Council move is right for future
WHILE many readers have been quick to criticise the city council's relocation plans, from a geographic and urban planning standpoint it makes perfect sense.
The six towns of Stoke-on-Trent have been nothing short of a development curse.
Put simply, you can not expect to experience successful development when a finite resource pool is spread so thinly.
The majority of successful and sustainable urban settlements in the developed world follow one of two models: the Burgess Zone Model or the Hoyt Sector model.
****Best Deals**** Van Insurance for 17-24 Yr Old Drivers - Contact Insure365 on 01782 898188
Terms: 1 Voucher Per Customer
Contact: 01782 898188
Valid until: Friday, July 19 2013
These models, despite their differences, stress one vital element – the importance of a central business district. An element which is crucially lacking from Stoke-on-Trent.
The Burgess Model highlights the process of 'growing out' from the CBD in a series of concentric rings.
Similarly, the Hoyt Model, modifying the Burgess model, highlights the importance of transport links, with industrial areas developing outwards and housing growing around these main transport links.
However, the relocation plans should be treated as a 'first step on the ladder' with much more significant steps to climb in future years.
It will take many years, if not decades, to successfully transform the city's haphazard design.
Drastic action may, however, be required.
JORDAN HUXLEY Rudyard
Comments
by Dizzy1960
Sunday, June 10 2012, 9:27AM
“Who is this geezer high-lighting a "BIG FOR" for the "City Council" moving to a CBD in Hanley, by emphasising how the Burgess Zone and Hoyt Sector Models work, and how transport is essential to any CBD development. But why is it essential for our council to move into the CBD and away from the town which gave us "City Status"? And why does the CBD have to be in Hanley?
The advantage of any CBD is easy accessibility for its potential cliental and visitors and therefore, would Hanley be the ideal location? Clients and visitors would arrive at the CBD by either rail/bus or car and would the road network surrounding Hanley and into it make it easily accessible for all visitors? I don't think so. But housing our councillors within Hanley's Old Town Hall would benefit Stoke-upon-Trent by locating the CBD close to the easily accessible road network and rail links already in place and therefore, not requiring further investment to make the CBD accessible. But is this what the manipulators want?
Stoke-upon-Trent is already separated from the rest of the City of Stoke-on-Trent by the A500 and if the power base is removed, will Stoke become the forgotten town of the future? Although I'm not against the power bases move to Hanley because I feel it will eventually benefit the town to be rid of oik's dancing to the tune of GIMP's.
I have my vision for the town of Stoke-upon-Trent but it's obviously not the same vision as our misrepresentatives and therefore, the residents of Stoke-upon-Trent or Stoke-on-Trent aren't going to benefit!
Apark@Stoke4LUZ
Honi soit qui mal y pense”