Williams Poto: Riccarton Racecourse Development Enabling Bill Riccarton Racecourse Bill — First ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Poto: Riccarton Racecourse Development Enabling Bill Riccarton Racecourse Bill — First Readings[Sitting date: 03 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7577. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]POTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. It has been well traversed the history that sits behind this bill: that the racecourse of course was set up over 100 years ago. At that time it was actually countryside and I think it might have been a day trip to get out there to watch the races. So it is certainly a facility that is well and truly rooted in the history of Christchurch and the city and the suburbs have grown around it. It is a beautiful example of green space open space in the heart of Riccarton. I know that it was a difficult decision for the board to make to relinquish some of its land for this very worthwhile project but it is a decision that the board has had to make and we support it in doing so. But not only is it about the survival of the racing club; it is also around ensuring that the facilities the buildings the outbuildings the stables—all of those facilities—are able to be maintained not only due to damage from the earthquake but actually just over time and the maintenance costs etc. So in that regard it is important for us to be supporting the club on this bill.We do however have some concerns. The local community when the bill was first promoted of course spoke with the local MP Dr Megan Woods about the loss of use of the land. It is a piece of land that many of the locals walk through. They walk their dogs in it. It is a lovely park area quite open but also sheltered at the same time—beautiful trees. So they were concerned about the loss of that land and I know that in discussions with the board at that meeting that Dr Megan Woods held and at other times there has been a lot done to reassure the community that the facilities and the ability to enjoy that part of the racing club will be protected and will still continue to provide some recreation for them.I do want to say it is an important partnership too with Ngāi Tahu Property. It is a very interesting venture and one that Ngāi Tahu are definitely in the right position to take advantage of but I do recall when I and my colleagues Dr Megan Woods and the Hon Ruth Dyson went to speak with them about the development I had some questions about the level of affordability they were predicting. I remember at the time suggesting that around $450000 was out of the purview of many local Christchurch people and at the time I did make the statement that for many people it is not affordable. The repayments on a 15-year mortgage with a 20 percent deposit would take 75 percent of the wages of a household on the median income before tax and I think that is fairly significant because it does suggest that affordability is a topic that we perhaps need to resolve at the select committee consideration. What is truly affordable for the people of Christchurch?The other issue that we raised at the time was around the exemplar status. From what I recall and I am happy to be corrected on this I had believed that this particular development did not meet the criteria for exemplar although I see that it is quoted as being one of the six fast-track exemplar subdivisions. I was of the view that even though it met most of the criteria it did not meet all of them and it was not actually an exemplar subdivision. An exemplar subdivision has percentages of affordable homes within the development. It has a certain level of urban design. There are many other criteria—the type of building materials that are used etc. I am unsure and I would like to have that corrected if that was the case but I am unsure that this is actually an exemplar subdivision.I am also concerned that property development in this city has tended towards the larger three and four-bedroom homes where really a range of different types of properties—smaller properties particularly—are really needed across the city. I know that this is a development that will require a certain look and has a certain price point but I would be encouraging anyone who is listening to this debate who is involved in property development to really look at the opportunities that lie in providing homes for different family groupings—whether it is for single people for couples or for smaller families—because we have tended to go down the route of the larger four bedroom executive-type homes. A lot of the developments of course that happen on the North Island are on the very very fringes of cities and have difficult transportation connections into work and schools or very loose connections to major facilities.I am not going to talk too much more on this bill. It has been well debated across the House. Just in reviewing I am concerned about $450000 being set as an affordability level. I think we could do better than that. As I say I would hope that the concerns of local people are addressed during the select committee process. There is an awful lot of select committee work being undertaken in Canterbury over the next few months. I hope that the select committees and those who will be involved in hearing submissions on the range of Canterbury bills are actually given an appropriate period of time and that people who want to submit on a vast array of legislation—going from our local democracy to housing to the way the governance of our city and future developments will go into the future. Just on that final concern about the select committee process and the period for submissions I hope that the public is given enough time and enough information to provide for the appropriate consultation of local communities. On that note I commend the bill to the House. Thank you.