A Californian Take on Housing Affordability

·

A look at the situation from our Pacific cousin

 

We all know about housing affordability. It is literally shoved in our face by Central and Local Governments, the media, and social media. How do we address the issue of housing affordability is as vexed whether the chicken or egg came first. Below is an extract from ‘The Planning Report’ and its Housing Affordability post by Bill Witte.

From The Planning Report:

Bill Witte on Housing Affordability: A Supply and Demand Problem

Bill Witte. Source: http://www.planningreport.com/2014/05/28/bill-witte-housing-affordability-supply-and-demand-problem

“You have a coastal California with a relatively expensive housing market, but you also have a significant percentage of the population whose incomes are below middle class, and with job growth concentrated either in ‘knowledge economy’ jobs that pay very well, or lower paying service jobs. There is a disconnect.” –Bill Witte

Bill, a recent study by Trulia found, after examining the range of affordability for a typical middle class home against median household income, that home ownership was increasingly out of reach of the middle class along the coasts, and specifically in Los Angeles County. Please share your thoughts on the meaning and significance of that finding.

Bill Witte: First of all, I think one of the reasons that’s true is that Los Angeles County has a very high percentage of low and very-low-income households. You have both a supply and a demand problem. You have a relatively expensive housing market and an often lengthy and expensive approval process for new development,

In the Bay Area, which might even be less affordable, housing prices are even more astronomic but incomes are generally higher. That’s fundamentally not the case in Los Angeles.

What are the implications of this phenomenon?

First of all, it is worth considering the context in LA County for middle class residential options, which is related to a whole basket of issues, including quality of schools and other quality of life concerns. A lot of the working and middle class moved out of inner city neighborhoods to distant suburban areas in the ‘90s where housing is more affordable. So, an obvious problem arises from commuting—the time, the effect on families, and transportation costs, which have risen as gas prices have risen. That’s one problem. Another problem is the City and the County find it increasingly difficulty to support or attract the middle class, and that impacts a city’s economic base. The net result: middle class jobs may be less likely to locate in urban LA and LA County.

…

You can read the rest of the article here: http://www.planningreport.com/2014/05/28/bill-witte-housing-affordability-supply-and-demand-problem

 

Your thoughts on the situation in California and any similar issues back here in Auckland? 

 

Being Sensitive when Committing Someone’s Ashes

·

Please Remember and Be Considerate of All Others

 

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):

Council told to think again on ash scattering

PHIL GOFF | 6 JUN 2014

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.

—ends—

Source: https://www.labour.org.nz/media/council-told-think-again-ash-scattering

 

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

$75m offer for AT’s Downtown Car Park

· 1 Comment ·

Should the Council take the money and invest?

 

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

Source: http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/10126538/Council-offered-75m-for-car-park

 

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:

  1. The CV of the site is at $65 million. So is $75 million a good offer or a bit of a bargain here
  2. 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
  3. Would the loss of income from the parking building be a detriment to Auckland Transport and Auckland Council on upcoming capital expenditure programs
  4. 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 Remodelling Itself

·

What Penrith in New South Wales is doing

 

From ‘Sourceable’

The Changing Face of Penrith.

penrith-main
Source: http://sourceable.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/penrith-main.jpg

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.

– See more at: http://sourceable.net/changing-face-penrith/#sthash.FhPX68q3.PSANSn54.dpuf

….

 

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.

 

Cunliffe promises to legislate against coat-tailing

·

Further commentary from Pete George on Labour and the ‘Coat Tailing’ provision in our MMP system

Pete George's avatarYour NZ

On Firstline this morning Labour leader David Cunliffe reiterated Labour’s opposition to the MMP ‘coat-tailing’ provision (where a party that wins one electorate seat gets proportional representation on their party vote without having to make the 5% threshold).

Cunliffe said went further, saying that ‘in the the first 100 days of a government I lead we will introduce legislation” to remove coat tailing from the electoral act.

@FirstlineNZ

David Cunliffe says a government he leads would pass law to remove coat-tailing from MMP “within the first 100 days”.

“We think it’s wrong, no matter who does it” Cunliffe on Internet-Mana electorate coat-tailing.

Stuff quotes Cunliffe:

Cunliffe said he challenged prime minister John Key to sign up to Labour’s bill, but the party would move to change the Electoral Act within its first 100 days in government, regardless.

“We’re saying a very principled and consistent thing,” he told Firstline this morning.

View original post 198 more words