Some outlines on what is going on with the vexed residential zones
While the weekend basically a large pile after Labour’s Phil Twyford remarks about who is buying what real estate in Auckland there was another piece on Auckland housing that slipped entirely under the RADAR.
It was a Herald piece on the Volcanic View Shafts, Residential Zones, and the Unitary Plan.
Conflicting points of view
By Geoff Cumming 5:00 AM Saturday Jul 11, 2015
Aucklanders tend to take their picturesque volcanoes for granted. But as Geoff Cumming discovers, plans for more high-rise living could wipe out some of our favourite city vistas.
“It’s ludicrous,” says Margot McRae, the heritage campaigner and playwright.
“They are shooting themselves in the foot with the idea that getting rid of the [height limit] will improve Devonport. It will, in fact, ruin its main attraction.”
What attracts visitors to Devonport is, in fact, two things — the low-rise heritage buildings along its main drag and the overarching presence of Mt Victoria (Takarunga), she explains.
If some landowners have their way, those close-up glimpses of the maunga could largely disappear — lost in places, reduced in others — behind a high-rise curtain.
It’s not just Devonport where battle lines are drawn: views of all of Auckland’s famous volcanoes are in the firing line as big landowners and property developers seek changes to the Auckland unitary plan.
The draft plan promotes intensive development to greater heights in most town centres, commercial and residential zones, particularly on the isthmus.
But the “allowable” heights in many places are gazumped by other planning tools such as character overlays and, lesser known, volcanic viewshafts — where heights are limited to protect views of the maunga and other volcanic features.
These “viewshafts” and related Height Sensitive Areas (HSAs) have worked since the mid-1970s to protect views of the volcanic cones. With new ones added over the years, they currently protect views from 87 vantage points. The view of Mt Wellington from Pakuranga Highway; the view from the northern approaches to the harbour bridge — over height-restricted city office towers — to Mt Eden; the view to North Head and Rangitoto from the Museum; Mt Eden again from Tamaki Drive: these are “regionally significant” views that contribute to Auckland’s identity as a harbour city built on a volcanic field.
Many district and local views are similarly protected — allowing Aucklanders to “connect” with the cones. The views may be fleeting; they may not be outstanding (the maunga have suffered enormously since European occupation), but they reinforce what planners call a “sense of place”.
As the all-powerful Regional Policy Statement (RPS) says, the cones are “islands of naturalness, of open space and green that interact with an urban landscape … They set this region apart from other cities in the world.”
But what happens if many cones lose their prominence (from near or far) as the wall of high-density apartments and commercial blocks rises? The unitary plan allows 4-8 storey development in suburban town centres, four storeys in business zones, three-level apartments in many residential areas and up to 18 storeys in “metropolitan centres” such as Newmarket.
……..
Full story and source: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11478950
Given that workshops were held recently on the Residential Zones in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and that mediation is due to start at the end of the month I was concerned the Herald not being entirely factual here especially with the bit in bold.

I have pushed for corrections to the Herald but in essence these are the clarifications I put forward:
Feedback and Corrections sought after:
But what happens if many cones lose their prominence (from near or far) as the wall of high-density apartments and commercial blocks rises? The unitary plan allows 4-8 storey development in suburban town centres, four storeys in business zones, three-level apartments in many residential areas and up to 18 storeys in “metropolitan centres” such as Newmarket.
- Under 3 storeys is both low-rise and low density
- 4 to 8 storeys is mid rise and medium density
- 9 storeys and above are high rises and high density
- City Centre Zone
- Metropolitan Centres
- Town Centres
- Local Centres
- Neighbourhood Centres
- Mixed Use Zone
- General Business Zone
- Office park Zone
- Light Industry Zone
- Heavy Industry Zone
- Newmarket Metropolitan Centre has height restriction of 8 storeys in the Proposed Unitary Plan owing to those volcanic view shafts
- Papakura Metropolitan Centre has an 10-11 storey height restriction
………
In other words if false subject presumptions enter a Unitary Plan Hearings debate over a particular topic, submitters and the Council have to get around those first (consequently wasting time) before the actual material is then dealt with objectively.
The Centres are controversial enough and the Residential Zones are going to be a white-hot issue. Inaccuracies especially subjective rhetoric ones are not going to help any one at all.
Below is a short overview of the Residential Zones in the Unitary Plan followed by what has come out of the workshops thus far for these zones. From there mediation happens then the Hearings in October.
Basic Outline of the Unitary Plan Residential Zones
*Note: there are more of the above related to the respective sub topics within the main Residential Zones topic. I can get them on request
Workshop Outcomes for the Residential Zones
More on this as the Hearings approach in October

