It looks like we will be able to say goodbye to ugly – but unfortunately not the parking.

One of Auckland’s ugliest carparking buildings which its owner describes as “an eyesore” is to get a makeover and have apartments built on top.

Luke Manson of rich-list family developer Mansons TCLM, said the Auckland Council had granted resource consent for the project at 206 Victoria St West, opposite Victoria Park and next to the Victoria Park Markets.

Mansons will develop 39 two and three-bedroom 80sq m to 115sq m apartments, and instead of selling them, will rent them.

This is good because that carparking building really is horrid.

Victoria St carpark

However we won’t be able to say goodbye to it altogether, in fact there will be even more carparks (presumably for the apartments).

“We have named the development The Boutique,” he said. “At this stage it is too early to confirm rents, but we will be looking for long-term leases for each unit.”

The carpark has 200 spaces. Mansons will add an extra 30, but will disguise the building with an aluminium wrap.

“The car park, which is an eyesore, will be removed from view and beautified with screening and planting of trees,” Manson said.

Steel beams would be lifted on to the top of the existing building to create an extra three levels at one point and five levels at another point.

“Because the site is a gateway corner location, we are getting extra levels,” he said.

The Boutique

It’s good to get more development but it does look funny sticking apartments on a massive podium of parking¬†(the same thing is happening in New Lynn too). Mansons push the fact that most of their recent buildings have been green star rated and I wonder if they’ll push that angle with this one too. It would be a bit hard though with the amount of parking on site.

Still I’d rather have parking in this building than having Auckland Transport suggest something stupid like putting a massive underground carpark under Victoria Park.

Share this


  1. Apartments tacked on top of a large parking garage is what was done on Albert Street too. Street level remains blank and ugly. That’s the main issue here, there appears to be no plan to, for instance, turn the ground floor into retail. Instead, they’re proposing planting street trees which isn’t really anything to do with them and already exist. They’ve also been pretty disingenuous with their reflecting trees on what looks like glass almost giving the impression of trees inside the building. I think we can be quite sure street level will not be glass clad but will remain open, albeit with the existing planting removed, in that regards this proposal will make it even more bleak.

    The parking is there, but I wonder if the additional 30 spaces were actually required by the council? MPRs and all.

    1. Problem is I’ve heard that a senior AT manager actually proposed it “because how will people get to Wynyard if there’s not much parking ” (as mandated by the consent which states that 70% of trips must arrive by non car modes)

  2. I’m disappointed they didn’t take the chance to bowl the carpark and start afresh. It just looks awkward; a building on top of something that looks like lipstick’s been applied to a pig (no offense to pigs!).

    1. No incentive for ground floor retail probably due to the current over supply in the markets, I doubt the economics would have stacked up

    2. There is probably no demand for retail. Victoria Park Market next door has always struggled so additional retail is unlikely to be popular

      1. That’s because the area is surrounded and cut off by arterials and a motorway. I just don’t feel like walking there.

  3. This is the problem with the idea that parking buildings can be mere place holders for future development. Once built they never get removed. Yes I’m looking at you former Star building site. Am still disgusted that the Council have approved a parking building for this important inner city site. What is the point in trying to up value by de-carring streets only to approve parking buildings on those very streets?- a parking resource is a driving incentiviser ffs.

  4. bland, bland, bland.Generic, boring, dull. They need a proper architect to come up with something better! My eyes are actually drawn to the old building behind it!

  5. I don’t think that there is any way that this so ugly building can ever compliment the area especially sited right next to the Vic Markets. Drop it and start again.
    P.S. I think that an underground car park under Vic Park is a great idea.

    1. I guess that would mean cutting down most of the plane trees in the area then, no way you can dig a car park without killing them off.

    2. Except for the cost. If it was done then they would be looking for at least 1000 carparks however at ~$50,000 per carpark (probably more seeing as this is on reclaimed and contaminated land) you’re looking at spending $50 million+. How much would parking charges need to be to recoup this cost?

      This also doesn’t take into account the impact on the local road network of having a heap more cars passing through it, especially the intersections.

      1. Well at least no one is proposing to sell off/redevelop the Vic Park land yet.
        But that day can’t be too far off surely?

  6. What is wrong with the photo? It looks like someone has tried to merge a bunch of photos, but none of the vertical or horizontal lines join properly. But it isn’t Street View because there is no Google branding.

  7. Boutique? Laughable. That’s like calling Lion Brewery’s Hopt range, ‘artisan’. Least their branding is passable.

Leave a Reply