|
(Note: This Monograph has been reproduced
by kind permission of the Commission for the New Towns now known as English
Partnerships. It is published for general interest and research purposes
only and may not be reproduced for other purposes except with the permission
of English Partnerships who now hold the copyright of LDDC publications)
Top of Page
The experience in Docklands
The Corporation's experience in providing a road and
public transport network for London Docklands points to certain lessons
which may be usefully applied elsewhere, especially where public and private
sector partnership mechanisms are used.
At one level basic provision can be quickly provided
by directly funding the expansion of existing public transport services
or by directly subsidising new skeleton services. Both approaches will
help to generate investor confidence and attract new levels of activity
so that eventually subsidy can be withdrawn. The level of investment activity
and development, however, is severely constrained by the level of service
provision.
Therefore, in addition and in parallel, what may also
be required, especially in such neglected areas as Docklands, is new investment
of a high order to provide a level of provision commensurate with regeneration
ambitions.
Top of Chapter
Top of Page
Two basic problems: funding and timescale 
There are two basic problems to this approach: first,
obtaining funding for such schemes prior to and in order to facilitate
the realisation of such ambitions; second, implementing such schemes within
acceptable time scales, especially in periods of intense development activity.
Failure to do so however, can severely slow down the momentum of investment
and development, and at worst, prevent it from taking place at all.
Top of Chapter
Top of Page
Partnership
Of critical importance has been the need to agree project
objectives at the outset with all the agencies involved in the regeneration
process. Both development opportunities and early implementation of transport
schemes can be greatly enhanced when there is an effective partnership
between public and private sectors, including Government. The prospects
can be especially improved when the cost of schemes can be shared between
the parties and such arrangements endorsed by Government.
The building of Phase I of the DLR network, with costs
shared between LDDC and GLC/LT, the extension of the DLR to Bank, and
the building of the Jubilee Line Extension, (where in both cases the same
developer made significant contributions to the overall costs), are examples
of such approaches.
Top of Chapter
Top of Page
Flexibility
If initial funds are limited another requirement in
facilitating early development is to provide for flexibility and growth
in both public transport systems and roads. Once again the DLR provides
a good example of a basic system which was built with the capability to
be expanded when further funding became available. Flexibility is thus
a key to early development. It is particularly relevant in the UK where
the paradox of transport planning is such that in order to obtain Government
funds and support, one needs to demonstrate demand.
Top of Chapter
Top of Page
 The
chicken or the egg?
However, in areas awaiting regeneration that is not
always possible as demand follows the supply factors of location and accessibility.
In France, by contrast, the Government in such examples as La Defense
and the holiday resorts of Lanquedoc-Roussillon have funded transport
infrastructure in advance of investment by the private sector.
In this country such an approach has been adopted as
part of previous regional assistance policies. It is particularly difficult
in London, however, to persuade Governments to commit public expenditure
for major transport investment in advance or as an 'act of faith'. Such
an approach would certainly have been necessary for Docklands and East
London in the 1970s and the first part of the 1980s as part of a major
regeneration exercise. As this story has shown, however, transport investment
at that time was piecemeal and at a much lower scale. Even by the late
1980s with clear evidence to be seen of the new Isle of Dogs business
district centred on Canary Wharf, large sections of public opinion did
not support the funding of the Jubilee Line Extension.
This was because there is already substantial demand
for transport investment to support existing London travel and work patterns
and to tackle congestion. Regeneration areas of London therefore face
strong competition for resources from well established areas where transport
problems are seen to be self evident. Too often programmes to regenerate
areas of East London, for example, are seen as less important than programmes
to make existing travel a more pleasant and more efficient experience.
In Docklands it was the scale of private sector investment,
led by Canary Wharf, which provided a stimulus for the Cotporation's major
transport programmes and subsequent funding by Government.
Canary Wharf became committed because of the early activities
of the LDDC, and in particular because of the planning and tax regime
in the Enterprise Zone and the building of the initial DLR. Without these
factors there would have been no Canary Wharf, and without Canary Wharf
there would not have been a Jubilee Line extension to Docklands, or a
DLR Bank Extension.
The significance of Canary Wharf is not simply as a
major commercial development creating a new business district. Rather
it was the stimulus, on behalf of large parts of Southe-east and East
London, which generated essential transport infrastructure. That infrastructure
will in turn stimulate investment in jobs far beyond the new business
district itself.
The transport schemes which have now been committed
have in turn provided the impetus for a higher level of development and
investment, both in terms of scale and quality, to be drawn to the area.
This would certainly have not been feasible if the realities and perceptions
of accessibility to and within Docklands were still focused on red brick
roads and subsidised bus services.
Top of Chapter
Top of Page
Note by Webmaster:
Some readers will be interested to know about the progress
made in developing the transport infrastructure since the LDDC closed
its doors in 1998. There is a good summary of the various projects
completed, in progress or planned at the website of the London City Airport Consultative Committee.
|
