The study on the future of Auckland Port to be released on Friday is likely to recommend a “super port” near Waimangu Point in the Firth of Thames to be built within the next 35 years.
And the port is likely to replace both Auckland and Tauranga.
POLITIK understands the study will reject the Manukau Harbour proposal because it would pose huge technical and resource consent challenges.
Northland has also been rejected because of the difficulty transporting cargo backwoods and forwards across Auckland city. POLITIK has spoken to two sources close to the Study Group and has been briefed on the details of the report.
One source says offers several advantages:
- There is 15m of water depth almost right to the shore
- It is closer to South Auckland
- And it is closer to the Waikato
Ports of Auckland
Phil Goff is the latest politician to suggest moving the port. But it is damn expensive to move a port.
Now some idiots are suggesting that Manukau Harbour is the preferred option.
A leaked draft report into the future of Auckland’s ports has revealed it could be relocated to the Manukau Harbour.
But that option would cost billions of dollars, and there are concerns it might not even be safe.
Auckland’s port is a hive of activity right in the middle of the CBD. But as more and more freight comes in, there’s less space for it.
“The first decision is: are you going to expand out into the harbour or are you going to find an alternative location?” says mayoral candidate Phil Goff.
In a draft report leaked to The Nation, the Port Future Study panel examined alternatives like expanding the current port and relocating it.
The preferred relocation option is Manukau Harbour, followed by Thames and Muriwai.
Mr Goff wants it moved. He says expanding into the Waitemata isn’t an option, nor is staying put.
“Those 75 hectares can be used for far better revenue-raising purposes — high-value residential and commercial public space,” he says.
But the Manukau option has its pitfalls. The channel would need to be dredged to make it deeper, and that would cost billions of dollars. Also the mouth of the harbour is a well-known danger zone for shipping.
Auckland mayoral candidate Phil Goff is pushing for the Ports of Auckland to be shifted, telling The Nation programme that by the time the port reaches capacity, it’ll be too late to make a change.
While Manukau, Muriwai and the Firth of Thames have all been floated as possible future sites for the port, in the interim Mr Goff’s backing Whangarei’s Northport.
Valuable land in the CBD is being wasted on used cars and containers coming into the country, Mr Goff argues, and in only three to 12 years room is going to run out.
“What you can do as an interim is that you can move the used cars off the wharves in Auckland and you could put them in Northport.”
And it’ll cost less than the estimated $5 billion to shift the port.
“The chief executive of Northport has told me that he can deliver the cars to the consumer in Auckland for the same price as they get it from those cars sitting on really expensive real estate,” Mr Goff tells The Nation.
John Palino wants the port moved and provided some analysis on how that might be achieved. Vic Crone also wants it moved but has no idea how to move it, it’s just blocking her view. Phil Goff is just echoing what his corporate donors are saying.
Mark Thomas says that people will be living on Mars before the port is ever moved, and he’s right.
Even if Auckland Council’s Port Future Study recommends moving Auckland’s downtown wharves, mayoral contender Mark Thomas says it will be pie in the sky.
Mr Thomas says people will be “living on Mars” before the port is moved as there are higher priorities for the city.
He says the port is a low priority for the thousands of Aucklanders he has spoken to during his campaigning. Read more »
Vic Crone is feeding nice stories to Bernard Orsman constantly now.
But if you actually look at what she is saying it is just more corporate weasel words with no promises for anything other than more weasel words and meetings,
Auckland mayoral candidate Vic Crone is promising to look at relocating the city’s port, saying its current downtown location is obsolete.
The port, she says, will be unable to keep up with the growth of Auckland in the next 50 years unless is expands further into the harbour.
“The community has spoken loudly and clearly,” Ms Crone said in a speech to the Committee for Auckland today.
“As mayor I will commit to leading a robust decision-making process to seek out a new home and transition our port there.”
Vic Crone’s handlers are keeping her away from unscripted comments, meaning she is running a very boring, conventional campaign. The problem is that every time she says something she manages to demonstrate a lack of knowledge of basic facts.
Her views on the waterfront are interesting to say the least.
“I do think we need to move the port over a period of time and give Aucklanders back their waterfront. Then I’d like the people of Auckland to have a say in what we ultimately do with this space,” she said.
There she is wanting a “conversation” again. This comment, though, seemed a little dopey because I had always understood Auckland was built up around the Port, and the Port was the real reason Auckland grew as a city. A quick search on Wikipedia seemed to confirm this: Read more »
The Ports of Auckland won’t be having anymore problems with their scumbag union staff.
They are proposing to automate container handling.
Tony Gibson, CEO of Ports of Auckland, today announced the start of consultation with staff on a proposal to automate part of the container terminal.
Mr Gibson said: “Auckland freight growth is relentless. To handle it we’ve pushed our performance to world class levels but we’re reaching the limit of what we can do with our current technology. We need more room. We can’t go out so we need to go up, and for that automation looks the best bet.” Read more »
Auckland Council is finally broke.
It’s cash strapped and now it’s looking at selling down the family jewels to find some more money.
This is the sort of thing a compulsive addicted spender would do. Pretty soon it will be selling furniture and then the bailiffs will turn up.
The Super City has earned $391 million from shares in Auckland Airport and Ports of Auckland, which could be sold by the cash-strapped council.
The council’s finance committee yesterday voted 16-3 for a review of alternative financing sources, including the possible sale of a $1.4 billion stake in Auckland Airport and the $1.1 billion ports company.
Councillors are taking a wait-and-see approach to a push by senior officers to consider asset sales.
The Herald has reported investors would eagerly snap up any shares with one investment banker, Mark Lister, saying the council’s airport stake could be sold in a matter of hours.
Figures supplied to the Herald by the council’s investment arm show that dividends from the two assets have totalled $391.6 million in five years.
The airport company has accounted for $231.9 million, including a special dividend of $101.5 million last year. Read more »
Auckland Council blames lack of tax payer money from everyone else in New Zealand for their problems
If it isn’t clear to everyone yet that Auckland Council isn’t an Auckland problem, here’s your latest example.
If the government is to get involved at all, it’s to put in place a statutory manager and to introduce recall elections.
Several Auckland councillors say a serious lack of funding by the Government is forcing them to consider selling assets, and they want some protected.
Yeah, that’s it. They can’t balance the budget, so now they want people in Christchurch, Westport and Kataia to chip in so they can keep their toys.
The council has approved a review of all its assets after its budget committee agreed in May to consider alternative sources of financing to take the pressure off the region’s rising rates.
But some councillors have hit back against the idea of leaving all assets on the table for possible sale, including major ones such as the airport and Ports of Auckland.
Councillor John Watson said he had never come across anyone from the public who thought it was a good idea to sell assets, especially when the priority was to look at the council’s own costs.
“I’m not a business person, but in terms of household budgets most people look at their own costs… before they start hocking things off.” Read more »
Auckland Council have unanimously committed $1M for a review on the port expansion but it won’t be completed before the port needs to expand.
No, I’m not making it up.
Auckland Mayor Len Brown’s office will stump up more than $1 million to fund a port future study – but it will not be completed in time to meet Ports of Auckland’s deadline for starting its controversial expansion of the Bledisloe Wharf.
A meeting of Auckland Council’s development committee today unanimously voted in favour of a draft design proposal for the study, which will ban input from politicians and councillors and put the ratepayers at the heart of the decision-making process.
However, the “collaborative” project, described as “complicated” by the report’s author Jacques Victor, will come at a cost of more than $1 million dollars and is expected to take at least a year.
As an observer of these kinds of initiatives, I can now state with total confidence that two things will happen. One, it will cost more that $1M. Two, it will take more than one year (easy one, as they have already stated “at least” a year).
Last month, the council agreed to a compromise with Ports of Auckland, in which it promised to halt the extension of the western end of Bledisloe Wharf by 92m into Waitemata Harbour, pending completion of a port future study by April 30 next year.
Today the committee heard it would not be completed by that date.
Mr Victor said: “We’re trying to make this go as fast as we can, remembering that is a collaborative process.
“Unfortunately, it still comes to a year, and I do not believe we can do it any faster than that. We’re probably looking at June or July next year for the recommendations to come to this committee.”
Quizzed on the time frame by councillors, he said: “I do not think it can be done by April. I don’t think it should be driven by what the Ports need.
A review of what to do with the Auckland Port should not be driven by what the Ports need.
I’ll just leave that there.
– Patrice Dougan, NZ Herald