Opening Up Highly Productive Land For Housing
Sweeping proposals to change the RMA national direction include the country's most productive agricultural areas, which are classed according to how versatile they are for primary production. According to the proposal, Land Use Capacity 3 land would no longer be protected in the National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL), which restricts the rezoning, subdivision, and use of Highly Productive Land.
Consultation on the proposed changes to the NPS-HPL runs until this Sunday, 27 July 2025.
The SMC asked experts to comment. The SMC has also gathered expert reactions on proposed RMA changes to housing and slash management.
Emeritus Professor David J. Lowe, University of Waikato, comments:
'It is proposed that the National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land is emended to remove land use capability (LUC) class 3 soils from their current protection 'from inappropriate land use and development'. The proposal is poorly considered and, if it goes through, would be an irreversible blunder of intergenerational scale for multiple reasons.
'Future generations of New Zealanders are being robbed of the potential productivity of versatile soils by people with a vested interest. The Luxon-led coalition government has an ethical, moral, and legal obligation to provide for future as well as current generations.
'Contrary to popular myth, New Zealand does not have large areas of highly productive soils. Rather, such soils, encompassing LUC classes 1 and 2 along with most class 3 soils, make up only 14% of New Zealand's soils. Class 1 (0.7%) and 2 (4.5%), the most versatile soils, amount to a mere 5.2%, with class 3 soils another 9.2 %. Removing class 3 soils from protection would leave just 5% of New Zealand's soils to sustain the entire nation in perpetuity.
'Many of the highly-productive (versatile) soils typically have taken around 10,000 to 20,000 years, some 50,000 years and even longer (several hundred thousand years in Pukekohe area), to develop and hence are irreplaceable.
'The versatile soils confer the key capability to produce a wide range of crops yet over 10% have already been lost to lifestyle blocks and housing, with around 33% of the best land (highly versatile soils) in Auckland and Waikato lost for good to urban expansion under an accelerating process.
'The high-value soils of the Pukekohe-Bombay area have been facing 'death by a thousand cuts' over the past few decades under housing pressure yet it is seldom appreciated that these soils, only ~4,400 ha in extent (~3.8% of New Zealand's horticultural land) produce ~26% by value of New Zealand's vegetable production adjacent to the country's largest market and under a horticulturally favourable climate.
'The versatile soils, including many LUC 3 soils, must be preserved:
– to support a wide variety of viable land use options, including cropping, to meet the foreseeable needs of future generations
– to facilitate the sustainable production of food and fibre and other services and to help maintain food sovereignty (the ability to maintain authority over New Zealand's food supply)
– to preserve soil ecosystems that provide environmental services and confer the greatest natural protection to the environment
– to maintain natural capital and soil diversity
'The versatile soils have
– high energy-use efficiency and yields for various crops
– high pollution absorption capacity
– moderate or better soil resilience
'There are plenty of less-versatile soils available for housing.
'In conclusion, preservation of nationally scarce highly-productive land including LUC class 3 soils for growing crops is of paramount importance because further loss needlessly and irreversibly limits this option for current and future generations. Hence the proposed amendment should be abandoned.
'Further, rather than maintaining its disparaging attitude to science, and geoscience in particular, and its reprehensible ridiculing of expert opinion, the current coalition government should engage meaningfully and respectfully with soil scientists and horticulturalists to resolve the conflicts and self-interest of vested parties with respect to land use in New Zealand.'
Conflict of interest statement: Lowe is a former professor in Earth Sciences, School of Science, University of Waikato, Hamilton. He is not commenting on behalf of the institution.
Dr Pierre Roudier, President, New Zealand Society of Soil Science, comments:
'Land classified as Land Use Capability class 3 (LUC3) represents the backbone of New Zealand's food and fibre production and high-value exports. It makes up two-thirds of the land currently protected under the National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL) and supports a wide range of primary production, ranging from dairy and arable farming to viticulture and horticulture. In Taranaki, 80% of LUC3 land is used for high-value dairy exports, while in Marlborough and Tasman, around 30% supports intensive horticulture, including vineyards. LUC3 land is characteristically extensive and highly productive, supporting large-scale farming and a wide range of crops across New Zealand's varied climates. If the protection of LUC3 land were removed entirely, New Zealand would risk losing large, connected and versatile areas of land that are essential for both domestic food supply and high-value export industries. Once this land is built on, it's lost from food production forever.
'Blanket removal of protections of LUC3 land from the NPS-HPL is not required to achieve the housing goals the Government has set. Exceptions to the current NPS-HPL already exist that allow councils to approve urban development on LUC 1-3 land when justified. Meanwhile, blanket removal of LUC3 protections risks large-scale rural residential subdivision, which is an inefficient use of our best land. Research shows that the most pressing issue on HPL is residential lifestyle development, significantly more so than edge-of-city expansion. This type of development breaks up productive farmland into smaller, disconnected parcels, which not only makes the land harder to farm efficiently but also introduces new pressures because of 'reverse sensitivity' (when new residents in rural areas object to normal farming activities, leading to restrictions on farms). These impacts reduce the overall productivity and versatility of the land. Rural residential blocks on LUC class 3 land now take up an area equivalent to nearly 60% of all the land in New Zealand used to grow vegetables – highlighting the scale of land lost to low-density residential development.
'The Regulatory Impact Statement outlines 4 different policy options, ranging from a status quo to a complete removal of LUC3 protections. One of the more balanced options would allow councils to enable urban growth on LUC3 land through local planning processes, while still protecting that land from residential lifestyle subdivision. This targeted approach would support housing goals near urban areas without opening the door to uncontrolled sprawl across the wider countryside.
'The proposed Special Agricultural Areas (SAAs) are poorly defined and currently limited to just two regions (Pukekohe and Horowhenua), raising concerns about transparency, national consistency, and scientific rigour. Their effectiveness depends on being grounded in biophysical land qualities, not just current land use. This narrow focus risks excluding other significant food-producing areas and ignores future shifts due to climate or market changes. SAAs could also be less efficient than refining the existing LUC system, which already covers the whole country and is based on scientific land assessment. Without clear criteria and wide consultation, SAAs may create confusion and leave large areas of valuable land unprotected – especially if protections on LUC3 land are lifted before the SAA framework is finalised.'
Conflict of interest statement: 'Pierre Roudier is employed full-time by the Bioeconomy Science Institute as a Senior Scientist. He is also the current President of the NZ Society of Soil Science (NZSSS), and his commentary is provided from his perspective as President of the NZSSS.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
an hour ago
- 1News
Te Pāti Māori, Greens outraged at 'marginalising' passport changes
Te Pāti Māori says the Government's changes to passports are an attempt to whitewash the national identity. The Government confirmed on Friday that New Zealand's passport is being redesigned to place the English words above the te reo Māori text. The new look won't start being rolled out until the end of 2027. Since 2021, passports have had "Uruwhenua Aotearoa" printed in silver directly above New Zealand Passport. Internal Affairs Minister Brooke van Velden said the positioning of text on passports will change to reflect the Government's commitment to using English first. She said the redesign, which would be unveiled later this year, was being done as part of a scheduled security upgrade, ensuring no additional cost to passport holders. ADVERTISEMENT Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said the change diminishes the visibility of tangata whenua. "Our passport is not just a travel document, it's a statement of who we are as a nation. So, the stripping down of te reo Māori, or marginalising our indigenous identity, reflects this Government's sad obsession with erasing Te Tiriti o Waitangi and dragging us back to a monocultural past," she said. Ngarewa-Packer said the move undermined Aotearoa's reputation as a leading nation in recognising indigenous rights. "Restoring our reo took a long time. I mean imagine doing this in Ireland, imagine doing this to the Welsh. This was hard fought for. It's not re-ordering of words, the reformatting is deliberately done to undermine the mana [and] to sideline us tangata whenua." Not 'a positive vision' - Greens Green MP Benjamin Doyle. (Source: Green Party MP Benjamin Doyle said the move is not what New Zealanders need from the government. ADVERTISEMENT "We are seeing day by day, the rights and dignities of minority communities being stripped away while they leave the majority of New Zealanders suffering under the Government's current decisions," Doyle said. "This is not a positive vision for Aotearoa, this is not a positive step towards unifying kotahitanga and it's not benefiting anyone. Really, its just dog-whistling politics. It's the tail wagging the dog." The ACT Party celebrated van Velden's move on social media, saying the change would "restore English before te reo Māori - without costing taxpayers". The change comes as part of a deliberate push by the coalition to give English primacy over te reo Māori in official communications. New Zealand First's coalition agreement with National stipulates that public service departments have their primary name in English and be required to communicate "primarily in English" except for entities specifically related to Māori. It also includes an as-yet-unfulfilled commitment to make English an official language of New Zealand.
NZ Herald
11 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Love this City: Helipads, Pukekohe soil, Dominion Rd buses, Monte Cecilia dogs and more
The court should be able to decide this quickly. If it rules in the council's favour, the couple will have to halt their plans. But if it rules for the Mowbray-Williams project, the council will draft a plan change to make it 'explicitly clear' private helipads in the suburbs are a 'non-complying activity'. If adopted, that will make them extremely difficult to approve. On Thursday, the council opted for this 'non-complying' route, instead of full prohibition as proposed by councillors Mike Lee and Kerrin Leoni. Lee believes he was 'ambushed' and the vote was a 'stitch-up', which will achieve little. But his colleagues voted against him, 15-7. They had several reasons for doing this and they all boil down to the same thing: they believe Lee's approach was doomed to fail but their approach could succeed. I'll be analysing this in full next week, but briefly: The council does not have the power simply to ban something on the spot. There's a legal process to follow and it usually takes about two years, perhaps double that if there are appeals. Some councillors said it was misleading for anyone to claim a vote this week would achieve that ban right now, or that it would stop Mowbray and Williams. The hearing into the Anna Mowbray and Ali Williams' helipad application was heard by commissioners Dr Hilke Giles (left), chairman Kitt Littlejohn and David Hill. Also, some councillors believe there are parts of some suburbs where a private helipad might be permitted. Definitely not in Westmere, they were completely united on that. But remote Hillsborough cliffs above the Manukau Harbour and remote parts of Howick were both mentioned. More significantly, councillors know the RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop has instructed councils not to make any new plan changes because he has the whole act under review. They believe he will not allow a plan change to ban private helipads outright, but he might allow an exemption to make them non-complying. There's also a cost issue: a prohibition plan change could cost the council $1.5 million. Councillor Josephine Bartley had a question for one of the council officials in the meeting: 'Is it fair to say that it's a $1.5m risk for something we already know is not likely? That we won't win?' 'Yes, that's fair,' said planning manager Phill Reid. Councillors voted for the option they thought had the best chance of succeeding, and against the option they thought was, in effect, full of sound and fury, but signified nothing. But it's election time and several councillors are staking out their positions. Paving over Pukekohe paradise Vegetable grower Allan Fong with his elite soil land at Pukekohe. Photo / Trefor Ward The Government is proposing to amend the National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL) to remove the protections on 'class 3 soils' that prevent their 'inappropriate land use and development'. It will mean more city in the countryside. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop argues these soils are not as valuable as is commonly thought and there will still be adequate protection for the soils that are genuinely valuable for crops and other agricultural land uses. The NPS was introduced by the Labour Government in 2022; public consultation on the proposed changes closes this Sunday and a decision will follow soon. Soil experts have been making a last-gasp appeal for a rethink. 'The proposal is poorly considered and, if it goes through, would be an irreversible blunder of inter-generational scale, for multiple reasons,' says David Lowe, an emeritus professor of earth sciences at the University of Waikato. 'Future generations ... are being robbed of the potential productivity of versatile soils by people with a vested interest. The Luxon-led coalition Government has an ethical, moral and legal obligation to provide for future as well as current generations.' NZ Society of Soil Science president Pierre Roudier says class 3 soil 'represents the backbone of New Zealand's food and fibre production and high-value exports'. It makes up two-thirds of the land currently protected under the NPS-HPL and supports a wide range of primary production, ranging from dairy and arable farming to viticulture and horticulture. 'Contrary to popular myth,' says Lowe, 'New Zealand does not have large areas of highly productive soils.' Class 1 soils make up only 0.7% of productive soils and class 2 another 4.5%. 'The high-value soils of the Pukekohe-Bombay area have been facing 'death by a thousand cuts' over the past few decades under housing pressure,' he says. The area includes only 3.8% of New Zealand's total horticultural land but it produces 26% by value of our vegetables. Already in Auckland and Waikato, Lowe says, around 33% of the best land has been lost to urban expansion and the process is accelerating. He wants the proposed NPS changes abandoned. Roudier isn't so categoric. 'Research shows that the most pressing issue on HPL is residential lifestyle development, significantly more so than edge-of-city expansion,' he says. Lifestyle blocks, not new subdivisions. 'This type of development breaks up productive farmland into smaller, disconnected parcels, which not only makes the land harder to farm efficiently but also introduces new pressures because of 'reverse sensitivity' (when new residents in rural areas object to normal farming activities, leading to restrictions on farms).' People move to the country, then complain about the country (the same thing happens in central cities). RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop. Photo / Calvin Samuel, RNZ Bishop doesn't necessarily intend to remove protections on all class 3 land. The regulatory impact statement on his proposals outlines four policy options, with complete removal being one of them. Roudier supports a 'more balanced option' that would allow councils to enable urban growth on class 3 land but protect it from lifestyle blocks. 'This targeted approach would support housing goals near urban areas,' he says, 'without opening the door to uncontrolled sprawl across the wider countryside'. Quality soils are a long time in the making. Typically, says Lowe, the timespan is 10,000 to 20,000 years. Some take 50,000 years or even longer: the elite soils of Pukekohe have taken several hundred thousand years to develop. Once gone, they're really gone. Halfway down Dominion Rd and stuck Dominion Rd is one of the busiest roads in Auckland. Photo / Alex Burton Auckland Transport wants to extend the bus lane hours on Dominion Rd and the business association is not happy. They may have Mayor Wayne Brown to contend with. Brown has identified road efficiency as one of his key transport expectations. That means doing everything possible to allow traffic on the city's arterials to flow smoothly. 'Smart' traffic lights that give buses priority and recognise and respond to traffic build-ups. The removal of car parks that block peak-time traffic. The use of 'dynamic' centre lanes, which change direction according to the morning and evening demand. On Dominion Rd, which is narrower than most arterials, the key is to keep those bus lanes moving. AT, supported by the Albert-Eden Local Board, isn't proposing anything drastic, like 24-hour bus lanes. All it wants to do is have the peak times start at 3pm instead of 4pm. One hour earlier, which recognises the build-up of school traffic. The Dominion Rd Business Association wants this 'immediately cancelled'. It says the move is 'a premature and economically damaging decision that threatens the livelihood of local businesses'. The bus lanes opened in 2015 and have been instrumental in preventing congestion from creating complete gridlock on the street. Four years earlier, AT predicted that extending the hours would not be necessary until 2041. But in 2011, AT did not reckon with the extent of population or vehicle build-up of the past 25 years. Gary Holmes, manager of the association, says: 'We are utterly dismayed by Auckland Transport's short-sighted proposal. The 2011 report clearly indicated that extending these hours to 3pm was a decades-away prospect, based on future demand. We do not believe the current traffic numbers in 2025 warrant it happening a decade and a half earlier than originally suggested.' Halfway down Dominion Rd, people stuck in traffic may beg to differ. Two things about making bus priority lanes more efficient: it works, and it's one of the cheapest things the council can do to improve traffic flows. There are still many more car parks for shoppers and retail staff in the streets all around that area. More savings at council Deputy Mayor Desley Simpson with the boss. Photo / Alyse Wright The council has an ongoing programme to 'deliver better value', which means finding ways to cut spending. It's run by the Revenue, Expenditure and Value Committee, chaired by Deputy Mayor Desley Simpson, and adheres to 10 'better value project principles' set out by the Mayor. After the committee's latest meeting, Simpson reports: 'We have halted several projects to reassess costs, which has seen several repriced considerably lower. This includes the Paremuka Dam culverts in Henderson, where the council retendering the project's contract reduced the construction cost from $3.4 million to $1.9m – saving $1.4m from the focus on value for money.' Staff have also stopped work on two other projects, Milford Marina and Long Bay footbridges, 'to enable costs to be reassessed and delivered lower'. Project manager Mark Townshend says: 'We want all staff consistently applying the principles to their work, so we see every ratepayer dollar used to deliver greater value across our projects.' Townshend says they do around 25 'health checks' in parks and community facilities each month, to see if the better value principles are being applied well. 'Supplier performance workshops are also under way, which enables us to partner with our suppliers to provide better value projects for our communities.' The mayor says the principles have saved $43.2m to date, which equates to not raising rates by 1.8%. Monte Cecilia Park: Dogs can roam, for now Dogs and their owners in the bowl of Monte Cecilia Park, where debate continues over whether dogs should be allowed off-leash. Photo / Owen McMahon Dog Lovers of Monte Cecilia, which says it represents more than 500 dog owners and allies, has gained an interim order from the High Court preventing the Puketāpapa Local Board from enforcing its on-leash policy. A full judicial review is to follow. Monte Cecilia Park is a very beautiful park between Three Kings and Hillsborough, with a large bowl in the middle that can't be used for sports, formal or informal, and has been for many years an off-leash area for dogs. The local board vote revealed a clear political divide. Community & Residents members on the right voted to remove the off-leash status; City Vision members on the left wanted it preserved. C&R has a one-vote majority, but City Vision has 88% of public submissions, a 1000-signature petition and the advice of council staff on its side. The board's decision 'unfairly penalises responsible dog owners and undermines the wellbeing of both dogs and the wider community', the Dog Lovers group said. 'We are committed to ensuring that Monte Cecilia Park remains a safe and welcoming shared space for all Aucklanders.' Board member Jon Turner, who is now a City Vision candidate for a ward seat on the governing body of council, says: 'Communities & Residents members ran on a platform of listening to the community, yet they have twice disregarded overwhelming public sentiment and clear staff advice.' C&R, for its part, is understood to be concerned about the views of some of the residents in a nearby retirement village. Warkworth development heading to court Map of the land Arvida wants the council to rezone for urban development. The yellow area is the proposed site of its new retirement village. The main Warkworth township is below the river at the bottom of the map; the golf course is to the upper right. Next month, the Environment Court will hear an appeal against the council's decision in March to block a private plan change allowing land development in Warkworth. The plan change is sought by the company Arvida, which wants to build a 198-unit retirement village on the edge of town. The council wasn't opposed to the village but objected to Arvida wanting 140ha to be rezoned. Arvida owns 55 of those 140ha. It plans to build on 22 of them and sell the remaining 33. That, as Mayor Wayne Brown said in March, casts Arvida as a land banker: it had bought a larger site than it needed and with the rezoning in place would be able to sell parts of it for a substantial profit. 'Why don't they just build the retirement village?' Brown said. The court hearing comes after talks broke down between the company and the council. Arvida says it wants the whole site rezoned to allow 'a more co-ordinated, master-planned approach to the land', which would 'address the growing and future demand for retirement housing in the area'. Arvida chief executive Jeremy Nicoll describes the process as 'frustrating'. The company believes the council was wrong to block the plan-change request, in part because that prevented 'a fair public hearing'. 'The plan change area adjoins the existing Warkworth urban area, is well connected to Warkworth's many amenities and will integrate with existing and planned infrastructure,' he says. 'This appeal is necessary because due process must be followed when it comes to making important decisions about New Zealand's urgent housing needs.' In March, Brown made his position clear: the council is empowered to make these decisions, and it would continue to do what it considered right, even under threat of legal action. To sign up for Simon Wilson's weekly newsletter, click here, select Love this City and save your preferences. For a step-by-step guide, click here.
NZ Herald
14 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Government should cut GST on food if it's worried about butter price – Fran O'Sullivan
The Finance Minister did not need to call Hurrell in to reaffirm that global dairy prices are at a high and that this would inevitably spill over to higher farmer returns and, in turn, boost regional and finally national economies. (That's the plus side you didn't hear about before the meeting). Or that any notion of Fonterra slashing its own margins was not going to happen. They are thin when compared with the margins applied by supermarkets to dairy products, and she knows it. The upshot is that Willis did seek explanations from Hurrell over the co-operative's pricing, which she of course accepted. Within days, she was talking up Fonterra and the surging global prices on the Mike Hosking show as a plus – as indeed they are when it comes to the impact on the New Zealand economy. Hurrell subsequently made it clear his company is not moving to a two-tiered pricing system: an export price geared to global prices and a subsidised price for domestic consumers. There was more besides. It was sensible for Fonterra to shut the issue down quickly. It currently has its consumer brands business on the market. Any suggestion of a move to a two-tiered system would be a complication to that sales process or indeed an IPO of that business if that ultimately turns out to be the Fonterra board's preferred option. But while there was an element of the performative to the Beehive shenanigans, it does underline how much 'cost of living' issues are a lightning rod when it comes to sparking domestic dissatisfaction with the Government. Willis later described her meeting with Hurrell as 'constructive and engaging', underlining the fact that Fonterra does not control retail prices and that the final price is set by supermarkets, whose contracts and pricing strategies vary. This was more grist to Willis' campaign against what she claims are supermarkets profiteering at the expense of consumers. Already, she has been working to reduce the barriers to entry for other competitors. Willis has been encouraged that the Commerce Commission has taken a case against grocery giant Foodstuffs North Island and Gilmours Wholesale to court over what it believes is cartel conduct. The regulator said civil proceedings would be filed against the big grocery suppliers under the Commerce Act and Grocery Industry Competition Act (GICA). Foodstuffs 'strongly denies' any unlawful conduct. The Commerce Commission has also levelled criminal charges against retailer Noel Leeming over what it claims is a misleading price-matching promotion. The company 'firmly' maintains it had not committed an offence and would vigorously defend itself against multiple charges of misleading customers under the Fair Trading Act. Put that to one side. Prices have escalated on multiple fronts: dairy products, meat and some fruits; electricity and gas, rates, insurances. But they have decreased on others: mortgage and loan interest rates, and some fuels. There is little point in trying to jawbone prices down. In many respects, the answer lies with Willis. If she is overly concerned, she could wipe the 15% GST from particular food items. This is the case in Australia, where its 10% GST does not apply to meat, fish, produce, cheese and eggs, plain milk and cream, bread, butter and other spreads, bottled water, tea and coffee, cooking ingredients and oils, or infant formula. In Britain, most foods are zero-rated. Many European countries have reduced value-added tax rates for food, typically running at 5%-7%. Basic foods are exempted in Singapore, there is an 8% rate in Japan, and in the United States some states exempt various food items from sales tax. The upshot is that New Zealand verges on being an outlier in this area. Any changes to the GST regime would, however, have an impact on how New Zealand's tax regime is perceived as being neutral. Farmers are not the enemy. There is much to celebrate from our rural sector, which will deliver nearly $60 billion in export earnings this year. The fixation on rising prices has also overly consumed the Prime Minister, who frequently talks about 'cost of living issues'. But this is not going to be solved in the medium term. The upshot is that, short of any intervention by the Government, consumers will just have to suck it up.
