So I said I'd be back with all guns blazing, but I didn't honestly expect the DDDA to hand me this one on a plate. It's all starting to feel a bit Truman Show for my liking.
*checks for cameras*
I worried when this was discussed before that Paul's comment re 'thesis proposal' was too good to be true. I don't like doubting you, P, but this is the DDDA, remember? And guess what- yup. The DDDA- Where Nightmares Become Reality.
The canal could be a nice feature (or it could become another dustbin- Portobello College, anyone?), but why introduce one here? Is there a history of canals along this stretch? Not that I know of. (Except for the existing one, obviously. But that's OLD! And this is NEW!)
And yes, it counts as open space of a sort, but open water is the least flexible/usable space there is. Not only that, it creates a barrier wherever it's not bridged. What's so wrong with the idea of a linear park? Too boring? Too dependable? Not avant-garde enough?
But as Peter said, the issue of the quay wall breach / quay line interruption is of another mangitude altogether, if not remotely surprising from the Agency that brought you the infilling of George's Dock, the heneghan.peng.timber.jetties.proposal, the Martha! Schwartz! Red! Thing! With! The! Poles!, and many more misadventures. It just seems incapable of understanding that, as the responsible agency, it is supposed to be guardian of the bodies of water. Isn't it? *checks website* Oh hang on. I see what's going on. It's got the word Development in it's title, but not the word Protection, or even Planning.
But this previous lack of understanding of water makes this canal all the more baffling. If it gets the go-ahead (please no!), how long before they propose to pave over it for security reasons?
A (reiterated) message to the DDDA- LEAVE THE RIVER ALONE. Please?
This presumably has to be discussed in public, and the relevant planning scheme amended? Or is it like the U2 tower, where the argument will be along the lines that the proposal is close enough to the existing scheme, and anyway, it's Shiny! And New! And Dynamic! And Progressive!
Please reconsider this nonsense, DDDA.
PS Can anyone confirm / deny if this is the one West 8 is involved in?
EDIT: 'magnitude'. I'd change it, but 'mangitude' has a certain ring to it in this context, no?