Knowledge Hub.

Overview

The complexities that our cities and neighbourhoods face require us to find new solutions and approaches to planning and building. The Urban Advisory’s (TUA) desire is to equip local urbanists, policy makers, developers and investors with knowledge and insight to support the delivery of more equitable, meaningful and sustainable cities across Aotearoa New Zealand.  

This report is based on TUA’s 2018 European Study Tour, when our directors visited London, Freiburg, Oslo and Amsterdam, and also participated in the inaugural City Makers Guild Study Tour on Collaborative Urbanism, which visited Berlin, Vienna and Zurich. 

The visited projects were examples that provided affordable, secure and quality housing, each with a strong sense of a connected community. These were established through different development models such as collectives, cooperatives or partnerships between public, not-for-profit, and private sectors. 

This report is a resource for advancing better outcomes for the future of urbanism in New Zealand by critically reflecting on lessons learned the seven cities visited. It is divided into five key sections. These are: 

1. Key forces and themes in global city-making providing an overview of the urban challenges facing New Zealand. It discusses what makes a successful city that prioritises wellbeing outcomes for people and place. 
2. Key lessons from The Urban Advisory’s European tour, from each of the seven cities visited. 
3. Ten critical themes of successful collaborative urbanism are explored.
4. The future of urban development in New Zealand is considered.
5. The challenges of collaborative development in New Zealand are considered. 

Key Lessons 

• In order to address inequality and improve the wellbeing of citizens in our country, New Zealand must move beyond solely market-led speculative development. 
• New Zealand’s housing sector will be radically transformed by pursuing collaborative, alternative and integrated development projects. Although these can be slow and face their own challenges, this is a feasible pathway to provide for the long-term needs of residents, with fit-for-purpose, quality and affordable homes within a strong and sustainable community.  

Read the full report here:

Get a snippet of the trip by watching the video:

In this glossary, we aim to make it easy to understand what we here at TUA mean by these terms, and maybe introduce you to some innovative urban ideas. Keep this guide bookmarked, and you’ll be able to decipher any urbanist gibberish in no time.

Accessibility: The quality of being able to be reached or entered. In urban planning and design, accessibility refers to designing and implementing infrastructure and public spaces that supports the access of a diverse range of users. Infrastructure and spaces should especially account for the ease of access of children, the elderly, people from low socio economic backgrounds, and those with a disability.

Built form: The form and function of buildings as well as their configuration and relationship to urban spaces such as streets and open spaces.

Circular Economy: As defined by the The Ellen MacArthur Foundation, it is a practice that decouples economic activity from the extraction and consumption of finite resources. It is a resilient, self-healing and sustainable practice that is good for business, people and the environment. In a circular economy, materials are never wasted, and nature is “regenerated.” This term is also known as Regenerative Practice or Regenerative Economy. 

Learn more about circular economies here.

Community wealth building/local economies: A collaborative approach that puts people back at the centre of their local economy and ensures wealth is circulated within the community. The approach is tailored to the area/communities it is implemented in, focusing on strengths and opportunities. The result is greater equity, economic resilience, and community wellbeing. 

Density: The degree of how compact or concentrated something is. In this context, we are referring to how compact or concentrated housing is by typology or by neighbourhood/residential zone. 

• ‍Density by housing typology: Refers to the number and type of dwellings on a site.‍
• Low density housing: Standalone houses, generally 1–2 storeys, on an individual section‍
• Medium-density housing: Housing that is multi-unit dwellings (up to 6 storeys).‍
• High density housing: Housing that is multi-unit and over 6 storeys.

Density by neighbourhood/residential zone: Refers to the average density of an area, generally measured by dwellings or population per acre, hectare, m² or km². These areas may include a mix of typologies up to the maximum size as per the zone rules. The categories below are defined by the Ministry for the Environment in the National Planning Standards, November 2019.

• ‍Low density Residential Zone/Neighbourhood: Areas used predominantly for residential activities and buildings consistent with a suburban scale and subdivision pattern, such as one- to two-storey houses with yards and landscaping, and other compatible activities.‍
• Medium density Residential Zone/Neighbourhood: Areas used predominantly for residential activities with moderate concentration and bulk of buildings, such as detached, semi-detached and terraced housing, low-rise apartments, and other compatible activities. ‍
• High density Residential Zone/Neighbourhood: Areas used predominantly for residential activities with high concentration and bulk of buildings, such as apartments, and other compatible activities.

Design thinking: a process in which planners study and interact with the community to gain a deeper understanding of the needs of the end user. This is a way of ensuring the final product will be fit for its intended purpose and the needs of the community. It often involves challenging common assumptions and creating innovative solutions to address existing problems. By challenging the existing process in design and planning, we can produce better outcomes because continuing to do what we have always been doing is not enough to create cities that can overcome challenges and support their communities. More may be learned about design thinking here.

‍

Integrated neighbourhoods: a community-focused place which provides for the diverse needs of all residents; this means a neighbourhood with varied housing options across price points, a variety of amenities that serve daily-life needs (e.g. mental health services, a supermarket, parks, social care) and other opportunities for inclusiveness and social mobility. 

Land development: The process in which improvements are made to a piece of land to make the area more useful, e.g., clearing land for agricultural use or using land for the construction of buildings.

Masterplanning: A process of visioning for a place that draws together diverse stakeholder opinions and aspirations and balances these with sustainable and other project imperatives.

‍

A masterplan: A planning and design document that sets out the conceptual layout for a site or area to guide future growth and development.

Mixed-use development: A type of urban development that integrates two or more uses, such as residential, commercial or retail in a development. 

Mobility: How far an individual can physically move or travel in a given time period. Mobility is also not just about having access to one mode of transport - it is about having access to a range of quality and reliable mobility options.  

Placemaking: We like Placemaking Aoteroa’s definition: “an approach where people work together to make places better, not only for themselves but for others and for the place itself”.

Place delivery strategy: A comprehensive process for delivering places, spanning across the scoping, engaging and testing, designing and refining, and delivering and activating phases of any infrastructure or development project or programme of works. It includes roles of different players across the built environment industry, and considers governance arrangements, the importance of treaty partnership and mana whenua, and the inputs required from professional services, the property sector, communities, and citizens. 

Public realm: The publicly owned places and spaces that are for everyone’s use e.g. streets, parks.

Smart cities/smart growth: A city or urban area that has become more efficient through the use and development of digital technology.

Streetscape: The appearance or view of a street (e.g. buildings, footpaths and landscaping).

‍Systems thinking: A holistic approach looking at the relationships and interactions within a system, and how they connect and influence one another, rather than focusing on the different parts in isolation. 

Tactical urbanism: A prototyping process within urban development; experimenting with or showcasing potential changes with the intention of improving local neighbourhoods and city gathering places using low-cost, temporary change to the area e.g. temporary bike lanes, pedestrian-only streets. These are often intended to pressure government organisations into installing a permanent or more expansive version of the improvement. This process can be led by residents or community organisation groups, but can also be initiated by government entities demonstrating the positive outcomes of a project that is controversial or receiving resistance from the public. 

Transit-oriented development: A type of urban development that focuses compact, mixed-use and higher-density development around or close to public transport, allowing people to enjoy easy access to jobs, services and amenities.

Universal design: The process of designing environments to be accessible to all people, regardless of age, disability or other factors. 

‍Urban amenities: Facilities that contribute to the urban experience of residents. They are linked to daily life needs, e.g., food, entertainment, health and wellness facilities, public transit, education, retail, community facilities, public spaces, etc. 

‍Urban amenity: A broad term that describes the perceived quality or character of a space or place which makes it appealing to residents. The convenience, accessibility, and design of urban amenities is only a contributing factor to the urban amenity experienced in an area. Urban amenity is also affected by environmental factors such as perceived noise levels, air or water quality, and socio-cultural aspects such as a sense of community. 

Urban economics: The study of urban environments using the tools of economics to analyse urban issues. 

Urban form: The physical characteristics and the built environment of an urban area.

Urban intensification: An urban development process in market conditions, characterised by increased housing and infrastructure provision in line with planning for projected population growth.

Urban morphology: The study of urban form, focusing on the formation of urban forms and how they change over time.

Urban regeneration: An urban development process with a large degree of transformation at its core to support improved social, cultural, economic, and environmental outcomes. It is characterised by significant intervention, a coordinated approach across government councils, community and private sectors, and new planning policy. The use of strategic partnerships and brokerage among Delivery Agents to deliver the coordinated approach required is also fundamental in order to change the economic and social geography of a place. Citizens are empowered as part of the process.

Urban renewal: An urban development process that addresses the physical urban decay or decline of an area within the existing hierarchy of planning policy. It is characterised by physical interventions – such as the large-scale replacement and provision of housing, infrastructure and amenities – usually over a shorter period of time than regeneration. Communication and engagement with the community is a priority.

Urban strategy: Urban strategy is about shaping the development of cities through a systems thinking approach. It is about bringing together different ways of thinking, improved systems and more collaborative processes to improve the wellbeing of people through interventions in the built environment.

Walkability: The ability to safely walk to services and amenities within a reasonable distance of the home. 

‍Wellbeing: The Treasury’s official definition states “Wellbeing refers to what it means for our lives to go well. It encompasses aspects of material prosperity such as income and GDP. And it also encompasses many other important things such as our health, our relationships with people and the environment, and the satisfaction we take in the experience of life.” They consider wellbeing analysis as “economics done well”  because “it creates a more complete picture of societal progress.” Wellbeing is being recognised internationally as a critical factor in economic development and is now being considered at the forefront of public policy. In 2019, the Labour-led New Zealand Government announced the first Wellbeing Budget as an effort to consider “the wellbeing of our people, the health of our environment and the strength of our communities'' (Robertson, 2022). It adopts the evolving “Living Standards Framework” (LSF) to recognise all aspects that play a role in our wellbeing. He Ara Waiora has also been developed to provide a framework helping the government to understand the Māori perspective on wellbeing alongside the LSF. The first Wellbeing report was published in November 2022 and assessed how wellbeing has changed and areas that require further effort. 

Other predecessor terms in the built environment covering aspects of wellbeing:

• ‍Liveability: The features that create a place where people want to live.
• ‍Quality of life: A person’s perception of their life satisfaction. It is a non-financial measure of happiness that factors in a person’s values and culture, as well as things like job satisfaction, health, safety, financial position, interests, achievements and relationships they have with the people around them. 
• ‍Quality of Urban Life: Related to quality of life, this is a branch off that considers the satisfaction of residents within a neighbourhood.  

‘20-minute neighbourhood’: The concept of a neighbourhood with convenient, safe and primarily pedestrian-focused access to services and amenities that residents use nearly every day and are within an approximate 20-minute walk. More may be learned about the 20-minute neighbourhood concept here.

‘15-minute city’: A concept in urban planning where all the basic things a resident needs (shops, parks, health care, schools, etc) can be accessed within 15 minutes on foot or on other micromobility (e.g. bikes and scooters).

All above illustrations done by Emma McInnes.

In this glossary, we aim to make it easy to understand what we here at TUA mean by these terms, and maybe introduce you to some innovative urban ideas. Keep this guide bookmarked, and you’ll be able to decipher any urbanist gibberish in no time. 

Accommodation Supplement: A non-recoverable weekly payment to people who are not in public housing, to assist them with their rent, board, or the cost of owning a home.

Affordable housing: A home that a household could occupy for less than 30% of their pre-tax household income, as either renting or purchasing. This includes dwellings available through a housing assistance program that provides housing below market rent, i.e., council provided housing, Kāinga Ora housing. Affordable housing includes Assisted Housing.

Assisted housing: A category on the housing continuum that includes emergency and transitional housing. This is synonymous with Supported Housing. 

Housing adequacy: A vision for, or condition of, housing that is habitable, affordable, accessible, secure and culturally appropriate, as defined by the UN Habitat goals and adopted by the NZ Human Rights Commission. This includes the concept of sustainable housing that is able to meet the needs of current and future households.

Housing choice: The revealed preferences through people’s actual housing market decisions and trade-off behaviour. Housing choice is influenced by the limitations and constraints of the actual housing environment and market conditions people find themselves in.

‍Housing continuum: A linear spectrum that categorises households into cohorts of people, and identifies a range of housing tenures available, on the basis of cost, affordability and/or ownership and management. This can be a visual tool for understanding housing delivery and intervention, illustrating the pathway from insecure housing (homelessness) through to private rental and home ownership.

Housing demand: The willingness and ability to purchase a house, or take on another housing tenure. Demand for housing is assessed at national and regional levels to ensure that public housing is provided in the areas that need it the most. 

‍Housing ecosystem: An interrelated system that encompasses the affordability continuum, its cohorts, the housing tenures and models that exist in New Zealand and internationally.
‍

‍

Housing model: A comprehensive way to deliver a housing solution. This includes a clear resident formation and participation method, financial, legal and tenure structures, and design, management and governance processes.

Housing mobility: The movement of people due to a change in their usual place of residence. Housing mobility can occur due to changes in tenure arrangements, or moving from one geographic location to another for various housing, employment or lifestyle reasons.

Housing need: The number and type of houses required, related to household size and population growth. A household is in housing need if its housing falls below at least one of the adequacy, affordability or suitability standards and it would have to spend 30 per cent or more of its total before-tax income to pay a median rent.

Housing preferences: The relative attractiveness of housing, with an aspirational and long-term orientation. Preference is a relatively unconstrained vision of what someone seeks in a house, including longer-term aspirations and desires.

Housing product: A defined legal, financial and tenure structure for housing that forms part of a housing model.

Housing right/right to housing: The international standard, first recognised in 1948 by the United Nations, acknowledging access to adequate housing as a human right, not a commodity. We all have the right to live somewhere in security, peace and dignity. 

Housing supply: The total number of housing units in a given area. 

Housing tenure: The nature of a person’s or household’s legal right to occupy a dwelling.

These legal rights range across rights of use, control and disposal. Rental and home ownership are the most common tenure types in New Zealand.

• ‍Land tenure: The legal relationship that describes how people, as individuals or groups, own or ‘hold’ land (legal or customary).
• ‍Rental tenure: A housing tenure which offers someone who does not own the property the right to occupy a dwelling. Rental tenants agree to pay a mutually agreed rent to the owner periodically. This includes social rental, affordable rental and market rental.
• ‍Security of tenure: A legal arrangement that determines the guaranteed length or extent of housing tenure. Secure housing tenure allows residents to live in their home (or sometimes an equivalent home) for as long as they want to, whether it is rented or owned.

Income Related Rent (IRR): IRR is a rent that is subsidised by the government to make accommodation affordable for low-income households. For qualifying households, an IRR equates to 25% of their net household income, and the government pays the difference up to the market rental rate.

Intermediate housing: The market of private sector renter households with at least one member in paid employment who are unable to affordably (“using no more than 30% of their gross household income to service mortgage expenses) purchase a dwelling at the lower quartile house sale price”. This cohort generally does not qualify for social housing, and struggles to afford market rent. Also called the Third Sector.

Licence to Occupy: A short-term right to occupy or use a property for a particular purpose, with no particular right to exclusive occupation or ownership of the land or facilities. Licences to Occupy are common with retirement villages and developments on Māori land.

Housing Models

‍Baugruppen: Literally, ‘building groups’, this term describes smaller self-organised housing projects, as separate from larger, more mainstream development entities. Baugruppen focuses on group self-build or group-based design processes that align housing design to clear community needs and housing is allocated to a predetermined pool of residents (usually buyers). Baugruppen is typically high density housing; multi-storey & multi family buildings such as an apartment complex.

Build-to-rent: A property development model that delivers long-term investment and returns, from purpose-built rental housing managed by a single ownership entity. Build-to-Rent provides longer-term security of tenure for rental tenants than is generally delivered by market rentals.

Cohousing: An intentional clustering of private homes, with some common facilities and shared neighbourhood life. Cohousing communities are co-developed & co-designed by future residents, then managed and operated by the residents, supported by a hierarchy-free decision-making process. This term is sometimes misunderstood and used to describe the broader range of Community-focused Housing models. While they both build on the concept of collaboration and purpose-built housing (built for residents, by the residents), cohousing differs from Baugruppen by density; where Baugruppen is high-density, cohousing is typically low to mid-density. 

Coliving: A commercially operated form of build-to-rent housing, that offers a curated lifestyle, communal spaces, flexible tenure, and often, reduced private space. This term is sometimes misunderstood and used to describe the broader range of Community-focused Housing models.

Community-focused Housing (CFH): Describes a range of housing models that contribute to greater economic, environmental, social and cultural wellbeing of current and future generations. CFH models include Cooperatives, Cohousing, Community Land Trusts, Property Collectives and Coliving.

Community Housing Provider (CHP): A not-for-profit organisation that provides safe, secure, affordable and appropriate rental housing. These organisations provide, and largely self-fund, housing products and programmes for low-income households.

Community-led housing (CLH): A housing initiative where local people come together to solve housing problems in their community, with the purpose of providing affordable homes through construction, repairs and property management. “Community-led housing” is a term commonly used in the UK. Under this umbrella, other community or group schemes such as cooperative housing, cohousing, community land trusts, tenant management organisations, community self-build (Baugruppen) schemes, and self-help housing groups are also covered. Key components include community engagement, formal management and community benefits. Note: the group does not necessarily need to pick up a hammer themselves but depending on the skillset of the community group, some may do! The group will have an ongoing role in terms of formal ownership, management or stewardship of the homes and this is to ensure the benefits to the local area/specified community are protected. This definition was inspired by the work of Louise Crabtree et al. 

Collective Tenure Models: A community sharing land access rights to benefit from economies of scale during production, to spread risk and to avoid the costs of enforcing individual property rights.

Community Land Trusts (CLT): A shared-ownership tenure model, where ownership of the land and house are separated to provide retained affordability. Occupiers own (or rent) their home but not the land: a long-term ground lease is established for the land. A CLT acquires and manages land with the intention of holding it in trust and developing affordable housing and other community amenities.

Emergency housing: Temporary accommodation (from overnight to 12 weeks) and support for households who have an urgent need for accommodation, because they have nowhere else to stay or are unable to reside in their usual residence. This is part of the Supported Housing category.

Housing cooperative: A form of shared ownership where residents purchase shares in a corporation. In this arrangement, the corporation is the development entity and retains ownership of either the land and housing, or just the housing (with a lease over the land). The residents purchase shares in the corporation, with each share corresponding to a dwelling unit or proportion of the overall roughly equivalent to a single dwelling. Cooperatives can be developed on a single site, or across various (scattered) sites.

• Equity cooperative: This is an umbrella term to refer collectively to both limited and market equity cooperatives, a form of shared ownership where residents purchase shares in a corporation, which correspond to a dwelling unit or proportion of the overall development.
• Rental cooperative: A form of shared ownership where residents purchase nominal shares in a corporation that correspond to a dwelling unit that residents rent or lease from the cooperative.
• Limited equity cooperative: Where share prices are set by a formula, usually related to average median income, and not by the market, in order to retain affordability.

‍

Intentional communities (IC): A group of people who live together or share common facilities and who regularly associate with each other on the basis of explicit common values. Some IC are established as cooperatives as the cooperative principles can align well with IC principles.

Mutual housing / Mutual Housing Associations: A housing model which offers legal membership to tenants, service users and possibly employees, and takes active steps to promote membership and involve members in governance and decision-making. Note: The terms ‘mutual housing association’ and ‘cooperative’ are used interchangeably in the UK, under the umbrella term ‘mutual housing sector’, which can confuse discussion.

Papakāinga: A contemporary kāinga or settlement on collectively-owned Māori land that includes houses and other communal facilities, occupied by people who have ancestral connections to the land and whakapapa connections to one another. In a planning context, papakāinga is understood as – any activity which the owners of land held under Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993, that is in the traditional rohe of those tangata whenua, shall seek to undertake on their land to sustain themselves. Papakāinga may include (but not be limited to) residential, social, cultural, economic, conservation and recreation activities, marae, wāhi tapu and urupā.

‍Participatory housing approaches: Housing providers and developments which offer future residents the opportunity to participate in the planning, design and development process of housing.

Public housing: Rental properties owned (or leased) and managed by the state, Kāinga Ora (formerly HNZ), or a Community Housing Provider, that can be tenanted by people who are eligible for public housing. Also known as social housing or state housing (specifically housing provided by the state).

Progressive ownership: A collection of housing models which offer alternative entry into home ownership by reducing the financial burden of entry associated with market home ownership. Progressive Ownership can be categorised as subsidy retention or shared appreciation. This is an umbrella term which includes shared equity and rent-to-own.

• ‍Rent-to-own: A housing model administered by a third party, Trust, or corporation where tenants rent for a predetermined period (e.g. 5 years), before they are offered the opportunity to wholly or partially purchase the property at or below market value. Restrictions are usually placed on the property to ensure affordability is retained for future households. This is a type of Progressive Ownership.
• Shared equity: A housing tenure arranged between a Trust, Incorporation and/or third party, and an individual household, that share in the ownership and cost of housing, at a price point the household can afford. Shared Equity can also be called ‘Co-Ownership’ or ‘Shared Ownership’. This is a type of Progressive Ownership.

‍Property collectives: A joint venture which allows groups of people to collectively design, finance and develop a series of homes. At the completion of the development, homes are generally owned individually by households in the joint venture, with no on-going collective responsibility.

Self-organised housing models: Housing development driven by a group of individuals acting together on the basis of a shared interest or objective. Note: Self-organised housing models can include various types of cooperatives, community land trusts, and intentional communities.

Supported housing: A support programme that provides short-term subsidised housing and related support services for households with acute housing needs. Supported housing aims to help people gain safe and secure housing and offers them support to gain independence in their community. This category on the housing continuum includes emergency and transitional housing, and is sometimes referred to as Assisted Housing.

‍Transitional housing: Short-term housing (12 weeks on average) and social services for people with an immediate housing need while support is put in place to transition them into sustainable public or private housing on a long-term basis. This is part of the Supported Housing category.

‍Wāhi Kāinga: A concept derived from traditional Māori society, where collective living was focused on extended whānau and hapū based collectivism and founded on whakapapa. It is a model that adopts principles of Māori living, but is not limited to Māori people, and does not have to be associated with Māori land.

All Illustrations in this article have been done by Emma McInnes.

‍Some other urban glossaries TUA likes:

Urban Design Works: Urban Design Glossary

Urban Design Lab: Urban Design Terminology

The Mayor's Institute on City Design in cooperation with the National Trust for Historic Preservation: City Design Glossary

This comprehensive literature review dives deep into the critical forces shaping modern urban life and the complex relationship between planning strategy and resident experience. It examines the complexity of development policy and sociological reality to provide a robust, strategic analysis of the neighbourhood ecosystem.

Five core areas were examined: 

1. Neighbourhood Planning: Focused analysis of development patterns, smart growth initiatives, and the impact of Transit-Oriented Development (TOD).
2. Neighbourhood Units and Boundaries: Examining how planners define communities versus how residents perceive them.
3. Neighbourhood Walkability: The vital metrics and sociological outcomes of designing accessible, pedestrian-friendly spaces.
4. Neighbourhood Satisfaction: The crucial, subjective measure of resident (and residential) well-being.
5. Neighbourhood Change: Understanding the dynamics of growth, evolution, and decline in urban settings.

Structured to be read as a coherent narrative that guides you through the progression of urban theory, this document is also designed for immediate utility. Throughout the text, you will find relevant references and abstracts included in clearly marked text-boxes, ensuring this review serves as an indispensable, easy-to-use tool for writing subsequent research reports and articles.

Read the full report via the National Science Challenges website HERE.

Following the devastating 2011 Canterbury earthquakes, Christchurch faced the challenge - and opportunity - of reimagining its urban future. The Christchurch Central Recovery Plan (CCRP) introduced a bold, design-led approach to rebuilding the city, anchored by three core objectives: creating a compact low-rise core, a green city, and an accessible city.

Eight years on, this approach delivered mixed results. While the Blueprint Plan provided a strong vision and catalysed some public and private investment, progress was slowed by fragmented governance, limited community engagement, and delays in key anchor projects. The experience highlights a critical lesson for urban regeneration: design alone is not enough. Successful recovery requires integrated strategies, clear governance, and genuine collaboration with communities.

As Christchurch transitions from recovery to long-term regeneration, the focus must shift toward strategic alignment, stakeholder buy-in, and sustainable urban design that reflects cultural, social, and economic aspirations. This case study underscores the importance of combining visionary planning with inclusive processes to create cities that thrive after disaster.

Read the research paper below, or read and download HERE.
‍

This chapter explores the role of placemaking as a tool for resilience in post-disaster urban regeneration, using Christchurch, New Zealand, as a case study following the 2010–2011 earthquakes. It examines how community-led temporary and adaptive urbanism initiatives bridged the gap between emergency response and long-term recovery, fostering social capital and civic engagement. 

Three key projects - Re:START Mall, the Festival of Transitional Architecture (FESTA), and the Commons - are analysed against the Resilient Greater Christchurch Framework to assess their contributions to connectivity, participation, economic vitality, and adaptive capacity. 

Findings highlight that grassroots placemaking not only reactivated urban spaces but also empowered communities, influenced permanent regeneration strategies, and strengthened resilience. The study underscores the critical importance of temporary urbanism and collaborative placemaking in disaster recovery planning.

Read the paper below, or read and download HERE.

‍

This research paper, funded by BRANZ, sought to understand the key barriers to delivering multigenerational housing in New Zealand. The research involved TUA's Natalie Allen and Greer O’Donnell, as well as Kate Bryson, Charmaine 'Ilaiū Talei, Jade Kake, and Jacqueline Paul. In summary, they found that multigenerational housing offers a promising solution to address the ageing population, cost of living pressures, and housing affordability in Aotearoa NZ, by enabling resource pooling, strengthening family connections, and fostering social inclusion.

Part of this research involved developing a policy paper; designed for policymakers across the housing system in NZ to engage with and understand the implications of the research. You can read the policy paper via the flipbook below.

The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development's vision is that "everyone in New Zealand lives in a home and a community that meets their needs and aspirations" (2021). This policy paper provides actionable insights to achieving this goal, and a way forward in shaping a more responsive and inclusive housing future for all New Zealanders.

‍
Read the report below, or on the BRANZ website HERE.

Watch the Webinar below, or on YouTube HERE.

‍

View and download the Webinar slides here:

The New Zealand Housing Survey (NZHS) is giving the sector something it has never had before: a clear, evidence‑based picture of what New Zealanders need, want, and can afford across regions, life stages, and tenures. It replaces assumption‑based planning with a robust, longitudinal dataset that shows where the housing system is under pressure, who is most affected, and where investment and policy change will have the greatest impact.

‍
Read the year two survey results below:

This BRANZ commissioned research was a multi-year project aimed at understanding how liveability was being achieved by medium density housing and how it could be improved, reviewing local and international strategy, policy and research documents relating to the liveability of MDH, and identify and addressing the knowledge gaps relating to liveability research in New Zealand.

The Wellbeing Budget (2019) was launched during the evolution of this project. This redefined a way for how liveability and well-being aligned with each other and was then considered in the literature review and became integral to the survey and focus group questions, and the legislation and regulation review.

TUA has further tested the methodologies of this project to gather a robust evidence base for how to deliver liveable neighbourhoods in New Zealand. This is being applied in projects in Auckland (Tamaki) and Wellington (Porirua).

‍
Read the summary report below, or view on the BRANZ website HERE.

Read the literature review below, or view on the BRANZ website HERE.

Read the legislation review below, or view on the BRANZ website HERE.

‍‍
Read the residents survey report below, or view on the BRANZ website HERE.

‍
Read the council survey report below, or view on the BRANZ website HERE.

The Urban Advisory is proud to release the first report of The New Zealand Housing Survey.

After years of development, an initial 2,500+ responses, a data analysis from the University of Auckland and a full report written by the team at The Urban Advisory; we are now able to start building a more nuanced picture of how people live, want to live and the barriers that are in the way of achieving their housing aspirations. 

Three key insights have emerged as a results of this first tranche of data:

‍ 1: That there is a growing appetite for more housing options.

New Zealanders are signaling a clear demand for more diverse housing choices that cater to different life stages, financial situations, and cultural needs. The desire for flexibility is now a major factor in the housing demand being expressed by respondents, with many feeling that the current choices aren't always in the right places, or the right type of houses to suit their needs.

2: Housing mobility is constrained — especially for renters and downsizers.

The survey reveals significant constraints on housing mobility, with renters reporting far worse outcomes than homeowners. This is underscored by widespread dissatisfaction among renters, with nearly 75% expressing dissatisfaction with the housing options available to them. This dissatisfaction is intrinsically linked to affordability, which presents a major barrier to entering the homeownership market. 

3. Affordability pressures are eroding quality of life.

While there are those that own their homes and are comfortable and secure, hidden hardship for many other groups is widespread. People, and particularly renters or those over leveraged paying their mortgages, are sacrificing essentials — healthcare, rest, family time — to meet living costs. Financial strain like this limits productivity, entrepreneurship, and social contribution, replacing the “Kiwi Dream” with economic trade-offs and disillusionment.

"To build a truly equitable and sustainable housing system, 
we must expand the range of choices available to all New Zealanders." 

The report goes into further detail to expand on the socio-demographic variations across these key findings, as well as beginning to validate or disprove prevalent housing narratives. 

By reading the full report below, you can dive deeper into the data and learn more about what’s really going on for New Zealanders when it comes to their housing. This is just the beginning: we have big plans for the data and collecting a lot more of it throughout 2026. Join us on the journey by reaching out to one of our directors.

Across Aotearoa New Zealand, towns and centres are under increasing pressure from growth, affordability constraints, infrastructure limits, and shifting patterns of everyday life. Large‐scale developments are frequently positioned as solutions to these challenges. This Insights Report brings together findings from the University of Auckland Town Centre & Wellbeing Survey undertaken in 2023, alongside key insights from The New Zealand Housing Survey®, behavioural clustering, and applied scenario‐testing practice to demonstrate a simple but critical proposition: town centres succeed or struggle based on how housing, mobility, amenities, and social infrastructure function together as a system.

‍

Retirement is a time of life that is associated with relaxation and reaping the rewards of a lifetime of hard work. However, many of the older people in New Zealand are faced with increasing stresses and insecurities with housing and the cost of living. Older New Zealanders want to live in a safe, warm, dry, secure home, within a suitable distance to essential services and facilities, and friends and whānau enabling them to maintain vital social connections.

From speaking first-hand with representatives of the older population, and reviewing key pieces of research, The Urban Advisory explains how the current system of housing is failing New Zealanders. Providing a potential solution, this report details how scaling up the delivery of innovative housing models could go a long way towards avoiding many older New Zealanders facing retired life with financial stresses, and poor housing quality and insecurity.

Read the report here:

TUA worked with Unitec School of Architecture and Design to curate the publication of the first special edition of Asylum journal for Unitec’s School of Architecture.

TUA developed the journal theme Reimagining our Future Neighbourhoods, which invites readers to challenge our typical conceptions of how we build our towns and cities in Aotearoa, and embrace new philosophies, construction methods, and amenities. The journal was published in 2023 and included new, diverse voices in the fields of architecture and urban design. A high quality physical and digital publication was produced, with TUA providing input into the design of the journal.

‍
Focusing on the theme Reimagining our Future Neighbourhoods, we curated 14 articles from innovative academics and practitioners around Aotearoa. An open submission process was conducted, which involved curation and selection of articles, as well as targeted invitations of voices who we wished to amplify in the journal.  TUA provided feedback to authors, worked on edits, and managed the submission and peer review processes.  TUA created a narrative to guide the reader through the journal TUA’s input included theming and sequencing the submitted articles.

‍
Read the report below:

If you are in the business of urban or economic development in Aotearoa, you would have heard about City Deals by now. But what does it mean practically to think about economic growth and urban development together?

Drawing on best practice, and our experience and lessons learned by The Urban Advisory on multiple international study tours and from our work here in Aotearoa, we consider the interrelationship between economic and urban development functions within publicly funded agencies.

This report covers:

●  Critical success factors for urban development functions within a broader economic development context

●  Future form, function and outcomes required for an economic development focused infrastructure delivery agency

Read the full report here:

Set within a larger piece of work as part of the government funded National Science Challenge 11: Building Better Towns and Cities (NSC11) programme, TUA collaborated with Dr Paola Boarin and Professor Errol Haarhoff from The University of Auckland to develop a Post Occupancy Evaluation framework based on international best practice. The framework was tested using Hobsonville Point, Auckland as a case study neighbourhood.

TUA provided a peer review of the initial literature review and developed an evaluation framework matrix informed by international tools. The framework was refined through the case study process to produce the final environmental sustainability framework in collaboration with Dr Paola Boarin. TUA also provided advice and assistance with data collection, developing the case study analysis of the proposed framework and writing the final report.

The Hobsonville Point case study tested the framework at a neighbourhood-wide and block scale. The research was considered novel for New Zealand as no equivalent analysis of neighbourhood sustainability outcomes at this scale had been previously undertaken. 

The case study highlighted how improvements could be made to a) the environmental sustainability performance of New Zealand neighbourhoods and b) the applicability of the framework overall to support urban development outcomes.

‍
View the full report below.
You can also read it on the National Science Challenges website HERE.

The prevailing development settings in New Zealand severely limit the number of innovative housing models that can succeed at present. Current regulation, legislation, finance and lending, and land acquisition and underwriting systems do not adequately address this type of housing development. This means that those wishing to pursue this form of housing have to seek and pay for (expensive) bespoke legal advice. Without bespoke legal advice on each project, they encounter barriers that undermine project viability. Additionally, a lack of political support, as well as public awareness and acceptance of these models, further impedes upon successful delivery and possibilities of up scaling.

Read the report here:

Overview

Collective housing is innovative, community-focused housing which provides options outside of the typical renting or ownership models. Three of these models - Cooperative housing, Community Land Trusts, and Cohousing - are internationally popular tools to provide affordable, stable housing, but they are poorly understood in Aotearoa New Zealand.

To bridge the gap, The Urban Advisory (TUA) have created one-page learning guides for each of these models. These give a quick guide for people to understand the basics of what these models are and how they work.

The Urban Advisory (TUA) and WEAll Aotearoa co-published the white paper, Community Wealth Building: An equitable approach to economic development for Aotearoa New Zealand. This collaborative effort positions Community Wealth Building (CWB) as a strategy to restructure the local economy to ensure that wealth is held and reinvested back into the community, ultimately delivering greater equity, economic resilience, and community wellbeing. WEAll Aotearoa, a non-partisan 'think and do' tank, is focused on redesigning the New Zealand economy around the wellbeing of people and te taiao. The report explores the principles and practical applications of CWB in the local context, detailing the five key pillars of action and drawing on both international and New Zealand-based initiatives. The co-created paper has been launched with Local Government NZ and is included in their toolkit for councils.

The paper explores the principles of Community Wealth Building, outlines the five pillars with case studies of how it has worked internationally and in Aotearoa New Zealand, identifies common challenges, and shares what people can do to get Community Wealth Building started in their area.

The white paper was launched via webinar kindly hosted by LGNZ in July, watch here.

About Community Wealth Building
Community Wealth Building offers Aotearoa New Zealand an approach to economic development that leads to more prosperous, equitable, sustainable, and resilient local economies and communities. At its heart it puts people back at the centre of local economies. It ensures wealth generated in a local economy is held and invested back into that local economy, and puts control and benefits into the hands of local people.

‍
Read the report here:

Auckland's housing landscape is shifting: over half of new residential developments now feature attached housing like terraces and apartments. But what's it actually like to live in these higher-density neighbourhoods?

This report dives into Hobsonville Point, a suburb built at two to three times the typical density. The results are clear: residents are largely satisfied with their homes and their neighbours. The key to this success? High-quality public spaces and amenities, from coastal walkways and parks to initial cafes and transport services.

The research however, highlights concerns over privacy issues in some dwelling designs, as well as increasing traffic and parking pressures as the area grows.

Ultimately, the data shows that housing satisfaction is strongly connected to the quality of the public realm. Hobsonville Point's success points to the crucial role of a clear vision and intentional design in creating thriving high-density communities.

Dive into the full report to explore the details, which you can read on the National Science Challenges website HERE.

Cooperative housing models are common across Europe, and provide an attractive “third option” for delivering housing beyond traditional rental and ownership models. Despite this, the model is not present and poorly understood in Aotearoa. The Urban Advisory (TUA) have distilled key lessons from visiting several European cooperatives in this report to show the wider potential of cooperatives and how they could work here.

Many New Zealanders are locked out of home ownership and trapped in expensive, insecure rentals. Innovative housing models have the potential to address parts of Aotearoa’s housing crisis - the first step is understanding the potential, and how they may be delivered. This report answers six questions:

1. What is cooperative housing?
2. How do housing cooperatives work? 
3. Who do housing cooperatives serve?
4. How are housing cooperatives funded?
5. How are housing cooperatives managed?
6. What kind of typologies can a housing cooperative be? 

Using Case Studies from Europe, this report gives a short overview of how cooperatives have provided safe, affordable housing around the world and how they could be one part of the solution to Aotearoa’s housing crisis. 

‍
Read the report here:

New Zealand towns and cities are growing, and the housing market needs to keep pace with an increasingly diverse population. This report kicks off the BRANZ medium-density housing (MDH) research program by defining MDH as multi-unit dwellings up to 6 storeys and diving deep into the current landscape.

MDH is widely seen as a key to managing growth, avoiding sprawl, improving affordability, and meeting the needs of smaller, ageing, and increasingly varied households. However, the report identifies critical knowledge gaps, especially concerning the actual delivery of projects, the "missing middle" of attached terraced homes, and how policy truly translates into supply.

Discover the common MDH typologies present in the national stock, the trade-offs New Zealanders make in their housing choices, and the crucial research needed to ensure MDH meets both our strategic growth goals and the diverse aspirations of all residents.

‍
Read the report below or view on the BRANZ website HERE.

This report explores how to deliver ‘en-masse’ houses that reduce initial and ongoing costs and become affordable. The report looks at ways of achieving this through better use of our physical, economic and knowledge-based resources. 

The key topics covered by the report are;

1. Co-operatives; what they are and their potential to support diversity and reduce individual costs.
2. Community Land Trusts; what they are and how they can support perpetual affordability.
3. Mechanisms to deliver affordable housing; six regulatory and non-regulatory pathways: Policy, Strategy & Leadership, Land-use Planning, Building & Planning Regulations, Funding, and Education. 

The current system and its band-aid approach to affordability is not working. Change is long overdue. The state of flux caused by the pandemic presents an opportune moment to test new ideas. A call for collaboration between the new urban development not-for-profit-sector and the government sector can emerge as being drivers for this change. Through this will emerge a resilient and equitable system for housing at scale.

Read the report here:

How bringing back trains and investing in rail infrastructure could help revitalise our rural and regional town centres.

Transport and infrastructure has immense power to catalyse the regeneration of local neighbourhoods (being environments and communities). The challenge is to make sure that this regeneration is inclusive, economically and environmentally sustainable, and innovative. Many of Aotearoa New Zealand’s town centres could better serve the people who live and use them everyday – passenger rail could be the impetus for the local regeneration of these neighbourhoods.

People and places should be at the centre of all urban policy – we looked at the opportunity for people to have passenger rail networks available and accessible and the impacts on their wellbeing. This article outlines an indicative process for prioritising and planning rail regeneration projects. An integrated process of prioritisation, identification, visioning, investment, and ongoing support is essential for successful regeneration projects.

Read the report here:

We have a climate crisis and an emerging energy crisis, which will demand more major investment in renewable energy generation infrastructure for Aotearoa. 

There are clear public benefits of investment in major energy infrastructure at a regional and national scale through electricity generation, a tool of ‘nation building’. Power developments began to incorporate landscape beautification later on in New Zealand’s 20th century hydro-development boom, but there remained limited attention or understanding of the localised public benefits (or disbenefits) and about how public space is rendered through major infrastructure development, particularly in rural contexts.

The Urban Advisory led primary research with the University of Auckland School of Architecture to explore this knowledge gap and develop greater understanding about public spaces created through power development in New Zealand. We applied frameworks and principles from landscape, urban design and energy systems disciplines, and compared case studies from the Waikato Power Scheme (Aratiatia) and Waitaki Basin Scheme (Benmore). 

This research raised important questions about how New Zealand has previously conceived of and valued public space in rural infrastructural contexts, and how we could enhance public space and broader public benefits when planning major infrastructure investment in the future.  At The Urban Advisory, we are always interested in how to improve development processes and meaningfully deliver outcomes for people and place: the delivery of major infrastructure is no different! We have developed a framework to assess the public space elements of major energy infrastructure projects. We hope this research will benefit future planning and investment in major energy infrastructure, applying multidisciplinary knowledge and past projects into a practical framework to guide decision-making and the integration of public space benefits across the scales of major infrastructure development. 

How do we deliver quality public space through energy infrastructure projects?

While the principal purpose of major energy infrastructure projects is to generate electricity for regional or national benefits, they also provide local benefits like public space. In this research, an integrated, interdisciplinary perspective of infrastructure, landscape and public space was critical to understanding the different elements and interrelationships of public space that can emerge in major energy infrastructure projects. We considered perspectives and principles from energy systems, urban design and landscape disciplines to find the intersections and implications for the provision of public space in energy infrastructure. 

• Major energy infrastructure projects like hydroelectric power development create a transformed landscape through harnessing natural processes and modifying the natural landscape to generate energy. In our research we described the transformed landscape as the ‘energyscape’. This includes the natural landscape environment, power generation infrastructure and, through this transformation, an additional spatial typology: public space (see diagram). 
• Multifunctionality is a key characteristic of integrated infrastructure development. There are many opportunities to integrate other functions beyond energy generation, including public space and other localised public benefits. While more complex, there are numerous advantages to enabling infrastructure development that is more multi-functional.
• Context is a crucial consideration when planning major energy infrastructure. A deep understanding of social, environmental, cultural, economic contexts should be developed through engagement and applied to meaningfully provide for local public benefits. This may include prioritising public space for socio-cultural outcomes, but also encompasses Te Tiriti obligations and the role of mana whenua, environmental impact and carbon life cycle impact analysis, for example. Overall, the role of the pre-development context must inform how major energy infrastructure is created.
• Public values of the environment and energyscapes have changed over time, and certainly will have shifted since the major development period from 1950s-1980s. It’s important to understand these values through engagement, integrating urban design and landscape expertise into the engineering design process, and realising the proposed public benefits through design & delivery.

Public Space Assessment Framework for Major Projects

We developed a public space assessment framework (below) as a tool to understand public space values within energyscapes created by major energy infrastructure development. The framework was informed by systems, principles and frameworks related to spatial functions, values and interrelationships from landscape, urban design and energy systems literature. There is scope to expand this framework to provide a more comprehensive tool. However, as is, this framework offers a range of relevant criteria which demonstrate the diverse ways that public space can be rendered through major infrastructure development, while highlighting key constraints and opportunities.

Case Studies

As part of testing and refining this framework, we assessed two New Zealand case studies: Aratiatia in the North Island of New Zealand and Benmore in the South Island. These cases were chosen because of their contrasting characteristics as energyscapes and similar period of construction and completion from 1964–1965. Aratiatia has an iconic scenic location, controversy surrounding its development and an innovative design response to preserve the natural value of the site. In contrast, the Benmore has a very different landscape context with different values informing the form and scale of the intervention. 

Over time, we have seen an improvement in how environmental impacts and environmental values are considered in hydropower developments and planning, demanding more mediation of the way massive infrastructural elements are built into the landscape. However public space and public values in the local context have been undervalued in past design and planning processes for major energy infrastructure. There is room for a broader conception of public benefits from public investment.

In the future, we hope this framework can be used to evaluate and influence energy infrastructure planning, decision making and design in a way that prioritises the public space elements at the local scale of these projects. Prioritising the provision of public space can enhance the broader public values and functions at the local scale.

New Zealand will need future investment in major renewable energy infrastructure, like hydropower, solar and wind, to reduce climate emissions from energy and improve energy resilience. While the location and type of energy systems are undetermined, there will be opportunities to deliver broader public benefits through major infrastructure investment for public benefit regardless. This research has highlighted that intergenerational investment in energy infrastructure should be viewed as an opportunity to invest in both local and national wellbeing. 

This research has built new knowledge around the nature and functions of public space in major energy infrastructure projects, which provide public benefits at a local scale within these transformed landscape contexts. 

The Urban Advisory exists to support and provide more integrated thinking about urban development challenges, to create better outcomes for people and place. Major energy infrastructure projects are a critical opportunity to apply an integrated approach, from investment and planning to design and delivery. The range of public benefits and values that can be provided through major projects can be enhanced throughout the process by drawing on interdisciplinary knowledge, thinking across scales and disciplines.

While supporting the establishment of a large regeneration project, we took our Government clients on a study tour to the UK and the US to showcase best practice regeneration and community wealth building.

We captured the key insights from this study tour, with a report divided into four sections. These are: 

1. An insight into the current unprecedented opportunity for our generation to respond to the existing crisis of housing and invest in better communities. 
2. Key lessons to learn from examples we visited in the United Kingdom and the United States on housing affordability displacement within large scale development and regeneration programmes and income equality. 
3. A roadmap for transforming housing and urban development in New Zealand through partnerships and cross-sector collaboration, new approaches to governance, strategy and leadership, and prioritising equitable and sustainable housing models. 
4. A summary of how the future of homes and communities in New Zealand are changing. 

Overall, the report argues for a systemic change in how we think about housing and urban development. The study tour highlights the opportunities and challenges for how to approach this differently in New Zealand. With the 2020 ‘Rebuilding together’ Budget, and a new housing and urban development policy agenda, we have an opportune moment to develop a strategic and substantial response to our urban development and housing issues in New Zealand.

Read the full report here:

Get a snippet of the trip by watching the video:

In the aftermath of COVID-19, and in response to concerns surrounding the housing ecosystem in Aotearoa, the report reveals the complex, interconnected factors contributing to the current housing crisis, and proposes a vision for a new housing ecosystem in Aotearoa.

The How We Live report creates a platform for shared understanding and consistent language for the housing ecosystem enabling different sectors to engage more meaningfully and effectively in conversations about potential solutions. Commissioned by the PIF Foundation, TUA provided key input from our extensive resource library based on previous projects, helping to shape essential content.

‍
Read the report here:

It is about the use of fresh thinking, improved systems and more collaborative processes to transform places to improve the wellbeing of people.

Urban strategists are skilled in being able to see the ‘big picture’, synthesise large amounts of information, broker between project partners in complex environments, and provide clarity & direction to identify creative pathways towards implementation.

Urban Strategists are at the table, helping to bring clarity to urban challenges and identify new and workable solutions.