Queenstown Smart Growth Initiative

Last week Mountain Scene asked its readers: are you worried about the implications of the Ridgeburn development at Arrow Junction?

92% said yes.

It's a clear signal of genuine, widespread concern about Ridgeburn across the Wakatipu Basin.

Communities around the country are facing the same pattern: housing proposed outside community and council plans, through a process that moves quickly on economic benefit and leaves councils and communities to manage the consequences later. This can't continue to be individual communities fighting the same fight, separately. This needs a legislative fix.

Could opposition to housing projects under the Fast-track Act be the issue that brings about a change of government? It’s a tight election, and it won’t take much.

More than 2 million people have visited our page since Wolfbrook purchased Pegasus Golf Course. The level of support we have received has been overwhelming, but we are just one of many communities across New Zealand facing unwanted housing developments in inappropriate places.

The number of media articles and news items about unwanted housing developments has been huge and is only growing.

So far, only one party has made a formal statement on the issue: The Opportunity Party. We challenge the other political parties to make their positions clear. What changes would they make to the Fast-track Act to protect communities from developments that bypass the normal planning process?

Our view is that there is no reason to remove fast-track as an option for housing. If the intention is to speed up the delivery of much-needed housing, then fast-track could continue to be available for developments within areas that have already been identified and designated for growth through the proper district planning process. What we object to is using the legislation to override those planning decisions and allow development to occur in places that councils and communities have identified as unsuitable for that level of growth.

Communities are becoming increasingly angry at the government’s inaction while developers use the Fast-track Act as an opportunity to bypass district planning, purchase cheaper land and propose large housing developments in locations where they were never intended to go. The developers may make the commercial decision to build there, but it is the surrounding communities that will ultimately have to deal with the consequences.

How do we know this is becoming a much bigger issue? Because these communities are talking to each other. We are sharing information, comparing experiences and looking at what we can do to support one another. What might once have looked like isolated local disputes are increasingly being recognised as part of a much broader problem with the way the Fast-track Act is being used.

This land grab is not what the Fast-track Act was sold to us as.

Take the Pegasus and Ohoka housing development proposals. The housing being proposed is simply not needed. Our council has already planned for housing provision for the next 30 years and has identified land that is suitable for that growth. If the required housing capacity already exists in areas that have been planned for development, what public benefit is there in using the Fast-track Act to move that development somewhere else?

If the Pegasus and Ohoka developments are approved, they will not provide housing that the district has somehow failed to plan for. They will move where people live from areas that have been identified as suitable for growth into areas that will not cope with that level of development. The consequences will be carried by the people already living there, by ratepayers who will ultimately fund infrastructure upgrades, and by the wider environment.

And for what? If the housing is already catered for elsewhere, the public benefit becomes very difficult to see. The communities do not benefit, the wider economy does not benefit, and the environment does not benefit. Even the subcontractors doing the work won't benefit, because the number of houses being built doesn't increase - only where they are located changes. The only obvious beneficiary is the developer.

This is why political parties need to take this issue seriously. It is no longer just about one golf course, one development or one group of residents objecting to change. Communities are talking to each other. We are seeing that the Fast-track Act is being used by developers to bypass the planning decisions that communities and councils have spent years making, and the government is seeing this and doing nothing.

The election is close enough that this could matter. We are asking every political party to tell voters what they would actually change.

Would you stop fast-track for housing where that housing is not consistent with district plans and when the councils have already identified a sufficient level of growth areas?

This could be the issue that changes an election, and every political party has a chance right now to show us where you stand.

RNZ's The Detail looks at why residents and mayors around the country are pushing back on fast-track, from jammed roads to housing on flood-prone land and inadequate infrastructure. A great in-depth piece that explains the process and the issues we're seeing arising from these out-of-zone Fast-track approvals

In theory, giving developers the power to build more houses quicker is great - but the reality is more complicated.

The debate about fast-track continues, and it should.

Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop has said these projects only get approved if the infrastructure is there to support them.

Delmore is a live example of where that isn't the case. The fast-track panel's draft decision approves around 1,200 new homes at Ōrewa, but Watercare's own letter on the file says there's no spare capacity in the public wastewater network to service the development. Instead, treated and untreated waste will need to be trucked an hour and a half daily to Whangārei.

Delmore and Ridgeburn draw a lot of parallels. No existing infrastructure to connect to. Both sit outside the areas the council's own growth plans have identified as ready for development.

If this is the kind of solution fast-track brings to communities, what assurance this there that a sensible, properly funded infrastructure solution will be delivered for Ridgeburn?

Local board member raises concerns over fast track process The deputy chair of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board says comments made by Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop about the government's Fast Track process, don't stack up. Jake Law spoke to John Campbell.

On RNZ this morning, John Campbell asked Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop why Fast-track needs to override a planning process communities have already been through, like Queenstown's own Spatial Plan. Bishop's answer was that infrastructure has to be in place before a project can proceed, pointing to Drury Metropolitan Centre as an example of the system working.

What went unmentioned is that Drury has been a formally planned growth area since 2019, sitting inside Auckland's Future Urban Zone. It's an example of planned growth being accelerated, not proof that Fast-track handles what communities are actually concerned about; developments like Ridgeburn, sitting well outside a council's own spatial plan.

And Bishop's claims that projects can't proceed until "the infrastructure is there" is a low bar on its own. It says nothing about whether it's the right infrastructure. Delmore is the clearest example. The development has no access to council water infrastructure until 2050. Until then, it relies on privately provided water and wastewater, with treated wastewater trucked from Auckland to Whangārei.

Standalone, private systems running in parallel to council networks aren't an efficient long-term solution. They're a workaround that leaves communities and councils managing the consequences, and the cost.

Chris Bishop discusses Fast-Track Approvals Act The Government says its Fast-Track Approvals Act is about cutting through red tape to get more projects built sooner. But councils and community groups are increasingly arguing the legislation is allowing large housing developments to leapfrog years of planning work, leaving local governments to fig...

Great interview last week with Queenstown Lakes District councillor Samuel "Q" Belk, talking with RNZ's Morning Report about the traffic pressures Queenstown is already facing, and the extra strain that fast-track applications like Ridgeburn would add for our community.

Worth a listen if you want to understand what's at stake for our roads and our district.

🔗

Samuel Q Belk discusses planned Arrowtown development A plan to fast-track the consenting and building of more than 1200 homes near Arrowtown is drawing strong opposition from locals. Queenstown Lakes District councillor Samuel "Q" Belk spoke to John Campbell.

Great piece from RNZ's Katie Todd covering last night's community meeting.

Arrowtown residents oppose a 1210-home fast-track plan.

Reposting the AVA's photo from the evening as none of us managed to take one ourselves. A huge thank you to everyone who came along, listened in and asked questions.We wouldn't have got this far without the backing of a community that genuinely cares about the future of our Basin. If you have any further questions or want to know more, don't hesitate to reach out to us directly.

Thanks to all those who came to hear from Queenstown Smart Growth Initiative about the extensive work they continue to do in opposition to the significant “Ridgeburn” fast track development at Morven Ferry Road.

As a volunteer group they need funding towards the experts required to mount a credible and definitive case against the application. Please help if you can.

💰Donation Details:
Queenstown Smart Growth Initiative Inc
Account: 02-0673-0185863-000

The Ridgeburn Fast Track proposal, which would see the Morven Ferry Road area transformed into a development the population size of Arrowtown, continues to make headlines. Despite the developer lodging many documents as part of the application, the Fast Track panel convenor has raised concerns about the lack of critical information on the effects of the Ridgeburn proposal and is requiring further detail, particularly regarding traffic, to be provided, before the application will be considered by a hearing panel. This applicant has now decided to relodge a substantive application 'in the near future'. The situation is really getting serious!

Want to know more, including what will happen if it succeeds, and how you can help QSGI continue its work gathering the essential evidence? Come down to the community update meeting this Tuesday, 28 July at 6pm, Arrowtown Rugby Club Rooms. Refreshments available. See you there!