Saying Yes To More Housing
Press Release – New Zealand Government
Minister for RMA Reform
Hon Simeon Brown
Minister for Auckland
City-shaping changes are coming to New Zealand's largest city, ensuring that Auckland can fully harness the economic growth benefits of the new City Rail Link, RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop and Auckland Minister Simeon Brown say.
The Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Bill (the Bill) has been reported back to Parliament today by the Environment Committee, containing significant changes to enable housing growth in our largest cities.
'After many months, Auckland Council and the Government have reached agreement to free up more land for housing, particularly around City Rail Link (CRL) stations. These are some of the most significant changes to the shape of Auckland since the Auckland Unitary Plan,' Mr Bishop says.
'It doesn't make sense that we have single story houses on quarter acre sections a stone's throw away from stations that, in a year or so, will see trains every few minutes.
'The Government and the Council are investing billions in CRL and have a shared vision for stations that become hubs for public transport, mixed use development and new housing.
'Successive Governments and Councils have failed to grasp this opportunity for economic growth in New Zealand's largest city. This is how modern, growing cities all around the world operate, and now it's Auckland's turn.'
'Today's announcements are a result of Auckland Council and the Government working together to deliver a plan for more housing that works for Auckland. The Bill now has the effect of abolishing the Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS) in Auckland while requiring more housing density around key public transport corridors – a common sense solution for Auckland,' Auckland Minister Simeon Brown says.
'Auckland must grow to fully meet its potential as a world-leading city. The one sized-fits-all approach of the MDRS was not appropriate for Auckland. Today's announcement will ensure our city grows where it makes the most sense and maximise on the significant investment made in the City Rail Link.'
'I want to thank Auckland Council, particularly Mayor Brown and Councillor Richard Hills, for their pragmatic approach to solving these complex challenges over many months,' Mr Bishop says.
'Mayor Brown has previously described this situation as 'RMA gymnastics' and he is right, but I am confident that these arrangements align with our shared vison of density and development in places that work for Aucklanders.'
Removing ability to opt-out of the MDRS
'The Bill as introduced provided councils with the flexibility to opt out of the MDRS, if they could show they had provided for 30 years of housing growth in their district and unitary plans,' Mr Bishop says.
'Councils have been going through plan changes for years in order to incorporate the MDRS. Most councils have already substantially completed their plan changes through this process, with just three (Auckland, Christchurch and Waimakariri) yet to finish.
'The practical reality is that if councils did vote to 'opt out' of the MDRS, they would have to pass a new plan change to do so, and due to the length of time this typically takes under the RMA, by the time this was complete, the Government's new planning system is expected to be in place.
'Fundamentally, it would have achieved nothing, but cost ratepayers a lot.
'The Government has therefore taken the pragmatic view that it would be sensible to remove the ability for councils to opt out of the MDRS and to work on bespoke legislative solutions for Auckland and Christchurch instead.'
New plan change for Auckland
'Auckland's intensification plan change, PC78, has been underway since 2022. Progress has been slow for many reasons, including the Auckland floods. The intensification plan change process does not allow Auckland to 'downzone' certain areas due to natural hazard risk – only to 'upzone' them – and the Council wrote to the government asking them to fix this problem,' Mr Bishop says.
'The Government has therefore agreed to change the Bill to allow Auckland to withdraw PC78. However, the government is determined to unlock housing capacity in Auckland and fix our housing crisis and has taken steps to ensure this is achieved.
'Earlier in the year I directed Auckland Council to bring forward decisions on the parts of PC78 that relate to the city centre, requiring final decisions to be made by the end of May. Auckland Council met this requirement, finalising this part of PC78 on 22 May 2025.
'These decisions made by the council are a step forward in increasing development capacity in Auckland's CBD, but there is more work to be done.
'The Bill as reported back from the committee now allows Auckland Council to remove the remaining parts of PC78, but requires them to process a new plan change urgently. This plan change must be notified by 10 October this year, and must enable housing capacity equal to or greater than that enabled by PC78.
'As I've indicated, the Government is keen to see greater density around public transport, particularly City Rail Link stations. The Bill therefore now also requires Auckland to allow for greater density around the key CRL stations of Maungawhau (Mount Eden), Kingsland, and Morningside.
'Auckland Council must enable within a walkable distance from these stations heights and densities reflective of the higher demand for housing and business in these areas. This requirement goes further than the existing requirements under the NPS-UD, and I expect heights and densities that ensure we make the most of the opportunities offered by this transformational transport project.
'The government is also considering whether further amendments to the Bill to fully maximise development opportunities around other CRL stations as necessary, and I will have more to say in due course.'
30 years of growth for Christchurch
'Christchurch City Council also requires a bespoke solution, as they have made a number of decisions on their plan change to implement the MDRS and NPS-UD, known as PC14, but have yet to complete it,' Mr Bishop says.
'Last week I released my decisions on the recommendations from the Council on parts of PC14. These decisions will enable a greater level of development in and around Christchurch City's urban centres.
'Christchurch City Council is currently required to finalise the MDRS components of PC14 by December 2025. The Bill will allow Christchurch to withdraw the MDRS parts of PC14 provided they allow for 30 years of housing growth at the same time. Assessment of that target will be made by me based on advice from officials.'
Additional changes
'In addition to these changes, the Environment Select Committee has recommended a suite of changes to improve the workability of the Bill and help unlock growth in infrastructure and energy, farming and the primary sector,' Mr Bishop says.
The Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Bill will have its second reading in the coming weeks and is expected to pass into law in mid-2025.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
Children Most At Risk As Government Forces Reversals Of Safe Speeds On 1 July
Just as the school holidays get under way, children around the country will be at higher risk on streets in their neighbourhoods as the Setting of Speed Limits Rule (the Rule) introduced by Minister Simeon Brown and implemented by current Minister of Transport Chris Bishop requires councils to revert to dangerous higher speed limits from 1 July, with variable speeds in place only at school gates at the start and end of the school day. 'Children across the country are at risk from higher speeds when they're walking, biking or scooting around their neighbourhoods. If hit by a vehicle going 50km/h, children have an 80% higher likelihood of being killed or seriously injured than at 30km/h. We also know that 85% of crashes that injure or kill people on streets around schools happen outside of those short periods at the beginning and end of the school day', says Caroline Perry, NZ Director of Brake, the road safety charity, and a spokesperson for the Save our Safe Streets campaign. 'The heightened risk is especially concerning in Auckland, where Auckland Transport has taken an unusually strict interpretation of the Rule that has seen over 1400 mainly quiet residential streets swept up in speed limit reversals. Not only has AT gone far further than other councils in applying the rule, they have rushed the work, resulting in confusing, incomplete, contradictory and dangerous signage,' says Ms Perry. The Save our Safe Streets campaign is an alliance of leading road safety experts and transport advocates. In a briefing paper to Auckland Council's Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee, they have documented AT's flawed approach to the Rule. In particular they note that the rollout of reversals back to unsafe speeds – against the wishes of impacted communities – will result in harm to Aucklanders, wasteful expenditure, unnecessary disruption, higher costs and more extensive traffic management processes, environmental and economic damage, and a less efficient, more congested transport network. Group member Pippa Coom says, 'Instead of doing everything it could to defend its world-class road safety programme from ill-advised reversals, AT has capitulated effectively throwing Aucklanders under the bus at every opportunity. Moreover, the small handful of streets that have retained safe speeds were saved only due to tenacious intervention by residents and advocates – with neither public acknowledgement nor thanks from AT.' 'Throughout, AT has operated in secret. It has not been transparent or proactive in its dealings with Council and the public about its process around the Speed Limit Rule, nor has it communicated the impacts on communities. AT has had plenty of opportunities to limit the perverse and harmful outcomes of the Speed Limit Rule but chose not to, despite increasingly urgent requests from community leaders, advocates, and elected members,' says Ms Coom. Councillor Julie Fairey expressed profound disappointment in the outcome for Auckland. 'AT just were not interested in moving on this, despite being given plenty of opportunities and excuses they could use. Sadly, I think we won't have a full realisation of the liability question until someone is hurt or killed. The advocacy efforts on this have been amazing, huge amounts of research and effort put in, all voluntary, and the stonewalling at senior levels of AT has been heartbreaking'. She has gone on to say, 'I find it particularly cruel that many of the staff who have had to roll this out were those who understand the evidence, championed and implemented safer speeds.' The higher speeds kick in on 1 July, during the school holidays, and the reality of central government overriding evidence and local preference is only just becoming clear to many communities. For example, a stretch of beach north of Auckland is rising from 50km/h to 70km/h against community wishes, while further south, a nonsensical 100km/h will be installed on a dangerous stretch of road through a Lake Taupō campground. Ms Perry adds, 'A few fortunate communities, such as Rakaia and Nelson, will be rightly celebrating their common-sense retention of safe speeds, but this only came after a hard-fought campaign resulted in public consultation on the proposed speed limit increases to these stretches of road.' 'It should be common-sense to always apply the evidence to keep children safe. Everyone benefits when children can move independently, when people are free to walk and cycle without fear of serious injury and death, and when streets are safer for all of us,' says Ms Perry.
Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
Ferry Privatisation Would Be A Disaster
The Maritime Union of New Zealand (MUNZ) says suggestions of privatisation of the new Cook Strait Interislander ferries would be a dangerous step backwards. The proposals were contained in a cabinet paper presented to the Government earlier this year and obtained by media under the OIA. Maritime Union of New Zealand National Secretary Carl Findlay says past privatisation of strategic transport infrastructure had caused great harm to our national supply chain. He says the ideological push for privatization will be coming from the extreme right in the Government represented by the ACT Party. Mr Findlay says New Zealand's rail network, including the ferries, had been sold off to overseas corporates in the 1990s by a right wing National Government. "What followed was a textbook case of corporate raiding, where assets were stripped for short-term profit, maintenance was run into the ground, and workers paid with their lives due to shocking health and safety breaches.' 'The taxpayer was then forced to spend millions to buy back the asset and start the long process of fixing it up.' Mr Findlay says it is essential for a New Zealand owned, public ferry operator to be on the Cook Strait for economic security and supply chain resilience. He says the Cook Strait is our 'blue highway', an essential extension of State Highway 1 and the Main Trunk Line. 'We believe the Minister of Rail, Winston Peters, who has spoken at length about the failures of past privatisations, will not allow the Government to be swayed by ACT style agendas.' Mr Findlay says the ferry replacement process has already been a fiasco, with the decision of Finance Minister Nicola Willis to cancel the iRex project creating years of delays and a billion dollar cost to New Zealand. He says there are many other opportunities for private operators to enter into other coastal shipping services, and the Government should be supporting this goal. 'For the Cook Strait, our focus should be on investing in a modern, reliable, and publicly-owned ferry fleet that is fit for the 21st century and serves all New Zealanders.' The Maritime Union of New Zealand represents seafaring and catering crews on both Cook Strait ferry operators.
Scoop
3 hours ago
- Scoop
Increased Accountability For Jobseeker Support
Minister for Social Development and Employment From today, people getting Jobseeker Support will need to reapply every 26 weeks (six months), instead of just once a year, Social Development and Employment Minister Louise Upston says. 'This previously signalled change increases accountability, while also improving opportunities for jobseekers,' Louise Upston says. 'Reapplying for their benefit more often makes sure people receiving Jobseeker Support engage with MSD more regularly. Frontline staff are then able to check people are doing everything they can to find a job and prepare for work, while getting the right kind of support from MSD to make that happen. 'It also gives MSD another opportunity to assess people's eligibility and make sure they understand what they need to do to stay on track with their obligations while receiving a benefit. 'We know getting back into work produces better outcomes for people and their families. Reapplying for Jobseeker Support every 26 weeks instead of 52 is a realistic expectation, as part of the Government's initiatives to actively support people off welfare and into employment. 'Having to apply only once a year was a significant gap and didn't help either jobseekers or the MSD staff working with them.' Changes have also been made to the reapplication process to make it easier for many people reapplying. If they've recently interacted with MSD about their job search, for instance, they may be able to complete their reapplication online without needing an appointment. 'The improved reapplication process means less time repeating information and more time focusing on support to overcome barriers to work,' Louise Upston says. Notes: For people already getting Jobseeker Support on 1 July 2025, the date they will need to reapply depends on when their benefit was last granted and their situation. Some clients will reapply at 52 weeks from when their benefit was last granted where they are current subject to annual income charging, and then every 26 weeks after that. 26-week reapplications were introduced as a part of the suite of changes made by the Social Security Amendment Act 2025.
