Wednesday, 6 March 2013

MLA Orientation 2013


. 
This year we have 8 new MLA candidates,  many thanks to Peter Connolly for his great effort last year in promoting the MLA. Many of the candidates bring strong research interests from their professional backgrounds. We met staff from the Department of Landscape Architecture who outlined their research areas.  Two research topics that attracted candidate’s interest were  landscape parametrics,  Nikolay Popov's research field,  and  children environments, Sue Wakes research interest. Assoc. Professor Ken Simpson introduced a collaborative research project with TEPU to develop new master plan for the Rosebank peninsula.   We also had professionals from Auckland practice; Gary Marshall from Jasmax, Will Thresher from Thresher Associates and Nat Lawrence from Reset Urban design presented research projects. These projects received  active interest from the candidates. We believe working with practice is a fantastic opportunity for postgraduates to explore important research areas that practice can bring to Unitec and to which postgraduates can respond with an in-depth research investigation. 













Wednesday, 20 February 2013


Hi everyone and welcome to the MLA by Project programme, Unitec, 2013. My name is Matthew Bradbury, I am a senior lecturer in the Landscape Architecture programme at Unitec and acting programme leader for the Master of Landscape Architecture by Project programme. Peter Connolly, the previous programme leader, has recently joined the Landscape Architecture programme at Victoria as an Associate Professor. I want to thank Peter for his sterling work with the MLA .  For the last three years Peter has been dedicated to making a theoretically robust programme, helping students to realise there own potential for advanced research work and made real cross disciplinary connections. Pete has also been tireless in building a studio culture for master’s by project students with a dedicated workspace that we can now all enjoy. We wish Peter the very best.
This year we have six new candidates from different disciplines and at different stages of their landscape careers, from recent graduate to mid career professionals. We are kicking of the year with a group meeting and orientation on Wednesday the 27th. We start with a bbq in the Fale courtyard at 12.30 then move to the masters studio where we will introduce ourselves and our areas of research interests, and meet the prospective supervisors. The supervisors will briefly talk about their research interests (and I encourage you to read about them on the blog before we meet). We also have a number of professionals from landscape practice who will talk about their  collaborative projects.
After the meeting please consider who you think would be sympathetic to your research interests, then get in contact with me and we can discuss your choice.   To help you develop your ideas into a research proposal we are planning  an all day proposal workshop on March the 15th.  This will cover the basics of writing a proposal, where to find material in your field of interest and how to use end note. Working with your supervisor you have seven week to present your research proposal  at the candidature workshop on the 3rd of May.  
You will then work with your supervisor to develop your research project,  presenting your work at three workshops to a panel of professionals and academics.  The dates for the workshops are on the blog . If you are a full time student  you must present at every workshop, if part time ,every second one. If you pass every workshop then you are eligible to be examined at the subsequent workshop.
If you have any queries please don’t hesitate to contact me.   

Tuesday, 5 February 2013



Dear Colleagues, Welcome to the Masters of Landscape Architecture Programme 2013.
Below is the calendar for the academic year. The calendar will be updated regularly.  Important dates so far are


Orientation Day
Wednesday 27th February, 1 - 3 pm
BBQ lunch in the Fale Courtyard followed by orientation talk in the Masters studio.

Meet the supervisors
Friday 8th of March

Informal get together to meet the supervisors and discuss nascent research proposals

Proposal Workshop
Friday 15th March
How to write a research proposal.
All day workshop in the MLA studio and Unitec Library 10 - 3

Candidate presentation practice
Friday 5th of April
All MLA students

Research Proposal Run through
May Presention run through

Wkshp 1


Interim Presentations
Candidate presentation
Friday 3rd May


All first year MLA students to present their research proposals.

Zoe, Jennifer, Betsey, James, Ryan to present

Wkshp 2
Friday 14th June

Exam Jo Leather
Exam Ryan Hodgson

Zoe, Betsey, James, Jack to present




Wkshp 3
Friday 30th August


Wkshp 4
Friday 1st November
Exam Betsy Kettle
Exam Jennifer Parlane























The 2012 Fred Tschopp Senior Scholarship, Department of Landscape Architecture, Unitec, NZ.


This year we had three very good candidates. Their work was of a very high standard, they all showed a willingness to engage in the many complex and difficult issues that our society faces now. How should we live and develop the edges of our cities? what role does the recycling play in our lives?  how can green roofs be more than a technical innovation? these question affect us all and we are very grateful that these students have decided to undertake this critical research within the Masters of Landscape Architecture.

After much discussion and deliberation, the Panel, Chaired by Fred Jr.,  Renee Davis, Head of School and Matthew Bradbury have decided to award Zoe Cooper the 2012 Fred Tschopp Senior Scholarship.  

Zoe’s research by design project is titled “A Living Roof Urbanism”.
Zoe’s proposal displayed a strong potential to contribute new knowledge to the discipline of landscape architecture by investigating the urban and public potential of living roofs. Living roofs an emerging area in the practice of landscape architecture, at the moment they tend to be technical solutions using generic planting on private roofs. Zoe’s project is looking at ways in the indisputable benefits of green roofs can include their use and enjoyment by the public. Perhaps this is a bit like the development of the public park, they started as private pleasure grounds before becoming what we now know as parks. Of course the inventor of the public park in America was the first landscape architect Fredrick Law Olmsted, his master piece is Central Park. Fred Tschopp was the first landscape architect in New Zealand to introduce the idea of a people park, a multi functional public space that everyone could use for a multitude of recreational purposes.
We see Zoë’s project as being just as revolutionary, imagine if not only the ground was public in the city but also all the roofs. This would be another great contribution that the discipline of landscape architecture is making to the development of the modern city.
Congratulations to Zoe for being the recipient of the 2012 Fred Tschopp Senior Scholarship.   

Thursday, 31 January 2013


Ryan Hodgson

Research Question: How to Design Community Appropriation?

In this project I will investigate how a change in infrastructure can facilitate community appropriation. This research argues that past approaches to community appropriation have tended to rely on generalised guidelines and assumptions. I will explore how the understanding of urban context and the detailed configuration of spaces on Dominion Road can aid design that produces spaces, which will be appropriated by the community.

Betsy Kettle

Research Question:  How can one create a community-based Resource Recycling Depot  (CRD) that fits into people’s everyday lives?

In the last workshop a community-based, zero waste, recycling centre was defined.  In the last four months  I have been understanding the seeds that give rise to the physical form of a resource recovery facility. To accomplish this I researched the stakeholders, the landscape model, the process model,  the unique business of the waste industry and worked on conceptualizing  these unique combinations in designerly way and discovered ten unique concepts that need to be imbedded in the core essence of resource recovery design.  
Existing infrastructure was visited, gaps identified between the desired and current practise, Auckland Council waste consultation reports read, an abstract site concept developed, potential sites identified and  conceptual site plans begun.   
Challenges have included
·       finding a simple, graspable,  description of a complex resource stream
·       Squeezing out  a potential for profit-making,  a ‘way in’ , in an already well-niched market place
·       Finding examples of how the legislative framework/dominant private  waste industry gives form to the public waste infrastructure
·       Understanding  why the Envision concept  of a RRF challenge has not been accomplished or even attempted  in other places in the past
·       Researching the planning requirements for a RRF
·       What makes Auckland’s situation unique to any place else in the world, both in terms of challenges and potentials
To overcome these challenges,  I read the Waste Assessment, a 1000 page document consolidating the many reports prepared by Auckland Council in preparation for the amalgamation, reading the new Council Waste Management and Minimisation Plan particularly searching for business ideas that could involve community, and studying similar community-based recycling facilities overseas within their unique legislative frameworks.
Future work will be around studying how to bring community into the facility, how to spread tendrils of action from the RRF to the community, how to phase the facility from first contractural work to full build out, looking within the processing modules to understand and develop them in more detail.

Joanne Leather




Beyond separatism
How can an understanding of domesticated animal behaviour enhance current models of subdivision design to privilege conservation and biodiversity goals in human settlements?

Abstract
Traditional approaches to subdivision led to an erasure of nature in favor of human habitation and therefore a trend to separatism, a disparity as historically humans separate themselves from nature, the landscape and the species that inhabit it - the result a loss of connectivity in particular to rural and remnant natural landscapes.
The current phase of subdivision design uses nature as infrastructure e.g. waterways, erosion control planting, recreation corridors. This research investigates the potential for further integration of farming and habitat conservation design into subdivi- sions.
This dissertation uses research by design to look at how the domesticated species we surround ourselves with and human activi- ties such as settlement and production can be viewed as a means to achieve wider goals of sustainability/biodiversity enhance- ment and not a barrier to it.
The contribution I can make as a designer (and veterinarian) is to develop strategies for an economically viable ‘Mainland Island’ settlement as a new landscape exemplar. One, which provides new opportunities for intensified rural settlement and community growth, simultaneously maximizes ecological connections; provides safe habitats for threatened species, integrates the different aspects of rural landscapes and human activities to achieve sustainability and to add value and moral legitimacy with global and national consumers. The resulting ‘Mainland Island’ settlement is an integrated part of rural communities - protecting and promoting the rural landscape providing new opportunities for tourism, recreation, education, rural production and settlement. ‘Mainland Islands’ will be shown to have the potential to become part of communities and the national open spaces linking New Zealanders to their heritage.

Jack Haldane-Willis

Research Question: How can shopping development promote peri-urban social life?


This research aims to re-conceptualize shopping (“Big Box”) infrastructure and investigate its potentials to contribute to social life as a component of peri-urban settlement.

Peri-urban “Big Box” shopping development today tends to be isolated, situated away from or disconnected to main and residential centres. The isolated nature of this type of development is explored by many authors (e.g Garreau J (Edge City) as a condition in which large format retail tends to appear. “Big Box” mall development tends to sit at the periphery of settlement where development is most unobstructed and cost effective. The overarching consideration of cost and desired disconnects from centres and settlement suggests to me a strong economic focus for these types of development. Early visions for shopping mall development incorporate ideologies that seem to express concern for how shopping mall infrastructure might redefine the contemporary city. Victor Gruen is widely acknowledged as being among the earliest figures in shopping mall design (Sze Tsung leong). His vision for the shopping mall visualized the mall as a unit of urban planning which acted as a central player with specific relationships to residential areas, schools, work environments, recreational areas etc. The mall was seen as an instrumental component in a settlement assemblage. In New Zealand, today “Big Box” stores and environments seem to connect primarily to patterns in automobile use in establishing a dialect between the confined shopping environment and society. Within the shopping centre this focus becomes evident with car parking occupying similar floor areas to retail space, both of which far outweigh social, environmental or cultural spaces.  In my view, retail centres such as Westgate and the types of shops they contain are becoming, if not already are the primary means by which our society does most of its shopping.  At this stage I have observed an interesting relationship between retail centres and their users. Users of spaces like westgate or Albany mall are happy to visit, shop and return home (generally to the suburbs) happy to not have the non-human scale shopping centre in their settlement. The retailers with an economic focus are interested in turnover thus are happy for consumers to arrive, shop and leave. Zoning is an instrumental tool in maintaining this disconnect (Allan A). This is the status quo. However, given increasing use of shopping environments by society, the increasing costs in using automobile transport, homogenous settlement environments implemented by zoning controls, etc, I feel there is a design challenge in dealing with the disconnects between shopping environment and settlement, retail centres and social outcomes and the contribution of retail environments beyond shopping and economics.

Whilst embracing the requirements and logics around shopping development, I would like to explore how shopping infrastructure might contribute to social life in general and specifically how shopping infrastructure might contribute to social life and settlement in peri-urban New Zealand. Focusing on Huapai/Kumeu, I am interested in how the application of design might enable shopping development to position itself as a valuable component of this emerging settlement in peri-urban New Zealand. A return to the ideologies presented by Gruen at conception of shopping environments. Thus far development strategies for Huapai/Kumeu maintain the disconnect between settlement and large format retail environments by creating a “town Centre” proper at Huapai and a Large Format/Industrial centre at Kumeu. The decision here seems disconnected from the realities of shopping tendencies today. It would be my speculation the there is potential for the town centre at huapai to struggle economically against the centre at kumeu and for this to have social impacts on both centres. I am interested in the potential in the application of design to enable these two centres to become one in a way that a settlement centre is developed that maximizes potentials across all aspects (social, economic, environmental and cultural) At a contextual scale the focus will predominantly be on planning and spatial connections that establish a strategic position for large format retail infrastructure within peri-urban settlement. Focus for this strategy/positioning will be equally weighted to producing a viable shopping development whilst promoting social life and investigating how large format retail infrastructure can positively impact on settlement structure. At a finer scale the research will look to develop a design for a viable shopping centre in huapai/kumeu that maximizes the potentials for the mall to be a social space and offer the community potentials beyond shopping.


Jennifer Parlane

Research Question How to design industrial areas for public enjoyment?

The perception of industrial areas is that they are often one dimensional and isolated parts of a city; they are the marginalized areas of a city. function (both economically and in a design sense). They are highly un‑planned and they lack appeal for most people. Metaphorically speaking, they are like the poor cousins of the city; perceived as dirty, labeled as undesirable and left to their own devices to survive ‑ and survive they do (flourish in fact). For this reason, industrial areas are a fascinating landscape of contradictions and juxtapositions.  With their purely functional buildings, the industrious work force, the whir of machines and the surprising ways in which nature takes a foothold on these manufactured landscapes, the industrial world has a cool seductiveness about it.

Industrial areas are also a vital component of a city, occupying significant tracts of land and often found close to sensitive ecological areas.  In this post‑industrialist era, where sustainability and even ‘livability’ are the desired goals, and accommodating an ever‑increasing population is an ongoing pressure, can industrial areas become more dynamic and more responsive to the people that work within them and the ecologies that inhabit them, while at the same time, maintaining their core function of being economic hubs?  Can discovering opportunities for public enjoyment create multi‑functional landscapes that can achieve the new growth paradigm; the accommodation of economic development and population growth, while sustaining the spirit of community and of the physical environment?

To demonstrate the relevance of the industrial landscape in our current climate, and a design approach that considers environmental, social, and economic aspects, this thesis analyses the industrial area around Mangere inlet, Auckland, an area that epitomises the challenges faced by post‑industrial New Zealand. The site presents vast potential for redevelopment.

The main objective of this thesis is to show the existing industrial landscape is a complex resource, which can be recovered, re‑used, reintegrated and enjoyed by the surrounding community.  Additionally, the intention of the overall design strategy is discussed in a manner such that it can be used as a resource for other designers for non site‑specific challenges.


James Walker








Globalisation is the dominant factor in the structuring of landscapes today.[1] Counterurbanisation is a secondary process that has emerged as an effect of globalisation. It involves the restructuring of urban settlement patterns, whereby settlement arrangements decentralise in decreasing densities over a given space, whilst becoming increasingly interconnected as they extend into rural landscapes.[2] During this restructuring, system dynamics contained within both rural and urban landscapes undergo a process of exchange in the socioeconomic organisation of a given space.[3] The following design research is an investigation into the effects of this exchange, the problems it incurs and solutions to these problems.

Rural and urban system exchange occurs when generalisations are applied to the socioeconomic organisation of a given space. Such generalisations are held within state models of spatial development. [4] As such urban systems, conceived as the topological space in which this socioeconomic development occurs, have become the dominant mode of landscape intervention. Globalisation has thus become increasingly viewed as a dualistic process whereby the regional will supersede the local.[5] The urban rural duality, by default of this conception, has become an issue in the reformation of rural landscapes today. Globalisation, represented in this dualistic way necessitates a confrontational relationship when opposing systems come into contact with one another.  However, globalisation in itself doesn’t necessitate such a duality.[6] Such representations of globalisation have created an unnecessary approach to landscape intervention, in which, during the process of counterurbanisation, local socioeconomic systems are exchanged for regional socioeconomic systems.[7] When a landscape intervention involves the exchange of such systems, opportunities for the development of rural goods and services within these evolving landscapes are lost. Such representations of globalisation have brought to the forefront of landscape intervention the future nature of rural landscapes and the associated restrictions regarding the development potential of the goods and services they provide.

Today counterurbanisation approaches, regarding rural landscape development, fit into two categories of thought; those that assert the ‘irremediable urbanisation of the country side’ as postulated by Lefebvre and Berry, in which the process of landscape evolution is seen purely from the realm of the urban; and those that assert that both rural and urban are intrinsic to the transformation of space during the process of globalisation.[8] The former holds to the segmentation of systems, the changeability of the city and the ‘right to the city’ as our global conditions evolve. The latter holds to synergism between rural and urban conditions, whereby new socioeconomic systems of organisation are produced. Therefore the question of the new, or Novelty as Whitehead called it, has become of crucial importance in the restructuring of socioeconomic spaces. The following design research will investigate the conditions required for novelty during the counterubanisation of rural landscapes. The research method involves four stages:

  • Investigate the conditions in which socioeconomic conceptions, driven by dualistic representations of globalisation, lead to the exchange of local processes for regional processes, and demonstrate how novelty can occur after the initial representations have been established.
  • Investigate the conditions required for Novelty to occur in a selected rural landscape unrestricted by socioeconomic representations, and analyse how other countries are creating such conditions.
  • Use this information to explore through design, the Ideas (expressions) from which rural and urban conceptions arose, and reveal through the exploration of these Ideas the conditions required to produce novel socioeconomic situations.[9]
  • Explore through design the potentials for novelty in creating truly sustainable healthy socioeconomic spaces.





[1] Brenner, N. Global, Fragmented, Hierarchical: Henri Lefebvre’s Geographies of Globalization, Duke University Press Journals, 1997, pg. 136-140.
[2] Brain J. L. Berry, Urbanisation and Counterurbanisation in the United States, Sage Publications Inc, California, 1980, pg. 13-20.
[3] Esparcia, J. et al, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning: The Context of Rural–Urban Relationships in Finland, France, Hungary, The Netherlands and Spain, Routledge Informa Ltd, London, 2009, pg. 9-25.
[4] Brenner, N. Global, Fragmented, Hierarchical: Henri Lefebvre’s Geographies of Globalization, Duke University Press Journals, 1997, pg. 136-140.
[5] Castells, M. Globalisation and Identity, Journal of Contemporary Culture, No.1, 2006, pg. 56-67.
[6] Brenner, N. Global, Fragmented, Hierarchical: Henri Lefebvre’s Geographies of Globalization, Duke University Press Journals, 1997, pg. 136-140.
[7] Esparcia, J. et al, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning: The Context of Rural–Urban Relationships in Finland, France, Hungary, The Netherlands and Spain, Routledge Informa Ltd, London, 2009, pg. 9-25.
[8] Mathieu,  N. Rural-urban context in France: French Vexin and Pays de Caux,
RURBAN Internal Report, Paris: UMR Ladyss, 2003, pg. 1-4
[9] Deleuze, G. Difference and Repetition, Columbia University Press, New York, 1994, pg. 288.




Zoe Cooper
Research Questions.  How can living roofs be approached urbanistically?
How can living roofs be part of the landscape? How to structure development and cities where living roofs are part of the city and systems of the city?
This research proposal outlines living roof urbanism by design: how we can design living roofs to enhance urban systems.  A disconnect exists in the design practice for maximising living roofs potential value in the urban environment.  Living roofs are regularly designed for urban enhancement, however, I propose that potential value is not understood or overlooked. 
Living roof urbanism is the consideration of the relationships that can exist between living roofs and the urban environment; environmentally, socially and economically. 
My ambition is to develop a practice of living roof urbanism identifying robust existing technical information and extend the research focusing on urbanistic, social and landscape systems, which have not been sufficiently represented in my opinion.  Currently, most living roof designs do not consider the roof space as an extension to the landscape, society and part of our urban environment, but as a separate system with localised benefits - such as mitigating stormwater.  Architects and landscape architects are designing systems in isolation and I suggest this has led to a loss in living roof value and perceived value.