Where Ben is for the next round of Unitary Plan Community Meetings Commentary and community meetings continue as The Unitary Plan causes further debate from all sides. I am … Continue reading The Clunker and Me (2) + A Note on Manukau
Where Ben is for the next round of Unitary Plan Community Meetings Commentary and community meetings continue as The Unitary Plan causes further debate from all sides. I am … Continue reading The Clunker and Me (2) + A Note on Manukau
VOTE NO = Rail Roaded Viable Alternative = Saving Your Town Milford was the second community meeting I have been to thus far in regards to the Unitary … Continue reading Conclusion from Milford Unitary Plan Community Meeting Last Night
Auckland Vs. Wellington Thanks to the kindness of Metro Magazine this thoughtful Editorial piece from Simon Wilson was able to be read while I was in Sydney and Brisbane … Continue reading Metro Mag Opinion
Concept Work Continues on Potential MCC Redevelopment And Someone Has Already Started Doing So From “MANUKAU CITY CENTRE – POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT” Manukau City Centre is arguably … Continue reading MANUKAU CITY CENTRE – POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT CTD
As we await the release of the Draft Unitary Plan on March 15 I would like to bring to your attention two items being sort for discussion in the Unitary Plan by Council. They are called “Sharing Land Value Uplift from Rezoning” and “Inclusionary Zoning;” of which both come under “Additional Tools for Enabling Affordable Neighbourhoods” under the Draft Unitary Plan.
Now these two options can be found from Page 67 in the embedded document below (so you might need to scroll if Scribd does not automatically go to that page):
For you homework I would like you to read these two “Additional Tools for Enabling Affordable Neighbourhoods” then post for your feedback here at BR:AKL on them.
Wikipedia also has a nice piece on Inclusionary Zoning which you can see by clicking the respective hyperlinks in red. I noticed Inclusionary Zoning is a tool from the USA while Sharing Land Value Uplift is from the UK.
However, I am currently reading it and from what I interpret so far both tools are additional taxes to middle and upper class citizens in a wealth distributing exercise for the lower and working classes here in Auckland. In effect Auckland Council is going to be coercing either directly or indirectly (through developers having to comply and as a result pass extra costs on) citizens and developers through regulations and plans to at least set aside for “affordable housing” (which is often becomes social housing) rather than do the actual opposite and liberalise our regulations and plans allowing at least developers to act more freely in providing a range of housing without costing the citizenry in Auckland.
So either you get a tax slugged on top of your rates and maybe targeted rates for whatever the Council decides to do with that money, or coerced into providing social housing at the cost of a large bulk of Auckland citizenry who end up carrying the can for this provision (rather than the State undertaking the social housing exercises via Housing NZ).
Time to delved deeper into these two new coercive and taxation regimes lurking in the Unitary Plan draft.
Remembering I stand for a more liberalised planning and provision approach to building neighbourhoods in Auckland.
Auckland Council have called for submissions to the Draft 2013/2014 Annual Plan – the main budgetary document for Auckland Council for the next 12 months. All revenue and expected expenses (including capital outlay for proposed capital projects) over this twelve month period are laid out in the Annual Plan documents which I shall link and embed below.
I am still working through the Draft Annual Plan at the moment before compiling a submission (submissions close 4pm – 25 February 2013) but will upload my submission to BR:AKL as soon as it is done.
It is of note that Council has asked for our feedback via the submissions on the “Regional Facilities Auckland grant towards development of the TelstraClear Pacific Events Centre” – which is building this White Water Rafting Facility at a cost to the ratepayer of $32m as well as taking on some financial risk if the project fails. In order for this development to happen (and as stated in the Draft Annual Plan) there will have to be an amendment to the 2012-2022 Long Term Plan which is already in operation. This would be because this particular development is calling on for extra funds made outside what has been allocated already in the existing and current Long Term Plan.
As a result I will be submitting in strong opposition to this as it creates precedent for every other Tom, Dick and Harry project with dubious actual economic merit to come before Council and thus allowing an existing LTP to be butchered to cater for it – when if needed, it should be kicked over to the next Long Term Plan which is the 2015-2025 LTP.
This is not how we budget for things anywhere – and I expect Council to follow the same standard. Besides I can think of better used to go and sink $32m such as cleaning up Otara Creek which is a toxic site or to our struggling Local Boards to fund local community facilities or events.
However I will run further commentary on this as I draw up my submission
In the mean time some links and documents
Draft annual plan 2013/2014 – Home Page
Draft annual plan 2013/2014 – Documents
Draft annual plan 2013/2014 – Key topics and events
Draft annual plan 2013/2014 – Draft Annual Plan 2013/2014: Have your say
VolumeOne of the Draft Annual Plan
Volume Two of the Draft Annual Plan
Volume Three of the Draft Annual Plan
(Yep another rates decrease coming my way)