'Kick in the guts': Govt knocks back Christchurch council housing plans
The mayor of Christchurch says a government knock-back on its three-year battle to create a custom carve-out of national housing intensification rules feels like a "kick in the guts", but others are welcoming the certainty of the move.
On Friday, Minister for Resource Management Act Reform Chris Bishop issued a final decision on 17 of 20 recommendations the city council had referred after rejecting recommendations from an independent panel on the council's plan to shape a bespoke Christchurch response to national housing density policy).
Minister Bishop rejected the bulk of the council's proposals.
In 2021, the then-government released its National Policy Statement on Urban Development, a plan to ramp up housing intensification across most urban areas but focused on the five high growth centres of Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga, Wellington and Christchurch, amid bi-partisan support for the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, though the National Party would later withdraw its backing.
The bill contained Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS), which detail what development can occur without the need for resource consent, public notification and consultation in the areas identified as most in need of housing intensification.
ADVERTISEMENT
Those rules were intended to apply across all residential zones in those identified cities, unless "qualifying matters" made intensification inappropriate.
The decisions come into effect immediately and cannot be appealed to the Environment Court. (Source: rnz.co.nz)
In 2022, the council voted to reject the standards, despite warnings that a commissioner could be appointed.
Instead, the council began several years of consultation, submissions and hearings on Plan Change 14 - its proposed changes to the district plan that would give effect to the Medium Density Residential Standards, but in a way, it claimed better acknowledged the character and context of the city.
The council temporarily halted the process following the last election, and was later granted an extension until the end of this year on some aspects of the plan change.
Minister Bishop declined a further extension request last month.
The council's stance culminated in an Independent Hearing Panel (IHP), which reported back in the middle of last year.
ADVERTISEMENT
The council accepted the majority of the IHP's recommendations, which were incorporated into the district plan. But it rejected various aspects of the proposed plan, making twenty counter-recommendations that went to the Minister.
The minister announced on Friday he had rejected 14 of the council's recommendations, accepted three and deferred his decision on three more.
Minister for Resource Management Act Reform Chris Bishop has rejected the bulk of the council's proposals. (Source: rnz.co.nz)
The decision means some parts of the city will be zoned higher-density housing and taller buildings, while the council will not be allowed to use several different "qualifying matters" to refuse consents even in high density zones - most controversially, one that hinged on the impediment of sunlight and proposed the Garden City should get an exemption because its southern location meant sunlight angles differ.
Bishop's announcement locks in changes for areas in and around the CBD, and the "town centres" of Riccarton, Hornby and Linwood, which will be zoned high density residential. Taller buildings will be allowed within 600 metres of shopping areas in some suburbs - 32m (around ten storeys high) for the Hornby shopping area, 14m for high density residential zones surrounding the shopping area, 22m (around six storeys) for Linwood's town centre, and 14m for high density residential zones around it.
The council's bids to create qualifying matters on the basis of sunlight access, recession planes (a line or plane which limits how close a building can be to a property boundary), or by location - such as 'the City Spine' (major transport routes) or Riccarton Bush - also failed. Nor did the minster accept areas around Peer Street in Ilam or the Papanui War Memorial Avenues should be excluded from density rules or allowed special consideration.
The council proposals the minister did accept were Local Centre Intensification Precinct - intensification around eight of the city's commercial centres, including Barrington, Prestons and Wigram; increasing the building height overlay for the former stock yards site on Deans Avenue (a prime spot adjacent to Hagley Park, currently used as car parking for the Christchurch Hospital shuttle service) to up to 36m; and allowing high density residential zoning for Milton Street (the site of the Milton St substation, which Fletchers plans to build 80 homes on).
ADVERTISEMENT
All other council alternative recommendations were rejected in favour of the hearing panel recommendations.
The minister has deferred decision-making for the heritage listing for Daresbury - a historic home in Fendalton; Antonio Hall - a derelict historic home on Riccarton Rd; and Piko Character Area - a Riccarton residential neighbourhood made up of many original state houses from the 1930s - until the council decided on the underlying zoning.
Antonio Hall after a fire in 2019. (Source: rnz.co.nz)
"In putting these decisions forward to the government, we obviously wanted to get all of our alternative recommendations approved. So to only have three of them get the tick is a kick in the guts," mayor Phil Mauger said.
"This plan change has been a huge undertaking for our city, and we've said right the way through that we want to get the best outcome we possibly can. This doesn't feel like the best outcome.
"To that end, we'll keep working hard as a council, and there are still major decisions yet to be made when it comes to housing density and planning across much of Christchurch, so watch this space."
New Zealand has one of the most unaffordable housing markets in the OECD.
ADVERTISEMENT
Urbanist collective Greater Ōtautahi welcomed the minister's decision.
Chairperson M Grace-Stent said the decision finally brought some certainty after years of delays, decision making, submissions and hearing panels.
"What we're most excited about is that Ōtautahi Christchurch is set up for the future, it has certainty around where it can grow and where it can continue to develop in the future."
The decision will not mean apartment buildings spring up overnight, they said.
"It's still going to be a slow developing process, just as our cities always continually change. This is just another step."
The city also needed to turn its attention to improving public transport.
"Ōtautahi Christchurch definitely needs a reevaluation of its transport system. We've been calling for the introduction of mass rapid transport across the city to support and facilitate the kind of growth and development that needs to happen, and to make sure that everyone has a choice about how they're getting around the city and aren't forced to just pick cars."
ADVERTISEMENT
Grace-Stent said the debate touched on ideas embedded in the national psyche about how and where New Zealanders live.
They said the quarter-acre dream of a stand alone house on a large section is unsustainable and doesn't not always produce greater social outcomes.
"Not everyone wants to live the exact same lifestyle - allowing more housing to be built allows people to make that choice for themselves. So if people want to be living on 1/4 acre block, they're allowed to, and if people want to be living in an apartment close to their friends and amenities and where they work, they also have that choice."
They acknowledged that some medium and high-density housing is not built to high standards but said some of that was due to limitations of the current zoning process, which can mean the lowest bidder builds on these sites.
"This is just the first step into assuring that everyone has a home that is liveable and that works for them, and is good quality. There also needs to be changes throughout the way that we are think about housing and building houses across the country," Grace-Stent said.
The decisions, which come into effect immediately, are final and cannot be appealed to the Environment Court.
The council has until the end of the year to decide on density rules for the rest of the city.
It was unable to confirm by deadline how much it had spent fighting the density rules, but had budgeted for $7 million between 2021 and the middle of this year.
By Keiller MacDuff of rnz.co.nz
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
The House: A sentencing hearing in Parliament
Rawiri Waititi speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. The noose is a reference to a tupuna who was hanged in Mount Eden Prison. Photo: VNP / Louis Collins The fate of the three Te Pāti Māori MPs who performed a haka during the vote on the first reading of the Principles of Treaty of Waitangi Bill last November was decided on Thursday , following a long, and at times intense debate. The Privileges hearing outcome was something the Government clearly wanted finished, and it ended the week. Leader of the House Chris Bishop, kicked off Thursday's debate by asking the House to bring down the curtain on an issue that has lingered in Parliament for seven months. The debate boiled down to whether the recommended punishments - all unprecedented - were fair, or even wise. Before the debate paused a fortnight ago, the positions of the two largest parties ( National and Labour ) had been outlined. The Privileges Committee Chair, Judith Collins had stood by the recommended punishments, while Chris Hipkins moved an amendment to reduce them to more historically usual levels. Some of the speeches stepped beyond a simple defence or opposition. Some were personal, some philosophical, some emotional. A few moments are noted below. Labour's Duncan Webb, who is Deputy Chair of the Privileges Committee, is a former jurist and went for the dissect-the-facts approach. It felt like a trial defence summary. "It's well known that those three members chose not to attend the Privileges Committee or provide any explanation. They weren't required to attend the committee. They were not called to attend and therefore did not have to. Whilst they can't claim credit for cooperation - nor can they say they were denied an opportunity to explain - neither can they be punished. "It appears that some members of the committee may feel affronted that the members didn't come to the committee when they were invited. They may even consider that the members were defiant in not attending. "However, they were not required to attend. This is no justification for the imposition of a punishment that is disproportionate and arbitrary." Te Tai Tonga MP Tākuta Ferris took Te Pāti Māori's first call, and took a constitutional approach, questioning the underpinnings of the institution making the judgement. "This debate is not about a haka. It is not about a suspension. It's not about the interruption of a vote. "It is, at its heart, about the fact that this House continues to ignore Te Tiriti o Waitangi, that this House continues to ignore Māori sovereignty, and that this House continues to ignore all of the constitutional rights that flow forth from those two things. "The fact of the matter is simple: without Māori sovereignty, there is no Te Tiriti o Waitangi. "Without Te Tiriti o Waitangi, there is no constitutional right for the presence of the Crown in this part of the world. "Without the constitutional right, there is no Parliament." New Zealand First Leader Winston Peters is a harsh critic of Te Pāti Māori. There was a sense that the pot was boiling over as Peters, himself a member of the Privileges Committee, launched into Te Pāti Māori MPs. "No ordinary Māori, Māori, or non-Māori should accept the behaviour or the intent of this party of absolute extremists, screaming out that everybody else in the Parliament is here only by their behest. "Have a look in the mirror. Mr Ferris, look in the mirror. What is the majority of your DNA? What's the majority of your DNA? Well, if you're disgraced by your European DNA, we over here are not. We are proud of all sides of our background because we are New Zealanders first and foremost. As for blood quantum, if the cowboy hat wearer is an example of blood quantum, I'm going to a new biology class." Winston Peters speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith Labour's Willie Jackson also focused his speech on Te Pāti Māori, playing what could be called the role of 'good cop' and encouraging them to compromise. "You know I love you, but a little bit of compromise could help the situation... I know it's hard to apologise, but I want to say to you Te Pāti Māori that not every single Māori in the country supports you and they don't support some of the strategy. "They love you, I love you, but some of the stuff is not going down well. "This is the centre and a celebration of the Westminster system, and I think our challenge - as, I think, you know - is that we have to imbue some of our Māori culture into the system. "We have to get a partnership going, and I don't think the kōrero so far is going to help with the partnership. You know, we have to get the House to embrace some of our values." Willie Jackson speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith Former Speaker Adrian Rurawhe is also from Labour's Māori caucus. His speech was a change of pace and had a touch of elder statesman. He began by speaking of a new precedent set - a government majority within the privileges committee punishing the opposition. Raiwiri Waititi and Adrian Rurawhe chat during the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Louis Collins "There are no winners in this debate. Each party in this House might think they're winning by talking to the people that support them, but there are no winners in this debate - none - especially not this House. "The Privileges Committee of the future will have a new precedent, without a doubt - a new range of penalties against members who err in the future. You can guarantee that. "You can also guarantee that Governments of the day, in the future, will feel very free to use those penalties to punish their opponents. "This is what we are doing in the House today." The House also heard from the ACT party, who the Te Pāti Māori performed the haka in front of. One of the key points of contention was whether the ACT MPs were victims of intimidation. All three ACT MPs who spoke certainly thought so, with Karen Chhour, who compared the debate to an HR meeting. "I've listened to the speeches across this House, and the hate and the anger that's been chucked from both sides of this House, and it actually really saddens me - it really saddens me. Somebody can say that I don't have the right to stand here and speak, but that's what this place is about. "Four and a half years ago, when I had the privilege of being elected into this place, I felt that burden of what was expected of me when I came to this place, to represent the people that I wanted to come here to make a better life for." "This is what the Privileges Committee is there for - sort of like our HR, where we sit down and we discuss what the issue was and, hopefully, can come to a medium ground where there is a little bit of contrition shown from those who have had the accusations brought to them, and then a simple apology could be enough." Demanding an apology for behaviour found to be intimidating is actually one of the most common punishments recommended by the committee. The Committee's report noted that the MPs not meeting the Committee had no bearing on their decision. As in most courtrooms, where the accused have the chance to represent themselves. All three Te Pāti Māori MPs in question spoke during the debate. Rawiri Waititi used his speech to not only defend his and his colleague's position but as a rallying cry. Rawiri Waititi speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Louis Collins "Turn our rage into power and make this a one-term Government. Enrol! Vote! If you hear the haka outside these walls, add your voice. If you see injustice trending online, amplify the truth. "If you feel fear, remember fear is the coloniser's last currency. Spend it into worthlessness by standing up. You can bench my body from this house for 21 days, but you will never bench our movement." The Greens' Steve Abel, who was the last to speak, also picked up on the courthouse feel to it all, but not just any courthouse. "We're not supposed to critique the courts, but I guess this is a court of our Parliament. The Privileges Committee represents the Parliament. We have two of the most senior members of this Parliament on that Privileges Committee, the then Deputy Prime Minister, Winston Peters, and the Attorney-General, Judith Collins. "Two of the most senior members, both lawyers, have egregiously punished one of the newest members of this Parliament. "What is the message that that sends to young people watching about the justice of this House, to newcomers to the House? "What is the message that it sends about a young Māori woman who has come and spoken with such certainty of the people she represents? "I think it sends a very bad message and I believe it renders the character of the Privileges Committee under that leadership as something of a kangaroo court." After three hours of debate, the House finally came to vote. All amendments put forward by the Opposition were voted down, and the original motion supporting the punishment recommended by the Privileges Committee was agreed upon, thereby kicking off the suspension period for the three Te Pāti Māori MPs, who also lost their salary and their votes in the House whilst suspended. - RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Enjoy our articles or podcast at RNZ. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Scoop
15 hours ago
- Scoop
The House: Parliamentary Week Achieves Two Out Of Three Goals
, Editor: The House While Parliament's week was dominated by its final event - Thursday's debate on the report from the Privileges Committee into a haka performed in the chamber - the rest of the week focussed on other business that, while more mundane, was still worthy of note. The Government appeared to have three objectives for this week in the house. Crucial to the administration's continuance, the first goal was to successfully complete the initial debate on the budget. The long initial budget debate could no longer dribble on over weeks, so the house spent six hours of the week completing the second reading debate, which is the first debate a budget gets. The reading was accomplished and so the Government continues. This may sound silly, but a Government cannot survive, if the house votes against its budget. Agreeing to vote for budget and taxation bills are the 'supply' portion of the 'confidence and supply' agreement that is the foundation of any coalition agreement. The budget focus now turns to select committees and what is called 'Scrutiny Week', when ministers appear before various subject committees to defend their budget plans. Scrutiny Week begins on 16 June. Slow seconds A second objective was possibly not in earlier plans for this week - to finally polish off the bills originally slated for completion two weeks ago during budget week urgency. Then, the Leader of the House had asked the house to accord urgency for 12 bills the Government hoped to progress through 30 stages of parliamentary debate. The plan was ambitious and it did not succeed. Despite day-long sittings until midnight Saturday (when urgency must end), only two bills were completed, others were untouched, and 13 stages were unfinished or unstarted. This week's plan for the house had MPs returning to the well for more of the same. Just like last time, progress was at a snail's pace. After quite a few hours, the Government had slugged its way through just a few more stages. The plan was slowed to a crawl by bills' committee stages (formally known as the Committee of the Whole House). Committee stages are a crucial way for MPs to publicly interrogate the minister in charge of a bill. With patience, they can tease out a lot about both a government's development of legislation and its intended real-world impacts. Because the committee stage has no set duration, it is also a way for the opposition to make the Government really work for progress. The Government did achieve progress on the bills left incomplete from budget week, but again, it was probably not what was hoped for. They will need to come back yet again in three weeks to have a third crack. The Opposition is showing itself to be quite effective at the filibuster. The Government's third objective was to have the debate on the recent Privileges Committee Report on three Te Pāti Māori MPs done by the week's end. As Leader of the House Chris Bishop said in re-initiating the debate: "My encouragement would be for everybody to finish this debate today. "Have a robust debate, but let's end this issue once and for all, and deal with the issue and get back to the major issues facing this country." That wish was fulfilled with apparent agreement from across the house. As 6pm neared, the MP who eventually moved that a vote be taken was Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi. The frankly fascinating debate on the report will be reported separately. - RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Enjoy our articles or podcast at RNZ.
1News
15 hours ago
- 1News
'Kick in the guts': Govt knocks back Christchurch council housing plans
The mayor of Christchurch says a government knock-back on its three-year battle to create a custom carve-out of national housing intensification rules feels like a "kick in the guts", but others are welcoming the certainty of the move. On Friday, Minister for Resource Management Act Reform Chris Bishop issued a final decision on 17 of 20 recommendations the city council had referred after rejecting recommendations from an independent panel on the council's plan to shape a bespoke Christchurch response to national housing density policy). Minister Bishop rejected the bulk of the council's proposals. In 2021, the then-government released its National Policy Statement on Urban Development, a plan to ramp up housing intensification across most urban areas but focused on the five high growth centres of Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga, Wellington and Christchurch, amid bi-partisan support for the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, though the National Party would later withdraw its backing. The bill contained Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS), which detail what development can occur without the need for resource consent, public notification and consultation in the areas identified as most in need of housing intensification. ADVERTISEMENT Those rules were intended to apply across all residential zones in those identified cities, unless "qualifying matters" made intensification inappropriate. The decisions come into effect immediately and cannot be appealed to the Environment Court. (Source: In 2022, the council voted to reject the standards, despite warnings that a commissioner could be appointed. Instead, the council began several years of consultation, submissions and hearings on Plan Change 14 - its proposed changes to the district plan that would give effect to the Medium Density Residential Standards, but in a way, it claimed better acknowledged the character and context of the city. The council temporarily halted the process following the last election, and was later granted an extension until the end of this year on some aspects of the plan change. Minister Bishop declined a further extension request last month. The council's stance culminated in an Independent Hearing Panel (IHP), which reported back in the middle of last year. ADVERTISEMENT The council accepted the majority of the IHP's recommendations, which were incorporated into the district plan. But it rejected various aspects of the proposed plan, making twenty counter-recommendations that went to the Minister. The minister announced on Friday he had rejected 14 of the council's recommendations, accepted three and deferred his decision on three more. Minister for Resource Management Act Reform Chris Bishop has rejected the bulk of the council's proposals. (Source: The decision means some parts of the city will be zoned higher-density housing and taller buildings, while the council will not be allowed to use several different "qualifying matters" to refuse consents even in high density zones - most controversially, one that hinged on the impediment of sunlight and proposed the Garden City should get an exemption because its southern location meant sunlight angles differ. Bishop's announcement locks in changes for areas in and around the CBD, and the "town centres" of Riccarton, Hornby and Linwood, which will be zoned high density residential. Taller buildings will be allowed within 600 metres of shopping areas in some suburbs - 32m (around ten storeys high) for the Hornby shopping area, 14m for high density residential zones surrounding the shopping area, 22m (around six storeys) for Linwood's town centre, and 14m for high density residential zones around it. The council's bids to create qualifying matters on the basis of sunlight access, recession planes (a line or plane which limits how close a building can be to a property boundary), or by location - such as 'the City Spine' (major transport routes) or Riccarton Bush - also failed. Nor did the minster accept areas around Peer Street in Ilam or the Papanui War Memorial Avenues should be excluded from density rules or allowed special consideration. The council proposals the minister did accept were Local Centre Intensification Precinct - intensification around eight of the city's commercial centres, including Barrington, Prestons and Wigram; increasing the building height overlay for the former stock yards site on Deans Avenue (a prime spot adjacent to Hagley Park, currently used as car parking for the Christchurch Hospital shuttle service) to up to 36m; and allowing high density residential zoning for Milton Street (the site of the Milton St substation, which Fletchers plans to build 80 homes on). ADVERTISEMENT All other council alternative recommendations were rejected in favour of the hearing panel recommendations. The minister has deferred decision-making for the heritage listing for Daresbury - a historic home in Fendalton; Antonio Hall - a derelict historic home on Riccarton Rd; and Piko Character Area - a Riccarton residential neighbourhood made up of many original state houses from the 1930s - until the council decided on the underlying zoning. Antonio Hall after a fire in 2019. (Source: "In putting these decisions forward to the government, we obviously wanted to get all of our alternative recommendations approved. So to only have three of them get the tick is a kick in the guts," mayor Phil Mauger said. "This plan change has been a huge undertaking for our city, and we've said right the way through that we want to get the best outcome we possibly can. This doesn't feel like the best outcome. "To that end, we'll keep working hard as a council, and there are still major decisions yet to be made when it comes to housing density and planning across much of Christchurch, so watch this space." New Zealand has one of the most unaffordable housing markets in the OECD. ADVERTISEMENT Urbanist collective Greater Ōtautahi welcomed the minister's decision. Chairperson M Grace-Stent said the decision finally brought some certainty after years of delays, decision making, submissions and hearing panels. "What we're most excited about is that Ōtautahi Christchurch is set up for the future, it has certainty around where it can grow and where it can continue to develop in the future." The decision will not mean apartment buildings spring up overnight, they said. "It's still going to be a slow developing process, just as our cities always continually change. This is just another step." The city also needed to turn its attention to improving public transport. "Ōtautahi Christchurch definitely needs a reevaluation of its transport system. We've been calling for the introduction of mass rapid transport across the city to support and facilitate the kind of growth and development that needs to happen, and to make sure that everyone has a choice about how they're getting around the city and aren't forced to just pick cars." ADVERTISEMENT Grace-Stent said the debate touched on ideas embedded in the national psyche about how and where New Zealanders live. They said the quarter-acre dream of a stand alone house on a large section is unsustainable and doesn't not always produce greater social outcomes. "Not everyone wants to live the exact same lifestyle - allowing more housing to be built allows people to make that choice for themselves. So if people want to be living on 1/4 acre block, they're allowed to, and if people want to be living in an apartment close to their friends and amenities and where they work, they also have that choice." They acknowledged that some medium and high-density housing is not built to high standards but said some of that was due to limitations of the current zoning process, which can mean the lowest bidder builds on these sites. "This is just the first step into assuring that everyone has a home that is liveable and that works for them, and is good quality. There also needs to be changes throughout the way that we are think about housing and building houses across the country," Grace-Stent said. The decisions, which come into effect immediately, are final and cannot be appealed to the Environment Court. The council has until the end of the year to decide on density rules for the rest of the city. It was unable to confirm by deadline how much it had spent fighting the density rules, but had budgeted for $7 million between 2021 and the middle of this year. By Keiller MacDuff of
