|
[Editor: Jim and Catherine McKie recently wrote to the council in response to the proposed building plans for Bridle Path Road. Their concerns are valid for any building project in Heathcote and they write about them for us here.]
 We are writing to voice several concerns, make some suggestions, and highlight potential opportunities for anybody who has plans for building in Heathcote. Any plans and calls for submissions usually relate largely to section sizes and lot numbers. Whilst these specific decisions are important, the over arching principles of good urban design, and the existing Heathcote village context need to take priority. Quality subdivision and planning decisions for Heathcote as a whole will then follow.
Context and Opportunity
Heathcote is a unique valley within Christchurch. Geographically it is wider than the likes of Avoca or Horotane Valleys. This allows for a village centre rather than a singular valley road. Access to Lyttelton, historically via foot using the Bridle Path and more recently by the road and rail tunnels, as well as the city combine to add a life and dynamic to Heathcote.
Being more remote from the city than nearby St. Martins or Opawa, Heathcote has maintained an isolation of special (almost autonomous) character. Whilst infill industrial growth in Woolston and residential development on the Mt Pleasant hillsides are eroding this 'isolation', Heathcote still retains its village feel.
Heathcote therefore has a wonderful geographical and urban basis for development. We realise that it is foolish to put one’s head in the sand and try to prevent development. The key in moving forward is good foresight, planning and management. To make these decisions requires an understanding of urban context.
What is the context that allows these development opportunities?
 Networks and connections
The network of roads at the heart of the village link to key community features. The church, the pub, the railway station (historical link now), the school and library. The corner dairy anchors the entrance to the village from the north west. The park, playing fields and bowls club then link back to the village heart. All these features are linked by a mixture of varied pedestrian and vehicular networks. It is safe to walk these routes.
More recent development has introduced the cul de sac subdivision; the gated community perceived as the 'ultimate' residential safe way to live. Whilst this provides a 'nice' solution for those within the cul de sac, this development strategy is negative in developing community and village from an urban design point of view. Streets become dead ends only visited by 'locals'. The existing village centre is the healthy opposite of this. Streets have two ends; connections via the pub intersection are varied. Community interaction is enhanced. Ellis Track, the steps to Flinders Road are another example of good urban connection. Flinders Road is a long two ended street. Half way along the road, these steps provide access down to Port Hills Road. They allow a link to the park, sports fields etc. and as such provide another set of linkages to the village centre.
Morgan’s Valley is another cul de sac subdivision. In this case it is geographically limited to such a definition. Because of this, connections to the village are far more tenuous. People who live there feel part of the village, but those outside this street have little connection. The lack of reserve connection to the Scott’s Valley track etc. has not enhanced this.
In summary, a good measure of connectedness is: how many people would walk their dogs down this street? How does a street layout enhance community interaction /meeting? In a cul de sac subdivision it is generally only those walking their dogs back home who use the street. In streets such as Cooks Lane, a well considered green link allows connection through to Bridle Path Road (but only for the main streets.). The Village centre though is open ended and offers the dog walker a varied number of paths, meeting points and interaction. It therefore builds community by pure layout.
 The new subdivision planned therefore needs to allow for multi-point connection. These need to be for the car, but also pedestrian and recreational. The mixed use of these connections makes them safer and caters for a wider range of 'dog walkers'. Link ways need to work for school, church, dairy, library, toy library access –otherwise they become redundant. Bridle Path Road is a link to the new tourist activities such as Ferrymead, soccer fields, the golf driving range and Tamaki Village. Road cyclists use Bridle Path Road as part of their training route. At such intersection locations, cycle way integration becomes important. These features can be driven often by the traffic regulations, but actually need to be integrated into the overall urban design.
Traditionally the pub, or dairy become focal points in a village. These are usually found on key street corners. New intersections are therefore important. The corner Dairy on Port Hills Road is a gathering point as is the pub. The new pocket park at Morgan’s Valley road is a lost opportunity. By design, it does not encourage meeting and greeting. Morgan’s Valley therefore feels more isolated from the main village.
Any new sub-division layout as mentioned needs to address the connection and the quality of its street intersections. Is this a new park? Is it a bus stop? Community garden? Community signboard? Is it a smaller section that by zoning allows a coffee shop or hair dresser? Is it a post shop or live /work scenario? Boutique accommodation? The opportunity needs to be addressed, connections deliberately considered on multiple levels, and community fostered.
Scale of building /site density
The scale of the village houses /cottages is small – human scale. Sections in the heart of the village are generally narrower than those outside the village centre, so they convey an image of village centre by their apparent density. These sections are also smaller towards the triangular intersection of roads (the village heart), but despite this the small house / cottage footprint keeps the site coverage percentage down. Garden and open space is preserved.
More recent development has raised two conditions that affect good urban design. The first, the cul de sac development produced by singular developers has worked against good urban quality. The subdivision layout is based on maximum road and services efficiency and maximisation of lot size. Development contribution and reserve land gifting are usually a “have to” way out to get the development through the planning process. The newer sub divisions off Port Hills Road are classic cases where lot sizes are small, house sizes are large. Lack of privacy because of a higher density encourages high 6ft fences. Community connection is thereby eroded. Houses generally are built at the same time of similar materials and roof shapes. In essence “suburbia”. Density is not benefitting the village character (like the historic village area) but benefitting the pocket of the developer.
 Morgan’s Valley is the opposite scenario. Larger houses are built on larger sections. Again houses become more dominant and generally insular units well protected by topography of fences etc. Visual and community connections to the street are reduced mainly by an increased setback from the street and the sheer scale of the houses. From Heathcote’s long term more rural character, the larger section model is more suited. Larger lots can decrease density. Most of the Morgan’s Valley houses though are large; therefore site coverage is in a lot of ways no better. The solution is to provide larger sections, but also reduce site coverage and have design controls on building scale, height and size. The existing houses in the village are not grand monstrosities; therefore new development needs to sympathetically respect this at its connections to the existing fabric.
The increase in section sizes is a double edged sword – these sections are more expensive. This can restrict opportunities for first home buyers, and isolate portions of society who do not have the same capital backing or income. This socially has a negative impact on community.
As such, models from around the world could be learned from and aspects applied to development. Clustered housing can allow smaller sections but preserve more communal open space. The initial Hornby Housing concepts by James Lunday and Don Donnithorne that I worked on, had wonderful aspects of this in its planning. By grouping houses as clusters, open space for gardens, park, play etc. could be generated and connections maintained. Some smaller lot sizes closer to Bridle Path Road could also work. It is important to note that sections less than 750sqm are rare in most of Heathcote. The new subdivision needs to reflect this character. The smaller units by the library work to provide a niche house type, but are not everywhere in Heathcote. They therefore complement the village by providing diversity rather than defining it. A whole lot of 450sqm sections in the new subdivisions are therefore inappropriate. Groupings of 3-4 in a few locations around shared open space is a more acceptable option in keeping with the Village urban condition.
Street Character
The character of the village exists because houses /cottages address their street positively. Low gates, picket fences, gardens, detailed front verandahs and porches, and entry paths are the ingredients that allow this success. These are generally the heritage elements that people love. As one moves away from the village centre (but still within the valley floor), the sections become wider and the setback of houses varies more. Site coverage is still more in keeping with the 750-900sqm section size. Perhaps restrictions on fencing would help reduce the 6ft high fences surrounding concrete driveways, and prevent the all-too-common ‘subdivision’ eyesore. From the points above, large overpowering houses on large sections are just as intimidating to streetscape as medium sized houses squashed onto smaller lots. Street character is defined by many factors. The existing conditions of the valley need to be considered and it is suggested deign controls are put in place to steer development in the right direction.
Questions such as:
- Is the new subdivision subservient to the existing village heart, or is it looking to create another node?
- What does the existing built fabric look like from street level and from far away?
- How does the new blend /connect to the existing from street level and from far away?
Ecology
The increase in native planting has assisted native bird attraction to the valley. The existing land use is rural. A change in use will affect the natural balance. Storm water runoff/catchments, planting, open land treatment, connections to services all offer an opportunity to adopt Green and sustainable development principles. Interestingly, development brings an influx of residents which in turn increases the cat population. This works against some other user group interests of native bird species growth and diversity. Both sides of the story need to be allowed for in the development plan for such a subdivision.
 In summary
The above text defines a set of intertwined urban issues and opportunities for Heathcote Valley. A close look at the existing and historic context is vital to gaining an understanding of how to develop new land sympathetically with the existing urban fabric.
Key issues such as: networks and connections, scale of buildings and lot sizes, street character and ecology need to be addressed both looking back and looking forward.
Cul de sac dead end development is not appropriate. Multiple connections through to Bridle Path and the village need to be planned, with allowance for multi-use of these. Intersections need to be well planned to connect to the existing services and key community locations (for some the school, for others the coffee shop). Some light commercial sites could accentuate these intersection sites.
Section sizes in Heathcote are generally over 700sqm. New development should respect this existing condition. Large houses and large houses on small sites are inappropriate for where the development blends into the existing built fabric. The scale and site coverage is wrong. Smaller sites are generally located in the Village centre or small clusters for a typology of housing. The new development should respond in a likewise manner. Clustered type housing with an allowance for some mixed use /unit type housing may be strategies to allow for social diversity.
Streetscapes, open planted areas, the picket fence approach to street frontages need to be preserved. Footpaths need to be welcoming and encourage the “dog walkers” The safe increase in pedestrian traffic helps build connections but also keeps our streets safer. The 6ft enclave wasteland is inappropriate. If section sizes need to be larger to achieve this, or planted buffer zones to allow privacy, then these approaches must take precedent over pure economic gain.
Heathcote has some wonderful opportunities ahead. We hope that decisions made in the near future are made with a good vision of what could be. Decisions that enhance the village of Heathcote for future generations.
Jim and Catherine McKie
17a Flinders Road, Heathcote
18 May 2008
As a registered architect, Jim helped write the Lyttelton Heritage Zone Design Guidelines and illustrated the Akaroa Heritage Zone Guidelines. These positively addressed design issues such as streetscape, scale, context, pedestrian and vehicular connections to generate successful development. Having managed an architectural practice in Arrowtown for the last 3 ½ years, Jim is very conscious of the similarities Heathcote Valley faces in addressing new development in a rich historic context.
Catherine has a degree in ecology and is therefore well aware of the intricate connections that exist within ecological systems. This same complexity envelops urban design and the built environment. She suggests decisions such as lot sizes and layout are not mutually exclusive decisions and feels the impacts are likely to be far reaching for Heathcote.
|
