Proposed Plan Change 120: What You Need to Know What is PC120 and why does it matter? Auckland Council has proposed a change to the Auckland Unitary Plan called Plan Change 120 (PC120) . This change is about two main things: Rezoning areas of residential land to allow more housing intensification in and around urban centres and transport hubs. Making communities safer from natural hazards like flooding and landslides. Why is this happening? By way of background, PC78 (Auckland’s former intensification plan change, as required by the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020) incorporated the Medium Density Residential Standards that were required at the time. Generally, this allowed three dwellings of up to three storeys to be built on most residential sites without the need for resource consent. In August 2025, the Government amended the Resource Management Act 1991 to allow for greater intensification in town centres and around existing and planned transit routes. As a result, PC78 was withdrawn in part by Auckland Council and PC120 was notified. What will PC120 do? Increase housing density within and around town centres and transport hubs. Allow taller buildings: At least 6 storeys within walkable catchments of the city/town centre zone and around existing and planned train and bus routes. At least 10–15 storeys around certain train stations listed in the Resource Management Act 1991. These heights and densities must be enabled unless a ‘qualifying matter’ applies to a site which makes that level of development inappropriate. Natural hazard rules PC120 also introduces stricter rules to manage natural hazards such as flooding, landslides, and coastal erosion. This is a response to recent severe weather events like the 2023 Auckland floods caused by Cyclone Gabrielle. The updated rules and hazard mapping re-classify hazard areas and their risk level and require mitigation measures to be implemented that avoid creating or worsening natural hazard risks. What does this mean for property owners and developers? Expect more multi-storey and apartment-style housing near town centres and transport hubs, and an increase in shared spaces and communal assets. Intensification may lead to issues concerning: Boundary and airspace rights. View and sunlight obstruction. An increase in easements and restrictive covenants in already built-up areas. New subdivision and land uses may only be allowed where the natural hazard risk is considered tolerable or acceptable. Coastal development will become more difficult. The impact of a proposed development on existing floodplains and overland flow paths will be scrutinized. Maintenance or upgrade works may be required to ensure stormwater runoff and flood waters are adequately conveyed. Why should you care? These changes could affect your property rights, development plans, and legal obligations. If you’re buying, selling, or developing land, it’s important to understand how PC120 impacts you. Please get in touch with our property team if you’d like to discuss how these proposed changes could affect your property or future plans.

Sole v Hutton – disclosure obligations for apartment sales and the importance of thorough due diligence when purchasing In Sole v Hutton [2025] NZHC 430, the High Court dealt with a dispute over undisclosed weathertightness issues in an apartment complex and delivered a strong reminder about vendors’ disclosure obligations. In 2019, the Purchasers (the Soles) purchased an apartment in Mount Maunganui for $1,495,000. Less than a year after settlement, they discovered major weathertightness issues affecting the entire building. The Body Corporate embarked on an extensive remediation project, and the Purchasers were hit with more than $1,300,000 in special levies for their share of the work. The Court found that the Vendors (the Huttons) had attended Body Corporate meetings in 2014 where multiple expert reports highlighted significant leaks and recommended re-roofing and re-cladding of the building. Despite this, the Vendors told their agent that there were no known weathertightness issues and this information was passed onto the Soles. The Court held that:- · The Vendors breached the warranty in clause 11.2(7) of the Agreement for Sale and Purchase of Real Estate, which requires disclosure of any facts that may give rise to liabilities under the Unit Titles Act 2010; · The failure to disclose the reports and the assurance that there were “no issues” amounted to misrepresentation. The Soles were awarded $926,806.48 plus interest in damages, including their share of remedial costs (after a 30% betterment reduction, as the remedial works increased the value of the property), alternative accommodation and general damages for stress and inconvenience. Key takeaways:- · Vendors : Always disclose all known issues including historic reports and AGM minutes, even if you believe the matter has been dealt with or is no longer significant. · Purchasers : Buying a unit title property comes with shared risk. Ensure you complete thorough due diligence including reviewing all Body Corporate records, reports and minutes to understand potential liabilities and future levies. · Risk management : Non-disclosure can lead to expensive litigation, while thorough due diligence can prevent nasty surprises. Thinking of buying a unit title property? Our property team can guide you through a thorough due diligence process so you have a clear picture of any potential liabilities before you buy. This can save you from unexpected costs and disputes down the track.  Selling a unit title property? Full and accurate disclosure is not just a legal requirement, it’s the best protection against expensive claims after settlement. If you’re unsure what must be disclosed or how the warranties in the Agreement for Sale and Purchase apply to your situation, get in touch with our property team. We can help you prepare clear, compliant disclosure statements and minimise the risk of future disputes.