New planning process for housing intensification rules

New planning process for housing intensification rules
Thursday 28 October, 2021
On 19 October 2021, the Government introduced the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill (the Bill) which will require councils in Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga, Wellington, and Christchurch to adopt medium-density residential standards (MDRS). These standards will allow, at a minimum, the building of 3 houses, each up to 3 storeys high without land use consent, whereas currently most district plans only allow one home up to 2 storeys. The new housing density rules are intended to the number of houses in New Zealand by making it easier to build new houses, however we note that subdivision consent may still be required by each council to create new property titles for the land on which these houses will be built.
In order to ensure that councils can quickly adopt and implement the new MDRS, the Bill also introduces a new intensification streamlined planning process (ISPP), which is proposed to be quicker than the standard plan change process under Schedule 1 of the RMA, and which councils can use when making or changing their district plans to introduce the MDRS or to speed up the implementation of the intensification policies in the National Policy Statement on Urban Development.
Intensification streamlined planning process (ISPP)
The ISPP includes the following standard steps:
- Pre-notification consultation and engagement with iwi about the intensification plan.
- The intensification plan is notified; the MDRS rules have immediate legal effect from this date (that is, the usual statutory position that would not see the rules have immediate legal effect until after Step 7 below, does not apply).
- Submissions on the notified intensification plan.
- Further submissions on the notified intensification plan.
- Independent hearings panel (IHP) to conduct hearings on the intensification plan. The council can choose to conduct an optional pre-hearing mediation.
- IHP provides report to council with recommendations.
- Council makes its decision. (If the council does not agree with the IHP’s recommendations, the Minister for the Environment will become the decision maker.)
- Intensification plan becomes operative.
Independent hearings panel (IHP)
The IHP will conduct hearings on the intensification plan and report its recommendations to the council. The IHP is not limited to recommendations on the submissions and can include recommendations on other matters related to the intensification plan.
Decision making within ISPP
The council is the primary decision maker on the intensification plan, but the Minister for the Environment becomes the decision maker on any IHP recommendations that the council chooses not to adopt. The Minister can decide to accept the IHP’s recommendations or make alternative decisions.
No appeals
If an intensification plan goes through the ISPP, there is no right of appeal to the Environment Court. This is a deliberate statutory direction to ensure that intensification plans are operative by mid-2023. In contrast, if councils proceeded under Schedule 1 of the RMA, the plans would not be operative until August 2024 at the earliest.
The Bill was introduced on 19 October 2021 and there will be a three-week period for submissions on the Bill, likely starting in late October. The Government intends to pass the Bill by the end of this year, with councils starting to implement it by 2022. The ISPP is a big change for councils, and it will be important to get the process right, particularly for the associated subdivision process.
If you have any questions about the ISPP, or you would like help to make a submission on the Bill, our experts (listed below) can help.
Author
Talk to one of our experts
Related Articles

Councils challenge to transfer of water services rejected in High Court
Thursday 30 March, 2023

When the rubber hits the road - All aboard Aotearoa's challenge
Tuesday 11 October, 2022

Operative plans and proposed plans: what to do when there is a significant policy shift?
Wednesday 30 March, 2022

Notices of requirement are relevant for resource consent applications
Wednesday 30 March, 2022

Avoidance policies reign in the wake of King Salmon, but what do they require?
Wednesday 30 March, 2022

Court gives guidance on consultation and decision-making process
Wednesday 30 March, 2022

Cultural evidence and the continued draw of the overall judgment
Tuesday 21 December, 2021

Will new housing density rules increase contributions for developers?
Thursday 28 October, 2021

Lease of Wanaka Airport set aside due to insufficient consultation
Tuesday 15 June, 2021

What if an abatement notice requires you to breach the Resource Management Act?
Tuesday 15 June, 2021

“No ‘wine-ing’ covenants” declined for a subdivision consent in Gibbston Valley
Tuesday 15 June, 2021

From car parking fine to judicial review of a council’s code of conduct
Tuesday 15 June, 2021

Councils remain liable for compliance of contractors with the RMA
Thursday 18 March, 2021

Randerson Report released: New Direction for Resource Management
Wednesday 5 August, 2020

Could companies be liable to the public for the harm caused by their emissions?
Tuesday 10 March, 2020

Avoiding double penalties when sentencing a company and director
Thursday 23 April, 2020

Can an easement be granted over an esplanade reserve for a commercial activity?
Thursday 12 December, 2019

Draft National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2019 for consultation
Thursday 3 October, 2019

Local authority requiring monetary contributions on designations
Thursday 20 June, 2019

Bella Vista: MBIE Report highlights failure to perform statutory functions
Tuesday 9 April, 2019

Recent decision on "affected persons" highlights the importance of context
Wednesday 28 November, 2018

Must Councils accept an assertion that a person is ‘suitably qualified'?
Friday 9 March, 2018
