Category: Unitary Plan

Unitary Plan Coverage Running Hot Again

·

Feedback Closed yet the Commentary runs Hot

 

There must be a report due out (which there is) in regards to the Unitary Plan looking at five (now six) different Chrome tabs I have open at the moment in regards to media coverage. The MSM coverage is pretty wide-ranging from support of the UP to some impending changes towards The Clunker as well. Some of the more “interesting” pieces I will look at an individual level later on today and tomorrow.

But first some links into the chatter today around the draft Unitary Plan:

There is also a segment from Morning Report on how kiwi’s might be needing to let go of the 1/4 acre dream as well and be more pragmatic as Auckland grows

Quite the reading for your start of the week…

 

 

Council Submission on the Housing Accord

·

What Council thought on the Housing Accord

 

I am no fan of the Much-Ado-About-Nothing (aka the Housing) Accord as it short cuts the Rural Urban Boundary processes we are going through right now, and it also impinges on Council Sovereignty. I have made mention of this last month while the Unitary Plan was open for the first round of discussion.

Auckland Council, some Local Boards and the Independent Maori Statutory Board have written draft submissions on the Accord which is due to go before Select Committee in Wellington.

I am still reading the submission Council has written myself and will comment on it on Monday. In the mean time some light reading for you and if you are inclined leave your thoughts in the comments below.

The Submission (Starting page 7) to the Housing Accord

 

Unitary Plan Update

·

Over 20,000 pieces of feedback?

Judging by the Auckland Council‘s release there was 20,200 individual pieces of feedback to the first round of “consultation” for the Unitary Plan.

From Auckland Council

Thanks for your feedback

Published: Tuesday 04 June 2013
Mayor Len Brown with some of the written feedback on the draft Auckland Unitary Plan.
 Mayor Len Brown with some of the written feedback on the draft Auckland Unitary Plan.
(Wonder where my one got put at 104 pages)

More than 20,200 Aucklanders have had their say on the draft Auckland Unitary Plan– the new planning rulebook that will help shape Auckland.

Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse says the level of interest during the 11-week informal public engagement period, which finished on 31 May, was phenomenal.

“Developing a plan that covers all eight previous council areas is a mammoth task and we are taking on board the feedback from our communities to ensure we get the best plan possible,” she says.

“It has been fantastic to see so many Aucklanders taking part in the engagement and sharing their ideas as we plan for the next 30 years of Auckland’s development.”

To ensure communities understand the proposed changes, local boards held around 250 events across the region, including drop-in sessions, meetings in libraries and community centres, and community walks.

  • About 14,000 Aucklanders attended these events.
  • Auckland Council also sought the opinions of Auckland’s young people – via a youth video competition.
    • The competition was won by ‘The Future’, produced by four Orewa College students.
    • View the five finalist videos.

 

Aucklanders involvement

  • 20,200 pieces of individual feedback received
  • 14,000 people attended events
  • More than 88,000 people visited www.shapeauckland.co.nz
  • More than 15,000 people tried the housing simulator.

Next steps

Feedback will be considered in the development of the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, which is due to be notified later this year.

On notification, the public will have a statutory right to make submissions and be heard by a hearings panel.

More information will be available at www.shapeauckland.co.nz and in future editions of OurAuckland.

———-

Of note the following developments have either occurred or being heard in the wind somewhere (but something to keep an eye on)

  • An independent review is under way with the recent 11-week feedback process. The review will be presented to the Auckland Plan Committee (“Wart n all”) at its conclusion
  • Caught in the wind that the current stacking of feedback is 60:40 “against” the Unitary Plan. HOWEVER and this is a big point here, the definition of “against” is wide open for interpretation. If I support the basic concepts of the UP but wrote 104 pages on how to clean it up through some large-scale alternatives, does that make me “against” the Unitary Plan. I think the better way in looking at it if the 60:40 point can be substantiated is that 60% are looking for some whole-scale changes to aspects of the UP rather than minor (which is where the 40% would go). In those regards then yes I would fit in there especially with the Special Character Zones and Manukau as the Second CBD of Auckland

 

But, lets wait and see where things go with the UP and the review currently underway

 

And Orsman got SERVED

·

Media3 – The Unitary Plan Debate

And a Nice Mention too

 

Tuesday night I made my up to Mt Eden from Papakura to watch a recording of Russell Brown‘s Media3 program. The show was broadcast last night just after 11pm and can be found either online at TV3 or you can wait for the repeat on Saturday morning.

The main topic I was there for was Russell interviewing three journalists (or an editor in the case with Metro Magazine) over the media’s coverage of the Unitary Plan. The three journalists were:

  • Simon Wilson of Metro Magazine
  • Todd Nial of Radio NZ
  • Bernard Orsman (yes Orsman) from the NZ Herald

The discussion trundled along and was covering the fact that Council did balls up the sales pitch of the Unitary Plan rather badly. I would tend to agree on that regard against the Council with having to run the blog hard in providing information more clearly than Council did or could. But, as Desley Simpson of Orakei Local Board; the Unitary Plan was written by planners for planners and 99% of the city are not planners. Well I am not a planner strictly by University qualification – I am a Geographer and Political “Scientist”. As a Geographer though I still understood the Unitary Plan and what it meant. Although the planning discipline could be argued it was born out of Geography and that Geographers dabble in the planning discipline quite a lot (go Geography as the mother of all sciences and arts with what it encompasses). That understanding would provide assistance to those in Auckland through the first round of Unitary Plan feedback

But I digress

And so Russell facilitated the debate on with the Main Stream Media covering the Unitary Plan and the panel of three journalists continued to make their points until…

Bernard Orsman of the NZ Herald basically having his backside served to him on a silver platter by Simon Wilson. If you have not watched the particular Media3 then I recommend doing so before continuing here.

While I have seen it in the States, having the Main Stream Media serve up one of their own in NZ is something not often seen here. And as I mentioned just earlier Orsman got served – on extremely biased coverage against the Unitary Plan that included blatant misinformation coming from some Right Wing quarters (which got heavily debunked here and in other blogs).

Orsman while looking shell-shocked at being served tried to justify himself through he providing “balanced coverage” and that others are entitled to opinions.

Cue from Russell his mention of myself and Auckland Transport Blog on our extensive, balanced and leading coverage on the Unitary Plan through our blogs. Coverage that would earn the praise of the Deputy Mayor even though some days I was harsh against the Council in some aspects of the UP!

Again Orsman said after the “cue” said “they are entitled to our opinion” after which I think there was silence from him. Soon after the debate session ended.

And so that was the Media3 recording on the Unitary Plan discussion to which it was time to mix and mingle.

I was joined by Ryan and Sudhvir of Generation Zero and were talking to Russell, Simon and Todd on a wide range of issues with the Unitary Plan including angles wanting to be covered but could not due to time limitations.

Orsman I think decided to snob us but not that I am particularly fussed.

Also I was talking to mayoral candidate John Palino who was watching the Media3 recording as well. A good discussion on all things Auckland

At the conclusion of the mix and mingle session  was time to head back home. A good night and a good discussion on the Unitary Plan

Thanks Russell for the mention and I can say Tuesday night was a good night in watching the recording (with its serves) and the mix and mingle afterwards

Experience from the Unitary Plan – Part Two

·

Part Two of my reflections of the last 11 weeks with the Unitary Plan

April: Community Meetings and THAT Bridge

 

April would prove to be the busiest of months for me in regards to clocking up the kilometres across the city attending community meetings on the Unitary Plan. By the end of it I would have attended around 14 community Unitary Plan meetings and a Civic Forum right across the city (apart from West Auckland).

April would also prove to me a more “heartbreaking” month as a folly from Auckland Council led to anger and upset for residents down in Southern Auckland. The cause? A (which ended up being called “THAT”) bridge that spanned from Karaka to Weymouth over the Manukau Harbour. That bridge had shown up in  the Unitary Plan – Rural Urban Boundary Addendum as a “possible option” needing to be built somewhere down the track.

The only catch was that the bridge showed up in all three southern RUB options and has not even been “vetted” by Auckland Transport and NZTA yet. When pressed and after a more heated meeting in Weymouth did the Deputy Mayor and Chief Planning Officer realise “oops” and got a new set of RUB maps out with the bridge removed. The only problem was that the horse had already bolted on the issue and was continued to be further fuelled by a group known as the Karaka Collective.

While the Collective would give a presentation in May on their options (and I have their literature as well), it was basically known that certain landowners were looking at having their land come under potential development options through the life of the Unitary Plan. It was also known that they were keen on the bridge to act as a short cut in skipping out State Highway One. However, the negative consequences to both the Karaka North and West development as well as the bridge would be deemed too high on existing Karaka and Weymouth residents. If the bridge was to be built it should have been done 70 years ago before Weymouth was truly established. But, now it is too late and alternatives must be found. In essence we await Council’s decisions on the southern RUB before formal notification on the Unitary Plan. Once known then the next stage of the “battle” begins…

 

While things were heated in Karaka and Weymouth over the Unitary Plan and THAT bridge, things were also running high in St Heliers.

It is of note that in these meetings I would usually sit quietly with my notebook and pen and take notes on the proceedings. These notes would form commentary here on the blog as well as any “battle plans” required in the Unitary Plan feedback round. After the meetings I would talk to people (ranging from the Deputy Mayor to planners, to Local Board members and councillors, to residents) in their thoughts and seeking out dialogue. This dialogue (especially in Weymouth and St Heliers) would form two battle-plans (or rather alternatives) that I later drew up. I would ask questions in the meetings later in the game but, were only done so at the Southern Auckland meetings.

The St Heliers experience was an interesting one. What would be deemed at first pretty much naked hostility towards to main Council and the planners became in fact a community giving a damn and trying to seek out a solution not only for their own place but also the wider city. What would give the initial reaction to St Heliers was a piece from Eye-On-Auckland on NIMBYism that would set the city off. It also woke the Main Stream Media up and set off some of the more shrill-aspects of opposition to the Unitary Plan. Those shrill-aspects would eventually lead to near daily debunking on not only my blog but, else where as well.

With the Weymouth and St Heliers experience though came two alternatives from here. The first was more widely publicised – the Special Character Zone, while the second in staving off THAT bridge was a more quiet and behind the scenes affair.

Both alternatives have landed in my feedback to the Unitary Plan with other people using the Special Character Zone concept as well. Again we await the council to point out what changes they have made to the Unitary Plan prior to formal notification to see what we essentially got.

 

While Weymouth, Karaka and St Heliers would be more “noisy” meetings I did attend the Civic Forum in Manukau which was a more tame affair. In saying that though the discussion was lively as the future of Southern Auckland through the Unitary Plan were debated at length. Four main aspects would come out of that forum which were:

  1. The socio-economic and demographic consequences behind the level of intensification indicated in the Unitary Plan
  2. Height on the Town Centres
  3. Zones and Centres needed a rework
  4. Manukau as the Second CBD of Auckland

While all four points would end up mentioned in my own feedback to the Unitary Plan, Manukau as the Second CBD would be an idea that was picked up and ran with all the way to the Auckland Plan Committee last month.

 

So was April a busy month? In the terms of clocking up those kilometres it sure was. But the final month of the Unitary Plan feedback would prove to be the actual busiest month for me. How? Find out in my next “Experience from the Unitary Plan” post.

 

Experience from the Unitary Plan

· 1 Comment ·

Part One of my reflections of the last 11 weeks with the Unitary Plan

 

Writing this while listening to Q & A on TVNZ-on-demand is going to be an interesting exercise. Reactions on Susan Wood’s interview with Mayor Brown at the end of this post.

My own experiences with the Unitary Plan at this stage of the (long) game has been real interesting and an eye opener (and that is still being an underestimate as well) since the launch on March 15.

The Unitary Plan was launched on March 15 with the first round of engagement with the wider city having just closed (on May 31). I was in Australia on holiday when the Unitary Plan was launched and was not back until a week after the launch. But, once back in the country the extensive and leading independent commentary on the Unitary Plan would begin.

“Part One” in my experience journey of the Unitary Plan – essentially the first four weeks (March 27-April 2) was reading sections of the Unitary Plan and attending my first round of community Unitary Plan meetings.

The particular sections of the Unitary Plan are (and would be what I would submit on):

  1. Section 3 – The Zones and Centres
  2. Section 4 – The Rules and Definitions
  3. The Rural Urban Boundary Addendum (which includes the two new “taxes”)

The first round of community meetings would be on the North Shore and out in the East. However, a Council run Civic Forum was also run in Manukau which I attended.

 

This part of the experience with the particular three sections of the Unitary Plan will be the learning and networking part. Brushing up on what the Unitary Plan has installed for me personally and the wider city, seeing initial reactions from communities, and forging or strengthening relationships with both ordinary people and key players were occurring in this part. All this work in the part would be required later on as the UP debate became increasingly political and divisive from some quarters.

But keeping the commentary balanced (the Deputy Mayor has acknowledged my opposition to some aspects of “The Clunker” but also keeping mature through keeping the commentary balanced on both sides (what works and what does not work)) and running those thought-provoking alternatives – all starting from Day One is what kept me honestly sane as well as acting a moderator to a very hot reactor about to meltdown (the reactor being the city, the fuel being the Unitary Plan).

I suppose the question is; ‘Would I do this all again?’ Would I be a moderator plunging myself into a very hot reactor that could meltdown any time – again? The answer is yes I would and will actually be doing so again. Again being when the Unitary Plan goes for formal notification at the end of the year.

My next “Experience from the Unitary Plan” post will cover the month of April. The month where the commentary was running hot, the alternatives running hotter, the Rural Urban Boundary saga running white-hot, and the opposition finally getting a clue on the UP.

All here at Talking Auckland

Oh and as for TVNZ’s Q&A program. Note to TVNZ; get better interviewers who know how to interview. Oh and do your actual homework on the Unitary Plan and who is actually running for mayor. I want dialogue and critique, not Len’s predetermined PR spin and an ill-informed panel looking at our Super City elections…

 

 

Lets not Play Silly with the Unitary Plan

·

Work with what we have please

I saw this from the much respect Councillor Fletcher this morning in regards to the Unitary Plan (it also has comments on it as well as it comes from Facebook):

The Unitary Plan should be withdrawn and replaced with a carefully staged approach that takes into full account critical infrastructure and the cost of growth. I hope the Mayor and CEO of Auckland Council will be willing to consider this with submissions on the ill conceived plan closing today. It would be throwing good money after bad to keep fiddling with this fundamentally flawed document. Better to scrap it and start again.
  • Matt van Tuinen Hear hear
  • Ben Ross While I hear you Christine have you asked the respective Ministers back in Wellington if such an exercise can be done? You of all people know that the UP is a creature of the Local Government Act (Auckland Governance) 2010 and procedures must be followed set out in that Act (let alone the RMA).

    Yes we might want to restart the UP again but is it “legal” to do so
  • Sharon Stewart I agree with Christine Fletcher the information the public have been asked to submit on has so many mistakes.. The question that needs to be asked is it legal to ask the community to submit on something with so many mistakes. Cameron BrewerDick QuaxGeorge Wood
  • Ben Ross So anyone going to ask the Local Government Minister, the Minister for the Environment and the Attorney General for a legal opinion on all this?
  • Sharon Stewart I am sure this will happen
  • Ben Ross Let me know when it does please 
  • Sharon Stewart Needs to be done before we waste more rate payers money. This is so important for Auckland to get it right.
    • Ben Ross Please do so ASAP. I have a 110 page submission sitting here on the UP as well as Clients’ submissions. None of us want our time (and money wasted) under taking the work we have done only for it to be “pointless” due to a total rewrite ordered
    • Sharon Stewart Better to rewrite and get it right.
    • Ben Ross Waiting
  • Gayatri Jaduram Do we have a legal definition for “Draft, Draft” ! 

 

So a pile of umming and ooo-ing over the Unitary Plan as the 5pm deadline comes and goes today on this feedback round. Thus far the Councillors pushing a rewrite seem non-committal to actually doing what I stated and contacting the relevant Ministers if they seriously want rewrite.

As I said “Please do so (get a rewrite ordered) ASAP. I have a 110 page submission sitting here on the UP as well as Clients’ submissions. None of us want our time (and money wasted) under taking the work we have done only for it to be “pointless” due to a total rewrite ordered”

Having just got my own submission and and helped my clients get theirs in I think we would be rightfully annoyed if a total rewrite was to occur now.

Councillors if they wanted the rewrite should have asked for one on March 16 when the plan was released. Not on May 31 when the first round of feedback is about to close (as I write this).\

I have said the Councillors have been particularly slow in some aspects of the UP. I am wondering if this call for a rewrite is them being slow again.

Not good enough if it is and was…

I and my clients do not appreciate our time being wasted due to slowness from the Governing Body…