Under the Mountain by e. mecredy

UNDER THE MOUNTAIN A briefing document for the proposed redevelopment of the former Winstone Quarry

Fig. 1.

Winstone Quarry Site

CONTENTS. global. living up to liveability the packaged narrative comparitive density

regional. the world’s 3rd & 10th most liveable city. the current liveability of auckland housing. auckland, a super-city. RMA reform. the draft unitary plan. skepticism, resistance, and… vision?

local. puketapapa demographics. transit. volcanic beginnings. industrial land use. residential land use. under the unitary plan. open space. site topography. the Fletcher Development proposal.

GLOBAL. living up to liveability. QUESTIONING HOW INTERNATIONAL INDICES SHAPED CONTEMPORARY PLANNING.

the packaged narrative. THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MARKETABLE IDENTITY

comparitive density. CONTRADICTIONS, MANIPULATIONS & COMPLIANCE

Fig. 2.

Monocle Index

Fig. 3.

Economist Intellegence Unit Index

Fig. 4.

Mercer Index

global : liveability

living up to liveability. QUESTIONING HOW INTERNATIONAL INDICES SHAPED CONTEMPORARY PLANNING.

The criteria employed by global liveability surveys are both wide-ranging in their scope and in their vagueness, including terms like; international connectivity, quality of architecture, pro-active policy developments and tolerance. Of them, Mercer’s survey is perhaps the most exhaustive, ranking over “460 cities against 39 factors within ten categories,”1

Fig. 5.

Mercer Categories

These international ranking indices are interesting in illustrating the current criteria for defining quality urban space, or rather the latest fashion of city building. But the foundational aspects of these indexes need to be bought into question; they are often misleading, biased and even inaccurate. There is a clear conflict of interest in the Siemens Index - ranking cities in which they have an economic share and the Economist’s Intelligence Unit lacks social criteria and omits the cost of living in their calculation of liveability.2

In The Atlas of the Copenhagen’s Deane Simpson argues liveability surveys reflect only a sampling of the city. The data of which these rankings are calculated focus on a central urbanized area and ignore the ever-expanding periphery that feed it. Mercer’s survey excludes half of Copenhagen’s urbanized area and three quarters of its larger regional base, essentially describing an urban condition that does not exist.3

But regardless, the proliferation and exposure of these International-ranking indices has ensured their position as an authority and an essential part of the debate on urban development policy. Simpson highlights the mutually beneficial relationship between these International ranking indices and the municipalities of the cities in question. Using the language of sociologist Bernard Stoeger, Simpson argues this relationship is a form of “re-enforced

mutual authority”4

which has led to an uncritical acceptance of the values and premises behind rankings and has seen municipalities engage in a form of gaming.5 Leading him to argue that global liveability surveys set superficial goals for cities and give tenuous legitimacy to one planning method over another.6

global :

the packaged narrative. Despite these shortcomings International ranking indices help construct a marketable identity for the cities they elevate. “Cities on top of liveability indexes who can put together a catchy narrative about their success can in turn pedal this to other cities for huge profits.”7 The transference of a city from a noun to a verb illustrates a packaging up of a city’s reputation or identity as a marketable and exportable product.

The most blatant examples of this being Vancouverism & Copenhagenization.

During the 1990s Vancouver manufactured a reputation around community planning and green solutions which led to various accolades and a uptake in the property market. “On the surface Vancouverism is a term used to define a newly celebrated planning model. Peel back the layers and it can mean much more – a global brand, a consultant commodity, a profitable development model, an instance of local boosterism, a set of succinct urban design ‘lessons’, an aspiration for other municipalities…”8 The consensus and backing of municipality and global indexes (Vancouver has/

Fig. 6.

Exporting Vancouver

is consistently ranked highly) shifted a planning trend to the level of ideology. And although the intensive development of Downtown Vancouver has been criticized since, (“90% of the nine million square feet of new towers developed in the downtown over the last decade have been residential”9 creating an imbalance with the commercial sector) its logic is still been translated globally. Vancouverism is still being promoted by its entrepreneur Larry Bealsey, from

global : the packaged narrative

Rotterdam to Abu Dabi.10 In Beasley’s own words his role as a special advisor allows one “…to give very direct and solid advice without all the encumbrances of being vested in the local political context.”11 The formula will work.

Fig. 7.

The Vancouver connection

global :

the packaged narrative

Also Copenhagen’s reputation as “Europe and even the world’s most liveable city” has been developed by a series of scales and registers including; the humanist city of high quality democratic public spaces, Jan Gehl’s dense, compact, pedestrian orientated city, the planned welfare utopia of the 1947 finger plan and even Oprah’s 2009 tour of a typical Danish apartment.12

Fig. 8.

Oprah abroad

This image of urban sustainability has been aggressively pursued by the municipality over the last couple of decades; most notably in a wish to cement Copenhagen’s position as an “eco-metropolis.” Yet the greater regional system that feeds this compact benchmark city is both unsustainable and increasingly ignored.

auckland

sydney

perth

vienna

toronto

copenhagen

global : melbourne

stockholm

comparitive density

adelaide

vancouver

the urban fabric of liveable cities. A SAMPLE OF BUILT FORM AT THE SAME SCALE AND DISTANCE FROM THE CENTRAL CITY AS THE QUARRY SITE

northern hemisphere

Fig. 9.

building your own house

stockholm

plot size dwelling size

average interest rate for a home loan 3.57%

global :

comparitive density

southern hemisphere

average interest rate for a home loan 7.09%

central melbourne

dwelling size

plot size

melbourne

plot size dwelling size

suburban melbourne

THE COMPACT CITY Councillor Dick Quax, supported by Cr Cameron Brewer, says Auckland is already more compact than any other city in Australasia, and in a sense he’s right. If you divide what’s called the “contiguous urban area” of Auckland by the number of residents, you discover Auckland has 2400 people per square kilometre. Sydney, in contrast, has 1900, Melbourne 1500 and Brisbane a mere 1000. The data, which is not disputed, comes from an international agency called Demographia. But the ﬁgures are misleading. Auckland’s contiguous area stops at Long Bay in the north and the foothills of the Waitakeres in the west. It’s relatively small. Sydney’s in contrast, goes on forever: its outlying towns are all joined up, so most of what we would call “rural residential” land is included. In fact, by Quax’s measure, Hamilton is almost as dense as Auckland and Napier is equivalent to Melbourne. It’s more revealing to look at the densest area in Auckland — the isthmus from Parnell to Pt Chevalier and Westhaven to Onehunga. It has around 3500 people per hectare. In Sydney, the equivalent built-up suburbs cover about seven times more land and contain between 3800 and more than 7000 people per hectare. The densest single suburb in Auckland is Ponsonby, and it has very few buildings over two storeys in height. Council planner Ludo Campbell-Reid says Ponsonby offers the kind of model they would like to see adopted in some other parts of the city.

Fig. 10.

The myth of the compact city

global :

comparitive density. By taking samples of the urban fabric of cities celebrated for their “liveability” this paper seeks to illustrate the contradictions and manipulations surrounding density. By layering these samples with information regarding home ownership, housing policy and wealth per capita perhaps they start to explain their organization, their scale, their prioritizing of space? But in reality, its guess work, generalizing, or even developing a narrative discussed earlier.

Density within the single section, within the city block, within the suburb, within the city and within the periphery that feeds that city all operate differently. The mantra of low, medium and high density by dwellings per hectare needs to be challenged.

Freek Persyn in his lecture “Changing Culture of planning” argues for a response that looks beyond property boundaries and the current compliance logic to interrogate of the relationship between local, regional and global forces within cities. Teddy Cruz poses the concept of “density as exchange” within his practise, arguing for political and economic systems to be re-organized to meet new demands and new logic.

Call it… intensification, densification, efficiency, productivity, maximizing space – but possibly what is of greater need is a shift away from seeing it purely as a physical entity – the conception of a density of exchange, the potentials in densifying programmatics or in developing relationships between disparate elements could offer new urban potentials beyond setbacks, height restrictions and floor areas ratios.

global : NOTES:

Mercer, “Quality of Living Reports,” Mercer LLC, h p://www.imercer.com/products/2012/ quality-of-living.aspx.

Deane Simpson, “Urban Transforma on: Atlas of the Copenhagens: The Limits of Sustainability” (paper presented at the FCL Territorial Encounters: 2nd Interna onal Conference, Zurich, 10.09.12 2012).

Ibid.

Brendan Cormier, “Vancouverism is Everywhere,” Monu : magazine on urbanism 13(2010).

Ibid.

unknown, “The man who built Vancouver has a grand plan for Abu Dhabi,” The Province, 13.04.13 2008.

Marieke Hillen, “Engaged at a Distance,” Volume(2010), h p://almanakh.org/?p=1180.

Simpson, “Urban Transforma on: Atlas of the Copenhagens: The Limits of Sustainability.”

Cormier, “Vancouverism is Everywhere.”

REGIONAL. the world’s 3rd & 10th most liveable city. BUT RATHER UNAFFORDABLE

the current liveability of auckland housing. THE STATE OF THE PROPERTY MARKET CRISIS OR SHORTAGE?

auckland, a super-city. AMALGAMATION & STREAMLINING

RMA reform. POLICY CHANGE AND GOVERNMENT PRESSURE

the draft unitary plan. AUCKLAND COUNCILS STRATEGY FOR GROWTH

skepticism, resistance, and… vision? MEDIA REACTION & PUBLIC CONSULTATION

regional :

The World’s 3rd & 10th Most liveable City.* *

AS VOTED BY 2 MAGAZINES AND A FINANCIAL CONSULTANCY FIRM

International ranking indices are an effective marketing tool for stimulating a city’s business, tourism and property market and therefore a tool for politicians; Auckland’s Len Brown being no exception.

Unfortunately the application of one citiy’s successful narrative to another in the hope of unearthing a marketable uniqueness is deeply flawed. Vancouverism or Copenhagenization represent how urban design and planning decisions are currently being made globally. “The profession of city building has become overly reliant on ‘best practices’ and ‘precedent studies’. Solutions to complex urban problems are no longer sought through rigorous analysis and critical thinking, but through neatly packaged anecdotes and sound-bites.”1

“GREEN SOLUTIONS” “CARBON NEUTRAL” “COMPACT CITY” “SUSTAINABILITY” “COMMUNITY PLANNING” “CONNECTIVITY” “PRODUCTIVITY”

Fig. 11.

Section 15 of the Auckland Plan

regional :

Although Auckland is ranked the 3rd / 10th most liveable city it is also the world’s 347th most unaffordable.2

Fig. 12.

liveable Len

Fig. 13.

average house price outstripping average income

regional :

The current liveability of Auckland Housing. The current state of Auckland’s property market… whether it is a crisis… the degree to which it is in crisis… who or what is responsible… and how to rectify it? are all hotly debated questions. The information below seeks to outline an issue still being teased out…

HOUSE PRICE INFLATION IN AUCKLAND HAS INCREASED DESPITE ECONOMIC INSECURITY BROUGHT ON BY THE GFC.

The average sale price for a house in the year ending 31 December 2008 ($402,782) was 120% higher than in 1998 ($182,970), which in turn was 47% higher than in 1993 ($125,609). By mid-2013, Auckland City’s median house price was $650,000, up $172,500 over the previous four years.3

In the last 2 years the average house price has increased by; NZ

5 % each year

Auckland

9.8 % each year

According to the International Monetary Fund, New Zealand housing is currently overvalued by about 25 per cent (much of which is due to Auckland) and if it continues to rise it may force the Reserve Bank to hike interest rates.4

PRICES ARE CONSIDERED PRECARIOUS AT BEST - FOR SOME, UNSUSTAINABLE.

The Institute of Economic Research has stated that the underlying pace of recovery

is boosted by house price inflation in Auckland and if the bubble is to burst it will stress the banking system and cause widespread economic weakness.

COMPARABLE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY.

“… in previous times, houses could be bought for the equivalent of two or three times an annual household income, this so-called ‘median multiple’ for New Zealand’s cities has reached worrying levels. For the whole country, it currently stands at 5.1. For Auckland it is 6.8.”5

HOUSING TENURE.

“New Zealand once had one of the highest levels of homeownership in the world (nearly 80%). But the figure today is down to 66% nationally, and 57% in Auckland.”6

Despite this shift there is a lack of policy in New Zealand to support long term renting and the current capital gains and tax incentive system rewards home ownership.7

RISING RENTS & INCREASED DEMAND IN CITY FRINGE SUBURBS IN AUCKLAND.

According to the Centre for Housing Research in the new 20 years there will be an increase in financially stressed renter households (those paying more than 30% of their gross household income in housing costs).8 In Auckland rent in all 30 suburbs and for all-sized houses went up over the last four years. Renters are paying up to $70 more a week than they were four years ago in some of Auckland’s city fringe suburbs.9

Mt Roskill up 18 % Waterview, Avondale and Titirangi up 17% Sandringham, Three Kings and Hillsborough up 17% City centre up 7%

regional :

three kings.

Fig. 14.

Spatial distrubution of financially stressed renter households

POPULATION GROWTH.

For the past 15 years, Auckland has been growing at the rate of around 30,000 people every year. About 60 per cent is “natural growth” (births over deaths) and the rest is internal migration and immigration.10

Fig. 16.

Fig. 17.

Fig. 18.

Expected housing need

Changing housing needs

Dwelling size increasing

three kings.

Fig. 15.

Housing need by dwelling size

regional : HOUSING SUPPLY

An increasing population and smaller households have driven housing demand; whilst housing supply has decreased - completion figures have more than halved since the mid-1970s.11 “In Auckland, the number of new houses that needed to be built in 2012 to keep abreast of demand was between 10,000 and 13,000, but only 4,000 were completed.”12

DEMOGRAPHIC SHIFTS INFLUENCING DWELLING TYPES

Demographic shifts including; fewer people having children and increasing longevity are changing the composition of households and therefore Auckland’s housing needs. One or two person households will soon overtake households with children.

Although the average household size has decreased, between 1991 and 2011, the average detached dwelling size increased by 35% from 144m ² to 220m ² in floor area.13 Auckland’s current housing stock cannot accommodate predicted demographic changes

regional : AN AGEING POPULATION.

Over the next 50 years the age pyramid of the population will be turned upside down. Life expectancy is expected to increase by 6 years and the fraction of the New Zealand population aged over 65 years in the next 30years is set to increase to 25 percent of the population.

In The Ageing of Aquarius, Shane Murray discusses how In contrast to previous generations who viewed the home as a symbol of stability, the Boomers see property as the economic facilitator for a greater flexibility in retirement.14 Large detached dwellings, designed for the nuclear family and accessible by automobile are unsustainable and inhospitable to an aging Boomer population.15 Especially given that by the age of 75 almost half of the Baby Boomer population is likely to be living solo.16

Without attractive one, two or three bedroom options within or adjacent to the suburbs they currently reside in; the Baby Boomer population is likely to remain in a family home too large to maintain, resulting in the unnecessarily fast draining of their principal asset, increasing demand and affecting housing patterns among working age people.17

There is currently lack of 20-40yr olds entering the housing market and this gap is expected widen significantly in the next 30 years leading to suggestions that a generation may be “priced out”.

What it Costs...

Fig. 19.

Internal Affairs devleopment conribution review

regional : INCREASING CONSTRUCTION COSTS & COUNCIL LEVY’S

On top of the increasing cost of land there have been steep rises in levies, consent fees, and development contributions. Connecting a subdivision to water and wastewater mains ($20,000); roads, footpaths and drains ($85,000), consent levies, development levies, and inspection fees ($40,000) which increase construction costs and discourage individuals or developers. 18 A lack of construction has also been exacerbated by Resource Management Act delays and inefficiencies or discrepancies between District Plans.

AUCKLAND CITY’S CAPACITY FOR GROWTH.

A Capacity for Growth study conducted by Council in 2012 arrived at a figure of a possible 189,059 new dwellings through infill housing and 273,045 through infill and other forms of development, such as apartment blocks. Patrick Fontein, of Studio D4, argued that the Council has overstated the development sites by including schools, churches, retirement villages and parks. “It also took insufficient account of sloping sites, cliff-top sites, sites in valleys and sites prone to flooding.”19

Fig. 20.

Capacity for growth

' ( ( ) '

Fig. 21.

Auckland traffic congestion

regional : STRESS ON EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE (CONGESTION).

It is generally understood that Auckland’s current transport system cannot cope with further densification or sprawl beyond the current Metropolitan Urban Limit (MUL) without a considerable investment in either widening infrastructure or increasing public transport systems. Motorway congestion is increasing and the discussion surrounding upgrading to the inner city rail link (rather than our current reversing trains) is ongoing.

Increasing the routes, links and frequencies of public transport is on the agenda, but this cannot work well unless there is a certain critical mass of people using it suburbs need to densify to achieve this.20

Due to economic instability and growing neoliberalism the government’s financial contribution towards a mortgage was scaled back from the late 1970s

34,400 houses were built in 1975 this figure slid to 24,200 in 1978 and 14–15,000 in the early 80s.

At no point over the next 25 years has the no. of new house authorisations per year reached the 1975 level

Instead hovering around 15,000

since the onset of the GFC in 2007.21

regional :

but is it a CRISIS?.

Fig. 22.

According to the Auckland Plan, yes

All of this constructs a highly negative discussion around one’s ability to live in Auckland… but it is important to note that the media’s presentation of the property market is often conflicted and at times alarmist.

Mayor Len Brown argues it is a housing shortage.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/7844917/Auckland-in-grip-of-housing-crisis

regional :

NZ Herald headlines 2013/14

regional :

Auckland’s property market is a highly complex and ever-changing beast. Much of the data collected on housing stock could be attributed to a variety of political, economic or social factors, ranging from but not limited to;

INCREASED PLANNING CONTROLS, THE SETTING OF AUCKLAND’S METROPOLITAN URBAN LIMIT, TAX INCENTIVES FOR HOMEOWNERS, THE LACK OF A CAPITAL GAINS TAX, FOREIGN PROPERTY SPECULATION, SMALLER HOUSEHOLDS, LACK OF HOUSING OPTIONS, INCREASED PRIVATE LENDING DURING THE 1990S, MINIMUM DEPOSITS ON MORTGAGE RATES, INTEREST RATES DURING THE GFC, INCREASING POPULATION DUE TO LONGEVITY, INCREASING URBAN POPULATION, INCREASING CONSENT FEES, LEVIES AND RATES, RMA INEFFICIENCIES, COST OF LIVING SLOWLY OUTSTRIPPING THE AVERAGE WAGE, A PREOCCUPATION WITH HOME-OWNERSHIP, LACK OF RENTAL CONTROLS, HOUSING BUBBLES NATIONALLY AND INTERNATIONALLY.

Much of the current media debate focuses on who is to blame, with the finger pointing switching between National government, local government, banks, speculators and property developers and even stretching to demographic cohorts including the Baby-Boomers or non-residents. Suggestions by Labour, the Greens and NZ First to exclude foreign buyers have been both celebrated and condemned as ‘xenophobic’ and ‘not supported by the evidence’22

Fig. 23.

Policy changes?

The current lack of hard data on who is actually purchasing Auckland property, which could be easily provided by banks or real estate agents, is fueling a widespread unproductive debate.

Overall there is very little consensus regarding the degree to which Auckland’s housing is in crisis and the remedy for this. The solutions proposed are as diverse as the agendas of the groups involved.

Fig. 24.

Gareth’s Five Point Affordable Housing Plan for New Zealand

OTHERS INCLUDE; EXTENDING THE MUL, THE DEVELOPMENT OF BROWNFIELDS, GREENFIELD GROWTH WITHIN THE RURAL URBAN BOUNDARY, STRENGTHENING TENANCY RIGHTS, LIFTING HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS, ZONING CHANGES, RELAXING THE RMA, COLLAPSING THE MORTGAGE BELT, SOCIAL HOUSING SCHEMES, AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES, REDUCING COUNCIL LEVIES, BIGGER/BETTER TRANSPORT LINKS, SPECIAL HOUSING AREAS, PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

regional :

Thus far some of the major steps towards streamlining Auckland’s development have been the formation of the Supercity, pressure from the Government to reform the Resource Management Act of 1991 and the drafting of the Auckland Unitary Plan.

regional :

Auckland, a supercity. The formation of the Supercity in November 2010 amalgamated 7 district & city councils into one territorial authority.

Auckland Council replaced the existing Auckland Regional Council, Auckland City Council, Manukau City Council, North Shore City Council, Papakura District Council, Rodney District Council, Waitakere City Council, Franklin District Council and any associated community boards and divided Auckland into 13 wards, each to be administered by a Local Board.23

0$3 /RFDO %RDUGV

5RGQH\

*UHDW %DUULHU *5($7 %$55,(5 ,6/$1' ,16(7

+LELVFXV DQG %D\V

'HYRQSRUW 7DNDSXQD .DLSDWLNL

8SSHU +DUERXU

:DLKHNH +HQGHUVRQ 0DVVH\

:DLWHPDWD 2UDNHL

:DLWDNHUH 5DQJHV

0DXQJDNLHNLH 7DPDNL

$OEHUW (GHQ

+RZLFN 3XNHWDSDSD

:DUGV

Fig. 25.

2WDUD 3DSDWRHWRH

:KDX

5RGQH\ $OEDQ\ 1RUWK 6KRUH :DLWDNHUH :DLWHPDWD DQG *XOI $OEHUW (GHQ 5RVNLOO :KDX 2UDNHL 0DXQJDNLHNLH 7DPDNL +RZLFN 0DQXNDX 0DQXUHZD 3DSDNXUD )UDQNOLQ

0DQXUHZD 0DQJHUH 2WDKXKX

3DSDNXUD

)UDQNOLQ

Map of local boards / Auckland’s Wards under the Supercity

And the 12 plans prepared under the Resource Management Act 1991 (a regional policy statement, four regional and seven district plans that Auckland currently operates under) will be superseded by The Auckland Plan and The Unitary Plan, currently being developed.24

The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 clarifies the relationship between the new governing body and the Local boards. “…a unique governance model made up of two complementary and non-hierarchical decision-making parts.” The governing body sets policy and direction and makes region-wide decisions including the setting of rates and bylaws. The local boards make decisions on non-regulatory local issues, activities and facilities, enable democratic decision-making on behalf of and by their communities and promote the well-being of their communities.25

Local boards provide input into Council Controlled Organisations plans (Watercare, Auckland Transport etc.) and have the power to make submissions to policy and plan changes. But the determinations on notification of resource consent applications remain with officers and independent commissioners. Local boards are not empowered to make submissions or appeal resource consent applications.26 This is to ensure they are not both the advocate and the decisionmaker within the RMA process….However the choice to be either/or is not an option - the governing body makes the final decision on policy and a Local Board’s view may not always coincide with the governing body’s view.

regional : auckland

RMA reform. The Government argues that land has been made artificially scarce by regulation that locks up land for development. This regulation has made land supply unresponsive to demand. When demand shocks occur, as they did in the mid2000s in New Zealand and around the world, much of that shock translates to higher prices rather than more houses.27 The Government believes RMA reforms will reduce duplication and confusion among councils across the country with a new “national template” to set standards for planning.28

As of August 2013 these included; 10 working days (instead of 20) for consents regarding straightforward/ minor applications fixed-fee options for certain consents, so there is certainty of cost Give Councils the ability to waive resource consents for insignificant variations from planning rules such as a retaining wall being slightly over a permitted height Require Councils to provide a minimum of 10 years of urban land supply to cope with projected population growth Make subdivisions non-notified unless they are clearly not of the type anticipated by the relevant plan and zoning.29

Speeding up the upfront assessment processes for building developments through RMA reform is one avenue being attempted. As is density bonuses as incentives for affordable housing and developing a Unitary Plan which will act as a platform for partnerships between government, non-government organisations and the private sector for development on existing brownfield land.30

But when it comes to whether Council should take a leading role in actually building affordable homes itself, Len Brown argues legacy Councils had in fact sold the vast majority of Council stock in Auckland. “As we look for savings to keep rates increases low for Auckland families, the Council simply does not have enough money to build new council housing.”31

The answers will need to come from the private sector, or through publicprivate partnerships

regional :

Draft Unitary Plan. The Unitary Plan is a reaction to Auckland’s current housing shortage, its premise being that with the forecasted population growth and housing demand Auckland must develop strategies to densify.

“This Plan presents a vision of Auckland as the world’s most liveable city: a quality, compact city. It acknowledges we are a growing city, and outlines a series of strategies to build on the social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits that growth can bring - provided it is carefully planned for and managed.”32 - Len Brown

Drafted over 18months, presented both online and through community consultation meetings across Auckland, opened up for formal submissions in September 2013, with further submissions to be collected mid 2014… the Unitary Plan is put forward as a “vision” for Auckland 30 years from now. But it’s a vision with a statutory function; as it is set up under the RMA it must be sturdy enough to withstand legal challenges under that act. Replacing the existing Regional Policy Statement and 13 existing district and regional plans, the Unitary Plan is the key tool for implementing

unitary plan

Fig. 26.

Statuatory policy framework

the Auckland Plan.

The Unitary Plan describes Auckland as a compact city that accommodates growth, yet “…

only 60 per cent of the growth will be settled within the existing urban areas. The balance will be housed in new suburbs, towns and villages in the outer reaches of greater Auckland.”33

Auckland Council is making large tracks of land both North and South of Auckland’s isthmus available for development.

The proposed Rural Urban Boundary (RUB) will replace the Metropolitan Urban Limit and defines a new extent of urban development to 2041.34

regional :

Fig. 27.

Auckland’s Metropolitan Urban Limit

Fig. 28.

Aerial of this zoning boundary condition

Fig. 29.

MUL to RUB

regional :

Auckland Council reports that there is sufficient greenfield land (rural blocks yet to be subdivided into suburban blocks) to carry 15,000 new dwellings and The Council is planning for 400,000 new dwellings to be built across the Auckland region over the next 30 years to accommodate the higher end of household growth forecast for the region.35 Even with this development the 40,000 dwelling capacity only adds up to about 10 years of the required supply, thus other development opportunities will need to be found within these limits.36

Therefore it is perhaps more accurate to describe an Auckland in 30 years that resembles a city of greater density and greater

As for the other 40 %, the question is densify how? And where?

regional :

THE PROPOSED HOUSING ZONES SINGLE HOUSE 53 per cent of the residential parts of the city. Single units up to two storeys high, with a minimum section size of 500sqm. If you want to build something else, you’ll need planning consent and it won’t be easy to get. This is very similar to most places now.

MIXED HOUSING 40 per cent of the residential parts of the city. You will be able to create a second property on as little as 300sqm of land: this is the “granny ﬂat” option, which the old Auckland City Council abolished more than a decade ago. Developers who buy several sections will be able to build apartment blocks, with height limits but no density limits, although they will require planning consent. The council wants to use a ﬂexible approach to density and the Urban Design Manual to encourage good design.

TERRACE HOUSING/APARTMENTS Seven per cent of the residential parts of the city, mainly along major transport routes, around major train stations and near shopping centres. Blocks of four, ﬁve or six storeys are permitted, although planning consent is required for each project — largely to ensure good design standards. If you own a single home in these areas, no one will take it from you, but it might be hard to get a building consent to renovate, because the council sees the long-term future of the land as more intensive.

OTHER Mixed-use areas in local centres will allow residential and commercial activity in the same areas. And in rural areas, there are regulations, as now, for homes on large sites.

Fig. 30.

Unitary zoning

Fig. 31.

Special Housing Areas

regional :

sprawl. The Unitary Plan focuses growth along “transport corridors” to bolster public transport yet the plan contains no transport planning at all. It advises readers to consult the separate Auckland Transport Plan. In fact…

Deciding where schools go lies with the Ministry of Education, not the council. Public transport is organised and planned by both Auckland Transport (AT) and the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA). Although Auckland Transport is a Council Controlled Organisation it’s planning does not form part of the Unitary Plan. And as NZTA is a government agency its role in planning Auckland transport lies with the government in Wellington.37

Also, “…under the Resource Management Act the Council is not mandated to produce plans for traffic, schools, stormwater and sewage within the UP. So even if it did, those plans might not be legally defensible.”38

This lack of integrated planning or “silo mentality” within Council significantly reduces the perceived weight and usefulness of the Unitary Plan.39 Leaving its vision for density susceptible to criticism, although the Unitary Plan encourages most intensive housing over 43 percent of the Orakei Ward, there are currently no plans for more buses or trains…40

regional :

skepticism, resistance, and… vision? The Draft Unitary Plan revealed in 2013 was met by a myriad of media controversy and its proposal to densify gathered significant resistance from councilors, particularly within the inner suburbs. “… many people in St Heliers don’t want their suburb to grow like that, and their sentiments have been loudly shared by people in the other eastern suburbs, and in Milford and Belmont, in Mt Eden…”41

Epsom-based MP Paul Goldsmith argued the Unitary Plan was unnecessary. In his opinion Auckland is already one of the world’s most liveable cities and “… incremental development has successfully given Auckland new suburbs, new motorways and new town centres such as Albany and Botany, and there’s no reason to believe it will not continue to serve us well. Sprawl is good.” Unfortunately this NIMYism or “Not in My Backyard” leads to the construction of “cheap, isolated dormitory suburbs on the far-flung edges of the city.”42

Fig. 32.

More Botany Town centre’s?

ANGER AND HOPE STORY SIMON WILSON

Fig. 33.

ILLUSTRATION TANE WILLIAMS

PHOTOGRAPHS SIMON YOUNG

Metro article JUNE 2013

Simon Wilson in his article Anger and Hope; the battle to build the city we deserve, noted most resistance to the Unitary Plan at community meetings, stemmed from the uncertainties surrounding it and a natural reaction by residents to protect their main asset. Public concern for the lifelong equity in their homes, possibly losing sunlight, their kids not getting into local schools and the neighbourhood losing the aesthetic feel were ranked highly on their list of concerns.43

But Councilors including Cameron Brewer and Desley Simpson have encouraged misreadings of the Unitary Plan. Proclamations that “we don’t want Tamaki Drive to turn into Surfers Paradise. Or Bondi”44 are unfounded. The Unitary plan is not calling for high rises, in fact much of the height restrictions in the Unitary plan have not changed from the District Plan it replaces.

Cameron Brewer has also argued that, “Many people fear the plan is so radical it will destroy the “New Zealand way of life”45, which if accurate, borders on xenophobia. Other comments like, “why don’t we put a cap on it?”46 in reference to Auckland’s growing population, “Why do we have to have those people? Why can’t we put them down south and out west?”47 or “Let’s look after those who are already here…”48 should not have been given more weight than they deserved.

But unfortunately their sentiments were repeated loudly. Chris Barton argues

regional :

Fig. 34.

Orakei Unitary meeting

much of the “dim-witted, poorly informed and polarized nature of the discussion” surrounding the Unitary Plan was thanks, in part, to shrill media coverage.49 Comments like, “High-rise plans are flawed says councilor”, “Battle lines drawn” and “Consultation just ‘lip service” reflect an unconstructive high-jacking of discussion.50 Barton notes that, “Many appear to have no idea they are in a consultative process. Mistrust pervades — us against them in an antagonistic, adversarial foray.”51

In the worst cases there is a “… suspicion that the council is conspiring against the people.”52A member of the Save our Cities group and resident of Belmont stated that they had, “… no confidence in the council at all.”53

As for the supporters, Generation Zero spokesperson Sudhvir Singh believes the Draft Unitary Plan was a “missed opportunity” to present a good case for a denser Auckland. Arguing many submissions were by much older people who grew up with the quarter-acre dream and are justifiably sceptical of a plan that suggests density without presenting design principals. “Those people who submitted against the plan were concerned about ugly high-rise buildings, and there are a lot of those in Auckland. We need to communicate a more high-quality version of what density can provide.”54

But despite all of this, Council officers have identified close to 200 issues arising from the consultative process that they will need to address.

One key element being the interface between zones; currently the Unitary plan does not have graduated divisions in height restrictions from one zone and the next. Upon reflection Penny Hulse concedes, “…the envelope interface from town centre to terrace housing is too harsh,” and “things need to be done on a human scale.”55 The stepping of building heights was taken forward, reflecting that rules, zones, heights and the Unitary Plans “vision” is still very much in flux.

...does the Unitary Plan signal better design?

regional : The Unitary Plan marks a shift away from the compliance logic of the previous District Plans. Instead of prescribing exactly what and how to build, the new approach allows the applicant to put forward a proposal that satisfies a set of Urban Design Guidelines.

Unfortunately these guidelines are yet to be developed… which demands a certain leap of faith from the public. Whether the design of buildings and urban spaces improve under the Unitary Plan really depends on what these Urban Design Guidelines are? And how robust or flexible they are?

Many Aucklanders’ negative perception of apartment living has been shaped by the failures of shoebox apartments along Hobson Street and Beach Road constructed during the 1990’s under minimal design rules.56 Greater flexibility allows for creative solutions, but it also adds a level of financial uncertainty to construction. Whether applicants will make decisions based on merit, rather than what is easier to be approved, could significantly influence Auckland’s development under the Unitary Plan.

Also with discretion being built into the approval process, questions regarding who will be involved and how this process will be managed need to be addressed. Planning consents, mindful of rules about height and density will still be required. But apartment buildings (in zone) will not require resource consent and therefore do not have to be notified. Leading Simon Wilson to question whether Council should be afforded both the right to decide and the right to tell you?57

In the Council’s effort to accommodate growth will the affected parties’ interests be under represented? Although the “Not in My Backyard” mantra is often in opposition to densification, its place within urban planning and development should not be disregarded.

regional :

Ultimately the effectiveness of the Unitary Plan is in its ability to capture support. Penny Hulse notes that,“if local communities don’t like it, the politicians who gave it to us will be thrown out of office, and their plan with them. If developers don’t like it, they won’t engage with it and won’t build the way it proposes they should….Our role is to make it easier to allow the market to do the right things.”

What the Unitary Plan has achieved already is more discussion around alternative typologies to the detached dwelling – the granny flat, the townhouse and the apartment have all been put forward as models for increasing density. And although words like density and intensification are met with skepticism, there is a noticeable push towards apartments, in the central city, inner suburbs and areas earmarked for growth under the Unitary Plan.

2 bedroom apartments

10 levels of 1 & 2 bedroom apartments

Fig. 35. The Saint 17-19 St Benedicts Street http://livingthesaint.co.nz/

Fig. 36.

Merchnat Quarter 28-42 Totara Ave, New Lynn http://www.merchantquarter.co.nz/

195 1, 2 & 3 bedroom Apartments apartments for baby & retail boomers Fig. 37. Xanadu 37-47 Union Street http://www.thexanadu.co.nz/#!about-us/ chvk

Fig. 38. The Isaac 54 -64 Surrey crescent http://www.theisaac.co.nz

Sky residence &3 room flexi (?)

1,2 & 3 bedroom apartments

Fig. 39. Urba 5 Howe Street, CBD http://urba.co.nz

Fig. 40. Queens Residence Cnr Queen & Airedale St, CBD http://queensresidences.co.nz/

14 luxury apartments

Fig. 42. Vert Cnr of Hamilton & Jervois Rd, Herne Bay http://www.vert.co.nz/

30 freehold lots for apartments …

Fig. 41. Vinegar lane Pollen Street, Ponsonby http://vinegarlane.co.nz/

regional :

100 town houses, 300 apartments & 50 retail shops Fig. 43. Orakei Bay Village 228 Orakei Road Remuera http://eqgroup.co.nz/portfolio/orakei-bay-village/

Office building converted into 62 x 2 & 3 bedroom apartments Fig. 44. Vincent st apartments 132 Vincent St, CBD http://taweragroup.com/project/132-vincent-street/

…commercial & a supermarket

114 apartments

Fig. 45. M central 17 Putney way, Manakau city http://www.mcentral.co.nz/

563x 1,2 & 3 bedroom apartments &retail Fig. 46. Sugartree Nelson Street, CBD http://www.sugartree.co.nz/

Oct 21, 2005

Dec 6, 2013

Jan 10, 2014

Fig. 47.

apartment bust to buzz

regional : These represent only a few of the developments currently being pitched. It seems there is an acknowledgement of a changing perception towards what an apartment could offer and a wish to capitalize on emerging markets. Professionals looking to get into the property market, appeals from a younger cohort that they want “affordable choices in the city,” 58 over the section and the house and the lucrative market of the baby boomers are all being marketed to, although some more blatant than others.

Fig. 48.

baby boomer building makes the front page

There will be those unwilling to relinquish their attachment to the suburban detached dwelling, the Auckland villa or the quarter acre dream. But hopefully the debate stimulated by the Draft Unitary Plan and Auckland Councils declaration to create

greater housing opportunities and more housing choice will provide emerging markets with a range of typologies and densities.

regional :

NOTES 1 2

Brendan Cormier, “Vancouverism is Everywhere,” Monu : magazine on urbanism 13(2010). Out of 360 cities in Hugh and Wendell Cox Pavle ch, “10th AnnualDemographia Interna onal Housing Aﬀordability Survey: 2014,” (Demographia, 2014).

New Zealand Herald (NZH), 24 July 2013, A17

Business desk, “NZ houses overvalued by 25pc - IMF,” The New Zealand Herald.

Luke Malpass Michael Basse , Jason Krupp, “Free to Build; Restoring New Zealand’s Housing Aﬀordability “ in The New Zealand IniƟaƟve (Wellington: The New Zealand Ini a ve, 2013), 7.

“Priced Out; How New Zealand Lost its Housing Aﬀordability,” in The New Zealand IniƟaƟve (Wellington: The New Zealand Ini a ve, 2013).

John Ditch, Alan Lewis, and Steve Wilcox, “Social Housing, Tenure and Housing Allowance: An Interna onal Review,” (York: Department for Work and Pensions, 2001), 135.

Darroch Limited, “Auckland Region Housing Market Assessment,” (Centre for Housing Research Aoteraroa New Zealand 2010), 202.

Alanah Eriksen, “Squeezed in city of rising rents,” The New Zealand Herald 2014.

10 11

Michael Basse , “Free to Build; Restoring New Zealand’s Housing Aﬀordability “ 7.

“Priced Out; How New Zealand Lost its Housing Aﬀordability,” 28.

Auckland (N.Z.). Council., “Chapter 11: Auckland’s Housing,” The Auckland plan ([Auckland, N.Z.: Auckland Council, 2012), h p://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/planspoliciesprojects/plansstrategies/ theaucklandplan/Pages/theaucklandplan.aspx.

Shane Murray, “The Ageing of Aquarius,” Architecture Australia 96, no. 3 (2007): 95

Eric Klinenberg, Going Solo: The Extraordinary Rise and Surprising Appeal of Living Alone (New York: Penguin Press, 2012).209.

Julia Huber and Paul Skidmore, The New Old: Why Baby Boomers Won’t be Pensioned Oﬀ, (London: Demos, 2003), h p://www.demos.co.uk/files/thenewold.pdf.67

Andrew M. G. Coleman and Motu Economic and Public Policy Research Trust., Squeezed in and squeezed out the eﬀects of popula on ageing on the demand for housing, (Wellington, N.Z.: Motu Economic and Public Policy Research, 2009), h p://ndhadeliver.natlib.govt.nz/content-aggregator/ getIEs?system=ilsdb&id=1395766.

Michael Basse , “Free to Build; Restoring New Zealand’s Housing Aﬀordability “ 2.

Orsman, “Luxury homes picked for infill plan,” The New Zealand Herald 2013.

Simon Wilson, “Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve,” Metro 2013, 44.

New Zealand Government, New Zealand Oﬃcial Yearbook (NZOYB), Wellington, 1994. p.426; 2000, p.469; 2010, p.415.

Brian Rudman, “Brian Rudman: Foreigner ban won’t build one new home,” The New Zealand Herald 2013.

h p://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/AboutCouncil/HowCouncilWorks/auckland_council_explained/ background_informa on/Pages/Home.aspx

Mayors Foreword – Auckland (N.Z.). Council, The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, (Auckland (N.Z.). Council,, 2013), h p://ndhadeliver.natlib.govt.nz/content-aggregator/getIEs?system=ilsdb&id=1627334.

h p://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/SiteCollec onDocuments/aboutcouncil/governingbody/

governingbodyag20110728.pdf governingbodyag20110728.pdf 27

9th Annual Demographia Interna onal Housing Aﬀordability Survey - h p://www.demographia.com/dhi. pdf

h p://www.nbr.co.nz/ar cle/rma-changes-govt-not-forcing-its-way-councils-adams-ck-144561

h p://www.nbr.co.nz/ar cle/major-rma-reforms-ck-144199

h p://www.stuﬀ.co.nz/auckland/local-news/7844917/Auckland-in-grip-of-housing-crisis

Mayors Foreword – Auckland (N.Z.). Council, The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

Wilson, “Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve,” 42.

RUL document

“Housing Aﬀordability: Residen al Land Available in Auckland,” in Building & Housing InformaƟon (Ministry of Business, Innova on & Employment, 2013), 3.

“Housing Aﬀordability: Residen al Land Available in Auckland,” in Building & Housing InformaƟon (Ministry of Business, Innova on & Employment, 2013), 6.

Wilson, “Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve,” 44.

Ibid.

Roger Blakely Head planner May 2013

Wilson, “Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve,” 44.

“Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve,” 41.

“Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve,” 47.

“Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve.”

“Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve,” 44.

“Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve,” 41.

“Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve,” 45.

Ibid.

Chris Barton, “Brouhaha in Belmont,” Metro 2013.

“Brouhaha in Belmont,” Metro 2013, 48.

“Brouhaha in Belmont,” 49.

“Brouhaha in Belmont.”

“Brouhaha in Belmont,” 49.

http://blog.generationzero.org.nz/rarangi/category/the-wireless

Wilson, “Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve.”

Ibid.

“Anger and Hope; the ba le too build the city we deserve,” 44.

regional :

LOCAL. Puketapapa TERRITORIAL AUTHORITY UNDER THE AUCKLAND SUPERCITY

demographics. THREE KINGS AND ITS NEIGHBOURS

transit. CURRENT CONNECTIONS AND FUTURE TRANSFORMATIONS

volcanic beginnings. ERUPTIONS ON THE ISTHMUS & MAORI ASSOCIATIONS

industrial land use. A PLINTH FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND A RESOURCE FOR SUBURBAN EXPANSION.

residential land use. THE PROPORTION & NATURE OF THREE KINGS HOUSING STOCK

under the unitary plan. CHANGING ZONING & HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS WITHIN THREE KINGS

open space. THE PROGRAMME AND ACCESSIBILITY OF PUBLIC SPACE

site topography. VARIATIONS OF DEPTH AND INCLINE WITHIN THE QUARRY SITE

Fletcher Development proposal. ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT MASTERPLAN FOR THE THREE KINGS QUARRY SITE

what constitutes place?

4. 5.

6. 7. 82

local :

Three Kings according to. 1. Territorial authority, The Puketapapa Local Board

2. Google

3. Three Kings School zone

4. Main transit routes

5. Volcanic formation, cone and tuff ring

6. Statistics New Zeland

7. The Auckland Plan, Auckland Council

Is a place defined by the boundaries set by a territorial authority, its statistical mesh block, it’s representation on the internet, the street grids that divide the city into blocks, its topography or its history? How does one describe a place when its extents or identity are both fluctuating and subjective?

Puketapapa Local Board area

Three Kings Precinct

local :

Puketapapa. TERRITORIAL AUTHORITY UNDER THE AUCKLAND SUPERCITY

With the formation of the Super-city Three Kings was amalgamated into the AlbertEden-Roskill Ward which is managed by the Puketapapa Local Board. Puketapapa includes the suburbs of Three Kings, Hillsborough, Waikowhai, Lynfield and Wesley. And has…

57,000 residents (40% European, 39% Maori, 15% Pacific, 6% Asian) 4,032 businesses 9,600 employees 22 schools (7x decile 7,8 & 9 and 9x decile 1,2 & 3)

Puketapapa is described as a rapidly changing and growing area with half of its population being born overseas. The scale of the Puketapapa and the diversity of this cohort make it difficult to define under one banner.

Acknowledging this the Puketapapa Local Board has developed a Three Kings Precinct Plan which describes the residential development, town centre growth and changes proposed under the Unitary Plan for the area directly surrounding the Big King.

ALBERT-EDEN THREE KINGS SITE

THREE KINGS SITE

PUKETAPAPA 86

local :

demographics. This section compares the current demographic profile of Puketapapa in relation to the neighbouring Albert-Eden Local Board area and wider Auckland. This broad data sits alongside data from local schools, which is more specific to the Three Kings precinct.

age.

0-5

5 - 10

kindergartens

primary schools

intermediate / high schools

ORAL

INIO DOM

Fig. 49.

2013 census statistics

Fig. 50.

Schools by age within the Three Kings area

ROAD

PAH R OAD

N RO AD

BALM

11 - 17

local :

demographics

06 13

ALBERT-EDEN THREE KINGS SITE

THREE KINGS SITE

PUKETAPAPA

13 - 17

Fig. 51.

Ethnicities within schools in zone

Fig. 52.

2013 census statistics asiain

european pakeha

asiain

pasifika

4 5.8 6.4

8.6

10.6

21.5

asiain

3.7 4.5 5.7

asiain

6.2

pasifika

middle eastern, african or american pasifika

N RO AD

pasifika

11 - 13

european pakeha

5.2

european pakeha

5 - 10 middle eastern, african or american maori

INIO

1 2.3

maori

ORAL

maori

BALM

european pakeha

5 - 10

maori

DOM

ORAL

middle eastern, african or american

N RO AD

BALM

middle eastern, african or american

other

INIO

PAH RO AD

90 PAH RO AD

DOM

ethnicity.

THREE KINGS SCHOOL

ROAD

21.7 56.8

17.8 66

21 59

MT ROSKILL GRAMMAR

ROAD

local :

demographics

06 13

ALBERT-EDEN THREE KINGS SITE

THREE KINGS SITE

PUKETAPAPA

CITY

waterview connection

SOUTH AUCKLAND

WEST AUCKLAND

NORTH AUCKLAND

local :

transit. CURRENT CONNECTIONS AND FUTURE TRANSFORMATIONS.

Two large roads dissect the Three Kings precinct; Mt Eden Road runs approximately north / south and Mt Albert Road east / west. With the introduction of the Waterview Connection on the South Western motorway, soon to be completed, the commute to Three Kings will reduce and hopefully ease congestion along Mt Eden, Dominion and Manukau Road.

Provision for rail has been considered in the construction of the SW motorway, leading some to speculate about a rail link (in the distant future) that would connect to both the Southern Line and the Western Line. This would put Three Kings at the centre of a rail loop and a highly efficient public transport system.

Other changes proposed over the next 30years include Len’s City Rail Loop, an upgrade of cycle ways, increased frequency of buses and more routes running east-west across the city (between arterial routes).

If these changes were to go ahead it would alter the current centre-focused nature of Auckland city, with the isthmus instead being composed of a network of wellconnected feeder suburbs, including Three Kings.

Fig. 53.

Current arterial logic

Fig. 54.

A network

+ + +

Fig. 58.

three kings

Fig. 55.

City Rail Link

three kings

Fig. 56.

Motorways, Ferries & Rail

three kings

Fig. 57.

Existing frequent service network

Cycle network

transit

local :

= Browns Bay Northcross

Rothesay Bay

Albany

Mairangi Bay

Massey University Castor Bay

Windsor Park Constellation

Crown Hill

Sunset Rd

Milford Sunnynook

Cuthill

Smales Farm

Greenhithe

Takapuna

Glenfield

Bir kd ale

Akoranga

Hauraki Corner

Belmont

Me ad ow ba nk Me ad ow ba nk St Jo hn s

Victoria Park Herne Bay

Ponsonby

d lan gs Kin

Mt Albert

Panmure

Sylvia Park

Penrose

Botany

ctio

East Tamaki Heights

Te Papapa Onehunga

tan

Otahuhu Town Centre

Waikowhai Mangere Bridge Lynfield

Ormiston

Hunters Corner

Middlemore

Mangere

Airport Oaks

Otara

Otahuhu Station

Clover Park

Ma ng ere Ea st

Blo ck ho us eB ay

Rd ale itv Fru n de nE Gle

Su nn yv ale

nn Ly

r so ind W

Ra nu i St ur ge sR d

w Ne

y sle We

w Ne

He nd ers on

Sandringham Shops

d oo rsw Bu

le da on Av

on lst Ke

e en nd Gle

Sw an so n

Rosebank

Greenlane Station

za Pla ga ran ku Pa

St Lu ke s

Waterview

Te Atatu South

ts igh He ga ran ku Pa

Lincoln Rd

Howick

Highland Park Glen Innes

Remuera Station

Ro ya lO ak

Pt Chevalier Shops

e sid ing e rn Av in Mo ldw Ba

Triangle Rd Te Atatu Interchange

K’ Rd

Grey Lynn

Bucklands Beach

Ell ers lie

Westmere

Pt Chevalier Beach Te Atatu Shops

Mt Ro sk ill Th ree Kin gs

Te Atatu Peninsula Massey

Mt We llin gto n

Westgate

Sa nd Mt rin Ed gh en am St Ba atio lm ora Gr n l aft Mt on Ed Mt E en de nV Ep illa so g e New Pa m Gr ma rne ee nla rke ll Vil ne t lag

e Or ak ei Re mu era

West Harbour

St He lie rs

Mis sio nB ay Ko him a St atio ram a n

Devonport

W yn ya rd Br ito ma rt

Hig hb ur

Ve rra ns

No rth co te Pt

Co rn er

Narrow Neck

Hobsonville

Paptoetoe Papatoetoe Manukau Puhinui

Auckland Airport

Homai

Ta ka nin i

Manurewa

Weymouth To To Pukekohe Pukekohe

Fig. 59.

one cohesive transitt network?

Fig. 60.

Tuff Ring [crest at 126m above sea level ]

Fig. 61.

Flow of Basalt from the Three Kings eruption

local :

volcanic beginnings. ERUPTIONS ON THE ISTHMUS & MAORI ASSOCIATIONS

What is now considered Three Kings erupted 28,500 years ago, forming 5 scoria cones within an approximately 1km diameter explosion crater and tuff ring; what remains of the tuff ring’s crest is defined by the streets that surround Big King (clockwise from Landscape Rd to St Andrews Rd to Mt Albert Rd, Simmonds Ave, Scout Ave and Duke St)

From this explosion basalt flowed out of this crater to the north and down the valley through Western Springs to terminate as the Meola Reef in today’s Waitemata Harbour.

Maori tradition describes Auckland’s volcanic formation by linking present-day tribal groups with the creation of the topographical features of the land through decent from the deities who created them. Auckland’s landscape is described through the actions of Maui Tikitiki a Taranga and his brothers. “The wrath of Mataaho (the deity associated with volcanic forces) flowed from deep under the earth creating Auckland’s distinctive volcanic landscape.”1

Maori place names and traditions describe and define individual physical features; explosion craters are described as Mataaho’s movements over the landscape, Nga Tapuwae a Mataaho –‘the footprints of Mataaho.2 The impressive group of cones (Three Kings) were known as Te Tatua o Mataaho –‘the girdle or belt of Mataaho’3 Names also reference the varying flora or fauna specific to each of Auckland’s volcanic cones. For Big King the large leafed kohekohe trees, which grew there, gave it the name Koheraunui.

Volcanic features are given identities and define an iwi’s history; recalling ancestors, events and reflecting generations of occupation, cultivation, warfare and worship.”4 The highly fertile areas of ash, tuff and lava flow within Auckland volcanic field were a fundamental reason for Tamaki Makarau being so highly populated.5 Centuries of occupation led to significant modification of the surface features of Auckland’s volcanic field; both in the intensive terracing ‘tuapapa’ of the cones and the cultivation of the surrounding slopes into ‘stonefields’.6 (Although some evidence of tuapapa remains, most of Auckland estimated 8000ha of stonefields have been destroyed by urban development.7)

local :

volcanic beginnings

By the mid eighteenth century the cones became important focal points at the hub of an expansive garden system of medicinal and edible plants located on their lower slopes and surrounds.8 Cones were settlement sites occupied by intimately related descent groups of Tainui.

“After generations of occupation, layers of ancestral names built up in a mosaic covering the Auckland volcanic field”9 These names reveal a continuity of occupation by the same broad descent group over many generations. These names are not purely historical references, local iwi continue to take identity from the features of Auckland’s volcanic field, its cones “…are imbued with a mana (spiritual authority and prestige) and mauri (spiritual essence)…”10

The majority of Auckland’s volcanic field was alienated from iwi as a result of the private European and Crown purchases of the 1840’s.

Fig. 62.

The Kohekohe

Fig. 63.

Tuapapa on Mangere Mountain

Fig. 64.

Otuatua Stonefields

100

local :

industrial land use. A PLINTH FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND A RESOURCE FOR SUBURBAN EXPANSION

The transformation of Three Kings’s volcanic topography sits within a wider context of Auckland’s city building. Ferdinand von Hochstetter’s 1859 map locates almost 50 volcanic eruptions within Auckland’s isthmus. In the ensuing 150 years, many of these volcanic landforms were quarried or otherwise submerged under the infrastructure and built form of the city.11

Fig. 65.

The isthmus of Auckland with its extinct volcanoes

Fig. 66.

Destroyed & Damaged Volcanoes

102

local :

industrial land use

Frank Simpson - “The pioneers of Auckland could at first find little use for the volcanic cones, except as signal stations for announcing the arrival of ships, or as a survey point. The scoria of the slopes and the extensive areas of basaltic rock spreading out from their bases were a hindrance to farming activities, except for the use of surface stone to build dividing fences. But it didn’t take Auckland long to realise the use to which scoria of the volcanic cones could be put, especially as a base for road building.”12

Government administrators and surveyors excluded the cones from subdivision & private sale; setting them aside as crown-owned public domains or quarry reserves.13 But this legislation did not require the domain boards that administered these areas to protect heritage or scenic value.14 In addition local boards were prohibited from spending rates or taxes on the domain upkeep. Except for a small revenue from grazing leases, the budget was balanced by selling off the rights to quarry scoria for local use.15

The perception of Auckland’s volcanic cones as a resource or a form of infrastructure for a growing city was a product of the composition of the Domain Boards. Boards were dominated by borough councillors who were responsible for local water supply and roading. The volcanic landscape of Auckland built many of Auckland’s earlier roads, the main railway truck line between Whangarei & Ohakune, Auckland airport’s runway, the Northwestern Motorway causeway and the Mangere sewerage project of the 1950s.16

During the late 19th and early 20th century many private operators were involved in quarrying but from the 1950s larger companies gradually replaced them. Following the general trend towards privatization, local & central government slowly withdrew from the quarrying industry.17 By the 1980s Winstone, Ivan Whale & Stevenson dominated the industry.

104

local :

industrial land use

winstone quarry. The quarry at Three Kings is Auckland’s largest scoria quarry and has been operated by Winstone Aggregates for more than 80 years.

1850

Fig. 67.

Kinder’s Sketch

Fig. 68.

Panorama of Three Kings

Fig. 69.

Auckland Golf Club

Fig. 70.

Pigeon pond

Fig. 71.

Mt Rosill Water Resevoir (before covered over)

Fig. 72.

McLaughlin Pyramid

106

local :

industrial land use

the many uses for an extinct volcano. A Golf Club (One Tree hill) Auckland Hospital & Auckland Museum (Puketawa’s tuff ring) A military bunker 20m below ground level - now a three storey carpark (Te Pou Hawaiki) Industrial Park (Te Hopua, Otara-Te puke o Taramainuku, Matanginui, Styaks Swamp, Pukewairiki, Te Apunga o Tainui, Moerangi, Wiri Mountain, Ash Hill and Te Tauoma) Play area and skateboard park (Little Rangitoto) Glover Park and residential tuff ring (Whakamuhu) Sacred Hill playing fields (Taurere) Freshwater Pond on Pigeon Mountain drained for subdivision 1980s (o Huiarangi) Sturges Park or Otahuhu Rugby Football Club/ Softball Club (Mt Robertson)

The water reservoirs atop 12 scoria cones gave them an infrastructural value that kept many from being quarried away.19 This value is best exemplified by the treatment of McLaughlin Mountain; its height preserved for water reticulation and slopes quarried for roading rendered it an artificial pyramid.

changing perceptions. In 1845 & 1851 Governor George Grey proposed “ all the volcanic hills of Auckland” should be reserved for parks and natural objects of beauty for the city.20

1910 growing concern about damage of quarrying activities. PM Massey included a section in the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and Public Bodies Empowering Act 1915 which made it unlawful to make an excavation on the slopes of a volcanic hill where the land abutted onto a public reserve, without leaving a batter of forty degrees or less slope to be planted.21

Despite these efforts compliance was vested within local authorities ie. borough councillors heavily invested in infrastructural works.22

By the mid 1920s the 1915 Act was all but irrelevant.

In 1928 an assessment of the state of Auckland’s volcanic cones “Auckland’s Unique Heritage” was circulated.

In 1957 the Historic Auckland Society recommended that;

Fig. 73.

108

Society recommendations

local :

In 1977 the Auckland Regional Authority Planning Scheme was changed to provide for view shaft protection of 12 volcanic cones - a world first - which was made operative through the district schemes of local authorities

1990 appeal to place Sky Tower in a view shaft on Symonds Street was denied

1991 Resource Management Act become major tool for seeking protective management of Auckland’s volcanic cones

1990s / 2000s AVCS led lobbying and Council purchase / reservation of Otuataua, Pukeiti, McLaughlin Mountain, Mt Wellington, Pukaki Lagoon, Pukewairiki crater, Mangere crater.

Fig. 74.

Protected volcanic features

...protection. The common assumption that Auckland was occupied by one iwi, Ngati Whatua o Orakei, is inaccurate. In 2007 Treaty settlements were delayed as the Crown refused to recognise Ngati Te Ata, Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngai Tai ki Tamaki, the Marutuahu iwi and Te Taou’s status as tangata whenua; instead seeing them as ‘cross-claimants’ or ‘overlapping claimants’ to the primary group it decided to negotiate with.24

Allegations of preferential Crown treatment resulted in a deadlock. The Tamaki Makaurau collective settlement involved the overlapping interests of 13 Auckland groups and resulted in the Crown vesting 14 volcanic cones to their related tribes, subject to public access. This enabled the Ngati Whatua o Orakei settlement to progress.25

The Ngati Whatua o Orakei settlement of 2011/12 was for $18 million and included the returned stewardship of Maungakiekie (One Tree Hill), Maungawhau (Mt Eden), and Puketapapa (Mt Roskill) .26 In regards to Big King Recreation Reserve, Ngati Whatua o Orakei sought statutory acknowledgment, which would recognize the significance of this site to the tribe and their position as an affected party within the RMA process. 27 Resource consent authorities would be required to notify the tribe of any application and if any proposal could adversely affect the site, a Cultural Impact Assessment would need to be provided.28

One intent of the Puketapapa Local Board Plan is…” to form meaningful partnerships with Mana Whenua, the Auckland Council governing body, and our local community to develop volcanic cone management plans and prioritise capital investment for both Puketapapa and Te Tatua a Riukiuta.”29

110

local :

The perceived value of Auckland’s volcanic landscape shifted greatly in a short period. Although its cones are now protected as a cultural, natural and recreational space within an increasingly urbanized isthmus, its slopes remain a vehicle for economic growth and urban development. There is a certain irony in that a volcanic landscape, which helped construct the fabric of sprawl, should now be used as a model of density.

5. Restriction on quarrying operations on volcanic hills in the Auckland Provincial District— (1) From and after the passing of this Act it shall be unlawful for any person, unless expressly authorized in that behalf by the Governor in Council, to make, or permit or allow to be made, any excavation, quarry, terrace, or cutting of any kind (whether on any quarry reserve, or on any private land) on the side or slope of any of the volcanic cones or hills in the Auckland Provincial District which is bounded by or abuts on to a domain or other public reserve, without leaving an angle or batter of not less than forty degrees from the top of such excavation, quarry, terrace, or cutting (or from the boundary of such domain or reserve in cases where the excavation, quarry, terrace, or cutting extends back to such boundary) to the floor or base of such excavation, quarry, terrace, or cutting. (2) Every person who hereafter makes, or causes or permits to be made, any such excavation, quarry, terrace, or cutting shall on completion thereof plant the slope formed by the angle aforesaid with trees or shrubs of a kind to be approved by the Board of Trustees or other body having control of the domain or reserve affected thereby. (3) Every person who commits a breach of any of the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of an offence, and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine of not less than [twenty dollars] for every such offence, or in the case of a continuing offence to a penalty of not less than [twenty dollars] for every day during which such offence continues. (4) If any person not being authorized as aforesaid commences to make, or permits or authorizes to be made, any such excavation, quarry, terrace, or cutting, the local authority or Domain Board, as the case may be, having control of the domain or reserve bounded by or abutting on to the land upon which such excavation, quarry, terrace, or cutting is being made or is about to be made may call upon such person to enter into a written undertaking with such local authority or Domain Board to comply with the provisions of subsection one hereof; and if such person fails or refuses or neglects to enter into and sign such undertaking upon being requested by the said local authority or Domain Board so to do, the said local authority or Domain Board, or any person on behalf of such local authority or Domain Board, shall be entitled to apply to the [High Court] for a writ of injunction to restrain such person from making, or permitting, or authorizing to be made, any such excavation, quarry, terrace, or cutting.

Fig. 76.

Section 5 of the 1915 Act of Parliament no. 68

Fig. 75.

The recreational slopes of Mangere

a lumpy city. Urbanist Antoine Grumbach argues that geographic elements are the tools for building identities and organizing a territory. For Grumbach, it is ultimately the physical geography that establishes “place”. In the case of Paris, for example, the valley of the Seine or the plateau of Sarcelles determines her identity.30

In contrast Michael Maltzan discusses Los Angeles’ “…sprawling, horizontal city-plane”31, not as a lack of physical geography, but a defining aspect in its temperament for expansion. For Maltzan this flatness paired with its overexposed horizon makes its scale impossible to comprehend in its entirety; helping spur the notion of an endless city, a city that could not reach its limits.32 “LA’s relentless growth has never paused long enough to coalesce into a stable identity.”33 It is therefore seen (romanticized or slated) as a centre-less city, lacking a formal hierarchy and epitomizing the development-centric automobile-orientated American landscape of suburban sprawl.

Fig. 77.

The LA Horizon

112

local :

So where does Auckland sit within this discourse? Does its undulating volcanic landscape define it as a singular entity? Or does it inform a city with multiple identities? Could the ridgelines of tuff rings and lava flows define separate pockets within a larger entity? Could Auckland be organized or ordered by them?

Could a close consideration of Three Kings topography, present and historical, offer ways of manufacturing a landscape within the quarry site?

62% Private ownership N

school

church & school

114

church

community buildings

local :

residential land use. THE PROPORTION & NATURE OF THREE KINGS HOUSING STOCK

Due to the conditions outlined in the previous chapter there is current reassessment of what was once Auckland’s industrial hinterland. As suburbs have spread past the isthmus, brownfield and industrial zones within have come to be seen as development opportunities for new residential suburbs. Their position once considered part of a “hinterland” is now, with transit changes and growth, considered relatively central.

Puketapapa currently has a broad range of typologies, but the detached dwelling still dominates. Within the Puketapapa Local Board area there is apparently a 53% capacity for growth, but this seems exaggerated considering the proportion of private land holdings.

households.

116

local :

residential land use

06 13

ALBERT-EDEN THREE KINGS SITE

THREE KINGS SITE

PUKETAPAPA

dwelling type.

118

local :

06 13

ALBERT-EDEN THREE KINGS SITE

THREE KINGS SITE

PUKETAPAPA

dwelling tenure.

120

local :

06 13

ALBERT-EDEN THREE KINGS SITE

THREE KINGS SITE

PUKETAPAPA

122

local :

under the unitary plan.

Single House

Rural Production

Mixed Housing Urban

Rural Coastal

Rural

Residential

CHANGING ZONING & HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS WITHIN THREE KINGS

Mixed Housing Suburban

Mixed Rural

Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings

Countryside Living

Large Lot

Coastal Transition

Rural and Coastal Settlement

Defence

Neighbourhood Centre

General Coastal Marine [ rcp ]

Coastal

Local Centre Town Centre

City Centre Mixed Use

New Growth

Business

Metropolitan Centre

General Business Business Park

Ferry Terminal

[ rcp/dp ]

Marina

[ rcp/dp ]

Minor Port

[ rcp/dp ]

Mooring

[ rcp ]

Future Urban Green Infrastructure Corridor

Light Industry

Special Purpose

Heavy Industry

Strategic Transport Corridor

Public Open Space - Conservation Public Open Space - Informal Recreation Public Open Space - Sport and Active Recreation Public Open Space - Community Public Open Space - Civic Spaces

For more information refer to: http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/unitaryplan

Water

[i]

Indicative Coastline

[i]

Rural Urban Boundary [ rps ]

Key to Abbreviations of Provisions

Public Open Space

ZONING

Rural Conservation

[ rcp ] = Regional Coastal Plan = Regional Policy Statement = Regional Plan [ i ] = Information only = District Plan (only used to depict dual provisions. Otherwise, District Plan is the default category, i.e. no abbreviation) [rps/rcp] (or any other combination using /) = dual provisions

[ rps ] [ rp ] [ dp ]

The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (notified 30 September 2013)

Fig. 78.

Proposed Unitary Plan Zoning (sept 2013)

Fig. 79.

Proposed Unitary Plan Zoning - Key

business zoning neighbourhood(3 storeys) 12.5m general business(4 storeys) 16.5m town centre (8 storeys) 32.5m

terrace housing & apartment buildings (4-6storeys stepped)

14.5 - 20.5m

mixed housing urban (4 storeys)

16.5m

mixed housing suburban (2 storeys)

single house (2 storeys)

Fig. 80.

Height restrictions of Unitary zoning

124

local :

under the unitary plan

business zoning. neighbourhood(3 storeys) 12.5m general business(4 storeys) 16.5m town centre (8 storeys) 32.5m

feedback As with the Metropolitan Centre zone feedback, some respondents expressed support for the principle of intensification around Town Centres. A moderate proportion expressed support for the application of the Town Centre zone to specific sites. The majority of comments received focused on the proposed Town Centre small (4 storeys), medium (6 storeys) and large (8 storeys) height limits. These respondents were generally opposing height limits for specific centres – most of these were seeking reduction in the specified height limit, but some feedback requested an increase.

Fig. 81.

Setbacks for business zones

Fig. 83.

Unitary Plan feedback

Fig. 82.

Land use for business zones

126

local :

under the unitary plan

permitted land use. Activity

Town Centre

Neighbourhood Centre

General Business

Accommodation

Dwellings, retirement villages, supported residential care, visitor accommodation and boarding houses

Dwellings, conversion of a building or part of a building to dwellings, visitor accommodation or boarding houses, supported residential care

Resource consent required for all accommodation activities (noncomplying)

Commerce

Commercial services, commercial sexual services, entertainment facilities, food and beverage, funeral directors’ premises, garden centres, marine retail, motor vehicle sales, offices, retail, supermarkets, trade suppliers

Commercial services, commercial sexual services, food and beverage, offices 2 up to 500m GFA per site, retail up 2 to 450m per site

Commercial services, drive through facilities, entertainment facilities, food and beverage, offices up to 2 500m GFA per site, storage and lock up facilities

Community

Art works, care centres, community facilities, education facilities, healthcare services

Art works, care centres and healthcare services

Art works, community facilities, education facilities

Industry

Artisan industries, industrial laboratories, light manufacturing and servicing, repair and maintenance services, warehousing and storage

Artisan industries, repair and maintenance services

Artisan industries, industrial activities, industrial laboratories, light manufacturing and servicing, repair and maintenance services, warehousing and storage

Mana Whenua

Marae complex

Development

Demolition of buildings, Alterations to building facades (up to a specified threshold), additions to buildings (up to a specified threshold), internal alterations

Marae complex Buildings, demolition buildings, additions alterations buildings, internal alterations

of any and to any

Demolition of buildings, all alterations to building facades (up to a specified threshold), additions to buildings (up to a specified threshold), internal alterations

commercial profile. THE PROGRAMME OF CONSUMPTION SURROUNDING THE QUARRY SITE.

The appropriation of residential buildings for commercial purposes within Three Kings is evidence of growth and of zoning playing catch up. The Unitary Plan acknowledges a need for commercial growth in this area, suggesting an increase in height restrictions. If Three Kings is to densify then amenity will need to be injected into its town centre to support an increasing population.

With an added estimated population of 3000 residents adjacent to zone b due to the redevelopment of the quarry site, a shift away from the heavily car-orientated mall typology of the “Plaza” is feasible.

Although the allowance of an 8 storey height restriction under the Unitary Plan is possibly ambitious considering there is very little other undeveloped land within the Three Kings precinct.

128

local :

under the unitary plan

a snapshot of commercial typologies.

N A C VA

zone a

Fig. 84.

The post-modern Harvey’s

zone b

zone c

130

local :

under the unitary plan

ZONE A : Big King intersection

Currently comprising a commercial strip of small scale shops with verandah’s at the intersection, mixing in with apartments and detached dwellings along Mt Eden Road and with 1980’s style large-scale commercial buildings/ wharehouses towards the south.

The mixed use zoning and height allowance proposed under the unitary plan has concerned residents within South Epsom.

ZONE B : Three Kings town centre

Currently comprising a mini mall (three Kings Plaza) surrounded by carparks, a council building, a library and smaller scale commercial on the Mt Albert street frontage. The conversion of previously resiential buildings into businesses has altered the formal language of the street. This is zoned to rise to 8 storeys under the Unitary Plan, hopefully this is stepped back to preserve a human scale at street level.

ZONE C : Industrial fringe

Currently comprising big box retail and light industry adjacent to the South-western motorway

residential zoning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

Fig. 85.

Housing Objectives

Fig. 86.

THAB setbacks

132

local :

under the unitary plan

terrace housing & apartment buildings (4-6storeys stepped)

14.5 - 20.5m

Setback of THAB zone site where it adjoins Single House zone site or Public Open Space zone site at less than 2000m2

Setback of THAB zone site when it adjoins another THAB zone

Setback of THAB zone site where it adjoins Mixed Housing Suburban or Mixed Housing urban zone site

Setback of THAB zone site when it adjoins another THAB zone

Dwelling mix In the THAB zone (and Mixed Housing Urban zone), where a single development contains more than 20 dwellings, WKH FRPELQHG QXPEHU RI VWXGLR DQG RQHßEHG GZHOOLQJV PXVW QRW H[FHHG SHU FHQW RI WKH WRWDO QXPEHU

Outdoor living space A dwelling with the principal living room at ground òRRU OHYHO PXVW KDYH DQ RXWGRRU OLYLQJ VSDFH FDSDEOH of containing a delineated area measuring at least 20m² that: é has no dimension less than 4m é is directly accessible from the principal living room é has a gradient not exceeding 1 in 20 Where an entire dwelling is above ground level, it must have an outdoor living space in the form of a balcony or roof terrace that is: é at least 8m² é has minimum depth of 2.4m

Existing Plans 5DQJH RI DSSURDFKHV DFURVV WKH H[LVWLQJ SODQV

March 2013 draft of the Unitary Plan

Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan

]RQH

]RQHV

Examples include:

10m

5HVWULFWHG GLVFUHWLRQDU\ 2

5HVWULFWHG GLVFUHWLRQDU\ 2 10m 3 storeys 5HVWULFWHG GLVFUHWLRQDU\ 1 8m 2 storeys 3HUPLWWHG

3HUPLWWHG

=RQH % LQ IRUPHU $XFNODQG &LW\ GLVWULFW SODQ 9m 8m

=RQH $ LQ IRUPHU 1RUWK 6KRUH &LW\ GLVWULFW SODQ

Fig. 87.

Plan changes

Fig. 88.

Mixed housing urban / suburban

5HVWULFWHG GLVFUHWLRQDU\ 2 3HUPLWWHG

0L[HG +RXVLQJ 6XEXUEDQ

0L[HG +RXVLQJ

1RQ FRPSO\LQJ 5HVWULFWHG GLVFUHWLRQDU\ 2 3HUPLWWHG

134

10m

5HVWULFWHG GLVFUHWLRQDU\ 2 3HUPLWWHG (+1 metre IRU D SRUWLRQ of the roof)

0L[HG +RXVLQJ 8UEDQ

local :

mixed housing urban (4 storeys)

16.5m

3HUPLWWHG

$OWHUQDWLYH

mixed housing suburban (2 storeys) 3HUPLWWHG

$OWHUQDWLYH

under the unitary plan

The stakeholders. Bylines, Agendas & Mission Statements of interest groups in Three Kings, Puketapapa, Auckland

Puketapapa (Mt Roskill) Historical Society: To encourage and promote the study of and interest in history generally and relating to the Districts of Mount Roskill, Three Kings, Hillsborough and Lynfield and the surrounding districts in particular, and including the history of tangata whenua. To take steps to ensure the preservation of buildings, sites and places of historic interest. https://sites.google.com/site/roskillhistory/

The South Epsom Planning Group (Inc) is a Society comprising approximately 100 members who reside to the east of Three Kings in the South Epsom neighbourhood located on the north eastern edge of the tuff ring of the Three Kings volcanic system. Approximately 50% of our neighbourhood falls within the Puketapapa Local Board area (to the north of Landscape Rd) with the remainder falling within the Albert-Eden Local Board area (to the south of Landscape Rd).

We want to see an Auckland in which local communities are empowered, public assets are retained, public transport is prioritised, and our rating system is made fairer. http://roskillcommunityvoice.blogspot.co.nz/p/main.htm

136

local :

“Our school seeks to provide a learning community, which promotes a culture of inclusion, partnership, respect and celebration of student achievement.” http://www.3kings.school.nz/Site/Welcome.ashx

City vision: for social justice, for public transport, for environmental protection, for public ownership, and for local communities to have a real say. http://cityvision.org.nz/our-vision/what-we-stand-for/

Generation Zero is made of up of young New Zealanders working together to secure a thriving zero carbon Aotearoa. http://www.generationzero.org.nz/

Three Kings United Group Inc General information about Three Kings United Group President Secretary email

: : :

Dianne Hill ph 09-520-3985 Robin Duke ph 09-624-1520 threekings.enviro@xtra.co.nz

Three Kings United Group was formed in 1995 when it became known that Winstone Aggregates Ltd had applied for resource consent to take water from the Three Kings aquifer, allowing quarrying to continue a further 57 metres down to sea level. At the same time consent was sought by Auckland City Council to build a water pumping station on the quarry site so that the unwanted ground water could be reticulated to about 40,000 people in the Three Kings and Hillsborough areas. Both resource consents were granted. Our group has campaigned effectively to bring to light major concerns about the consequences of these two resource consents. http://www.3kug.org.nz/

The Character Coalition is an umbrella group representing heritage, historical and special interest groups and residents associations who care deeply about their city. http://charactercoalition.org.nz/

public reactions & submissions.

The Precinct Plan for Three Kings should be completed prior to the implementation of zoning. Zoning should only occur once a Structure Plan has been prepared We further submit that areas recently identified for intensification in the Draft Unitary Plan are inappropriately located. First, we question Three Kings being proposed as a town centre seemingly of greater scale and density than Royal Oak and Mt Roskill, which are both better established and on better transport routes. The rationale for this dramatic change to the scale of Three Kings town centre is not apparent in either the Draft Unitary Plan or the Precinct Plan Discussion Document. The style and intensity of development proposed for the town centre should be reduced to reflect better the nature of the activities contemplated and to better match the Planning Principles adopted by the Local Board. Current and future competing service centres already operate in close proximity to Three Kings; this suggests that the proposed commercial area is unlikely to be economically viable as a major retail

Second, the intensive development proposed for the eastern side of Three Kings Rd (Mt Eden Rd) would very adversely affect the interaction of the community with Big King and destroy visual connectivity. We believe that there is much better opportunity for intensification to occur on current Housing New Zealand land to the west of the current quarry area. In both the Draft Unitary Plan and Precinct Plan

Fig. 89.

Excerpts from the South Epsom Planning Group submission

138

local :

Fig. 90.

Precinct Plan workshop feedback

under the unitary plan

precinct planning.

140

local :

option 1.

Fig. 91.

Quarry redevelopment option 1

142

local :

option 2.

Fig. 92.

Quarry redevelopment option 2

144

local :

option 3.

Fig. 93.

Quarry redevelopment option 3

146

local :

option 4.

Fig. 94.

Quarry redevelopment option 4

148

local :

option 5.

Fig. 95.

Quarry redevelopment option 5

150

local :

open space. THE PROGRAMME AND ACCESSIBILITY OF PUBLIC SPACE

As a map, the public open space in Three Kings looks significant and well connected. In reality the steepness of the parks edges, the residential sections that surround it and the lack of signage and sightlines all reduce its accessibility and therefore its use.

One large section is completely inaccessible and another that is coded as public open space is in fact carparking. Both the Unitary plan and the Puketapapa board reference an intent to provide high quality and well connected public space.

Public Open Space

Public Open Space - Conservation Public Open Space - Informal Recreation Public Open Space - Sport and Active Recreation Public Open Space - Community Public Open Space - Civic Spaces

Fig. 96.

Unitary plan map of public open space

BUSY RO AD pedestrian access vehicular access

152

SCHOOL

local :

Big King Reserve

Robinson Reserve

Three Kings Reserve

Smallfield Reserve

Three Kings Park

Three Kings School Fields

open space

Fig. 97.

View of the Quarry from Big King’s slopes

? Fig. 98.

154

Clockwise around the site

local :

open space

An inaccessible edge. Due to the previous industrial land use of the quarry site it is inaccessible physically and visually. Despite being surrounded on three sides by public space (a reserve, a carpark and Mt Eden Road) it is relatively difficult to comprehend its scale, unless observed from the volcanic cone of Big King or a high ridge along the tuff ring crest.

Fig. 99.

The Berm (aerial)

Fig. 100.

Scale along Mt Eden Road

156

local :

open space

the berm as a tool for privacy. Along Mt Eden road the ground rises up from the footpath and is covered in vegetation, forming a berm. This slight shift in the topography separates the pedestrian from the quarry at a relatively human scale.

Perhaps this could be used within the site to break up the considerable scale of the development, subtly signal a shift from a public domain to a private domain or designate circulation space.

public

private

examples of manufacturing topography or sculpting it into a surface for activity. Using topography to direct the pedestrian through a space is a widely used technique within landscape architecture , widening into a public park or sports field and narrowing into circulation spaces (without a blatant concrete footpath or kerb)

Within increasingly urbanized cities, the threading of public space through a built up area, connecting larger and smaller spaces together, is not just necessary but highly successful. There is a growing body of work that see an urban opportunity in the steep slopes or difficult topographies within the city, attaching recreational activities to them. The Parc des Cormailles is an example of preserving a topography to create an exciting,vertiginous play–scape for children of varying ages. And in Los Angeles certain staircases have become appropriated by a gym loving population into crowded exercise spots.

Fig. 101.

Parc des Cormailles

Fig. 102.

Rainer Schmidt

Fig. 103.

Playground by Rehwald Landscape Architecture

Fig. 104.

LA Santa Monica stairs

158

local :

open space

e Fig. 105.

160

Sections through the quarry site

local :

open space

site topography. VARIATIONS OF DEPTH AND INCLINE WITHIN THE QUARRY SITE

e d c b a

162

over circulation

services within

through the architecture

pedestrian

the_lift.

the_ramp.

the_bridge. terrain

individual

spiral

external

mechanical

the_stairway.

local :

mediating a 34m drop. No one solution will suit throughout the site, the scale and the variety of the sites topography demands a network of elements. The insertion of lightweight bridging devises (gantry’s or ramps) between buildings, along with well-placed lifts in public areas of intensive use and manufactured slopes to ease and direct the public

the carpark gantry

shaped by land removed

open space within

through the site and up to the Maunga will improve the sites porosity.

previous images left to right

Fig. 106.

Outdoor escalators in Barcelona up to parc guel

Fig. 107.

Fire stairs clipped on

Fig. 108.

external spiral staircase

Fig. 109.

Santa Lift, Portugal

Fig. 110.

Lift,

Fig. 111.

Lift,

Fig. 112.

Munipal evelator,

Fig. 113.

Outdoor escalators in Barcelona up to parc guel

Fig. 114.

Fire stairs clipped on

Fig. 115.

external spiral staircase

Fig. 116.

Santa Lift, Portugal

Fig. 117.

Lift,

Fig. 118.

Lift,

Fig. 119.

Munipal evelator,

164

local :

Fig. 120.

166

Herald article

local :

the Fletcher Development proposal. ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT MASTERPLAN FOR THE THREE KINGS QUARRY SITE

1,200 - 1,5000 dwellings / 21ha Terrace houses and apartments approx. 2,500-3,500 people site filled to 15m below Mt Eden Road a dedicated bus stop links from Three Kings town centre through to Big King Land swap with Council & an upgrading of open spaces / provision for sportsfields

Fig. 121.

Current masterplan

Fig. 122.

Option 4 within the Precinct Plan

168

local :

land swap. Based on option 4 of the Three Kings Precinct Plan

Fletcher Development 15ha

council 6ha

access to Maunga

7.5ha 2x sand carpeted sportfields

access to three kings town centre

current concerns regarding nature of the pedestrian access to Maunga and the Mt Eden Road edge.

170

local :

exploring fills. The current proposal is to fill the site to a new level 15m below Mt Eden Road. To maximise the potential of the quarry site, filing the site to different levels based on required access and programme could be explored.

Increasing circulation through site to the Maunga and improving connections in Three Kings will be achieved through the relationship between the architecture and the topography

@ Mt Eden Rd

@ 3 Kings Reserve

@ Mt Eden Rd -15m

@ Mt Eden Rd -30m

172

local :

Slopes & terraces.

174

local :

@ Mt Eden Rd -15m

@ Mt Eden Rd -30m

176

local :

The site as a volume. The topography and the sheer depth of the quarry site (currently 34m) should be seen as an opportunity.

Fletcher Developments decision to allow the architecture to mediate a 15m level change up to Mt Eden road to maximize sun and outlook is a novel idea.

So what to do with the volume from -15m to -34m? That is 1-1.3 million cubic metres of space to fill…the question is, fill with what? Hard fill? Or could other programmes mediate this level change?

3000 new residents could potentially bring 3000 new cars… could the provision of carparking below the housing prop the development up physically and financially?

The sites adjacency to a town centre marked for growth under the Unitary Plan, the inclusion of sports fields and a total of 7.5hectares of recreational space within the development give this sunken volume a value. Could other programmes that currently service the surrounding residential population and are observable around the sites perimeter buy in? A supermarket … personal storage companies…?

This position follows the logic of OMA, who see each project brief as a volume to be filled, layered up or cut away at programmatically...

LES HALLES - “infrastructure/metro 60,010m2; public space 34,130m2; parking 111,940m2; 73,205 m2 (total area: 279285m2)”1

Fig. 123.

Movie still from Touche pas a la femme blanche showing the “void” to fill

Fig. 124.

OMA design for les halles

178

case study A. LES HALLES by OMA

For OMA the competition to redevelop Les Halles in Paris was an opportunity to “… test the concept of a cumulative modern culture, to see if an accumulation of specific, precise, contextual and delicate interventions could together redefine a territory as large as that of Les Halles.”2

“The project consists therefore of a group of buildings that are in part structures that emerge from the underground and in part penetrations into the ground from the surface with the hope that this concept will once and for all do away with the schizophrenia that exists in Les Halles between the underground and the surface. We therefore need to find a building type suitable for connecting one to the other, wherever it is more efficient, more necessary, or more exciting. We want these small pavilions to have very different identities. Some of them will be for specific programs, and others will be more playful or lighter in nature.” 3

Fig. 125.

180

OMA design for les halles

By levelling the top OMA connects this site to its urban surrounds, physically ‘unifying’ it and maximizing connections along its edges and the use of it’s as a surface. They then introduce vertical elements both physical protrusions or towers and negative voids downwards that allow the volume to be circulated. Although the scale of the quarry site is similar to that of Les Halles, its position within three kings calls for a different condition. Something that sits between the urban and the suburban…

However OMA’s treatment of the vast volume of Les Halles offers a model for the quarry redevelopment, how variety can be introduced through a consideration of programme, surface and architecture.

1. Office for Metropolitan Architecture., “Les Halles, France, Paris 2003,” http://www.oma.eu/projects/2003/ les-halles. 2. Ibid. 3. Ibid.

defining different conditions & densities within the site. unchanged - level terraced - 2m increments slope - from terrace to -15m Vehicle access from Mt Eden Road

filled - to 15m below Mt Eden Road vehicle circulation / entrance to parking sports grounds

filled - to 30m below Mt Eden Road parking? storage? supermarket?

182

local :

townhouse blocks stepping up a terraced landscape, gradient providing overlapping of rooftops and outdoor space

level ground plane with semi-detached dwellings increasing in height and scale to catch the northern sun

higher density dwellings hugging the stepper parts of the site, facing north and mediating the change in level

vehicular access through site spaces between the higher density dwellings provide pedestrian circulation through ie. gantry’s steps, ramps or sculpted into slopes depending on gradient and adjacencies

Fig. 126.

184

Exploring typology in Ypenburg

case study: YPENBURG by MRDV

The nature of 1990s developments in the Netherlands of purely detached dwellings led MRDV to challenge built environments that are “… neither urban or rural or even suburban…” but rather houses with small gardens on small sites that on mass are and claustrophobic. This led to their design for the Waterwijk, which tries to exploit the site whilst working within market-driven technical possibilities.

“A diversity of development spreads risk. This resulted in a choice of as many different living environments as possible on each group of islands; patio house, garden houses, houses around a court, apartments and reed houses. The difference in character is maximised by different choices of green facilities, different ecological measures, different lighting and different materials for the houses of each island.”1

The detached dwelling (although repeated element throughout the city) is perceived as an individual, unique product that satisfy’s the consumers wish for self-differentiation. If you can sell the notion of “choice” and “difference” within other typologies the market will respond.

1. http://www.mvrdv.nl/projects/ypenburg/

+ + +

three kings .

= 186

public

semi-public

local :

the roofscape. Open space is valued, but private open space is desired.

Communicating an alternative to the “backyard” or the typical arrangement of the residential section will be key to selling the public on the idea of the apartment. The size of the dwellings balcony, the relationship to its neighbours balcony, the surface treatment of this balcony or even the provision for a dwellings roofscape to be converted into a private open space are crucial.

There is a plethora of architectural precedents that incorporate both public and private roof-scapes into the design for residential developments. Although both Kings landing by Arthur Erickson and Goldhawk Village by Peter Barber Architects propose generous and interesting outdoor spaces, they are restricted by their flat topography.

The quarry sites variation in topography poses a far greater opportunity for designing unique, private outdoor spaces.

private

Fig. 129.

Fuji Kindergarten

Fig. 128.

Kingslanding by Arthur Erickson

Fig. 127.

The waterfall building by Arthur Erickson

Fig. 130.

JDS Architects Hedonistic rooftop

Fig. 131.

Kings landing, Toronto

Fig. 132.

Plans of a few of the apartment layouts

188

case study: KINGS LANDING by ARTHUR ERIKSON.

The Kings Landing and Spadina Quay project was the winning entry in a developerarchitect competition for the first new construction at Harbourfront, the Federal Governments park along the waterfront in downtown Toronto.

This building houses 5,000 square metres of on-going cultural programs including a museum, an art gallery and a multi-purpose conference hall and exhibition area. These programmes act as a buffer between the expressway on the northern side and the residential units that wrap around the southern side of the building. The façade is broken up and terraced to provide private balconies and solaria for the residential units. This organization allows for light and outlook to be maximised.1

1. The Arthur Erickson Foundation, “King’s Landing,” http://arthurerickson.com/residential-buildings/ king’s-landing/1/.

If this logic was applied to a site with a gradient, dwellings could overlap; the roof of one dwelling could provide the outdoor space for the other allowing greater privacy and larger spaces.

1 bedroom

2 bedroom

Fig. 133.

Apartment Layouts

Fig. 134.

Goldhawk Village

190

case study: GOLDHAWK VILLAGE by PETER BARBER ARCHITECTS

Goldhawk Village is a network of intimately scaled streets widening into a little square. A density of 240 dwellings per hectare is achieved through a radical reworking of the traditional ‘back-to-back’ terraced house.1 By stacking the traditional backyard on top of the dwelling both the density of the development and the quality of the private outdoor space is increased.

1. http://www.dezeen.com/2009/01/12/goldhawk-village-by-peter-barber-architects/

192

NOTES 1

Bruce W. Hayward et al., Volcanoes of Auckland : the essential guide (Auckland, N.Z.: Auckland University Press, 2011), 43.

Volcanoes of Auckland : the essential guide (Auckland, N.Z.: Auckland University Press, 2011), 44.

Ibid.

Volcanoes of Auckland : the essential guide, 45.

Volcanoes of Auckland : the essential guide, 57.

Volcanoes of Auckland : the essential guide, 54.

Volcanoes of Auckland : the essential guide, 58.

Volcanoes of Auckland : the essential guide, 55.

Volcanoes of Auckland : the essential guide, 53.

Volcanoes of Auckland : the essential guide, 63.

Ellen Ashenden, “Convex City : Landform>People>Place” (MArch-Prof, University of Auckland, 2011, 2010).

Volcanoes of Auckland : The Essential Guide, 82.

Ibid.

Volcanoes of Auckland : The Essential Guide, 86.

Volcanoes of Auckland : The Essential Guide, 82.

Ibid.

Hayward et al., Volcanoes of Auckland : The Essential Guide, 68.

Volcanoes of Auckland : The Essential Guide, 68.

Hayward et al., Volcanoes of Auckland : The Essential Guide, 84.

Volcanoes of Auckland : The Essential Guide, 85.

Ibid.

Volcanoes of Auckland : The Essential Guide, 87.

Chris Barton, “Back to drawing board on Treaty settlements,” The New Zealand Herald 2007.

Yvonne Tahana, “Treaty settlements: Long and winding road to resolving the past,” The New Zealand Herald, 4.06.13 2013.

Ibid.

http://nz01.terabyte.co.nz/ots/fb.asp?url=LiveArticle.asp?ArtID=94391604

this process is evident in Ngai Tahu - http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/rma/statacknowledgments-flyer-dec02.pdf

“Local Board Plan “, (Auckland: Puketapapa Local Board, Auckland Council, 2011), 14.

“Unlimited Greatness,” Monu 19(2013).

Michael Maltzan and Jessica Varner, No More Play : Conversations on Open Space and Urban Speculation in Los Angeles and Beyond (Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz Verlag, 2011), 39.

Ibid.

No More Play : Conversations on Open Space and Urban Speculation in Los Angeles and Beyond, 41.