Bishop was overruled, however. A final Cabinet minute shows it took a different view, removing a policy change that officialsestimated would zone for 540,000 dwellings and leaving an option that would enable about 197,100 (342,900 fewer dwellings than Bishop pushed for).
Bishop told the Herald that he was currently negotiating plan changes with Auckland Council, which will take into account zoning problems raised by the floods of 2023. The result of those negotiations may result in a “bespoke” solution for the super city.
He said that it is “still possible” these negotiations might result in plan changes that result in a number closer to the 540,000 figure.
According to the 2023 Census, there were 542,349 occupied dwellings and 24,228 unoccupied dwellings in Auckland. That means that had the proposal been adopted, Auckland might have zoned for a doubling in the number of dwellings. These dwellings would not necessarily have been built; the figures refer to the maximum number of dwellings the plan would have allowed for.
The existence of the proposal that would have released the additional dwelling capacity was revealed in an Official Information Act request by the Green Party.
Green Party Resource Management Act (RMA) reform spokeswoman Julie Anne Genter criticised Cabinet for blocking the proposal last year. Genter said she would be watching to ensure the 540,000 dwellings were enabled.
“There is a lot of opportunity for more affordable housing within the isthmus outside the city centre, but we need Government to show leadership and direction on that.
“Right now, heights and other planning rules are limiting the number of homes provided right outside the city centre, and that’s a problem. We want to see affordable housing and walkable neighbourhoods.”
Green Party RMA reform spokeswoman Julie Anne Genter. Photo / Mark Mitchell
National had previously joined forces with Labour to pass the MDRS in a rare show of housing bipartisanship. As part of National’s U-turn in making the standard optional, Bishop said councils that made the MDRS optional would have to instead immediately zone for 30 years of housing demand in their city.
However, in the June 2024 Cabinet paper that finally gave effect to this policy, Bishop proposed a slightly different solution to what National had campaigned on.
He proposed to set councils housing growth targets that would provide for whichever was larger of these two options, “at least 30 years of housing demand at any one time” or the “amount of development capacity that is or would be enabled under current requirements”.
In other words, the policy would force councils to keep the large amounts of development capacity enabled by the MDRS if it was greater than 30 years of housing growth. However, councils would have a greater say in where this development went.
The documents released to Genter, however, showed that “as a result of decisions taken by Cabinet” the “current development capacity” provision was removed, leaving just the 30-year rule. Another recommendation, prohibiting councils from imposing rural-urban boundary lines, was added.
The targets will be incorporated in a new National Policy Statement-Urban Development.
An example from Hamilton of higher density housing. Image / Hamilton City Council
A separate paper provided by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development said that the “best estimate” Auckland Council would need to enable under Bishop’s original proposal would be 540,000, which was the best guess of what it was required to enable under current policy.
Bishop said these numbers were “a bit speculative”.
The challenge is that the Government is currently locked in negotiations with the super city over a plan change – Plan Change 78. This change will incorporate several upzoning measures made by central Government, including the NPS-UD and the MDRS.
However, after the Auckland Anniversary floods, the council also wants the plan to downzone parts of the city that the floods showed were not suitable for densification.
The council has no legal instrument to do this downzoning and must call on central government to give it the tools to do so. Auckland Council was unable to provide comment by deadline.
There is broad agreement in the Government and across Parliament that the council be allowed to downzone these areas. However, the Government wants to make sure the council upzones land elsewhere to compensate for capacity lost as a result of downzoning.
Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown has previously called the rules a “dopey mandate”.
The changes are likely to be incorporated in an amendment to the second RMA amendment bill currently before Parliament or in an amended National Policy Statement.
Bishop said the negotiations involved “a bit of a dance with the council”, but “there is goodwill on either side”.
“I’m in discussions with the mayor and other councillors around it. We can get to a good solution that fits everyone,” he said.
Thomas Coughlan is Deputy Political Editor and covers politics from Parliament. He has worked for the Herald since 2021 and has worked in the press gallery since 2018.
