The Wellington Civic Trust’s Peter Brooks says the flaws in the proposal for a Hilton Hotel on the Outer T may yet be the project’s downfall, as the Trust and Waterfront Watch prepare to appeal against the hotel in the Environment Court.

HEARING commissioners, selected by the Wellington Regional Council, have decided that the application for resource consents for a five-storey Hilton Hotel on the Outer-T of Queens Wharf has met the necessary statutory tests.

The decision was not unanimous and the approval is subject to conditions.

That is a considerable achievement for the promoters of the project and a blow for community groups such as Waterfront Watch and the Wellington Civic Trust who argued strongly against the consents sought.

Since 1993 the late George Middleditch and his associates have presented a number of proposals for a hotel on the Outer-T. The first design was for a three star $10m conversion of Shed 1. The next published proposal was for a hotel combining Sheds 1 and 6. Finally they produced the $45m Hilton project. The hotel concept and design changed over the decade, but the focus on the Outer-T never varied.

It is a great site. The Outer-T is the focal point of Queens Wharf, which is itself the hub of Lambton Harbour.

Those responsible for drafting the planning framework for the waterfront saw the Outer-T as so special that they decided that a competition should be held to explore options for a structure to replace Shed 1.

One would have thought that the public authorities, the Wellington City Council and its company, Wellington Waterfront Ltd, would have respected such a key outcome of the waterfront planning process. But it seems they had already decided what they wanted. It was not something unique and special for our waterfront; it was what Auckland had one of – a Hilton hotel.

As for the regional council and its chosen commissioners they found that while it was "very unfortunate that a competition was not held" it was "not a statutory requirement".

Although the commissioners claim that "the resource consent process provides a fallback position by which public concerns can be aired and considered" it is a very deficient instrument for assessing and achieving the public will.

For example commissioners were not concerned with finding the best outcome for the Outer-T in the context of the waterfront project. They were concerned only with establishing whether or not the application before them could be approved in terms of the relevant statutory
provisions.

Moreover, the commissioners showed clearly that they were more interested in hearing what experts had to say than the views of those representing community organisations.

Developers can afford to hire specialists to argue their case. Organisations such as the Wellington Civic Trust and Waterfront Watch are not so well endowed.

Not that it should be necessary to hire experts to establish that a five-storey luxury hotel on the water’s edge will block views and cast shadows.

Or that it will be a magnet to taxis, cars and service vehicles which will be required to navigate through a pedestrian promenade.

It is some consolation that the commissioners were not satisfied with the traffic plans submitted by the applicant and they have made their consents subject to approval of a traffic plan which among other things includes "arrangements to ensure pedestrian safety".

If a proper planning process had been applied we would have had a competition for the Outer-T, resulting in a solution that had broad
community support which respected the special nature of the site and added aesthetic value to the whole development.

The city’s urban planners could then have looked for another site on the waterfront for a hotel – and one which was suitable and appropriate for the purpose. If Hilton International is only interested in the most spectacular site on the waterfront then maybe Wellington is not their city.

Maybe it is time we acted as if it were our own.

Waterfront Watch has decided to appeal and hopefully others may join with them. But it will be an expensive business. Commissioners showed that they wanted evidence from experts and this will be even more important in a full judicial hearing before the Environment Court.

So those who do not want a five-storey hotel on the Outer-T can, even at this late stage, make their opinion count. They can make a donation to the fighting funds which will inevitably be established by those who decide to fight this one to the end.