Southerly by David Haywood

Read Post

Southerly: Village People

109 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last

  • Sacha, in reply to DeepRed,

    ..and better weather

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16741 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to DeepRed,

    In NZ’s case, I wonder if it’s a lingering hangover from Wakefield’s New Zealand Company, escaping the crowded squalor as Charles Dickens wrote of.

    That's a looong hangover. I think the mythology of escape from overcrowding has persisted, though. As if the poverty of Dickens' time were a function of overcrowding alone, rather than just an uncaring society, which can create squalor no matter what the level of crowding.

    I'd say it's more this deep attachment that so many NZers feel to owning land, meaning the actual ground under it. Given my ancestors were Irish and Scots, the idea of being able to work one's plot is deeply built in, as a response to depression and famine. A society with strong agrarian roots, both Pakeha and Maori alike. Our strongest industries are still rural.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 8584 posts Report Reply

  • James Green, in reply to BenWilson,

    That's a looong hangover. I think the mythology of escape from overcrowding has persisted, though.

    I don't entirely disagree with thinking about attachment to the land, but how do you explain the strongly held (at least in district plans) attachment to entirely detached dwellings, even at the point that this frequently means a pointless an unusable strip of land between houses that is home to a fence and not much more?

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 689 posts Report Reply

  • merc, in reply to James Green,

    I blame Masport ;-)

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to James Green,

    a masochistic relationship to drafts from all sides?

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16741 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    The sad truth is that when you first cut up your farm it is cheaper to parcel in say 1500 square metre sections (you will need to get on the council to be able to do this).
    It's only later when the serfs have to live in your town to work that preferably other people build tenements and footpaths and stuff.
    Some day someone is going to do a thesis on how the west was won and where it got us.
    True story from old farmer to me...

    when I got here I grew grass, then I grew cows, then I grew houses.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to merc,

    Bob Hope's method of getting rich: Buy land on the edge of town and wait.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2608 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Hebe,

    standard landbanking behaviour that has screwed the Auckland region for decades

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16741 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to James Green,

    I don't entirely disagree with thinking about attachment to the land, but how do you explain the strongly held (at least in district plans) attachment to entirely detached dwellings, even at the point that this frequently means a pointless an unusable strip of land between houses that is home to a fence and not much more?

    I don't disagree with it either, I'm a suburbanite myself, who likes a garden and lawn. There's definitely wasted space here, though.

    Merc is onto it, probably the only real justification for the gaps is lawnmowers, and wouldn't even be needed if there were no lawns at the front. Even when they are needed, they're not needed on all sides - it's perfectly enough to have only one gap like that every two houses.

    My place doesn't have it - whoever conceived of this little development in the 70s (my parents remember my exact location being orchards and market gardens before that), built 4 houses in a row identically, but all placed diagonally on the sections. So we're all north facing, and have odd shaped front and back areas that are triangular. This means also that the north side becomes the backyard space, so each house doesn't really interfere at the back with the privacy of the next - the south sides are car-parking, access, and "pretty" gardens, whereas the back gardens are "edible".

    The front area is a big unused lawn. Maybe when the kids get older. I discovered a completely unused triangular jungle that I've turned into the much needed sequestration area - the sheer biomass I was dealing with during summer is ridiculous - I had professional gardeners come in and take away an entire skip, and there was still a lot more to deal with.

    Most of my interactions with neighbors have been when using the front space - low fences and clear visibility encourage it.

    Things could definitely be organized better, even with this level of people per hectare.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 8584 posts Report Reply

  • merc, in reply to BenWilson,

    Imagine...if we could share power reticulation, communal areas, had water savings in place, grey water collection, an actual real stormwater system, proper sewerage, collection recycling that the council didn't consider as their property, public transport...oh dear, must stop.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Tamsin6, in reply to James Green,

    I don't entirely disagree with thinking about attachment to the land, but how do you explain the strongly held (at least in district plans) attachment to entirely detached dwellings, even at the point that this frequently means a pointless an unusable strip of land between houses that is home to a fence and not much more?

    I currently live in a terraced house in London (built in the late 1890's) - it has made me even more inclined to never ever ever live in a house that is NOT detached. Even with retrospective sound-proofing (if you can afford it) party walls are a complete and utter nightmare. I have felt bad for my neighbours when my children were very small but very very loud in the early hours of the morning. I have felt true enmity to those same neighbours when they play very loud Polish rock/metal in the early hours. Don't get me started on our other nightmare neighbours and their incompetent builders putting a steel beam through my daughter's bedroom roof.

    I also think that the modern tendency to build a house almost to the outer limits of the available land area is nuts. What happened to the idea of having outdoor space? Why build these enormous houses on relatively small sections?

    London • Since Dec 2007 • 123 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Transportblog has addressed differences in our historic housing patterns with some great aerial shots to illustrate, from Freemans Bay and Dannemora. Worth a look. And another recent article.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16741 posts Report Reply

  • DeepRed, in reply to Tamsin6,

    I also think that the modern tendency to build a house almost to the outer limits of the available land area is nuts. What happened to the idea of having outdoor space? Why build these enormous houses on relatively small sections?

    Probably because it means speculators laugh all the way to the bank. Or once did.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 4351 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    I watch Time Team on telly. For me our councils, our urban development may be traced back to the time the Romans invaded what is called Britain.
    Certainly our councils, and water boards and so forth have direct antecedents in Britain, including the ward system. Then I think of the Treaty and Tuhoe (Judith Binney, Encircled Lands),

    Just one of the many so-called legal methods used was to insist on surveying land, against Tuhoe wishes, only to charge huge sums for the survey then take the debt back in acres and acres of the best land.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/maori/news/article.cfm?c_id=252&objectid=10612094
    We have inherited a system that is perpetuated to this day. Christchurch is a reminder. Auckland is a lesson.
    The Crown is and always has been hostile to it's people in the pursuit of an agenda that is transparent for those with the will to read the sorry history.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to DeepRed,

    Apparently, land prices also dictate developers building the biggest house that local rules allow, to get maximum return.

    The bigger picture of urban planning is playing out now with developers and the political right succeeding in lobbying for more lateral suburban sprawl where the true costs are put onto everyone else.

    Expect widespread regressive changes along those lines when govt guts the Local Govt and RMA legislation like they've been quietly preparing to do for the last couple of years. This is what was at stake while clowns like Mallard played political games.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16741 posts Report Reply

  • merc, in reply to Sacha,

    I was about to post that link. Sprawl was a deal done long ago. I lived out west when the true nature of urban development was displayed. Suffice to say land is the only game in town controlled by a very few, and they will have their way.
    Auckland was founded by robber barons and beer, plus ca change.
    Even if we could afford to lobby, we could not effect change.
    Post note, that would be Buy Now Mallard ;-)

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to merc,

    There was significant official action against sprawl for the last decade in Auckland, fuelled by obvious disasters like the West's Massey suburb. Now being unpicked exactly as those who stand to make out like robbers from it wish.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16741 posts Report Reply

  • merc, in reply to Sacha,

    Sadly, it is only the beginning, follow Highway 16, follow the money. Soon the areas in yellow in http://transportblog.co.nz/2012/02/25/council-chooses-sprawl/ will be re-zoned to accomodate land already being prepared, see http://www.waitakere.govt.nz/abtcit/cp/massey.asp
    Rain apparently still follows the plow.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    Attachment

    And our rates go up, along with the advice it will soon be a luxury to own a dog and if one can't afford house and dog rego increases one instantly becomes a criminal,
    as one bright lady on C live last night said. Hulse last night says dog regos collect $7 ,000,000.00 They need $12,000,000.00 so increase dog rego 3 fold and voila.
    When asked what it covered , we pay for complaints about our dogs, we pay for impounding dogs(another fee to get them back), dog officers (how many?) and apparently lots of other people to do paperwork. The park needs a rubbish bin too. C Live did a quick calculation when Hulse said they will only collect $2,000,000.00 extra , hello, they will make $5,000,000.00. She says we need to pay with comparative highest fees in the country. That's the reason! Welcome to the Supershitty and remember $500 squillion for a fucking computer. Wonder how Rodney feels about the working dogs increased fees. Rodney, who wanted no part in Supershitty.
    Our rates or our dogs, we get to pay twice again. I'm sorry but a small fee for owning a cat .......
    rant over

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6261 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to merc,

    Buy Now Mallard

    nice

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16741 posts Report Reply

  • DeepRed, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    Wonder how Rodney feels about the working dogs increased fees. Rodney, who wanted no part in Supershitty.

    Nek minnit… poll tax.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 4351 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    Hehe the way the rate is struck is way better than any old poll tax...then there's those property valuations, non-transparency on tenders and spenders, LATE's and property development.
    Our council is way past needing or wanting a poll tax, believe me.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes, in reply to Russell Brown,

    You’re not the first to muse that Christchurch really needed the old Ministry of Works and its power to command resources. Many of the MoW’s old roles have become specialised and may be more suited now to contracted-in machinery like the big blue thing that added the lanes to the Newmarket Viaduct. But imagine how Christchurch might have used the men and machines from our great public works projects.

    Don't be silly man, you know that the public sector is only wasteful and inefficient and that private enterprise is the sensible, nay proper, way to do things.
    Power companies, for instance, can only make power more efficiently by allowing more people to take profits. The quality of buildings will improve by making it impossible for people to become builders without first being registered with a private licensing authority and encouraging developers by removing the costly "red tape" of the RMA.

    The wireless north ;-) • Since Dec 2006 • 4869 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    Contact have just put power charges up again.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes, in reply to BenWilson,

    escaping the crowded squalor as Charles Dickens wrote of.That’s a looong hangover. I think the mythology of escape from overcrowding has persisted, though. As if the poverty of Dickens’ time were a function of overcrowding alone,

    There is more to this than has been mentioned.
    There was this little thing called Enclosure which, in simple terms, removed the right of people to use the land, commoners using common land, to grow food, graze stock and generally have access to the necessities of life. One of the results of Enclosure was the removal of the means to exist without money, taxes were still paid but usually in goods or service. This left the landless commoner with no real alternative but factory work and other work for payment and therefore a slave to the mighty dollar.

    The wireless north ;-) • Since Dec 2006 • 4869 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.