Abstract:
In the 1960s, Auckland’s Downtown site at the prominent No. 1 Queen Street
gateway faced comprehensive redevelopment, with a series of proposals
combining the clearance of numerous old buildings and their replacement
with a convention centre, department stores, high-rise office buildings and a
public space that ultimately became known as Queen Elizabeth II Square.
The Square was proposed in the first scheme developed by Professor Robert
Terence Kennedy of the University of Auckland. A later scheme, by Connor &
Associates, introduced a 22 storey office building on its north side.
This paper explores the controversy surrounding this office building: Air New
Zealand House. Groups of young architects and planners, particularly
members of the Auckland Architectural Association (AAA), objected to the
building, because of the negative effects they believed it would have,
including increased wind speeds at street level at its base and excessive
shading on the Square to its south.
Utilising archival documents and newspaper reports, this paper examines the
campaign against this urban renewal proposal and the technologies that the
opponents used to build their case, and to demonstrate and present their
concerns, particularly wind tunnel testing. The main research question
becomes, how effective were the technologies of the day in predicting the
negative impact that Air New Zealand House would have on its immediate
surrounds?
In the end, the Auckland City Council gave permission for the construction of
Air New Zealand House. As built, it confirmed all the predictions about
increased wind speeds and shading; QEII Square’s value as a public space was compromised from the outset. The paper shows that economics and
politics were privileged over amenity value. And the decision was shortsighted, as evidenced by another major redevelopment of the site, underway
at the present time.