It’s not altogether a surprise that he did this and announced it this afternoon, because it’s been rumoured for months - for the obvious reason that it’s election year.
Auckland is a key battleground. Aucklanders are obsessed with houses. Auckland voters who own their homes were already stressed about this plan, and if it turned into a full election issue with proper media coverage, even more of them would’ve become stressed.
That would mean blue Auckland voters heading straight to New Zealand First, ACT or Labour. So it was a political problem for National and Bishop had to back down.
But in reality, it’s not just politics, is it? It’s basic common sense. I think it’s reasonable for an Aucklander who has sunk one to two million dollars - maybe more, maybe a bit less, but still a lot of money - into their home to feel stressed at the idea of a multi‑storey apartment block popping up next door, blocking their view, blocking their light, ruining their privacy. Whatever it is.
We mock these people as NIMBYs, but actually, I think it’s fair for them to want to protect the place they live in. Don’t you want to protect the place you live in?
This battle, though, is far from won. Anyone looking at this and thinking, “That was a close call, thank God that’s over,” - it’s not over.
All Bishop has done is reduce the number of new houses to the point that it shouldn’t impact on suburbs. But whether it does affect suburbs is a decision for Auckland Council, and that decision hasn’t been made yet.
So while it should, on balance, be okay, nothing is certain until the Auckland maps are released. What this is, then, is one u-turn down, and one more to go.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and commentator who hosts Newstalk ZB's Drive show. This article was sourced from Newstalk ZB.
4 comments:
It was Auckland council who wanted to build 2 million homes in the first place. Auckland limitations come mostly from infrastructure deficit - both social and utility, and the cost and viability of resolving it. And providing housing without sufficient infrastructure is a third world practice! It is fundamentally wrong when short term politics replaces vision and common sense.
To anon 7.29 am: yes - but the lunatic council ( bar a few experienced heads) pushes ahead! Hence the ongoing "mish-mash" mess.
The govt interference in Auckland housing planning is remarkable. Incredibly, the public submissions on which many citizens expended great effort are not yet available for consideration! The nominal gross number of houses means little. Without seeing revised zoning maps it is difficult to fathom who will benefit from the revision. As previously the highly vocal champions, who often are not actual owners, of character housing, cherished
largely for aesthetic appeal to and by others, seem to have had grossly disproportionate influence. The housing shortage is due excessive immigration and excessive multiplication by highly subsidised/encouraged local groupings. How many of those will work in the CBD and so need to live near inner rail stations is very questionable. What other countries double in 50 or so years? Property owners faintly near inner rail stations are to be the fall guys to reduce intense zoning elsewhere. Their situation will worsen, not improve as HdPA imagines. Having invested 2 million or so, owners go from pleasant settled attractive neighbourhood to living in a canyon floor. Whether 10/15 story blocks materialise or not the threat exists over huge areas and will trigger flight of responsible and caring owners, and descent to rentals. Many of the displaced and threatened are city professionals. Many will flee to Australia. Or work distant from home, further killing CBD. If the blocks become occupied by persons employed other than in the city, by retired, students, under or unemployed, the new city train set and disruptive dismal housing exercise will be largely pointless. Tower blocks should be built where the neighbours are distant; Chamberlain park, Avondale race course etc and not in such pleasant settled areas such as surround Baldwin Ave station.
Bishop sees to think he is preserving National votes. He will not get mine and when I complete door knocking on the comfortable homes of the mostly city employed professionals in the Baldwin station street area of especial concern, it is likely most of them will also abandon National. Incidentally when I carried out this exercise about 2022 following the slightly less threatening Plan Change 78 propsals, I was astonished at the general lack of awareness. Despite mostly professional persons, only about 1 in 10 was reasonably aware of developments. Such has been the effect of the demise of the traditional style newspapers and Council news letters. The modern world is a weird place.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.