Thames Gateway – “is sliding towards a future which excites no one and is profitable only for a few”.

Back in 2007 Cany Ash of Ash Sakula Architects @Cany_ash wrote about the Thames Gateway (‘Regenerate’, November 2007, page 7) complaining that ‘it is sliding towards a future which excites no one and is profitable only for a few’.

She goes on to say that there is no real sense of what those ‘in charge’ are actually thinking on the ground – there are aspirations but ‘without any hard propositions’.

The politicians talk about ‘ the best of the best’ and that ‘new communities will be happier and safer’, but they don’t even try to explain how this will come about, apart from by telepathy (and wishful thinking?)

Cany suggests that what needs to be done is to identify 1,000 places that already have names and exist across The Thames Gateway, and to work closely with those who already live there to explore what sort of places these could be and what they could look like. These communities should be allowed to work with the architects of their choice in order to do this. And this needs to be done ‘before the market gets this wonderful area in its dreary grip.’

It is depressing that nearly 12 years later Cany’s observations are still (it seems to me) valid. I have seen nothing in The Thames Gateway which excites me. It is going to be another wasted opportunity for what is a unique part of the UK. What a waste.

I originally posted this on my blog: https://stevenboxall.wordpress.com/2019/06/19/thames-gateway-is-sliding-towards-a-future-which-excites-no-one-and-is-profitable-only-for-a-few/

I have other observations on Thames Gateway here - https://stevenboxall.wordpress.com/2018/08/16/thames-estuary-2050-vision-some-thoughts/