Ocean Sports Centre - Lost Opportunity

So. North Shore City Council is pressing ahead with the proposed National Ocean Water Sport Centre (NOWSC) on public land adjacent to beachfront reserve. There has been one public opportunity to see what is planned. That was on Thursday 29th July. The handout there answers the question: "Was the public consulted about this project...?" with this answer: "While Council has complied in full with Local Govt Act requirements that excuse councils from consultation due to the transition to Auckland Council, the timing of this proposal has restricted the ability of council to consult fully on this matter...." Yeah right. The picture above shows an architect's idea of how the Centre might look like above ground, as the idea is the rest of it is underground, with windows and entry ways directly onto the Takapuna Beach Reserve. I believe the project is a lost opportunity for three reasons, three opportunity costs that need to be taken properly into account in the economic analysis of this project: 1) While a National Ocean Sports Centre is a great idea (and it is true that lots of ocean sports competitions are held off North Shore beaches) putting it on Takapuna Beach is like putting a cuckoo in a sparrow's nest. There is not enough room for it at Takapuna - especially as it's aimed at canoe, kayak, sailing, sail-boarding. There's not enough room for the car-parking requirements which will compete with Takapuna parking for shoppers, shop-workers and office workers. So there will be continuous pressure for NOWSC to stay small and generate tiny effects. It will not be able to develop in this location. It will be a lost opportunity. That is one opportunity cost of putting NOWSC on Takapuna Beach. Because you can bet your bottom dollar there won't be Government money to build another one anytime soon, when this one gets too small (NB: Millenium Institute has just needed to double in size. Remember that.)

(2) The second reason it will be a lost opportunity is explained in these next few maps. This one shows the whole of Takapuna Beach. You can see how little of Takapuna Beach has a public frontage.....

This public amenity is precious, based on a chunk of beachfront reserve paid for at great cost by the Council with ratepayer dollars. Takapuna has a low provision of public parks and beachfront reserves, compared with other Auckland coastal suburbs. This land, how it is fronted and used, becomes more important. If it is taken for another purpose, or alienated, the public will be the loser of this valued opportunity of enjoying Takapuna Beach without being pressured by commercial activities - even if those activities are associated with an ocean sports school.

This aerial photo shows how much of Takapuna beachfront reserve was taken up by a SailBoard Event run out of Takapuna Boat Club. There are structures on the reserve, trailers pulled up, cars parked. Sail boards all about. I estimate about half of the reserve area and amenity was taken by this event. However the public are prepared to accept this on a temporary basis. Event by event permission being given for some times in a year. Strict conditions. But not a permanent facility. Not incurring public opportunity cost. There is no way to offset it.

(3) The third lost opportunity embodied in the NOWSC proposal is that Takapuna risks losing the opportunity of transforming its waterfront space to something that is really stunning by good urban design. Stunning for the public, for the town centre, and for visitors. These next few pictures show the urban design of recognised Sydney beachfronts. The urban layout is exemplary. We need to learn from what the Aussies do well.

Look at this close up of Manly Beach front. You can see how the beach edge of the road is not developed. It is for pedestrians, and some car parking. It is purely public. As is the beachfront reserve. As is the beach itself. Commercial activity - retail and food - is on the other side of the road. Along with verandahs and lanes. The road is the separator between public and private.

And here's a closer view. There's no way Manly Beach residents would allow half its beach width permanent rights for Year round Ocean Sports education for NSW or the whole of Australia. Nor should that by happening on Takapuna Beach.

And here is Bondi Beach. You can see a similar development pattern to Takapuna generally - ie low rise, development, grid streetscape, beachfront reserve, beach. But Bondi has obeyed the same urban design rule as Manly. The street between the beach and commercial area is developed on one side only. The rest is public.

Here's one end of Bondi Beach in closer view. While there's the odd changing area on the reserve grass, all the way from the shop fronts to the waves is public. Pure and simple. And that is the case for the whole length of the beach, apart from a facility in the middle which is a public facility anyway.

But here is an artist's impression of what is proposed in and on Takapuna's Beachfront Reserve. The squares you can see are plate glass windows - eight or ten of them - fronting right the way along almost half of Takapuna Beachfront reserve. A bit like the most expensive house you can imagine, having its windows and deck right on and up against and in your face on the public reserve.

This aerial/map shows the footprint of the NOWSC proposal. It is a very extensive area - most of it underground, with the proposed observation deck above ground on the beach side of the footprint.

This aerial shows the proposed realignment of the road to carry traffic and to provide some parking. It is also proposed that some public walking access be over the top of NOWSC, though the detail of that is unclear. The road shift is needed to make way for NOWSC. It is another indication of the size and demand of NOWSC pushing public amenity to one side. It also comes at a huge opportunity cost to Takapuna.

Let's take a second look at the Takapuna beachfront reserve. Here it is shaded in green. Undeveloped at the moment, and with street space (street reserve) that can also be taken to expand beachfront reserve, or used to deliver great urban design, and a frontage and amenity like Manly and Bondi.

The first building development needs to front the side of the street opposite from the beach and away from the beachfront reserve. So shoppers or whatever can look across the street, across the reserve to the sea and Rangitoto. Following the exemplary urban design of Bondi and Manly. That is the economic and amenity opportunity at risk. It risks being lost, by instead giving in to the enthusiasm of NOWSC.

The next stages of ideal and exemplary development could proceed in time. With laneways extending up into Hurstmere Road, and access laneways between the new "yellow" blocks and the rear of the buildings built facing Hurstmere. Let's not lose any of those opportunities. And by the way, I understand there are some great potential spots for NOWSC on Regional Parkland. Sure they don't have hotels, but then - we only have one Takapuna. The price and opportunity costs are too great.

Takapuna Strategic Framework

Among the more visionary and thoughtful planning documents that have been prepared during the current term of the North Shore City Council is its consultation document entitled: "Takapuna Strategic Framework".

Its release and purpose was explained this way by the North Shore Times:

"....POPULATION and employment projections indicate surging growth of about 100,000 residents and 40,000 jobs across North Shore city over the next 30 years. Takapuna is expected to take in 35 percent of this projected growth....

That translates into 6000 new homes for 12,000 new residents and an additional 5000 jobs over that period. Auckland-wide, the population is expected to increase from about 1.4 million to about 2.3 million by 2051.

The Adequacy of Auckland Region's Residential Land report back in 2008 said the North Shore could soon run out of land for housing, including intensive development.

The Takapuna strategic framework discussion document tackles growth and change possibilities over the next 30 years. It examines how they might affect the future make-up, look and feel of buildings, streets and other public spaces. It looks beyond the existing centre and considers the longer term potential for business redevelopment along the Takapuna-Barrys Pt-Smales Farm corridor leading to the central spine of Wairau Valley.

The sequencing of this proposed development will be heavily influenced by whether an additional harbour crossing materialises and whether it includes a northern rail link.

Council officers say the framework will provide a direction for more detailed precinct planning and for the infrastructure and facilities needed to support the wellbeing of local businesses and residents.

The document divides Takapuna into eight precincts – central and beachfront, central west, northern Hurstmere, Upper Shoal Bay, Anzac west, Barrys Pt Rd, Taharoto and lake edge.

They say previous studies on Takapuna have been limited to the commercial and shopping core.
The new draft covers areas up to Northcote Rd in the northwest, the southern edge of Lake Pupuke, Earnoch Ave in the northeast, the beachfront and Lake Rd, Esmonde Rd and the northern motorway.

North Shore mayor Andrew Williams says Takapuna has huge potential in its central business area and wider precincts to further develop into the thriving southern hub of the Shore...."

Among the documents available on the council website that inform this planning document is the: Takapuna Strategic Review research. Not sure why I can't find a link on the website now to the actual Strategic Review document. Feedback was requested, closing 9th July 2010.

When I was a North Shore City Councillor, it was hard to get planning for Takapuna to extend beyond the shopping and beachfront precinct. So Barrys Point was left out, so was half of Anzac Street, Taharoto, links with Wairua Valley, let alone links with Albany and the Auckland CBD. So this document is an expansive breath of fresh air.

I attended a public meeting at Takapuna where James Lundy of Common Ground had been asked to present his urban planning response to issues and challenges that were set out in the Takapuna Strategic Framework document. This was quite a good way to handle a difficult communications problem, though it meant those in the audience were responding to one man's set of ideas, or to the written document itself. Questions outside Mr Lundy's presentation were handled by David Sanders for NSCC. It was an interesting afternoon. And it was apparent that Takapuna residents are only at the start of what should be a long and thorough process. There are no shortcuts.

In my experience of Auckland planning, it has only been Waitakere City Council that has made appropriate efforts at engaging its communities (including residents, shoppers, public service providers, land owners, developers, transport users) through charrette processes in the development of land use plan changes for places like New Lynn. So, hopefully, sudden decisions are not made on the back of this start by North Shore City Council - changes that would preclude other more thoughtful and long term strategic plans.

Questions that were raised by concerned citizens indicated that two major initiatives were in the wings that threatened the integrity of the long term planning process. These are:

- a possible ferry wharf and terminal at Takapuna
- a possible Elite National Yachting Centre fronting Takapuna beach

I understand that the Hon Murray McCully is championing both of these projects in the background, and that significant discussions have occurred with North Shore City Council and other interested parties. Possible Government money is on the table. Partnership discussions are happening in cofidential session. However little information is in the public domain and designs have not reached the stage where necessary resource consents are being sought.

These rumours and partial information set alarm bells going in my head. Shades of Queens Wharf and ARC confidential meetings. So I made a few phone calls, and wrote this letter to the North Shore Times Advertiser:

Dear Editor,

Beware of Ministers bearing gifts!

The Hon Murray McCully has put $10 million on North Shore City Council’s table in a deal to build an elite yachting school on Takapuna’s Beachfront. There’s talk of a joint venture between Council and Government.

This might be a good idea, but should it be built on Takapuna’s precious and limited beachfront reserve land?

What about the public’s enjoyment of Takapuna Beach?

The Auckland Regional Council got into a similar deal with the same Minister to turn Queens Wharf into an industrial cruise ship terminal. A deal which side-lined the public interest.

Look and learn. Beware of Ministers bearing gifts that risk alienation or commercialisation of the public’s hard won harbour and coastal assets.

Joel Cayford (Auckland Regional Councillor)

A National Yacht School or Centre is a good idea. Just like a Cruise Ship Terminal. But where it goes and how it operates is a critical decision - especially if it is on land or space currently set aside as public reserve (which is what Takapuna beachfront land is). I am aware that there are proposals to place this Yacht School partially in the road reserve, and partially underground beneath the existing reserve. But it is an activity that will still occupy public land, public space that has not been set aside for any special activity.

Takapuna beach has been a sort of tragedy of the commons on the North Shore, because so much of the beach frontage has been effectively privatised. Only a narrow public window exists onto the beach, and this needs to be protected from any sort of development.

This is a bit of a ramble, but I want also to address the issue of a Takapuna Ferry service and wharf. Everybody likes ferries and it seems to be a no-brainer that as there is a regular ferry service from Gulf Harbour, why not let it call in at Takapuna (or Mairangi Bay and Browns Bay for that matter), and pick up passengers on the way. These arguments need to be addressed:

- Before the Harbour Bridge was built, these places needed ferry services, because there were few alternative transport options to get to Auckland CBD. That changed when the bridge was built.
- Public attitudes to development on beaches has changed since the days of every beach having a wharf. The public want their East Coast Bays beaches kept free from development and activities which detract from the natural environment and peace and quiet. There will always be some who would like economic development opportunities that come with wharves, but I believe these desires are in the minority.
- Ferry services need to justify their costs. That means that patronage needs to be at a level that justifies the costs of building wharves and landside servicves - including car parking. The Devonport ferry is successful in part because about 300 car parks are within a short walk of the ferry. That is not the case at Takapuna. Parking space is at a premium, and much of it is valued by recreational boaties. A Takapuna ferry service would not be economic, and car parking would be insufficient.
- Significant investment has already occurred for Takapuna public transport services, especially to the Auckland CBD. These include the Busway, Takapuna Bus Station and buslanes, and Akoranga bus station. These services provide a 20 minute service between Takapuna and Auckland at nominal cost. Ferry from Takapuna to Auckland CBD would take about 30 minutes (takes 12 minutes from Devonport), and cost more than a bus trip.

I will further investigate the Takapuna Strategic Framework process. And report further here. Key has to be turning Hurstmere Road inside out, using Council land holdings between it and the beach, so that Takapuna stops facing away from its beautiful beach and Rangitoto. Then its design potential will start to be realised. But this transformation will be frustrated if development is allowed with further blocks public access and sight of the beach, and if activities are permitted which detract from public use of the beach.

Smarter Governance for a Smarter Auckland

Today I delivered a presentation at the Rendevous Hotel to the Smart Cities Summit Conference. I was asked to speak about the sort of governance and leadership that Auckland needs - across the Region. And to speak about whether the governance reforms will deliver. These are a few slides and words from that presentation. They cover issues in Auckland City and North Shore City...

I used the example of Mexico to begin. Mexico has a reputation for poor air quality and a lot of other environmental bads. But their streets and communities are dynamic with life and energy.

This is a typical Mexico arterial street. I know it's an old city, but what a great streetscape. Sure the air looks pretty unhealthy.

But the back streets and communities are dynamic with life and energy. A lot of attention given to public spaces without cars and traffic. Interesting.

When you come back to Auckland it strikes you what it's like here - in the hearts of our cities. This is the heart of Manukau City as seen from the air on the way to land. It's really just a huge car park. Not a great people place...

And then when you do get back to North Shore, you can't ignore the fact we have some "bad air days" of our own in Auckland. And it's not because of winter fires. It's because of our dependence on, and heavy use of motor vehicles...

This is an aerial view of where Northcote Road crosses State Highway 1 on the North Shore. The uses of the land are labelled. To get between them you really need to drive. It's a car oriented design. It's not for pedestrians or cyclists. A lot of the North Shore has been designed this way.

It's one of the reasons the Auckland Region developed a Growth Strategy. To stop sprawl, and to establish much better quality urban environments. The idea was to encourage better quality density development around centres, and corridors, but to leave other parts free of infill development so the leafy character remains. This picture is from the strategy. It shows what the vision was supposed to be for Centres....

But these pictures show the reality of residential development in downtown Auckland. Very poor amenity compared to the vision. Disappointing - both for the people who live there, and setting a bad example for other places to copy. Not exemplary. And leaky building construction adds further injury...

Another part of the strategy has been Corridor Development. Aimed at streets like Taharoto, Wairau, Dominion, Sandringham - for example. These are served by quality bus transport. Others are close to railway lines....

This is a bad example from Auckland/West Auckland. Nobody really wants to live next to a railway line that looks like this. Nothing like the strategy. Poor amenity and lowest quality urban design. We can do better, and we need to do better...

This picture shows an aerial view of Highbury, on the North Shore. Highbury is a village and centre that was built long before the Harbour Bridge was built. It is a classic "english" town design. It has good main streets with shops and cafes, it also has commercial and light industrial areas which offer employment opportunities, there are green spaces and other public facilities (like a library). And as you can see, residential development is close enough so people can walk to the shops and to work...

But this is not how the new parts of North Shore have been developed. This is part of the Albany development. To the right is the Rosedale Industrial Estate, and to the left is new residential subdivision. This is a classic single use zoning. No mixed use. No walkable relationship between different uses. This is a negative change to car based living, because of its reduction in pedestrian and cycling based living and amenity. We need to do better....

Water, wastewater, and stormwater are issues for Auckland and for North Shore - where these images were taken. Flooding and erosion are issues when it rains. Yet - like last summer - when it's dry then we seem to not have enough water!

North Shore's steep topography means when it rains hard, water finds overland flow paths, and goes downhill at great speed. Down driveways, along fences, damming up and causing floods as it goes...

And then finally, what's left after the floods, discharges at great velocity into stream beds (causing damage and erosion and scouring), and finally into the the sea - often at beautiful beaches. Like here at Takapuna. Stormwater eventually needs to get to the sea, but the pathways its takes, and the damage done on the way, need to be carefully managed.

But it's not all bad.... North Shore City Council is a leader in the Auckland region at managing water in a 3 water way. This means storing stormwater in detention tanks, for reuse, but also to slow its flow when it rains hard. Slow it down in those short, peak 15 minute downpours. The strategy is also about keeping stormwater out of sewer pipes, so they don't discharge. And those old straight concrete drains and pipes are giving way to softer, more attractive approaches which slow water down and provide storage, rather than approaches based around high flow rates...

There is some high quality urban design around corridor and station development. This station development at Newmarket marries a railway station with great urban design, new shops, public open piazza spaces, and high quality medium density housing for those people wanting to live closer to the action, but unable to afford an expensive freehold house.

And across the Auckland Region there is a concerted approach to provide improved and safe cycle infrastructure, so Auckland's potential for this form of transport can be realised, along with the change in look and feel of town centres. They come to life when more people come and go by bike or on the footpath. But they must be safe.

This simple table illustrates what Councils do, the activity areas, and the legislation that directs council activities. Good governance depends on three things: good staff; good councillors, and good legislation. Without all three it's difficult to make positive changes to the look and feel of Auckland's urban landscapes and our town centres and streets.

This picture is from the Government document: "Making Auckland Greater", which led to the legislation that will abolish existing councils including North Shore City Council, and Auckland Regional Council - and establish a single supercity council. This will have a set of CCOs to provide key services like transport and water services. But there are major questions about the new supercity.

For example: how integrated will all this be? Will the new legislation lead to better outcomes? Is it more likely that the good things in the old Growth Strategy can finally be delivered more reliably? This diagram shows one of the problems with what has been proposed. Council "3 water" services will be split up. The Watercare CCO will only provide water and wastewater services, and stormwater will be provided alone by Auckland Council. This is a very disappointing disintegration.

There was more in my presentation about these aspects. However a lot of faith is being put in a new spatial plan to solve problems around integration and implementation. But it could just be a fashion. A planning fad. Check out the blog below for more on the spatial plan. This was published in NZ Herald on 29th June. And there's more on this blog about spatial planning....

North Shore - as recommended by Local Government Commission

This blog contains extracts from the Local Government Commission Super City Boundary, Ward and Board recommendations that relate to North Shore City. The LGC has recommended that North Shore be divided into one and a half, 2 member wards for SuperCity representation. The extra half of the northern ward is "taken" from Rodney District, to form a ward that extends from Mairangi Bay up and including the Whangapaoroa Peninsula....

These 2 Super City wards are made up of 3 Local Boards....

And each of these Local Boards are further divided into Subdivisions, which each have a quota of members. Candidates will stand for a specific subdivision. This is to ensure that each community of interest has representation on the Local Board...

The relevant maps are below...


North Shore Ward
This map shows the North Shore Ward of the proposed Auckland Council. It extends from Campbells Bay in the North, to Devonport in the South, across to Northcote, and up to Beachhaven. It will have two councillors elected at large across the ward. Thus voters will cast two votes, for their preferred two Auckland Councillors. It will have two Local Boards - maps shown further below.




Hibiscus-Albany-East Coast Bays Ward
This map shows the Hibiscus-Albany-East Coast Bays Ward of Auckland council. (By the way - the LGC expects submissions about names. What should this Ward be named?) This ward will have 2 Auckland Councillors elected at large from across the Ward. Voters will have two votes to cast for their ward councillors. This ward extends from Wairewa in the the north, to Mairangi Bay in the south. It includes Paremoremo and Greenhithe. It will have just one Local Board. Map below.










Glenfield/Birkenhead Local Board
This map shows the Glenfield/Birkenhead Local Board, which is contained in the North Shore Ward of Auckland City Council. This Local Board is divided into 2 subdivisions: The Glenfield subdivision will be represented by 3 members on that Local Board, while the Birkenhead subdivision will also be represented by 3 members on that Local Board. Giving a total of 6 members.

Devonport/Takapuna Local Board
This map shows the Devonport/Takapuna Local Board, which is contained in the North Shore Ward of Auckland City Council. This Local Board is divided into 2 subdivisions: The Devonport subdivision will be represented by 2 members on that Local Board, while the Takapuna subdivision will be represented by 3 members on that Local Board. Giving a total of 5 members. (This tends to suggest that Takapuna will always have a majority on that Board....)












Hibiscus/Albany/ECB Local Board
This map shows the Hibiscus/Albany/ECB Local Board, which is contained in the Hibiscus/Albany/East Coast Bays Ward of Auckland City Council. This Local Board is divided into 3 subdivisions: The Hibiscus subdivision will be represented by 3 members on that Local Board, and the Albany subdivision will also be represented by 3 members on that Local Board, and the East Coast Bays subdivision will also be represented by 3 members on that Local Board. Giving a total of 9 members.