The Auckland Development Committee for June 12 is up and should prove to be a cracker of a meeting. The Committee is looking at discussing (or reviewing) the following:
Progress with the Housing Accord
Hobsonville Point 20ha Block: Future Residential Use
Submission to the Ministry for the Environment on the “Setting a direct referral threshold and related matters” discussion document
And behind closed doors: Takapuna Beachfront Precinct
No doubt the parking issue will be a lively debate. I can already take a good guess on which way the debate will fall and which of our more “vocal” Councillors will be at the “forefront” of any discussion around parking.
The Auckland Development Committee – June 2014 Agenda
I have noticed quite strong and often knee-jerk reaction to what has become the “Ashes” debate here in Auckland. The debate has been in response to the “Proposed Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw” processes being currently working its way through Auckland Council.
A typical some-what knee-jerk response can be seen here (and the last place I expect it too):
Plans to make grieving families seek permission before scattering the ashes of loved ones and charge them for the privilege need to be reconsidered, Labour’s Ethnic Affairs spokesperson Phil Goff says.
“Auckland Council’s proposals seem heavy handed, unnecessary and bureaucratic.
“There has been insufficient consultation with the public and in particular with ethnic communities before proposing the restrictions. Nor has the council made a solid case for why the restrictions are necessary.
“There are no health considerations because cremations are carried out at 800 degree temperatures and families almost always conduct the scattering of their loved ones ashes with care and consideration.
“The last thing we want to impose on grieving families are bureaucratic procedures, long time delays and additional expenses.
“I understand that in former Council areas like Waitakere, Papakura and Frankton there were no restrictions imposed for the scattering of ashes and I have yet to see any evidence of this causing any widespread problem.
“The Council also seems unaware of Hindu customs about the importance of scattering ashes within a time period after cremation and the impact such restrictions would have on their community.
“I have also been made aware of another important and unnecessary restriction of preventing more than two people attending the placing of the casket in the cremator. This cuts across Indian Hindu cultural tradition where all the deceased’s male children are normally involved.
“I have written to the Mayor asking for the Council to think again. At the very least the Council should consult widely with the public, ethnic organisations and religious and cultural groups before they make any final decision. The present Council decision is more likely to create problems than resolve any,” Phil Goff says.
I would like to remind Phil Goff on the following comment below I picked up from Councillor Cathy Casey’s thread about the ashes debate:
Might want to read what was put in Councillor Cathy Casey’s comments before knee jerk reacting in here. Here I’ll copy paste the actual problem here: Qiane Matata-Sipu: We have a problem with people scattering ashes in the sea by Ihumatao. It is mostly Hindu ceremonies when this occurs, not only is this an area for Kai gathering and so is an innapropriate place to scatter the ashes of a dead person where we would gather food, but there is also a significant amount of mess left behind, streamers, flowers, other foods (citrus foods) etc… That just causes extra problems. A non-resident of ihumatao once visited me after cleaning and filling 4 rubbish bags of ceremony “left-overs” from an area of the beach he often visits and takes overseas visitors. I was disgusted by the mess – not to mention the tapu nature/effect on our Moana and awa. I support the notion we must treat the deceased with respect an dignity but we also need to remember that we must treat the living with respect too, and the particular cases that happen in our area are very disrespectful to us.
Your “rights” do not extend to trashing and disrespecting an already culturally sensitive area – especially one that is used for food..
Especially those rights and culturally sensitive areas of an indigenous population – which for our international readers is the Maori people.
A reminder that yes you can commit the ashes of your loved ones back to the Earth (and what your particular belief system is around committing those ashes) but let’s be fair and respective towards others – especially the indigenous people who live here. You would ask the same respect back in your ancestral lands so what was quoted above is fair and a very important reminder.
I will go back over the Council processes and see where this might have gone wrong. That said while Wellington already has a similar policy to what Auckland is proposing in place (which causes minimal fuss in Wellington) I hope Council is not causing extra grief from unnecessary bureaucracy and “fees.” It is the last thing anyone needs when saying their final good byes to a loved one or loved ones.
Note: Comments will be closely monitored and moderated as required
I saw this come up from Stuff earlier this morning:
Council offered $75m for car park
ELLEN READ Last updated 09:00 06/06/2014
Auckland Council has been offered $75 million by two businessmen keen to snap up one of its inner city car park buildings.
James Brown and Simon Rowntree, who run Tournament Parking, said their offer for the multilevel 890-space Downtown building on Customs Street would give the council funds to fast track rail-link plans without having to consider selling two other high profile CBD sites.
Recent reports have suggested the council might sell a section of Queen Elizabeth Square and privatise sections of Queens Wharf.
Brown and Rowntree said the offer was unconditional. They visited council authorities this morning with a $7.5m deposit cheque this morning and said their proposed settlement date for the remaining $67.5m was July 1.
The Council has yet to respond to the offer.
The pair said they were prompted to make the offer after proposals were made to privatise inner city public space including Queen’s Wharf and Queen Elizabeth Square.
“The rail link is essential for Auckland but it’s wrong for the council to sell public space to fund it,” their spokesman said.
“This offer would keep Queen’s Wharf and Queen Elizabeth Square in public ownership while providing $75m cash to kick-start Mayor Len Brown’s vision for long-awaited first-world public transport.”
They say the $75m offer was a significant premium on the carpark’s value and included clauses preventing them from increasing casual parking rates, presently $3 an hour at the Council-owned site, above the rate of inflation for at least five years.
Tournament Parking casual rates for some Auckland sites are $4 for half an hour
A rather interesting development this morning that no doubt will have Auckland Transport, Council, and the wider city debating over the offer and whether to accept it or not.
I suppose the questions I have over this offer would be the following:
The CV of the site is at $65 million. So is $75 million a good offer or a bit of a bargain here
Will Tournament who if successful in their offer redevelop the site according to the wishes of the City Centre Master Plan. If not then would it be better if Council via Auckland Transport (who currently own the site) to hang on to it
Would the loss of income from the parking building be a detriment to Auckland Transport and Auckland Council on upcoming capital expenditure programs
Does this need to go through the Auckland Transport Board and the main Council Governing Body before any cheques are accepted for the parking building.
We all await a reply from Council and Auckland Transport on the offer.
Penrith’s sleepy country town feel is changing fast. A hands-on Council and several exciting developments are transforming its character, breaking old stereotypes and looking to a new future.
Walking down High Street, locals stop to chat with each other and people are comfortable window shopping, spending time in the arcades or watching the footy in the local pub. This is Penrith.
What’s new in the area is the growing number of innovative projects and fresh spaces within the city centre. Penrith is now home to pop-up parks, mobile playvans and even a European-style water canal.
It’s enough to challenge other hip initiatives happening elsewhere in Sydney, but like many other places, Penrith’s vibrancy differs greatly depending on what side of the tracks you find yourself.
The southern side of the train station and traditional city heart has long been a centre of activity, while the northern side has traditionally been associated with farming, recreational and defence land. This too is changing, however, with several new developments to the north bringing people and rejuvenating place.
One such development is Thornton, a new suburb directly north of the Penrith train station that includes approximately 1000 dwellings, commercial and retail uses, two hectares of industrial land and seven hectares of open space. The diversity of land uses provided in the masterplan and its focus on walkable human scale promise to improve experiences on the ground and permeability into the Penrith CBD.
What is happening in Penrith seems similar to what is happening in our own Wynyard Quarter. That said I hope the Penrith project is not eye watering expensive thus attracting flak as its Wynyard Quarter cousin currently is.
Next time I go over to Sydney (next year hopefully) I might go check out Penrith and see how it going.
Campbell Live following Metro Magazine and Radio NZ in Decent Auckland Planning Reporting
It was flagged in advance last week on Twitter last night’s Auckland planning piece on Campbell Live. And so the piece or rather three pieces showed on Campbell Live last night to positive acclaim by progressive Aucklanders and the Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse.
Earlier last week there was an Auckland Conversations presentation (that I had to pass over) by Janette Sadik-Khan on how Auckland could use ideas from New York City to turn Auckland into a more pro-people rather than a auto-centric city.
Update: Below is the 30 minute interview with Janette Sadik-khan on her time in New York City with their transport and how their ideas could be translated to Auckland:
Having watch the Auckland Conversation piece on the net and the Campbell Live pieces yesterday I could feel mood swelling for wanting and building a 21st Century Auckland. However, I am cautious as well with the feeling we have a very high risk of stumbling at the first hurdle once out of the starting blocks. That stumbling at the first hurdle could either be from the wider Council itself (a watered down Unitary Plan for example) or the NIMBY’s not quite realising Auckland is a world City not some village in the south-west Pacific.
As for the Main Stream Media showing a more balanced view of Auckland planning such as that shown on Campbell Live last night, it has been a rather long time coming.
Metro Magazine, and Media3 (when it was showing) by Russell Brown as part of the Main Stream Media outlets have been pretty much on the ball with Auckland planning coverage since the first round of Unitary Plan feedback last year. Whether positive or a critique one could rely on these two MSM outlets to broadcast the news as Auckland works its way through getting its master planning manual sorted. TV’s One and Three were a bit absent until TV3 showed a concerted push with them through Campbell Live showcasing the Congestion Free Network earlier this year. The NBR I’ll give credit to as well with their coverage on Auckland Planning issues although the NBR is not as far-reaching as other MSM outlets. Stuff is there with the suburban reporters like former Papakura Courier journalist Dubby Henry being at public meetings and gauging the reactions to the Draft and Proposed Unitary Plans. Radio NZ with Todd Nial has been there since dot when the Unitary Plan was first released March 15 last year and I often find Todd next to myself and Bob Dey at the media table when Council committees meet. The Herald and our more conservative talk back shows are much to be desired in their Auckland Planning reporting with them often making the news rather than broadcasting the news. That said Duncan Garner is always an interesting one to watch of recent when he reports on what Auckland is up to.
The three individual pieces on Auckland’s planning by Campbell Live last night led to this Tweet by Deputy Mayor and Auckland Development Committee Chair (formerly the Auckland Plan Committee).
@CampbellLiveNZ. NY and Seattle are great! Where were you guys as I fronted Unitary plan public meeting to make this future for Auckland?
Essentially when the Unitary Plan was first released March 15 last year (when I was in Australia at the time) it was the bloggers and social media being at the forefront of the commentary and debate. Arguably I was the quickest off the blocks with this blog and my Twitter feed when the Unitary Plan first came out. Other social media outlets (both balanced, and shall we say tending more unhinged) took a little while longer to get off the blocks. I remember feeling a bit lonely covering the Unitary Plan debate in the beginning until the others came to the party. After that then some battles came along especially with one particular group from the North Shore.
But as the course drew on I became quite comfortable taking a leading edge in the commentary despite the limitation of resources others had at their disposal. In the end it was pointed out I was the most prolific Tweeter on the Unitary Plan last year.
Now as we work our way through mid 2014 and in preparation for the next round of submissions for the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan the larger MSM outlets are finally giving more balanced reporting. As Penny Hulse did Tweet a shame they were not there in the beginning with the Unitary Plan. No matter the bloggers stepped up and we carried the can – in fact we still do 😉
That said good to see the Campbell Live pieces last night. I wonder if we can get John in to sit through one of the longer Auckland Development Committees when a more substantial item is on the agenda, say like QE-II Square 😉
Talking Southern Auckland 
