Amenities and Infrastructure you say? Support Three Storeys
With the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill closing for submissions today and yours truly submitting on this Bill (and maybe even making an oral submission before the Select Committee) I thought I might address two questions I keep seeing in this very short post.
Mainly this one has been: WE DON’T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT THIS.
Well no you wont when you 1) disconnect infrastructure planning and investment from urban development, and 2) engage in Infrastructure Deficit Mode – that being the urban development goes in and you MIGHT just might build the infrastructure 30 years later. IF you tried building the infrastructure at the exact same time or even better engage on the Infrastructure Surplus model where the infrastructure is built first THEN the urban development the infrastructure problem would not exist at all. In fact you would always have a small amount of infrastructure spare to absorb growth while the new infrastructure is being built.
The other one I have seen is AMENITIES
Well folks mucking around with prescriptive based rules creates perverse outcomes rather than allowing for more flexibility into the private realm (where in all honesty Consenting Planners should not be dabbling). However, through the Public Realm (where Planners should be dabbling) one you cause infrastructure and public amenities to heavily influence the urban geographies and private realm of a City.
For example here is one using Laneways, Trees, no setback rules and allow three storeys as normal to create this very attractive residential area:
The other encouragement through public amenity is this:
So; through public realm interventions we can influence the amenity and design that the NPS-UD is looking for rather than going prescriptive as in the past and creating perverse outcomes in the Private realms.
2 thoughts on “Going Three Storeys as Standard Operating Procedure in Urban Auckland – A very short post”
“The effect on Amenities” is a flawed argument.
Intensification in short term reduce amenities capacity like swimming pools, library, roads.
However in long term, more residences means more rates. So the likely outcome is the library/pools will be upgraded, roads will be converted into Rapid mass transit.
More residences means more local spenders. So we will expect more local shops and restaurants.
Comments are closed.