Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Elizabeth Mullner | Isabella Jones | Nadya Entts | Sebu Pfisztner | Yuki Koshiba Lin
Canada Water:
An Evaluation of the
Regeneration Project
Canada Water: An Evaluation of the Regeneration Project Word count: 2,750 (10% leeway)
Main Contents
1. Introduction
2. Development Area: Background and Local Context
3. Outlining the Regeneration Plans
3.1 Creating the Action Plan: Who is Governing the Scheme?
3.2 The Action Plan Content: Who is this development for?
4. Examining Planning Debates Within The Development
Part 1: Transport Infrastructure: Can This Area Support the Increase in Population?
Part 2: Balancing Legal Obligations and Housing Targets with Developer Motives
Part 3: The Role of Sustainability in OA’s
5. Conclusions: A Critical Evaluation of London’s Regeneration Dynamics
Reference List
1 - Canada Water: An Evaluation of the Regeneration Project
1. Introduction
This report evaluates the Canada Water regeneration scheme, with reference to the Canada
Water Area Action Plan (APP). The report provides a brief overview of the development area’s
background and local context before discussing the AAP’s policies and vision for the area until
2026, as well as how the scheme aligns with national guidelines such as the London Plan (2021).
It then examines three pressing planning debates: transport infrastructure capacity, affordable
housing and developer motives, and a flawed sustainability narrative. The report concludes by
linking the project to existing academic and policy literature on regeneration and wider London
development dynamics; it addresses the controversy surrounding whether redevelopment should
prioritise the benefit of London as a global city or the welfare of the local area and its residents.
Currently, approximately 27,000 inhabitants are living in 12,000 dwellings in Surrey Docks and
Rotherhithe wards (AAP, 2015). While the Southwark’s ethnic diversity varies, both wards have
a higher percentage of residents with white ethnic backgrounds, at 63% (Census, 2011). The
general trend indicates that the Rotherhithe area tends to be more deprived, while Surrey
Docks is relatively affluent and situated close to the river, making it an attractive location for
redevelopment investment. Such a trend is prevalent in the area’s urban health index, which
morphs from ‘good’ and ‘neutral’ in Surrey Docks to ‘poor’ in Rotherhithe neighbourhoods.
The Canada Water AAP lay strongly in line with policy from the London Plan and NPPF on
providing new retail space and employment through retail-led regeneration, as well as new
housing for London. Additionally, the Canada Water AAP takes into account the Council
Plan 2011-2014 and the Fairer Future principles to provide a long-term vision, spatial strategy,
and strategic policies for delivering sustainable development in the area. Similarly, the
council was required to consult in compliance with legal legislation and the Statement of
Community Involvement during the preparation and establishment of the Canada Water AAP.
From 2014 onwards, British Land has been formally and informally engaging with around
5,000 local community individuals on the masterplan, including through the consultation
process, developing stakeholder connections, and funding socioeconomic studies.
3 - Canada Water: An Evaluation of the Regeneration Project
Public transport overcrowding is a major development issue, with the Jubilee Line and Overground
already operating at peak capacity due to high through-traffic from Canary Wharf and other
destinations, creating concerns about adapting to increased population in this area (Southwark
Council, 2013). Congestion is additionally apparent in the road network, negatively impacting
the area’s air quality, reliability of bus services, and active modes of transportation, as the area
has a high rate of car ownership and on-street parking is a significant issue for pedestrians.
To address these challenges, British Land and Arup organised locally-led walks, in which
residents were able to discuss key transportation issues in and around the site. This was
paired with multiple drop-in sessions, open to all in the Surrey Quays Shopping centre,
in which background information on transport, local context and potential improvements
were provided. British Land’s involvement with the community has been ongoing since
2014, fostering stakeholder correspondence, consultation schemes and commissioning
site-specific socioeconomic research (Partridge, 2023). Together with the Southwark
council’s efforts (e.g. the Southwark Conversation 2017) an estimated 8,000 people
have engaged with the ongoing consultation processes (Southwark Council, 2018).
The consultation process sparked a planning debate between prioritising public transportation
or car-based transport. The local community advocates for reduced road capacity and
parking space, while the Masterplan supports active modes of transportation. However, the
development’s scale and number of potential users requires high-capacity transport measures
to be developed even before the project begins. The extent to which this is realised in the
AAP (2015) is arguably not substantial enough to support such an influx into the area, as the
development provides walking and cycling infrastructure but lacks additional rail services,
which already operate at full capacity. Such shortfall may become a significant problem
later, as evidence suggests that planning transport provision after the regeneration process
is disruptive and time-consuming, requiring lengthy construction periods. Small-scale
improvements, such as the DLR, may be costly, and incremental additions may be necessary.
This issue contradicts Policy 3.9 (para 3.58) of the Mayor’s London Plan, which stipulates that
“there should be no segregation of London’s population by housing tenure” (The London Plan
2016). Many of those opposing the separation of the affordable units are residents of the recently
developed neighbouring schemes on Quebec Way and they developed the G7 activist organisation
and gathered approximately £27,000 to contest the development in the High Court (Porter 2022).
Figure 8: Massing and disruption of the skyline (Design and Access Statement, 2021).
The Planning Committee Meeting document recognizes that while the separation of affordable
and private housing may be apparent, it should be viewed as part of a larger development. The
development aims to provide at least 700 affordable homes, which could increase to 1,600 and
would necessitate the distribution of affordable homes across a broader area of the Masterplan site
(Planning Committee). Officers are convinced that Plot K1 is a viable and sustainable location for
new houses, particularly for families, because it is near to schools and green areas, and because
both sites are vacant and can be provided without the need to evict or dismantle existing structures.
Additionally, concerns have also arisen regarding building heights. The proposed development
significantly deviates from the original plan designated in the AAP (2015) of 28 flats, now
proposing 79 flats. There has been no thorough evaluation of the potential shading effects on
nearby buildings, nor has there been a complete environmental impact assessment on the
adjacent Local Nature Reserve (Crowd Justice, 2019). Historic England (2018) has stated that
such a development, with seven buildings proposing heights of around 138 m AOD, would have
major negative impacts on the London skyline and decrease the historic significance of the area
(Design and Access Statement, 2021).
8 - Canada Water: An Evaluation of the Regeneration Project
The development’s slogan is displayed above, inviting readers to imagine a natural and green
environment. At first glance the development’s catchphrase appears to comply with the
NPPF’s paragraph 14 “presumption towards sustainable development”. However, sustainability
encompasses more than just environmental factors; Canada Water’s ‘environmentally
sustainable’ development appears to be designed primarily to serve as a flagship for others and
to satisfy British Land’s reputation. As a result, it makes key sacrifices in terms of community
well-being and infrastructure.
The most notable contradiction in the proposal concerns the claim that it will be “the UK’s most
sustainable new town centre”, while also utilising retail-led regeneration (Canada Water AAP).
Although retail-led regeneration is in line with government policies aimed at promoting retail, there
is a larger debate on the sustainability of retail practices. A sustainable town centre should focus
on community infrastructure and the promotion of small and local businesses, as recommended
in the RTPI’s post-pandemic literature as the key to community resilience (Vianello and Krabbe,
2021). However, this is not reflected in the AAP; less than 10% of retail space is allocated for SMEs
alone. Additionally, the development only provides two community facilities, a council funded
library and leisure centre, which are to be shared by all residents, as the high-end apartments
nearby deliberately do not offer such amenities. The lack of emphasis on community infrastructure
undermines the claim that the project will be the UK’s most sustainable new town centre.
The development boasts 35% open space, in accordance with Southwark council’s aim to
address health inequality. Nonetheless, the adequacy of this open space for the number of
residents living in the 37-storey towers is not the only concern (see Figure 9). The most vulnerable
members of the community, who are disproportionately affected by health inequality and the
housing crisis, are being placed in the car-free plot K1, which is located far from the town centre
and lacks access to open space (see Figure 7) Moreover, no GP services are offered within
the development. Additionally, a socioeconomic analysis revealed that schooling is not a high
priority in the area, yet the development includes a new school instead of a health or childcare
centre, which would be more beneficial to the community’s sustainability. These individuals
are also affected by poverty cycles, worsened by low-quality retail practices and inadequate
activities; The 35% open space will likely feature private security, similar to King’s Cross, and
strict closing times (Pick and Sirkin, 2010).
It is important to recognize that investors are part of a larger system of provision that aims to
produce consistent income streams to fulfil obligations to pension fund supporters (Raco and
Brill, 2022). Canada Water development utilises many actions in line with government policy,
such as retail led regeneration; however, as a result of those same policies, it leaves the council
and those they serve at a loss. Despite the positive implications made in Canada Water by
section 106 and CIL, which went into effect in 2015 by directing investment into the Canada Water
Library and public realm, as well as transport accessibility, there are still significant issues with
regard to segregation and dislocation from the community’s needs (particularly those located in
the K1), as well as the damage caused by the altered skyline (AAP, 2015; Rotherhithe Community
Council 2010 s106). However, such a relationship with developing the surrounding area and
balancing the effects of redevelopment is yet to be established through s106 after the completion.
The above highlights the need for regeneration projects to balance global and local community
needs, and prioritise social and economic inclusion, environmental sustainability, and cultural
diversity to ensure a sustainable and equitable future for all. Achieving this requires collaboration
and consultation with a diverse range of stakeholders, notably community groups, to ensure that
the demands of all stakeholders are addressed. As this project is still ongoing, its future is not yet
known, nor what the actual outcome of the 106 agreements will be by completion, or if the community
groups campaigning will be successful in making this area more livable for the local community.
9 - Canada Water: An Evaluation of the Regeneration Project
Reference List
Allies and Morrison. (n.d.). Allies and Morrison - Green and blue. [online] Available at: https://www.al-
liesandmorrison.com/projects/canada-water-masterplan
British Land. (2015.). Canada Water Masterplan. [online] Available at: https://www.britishland.com/our-plac-
es/canada-water-masterplan.
Church, A. (1990). Transport and urban regeneration in London Docklands - A victim of success or a failure
to plan?Cities November 1990 p.289-303 Butterworth Heinemann Ltd: London.
CrowdJustice. (2019). Rethink Canada Water Masterplan. [online] Available at: https://www.crowdjustice.
com/case/rethink-canada-water-masterplan/.
David, A. (2012). Shaping places: urban planning, design and development. Routledge.
Ferm, J., Clifford, B., Canelas, P. and Livingstone, N. (2020). Emerging problematics of deregulating the ur-
ban: The case of permitted development in England. Urban Studies, 58(10), p.004209802093696.
Historic England (2018). T&CP (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 & Planning
(Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Regulations 1990; CANADA WATER MASTERPLAN - LAND
BOUNDED BY LOWER ROAD (WEST), REDRIFF ROAD (SOUTH), QUEBEC WAY (EAST), SURREY
QUAYS ROAD AND CANADA WATER DOCK (NORTH), AND SITE AT ROBERTS CLOSE, LONDON;
SE16; Application No. 18/AP/1604
London Borough of Southwark (2021). State of the Borough Report 2022: Southwark’s Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment. [online] London Borough of Southwark, pp.1–53. Available at: https://moderngov.southwark.
gov.uk/documents/s105579/Appendix%201%20-%20State%20of%20the%20Borough%20Report%202022.
pdf.
Mayes, A. (2018). The regeneration of Canada Water. [online] LiFE Residential. Available at: https://liferesi-
dential.co.uk/news/regeneration-canada-water/.
Partridge, J. (2023). Canada Water: first homes for sale in new £5.6bn London neighbourhood. The Guardian.
[online] 1 Mar. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/mar/01/canada-water-new-lon-
don-british-land.
Pick, S. and Sirkin, J. (2010). Breaking the poverty cycle : the human basis for sustainable development. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Raco, M. (2003). Remaking Place and Securitising Space: Urban Regeneration and the Strategies, Tactics and
Practices of Policing in the UK. Urban Studies, 40(9), pp.1869–1887.
Raco, M. and Brill, F. (2022). Governing the development, financing and funding of the London model. In:
London. Agenda Publishing.
9 - Canada Water: An Evaluation of the Regeneration Project
Reference List
Rotherhithe Community Council (2010) “To release section 106 monies to the Canada Water Library pro-
ject to the value of £1,750,000. 8106 Agreements; Neighbourhoods referenced 8106/115990 account 324;
8106/137053 account 452; S 106/115990B account 402” Report
Southwark council (2015). Revised Canada Water Area Action Plan (final version)
M. Vianello and I. Krabbe (2021). Supporting a global sustainable recovery. [online] Available at: https://
www.rtpi.org.uk/media/9558/urban-planning-after-covid-19-final.pdf.
www.canadawater.co.uk. (n.d.). Canada Water London | Shops, Restaurants & Offices. [online] Available at:
https://www.canadawater.co.uk/ [Accessed 23 Mar. 2023].
Hawkins/Brown (2020). Green light for Temporary Innovation Hub in Canada Water
https://www.hawkinsbrown.com/news/green-light-for-temporary-innovation-hub-in-canada-water/
D. Adams, S. Tisdell (2013). Shaping places: urban planning, design, and development