Government to bulldoze Housing NZ complex in central Auckland to make way for 280 new apartments – 80 of which will be for the homeless

Housing Minister Phil Twyford has unveiled plans to build a new apartment block in Auckland’s city centre, with 80 of the 280 units allocated to the homeless.

Housing New Zealand expects the complex to cost at least $100 million, with the exact amount possibly changing as the project unfolds.

The development will replace 87 Housing New Zealand units on Greys Avenue.

Built 60 years ago, Housing New Zealand says the units are nearing the end of their economic life.

The apartment complex will include an on-site wrap-around health and support service centre.

According to Auckland City Mission, there are about 500 people sleeping rough in the city – Twyford says the new development will help support many of these people.

The remaining 200 units will be a mix of state housing and rentals designed for key service workers in the city centre.

The building is estimated to be completed in 2021. Tenants in the current building are being relocated, with this process expected to continue until February next year.

The current Greys Ave building will be demolished in early 2019.

“Having a permanent home gives people the safe and stable environment they need to address factors which have led to their homelessness such as mental health issues and substance abuse,” Twyford says.

Housing New Zealand Chief Executive Andrew McKenzie says the complex will be a modern, safe and sustainable development, close to central city amenities.

He says in planning the new site, Housing New Zealand has sought input from more than 50 organisations including NGOs, Government agencies and international experts in supportive housing.


Here is how this project compares with the many other large Auckland building projects.

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 or click on the "Register" link below a 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.

51 Comments

Just been watching on Choice TV a programme called Scandamania.
They erected an apartment block of 4 in less than a day.
Two bedroom apartments made by Ikea.
70000 pound was the cost.
Power phone and all other utilities came thru the one attachment.

Yup its pretty amazing what the rest of the world does with their construction sector...ours is just embarrassing.

Thank God for some action.

up
10

They may as well save one of the ground floor units for a Police Station. Save them the short walk to what is sure to be one of their most visited buildings in Auckland. Probably need a doughnut shop there as well.

Rather mean spirited don't you think? Why the need to insinuate that poor people are law breakers and have poor diets?

Indeed, one might construe that poor people have all suddenly started running finance companies.

Mean spirited yes, but calling it an insinuation is incorrect as believe there is a real correlation.

Crime:

http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199914050.001.0...

The question isn't IF there is a correlation, but if this action will help. Honestly I don't know but I hope it does. Something needs to be done and this sounds like as good as we are going to get for now at least.

The Krispy Kreme's are obviously for the Po Po. They will need a break after climbing all the stairs in that place.

Wonderful! Auckland city is going to look glamorous

Wasn't this already announced in March?

"According to Auckland City Mission, there are about 500 people sleeping rough in the city – Twyford says the new development will help support many of these people."

And many more to come. I'm not against helping those people who are not physically or mentally fit to work. But these lazy people? Seriously?

There are people sleeping rough because they are too lazy to work? Pretty extreme laziness...

Most of them are mentally unfit for work, this is our mental health system, right there on the streets.

When people are homeless they are stripped of everything. There is no showering, fridge to keep milk, ability to shave, power to charge a phone - there is no mailing address.

NZ has the worst homelessness in the OECD and it would seem many of us don't treat our neighbors as our-self. Or even know who our neighbors are.

I know my neighbours. They are mainly Chinese...they always smile to me and I smile back.

Maybe you are just looking in a mirror.

The reality no private buyers will buy into any apartment complex that is for the Homeless or has Housing NZ tenants. This is a good idea, but without cash from the private sector who will pay for this building? Who will pay for the upkeep, maintenance & damage? If this building complex is not carefully monitored this would become just another slum building.

Here I was thinking I could low ball them as no one would want to live there!

Showing a lack in familiarity with the Auckland apartment sector there. The tried and true answer always trotted out to suggestions the place is lacking in investment desirability is "it will be big with students and Mom and Pop investors" and how well it worked back in the day as so many brought into that line, (on leasehold places, places with "remediation" issues, places with restricted housing to low incomes, places without kitchens, without private living areas or laundry facilities etc). Even places at the worst point of habitability & huge costs upcoming always have been able to sell. The question is at what point of the market. They likely will do well out of these new ones and especially since they are aimed for the lower half of the market, the one currently experiencing a housing crisis.

The Labour Govt will buy them, call them Kiwibuild, and dish them out to "lucky" punters on the ballot list.

Something NZ has done for generations, no difference except the expectation for the FHB to pay over half a million in a housing crisis.

Is the 100,000,000 plus gst and the govt is absorbing that cost? For an extra 193 homes equates to nearly 520k each apartment as an "at least" estimate. When you already own the land, this amount seems extremely high and a complete waste of our taxpayer money. If that's an indication of KB costings I don't think the private sector landlords have anything to worry about that the gubmint will bring down the cost of housing.

Stripping off piece by piece ... makes the show more entertaining.
I thought Labour were all up in arms against National demolishing and selling State houses ? ... Now , it seems like a good idea, just like Northcote and many others to come ....

Idiots can only protest and object until they come to understand what is going on around them ! ... then it becomes their idea and achievement ...

PT should put in an application to Grand Designs NZ for this project. It will be a great watch and probably the highest rating program in nz so we can see what really goes on without the b.s. from his ministry.

Idiot they are increasing stock, unlike national who reduced them, don't you know the difference

Of course they know, but that would spoil their narrative if they admitted they did.

The 87 existing units are being completely demolished as they are unfit to House people. Therefore the $100 million is for the demolition of existing units, site prep and construction of 280 new units.

$100 million divided by 280 is $357k per unit.

They are adding 193 to existing stock. Have you ever been inside the existing flats kbkiwi? I have. They are in good condition and comfortable, they are 50 years old but seem relatively maintained, there's a controlled access system and the tenants are perfectly reasonable small families. I suggest there is a level of hype about the property coming from those who have an agenda to redevelop the land. It wouldn't be the first time that has happened.
100 million for some new studios and the like is a ridiculous amount. The land is already owned so I would compare the new units/apartments in terms of pricing with leasehold apartments that are on the market. They can be bought for 150k. Some which are freehold are also around that price. So 100 million is another rip off of the taxpayer.

Insider information tell me it will actually cost $120m not 100M .

This has been in the making for the last two years, the leaky building owned and operated by HNZ and they have already spent millions on studying renovation options including the possibility of building a 10 story building with NZ materials only i.e. timber !! ...

So now that they came back to their senses, it was PT's time to wear his helmet and hi-vis and claim a solution under his auspices ( with PR and photos to match of course)

This project MIGHT be completed in 2020 if lucky, there is no concept design for it yet ...will need at least 6-9 months of engineering and another 18 months to demolish and rebuild.

"Some" of the homeless will have to wait at least another two winters !

Another shot of tranquilizer for the simple minded who still believe in these losers and their management capability and promises.

Please tell us what your superior, alternative plans are.

If you notice he blurts out a number of senseless statements and then vanishes

Please tell us what your superior, alternative plans are.

Sounds like a great place to live if you are currently homeless.
I am sure they will look after their new abode really well.
Plenty of money to build brand accommodation for people that contribute nothing positive for the country.
Some skew whiff here!

You think alll the money switching hands and into each ones pockets is very productive to the economy

Sure the disabled & homeless should just remove themselves as you see them as nothing positive for this country. I shall present you with your award for the worst human being right after they ship you to a retirement home for contributing nothing positive to the existing area once the marbles start going (at which your ability to maintain a multi apartment facility at that point would be useless). It is both those who have health needs & difficulty with living day to day who need a home. They could then have a chance to address those health needs & find their way to live in their community, perhaps even build skills they can use. Yet and here is the key, demonising those with serious health issues is a fatally flawed argument since we all had and will have them at some point, (that is if we are not all taken out in a accident, on say, the NZ roads). Eh... I give up might as well invoke Godwin's Law now. Many arguments against those poorer are rooted there anyway.

The real problem for his like is the state providing these units,it means investors no longer have the opportunity to ream out the public purse by way of welfare and accommodation support.

True but many state homes went to private companies anyway, so anyone could set up a company with a lame feel good name and receive far more government subsidies for the same tenants. It helps to aim marketing dross towards minorities & families. Something even The Man can do.

Only 80 homeless will get in, probably the most likely to succeed in life with a job. Nothing skew whiff about that.
Also, most of the social security in this country is run by unpaid volunteers who contribute a huge amount. It is about time the effort of unpaid workers is counted in our GDP.

I'm wondering how this new building will be any sort of improvement over the current building. Sure, its bigger. Is there a communal area? If so, the size increase may make the communal area more crowded. Would it be safe for children?

just building apartments and then telling homeless here you go is not going to work, they will need support to adapt, also a lot of them form little groups ( or family) as that is what they are missing so putting them in their own in a flat will see them back on the street in very little time,
they might be better building some dorms and a big common room for those that need that as the first step off the streets.
i know it wont happen but i hope those that design the buildings talk and listen to those on the front line dealing with the homeless so they can put in good options

Fifth paragraph:

"The apartment complex will include an on-site wrap-around health and support service centre."

The homeless don't need fancy apartments. What they really need is occasional care and the money should be put into facilities that can provide this. A place where they can sleep in a warm bed, have a hot meal and a shower, freshening up before returning to their noble lifestyle choice as free men (or women or whatever) with the keys to the city. Not for them the life of a uniformed wage slave entombed in an office cubicle random Agile workspace, forever kowtowing to political correctness.

Try and rein them in and they will be miserable. The situation is a bit like those misguided men who try and save prostitutes. It rarely works.

And anyway homelessness is not necessarily a career killer. It can be an important character building part of a life's journey. Consider George Orwell of Hitler as prime examples. If a homeless person can rise to the height of megalomaniac leader with a shot at global world domination who are we, the merely comfortable, to criticize it?

PS, I see the article mentions, will include an on-site wrap-around health and support service centre. Bravo!

Precisely

You could grab a bunch of used 20ft shipping containers, aluminium joinery at one end and kit out with basic furnishings/plumbing and i'm sure they'd be over the moon.

George Orwell was voluntarily homeless and had a way out waiting for him at the end of it. Bit different.

He also did it to be able to provide an accurate account of life in that situation and was an important voice in fostering social reform.

The AKL CBD is already a sht hole so this wont make much difference

No doubt someone will call me racist or anti-poor , but the cost of erecting and maintaining 280 apartments (which I assume will be high-rise ) with lifts and amenities , and the on-going costs of supervisors common area cleaning, noise control and Body - corp fees is a major problem .

Given 'homeless " folk will live in these blocks , who in their right mind is going to buy them?

Its a taxpayer funded disaster in the making

What is wrong with you. They will all be paying rent.

In 20 years they'll call it "the projects". Make Ghettos - let's do this.

As a proven design theme, make 'em entirely from concrete, including beds, furniture and washbasins - just like some apartment blocks in the Paris banlieues in some of the 751 'Zones Urbaines Sensibles' there. Lower maintenance and high thermal mass so once it's warm it stays that way.

Well done to the Coalition from me.