Comments on: Changes to Manners Mall and Cuba St confirmed

By: andy foster

andy foster — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 09:53:14 +0000

Thanks Maximus. At the moment the timetable is Manners Mall first. (obviously we need to have somewhere for the buses to run and new trolley bus wires before we can take out the streets that buses currently run on. The the programme would be to do Lower Cuba Street. Obviously there will be some changes to other streets (Dixon, Wakefield, Mercer) simply as a result of taking the buses off them. The question, as I noted in my earlier email would be how are those streets developed, what is the balance between space for human beings and space for parked cars for example ? It will also be how far will the money for public space development stretch ?

In my view we should do the key streets once and do them well, rather than do a cheap temporary job with whatever money is left over once lower Cuba is finished. The key and most exciting opportunities to me are Dixon and the opportunity to make Te Aro Park, and indeed that whole neighbourhood work, and the link between lower Cuba St and Civic Square. That is not to dimish the value of other links – for example Lombard – Bond St.

I will keep you posted as information develops further.

Warmest regards

Cr Andy Foster
Urban Development Leader
Wellington City Council

By: Maximus

Maximus — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 22:40:34 +0000

You’re right that the key to Te Aro Park is the treatment of Dixon – let’s hope the Council gets it right, although almost any move there will help the park bed in more with its surroundings. Personally, I can’t believe that anyone will need to park there – of the hundreds and probably thousands of shoppers there each day, almost none will come by car parked outside – we’re all capable of walking or riding a bus a few stops. But the servicing you speak of is key to the businesses upstairs – couriers and delivery vans still need access 24/7 to the entire Cuba / Dixon / Manners area, but I can see that happening in a Shared Space scenario the same as it does in Cuba Mall at present.

Re the Oaks building – it’s crumbling away before our eyes – and the businesses are going further and further down hill, so it won’t be there for ever. But as you say, there are a number of options, including a different way of facing onto the street, and hopefully a better use than it is at present.

Can you give us any time line on the progress of the designs and implementation?

By: Andy Foster

Andy Foster — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 23:10:37 +0000

All interesting comments. The key to me is the way in which we redevelop the streets which will no longer have buses on them – lower Cuba, Wakefield, Mercer, and in particular Dixon. I completely agree with the comments that removing buses from Dixon allows us to do something that makes Te Aro Park work a lot better. It’s a sunny area, plenty of cafe type businesses around it. Some councillors appear completely committed to the additional net 40 carparks between Taranaki and Willis Streets – either for financial reasons or because they see that as an essential way of promoting retail in the area. I would have thought that some good quality public space would add at least as much to retail in the area. There’s almost $5 million for public space in the budget – the issue is going to be how far that will go across all these areas. We need to do what we do really well. I suspect that in time we will want to invest somewhat more than the $5 million. For example during the submission process businesses in Bond Street are asking for road narrowing and beautification too.

For Dixon we’ve had several suggestions. Do we retain local traffic entering it slowly through the Eastern end on a narrowed roadway ? Should it be a dead end at Cuba St ? Could servicing traffic enter and exit through the smaller side streets (Eva/Egmont) ? How much parking space again ?

I agree with the comments about the Oaks building, though of course Council doesn’t own it. Whether in time that space is best as open space, or as a much better building interfacing with Cuba Street, an enhanced Dixon Street, and a better Te Aro Park will be something worth discussing.

The other real public space opportunity that comes from the upgrade of Lower Cuba Street, and a number of submitters mentioned it, is improving the pedestrian link across Wakefield Street, and then between the Town Hall and Michael Fowler Centre to Civic Square and to the Waterfront.

Keep up the good thoughtful dialogue. Always happy to talk about these kinds of issues.

Warmest regards

Cr Andy Foster
Urban Development Leader
Wellington City

By: Mechaniker

Mechaniker — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:25:54 +0000

Yes I have long through that the Oaks should go, along with Te Aro Park, and a nice new “high end” shopping building built, maybe 2-3 stories, all glass perhaps triangle shape, and really lift the whole image of the area.

If they redid the park in the style of Waitangi Park, minus the pointless water feature (which seems to only attract flying rats), then I think it would turn out to be a very nice place to spend time.

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 05:16:13 +0000

… and don’t forget a relatively recent Arch Centre 20u40 competition … though personally I don’t mind the Oaks – probably because I’m still pretending it has a mall that working inside it

By: Philip

Philip — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 03:10:35 +0000

The Oaks / Te Aro seems to be the favorite site for the local architecture theses. Maybe i’ll try and rustle up the best proposals that have been done over the past few years…

By: Guy

Guy — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 00:48:51 +0000

Hear hear. Arch Centre has advocated a similar proposal to that brought up by John. That is: time for a big rethink on the trafficpatterns all around Te Aro Park.

Although we didn’t directly advocate demolishing the Oaks, I have to agree with you that it’s way past it’s prime and should be demo’ed.

By: John H

John H — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 22:07:00 +0000

This would seem like the ideal opportunity to think-big(ger) put a wrecking ball through The Oaks – a building which was only ever meant to be a temporary structure and is well passed its “best before” date. I recall the building when it first opened in the mid 1980s : all clean white lines and masses of ferns and other greenery tumbling down from the upper level into the atrium. Now it’s a leaking, rusting hulk and a million miles away from the sophisticated image it had when new. Te Aro Park on the other hand was a design mess from the day it opened and like the Oaks, now looks completely knackered and worn-out. If the two were redeveloped in tandem, something really special could come out of it. However Te Aro Park is a cultural and political hot-potato and any Councillor willing to take it on would have to tread very carefully.

By: Peter

Peter — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:23:57 +0000

Re the quote from Maximus’ most recent comment: ‘ Council general counsel Sally Dosser said a �reasonable person� would not perceive Ms Prendergast did not have an open mind because of her close relationship with NZ Bus.�’

OK – so I’m not a linguist, but if one processes the double negative, Sally Drosser’s statement reads as,”a reasonable person would perceive Ms Prendergast has an open mind because of her close relationship with NZ Bus.’ Yeah – what does that mean?

Those who council meetings are well aware that councillors are precluded from debating and voting because of conflict of interest,when far more tenuous relationships are involved.

By: Not so fast

Not so fast — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 07:32:08 +0000

Ryan, re the Shared Space – apparently everyone starts out thinking that way. If you are interested, there is a very good article in the latest Landscape Architecture New Zealand magazine, just out this week, all about the shared spaces that Auckland is getting ready to install – one in Elliot St, one down in Fort St.

You’ll have to read the article yourself, but it does say such things as:
“Studies show that the physical design of shared streets slows traffic and can actually be safer for pedestrians than conventional street design.”

Room for thought. Worth keeping an open mind maybe for the time being?