“It’s insanity like this which is driving us to reform theResource Management Act,” Bishop said after a scheme by the $800 million-plus James Kirkpatrick Group was barred from proceeding.
Hearing commissioners Janine Bell, Bridget Gilbert and Heike Lutz refused plans for the new mass timber building, even after modifications, citing submissions from Waitematā Local Board members Alexandra Bonham and Allan Matson.
“The principal concern for the board is the scale of the development,” the commissioners’ report said.
The plans failed to meet tests under the Resource Management Act (RMA) and were contrary to the Auckland Unitary Plan objectives and policies, the commissioners said in their February 7 report.
“Total nonsense. RMA reform is critical to making us a wealthier country,” he said on a social media post, challenging the local process which does not allow the building to proceed in its current form.
James Kirkpatrick Group planned this mass timber office block for 538 Karangahape Rd. Photo / Resource consent application to Auckland Council
The developer sought consent for the 10- and 11-level block at 538 and 582 Karangahape Rd, near the new Karanga-a-Hape station.
That would result in a “regeneration of this site from a demolished, end-of-life building into a robust and legible urban structure to stand for the next 50 years”, the developer said.
538 Karangahape Rd (right) near the Ponsonby Rd intersection, where the James Kirkpatrick Group plans the new mass timber offices. Photo / Google Street View
Rejection of the plans was based on an assessment that said the proposal would have adverse effects on the environment that are more than minor.
Auckland Council notified the application, seeking input by early June last year.
Full public notification said the scheme was “to construct and operate a new part 10-, part 11-level commercial building with two basement levels. Bulk cut earthworks with associated groundwater drawdown and diversion and associated construction noise and vibration. The proposal is located on contaminated land and a contaminated land discharge consent is required”.
Last year, James Kirkpatrick jnr, group chief executive and managing director, said the building was planned to rise 10 levels from the Karangahape Rd elevation, have around 9500sq m of office space with two levels of basement for 48 car parks and “encourage a high-quality tenant in line with some of the green initiatives required for their businesses or their clients”.
Once completed, the land and new building might be valued together at around $100m, he forecast, although resource consent has yet to be granted.
Heading towards the Ponsonby Rd intersection, along Karangahape Rd (left), showing plans for the new building (left) by the James Kirkpatrick Group. Photo / resource consent application
Kirkpatrick said more than 400 people could work in the offices, which would have floor plates of 1000sq m. The group would target a 6 Greenstar rating for the block, using timber as an alternative to concrete, which would result in lower carbon materials being used.
Businesses in the creative industry who had signed up to the Paris Agreement or the Kyoto Protocol might be interested in leasing such space, Kirkpatrick said.
The Civic Trust Auckland, via Audrey van Ryn, opposed the scheme.
“Civic Trust Auckland has long advocated for the protection of historic heritage, and we consider that the building as proposed in this application is likely to have negative effects on the heritage values for which the Karangahape Road Historic Heritage Area is scheduled in the Auckland Unitary Plan,” van Ryn wrote for the trust.
The design of the building may be high-quality, but efficient use is just another way of saying the developer was trying to build as much floor space on the site as possible, to an extent that was in fact well beyond that envisaged by the Unitary Plan, a plan widely consulted on with the public of Auckland, she said.
The aspect of greatest concern to Civic Trust Auckland was the sheer bulk of the proposed building, she said.
Civic Trust Auckland did not agree with the applicant’s professional advice that the effects of the building would be no more than minor.
“Consequently, we would like the council to decline the application as proposed, but allow instead a modified proposal that removes the infringements which contribute to what we consider to be the potential negative effects on the Karangahape Road,” the submission said.
Anne Gibson has been the Herald’s property editor for 25 years, written books and covered property extensively here and overseas.
