Editorial: Grand designs can wait until Cup is over

Opinion

Murray McCully is pressing Auckland leaders to adopt a bigger revamp for Queens Wharf, incorporating a doubling of the cost to about $100 million. On one level, his thinking is to be applauded.

Queens Wharf has the potential to be a wonderful amenity in the centre of the downtown waterfront. The only problem is that Mr McCully is speaking not as an urban visionary but as the Rugby World Cup Minister.

He will want this Plan B to be in place by the time the event starts next year. That schedule suggests a compromised, second-class outcome, not the inspired design the site warrants.

Mr McCully says the Government is considering options for Queens Wharf, including improving the winning entry in the design competition to build a cruise-ship terminal and turn the wharf into the Cup's "party central" venue. That is quite a turnabout from a couple of months ago when it supported the decision of Auckland's local-body leaders to back away from the design contest.

Then, Mr McCully said the Government would not countenance any short-term decisions that compromised the long-term development of the waterfront. There seemed unanimity that the design contest, undermined by a tight, unrealistic budget and a short timeframe, had thrown up substandard fare.

And that the quest for a more inspired development could be put on the backburner while $10 million was spent sprucing up the wharf for its "party central" role.

Now, however, Mr McCully seems determined to see a beefed-up version of the $47 million contest-winning design by architects Jasmax and Architectus in place for the World Cup.

It is his job to present New Zealand in the best light during the event. On that basis, he seems willing to embark on what will, given the time available, be a frenetic endeavour. A broader perspective needs to prevail.

The World Cup is a one-off event. It must not become an overarching concern. As tempting as it may be to smarten up the Jasmax and Architectus design, it should remembered that it was one of the concepts that Mike Lee, the chairman of the Auckland Regional Council, described as "lacklustre, underwhelming and mediocre".

It is questionable whether from that base, any amount of titivation would be sufficient to give Queens Wharf the desired wow factor. This, as Auckland City Mayor John Banks suggests, smacks of a quick fix and a cheap build.

The approach that seemed broadly agreed in November remains the best. Queens Wharf is ideal for "party central" entertainment at the World Cup purely by dint of its location.

Relatively little needs to be done. A few temporary grandstands will have to be erected, big television screens and lighting installed, and places for eating, drinking and dancing provided.

But there need be no major structural alterations. A figure of $18 million is now being mentioned for this sprucing up. That should be more than enough.

Mr Banks says he is not going to be told by Wellington what can be built at the bottom of Queen St. That comment will strike a chord with Aucklanders.

Most seemed to accept that the scrapping of the design competition was a triumph of good sense. While the World Cup has provided the impetus for the purchase of Queens Wharf and to turn it into a combined cruise-ship terminal and temporary "party central", it must not be the cue for a flawed permanent development.

The time for grand designs will come when the World Cup is out of the way. At that time, an orderly process will go a long way towards ensuring public expectations are met. Such will surely not be the case if Mr McCully succeeds in putting the cart before the horse.