HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_BLACK_AGENDA_COVER

 

 

Extraordinary District Plan Review Subcommittee Meeting

 

 

5 November 2020

 

 

 

Order Paper for the meeting to be held in the

Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt,

on:

 

 

 

 

Wednesday 11 November 2020 commencing at 1.30pm

 

 

Membership

 

 

Deputy Mayor T Lewis

Cr K Brown

Cr B Dyer

Cr S Edwards

Cr N Shaw

 

Maiora Dentice (endorsed by Te Rūnanganui o Te Ati Awa)

Ashley Ede (endorsed by both the Wellington Tenths Trust and the Palmerston North Māori Reserves Trust)

 

 

 

For the dates and times of Council Meetings please visit www.huttcity.govt.nz

 

Have your say

You can speak under public comment to items on the agenda to the Mayor and Councillors at this meeting. Please let us know by noon the working day before the meeting. You can do this by emailing DemocraticServicesTeam@huttcity.govt.nz or calling the Democratic Services Team on 04 570 6666 | 0800 HUTT CITY

 

 


HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_SCREEN_MEDRES

DISTRICT PLAN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE

 

Membership:                   Chair of Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee

                                     4 other councillors

                                                 Up to 2 representatives appointed by Iwi

 

NOTE:

Elected members should hold current certification under the Making Good Decisions Training, Assessment and Certification Programme for RMA Decision-Makers.

The Chair should in addition hold Chair certification.

Standing Orders 30 and 31 outlining provisions for Tangata Whenua and Taura Here do not apply to this Subcommittee, and Iwi appointees will have full voting rights as members of the Subcommittee under Standing Orders.

 

Meeting Cycle:              As required

Quorum:                      4

                                        

Reports to:                        Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee

 

PURPOSE:

To make recommendations to the Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee, for recommendation to Council, on the matters to be addressed in the full review of the District Plan and development of a Proposed District Plan.

 

Provide:

Direction to Council officers on all matters relating to the drafting of content for the review of the District Plan. This includes but is not limited to:

·         scoping and investigation of the issues

·         engagement on possible content

·         development of discussion documents and other draft documents for consultation

·         development of a Draft District Plan for consultation

·         development of a Proposed District Plan for statutory consultation.

 

General:

Any other matters delegated to the Subcommittee by Council in accordance with approved policies and bylaws.

    


HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

District Plan Review Subcommittee

 

Extraordinary meeting to be held in the Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt on

 Wednesday 11 November 2020 commencing at 1.30pm.

 

ORDER PAPER

 

Public Business

 

1.       APOLOGIES 

2.       Appointment of Chair (20/1419)

3.       PUBLIC COMMENT

Generally up to 30 minutes is set aside for public comment (three minutes per speaker on items appearing on the agenda). Speakers may be asked questions on the matters they raise.  

4.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS

          Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.        

5.       Presentation

          Central Government freshwater legislation and Whaitua Te Whanganui-a-Tara: Implications for District Plan (20/1420)

Verbal presentation by Tim Sharp, Kaiwhakahaere Whaitua, Whaitua Programme Manager, Environmental Policy, Greater Wellington Te Pane Matua Taiao

6.       Urban Form and Development (20/1131)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/271 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst       5

7.       Historic Heritage (20/1126)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/272 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst     25

8.       Residential Zones (20/1124)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/273 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst     35

 

9.       Light Spill and Glare (20/1127)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/263 by the Policy Planner                                          49

10.     Public Access (20/1128)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/274 by the Policy Planner                                          56

11.     Information Item

          Aspirations and Ideas for the District Plan Review (20/1401)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/120 by the Head of District Plan Policy           69

12.     QUESTIONS

With reference to section 32 of Standing Orders, before putting a question a member shall endeavour to obtain the information. Questions shall be concise and in writing and handed to the Chair prior to the commencement of the meeting.   

 

 

 

Kate Glanville

SENIOR DEMOCRACY ADVISOR

               


Extraordinary District Plan Review Subcommittee Meeting

29 September 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/1131)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2020/6/271

 

Urban Form and Development

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to:

a)   Inform the District Plan Review Subcommittee on the issues for the urban form and development topic of the District Plan Review, and

b)   Seek direction from the Subcommittee on how the Review should proceed with regard to urban form and development.

 

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

(i)         receives the information in the report; and

(ii)        directs officers to undertake the urban form and development component of the District Plan Review through the following approach (Option 1 outlined in the Options section of the report):

(a)        Investigate and engage on how the intensification direction of the NPS-UD can be given effect to through the district plan review.

(b)        Investigate and engage on the extent to which further intensification should be enabled in existing urban areas subject to natural hazards.  

(c)        Investigate and engage on how and when greenfield development could be enabled in Upper Fitzherbert and Kelson.

(d)       Carry out spatial identification of the planned future urban form of Hutt City, and develop provisions for the urban form and development chapter.

 

Background

2.    The National Planning Standards require district plans to include an Urban form and Development chapter which sets out strategic direction for this topic. This chapter must be included under the Strategic Direction heading of the plan. This chapter is mandatory because central government expect this is where Councils will put content relating to implementing the National Policy Statement for Urban Development.

 

3.    There is no single chapter directly addressing urban form and development in the operative City of Lower Hutt District Plan. Instead the topic is addressed indirectly in a number of places including through the area wide issues section of Chapter 1, and through some of the objectives and policies in the following areas: Chapter 4 Residential, Chapter 5 Commercial, and Chapter 8 Rural.  

 

4.    The purpose of the Urban Form and Development topic in the district plan review will be to:

a)    Provide high level direction and set the high level zoning framework for the district plan review.

b)    Provide objectives in the reviewed district plan to provide strategic direction to the other chapters of the plan with regard to urban form and development.   

 

5.    Between the 1980s and about 2013 the city of Lower Hutt experienced little growth in housing stock or population. However, since 2013 the city has experienced steady population growth which, in the absence of sufficient construction, has resulted in a shortage of housing. This growth in turn has seen rapid increases in house sales prices and rents.

 

6.    Recent development has occurred in greenfield growth areas in Kelson and Wainuiomata, and through intensification on the valley floor.

      

7.    Projections of future population growth show that the city will grow by approximately 10,000 to 20,000 people over the next 30 years. To accommodate this growth the city will require an additional 6,000 to 11,000 dwellings.

 

8.    Geographical constraints and past growth mean Lower Hutt has few remaining areas of greenfield land. Strategies for accommodating future growth have focussed on intensification around key centres on the valley floor, supplemented by greenfield growth in the remaining undeveloped areas in Wainuiomata and the Western Hills.

 

9.    Modelling shows that Lower Hutt has sufficient supply of business land to meet projected demand. However, this capacity is principally in the form of infill and redevelopment capacity and the city has little vacant business land.

 

10.  The key factors shaping the future urban form of Lower Hutt are natural hazards, and infrastructure. Natural hazards are addressed in the future topic papers on Seismic Hazards, and Flood Hazards. 

 

11.  Constraints in the three waters network for Lower Hutt suggest upgrades will be needed to Lower Hutt’s three waters infrastructure to support the anticipated population growth. There is capacity for population growth in Lower Hutt’s schools and public open space. Rail plays a significant role in providing access from the Hutt Valley to the Wellington CBD.  As the city grows, and road transport becomes increasingly constrained the rail network will play a key role in enabling and serving growth.

Discussion

Statutory and policy context

12.  The following section summarises the key statutory and policy direction for the urban form and development topic and the implications of these for the district plan review. 

 

National Policy Statement –Urban Development 2020

13.  The NPS-Urban Development (NPS-UD) took effect from 20 August 2020 (the full NPS-UD objectives and policies are attached as appendix 1). The NPS-UD recognises the national significance of:

·      Having well-functioning urban environments that enable all people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing, and for their health and safety, now and into the future.

·      Providing sufficient development capacity to meet the different needs of people and communities.

 

14.  Under Policy 3 of the NPS-UD, Council will be required to enable the following intensification through the District Plan:

a)    in city centre zones, building heights and density of urban form to realise as much development capacity as possible, to maximise benefits of intensification,

b)    in metropolitan centre zones, building heights and density of urban form to reflect demand for housing and business use in those locations, and in all cases building heights of at least 6 storeys,

c)    building heights of at least 6 storeys within at least a walkable catchment of the following:

·   existing and planned rapid transit stops,

·   the edge of city centre zones,

·   the edge of metropolitan centre zones

d)    in all other locations, building heights and density of urban form commensurate with the greater of:

·   the level of accessibility by existing or planned active or public transport to a range of commercial activities and community services, or

·   relative demand for housing and business use in that location.

 

15.  These requirements to enable intensification under policy 3 are only able to be modified to the extent necessary to accommodate the following qualifying matters:

·   Matters of national importance (specified in section 6 of the Act. This includes historic heritage and natural hazards among others.)

·   Other national policy statements

·   The safe and efficient operation of nationally significant infrastructure

·   Open space provided for public use

·   Designations and heritage orders

·   Iwi participation legislation

·   Provision of sufficient business land suitable for low density uses

·   Any other matter that makes high density development inappropriate in an area, if supported by an evaluation report (requirements for the evaluation report are stated in the NPS-UD).

 

16.  Policy 8 of the NPS-UD requires council to be responsive to plan changes that would add significantly to development capacity, even if the development capacity is unanticipated by RMA planning documents; or out-of-sequence with planned land release.

 

17.  Council is also required to prepare a Future Development Strategy under the NPS-UD in order to assist the integration of statutory planning decisions with infrastructure and funding decisions.

 

18.  The requirement to enable intensification will have a significant impact on the urban form of Lower Hutt. This national policy direction will require expansion of the existing areas of intensification centred on rail stations identified by Plan Change 43 as well as potentially providing new areas of intensification around the Ava, Wingate, Pomare, and Manor Park stations. It will also require providing for six storey intensification within walking distance of the CBD.

 

19.  Applying the ‘qualifying matters’ for excluding areas from intensification set out under policy 4 will require gathering further technical information, especially to determine any historic heritage and natural hazard constraints.  

 

20.  Key additional questions regarding the NPS-UD include:

·   What distance should be used for “walkable distance” in terms of providing for intensification proximate to rapid transit, city and metropolitan centres?

 

·   Should the Melling line rail stations be considered ‘rapid transit’ for the purposes of the NPS-UD given that the line is single tracked and currently has low frequencies outside of peak times?

 

·   Should Petone be considered a “metropolitan centre” for the purposes of providing for intensification?

 

·   How should the district plan give effect to the requirement to enable building heights and density commensurate with access and demand? This will be especially relevant to areas of high demand such as those in coastal areas or hill suburbs with views, and areas with good access to jobs and services such as Petone and Central Hutt.

 

·   What are the implications of policy 8, which requires council to be responsive to plan changes that would add development capacity even if out of sequence, for planning greenfield growth?     

 

 

 

 

Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region 2013

21.  The Greater Wellington Regional Policy Statement became operative in 2013. It has four key policies that are directly relevant to the Urban form and development topic of the district plan:

Policy 29: Avoiding inappropriate subdivision and development in areas at high risk from natural hazards.

Policy 30: Maintaining and enhancing the viability and vibrancy of regionally significant centres.

Policy 31: Identifying and promoting higher density and mixed use development.

Policy 32: Identifying and protecting key industrial-based employment locations.

 

22.  Policy 30 requires district plans to include policies, rules and/or methods that enable and manage a range of land use activities that maintain and enhance the viability and vibrancy of a number of specified sub-regional and suburban centres in the Wellington Region including the Lower Hutt city centre and the Petone suburban centre.  These were identified during the development of the Wellington Regional Strategy as centres of significance to the region’s form for economic development, transport movement, civic or community investment.

 

23.  Council has partially given effect to policies 30 and 31 of the RPS through Plan Change 43, which identified areas for mixed used and medium density residential development around public transport and suburban commercial hubs. However, Plan Change 43 did not assess areas in Petone, the Eastern Bays and the fringe of the city centre because it was considered at the time that more information was required on natural hazards, infrastructure and character. Also further analysis is required to determine if the mixed use centres identified in Plan Change 43 are sufficient to accommodate future growth.

 

24.  A key issue for the urban form and development topic will be addressing the issue of avoiding development in existing urban areas at high risk from natural hazards in accordance with Policy 29 of the RPS. Natural hazards are addressed as their own topic within the district plan review, but the urban form and development topic will need to provide high level guidance on how hazards should be addressed in relation to urban form.

 

25.  Giving effect to policy 32 of the RPS will require identification of the key industrial based employment locations, and protecting these from non-industrial uses. This will be especially important as demand for alternative uses for industrial land, such as residential and retail, increases.  

 

Wellington Regional Growth Framework

26.  The Wellington Regional Growth Framework is a spatial plan that is currently being developed in collaboration between the Wellington region’s councils, central government, and mana whenua. It aims to set  a long-term vision for how the region will grow, change and respond to key urban development challenges and opportunities. The regional growth framework has the following objectives:

·   Increase housing supply, and improve housing affordability and choice

·   Enable growth that protects and enhances the quality of the natural environment and accounts for a transition to a low/no carbon future

·   Improve multi-modal access to and between housing, employment, education and services

·   Encourage sustainable, resilient and affordable settlement patterns/urban form that make efficient use of existing infrastructure and resources

·   Build climate change resilience and avoid increasing the impacts and risks from natural hazards

·   Create employment opportunities.    

 

27.  The Growth Framework identifies the ‘Central Hutt Triangle’ (which includes the Lower Hutt CBD, Woburn, Waterloo and Epuni),  Naenae, and Taita as ‘Urban Renewal Areas’ for medium to high density development. The Growth Framework also identifies Wainuiomata North as a ‘Future Urban Area’, a classification which applies to areas with the potential to provide over 1000 new dwellings.     

 

28.  The Growth Framework may be used to meet the requirements of the NPS-Urban Development to develop a Future Development Strategy.

 

HCC Urban Growth Strategy 2012

29.  In its Urban Growth Strategy (UGS), Council targets a population of at least 110,000 people and at least 6,000 new homes by 2032. The UGS also gives direction regarding both residential greenfield development and intensification.

 

30.  For greenfield development, the UGS gives direction on providing development in:

·   Upper Fitzherbert area of Wainuiomata

·   Upper Kelson area

·   Investigations on development feasibility in Shaftesbury Grove, Stokes Valley.

 

31.  For intensification, the UGS gives direction on:

·   Targeted infill intensification in Waterloo and Epuni,

·   Investigations in other areas that may be suitable for targeted infill intensification, such as along the railway corridor and on the periphery of the city centre, and

·   Low-rise apartments in:

o Eastbourne,

o Jackson Street, The Esplanade, and Marine Parade in Petone.

o Around the Waterloo shops and train stations (excluding Ava Station), and

o Suburban shopping centres.

 

32.  The UGS gives direction on providing for rural residential development on approximately 265 hectares in Normandale and Moores Valley, and providing for one hectare lots across all the remaining rural residential areas in the city.  

 

33.  The direction relating to intensification in the UGS has partially been given effect to through Plan Change 43. However, Plan Change 43 did not include Petone, Eastbourne or the CBD periphery in its targeted areas of intensification. 

 

Potential greenfield growth areas

34.  The three main areas identified for future greenfields growth in Lower Hutt are upper Fitzherbert, Wainuiomata, upper Kelson, and Shaftsbury Grove, Stokes Valley. Other potential areas include the Kilmister block, and the remaining rural areas in the Western Hills and Wainuiomata. Each of these areas is described further below (see appendix 2 for indicative maps of key potential greenfield growth areas).

 

Upper Fitzherbert, Wainuiomata

35.  The Upper Fitzherbert area contains over 100 hectares of land, most of which is currently zoned Rural Residential. To the south are some large General Residential zoned sites that are either in the process of being developed into urban sections or remain in rural residential use.  

 

36.  During the development of the 2012 Urban Growth Strategy, 60 hectares of land with potential for 1500 dwellings was originally identified for greenfield development in the area. However, following public feedback the strategy proposed to make only 27 hectares of land available for development.

 

37.  The 2018 Wainuiomata North Development Framework investigated a wider area of 136 hectares of land in Upper Fitzherbert currently zoned Rural Residential, Hill Residential and General Residential. The framework set out a concept plan for the area to develop 1,296 - 1,841 new dwellings. It was anticipated that this would form the basis of a future structure plan and plan change to rezone the area for urbanisation. However, since the development framework was completed in 2018 no significant further work has been carried out to progress the development of the Upper Fitzherbert area.

 

Upper Kelson

38.  The 2012 Urban Growth Strategy identified 40 to 50 hectares of land in the upper Kelson area for future residential development.

 

39.  Plan Change 48, which became operative in 2018, re-zoned 12.4 hectares at 64 Waipounamu Drive, Kelson from Hill Residential to the General Residential Activity Area.  A further 1.7 hectares was also re-zoned to the General Recreation Activity Area.

 

40.  Proposed District Plan Change 47, which is currently being processed, proposes re-zoning 7.1 hectares in Kelson from Rural Residential and Hill Residential to General Residential Activity Area. The proposal also involves re-zoning 5.5 hectares to the General Recreation Activity Area.

 

41.  Once plan change 47 is operative there will be approximately 10 to 20 hectares of remaining rural residential land in Upper Kelson that could potentially be used for future urban growth.

 

Shaftsbury Grove, Stokes Valley

42.  Shaftsbury Grove is a 10.6 hectare undeveloped site currently zoned Hill Residential. It was formerly owned by council and was identified in the 2012 Urban Growth Strategy as an area to investigate for feasibility of development.

 

43.  A 2015 concept plan developed in preparation for a potential plan change for the site showed potential for 168 sections. This plan change and development did not proceed and the site was sold into private ownership in 2016.

 

44.  The housing and business assessment found theoretical capacity for 47 sections on the site but that these would not be feasible to develop, most likely due to the high costs of infrastructure and site development.

 

Kilmister block

45.  The Kilmister block is approximately 633 hectares of land between Belmont and Kelson currently zoned General Rural. It is owned by Hutt City Council and forms part of the Belmont regional Park, managed by Greater Wellington Regional Council.

 

46.  The land was purchased by the then Lower Hutt City Council in the 1970s, using the Public Works Act, for housing purposes. The land was considered as a potential greenfield development site during the workshop stages of the 2012 Urban Growth Strategy, but it did not make it into the final version of the UGS. 

 

47.  Future development of the land would require the Regional Council and Government to remove the reserve status and take it out of the Belmont Regional Park. However, given the limited possibilities for greenfield growth in Lower Hutt it may be worth further analysis for suitability of future development. 

 

Other areas

48.  The rural and rural residential areas in the Western Hills, Moores Valley, and Coast Road in Waiuiomata could provide further possibilities for future urban growth. However, these areas are likely to have significant topographical and infrastructure constraints. Further analysis would be needed of the suitability of these areas for development.   

 

Efficiency and Effectiveness of the District Plan/State of environment

49.  As there is no specific chapter directly addressing urban form and development in the operative district plan, this chapter will be predominantly new content for the district plan. Therefore it is not possible to fully assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the current district plan in relation to this topic. 

 

50.  However, information on housing prices and rents suggest that the district plan has not provided sufficient development capacity. According to figures from the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment:

·   There has been a significant increase in house sales prices in Hutt City since 2015.

·   There has also been a significant increase in average rents in Hutt City since 2015.

·   Since about 2016 growth in new households has outpaced growth in building consents in Hutt City. This broadly coincides with the increase in rents and sales prices suggesting that the rises are linked to a growing housing shortage.

 

51.  The district plan has also not been effective at enabling the greenfield growth that was identified in the Urban Growth Strategy 2012. In the Upper Fitzherbert area of Wainuiomata urbanisation of much of the area identified for growth has not occurred despite interest from landowners, though this is also due to infrastructure constraints and development costs. In Kelson further urbanisation has occurred and is planned to occur through plan changes, though the costs and time of these plan changes to enable development suggest a low efficiency.     

 

52.  The 2019 Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment was carried out in collaboration between the councils of the Wellington metropolitan area. It modelled projected population growth and assessed housing and business development capacity. The key findings of this assessment for Hutt City were as follows:

a)    The population of the city is projected to grow by between 9,515 and 20,359 people by 2047 from a base population of 101,200 people (2013).

b)    To accommodate this growth, the city will require between 6,105 and 11,256 additional dwellings. This growth in the need for housing is driven by population growth, as well as decreasing average household size.

c)    Currently, Lower Hutt has feasible greenfield development capacity for 1,316 dwellings in areas identified for greenfield growth. This includes some areas that have been identified for growth but have not yet had an urban zoning applied to reflect this.

d)    Under the operative District Plan, Lower Hutt has feasible development capacity for 4,160 dwellings (through infill, redevelopment and intensification).

e)    This gives a total feasible development capacity of 5,476 dwellings.

f)     Applying a realisation test suggests that of that feasible capacity, only 4,473 dwellings will likely be realised over the next 30 years based on today’s costs and sales values.

g)    Contrasting that realisable supply with the anticipated demand over the same time leads to an anticipated shortfall of between 1,631 and 6,783 dwellings over the course of the next 30 years.

h)    Lower Hutt has a sufficient supply of land to meet all categories of projected business demand. This capacity is principally in the form of infill and redevelopment capacity. However, the city has little vacant business land. 

 

53.  Plan Change 43: Residential and Mixed Use became operative in part in April 2020. The purpose of the Plan Change was to provide for greater housing capacity and a wider range of options for housing styles and sizes at medium densities within the existing urban area. However, as the 2019 Housing and Business Assessment did not take Plan Change 43 into account in its modelling, at this time we do not have information on the precise effect it has had on development capacity for the city.

 

Issue analysis

54.  The issues below have been identified as the significant resource management considerations for urban form and development:

 

55.  Issue 1: What high level guidance is needed on urban form and development in the district plan to inform the other chapters? How can this chapter provide policy guidance on future plan changes (eg from rural to residential, from industrial to residential, or residential to commercial)?

 

56.  Issue 2: How should natural hazards be addressed as they relate to high level urban form? How to resolve the trade-off between avoiding increasing exposure to risks from population growth, and enabling a greater population to fund engineering and mitigation works?

  

57.  Issue 3: To what extent should the district plan enable urbanisation of existing rural areas in Upper Fitzherbert and Kelson? Should these areas be zoned future urban or given operative urban zonings? Or should these areas retain Rural Lifestyle zoning and use plan changes for any potential future development?

 

58.  Issue 4: Are there any other greenfield areas that could be urbanised in addition to those identified in Kelson and Upper Fitzherbert such as the Kilmister Block, rural areas in the Western Hills and Wainuiomata? Could development of the Kilmister block connect with future growth areas identified in Porirua around the new Transmission Gully interchange at Whitby?

 

59.  Issue 5: How much additional growth should be enabled in rural areas in Coast Road and Western Hills? Could lifestyle blocks (eg 1 per 2 ha) be enabled throughout the existing general rural areas as indicated in the 2012 Urban Growth Strategy (excluding parks and areas of recreation)?

 

60.  Issue 6: Where should further intensification be enabled and how should the intensification direction of the NPS-UD be applied?

 

61.  Issue 7: Does the city have sufficient industrial and business land to service the city and to provide for employment over the long term? To what extent should alternative uses be enabled in existing industrial areas?

 

62.  Issue 8: Does the city need to expand existing commercial centres, or to establish new commercial centres, to service growth in areas of intensification and greenfields respectively?

Options

63.  Option one is the recommended approach to the plan review for urban form and development. The first stage of this would involve the following:

a)    Investigate, develop and engage on a plan for how the intensification direction of the NPS-UD can be incorporated into the district plan review including mapping areas of intensification and determining where the “qualifying matters” under policy 4 of the NPS-UD would apply.

b)    Investigate and engage on the extent further intensification should be enabled in existing urban areas that are subject to natural hazard risk.  

c)    Further investigate and engage with affected landowners on the potential constraints on development in Upper Fitzherbert and Kelson, and determine how and when greenfield development could be enabled in these areas.

d)    Carry out spatial identification of the planned future urban form of Hutt City, and develop provisions for the Urban form and development chapter.

64.  Option two: An alternative approach to the district plan review for urban form and development could include everything in option one above with the following alternative variation:

a)    A more expansive greenfield option for developing the city with investigations of potential greenfield areas outside of Upper Fitzherbert and Kelson in the Western Hills including the Kilmister block, Moores Valley and Coast Road.

65.  Option three: An approach of intensification only (parts a, b, and d of option one above) that would include no further investigation of new greenfield areas in Upper Fitzherbert and Kelson with these areas retaining the status quo of rural or rural lifestyle zonings. 

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

66.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

 

67.  Intensification and a more compact urban form can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the overall need for travel, increasing use of public and active transport, reducing car use, and providing more energy efficient housing types.  By contrast a greater reliance on greenfield growth is likely to increase overall emissions.

 

68.  The effects of sea level rise also have implications for urban form and development as this will increase the risk to existing urban areas in low lying and coastal locations.

Consultation

69.  Given the scale and significance of the urban form and development topic for the District Plan Review, a high level of engagement will be required.

 

70.  Subject to the option selected for reviewing this topic, it is anticipated that partnering and engagement would involve:

a)    Mana Whenua partnership:

·   Partner with Mana Whenua to share information and discuss issues and aspirations regarding urban form and development.

 

b)    Primary stakeholder engagement. The following primary stakeholders have been identified for this topic:

·   Greater Wellington Regional Council

·   Kainga Ora

·   Ministry of Housing and Urban Development

·   Local property developers

·   Wellington Water

·   NZTA

·   Kiwirail

·   Porirua City Council

·   Upper Hutt City Council

·   Wellington City Council

 

Engagement with these stakeholders will likely involve ongoing meetings, either individually or in groups, on issues where the stakeholder has expressed an interest. Some initial discussions with Greater Wellington Regional Council and the neighbouring city council have begun.  

 

c)    A high level of engagement with the wider community is recommended for this topic. While the exact dates and forms of this engagement have not been finalised it is anticipated that this engagement will involve:

·   Community open days, including open days held in different suburbs,

·   Community surveys through the Bang the Table online consultation tool,

·   On request, meetings with specific property owners, groups of property owners, and community or interest groups, and

·    Updates on the progress of the Review through Council’s social media avenues and website, with additional media releases at key stages of the Review.

Legal Considerations

71.  Section 79(1)(c) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requires local authorities to commence a review of a provision of a district plan if the provision has not been a subject of a review or change in the previous 10 years. Section 79(4) provides scope for local authorities to commence a full review of a district plan. All sections and changes must be reviewed and then the plan be publically notified (79(6)&(7)). Schedule 1 sets out requirements for the preparation, change and review of plans.

 

72.  The National Planning Standards set out standards to which every policy or plan must comply. Chapter 7 requires Local Authorities to either amend their plan or notify a proposed plan within 5 years of the planning standards coming into effect (April 2024).

 

73.  Section 8 of the RMA requires all person exercising functions/powers under it to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

 

74.  As a tier one territorial authority council is required to give effect to the intensification provisions of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development by notifying a proposed plan change no later than August 2022. 

Financial Considerations

75.  The high level urban form of the city can have implications for infrastructure costs. Further work is required to determine the specifics of this.

 

76.  Options 1 and 2 would be undertaken within the current District Plan Review budget. However, if a greater level of technical assessment is required then additional funding may be needed.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

NPS-UD Objectives and policies

18

2

Maps of potential greenfield growth areas

23

    

 

 

 

 

 

Author: Joseph Jeffries

Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

 



 


 


 


 



 


Extraordinary District Plan Review Subcommittee Meeting

28 September 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/1126)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2020/6/272

 

Historic Heritage

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to:

a)   Inform the District Plan Review Subcommittee on the issues for the District Plan Review with regard to historic heritage, and

b)   Seek direction from the Subcommittee on how the Review should proceed with regard to historic heritage.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

(i)    receives the information in the report; and

(ii)   directs officers to undertake the historic heritage component of the District Plan Review through the following approach (Option 1 highlighted in the Options section of the report):

(a)   Carry out engagement in conjunction with the engagement on council’s heritage policy.

(b)   Follow and implement the direction of the heritage policy.

(c)   Carry out a technical assessment of the state and sufficiency of information of existing historic heritage listings as well as an assessment of any possible additional listings.

(d)   Engage on the outcome of the historic heritage assessment.

(e)   Develop district plan provisions for the protection of identified historic heritage. 

           

 

 

 

 

Background

Current District Plan Approach to Historic Heritage

2.    Historic Heritage is addressed in the following sections of the operative District Plan:

·   Chapter 14F Heritage Buildings and Structures

·   Chapter 14E Significant Natural, Cultural and Archaeological Resources

·   Chapter 4C Historic Residential Activity Area.

 

3.    Historic Heritage is also indirectly addressed through provisions in:

·   Chapter 5B Petone Commercial Activity Area

·   Chapter 5D Special Commercial Activity Area.

 

Chapter 14F Heritage Buildings and Structures

4.    The Heritage Buildings and Structures Chapter of the district plan seeks to identify and protect the heritage values of specific individual notable heritage buildings and structures, and wider heritage areas. This chapter includes:

a)    A schedule of 50 buildings and structures that have been listed by Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga,

b)    Three spatially defined heritage areas listed by heritage New Zealand in:

·   Jackson Street, Petone (this area contains 111 buildings but only 64 are specifically mentioned by Heritage New Zealand).

·   Patrick Street and Adelaide Street, Petone. 

·   The Lower Hutt civic centre.

c)    A schedule of 59 buildings and structures that have been identified as making a notable contribution to local heritage.

 

5.    The chapter then provides objectives, policies and provisions protecting these identified heritage areas, building and structures from inappropriate development. This protection applies rules on demolition, relocation, or additional work.

6.    The Heritage Buildings and Structures Chapter has had minor updates but it has not been substantively reviewed since it was made operative in 2003. In 2007 council commissioned the preparation of a Heritage Building Inventory to review and identify built heritage for potential inclusion in the District Plan. This work did not proceed to a district plan change due to a decision of the elected council in 2011.

Chapter 14E Significant Natural, Cultural and Archaeological Resources

7.    The Significant Natural, Cultural and Archaeological Resources chapter of the district plan seeks to identify and protect significant natural, cultural and archaeological resources in the city from inappropriate subdivision, use and development. This chapter provides a schedule of significant archaeological resources and makes any activity or development in these areas a restricted discretionary activity.

8.    A separate report will be brought to the Subcommittee at a future meeting for direction on the topic of sites and areas of significance to Maori - this specific aspect of historic heritage is not considered in this report.

Chapter 4C Historic Residential Activity Area

9.    The Historic Residential Activity Area applies to two areas - Patrick Street, and Riddlers Crescent, both in Petone.  This Activity Area (zone) recognises these areas of the City have a collection of buildings with distinctive form, style and character, based on their historical significance, and the Operative District Plan seeks to ensure these areas are protected from inappropriate development. It is a stand-alone zone providing a full set of objectives, policies, and rules.  This zone makes re-development, alterations, and modifications of buildings a restricted discretionary activity (needing a resource consent) and has development standards which restrict the scale of development so that it is fitting with the existing buildings.

10.  Patrick Street has a considerable number of Workers Dwelling Act (1905) houses, which comprised the first state housing scheme in New Zealand. Riddlers Crescent is characterised by Victorian villas and cottages, erected at the turn of the century by early settlers to Petone.

Chapter 5 Commercial

11.  Area 1 of the Petone Commercial Activity Area (chapter 5B) covers the historic commercial area of Jackson Street. It provides provisions relating to historic heritage including a policy on managing the effects of development on adjacent areas of historic heritage.

12.  The Special Commercial Activity Area (chapter 5D) provides site specific provisions for two separate sites, one of which is the Station Village. The chapter provides provisions relating to the protection of the historic values of the station village area.

Direction from Council

13.  Council passed the following resolution when making its decision on proposed Plan Change 43 in response to concerns raised about effects on historic heritage:

“during 2020 – 2021 as part of the District Plan review, prioritise addressing the issue of protecting historic heritage and character in Petone-Moera and elsewhere within the district as suggested by the independent commissioners for Plan Change 43.”

14.  As a result of this resolution historic heritage is a high priority in the review of the District Plan and further direction is sought on implementing this resolution.

Discussion

Statutory and Policy Context

15.  The following legislative and strategic documents provide direction for the District Plan on historic heritage.

RMA 1991

16.  A 2003 amendment to the RMA introduced the following “matter of national importance” to section 6 of the act:

(f)    the protection of historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development.

17.  As a number of the District Plan provisions relating to historic heritage have not been reviewed since they were included as part of the original plan that became operative in 2003, the district plan historic heritage provisions will need to be reviewed to ensure that they give effect to s6(f).

National Planning Standards

18.  The National Planning Standards set out a District-wide Matters standard which includes a Historical and Cultural value heading. Of relevance to this topic, the planning standards sets out the following direction for chapters under the Historical and cultural value heading:

Where the following matters are addressed, they must be located in the Historic heritage chapter:

a)    identification of historic heritage   

b)    provisions to protect and manage historic heritage

c)    heritage orders

d)    schedule(s) of identified historic heritage and heritage orders. This may cross-reference an appendix.

19.  The National Planning Standards do not specifically provide a chapter addressing archaeology, though additional chapters to address other historical and cultural values may be added. Archaeology is included within the RMA definition of historic heritage, so could be addressed in the historic heritage chapter of the reviewed district plan, or within the Sites and areas of significance to Maori as relevant.  

 

20.  The National Planning Standards also prescribe a limited set of zones that may be used in the District Plan. ‘Special purpose zones’ which depart from the standard set of zones can only be used if they are to address issues that are impractical to be managed through a combination of spatial layers. This limits the ability of council to use the Historic Residential Activity Area in the reviewed district plan. If it considered as part of the review that there are specific aspects of the Historic Residential Activity Area that require addressing outside of historic heritage, another spatial layer may be required.       

National Policy Statement on Urban Development

21.  The National Policy Statement on Urban Development came into effect on 20 August 2020. The NPS-UD 2020 recognises the national significance of:

·   having well-functioning urban environments that enable all people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing, and for their health and safety, now and into the future.

·   providing sufficient development capacity to meet the different needs of people and communities.

22.  The NPS requires council to amend district plans to enable development up to a height of at least six storeys in areas within walkable distance of the city centre, metropolitan centres, and rapid transit stations unless a qualifying matter applies to exempt an area. Historic Heritage is one of the qualifying matters that may be used to exclude an area from this level of intensification.  

23.  This urban development national policy direction is significant for the Historic Heritage topic as the requirement to enable intensification is likely to increase the risk of losing historic heritage that has not been identified and protected through the district plan.

Greater Wellington Regional Policy Statement

24.  The Greater Wellington Regional Policy Statement which became operative in 2013 includes the following objective and policies relevant to the historic heritage topic:

Objective 15: Historic heritage is identified and protected from inappropriate modification, use and development. 

Policy 21: Identifying places, sites and areas with significant historic heritage values – district and regional plans. 

Policy 22: Protecting historic heritage values – district and regional plans.

Policy 46: Managing effects on historic heritage values – consideration.

25.  As the historic heritage provisions of the District Plan have not been fully reviewed since the Regional Policy Statement was made operative the existing provisions will need to be reviewed to give effect to these policies. Policy 21 of the RPS in particular, will be used to provide the criteria to identify places, sites and areas with significant historic heritage values to be included in the reviewed district plan.  

Hutt City Council Heritage Policy

26.  Council’s existing heritage policy dates back to 2008.  It sets out the council’s high level vision for heritage and provides non-statutory methods for protecting historic heritage.

27.  In 2018 officers were directed to review the heritage policy, and in 2019 council accepted recommendations that a draft heritage policy be developed.  This heritage policy is currently being developed and it is intended to provide the vision, outcomes and principles to underpin the review of the District Plan’s historic heritage chapter.

28.  It is intended that engagement on the reviewed/new draft heritage policy will begin in November 2020.

Effectiveness and efficiency of the operative District Plan 

29.  Most of the historic heritage buildings and structures identified in the operative district plan have been retained. There has also been some loss of identified historic heritage. However, existing monitoring information on this is incomplete. The technical historic heritage assessment currently being carried out will provide a clearer picture of the current state of all historic heritage buildings and structures identified in the district plan.

30.  Some of the scheduled historic heritage items in the operative district plan also have incomplete information defining their historic heritage values.

31.  There are indications that there are a number of sites with notable historic heritage values that have not been identified and currently have no protections in the district plan. This situation has resulted in the loss of buildings perceived by the community to be a loss of heritage, for example, the Oddfellows Hall in Petone.

32.  Analysis of resource consent applications show there has not been an unusually high number of applications involving heritage issues. This suggests that what the District Plan has achieved in protecting historic heritage has been relatively efficient. However, resource consent applications do not give us the full picture. Also relevant, but largely unknown to us, is the extent to which the district plan provisions are deterring potential developments or applications altogether.

33.  With historic heritage provisions split across at least three different chapters, the approach to this topic in the operative district plan is somewhat convoluted.  The various historic heritage provisions are inconsistent with each other in some cases and in other cases overlap, adding to complexity in interpreting the plan.  

Historic Character

34.  The resolution passed by council when making its decision on plan change 43 (as outlined in paragraph 13 above) directs staff to prioritise the issue of protection of historic heritage and character in Petone-Moera and elsewhere within the district.

35.  There is no national or regional definition or guidance on historic character (as distinct from historic heritage), and the operative district plan only has limited provisions addressing historic character in the Historic Residential Activity Area. However, there may be other areas with historic character values that do not meet the criteria for being listed as historic heritage in the district plan but that council may wish to further protect through the district plan. 

 

36.  One of the nine guiding principles set out in the Petone 2040 Spatial Plan is “enhance the character of traditional housing areas”. The Spatial Plan identifies several “character areas” in Petone and Moera and recommends that further District Plan protections are applied to these areas as part of a future plan change.  

37.  A more detailed site by site technical assessment of potential historic character areas would be required to determine the appropriateness of identifying and protecting historic character in the district plan. This assessment on historic character could be undertaken in combination with a potential residential character assessment (refer Residential Zones report on the agenda for this Subcommittee meeting).

38.  Additionally, restricting density to protect character in areas where the NPS-UD directs intensification will require a more robust evidence base including a further evaluation report that:

a)    identifies the special characteristic that makes the level of development directed by the NPS-UD inappropriate in the area.

b)    justifies why that development is inappropriate in light of the national importance of urban development and the objectives of the NPS-UD. 

c)    evaluates the specific characteristics on a site specific basis to determine the spatial extent where intensification needs to be compatible with the specific matter.

d)    evaluates a range of options to achieve the greatest densities directed by the NPS-UD while managing the specific characteristics.     

Issues

39.  There are indications that there are a number of historic heritage buildings and structures in the district that have not been identified in the district plan to date and therefore are not protected from inappropriate modification, use and development.

40.  Increasing development pressure and requirements to intensify under the NPS-UD is placing any historic heritage buildings or structures that have not been identified as such in the District Plan Hutt City under increased threat of inappropriate modification or loss.

41.  The operative district plan has complicated and overlapping provisions that need to be rationalized to make them easier to read and to give effect to the national planning standards.

42.  Protecting historic heritage provides a public good, however the provision of this public good may require placing constraints on property rights.  

43.  There is a need to allow for changes of use of historic heritage buildings to enable ‘adaptive reuse,’ however any changes of use need to be consistent with the historic heritage values.  

 

44.  Historic Heritage buildings may be earthquake prone and the need to strengthen buildings to a certain standard can conflict with the preservation of historic heritage values.  

45.  Council may wish to protect historic character through the district plan as distinct from historic heritage. If so, then a technical assessment of these values will need to be commissioned and carried out.

Options

46.  Option 1 –This option for the district plan review for historic heritage will follow the following steps:

a)    Carry out public engagement in conjunction with the engagement on council’s heritage policy in late 2020.

b)    Follow and implement the vision and direction set out in the reviewed heritage policy.  

c)    Carry out a technical assessment of the state and sufficiency of information of existing historic heritage listings as well as an assessment of any possible additional listings.

d)    Engage on the outcome of the historic heritage technical assessment.

e)    Develop district plan provisions for the protection of identified historic heritage. 

47.  Option 2: This option would include all aspects of option one above plus an additional assessment of historic character in Petone and Moera, and consideration of potential district plan provisions for protecting any identified historic character areas.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

48.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

Consultation

49. Engagement and consultation for the historic heritage topic will involve extensive consultation with Mana Whenua, Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga, local heritage interest groups, and directly affected property owners. A high level of engagement with the broader community is also recommended for this topic including:

·   Community open days, including open days held in different suburbs,

·   Community surveys through the Bang the Table online consultation tool,

·   On request, meetings with specific property owners, groups of property owners, and community or interest groups, and

·   Updates on the progress of the Review through Council’s social media avenues and website, with additional media releases at key stages of the Review.   

 

50.  This community engagement will be carried out in conjunction with the consultation on council’s Heritage Policy in order to ensure consistent messaging and to reduce ‘consultation fatigue’ with the public.   

 

51.  We will work in partnership with Mana Whenua throughout the process. This partnership will involve incorporating Tangata Whenua values and their aspirations for historic heritage.

52.  Mana Whenua will be involved throughout the process. They will be invited to provide recommendations on Maori historic heritage and to review any potential historic heritage listings from the perspective of Tangata Whenua values.

53.  The following local historic heritage interest groups have been identified:

·   Petone Historical Society

·   Lower Hutt Historical Society

·   Wainuiomata Historical Society/Museum

·   Eastbourne Historical Society

·   Petone 2040

·   Historic Places Wellington

·   Stokes Valley Historic Society

 

54.  These groups will be contacted early in the review process. This engagement would include the opportunity for them to nominate buildings and structures to be included in the historic heritage schedule of the district plan. Engagement with them will also likely involve ongoing meetings and discussion on issues where they have expressed a specific interest. 

Legal Considerations

55.  Section 79(1)(c) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requires local authorities to commence a review of a provision of a district plan if the provision has not been a subject of a review or change in the previous 10 years. Section 79(4) provides scope for local authorities to commence a full review of a district plan. All sections and changes must be reviewed and then the plan be publically notified (79(6) & (7)). Schedule 1 sets out requirements for the preparation, change and review of plans.

56.  Section 6 of the RMA requires council to provide for the protection of historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development as a matter of national importance.

57.  Section 8 of the RMA requires all person exercising functions/powers under it to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

58.  The National Planning Standards set out standards to which every policy or plan must comply. Chapter 7 requires Local Authorities to either amend their plan or notify a proposed plan within 5 years of the planning standards coming into effect (April 2024).

Financial Considerations

59.  Options 1 above would be undertaken within the current District Plan Review budget. However, depending on the consultation approach and extent of additional historic heritage nominations for assessment additional budget may be required. 

60.  For option 2, if an additional assessment of historic character is carried out in addition to the historic heritage assessment there will be significant additional costs, likely of $100,000 or more. 

Appendices

There are no appendices for this report.   

 

 

 

 

 

Author: Joseph Jeffries

Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

 


Extraordinary District Plan Review Subcommittee Meeting

28 September 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/1124)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2020/6/273

 

Residential Zones

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to:

a.    Inform the District Plan Review Subcommittee of the District Plan Review with regard to residential zones, and

b.    Seek direction from the Subcommittee on how the District Plan Review should proceed with regard to residential zones.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

(i)    notes and receives the information contained in the report; and

(ii)   directs officers to undertake the District Plan Review through the following approach (Option 2 outlined in the Options section of this report):

(a)   A full review of the provisions of the District Plan for residential zones, but with a particular focus on:

·   Aligning the District Plan with the National Planning Standards, particularly the zones provided for by the Standards.

·   Addressing the areas not addressed through Plan Change 43: Residential and Suburban Mixed Use.

·   Giving effect to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development and Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region.

·   Identifying areas with a residential character that may warrant a specific response in the District Plan to manage effects of land use and development on the character of those areas.

 

Background

2.    Council’s District Plan Review includes a review of the residential zones of the Plan and associated objectives, policies and rules.

3.    This report:

·   Provides information on matters the Subcommittee will need to consider with regard to residential zones.

·   Presents two high-level options for the Review with regard to residential zones, and

·   Highlights a recommended option, with reasons for that recommendation.

Discussion

Introduction

4.    Residential zones provide for residential activities, along with a mix of other non-residential activities that are compatible with the residential nature of the zones (such as childcare facilities and home businesses).

5.    The current District Plan includes six residential zones:

·   General Residential Activity Area

·   Medium Density Residential Activity Area

·   Special Residential Activity Area

·   Historic Residential Activity Area

·   Hill Residential Activity Area

·   Landscape Protection Residential Activity Area

6.    The Plan includes 29 objectives for residential zones (Appendix 1 of this report). These objectives address:

·   Provision for residential activities as the dominant activity for a zone,

·   Provision for non-residential activities within a zone,

·   Increasing housing capacity,

·   Amenity, character and particular characteristics of a zone,

·   The level of density and built development in a zone,

·   Infrastructure capacity and servicing of development, and

·   Slope stability and natural hazard risk.

7.    The residential zones in the District Plan were partly reviewed through Plan Change 43: Residential and Suburban Mixed Use, which became mostly operative in April 2020. Plan Change 43 added the Medium Density Residential Activity Area to the Plan and reviewed the objectives, policies and rules for the General Residential Activity Area.

8.    However, Plan Change 43 did not review the District Plan approach for the Special Residential, Hill Residential, Landscape Protection Residential or Historic Residential Activity Areas. These zones have not been reviewed since the District Plan became operative in 2003.

State of the Environment

9.    Approximately 33,000 properties in Lower Hutt are in residential zones. While this is approximately 90% of all properties in the district, it is only 10% of the total area of the district (most of the district is in either an open space or rural zone, largely because of the size of the regional parks and Remutaka Forest Park).

10.  The proportion of residential zoned properties in each zone are:

·   General Residential Activity Area: 86%

·   Hill Residential Activity Area: 7%

·   Medium Density Residential Activity Area: 5%

·   Special Residential Activity Area: 2 %

·   Landscape Protection Residential Activity Area:<1%

·   Historic Residential Activity Area <1%

 

Residential development capacity

11.  The councils of the Wellington metropolitan area (Wellington, Porirua, Hutt and Upper Hutt City Councils and Kāpiti Coast District Council) have assessed the current residential and business development capacity for the Wellington metropolitan area, using projected population growth to determine whether development capacity is sufficient. This assessment resulted in the Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment 2019.

12.  For residential development capacity in Lower Hutt, the key findings of this assessment were:

·   Hutt City has a theoretical District Plan enabled residential capacity of 41,240 dwellings.

·   Once tested for feasibility, the feasible residential capacity falls to 5,476 dwellings.

·   Applying a realisation test suggests that of that feasible capacity, only 4,473 dwellings will likely be realised over the next 30 years based on today’s costs and sales values.

·   Contrasting that realisable supply with the anticipated demand over the same time leads to an anticipated shortfall of between 1,631 and 6,783 dwellings over the course of the next 30 years.

·   The city has experienced significant price increases in both house and rental costs.

13.  However, this capacity assessment pre-dates Plan Change 43.

 

Housing affordability

14.  In 2019, Council commissioned the Housing Demand and Need in Hutt City report from Community Housing Solutions.

15.  This assessment found that from 2001 to 2018, house prices increased over three times faster than household incomes and rents increased at a slightly faster rate.

16.  The assessment also found:

When compared to 2001, it takes between four and eight percentage points more of median household income [in 2018] to affordably pay the lower quartile and median market rent in Hutt City. The cost of affordably servicing a loan to buy a dwelling at the lower quartile house sale price has increased 47 percentage points [from 2001 to 2018]. This would have been significantly higher had interest rates not fallen by two percentage points.

 

Statutory and Policy context

17.  This section summarises the key components of the statutory and policy context for the District Plan Review with regard to residential zones.

Resource Management Act 1991 (the RMA)

18.  The RMA is the piece of legislation that requires Council to prepare a district plan.

19.  The purpose of the RMA is to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources (s5).

20.  The RMA states that the purpose of a district plan is to assist territorial authorities to carry out their functions in order to achieve the purpose of this Act (s72).

21.  The functions of territorial authorities under the RMA are set out in s31 of the Act. While all these functions are relevant for the District Plan Review, a function that is of particular relevance for residential zones is:

the establishment, implementation, and review of objectives, policies, and methods to ensure that there is sufficient development capacity in respect of housing and business land to meet the expected demands of the district (s31(1)(aa)).

 

National Planning Standards

22.  The National Planning Standards (in effect since 2019) include standards that all regional policy statements, regional plans and district plans must meet, including the structure of the statements and plans. The current District Plan does not meet these standards.

23.  Of particular relevance for the residential component of the District Plan Review, the National Planning Standards state which zones can be included in a district plan. The National Planning Standards provide for the following residential zones:

Large lot residential zone

Areas used predominantly for residential activities and buildings such as detached houses on lots larger than those of the Low density residential and General residential zones, and where there are particular landscape characteristics, physical limitations or other constraints to more intensive development.

Low density residential zone 

Areas used predominantly for residential activities and buildings consistent with a suburban scale and subdivision pattern, such as one to two storey houses with yards and landscaping, and other compatible activities.

General residential zone: 

Areas used predominantly for residential activities with a mix of building types, and other compatible activities.

Medium density residential zone 

Areas used predominantly for residential activities with moderate concentration and bulk of buildings, such as detached, semi-detached and terraced housing, low-rise apartments, and other compatible activities.

High density residential zone 

Areas used predominantly for residential activities with high concentration and bulk of buildings, such as apartments, and other compatible activities.

 

24.  As part of the District Plan Review, Council will need to decide which of these zones are included in the District Plan. It may be that Council chooses to include all of these zones in the District Plan or a smaller subset of these zones.

 

National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (the NPS-UD)

25.  The NPS-UD recognises the national significance of:

·   Having well-functioning urban environments that enable all people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing, and for their health and safety, now and into the future.

·   Providing sufficient development capacity to meet the different needs of people and communities.

26.  District plans are required to give effect to all national policy statements. However, as the NPS-UD only came into effect earlier this year, Council’s current District Plan has not been updated to give effect to it.

27.  Policy 3 of the NPS-UD is of particular relevance for residential zones. Under this policy, the District Plan is required to enable building heights of least six storeys within at least a walkable catchment of:

·   Existing and planned rapid transit stops (such as train stations),

·   The edge of city centre zones (such as the Lower Hutt city centre), and

·   The edge of metropolitan centre zones (which may include the Petone commercial centre.

28.  For all other locations, the District Plan is required to enable building heights and density of urban form commensurate with the greater of:

·   The level of accessibility by existing or planned active or public transport to a range of commercial activities and community services, or

·   Relative demand for housing and business use in that location.

29.  These requirements are only able to be modified to the extent necessary to accommodate the following qualifying matters:

·   Matters of national importance (specified in section 6 of the Act),

·   Other national policy statements,

·   The safe and efficient operation of nationally significant infrastructure,

·   Open space provided for public use,

·   Designations and heritage orders,

·   Iwi participation legislation,

·   Provision of sufficient business land suitable for low density uses,

·   Any other matter that makes high density development inappropriate in an area, if supported by an evaluation report (requirements for the evaluation report are stated in the NPS-UD).

 

Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region 2013 (the RPS)

30.  The RPS provides an overview of the resource management issues of the Wellington region and policies and methods to achieve integrated management of the natural and physical resources of the region. The current RPS has been operative since 2013.

31.  District plans are required to give effect to regional policy statements for their region. However, Council’s current District Plan does not give effect to the RPS. This is partly because some chapters of the District Plan have not been reviewed since 2013, including the chapters on the Special Residential, Hill Residential, Landscape Protection Residential and Historic Residential Activity Areas.

32.  The RPS includes several policies that give Council direction on residential zones. The key policies of the RPS for residential zones are:

·   Policy 30: Maintaining and enhancing the viability and vibrancy of regionally significant centres

·   Policy 31 Identifying and promoting higher density and mixed use development

·   Policy 54: Achieving the region’s urban design principles

·   Policy 57: Integrating land use and transportation

·   Policy 58: Co-ordinating land use with development and operation of infrastructure

·   Policy 67: Maintaining and enhancing a compact, well designed and sustainable regional form.

 

Other relevant legislative and policy documents

33.  In addition to these key statutory and policy documents, Council will also need to consider the following:

·   New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010

·   Wellington Regional Growth Framework (currently proposed)

·   Long Term Plan 2021 (currently in development)

·   Urban Growth Strategy

·   Petone 2040 Spatial Plan

·   Central City Transformation Plan

 

Key Resource Management Issues

34.  The following key resource management issues have been identified for residential zones:

a.       The District Plan should provide for well-functioning urban environments, with sufficient residential development capacity and affordable housing.

b.       A balance needs to be struck between enabling development whilst managing effects on the surrounding environment.

c.       Residential development needs to be able to be supported by infrastructure and services.

d.      Residential development can be vulnerable to natural hazard risk.

e.       Some areas in the district have a residential character that is specific to that area. In some cases, the current District Plan includes objectives, policies and rules to address the residential character. However, the identification of residential character in the current District Plan is not comprehensive. In addition, there can be a tension between protecting residential character and providing for sufficient residential development.

 

Options

35.  Two high-level options have been identified for the District Plan Review with regard to residential zones:

 

Option 1

A full review of the provisions of the District Plan for residential zones, but with a particular focus on:

·   Aligning the District Plan with the National Planning Standards, particularly the zones provided for by the Standards.

·   Addressing the areas not addressed through Plan Change 43: Residential and Suburban Mixed Use.

·   Giving effect to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development and Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region.

36.  This option would focus on meeting Council’s statutory requirements under the National Planning Standards, NPS-UD and RPS.

37.  Tasks under this option would include:

·   Identification of areas where residential intensification should be enabled, in accordance with the requirements of the NPS-UD.

·   For each residential zone, an evaluation of the appropriate mix of activities and built development that should be provided for.

·   Engagement with communities, including residents, community groups and the development community, on how the District Plan should strike a balance between providing for residential development while managing effects of development on the surrounding environment.

·   An assessment of the development capacity that would be provided through a range of district plan approaches.

38.  As stated earlier in this report, the District Plan provisions for some parts of the district have been relatively recently reviewed through Plan Change 43. While the focus of the Review under this option would be on the area that were not addressed through Plan Change 43, Council would still need to consider the district as a whole, in order to give effect to the NPS-UD.

 

Option 2

The full review included in Option 1, but with a focus on:

·   Aligning the District Plan with the National Planning Standards, particularly the zones provided for by the Standards.

·   Addressing the areas not addressed through Plan Change 43: Residential and Suburban Mixed Use.

·   Giving effect to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development and Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region. AND

·   Identifying areas with a residential character that may warrant a specific response in the District Plan to manage effects of land use and development on the character of those areas.

39.  Option 2 is the same as Option 1, but with an added focus to address residential character.

40.  While there is no formal definition in the Resource Management Act or other statutory documents of residential character, it can be defined as:

Common, consistent natural and physical features and characteristics that collectively combine to establish the local distinctiveness and identity of a residential area, and that contribute towards the general sense of character and amenity experienced in the area.

41.  Elements that could contribute to the residential character of an area include the style and scale of built development in the area, the pattern of streets and allotments, and how development is integrated with natural features such as vegetation, topography and waterbodies.

42.  As mentioned in the Key Resource Management Issues section of this report, the current District Plan identifies some areas for their particular residential character, and includes objectives, policies and rules that specifically apply to the identified areas. Specifically, the District Plan includes objectives, policies and rules to address the specific character of the following residential zones:

·      Special Residential Activity Area, regarding low density, large lot sizes, mature vegetation and a high standard of development.

·      Historic Residential Activity Area, regarding historic characteristics of development,

·      Hill Residential Activity Area, regarding low density, large lot sizes, vegetation and native bush,

·      Landscape Protection Residential Activity Areas, regarding low levels of development, extensive open space, and vegetation cover, and

·      The parts of the General Residential Activity Area in Petone and Moera, regarding historic character.

43.  By having a particular focus in the District Plan Review on residential character, including a residential character assessment, Council would be able to better evaluate which areas should be identified in the District Plan for their character, and the most appropriate objectives, policies and rules to manage the character.

44.  However, there would be an added cost associated with the residential character assessment. While the exact cost would depend on the scope and level of detail of the assessment, it is estimated that district-wide assessment could cost as much as $100,000. While a district-wide character assessment would have a higher cost, it would provide Council with a more comprehensive understanding of the character of the district’s residential areas. Alternatively, Council could direct officers to proceed with a more targeted character assessment, with a focus on specific parts of the district.

45.  The residential character assessment may also be able to be combined with a heritage character assessment (covered in the briefing paper to the Subcommittee on Historic Heritage).

46.  While residential character may be identified through such an assessment, it is likely that there will be a tension between:

·   Protecting the residential character in identified areas, and

·   Meeting the requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development for providing sufficient residential development capacity, particularly through intensification.

47.  This tension is not to say that the areas should not be identified, but that while particular residential character may be identified in some areas, the District Plan may ultimately need to provide for development in the identified areas that has some impact on residential character.

 

Recommended Option – Option 2

48.  Option 2 is the recommended option. While both Options 1 and 2 ensure Council will meet its statutory requirements, the additional focus and assessment of residential character enables Council to be more thorough in its evaluation of the most appropriate district plan measures options for the District Plan Review.

49.  In addition, as some areas identified in the current District Plan for their residential character (the Special Residential, Hill Residential and Landscape Protection Residential Activity Areas) have not been fully reviewed since the District Plan first became operative in 2003, there has not been a review of the provisions that address the residential character in these areas.

50.  However, this option would involve an added cost for a residential character assessment.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

51.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

52.  The following key climate change considerations have been identified for the residential zone component of the District Plan Review:

·   Residential areas of the district will be impacted by sea level rise resulting from climate change, particularly coastal suburbs and suburbs adjacent to the lower reaches of the Hutt River. Council is currently working on a climate change project, which will inform Council’s approach to climate change, including sea level rise.

·   A more compact urban form enables greater use of public and active transport, which can reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The location of residential zones and forms of development in residential zones could contribute to a more compact urban form.

Engagement

53.  Given the scale and significance of the topic for the District Plan Review, a high level of engagement on residential zones will be required.

54.  It is anticipated that engagement would involve:

·        Iwi partnership

Partnering with mana whenua, initially through meetings to provide information on the topic and to discuss any particular issues for mana whenua with regard to residential development.

Further details would be determined during the initial discussions.

·        Stakeholder engagement

The following key stakeholders have been identified for the residential zone component of the District Plan Review:

·   Greater Wellington Regional Council

·   Kāinga Ora

·   Community groups

·   The development community

·   Infrastructure providers

Engagement with stakeholders will likely involve ongoing meetings, either individually or in groups, on issues where the stakeholder has expressed an interest.

Community engagement

A high level of engagement with the community is recommended. While the exact dates and forms of this engagement have not been finalised (in part because keeping this fluid enables Council to respond to how communities wish to be engaged) it is anticipated that this engagement will involve:

·   Community open days, including open days held in residential suburbs,

·   Community surveys through the Bang the Table online consultation tool,

·   On request, meetings with specific residential property owners, groups of property owners, or community interest groups, and

·   Updates on the progress of the Review through Council’s social media avenues and website, with additional media releases at key stages of the Review.

Legal Considerations

55.  The legal consideration for this decision is the necessity for Council to meet its legal obligations under the RMA. In particular, those sections outlined in section 4 of this report.

Financial Considerations

56.  The key costs of implementing the recommended option for the District Plan Review regarding residential zones will be the costs associated with:

·   Preparation of reports, through a combination of council staff and external experts.

·   Officer’s time for engagement with iwi, stakeholders and the community, including the attendance of meetings and community open days and the preparation of engagement material.

57.  To date, budget is available for the following assessments:

·   Urban design,

·   Development capacity and feasibility,

·   Infrastructure capacity, and

·   Natural hazard risk.

58.  However, additional funding would be required to cover the cost of the residential character assessment that would be required under Option 2 of this report. While the cost of the residential character assessment would depend on the scope and level of detail of the assessment, it is estimated that a district-wide assessment could cost as much as $100,000. While a district-wide character assessment would have a higher cost, it would provide Council with a more comprehensive understanding of the character of the district’s residential areas. Alternatively, Council could direct officers to proceed with a more targeted character assessment, with a focus on specific parts of the district, or combine the residential character assessment with a heritage character assessment (covered in the briefing paper to the Subcommittee on Historic Heritage).

59.  In addition, as part of the District Plan Review Council will also need to consider in which situations, if any, it is appropriate to require financial contributions from developers in order to address impacts of development on infrastructure and to ensure that Council can provide sufficient community facilities and services. The Subcommittee will be briefed on issues and options for financial contributions through a future report.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

City of Lower Hutt District Plan - Residential zone objectives

47

    

 

 

 

 

 

Author: Nathan Geard

Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

 

 

 

Author: Joseph Jeffries

Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

 


City of Lower Hutt District Plan

Objectives for Residential Zones

Chapter 4A:  General Residential Activity Area

Objective 4A 2.1

Residential Activities are the dominant activities in the General Residential Activity Area.

Any non-residential activities that locate in the General Residential Activity Area are compatible with the low to medium density residential development and high levels of amenity anticipated for the zone.

Objective 4A 2.2

Housing capacity and variety are increased.

Objective 4A 2.3

Built development is consistent with the planned low to medium density built environment and is compatible with the amenity levels associated with low to medium density residential development.

Objective 4A 2.4

Built development provides high quality on-site amenity for residents as well as high quality residential amenity for adjoining properties and the street.

Objective 4A 2.5

Built development is adequately serviced by network infrastructure or addresses any network infrastructure constraints on the site.

Objective 4A 2.6

Built development is located and designed to manage significant risk from natural hazards.

 

 

Chapter 4B:  Special Residential Activity Area

Objective 4A 1.1.1

To maintain and enhance residential areas of the City which possess special amenity values.

Objective 4A 1.1.2

To avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects of home occupations on residential character and amenity values of the residential environment in which they are located.

Objective 4A 1.1.3

To ensure non-residential activities do not alter the residential character or affect adversely the amenity values of the residential area.

Objective 4A 1.2.1

To maintain and enhance the distinctive residential characteristics, and special amenity values of sites and surrounding residential environment.

 

 

Chapter 4C:  Historic Residential Activity Area

Objective 4C 1.1.1

To ensure that residential areas of the City with a collection of buildings with a distinct character are protected from inappropriate development.

Objective 4C 1.1.2

To avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects of home occupations on residential character and amenity values of the residential environment in which they are located.

Objective 4C 1.2.1

To ensure that building height, scale, intensity and location does not adversely affect the character or amenity values of adjoining sites, or detract from the existing patterns of development.

 

 

Chapter 4D:  Hill Residential Activity Area

Objective 4D 1.1.1

To maintain and enhance the distinct characteristics and amenity values associated with the hillside residential areas of the City.

Objective 4D 1.1.2

To avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects of home occupations on residential character and amenity values of the residential environment in which they are located.

Objective 4D 1.1.3

To ensure non-residential activities and buildings do not generate adverse effect on the surrounding environment, alter the residential character or affect adversely the amenity values of the area in which they are located.

 

For Policies, Explanations and Reasons with respect to Non-Residential Activities within the Hill Residential Activity Area refer to Policies General Residential Activity Area 4A1.1.4.

Objective 4D 1.2.1

To ensure future development does not affect adversely the stability of the site.

Objective 4D 1.2.2

To avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects caused by building height, intensity and location on the amenity values of adjacent residential sites and the residential character of the surrounding residential area.

 

 

Chapter 4E:  Landscape Protection Residential Activity Area

Objective 4E 1.1.1

To ensure the character and amenity values of undeveloped steep hillside areas are maintained and enhanced.

Objective 4E 1.1.2

To avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects of home occupations on residential character and amenity values of the residential environment in which they are located.

Objective 4E 1.2.1

To ensure future development does not affect adversely the stability of the site.

Objective 4E 1.2.2

To avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects caused by building height, intensity and location on the amenity values of adjacent residential sites and the residential character of the surrounding residential area.

 

 

Chapter 4F:  Medium Density Residential Activity Area

Objective 4F 2.1

Residential Activities are the dominant activities in the Medium Density Residential Activity Area.

 

Non-residential activities are compatible with the amenity levels associated with medium density residential development anticipated by the zone.

Objective 4F 2.2

Land near the Suburban Mixed Use Activity Area and Central Commercial Activity Area and close to the public transport network that has been identified as suitable for medium density development is used efficiently.

Objective 4F 2.3

Housing capacity and variety are increased.

Objective 4F 2.4

Built development is consistent with the planned medium density built character and compatible with the amenity levels associated with medium density residential development.

Objective 4F 2.5

Built development is of high quality and provides on-site amenity for residents as well as residential amenity for adjoining properties and the street.

Objective 4F 2.6

Built development is adequately serviced by network infrastructure or addresses any infrastructure constraints.

Objective 4F 2.7

Built development is located and designed to manage significant risk from natural hazards.

 


Extraordinary District Plan Review Subcommittee Meeting

28 September 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/1127)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2020/6/263

 

Light Spill and Glare

 

Purpose of Report

1.    This report is to review the provisions relevant to light spill and glare in the operative District Plan, and

·   To inform the District Plan Review Subcommittee on the current status of the review of the issue of light spill and glare in the District Plan, including the effectiveness, efficiency, and compliance with legal requirements and policy direction of the current provisions, and

·   Offer options for direction on the scope of the district plan review as it relates to light spill and glare, including the scale and type of engagement and specialist input required.

Recommendations

That the subcommittee:

(i)    notes the contents of this report;

(ii)   agrees to undertaking a review of the provisions for light spill and glare with a scope in line with the recommended Option 2; and

(iii)  agrees to the engagement approach outlined for Option 2, or

(iv) endorses an alternative option.

For the reasons this approach:

·    Is an efficient use of council resources appropriate to the scale of the issue;

·    Will make efficient use of the resources of those parties council will engage with during the review; and,

·    Meets our legal requirements and is consistent with national, regional, and other council plans and policies

 

Background

2.    Council’s review of the District Plan includes a review of the current provisions relating to light spill and glare, and potentially, consider other issues related to light spill and glare that may be relevant.

3.    Council has a choice in the nature and scale of the issues to be addressed in this review. It is obliged to review the continued appropriateness of existing provisions. It may also choose to address additional issues that are not covered in the existing plan but are still within the scope of the Resource Management Act.

4.    Having reviewed the issues, and the options for addressing those issues, Council will then be able to make decisions about which issues to address in the new district plan.

Issues with light spill and glare

5.    Artificial light has numerous benefits. It allows many activities to occur later in the evening, can provide a greater sense of personal security, and appropriate street lighting has safety benefits for transport.

6.    However, light can have adverse effects, particularly outdoor artificial light at night. These include impacts on people’s sleep, human health, wildlife, transport safety, residential amenity, residential and rural character, heritage values, and significant landscapes. Light in aggregate contributes to sky glow which degrades views of the night sky. Lighting can also use energy inefficiently, although this is common to all electricity uses and is covered in the broader sense in the Energy topic of the district plan review.

7.    Since the operative district plan was prepared, there are new and updated evidence-supported technical standards relating to the control of the obtrusive effects of light for certain issues, especially residential amenity (including sleep), traffic safety, and the night-sky effects of sky glow. There are also technical standards for certain types of lighting such as sports fields and street lighting that aim to provide sufficient light for their purpose while avoiding excessive light spill.

Operative District Plan

8.    The operative district plan contains no objectives or policies that are specific to light spill and glare, although there are some broader objectives and policies that are relevant. Those zones that have objectives and policies requiring non-residential activities to avoid adverse effects on residential activities sometimes include light explicitly as such an adverse effect.

9.    Light and glare provisions are spread across the zone chapters and the signs chapter. These provisions chiefly address adverse effects of artificial light shining into sleeping places.

10.  Light provisions vary slightly between different zones. In most zones lighting is managed through the use of conditions which classify activities as permitted as long as:

·    Lighting does not cause added illumination  of more than 8 lux on certain residential windows,

·    Lighting avoids light spill or unreasonable light spill beyond the site boundary, and

·    The activity avoids glare from reflected light.

11.  The Central Commercial and Petone Commercial zones also require lighting in pedestrian routes and carparks, to assist public perceptions of commercial areas as having a good level of personal safety and security.

12.  Resource consent is required when these conditions are not met.

13.  A few specialised zones do not use permitted activity conditions, but they either only permit activities that are not normally lit, such as urupā, or require resource consent for almost all new developments and lighting would likely be an issue addressed in those resource consents.

14.  There are numerous small but meaningful differences in wording and scope for the provisions between chapters.

Discussion

State of the environment monitoring

15.  Little specific monitoring of light spill and glare has been undertaken in the time since the district plan became operative. Complaints for light spill are low relative to other issues such as noise.

16.  Urban areas of Lower Hutt have significant levels of night-time illumination likely to be typical of cities of this size globally. The main sources of light are street lighting, and institutional and industrial sites. However, in particular places, the dominant light sources may be from other uses such as residential, commercial, community or recreational (e.g. floodlights for sports fields).

17.  Science and technology have progressed since the operative district plan was prepared. There is greater understanding of the effects of light on human health, in particular. Technology has also progressed, and light-emitting diode (LED) lighting has made lighting cheaper and changed its colour profile. This progress is likely to continue.

18.  A significant part of the night-time environment for light is set by Hutt City Council through council-operated lighting such as street lighting and at sports fields. Council has the option to manage the effects of this lighting through operational policies, through the district plan, or both. For lighting operated by other people or organisations, the district plan is the main tool council has if it wishes to take a regulatory approach.

Efficiency and effectiveness monitoring of existing plan provisions

19.  As the existing plan does not have objectives and policies specific to light, we cannot monitor their effectiveness.

20.  The plan has wider objectives and policies, particularly around avoiding adverse effects of non-residential activities on residential activities. These provisions are generally so broad it is difficult to assess what impact light spill and glare has on achieving those objectives without undertaking specific original research and technical assessment.

21.  If there are widespread community concerns with light spill’s effect on residential amenity we would expect that to be raised by the community during the general engagement Council will conduct for the district plan review.

Statutory and policy context

22.  The National Planning Standards set out requirements for district plans that Hutt City Council must comply with by April 2024. The standards require that provisions relating to light spill and glare be consolidated into a single “Light” chapter, however, the policy direction of that chapter is not prescribed.

23.  The District Plan must give effect to the Regional Policy Statement. This Policy Statement has no specific policies relating to light spill and glare but provides some indirect policy direction for matters of importance that can conceivably be affected by lighting policy, such as:

·    The value of coastal areas, outstanding natural landscapes, indigenous ecosystems and habitats, and rural aesthetic values,

·    Protecting the viability of regionally significant infrastructure, industrial employment centres, and regionally significant centres (Lower Hutt city centre, and Petone),

·    Recognising historic heritage values and matters of significance to tangata whenua, and

·    Promoting good urban design and energy-efficient design.

24.  The District Plan must be in accordance with the matters in Part 2 of the RMA. This includes having regard to “the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values”.

25.  Therefore there is some external direction about which issues to consider in choosing a policy direction for light spill and glare, but how these issues are handled and to what degree is left up to Council.

Resource management issue analysis

26.  Council will need to set a policy direction for light, which chiefly includes which issues of light to address, if any, and how to balance beneficial and adverse effects of light.

27.  If Council decides to do so, residential amenity, traffic safety, and sky glow can be addressed by implementing parts or all of the relevant New Zealand standards.

28.  However, the impact of lighting on some other issues such as energy efficiency, wildlife, heritage, landscapes, and character is less well addressed by technical standards. These impacts are also more likely to be specific to local areas, and there is little Lower Hutt-specific information available.

29.  More information on some of these topics may become available through engagement, and for others could be commissioned from technical experts. This would likely have significant cost. Engagement specifically targeted to this issue would contribute to the large volume of topics the public are presented with and risks contributing to “consultation fatigue” if it is an issue the public do not see as a priority.

30.  Without such extra information, Council would find it difficult to address these issues through the district plan. However, we would expect from our theoretical understanding of these issues that they would indirectly be partly addressed or at least unharmed by the use of basic lighting design principles to avoid unnecessary lighting and where lighting is used, to avoid light spill. Where resource consent is triggered, additional issues can also be considered in the consent process.

31.  The operative district plan deals with glare from reflected light in a qualitative way. The anecdotal information available to council officers suggests that this type of glare is not a significant issue for the district in practice.

Options

Option 1: Do minimum – address residential amenity issues using current technical standards

32.  Under this option, Council would continue to focus on the main issue of the operative district plan, residential amenity. The proposed district plan would consolidate provisions into a single “Light” chapter as required by the National Planning Standards, and update those provisions to take account of current technical standards.

33.  Council would engage the community as part of general engagement for the review and further engagement with those stakeholders who proactively reach out.

34.  This approach would not deal with other identified issues. It runs the risk that stakeholders who are concerned with those issues will seek changes to the proposed plan which Council has not prepared sufficient information to make decisions on.

Option 2 (Recommended): targeted engagement and present options for addressing those issues where this can be done without substantial original technical assessment and research

35.  Under this option, Council will focus on those light spill issues that are covered in technical standards for addressing obtrusive effects of light – residential amenity (including sleep), personal safety and security, traffic safety, and sky glow interfering with astronomy.

36.  Engagement would be with parties with particular interests in light (e.g. lighting suppliers, NZTA, recreational facilities, astronomical groups), as well as the general public as a part of overall engagement on the district plan review.

37.  Having undertaken this engagement, Council could make a decision about how to set the balance between providing for beneficial uses of artificial light and controlling the adverse effects, by selecting from the approaches in relevant technical standards.

38.  This option would directly address topics most likely to be of concern to parties with particular interests in light and would likely indirectly address some others. It would avoid contributing to “consultation fatigue” at a time when council is engaging on a significant number of topics. It would avoid the need for costly original technical assessment and research.

Option 3: Full scale review including wider engagement and original technical assessment and research in a Lower Hutt-specific context

39.  Under this option, Council would take the approach in Option 2, but also commission advice from experts in dealing with topics that are not covered in technical standards, such as impacts on energy efficiency, landscapes, wildlife, character, and heritage. Council would engage with the public and a wider range of stakeholders about these issues.

40.  This option will have a greater cost to Council and risks producing little value if there is low public interest in addressing the additional issues. This option is a substantially greater level of assessment than other comparable local authorities have done for this topic in recent full plan reviews.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

41.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

42.  The matters in this report are unlikely to be affected by a changing climate.

43.  Decisions relating to lighting policy can have an effect on greenhouse gas emissions from the use of carbon-emitting sources of electricity being used to power artificial lighting systems. This issue is common to all uses of electricity, not only lighting, and will be considered as part of the Energy topic of the district plan review.

Consultation

44.  Council has not yet engaged in significant consultation about light spill and glare. Based on current information, light is not thought to be a major area of concern for the community at large, but is likely to be somewhat of a concern for particular stakeholders.

45.  All options would include engagement with identified affected stakeholders and other stakeholders who choose to become involved. The recommended option would include light spill and glare within general engagement on the district plan, including releasing a summary of the issues and options for public feedback, and later a draft chapter of the plan.

Legal Considerations

46.  Section 79(1)(c) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requires that a local authority must commence a review of a provision of a district plan if the provision has not been a subject of a review or change in the previous 10 years. Section 79(4) provides scope for local authorities to commence a full review of a district plan. All sections and changes must be reviewed and then the plan be publicly notified (s79(6)&(7)). Schedule 1 sets out requirements for the preparation, change and review of plans.

47.  The provisions for light spill and glare have not been fully reviewed within the last 10 years and Council is required to review them.

Financial Considerations

48.  The recommended option, as well as Option 1, can be accommodated within the existing budget for the District Plan review. The alternative Option 3 involving expert assessment would require additional funding depending on the number and scale of topics included.

Appendices

There are no appendices for this report.   

 

 

 

 

 

Author: Stephen Davis

Policy Planner

 

 

 

Author: Cathy McNab

Environmental Policy Analyst

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

 


Extraordinary District Plan Review Subcommittee Meeting

28 September 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/1128)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2020/6/274

 

Public Access

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to provide an overview assessment of the current District Plan provisions and to outline options and make a recommendation to the District Plan Review Subcommittee as to how Council should proceed with the review of the Public Access chapter of the District Plan.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

(i)    agrees to undertake the review of Public Access to waterbodies provisions as set out in Option 1 contained in the report; and

(ii)   agrees to undertake engagement, in regard Public Access to water bodies, as set out in the report.

For the reasons that it is efficient use of Council resources, will ensure Council can work toward giving effect to the Regional Policy Statement and statutory requirements for the maintenance and enhancement of Public Access to and along waterbodies, will allow officers and Council to better understand the most appropriate means to address the issues outlined in this report and engagement is at the appropriate level. 

 

Background

2.    New Zealand’s waterbodies and the coast are highly valued, especially for their natural beauty, recreation value, ecological value, and cultural significance. However, a substantial amount of land across New Zealand that adjoins waterbodies and the coast is in private ownership and this can limit the public’s access and their ability to enjoy and appreciate rivers, lakes and the coast.

3.   Public access under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) refers to legal and physical access to waterbodies and the coast. To implement this requirement, the Operative District Plan requires esplanades reserves or strips (esplanades) as a mechanism to provide public access, when properties adjoining lakes, rivers or the coast are subdivided. 

4.   Esplanades are legal mechanisms that set aside land to provide the public with physical and legal access to rivers, lakes and the coast. There are two types of esplanades; esplanade strips and esplanade reserves. Each provide access but with slight differences:

·     Esplanade reserves:

       Ownership of the esplanade is transferred to Council and is officially classified as reserves under the Reserves Act (1977)

·     Esplanade Strips:

       Ownership of the esplanade strip is left in ownership of the landowner.

5.   Esplanades reserves and strips provide a number of benefits, primarily legal and physical access to rivers, lakes and the coast. Esplanades also play a role in protecting and enhancing ecological values, water quality, and can provide flood hazard management opportunities. The provision of public access can also enhance the relationship of Māori with their ancestral lands and water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga.

6.   Under the District Plan, public access is provided through provisions in the subdivision chapter. The rules require applicants to establish esplanades along the margins of lakes and rivers and along the coast when subdividing. However, esplanade requirements (such as size of the esplanade or type of esplanade) differ depending on the nature of the subdivision, size of the property or the location.

7.   If the subdivision application does not comply with the controlled activity standards for esplanades, the subdivision will be processed as a discretionary activity.

8.   Beyond the subdivision chapter and the esplanade requirements, the District Plan also aims to protect and maintain public access in a number of other zones. These include policies that aim to ensure land use maintains (or does not affect) public access that relate to certain areas such as the Petone foreshore.

Discussion

State of the Environment

9.   Overall, the city has relatively good public access to rivers, lakes and the coast.

10. Council Officers undertook an initial desktop analysis of public access through the Council’s GIS mapping system. The analysis found that most land adjacent to the rivers, lakes and the coast was publically owned/ managed by the Council, Department of Conservation or Greater Wellington Regional Council. However, public access to the Wainuiomata River was found to be particularly limited (note, this assessment was desk based and does not provide an understanding of accessibility).

Effectiveness and Efficiency of the District Plan

11. Through the early stages of the review, council officers assessed 10 subdivision applications. The assessment provided a general understanding of the efficiency and effectiveness of the current District Plan provisions. It found:

 

·        Public access was maintained (subdivision did not affect public access) in all cases.

·        In a number of cases, public access was enhanced through an additional esplanade reserve or strip being provided.

12. This assessment of resource consents has provided a general indication that provisions in the plan have maintained and enhanced public access in the city.

13. However, the assessment of resource consents has also revealed there are a number of issues with the plan provisions. These include:

 

·        Provisions are broad (lack flexibility) and do not enable variation in the size and type of esplanade on different rivers under the controlled activity standards. A review of esplanade provisions would likely ensure efficiency and effectiveness is improved.

·        Objectives, policies and rules are not clearly linked. This has made it difficult to determine whether the outcomes have been achieved and makes policy direction unclear.  Note, these objectives and policies have not been reviewed since the plan was notified.

·        Public access provisions are spread across multiple chapters of the plan. Consolidation of provisions would likely create clarity and consistency.

·        It was found that provisions are not effective in consideration of mana whenua interests. Particularly, for the provision of public access for mana whenua and for protecting the mana whenua values. This is largely linked to broader issues throughout the District Plan.

 

 

 

 

Statutory and Policy Context

Resource Management Act (1991)

14. Section 6(d) states that the maintenance and enhancement of public access is a matter of national importance.

15. Council is required to make provision for the maintenance and enhancement of public along lakes, rivers and the coast.

 

New Zealand Coast Policy Statement (2010)

16. The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS) provides specific direction for the maintenance and enhancement of public access in the coastal environment.

17. Objective 4 and Policy 18, 19 and 20 (see Appendix 1 for full text) are of particular relevance to public access.

 

Wellington Regional Policy Statement (2013)

18. The Wellington Regional Policy Statement (RPS) provides direction for the enhancement of public access in the Wellington Region (see Appendix 1 for a full description of relevant policies). It should be noted that the plan provisions have not been reviewed since the RPS was adopted.

19. Policy 53 of the RPS requires Council to enhance access in particular areas, which include sites with significant historic heritage, biodiversity, landscape, and amenity and / or recreation value. A number of these sites are likely to be located along most rivers, lakes and coastal areas in the city. 

20. The policy also requires Councils’ to restrict public access where the following needs to be protected:

 

a.       sensitive indigenous habitats of species;

b.       the health or safety of people;

c.       sensitive cultural and historic heritage values; and/or

d.      The integrity and security of regionally significant infrastructure.

21. Note the policy does not provide specific direction on the maintenance of existing public access.

 

Council Policy

22. Maintenance and enhancement of public access is also recognised as a Council priority in the Leisure and Wellbeing Strategy and the Reserves Strategic Direction.

 

Beyond the District Plan

23. It should be noted that enhancement of public access, under the District Plan can only be provided through a subdivision resource consent application. This limits opportunities for enhancement to when an applicant decides to apply for subdivision consent on a property adjacent to a river, lake or the coast. The enhancement mechanism cannot be initiated by Council; only the landowner.

24. However, Council can enhance public access through a number of other mechanisms outside of the District Plan, including:

 

a.       Access strips are another mechanism that provides public access similarly to esplanade strips. They can be established (and cancelled) at any time through negotiation between Council and landowner.

b.       Esplanades can be required through resource consent applications for reclamation of river beds, lake beds and or the foreshore and seabed (Regional Council function).

c.       Access can be enhanced through regulatory functions held by Walking Access Commission.

d.      Members of the public can simply negotiate access with landowners on a case by case basis. However, access cannot be guaranteed.

Resource Management Issue Analysis

25. The following resource management issues have been identified which are to be addressed in the review.

 

Issue 1: Maintenance and enhancement of public access

Ensure the District Plan continues to manage subdivision and land use to ensure public access is maintained and enhanced through continuation of the esplanade requirements.

 

Issue 2: The need to manage the effects of public access

There is demand for public access to and along the coast, rivers and other waterbodies to support recreation. However, this access can adversely affect other values of the waterbodies (e.g. cultural, heritage, biodiversity, natural character) as well as operational requirements of adjoining land (e.g. farming, residential, business).

 

Issue 3: Giving effect to the Regional Policy Statement and the NZCPS

The District Plan has not been reviewed since the adoption of the RPS and NZCPS and it must give effect to this direction.

 

Options

26. Set out below are two options for the nature, scale and extent of the scope the review for public access.

 

Option 1 – Targeted review of current approach

27. Under this option, the general approach in the current District Plan would largely be carried over into the new District Plan, while also applying the National Planning Standards framework. However, this option would involve a review of the current objectives, policies and rules for the maintenance and enhancement of public access. The review of provisions would enable Council to further investigate issues outlined in this report and work toward improving its functions in regard to maintaining and enhancing public access.

28. Under this option, officers would review and assess areas where public access should be prioritised and restricted, as outlined under the RPS and NZCPS. This would be a desktop exercise.

29. Further GIS analysis would be undertaken to understand the exact extent of public access and to map the projected outcomes for different approaches.

30. Engagement would be undertaken with mana whenua, landowners and key stakeholders (e.g. Walking Access Commission, Fish and Game).

31. This option would be appropriate if Council seeks to refine and make improvements to the current approach under the District Plan.

 

32. However, this option would not involve a council wide, strategic review of public access.

 

Option 2 – Comprehensive review of current approach

33. This option would involve a review of the current approach, including objectives, policies and rules, similar to that outlined in option 1.

 

34. In addition, the spatial analysis of the extent of public access would be more thorough, likely involving a comprehensive review with onsite assessment. 

 

35. The review would investigate the potential for a collaborative process with Parks and Gardens (and other teams within Council) along with key partners, stakeholders, landowners and the public, to develop and set strategic direction for improving and enhancing public access to and along, and beyond waterbodies. This option would identify city wide priorities and objectives for public access, and would likely involve the enhancement of a ‘public access network’ between waterbodies and across the city.

 

36. This option would involve extensive engagement with Council partners, key stakeholders, landowners and the public. Surveys or targeted interviews could be used to help better understand public use, demand and priorities for public access.

37. This option would be appropriate if Council is seeking to use the plan review as an opportunity to strategically enhance public access and recreation opportunities across the city.

38. However, this option would require substantially more resource and time in comparison to option 1. Additional budget would be required to undertake this work.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

39. The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

40. Esplanades can contribute toward mitigating the effects of flood events and coastal erosion.

41. At the same time, it is possible that the effects of climate change may impact public access, especially in coastal areas. Esplanades could be eroded and public access to some coastal areas could be lost.

Consultation

42. No engagement or consultation has been undertaken so far specifically on issues relating to public access.

43. The level of engagement for the review will depend on the option selected for reviewing this topic.

44. The following have been identified as the key partners and stakeholders with particular interest in this review:

 

·    Mana Whenua.

·    Greater Wellington Regional Council.

·    Fish and Game.

·    Walking Access Commission.

·    Department of Conservation.

·    Affected landowners/ landowner groups.

·    Local recreation groups.

 

45. Initial engagement will involve consultation with key partners and stakeholders to gain understanding of their key issues. This will help guide the review of plan provisions that relate to public access.

Legal Considerations

46. Section 79(1)(c) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requires that a local authority must commence a review of a provision of a district plan if the provision has not been a subject of a review or change in the previous 10 years. Section 79(4) provides scope for local authorities to commence a full review of a district plan. All sections and changes must be reviewed and then the plan be publically notified (79(6)&(7)). Schedule 1 sets out requirements for the preparation, change and review of plans.

47. The National Planning Standards set out standards to which every policy or plan must comply. Chapter 7 requires Local Authorities to either amend their plan or notify a proposed plan within 5 years of the planning standards coming into effect (April 2024).

48. Section 8 of the RMA requires all person exercising functions/powers under it to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

 Financial Considerations

49.  Option 1 would be undertaken within the current budget. Additional budget would be required for Option 2 unless there was reduced scope for the review of other topics.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1

64

    

 

 

 

Author: Benjamin Haddrell

Policy Planner

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

 


 

Regional Policy Statement

 

Objective 8

Public access to and along the coastal marine area, lakes and rivers is enhanced

Policy 53

When considering an application for a subdivision consent, or a coastal or land use consent on public land, or a change, variation or review of a district plan to address subdivision or rezoning, particular regard shall be given to enhancing public access to, and along:

(a) areas of the coastal marine area, and lakes and rivers with:

(i) places, sites and areas with significant historic heritage values identified in accordance with policy 21;

(ii) areas of indigenous ecosystems and habitats, and areas with significant indigenous biodiversity values identified in accordance with policy 23;

(iii) outstanding natural features and landscapes identified in accordance with policy 25;

(iv) special amenity landscapes identified in accordance with policy 27;

(v) places, sites and areas with high natural character identified in accordance with policy 36; and

(vi) the rivers and lakes identified in Table 15 of Appendix 1;

(b) Wellington Harbour and Porirua (Onepoto Arm and Pauatahanui Inlet) Harbour;

 

Except where there is a need to protect:

 

(c) sensitive indigenous habitats of species;

(d) the health or safety of people;

(e) sensitive cultural and historic heritage values; and/or

(f) the integrity and security of regionally significant infrastructure

Method 39: Prepare protocols for tangata whenua access to mahinga kai and natural resources used for customary purposes on public land

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                         

Prepare protocols to define where and how tangata whenua can access significant mahinga kai and areas of natural resources used for customary purposes, on public land managed by local authorities.

Method 51: Identify areas for improved public access

Identify areas of the coast, lakes and rivers where public access should be improved.

 

 

New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement

 

Objective 4

To maintain and enhance the public open space qualities and recreation opportunities of the coastal environment by:

•     recognising that the coastal marine area is an extensive area of public space for the public to use and enjoy;

•     maintaining and enhancing public walking access to and along the coastal marine area without charge, and where there are exceptional reasons that mean this is not practicable providing alternative linking access close to the coastal marine area; and

·    Recognising the potential for coastal processes, including those likely to be affected by climate change, to restrict access to the coastal environment and the need to ensure that public access is maintained even when the coastal marine area advances inland.

Policy 18

Recognise the need for public open space within and adjacent to the coastal marine area, for public use and appreciation including active and passive recreation, and provide for such public open space, including by:

(a)  ensuring that the location and treatment of public open space is compatible with the natural character, natural features and landscapes, and amenity values of the coastal environment;

(b)  taking account of future need for public open space within and adjacent to the coastal marine area, including in and close to cities, towns and other settlements;

(c)   maintaining and enhancing walking access linkages between public open space areas in the coastal environment;

(d)  considering the likely impact of coastal processes and climate change so as not to compromise the ability of future generations to have access to public open space; and

(e) recognising the important role that esplanade reserves and strips can have incontributing to meeting public open space needs.

Policy 19

(1)  Recognise the public expectation of and need for walking access to and along the coast that is practical, free of charge and safe for pedestrian use.

(2)  Maintain and enhance public walking access to, along and adjacent to the coastal marine area, including by:

(a)  identifying how information on where the public have walking access will be made publicly available;

(b)  avoiding, remedying or mitigating any loss of public walking access resulting from subdivision, use, or development; and

(c)   identifying opportunities to enhance or restore public walking access, for example where:

(i)            connections between existing public areas can be provided; or

(ii)           improving access would promote outdoor recreation; or

(iii)          physical access for people with disabilities is desirable; or

(iv)         the long-term availability of public access is threatened by erosion or sea level rise; or

(v)          access to areas or sites of historic or cultural significance is important; or

(vi)         subdivision, use, or development of land adjacent to the coastal marine area has reduced public access, or has the potential to do so.

(3)  Only impose a restriction on public walking access to, along or adjacent to the coastal marine area where such a restriction is necessary:

(a)  to protect threatened indigenous species; or

(b)  to protect dunes, estuaries and other sensitive natural areas or habitats; or

(c)   to protect sites and activities of cultural value to Māori; or

(d)  to protect historic heritage; or

(e)  to protect public health or safety; or

(f)   to avoid or reduce conflict between public uses of the coastal marine area and its margins; or

(g)  for temporary activities or special events; or

(h)  for defence purposes in accordance with the Defence Act 1990; or New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010 21

(i)    to ensure a level of security consistent with the purpose of a resource consent; or

(j)   in other exceptional circumstances sufficient to justify the restriction.

(4) Before imposing any restriction under (3), consider and where practicable provide for alternative routes that are available to the public free of charge at all times.

Policy 20

(1)  Control use of vehicles, apart from emergency vehicles, on beaches, foreshore, seabed and adjacent public land where:

(a)  damage to dune or other geological systems and processes; or

(b)  harm to ecological systems or to indigenous flora and fauna, for example marine mammal and bird habitats or breeding areas and shellfish beds; or

(c)   danger to other beach users; or

(d)  disturbance of the peaceful enjoyment of the beach environment; or

(e)  damage to historic heritage; or

(f)   damage to the habitats of fisheries resources of significance to customary, commercial or recreational users; or

(g)  damage to sites of significance to tangata whenua; might result.

(2)  Identify the locations where vehicular access is required for boat launching, or as the only practicable means of access to private property or public facilities, or for the operation of existing commercial activities, and make appropriate provision for such access.

(3) Identify any areas where and times when recreational vehicular use on beaches, foreshore and seabed may be permitted, with or without restriction as to type ofvehicle, without a likelihood of any of (1)(a) to (g) occurring

Policy 25

In areas potentially affected by coastal hazards over at least the next 100 years:

(a)  avoid increasing the risk of social, environmental and economic harm from coastal hazards;

(b)  avoid redevelopment, or change in land use, that would increase the risk of adverse effects from coastal hazards;

(c)   encourage redevelopment, or change in land use, where that would reduce the risk of adverse effects from coastal hazards, including managed retreat by relocation or removal of existing structures or their abandonment in extreme circumstances, and designing for relocatability or recoverability from hazard events;

(d)  encourage the location of infrastructure away from areas of hazard risk where practicable;

(e)  discourage hard protection structures and promote the use of alternatives to them, including natural defences; and

(f)   consider the potential effects of tsunami and how to avoid or mitigate them.

 

 


Extraordinary District Plan Review Subcommittee Meeting

02 November 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/1401)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2020/6/120

 

Aspirations and Ideas for the District Plan Review

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

That the report be noted and received.

 

 

1.    As mentioned at the District Plan Review Subcommittee briefing on 16 September 2020, officers are keen to hear the aspirations and ideas of the District Plan Review Subcommittee on the District Plan Review overall.

2.    A review of the District Plan is a significant undertaking, both in terms of the influence it has on the future of the city, and the process of the review. It involves significant time, resources and thinking by Council, and its partners, the community and stakeholders.

3.    The review process extends for a significant period of time, and involves engagement, research, evaluation, plan drafting, submissions, hearings and appeal phases.

4.    In addition, the review covers a wide range of topics, such as urban growth, housing, indigenous biodiversity, natural hazards, temporary events, noise, signs and public access to waterbodies.

5.    In undertaking the review, officers will be advising the Subcommittee on the legal framework and national/regional policy direction, as well as technical and other evidence to inform decisions.  In addition, officers will be reporting views and feedback received during engagement.  

6.    The role of the Subcommittee is to provide the overall direction and decision-making for the review. At this early stage in the review process, officers seek any overall aspirations or ideas from the Subcommittee on what the review should seek to achieve. These aspirations or ideas could relate to specific topics or issues, the review process, engaging with our partners, the community and stakeholders, or the production of the District Plan itself.

7.    Officers would use these aspirations or ideas to guide the District Plan Review and would refer to them in future reporting to the Subcommittee.

8.    Given this discussion is during the initial stages of the review process, any comments made by Subcommittee members on aspirations and ideas will be viewed at this point in time. The Subcommittee will receive information (including views from various groups and individuals) during the review process, it is therefore important that all members maintain an open mind throughout the review process.

 

Appendices

There are no appendices for this report.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

 

 

 

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability