$4b ‘car-free’ project bogged down in court and red tape
Analysis: At first glance a Winton development would seem to be an easy fit with the Urban Development Act, but Ka¯inga Ora says it isn't.
When the Urban Development Bill was going through its third reading in Parliament, Green MP Julie Anne Genter likened the kind of developments that would be green-lit to the solar panel-filled, almost car-free German city of Freiburg.
It’s a place so peaceful that, it is said, the only sounds you can hear are birdsong and the laughter of children.
“Imagine living in this kind of community. It means that you can walk right down to the shops, that houses were built to the highest energy-efficiency standard – incredibly warm, many with solar panels, and all of them surrounded by lush green gardens. This type of living isn’t a dream. It exists.”
The then-Minister for Urban Development Phil Twyford said the bill would enable a new type of urban development that would be good for the environment, transform communities, improve housing options, provide access to jobs, green spaces, and amenities.
Most importantly, for these big complex and sustainable developments, the bill was supposed to fix a perennial problem seen in every corner of New Zealand’s planning and consenting system: Speed – or rather, the lack of it.
‘‘This legislation is about having a public agency – Ka¯ inga Ora – that can partner with the private sector, with iwi, and with local government to de-risk these projects so that people will invest in them and make them happen,” Twyford said.
“This bill addresses the barriers to complex development by creating a streamlined process that gets decisions made upfront in an integrated way, and it will enable large-scale developments to happen much more quickly.
“It represents a new way of doing urban development. Specified Development Projects (SDPs) that are set out in this bill are the kind of complex projects that, by and large, New Zealand has not undertaken.
“These projects have a scale that means they have the potential to transform our urban areas and deliver desperately needed housing and infrastructure.”
At first glance NZX-listed property developer Winton’s $4 billion Sunfield development would seem to an easy fit with the bold visions politicians had when Parliament passed the Urban Development Act (UDA) under urgency.
Winton’s Papakura-based Sunfield development contains 4400 homes and three retirement villages, it has 22.8 hectares of green space and is powered by a renewable energy network courtesy of solar panels on the rooftops of almost every building.
The project is master-planned and carfree with transport provided by an autonomous electric shuttle fleet.
Ka¯ inga Ora runs the process behind who gets to use the UDA’s powers, but when Twyford shepherded the act through Parliament, he made it clear private and public parties would both be able to access the legislation.
But now, just over two years since the UDA became law, Winton is suing Ka¯ inga Ora for not considering Sunfield under the act.
And in December, Ka¯ inga Ora dug in, issuing a defence to Winton’s claims.
Central to Ka¯ inga Ora’s case is a set of arguments about what the UDA is actually about. It argues it is not the fasttrack tool for development Winton thinks it is and also questions whether Sunfield is the type of development that should be considered.
A spokesperson for Housing Minister Megan Woods’ office says the UDA process is not “a fast-track alternative to the normal RMA plan change and consenting processes”.
“There are other planning pathways such as the Streamlined Planning Process available to developers which are available for suitable developments.
“A project unlikely to be approved under the RMA is likely to also face challenges under the UDA as collaboration with territorial authorities, mana whenua and other key stakeholders is still required in either process.”
National Party MP Chris Bishop says the UDA is effectively now bogged down with the same types of problems the Infrastructure Funding and Financing