Challenging Steps for Downtown Auckland

This 3D view diagram of a Precinct Property proposal for the re-development of Auckland's Downtown area (which shows Queen Elizabeth Square) is included in the information being considered today, under urgency, by the Chair, Deputy Chair and another Councillor who are members of Auckland Council's Hearings Committee.

Also included in the information is this 3D diagram of how the area looks today. The Hearings Committee are asked to make decisions about the appointment of an independent commissioner who will be asked to decide whether the resource consents applied for, and that are necessary for the development, should be publicly notified. Or not. And if not, that commissioner will be expected to make decisions on those resource consents alone. (As happened with the Bledisloe Wharf extensions for example).

If the commissioner decides that the applications should be notified, then that commissioner will be joined by three more commissioners who will then make decisions after notification and related hearings of submissions.

On the face of it - looking at these diagrams which are the only information about the application contained in the report being considered today by the 3 members of the Auckland Council Hearings Committee - it looks as if all of Queen Elizabeth Square is being retained as an open space. And that its edges will be activated by the proposed development. Also that a laneway will connect Queen Elizabeth Square through to Lower Albert Street. Other features of the development that are worth knowing more about include what is proposed at the corner of Custom Street and Queen Street, and at the corner of Quay Street and Albert Street. And of course the tower. It is very large and dominating.

What this report does not say is who owns Queen Elizabeth Square. It does say that Precinct will be building car parks beneath part of Queen Elizabeth Square. That was predictable - given that the original resource consent obtained by previous owners Westfield - provided for several levels of basement parking - some of which have been lost because the Central Rail Tunnel passes beneath the tower.

A number of questions and comments arise:

1) I note that the Authorisers and Authors of this report include the same Penny Pirrit who was part of the Auckland City Council team that granted the original non-notified consent to Westfield in 2008. (One blog about this is: Downtown Deal Plot Thickens) Also part of the team today is the same senior planner. The continuity of council planning from the bad old days of Auckland City Council is alive and well in Auckland Council today.

2) I suspect the Auckland Council Hearings team will be delighted and relieved to see Queen Elizabeth Square untouched in the Precinct proposal. Certainly I am. But is it what it seems? Why release only this image - without also explaining and clarifying the final deal.

3) The package of consents applied for have been divided into two chunks - above ground and below ground - all part of the same application. That makes sense. The preliminary report from Auckland Council officers advises that some of the above ground activitiesfor which consent is sought are "non-complying", and some below ground are "discretionary". With any luck you'd think a commissioner would take that, and the public interest that has been generated, as a signal that these consents should be notified.

4) However, even if they were notified, this is clearly a Public-Private-Partnership. It is a Public-Precinct-Partnership. The applications appear to only relate to what Precinct Properties would like to do on its land, under its land, and under some public land. They don't appear to relate at all to the public part of the partnership - except in so far as there will be urban design questions about the interface between buildings and public domain.

5) This is a very important part of the city. It is critical that the redevelopment of the block integrates with other plans and with the rest of Auckland downtown. We see none of that in this proposal which brings with it the risk of incrementalism that has blighted other parts of downtown Auckland's regeneration (Princes Wharf and that part of Quay Street are examples of this sort of incremental approach where public amenity and public space planning gets forgotten.)

6) The risk with the Council's current approach - exemplified in its determination not to notify projects such as the artwork on Queens Wharf - is that it will only satisfy private sector needs and Council's insatiable thirst for increased revenues (from land sales, development levies and increased rates). The public's right to its city and to public spaces and places that are public and which meet the varying needs of the changing Auckland waterfront visitor demographic (families, kids, young people, pensioners .... and so on), is again at risk of being short-changed.

7) This is a joint Downtown application. Be honest. Its Council and Precinct together. Normally I would expect a plan change. Like we saw for Wynyard Quarter. That's the honest and open and systematic way of allocating land uses and planning for public and private outcomes. There is a smell of incrementalism about this process which is disturbing. Council owes Auckland citizens an explanation and reassurance.

ENDS

© Scoop Media