to continue to support and expand the Regional Target Sector growth which has located here (including bio-tech clustering) and to support investment which will enhance accessibility by public transport.

Mersey Belt Study

KEY SITES – CATEGORY B 3.11 Other sites in both the Southern Crescent and Metropolitan Axis are no less important than the key sites (Category A) for the knowledge-based industries in policy terms, but, in general, they have a lower call on public investment for site preparation and assembly. Several sites will require some public investment, especially in public transport, although some will be successfully developed in the future without major intervention. These sites are: Manchester City Centre Sites Chester Business Park (Strategic Regional Site) Chester City Centre Sites Saighton Camp (Chester) Daresbury Park Location (Strategic Regional Site) and Manor Park IV (Halton) Lostock Triangle, Northwich Manchester Southern Corridor (Manchester Business Park, Sharston Green, Birley Fields and Princess Parkway) Remaining sites in Salford Quays M60 Gateway to Stockport Davenport Green (Strategic Regional Site), Southbank, Victoria Warehouse and Barton Dock Road (Trafford) Cheadle Royal (Stockport) Kingsway (Rochdale) (Strategic Regional Site) All sites in Macclesfield (East Tytherington Business Park, Danegate, Parkgate Industrial Estate, Earl Road and Kings Court) including Astra Zeneca Kings Business Park (Knowsley) (Strategic Regional Site). 3.12 Key transport priorities identified in Section 4 should ensure that some of these sites become ever more attractive and more sustainable, being better connected to areas of need. 3.13 In addition to these sites, a number of other sites could benefit from initiatives being undertaken in the region to support specific sectors. These are: Clatterbridge Hospital (Wirral) – for life sciences Salford University Business Park and Blackfriars (Salford) – for the creative industries also recognising that there are many other creative industry clusters including Liverpool’s Bluecoat and Ropewalks and Manchester’s Northern Quarter The Middlebrook Area of Bolton – for medical technology/equipment Daresbury Laboratory Science Park – life sciences and medical technology (identified in Figure 3.1 with Daresbury Park. 3.14 Given the concentration of the relatively small environmental technology cluster in the Warrington area, we would also like to recommend that: The feasibility of creating a new incubator/managed workspace centre of excellence in environmental technology in the Warrington area is investigated and prioritised.

Mersey Belt Study

3.15 All initiatives to support the development of clusters of Target Sector businesses are fully supported by this study including linkages to higher education facilities, business networking, incubation space etc. SITES SUITABLE TO THE TARGET SECTORS BUT NOT KEY SITES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY REASONS 3.16 Two sites – M6 Junction 23 NW and SW (St Helens) and Cronton Colliery (Knowsley) – were identified as suitable to meet the requirements of the Target Sectors but unsustainable in environmental and public transport terms now and in the foreseeable future. The sites may eventually be developed by the Target Sectors (subject to planning policy – see Section 6) but cannot be identified as key sites in the context of this study. In both cases it is difficult to argue release of the sites from the Green Belt at the present time. GAP AREAS 3.17 Although the study has identified a strong portfolio of sites to meet the requirements of the Target Sectors across the Mersey Belt Study Area, it is recognised that in some areas no predominant key sites have been identified. These include the Central Metropolitan Axis between the two conurbations, from North Warrington up to St Helens and Wigan and across to Bolton, and to a lesser extent North Greater Manchester (less of an issue because it will be well connected to Manchester and Salford by Metrolink and other transport). Section 6 sets out our recommendations on how to overcome this issue. 3.18 Figure 3.1 illustrates the Mersey Belt Strategy and identifies the location of the sites identified in this section and Table 3.1 summaries key characteristics of each of the sites.

NWDA Strategic Sites 3.19 NWDA published the formal designation of the Strategic Regional Sites in December 2001. 25 strategic regional sites have been designated. A list of strategic sites also identified as key sites in this study are identified below: Ashton Moss, Tameside Chester Business Park Daresbury Park, Runcorn Davenport Green, Trafford Kings Business Park, Knowsley Kingsway, Rochdale Liverpool University Edge North Manchester Business Park Omega 600, Warrington The Estuary, Liverpool (Speke Garston) Waterside Park, Tameside Wavertree Technology Park, Liverpool.

Mersey Belt Study

East Manchester * Ashton Moss * Waterside Park * Denton Cluster Liverpool City Centre * Wavertree Technology Park * Omega * Hooton Employment Area Capenhurst The Estuary Liverpool *

✽

✪

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Districts which should review availability of housing land to accommodate clusters from target sectors

Strategic Regional Sites

Wigan South Central – see para 6.11

Reserve Site in Warrington – see para. 3.38

Astra Zeneca, Alderley Park – see para. 6.7

WALES

Sefton Manchester City Centre Sites Chester Business Park * Chester City Centre Saighton Camp Daresbury Park Location * Manor Park Lostock Triangle Manchester Business Park Sharston Green Birley Fields Princess Parkway Salford Quays M60 Gateway to Stockport Cheadle Royal M53 Davenport Green * Southbank Wirral Victoria Warehouse Barton Dock Road Kingsway * East Tytherington Business Park Danegate Parkgate Industrial Estate Earl Road Kings Court Kings Business Park * Clatterbridge Hospital Salford University Business Park Blackfriars Middlebrook Daresbury Laboratory

Category B Sites

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Category A Sites

✽

12✽ Key

Ellesmere Port and Neston

35✽

Strategic Corridors

Chester

Knowsley

10✽

Liverpool

✽

M57

M58

West Lancashire

16 40 15✽

M61

Wigan

Vale Royal

M60

Macclesfield

25✽

Congleton

en p tro resc Trafford Me C rn he o ut

Salford

Bury

Rochdale

2✽ 3✽ 4✽

Figure 3.1

Tameside

Oldham

29✽

Stockport

37 38 1✽ 22 28 26 27 11 dary n u o 20 Manchester sB Axi n undary o 21 il ta B t o

Bolton

A R E A

Warrington

7✽

G A P

✪

M66

THE MERSEY BELT STUDY : RECOMMENDED STRATEGY

M56

Halton

M62

St Helens

M62

Figure 3.1 RECOMMENDED STRATEGY

Mersey Belt Study

3.20 It should be noted that the list of strategic sites does not exactly coincide with the specialist and sub-regional investment sites for Target Sectors identified in this report. The strategic sites are large sites identified for all employment sectors across the whole of the region. The sites identified within this Study are considered to specifically meet the needs of the RS Target Sectors within the Mersey Belt Study Area with a particular emphasis on sustainability (brownfield land and public transport).

Summary of Explanation of Category A and B Sites 3.21 For the purposes of summarising our site recommendations, we have grouped key sites by geographical area rather than simply differentiating between the Southern Crescent and the Metropolitan Axis, as follows: Greater Chester (Southern Crescent) The West Coast Mainline/M6 Axis (Central Southern Crescent and Central Metropolitan Axis) Greater Manchester (Metropolitan Axis) Greater South Manchester (Southern Crescent) Greater Merseyside (Metropolitan Axis).

Greater Chester (Southern Crescent) CHESTER 3.22 Chester is an important centre within the Southern Crescent where environmental characteristics need to be carefully balanced with demand for sites from national and international investors (particularly from the financial sector). Turning away potential investors from the Chester area runs the risk of losing them altogether to the North West Region. 3.23 There are a few sites, which meet the needs of the Target Sectors within the City Centre, but these sites are coming under increasing pressure from the strong residential market. We recommend that every effort should be taken to ensure that these sites can be brought forward for employment or mixed use and are not lost to solely residential development. Chester City Council should endeavour to ensure that the full weight of the planning policy framework is brought to bear to achieve this. One option to support this is for some or all of these key sites to be taken into public ownership. Chester City Council already owns a number of the key sites and considers that it will have a significant degree of control over the other sites resulting from development briefs and recent revisions to the Local Plan. 3.24 The Chester Business Park has been a major factor in the success of the City as a financial/professional service centre and is identified as a strategic regional site by the NWDA. However the Business Park is now essentially fully developed. A proposed extension area (within the Green Belt) has been allocated in the emerging Chester District Local Plan. A planning application has been received for the development of the remaining undeveloped parts of this allocation. Further development will be restricted to the consolidation and completion of areas allocated in the Chester District Local Plan and there will be no further encroachment into the Green Belt beyond the boundaries of that allocation. Mersey Belt Study

Mersey Belt Study 61 94 25

Omega, Warrington*

Wavertree Technology Park*

The Estuary, Liverpool (Speke Garston)*

Liverpool City Centre (various sites inc. Liverpool University Edge*)

17 35 5

Lostock Triangle, Nr Northwich, Vale Royal

Manchester Business Park, Manchester

Sharston Green, Manchester

135** 39 16 114

Davenport Green*, Trafford

M60 Gateway, Stockport

Cheadle Royal, Stockport

Kingsway*, Rochdale

Manor Park IV, Runcorn, Halton

Salford Quays, Salford

Daresbury Park* & Surrounding Sites (including Daresbury LAB), Runcorn, Halton

Saighton Camp, Chester

6.5

Chester City Centre Sites

Princess Park Way, Manchester

Chester Business Park, Chester*

Birley Fields, Manchester

Manchester City Centre

KEY SITES â&#x20AC;&#x201C; CATEGORY B

Denton Cluster

92***

205

Waterside Park, Tameside*

Capenhurst

39 33

Ashton Moss, Tameside*

15 190

Greater East Manchester (various sites inc. North Manchester Business Park)*

Size (Ha)

Hooton Employment Area, Ellesmere Port

KEY SITES â&#x20AC;&#x201C; CATEGORY A

SUMMARY OF KEY SITES

Table 3.1

Allocated Potential

B/G

Geenfield/ Brownfield

H/M

Suitability Now & Future

H/M

M/H

Transport Sustainability Now Future

Table 3.1 SUMMARY OF KEY SITES

1 6 8 22 20 20 2.3 1.5 3.6

Earl Road, Stanley Green (61 MU), Handforth, Macclesfield

AstraZeneca Hurdsfield Industrial Estate, Macclesfield

Danegate, Macclesfield

Parkgate Industrial Estate, Macclesfield (2 sites)

Kings Business Park*, Knowsley

Southbank

Victoria Warehouse Site

Barton Dock Road

G/G

Geenfield Brownfield

Figures are gross and based on discussions with local authorities in 2001, where relevant the size of sites have been updated to April 2002 based on current information

Allocated Potential

*** Capenhurst – available area depends on current levels of occupancy – in reality a small proportion of this will be available for development

** Developable area is likely to be in the region of 36ha

* Strategic Regional Sites

Middlebrook, Bolton

3 13.5

University Business Park, Salford

Blackfriars, Salford

Clatterbridge Hospital, Wirral

SECTOR SPECIFIC SITES

Kings Court, Macclesfield

Size (Ha)

East Tytherington Business Park, Macclesfield

KEY SITES – CATEGORY B continued

SUMMARY OF KEY SITES

Table 3.1

H/M

Suitability Now & Future

H/M

Transport Sustainability Now Future

Table 3.1 SUMMARY OF KEY SITES continued

Mersey Belt Study

3.25 The only other potential strategic site that has been identified in the vicinity of Chester is Saighton Camp. This site is a brownfield site surrounded by, but not within, the Green Belt. It is owned by the MoD and has poor public transport accessibility. Under the Critchell Downs Ruling the MoD must maximise the value obtained from the site within the constraints set by the planning policy framework and in the first instance must offer the site to the original owner. The future of the site is currently under debate – it is safeguarded to meet Chester’s long to medium term employment needs in the deposit local plan. It is recommended due to the unique strength of the area (to the Financial Sector of national and international importance) that every effort should be taken by all those involved in the decision making process to maximise the amount of this site that is developed for employment. Redevelopment will require a new link road onto the A55. Investment in the site’s public transport and ICT infrastructure will ensure it can be brought forward more sustainably. Mixed use development (as is likely) will have the added advantage of encouraging living and working in close proximity and may also add greater weight to the case for public transport improvements. 3.26 Another noteworthy site in Chester District is Capenhurst – a significant complex of buildings and land adjacent to Capenhurst Station on the Liverpool to Chester rail line, south west of Ellesmere Port. This site is ‘washed over’ by the Green Belt but is identified as a Major Development Site within it. It benefits from a high quality environment although road access is poor. There is potential to develop a cluster of knowledge-based industries on the back of the specialist manufacturing knowledge intensive industries already located here subject to green belt policy. Ownership and partnership issues are potentially significant and will require particular attention. It should also be noted that only a small proportion of the total site area (92ha) will be available for development. 3.27 What therefore are our recommendations for ensuring the future supply of employment land in this area of significant importance to the Southern Crescent and Mersey Belt? We suggest a three fold approach: i

As many potential sites (i.e. windfall) sites within the District of Chester should be brought forward for economic use including a substantial part of Saighton Camp.

For those investors who are not as focused on the City itself we recommend that sites to the north of the city adjacent to stations on the Chester to Liverpool railway should be promoted as alternative locations (including Capenhurst, Chester and Hooton Employment Area, Ellesmere Port – see below). These will assist the regeneration of Ellesmere Port and help to stimulate the Southern Crescent characteristics to spread towards this area of need and further into the Metropolitan Axis, including Wirral.

iii

Recognising the limited availability around Chester and its important role as an attractive location to the Target Sectors, an alternative option would be to identify a suitable site for knowledge-based industries just over the border in Wales within close proximity to the Chester Business Park that could be perceived by investors as a “Chester” location. This study has not sought to identify any specific sites in Wales. We recommend that the NWDA, local authorities and their partners in the North East Wales/West Cheshire subregion should undertake a co-ordinated appraisal of cross-border economic needs and opportunities. This could explore a range of options for future land supply and would accord with the approach beginning to emerge out of the RPG process.

Mersey Belt Study

ELLESMERE PORT 3.28 As identified above we recommend that pressure from Chester should be diverted into key sites identified in Ellesmere Port. In particular we consider the Hooton Employment Area (15ha) as holding the greatest potential. This former Royal Ordnance factory is ‘washed over’ by the Green Belt but is identified as a Major Development Site within it, as such, its status for redevelopment within the Green Belt is secure. It benefits from a high quality environment, is reasonably accessible by road and highly accessible by rail. The land is believed to have significant chemical contamination and site preparation costs could be high. The site is included in the proposal for an Economic Development Zone in Ellesmere Port. Furthermore there is no established office market in the area and therefore marketing would be critical to success. 3.29 Hooton Employment Area in Ellesmere Port together with Capenhurst in Chester District hold the potential to create a strategic corridor building on the strengths of Chester with the added benefit of being highly sustainable locations with excellent access to a good regular rail service to Liverpool, with potential to support the regeneration of Ellesmere Port and parts of the Wirral and to deflect pressure away from Chester and the Southern Crescent.

The West Coast Main Line/M6 Axis (Central Southern Crescent and Central Metropolitan Axis) HALTON 3.30 Within Halton, two large greenfield sites performed well in terms of their suitability to the Target Sectors, however both sites score low in terms of current accessibility to public transport although they do improve in the longer term. These are: Daresbury Park Location (64ha) – The southern half of the main site is currently under development and is proving attractive to the Target Sectors, particularly financial and professional services and computer software houses. To the north of the main site, a masterplan is being prepared to incorporate employment use as well as high density housing and associated community uses. Further extensions to the Daresbury site are proposed in the Deposit UDP to build upon the existing success. Daresbury Park is identified in the RS as a strategic site. All agencies involved in bringing the site forward for development must be fully committed to increasing the accessibility of the site by public transport. Manor Park (22ha) – English Partnerships have submitted a planning application for Phase IV which demonstrates ambitions for a much higher quality business park. The potential for attracting the knowledge-based sectors to this element of Manor Park appears far greater. 3.31 The former Daresbury Laboratory is located close to Daresbury Park and is understood to have a lifespan of approximately 6 years in its current use. Despite the loss of the Diamond project to Oxford, the site looks set to benefit from a major injection of government funds to secure its longer term future. The NWDA has purchased 5ha as Phase 1 of a Science Park to include incubator facilities. Given their proximity to the Daresbury Laboratory these sites are recognised as important potential sites to support clustering around the research facility with the scope to develop linkages in terms of spin out businesses. As such the sites are potentially important sites for which to target the Life Sciences and Medical Technology Sectors (potentially a sector specific site).

Mersey Belt Study

WARRINGTON 3.32 Warrington has been very successful in recent years in attracting investment and offers the potential to be a strategic corridor location in a northerly direction leading into the Metropolitan Axis. Its major future employment site – Omega (bigger than any other site analysed in the Mersey Belt Study) is located within the Metropolitan Axis. Omega (205ha brownfield site with frontage onto the M62) is considered to score high/medium in terms of its suitability to the Target Sectors (although only part of the site is likely to be taken up by them). The exact mix and type of uses to be developed on this very large site are currently being discussed as part of the UDP preparation and with English Partnerships and NWDA. Work has recently commenced on a new junction onto the M62 with completion due by the end of 2002. In terms of its sustainability, although it is a brownfield site it has been judged to have low sustainability both now and in the future due to its poor access by public transport and the limited opportunities to improve access by public transport. 3.33 To maximise Omega’s potential to play a role as a sustainable location for the Target Sectors, investment is required to make the site more accessible by public transport. 3.34 To be sustainable, the Omega site needs to attract workers principally from the north – Knowsley, St Helens and Wigan – and from residential areas in Warrington on the far side of the Ship Canal and from Halton. In particular, it is acknowledged that English Partnerships is working with partners to try to secure sustainable modes of access in bringing forward the site. Discussions are underway to improve public accessibility to the north – between the site and St Helens – through improved bus services. Another solution could be to develop a much better ‘within Warrington’ public transport system connecting to the railway station and hence Liverpool and Manchester. 3.35 Accessibility from the South of Omega is limited by the need to cross the River and by congestion in Warrington town centre. It is therefore recommended that to enhance the strategic potential of Omega to residents in Warrington and to minimise in-commuting, North/South accessibility through Warrington (including the town centre and M6 Thelwall Viaduct) should be investigated in detail to see how the significant problems of congestion in the town centre can be tackled to the benefit of the town and its residents and employees. It is understood that Warrington Borough Council is already involved in such discussions, however effective solutions will require significant investment. 3.36 Finally, we consider there to be scope for Warrington to play a major role in ensuring that a broad portfolio of sites is available to the Target Sectors through the reservation of a special site in the south of the district. It is recognised that Davenport Green currently plays a role of offering a high quality site for Target Sectors however it is considered that this site is likely to be developed out relatively quickly. It is therefore considered that another quality site should be identified in the Region. To overcome the concern that under current planning legislation it is difficult to reserve a site solely for the Target Sectors it is recommended that a site is identified which is in public ownership which could be confidently reserved for the Target Sectors. 3.37 Given that English Partnerships have considerable landholdings in the Warrington area to be released for development in the long term, it is recommended that these landholdings are appraised and a single strategic site is identified which would be reserved for a small number of major investors from the Target Sectors who would otherwise be lost to the Region.

Mersey Belt Study

3.38 It is recommended that Warrington Borough Council, through its UDP process and discussions with English Partnerships, investigates the potential of identifying and reserving a very high quality site to be held in public ownership for a small number of Target Sector users (up to 3) in a parkland setting for investment projects which would otherwise be lost to the region. 3.39 The timescales for bringing forward any such site would need to be considered in detail. The purpose of the site could be so that the Region was confident that if a major investor from the Target Sectors came looking for a particularly high quality site e.g. an outstanding setting, investment would not be lost to the Region. VALE ROYAL (NORTHWICH) 3.40 Northwich lies outside the defined Core Mersey Belt Southern Crescent but is considered to be a possible location for the Target Sectors due to its potential improved connectivity by rail to Manchester, Merseyside and Chester. 3.41 The key site identified as being suitable to the Target Sectors is Lostock Triangle a 17ha greenfield site located along the main road from the east into Northwich which is the Borough’s only allocation that is available and reserved for a high quality business park. It is understood that the future development of the site is imminent and that considerable end user interest has already been generated. It is considered to score high/medium in terms of suitability to the Target Sectors; but, only low now and medium in the future in terms of public transport sustainability. There is apparently good demand for sites in the town. Northwich is the centre of a possible Weaver Valley Regional Park. 3.42 As set out in Section 4, construction of the Manchester Airport Western Rail Link is a priority supported by this study. Its construction would make Northwich a much more sustainable location, indeed it could make it one of the more sustainable locations in terms of public transport in the Southern Crescent. In addition, there are a number of other factors which will enhance the area’s attractiveness including its identification as a ‘Regional Town’, work to stabilise the former salt mines and proposals for two urban villages in the town.

Greater Manchester (Metropolitan Axis) MANCHESTER 3.43 Manchester City Centre is one of the most important attractors of the Target Sectors within the Mersey Belt Study Area. It is a highly accessible area by public and private transport, well served by a range of services and facilities including shops, restaurants and most importantly ICT. Increasingly over the last five years the City Centre has offered high quality residential accommodation for potential employees. The City’s highly regarded three Universities are important drivers to the location decisions of the Target Sectors, as are its Hospitals and their research reputations. 3.44 There is a total identified supply of land within the City Centre of over 25ha. Key areas within the City Centre for new development include the Spinningfields area and the Southern Gateway. Other key sites outside the City Centre but which all form a strong existing ‘Southern Artery’ connecting to the Southern Crescent include:

Mersey Belt Study

Birley Fields – Promoted by the City Council for ICT companies. It has a very high level of ICT and this is reflected in the decision of 360 Network (which is the first Internet Exchange facility outside London) to locate on the site. Manchester Technopark (a joint venture with Manchester Science Park) has plans for further development. It is a key area where firms from the highly managed environment of Manchester Science Park can expand. Princess Parkway sites including Withington Hospital/Christie Playing Fields/Princess Road – This is a cluster of 3 sites fronting Princess Parkway that are well located between the City Centre, Universities and Manchester Airport. The Withington Hospital site is likely to be developed for mixed use with the other two sites developed for office uses. The sites will achieve high public transport sustainability because there is a proposed Metrolink stop close to the Withington Hospital site. 3.45 In addition to these Southern Artery locations appraised to be of high and high/medium suitability, there is a large amount of land within East Manchester, that has been judged to be of medium suitability now or in the future (referred to as Greater East Manchester). Some of this land is of low suitability at the present time but in the future with the long term regeneration programme being promoted by New East Manchester, the opening of the M60 on the east of the conurbation and the development of two Metrolink lines through the area, there are several key locations that have potential to accommodate the Target Sectors. The absence of a direct link to a dual carriageway/motorway is a factor that has influenced the area being judged as having only medium potential in the future, but certain locations could, with investment in the overall environment and public transport links, become more established locations for the Target Sector. 3.46 Key sites within Greater East Manchester are: North Manchester Business Park – Phase 1 comprises 37 ha of land mainly to the north of the Manchester to Oldham/Rochdale Metrolink extension. A compulsory purchase order is being pursued by the NWDA to facilitate the assembly of land for the business park. The business park will accommodate a range of uses including corporate office space for national and international companies, incubator space for expanding companies, mid-tech business space and financial service centre space. Oldham Road Corridor – This area links the City Centre to the M60 and there a number of developments along its length already approved. This area may play a role in providing accommodation for companies in service and distribution uses who wish to relocate from the City Centre into more suitable operational buildings. Northern Quarter – This area is focussed around Oldham Street and is included within the East Manchester Economic Development Zone. It is already the location for a number of cultural industries, but could also provide office space for other knowledge-based industries. Eastlands – The area around the Commonwealth Games Stadium has been identified for leisure and retail uses but also has potential for B1 and office use. 3.47 Based on the regional regeneration priorities and on our analysis it is recommended that Greater East Manchester should be promoted as a priority investment area for the knowledge-based industries. If environmental change is on a large enough scale, it offers real scope for integrated employment and housing development linked in an accessible and sustainable manner. It has potential to be a strategic corridor extending the characteristics of the Southern Crescent north along the M60 corridor and improved public transport routes. These improvements will enable

Mersey Belt Study

links with the Southern Crescent to be developed. Initially knowledge-based managers may live in the Southern Crescent and work in Greater East Manchester but in the long term following the development of quality housing and improvements in the quality of the environment scope exists for more highly qualified employees in the Target Sectors to live in Greater East Manchester also. 3.48 Manchester Airport is currently considering the development of a small number of remote checkin/Airport Villages to divert development pressures and congestion away from the Airport. One possible location is in East Manchester or Tameside. We fully support the development of a remote check-in/Airport Village in East Manchester or Tameside. It is considered that such a development would be a major catalyst to attract the Target Sectors to invest in the area. A number of businesses from the Target Sectors aspire to be close to the Airport for the prestige of the address rather than a technical need to be close to the Airport and a successful Airport Village could transplant this advantage. 3.49 It is considered that if a remote check-in were developed, served by a regular quick rail service to the Airport, it would be an attractive location for some of the Target Sectors in particular those in the Financial/Professional and Computer Services who want to be able to travel internationally as efficiently as possible. TAMESIDE 3.50 Tameside holds the potential to play an important role in the development of Greater East Manchester as a strategic corridor for the Target Sectors. Although no site in Tameside was identified as being highly suitable to the Target Sectors, three sites/areas were identified as scoring medium suitability. These sites have been identified within this Section because of their potential role given sufficient scale of investment and environmental change. They are: Ashton Moss – 24ha brownfield site with planning permission for B1,B2,B8 uses. In the future the site will be highly sustainable by public transport as the extension to the Metrolink will run through the site. Waterside Park (Audenshaw Reservoir) – 25ha site part of which is brownfield, suitable for high quality B1 development with an excellent location adjacent to Junction 22 of the M60 within an attractive setting. Although it is allocated within the UDP the application to develop the site was called in by the Secretary of State and was refused. However this decision has been successfully challenged in the High Court and the Secretary of State’s decision has been quashed. This leaves the way open for the planning issues on the site to be resolved. Cluster of sites in Denton – there are a number of sites (approx 10ha in total) adjoining Junction 23 of the M60 and close to the Waterside Park site that have been identified as having medium potential for the Target Sectors. This land is mostly vacant and underused at the present. SALFORD 3.51 Salford Quays is one of the great success stories of the Metropolitan Axis. It is a high quality investment location for the Target Sectors and other employers set in an attractive, highly accessible location with quality houses and associated facilities. It is an excellent example of the type of satellite with Southern Crescent characteristics which this Study could recommend duplicating elsewhere.

Mersey Belt Study

3.52 Two small sites have been identified within the Salford Quays area as having the greatest potential to meet the needs of the Target Sectors. These are Harbour City Phases 2 & 3 (2ha), Dock 9 – adjacent to Salford Quays (8ha) and Quays Campus (2ha). These sites have good transport sustainability due to the proximity of the Metrolink. 3.53 Other smaller sites identified within Salford suitable to the Target Sectors are: University Business Park, Frederick Road – 3ha site where Salford City Council is looking to establish an innovation park linked to the existing University Business Park. Blackfriars – There are a number of sites in the Blackfriars area, between the Manchester City Centre and University of Salford that have potential to accommodate the Target Sectors (particularly the Creative Industries), which include: Exchange Station (1ha) Chapel Wharf Street (2ha) Deva Centre (former Chester’s Brewery site – 2ha) Land in Central Salford, close to the University (10ha)10 3.54 Two large sites in Salford – Barton and Agecroft – have not been identified as priority sites for investment for the Target Sectors (scoring only medium suitability). They may well be important sites for other sectors and investment for these other sectors might then in turn improve their standing for the knowledge-based Target Sectors. TRAFFORD 3.55 Key sites in Trafford within the Metropolitan Axis are: Southbank – 2.3ha site on Trafford Wharf Road. Victoria Warehouse – Prominent 1.5ha site on the junction of Trafford Road with Trafford Wharf Road and Trafford Park Road. Barton Dock Road – 3.6ha site close to the Trafford Centre. 3.56 The public transport sustainability of each will be greatly enhanced by the extension of the Metrolink to the Trafford Centre. OLDHAM, ROCHDALE, BURY, BOLTON, WIGAN 3.57 No sites have been identified through the analysis as being highly suitable to the Target Sectors in this ‘North Greater Manchester’ area. Sites which we have identified as scoring medium suitability feature: Kingsway (Rochdale) – 114 ha predominantly greenfield site adjacent to Junction 21 of the M62. Its location and size make it suitable for a high quality mixed-use business park, incorporating offices, manufacturing and distribution uses, which would be appropriate for the Target Sectors. Kingsway's master plan also includes a hotel, ancillary on-site retail and support services, extensive areas of landscaping and amenity space and some new housing on the periphery of the business park, all of which will raise its image. The planned Metrolink stop within the site together with other infrastructure enhancements will significantly improve public transport accessibility in the future.

10 These four sites equate to 15ha but it is considered that only 13.5ha are suitable for the Target Sectors.

Mersey Belt Study

Middlebrook and surrounding area (Bolton) – Within the Middlebrook development itself is a 8.1ha site within the UDP. In addition there is a site of 5.2ha adjacent to the Middlebrook development. Both sites have direct access to Junction 6 of the M61. They also have access to the newly constructed Horwich Parkway Station and therefore have high sustainability. In the longer term there is another 16 ha available on the Horwich Loco Works site, but it does not have as good an image at present as the land around Middlebrook and has low sustainability in public transport terms. 3.58 It is considered that in the longer term with significant investment in employment land, housing land and environmental improvements, Middlebrook and its surrounding area might develop Southern Crescent characteristics. It is recommended that the potential of creating a cluster of critical mass (or ‘satellite’) to attract Target Sectors (and the medical equipment sector in particular) in the vicinity of Middlebrook is investigated by the relevant local authorities, NWDA and other potential partners. Emphasis will need to be placed on creating a quality environment in terms of employment land but critically also high quality housing with access to good schools and other facilities.

Greater South Manchester (Southern Crescent) MANCHESTER 3.59 Two particular sites in Manchester within the Southern Crescent form the beginning of the ‘Southern Artery’ which extends from the Airport/M56 into the Metropolitan Axis along Princess Parkway and into the southern part of Manchester City Centre: Manchester Business Park – Reserved in the UDP as a ‘strategic high-tech site’, this 35ha greenfield allocated site adjacent to Manchester Airport is already being developed for serviced office facilities. Sharston Green – Reserved as a ‘strategic high-tech site’ but the early development of part of the site for B2 use (to secure a local major employer who was threatening to move out of the area) has to a degree prejudiced the development of the remainder of the site for high-tech use. TRAFFORD 3.60 The key site identified in Trafford is Davenport Green (135ha). A former agricultural estate that was released from the Green Belt and allocated in Trafford’s UDP for a small number of ‘hightech users’ and ‘investment that would otherwise be lost to Greater Manchester’ (controlled through a carefully worded Section 106 Agreement). The site has been judged to be highly suitable to the Target Sectors but has low public transport sustainability at present and is greenfield. There may be an opportunity to increase the site’s sustainability in the future if a Metrolink station can be provided on the site on the planned Manchester Airport branch. Beyond this, public investment should not be necessary but a tight line should be held on who should occupy the site given its unique size and attractiveness to the Target Sectors within the Southern Crescent.

Mersey Belt Study

STOCKPORT 3.61 Stockport’s only major strategic site for the Target Sectors is Cheadle Royal, a 16ha greenfield site. It has been identified for office use rather than specific business sectors. There is an issue relating to its likely inclusion within the Public Safety Zone of the Airport that could restrict future development. 3.62 There are a number of other sites within the M60 Gateway area which total approximately 39ha. These sites are all brownfield and several contain existing buildings. They have the potential to accommodate the knowledge-based industries although the need for land assembly and reclamation on some of the sites means that most of this land will not be available in the short term. These sites were not highlighted by Stockport during our site analysis stage and have therefore not been included in the analysis. The importance of the M60 gateway sites to the Target Sector is however acknowledged. 3.63 Stockport suffers similar problems to Chester in terms of limited sites. However, unlike Chester it is surrounded by local authorities with similar characteristics which can accommodate pressure from investors. Nevertheless, we recommend that the NWDA opens discussions with Stockport MBC to identify the feasibility of assembling a suitable site or sites in the M60 corridor close to Stockport town centre, especially where sites could be well served by public transport including the Metrolink extension. MACCLESFIELD 3.64 It was anticipated prior to the detailed analysis that Macclesfield may suffer similar problems to Chester in terms of a limited supply of sites. However this has not been found to be the case. There is a good supply of sites in Macclesfield, particularly sites which scored high medium/high in terms of their suitability to the Target Sectors. These include: East Tytherington Business Park – Where a 20ha greenfield site is allocated for B1 and B8 use and is considered to be highly suitable to the Target Sectors with medium public transport sustainability (using the site for B8 warehousing use could be a wasted opportunity). Danegate – In South Macclesfield, a 22ha greenfield site allocated for B1, B2 and B8 uses. This is considered to be the key future site by Macclesfield Council, scoring highly in terms of suitability but only low in terms of sustainability now and medium in the future. Parkgate Industrial Estate – Expansion to existing estate – totalling 20ha. Site is part brownfield and part greenfield and is allocated for B1, B2 and B8 use. Considered to have high/medium suitability to the Target Sectors but only low transport sustainability now rising to medium in the future. Earl Road, Stanley Green (61 MU) – 6ha brownfield site in Handforth that would be highly suitable to the financial and professional services and ICT sectors. Although its sustainability in transport terms is low at the present, it does have the potential to improve in the future to medium sustainability through the provision of a new station. Kings Court – Only 1ha in size but this brownfield site is in a key location within Wilmslow Town Centre with high transport sustainability with the potential to accommodate high-density development.

Mersey Belt Study

3.65 In addition to these growth sites the importance of Astra Zeneca must be highlighted as the nucleus of an R&D cluster employing 6,500 people on two sites – Alderley Park and Hurdsfield. Hurdsfield is within an employment area in the Macclesfield Local Plan with little scope for lateral expansion. 3.66 The Alderley Park site, which employs some 4,500 people, must be highlighted as a major developed site within the Green Belt with an approved development brief. In developing planning policy the area's environmental sensitivity must be balanced against its role as a vitally important site for critical international investment.

Greater Merseyside (Metropolitan Axis) LIVERPOOL 3.67 Like Manchester, Liverpool City Centre and Waterfront is an important attraction to the Target Sectors with a prominent profile in terms of biotechnology and creative industries. The strong profile of the City’s two universities are also important drivers for investment as also is the developing ‘city centre living’ market. The expanding Liverpool John Lennon Airport also has the potential to play a role although it is accepted that currently the majority of trips are for pleasure. The study supports investment which will continue to encourage the regeneration of this important City Centre. In particular, where there is competition for other uses on sites that are identified as priorities for the Target Sectors, every effort should be made to reserve such sites, including public purchase if necessary. 3.68 In terms of meeting the future requirements of the Target Sectors there are various sites within the City Centre which have been identified as having high/medium suitability. All the sites scored well in terms of sustainability being brownfield and highly accessible by public transport: Rope Walks is identified as the focus of the cultural industries in Liverpool in the Liverpool Vision document. It is considered that there is potential to create an Arts and Media/Cultural/ICT incubation zone. A great deal of development is already underway – Maggs Building/Fleet Street/Concert Square and various schemes on Seel Street and Duke Street. Liverpool University Edge – There are various sites in this location which have the potential to consolidate the biotechnology cluster already emerging around the University. A key priority is to develop spin-out space for businesses incubated by the University. Work is on-going in this area in collaboration with Manchester University. In terms of economic development we consider that there is significant potential to harness the strengths of the City’s three universities to attract the target sectors particularly those related to creative industries and environmental/biotechnology. There is potential to redevelop underused land and derelict buildings for a mixed use development including employment focused on the Target Sectors and housing. We thus recommend that the potential for incubator and spin out development on underused land on the east side of Liverpool University (formerly reserved for road schemes) should be investigated. Old Hall Street – Scope is identified to accommodate ICT dependent businesses in this location by providing ‘plug and go’ incubation.

Mersey Belt Study

3.69 Wavertree Technology Park (36ha) is a Liverpool success story and as such should be a key site for investment. Speculative development is taking place on 4 of the remaining 5ha of the site. The park is home to 39 businesses employing around 2,700 people in a range of knowledge-based, ICT and creative activities. However its profile on the strategic corridor (Edge Lane) is low. The Eastern Approaches Objective 1 Strategic Investment Area (SIA) Programme identifies the extension of the park onto the vacant MTL site (7ha), which fronts Edge Lane, as key to its future expansion. The NWDA gave evidence at a conjoined section 78 (CWS appeal on MTL site) and UDP inquiry last October. The Agency has resolved to use its CPO powers to secure the expansion of the Wavertree Technology Park and has commissioned the production of a master plan. 3.70 The expansion of the Park would incorporate MTL, Littlewoods, land to the north of Edge Lane and land to the east and south east (a total of about 25 ha). The first phase would create 10 ha and includes the MTL site, Littlewoods and former convent site north of Edge Lane to provide about 35,000 m2 of new B1/B2 development, create high quality gateway buildings on the Edge Lane frontage in keeping with Liverpool City Council's aspirations for an enhanced corridor into Liverpool city centre, complemented by high quality landscaping. At the public inquiry NWDA said there were the following five technology clusters – internet services, computer hardware, computer software, communications and medical/pharmaceutical/biotechnological. Wavertree Technology Park is highly sustainable in public transport terms benefiting from a relatively new Merseyrail station with potential to offer opportunities for residents across the City including North Liverpool. However it is essential that sustainable transport needs are incorporated into future development plans, ensuring good quality access to public transport and improved cycling and pedestrian access. Links should also be developed between the site and the Universities. SPEKE GARSTON 3.71 Like Salford Quays, Speke Garston has been a success story whereby many of the characteristics that attract the Target Sectors to the Southern Crescent have been able to be created as a ‘satellite’ in the Metropolitan Axis, be it with significant public sector investment. This study supports the continued investment to regenerate the area particularly public transport improvements (especially the Allerton Interchange) seeking to strengthen links north to Liverpool and south to Halton. 3.72 In terms of future sites highly suitable to the Target Sector the Estuary, Liverpool (Speke Garston) (94ha) forms the key site in the area. Its overall impact will be at a regional scale. The site has been identified as having the potential to be developed as a Biotechnology Park, building upon the success of the biotechnology cluster emerging in the University area and Speke itself11. The site is close to the expanding Liverpool John Lennon Airport. It could provide follow on space for new bio-tech incubation businesses associated with the University. Discussions are currently underway between major pharmaceutical companies, Liverpool University, the NWDA and Speke Garston Development Company concerning the feasibility of this proposal. Land ownership of the site rests principally with Peel Holdings who are currently preparing a planning application with an accompanying Environmental Impact Statement. The first phase of infrastructure works is complete. A bid for Objective 1 funding has been

11 Although this objective has been dented by the recent announcement of major job redundancies at Speke.

Mersey Belt Study

submitted, under the Speke Halewood SIA programme, to assist with the completion of infrastructure and servicing works. Longer term additional sites on Speke Industrial Estate (29ha) could potentially come forward on the back of development at Estuary, however these are more likely to be suited to the needs of local SMEs rather than making a significant contribution to the needs of the knowledge-based industries. WIRRAL 3.73 Only one site in the Wirral achieved a highly suitable rating and that was land at Clatterbridge Hospital (5ha). The site is ‘washed over’ by the Green Belt but is identified as a Major Development Site within it, which could potentially come forward in the next 5 to 15 years. The site benefits from excellent access to the M53 (J4) and a high quality, attractive environment. Clatterbridge is a leading oncology research centre and the Council has ambitions for its development as a medical/pharmaceutical cluster. Preliminary discussions have taken place in this regard and it is hoped that these can continue. Scope exists to develop linkages between the Clatterbridge Hospital, hospitals in Liverpool City Centre, the Universities and Daresbury Laboratory Science Park. The site has poor public transport access with no plans for improvement. However, should significant development occur, sustainable transport access could be improved through the implementation of green travel plans. We recommend that, as a priority, the NWDA open discussions with Wirral Borough Council and the site owners to identify and realise the strategic potential of this location. KNOWSLEY 3.74 Kings Business Park (a.k.a. The Hazels) (20ha) is one of the 25 strategic sites identified in the Regional Strategy. It is brownfield (a former college site) and has excellent road access being located at the junction of the M57 and the A57 Liverpool Road. Kings has been developed for mixed residential and high quality office uses. The site is relatively accessible by public transport benefiting from good bus services along Liverpool Road and it is anticipated that this will improve still further in the future (with the implementation of Line 2 of the Metrolink). The Council is also understood to be in discussions with Vertex to improve public transport accessibility to the Business Park. ST HELENS 3.75 Although St Helens is identified in the “gap area” its needs would be served by Omega and Kings Business Park provided that effective public transport links were established (see paragraphs 4.44 – 4.47). We also believe that the Lea Green, St Helens site can make a contribution.

The Spatial Pattern of Development and Investment 3.76 The picture of development which emerges from our typology of sites (see Figure 3.1) can helpfully be summarised in terms of investment corridors and in terms of gaps. This analysis is depicted on Figure 3.2. The main existing corridors of growth for the Target Sectors are: The M56 corridor extending into The Manchester Southern Artery along the Princess Parkway to Manchester City Centre.

Mersey Belt Study

3.77 The main additional proposed corridors of growth for the Target Sectors are: Selected Station points along the Chester to Liverpool railway Liverpool City Centre to Estuary Park Liverpool City Centre to Wavertree and M62 Motorway end A central M6/West Coast mainline corridor running from Northwich up to Warrington then north to the Omega site A radial corridor (Metrolink) from Manchester City Centre to Greater East Manchester, meeting An orbital corridor, the M60 from Greater East Manchester to Manchester Airport. 3.78 Both Merseyside and Greater Manchester have been identified as having a sufficient supply of sites which are potentially highly suitable to the Target Sectors, albeit that in many cases investment is required to realise this potential. However between the two conurbations there is a gap in which very few suitable sites have been identified by the local authorities in terms of employment sites and housing sites to meet the specific requirement of the Target Sectors. This issue of gap area is considered in more detail in Section 6.

Mersey Belt Study

4. Transport Priorities to Support the Target Sectors 4.1

In identifying transport priorities to support the target sectors we assessed the key transport issues in the Southern Crescent and the Metropolitan Axis. We looked at existing and future levels of congestion on the transport networks and identified how transport policies and schemes could contribute to the accessibility and sustainability of knowledge-based industry.

4.2

We analysed journey to work patterns on a district by district basis and then carried out a more detailed assessment of each potential development site to identify its accessibility by road and its sustainability in terms of public transport, both now and in the future. The results of these assessments were an important part of the process outlined in Section 3 to identify key sites and locations for Target Sector development.

4.3

In this section we set out our recommendations for transport policies and transport schemes that we believe will best support the Target Sectors. In doing so we do not challenge the policies and schemes that are set out in the Regional Transport Strategy, North West Strategic Transport Priorities, Local Transport Plans and other planning documents. It is far beyond the scope of this study to carry out the detailed analysis necessary to develop new policies and schemes or to reject or substantially modify existing. All of our recommendations are drawn from current strategies and plans and can therefore reasonably be assumed to be in accordance with policy and justified by an appropriate level of analysis.

4.4

Our recommendations are focused on providing sustainable and effective access to the identified existing and potential Target Sector areas. We have limited our recommendations to a concise programme that we believe is: capable of being delivered in the short to medium term, taking into account funding, planning and engineering constraints; likely to be perceived by investors and employees as offering attractive, high quality access; and strongly supportive of sustainable transport policies. The recommendations focus on those schemes which we consider will have the greatest impact on supporting the Target Sectors. Therefore some North West transport polices and schemes have been omitted, some of which may be beneficial to the Target Sectors.

4.5

Whilst North West transport strategies and plans are well developed, the overall implementation cost of proposals quite properly exceeds the currently available resources. Additional transport funding is required and proposals must be prioritised. The purpose of our study is to highlight those transport proposals which will best support Target Sector development and thereby to support both the prioritisation of existing funds and the provision of additional funds.

4.6

We fully support the North West sustainable transport policies and strategies, in particular the requirement to offer a range of means of access and to promote sustainable alternatives to car travel. This requirement is particularly relevant given the apparent significance of motorway access to some existing Target Sector development.

4.7

Our outline transport strategy which we see developing from this and other work is to provide high quality local public transport in each of the five geographical sub areas, linked by a heavy

Mersey Belt Study

rail system which provides flexibility of service between the sub areas. The rail recommendations, together with more sustainable use of east-west motorway corridors for public transport would connect the local public transport services to create the strong public transport grid that is recommended in the RS. The quality of the public transport units (bus, rail and light rail), the passenger facilities, service frequency and reliability must be sufficient to provide a genuine and attractive alternative to the private car. 4.8

It is important to remember that while travel distances have increased over the last decade the journey to work pattern is still dominated by relatively short local trips. It is however reasonable to assume that knowledge-based employment is likely to generate longer trips than other sectors. Trips between the five geographical sub areas are important, but it is trips within the sub areas which should be encouraged to make up the majority of travel for the Target Sectors. This desired limited movement pattern is consistent with sustainable transport policy and is supported by Target Sector work patterns that include teleworking. Our recommended transport schemes and strategies have therefore been selected to reinforce this pattern. Importantly, it also requires knowledge-based workers to live more closely to their workplaces â&#x20AC;&#x201C; reversing the trend of the last three decades.

4.9

We have recognised that high standard road access and, in particular, motorway access is considered important by employers and is probably essential to the successful promotion of new Target Sector sites in the Metropolitan Axis. The current motorway congestion levels do not appear to be a major deterrent to development investment. For example development pressures remain strong in the vicinity of the Trafford Centre and Manchester Airport which are both adjacent to congested sections of motorway. Motorway travel is likely to be particularly important in the early years of Target Sector development in the Metropolitan Axis when many employees would be drawn from the existing Southern Crescent pool. Clearly the intention, over time, would be to achieve substantial modal shift from motorways to public transport and to reduce the need to travel through the development of more quality residential areas, closer to proposed development sites for knowledge-based industries, especially in the Metropolitan Axis.

4.10 To achieve the desired modal shift in the Metropolitan Axis and to improve the sustainability of development in the Southern Crescent, we need to encourage more sustainable transport options throughout the Mersey Belt Study Area. To achieve this public transport must offer employees and residents an efficient high quality network of services between key destinations. The knowledge-based industries have the ability to lead the way in improving transport sustainability because due to their people intensity and high added value, moving people is much more important than moving goods. One way to achieve a reduction in the proportion of journeys to work is to reduce the proportion of journeys made by single occupant cars. 4.11 We have identified eight packages of transport schemes and strategies that we consider would best support Target Sector development in the Mersey Belt Study Area, while at the same time supporting sustainable transport policies and offering a realistic prospect of being implemented within a reasonable timescale. The schemes and strategies have been selected to support development at an area scale by providing an efficient and sustainable transport framework for development. Transport details for individual sites would evolve within the area framework during the detailed planning process and in consultation with the transport authorities. The packages are: The Manchester Airport Western Rail Link and Mersey Belt Rail Circle Concept

Mersey Belt Study

Improvements in and into Manchester City Centre Improvements in and into Liverpool City Centre Improvements in and into Speke Garston Linkages between South Manchester and Greater East Manchester Strategic public transport improvements in the Mid-Mersey Area Linkages between Chester and Liverpool and their environs M56 Park and Ride. 4.12 The packages include schemes that have been assessed in detail and have achieved broad approval, together with new ideas that will require detailed assessment before they can be adopted. 4.13 Figure 4.1 illustrates the key transport schemes which are prioritised as having the greatest potential to support the Target Sectors. 4.14 The first four packages have been identified to improve the accessibility and sustainability of the most important attractors of knowledge-based industry in the Mersey Belt Study Area, namely the Manchester and Liverpool conurbations and the two airports. The latter four packages have been selected to support the establishment of Strategic Corridors from the Southern Crescent to the Metropolitan Axis. The Strategic Corridors, with their high quality sustainable transport links, would promote Target Sector development in two ways: Initially new Target Sector development in the Metropolitan Axis could draw, in part, upon the existing pool of skills in the Southern Crescent using the new sustainable transport links for medium distance commuting, as well as for business to business trips. Following the success of the Strategic Corridors and the accessibility of the development areas, the Metropolitan Axis would be expected, over time, to support high quality residential development in parallel with the growth of the local skill base. 4.15 Details of the eight transport packages are set out in the following paragraphs, followed by an overview of other, more general, transport recommendations.

The Manchester Airport Western Rail Link and Other Infrastructure Required for the Mersey Belt Rail Circle Concept 4.16 The proposed Manchester Airport Western Rail Link is a vital link in the Regionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rail network (linking Manchester Airport station and the mid Cheshire Line to the north of Mobberley). With the Link in place the Mersey Belt Rail Circle would be established linking key locations in the Metropolitan Axis and the Southern Crescent and providing flexibility of service throughout the Mersey Belt. In particular Liverpool (City Centre), Warrington, Manchester (City Centre) and Chester would have direct rail connections to each other and to Manchester Airport. The rail link between Manchester Airport and Chester would compete with the congested M56 as a travel option. The Link would also connect Mersey Belt centres to any new Airport based services running between Chester, North Wales and the north of England. 4.17 The Hartford Chord linking the Chester Line to the West Coast mainline is also important for delivering the range and flexibility of services which the Rail Circle aims to deliver. Its construction will deliver sustainable high quality public transport to serve those working in the Mersey Belt Study

Target Sectors and importantly will specifically help to improve the sustainability of movement within the Southern Crescent. 4.18 The Western Rail Link and the Mersey Belt Rail Circle are identified in the priority 1 set of schemes scheduled in the Regional Transport Priorities document. Neither scheme has specific funding allocated although some scheme enabling works are identified for funding in Local Transport Plans. 4.19 We consider these rail schemes to be fundamental to achieving the economic benefits of Target Sector development in a sustainable way. New, high quality rail services are likely to be the only genuinely attractive alternative to the car for medium length trips and therefore be of crucial significance in promoting new Target Sector development in locations that are remote from existing development and skills. We therefore strongly recommend support for both schemes. 4.20 An example of how the new rail links would be instrumental in promoting sustainable development is provided by Northwich. Local public transport use in the town is already well established and with the new Rail links in place there would be the potential for Northwich Town Centre to support a Transport Development Area (TDA). This new concept builds upon established sustainable transport policy and planning principles to concentrate high density mixed use development in areas that are highly accessible by public transport12. 4.21 Other potential TDA sites that would arise from completion of the rail schemes include Wigan Interchange, Manchester Airport itself and possible Airport satellite â&#x20AC;&#x153;villagesâ&#x20AC;? to the east on the M60 corridor and to the west near Warrington. Further investigation into the potential of developing TDAs is encouraged.

Improvements in and into Manchester City Centre 4.22 Manchester City Centre is a highly sustainable location in transport terms with good long and medium range rail links and short range bus and Metrolink services. The Centre will become more accessible over the next few years as public transport services are improved and developed. The City Centre therefore represents an excellent location for many Target Sector businesses. 4.23 There is an existing programme of new and improved high quality public transport services, particularly Metrolink and quality bus. There is funding for current Metrolink and bus schemes and a high level of commitment to future schemes that together will improve accessibility and should encourage a shift from car travel to more sustainable modes as road congestion and parking limitations have an increased effect. We support the current programme and published future plans for Metrolink and quality bus corridors. In particular we support the concept of reliable, high quality services that can realistically attract a modal shift from car, as demonstrated by the initial phases of Metrolink. 4.24 Road access will remain an important attraction for some Target Sector businesses and it is important that road space is carefully managed to balance economic and environmental demands. Major bottlenecks will need to be addressed. For example the M56/Princess Parkway 12 Draft guidelines on the development of TDAs have been published by RICS and the concept is supported in the new PPG13.

Mersey Belt Study

ter R a

Districts which should review availability of housing land to accommodate clusters from target sectors

Strategic Regional Sites

hes or S

✽

C orth rrid il Co

Wigan South Central – see para 6.11

✽

8 9

Liverpool

Knowsley

12✽

13 14

Chester

Ellesmere Port and Neston

Liverpool John Lennon Airport

10✽

35✽

Key

M56

7✽

16 40 15✽

M61

Warrington

Wigan

Vale Royal

Mersey Belt Rail Circle

M56 Strategic Park & Ride

Heavy Rail

Light Rail

Salford

Bury

M66

M60

Rochdale

o rt

Oldham

29✽

M62

en p tro resc Trafford Me C rn he o ut

Macclesfield

Figure 4.1

Stockport

KEY TRANSPORT SCHEMES

Congleton

Manchester Airport

25✽

d Park raffor to T

to Tameside 37 38 ✽ 2✽ Tameside 1 22 28 26 27 11 3✽ 20 Manchester 4✽ s Boundary Axi n Rail Link from Manchester Airport undary 21 to Stockp ita t Bo to East Manchester ol

Bolton

A R E A

Further study needed of strategic public transport in Mid Mersey and North Chester rail corridor

Halton

M62

St Helens

rt I m

Reserve Site in Warrington – see para. 3.38

r n C o r ri d o r

M57

il Easte Light Ra ✽ Edge Lane

y rkb

G A P

✪

n spo

Astra Zeneca, Alderley Park – see para. 6.7

Sefton

c Tra rea sey A -Mer id M s in ment prove

WALES

Manchester City Centre Sites Chester Business Park * Chester City Centre Saighton Camp Daresbury Park Location * Manor Park Lostock Triangle Manchester Business Park Sharston Green Birley Fields Princess Parkway Salford Quays M60 Gateway to Stockport Cheadle Royal M53 Davenport Green * Southbank Victoria Warehouse Wirral Barton Dock Road Kingsway * East Tytherington Business Park Danegate Parkgate Industrial Estate Earl Road Kings Court Kings Business Park * Clatterbridge Hospital Salford University Business Park Blackfriars Middlebrook Daresbury Laboratory

M58

West Lancashire

t o A i r p o rt

✪

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Category B Sites

East Manchester * Ashton Moss * Waterside Park * Denton Cluster Liverpool City Centre * Wavertree Technology Park * Omega * Hooton Employment Area Capenhurst The Estuary Liverpool *

ail tR

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

st Gar ke Spe

ail Lin k

Strate ubli g ic P

e st ern R

Li gh

am, R o chdale ldh

to O

Category A Sites

Figure 4.1 KEY TRANSPORT SCHEMES

tudy

Mersey Belt Study

radial route from the Southern Crescent residential areas (which is itself an important Target Sector development spine) may require capacity improvements at and around its junction with the M60. These could involve traffic management of the motorway junctions and adjacent local road networks and/or local capacity enhancements. Traffic modelling of the main radial/orbital routes would be required to test the impact of public transport measures and Target Sector development. 4.25 The Strategic Rail Authority Manchester Hub Rail Study has now reported and identifies measures to overcome the bottleneck effects of the current heavy rail radial network. The Manchester Rail Hub is the regionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s number one priority in the North Westâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Regional Transport Priorities report and is identified in the SRAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Strategic Rail Plan. It is important for the development of Target Sector businesses in the City Centre that Manchester retains and builds upon its accessibility by mainline rail from London and other UK cities. It is equally important for the development of Traffic Sector businesses elsewhere in the eastern Mersey Belt that the Manchester rail hub offers access to a range of efficient local services. We therefore recommend support for the Rail Study proposals. We recommend early collaboration between NWDA and the Highways Agency to identify potential development scenarios and transport packages. 4.26 Overall Manchester City Centre offers the most comprehensive short and long range public transport networks in the Mersey Belt. Taken together with the concentration of businesses and the development of City Centre living this translates to the most sustainable location, in transport terms, for Target Sector development. However, rail and road networks are overloaded and very substantial upgrades of public transport infrastructure and services are required if the sustainable benefits are to be achieved.

Improvements in and into Liverpool City Centre 4.27 Liverpool City Centre is a highly sustainable location and will become more accessible over the next few years as public transport services are improved and the Mersey Tram system is developed. 4.28 There are good heavy rail links to the West Coast Mainline and a reasonably comprehensive network of local train services, including City Centre underground services and the important east-west link to Warrington and Manchester. There is a high level of bus accessibility, including quality vehicles and shelters and bus priority routes. A Programme of bus and rail improvements is set out in the Local Transport Plan (LTP). 4.29 Line 1 of the Mersey Tram system will link the City Centre with Kirkby and design is under way. Line 2 through the Eastern Approaches and Line 3 to the Liverpool John Lennon Airport are identified in the LTP for completion by 2010. This high quality system should be effective in promoting modal shift and in supporting Target Sector development. 4.30 Traffic congestion is generally at a significantly lower level than Manchester City Centre. However, links to the motorway network are poor and plans are in place to improve the main route from the M62. Funding is in place for the Hall Lane improvement scheme and a multidisciplinary study has been commissioned for the Edge Lane corridor.

Mersey Belt Study

4.31 The combination of good public transport access and relatively low traffic congestion with substantial existing business and housing development, albeit on a smaller scale than Manchester, means that Liverpool City Centre offers an excellent opportunity for sustainable Target Sector development. New high quality transport facilities, particularly Mersey Tram and the proposed highway schemes should improve investor perceptions as well as achieving actual improvements in accessibility. The range of measures set out in the LTP will encourage the use of sustainable alternatives to the car. We therefore support the current proposals, including the full Mersey Tram network, the highway schemes and LTP public transport measures.

Improvements in and to Speke Garston 4.32 Speke Garston is an important new business cluster including the Life Science Sector. Much is being done to develop sustainable transport links to this area generally and specifically to Liverpool John Lennon Airport through improvements to bus services and development of the Allerton Interchange which will be served by Mainline (London), regional and local rail services. 4.33 The proposed Mersey Tram Line 3 (to Liverpool Airport) is required to provide direct rail based public transport into the heart of the area linking it to the City Centre. From the perspective of the Target Sectors, this is the most important light rail scheme in Merseyside and in our view should be implemented ahead of Lines 1 and 2. 4.34 Liverpool John Lennon Airport is experiencing significant growth in budget airlines which is forecast to continue. The Airport operators do not see the Airport providing a regional hub function like Manchester and it is unlikely that it will attract the knowledge-based sector to the extent that Manchester Airport has. However there is no doubt that a growing and successful Airport will encourage local Target Sector development. 4.35 There are road links to the M56 across the Runcorn Bridge and to the M62 at Tarbock. Both suffer from peak period congestion. Capacity improvements are already planned at Tarbock and in the vicinity of the Airport and Business Park. There are also studies in hand to identify improvements on the route from Speke Garston to the City Centre. 4.36 The capacity problems at the Runcorn Bridge have been studied at some length and the justification for a Second Mersey Crossing is beyond the scope of this study. However, it is clear that additional river crossing capacity at or near Runcorn would significantly improve the connection between the Southern Crescent, Speke Garston and Liverpool City Centre. It was identified as a problem in the Regional Strategy and is a priority in the North Westâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Regional Transport Priorities report. 4.37 Speke Garston provides a realistic opportunity to promote Target Sector development because of the existing development cluster and its accessibility from the City Centre and the Southern Crescent. At present it has a limited local skill base and it is therefore likely that medium distance access for skilled employees will be important as the local base develops. In order to achieve this in a sustainable way we recommend prioritising the Mersey Tram Line 3 scheme, the Allerton Interchange (mainline heavy rail station) and its associated bus and rail improvements. We also support the proposed highway improvements and recommend that the development potential of Speke Garston be given due weight in the assessment of options for a Second Mersey Crossing.

Mersey Belt Study

Linkages between Greater East Manchester and South Manchester 4.38 The Manchester Rail Hub Study and SEMMMS have both recently identified the potential for improvements to the rail linkages around the eastern side of Manchester linking the Ashton area with Manchester Airport. Much of this link would utilise improved existing track although a new Eastern Rail Link to the Airport would also be required. There is no committed funding for the suggested rail linkage improvements but we would support the recent study proposals and would recommend further detailed assessments to support the inclusion of rail improvements in funding bids. 4.39 The rail improvements would provide a sustainable and efficient access link between the Greater East Manchester development area and the existing Target Sector cluster around the Airport. The link would have two main benefits, allowing Target Sector development to spread into Greater East Manchester while retaining direct links with the Airport cluster and also providing an additional sustainable alternative to car access to the Airport development area. 4.40 Manchester Airport has been the catalyst for a great deal of Target Sector activity in the Southern Crescent and more specifically South Greater Manchester area. The Airport company is considering the development of remote check-ins/Airport Villages and has identified Greater East Manchester around Ashton as a possible location. The M60 has recently opened through Greater East Manchester where it is relatively uncongested. There are established heavy rail and bus links to Greater East Manchester and the Metrolink will be built to Ashton. With further investment in sustainable transport, including the new rail links that we support, Greater East Manchester has the potential for becoming a particularly accessible location for Target Sector development. 4.41 The current attraction of development to Manchester Airport, together with strong Airport growth, has resulted in congestion of transport networks and particularly the M56. Ongoing and committed public transport improvements and sustainable transport policies will mitigate the impacts of growth to some extent, but it is clear that continuing growth around the Airport will be difficult to accommodate in transport terms. 4.42 We consider that the improvement of linkages between the Airport and East Greater Manchester to provide fast, high quality, sustainable access, together with the committed Metro line to the City Centre, will provide a major opportunity to use the attraction of the Airport to promote new Target Sector development without adding to Airport congestion. We consider that this offers probably the best opportunity to spread existing Target Sector success into the Metropolitan Axis in a sustainable way. 4.43 We recognise that there are already local pressures on the eastern and south eastern M60, particularly at the Denton interchange with the M67 and through the Stockport area. These pressures are unlikely to be totally relieved by new rail infrastructure, because the traffic growth that will arise from new development in the area will not realistically be entirely catered for by the new rail capacity. Improved junction capacity may therefore be required at Denton in addition to committed M60 improvements and any improvements that may be recommended in ongoing multi-modal studies. SEMMMS has reported on orbital road capacity through, or to the south of, Stockport. The package of highway schemes recommended in the SEMMS study (and recently endorsed by Government Ministers) includes A6M, Poynton Bypass and completion of

Mersey Belt Study

Manchester Airport Eastern Link Road (MAELR) complete an alternative link to Greater East Manchester from the Southern Crescent. We would support these highway schemes which are shown to complement the rail improvements and to contribute to providing a genuine choice of means of access to Manchester Airport and to Greater East Manchester.

Strategic Public Transport Improvements in the Mid-Mersey Area 4.44 Warrington has been a successful investment location in recent years. While not specifically focused on the Target Sectors, the town, particularly in the south, is a popular residential location for highly skilled workers. In transport terms Warrington has suffered from the severance effects of the Mersey/Ship Canal and from the traffic pressures of major development. For other than the shortest journeys cars are the most realistic mode of transport and hence congestion is a major problem. The lack of crossings over the Ship Canal means that it is difficult to improve travel from South to North (including the key Omega site). The town is however on the crossroads of the West Coast Mainline and the Manchester to Liverpool Rail Line which provides the basis of a sustainably accessible town, particularly if the performance of the Manchester to Liverpool line could be improved by removing the existing bottlenecks on the approaches to Manchester and Liverpool. The Manchester Hub Rail Study identifies means of overcoming the Manchester bottlenecks and we would support a further review of Liverpool heavy rail access. 4.45 Providing the sustainability of transport links to and through the town can be improved, we see Warrington as having the potential to provide a strategic corridor of new Target Sector development that can be expanded into the Metropolitan Axis, through Omega to St Helens and Wigan. In particular we see the need to increase the capacity of the Ship Canal crossings and to promote high quality public transport that will link the Target Sector skills base to the south of the town with the development targets to the north. 4.46 We therefore recommend that a study is undertaken building on the recent work by Warrington Borough Council which considers the opportunities for public transport within the town and leading to the identification of efficient (preferably segregated), high quality public transport services linking employment and residential areas with the town centre and rail stations. It should be a far sighted study looking beyond its boundaries to consider linkages with St Helens and Wigan to the north and Halton and Northwich to the south and comprehensively addressing the river crossing issue for public transport. The study is important to allow the development potential of Warrington to be realised in the most sustainable way. In particular, the study should ensure that the development of the Omega site does not merely exacerbate existing congestion but, through improved public transport linkages, it should assist the economic development of the wider area. 4.47 Implementation of such a public transport system will take time. It is therefore important that motorway congestion, particularly at the junction of the M62 and M6, should not restrict the opportunity for Target Sector development. Capacity improvements at the motorway junction may therefore be required and we would support a level of improvement that can be shown to be in balance with the achievement of the public transport improvements that we have recommended.

Mersey Belt Study

Linkages between Chester and Liverpool and Their Environs 4.48 We see the potential for supporting further Target Sector development to the north of Chester utilising the existing rail links between Chester, Ellesmere Port, Birkenhead and Liverpool. Sites adjacent to this rail link offer the opportunity for Merseyside and Chester based employees to access potentially attractive sites by rail. 4.49 No specific schemes are required to deliver this strategic corridor but we would strongly support that the general improvements to public transport that are currently being promoted by Cheshire and Merseyside Authorities to maximise its attractiveness against trips by private car. There are however a number of specific schemes under consideration in the Chester/Wirral area and we would recommend further public transport development in areas to the north and west of Chester. Relevant schemes for consideration include the Chester Deeside Transport System, proposals to link the Wrexham â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Bidston Line into Liverpool and the increase in service frequency and electrification of the Ellesmere Port link to Warrington via Stanlow. 4.50 We recommend a multi modal study that assesses the potential of public transport schemes, together with the existing public transport provision, to promote growth in knowledge-based employment along public transport corridors. The study outputs would inform decision makers on the long-term capacity for sustainable development. The trunk road network in this area experiences localised capacity problems as is acknowledged in the Deeside Park Junctions Study and the Birkenhead to North Wales Route Management Strategy. Road capacity and the impact of development would need to be considered further within the multi modal study. M56 PARK AND RIDE 4.51 There is a concentration of existing development and allocated land for the knowledge-based industries in the M56/Manchester Southern Corridor. From Manchester City Centre the corridor includes Birley Fields, Parkway, Siemens, Davenport Green, Manchester Airport, South Warrington and Daresbury Park. 4.52 We consider that the feasibility of a strategic park and ride network based around the key sites both as employment locations and interchange points should be studied. Car parks linked by regular, high quality public transport could provide an alternative to car trips along the M56 for commuters to employment sites within the corridor. A number of local authorities and the Highways Agency are keen to consider park and ride and a network based on employment sites may well provide an immediate market from which to launch a wider network. 4.53 The success of a park and ride initiative is likely to be predicated on three key issues: The availability of high quality car parks within existing development areas at regular intervals along the corridor; The willingness of the Highways Agency to promote traffic management measures such as high occupancy lanes on the motorway; The provision of high quality vehicles, providing on board business facilities such as internet connection. The feasibility study would need to look at the business economics of such a scheme as well as assessing the broader costs and benefits and the impacts on travel patterns. The study could either be free standing or could form part of a more comprehensive multi-modal corridor study

Mersey Belt Study

as recommended in the draft RPG. Successful development of park and ride on the M56 corridor could provide a model for future schemes along the M62. It must also be recognised that the majority of the M56 corridor lies within the North Cheshire Green Belt and thus environmental implications will also need to be carefully considered. However PPG13 recognises that there may be cases where a Green Belt location is the most sustainable of the available options for a Park and Ride scheme.

Other Transport Recommendations MANCHESTER AIRPORT 4.54 We have identified Manchester Airport as a key attractor to the Target Sectors for the Southern Crescent and whole Mersey Belt Study Area and we anticipate that it will continue to be so. The attraction relates to accessibility for customers, staff travel and high value freight, all of which may be relevant to knowledge-based businesses, and perhaps most importantly, to the prestige of an airport location. The Airport company is concerned about motorway congestion associated with adjacent development and has successfully promoted sustainable transport alternatives. As a consequence the Airport area is developing into the third most accessible location in the Mersey Belt Study Area with Metrolink and heavy rail links as well as direct motorway access. We do not believe the opportunities to attract new Target Sector investment in such a sustainable location for ground based public transport should be ignored. Adding to road congestion is a concern and it may be necessary to invest further in the capacity of the M56 as part of a multi modal access strategy. Any such investment would require the support of the Highways Agency and would depend upon a detailed appraisal of transport and environmental impacts. 4.55 Whilst the Airport company is naturally concerned about displacement of vital airport related activities, many of these are not knowledge-based and do not need prestigious sites. Research has shown that they can be successfully located within 20 minutes reliable journey time of the Airport perhaps at new Airport Supplier Villages. Our proposals for Greater East Manchester could be attractive for Airport related employment. 4.56 The presence of airport related employment and possibly remote check-in facilities in Greater East Manchester (with a quality rail link) could potentially release land at the Airport for Target Sector businesses who either depend on the Airport for travel or who crucially value the Airport as a prestige location. Through integrated transport both the Airport itself and one or two satellite check-ins (east and west) could become carefully controlled Transport Development Areas (PPG13). RIVER MERSEY/SHIP CANAL CROSSINGS 4.57 We have mentioned the severance effects of the River Mersey and Manchester Ship Canal crossings in Warrington and have referred to the transport benefit of a Second Mersey Crossing to the Speke Garston area. The barrier effect of these waterways is clearly a major restriction to the natural spread of knowledge-based employment from the Southern Crescent to the Metropolitan Axis.

Mersey Belt Study

4.58 We are aware of current suggestions for a new road crossing to the west of the M60 at Barton as well as the long term plans for a Second Mersey Crossing at, or, near Runcorn that would create a major new gateway between the Southern Crescent and the Metropolitan Axis. There are also existing proposals for improving the Warrington crossings. We consider that the impact of crossing capacity on development is crucial to the success of the Region and, in particular, the Metropolitan Axis. We therefore strongly recommend that this issue is given considerable weight in any wider area Mersey Belt/Southern Crescent multi-modal transport study that may arise from the recommendation of paragraph 10.38 of draft RPG. SUPPORTING SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT MEASURES 4.59 Our transport recommendations to support Target Sector development have focused on limited packages of schemes and further studies at a scale that we believe will be most effective in achieving successful sustainable development and which is capable of being delivered in the short to medium term. 4.60 In addition we offer our broad support to the sustainable transport policies that are set out in the regional and local plans and to those transport schemes which we have not prioritised but which will help to support sustainable development. 4.61 Finally we suggest that the sustainability of Target Sector development will depend not only on major schemes but also on development control policies and the willingness of developers and employers to adopt sustainable transport measures. The development of new rail stations at sites such as Daresbury Park requires major investment, but smaller scale investment that, for example, integrates development into bus networks with high quality stops and shelters can also be effective. Employersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Travel Plans should also be a key part of the development process and we cover these in more detail in Section 6 of the Report.

Mersey Belt Study

5. Lessons from Elsewhere 5.1

Before developing specific policy recommendations for the North West it is worthwhile reviewing the approach adopted in other regions of the UK towards the development of knowledge-based industries. Whilst acknowledging that every region faces a different set of circumstances it is instructive to consider how planning and economic development policies have responded to the differential pressures for growth which all regions appear to face. Additionally it is important to be aware of the approach that other competing regions are taking to the Target Sectors.

5.2

Our initial investigations focused upon two regions which are generally recognised to be at the leading edge of high-tech/knowledge-based growth – namely the East of England (Cambridge) and the South East (Thames Valley). Both regions face a very different set of circumstances to the North West – with development occurring against the background of low unemployment/skilled labour shortages, rising house prices/affordable housing shortage, and significant problems of traffic congestion.

5.3

Despite these pressures, knowledge-based industries continue to set up in these areas – drawn by the benefits of ‘clustering’ – in particular access to R&D capacity associated with Universities and Research Establishments, the availability of a highly skilled labour force, proximity to international travel connections (South East Airports) and a perceived ‘quality of life’ package.

5.4

Despite the existence of planning policy constraints, including Green Belt around Cambridge, there is strong evidence of continuing land release for major high-tech/knowledge-based development. In other words there is little evidence that the planning system is able, or indeed willing, to turn off the supply of land (including greenfield land) for new high tech/knowledgebased companies in more buoyant regions which are in competition with the North West e.g. East Anglia, even where there are signs of the local economy over heating.

5.5

In these circumstances the planning and economic development response has sought to redirect growth to other parts of the region. For example: In the East of England EEDA is promoting the concept of an A14 High Technology Corridor between Cambridge and Ipswich, seeking to build around existing activities such as BT’s research facility at Martlesham Heath in Suffolk. At the same time attention is being focused on ways of managing the problems of growth in and around Cambridge – with a multi-modal study being undertaken of the A14/M11 corridor, and a review of Green Belt policy looking at the scope for allowing some outward expansion of the city. In the South East, SEEDA have developed and are promoting the concept of Enterprise Hubs. This envisages the establishment of a network of innovation/incubator units and support facilities aimed at stimulating new business enterprises across the region. Here the emphasis is upon encouraging the growth of new/small businesses – often linked (but not exclusively) to universities. For example the RDA is supporting a second phase Innovation Centre (approx 3,000 m2) on the campus of the University of Sussex, and a similar proposal is being pursued in North East Kent linked to the University of Canterbury.

5.6

This focus on start up business reflects the fact that the market will deliver the ‘down-the-line’ premises necessary to sustain the growth of the high-tech/knowledge-based sector through developments such as the Oxford Science Park and Milton Park, Didcot – which lies close to the

Mersey Belt Study

site of the Wellcome Trust’s Cyclotron Research facilities which was given preference over Daresbury. In the North West however arguably in addition to concentrating on incubator projects NWDA must also be concerned about market support with follow on sites. 5.7

The regions outside the South and East pose a different balance between economic opportunity and growth and need. However virtually all regions face significant issues of differential growth for example: The South West enjoys high rates of growth in high-tech/knowledge-based industry in the Bristol/Cheltenham/Swindon triangle, but major problems of economic disadvantage in the peripheral areas (Cornwall); The West Midlands experiences substantial pressures for growth to the South and East of the Birmingham conurbation, but continuing problems of inner city decline and structural adjustment in the traditional manufacturing heartlands of the West Midlands (Black Country, North Staffordshire); The Yorkshire and Humber Region experiences substantial pressures of growth focused on Greater Leeds, West Yorkshire and Greater York whilst other areas, both urban and rural, continue to suffer decline – recognised most clearly by the Objective One Status of South Yorkshire.

5.8

The West Midlands response to the problems of differential growth has been to identify a combination of clusters and high technology corridors, which are being actively investigated and promoted following the work of the Rover Task Force. For example a corridor is being promoted between the Wolverhampton Science Park and the new town of Telford. This does not mean, however, that Advantage West Midlands (AWM) is not continuing to invest in projects such as Ansty Park to the north of Coventry as the focus for high technology business – the equivalent to our Southern Crescent area.

5.9

This overview of policy points to the following conclusions which need to be borne in mind in developing recommendations for the North West: All competing regions, including the most successful ones, continue to provide for the continuing development of high-tech/knowledge-based industries. Notwithstanding the very different policy environments which apply, planning in competing regions seems neither able nor willing to risk loosing the economic growth which it is anticipated that the new economy will deliver by confining it to unattractive areas of need. The North West must therefore recognise that it operates in a highly competitive marketplace for new investment; Outside the South East/East of England, RDAs such as AWM are investing in both natural growth locations and areas of need as a twin track approach (and this is what we should be doing in the North West); All regions have/are developing policies to tackle sub-regional imbalance. These take a variety of forms, covering ‘clusters’, ‘corridors’ and ‘networks’. What this means in practice is a combination of site/infrastructure provision, premises/service development and importantly policy and marketing initiatives.

5.10 Commonly found elements of best practice which could be used in the Mersey Belt Study Area to attract the Target Sectors include: Developing strong links (physical and people) to universities and research institutes – this should be a key ingredient for less immediately attractive sites in the Metropolitan Axis

Mersey Belt Study

given the strength of the area in terms of its Universities and research based institutions e.g. Daresbury Laboratory in the Southern Crescent. Provision of common infrastructure and a supportive environment – particularly for small, start-up/spin off enterprises to support fragile sectors. Broadband width telecommunications infrastructure – looking to the future, at least for the next 3 to 5 years the availability of broadband infrastructure is likely to be a significant locational determinant and one may see new development forms emerging linked to mixed use environments in urban locations. In this regard the potential for linking physical and economic regeneration needs to be fully exploited. Large mixed-use developments – creation of the next generation of business parks including housing and links to Universities. Theme and sectoral clustering – the creation of themed enterprise hubs/incubation space around a local cluster. This approach has been taken in support of creative media sector in Brighton and Biotech in Oxford. Being considered in Liverpool City Centre and Speke Garston. Environmental regeneration – moving away from business park developments of the 80s and 90s to city/town centre mixed use development in attractive locations e.g. Temple Quay in Bristol.

Mersey Belt Study

6. Policy Recommendations for the Mersey Belt Area 6.1

This Section seeks to identify a range of policy recommendations to be considered by regional partners in preparing development plans and other strategies in respect of the Mersey Belt. It draws upon the findings of the Study and on best practice elsewhere. The recommendations provide the framework in terms of land use planning to support the twin objectives of continued success of the Southern Crescent and the deflection of more economic development in the Target Sectors into the Metropolitan Axis. These policy recommendations are compatible with the key sites identified within Section 3, but extend wider than the investment strategy for individual sites.

6.2

The guiding principles set out at the start of Section 3 apply equally to this section.

Employment Land Policy 6.3

Planning policies should continue to support the Southern Crescent as a key driver of the Regional Target Sectors in the Mersey Belt. However, policies should seek to ensure that future development is undertaken in a more sustainable way and where appropriate that economic prosperity is encouraged to spread north to the Metropolitan Axis.

6.4

Development plans and other regional strategies and policies should assist the development of the six Regional Target Sectors (knowledge-based industries) in the Mersey Belt as follows: IN THE SOUTHERN CRESCENT (AREAS SOUTH OF THE RIVER MERSEY) Recognise the importance of existing employment allocations to knowledge-based industry and possibly re-draft these allocations for this express purpose. This means being more precise than a ‘B1’ use allocation either referring to the six regional target sectors by name (they can cross B1 and B2) or by using the ‘high-tech’ designation already used by Manchester and Stockport UDPs, or a defined ‘knowledge-based employment’ designation. Promote a small number of sites for the Target Sectors specifically: one or more sites close to stations on the Chester to Liverpool railway including Capenhurst and Hooton local authorities and their partners in the North Wales/West Cheshire sub-region should undertake a co-ordinated appraisal of cross-border economic needs and opportunities. This could explore a range of options for future land supply and would accord with the approach beginning to emerge out of the RPG process Reserve a small number of sites confined to investments that would otherwise be lost to the region (or defined sub-region) including: Davenport Green in Trafford (already in force) there is potential to reserve one of the sites currently owned by EP in Warrington for the use by a small number of Target Sectors projects which would otherwise be lost to the region (see Section 3 for detailed explanation)

Mersey Belt Study

These should be enforced preferably through a public sector stake in land ownership, otherwise a combination of a S106 agreement, planning conditions and the development plan policy. Promote transport schemes that will improve the accessibility/sustainability of sites earmarked for the Target Sectors including: reservations for strategic rail and light rail links and new stations/halts company/site Travel Plans new or improved junctions on the eastern M60 to service Greater East Manchester Consider the removal of wider employment allocations, especially B8 (warehousing) on sites which have good public transport accessibility. Recognise that ‘landless’ employment growth is a real feature of the knowledge-based sectors and popular towns and villages can increase their employment even without the need for planning consent – recognise the need for transport, services and housing to support such growth, especially around town centres. IN THE METROPOLITAN AXIS (AREAS NORTH OF THE RIVER MERSEY) Recognise that only a relatively small number of key sites (as defined in this study) should be reserved for/promoted for the Target Sectors, in order to concentrate resources. For the best sites, define this usage in a similar way to the Southern Crescent sites (this might be the whole of small sites under 5ha or part of larger sites). Concentrate these sites on regional Strategic Corridors identified in this study. Recognise that strategic corridors physically linked to the Southern Crescent or existing knowledgebased industry locations will be easier to establish than satellites which ‘jump’ into new areas. Ensure that each site for knowledge-based industry has a Local Employment Strategy linking its employment potential to regeneration areas (areas of need) – in terms of both public transport, education, training and job access. For sites other than sites recognised in this study, permit, but do not promote, target sector development on those sites defined as of medium suitability to knowledge-based industry. Whilst recognising that employment land is required for many other industrial uses other than the Target Sectors, also recognise that there appears to be excess amounts of allocated employment land and that some of it might be converted to residential use to support the need for quality homes for knowledge-based workers, thus cutting down journeys to work and leading to a more sustainable development pattern. Promote transport schemes that will improve the sustainability of these sites including: reservations for strategic rail and light rail links and new stations/halts company/site Travel Plans

Mersey Belt Study

R&D in Macclesfield 6.5

This study recommends that all local authorities and other agencies should support the Target Sectors in all the ways they can. Particular attention is drawn in this Section to Macclesfield district because it is such an important life sciences cluster in an environmentally sensitive area including Green Belt designation.

6.6

Astra Zeneca is the nucleus of this cluster employing some 6,500 people on two main sites, one of which, Alderley Park is a major developed site ‘washed over’ by the Green Belt with an approved Development Brief. The other at Hurdsfield is within an employment area in the Macclesfield Local Plan with little scope for lateral expansion.

6.7

In national/international terms, the life sciences cluster centred on Astra Zeneca at Alderley Park can be regarded as fragile and we recommend that expansion must be encouraged by: Fostering links along the north south axis (A34/M56) into South Manchester – with the Manchester University Biotech Incubator and other potential employment sites; Improving public transport between cluster sites (including Alderley Park) and between Macclesfield and Manchester and Manchester Airport (as a public transport interchange as well as airport) together with strategic road links (e.g. Alderley Edge Bypass); Dealing with road traffic congestion hot spots such as Alderley Edge Village centre on the A34 (for example by building the bypass); Allowing further careful redevelopment and expansion within the curtilage of the Alderley Park site or, if this is not possible or adequate, assisting with the provision of suitable additional land elsewhere in the district. In exceptional circumstances we consider that expansion at Astra Zeneca’s Alderley Park facility which involves Green Belt release should be supported.

A STRATEGY FOR THE ‘GAP AREAS’ 6.8

Both the core areas of Merseyside and Greater Manchester have been identified as having a sufficient supply of sites which are potentially highly suitable to the target sectors, albeit that in many cases investment is required to realise this potential. However, between the two cities there is a “gap” in which very few suitable sites have been identified by the local authorities in terms of employment sites and housing sites to meet the specific requirements of the target sectors. Our research indicates that, with the exception of environmental technologies, the area has weak representation in the Target Sectors and restricted access to a pool of high-level skills.

6.9

The options for public investment are: (a)

not to make a major commitment given the difficulties and risks involved in developing Target Sector growth in the area;

(b)

to spread available resources across a large number of competing (smaller) locations;

(c)

to concentrate resources on a small number of locations with the best opportunities for success;

(d)

to improve transport links (especially public transport) to increase accessibility to jobs on the fringe of the area and to assist in commuting. Mersey Belt Study

6.10 Our recommendation is to pursue a mixture of options (c ) and (d). In the southern parts of the area improved public transport networks would give access to target sector job development, particularly at sites in Warrington and Runcorn (including Omega). This issue is discussed in our proposals for transport. 6.11 In parallel we recommend that the NWDA capitalises on specific emerging opportunities in south central Wigan, which is included within the Coalfields Communities area. A substantial programme of public investment, including ERDF monies for an Economic Development Zone and NWDA's own funds in support of an expanded Single Regeneration Budget initiative, will help to promote, develop and re-image the area. This would build on its existing good quality public transport access by bus and local rail, programmed local infrastructure improvements such as the Leigh Guided Busway and its excellent national inter city rail connections on the West Coast Main Line. The principal opportunities are likely to include: Site preparation and development at Westwood Park, including strategic access; Major environmental work focussed on the potential Regional Park at Wigan; The identification of sites suitable for quality housing, particularly within Wigan; Major investment in leisure, tourism and sport to help re-image south central Wigan as a whole. 6.12 In addition we are aware that the NWDA already has some commitment to the site at Lea Green, St Helens. This location has some potential for the Target Sectors, and should proceed in parallel with the nearby Omega proposals. 6.13 North of the River Mersey, the key site with the most promising environmental setting is at Middlebrook, Bolton. We have identified this as a Category B key site and it is discussed in paragraph 3.58 above.

Providing Quality Housing Sites METROPOLITAN AXIS 6.14 To encourage the Target Sectors to invest in the Metropolitan Axis it is essential that there is a good supply of quality housing sites, attractive to the higher paid knowledge-based industry workers. Key characteristics of good sites should be: Capable of supporting houses with values over ÂŁ100,000 Located within an attractive quality environment large enough to have critical mass Accessible to a range of services and facilities including good schools, shopping, leisure and culture facilities Accessible by both private and public transport Within average national journey to work time (20 minutes) of at least one key site being promoted for the Target Sectors.

Mersey Belt Study

6.15 Within the Metropolitan Axis it should be a priority to encourage opportunities for the development of quality housing in the area to enhance the area’s skill base and to attract workers from the Target Sectors. 6.16 Given that a number of employment sites in the Mersey Belt Study Area remain undeveloped despite being available, it is recommended, particularly within the Metropolitan Axis, that in preparing their development plans local authorities should consider identifying additional sites suitable for quality housing (i.e. in the £100,000+ value bracket). This will raise an important housing issue for the draft RPG. SOUTHERN CRESCENT 6.17 In the Southern Crescent, the housing land supply is tighter than in the Metropolitan Axis and represents about five years supply overall. Due to a lack of space, draft RPG gives some districts (e.g. Stockport) a lower supply than required by their past indigenous growth rates. 6.18 It is important that a steady supply of quality housing is achieved in the Southern Crescent as a whole to match the natural capacity of existing and proposed Target Sector employment locations. Switching off this supply would not only be non sustainable in commuting terms but it would detract from the area’s pulling power for nationally mobile investment. However, as the area grows in population, it is important ‘not to kill the goose that lay the golden egg’ in terms of overcrowding the north Cheshire countryside (see later – re: design policy).

Innovative Sustainable Transport Initiatives 6.19 Specific transport priorities are considered in detail in Section 4, in addition local authorities should promote innovative policies to reduce the need to use private cars and to encourage more sustainable patterns of movement. 6.20 In determining planning applications and negotiating planning agreements local authorities should seek to encourage new occupiers, (particularly in the Southern Crescent where demand is stronger), to identify innovative policies to encourage sustainable travel to work patterns including Green Travel Plans. 6.21 Travel Plans are effective tools in reducing single occupancy car trips. Policy should embrace the development of innovative travel plans but just as importantly it should provide the mechanism to regularly review and refine the Plans. 6.22 Facilities for all travel modes should, through policy, be provided in developments. Cyclists often benefit most from this through the provision of secure parking, showers and lockers. 6.23 Innovative parking strategies often linked to Travel Plans are effective ways of managing travel. In the same way spaces are allocated for disabled drivers, convenient spaces can be allocated for car shares and overall parking provision modified accordingly. Parking strategies could also allocate spaces for use as park and ride spaces. 6.24 In particular, development site infrastructure should include IT links and networks to permit and encourage the development of travel information systems at employee workstations and in employee homes. The aim would be to allow employees to see, at a glance, traffic conditions on roads and service conditions on public transport so as to be able to plan journeys to and from

Mersey Belt Study

work to avoid congestion by changing travel mode or journey time. The attraction to employees and employers would be the saving of time and consequent efficiency gains, while the region would benefit from the travel related emission reductions that would arise from avoiding congestion. 6.25 Data collection technology and delivery systems are developing in the North West. Warrington have obtained funding for an Urban Traffic Management and Control (UTMC) system, Merseytravel has promoted service information systems at bus stops, the Manchester Metrolink has tram countdown information on platforms and Bolton are pioneering bus lane cameras. Work needs to be done to draw these strands together to provide an integrated information package, but knowledge-based employers, particularly the larger ones, would have the skills, IT networks and workplace flexibility to contribute to the process.

Quality and Design of Development 6.26 We recommend that local authorities should prepare development briefs or masterplans for the identified priority employment sites which they bring forward to meet the requirements of the Target Sectors. These plans should seek to: encourage high quality landscaping – where appropriate integrated into existing quality environments or, where the latter are absent, setting new high standards encourage innovative design in new development including in appropriate locations, the creation of landmark buildings encourage the use of new technologies to maximise energy efficiency. 6.27 On priority sites, and other sites that come through the local development plan process as sites suitable for the Target Sectors, local authorities should seek to ensure that any development undertaken is of the highest design quality in terms of both the building and its setting. Specifically, allocated sites should require masterplans to be prepared to ensure that the proposed developments are of a design quality that will continue to allow the areas to remain attractive both in the more rural Southern Crescent and more urban Metropolitan Axis. It is recommended that for important sites generally and particularly those identified as priorities for the Target Sectors that the preparation of a masterplan specifying the need for quality development should be a requirement of NWDA’s support. 6.28 It is particularly important that quality design is achieved on employment and housing development in the Southern Crescent so as not to ‘kill the goose that lays the golden egg’. The relatively high land values here should help achieve this ‘design levy’. 6.29 Some scope exists in the longer term for sites to become more attractive to potential investors through the creation of Regional Parks. For example the current proposals to develop a Regional Park along the Mersey Estuary holds the potential to create a much higher quality setting in the vicinity of Wirral International Business Park. In the longer term this could raise the profile of this site to attract the knowledge-based industries. Other proposals to create Regional Parks could enhance development potential in the Weaver Valley around Northwich and also in the vicinity of Wigan/Salford.

Mersey Belt Study

6.30 An intended output of the Study is to identify recommendations which will make the Mersey Belt more sustainable, especially in terms of the Urban White Paper, 2000. Developing high densities around existing transport hubs and encouraging high-density development to make public transport more viable are therefore recommended. However, it must be accepted that away from city and town centres, densities may need to be as low in the Metropolitan Axis as in the Southern Crescent to compensate for the fact that generally the Metropolitan Axis is not considered to offer the same choice of housing to highly paid knowledge-based workers. 6.31 In specifying density standards Local Authorities should take account of the specific location of the site. These standards should take account of the following: Around public transport hubs/interchanges, development densities should be high (especially in any Transport Development Areas) In Cities and Towns development densities should be high In creating attractive sites for investment in the Metropolitan Axis away from urban areas development densities may need to be lower (for both employment and housing) combined with high quality landscaping to recreate aspects of the Southern Crescent product In particularly environmentally sensitive locations in the Southern Crescent even lower densities may need to be permitted to minimise the impact of development and set it within high quality landscaped surroundings.

Revised Use Classes Order 6.32 In the context of the Government’s forthcoming overhaul of the whole planning system, Local Authorities and regional organisations should lobby the Government to review the Use Classes Order in order to allow sites to be more easily allocated (reserved) for use by the Target Sectors/knowledge-based industries. 6.33 The existing Use Classes Order is not sufficiently flexible to allow planning permission to be granted to restrict development of sites to only the Target Sectors. This has been clearly seen in respect of Davenport Green where a strictly worded Section 106 Agreement is now in place to try to reserve the site for the ‘high-tech users’ which would ‘otherwise be lost to Greater Manchester’. Only time will tell whether this Agreement will achieve its objectives. 6.34 We realise that a planning definition of the Target Sectors will be difficult to achieve and if this is not possible (and for the meantime in any case) greater use of the Davenport Green conditions should help enforce our employment land policy recommendations.

Mersey Belt Study

Manchester Airport 6.35 Manchester Airport is itself a very important attractor to the knowledge-based industries in the North West. 6.36 Previous research has pointed towards three main types of business that prefer to be at or close to a major airport. These are: Airport related businesses (with a minimum of 50% of turnover related to the airport). High intensity users of international air travel. Prestigious business park occupiers attracted by the airport address. 6.37 The second of these categories is a very small group in terms of space and land take. Moreover, the great majority of regional businesses including those in Target Sectors have been shown to only be concerned about being within about 45 minutes of the airport, which opens up much of the Southern Crescent and more accessible parts of the Metropolitan Axis. This leaves the scarce land at or near the airport subject to competition between airport related uses (often not knowledge-based) and prestigious business park businesses. 6.38 There is an argument that whereas the airport related businesses could operate anywhere within 20 minutes drive time, the attraction to some prestigious businesses falls off much more quickly. The airport company is naturally concerned that airport related businesses and essential operations only are sited at or very near the airport. However, it acknowledges that the future locational solution to airport related businesses may lie in new ‘Airport Supplier Villages’ located within 20 minutes drive time. Such a policy might possibly leave remaining land near the airport available for some prestigious, knowledge-based, inward investors in a similar fashion to Manchester Business Park on Ringway Road. 6.39 Draft RPG acknowledges the role of Manchester Airport as a passenger transport interchange and this role could be expanded considerably separately from air travel, assisting journeys to work between Manchester and the Southern Crescent in particular. Whether the airport could become a Transport Development Area and a location for high-density office development around the interchange is doubtful because of the lack of land and the need to give priority to airside development and the hemming in by the present Green Belt. The development of land in and around the airport should be considered in the context of the draft RPG, the draft Greater Manchester Planning Framework, the Airport’s own Strategy and proposals and the review of UDPs. 6.40 Certainly, we recommend that any land capable of receiving planning permission for employment use that does become available within 5 minutes drive time of the airport should be reserved for the Target Sectors or ‘high-tech’ users in a similar fashion to Davenport Green which is the nearest major development site and as is already happening at Manchester Business Park. However priority within the Airport Operation Area must be given to airside land requirements if the airport is to realise its objective of 40 million passengers per annum by 2020. Regarding non-knowledge-based airport supplier businesses, the provision of Airport Supplier Villages within a 20 minute drive time in Greater East Manchester should be seriously investigated and if necessary controlled through ownership.

Mersey Belt Study

ICT Infrastructure 6.41 Broad bandwidth telecoms connections are becoming increasingly vital to knowledge-based businesses for data communications (as well as their call centre counter parts) and especially fibre optic connections. British Telecom has no universal service obligation for data as it does with voice communications. 6.42 Fibre optics connections can be very costly at ÂŁ100,000 a kilometre, especially when more than one supplier is required to ensure competition. Whereas major Target Sector users may be able to afford to pay for fibre optics to come to them, smaller firms will need to locate in developments with critical mass sufficient to be economic for two or more ICT suppliers to service. Based on our existing knowledge it appears that Manchester and Liverpool City Centres have the greatest connectivity in this respect although more detailed analysis may find others. 6.43 We recommend that when investing in a new development site for the Target Sectors, its fibre optic connectivity is borne in mind and that developments are large enough to make broad bandwidth ICTs economic to supply. We also recommend that it would be worthwhile undertaking an exercise to map ICT infrastructure across the Mersey Belt area. It is understood that in response to this recommendation the NWDA are commissioning this work.

Mersey Belt Study

Appendix A Mersey Belt Area Ward Boundaries

Mersey Belt Study

Mersey Belt Southern Crescent Ward Defined Boundary Core Area1: Includes the following wards: LA District

Wards

Manchester

Baguley Benchill Brooklands Didsbury Northenden Sharston Woodhouse Park

Stockport

Bredbury Brinnington Cale Green Cheadle Cheadle Hulme North Cheadle Hulme South Davenport East Bramhall Edgeley Great Moor Hazel Grove Heald Green Manor West Bramhall

Trafford

Altrincham Bowden Broad Heath Brooklands Hale Mersey St Mary’s Priory Sale Moor St Martin’s Timperley Village

1 Area as defined by NWDA in brief.

Mersey Belt Study

LA District

Wards

Macclesfield

Alderley Edge Bollington Central Bollington East Bollington West Dean Row Disley Fulshaw Handforth High Legh Hough Knutsford Nether Knutsford Over Knutsford South Knutsford West Lacey Green Macclesfield Central Macclesfield East Macclesfield North East Macclesfield North West Macclesfield South Macclesfield West Mere Mobberley Morley and Styal Nether Alderley Plumley Poynton Central Poynton East Poynton West Prestbury

Warrington (all wards south of the River Mersey)

Appleton & Stretton Booths Hill Grappenhall & Thelwall Heatley Latchford Lymm Statham Stockton Heath & Walton Westy

Mersey Belt Study

LA District

Wards

Vale Royal

Old Wards Frodsham East Frodsham South Frodsham North West Helsby South & Alvanley Helsby Central Helsby North Seven Oaks Weaver

Chester

Blacon Hall Boughton Boughton Heath Christleton College Curzon Dee Point Dodleston Elton Grosvenor Hoole Mollington Newton Plas Newton Saughall Sealand Upton Grange Upton Heath Vicars Cross Westminster

Halton (Runcorn)

Beechwood Brookvale Castlefields Daresbury Grange Halton Brook Heath Mersey Murdishaw Norton Palace Fields

New Wards Frodsham North Frodsham South Helsby Milton Weaver Seven Oaks & Marston

Mersey Belt Study

LA District

Wards

Ellesmere Port & Neston

Central Grange Groves Ledsham Pooltown Rivacre Rossmore Stanlow Sutton Westminster Whitby Wolverham

Possible Fringe Area : Southern Crescent Core Plus LA District

Wards

Vale Royal

Barnton Cogshall Cuddington & Oakmere Davenham & Moulton Hartford & Whitegate Leftwich & Kingsmead Lostock & Wincham Northwich & Castle Northwich Winnington Northwich Witton Rudheath & South Witton Shakerley Weaverham Winsford Dene Winsford Gravel Winsford Over Winsford Swanlow Winsford Verdin Winsford Wharton

Mersey Belt Study

Metropolitan Axis Ward Defined Boundary

LA District

Wards

Bolton

All wards

Bury

All wards

Halton (Widnes)

Appleton Birchfield Broadheath Brookvale Ditton Farnworth Hale Halton Hough Green Kingsway Riverside

Knowsley

All wards

Liverpool

All wards

Manchester

Ardwick Barlow Moor Beswick & Clayton Blackley Bradford Burnage Central Charlestown Cheetham Chorlton Crumpsall Fallowfield Gorton North Gorton South Harpurhey Hulme Levenshulme Lightbowne Longsight Moss Side Newton Heath Old Moat Rusholme Whalley Range Withington

Oldham

All wards Mersey Belt Study

LA District

Wards

Rochdale

All wards

Salford

All wards

Sefton

All wards

St Helens

All wards

Stockport

Heaton Mersey Heaton Moor North Marple North Reddish Romiley South Marple South Reddish

Tameside

All wards

Trafford

Bucklow Clifford Davyhulme East Davyhulme West Flixton Longford Park Priory Stretford Talbot Urmston

Warrington (all wards north of River Mersey)

Bewsey Burtonwood Croft Culcheth & Glazebury Fairfield Great Sankey North Great Sankey South Howley Hulme Longford Orford Penketh & Cuerdley Poulton-with-Fearnhead North Poulton-with-Fearnhead South Rixton & Woolston Whitecross Winwick

Wigan

All wards

Wirral

All wards

Mersey Belt Study

Appendix B Employment and Housing Land Supply Analysis Methodology

Mersey Belt Study

Employment Land Method Statement Employment Land Supply Data was collated from the following sources: Employment land monitor supplied by each local authority Employment land data supplied by each authority and collected in a common format (see Tables at the end of this Appendix). The format for collecting data in the Metropolitan Axis was slightly different to that in the Southern Crescent. Authorities were asked to supply details of: Completions over the past 5 years Allocations Potential supply to 2021 Sites of less than 0.5ha were excluded from the study. The employment land supply data was supplemented by information about investor enquiries, which each local authority was asked to supply. A questionnaire was circulated to all local authorities.

Analysis SUITABILITY TESTS Macro Level: Investors normally base their initial decision to invest upon macro locational factors i.e. the attractiveness/suitability of the area or district as a whole. Once they are satisfied that these criteria can be met they will then begin to look at individual sites. This convention is rarely challenged, and is only likely to be where an investorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site needs are very specific or where an individual site has unique attributes. As a consequence each district was scored in terms of each of the key macro-locational drivers and awarded a score of low, medium or high (see Table B1).

Mersey Belt Study

82 ●●

●●●●

●●●

●

●●●

●●

●

●●●●

Mersey Belt Study

●●●●●

●●●●

●

●●●●●

●●●●

Medical Equipment Technology

High Value

Back Office

Creative Industries

Media/Advertising/ PR

●●●●

●●●●●

●●●

●

●●●●

●●●

●●

●●●

Cluster Effect

●●●●

●●

●

●●●●

●●

●

●●

Access to Markets

●●●

●

●●

●

Image

Comments

Require highly skilled labour-force. Tend to cluster in profile locations with good access to customers.

Dominated by small firms that tend to cluster for several reasons – sharing support services, image of a particular area, access to suppliers etc. Proximity to HEIs increases potential for spin-outs and knowledge sharing. Diverse sector requiring specialist skills.

Firms require a highly skilled labour force and this tends to over-ride all other factors.

Locational decisions affecting low order functions tend to be governed by availability of sites and premises rather than macro level factors.

High order functions require high level, but fairly generalist skills. They prefer to be located close to similar institutions with opportunities for face-to-face contact with clients, often in urban locations.

Firms require highly specialist labour. They also benefit from closeness to suppliers and users of medical equipment.

Firms require highly skilled labour. They are also research intensive and therefore benefit from being located in close proximity to other research establishments.

Firms tend to be very specialised requiring highly specialist labour. It is this need that over-rides all other factors at the macro level.

Notes to Drivers: 1. Skills Availability: Influenced by economic characteristics of an area, proximity to companies involved in similar activities and proximity to HEIs. 2. Proximity to HEI and R&D: Specific need to be close (within 30 minutes travel time) to centres of research excellence, including other companies or organisations engaged in similar activities and educational institutions – potential for knowledge sharing and spin outs. 3. Cluster Effect: Reference to proximity of supplies and opportunities for networking and knowledge/information sharing. 4. Access to Markets: Need to be in physical proximity to market and need for face-to-face contact with customers. 5. Image: perception of an area as a prestigious location for a particular industry.

Macro level refers to the factors that influence a company’s decision to locate in a particular region or area

Computer Software & Services/Internet based services

Life Science Industries

Environmental Technologies

Proximity to HEI/R&D Facilities

Skills Availability

Financial & Professional Services

MACRO LEVEL LOCATIONAL DRIVERS

Table B1

Table B1 MACRO LEVEL LOCATIONAL DRIVERS

SUITABILITY TESTS – MACRO LEVEL SCORING CRITERIA Driver

Criteria

Score HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

Skill Availability

Proportion of graduate level skills in LA & adjoining LAs.

More than 25% of resident population in a district, plus access to other ‘High’ rated districts.

20-25% of resident population in a district, plus access to other ‘high’ or ‘medium’ rated districts.

Less than 20% of resident population in a district.

Cluster Effect

Scale of growth sector employment in LA & adjoining LAs.

Less than 10% of employment in growth sectors.

10-12% employment in growth sectors.

More than 12% employment in growth sectors.

Access to markets

Mainly a factor for creative, media, specialised businesses & financial services.

City centre location.

Town centre or other well connected urban location.

Edge of urban area or rural location.

Proximity to HEIs & R&Ds

Based on proximity to main research universities.

HEI within district.

HEI within adjacent and accessible district.

No easily accessible HEI.

Image

Qualitative assessment of external opinion and use of Land Registry house price information.

Prestigious business location. Average house prices are More than 30% above NW average.

Growing business location. Average house prices generally above NW average.

No profile as a business location and average house prices generally at or below NW average.

Our assessment was carried out at a District level as skills data is only available at this level. However qualitative information gleaned from our discussions with local authorities and supplemented by our own local knowledge has enabled us to break the assessment down into constituent parts of districts where appropriate. This is particularly important in locations such as Manchester, where the data is skewed by areas of deprivation within the urban core, and Halton, which is comprised of two distinct areas – Runcorn and Widnes. Micro Level: Each employment site (allocated and potential) was assessed in terms of suitability to the target sectors (see Table B2). The target sectors are driven by macro (or area/district) and micro (or site) level factors. Two tests were applied at the site level: Accessibility of the site by road Image (immediate environment)

Mersey Belt Study

Mersey Belt Study ●●●

●●●●

●

●●●●●

●●●

●●●●

●●

●●●●

●●●

●●●●

●●

Life Science Industries

Medical Equipment Technology

High Value

Back Office

Computer Software & Services/Internet based services

Creative Industries

Media/Advertising/ PR

Environmental Technologies

Connectivity/ Telecoms

●●●

●●●●

●●

●●●●

●●●

Transport Accessibility

●●●●

●●●

●

●●●●

●●

●●●

●●

Immediate Environment/Image Comments

This sector prefers a high profile, often urban location. High level connectivity is of great importance. Macro and micro level factors are of similar importance.

This diverse sector is driven at the macro level by the cluster effect. This effect manifests itself at the micro level as firms tend to cluster in the ‘trendy’ quarters of towns and cities. Access to both markets and suppliers is of critical importance. Factors such as connectivity and property needs will vary dependent upon the activities of individual firms.

This sector is locationally driven equally by the availability of skills and the need for high level ICT connectivity. However in reality the former is more important than the latter, particularly for the larger companies who can fund their own ICT infrastructure.

Back office functions critically require high-level ICT connections. They sometimes have specific office requirements and public transport accessibility can be an issue for the workforce. Skills are less important than an available and reliable labour force.

This sector as a whole is driven by micro factors more than any other sector. High-level functions are locationally driven by the need for face-to-face contact with clients in profile locations. High level ICT connectivity is also essential but does not remove the need to be in close physical proximity to the customer base. As a result such functions often prefer to locate in urban areas.

Similar to life science industries in that availability of specialist skills is of over-riding importance. However medical equipment firms also have very specific property requirements, tending to prefer purpose built facilities.

Highly knowledge intensive. Macro level factors, specifically skills availability and access to R&D facilities, of most importance. However firms often have refined property needs and require high levels of ICT connectivity.

Highly specialist field. Consultants are likely to be more footloose than those working in a single industry. As a general rule macro level factors of greater importance, specifically requirement for access to a highly skilled labour force. At the micro level the most influential factors, in addition to site availability, are connectivity and transport accessibility.

Notes to Drivers: 1. Property Needs: Refers to a specific need for a particular type of building, e.g. purpose built, space requirements etc 2. Connectivity: Refers to need for access to broadband width services with the capacity to accommodate large volumes of information at high speed. 3. Transport Accessibility: Importance of accessibility by both public and private transport, and including air – facilitating access to and for customers, suppliers and workers. 4. Immediate Environment: Importance of a high quality locality whether urban or greenfield.

Micro level refers to the factors that influence an investor’s choice of site

Financial & Professional Services

Property Needs

MICRO LEVEL LOCATIONAL DRIVERS

Table B2

Table B2 MICRO LEVEL LOCATIONAL DRIVERS

These tests were selected as they are considered most critical to the site level locational decisions made by the target sectors. Each site was awarded a score of high. medium or low based on the following criteria: SUITABILITY TESTS â&#x20AC;&#x201C; MICRO LEVEL SCORING CRITERIA HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

Accessibility by Road

Adjacent to a motorway junction or other high capacity strategic road.

Adjacent to a primary route with good access to the strategic road network.

Accessed via a secondary route with poor access to the strategic road network.

Image

High quality environment (urban or rural); existing prestigious location (e.g. city centre or established business location); frontage site.

Good quality environment (urban or rural); developing prestigious location, could be mixed business use; frontage site.

Poor quality environment; bad neighbour uses; backland; no current or developing profile.

Overall Score: The overall score was calculated for each site by combining its macro and micro level scores to produce an average â&#x20AC;&#x201C; High, Medium or Low for each site. Overall Suitable Land Supply: The overall suitable land supply was calculated by totalling the areas of all sites rated medium or high in terms of suitability to the target sectors. The amount of suitable land supply has been calculated: At a ward level At a district level At a sub-area level At a Southern Crescent/Metropolitan Axis level Land not identified in the statistics: It is recognised that additional land could become available but is not currently allocated for employment use. Potential includes: In designated regeneration areas In mixed-use developments and proposed urban villages Conversions of agricultural buildings and historic buildings. Sustainability Tests Those sites which were judged to be suitable to the target sectors needs were then assessed in terms of sustainability. Two tests were applied:

Mersey Belt Study

Brownfield or greenfield: This is a straight measurement of the area of brownfield or greenfield land as supplied by each local authority. Accessibility by Public Transport: Each site was assessed in terms of its accessibility by public transport and given a score of low, medium or high, using the following criteria. Public transport accessibility was assessed now and in the future to enable proposed public transport schemes to be taken into account.

SUSTAINABILITY TESTS SCORING CRITERIA HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

Accessibility by Public Transport (Now)

Close (within 400m) to a railway station or bus interchange. Within a town centre location.

Within 800m of a railway station or adjacent to a frequent bus route.

Little or no adjacent public transport provision.

Accessibility by Public Transport (Future)

Close (within 400m) to a proposed railway station or interchange.

Within 800m of a proposed railway station or adjacent to a proposed improved bus route.

No planned or potentially feasible public transport provision.

Those sites which were judged to be medium or high now or in the future were considered to be sustainable or potentially sustainable in public transport terms. Suitable and Sustainable Land Supply The resulting figures enabled us to identify the proportion of land within each ward, district and the Mersey Belt as a whole which is: Both suitable and sustainable (public transport only) Both suitable and sustainable (public transport and brownfield)

Mersey Belt Study

Land Developed in Last 5 Years (Ha)

Land Allocated (Ha)

Unallocated but Potential to 2021 (Ha)

2. Sites smaller than 0.5 ha should be added together and inserted as on row for each ward or sub-area.

Note: 1. It would be helpful if sub-areas comprised aggregated whole wards and if you could list which wards are in which sub-area.

BOROUGH TOTAL

Ward or sub-area total

Total of all remaining sites under 0.5 ha (if known)

Site 3 etc.

Site 2 .

Site 1

Ward or sub-area name

Ward or sub-area total

Use

B1, B2, B8 etc

Total of all remaining sites under 0.5 ha (if known)

Site 3 etc.

Site 2

Site 1

Ward or sub-area name

Site

EMPLOYMENT LAND TABLE – SOUTHERN CRESCENT

Table B3 Brownfield/ Greenfield To be completed by JMP Consultants

Transport Sustainability

To be completed by SMBC or DTZ

Suitability to the RS Target sectors

Table B3 EMPLOYMENT LAND TABLE – SOUTHERN CRESCENT

Mersey Belt Study

Mersey Belt Study 3 Unallocated but Potential to 2016 (Ha)

Land Allocated and/or Committed (Ha)

2 - If data is collected at a sub-area level please list the wards which make up each sub-area.

1 - Refer to locational drivers in explanatory notes

Notes

BOROUGH TOTAL

Ward or Sub-Area Total

Site 3 etc

Site 2

Site 1

Ward or Sub Area 2 Name:

Ward or Sub-Area Total

Site 3 etc

Site 2

Site 1

Ward or Sub Area 1 Name2:

Site Name & Address

Greenfield (Ha)

(To be completed by Local Authority)

Brownfield (Ha)

METROPOLITAN AXIS: EMPLOYMENT LAND SUPPLY: (INSERT AUTHORITY NAME)

Table B4

Suitability to RES Suitability to RES Target Sectors1 Target Sectors1 (0-5 years) (5-15 years)

(To be completed by JMP)

Transport Sustainability

(Independent Assessment â&#x20AC;&#x201C; to be completed by DTZ)

Suitability to RES Target Sectors

Table B4 METROPOLITAN AXIS: EMPLOYMENT LAND SUPPLY: (INSERT AUTHORITY NAME)

Mersey Belt Study Enquiry information questionnaire How many enquiries have you received from companies requiring land or accommodation in each of the last 5 years and what business sector have the enquiries been from? Name of Company and Activity & is it in one of the 7 Target based sectors referred to in the Regional Strategy, which are: Environmental technologies (biotechnology and pharmaceuticals) Life Science Industries Medical equipment and technology Financial and professional services Tourism Computer software and services/internet based services Creative industries, media, advertising and public relations Where have these enquiries come from? Within the local authority area From within the ‘Southern Crescent’, i.e. those local authorities or parts of local authorities that lie within the ‘Southern Crescent’, namely: Stockport, Trafford, Manchester, Chester, Macclesfield, Halton, Ellesmere Port, Vale Royal and Warrington From the rest of Greater Manchester and Merseyside From within the rest of the North West Region From outside the North West Region What type of accommodation have businesses in the knowledge-based sector sought? Purpose built on a greenfield site Purpose built on a brownfield site Existing building in a greenfield location Existing building on a brownfield site What are the other factors that companies within the knowledge-based sector cited as being important in their choice of site/property? Please list in order of importance for each company you know about. If you do not know this please use your general experience to give an overall list in order of importance e.g. Motorway access Airport access Access to skilled labour Image Access to Higher education institutions Proximity to other similar businesses Other

Mersey Belt Study

How many of the initial enquiries have resulted in development/investment taking place and in which businesses: (jobs and square metres of space constructed or occupied would be helpful). What proportion of businesses who have invested in new premises or developed have come from: Within the local authority area From within the ‘Southern Crescent’, i.e. those local authorities or parts of local authorities that lie within the ‘Southern Crescent’, namely: Stockport, Trafford, Manchester, Chester, Macclesfield, Halton, Ellesmere Port, Vale Royal and Warrington From the rest of Greater Manchester and Merseyside Within the North West Region From outside the North West Region Have there been any instances within the last 3 years when investment from businesses within the 7 Targeted business sectors and other sectors have been lost to the area because there has not been any suitable premises or land? Do you know where they invested instead?

Mersey Belt Study

Housing Land Supply Analysis Methodology HOUSING LAND SUPPLY Data was collated from the following sources: Housing land monitor supplied by each local authority Housing land data supplied by each authority and collected in the common format included at the end of this appendix. Authorities were asked to supply details of Completions over the past 5 years Allocations Potential supply to 2021, including an allowance for windfalls. ANALYSIS Sustainability Tests Housing land was tested in terms of: Brownfield/greenfield – direct measurement based on information supplied by each local authority Accessibility by public transport – now and in the future to take account of proposed changes to public transport services. Due to the large number of sites it was not feasible to test each site individually for public transport access within the timescale and budget. The tests were therefore carried out at a ward level using the following criteria. SUSTAINABILITY TESTS SCORING CRITERIA HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

Accessibility by Public Transport (Now)

Town Centre or a Ward with a railway station

Adjacent to a town centre

Edge of town or rural

Accessibility by Public Transport (Future)

Ward with proposed station

Adjacent to a town centre

Edge of town or rural

Land within wards which were rated ‘medium’ or ‘high’ was then totalled to give an indication of sustainable housing land supply. However there is an important caveat to this process. Not all land within a single ward will be of equal sustainability - scores could vary depending on the location of individual sites. For example a ward may contain a station with excellent service availability. Sites close to the station would score high, but in a large ward, particularly rural wards sites, could be located at some distance from the station and would score low or medium (depending upon bus service availability). In such a case the ward would receive an overall score of medium.

Mersey Belt Study

In the case of large housing sites, where accessibility is clearly at variance with that for the ward as a whole, the public transport accessibility of the individual site has been assessed rather than that of the ward. OVERALL SUSTAINABILITY Due to the method used it has not been possible to calculate land which is both brownfield and sustainable in public transport terms. However the proportions of total land supply which is sustainable in transport terms and the proportion which is brownfield is illustrated in Table 2.4 and 2.5 of the report.

Mersey Belt Study

Note :

TOTAL

Land Allocated (Ha)

Brownfield

Unallocated but potential sites to 2016 (Ha)

Insert Total (Ha) (estimate only)

Insert Total (ha)

(To be completed by Local Authority)

2. Sites smaller that 0.5 ha should be added together and inserted as one row for each ward or sub area.

1. It would be helpful if sub-areas comprised aggregated whole wards and if you could list which ward are in which sub-area.

Windfall Sites

Ward or sub-area Total

Total of all remaining sites under 0.5ha (if known)

Site 3 etc.

Site 2

Site 1

Ward or sub-area name

Ward or sub-area Total

Total of all remaining sites under 0.5ha (if known)

Site 3 etc.

Site 2

Site 1

Ward or sub area name

Site

HOUSING LAND SUPPLY

TABLE B5

Insert Total (Ha) (estimate only)

Insert Total (ha)

Greenfield

To be completed by JMP Consultants

Transport Sustainability

Table B5 HOUSING LAND SUPPLY

Mersey Belt Study

Appendix C List of Consultees

Mersey Belt Study

LIST OF CONSULTEES Name

Organisation

Mike Cunliffe Pat Rattigan Mary Sergeant Catherine Mullin Crispin Logue David Wiggins Nick Porter Adrian Frost David Erskine Fil Prevc Gerald Farrell Marc Pembleton Murray Graham Mike Ross David Lewry Peter Cocker Charlie Seward Chris Hardy Angela Loftus Mike Worden Sian Williams Richard Tregea Andrew Pannell Jill Stock Bernard Payne Phil Cornthwaite Alan West Eric Belfield Eira Hughes Jonathan Clarke Tony Roberts Catrina Fleming Gary Collins Catherine Garnell Vikki Popplewell Jan Morrison Pete Stowe Peter Yates Paul Ansell Andy Turzynski Peter Babb David Brettell Alison Gordon Ann Morgan

Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council Bury Metropolitan Borough Council Bury Metropolitan Borough Council Bury Metropolitan Borough Council Bury Metropolitan Borough Council Cheshire County Council Cheshire County Council Cheshire County Council Cheshire County Council Cheshire County Council Cheshire County Council Cheshire County Council Cheshire County Council Chester City Council Chester City Council Chester City Council Ellesmere Port & Neston Borough Council Ellesmere Port & Neston Borough Council Halton Borough Council Halton Borough Council Halton Borough Council Halton Borough Council Halton Borough Council Halton Borough Council Highways Agency Government Office for North West Knowsley Borough Council Knowsley Borough Council Knowsley Borough Council Knowsley Borough Council Liverpool City Council (and representing the Merseyside Authorities) Liverpool City Council Liverpool City Council Liverpool City Council Macclesfield Borough Council Macclesfield Borough Council Macclesfield Borough Council Manchester City Council Manchester City Council Manchester City Council Manchester City Council

Mersey Belt Study

LIST OF CONSULTEES Name

Organisation

Kerri Farnsworth Ian McArthy Martin Kelly Bryan Harrison Tim Hill Sarah Barker Andrew Fletcher Len Harris Ray Halliday Paul White Steve Beckwith David Davison John Hudson Andrew Zuntz Malcolm Sykes

Manchester City Council Manchester City Council Manchester City Council Manchester City Council North West Regional Assembly Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council Salford City Council (and representing the Greater Manchester Authorities) Salford City Council (and representing the Greater Manchester Authorities) Salford City Council Salford City Council Salford City Council Salford City Council Salford City Council Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council Vale Royal Borough Council Vale Royal Borough Council Warrington Borough Council Warrington Borough Council Warrington Borough Council Warrington Borough Council

Chris Finley Mike Morris Nick Ash Emma Colledge John Rehall Paul Holme Alan Young Ingrid Berry Mike Mullin Mark Cole Tom Ferguson Dave Bryant Geoff Taylor Sharon Mayo Simon Styche Richard Wilde Lisa Hoyland Martin Arther Gary Pickering Ian Ferguson Paul Corner Jeremy Owens Catherine Jukes Alan Stephenson John Litt Jenny Moss Alistair Cross

Mersey Belt Study

LIST OF CONSULTEES Name

Organisation

Ian Estall Alan Turley Roy Desouza Barry King Martin Stuart Peter Rawlinson Andy Wallis Richard Lewis

Warrington Borough Council Warrington Borough Council Warrington Borough Council Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council

OTHER KEY STAKEHOLDERS Name

Organisation

Moira Percy Eric Belfield Malcolm Roberts John Twigg Louise Congdon David Hall Martin Harrison Peter Nears Louise Morrisey Ian Betts Simon Coulthard Steer Davis Gleave

GMPTE Highways Agency Highways Agency Manchester Airport Manchester Airport Merseytravel Merseytravel Peel Holdings Peel Holdings Peel Holdings Railtrack SEMMMS Team

NWDA Name

Organisation

Mike Shields Peter White Ian Wray

Northwest Development Agency Northwest Development Agency Northwest Development Agency

Mersey Belt Study

100

Appendix D Economic Trends: Supporting Information This Appendix sets out the following information in support of the economic trends analysis.

Mersey Belt Study

101

Mersey Belt Study

102

Table D1 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION (SIC) CODES - WORKING DEFINITIONS Target Sector

SIC Code

Industry

Environmental Technology 29.23

Air Cleansing

31.20

Electricity Distribution

41.00

Water Purity

45.11

Land Reclamation

45.32

Acoustical Engineering

73.10

Environmental Research

74.30

Technical Testing

74.20

Environmental Consultancy

Life Science & Medical Technology 24.4

Pharmaceuticals

33.1

Medical Equipment

Financial & Professional Services 65

Finance

Insurance & Pensions

Auxiliary Finance

74.1

Business & Management

Computer Software & Services 72

Computer Services

Creative Industries 74.4

Advertising

92.1

Motion Picture & Video

92.2

TV & Radio

92.31

Art & Literary

92.32

Arts Facilities

92.5

Library & Museums

Mersey Belt Study

103

104

Mersey Belt Study 19.3 42.2 55.3 51.1 43.3

Life Sciences/Medical Tech

Finance & Professional

Computing & Software

Creative and media

All above growth sectors

34.8

25.8

27.2

36.2

42.1

32.4

MA (%)

1 : Defined as the Reduced Metropolitan Axis. 2 : Defined as full Southern Crescent

Notes :

47.9

Environmental Technologies

SC (%)

Percentage Share of North West Employment

45.1

45.4

48.6

44.4

39.4

46.0

SC (%)

31.8

29.8

28.3

32.5

28.5

33.6

MA (%)

Percentage Share of North West Employment

123.8

10.7

15.8

64.7

5.3

27.2

87.4

7.1

9.2

47.5

3.9

19.8

SC (000s) MA (000s)

Actual Employment (1998) (000s)

1.8

-5.7

-6.7

2.2

20.1

-2.0

+3.0

+4.0

+1.1

-3.7

-13.6

-1.2

Percentage Point Change in Share of North West Employment

Table D2 KEY DATA ON RS GROWTH SECTORS: SOUTHERN CRESCENT1 Vs METROPOLITAN AXIS2

23.0

5.6

9.5

4.7

2.7

0.5

+6.4

+4.5

+6.1

-4.0

-1.9

+1.8

SC (000s) MA (000s)

Change in Employment (1991-98)

22.8

109.8

149.5

7.9

101.3

1.9

SC (%)

+7.9

+173.0

+195.0

-7.8

-33.3

+10.1

MA (%)

Percentage Change in Employment (1991-98)

Table D2 KEY DATA ON RS GROWTH SECTORS: SOUTHERN CRESCENT1 Vs METROPOLITAN AXIS2

Table D3 CONCENTRATIONS OF GROWTH SECTOR EMPLOYMENT IN THE METROPOLITAN AXIS Sector

Numbers Employed (1998) (000s)

District (LQ)

Environmental Technologies

Manchester (above average)

7.8

Wirral (above average)

2.9

Wigan (above average),

3.1

St Helens (above average)

1.5

North West total Life Sciences/Medical Technologies

Financial and Professional

59.1

Liverpool (well above average)

1.9

North West total

13.5

Manchester (well above average)

31.5

Liverpool (above average)

16.8

Sefton (above average)

5.7

North West total Computer Software

145.8

Sefton (above average)

1.4

Salford (above average)

1.8

North West total Creative and Media

32.5

Manchester (well above average)

5.3

Liverpool (above average)

2.4

North West total

23.7

Figure D1 % OF ADULTS WITH NVQ LEVEL 4 QUALIFICATION OR EQUIVALENT OR BETTER WITHIN THE SOUTHERN CRESCENT AREA 1997 Great Britain North West All Southern Crescent Less Manchester All Southern Crescent Halton Ellesmere Port and Neston Warrington Manchester Vale Royal Trafford Stockport Chester Macclesfield 0%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Source: Labour Force Survey 1997

Mersey Belt Study

105

Figure D2 % OF ADULTS WITH NVQ LEVEL 4 QUALIFICATIONS OR EQUIVALENT OR BETTER WITHIN THE METROPOLITAN AXIS AREA 1997 Great Britain

20.8

North West

18.6

Reduced Southern Crescent

23.8

Southern Crescent

23.5

Metropolitan Axis

16.4

Manchester

22.6

Wirral

21.2

Bury

19.7

Sefton

18.6

St Helens

18.0

Bolton

16.9

Wigan

15.7

Rochdale

15.3

Salford

15.0

Tameside

14.2

Liverpool

14.0

Oldham

11.8

Knowsley Source: Labour Force Survey 1997

8.1

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Figure D3 DEGREE OF SPECIALISATION IN RES SIX GROWTH KNOWLEDGE BASED INDUSTRIES WITHIN THE SOUTHERN CRESCENT AREA 1998 All Southern Crescent less Manchester

1.27

All Southern Crescent

1.43

Ellesmere Port and Neston

0.45

Vale Royal

0.68

Halton

0.85

Trafford

1.16

Stockport

1.22

Warrington

1.26

Manchester Chester

1.83

Macclesfield

2.00

0.0

Source: Annual Employment Survey, Crown Copyright

Mersey Belt Study

106

1.77

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Location Qotient referenced to North West (ie NW=1.00)

2.0

Appendix E Capacity of Housing Sites

Mersey Belt Study

107

Mersey Belt Study

108

Table E1 identifies the potential capacity of the housing sites identified in the Southern Crescent assuming a density of 25 dwellings/ha2. Based on this assumption sites within the Southern Crescent have the capacity to accommodate 21,400 dwellings. If we then calculate the number of workers this equates to (derived from the 1991 Census of Population) it is found that these housing sites could accommodate around 26,700 workers. Table E1 CAPACITY OF HOUSING SITES IN SOUTHERN CRESCENT

District

Total Allocated & Potential Sites (Ha)

Chester

Number of Units (dwellings)1

Workers per Household2

Workers

1,025

1.15

1,179

Ellesmere Port (exc Neston)

177

4,425

1.36

6,018

Halton (Runcorn) *

137

3,425

1.18

4,042

Macclesfield

1,350

1.31

1,769

Manchester (South of Mersey) *

1,175

1.06

1,246

Stockport (South of Mersey) *

1,425

1.28

1,824 2,261

Trafford (South of Mersey) *

1,900

1.19

Vale Royal (North Core)

156

3,900

1.24

4,836

Warrington (South of Mersey) *

111

2,775

1.26

3,497

TOTAL

856

21,400

26,672

Notes: 1 Assumes density of 25 dwellings/ha. 2 Derived from 1991 Census of Population. * Figures relate only to employment land within ward in the Southern Crescent. Remaining wards are covered in the Metropolitan Axis. Source: DTZ Pieda Consulting Survey of Local Authorities 2001.

If this is compared with Table 4.4 we see that there is a considerable mismatch between the potential of the Southern Crescent to accommodate the workers in homes (around 27,000) compared to the number of employees who could be employed on employment sites (around 77,000). If a development density of 40 dwellings/ha is assumed3 the capacity of the sites within the Southern Crescent rises to 43,000 workers which is just over half of the number of workers who have been estimated as being able to be accommodated on employment sites. Generally therefore we see a mismatch in the Southern Crescent between the supply of future employment land and workers housing land to accommodate. Table E2 overleaf identifies the potential capacity of the housing supply in the Metropolitan Axis to accommodate housing suited the knowledge-based workers, (i.e. over ÂŁ100,000 in value) assuming a density of 25 dwellings per ha. Based on this assumption, the suitable sites within the Metropolitan Axis have the capacity to accommodate 33,225 dwellings. If we then calculate the number of workers (derived from the 1991 Census of Population) it is found that these housing sites could accommodate around 39,000 workers.

2 Recent average density for England as identified in Urban White Paper 3 Past suburban density as identified in Urban White Paper

Mersey Belt Study

109

Table E2 CAPACITY OF HOUSING SITES IN METROPOLITAN AXIS Total Suitable Supply

Number of Units (dwellings)1

Workers per Household2

Workers

Bolton

1,050

1.21

1,270

Bury

1,800

1.28

2,304

186

4,650

1.22

5,673

450

1.16

522

Halton (Widnes) * Knowsley Liverpool Manchester (North of Mersey) *

2,150

1.07

2,300

135

3,375

1.06

3,577

Oldham

725

1.22

884

Rochdale

2,150

1.21

2,601

St. Helens

110

2,750

1.21

3,327

Salford

186

4,650

1.10

5,115

Sefton

475

1.27

603

Stockport (North of Mersey) * Trafford (North of Mersey) *

175

1.28

224

275

1.19

327

Tameside

110

2,750

1.24

3,410

Warrington (North of Mersey) *

124

3,100

1.26

3,906

Wigan

1,175

1.24

1,457

Wirral

1,525

1.14

1,738

1,329

33,225

Total Notes:

39,238

1 Assumes density of 25 dwellings per hectare 2 Derived from 1991 Census of Population * Figures relate only to employment land within the wards in the Metropolitan Axis. Remaining wards are covered in the Southern Crescent

Source: DTZ Pieda Consulting Survey of Local Authorities 2001

At a density of 25 dwellings to the hectare, the total number of workers (39,238) that can be accommodated by the supply of suitable housing, closely matches the total number of workers in the knowledge-based sector (95,000) who could be accommodated on the supply of employment land that is of high or medium/high suitability to the knowledge-based sector4. Even if a density of 40 dwellings per hectare is assumed the capacity of the housing sites suitable to the knowledge-based workers, rises to almost 63,000 workers, which is more than the total number of workers in the knowledge-based sector who could be accommodated on the supply of employment land that is of high or medium/high suitability to the sector.

4 Highly suitable supply = 602ha â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Assume density of 158 workers/ha

Mersey Belt Study

110

Appendix F Mersey Belt Area Journey to Work Analysis

Mersey Belt Study

111

Mersey Belt Study

112

JOURNEY TO WORK This Appendix sets out journeys to work data for districts which lie within the Mersey Belt Study Area from the 1991 Census data. While this data is old and incorporates all employment sectors (not just the knowledge-based industries) and should therefore be treated with care, it does help to demonstrate a number of issues, as follows: the relative isolation of Chester to the rest of the Southern Crescent; the relatively low levels of movement to Vale Royal; the strength of movement between south Manchester and Macclesfield; the importance of Warrington to Wigan and St Helens. A matrix of journey to work trips between the districts in the Southern Crescent is set out in Table F1.

Table F1 SOUTHERN CRESCENT* JOURNEY TO WORK MATRIX Work at: Chester

Halton

Vale Royal

MacclesWarrington field

Trafford Manchester Stockport

Other

Total

Live in: Chester

34,220

1,090

1,390

550

140

220

440

120

12,910

51,080

Halton

560

31,820

1,320

2,770

130

280

250

8,860

46,070

Vale Royal

1,830

3,250

30,730

1,840

3,040

860

1,120

450

7,260

50,380

Warrington

450

4,040

870

57,400

1,100

2,870

3,360

530

12,590

83,210

Macclesfield

140

230

1,050

850

45,720

2,690

7,870

6,890

6,590

72,030

Trafford

350

300

1,220

1,630

54,690

20,930

2,990

9,820

91,990

Manchester

120

150

560

1,550

8,870

96,780

6,040

16,970

131,110

Stockport

150

650

6,260

5,660

27,100

77,350

13,110

130,500

24,510

97,200

16,670

Other

21,240

8,770

5,450

18,710

9,880

TOTAL

58,640

49,820

41,410

84,550

69,450

100,650 255,050 111,120

* Refers to whole of any districts which lie within the Southern Crescent boundary.

Mersey Belt Study

113

114

Mersey Belt Study

Rochdale

380

1520

43160

Knowsley

Sefton

St Helens

SUBTOTAL

76960

4260

500

620

630

1040

92360

290

330

170

330

260

229410

620

820

200

570

830

14240

4700

5750

13540

9480

12200

18040

6040

97930

230

110

880

490

390

650

530

950

6630

77350

8290

25640

13190

180

5740

75630

69890

390

110

260

770

3360

57510

4140

2480

520

* Refers to the whole of any district which falls within Metropolitan Axis boundary

6660

7590

1180

Wirral

7780

2400

2010

2090

1100

1260

1970

96780 27100

530 2990

live other

750

Liverpool

970

4760

630

360

140

200

250

8870

5660

3360 20930

84550 100650 255050 111120

1940

Salford

560

650

2870

54690

WORK TOTAL 49820

520

120

Wigan

100

Oldham

120

Tameside

Bolton

Stockport

Bury

120

150

Manchester

1220

57400

3080

81240

78160

500

270

460

1250

5970

61650

3720

830

2760

530

170

4940

73790

68850

590

430

890

3260

55590

4890

530

390

1700

340

110

3740

61550

57810

1390

690

4260

45780

2680

770

260

280

1040

370

170

95090

3570

400

160

110

240

1090

82740

3710

520

150

120

200

310

1280

85020

400

260

130

230

49370

5410

5590

4940

1530

1640

1480

2180

5260

4390

1850

130

5870

6500

5480

100920 101590 90500

95050

370

170

130

3230

7480

76420

3940

680

430

190

420

670

590

270

240

1020

470

87750

2180

120

200

220

10720

7060

196030 99260

185310 92200

4770

24490

17170

18990

111650

240

1610

260

100

190

240

180

1770

3450

2920

51850

48930

6030

4310

22430

760

10700

960

1240

2340

7284

94000

86716

1030

72050

2350

206

9220

640

120

320

360

2600

60550

57950

45180

720

1980

270

950

160

5110

220

110

150

2200

700

St Helens

Sub

91990

83210

46070

Total

Living

Work

4240

4290

5250

3580

Other

81380

82580

89760

94460

6400

4600

3780

2150

3670

84410

3710

3400

48450

68530

71690

105530 111570

46860

3160

6040

1590

110936 126980 16044

139600 143310

81010

118440 128710 10270

101090 107490

76780

78800

87610

90790

119600 130500 10900

127070 131310

87700

77960

350

Sefton

4040

Knowsley

Trafford

250

Wirral

Warrington

280

Liverpool

42490

2770

Salford

31820

Wigan

Halton

Bolton Total

Bury

Work at:

Live in:

Halton Warrington Trafford Manchester Stockport Tameside Oldham Rochdale

METROPOLITAN AXIS *JOURNEY TO WORK MATRIX

Table F2

Table F2 METROPOLITAN AXIS *JOURNEY TO WORK MATRIX

This report has been published by the Northwest Development Agency Renaissance House, PO Box 37, Centre Park, Warrington, Cheshire WA1 1XB Tel: 01925 400 100 Fax: 01925 400 400 e-mail: information@nwda.co.uk www.nwda.co.uk www.englandsnorthwest.com

englandsnorthwest