Stop Government intensifying every suburb in our cities before it's too late.

Comments

#802

The impact of the new housing regulations are having and will continue to have an adverse impact on the citizens of the community. Consent is being handed out without thought about the character of existing suburbs, the appearance and effect of building constructed on the people living in the area and the impact on existing housing.
By allowing large areas of in fill, high density housing in a non controlled manner impacts the environment both mentally and socially now and in the future.
Lastly the infrastructure that is needed to support high density housing is not available and will create further issues with flooding, sewerage leaking into waterways.

Kay Walker (Auckland, 2022-09-12)

#806

I fully agree that is totally wrong and has affected our human rights at many levels!

Chris Schultz (Auckland, 2022-09-12)

#807

I'm signing this petition because I am totally in disagreement with the Act

Alun Hughes (Waikanae, 2022-09-13)

#808

Want to protect the lovely suburbs / cities we have . Don't want 3 storey dwellings too close to neighbours boundary, These dwellings spoil the look of the suburbs.

Caroline Parker (Auckland, 2022-09-13)

#811

I disagree with 3 story buildings being built 1m from a boundary wall, blocking out the light and reducing the value of ones property.

Nicole Matthews (Auckland, 2022-09-14)

#812

Local government planning control for the people by the people has been incorrectly usurped by Central Government and their bureaucrats, to the detriment of local community rights of due process.

Ewan Cleave (Auckland, 2022-09-14)

#817

I'm signing this because it is a total abuse of process.

Bruce Ross (Castor Bay, Auckland , 2022-09-14)

#818

I have these horrible houses in my street and more are coming. We now have hardly any street parking and these houses are already deteriorating rapidly

Emilija Nikolic (Auckland, 2022-09-14)

#822

I'm signing because my partner made me.

Ian richardson (Auckland, 2022-09-15)

#826

I am opposed the 12 m height.
The old 8m height was workable.
Gross impact on neighbouring property - privacy and sunlight .

Colin Cornelius (Auckland, 2022-09-15)

#827

This is not theNZ I grew up in and I do not want my grand children to have to live in high density apartments.
People need a section space n privacy

Eve Robertson (Auckland , 2022-09-15)

#829

Your sun is being stolen, greed has taken over...

John Smallfield (Auckland, 2022-09-15)

#830

The Auckland Unitary Plan already adequately caters for intensification where it makes sense to do so. A random intensification process as permitted by this ill-considered legislation takes no account of voters historical rights to live in areas that have consistent intensification rules. And it disingenuous to argue that such developments next door will not have a material, detrimental impact on property amenity. Every person should have protections of zoning laws to ensure amenity is reasonably retained.

Andrew Bartlett (Auckland, 2022-09-15)

#831

Repeal law that allows;
3 story buildings [3 dwellings]
12 metres high to be built just 1metre off boundary

JEFFERY & SANDY TODD (Auckland, 2022-09-16)

#838

This legislation is misconceived, incoherent and was inadequately consulted on. It will render our cities unliveable given inadequate infrastructure and virtually non-exist planning controls.

Saul Derber (Auckland, 2022-09-16)

#839

I am opposed to the Plan Change because there has been no EIA work done for the people to understand the potential effects of the Plan Change . That you want the Plan withdrawn until this essential work is done. Also that the people are being unreasonably denied a voice over massive change to the nature and scale of residential housing in Auckland (and throughout NZ ) and that you want the right of appeal to ensure the Plan Change assessment is robust.

Keith Humphreys (Auckland, 2022-09-16)

#841

This law is not good for our communities going forward and snuck and bullied in like many others by this government.

Tony Hogg (Auckland, 2022-09-17)

#845

We have a vacant section next to us and don’t want a 12 metre building 1 from our boundry

Don Deuchar (Auckland, 2022-09-17)

#846

Loss of privacy, loss of sunlight, loss of house value

Ramin Hedayatzadeh (Auckland, 2022-09-18)

#849

I’m concerned about the reduction of sunlights causing physiological & psychological impacts

Michelle Ferguson (Auckland , 2022-09-18)

#850

Affects privacy and communities peace of living in their own homes giving the noise pollution is causes. Creates more traffic in areas that were not originally designed for higher population density causing more stress to our lives. Affects the natural environment in our surroundings.

Rodolfo De la garza w (Auckland, 2022-09-18)

#854

Already unnecessary housing development in all Auckland from Manukau to Rodney. Lots of ghost houses, townhouses and apartments already existing. Living things habitat and green areas are been destroyed just for Governement and Propert Developers poorly planning development with the aim to get more money instead of making Auckland better quality living city. There is significant increase of Unsafe suburbs due to higher population.

Lilia de la Garza (Auckland, 2022-09-18)

#855

Intensification will overburden infrastructure, reduce sunlight, peace and privacy and destroy the character of historic suburbs.

Susan Davis (Auckland , 2022-09-18)

#859

THIS WILL COMPLETELY CHANGE THE CHARACTER AND DESIRABILITY OF WHOLE AREAS OF THE CITY AND RUIN THEIR ATTRACTION.

COUNCIL SHOULD LOOK AT FURTHER SATELLITE AREAS SUCH AS THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALBANY - HOUSING AND LIGHT COMMERCIAL INDUSTRY IN SAME AREA.

Cyril Baker (Auckland, 2022-09-19)

#862

This is completely insane! and apparently, it has been amended to 19 meters high and a meter from the boundary!!
We are not quite over the blunder with the leaky buildings Auckland City Council approved even though it had happened in Canada ten years earlier.

Ashleigh Kearsley (Auckland, 2022-09-19)

#863

The clear is a clear over reach by central Government, political grandstanding to "fix" the housing crisis. There is clearly a lack of checks and balances. Also, shame of National for their supprt.

David Walker (Glendowie, Auckland, 2022-09-19)

#868

Severe impact on neighbours sunlight, privacy & peace along with desecrating the beautiful heritage homes that make Auckland a beautiful place.
Plus degreen what green spaces are still here along with all the trees in current home gardens and push the current infrastructure beyond capacity at every level while turning Auckland into chaos with no parking, no home gardens, no sunlight, nowhere for children to play, no character. The once fabulous city centre with beautiful Victorian buildings have already been consigned to the junk heap and tall buildings jamming people in like rats in a cage is now the future that the council is allowing to happen. Shame on them.

Karn McIntosh (Auckland, 2022-09-20)

#870

There is no need for this change, we do not have the infrastructure in place to support it and I do not want to live in a shantytown!

Rebecca Jameson (Auckland, 2022-09-20)

#872

I agree with all that you say in the pamphlet

Jenny Joyce (Auckland, 2022-09-20)

#875

They are destroying the heritage of Auckland & beautiful houses that will never be built again and with no real thought or concern about the environmental effects and lack of infrastructure which will cause ongoing issues.

Wendy Kay (Auckland , 2022-09-20)

#878

This law will destroy the spaces we love to live in. Our quality of life and our local communities depend on useful space around our houses to allow light, privacy and peace. Our health will suffer.
This law will simply hasten the slums of the future in our cities and suburbs.

PAULINE RUNDLE (Castor Bay, 2022-09-21)

#879

Lack of consultation.
The lasting social impact on such poor decisions around loss of privacy, sunlight and increased anxiety.
Long term affect on infrastructure.

Greg Thomson (Auckland, 2022-09-22)

#885

My residential area is very beautiful and quiet with one single floor houses built by Universal Company over 20 years ago. We love our community. But now the council give permission to build a 5 houses on 600 square meter site.They are ugly and destroy our whole living style not to mention they will bring parking issues and safety issues. We have signed petition against this construction But Auckland council chose to ignore what the residents really concern about. This Act will ruin our community we are proud of.

Celine Zhan (Auckland, 2022-09-23)

#886

I don't want to see Auckland become a high rise city and suburb as many countries overseas are. People need to have a garden and area for their kids and pets to explore privately. If we lose connection with nature our society will become self-obsessed and ultimately depressed.

Julie Robertson (Auckland, 2022-09-23)

#889

I am against 3 storey buildings built 1 metre from a neighbours boundary due to the lack of sunlight that will result. Also streets will become car parks for resident's cars making navigating streets a danger to all road users and pedestrians. A property with sunlight will become a luxury.

Marian Jones (Auckland, 2022-09-23)

#890

I completely disagree with this proposal. Quality of life and neighbourhoods will be severely negatively impacted.
The current unitary plan is fine if enacted to its potential. This change would be catastrophic for communities and lifestyles as we know them today.

Matthew Crumpton (Auckland, 2022-09-23)

#892

I totally disagree with the changes to the RMA in ALL suburbs in Auckland and other cities around the country.

This mandate is unconscious and does not allow for special heritage areas and properties. After all, why do people like to visit San Francisco? If developers are allowed to bulldoze or remove heritage villas etc from streets where these buildings predominate, you might as well kiss goodbye to any reason people might want to visit or live in New Zealand! We have little enough character as it is, so don't let this Government destroy what is left of it.

Priscilla Taylor (Auckland, 2022-09-24)

#898

I totally agree. These idiots (who are paid and work for us) need to be bought to account and stopped.

Bob Davidson (Auckland, 2022-09-25)

#903

I have house next me which has huge section where this new law could potentially effect me if a developer was to purchase the property.

Ian Cutress (Auckland, 2022-09-25)

#908

I agree with the flow-on effects of intensification cited by "Citizens" group, eg loss of privacy and special character housing, plus the consequent problems of enjoying intangible but real benefits of peace and privacy in one's own home ... increasingly eroded.

Ellen Carruthers (Auckland , 2022-09-26)

#909

An absolutely stupid, ill-conceived idea. It is unbelievable that supposably rational people could come up with such a scheme. Not only has it the potential to severely impact the lifestyle of any existing property owner having one of these built next door, it will also have a knock on effect of devaluing their property. What clown came up with this?

Michael Cleland (Auckland, 2022-09-26)

#912

Severe impacts on neighbours’ sunlight, privacy and peace.
Lack of freedom of choice for average-income people as to how they live
a major acceleration of the de-greening of our neighbourhoods, as what remaining green spaces in city sections disappear under houses, tarmac and decks, with the consequent negative environmental impact of higher summer and lower winter temperatures
potential building of 12-metre-high, low-quality, featureless, dormitory-type structures metre off neighbourhood boundaries increased
anxiety levels from the constant threat of this randomly occurring next door to your home
local infrastructure stretched beyond capacity; increased road congestion. Excessive rate hikes to cater for reactive/inefficient infrastructure spending.
no on-site parking is required, and little available street parking
, a significant reduction in the value of one’s home; as soon as it is known these structures are to be built next door.

Sharon Lightfoot (Auckland, 2022-09-27)

#913

To have the housing law repealed. The housing act 2021 allows ugly 'match box' houses build randomly anywhere and as close as 1m off neighbor's boundary which is outrageous. I have been voting for Labors for years but I am really disappointed with our current government for this, and a number of other reasons.

Erekle Sesiashvili (AUCKLAND, 2022-09-27)

#916

I value and appreciate space and privacy.
Also, am really concerned about a government style that autocratically make decisions about the character and nature of our neighbourhoods without any consultation, consideration or respect for people's choices and rights.

Jeanne le Roux (North Shore City, 2022-09-27)

#919

I believe the current intensified housing is ruining our city, and also the infrastructure is not capable of this - eg: roads, water & sewer mains which cannot withhold a further barrage.

Selina Parsons (Auckland, 2022-09-27)

#921

The high rise buildings close to my house are cutting off sunlight, increasing congestion, cutting off my views and reducing the quality of my life.

George Varghese (Auckland, 2022-09-29)

#923

A one size solution takes no account of aspect, topography and section size and shape. It disregards privacy, access to sun (for healthy house, garden and occupants) and physical and psychological effects of taller buildings. It is disrespectful and inconsiderate.
Historically, suburbs were developed to enable inner city residents living in crowded conditions to move to areas with healthier conditions but many sections were subsequently subdivided for profit reducing the liveability.
Building generous low rise multi-generational housing for families would be better than apartments and townhouses enabling generations/relatives to have their own accommodation yet be close to each other for daily assistance. This would also reduce some car journeys as people could walk across the section for visits.

Karen Thomas (Wellington, 2022-09-30)

#926

I object to government overriding council’s authority.

Murray Irwin (Cambridge, 2022-10-01)

#927

I too am appalled at the blanket nature of this legislation and believe it is a fast track to ruin our beautiful city. The Auckland City Council went through a consultative process over several years to come up with the unitary plan - it is undemocratic of the Labour government to ride rough-shod over this.

Philippa Newlove (Auckland, 2022-10-01)

#931

I agree with everything

Kristene Milich (Auckland , 2022-10-02)

#933

Government's abuse of power by not consulting the people and not allowing a referendum.

David Arvidson (Auckland, 2022-10-03)

#937

I’m am signing in support of this petition as this socialist Government have not been constitutional in the casting and implementation of this legislation, to allow this form of high density housing. Totally undemocratic. We don’t want our suburbs suffocated by this reckless brain storm that current infrastructure cannot support. We don’t want our streets cluttered with cars parked on the road from the intensity of the occupiers. Nor our sun blocked out, having to spend the afternoon in the shadow cast by these abominable ugly looking eyesore buildings. We don’t wont our suburbs to turn into slums! This labour government need to be accountable and must be stopped immediately.

Brent Mitchell (Auckland, 2022-10-04)

#939

I’m against intensification

Samuel Welsh (Devonport, 2022-10-04)

#942

There is no consideration to privacy and sunlight to neighbors.

Jen Sainsbury (Auckland, 2022-10-05)

#943

I would hate to live in a match box suburb. NZ boundaries should not be taken from our current state now or in the future.

Astreena Hanisi (Auckland, 2022-10-05)

#944

We as homeowners had no say in this law which effects us all directly.

Hylton Pause (Auckland , 2022-10-05)

#945

The noise factor is going to go up 100 fold with the over thousand new occupants in the area, which will increase peoples anxiety in what was once a very quiet area, so no peace and quiet at all. The value of my home will go down significantly as building work and it’s constant noise is going on just over my hedge.
The loss of privacy is going to be significant as no fence or hedge is high enough to screen out the upper levels of these 3 story prison cell looking constructions that are being put up …. So ugly as well as being so obvious that they’re council housing.

Debs Cassidy (Auckland, 2022-10-05)

#946

The character of whole neighbourhoods are being changed by housing intensification. Character bungalows and villas are being demolished and replaced with 3-4 multi-storey housing units, most of which have no character or interest about them. Too many people in single dwelling homes are losing space, light and community to these townhouse type buildings. It’s wrong.

Erin Reeves-McMillan (Auckland , 2022-10-05)

#947

Reprehensible skulduggery to destroy civilised communities by promoting misery and social distress through the creation of ghettos through completely irrational and ill-conceived legislation.

Brooke Mackley (Auckland, 2022-10-06)

#949

I thinks that being able to build 3 stories 1 m from a boundary will do great damage to our suburbs

Nathan Collis (New Lynn, 2022-10-07)

#950

I want to see the suburbs we chose to live and work in remain the characterful and liveable places they are. If I want to live in multistory dwellings I can move overseas or choose to live in the central cities. If neighbors redevelop and build up around me I will leave Auckland, as many others will choose to do as well. This will negate the need for more housing and further probe the futility of central govt and council planning without a mandate from tax and rate payers

Robert Dowling (Auckland, 2022-10-08)

#952

Ugly housing with no real outdoor areas, less trees and no consideration of neighbouring property owners. I could go on.

Joanna Mayn (Auckland , 2022-10-08)

#954

We need to preserve our neighbourhoods

Hannah Bowden (Auckland , 2022-10-09)

#957

I am also strongly against what is happening in our suburbs. We are losing our privacy, space, accessibility to nature, freedom, etc. It's not the right way for our communities to live and thrive being so tightly packed and condensed. Our mental health is also being put in jeopardy as a result.

malone rogers (Auckland, 2022-10-10)

#961

This legislation is the single most destructive change to the quality of a lot of our suburbs. It will lower hugely neighbourhood amenity values and create slums

Paul Travers (Auckland, 2022-10-17)

#962

Intensification will destroy this city. There is no capacity for more people using the current infrastructure. Government should be promoting development if other towns in NZ to share the load and the business development opportunities.

Katie Wilson (Auckland, 2022-10-18)

#963

I believe this 'one rule fits all' rule will reduce the variety of suburb, leading to boring city environments.

Michael Reynolds (Auckland , 2022-10-20)

#964

I agree with all the 'disturbing negatives' listed

Susan Hamp (Auckland, 2022-10-23)

#965

Stanley St is not zoned for motels and there are more then enough motels around but not enough actual accomodation. Or is this a ploy to put more homeless into motels so the government can give the motliers can continue to charge huge rents !!! Let’s be open and honest about this.

Jo Armstrong (Hamilton , 2022-10-24)

#966

This is an appallingly bad piece of legislation!

Mark Squires (Tewantin, 2022-10-25)

#967

A lot of these developments will result in slums. I am also concerned about the amount of trees we are losing within the Auckland region. Although not impacted myself, I am concerned that 12 metre buildings can be built a metre from the boundary. This is an invasion of privacy and can result in a loss of sun. Who are the winners here? The developers who make millions, and the government who say under their watch x amount of homes have been built. Everyone else is a loser. Not even the buyers are the winners, paying for cramped overpriced apartments.

Karen Challinor (auckland, 2022-11-01)

#974

I'm signing this petition because
Urban Development Act 2020 NZ with no consideration on the affected neighbor's needs and no consideration of the adverse impact it could have on the neighbors

Quin Tang (Christchurch , 2022-12-12)

#976

For the purpose of citizens quality of life.

Bruce Telford (Christchurch, 2022-12-12)

#978

Everyone needs trees & a green private space to call their own. Being separated from the Natural world causes mental instability. Everyone needs a garden . There is also the issue of food security.Growing your own is good for us & our children.

Evie Walker (Christchurch, 2023-01-08)

#979

The RMA is abdication of town planning. I am so saddened by the loss of character areas and green areas. There is no planning for public amenties and infrastructure. On an individual basis the threat and then reality of a sudden loss of privacy, views and light when a neigbouring section is developed is incredibky stressful. For a law change with so much potential to affect our lives it slipped in with no public debate.

Sati Sembhi (Auckland, 2023-01-09)

#981

As we are seeing with the severe flooding in our country recently, housing intensification is contributing to this devastation by occupying land that would normally absorb excess water! Also our antiquated infrastructure has not kept up with this housing intensification as we have recently seen all too clearly. Also many trees have been ans continue to be cleared for intensive housing developments to our detriment and that of wildlife too, as these trees would help to hold up land and prevent slips. Housing intensification is a disaster and many developments have been built on land that should not have been approved for building! Serious questions need to be addressed about housing intensification and approvals for such building in particular with regard to climate change and building in the future!!!

Suzie Rogers (Auckland, 2023-02-17)

#984

I'm signing because of the damage the caused by the intensification of housing in Auckland on the already woefully undersized supporting infrastructure such as waste water is not being addressed and as we can observe from the recent deluge, is a disaster to the Auckland region.

John Askew (Long bay, 2023-03-19)

#985

NZ ers do not buy into UN agenda.
We can see you are engineering all our little places villages to be destroyed.
And making everyone move into the cities. Where we can then be locked down in 15min cities.We don't want it.
Leave us be.

Mary Shepherd (Hamilton, 2023-03-21)

#987

this is the start of 15min cities and that cannot happen

tandi michelle (New Zealand , 2023-04-04)

#988

What a uneducated law to ever make

Paul Mundt (New Plymouth, 2023-04-09)

#991

I want to the best of our urban and sub-urban environment protected to be enjoyed by presnt and future generations.

Jonathan Wilson (Porirua, 2023-04-23)

#992

This legislation is not fit for purpose. This is a serious matter affecting People's wellbeing, health, safety, happiness and ability to thrive. The impacts of this legislation on the lives of communities are so serious and far reaching that there should have been well advertised and accessible prior consultation with the people in a timely manner. This nation's people have a right to exercise consent to legislative changes proposed by the government - a body of public servants voted in to serve the population.
Those who serve in our government have access to the appropriate intelligent, educated, skilled professionals for consultation and planning the Nation's wellbeing for its future. Thus there is no reason for clumsy inappropriate legislation which harms the people.

Hilary Lovelace (Auckland, 2023-04-30)

#995

I live in Gisborne but we can see that this is happening here too.

Government is turned some suburbs into American style projects… build and forget!!!

It must stop

Harata Gibson (Gisborne, 2023-06-05)

#996

Town planers do not represent the will of the people and often destroy communities with ill thought out changes.
Building on unsuitable land is a prime example.
Infrastructure cannot cope with rain, sewage and rubbish now and intensification will aggravate these problems.

Barry Taylor (Takapuna, 2023-06-09)

#999

I agree and support this petition to stop the intensification of our communities.

Nici Curtis (Kerikeri, 2023-06-30)



Paid advertising

We will advertise this petition to 3000 people.

Learn more...