03/05/2024
OPEN LETTER - Edited from the original post as we accidentally posted a previous draft and not the final letter. Final letter now attached.
2nd May 2024
Expression of Concern over lack of Compliance with Longview Deed
Dear QLDC and WCB Elected Members,
I am writing to raise my extreme concern and frustration regarding the lack of oversight and enforcement by Council staff of the requirements set out in the Deed between Universal Developments and the Queenstown Lakes District Council for the development of the Longview Special Housing Area.
This has arisen out of an Official Information Request submitted to QLDC in a private capacity, however, I have since raised this with the Hawea Community Association Committee, of which I am a member, and it is agreed that this letter and these concerns are shared and submitted by the HCA and by our wider community.
A key aspect of the Deed under Clause 41 was that (in addition to the provision of land to the QLCHT) the Developer was to offer house and land packages within set price brackets.
The Developer, as you are likely aware, applied for a variation to the Deed to increases in build costs - with the most expensive bracket being up to $599,000.
I have two key areas for concern:
1. Council staff have taken no proactive action to ensure compliance with the Deed and appear to have no systems or protocols in place for doing so – rather have waited for questions to be asked prior to scrambling to request information from the Developer.
a. When I recently made an Official Information request on this topic, emails showed that it was only on receiving this request that planners requested this information from Universal Developments – the request showed no prior request for information by Council to the Developers relating to compliance with Clause 41.
b. In referencing the information provided in the request, the Council respondent advised that I take into account the impact of cost increases on the Developer – I believe that this shows a weighting towards the Developer and their concerns rather than wider the community good. Furthermore, I believe it is well outside of the scope of an Official Information request for the issuer to advise the recipient in what light to receive the information provided.
c. There appears to be a complete lack of oversight and accountability within Corporate Council for managing compliance with the terms of the Deed.
2. The Developer has failed to show any intent of complying with clause 41 of the Deed – the delay in offering these packages and the placing of onus on the group home builders means that as far as I can ascertain no packages have actually been offered at this level. The wording of Clause 41 of the Deed itself states that: "Until the Hawea SHA Outcome is achieved, the Developer shall promote, so as to make 'widely known' in the Queenstown Lakes District, land and dwelling packages for purchase…." ('highlighted' by me)
The clause then goes on to describe different housing types and expected price brackets for these.
a. Placing the onus on Group Home Builders is simply not good enough – the Deed is between the Developer and Council, therefore the onus lies with them.
b. In the emails provided following the information request, the Developer claims that it was “possible” for a house of around $600,000 to be built by Breen if a $300,000 section was purchased – however, there have been no efforts to advertise packages at this rate – rather most, if not all, appear to be over $800,000 with the majority being in the $900k-1.2m range
c. The Developer’s delays contribute significantly to the increase in costs – if they had proactively produced these houses when the subdivision was first developed it would have been more achievable.
d. The cost of sections has also risen significantly since the Deed was signed – this would indicate that the Developer is making a greater margin on the sale of these which surely should be off set against the increase in build costs for the provision of homes in the set price ranges.
I would ask that you as our elected representatives consider what has happened here – both in the failure of Council to ensure compliance with the Deed as well as, if not the actual, certainly the perception, that Council seem more committed to the interests of the Developer than the members of the community that they are serving. This SHA was developed under the auspices of increased affordability – concerns were raised at the time over the genuine nature of this and hindsight shows that this has not been achieved. However, accepting that what’s done is done, I ask that you use your influence and your role in holding Corporate Council accountable to, at the very least, stand up for those in our community that we know are desperately struggling to afford a home, by seeking to ensure that the agreed terms of this development are met.
Yours Faithfully,
Louise Merrall
On Behalf of the Hawea Community Association
Photo credit - Colliers Otago
