PRESS RELEASE

22 September 2011

Market forces will shape Christchurch Central city’s future says Property Institute

Optimism that Christchurch’s central city area can be redeveloped through a formula of market forces and consumer demand is expressed in a submission to the City Council from one of the country’s oldest land-related professional bodies, the Property Institute of New Zealand.

The Institute’s Canterbury/Westland Branch, has lodged a submission on the Christchurch City Council’s Draft Central City Plan, after surveying members’ views on a range of issues.

In the submission, the Institute argues against prescriptive limits on building heights and retail floor areas; recommends shelving light rail for the moment; supports a centrally located Sports Hub; wants affordable housing in the Central City linked to occupant purpose rather than simply low rents; and challenges a seemingly “anti-car” tone in the Plan, believing that the removal of motor vehicles from the CBD is unrealistic and impractical and that car parking for retail and office activity is a “paramount” consideration, with restrictions and disincentives compromising such development.

Overall the Institute is optimistic that given the right incentives for development and occupancy, a city will emerge that meets the Plan’s aspirations for a “strong, prosperous and resilient place where people want to invest, where residents want to spend their time and where visitors want to stop for a few days”.

While such aspirations are “laudable”, the Institute says it is “very concerned” at the commercial viability of the Plan.

“Implementation is the key to the Plan’s success,” says Canterbury/Westland Branch Chairman Marius Ogg, “but for this to happen a level of market empowerment, to a degree which is not evident in the Plan, is necessary.”

“The Central Business District needs to be made as inviting as possible for tenants, owners and developers to rebuild and reoccupy it with confidence and this will not be achieved through prescriptive planning.”

“Prohibitions and restrictions - particularly in relation to building heights, retail floor space and car parking - are not positive signals for investment and progress.

“As far as possible, market dynamics need to be left to determine what happens within the CBD, without comprising the overall aim of the Plan and revitalisation. Both can be achieved through appropriate design and implementation controls, rather than up front rulings.”

“Overall the views expressed by the Property Institute in the submission are consistent with our philosophically founded belief that the market, rather than centralised prescription and prohibition, will ultimately play the dominant role in determining the shape and extent of redevelopment in Christchurch,” says Mr Ogg.

Specific points made in the submission include -

Building heights: There should be an emphasis on design and enhanced seismic standards, rather than blanket restrictions. If the design, seismic standards and direction are clear and appropriate, then the market should be allowed to dictate the height. It is possible to design and engineer tall buildings specific to geo-technical constraints. Exceeding seismic standards should be encouraged.

Retail floor space: The total size retail footprint in the Central City needs to be reconsidered, relative to the realistic demand for such space. A much smaller retail footprint, particularly to the fringe of the core, is required to create a concentration of vibrant retail space.

Affordable housing in the Central City: The Institute is opposed to the concept if it equates with low cost accommodation, likely to show early deterioration in appearance, and occupied simply on the basis of low entry cost. Members see the real issue around Central City housing as people having a reason to live there, over and above simple affordability.

The Institute believes housing should be linked to the residential needs of staff associated with key Central City institutions and facilities such as the hospital, the polytechnic, the proposed Sports Hub and entertainment complexes. It says there are too many national and international examples of the adverse social consequences of cheap inner city accommodation where the sole criterion for occupancy has been affordability.

Sports Hub: A Sports Hub with a family recreation focus, as distinct from a performance sport focus, is supported for the Central City. It is described as a potential “anchor” for the Central City and would generate a high level of pedestrian traffic. The existing proposed location (near AMI stadium) is seen as to far away to provide any real support to or from the central core retail precinct. Preferred locations would be within easy walking distance of Cashel mall.

Transitional city: The Institute says it is vital to concentrate energy and effort into the city’s core and quickly establish “critical mass”. Government–private sector partnerships are recommended to “seed” development and the Institute recommends putting a premium on the early presence of Government offices to assist “seeding”. Aggregation of sites would also enable more sustainable design solutions to be developed and should be incentivised.

Light rail: The Institute notes its “immense cost” compared with other transport options and says an investment at the moment would absorb a disproportionate amount of the overall Transport budget. There are other funding priorities. Attention should be concentrated on a dedicated bus system, but the “corridors” for a rail system could be provided for now and used in the interim as bus routes, cycle paths and other transportation passageways.

Car parking: The Institute submits that the market will respond badly to restraints on car parking in the Central City.

Short term car parking and retail activity are critically interlocked, it says. Mechanisms to directly connect retailers to car parking should be supported. Retailers are seen as the people best positioned to decide on short term parking requirements and price. More than any other stakeholder, they know that as traders in the city’s core they have to compete with suburbia where parking is not so constrained.

To get office workers, retail assistants and other mass occupation groups into the Central City for their jobs, the Institute suggests a “park and ride” concept as a “good compromise” between private and public transport modes. This would involve driving to a strategically placed parking facility, then taking a public bus from there to work locations.

End

© Scoop Media