But Ms Coney, who chairs the heritage panel and the parks, recreation and heritage forum, said the council was not getting it right with replacement buildings in character suburbs.
She said they might conform to the letter of the rules, but there were real problems with bulk and appearance.
A case in hand was a house at 28 Arnold St in Grey Lynn, she said, which had a big blank face that didn't fit with the character of the street.
"One of the things about older houses is they are broken up on their face to the street with porches and windows and a bit of a comfortable look," she said.
Ms Coney said she wanted the heritage panel to discuss the issue of replacement buildings and unsympathetic extensions. Another issue was the move away from modest workers' houses such as Hakanoa St towards bigger houses reflecting increased wealth and a different lifestyle.
The new house at 58 Hakanoa St - owned by Daniel Birt and Justine Muxlow - was granted consent even though it infringes the height to boundary rule, the front yard set-back rule and covers 46 per cent of the site when the maximum allowable is 35 per cent.
Ms Coney said Auckland could not continue with current rules and everything hinged on the unitary plan - a new district plan for the Super City - delivering a better heritage outcome.
Mayor Len Brown, who has promised to do more to protect heritage, was reluctant to be drawn into the Hakanoa St case yesterday and say whether council planners were in step with the community will to protect character suburbs.
"As part of putting together the upcoming unitary plan, and in recognising previous heritage issues and community concerns, the council is working to give greater protection to heritage and historic character buildings," Mr Brown said.