The Queenstown Lakes District Council needs a better reason to withdraw from its affordable (community) housing plan change than it had "simply changed its mind", council policy and planning general manager Philip Pannett says.
At an extraordinary meeting in August, the council voted to seek legal advice about the process and implications of withdrawing from the plan change.
The requested information was presented to the council, with the public excluded, at its meeting in Lake Hawea on September 27.
This week Mr Pannett said the item was not discussed publicly "because of the need to traverse legal proceedings", but the council subsequently voted to make the agenda item, legal advice and recommendations public.
After discussions the council resolved to invite community members to form a consultation working group to further discuss the provision of affordable housing in the district and ask the Environment Court to put an appeal by Infinity Investment Group Holdings and others against the plan change on hold.
It also resolved to instruct the Strategy Committee to "reconsider with urgency" Plan Change 24 by undertaking a process with a consultation working group, made up of the Queenstown Lakes Community Housing Trust, appellants and other stakeholders, to develop a solution.
In a report to the council Mr Pannett said before making any decision to withdraw the plan change councillors needed to be "fully informed" on its content; give "careful consideration" to all options for future action; and consult with various stakeholders to the plan change.
"Failing to follow a proper process could expose the council to the risk of its decision being the subject of challenge by way of judicial review."
Mr Pannett said it was no longer possible for the council to "simply withdraw the plan change" as hearing of appeals had begun and it was only possible to withdraw it with the leave of the Environment Court and agreement of various appellants and other parties.
"This could raise issues with any of these parties and council will need to state the reasons why it has chosen not to proceed with the plan change.
"[These] reasons need to be more than council has simply changed its mind."
Mr Pannett said if the plan change was withdrawn it would "make it difficult" to recover affordable housing or community housing contributions from developers who had committed through agreements to make contributions, but had not yet made the contribution.
"This raises significant issues for the Housing Trust and its efforts to provide affordable housing in the district."
One "clear option" available to the council - which it subsequently resolved to adopt - was to retain the objectives and policies of the plan change and remove the method and rule part.
"It has never been clear whether all of PC24 in its current form would survive the appeals.
"That is usually determined by negotiation of a hearing of the appeals in the Environment Court."
