RMA Reform and Housing Minister Chris Bishop at a Government announcement at Parliament on the RMA. Photo / Mark Mitchell
RMA Reform and Housing Minister Chris Bishop at a Government announcement at Parliament on the RMA. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Housing Minister Chris Bishop says there is a “pragmatic and sensible” solution to housing intensification plans for Auckland as the Government considers watering down controversial planning rules that would allow for two million homes to be built over the coming decades.
Bishop says “some tweaks and finessing” of thesuper city target were underway with a decision expected in the “next month or so”.
Earlier this month, political columnist Matthew Hooton revealed in a column for the Herald that the Government was planning to U-turn on changes it had made to Auckland densification rules (called Plan Change 120) which would allow for the two million potential homes to be developed with greater density and building heights in some inner-city suburbs.
It was a sensitive issue that could spook potentially blue voters who do not want “apartment blocks to be built on either side of their homes, without even the infrastructure investment to support them”.
Hooton said any U-turn would be a win for National “since it denies Act, New Zealand First and Labour a potent issue on which to raid the blue vote”.
Bishop, speaking to reporters at Parliament this morning, said debate around the issue “has kind of got lost a bit”.
“But I actually think there is a ... really pragmatic, really sensible way through that most reasonable people can support. It’s just about trying to land that in the right way and that’s my job in the next month or so.”
Housing Minister Chris Bishop (right) with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon at a post-Cabinet press conference at Parliament in November last year. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Asked if by this he meant a middle ground, he said: “You know me, I’m always a middle ground kind of guy.
“The sort of slight frustration with all of this is that most reasonable people kind of agree we need to intensify in the CBD, around train stations, around busways, around metropolitan urban centres, that all makes sense.
“The debate is really a bit on the margins which is how much do you do in suburban Auckland and how much do you do elsewhere.”
Act leader David Seymour recently told the Herald the issue of intensification in Auckland had become “highly politicised”. He said residents in his Epsom electorate were not “anti-intensification”, but if they’re told towering buildings will be constructed “looking into everyone’s backyards and their swing sets and their pools”, they’ll ask, “why would you do that”?
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon flanked by coalition partners David Seymour and Winston Peters. Photo / Michael Cunningham
He told the Herald the debate had become a “symbolic” one – rather than a practical one about “how do you actually make it easier to build more houses faster and cheaper”.
The previous Plan Change 78 would have incorporated Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS) – introduced under Labour and initially supported by National – into planning.
As opposition grew to those rules, National changed its policy to allow councils to opt out of the MDRS if they could zone for more housing in other ways. And last year, the coalition Government allowed Auckland to withdraw from Plan Change 78, leading to Plan Change 120.
Julia Gabel is a Wellington-based political reporter. She joined the Herald in 2020 and has most recently focused on data journalism.
