Are we ready for this? The true size and scale of Queenstown's Ladies Mile development

All the signs are that this SH6 development is uncoordinated, lacking in infrastructure and could be a disaster before its even finished.

By Amanda Robertshawe

Analysis.

An estimated population increase of 6,720. Up to 4,300 additional vehicles on our roads. Around 1.5 million litres increase in sewage per day.

These are projections calculated by academics scrutinising potential consequences of the Queenstown’s Ladies Mile housing development.

This development is equivalent to transplanting the combined populations of Balclutha and Arrowtown, give or take a few, to live on 160 hectares at the edge of a short section of State Highway 6.

Are we ready for this?

Community scepticism that Queenstown’s infrastructure has the capacity to accommodate the Ladies Mile housing development is nothing new. The vexed issue of traffic congestion is arguably the most inflammatory concern for residents, followed by Queenstown’s struggling sewage treatment capacity.

Even though current infrastructure shortcomings continue to make headlines it seems they provide insufficient incentive for reconsideration of what might be a dreadful mistake.

Again, last week, the national media covered two issues which Queenstown’s rapid population growth will inevitably exacerbate.

The first article concerns our inadequate health and hospital services.

RNZ reported that, last year, more than 3,000 patients travelled to Dunedin and Invercargill Hospitals as a consequence of our limited local health services and hospital beds. This included half of all planned births but it did not include emergency transfers. These shortcoming come at a price.

As RNZ reported, it cost $6.3 million to transfer patients from Lakes District Hospital to other hospitals in 2024.

• Helicopter hospital transfers are now routine - but the expense is significant.

Two days earlier, Stuff headlined Queenstown’s growing housing crisis.

In two years there has been a 42% increase in the Queenstown Lakes Community Housing Trust’s waiting-list.

That people are living in tents, cars, hot bedding, or inappropriate housing in Queenstown’s harsh winter is not news.

Nevertheless, the waiting list grows. This week, the Trust has 1,481 eligible households, on its books, an increase of 17 households since Stuff published this article. Alarmingly, there are more than 1,000 children in those households, living in impoverished conditions.

Building new houses in the region has not reduced the waiting list. As QLCH Trust’s Chief Executive, Julie Scott, says, “Every day is a new high – unfortunately it never really reduces. Demand exceeds supply.”

• The Queenstown Lakes Community Housing Trust CEO Julie Scott. “Demand exceeds supply.”

This begs the question, has the rapid increase of new homes in Queenstown addressed the housing crisis?

The Council’s justification for zoning Ladies Mile for intensive development is the housing crisis.

Is the notion of building houses to solve the crisis simplistic and flawed?

While construction doesn’t directly provide accommodation for households on the Trust’s waiting list, Scott does think there could be benefit in increasing the number of new houses, “A strong new supply of properties could have a positive impact on long-term rental supply, with market rents stabilising, if not reducing.”

We note, however, that unlike some earlier housing developments, the developers of the Ladies Mile housing project are not making a contribution to the Trust. Previously, the Trust has been gifted land, enabling construction of affordable housing.

As Scott says, “There’s currently no obligation for developers to make contributions to QLCHT under the inclusionary housing process. This has been occurring on a voluntary basis over the past 22 years - or with the use of past government legislation (i.e. Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act ) - but there’s no mandated requirement for developers to participate in the process currently.”

The developers’ website, promoted as the Ladies Miles Landowners Collective, reveals The Master Plan, promoting virtues of the development. While the website is fashionably stylish, it is a bit short on detail.

• The Ladies Mile development will change the landscape of Queenstown - and stretch existing resources to, or beyond, their limits.

Affordable housing, it says, offering a “good diversity of section sizes, townhouses, terraced houses and apartments”, without indicating who could afford these dwellings.

Affordability is relative to circumstance.

As Dr Elham Bahmanteymouri, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning at Auckland University says, “Affordable is an empty word.” “First, they need to define what is affordability.”

“What is the level of affordability in Queenstown?”

She also notes, “Affordable housing can be an excuse for development”, a point made clearly, and critically, in Crux, by former World Bank senior economist Ralph Hanan in 2020.

Hanan still maintains this view. “It is, as you say, pushing ahead with no clear rhyme or reason, other than satisfying the profit motive of those who own the land and their developers. The balance of private vs. the public interest is perverse.”

Bahmanteymouri adds, “The Masterplan does not make any promises or calculations around affordability. Its focus is clearly on high-quality design, which shifts the basis of discussion.”

She continues, “The plan focuses on spatial planning, urban design, and community integration, not on economic feasibility or affordability analyses. The Masterplan does not promise "affordable" housing in a regulatory or subsidy-based sense.”

• There are no plans to increase the capacity of the Shotover Bridge - putting even more pressure on the Ladies Mile development.

Dr Iresh Jayawardena | MNZPI, lecturer at Auckland University School of Architecture and Urban Planning, also raises concerns.

“The masterplan proposes a mix of terraced housing, apartments, and detached dwellings, with a minimum density of 40 dwellings per hectare in high-density zones. This could increase the district’s housing stock by approximately 15% (based on 2023 figures), helping to alleviate acute shortages and diversify tenure options. Without enforceable affordability mechanisms or inclusionary zoning in place, housing prices from the proposed development may continue to reflect tourism-driven demand, potentially exacerbating inequality and displacing essential workers in the local environment.

Dr Bahmanteymouri also points out, “Intensification of a population comes with consequences. The increase in social issues like poverty, crime, mental health problems, and a widening social gap.”

Just how many people are we talking about?

We asked Dr Jayawardena to estimate the population based on what we do know.

He says, “Based on the 2018 Census average household size for Queenstown-Lakes (approx. equal to 2.8 persons), this equates to a potential population of approximately 6,720 residents.”

Is this population likely to grow?

Dr Jayawardena, “Applying Stats NZ’s medium sub-national growth rate (~1.55% p.a.), the population could reach approximately equal to 7,840 within 10 years and over 9,140 within 20 years.”

He also has reservations.

“A key concern would be that social infrastructure—particularly schools, healthcare, and recreational facilities—may lag behind residential growth, placing additional strain on already stretched services in Queenstown and Frankton.”

A primary and a secondary school are planned in the development. It’s unlikely they will be completed by the time dwellings are ready for occupation, which as Dr Jayawardena pointed out, will place strain on other schools in the Frankton area.

There’s also an intriguing, and potentially disastrous, Catch 22 built into many of the Ladies Mile planning assumptions. The main one is that the houses can’t be occupied until the required infrastructure is in place.

Taking schools into account we asked the Ministry of Education how that would work - new schools need population but if the houses cant be occupied until the schools get built - surely checkmate?

This was their response.

“A 2.7-hectare site at 439 Frankton-Ladies Mile Highway has been purchased for the development of a primary school within the Ladies Mile catchment area.

Growth in the Ladies Mile area continues to be closely monitored, and both primary and secondary school provision remain regional priorities. Future decisions around acquiring a secondary school site and constructing the two schools will depend on further prioritisation assessments and the availability of funding.”

• Source: Ministry of Education - Andrea Williams, Hautū (leader) Te Tai Runga (South)

The burgeoning population will also impact on emergency services such the volunteer fire brigade, police, and ambulance. Our 15 bed Lakes District Hospital will also be under additional population pressure as well as tourist pressure.

And what about wastewater?

Hamish Mackey, Associate Professor, Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at Canterbury University produced a rough estimate of the wastewater at Ladies Mile.

“Typical household water use in NZ is around 225 litres per day. This varies quite a bit between different cities, often a conservative value of 250 L/p/d is used in the engineering standards and council engineering codes. Most of that will become wastewater, so you can assume the same.”

It is noteworthy that QLDC uses an even higher figure of up to 380 litres a day.

“So a new 6,720 population will produce somewhere in the order of an extra 1.5 million litres of wastewater a day.”

That works out to be roughly 10.5 million litres of sewage a week.

To put that in perspective the QLDC’s Shotover sewage plant has a capacity of 12 million litres a day - so the extra Ladies Mile population will be producing more than 10% of the entire Shotover plant’s current capacity.

How does the QLDC propose to deal with this, given the current stretched capacity of the sewerage treatment plant? Consultants are still working on that problem while the council battles in the Environment Court for retrospective consent to discharge treated sewage direct into the Shotover River, following the failure of the plant’s disposal field some years ago.

However, residents’ greatest concern is traffic congestion.

As Dr Jayawardena says, “The masterplan promises dedicated bus lanes, park-and-ride facilities, and a fully walkable centre, potentially reducing per-capita Vehicle Kilometre Travel”.

Is this realistic? The development plans minimal provision for car parking for the estimated 6,720 residents. It’ s anticipated they will walk, ride bicycles, and use public transport.

• A Crux reader asked us this week for an image of 10,000 cars - about the total linked to current Queenstown fast tracked housing plans - including Ladies Mile. Here’s an image of 10,000 cars.

Ralph Hanan, is sceptical about these solutions.

“You will be aware that the proponents of the Ladies Mile development have argued that there will be little if any impact on traffic flows from the Ladies Mile development. There will be a school and supermarket there, there will be provision for public buses, and people will be encouraged to ride bicycles.

• Former World Bank economist and Queenstown resident Ralph Hanan. QLDC shows zero enthusiasm to speak with Ralph - which begs the question - why?

“This justification has been set out for previous developments also. And so employees will be presumed to be riding their bicycles to Frankton and Queenstown in mid-winter. Anything to persuade a 'panel of experts' that the development will have minimal impact on congestion. Rubbish!”

It is difficult to believe many of the anticipated 6,720 residents would live without a car.

Dr Jayawardena’s estimation of vehicle numbers is sobering.

“Even at 1.0 car per dwelling (below the current district average), ≥2,400 extra vehicles would enter the network; at the historic average of 1.8 cars per dwelling, this rises to approx. 4,300.”

These statistics don’t include additional vehicles originating from other housing developments, nor the proposed sports ground ( or council HQ) at 516 Ladies Mile.

Road widening for additional traffic lanes, roundabouts for traffic flow, plus a new and comprehensive public transport system are proposed as solutions for the already troublesome road congestion. However, one crucial component can’t be ignored. There is only one bridge across the Shotover River.

What will the eventual cost to the community be?

Ralph Hanan. “I am not aware of any cost benefit analysis of the Ladies Mile development. It would be a difficult exercise, depending on lots of assumptions, including social impacts. For example, the additional traffic on the Ladies Mile and Shotover bridge will add to the current congestion, and what does this mean economically (and socially) in terms of the additional delays to commercial traffic getting where they intend to go.”

Hanan also observes, “Frustrated parents driving to get their kids to school on time will have an impact. The volumes of waste water from the development is likely to require an expansion of the capacity of the Shotover treatment plant - and that would depend on whether the current location could even cope with the necessary expansion.”

There are, of course, environmental impacts arising from this greenfields development but one significant question remains. What contribution will developers, who stand to make handsome profits, make towards infrastructure shortcomings?

Dr Bahmanteymouri wonders whether developers’ profits should be made public.

“Will there be collaboration between them and central and local government to upgrade the infrastructure? She asks, “Is this project addressing a need for housing, or profit for some individuals?”

• A new Woolworths supermarket for Ladies Mile is already confirmed - but what about schools, sewage, traffic, health services and even additional power supplies?

Ralph Hanan adds, “We may ask whether the economic, social, and environmental costs to our community will outweigh the benefits. There’s no question that these costs are considerable. The benefits to our community, however, are more debatable. The evidence suggests that the development is unlikely to reign in the high costs of housing, and therefore will do little to alleviate the shortage of affordable rentals.”

“At the very least, our Council should insist that the necessary public infrastructure, e.g. widening Highway 6, precedes a new housing development, not the other way round. Though this sequence should be self-evident, QLDC appears not to appreciate this, or it is dancing to some other tune.” Says Hanan.

Candidates nominated for upcoming local authority elections might well seek answers to these questions, and more. Why do we keep repeating the mistakes in this country?

Perhaps they could chat to Ralph Hanan, no one else has.

“My article published by Crux last February on productivity generated no response other than a few friends commenting that they thought it was interesting and they agreed with it. I don’t know why there wasn’t a more evident response.” “In any event, I would have expected (according to the way I think) a call from QLDC’s Economic Development Manager, Peter Harris, or David Wallace, Planning and Strategy Manager, asking me to drop by for a chat. But nothing. “

• QLDC’s economic development boss Peter Harris. It’s hard to measure his effectiveness - he enjoys a low public profile and has produced little visible progress in terms of economic diversification.

Interesting. He was, after all, a senior economist at the World Bank and clearly knows a thing or two. A chat probably wouldn’t cost more than a cup of tea.

We approached the Ladies Mile Landowners Collective ( the developers) for comments but the have not responded to our requests.

Crux will be following Ladies Mile and other fast tracked developments closely during the upcoming local body election campaign.