Blog

Shared ownership is popular with Londoners but unaffordable in some areas, committee told

London Assembly Members have heard that the tenure meets the needs of some middle-income households, but not those in expensive parts of Camden
Charles Wright

Shared ownership housing has stood the test of time as an “affordable” housing model. But is it “shared”, is it “ownership” and, above all, is it genuinely affordable for low to middle-income Londoners? Those were the questions posed to housing experts this week as the London Assembly’s housing committee continued its investigation into housing affordability in the capital. 

Introduced in 1979, shared ownership enables households to part buy and part rent a home, generally with a minimum 25 per cent purchase and the option of increasing the ownership share to up to 100 per cent.

Administered generally by housing associations, shared ownership has been a key element of successive governments’ strategies supporting housing affordability. Mayor Khan’s current £4.82 billion funding from central government, to start 116,000 affordable homes by 2022 comes with a Whitehall stipulation that almost 60,000 should be so-called “intermediate” homes – shared ownership or “London Living Rent”, itself designed as a stepping stone towards shared ownership.

But Danny Beales, cabinet member for planning and regeneration at Camden Council, told the committee that with shared ownership costs rising alongside full market house price increases, affordability was an increasing concern, particularly in Inner London. With a household income of more than £50,000 a year required for shared ownership in Fitzrovia, in the south of the borough, the product wasn’t working for “squeezed Londoners”, he said.

“Our view is that shared ownership is not an affordable housing product in Camden. People who don’t qualify for social housing are being squeezed out of areas like Camden,” he continued, confirming reports last year that shared ownership rates in Inner London had fallen by 43 per cent since 2016/17.

Camden was now building living rent homes with three-year renewable tenancies, targeted at local people, key workers in particular, on incomes of around £30,000 to £40,000 a year. And it was an increasingly popular offer.

“Shared ownership is selling the dream that isn’t quite true,” he said. “People want stability and security and there are ways to provide that which aren’t home ownership. There is a demand for stability of a different kind.” 

Shared ownership nevertheless remains popular after 30 years, despite issues in some areas, said Steve Moseley from London and Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q), the capital’s biggest landlord, with 95,000 homes across London and the south east. 

“It is affordable to the middle income group,” he said. For L&Q, the average sale price of a shared ownership home was £430,000, with average purchaser income ranging from £35,000 a year for individuals to £50,000 a year for couples. Eight per cent of shared owners increased their stake in 2019, he said, the majority to full ownership.

And while increasingly unaffordable in Inner London, shared ownership is “the only option for many people in London to live in an area for a long period of time,”  said Pete Apps, deputy editor of trade magazine Inside Housing and himself a shared owner. For him, he said, it had been “the only way to get somewhere with security for my son’s primary school years”.

Speakers were unconvinced by government plans to reduce the initial purchase stake to 10 per cent and to allow occupants to increase their stake one per cent at a time. “People want security not necessarily 10 per cent of a home,” said Apps. There were risks that over-enthusiastic marketing of an option which was not actually ownership could draw in people “for whom it’s not the best place to be”, added Dr Alison Wallace from York University.

Applicants needed better information, the committee heard, with a possible role for City Hall in providing clear advice on leaseholds and service charges, or even compulsory home ownership education, as required in the United States for “assisted” purchasers.

Longer term, the answer to the affordability trap lay in support for renting. “London needs many, many more social rented homes,” said Apps. “Shared ownership isn’t the answer for people at the sharpest end of the problem.”

OnLondon.co.uk is committed to providing fair and thorough coverage of the capital’s politics, development and culture. The site is small but influential and it depends on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via PayPal or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

 

Categories: News
Tags: affordable housing, Camden Council, housing, London & Quadrant, shared ownership

Leonie Cooper: London must protect itself against the effects of climate change

The capital has not felt the worst impacts yet they are already taking their toll
Leonie Cooper

Tackling the climate emergency is the primary issue of our time. It seems that every day new scientific evidence is released about the risks to us, the planet, and the wildlife with which we share it. Many Londoners will also be  aware of the awful bush fires in Australia and those that tore through the Amazon rainforest a few months ago.

This crisis is not just happening overseas. While we in London have so far been protected from its worst impacts, our weather is changing fast and our infrastructure and communities are already suffering. Much of our city is not prepared for such the temperatures recorded in England in recent years, with buildings overheating, public transport being disrupted, and water supplies put under pressure. Public Health England recently released data showing that last summer, across the UK, there were 892 more deaths over the course of three heatwaves than would have been usual. Of these, 235 were in London with the vast majority older people. Overheating and dehydration are particularly dangerous for this group, especially if they have pre-existing health conditions.

At the same time our winters are becoming wetter and extreme rain and cold, more common. For example, in early 2018 we experienced the ‘Beast from the East’ which saw London temperatures dip below -6°. Provisional data shows that London had 2,000 excess winter deaths in 2018/19. Older people, those who are unwell and Londoners living in cold and damp homes – who are more likely to be on a lower income – are most at risk. The climate emergency will cause extreme and unpredictable weather across the spectrum, both warm and cold. We must act now to protect Londoners before things get even worse.

The buildings Londoners live in need to be fit for purpose and fit for the future. Too many homes are poorly insulated and ventilated, leaving them vulnerable to cold, damp and heat. As many as 39 per cent of London’s private renters have damp or mould in their homes, while 26 per cent endure poor insulation or excess cold. With nearly one-third of London’s homes being privately rented (compared to 18 per cent in the rest of the country) this is a particular problem in the capital. As a result of a report by the London Assembly environment committee, produced when I was its chair, the Mayor introduced London’s first ever Fuel Poverty Action Plan and during his current term he has retrofitted or contracted the retrofit of around 26,800 London homes, saving around 20,000 tonnes of CO2 per annum as well as making the homes warm.

It is also vital that new homes are built to the highest possible standards. The Mayor’s draft new London Plan contains provisions to ensure they are energy-efficient and use shading and orientation to limit heat levels inside. I would like to see greater use of natural solutions to limit heat risk in buildings, such as ensuring there is adequate green infrastructure to mitigate it and provide shade. Developers should take responsibility for building to the highest standards.

I am hopeful that Londoners can reduce our city’s carbon emissions and I’ve been thrilled to see so many people getting involved in the climate movement in the last couple of years – particularly so many inspirational young people. To that end, we need to be prepared for increasingly unpredictable and extreme weather, and to keep Londoners safe at home.

Leonie Cooper is London Assembly Member for Merton & Wandsworth. Photograph by Omar Jan.

OnLondon.co.uk is committed to providing fair and thorough coverage of the capital’s politics, development and culture. The site is small but influential and it depends on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via PayPal or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

 

 

Categories: Comment
Tags: climate change, environment, London Assembly, poverty, Sadiq Khan

Lib Dem mayoral candidate Siobhan Benita accuses rivals of ‘ambulance-chasing’ over violent crime

Her criticism appears aimed at Conservative Shaun Bailey and Independent Rory Stewart
Dave Hill

The Liberal Democrat candidate for London Mayor has accused two of her rivals of “ambulance-chasing” and trying to “score political points” by visiting the scene of a fight in Seven Kings which resulted in three men being stabbed to death.

Explaining why she had not gone to the area following the incident on Sunday evening, Siobhan Benita said in a video message on Twitter that she does not consider it “useful and helpful for candidates to pile in” after such events and that a lot of what had been said by her two fellow mayoral contestants was “not helpful or relevant” to the case.

Both Independent candidate Rory Stewart and the Conservative contender Shaun Bailey had previously been to the crime scene to comment on the incident, with Stewart posting two video messages, including one from Seven Kings which went live on Monday lunchtime, and Bailey posting one on Monday evening which also featured a fellow Tory, local London Assembly Member Keith Prince, in front of what appears to be the location of the fatal confrontation.

Benita’s criticism seems to be directed not at the response of the current Mayor, Labour’s Sadiq Khan, who is seeking a second term and whose mayoral Twitter account carried a photograph of him at Seven Kings meeting a police officer and Redbridge Council leader Jas Athwal, but at Stewart and Bailey, though neither is mentioned by name.

She said that a lot of the serious violence in the capital at present is connected to the illegal drugs market” and organised crime or gang violence, though this particular incident seems not to have been. “I won’t be ambulance-chasing in this campaign,” she said. “I think that in these types of incidents the police need to be able to do their job, communities need to be allowed to grieve”.

However, she would be continuing her work with cross-party bodies examining the causes of youth violence and presenting “an evidence-based plan with solutions that I know will work”. Benita has argued that cannabis should be decriminalised in London as a way of taking that section of the drug trade out of criminal hands as one element of a five-part anti-knife crime plan.

Reducing violent crime, particularly involving knives, has been the principal theme of Bailey’s campaign since his selection as the Tory candidate in September 2018. The former youth worker has sought to highlight his past experience with young people and claimed that he would be more active than Khan in dealing with the problem. In his video message he said the crime “signifies just how dangerous things have become in London,” and that he had urged residents to consider “how they can get involved, how they can support the people around them”.

In video from Seven Kings, Stewart said: “Someone needs to sort this out and the person is the Mayor.” He listed three priorities: more uniformed police on the street; a supply of data to alert them to hotspots in advance; the necessary training and support. In his second video, posted on Monday evening, Stewart said “I’ve spoken to a bereaved mother, I’ve spoken to police officers” as well as to the local Sikh gurdwara. Praising officers’ professionalism, he said that “above all” it was necessary to “make sure that everything is directed towards reducing violent crime in our communities”.

As Mayor, Khan has introduced a Violence Reduction Unit with the aim of pooling specialist advice about addressing the causes of violent crime, and one year ago he announced an extra £234 million towards reducing violent crime, about half of which was derived from business rates. There was a total of 149 murders in London in 2019, the highest since 2008, though deputy Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir Stephen House recently told a London Assembly committee that violent crime as a whole has been on a downward trend for the past two years.

OnLondon.co.uk is committed to providing the best possible coverage of the 2020 London Mayor and London Assembly election campaigns. The site is small but influential and it depends on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via PayPal or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categories: News
Tags: Conservatives, crime, Jas Athwal, Keith Prince, knife crime, Labour, Liberal Democrats, London Assembly, Metropolitan Police, Redbridge Council, Rory Stewart, Sadiq Khan, Seven Kings, Shaun Bailey, Siobhan Benita, Sir Stephen House

Barnet: Council’s Sainsburys site consent tests flexibility of London Plan

The proposed scheme also includes tall buildings outside of local areas designated for them
Dave Hill

Barnet Council has approved a plan to build a new supermarket and 1,309 homes within eleven tall buildings in Hendon on a site which falls outside locations it has deemed acceptable for high-rise blocks and will require Sadiq Khan’s approval of its design in order to go ahead.

Consent for the scheme, submitted by developer St George City and Sainsburys Supermarkets, was granted last week in line with council officers’ recommendations, which acknowledged that the London Mayor’s blessing will need to be secured.

The site, which lies off the Hyde Estate Road, NW9, east of the A5 road, already contains a Sainsburys store along with a petrol filling station, both of which would be replaced in two phases by a new Sainsburys, “flexible commercial space” and housing within twelve buildings, ten of which would be between 11 and 20 storeys high and one of which would be of 28 storeys. Of the 1,309 homes, 139 would have three bedrooms, 543 would have two, 503 would be one-bed and 125 would be studio flats.

A total of 403 homes would meet the Mayor’s definition of “affordable”, comprising 243 shared ownership homes, 56 London Living Rent homes – another form of low cost home ownership product – and 101 London Affordable Rent homes, which have rents close to those of new social rented homes. A further 30 are described as for “intermediate rent”.  At 35 per cent, the proportion of “habitable rooms” among the “affordable” types just meets the Mayor’s threshold for avoiding City Hall scrutiny of the plans’ viability calculations.

Responding to objections by local residents that “the height and scale of development is excessive”, council officers responded that although the application site is “not identified as a strategic tall buildings location” by Barnet “there are material circumstances which justify a departure from policy in this regard”. Their report includes a series of provisional views of the development from various nearby neighbourhoods and concludes that “overall, the proposed layout of the development would be coherent” and “benefit the legibility of the immediate vicinity”.

The plans have been considered in the context of the transition from the current London Plan, drawn up under the mayoralty of Boris Johnson and published in 2016, and his successor Mayor Khan’s draft new Plan, which sets out different rules but has yet to come into formal effect.

The officers’ report states that planning applications in the capital “should continue to be determined in accordance with the 2016 London Plan, while noting that account needs to be taken of emerging policies,” and that “due to the advanced nature of the DLP [draft new London Plan]” increasing weight” should be attached to the policies it contains which government inspectors – who have suggested changes to some of them – are content with.

It acknowledges that the proposed density of the development “exceeds the optimum densities set out within the current London Plan density matrix” it has nonetheless been “subject to a design-led approach in line with the draft London Plan”, which is described as taking “a less prescriptive approach”, whereby a development’s density results from an overall consideration of the site’s context, transport connections and access for pedestrians and cyclists. Khan’s draft plan also demands that the maximum possible housing density should always be sought.

Nearly 900 objections to the scheme have been received compared with 13 letters of support.

OnLondon.co.uk is committed to providing fair and thorough coverage of the capital’s politics, development and culture. The site is small but influential and it depends on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via PayPal or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

 

 

 

 

Categories: News
Tags: affordable housing, Barnet Council, Boris Johnson, housing, Sadiq Khan, The London Plan

HS2: What will happen next and where do London’s 2020 mayoral candidates stand?

Boris Johnson has promised a decision on the future of the vast new rail project as cost and priority pressure mount on different fronts
Dave Hill

Speculation about the future of High Speed 2 (HS2), the long planned brand new rail link between London, Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Glasgow and several other destinations in the North of England, has further intensified with the Financial Times reporting details of an unpublished review of the project commissioned by national government.

The first section of the HS2 line was scheduled to be built between London and Birmingham and to open at the end of 2026, but transport secretary Grant Shapps said in September that it will be delayed for between two and five years. A second phase, which would see HS2 connecting Birmingham with Leeds and Manchester, was supposed to be finished by 2033 might now not open until 2040.

The FT says the unpublished review, led by former HS2 chairman Doug Oakervee, concludes that the overall cost of HS2 could rise as high as £106 billion – in 2015, the price was put at £56 billion – and recommends that the second phase is paused so that consideration can be given to whether conventional rail lines could be used to better link Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester instead.

Another report about HS2, by spending watchdog the National Audit Office, is expected very soon. Both assessments are being made against the backdrop of Boris Johnson’s general election gains in the Midlands and North of England and frequent promises to “level up” the UK by assisting those regions of England. Shapps said at the weekend that a decision about HS2 is “weeks away”. The government had previously said it would be taken before the end of 2019.

When he was London Mayor, Prime Minister Boris Johnson was a strong advocate of HS2 and its value to London, right up until the end of his eight years at City Hall. In December 2015, less than six months before the end of his second and final term, he hailed the plan of bringing the line right the way into Euston station as a “once in a lifetime chance to transform the Euston area”, including the redevelopment of the station itself.

In July 2011, he told an anti-HS2 campaigner that the scheme at that time did not serve the capital well enough, explaining that he wanted the line to enter Central London through tunnels and an increase in Underground capacity to cope with a larger influx of people.

However, the Mail on Sunday recently reported that Johnson’s transport adviser Andrew Gilligan, a vehement opponent of HS2, has been urging Johnson to scrap the London to Birmingham and prioritise the current phase two instead. In May last year, when he was working as a journalist for the Sunday Times, Gilligan highlighted the findings of a YouGov poll which found that most people in the North and in the Midlands and Wales opposed what he called “this disastrous scheme”.

Gilligan, a media ally of Johnson going back to the 2008 mayoral election campaign, was given the job of mayoral “cycling commissioner” by Johnson in 2013 despite his having no prior experience in transport planning. Transport for London research shows that the network of infrastructure for helping cyclists Gilligan insisted be installed in the capital has so far failed to bring about any significant increase in the capital’s cycling population.

The attitudes to HS2 of candidates for London Mayor will be important to some London voters and may give an indication of their views towards rail transport more generally.

For the Liberal Democrats, Siobhan Benita told on On London that HS2 “feels like Crossrail all over again, with spiralling costs, delays and incompetent management” and that the delay announced last year “will have a serious impact on businesses in the capital that have rightly planned around the opening date they were previously given.” She added that the project “will undoubtedly bring a huge boost to London and the whole country but we need more honesty and transparency about the cost which is clearly running out of control.”

The incumbent Mayor, Labour’s Sadiq Khan, who is to seek a second term, supports the project but said in November that he had urged the Oakervee review to reject the idea of the service terminating at Old Oak Common instead of at Euston, as this would put additional pressure on the Crossrail Elizabeth Line when it eventually opens. He argued that HS2 stations are needed in both places. Khan also underlined his enthusiasm for HS2 to trigger regeneration around Euston. He suggested slower trains rather than reduced capacity on the line itself as a way of reducing costs.

A spokesperson for Mayor Khan told On London: “The whole of the UK is in desperate need of rail investment. And it can’t be a zero-sum game, playing the needs of one part of the country against another. With London’s population continuing to grow it is essential that the government also shows its commitment to Crossrail 2 and other crucial infrastructure projects in London. These will boost our economy by billions of pounds and importantly tackle the chronic levels of overcrowding that could develop on London’s tube and rail networks if no action is taken.”

The Green Party wants HS2 cancelled completely and its London Mayor candidate Siân Berry told On London today: “Costs for HS2 are spiralling out of control, with the Conservatives now looking at pumping £100 billion into a project that mutilates our countryside and shaves a mere 20 minutes off a journey from London to Birmingham. If we cancel this white elephant now we’ll only have lost £8 billion and we can put the remaining £90-plus billion into an HS2 dividend that would mean massive and unprecedented investment in rail, and new bus routes, walking and cycling in every town across the country.”

Independent candidate Rory Stewart, when running to be leader of the Conservative Party last summer, told Conservative Home that he would not commit to cancelling HS2 as one reader requested, but would commission a “rapid review from independent experts to draw on views in government and the regions, to ensure that costs are controlled and that the projects work for the whole country.” He added: “My personal instinct is that we should prioritise infrastructure investment in the North of England.”

For the Conservatives, Shaun Bailey called last July for a “pause” on HS2 and said that “instead of continuing with HS2 as it stands the government should send the funds to the regions” instead. In a speech to a gathering of the Taxpayers’ Alliance, Bailey said it wasn’t clear to him that “better connecting London to the North and vice versa in what we need in Britain at this point in our history”.

On London has contacted candidates Stewart and Bailey for any fresh comment on HS2 they wish to make. This article will be updated if and when they respond.

OnLondon.co.uk is committed to providing the best possible coverage of the 2020 London Mayor and London Assembly election campaigns. The site is small but influential and it depends on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via PayPal or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categories: News
Tags: Andrew Gilligan, Boris Johnson, Conservatives, cycling, Doug Oakervee, Euston, Grant Shapps, Green Party, High Speed 2, Labour, Liberal Democrats, rail transport, Rory Stewart, Sadiq Khan, Sian Berry, Siobhan Benita, transport, Transport for London

Unhappy West Ham fans aren’t alone in hoping for better results

The finances of the publicly-owned London Stadium won't be helped if the club continues to struggle on the pitch
Dave Hill

Ten years ago, West Ham United football club came under the control of David Sullivan and David Gold, businessman friends who had made their fortunes from what is politely called adult publishing and from lingerie retail. At a slightly dazed press conference, the duo described their acquisition in largely sentimental terms: though they had previously owned Birmingham City, the Hammers was their local club. Gold, born and raised in Stepney, had even represented them as a schoolboy.

The pair also revealed that they’d been in talks with Newham Council about the possibility of moving the club from its Boleyn Ground stadium in Green Street, Upton Park, to the Olympic Stadium after the 2012 Games. A big club needed a bigger home, and Sullivan said he wanted West Ham move up a level from that of its illustrious but uneven history and join the cream of the Premier League rather than simply surviving in it. He and Gold had taken on a business with a struggling team and tens of millions of pounds in debt, but they had big dreams of turning things around.

 

It hasn’t yet happened on the pitch: the club was relegated in 2011 but came back up to the Premier League the following season and has broadly held its own since. However, the team’s best finish has been seventh place, four years ago, which was its last season in the old stadium. And this year, they are mired in another relegation fight, hoping their newly-appointed manager David Moyes, in his second spell at the club, can again win it for them. Before today’s home game, hundreds of fans held a protest to mark the 10th anniversary of the Sullivan-Gold takeover – they say promises have not been kept.

Meanwhile, the finances of the stadium continue to be a source of close and sometimes critical interest. The 2016 report by the BBC’s Dan Roan embedded below provides a very good examination of the main issues as they were emerging at the time: the extra public money going into converting the 2012 Olympic stadium, built only for athletics, into what is now called the London Stadium, primarily hosting football but adaptable for other types of event; the emergence of West Ham under Sullivan and Gold as the only Premier League club willing to become the anchor tenant under what appeared to be very favourable terms; the difficulty of getting Boris Johnson, who as London Mayor had overseen the progress of the Games legacy, to answer any questions about it.

In September 2018 it was confirmed that the £2.5 million a year rent West Ham had been paying didn’t even cover the cost of staging home matches and that the stadium was on course to make losses for the duration of the 99-year lease.

However, in September, London Legacy Development Corporation chiefs struck an upbeat note, saying the financial situation with the stadium was improving, helped by an increase in capacity to 60,000. And Jack Brown has argued for On London that, although with hindsight the public bodies responsible for orchestrating the 2012 Olympics could have ensured a better deal for the public purse, the London Stadium will surely succeed in the end.

In the shorter term, though, much depends on naming rights being sold. The stadium lost £25.5 million in the financial year to March 2019, and that is expected to get worse. A naming rights deal could help a lot, but securing one won’t be made any easier if its lustre is lessened by West Ham dropping to the Championship at the end of the season. A recent study concluded:

“There is significant untapped potential for European teams without stadium naming rights sponsorship, with the most valuable and long-term deals reserved for those with the highest levels of global exposure, Champions League participation and low relegation risk.”

The London Stadium isn’t wholly dependent on the fortunes of West Ham United. Even so, the taxpayer is depending on David Moyes.

OnLondon.co.uk exists to providing fair and thorough coverage of London’s politics, development and culture. It depends on donations, including from readers. Can you spare £5 a month (or more) to help the site keep going and growing? If so, follow this link. Thank you.

 

 

Categories: Culture
Tags: 2012 Olympics, London Legacy Development Corporation, London Stadium, Olympic Park, West Ham United

Vic Keegan’s Lost London 126: The Blackfriars Rotunda

It housed one of the most extraordinary museum collections the capital has ever seen
Victor Keegan

On March 23, 1786  James Parkinson struck it lucky. He won the entire contents of a large London museum in a lottery for which he had paid a little over £2 for two of the 8,000 tickets sold. Sales were considerably lower than the 36,000 target hoped for. It must be the cheapest museum ever sold.

The collection – including lots of specimens collected by Captain James Cook on his voyages – had been painstakingly built up by Sir Ashton Lever, first in Manchester and later in Leicester House, the former royal dwelling that dominated Leicester Square. He rather ambitiously gave it the Greek name Holophusicon after a word meaning “whole of nature”. John Quincy Adams, the future President of the United States, wrote home in the 1780s during a sightseeing visit to London full of praise for it. 

Lever obtained an Act of Parliament to sell all of it by lottery after failing to get the British Museum or Catherine the Great of Russia to purchase the collection. This enabled him “to dispose of his Museum, as now exhibited at Leicester House, by Way of Chance.” It by then included 26,662 specimens.

At first, lottery winner Parkinson kept the collection at Leicester Square. But after a few years he moved it to a new building on the southern side of Blackfriars Bridge at No 3 Blackfriars in Albion Street (as the top end of Blackfriars Bridge was then known) and renamed it the Lever Museum, though it became known as the Blackfriars Rotunda because of its circular core. It would have occupied much of the space now dominated by the huge “carbuncle” skyscraper there.

Screenshot 2020 01 14 at 19.57.44

After a while, Parkinson, like Sir Ashton, also tried to dispose of the contents including another attempt to sell it to the government which, on this occasion, was stymied by the distinguished naturalist Joseph Banks.

Instead Parkinson decided to sell the contents in an extraordinary auction (not to be confused with the lottery in which he won it in the first place). It commenced on May 5, 1806 and didn’t terminate until the end of July. The official part of it finished on the 57th day after the 6,800th item had been sold. But after that there was an Appendix which took up another five days. Among the thousands of smaller items sold were two fighting cocks “trimmed down for fighting”, a small crocodile, a Southsea snake, Siberian Jaspar and a gilt frame with skins of North American snakes. The catalogue has been put online, but you may need to take a short holiday to get through it all.

The contents ended up all over the country and abroad – maybe the Britian’s first distributed museum – but the building itself continued with multiple uses, including as a music hall and a pub – the Royal Albion – until it was eventually demolished in 1958. Whether the skyscraper that now dominates the site marks a cultural improvement can only be left to the imagination.

The rest of Vic Keegan’s Lost London series can be found here. His latest volume of poetry can be bought here.

OnLondon.co.uk is dedicated to providing fair, thorough, anti-populist coverage of London’s politics, development and culture. It depends on donations from readers and would like to pay its freelance contributors better. Can you spare £5 (or more) a month? Follow this link if you would like to help. Thank you.

 

Categories: Culture, Lost London
Tags: Blackfriars, Leicester Square

Travel watchdog says decline in London bus speeds must be reversed

A five-point action plan has been produced to help the capital's most used public transport mode
Dave Hill

London’s official transport watchdog has called on Transport for London to take “urgent action” to address a fall in the average speed of bus services around the city, along with a related decline in the number of bus passengers.

London TravelWatch, an independent body funded and supported by the London Assembly, has produced a five-point plan to increase bus speeds, which have fallen below nine miles per hour for the first time ever according to TfL performance data.

The measures proposed are:

  • Longer hours of operation for bus lanes and adjustments on “red route” roads managed by TfL, which carry 30 per cent of London’s road traffic and restrict parking and loading in order to keep traffic moving.
  • A review of parking provision on bus routes.
  • Creating more streets that are for buses and bicycles only.
  • Extending the period in which the Central London congestion charge applies.
  • Investigating more road-user charging in general in the medium term.

Buses are by far the most-used form of public transport in London, with 2.2 billion journeys made on them every year – about 40 million a week – compared with 1.4 billion on the Underground.

Period 9 bus speeds

A review of bus services has seen some routes axed, a new one introduced and several others altered in length and frequency. There has been some shift of capacity to Outer London but an overall loss of seven per cent of total mileage across the city.

London TravelWatch chair Arthur Leathley emphasised that “many people have no alternative transport” to the bus while slower services have become “a real deterrent” to using them which will see a continuation of the fall in bus passenger numbers seen in the past five years.

Nick Biskinis of the Clapham Transport Users’ Group said that the Number 88 has frequently become stuck  of Vauxhall Bridge Road in recent years, leading to more overcrowding and slower journeys, with “disabled people in particular being penalised by the de-prioritisation of buses”.

In an autumn 2018 interview with On London, John Trayner, boss of London’s biggest bus operator Go-Ahead, expressed fears that the success of the London bus service was in danger of being forgotten and that cuts to the network would start to break it up and accelerate its decline.

Photograph by Omar Jan.

OnLondon.co.uk exists to providing fair and thorough coverage of London’s politics, development and culture. It depends on donations, including from readers. Can you spare £5 a month (or more) to help the site keep going and growing? If so, follow this link. Thank you.

Categories: News
Tags: buses, London TravelWatch, London Underground, public transport, transport, Transport for London