Difference between the Manukau “Policies” I have noted today that Mayoral Candidate John Palino has released his “Second CBD” policy which entails Manukau. You can see the PDF at … Continue reading Manukau – Key Difference
Difference between the Manukau “Policies” I have noted today that Mayoral Candidate John Palino has released his “Second CBD” policy which entails Manukau. You can see the PDF at … Continue reading Manukau – Key Difference
I arrived back from the Unitary Plan briefing with the Deputy Mayor and the Unitary Plan Planner – the two Pennys just a little while ago. I am still digesting the information and will have something up tomorrow for your consumption.
The briefing and my subsequent commentary on the Unitary Plan will be split into two parts:
I believe Monday I also get a digital copy at 7000 pages of “tracked changes” applied to the Unitary Plan thus far. Anyone that uses Microsoft Word well enough knows what I mean by “tracked changes.” However, the actual Unitary Plan should be around 1200 pages long at a guess – so you can breathe that bit easier.
And so campaigns get under way with the nominations for Local Government Elections 2013 closed as of Friday 16th August. You can see the full PDF version of who is running for what HERE. The guys over at Generation Zero and Auckland Transport Blog I believe are converting that PDF over into an Excel format chart – why? I have an idea but will let them tell you 😉
I had noted a bit of attention in the last 72 hours in the form of prodding me to run for either Local Board or a Council Ward seat. Some were also asking why I was not running for either position.
I had made a decision during the Unitary Plan feedback process (March 16-May 31) not to run for a Council position but rather focus on TotaRim. TotaRim being my consultancy business that advances #BetterAuckland projects amongst other things.
Council is like a tent and that tent includes the elected representatives, the bureaucracy and the Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs). One decides whether they can make their contribution to Auckland either inside or outside the tent.
I decided for the 2013 elections to stay outside the tent and continue to advance a #BetterAuckland (including #movingauckland and #SuperManukau) . That means I will be around for another three years in continuing the push to achieve this via TotaRim.
This means TotaRim and myself working with willing and cooperative elective representatives of the Centre Left and Centre Right factions of Council. Yes, that can be “interesting” some days, but I must say it has been a good three years. Let’s hope the next three years will be as good too in pushing for a #BetterAuckland. Although TotaRim and myself are bi-partisan in our work, it seems some are still quite partisan in their thinking/politics:
Interesting you say this Ben because there is a rumour I hear that you were helping Palino with Unitary Plan policy in the early stages of his campaign before he had to remove you? What is Hulse and the rest of your friends at Council going to think when they hear this?
The person who said that links back to here http://www.palinoformayor.co.nz/ while the comment came from here http://louisoutlook.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/evaluating-john-palinos-unitary-plan-policy/
Rather interesting comment given that I believe in Free Enterprise and was approached first by Palino. As for being ‘removed’, I did earlier mention willing and cooperative ‘representatives’. I was approached to scope out the task at hand at the request of Palino but no contract was entered upon completion of scoping. It was his choice not to continue business for whatever reason he chooses. I respect his decision to do so – this is the nature of free enterprise.
The following has been stressed by Council more than once with the Unitary Plan and its processes:
From my Facebook update in regards to Slowing Down the Unitary Plan
Only one problem with Centre Right people when they say that – it can not be slowed down any more than what it is. I think they have forgotten three things:
1: Section 32 analysis still needs to happen on the Unitary Plan and the Governmentwill be watching this closely to make sure it is robust. We should get more details on this tomorrow
2: The Central Government actually has a limited time frame on the Unitary Plan before notification actually must occur – a three year process in itself. If we – The Council and Auckland blow that time frame via slowing down the Unitary Plan process then Government will take over and that does no one ANY good
3: “I’ll work to slow down the Unitary Plan and make sure we get it right for Maungakiekie-Tamaki and our future.” A Patch candidate using that language with no focus on the region. As a Ward Councillor you not only have your ward but all other wards as well. You make decisions for the region, the Local Boards look after the local. So be wary of those who are patch focused (usually the Centre Right) as they will re-cause the fragmentation the old Auckland City Council area saw for countless decades. This will come at great expense to the other Wards…
Monday there is a briefing on the Unitary Plan thus far and where to next with it. The briefing will: “cover key issues identified in the informal feedback, interim directions and an update on the next steps in the process.”
I will be in attendance at that briefing and will deliver full commentary on Tuesday for your consumption.
As readers would know, August 28-30th is where the Auckland Plan Committee will make final decisions on the Unitary Plan before setting a date when the plan goes for formal notification.
I assume this briefing (to the media) will be an extensive one. Yes, I will be asking questions as well.
Talking Auckland: Blog of TotaRim Consultancy Limited
TotaRim Consultancy
Bringing Well Managed Progress to Auckland and The Unitary Plan
Auckland: 2013 – YOUR CITY, YOUR CALL
The nominations have closed for: mayor, council wards and local boards. The list is now out on those who are standing for each position:
My congratulations to: Cameron Brewer, Sharon Stewart and Dick Quax for being reelected unopposed back to Council. No matter our politics it will be good to see some familiar faces for another three years as I continue to advance some #BetterAuckland projects.
As for my Ward? Calum Penrose should be a shoe-in again for Papakura while Arthur Anae should get one of the two seats of the Manukau Ward. I mention Manukau as that is where the #SuperManukau work is happening from TotaRim, so I like to keep an eye on “things in that area.
All the best to all the candidates running
Two notes before I start this post in reply to The Vote NZ’s supposed debate that occurred on Wednesday night:
On Wednesday night The Vote NZ decided to hold a debate on whether Auckland was sucking the life out of the regions (everywhere else) and what should basically be done about it.
I did not bother to watch as it turned out as I predicted: a Duncan Garner (the host) led JAFA bashing session of New Zealand’s largest and most powerful city. Then again I can’t expect much else out of Garner and his ineptness most days of the given week.
Look, I’ll keep this post brief; Auckland is not sucking the life out of the regions, Wellington is. That is the current Neo Conservative John Key led Government is with Steven Joyce as the Minister of Everything (Business, Innovation and Employment) and Gerry Brownlee as the Minister of Transport.
“Pick winners.” $30m subsidy for Rio Tinto’s Aluminium Smelter yet nothing for Solid Energy and Huntly. Interfere with the free market through getting in the road and picking winners through subsidies – most times the winner being sold overseas soon after or failing and needing prop up. If a company fails in the free market it usually (if there was demand) will rise again from the ashes and continue on. Let the private individual decide not Government. Our Neo Con Government also does not really have a regional development strategy in place to help the regions grow. Now it can do that in two ways: infrastructure upgrades, or either a Crown Research Institute or tertiary education facility somewhere near by. Businesses naturally flock to these areas including large and often heavy industry through complementing each other.
Our Neo Con Government can not build our transport infrastructure to save both itself and NZ. While our State Highways do need to be maintained do we need to binge on the gold-plated Roads of National Significance? Of all of the RoNS that are there (7) I can only think of two that were needed at all – the Western Ring Route (under construction) and the Victoria Park Tunnel. Both in Auckland and both needed to assist Auckland move. For the rest, like the Holiday Highway, better and less expensive safety upgrades and bypasses can be built (like the Maramarua State Highway 2 bypass) rather than 4-lane motorways. Ironically I just saw this as I was writing this post: Motorway benefits debated. A virtual drain on both Auckland and the rest of the nation’s regions. As for other forms of transport, we need major investment in road and coastal shipping as well.
We do hear the regions wail that they do not get their taxes they send to Wellington in the form of investment and blame Auckland for getting the “lion’s share.” News to the regions, Auckland does not even get all the tax it sends down back to the city into the form of investment. For every dollar we send down especially in transport and fuel levies, anywhere between 65-75cents comes back to Auckland in transport investment. That hurts us as much as it hurts the regions.
First of all Auckland does not suck the life out of the regions. Auckland like Fonterra is a powerhouse. However, Auckland is also massive and of critical mass in size and population. Realise though, especially those who are quick to bash Auckland – which can contribute up to 40% of New Zealand’s GDP Â (great if Fonterra takes any more whacks), Auckland and the regions are interdependent on each other. Not one over the other and independent of the other – interdependent! If one fails the other also fails.
Wikipedia: The sub-national GDP of the Auckland region was estimated at US$47.6 billion in 2003, 36% of New Zealand’s national GDP, 15% greater than the entire South Island.[54]
In my honest opinion the Government should be doing this:
Stop picking winners and sending money to places like Rio Tinto. It does nothing for the regions nor Auckland. It only helps a few and most likely an elite few at that. Allow the free market to work, create, burn, destroy, and recreate out of the ashes. Private individuals are responsive to the needs of others and often the economy, not the cumbersome Government.
People in a free market situation also move naturally to areas best suited to them and their requirements. For some that is Auckland and its offerings, others the regions and its offerings. When the Government does not interfere the movement of people and capital moves naturally, balancing itself between the interdependent regions and Auckland. Our Government has upset this natural balance.
Sure, the Government can help with education and mentoring people along BUT, no hand outs.
Realise this for moving goods efficiently and economically:
Plan and build for this. This means upgrading the North Auckland Rail Line and building the Marsden Line to serve the North Port in Northland which is growing. Reopen the Napier-Gisborne Line as it can move logs much better and in higher volumes than trucks can. Make sure our coastal shipping facilities and inter-modal transfer (boat to train or truck) are in tip top shape. These water haulers move vast amounts of cargo in the most cost effective and efficient manner possible over a long distance.
Building the infrastructure also has a bonus effect: people wanting to set up a business to utilise that infrastructure and its benefits. This means that if the regions are well served by good roads (not gold plated ones), good rail connections and/or good coastal shipping connections then people, business and industry will naturally come and invest in that particular region (providing the government is not “picking” winners).
In building the infrastructure and as a flow on effect, neighbouring Local, City and Regional Councils start working together and plan growth and cooperation with each other – benefiting all. This working together between each other seems to be happening between Auckland and Waikato (although the Government is NOT building the complete infrastructure suite of road and rail).
It got mentioned to me that Auckland Council and Environment Waikato are talking and planning ways to set about achieving cooperation in planning as both areas continue to grow. Effectively what is being looked at is population load sharing – people move naturally out of Auckland and live in northern Waikato and work in Auckland. However, they might do their shopping in the regional town centre or even Hamilton city. This kind of movement is normal and seen internationally. It seems wise as Auckland grows to have the Waikato help us out in return for population load sharing. Both Waikato and Auckland win on all fronts: economic, social and physical.
In fact I might do some commentary on that this weekend – the Auckland-Waikato partnership and population load sharing. It does have effects on Manukau as well as an interesting issue,
This is easy; for every dollar we send down to Wellington in transport levies we get the same dollar back for transport investment – for regions and Auckland. Not for Holiday Highways but for actual transportation infrastructure suited to moving whatever we need to move to wherever most efficiently.
While not the full spiel and hot air of The Vote NZ, this is a quick look into what I think is happening and should actually be happening.
An interesting piece here from Louis. While I could say he is Centre-Left his analysis is quite sound and methodical (and respectable in language). Good contribution to the debate Louis and something I would incline to agree with you on against Palino
Not too much here – most likely because I did not cover these issues in my submission to the Unitary Plan. However, for your reading:
Draft Unitary Plan proposals for sustainable design, including green building rules for new residential and commercial developments, were topics covered at yesterday’s Unitary Plan workshop.
Discussions included the proposals for a Homestar six-star rating (or equivalent) for new developments with five or more dwellings, and a GreenStar five-star rating for new office and industrial buildings.
Councillors and local board chairs agreed to consider retaining the six-star rating for homes but reduce the rating for office and commercial buildings to four-star. Council staff were also asked to look at a different approach for certain industrial buildings.
Extensions to quarry zones and quarry transport routes were also covered. The draft Unitary Plan quarry zone provides for regionally significant mineral extraction such as aggregate products for infrastructure projects.
Six regionally significant quarries currently have over 2000 truck movements a day and the Unitary Plan process will consider if controls may be needed.
Ends
From Yesterday’s Proceedings As usual Bernard Orsman has one heck of a slant on “proceedings” that might happen at a Council Committee meeting. His interpretation was much different then … Continue reading Unitary Plan Report
Council has just endorsed the Lot 59-Concept on the Manukau Interchange and future subsequent developments in the area. Having read the Auckland Transport Blog comments (and they are for the most part educated comments so I take them with a measure of seriousness), reviewed feedback I got back after I posted on the issue yesterday and today, and compare it to what is being looked in the Manukau Super Metropolitan Centre work that is slowly starting, I am rejecting the endorsement given.
Thus I will have a discussion with clients TotaRim has in the Manukau area and decide whether to lobby council to get the interchange redesigned better.
Because to be honest it is a poor standard design and will be both asking for trouble and not serve Manukau and wider South Auckland as it should! I am sorry but it is a design and reinforces 1970s planning that makes Manukau currently unloved and so needing much love.
We can do better and Council and AT need to be shown that.
I will seek advice on whether I can speak against the Concept at the next Auckland Plan Committee meeting…
Gallery of my own Alternative This is a Gallery of basic Sketch Up mock ups of my alternative to Auckland Transport‘s Manukau Interchange. You can see yesterday’s post about … Continue reading Manukau Interchange – An Alternative