Yesterday was a good day for Auckland's waterfront.
The perspective image above was available from MBIE's website. Part of a joint release from Minister David Parker and Auckland's Mayor Goff after they had reached an agreement in the course of this very Auckland tussle over the next development of Auckland's waterfront.
The key changes from the option which Auckland Council and Panuku and Team New Zealand have wanted (which mainly required a large extension of Halsey and Hobson Wharves and the relocation of the fishing industry and the Sealink ferry), include that a smaller extension of Halsey is required housing two syndicate bases (instead of 4), and that Stolthaven have agreed to exit a section of Wynyard Point so that four syndicate bases can be located there (includes one on the soujthern end of Wynyard Wharf). So that's real progress for those stakeholders advocating for protection of views and for this event to be an opportunity to release and develop some of the public space potential on Wynyard Point.
It still leaves the fishing fleet and Sealink Ferry - and the working waterfront character of Wynyard Quarter - in limbo and in jeopardy. Though none of the plans available from MBIE nor the media release from Minister Parker speak about those economic and environmental matters. The Minister's release begins like this:
I include here a section of MBIE's advice on the merits of the economic benefit assessment prepared for the event by Market Economics:
The economic evaluation does not capture any of the broader benefits associated with hosting an event of this scale, including showcasing New Zealand to international audiences (and associated reputation impacts), high performance sport outcomes, and participation and engagement of New Zealanders that may have “feel good” effects (increasing national identity and pride).
The study does not account for environmental impacts and is confined to the economic benefit only. It makes no assumptions around location or whether there are any incursions into the harbour or not. It does not, therefore, take account of any loss of value from reducing the available harbour space. Any investment decisions will take into account a broader range of considerations than just the economic, including environmental, social and cultural values.
The study is consistent with Treasury guidelines for studies of this kind. This is one input into the discussions between government, Auckland Council and ETNZ. Any decision needs to stack up for ETNZ, and the New Zealand ratepayers and taxpayers.MBIE and the Minister appreciate the big picture here - that it is not just about economic outcomes.
The NZ Herald and Stuff carry stories about the "deep upset" of Team New Zealand about the joint move of Minister Parker and Mayor Goff. Meanwhile the clock ticks on the resource consent application lodged by Panuku (with Auckland Council's agreement), which is in two parts: one for the big wharf extension favoured by Team New Zealand, and the other for the relocation of the fishing industry and the Sealink Ferry - both of which assume a plan change allowing the relocation to occur on land that is presently designated public open space and which forms part of the proposed Headland Park.
Many people - including me, including everyone I know who is advocating for the waterfront - love the America's Cup event and all the excitement and innovation and drama that goes with it. What is required here is broad planning perspective on the future of Auckland's waterfront assets and space. How to accommodate everything. What is at risk here is an unbalanced approach.
Team New Zealand (TNZ) has been robust and rigorous in getting what it wants. But as I understand it there's a lot of concern behind the scenes with Team NZ's decisions. For example, I understand that because TNZ has adopted a highly complex and technically difficult yacht design for the regatta - which is proving very expensive to enter now - only three syndicates have put their hats in the ring. This is causing ripples throughout the yachting industry because it means fewer boats to build, and fewer syndicate customers buying the services available from our marine industry. It will also limit the drama of the regatta itself and of the challenge regatta.
This factor will be very evident to TNZ which will be under the pump to get other costs of entry minimised - such as syndicate bases. The more public money that is pumped into syndicate base construction and the provision of sponsor super-yacht berthage, the less it will cost syndicates to participate. Thus, the public subsidy that TNZ has been banking on, is becoming more and more important to TNZ, as potential syndicates start to crunch the numbers, figure out how much it will cost them to mount a credible challenge, and wobble on the starting line.
Auckland and NZ need to support TNZ, but not at any cost.
If, due to circumstances completely outside Government and Council control, there are only 3 or 4 syndicates involved in the AC36 event, then these can all be hosted on the Wynyard Point land that is now available because of the deal with Stolthaven. Advocates for this regatta all want an integrated village. The 4 bases on Wynyard Point will deliver that outcome - without taking over the entire Auckland waterfront. (There is no justification for giving Team New Zealand its own piece of wharf and waterfront in perpetuity - like Auckland did for Ports of Auckland Ltd back in the day).
The fishing fleet would not need to be relocated. The original vision of a working waterfront celebrating Auckland's maritime heritage would remain. And a great AC36 event would be accommodated and hosted on land set aside in perpetuity for the hosting of future such events.
That would be a win win win win outcome.
