Inner city redevelopment and regeneration – London’s Dockland case study

* During nineteenth century, London was the busiest port of the world. But due to changes such as better technology, they became abandoned and derelict. * Larger ships could not reach the port and containerization did away with the need of large number of dockers. * By that time the area had very few jobs, the docks had closed and over half of the land was derelict, many of the houses needed urgent repair, transport was poor and there was a lack of basic services, leisure amenities and open space. * The London Dockland's Development Corporation (LDDC) tried to improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. Changes ; Physical: derelict land reclaimed, trees planted, open space created and conservation areas created. ; Economic: improved transport systems means faster journey. Improvements in roads. Employment and businesses increased e.g. The Guardian and Daily Telegraph. High tech firms came due to the low rates of the enterprise zone. These were followed by firms wishing to relocate in new office blocks. ; Social: more than 20 000 homes created. Former docks converted into luxury flats. Large, modern shopping complexes built. Other activities such as marina for water sports and indoor sports centre built. Several areas cleared and converted into parks and area of open space. Almost 100 million pounds has also been spent of health, education, training and community programmes. Reasons for success You can read also Costco Case Study * Extremely high prices of land for new offices and residential development. * The potential of leisure activities and scenic views along the riverside. * Funding of some of the infrastructure by the government. * Initiatives taken by entrepreneurs like John Mowlem, whose company built the London City Airport. * The development of the Dockland Light Railway. * The setting up of the Isle of Dogs Enterprise zone to attract industry. * The development of the airport bringing easy journeys. Groups involved in this * Local housing societies helped by gaining home improving grants. * The local Newham council built affordable houses and improved local services. * The LDDC were responsible for planning and redeveloping dockland. * The national government created enterprise zone with its reduced rate. It encouraged private investment and improved transport systems. * Property developers were responsible for building large office blocks and converting derelict warehouses into luxury flats. * Conservation groups supported tree planting and other schemes. Opinions ? School leaver: happy because there are more new jobs available. ? Local shopkeepers: happy because they will have wealthier customers. ? Local retired people: bad, because the prices in the area rise sharply. ? Former docker: bad because no appropriate manual jobs created. ? Social worker: bad because local community is broken by newcomers. ? Elderly: bad because there is no sufficient services such as hospitals. ? Local people: bad, they wanted jobs and affordable houses. ? People living in Birmingham: happy as their houses were improved along with new facilities provided with them. Nupur Jain 5F Geography case study