Councils Holding the Country to Ransom

[RHarris]

Idiotic to me. We vote in people in our local area to run the city not someone in Wellington.

[Wayne]

This govt has a habit of 'off the cuff' legislation and dis-respect to due process.

[Davo36]

The government has always stipulated how local government is to act.

They're getting involved at this point because councils have just run amok. You might decide to let your teenager drive your car, but if you find out they've been doing burnouts, driving drunk etc. you take their privileges away. It was obviously too much responsibility for them. Same with councils, they were given a chance to do things sensibly and what did they do? Line their own pockets. Increased salaries massively, employed way too many people (to do useless things) and made the public pay for it through increased rates and massive development contributions.

Shalodge, that act needs repealing for other reasons too, such as the councils getting involved in building communities etc. All socialist BS which leads to things like clowning workshops being offered and Auckland Council staff demanding they get involved in high school exam pass rates and so on.

[speights boy]

Idiotic to me. We vote in people in our local area to run the city not someone in Wellington.

Still happy to have a hand out for their (read taxpayers') money, eh ?

[RHarris]

Still happy to have a hand out for their (read taxpayers') money, eh ?

Dont even think that comment is worth replying to considering a third of the country live in Auckland. The 2 should always work together funding matters.


Local government should listen to what the majority of local community want.


Auckland council at the moment are trying to get rid of red tape for development and what happens? Some in the community complain they want to be heard but now the government want to override that consultation.

[speights boy]

Local government should listen to what the majority of local community want.

Correct.
Some good questions asked here.
Let's read the responses later this afternoon.

ASK ME ANYTHING: Penny Hulse and Penny Pirrit

www.nbr.co.nz/ask-penny

[Davo36]

Auckland council at the moment are trying to get rid of red tape for development

You really think this is what the unitary plan is about?

How on earth did you get that idea?

[RHarris]

You really think this is what the unitary plan is about?

How on earth did you get that idea?

Have a look what you can do without notification. Thats what getting people up in arms. From what Im seeing people love red tape and council costs when its next door but not when they're doing the developing. Council can't win. They try remove red tape, people want it back.

[speights boy]

. Thats what getting people up in arms.

Development inappropriate for the area is what's getting up peoples' noses.

[speights boy]

Height limit three storeys, not two

Height rule shock for half of city residents: Three-storey blocks, not just two, will be allowed - and you won't get a say

After nine weeks of telling Aucklanders the maximum height of "small-scale apartment buildings" in neighbourhoods was two storeys, the Auckland Council has admitted the height limit is three storeys.

North Shore councillor George Wood said it bordered on misleading to tell Aucklanders the limit was two storeys in the mixed housing zone when it was three.
A published media guide also described the maximum height as two storeys. He was gobsmacked to find the detail buried in the detail on the Unitary Plan.

Maximum heights (for "mixed housing" zone covering 49 per cent of urban Auckland)
What the council said:

• During the first nine weeks of public consultation: two storeys
• Yesterday: three storeys

www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10884432

[muppet]

Ha Ha
The Irish are running the Auckland City Council.

[RHarris]

Height limit three storeys, not two




www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10884432

the story is a crock of. The journalist should be fired. It's the same conditions that currently exist of 8m. Nothing changed. If only there were competent journalist out there.

[speights boy]

By choosing the wrong definition of 'affordability', Auckland Council's Unitary Plan ends up focused on the wrong goals says Dale Smith

The Unitary Plan is nothing more than a revenue collecting and funding mechanism for a variety of council projects, including new projects of subsidised housing and rail transport.

It will raise revenue by increasing land and developments costs.

Auckland needs more housing choice at truly affordable prices (as defined by the Demographia definition) that makes housing more affordable across the board but unless you want to become a subsidised ward of local government, the Unitary Plan will only increase the cost of your housing.

It should not be approved in its present form.

www.interest.co.nz/property/64525/choosing-wrong-definition-affordability-auckland-councils-unitary-plan-ends-focused-w

[Davo36]

Have a look what you can do without notification. Thats what getting people up in arms. From what Im seeing people love red tape and council costs when its next door but not when they're doing the developing. Council can't win. They try remove red tape, people want it back.

RHarris, seroiusly, I'm quite interested in this. I don't want to have to wade through that plan to try and find what you mean. Can you point to any sections that allow you to do undertake developments that would currently require notification but won't under the new plan?

[Baldy]

RHarris, seroiusly, I'm quite interested in this. I don't want to have to wade through that plan to try and find what you mean. Can you point to any sections that allow you to do undertake developments that would currently require notification but won't under the new plan?

Hi Davo36,

My understanding is that the new unitary plan will allow for much more denser developments. Currently a 1200 sq/mtr or slightly larger section in Manukau is allowed via a restricted discretionary activity (i.e. no need to get neighbours consent) it can be subdivided into 4 titles (once services are provided and the buildings are at framing and roof on stage). If one wanted to put more dwellings on it, (they would probably be rejected by council right away) but one could try to ask for it with a 'notified consent processes' (which would welcome your neighbours opinions and create a sh*t-fight!).

WIth the new Unitary Plan (as it stands so far) there would be no restriction to the number of dwellings as such, as long as you can provide proof of car parking, and other amenities, this is only for sites that are larger than 1200 sq/mtrs and are in the 'mixed use or terrace housing zone'. For example we would be able to issue 10 new titles (on a 16000 sq/mtr or larger site) for mostly single bedroom units (or maybe even create a couple of double bedroom ones) via a 'unit title subdivision'.

Remember this is currently impossible under the current density requirement in Manukau, unless you are within 500 meters from public transport and also zoned as 'business 2 to 5' in which case it is a 'restricted discretionary activity' but not requiring a 'notified consent' (neighbours and sh*t-fight etc!).

I only know this stuff because it applies to my property! Perhaps you could consult a planning consultant for the deatails as they apply to your particular property/s.

I am enjoying being a member of PT :-) I get to learn heaps and share what I know too :-)

Cheers,
Baldy