tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post7000769354990498713..comments2024-03-18T17:17:00.423+13:00Comments on Not PC: Affordable housing: Learning from LevittownPeter Cresswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-85692703461245552452010-10-18T23:41:45.057+13:002010-10-18T23:41:45.057+13:00There is a very simple answer to the question as t...There is a very simple answer to the question as to why Smith does this - the advice he gets is from new-urbanist true believers.<br /><br />The Ministry for the Environment has for many years been filled with senior advisors who are convinced that the future belong to this faith. I know because I used to confront one on a regular basis which arguing against requiring what were then Auckland territorial authorities from adopting the then ARC's grand plans in this area. MfE was cheerleading on the ARC in this vision.<br /><br />Nick Smith has been captured by MFE. Their Sir (and Madame) Humphreys have trained him well.Libertyscotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12741049550997300680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-87727693296752921972010-10-18T22:47:27.313+13:002010-10-18T22:47:27.313+13:00Very true indeed, especially in a country as spars...Very true indeed, especially in a country as sparsely populated as NZ.<br />Another reason for ridiculous housing costs in NZ are of course the building regulations, which appear mostly aimed at enforcing the government supported monopolies in building supplies and building technology.<br />BezAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-61693242406004247732010-10-18T17:13:43.686+13:002010-10-18T17:13:43.686+13:00@Ruth: The simplest transition I'd suggest is ...@Ruth: The simplest transition I'd suggest is that upon abolition of the RMA all the present "no-bullshit" rules on District Plans would be registered as the equivalent of common-law covenants on everyone's respective titles in favour of their neighbours.<br /><br />This recognises that the both present title and present value of each site is based on present rules--upon which basis everyone has bought, and from which we should be able to advance in a peaceful manner without the grey ones waving thei big sticks.<br /><br />So, following that registration process and after the abolition of the RMA which (and after we'd all celebrated the sacking of all the planners), property owners would be quite able to freely negotiate between each other property-owners whatever arrangements they liked, using the codified common law as the framework.<br /><br />So in your case, for example, the covenant for the green belt would be on your neighbour's title, granted in your favour. A real property right, not something for which you have to play politics to protect. And to have that covenant eased, they'd need to offer you (and the other neighbours) something you valued more than the green belt.<br /><br />This states the thing very simply, of course, and neglects to mention any other rights that might inhere in any of the land presently without any title (for which another registration process would begin ASAP). <br /><br />But what I outline above that would be the basic process as I would see it. No need for blowing up Cortlandt. :-)Peter Cresswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-60014357066741899452010-10-18T17:09:26.110+13:002010-10-18T17:09:26.110+13:00Actually Ruth what is happening to you is the cons...Actually Ruth what is happening to you is the consequence of ring fencing land because it is part of a dense thinking policy to intensify everything within the Metropolitan urban limit which is not a green belt at all.<br />Consequently Auckland Urban Area is now the densest urban area in Australasia and would be the second densest urban area in the US – second only to Los Angeles, which is the densest. <br />Cities without MULs actually allow cities to spread in new town town and hamlet developments with lots of green space. MUL fenced cities have high cost land and so open space is too expensive.<br />Auckland's urban area density is about 2,200 per sq km. The most popular and rapidly growing cities in the US have an urban density of about 700 - 1200 people per sq km. Council is not in the pocket of the developers. The Developers are in the pocket of Council. Many have shut up shop in NZ because they refuse to build the junk that the planners want.<br />Especially when after they have obliged the planners the developers get blamed for the results.Owen McShanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10130002581563595646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-78774255712585372602010-10-18T14:54:21.422+13:002010-10-18T14:54:21.422+13:00As I’ve pointed out frequently here over past year...<i>As I’ve pointed out frequently here over past years, the simple solution is to stop ring-fencing New Zealand’s cities with planners’ edicts not to build.</i><br /><br />What about folk like us in rural South East Auckland who paid a lot to live in an area with a so-called green-belt. Now council have decided that we will have 200 high density homes next to us.<br /><br /><br />Objections matter not, nor does environmental damage, or that the development is out of character for the area; as council is in the pocket of the developers. <br /><br />All we have been offered is a protection order on one of the garden trees. <br /><br />So what can one do - and the males in the family have already suggested a Roark style explosion so don't suggest that! ;-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com