Docklands Housing
Planning Background
As far as the local authorities were concerned, the closure
of the docks provided an opportunity to use the dock
estate to meet the housing needs of the local people. The
1976 London Docklands Strategic Plan recognized the need
to extend the range of tenure in the area, but argued that
simply to introduce private housing would not help most
of those in need, because it would be beyond their
economic means. For Tower Hamlets, therefore, the plan
tentatively suggested that while 40 per cent of new
Docklands housing should be local authority and 20 per
cent should be for owner occupation, a further 40 per
cent should have some form of 'middle tenure', such
as equity-sharing, housing association, or co-operative
schemes. (ref. 107) Tower Hamlets Borough Council's own plan
for the Isle of Dogs, published in 1981, broadly endorsed
the views of the 1976 joint plan, but emphasized that in
any new housing development programme 'there should
be a high proportion of local authority and housing
association developments'. (ref. 108) As a result of the 1976 plan,
between that date and 1981 some 1,300 houses were built
in Docklands and in 1981 another 900 were under
construction, mostly for rent. (ref. 109)
One immediate result of the setting up of the LDDC
was that it acquired more than 600 acres of public land,
mostly owned by the local authorities and intended for
public housing. (ref. 110) Although apparently there were some
initial thoughts that the LDDC might build houses itself,
to set a standard and encourage developers to follow its
example, private house-builders quickly came forward
and made this unnecessary. (ref. 111) In its public pronouncements the Corporation emphasized that it was not
a housing authority and had no remit to build houses.
Nevertheless, it did have a housing role, which was
primarily to provide sites for development by private
builders or by housing associations. According to the
Secretary of State for the Environment in July 1980, the
LDDC could, when disposing of such sites, impose
conditions on the developers, which 'might specify the
type of housing to be provided or the purchase price,
and might give nomination rights either to LDDC or to
the local housing authority, enabling preference to be
given to those in housing need, key workers etc.'. (ref. 112)
In terms of land use and geography, the new housing
of Docklands followed the pattern set in the 1970s and
early 1980s by a series of housing schemes (instigated by
various agencies), in being built on redundant wharves
and industrial sites on the east side of the Isle of
Dogs; indeed, those sites were suggested for residential
development in Tower Hamlets Borough Council's Isle
of Dogs plan. (ref. 113) Of the 12 housing schemes begun after
the inception of the LDDC and before the end of 1986,
nine were on the eastern half of the Island, and six of
these were built on former industrial riverside sites. The
14 schemes begun from 1987 show an almost complete
reversal, with only four on the east side of the Island and
ten on the west side — where the London Borough of
Tower Hamlets had wished to retain sites in industrial
use (ref. 114) — and a total of only five riverside sites (although
there are permissions for residential developments on
several more, not yet implemented). In part this reflects
the fact that as the price of land in Docklands rose the
existing industrial firms on the west side of the Island
were more ready to relocate elsewhere and sell their old
sites for residential development. The designation in 1982
of the land immediately around the docks as an Enterprise
Zone offering tax and rate concessions to business
developments had the effect of virtually excluding new
housing from that area. For this reason only four of the
housing developments so far built actually have dockside
locations.
'Affordable' Homes
The type of tenure of the new housing was very different
from that already built or envisaged by the local authorities. One of the assumptions behind the LDDC's
housing policy was that it needed to provide dwellings
for sale in order to help redress the apparent imbalance
created by the presence of so much council-owned, rented
accommodation in the area. (ref. 115) According to the LDDC's
own figures, from 1982 until 31 March 1988, of a total
of 2,819 housing starts on the Isle of Dogs, 2,737 were
for sale, 22 were for shared ownership, and only 60 were
available for renting. (ref. 116) While, for Docklands as a whole,
between 1981 and 1990 the proportion of owner-occupier
households rose from 5 per cent to 36 per cent and
the proportion of households living in local authority
dwellings had dropped from 83 per cent to 44 per cent. (ref. 117)
Nevertheless, one of the LDDC's roles was to improve
conditions for the existing population and it sought to
ensure that a reasonable proportion of the new housing
would be occupied by local people. On a number of
developments on the Isle of Dogs, therefore, priority was
given to local applicants living in rented accommodation.
In several instances the Corporation also required that a
certain number of dwellings in a scheme should be
'affordable' housing — the Corporation's definition of
affordable being below £40,000. On the Isle of Dogs, the
Glengall Place and Friars Mead schemes were intended
to provide affordable housing, and in 1984 and 1985 twobedroom houses could be obtained on those developments
for no more than £37,000. On the more desirable dockside
or riverside sites the LDDC allowed developers to charge
high prices for the best positions overlooking the water
in return for offering the rest of the housing at affordable
prices. (ref. 118) Thus, in 1984 a two-bedroom flat could be
obtained at Clippers Quay for £39,495, (ref. 119) while even in
1986 properties for £40,000 or less were available on the
riverside developments at Caledonian Wharf, Compass
Point and London Yard. (ref. 120)
However, as house prices in Docklands rapidly escalated, so the proportion of affordable new dwellings
dropped. For example, on sites owned by the LDDC,
by September 1985, 74 per cent of the dwellings sold
cost less than £40,000, but by the end of 1987 only 42
per cent were at an 'affordable' figure, (ref. 121) and only 12 per
cent of those went to former council tenants. (ref. 122) The rapid
rise in house prices also meant, of course, that dwellings
originally offered at 'affordable' levels were well above
the £40,000 mark when they were resold. (ref. 123) Indeed, in
1988 the Corporation had to admit 'it is increasingly
difficult, if not impossible, for homes to be offered at
"affordable" prices', (ref. 124) and in 1989 the affordable-homes
scheme was abandoned in favour of a 'social' housing
programme (see page 54). (ref. 125)
Docklands-based groups argued that these policies of
local priority and affordable prices were of little use to
those already living in the area, and in any case were
subject to widespread abuse. A dwelling of £40,000 was
beyond the means of many local people and ignored the
need for more rented accommodation. The LDDC did
not deny that the local-priority system had been abused,
but disputed that such abuse was as widespread as was
alleged. (ref. 126) Nevertheless, it was said that people outside
the area gave local addresses to qualify for priority or
tenants sold their rent books to others, that however
well-intentioned the policy was, it allowed speculators to
acquire cheap dwellings which they never occupied and
sold on for a quick profit. (ref. 127) At the end of 1985 the LDDC
did tighten up the system to try to stop speculators, and,
among other things, required those who resold within
five years to pay back a proportion of any profit made. (ref. 128)
In 1990 the LDDC claimed that 58 per cent of those
who had moved to live in Docklands since 1981 had
come from Docklands boroughs. (ref. 129) On the other hand,
in 1991 a report that was critical of the LDDC claimed
that only 2,253 of the 15,200 flats and houses built in
Docklands since 1981 had been for local people. (ref. 130)
Figure 263:
Ambassador Square, plans of a typical three-bedroom house. Developed by Laing Homes using standard dwelling types, 1988
Development and Design
Of the 26 housing schemes to be built on the Isle of
Dogs since 1981, only six were actually on land owned
by the LDDC and all were begun in the mid-1980s. On
two of these, at the Mudchute and Maconochie's Wharf,
self-build schemes were carried out, and in both instances
those promoting the projects made the first approach to
the Corporation. Of the private developers responsible
for residential schemes on the Isle of Dogs, Kentish
Property Group was the only one which specialized in
Docklands projects. The firm had already been active in
East London with a number of residential schemes, either
involving the conversion of old buildings or the erection
of new ones. Its Cascades development on the Island
seemed a brilliant success (fn. c) and in the summer of 1987
the company was able to make a share-issue valued at £37
million. (ref. 132) It then set about converting and redeveloping
Burrell's Wharf, but this was to prove its downfall (see
page 478).
The overwhelming majority of housing schemes built
under the LDDC regime have been developed by the
national, volume house-builders such as Barratts, Wates,
Costains, Fairclough, Groveside Homes, Ideal Homes,
Laing and Wimpey. This was probably due in part to the
fact that Sir Nigel Broackes and his next two successors as
Chairman of the LDDC, Christopher Benson and David
Hardy, all came from the property industry. (ref. 133) In stylistic
terms, some of the house-builders have made little concession to the area and have been content to employ their
own standard dwelling-types (see fig. 263). Most, though,
have engaged outside architects to design schemes
specifically for particular sites. Nevertheless, in comparison with the new commercial developments on the
Isle of Dogs, the housing has — apart from a few
exceptions — been quite conservative in design, and there
are rather more traditional-style houses than might be
expected. Materials have tended to be equally traditional:
walls faced in red, brown, yellow, or buff brick, often
relieved by dressings in a contrasting colour; pitched or
hipped roofs covered in slates (albeit often artificial) or
tiles. Construction methods have also generally been
conventional, partly because many developers acted as
their own building contractors, although both Cascades
and Cyclops Wharf employed 'fast-track' methods, pioneered in North America, which made extensive use
of precast concrete and prefabricated components. At
Cascades, a central concrete core was constructed to the
full 20 storeys, and structural floor-slabs were then cast
from the bottom up. Not only was the system fast
(Cascades was completed in just over 18 months), but
floors could be occupied as they were completed, and
while work on the upper floors continued (Plate154a ). (ref. 134)
Another device adopted to speed up building work at
Cascades and The Anchorage was the installation of fully
complete, prefabricated bathrooms (with all fittings and
even with tiles on the walls). (ref. 135)
The presence of the river and the docks had a powerful
influence on the design of much of the housing. Few
designers were able to resist at least one or two 'nautical'
touches, usually metal balconies with brightly painted
railings and an occasional 'porthole' window. Only The
Anchorage and Cascades (Plate 155b) exhibit a more fullblooded treatment in this style, however. At least five
developments (Felstead Gardens, Glengall Bridge, Jamestown Harbour, Luralda Gardens and Plymouth Wharf)
have blocks which seek to re-create the appearance of
traditional riverside and dockside warehouses (see Plate
158a). Beginning with Compass Point, a number of
housing schemes have, to varying degrees, Classical aspirations. Compass Point (Plate 142b) and De Bruin Court
are more Regency in feel, while parts of Timber Wharves
employ a reworking of the traditional Georgian-London
terraced house (Plate 144b), and Lockes Field attempts
to re-create an eighteenth-century mews (Plate 142d).
The layouts at Compass Point and Timber Wharves are
also Classically inspired and both have an impressive
central axis (Plates 142a,142b,143a). However, apart from
Lockes Field, the other three developments all have
touches of Modernism as well.
Figure 264:
. Jamestown Harbour. Plans of one- and two-bedroom flats as envisaged by the developers, Wates, 1985
Some of these schemes were designed very defensively,
most notably at Luralda Gardens, where the closed gates
are apparently guarded by two gatehouses (which actually
each contain a studio-flat), and at Cumberland Mills,
where there is a sophisticated television surveillance
system with a control centre by the entrance gates (again
normally shut), which is manned continuously. It is not
clear whether these installations were just part of the
general demand for protection against crime and vandalism, or were more specifically intended as a defence
against the supposed threat of local hostility, fuelled by
newspaper stories at the time. Certainly, in 1989 security
was a major concern of would-be purchasers on the Isle
of Dogs. (ref. 136)
So far, most of these developments have been exclusively residential, another result, to some extent, of the
designation of the Enterprise Zone. The major exception
is Glengall Bridge, conceived as a 'Business Village', a
mixed development of residential, commercial and retail
space. This is, indeed, the only new housing as yet built
within the Enterprise Zone. Otherwise three housing
schemes also included some shops (Cascades, Cyclops
Wharf and London Yard — where there is also a
restaurant), while The Anchorage incorporated four commercial units, and the Burrell's Wharf scheme was also
intended to have a number of business and commercial
units. (ref. 137) These last two, together with Cascades and
Cyclops Wharf, offered leisure centres as an integral part
of their schemes.
Selling Docklands
The LDDC, the developers and estate agents engaged
in a high-powered marketing campaign which received
widespread coverage in the media and was designed to
persuade house-buyers to come to Docklands, more
especially to the Isle of Dogs. The proximity of the river
and the docks influenced not only design, but was also
seen as a major marketing feature. An image was presented of residents mooring their motor boats or yachts
alongside their homes, and indulging in water sports such
as sail-boarding and water-skiing. Similarly, the names
given to these Docklands housing schemes usually invoke
a waterside connection: 'Quay' and 'Wharf' are the most
favoured, but there is also London Yard (the former
name of the site) and Jamestown Harbour (a new name),
as well as the more obviously nautical The Anchorage
and Compass Point (where the old name of Dudgeon's
Wharf could hardly have appealed to a developer). In
fact, all this is fairly illusory. Most of the riverside
sites have no direct access to the river and, as already
mentioned, only four housing developments enjoy dockside situations. In any case, the tidal nature and fast
currents of the river and the state of the water in the
docks can make leisure activities dangerous, (ref. 138) while until
the completion of the Docklands Sailing Centre in 1989
there was little in the way of facilities for water sports.
Even on a development such as Clippers Quay, with its
own private moorings, scarcely any boats are actually to
be found there. Surprisingly, a survey taken in 1988
revealed that the presence of water was not the most
significant attraction for most Docklands home-buyers. (ref. 139)
The Island is only about 2½ miles from the heart of
the City, and this was another selling-point for houses in
Docklands. The 'Big Bang' of October 1986 (see page
704) in the City created a large potential house-buying
market of highly paid workers seeking to live close to the
City (ref. 140) — many of them young and, in social terms,
upwardly mobile (the so-called 'yuppies'). However, the
notoriously inadequate road and rail systems made the
Isle of Dogs less immediately accessible to the City than
its position suggested. Nevertheless, the 1988 survey
indicated that about half of the house-buyers in Wapping,
Surrey Docks and the Isle of Dogs were professionals or
worked in the City, and their main reason for living in
Docklands was its proximity to the City or their place of
work. (ref. 141)
So, Docklands was promoted as offering a luxurious
way of life, aimed especially at City 'whizz-kids' looking
to enjoy the fruits of their hard work and wanting
relaxation from their hectic lifestyles — hence the attraction of glamorous water sports and the inclusion on a
number of the later developments of leisure centres.
The extensive media coverage helped to suggest that
Docklands was the fashionable place to live. The dwellings themselves were promoted as the last word in luxury,
but this claim did not always bear close scrutiny. In 1989,
when large numbers of new homes were still empty,
housing associations began to consider taking them over
but found that many were below their normal standards. (ref. 142)
Of all the recent housing, Cascades was the most explicit
and most successful in promoting an image of unashamed
luxury. Purchasers of apartments there were less impressed when they subsequently found that some dwellings
in the block were being rented to people receiving housing
benefit, (ref. 143) while the majority of dwellings at Timber
Wharves were occupied by council tenants rehoused from
the St Vincent Estate, Limehouse (see page 408).
A Speculators' Market
Another major incentive for house-buyers, until 1988 at
least, was that dwellings on the Isle of Dogs seemed to
offer a profitable investment. (ref. 144) The initial development
of Docklands coincided with a rapid increase in house
prices in London and the South East, but those in
Docklands — including the Isle of Dogs — rose more
dramatically than anywhere else in London, except
Westminster. (ref. 145) Indeed, house prices on the Island
between 1985 and 1987 far outstripped the hopes of the
most sanguine developers. One of the early housing
schemes, Clippers Quay, saw some of the most startling
increases: the price of a two-bedroom flat, which when
new in 1984 was available at the 'affordable' price of
£39,495, more than tripled in two years, so that by 1986
it was £125,000, while a year later it had risen to
£199,995. (ref. 146) The price of land similarly rose: in 1985 the
Great Eastern Self-Build Housing Association was able
to buy a riverside site of 1.4 acres at Maconochie's Wharf
for a little over £250,000 an acre, in 1986 Ideal Homes
paid over £1 million an acre for the 14.4-acre nonriverside Timber Wharves, while by May 1987 the cost
of riverside land suitable for residential development was
approaching £3 million per acre, (ref. 147) and a record £4
million an acre was paid for the prime Cumberland Mills
site overlooking Greenwich. (ref. 148)
Such quick profits attracted considerable numbers of
speculators, or 'dealers', (ref. 149) who added to the priceinflation. Usually such speculators would put down
retainers on a number of dwellings, even before work
began on site, expecting to sell them at a higher figure
before they had to complete the original sale and pay the
full price. (ref. 150) According to the Financial Times in
December 1987, research showed that about 60 per cent
of advance sales of new dwellings in Docklands had been
to speculators. (ref. 151) As a result, little less than a mania was
created, (ref. 152) which at its height saw second-hand flats on
one development on the Island being offered at £35,000
more than a new one could be purchased for when bought
direct from the developer. (ref. 153)
Difficult Times
During 1987 and 1988 several factors combined to depress
the Docklands housing market. The crash on the Stock
Market in October 1987, when the value of shares
tumbled, slowed down house sales on the Isle of Dogs.
By this time higher-priced properties, over £120,000,
were becoming increasingly difficult to sell, and speculators were beginning to relinquish their options to
buy unfinished dwellings. (ref. 154) Also, from the early 1970s
onwards, the special attraction of Docklands had been
the novelty of living in redundant warehouses, but by
1987 there were few of these left to convert. (ref. 155) Ironically,
on the Isle of Dogs, the only conversion of old industrial
premises into residential — at Burrell's Wharf — was then
being launched.
The large number of new housing schemes which
became available in Docklands during 1987 and 1988
aroused fears of a massive over-supply. To compound
developers' problems, building costs were rising rapidly,
by about 20 per cent a year, threatening the economic
viability of those schemes under construction and deferring some which had not been started. (ref. 156) Simultaneously,
in 1988, potential purchasers were discouraged when the
double tax-relief on a single mortgage for a couple was
withdrawn and interest rates were raised. As house prices
dropped nationally, those in Docklands - just as they
had risen more steeply than elsewhere - now began to
fall more rapidly. (ref. 157) By late 1988, therefore, directly or
indirectly, a number of developers were giving considerable price reductions in an attempt to sell their
properties, (ref. 158) and some owners re-selling two-bedroom
flats overlooking the river on the Isle of Dogs had to
accept prices between 4 per cent and 16 per cent below
those they had expected. (ref. 159)
House sales in the area continued to fall: (ref. 160) in 1988,
205 new dwellings had been sold in Docklands during
one month, but throughout the first 7½ months of 1989
only 300 were sold, out of more than 2,000 available. (ref. 161)
Strangled by slow sales, high interest rates, and escalating
building costs, the Kentish Property Group found itself
in trouble with its Burrell's Wharf development, and in
July 1989 went into receivership. (ref. 162) The psychological
effect of this was far reaching, and dramatically altered the
popular perception of Docklands. (ref. 163) There had previously
been some criticisms, but they now became more widespread, and began to come from the least likely sources.
Very soon after the Kentish crash, a director of a leading
merchant bank expressed the fear that 'the risk and
nightmare is that a ghost city is being created down in
docklands, an environment where people will not want
to live and work'. Even the chief executive of another
house-building company involved in developments on
the Isle of Dogs complained that the Island was one great
building site and hardly seemed the ideal place to live. (ref. 164)
Until then the difficulties had seemed only temporary,
now it seemed that they might prove terminal.
As the seller's market changed to a buyer's one, so
developers had to resort to greater incentives in an
attempt to sell new properties. This process can be traced
particularly well at Cyclops Wharf, where in the second
half of 1988 Fairclough Homes offered purchasers £1,000
a month for a year, to cover payments on the first year's
mortgage. (ref. 165) In the following year they introduced an
equity participation scheme; not only was 10 per cent
of the purchase price deferred, but the mortgage was
subsidised by fixing the interest rate at 10.5 per cent for
the first two years. Even so, by January 1990, only 39 of
the 200 flats had been sold in almost two years, and so a
'Fair Share' scheme was introduced whereby buyers paid
50 per cent of the asking price at the outset and the
remainder at any time during the next five years at the
then market value. (ref. 166) A few months later, in May 1990,
on top of the 50-per-cent scheme, Fairclough also offered
mortgages at 7.5 per cent (half the normal interest
rate at the time) for 18 months. (ref. 167) Apartments in this
development were still being advertised, with various
inducements, in July 1992. (ref. 168)
In their desperation, developers turned to other expedients. On the Cumberland Mills development, Building
Design reported in September 1989 that two half-completed blocks were being sealed without internal fixtures
and fittings. (ref. 169) At Timber Wharves, where only 37 dwellings had been sold to private buyers, Ideal Homes
preferred to offer them their money back, and sell all the
other 421 new homes to the LDDC, which paid £65
million in 1989 so that it could rehouse Council tenants
displaced by the Limehouse Link road. (ref. 170) In 1992 the
LDDC sold some of the dwellings at Timber Wharves
to three housing associations for letting to council tenants
who wanted a move. (ref. 171) In 1991, 40 flats at The Anchorage
were let to Tower Hamlets Council for housing teachers. (ref. 172)
As house sales dwindled, so the number of residential
properties available for rent increased. In the autumn of
1989, for example, one- and two-bedroom flats at Clippers
Quay were offered at rents of between £125 and £135
per week. (ref. 173) New legislation in that year increased the
attractiveness of renting out properties by enabling landlords to charge market rents and introducing 'assured
shorthold' tenancies for a minimum of six months (with
a new contract after the agreed period). (ref. 174)
By October 1990 construction of new dwellings for
sale in Docklands had virtually ceased, with about 1,500
completed dwellings still unsold, and it was estimated
that the existing rate of sales would have to increase by
50 per cent to clear this over-supply by the end of
1991. (ref. 175) Among the sites where plans for residential
developments have been drawn up and agreed, but had
not been implemented by March 1994, are Arnhem
Wharf, Britannia Dock, Clyde & Langbourne Wharves,
Cubitt Town Wharf, Ferguson's Wharf, Hutching's
Wharf, Millwall Wharf, Ocean Wharf and Winkley's
Wharf - the majority being riverside sites on the west
side of the Island. At Glengall Bridge West, a block
intended as housing was remodelled as 'Business Apartments', complete with kitchens and bathrooms, while at
Timber Wharves show houses and flats were demolished
in 1991, to make way for a proposed office block. (ref. 176)
Equilibrium?
In 1989–90 the future of the residential developments on
the Isle of Dogs, as much as the commercial ones, was
thought to be dependent on the success or otherwise of
Canary Wharf. (ref. 177) Yet, despite the fact that Canary Wharf
went into administration in May 1992, there were some
signs of a revival in the housing market in Docklands. (ref. 178)
House sales began to pick up during the first half of 1991
and continued in 1992, although, at Cumberland Mills,
at least, this was only achieved by dropping prices in
1991 by as much as 40 per cent and arranging lowinterest mortgages. (ref. 179) This upturn encouraged developers
to resume the construction of new housing, with the
commencement of another 120 dwellings at Burrell's
Wharf in 1992 and more than 100 low-cost starter homes
in the Corn Mill Quay scheme at Timber Wharves in
1993. (ref. 180) The latter, however, are in stark contrast to the
luxurious Docklands apartments of the 1980s and mark
something of a return to 'affordable' homes.
Undoubtedly, several developers were caught out by
the sudden slump in the housing market and suffered
serious financial damage as a result. Similarly, those
buyers who purchased dwellings at the height of the
boom saw the value of their properties drastically eroded.
However, the Independent concluded in May 1992 that
in Docklands:
Prices have fallen more than 30 per cent since the boom - but
that is no worse than elsewhere in London. People who paid
as little as £50,000 for a flat and £110,000 for a four-bedroomed
house on the Isle of Dogs in 1985 are still ahead of the game. (ref. 181)