sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

As the arguments continue over 'how much is enough?' Auckland's residential construction market IS now seriously ramping up

As the arguments continue over 'how much is enough?' Auckland's residential construction market IS now seriously ramping up

By David Hargreaves

One of the interesting things about engaging in carping/whingeing/bleating about how a problem is not being dealt with is that you can deafen yourself to the sound of progress actually being made on said problem.

I think it is time to acknowledge that genuine progress IS being made on Auckland's perceived shortage of new housing.

As my first paragraph indicates there has been, and continues to be, a terrific amount of noise around this issue. First there was the cacophony of: "Auckland's not building enough houses!!!!" And general shrieking and carrying on.

Then there's been Government Action Man Nick "I'll get stuck in and crack heads together" Smith with the noise around the Auckland Housing Accord and his efforts in generally seeking to insert a broom under the Auckland Council's sensitive bits in order to elicit the desired urgency of response.

Then there's been the ever-trying (take that expression as you will, it has two potential meanings) efforts of the the Labour opposition to point out that the welter of new sites approved under the housing accord is not translating into things actually being built (just perhaps overlooking the fact that even a fast-tracked approval process has a lag between something appearing on a drawing board and a house appearing in a new street).

So, between all this, and the comments of all and sundry that even a huge acceleration in the numbers of new Auckland houses being built won't, probably ever, never, till the end of time, get rid of the shortage, it is very easy to miss the fact that already Auckland's housing construction figures are now starting to approach historic highs.

The latest figures from Statistics New Zealand showed a big surge in the number of approvals for new Auckland dwellings in July.

It's worth putting the 1116 dwelling consents for July into some historic perspective.

Stats NZ has break-out figures for Auckland only as far back as March 1991. In that time the record high number of consents for a month is 1945 recorded in October 2002. It is to be assumed that month probably included fairly major apartment and/or retirement village projects because it's an absolute stand-out. Otherwise no other month has seen the figures exceed 1400, while that 1116 figure for July was the highest for any month since March 2005 and the third highest ever figure for a July.

That big July surge took the total number of Auckland dwelling consents for the first seven months of this year to 5149, which is up 22.2% on the 4214 recorded at the same time a year ago. As an indication of how far things have gone, for the first seven months of 2011 there were just 1959 dwellings approved.

If, and of course it's a big if, the 22.2% improvement in this year's figures compared with last year's was maintained for the full calendar year, we would be looking at around 9325 dwelling consents this year compared with the actual total of 7632 in 2014.

A figure in excess of 9000 would be easily the most since 2004 and would in fact be the fifth highest ever since the start of the break-out figures in 1991. The most ever recorded was 12,182 in 2002, which was to be the start of three consecutive years of in-excess of 11,000 consents. The trough was 2009 following the Global Financial Crisis, when there were just 3475 consents.

So, it can be seen that while the carping continues about Auckland not building enough houses, the numbers are already much higher than they were not so long ago and are moving Auckland toward historic highs.

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment has been putting out reports on the 'pipeline' of building activity, the most recent of these in July.

Its forward projections for Auckland were revised upward from the forecasts of a year earlier. Auckland's forecast to get 80,000 new dwellings in the six years to the end of 2020, which would blow all other historical rates of building in the city out of the water. Activity is projected to peak at 14,000 new dwellings in the 2017/18 period.

At the current rate of progress, it certainly looks like those figures will be attained - particularly as the Christchurch residential rebuild appears to have peaked earlier than was originally forecast - so potentially freeing up more resources for the Auckland market.

So, this is all good news. Whether of course even 14,000 new dwellings a year in Auckland is enough to keep up with the demand is something that people will continue to discuss/argue.

The probably key factor that wasn't really an issue (or not to the extent it is now) when the first serious discussions about ramping up Auckland residential development were being undertaken is the rising tide of inbound migration.

It's a fair bet to say that when the August figures are released later this month they will show annual net inbound migration to have topped 60,000, which compares with a fairly long-held previous high water mark of around 42,000 from the early 2000s.

Statistics NZ figures show that for the year to July, out of the more than 59,000 net immigrants into the country, more than 27,000 of them were recorded as settling in the Auckland region. That's consistent with recent patterns of close enough to 50% of new migrants coming into the largest city. And 27,000 new people to house is a lot, let's face it.

While the Government is now making efforts to encourage new migrants to go to other parts of the country (a long overdue move in my opinion), you suspect that more will need to be done. And how long can it be before the Government is forced to concede that our current immigration settings are too loose. Quite simply, with economic conditions in Australia and the world in general not looking buoyant, it is hard to see the normal strong outflows of Kiwis resuming in the foreseeable future.

So, while progress is really being made, and the Auckland housing machine is starting to crank up, thanks in reasonable part to Government efforts, it's probably over to the Government to give matters a further helping hand. Quite simply, around 14,000 new houses a year will make a big difference in Auckland on current rates of expected natural population growth. But keep adding a net 27,000 people from outside every year and no, not so much.

It will be very interesting to see how this all develops.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

43 Comments

...this is so freaken tiresome. Aucklanders can't move for traffic, the infrastructure needs billions, yet the solution is more houses? How about less migration. Damn John Key.

Up
0

How about more homes and more infrastructure?

Up
0

harhar-hardy-harhar

Infrastructure - well they are already planning on paralleling the southern motorway from Manukau to Drury - including compulsory acquisition of houses and land that are in the way

First - can you imagine how much it will cost when they get to planning the inner stages from Manukau into the CBD

Second - this sounds like a repeat of the original building of the southern motorway - which they did in stages - began at Manukau in to Penrose - then Penrose to Greenlane, then Greenlane to Newmarket, then Newmarket to Symonds Street, then Symonds Street down Grafton Gully into Wellesley Street - long before Spaghetti Junction was built

All backside about face - they should have started at the CBD and built outward - because each extension just added more and more traffic that got tipped out into a bottleneck - do they never ever learn

Up
0

I know which is quicker

Up
0

Great that means new homes to buy and rent out to those who need rental homes while they save for their first home. Traffic is always very busy in every big city in the world. Try getting around LA even with its motorways. If you don't like heavy traffic go live in a smaller city.

Up
0

..... good grief. Thats why I dont live in LA, thats why I live in NZ....thats why I object to the importation of the problems of over poulation to our gem of a country. The masses want to be here becasue we are not like them, but bringing them in is turning us into what they want to leave behind. How about you hop it to Bejing or LA......

Up
0

One-hundred-and-four traffic lights:-
I live on one side of the city, my son and daughter-in-law live on the other side of the city
104 traffic lights from my place to theirs - mostly red - about 22 km's away
I've counted them - you get so much time at red lights might as well count them

soon to be resident in NZ in a place which is 2 traffic lights away from the CBD and 27 kms

Up
0

Get a life, live in a country town. I can drive for around 40kms to Masterton or Palmerston North (or is that North Palmerston?) without hitting one traffic light.

Up
0

I would rather live in LA with its beautiful weather and cheaper cost of living than live in your neck of the woods and that is saying something. Gloomy cold windy weather and no work prospects for the average person.

Up
0

Have you tried Hamilton? There is much less traffic there. Some of us actually like progress. More people = larger market = economies of scale = cheaper consumer products = deflation = lower for longer interest rates = rising asset values.

Up
0

I have a horrible feeling you believe that.
Oh but tell us, what do you think the optimum number of people is, the number that we can say, that's it, we need to stop now as there is not enough for everyone

Up
0

I can't believe you believe that.

Up
0

Believe what? That we have a finite planet?

Up
0

Seriously? So more congestion, more overloaded infrastructure with no real plans in the foreseeable future to develop it before adding to the population is....."Progress" in your eyes? wow..just wow.

So on that basis Mexico City must be very "Progressive" just like Shanghai or Manila or Los Angeles -...what an absolute load of nonsense.
What it actually equates to is a poorer standard of living despite what your house may be "worth" and Auckland becoming like any other crowded, filthy, clogged nasty city.
It does nothing to drive any price down - do you seriously think more people will equal cheaper consumer products.....ummmm no. This sounds like a neo-con regurgitation...

Up
0

I've got pictures of battery people in their rented battery apartments just constantly consuming all these cheap consumables and throwing the wrappers out of the windows. Something to aspire to, eh.

Up
0

Yep, "progress".

Progress means 'onward movement', people like sadr might aspire for people to have to live like battery hen. He may wish to proceed (progress) in this direction, for others this is the opposite of what's desirable. But you know, the lure of cheap electronics...

Up
0

You are kidding aren't you. Why would anyone leave Auckland's access to water for boring old Hamilton. Or for Palmerston North?

Up
0

....much of your water comes from Hamilton...you're running out of that too.

Up
0

Sadly not even this lovely country will escape the over population of the world. Auckland needs to go up and out unfortunately.

Up
0

The world's human population has already gone past the sustainable number for the planet

Up
0

in about 1920

Up
0

Sadly not even this lovely country will escape the over population of the world. Auckland needs to go up and out unfortunately.

Up
0

we can, by stopping the net inflow and the numbers of births.

Up
0

Are you suggesting a one child limit?

Up
0

Or increasing the number of deaths?

Up
0

Interesting that when I was at school in the 80s and 90s we (kiwi kids) were ear bashed about the world being overpopulated and running out of resources and we all need smaller families etc and here we go 20 years later actively filling the country with people that do not have the same psychological aversion to breeding.

It seems there is some full blown invasion conspiracy against NZ natives.

Up
0

Iif NZ had a population of under a million we would be much better off economically. And everything else.

Up
0

Females educated, with choice about their fertility have fewer children, delay reproduction and many even decide not to reproduce at all, so with a female population who have control of their lives and reproduction you don't need arbitrary about birth rates, it pretty much happens by itself, there is even room for the odd few who may wish to have half a dozen kids under these circumstances, its no-one is forced to have that many.
What is needed when you no longer have growth is a new way of doing things so that the human race can continue to prosper without it.

Up
0

While you are correct the context is not. It is also an effect depending on the energy use per capita ie how developed a nation is. So developed nations have a small less than needed replacement rate and use a huge kwh per capita per day. Developing nations would need to get significantly higher energy use and development to also see that effect make a difference. So 1.5billion ppl in the developed world need to become 7billion overnight almost literally. No more growth means by default those other aspiring 5.5billion cannot become "developed" and use 230kwh? each per day like we do (some use 2 or 3 kwh per day). As oil runs out and climate change gets worse the double whammy will decimate food production, well see Syria on an ever increasing scale. It is going to be ugly frankly.

Up
0

Best we get started on reducing our impact then, now

Up
0

I think the issues should be debated. In NZ's case certianly 2 ie a stable population. a) We are on a finite planet and it is under stress and the principle cause is too many humans. b) We need huge quantities of fossil fuels to power the food system and fossil fuel output per day will decline shortly to none by around 2050.

Up
0

Maybe issue procreation licenses that have a cost scaled based on the number of targeted births for the year. Non-compliance results in penalty taxation and removes eligibility for welfare?

Up
0

See above, scaremongering not required

Up
0

You are wrong.

Up
0

I think in the US? some states introduced legislation that if a single mother had yet more children she got no more welfare, it had a great effect, no more kids.

Up
0

Maybe issue procreation licenses that have a cost scaled based on the number of targeted births for the year. Non-compliance results in penalty taxation and removes eligibility for welfare?

Up
0

David H I hear you that construction is beginning to ramp up in Auckland. But so far not as much as it did in the 2002 to 2004 period under the much maligned Cullen/Clark Labour government. That building boom was too late and too little to stop the property price boom that continued until the GFC in 2007.

What will stop this current property price boom?

Up
0

the debt bubble popping

Up
0

Only if supply was the problem...

Up
0

Some people still waiting for house prices to fall but it won't fall. They are dreaming. Banks, mortgage brokers,real estate agents, and media( articles like this) won't let them fall!! After few years Auckland will be another Singapore!!

Up
0

If you can't imagine scenarios where Auckland house prices fall your dreams are not vivid enough and you may find the future looks like a bit of a nightmare...

Singapore has a strong supply of affordable accomodation (as well as expensive accomodation), great public transport and a well managed economy. Auckland might be lots of things in a few years but it won't be Singapore, that's for sure...

Up
0

..let's be honest...no one knows and most 'opinions' i suspect are based on if you hold property or not i.e to convince yourself you are correct in your position. For me I'll just remind you of milk powder prices... 18 or so months ago...a sure winner. Job losses are now kicking in...some around my neck of the woods are wondering how they will pay the mortgage . The tend lines gotta met sometime don't it?

Up
0

The figures presented in this article coincide with my observations around Auckland.

There's no doubt that as the supply of new houses increases, the house price rises of recent years will ease off. The years of rapid price escalation are coming to an end.

Up
0