Legislation and Policy:
The property ownership, planning, and land tenure systems in Aotearoa New Zealand are focused on individual property rights. This focus inhibits ease of collective ownership and occupation as desirable alternatives to mainstream individual, single site, or independent unit housing. There is a mostly unfounded fear of higher risks to be mitigated which require careful navigation. The following headings break down some of the potential challenges that may arise:
-
Forming an incorporated society or a charitable trust requires a lot of documentation. To become a registered organisation in Aotearoa requires a constitution or similar founding document, and member signatures. It is valuable to record information about your community publicly, as this can help future members and other communities learn about your community. Additionally, a well-documented organisation is easier to manage when it comes to complying with legislation, regulations, and taxes.
-
Collective housing is rarely considered in the current legislation and policy of Aotearoa New Zealand and so people and organisations involved with the sector will inevitably need to advocate for changes to legislation to help change misperceptions about the sector. An example of positive change that has occurred is the recognition of the collective housing sector by the Government Policy Statement on Housing and Urban Development (GPSHUD). Achieving big changes is difficult, especially as a small group with limited financial resources, but together we have a significant voice. For more see: The Housing Innovation Society
-
Most district plans are written as if the only form of land ownership or occupation is individual sites and housing units. To have more than two houses on a single property typically triggers a resource consent application as a non-complying use with reference to individual housing subdivision rules, or triggers multi unit housing rules and design guides. Collective housing models are subject to significant extra consideration, costs and time burdens as if their effects were different and more demanding than a group of comparable approved as of right individual housing uses of similar density beside each other. In most district plans collective housing models are not anticipated or defined and so need to be treated as if they were for example halfway houses for prisoner rehabilitation, or commercial development uses, and many affected parties are identified to be consulted. This inhibits or prevents many projects, and suppresses significant design innovation.
-
It is usually easier to navigate roadblocks when you have help from someone with knowledge of processes or policy either as a consultant or someone working within an organisation. Networking events such as CoHoHui are an excellent opportunity to link up with policy makers, planners, advocates, and other communities. Reach out to others who have fought these battles before. There are many communities who generously assist the future development of emerging collective housing projects. Their founders, members, and network of collaborators and friends can be great allies.
