This is a Single Point link, quick commentary on the article or page linked above.
(Follow the title link above to the source for full background on the commentary below).
Published on October 27, 2009 8:17 PM by dbo.
Finally, an argument that doesn’t fall to quick counter-points with no basis to win minds. Throwing out many of the points of attack stated ad nauseam for months, this analysis focuses on the lack of imagination in the retail plans for the site. The proposed components do not provide anything to bring visitors to the Glebe. However, the original proposal’s aquarium, which could have provided that unique centrepiece, was rejected. Banal, unimaginative, but safe is what you get when you plan by committee and try to reduce as much risk as possible.
It is too late to make the plan better now, too much time has been wasted attacking it.