Auckland housing intensification plan: Government ‘softens’ housing capacity requirement from 2 million to 1.6 million, Housing Minister Chris Bishop to investigate ‘planning provisions that are holding back city centre’

By Anna Whyte and Mandy Te

The Government will be softening the housing capacity requirement for Auckland’s housing intensification plan, lowering it from 2 million to 1.6 million.

Alongside this, Housing Minister Chris Bishop says the Government believes there is still significant, unrealised potential in the city centre - and he will investigate the “planning provisions that are holding back Auckland’s city centre, with a view to making regulations under the RMA (Resource Management Act)”.

Bishop made the announcement on Thursday, as he delivered a speech at an event hosted by the Committee for Auckland. Earlier, interest.co.nz reported a decision was expected and it was understood that changes would be a pragmatic middle ground.

In his speech, Bishop told the audience the Government had heard Aucklanders’ feedback and had answered.

“Softening the housing capacity requirement strikes an appropriate balance between those Aucklanders concerned about densification, and those who wish to see more growth.”

The plan

The plan, called Plan Change 120 (PC120), had become an ongoing political issue for the Government. The target for Auckland Council would have provided housing capacity for two million houses (a number that people have been hung up on), following a change to the Resource Management Act.

In a question and answer sheet, Auckland Council said the main changes with this proposed plan was “increased building heights and densities of either six, 10 or 15 storeys” in "walkable catchments from the edges of the city centre zone, metropolitan centre zones, and from existing and planned Rapid Transit Network stops in urban areas”.

An increase in building heights and densities was also proposed for local and town centres as a way to match what commercial and community activities these places offered.

This plan would potentially allow 15-storey buildings around Maungawhau, Kingsland and Morningside train stations, and 10-storey buildings around Mt Albert train station.

As for the two million homes figure, Auckland Council said this does not mean two million extra houses will be built or needed - this is the “theoretical number of houses that could be built, if houses were built to the full extent across the city within the rule that applied”.

“What actually gets built is much less,” Auckland Council said in a fact sheet.

‘Determined to put this issue to bed once and for all’

Bishop said Cabinet has agreed to legislate this housing capacity softening.

Currently, the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) enables capacity for 1.2 million extra homes.

Bishop said: “The Government’s view is that 1.6 million is the midpoint between the 1.2 million housing capacity enabled by the AUP, and the 2 million that would have been enabled by PC120 (as currently notified).”

“Going from at least two million to at least 1.6 million does reduce minimum housing capacity by around 20%, but this is in the context of a stronger Plan Change that could see a 20% increase in planned housing turning into real housing.”

Bishop said PC120 is a stronger plan compared to previous ones because the Government and Auckland’s “shared objective of upzoning around key CRL (City Rail Link) stations, and shared commitment to the NPS-UD (National Policy Statement on Urban Development)”.

“We are not backing away from these bottom lines.”

Cabinet has asked for a summary of the provisional changes the Council would make once the Government started legislation.

“And once we legislate the lower housing capacity number, the rest is in Auckland Council’s hands," Bishop said.

“The Council will determine which parts of Auckland they wish to downzone in PC120. They can then formally withdraw parts of PC120 from the Plan Change, except for those parts needed to implement the NPS-UD or to upzone around key City Rail Link [CRL] stations.”

“We are legislating in the middle of a plan change process that is already underway, so it is quite legally complicated, but we have devised a way through that will allow Aucklanders to see the areas that will be removed from PC 120 and provide another opportunity for Aucklanders to have their say – including those who have already submitted on PC120 and others who would like to join.” Bishop said.

“I want to stress that I am determined to put this issue to bed once and for all. Auckland has been struggling with an update to the AUP since 2021.”

“I accept Parliament hasn’t helped, but it’s now 2026,” he said. “I think we’ve now got the balance right.”

Bishop said the new plan would mean more growth around areas that make the most economic sense and where there is the most support. This includes CRL stations, rapid transit stations and metropolitan centres.

“And it means more flexibility for Auckland around suburban Auckland.”

‘Significant, unrealised potential’

Bishop said the Government believes there is still significant, unrealised potential in the city centre.

Existing provisions such as setback requirements, tower dimension controls and height limits constrain development, he said, and should be revisited.

“Enabling more growth in the city centre will unlock productivity and increase the benefits of CRL even further.

“However, for largely unfathomable Resource Management Act legal reasons, the City Centre Zone is not included in PC120, and the Council does not have a simple mechanism to unlock this potential.”

“Therefore, Cabinet has agreed that I will start an investigation into these planning provisions that are holding back Auckland’s city centre, with a view to making regulations under the RMA,” Bishop said.

His intention was that any extra housing capacity enabled in the city centre would count towards the 1.6 million housing capacity figure.

So, what does this look like?

Bishop said it would likely mean less growth enabled in suburbs while keeping capacity enabled around CRL stations, other train stations, busways, metro centres and the city business district.

“The evidence is clear – well connected growth drives productivity.”

“I’m grateful to have an advocate of housing and urbanism in Mayor Wayne Brown who backs density like I do,” Bishop said.

“And that’s important because ultimately, PC120 is Auckland’s Plan – not the Government’s.”

Bishop said: “We set the guardrails, and – rightly – Auckland Council largely decides where and how growth occurs.”

He said some people will think this doesn’t go far enough to protect their suburbs while others will think there’s been a step back on housing affordability.

“But I’m sure we can all agree that Auckland could debate this question – and this number – for a lifetime and get no closer to a remotely agreed-on decision.”

Bishop said at some point, someone needs to make a call and move forward.

“It’s my strong view that if we can fix housing there is nothing, nothing that we can’t fix together as a country.”

'There will need to be some changes'

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has previously hinted at watering down PC120, telling reporters after his 2026 State of the Nation address: “We said very clearly before Christmas that we were monitoring the issue very closely … Clearly there’s been a huge amount of feedback. Clearly things are going to need to change in our response as well.”

“Ultimately, the feedback is saying things are going to need to change and there will need to be some changes.”

While Bishop has been a champion of the proposed plan, there’s speculation that National’s Auckland MPs have been feeling the heat, and former National Cabinet Minister Maurice Williamson warned that it could cost National party votes at the upcoming election.

And when it comes to the politics of housing - Bishop and Luxon have been out of sync when it comes to house prices.

Luxon previously told RNZ he wanted to see “modest” and “consistent” house price increases while Bishop said average house prices in New Zealand were too expensive.

“We’ve got to decouple the idea that the economy is linked to house price growth,” Bishop said.

Last year, there were murmurs of a leadership “coup” by Bishop. Asked about this by Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hosking in November, Luxon said he did not think it was the case and that Bishop was a good minister and a good friend.

And when asked if he would lead the party in the 2026 election, Luxon said “absolutely”. Bishop has denied a leadership challenge.