London Borough of Tower Hamlets Central Stepney SRB: Final Evaluation The area in about 1992, with the Gas Works site and BMT Houses to the Perspective of part of the new development, with Waterview House in the north, Limehouse Fields Estate to the south, before the SRB (LDDC photo) background and the Canal to the right (PRP Architects image) Michael Edwards, The Bartlett School of Planning, University College London Simona Florio, Scool of Planning, Oxford Brookes University Nikos Karadimitriou, The Bartlett School of Planning, University College London Claudio de Magalhães, The Bartlett School of Planning, University College London with assistance from Ziaur Rahman and Jabeada Begum [email protected] May 2003; minor corrections September 2003 Page 2 Contents A summary of the main findings of this study is to be found in section 4 1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................................................................4 1.1 The brief...............................................................................................................................................................................................................4 1.2 Our approach........................................................................................................................................................................................................4 1.3 Context.................................................................................................................................................................................................................5 1.4 Research method..................................................................................................................................................................................................6 2 The Housing programme...............................................................................................................................................................................................8 2.1 Has the Masterplan been implemented?................................................................................................................................................................8 2.2 Have all the outputs been achieved? (see Appendix A for further details)............................................................................................................17 2.3 Has the programme kept to time and budget?........................................................................................................................................................18 2.4 Have any additional outputs been achieved?........................................................................................................................................................19 2.5 Has the Stepney Charter been adhered to (including an assessment of the quality of consultation)..........................................................................19 2.6 Has the allocation of homes been discriminatory in any way?...............................................................................................................................24 2.7 Has SHADA having a dedicated re-housing team made a difference to the treatment of residents?........................................................................26 2.8 Is the programme perceived as a success by residents, the Council, funding agencies, RSL partners and contractors?..................................................28 2.10 Has the partnership approach worked?..............................................................................................................................................................31 2.11What added value has SHADA brought to the programme?................................................................................................................................34 2.12 Has the SHADA been a cost effective method of delivering the programme?.......................................................................................................34 2.13 How has the programme performed against comparable schemes?.......................................................................................................................34 2.14 Was this an optimum density in terms of number housed?.....................................................................................................................................34 2.15 Are higher prospective housing costs perceived by tenants as increasing the 'benefit trap'?...................................................................................35 2.16 The gas works site..............................................................................................................................................................................................35 2.17 To what extent have external partners' and investors' perceptions of the area changed?.......................................................................................37 Final Evaluation of Central Stepney SRB, Tower Hamlets 2003 page 3 3. The Environment & Leisure, Health, Economic and Community Development Programmes...........................................................................................38 3.1 Progress and achievements of programmes relative to original appraisals and expectations in the Bid...................................................................38 3.2 What have been each programme's outputs and costs?...........................................................................................................................................42 3.3 What synergy and added value have been secured from linking with other initiatives such as EU Programmes, NDC and other SRBs?...................47 3.4 Is there still a need for each programme, and if so how can it be sustained after the SRB has ended?.......................................................................47 3.5 What lessons do the community-related programmes pursued in Central Stepney yield in terms in good practice?...................................................48 4 Conclusions.................................................................................................................................................................................................................53 4.1 Strengths and weaknesses in SHADA's and the SRB's achievement.......................................................................................................................53 4.2 Lessons: what can be done within the rules which applied?...................................................................................................................................54 4.3 Could a better job be done in a different context (i.e. with modified rules and policies)?..........................................................................................55 4.4 Research Questions..............................................................................................................................................................................................55 Appendix A: Detailed project-by-project data...............................................................................................................................................................57 Details for the housing programme............................................................................................................................................................................58 Environment & Leisure, Health and Community Development Programmes.................................................................................................................75 What synergy and added value has been secured from linking with other initiatives such as EU Programmes, NDC and other SRBs?...........................95 Appendix B: People interviewed...................................................................................................................................................................................99 Appendix C: Aims and Objectives in SRB evaluation....................................................................................................................................................102 Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................................................102 SRB bid objectives and programmes..........................................................................................................................................................................102 Delivery plans, objectives and programmes..............................................................................................................................................................106 Conclusion...............................................................................................................................................................................................................110 Appendix D: Bibliography..........................................................................................................................................................................................112 It is planned to make electronic copies of this report available