Department of Planning Seminar Series: 27 th March 2014 The New Economy in Oxfordshire

1. Department of Planning Seminar Series: 27th March 2014The New Economy in Oxfordshire The Planning Implications of The Oxfordshire Innovation Engine: Realising the Growth Potential, SQW (and OEO), 2013 Professor John Glasson Department of Planning, Oxford Brookes University Director: OEO

2. Structure of Presentation • What is the Oxford Innovation Engine (OIE) report? • A few steps back in Oxfordshire planning history and high-tech activity • The planning elements of the OIE report • Some planning implications of the report---taking a few steps forward ? • What next for Oxfordshire planning for high-tech activity?

3. 1.What is the Oxford Innovation Engine (OIE) report?-purpose -methods-key elements-recommendations

4. OIE—purpose Sponsors: the report was commissioned by the University of Oxford and Science Oxford with support from the Oxfordshire LEP Purpose: to ensure that Oxfordshire builds on its position as a leading high technology cluster and that the Oxford brand is more consistently associated with science and innovation (sub-text: hi-tech Oxon should be realising its potential better than it has to date) Audience: report is aimed at --Oxon organisations–need for more consistent messaging and co-ordinated agenda for sustainable growth --UK government—toinfluence policies and expenditure --Global actors– to influence knowledge of and future involvement with this major European centre of research and commercial application

5. OIE--methods Analysis of secondary statistical data on the Oxon high-tech economy (OEO—including specialist annex) Review of spatial planning policies, infrastructure and specialist property for high tech firms in Oxon (OEO –including specialist annex) Survey of high-tech firms, including in depth consultation of sample, and survey of employees In depth consultation withsenior staff from Oxfordshire’s universities, big science facilities, LAs, property providers, financial services providers etc Meetings with Steering Group and 4 advisory groups. Particularly contentious issue—report title (Oxford Phenomenon, Oxford Paradox, Enterprising Oxford etc etc)

6. OIE—key elements Research infrastructure: key role of University of Oxford, complemented by Oxford Brookes University, Research Institutes and Hospitals. Key high technology sectors. Space issues; public and private sector linkage issues Soft infrastructure: high calibre workforce, but shortage of some scientific and technical skills. Chronic shortage of early stage investment capital Physical infrastructure: issues of (un)affordable housing, transport constraints, shortage of suitable premises and limits on Oxford city as a preferred location Leadership: lack of strong local leadership and consistent positive messaging, for example in comparison with Cambridge (Cambridge2You website)

10. Underlying concern – is there enough of an alignment of interests and activities in Oxfordshire for high-tech activity?

11. 2. A few steps back in Oxfordshire planning history and high-tech activity-Context-Science parks-Central Oxon-S.Oxon Quadrant

12. Context (70s/80s)Oxford is a relatively small and historic city set in an attractive county environment with many landscape constraints and many development pressures-------The constant challenge is to balance growth and restraint objectives. The local planning system, set in the context of changing regional and national policy guidance, occupies a key role in seeking to mediate between multiple and often conflicting objectivesOxford and its country towns—the 1970s/1980s spatial metaphor

13. Science parks (90s on)The rapid growth of science park developments in Britain since 1982 has now left the University and other academic institutions in Oxford in the unflattering position of not having access to this form of development. Glasson, Thomas and Leary (1987), The Need for an Oxford Science Park, Oxford Polytechnic

14. Central Oxfordshire (early 00s) • Within the South East RSS, a sub-regional strategy for Central Oxfordshire identified the areas around Bicester, in the NE of the county, and around Didcot (in the S) as areas for substantial housing growth. • But some missed opportunities at the time for innovative infrastructure ideas in the county: --- a Guided Transit Express (GTE) busway system to run between the N and S Park and Ride locations in Oxford, with possible extensions to key locations in the county; --- a re-siting of the Oxford Railway Station to allow it to become an important national hub; and --- proposed investment in improved transport infrastructure to underpin the incipient Oxford- Milton Keynes-Cambridge Arc linking the high-tech belt to the north of London.

15. S. Oxfordshire Quadrant (later 00s) A study of 2007 sought to identify what needed to be done to realise the great potential of this area (including Milton Park and Harwell), then conceived as the S. Oxfordshire Quadrant (SQW, 2007)—but now as Science Vale UK.It advocated improving the national and international profile of the area, the institutional partnership for its development, business support services, the provision of attractive and affordable housing, and lobbying hard for investment in transport infrastructure.

16. Overview of spatial planning – help or hindrance for high-tech development in Oxfordshire? Willingness for Oxon Structure Plan to be more flexible over time---eg support for science park locations near Oxford and initiatives in the now SVUK But often tension between the county and districts on housing and employment locations, and between the districts themselves Also still a serious concern about the scale of site provision for high tech business development especially in and very near to Oxford. Never been a strategy of more concentrated development around Oxford, in contrast to the approach so successfully adopted by Cambridge. Yet Oxon planning does not deserve Economist portrayal (29 Sept 2012) as Byzantine! But damaging comment.

17. 3.The planning elements of the OIE report-property-housing and workforce-transport and communications-spatial strategy The scale, nature and effectiveness of planning and development for a sub-region and its constituent districts is partly reflected in its performance in delivering key elements of social and economic infrastructure, such as housing, employment sites and transport and communication facilities. A deficiency in the provision of relevant infrastructure in relation to population growth and business activity can provide many serious externality problems, such as congestion and lack of affordable housing, providing a potential, and often real, constraint on the growth of a sub-region.

18. Shortfall in appropriate property • Oxon is well endowed with specialist property for small new and small high-tech firms (eg 8 innovation centres). But still waiting lists for Oxford location--potential Magnet Centre [?] and Bio-escalator. • For larger firms. 500,000 sqm already developed at 6 science parks/technology parks (eg Milton Park) and further 385,000 sqm available for development (eg EZs at MP and Harwell) • But the bulk of future space (4/5ths of the 385,000 sqm) is in the S. of the county, and sites are again limited around Oxford --where hi-tech firms prefer to locate. • survey by Withy King (Business Barometer, 2012) found that 53% of respondents saw lack of suitable business premises as greatest barrier to location/relocation to Oxford

20. Housing and workforce issues • high house prices and limited affordability, esp in Oxford (key issue for 1/3rd of firms responding to our survey). • slow growth of Oxon working age population; between 2001-2011 grew by 7.1 % cf England at 9.2%. Decline in age key 30-39 years age group of 11% compared to England at 7.9% and Cambridge sub-region at 3.7%. • Substantial housing developments proposed for Didcot, Grove and Wantage may help SVUK (although delays in supply, and increasing need), plus Bicester developments – but Oxford is more constrained. Duty to co-operate on the District borders is contentious when identification of need is increasing all round and delivery is slow.

21. Working age population growth: Oxon and others

22. Housing growth: achieved and projected—Oxon and Cambridge sub-region

23. Conclusion on future need for housing—Oxon SHMA (March 2014)

24. Transport and communication • Oxon has excellent external connectivity, but internally very different, with almost ¼ of our survey of high-tech businesses seeing road congestion as a major constraint on growth—esp in relation to A34 and in and around Oxford • Some high- tech workers are travelling long distances • Major rail improvements on the way: electrification; Oxford-Bicester route; station improvements etc—offering opportunities for high density development of business space around improved stations • c 40% of Oxon not served by superfast (24Mbps) broadband; will fall to 30% with BT improvements (but only 16% in Berks). Super-Connected City initiative will help Oxford City achieve 80-100 Mbps

25. Milton Park—daily travel to work pattern 2012

26. Spatial strategy • current ( hi-tech) spatial metaphor is the knowledge economy spine, running N-S through 3 nodes • but each node has constraints in terms of delivering the appropriate soft and physical infrastructure • the favoured Oxford city location has major constraints • even SVUK would have problems for major new employers (eg: recent Astra Zeneca Cambridge preference)

27. 4.Some planning implications of the OIE report- taking a few steps forward?-for the Oxon knowledge economy spine-for Oxford city centre-for strategic and local transport and communications

28. For the Oxon knowledge economy spine The Knowledge Economy Spine concept, articulated in 2014 City Deal, is a significant step forward – but over-focuses on SVUK and Bicester areas at expense of Oxford City Oxford is the main centre of research, has the best educated workforce, is the main service centre, and is where hi-tech firms wish to locate. Implications: --develop housing and research and hi-tech business capacity, and supporting activities, beyond existing plans to the N and S of the existing urban area (Begbroke R&D village to N; Grenoble Road to S) --will require de-allocation and remodelling of some Green Belt land, as undertaken positively for Cambridge, and Chester(?) --if not undertaken may lose firms, which want to work closely with universities, completely out of county

29. -Begbroke R&D village Oxford University owns 170ha adjacent to its Begbroke Science Park, in the Oxford Green Belt This could provide space for the hi-tech/R&D village concept, integrating Begbroke technology initiatives (in engineering and other applied sciences) and substantial employment with affordable housing, hotel and recreation facilities. The new access road to the park has capacity to serve a larger area, Oxford airport is adjacent, and the new rail station at Water Eaton, planned to open in 2015, is easily accessible Such facilities could be of wider benefit to adjacent communities, such as Yarnton and Woodstock.

30. For Oxford city centre Oxford needs more space for hi-tech start others ( and other small/medium firms) within the city Need to manage the potential opportunities of: - West End development - Oxford Station & Oxpens redevelopment - 5,000 sqm bio-escalator facility on Churchill Campus, linking bio-medical research and business - support implementation of the Magnet proposals

31. For strategic and local transport and communications • improve capacity and connectivity of strategic and local transport infrastructure within Knowledge Economy Spine • Including, in addition to welcome rail initiatives: -improvement to A34 -fast and frequent public transport links to stations -plus array of other good initiatives noted by Peter Headicar in recent Oxford Civic Society workshops* *including enhancing local rail services, some form of rapid transit, better interchange hubs, shuttle links, integrated travel information and ticketing systems, workplace travel plans, and changes in transport funding arrangements, including ‘congestion’ charging in the city

32. 5.What next for Oxfordshire planning for high-tech activity---?-other relevantinitiatives-more than planning-widening the scale-importance of betteralignment

33. Other relevant initiatives- the Oxford Civic Society has organised a series of debates during 2013 to explore how a smarter growth approach can better support the delivery of the Knowledge Economy in Central Oxfordshire.-this is an important initiative, more community driven than the more business driven OIE initiative (but some common apirations) - the ‘call to action’ report will be launched on the 31st March 2014

34. Other relevant initiatives--key proposals in the Oxford Futures report • Set up an Oxford Futures Commission • Develop a spatial growth plan • Establish a Quality Review Panel • Engage the public through a Development Forum • Train and develop key decision makers • Establish competitions for key sites • Model the impact of transport options • Mobilise and co-ordinate investment

35. Other relevant initiatives-- lessons from Cambridge? • The creation in 1996 of Cambridge Futures, a private sector led organisation to stimulate thinking about the future development of Cambridge, and to influence policy decisions. The work for Cambridge Futures was led by the Department of Architecture in the University of Cambridge, but it involved a wide range of senior people in private, public and third sectors. • Another key agency was Cambridgeshire Horizons, formed in 2004 to manage the delivery of the growth strategy for Cambridgeshire. Horizons was a company limited by guarantee and did not have statutory planning powers, which remained the preserve of the local authorities. The Horizons Board comprised a cross-section of partner representatives (elected members) and independent figures from different sectors.

36. Cambridge Futures: modelling spatial plans 7 Options considered • Minimum growth • Densification • Necklace villages • Green swap • Growth along transport links • A virtual highway • A new town

37. More than planning -other key OIE report recommendations Research Infrastructure • Increase involvement of Oxford University with the public and private sector research facilities at Harwell • Develop proposals for a major long term expansion of university and corporate research in the Begbroke area to the north of Oxford Soft infrastructure • Lobby Government to develop measures to encourage institutional investors with a longer term perspective, such as pension funds, to invest in high-tech firms • Improve networking events and activities in Oxfordshire, to support improved linkages across all areas of the high-tech community Strategic direction and leadership • Provide strong public and private sector leadership and consistent messaging to realise the growth potential of Oxfordshire’s innovation engine.

38. Widening the scale – must see the future of hi-tech Oxonin relation to its other dynamic neighbours

39. Of key importance is the better alignment of planning policies and the wider institutional environment

40. But who are the strategic planners now? Absence of effective sub-regional planning • LEP—and the Oxfordshire Strategic Economic Plan? • The Oxfordshire Spatial Planning and Infrastructure Board? District Local Plans – and Duty to Co-operate? Importance of ad-hoc initiatives to fill the gap; hence • OIE initiative –with more of a high-tech/business focus • Oxford Futures –with more community/SD focus • City Deal – with co-ordination/infrastructure focus (?) Disjointed incrementalism in action—but currently the best we have? And is engaging with key stakeholders.

41. More than ever, it can be argued that now is the time for a strong, united sustainable development public-private sector partnership for Central Oxfordshire, with a single team delivery vehicle. Change is unpredictable but inevitable and must be managed effectively and efficiently to ensure the prosperity on which all of the area’s future depends.

42. Thankyou for your kind attentionOver to you