Snapshot on Emergency/Social Housing

Snapshot on Emergency/Social Housing
Tuesday 22 November, 2022
Download our Natural & Environment Bill Snapshot here
The effects of emergency and social housing, both positive and adverse, are currently the subject of hot debate in many of our communities.
Amplified by our local and national economies emerging into a post-COVID world and the focus on increasing residential density through a suite of plan changes across Aotearoa to enable greater housing supply and choice. Against this backdrop it is understandable that the Government wishes to limit procedural challenges and delays motivated by NIMBYism.
Sections 108(d), 223(8)(e) and 512(1)(c) of the Natural and Built Environment Bill proposes to prohibit the plan making, resource consent application and notice of requirement processes respectively, in consideration of adverse effects arising from the use of land for activities such as emergency, transitional, community or social housing.
The same prohibition fetters the considerations of Boards of Inquiry under clause 19(2)(c) in Schedule 6 and Independent Hearings Panels under clause 126(2)(c) of Schedule 7.
While consideration of the positive effects of such land uses can take place, the Bill does not allow any person performing decision making or recommendation roles to have regard to any adverse effect arising from the use of the land by:
- people on low incomes;
- people with special housing needs; or
- people whose disabilities mean that they need support or supervision in their housing.
The Bill does not define ‘low income’, ‘special housing needs’ or ‘support or supervision in housing’. In the absence of these statutory definitions, years’ worth of judicial interpretation looms large on the horizon if parties are left trying to work out whether a particular recommendation or decision overstepped the line between what the eventual Act said they could and could not have regard to.
However, of greater concern is the fact that the Bill’s current approach would not allow or enable the transparent and objective assessment and management of adverse effects arising from these land uses through plan provisions or conditions.
Having recently worked through a seven-day hearing with a consent authority client to consider and decide resource consents for 13 emergency housing sites, it is sobering to reflect that the complex adverse effects resulting from this land use had the potential to not only impact the surrounding community, but also impact vulnerable emergency housing occupants themselves.
The assessment by professional expert witnesses of basic needs such as provision for adequate play space for children, management of crowding and provision for personal safety and wellbeing is at risk of being lost through Government denying the consideration and regulation of these matters when recommendations and decisions are made.
One alternative approach, which could both address Government’s desire to constrain NIMBYism without constraining the assessment and management of these adverse effects, could be to restrict standing to appeal such matters rather than restrict the important assessment and consideration of them in the first place.
There are bound to be other alternative approaches, which could ensure that the purpose of the proposed NBA, in this context, to enable use of the environment in a way that manages adverse effects, is achieved rather than ignored.
While we await confirmation of the closing date for submissions on the Natural and Built Environments Act ('NBA'), we welcome your comments and observations on NBA.
We have a team of experts here to help if you would like to prepare and lodge a submission.
Author
Talk to one of our experts
Related Articles

Councils challenge to transfer of water services rejected in High Court
Thursday 30 March, 2023

When the rubber hits the road - All aboard Aotearoa's challenge
Tuesday 11 October, 2022

Declarations that an Enactment Inconsistent with Bill of Rights
Tuesday 11 October, 2022

Proposed mandatory consideration of specific Māori representation
Tuesday 11 October, 2022

New Regime for Protected Disclosures (Whistleblower legislation)
Wednesday 29 June, 2022

Operative plans and proposed plans: what to do when there is a significant policy shift?
Wednesday 30 March, 2022

Notices of requirement are relevant for resource consent applications
Wednesday 30 March, 2022

Avoidance policies reign in the wake of King Salmon, but what do they require?
Wednesday 30 March, 2022

Court gives guidance on consultation and decision-making process
Wednesday 30 March, 2022

Cultural evidence and the continued draw of the overall judgment
Tuesday 21 December, 2021

Fluoridation debate lifted from shoulders of local government
Tuesday 21 December, 2021

Will new housing density rules increase contributions for developers?
Thursday 28 October, 2021

Judicial review of Hamilton City Council's development contributions policy
Tuesday 5 October, 2021

Lease of Wanaka Airport set aside due to insufficient consultation
Tuesday 15 June, 2021

What if an abatement notice requires you to breach the Resource Management Act?
Tuesday 15 June, 2021

“No ‘wine-ing’ covenants” declined for a subdivision consent in Gibbston Valley
Tuesday 15 June, 2021

From car parking fine to judicial review of a council’s code of conduct
Tuesday 15 June, 2021

Councils remain liable for compliance of contractors with the RMA
Thursday 18 March, 2021

Randerson Report released: New Direction for Resource Management
Wednesday 5 August, 2020

Could companies be liable to the public for the harm caused by their emissions?
Tuesday 10 March, 2020

Avoiding double penalties when sentencing a company and director
Thursday 23 April, 2020

Can an easement be granted over an esplanade reserve for a commercial activity?
Thursday 12 December, 2019

Draft National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2019 for consultation
Thursday 3 October, 2019

Local authority requiring monetary contributions on designations
Thursday 20 June, 2019

Bella Vista: MBIE Report highlights failure to perform statutory functions
Tuesday 9 April, 2019

Recent decision on "affected persons" highlights the importance of context
Wednesday 28 November, 2018

High Court finds Council liable in negligence for damage from fallen tree
Thursday 27 September, 2018

Court upholds sensible approach to local authority works on private property
Tuesday 24 July, 2018

Must Councils accept an assertion that a person is ‘suitably qualified'?
Friday 9 March, 2018
