Dialogue: Five factors show square has The Edge

If the city council shows real leadership in deciding the site for Auckland's convention centre it can reach only one conclusion, writes JOHN SINCLAIR*.

Whether Auckland City commits to an arena, a convention centre, both or neither, is a decision for the city council to make.

But the public debate on the preferred location of a convention centre is of real significance and give the council an opportunity to demonstrate true civic leadership.

If a convention centre is built, it will become an important flagship component of the city - as one of the key elements by which people read the city, by influencing the way the city grows, and by the way it contributes to the well-being of its neighbouring businesses and functions.

From published reports it seems two options are being considered : the Sky City casino extension in Hobson St and The Edge extension in Aotea Square. Both offer the same facilities (although there may be some question as to this).

But the fact that the casino proposal apparently has a lower initial cost, and hence upfront appeal that might entice councillors to support it, is a worry to those concerned about the quality of our city.

Councillors are bound to consider a number of factors. And history demands that their decision reflects proper evaluation of those factors.

* The city is growing into natural nodes - downtown-Viaduct Basin as the cafe-retail area, High St-Chancery as the fashion centre, Aotea Square as the entertainment centre, and Karangahape Rd as a special character area.

Beyond that, the village centres of Auckland reinforce this development pattern.

It is logical that a major development such as a convention centre reinforces the existing pattern.

Because of its present focus and adjacent areas, Aotea Square is the appropriate node to reinforce.

* Convention centres bring many visitors to the city - the people attending the conferences, their accompanying friends and families, and those who contribute to the events. So the benefits come not just to the convention centre but to shops, cafes, bars, galleries and so on.

This wide range of beneficiaries is entitled to expect their council to recognise their entitlement to share in the outcome of the siting decision.

So the location should be close where a lot of activities already exist.

It is becoming increasingly evident that one of the measures of urban quality is the ability to have functions within easy walking distance of each other, reasserting the importance of individual walking access. This also makes Aotea Square the logical location.

* Closeness to a range of accommodation is important - preferably within easy walking distance. Smaller centres are appropriate to hotels (including the casino). They support the concept of Auckland as a conference centre for the world.

But when it comes to a major convention centre, it is essential that visitors have a range of convenient accommodation on offer, and the freedom to choose what suits them. The variety of hotels surrounding Aotea Square makes it the logical site.

* A convention centre, and its supporting hotels, should be part of an easily understood transport pattern to encourage visitors to explore other parts of the city. Short-term visitors need to be able to confidently use public transport to get to the other attractions of Auckland. The centre of the city is the logical place for this, and Aotea Square is in that.

* A major convention centre requires a range of supporting spaces - for break-out functions, supporting exhibitions, parallel activities. The variety of these spaces is an important factor in a location being selected by conference organisers. Aotea Square is fortunate in being able to offer, as well as the convention centre spaces, the Aotea Centre, the Civic and the Town Hall.

This makes it special in the globally competitive convention scene.

An international convention centre will become one of the flagships of Auckland and New Zealand. As such, it has the potential to bring groups of people here who would not otherwise come - and all New Zealand should benefit.

But visiting a city for a relatively short time is, for many, a challenging thing to do. To help them read it, and confidently consider activity options (such as visiting other parts of it or out-of-town attractions) they need landmarks.

Their hotel will be one, civic buildings, cathedrals and so on will be others. A convention centre must be one, whether they are using it or not.

The Sky Tower will be one, too - and so it should be. But we need to ask whether it is appropriate that the convention centre - a flagship for Auckland - be part of a gambling facility.

Is this the image of Auckland we want when convention organisers around the world consider the many options available to them?

The economics of this decision must go beyond the immediate apparent initial cost. The decision must reflect the responsibility and wisdom we should expect from our civic leaders. And it must be a decision that will stand up to a wider scrutiny than the next election. History will be the judge.

* John Sinclair, an architect in Auckland, is national president of the Institute of Architects.