Our medium-density standards won’t promise wellbeing

The legislative changes requiring dispersed medium-density housing in our major cities will not deliver the compact urban centres we should be aiming for. The ideal is higher-density developments, dotted with open green spaces, which enhance wellbeing and provide living environments that are accessible and communal.

Topics include

Urban density & city development
Our medium-density standards won’t promise wellbeing
Last updated 19 May 2026
Share

Urban intensification is perhaps one of the most talked-about issues following the government’s announcement of the resource management reforms. The Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS) were introduced under the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021 with the objective of accelerating the supply of housing.

What the Act required

The Amendment Act required Tier 1 councils – Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga, Wellington and Christchurch – to introduce plan changes to incorporate the MDRS standards, which enable the development of three homes up to 3 storeys on sites throughout urban areas as a permitted activity.

The plan changes must also allow for at least 6-storey buildings within walkable catchments of the edge of the city centre, metropolitan and planned rapid transit stops. Other councils may also be included as Tier 1 councils where housing pressure is being experienced – Rotorua was included after the Amendment Act became law.

Unless a qualifying matter applies – such as ensuring safe or efficient operation of nationally significant infrastructure – these provisions are mandatory.

If relying on a qualifying matter, councils must produce a comprehensive section 32 report demonstrating why the qualifying matter is incompatible with the required intensification and the impacts of limiting development capacity, including the costs.

The potential upsides

Urban intensification is critical if our cities and towns are to become well-functioning urban environments and support the wellbeing of the people who live there. A compact urban environment ensures better access to services and facilities via public transport, walking and cycling, enables the efficient provision of infrastructure, and assists in meeting Aotearoa New Zealand’s climate change goals. An increase in supply of land zoned for intensification may also help housing availability and assist in controlling house prices.

The potential downsides

Plan changes requiring all urban areas to be zoned for a minimum of 3-storey, three dwellings per site are a very blunt tool. The dispersed medium-density intensification required by the MDRS across swathes of suburbs is difficult to service with infrastructure.

It also compromises urban form and potentially undermines the greater level of intensification desperately needed around centres and close to rapid transit routes.

The RMA reforms, and the regional spatial strategies proposed under them, provide an opportunity to masterplan development in our urban areas in a way that improves the wellbeing of communities. Unfortunately, the rushed- through intensification plan changes are unlikely to support that outcome.

Wellbeing considerations

Urban intensification can have a positive impact on wellbeing by promoting and ensuring better access to services and transport as well as supporting Aotearoa’s commitment to addressing climate change. However, medium-density development will not necessarily achieve that positive outcome. Rather, higher- density development is required.

The key to high-density development is that it needs to be a development of sites in a way that creates a good level of amenity and provides the public with open spaces. Perhaps the ad hoc development of 3-storey houses dotted across the suburbs is not likely to result in the creation of well-functioning urban areas that promote the wellbeing of our communities.