Two proposed options for addressing Auckland's housing crisis will be left out of the region's 30-year Unitary Plan.

Councillors have voted against a rule requiring a certain proportion of homes in new developments to be sold at affordable prices.

Community Housing Aotearoa chief executive Scott Figenshow said the organisation had got legal advice that the rule was legally sound and it would have been the right thing to do.

"It's a very clear, legally safe decision to require that at least 10 per cent of the houses that get developed would meet these affordability tests.

He said there was not guarantee the Unitary Plan would lead to enough homes being built, or those homes being affordable, or those homes being built on time.

"What's going to happen now and that decade down the road. We're going to have more people living in their cars - that's just not an option."

The vast majority of councillors also voted to keep minimum apartment sizes in the Unitary Plan.

1. Councillors voted against an affordable housing quota
Auckland mayor Len Brown said affordable housing quotas had already been included in Special Housing Areas and could effectively be used around the region.

But hearings panel and council staff claimed it should be included in the Unitary Plan, because homes would become more affordable if they could be built with fewer restrictions.

A majority of councillors accepted the advice, including deputy mayor and traditional Len Brown ally Penny Hulse.

The #UnitaryPlan vote on whether to retain the rules on minimum apartment sizes. @NewstalkZB pic.twitter.com/IEGc9Nbwg1

— Michael Sergel (@michaelsergel) August 11, 2016

Disappointing decision by AKL Council to scrap provisions that encourage 10% affordable homes in the #UnitaryPlan https://t.co/5b6CC4Yxot

— David Cunliffe (@DavidCunliffeMP) August 11, 2016

The #UnitaryPlan on its own won't deliver "affordable housing", but it will improve things, and it won't ban affordable types of housing.

— Luke Christensen (@lukechristensen) August 11, 2016

2. Councillors voted to keep minimum sizes for apartments
Councillors have voted to retain minimum apartment sizes, following the introduction of minimum sizes in 2007.

The independent hearings panel recommended the rules be scrapped, because minimum dwelling sizes are controlled by legislation like the Building Act.

However, councillors wanted extra rules for Auckland to prevent low-quality "shoe box" apartments being built in intensified areas.

The #UnitaryPlan vote on whether to remove "retained affordable housing" rules for developments. @NewstalkZB pic.twitter.com/l6A4Snyiu6

— Michael Sergel (@michaelsergel) August 11, 2016

Dick Quax once again speaking sense about minimum apartment sizes, "need to provide micro apartments as an option" #UnitaryPlan

— Luke Christensen (@lukechristensen) August 11, 2016

3. Councillors rejected some recommendations and accepted others
Councillors rejected the independent hearing panel's recommendations relating to deletion of policies to allow development with transport infrastructure and public transport routes.

They accepted some, to move the rural urban boundary to the district plan level, and delete the boundary from rural and coastal towns.

Recommendations to scrap policies to focus growth within the existing metropolitan area, guiding the location of the rural urban boundary, and enabling commercial activities within centres and corridors were rejected.

So too were recommendations to make it easier to start subdivisions and landfills in the future urban zone.

Councillors backed recommendations to be more restrictive about mangrove removal and less restrictive about houseboats.

But they also agreed to clear up some technical errors by the panel, like applying the same standards to all forms of bio-fouling and defining sea walls as a marine or port facility.

4. Councillors voted to protect historic Queen Street buildings, but allow waterfront developments
Councillors accepted streamlining all port reclamation, other than than minor reclamation for the purpose of repairs, maintenance, remediation or rehabilitation, as discretionary activity.

They also agreed any new wharfs or wharf alterations should be a restricted discretionary activity, and voted to remove a viewshaft from Queen's Wharf to the harbour.

Councillors agreed to delete standards relating to building work and internal design, and prescriptive design standards in the resource consent process, leaving it up to the Building Code to address design issues.

They agreed to delete framework plans for Quay Park Precinct, but keep framework plans for Wynyard Precinct which allow for higher and bigger buildings like apartments on Jelicoe Street.

Councillors rejected recommendations to delete demolition controls for buildings built before 1940 on the Queen Street Valley Precinct, and scrap minimum dwelling sizes in the central city and business zones.

5. Councillors agreed to scrap many rules for business zones
Councillors agreed to delete urban design and internal dwelling design standards for business zones, because design issues are addressed in other ways.

They also agreed to increase the Newmarket Metropolitan Centre standard zone height to 72.5 metres, but continue to have viewshaft height limits for some parts of the city.

Councillors rejected recommendations for boundary height controls within mixed use zone, and between the mixed use zone and the general business zone.

They also rejected recommendations to scrap natural hazard standards within the port precinct, and apply a bound height control diagram that had technical errors.

6. Councillors accepted most changes to residential areas
Councillors voted not to amend the activity status of new buildings and additions, height and gross floor area threshold standards, but agreed to remove design standards.

They agreed to amend the single house zone, allow minor dwellings in the single house zone, and delete density controls for mixed house suburban zone and delete development standards for garages and dwellings fronting the street.

However, they voted against allowing retirement villages to be built in single house zones without a resource consent.