tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7011655232093163642.post3117782038083078354..comments2024-01-14T06:16:50.475+13:00Comments on Cities Matter: After the quake: old new town solution for new overspill problemPhil McDermotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06869744647213369964noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7011655232093163642.post-66270845412065109952023-10-29T19:11:18.900+13:002023-10-29T19:11:18.900+13:00Hi great readding your blogHi great readding your blogColten Carterhttps://coltencarter.tumblr.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7011655232093163642.post-90115760858518333752011-06-24T14:30:46.982+12:002011-06-24T14:30:46.982+12:00Reality Strikes
Interesting article today on accom...Reality Strikes<br />Interesting article today on accommodating the first tranche of new homes in Christchurch:<br /><br />http://www.interest.co.nz/property/54005/environment-canterbury-looks-release-land-christchurch-fringes-5000-homes-environment<br /><br />Boundaries are made to be bent. There will be more as further damaged houses are condemned. On top of that, the capacity and attractiveness of parts of central Chritchurch have been seriously dented so that the boundaries need to be stretched further (or leap froged) to accmmodate relocating businesses as well as relocating households, and to provide for any eventual recovery in growth. <br /><br />Failure to maintain a pragmatic and flexible approach to options for additional housing under today's circumstances could be self-fulfilling, because without a generous and flexible approach to new housing stock, residents looking for relocation may be persuaded to leave the city and there will be one more reason why potential migrants might choose to pass on Christchurch.<br /><br />June 24, 2011 2:28 PMPhil McDermotthttp://cities-matter.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7011655232093163642.post-67974824422083783272011-06-22T13:04:46.839+12:002011-06-22T13:04:46.839+12:00PHIL.....
You really, really need to read Alain B...PHIL..... <br />You really, really need to read Alain Bertaud on "The Spatial Distribution of Density" (if you haven't):<br /><br />http://alain-bertaud.com/images/AB_The%20Costs%20of%20Utopia_BJM4b.pdf<br /><br />There CAN be unintended consequences to Curitiba's particular kind of urban planning. <br /><br />Bertaud's thesis is one of the most important things everyone in urban planning needs to know about and understand. Especially his findings about the effects of the urban growth boundary in Portland.<br /><br />There is another paper Bertaud does with Malpezzi, where Seoul is another obvious example of distorted "spatial distribution of density" owing to an urban growth boundary (or green belt in Seoul's case). <br /><br />The case in favour of polycentricity is still strong, however, because it flattens land rent curves and enables affordable efficient locational decisions by households and businesses. But even in polycentric cities, the spatial distribution of density will be most efficient if "weighted" towards the centre. <br /><br />I am wondering whether maximum efficiency might be attained by leaving the centre of the whole metropolis largely empty of buildings, but utilised as a hub for maximum transport connectivity. If you have multiple nodes surrounding this centre, the ability to travel rapidly ACCROSS the centre to any one of the other nodes, has to be an advantage. The "nodes" would naturally be "weighted" in terms of density, towards the centre, which would leave the "spatial distribution" Bertaud refers to, still weighted in the right direction. <br /><br />- "The other Phil"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7011655232093163642.post-22918304347062759582011-06-21T21:55:56.709+12:002011-06-21T21:55:56.709+12:00good comment - oddly enough it was all of the &quo...good comment - oddly enough it was all of the "bad" planning decisions of the past that allowed the satellite commercial centres to develop that has given christchurch its resilience it is a town with a multiple of distributed commercial centres and it only lost a couple of them the rest continued to function largely undamaged making it less complicated for the damaged areas to survive - lesson for the rest of NZ here in that large population centres are not as resilient as a larger number of smaller ones - a key consideration in a land so at risk from natural hazard. the big risk for the future of canterbury is that in moving from the vicinity of one disaster you don't build in the road of the next one - a major event on the alpine fault poses a risk to river bed stability across the canterbury plains. A similar event in wellington would be a vastly greater challenge for survival and recovery.DarkHorsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05400760231991780190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7011655232093163642.post-83576460071572459372011-06-21T16:31:53.555+12:002011-06-21T16:31:53.555+12:00Sounds sensible - the key part would be once an ar...Sounds sensible - the key part would be once an area is identified, that the govt starts a school asap. That will be a key driver to get people to relocate. If they feel the govt is going to sit on its hands and wait, or rebuild old schools in chch, then they won't move.Marknoreply@blogger.com