Is the aim of the planner to: 'Allow development to come forward.' Is this the best use of their time.
Is it progressive to make this process more of a negotiation rather than dictating terms?
How best can development be steered to create good urban spaces.
Croydon has never been of interest to me. However, I had heard that the majority of Visa's are sought at the government office in Croydon, as was mentioned in the lecture, how exciting is that. From pictures of this process broadcast on the news every time an immigration issue arises it doesn't look like provision for these visitors is best. Perhaps Croydon could buck the national trend against immigration and really welcome these visitors, what a great message Croydon would be giving then, one which other Council's could be envious of.
Also, the Warehouse Theatre, mentioned and seemingly exciting, if only for the space it occupies, how could this be celebrated.
My argument is that you could have as much investment as you wanted, as Croydon did post-war, without making a place.
The argument for functional or dreamy Masterplan's is also exciting. When do we need which version?
Yes no matter how much they want to increase office provision to become the next "Canary Wharf", Croydon doesn't have the reason for anyone to come except people needs Visa. Maybe making the city more welcoming to these visitors could actually benefit them somehow.
ReplyDelete