2410 days ago

The Kaipātiki Local Board feedback on Plan Change 26

John Gillon from

Submissions on Proposed Plan Change 26 to the Unitary Plan, regarding changes to Special Character (heritage) areas, closed on Friday. Below is the Kaipātiki Local Board feedback, prepared by myself and Danielle Grant​, under delegation from the Local Board:

The Kaipātiki Local Board objects to proposed Plan Change 26. In particular this feedback relates to:
* D18.6.1 Standards for buildings in the Special Character Areas Overlay - Residential and in the Special Character Areas Overlay – General (with a residential zoning)
* D18.6.1.1 Building Height
* D18.6.1.2 Height in relation to boundary
* D18.6.1.3 Yards.

Reasons for Objection are as follows:

1. The plan change will allow greater building heights and densities in the side and rear of character properties than currently allowed for under the Single House zone. As such, the proposed changes will have detrimental effects on the heritage character of the buildings and it is erroneous to think that the changes will achieve the aim of protecting the character of the area, in fact it will be the opposite.

2. Height to Boundary: The proposed Special Character Area Overlay rule for height in relation to boundary is more permissive than the Single House zone. It defines the envelope based on a 3m vertical height and then a 45 degree incline.
This proposed plan change therefore creates a more bulky and dramatic effect than the Single House zone, which is based on a 2.5m vertical height and then a 45 degree incline. The Special Character Area Overlay area rules should provide additional protection to the zone rather than being more permissive or lenient than a Single House zone.
The outcome of the proposed more lenient rule is that a building can be built higher with greater bulk and visual impact.

3. Rear Yard: In the rear yard, the proposal is to reduce the current 3m boundary to just 1m. This will allow building to occur only 1m from a neighbour’s boundary and will have a significant visual and privacy impact on neighbours.
Relaxing the 3m setback for the rear yard will have a highly detrimental impact in areas of Northcote Point and Birkenhead Point where sections near corner junctions have rear yards adjacent to side yards.

If the proposals go ahead then the Special Character Area Overlay will place properties at a more vulnerable position from those in the Single House zone without the overlay. These properties will be adversely impacted by increasing encroachments into side and rear yards, affecting sunshine and privacy.
The increased encroachment of development to the side and rear of houses increases the size and scale of residential homes in a Special Character Area Overlay area and as such will add visual bulk detracting from the character features of the area.
The proposed plan change will result in the original fronts of heritage houses, and therefore neighbourhoods, being unduly dominated by large rear and side developments.
Such an approach will allow a form of facadism, and dramatically reduce the protection of the character of the area.

Image
More messages from your neighbours
7 hours ago

Emma’s wedding dress reveal tells a different love story

Bert Sutcliffe Retirement Village

A Valentine’s-inspired wedding dress show at Ryman Healthcare’s Logan Campbell Village is providing the perfect opportunity for residents to share memories of their romantic day.

But for Emma Muller, it has also turned into an opportunity to celebrate her late daughter Nicola, who died 19 years ago at the age of 37.

Image
7 days ago

Poll: Should the government levy industries that contribute to financial hardship?

The Team from Neighbourly.co.nz

As reported in the Post, there’s a $30 million funding gap in financial mentoring. This has led to services closing and mentors stepping in unpaid just to keep helping people in need 🪙💰🪙

One proposed solution? Small levies on industries that profit from financial hardship — like banks, casinos, and similar companies.

So we want to hear what you think:
Should the government ask these industries to contribute?

Image
Should the government levy industries that contribute to financial hardship?
  • 59.4% Yes, supporting people is important!
    59.4% Complete
  • 26.4% No, individuals should take responsibility
    26.4% Complete
  • 14.2% ... It is complicated
    14.2% Complete
1179 votes
1 day ago

Brain Teaser of the Day 🧠✨ Can You Solve It? 🤔💬

The Riddler from The Neighbourly Riddler

Make a hearty dish. Take just half a minute. Add four parts of kestrel. Then just add one. What have you made?

(Trev from Silverdale kindly provided this head-scratcher ... thanks, Trev!)

Do you think you know the answer? Simply 'Like' this post and we'll post the answer in the comments below at 2pm on the day!

Want to stop seeing these in your newsfeed? No worries! Simply head here and click once on the Following button.

Image