Thursday 13 January 2011

T23 Crit: How can we plan incrementaly to develop green spaces and their surrounds in the Upper Lea Valley?


Following Sammas' comments on my crit, I have attempted to reflect on the information that I presented and formulate new ways of approaching the site of study, keeping in mind the research done since.

Quoted from Sammas:


'for Bethan.....
I have to say I am sorry as I didn't pay 100% attention as some of them are too tired...
1.The presentation has focus a lot on policies about green space in the Tottenham Marshes area, given it's located at the border of a few different councils, there must be a lot of different policies for the area. It might be an idea to sort out and summarize, see if there's any discrepancy, or any gaps between different councils.
2.The discussion is on opening the green space to the locals, there are a few suggestions already about the program, but there might need to be consideration on who is going to manage them and how... Although Thames Water might be desperate to improve their reputation who would be more appropriate to manage these spaces?
3. Is Thames Water obligated to open up these spaces? Do we have enough power to order them to open up? How might we do it?
4.With the possibility of increasing footfall into the green spaces, how do we protect these spaces from any damages by human? Are these green spaces of any scientific significance (sorry you might have mentioned this...?)? Can we protect the species that is currently living there? You have mention about bat house the other day, would they create any problems with the existing ecosystem?
5. As they are working reservoirs, do we need any rules about how these green spaces can be developed (if any) so that they won't have any negative impact to the reservoirs and london's water?
6. With is proximity to the Olympic Park, did their masterplan promote or ignore the connection with these spaces? What can be done to make it better? (or not? if we don't want too many outsiders into the area?)
7. Is there any policies that can be relaxed to make the spaces more useful but still protects them? or do they have to be tightened?
Hope I didn't suggest anything that you have already covered..........!
Do let me know if any and I will think of other suggestions.......


-----


It's easy to get swallowed up into the policies of just one Borough on just one subject ie Open Space in Waltham Forest and think that they should be followed, yet questioned through design (for instance the way in which 'small scale' can be interpreted from Planning documents). In taking a step back, one can see that there is equally as much importance in probing the areas surrounding the reservoirs and their neighbourhoods, in a more rounded look at the site. Following research for our evidence module, into the high indices of deprivation in the communities either side of the reservoirs, not only does an argument build for creating stronger links up and down the valley to the new economy of the Olympics, but in the value the connections across the Valley would create, not only the physical use of the open space itself.

There are precedents to be had on opening up reservoirs, on how they can be managed, and how contracts can be made so that the opening of the reservoir can make money to fund the employment of rangers and hence maintain the security of the site. In fact, there is a reservoir at home that does exactly that called 'Llysyfran Dam', with a cafe, shop and visitors centre in which I used to work. What a coincidence.


Though policy is not the be all and end all (as my design tutors like to tell me) it is interesting to see how it plays a big part in determining what stays green and what doesn't.

No comments:

Post a Comment