Although this particular development is in Hanley, it will affect all the people of Stoke-on-Trent as a whole for many years to come.

Let this be made clear from the outset - all of Stoke-on-Trent, and Hanley in this instance, are both in dire need of regeneration and redevelopment. There is, and can be, no argument about that. But there are concerns about the proposals for regeneration and the manner in which redevelopment is being carried out.


One huge concern is about the efficacy of retail-led regeneration. Will it work effectively in Stoke-on-Trent, where the eightieth percentile of wages is just over £25,500, in other words, eighty percent of the wage earners in Stoke earn less than the given sum (Source: Office of National Statistics)? One would certainly hope so, but the introduction of "flagship" stores, which, most likely, cater for middle to higher income brackets, is hardly likely to benefit the average Stokie. Yes, jobs will be created (possibly 2,500). Yes, there will be new brands of shops in Hanley. Yes, they may draw in people who currently shop elsewhere. But will the people who currently shop in Hanley be shopping there? One observation has been noted: "People shop at Trentham Lakes because they want to. People shop in Hanley because they have to". This simple statement must be borne in mind before any redevelopment plans are finalised.


Another concern is the reliance of the success of the development on car parking. Two different stories have been heard from the developers:

1. that the City Council has made it a pre-condition of planning that an equal number of car parking spaces are built as are removed by the development.
2. that the "flagship" retailer will demand a certain number of adjacent parking spaces before committing to the development.

It must be remembered that this development will open in five years time (2013). With the spiralling cost of fuel, will anyone but the best-off be driving their own vehicles in five years time? Will Stoke-on-Trent have gone down the road of congestion charging? Will there be a coherent City-wide public transport policy in place? Will Stoke-on-Trent have implemented the Park-and-Ride policy that seems to be on the cards. In this regard, it seems that there is no innovation in the design, although lip service is paid to cycling - the plan is firmly rooted in the car-driven present, and is not forward-looking enough.


One disturbing fact is that the East West development has a projected service life of a mere thirty years. So, by 2043, this area of Hanley will once again be the wasteland that it is today. Is this an economically viable use of £250,000,000? Nowadays, who knows? Incidentally, Blackburn House, home of the Inland Revenue, stays. Quite how this particular eyesore is meant to provide a welcoming backdrop to a gateway to Hanley is anybody's guess.

While the bulk of the proposed development looks to be tastefully designed and quite radical, there is the problem of the retail "shed" and multi-storey carpark fronting the Potteries Way and Lichfield Street. This looks like a 1970s retail shed, and cannot be described as anything but a shed. Does a shed have a place in such a development? Not unless there are innovative designs in the pipeline to disguise the fact that it is a shed. None have yet been revealed.


The "Green Credentials" of the development have not been publicised. Is there any plan for solar or wind generation of electricity? None visible. It seems that the area set aside for the new bus station is smaller that the existing site. If bus travel is to be encouraged, surely this is wrong. From what has been seen so far, the carbon footprint of this development will far exceed the current carbon footprint of the area. Is this acceptable? We will find out in due course.

One possible way to address the concern is to reduce the size of the provision for cars. Fewer cars mean a smaller carbon footprint, and less pollution. But, unfortunately, before this can be considered, there needs to be an integrated public transport policy in place. Park-and-Ride, better buses and bus services, maybe trams (the old lines can still be found under the tarmac), and so forth. In an ideal world (or City), this development, along with that of the new bus station, needs to be in the true City Centre (Stoke), next to the railway station, where a proper integrated transport hub could be created. Regrettably, this will not happen.


If the size of the new multi-storey carpark is reduced, there would be room for the retention of a flavour of old Hanley. The six buildings, including the Coachmakers Arms, that front onto Lichfield Street could be renovated to provide an attractive gateway to the new shopping centre. With a bit of imagination these could be incorporated into the plan as a real asset to the development. The premises could have a variety of small business users - maybe even the "Hole-in-the-wall" oatcake shop could relocate? They have the potential to provide an attractive, income generating, screen to hide the massive, bland, side of the proposed retail shed/carpark.


Many opinions will be generated about this development, about its location, and about its impact on Stoke-on-Trent. None will be particularly right, none particularly wrong. All need to be considered before construction begins. If they are rejected, there needs to be a genuine, over-riding reason for rejection, and this reason needs to be made public. After the tribulations of the last year, the "for the good of the City" argument does not really hold water any more.