A flyer received this week at Pitt St…. (the photo is lower Scotland St)
Dunedin City Council – Media Release
Surveying Views on Parking
This item was published on 21 Oct 2014
The Dunedin City Council wants to hear what the public thinks about possible changes to how parking is managed in areas close to the CBD. Areas include City Rise, residential streets near the campus, the Warehouse Precinct, and around Lower Princes Street, Smith Street, York Place and Harrow Street.
Under a review of Dunedin’s District Plan, the DCC is looking at whether the number of off-street car parks required for dwellings in these areas should be reduced. “While this would make more space available for inner city living and could improve neighbourhood amenity, it would also mean more demand for on-street parking,” says City Development Manager Anna Johnson. “To manage this, the DCC may make changes to how parking is managed, with more on-street car parks in the affected areas being reserved for residents with permits or for visitors parking for up to two hours. This would mean that fewer on-street parks would be available to commuters,” says Ms Johnson.
Before any decisions on these matters are made, an online survey will query what the general public, affected residents, commuters, developers, businesses, schools, and other affected organisations think. Survey results will then be used by the DCC to help decide how parking in the affected areas should be managed. If any changes are proposed to District Plan rules for off-street parking, people will be able to make submissions on these changes next year, when the reviewed District Plan is notified. Any changes to these rules would not be likely to come into force until 2016.
In most of the affected areas, changes to on-street parking would only be proposed after the changes to District Plan off-street parking rules had taken place. However, where on-street parking pressure is already particularly high changes may be considered earlier. This could include, for example, areas around Royal Terrace, Heriot Row, London St and Cargill St and parts of City Rise, such as around Arthur Street. If any changes to on-street parking are proposed there will be formal consultation and people will be able to make submissions on the proposals.
█ Online surveys will be available from Wednesday 22 October to Friday 7 November from http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp and paper surveys are available on request from the DCC. Please call 03 477 4000 to request a hard copy to be sent in the post.
Contact Anna Johnson – City Development Manager on 03 474 3874.
Dunedin City Council – Media Release
Medium Density Housing Zones Identified
This item was published on 21 Oct 2014
The growth in one to two person households in Dunedin has prompted a rethink of how we look at residential development. As part of the development of the Dunedin Spatial Plan and the city’s second generation District Plan (2GP), Dunedin City Council staff have been working with stakeholders and experts, and consulting with the community, to identify areas that should provide for medium density housing, particularly in areas close to centres, public transport, and community and recreational facilities.
Medium density relates to how many residential units there are per section. Medium density housing can be in the form of houses on small sections, semi-detached or terraced houses, or two to three storey apartment buildings on larger sections. Much of South Dunedin and the residential areas around the University of Otago are examples of areas that are developed to a “medium density” level.
DCC City Development Manager Anna Johnson says various ideas about where to provide medium density housing have been tested through different stages of consultation. As a result of that feedback and further field work, a final set of areas to be included in the 2GP, to be notified in the first half of next year, has been proposed.
Many of these areas are already zoned for, or developed as, medium density housing, but some new areas have been identified to cater for a predicted growth in demand for different housing types. From this week, owners and occupiers in areas of medium density zoning will be given a chance to see what is proposed in these areas and to provide feedback on the key draft Plan provisions.
Ms Johnson says the need to identify such areas reflects Dunedin’s changing demographics. “The city’s largest demographic growth area is one to two person households, which includes couples with no children at home. These so-called empty nesters often want to make a move to warm, low maintenance forms of housing in their existing neighbourhoods. We need to ensure the city’s planning rules have scope to do that.”
The proposed medium density zones would require a minimum site size of 200m2 for subdivision. In terms of existing sites and newly-subdivided sites, 45m2 of land would be required for each ‘habitable room’, which equates to a room that is, or could be, a bedroom. Providing all performance standards related to the building were met, this would allow, for example, a four bedroom house, or two semi-detached residential units with two bedrooms each, to be built on a 200m2 site.
Research by DCC planning staff and public submissions on the 2GP point to the need for medium density housing in areas where there is good access to public transport, community facilities and green spaces. There are 23 areas that have been identified for medium density zoning. Five of these may need infrastructure upgrades if significantly more development occurred. The 23 areas include areas that are already zoned medium density, areas where development is at a higher level than is currently permitted and areas that might benefit from redevelopment to improve the range and quality of housing available. It also includes areas where there is a market for more housing choices, where some change in housing types can occur without a major impact on existing amenity values.
Neighbourhoods already zoned for medium density (residential 2, 3 and 4) include areas below the Town Belt, around the University campus and parts of Caversham and Mosgiel. Areas where there is already quite a lot of medium density housing include parts of Mornington, City Rise, the Gardens area and North East Valley. In some suburbs, such as Opoho, Roslyn, Belleknowes, Andersons Bay, Waverley and parts of Caversham, residential 1 zoning currently restricts building to a minimum 500m2 site, but there is a market for more housing choices.
“We believe medium density housing could be provided for, with appropriate design standards, in areas like these without significant impact on the amenity values of the area,” Ms Johnson says. “Ultimately we want to spread the options for medium density housing across the city and not just be focusing on older areas that may be perceived as less desirable. We want people to have choices as they get older. Not everyone who wants to live in an apartment or low maintenance home wants to live in the central city. People want choices in their own neighbourhoods and there is a growing demand for quality smaller homes in our popular suburbs.”
In addition to the medium density housing zones, a further eight areas are proposed to be zoned as heritage residential zones, but with density and plan provisions similar to those for medium density zones.
█ From Wednesday, visit http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp for more details and to fill out a survey on medium density housing. Consultation closes on Friday, 7 November.
Contact Anna Johnson – City Development Manager on 03 474 3874.
● ODT 24.10.14 Plan changes target housing, parking
Posted by Elizabeth Kerr
23 responses to “DCC 2GP (district plan): Residential parking + Medium density housing”
“The city’s largest demographic growth area is one to two person households, which includes couples with no children at home. These so-called empty nesters often want to make a move to warm, low maintenance forms of housing” – this describes my friends, a couple who are currently house-selling and house-hunting. They have found house-hunting very dispiriting. “There are so many of the houses where the section has been split leaving a tiny rim of ground around the front house on 3 sides and a driveway to the new house at the rear, that goes right past the windows. No privacy, and imagine what you’d have to put up with if the people in the back house have a noisy car with a stereo booming past at any hour of the night!” The aesthetic balance of the house on the section has been ruined. Their opinion is that where this has occurred it’s like Coronation Street except you still have a mini lawn and garden, too small to be useful but it looks frightful if neglected.
### dunedintv.co.nz October 28, 2014 – 5:55pm
DCC looks at changes to inner city parking
The Dunedin City Council is tackling some contentious issues as part of its next generation plan. It’s looking at changes to inner city parking, and the establishment of more resident-only parking zones. It’s also proposing to change housing policy. And before final decisions are made, staff are calling for public feedback.
We live in one of the medium density zones where there also happen to be a fair number of heritage homes in between more basic type of properties.
I rang the DCC and spoke to someone there about how tight the council was about the medium density zones presently set. I gather there is not much flexibility to reconsider tweaking these zones and consider more heritage zones. Apparently, the assessments done earlier this year were considered thorough.
Personally, I have no problem with medium density zones, in order to stall urban sprawl, but I am uneasy about the council’s enforcement of any rules determining new developments. I got the impression the council did not want to be seen to dictate how….in terms of design, building materials, colours….new properties were developed.
(I note in Central Otago they have strict rules in housing estates like Jacks Point. There the rules are too restrictive dictating even what kind of plants you are allowed.) This is the other extreme, but there is a case for some balance between strict rules and diversity.
My main worry is that we end up with new slums with hideous buildings, crammed with rooms, to achieve medium density. I can think of areas presently in City Rise….lower Duncan St and Cargill St… where development has been unsympathetic. We need to watch out for dodgy developers who work from the back of their calculators to make a killing.
The Dunedin and Jacks Point situations are different.
The Jacks Point rules have been voluntarily entered into by those who have chosen to purchase property in a private development. The DCC rules are imposed on on the owners of private property whether they like it or not.
Peter, I strongly share your concerns. I did preliminary character area assessments for DCC in the areas you mention, god knows what screwy thinking followed on the part of council staff in policy planning (and at the so-called City Development Team led by the nimbus Ms Johnson) to arrive at what now parades as change to the district plan.
I became greatly disheartened by what I plainly foresaw would turn into developer-driven erosion of existing heritage, character and amenity values by lowest common denominator subdivision and extremely “low-design” builds – wrecking our city’s oldest neighbourhoods of which the property owners and residents are generally proud, and indeed responsible for upkeep and presentation.
Blame this exercise in change for change’s sake on the poor quality academic fruitcakes staffing this council, and who have no conscience or worth beyond the comfort of make-work schemes to qualify their too generous salaries.
It seems the job of doing assessments was divvied up between heritage planners at the DCC, a consulting company the name of which I cannot yet establish, and others more concerned with medium density issues.
I gathered the heritage planners, according to the lady l spoke to, looked at existing heritage areas, plus the peripheries. I am not sure how peripheral their scope was intended beyond those areas.
My contact was honest enough to say she was not aware of the whole medium density area in question. It seems one part of the planning department is reliant on the expertise of the heritage people. I guess that is how bureaucracy works, but personally I would like the whole team of planners to get out from behind their desks and do some walking around the areas in question.
In that way we can hopefully get them to view present medium density eyesores and have rules in place to stop more of them.
Peter, there is only one Policy Planner – Heritage at DCC. Glen Hazelton. He has used two consulting independent architectural historians to assess properties in existing and proposed heritage precincts, and yes extension of existing District Plan listed heritage precincts. They continue their valuable assessment work, in effect, on extended contract according to each annual plan period. The 20+ character areas which you dwell in one of, are another exercise. And that is likely where the dread consulting company has been used. The latter is ALL CRAP. In my opinion. And has the potential for conflict of interest, such that an officer responsible for upkeep and maintenance of heritage values in the city could unwittingly cross over into advocacy for new development and the developers set to utilise wrecking balls and excavators. This is not an exercise in quality urban design or raising design values and amenity for enhanced sense of place.
Some of these arguments have been raised earlier at this website (enter *housing* in the search box at right). What happens is land values are raised in the central suburbs forcing people to seek cheaper land further out thereby destroying existing mixed residency neighbourhoods (adding to sprawl and high infrastructure costs). Raising density sounds good in theory… It fuels property speculation of the worst kind; DCC will describe it as “economic development” – it causes wealth and resources to flow to the GOBs at ever faster rates. We need that like a hole in the head.
Mosgiel sprawl already zoned may take effect.
### ODT Online Sat, 1 Nov 2014
82-lot estate planned
By Debbie Porteous
A Wanaka-based developer has applied for consent to create an 82-lot subdivision on one of the largest pieces of undeveloped residential-zoned land left in Dunedin. The latest large subdivision for Mosgiel – the fastest-growing area in Dunedin – would be on 7.5ha between Gladstone Rd North and Hagart Alexander Dr.
Interesting that the deputy chair of the community board is now making public comments, after the blundering comments by the chair of the board made while sitting on a resource consent hearing recently.
Housing: sample of older posts and comments:
29.3.13 Reykjavik, Iceland: The strongest mirror [speculative apartments]
21.3.13 Growth fetish ? Urban sprawl v Higher density living ?
3.3.13 RNZ Sunday Morning | Ideas: Re-imagining the Urban House [audio]
14.4.12 How perverse is the New Zealand housing market?
24.9.11 Kevin McCloud interview [audio]
24.10.10 Otara Simple House
15.8.10 WILD about Wanaka
Urban expansion [Image: shutterstock.com]
Mosgiel’s future? Tawdry cul-de-sacs, cheek-by-jowl McMansions, high-cost retirement villages and horsy-jodhpur lifestyle blocks. DCC hasn’t got a plan, and it’s too late anyway – the developers with all the control only offer the bad-taste ad hoc.
Each to his own, I suppose, but this image of urban life looks like hell on earth to me. Uniformly boring. Do they have a Fountain Gate Mall yet? Is this where Kath and Kim go on holiday when in Dunedin?
This at the extreme end of cul-de-sac, Peter – such a cool reminder of how to get lost with no landmarks or amenity present. Mosgiel suburbia has a few of the little cul-de-sac cousins, some built in the 1960s when I was growing up – I remember my newly married (youngest) aunt and uncle settling into their new house in one – we country clods visiting on high days and holidays always wondered about this……
Happy birthday Peter xxx
Did John Key tell you, Jenny?! I’m getting paranoid under National. But, thanks.
Mosgiel is a developer’s dream. Where else in the country do you get a developer sitting on a resource consent hearing for residential development. Yes it happened right there in Mosgiel, and council were fully aware of what was going on, and did nothing.
Steven! Mate, please don’t crash DCC’s quest for “economic development at any cost”, because it has NO chickens left to count, y’know – nothing left in the coop except the hollow cry “gigatown” from the CEO, via twitter @sue_bidrose (you don’t need to be subscribed to Twitter to read tweets, it’s all public domain)…..
[did someone say Dillon?][oh, I said that]
Steven, Dillon has always passed himself off as a developer. He’s nothing other than a poser […] (remember The Village Green?) but the only thing he has ever developed successfully is a big fat guts.
Is that the reason that they want a larger pool out at Mossie
Densification – related post:
29.12.10 Geospatial analysis, relieving burdens on existing infrastructure
Old post, strategic planning, envisioning…… [extremes / key themes]
15.12.09 Abu Dhabi
Boom times…. (joke) at Mosgiel/Taieri according to COC, Community Board, Real Estate agents, Developers, and ALLIED PRESS (including its pitiful midweek effort to pump it in ‘Dunedin News’ as a “community” force). It’s called mobilisation against the city council’s District and Spatial plans.
Property speculation for sprawl is best understood by the trashy fuckers from Wanaka that know how it’s done (with limited opportunity left there), so they’re here. They’ve always been here. OBHS and friends. Where there’s a buck for themselves 100 or 1000 times over, there’s a way. So yeah, expanding pool and spa needed by the big boys in speedos.
DCC looks Mighty stupid. Victim has already paid $116 for licence to occupy road reserve outside his house.
Monday, 15 August 2016
Ticketed for parking, despite permit
A Port Chalmers resident has slammed the “revenue gathering” of Dunedin City Council parking officers after he and two others were ticketed for parking the wrong way on a quiet Port Chalmers residential street. Ryan Henry, his father-in-law and another motorist were ticketed for parking the wrong way in Bellevue Pl on Wednesday afternoon. But Mr Henry said he had always parked in the opposite direction as there was no parking on the other side of the road and attempting to turn in the steep and narrow street could be hazardous in winter.
Nice one, DCC moneygrubbers! Find a non-problem and turn it into your advantage. That’s why we love our cyborgs in uniforms, who have the right to ignore harmless breaches of their precious Rules, but choose not to because what’s the point of having the uniform and the power to jerk people around if you don’t get to use it?