A gutsful of the infill

Property owners have been turning their backyards into money but, as Kirsten Grant reports, not everyone is happy
Stricter controls on infill housing may be too little too late for some North Shore residents.
Sandra Lane from Torbay, who believes infill housing in the area is already out of control, is thinking of selling up after 35 years.
``It's overkill with all the houses they're putting on the land. There is too much infill housing,'' says the long-term resident.
Mrs Lane's 870sq m section is one of the few in her area not subdivided with smaller houses built on the back.
``We've got quite a good backyard,'' she says. ``What will happen is all the infrastructure won't be able to handle it.''
Colin Bramfitt's property in Birkenhead is in a similar situation, being one of the few on the street not subdivided.
``I've always believed that you need a reasonable piece of garden to play with,'' he says.
Mr Bramfitt has looked into developing his quarter-acre backyard and says new controls wouldn't be too restrictive.
``Even tightening up the size, we'd still be able to put at least one house instead of cramming them in.''
The controls are part of changes to North Shore City Council's district plan. Commissioners have increased the minimum lot size from 350sq m to 400sq m and the density of apartments from one to 550sq m of land to one to 800sq m.
The council's senior environmental policy advisor Tony Reidy says the issue of infill housing should have been addressed 20-30 years ago.
``It's happened over the last 30 years. We're in the late stages now, remaining sites only make up about 10 per cent of the total lots that could be developed, like steeper sites and those with native bush.''
Mrs Lane says Oteha Valley Rd near her home is ``out of control'' with infill housing and apartments all blocked in together.
``When I first came here 35 years ago, it was all paddocks and orchards. It was why we moved here,'' she says.
``We are thinking about leaving.''