DOCSLIB.ORG

Wesley College Trust Board and Grafton Downs Limited on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (‘The Unitary Plan”)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wesley College Trust Board and Grafton Downs Limited on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (‘The Unitary Plan”) Before the Commissioners of the Auckland Unitary Plan Hearings Panel IN THE MATTER: of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act AND 2013 IN THE MATTER OF a submission by Wesley College Trust Board and Grafton Downs Limited on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (‘the Unitary Plan”) Submission Number 4767 Topics 017 RUB South – Paerata North. STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF JANINE ANNE BELL Dated 11 November 2015 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Grafton Downs Limited (“GDL”), in conjunction with the Wesley College Trust Board (“WCTB”), own approximate 320 hectares of land at Paerata North bounded by State Highway 22 to the north and west (Karaka and Paerata Roads respectively) and the North Island Main Trunk (NIMT) rail line to the east (the ‘Wesley Land’). GDL is comprised of a 50:50 shareholding between the Wesley College Trust Board and the PACT 2086 Trust, a trust of the Methodist Church. A locality and ownership map is included as Appendix A. 1.2 The majority of the Wesley College land is included in the Wesley College Special Housing Area (Wesley College SHA) under the provisions of the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 (HASHA Act). Pursuant to the provisions of the HASHA Act, GDL lodged and was granted consent for a private plan variation (PV 3) request that has rezoned the Wesley College SHA from Future Urban Zone and Special Purpose School zone to Mixed Housing Urban and Local Centre zones. In addition the land was identified as a precinct (the ‘Franklin 2 Precinct’), with its own objectives and policies and tailored set of activity and development controls. A copy of the effective PV 3 provisions is attached as Appendix B. 1.3 A small part of the WCTB/GDL landholding (Part lot 3, DP 7497), was excluded from the SHA area. A copy of the certificate of title for the subject land is included in Appendix C. The only reason Part Lot 3 DP 7497 was excluded from the Wesley SHA was that it was not located within in the Proposed Unitary Plan’s RUB and as a consequence could not be considered for inclusion in the Wesley College SHA and subsequent PV 3 request. The area was however, included in the early GDL master planning work for the Wesley College SHA and has been fully assessed within the specialist technical assessment reports prepared to support PV 3. A copy of an early masterplan drawing developed for the full Wesley landholding is included in Appendix F. In addition the table of contents to the Plan Variation application is included in Appendix G. The Table of Contents outlines the comprehensive analysis and assessment work that was undertaken in support of the PV 3 application to rezone the Wesley land for urban development. 1.4 The WCTB and GDL submission (no. 4767) to the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (“the Unitary Plan”) seeks to have the balance of the Wesley College land included within the 1 A12277_JBe_003_PAUP_RUB_Ext_Evidence_20151110 Rural Urban Boundary (RUB), rezoned Mixed Housing Urban and included in the Franklin 2 Precinct. The requested changes to the Unitary Plan maps sought in response to decision requested in the submission are set out in Appendix D, along with the consequential amendments to the Franklin 2 Precinct Plans. 1.5 The assessments undertaken by the GDL’s specialist team in support of PV 3, found the Wesley College land to be a somewhat unremarkable area and this description applies equally to the balance lot. 1.6 The inclusion of the balance of the Wesley land area within the Mixed Housing Urban Zone and the Franklin 2 Precinct will promote the achievement of a quality compact urban form. The Franklin 2 Precinct is consistent with clause B2.1 of the Unitary Plan (Providing for growth in a quality compact urban form) which includes policies that seek to concentrate urban activities within the RUB1 and to enable higher residential densities and the efficient use of land in neighbourhoods in the following circumstances: “a. within and around centres and within moderate walking distances from the city, metropolitan, town and local centres b. in areas close to the frequent public transport routes and facilities c. in close proximity to existing or proposed large open spaces, community facilities, education and healthcare facilities d. adequately serviced by existing physical infrastructure or where infrastructure can be efficiently upgraded.” These circumstance apply equally to the balance of the Wesley land as they do to the land within the Franklin 2 Precinct. 1.7 Policy 2 of Clause B2.1 sets out the circumstances in which higher residential densities should be enabled. The neighbourhood design statement prepared in support of the Franklin 2 Precinct provisions details the overall movement network proposed within the precinct, its interrelationship with the open space network, and the likely land uses that will be provided for in each of the distinct neighbourhoods within the precinct. The density 1 Policy 1, Clause B2.1, Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan 2 A12277_JBe_003_PAUP_RUB_Ext_Evidence_20151110 of residential activity within the neighbourhoods; has been informed by landform, natural features, views, and proximity to transport nodes such as the envisaged rail station/bus interchange. The majority of the precinct is anticipated to be medium density, with the densest area of development envisaged in the core of the precinct, due to proximate location to the proposed local centre, central open space, and proposed rail station/bus interchange. The density of residential development reduces towards the northern and southern edges of the precinct. Part Lot 3 DP 7497 would be included within the lower density area i.e. largely 1-2 storey detached dwellings with lot sizes in the range of 400m2- 450m2. 1.8 The Structure Plan work for Franklin 2 Precinct and associated technical reports have demonstrated that the provision of infrastructure to the balance of the Wesley land is feasible. The area does not included any scheduled areas of environmental, heritage, Maori, natural character or landscape values. Further, it does not include any commercially viable mineral resources or elite soils. The change in the boundary will avoid areas prone to natural hazards. Part Lot 3 DP 7497 is located adjacent to the NIMT Railway line and the National Grid Electricity Corridor, however any potential conflicts with development occurring in proximity to this infrastructure would be dealt with through the application of the buffer open space corridors included in the precinct provisions and the Overlay provisions of the Unitary Plan. The RUB, Zone and Precinct boundary will follow the property boundary. 1.9 The balance area has also been assessed against the Auckland Unitary Plan Hearings Panel’s (AUPIHP) “Interim Guidance – Best practice approaches to re-zoning, precincts and changes to the Rural Urban Boundary (RUB)”. This assessment supports both the requested inclusion of this site within the RUB, its rezoning to Mixed Housing Urban and inclusion in the Franklin 2 Precinct. Such an inclusion and rezoning will enable the efficient provision of development capacity and land supply for residential development. 1.10 The balance area of the Wesley land, being Part Lot 3 DP7497, satisfies both the requirements of the Unitary Plan and the AUPIHP Interim Guidance and should be included within the RUB, rezoned Mixed Housing Urban and included in the Franklin 2 Residential A sub-precinct. 3 A12277_JBe_003_PAUP_RUB_Ext_Evidence_20151110 2. INTRODUCTION Qualifications and experience 2.1 My name is Janine Anne Bell. I am an Associate Partner and Planner with Boffa Miskell Limited, a multi-disciplinary consultancy providing planning, design and ecological advice. I have a Bachelor of Town Planning degree from the University of Auckland gained in 1983. I have been a full member of the New Zealand Planning Institute since 1986. I am an accredited chairperson under the Ministry for the Environment’s Making Good Decisions programme. I am also a member of the Auckland Urban Design Panel. I have had considerable experience in the preparation and review of district plans and plan changes and plan variations. A summary statement of my experience is set out in Appendix I. 2.2 Since early 2013, I have been engaged by the Wesley College Trust Board (WCTB) and Grafton Downs Limited (GDL) (“the Applicant”) to provide planning and resource management advice in relation to the Wesley College land at Paerata North to seek its inclusion within the Rural Urban Boundary and its identification as a Special Housing Area. This has included assistance in the preparation of submissions to the Draft Auckland Plan, the Draft Auckland Unitary Plan, the Draft Pukekohe Area Plan and the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. In particular I have taken the lead role in preparing the proposed plan variation request for the Wesley College SHA. This has included the preparation of the Franklin 2 Precinct Structure Plan report, drafting the content of the Proposed Plan Variation Request - Franklin 2 Precinct, the accompanying s32 assessment report and the Schedule 4 Assessment of Environmental Effects. I have also been involved in a number of consultation meetings/sessions with the Council, Franklin Local Board members, adjacent Infrastructure providers (i.e. New Zealand Transport Agency, Auckland Transport, Transpower) and adjacent landowners. I am familiar with the site and the surrounding area. Expert Witness Code of Conduct 2.3 I have been provided with a copy of the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the Environment Court’s Consolidated Practice Note 2014. I have read and agree to comply with that Code. This evidence is within my area of expertise, except where I state that I am relying upon the specified evidence of another person. I have not omitted to 4 A12277_JBe_003_PAUP_RUB_Ext_Evidence_20151110 consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from the opinions that I express.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Southern Structure Plan Area Neighbourhood Design Statement Revision B
    Southern Structure Plan Area Neighbourhood Design Statement Revision B Drury-Opāheke and Pukekohe-Paerata August 2019 Contents Section A: Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 2 A1. The need for a Neighbourhood Design Statement ................................................................. 2 A2. Scope of the Neighbourhood Design Statement .................................................................... 2 A3. Structure of this Document .................................................................................................... 4 A4. Key Terms ................................................................................................................................ 4 A5. Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................. 4 Section B: Visions, Themes, Structure Plan Context .................................................................... 5 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 5 B1. Vision Statements .................................................................................................................. 5 B2. The Five Themes ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Paerata-Pukekohe Structure Plan
    Paerata-Pukekohe Structure Plan Landscape and Visual Assessment Background investigations for Auckland Council PAERATA-PUKEKOHE STRUCTURE PLAN: LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL ASSESSMENT – BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION FOR AUCKLAND COUNCIL Contact Details Name: Catherine Hamilton Opus International Consultants Ltd Auckland Environmental Engineering The Westhaven Building, 100 Beaumont Street PO Box 5848, Auckland 1141 New Zealand Telephone: +64 9 353 2960 Mobile: +64 27 244 7849 Document Details: Date: 04 August 2017 Reference: 3AL240.00 Status: Final Prepared by: Catherine Hamilton | Principal Landscape Architect Reviewed by: David McKenzie | Technical Principal – Landscape Architecture Approved for Release by: David McKenzie | Technical Principal – Landscape Architecture www.opus.co.nz ©OPUS INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANTS | DATE PAERATA-PUKEKOHE STRUCTURE PLAN: LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL ASSESSMENT – BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION FOR AUCKLAND COUNCIL Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 3 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Background to the Project .......................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Limitations .................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 9 Attachment 1 RLTP JUNE 2021 at Board
    VERSION TO AT BOARD 28 JUNE Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 The Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 sets out the land transport objectives, policies and measures for the Auckland region over the next 10 years. It includes the land transport activities of Auckland Transport, Auckland Council, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency, KiwiRail, and other agencies. VERSION TO AT BOARD 28 JUNE 1 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 Contents 01. Introduction from the Chair 3 02. Context 5 03. Feedback from consultation 13 04. Purpose and scope 21 05. Transport funding 29 06. Auckland’s transport challenges 33 07. Responding to Auckland’s transport challenges 47 08. Measuring outcomes 77 09. Inter-regional priorities 85 10. Funding and expenditure 91 11. Appendices 99 VERSION TO AT BOARD 28 JUNE 2 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 01. Introduction from the Chair VERSION TO AT BOARD 28 JUNE To come 3 Introduction from the Chair Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 VERSION TO AT BOARD 28 JUNE Introduction from the Chair 4 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 02. Context Auckland, Tāmaki Makaurau, is home to 1.7 million people – one third of all NewVERSION Zealanders – and TO is forecast to grow by another 260,000 overAT the BOARD next decade, reaching around 2.4 million by 2050. This 28rapid JUNE population growth presents a number of challenges in our quest to be a liveable, climate-friendly and productive city. Growth represents opportunity but Evidence tells us that Aucklanders Auckland needs a well-coordinated when combined with Auckland’s like the improved experience, and integrated approach to help challenging natural setting and particularly on rapid and frequent people and freight get around urban form the outcome has bus and train services where quickly and safely – one that been increased congestion and the number of trips has almost significantly reduces harm to the limited connectivity.
    [Show full text]
  • Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan
    19-PRO-0364 Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan August 2019 Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan 2019 August 2019 Table of Contents 1 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Update since 2019 consultation .............................................................................. 9 2 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 11 2.1 What is the growth challenge? .............................................................................. 11 2.2 What is structure planning? .................................................................................. 11 2.3 What is the structure plan study area? ................................................................. 12 2.4 How does the plan relate to the existing land uses and other features in and around Pukekohe? ......................................................................................................... 14 2.4.1 Existing urban areas ...................................................................................... 14 2.4.2 Existing rural areas ........................................................................................ 14 2.5 What is the structure plan process? ...................................................................... 14 3 The Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan 2019 .............................................................. 16 3.1 Vision ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • KIA PUĀWAI a PUKEKOHE Unlock Pukekohe High-Level Project Plan
    KIA PUĀWAI A PUKEKOHE Unlock Pukekohe High-Level Project Plan November 2019 ABBREVIATIONS AT Auckland Transport BID Business Improvement District CCO Council-controlled organisation the Council Auckland Council HLPP High Level Project Plan LTP Long-term plan Panuku Panuku Development Auckland 2 PUKEKOHE HLPP CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 5 THE KEY MOVES – WHERE WE WILL 43 APPENDICES 83 Planning to unlock Pukekohe’s potential 7 FOCUS OUR ENERGY AND EFFORTS Appendix 1: 84 Mihi 8 Three precinct redevelopment key moves 45 Property map of town centre sites Panuku – who we are 9 Three public realm key moves 49 (excluding sites outside of the programme boundary) What we do – shaping spaces for Aucklanders to love 10 Two placemaking key moves 54 Appendix 2: 85 A range of partnering opportunities 56 ABOUT THIS HIGH-LEVEL PROJECT PLAN 13 Property map of all sites and the What’s in the plan 14 HOW WE PLAN TO IMPLEMENT THIS PROJECT 59 full extent of the programme area investment boundary Why Pukekohe? 15 Our approach to delivery 60 Appendix 3: 86 Developing the Kia Puāwai a Pukekohe story 16 Development of key properties 60 Property schedule Working with mana whenua 17 Funding 63 Our partners 18 Other resources 63 ABOUT PUKEKOHE 21 INFORMATION USED TO DEVELOP THIS PLAN 65 A strategic location 22 Other plans and policies 66 A diverse and growing community 24 Transport infrastructure 70 The Kia Puāwai a Pukekohe area and properties 26 Infrastructure capacity 71 Property market dynamics and demand 72 VISION 29 COMMUNICATING WITH THE COMMUNITY 75 THE PRINCIPLES
    [Show full text]
  • Council Parks Comments
    Parks Memo 8 June 2021 To: Dough Fletcher, Principal Project Lead, Premium Team, Auckland Council From: Lea van Heerden, Senior Parks Planner, Parks Planning, Auckland Council Subject: REQUEST FOR PARKS PLANNING ADVICE ON FAST TRACK CONSENT FOR THE ELECTRIFICATION OF MORE THAN 19KM OF THE NORTH ISLAND MAIN TRUNK LINE (NIMT) BETWEEN THE PAPAKURA AND PUKEKOHE STATIONS AS PART OF THE KIWIRAIL PAPAKURA TO PUKEKOHE RAIL ELECTRIFICATION PROJECT (P2P) - LUC60378393. 1. PROPOSAL KiwiRail is seeking resource consents for works between Papakura and Pukekohe Stations, including installation of the overhead line equipment (OLE) along the length of the rail corridor (approximately 19km), track replacements, and upgrades at both Pukekohe and Papakura Stations to accommodate electrified locomotives. Other works include the construction of platforms for three new stations at Drury, Drury West and Paerata. A map of the major works for this project is provided in Figure 1 below. Works that may be relevant to parks planning involves the removal of riparian vegetation from riparian areas of various streams and removal of vegetation and earthworks within riparian margins and wetlands. Specific work includes: • Bulk earthworks across the entire project footprint, including with the riparian margins of 11 wetlands. • The removal of up to approximately 34,750m² of vegetation from the riparian areas of 35 streams. • The removal of up to approximately 9,120m² vegetation within 10m of 11 wetlands. Temporary access tracks are proposed across the course of the route for enabling construction vehicles. 1 Figure 1: The extent of Auckland Railway Improvement from Papakura to Pukekohe. 2. BACKGROUND COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 P2P is a regionally significant transport project, providing for improved rail services and safety.
    [Show full text]
  • Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan Growth Themes Background Paper -Transport
    Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan Growth Themes Background Paper -Transport Table of Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3 2 Study area, location and description ............................................................................. 3 3 Existing Transport Environment .................................................................................... 8 4 Plans, Projects and Initiatives ..................................................................................... 12 5 Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan – Opportunities and Constraints ............................ 22 6 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 24 3 1 Introduction This report provides an outline of existing information and previous planning relevant to transport planning for the Paerata-Pukekohe structure plan area. From this, a preliminary list of opportunities, constraints and gaps in information have been identified. This topic paper draws on information that is known or currently in progress. It has been informed by the Future Urban Land Supply Strategy 2017 (FULSS 2017), Supporting Growth Programme (Transport for Future Urban Growth) and preliminary structure planning processes including workshops with a variety of planning and engineering specialists from Auckland Council, Auckland Transport, Watercare and the New Zealand Transport Agency. An integrated transport assessment
    [Show full text]
  • Auckland's Urban Sprawl, Policy Ambiguities and the Peri
    Article Auckland’s Urban Sprawl, Policy Ambiguities and the Peri-Urbanisation to Pukekohe Cristian Silva School of Architecture and Planning, University of Auckland, Auckland 1010, New Zealand; [email protected]; Tel.: +64-9232829 Received: 10 November 2018; Accepted: 17 December 2018; Published: 21 December 2018 Abstract: Urban sprawl has been discussed extensively with regard to its negative impacts. On this basis, regulations have been put in place to control sprawling suburbanization, including the establishment of restricted areas for expansion defined by administrative urban boundaries. Overall, these measures have not been at all successful, considering that city-regions continue to expand inorganically, often reinforcing urban sprawl patterns. As clear evidence of the weaknesses of planning regimes of control, these unsuccessful attempts are partly explained by a series of policy ambiguities that contradict the meaning of planning as a prescriptive discipline. This ambiguity is justified by the need to frame flexible regulations that allow adaptation to unforeseen events over time. In this paper, using the case of Auckland, New Zealand, it is demonstrated that instead of planning flexibility, there is planning “ambiguity” accompanied by weak opposition from rural regimes, which deliberately contributes to urban sprawl. This is relevant considering that the inorganic encroachment of rural lands diminishes the huge environmental potential of the peri-urban space of Auckland, its ecosystem services, and agricultural activities—all elements that encourage the creation of more environmentally sustainable peripheral landscapes as a counterpoint to traditional sprawling suburbanization. Keywords: urban sprawl; planning policy; peri-urbanization; rural lands; Auckland; Pukekohe 1. Introduction Urban sprawl has been discussed mainly in terms of population growth, suburban inertia and improvements to transport infrastructure [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Pukekohe / Paerata Structure Plan Process
    Summary report – September 2017 Draft Pukekohe / Paerata Structure Plan process Have your say in shaping Auckland’s future together. shapeauckland.co.nz [email protected] 09 301 0101 Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan Process September 2017 Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan Process September 2017 Table of Contents 1 Purpose .................................................................................................................... 4 2 The Pukekohe / Paerata structure plan area ......................................................... 5 3 Pukekohe / Paerata structure plan process and consultation ............................ 6 4 Auckland’s growth challenge................................................................................. 8 5 Opportunities and constraints ............................................................................. 13 5.1 Introduction..................................................................................... …………….13 5.2 Transport ........................................................................................ …………….13 5.3 Stormwater and management of the freshwater environment ........ …………….17 5.4 Water and wastewater servicing ..................................................... …………….19 5.5 Geotechnical .................................................................................. …………….20 5.6 Ecology .......................................................................................... …………….21 5.7 Natural character, landscape and visual ...................
    [Show full text]
  • Ngati Te Ata (Waiohua) Cultural Values Assessment Report
    NGATI TE ATA (WAIOHUA) CULTURAL VALUES ASSESSMENT REPORT Auckland Metro Rail Programme – Papakura to Pukekohe Electrification (P2P) “Kia whakatōmuri a Ngaati Te Ata Waiohua ki te haere whakamua.” “Ngaati Te Ata Waiohua walk backwards into the future, with our eyes fixed on our past.” PREPARED FOR KIWIRAIL HOLDINGS LTD (FEBRUARY 2021) “Ko nga kahupokere ko nga kurirangaunu e kore e ngaro i te hinapouri” “Our chieftainship in Tamaki will never be lost to darkness” (Ngati Te Ata Chiefs Te Rangihahautu and Te Rangikaimata) Te Kahupokere, The Deeply Tattooed Hawke representing Chieftainship 2 Table of Contents 1.1.1. WHAKATAUKI ................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................ ............................................................................................. ................ 555 2.2.2. FOREWARD ................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................ ................................................................................................ ..................... 555 3.3.3. INTRODUCTION TO NGATI TE ATA ..................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Young People's Perspectives on Youth Employment in Franklin
    Young People’s Perspectives on Youth Employment in Franklin, Auckland Scoping Research for Auckland Council August 2015 Fouche, C. Kim, H. 2 Executive Summary Rising youth unemployment coupled with the need to generate more local employment opportunities have been key issues for the Franklin Local Board. A gap in local knowledge towards developing sustainable solutions to these issues was identified and the perspectives of local young people sought regarding: barriers in the local employment sector opportunities in the local employment sector thoughts on being ‘work ready’ preparing young people for employment preparing local employers to employ young people A survey exploring these five issues was undertaken by 110 young people (aged 16-19 years) from Waiuku College, Pukekohe High School, Clevedon Presbyterian Church, Waiuku Youth Group, and Pukekohe Youth Centre in June and July 2015. Survey findings indicate that in terms of barriers, the majority of participants did not have any paid work, and felt finding local paid employment difficult. This was partly attributed to not enough work being available and ‘unsuitable’ employment – i.e. work opportunities did not match a young person’s skill set, and/or hours they were available to work, and/or were not accessible. With regards to opportunities, most survey participants indicated a wide interest in jobs - especially those which increased their skills and were linked to career prospects. Managing the challenge of non-flexible work hours was noted amongst many survey responses. Work readiness: the majority of participants felt confident to ‘start’ a job, but ‘finding’ a job seemed difficult. In being prepared for paid work, participants saw the importance of having work experiences and skills, a driver’s licence and getting timely information about available jobs.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Auckland's Growth Challenge
    Meeting Auckland’s Growth Challenge: The Innovation City Discussion Document OCTOBER 2017 Contents Executive Summary 2 Auckland’s Growth Challenge 6 A New Approach: Integrated Urban Development at Scale 8 Costing a Satellite: Infrastructure 14 Land Values 30 Paerata City: Employment and Construction 36 Funding Tools 44 Delivering Paerata City 52 The Innovation City 60 Appendix 1: Assumptions Used to Inform Transport Networks 62 Executive Summary The Approach We test the costs and feasibility of delivering an additional 30,000 homes and jobs, over and above current plans, built around rapid transit on undeveloped land. Homes closer to jobs will reduce regional travel. Transit oriented development will facilitate access to high capacity services. Raw land provides the opportunity to capture value to fund public infrastructure and build quickly. Auckland is confronted with a We examine five locations around Auckland with sufficient land three-sided growth challenge. to support a city of 100,000 residents. We compare the costs of servicing these areas with infrastructure and examine whether There are not enough homes, there housing can be delivered affordably. is growing traffic congestion and We find Dairy Flat-Silverdale to be the most expensive location solving either problem is becoming to grow. High land costs, water challenges and the prospect of increasingly unaffordable. extremely expensive transport upgrades suggest this area is not capable of accommodating planned growth, let alone an additional city. Growth and investment in the north should be deprioritised. Rapid population growth is exacerbating pressures, but it is not the root cause of Auckland’s growth challenge. Kumeu south is more suitable.
    [Show full text]