London Docklands / Pimlico Quality of Life Comparison.

Authors Avatar
London Docklands / Pimlico Quality of Life Comparison

Hypothesis

'The quality of life at the Boardwalk in Docklands is better than at Churchill Gardens in Pimlico.'

Introduction

To prove or disprove the above hypothesis, we must first attempt to define 'quality of life'. Put simply, it is how content people are with their lives and the environment in which they live. However, quality of life is much more than that, it encompasses not just a person's contentment, but the way they live and the place where they choose to live. There are many factors that contribute to 'quality of life', among them are crime, climate, background, education, access to transport and services, living conditions and employment. However, for the purposes of this investigation, many of these factors are immeasurable. This is what makes quality of life so hard to define and gauge - the fact that there are things which clearly have great worth to some but others take for granted, and also that many of the elements of quality of life can only be measured when compared to those of a different place. For example, the quality of life in a developed country will easily exceed that of a developing country, but the same developed country could have a lower quality of life when compared to an even more highly developed country.

We used a wide variety of fieldwork techniques to come to our conclusions. These included doing traffic counts and local service surveys, using bi-polar diagrams and collecting environmental quality data. Each of these techniques were used for specific reasons:

· Traffic Counts: To observe how busy and congested the areas' roads were. Also to examine factors like noise and transport access. These were carried out on the nearest roads to the test sites for 5 minutes, measuring the type and quantity of the traffic.

· Local Service Surveys: To analyse how resident-friendly the areas were in terms of offering a wide range of useful services. We measured the types and quantity of the services we saw.

· Bi-Polar Diagrams: To give an overall profile of the two areas and their quality of life. Scores between 1 and 8 were given in the following categories: Noise, Litter, Space, Transport Access, Services, Air Quality, Accommodation Size, Employment, Homelessness, Crime, Education, Traffic, Places to Worship, Open Spaces and Youth Facilities. A score of 8 means the area is excellent in that field, eg. very spacious, no crime. · Environmental Quality Data: Used to examine and compare how environmentally sound the two areas were. The sites were ranked out of 10 in the following categories: noise, air pollution, litter, natural surfaces and areas for wildlife. A score of 10 indicates that the area is excellent in that particular class, eg. very quiet or litter free.

History of the Sites

London Docklands

For nearly 200 years, the docks of London's East End were the commercial heart of the world's largest empire. At the beginning of the 1960s, one-third of all Britain's trade passed through the Port of London and there were jobs for 28000 dockers. However the start of containerisation in the 1960s marked the beginning of the end for London as a major port. The docks were found to be too small and shallow to handle the huge container ships that were quickly overtaking the docking business in a bid to cut overheads by major shipping companies. By shipping more bulk the container ships quickly proved their worth. They could be loaded or unloaded in a fraction of the time and more cheaply using large cranes and fewer dockers. This containerisation started a rapid decline in the docking industry in London. The first dock to close was St. Katherine's Dock in 1967. Other closures followed in quick succession, the last three (Royal Docks) closing in 1981. The end of London's docking industry (excluding Tilbury, the new container dock near the mouth of the Thames where nearly 2000 people are employed) had grim consequences for the whole of the Docklands area, left virtually derelict. It has been estimated that for every job lost on the docks, three other jobs disappeared in the linked industries of ship repair, manufacturing and transport (the multiplier effect). In 1985 male unemployment in London's Docklands reached 32%. This had the effect of driving people away as young, richer and better educated people moved away in search of employment.

In an attempt to halt the Docklands' rapid degeneration the government set up the London Docklands Development Corporation (LDDC) in 1981. Their brief was to make the Docklands more attractive to businesses and generally rejuvenate the area. Largely, this has worked very well. By making the Docklands an enterprise zone (an area free of normal planning restrictions with tax incentives to develop) the LDDC has made the Docklands a new ultra-modern extension of London's business district. The industries of printing, media, communications, retailing, leisure, tourism, commerce and finance have all set up major bases in the Docklands recently. Land and house prices are now reaching a peak as rich young people with highly paid jobs in the City of London are now moving in. The LDDC also orchestrated the building of the London City Airport (a short take-off and landing airport) and the Docklands Light Railway, connecting Docklands with the rest of central London.
Join now!


The Docklands look to have a bright and wealthy future, having adapted well to once again become a major centre for industry and business, but of a different sort than would have been expected forty years ago. However, this 'new money' is perhaps resented by some of the area's older residents despite the money it has injected into their local economy.

First Impressions

We found Docklands a richly gentrified area, full of modern architecture and continuing construction. The apartments on the Boardwalk are very new and modern-looking (see photographs). They overlook a small marina of expensive ...

This is a preview of the whole essay