It’s always wise to plan ahead. Too many politicians measure progress in three-year bites; that is, from one election to the next.
In order to jam in up to another million people, a radical cramming in of high-rise apartments and terrace housing has been planned. As well, the rural-urban boundary (RUB) will be flexible, and expanded when deemed necessary. However, there are suggestions that the extra million people mooted might be quite an exaggeration. Immigration could, and perhaps should, slow down, and if the economy of Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States improves, expats may not come home in such great numbers. The Government might also make some requirement on immigrants to spend time in the provinces rather than all squashing like sardines into Auckland.
I have always supported population intensification to prevent too much urban sprawl, with its implications for loss of good rural land, and its dependence on new infrastructure. As Professor Tim Hazledine of Auckland University has said, “The MUL (Metropolitan Urban Limit) has been around for 50 years and has done a great job with little fuss.” Hazledine says to compare land prices inside and outside the MUL is too simplistic. Urban land is surveyed, subdivided and serviced. It is close to roads, shops, public transport, schools. For the price of the house building lot you get thrown in for free, parks, reserves, footpaths, verges, school grounds. Housing land costs more than farmland because it has a heap of value added to it. So the whole exercise, according to Hazledine, is more complicated than just moving the MUL.
I do predict that the proposed proliferation of three, four, five and seven-storey apartments in amongst early 20th Century villas in Mt Eden, Glendowie, and around the city fringe, will fuel some almighty arguments in coming years. The abandonment of the pre-1944 demolition control in the Unitary Plan will compound the problem and result in the loss of important heritage houses. Every wooden villa in the parts of Grey Lynn designated ‘mixed housing suburban’ is potentially threatened with a villa being replaced by three-storey apartments.
I think it’s time to put to bed the wild throwing around of the term NIMBYism. Most of the objection to high-rise apartments, especially in inner city suburbs, is about loss of valued amenity, and not primarily about ‘not in my backyard’. If Auckland is to continue aspiring to be one of the world’s most liveable cities, then residents should make it clear to city fathers and mothers, what it is they value about living in Auckland, and what amenities and built environment they demand be retained and enhanced.
Every home owner in the Greater Ponsonby area should sit down with their family and friends and draw up a list of amenity values they want to retain. These may include: trees, bird life, harbour views, views of natural features like volcanic cones and the Waitakeres, the sunlight, quiet, especially from traffic noise, few burglaries, no unnecessary party noise, clean streets, heritage retention.
If a number of the qualities which residents value are diminished, Auckland will not be anything like the world’s most liveable city, however much Len Brown or his successor crows about it. And why should those who have had those amenities for 10, 20, sometimes 50 years, lose them?
While public transport does remain an important priority for Auckland Council, until there is quick easy rapid transit, not only to work, but also to the gym after work, to family in other parts of Auckland, and to sporting activities, Auckland will need to provide rapid transit for cars too. It’s all too easy to say walk or cycle, but for many, including the elderly, that is not an option. While driving a car remains legal, provision for cars must continue to be made.
Like many other commentators, I would make a plea for quality developments as well as quantity. I know this is quite subjective, but as just one example, how inhumane, how socially undesirable is it, to have no minimum unit size? It would also be a travesty to take any park land for housing. We need every inch of it, for the sake of the quality of our lives, and our sanity. Council and councillors must listen carefully and note what residents want, providing it wherever possible. (JOHN ELLIOTT)