Westhaven ??

[Fusion 0]

Quite a few years ago we had the nice old guy who anchored off the beach in Westhaven for ages. He was a "Compulsive Dinghy Hoarding" I think he got trespassed off?

[Guest]

Now call me suspicious Putangi... but didn't this thread start because you were having a groan at being kicked off a private marina berth because you weren't a berth holder?

You've obviously raised this issue with them and haven't got the response you wanted.

Now you're in the Herald because you decided to anchor for what you describe as safety reasons.

This smacks of beat up to me!

Is your story in Herald really true or are you deliberately trying to cause an issue?

Seems to me you've made you're own bed here somewhat.

[Guest]

It wasn't a private marina berth.

[Guest]

Hey Dan,

wires crossed a little, there are 2 issues,

1) I anchored in the water by the launching ramps, where the rowing club was. In no way was I impeding anyone. I have used this water as a safe haven a number of times over the years and never had a problem.

I am never there more than a few hours and never leave the boat.

Being told it was now illegal was a true shock to me.

 

2) I needed to fit my main sail and pick up a technician from Kiwi Yachting to sort out my auto pilot.

I pulled up to X pier to allow them to board.

It was then I was told that there is no public allowed in Westhaven.

At no time was I trying to use someones mooring or berth. I was only making use of what I believed and still do believe to be public area.

Cheers Pete

[Deep Purple 512]

Kinda begs the question though, why have locked gates on the piers to keep out the public yet give any member of the public the right to walk the piers as long as they arrive by boat. Sounds like they need a dedicated "public" berth.

 

We know the public is excluded from the piers, thats why they have gates and that is no different from most marinas.

 

As mentioned previously perhaps the launch ramp pontoons or the marine centre pier (suitable for shallow draft only)

 

As far as just anchoring, or going up to the beach, well thats wrong as I posted earlier

[Guest]

Interesting to see yet more Council 100% hypocrisy at work here. It does make one wonder why they make others comply to the very laws they themselves feel free to ignore whenever they like.

 

Hell, if all the privately owned marinas have public access berthing spots, some complete with actual facilities like fuel and water, why the f*ck do the council and Westhaven residents think they don't have to provide anything what so ever. Selfish greed is all I can think of.

 

As a Akl Shitty ratepayer I demand Westhaven has space for the public to use or if they don't they increase all the rentals on the marinas to compensate for the removal of public space just to allow rich pricks to keep their toys in.

[Grinna 2]

Westhaven has sewage pump out facilities (one at U pier and one at Z pier). Are these publicly available or are they only to be used by berth holders?

 

Environmentally, I would think it would be better to have public availability for pump out facilities than have sewage discharges into the harbour (due to there being no alternative pump out facilities)?

[Guest]

For those that don't know the area can someone tell us exactly where x pier is?

[Grinna 2]

http://www.westhaven.co.nz/getmedia/a29 ... p.pdf.aspx

[Chewing Gum 17]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... d=10902150

[Guest]

Agree they are two slightly different issues and personally I don't have a problem with you anchoring there.

I betcha Westhaven view them as related issues however - its the same person both times.

 

Also raises the question, are we allowed to anchor where ever we like? How about off Princess wharf? or in the middle of the Viaduct?

Obviously we're not. Why is St Mary's bay any different?

 

Unfortunately now its a political issues with wankers like Mike Lee weighing in

Auckland Council member Mike Lee said he would take up the issue with Waterfront Auckland.

 

"Most people assume that Westhaven is publicly owned - the Government and the ratepayers paid for it - yet officials and security people are acting as if the harbour has been privatised."

 

Unfortunately when pollies get involved, especially bleeding lefties like Mike, minority groups, like sailors, end up losing out.

How do we all feel if Mike makes access to Westhaven "Public" because its owned by the council?

 

How do you feel about Joe anybody having a wander down your finger after midnight just to see what's around.

 

Personally, i'm pretty happy with Westhaven as it is, my experiences with security have been pretty good, while its not perfect (Lou left), it could be far far worse.

[Guest]

Dan, this is the reality so get over yourself.

"Most people assume that Westhaven is publicly owned - the Government and the ratepayers paid for it - yet officials and security people are acting as if the harbour has been privatised."

Petes experiences were a real event where as your left bashing rant about anchoring at the end of Princess wharf is a nonsense.

What exactly have the "bleeding lefty pollies" cost the boating community?.

Like him or loath him Mike Lee has at least made a decent effort to have some positive input into the way the local landscape is protected and shaped.

WTF have you ever done thats contributed to the social good.

[Guest]

Also raises the question, are we allowed to anchor where ever we like? How about off Princess wharf? or in the middle of the Viaduct?

Obviously we're not. Why is St Mary's bay any different?

The same very reason why you don't park up in the middle of the Southern motorway for a quick rest but doing that in a cal de sac is fine. One is used extensively by ALL boaters and the other is used by maybe one boat per month, in the busy season.

 

Council driven bullshit exactly like this crap is why boating facilities are disappearing by the day, to the detriment of both all boating and the City itself.

[Guest]

Also raises the question, are we allowed to anchor where ever we like? How about off Princess wharf? or in the middle of the Viaduct?

Obviously we're not. Why is St Mary's bay any different?

The same very reason why you don't park up in the middle of the Southern motorway for a quick rest but doing that in a cal de sac is fine. One is used extensively by ALL boaters and the other is used by maybe one boat per month, in the busy season.

 

Council driven bullshit exactly like this crap is why boating facilities are disappearing by the day, to the detriment of both all boating and the City itself.

 

How about you substitute cul de sac for carpark at the local supermarket?

 

My point here is not its unreasonable to anchor there on a one off basis - in fact if you reread my post you notice one of the first things I mention is I have no problem with him anchoring there. But when its viewed in context with his previous run in with Westhaven there were many other close and easy places to anchor without a security guard that already has taken issue with him. How about shoal bay? Little shoal bay? If all he wanted was a place to anchor they would have made perfect sense to me.

 

Perhaps you are right about the creep of council meaning lesser facilities for all, but what I don't want to see is the general publics rights start taking precedence over paying berthholders rights and this is where I see this going if pollies start getting involved.

 

There seems to be a general beat up on Westhaven marina over this but in reality, apart from a perhaps heavy handed security guard, they have done little wrong. Give them a break.

[Guest]

Dan, this is the reality so get over yourself.

"Most people assume that Westhaven is publicly owned - the Government and the ratepayers paid for it - yet officials and security people are acting as if the harbour has been privatised."

Petes experiences were a real event where as your left bashing rant about anchoring at the end of Princess wharf is a nonsense.

What exactly have the "bleeding lefty pollies" cost the boating community?.

Like him or loath him Mike Lee has at least made a decent effort to have some positive input into the way the local landscape is protected and shaped.

WTF have you ever done thats contributed to the social good.

 

My point is where do you draw the line over where is a sensible place to anchor, given the circumstances? Yes, we can all take the "its my right line" and in most cases it is. In this case i'm not arguing that Pete most likely has every right to anchor there, however given that he has a history with Westhaven, it may not have been the most prudent place.

 

Unfortunately we're now in a position where pollies are involved (and for the record, I don't have much time for most pollies left or right,) and I don't see what good can come of it.

 

Whether its a case of a bylaw change or an anchoring ban or other legislation, who knows, however this kind of thing getting in the paper just makes all boaties seem like spoilt brats.

 

Seems dumb.

[Blackie 0]

Difficult to understand why Westhaven cannot accommodate a hospitality berth for short visits, say an hour or two. If all marinas complied, it would be a great servuice for all.

[Guest]

Dan, this is the reality so get over yourself.

"Most people assume that Westhaven is publicly owned - the Government and the ratepayers paid for it - yet officials and security people are acting as if the harbour has been privatised."

Petes experiences were a real event where as your left bashing rant about anchoring at the end of Princess wharf is a nonsense.

What exactly have the "bleeding lefty pollies" cost the boating community?.

Like him or loath him Mike Lee has at least made a decent effort to have some positive input into the way the local landscape is protected and shaped.

WTF have you ever done thats contributed to the social good.

 

My point is where do you draw the line over where is a sensible place to anchor, given the circumstances? Yes, we can all take the "its my right line" and in most cases it is. In this case i'm not arguing that Pete most likely has every right to anchor there, however given that he has a history with Westhaven, it may not have been the most prudent place.

 

Unfortunately we're now in a position where pollies are involved (and for the record, I don't have much time for most pollies left or right,) and I don't see what good can come of it.

 

Whether its a case of a bylaw change or an anchoring ban or other legislation, who knows, however this kind of thing getting in the paper just makes all boaties seem like spoilt brats.

 

Seems dumb.

Hey there, where do you get the idea i have a history with Westhaven.I have never had any dealings with them. This is the first time I have had any sort of dealings.

As far as "just makes boaties seem like spoilt brats"

What Planet you on!

[Terry B 71]

I think a few of you need to get together in a bar somewhere for a chat - you'll probably all end up agreeing with each other

 

After all, no-one ever had a good idea after a second glass of water...................

[Guest]

Always happy for a second glass of water......

[Elenya 33]

Interesting comments and thoughts allround here.

 

The 'no anchoring area' within the Waitemata Harbour is shown within the Navigation Safety Bylaw. There is no cable protection or other protection zone made under any Act for the area. So if there is no anchoring in the area then it will be shown in the Bylaw. The HM can remove vessels if he/she feels they are 'causing an obstruction, or are a hazard to navigation' (See Local Government Act 1974 Section 650).

 

The area of the marina will be the subject of a resource consent or a seabed licence. Either of these may specify that the area is subject to 'exclusive occupation' however that is unlikely to be for any other area than the berth pocket (mairina berth/moorings). A Local Government Information Act request would easily provide that information to you.

 

There is an existing case with regards the use of a privately owned jetty by members of the public. The short outcome was that members of the public can use a private jetty (unless the consent is for exclusive occupation and there is one of those for the boatyard at Kawau owned by the Pardey's). This extends to marina's also. You can walk along the pontoons and access can npot be restricted outside of the terms of thier consent. Okahu Bay Marina has a change to their consent that allows them to lock the gates, but must allow access to anyone who asks. In using a wharf/jetty or when having access to a marina pontoon you cannot obstruct or prevent the consent holder form using the facility. So tying up to the dighy pontoon to unload a dighy and move straight off may well be acceptable, leaving the vessel thier for a prolonged period, or when the owner wished to use it may not be.

 

Interesting comments on the use of the facilities by people than paying berth owners. The marina's (Gulf Harbour excepted) are built on publicly owned seabed. The berth holders are effectively getting rent free use of public space, a bit like having a reserved carpark at the local park just for you). There is no payment from the marina berth holders or company to compensate the public for the use of public land. There used to be a seabed licence fee which was exactly this charge, but that is no longer payable. There have been talks about the 'occupatiobal user charge' under the RMA but no Council in NZ has introduced this yet.

 

Marinas, wharf, mooring owners do pay resource consent monitoring fees and administration fees (all based on making sure the structure complies with the requirements of its permit/consent). These fees do not offset the use of public land/seabed. I'm sure there will be great debate if those fees are proposed.

 

If you look at moorings around the Hauraki Gulf you will find some of the consents specificaly allow other vessls to use them when they are not in use by the owner.

 

A good example of a marina that works well with the public is Bayswater. The fuel dock (funded by the marina for marina users) is used by all the dinghy/yacht owners wishing to access moorings off of the marina, or launch at the marina funded boat ramp. There appears no issues with access, and the pontoon is often used by those moored yachts to stock up/load/take on water. Those mooring owners don't pay but are entitled to use that facility as described above.

 

Westhaven threatening to trespass a person/vessel from a public area, with lawfull access (see also Seabed and Foreshore Act), is unlikely to be anything other than a hollow threat of a person who does not understand the requirements.

 

I shall now await some flow of comments corrections opinions and........