In a move that has sparked widespread concern among property owners and ratepayers, Auckland Council has pushed forward with Plan Change 120 (PC120), a sweeping proposal to intensify housing while imposing stringent controls on development in the name of “resilience” against natural hazards.
Notified on 3 November 2025, this plan change replaces the controversial PC78 and mandates denser urban living across residential zones, ostensibly to meet government housing targets.
However, critics argue it represents yet another example of bureaucratic overreach, devaluing homes and eroding individual freedoms—all while clinging to outdated policies from the Jacinda Ardern era.
Not all representatives are towing the push, however. Among others, Howick local board member Mike Turinsky writes:
While protecting our communities from natural disasters is very important, the intensification component of PC120 is deeply concerning and fundamentally flawed. We must warn the Council and Independent Commissioners that this approach is unsustainable.
Turinsky criticises Plan Change 120 (PC120) for basing its approach on an arbitrary, government-imposed target of over two million new homes, lacking local evidence and enforcing rushed, blanket zoning.
He highlights the plan’s disconnect from reality, as it permits massive density without funded upgrades to strained infrastructure like stormwater, wastewater, and roads, risking a future crisis.
Turinsky argues it erodes suburban character by extending high-density zoning into quiet neighbourhoods beyond train-adjacent areas, leading to sporadic development and inadequate parking due to limited council powers.
He notes that PC120 is fundamentally tied to the 2020 National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) under the Labour government of Ardern.
That administration, known for its progressive interventions, prioritised compact urban growth and climate adaptation measures that many conservatives view as heavy-handed social engineering.
PC120 dutifully implements these directives, rezoning areas to allow for higher-density housing while restricting development in zones deemed vulnerable to floods, sea-level rise, and other hazards.
Yet, this comes at a steep cost: reports suggest it could slash property values in affected areas by imposing 100-year projections that limit what owners can do with their land.
Compounding the issue is the plan’s reliance on climate modelling that even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has cautioned against.
Auckland’s hazard assessments draw from projections outlined in reports like the 2020 Auckland Region Climate Change Projections and Impacts, which utilise Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) from the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report.
Notably, RCP8.5—a high-emissions scenario described in those documents as “business-as-usual”—underpins many of the dire forecasts for temperature rises, extreme rainfall, and sea-level increases.
However, the IPCC’s more recent Sixth Assessment Report and subsequent expert analyses have repeatedly warned that RCP8.5 is an extreme, unlikely pathway, not a realistic baseline for policy-making.
One of the authors of the model being implemented by Ardern, and now the Auckland council, stated the following:
RCP8.5 was never meant to be a business-as-usual scenario, but as a high-end scenario, consistent with the highest emissions scenarios in the literature…I wished I would have been clearer with what I meant by business as usual in that paragraph.” – Detlef van Vuuren, Professor in Integrated Assessment of Global Environmental Change
It assumes a massive resurgence in coal use and unchecked emissions growth, which scientists now deem “exceedingly unlikely” without a reversal of current global trends towards renewables and efficiency.
By basing PC120 on this inflated scenario, the Auckland Council appears to be over-regulating based on alarmist assumptions, potentially locking in unnecessary restrictions that stifle economic growth and personal choice.
This intensification push also aligns suspiciously with the global “15-minute city” agenda, promoted by the United Nations through its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and UN-Habitat initiatives.
The concept—envisioning neighbourhoods where residents can access essentials within a 15-minute walk or cycle—sounds innocuous but has drawn fire from conservatives as a Trojan horse for greater surveillance and control.
PC120’s emphasis on compact, mixed-use developments aligns with these UN-backed ideals, potentially paving the way for restricted vehicle use, increased public transport dependency, and even zoning that discourages suburban lifestyles.
In a nation that prides itself on wide-open spaces and individual autonomy, such alignments raise alarms about New Zealand surrendering sovereignty to international bodies.
Ardern’s government was a vocal supporter of UN agendas, including Agenda 2030, and PC120 appears to perpetuate that globalist tilt, prioritising collective “sustainability” over the rights of ordinary Kiwis to live as they choose.
As submissions on PC120 close on 19 December 2025, opponents are urging Aucklanders to voice their dissent.
This plan change not only perpetuates the interventionist policies of the Ardern years but also burdens future generations with decisions grounded in questionable science and supranational ideologies.
If left unchecked, it could transform Auckland into a denser, more regulated metropolis, where property rights take a back seat to utopian visions.
