planning for growth submission - wordpress.com
Post on 16-May-2022
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
ONSLOW RESIDENTS’ COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
O n s l o w R e s i d e n t s ’ C o m m u n i t y A s s o c i a t i o n ; c / o 1 3 S a t a r a C r e s c e n t ,
K h a n d a l l a h , W e l l i n g t o n 6 0 3 5 ; 1 / 7
e m a i l : o n s l o w c o m m u n i t y a s s n @ g m a i l . c o m ; T e l e p h o n e 0 2 7 4 5 1 1 3 6 6
The Convenor
Planning for Growth
Wellington City Council
PO Box 2199
Wellington 6140
PLANNING FOR GROWTH SUBMISSION
OBSERVATIONS:
1. Statistics NZ census shows that the growth in Wellington’s population actually
fell between 2006/2013 compared to 2001 / 2006. The statement that in the
next 30 years Wellington will be home to 50,000 to 80,000 more people is simply
a “projection”, not a given. Statistics NZ projects only 65,000 over the same
period of which 46,000 will live in the Wellington city area.
2. New homes need to be defined and related to actual need. Many Baby Boomers
want to downsize from the 4- bedroom home to a 2/3- bedroom maintenance
free town house or apartment. Many of the Millennials need similar
accommodation due to existing debt (student loans), long working hours, fewer
children and the prohibitive cost of buying a bigger home in the city.
3. Many major cities from Manila to Sydney are spending massive sums of money developing infrastructure/utilities and transport hubs outside of the existing city boundaries. The benefits include:
a. Reducing traffic congestion
b. Reducing pressure on existing utilities
c. Reducing inner city living costs.
d. Reducing pollution
ONSLOW RESIDENTS’ COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
O n s l o w R e s i d e n t s ’ C o m m u n i t y A s s o c i a t i o n ; c / o 1 3 S a t a r a C r e s c e n t ,
K h a n d a l l a h , W e l l i n g t o n 6 0 3 5 ; 2 / 7
e m a i l : o n s l o w c o m m u n i t y a s s n @ g m a i l . c o m ; T e l e p h o n e 0 2 7 4 5 1 1 3 6 6
OPTIONS TO CATER FOR PROJECTED GROWTH IN WELLINGTON
SCENARIO 1: Inner-City Focus
“This scenario has most of the growth going into the inner city. It involves apartments
up to 15 storeys high in the city centre and low rise up to six storeys high around
Newtown. It has town houses in the inner suburbs.”
Not the best option considering the potential for loss of life in an earthquake or potential
for sea level rise.
On the positive side a concentration of people within the city means they live close to
their work places with less need to use transport (lower carbon emissions and reduced
demand for parking)
The challenge with this scenario is how to determine when the Inner City reaches an
optimal saturation level. If you compare cities such as Singapore and Hong Kong, where
these densities are feasible and certain, it is difficult to see Wellington reaching these
saturation levels. As long as the infrastructure system (services such as water, storm
water, electricity and transport) is upgraded to handle the additional population the
seismic risks can be readily mitigated with technical and engineering solutions.
Considering the comments regarding the central city being susceptible to rising sea
levels, liquefaction and earthquakes, these factors can all be mitigated by focusing on
building on land at least 1.9 metres above high-tide level as mandated by the government
in 2017.
If an engineering solution cannot be achieved, then this land should necessarily be low-
rise development if it’s built on at all. With earthquakes risks, there’s an existing NBS
standard that is being continually revised. As long as buildings are built to comply with
this standard, it should allay any fears in building high-rise apartments.
It is neither necessary nor arguably desirable to increase the density in “character” zones.
Typically, these inner-city character sites are comparatively small and should be retained
by placing a minimum size section such as 800 square metres where redevelopment may
be permitted.
ONSLOW RESIDENTS’ COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
O n s l o w R e s i d e n t s ’ C o m m u n i t y A s s o c i a t i o n ; c / o 1 3 S a t a r a C r e s c e n t ,
K h a n d a l l a h , W e l l i n g t o n 6 0 3 5 ; 3 / 7
e m a i l : o n s l o w c o m m u n i t y a s s n @ g m a i l . c o m ; T e l e p h o n e 0 2 7 4 5 1 1 3 6 6
We wouldn’t support removing the pre-1930’s character protection designation ad-
hoc.
The suburbs that we believe are amenable to having denser housing are parts of
Newtown, particularly in lower Adelaide Road from the Basin Reserve to John Street
where there’s currently many old industrial sites that appear to have fallen into desuetude.
ONSLOW RESIDENTS’ COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
O n s l o w R e s i d e n t s ’ C o m m u n i t y A s s o c i a t i o n ; c / o 1 3 S a t a r a C r e s c e n t ,
K h a n d a l l a h , W e l l i n g t o n 6 0 3 5 ; 4 / 7
e m a i l : o n s l o w c o m m u n i t y a s s n @ g m a i l . c o m ; T e l e p h o n e 0 2 7 4 5 1 1 3 6 6
SCENARIO 2: Suburban Centres Focus
“This sees more town houses in most suburban centres, plus apartments up to six
storeys high in Newtown, Berhampore and around Kilbirnie. There would also be
some apartments up to 15 storeys high in the central city.”
Although this scenario would be more expensive than scenario one, it is the direction we
should move towards if we are to minimise the disruption caused by major emergencies
such as earthquakes and sea level rise. In an earthquake many areas could be cut off so it
would be sensible for suburbs to be more self-sufficient.
We would be supportive of increasing the maximum height of buildings in selected
suburban centres to accommodate 4, 5 and 6 storey buildings providing the infrastructure
is improved to allow this.
The number of storeys is to be determined by the terrain and contour of the site, health
and safety considerations and not by the developers’ economic return. We should also
be mindful of access to and provision of amenities like emergency services - police, fire
ambulances and hospitals keeping in mind our risk of earthquakes.
These areas need to be carefully selected. Whilst Newtown and Berhampore are on
higher ground, and as stated in the previous option, where higher buildings would be a
desirable utilisation of land, Kilbirnie and the flat areas in Miramar would be in danger of
rising sea levels as would any coastal housing such as in Seatoun, Lyall Bay, Evans Bay
and all small coastal suburbs.
For properties further out from these suburban centres, the existing right under the
District Plan to have a maximum of two dwellings should be rigidly enforced. As it is
now, Town Planners are approving large numbers of dwellings on a single section where
they see fit ignoring the provisions of the District Plan.
The statement “vibrancy and commerce would be boosted in the suburban centres.” is driven by the private sector and has nothing to do with simply more people moving into an area. At Johnsonville central, roads and amenities have recently been upgraded. However, Stride Property had stated that they were going to redevelop the Johnsonville Mall but over 12 years have done nothing.
ONSLOW RESIDENTS’ COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
O n s l o w R e s i d e n t s ’ C o m m u n i t y A s s o c i a t i o n ; c / o 1 3 S a t a r a C r e s c e n t ,
K h a n d a l l a h , W e l l i n g t o n 6 0 3 5 ; 5 / 7
e m a i l : o n s l o w c o m m u n i t y a s s n @ g m a i l . c o m ; T e l e p h o n e 0 2 7 4 5 1 1 3 6 6
SCENARIO 3: New Greenfield Suburb (Ohariu Valley, Upper Stebbings Valley, Marshall Ridge and Lincolnshire Farm)
“This scenario identifies a new suburb in Ohariu Valley. The scenario still requires
moderate growth in the inner city and some suburban centres.”
We support this option to develop this area.
To ameliorate the effect of extra traffic from this new development, encouragement may
be given to developers to integrate electric car charging in the houses that they build.
Note, the cost of providing this should be the responsibility of the developer and not
subsidised by ratepayers. A good public bus service will also be essential to encourage
commuters to avoid using private cars.
Mention is made of a big investment in infrastructure, particularly with public transport
and water systems. The cost of public transport will be recouped by greater patronage,
particularly in the peak hours with commuters going to and from work. The cost of water
reticulation should be incorporated into the developer’s cost, the same as building roads
and footpaths in this new development. The developer would recoup the cost of
providing this infrastructure into the sale price of the sections and houses. This would, of
course, increase the cost of the sections and houses. However, smaller houses and
sections could be built in this new subdivision as well as low to medium rise apartments
and town houses to give a mixture of different housing options. Ratepayers would be
responsible for the development of a small suburban centre similar to Churton Park with
supermarkets and small retail outlets.
As mentioned earlier in our submission, major cities around the world are decentralising
to take the pressure off from existing infrastructure, reducing congestion, providing
people with affordable housing options and in Wellington’s case, spreading the risk
should global warming speed up or we are subjected to a major earthquake.
ONSLOW RESIDENTS’ COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
O n s l o w R e s i d e n t s ’ C o m m u n i t y A s s o c i a t i o n ; c / o 1 3 S a t a r a C r e s c e n t ,
K h a n d a l l a h , W e l l i n g t o n 6 0 3 5 ; 6 / 7
e m a i l : o n s l o w c o m m u n i t y a s s n @ g m a i l . c o m ; T e l e p h o n e 0 2 7 4 5 1 1 3 6 6
SCENARIO 4: Greenfield extensions (Takapu Valley, Horokiwi & Owhiro Bay)
“The scenario looks at extending the urban area into Takapu Valley, Horokiwi and
Owhiro Bay. This still requires moderate growth in the inner city and some suburban
centres.”
We are supportive of this option in conjunction with Option 3.
The decision on the economic viability for both of these options would be assessed by
developers and it is the function of the WCC to encourage and facilitate these
developments but not to subsidise them.
New areas as proposed in Scenarios 3 and 4 will provide the following benefits:
a. New developments with affordable housing
b. Small business operations that mean workers do not need to travel into the city centre
c. Having an effective public transport system to reduce the use of cars entering the city
d. Risk mitigation in central Wellington by spreading the risk potentially caused by heavy flooding, sea level rise and liquefaction from earthquakes.
ONSLOW RESIDENTS’ COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
O n s l o w R e s i d e n t s ’ C o m m u n i t y A s s o c i a t i o n ; c / o 1 3 S a t a r a C r e s c e n t ,
K h a n d a l l a h , W e l l i n g t o n 6 0 3 5 ; 7 / 7
e m a i l : o n s l o w c o m m u n i t y a s s n @ g m a i l . c o m ; T e l e p h o n e 0 2 7 4 5 1 1 3 6 6
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. That the plan considers a mixture of all four scenarios with due regard to the
following:
a. Keeping the character and street appeal of the developed older suburbs by
avoiding infill housing.
b. Setting generous minimum sizes for sections and living areas for
dwellings and apartments.
c. Provision for off street parking for all dwellings and apartments
2. We wouldn’t support removing the pre-1930’s character protection designation
ad-hoc.
3. Because of such a large disparity in population growth projections, the plan
should err on the side of caution and plan for growth of 45,000 to 65,000.
4. In the character built-up suburbs the resource consent should strictly adhere to a
maximum of two dwelling per section as per existing right under the District
Plan, to maintain the current character and street appeal of these areas. This
would guarantee a sufficiently healthy and safe living environment for two
families with a garden and adequate off-street parking. Excessive builds on a
single section does not provide for low house prices as developers are simply
leveraging off the prices in these suburbs.
5. The Planning Office / Resource Consent Office should strictly adhere to the
District Plan. Any non-compliance of the district plan should be notified to the
affected parties. The currently overused term “less than minor” should not be
used to cover up non-compliance.
Lachman Prasad
Convenor – Building and Infrastructure Committee
Onslow Residents’ Community Association
top related