Challenges, Strategies, and Risks in Managing the Canary Wharf Megaproject - Dissertation Example

Even though there is an obvious need for such projects, extant literature suggests that the majority of megaprojects exceed their anticipated costs, fall behind schedule, and fail to deliver in the terms used to justify the need for the project. Flyvbjerg (2007) points out “Cost overruns of 50% are common, overruns of 100% are not uncommon. Similarly, substantial benefit shortfalls trouble many mega-projects. Finally, regional development effects and environmental impacts often turn out very differently from what proponents promised,” (P 2).

Stakeholders of mega-projects usually are international construction firms, private and public international financial institutions, and public-works bureaucracies, who form the multinational epistemic groups hence exercising significant influence in support of mega-projects, especially in developing nations (Goldman, 2001). Using the Canary Wharf megaproject in London as a basis, this research paper will explore the importance of good planning as a case study highlighting the importance of prioritizing accessibility together with other major parts of any megaproject.

Canary Wharf has projected up to 50,000 workers in the area after the development scheme. However, Canary Wharf today has more than 90,000 workers and access and mobility have become a major problem. This paper will proceed to discuss the matter in a case study format. Statement of the Problem Accessibility Challenges of the Megaproject Canary Wharf Canary Wharf is a success story considering the challenges and difficulties its planners and developers went through to pursue the redevelopment megaproject.

However, it has encountered one consistent problem throughout its history since the 1970s and that is accessibility, mobility ad transport. This case study will try to answer what are the possibilities immediately as well as sustainably available for Canary Wharf when it comes to accessibility, mobility as well as transport. As the LDDC admitted, “One of the difficulties of planning transport for Docklands (as in the rest of London) has always been the long lead time needed for the implementation of road and rail proposals.

It inevitably takes very much longer to plan, fund, and execute plans for transport infrastructure than it does to plan and complete a development scheme, particularly a zone with EZ incentives,” (LDDC History, 2009, P 27). Areas of Consideration 1. Demand-side Solution 2. Supply-side Solution In addressing mobility approaches on transportation network design are supply-side solutions and demand-side solutions. Supply-side solutions meant building more roads and bridges, expansion of more lanes in the main urban artery, optimizing traffic signals to reduce congestion, more commuter train lines, among others.

These make mobility easier and stable for humans. The demand-side solution, on the other hand, tries to reduce the need for mobility. The method examines all elements of urban form to shape the way people travel and seek ways to reduce travel distances, increase active travel, and decrease the impact of the motor vehicle on the environment and quality of life (Marzoughi and Vanderburg, 2010).

Objectives
The main objectives of this case study are:

• To define the established answers to Canary Wharf’s accessibility, transport, and mobility problems
• To present other available options for accessibility, transport, and mobility
• To establish sustainable and long-term solutions for accessibility, transport, and mobility to, from, and within Canary Wharf.