“In response to out-of-sequence growth, mainly housing projects, councils will be able to amend their development contributions.
“It’s a complicated area of policy, at the moment the charges are locked in at the time a consent is granted and sometimes it can end up out of whack with what it should be.”
He said in most cases, it will mean developers paying more to councils.
It will be law by Thursday, he expected.
“Where a development creates additional infrastructure costs, an appropriate share should be met by the development rather than being shifted on to existing ratepayers,” Bishop said.
“It was a pragmatic response to something that needed fixing.”
He’s met with a lot of the mayors who have been concerned and made it clear to him they are worried about the looming costs.
Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) has joined a chorus of mayors calling for residential developments to be paused.
LGNZ vice-president Dan Gordon welcomed Bishop’s move to make changes to development contributions.
“Today’s announcement shows the Government is listening,” Gordon said.
“We welcome the Government’s decision to include projects with a substantive application already lodged. This strengthening of development contributions was one of the recommendations in LGNZ’s four-point plan to ensure growth pays for growth and communities aren’t left carrying costs they didn’t create.”
“This is a positive step and an acknowledgment that improvements were needed to the way infrastructure costs are recovered under Fast-track. However, they’ll come too late for already approved projects, which means that councils still lose out on significant revenue.”
Auckland councillor Richard Hills, an outspoken critic of some of the developments, said he too was pleased the Government was listening.
“It’s too late and fixes one glaring error,” Hills told the Herald in a text.
“That error has already locked in a $450-650m cost to all Auckland ratepayers and taxpayers which is the estimated amount we can’t now retrospectively recover through Development Contributions for Sunfield and Delmore.
“The change doesn’t allow us to recover the costs of maintaining and running services to these unplanned communities, we estimate those costs to be in the billions, not millions.”
Auckland Council last week voted to look at ways to either require developers to pay more for fast-track projects or send a message to residents that the council will not provide any services to them.
Hills said today’s move would not change the council’s position.
“We are considering all options to charge costs back to these developments and we are serious about finding ways to not provide these places with things like noise control, buses, animal control and other services.
“Fast-track for residential developments is not how you plan a city, but it is how you shovel massive social, environmental and economic costs on to all Aucklanders and the next generation,” Hills said.
He’s urging all parties running for government to campaign on removing residential from fast-track and stop taking the local out of local government.
LGNZ said there was more work to do.
“We still think there’s merit in pausing future referrals, requiring consideration of cumulative effects, and reviewing Fast-track for housing to ensure it works well with the new planning system,” Gordon said.
“We’d now like to see the remaining recommendations in our four-point plan progressed. We’d welcome working with minister Bishop and minister Watts to make Fast-track work on the ground.
That four-point plan includes the temporary pause on ministerial referrals to the scheme, requiring the fast-track panel to consider the cumulative effects of multiple projects in one area and commission a longer-term review of the system to ensure it fits in with the new planning system developed by replacing the Resource Management Act.
LGNZ’s move follows letters sent by Auckland, Queenstown, Waimakariri and Selwyn councils demanding a pause on fast-track housing projects.
The law change will also allow councils to use development contributions to recover the capital costs incurred by another council in meeting the increased demands on their infrastructure attributable to growth imposed by fast-track development.
That portion of funds can then be transferred back to that council.
Local Government Minister Simon Watts says councils will be able to amend their development contribution policies where necessary to recover eligible growth-related costs.
“Importantly, councils will be able to make those targeted amendments without going through the usual consultation process, allowing them to respond quickly where an existing policy does not adequately reflect the infrastructure demands of a development,” Watts said.
“Any amendment will need to be adopted within six months of Fast-track approval, notified to the authorised person and published as soon as practicable.
“We are also addressing cross-boundary infrastructure costs. Where growth in one council area creates eligible infrastructure costs for another council, the collecting council will be able to recover those costs and transfer the appropriate share of the development contribution.”
The changes will apply to all projects, unless an applicant has received a draft decision to approve or decline a project.
“This creates a clear transition point and helps councils recover infrastructure costs from eligible projects while giving certainty to projects within the fast-track process,” Bishop said.
“Fast-track has been a much-needed circuit-breaker for projects that should be creating jobs, delivering homes and growing local economies. These changes maintain that certainty and effectiveness while making sure the infrastructure funding system can keep up.”
A petition by residents of Waimauku West calling for a project there to be halted is also gaining support.
Katie Bradford is a Senior Correspondent at the Herald. She has been a broadcast journalist for over 20 years and was based in the press gallery for 10 years. She specialises in politics, business and Auckland issues.