05 January 2010
Shadows cast on development
18 August 2006
By Marc Checkley: Te Waha Nui Online
With the increase of permanent CBD residents, developers constructing commercial buildings alongside apartments are coming into conflict with their neighbours. Some residents stand to lose their window views and gain ill-designed buildings next door. Last year, the council proposed revisions to its district plan to curb substandard and poor building design. But will this help?
Inner city residents in Auckland’s Emily Place have been thrown a lifeline after the council stalled plans to build a commercial property on their door-step.
But questions still remain about the site’s future.
Property investment company City Estates wants to build an apartment hotel on a vacant site straddling Anzac Ave and Emily Place.
Council have asked the developer to revise the design for the 16-storey complex, based on the opulent Burj Al Arab Hotel in Dubai, as it did not suit the existing character of Emily Place.
“Council has asked the applicant to produce a design more complementary to the neighbouring properties,” says a council spokesperson.
“Consent will not proceed until further information has been received from the applicant.”
In June last year, the council proposed revisions to the district plan, aiming to curb the spate of substandard and poorly designed apartments that have made an eyesore of the central business district over the past decade.
The plan specifies new minimum requirements for developments, such as floor space, boundaries and use of environmental design principles to make areas more attractive.
It also seeks to protect the rights and outlook of the city’s existing residents.
Temporary relief
The council’s stymie of the Anzac Ave development is a relief for Frances and Richard Nelson.
The couple own a three-bedroom apartment in the adjacent Four Seasons Plaza, originally the Paykel Building.
The Nelsons moved into the 80-year-old building two years ago when the newly renovated apartments came up for tender.
In January they heard of City Estates’ plans to develop the site into a hotel, linked with international hotel chain Accor.
Nelson says the 16-storey design would see her lose the use of three of her four windows.
Over the past eight months the couple have tried unsuccessfully to meet with the council and Mayor Dick Hubbard to voice their concerns.
She is relieved to know the project is on hold but is still concerned about the future plans for the site.
“This is good news but it’s by no means over yet. The developers are still permitted to build there.”
Sanjay Pratap, managing 1-5 Anzac Ave on behalf of City Estates, says the company has every right to develop the Emily Place site.
“They talk about their property rights, what about our property rights? Under the current district plan we’re entitled to build there.
“There’s a lot of bullshit going on. It’s economic sabotage. If the residents have $6.5 million, we’ll sell it to them.”
Pratap says the proposed revisions to the district plan have made it unviable for developers to build in Auckland City.
“If we had a choice we wouldn’t build in Auckland,” he says. “It’s too difficult.
“The existing residents should have done their homework. The site was earmarked for development before they moved in.”
Pratap says realtors are the ones the residents should be pointing the finger at.
The facts of development
Paul Archer, northern regional manager of Accor Hotels New Zealand, which manages a number of City Estates’ properties, says developers are getting mixed messages from the council.
“Apartment style hotels are what the market is demanding. If the development has been given prior approval then it’s a council issue.”
Archer says it’s unfortunate the residents’ outlook from their apartments could be affected.
“A developer has a moral obligation to other residents but it’s entirely in their hands.”
Pratap says many development issues regarding light and outlook stem from Auckland’s geography.
“The contours of the city dictate how and where we build. Some win, some lose.
“The CBD is the commercial hub of Auckland. If the project were to go through it would create jobs, create revenue. It’s forward thinking.”
Nelson says people will be wary of moving into the city if tussles between residents and developers remain.
She says the rights of residents living in the city still fall short of those living in suburbia.
“This doesn’t happen in the suburbs. The smallest thing has to be notified.
“I’m disappointed at the council’s lack of consultation. City residents don’t have a voice.
“We do like living here, it’s a lovely building. We’re just worried it will become untenable.”
More work to be done
Pratap says City Estates wants to do its best by the Emily Place residents and adds the design is still being worked on. “The final design will have mitigation incorporated even though under current rules we don’t have to mitigate the light and air space.”
He says no one from the Four Seasons or the neighbouring Britomart building have approached City Estates personally to discuss the project or seen the proposed design plans. “We want to do what’s best for Auckland. It would make me happy if the residents just bought the property.
“We don’t need to build in Auckland City, it causes too many headaches.” Pratap says if the revised district plan comes into force Auckland will not be ready for the demands of the World Cup in 2011.
Further revisions to the district plan require new developments to secure outlooks over either parks or roads or within the application site. “However, existing developments or buildings are required to have legally secured their own outlook,” says a council spokesperson.
She says residents in Emily Place have not done this. The Council is yet to decide if changes to the Anzac Ave/Emily Place development will proceed on a notified or non-notified basis.
A hearing for the new district plan will be held later this year.
