|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Housing intensification is in the spotlight as Auckland Council weighs up options related to where residents will reside moving forward.
Feedback is being sought for Plan Change 120 (PC 120) with two options on the table – the Planning and Development Committee will decide which to adopt on July 21.
“As we near the long-anticipated opening of the City Rail Link (CRL) and other major transport and infrastructure investments, we have an important opportunity to concentrate growth,” committee member Andrew Baker says. “We need to make the most of these investments by enabling more people to live close to the stations and town centres.”
Franklin Ward Councillor Baker is also council’s Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee chair.
Even though Franklin’s towns are further removed from the main urban areas in the city’s centre, the options have generally the same impacts, he explains.
“This is not about widespread change in every suburb. Around 85 per cent of Auckland would remain exactly as under the current Auckland Unitary Plan. Franklin communities and neighbourhoods seeing no change other than in the main street of Pukekohe, which will have its own rules regarding the height limits of buildings.”
The CRL will transform Auckland’s rail network with communities along the line better connected than ever before, Baker says.
“Scenario B recognises the investment in the CRL and means that, where transport connections are strongest, there should be more opportunities for people to live nearby.
This is a widely used planning concept in other big cities with quality public transport networks.
“Scenario A is about doing the minimum, which only requires us to intensify along some of the Western Line. To me, it’s an opportunity wasted, whereas scenario B allows for housing intensification along the inner eastern and southern train stations, the main bus routes into the city and some local town centres.”
Restricting more development in the right places, along the network, would result in even more development in the wrong places, Baker contends.
“[It would mean] further sprawl as more people choose to make Auckland their home,” he says.
“As we know too well in Franklin, sprawl comes at a cost – it happens on our rural land and requires new roads, pipes, transport links and community infrastructure, all of which must be paid for. It also increases congestion as there is no ability to service every area with quality public transport that suits everyone’s needs.”
Fewer housing options closer to the network would also have a financial impact.
“Those travelling the furthest in their cars pay the greatest cost financially and socially so we need to do all we can to mitigate these. The cost to council and ratepayers to deal with sprawl needs to be avoided.”
Scenario B also provides additional flexibility as it allows the Independent Hearings Panel to consider more evidence and public feedback, making sensible adjustments and ensuring natural hazard and infrastructure issues can be properly addressed, Baker says.
“There has been a lot of pressure from those who don’t want change and are protective of their current neighbourhoods,” he adds. “As a lifetime resident of Drury – where development is enormous and hugely disruptive – I have seen houses [practically] sprout in our paddocks. So, I’m keen to see future development also happening in our existing urban areas where it just makes more sense. That’s what Scenario B delivers.”
