MEDIA RELEASE

10 July 2013

Auckland in danger of damaging its future

Auckland Council is in danger of failing to achieve the density objectives outlined in the Auckland Plan – placing its future in jeopardy – warns Property Council New Zealand.

Responding to Council officials and attendees of a mixed housing, terraced housing and apartment building zone workshop for the Unitary Plan, Property Council’s chief executive Connal Townsend has reinforced that Auckland is a city which exists for a wide range of people – not just existing residents.

“It is vital for Auckland to grow in order to retain its economic vibrancy, innovation, skilled workers and entrepreneurs.

This is particularly important given the aging of populations in western countries, and the battle to retain skilled, young, entrepreneurs which is likely to ensue in the next 30 years.

“If you dampen development, you will have even more unaffordable housing, cobbling Auckland’s growth, vibrancy, and prosperity.

Overly restrictive provisions will mean we cannot meet the essential accommodation needs of our young people and new residents.

“Development is hard.

A single project can take years to come to fruition,” Townsend explained.

“Absolute clarity of vision and process is required from day one – staging will create uncertainty.

“If the plan is not sufficiently permissive, private land owners will undertake work such as dividing their sections into two, cross leasing their sections or even upgrading their existing homes.

“If this happens, developers will not be able to acquire that land in the near future and dense development will not take place.

Once a three story building has been built, you cannot easily go back a couple of years later or once the area is rezoned and then do a six or eight storey one – it is simply too expensive.” Property Council supports the principles enshrined in the Unitary Plan, but strongly opposes the Unitary Plan trying to prescribe a staged approach or stipulate when development should take place.

“We are concerned that tinkering with the zones and extensive overlays and rules are going to stifle development – resulting in sub--optimal outcomes for the city and its existing and future residents.

“Similarly, be very cautious of any proposal to view attached and terrace housing developments as a silver bullet.

They are a great option but Auckland needs apartments too.

Terraced housing involves the acquisition of relatively large development sites.

That takes time and patience and will be severely hindered by heritage and character overlays.” He warned that any further proposal to widen the heritage net to pre--1944 houses outside the existing character heritage areas will make the task of achieving density virtually impossible.

“No one is arguing that heritage and other issues protected by overlays in the draft Unitary Plan are not important and worthy of protection.

“Overly restrictive provisions prioritise what is ‘nice to have’ over the essential accommodation needs of our young people and new residents.

“There is simply no way that an additional million people into the current Auckland boundaries.

Therefore, like other successful international cities, we must adapt and change.

Greater intensification will assist in alleviating this spatial issue.”

ENDS

© Scoop Media