Showing posts with label human ecological relationships. Show all posts
Showing posts with label human ecological relationships. Show all posts
Monday, December 26, 2011
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Saturday, December 17, 2011
...goats optional
from Winter Street Architects
I'm inspired by the colours of these wildflowers carpeting a city roof, a delightful hibridity of soft clothing for the urban hardscape; a colourful coat for a building. Gentle, beautiful.
These images from the USA, from Green Grid Roofs
All images found images.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
I was just doing some random searching online this evening when I came across this report in relation to the sheoak woodland we were trying to protect from clearing back in 1998-2000, that is now Woodrise Estate.
REPORT OF THE
STANDING COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
IN RELATION TO
A PETITION INTO HOMESWEST AND THE DEPARTMENT OF LAND ADMINISTRATION POLICIES: OPPOSING THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF LAND OWNED BY HOMESWEST IN SPENCER PARK, ALBANY.
If your interested in the processes of government, the full document is available at this link:
Here are a few interesting extracts. Right now, I don't have any comments to make, I want to think about it some more. And see if this can be used in any useful way. Then I'll do another post.
But if you've gat anything to say, for now, I'm interested.
The Committee requested information from the Minister for Housing, Hon Dr Kim Hames MLA, relating to the development of the land the subject of the petition. In response to its request, the Committee received a letter from the Minister dated January 14 2000.
3.2 In response to its inquiries about the public open space in the development, and the amount of natural vegetation that would be retained, the Minister advised the Committee that a standard allocation of ten per cent public open space as per the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) requirements was allocated for the subdivision. The Minister advised that this has been allocated in three separate parcels in the manner listed below:
8 892m2 3 919m2
Parcel 1 Parcel 2 Parcel 3 2 685m2 TOTAL 15496m2 Total land area 15.496 hectares
3.3 The Minister also advised that the open space allocation has been designed to provide for a mix of recreational pursuits including active, passive and natural recreation and children’s playgrounds. The Committee was informed that of the total amount of open space, 3 919m2 has been specifically set aside for natural recreation through the retention of existing vegetation. The other two areas of open space will retain a percentage of existing trees whilst also including grassed areas, playgrounds, walking paths and seating in a landscaped setting.
6.9 In regard to the Committee’s request relating to remnant vegetation and bio-diversity, Mr Prattley advised that the WAPC does not have a strategy or policy which specifically deals with remnant vegetation in Albany. “Perth’s Bushplan” only applies to the metropolitan area and although the State Planning Strategy and Albany Regional Strategy give broad direction encouraging the preservation of remnant vegetation, specific areas worthy of protection are not identified.
6.10 The Committee was advised that the WAPC's “Residential Expansion Strategy for Albany” (1994) which was a key action of the Albany Regional Strategy only gives broad guidance in promoting the preservation of significant remnant vegetation as follows:
• “Existing reserves, wetlands, waterways, proposed buffer areas and significant remnant vegetation will be integrated into a comprehensive regional, district and local open space system...” (p5); and
• “Significant areas of remnant vegetation, particularly in prominent locations, should be given priority when designing areas for public open space.” (p6).
6.11 Mr Prattley informed the Committee that the City of Albany, with assistance from the Ministry for Planning, is presently preparing a Local Planning Strategy. Mr Prattley submitted that this will be an ideal opportunity to identify areas of remnant vegetation which should be preserved. The City of Albany will then have an opportunity to reserve these areas under a new town planning scheme.
6.12 Mr Prattley also informed the Committee that the State Planning Strategy identifies the need for a Statutory Region Scheme for Albany by 2005 which would identify
12 F:\DATA\CA\CARP\Ca050rp.docFIFTIETH REPORT
areas of remnant vegetation significant at a regional level and provide a mechanism for the acquisition of this land.
8 CONCLUSIONS
8.1 Having visited the land the subject of the petition, met with the petitioners and conducted a hearing into the issues raised in the petition, the Committee is aware of
F:\DATA\CA\CARP\Ca050rp.doc 13Standing Committee on Constitutional Affairs
the local significance the land has for people in Albany and the petitioners in particular.
8.2 The Committee concludes that the Local Planning Strategy currently being prepared by the City of Albany and the Ministry for Planning will assist in identifying areas of remnant vegetation which should be preserved. The City of Albany will then be able to reserve those areas under a new town planning scheme.
8.3 It is Committee policy that with respect to petitions concerning planning and environmental matters the Committee’s role is not to replace existing planning or environmental appeal bodies but is limited to inquiring into breaches of the proper planning and environmental procedures.
8.4 Having considered all of the submissions received in relation to this petition, the Committee concludes that the evidence supplied to it indicates that at least the current minimum planning and environmental requirements have been met and that there has not been a breach of the current proper planning or environmental procedures in this instance.
9 RECOMMENDA TIONS
9.1 That the Local Planning Strategy and the Statutory Region Scheme for Albany
referred to in paragraphs 6.11 and 6.12 respectively of this report be implemented at
the earliest possible opportunity.
9.2 That in allocating the areas of land to be set aside as public open space,
consideration be given to:
• the quality of the vegetation to be included in that ten per cent;
• allocating a sufficient amount of land in each parcel of remnant vegetation in
the public open space to sustain its ecological integrity; and
• the amount of public open space in surrounding areas and the possible need to
set aside more than the current ten per cent minimum.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
AEC greenroof
For those of you have averted your faces, maybe it's time to take a new look at the Albany Entertainment Centre:
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Water Feature
Yay! another little garden! A water feature this time: a bird bath. This is another one of those gorgeous "inefficiencies" that I love so much: someone stepped on the plastic sheeting cleaning the gutters, and left this indentation. The birds love to bathe here. High and safe.
It appeals to me as a lovely notion that "nature" is about that which takes advantage of opportunities, of niches, of inefficiencies in design or maintenance...therefore suggesting that such inefficiency are a really beautiful thing to plan into design.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Taking Down the Fences
Keith Bradby: And what next for us was to work with the farmers on the origins of the Landcare movement, work with the ecologists and the concerned members of the community on the biological values of this place and what it needs, and I'll be honest, that after 15 years of that, I think we'd achieved a lot, but nowhere near as much as we need to achieve. So we start searching for what is the next big lift that this landscape and society needs. And it is being able to think across a thousand or two kilometres and across a thousand or two years, to what is health in this landscape, what is vitality in this landscape. And it's a lot more than looking after rare species or propping up farms with a few belts of trees. It is stitching the health back together and it is bringing it, and its values and its needs into our culture. Gondwanalink is the vehicle that we think helps us do that here, and helps us appreciate both the need and the ability to do that nationally.
from the transcript to the radio program, Taking Down the Fences.
This image from http://www.gondwanalink.org/
A great show for encounter on ABC Radio National.
Gondwanalink, as most Albany people know, is an amazing programme to regrow a strip from Kalgoorlie to Margaret river, the brainchild of Keith Bradby.
What excites me about it is that taking down fences and reclaiming farm land demands a rethink of entire social, cultural and community systems. And it proposes using nature as the infrastrucure through which human interaction with the land is controlled.
Keith Bradby: ... Again, at the risk of sounding either arrogant or facetious or some other rude word, we have formally apologised as a nation to the Aboriginal people of Australia for shall we say both our mistakes and our intentional wrongs. And I don't think we have yet formally apologised to the country as a whole for our clumsiness and our mistakes and our intentional damage. And I think when you work on something like Gondwanalink and you say 'Look, over 1,000 kilometres we've ripped it asunder and broken the essential links', at some point you do have to apologise to the land or at least do those things which help atone for those wrongs.
from the transcript to the radio program, Taking Down the Fences.
This image from http://www.gondwanalink.org/A great show for encounter on ABC Radio National.
Gondwanalink, as most Albany people know, is an amazing programme to regrow a strip from Kalgoorlie to Margaret river, the brainchild of Keith Bradby.
What excites me about it is that taking down fences and reclaiming farm land demands a rethink of entire social, cultural and community systems. And it proposes using nature as the infrastrucure through which human interaction with the land is controlled.
Keith Bradby: ... Again, at the risk of sounding either arrogant or facetious or some other rude word, we have formally apologised as a nation to the Aboriginal people of Australia for shall we say both our mistakes and our intentional wrongs. And I don't think we have yet formally apologised to the country as a whole for our clumsiness and our mistakes and our intentional damage. And I think when you work on something like Gondwanalink and you say 'Look, over 1,000 kilometres we've ripped it asunder and broken the essential links', at some point you do have to apologise to the land or at least do those things which help atone for those wrongs.
mcShed_2007
McShed was a way of using opportunities on site to bring more intensity and interest to the urban environment. Any food supplier could be the organisational centre for laying out the suburb: mcdonalds works because it is currently so disconnected from site, that it looks radical to use it rethink growing food in the city. My favorite design moment was the glass-walled abatoir next to the drive-thru. I think it's nice to be able to give the mcDoanalds customer something back, and this is a moment of theatre. It's a drive thru theatre...
MVRDV are the obvious precedent for thinking about urban systems. What my work does differently is tries to engage with a history of farming that is pre-industrial, and formally has an organic lyricism.
This image from MVRDV's project Pig City, sourced from: www.nextnature.net/?p=147
Saturday, October 10, 2009
taking down the fences
Keith Bradby: And what next for us was to work with the farmers on the origins of the Landcare movement, work with the ecologists and the concerned members of the community on the biological values of this place and what it needs, and I'll be honest, that after 15 years of that, I think we'd achieved a lot, but nowhere near as much as we need to achieve. So we start searching for what is the next big lift that this landscape and society needs. And it is being able to think across a thousand or two kilometres and across a thousand or two years, to what is health in this landscape, what is vitality in this landscape. And it's a lot more than looking after rare species or propping up farms with a few belts of trees. It is stitching the health back together and it is bringing it, and its values and its needs into our culture. Gondwanalink is the vehicle that we think helps us do that here, and helps us appreciate both the need and the ability to do that nationally.
from the transcript to the radio program, Taking Down the Fences.
This image from http://www.gondwanalink.org/
A great show for encounter on ABC Radio National.
Gondwanalink, as most Albany people know, is an amazing programme to regrow a strip from Kalgoorlie to Margaret river, the brainchild of Keith Bradby.
What excites me about it is that taking down fences and reclaiming farm land demands a rethink of entire social, cultural and community systems. And it proposes using nature as the infrastrucure through which human interaction with the land is controlled.
Keith Bradby: ... Again, at the risk of sounding either arrogant or facetious or some other rude word, we have formally apologised as a nation to the Aboriginal people of Australia for shall we say both our mistakes and our intentional wrongs. And I don't think we have yet formally apologised to the country as a whole for our clumsiness and our mistakes and our intentional damage. And I think when you work on something like Gondwanalink and you say 'Look, over 1,000 kilometres we've ripped it asunder and broken the essential links', at some point you do have to apologise to the land or at least do those things which help atone for those wrongs.
from the transcript to the radio program, Taking Down the Fences.
This image from http://www.gondwanalink.org/A great show for encounter on ABC Radio National.
Gondwanalink, as most Albany people know, is an amazing programme to regrow a strip from Kalgoorlie to Margaret river, the brainchild of Keith Bradby.
What excites me about it is that taking down fences and reclaiming farm land demands a rethink of entire social, cultural and community systems. And it proposes using nature as the infrastrucure through which human interaction with the land is controlled.
Keith Bradby: ... Again, at the risk of sounding either arrogant or facetious or some other rude word, we have formally apologised as a nation to the Aboriginal people of Australia for shall we say both our mistakes and our intentional wrongs. And I don't think we have yet formally apologised to the country as a whole for our clumsiness and our mistakes and our intentional damage. And I think when you work on something like Gondwanalink and you say 'Look, over 1,000 kilometres we've ripped it asunder and broken the essential links', at some point you do have to apologise to the land or at least do those things which help atone for those wrongs.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Bringing architecture and nature together
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Scale of the new garden.
Yep, there's a lot of differences. Some too obvious to mention. Most obviously they look different. One is a stinking great palace garden manicured, managed, loved and cultivated carefully and systematically by a huge squadron of horticulturalists, aware of the full import of their every action on the history of France and landscape architecture in the western world. The other is four square inches of weeds growing in a footpath somewhere in Brunswick (or was it Preston?) about which probably no human being would care if it's not even there anymore. Quite a lot more people would be fussed if the Versailles gardens got a damn good dose of agent orange.
Chance: the chance events of viable seeds somehow managing to land in an hospitable soil in a vast desert of cement, and the chance of history preferencing one species over another for a complex planting of human-preferred geometries.
Design next to nature makes an interesting question: does nature design? To bring it a more manageable size I'll use Bill Mollison's axiom: everything gardens. This is as true of plants as it is of us, rabbits and ring tailed possums: everything tries to modify the conditions that it finds itself in to be more amenable, more capable of meeting its needs and comfort and ensuring the continued survival of itself as an individual and a species.
To get to the point, it's probably more fair to ask what's the same?
Because I'm tempted to say there's no difference, from this point of view:
both of these gardens are a whole bunch of plants and other animals (insects, microbes...) struggling to survive in a hostile environment managed by human beings. What we describe as difference is often around how we, as aesthetically focused, historically minded cultural animals feel, how we consider what are the histories of these styles of garden, on the one hand the intensely managed royal gardens that speak of power and privilege, on the other the vertiginous survival despite the odds: the wandering suburbanite, roundup in one hand, lawn mower in the other, how much odder do you get than that?
I don't know about the French floral condition, but here we know these little plants as garden weeds. And weeds in our bush. From their point of view they are living organism doing what living things do: their best to survive in the condition in which they find themselves.
As far as the concept of garden goes, is it too big of a leap to consider these little gardens with as much fidelity to the notion of garden as the Versailles gardens, to the notion of public parks as a botanical garden, as a soccer field, a reserve, a suburban park, a regional park? As the garden in the main street? As the front yard? It's about scale.
Chance: the chance events of viable seeds somehow managing to land in an hospitable soil in a vast desert of cement, and the chance of history preferencing one species over another for a complex planting of human-preferred geometries.
Design next to nature makes an interesting question: does nature design? To bring it a more manageable size I'll use Bill Mollison's axiom: everything gardens. This is as true of plants as it is of us, rabbits and ring tailed possums: everything tries to modify the conditions that it finds itself in to be more amenable, more capable of meeting its needs and comfort and ensuring the continued survival of itself as an individual and a species.
To get to the point, it's probably more fair to ask what's the same?
Because I'm tempted to say there's no difference, from this point of view:
both of these gardens are a whole bunch of plants and other animals (insects, microbes...) struggling to survive in a hostile environment managed by human beings. What we describe as difference is often around how we, as aesthetically focused, historically minded cultural animals feel, how we consider what are the histories of these styles of garden, on the one hand the intensely managed royal gardens that speak of power and privilege, on the other the vertiginous survival despite the odds: the wandering suburbanite, roundup in one hand, lawn mower in the other, how much odder do you get than that?
I don't know about the French floral condition, but here we know these little plants as garden weeds. And weeds in our bush. From their point of view they are living organism doing what living things do: their best to survive in the condition in which they find themselves.
As far as the concept of garden goes, is it too big of a leap to consider these little gardens with as much fidelity to the notion of garden as the Versailles gardens, to the notion of public parks as a botanical garden, as a soccer field, a reserve, a suburban park, a regional park? As the garden in the main street? As the front yard? It's about scale.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
what's the difference?
From: http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0508/images/versaille.jpgHere's a little puzzle for you...what's the difference between the formalist garden at Versaille, and this little garden in Brunswick?
Saturday, September 26, 2009
just chicken feed
These trucks weigh about 1.3tonnes.Australians eat 1.1 - 1.2 million kg of chicken meat each day, and 25 million chook eggs.
(Lucky she's got strong knees.)
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Spencer Park Rezoning_my submission
24th September 2009
Re: TOWN PLANNING SCHEME NO. 1A – AMENDMENT NO. 171
I have viewed the Town Planning Scheme No. 1A – Amendment No. 171 from the City of
and would like to make the following comments and suggestions:
LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS
Porous Paving Surfaces
I would like to suggest that, as there will be an increase in impervious surfaces resulting from increased density in the Spencer Park Special Zone, that to maintain natural hydrological systems it be required as part of onsite landscaping to use porous paving surfaces (e.g. matrix paving, porous asphalt or similar.)
Stormwater
I would suggest that rock, stone or gravel be used to line stormwater basins or channels[1], to slow the rate of flow, dissipate energy and prevent surface erosion.
Infiltration Pits
I would suggest that infiltration pits or rain gardens be part of the landscape requirements or part of works undertaken by
General construction
It is important that locally-sourced rock be used wherever possible as this will minimise energy inputs. Using recycled aggregate for fill and sourcing rocks from on-site excavation works or other local construction sites would be two suggestions.
BUILDINGS
Energy efficiency in building function
I would like to suggest that design of all buildings including commercial and other non-residential building be required to meet highest energy efficiency standards and that design requirements be limited to these processes, i.e. that it not be part of the Amendment to recommend glazing areas greater than what would meet highest standards of energy efficiency, nor that a particular façade treatment be required.
75 to 85% glazing is recommended in the Amendment, which seems contrary to council standards for residential and dwelling requirements for energy efficiency standards in other documentation, e.g. Energy Efficiency Provisions for Houses BCA Part 3.12. I suggest that glazing and façade treatment recommendations be reconsidered.
Construction and function of buildings
I would like to suggest that requirements for meeting low energy usage in both construction and function of buildings be inserted into the Amendment.
Yours sincerely,
Christine King.
[1] As well as many other WSUD recommendations from councils in Australia, many of which are available online, this fact sheet offers some practical suggestions that might be worth considering, obviously making adjustments to satisfy conditions specific to Albany: Water Sensitive Urban Design in the Sydney Region, Practice Note 7, Landscape Measures. Available from http://www.wsud.org/planning.htm, Accessed 24th September 2009.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
design a city
group exercise.
characteristics of moments from our everyday:
Use these characteristics to design a city.
Afternoon: what are the material properties of an "afternoon" site?
Where would you put the afternoon?
If this is a plan of a street, then:
Put the afternoon on top of a hill so it gets lots of sunlight. Then the morning is down the bottom, so you don't have to walk so far, and the evening is on the south side, away from the sun, because there isn't any then. Move between the different times of day.
A localized delivery system at the bottom of the hill for internet access, might become a transfer station: cold water moving down hill might capture heat produced by an internet service provider hub, and use that warm water to...warm a green house: transfer of enegry from isp to growing plants. Localised energy production at these sites, related to needs for each part of the day.
Move between days of the week. A circle of hills is a city layout, so that you move gradually from one day to the next.
Hill Friday might have a longer profile to accomodate the larger number of people there, and the delevery systems needed to supply what constitutes Friday, like alcohol, comfy couches, dance music...
characteristics of moments from our everyday:
| | | | | | |
| | DOG | Free roaming | | | |
| | ROLLING CHAIR | Directed roaming | | | |
| | GUMBOOT | Protective roaming | | |
|
| | TRAIN | Directed | | | |
| | CUP | Delivery | | | |
| | COMPUTER | Free roaming | Free roaming | Delivery | |
| | DISHES | Cleanliness | Place | | |
| | AFTERNOONS | Chill time | Other time Own time | Sunny | Relaxed |
| | iPOD | Free roaming (not fixed) | Delivery | Transportation | identity |
| | JUMPER | Warmth | Wind protection | | |
| | TIN ROOF | Shelter | Phenomenological | Experiential | sound |
Use these characteristics to design a city.
Afternoon: what are the material properties of an "afternoon" site?
Where would you put the afternoon?
If this is a plan of a street, then:
A localized delivery system at the bottom of the hill for internet access, might become a transfer station: cold water moving down hill might capture heat produced by an internet service provider hub, and use that warm water to...warm a green house: transfer of enegry from isp to growing plants. Localised energy production at these sites, related to needs for each part of the day.
Move between days of the week. A circle of hills is a city layout, so that you move gradually from one day to the next.
Hill Friday might have a longer profile to accomodate the larger number of people there, and the delevery systems needed to supply what constitutes Friday, like alcohol, comfy couches, dance music...
Thursday, September 10, 2009
turtle creek pump house
This is an image from the fabulous "Turtle Creek Pumphouse" project by D.I.R.T. studio that I'm investigating at the moment.This image lifted from HATCH blog.
I just love that line of reeds coming down from the building, it's beautiful and funny. And it reminds me of a fellow student from Curtin, Jacqui Koffman, who did the most amazingly delicate work.
A link to acid mine drainage project on Pruned blogspot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)