[
Classification
Briefing: Further advice on increasing development
capacity in Auckland and options for RM Bill 2
Date submitted: 5 June 2025
Tracking number: BRF-6283 / HUD2025-007187
Security level: Classification
MfE priority: Urgent
Actions sought from Ministers
Name and position
Action sought
Response by
To Hon Chris BISHOP
Record your decisions on the
Minister Responsible for RMA
recommendations and sign the
16 June 2025
Reform and Minister of Housing
briefing.
CC Hon Judith Collins
Note the contents of this
N/A
Attorney-General
briefing.
CC Hon Tama Potaka
Note the contents of this
N/A
Minister for Māori Crown Relations
briefing.
CC Hon Penny Simmonds
Note the contents of this
N/A
Minister for the Environment
briefing.
CC Hon Simeon Brown
Note the contents of this
N/A
Minister for Auckland
briefing.
Actions for Minister’s office staff
Return the signed briefing to the Ministry for the Environment ([email address] and
[email address]).
Please note
Appendices and attachments
pages 28-32
(Appendices
1. Appendix 1: OUT OF SCOPE
1 &2) have
been
2. Appendix 2: OUT OF SCOPE
removed as
they are out
of scope of
Key contacts at Ministry for the Environment
your request.
Position
Name
Cell phone
First
contact
Responsible Manager, MfE (Part 1)
Stephanie Gard’ner
9(2)(a)
Responsible Manager, HUD (Part 1)
Fiona McCarthy
9(2)(a)
Responsible Manager, MfE (Part 2
Pernelle Vari
9(2)(a)
and 3)
General Manager
Jessica Ranger
9(2)(a)
✓
BRF–6283
1
[Classification
[
Classification
Minister’s comments
BRF-6283
2
[Classification
[
Classification
Further advice on increasing development capacity
in Auckland and options for RM Bill 2
Key messages
Part 1: Advice on a package of options to enable greater
development capacity in Auckland
1. You have asked for advice on options to ensure that Auckland’s unitary plan:
a. enables sufficient development capacity to recognise the significance of Auckland’s
city centre
b. OUT OF SCOPE
c. OUT OF SCOPE
2. OUT OF SCOPE
3. 9(2)(g)(i)
It is therefore timely to consider a package of options to ensure greater
housing and business capacity in Auckland, both to better optimise the city centre
opportunities, and to ensure the upcoming plan changes meet your objectives.
4. This briefing proposes to do this in two ways:
a. Strengthen the provisions and related processes in the Bill relating to Auckland’s
replacement plan change to:
i.
OUT OF SCOPE
ii.
OUT OF SCOPE
b. Use existing ministerial intervention powers or other options (such as the proposed
new regulation making power) to revisit the City Centre provisions following
notification of the replacement plan change.
5. There are some constraints on the council’s capacity to support both proposals at the
same time. On balance, we consider the biggest gains for growing housing in Auckland in
the short term will be from ensuring the replacement plan change is notified as directed in
the Bill, including any strengthened requirements you agree to through this briefing. For
BRF-6283
3
[Classification
[
Classification
this reason, we recommend focusing on ensuring the replacement plan change is notified
before taking next steps on intervention for the City Centre provisions.
OUT OF SCOPE
6.
OUT OF SCOPE
Recommendations
We recommend that you:
a.
note you are seeking agreement from Cabinet to policy proposals to progress through an
Amendment Paper to the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System
Changes) Amendment Bill (the Bill).
BRF-6283
4
[Classification
[
Classification
Part 1 Housing capacity in Auckland
b.
note you can undertake an investigation under section 24A of the RMA as a first step to
using further intervention powers to address the city centre decisions by Auckland
Council, but we recommend this investigation commences once the replacement plan
has been notified so Auckland Council can enable the potential development uplift in the
replacement plan change first
c.
agree we will provide you with further advice on undertaking an investigation under
section 24A of the RMA on the city centre decisions, which could lead to use of
Ministerial intervention powers
Yes | No
d. OUT OF SCOPE
Yes | No
OUT OF SCOPE
e.
f.
g.
Please note pages 6-8 of this document have been removed as they are out of scope of your request.
BRF-6283
5
[Classification
[
Classification
x. OUT OF SCOPE
OUT OF SCOPE
Signatures
Jessica Ranger
Fiona McCarthy [Part 1 advice only]
General Manager, Urban and
Manager, Land Use and Land Markets
Infrastructure
Ministry of Housing and Urban
Ministry for the Environment
Development
5 June 2025
5 June 2025
Hon Chris BISHOP
Minister Responsible for RMA Reform
Minister of Housing
Date:
BRF-6283
9
[Classification
[
Classification
Further advice on increasing development capacity
in Auckland and options for RM Bill 2
Purpose
1.
This briefing provides three sets of advice:
a. Part 1: advice on a package of options to enable greater development capacity in
Auckland
OUT OF SCOPE
b.
c.
Part 1: Increasing development capacity in Auckland
Background
The Bill as currently drafted provides for Auckland to withdraw Plan Change 78 (PC78)
and notify a new plan change before local body elections
2.
Auckland Council notified decisions on the parts of Plan Change 78 (PC78) that
implement the NPS-UD in Auckland’s city centre on 29 May 2025. You have agreed
the Bill will enable Auckland Council to withdraw the rest of PC78, and that if it does, it
will need to notify a new replacement plan by 10 October 2025.
3.
In the Bill as currently drafted, the replacement plan must enable at least as much
housing capacity as PC78 as notified. It must respond to the greater demand and
accessibility created in the walkable catchments around Maungawhau, Kingsland and
Morningside stations by enabling commensurate heights and densities and no less
than six stories. It must give effect to the intensification policies of the NPS-UD.1
4.
You are seeking Cabinet agreement to strengthen the replacement plan change and
related processes to better enable development capacity and intensification via the
replacement plan change. This includes delegation to make further policy decisions.
5.
OUT OF SCOPE
1 OUT OF SCOPE
BRF-6283
10
[Classification
[
Classification
6.
This advice is premised on Auckland Council being required, and being able to notify, a
plan change before the local government election. This should result in a significant
and timely uplift in development capacity, particularly around the CRL stations.
City Centre
You could use ministerial powers to revisit city centre decisions
7.
You have raised concerns about the level of development uplift in the city centre, and
the lack of robust information on the impacts of recent decisions by Auckland Council
on the IHP’s recommendations. To address these concerns, you can use ministerial
powers to investigate and direct the council to revisit the city centre.
8.
If you would like to use ministerial powers, the first step is to undertake an investigation
under section 24A of the RMA. This would include seeking modelling from the council
on the capacity enabled by the city centre. Instigating an investigation would provide a
strong signal about your expectations in relation to eventual decisions on the
replacement plan change.
9.
Pending the recommendations following an investigation, you could:
a.
use further ministerial intervention powers under section 24A and section 25A such
as directing Auckland Council to prepare a plan change or variation to the
replacement plan change. This could be focussed on the city centre and the
walkable catchments of the city centre rail stations (Waitemata (Britomart), Te
Waihorotiu (Aotea) and Karanga-a-hape); or
b.
amend the Auckland Unitary Plan through a proposed new regulation making
power to remove provisions in district plans which disproportionately impact
development capacity or housing cost.
10. The Bill does not currently provide for variations to the replacement plan change once it
has been notified. To enable you to direct a variation (or a variation to the plan for
another reason) to the replacement plan change to address city centre provisions, we
recommend you amend the Bill to enable this. The Bill provisions should direct that any
variation to the plan change must be notified to the Minister, to enable the direction on
the plan change to be updated, and to ensure the variation complies with the
requirements of the plan change.
11. There will be some complexities involved in exercising ministerial powers to intervene
in the city centre, given how the RMA provides for matters (such as amenity) in
sections 6 and 7. It will be important any investigation is appropriately scoped, and we
can provide you with further advice on this.
12. There are also options for non-regulatory means to re-visit city centre provisions. For
example, officials could work with the council on a variation to the plan change through
other processes (such as a City/Regional Deal, or spatial planning process ahead of
phase 3 implementation). However, these processes will not be as timely or directive.
We recommend you pursue any use of intervention powers once the replacement plan
change has been notified
13. Auckland Council has advised it would need to divert technical planning and modelling
resources from the replacement plan change to accommodate additional work on the
BRF-6283
11
[Classification
[
Classification
9(2)(f)(iv)
14. On balance, we consider that the biggest housing gains in Auckland in the short term
will be from ensuring the replacement plan change enables development capacity as
will be directed in the strengthened Bill. We therefore recommend that you take further
action on revisiting the city centre provisions once the replacement plan change has
been notified. 9(2)(f)(iv)
15. OUT OF SCOPE
OUT OF SCOPE
BRF-6283
12
[Classification
[
Classification
OUT OF SCOPE
OUT OF SCOPE
24.
25.
Please note pages 14-24 have been removed as they are out of scope of your request.
BRF-6283
13
[Classification
[
Classification
Other considerations
9(2)(h)
BRF-6283
25
[Classification
[
Classification
9(2)(h)
OUT OF SCOPE
OUT OF SCOPE
BRF-6283
26
[Classification
[
Classification
OUT OF SCOPE
Please note pages 28-32 (Appendices 1 &2) have been removed as they are out of scope of your
request.
BRF-6283
27
[Classification
