Decision Maker: Cabinet

Outcome: Decision approved

Is Key Decision?: Yes

Is Callable In?: Yes

Date of Decision: October 23, 2025

Purpose: The report and appendices presents a Strategic Regeneration Framework (SRF) with a place-based vision for the industrial areas and surrounding developments to the northwest of Canning Town town centre. Cabinet is recommended to adopt the SRF as the key guiding document that sets out the Council’s ambitious approach for the area, and to support the establishment of this area as a hub for inclusive growth and green innovation.   The SRF outlines a number of proposed interventions to improve active travel, vehicular and green infrastructure. This includes bridges across the River Lea. The report and appendices propose that the Mayer Parry Bridge is the most feasible bridge to deliver in this area at the current time. Cabinet is recommended to allocate funding towards the delivery of Mayer Parry Bridge using development contributions.

Content: For the reasons set out in this report and its appendices, Cabinet RESOLVED to Agree to:   i)  Adopt the Canning Town Enterprise Hub Strategic Regeneration Framework (Appendix 1) as the key guiding document that sets out the Council’s ambitious approach for the area. ii)  Allocate funding to progress with the project to deliver the Mayer Parry Bridge (MPB), with the Council committing to contribute £4.8m of funding towards the £12m anticipated shared project costs. This includes: a) Extending the scope of the permitted expenditure of the CIL funding (previously allocated by Cabinet on 20 July 2021 for enablement works on the Lower Lea Valley Priority Bridges Programme) to allow for this to be spent on LBN’s contribution towards the shared project costs for delivery of the MPB, with £650k of the CIL funding anticipated to be spent toward this extended scope, as per the spending profile at Section 4.2.18; b) Allocating up to £3.15m funding that was secured by S106 agreement from the English Cities Fund, developers of the Rathbone Market site, towards the delivery of the MPB, as per the spending profile at Section 4.2.18; c) Noting £1m funding has been secured by S106 agreement from sineQN, developers of the Bidder Street Data Centre site, specifically towards the delivery of the MPB (see Section 4.2.15-4.2.16). Subject to receipt of the funding and further Council governance, this will be allocated towards the delivery of the MPB, as per the spending profile at 4.2.18.   Alternatives considered   a)  Do not adopt the Canning Town Enterprise Hub Strategic Regeneration Framework as the key guiding document for the area. This alternative option is not recommended as without a regeneration framework to set out a vision for development and strategy for supporting infrastructure the growth potential of the area is reduced. The Council would not have a guiding document to direct its own interventions in the area and a framework to steer the direction of inward investment would not be in place. There is a risk that development would not be co-ordinated and the Council would have reduced ability to influence local growth to support an inclusive economy. b)  Do not proceed with the delivery of the Mayer Parry Bridge and instead proceed with delivery of an alternative LLVPBP bridge, such as Lochnagar Bridge. This alternative option is not recommended as Mayer Parry Bridge has now been assessed as the most feasible LLVPBP bridge to deliver in the short-medium term (see Appendix 3). Additionally not all aspects of the proposed funding package outlined in this report could not be used to fund the other LLVPBP bridges, and so to deliver these bridges would require provision of additional funding from other sources. c)  Do not proceed with the delivery of any bridges within the LLVPBP at this time. This alternative option is not recommended as there are currently no options to cross the River Lea between the A13 at Canning Town and Twelvetrees at Bromley-by Bow, a distance of nearly 2km. A new bridge crossing is therefore vital infrastructure that will unlock investment and support new homes, jobs, green spaces and community and cultural assets. River crossings are key pieces of enabling infrastructure identified in the SRF and a decision not to proceed to deliver a bridge could reduce the potential to achieve the ambitions set out in the SRF. A funding package to deliver the Mayer Parry Bridge is currently in place, however some of the funding (including a £2.4m GLA grant) is conditional on LBN and LBTH allocating the remaining funding. If the decision is made not to proceed with the delivery of the bridge at this time, 16 then the currently secured funding may not be available in the future to fund delivery of the bridge. d)  Do not extend the scope of the CIL that has already been allocated to the LLVPBP enabling works to permit expenditure on costs required for delivery of the Mayer Parry Bridge. This alternative option is not recommended as the current proposal avoids the need for either a new allocation of CIL or increase in Council Capital borrowing. e)  Do not allocate S106 funds secured from the English Cities Fund, in relation to the development at Rathbone Market, to the delivery of the Mayer Parry Bridge. This alternative option is not recommended as the S106 funding is required to be spent on infrastructure within vicinity of, or benefiting, the Rathbone Market development. The funding has been paid from the private developer to the Council and can only be spent on local infrastructure requirements (it does not reduce any funding available for the market). The Mayer Parry Bridge project delivers new infrastructure listed on the Council’s capital pipeline and Infrastructure Delivery Plan, that is located less than 500m from the Rathbone Market development and would unlock a new walking/cycling connections. At the present time the Mayer Parry Bridge project is considered to be the project that best meets the requirements of the S106 funding and Council priorities. If these funds were not allocated to the bridge project they may remain unspent and alternative funding for the bridge would be required.