Monday, April 04, 2016

How Awful must the MUL be to "Work"?

To achieve its exurban goals the Auckland Council needed to convince people to want to build in exurbs - something that people generally were opposed to do.  This required an increase in land cost of more than $350,000 above normal in Auckland City.  Within the context of the Auckland plan, allocating 65% of new building (205,000 homes before 2040) within existing city, means adding a total of $72billion extra unnecessary cost to building in Auckland City. 

Auckland Council has imposed a $72billion barrier against urbanisation. 

Monday, March 28, 2016

Maximising Urban Limitation

Auckland is a city.  Auckland has a centre, inner suburbs, outer suburbs (which contain the peripheral and hubs of Manukau, Waitakere and Takapuna) and eventually an extremity of its suburban development.  This extremity of its suburban development is called the Metro Urban Limit (MUL).  Outside of the MUL are some low density Auckland exurb towns.

Auckland was a growing city expanding upwards more and outwards less. Then we merged the governance of Auckland and all its surrounding areas to form a Super City.  Elections were held - Len Brown became mayor, along with Penny Hulse as deputy mayor.  After the merger the whole of Australasia entered a construction boom with a multitude of apartments being built everywhere - except Auckland.

Len Brown and Penny Hulse killed development in Auckland by doing one simple thing - constricting expansion of the city way below that required for growth.  Implementing this Auckland Plan they restrict the greenfield expansion of Auckland City to less than 10%, whilst expanding the surrounding exurb towns by adding 80% - 120% greenfield to each of those areas.

The natural rate of expansion Auckland had been 25 - 35% greenfield and 65 - 75% intensification for about 25 years prior to 2010.  The Auckland Plan states that the council wanted this to continue, but suddenly cuts off the 30% land supply required to sustain the growth, reducing it to 9%.  The plan takes that 21% greenfield development reduction land of Auckland City and spreads it across the Auckland exurbs.

The Auckland City Council treats the city and the exurbs as one continuous entity.  Which is a very weird position to take. 

The Auckland Plan states that it expects the city to develop 70% intensively and 30% greenfield.  The Auckland Plan then restricts greenfield Auckland City land expansion to 9%, directing most greenfield to exurbs and states that it expects that the 70% intensification will continue.    This means the Auckland Plan calls for 91% of development in Auckland City to be intensification.

The historical natural market has intensification 70% to greenfield (largely single dwelling) 30%.  The regulations entrench a 91% supply intensification and a 9% supply greenfield.  The result is obvious - there is anticipated over supply of intensification and a shortage of low intensity greenfield.

This has two easily observable effects:
- Prices of single dwelling will increase.   As single dwelling is highly land inefficient, but highly valued - land prices will rise.
- Prices of apartments will be suppressed on expectations of over demand.  As the cost of land increases, but price remains suppressed, the rate of apartment construction becomes very slow. 

Saturday, March 19, 2016

Lenny & Penny said the City is Sprawling

In the decade prior to 2008 Auckland added 20,000 plus apartments to its central areas, the start of a phase of intensification that looked set to continue.  Auckland had a growing amount of intensification and was reducing the proportion of outward expansive growth to the lowest ratio seen in a century.

Yet in the decade after 2008 we are due to have a mere 5000 additional apartments built in our central city.  Overall growth has slowed to a crawl, but is dominated by single dwelling sprawl.  We are predicting a housing shortfall lasting towards the middle of the century. 

This is all the result of a truly awful policy platform of the Council led by Len Brown and Penny Hulse.  The platform has destroyed intensification and created never before seen sprawl. We are now sprawling our development outwards in Warkworth, Orewa, Kumeu, Pukekohe and Pokeno.

Ironically, Lenny Penny got elected on the zeitgeist of the time - when intensification was booming and sprawl was slowing - they promised to intensify Auckland faster and slow sprawl to nothing.  Then they implemented policies that have stopped intensification dead and sprawled over far horizons .

Lenny Penny said the city was sprawling, it wasn't. 

Sunday, March 13, 2016

Len Years For Auckland

From 2011 to 2016 has been the largest ever residential construction boom in Australasia and CanadaEverywhere that is growing is reaching record highs or surpassing those and moving ahead by 20 - 40% higher peaks.  Low interest rates and capital inflow from China have been used to construct buildings and kick-start economies

Except in Auckland - where we are merely approaching our previous highs of 2005. 

Why are we so bad?  

Monday, October 21, 2013

The Missing Stair Part 3 (unauthorised): A Requiem of Len

Whaleoil broke the story of the unfaithful Len Brown, touching off a political left-right slug fest.  In the crossfire an idea has died.  The idea that inequity should not be supported in relationships, as espoused by Emma Hart hardly made it a month. 

Emma Hart at Public Address wrote two Missing Stair posts: The Necessary Bastard and The Creeper and the Excuser. Go read them if you want, I liked ideas put forward. 

Mayor Len

Auckland's Mayor Len Brown is a highly successful creeper. He has a excusers all over the place. Len Brown will get away with it, probably he has got away with it before. People like him almost always get a free pass. 

What is a Creeper?

Creepers are on the lookout for someone vulnerable. They can use a number of approaches, but what they want is someone who will not say no.  Ideally they want someone who can be pressured into saying yes, repeatedly. 

The description of a creeper Emma provides details a promiscuous form of creeper, the mass mail out approach where as high as number as possible are randomly approached.
What about somewhere short of that? What about the Creepers? The ones who have a habit of touching people who don’t want to be touched? The hand on the leg, the accidental brushes, the sexual remarks that make people really uncomfortable? Would you do something about that?

That is the route of the lazy, unintelligent creeper and is not the best approach. Creepers are just one person so mass marketing is hard to carry off.  Creepers are  better served to find someone they know is vulnerable and exploit that vulnerability.  Doing a bit of research beforehand and then repeatedly targeting the same individual can induce impetus. 

What is an Excuser?
Emma provides descriptions of societal perceptions that play into the hands of creepers, implying that society is passively biases towards the creeper. 

One of the reasons women tend not to talk about this stuff is the tendency for people to minimise it. It was a joke. You misread the situation. You’re over-reacting.
I think Emma is incorrect here.  I think that society deserves more credit and is basically non-biased on the subject. 

An Excuser is someone who actively aids the creeper and will exploit vulnerabilities in the target to minimise the accusations.  Excusers will do so out of a feeling of obligation to the well being creeper or for personal gain. 

How to pattern yourself as a highly successful creeper?

Be powerful, useful to as many people as possible.  Excusers will be ready at a moments notice. 

Find a vulnerable person who you would like to utilise for your pleasure.  Approach them obliquely in a complimentary manner.  Demonstrate your power, that you can be useful to them or that you can break them.  Isolate your target away from potential support networks.  Obtain consent.  Utilise for your pleasure.  When they break your control or you get bored with them, leave them. After leaving, remind them of your power and caution them of the need to remain quiet. 


Saturday, February 11, 2012

Auckland City Planning

Auckland City is a lock for the centre left for the next 5 years, at least. The left has a strong organisation in South Auckland and West Auckland. The Greens are disproportionally popular with youth and in the suburbs. And the meta is good, the population is bound to be turning agianst the John Key Nayional government and will look to protest vote more in the next round of local body elections.

What the council should be doing is using this opportunity to make some real gains for left-wing voters. Make rents more affordable by building some more council rental accomodation. Lower land costs by moving land from lifestyle block to residential zoning. Send a clear message to the government about supporting public workers by backing the unions in the ports dispute.

So why is the Auckland Council jumping so far to the right? It has decided that its primary project focus is a $billions rail tunnel to support the property values of the CBD landlords - the richest of the rich. Restrict land borders to protect the property values of middle class suburbia - core strength National Party supporters. Back the ports company as it privitises the port operations.

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Dear Mark Steyn

Dear Mark Steyn,

Climate change can be solved by small government. This may shock you, but the best solution to anything is seldom a bigger more expensive government based on over-arching socialism. Climate change should be an opportunity for small government blowhards to demonstrate the need for a small government solution.

The solution to climate change is to have every country independently operate a consumer marketplace where a high price of AGW gases is charged to private consumption. There will be no capping, trading, emissions limits, production controls, bans or restrictions - there will be no UN involvement. There will be no big government, because government retards and distorts market incentives by its existence. Our governments will exist solely to provide security and to enforce the consumer taxation on the AGW gas footprint. The smaller the government is the better the planet will be.

As the Greens have been saying for years - if the planet is to survive climate change we must make sacrifices and the best sacrifice is to relinquish our socialist spending.

Regards u-c