Brian Rudman: Marina trust the answer

COMMENT

With politicians, national and local, wimping out in the battle to stop Ports of Auckland selling Westhaven Marina to the highest bidder, it's time to think alternatives.

And if it's a toss-up between Auckland City ratepayers forking out $50 million to $60 million to keep this waterfront jewel out of developers' hands, or a trust run by some of the yachties paying for it, I'm starting to lean towards the latter.

By rights, of course, the broad sweep of land beneath the cliffs from Pt Erin in Herne Bay round to downtown now surplus to the port company's requirements should revert to public ownership, as was the case until the reforms of the late 80s. It had always been the foreshore land of Aucklanders and should remain so.

It was these sentiments that drove Auckland Mayor John Banks and his right-wing allies to go all socialist a few weeks back and announce a plan to buy the lot - at a cost, to city ratepayers of $100 million to $400 million.

It was a brave move, which I supported. But from what I've seen of the Westhaven Marina Charitable Trust's proposal, publicised on this page yesterday, what they propose seems almost identical to the plans announced earlier by Auckland City, even down to the dinky little new sandy beach at St Marys Bay.

That being so, I can't see why we ratepayers should compete in a bidding war with the trust, if only because it would leave us $50 million or more to put towards other areas in our sights like the tank farm and the Transit New Zealand-owned desert land west of the bridge.

Spokesman Cedric Allan says the trust is happy to consider the council coming in as partner in the trust.

Alternatively, "we would look at a side agreement where, as a condition of council dropping out of the bidding, we would agree to certain things. We believe the council can achieve almost everything it wants without parting with a cent."

The trust, which is the child of the Royal NZ Yacht Squadron, Yachting NZ and the Westhaven Marina Users Association, has $9 million pledged by members and access to finance for the rest. It is unfortunate, if a united front is the aim, that the neighbouring Ponsonby and Victoria Cruising Clubs were left out of the negotiations setting up the trust.

Not unnaturally, there is bad blood now and those on the outer favour council ownership. But in the spirit of co-operation that Mr Allan is calling for, it's surely not too late to widen the membership to make it more inclusive.

It wouldn't be the first piece of land that we Aucklanders consider is ours to be run by a trust board. Just think Cornwall Park.

Meantime, the port company is trying to push the price of the marina up by extending the life of a now-expired resource consent for a building on the sale site between Sails restaurant and the Ponsonby clubrooms.

The proposed building has had a controversial history. The company gained non-notified consent from Auckland City in February 2000 for a marine-related commercial building with more than 100 basement carparks on a site zoned Open Space 5. Two years later with nothing built, they gained a two-year extension.

In July 2002 the company then sought consent for a much grander development on the site consisting of a series of three-storey buildings including 26 apartments, a marina office and commercial premises. Because residential and non-marine commercial activities are not permitted within the Open Space 5 zone, the application had to be publicly notified, and widespread opposition ensued.

As a result of the uproar, the port company backed off, and this application is now on hold.

Then, two days before Christmas last year, the port company tried to revive the original plan by slipping in a request for a further year's extension to the 2000 consent.

Obviously, to a potential buyer with an eye for development, a live resource consent for a commercial building adds value to the site. Three months on, planners are still pondering whether to grant another extension. Apparently a third extension is very unusual, particularly when no physical construction has begun.

The Resource Management Act states that to grant an extension, considerable progress on the project has to have been undertaken. The environment court has interpreted this requirement as being wider than just physical progress on a building.

As a result, Russell McVeagh solicitor Heather Harris has gone for broke, listing among her items of considerable progress "reports relating to acoustic design and air quality analysis" and "the most comprehensive parking survey ever conducted at Westhaven".

You have to admire a trier.