Everything else
I got told yesterday by the Deputy Mayor that the Karaka-Weymouth Bridge was removed from the Unitary Plan draft maps and even have the PDF to prove it:
However someone forgot to tell Dr Google:
Seems the bridge and link road are already there – we just don’t know it.
Roll eyes material there Google :p
Finally got them sent through from the Deputy Mayor’s Office but, I now have the map of the Southern RUB – with no bridge. There is even a note on page two of the map for your reading:
A reminder though that the Karaka Collective are presenting their view on development in the Southern RUB – and that does include the Karaka-Weymouth Bridge. You can find out more here in my “KARAKA PUBLIC MEETING – KARAKA COLLECTIVE PRESENTS” post.
CLUE: An Alternative Unitary Plan From David Thorton This is a repost of Unitary Plan commentary from David Thorton. All credits and references belong to David with … Continue reading An Alternative Unitary Plan
Special Character Zones – Are Go Well – that is, the concept is now being worked on. Note: Waiting for Unconfirmed Minutes of last night’s Orakei Local Board … Continue reading Back From Orakei Presentation
Karaka Collective to Present on their proposals (and hopefully why) A comment was made in my “RUB DISCUSSIONS” post in regards to the Karaka Collective: The Karaka Resident & Ratepayers … Continue reading Karaka Public Meeting – Karaka Collective Presents
Seems our Ageist Old Fart from the NZ Herald – Bernard Orsman has had one of those John Key/David Shearer “brain fade” moments when banging on about the Unitary Plan. Orsman decided to go post this piece in the Granny Herald which caught the attention of a few people:
Secret plan papers kept from public
8:06 AM Monday Apr 29, 2013
The Auckland Council is sitting on secret documents used to draw up a new planning rulebook for the city and instructed its top lawyer to keep them hidden from the public.
Mayor Len Brown and chief executive Doug McKay have rejected requests from the Herald to release background papers used by a political working party to develop the most important planning document in the history of Auckland.
The new rulebook – or Unitary Plan – sets out a new way of life for Auckland’s 1.5 million residents that includes high-rise apartments and infill housing to cope with squeezing another 1 million people into the city.
But when the Herald sought the background papers on the heritage rules from Mr McKay under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act, the council’s general counsel Wendy Brandon refused to release the material. Requests for background papers on other issues would also be refused, she said.
…
The Herald is seeking a review of the council decision from the Ombudsman.
Not trusting Orsman I decided to go digging up for myself for these apparent secret papers. Often private citizens – those being private citizens who have not gone out of their way annoying Council have better luck getting a hold of council documents than the commercial media. I got an answer back pretty much the same day in regards to those “secret” paper and it is the following:
The papers are both beside me and on my desktop. I have had them since 2011 (with the collection still ongoing) and I already refer to them quite often here at this blog for research. Heck the paper version even follows me to Unitary Plan Community Meetings as well. So what were those papers? Well they were:
Anything not available would have been from commercial sensitivity grounds such as someone’s property to be directly affected by a project (happens). However, those documents can also be sort after – usually with some black highlighter through it.
So the question was asked (basically Where’s Wally) about the background documents used to draw up the Draft Unitary Plan. Well seems the answer was if I trawl through over 10,000 pages of both hard and digital material – the background information is all there. One just needs to go sifting through it to go find it – or be more proactive and go ask someone who knows 😛
Might be time to leave the Herald alone folks. I see Stuff.co.nz do a pretty decent coverage on the Unitary Plan from all angles including the youth angle.
At the same time I could always go out to the community and talk Unitary Plan independent from the Council. Might go work on that business flyer this morning…
BR:AKL: Bring Well Managed Progress
The Unitary Plan: Bringing Change
Auckland: 2013 – OUR CITY, OUR CALL
Manukau Transport Interchange Site Still Nothing – and May/June is Nearly Here I often trundle down to Manukau City Centre to either: carry out business, shopping, or … Continue reading Auckland Transport – Still Waiting…
It seems the NZ Herald with their Auckland Unitary Plan reporter Bernard Orsman can just simply not get it when it comes to actual coverage and commentary on the Unitary Plan. I have repeatedly noted and am doing so again that the Main Stream Media are failing in their obligations of balanced reporting with the most two prominent posts being these two:
This unbalanced and one-sided coverage is annoying the city greatly as there are those who support the Unitary Plan in-part or as a whole. However Orsman and the NZH seem to be more interested in the Blue Rinse Brigade and trotting out what they say rather than what we all say.
However, Fairfax media who run the local Couriers you get, plus individual private blogs like my own have stepped up to the plate and are doing much better coverage and commentary thus far on the Unitary Plan. Fairfax and those bloggers should be applauded (although I still wince at Sydney’s piece – although that was out of circumstance) for their efforts so far while the NZH be vilified for their continued failings.
So where did Orsman and the Herald fail this morning prompting the latest round of backlash in social media. Well it was this article here: ‘Not in my back yard’ and if you look at the main story carefully it is actually not a NIMBY-ism story. It is a story of genuine concerns for an elder – someone with wisdom and knowledge on city planning listing his thoughts on the Unitary Plan and actually giving an alternative here. However, what flipped the story over to a NIMBY-ism piece was Orsam’s rant on the side – obviously still hurting from Sydney’s blog post.
I shall get to Mr Kirk’s concerns in a moment but first Orsman.
This is what the fool had to say as a sidebar to the article:
The battle backed by a blog
Hate speech is coming to a street near you – if you live in a quiet piece of suburbia, like Poronui St in Mt Eden, and object to your neighbourhood being rezoned for apartments and infill housing.
In a sign that the council is losing the battle to persuade middle-class suburban Auckland to adapt to a new way of life, it has appointed 28-year-old councillor Michael Goudie to counter more conservative views.
Not only that, but wise heads like deputy-mayor Penny Hulse are turning a blind eye while Goudie promotes an anonymous blog article, We Hate Nimbys (Not In My Back Yard) that labels a “sea of grey hair” opposing a new planning rulebook “selfish, arrogant, narrow -minded and parochial people” who should “just hurry up and die”.
Suburbs, including Orewa and Browns Bay that helped elect Goudie to the council in 2010 are branded “soulless, geriatric timebombs” in the blog he calls “brilliant” but that others label “hate speech”.
Yep he is still sore after that apparent line. However let me copy over a post from ANZAC Day by Orsman that would give rise to the ‘Pot, Kettle, Black’ argument:
Len Brown is attending four Anzac Day services tomorrow. I wonder if Michael Goudie will be tagging along in his official capacity of nobbling the oldies on the unitary plan to tell the “sea of grey hair” what a bunch of arrogant, deluded and selfish people they are who should “hurry up and die”.
Bernard Orsman Other councillors are not speaking in an official capacity Penny. You are condoning this hate speech by doing nothing…and making it political. So Michael can tell the oldies to ‘hurry up + die’ just not on Anzac Day???
Penny Hulse sigh
Meaning we put aside our what ever differences (with the UP) for just today and stand united together to remember those who served and fell protecting what we have today.
Heck if I was your employer and thank your stars I am not, it would have been a formal reprimand for bringing the company into disrepute on a sacred day as this…
That reprimand should now be dismissal…
I don’t care what beef one might have against councillors and the Unitary Plan, you NEVER EVER imply ANZAC Day the way he did nor utter such tripe as Orsman did ON ANZAC DAY either. What Goudie might of said can be remarked as offensive to some but, we leave those gripes behind as we remember our War Heroes on that special day – hand in hand united. And if you are wondering if I am fuming – yes I am as ANZAC Day to me does hold close to me (as it does to all others) with having family on both sides of both World Wars.
Mr Kirk (a former planner with the former Auckland City Council) who lives in Mt Eden and right next to the famous iconic Mt Eden Volcano had concerns about the Unitary Plan (as does many others) did have to say this which struck me most:
“Kirk, 77, has produced a demographic breakdown of Poronui St that shows more than half the residents are under 30 – and just six over 65 – countering critics’ claims (see sidebar) that most opponents of the plan are elderly.
He says he has no moral answer to the “nimby” question.
“That’s the dilemma. Do I share Poronui St with others or do the drawbridge thing and say ‘I’m bloody in and I don’t want more people’?”
The planner and social conscience in Kirk says if the council is serious about Poronui St, it needs to develop a specific, comprehensive plan where the architecture and buildings work for the residents – and not rely on blanket zoning passed over to developers.
“That is a lazy, unprofessional cop-out.”
Now that I do honestly hear loud and clear from Mr Kirk. It is something I have picked up through my Unitary Plan commentary and jet-setting and it is an issue Auckland Council needs to address. Fortunately I am writing and redeveloping a concept that Mr Kirk is looking for with Mt Eden. It is my Special Character Zone work and presentation I am compiling for Orakei Local Board next week in regards to St Heliers but, can easily be translated to other areas such as: Mt Eden, Onehunga and Ponsonby.
My submission to the draft Unitary Plan (and currently seen in the Shape Auckland Housing Simulator) calls for Local Centres to be dropped to three storeys. This would be consistent with the calls in St Heliers to drop the Local Centre to three storeys – with further restrictions at nine metre heights in place within the rules. What is not recognised thus far through the Unitary Plan is the fact our city is heterogeneous and the great role Local Boards has to play with Unitary Plan “planning” once the UP is operative.
To recognise the heterogeneity of our city I am proposing to St Heliers via the Orakei Local Board a Special Character Zone tied in with my Centralised Master Community Plan (CMCP) – Land Allocation/Development/Utilisation urban development/management model.
CMCP’s were covered in my submission to The Auckland Plan and I shall go back over it in a moment. First it is introducing and working on a new zone – the Special Character Zone (SCZ).
Introduction
CMCP’s
The CMCP extract is a bit vague as I update and clean it up but in short it takes some of these merits in regards with Local Boards that are found in my other methodology (the SLPD):
The main crux of the SLPD would come from the: decentralised, semi-regulated, collaborative, efficient, simplistic and affordable approach to LADU. This is how the crux or ideal would be achieved:
Under SLPD’s the decisions and/or oversight would be with the Local Community Board rather than the centralised Council
Council provides a statement of intent (The Auckland Plan) and action plan for Auckland (Auckland Long Term Plan) over the next period of time
Council provides a mediation service when there is a dispute with an SLPD
Council assists Local Community Boards with resources required when an SLPD is being carried out
SLPD follows the Philosophies of Land Allocation/Development/Utilisation (mentioned page 14)
Simplified Zoning
Collaboration between the Local Board, Community and Developer (allowing greater flexibility and response to community concerns and needs/desires)
Mr Kirk is wanting a comprehensive plan in regards to Mt Eden, I think that can be provided for with a ‘Mt Eden Special Character Zoned – Centralised Master Community Plan’ – a specialised local plan led by the Local Board overseeing the land allocation/development/utilisation of Mt Eden.
Once I have given my presentation to Orakei Local Board, I might translate St Heliers Special Character Zone over to Mt Eden and see where that goes. But good on Mr Kirk for making his concerns known AND seeking out an alternative for his community. No he is not a NIMBY, he is a genuine concerned citizen wanting the best for his community (and the wider city). 🙂
Just a note before I sign this off: this Unitary Plan is like the rabbit hole in Alice and Wonderland 😛 I have gone down the hole and where I end up at the end of this – who know!
BR:AKL: Bring Well Managed Progress
The Unitary Plan: Bringing Change
Auckland: 2013 – OUR CITY, OUR CALL
You know when something gets flagged on Facebook more than three times it is worth considering rather urgently. I had commented on the polarisation and slack Main Stream Media report on The Unitary Plan in my “This and That” post:
THIS AND THAT
From One Extreme To The Other
With The Clunker?
While most commentary and interaction with The Unitary Plan (The Clunker) continues as May 31 approaches at a more civilised level, unfortunately extremes can crop up that skewer the debate. This can either be extreme commentary from a particular group or individual (which I will comment on below), the media being particularly lazy as they are and only covering one side of the debate which they are doing with The Clunker for the most part (that will be bringing me to my second part).
…
After thinking that kind of situation was to be buried and we all move on with the Unitary Plan feedback and all keep our heads and maturity. Guess I spoke too soon when this was flagged to me:
Councillor backs ‘village idiots’ blog
A blog calling residents “delusional village idiots” for opposing apartment plans in Milford, Browns Bay and Orewa is backed by Albany councillor Michael Goudie. The councillor posted a Facebook link to the anonymous “I hate NIMBYS” blog that labels unitary plan opponents “soulless geriatric time bombs”. Mr Goudie, who prides himself as being the voice of youth on council, says the blog is “brilliant” and encourages people to share it. “I am glad people power is finally taking a stand against the loud minority.”
Hibiscus Bays Local Board member Gary Holmes says Mr Goudie holds passionate views but should step back from debate while the council is consulting on its draft unitary plan. Mr Holmes says it’s “unfair” to pit old versus young generations during discussions on Auckland‘s intensification. “It’s not generational. People have been through battles and understand what is at stake.” Browns Bay and Orewa residents have already fought hard to restrict heights, he says. “In 30 years they will thank us,” Mr Holmes says. If Auckland had listened to members of the older generation such as former mayor Sir Dove Myer Robinson the region would have a widespread rail network. Mr Holmes says there is support for some apartments, particularly around transport routes, but some of today’s character needs protection. “You can’t look at every area in the same way.”
Mr Goudie says on Facebook that the issue was about attitude not age.
…
It is about attitude and not age as I can attest to through my work on the Unitary Plan thus far. It is the reason why (and for my views of THAT blog see my “This and That” post) I can be scalding of St Heliers but in the same breath reach out to RIGHT ACROSS THE SPECTRUM age and demographic wise (except the NIMBY’s) with everything thus far with the Unitary Plan. And heck you need to reach out across that spectrum as the old adage states: united we stand for divided we fall (or more simply put divide and conquer).
While an age polarisation debate might have kicked off on The Shore and the Isthmus, down here in Southern Auckland I see: people young and old, workers and entrepreneurs, urban and rural folk alike somewhat if not united in concerns, voices, and ideas with the Unitary Plan. I could go a far as saying Southern Auckland knows growth is going to happen but, it needs to be done right with all negative consequences mitigated against. Then again we always want things done properly. This is what we are fighting for down here in the South with The Unitary Plan – making sure as Dene Andre said “Liveability from international best practice is executed.”
So again my conclusion:
CONCLUSION
All this brings me to the conclusion which seems inevitable in this Clunker debate. The two extremes facing off and firing broadsides against each other which will polarise the debate and entrench views. This action goes and buggers up the middle ground from both sides (those pro-sprawl, and those pro-intensification) who are actively working together and working a compromise in bringing this city forward for the next thirty years. The extremes are trying to force either change or no change, while the middle favours more progression. Progression and change are two very different things and have very different consequences to people and the city.
I just ran these words through a thesaurus to get the synonyms that we can more relate too:
- Change: transformation, revolution (which then implies upheaval), conversion
- Progress and Progression: development, evolution, growth, advancement, improvement
Now look at those words and think to yourself which basically scare the living daylights out of you. Those that are NIBMY-ists don’t bother answering as I am rather not interested in hermits or fossils (one which is a relic of a by-gone era) as nothing is static in this universe. For me I am more inclined towards Progress and Progression over “Change” even though I am a social liberal and can tolerate some “change” as defined above.
But look at the language of the Unitary Plan (and Auckland Plan) and you see the language I classed under the ‘Change’ department (especially transformational). I admittedly have parroted that same language although that has been scaled back in more recent submissions as I swing more to progression rather than transformational. Then again you often have to speak the language of the council (so transformational) to get them paying attention (oops there goes a secret of mine). The language Council is using in the Unitary and Auckland Plans through “change” is pretty much enough to go make most people (even those progressive) rather hesitant in what is being pushed forward. Probably won’t help matters is when Council goes and bollocks up the communications process and people really do start running around clueless through no fault of their own (although communications with the Unitary Plan has been “basic” but not flash).
SO WHERE TO NEXT?
Well I expect nothing from the MSM in reporting both sides of the coin in a more balanced manner so blogging continues and my main outlet. But moving the language from change to progression will be more the theme as I continue and sell my alternative to The Clunker. A story is being told, this is my story on our city
BR:AKL: Bring Well Managed Progress
The Unitary Plan: Bringing Change
Auckland: 2013 – OUR CITY, OUR CALL
So What Will it be? While the Auckland Isthmus and North Shore debate about Brownfield intensification, down here in the south a battle has shaped up over Greenfield Development. … Continue reading That Bridge – Still Causing Annoyance
Talking Southern Auckland 