Submission details
| Submission ID | 9845 |
|---|---|
| Organisation | Hounsell Holdings Limited |
| Name | Niksha Farac |
| Date | 3 April 2026 |
| 1. Do you have any feedback on the IAWAI Water Services Strategy? |
We support the overall direction of the Water Services Strategy. In particular, we strongly support:
1. The move to a regional, integrated water services model (IAWAI). 2. The commitment to unlocking growth and removing infrastructure constraints. 3. A partnership-based approach between IAWAI and the development sector This represents a necessary and positive shift to enable long-term housing supply and infrastructure delivery. We support the clear recognition that water infrastructure constraints are currently limiting development. It is critical that resolving these constraints, particularly in key growth areas, remains a primary focus of the capital programme. We strongly support the strategy’s intent to work more closely with developers and explore alternative delivery models and private partnerships. For large-scale developments, including areas such as Rotokauri, this approach is essential to: 1. Deliver infrastructure earlier and more efficiently 2. Share risk and cost appropriately 3. Enable coordinated, master planned growth outcomes We encourage IAWAI to continue developing clear frameworks for how these partnerships will operate in practice. |
| 2a. Do you support a growth pays for growth approach for new residential and commercial developments, including the use of growth charges to help fund growth-related infrastructure and services? |
Yes
|
| Please provide comment. |
We support the principle that growth-related infrastructure should be funded by those creating the demand. This is a fair and sustainable approach.
However, implementation must ensure that: 1. Costs are predictable and transparent 2. Charges reflect actual infrastructure demand 3. Funding mechanisms do not unintentionally delay or constrain development delivery |
| 2b. In the current residential growth charges proposal secondary minor dwellings (i.e. granny flats) may be treated as ½ HUE. Do you support treating secondary minor dwellings as ½ HUE? If you have an alternative proposal, please explain. |
Yes,
|
| Please explain. |
We support treating secondary minor dwellings as ½ HUE.
|
| 3. How would you prefer IAWAI engage you? |
Website, Social media, E-newsletter, Surveys, Events (online or in person), Antenno app
|
| 4. Do you support IAWAI’s Significance and Engagement Policy? |
Partially support
|
| 5. Do you have any feedback on the Significance and Engagement Policy? |
We support the intent of the policy to provide a structured and proportionate framework for determining significance and engagement. The approach is logical and aligns with good practice.
However, from a development perspective, the policy introduces uncertainty and potential delivery risk due to its reliance on discretion and lack of clear thresholds. Significance is assessed on a case-by-case basis using qualitative criteria, which makes it difficult to predict engagement requirements, timelines, and costs. We suggest thar clear objective thresholds are introduced to determine significance. There are no clear triggers for engagement levels, such as scale, value, or impact), which can create inconsistency and risk in project planning. Standard engagement pathways for common development scenarios would make this clearer for developers. |
| 6. Do you support IAWAI'S Waiver Policy? |
Yes
|
| 7. Do you have any feedback on the the Waiver Policy? |
We support the intent of the policy to create a clear and consistent waiver framework.
|
| Are you giving feedback on behalf of an organisation? |
Yes, I am a spokesperson
|
| My organisation's name is |
Hounsell Holdings Limited
|