Readers predict ghettos, slums

Readers have strongly opposed Auckland City Council plans to allow 10 times as many people to live in selected suburbs. The higher density housing proposals, revealed yesterday, are intended to fit an extra 141,800 people into the city by 2021. We asked for your responses - this is an edited selection

High-density targets - The 19 suburbs identified for more high-density housing are the central business district, Avondale, Stoddard Rd, Mt Albert, Sandringham, Balmoral/Dominion Rd, Newmarket, Pt Chevalier, Surrey Cres/Grey Lynn, Mt Roskill, Onehunga, Royal Oak, Remuera, Ellerslie, Mt Wellington/Sylvia Park, Panmure, Glen Innes, Otahuhu, Mt Wellington quarry.

* * *

In the past six years I have lived in the dense areas of Auckland - Mount St (just off Wakefield St in the inner city), in the "leaky house complexes" of Eden Terrace and in the eastern suburbs.

With an introduction to the dense living styles of Mount St and Eden Terrace, where the walking space of the footpath is squeezed hard up against a parked car, and the vertical wall of a property developer's retirement fund, I was horrified to hear my friends from Hong Kong talking of developments 25 storeys high housing 500 to 600 people a building, with land so scarce that they built gardens for the residents on the fifth and sixth storeys of the apartment.

So I was very surprised to find some of these 25-storey developments very pleasant to live in. The high-rises were placed back from the road and footpath, so I didn't feel crowded.

Swimming pools, basketball courts and parks, schools and shops had been built within five minutes' walk of all in the development. There was obviously no need for a car in this place. The air quality was surprisingly good and the neighbourhood quiet.

Back in Eden Terrace, I don't see any basketball courts or parks within the housing development, just concrete from wall to wall and where the developer maximises profit by selling more lots. It makes me wonder, where will the children play?

It is obvious that the Government needs to keep one step ahead of developers, because without Government regulation they won't put in a bit of grass between the footpath and their three, five or 25-storey high wall - they'll put it right up against the footpath and sell an extra 6 x 25 rooms.

The biggest problem with what is going on in Auckland at the moment is that those walls stay there for a very long time.

Take the Auckland City planners to look at a few success, and failure, stories around the world, and let them walk the street and feel the difference.

Then bring them back to walk along Mount St and let them decide whether they're creating success or failure stories in Auckland. - Nathan Shaw.

* * *

I'm not going to beat about the bush. I think the plans are awful.

Just take a drive around Auckland's suburbs and see the disgusting housing developments blotting the landscape like a plague. Most look cheap and tacky and there's obviously no thought given to longevity.

The new development of weather-clad houses along Pooks Rd, Ranui, is a prime example - the clad is already looking awful. These slums are appearing on every spare inch of land.

The only people to benefit are the greedy developers and the respective councils who are creaming in the rates charges many times over per piece of land. I, a proud Aucklander, am fast becoming disillusioned and alienated from my own city. - Tim Wheat.

* * *

I live in Toronto and am moving back to NZ because of the very problems Auckland has a chance to avoid.

Revitalise north of Auckland and spread the population around, otherwise the urban blight will be compounded and ghettos will arise due to the nature of immigration policies.

Over 40 years I have seen this occur in London and Toronto.

Enlighten your politicians ... New Zealand's distance from the Northern Hemisphere's crowded cities doesn't make it impervious to this "cancer". - Brian Pearcy.

* * *

It's simply another crazy idea by people who should not be in charge.

The solution to the problem is not to increase the density of housing. By trying to jam so many people in they're just going to worsen the traffic situation and increase the tension between different elements of the population.

The proper solution would be to encourage growth on the outskirts of Auckland, to distribute the CBD and major centres around the city.

By providing high bandwidth and connectivity in a centralised technology park beyond the core fringe of suburbs, they [city planners] can encourage IT firms to move outside the CBD and into the fringes. People would not have to cross the bridge or spend hours on the motorway.

To pack 141,000 extra people into the Auckland isthmus without fast-tracking new motorways and public transport projects would lead to total chaos. The council would need vast sums for these projects ... Think multiples of $10 billion. - Bruce Crossan.

* * *

I come from England where they have high-density housing areas. It's the worst possible thing to do.

People need space. Being crammed into small areas and having virtually no personal space can cause friction with neighbours and other problems.

New Zealand is a beautiful country, but unfortunately doesn't seem to learn from the mistakes that Britain has made. It appears to be going down exactly the same path.

I hope Aucklanders stand up and protest because, once close development starts to happen as a matter of course, you won't be able to change it. - Jill Brown, Wellington.

* * *

Anyone can see that all the world's poverty and crime are basically linked to intensive housing developments.

High-rise flats and apartment blocks are being pulled down in the United Kingdom where, as a youth worker, I saw first-hand how badly such living affects communities.

I read newspaper reports saying housing is a major cause of disease and crime in Auckland and then that the city council wants to perpetrate this.

Standards will not be maintained or even achieved by property developers, who, through such issues as "leaky houses", show time and time again that money is their motivation. - Andy Woodhouse.

* * *

Just because one might live one or two floors off the ground does not imply poverty or anti-social attitudes.

A higher population density will allow public transport to develop successfully and reduce pressure on roading infrastructure - improving rather than ruining our city, as claimed by those who seem to think endless quarter-acre sections are the only way to protect the environment. - John Tizard.

* * *

Auckland's leaders are completely out of touch with the general public over future growth in the city.

The desirability of accommodating 141,000 extra people in the city and the increasing strain this will put on essential services have never been discussed with the community.

I have noticed a distinct drop in the quality of life here as more and more people from other parts of the country and overseas have moved here, increasing population densities. I can only assume this will get worse. - Alan Hartley.