The RUB is an oversimplification. Shouldn’t that be an as of right dwelling option. Imagine if we build a Gold Coast-style high rise satellite city. I forgot that planning rules are permanent and can never be changed to allow sensible developments.
We want to do density well and build great urban communities for people to live, work and play, so as far as I’m concerned it’s got to be up and out. When he talks of fixing the financing and the MUL, what he means (and a Phil Goff soundbite echoed this yesterday on Radio NZ news), that if a developer wants to build outside the present [rapid] transport modes, they better be prepared to pay for all the infrastructure its going to need, rather than assume that the council, its CCOs [AT and WaterCare], and other parties [like Vector, NZTA et al] will rush in and all put in the infrastructure in on a time frame to suit the developers wishes. We just don’t have a method in NZ to make this happen.
But we need to ensure critical aspects like amenity and environment are not ignored. The proof of the RUB working will be when a line across a piece of land doesn’t make one side worth a multiple of the other side. Then you spend 300k building a house. This implies that this government intends to do what Mayor Phil seems to have done with Panuku, pushing “affordable” to the outskirts, and making more land on the outskirts available for this. There is a limit to what market forces can do.
NZ’s safe haven status is quite attractive, regardless of capital gain. I agree -an important part of my reciprocal intensification idea was the use of a National Policy Statement in the RMA. This layer contains spatial and non-spatial (without geometry) parcels. I’ve got an article brewing at the moment trying to speak to some of these issues. But it comes at a cost of a delay of up to 10 years or so. It took 60+ replies but finally a response from someone who gets it. For more information see. Something that can work with the worldwide trend of increasing numbers of people seeing transport as Mobility as a Service. Survey Historic: A parcel that has been extinguished from the primary cadastral network but still exists in live Title estates.
Which all comes back to the cost of getting infrastructure in place.’ Yes.
There’s a lot of different terminology being thrown around here and distinguishing between them is pretty crucial here. Where are the proposed ferry terminals, the marinas?
The reason the Gold Coast is successful is because it pulls in visitors in big numbers from the southern states of Australia and also New Zealand because of its climate. If they were allowed to build up one more floor -that would be a huge increase in potential supply. Kiwibuild also depends on the government’s ability to force the council to allow far, far more mid-density development. This item was last updated on LINZ Data Service on 18 Nov 2018. Either you accept the government can intervene with the workings of the market to create a desired outcome, or you don’t. But Auckland still has not built enough houses -there is an estimated shortfall of 45,000 houses. If this has happened to the “most development ready” area (Structure plan already in place) why would you start again from scratch planning a new development outside the RUB. ‘What is required is speeding up the release of development – ready land inside the RUB. What NZ needs is a radical change so it can build more affordable houses. It might be a ‘dumb idea’ but we have a situation where a massive portion of the cost of a house at the moment is the value attached to the land. If they prefer sprawl, they will build sprawl. I think the usual case is: – you cannot get finance on that $750k property – you can get finance on that $500k property further out but you’ll have to suck up that 1 hour or longer commute. Ok, at least now we know to not take you seriously. No, people won’t. The common denominator I saw in all of those (other than Houston – obviously not an appropriate model for NZ) is that all of them make it simple to build density. While my land might cost 1000k, but once you divide it by 4-5 it’s pretty much works out the same.
Large capital gains are not necessarily a pre-requisite. Yes foreign investors are part of the problem, but “local” investors are milking it too. Primary parcels can be thought of as the 'base level' of the 'jigsaw puzzle' of all land making up New Zealand. There is no need at present to think about expanding outside the RUB. However, sprawl beyond the RUB is not the answer. For example in the case of a quarry operation:. Even without the RUB, there is still scarcity of good land because of these physical factors. For more information about this table, other property datasets, and how to relate them to each other, refer to the Property Boundary and Ownership Data Dictionary. Proposed electorate boundaries and names were released in November 2019 for public consultation. Source: Seven Sharp So we want to build most of the development we can in the city, around the transport network. A Land District is an administrative area that all titles and surveys were registered against prior to Landonline. With affordable housing (Kiwibuild) as part of it.
It is not too far fetched to say if current housing affordability conditions continue then the middle class in NZ will fracture. The Unitary plan has been inadequate. Land prices will have to come down so Auckland can build up or out. Phil Twyford needs far more imagination to sort this one out, including addressing the rampant rental market.
Often quite the reverse. The market is signalling well located land is a scarce resource (land itself being a fixed quantity!
But another issue, that varies in severity, is landbanking. A new electorate has been created in South Auckland called Takanini. Only observations that have been captured in Landonline are available. It is ridiculous that houses cost so much in Auckland -which at the end of day is only a moderate sized city by international standards. So true.
See https://twitter.com/BenRoss_AKL/status/922682349279694848. For more information see. And if you are planning a new home the difference between the infrastructure being in place next year or 9 years away makes for uncertainty. that makes total sense, and is much more sound Unfortunately I think Twyford does imply total abolition of the RUB. The successful cities all seem to have found ways to do that. Expensive housing that is often poor quality -cold, mouldy and unhealthy. Yes, that’s what I’m seeing. It is a big job, but not as tough as dealing with nationalisation, which is not too far away from becoming a political reality. The report is also available at Electoral Commission offices and public libraries.
You may use this work for commercial purposes.
The combination of this layer with the road parcels and hydro parcels equates to the primary parcels layer which provides all current parcels for New Zealand (i.e. Formerly transportblog, we provide evidence based debate on urban form, transport, housing, design, and public space. I’m happy for you to make that choice, but I’m not paying for it with my rates. Even 2 years ago, I would have said ‘over my dead body, that’s too draconian!’ the market has it’s place, but it is a limited one in terms of urban housing development. For more information see the LINZ website, APIs and web services I think that Phil Twyford has been listening to the NZ Initiative (Business Roundtable) too much on this issue. Construction companies have the confidence to invest in capital and labour to raise productivity. In most cases it’s just an outward extension of existing sprawl by a further 1-2 km, with no detail about what will happen inside of that Future Urban Zone. This means that if a good argument can be mounted to – for example – fill in the gap between Whenuapai and Kumeu to make the most of infrastructure investment, this could be possible. Super city my arse, it should be SUPER RIP OFF CITY.
Which all comes back to the cost of getting infrastructure in place. The markets ability to response to demand is very sticky. Over time booms and busts are less of an issue. The quarry could have been operating for decades and when started the city boundary was miles away. 5) The transport costs need to be closer to actual costs to get better signals to the land development market. So, are you going to ditch it, the Metropolitan Urban Limit? People will still pay more for places in the existing urban area. I don’t know why we need a council telling people what they want. There is no way AT would bother with rapid transit to Huapai and Silverdale if there was no certainty of that being where future housing occurred.
Too late in their body-wearying career to want to take on the risk of a new style of development. Economics 101.
So we are going to have a sprawl with development located on different random spots without any public transport and master plan. Landowners with developable land have less monopolistic pricing power and the result is that urban land prices are lower than they would be in a more restrictive planning environment. Required fields are marked *. 2. • Maori freehold land or Maori customary land There were three stages of public consultation on the boundary review: Read the objections and counter-objections. Imagine if the council told you what car you must own (and sleep in…).
ArcGIS Online map services
The reason why land is “expensive” is because the land utility is wrong. https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/98442811/Fixing-New-Zealand-housing-Lets-prefab-this. Name changes.
The rationale for making it easier to build new high amenity satellite towns is the same rationale for removing restrictions for building a city up, by removing some or all of the following; density restrictions, height restrictions, shade-plane, setback requirements, car parking minimums etc. LGC Ak D1 WaikatoWards type: pdf, size: 1.5 MB What is wrong with 3 story residential dwellings?
So just to summarise, there is capacity for around 137,000 dwellings in “outwards urban growth” in these future urban zoned areas – which are all still inside the Rural Urban Boundary.