CANAL-SIDE DEVELOPMENT: SHOULD WE APPLAUD OR OPPOSE IT? Here are some suggested criteria for judging planning proposals. Do they reflect the values and priorities of the Friends of Regent's Canal?

	Criterion	Comments/Examples
1	Public accessibility	Some sites allow the public to access the waterside while others are gated communities. Sometimes the public right of way is obvious; sometimes it is cleverly disguised.
2	Interaction with the canal	Some sites serve the canal well (e.g the community mooring at Kings Place); others merely overlook it.
3	Loss of sky or open space	Bow Wharf, Rosemary Works.
		Wall-to-wall development in de Beauvoir
4	Harm to character of the area	Bow Wharf. Rosemary Works. Holborn Studios demolition
5	Impact of change of use	Canal information centre was nearly lost in Camden Town.
6	Buffer between buildings and the canal	Sometimes the buildings encroach on the waterspace (e.g. Rosemary Works) or make the towpath feel claustrophobic (e.g Bow Wharf); in other cases a wide gap is retained, allowing room for biodiversity.
7	Loss or gain of amenity	Loss of jobs in and around Holborn Studios. Loss of workshops and live/work units at Rosemary Works
8	Loss of affordable mooring	Whenever land ownership changes hands, there is a risk that any associated mooring spaces will be beyond the budget of regular boaters.
9	Harm to navigation	Encroachment of second chamber at City Road Lock.
10	Loss of heritage	Proposed demolition of industrial buildings (including chimney) at Holborn Studios
11	Use of the Canal during Construction	Kings Place was exemplary during its construction.

Return to Home page