Planning for—what?
Sir: I've only just read Simon Jenkins's long review of Colin Buchanan's recent book (December 23). One cannot let him get away with the naive and sentimental prejudices which finally swamp a piece of critical writing which started off promisingly. Does he really believe that " safety control or sewerage" are functions of planning? Does he honestly think that planners can stop market forces rebuilding at least parts of the commercially viable centres of towns and cities despite the loss of old buildings of character? Has Mr Jenkins ever himself been to a ' participation ' meeting where the planners wait in a half empty hall for people to come to participate? It is so easy for the liberal intelligentsia who do attend participation meetings, not least to safeguard their own personal interests, to criticise planners and politicians. Maybe Mr Jenkins imagines that his early memories
of Piccadilly Circus, when perhaps there was still petrol rationing, are valid today as people swarm desperately around and over barricades and car-crowded streets totally unconscious of pleasure in their surroundings. Perhaps Mr Jenkins really believes that his 'goals' for the environment are those of the average Briton. Planning for the relationship between the social interests of the planned, the environment, politics and profit requires of course a very delicate balancing act. Cohn Buchanan may be a little Dut of touch with the impatience of yet another younger generation — but Mr Jenkins is walking through a mirage-full fog.
R. S. McConnell Department of Town Planning, Polytechnic of the South Bank, London SW11
Previous page
