The two candidates leading the race to be Christchurch's Mayor believe more housing intensification is needed in the city - but not in the way the Government has pushed through in its density standards.
Recently, the Christchurch City Council pushed back on the cross-party law that allows up to three homes of three storeys each on most sections across New Zealand's major cities.
Mayoral candidate Phil Mauger, currently a city councillor, was one of those who voted against the standards.
Seventeen residents' groups approached the council pleading with them to push back on such intensification, he told AM on Tuesday.
"We do need intensification but we've got to have it done in a planned way," he said. "[Many] people had moved out into the suburbs because they want green grass like they had when they were kids; let their grandkids play on it, grow some vegetables in the backyard and that's the bit that is worrying people down here."
Christchurch did need to intensify but what was being proposed didn't make sense for the city, fellow candidate David Meates said.
Any intensification that went ahead needed to be well-organised, Meates added.
"There is a range of places that are absolutely suitable for intensification and it just needs to be done in a really planned and coordinated way, in a way that makes sense for Christchurch," he told AM host Ryan Bridge.
Moves to intensify in Christchurch may differ from Auckland and Wellington, Meates said.
He reiterated he wasn't against housing intensification.
"It's not about anti-intensification in Christchurch - it's about how it's done."
Prominent economist Brad Olsen said New Zealand was at risk of taking its foot off the accelerator when it came to solving the country's housing challenges and Christchurch's move set a worrying precedent.
Olsen, from Infometrics, told AM Early last week rejecting housing intensification was effectively pulling the "middle finger" at young Kiwis trying to buy a home.
