Planet Wadestown

File under: waterfront, rants, Wellington

I had hoped not to end the week's blogging with another rant, but as both Russell Tregonning and Pauline Swann had letters published in the Dominion Post yesterday, I felt that I needed to reply. I've already had enough of responding to Ms Swann, but since Tregonning's letter referred to one by Ian Pike that was based (with my permission) on an unpublished one of mine, I felt obliged to write.

One part of Tregonning's letter that's truly bizarre is when he refers to "the cramming of high rises into tiny Waitangi Park". Now, there are many different definitions of a "high rise", and with the exception of one specific to fire-safety purposes, the only concrete definitions require at least 6 storeys, and one requires 25 storeys! Apart from Oosterhuis Lenard's 8-storey blob, none of the proposed buildings in any of the entries exceed 5 storeys.

As for a "tiny" park, have a look at this comparison:


In central Wellington, a space that's bigger than three city blocks hardly counts as "tiny". If you turned the open space of the planned Waitangi Park into a mid-rise neighbourhood of 4-storey apartments, you could create 300 homes here. At suburban densities that would have taken 30 hectares of sprawl (bigger than the Botanic Gardens), so we're already sacrificing a substantial opportunity for sustainable development in order to provide a very large open park in the centre of the city.

I had to wonder what planet Tregonning comes from if he considers Waitangi Park to be "tiny". Then I realised: he's from Planet Wadestown.

Anyway, here's my reply:

Despite what Russell Tregonning claims, buildings do support open space. That's not a "discredited policy", but a demonstrable principle of good urban design. Midland Park thrives, not despite the buildings around it, but because of them: they provide shelter, activity and a local population.

Why is Ian Pike's comparison with parks in other cities "mischievous", when Tregonning himself brought it up? But it's his description of "cramming ... high rises into tiny Waitangi Park" that is truly bizarre. Where on earth would 3 to 5 stories be described as "high rise"? In Wadestown perhaps, but surely not in downtown Wellington. And this "tiny" park is as big as three city blocks, even if you discount the building footprints, Chinese Garden and promenades. The lawn alone is at least five times the size of Midland Park! In the context of central Wellington that's a big, flat piece of grass, and it will be 90% empty 90% of the time.

The landscape architects have done well to bring complexity to what could have been a dull suburban paddock. But it still needs buildings: to define intimate, sheltered spaces; provide active edges; and to give the park a stunning architectural backdrop.