Media release
Wednesday, 27 July 2016
Property Institute says Unitary Plan recs go too far
Property Institute of New Zealand Chief Executive, Ashley Church, says that a range of very positive recommendations in
the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel final report have been completely overshadowed by a number of
bizarre and divisive recommendations which 'must be resisted at all costs'.
Mr Church has applauded widely anticipated recommendations around intensification and a revised target of 400,000 new
dwellings over the next 30 years, a greater focus on metropolitan centres as a counter to the growing importance of the
CBD, and the extension of urban growth boundaries to cater for this growth. He says that these proposals are worthwhile
and would be strongly supported in many quarters. But he goes on to says that, having made these recommendations, the
Panel then seems to have gone out of its way to offend as many people and groups as possible.
"I think most reasonable people knew that the document would outline the necessity of much greater intensification - but
expected that to be balanced by a strong commitment to the protection of heritage and culture, requirements to maintain
and enhance lifestyle facilities and amenities, and a very strong focus on the need to maintain quality and standards at
all levels".
"Instead, we have a document that appears to be so obsessed with the development of new dwellings that it is prepared to
forgo the things which have made Auckland into the world's 3rd most livable city".
Mr Church points to recommendations to delete building demolition controls for pre-1944 houses and to delete the
Schedule of sites of value to Mana Whenua as 'unnecessary acts of cultural vandalism'.
"These recommendations add nothing to the proposed document and any perception that they might somehow speed up the
development process is naïve and misplaced. Yet their application would progressively rip the soul out of the city on
the altar of expediency".
"The recommendation that Sites of Value to Mana Whenua should be disregarded until the 'evidential basis of their value
has been assembled' is particularly offensive and appears to pander to a small but vocal element rather than the wider
interests of the city".
Mr Church says that Aucklanders have a right to expect that the plan setting out the growth of their city should be
underpinned by a strong commitment to quality, liveability and respect for the past.
"If it doesn't achieve those things - what's the point?"
Ends