Where did it all go wrong for Croydon?
Strategy says on failed historic regeneration
|
The Strategy does not analyse why progress on regenerating Croydon was so dismal at a time when London boomed during the “good years” leading up to 2008. What went wrong?
|
Stanhope Schroders Ruskin Square site has been vacant for decades
|
Partnerships say on failed historic regeneration
Croydon had a relatively successful economy up until the end of the 1980s. However, Croydon has underperformed the overall London economy since that time. A sobering statistic is that Croydon's employment grew by only 2.9% (3,600 new jobs) between 1998 and 2008, compared to 10.7% across London. It is also apparent that Croydon’s retail offering has lost its competitive edge against newer shopping developments.
A troubling feature of the last 20 years has been the extra-ordinary lack of construction of modern first class office space. Croydon’s record of attracting new investment over the last 20 years has been poor. The centre of Croydon is littered with huge development sites – in prime locations – that have been vacant for years. The huge Stanhope Schroders' site next to East Croydon station has been vacant for decades. The former site of the Croydon General Hospital - just to the north of West Croydon station - has been vacant since 1996.
One of the reasons why Croydonians are so cynical about the Strategy is because so little progress was made on regenerating Croydon during the good years up to 2008. It would be helpful if there was an honest analysis of why so little historic progress was made so as we can apply the necessary lessons to the 20 year Strategy period.
We believe the three key historic factors hindering Croydon’s renewal were:
Croydon has made little progress in improving its external image. We believe that the negative external perceptions of Croydon are unfair in many ways. However, this external prejudice is a real factor in discouraging much needed inward investment. Also, it has a negative effect on Croydon house prices. Unfortunately, the riots of 8 August 2011 have worsened Croydon's already poor image which makes it an even greater challenge to attact inward investment.
We believe that Croydon was historically over-ambitious in seeking the very best developments possible - at the expense of expediting good developments that could proceed rapidly. The prime example of this over-ambition is the Arena development at the former Gateway site - now Stanhope Schroders stalled Ruskin Square development. Also, Croydon placed too much reliance on weak developers who ran into financial trouble when the recession hit – the prime example being Minerva and the Park Place development. Given Croydon’s relative decline, it needs to understand what went wrong in the past and to be realistic about the quality of potential developments that it can attract.
A troubling feature of the last 20 years has been the extra-ordinary lack of construction of modern first class office space. Croydon’s record of attracting new investment over the last 20 years has been poor. The centre of Croydon is littered with huge development sites – in prime locations – that have been vacant for years. The huge Stanhope Schroders' site next to East Croydon station has been vacant for decades. The former site of the Croydon General Hospital - just to the north of West Croydon station - has been vacant since 1996.
One of the reasons why Croydonians are so cynical about the Strategy is because so little progress was made on regenerating Croydon during the good years up to 2008. It would be helpful if there was an honest analysis of why so little historic progress was made so as we can apply the necessary lessons to the 20 year Strategy period.
We believe the three key historic factors hindering Croydon’s renewal were:
- its poor external image
- an emphasis on seeking “optimal” developments as opposed to backing good developments by creditable property companies that could proceed in the short term
- Croydon's location in "prosperous" South East England has constrained central government's willingness to commit substantial regeneration finance
Croydon has made little progress in improving its external image. We believe that the negative external perceptions of Croydon are unfair in many ways. However, this external prejudice is a real factor in discouraging much needed inward investment. Also, it has a negative effect on Croydon house prices. Unfortunately, the riots of 8 August 2011 have worsened Croydon's already poor image which makes it an even greater challenge to attact inward investment.
We believe that Croydon was historically over-ambitious in seeking the very best developments possible - at the expense of expediting good developments that could proceed rapidly. The prime example of this over-ambition is the Arena development at the former Gateway site - now Stanhope Schroders stalled Ruskin Square development. Also, Croydon placed too much reliance on weak developers who ran into financial trouble when the recession hit – the prime example being Minerva and the Park Place development. Given Croydon’s relative decline, it needs to understand what went wrong in the past and to be realistic about the quality of potential developments that it can attract.
Where did it all go wrong? - discussion board
In setting up this website, our main goal is to encourage a grassroots' debate on the Croydon Strategy. Your feedback is really important – tell us what you think! If you would like to have your say on the discussion board below, please read the short articles on how the discussion boards work and our privacy policy.
