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

The Unitary Plan has protected Auckland families from significantly higher rents, according to Auckland University's Ryan Greenaway-McGrevy

Property / news
The Unitary Plan has protected Auckland families from significantly higher rents, according to Auckland University's Ryan Greenaway-McGrevy
Medium-density builds (left) began to replace 1950s-era state homes (right) in Mt Roskill in 2018 after the Unitary Plan was passed.
Medium-density builds (left) began to replace 1950s-era state homes (right) in Mt Roskill in 2018 after the Unitary Plan was passed.

Auckland families are paying up to a third less in rent than they might’ve done if the city hadn’t substantially up-zoned in 2016, according to new research. 

A working paper published this week by Ryan Greenaway-McGrevy, an associate professor of economics at the University of Auckland, found zoning reforms had improved affordability for family-sized rentals.

The paper compared rents in Auckland to a weighted average of rents from other urban areas that were similar to the city prior to zoning reform in 2016, better known as the Unitary Plan

“Six years after the policy was fully implemented, rents for three bedroom dwellings in Auckland are between 22% and 35% less than those of the synthetic control, depending on model specification,” he wrote. 

The impact on two bedroom dwellings was less significant, with rents between 14% and 22% less than those in the comparison group. 

“These findings suggest that large-scale zoning reforms in Auckland enhanced affordability of family-sized housing when evaluated by rents,” Greenaway-McGrevy wrote. 

No-grow zone

Housing costs in New Zealand are among the most expensive in the developed world. In 2021, the median person spent 22% of their disposable income on housing, either in rent or on a mortgage.

That number was even higher for renters who spent a median 28% of their disposable income on housing. About two-fifths of Auckland households rent.

Greenaway-McGrevy said a wide range of economists and urban planners attribute high house costs, at least in part, to restrictive zoning.

“However, up until very recently, few cities have pursued large-scale zoning reforms to enable affordability meaning there is little empirical evidence to support the purported effects of zoning reforms”. 

This changed in 2016 when Auckland up-zoned approximately three-quarters of its residential land with The Unitary Plan and triggered a construction boom in the city.

The plan introduced a standardized set of planning zones across the city, including four residential zones intended to encourage medium density housing.

“Consents for new dwellings significantly increased year-on-year from 2016 onwards, with all of the new construction occurring in up-zoned areas,” Greenaway-McGrevy said.

Developers have built large quantities of medium-density houses in the years since, which appears to have prevented significant increases in rents. 

The working paper found the cost of renting a three bedroom home would have been 28% to 54% higher in 2022, if Auckland had not implemented the zoning reforms.

A back of the envelope calculation suggests that the median Auckland rent could have been over $800 per week, instead of $595 in the fourth quarter of 2022. 

Greenaway-McGrevy found there was a smaller effect on two bedroom dwellings, for which rental costs would have been between 16% and 28% higher. 

His conclusion from the research was that large-scale zoning reform, such as the Auckland Unitary Plan, enhanced housing affordability — at least as measured by rents. 

The logic behind looking at rental costs, rather than purchase prices, was that the former was not directly affected by enhanced redevelopment rights from zoning reform.

Allowing more dense development is likely to lift the value of large residential lots such as detached single family dwellings, which could distort price data in the short term.  

The most expensive part of a home is the cost of the land it sits on, and so more affordable housing only emerges when a piece of land is actually divided up into more dwellings. 

Many small state houses, as pictured, in Mt Roskill were demolished from 2016 onwards to make room for newer and denser buildings.

Many medium density houses were built in Auckland after the Unitary Plan up-zoned three-quarters of the city.

Everything comes back to interest rates 

Greenaway-McGrevy also chose to focus on rental prices as it had potential to capture housing costs across a wider socioeconomic demographic, given that low income households are more likely to be tenants.

There is room for debate as to whether the research translates into the homebuyer market, as house prices are influenced by a wider range of factors. 

In a speech last year, Dominick Stephens, the chief economic advisor at the Treasury, said rising house prices were not due to a shortage of dwellings alone. 

As evidence, he pointed out that rent increases had risen broadly in line with incomes while house prices had far exceeded them. 

“In the Waikato region, over the 20 years to mid-2021 incomes rose 98%, rents rose 114% and house prices rose 372%.”

“If the dwelling shortage was the key underlying driver, both rents and prices should have risen in closer to equal measure,” he said. 

Runaway house prices could be attributed to a combination of falling interest rates and a highly inflexible market for land in NZ. 

“Specifically, if land markets had been more flexible, and urban land supply had been more responsive to demand, then house prices and rents would have risen by less when interest rates fell,” Stephens said.  

Because the supply of land was so highly restricted, the global decline in interest rates was “capitalised into the price of scarce urban land” rather than causing a construction boom. 

An urban-rural divide

This is what Chris Bishop, the National Party housing spokesperson, means when he says New Zealand needs to “smash the urban limits which have held our cities back”. 

National’s revised housing policy would encourage councils to relax their city boundaries and provide funding tools to help developers essentially create more urban land.

It would also require councils to do more upzoning on transport corridors and encourage—but not force—them to adopt the widespread medium density standards that are currently taking effect. 

The National Party voted in favour of the Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS) 18-months ago, but have since withdrawn its support after receiving too much pushback from voters in their electorates.

New Zealand’s Infrastructure Commission, Te Waihanga, said in a recent urban land price progress report urban-zoned land was valued at a premium of nearly $1,300 per square metre relative to nearby rural-zoned land.

This was up from a premium of less than $200 per square metre a decade earlier and suggested that demand for urban housing was increasing faster than planning and infrastructure supply was responding.

Price differences between urban and rural land have increased dramatically in all of NZ’s major cities except Christchurch. 

Labour and National’s bipartisan MDRS legislation was supposed to help tackle this issue by allowing three-story townhouses to be built almost anywhere in the largest cities.

But National’s revised policy would attempt to open up more farmland to be developed and hopefully avoid too much dense construction occurring in suburbs where its voters live.

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.

57 Comments

It sounds like they have not looked deeply at home ownership because it doesn't fit the narrative. ie Small houses on large sections (prior to the zoning changes cost about the same as big houses on tiny sections now do.

There are so many factors involved in such studies. Infill housing used to be the thing. Often cross leased to save money. Still with a fairly generous amount of land on which to have a lawn and garden. No longer! But does the software assume that this could still have been occurring without the unitary plan in place? Probably not.

I had a minor unit put on my section years ago. Prior to the rates skyrocketing under the Auckland Council. It had family members in it. Back in the North Shore City Council days, they had a rates reduction feature for when family lived in a minor unit. (Len/Goff killed that one). So back then, there was no need to charge much rent at all.

Up
0

It’s not because it doesn’t fit the narrative, they explain in the article… you wouldn’t expect upzoning to improve affordability to purchase in the short-medium term, because the potential for densification pushes up the land value. That premium on the land should be temporary, until higher-density developers have soaked up as much land supply as the market requires. But that cycle must be expected to take several years. 
 

Remember that over half the population are renters. Rent affordability is not a side-show to property prices, it’s more important.

Up
8

We don't want anymore infill-housing because we don't want to lose anymore permeable (and arable) land in Auckland.  Doesn't anybody remember the recent floods?

I don't want to have to pay for the rebuilding of flood-damaged houses through higher rates or taxpayers' money with the now increasing prospect of more flooding due to climate change.

Auckland traffic congestion has now reached saturation levels.

The only commonsense remedy I've heard of lately might be to develop Kaipara as a new city because its poor quality soil means there's no arable land at stake and a new city could be planned from scratch to avoid the possibility of flooding.

 

Up
4

Don't come here and start talking common sense mate, no room for it on here.

Up
1

Can you give me an example of a city that has been preplanned and hasn't mainly grown organically? The only examples I can really think of are ego driven projects like Dubai in the Middle East (Which we cannot replicate at all) and the empty apartments in China that nearly caused a 2008 like crash in China. Maybe Milton Keynes but even that wasn't really that successful and Londons growth still outstripped it.

The reality is the jobs are in Auckland, so thats where the people are going to be. You can't just go and make a new city that is designed to be high density from the start, it doesn't work that way unfortunately. Cities have to be allowed to grow organically as they are much more than a collection of buildings and roads. It's about the people, communities and businesses within them. Developing better infrastructure within Auckland to handle infill housing will be an easier task than building an entirely new city hundreds of kilometres away from where all the workers, jobs and existing construction infrastructure are, and it won't financially work out. Who exactly is paying for the new city? Private developers aren't gunna touch it.

 

Realistically with the current crop of leaders, we will probably end up with nothing. Maybe more greenfield development putting more pressure on the motorways and continue to cripple the productivity of our largest city. What Auckland really needs is better public transit infrastructure and more densification closer to the CBD where the transport links can spur out into the North/West/South.

 

Up
2

Don't agree. Building and then changing over the years including densification is an epic fail. All the infrastructure you put in at the start needs replacement and constant upgrades. If you had the planning from the start and the number of people was clearly limited by the dwelling type and no expansion then its a one off development that simply has to be cheaper in the long run. This country has no forward planning and simply doesn't have the skills required to do the job. Putting in more roads in Auckland is now pretty much impossible unless you start going overhead of the existing motorways or recovering roads from land currently in the sea, both are extremely expensive. Auckland will be forced to continually move out in a never ending sprawl, that's what we do best just stumble along.

Up
0

Auckland just needs to be tougher on cars, and give people incentives to operate outside of already busy areas. I think it needs to toll the motorways during peak just to get the cars off the roads, transform every arterial route into  1x bus lane (maybe T3 as well) + car lane, encourage businesses to set up shop in fringe suburbs and begin to build clusters of business districts which just aren't tacked on to retail complexes with adequate roading, transportation etc.

AT needs to look at why people use the roads in the first place, and either get them off the roads by taking pub transport or staying at home, or get them off as quick as they can. There are so many routes which have sets of lights with horrible phasing, prioritising pedestrians over cars and all sorts. Post covid you don't need to be at work 5 days a week, 2 at most really - yet a lot of businesses are getting back to pre-covid era where boss man wants to make sure you aren't picking your nose during work hours or else he'll dock your pay. Not to mention you save 1-3 hours a day commuting to work.

Perhaps changing some of the tax laws to resemble something like Australia or the USA do with their personal tax return system so you can claim a little bit more against the income you paid might help a few people as well.

And, the people who have to go to work - receptionists, retail clerks, warehouse workers will also get a benefit because less people are using the roads.

 

Up
2

Sediment and nutrient flows into the harbour are already suffocating wildlife, threatening snapper spawning success.

Want a new city - I'd aim for massive expansion of Palmy North and surrounds.  Extend the airport to handle international travel - it's already getting a major transport hub upgrade, as well as a modern/upgraded sewerage plant.  Move the capital.

 

  

Up
3

Infill housing is fine if you keep up with infrastructure improvements- and as we know, AKL is terrible at that.

It’s not as if outer suburban green fields developments are immune to flooding etc. Probably worse. Places like Kumeu have been hit harder than anywhere in the city.

Up
0

I'd need that figure of 28% clarifying. (The amount the average household income is spent on rent). Average rent is around $700pw. A couple earning the living wage would pull in around $1600pw after tax. I'm only spit balling on the math, so please don't go all E=mc2 on me... but something fishy about that 28% average. I think it's way higher than that (anecdotally).

Up
5

Yeah, seems that to me as well.

Up
1

Jeez, what flawed “analysis”. Too many factors to draw any results from. 
 

people having being paying as much as they can. If it was more they probably would have gone elsewhere. 

Up
8

I totally agree. Landlords are struggling to pass on their additional financial burden as it is. By in large, rents are lagging the current rate of inflation which in itself is clear evidence tenants are tapped out. They would never have been able to pay an additional 22% anyway (even if it were gradual). A growing number of newbie investors are finding they're now reluctant and unfortunate Landlords. They're potentially paying eye watering sums in interest (now unclaimable) on a depreciating asset. Its no wonder they (the vested) are dreaming up anecdotal tidbits to form the opinion of an imminent recovery is nigh. They're hoping for a dignified exit. Hopefully over the coming years this reset of unknown proportions results in an increase in home ownership.

Up
13

Well said RP thanks for explaining it so clearly 👏

Greedy boomers and their counterpart newbie investors will be tits up and face down at the same time.

Up
4

Greedy boomers.  FFS stop the divisionist speech.  Don't let the government convince you that it's the 'others' that are the problem for you.  We're all NZers.

Up
0
Up
0

So you've read an article about the analysis, that doesn't outline about all of the factors they took into account, then say it's flawed analysis, as there are too many factors.

 

Cool analysis bro.

Up
1

Cannot help thinking we should have just left the state houses alone and built medium to high density elsewhere. Still living in your car must be better than a state house any day because that's classified as ultra high density living.

Up
1

To clarify, the state homes pictured in this story were replaced with new ones. There is more state housing, not less.

Up
4

It's good that state KO tenants can rent these ultra modern warm and dry homes for 25 percent of their incomes. Its not good that when the benefits go up, so does the rent. Govt piss take to claw back the money 

Up
1

I get that but then you still end up with LESS housing don't you ? Better just to build the new stuff elsewhere. The new stuff sounds great but its probably more expensive to rent. If pulling down existing places and building new one was so great, how come we have more homeless people living in motels and in their cars then ever before ? People living in ivory towers cannot see the big picture.

Up
0

“In the Waikato region, over the 20 years to mid-2021 incomes rose 98%, rents rose 114% and house prices rose 372%.”

A good reason to buy and hold investment properties. Which I won't be doing until after the coming crash and resulting depression when houses will crash 50 percent to 2012 levels, based on my scientific investment models. Another 4 more years of pain for greedy spruikers 

Up
8

So the income relative to price has gone down a shedload, and even if it crashes, it will still be miles behind, and that's why it's a good reason to buy and hold the asset.

 

WTF did I just read.

Up
4

Its true that Capital Values are not directly correlated to rents. As property values fell heavily, rents have not. 

Wait for the swing down and then catch the ride back up. Though it going to be a slow slog back over a decade or two. See how long it has taken Ireland and NZ is far worse off.

 

Up
4

Can you share your scientific investment models? They sound pretty valuable....

Up
1

Believe me mate they exist and I'm not making it up 

Up
0

Source: Trust me bro

Up
0

Hamilton rental market is one of the worst in the country, imho. Little people who want to 'lord' it over others.

Most of the properties are let through property managers - 4 of whom were fined millions for price-fixing and cartel behaviour (and they kept getting fined, it's just a cost of doing business).

I still remember the property manager trying to tell me prices were rising $40 because of their advertised rent on an empty apartment the other side of the city, whilst in his face I had the bond data showing a mere $6 increase. And the landlord that put our rent up $20 because minimum wage went up 50c (yes, I'll take all your gross income increase, thanks!).

Loved the property manager who never showed up for inspections because "you should be grateful, I can't pull you up on anything if I don't see it" - and the list of maintenance needs we dutifully filled out on the form was then not taken to the landlord - yes, we issued 14-day notice-to-fix on those after 6 months of absent inspections.

Up
5

Is there anything good about the Tron, apart from their rugby team?

Up
2

Kick the clowns hard where it hurts, in their back pocket 🖕

Up
0

Went to Hamilton on "holiday" a few weeks ago.  Never been, so thought why not?  

Not an understatement, what an absolute hole.  Credit their motorway/roading system is very good, but the people.  Man if you ever wanted to be randomly abused at for walking down the street with your family, this is the place.  Everybody looks like they're on edge and tweaking.  

Up
6

 

Gotta have a GOOD roading system so people find it easy to escape.The problem is than on every escape route somebody holds up a sign that wants your money because they have a family to feed.

Up
1

Yesh i was reading a few stats as I do and came across projected future growth for Hamilton. Well I pissed myself laughing that it was actually above zero and fairly high. It must be a typo. 

The reason the speed limit is 110 is for those who can't get away fast enough. 

Mind you it could be worse .... Auckland 🤣🤣🤣🙄🤭

Up
4

Gee that’s harsh

Auckland has some downsides for sure but also lots of great attributes

Up
2

As an aucklander I say it.

A tonne of foreigners you feel like a visitor in your own city. With concentrated pockets means you go from country to country without leaving the city 

Might I say your rather precious about auckland after you've been having a go at your neighbour. Immediately after telling us you've turned a new leaf. Ahem ahem

Btw did you price up what a house costs so you can move there 

Up
3

Precious?

not all all

just saying Auckland has lots of upsides as well as its downsides

And Hamilton is a dump, with almost no upside

If that’s abusive then gee report and censor me lol

Up
1

Oh no it's just fcken funny 🤣

Up
0

I'd  rather hang out with the Asians,  Europeans, Africans.. . Than the kiwis that frequent most NZ  cities after 10pm nowadays 

Up
1

“Everybody looks like they're on edge and tweaking”

don’t worry, that’s just the meth. 

Up
3

It’s a shocker

any little bit of soul the cbd had has been sucked out by the malls. Although there’s a little stretch next to river, never the casino, which is quite nice

Dull, soulless place

It’s not even cheap, either

Up
2

Good roads = shit cities

Up
0

Back to horses and carts?

Up
0

Its a good article but the headline is misleading. The Unitary Plan although allowing for more intensive housing in the existing areas, didnt address the actual problem causing the crazy house prices and rents . That is the draconian urban containment restrictions from the Rural Urban Boundary. House prices and rents would probably have halved if the plan did this.

Instead we have continued misery of the downstream effects of this misguided thinking. Great to see Luxon see through this and give Kiwi homebuyers and renters some hope. 

 

 

Up
2

Rents might be higher as rates would need to be much higher to pay for the infrastructure. They are already building a city the size of Napier in Drury, another 50k joining the southern motorway in rush hour, how much will that alone cost to fix?

Up
1

Repeat after me: "Import more people, widen the motorways, import more people, widen the motorways..."

Up
0

"If the dwelling shortage was the key underlying driver, both rents and prices should have risen in closer to equal measure,” he said. "

 

Nonsense.... Purchasing power is also a function of interest rates and credit availability. 

 

That's kinda basic stuff.... so I wonder about the efficacy of his research.

Up
4

Yip, you only need to look at the last 2 years to see that interest rates are probably the largest influencer of house prices. followed closely by credit availability and supply.

 

Up
4

Apologies, if the writing was unclear but that is the point of the quote. If shortage was the main factor, prices and rent would have moved up together. But prices have moved more because of interest rates (and tax settings).

Follow the link to read full speech with context and caveats 

Up
0

Dan... What u say does not make sense to me.

How can u argue that  shortages were or were not the primary driver because of rents vs prices when u agree that prices are strongly  influenced by interest rates. 

Like I said.... I think it is wrong to suggest shortages are not the primary driver because rents/prices did not move together.

Up
0

Think I may have misunderstood you, sorry.

Up
0

"The National Party voted in favour of the Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS) 18-months ago, but have since withdrawn its support after receiving too much pushback from voters in their electorates."

Love it.  Even politicians can do the right thing by accident, but then correct when they realise their mistake.

 

Up
2

Assuming that rents would be approx 22% higher without the Plan, that means an equivalent monetary amount would not be spent into the consumer economy. Less revenue and profits for business and greater downward pressure on wages.

I take this estimate with a grain of salt. 

 

Up
1

Cameron Murray is skeptical that the Unitary Plan has done anything positive. 

Cannot summarize the analysis but read for yourself.

https://www.fresheconomicthinking.com/p/the-auckland-myth-there-is-no-e… 

Up
0

These articles are normally phrased in a way that makes the council sound like super heroes, when really they are the bad guys that kept rents higher for decades with restrictive planning rules, and even now land zoned for appartments is significantly more expensive than other land due to short supply. 

Up
2

My pick is the rents didnt kick up due to the low interest rates and the perceived capital gains to be had during the Frenzy...folk didnt care about the rental returns they were more interested in the CG's...Land didnt get cheaper...subdivision costs didnt fall ...material prices climbed...rating charges  didnt match value climbs...and likely still dont... wages another factor ... Now we could see rents rising with values declining matched with increased insurance/ mortgage/ build/living costs... the mirage is clearing ... but the debt levels remain a concern. Banks are likely setting aside reserves for the weather ahead.... How long can the managers of industry keep the lower income earners wages out of kilter with living costs ? Average folk are feeling the heat and will be subjected to election promises that likely will be not financially viable in the current economy . Certainly an adjustment of sorts ahead but what it looks like is anyones guess.

Up
1

This explains why house prices are recovering in Australia but not in NZ.

Thanks to the MDRS and the NPS-UD we now have plenty of brownfield sites with development potential. (And I'll say it again ... House prices are not going to suddenly resume their massive gains for 20-30 years until these sites have been developed to their potential.)

Up
0