Housing density panel will cost Christchurch ratepayers $4.2m

Thursday, 30 November 2023

Christchurch city councillors will discuss whether to continue with the hearings panel at its meeting next week.

Christchurch ratepayers are forking out $4.2 million on a housing density panel, despite the new coalition Government throwing uncertainty into the process.

An independent panel, convened by the Christchurch City Council to consider housing intensification rules imposed by the former Government, started hearing from submitters in October.

Calls to halt the hearings before they began, due to the impending election, were dismissed by the panel.

The intensification plan being considered allows three residential buildings of three storeys each to be built, without a resource consent, across vast parts of the city. It also allows for higher limits in main suburban centres.

The plan, which has garnered strong opposition from residents’ groups, provides enough space for housing for the next 150 years.

But the new Government says it will now make the density standards optional for councils, causing some to question where this leaves the hearings panel.

Council planning and consents manager Mark Stevenson said the council had yet to be briefed on the implications of the coalition agreement, and a halt to the hearings panel process required a council decision.

However, the council was not able to stop the process unless the necessary changes were made to the Resource Management Act and the National Policy Statement on Urban Development, he said.

The council will discuss the issue next week.

The hearings panel process is expected to cost the council $4.2m.

Stevenson confirmed the council had already spent $2m on the hearings process and its total budget was $4.2m.

The cost was comparable to that of other cities going through the process, Stevenson said.

Some councillors have already indicated their preference for the hearings to continue.

The Press asked all 16 councillors and mayor Phil Mauger if the panel should be halted. Of the eight councillors to respond, five (Sara Templeton, Kelly Barber, Andrei Moore, Tyrone Fields, and Tyla Harrison-Hunt) favoured continuing with the panel process.

Councillors James Gough and Sam MacDonald wanted to press pause while councillor Yani Johanson and Mauger were non-committal.

Templeton said the proposed changes included rules on other things like tree coverage and penalties for developers if they felled mature trees.

“We've spent a huge amount of ratepayers' money doing the planning and legal work for this plan change and I'd be reluctant to throw that away just because it is no longer compulsory.”

Templeton said the plan enabled more homes to be built adjacent to the central city and additional housing was needed near key public transport routes.

“We simply cannot afford to build out onto the productive soils around the city - it’s bad for the environment and expensive building the infrastructure to support it.”

Templeton said she wanted to see the results of the community consultation and submissions process via the panel, before making any decisions.

A number of residents’ groups across the city have opposed the new density proposals.

Moore said shutting out the voices of people who had already submitted to the panel at this late stage would be “anti-democratic”.

Barber said the panel should go ahead because the need to consider intensification was not going away.

“I think most of us realise we need to grow up as a city, figuratively and literally. It just becomes a matter around where are the best places to do this.”

Fields said the council needed to make brave calls to keep the city being the place people want to come and live.

“We need to be far-sighted on this.”

However, Gough said pressing pause on the hearings would make sense until there was some direction from the Government.

MacDonald said he wanted to see next week’s report before making a final decision, but his preference was to pause the hearings.

Mauger said the council had yet to be briefed on the issue and it would be premature to comment.

The council is due to consider the panel’s recommendations in April.

Tony Simons, of the Combined Residents’ Association and Riccarton Bush Kilmarnock Residents’ Association which had previously asked for a halt, said given the process was half way through now, he wondered if there would be helpful information to come out of it.

But he also questioned whether some of that information could have been gained another way.