Building and Housing Minister details first four Govt land sites in Auckland to be sold to developers to build 600 homes; sees first homes built by late 2016

Building and Housing Minister details first four Govt land sites in Auckland to be sold to developers to build 600 homes; sees first homes built by late 2016
Moire & Glandville Road site, Massey, Auckland

By Bernard Hickey

Building and Housing Minister Nick Smith has listed the first four areas of Government-owned land in Auckland to be offered to developers to build new homes.

The four sites covered 30 hectares and could be used to build 600 new homes, Smith said as he launched a broader plan announced in Budget 2015 to offer up to 500 hectares in Auckland for development.

Smith detailed the four sites at a function in Auckland that invited expressions of interest from developers and buildings, including from Australia.

The most advanced site was at the corner of Moire and Granville Roads in Massey and included 10 parcels of land totaling 9.5 hectares. It already had access to water and waste infrastructure and had the capacity for 200 homes, Smith said. The land was originally set aside for a school, but another site at Hobsonville was eventually used.

Cabinet had agreed the Government could buy the Massey land from the Ministry of Education and formally notified it for housing use under the Housing Act of 1955, which supersedes any need to offer the land up to Iwi under right of first refusal provisions in the Treaty of Waitangi.

Smith also detailed three other areas of land owned by the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) that could be used for a further 400 homes, although they had yet to be formally assessed for their infrastructure needs and commercial viability.

One site was next to a motorway in central Manukau and could be used for apartments and townhouses, while another was near a train line in Avondale and had previously been designated for the Water Connection trench, which was now a tunnel.

A third site was at Brigham Creek Road, just off the Upper Harbour Motorway.

Smith said the sites were part of a broader plan to offer up to 500 hectares to developers, who would build homes and sell them, often paying for the land once the homes were built and sold to home owners.

The Government set aside NZ$52.2 million in a contingency fund to launch the programme and buy land from Crown agencies where necessary. The percentage of homes being built in the affordable range below median house prices would vary from site to site, Smith said.

Smith detailed the sites in a launch event after a bus tour of various Government-run house building and redevelopment sites and vacant land in Auckland.

"This new initiative is not a silver bullet, but a further step in our plan to improve housing supply and affordability in Auckland," he said.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

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.

55 Comments

Comment Filter

Highlight new comments in the last hr(s).

Trying to circumvent the Treaty of Waitangi? This sounds problematic!

What is the process for selecting the lucky developer? Jobs for mates again?

This whole process has non-transparent and dodgy written all over it.

Pulling a legal fig-leaf over reneging on a deal with iwi can't be a good start.

The Massey East site is being lined up by waipareira trust/ mr JT I heard. Didn't they just get some more money in the budget for whanau Ora? #moneygoround

17
up

Ye would have to be dead from the neck up to believe that a few (or many for that matter) hundreds of new houses on the market will tame the Auckland Ponzi. With potentially hundreds of millions of Chinamen alone with or developing ambitions to join the scheme, only an end to immigration will work. NZ is just too small and precious to expose to asymmetrical treatys that allow such invasions. National and Labour both know this I am sure but for different reasons evade the logic. Since 1999 we were governed by perverted fools and since 2008, by perverted crooks.

12
up

Agreed. Will it take until there is no Pakeha left in Auckland to admit we are actually being invaded??

I could rephrase that as: will it take until Chinese are the majority in Auckland, but the reality is that that is inevitable and not in the distant future... And it is clear that even at that point the sheep will continue to blindly continue on the same path.

The reality is that a militarised China building islands in the South China Sea, with frosty American relations is looking for small targets that are easy to overwhelm and subjugate.

If 50% of NZs population were of Chinese extraction it would not be hard for alliances to greatly change.

Our country is being stolen and the cowards in charge and journalists aren't man enough to stand up and question what is going on.

Even Maori had a choice when they signed the Treaty, this time around the Chinese colonisation of NZ is being done by subterfuge without the consent of its people.

Even the Prime Minister wants to change the flag so it doesn't offend the new masters, how about going for one with 4 gold stars on a red background?

one of the great spins they use is to quote national stats to diffuse what they are allowing to happen in Auckland. I did a count of my office on Friday and 50% were not born in NZ and I went back ten years and it was 15%. I thought wow where will it be in another ten years, will we start to feel like the fijians

I live in the lower North Island and was at a school sporting fixture today in the Hutt Valley. The event had around ten different schools taking part. There was only one Asian face that I could see present and she was talking to me and was born here. However the majority of kids weren't Pakeha, they were either Maori or Pacific Islanders. The Pacific Island kids were by far the majority as were the spectators. The sport was girls netball. So the Aslan Invasian must be Auckland based. I guess that most of the Island kids were also born here.

the immigrants in my office are indian, Asian, poms, south Africans, aussies, Brazilian, and islanders (most born here) maori and pakeha
its probably only the Indians that I noticed as they make up the most so stood out.
and what is interesting is the ones that have been here awhile are like the rest of us and want the taps turned down

Because I live in a rural area of the lower North Island the population base is Pakeha and Maori with a few I presume NZ born Indians and Chinese. It's not until I venture to Wellington and see how multi- cultural NZ has become. Personally I don't have a problem with it especially when I see how my grandkids just accept all the different ethnicities around them. What I do have a problem with is, if it is fact, foreign people money laundering in the Auckland property market. That is so wrong. Surely some investigation needs to be carried out with this.

No, it's more a case they don't participate in sport and (generally) community activities

maybe not netball, my Indians friends love their cricket and their kids play, so the silver lining the black caps may get a decent spinner in ten years.
for my Asian friends sport is not a big part of their lives

In Sydney NSW they are organising public rallies and protests

It's in the news

People are standing up and being counted

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/race-hate-flyer-distributed-in-sydneys-north-s...

NZ is not being stolen. It is falling victim to the short sighted greed of many Kiwis. They rather sell out and party while the Chinese are long-term thinkers using the opportunities many of us afford to them.

Of course politicians and media play their role by simply denying reality and making sure people do not start thinking whether they really want what is going on around them. And it is not just an NZ phenomenon. Same is happening in Europe (overrun by illegal migrants actively aided by politicians sending navy and coast guard to help illegals cross the border) and even the US where a so-called president simply legalizes illegals by the millions and messes up country by country (Libya, Syria, Iraq etc) effectively handing them to Islamic terrorists.

The world, even Maori, have greatly benefitted from European civilization over the last centuries. Science, engineering, education, medicine etc. have improved billions of lifes across the globe. There is a lot on the line when our "leaders" and their groupies in the media now smirch our heritage and open the door to people who have contributed infinitely less and are not likely to change their ways any time soon.

Peter - I can think of a number of migrants I know who contribute considerably more to NZ than a number of native NZers I also know...we were all migrants once and I don't think that was too short sighted ? I'm more than happy with what migrants are contributing and aren't reliant upon what the media likes to portray, I can use my own eyes. Personally I love the globalisation of labour and cultures, and have no problem with 50% population of Chinese..or Indians, Aussies or Sth Africans. Yes we need to fix the housing shortage, but the cart never goes before the horse.

Comment of the year.

New Zealand is probably unique in that everyone can trace their family's arrival back to a specific migration. Whether your family came on one of the first waka, by sailing ship, on the Zuider Kruis or by Boeing they all started off somewhere else.

What NZ born people tend to forget is that it really takes something to travel a long way to a new country possibly to never return, to never see friends and family again. And that something is a great thing to build a country on.

I don't think most born kiwis are against immigration, especially those of us that remember how bland NZ was without the bars, restaurants and markets.
but they will be for controlled immigration so that we can have the houses roads schools and hospitals in place and we are not playing catch up all the time.
try driving across Auckland and its just road works after road works. there are big subdivisions being built out south and the two lane motorway crawls.
also there will need to be new schools built as the numbers increase and they will also need to expand the hospitals Etc Etc.

62 percent of voters want tighter restrictions on immigration, while only 35 percent say leave it
http://www.3news.co.nz/David-Cunliffe-blames-migrants-for-housing-crisis...

The problem really isn't visa-based immigration. After all its only 3 short years since net migration was negative. Its really all to do with NZers and Australians who will move back and forth between the two countries depending on which place seems to be doing better at the time.

Over the last ten years the net number of long-term arrivals on visas has been completely predictable and largely non-volatile. The key number is the number of arrivals on residency visas (unlimited live and work rights). In the last 3 years that number has barely changed hovering around 1,000 per month. It had a good run from last August to this March where it was probably up by 100 per month but in April it dropped back to 943 showing that there is no sustained growth in that number.

We have seen a marked increase in the number of people let in on fixed term student visas (export earnings for us) and work visas (Irish builders in Christchurch). But not in PR's who are the ones that buy family homes.

No the big swings in net migration figures really boil down to whether NZers are emigrating to the Gold Coast or not. Tricky for the government to control that one.

A lot of the immigration to australia was new NZers but since the downturn they have stayed here waiting, that was why the Aussie got h Clark to sign away to us being second class when we live in Australia. Once Aussie upturns you will see the flow again

"We are all migrants" ... sure all out of the African Rift Valley, initially. And sure, I also prefer a quiet, hard-working Chinese family next door to a Kiwi druggie. But this does not change the fact that living in a Chinese dominated society is a whole different cup of tea than living in an European based society. Have you ever lived in China? I have. Individual freedoms are terribly constrained, pressure to conform is stifling. I dont want this here. I also dont want this whole Islam stuff or other avoidable problems, thank you.

And btw why does the world want to live in our civilisation? Because it creates much better results, that is why. Even so, the vast majority of migrants does not respect our culture and traditions and cannot wait to turn our countries into the same mess they originated from. And who is even to blame them, if we do not stand up for our own heritage? I know "white" Kiwi kids who tell you that only Maori or Chinese or Indians have culture, but that "we" dont. This is the racist rubbish they teach them at schools.

God help us all - I hadn't realised, not only are they going over run us, but theyre also going to get into power, turn us all into communists and replicate the polictical situation that they left behind - youre a real long term thinker Peter.

Hmmm, one thing I notice about pro-mass-immiration do-gooders is their scorn for anyone who has an opinion different to their own. Tolerance, huh?

English 101, not talking about POLITICAL, but SOCIAL conditioning. The intellectual standard of the bleeding heart army is a big worry.

All the Austronesian peoples including Maori trace themselves genetically back to a source island close to Taiwan. The Chinese got here first.

It's not where we come from or who we are related to that is important it is the culture we develop as a country. One of the things that make me proud as a kiwi is when I meet up with tourists they comment how friendly and welcoming kiwis are. Some countries I have been too I would say the exact opposite

Couldn't agree more. Was trying to make the same point at 18:44 above. Not as clearly as you.

And did those tourists give you brownie points for that? The opinion of some people who know pretty much nothing about real life in NZ is imho not relevant and quite often it is just sucking up anyways.

the last tramp I did down south the group was all tourists (mostly aussies) and at the end listening to their speeches they all remarked how friendly and beautiful our country was, a couple from new York were also surprised how unpopulated we were they had arrived through Christchurch and had travelled around the south island, my guess if only !0% of the group pass that on then we will get more tourists
the only moans I got from talking to them was from the ones that came through Auckland and how expensive it was for taxis and meals

No. Genetically, unless you are of a different species, Kimble, we are all descendants of Rift Valley Africans. Hence the Africans got everywhere first, also to NZ.

However: whats your point? I can also say "the grass is green" which is a true statement. Would that help the discussion? Probably not.

Let's be honest, locals have been priced out by foreigners since the 1840s it's just that these foreigners put their flag on the pole + southern cross, and all of a sudden it's 'our' country. Ye-olde way of doing things. NZ's going to keep changing and it's great to see. .

I reckon that as people get older they don't like change because they feel less relevant. Come on, your 80-100 years is a drop in the ocean of time. Roll with it, expand your mind and enjoy the ride

And why are we criticising people purchasing the properties - what's the race of the people who are making a killing? White dips into translucent sometimes

There is a commenter called Kimble but its not me.

So sure everyone in the world is a descendant of one of six women who existed about 100,000 years ago at the time humans first wandered out of Africa. The ancestors of Maori in turn expanded out of China some 4000-7000 years ago migrating through the Pacific till they got here about 1000 years ago.

The point is we are all the same. I don't get the strong anti-immigrant streak that seems to run through this site.

Yes but the Crown who is still sovereign today signed a compact with the Maori Tribes which guaranteed their traditional prerogatives and proceeded over the following 150 years to violate the terms of the Treaty.

Within a couple of decades a new immigrant Chief Justice Jame Prendergast , decreed that the Treaty of Waitangi to be worthless and a nullity, because it was a document which had been signed between a civilized nationa and a mere group of "Savages" This decision determined government decision making for decades afterwards. Goes to show the worthlessness of a treaty with a group with such a dishonorable attitude to covenants between peoples.

A lot of people don't feel they should be responsible for the actions of their fore-bearers.
It worries me that Maoris will be sidelined by new immigrants, who have no historical links to the country.

If your dad stole cars and say died 5 years into a 10 year jail sentence are you expected to go to jail to complete the time? On the other hand the cars he stole should be returned. However Maori are also immigrants landing and taking possession of anything they wanted often by force of arms only 700 odd years earlier than Europeans. So does one Maori tribe seek damages off another? not that I am aware of.

I really dont think that "no historical links" is a worry. What is a worry is Maori poor academic and work achievement, that needs to be and has to be fixed. That means investment in things like the lower decile schools etc, but no one really seems to want to tap what must be an intellectual resource pool/capability going to waste.

I have two good friends who are brothers. Father went broke when they were in their early teens. Both now successful, both two children, one charges rent, makes his children work for pocket money, makes them save for cars etc. Both children successful one in medical field one research. Both in stable long term relationships.
The other gave his children everything, bikes jet skis, trucks. Now they are both battling addictions no motivation, struggle to see a future.
You are right the Maoris are a wasted resource, ( around us mostly on weed) clever people. Got to stop the handouts.

Actually, I'm part Maori, and no we are not a wasted resource. We are people, not a commodity.

A hard luck story of one particular family can't be compared to what Maori have suffered over the past one hundred and seventy years. My ancestors were deprived of their economic base when the European settlers breached the Treaty of Waitangi and confiscated their land, they died in droves from introduced diseases and the deterioration of their living conditions after confiscation, their culture was systematically denigrated, displaced by a purportedly superior culture, and forceably assimimalated, under the aegis of the Native School system.

Economically Europen settlers, particularly new immigrants were lavished with government largess, whilst for Maori the government throughout the 19th and 20th Century partitioned Maori lands into uneconomic parcels and often employed pre-emption to acquire it at well below market rates which was then given to white settlers.

Maori were also faced with systematic curtailing of their educational opportunities and diminution of expectations of academic achievement. In 1908 a Royal Commission of Inquiry into Te Aute College recommended that the College focus more agricultural and manual instruction at the expense of more academic subject which were taught to prepare the Maori students for entrance into University.

The purpose being that Maori were trained for manual tasks which they were seen by the Pakeha to be best suited for.

"Dr Simon also quoted W W Bird, the Inspector of Native Schools, who declared that the purpose of Maori education was to prepare Maori for life amongst Maori, not to encourage them to mingle with Europeans in trade and commerce. 15 In 1915, Bird affirmed the Department of Education’s assimilative policy in his annual report: So far as the Department is concerned, there is no encouragement given to [Maori] boys who wish to enter the learned professions. The aim is to turn, if possible, their attention to the branches of industry for which the Maori seems best suited. 16"
http://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/waitangi-tribunal/Reports/wai0718/C...

I remember when I was young there were very generous grants for young Maori to go farming. It hasn't been all one sided.

I recently heard Liz Te Amo, Director Maori Customers, NZTE, give a very enlightening presentation of the bright future for Maori Agribusiness. They have massive agri business assets and their aims for the future e.g. to be 20% of NZ Dairy production, are certainly achievable. In time as they are building capacity and sorting out structures and JVs, they have the potential to be a real agri business powerhouse.

How that will trickle down and change the lives of their people only time will tell. I know a chap who wanted to go and study as an adult. It was suggested that he approach Ngai Tahu for a student grant. He did, was sucessful with his application, but hadn't considered approaching them earlier as he felt that his age - 40something- would have precluded him. How many other opportunities are out there that are going wanting, because those opportunities haven't been promoted well, to those who could benefit?

The Maori elite will milk it, the rank and file will miss out. Tribalism isn't going to deliver to the average Maori.

You think its different for Pakeha Andrewj? What do you think politicians, bankers, academics, media barons, local and national government bureaucrats, and corporate executives are, but a self-appointed, intertwined elite?

I did not mean to imply that Pakeha haven't made any attempts to redress grievances for past injustices. I just took it as too obvious to mention. I just meant that the damage has been done and won't be healted in a mere few generations.

I do have high expectations for my people and acknowledge there to be far more opportunities for us today than at any time in New Zealand's history, but I am rather dubious about the merits of the top town, bureaucratic approach to development as espoused by NZTE, not because I wish to be contrary, but because I believe it to be unsustainable in the long term. It may be good for the bureaucrats in MBI and NZTE, local councils, Fonterra and reservoirs of various other ticket clippers,, but not so good for thsoe who must bear the inevitable risks and the costs should circumstances not transpire according to optimistic projections and forecasts purveyed by the bureaucrats.

I reckon farmers both Pakeha and Maori will find this out much to their cost before too long.

a lot of successful self made people will not pass onto their children. they make them earn there way then reward. one of the dragons does that for ever dollar they get a dollar and if they become nurses, social worker something that helps people but is lower paid they get 5
I have believed that receiving any benefit should entail something in return, anything even picking up rubbish. I work with a lady that works her arse off and her partner is a lazy sod she has tried and tried to get him to work and has lined up heaps of jobs for him but he would rather sit at home and watch TV and collect the unemployment benefit
I sure if suddenly he got no benefit unless he picked up rubbish along the motorway or cleaned windows at the local school the attitude would change and he would get a real job

Lots of comments here on Chinese immigration.

I agree that we have too much immigration but why do the Chinese get all the bad press when it appears they are virtually dwarfed by the Indians moving in? From a recent Interest article
http://www.interest.co.nz/property/75148/net-migration-hit-56275-march-year

"The biggest single source of new migrants was India, with a net gain in population of 12,112 from that country in the year to March, followed by 8317 from China and Hong Kong, 4924 from the UK, 3951 from the Philippines, 2841 from France, 2658 from Germany, 1495 from South Africa, 1389 from Samoa, 1182 from Japan and 1051 from Fiji."
Regardless of where they come from and what they are doing to the housing crisis the bigger picture is what happens a few years down the road with roading, health, education and (from what has happened recently wrt money laundering at the casino and drug groups) policing and law and order. Add in a recession or worse and we could have some severe racial issues which would make the maori/pakeha relationship a fond memory, especially if things go pear shaped in the South China Sea. Remember JK's PONZI housing scheme is the only bright spot in the economy at the moment. Tourism is probably just another name for future migrants, investors to check the place out.

The Chinese have a high-number high-visibility presence at property auctions, tend to dominate successful auctions, use aggressive knock-out bids, use proxy-buyers, fly-in fly-out buyers, high-end high-value value purchases during times when it is difficult to get money out of China, $125 billion a year, lot of hole-in-the-wall currency traders along Queen Street, all symptomatic of money-laundering. They tend to be high-end-wealthy and happy to flaunt it with Ferarris, Maseratis, Lamborghinis

By way of contrast, Indians are much less visible at auctions and in casinos. It's even more difficult to get money out of India. The Indian rupee is a highly managed currency, and the Indian government keeps a close eye on rupees that are converted into other currencies. Paypal has stopped outward remittances from India. Sending a cheque is the most difficult way to send money outside India, and you may be more likely to run into roadblocks during the process.

I see a whole different market emerging.......if all this dirty money is coming in here then surely we will see a rise in blackmail.....you know the sort,,,how did you get your money out of China to pay for this house here in NZ........

Australia faces similar issues.... More at the top end of the market.
http://news.domain.com.au/domain/real-estate-news/villa-del-mare-lola-wa...

Yikes, the sunlight is being shone where the sun doesn't shine

Auckland becomes more attractive every day where they won't receive the same exposure

and then comes the question how much has already been stored in Auckland property, we don't know because we were told we didn't need to know. we will have some idea by xmas and if its anything like the stories coming out of auctions then what do we do, I would suggest nothing until the next election when call me a cynic national six months out will crack down on foreign buyers of existing residential housing

That's a top 10 hit-list of Tigers and Flies and Foxes

You can almost feel sorry for them because the ATO will be all over them now. Won't be pleasant

Part of the difficulty is that the rules change in China depending who you talk to and which department you're asking. Even from area to area. Do not mention such things IN China, it's the elephant in the room which will get you avoided and suspicion of being a anti-government dissident.

Most of the money isn't actually dirty - not like cartel drug money running from the US. It's more like inventing Bitcoin... not actually illegal but inventing it will get you jail time and confiscation as money laundering and a raft of sideways charges. Or like being fined because your mate borrowed your fishing boat for a weekend trip, and his mate took more than quota and made the inspector mad.
Some of it's a bit more ambigious, like layers of shell companies, such as those used by larger companies buying NZ land, and not having a traceable record...if certain people or companies fall off the radar, and no one has a good track of that companies assets...then they can't chase after them - sure there's usually a scapegoat or two to take the fall for the mismanagement but they're usually well reimbursed (or their family is) or they're already in disgrace so if they "mess up" their "second chance" no one bats an eye. After all you pay the correct fees to the correct people and keep to the rules (just like NZ, it's not your problem as long as you're following the rules)

Michael West having a go in the SMH
Solution to housing affordability staring politicians in the face

Chinese investors are only permitted to take $US50,000 ($65,413) out of the country. Yet they are regularly paying cash for $1.5 million-plus homes in Sydney and Melbourne. It is a fair assumption then that most of the money pouring into Australian residential property from China is therefore black money.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/solution-to-housing-...

Check out this book review
In Bed Together: Marxism, Capitalism, and Immigration
http://www.immigrationwatchcanada.org/2015/05/04/in-bed-together-marxism...

my question how if you have student debt and I would suggest a lower wage can you get an interest only loan, I guess working for the bank is the key
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=1145...

Money laundering burden yet to hit property market

The real estate industry has escaped compliance of the Anti-Money Laundering Act so far – but experts predict not for long

http://www.theage.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/money-laundering-...

"Smith said the sites were part of a broader plan to offer up to 500 hectares to developers, who would build homes and sell them, often paying for the land once the homes were built and sold to home owners"

Is this just more corporate welfare? Why is the government involved in propping up developers?

Does raise some interesting questions doesn't it. Three responses come to mind:

1. It is a tacit admission that the reason new building is so slow in Auckland is that raw land is too expensive. So the government are basically subsidising developers' cash flow and, yes, it is corporate welfare.

2. This government's track record suggests that the raw land will be undervalued when it is eventually sold to the development partners. So, yes, on count two still corporate welfare.

3. On the plus side it prevents further land-banking which might have happened had they simply tendered the land as is. This way the government can force the pace until properties are developed. If they don't lose interest in a month or two which they are also very prone to do if the going gets hard.