Legal bloody highs | DCC’s pathetic buffer zones (fail OGHS / View Street)

Legal highs (via ODT 31.8.15)
• All psychoactive substances banned last year.
• Producers now need to prove their products are safe.
• Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority expected to begin issuing retail licences to sell approved products from November.
• Dunedin City Council consulting on proposed legal high retailers location policy; outlets permitted in only limited central city sites.
• No applications for product approval, or manufacturing licence, yet received.
• Any psychoactive product expected to take “at least” two years to win approval.

Dunedin City Council
Legal High Retail Location Policy

Closes: 14/09/2015

The Council is proposing to set out where legal highs (commonly referred to as ‘party pills’ or ‘synthetic cannabis’) can be sold within Dunedin.
The proposed Legal High Retail Location Policy will effectively ban sale of legal highs outside of the central city and within 100m of sensitive sites such as education facilities, churches, libraries, hospitals, mental health facilities and justice premises.

Background
Previously psychoactive substances could be manufactured and sold without restriction. The government reacted to the harm these products caused by banning them individually once harm had been investigated and proven. The process for doing this was slow and reactive and did not effectively manage the harm caused by the substances.

Parliament has now banned all psychoactive substances unless they can be proven to be no more than a low risk of harm to users. Although manufacturers are testing products, none have yet met the test to be considered an approved product.

Despite this, from later this year, those wanting to sell legal highs can apply to the Ministry of Health’s Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority for a retail licence. This means the retailers could sell legal highs as soon as one meets the low harm threshold.

Parliament also introduced rules around selling legal highs, including an age restriction, display and packaging restrictions and a ban on their sale from supermarkets, dairies, petrol stations, premises licenced to sell alcohol, residential premises, vending machines or places likely to be frequented by minors (for example recreational or sports facilities). It also gave councils the power to specify where (within reason) in their districts, legal highs can be sold.
This means the Council can formalise the community’s preferences for where legal highs can be sold (within the scope of the law) by adopting a Legal High Retail Location Policy (also called a ‘Local Approved Products Policy’). All applications for retail licenses would have to first be checked against the policy before the Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority could legally grant a licence. The Council cannot make a policy that bans legal highs outright, or is so restrictive it effectively bans their sale.

OPTIONS (Pros / Cons X)
Parliament has created a system which makes some psychoactive substances legal. The Council does not have the power to ban the sale of legal highs in Dunedin. The options available to the Council include:

Option A
Restrict legal high retailers to the Dunedin central city area provided they are more than 100m from “sensitive sites” (proposed).
Restrictions within the Act apply (no sales from dairies, petrol stations and residential premises etc.)
Sales only allowed where there is high public surveillance (Dunedin central city area) and away from sensitive sites like schools, churches, the library, the hospital, mental health facilities and justice premises
X Demand for complete ban not met

Option B
Allow sale of legal highs in areas other than the Dunedin central city area
Restrictions within the Act apply (no sales from dairies, petrol stations and residential premises etc.)
X Sales occur away from the areas of highest public surveillance and potentially closer to sensitive sites like schools, churches, the library, the hospital, mental health facilities and justice premises
X Demand for complete ban not met

Option C
No restrictions above those outlined in the Act
Restrictions within the Act apply (no sales from dairies, petrol stations and residential premises etc.)
X No restrictions on sale of legal highs near schools, churches, the library, the hospital, mental health facilities and justice premises
X Demand for complete ban not met

The Proposal
We are proposing Option A – restricting legal high retailers to the Dunedin central city area (Option A), provided they are not within 100 metres of sensitive sites such as schools, churches, the library, the hospital, mental health facilities and justice premises.

There are two key reasons for this approach.

This is the only regulation currently available to limit sale of legal highs in Dunedin

A Legal High Retail Location Policy is the only way the community can limit the sale of legal highs within the current regulatory system. The proposed policy limits the sale of legal highs to the extent possible under the law as it stands. Adopting an overly restrictive policy could be legally challenged.
Non-regulatory responses such as education and advocacy to central government can and will also be used to help manage the harm caused by legal highs.

To limit sale of legal highs to where harm is likely to be better managed

Limiting the sale of legal highs to the central city would mean sales would occur in areas where there is natural public surveillance (ie areas of high foot traffic and/or CCTV cameras). This would help reduce risks to the community.
Adding a 100m buffer zone around sensitive sites (schools, churches, the library, the hospital, mental health facilities and justice premises) will further reduce exposure to legal highs, particularly among users of sensitive sites.
By applying these criteria legal high retailers will be prohibited from suburban retail areas such as South Dunedin, Green Island, Mosgiel and Port Chalmers.

DCC Legal Highs CBD-July-2015-buffers

Have Your Say
The Council wants to know what you think about the proposed Legal High Retail Location Policy. Have we defined sensitive sites effectively? Would you add or remove any? Are the proposed buffer zones correct? How would the proposed policy affect you?
Provide your feedback using the form below and/or indicating whether you would like to speak at the public hearing, to be held in late September.

█ Feedback closes 5pm, Monday 14 September.

Consultation documents
Draft Legal High Location Policy (PDF, 549.0 KB)
Legal Highs in Dunedin – Have Your Say

Consultation details: Closing date: 14/09/2015

Public feedback
Online submission form
● Email to – legalhighs @dcc.govt.nz
● Post to – Dunedin City Council, PO Box 5045, Moray Place, Dunedin 9058, Attention Governance Support Officer – Legal High Retail Location Policy Consultation
● Hand deliver to – DCC Customer Services Centre, Ground Floor, 50 The Octagon, Dunedin, Attention: Governance Support Officer – Legal High Retail Location Policy Consultation

DCC Link

Comment at ODT Online:

What next DCC?
Submitted by Catcher on Mon, 31/08/2015 – 9:37am.

I think it’s just an unhappy circumstance that we’re seeing the ‘Bermuda triangle’ occur at the bottom of View St – A known problem area for anti-social behaviour. The Council will certainly be copping some flak for it and where they depict the woefully inadequate buffer zone that 100m represents around the most vulnerable and impressionable of all the ‘Sensitive sites’, the school. If that measurement started from the perimeters of these sensitive sites, no one would be permitted to operate in the city centre – which would send a clear message to our City planners.
Read more

██ AS IF VIEW STREET RESIDENTS AND NEARBY BUSINESSES HAVEN’T HAD ENOUGH ALREADY, MAYOR LIABILITY CULL

Related Posts and Comments:
12.5.15 View Street, seen from Moray Place
2.6.15 Unpublished letter to ODT editor —Aftermath of Sunday TVNZ (10 May)
17.5.15 Social media messages after Sunday TVNZ (10 May)
11.5.15 Aftermath of Sunday TVNZ on ‘Party Central’
8.5.15 Sunday TVNZ #Dunedin —10 May TV1 at 7:00 pm

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

9 Comments

Filed under Business, Corruption, Crime, DCC, Democracy, Disinformation, Economics, Media, New Zealand, People, Police, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Stupidity, Tourism, Town planning, Urban design

DCC | Emulate CCC ? #shredding

Link received.
Mon, 31 Aug 2015 at 2:51 p.m.

█ Message: What Dunedin should do also— cull as a verb

untitled [summation.typepad.com] - the money or your life 1To: Dunedin ratepayers & residents —“The money or your life!?!” (who said that)

### Stuff.co.nz Last updated 05:00, August 31 2015
The Press
Editorial: Proposals aim to make Christchurch council streamlined, efficient
OPINION The proposals announced by Christchurch City Council chief executive Karleen Edwards last week for far-reaching changes to the council’s administrative structure come as no surprise.
The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) is beginning the process of winding down its functions. The council and many outside the council want it to be in best shape possible to stake a plausible claim for taking back all, or almost all, of the powers that have been wielded over the last four years by Cera. A fundamental reorganisation shows a seriousness of purpose that should improve that claim.

The proposals are far-reaching. They begin at the top, with seven executive leadership roles reduced to five. Overall, 175 administrative roles will be disestablished and 115 new ones created. The aim, according to Edwards, is to streamline the organisation to make it more dynamic and agile, as befits a city in the process of recreating itself.

Surveys, both of Christchurch citizens who the council is designed to serve, and of council staff themselves also show that, despite considerable efforts that have been made in the last couple of years, the council is still not functioning as smoothly and efficiently as it should be. One survey in particular in May, done after a reorganisation designed to focus the council’s operations on the rebuild, showed that many residents felt the council was operating below expectations. As Edwards said last week, the council had to respond to those concerns with significant changes in order to get it to where people expected it to be.
Read more

Related Post and Comments:
28.8.15 Joel Cayford: ‘Mangawhai Ratepayers at Court of Appeal’
19.8.15 Hotels ? Business ? [DCC lost +++152 fleet vehicles] —Cull in charge….
26.7.15 Leadership woes universal #Minions #DUD
17.6.15 Citifleet: ‘Checkpoint’ interviews Dave Cull
21.5.15 Tomorrow’s newspaper —Cull on CST

█ For more, enter the terms *cull*, *bidrose*, *dchl*, *stadium*, *orfu*, *delta*, *citifleet*, *cycleways*, *flood*, *pipe renewals*, *st clair*, *junkets* or *hotel* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: summation.typepad.com – untitled [tweaked by whatifdunedin]

1 Comment

Filed under Business, Corruption, Crime, CST, Cycle network, DCC, DCHL, DCTL, Delta, Democracy, DVL, DVML, Economics, Enterprise Dunedin, Fraud, Geography, Heritage, Hot air, Hotel, LGNZ, Media, Museums, Name, New Zealand, NZTA, OAG, OCA, ORFU, People, Police, Politics, Pools, Project management, Property, Site, Sport, Stadiums, Tourism, Town planning, Transport, Urban design

DPAG exhibition | Dunedin 1865: A City Rises (29 Aug – 27 Sep 2015)

2015 marks 150 years of the city of Dunedin
With the benefit of William Meluish’s magnificent panorama of 1865 this exhibition centres on the year Dunedin becomes a city. Drawing on other contemporary and pre- and post-dated images we see where Dunedin had come from and was going to. Fuelled by the Otago goldrushes and driven by the acumen, tenacity and aspiration of its citizens Dunedin rapidly rises. This exhibition is brought to you by Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga with support from the Southern Heritage Trust.

[screenshot]

DPAG exhibition - Dunedin 1865 A City Rises (29 Aug - 27 Sep 2015)

█ View more of Meluish’s panorama by clicking the arrows at http://www.dunedin.art.museum/exhibitions/now/a_city_rises

█ Encyclopedia of New Zealand | Story: Meluish, William

Related Posts and Comments:
30.8.15 La Maison House of Pleasure, Queens Gardens —then and today
30.8.15 Standard Building, 201 Princes Street —then and today
23.8.15 1865 Dunedin —Heritage Festival 2015 ‘The Open City’ Sat 29 August
23.8.15 1865 Dunedin —Heritage Festival 2015 Shoreline Trail launch

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

3 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Construction, Design, Dunedin Amenities Society, Events, Fun, Geography, Heritage, Heritage NZ, Inspiration, Media, Museums, Name, New Zealand, People, Pics, Project management, Property, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Urban design, What stadium

La Maison House of Pleasure, Queens Gardens —then and today

Service Gibson & Co Building (1866) – former Dunedin Savings Bank
Architect: Robert A Lawson

La Maison House of Pleasure at 5 Queens Gardens is co-owned by city councillor and former Act MP Hilary Calvert. In 2011, her eyes featured on a sign at the top of the building (the image is still evident).

La Maison (former Dunedin Savings Bank) IMG_20150829_123957 (1b)La Maison IMG_20150829_125851 (1a)

La Maison IMG_20150829_123454 (2a)La Maison IMG_20150829_124102 (1a)La Maison IMG_20150829_124338 (1a)

La Maison’s ground-floor ceiling was ornate and perfectly preserved, its below-ground vault still intact – original door included – although now it houses a “dungeon” stocked with items considerably different to those the vault was designed for. Upstairs, the building’s origin was harder to spot, although staff promised today’s tour would be comprehensive, including an all-access walk-through and details of the building’s changes through its 149 years. ODT 29.8.15

### Stuff.co.nz Last updated 15:12, August 29 2015
Open day at Dunedin’s House of Pleasure
By Hamish McNeilly
It was a happy ending for the dozens of visitors who attended an open day at La Maison House of Pleasure in Dunedin. Business owner turned tour guide, Teena Ingersoll, doesn’t like the word “brothel” to described her Queens Garden based business, which opened its doors on Saturday morning as part of a Heritage Festival open day. “I hate the word brothel, this is a house of pleasure.” Read more + Images

Stuff: Dunedin brothel set to open doors to public

La Maison IMG_20150829_124219 (2a)

Related Posts and Comments:
23.8.15 1865 Dunedin —Heritage Festival 2015 ‘The Open City’ Sat 29 August
23.8.15 1865 Dunedin —Heritage Festival 2015 Shoreline Trail launch

Post and 6 smartphone images by Elizabeth Kerr

6 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Events, Fun, Heritage, Media, Name, New Zealand, People, Pics, Property, Site, Tourism

Standard Building, 201 Princes Street —then and today

Standard Fire and Marine Insurance Company of New Zealand Building (1875)
Architect: Mason and Wales

Standard Building IMG_20150829_130631 (7)Standard Building IMG_20150829_130847 (2c)

Standard Building IMG_20150829_130847 (1b)Standard Buildiing IMG_20150829_130418 (7a)

█ Ideas: https://www.pinterest.com/throughjo/staircasing/

### ODT Online Sat, 29 Aug 2015
Surprises in old buildings
By Craig Borley
The doors to some of Dunedin’s historic buildings will be opened to the public today as the city’s heritage festival continues. The Dunedin Heritage Festival began yesterday with the “Dunedin 1865: A City Rises” photographic exhibition in the Dunedin Public Art Gallery. The festival finishes tomorrow. A major draw is the tours today and tomorrow of 64 historic buildings, which will be raising their customary barriers to the public […] the festival would also include a children’s heritage trail at Toitu Otago Settlers Museum, a walking trail following Dunedin’s original shoreline and a special service in First Church.
Read more

### ODT Online Tue, 2 Jun 2015
‘Absolutely incredible’ revamp of heritage building
By John Gibb
An “absolutely incredible” conservation and adaptive reuse project is nearing completion in Dunedin. This work on the Standard Building in Princes St, including extensive earthquake strengthening [and restoration of the Italian-style facade] has been undertaken as momentum grows to further revitalise the Exchange area, and a wave of adaptive reuse work continues to transform the nearby warehouse precinct. […] The project also includes the Stanton Building, situated behind the Standard Building, and backing on to the council’s Dowling St car park. A crucial – and previously largely hidden – feature of the redevelopment is an innovative, light-filled multilevel internal atrium, making extensive use of glass, which will link the two buildings and provide access to the various floors.
Read more

Related Posts and Comments:
23.8.15 1865 Dunedin —Heritage Festival 2015 ‘The Open City’ Sat 29 August
23.8.15 1865 Dunedin —Heritage Festival 2015 Shoreline Trail launch
17.3.12 Call for photographs or building plans – Standard Building….
24.10.11 Former Standard Insurance building, 201 Princes St, Dunedin

Post and 4 smartphone images by Elizabeth Kerr

Leave a comment

Filed under Architecture, Business, Construction, Design, Economics, Events, Fun, Heritage, Inspiration, Media, New Zealand, People, Pics, Project management, Property, Site, Tourism, Urban design

Joel Cayford: ‘Mangawhai Ratepayers at Court of Appeal’

Link received. [Hooray!]
Fri, 28 Aug 2015 at 10:50 a.m.

Joel Cayford (via Twitter)### joelcayford.blogspot.co.nz Thu, 27 August 2015
Mangawhai Ratepayers at Court of Appeal

Joel Cayford [‘Reflections on Auckland Planning’] updates the Court of Appeal hearing (25-26 August) – Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Association v Kaipara District Council – in front of Justice Rhys Harrison, Justice Mark Cooper, and Justice Forrest Miller.

Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Association (MRRA) is represented by Matthew Palmer QC and barrister Kitt Littlejohn. David Goddard QC represents the council.

Cayford summarises the “causes of action for this hearing – which followed the judicial review heard by Justice Heath (posts here and here)”:

“that the Kaipara District Council (KDC) does not have the power to rate for unlawful purposes. That KDC acted unlawfully in deciding to enter into and expand the Ecocare Wastewater Scheme, and that it could not then enforce rates on ratepayers.

“that the Validation Act did not retrospectively validate ALL matters stemming from those unlawful decisions. It only validated various historic rating defects. Significant matters – including the additional $30,000,000 loan were not dealt with or validated by the Validation Act.

“that the KDC acted inconsistently with the Bill of Rights Act by initiating Validation Legislation which had an effect of undermining MRRA judicial review proceedings – to which they had a right.”

Of critical interest, Cayford says Matthew Palmer, in his closing, “told the Justices, to the effect: “a consequence of adopting the arguments of my learned friend would mean that any Council in New Zealand can breech Local Government Act provisions with impunity, leave ratepayers with the bill, and mean that Long Term Plans all become window-dressing, ratepayer submissions become meaningless. That cannot have been what Parliament intended.””

█ Read Cayford’s excellent post and reader comments here.

LinkedIn: Joel Cayford

Although the Court of Appeal ruling is some way off, fallout might very well illuminate effects of the Dunedin stadium rort, council debt loading and issues of general competency.

Related Posts and Comments:
2.2.15 LGNZ run by Mad Rooster Yule, end of story
27.11.14 Auditor-general Lyn Provost #Resign
31.10.14 Whaleoil on “dodgy ratbag local body politicians” —just like ours at DCC
9.9.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara: Latest news + Winston Peter’s speech
19.7.14 Whaleoil / Cameron Slater on ratepayers’ lament
12.6.14 Fairfax Media [not ODT] initiative on Local Bodies
29.5.14 Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Assn wins at High Court
11.4.14 Councils: Unaccountable, ready to tax? #DCC #ORC
31.3.14 Audit services to (paying) local bodies #FAIL ● AuditNZ ● OAG…
29.1.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara —we hear ya!
3.12.13 LGNZ: OAG report on Kaipara
12.11.13 Northland council amalgamation
29.6.13 Audit NZ and OAG clean bill of health —Suspicious!
21.4.13 Councils “in stchook” —finance & policy analyst Larry.N.Mitchell
19.3.12 Local government reform
21.2.12 Kaipara this time

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Leave a comment

Filed under Business, Construction, Corruption, Crime, DCC, Democracy, Economics, Fraud, Geography, Inspiration, LGNZ, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, People, Politics, Project management, Property, What stadium

DCC: Non-notified resource consent Leith Valley 19-lot subdivision #ULCA

259 Malvern Street Dunedin (LUC-2014-631)
This consent was an application to/for earthworks to form building platforms for 19-lot residential subdivision at 259 Malvern Street Dunedin. This was considered by the Council’s Senior Planner (Consents) on 1 January 2008.

DCC Non-notified Consent Decisions (2015) LUC-2014-631 [page 8 as at 26.8.15]
Source: DCC Non-notified Consent Decisions, page 8 as at 26.8.15

DCC Webmap - 259 Malvern Street (JanFeb 2015)DCC Webmap – 259 Malvern Street (Jan/Feb 2013)

Received from Jeff Dickie (Woodhaugh)
Wed, 26 Aug 2015 at 10:10 a.m.

Subject: dodgy valuations

There’s a 19-lot subdivision underway in Malvern Street, just past the bridge after Patmos Avenue. What makes this odd is that it was granted non-notified consent.

There is a ground swell of anger that this has been allowed. None of the residents knew anything about it until it was through.

It also appears to be within Dunedin’s Leith Valley Urban Landscape Conservation Area [ULCA24], that incidentally was foisted on me. I spent $25,000 fighting this including appealing to the Environment Court. I employed a QC, a barrister and an Environmental Planner. In summary, the Judge said I had a right to feel aggrieved. However, he was reluctant to make a ruling that could potentially open the floodgates to other cases against a local authority [DCC].

It meant people like me, and all the other affected re-zoned owners were privately funding a public visual amenity, a de facto reserve.

The reason I felt so aggrieved is that it has happened to me before with an eight and a half acre section directly opposite Millbrook in Queenstown. My partners and I have owned this for about 26 years and have been obstructed for that entire time. Surrounding us everywhere is quite intensive development and ours remains an island of undeveloped land. Our intentions had been for very restrained use, unlike our more successful neighbours, who are clearly “better connected” than us!

The Leith Valley case is odd. The ULCA was supposed to protect the rocky escarpment and bush area and the latest development doesn’t do that.

I’m not certain, but I’ve been told the developer is John Dunckley, a valuer.
He used to live on-site but now lives in Motueka. Ironically, he objected to a neighbour’s subdivision on the grounds of spoiling his view. One has to wonder how on earth this was granted by the DCC. A reward for favours past?

John Dunckley is the ‘stadium valuer’. He put the eye-watering $225M value on the just completed well over budget stadium. That in effect validated the cost overruns.

[ends]

It appears the developer Dunckley has chosen to push through with subdivision prior to public consultation of the proposed 2GP this year. Very possibly, the existing overlay of ULCA24 should have been one of the factors necessitating full public notification of the application for (land use) consent. The decision should be investigated or challenged due to the number of potentially affected / interested parties not made formally aware of the land owner’s or indeed the city council’s (covert) process and intentions.

DCC Rates Book - 259 Malvern Street - Three Hills Limited

Ratepayer: Three Hills Limited

NZ Companies Register:
THREE HILLS LIMITED 5547070
Incorporation Date: 23 Dec 2014
Company Status: Registered
Registered Office: 147b Redwood Valley Road, Rd 1, Richmond 7081
Address for service: 147b Redwood Valley Road, Rd 1, Richmond 7081

Directors (1 of 1):
John DUNCKLEY – 259 Malvern Street, Glenleith, Dunedin 9010

Total Number of Shares: 100
Shareholders in Allocation:
Allocation 1: 100 shares (100.00%)
John DUNCKLEY – 259 Malvern Street, Glenleith, Dunedin 9010
Ellen Jane DUNCKLEY – 259 Malvern Street, Glenleith, Dunedin 9010
Stuart James MCLAUCHLAN – 3 Walsh Lane, Maori Hill, Dunedin 9010

Subject Site at Leith Valley [screenshot]
DCC Compare Existing and Second Generation District Plans [259 Malvern Street + ULCA24]

█ For interactive comparative maps, go to District Plan Maps

Definition (Dunedin City District Plan):
Urban Landscape Conservation Areas – means those areas addressed in the Townscape Section and identified on the District Plan Maps which provide a landscape setting for the urban areas.

Dunedin City District Plan Volume 1
District Plan – Section 3: Definitions
District Plan – Section 13: Townscape

Dunedin City District Plan 13.8 ULCA

Source: Townscape, page 13:47 [screenshot]

█ The 2GP appears to reduce Dunedin City’s biodiversity in residential areas due to Dunedin City Council’s unconstrained support for private speculator/developers to subdivide property holdings and intensify/densify construction, resulting in the removal of existing ULCAs from significant and potentially regenerative conservational environments.

DCC on Natural Environment and Biodiversity
– in reference to the proposed second generation district plan (2GP)

Review of Urban Landscape Conservation Areas
A review of Urban Landscape Conservation Areas (ULCA) has determined that it has been applied in most cases to public reserves. A large number of these reserves are sports grounds with limited vegetation cover and do not meet the intent of a ULCA. Instead the ULCA Zone has functioned as a default reserves zone. The preferred approach in the new Plan [2GP] is to zone large reserves as part of a new Recreation Zone which will better recognise the values of reserves (refer to Q&A: Community and Recreation Activities). This will reduce the need to include such areas as a ULCA.

The approach to be taken with reserves in the 2GP provides an opportunity to reconsider the remaining ULCA areas and whether there are alternative approaches. Some large reserves, such as the Dunedin Town Belt contain extensive areas of vegetative cover that play a significant role in providing corridors for biodiversity and these values need to be recognised with a method that manages biodiversity. The ULCA also includes areas of private land, generally the vegetated steep sides of valleys or gullies, such as the Leith Valley, that provide biodiversity corridors. It is proposed to recognise their values in any method that manages biodiversity.
DCC Link

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

12 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, Corruption, DCC, Democracy, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Name, New Zealand, People, Pics, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Stadiums, Stupidity, Town planning, Urban design