Some Other People’s Reflections on the Unitary Plan

A comment posted a couple a days ago in the “WEYMOUTH AND THAT BRIDGE” caught my attention enough that it deserves its on post to highlight some key concerns around the Unitary Plan. I will copy the comment (which is public) which is from ‘John McCaffery –Manukau Harbour Protection Society Researcher.’

His comments worth reflecting over and bringing attention to Auckland Council AND Auckland Transport (seeming AT were paying particular attention and commenting this morning) – although in two parts:

Part One

The Southern RUB
Kia ora Our apologies for not being able to attend Thursdays meeting – Everyone did a great job .Well done and thank you from the Harbour protection groups, coalitions and organisations now rapidly reforming and re-invigorating and connecting with the newer Onehunga based organisations. Weymouth has always played an important part in the “Struggle for the Manukau”.

Research Analysis –
It seems impossible that the Senior Councillors and Planners have not read or do not understand the implications of their own Auckland City Planners and Transport material up on the following Official Formal Options for consultation on the RUB AK Council page and lInks- This material as you have pointed out Ben makes it very clear that if Karaka North and or Karaka West go ahead a Weymouth Bridge is in the view of the Transport and Council Planners managing the Unitary Plan process inevitable – Further it is projected to be inevitable in all other Southern RUB options in the longer term. If this is correct in planning terms then debate the RUB options as you say. If it is NOT the case then the bridge and the Sewage Works should come off the options that do NOT automatically require a bridge . What seems to be happening is as the political voters opposition to some of the current looney greatest height and density intensification proposals of the existing Brown fields urban areas intensifies -the ” pro- intensification Planners and Councillors may be seeing the expansion of the Southern RUB as their solution to mopping up the falling number of household buildings in the Brown Fields. The two are clearly closely linked. Your advice on dealing with RUB and alternatives on how to accommodate this massive new urban growth then is really important and useful. However it is the Planners who have the professional expertise to do this accurately and they should be directed now to produce alternative urban growth options for lower density and height approvals.
The material senior Auckland Officials and Councillors claim not to understand is as follows-

http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/planspoliciesprojects/plansstrategies/unitaryplan/Pages/TheRuralUrbanBoundary.aspx

“Following the consultations, we worked with local boards and technical experts to build scenarios that meet the projected growth for this area. This included looking at the new areas for urban growth proposed through submissions.”

“Have your say

RUB options in the south

The West-East Focus, Pukekohe Focus and Corridor Focus maps below show how we could package the RUB together in the south. Determining the RUB is part of the Unitary Plan consultation, which is open for submissions until 31 May 2013.

Tell us what you think

What is your preferred scenario and why?
Do you have any concerns about any particular locations?
Do you have any comments on the three scenarios?
Visit http://www.shapeauckland.co.nz to have your say. ”

This link and all its material makes it very clear that the Karaka North and West RUB development links require a Weymouth bridge, motorway or express way to state Highway 20 and to Paerata and a new Manukau Harbour Sewage Plant.

This material on the page includes bridge options, associated roads maps and statements as follows-

Southern Rub Feedback Consultation pdf
Addendum to the draft Auckland Unitary Plan .pdf
Southern RUB Engagement and Feedback Report .pdf
Future Growth Options –RUB South .pdf
Issues and Constraints- RUB South.pdf
Map West east Focus.pdf
Map Pukekohe Focus.pdf
Corridor Focus.pdf
Frequently asked Questions

The material also has NOT been updated to represent the Consultations with Weymouth Manurewa including the Local Board which should have fully taken place in Nov Dec but did not so it still represents ONLY the pro-development pro-Bridge pro- Sewage plant lobby . However selective parts of it have been updated like the meeting times and places.

Regards to all
John

John McCaffery: Researcher for the Manukau Harbour Protection Society

——–

The links to those PDFs can be found in the RUB webpage with the link found either above or by clicking HERE.

Part Two

What is Auckland Council playing at ? – Claims that there were no plans for the bridge, no money for the bridge and no justification for the bridge…are being made at meetings the last one at the Weymouth meeting?

However see below ?-

if there are no plans for the bridge why at the Auckland Council Unitary Plan Consultative Leaders’ Forum on Friday 16 November 2012 was the following discussed /recorded?

Page 3- Key issues with the release of greenfield land for industrial activity
Infrastructure needs such as transport
Need to be careful that the new Greenfield areas do not place too much importance on State Highway 1 for access. Already congestion issue. Need to open up an alternative route via Weymouth and have a supporting urban form.

Page 14- Catering for future industrial zoned land requirements
Proposal for a new southern road and rail connection to run parallel with SH1 between Roscommon Road and Weymouth (bridging the estuary). This would enable access to a large area of flat and under-utilised land for industry. The transport connection would also ensure more resilience in the road network to deal with congestion and incidents.

John McCaffery -Manukau Harbour Protection Society Researcher

——-

So very relevant points raised by John and hence the reason why I have reposted them here in a dedicated blog post for everyone to see. His comments echo points I raised in an email I flicked to Council recently in regards to the Weymouth Meeting and the RUB in which Council need to get cracking with some planning work down here now so we can make an informed decision:

The conclusion I drew from this (and while I have my preferences to which RUB option and all that) is that Council and AT should (even before the consultation round starts with the RUB next month) is to put together a very comprehensive report into each of the three Southern RUB options on the table currently. In that report it should have:

Now I know in the RUB documents seen so far there has been population project estimates for the Southern RUB options. But what I am calling for is Council, AT and Watercare to get cracking now and run some very extensive models so at least Southern Auckland has an idea what we are in for over the next thirty years down here. Because right now we are blind and can’t wait some 10-years down the track when the first RUB Greenfield site is up for development – it will be too late.

I know Auckland Council and Auckland Transport (yes Wally I see you) are paying attention here, so could you please for Southern Auckland address the concerns raised above. It would be very much appreciative for the residents and businesses of Southern Auckland to have just SOME certainty down here.

BEN ROSS : AUCKLAND