I am mentioning My Housing Mix again today as I am off to the Southern Auckland Civic Forum at the old Manukau City Council building this morning from 10am. We will be discussing today housing options hence why the reblog on my attempt at housing mixes:
I have been invited to another Civic Forum on the Unitary Plan to which I am going to the Manukau session this Saturday. By the looks of the invitation we will be looking at with the Unitary Plan team:
Key things are:
how we create housing choices and more affordable housing
how we enable businesses to develop and grow
how we protect our region’s environment, heritage and character.So residential, commercial and industrial matters which I have covered previously in these posts: “THE UNITARY PLAN, AND THE CMCP AND SLPD’S,” “THE CLUNKER AND BUSINESS ZONES,” and “THE CLUNKER AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING“ are going to be feedback sort after as well as; environment, heritage and character.
Will post feedback on the forum either tonight or tomorrow.
In the mean time this rain is welcome
Attempt One using Shape Auckland Housing Simulator
Auckland Council has released today an interactive housing simulator for YOU to experiment around with in how you as a theoretical Auckland Unitary Plan planner would fit in those extra 400,000 new dwellings for those one million extra people over the next thirty odd years. You can find the simulator HERE!
So I decided to play around with it and follow through my idea of the housing mix for Auckland in line with my submission to the Auckland Plan which called for 60% development in Brownfield Land (often intensification) and 40% in new Greenfield sites. This is what I got as I went through the process:
Stage One – How You Are Introduced to the Simulator
You can see the sliders which controls what housing goes where, the total you are giving and how many short or surplus…
View original post 680 more words
Talking Southern Auckland 
Hi Ben See attached info on Texas MUD’s. I have written extensively on MUD’s but I think these articles give a very good third party account and a clear overview of how they work and the benefits of using them. However what they don’t show is how MUD’s fit into the rest of council policy. For example Houston council has an expectation that at some future stage they will annex the MUD ie the council looks foreward to this annexation as it is a guaranteed revenue source (the management fees). They welcome and SUPPORT the idea, and plan ahead for any future connecting infratstructure that might be needed to join the MUD to the city in future years. Councils in NZ will not be so welcoming. It is this council human element that is the wild card. We already have a number of small NZ style MUDs and they work very well, but are saddled with extra costs becuase council still want all their levies and contributions as well, in inspite of the MUD’s taking over some of those roles and paying for their up keep. In effect, the residents pay twice. My experience in Texas and NZ property development then builds on this Texas base model to show how it can be successfully implimented in NZ. But until the base concept is understood and an acceptance that there is another tool for housing affordabiloity, then the practicial side will not succeed. To try and develop a MUD under the present conditions would almost mean certain failure. This would only hamper the future viability of MUD’s in NZ, much to the great delight of the status quo. The Auckland Unity Plan is not only designed to mantain the staus quo, but to strenghten it. Enjoy reading your blog. Talk soon. Regards Dale Smith B.Sc. (Psych.) Dip. Bus. Studies (Real Estate)
Ecellent Dale Cheers, Keith Coelho, BE Logistics Bombay University, MBA Supply Chain Management MIT USA, Post Graduate Diploma E- Business Auckland University.