Questions about the Ports of Auckland’s future remain, despite its plans to revamp the site over next 30 years while the search for a new home begins.
The port’s draft 30-year master plan includes the removal of Marsden Wharf and part of a wharf known as “B1” to create nearly a kilometre of new general cargo berth space. The project would need resource consent.
It also includes a proposal to build a five-storey car-handling facility. A resource consent application for that facility is set to be filed next year with the intention to build within five years.
The facility would remove incoming vehicles from public view and include space for a public carpark on top and room for a hotel next door.
Carr and Haslam managing director Chris Carr hasn’t seen the detail of the plan but says the port is in a difficult position.
“They have been forced into a corner by politicians playing games over many years and have to plan for the future.
“All the talk of moving the port doesn’t help because while it might be moved one day, they can’t afford to wait and do nothing as it will take 30 years to move the port.”
Carr says it’s unclear what the Government’s plans are.
“Review and consider and consult is what they are saying. That is political terminology for delaying things, which is something New Zealand is very good at.”
VIA chief executive David Vinsen says the port’s plan makes sense.
“Ports of Auckland is stepping forward in trying to meet the requirements of all the different stakeholders while maintaining an operational focus.
“It’s a very reasonable solution for next 30 years to operate effectively and efficiently in its existing footprint.
“Auckland exists because there’s a port. They’re trying to move with the times using modern technology.”
Automobile Association infrastructure spokesman Barney Irvine says moving or down-scaling the port would have a major impact on Auckland’s traffic network so it’s an issue his organisation is following closely.
“We think it makes good sense to look into new
approaches but we see the whole thing as a ‘slow burn’.
“Setting up a new port, putting in place the required road and rail infrastructure and starting to decommission the existing port would be really difficult and really expensive – so we wouldn’t expect any big changes for some time yet.”
Ports of Auckland chief executive Tony Gibson says the plan tries to balance Auckland’s economic, social and environmental needs.
“Our plan provides transparency and certainty about what we need to do to continue delivering for Aucklanders.
“It creates space for freight and gives Auckland Council the time it needs to make a sound decision on where, when and how to move the port.
“Auckland’s population is growing and Ports of Auckland needs to adapt to keep pace.
“Our master plan outlines all the projects that we will need to undertake until such time as the port is relocated.”
Building a new wharf running east-west along the north end of Bledisloe Terminal is in line with the recommendations of Auckland Council’s Port Future Study, Gibson says.
“It will be a piled structure in line with our commitment to no further reclamation but it will reach an extra 13 metres north into the harbour. This 13 metres is essential to the success of the other wharf projects.”
Auckland mayor Phil Goff, who campaigned on moving the port during his election campaign last year, has some reservations about the draft plan.
“There are… areas where I’m far more conservative than they are on including the extension of any wharf.
“If they can come back to me and show they are taking infrastructure out of the harbour that it is broadly in line with some marginal work, maybe they will persuade the community and maybe they will persuade me.”
Whether the port succeeds depends on it getting resource consent and convincing Aucklanders it is the right way to go, Goff says.
Any proposals will need to be in line with the new Government’s recently announced ports review.
