Re: Re: Smithfield Market Development

I agree that Smithfield didn’t need tax breaks as the Collins Barricks development & Jameson Distillery Scheme had already lifted the area up, there is a very funny thread on http://www.p45.net about smithfield a sort of humorous attempt at a gentrification indicator rating, and it safe enough to assume the Smithfield scored quite well if one moves the childrens Court.

I do however think that Section 23 still has a very valid role to play in eliminating urban decay as it does take much of the risk out of developments that could only be considered marginal. The key is definitely to ensure that areas selected require the extra push, what is required is to stop drawing lines on maps and start offering site specific incentives, surely if the government can afford to forgo significant revenue they can afford to adequately assess what specific sites could most benefit from the overall objective which is I believe called ‘Urban Renewal’.