Tag Archives: Manukau City

Manukau Urban Design Competition

Posted on by
Reply

An Idea Being Floated – Seeking your views on it

 

An idea popped into my mind yesterday after reading Auckland Transport Blog’s “Manukau street getting a parking diet.” In that particular post we see a small project Auckland Transport is about to embark on in improving one small bit of the auto-centric Manukau CBD street scape.

I had asked ATB’s contributor Patrick for a comment which I got one. Patrick also left a link on the history of Manukau: “How Do You Solve a Problem Like Manukau?” in which I caught this comment: ““let it die a dignified death””

I do not quite think Manukau now is quite willing to go down that path. If anything it is a sleeping giant waiting to be woken up and its full potential realised as a city centre.

Interest in urban renewal around Manukau is simmering away with recent and continued calls in allowing Manukau to become the Second CBD of Auckland slowly raising prospects of more whole-scale urban renewal in Manukau.

A recent animation of what Manukau could look like by 2040 has also been floated around on YouTube and with the link found in my following blog post: “Manukau Like This.“

 

The idea that popped into my head was ‘We should hold an Urban (Renewal) Design Competition for Manukau.’

A Draft Idea on the Competition

The brief is this

Manukau is a major hub of business activity for Auckland and especially South Auckland. However, Manukau’s past as a city centre as been blighted from the auto-centric planning models of last century. This makes Manukau cold and unfriendly through its street-scape and urban design for people. With the Unitary Plan forecasting intensification especially around our larger urban centres like Manukau, we have a unique chance to bring via urban renewal Manukau from its last century auto-centric past to a modern 21st century people-centric centre.

Manukau is shaped to become the Second CBD of Auckland (after the main CBD) thus a critical player in Auckland’s future and well-being. We need people to step up and help take Manukau CBD from its auto-centric past and bring it into its people-centric future. Remembering we have the Mayor’s aspiration of The World’s Most Liveable City to live up to.

The Manukau Urban (Renewal) Design Competition has two categories to which you can enter one or both. It is open to both New Zealanders and international folk alike.

The winner would be one who not only designs a people-centric physical urban scape of Manukau, but also in their design recognises “sense of identity” the population attaches to both the physical urban scape and to the identity of “Manukau” itself!

 

The two categories are

  • Macro Urban Renewal
  • Micro Urban Renewal

Macro Urban Renewal is drawing up a design for the entire competition area – that is Manukau City Centre (to be defined). In this you look at the holistic approach of such an urban renewal task rather than a specific place within Manukau itself. You are not asked to do micro-level work in this category. The broad sweeping beginning of the Manukau Animation video is an example of a macro approach

Micro Urban Renewal is drawing up design for a set specific area within the Manukau CBD competition area (yet to be defined). Your attention compared to the macro level is looking at the finer details of a set area rather than a broader narrative. Bear in mind though it could be wise to partner up with someone undertake Macro work and work together as a team capitalising on your own set of specialist skills (massive hint folks). You are free to choose one or as many of the set micro areas as you desire for this category. An example of micro work can be seen in the sweep down of the Ronwood Precinct around two-thirds of the way in of the Manukau Animation video.

 

There would overall winners and category winners (prizes to be determined) at the end of the competition. Hopefully then Auckland Council would use the winning ideas and assist Manukau realise its bright new future.

—–

So what do readers think? Good idea or utter crazy? It is an idea that popped into my head and one I thought be worth exploring. That does not mean you go bugger off with the idea either :P

I’ll toy around with the idea some more and see if it is worth floating to Council later this year. In the mean time your thoughts below

 

Proposed Public Transport Network – Southern Auckland

Posted on by
Reply

This will be due for consultation from June 19

 

Auckland Transport through the Council Transport Committee have released the “Auckland‘s New Network for Public Transport – Southern Network for consideration and consultation.

You can see the presentation and proposed bus routes below

 

I have read through it and am looking at it closely before I submit on it. For the most part it looks pretty good what is proposed for the south in regards to buses. I even have a choice of Route 365 (hey did, let me check what I proposed for that route, well look at that don’t know if one can claim credit but apart from adjustment to the northern end, AT’s Route 365 is very similar to the one I drew up for my RPTP submission) or Route 371 to get to Papakura Station rather than use the Park and Ride as I do now. Both routes (although 371 is more of a circuit) would even get me within walking distance of the Takanini Village and the future Glenora Road Station (which the 365 might be altered for in the future once that station is built).

If there is one thing got me head scratching is the duplication and double bus transfer from Papakura to Manukau City Centre. I have feeder buses feeding into Papakura Station which also has the major bus stop where you would catch either the 365 or 33A (a frequent service bus that trundles for the most part down the Great South Road) to head into Manukau. Seeming the trains are already there and are being feed to by buses; would it not be wise for AT to haul backsides and get the Manukau South Rail Link built? 15 minute frequencies from Pukekohe to Manukau Station via the south link direct and be there in less time than the main bus. The same principle would apply to the 33B from Weymouth which stops at the Manurewa Interchange and Rail Station.

Manukau is under active consideration for major employment centre growth and the population in South Auckland is also due to grow significantly. The EMU trains would be the only thing with enough capacity to move the people between the two places compared to a bus.

A thought there for you while I get my submission done in this otherwise very good piece of work from AT.

 

 

Concerns on the Manukau South Link

Posted on by
Reply

Port of Auckland – Can we talk please?

Caught this today in the Manukau Courier. Rather interesting that they bring this up today of all days. Ah well lets take a look:

Wiri train tracks block access

Creating a southern connection between the Manukau Train Station and the main trunk line could be more difficult than first thought.

Local boards throughout the south have called for the link so passengers can travel from Manukau to Papakura and Pukekohe directly.

Passengers wanting to head south from Manukau now have to transfer at Papatoetoe.

But a Kiwirail spokeswoman says if the connection gets approval it would need to cross tracks that lead to Ports of Auckland’s inland port at Wiri.

That would require reconstruction of those tracks.

“This part of the rail corridor has quite complex track layouts because of the Manukau branch junction, the port facility and the EMU [Electric Multiple Units] depot,” she says.

A Ports of Auckland spokesman didn’t want to comment on how ripping up its tracks could affect operations at the port because no-one had put forward an official proposal to do the work.

But Manurewa Local Board chairwoman Angela Dalton says linking the Manukau station with the main trunk line made more sense than other transport projects being pushed.

“It doesn’t make sense to me, pouring money into the city rail link when we need to get things moving out here.

“We need to get cars off the streets and the trains connecting effectively.”

Auckland Transport‘s main priority at the Manukau line is double-tracking it so services can run every 10 minutes to and from Britomart, council documents show.

It’s also assessing the viability of a link between the two lines as part of its rail development plan.

 

The Manukau South (Rail) Link is a project that I have been following closely since I first raised the point that a Electrification Mast would be in the road of the south link early last year. It is a project that I still follow closely while Auckland Transport develop a case study for this link – that south so desperately need!

In saying that though has anyone actually approached Port of Auckland and had a decent conversation with them on how the South Link might work. Work as in POAL has their Wiri Inland Port that covers part of the South Link path. And whether POAL should move their Wiri facility 900 metres down the road where this is a mothballed siding and massive block of land sitting vacant.

Port of Auckland I think we of the South need to have a chat over coffee and hot scones. What do you think?

 

Dr Smith and the NIMBY’s

Posted on by
Reply

So a Fish Hook?

 

cats_fail-14143

I am getting the Herald delivered free on a five-week trial thanks to the AA. You can comment on the irony of the situation later but the word free and word worm-food have relevance here.

So upon reading the A-Section of the Herald (was looking for Orsman after a menacing Facebook remark he made last night on his page) I found this about Dr Nick Smith:

I wonder what he means “lower quality developments” for Auckland and affordable housing.

Would it be the quality like my ex-army house made of treated wood and brick built in the 70′s. It is basic with basic fittings provided in the house but huge potential to upgrade as the resident saves up and upgrades the dwelling (like what we are doing with our home).

Or (and most likely) something like the quality of the Hobson Street rabbit hunches that the NIMBY‘s bark on about that leak like a sponge and are of poor quality (forcing off an expensive virtual rebuild). History (and this hurts when it spells the truth) I believe tells us those rabbit hunches were “signed off” by the C&R dominated former Auckland City Council in 2004 (while the Mayor at the time – Banks wanted a stop to it before he got chucked out because of the Eastern Highway). Oh dear I see irony abound here folks…

For further irony I need not remind Auckland that it was the then National Government of the 1990s that removed the requirement of treated wood for new houses (saving costs to the consumer apparently) and now most of them leak worse than a sponge and have rotted away to such an extent that if your repair bill was not sky-high, your house was basically condemned. As for the old Auckland City and Manukau City Councils that signed off on these disasters as well, I believe both were Centre Right dominated as well in most of that period. If you want me to drive a further boot in the situation who do our conservatives (and NIMBY’s) vote for traditionally.

And before someone sends a flaming comment right back I ask you reflect upon yourself and remember you get what you either ask/vote for or deserve (to the point my generation have to pick up the can from your mistakes).

 

Now the onus is on the Minister Dr Nick Smith to clearly define what he means by “lower quality development.” Because unless you plan to return to building leakers and crap like those Hobson Street apartments, then under the current situation with constructions costs artificially high building a quality basic house like mine would be near impossible for under $300k all up (including land).

Hmm with Northern Regional National Party Conference this weekend, I wonder what is being schemed or parroted in the hallways and theatre rooms…

 

Manukau as the Second CBD – A Clarification

Posted on by
1

I Believe in a Second CBD

NOT Shifting the Existing One

 

With Auckland Transport Blog stuck in their Mono Core Centric view thus a guest post from myself over to their blog on the incoming confusion over Manukau not rather possible, I shall run the clarification exercise here.

What has happened is that the media and other blogs have picked up Manukau as a CBD in Auckland. Whether that be shifting the CBD to Manukau from its existing site or allow two CBD’s in Auckland. This has the potential to create confusion in the Manukau debate, confusion I wish to clear up quickly.

On May 14 I gave a presentation to the Auckland Plan Committee on Manukau as a Second CBD of Auckland. This idea from my end has been floating around since my submission to the Auckland Plan two years ago. The presentation and subsequent master booklet outlined why Manukau should be a Second CBD of Auckland (not shifting the CBD to Manukau). Sustainability, Auckland as three distinct metropolitan areas, Auckland as a Megaopolis, and most of all the Geography of Sense of Identity around Manukau as a Second CBD of Auckland.

The presentation was received well by the Council and has been picked up from other quarters including the Manukau Central Business Association and the various media forms. However, since then something else has cropped up with Manukau that can skewer the debate rather quickly and muddy the waters.

 

The boys over at ATB have picked up on mayoral candidate John Palino’s call for shifting the CBD to Manukau. I don’t exactly recalling Palino saying that but will seek clarification. Clarification because I had a two-hour meeting with Palino last week in Manukau discussing Manukau at considerable length. I presented my idea on Manukau as a Second CBD and it provided some excellent discussion.

What the boys over at ATB have NOT done is finish their blog post and bringing a more balanced approach and bring to the table my own option with Manukau as the Second CBD. I believe in a dual-core city and have run the reasons why in my presentation work. It is all there for your reading. 

As I mentioned yesterday, the South Auckland is Choice blog picked up both mine and John Palino’s respective calls for Manukau. SAC also picked up the You Tube video showing how Manukau could look like by 2031 which caught my attention clearly.

Thus with ATB not rounding out the options there are being considered by Council and Southern Auckland I will paste below the links of the actual debate happening thus far:

 

To be very clear on the options that are out there currently and as they stand:

  1. Unitary Plan has Manukau as a Metropolitan Centre
  2. John Palino per the Manukau Courier wants to shift the CBD
  3. I am calling for a SECOND CBD in Auckland – Manukau being that second CBD!

 

So Manukau as a; Metropolitan Centre, Main CBD, or Second CBD of Auckland. Those are the options to consider.

If one does have any queries on the Manukau matter, leave a comment in the comment box and I shall answer then ASAP.

The Manukau as a Second CBD Booklet

 

 

TALKING AUCKLAND

Talking Auckland: Blog of TotaRim Consultancy Limited

TotaRim Consultancy
Bringing Well Managed Progress to Auckland and The Unitary Plan

Auckland: 2013 – YOUR CITY, YOUR CALL