General Comments about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development and Medium Density Residential Standards.
Well, here we are. Nearly two years of NPS UD work and 9 months after the RMA amendment introducing the Medium Density Residential Standards. Work that central government has imposed on the people of Auckland. Work frankly I do not think was needed and at great expense which also wasn’t needed .
I strongly believe that we need to build a lot more houses our failure to do that over the last 30 years has created enormous problems. In my opinion,the housing crisis is driven by interest rates, borrowing restrictions, housing material availability, housing material inflation and labour shortages. All of which are outside of council control. Yes we could consent faster but that’s not the issue we are dealing with today
I fundamentally disagree with the governments approach and direction for Auckland, Respectfully I believe they should concentrate on delivering their core business without interfering in ours
However, they have set this direction and imposed intensification including the those in established suburbs such as those within the Orakei Ward and other areas that are already struggling with capacity constraints.
And that’s not nimbyism. The AUP already allows for managed and sensible growth that is in keeping with the area. This NPSUD /MDRS ‘one size’ does not fit all. Auckland is of a scale that is different and should have been treated differently.
The current AUP delivers enough housing to satisfy Auckland’s residential and business growth for the next 30 years.
I have fought to minimise the impact of this bad piece of government legislation. Sadly for me, I haven’t won every fight but we are probably in a slightly better position from where we started, and I acknowledge staff who have reacted to feedback from Auckland
Special character areas.
The intention of the NPSUD is to release as much development potential as possible and the government expects council to remove significant areas of Special Character.
But, Special Character Areas are an important part of a well-functioning urban environment and are valued by Aucklanders
And boy did we hear from our community, Aucklander’s overwhelming supported the retention most or all our special character areas.
In response, with others, I fought hard to keep as much of the special character areas as we could.
My first resolution was to keep all our special character areas- that was lost that is, not supported by the majority around the table . Then I wanted to keep the 4s, again I lost my resolution to support that . But we did secure further work from staff reviewing submissions and responding to more supporting information.
We see the results of that work today, and it is good to see that more properties are now included in those special character areas alongside better spatial cohesion.
And I see this as a win with supportable evidence. We could have lost a lot more but with help from a passionate community , we have saved more properties for future generations. I do want to specifically thank the Character Coalition and my OLB who have been leaders in this space
So whilst I don’t specifically like where we have landed,I do believe special character areas are in better shape than when we went out with our preliminary view. So I want to give confidence to Aucklanders that we have listened and we have made real changes.
From my two local board areas Orakei and Waitemata- In Orakei 26 properties were deleted and 136 added and In Waitemata 73 deleted and 195 added -
It’s important to note , it's not the end of the road for Special character areas. The public will still have an opportunity to have their say when this opens for public consultation.
Walkable catchments
I still felt 1200 is quite significant considering we have an aging population in Auckland. And we asked staff to continue to refine those distances in response to the public feedback.
Staff have responded and in some areas such as Parnell staff have reconsidered and have revised in the distance in some parts down to 800m. Again, we have responded to our community concerns.
Electricity Resolution
We all received a letter from Vector highlighting their concerns about the potential risks of buildings of higher heights being enabled closer to Vector assets.
I want to thank staff who have listened to those concerns and assisted me in amending the original resolutions
What this amendment does is give staff more time to work with Vector in assessing those concerns and provide clarification on the council’s regulatory responsibilities
Final comments
So In conclusion, In voting for these resolutions I do so not because I agree with this legislation nor do I particularly like where this has landed, but
To all Aucklanders, my challenge to you, please use the submissions process to continue the fight. The way Auckland looks and feels in the future is too important to say nothing