In September last year the council created Panuku Development Auckland – a region wide urban redevelopment agency. In December the council’s development committee confirmed a range of potential locations where Panuku could be involved and one of those was Takapuna – which Panuku listed as an “Unlock” location. They define unlock as “act as the facilitator to create opportunities for others”. In essence it will mean they will sell off land to developers with certain requirements attached as to how it is developed.

They’ve now received approval from council to proceed with a high level project plan to get under way with unlocking Takapuna – an area I’m quite interested in given I work there so am keen to see it improve. It’s also important in the context of Auckland as it’s identified in plans as a metropolitan centre and it’s quite a unique one at that given its location with both a beach and a lake on its doorstep.

The plan revolves around a handful of properties the council own in Takapuna – most of which are currently used as carparks. Panuku say the outcomes they are seeking include:

  • Takapuna metropolitan centre is recognised as the primary commercial and community hub for Devonport-Takapuna that is contemporary, vibrant, pleasant, inviting and with a relaxed beach-side atmosphere
  • Strong pedestrian connections and orientation to Takapuna Beach
  • Quality future mixed use development and public space improvement
  • Increased opportunities for new local businesses and economic growth
  • More intensive housing options with easy access to local community infrastructure and amenities
  • A more pedestrian focused and cycle friendly environment with a network of open space, laneways and urban plazas
  • Car parking that supports the retail and entertainment identity of Hurstmere Road and the centre’s heart
  • High quality transformational projects including, the ‘Gasometer’ and Anzac Street car parks

The map below shows the sites Panuku are looking at and they form two separate opportunities.

Panuku High Level development areas

And here are some details about the sites

Panuku High Level development areas - details

The properties form two distinct opportunities, the Anzac Ave carpark and the old Gasometer site between Huron and Northcroft streets. In both cases it seems that the biggest challenge will be about what to do with the carparking and on that front it seems Auckland Transport are pushing for it to be retained and even expanded. This isn’t to say that the parking should all just be removed but does suggest that some parts of AT still believe their role is to ensure everyone can drive everywhere.

29. AT has advised that there is a requirement to secure the continued and future provision of commuter parking within the centre and also that any development planning needs to have regard to meeting future public transport needs.

30. AT has developed the Takapuna comprehensive parking management plan which estimates that the current supply of short stay / visitor parking in Takapuna exceeds the demand by about 300 spaces. Projected economic growth is expected to absorb this surplus over the next 10 years, with demand for an additional 580 visitor parking spaces anticipated in 30 years’ time. As the development of the Anzac and Gasometer sites will result in the removal car parking, anticipated demand will need to be accommodated within the centre in some way that is acceptable to AT.

31. To progress any initiatives to facilitate the development of these sites it is essential to confirm and test the AT requirements and the degree of flexibility as to where this car parking is located in order to optimise development opportunities and design outcomes. In addition, the provision for and management of public transport through the centre is also critica. At this stage it is assumed to be catered for within the existing public streets and does not have a direct impact on any of the sites.

32. The final details of AT requirements will be worked through as part of the framework planning which will directly inform the opportunities for each site. Furthermore, as the main areas of Council land are so significant in meeting the off street parking provision within Takapuna, the sequencing and timing of development of each site needs to be planned to ensure that the commercial functionality of the centre is not undermined by the loss of parking for a significant period of time.

The Takapuna Centre Plan published in 2014 gives an idea of what could be in store for the Anzac St carpark site.

Takapuna Centre Plan - Anzac St carpark concept

And what it could look like integrated with Potters Park which is often underused.

Takapuna Centre Plan - Anzac St carpark concept Potters Park

While they might only be concept images, they present an interesting vision and something that is considerably better than what exists now.

Speaking of what exists now, this is what the Gasometer site looks like, it even has a ready-made hole in the ground for underground parking which is bound to make AT happy.

Land supply problem

Not everyone is happy with the idea though. Local board member Jan O’Connor calls the Anzac Ave carpark public open space because it’s used on a Sunday for markets. The rest of the week it’s full of cars or cars looking for a park and is hardly a very welcoming public space.

Tapakuna - Anzac Ave Carpark

Further if the markets are desirable to retain then there are lots of other options, for example they could go on a closed Hurstmere Rd – something the Centre Plan says

The council is working on concept designs for Hurstmere Road. An important part of the design will be to prioritise pedestrians over vehicles. For example, a flush surface street (as illustrated) assists in slowing traffic while creating additional space for pedestrian amenity, particularly where the recently upgraded Hurstmere Green meets Hurstmere Road. A flush surface also provides flexibility for the whole street to be closed for special events and to introduce an increasing pedestrian open space function as the centre’s population and activity grows.

She is in the first part of the video below complaining about potential development. The second part is the Local Board Chair Joseph Bergin

Let’s hope Panuku can have some good progress and start getting these developments going. More people and shops in the heart of Takapuna would be a very good thing.

Share this

110 comments

  1. Anzac carpark I.S. N.O.T. A. G.R.E.E.N. space. It is concrete and Bitumen!
    Anzac carpark I.S. N.O.T. O.P.E.N. S.P.A.C.E. It is covered by those 500+ KG petrochemical and metal death boxes 6.75 days of the week.

    1. The concept shows a new square, linked to a broad plaza to Hurstmere Rd, and a bunch of smaller side lanes. That’s absolutely perfect territory for the Sunday Market. Whats the big issue?

  2. What do other people think: Is AT right to be worried about the future supply of car-parks for commuters in a metropolitan centre? Or should such matters be left to the market to provide if and when parking represents the highest and best use of space and resources? And whichever way you vote Id be interested to know why.

    1. Both! AT is right to at least think about the issue, but in this context I suspect someone will provide private paid parking if there’s demand for it.

    2. We if bake in more car parking in a redesign, we’ll never complete the (slow) transition from an expectation of being able to drive close to wherever and park, which will continue the auto dependency we currently have.

      Yes AT are right in thinking about it, but shouldn’t they be investigating options for reducing the amount of parking they provide, in order to decrease their costs long term (depreciation & maintenance) with the market providing capacity and AT investing in PT and active modes.

    3. First up, I’m all for getting rid of parking minimums. Unfortunately while they should work in an ideal world they do have tendency to end up being the focus of political attention. This applies to pretty much everything that you would think is an internal effect.

      The usual way of things that I have become exposed to since working for a local authority is as follows: Applicant argues for reduced parking (or inadequate driveway capacity or something similar) on the basis that any effect is internal (eg if customers can’t find anywhere to park they will go elsewhere, business will fail and a more appropriate business will take its place), resource consent planners grant consent, business starts to operate on the site and finds on-site parking provisions don’t meet demand, business owner/landlord complains to council staff who point them to their own resource consent application, business owner/landlord complains to Mayor/Councillors, Mayor/Councillors instruct staff to spend ratepayers money solving the problem.

      Having now been on the end of plenty of these instructions I’m not convinced there is such a thing as an internal effect in the real world which I find pretty depressing.

    4. “The market will solve everything” is the very type of cinderella thinking that has held NZ back for the last 30 years. Please tell me where Wilsons or any other market player has built multistorey parking buildings to address structural parking problems. Please also tell me why we should be setting up disincentives for businesses to set up in Takapuna, which is what a lack of parking would create.

      Even with the best of intentions, PT mode share will not exceed around 30% for Takapuna, less still for casual trips. Lastly, it is more prudent to hold a site to be used for parking on the outskirts of Takapuna (aka Gasometer site) and find it is not necessary, than to hock off all Council land to find there is a future problem and no site for either the Council or private sector to use to rectify it.

      1. The CBD? Newmarket?

        Private companies frequently build parking where they perceive it to be a good use of land. Your question with regards to discouraging business is disingenuous too. Firstly, those businesses currently receive a subsidy through council provided carparking. Secondly, the removal of free parking doesn’t discourage businesses. Also, I wouldn’t be suprised if PT modeshare was already close to 30% in Takapuna, the buses are heaving!!

        1. Yes, but how many of those are getting on/getting off in Takapuna? Mode share is closer to 7-8% at present during peaks.

          1. A lot get on and off at Takapuna daily. Buses are about every 15 minutes all day and it’s not uncommon for buses even in the middle of the day to be standing room only.

        1. Except that by the time the market looks to intervene land values may have doubled, tripled? Which means the economics dont stack up or the hourly parking rates needed to justify investment are astronomical?

          The Council has the ability to buy and hold land for the longterm for strategic reasons and I think it is appropriate to do so, rather than taking a short term view of life which would make them little different from the private sector.

          1. If the economics don’t stack up, then that tells us people don’t value parking enough for it to be the best use of land.

            Parking is a private good. People use land to store private property. Should they take a strategic view on storage units too?

          2. So long as private vehicles form part of the transport system then parking remains an integral component of the transport system. Whether Council or the private sector provides this is probably more of a political question.

            One draw back of “leaving it to the market” is you will get a whole lot of small parking areas, with associated vehicle crossings, dotted all over Takapuna. This is detrimental to peds and cyclists, brings traffic into the heart of the centre etc.

          3. Vehicle crossings don’t have to be detrimental to peds and cyclists. Do you think they don’t have driveways in the Netherlands?

            Seriously – do you want to subsidise car storage?

          4. The subsidy is as described by Scott above. He wants the council to intervene so parking rates don’t go too high.

          5. Public bodies subsidise what can be viewed as having non-financial returns. So subsidising people taking the bus into a regional centre like Takapuna and thereby reducing congestion can be seen as ‘good’. Subsidising carparks in Takapuna to encourage people to drive into the regional centre, clog the roads and cause congestion can be seen as ‘bad’.
            I think you can make an argument to subsidise the form of transport that reduces congestion and not the opposite.

        2. Indeed I would, once we had market based road pricing with pigouvean taxes on top for pollution etc.

          Although Bevan is right, subsidies can be justified in certain situations. What is the justification for subsidising car storage?

          Edit: This is a reply to Scott above on subsidising PT.

          1. In my view having a comprehensive plan for our metropolitan and town centres, including a centralised site for parking is a “good”. Rather than each site providing a little bit of parking here and a little bit there, in my view you should choose the most appropriate location for parking, preferably on the outskirts of the centre and secure that site. So long as this is paid parking I really don’t see where the subsidy is. This is exactly what has happened in the CBD and even with very high levels of PT patronage you still see those facilities full as they provide for trips that aren’t well catered for by PT – such as multiple destinations, short duration meetings etc. where PT isn’t as efficient for people.

            And if the Council choose not to charge a strict market rate due to political reasons so be it.

          2. Indeed – so be it a subsidy. There is a question as to whether the market rate would provide sufficient return to make the investment self funding though, including a risk adjusted return on capital and depreciation. That is an unknown.

  3. Given we are weeks away from driverless cars taking over the world surely investing in car parks is not something we should be doing any more.

    Or is that argument only supposed to apply to investment in public transport?

    Looks like a great project. Hurstmere Road is an obvious place for the market. In fact making it a permanent shared space as far as Anzac and closed on Sundays would make sense.

    1. need to be careful around the driverless cars – if they stop somewhere while the occupants go for a shop, they still need to park. a car is a car regardless of what’s driving.

  4. I’m so sorry for the people of Takapuna to have such dinosaurs in command. I’m even sorry for the dinosaurs as they are so saddened by the inevitability of the times passing.

    1. Indeed. And proper cycle infra. You know, the stuff that actually goes through intersections. Alternatively / in addition 30kPh streets.

      1. !00% agree. This project, along with Vodafone’s move to nearby Smales Farm, will mean a lot more people commuting into and out of the region. AT desperately needs to get its game together on the North Shore, with this area as top priority. The current plan for endless road widening and car-parking buildings is not the answer.

        1. Oh that thing is so wildly inappropriate for a town centre. I find it scary even when driving. Traffic on Hurstmere road is right in your blind corner.

          I guess according to the design I’m supposed to take that bend at full 50 kph speed and then merge into the traffic on H road. Well I’m a bit too timid for that.

          1. You should try riding a bicycle through it everyday; nerve-wracking.
            Shore drivers are actually pretty good here though, most of them (coming out of Killarney) slow and let me change lanes so I’m as left as possible (we’ll leave aside the dickhead who shouted at me this morning then sped off in his – wait for it – Audi).

        2. I think it was right there that someone crashed into a Porsche right there. I don’t know how they apportion blame for a merge + 4 way intersection.

    2. The hole in the ground site next to Huron St seems like an ideal already dug location to put the underground Takapuna Light Rail station. Connect to Akoranga Stn via a short spur. Cover the Takapuna station with a high density development. Ta da o more 1960s thinking!

    3. Transport Blog should put in a LGOIMA asking for latest transport study for Takapuna. You will see thinking from AT is very much about pedestrian, cycle and PT modes.

      However, even with SIGNIFICANT investment in those modes there will still be a need for a centralised parking building to cater for the 50% still travelling by car.

      1. Scott – i dont think anyone’s questioning scale of future growth in takapuna and associated demand for parking. Question is whether AT/AC should subsidize the provision of this parking or whether market should provide at commercial rates.

          1. It doesnt have to be free for it to be subsidized.

            Subsidies just mean the price is below market rates. In this case the true price should probably include congestion externalities as others have noted, which i suspect will outweigh any externalities associated with driveways etc.

            Consider this question: if the market is not prepared to provide commuter parking in Takapuna, is that not a good sign that its not worth the costs of investment?

        1. Actually, I think it is worth at least questioning the projected growth in Takapuna. Employment in the town centre (Takapuna Central area unit) has actually fallen over 2000-2015. It’s been slightly on the up in the last few years, but still only back to 2004 levels. Yes, there’s new development planned, and Panuku is looking at the ways the council can ‘unlock’ this.
          But the private sector is perfectly capable of building new carparks if the demand is there; what justification is there for AT building new carparks if they don’t make a satisfactory financial return? Is parking really that much of a public good?
          That’s what Stu means when he talks about the carparking being ‘subsidised’ – if the returns from a new parking building aren’t going to be sufficient to justify the project, but it goes ahead anyway, that’s a subsidy. And I’d seriously question whether new buildings like the one in Manukau (granted, that one may have been signed off on before AT’s time) are giving financial returns which would have justified them.
          For a Hamilton example, see this one which was built for $12 million and sold for half that: http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/news/64816651/Council-defends-deal-with-6m-sting-for-ratepayers

  5. Not so long ago the gasometer was going to be turned by the local council into an expanded carparking building IIRC, there were cries of horror when that was cancelled. Hopefully Panuka ignores AT’s car obsessed views, and I’m pretty glad AT are not the ones doing these redevelopments they’d sell the land off with the only requirement being vast underground parking garages were provided.

  6. Do we really pay salaries of 100k + for these AT people to tell us that our cities need to be designed around the car.
    There needs to be a serious cleanout of staff at AT..

    1. AT do some really good stuff, but you can’t expect the entire organisation to transition instantly, in the same way that MOT and NZTA haven’t progressed as far as many would like away from auto dependency and towards enlightment.

          1. It’s the ballooning Km’s of new motorway that are the true measure of where NZTA’s priorities now lie. And this has all happened since National took office, thanks to road-zealots Joyce, Brownlee, (not sure about Bridges), and of course John Key for doing nothing to stop them.

            The insidious corollary of this has been the starvation-of-funding for many other sectors, notably rail which has been, and still is being forced to make strategically damaging decisions.

            Cycleways are small-beer in the funding stakes, plus they are a concept that has only recently ‘come of age’ in this part of the world. Labour would probably have advanced them also, had they remained in office. Fair to speculate also, that had Labour remained in office in 2008, Auckland’s CRL could be nigh-on finished by now.

  7. I’d suggest Panuku simply wait and see the outcome of the IHP and the AUP process first, before they or the local board rush off and do anything.
    As that will largely determine how the entire town centre is going to develop [or not] over the next few decades.
    If the IHP recommend higher intensity and AC accept that recommendation, then Panuku can now go more upscale.

    If they don’t, is it up to Panuku to “lead the way”? And if so can they do it? Or will AT get cold feet at the first sign of protest at any car-parks being removed?

    Either way this entire area needs to have its car prioritisation radically downsized and PT plans upsized – especially by at least future proofing the corridors for LRT and/or rail.
    And if that means reserving some of this space for a future “transit” terminal then thats going to be goldmine of foot traffic longer term.

    Merely poking about with 1 street frontage here and a block there as they are doing now – won’t fix the problems this area has currently.

    You need a totally holistic view here, not just a blinkered one. And certainly not continuing with the current view where it seems the first thing is that we need to cater for lots of car parking before we do a thing.

    ‘Cos if that driverless future ever does arrive as is suggested, all those “at grade” carparks and carpark buildings will surely be “the first up against the wall” during the revolution.

  8. Lotsssssssssss of money being spent on a town centre surrounded by $5m houses

    How’s the upgrade of Otahuhu Town Centre going? Oh, that’s right…

    1. Not sure about the otahuhu town centre itself, but just down the road is a million $$$ new bus-rail interchange. So the south is not being ignored from what i can tell.

    2. Massive intensification planned and already happening around Takapuna EC. You can buy an apartment off the plans in Taka for cheaper than you can buy a house in Otahuhu.

    3. What’s your problem with that? Panuku would only do this if they could make a buck from it. It isn’t a public service. The idea is remove the parking that serves a business area, plonk some apartments on it and flog them off for profit moving Takapuna one step closer to being a retirement village. I am willing to bet nobody in Otahuhu would want Panuku showing up there to develop the big carpark just so they could sell it off and take the money and spend it in some other community.

      1. They’re not removing the parking mfwic, it will be replaced by more parking.

        And gee, heaven forbid the build a new public square and a plaza and some new streets and development for new jobs, new retail, new hospitality. It’s almost as if they’re planning stuff that people might actually want to use…

        1. Nick the plan seems to be to remove it completely from the Anzac St site. If they follow AT’s advice they will build some somewhere else less convenient. The new square you like is less than 1/6th of the site and despite the PR image more likley to be a dead area like most of the other squares that get built. As for the Council’s ability to plan successful retail, that’s the funniest thing I have read here for ages. Maybe if they copied St Lukes or Sylvia Park they might manage a poor imitation but they would need to get rid of the twee urban designer nonsense first. How many successful shopping centres have converted their parking into blocks of flats and barren spaces? Maybe they know something the Council doesn’t about retail.

          1. The shopping centre in and around Queen Street is rapidly cannibalising carparks for retail and apartments, pushing carparking from the centre and the seem to be booming.

          2. You’re making an assumption there, they could just as easily put it under the existing site, especially if the gasometer site is contaminated. Maybe they do two levels and double the amount?

            I don’t see what the problem with a square 1/6th the size of a carpark is, like a small square will be more of a dead area than an open lot carpark?!

            The council aren’t planning retail, they’re planning to sell the carpark to developers who will presumably plan their retail. But I do get your point, recent council led developments like the Wynyard Quarter and the shared spaces have been such failures for the retail sector… right?

          3. Nick R their website doesn’t mention parking going back on the Anzac site. I can’t help but think they employed an urban designer who must have walked around Takapuna and saw the dead space at Hurstmere Green, at the library square, at the Rose Garden and that nasty bit by the Sentinel and thought hmmm “what is the character of Takapuna?- I know it is empty public spaces that people walk through quickly. I think I will give them another one.”

            Again I ask how many successful Metropolitan Urban Centres in Auckland have converted their parking areas into blocks of flats and dead areas? This is just one more hammer blow for Takapuna. Once it is built Panuku will want to sell it off and spend the money somewhere else.

          4. mfwic – you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about.
            I work in Takapuna:
            Hurstmere Green is busy all day, every day that it is sunny.
            Library Sq has a busy cafe all day, and has the library, council, and Citizens Advice entries. It’s not heaving with people, but they move through it all day.
            Rose Gardens has people in it all day. Not in high numbers, but then it’s cut off by poor road design (and backs onto a car park). Young families love it because of the playground.
            Source: I can see all of them from my office window.

          5. Take another look at how they have designed Takapuna Scott. It has repeatedly been designed to provide walkways between streets specifically so people dont have to walk past retail frontage. Big wide areas that get you from A to B without contributing to the pedestrian count outside the shops. The have office workers in them at lunchtime but for large parts of the day they are just wide empty pedestrian short cuts. Dead space. If the Council really wanted to fix the retail they would build a block of shops in the carpark fronting Lake Road to repair the hole in the retail frontage and close off some of the shortcuts. It is how a mall operator would do it because it works.

          6. I actually agree with you; the square spaces aren’t perfectly served by the walkways in Takapuna. The area is a real hodge podge of poor design choices. However, I think that (after a very superficial look) what Panuku has planned will help to fix that. And certainly upping the population density and PT links in Takapuna will help too.
            I actually think that Browns Bay is doing a better job of being Takapuna than Takapuna is.

          7. Mfwic, I assume you really don’t go to Takapuna often? Hurstmere green isn’t empty, its chockers. The two restaurants there have people spilling out over the terracing. Likewise with the shortcuts you are deriding, you might not have noticed but they are lined with retail/hospo and people going in and out of the retail/hospo. Where exactly are these dead wide empty thoroughfares? The one with the Starbucks on the corner (because Starbucks loooves dead zone, right), the one with the new pizza joint and the Colombian restuarant? Perhaps you mean the one with the garden bar in the middle of it?!

          8. New Lynn and Lynmall is the example that comes to mind! The Brickworks, pus the new multiplex, at the mall swallowed up a few car parks directly, and even though Kiwi property claims that they have not actually lost any – http://theregister.co.nz/news/2015/11/brickworks-dining-development-new-lynn-opens-jingle -, neither do they claim to have built more to take in the induced demand! Then there is the councils Merchant Quarter developments plus Crown Lynn. Lots of parking was and is being taken, though the 5 story car park as part of the the Mews apartment building will compensate some of this, despite the residents requirements and further induced demand.

            There we go: a successful town center development and one with quite a bit of council input!

          9. Ouch that hurt Patrick M. Yes you are right I should have thought of the Brickworks. It is a great development and a very good example.

  9. I think there would be a lot of support for removing the Anzac St carpark. At least 99% of business owners in Birkenhead, Glenfield and Albany would love it!

      1. I meant the business people in Albany Birkenhead and Milford would love to see the most convenient parking in Takapuna removed or buried.

          1. Lucky the Council doesn’t own it. Panuku would turn it into flats and then wonder why the shops die.

  10. So basically AT have some old school traffic engineer extrapolating parking demand from historic provision. Two problems with this:

    1. Not understanding that as land intensifies in use parking becomes a poor land use and other modes are favoured.
    2. Nor on message with AT/AC policy to incentivise alternative modes; which expressly means the end of maximising subsidised parking provision by the Council family.

    1. Anyone would think the planners at AT, MOT and NZTA all went to the same schools and belonged to the same industry associations.

    2. Takapuna isnt really intensifying as much as putrefying. It used to be a sub-regional centre and relied on parking so that it could serve a large catchment. Its role now is more as a retirement and residential area with businesses serving a local catchment. The Gasometer site isn’t really needed at all but as possible contaminated land will cost someone a bundle to develop. As a town centre (yes I know its still called a metro centre- but it doesnt function as one) it makes sense to reconfigure things and use the money somewhere else.

      1. What money? Council makes 25m from selling these wastes of space that can then be used to upgrade town centre, no dollars spent, better city. Young people may even afford the apartments.

      2. You clearly haven’t been to Takapuna recently if you think its a retirement community. The three major new retail/hospo developments that have popped up over the last two years are serving a decidedly youthful crowd.

      3. Not only is employment in Takapuna down but the type of jobs are also changing. It has had to reinvent itself as a place to go and eat so the jobs are wait staff rather than office workers. Takapuna was a sub-regional centre and run like the ‘capital’ of the North Shore. Generations of local politicians subverted the planning process to make sure it remained as the major retail area. The proposed regional centre that got stopped & turned into AF Thomas park golf course for example. (Fred Thomas was the mayor). Even Albany was planned on the basis that the first politicians who put it in the District Scheme did so as it was as far away from Takapuna as they could get. Now Takapuna is really just a Town Centre. Check out Figure 9 page 31, Takapuna’s share of core regional retail sales is less than 3% (y-axis). It sits with the town centres. http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/SiteCollectionDocuments/aboutcouncil/planspoliciespublications/technicalpublications/tr2013046aucklandretaileconomicevidencebase.pdf

        1. Is that how we ended up with that “event centre” in the middle of nowhere?

          A town centre in that place would now very conveniently lie right next to Smales Farm station.

    3. The downtown, civic and victoria St carparks are such loss makers. They sit empty all day!

      Lets just divorce ourselves from reality because it doesnt suit our view of the world.

          1. Actually, they make losses if you include the cost of ownership and removed the subsidy they enjoy by not paying rates.

          2. Did the Civic self fund the roof repairs?? Anyway the question is what is the return on capital. The fact Wilsons want to buy a carpark doesn’t mean they want it for any price.

      1. Oh c’mom. They’re terrible examples: they were very much loss makers for the first 20 years of their lifetime. Once theyve been profitable for 30 years then theyll be back to neutral. And until recently prices for those car-parks were below market rates, which implies a subsidy.

        1. If you don’t want to be that precious about PT subsidies, then you have no objective reasons for being so opposed to public car parking buildings being subsidised. Neither is “wrong”, and yet you are trying to treat them differently.

          My view is that they are both legitimate parts of the transport system. You have an ideological view that one can be subsidised and the other can’t.

  11. We can make Hurstmere Road between Anzac Ave and Lake Rd a car-free zone. Except for deliveries there’s no need to drive there at all.

    And what about the car park around The Strand, is there already a plan to develop that in something more welcoming than a car park?

  12. Plenty of free or cheap on-street car parking already in Takapuna, I’ve never had an issue finding a park on the weekend.
    Plenty of potential in these plans as well, a great addition to the area.

    1. Yes you can observe that during the Sunday market the parking lot at Anzac Ave is closed but people still figure out how to get there.

      It boils down to a simple question:

      Why do you go to Takapuna?
      (A) Because there’s lots of free parking
      (B) Because there’s something interesting to see there

      1. Yes, that’s a good point. It is after all a shopper’s carpark, yet on Sundays which must be when there’s peak demand (shops are open and there’s a huge great market on), it’s not available anyway and everyone seems to cope. Kind of proves it’s not needed at all.

        1. I dont disagree with your conclusion. Just note that commuters aren’t present on a sunday and ATs (apparently and for some unknown reason) insisting that Council spend millions to provide commuter parking.

          1. Are they?

            They are more likely to be considering casual parking needs, which will increase if the growth envisaged for Takapuna materialises.

          2. Many commuters by definition won’t be present on sunday. Unless you are anticipating a change to a 7 day working week? Even the city centre is quieter on a sunday because the commuters arent present. Sure, service and retaik employees will always be present but not your stock standard 9-5 commuter. And thats what drives your peak …

      2. I like to cycle to the market on nice Sunday mornings.

        At least there are railings to chain up the bikes, but not a lot of other support for cyclists in the form of cycle-ways, racks etc.

        (and Hurstmere cobblestones are painful on the bike, so I like to cycle around the strand, but cars pulling in and out of carparks there are a worry)

  13. Has any consideration been given to future proofing for a possible rail connection? Takapuna is pretty well served by buses, but if it could be served by rail as well that would reduce the need for car parking.

    1. Yes replace visitors (drive in people) with residents. Let’s encourage ground floor living, better than having empty ground floor retail. As population increase the ground floor rent raises, retail replaces ground floor residents, or should ground floor rent decrease, more residents move to street level and we have more street life, more demand for commercial activity, increasing rent more retail. Oh a town centre that breaths, full of life and freely changing.

  14. The Strand is a barrier between the center and the beach. It could be trenched along the beach front and plazas extended over the top to create a continuous people space. Such is the value of this land Panuku should make a mint. By pass routes need improvement. For instance morning traffic from south of Esmonde Road wishing to go north or to western North Shore have their access blocked by the south bound traffic queue so drive through Takapuna instead. Then there is the Lake Road problem. Say that there was a RT system to Belmont it would be lucky to have 1000 people per hour because the population density is not there. Mind, that would completely decongest Lake Road.

      1. What and turn prime waterfront space over to people? Maybe even played on by children? Madness!

        No, no. As any true blue NZer knows any prime waterfront space must be immediately and exclusively used by cars. Just look at the great views enjoyed by cars all day by Devonport wharf and on Tamaki Drive. Would you take that away from them?

        If you think otherwise, you are a socialist. That’s right, a socialist.

        1. The best way to develop a waterfront is to build a row of stadiums along it. Or else build a continuous wharf for the unloading of imported cars. We need to make Auckland great again!

Leave a Reply