Yesterday saw a massive announcement on housing - a rare show of bipartisan support with Labour and National announcing an end to single house zones in the largest cities in New Zealand. Minister of Housing Megan Woods and Minister for the Environment David Parker held a joint press conference in the beehive theatrette with Leader of the Opposition Judith Collins and Opposition Housing Spokesperson Nicola Willis. Beehive
Approximate of new zone allowing 3 stories (Source)
Effectively it forces councils to allow up to 3 homes of up to 3 storeys on most sites in Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga, Wellington, and Christchurch without the need for a resource consent. There are other changes to the minimum rules with increased building height to 11m and height in relation to the boundary now 6m + 60 degrees. I’ve seen estimates that this will affect 92% of Auckland’s residential area which is massive.
After years of politicians blaming each other for the housing crisis, it was refreshing to see them actually do something about it. Cross party support is more than just good PR, it creates certainty. Our construction industry has been calling for greater clarity on long term demand which this should help provide.
Unfortunately this seems to be as inclusive as it’s going to get, with other political parties (including Labour’s political ally the Greens) not involved. And most critically the councils weren’t consulted, despite asking to be involved. It’s a stark reminder of the dysfunctional relationship between central and local government, the same misalignment that continues to play out in infuriating delays to projects like the Eastern Busway. Given this, it wasn’t surprising to see councils respond negatively to the announcement.
“If they want to make a big dent in Auckland [housing supply], then the problems are skills shortages, supply chain problems, material costs due to a duopoly of suppliers, and the funding of infrastructure to support big developments,”
- Chris Darby, Auckland Councillor and Chair of the Auckland Council Planning Committee via Stuff
Some argue that councils have failed and the government is being forced to step in. There is definitely some truth to this - councils have been extremely slow to respond to growing populations and progress has often been held hostage by a noisy, privileged few. However these criticisms (and a lot more) can also be made of government. And it’s also worth remembering that the structure, funding and very existence of councils is controlled by the government - while we all wish that Auckland Council would get those pesky CCO’s under control, there are limits that were put in place by an Act of Parliament. Critically, government needs councils to buy into this change, not fight it.
How could councils cause trouble? While the proposal will force councils to intensify in most residential areas, there is an exception for heritage protection. Minister Phil Twyford (former Minister for Housing and Urban Development) said on Twitter last night that “Character overlays precluded. Councils can protect individual buildings or clusters, as with NPS-UD, but that requires site analysis & justification.” (Twitter)
When I asked who would be making those decisions, I was told “Protection is Council's.” . It’s good to see that there will still be some local input and it will be interesting to see how heritage is interpreted and implemented. I’m a passionate supporter of respecting our history but it’s open to abuse as we've seen. Tywford agreed about the risks of misuse and noted “its something we're working on for the new planning system.” This will be a critical detail and may make or break this policy. In particular I’m interested to see how these changes will impact other rules such as the limited view protection that we have on Stockade Hill, secured after a long, bitter and expensive battle in the media and courts. On the other end of the spectrum is Wellington, who’s extremely broad interpretation of character has led to some feisty exchanges.
Judith Collins had some pretty direct words on heritage protection:
"To those... I say this: Our communities lose their character when people can't afford to own their own home.
"Stronger communities are formed when families can own their home and it is in the interests of all Kiwis to live in a property-owning community, where people put down anchors in their community and have a stake in local affairs; where kids get to stay at the same school; where the politics of envy aren't fuelled by rapidly rising house prices; where our children can afford to buy a home and start a family and growing up in a property-owning democracy."
The announcement also included bringing the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) forward by a year, meaning councils need to notify plan changes by August 2022. It’ll be a busy year for councils as they adapt to these changes, untangling the current rules and applying the new ones. There is also some risk of throwing out what we've got, broken as it may be. The Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) was made operative in 2019 and while it’s still undergoing changes, it’s largely done. It’s far from perfect (too much to cover here) but it has delivered more consents with nearly 20,000 being issued the last year, up from 3,600 in 2012.
The government estimates the changes will mean another 27,900-53,700 houses consented in Auckland over the next 5-8 years which isn’t a small number. But you can’t live in a consent - someone still has to fund, build and own these houses. There is some hope that the additional scale will bring efficiencies, but I wouldn’t be holding my breath for affordable housing. The significant increase we’ve seen under the AUP hasn’t had any measurable impact because supply is only one part of the equation.
Critically we need more funding and commitment to infrastructure, especially transport and water. Announcements like this are important but ultimately the budget is where we see the real priorities. The $3.8 b Housing Acceleration Fund is a good start but a tiny drop in a massive ocean. We also need to deal with our inequitable tax system and the massive wealth transfer that continues to undermine our economy and the future of our country.
In summary:
Great to see cross party policy.
Not engaging councils was a mistake.
Enables more intensification which should mean more housing.
Still need significant systematic change to address the root causes + wider issues.
Heritage protection will be the key battleground.