Boundary issues
Let it follow the catchments to the north and west then.
As far as the development quandary goes a mirror to the Metropolitan Urban Limit boundaries in the rural districts may be an answer. Have one MUL inside the city (currently in red on the map above) - to be north and south and run contiguously from points on the water as it does now. And have the Northland council set one running contiguously from the city boundary north, and contiguously across the southern boundary in the Waikato determined by their regional council. This outer boundary being the rural/openspace protection area (limited development area) adjoining the corresponding protected non-urban area on the other side.
This will in effect create a greater town belt - the inner boundary controlled by the city council, the boundary to the north by Northland Regional council - the boundary to the south by Waikato Regional Council. Quite where those boundaries might end up and how much area they may encompass if the exercise was gone through I have no idea, but it is a way of addressing the "uncontrolled development" concerns that have arisen for the rural areas within commuting distance of the city.
My submission map above.The northern boundary is the watershed of the Kaipara and Waitemata to the Waiwera river (a point at which I agree with the majority select committee report). The southern boundary is every bit bas disputed as the north. I put the Hunua outside Auckland, but the city must retain control over the dams and the water supply (and other "legacy" assets that may now fall outside its boundaries). The select committee said that the coast east of Hunua should be part of the Hauraki District. I would like to see Waiheke and Aotea (the Barrier) removed from the city and choosing whether to go to the Hauraki District - they can be distinctive vibrant local communities in another jurisdiction - that would be a lot easier for everyone except those who would want to continue the development (and population increase) of Waiheke with subsidies from the city's rating base. If Waiheke wants to develop they can pay for it themselves, or they can decide not to whore themselves off and not to develop. The city population should not be determining these matters over this island.
Labels: Auckland/Tamaki








2 Comments:
"The city population should not be determining these matters over this island."
The problem is that the "city" loves Waiheke because it gets more in rates than it spends on the island. Waiheke Islanders basically subsidize city dwellers:
http://www.waihekegulfnews.co.nz/other-news/waiheke-owes-city-10-million-a-year-for-overheads-says-co-2.html
STOP THE SUPER CITY FULL STOP!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfPGih1VDJk
Post a Comment
<< Home