Bacaro di mistero
Hmm, not many takers yet for last week's mystery bar. Too hard? Too easy? Not hip enough?
I could give more hints: in fact, I think I already did.
Personal reflections on urbanism, urban life and sustainable urban design in Wellington, New Zealand.
Peter Brooks denies that Waterfront Watch want nothing but park for Waitangi, but the article "Election Promises Questioned" (Capital Times, 12 October) stated: "a motion was passed opposing the large buildings, proposing instead that the entire Waitangi/Chaffers area between Te Papa and Oriental Parade be declared public park land indefinitely". That's a vision that I, and most people I talk to, do not share. He also says they accept mixed use, so I assume they want homes and workplaces on the waterfront?Oops, I was rude about the Hutt again! On the other hand, they have been asking for it.
Doris Heinrich suggests that my vision is for "buildings along the length of the waterfront" with "a few narrow pathways between buildings". Personally, I could handle a more urban waterfront, but my letters always advocate the balanced solution that is proposed, which is far from Heinrich's caricature. For example, the public spaces leading to the water at Kumutoto will be wider than Cuba Mall: hardly "narrow lanes"!
We'll never agree about whether empty spaces are dull. The Hutt Valley has plenty of open space, and it's as dull as ditchwater; downtown Wellington is fairly built up, and it's relatively lively. Let's have a waterfront that's alive around the clock, not one that dies when the sun goes down.
Do Kiwis just not want to live in city centers, or do they not want to live in high rise blocks, or is there some regulatory intervention happening to make it hard to develop and live in big apartment buildings?I think that there's no single answer, and also that the situation is changing, especially in Wellington. Regulation may have been an issue a few decades ago, but it doesn't seem to be the case now. It seems to me that if anything, the Wellington City Council has been more than happy to grant consents to buildings that are over the District Plan limits (and if anyone reading this has experience in designing or developing high rises in Wellington and disagrees, I'd be interested to hear otherwise).
"We want to have flavour. We don't want to be a generic, homogenised bloody list of where all the boutiques or Starbucks are in town," he says.That's the sort of thing that people in the US have been able to do with the Google Maps API for a while, and it's spawned all sorts of fascinating commercial and community mapping applications. I've looked before at opportunities for integrating blogging with mapping, but in New Zealand we've always been limited by the lack of online mapping services. Perhaps all this will change when ZoomIn's API becomes available next month.
"We want it to be a lot more 'two-way', so instead of just indexing things and plotting them on the map, we want people to add stuff - like their views of what cafes they like and what beaches are good, so people can use it to share information. They could perhaps take a photo of some street art and add it to the map."
John Macalister accuses me of twisting Waterfront Watch's views, but I don't need to: they're twisted enough already. Most people who know and enjoy cities realise that they are best when a range of uses (including residential, commercial, entertainment and recreation) is mixed throughout the city at a fine scale; yet Waterfront Watch seem to want to go back to the Modernist doctrine of segregating uses.I hope I'm not being too broad when I claim that no-one I know wants nothing but park at Waitangi, but that's definitely the consensus among my friends, and though the comments on my last Waitangi Park post covered a range of opinions, I think it's fair to say that none of you wanted a complete absence of new buildings in the Waitangi precinct. I'm not quite as adamant about the Hilton project (I support it, but with reservations, and I've proposed what I hope is a constructive solution to meet the most serious objections), but even on that most people I know are more in favour of it than against it.
It's ironic for Dr Macalister to accuse others of 'smug, "we-know-best" attitudes', when Waterfront Watch is always claiming to speak for all of Wellington. "We Wellingtonians know what we want," he says. Well, I'm a Wellingtonian too, and I know that I don't want Waterfront Watch's big, dull, empty spaces.
Waterfront Watch want nothing but park between Te Papa and Oriental Parade, but I don't know anyone who thinks that's a good idea. Jack Ruben wants an outer T without buildings, and most of those I've talked to believe that the result would be windswept and bleak, with or without sculptures and paintings.
"We Wellingtonians" don't go into fits of self-righteous apoplexy when we learn about plans for a lively, urban waterfront: instead, we say "That's cool: we can't wait!"
The jay walking culture and the culture of red crossers is ... not a sign of well-behaved versus less well-behaved pedestrians, but merely a sign of a traffic system which is not laid out to meet pedestrian requirements for short waiting periods at lights and easily accessible crossings at level. ... A high number of jay walkers in the city usually points to a traffic culture which is out of balance.The council is seeking submissions on these proposals, so have a good look at the details, and if you believe that city streets are better when people are put ahead of cars, fill in the online form and add any other suggestions you might have. Submissions close on the 5th of December.