Ellerslie Draft Unitary Plan Meeting

Ellerslie Draft Unitary Plan Meeting

Key:

Questions/comments from residents

Answers/comments from planners

Presentation Notes

The draft Unitary Plan will reduce 14 plans to one

Enables consistency, ease of use, while addressing the distinct areas of Auckland

The Ellerslie town centre commercial area will retain its 12.5m height limit to protect its historic character

For Ellerslie, the draft Unitary Plan has adopted much of the Future Planning Framework, which was extensively consulted on by the legacy AucklandCity Council

All pre 1944 homes will require demolition consent unless otherwise already within the Residential 1-4 zones of the operative plan where these provisions will apply.

The mixed use zone fronting Findlay Street is a mistake – it will remain the equivalent of Residential 1 in the draft Unitary Plan.

Zoning

What will happen to the residential homes along Tecoma Street which is zoned for mixed use?

Residential uses, including daycare centres and aged care are permitted. Small scale commercial activities are also permitted, but not car yards and service stations

All new buildings in this zone will need resource consent to consider the design of the building so none will be able to locate here as of right. Will still be subject to resource consents to establish if appropriate in this area

Somerfield and Kentucky Streets have a lot of character housing – why is this residential area treated different from others?

Not all character homes are protected as of right. Planners suggest that neighbours talk and jointly submit to become a ‘character area’ if that is what is supported. Buildings constructed prior to 1944 in these areas will require resource consent prior to demolition.

The terrace housing between Ladies Mile and Arthur Street– should be zoned mixed housing, not terraced housing and apartments.

Business uses should not takeover residential areas

Ellerslie Residents Association

Brian Johnston presented the Ellerslie Ratepayers Association’s 11 principles

All current residential areas should remain residential

Mixed use will drive people out – only brothels and liquor stores will be able to afford the rent

Intensification

We need to keep people close to their work

This is the principle enabled in the draft Unitary Plan - the purpose of the draft Unitary Plan is to provide a range of opportunities for people to live and work in close proximity. It is not designed to push people out.

Won’t the UP create a “canyoning effect”, closing in the surrounding areas?

Where required resource consent assessments will have to take into account any impact on the character of an area/zone In addition residential zones have provisions which require protection of daylight, and privacy

The current operative plan does not protect private views and it is not proposed to introduce this into the draft Unitary Plan

The UP will mean 1 in 2 houses in Auckland will be intensified

Zoning does not mean you will choose to sell your house, or are compelled to develop – a lot of Auckland property owners will choose to retain the section the way that it is.

The UP is about enabling growth – not developing land

Transport

How will the UP address transport issues? There is difficult east to west transport connections for Ellerslie

Auckland Transport’s strategy looks at transport, and will be developed concurrently with the UP

Transport modeling predicts there will be worse traffic congestion in Auckland compared to Sydney and Melbourne. The Auckland Plan did not say we would be a ‘compact and congested city’

Auckland Transport’s models have looked at growth and the Auckland Plan identifies a number of large transport projects in the future.

The city will have to look at providing alternative travel choices (e.g. public transport)

Urban sprawl is expensive in terms of infrastructure and means not using land to it’s highest potential/value

Stonefields was modelled, but has significant transport problems. People are parking all over the verge

We need a train to Pakuranga

Ultimately the Auckland Plan identifies rail to Takapuna

AMETI – is already constructing bus lanes to the Ellerslie highway in an effort to respond to existing traffic congestion issues faced in the east of Auckland

Council never monitored the effect of AMETI on Ellerslie. We need a loop at Silvia Park too.

The City Rail Link will deliver greater frequency for rail (x2)

Is Council going to force people to use public transport? – People don’t want to take PT and need to get kids to school and sport etc

The provisions in the draft Unitary Plan will enable more options – how people choose to utlilise those options will ultimately be up to them.

Infrastructure

Extra people will require extra infrastructure (bigger cables; bigger pipes etc)

Planning has been working closely with Watercare and Stormwater department to align where more intensive land uses are possible and infrastructure constraints may be faced.

Investment will need to be ‘just in time’ to match housing

The bulk of infrastructure will be paid for through the LTP – both from rates and development contributions

Open Space

How will the UP ensure sufficient open space is provided?

the Auckland Council Open Space Strategy will look at the gaps at the same time as the UP is taking place

potential areas for open space acquisition will not be shown in the UP however to ensure private property is not unnecessarily identified.

Parking

What will be the effect on car parking in residential areas?

if a studio apartment – 1 carpark

all other units require 2 carparks (no change)

Value uplift

What does the proposed windfall tax mean for residents?

as part of the draft UP consultation, council has included a number of options in an addendum to get feedback on – these include ‘value uplift’ and ‘inclusionary zoning’

‘Value uplift’ only applies to rural-greenfield areas, not urban areas

Inclusionary zoning proposes that for all new developments, that a certain proportion of dwelling are made affordable

Community involvement in the Unitary Plan

Why were the maps not developed ‘bottom up’ – getting the view of the community first?

The maps were based on a number of previous planning initiatives (such as the Future Planning Framework and Ellerslie’s Future Framework) which was developed with the Ellerslie community

Chairman of the Ellerslie Residents association acknowledged that the UP has indeed built on the previous 5 years work with the Ellerslie community

Unitary Plan general

When can we get error free maps?

Maps will be updated throughout the consultation process

Planning will look at fixing errors on the website

Penny Pirrit, Manager Regional and Local Planning agreed to send a letter through the Ellerslie Ratepayers Association outlining the errors for Ellerslie

Desley Simpson, Local Board Chair agreed to ensure the board considered Bryan Johnston’s 11 principles for the UP

Why is Council rushing the UP notification?

Council is not rushing the UP. Many of the proposed changes have been around since the Auckland Growth Strategy and the Future Planning Framework

A compact city has been proposed since 1998

The Deputy Mayor was quoted as saying – this is the “pencil draft” – nothing is fixed and Council wants to hear from as many people as possible

Cameron Brewer noted that much of the UP’s growth aspirations are not backed up by investment in the LTP. Less than 10% of what is needed in his view