Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: So what now?

219 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 9 Newer→ Last

  • Matthew Hooton, in reply to Sacha,

    I doubt people are asking for high-rise ghettos like previous councils allowed on Nelson St.

    Those are slums, but very 'affordable' I hear. I was referring more to higher quality apartments to draw in wealthier people (including baby boomers) to the inner city.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2007 • 195 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Hooton, in reply to Sacha,

    Leadership sometimes involves putting longer-term evidence-based policy ahead of what the polls say right now.

    Yes, but that has been very out of fashion in New Zealand for at least 17 years.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2007 • 195 posts Report Reply

  • Keir Leslie,

    There is no way Key puts commissioners into Auckland.

    It would be an absolute undemocratic outrage, the optics of shafting a Goff either possessing or about to take a huge mandate are awful, and it would open Labour up to hold an pro-intensification stance - in principle - while simultaneously arguing against any given bit of intensification as an undemocratic abuse of power (which it would be). National would be alienating key constituencies across the board - I suspect it would be one thing that would put Seymour under real pressure to break with National, for instance.

    Even if the AC rejects the UP (which I doubt it will) I would imagine Key does nothing for the rest of this year and resets the agenda with Goff in early '17, and they try and deal with this early in the term and as far away from an election as possible.

    You can't get elected members to vote against their constituents' wishes in an election years, it's just not feasible, and if you construct a process that requires that you are set up for failure.

    Since Jul 2008 • 1452 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Sacha,

    I doubt people are asking for high-rise ghettos like previous councils allowed on Nelson St. Medium-rise is the typology we are most missing.

    Exactly, and also not all in one place but spread through the mid-range suburbs and aligned with improved public transport routes.

    This isn't rocket science and it isn't something never seen before in the world so there is plenty of information on how to do this right - if you want examples have a look at transportblog and the gen zero sites.

    BUT people see two things - first is their backyard suddenly becomes something they don't like and they'd rather have their personal slice of heaven unchanged regardless of how many others are left in the lurch AKA selfish nimbyism.

    And second, people see the opportunity to make LOTS of money, especially if the system can be rigged to make their business profit AKA greed.

    At least 13 of our current council appear to be happy to go with nimbyism and greed and are too stupid to see the next likely step of a government appointed commission, which ironically will cut them out of the profits and make sure they have no influence over whose backyard is affected.

    Nose wave bye bye to face.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 4460 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Keir Leslie,

    It would be an absolute undemocratic outrage

    As crazy as disbanding an elected body that was protecting waterways from overuse and appointing a commission that to greenlight dairy expansion in one of the least suitable environments in NZ.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 4460 posts Report Reply

  • Wichid,

    Removing just the out-of-scope changes isn't possible as you end up with a pock marked map that, because of inter-dependencies will collapse on itself. The Council Officers made it clear that the spatial application of the planning principles is supported by evidence up to a professional standard. The planners can't remove large sections of the submission and then defend the evidence of what is left. They even made it clear that there is no 'old version' to roll back to. You either apply the planning principles spatially with supporting evidence, or fail. Planners can't conduct themselves to their required professional standard to Hearings Panel.

    So now council officers are in a bind, they don't have time to rework the council submission in any meaningful way. They can't defend half a submission as they've been asked.

    Likely outcome is that Council fails to make a submission, leaving the IHP to consider other large players to fight for much higher density (Housing NZ etc).

    Resulting from this will likely be a delay, wrangling and an unbalanced city. Infrastructure spending is heavily tied to projected population growth. Just as Lake Rd, Devonport is a nightmare, the well healed Eastern Suburbs will see Tamaki Drive and other major routes endure all day congestion while interchanges and metro systems thrive out West and South. That's the way it should go if the NIMBYs fight progress.

    Auckland • Since Jul 2015 • 7 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Keir Leslie,

    You can't get elected members to vote against their constituents' wishes in an election years, it's just not feasible, and if you construct a process that requires that you are set up for failure.

    Yet that is precisely the timing the govt created, almost like they knew it would apply pressure on the council ..

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19743 posts Report Reply

  • Wichid, in reply to Glenn Pearce,

    The council officers did a fine job regarding Glendowie against a hostile, rude and out of order mob behind them. The plan is a 30 year plan and the crowd seemed to think that housing changes would be instantaneous while supporting infrastructure would never happen.

    Auckland • Since Jul 2015 • 7 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Keir Leslie,

    Govt could put commissioners in right now for 2 years, promising an election after that. If they leave it until closer to the scheduled election, gets politically way harder as you say.

    ECan has shown they can get away with it. No voter backlash at all.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19743 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Matthew Hooton,

    There are already plenty of expensive apartments being built in the CBD. It's the other locations you mentioned that would not cope with just high-rises.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19743 posts Report Reply

  • Glenn Pearce, in reply to Wichid,

    because of inter-dependencies will collapse on itself.

    Serious question, if the Out of Scope changes have inter-dependencies on other changes then by definition they're not Out of Scope surely?

    What would be an example of an Out of Scope change that had inter-dependencies on other changes.

    Auckland • Since Feb 2007 • 504 posts Report Reply

  • Keir Leslie, in reply to Sacha,

    Much different dynamics : as far as urban residents care, ECan does buses and water, neither of which are big issues in the way that these zoning issues are. The Ecan removal basically just confirmed people's beliefs in a way that didn't shift voter intentions. The AC structure & Unitary Plan process was set up by this government - they own it in a way they don't own regional councils and the RMA. And, in reality, fewer people live in Christchurch.

    Going into Auckland would be a very different prospect both in terms of scale and optics. Why not wait and see what Goff's like to deal with before picking a huge fight that you're likely to end up on the wrong side of?

    Since Jul 2008 • 1452 posts Report Reply

  • Glenn Pearce, in reply to Wichid,

    The crowd was certainly hostile but Pirritt was poor when she started off talking about St Heliers Bay Rd and Riddell Rd which of course aren't in Glendowie.

    Then when Brewer read the guidelines for MHU (near train, bus routes, town centre etc.) and then pointed out areas of Glendowie with MHU that have none of those she had no answer.

    That's my humble opinion anyway.

    I thought Shale Chambers example from West Lynn was enlightening too. A resident have made a passing comment in a submission that lead to a Neighbour's house being rezoned THAB which then because of the step down planning rules meant the surrounding properties were re-zoned as well. All because of a passing comment in a submission, when the submitter found out they were horrified and withdrew the submission according to Chambers.

    Auckland • Since Feb 2007 • 504 posts Report Reply

  • James Dunne,

    The awful truth is that millenials don't vote enough for anybody to really care what they think. If Generation Zero et al could mobilise enough votes to unseat even two or three of the councillors responsible, things might be different. But they can't so they won't.

    Wellington • Since Sep 2013 • 25 posts Report Reply

  • Keir Leslie, in reply to James Dunne,

    Also if they could mobilise to protect a councillor who was on the fence but scared - if you're a councillor who'd like to support density but you look over to where Northey used to be and see Krum sitting there as a result of a scaremongering anti-intensification campaign, and you know there's no votes in it, who wants to be a martyr?

    Since Jul 2008 • 1452 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic,

    In any case, the Unitary Plan has single-handedly sorted out the actual free-marketeers from the Generation Rentier brigade.

    If Donald Trump fails to take the White House and decides to look to Auckland for new business, popcorn merchants will be laughing all the way to the bank.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5442 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to John Palethorpe,

    What next? Winston advocating Green policies....

    In Winston's defence (ugh) NZ First has had policies about obliterating 1080 use for a while, though it's usually spearheaded by Richard Prosser. But yeah, he seems to have ignored that (briefly) with the latest media statement. Its more pure stance historically has tended to be that 1080 use should be stopped immediately, because obviously it kills everything and doesn't work and stuff. The Green Party's position is more that NZ's conservation estate is in a dire crisis, and 1080 is the only realistic option to mitigate this on anything other than a small scale, but that its use shouldn't offset the need for additional research to find more and better options.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1142 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Keir Leslie,

    Why not wait and see what Goff's like to deal with before picking a huge fight that you're likely to end up on the wrong side of?

    It won't be Goff they are concerned about but the bozos we've just seen in action. Mayor only gets one vote.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19743 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    What it was like to be one of the rare young people in that room yesterday.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19743 posts Report Reply

  • Wichid,

    Serious question, if the Out of Scope changes have inter-dependencies on other changes then by definition they’re not Out of Scope surely?

    What would be an example of an Out of Scope change that had inter-dependencies on other changes.

    True, but I think that the anti-density groups would have just used some other excuse to force councillors to withdraw the evidence.

    'Out of scope' zones should really be 'not raised specifically so far.' That doesn't mean that it isn't part of the process of developing a coherent Unitary Plan. The IHP will be considering changes in much the same way themselves. Peoples shock at the development of the councils evidence for change is more a result of non-participation from stakeholders throughout the process since 2013. Particularly the right wing block of councillors themselves.

    Auckland • Since Jul 2015 • 7 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    The Property Council is unamused:

    Property Council is appalled with Auckland councillors who have withdrawn their support to rezone Auckland suburbs with the capacity for more housing and apartments.

    Auckland Branch President Phil Eaton says soaring house prices are creating systemic social injustice, inequity and major economic risk.
    ...

    “We desperately need to open up supply. The market tells us we are not building what customers want. We need a wider range of housing choices to suit the changing demographic profile of Auckland over the next 15-20 years, including smaller homes in existing areas for both older and younger people.

    “Local politicians must ditch their “Not in My Election Year” mentality and do what is right by all Aucklanders, not just some.”

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19743 posts Report Reply

  • Glenn Pearce, in reply to Wichid,

    Quite, the labelling "out of scope" is largely irrelevant. It's the "surprise" nature of it and the general lack of transparency that caused the problems.

    As I've said before if the revised maps were issued with notes for each area indicating why each of the zoning changes had occurred and justifying they would have been better received.

    I still don't think the revised maps are even available on the Council website? They only on the Stuff and NZ Herald sites I think.

    Auckland • Since Feb 2007 • 504 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Sacha,

    ECan has shown they can get away with it. No voter backlash at all.

    Unless of course, the water starts becoming like that of Flint, Michigan.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5442 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to John Palethorpe,

    Given Nick Smith’s comments that the Auckland submissions are now ‘nonsense’ due to the withdrawl of justifiable zoning planning, I’d say we’re headed to the Independent Hearing Panel without a strong voice for Auckland.

    And whatever you think of Nick Smith (he’s not popular around here, to put it mildly) Auckland’s feckless council has lovingly handcrafted this rod for its own back. That said, and at the risk of speaking well above my competence, as I understand the law being spineless cock Wombles isn’t sufficient grounds to appoint commissioners.

    My sympathy is in rather short supply, to put it mildly.

    At the very least, those who advocate intensification need to carry the existing residents of the areas planned for intensification.

    That superficially sounds delightfully egalitarian, Matthew, but let’s cash the reality check for a moment. These massively entited rentiers who heckled the chair and deputy of the Youth Advisory Panel yesterday will take nothing but complete and abject surrender. Richard Burton’s performance on Morning Report today made that perfectly clear. I do you the courtesy of assuming you’re neither foolish or disingenuous enough not to see that.

    I’d like to make something perfectly clear: I don’t think every opponent of “intensification” is a drooling bigot who just doesn’t want icky ethnics, beneficiaries and mental patients stinking up their pristine, over-leveraged streets. But far too many are, and don’t even try that hard to fig-leaf it. They’ve also been aided and abetted by media that range from merely lazy and/or under-resourced to properly cover complex local government issues to the outright deceptive. The Herald has been running a typical disinformation campaign against the Unitary Plan for reasons I can’t figure out.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    These massively entited rentiers who heckled the chair and deputy of the Youth Advisory Panel yesterday will take nothing but complete and abject surrender. Richard Burton’s performance on Morning Report today made that perfectly clear. I do you the courtesy of assuming you’re neither foolish or disingenuous enough not to see that.

    And in today's world, rentiers are a de facto unelected Senate or House of Lords. I've said it before, but only a massive act of Murphy's Law is guaranteed to put them in their place.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5442 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 9 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.