The environment select committee reported back at 7pm on its deadline day, on a law that would allow apartment blocks throughout our biggest cities – but it ran out of time to make any changes
Critical details of the new medium-density housing law are expected to be negotiated in a tough back-room talks between the new-look National leadership and Labour ministers.
That comes after a parliamentary select committee failed to make any changes to the contentious bill by its Thursday night deadline. Though it has reported back to Parliament with recommendations around increased outdoor space and a greater say for city councils, the adoption of the committee's changes now relies on ministers' goodwill next week.
"If the bill failed to address the recommendations made by the committee and the concerns that we have raised, then we would regretfully have to walk away. I don't think that the Government wants that to happen. And I don't think it's our intention." – Nicola Willis, National
The committee, chaired by Green Party MP Eugenie Sage, has agreed on the importance of greater housing intensification to address the housing crisis, and agreed that dwellings should be allowed to be built 11 to 12 metres high throughout most of Auckland, Tauranga, Hamilton, Wellington and Christchurch.
But it recommends ministers pull the roofline away from the boundary – and it is understood National is seeking to go even further. The bill, as it stands, would allow a new apartment block's roofline to overshadow the boundary up to 6 metres high, with a 60° recession plane (see diagram above).
The committee recommends that boundary shadow be lowered to 5 metres, and National's housing spokesperson Nicola Willis told Newsroom the party wants it lowered still more. "We believe that it would potentially reduce sunlight and amenity loss for neighbours if this reduction were to occur, while still allowing for a healthy degree of intensification."
The committee also recommends councils have a greater say in qualifying matters that will further restrict the new buildings – for instance, historic heritage neighbourhoods, the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water and wāhi tapu, the natural character of the coastal environment, outstanding natural features and landscapes, and significant risks from natural hazards. Again, National wants to go further.
"If the bill failed to address the recommendations made by the committee and the concerns that we have raised, then we would regretfully have to walk away," Willis said. "I don't think that the Government wants that to happen. And I don't think it's our intention.
"I think it's in everyone's interests that concerns raised at committee and concerns raised by National are addressed, and that this is an enduring bipartisan deal. There's no use in an accord that creates bad law."
"Years of work and millions of dollars in land development design will have been wasted, and the homes due to be delivered by these schemes will be delayed by years. We heard at committee that there may be as many as 15,000 homes in Auckland and Waikato, and almost 10,000 in Canterbury, affected in this way." – ACT minority report
The Government, too, seems prepared to lower the boundary shadow below five metres – though Ministers Megan Wood and David Parker weren't giving away much detail.
“We are carefully considering the select committee’s report and recommendations, and will move to adjust the balance between the desire for additional housing and provision of sunlight and amenity," they said, in a joint statement.
The select committee recommends every ground unit have at least 20 square metres of outdoor living space, and 4 metres space outside the main windows so residents aren't looking straight at another building – proposed changes that are welcomed by the Green Party.
"The select committee has requested and been told that it will get to see the supplementary order paper amending the bill before it goes to the House," Sage said.
But despite having the chair of the committee, she wasn't able to get majority support to provide greater protection for trees as the Greens wished.
"The risk is, for the infill development and the small side yards and front yards and the fact that a resource consent is not required, that we will see a loss of urban trees," she said.
"And so our solution to that, which we're still trying to get through the process, is to increase the landscaped area to 35 percent, and to have some controls on felling of trees over 6 metres."
Both the Greens and the ACT Party published minority reports, describing further changes they would like made to the bill.
Act is worried that proposed greenfields developments that are already in the planning pipeline will now be forced to go back to square one through a drafting anomaly in the bill.
"The bill will actually cancel many planned homes because Schedule 3 nullifies high quality master planned developments which will be required to adopt the Medium Density Residential Standards for lower-density areas of their developments," ACT's minority report says. "Years of work and millions of dollars in land development design will have been wasted, and the homes due to be delivered by these schemes will be delayed by years.
"We heard at committee that there may be as many as 15,000 homes in Auckland and Waikato, and almost 10,000 in Canterbury, affected in this way."
Last night, Act leader David Seymour said the environment committee had returned it without amendment because it didn’t have time to fix its many flaws. “This bill was conjured in secrecy with advice from only government officials, the people who gave us KiwiBuild. It is totally impractical, and its net result will be building the same number of houses in different places while destroying urban design.
“Labour and National will now have to cobble together changes in the last stages of lawmaking by this Thursday if they want the bill passed this year as they’ve promised. It is disastrous lawmaking."
