Tag: Ann Hartley

Unitary Plan Updates – Day 2

·

We Finally Move on from Residential Provisions

 

Two days later the Auckland Plan Committee finally got through Recommendations A-E, V, and W. Effectively 7 out of 69 recommendations have been passed since yesterday.

What happened on those two days? Some rather shameless (or is it shameful) politicking and lobbying via the now defeated Councillor Ann Hartley-slash-Auckland 2040 lobby group’s amendments. If some of the more dangerous ones passed, they would have held Auckland back towards 1950’s style planning for the next 30 years. There were a few amendments though that were needed to clear things up in which the planners supported any how (these were not wrecking amendments though). Councillor Hartley’s amendments had effectively grounded down the Auckland Plan Committee into spending two full days covering residential provision. The Committee has not even started yet on such topics as:

  • The Rural Urban Boundary
  • Business Zones and The Centres
  • Social and Physical Infrastructure
  • Port of Auckland
  • Heights in some centres

 

Despite what some representatives and others might think, I hold the liberal view that through defeating these amendments Auckland has stepped one bit closer a more liberalised planning framework. What does that mean? For every control the conservatives lug onto the Unitary Plan whether it be: 80m2 minimum backyards in the Mixed Housing Zones, minimum parking on the Terrace Housing/Apartment Zone and Mixed Housing Zones, minimum lot sizes (so opposite unlimited density in certain circumstances) and so on is a cost to the developer that is passed on to the end-user – the resident.

Furthermore the planning disasters we have had in Auckland are actually owing to two things:

  • The Building Act reforms of the late 90s and early 00’s which led to the leaking housing disaster
  • Over Planning (too many controls) which as an example led to the shoe box apartments we see in the city today

And so if the cost has to be passed on from the developer to the end-user what do we get? Housing Affordability and Choice out of reach even further for everyone, not just Anglo-Saxon nuclear families.

Now I do advocate quality urban design via the Auckland Design Manual and solid building of dwelling (such as treated timber, eaves, and good heating and ventilation of the house interior). But I will not advocate controls that interfere with a freer market to deliver the choices and price ranges to every single person whether they are in a collective or nuclear family living in Auckland. Controls as seen in Councillor Hartley’s amendments that were defeated today, and Councillor Brewer’s parking amendments that also need to be defeated.

 

I do give my absolute congratulations for Councillor George Wood for his reasoning, logic and sanity in voting down those Auckland wrecking amendments. Thank you George for allowing us to bring Auckland slowly out of 1950 to the 21st Century.

 

I have decided to be at tomorrow’s proceedings as the Councillors pass the recommendations on:

  • The Business Zones (including the Metropolitan, Town and Local Centres)
  • The City Centre which includes Port of Auckland
  • Social and Physical Infrastructure

 

Live Tweets and updates will occur as they happen.

Oh one last thing:

“Any urban plan thicker than one’s thumbnail length will fail and cost the city due to the said plan’s over complex nature which makes it beyond comprehension.”

Controls add to the thickness of an Urban Plan…

Remedy? DIET!

 

TALKING AUCKLAND

Talking Auckland: Blog of TotaRim Consultancy Limited

TotaRim Consultancy
Bringing Well Managed Progress to Auckland and The Unitary Plan

Auckland: 2013 – YOUR CITY, YOUR CALL

Related articles

Unitary Plan Updates – Day 1

·

Long and Only One Actual Decision Made

 

If I was to give a one line summary of Day One of the Unitary Plan proceedings it would be this:

Elect Councillors who know how to give 30 second speeches. Anything beyond that is always irrelevant dribble stuck on a Merry-Go-Round with the Emergency Stop Button busted.

Okay a bit more than a single line but the sums up yesterday after only one major resolution (out of a few pages worth (which I will stick up in a moment)) was passed and we have only two days left.

I will not be present at Day Two of the Unitary Plan proceedings today. I will be on TotaRim business in Manukau today advancing the Manukau Super Metropolitan Centre concept with potential stakeholders. Tomorrow I might be back at Town Hall depending on today’s outcomes both in Manukau and at Town Hall. However, if Councillors are that damned slow in getting through the recommendations I might consider Friday a write off entirely and go do something else.

 

So what did we get out of Day One? Well two three things.

Starting with Councillor Brewer’s shameless motion to effectively kill off the three day proceedings and stall it until November 30. This was his motion which he tried to get through but failed on a vote of 6-15 (and thankfully):

My amendment by 15 votes to 6:

 

Brewer/Fletcher: “That the Auckland Plan Committee delays its decision until November to approve the notification of an amended  draft of the Auckland Unitary Plan to allow the local body elections to conclude, and to give the newly publicly mandated second term council the opportunity to review and seek advice, and to allow the wider community and stakeholders more time and input on the latest revised changes and significant new information still emerging.”

 

The 6 that voted for this were: Brewer, Fletcher, Lee, Stewart, Quax and one other (but can’t be seriously bothered digging that up).

 

Once that shameless motion was defeated soundly the Committee moved onto Residential provisions in the Unitary Plan – which we are still on as I write this very post today.

Basically what the Councillors are trying to do is get through all these recommendations (embedded below) so that the Unitary Plan can be decided on September Five whether to be notified or not.

These are the recommendations the Auckland Plan Committee are trying to get through:

 

The only recommendations that passed yesterday were the following:

  • A
  • B
  • L – which was amended to allow 10% “affordable” housing in a Greenfield development area – not the original 7%. It is to note that the amendment only passed on a vote of 11-9

 

For more “fast” updates check my Taking Auckland Facebook page or @BenRoss_AKL Twitter link. There is really no point doing a 5000 word post on giving the breakdown of yesterday’s proceedings believe me. Not unless you want to share my utter pain of being stuck on a Merry-Go-Round stuck on fast with the emergency button busted…

 

In saying this with Day Two, I will be keeping tabs on the live video feed and will Tweet happenings as they happen – if they happen today. The live feed can be found here http://www.allaboutauckland.com/

 

Oh one thing seeming we are dealing with the Residential provisions in the Unitary Plan. I have a copy of all of Councillor Ann Hartley’s amendments to these residential provisions in the Unitary Plan. Councillor Hartly seems to have done a total U-Turn on her stances – owing most likely to being “influenced” by lobby groups possibly like Auckland 2040. I will get the amendments up today on Scribd for your viewing ASAP.

 

More Unitary Plan Updates and documents will be posted later today and tomorrow. However Manukau business must be attended to.

TALKING AUCKLAND

Talking Auckland: Blog of TotaRim Consultancy Limited

TotaRim Consultancy
Bringing Well Managed Progress to Auckland and The Unitary Plan

Auckland: 2013 – YOUR CITY, YOUR CALL

 

 

Related articles

 

Close Election?

·

Rudman Says No, Orsman Says “Could”

 

NOW the commentary starts ramping up on the Auckland Council Elections in the main stream media. This after I believe I started it quietly back in 2011 and ramping it up more recently.

We have heard some commentating writing off the elections already especially in the Auckland mayoral race with myself at this point in time giving Len an 85% chance of getting his re-election. As for Council Ward seats (those wanting to become a Councillor) this is proving to be more interesting (not that I don’t mind even with our shills).

Resident Unitary Plan writer Bernard Orsman thinks different to his counterpart Rudman and offered this insightful piece on the upcoming elections.

 

From the NZ Herald

Split vote could lead to close mayoral contest

By Bernard Orsman @BernardOrsman

As the race for the Auckland mayoralty begins, Bernard Orsman looks at the big issues for candidates and voters

…

And even if the mayor gets re-elected, he might find a different hue around the council table, one less friendly to the “inclusive” team he has come to rely upon.

The failure of the centre-right to unite around the Communities & Residents brand (with subsequent desertions from C&R this month) and the mixed bag of left-leaning councillors have worked in Mr Brown’s favour in his first term.

It would take only a handful of new, right-leaning faces to tip the balance and make life difficult for the mayor. Pro-Brown councillors Michael Goudie and Des Morrison are stepping down in the respective conservative wards of Albany and Franklin. The centre-right is also targeting Cathy Casey (Albert-Eden-Roskill), Ann Hartley (North Shore) and Richard Northey (Maungakiekie-Tamaki).

Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse has taken umbrage at a call from Herald columnist Brian Rudman for candidates to embrace the labels of National, Labour and the like.

She says this would see a return to the bad old days of the former Auckland City Council with secret caucus meetings, one-term councils and three-year planning horizons.

She has coined the term “Auckland Party” for people who want to focus on the city and building for the future.

But even minus the C&R tag, there are enough issues uniting centre-right candidates – such as a low uniform charge that leads to bigger rates for high-value home owners and debt levels – to potentially scupper the “Auckland Party”.

The looming election is already seeing changes made to the Unitary Plan, with word leaking out that height limits are being reduced in many town centres and “small-scale” apartment buildings banished from many residential areas.

Modifications to the draft Unitary Plan for formal notification in September is a political test for Mr Brown and his inner circle of Ms Hulse, Ms Hartley, Penny Webster and Mr Northey. Get it wrong and the Unitary Plan – the new planning rulebook that affects every Aucklander and every property – will become a big election issue.

…

I did leave the first half out as it was covering the mayoral stuff.

 

Orsman does have a legitimate point (if not a slight slant due to perceived bias against the Unitary Plan and Deputy Mayor (Bernard have you asked me yet for those secret papers – I do have all 7,000 pages of them sitting here)) though that Council could change its make up (regardless of who is Mayor).

Right now to get a true Centre-Right “dominance” around the Council table you would need a swing of 6 to 7 seats from the Centre Left or pro-Brown supporters in the election. That is one heck of an ask and would need pretty much a city-wide revolt for that to happen. I do not see such a revolt towards the Councillors let alone the mayor at the moment.

But, what makes this more uncertain is what kind of Centre-Right person could land a spot at the table and what they might actually do.

I’ll give an example using me in contrast to a shill. While I have no intention of running for a Local Board or Council seat until 2016 if I did decide to run this could happen.

I am a Social Liberal which naturally puts me Centre-Left on the Political Compass tests. However, I am perceived to be a “young Tory” that would hark back to Golden Era of National from 1936 to 1972. This means I would be cast as a Centre-Right candidate. In saying that unlike the Right Wing shills out there (just look at their stance on the Unitary Plan), I would be more inclined to work with the Deputy Mayor and push through the concessions for my area and the wider city. This is already occurring and I am not even a Councillor nor running this round.

Effectively rather than sit, their arms crossed and looking like a permanent sour-puss grumpy going “No, no, no” and not put any non NIMBY alternative forward (enter the Shill), I would work with the hand I got dealt with and make something useful out of it. So far working with that I have has worked as an advocate and consultant in gaining concessions for a Better Auckland through a better Unitary Plan – all while I am Centre Right.

So in Orsman’s case being Centre Right might not upset the cart per-se in Council business. Sure the sharper edges of the Mayor’s policy might be sanded back but no whole scale change that having a bunch of Right Wingers would foster (and damage the city due to instability – yes I am pointing to you C&R)!

Speaking of C&R – what on earth happened? Never mind!

 

Now what about this Auckland Party concept the Deputy Mayor brought up? Orsman said the concept would not work if the Council make up swung to the Centre-Right. I would correct him and say the Auckland Party would not work if the Council got dominated by Right Wingers for which in any case the City would be royally buggered.

I would say that the Auckland Party would be made up of both Centre Left and Centre Right Councillors who can work in a Grand Coalition sort of manner and advance the interests of the Auckland region. Rather than have factional politics and a divisive Council that marred the Isthmus for the last 50-60 years.

Lets see how this pans out as we draw closer to October 12 – Election Day

 

Related articles