What’s the Plan? Upwards, backwards or sideways?
The Auckland Unitary Plan has been launched. Will it float or should it be torpedoed?
The spin is to make Auckland the world’s “most liveable city.” That promotion seems firmly rooted in building upwards and increasing the population as rapidly as possible, with increasing numbers living in apartments, often very small.
Will this Plan achieve a reasonably liveable city, let alone the most liveable city. The proposed Plan will produce greater traffic congestion, more costly infrastructure, very crowded beaches and parks, increased pollution, greater waste disposal, wastewater and stormwater problems, extra water supply requirements from the polluted Waikato, and ‘high rise rates’ to pay for the result.
Lacking so far is how the region is going to be made more liveable than it is now. More people and massive intensification doesn’t cut it!
Where is the comprehensive plan to achieve the following requirements to move up the scale towards a more liveable city, let alone the most liveable city in the world?
Consider this:
The cities that are consistently in the top three “most liveable cities,” are Copenhagen, Helsinki and Zurich.
All have fewer than 2 million people, are very environmentally conscious with various effective schemes in place. Copenhagen is considered one of the most environmentally friendly cities in the world, with Zurich probably very close behind.
In 2006 Copenhagen received the European Environmental Management award for long-term, holistic environmental planning, and was named “greenest city” in Europe by Siemens/Economist publication.
Much of its environmental success results from a strong municipal environmental policy combined with, and supported by a sound national one. One municipal policy is to reduce its CO2 emissions by 20% by 2015.
Zurich similarly has ‘climate protection’ policies, one example being a public referendum in 2008 which established a law requiring no more than 1 tonne of CO2 per person to be achieved by 2050. Not merely a target, but the law. Zurich also has “green lungs,” forests and major parks within its jurisdiction. Within the municipal area, 26.5% of the land is forest.
These three cities make huge investments in public transport. Copenhagen has a wide spectrum of modes: bikes, trains and buses, with industry experts claiming it has the best ‘metro’ in the world. About 40% of the population cycle to work. Zurich also continues major improvements to its public transport, including expansion of its cycle only network. Public transport is heavily used, comprising trams, trains, and a ferry service.
Helsinki too has an efficient public transport comprising trams, trains, buses and two ferry lines. Perhaps because of this there is a low car ownership of only 390 cars per 1000 people).
The list of environmental improvement continues with Copenhagen investing in off-shore windfarms, and big improvements in harbour water quality.
Other key factors in the mix of attributes providing these cities with such good reputations for liveability include: personal safety (Copenhagen 9th); Best Design City, Copenhagen; “Cleanest City in Europe” – Copenhagen. Few tall buildings: Zurich – with high rise allowed in only a few areas, mostly industrial.
All of these factors have significant influence on the happiness and “liveability” of these places, as do other social and economic factors like entertainment, culture, considerable green space, and architectural planning.
Good design of buildings, open space, and good public facilities are all critical elements in helping people enjoy their lives where they live and of course, Scandinavia is renowned for its designers, architects and planners, something which Auckland has generally been bereft of.
Helsinki, for example was designated “World Design Capital” in 2012, “…in recognition of the use of design as an effective tool for social, cultural and economic development.” So far as residential aspects are concerned, whilst within the central city most live in apartments, the suburbs have been left in very low rise, human scale dwellings ranging from single family homes to row housing.
Another factor of major importance making the people of Copenhagen and Denmark regarded as among the happiest people in the world, (even although they are one of the most highly taxed) is that there is a very strong emphasis on economic equality, which unfortunately is a critical deficiency in NZ, and most markedly in Auckland.
Unemployment is minimal in the cities quoted above, Zurich’s being around 3.2%.
So, where is the holistic plan for Auckland? Where is the plan to provide much more park and green space, more public amenities, comprehensive environmental plans to improve air quality, stormwater pollution of the sea, a greatly expanded public transport system, improved personal safety, more human scale habitation rather than high rise pepper-potted across residential areas in local shopping precincts, and a population policy to limit rather than expand the population of the region?
Rushing on headlong with a plan of “more is better and higher is better” rather than a well rounded, well supported plan, will drag Aucklanders down the scale, not up.