Category Archives: Port of Auckland

Consultation on Port of Auckland

Posted on by
Reply

Time to Talk Port

 

Bit of a change of tact today. Today BR:AKL talks port – no not the drink – the port that sits on Auckland‘s prime waterfront and moves goods in and out of the city via ship.

 

During the anxiety caused by the Housing Accord being dumped upon Auckland by the clueless Dr Nick Smith, Port of Auckland released their latest development proposals. You can read the “interactive” presentation from Port of Auckland here: Port of Auckland Development Proposals

Note: You need Flash to run the page and  not recommended on Smart Phones

 

I have gone through the entire proposal on first glance and will take a decent look at it tomorrow (unless someone else decides to dump a Unitary Plan stopper upon the city) (makes a good break from the UP anyhow). In going through it my pragmatism came to the play and some realisations had to be “made.”

 

Port of Auckland knows very well I would like to see the port shifted to the South East Auckland site near Clevedon (and 35mins east from where I live in Papakura). This would allow the redevelopment of the $4.5b worth of waterfront real estate into something more eye pleasing to the public, as well as get that freight traffic off the inner motorway system (to the point of staving off the Eastern Highway even further). However, due to Council through its shortsightedness (Ann Hartley) in denying the second part of the Port Review (looking at relocation options) the city (we) are stuck with the port staying where it is. In the same regard the Port seem happy enough to stay where it is, so efforts flip over to mitigation on their expansion ideas.

 

And so I realise the Port is staying where it is and now thoughts focus on how do we mitigate the worst of the effects if and when the Port expands in its current location. Hence I shall have good look at the proposal tomorrow and give my feed back on what POAL is proposing.

 

In the same regard; Port of Auckland is asking for public feed back. So please do so as this is critical piece of infrastructure and real estate holder in Auckland.

 

 

 

 

Port of Auckland Debate

Posted on by

Port of Auckland Debate is Back

 

I have brought back my Auckland Waterfront Index to the front page after putting into suspension with Port of Auckland (POAL) making another attempt in its bid to extend the port in its current location at the downtown waterfront.

This has been brought on after commentary from ATB on Port of Auckland’s scaled back expansion program proposal which can be seen at this post: Do we need a port in downtown Auckland?

 

Admittedly I was wondering why I got such a large spike in traffic on what are usually quiet Sundays for me. I send my thanks to Sacha for his link back to my “POSSIBLE PORT OF AUCKLAND RELOCATIONS” post which did stir some debate although somewhat one-sided.

 

So it seems after a 12 month break, the POAL chestnut is back on the table with me opening around of commentary on Facebook:

Tony Gibson is as unvisionary as Councillor Ann Hartley who shot down Part Two of the Upper North Island Port Review which to look at ALL OPTIONS for Port of Auckland. And by ALL OPTIONS I mean whether:
1) Expanding the Port as is where is, is a good idea
2) Moving the Port to Clevedon is a good idea}
3) Moving the Port to Marsden Point and Port of Tauranga is a good idea

The review would have looked at all costs AND benefits to each of those three options so at least Auckland knows where it stands in any future decisions
http://www.3news.co.nz/Ports-move-too-costly—CEO/tabid/421/articleID/293399/Default.aspx

 

Port of Auckland have replied through Twitter after I posted the above with them noting that I am most likely to be opposed to the new expansion idea – which I am.

 

A reminder to all that I support moving the Port to Clevedon unless a comprehensive report will all the pro and con’s for my reading and comprehension is undertaken and presented.

 

I better keep an eye out when the public consultations start on POAL again…

Port of Auckland Review is Out

Posted on by

PWC Release Review into Upper North Island Ports

 

The much awaited review by Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) into the Upper North Island ports is finally out.

I had last mentioned about this strategic review in May when Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse told me about it at the Long Term Plan Forum.

 

I am still reading it at the moment as it is very thorough at 228 pages long. And somewhere buried in that report is the look-in at options of Port of Auckland to another site, something close to my heart (as well as the City Rail Link).

I will give my verdict on the report after reading it. But for now for your viewing pleasure you can read the report in your own time below:

 

 

Or for a separate window, click THIS LINK

Council and The Auckland Waterfront

Posted on by

What The Mayor and Councillors Think  - In Regards to The Auckland Waterfront

 

Today is the last day of the NZ Herald‘s campaign about The Waterfront – to which I have run on commentary here. My basic take on The Auckland Waterfront can be seen in my “PORT OF AUCKLAND – CAN IT BE MOVED?” post from yesterday in which I spell out where I see The Auckland Waterfront by 2040!

 

In today’s particular article in the Herald, Auckland Councillors plus the Mayor were asked where they see The Auckland Waterfront now and where they think it should be going in the future.

From The NZH:

 

Creating right balance for future of waterfront

By Michael Dickison

5:30 AM Friday Sep 28, 2012

 

…

What our city’s leaders think

Council members’ views City leaders comment on the best idea for the waterfront and the balance between public spaces vs industry, where
0 = Put all emphasis on public spaces
5 = The balance is just right
10 = Put all emphasis on industry, including the port.

Len Brown Mayor
len.brown@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 6.5

The Waitemata Harbour was a stunning backdrop when the world came here for the Rugby World Cup. The event’s legacy is that Aucklanders now see the waterfront as our waterfront. People from across the region tell me they are proud of Wynyard Quarter. It’s becoming the place to take visitors, and gives us a glimpse of what is possible.

We have a way to go to realise our waterfront’s potential and truly connect the city with the sea but we are on the way to getting it right.

We want fishing boats and ship chandlers mixed with parks and cafes, hotels and apartments, markets and open spaces to attract as many people as possible.

We want real connection with the harbour, so people can walk right down Queen St to the water’s edge and dip their feet in the sea.

With extensive input from the public, the council has formed a suite of plans giving us a co-ordinated vision for our waterfront, rather than the piecemeal approach and lost opportunities of the past.

Our waterfront has an important and evolving part to play in the life of Auckland, and while the port plays a vital role in our economy – it’s up to us to structure that role. The best is yet to come.

Councillors:

Christine Fletcher
Albert-Eden-Roskill
christine.fletcher@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 2

I’m proud of being part of kicking off our waterfront development with Viaduct Harbour and Britomart. In its next phase let’s consider its role as gateway to the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park. Tourism and recreational activities make a significant chunk of the total pie. Marine reserves, island sanctuaries, great walks, multisports, volunteerism, cultural journeys, education programmes, historic places and top recreational fishing spots should draw visitors to and beyond the waterfront.

Link this to high-value, uniquely marketed seafood, boutique wines and foods, a regulatory framework demanding environmental integrity and investment and we have a powerful engine for growth.

Arthur Anae
Manukau
arthur.anae@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 3.5

The waterfront is an iconic asset, and I’m in strong favour of a cruise ship terminal and attracting as much of the cruise ship market to downtown Auckland as we can.

I also support all the projects in the pipeline – the Wynyard Quarter, opening up the wharves, having pedestrian areas – to attract domestic visitors, who are an untapped market.

Sandra Coney
Waitakere
sandra.coney@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 4

The waterfront is a working waterfront, not just an entertainment zone. It has a port, ferries and fishing vessels. These things make the waterfront gritty and interesting. A huge amount of waterfront has been opened up to the public and more will over time. But it all costs ratepayers’ money, so a “big bang” approach is unpalatable.

Cathy Casey
Albert-Eden-Roskill
cathy.casey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 4

I spluttered over my cornflakes this morning to read the vision of Tony Gibson (Ports’ chief executive): “This year’s industrial dispute is a distant memory. We reached an amicable settlement with the unions …”. That vision is easily achieved if the Ports engages in good faith bargaining. For me, the most pressing need on the waterfront is for the Ports to end the prolonged industrial dispute.

Penny Hulse
Waitakere
penny.hulse@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 4

Having been born in Cape Town, where I spent a lot of time on the V&A Waterfront, my vision is an open, vibrant waterfront and port that can be a tourism attraction and an area loved by locals. Let’s cut holes in the red fence and get people to the waterfront. It doesn’t have to be either/or with the port. We just have to be more imaginative about how we use our assets.

George Wood
North Shore
george.wood@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 5

Opening up the harbourside area between the Ferry Building and Britomart Place must be given the highest priority. Allowing Aucklanders and our visitors to break through the red fence to gain access to this part of the waterfront will be a huge accomplishment. The main attractor is the wonderful location itself. Integration to cafes and bars with outdoor dining should be part of the presentation. We have a plan – let’s do it over time.

Sharon Stewart
Howick
sharon.stewart@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 5

Most people would agree what has been achieved in the Viaduct/Wynyard area is a vast improvement. However, I am against over-developing the waterfront, creating public space to the detriment of the ports. I was pleased that the cruise ship terminal was scaled down. I am not convinced further development in public areas will improve Auckland as a tourist destination. The CBD/waterfront areas will still be used by a small proportion of Aucklanders. Let’s not put the city into huge debt with further grandiose ideas.

Wayne Walker
Albany
wayne.walker@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 5

The boulevard along the waterfront gets my most backing. It ties the waterfront together and will make it buzz with life more than anything else. People like to see other people and be seen themselves, walking, sitting, eating – having fun. They will be able to browse through pop-up weekend markets, enjoy the busker musicians and artists playing to the crowds and dine out or catch a coffee at a waterfront cafe. All of this for modest money and cheap running cost. Create a welcoming free public space and people will make it work for themselves.

Alf Filipaina
Manukau
alf.filipaina@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 5

I just agree with the direction we have at the moment. I voted for the Waterfront Plan and I support it. There will be interaction between our public and our assets down at the waterfront. Business and the public aspect will both be there – there has to be a good mix.

Cameron Brewer
Orakei
cameron.brewer@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 6

It’s great that Aucklanders love the opening up of the waterfront around the old Tank Farm. However, it’s important we now activate the other part of the Wynyard Quarter plan, which was always to have the private sector move in. That’s who the council needs to start paying the bills. Ratepayers have poured in tens of millions of dollars lately to create some fabulous public spaces and amenities but it’s probably time for a cup of tea. The 25-year vision for Wynyard Quarter was never about transforming it for the general public alone. Rather, this area promises to accommodate a mix of residential, retail and commercial development.

Richard Northey
Maungakiekie-Tamaki
richard.northey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 6

What is most needed is a long-term plan and vision for Queens Wharf. This space, the continuation of our main street, Queen St, into our Waitemata Harbour, should be the jewel in the crown for publicly accessible, exciting vibrant public space on the harbour. Let us have a thorough, creative and participatory look at what will succeed the Cloud. The next thing to do is to develop an equally exciting, albeit cheaper, vision for public spaces on the Manukau Harbour at Onehunga and Mangere Bridge.

Dick Quax
Howick
dick.quax@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 6.5

People at work and people at play. That’s my vision for the waterfront. People create atmosphere, not buildings. Too much of the waterfront is lifeless. Over 70ha have been opened up and that’s a lot of space. Give the new Waterfront Plan time to work before we open up more. Let’s not kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. The commercial port pours millions into the council coffers. Every container, every car, every cruise ship, is a few more dollars off our rates bill.

Ann Hartley
North Shore
ann.hartley@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Ideal balance: 7

The best idea for the waterfront was recognising that one, single governance agency would take responsibility for its redevelopment, avoiding the piecemeal actions of the past. The waterfront is much loved by its owners – the people of Auckland – however, the public purse will never be able to afford the revitalisation of this whole area. It needs commercial support and Auckland needs to start thinking about what kinds of private investment it can court to share the rewards and the risks of the redevelopment.

Mike Lee
Waitemata and the Gulf
mike.lee@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Did not give a rating

Over the past six years, a significant amount of waterfront space has been opened to the public. More is to come. Remember, the port occupies only 2km of a continuous recreation waterfront of 13km from the harbour bridge to Achilles Point. While I oppose further encroachment of the port into the harbour, it would be foolish to talk about closing it down.

Calum Penrose
Manurewa-Papakura
calum.penrose@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Did not give a rating

If Auckland Council think that we are exempt from what is happening across the globe then they live in dream land; the spinoff is hitting our shores daily. I would like to see the council defer the waterfront projects for the next 3-5 years.

Noelene Raffills
Whau
noelene.raffills@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Did not give a rating

The waterfront is one of the truly amazing features of our city. For Kiwis the coast and beaches are part of our lifestyle, family life and informal enjoyment – and for the first time on the waterfront there are some family-friendly places for eating. The mix feels about right.

Did not contribute:

Michael Goudie, Albany
michael.goudie@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Des Morrison, Franklin
des.morrison@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

John Walker, Manurewa-Papakura
john.walker@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Penny Webster, Rodney
penny.webster@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

The campaign

This week, we examine the key issues in a campaign to break open Auckland’s waterfront. This means:

1 Opening up what’s already there for everyone’s use – particularly Queens Wharf, which is still far from reaching its potential.

2 Looking ahead to more wharves being opened, notably Captain Cook Wharf.

3 Planning the entire waterfront – importantly, including ports land – as urban space, whether or not the working port is retained or developed.

Monday: What readers want on the waterfront
Tuesday: Auckland Architecture Association sketches the all-time good ideas
Wednesday: Tourism on the waterfront
Yesterday: The working port and its vision for Auckland
Today: Where our city leaders stand.

 

Interesting and a rather mixed array of results which will make December rather interesting when PwC report back on their review of the upper North Island ports including POAL.

I suppose if I gave a rating it would not fit on the Herald’s scale as I am for shifting the port south and redeveloping the ENTIRE Waterfront with both urban residential and commercial development, AND civic/public/green spaces to boot.

But enough of me giving my spiel on The Auckland Waterfront, what is your spiel? Comments can be left below as always!

Port of Auckland – Can It Be Moved?

Posted on by

Someone Else Has a Port of Auckland Relocation Idea

 

 

Some people over at a particular blog think I am being a bit obsessive about Port of Auckland and the review under-way into its future. These particular bloggers go as far as basing Auckland’s future urban and transport development over the next thirty years with the Port of Auckland staying static (so status quo or some “improvements”) over the next thirty years. They dare not even entertain the fact that there is a simmering debate under-way on the Port of Auckland and a very good chance that the port could get shifted!

However I am not one of those people over at that particular blog, this is me at my blog who dares to go outside the square and entertain the notion on the Port of Auckland shifting entirely away from its current Waterfront site. And I am not the only one to entertain this notion as well either folks.

From The NZ Herald’s Auckland Waterfront Campaign with this article regarding on the possibility of moving The Port of Auckland:

Firth of Thames viable location

5:30 AM Thursday Sep 27, 2012

 

An architect with more than 40 years’ experience has a vision to move Auckland’s city centre port to a new location. British-born Martyn Evans, 73, is proposing a new port three times the size of the current one could be built and developed at Matingarahi Point on the Firth of Thames.

Mr Evans, who lives in the centre of Auckland, said: “Ports are growing all the time and so you need to be planning for expansion at all times.

“You need to be planning about 100 years ahead otherwise you are just going to run into the same problems time and time again.

“In my plans there is lots of room for growth and we need to be thinking years ahead if it’s going to be a success.

“The port I have designed is three times bigger than the current one at Auckland harbour and that’s accounting for growth. I don’t have exact costings as yet but it would make much more sense to move the port out of the city centre and let the most be made of the waterfront which has so much potential.”

If the port was moved the current port area could be transformed into an arts and music hub with a cruise liner terminal and a new iconic building similar to the Shard in London built by an international architect to act as a gateway into Auckland, Mr Evans said

Mr Evans, who moved to New Zealand 30 years ago and helped design the port city of Ashdod in Israel, said: “We have so many options for Auckland’s waterfront and we need to make the most of them now.

“It’s the right time to make the waterfront in Auckland come alive.

“We could have a “Te Papa two” and a nautical museum, an international conference centre, a new cruise ship terminal for six ships, a harbour entrance with a large iconic building.

“I would love to see an artists’ quarter with music venues developed with hotels, new homes and apartments, a performance theatre, commercial offices and a small container port.

“Green spaces and trees would also need to be incorporated so it would make a lovely family friendly area which would attract people of all ages.”

Mr Evans has been working on his plans for the past five years and said there were many advantages to moving the port out to Matingarahi Point.

He said: “At the site I am proposing the water is already deep enough and there wouldn’t have to [be] much dredging at all to make it deeper.

“The route that the ships would have to take would be much easier and the large ships would have no problem navigating their way in and out.

“Some ships trying to access Auckland Port are up to 400m long and it’s challenging. If the current port was expanded it would make access for these larger ships very difficult.

“The road links from the proposed site are also very good and only 20km of road would need to be upgraded with a new 30km railway track put in to accommodate for the increase in traffic.”

Mr Evans would like to see the new port built with a logistics park so all deliveries can be sorted out on site rather than transported out and sorted out at a different location.

At the moment most of the deliveries coming into Auckland Port are sent to South Auckland to be sorted and then they are distributed.

He said: “Nowadays most ports have a logistics park on site and a good example of this is the new super port being built just outside London in England.

“There are so many advantages to moving the port and it would mean we could show off the green side of New Zealand because it would be built with the environment in mind.

“The new port would have a green infrastructure with light controls, it would be surrounded by parks and green belt. Rail and road links would be barricaded and tunnelled and with the logistics park on site it would cut down extra traffic.”

A PricewaterhouseCoopers report for the Auckland Council into the future of ports in the Upper North Island is due back in December.

 

Now to get an idea where Mr Evans is pointing for his location to relocate Port of Auckland, check the map below which also includes my relocation location for POAL:

 

BR:AKL and Mr Evans in relation to relocating Port of Auckland to the South; similar vision, similar boldness, similar reasoning, and even similar region/location (along with transit links) to the south-east of the city.

Personally I am quite excited here after Mr Evans’ contribution got published in today’s Herald. Although there is one drawback here: “A PricewaterhouseCoopers report for the Auckland Council into the future of ports in the Upper North Island is due back in December.” Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse alerted me to this review when I participated in the then Draft Long Term Planning forums where I aired my concerns on Port of Auckland. The drawback is that I have basically until around February (most likely when public feedback is asked for (better not be the Christmas Holidays either))  to get all my Port of Auckland Relocation renderings complete and my extensive feedback all written up. Now that is going to be one interesting challenge as this kind of work for one person (on an amateur level) takes a heck load of their spare time. Never mind as I am sure I can rise to this challenge.

The same also goes into finishing the renderings on my Auckland Water-Frontier work which replaces the Port at its current location. I see Mr Evans also has some bold ideas for The Auckland Waterfront – Post POAL which are somewhat similar to mine too. And no I did not copy Mr Evans as I have not heard of him until today with my rendering work being happening since the beginning of the year. But it is good to see like-mindedness though :D

 

With this article from Mr Evans published and feedback soon to be asked for by Council on Port of Auckland’s options I better get cracking and finishing up those renderings.

For some refresh in the work I have done so far in my Port of Auckland Relocation Project you can check these two posts here:

PORT OF AUCKLAND RELOCATION WORK CTD

PORT OF AUCKLAND RENDERINGS – #1

 

I also have a dual-mode Alternative Auckland Transport Plan written taking into account transport projects over the next thirty years depending on whether the port stays or moves – basically covering bets here although I do wish for the Port to be relocated to the south-east:

 

And so until December I wait for the PwC report/review into the upper North Island Ports. Looking forward to what they have to say on the options available especially in regards to Port of Auckland. Until then I better get cracking on the renderings seem I also dare to produce bold vision and/or idea for Auckland – my home and city!