Housing scheme 'frustrating'

The housing bill that gives central government the ability to accelerate housing developments is removing political barriers previous governments have put in place, says Tauranga Mayor Stuart Crosby.

The Government announced the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill yesterday rushing it through with a first reading in Parliament overnight.

'The irony is that it is the governments of the day that have put all the barriers in play,” says Stuart. 'They are removing their own barriers.

'They have put all the barriers in place through the Resource Management Act. We at council find it frustrating as does the wider community.

'So there is irony in this development and ultimately it's about politics, nothing more, nothing less.”

The bill recognises that councils control a very important lever with their land supply and housing development policies, and is the circuit breaker needed to get pace and momentum around addressing housing affordability issues, says Housing Minister Dr Nick Smith.

'This will see consenting decisions made within six months for greenfield developments, as to the current average of three years, and three months for brownfield development, as to the current average of one year,” says Nick.

The bill allows for the creation of Special Housing Areas in both greenfield and brownfield areas suitable for residential development. There will be no appeals on developments up to three storeys high and special limited appeals on those between four and six storeys. High rise developments are excluded.

The bill requires Government to work in good faith with councils to secure housing accords, like the one announced last week with Auckland.

But if an accord cannot be reached in an area of severe housing unaffordability, the Government can intervene directly by establishing special housing areas and issuing consents for developments.

'I'm pleased several councils outside of Auckland have expressed their interest in using this legislation in their regions and I look forward to continuing this dialogue with them,” says Nick.

The bill confronts the reality that homeownership rates have been in decline for a quarter of a century, that house prices have soared unsustainably in the last decade, and that for too many families, buying or renting a home is unaffordable, says Nick.

It's not a silver bullet, but a much needed interim measure, while longer term work on the issue sets in, says Nick. That includes significant reforms to the Resource Management Act, the government inquiry into building materials, work on infrastructure costs, review of development contributions and compliance costs, and investment in skills to improve productivity in the residential construction sector.

Stuart thinks the bill is more applicable to Auckland than Tauranga, which has more than 400 new housing lots for development at The Lakes at Tauriko, and at Wairakei in eastern Papamoa.

'I believe it's more for areas where the planning isn't as advanced as for Tauranga and the Western Bay of Plenty,” says Stuart.

'So through growth management planning we're reasonably well catered for through forward planning. That's applicable for us and the Western BOP though Smart Growth.

'My view is let's see what the detail is first. I don't know if that would be necessary in Tauranga, I think it's more applicable to Auckland.

'I don't want to be negative about it, anything that speeds up the process of proving more developer land it's all good.”

The bill passed its first reading with the support of the Labour Party, United Future, the Māori Party, New Zealand First, Act and Brendan Horan. It has been sent to the Social Services Select Committee to report back to Parliament by 26 July 2013.

5 comments

Disagree

Posted on 18-05-2013 08:52 | By Murray.Guy

'The irony is that it is the governments of the day that have put all the barriers in play,” says Stuart ... Mostly disagree Mr Mayor. Yes, Central Government is responsible for the provision of a suite of tools including the Resource Management Act, but it is individuals, organisations and local authorities that are abusing many of those tools, mis-interpreting and re-writing, their intent and purpose. It was TCC, Smartgrowth and associates who chose to put up barriers to Mr Clarkson's 'affordable home aspirations', not the Government. Right or wrong, this Council chose not to meaningfully investigate, facilitate a very real and practical opportunity to add value to affordable home availability in our region, to enhance the sustainability of the Southern Pipeline and Route K tolling, to take the pressure off the at risk tsunami sand dunes of Papamoa.


Bob do the job

Posted on 18-05-2013 09:14 | By hapukafin

Bob submitt your plans to the top so we can have affordable homes


Wrong Stuart!

Posted on 18-05-2013 11:07 | By The Master

Central Government put in the RMA for good reason, the only mistake they made was to leave Coucnils to administer it, that then became a officials heaven and some, where local Councils then had a license to print money, waste a lot of time and years later eventually approve sub-divisions/developments. Some cases it takes 5= years for TCC to get around to approving and there is not good reason for the time and delay other than self importance and ego. I am very pleased that the time wasting ex TCC (like other Coucnils also) will be required to be dealt with a bit faster than currently. Get over it Stuart.


Provided the developer pays the real costs, Cr Guy

Posted on 18-05-2013 11:07 | By Councillorwatch

I'm told that through various mechanisms which I can't pretend to understand that developers get paid back by Council for the costs of stuff they do like roads, maybe sewerage etc. If that's the case, then us ratepayers are footing the bill for development aren't we?. Is it true that development has paid for itself or are ratepayers actually subsidising it? With all the stuff over development levies I think ratepayers are probably doing the paying. As for the Government, let them first take responsibility for the leaky building problems. The Govt laws allowed untreated timber and private inspectors, didn't it?


cheap slums????

Posted on 18-05-2013 14:40 | By traceybjammet

hmm I would think councils are becoming an unnecessary expense NZ is too small to have so many councils its crazy. Cheap housing is available but not necessarily in the areas people want to buy in, if we artificially create more cheap housing they will possibly just become more areas that people don't want to live in only buy to rent therefore possibly creating more slums instead of helping the overall problem


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.