KATE BLACKBURNE
Master of LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Lincoln University 2014 Bachelor of Applied Science DESIGN FOR TECHNOLOGY Otago University 2011
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PORTFOLIO 2016
KATE BLACKBURNE Master of Landscape Architecture Lincoln University 2014 Bachelor of Applied Science DESIGN FOR TECHNOLOGY Otago University 2011
ABOUT ME A motivated and ambitious landscape architect and designer looking to gain experience in a collaborative studio environment. Having completed my MLA with First Class Honours in 2014, I spent 2 years working as part of Lincoln University’s School of Landscape Architecture Designlab - a research collaborative actively engages with stakeholders and issues of value across society and industry. In this role I have developed a passion for design-led research, experimentation, and design communication. At the beginning of 2015 I became the Designlab Coordinator, and gained valuable experience in project management. I also gave lectures, tutored and lead studio projects across a range of technical and studio courses in the school. My particular research interests include cultural perception and landscapes of tension, programmatic landscape design and conservation landscapes. EMAIL PHONE LINKEDIN ADDRESS
2
kate.blackburne@gmail.com +44 7400 056083 https://nz.linkedin.com/in/kate-blackburne-2a8abb96 176 Southfield Road London W45LD
TECHNICAL AND DESIGN SKILLS
EDUCATION • NGA TAWA DIOCESAN SCHOOL 2004 - 2008 NCEA Level 3 with merit • UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO 2009 - 2011 Bachelor of Applied Science in Design for Technology ( A Grade average across design courses ) • LINCOLN UNIVERSITY 2012 - 2014 Master of Landscape Architecture with First Class Honours
EMPLOYMENT HISTORY PARTICULAR STRENGTHS IN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • Academic writing MLA completed by thesis, and awarded Lincoln University postgraduate writing scholarship (Thesis progress report feedback: Kate’s research is of a high academic quality, and the writing we have seen is very well written and academically rigorous.) Abstracts accepted to national and international conferences. Academic articles in progress • Report style writing Including for clients on a range of design projects, project briefs and media • Design development A strong interest in the power of design process and design tools, particularly scenario development and critique • Theoretical analysis and application Ability to break down and apply complex ideas to a site or situation • Planning through the scales Structure planning, master planning, intermediate and detail planning, planting plans and construction detailing (Major design feedback: A highly professional portfolio showing a wide range of thinking, well developed right through the scales.) • Sustainability Knowledge of frameworks and design applications
DEC 2014
-
MAY 2016
Designlab Coordinator ( Lincoln University)
MAY 2014
-
DEC 2014
Design Researcher ( Lincoln University)
AUG 2013
-
MAY 2014
Communication Design & Marketing ( Lincoln University)
NOV 2013
-
DEC 2013
Landscape Architecture Research Assistant ( A. Spicer, Christchurch)
2012
-
2013
Hospitality: Bar Manager ( Highway Inn, Christchurch)
OCT 2012
-
MAR 2013
Communication Design ( Otago University)
2013
-
2016
Tutor ( Lincoln University)
FEB 2011
-
JAN 2012
Hospitality: Promotions and Retail ( The Collective, Christchurch)
NOV 2010
-
FEB 2011
Hospitality: Front of House ( Alamir Bakery, Wellington)
2008
-
2016
Gardening, Orchard, Agricultural and Plant Nursery work ( R. Watters, Hirst Orchards, Te Horo Ornamentals, Tironui)
CAREER OBJECTIVE I have a 2-year work Visa for the UK through until June 2018, and am looking to use this time to gain some international experience in a Landscape Architecture Studio where I can further develop my skills and work in a collaborative environment.
• Project management and client relations • Presentation and articulation of ideas through written, oral and graphic communication methods
OTHER RELEVANT EXPERIENCE & KNOWLEDGE • Teaching Experience lecturing in computer application courses (Vectorworks, inDesign, Photoshop and Illustrator), generating studio project briefs, studio tutoring (structure planning, sustainable planning and design, landscape analysis, communication and innovative design) and advanced theory tutoring • Communication design A passion for communication and graphic design. Rebranding of department including conception, design and production of annual marketing publication (link and samples in portfolio) • Project management Experience co-ordinating multidisciplinary input for complex design projects, across both university departments and externally, mentoring scholarship and international students in design research projects and over-seeing design projects from pitch through to publication
PERSONAL I’m a 25 year old New Zealander from a small town north of Wellington, where my family farm deer. I have also lived for 3 years in Dunedin, and 4 years in Christchurch, and feel at home in both urban environments and the remote wilderness. My passions include travel, music (particularly guitar), conservation, film, friends and family. This year I am starting a new adventure in Europe and looking for somewhere new to fall in love with, gain some unique work experience and meet some interesting people. Thanks for taking the time to read my CV.
REFEREES MICK ABBOTT
JACKY BOWRING
Employer, Research Supervisor
Employer, Research Supervisor
Head of School, Associate Professor School of Landscape Architecture, Lincoln University (03) 4230469 mick.abbott@lincoln.ac.nz
Professor School of Landscape Architecture, Lincoln University (03) 4230466 jacky.bowring@lincoln.ac.nz
3
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
4
TE WHENUA HOU: DISTRIBUTED FOREST Designlab with Lincoln University Department of Ecology
AGRICULTURE & ECOLOGY
2014 - 2016
PAGE 6
EDEN PROJECT NEW ZEALAND Designlab
ECO-TOURISM
2015
PAGE 10
ARARIRA WETLAND PLANTING STRATEGY Designlab
COMMUNITY ECOLOGY
2015
PAGE 14
TE RŪNANGA O NGĀI TAHU SOCIAL HOUSING Designlab
URBAN ECOLOGY & SOCIAL HOUSING
2015
PAGE 16
LANDSCAPE AS TENSION Masters Thesis
MLA THESIS / RESEARCH BY DESIGN
2014 - 2015
PAGE 18
DIAMOND HARBOUR VILLAGE PLAN Course work example 1
VILLAGE CENTRE PLANNING
March - April 2013
PAGE 28
ADDINGTON STRUCTURE PLAN STRUCTURE PLANNING & APPLICATION OF THEORY
Course work example 2 December - January 2012/13
PAGE 34
5
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
DESIGN-LED RESEARCH : DESIGNLAB
TE WHENUA HOU: NGAI TAHU FARMING DISTRIBUTED FOREST PROJECT TYPE Agriculture & Ecology CLIENT Ngai Tahu Farming LOCATION Waimakariri, Christchurch, New Zealand DURATION 2014 - 2016 (ongoing) TEAM Lincoln University Designlab with Department of Ecology INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION Project coordinator and design lead, concept development through to implementation, including consultation, planting plans, rendering, species monitoring and shaping design research outputs.
This intervention takes the functional patterns found in a native forest and distributes them systematically across 7500 ha of industrial farmland. Initially scoped as a simple gateway design for a complex of 20 dairy farms, this project evolved into a gateway expressed at a regional level, working in both aesthetic and functional modes. The project focuses particularly on the practice of planting and how the planter needs to find affinity with what and how they are placing plants into the landscape. Fractals and fractal patches replicate through scales (Dramsted et al,1996), and this mechanism drove the form and content of the scheme at the plant placement scale, extending right out to a fractal ordering of the over 7500Ha development. Currently being implemented, these plantings are in marked contrast to the monocultural exotic shelter belts that dominate the plains. The form of the shelter belts at the regional and also farm scale, the species selection, and the planting sequences all resonate strongly with underlying MÄ ori cultural forms, and suggest a new signature to this area that communicates culture, farming practices, and landscape health.
6
Te Whenua Hou : 350H
A 350HA DISTRIBUTED NATIVE FOREST PROJECT ACROSS NGAI TAHU FARMING’S NORTH CANTERBURY DAIRY DEVELOPMENT
Ha distributed native forest project
7 Univers Lincoln Lab
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016 Design
DESIGN-LED RESEARCH : DESIGNLAB NZ NZ Native Native Forest Forest
CANTERBURY PLAINS NATIVE FOREST
Canopy Shelter Canopy Shelter Canopy Shelter
Shrub Shelter Shrub Shelter Shrub Shelter
Buffer Shelter Buffer Shelter Buffer Shelter
Redistributed as... Redistributed as... Redistributed as...
The scope of the planting/intervention builds an ecological architecture that negates the ecological desert of the Canterbury Plains and once again allows native birds, such as Tui, and Kereru, to cross from the Southern Alps to Banks Peninsula.
8
Tui & Bellbird flight span (up to 10km) Kereru flight span (up to 25km)
Milking Milkingsheds Sheds Milking sheds
PLANTING STRATEGY Using the underlying principle of fractals we developed a planting strategy which could speak to a range of temporal and spatial scales, from regional through to plant placement. From this a systematic planting strategy was developed to cover all intervention types: Shelter belts, roadside, around housing and amenity areas.
V3
3-As c- @ 1.5 29-La st- @ 0.8 47-Oz f- @ 1 33-He st- @ 1.2 53-Fe n- @ 0.8 22-Co c- @ 1.2 34-He st- @ 1.2
3-Co a 3-Ps c
3-Ps c
SYSTEMATIC SPECIES SELECTION
41-La st- @ 0.8 10-Oz f- @ 1 5-As c- @ 1.5
3-Ps c
3-Co a
3-Co a
3-Ps c
4-Co al- @ 1.2 34-Fe n- @ 0.8 36-As c- @ 1.5 64-La st- @ 0.8 40-Oz f- @ 1 26-He st- @ 1.2 82-La st- @ 0.8 66-Po n- @ 1 40-He st- @ 1.2 43-Oz f- @ 1 41-Co c- @ 1.2 29-As c- @ 1.5 80-La st- @ 0.8 42-He st- @ 1.2
3-Ps c 3-Ps c
3-Co a
65-Fe n- @ 0.8
2-He st- @ 1.2 4-Fe n- @ 0.8 3-La st- @ 0.8 2-Oz f- @ 1
50-Po n- @ 1 8-Co al- @ 1.2
3-Co al- @ 1.2 3-As c- @ 1.5 2-Pa p
12-La st- @ 0.8 10-He st- @ 1.2 17-Oz f- @ 1
1-Pr b
4-Co c- @ 1.2 30-Fe n- @ 0.8
V3
Farm 14 Shed Plant Schedule ID
As c
PLANTING PLAN FOR MILKING SHED AT FARM #4 Co a
Co al Co c Fe n He st La st Oz f Pa p Po n Pr b Ps c
Qty
Latin Name
104 Astelia chathamica 12 Cordyline australis 39 Cornus alba 'sibirica' 91 Corokia cotonester 210 Festuca Novae-zealandiae 236 Hebe strictissima 393 Lavendula stoechas 205 Ozothamnus fulvida 2 Parrotia persica 148 Podocarpus nivalis 1 Prunus x blireana 18 Pseudopanax crassifolius
Total plants = 1787 (3 feature trees)
Common Name
Silver Spear Cabbage tree Red-Stemmed Dogwood Korokio Hard Tussock Banks Peninsula Hebe French Lavender Golden Cottonwood Persian Ironwood Mountain Totara Flowering Plum Lancewood
Spacing @ 1.5m
NOTE: 1. Selected plants should be small, hardy species (not taller than 0.8m). None should be root bound. They should all have good root systems to withstand conditions. 2. Use of combiguards is required (*) for protection from hares etc 3. Note total number of plants is less than overall plan allocated. This is due to using plants that give better cover than the current selection on Farm 1. The plants have been chosen to grow well on the chosen sites, and is also anticipated that some of the under-allocation can be used in year 1 should any plants require replacing. 4. Do not mound the central turning island (this affects water retention) 5. Use above ground irrigation for all planting areas, to ensure active watering and direct feedback that the watering is occurring. 6. Native plants which have been ecosourced would be highly preferable 7. Please contact mick.abbott@lincoln. ac.nz / 0204 001 6921 when planting dates are confirmed. The design team are to physically position on site the cabbage trees, lancewoods and the specimen trees.
Notes
PLANTING AT MILKING ToSHED be placed ON on site FARM #4 @ 1.2m @ 1.2m @ 0.8m @ 1.2m @ 0.8m @ 1m @ 1m
Can be substituted for Hebe odora
To be placed on site To be placed on site To be placed on site
9
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
DESIGN-LED RESEARCH : DESIGNLAB
EDEN PROJECT NEW ZEALAND: ECOTOURISM IN THE RED ZONE PROJECT TYPE Eco-tourism CLIENT Water For Life Trust with Eden Project UK LOCATION Christchurch City Red Zone DURATION Phase 1 2015 TEAM Lincoln University Designlab: Mick Abbott, Jacky Bowring, Kate Blackburne, Charlotte Murphy, Xuejing Li INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION Project coordinator and designer, concept development stage, consultation, project branding, rendering masterplanning and project communication.
A new iteration of the iconic Eden Project in Cornwall, UK, Eden New Zealand explores the role of water in sustaining life on this planet in an eco-tourism development proposed for the earthquake-damaged land near the Avon River in Christchurch. The proposal looked at how ‘brand New Zealand’ might be incorporated into the Christchurch rebuild in an environmental, social community and tourism sense. Using landscape as the fundamental driver, we led an intensive process of collaborative conceptual development in order to explore, and articulate the aspirations of the project as an ecological system. A working proposal was revealed to the public in July 2015, and looks to the natural and cultural processes of the red zoned land in Christchurch as forces by which further ecological, infrastructural, productive, recreational and economic value may be generated.
Members of the Designlab Team meet with Sir Tim Smit (Founder) and David Harland (CEO) from the Eden Project Cornwall to discuss design concepts and a next steps during launch week, July 2015.
10
AN ECO-TOURISM DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED FOR EARTHQUAKEDAMAGED LAND ON THE AVON-ŌTĀKAARO RIVER IN CHRISTCHURCH
11
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
DESIGN-LED RESEARCH : DESIGNLAB
LAND USE The masterplan centres around water management, particularly flood mitigation and sea level rise. Supporting this is a network of mixed public and private ring access, with proposed community-driven sectors such as local production situated along the river’s edge. Vegetation builds upon existing and historic patterns and takes over the site from the east. The vulnerability of the land drives the dispersal of activity across the site, with the most intensive development on the highest and most stable points. The site is draped with a major tensile architecture structure (pictured), which is ‘pinned down’ to its fragile setting, rather than propped up or drilled in.
TENSILE ARCHITECTURE : SOUNDSHELL
PO
WATER WAY LOCKS WHARF WHARF
EDEN EDENPRESCHOOL PRESCHOO ECO PARK ECOINNOVATION INNOVATION PARK
CAPARKING
WETLAND ECOLOGIES RESTORED
ALLOTMENT GARDENS/BHU/EDEN KITCHEN GARDENS ZONE DESERT BIOME TROPICAL RAINFOREST BIOME
EXISTING WILLOWS KEPT, DECIDUOUS SO WINTER GROWING SUPPORTED
RESTORED HISTORIC FOOT BRIDGE WETLAND, THAT ACTS AS AS A STORM VALVE IN RAIN EVENTS FERNERY/GRAPE VINES/KIWI FRUIT OUTDOOR MUSIC VENUE
UC/LU WATERWAYS CENTRE
SOUNDSHELL INDOOR VENUE GLOBAL CLIMATE
CAFES/EDEN KITCHEN SPRINGS
WATERFALL & VIEWING PLATFORM
RAIN ROOM
NATIVE ALPINE SHRUBLAND MOSS ROOM
RAINBOW ROOM
POUNAMU ROOM
ARTISAN WALK
FIORDLAND BIOME MY LIFE IN WATER WALKWAY ICE ROOM KARST WORLD NURSERIES
OWHIRI / ENTRANCE PLAZA
NATIVE RAINFOREST INNOVATION CORE ABORETUM OF NATIVE PLANTS OF AOTEAROA NEW ZEALAND (MAP OF COUNTRY) MAHINGA KAI ZONE CONFERENCE
S/POOLS
OL
ENTRANCE/CAFE/SHOP EDEN SERVICES BUILDING & CORE CLASSROOM
DROP OFF ZONE WETLAND, THAT ACTS AS AS A STORM VALVE IN RAIN EVENTS
eden project Te Wai Pounamu
13
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
ww
DESIGN-LED RESEARCH : DESIGNLAB
ARARIRA WETLAND PLANTING STRATEGY
REBUILDING PLACE ATTACHMENT THROUGH RESTORATION PLANTING PROJECT TYPE Community Ecology CLIENT Living Water: Department of Conservation & Fonterra with the Waihora Ellesmere Trust LOCATION Te Waihora / Lake Ellesmere DURATION April - December 2015 TEAM Lincoln University Designlab: Mick Abbott, Jacky Bowring, Kate Blackburne, Charlotte Murphy INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION Project coordinator and designer, concept development stages for site design, project branding, rendering, masterplanning and project implementation.
This project dealt with one of New Zealand’s most pressing environmental challenges: juggling exceptionally productive landscapes with environmental sustainability. The LII catchment in Christchurch is unique in that it is the only Living Water ‘focus’ catchment to contain a significant urban development. Lincoln is a satellite town of Christchurch with a rapidly increasing population and a strong sustainability agenda. However, with 53% of residents commuting to the city each day, the catchment population tends to look more toward Christchurch than their coastline. Te Waihora is seen less as a destination and more as the end of the pipe at the back door. As such the central opportunity identified in this project was the generation of social and place-based value. In doing so, the proposal focuses on the role in which plants (and particularly the act of planting) create a connection between the person planting and the place.
14
0
50
75
100
125
150 m
PROJECT BRANDING
MASTERPLAN
Yarrs Flat DOC Reserve Masterplan Te Waihora
0
50
75
100
125
150 m
1:2000 @ A1
Extensive planting in a systematic, curved/circular patterning has been undertaken. This pattern is bold, and goes against many conventions of conservation land revegetation planting. It emphasises native species for their value beyond ecological – and toward symbolic and social. The planting pattern affords meaning for the variety of people who have a connection to Ararira wetland. In plan view, it may be seen as a meandering river or a tuna/ eel. In experience and on the ground – it is easily navigable, allowing people to return to spots they’ve previously visited or planted. The spatial quality moving across the site is variable from intimate to expansive, and as the plants grow to maturity this will become even more dynamic. The pattern challenges the faux-natural revegetation aesthetic of a native environment as it ‘was’ or ‘should be’, to being one that expresses that same sense of human involvement that can be found in productive, pasture landscapes. COMMUNITY PLANT OUT: SEPTEMBER 2015
15
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
DESIGN-LED RESEARCH : DESIGNLAB
TE RŪNANGA O NGĀI TAHU SOCIAL HOUSING AN INNER CITY FOOD GARDEN FOR NATIVE BIRDS PROJECT TYPE Urban Ecology & Social Housing CLIENT Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu LOCATION Addington, Christchurch DURATION May - October 2015 TEAM Lincoln University Designlab: Mick Abbott, Kate Blackburne INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION Project coordinator and designer, concept development stages, technical drawings and rendering.
This project considered the benefits beyond basic housing which might be enabled in social housing developments, in the context of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu’s three household development in Addington. Designlab were particularly engaged with the definition of New Zealand native forest in the 21st Century. Does it have to be a remnant (such as Deans Bush in Riccarton), or can it be purposed and distributed? Can it only be seen as an end-of-pipe past-time to which we may never return, or should it be considered as part of a working system, a legacy project for future generations, a further productive component of the resource-driven landscape?
Grasses ID An l Ap s As f Ca b Ca c Ca co Ca d Ca f Ca s Ca t Ca v Co b Co bu Co g Co r Gr Ha e He d He g He o He s Ku e Pl d Po t Pr Pr 1 Pr 2 Pr 3 Ps c Ps co So m So mo So p
Qty
38 37 30 164 142 68 41 92 26 113 43 6 7 10 13 1 25 6 8 17 8 20 12 3 1 1 1 1 11 8 1 7 13
Latin Name Anemanthele lessoniana Apodasmia similis Astelia fragrans Carex buchananii Carex comans 'Bronze' Carex comans 'Green' Carex dipsacea Carex flagellifera Carex secta Carex testacea Carex virgata Corokia 'Bronze King' Corokia buddlejoides Corokia 'Geenty's Green' Coprosma 'Roys Red' Grapefrut 'Golden Special' Haloragis erecta Hebe decumbens Hebe gracillima Hebe odora Hebe strictissima Kunzea ericoides Plagianthus divaricatus Podocarpus totara Prunus Plum 'Santa Rosa' Apricot 'Moorpark' Apple 'Initial' Pseudopanax crassifolius Pseudowintera colorata Sophora microphylla Sophora molloyii Sophora prostrata
Common Name Bamboo Tussock Oioi Bush Flax Grass/Sedge Carex 'Bronze' Carex 'Green' Carex dipsacea Carex flagellifera Green sedge Carex testacea Carex virgata Bronze Corokia Korokio Green Corokia Coprosma 'Roys Red' Grapefruit Tree 'Purpurea' Toatoa Hebe decumbens Hebe Boxwood Hebe Banks Peninsula Koromiko Kanuka Swamp Ribbonwood Totara Peach Redhaven Plum Tree Apricot Tree Apple Tree Lancewood Horopito / Pepper Tree South Island Kowhai 'Dragon's Gold' Kowhai Dwarf Kowhai
6-Ca b 1-Ap s 5-Ca b 2-Ca s 5-Ca f 3-As f
5-Ca c
3-Ca f 4-Ca d 3-Ca s
4-Ca f 3-Ap s 4-Ca c 6-Ca d
11-Ca co 1-An l 4-Ca v
5-Ca v 4-Ca b 6-Ca c 4-Ca f
3-Ca s 3-Ap s 10-Ca t 9-Ca b 4-As f 8-Ca c
10-Ca co 3-An l 4-Ap s 9-Ca f 5-Ca c 4-Ca b 3-Ca v
12-Ca t 8-Ca v 6-An l 13-Ca c 5-Ca v 17-Ca t 6-As f 15-Ca d
10-Ca c
8-Ca b 3-Ca t
7-Ca d 7-Ca b 3-Ap s 9-Ca co
28-Ca f 7-Ap s 17-Ca b
4-Ca d 17-Ca f
8-Ca s 29-Ca c 4-An l
3-Ca t 9-Ca v
16
12-Ca c 5-Ca v
16-Ca t 13-Ca b
5
10
15
20 M
9-Ca b 5-As f
6-Ca t 5-Ap s
7-Ca co 8-Ca f 8-Ca b 5-Ap s
4-An l 8-Ca t
15-Ca b 5-Ca d 14-Ca f 13-Ca c
3-Ca s 4-Ca b 7-As f 9-Ca t
2-An l 11-Ca t 26-Ca co 3-As f 9-Ca b
4-An l 9-Ca c 5-Ca co 13-Ca t 7-Ca b
5-Ca b 8-Ca b
0
9-Ca b 9-Ca c 3-An l
2-Ca s 9-Ca b
5-Ca t 4-Ca v 4-An l 8-Ca c 8-Ca b
5-Ca s
11-Ca c 3-Ap s 4-An l 2-As f
3-Ap s 3-An l
The site is perfectly situated as a catalyst ‘urban’ regeneration project - to continue Ngai Tahu’s work to bring native trees back to the Canterbury plains. Our proposal considers the home garden as a long-term ecological investment.
17
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
MLA THESIS
RESEARCH ABSTRACT PROJECT TYPE Masters thesis, design-led research CLIENT Banks Peninsula Conservation Trust
binary, and as such pays attention to relationships with, and within landscape
LOCATION Banks Peninsula, Canterbury
as well as its definitive state. Wylie considers this focus on landscape
DURATION 2014 - 2015
tension to be revealing of its most animating elements, where the resulting
Landscape As Tension: The analytical and generative potential of a focus on tension in the landscape
understanding of landscape value is distilled rather than all encompassing. In this paper we consider an alternate approach to landscape comprehension, to focus on the inherent sociocultural tension of place, rather than its
Human relationships with landscape are fiercely complex. They can be
perceivable value. Drawing on Wylie’s proposition of ‘landscape is tension’,
personal or collective, subjective or objective, and fundamentally resistant
I have considered a framing of landscape in terms of its complication,
to being analytically represented. Landscape architecture practice is deeply
rather than irrespective of it. The aim of this reframing is not for a closer
concerned with the breakdown and understanding of these relationships.
definition of place, clarity or categorisation, but for a deeper, comparative
The development of models and frameworks for categorisation of landscape
understanding of relations born out of difference.
value as it is to people (Meyer, 1997), has left us with a necessary, systematic understanding of landscape, required for comprehension of specific characteristics and qualities as they are to people (Selman, 2006). However, such models are often argued to limit our understanding, and blind us from recognising complex relationships (Meyer, 1997; Selman, 2006; Stephenson, 2008). These approaches force the acceptance of an inadequate framing of place, where we systematically break down dynamic and entwined relationships for binary representation. In particular, these frameworks struggle to represent the non-spatial dimension of landscape – such as inhabitant perception and sociocultural value (Stephenson, 2008).
In this research I have considered the potential of landscape comprehension in terms of its sociocultural tension within the particular setting of New Zealand’s Banks Peninsula. The primary sociocultural relationship within this rural/recreational landscape is that between ‘farmers’ and ‘walkers’ – collective positions grounded within an iconic New Zealand cultural paradigm. Using relational models, I comparatively mapped and layered perceived tensions of this landscape from the inhabitant, visitor and expert perspectives. These systematic approaches provide a lens to the intricacies of place, without reverting to the usual compartmentalised overview. While conventional models of landscape value provide a necessary comparable
The idea that “landscape is tension” underpins John Wylie’s survey of
understanding, a landscape tension orientated approach focuses attention
Landscape (2007), where landscape is “…precisely and inherently a set of
on relationships, layers and points of interaction, and begs question rather
tensions” (p. 2). This understanding landscape is comparative rather than
than providing clarity.
MAJOR DESIGN COMPONENT The complex design project is a site specific and fully resolved exploration of
The design response was based on the following principles drawn from the
the key findings from the literature review and context analysis phase. This
research:
design process was highly reflective and integrative, and allowed exploration of relationships from a planning scale, right through to construction details and planting elements. This process of designing landscape tension has been undertaken in response to a site on the Spine of the Lizard walkway, Banks Peninsula, New Zealand - a walking track segment at which sociocultural value is most diverse, and as such tension is most prolific.
18
• That tension and diversity of values in the landscape is something to be celebrated rather than ‘repaired’ or ‘resolved’ (Chapter 5); • That thresholds, edges and meetings are points of excitement and intrigue (Chapter 6); • Design interventions in this environment work on two levels: functionality and experience. The strongest consider both (Chapter 7).
Existing Vegetation
Proposed Vegetation
Patches of indigenous and remnant vegetation descending from summits, dispersed amongst farm land, with some nearby exotic forestry. Important habitats.
The shared zone takes advantage of areas of low productive farmland - rock outcrops, steep slopes, existing vegetation, to create a soft-edged corridor.
Existing Land use Public conservation land segregated by farm land sections. Existing walkway boundary acts as ownership boundary. Agricultural land uses become less integral along summit ridge. Existing thresholds Site is made up of a range of blunt edges and boundaries, obvious in plan view and in topographic maps but less so in actual experience. Fences form a race-like path across existing public access. Existing circulation Occurs typically along boundary lines or ridge lines - in ‘left over’ spaces. Often is repeated at boundary lines - eg. summit ridge has 2 farm tracks and one walking track running parallel within 60m of one another at some points.
Proposed Land use
Deer farming
Sheep & beef Sheep
Forestry
Shared buffer zone
Public conservation lands
Existing edges: physical
Existing circulation: Paper roads
Existing edges: political
Existing circulation: Private
MASTERPLAN: MT. FITZGERALD TO MT. SINCLAIR SUMMIT
The shared zone occupies the existing boundaries of land use - creating a ‘shared use’ band across the summit ridge.
Proposed thresholds
Proposed edges: The existing fence lines fence line
Existing edges: fence line
Existing circulation: Public
bounding the public access across the ridge line are pushed back to the existing track, to incorporate the left over margin within this zone that currently exists.
Proposed circulation: Private links
Proposed circulation
Proposed Rather than having multiple circulation: Public sole-use routes, connecting these as a network and creating shared use paths for a spectrum of private and public uses. The existing track becomes the spine of the shared zone, and closes during revegetation.
19
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
MLA THESIS
THE BANKS PENINSULA MOSAIC: PROJECT PHASING PHASE ONE - YEAR ONE
Strict, short-cycle sheep grazing in support of tussock establishment
PHASE TWO - YEAR THREE
Brush transport and laying by walkers in shelterbelt and threshold zones
Shared zone nurse crop planting supported by mountain bikers and farmers for direct seeding
PHASE THREE - YEAR EIGHT
Nursery plants transported by walkers spot-spray markers - left by farmers, fo planting Biocontrol agents
PROGRAMME
Threshold design elements constructed, revegetation indicators placed New track construction as required for connections across shared-zone frame
Fence line realignment Shared shelter construction Terrace and stair construction at saddle
INFRASTRUCTURE
Establishment of upper-podocarp, and sub-alpine shrub reveg. nurseries in designated sheltered zones Planting across sub-alpine tussock zones
VEGETATION
20
Threshold revegetation indicators placed Nurse crops planted in threshold zones
Nurse crops planted in shelter belt zones Shared zone nurse crop groupings planted
Nurse crops thinned at shelter belt zones, planted with native, fast-growing shelter species
YEAR 50: CENTRAL ZONE ACCESS RE-ESTABLISHED FOR DYNAMIC, SHARED EXPERIENCES PHASE FOUR - YEAR FIFTEEN
FROM YEAR TWENTY FIVE
s to or
s released at sheltered sites
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES VALUES Pest regulation/Biocontrol (R)
Aesthetic values (C)
On-site nursery growing out nursery at existing sheltered location. Site-sourced timber frame.
Social relations (C)
Sense of place (C) Educational values (C)
Knowledge systems (C)
Social relations (C)
Recreation and eco-tourism (C) Sense of place (C) Ornamental resources (P)
Mutual shelter; shell of a 20 ft. shipping container with radiata pine detailing
Recreation and eco-tourism (C) Aesthetic values (C)
Shared-zone access restricted disturbance minimised for maximum benefit
Spot-spraying/clearing and planting nursery species continues in sprawling fashion from threshold zones
Shelter (P) Pollination (R) Food (P) Climate regulation steps (R) Economic benefit Pest regulation/Biocontrol (R)
Integrated crossing: built into and diverging from existing track. Revegetation marker location
21
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
MLA THESIS DETAIL PLAN At the details scale the scheme is about subtleties, celebration and programmatic experiences. Focussing closer on a key threshold, farmers and recreationalists gain shared benefits through proposed infrastructural, programmatic and re-vegetation interventions. KEY PRINCIPLES • A programmed experience for revegetation, enabling celebration at the threshold zones • Use of forms and materials that represent the coming together of diverse parties
CONCEPT: SUPER STRUCTURE CONNECTION
735.20
The superstructure concept explores means of access with minimal ground surface disturbance; rather than cutting into the erodible soils of the steep summit slopes, the structure
735.20
sits above the landscape, allowing for continued farm grazing beneath. The forms of the structure from the bottom to the top evolve from agriculturally inspired (sheep rib shaped ladder cage), through to the intricate details of the Banks Peninsulas endemic fauna (Banks Peninsula Tree Weta leg shaped ladder cage, and antennae inspired boardwalk frame). Antennae inspired boardwalk frame
Fencing batton style boardwalk
738.20
On-site nursery growing out nursery at existing sheltered location. Site-sourced timber frame. Post revegetation programme: biocontrol agent release site Educational values (C) Knowledge systems (C) Pest regulation/Biocontrol (R)
Sheep ribs inspired ladder cage
22
FRONT ELEVATION (1 of 3)
8000
12000
PLAN VIEW (1 of 3)
Nurse crops surrounding gathered BP stone base
Proposed upper podocarp forest class revegetation, planted gradually outward from threshold zones (detailed on P6)
Combiguards and transferred key species Educational values (C)
734.70
Pollination (R) Climate regulation steps (R)
734.70
Integrated crossing: built into and diverging from existing track. Revegetation marker location (detailed on P5) Sense of place (C)
732
Proposed sub-alpine scrubland class revegetation, planted gradually outward from threshold zones (detailed on P6) Pollination (R) Climate regulation steps (R)
Nurse crops, 0-5m, densely planted during phase one. Griselinia, Kunzea, Leptospermum Plagianthus, Pittosporum, Hoheria (detailed on P6)
BW 734.00 TW 735.00
2% 735.70
TS 736.20
BS 735.90
2%
TW 735.00
735.70
Mutual shelter; shell of a 20 ft. shipping container with radiata pine detailing (concept pg. 5) Shelter (P) Proposed minimal track connection through existing vegetation. Light shingle and bark substrate to inhibit weed growth.
Social relations (C) Recreation and eco-tourism (C)
Integrated crossing: built into and diverging from existing track. Revegetation marker location (detailed on P5)
733.20
Sense of place (C)
23
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
MLA THESIS CONSTRUCTION DETAIL EXAMPLE 190
505
1.1
PLAN VIEW SCALE 1:10
505 x 300 x 5 H5 treated Pinus radiata face, fixed to joist and bearer faces with (2) 90 x 3.55mm HDG nails at 30mm centres
81.0
350 x 200 x 200 17.5MPa Concrete pile footing 700 x 125 x 125 H5 treated Pinus radiata pile 535 x 100 x 75 H4 treated Pinus radiata bearer, cut on-site to suit shown angle. Fixed to adjacent piles using M12 x 150 HDG bolts
1240
650 x 50 x 40 H4 treated fencing battens, cut on-site to suit shown angle. Fixed to joists using 90 x 3.55mm HDG nails at 30mm centres. (See plan 1.5/1.6) 1260 x 100 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata joist, fixed to piles using centred M12 x 100 HDG bolts
1345 x 100 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata joist, fixed to piles using centred M12 x 100 bolts fixed to piles using centred M12 x 100 bolts, and to adjacent joist using B50 angle bracket with M12 x 40mm HDG bolts (See detail 1.4) 1240 x 300 x 5 H5 treated Pinus radiata face, fixed to joist and bearer faces with (2) 90 x 3.55mm HDG nails at 30mm centres and to adjacent joist using B50 angle bracket with M12 x 40mm HDG bolts
8.7
675 x 100 x 75 H4 treated Pinus radiata bearer, cut on-site to suit shown angle. Fixed to adjacent piles using M12 x 150 HDG bolts
160
805 x 100 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata joist, fixed to piles using centred M12 x 100 bolts, and to adjacent joist using B50 angle bracket with M12 x 40mm HDG bolts (See detail 1.4) 805 x 100 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata bearer, fixed to piles using centred M12 x 100 HDG bolts
360
730
505 x 300 x 5 H5 treated Pinus radiata face, fixed to adjacent joist using (2x) 40 x 2.55mm HDG nails at 150mm centres
120
1.4
45.0
1.7/1.8
957 x 100 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata joist, ends cut to 45 degree angles and fixed to piles using 2x 45 degree B53 angle brackets, with M12 x 40mm HDG bolts, and 130 x 40, 135 degree folded nail-on cleats (See detail 1.4) 753 x 100 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata joist, fixed to piles using centred M12 x 100 HDG bolts 900 x 230 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata plank, fixed to bearer using 4x M12 x 40mm HDG bolts at 60mm centres (See detail 1.7/1.8) 855 x 100 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata bearer (fixings shown in detail 1.8) 1800 x 125 x 125 H5 treated Pinus radiata pile/batten post 550 x 300 x 300 17.5MPa Concrete footing
2000 x 175 H5 treated Pinus radiata No.1 corner post, possible inset for threshold revegetation marker
24
1.2A
SECTION ELEVATION SCALE 1:20
1.3
Detailing typical pile-joist-bearer relationship
Rear section elevation, illustrating structure interface with existing track 125
350
350
Original ground level line descending from track New cut line - 700mm from existing track edge, and 350mm deep
100
700
100
700
100
810
100
810
125 50
135 50
135 1345 x 100 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata joist, shown fixed to piles using centred M12 x 100 bolts, and to adjacent joist using B50 90 degree angle bracket with (3x) M12 x 40mm HDG bolts 753 x 100 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata joist, fixed to piles using centred M12 x 100 HDG bolts
200 150
250
200 150
250
830
Track edge line 830
DETAIL ELEVATION SCALE 1:10
805 x 100 x 50 H4 treated Pinus radiata bearer, fixed to piles using centred M12 x 100 HDG bolts 700 x 125 x 125 H5 treated Pinus radiata pile set into 350 x 200 x 17.5MPa Concrete pile footing
25
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
PLANTING PLAN EXAMPLE: SHELTERBELT TANGENT REVEGETATION CLASS SHELTERBELT PLANTING PLAN (1:150 @ A1) Intertwined bands of ‘backbone’ shelter species, with scattered supplementary local natives. Planting Plan: An exemplar native Banks Peninsula summit-ridge shelterbelt as planted by contractors, demonstrating patterns and species arrangement to adjacent land holders.
2- Gr l
1- Ol p
I.D.
Quantity
Botanical name
Common name
Scheduled size
Ar f
6
Aristotelia fruticosa
Mountain wineberry
PB12
Co ri
6
Coprosma rigida
Coprosma
PB12
Co ro
19a
Coprosma robusta
Karamu
PB12
Gr l
13
Griselinia littoralis
Kapuka
PB18
He s
4
Hebe strictissima
Banks Peninsula hebe
PB3
Ho a
5
Hoheria angustifolia
Narrow-leaved lacebark
PB40
Ho g
10
Hoheria glabrata
Mountain ribbonwood
PB40
Ku e
12
Kunzea ericoides
Kanuka
PB40
Ol p
7
Olearia paniculata
Akiraho
PB40
Pi t
11
Pittosporum tenuifolium
Kohuhu
PB40
Po c
3
Podocarpus cunninghamii
Mountain totara
PB40
3- Ho g 2- Gr l 2- Ku e
5- Ho a
1- Ol p
1- Ar f
4- He s
1- Gr l
2- Gr l
3- Pi t
2- Pi t
1- Ol p
1- Ho g
1- Ar f
3 Ku e
2- Ku e 1- Ol p
2- Co ro
1- Ar f
1- Gr l
2- Co ro 1- Ho g
1- Ol p
3- Pi t
2- Gr l
2- Ku e
2- Po c 4- Co ri
5- Co ro 1- Ol p 3- Ku e
2- Ho g 1- Ar f
2- Gr l
2- Gr l
3- Co ro 1- Ar f
1- Co ri 1- Ol p
1- Ho g
1- Po c
1- Ar f
1- Co ri
3- Pi t
1- Gr l
2- Co ro
3- Co ro
2- Ho g
2- Co ro
BIODIVERSITY PLAN Upper podocarp class with soft boundaries
Shelter belt planting projecting from soft-edge track boundary
Rock outcrop class
Shelter belt planting projecting from soft-edge track boundary
Upper podocarp class with soft boundaries
Lycaena phlaeas Copper butterfly Feeds on complexa Oligosoma lineoocellatum)
Banks Peninsula Tree Weta
Canterbury ground beetle
Skink
Habitat
Habitat
Feeds on complexa
SUB-ALPINE TUSSOCK CLASS Planted at initial phase of project Grazed by sheep on short cycle by adjacent landholders, in support of tussock establishment SUB-ALPINE SHRUBLAND CLASS Phased and progressive planting beginning at key thresholds, and progressing to shared zone limits Key species planted at nurseries, and carried to be planted by walkers at cleared nurse-crop zones (clearances spraymarked by farmers in species colour code)
UPPER PODOCARP FOREST CLASS Phased and progressive planting beginning at key thresholds, and progressing to shared zone limits Key species planted at nurseries, and carried to be planted by walkers at cleared nurse-crop zones (clearances spraymarked by farmers in species colour code)
Canterbury knobbled weevil
Hover flies and parasitic wasps
Feeds on Kanuka
Lives on Aciphylla
Natural enemies to agricultural pests
Aciphylla aurea Aciphylla sub flabellata
Nurse Crop species
Planted by walkers at relevant threshold zones (as marked by farmers)
Key on-site nursery species Podocarpus cunninghamii, Libocedrus bidwillii, Hoheria angustifolia, Hoheria glabrata, Melicytus ramiflorus, Fuschia excorticata
ROCK OUTCROP CLASS Open and exposed hardy species, supporting diverse Banks Peninsula fauna
26
Hadramphus tuberculatus
Jeweled Gecko
Chionochloa rigida Dracophyllum uniflorum Kelleria dieffenbachii
Key on-site nursery species Hebe strictissma, Hebe lavaudiana, Aristotelia fruticosa, Gaultheria antipoda
Olearia cymbifolia Olearia illicifolia
Nursery sites retire as experimental biocontrol agent release sites (Exapion ulicis, Tetranychus lintearius, Sericothrips staphylinus: Gorse/Broom, leafroller caterpillar: Boneseed, Phytomyza vitalbae: Old mans beard Criteria: Shared zone; Landowner co-operation Site unlikely to be sold
Griselinia littoralis Kunzea ericoides Leptospermum scoparium Plagianthus regius Pittosporum tenuifolium Hoheria angustifolia
Discaria Toumatou Muelenbeckia complexa
Phase One - Year One
Bellbird, Brown creeper, Kereru, Tomtit, Shining cuckoo, Rifleman
Naultinus gemmeus
Key Sources of pollen
Megadromus guerinii (Carabdiae)
Anticipated bird species
Hemideina ricta
Phase Two - Year Three
Not intensively managed Good access Warm and sheltered
Planted by walkers at relevant threshold zones (as marked by farmers)
Healthy plants
Schefflera digitata Coprosma rigida
Not prone to disturbance Source: ECan/Landcare publications
Aciphylla aurea Aciphylla sub flabellata
Phase Three - Year Eight
Phase Four - Year Fifteen
From Year Twenty Five
DESIGNING FOR CHANGE IN PERCEPTION THROUGH TIME
YR 10
EXISTING
YR 50
These diagrams show the evolving state of ownership perception; described by Stephenson (2010) as mine (of significance to the perceiver themselves), yours (of significance to the landscapes inhabitants), theirs (external parties with an interest but not necessarily a connection with the landscape) and ours (both the collective significance of a landscapes user parties, and the elements of significance that are shared between groups). These storyboards are configured from a walker’s perspective at five key threshold zones across the site. The four perceptions
(MINE, YOURS, THEIRS, OURS) are represented as colours, and at three stages of the project phasing; present, 10 years and 50 years.
CONSERVATION LAND WALKWAY - ON SITE GROW-OUT NURSERY - BIOCONTROL AGENT RELEASE SITE YR 10
EXISTING
YR 50
The diagrams show the beholder becoming more connected with both the environment and the farmer, through a mutual connection to the landscape (in yellow). By designing explicitly from the experiential perspective perhaps we can programme some perception of place more so than we might from plan view.
LAND USE/OWNERSHIP AXIS - CELEBRATED THRESHOLD - SECOND GROWTH NATIVE BUSH YR 10
EXISTING
YR 50
OWNERSHIP BOUNDARY - CELEBRATED THRESHOLD - REVEGETATED, CELEBRATED THRESHOLD
27
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
COMPLEX DESIGN
DIAMOND HARBOUR VILLAGE PLAN PROJECT TYPE Village Centre Planning CLIENT Diamond Harbour Village Community Group LOCATION Diamond Harbour, Canterbury DURATION March - April 2013 SKILLS UTILISED Masterplanning, complex levels and storm water management design, site planning, community-scale design.
The character of Diamond Harbour is defined by the lifestyle of the residents. This lifestyle is a reflection of its setting; its proximity to Christchurch City, Lyttelton Harbour and the surrounding ocean, its commanding topography and the resulting ecosystems. It is with the community in mind that this design proposal has been rendered - a focus on both sustainability and resiliency, surrounding concepts of both community collaboration and connectivity. A study connecting these two precedents was undertaken by the ‘World Business Council for Sustainable Development’, and looks at a concept coined ‘sustainable mobility’. The over-arching goal of this was for humans to move ‘more freely, gain access, communicate, trade and establish relationships without sacrificing other essential human or ecological values, today or in the future’. This goal has formed a foundation from which the objectives of this project have been developed; the output here, being a sustainable and connected system of resiliency, which is diverse, efficient and cohesive. The system takes advantage of a preestablished diverse demographic, with a range of cultures and sub-cultures. The system should nurture diversity in terms of its enterprise scheme, with diverse yet collaborative business strategies. It should promote diversity in terms of ecosystems, with a variety of flora attracting a range of native fauna.
28
STODDART POINT CONCEPT PLAN 1:2000 @ A1
HARBOUR-WIDE STRATEGIC PLAN: DESIGN FOR A SUSTAINABLE AND CONNECTED LIVELIHOOD Connections for Communities:
• Walkable connections • Public transport connections • Character and identity connections Connections for Ecology:
• Connections of indigenous cover • Connections and networks for local, indigenous fauna
STAGED REGENERATIVE NATIVE PLANTING AND HABITAT DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
MITIGATION STRATEGY: Monitor and cater for natural vegetation developments throughout. Eliminate weeds and control spreading, Provide habitat for a range of native and exotic fauna species.
STAGE 1 YR 1
STAGE 2 YR 2
STAGE 3 (post canopy closure)
CABBAGE TREE
KAHIKATEA
TITOKI
LEMONWOOD
LANCEWOOD
HINAU
MANUKA
TOTARA
PIDGEONWOOD
RIBBONWOOD
KOWHAI
MIRO
BLACK MATIPO
MARBLE LEAF
FUSCHIA
LACEBARK
BROADLEAF
POATANIWHA
COPROSMA
ROUGH TREE FERN
CLIMBING RATA
KAKAHA
PIRI PIRI
TOE TOE
HOUNDS TONGUE FERN WHITEYWOOD
FOREST SEDGE
SHIELD FERN
PONGA PIU PIU
29
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
MIXED-USE PLAZA DECK (A)
BOUTIQUE SHOPPING LANE (B)
TOWN CENTRE ENTRY (C)
30
C
B
DIAMOND HARBOUR VILLAGE CENTRE PLAN: 1:200 @ A1
A
31
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
4 42.20 49 50 51
BS 45.00
52 54
TS 46.00
53
BS 46.00 53
TS 4
TW 53.90 BW 53.50 54
TW 52.90 BW 52.00
0%
0%
TW 53.40 BW 53.00
2.
TS 44.80
56.50
TW 54.90 BW 53.40
2.
2.
BS 43.80
54
0%
BS 53.50 TS 53.90
BS 53.00
54.00
TS 53.40
56 55
44
2.0% 47
TW 53.90 BW 53.80
48
COLLECTED WATER HARVESTED FOR GARDEN IRRIGTION
49
50
54.30
2.0%
56.20
54.00
2.5%
52
51
BS 45.00
54
2.0%
BS 46.00
URBAN MINI SWALE AND RUN-OFF CATCMENT
53
54
6.0%
TW 51.10 BW 50.80
53.80
51
51.10
59.90 54.00
2400
54
TW 53.10 BW 52.00
54.00
54.00
BW 53.50
53.15
6400
4000
49
3500
7000
6.0%
%
5.3
2.5
0 6.0%
TW 50.30 50.00
52.50
0 ,00
1.4%
% 2.5
00 40
46
15
52
49
BS 48.80 TS 48.70
BK 52.50
51
DIAMOND HARBOUR VILLAGE CENTRE STORM WATER PLAN BS 46.90
52.40
52.00
TS 46.80 BS 46.00
00
50
B 48
49
BW 51.50 TW 52.00
1.0
%
52.40 6 000
52.10
.0%
50
TS 50.60
52
100
TW 52.50 BW 50.65
52
32
0
52.50
30
48
2500
52.00
19.0
%
47.00 47.30
BS 50.70
,00
8500
47
TS 52.50 11
51.50
52.00
52.55 52.50
50.00 51.50
52.00
52.00
00
52.50
% 100.0
.0% 1 00
46
46
50.50
51.40
47
80
00
52.45
51.50
52.00
48
4000
50
65.0%
52.30 52.35
51.80
48
RAIN GARDEN
TW 53.2 BW 47.00
52.50
52.40
50.40
47
BS 51.80 BW 51.80
52.55
52.30
46
TW 52.00
TW 52.00 BW 49.10
BS 52.50 TS 53.00
%
0.0
10
52.50
49
51.80
51
80.0 %
%
50
50.50
51.80
52.50
2.5
52.00
%
51
BS 50.60
UD 51.75 LD 50.60 TW 53.00
52.35
%
3.0
52
51.80
51.80
URBAN MINI SWALES
52.60
115.0
50.20
% 0.0 10
52.00
52.70
50.50
BS 50.80
TW 53.00
52.70
700 0
62.5 %
51.60
52
%
0.0
13
TS 52.00
53
TS 51.80
52.70
52.55
RAIN GARDEN
WATER TRANSFER TW 53.20 BW 47.00
TS 53.00
BS 51.80
51
25.0%
700
52
%
50.40
2.4%
60
BS 51.80
2.5
50.50
TK 53.15 BK 53.00
47
52.80 52.60 52.60
51.50
54.20 BW 53.20
53.20
52.60 52.80
51
62.5 %
50.30
52
5%
TS 53.00 00
%
51.00
50.30
52.80
52.60
TW 53.50 BW 52.30
2.
TW 53.40 BW 53.00
47
50
TW 54.00 BW 53.50
50.70
51.30
52.00
BK 53.00
54.20
TW 54.40 BW 52.80 6.0 % 52.80 53.00
TS 52.00
55.80
53.20
00
TK 52.20 BK 52.05
53.30
55
%
50
51.10
53.30 54.60
53.68 53.50
6.0
53.15
51.30
54.20
49
52
51
53
6400
STORMWATER CHANNEL
53.68 54 53.50
TW 53.40 BW 53.00
53.15
55.50
TW 54.00 BW 53.15
54.20
6.5%
0 600
53.15
53.15 53.25
54.60
TW 55.00 BW 54.00
54.00
53.10
TS 54.70
54.30
TW 55.80 BW 54.00
53.90
52.10
2.5%
BS 54.30
14,000
54.00
3000
700
53.15 53.15
52.00
54.20
BW 53.15 54.70
2000
5000
.0
%
TW 53.40 BW 53.05
0
TW 53.20 BW 49.90
54.20
11,000
53
26.0%
54.10 54.10
1.7%
6.0%
52
TS 54.00
54.00
TW 54.05
TW 53.00 BW 52.80
11
7000
% 5.0 50
51.40
TW 54.10 54.20
BS 53.10
3000
TW 53.00 BW 52.30
51.70
53.30
54.20 54.30
2500
49
54.20 6000
45
52
TW 54.90 BW 53.40
2.5%
4000
TS 52.00
TW 51.00 BW 50.20
51.50
54.00
BS 52.10
52.20
46.50
53.80
BS 51.20
TW 51.00 BW 50.90
TS 53.00
52.00
53.70
53.80
TK 51.20 BK 51.15
TK 50.60 BK 50.45
54.00
54.00
44
BS 49.20 TS 50.20
4000
BS 48.00 TS 49.00
1.0%
54
TS 47.80
53
TS 46.00
19.0
48
TW 53.90 BW 53.80
53
50
49
2.0%
54.00
2.5%
53
52
51
BS 48.00 TS 49.00
1.0%
54
47.80
53.80
51
59.90 54.00
4000
TW 53.10 BW 52.00
5 TS 52.00 2
55.10 54.20
54
TW 51.00 BW 50.90
BS 52.10
0 11,00
TW 53.40 BW 53.00
4000
0% 0.
52.00 52.30
52.50
0
1.4% 3000
%
48
47 4000
52.00
46
52.50 52.55 52.50
46.10
46.10
46.10
BS 50.70 0
TW 52.50 BW 50.65 52
50 49
BW 51.50 TW 52.00
48
TS 50.60 BS 48.80 TS 48.70
51
BK 52.50 DIAMOND HARBOUR VILLAGE CENTRE LEVELS PLAN: 1:200 @ A1 52.40
52.50 52.00
BS 46.90 TS 46.80 BS 46.00
00
51.50
52
46.10 4000
00
15
,00
49
53.00 51.80
BW 51.80
52.30 52.50
0
8500
52.00
BS 51.80
50
52
50
2500
52.00
00 ,00
51.50
52.10 50.50
TS 52.50 11
51.50
51
BS 50.60
46
100.0% TW 50.30 50.00
51.80
51.80
BS 52.50 TS 53.00
80
50.00
52.00
TW 52.00 BW 49.10
%
52.20 52.50
6.0%
51.50
52
47
50.50
53.50 51.80
51.80
50
65.0%
52.20 52.45
50.40 51.40
TW 53.00
52.50
52.40
BK 52.30 TK 52.35
53
TS 51.80
52.50
52.55
52.00
3.0 %
BS 51.80
40
10
% .0
TW 52.00
0
2 .5
11 5.0%
50.20
BS 51.80
TW 53.00 52.35
50.50
TS 53.00
UD 51.75 LD 50.60
52.90 52.60
52.50
BS 50.80
00
52.70
53.00 52.70
50.40
2.4%
TS 53.00 60
53.70 52.80
53.20 52.70
52.55
700
62.5% 80.0% 25.0%
50.30
TK 52.20 BK 52.05 51.60
52
TS 52.00
0 10
51.50
51
52.00
%
0
52.50 LP 50.50
53.20
700
2 .5
51.10
53.60 52.60
52.55
53.20 52.60 52.60
51.50
51.00
54.30 52.80
%
51
6.0%
3500
62.5%
53.00 LP 50.30
52
52.00
2 .5
52.90
52
TW 53.40 BW 53.00
53.60 52.60
TW 53.50 BW 52.30 52.10
54.15 53.00
52.90
51
TW 53.20 BW 49.90
14,00
53.70 LP 50.70
TK 53.15 BK 53.00
6.5%
6400 7000
26.0%
54.10 54.20 BW 53.20
TW 54.00 BW 53.50
5%
50.80 51.30
BK 53.00
TW 54.40 BW 52.80 6 .0 % 52.80
53.70 52.90
TW 54.00 BW 53.15
54.60 53.30
55.10 54.20
HP 55.80
54.10 53.20
00
55.00 53.30
55.20 54.60
53.80 54.20
2.
49
BW 47.65 TW 49.00
TS 52.00
%
UD 54.60
54.60 53.50
2 .5
51
50
50
52.90
% 0.0
6 .0
53.40 52.90
52.40 53.15
53.15 53.25 54.50 54.20
HP 55.50 55
54
00
52
52.80
51.30
13
BW 53.50 54.70 53.68
BS 54.30 TS 54.70
LD 54.30
TW 55.00 BW 54.00
54.60 53.90
53
52.90
48
55.20 54.00
%
52.80
6400
54.00
TW 55.80 BW 54.00
53.80 54.00
HP 53.10
53.15
UD 54.70
2000 55.10
5 .3
600
0
52.80
53.15
51.40
55.10 54.20
TW 54.05
5000
0
51.70
55.10 54.10
1.7%
6.0%
52 49
TS 54.00
BW 53.15
TW 53.00 BW 52.80 53.90 54.00
TW 53.40 BW 53.05
% 700
7000
% 5 .0
53
48.50 58.30
53.75 54.00
2.5%
50
52.20
53.30 TW 54.10
55.00 54.20
BS 53.10
3000
TW 53.00 BW 52.30
TW 54.90 BW 53.40
2.5%
55.20 54.30
2500
TW 51.00 BW 50.20
.0
55.10 54.00
55.05 54.20 6000
2400
BS 51.20
TS 53.00
11
55.00 53.80
53.70
53.80
TK 51.20 BK 51.15
TK 50.60 BK 50.45
54.00
54.00
53
51.30 51.10
TK 53.25 BK 53.10
54
6.0% TW 51.10 BW 50.80
BS 49.20 TS 50.20
20
0%
55.20 HP 56.20
54.30
33
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
STRUCTURE PLANNING
ADDINGTON STRUCTURE PLAN PROJECT TYPE Structure Planning and Landscape Urbanism theory application CLIENT Christchurch City Council
Addington Structure Plan
LOCATION Addington, Christchurch
The final structure plan layout for Addington comes as the result of a
DURATION December - January 2013/14
number of drivers, and entwines a number of landscape layers pulling them
SKILLS UTILISED Structure Planning, application of theory, design critique
to the surface of the land for this design. It considers landscape systems, and the incorporation of infrastructure into public and hybridised spaces as
This project interrogates Landscape Urbanism theory, and its practical
a focus, whilst remaining as minimalistic in and disturbance-free to existing
applications. Landscape Urbanism theory drove the design process, and
Addington as possible. It is proposed that these development processes will
then was used to critique design outcomes in the Christchurch setting.
take place over approximately 40 years.
The central-Christchurch suburb of Addington grew from a culture defined
STUDY AREA
by the working class, with labourers and technicians forming the majority of
REVIVED RAIL SYSTEM
the population. The ability to work and have a high quality inner-city lifestyle,
REGIONAL ARTERIAL ROAD
within the same area has developed Addington’s strong sense of community
LOCAL ARTERIAL ROAD
which is still evident today.
LOCAL SECONDARY ROAD CYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN LINKS
This historic culture and sense of community are the central focuses of this structure plan project for Addington; which looks to revitalise the suburb
B1 TOWN CENTRE
with a rich realm of landscape layers. It is proposed that these layers will be
CU3 EDUCATION FACILITIES
bought to the surface in turn, through the implementation and phasing of this development project over a 40 year period. Project Aim (drawn from Landscape Urbanism theory) To facilitate a constantly fluid exchange between the exposed process layers of the landscape, both historic and perceived, including ecology,
REGIONAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES TP (TRANSPOWER LTD NZ) C2 (CEMETERY) HIGH DENISTY HOUSING (50p.Ha) MEDIUM DENSITY HOUSING (30p.Ha) MEDIUM-LOW DENSITY HOUSING (25p.Ha) LOW DENSITY HOUSING (20p.Ha)
infrastructural systems, social and cultural layers. This exchange will work for the remediation and revitalisation of Addington’s former glory, providing the suburb with resiliency through an upcoming period of indeterminacy and unpredictably.
HYBRIDISED SECTORS: HS 1 (ENTERTAINMENT, AMENITY, STORMWATER) HS 2 (AMENITY, FOOD PRODUCTION, ECOLOGY, RECREATION, GREEN RAIL) HS 3 (INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS, STORMWATER, ECOLOGY) HS 4 ( BUSINESS RETAIL PARK, STORMWATER, ECOLOGY) HS 5 (COMMUNITY FACILITIES, RETAIL, RESIDENTIAL, ECOLOGY) STREAM PARK SWALE LINK WATER RACE LINK O1 PUBLIC GREEN SPACE TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE ‘STITCHING’ SH75 ‘GREENWAY’ DEVELOPMENT
34
RICC ARTO N
RICC ARTO N
AVE
AVE
E
E
EY
GL
HA
AV
HA
RD
AV
MOORHOUSE AVE
MOORHOUSE AVE
AR CL E
E NC
C EN
E AR
CL
ST
RD
EIG EL
N
RD
LIN
E
E
AV
LIN
AV
H
L CO
H
EIG EL HIT
HIT
W
ST
W
N
L CO
SH73
SH73
HOUSING DENSITY
EY
GL
BLENHEIM
DEANS AVE
RD
DEANS AVE
BLENHEIM
TRANSPORT
GREEN AND BLUE INFRASTRUCTURE
35
KATE BLACKBURNE PORTFOLIO 2016
KATE BLACKBURNE Contact details: EMAIL PHONE LINKEDIN ADDRESS
38
kate.blackburne@gmail.com +44 7400 056083 https://nz.linkedin.com/in/kate-blackburne-2a8abb96 176 Southfield Road London W45LD