The new Docklands Development feels unwelcoming to most people. Aspects of the physical environment can account for this feeling. The structures, their placement and what was not included in the design all contribute to a class landscape. This is an upper class landscape designed to attract specific people to the new development and to drive others out.

The British critic, Colin Davies, wrote of Canary Wharf, "[it is] a development that is at least 90 percent leasable offices, all designed to the same standard to attract the same kind of large business corporation. No one will live on the wharf, there are no factories or workshops, nothing designed for small businesses, nothing downmarket. . . it is a monofunctional and monocultural urban zone." Davies was writing specifically about Canary Wharf. There are large residential zones in other parts of the Docklands. The monofunctional and monocultural design of Canary Wharf has specific manifestations that lead to a classist landscape. To Davies this is a "classy but safe image that will appeal to big corporations."(Ibid.).

John Morris Dixon gave an American perspective on Canary Wharf and detected the same classist feeling that Davies did. The architecture of Canary Wharf is "turned inward." Dixon sees this as a "metaphor for social class distinction. . . a cluster of upper-crust club men -- disciplined, well-bred, uninteresting - - standing shoulder to shoulder against the surrounding riffraff." The best example of this is the square in front of One Canada Square. There is well-landscaped (one could say indicating a landscape of power) square almost protected from the rest of London by buildings designed by award- wining architects that house important men. Dixon also accused the development of not taking advantage of the fabulous views in the Docklands. While my tour guide dismissed this criticism, I tend to agree. The best views of London are from the offices. Through their windows, executives can look down on indistinguishable Londoners while Londoners can only see distant buildings with their backs to them.

Dixon complained of "no indoor gathering places except the lively light rail station and a bland little shopping mall." The dearth of gathering places is unwelcoming to those who don't "belong." Outsiders include anyone who doesn't have a reason to be at Canary Wharf. Because the buildings consist of offices designed to house large corporations, only white collar office workers have a reason to be at Canary Wharf.

Other areas of the Docklands are not exclusively business oriented and the monofunctional criticism does not apply. However, the new residential and retail development is still meant for a certain clientele. On my tour of the residential sectors (mainly in Beckton) of new Docklands development I saw several housing styles. While the theme of the facades changed there were also several constants. The housing was of primarily the same size and same cost. A new studio apartment is around 50 thousand pounds.

The LDDC has responded in several ways to the above criticisms. There is a huge campaign "Have a Great Night Out on the D (the DLR)" and either keep workers in the Docklands at night or bring people back at night for shopping and eating. The LDDC is trying to change its image of being "a heartless agent of gentrification" by refurbishing council housing. There are numerous signs that read "Another Project Funded by the LDDC" on council housing. Residential developers are often required to refurbish historic buildings such as warehouses before they are permitted to build new housing. Additionally, a certain percentage of the new housing stock must be sold to original Docklands residents at a pre-determined "reasonable" price,(Fordham, Interview).

While the LDDC quickly points out that original businesses and homes were rarely torn down, there are other ways to "kill" the original community. Original Docklands establishments and residents have been cut off, isolated and overshadowed by the new development. The effect is almost the same as tearing them down -- it only takes longer. One of the primary reasons for this sharp boundary between new and old in the Docklands is the lack of accessibility. The public transportation that exists and what is being planned for the future focuses on joining the city of London with the Docklands, not uniting the Docklands with itself.

The old and new sections of the Docklands are close geographically, yet it is very difficult to walk from one to the other. When I began my walking tour of the Docklands I started in the old section. Not knowing my way around, I used Canary Wharf Tower as a guide and began walking towards it. The more I walked, the further it seemed to get. After stopping to get directions I was told to take a bus and then walk. I could see the Tower close to me, yet could not walk there. Finally I learned that there was only one pedestrian bridge linking Canary Wharf to the rest of the Docklands.

Because it has been forced into a corner, the LDDC is becoming more responsive to the community it invaded. There is much thought going into making the Docklands more accessible to pedestrians. This is the first step in breaking down its elitist, exclusive feeling. In March of 1995 there was a display in Canary Wharf Tower of model bridges from an architectural contest to design the new pedestrian bridges. The sign by the models reads: