Transportation department
http://www.joburg.org.za/content/view/1226/78/1/4/
click on the different pdf's
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Rea Vaya Joburg BRT: WITS Town Planning & Urban Design Talk
Tuesday, 10:15
two presentations that may be of interest:
1. “Joburg United” a ten-minute paper prepared for AZA2010 on the impact of Rea Vaya on public space and urban transformation
2. A powerpoint on the 2009 BRT Land Use and Urban Design Guidelines project for City of Johannesburg DPF
come with questions.
two presentations that may be of interest:
1. “Joburg United” a ten-minute paper prepared for AZA2010 on the impact of Rea Vaya on public space and urban transformation
2. A powerpoint on the 2009 BRT Land Use and Urban Design Guidelines project for City of Johannesburg DPF
come with questions.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
comments + mo to come
General comment from 1 of the panelists
- All the groups should look at the movement along and onto Louis
Botha more (particularly group 3). They should look at who is moving
along the street, how they are moving, where do they stop etc. The
speed of movement and frequency of traffic lights is very important to
the character and usability of the different segments of the street.
- If possible it would be a good idea to identify buildings or urban
design interventions in their segments that do work and use these as
case studies for their future projects.
Group 1 –
- The group needs to work on simplifying their presentation – making
it clearer, more legible and not read the presentation.
- The point that the road is a barrier did not come across. This
needs to be understood and later on dealt with.
- The detail that they went into and the 3d modelling was good.
- I liked the fact that the identified opportunities and started to
look at urban design principles / interventions. They must be careful
not to make assumptions without backing them up – e.g. shop front have
to be transparent etc.
- They need look at and understand the two communities on the
different sides of the road. This was lacking.
- They should look at buildings that have a positive interaction with
the street – the Bedford Centre corner to see how they work. They
seemed to miss this.
Group 2 – - Presentation was good and clear.
- I question the portion of the segment that they chose – it is
atypical for the segment.
- They should look at what is working along the street – institutions
that have lasted – and understand why they work and what they can
learn from these.
- They need to look more at the movement along the street – vehicular
particularly. The speed, type and number of vehicles. They are what
make the street both functional and dysfunctional. All of the groups
should look at this.
- I thought the detail they went into was great – pavements etc.
- They should look at understanding the community as much as they do
the physical environment.
- I like the fact that they started to question what they found.
- They should map in more than 1 dimension.
Group 3 –
- I like the idea of giving the project a theme – they must be careful
not to set them selves unreachable goals…
- I enjoyed some of their graphics – especially the hand drawings.
- I think that they need to look more carefully at Louis Botha, the
shops and communities along it, how it is used, the traffic and
movement etc. I didn’t get the feeling that they were connected to
their research area. They should give us a sense of both sides of the
road.
- Better three dimensional mapping would be great.
- I suggest that they look for points where the two communities interact.
- I admire how involved they have become in trying to understand the
Jewish community. I think that they should look at their experience –
as traumatic as it was – and try to understand why they were treated
with such hostility (the community obviously feels threatened). This
could be a great opportunity for their intervention later on in the
project. I am however a bit concerned that they could get bogged down
in the politics of it all…
- I think that they are on the right track – they just have a lot more
work to do.
- All the groups should look at the movement along and onto Louis
Botha more (particularly group 3). They should look at who is moving
along the street, how they are moving, where do they stop etc. The
speed of movement and frequency of traffic lights is very important to
the character and usability of the different segments of the street.
- If possible it would be a good idea to identify buildings or urban
design interventions in their segments that do work and use these as
case studies for their future projects.
Group 1 –
- The group needs to work on simplifying their presentation – making
it clearer, more legible and not read the presentation.
- The point that the road is a barrier did not come across. This
needs to be understood and later on dealt with.
- The detail that they went into and the 3d modelling was good.
- I liked the fact that the identified opportunities and started to
look at urban design principles / interventions. They must be careful
not to make assumptions without backing them up – e.g. shop front have
to be transparent etc.
- They need look at and understand the two communities on the
different sides of the road. This was lacking.
- They should look at buildings that have a positive interaction with
the street – the Bedford Centre corner to see how they work. They
seemed to miss this.
Group 2 – - Presentation was good and clear.
- I question the portion of the segment that they chose – it is
atypical for the segment.
- They should look at what is working along the street – institutions
that have lasted – and understand why they work and what they can
learn from these.
- They need to look more at the movement along the street – vehicular
particularly. The speed, type and number of vehicles. They are what
make the street both functional and dysfunctional. All of the groups
should look at this.
- I thought the detail they went into was great – pavements etc.
- They should look at understanding the community as much as they do
the physical environment.
- I like the fact that they started to question what they found.
- They should map in more than 1 dimension.
Group 3 –
- I like the idea of giving the project a theme – they must be careful
not to set them selves unreachable goals…
- I enjoyed some of their graphics – especially the hand drawings.
- I think that they need to look more carefully at Louis Botha, the
shops and communities along it, how it is used, the traffic and
movement etc. I didn’t get the feeling that they were connected to
their research area. They should give us a sense of both sides of the
road.
- Better three dimensional mapping would be great.
- I suggest that they look for points where the two communities interact.
- I admire how involved they have become in trying to understand the
Jewish community. I think that they should look at their experience –
as traumatic as it was – and try to understand why they were treated
with such hostility (the community obviously feels threatened). This
could be a great opportunity for their intervention later on in the
project. I am however a bit concerned that they could get bogged down
in the politics of it all…
- I think that they are on the right track – they just have a lot more
work to do.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
thursday 19.08.2010
crits on louis botha from 8-10am.
please be prepared and there.
30 min per group/ 30 min general.
please put a digital copy of braamfontain on a cd
it will be corrected on a b&w print out over the w-end.
please be prepared and there.
30 min per group/ 30 min general.
please put a digital copy of braamfontain on a cd
it will be corrected on a b&w print out over the w-end.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
project 1
prometheus
put the vast space
of sky and earth
like a ball in one’s hand
The goal is a Design Guidelines document should provide an important tool for helping stakeholders through decision-making process. Before we get to that we need to record our observations to better understand the context. The purpose of draw the walk is that.
using the following as a guide:
Place Type Characteristics The following characteristics are used to differentiate the place types: Urban Form Building Placement Frontage Types Enclosure Edge Treatments |Open Space
group 1.
excellent contents page
text is too small
layout of intro page, text is amputated.
progressive primary school - what is that? articulate.
its too difficult to decipher the material when you cannot read what is on the page.
land use -- what does it mean to being a mix land use? articulate.
if one went there now, would one find the orange + blue dots? -- you have to say time, place + date.
good to see an attempt at sketchup.
what does flaneurs mean? its counterproductive to quote and not comprehend components of the quote within its totality.
colors on the sidewalk slide are difficult to decipher.
text has to be 1 font -- sidewalk analysis slide.
a statement was “sidewalk is not meant to be just a place for movement but also a place to rest -- is this for all sidewalks?
in the north elevation slide, the diagrams don’t necessary articulate the blocks -- this needs to be further explained.
sections have to do more than just be cool drawings.
when there are dimensions heights are also required.
movement map needs more work + clarity.
future public realm -- what does the legend tell us? and what does the site within braamfontein actually say + mean?
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 4.7/10
group 2.
text to small, layout needs work + graphics could be enhanced.
could have used an introductory page -- as in what u are going to show -- contents page
narrative is disjointed and it makes it complex and difficult to follow the story.
on the land use + movement slide, the tertiary activity is the same as the phone booths. the info is misleading.
it is curious to see the phone booths not being used on the presented image, esp. when it is stated that they are there to encourage pedestrian movement.
population vs time, we need units to articulate volume + clarify the information on the graph.
a better logo for south point has to be sourced.
the drainage component is difficult to access, as in, it is not visible in the slides.
repetition of images doesn’t enhance the presentation.
key is not visible or clear on the physical aspects slides.
interesting perception of the trash cans, but these would have been made clear in a plan.
presentation needs more plans to guide.
cannot read the conclusion matrix -- also not legible, as in what do the pie chart mean?
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 4.9/10
group 3.
excellent intro with the eland + orange lines.
context page text is too small. source of images has to be stated - captions also required.
what does it mean “site plan with elevations”? -- where are the elevations?
morphology, typology, and land use -- great -- but show where the images are taken from.
what is the difference between travelers, pedestrians, workers passing by + passers by? -- clarity required.
during the presentation, a member of the group said its a pity the resolution is not good -- why is that? resolution issues have to be solved prior to presenting.
furniture on juta street is great, but the graphics need to be enhanced for better visibility.
street paving could have had an image to show the 3 different types.
remove the north point when its not needed.
on section d-d the yellow is deceptive? its looks like a screen on the sidewalk. clarify.
the use of color + b|w images is very effective - push the graphic to say + do more.
no conclusion + a lack of design guidelines.
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 6.1/10
font arial
electronic copy 18 + 36
hardcopy 12 +16
put the vast space
of sky and earth
like a ball in one’s hand
The goal is a Design Guidelines document should provide an important tool for helping stakeholders through decision-making process. Before we get to that we need to record our observations to better understand the context. The purpose of draw the walk is that.
using the following as a guide:
Place Type Characteristics The following characteristics are used to differentiate the place types: Urban Form Building Placement Frontage Types Enclosure Edge Treatments |Open Space
group 1.
excellent contents page
text is too small
layout of intro page, text is amputated.
progressive primary school - what is that? articulate.
its too difficult to decipher the material when you cannot read what is on the page.
land use -- what does it mean to being a mix land use? articulate.
if one went there now, would one find the orange + blue dots? -- you have to say time, place + date.
good to see an attempt at sketchup.
what does flaneurs mean? its counterproductive to quote and not comprehend components of the quote within its totality.
colors on the sidewalk slide are difficult to decipher.
text has to be 1 font -- sidewalk analysis slide.
a statement was “sidewalk is not meant to be just a place for movement but also a place to rest -- is this for all sidewalks?
in the north elevation slide, the diagrams don’t necessary articulate the blocks -- this needs to be further explained.
sections have to do more than just be cool drawings.
when there are dimensions heights are also required.
movement map needs more work + clarity.
future public realm -- what does the legend tell us? and what does the site within braamfontein actually say + mean?
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 4.7/10
group 2.
text to small, layout needs work + graphics could be enhanced.
could have used an introductory page -- as in what u are going to show -- contents page
narrative is disjointed and it makes it complex and difficult to follow the story.
on the land use + movement slide, the tertiary activity is the same as the phone booths. the info is misleading.
it is curious to see the phone booths not being used on the presented image, esp. when it is stated that they are there to encourage pedestrian movement.
population vs time, we need units to articulate volume + clarify the information on the graph.
a better logo for south point has to be sourced.
the drainage component is difficult to access, as in, it is not visible in the slides.
repetition of images doesn’t enhance the presentation.
key is not visible or clear on the physical aspects slides.
interesting perception of the trash cans, but these would have been made clear in a plan.
presentation needs more plans to guide.
cannot read the conclusion matrix -- also not legible, as in what do the pie chart mean?
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 4.9/10
group 3.
excellent intro with the eland + orange lines.
context page text is too small. source of images has to be stated - captions also required.
what does it mean “site plan with elevations”? -- where are the elevations?
morphology, typology, and land use -- great -- but show where the images are taken from.
what is the difference between travelers, pedestrians, workers passing by + passers by? -- clarity required.
during the presentation, a member of the group said its a pity the resolution is not good -- why is that? resolution issues have to be solved prior to presenting.
furniture on juta street is great, but the graphics need to be enhanced for better visibility.
street paving could have had an image to show the 3 different types.
remove the north point when its not needed.
on section d-d the yellow is deceptive? its looks like a screen on the sidewalk. clarify.
the use of color + b|w images is very effective - push the graphic to say + do more.
no conclusion + a lack of design guidelines.
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 6.1/10
font arial
electronic copy 18 + 36
hardcopy 12 +16
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)