| |
Top of Page
What was the LDDC?
THE Corporation was an urban development corporation,
the second to be established by the then Secretary of State for the Environment,
Michael Heseltine, under s.136 of the Local Government, Planning and Land
Act 1980. Its object was to secure the regeneration of the London Docklands
Urban Development Area (UDA) comprising 8½ square miles of East London
in the Boroughs of Tower Hamlets, Newham and Southwark. This was a response
to a huge decline in the economy of the area brought about by the progressive
closure of the 1960s onwards. Years later, in his book Life in the Jungle*,
Michael Heseltine wrote:
"I had found myself in in small plane, heading
in that direction by way of the London's East End. My indignation
at what was happening on the South Bank was as nothing compared to my
reaction to the immense tracts of dereliction I now observed. The
rotting docks - long since abandoned for deep-water harbours able to take
modern container ships downstream - the crumbling infrastructure that
had once supported their thriving industry and vast expanses of polluted
land left behind by modern technology and enhanced environmentalism.
The place was a tip: 6,000 acres of forgotten wasteland"
There had been attempts by the local authorities
to deal with this. (These are described in an LDDC monograph "Initiating
Urban Change" published in 1997). These efforts were
perceived by the Government to be much too slow and there was a need
for resources on a scale which it would only make available through a
focussed agency of its own. LDDC was wholly financed by grant from the
Government and the income generated by the disposal of land for housing,
industrial and commercial development.
(* Hodder and Stoughton, 2000, ISBN 0
340 73915 0 - see pages 130,153, 200, 211-214, 380, 397-398 and 515.
Among LDDC veterans Michael Heseltine is often thought of as the father
of the Corporation - click the thumbnail to the right to see a 1987 picture
of Michael Heseltine with LDDC staff)
Top of Page
Aims and powers
Although its influence in the area was undoubtedly very
strong, LDDC's powers were in practice pretty limited:
-
It had powers to acquire land by agreement or compulsory
purchase and, in the case of the large amount of land in the public
sector, there were powers for it to be vested in the Corporation by
the Secretary of State. This ensured a supply of land for development.
-
It took over from the London Boroughs their planning
(but not their plan making) powers. This was response to the Government's
perception that the Boroughs had been too restrictive in exercising
their development control and other powers because their plans for
the area were outmoded and inappropriate.
-
It had powers, and the resources, to provide new
(or refurbish the existing) infrastructure.
Apart from planning all other public services (housing,
education, health etc) remained firmly in the hands of the Boroughs and
other public agencies although the Corporation could and did provide funds
for their development and improvement. The Corporation's lack of remit
in this respect was often misunderstood by those who felt the LDDC should
do more to revitalise these services for the benefit of local people.
Top of Page
The Task
THE 1980 Act requires an urban development corporation
"to secure the regeneration of its area, by bringing land and buildings
into effective use, encouraging the development of existing and new industry
and commerce, creating an attractive environment and ensuring that housing
and social facilities are available to encourage people to live and work
in the area".
Against such a brief the task facing the Corporation
in 1981 was daunting. A Regeneration Research Report (No
12 - see below) published in 1997 by the Department of the
Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) analysed the problems of
the Docklands as follows:
-
The area experienced catastrophic job losses over
a short period of time, as the Docks closed. Between 1978 and 1983,
over 12,000 jobs were lost. The skills of the local population, directed
at blue collar work, were inappropriate for many of the growth areas
of the London economy.
-
A high proportion of land was held by public bodies
who had neither the will nor the capital to make it available for
redevelopment. Relatively little land was in private holdings. Thus
the supply of land was constrained by a pattern of ownership which
was not market sensitive.
-
The extent of dereliction in parts of Docklands
was so severe that the costs of development would be very high and
uncertain, lowering the attractiveness of the area to investors. External
intervention was needed to meet extra-ordinary land reclamation costs
and to improve developer confidence more generally.
-
Many development sites were poorly served by the
local infrastructure - the provision of which would be essential for
these sites to be developed. Poor strategic links between Docklands
and the rest of London, the country and internationally, would have
created additional costs for employers thus depressing the potential
returns on investment.
-
 The
market alone was unlikely to provide the environmental improvements
(including landscaping, refurbishment of the dock estate or restoration
of prominent landmarks) or the provision of infrastructure and amenities
that were essential if Docklands was to cast off its run-down image
and become an attractive place in which to live and conduct business.
-
There were certain gaps in available information
that were hindering the operation of markets - for example, the almost
complete absence of private house-building in the area for years meant
that housing developers had no idea on the potential return for new-build,
thus magnifying the risk to developers and deterring investment.
-
This combination of factors made it difficult for
the market, without external intervention, to reverse the steep cycle
of decline experienced by Docklands before the establishment of LDDC.
Top of Page
Achievements
THE Corporation was at work for 17 years. In its final
Annual Report in 1998 it headlined its achievements as follows:
- £1.86 billion in public sector investment
- £7.7 billion in private sector investment
- 1,066 acres of land sold for redevelopment
- 144 km of new and improved roads
- the construction of theDocklands Light Railway
- 25 million sq feet of commercial /industrial floorspace built
- 1,884 acres of derelict land reclaimed
- 24,046 new homes built
- 2,700 businesses trading
- contributions to 5 new health centres and the redevelopment of 6 more
- funding towards 11 new primary schools, 2 secondary schools, 3 post-16
colleges and 9 vocational training centres
- 94 awards for architecture, conservation and landscaping
- 85,000 now at work in London Docklands
There is more detailed information in the LDDC's 1998 Regeneration Statement
and its nine monographs describing its work in the various fields in which
it operated -
Top of Page
How well did LDDC succeed?
OPINIONS vary about how well the Corporation succeeded
in its regeneration task and the extent to which its work was a benefit
to the original inhabitants of its area. Another Regeneration Research
Report (Number 16 - see below) published
by DETR in 1998 has this to say:-
-
The LDDC has successfully tackled the widespread
multiple market failure which prevailed in the London Docklands in
1981. Failures in land, housing and commercial property markets have
been addressed and labour market failures have been alleviated by
a combination of training projects, improvements in accessibility
in and out of Docklands and the creation of new local jobs.
-
When all projects are completed the total public
sector cost of regenerating Docklands will be of the order of £3,900
million, 48% incurred by the LDDC, 25% by London Transport and 27%
by the Isle of Dogs Enterprise Zone. Almost half the public sector
cost of regenerating Docklands was devoted to transport infrastructure.
-
Private sector investment in Docklands, at £8,700
million by March 1998, has been substantial and will continue to increase
well into the next century. 
-
The LDDC has generated a wide range of economic,
environmental and social benefits. Prominent amongst these are over
24,000 housing units and over 80,000 gross jobs within the Urban Development
Area (UDA). Housing tenure is substantially more varied, employment
is three times higher, the number of firms has increased fivefold
and the new stock of housing will accommodate an additional 45,000
population.
-
With respect to value-for-money, the evaluation
concluded that every £1M of public sector cost generated net additional
benefits in the UDA of 23 jobs, 8500 sq m of office floorspace, 7.8
housing units plus many other diverse and intermediate benefits. Since
almost all the costs have been incurred and some of the benefits have
still to materialise, this cost-benefit ratio should be more favourable
by a third when the end state position is reached in 2010 or 2015.
-
In spite of vociferous comments to the contrary
over the life of the Corporation, the LDDC generated substantial benefits
specifically for local communities and residents. The amount of new
social housing is higher than it would have been in the absence of
the Corporation.
-
In the wider local economy, the net impact of LDDC
activities is lower, but even so, the LDDC generated an additional
23,000 jobs in Central London by increasing the supply of high grade
office accommodation which led to a more competitive financial centre.
Top of Page
Completion
THE Corporation, which was established on 2nd July 1981,
was expected to need 10-15 years to accomplish its task. In October 1994
it began by stages to withdraw. Bermondsey Riverside in Southwark was
the first area to be "dedesignated" and the withdrawal process
ended with the Royal Docks on 31st March 1998 although its task there
was not fully complete. The Corporation was formally wound up on 30th
June 1998.
Top of Page
The Future
IN most of the LDDC's area the Corporation' work was
sufficiently complete, and the momentum of regeneration such, that there
was no need for a specialised agency to take over its role. The Boroughs
and other local agencies were left to carry on the work. In the Royal
Docks, however, the Corporation's there was a good deal of outstanding
work. This was taken over by another agency of the central government,
English Partnerships, working in collaboration with the London Borough
of Newham to whom the LDDC's planning powers were restored. The joint
team established for this purpose operates from offices on the north side
of the Royal Albert Dock just opposite London City Airport.
Top of Page
More
Information?
LDDC Monographs
The Corporation's own record of its work is recorded
in a series of nine monographs published towards the end of its life and
summed up in its Regeneration Statement. These have been reproduced in
HTML format and are available on this site
Top of Page
Completion Booklets
The LDDC withdrew from its area by stages starting with
Bermondsey Riverside on 30th October 1994 and ending with the Royal Docks
31st March 1998. As each area was "de-designated" the Corporation
published a booklet with a brief history of the area and of the LDDC's
work there. These,too, are reproduced on this site:
Top of Page
Select Committee Report
The Government's proposal to establish the LDDC attracted a number of objections. These were heard by a Select Committee of the House of Lords which sat for 46 days starting in February 1981.The Select Committee's report (.pdf 647 kb) was published on 5th June 1981 Top of Page
Presentation
In 2004 an IP consultant, who until
1998 was a senior LDDC officer (serving throughout the whole of the Corporation's
life), spoke to a group of students from Cambridge University. The
slides used in this presentation can be seen by clicking below:
The views expressed in the presentation are entirely
those of the former LDDC officer.
Top of Page
DETR Studies
In 1997/98 the Department of the Environment, Transport
and the Regions (DETR) commissioned an evaluation of the LDDC by Cambridge
Policy Consultants Ltd. This followed an earlier baseline report undertaken
by consultants PriceWaterhouse. Summaries of these reports, referrred
to above, are available on the DETR's website:-
Top of Page
Annual Reports and Accounts
As with most organisations the Annual Reports and Accounts of the LDDDC are a good source of chronological information about the work of the Corporation and how it spent its money. Altogether these reports contain more than 1000 pages of information. These have been scanned and reproduced as zip files on our Annual Reports and Accounts page.
Top of Page
NAO Report - How European Cities Achieve Renaissance
In 2007 the National Audit Office carried out a study of how central government departments work with each other and with regional and local bodies to deliver the Government's ambitious aspirations for the Thames Gateway. As part of this study the NAO explored how seven European cities or regions have tackled regeneration and brrought sustainable growth and renewal to local communities. Brief summaries of these companion studies are published in the NAO publication How European Cities Achieve Renaissance. Among the short reports, on pages 21-28, is one on the LDDC's work in London Docklands.
The report of the main studyThe Thames Gateway: Laying the Foundation is also well worth a read. There is also an Executive Summary
Top of Page
Overview of LDDC Accounts
As part of a wider NAO study of the Thames Gateway programme, the National Audit Office in 2007 carried out a short analysis of the Annual Accounts of the LDDC over the 17 years of its life.The resulting overview was not published but is reproduced here by kind permission. Top of Page
|
|
