Response to WCC evaluation

The WCC has issued a report which evaluates Alternatives to the NZTA’s proposal for a flyover at the Basin.
Download a PDF to read our response to the WCC report.
Arch-Centre_Response to WCC report

Posted on 19th March 2013
Under: Comment | No Comments »

Basin voting

 

Well, the Council have voted on the city’s official position with respect to central government’s proposed traffic improvements near the Basin Reserve.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted on 7th October 2011
Under: Basin Reserve issues, Comment, News, RANTING, Transport, urban design | 11 Comments »

The common ‘sense of place’.

Common sense is the knack of seeing things as they are, and doing things as they ought to be done Read the rest of this entry »

Posted on 4th July 2011
Under: Basin Reserve issues, Comment, RANTING, Transport, urban design | 4 Comments »

Making porridge pancakes: Te Aro Park

I haven’t been down to the container exhibition of WCC’s Wellington 2040 vision, but am looking forward to doing so soon. What I have seen is the recent post over on EyeoftheFish, which gives us a sneak preview of a small part of the type of outcome that might be expected to emerge from that vision: in this case, a new green space where the Oaks building is currently sited. As the Fish reports, that site has been the subject of many suggestions for ‘improvement,’ some of which are captured in this thread. A particularly intriguing one was the suggestion of a ‘Flatiron’/wedge-shaped building on Te Aro Park, and a park where Oaks currently is – a swap of building for open space and vice versa.

Anyway, WCC’s artist’s impression for this specific site (in accordance with the 2040 vision), has been published by the Fish, which I have plagiarised (above) for this post (click on the image to see it larger over on EotF). Although WCC might well be congratulated for a bold vision and a positive intervention in our urban fabric, at a detailed level, the featureless expanse of lawn probably leaves a lot to desire (and would present a heck of a maintenance issue, even worse that those that currently exist on the Te Aro Park part of the site). That aside, there are other, I think more interesting, issues here that seem always to be overlooked when discussion of what to do with Te Aro Park arises – in particular, issues of both urban and cultural heritage. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted on 24th June 2011
Under: Architectural History, Comment, Heritage, HISTORY, RANTING, urban design, Video of the Week | 16 Comments »

The great flyover teardown…

Those good folk over at the Congress for the New Urbanism run an initiative called “Highways to Boulevards,” seeking to reclaim urban environments and revitalise cities by campaigning for highway teardowns. They pay particular attention to elevated highways, yep, the good old flyover. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted on 21st June 2011
Under: Basin Reserve issues, Comment, RANTING, Transport, urban design | 2 Comments »

Wellington 2040: A smart green city – a “freakin fantastic” idea

Image by Phillip Capper

This post is really just a heads-up for those of you who don’t keep up with the Dom-Post (and let’s be honest, they don’t really offer much reason to do so), but here is an article (via stuff.co.nz) that should have some interest for our members:

Wellington 2040: A smart green city

Although I recommend you read the article for yourself, the basic gist is that WCC have prepared a Central City Strategy that recognises the central city’s role as the heart of Wellington, and seeks to devise a central city framework that recognises and further develops that role. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted on 16th June 2011
Under: News, urban design | 7 Comments »

WCC – ‘design’ competition

Posted by the Council last week, this competition is open until the July 3 (details click here):

“Entrants are required to design an upgrade to a typical Council housing complex consisting of four bed-sit units, with a focus on making them more practical to live in for everyone, regardless of mobility or age [ie. people with disabilities]. Several small complexes with similar plans are currently being upgraded as part of the Council’s Housing Upgrade Project.”

With the first prize of $2000 (total pool of $4000), it sounds a little like a lot of advice for next to free, but then the point of competitions is the engagement with design issues, not just doing a Daniel Libeskind and getting famous… or is it?

Note: to students and other architectural types, you’ll need to have a registered architect to stamp your drawings.

Posted on 1st May 2009
Under: Competition, EVENTS OTHER, News | No Comments »