Listening to the public might be a drag for local government, but it's a necessity, especially when the waterfront's at stake
The flashing banner on the waterfront NZX headquarters says it, so it must be true: You can't beat Wellington on a good day.
And on those incredibly special few days when the sun's shining and the wind drops, the waterfront is indisputably the best place to be in the capital.
You can go for a swim or sunbathe at the re-created Oriental Bay beach, buy outrageously good gelato from Kaffee Eis, wander through peaceful Waitangi Park, let the kids loose to play at Frank Kitts, or have a drink at any of half a dozen decent bars and restaurants. There's plenty of public sculpture lining your route (including the brilliant Solace in the Wind, which the council recently bought), lots of "heritage", a very clever new building, and some spaces for art, relaxation and sport.
The reclaimed land of Wellington's waterfront is what Auckland wishes it could have.
Not everything is perfect, though. Ratepayers continue to subsidize the failed $40 million Queens Wharf "retail centre" which was built in 1995 and attracted retail stores for about five minutes, until they realized that Wellingtonians just won't go there to shop.
The Overseas Passenger Terminal is an ugly beast built in the 1960s just in time for air travel to take over from cruise ships as a mode of travel, so it was never really fully used for "overseas passengers". (One designer: Michael Fowler, who would go on to become the city's mayor). Its primary uses today are as a live location for TV reporters talking about windy Wellington weather or New Year's festivities, and as a place for boy racers to hang around smoking in their cars.
Waterloo, where the police boat used to tie up, had to close down because of concerns over the safety of the old wooden wharf.
And behind all of the nice things on the waterfront, there is a decidedly un-idyllic fight: one long row between those who believe the waterfront should have more development, and those who think it should have less.
In the 1990s, there was a nasty, prolonged tussle over the Council's desire to build more apartments on what eventually became Waitangi Park. Opposition came from ‘Waterfront Watch', which wants "A waterfront with plenty of open spaces and panoramic views". More recently, Waterfront Watch saw off a plan to build a new Hilton Hotel on the outer T of Queen's Wharf.
Now, in a last burst as mayor, Kerry Prendergast is picking one more, big battle with Wellington Waterfront. Next month, the council will hear submissions on "Variation 11", which will remove the ‘zero' height limit on buildings on the waterfront and allow the council to go ahead with buildings with little, if any, public consultation.
Through press releases and the local Wellington rags, the developers and the anti-developers are waging war over who is being more true to the ‘Waterfront Framework' that was created to guide future decisions. Frankly, it's hard to work out whose spin is closer to the truth.
Let's turn then, to the big question. Should the council have more ability than it currently does to push through new building designs?
Waterfront Watch's concerns largely seem to come down to slightly hysterical complaints about "the privatisation of public space". New buildings shouldn't be built, they believe, because they "privatise" what should be yours and mine.
Surely, the ‘privatised' spaces add to the vibrancy. Without Dockside and Shed 5, and all of the other privately-run bars and restaurants on the waterfront, the whole thing would be empty. Perhaps that would be Waterfront Watch's idea of a nice space. An empty area from which to... watch the water.
Unlike Waterfront Watch, I would have quite liked the new Hilton. The developers would have paid for the needed strengthening of the wharf's piles (built in 1865), something that ratepayers now have to pay for. I didn't mind the design, and thought it would have added to an under-used part of the wharf.
Having said all that, I think Prendergast and her supporters are wrong, and Variation 11 is a big mistake.
In this excellent feature by Kerry Williamson, Prendergast complains that "every single [new building application] gets appealed to the Environment Court. Is it fair that one, two or three dissatisfied people – who could be well-meaning through to mischievous – can hold up a development for two, three or four years?"
Furthermore, she says, "At the moment, the level playing field is you can't build anything without a consent and a small group of people is going to take it to the Environment Court. So why would you even bother?"
I would have more sympathy with Prendergast's position if the Environment Court hadn't just sided with her council's plan to allow developer Willis Bond to take charge of the Overseas Passenger Terminal and create a $100 million redevelopment that will include up to 90 apartments, ground-floor shops, car parks and a viewing platform.
Greater Wellington regional council granted resource consent in May last year, and then the project was stalled when opponents appealed to the Environment Court. The 12-month delay is obviously frustrating, but does not exactly seem a horror story for such a big project.
And, while this is one of those areas where it's hard to know the truth, some argue that the Hilton developers could have made variations to their project that would have given it a stronger chance of getting legal consent.
Past decisions – the Queen Wharf retail space, or the plans to build more apartments on Waitangi Park – don't exactly fill me with confidence that future councils should be given more free rein to make building decisions without decent public input.
My biggest concern, though, is about the council being seen to be transparent, open and accountable. The Wellington Civic Trust also came out against Variation 11. As chairman Seddon Bennington wrote in the Trust's submission:
"Such a non-transparent process runs the risk of jeopardising public confidence in the waterfront development."
Let's avoid doing anything that could undermine Wellingtonians' smugness that we have one of the best waterfronts in the world (on those very few, good days).