Category: General

Everything else

This and That – Round Three. But I Hear Mr Kirk’s Concerns

· 2 Comments ·

The Herald Just Can’t Get It

 

Mr Kirk however has a Valid Point

 

 

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”.
I think Goudie has a bit more nous than that…
But there is more and even I replied right back
  • 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???
    • Ben Ross Major Face-Palm Bernard. For someone who is in the particular age group Councillor Goudie had an apparent crack at, you would think the term “with age comes wisdom (and maturity)” would resonate in your head before uttering that out with ANZAC Day upon us.

      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’s Concerns and Alternatives

 

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:

From that NZ Herald Piece:

 

“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.

 

Taking an extract from my OLB presentation:

 

 

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). 

 

Centralised Master Community Plans being as in the embed below:

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!

 

BEN ROSS : AUCKLAND

BR:AKL: Bring Well Managed Progress

The Unitary Plan: Bringing Change

Auckland: 2013 – OUR CITY, OUR CALL

 

This and That – AGAIN

·

Not Again…

 

Where is Progressive and REASON with The Clunker Debate

 

 

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

Update with Karaka Collective Information

·

An Information Error

 

PLEASE NOTE

I have received an email from a person in regards to the Karaka Collective and information the Collective’s representative has sent me which I subsequently posted on BR:AKL.

The information I had received which was subsequently embedded in my “Karaka Collective Shares” post was incorrect in the fact a resident who is not part of the Collective –  was highlighted as being part of the collective. Subsequently the incorrect information has been spread further in the public domain (the original submissions were already in the public realm prior to BR:AKL posting them) of which is a concern.

I have been informed that the barrister for the Karaka Collective has been alerted to this incorrect information and should be making the proper adjustments to reflect the correct information.

As a result of this I have pulled down the Karaka Collective Shares post, as well pulling down the information links from Scribd. I will repost the information once I have the CORRECT information from the Collective at hand. Thus for now any other posts linking back to the Karaka Collective Shares post will not work for the duration of the suspension.

 

BR:AKL does send apologies to the person affected by the incorrect information embedded in the blog for any inconveniences caused. 

The RPTP – Round Two

·

Next Round of Consultation with the RPTP

 

Bit of a break from the Unitary Plan this morning as I cover my perennial favourite topic: Auckland Transport (in particular public transport). Four days ago Auckland Transport released a full update post-hearings of the Regional Public Transport Plan (RPTP) which I both submitted and later presented in Manukau.

For a recap you can see my following RPTP posts on my submission and presentation

 

As a result of the hearings in February Auckland Transport has released a 57 page report on those hearings. You can read the report in the embed below:

 

I have not had a chance to read the document yet as such (busy with The Unitary Plan) however, take note of this:

 

When will the RPTP be formally adopted by Auckland Transport?

Auckland Transport has made significant progress towards the adoption of the draft RPTP.  Since the submission period closed:

  • We have successfully completed public hearings on the draft RPTP
  • After considering all the submissions received, the Hearing Panel presented a report to the Auckland Transport Board (the Board) recommending changes to the draft RPTP
  • In March 2013 the Board endorsed the changes to the draft RPTP recommended by the Hearing Panel.  This enables Auckland Transport to proceed with detailed local consultation on the proposed new public transport network for Auckland, a key element of the Plan.

 

The Land Transport Management Amendment (LTMA) Bill is currently before Parliament for approval.  Once the LTMA Bill is enacted by Parliament, the RPTP will be altered to ensure it is compliant with the new Act.  We envisage that any changes to what the board has endorsed will mainly relate to procurement issues.  Only once compliant, will the RPTP be formally adopted by the Board (expected to be later this year).  This delay is necessary because the new Land Transport Management Act will repeal the Public Transport Management Act under which the current draft RPTP was created.

 

Once formally adopted, we will inform submitters and make the final RPTP available for the public to view.

 

Local consultation on the proposed new public transport network for Auckland

Consultation on the proposed new public transport network for Auckland (the New Network) has been broken into 3 areas, with South Auckland being the first area to be consulted on.  Please see over the page the proposed consultation and implementation dates for the New Network.

 

 

​Areas ​Consultation ​Implementation
​South Auckland 19 June 2013 to
2 August 2013		 Mid – end 2014​
North Auckland​ Early 2014​ Mid 2015​
Central, East and West Auckland Late 2014​ Mid 2016​

If you would like further information on the proposed New Network please visit our consultation webpage www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/newnetwork, or email us at busreview@Aucklandtransport.govt.nz

 

Further information on the RPTP

To view further information on the RPTP; such as a copy of the draft RPTP, an electronic copy of the Hearing Panel’s report, or the hearings minutes please visit our consultation websitewww.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/rptp

 

So it seems I am back up for another round of consultation with the Public Transport Network (PTN) from June to August. I better brush up on my reading before submitting the next round of feedback (which is thankfully after the Unitary Plan).

 

Meantime I recommend a bit of brushing up as well with the PTN if you want a network that better serves you…

 

 

Council is Watching

·

Council Watching Digital and Social Media

 

On Unitary Plan Commentary and Feedback

 

I saw this from the Auckland Unitary Plan – Submit Now Facebook page this morning and took a rather particular interest in it. Not that BR:AKL has been linked (although I send thanks for the link (and further advertisement of where I will be this week with Unitary Plan community meetings)) but rather what Council is up to. I shall let the page do the explaining:

From Character Coalition:
Last week, as part of the Coalition’s action plan in the weeks to the end of May, we focused on encouraging your organisation’s members to contact your local MPs about the Government’s RMA changes, which will embed the whole Unitary Plan submission/panel hearings process.

Some feedback on your actions last week would be very welcome.

ACTIONS FOR WEEK TWO
This week we need to concentrate on getting involved in the public conversations about the Unitary Plan – they are happening in several important arenas and are gathering momentum.

It’s important the Coalition’s perspective gets out there for two reasons:
1. The Council has stated that comment on blogs and social media will be counted as an official part of the Unitary Plan feedback process.
2. There are some very organised forces at work trying to influence the debate their way.
3. Council staff are constant participants/contributors to these blogs/tweets etc…

There are a number of ways you can get your members to jump in and become part of the ongoing debate:

Do you go online to look at media coverage of the debates about the plan? The Herald site in particular has a very active comments section. After each article is published, please comment and give your groups’ perspective. Encourage your members to do the same. You need to register to participate, but it is easy to do.

Some important blog sites –

Auckland Transport Blog http://saveourstheliers.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8c1a4f3e43d639102ebf718c&id=220a4e61e3&e=c50f52d98b. Geoff Houtman has just posted an article about trams!

Cities Matter, at http://saveourstheliers.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8c1a4f3e43d639102ebf718c&id=25c582b7cf&e=c50f52d98b

Ben Ross: Auckland at http://saveourstheliers.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d8c1a4f3e43d639102ebf718c&id=8267307aec&e=c50f52d98b – he’s attending UP meetings all over Auckland and spreading his message

One to watch is Eye on Auckland http://saveourstheliers.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d8c1a4f3e43d639102ebf718c&id=6630d4584c&e=c50f52d98b. It has a rant about NIMBYs and some very vitriolic material on the St Heliers meeting. We can’t let this sort of misinformation go unchallenged so get on there and have your say.

If any of you are talkback fans it would be great to start some conversations on radio as well.

Keep local issues alive by writing to your local paper – letters to the editor generate debate

YOUR EFFORTS NOW ARE CRUCIAL
This “feedback/submissions” stage, finishing at the end of May, is extremely important.
Because it’s easier to try and influence a draft plan than to get changes made once it’s notified.

I cannot stress to you enough that this battle will be won only if we mobilise right across the Coalition.
The Council must be made to feel the heat all over the region.

Feel confident that your action makes a difference, get your members into gear and make the Coalition message visible across Auckland.

MAIN POINTS TO STRESS
• The timetable is far too rushed, given size and complexity of UP, remaining 6 weeks too short for informed public input.
• The plan will not protect heritage and character – lack of notification, scale and placement of intensification.
• Communities are still shut out of the process – no local plans, this is a ‘top-down-plan by the Council.
• Auckland’s infrastructure will not cope – where are the environmental impact reports?
• People do not trust the Council to get it right – look at the past.

These particular bold points are the ones to take note of:
  • The Council has stated that comment on blogs and social media will be counted as an official part of the Unitary Plan feedback process.
  • Council staff are constant participants/contributors to these blogs/tweets etc…

I know the last bullet point has been happening with the discussions I get into with Councillors and Planners through the digital outlets floating around. It is how I can convey messages and requests back quickly to the Council and Unitary Plan team, and vice versa from them to me.

As for commenting on blogs and social media, umm yeah well at this rate with that considered feedback then I have well and truly spammed Council with all my commentary on the UP thus far (and we still have 6-weeks to go).

 

 

But the point is rather indicative: Council is paying very wide attention to what is being said around the city with the Unitary Plan. So come on folks, get in there and have your say – this is your city here.

I also better work on my “message” too, can’t go to mush here and go contradicting myself in all this (or doing David Shearer’s favourite game of umm, ooo, and ahh)

 

BEN ROSS : AUCKLAND

BR:AKL: Bring Well Managed Progress

The Unitary Plan: Bringing Change

Auckland: 2013 – OUR CITY, OUR CALL