Vision for Tauranga waterfront shelved

A vibrant new plan to introduce a strong commercial focus into Tauranga's downtown waterfront has been put on the backburner after fears it will jeopardise progress to get cars off the foreshore and open up the area to the public.
The Tauranga City Council yesterday favoured continuing down the path of getting a resource consent to transform the waterfront into a largely passive green area, without any of the proposed commercial kiosks at the southern end of the reclamation.
Yesterday's meeting was called to give staff a clear direction on what should happen next after the city's economic development agency Priority One excited many councillors by challenging the passive vision for the area.
Priority One wants to inject more vibrancy by changing the masterplan so the private sector was granted leases or licences to run commercial activities, focused on the southern end and also around Dive Crescent's Cargo Shed and fishing wharf.
However it would have come at the cost of progressing the resource consent which has already been out for public consultation and now awaits a hearing.
The chairman of the council workshop Bill Faulkner urged the meeting to look at the big picture and not begin a new resource consent process.
"We have an opportunity to get the cars off there. Time and time again we hear the comment, I can't believe that cars have the best view in Tauranga."
He also highlighted the risk that changing tack midway through the consenting process could see the current master plan join the nine or 10 other plans for the area that have failed to reach fruition.
Cr Faulkner said the lesson to be learned from the past was the importance to take the waterfront from one point to another in one foul swoop. The council needed to get cars off so people could see the harbour and to then put in non-controversial aspects such as a boardwalk and grass in order to create a vista.
Council projects manager Tony Bodger advised the council could not run the current consent in tandem with a consent that reflected Priority One's plan.
He said the council had spent $150,000 on reports and planning to get to this stage of the process and it could cost another $50,000 to take it through to the hearing.
"If we don't go forward with this we will lose a lot of money and time."'
Cr Bill Grainger said, although he agreed with Priority One's vision, the council should not approach it like a bull at a gate.
"There are steps we can take, so let's do it."
He suggested once consent had been obtained for the existing master plan, the council could apply to overlay the area with a new consent for some commercial activities.
Cr Terry Molloy said the concept put up by Priority One was still largely open space, with about 25 per cent earmarked for small-scale commercial activity.
Another problem with Priority One's vision was it was at odds with the park-like open area in the council's new City Plan. It could only be used for temporary events.
Acting city directions manager Jeremy Boase said Priority One's concept represented a fundamental change in the rules.
Cr David Stewart said the resource consent should fit the project the council wanted and the Priority One proposal had the greatest chance of success.
Mayor Stuart Crosby wanted a consent that allowed the council to proceed in a modest and staged approach along the general lines of the master plan, but to allow some kiosks at the southern end and commercial development at the Dive Crescent fish and chip shop end.
Cr Wayne Moultrie was concerned about costs and community reaction if the council had to re-notify a new resource consent application.
"Let's see what we can do under the existing consent at minimum cost to ratepayers."
Cr Catherine Stewart strongly supported the current direction, exclaiming "No wonder we don't get anything done."'
A poll of councillors at the end saw seven of the 10 at the meeting supporting continuing in the current direction with the waterfront.