On spatial justice and urban regeneration

Introduction

The development of urban regeneration and revitalization projects tend to open big debates about their impact on the existig, spatial justice matters, and segregation. IThis research addresses in particular the case of the Masterplan of Canada Water, which has been underway since 2019. This research's framework will be developed in an initial section in order to set the basis of the work's analysis, building upon authors such as Edward Soja and David Dewar. Added to this, and considering that the selected project is part of London's Opportunity Areas (OA), the work will build on information and previous cases where OA have influenced local populations and dynamics in other parts of London.

The second section looks upon the evolution of Canada Water through time, presenting a snapshot of its current state, highlighting some important data such as demographic data and mapping of important places in the area. Subsequently, a third section will present the Canada Water Masterplan's objectives, as portrayed by developers, acknowledging, that certain aspects of the project are already in progress or completed.

Based on the general concerns urban regeneration projects have raised and previous interventions in Opportunity Areas, the research introuced some of the concerns that this project has specifically raised in media and justice levels.

Having done this and following the initial theorical framework built on spatial justice, this work develops a series of indicators and methods to draw on a comparative analysis between what the project proposes and what it

The following comparative sections evaluates both, the existing and the proposed project based on the previous stated variables, supported by photography, mapping of uses, pedestrian flow mapping and market cost research.

By combining a historical perspective, an analysis of the existant and an assessment of the future proposal, this work seeks to understand how can a project of such scale can impact on the existing population and dynamics. Following the dialetic between society and space and how they affect each other, the research tries to understand how can such intervention be permissive and oppressive when it comes to the fairness of its development and as a powerful tool to define habitats.

The work's final thoughts dwelve into the permissive and oppressive impacts of the Canada Water Masterplan, seen from a perspective of opportunities, threats and matters to take into consideration.

Building the framework

The theoretical framework is built upon concepts such as spatial justice and segregation. Further in the analysis, the topics of spatial justice will be analysed according the current situation and project proposal at Canada Water.

Within this framework, spatial justice refers to how cities are planned and designed to provide equal opportunities to all citizens, equal access to services, enjoyment of public spaces of equal quality, enjoyment of the environment, connectivity within the city, and a sense of security.

According to Dewar (2019), spatial justice encompasses aspects that affect human habitat comprehensively, as part of an everchanging and never fully definitive process. Therefore, spatial justice must be considered transversal to other performative qualities and not merely an added quality of space. In this sense, critically thinking about spatial justice involves considering that (Soja, 2010):

We are all spatial, as well as social and temporal beings.

Space is socially produced and therefore can be socially modified.

Space shapes the social and vice versa.

This last point of socio-spatial dialectics implies recognizing that space can have both positive and negative impacts on the social. The intersection of space, knowledge, and power can be both oppressive and permissive. Thus, spatial justice becomes a critical way of viewing space, where economic, social, and other activities develop fairly (Soja, 2010).

The way cities are conceived, often with capitalist aims and without consideration for the future, can lead to projects designed for only a small part of the population, further highlighting certain hierarchical structures of privilege embedded previously in many societies. These structures are largely defined by class, ethnicity, or gender discrimination (Soja, 2010).

The design process becomes a powerful tool with the ability to define habitats that allow for equitable spaces or the opposite. Moreover, when it comes to rethinking spaces already built by communities, histories, and relationships, the impact of a project can either strengthen these relationships or end them, leading to processes of gentrification as a consequence of the inability to afford or even to complete changes in the daily dynamics of the population.

Dewar (2019) conceptualizes spatial justice based on certain components, including:

Ecological justice: Refers to responsible urban design, prioritizing nature and defining spaces where built development should not occur.

Generative power:

Equal access to opportunities. 1. High densities in local areas, since a precondition for small business to flourish is a vibrant local market. 2. Hierarchical orders of access, defined in terms of scale and pace of movement. More continuous routes have the power to break down economic dependence of local areas.

Equitable access: efers to equal opportunities for mobility in a space, both in terms of distances and access to the same number of businesses (shops, supermarkets, etc.), services (schools, health centers, etc.), or public spaces. It also includes the possibility of universal mobility.

Liveability:

Mainly refers to the quality of public space. This becomes crucial nowadays when many homes do not allow for large dimensions, making public space a crucial element for interaction: sidewalks, squares, pedestrian crossings, and other forms of public space. The quality of this space is also defined by its scale, the activities it allows, and how naturally surveilled it can be.

Introducing Canada Water

Canada Water in time Canada Dock built in 1876 as the first major project of the Surrey Commercial Docks Company, handleling timber (particularly from North America). Dock Managers Offices are built for the Surrey Commercial Docks, remaining operational until the decline in timber demand leads to closure in 1969.

The building is now the Project Hub for the Canada Water Masterplan.

Economic activity

"A characteristic sight of the Canada Docks were the Deal Portrs, dockers who specialised in carrying huge baulks of deal" (Canada Water, 2024)

Post-Second World War, the docks suffer damage and decline due to bombing and the introduction of container shipping.

Surrey Commercial Docks become unprofitable and close in 1969.

First redevelopment The London Docklands Development

Corporation redevelops the area, and Russia Dock Woodland is planted on the site of various docks (a 34.5-acre woodland in 1980).

New retail model

Surrey Quays Shopping Centre constructed on an infilled section of Canada Dock, forming the commercial heart of Canada Water.

Connection with the city

Canada Water tube station opens in 1999 as part of the Jubilee line extension.

New infrastructure Inauguration of Canada Water Library (designed by CZWG Architects)

Re-use of industrial infrastructure Inauguration of Dock X. New venue for diverse events.

Expansion of connection

Overground services linking the area north and south commence in 2010. (Printworks, 2021).

Re-use of industrial

Current Situation

The current situation of Canada Water is not the same as it was a few years ago. The closure of major attraction hubs like Hawker House, due to noise complaints from neighbors, and Printworks, due to the start of the Masterplan construction works, has caused Canada Water to lose a certain portion of its external audience, especially during the weekends. However, new projects such as TEDI and the Paper Garden have become new attraction poles.

The two most significant commercial hubs in Canada Water are Surrey Quays Shopping Centre and Surrey Quays Leisure Park. In spite of the several bussineses they gather, their structure reflects the dynamics of a late 80s mall built on what used to be the outskirts of the city: with an inward-facing mall structure, lacking street-facing services, and currently underutilized parking facilities.

The existing community seems to find more dinamicity gathering in the main square, around the docks, or foodtrucks/stands. Nonetheless, the area is a great attraction pole for the communities to the north, south and east of the intervention area, which is why reflecting on the project's impact on them is crucial to the analysis. (Lipietz et al.,n.d.,p. 16).

As a result of this, many of the developed areas have prioritized the development of market private housing over council housing and affordable spaces for small and medium enterprises. Many of these projects have led to a loss of green space, and commercial and service activities, thus, also with the existing dynamics and urban life of many areas (Lipietz et al., n.d.). .

Moreover, this context has, therefore, had an impact into people having to move out due to unaffordable housing, new communities moving in the neighbourhood (Lipietz et al., n.d.). This

"The London Plan is the statutory Spatial Development Strategy for London. As the overall strategic plan for London, it sets out an integrated economic, environmental, transport and social framework for the development of London over the next 20-25 years" (Canada Water Opportunity Area, n.d.)

situation contradicts what the initial plan of OA target: 50% of "affordable" homes.

Previous experiences with OA have shown different impacts and ways of place making in the city. In terms of the community, part of it had to be displaced or has remained in a disadvantaged situation.

The case of Elephant and Castle has had a huge impact on its former and current residents.

-Besides a deficit of social housing, the demolished Heygate estate building left many in difficult situations of displacement.

-Many council estate leaseholders had to leave Southwark since housing became unaffordable.

-Many local and independent traders were displaced, which had an impact on the social dynamics since their activities were a social hub for Latin American and Afro-caribbean community.

A different scenario unfolded in the Vauxhall-Nine Elms-Battersea Opportunity Area, highlighting the significant role of design and urban policies in social and spatial justice (Just Space, 2022).

Design is political and is a way of placemaking. In this sense, this area serves as a clear example of how Opportunity Areas can also become tools for the fetishization of spaces by selling exclusive access, fostering a pseudo-status or at least being advertised as such.

The regeneration in Vauxhall-Nine Elms-Battersea did not represent the same level of social impact as that of Elephant & Castle, nor did it have the same community repercussions. However, it did lead to the formation of an exclusive space in the city accessible only to a certain sector of the population. The introduction of private investors, exclusive businesses, and services resulted in the creation of relatively active streets during the day, filled with cafes and restaurants accessible only to those who can afford them. These developers were also responsible for creating exclusive and highly segregating types of housing, even among the residents of the area. Rather than a participatory process, the project followed a process of public informative consultation through the years of planning, presenting the proposal in public events, accepting feedback and some surveys regarding what would people want. Since the announcement of the project, the proposal raised many doubts based on previous experiences with urban regeneration projects, specifically in the case of OAs. Many of the residents have expressed concerns about the entry of companies with purely profit-driven motives. Likewise, another concern raised both in public consultation events and on social media has always been the cost of housing and the favoring of a small group that can afford the price of a more exclusive housing in the new area.

The Masterplan's program

From a legal point of view, many residents, with the assistance of a public legal crowdfunding, initiated a process for over a year, where they argued about the negative impacts of the Masterplan on the area and community (Crowd Justice, 2020):

Comparative analysis: current situation & proposal

By Author (2024).

Methodologies & strategies

Activities and types of fluxes it allows

The kind of community created in Canada Water and who is being targeted

Connection of housing areas to businessses

Connections within the area

Since the Canada Water Masterplan is still under construction and planning, the analysis involves a comparison between the existing situation and the proposed one according to the plan's specifications. The analysis bases on some of the spatial justice indicators proposed by Dewar (2019). In addition to these, a third analysis variable is proposed (Affordability) as it has been a constant concern among the community and in other urban regeneration projects.

The comparison of uses in both plans denotes a change in distribution of activities and making the most of surface area:

Segregated uses & diffcult pedestrian connections [lack of natural surveillance]

Currently, there is a segregation of uses, where some residential areas are separated from service areas. The map indicates the furthest point of housing (new housing where most of the council housing is located) and its difficult connection with two important points (supermarket and station).

The lack of mixed uses generates moments in the day where there are "dead" spaces and without "surveillance" (no activity).

Indoor functions

Many of the businesses have an indoors function, which generates a continuous pedestrian flow; however, it does not generate continuous use of public space because it does not connect to it.

Activation of public space

It can be observed that the implementation of food trucks or food stands during the weekends activates public space positively, becoming a point of gatherig around the main square, facing the dock (this will be reflected in the analysis of flows and use of public space). An aspect worth considering is the range of retail shops and services available in Canada Water and its sorroundings and how economically accesible they are to the people living in the area.

For an instance, within the Shopping Centre, we can find pharmacies, a Tesco, a household supply market (The Range), beauty shops, some fast-food restaurants, and clothing stores. While these establishments enjoy high foot traffic, it is worth noticing that none of them fall under the category of upscale or 'fancy' stores. Undefined use

Equitable access Current Situation Project's proposal

By Author (2024).

To the south of the intervention area, a different local ambience emerges, within the business and housing sector, with an array of establishments ranging from traditional butchers and barbershops (mostly owned by a migrant population), to quaint markets offering cooking products.

While the intervention is confined to the designated project perimeter, the multiplicity of functions will significantly influence the surrounding areas.

The project advocates for vibrant street fronts and communal spaces throughout various times of the day by the use of a variety of amenities and mixed-use buildings. However, it must be considered the impact if these interventions on existing businesses: those outside the intervention zone and the food truck vendors who currently activate the area during weekdays and weekends. Particularly in the southern sector of the intervention, the shift in scale and the nature of businesses could be transformative. Talking about accessibility encompasses not only physical connectivity but also inclusivity, safety, and a sense of belonging. Hence, the project's impact on its surroundings is as crucial as its internal functionality.

The intervention exhibits indicators of significantly improving physical connectivity compared to the present conditions, along with shorter pedestrian distances to amenities that activates public spaces. However, it is crucial that this transformation harmonizes with the urban tissue and targets the diversity in the population inhabiting and frequenting the area. Liveability Currently, Canada Water has two types of pedestrian flows and uses of public space depending on whether it is a weekday or weekend.

Main Canada Water Square

Pedestrian flows in constant motion [will remain even during the intervention]

Due to the sectorization of activities, the highest pedestrian flows on weekdays occur in the morning when young people and children go to school or TEDI, as well as people heading to the station for work, so these are just passing flows without permanence in one place. The only point where people gather on these days is at the exit of Canada Water tube station, right outside of a small supermarket where people gather. During the rest of the day, Canada Water square and its streets are quite quiet with little pedestrian flow.

Pedestrian flow that remains [as a result of active fronts and attractive poles]

On the contrary, weekends are much more active. From the main square to the entire walk along the Dock become quite visited points where the furniture of the square, the food market, and the restaurants/cafés adjacent to the square complement each other. On the other hand, the activity presented by Dock X also attracts a specific audience, although they do not make much use of public space, before or after the show they are attending.

Finally, the spaces surrounding the main front of the Shopping Center usually have many people during the week, as Tesco is a great public attractor. In addition to this, food trucks and the two small squares that use the blind facades of the Shopping Center are great space activators.

The lack of variety of uses in a single space or the lack of mixed-use buildings generates that the residential areas outside the intervention boundary have a certain disconnection with the rest of the area around the Dock. This situation is further reinforced at night. However, it is perceived how in the few areas where there is a mixture of activities or mixed-use building, are great public attractors, generating active facades and public spaces, as is the case with the buildings around the main square.

In addition to this, the use of elements such as stairs, platforms, level differences, ramps, or benches is crucial to generate spaces of permanence.

Interrupted pedestrian flow [urban barriers and lack of continuity in pedestrian paths]

Lastly, the area currently grapples with extensive dead zones, notably expansive parking lots encompassing thousands of underutilized square meters, and even the Leisure Park itself, which no longer garners the foot traffic it once did. These aspects work as barriers, affecting on pedestrian routes and obstructing direct physical and visual links to key destinations within Canada Water.

Pedestrian flow in the proposal

The flow analysis within the proposal was conducted taking in consideration the mixed use programme, and a variety of squares and public spaces. The proposal presents a hierarchy of paths, interlinking the entire area and designating primary routes with commercial and service activity, stimulating and increased pedestrian movement.

A lingering consideration, however, lies in the connection with Green Docks, as this thoroughfare represents a significant physical boundary due to its heavy traffic volume.

Liveable areas for everyone

As seen in the previous analysis, including affordable and adaptable businesse is pivotal if wanting to maintain a desire of visiting this place, enjoy it and actually be part of it, rather than targeting exclusively to a singular demographic. The inequalities evident in areas like Vauxhall-Nine Elms-Battersea serve as stark reminders of the risk of exclusion posed by such developments, particularly to longstanding residents impacted by the intervention. In the Rotherhithe area, it is perceived that generally the majority of people rent their homes, usually social housing (either council houses or affordable housing) or privately rented. A very low percentage owns their homes, and they usually have a mortgage. These data could suggest some points:

Project's proposal

1. Acquiring a home (buying)has become too expensive for many people, so they prefer to rent.

2. Rotherhithe has a relatively young population, and due to the property prices, it is challenging to buy while still being young.

Affordability Current Situation

On the other hand, it is observed that the current housing for sale fluctuates between £500K and £300K for one bedroom, depending on the age of the property. However, there is a clear shift to the south of the area (a lower cost), the same area where previously businesses and services had a different scale and character.

New prices?

Regarding the Masterplan proposal, it has not yet presented all the housing prices it proposes, making it difficult to compare with current prices. However, some of the data available suggests that the housing proposed by "The Founding" is only for sale, similar to the housing classified as "affordable" (social or council) in Plot K1. The prices proposed by "The Founding" exceed the current market prices, indicating that the target audience is not the same as the one that currently exists.

In the case of Plot K1, the prices are quite affordable as it is classified as such, however, at the moment only one-bedroom apartments are available, thus only offering the possibility of moving in at a low price for either a single person or a couple, not families.

New population target?

It remains to be understood how much does the rest of the housing proposed by the project will cost, however, initial

Tenure of household

Occupancy rate indicators show that the type of housing proposed targets people who can afford more what currently exists, which could have repercussions especially in the northern and southern residential areas of the intervention.

Considering housing is related to the proposed commerces and services, as seen in the previous part of the analysis, a certain type of housing will attract a certain type of population and businesses, driven by the market and demand. If the housing areas are not properly balanced in terms of deman and costs, the area runs the risk of becoming affordable only for some, having an impact on the commercial areas, to finally have repercussions on the existant population. "< -1 : implies that a household's accommodation has fewer bedrooms than required (overcrowded) +1 <: implies that a household's accommodation has more bedrooms than required (under-occupied) 0 : suggests that a household's accommodation has an ideal number of bedrooms" (Office for National Statistics, 2021) The proposal offers a mixture of uses, attracting different public in different moments of the day, giving dinamicity for a longer span of time in the day.

The mixture of uses and mixed buildings generate active fronts and ground levels that become a natural surveillance.

Besides the work spaces that the project offers, the new businesses will be a place for new job opportunities.

One of the current main problems is businesses working indoors, becoming barriers for pedestrians. The proposal tackles this problem by creating commercial streets rather than enclosed shopping centers.

More activities can convert this place into an attraction pole to a city scale level. A bigger flux of visitors will demand an improvement of the area's connection to transport.

The regeneration project can have an impact on the affordability of housing, the existance of local businesses, which can both affect on the community's cost of living, affecting some parts of the commnity more than others.

Knitting not only the urban tissue but the urban dynamics of the existant becomes crucial for a successful functioning.

This implies designing and taking decisions in terms of businesses and housing considering what already exists: the living and working community of the area. This means including affordable businesses (like the existing ones) in the project.

The variety of housing prices and spaces are important to provide an affordable housing for a broader community, especially for a new population with similar characteristics as the current one.

Due to the possible high prices of housing, there is a risk of a young population having to move out Canada Water, becoming a place specifically for a type of public, from a narrow span of age.

Throughout the presentation of the Masterplan's objectives, the proposal does not seem to consider the sorroundings in terms of activities or even urban scale.

Besides the inclusion of the biggest businesses such as Tesco, the plan does not show the inclusion or dialogues with the foodtrucks, foodstand or local businesses in the sorrounding of the intervention area.

Besides Canary Wharf or some parts of Greenwich, the South East area of London remains disconnected from the rest of the city. The consolidation of this pole could give further attention to the rest of the southern areas.

areas that have not been developed yet, which is why a full comparative analysis was not possible. On the other hand, many of the areas that have been planned can also change during the development process, which was taken into consideration during the analysis.

Finally, the proposal was analysed according to its strenghts, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, added to some points to be taken into consideration in order to accomplish a just project and a desired transformation.

11,150/ km 2 Population density growth + 19% 2019 -Approval of Canada Water Masterplan by Southwark Council's Planning Commitee Expected ending year Updated Masterplan & consultation process Draft Masterplan [ 2021 -2024] Phase 1: Residential building + Paper Yard (Paper Garden, TEDI, The Pacific Tavern) 2016-Designation of Canada Water as an Opportunity Area Public consultation for local priorities & design principlesCompleted buildings since the begining of the project Buildings completed to a 50% or morea d a S t r e e t Alfred Salter Primary School R e d r i f f R o a d Q u eb ec w ay Deal Porters Way S u r r e y Qu ays r o a d Surrey Quays Shopping Centre Southwark Park Stave Hill Ecological Park 3 3 2 1 4 5 4 Surrey Quays Leisure Park Odeon Cinema Hollywood Bowl Tesco Student Accomodation Building in demolition (Ex. Printworks)

Raised concerns in social media 5. Main inquiries, doubts & concerns Legal actions taken by part of the community

Age of the current population