Auckland Plan 2050 Feedback

2018
BEN ROSS
BEN.R001@GMAIL.COM
HTTP://VOAKL.NET
TALKING SOUTHERN AUCKLAND
MARCH 2018
Ben Ross
Picture 1: Manukau Mall southern car park
[AUCKLAND PLAN 2050

FEEDBACK]
Feedback to the Auckland Plan 2050. Divided into sub-sections as outlaid on the Auckland Plan 2050
feedback website. Further references by Talking Southern Auckland blog links also included.
[AUCKLAND PLAN 2050 FEEDBACK] March 27, 2018
Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 1

About Me (Ben) and the Blog as an Urban Geographer

Talking Southern Auckland is the Conversation and Commentary from
Urban Geographer Ben Ross.
The elections have been and gone but the journey continues as projects like
Transform Manukau and the Airport Line continue to gather steam.
Talking Southern Auckland focuses on the urban geography issues of mainly

Southern Auckland (Manukau, Manurewa-Papakura, and Franklin Wards)
with occasional pieces from wider Auckland or overseas that might have
consequences to the South.
https://www.slideshare.net/lwolberg/cities-11-urban-geography-111
Join me as the Urban Geography story continues on that path of a #BetterAuckland

Blog History as an Urban Geographer
Urban geography is a branch of human geography concerned with various aspects

of cities. An urban geographer’s main role is to emphasise location and space and
study the spatial processes that create patterns observed in urban areas.
Source: An Overview of Urban Geography – About.com
As an Urban Geographer I have a keen interest (and passion) in how cities work and
how we can build better cities from knowing how spatial patterns create those
patterns observed in an urban area. My interest in Urban Geography would start
from those Sim City 2000 days and continue through to today’s advance
urban/transport simulator Cities Skylines (see: Ben’s Cities).
Picture 2: The GHD Aerotropolis exercise
Talking Southern Auckland as a Urban Geographer Digital Record
The blog itself started as VOAKL back in December 2011 before and Talking
Auckland in 2013.
Talking Southern Auckland is my digital story covering Urban Geography as well as

other topics here in the South as well as wider Auckland.
One of my major Urban Geography (and Planning) engagements was with the Unitary Plan that
is now operative in part. I was engaged with stakeholders, residents and other like-minded
groups and individuals from across the city in assisting them with Unitary Plan information,
questions and submissions. Through Talking Auckland I also ran extensive balanced
commentary from day one on the Unitary Plan. This commentary has gone noticed and picked

up mentions ranging from then Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse (and current Deputy Mayor Bill
Cashmore) to Russell Brown at Public Address, to youth organisation Generation Zero.
With the Unitary Plan operative (in part) and Area Plans soon to be formed, Talking Auckland
shifted their main focus to a project close to my heart – Transform Manukau. Transform Manukau
is a large (600ha) urban regeneration project led by Auckland Council’s property and
development arm Panuku Development Auckland. The story of Transform Manukau can be
watched through the series here on Talking Auckland.
Southern Auckland is my and Talking Auckland’s home. Despite often the negative
stereotypes again Southern it is a region we all love both physically and for its social
and cultural diversity as well (South Auckland – The Rising Jewel in Auckland’s
Crown).
Note: I do not work for nor am contracted to Auckland Council or its Council Control
Organisations such as Auckland Transport or Panuku Development Auckland.
I have been recently involved as a Researcher with the University of Waikato

looking into the ‘Architecture of Decision Making into delivery of
Intensification.’
I am open to opportunities in work and/or research projects preferably in the

Urban Geography discipline. For full profile and portfolio see my LinkedIn
profile:


Auckland Plan 2050 Feedback

 The Auckland Plan 2050
 Outcome: Belonging and participation
 Focus area 2: Provide accessible services and social infrastructure that are
responsive in meeting people's evolving needs
Feeds back into Focus area 1 (Focus area 1: Create safe opportunities for people to meet,
connect, participate in, and enjoy community and civic life)
Parks and Open Space provision policy deeply flawed and should be redone from scratch to
meet the requirements of the Auckland Plan.
Parks are too big and underutilised, too much focus on destination parks (that are not linked
properly to the transit and active transport systems) while note enough focus on “pocket
parks” being sprinkled liberally through Brownfield and Greenfield developments (local parks
used by local people promoting local communities that are actually connected).
See: https://voakl.net/2018/02/05/sociable-neighbourhoods-reconnecting-isolated-suburbia/
and https://voakl.net/2018/01/24/urban-design-urban-geography-and-green-utility-vs-the-city-
budget-a-citiesskylines-lesson/ for more
 Outcome: Belonging and participation
 Focus area 6: Focus investment to address disparities and serve communities

of greatest need
Refer to Focus Area Two and the Development Strategy in regards to Transport and Nodes

 Outcome: Homes and places
 Homes and places explained
See Outcome: Belonging and participation Focus Area 2 on flawed Open Spaces policy
 Direction 1: Develop a quality compact urban form to accommodate

Auckland’s growth
Ties into development strategy especially around the Nodes, also fleshes out how the
Direction would work (needs to reference the Unitary Plan
 Direction 2: Accelerate the construction of homes that meet Aucklanders’

changing needs and preferences
Mention of extra 320,000 homes by 2050 does not line up with the Unitary Plan which has
capacity 422,000 homes. Either UP drops its capacity or AP lifts its capacity so they both
match.
Modular, Prefab and full automation to allow builds offsite, shipped and assembled onsite
needed to get on top of housing need


 Direction 3: Shift to a housing system that ensures secure and affordable

homes for all
Look at Rent-to-buy and shared equity schemes.
Building Act badly out of date and not suited for purpose as exposed in Topics 059-063
Residential Zones Unitary Plan debate 2013-2016.
Reinforce Healthy Homes Guarantee from Central Government
 Direction 4: Provide sufficient public places and spaces that are inclusive,
accessible and contribute to urban living
See Focus 2 on flawed park policy
 Focus area 1: Accelerate quality development at scale that improves housing

choices
Agree fully

 Focus area 2: Increase security of tenure and broaden the range of tenure
models, particularly for those most in need
Agree fully especially with:
 cooperative and collective ownership models
 rent-to-buy models
 Encouraging long-term institutional landlords.
Read more about mixed tenure housing.
 Focus area 3: Improve the built quality of existing dwellings, particularly rental
housing
Agree in full with these recommendations:
Improvements in the rental housing stock can be made by:
 addressing the inability or unwillingness of some owners to attend to repairs,

maintenance and needed upgrades
 addressing the powerlessness of tenants to require owners to undertake ongoing

maintenance
 introducing compulsory 'warrants of fitness' for all rental properties and using levers
to enforce minimum standards
 Clarifying the relative ambiguity of the provisions under the Residential Tenancies
Act.
I do note that Auckland Council needs to push Central Government much harder to have the
Building Act 2004 replaced so that developments like Ockham’s Daisy become standard
bearers in higher density zones.

Council should also push for more coercive powers when “addressing the inability or
unwillingness of some owners to attend to repairs, maintenance and needed upgrades” –
that is the property is banned from being tenanted until such repairs are made and the house
brought to standard.

 Focus area 5: Create urban spaces for the future, focusing investment in areas
of highest population density and greatest need
Agree/Support in general with
It is therefore crucial that we:
 consider all publicly owned land as potential public space and able to contribute to
greening the city
 use existing public places and spaces as effectively and efficiently as possible
 Ensure our public places and spaces are accessible for people of all age groups and
physical abilities.
The use of public places continues to evolve in ways that are difficult to predict. It is
important that they are designed to be multi-functional in use and adaptable in the future.
And
How this can be done
First, we need to shift our perception of what a public space ought to be.
Second, we need to adopt different approaches to the design of public places so they:
 can perform many functions at the same time, giving people flexibility in how they use
them, and finding the right balance between the various functions of a space
 Connect areas and residents to each other and to the amenities they value.
Auckland is already starting to recognise the value of turning its public places to new and
multiple uses. This needs to be accelerated.
While some parts of Auckland are well served with quality public places and spaces, others
are not.
Investment must therefore be specifically targeted at:
 those areas that undergo significant growth and where population densities are
increasing

 Those parts of Auckland that are currently under-served and where it will make the
most difference to quality of life.
Our efforts could therefore focus on:
 restructuring streets and other public land into new public places and spaces that
support housing intensification and centre development, and provide safe
environments for the people who use them
 Communities where real improvements in quality of life can be achieved, using place
based initiatives. These combine investment in public spaces, service centres and
community facilities to achieve broader social, cultural, environmental and economic
outcomes.
However, the Open Space 2016 Provision Policy

(https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-
policies/Documents/open-space-provision-policy.pdf ) needs to be redrawn up as the park
size provisions (in terms of square metres) are too large and not nimble for rapidly evolving
communities and neighbourhoods.
Greater emphasis on smaller pocket park type green spaces sprinkled liberally through a
community rather than reliance on larger centralised destination parks that are expensive
acquire, build and maintain. Centralised parks also contribute to localised traffic congestion
in comparison to smaller pocket parks throughout the community.
See following blog post for more: Urban Design, Urban geography and Green utility vs the
City Budget. A #CitiesSkylines Lesson
Picture 3: Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/15/sunday-review/future-suburb-

millennials.html?lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_pulse_read%3BvP%2BwHXxoTKWPXOAOY7IKjw%3D%3D#

 Implementing the Homes and places outcome
Agree with the tenants of the text. However, it must be adaptive to changes such as central
Urban Development Authorities and Inter Regional Spatial Planning:
 Upper North Island Needs its Version of an Auckland (Spatial) Plan

 My Ideal central Urban Development Authority
 Outcome: Transport and access
 Transport and access explained
Agree in general:
 Making progress requires a combination of:

 additional investment
 rebalancing effort to other forms of mobility
 Focusing on changing our travel behaviour.
This work emphasised the need to focus on:
 getting much more out of existing infrastructure
 maximising new opportunities to influence travel demand
 Ensuring investment is targeted to the greatest challenges.
Addressing this challenge will require:
 an overall increase in funding from recent levels to keep up with Auckland's growth
 ensuring funding is prioritised by need rather than mode, and through fair and
consistent funding arrangements between central government, Auckland Council and
the private sector

 Continuing to explore new funding tools.
We will track progress against a set of measures.
The measures for this outcome are:
 access to jobs
 traffic congestion
 use of public transport, walking and cycling
 household transport costs
 Deaths and injuries from transport network.
However, where are the actual measurements and KPIs that were often seen in the
Auckland Plan 2012? In order to reach the outcomes mentioned above while complying with
the Government Policy Statement on Access, Safety, Resilience and Low Carbon the
Auckland Plan needs some KPIs that can be enforced against it.
The easiest way is using the 30/45min access to an employment centre measure that is
international best practice. That is a percentage of residents are within 30 minutes of and/or
their employment centre by car or 45 minutes by transit and/or active modes.
Thus the Auckland Plan 2050 should have the following goals that are tied to each Long
Term Plan while being reviewed every six years (when the Auckland Plan itself is reviewed):
 First five years: 50% of all urban residents within 30/45 minutes of a/their major
employment centre
 Second five years: 65%
 Third five years: 75%
 Beyond completion of last five years: 85% and this becomes the minimum
benchmark from there on
The Unitary Plan would be reviewed subsequently to make sure the zones are adequate to
meet the 30/45 minute requirement set in the Auckland Plan and possible GPS


 Direction 1: Create an integrated transport system connecting people, places,

goods and services
Ideals set in Direction One are noble and will go in-depth on it in the respective Focus areas
and the Development Strategy.
 Passenger rail transport between Auckland, Hamilton and Tauranga
Agree in general with inter regional rail as mentioned below:
Inter-regional passenger rail has the potential to reduce travel times between Auckland and
Hamilton to just over an hour, and reduce times between Tauranga and Auckland to around
two hours.
It would support growth in northern Waikato towns by making inter-regional commuting a

viable proposition.
The services would also:
 provide an express rail service within Auckland, which would reduce travel times
between Auckland city centre and Auckland Airport (via connection at Puhinui
Station)
 provide options for residents of northern Waikato to commute to Auckland for work
 make better use of the existing rail network
 improve the resilience of the transport network
 Reduce congestion, transport related emissions and deaths and injuries occurring on
the road network.

Past proposals for improving passenger rail services have not provided sufficiently attractive
travel times and frequencies to encourage use.
This is because they have been based on the use of existing slow trains and on Britomart
station's network capacity constraints.
For rail to be successful, it will require a substantial programme of investment that includes:
 new, faster trains
 completion of the City Rail Link to enable use of Britomart station by regional trains
 track upgrades within Auckland (including a third or fourth main line on busy sections
of track) to separate fast inter-regional trains from commuter trains
 Track and station upgrades outside Auckland.
However, while Greater Auckland has a time frame on the optimum roll out of RRR (backed
by Central Government) Auckland has lacked for its part foundational work on inter-regional
spatial planning on how RRR will foster interactions with the Waikato and Bay of Plenty.
Yes Central Government will take lead role in any inter regional spatial planning with
Auckland contributing in. For example the Auckland Plan makes mention:
 provide an express rail service within Auckland, which would reduce travel times
between Auckland city centre and Auckland Airport (via connection at Puhinui
Station)
Council needs to be very specific when they would like and support bus lanes from Puhinui
Station to the Airport on the proviso that it will become Light Rail when SH20B is widened.
Consequently what will Council do to facilitate better urban developments around RTN
routes and Stations such as the Southern Airport Line (Botany to Airport RTN)?

Picture 4: Congestion Free Network by Greater Auckland

Picture 5: Southern Airport Line - Airport to Manukau leg. Source: Own

 Direction 2: Increase genuine travel choices for a healthy, vibrant and equitable
Auckland
See remarks regarding Transport Access and Outcomes (30/45 KPI) and above with inter
regional spatial planning
 Focus area 1: Make better use of existing transport networks, including a

greater focus on influencing travel demand
Agree in general. See 30/45 KPI above on measuring outcomes
 Focus area 2: Target new transport investment to the most significant challenges
See above

 Focus area 4: Make walking, cycling and public transport preferred choices for
many more Aucklanders
See above and Focus area 5. Also see Development Strategy
 Focus area 5: Better integrate land-use and transport decisions
See above and Development Strategy
As Auckland grows, competition for limited street space will increase. Auckland
Transport's Roads and Streets Framework outlines an approach to providing greater priority
to pedestrians and place making. It does this through:
 the reallocation of road space
 slower speeds
 safer intersections
 Reduced crossing times.
See also Auckland's Transport Design Manual.
How this can be done
Better integration of land use and transport to support quality urban living will include:
 prioritising transport investment that supports intensification in the existing urban

area, supports growth in new urban areas and improves connections between these
newly developing areas and the rest of Auckland
 Encouraging housing and employment growth in areas with better transport

connections. This will enable shorter commutes and reduce pressure on the transport
system
 designing and managing streets in a way that makes it easier for people to get
around and enjoy the places in which they live and work, using good design to
manage any trade-offs between vehicle movement and place making functions.
Also see (applies to entire submission):
https://voakl.net/2018/01/16/redesigning-the-transit-network-citiesskylines-style-lessons-for-
auckland/
https://voakl.net/2018/01/22/the-southern-airport-line-and-transit-orientated-developments-
rethinking-transit-and-developments-in-auckland/
https://voakl.net/2018/01/26/uk-looks-at-lite-light-rail-could-it-have-applications-for-auckland/
https://voakl.net/2018/02/07/autonomous-vehicles-transit-the-city-and-urban-geography-an-
urban-geographers-look/
https://voakl.net/2018/02/13/rapid-regional-rail-and-the-southern-airport-line/
https://voakl.net/2018/02/19/the-southern-airport-line-more-than-a-light-rail-line-a-
community-and-city-builder-too/
https://voakl.net/2018/02/22/manukau-bus-station-build-nears-completion-open-date-set-for-
april-bike-facilities-poor/
https://voakl.net/2018/02/27/urban-geography-201-building-transit-right-first-time-everytime-
lessons-from-strong-towns/
https://voakl.net/2018/03/05/aucklandplan2050-transport-linking-auckland-in-and-out/
https://voakl.net/2018/03/20/national-policy-statement-on-urban-development-mk2-transit-
orientated-developments-present-opportunity/

Development Strategy
Agree in general with the Development Strategy however, disagree certain parts including:
Why we need a Development Strategy
Auckland is anticipated to grow significantly over the next 30 years. To make sure that we
build on its strengths and hold on to the things that are dear to us during this growth, we
need to plan for how and where Auckland will grow.
Around 1.6 million people currently live in Auckland.
Over the next 30 years this number could grow by another 740,000 people to reach 2.4
million. This means Auckland will need many more dwellings – possibly another 320,000,
and room for extra jobs – possibly another 270,000.
Growth on this scale is significant, and requires us to work together and ensure we have a
clear understanding of where and when investment in planning and infrastructure will be
made – this is what the Development Strategy provides.
………..
Those dwelling and population figures are not lining up with the Unitary Plan, the Auckland
Plan 2012 nor Statistics New Zealand actual and projected population numbers.
The Auckland Plan 2012 has Auckland requiring 400,000 new homes with a minimum 60%
in Brownfield areas and a maximum of 40% in Greenfield areas. The Unitary Plan met this
by allowing capacity for 422,000 new homes.
Having the Auckland Plan 2050 drop the dwelling count to 320,000 for 740,000 new
residents (AP2012 and AUP has 1 million new residents) defies the reality that Auckland is
still in High Population Growth and Trajectories – not medium as the AP2050 assumes.
Consequently the Auckland Plan 2050 needs to restore in its text:
 At least 400,000 new dwellings

 Population to increase by 1 million by 2042
 Development Ratio to continue on the 60:40 Brownfield – Greenfield approach

Also this part will need to be altered to match the above changes as well:
 The Auckland Plan 2050 - Our development strategy - Auckland’s capacity for growth
In regards with the Nodes as mentioned below from the Development Strategy:
A multi-nodal model
Over the next 30 years, Auckland will move towards a multi-nodal model within the urban
footprint.
The city centre will continue to be the focus of Auckland's business, tourism, and
educational, cultural and civic activities. It will continue to be an important residential centre
as well.
But it won't be the only main centre in Auckland.
The areas around Albany, Westgate and Manukau will emerge as nodes which are critical to
growth across the region.
They will become significant hubs of a broad range of business and employment activity,
civic services and residential options.
These areas, with their large catchments, will accommodate substantial growth in the north,
north-west and south and will be interconnected by a range of efficient transport links.
Outside the core urban area, the satellite towns of Warkworth and Pukekohe will act as rural
nodes.
They will:
 support significant business and residential growth
 service their surrounding rural communities
 Be connected to urban Auckland through state highways and, in the case of

Pukekohe, by rail.
………

Support the concept of the Nodes and the places that became Nodes fully. However, the
development strategy for the Nodes as mentioned here is off and does not match other
projected including Panuku led urban regeneration programs: The Auckland Plan 2050 - Our
development strategy - Anticipated growth - where and when
Having your Nodes in years 1-3 as a Development Area makes no sense especially as these
nodes are your larger and largest Metropolitan Centres. The table also does not align with
wider projects that might be underway such as Transform Manukau – a 30 year urban
regeneration program. So in this case would it not make sense to have the Nodes spread
right through the year 1-30 Development Area program especially Manukau and the City
Centre?
Also any reason Papakura Metropolitan Centre not included on this Development Area table
at all? It is our southernmost Metropolitan Centre and nearest to the large Drury-Pukekohe
Greenfield development area but no mention of specific development and investment for the
Metropolitan Centre.
The outline of the expected timeframe of key transit projects is incorrect although I
acknowledge it could change when the ATAP and new GPS come out late March – early
April (so outside of the consultation window for the Auckland Plan 2050).
None-the-less the below timeframes do not line up with the urgent need to get key
infrastructure projects off the ground.

Expected timeframe of enabling infrastructure projects in Auckland
Strategic public transport network projects
Years 1 - 3
Years 4 - 10 (2021 - 2027) Years 11 - 30 (2028 - 2048)
(2018 - 2020)
 City Rail Link  Mt Roskill to Airport light rail

[see note 1]
 Northwest Rapid Transit (City
centre to Westgate)  Botany to Manukau
 City centre to Mt Roskill light-  Lincoln Road bus

rail improvements Stage 2
 Eastern Busway (Panmure to  Ellerslie to Panmure

Botany)
 Upper Harbour Rapid
 Airport to Manukau bus Transit (Westgate to
improvements, including Constellation)
Puhinui interchange
 Northern Rapid Transit –
 Northern Busway (Constellation City centre to Takapuna and
to Albany)
 Orewa
 Pukekohe rail electrification
 Northwest Rapid Transit
 Lincoln Road bus (Westgate to Kumeu /
improvements Stage 1 Huapai)
………
These projects should be altered in their timeframe of delivery:
 North West Light Rail to Westgate: Years 1-10

 Airport to Manukau bus improvements, including Puhinui interchange: Year 1-3 AS
AN INTERIM MEASURE
 Pukekohe rail electrification: Years 1-10
 Botany to Manukau : Years 4-10
 Airport to Manukau Light Rail: Years 4-10 when the SH20B widening is undertaken
 Botany to Manukau LRT: Year 11-30

Again it is noted the ATAP and GPS can change the outcome on transit investment.
Picture 6: Strategic Transit Network - Auckland Plan 2050

 Our development strategy
 Future Auckland
 How Auckland will grow and change - a quality compact approach
Agree with text although disagree with timing on the Development Areas timeframe for the
Nodes and the exclusion of Papakura Metropolitan Centre as mentioned above.
 Growth in urban Auckland
 Building strong urban centres and neighbourhoods
Agree with the text. Strong emphasis needs to be made on the following:
 Why we have an 800 metre walk up catchment to Local, Town or Metropolitan Centre
 The Role of Transit Orientated Developments:
o Any Centre that has an RTN station within it has the opportunity to support
even greater intensified developments within 800 metres of the RTN Station
than otherwise normally allowed under the Unitary Plan zone given to that
Centre]
o Areas within 400 metres of an FTN stop or station has the opportunity to
support moderate levels of further intensification than otherwise normally
allowed under the Unitary Plan zone given to that FTN area
 See here for Green Utility and neighbourhood developments: Urban Design, Urban
geography and Green utility vs the City Budget. A #CitiesSkylines Lesson

 Business areas
Agree with the text in general however, to make best use of industrial land:
 Recognise that the Southdown-Penrose heavy industrial complex will decamp over
the next thirty years and become residential and commercial areas as the Isthmus
continues to grow in population
 In recognition of that decamping make sure adequate land in the South and around
Westgate is provided as heavy industry continues to move away from central
Auckland (land use pressures and price of land)
 Provision of at least an FTN system to connect residential and commercial areas to
the heavy industrial complexes
 Provision of land and protection of corridors for multi-modal freight hubs like Wiri and
Metroport and any future sites such as Drury South
End of submission
Picture 7: Auckland Plan and the Nodes

Auckland Plan 2050 Feedback

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Auckland Plan 2050 Feedback

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2018

Picture 1: Manukau Mall southern car park

[AUCKLAND PLAN 2050

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 1

About Me (Ben) and the Blog as an Urban Geographer

Talking Southern Auckland focuses on the urban geography issues of mainly

Join me as the Urban Geography story continues on that path of a #BetterAuckland

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 2

Blog History as an Urban Geographer

Urban geography is a branch of human geography concerned with various aspects

Picture 2: The GHD Aerotropolis exercise

Talking Southern Auckland as a Urban Geographer Digital Record

Talking Southern Auckland is my digital story covering Urban Geography as well as

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 3

I have been recently involved as a Researcher with the University of Waikato

I am open to opportunities in work and/or research projects preferably in the

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 4

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 5

Auckland Plan 2050 Feedback

 Outcome: Belonging and participation

 The Auckland Plan 2050

 Outcome: Belonging and participation

 Focus area 6: Focus investment to address disparities and serve communities

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 6

 The Auckland Plan 2050

 Outcome: Homes and places

 Homes and places explained

 The Auckland Plan 2050

 Outcome: Homes and places

 Direction 1: Develop a quality compact urban form to accommodate

 The Auckland Plan 2050

 Outcome: Homes and places

 Direction 2: Accelerate the construction of homes that meet Aucklanders’

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 7

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 8

 The Auckland Plan 2050

 Outcome: Homes and places

 Direction 3: Shift to a housing system that ensures secure and affordable

Look at Rent-to-buy and shared equity schemes.

Reinforce Healthy Homes Guarantee from Central Government

 The Auckland Plan 2050

 Outcome: Homes and places

See Focus 2 on flawed park policy

 The Auckland Plan 2050

 Outcome: Homes and places

 Focus area 1: Accelerate quality development at scale that improves housing

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 9

 The Auckland Plan 2050

 Outcome: Homes and places

Agree fully especially with:

 cooperative and collective ownership models

 Encouraging long-term institutional landlords.

Read more about mixed tenure housing.

 The Auckland Plan 2050

 Outcome: Homes and places

Agree in full with these recommendations:

Improvements in the rental housing stock can be made by:

 addressing the inability or unwillingness of some owners to attend to repairs,

 addressing the powerlessness of tenants to require owners to undertake ongoing

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 10

Ben Ross | Ben.R001@gmail.com http://voakl.net 11

 The Auckland Plan 2050

 Outcome: Homes and places