S
Sir Novelty Fashion
Guest
Re: Turf war in Tinytown
That's the funny thing, Ganj - you're right. It's not.
Looking at the Star website today, and saw a piece by Hume about the Donlands. Attached was a rendering of the revitalised area, one of the trademark pretty pictures that the endless EA's, design competitions, and precinct plans have drawn up for us, replete with big, green leafy trees, frolicking citizens, and lovely streetscapes.
I think the backlash here is less about the building itself and more about the broken promise it represents. In the planning process, that site was supposed to be a landmark public place. And we got sold on a new spirit of city-building built around public consultation, expert panels, and design excellence.
But, surprise surprise, when money comes calling and the Mayor wants something done, it all goes out the window. His campaign co-chair gets called in to draw up something else entirely, pronto, and it doesn't really matter what the experts or the willagers think.
Of course there's flex built into the planning process, but this isn't some 20-storey tower going on a plot that was meant for 6. It's not even just a dull building where we were promised a great one. It's a cynical slap that makes the whole deliberative, consultative process look hollow.
Why do we spend so much public money on planning consultations, assembling design review panels, and commissioning those pretty pictures, if the powers that be are just going to do an end-run around them?
I'm feeling the disenchantment of someone who actually took the bait. I should have been curmudgeonly about this all along.
That's the funny thing, Ganj - you're right. It's not.
Looking at the Star website today, and saw a piece by Hume about the Donlands. Attached was a rendering of the revitalised area, one of the trademark pretty pictures that the endless EA's, design competitions, and precinct plans have drawn up for us, replete with big, green leafy trees, frolicking citizens, and lovely streetscapes.
I think the backlash here is less about the building itself and more about the broken promise it represents. In the planning process, that site was supposed to be a landmark public place. And we got sold on a new spirit of city-building built around public consultation, expert panels, and design excellence.
But, surprise surprise, when money comes calling and the Mayor wants something done, it all goes out the window. His campaign co-chair gets called in to draw up something else entirely, pronto, and it doesn't really matter what the experts or the willagers think.
Of course there's flex built into the planning process, but this isn't some 20-storey tower going on a plot that was meant for 6. It's not even just a dull building where we were promised a great one. It's a cynical slap that makes the whole deliberative, consultative process look hollow.
Why do we spend so much public money on planning consultations, assembling design review panels, and commissioning those pretty pictures, if the powers that be are just going to do an end-run around them?
I'm feeling the disenchantment of someone who actually took the bait. I should have been curmudgeonly about this all along.