Here comes the RMA transition!

Welcome to the first edition of The Environmental Brief, a monthly post on ESG, environment and planning law. This post is for anyone who wants to understand what is changing in this space and why you’d care.

---

Two Acts are better than one

After 35 years or so, the Resource Management Act (RMA) is being replaced by two new Acts – focused on land use and, separately, on the natural environment (minus land use).

A country in transition

The transition to the new system is expected to take 3-4 years on the Government’s current timeline, or likely longer, based on experience from other reforms.

This also means that, in the meantime, the RMA is still with us. And we get to enjoy amendments along the way, the first of which will kick in on Friday, 30 October 2026. The aim of these first amendments is to shift the system closer to the upcoming replacement Acts, and be a quick, pragmatic fix. Councils were asked not to over-complicate the application of the amendments.

Transitional consenting: the short version

From this Friday, 30 October 2026, district councils must disregard (rather than give less weight, for example) a number of things when making decisions on land use consents (see the new s104(1A) RMA).

For residential activities (except where historic heritage is involved) this includes:

• area of glazing
• presence or absence of balconies
• outdoor living space
• internal layout
• size of a residential unit
• size of landscaped areas (except when considering permeability)

For any development:

• negative effects on trade competition
• effects on retail distribution
• lack of demand, or whether the project is financially viable
• the type of residents to be housed (could capture AirBnBs through short-term visitors, depending on how a plan treats them)
• views from private property (but not from public property, like a street)

Two more tools to support transitional consenting

At application level, if a consent application contains issues that fall within the listed items, council can notify the applicant that the activity is permitted (s 104AA RMA). It is unclear how consent authorities will ensure that the amendments are applied uniformly across a local government area (or New Zealand) – whether there will be registers for such notices or some way for councils and applicants to keep track of what is notified as permitted.

At plan level, territorial authorities can use a simplified process to remove these matters from their plans (s 76A RMA). Councils can choose to do this or not. There is no requirement to have public input, although that may provide a forum in which any differences of opinion can be identified, debated and resolved.

Why it matters

The amendments coming in at the end of the week will not be all that straightforward, fast or easy. The wording adopted in the amendments may make sense in plain language and, at the same time, be hard to apply to a real world proposal. If a plan requires mature trees to be kept on a residential site – is this about size of landscaped areas or about protecting trees? If a plan has setbacks for balconies – is this about the existence or not of balconies or simply a setback issue?

For applicants, if these RMA amendments make it easier to consent an earlier application, it may be best to re-lodge the application so the amendments apply. The RMA expressly provides that applications lodged from 30 October 2026 onwards will be assessed based on these amended provisions, while applications lodged before this date will be subject to the unamended RMA.

For consent holders, the amendments could mean that some existing conditions may be removed from consents. Taking this step involves a formal council process which, depending on the circumstances, may be worth the trouble.

Welcome to the messy middle

Nice of you to join in on the fun!

Until next time,

Ana

Sign up to my monthly newsletter, The Environmental Brief, for strategic insight on the issues shaping environmental law.