Auckland Unitary Plan

[Ross Brader]

where would i find what was permissible in an area zoned "countryside living"?

http://unitaryplan.aucklandcouncil.g...al%20zones.pdf

[buxlo122]

Under the Unitary Plan I can only see prices increasing significantly in areas where properties become subdivisible where they previously were not able to be subdivided.

With particular reference to Pt Chevalier area south of Meola Rd or Walker Rd:

A site with an original doer upper 3 bedroom bungalow or ex state that has a total land area of say 600m2 to 700m2 is not currently worth any more than about $800,000 to $850,000 if it is in the Res 6a zone.

If the Unitary Plan was active right now and that same property was in the Mixed Housing zone it would be worth, in separate lots, around $750,000 for the doer upper on a front site and the rear section would be worth around $500,000 for a total of around $1,250,000 less subdivision costs of say $90,000 = $1,160,000 less original purchase price a developer would be prepared to pay.

So the question is how much will the property be worth under the new zone versus the old zone?

Probably increase in value by $100,000 to $150,000 immediately.

Of course this will all depend on how many people suddenly want to sell or subdivide off the back yard - a surge of subdivision activity may see an over supply of sites which could impact on values - hard to predict the outcome but would be interested in other contributors thoughts.

Has anybody found other areas like this?

[td91]

I'm looking forward to seeing how Henderson, Massey and Takapuna turn out.

[SwissKiwi]

Zone	Dwellings
Single House	One dwelling per site
Mixed Housing	One dwelling per 300m² net site area where up to four dwellings are proposed No density limits apply where five or more dwellings are proposed and the requirements of clause 4.3.1.3.1.2.a and b are met
Large Lot	One dwelling per site
Rural and coastal settlements	One dwelling per 4000m² net site area

2. In the Mixed Housing zone:
a. where three or four dwellings are proposed on a site, the site must at least 15m wide:
i. at the road boundary
ii. for at least 80 per cent of the length of its side boundaries.
b. no density limit applies where five or more dwellings are proposed and the site:
i. has a minimum net site area of 1200m²
ii. is at least 20m wide:

• at the site frontage
• for at least 80 per cent of the length of its side boundaries.

c. development that exceeds the maximum density or does not comply with clause 4.3.1.3.1.1 or 4.3.1.3.1.2 is a discretionary activity
d. this rule does not apply where a dwelling is converted into two dwellings as a permitted activity complying with clause 4.3.1.3.3.

[SwissKiwi]

You have to drill down deep to get this info.

And so a 600sq site in Grey Lynn Westmere - can now be subdivided for 2 dwellings - as Ross says.

At least thats how I think that reads.

[TheLiberalLeft]

"and the requirements of clause 4.3.1.3.1.2.a and b are met"

That's the kind of thing that puts me right off reading a document.

[SwissKiwi]

Well can someone with a higher reading age please translate the k#$%g thing for the rest of us?

[Davo36]

Guys, guys, you sweet naive little cherubs. It's not supposed to be clear. You're not supposed to read it!

You're just supposed to look at the introductory section (including warm fuzzy video) and go back to sleep.

The truth is the plan means whatever the planners decide it means from time to time.

[SwissKiwi]

Great stuff - we may have have just been handed a windfall with properties which are now subdivisible adding 100's of thousands to their value.

Or maybe not.

Meanwhile on other threads people are worrying about if their agent has a facebook site or not.

[donna]

30 sqm for a studio (down from its current 35 sqm) why the need to reduce the size - they are small at 35 sqm - or is AKL aiming for a Hong Kong look?

cheers,

Donna

[RHarris]

30 sqm for a studio (down from its current 35 sqm) why the need to reduce the size - they are small at 35 sqm - or is AKL aiming for a Hong Kong look?

Designed well 30m2 is fine for a couple or single person who want a good location without the price. Good light, ventilation, good balcony maybe high ceilings. I don't think they should be less than this.

[speights boy]

Designed well 30m2 is fine for a couple or single person who want a good location without the price.

Ahh yes.

30m2 rabbit hutch for living.
Drunkenness, violence and vomit surrounding our 'entertainment' venues.
Increasingly transport at a standstill.

We have learnt so much from the experiences of other cities.
Growth, growth, growth.....that is the only answer.

We should be so proud of leaving such a liveable city for our grandkids to enjoy.

One example from today's Herald.
$244m viaduct fails to allow for walkers

No place for pedestrians
What was promised:
An enhanced pedestrian experience, incorporating a volcanic-themed walkway from Gillies Ave to Broadway.
What's there:
An empty fenced-off embankment while pedestrians are kept waiting by a new car-parking building.

www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10872540

[eri]

30m2 isn't a bad minimum

certainly more affordable than 50m2

and more liveable than the 9m2 in 33mount st auckland

[TheLiberalLeft]

A room measuring not quite 5.5m square. Incorporating living, kitchen, bathroom & bed. Holy Christ on a bike, my walk in wardrobe is 1/2 that size. I can't even imagine living in that kind of 3rd world condition.

[speights boy]

30m2 isn't a bad minimum
certainly more affordable than 50m2
and more liveable than the 9m2 in 33mount st auckland

Until, due to unfettered demand they too become unaffordable.
After all, it's all about growth growth growth.
The surgery was a success, unfortunately the patient died on the operating table.