Fighting to keep a lid on urban pressure cooker

Auckland Regional Council chairman Mike Lee says the city's growth pains are a national problem. Picture / Dean Purcell

Auckland's runaway growth is creating challenges for the planners who set rules for the city's development. In the final of a five-part series, environment reporter Anne Beston puts the questions to the new man in charge - Mike Lee, chairman of the Auckland Regional Council.

At present growth rates, Auckland is going to have to find room for an extra 49 people every day for the next 50 years. How are we going to do it?

We need a multi-faceted approach, not one just focused on providing opportunities for urban sprawl. We need the right infrastructure - trains and drains, schools and parks - to encourage quality development in areas around existing town centres and transport systems.

We also have to convince people that New Zealand is a relatively large and beautiful country and the continuing disproportionate development of Auckland for the next 50 years is definitely not in the interest of Aucklanders nor indeed for the rest of New Zealand.

Meanwhile, we need higher standards to ensure development is of a better quality. All agencies involved need to be working to a common plan.

Where are the areas Auckland should grow and where should it come to a standstill?

We can already see the areas where growth is most applicable - places such as Albany, Henderson, New Lynn and Otahuhu, which are all close to key transport corridors.

There are some areas which should never be urbanised - regionally significant areas such as the Waitakere Ranges and their foothills, the Hunua Ranges, parts of Waiheke, and the coastal areas to the north of the region. These places make Auckland distinctive and an attractive place to live. These need to be protected for us all to enjoy now and in the future.

Aucklanders are fed up with ugly housing developments that seemingly appear overnight, and appear to be uneasy about Auckland's growth and development. Is the ARC doing enough to allay their concerns?

The simple answer is we can and must do better. And it's not just the ARC which is responsible, but all the councils in the region, private developers and the Government. These unfortunate developments, including the leaky buildings problem, are in many ways the legacy of the hands-off approach that was the prevalent ideology in the late '80s and '90s.

The ARC is not at all complacent about this - quite the opposite. We have lobbied hard to get a review of the Unit Titles Act, which governs the management of multi-unit developments. A year ago the Government agreed to review this outdated legislation, and they have just released a discussion document, so there is some progress here.

The ARC is also working hard on getting changes to the Building Act to prevent any further leaky building-type problems.

We have also recently signalled that we will become a signatory to the New Zealand Urban Design Protocol, which aims to encourage a higher standard of design.

We are also reviewing the Regional Policy Statement, which will include objectives and policies relating to quality urban design.

We know that urban growth and development are priority issues for the Auckland region and that it's not just about fitting everyone in. It's also about ensuring that we have a quality urban environment to live in.

Five years ago the ARC and other Auckland councils signed up to a Regional Growth Strategy, designed to control this development. You have criticised the strategy in the past. What do you think is right and wrong with it?

Auckland needs a plan for controlling urban sprawl otherwise the region will end up being one urban mass spreading from Warkworth to Pukekohe, or even beyond.

While the Regional Growth Strategy is a start, it was the outcome of a compromise between the city councils, developers and the ARC. It focuses too much on providing opportunities for sprawl and doesn't do enough to enable intensification around our transport system. It also doesn't do enough to ensure that quality developments occur.

I would like to see a National Growth Strategy, perhaps as the outcome of a National Policy Statement under the Resource Management Act, to take some of the pressure off the Auckland region. A national strategy would also recognise that Auckland's growth has implications for the rest of New Zealand.

Why should the Government have to solve an Auckland problem?

Auckland is home to one-third of New Zealand's population. It is responsible for one-third of the economy. It is by far New Zealand's largest region, and it's growing at an average rate of 49 people per day. If we don't start making changes now, we are on track to run out of room for new houses within 15 years. Meanwhile some parts of New Zealand are declining in population. Therefore this is very much a New Zealand problem.

The Government is to be congratulated in helping us address the transport issues facing the region and now it's time for us to work together to better manage growth pressures.

What should the ARC be doing better to control growth?

Having a decent, integrated public transport system is one of the keys to managing sprawl. If we have a really good public transport system that gets people where they want to go in a reliable and timely manner, this will make development around the transport network more attractive and take the pressure off growth at the edges of the urban area.

Public transport is the key. I acknowledge we still have a long way to go, but the ARC has made massive improvements over recent years, and we are committed to improvements in the future.

The Metropolitan Urban Limit (MUL) is supposed to be a ring round the city's growth but in the past five years, no council application for it to be pushed outwards has been turned down. Doesn't that make the MUL meaningless?

To say the MUL is meaningless is wrong. It is a way of defining areas deemed suitable for urban development. The ARC actually did defend the MUL in the Okura area some years ago but it had to fight it through the courts.

However, there have been changes to where the MUL line is drawn since the growth strategy was adopted in 1999. Our region is growing very fast, and we have to be able to adjust strategies.

But as the Herald articles on urban sprawl reveal, we are running out of space and are approaching the time for tough decisions.