Rebuilding Christchurch – without a CBD
The government’s $1.35 billion ultrafast broadband project offers a chance to recast our cities, doing away with a CBD, one Telecom executive reckons - and workarounds in Christchurch point to the future.
At the Tuanz Telecommunications Day conference in Wellington, Gen-i Australasia chief executive Chris Quin said all major urban centres could become, well, less centred. Instead of being the centre of all business, civil and social activity, the current CBD could become one of the larger hubs surrounded by other smaller ones.
We hear endless bumf about urban planning, of course, a movement that usually delivers great ideas that get lost in a drawer somewhere, or less-than-great ideas (Canberra, Milton Keynes) that should have been lost in a drawer somewhere.
Single point of failure
Mr Quin said change has already come to Christchurch. The city’s CBD was a “single point of failure” during the two earthquakes.
Many organisations have developed into temporary distributed business hubs in lesser affected areas on the outskirts of the central business district, like Addington and Fendalton.
“These temporary centres could develop into fully-fledged and integrated business hubs. Instead of having a single CBD, Christchurch could have several, smaller business centres, or hubs, within the suburbs surrounding the current CBD,” Mr Quin said.
Another trend: more and more white collar workers working from home. In Christchurch, some Gen-i staff had to chase looters off their lawns and literally did not want to leave their homes.
More fibre, and better mobile broadband, will make it more practical for people to work in hubs outside the CBD, or from home.
Fibre lets you spread out
The Christchurch rebuild offers a genuine chance to adopt a more broadband-centred vision of urban planning years ahead of the rest of the country (however things turn out, it seems likely Telecom will play a part; Christchurch was the only major centre that the company lost in the Crown fibre tender but it is already in talks with the winner, council-owned Enable Networks, over a 50/50 joint venture).
A series of suburban hubs connected by fast fibre optic broadband would also unclog Christchurch – and by extension any city. Instead of having all major routes converging into the centre, transport could focus more on serving local areas around smaller centres, with main routes between hubs carrying less traffic.
Mr Quin also saw a rise in companies sharing workspaces and adopting new tools to monitor a distributed workforce. “This includes systems that will enable them to monitor output vs inputs. Knowing how many hours your people have been ‘present’ at their desks is not en effective measurement of their performance.”
Porta-presence
The Gen-i boss also sees fibre helping to grow high definition “Telepresence” big screen video conferencing, which will mean less travel to the office, and less pressure on infrastructure.
Again, in the aftermath of the quake, this became more than just another PowerPoint, with cheap-and-cheerful, two-person porta-cabins being used to house high-tech Cisco Telepresence gear (which will bring a smirk to the face of anyone who knows how protective the US company usually is about matching the décor on either side of a videoconference). The cabins were used by members of Telecom’s 1500 staff in the city, and Gen-i clients.
Safer communities together
Mr Quin’s vision also strayed a little into Big Brother territory (he sees a smarter, faster broadband network allowing “CCTV monitoring of more remote parts of community such as rural areas”). But technology can also be used to help the city get back on its feet faster, and to offer immediate help in feeling safer.
“We have already implemented a system in a local school in Christchurch that enables the school send a broadcast txt to all parents to let them know that their children are OK in the event of a shake or shock. This technology could be applied more widely to help keep communities together and help people feel part of the larger community,” Mr Quin said.
Signup to free NBR email alerts here


Share
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Scoopit















Comments and questions12
This is a joke. You will end up with a disjointed city with public transport and roading problems - another Auckland. CBD's and city centres are hub of any city
Telecom/Geni hardly have a history of innovation or honesty - so I'd give absolutely no credibility to their ideas - they will have an agenda behind anything they get involved with.
What kind of awful city would not have a CBD? It brings up images of a completely disjointed society, where everyone lives in their own little virtual bubble, working from home, socialising from home, shopping from home, all over the fibre connection. Auckland may be pretty awful, but at least when you get into the CBD and work there is nice- almost a proper city.
Well I think this guy is onto it. If there is to be a city centre it is likely to be based around entertainment and tourist "activities". By the time they get around to rebuilding, business will have got used to operating in different parts of the city. With modern communications , as he points out, there is no need for a CBD in the traditional form that other cities have. They are only there because they grew from the old city market areas and that was a result of the "poor communication" of the time.
It is an opportunity to rethink the city layout , reduce traffic congestion , reduce staff transport costs etc.
Great, we have an Accountant turned CEO from a lumbering telco having a view on urban design. Is there anything Telecom doesn't have an opinion on?
It's a great idea not having a centre. Just let the city grow by spontaneous order, keep the central planners out, and let niche areas grow where they will, which will be where it's safe, and where people want to go. It will create an organic, vivacious, interesting place to live.
LA has no centre, deliberately: makes bloody good sense not crowding people together in centralised high rise areas if you're living on moving fault lines. Low rise and spread out will save lives. And technology allows spread to happen.
But I see the think in straight lines brigade are all out again. I blame it on state schooling.
LA is just one huge urban sprawl. Look at the cities people love most- NY, London, Tokyo, Madrid, it is that hub of activity and people that makes those cities what they are. Small NZ cities need to have a central area otherwise everything will just be sparse and desolate.
Rather than calling it a CBD how about building a Central City Community - not just about "Business" but about people.
Auckland doesn't have a CBD to speak of. A tunnel of bank/tourist outlets and no soul does not a CBD make. plenty of cities are losing their CBDs and given the prices for living/working there, it's no surprise.
Multiple hubs around the cities are the way of the future. That is all.
Cities evolve due to societies change demands and needs, The more modern bigger cities largely driven by big business and climate.
Other than LA (which is a relatively new city), the cities you mentioned were established/had the critical mass before modern technology came along; and therefore a poor example to use.
Do some homework on some of the bigger cities established in the past twenty years, and you're likely to come up with a different answer.
Sadly, Christchurch need to rethink there strategy towards creating a crtical mass. The strength of the present location is the Avon River, and now that it has large commercially zoned sites after demolition, needs to build a fully integrated indoor shopping, business and residential complex. Just how you do that with a large amount of land owners is the difficult issues here. Cooperative ownership possibly, but a number of land owners wont be interested in this. Another option is to sell a lease in perpetuity to a large scale developer interested such a project. Beware Westfield however, & dont say I didnt tell you.
As an outcome of Christchurch's present situation, ending up without a centre is all too possible, but I had not considered the possibility that someone might actually want it to happen. I have lived in a variety of cities, and the "gas giant" model is not an appealing one. It's true that we should learn from the lessons of why CBDs have failed in other places.
Terrible idea. A city without a heart becomes a dead city. You can still have multiply centres and still have a vibrant CBD. Wellington has one of the most active central precindt in NZ yet it also has smaller centres such as Newtown, Johnsonville, Karori etc.
Post new comment or question
To share this article, click on a service below