To do this story justice it's necessary to start somewhere near the beginning. Based on the simple idea that if we don't learn from history we are sure to repeat it. Here's how Princes Wharf looked in the 1930's....
You can see that the buildings rose about 2 or 3 stories above the wharf. You can also see the classic and attractive architecture that was involved. This next picture is one of the few surviving pictures that I could find that looks down into the heart of Princes Wharf...
There are ships tied up. It was used mostly for cargo. You can see, on the right of the picture that the buildings on Princes Wharf consisted of two blocks with a street running up the centre, and the buildings had frontages to that street. I understand there were a couple of cross streets too. The uses changed a bit with time, and a public car park was established on the wharf at some later date.
I need to jump ahead now and include a few of pictures of how it looks today.
The central street idea is still sort of there - except it's basically a car park. You can see some of the colonades retained at street level. But basically it's a carpark, with its very own setof traffic lights, with a road up the centre. Cars go to and from their carparks, taxis and shuttles go to and from the Hilton hotel at the end. You can also see cars parked between the colonnades on the Eastern side of Princes Wharf - on public space. And any time of day you can see taxis and shuttles intruding on the public open space at the end of Princes Wharf. No penalties for driving all over a public park there!
And at the end there is a tiny remnant of the fine old architecture that was originally at the end of the wharf. That's the part that is emblazoned with the sign: "Hilton". It also frames a public viewing area - quite nice when you find it - one of the best kept public space secrets in Auckland.
Here's another picture of the viewing area - this time with 4 ARC Councillors checking it out.
The councillor on the left is Cllr Walbran. He was one of the ARC councillors who granted the resource consent needed to build the Hilton Hotel and the apartments. He was one of those who granted the consent in March 1998. Not that long ago when you think about it. Intuitively, you'd think Auckland City Council would have been the one to grant these consents. After all, it's a building. After all, it's pretty in your face down there on Auckland's waterfront. And there's traffic issues and urban design issues.
In fact, the reason ARC granted the consent is that the building is not on land, it's on water. Or above the seabed to be precise. So the Plan the application was tested against was the ARC's Plan Coastal, and - presumably, its Regional Policy Statement. So Auckland City Council's fine-grained isthmus section of its District Plan didn't have jurisdiction.
That is also why ARC Councillors heard the application. When I say "heard" that's somewhat of a misnomer, because the application was not even notified. ARC Councillors made that decision too. That it didn't need to be notified. This was largely possible because an earlier Scheme Change going back to 1990 had been adopted to the Waitemata Horbour Maritime Planning Scheme. ARC councillors could quite easily have decided to notify the application - citing public interest issues and all that good stuff. But they did not.
Time to include another picture....
This one shows a bunch of ARC councillors checking out the East side of Princes Wharf. It's hard to believe, but one of those councillors was heard to opine, "I don't know what all the fuss is about. This is really good...".
When you read the councillor's decision to grant consent, and the conditions attached, you can see the emphasis of the ARC coming through. It's all about sewage, stormwater, sediment, and wind, with some mention of signs. These are classic issues for ARC with its adverse effects to environment regulatory hat on. But as for urban design, streetscape, traffic effects, public space design - all of the things that contribute to public amenity. Almost total silence.
I'm getting grumpy now, so I'll end this post while I'm still cheerful. There will be one or two more coming up, with a few more facts and figures. What I wanted to end with though, is the fact that this ARC consent was granted having complied with a rather unusual requirement. This was that the design and appearance of the building had to be certified by an independent architect. This was presumably so that the ARC councillors - with no experience in such matters - could rely on some independent planning advice.
The certification for this application was carried out by Clinton Bird, who at the time was Director of Clinton Bird Urban Design Ltd, and Associated Professor of Architecture at University of Auckland. His analysis is a revelation. So are some of the other facts behind this project. More to come later....
The certification for this application was carried out by Clinton Bird, who at the time was Director of Clinton Bird Urban Design Ltd, and Associated Professor of Architecture at University of Auckland. His analysis is a revelation. So are some of the other facts behind this project. More to come later....
No comments:
Post a Comment