A modern building design with a large red "DECLINED" stamp over it, set against a blue brick wall background.
Image: The Spinoff

PoliticsMarch 19, 2025

Nobody is as creative as Auckland Council at saying no

A modern building design with a large red "DECLINED" stamp over it, set against a blue brick wall background.
Image: The Spinoff

Lots of councils find reasons to stop construction. Few do it with as much panache as Auckland.

When the developer James Kirkpatrick Group ordered a design for an 11-storey building on Karangahape Road, it probably believed resource consent would be a formality. The commercial building, with offices up top and shops on street level, was set to be built on an empty gravel site close to the new Karanga-a-Hape train station. Councils have been ordered by the government to allow tall buildings near train stations in part so more people can use the rail network we’ve just spent $5.5 billion upgrading. Besides that, the building would sit squarely in the city centre zone, where authorities are supposed to allow as much construction as possible. 

If the developer was thinking that way, it didn’t bargain on the Picasso-esque creativity of Auckland Council when it comes to stopping construction. Last month commissioners denied resource consent for the new building, citing its “more than minor” effects on the environment. 

To arrive at that conclusion, they relied on submissions from council’s planners and the Waitematā local board, both of which raised concerns the development would “dominate” the streetfront. So true. Why would you want new retail or restaurants dominating the streetfront when you could enjoy the urban feng shui of some gravel with a fence in front of it instead? 

Split image: Left side illustrates an architectural design by Fearon Hay for 538 Karangahape Road, featuring a modern multi-story building. Right side shows a Google Street View with a beige wall on Karangahape Road in Auckland under a blue sky.
The proposed development, left, and the site as it is today, right.

The Da Vincis of denial weren’t done. They said the new building would compromise the heritage of the local area. When confronted with the reality of the site currently being an empty lot whose immediate neighbours are a carpark and a Mobil station, the council’s urban design expert Chris Butler argued the “real world” context of the development extends down Karangahape Road and through the southern end of Ponsonby Road. Why only that far? Surely the real world setting of this building is all of New Zealand itself, which broke off from the supercontinent Pangaea, which in turn was formed out of the dust flung across the galaxy by the Big Bang, and if you think about it that way, nothing should ever be built anywhere ever. 

In a final splash of colour, a submission on behalf of the local board from the allegedly Green-aligned member Alexandra Bonham raised concerns about a lack of carparking in the building, which, again, is situated on a new cycleway a five-minute walk from a new train station.

James Kirkpatrick Group, after blinking slowly several times, decided to appeal the decision.  Infrastructure and RMA reform minister Chris Bishop also seemed flabbergasted, calling the denial “insanity”.

If they’d looked at recent history, they’d have been less shocked. Auckland Council has been issuing bizarre consent denials with a prodigiousness and creative flair matched only by early-career Mozart. Over in Balmoral, its planners found an unregistered architect to help them stop three townhouses being built on the site of a derelict dairy described as a “pile of shit” by its neighbours. The council argued the townhouses would compromise the historic aura of the “Balmoral tram suburb” – a claim undermined by the fact there was never a tram in the area.

Council eventually lost that fight. But you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take. In Waiuku it had more luck, putting onerous conditions on a proposed dairy because it was worried people stopping for coke lollies would cause traffic snarl-ups in the town an hour south of Auckland centre. Though the council may love crumbling, rotten dairies, it sure doesn’t like new ones.

Somehow these aren’t even the most tenuous reasons the council has come up with for banning construction in recent memory. Faced with the prospect of people building apartments near a train station and other amenities in Sylvia Park, its planning team searched the recesses of their collective brains and came up to the ingenious conclusion that tall buildings would ruin motorway drivers’ spiritual connection to the vision of a small hill. Nice try developers, but it’ll take more than an overwhelming weight of evidence to force this team to consent to housing.

Though ensuring drivers are able to crash into a median barrier after being overawed by the sight of a hillock is important, most of the time the council simply denies housing on “character” grounds. Because character is a nebulous term which basically amounts to “rich people live here”, it’s still able to express house-halting creativity within those bounds. Memorably, the council faced off against its own urban development agency Eke Pānuku in court over plans to build apartments and shops on Dominion Road, which it argued wasn’t worth the demolition of a single modified, post-war building that wasn’t so much character as “character supporting”.

Through all of this, central government politicians of all stripes have impressed the importance of new construction. New Zealand, they argue, has a debilitating housing crisis caused in large part by councils not issuing enough resource consents for roughly 50 years straight. Furthermore, the nation is currently a bit skint, and needs the economic activity generated by new residential and retail buildings. Auckland Council simply does not care. It cannot be stopped. The maestros won’t stop saying no until their symphony is finally complete and the city resounds in a great synchronised chorus of “consent application denied”. Only one thing could stop their creative flow: turning around and denying them the consent to keep denying consents.

Following the decision to stop James Kirkpatrick Group’s Karangahape Road, Bishop noted the government’s ongoing efforts to reform the Resource Management Act. It was insanity like this, he said, that was motivating the government to push on. Though the consent denials still come thick and fast, our council might soon be forced to issue a frightening, under-utilised word: yes.

The Spinoff is your meeting place in turbulent times, and with your help, we’ll see it through.
Keep going!
Christopher Luxon scatters rose petals at the Mahatma Gandhi memorial at Rajghat in New Delhi. Photo by AFP via Getty Images
Christopher Luxon scatters rose petals at the Mahatma Gandhi memorial at Rajghat in New Delhi. Photo by AFP via Getty Images

OPINIONPoliticsMarch 19, 2025

How Luxon’s bleakest week as PM gave way to his brightest

Christopher Luxon scatters rose petals at the Mahatma Gandhi memorial at Rajghat in New Delhi. Photo by AFP via Getty Images
Christopher Luxon scatters rose petals at the Mahatma Gandhi memorial at Rajghat in New Delhi. Photo by AFP via Getty Images

From coup conjecture at home to a breakthrough abroad. 

It wasn’t just the one week, not really. Back in February a series of unfortunate events – many of his own making – befell Christopher Luxon. After a burst of growthy-changey music at the outset of the year, the weeks since for the prime minister were accompanied mostly by a low, lacklustre hum.

That turned into something more like nails on a chalkboard last week. A series of polls had sent home a bleak message: New Zealanders just aren’t that into you. Consecutive results from Curia for the Taxpayers’ Union and Talbot Mills for whoever that got leaked to were bad for National but worse for Luxon personally. Both had him a hair’s breadth above 20% in the preferred prime minister category. Both put him behind Chris Hipkins. 

Asked about the polls, Luxon grinned and said he got it, but it was not fun at all. That, combined especially with the fallout from a bizarre interview with Mike Hosking in which the prime minister for reasons unknown decided to play that game in which you can’t use the words yes or no, fomented a blizzard of speculation

Conjuring the energy of the years when leadership coups were the norm, Duncan Garner declared the phone to be “off the hook” with National MPs already “plotting his downfall”. While more commentators (among them Richard Harman, Claire Trevett and Tracy Watkins) said there was no plausible threat to his leadership at this point, all of them reckoned the pressure was growing in response to what many judged, as Watkins put it, a “lousy job”. 

Ryan Bridge thought that “talk Luxon will be rolled is naff.” Andrea Vance, author of Blue Blood, the chronicle of the National Party civil wars before Luxon was swept into power, meanwhile offered some reassurance in a column headlined, “Why Christopher Luxon isn’t about to be rolled”, but it came with a telling final word, “(yet)”. “Luxon can breathe easy for now,” concluded Vance, but it too came with a grimly breezy qualifier. “He will likely be rolled, but not imminently.”

With all that going on, the big infrastructure investment jamboree at the end of last week could hardly have come at a better time. A host of squillion-dollar fund managers had flown in and congregated on the Auckland waterfront to hear the growth sermon. Alongside various politicians, including opposition MPs, were representatives of iwi organisations, integral engines of the New Zealand economy.

Luxon played his part, hit the marks, delivered the lines. There was no doubt this was a home crowd, but it was nevertheless far from guaranteed he’d ace it. The messages, it seemed, had been polished with a gentle nod to the mayhem emanating out of a Trump White House that has in a few short weeks sparked pandemonium in global markets, leaving more than anything a constant tremor of uncertainty. 

In that light, the flipside of New Zealand’s vulnerability to global vicissitudes is a commitment to the rules-based approach on which a trading nation – a cork on the ocean – depends. Luxon told potential investors this: “New Zealand has been, and will continue to be, a poster child for social and political stability, in a more volatile and changing world.” 

Almost as soon as that summit wrapped, Luxon was boarding the Air Force express to India. As Luxon arrived in Delhi so did the news that New Zealand and India had formally launched negotiations on a comprehensive free trade agreement. “Comprehensive” meaning that dairy products will not be exempted, or not at the outset at least. 

Luxon had made a surprising commitment during the election campaign – seemingly on the hoof following a TV debate – that he would secure a free trade deal with India before the term was out. That remains a long shot, but it is nevertheless a boon, and a timely one.  

The Spinoff is your meeting place in turbulent times, and with your help, we’ll see it through.

The talks, which follow groundwork laid by Todd McClay, are all the more meaningful set against the backdrop of the broiling Trump trade war, both in atmospherics and in practice. It sends an important reminder that not all trade roads lead to or via Washington DC. Successive governments have stressed that New Zealand needs to diversify its export market mix so as not to be too dependent on China. Nor, recent activity would caution, too dependent on the US. India ranks down the list as New Zealand’s 12th biggest trading partner, despite having become the world’s most populous country. 

The usual caveats apply: nothing has been agreed, or even formally discussed, yet. But the development, which Luxon could call without hyperbole a “major breakthrough” must have been a fillip for any flagging confidence. The global newswire headline of yesterday, “India and New Zealand look to bolster ties after reviving free trade talks”, was a fair bit preferable to that of a fortnight earlier: “New Zealand’s economic missteps hasten exodus to sunnier shores”.

He could be comforted, too, by reports that his two coalition counterparts were getting on with it without stealing any thunder. Winston Peters was busy bringing his vast diplomatic experience to bear in New York and Washington, while David Seymour was for the time being focused on local politics rather than explosive sandwiches. 

The rest of Luxon’s India trip appears to be progressing successfully, too. He delivered a strong, serious-minded keynote address at the sometimes-boisterous Raisina Dialogue. And he dealt adeptly with a bit of a curveball from Narendra Modi on supposed “anti-Indian activities” and “illegal elements” in New Zealand. (Apologies, that should be googly rather than curveball and, yes, Luxon did do the obligatory cricket-themed banter with the Indian prime minister.) 

A week, let me be the first person ever to say, is a long time in politics. The Post’s political editor, Luke Malpass, wrote from India that there were signs the prime minister was “getting his mojo back”. Whether he can ride that mojo wave back to New Zealand is another matter. And so is the next challenge – one that a leading commentator has repeatedly prioritised – feeding it back into the national bloodstream. 

Due to an increase in comments violating our community guidelines, we have defaulted to closing comments on political columns for the time being.