50
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AOTEAROA
Rural landscape or landscape ?
In the September online issue of Landscape Architecture Aotearoa we asked two of New Zealand ’ s most experienced landscape planning practitioners to answer some questions on rural character that were vexing us . Since then the issue of landscape character and the resilience and regeneration of our landscapes has been increasingly in the focus of politicians , lawyers , land users and practitioners and indeed the NZILA is currently working with others on revising the 2010 NZILA guidelines for landscape assessment . Dennis Scott is the third of the practitioners we approached and we asked him to comment on the questions we asked initially and the responses we received . Dennis thought there was now a more important event on the horizon - the proposed MFE Code of Practice for Landscape (‘ COP for L ’). He has therefore turned his mind to an ‘ opinion piece ’ on that important project . Dennis is a senior figure in the institute , an experienced landscape practitioner , a past president , past adjunct professor for the UNITEC BLA program who specialised in Landscape Planning , Assessment and Management and an ardent proponent of Catchment Management and associated integrated spatial and bio-geographic approaches to landscape .
THIS BRIEF STATEMENT , WHILE INTENDED AS A response to the NZILA Spring edition of ‘ Landscape Architecture Aotearoa ’ Rural Character debate article , in my opinion , promotes some early stimulation around dialogue associated with a much greater and more important event that is about to unfold ; the proposed MFE Code of Practice for Landscape (‘ COP for L ’). In essence and fundamentally , I promote :
• Landscape character as represented and perceived as a continuum .
• Landscape as the interaction of nature and culture .
• Landscape as an outcome that inherently contributes to the quality of people ’ s lives .
• Landscape planning as a process that demands comprehensive systematic and geographic approaches that address the proactive management of all areas , not just the identification and preservation of exceptional ( outstanding ) areas .
These are the simple , direct and primary matters that will underpin the discussion ( s ) and debate ( s ) that will now emerge as the proposed MFE COP for L project evolves .
The recent ‘ rural character debate ’ represents positive and specific thoughts about an important subject . However , in a detailed sense and specifically , the Rural
Character debate represents a ‘ sideshow ’ to the main event .
I take some critical passages from the NZILA email releases of 22.11.16 and 01.12.16 in relation to the MFE COP for L project as follows :
“ Open Workshops
This project is an exciting one for NZILA . Although wholly driven and largely paid for by MfE , it is our opportunity to shape the landscape legislation of the future , and also come together as a profession to assist in the management of landscape across the country . It is a project that will build on the work undertaken in 2011 ( the NZILA Best Practice Guide ), however , it will be a project where we will have to put some of our differences aside and work together to produce a good outcome . It is important that we unite , as the alternative will be that MfE ( and the Minister ) pursue this without our input .” And :
“ Project Scope
The objective of the project , very broadly , is to develop detailed guidance for the assessment of landscape ; the identification of outstanding natural landscapes and features ; and the assessment of landscape and visual effects . The deliverable will be a