Comments on: Windows to the world http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/ A wide-angle view of architecture, urban design and life in Wellington Thu, 09 Sep 2010 06:34:48 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: random http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5467 random Fri, 06 Feb 2009 08:38:18 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5467 as an apartment dweller I do not see the problem with internal bedrooms. the fact is bedrooms are for sleeping in, not living in, and hey at least you don't have to worry about the street cleaners and rubbish guys waking you up, haha... the fact is the building code (or it might be the district plan) requires the all new apartment buildings have mechanical ventilation to bedrooms whether they have external windows or not.. i do concur with htp though, the light well situation is not a good one... i am pleased to hear that someone was/is making life difficult for the building you mention... i don't actually see the fascination with century city.. i think the building is tacky, and as for being a "courtyard" building, i cannot quite see it... from what i've heard (all be it second hand) is that the units above the carpark are like a prison with the metal grate flooring, and the bedrooms with windows into this space.. it is a novel way for Walker to get around the building code light rules however.. as an apartment dweller I do not see the problem with internal bedrooms. the fact is bedrooms are for sleeping in, not living in, and hey at least you don’t have to worry about the street cleaners and rubbish guys waking you up, haha… the fact is the building code (or it might be the district plan) requires the all new apartment buildings have mechanical ventilation to bedrooms whether they have external windows or not..
i do concur with htp though, the light well situation is not a good one… i am pleased to hear that someone was/is making life difficult for the building you mention…
i don’t actually see the fascination with century city.. i think the building is tacky, and as for being a “courtyard” building, i cannot quite see it… from what i’ve heard (all be it second hand) is that the units above the carpark are like a prison with the metal grate flooring, and the bedrooms with windows into this space.. it is a novel way for Walker to get around the building code light rules however..

]]> By: erentz http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5445 erentz Tue, 03 Feb 2009 22:50:16 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5445 Monday: nope, genuinely curious, never made sense to me until now :) As htp says, shame we're in this situation, they manage dense apartments quite well in other cities, and we don't even need very dense buildings, so we should be better off, not worse off! Greed I guess. Monday: nope, genuinely curious, never made sense to me until now :) As htp says, shame we’re in this situation, they manage dense apartments quite well in other cities, and we don’t even need very dense buildings, so we should be better off, not worse off! Greed I guess.

]]> By: htp http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5440 htp Tue, 03 Feb 2009 18:49:05 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5440 There's a rumour going around that on a certain development proposed for the city by a certain developer, that a certain architect has had to undertake tests to prove that a room at the bottom of a lightwell (building to be built hard up close to the boundary) can still achieve a minimal light level. And the same rumour has it that although about 9 stories down a lightwell, the flats concerned manage to just squeak in enough light to pass, and so therefore be 'compliant' with the Code. I'm not sure if anyone would ever want to live there, looking out a window into a lightwell with a blank wall opposite, 9 stories down, with faint glimmers of daylight flickering against the wall from the sky far above.... and I sort of wonder how we got to this place, where such a proposal is considered acceptable, seeing as we live on such a sparsely populated island, that such intense living conditions are even contemplated. There’s a rumour going around that on a certain development proposed for the city by a certain developer, that a certain architect has had to undertake tests to prove that a room at the bottom of a lightwell (building to be built hard up close to the boundary) can still achieve a minimal light level.

And the same rumour has it that although about 9 stories down a lightwell, the flats concerned manage to just squeak in enough light to pass, and so therefore be ‘compliant’ with the Code.

I’m not sure if anyone would ever want to live there, looking out a window into a lightwell with a blank wall opposite, 9 stories down, with faint glimmers of daylight flickering against the wall from the sky far above…. and I sort of wonder how we got to this place, where such a proposal is considered acceptable, seeing as we live on such a sparsely populated island, that such intense living conditions are even contemplated.

]]> By: Monday http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5431 Monday Tue, 03 Feb 2009 07:48:34 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5431 erentz: hopefully I'm not telling you how to suck eggs... if memory serves the code requires operable windows in all habitable rooms in a stand alone residential dwelling. In an apartment, however, this is only required of living spaces; bedrooms in this case simply require a view to the outside, which can be through another space. Bizarre. erentz: hopefully I’m not telling you how to suck eggs… if memory serves the code requires operable windows in all habitable rooms in a stand alone residential dwelling. In an apartment, however, this is only required of living spaces; bedrooms in this case simply require a view to the outside, which can be through another space. Bizarre.

]]> By: erentz http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5430 erentz Tue, 03 Feb 2009 03:16:20 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5430 "Are we inner-city dwellers so stuck for choice that some of us have to accept shoe-boxes with internal windows or risk sleeping on the street?" Yep. But the market works don'tya see! I always wondered about that building code bit, I was told that waaaay back by a quantity surveyor, and never understood how if it was code all these apartments got away with ignoring it. Are codes just suggestive? Can I ignore the road code? Or is the building code just overspecified towards houses and never been updated to include apartments? “Are we inner-city dwellers so stuck for choice that some of us have to accept shoe-boxes with internal windows or risk sleeping on the street?”

Yep. But the market works don’tya see!

I always wondered about that building code bit, I was told that waaaay back by a quantity surveyor, and never understood how if it was code all these apartments got away with ignoring it. Are codes just suggestive? Can I ignore the road code?

Or is the building code just overspecified towards houses and never been updated to include apartments?

]]> By: M-D http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5428 M-D Tue, 03 Feb 2009 00:55:24 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5428 Someone should inform Bill Gates that some Wellington apartment dwellers are without Windows... he'll see us right... Someone should inform Bill Gates that some Wellington apartment dwellers are without Windows… he’ll see us right…

]]> By: Robyn http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5425 Robyn Mon, 02 Feb 2009 22:19:38 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5425 Internal bedrooms are awful. It's not just fresh air but also natural light. A friend of mine in Auckland briefly lived in an apartment with an internal bedroom and eventually had to move out because it was driving him crazy. Monday: I believe they removed the O to install the rest of the glass panels behind it. Century City H sounds like some sort of New York street heroin, circa 1982. Internal bedrooms are awful. It’s not just fresh air but also natural light. A friend of mine in Auckland briefly lived in an apartment with an internal bedroom and eventually had to move out because it was driving him crazy.

Monday: I believe they removed the O to install the rest of the glass panels behind it. Century City H sounds like some sort of New York street heroin, circa 1982.

]]> By: frontlawn http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5424 frontlawn Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:33:27 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5424 It's rather sad that our building code allows what is clearly a trade-off between greed on the part of developers and quality of life of any potential inhabitants of the apartments. I still find it curious that anyone is willing to live in such an apartment though. Are we inner-city dwellers so stuck for choice that some of us have to accept shoe-boxes with internal windows or risk sleeping on the street? (or in the suburbs!) Has there been a recent change of attitude to these buildings or did building codes change at some point? You see, I write this from a 1990s office-conversion apartment which got around the problem of difficult spaces by making the rooms big enough that each has windows, even if some have to be slightly L-shaped in order to take up all the space. It’s rather sad that our building code allows what is clearly a trade-off between greed on the part of developers and quality of life of any potential inhabitants of the apartments. I still find it curious that anyone is willing to live in such an apartment though. Are we inner-city dwellers so stuck for choice that some of us have to accept shoe-boxes with internal windows or risk sleeping on the street? (or in the suburbs!) Has there been a recent change of attitude to these buildings or did building codes change at some point? You see, I write this from a 1990s office-conversion apartment which got around the problem of difficult spaces by making the rooms big enough that each has windows, even if some have to be slightly L-shaped in order to take up all the space.

]]> By: Philip http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5422 Philip Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:03:52 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5422 The majority of apartment's I've come across that have completely internal bedrooms tend to be office block conversions, where the large open-plan floors haven't convert into apartment units very well. 59 Boulcott is probably the most recent example of this: http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-Me-Property/Residential-Property/Houses-to-rent/auction-199332070.htm The majority of apartment’s I’ve come across that have completely internal bedrooms tend to be office block conversions, where the large open-plan floors haven’t convert into apartment units very well. 59 Boulcott is probably the most recent example of this:

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-Me-Property/Residential-Property/Houses-to-rent/auction-199332070.htm

]]> By: Monday http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5421 Monday Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:32:08 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/windows-to-the-world/#comment-5421 Slightly OT, Century City Ho has recently dropped the 'O', much to my amusement, cakling to myself as I walk along Tory St. Perhaps EOTF has far reaching influence beyond the blogosphere... Back on topic, it is strange to me that a fundamental aspect of life--access to fresh air--is not considered a fundamental requirement in residential buildings. That may seem cliché, but only because it shouldn't even need to be discussed as operable windows should (IMHO) be provided in all habitable rooms as a matter of course. How did we get it so wrong at such a basic level? I'd really like to know the reasoning behind this oddity--beyond the obvious "it's too hard to build that way, so let's make it easy for developers." Is anyone able to enlighten me? Slightly OT, Century City Ho has recently dropped the ‘O’, much to my amusement, cakling to myself as I walk along Tory St. Perhaps EOTF has far reaching influence beyond the blogosphere…

Back on topic, it is strange to me that a fundamental aspect of life–access to fresh air–is not considered a fundamental requirement in residential buildings. That may seem cliché, but only because it shouldn’t even need to be discussed as operable windows should (IMHO) be provided in all habitable rooms as a matter of course.

How did we get it so wrong at such a basic level? I’d really like to know the reasoning behind this oddity–beyond the obvious “it’s too hard to build that way, so let’s make it easy for developers.” Is anyone able to enlighten me?

]]>