6,000 new homes for Auckland

October 10th, 2013 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

Sarah Harvey at Stuff reports:

Up to 6000 new homes will be built in 10 areas of Auckland in the first step by the Government and to try to solve Auckland’s housing crisis.

The announcement today of the Special Housing Areas, by Auckland Mayor Len Brown and Housing Minister Nick Smith, comes after the Government and council this year signed an accord to run through until 2016 to increase the number of quality affordable homes in Auckland.

Smith said today land supply was the most “critical issue” when it came to addressing housing supply and affordability in Auckland. The first batch of land was a “significant step towards the Auckland Housing Accord’s target of consenting for 39,000 new homes over three years”.

The special housing areas announced today are in Papakura, East Tamaki, Pukekohe, Hobsonville, Kumeu, West Harbour and Orakei.

Excellent. Freeing up land and making it easier for new houses to be built is badly needed.

Applications for subdivisions would be considered by council under fast-tracked mechanisms. These aimed to deliver approvals within six months for greenfield developments, compared to the current average of three years, and three months for brownfield developments, compared to the current average of one year.

This will help allow supply to match demand, rather than lag behind it.

The Bankers’ Association said today’s announcement was a positive step in addressing the housing supply issue in Auckland.

Association chief executive Kirk Hope said the big issue in the Auckland housing market was a lack of supply.

“Freeing up land for housing is a move in the right direction to help improve supply where it’s needed and alleviate pressure on house prices.”

All the independent analysis of the housing cost issue has concluded that the major increase in cost has been the land.

Tags: ,

14 Responses to “6,000 new homes for Auckland”

  1. alex Masterley (1,517 comments) says:

    The problem is that none of these areas apart from Orakei are where the punters want to live.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. swan (665 comments) says:

    alex Masterley,

    It is all substitutable. Here is a good post explaining that:

    http://aaronschiff.net/2013/08/something-that-cannot-carry-on-must-eventually-stop/

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. thePeoplesFlag (247 comments) says:

    Only 10% are designated affordable (under 500K). So 600 houses out of 6000. Hardly going to do much for the Auckland affordable housing crisis. Just more window dressing from a neo-liberal government that will spin any story rather than admit we in a situation of acute market failure and build the thousands of affordable houses we need.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Harriet (4,990 comments) says:

    3rd world immigrants have created the problem.

    They work for fuck all. Pay no tax. And get WFF.

    And buy up all the cheap housing.

    They’re of no benefit at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Elaycee (4,393 comments) says:

    The problem is that none of these areas apart from Orakei are where the punters want to live.

    Actually, the ‘problem’ is that there is a prevailing sense of ‘entitleitis’ from entry level buyers that they can somehow buy a $500k home in (for example) Herne Bay, with a deposit of $25k. And when they suddenly find out they need a 20% deposit and the homes in Herne Bay start at twice / three times the price (and they can’t afford to purchase there), they run off bleating “it just isn’t fair”….

    The concept of buying a first home at the ‘lower end’ of the scale [read: not in Herne Bay] and gradually working up to something more modern with a water view in a nice leafy suburb, is totally lost on the “I want it now” brigade.

    Now, that’s the problem

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Fisiani (1,040 comments) says:

    The new 6,000 homes that will be built in Auckland will be occupied by 6,000 families living somewhere else in Auckland. That allows another 6,000 families to live in the houses vacated by the first 6,000. ultimately after about 3 moves that leaves 6,000 very affordable houses and there are not 6,000 homeless families on the streets of Auckland. In short every house that is built and occupied frees up more affordable houses.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. seerob1946 (24 comments) says:

    you can bet there will be no forward thinking in any of these projects in regards to transport e.g. rail for the future.. they will just be gormless souless subdivisions, further adding to the detriment of Auckland as a “liveable city”

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. swan (665 comments) says:

    “thePeoplesFlag (4) Says:
    October 10th, 2013 at 10:18 am
    Only 10% are designated affordable (under 500K). So 600 houses out of 6000. Hardly going to do much for the Auckland affordable housing crisis. Just more window dressing from a neo-liberal government that will spin any story rather than admit we in a situation of acute market failure and build the thousands of affordable houses we need.”

    Peoples flag. Take a look at the link I posted above. Increases in supply in any part of the housing market will transmit to the rest of the housing market. So it is not as simple as saying what you have said.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    “The problem is that none of these areas apart from Orakei are where the punters want to live.”

    I disagree. Seen the prices in Kumeu lately?

    Hobsonville is OK.

    West Harbour – should be ok. tons of land opposite the early 90’s development.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. mandk (998 comments) says:

    “All the independent analysis of the housing cost issue has concluded that the major increase in cost has been the land”

    Are we talking about costs or prices here? They are not the same thing. The cost of land, and hence the cost of new houses, follows the price that buyers are willing/able to pay. In turn, willingness/ability to pay is influenced largely by credit conditions. The experience of the past 10 years shows that the heating of the housing market, followed by its cooling, followed by its heating again, has been driven by the availability and terms of mortgage finance.

    The amount of land you have is not critical. If house buyers can’t get the finance they need, developers won’t bid for land and houses won’t get built.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. KevinH (1,229 comments) says:

    There is a large portion of developed land at the end of the North Western motorway locally known as Westgate that is ready to go now with infrastructure and services in place. This development can cover half of the intended 6000 houses alone and has been in limbo for 5 years as a result of bickering between the council and developers and now it is all go.
    Westgate is a go ahead area with excellent shopping and schools in the vicinity as well as being handy to the city via the motorway and is also close to West Auckland’s iconic beaches Piha, Bethells and Muriwai. Recreational activities abound in this area, fishing, tramping, biking to name a few. West Auckland is also blessed with vineyards and numerous country cafe’s offering good food and good wine and a lifestyle many city dwellers would envy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Bob R (1,377 comments) says:

    Restricting the number of people entering NZ would also help ease the “housing crisis”.

    “The relationship between migration flows and housing prices has been analysed by Coleman and Landon-Lane (2007). They found that a net immigration flow equal to 1% of the population (10 per 1000 inhabitants) is associated with an approximately 10% increase in house prices. This relationship has existed since the 1960s. Limiting immigration swings could therefore lead to a substantial reduction in future house prices and housing debt.”

    http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/reviews-consultation/savingsworkinggroup/pdfs/swg-report-jan11.pdf

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Viking2 (11,491 comments) says:

    I’m kinda bemused by this build 6000 houses.
    I have yet to see any mention of who will build 6000 houses.
    Oh yep they may get the sections organized (or may not as fate dictates), but who is going to build the houses and who is going to buy them?

    Smith being in charge will probably announce next that the State is going to build them.

    Its what we would expect from that wet drip.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Odakyu-sen (679 comments) says:

    To nitpick: I often read that “the population of Auckland is growing” when what the writer really means is that “the population of Auckland is being inflated” (by the inflow of people from outside the region).

    What with the lower birthrate and the exodus of younger people, the pressure on housing space should naturally sort itself out. Is Auckland really “naturally sustainable”?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote