Relief for Auck Hospital Parking


At last relief for one of the tricky parking areas in the inner city - Auckland Hospital.

The Government has approved the DHB’s proposal to spend more than $10 million on the 400 park facility.

The new carpark will be just inside the entrance to the hospital grounds, and people should be able to use the new parks from the end of next year.

How it will look |/

Health minister Tony Ryall , who visited the site today, noted what many of us have also observed. Visitors using the current public car park have a confusing path to the hospital reception, following a blue line painted on the ground, across a road, through basement corridors to a lift which takes them to the 5th floor reception.

It’s expected that more than 120 people will be employed on this job at various times during the construction, with another 80 plus people employed offsite involved in design, manufacturing and transport.

And yes it would be great if everyone used the Grafton bridge bus corridor instead of bringing their cars but with sick people needing treatment and elderly wanting to visit people, it’s not always the appropriate option.




  1. Nick R says:

    Doesn’t sound like very good value at $25,000 per parking space!

    The annual opportunity cost of $10 million is about 700 grand, sounds kinda steep!

  2. greenwelly says:

    A couple of renders are on the DHB’s website

    @Nick R, 25K per space is not bad, most apartment developments will charge you at least 30K for a space in a new block

    Also these parks will not be “free” - the current charging regime is around $2-3 /hour,

    At a conservative $10 income per park per day you gross 4K per day, over a year you will easily cover the 700K cost of capital

    I suspect that the DHB will actually turn a nice little profit on this deal.

  3. John Dalley says:

    What about some innovation, time for another robotic carpark. More cars in the same space.
    Whats the bet that nothing will happen that involves innovation.

  4. karl says:

    Another car park, yay!

    I’d rather be building something else some days, but I guess a hospital needs them. Is that building wall solid or mesh?

  5. karl says:

    “What about some innovation, time for another robotic carpark. More cars in the same space.”

    The hospital has the space, so why would they pay the extra construction and operating costs?

  6. Chris says:

    Given that that building site is RIGHT NEXT TO THE DOMAIN I’d be very leery of Spanky - what’s not to say he decides to chop a few mil here there and turn it into your stock standard CHEAP ARSED FUGLY building?

  7. Nick R says:

    $25,000 is almost triple what carparks are costed at for commercial developments.

    It’s a shame such a prominent position overlooking the Domain is going to be used for parking.

  8. karl says:

    “Given that that building site is RIGHT NEXT TO THE DOMAIN I’d be very leery of Spanky – what’s not to say he decides to chop a few mil here there and turn it into your stock standard CHEAP ARSED FUGLY building?”

    They are called resource consent conditions, and they include building design. And I understand that consent has already been given, this is just pushing the button financially, so works can start.

    “$25,000 is almost triple what carparks are costed at for commercial developments.”

    I disagree, I have heard the figure of 15k-plus from developers. Multi-deck car parks cost more, so that is probably why it’s 25k per. Not really three times the 15k. Plus, you are ignoring the office / retail component in front - that is likely in the costs too.

    “It’s a shame such a prominent position overlooking the Domain is going to be used for parking.”

    It will actually be less visible than the existing hospital building. The real crime was bulldozing THIS in 1964:

  9. Chris says:

    It’s Crown land so Spanky can do whatever he wants.

  10. karl says:

    Actually, the District Plan limits what can be done here.

    Unless there’s been a plan change that I am not aware of, the consent will have had to reflect what is here (From Page 14 on, map on Page 18)

    Also, according to this, in 1993, the area had over 1,700 car parks already, and was not allowed to reduce that, in fact having to provide new ones for every new development on the site. Auckland Hospital already has significant car park buildings north of their main buildings. I assume they will free up some of those for staff once the 400 new ones for visitors go up.

    I wonder if they have cycle parking…

  11. rtc says:

    Would be nice if once this is built they returned a lot of thr grond level parking to more outdoor sitting areas and grass - at present it’s a bit of a carparking jungle in there.

  12. Luke says:

    Another example of major subsidies for car users. I know a fair number of people have to use car for hospital trips, but there are many who wont. Wonder how many free PT for hospital staff and patients $10 million could cover?

  13. rtc says:

    It would cover the 8 million that the NZTA is ‘saving’ by imposing the 50% farebox recovery on all of NZ…

  14. Bill says:

    Last time I checked this project is for Auckland Hospital patients and visitors, not anyone else.

  15. rtc says:

    Well the point is that space previously used for visitor parking will now be used for staff parking - hence this just perpetuates the ever expanding parking in Auckland’s CBD at a time when people like Jan Gehl say we should be decreasing it at a rate of 2-3% a year. In some cities new parking has to be offset by the removal of parking elsewhere, if this was the case in Auckland I’d really have no problem with converting on street parking, for instance, into more compact parking buildings.

  16. karl says:

    Agreed. Whatever their faults (and I actually kinda like car park buildings) they are a better use of space than at-grade car parking lots, which often feel like a moonscape.

  17. CB says:

    So this governemnt when they came in were concerened about the escalating cost of our health system and have set of to trim fat wherever they can yet they have no problem taking $10 million from that budget to throw at a carpark? Interesting.

  18. jarbury says:

    The fact that they’ve demolished the Wallace Block for a carpark is pretty outrageous:

  19. rtc says:

    When did they do that? Is this where the carpark is going? I’m actually pretty shocked that that is what the demolished for this carpark.

  20. Joshua says:

    Because it’s a hospital I don’t mind more car-parks there, I know how important it is to get to and from hospital by car when injured. Allot of the time your not physically able to go by PT, and it’s not fair for other commuters to travel by PT if your sick, so the majority of the patients would travel by car.

    In terms of Visitors, I think it’s fair for the majority of them to travel by car as well, you never know when your going to be needed or how long you will end up staying for, also you might need to wip off to get things etc. Although you are well served by the link bus, it’s the only reliable frequent service, our PT system is not up to a reliable service for hospital use as of yet. I’d rather doctors travel by car for this reason to, until we have a reliable service we can use. Not just one line.

  21. Karl says:

    AS usual a little research is always needed with these types of things.
    First, the building that was demolished had been condemned 10 years before the hospital stopped using it as there eye specialist building. I went there in the 80′s and remember the building falling down then. It was shut down properly in the 90′s. That was when they first planned a new parking building, before even the new hospital building.
    Secondly, the hospital does have subsidies for public transport for staff. The staff have access to much cheaper PT fares than the rest of us. They also use car parks in other areas such as Newmarket for their staff with a free bus, however, this does not allow for the public.

  22. Sacha says:

    The carpark behind Starship was only ever meant to be for staff parking, which has overflowed all over the site. This new carpark was always proposed as part of the new building project (including the orientation of the main hospital reception and entrance) but huge delays and backtracking in negotiating consents with the Council meant it could not be built years ago when budgetted.

    I agree with Joshua that hospitals are not prime places to push public transport as the main option - and certainly not until business commuters have been fully targetted.

    The Central Connector route has done a good job of opening up bus and pedestrian access with regular seating, smooth footpaths and driveway crossings and other features. The new Grafton rail station will also be great for fit walkers on a fine day. Sick or disabled people or night-time visitors, not so much.


Leave a Comment


XHTML: You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>