Kerikeri, whose spatial plan is still being finalised, still has some potential control, through its district plan, about what happens where in this prize-winning town. More than 1000 people in a public meeting expressed their views, forcing Kāinga Ora to modify its plans to create multi-storied, intensive developments for the homeless, right in the centre of town.
We have to be concerned about the missionary zeal with which this government department approaches its task, without taking its public with it.
The issue in Kensington is not just about what happens next door. It’s about infrastructure, stormwater, wastewater and drinking water capacity. It’s about roads, dangerous intersections, the lack of parking on site and how traffic moves on already-speed-bumped streets. It’s also about recreation facilities, living spaces on site, and an environment where everyone can live and play, without disrupting the quiet enjoyment and privacy of the existing residents.
At the crux of the issue, though, is what happens to an existing community of well-established homeowners, of an older, conservative demographic, when a whole group of people qualified to be on the housing register is transplanted into this community. These people will live in multi-level apartments, on intensively-developed single sections with little or no outdoor space or parking, and be expected to join in and share the values of the existing residents. Research evidence about this is not part of the Kāinga Ora consent applications.
The Human Rights Commissioner, in a recent Advocate column, derides these concerns as knee-jerk resistance. “Communities” he says, ”have a responsibility to welcome newcomers, whatever their backgrounds.”
But, if he is true to his label of Human Rights Commissioner, those human rights extend to the rights of people in communities to have a say about what is imposed on their living environments.
It seems to me that the Kensington residents want to be heard, but are up against a developer who considers it has the legitimacy of the new zone it bullied into creating, and has plans to build two three-storied apartments accommodating 12 double-bedroom units in one building, and nine single-bedroom apartments in another, within a few metres of each other, in an established single-level residential area.
There are multiple breaches of the zone rules including access width, outdoor living courts, fences and neighbour privacy. As well, council services are inadequate to cope with this intensity.
The residents expect to have a say in a public hearing before independent commissioners. Let’s hope council regulators also see it that way.
The recent research into what happens to communities when social housing comes to stay is pretty sparse. Studies in Brisbane and Sydney and a more recent one in Auckland tend to indicate that initial fears of increased crime and reduced house values were worse than the actual impact on completion.
The Auckland study is most relevant and indicated that increased traffic congestion and inadequate parking were still an issue. Community disruption was less than expected, and while privacy and sunlight for some residents were an enduring concern, it was less than anticipated.
But Whangārei is not Auckland and multi-storied apartments were never planned for in Kensington. Admittedly they might replace some pretty scruffy existing state houses, which could mitigate any property price effect.
Social housing is a live issue and Kāinga Ora needs to listen to resident concerns, prepare to modify plans and expect to stick to the rules.
