Romance, parkside

Here are some examples of the kind of service industry that could develop more around a Great Park and Park of Parks (abridged from www.holidayhomes.co.nz & www.baches.co.nz, 27th April 2006):

1. ROMANTICO COTTAGE, "a holiday home in Long Bay. Sleeps: 4 (6 max) Bedrooms: 2 Tariff: $200 per night, min: 2 nights.

Romantico is a private and peaceful eco-friendly cottage offering on request organic food and culinary workshops, a short walk from Long Bay Regional Park and beach."

Wouldn't it be nice if some of the organic food could be delivered fresh, directly from the Great Park itself?

2. "Gone Fishing - Torbay-Browns Bay, holiday home, sleeps: 6, Tariff: $150/night, min: 3 nights
Beautiful private home, tastefully furnished. decorated and equipped. Close to beaches, shops, cafes and restaurants. More details: Beach Stay Waiake, Auckland City, Auckland."

Gone fishing where? Somewhere near (but not in) the Long Bay-Okura Marine Reserve might be a good bet.

3. Holiday Home, sleeps: 4 (8 max), tariff: $120-160/night, min: three nights. An easy walk to Long Bay Regional Park through the suburbs, or scramble over the rocks at low tide. Nearby Browns Bay, offers general shopping, three good supermarkets, a Post Office and several restaurants."

After all that scrambling, a pity that there is only one restaurant over in the existing park. Greater choice and a scenic setting further up the valley above the beach would be nice, in our imaginary "Restaurant Park" of the future.

Long Bay planning report

Wayne Thompson (NZ Herald 24th April 2006) reports that the Long Bay planning commissioners have rejected the possibility of rezoning undeveloped urban-residential land for the Great Park. See other reports on this topic: Liz Willis: "Long Bay land set for houses" (Stuff.co.nz, 27 April 2006)

In a summary of what the Commission decided (North Shore City, 26th April 2006, file PCDN-6, VAR - 66), we can read that: '...it is not appropriate to rezone private land for a 'great park', particularly in the absence of present Council funding for the acquisition of that land.'

So, it is OK to rezone undeveloped rural land for urban-residential land; in this case the council is not required to buy the land at rural-land prices, nor do the owners have to pay the city all profits from selling land that was originally bought at rural prices.

It is not OK to rezone undeveloped urban-residential land to urban-other - unless the city compensate the owners for all their expected profit, at full urban-residential prices.

Why this lack of symmetry?

If the Great Park is created, land values in the vicinity will rise enormously. Does this expectation have any less priority than the expectation of profit by a property company? Why isn't the developer required to pay the neighbours and city for the loss of environmental value, if they proceed with urban-residential development? Why is the playing field tilted in the favour of one kind of development only?

The Great Park proposal is aimed at creating a great urban park. Most people - including the commissioners it seems - have assumed that such a park must be publically owned, but this should be regarded as a separate question. Zoning and ownership are different matters.

The private owners of land zoned for park development should at least have the right to put forward a proposal for private development of a park.

The Commission did acknowledge the strength of community feeling on the Great Park issue (57,000 petition signatures, 10,400 objections to the structure plan), and recognised the North Shore structure plan as a better approach than what the company (Landco) was seeking.

Personally, I feel that there has not been enough recognition of the huge potential value of the Great Park as a Park of Parks - a space where special-purpose parks might operate alongside the existing public park. Such parks could provide services that public authorities cannot attempt to offer (and might give greater profit to the developers):

Educational Park - with research and teaching facilities for marine education, architecture and landscape design; affordable student accomodation might also be a goood idea.
Historical Park - with facilities for a Hauraki Gulf Regional Museum and Garden.
Recreational Park - with facilities for horse-riding, farm display, maritime recreation, and some kinds of holiday accomodation.
Ecology Park - with research facilities for studies of natural ecology, organic farming and human ecology, climate change, etc.
Restaurant Park - integrating the services of restaurants spread throughout the other parks (for recycling efficiency and other cost savings)
Residential Medical Park - with facilities for nursing care, convalescence, sports medicine, and community health-care.

There are many other possible functions that could be developed within the framework of a Park of Parks. Providing a major service-industry destination next to the exisiting public park could be a good incentive to develop a scenic tram-way from the Albany education, business, and transport hub - thus giving all of Auckland car-free access to the beaches and adjacent parks. Such a link would also reduce the burdens of new roading and traffic on Long Bay, Okura, Torbay and the North Shore generally.

In the current stucture plan (see key above, top left), there is no indication of purpose other than the construction of houses and shops, shops and houses. The so-called 'village center' and 'urban village' are likely to become another characterless commercial retail center, with shops and apartments.