‘Horrifically tone-deaf’: Christchurch council grapples by new planning rules

The council’s Urban Structure and Transport committee. Photo / Logan Church

Rules that would increase building thicknesses and scrap minimum car-parking specs in parts of Christchurch have been termed as “horrifically tone-deaf” and an “Auckland plan written by Wellington bureaucrats”.

It comes as the Christchurch Site Council works on an implementation intended for the National Policy Statement (NPS) on Urban Development, released in Mid summer, which aimed to increase housing further advancement in urban areas.

One hundred dollars “tier-one” cities, which included Christchurch, is going to be directed to free up rules around advanced planning decisions.

The Christchurch City Council was directed to construct changes to its District Plan, including scrapping – without public appointment – all minimum car parking necessities by February 2022 and climb building heights and densities and also the parts of the city by August 2022.

Today, the council’s Urban Development and Transport Committee in charge of a particular competition, golf course, rules of golf committee, etc. – which was made up of all village councillors and the mayor – ended up being briefed on this work and conversed the impacts the NPS might on Christchurch.

The Christchurch Site Council building on Hereford St . Photo / NZ Herald

It also dicated to request a meeting with local Folks of Parliament to raise concerns within the impact of it on the district and write directly to the minister at fault expressing the council’s concerns.

Many councillors told those meeting the NPS seemed directly marketed fixing problems in Auckland, and must instead cause problems in Christchurch, additionally around the availability of car parking in the region – an issue that frequently on up around the council table.

Deputy mayor Andrew Turner said it could also result in a few high-rise buildings and a large number of nonincome producing sites – which was already a condition in Christchurch.

Councillor, James Gough, called it “nothing more than an Auckland policy”.

“Some of our biggest preparation issues in the city is parking area – or the lack of it. in

He said my “horrifically tone-deaf” NPS was like “cramming a round peg into a pillow hole”.

Councillor, Mike MacDonald, urged residents to “rise up” and write to their small town MPs and make their voices more than.

He said things looked like an “Auckland plan authored by Wellington bureaucrats”.

Quite a number councillors also spoke about the substantial planning that had gone into Christchurch since the earthquakes.

“This city has been over-planned for the last few years, ” said councillor Yani Johanson.

“I can’t decide any need for the Government telling associated with what to do. ”

Christchurch mayor Lianne Dalziel said is not was opposed to intensification, but what enjoying opposed to was over-intensification where gallantry values could be destroyed.

“The feeling that I have is that the problems have been identified in Auckland and the solutions are very much regarding Auckland – they don’t belong this site. ”

The local authority or council was now looking at its zone plan and what it could do in our own context of the NPS, she claims.

“There are a assortment of challenges that are ahead of us. inches

Issues around the meaning of areas defined in the NPS were also being worked through.