NPS - URBAN DEVELOPMENT
The NPS-UD replaces and expands upon the 2016 NPS on Urban Development Capacity, setting out what Councils must consider when assessing the provision of sufficient development capacity. Cultural, typology, locational, and environmental factors all now inform whether development capacity is deemed sufficient and feasible. Arguably, this presents more reasons and factors that limit what can be developed and where.
The NPS-UD replaces and expands upon the 2016 NPS on Urban Development Capacity, setting out what Councils must consider when assessing the provision of sufficient development capacity. Cultural, typology, locational and environmental factors all now inform whether development capacity is deemed sufficient and feasible. Arguably, this presents more reasons and factors that limit what This NPS demands a ‘well-functioning urban environment’. This standard is arguably being applied to greenfield development. However, the same standard isn’t being applied to existing urban areas. As a result, we are seeing the incremental degradation of urban environments and communities across the country. In an Auckland context, many suburbs were completely up-zoned to high density zoning through the Auckland Unitary Plan process. This resulted in increased housing supply through in-fill development, but a massive shortfall in supporting infrastructure and limited consideration of how and where this density was to occur. Only now are we seeing new houses come on stream, with local roads and motorways starting to clog.
THE ISSUE AND THE FIX
The major issue within urban development is the disconnect between zoning and the provision of infrastructure. The NPS does address infrastructure as a supporting requirement for feasible development. However, is vital to well-functioning cities that infrastructure (rather than zoning) drives growth in key urban centres and regions. A ‘broad brush’ zoning first, infrastructure second approach has presented proven challenges and negative outcomes.
Replacing zones with precincts, supported by a structure plan enables a greater focus on town centre connection and amenity, with density focused around transport nodes. A structure plan provides a level of certainty of actual infrastructure commitment. This approach provides for the unique characteristics of a community, while ensuring development occurs in the right parts of a town and community. Simply removing all development from existing suburbs is not feasible.
A balance must be struck between unbridled development and retaining neighbourhood character. When applied appropriately, protections and overlays can achieve this balance by focusing development in the right parts of a community. Reducing development contributions for projects around town centres is an example of how to incentivise centralised urban development outcomes. The NPS, aspirational as it is, does not provide those tangible incentives.
Future urban zoning also remains a feature of the NPS, and the wider New Zealand planning system. The identification of rural land as suitable for future urban development is a root cause of inflated land values and house prices. Signposted future development created an instant market for future urban land. Investors bet on the up-zoning of rural land, which inflated values. This is clear evidence that zoning has a direct effect on land prices. Future urban zoning is a major source of housing unaffordability, with undeveloped land now being around 20% of the total cost of a new greenfield home.
This raises serious questions about the effectiveness of zoning and the impact it is having on the affordability of housing. Competition for live zoned land in an upward market gets built into the cost of the end-user’s house. Instead, the focus should be on providing infrastructure and incentivising Town Centre development. There are international examples of cities doing away with zoning in favour of an infrastructure-first approach, based on efficiency and connectivity. Clearly rehashing the same principles and objective of planning and land-use isn’t working.