Yesterday I went to the launch of the Committee for Auckland's third The State of The City launch. It's great they are doing this work, and it was very interesting. You can read the itself report here.
There has been a lot of media coverage since, some of which you've no doubt seen, ranging from the sensationalist (Stuff) to the bored and dismissive (Auckland Now). Though to be fair to Ryan Bridge, while his cynical 'nothing means anything' editorialising mostly suggests he gave it almost no attention, I do agree the tendency in this industry to write indirect and waffly statements is infuriating. There's a fair bit of tip-toeing around issues that are most sensitive to larger vested interests and/or the government. So those are the issues I'll highlight here, in this quick and only partial report:
The Mayor of course cannot be accused of being indirect. And he was very good in his comments on these structural problems, and I have to say so were the new CfA CEO Rupert Hodson, a planner previously at BECA, and Kate Sutton from Deloittes.
It is very heartening to have the key structural problems explicitly highlighted in this context. Especially sprawl and auto-dependency. The twin demons that undermine all other efforts to lift productivity and wellbeing. As I wrote recently about here.
One of the more perceptive writers about the report is Matthew Cockram, CEO of Cooper and Co, ie Britomart. Writing in his newsletter he rightly calls it a 'call to action'.
I would suggest that Auckland’s central city is already a good example of the benefits of agglomeration: Auckland’s central city GDP of $33 billion is 21% of Auckland’s total output, as the report notes, a figure that has tripled in the past 25 years. A huge amount of public and private money has already been invested in our central city – in cultural facilities, in office and residential buildings, and in streetscapes – and it makes sense to capitalise on this investment. Parts of the downtown waterfront area are very appealing, but the way in which Auckland has slipped down the rankings in terms of quality of place – the overall desirability and coherence of the city – shows the need for more focus on this important area. As the report says: “Despite prior momentum, Auckland is not as often visible as a leader on the agendas that liveable cities are increasingly appraised on, whether it is cohesion and participation, new technologies, or the pace of decarbonising.”
going on to note:
At the moment there is a lot of hope being placed in large investments that are finally close to being realised: the City Rail Link and the NZ International Convention Centre. And while I think both of these will bring significant benefits, it’s worth remembering (as Duncan Greive does in his piece in The Spinoff) that these investment decisions were made a decade ago and there is no pipeline of projects of similar scale being committed to now. The report notes recent major investments by comparative cities: Copenhagen has approved a nine-station metro line; Fukuoka has moved to give local founders on-site access to global investors in a big new startup hub; Vancouver has committed to a 10-year target of over 80,000 new homes and backed it with city-wide up-zoning and faster approvals. Auckland needs to be similarly ambitious and forward-looking.
Along with resting on urban infrastructure commitments made two governments ago, it is completely infuriating that for decarbonisation and sustainability we still only have the power sector investments made in the 1960s, our inherited hydro resource for any sort of positive claim. Shameful. Meanwhile places starting from 100% fossil fuel grids, like South Australia, have over taken us.
Given this government's complete abandonment of agricultural sector sustainability, it could at least Terry to balance that with a bold push in cities, where the trade-offs are so much easier, or even positive. But apparently not. Local Government and Energy Minister Simon Watts was also a speaker.
He speaks well when sticking to generalities, is genuinely impressive, but on specific actions there is often a disconnect. The need for simplicity, economy, and value for money for local government, but of course not for his government and their bloated highway programme, for example.
He is promising legislation to limit councils ability to spending only on what he describes as 'core services'. Pipes and roads solely. This is miserablism, and a misconception of what society actually is (back to Thatcher's wrongness). Sadly so visible in their disastrous vandalism of Kaianga Ora. All council services are core. Community cohesion and quality of life are as much core functions as water and access systems.
Then we come to place and urban form:
Bottom three for walkability. Walkability is an indicator for urban appeal, effectiveness and efficiency. This needs real attention.
This is of course related to continuing sprawl, which will push that good 'access to nature' count lower in time too:
It is very good that Committee for Auckland is doing this work, and in general that they are upping their output. These organisations have been very positive for Australian cities, most especially in Sydney.
Also I got to hang with one of our greatest ever local government representatives, deputy mayor in the CRL-push era, Penny Hulse:
