Waterfront plans changing

Tauranga City Council is in the process of changing its Strand redevelopment plans – creating issues for the bureaucracy.

At a workshop meeting on Wednesday, councillors discussed whether they were going to continue with the current resource consent application for the $20 million waterfront park redevelopment plan, or make a new application for a Priority One style proposal that includes commercial kiosks and markets.


A Prioirty One concept drawing for The Strand redevelopment.

They decided to continue with the current application and then change details to suit the direction they now want the development to go in.

Either way, the council is no longer looking at spending $20 million on The Strand reclamation.

The Priority One vision is to liven up the waterfront by granting private leases to commercial operators.

The longer term plan is to have commercial market style developments at either end of the reclamation, separated by a central green space.


An aerial view of the Priority One concept.

Priority One city centre manager Duarne Lankshear says the intention is to attract people across the tracks onto the reclamation, and give them reasons to stay once they get there.

Allowing commercial developments on the reclamation will require a resource consent and any earthworks on The Strand will require a resource consent.

Councillors are keen to get things moving in the Priority One direction, but are leery of choosing a path that might add to the $150,000 spent so far on the current application.

'There's no doubt about what we want, it's how we get there,” says Councillor Terry Molloy.

Priority One's plan is to attract investment into the public space, similar to the way Auckland's viaduct harbour redevelopment has attracted people and commerce.

Duarne says by collaborating with the private sector, Tauranga can produce a world-class, self-sustaining waterfront at minimal cost to the ratepayer that will also provide long term revenue streams to Tauranga City Council.

He says international, and experience throughout New Zealand, shows the waterfront areas that are successful in attracting people are the active ones that include private sector activities and hospitality with open space.

By using the existing infrastructure, buildings and land means the development of the waterfront can begin in the very near future.

20 comments

The near future??

Posted on 09-06-2011 12:08 | By budgettga

Hhhhmmmm, I've heard that before, several times in fact for the last 15 years.


Not another change!

Posted on 09-06-2011 12:54 | By Ewa

As fas as I remember the hedge along the train line was removed (amid great protests) to open the view to the water! Are we going to let it be taken away now for the sake of a few stall holders, who will not survive there - look at the turn over rate of the downtown shops


Waterfront

Posted on 09-06-2011 13:05 | By socantor

No future for any development unless free parking is provided to at least the extent provided by shopping malls. Otherwise, very few people will bother to go there.


Oh Dear !

Posted on 09-06-2011 13:31 | By Jitter

Another change of plan. What a surprise. Priority One's ideas are from cloud nine. They seem to think that ratepayers money is a bottomless bucket and that they (P One) can keep on taking and taking. P One are wasting their time as the "commercial" development of the waterfront will not bring business back to down town Tauranga. Look at Wellington and Auckland where the CBDs are dying because rentals are far too high and people would rather shop near where they live. The same problems apply to Tauranga. Why not develop the waterfront in a similar fashion to Wellington as a recreational area ? TCC had the right idea right at the start of this excercise.


Move the train track!!

Posted on 09-06-2011 14:38 | By wreck1080

Step 1: relocate the train track (tunnel or alternate route). Step 2: Plan the waterfront redevelopment. The train tracks are a barrier to any waterfront development they might care to build. The tracks must be relocated or you are redeveloping the waterfront for the fish.


strand development

Posted on 09-06-2011 14:40 | By dstewart

Is this new dream for the benefit of commercial interests or for the people, residents, ratepayers of this city who wish to have the waterfront opened up for the enjoyment and recreation of all.


Open it Up !

Posted on 09-06-2011 15:10 | By NoWay

Why is Priority One determining what happens at the waterfront? Why would you want to put buildings or any other obstruction there and hide that wonderful view. Leave it as open space and attractive for people to go an enjoy. I thought there was a public forum where ratepayers could have their say on the proposals. What's the point having these forums if the people aren't going to be listened to !


Probably nothing will happen

Posted on 09-06-2011 15:16 | By JSmithington

But if it's going to happen there will need to be a commercial part to pay for it and to get people there. The days of people sitting in a park with a picnic rug are over (maybe sadly). These sort of areas are only busy and only attract people if they have the mix of park, cafes and the odd shop. But that would be a good way of paying for it. If council are persuaded to put up money for it, I think they'll end up subsidising the commercial people. It shouldn't need a subsidy.


I'm With You

Posted on 09-06-2011 15:39 | By makkas

I have to say I agree with you Oh Dear! The waterfront is a great playground for both young and old in Wellington and what a fantastic job the city council have done planning and upgrading the old dingy unused wharf sheds . . . With the good reception the drive in movies are getting . . . I wonder how an amusment park would feature on our water front . . .


Correction - SOME Councillors and Mayor Crosby ...

Posted on 09-06-2011 15:54 | By Murray.Guy

Correction - SOME Councillors and Mayor Crosby ... This councillor is opposed to the commercialisation focus of the waterfront. The original basis for the re-development was to add value to the existing inner-city business district, NOT to compete with it. The proposed buildings are converted container type boxes with lift up sides. With no consents required (other than minor earthworks)and minimal cost the strand waterfront can be landscaped, walkways/cycle-ways. Staff advise that the consenting process will cost upwards of $400,000 if challenged (which it will be). Absolutely NUTS! Millions of ratepayer dollars are being flushed down the toilet every year on wasted 'no-brainer' unrealistic schemes, the last wastage being $1.32 million on the declined Hot Pools development!


Murray...

Posted on 09-06-2011 17:10 | By Tony

What do P1 do ? . and can you tell us what the rate payers dollar input is please? I realy would like to know what P1 has actual achived on its own not is conjuntion with someone or some other identity / Department ...Just them ?


Add value

Posted on 09-06-2011 20:10 | By The author of this comment has been removed.

How can taking away car parks add value to the city centre?Who do the council think will use this park?Would it not be the worlds most dangerous park with a busy railway line on one side and water on the other side?What can people do in the water apart from fish?Is sand not required for a waterfront for families?Have the council lost the plot when it involves anything to do with the CBD?Sometimes I think you are on the right track Murray but then in the next sentence you completely spoil all you have said with some unrealistic comments.The councilors need to talk to the people who make their living in the CBD for some constuctive ideas on how to improve the viability of our city centre.To achieve the best result tell Priority One they are all now unemployed and put their budgeted money into tidying up the CBD.


TCC is an idiot magnet

Posted on 09-06-2011 20:25 | By KAMIKAZE

So TCC firstly endorse an over the top development plan costing $20-30 million then promptly have a toady clown aka Priority One produce some other sort of irrelevant tripe effectively at ratepayers expense.No new buildings should be erected on the Strand Reclamation or Strand Extension It is virtually clear of buildings now with the exception of the 'glass cage' which must be removed now lets keep it that way.No covert commercial leases to be permitted on the Strand buildings will simply ruin the vista.They can in due course be accommodated in Dive Crescent. KISS


Ringing in my ears

Posted on 10-06-2011 00:29 | By tibs

I though perhaps i had tinnitus but then I realised it was alarm bells ringing. I'd just read those Baywave, Wellness Centre, Waterfront Museum, Baypark Indoor Sport and Exhibition Centre, weasel words, contained in the quoted paragraph: "Duarne says by collaborating with the private sector, Tauranga can produce a world-class, self-sustaining waterfront at minimal cost to the ratepayer that will also provide long term revenue streams to Tauranga City Council" "Tauranga can produce a world-class, self-sustaining waterfront at minimal cost to the ratepayer" - YEAH RIGHT! Tui time again! What happened with The Fan, The Ferry and the Naval (Gazing) Barge? Were they so successful that we need more? Next thing they'll tell us it'd be a great place for a Waterfront Museum.


yip

Posted on 10-06-2011 07:55 | By Capt_Kaveman

again the tracks become an issue why was this not put over with the bridge they had 2 chances and both they failed


Like Hotel California-'Just can't kill the beast'

Posted on 10-06-2011 08:15 | By POCO O POCO

y good CR.GUY that is getting fairly close to the heart of the matter. The message is keep the Strand Reclamation and Foreshore clear and spend minimal funds in keeping it in a natural state.By all means spend a few $million on a new TCC carpark in Hamilton St. to get vehicles off the Strand Reclamation and to accommodate CBD etc.And yes the consultancy costs are obscene


Like Hotel California-'Just can't kill the beast'

Posted on 10-06-2011 08:15 | By POCO O POCO

y good CR.GUY that is getting fairly close to the heart of the matter. The message is keep the Strand Reclamation and Foreshore clear and spend minimal funds in keeping it in a natural state.By all means spend a few $million on a new TCC carpark in Hamilton St. to get vehicles off the Strand Reclamation and to accommodate CBD etc.And yes the consultancy costs are obscene


SELF SUSTAINING

Posted on 10-06-2011 08:25 | By MISS ADVENTURE

WE KNOW WHAT WE WANT ... PRIVATE FUNDING ... Great ideas (YEAH RIGHT) but this all smells like the Art Gallery. hate to point out the obvious but where is everyone going to park the car after 300 carparks are gone for ever? How is the priavte funding going to pay $30-40m in TCC created debt?


YoYo Council

Posted on 10-06-2011 09:47 | By Openknee8ted

Strikes again


@ MURRAY

Posted on 10-06-2011 13:25 | By Roadkill

The Hot Pools mess did not cost $1.32 million, that is only the consultants bills that are still rampaging through TCC's chequebook (not TCAL) don't forget the full time staff at TCC, they are not paid by TCAL the TCC finance department reports (unoffically of course) that TCC has paid directly some $2.0 million in other costs directly related. Go get some answers Murray, that is why you are there!


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.