The controversial inclusionary housing variation, proposed for the Queenstown Lakes District, may be dead in the water.
The variation would require most new residential subdivisions and developments to make contributions of either land or money to the Queenstown Lakes District Council.
That, in turn, would have been used by a registered community housing provider - for example, the Queenstown Lakes Community Housing Trust, to develop housing to help low to moderate income earners.
However, a report released by the independent hearing panel that heard the variation has recommended it be withdrawn.
The panel suggested the housing affordability issue should be the subject of a mix of regulatory and non-regulatory options, preferring a package of targeted measures over the variation alone to increase affordable housing provision in the district.
In a statement, council planning and development general manager Dave Wallace said the panel found more research and assessment was required to confirm whether such a variation would be effective.
"Staff and expert advisors developed a detailed case for the variation, on the basis that inclusionary housing rules could help deliver more affordable housing, in the same way developer agreements have been successfully used with specific developments since 2013,” Mr Wallace said.
“However, the independent hearing panel considered there was not enough research, analysis, and assessment of several alternatives that could be used to address housing affordability, meaning they could not make a recommendation in favour of the proposed Inclusionary Housing Variation.”
Other options the panel considered needed more research and assessment relate to providing funding through rates and development contributions, plan provisions (urban intensification) and partnering with central government, for example, and "directly addressing a primary cause of the affordable housing issue/lack of rental housing, being the increase of residential visitor accommodation".
Mr Wallace said work was already in progress on most of those, and the council had provided evidence on them in the case for the variation, but they remained "a work in progress" and their effects on the district were not yet fully understood.
The panel confirmed the council's position, that a range of Resource Management Act (RMA) and non-RMA methods were needed to address housing affordability in the district, and the variation would have helped implementing the government's National Policy Statement on Urban Development, and the council's case that any potential negative impact on the local housing market was likely to be short-term only.
Mr Wallace said those were fundamental questions responded to by the council in the face of challenges from some submitters, legal and planning advisors.
The recommendation report will be considered by the council at its meeting in Wānaka on Thursday.
