Conservation win, process and property rights lose


The owners of the  old kauri, the age of which is moot, have come up with a plan to save it.

In an open letter they write:

This is an open letter to the people of Auckland from myself John Lenihan and my wife Jane Greensmith, as today is our 20th wedding anniversary. Over these 20 years Jane and I have practiced as Architects who live and work in Auckland.

We have only ever built 2 houses for ourselves both in Titirangi.

The first house the year we got married, and I became a partner in RCG Ltd where I still work today. The second house we built 15 years ago and is the house our kids have grown up in. Both houses were on challenging sites, but as Jane’s Dad who was an Architect too, used to say “those are architect’s sites- difficult, complicated, fun and full of potential!”

As Architects we work in a city that we believe is under stress, as there is significant population growth. This is mostly from people like us having kids and because it is a great city.

But Auckland is under huge stress- it needs homes for extra people, and it needs affordable homes, and it needs homes of all types everywhere. This means change and many people hate change, and this adds more stress.

We wanted to be part of changing all this in our own small but optimistic way, so along with helping our clients achieve this, we thought we would try and build again and be our own client. We came across 2 lovely sites on Paturoa Rd and again they were “Architects sites”.

The rules for building in this part of Auckland and a lot of other areas are in our opinion very complex, often contradictory and from an outdated planning paradigm that gets added to in ad hoc ways that just keep making things worse.

The process to follow in making and processing applications is also too complex, contradictory and ad hoc.

There is very little certainty, so it is no wonder that Auckland is not building enough. Adding to this is the rapidly rising cost of land and building materials and you have the recipe for more stress. There are no easy answers to any of this, but we believe we all have to try.

This what we teach our kids.

We believe that the situation that has occurred at Paturoa Rd Titirangi is the outcome of the stress Auckland is under and the systems and processes we are given to work under. We believe that there needs to be a financial return for undertaking building work.

Banks require it when they give you a mortgage, they don’t call it a profit they call it the banks ”margin of risk”. Building is very risky, difficult, time consuming and prohibitively expensive.

Jane & I did not make the rules but we have to work with them and follow the law.

If we don’t, we lose the right to be Architects. We believe in law and order, but as Architects we also understand conflicting needs and different opinions, but to resolve these you need good systems and processes. We don’t believe these are good enough in the present regulatory process. The Auckland Unitary Plan might be an opportunity to change this, but not by keeping those old systems and paradigms. Maybe we need to try some brand new things.

Over the past few days we have been overwhelmed with the agendas of Council, Politicians, Protesters, and so on. We were quite normally private people but now we have been dragged into being public figures. We don’t have media training and crisis management skills and there are some who want us to take all the blame.

Our family, friends and colleagues and clients have been supporting us. So we have had to learn, adapt and change, because we are Architects and that’s what Architects are trained to do.

However we don’t want to play the games of others , games of blame, conflict, and abuse, instead we have been trying to come up with solutions where no-one loses everything but we all compromise, and is something new and hopeful that looks forward and not backward.

This is our Plan – Architects call it a design solution;

1. Let the trees stay including the Kauri which we have been calling 500, and the Rimu called 300. It doesn’t matter how old they are as they now need to stay. Some other trees might have to go – this is the compromise bit, but let’s keep it to a minimum. Trees grow faster than you all think.

Our wise elderly neighbour reckons the Kauri ”500” is only 70 years old like him.

2. Let’s turn these two sites from a place of conflict and division to a place of hope, a place to come together and plan a different future.

3. Let’s be innovative and consider new processes and new rules and prototype these and make it part of the Unitary Plan Process.

4. Let’s build on these sites as we need to keep property law intact and create homes. Our NZ is about family and community and nature. Can we try and have it all with small compromises?

5. Let’s build affordable, sustainable homes and try and fit as many as we can on these sites so that it works economically, socially and environmentally.

If we throw out the current rules we could do something a lot better than where we had got to with these houses.

6. Let’s take Jane and I out of the equation and give us fair compensation for our land and efforts to date as we have not broken the law and we need to encourage others to build and not be punished. Let’s respect the laws we have and try to improve them in the future.

7. Let’s allow Treescape and Vector, Iwi and Council to own the sites on the public’s behalf and let’s forgive them too. Give them a chance to try something new and create something better from this current mess. The compromise is they have to work together as a team and communicate quickly and professionally.

That’s our Plan and this is what Architects do.

We make plans for the future.

We hope everyone can support this, because then it will be the best 20th wedding anniversary!

If this is agreed to, it will be a win for conservation.

It is a loss for processes which are patently inadequate.

Those processes need to change to ensure no property owner is treated like this again.

And unless the  owners get compensation it will also be a loss for property rights.

People who follow due process and obey the law should not be out of pocket because other people don’t like the processes and disobey the law.

And Auckland still needs more houses.


I wonder how many of those who protested against the felling will be willing to help pay the compensation?

Whose tree is it?


Who owns this tree?

A protester is going into a second day 25 metres up a kauri in Titirangi, vowing to hang in there until the tree is safe.

The owners of the property have consent to cut down the 500-year-old tree and a 300-year-old rimu, but some locals have been vocal in their opposition. . .

Police issued Mr Tavares a verbal trespass notice yesterday afternoon.

Auckland Council had allowed the removal of the trees so developers John Lenihan and Jane Greensmith could build two homes.

The council said it was satisfied all measures were being taken to minimise the effects of the tree removal and ecological value of the site.

It said the developers had chosen to build the homes close to the road to minimise the number of trees that need to be removed.

The council said it understood people’s concerns but the zoning on these sites allowed for development if environmental effects were considered. . .

This tree is on private property.

It doesn’t belong to the protesters or the council.

It belongs to the people who own the property.

They have gone through the expensive process of getting consent for their plans and have chosen to site the homes to minimise the impact they’ll have on the trees.

Those wanting to protect the tree are trampling over the property rights of the owner.

They will also be putting other people off planting trees for fear that they, or those who come after them, will have their property rights threatened.

%d bloggers like this: