We want to facilitate the development of a wider range of housing types in Karori and Tawa.

69% Feedback received that supports our overall plan

39 Number of times people have told us what they think about this idea

46% Feedback received that supports this idea

#17 Out of 28 ideas based on amount of feedback received.

Who would benefit most?

35% Local businesses
29% Future generations
27% Local residents
6% Visitors to Wellington
2% NZ as a whole
  • Local residents
  • Local businesses
  • Visitors to Wellington
  • NZ as a whole
  • Future generations
  • Other

How should we prioritise it?

59% Quite low
21% Neutral
10% Quite high
8% Low
3% High
  • Quite low
  • Low
  • Neutral
  • Quite high
  • High
  • Peter, Karori

    Medium-density housing should be considered only for areas that are currently providing sub-standard housing and where transport and infrastructure have sufficient capacity to absorb the extra residents. This is not true for some of the areas proposed, particularly Karori. Do not neglect the value of the housing that would be removed to make way for the increased density.

  • Anonymous, Karori

    Creating medium density housing is a very good idea if an increase of the population is inevitable - it is better than ever-expanding into our valuable open spaces, bush and reserves and might be a great option for people who prefer a smaller, more manageable home. Seems like a very good solution for some of our elderly residents, as you point out. However, if asked if I support creating a more densely populated centre and increasing population in Karori, versus not doing so, I'd much prefer not to squeeze more people onto our already very busy main road, buses, pool, medical centre, mall, library, and schools, to name a few. Karori is a great place to live. Putting pressure on these resources would deteriorate quality of life here for all of us. It is hard to see how a noticeable increase of population could be absorbed in the short to medium term (think transport, pool, library, schools, mall, medical centre). Also, medium density (ie more dense) housing means more people and more cars squeezed into a smaller space - the drawn up pics at the library do not paint a realistic picture: barely any cars but instead people standing around chatting on open space that'll in fact be tight to even fit residents cars. Can you please clarify if we WILL need to squeeze more people into our suburb, the question being how and where, or if we have a choice of rejecting a plan of increasing the population here?

  • Mark, Karori

    It appears to be "the way of the future", in an area that is limited by its topography.
    Without better road access and associated infrastructure - and I'm not talking about priority bus lanes/cycle lanes - Karori is about at the limit of it's population, now.
    Prioritise better roading to/from Karori as part of this project, please, else overall, the quality of life will deteriorate. I'm already thinking about moving suburbs because of congestion.

  • Harold, Karori

    Tawa is fine but Karori is ill conceived - There have been access problems to the suburb for decades and there is no works programmed to relieve the already congested buslanes, roads and tunnel. The impacts of increased runoff on the Karori Stream havn't been explained and there are better connected suburbs with better infrastructure like island bay which havn't been selected.

  • Patrick, Karori

    What sounds an attractive idea will only detract from the reason these suburbs are popular (green, family friendly) and stress the existing infrastructure (have you seen peak traffic on Karori Road!) If people living in these suburbs wanted medium density housing they would not have brought there. This proposal has the real potential to destroy the character of these suburbs for a quick developer dollar.

  • Glen, Karori

    The infrastructure in this plan isn't coordinated with the proposed intensification- where is the money for providing extra capacity for bus lanes to Karori?

  • Naomi, Karori

    I think that with the removal of the 18 bus through Kelburn and the currently overburdened transport links through the tunnel and viaduct/glen more street this idea has been poorly thought out. How is council going to be able to better cater for buses cycling on these routes to support intensification? We haven't seen the solutions and it doesn't look like the infrastructure and land use is being coordinated.