Auckland Council protects eighty views across the city. Mainly, not views from homes. Instead, mostly sightlines from public spaces toward landmarks. Vistas like Rangitoto and the Waitākere Ranges.  

From the 1970s, Council drew invisible lines through the air above the CBD. It declared that no building could rise above them. The planning term is a view shaft. 

Those rules stifle development. Freezing the past comes at a cost.  

In late March, Housing Minister Chris Bishop put an indicative number on those costs. Just two Harbour Bridge view shafts block $4 billion of city centre development. That represents forgone income of around $2,500 per Auckland household per year. How many households would think this was a good deal? 

Some have scorned this cost information. To them it looks preposterous. Where would this extra money come from?  

The extra money would have been created by a more dynamic and productive city. There would be more businesses and more jobs. Household incomes would be higher because productivity would be higher.

Eighty view shafts in ignorance of cost is not in Aucklanders’ interests. Ask any household in need of a better-paying job. 

This does not mean all these rules should go. Aucklanders might wish to preserve some of the eighty sightlines, despite the cost.  

Who should fund that cost? Say you own a house with a view of the harbour. Your neighbour adds a second storey and your view goes. Should you be able to stop him? 

The legal tradition that New Zealand inherited from England says no. You have no legal right to a view across someone else’s property. Buy their property if you want to control its use. Councils should face the same discipline. 

That sounds harsh, but both properties are worth more if their future use is flexible. If you are both free to build up, the choice is mutual. 

Motorists have even less of a case. The views from Auckland’s Harbour Bridge will be rich regardless – a changing mix of water, cityscapes, mangroves and Rangitoto.  

Rangitoto will not disappear if the rules are relaxed. Auckland will still be uniquely Auckland. Views evolve. 

But eighty “no high-rise” zones, regardless of cost, is irresponsible. Cost matters. 

The Minister is right to start this conversation. A more prosperous and dynamic Auckland CBD would benefit many struggling households.