Red tape stymies housing ‘solution’

Modern space: Monika and Stephen Lovelock with a portable cabin made for accommodation. Pictures by Paul Rickard

A Gisborne couple believe they have a solution to the region's housing crisis but red tape means “desperate” people are needlessly going without shelter.

Monika and Stephen Lovelock run a mobile cabin building business in Gisborne but are increasingly being asked to build self-contained portable units for housing. However, building and resource management regulations means those homes could be at risk of removal.

“It's a fully self-contained unit, self composting toilet, solar-powered and totally off the grid,” Mr Lovelock said.

One customer had been told by the council that under the rules and regulations, it was classed as a permanent building.

That meant resource consents and geotechnical reports were needed and a code of compliance.

“I don't think people realise how bad it is but basically, if someone buys one off us, if someone complains there will be an issue and legally, they will have to get it removed. I don't want to sell product and then see it get swapped out from under their feet in three months time,” said Mr Lovelock,

“All the red tape in involved is really starting to screw people's lives over and affecting the housing crisis majorly. I just think a fully self-contained unit, off the grid, should be allowed and the rules need to be changed now, not in a year's time.

“I find it quite sad, people are desperate for somewhere to live.”

Mrs Lovelock said they had been shocked with the sheer number of people who were desperate to find somewhere for children who had returned from Australia.

“These hard-working young people have nowhere to go because there are no houses available.

“There are such modern solutions now that are cheaper than the old solutions to this problem for the council. It would be nice to promote those ways because that's the way the future is going. The saddest thing is that there is a solution but it is not being taken into consideration.”

One customer, who wished to remain anonymous, said he had been told by the council that if a complaint was made, the council would have to act.

“Now we are looking at having to bite the bullet and go through all the difficult constraints they put on you and try to get a polytech house from Auckland sent down.”

However, that was double the price of a self-contained cabin for the same 60m2 footprint.

“The Resource Management Act is just out of control.”

Gisborne District Council building services manager Ian Petty said even if a structure was portable or had wheels on the sides, it didn't necessarily mean they're vehicles.

“If it's not a vehicle, it's a building under the Building Act.

“Some buildings may still be exempt from the requirement for a building consent if they meet one of the exemptions in Schedule 1 of the Building Act. These exemptions can be convoluted and easily misinterpreted.

“We can give advice on the Schedule 1 exemptions to help anyone contemplating a small building on their land. We don't advise people to get building consents if they're not required.

“If the cabins meet the exemptions in Schedule1, they can be placed on a section to provide additional accommodation such as a sleep out. However, there are caveats that limit the use and they must meet the district plan distances from boundary and site coverage rules. If those rules aren't met, a resource consent may still be required, even if exempt from building consent.

“These cabins usually come to the council's attention via complaints from neighbours. If it's legal and meets both the Building Act and Resource Management Act criteria, we can dismiss the complaints. If not, we're required to take enforcement action and the cabin may have to be moved or taken off the property. It's central government law.

“We recommend getting in touch with us early in the planning phase, to avoid making a potentially costly mistake.”