The walking experience in Docklands illustrated a series of buildings that compromised private invested properties. When I crossed the boundaries of different private spaces with big private estate had separated docks that determined specific private spaces. Anna Minton’s Ground Control that presented alternative methods to share spaces within public and private urban settings in an urban environment for a sustainable future in society (Minton, 2012).
When I explored some private estates in Heron Quays, private spaces enabled rules for the public to do certain types of activities hence ownership with main private spaces that are not democratically appealing to the public community. Despite the support for democracy overseas I read in the news, property and land use in the UK shows a distinctly undemocratic trend displayed in private spaces.
The arrangement of the Docklands setup as a developmental area for industrial organisations, enhanced into private enterprise and private ownership, as displayed in Canary Wharf. In addition, I observed the main relevance to a wider urban scale investigating the means of development considered being a model specifically created for Docklands – that excludes other proposals in the area. I recalled Minton’s first chapter on how Canary Wharf was built with controversy, perceived as high-security enclaves of wealth surrounded by some of the poorest communities that showed a massive threshold between Canary Wharf and Poplar in terms of an economic and social dimension (Minton, 2012).
More so, I felt that the atmosphere was corporate obsession of private investment in Canary wharf with security guards, and CCTV cameras which had a connection to its financial markets, which was the catalyst for the exponential growth of the global financial services industry in Britain that affected local communities.
When I arrived in a local market in Poplar, the spatial layout had a better interaction within the public environment, which that shows a segregated zone created a fractured environment in private and public settings caused by Thatcher in the 80s. The public realm had its high point for marketing with quality style of materials in a private estate. This represented how easy for private investors to undermine democracy and creating fractures in the nature of civic society, based on wealth and education. Minton highlighted that segregation was not limited to jobs, filtering through to every aspect of people’s lives (Minton, 2012).I observed the framing issues between private and public are completely wide and no dialogue between the two spaces in Poplar and Canary Wharf.
When I walked towards Robin Hood Gardens, I read some newspapers that public owned affordable housing was a common system development for social housing. After the post-war in the 1940, the housing style influenced from Europe with a welfare scale approach. Robin Hood Gardens that is architecturally poetic of a social state despite the estate-listed status failed and the demolition started in April (Hodson, 2013).
Furthermore, when I walked around Robin Hood Estates, I saw private construction work in the background on the other side of Blackwall and started to question how to create a sustainability economic and social model with a regeneration infrastructure for creating public and private places and whether it created a healthy psychological environment for the local community to have easy access to private facilities from the estates.