Parking Takes Princes Wharf Public Accessway

The posting (above) introduces the Auckland Regional Council's regulatory consideration of the plans to redevelop Princes Wharf. These are clearly problematic.

However the permits that were granted do contain some conditions which arise from the consideration of the plans by independent certifiers. These were Professor Bird and Diane Brand. (Blog postings about this process can be seen here and here.) The ARC report states:

It should be noted that the Transitional Regional Coastal Plan requires certification by an independent registered architect. Professor Bird is not currently registered. In order to ensure full compliance with this requirement the report by Professor Bird has been endorsed and certified by registered architect Diane Brand, a director of Diane Brand Architect Ltd. The report recommends that conditions be placed upon any coastal permit concerning matters of consequential design detail as follows;

- ensuring availability of colonnade spaces for exclusive and uninterrupted use
by the general public.
- requiring evidence of lease provisions controlling the design and appearance
of areas of wharf deck utilised by commercial tenants in association with their
interior premises.
-  requiring design and appearance certification of any structural additions or
alterations arising as a result of wind tunnel testing necessary to ensure
pedestrian comfort at wharf deck level, all landscaping and signage and visual
identification proposals, and any more than minor architectural changes to the
overall design.

The design and appearance report has been used to guide the ARC's assessment of design and appearance and public use in determining the application.

This advice led to a number of conditions relating to car parking, and to spillover effects from cafes and suchlike on the relatively narrow public realm that was planned around the perimeter of the redeveloped Princes Wharf. The advice from the certifiers is summarised in the ARC planning report:

The quality of provision for public access and use has been addressed in the certification report. The report notes the use of colonnades of 2.1 metres in width along the entire north south length of the seaward side of all six buildings, and a similar colonnade of variable width and elevated 1.1 metres above the central street along the sides of the buildings facing the street. These colonnades will provide pedestrians with a sheltered pathway along the wharf no matter what the direction of wind and/or rain.

These colonnades will be for exclusive use as a pedestrian thoroughfare, and not
impeded by "spill over" of uses such as outdoor seating from adjacent tenancies.

ARC officers with the responsibility for granting consent along with appropriate conditions, accordingly set out Condition 12. This reads:

12.  All colonnade spaces between the exterior wall of individual tenancies and the outer face of the columns supporting the first upper level, around the entire perimeter edge of the development and along both sides of the central street, shall be set aside as an accessway for the use of the public.

The following photographs were taken today (Monday 5th August 2013). They show some of the creeping privatisation that has occurred on Princes Wharf. They also show creeping non-compliance with the original conditions of consent.

The condition states: "All colonnade spaces.... around the entire perimeter.... shall be set aside as an accessway for the use of the public." How can this be interpreted as permitting "public carparks"?