Declined Christchurch consent for planned units raises eyebrows

Wednesday, 2 October 2019

A property developer's resource consent was declined for this Spreydon, Christchurch, property.

An experienced planner says the resource consent rejected for replacing a dilapidated house with units in Christchurch had been routinely granted for similar developments in the city.

But the commissioner on the panel that declined it – against the advice of city council planning staff – stands by the decision.

Property developer James Cooney and business partner Steve Brooks bought a quake-damaged 'as is where is' house in Spreydon late last year, planning to build seven affordable units on the 800-square-metre site. They spent $30,000 on consent, planning and legal fees.

A hearings panel (made up of commissioner David Mountfort and community board members Melanie Coker and Helen Broughton) turned down the Bolton Ave project's consent on the basis the high-density design did not fit the area's character.

* Unhappy neighbours trigger urgent council look at housing rules

Property developer James Cooney outside the dilapidated house he planned to replace with several units before his resource consent application was declined by a hearings panel.

* Inner neighbourhood residents hope law changes could ease intensive development**

It took issue with the amount of outdoor space and the turning space for cars accessing the garages. The project needed consent for 12 aspects that breached district plan rules. It had support from council planning staff.

Planz Consultants senior planner Jonathan Clease said there were 'literally dozens and dozens' of very similar developments that had been given consent in Christchurch over the last decade.

The decision had raised eyebrows within Christchurch's planning community because consents for similar developments were routinely granted.

Clease said developments like this, breaching 12 district plan rules, were fairly typical for multi-unit developments.

The rules should not be treated like a speed limit, but rather as a trigger for further assessment, as many site-specific circumstances could breach rules but still deliver good results, he said.

The developer intends to leave the damaged house on the site after the resource consent was declined.

He questioned whether the panel's decision had a degree of political motivation.

Mountfort said he stood by the panel's decision and it was not appropriate to comment further.

Neither community board member responded to request for comment.

Clease said there were several pressures that affected resource consents. The district plan provided for urban growth, both at the city edges and upwards nearer to the centre, as it had since the 1990s.

Accommodating growth had to be balanced with providing different housing types for different needs, which had been changing over the last 20 years.

Housing affordability versus design was also a factor, with affordable new builds intrinsically smaller and providing less than a detached family house with a double garage.

In-filling existing neighbourhoods changed how the street looked, and the local community could be challenged by that, Clease said.

The competing outcomes led to a 'lack of consistency' in decision making regarding townhouses, where 'one person's affordable housing is another person's slums of the future'.

The Government is proposing changes that would force local councils to ease density restrictions in city centres or close to public transport, highlighting Christchurch as one of six high-growth centres the proposal would target. It would focus on high-quality streets, neighbourhoods and communities.

When announcing the plan in August, Urban Development Minister Phil Twyford said New Zealand's cities were 'failing' as council planning was restricting development and creating a pressure-cooker effect.

The council's submission on the proposal raises several concerns, including that the new policy would likely require greater intensification and in more areas than what is currently allowed in the district plan, that the city did not need the extra housing capacity, and that the policy would not consider effects on neighbourhood amenity. It calls for a better definition of what makes a quality urban environment.

It said the plan seemed better suited for cities with housing shortages such as Auckland, and doubted a one-size-fits-all solution for the country's six major urban centres would lead to the best outcomes.