| Submission point number/s: | S16.001 |
Click on each heading to view the submission details
-
Submitter and address for service details
Reference: 807218
Name Patrick Shannon Organisation (if applicable) Contact person/agent (if different to submitter) Postal address (address for service)
32a Eastbourne st, Caversham Dunedin 9012 Email address: patdinashannon@gmail.com Contact phone number: 4258350 -
Hearings
Do you wish to speak in support of your submission at a hearing No If others make a similar submission, would you consider presenting a joint case at a hearing No -
Trade competition
I could gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission No My submission relates to an effect that I am directly affected by and that: a. adversely affects the environment; and b. does not relate to trade competition or the effects of trade competition. -
Submission
Variation 2 change ID D1,D4,D5,D6,D7,D8,NDMD 2-15,E 5 Provision name and number, or address and map layer name My/our submission seeks the following decision from the Council: Reject the change Details F3 Reject the change which involves the extension of greenfield developments. Reasons for these views A major problem in planning has been contradictory siloed policies. The attempt to develop more space for housing through increased greenfield development is contradictory with major pending social changes such as those promoted by the national Climate Change Commission report: 1. Increasingly, urban development in A/NZ, in the face of the climate change and the coming major required changes in transport emissions, must be based on the "15 minute" city -whereby this is the limit whereby citizens can access work and services by non-private vehicles (walking, cycling, public transport) within 15 minutes. THIS IS COMING IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS AND IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT. 2. Short-term siloed responses to the housing shortage will contradict the needed changes in reducing transport emssions and must be resisted. 3. Greenfield development is almost certain to lead to the loss of productive land and local foood production which will be central to the Dunedin of the future. 4. Dunedin was fortunate is missing out on the 'scorched earth' destruction of heritage buildings in the 1980's and the retention of a single central core (CBD) and has the opportunity to solve its problems through housing intensification in the future, 5. Again, as with coming emission reductions policies, note the pending abolition and replacement of the Resoure Management Act which will mean that NIMBY-ism will no longer be a costly inhibitor on intensification of housing within a manageable city (which Dunedin still retains but will lose under greenfield development}. 5. The infrastructural costs of housing through expansion of existing capacity (undertaken along with and as part of already required maintenance) is going to be far cheaper than the provision of new and dispersed greenfield provision . In short - greenfield development is incompatible with the required carbon-neutral Dunedin of the 2030's and must be resisted as a simplistic and siloed "quick-fix" to the issue of housing shortage.
Submission documents
Submission that have been deemed to have 'Out of scope' submission points have had a pdf attached showing the Out-of-scope points highlighted.
No associated documents with this submission.