Agenda of District Plan Review Subcommittee

6 15 December 2020

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

District Plan Review Subcommittee

Minutes of a meeting held in the Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road,
Lower Hutt on

Tuesday 15 December 2020 commencing at 4.00pm

PRESENT:

Deputy Mayor T Lewis	Cr K Brown
Cr B Dyer	Cr S Edwards (Chair)
Cr N Shaw	Ms M Dentice

APOLOGIES: Mr A Ede

IN ATTENDANCE: Ms H Oram, Director Environment and Sustainability

Mr H Wesney, Divisional Manager District Plan Policy

Mr N Geard, Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

Mr J Joseph, Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

Ms C McNab, Environmental Policy Analyst

Mr S Davis, Policy Planner

Mr B Haddrell, Policy Planner

Ms K Stannard, Head of Democratic Services (part meeting)

Ms H Clegg, Minute Taker

PUBLIC BUSINESS

1. APOLOGIES

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Shaw) Minute No. DPRS 20601

“That the apology received from Mr Ede be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

2. PUBLIC COMMENT

There was no public comment.

3. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS

There were no conflict of interest declarations.

4. Minutes

	Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Lewis) Minute No. DPRS 20602 “That the minutes of the meeting of the Extraordinary District Plan Review Subcommittee Meeting held on Wednesday, 11 November 2020, be confirmed as a true and correct record subject to an amendment to Item 4 to read: Cr Dyer highlighted he had discussions about purchasing a block of land near Wise Street, Wainuiomata. He noted it was not in the area being discussed and to date had not proceeded.”
5.		SEAVIEW MARINA DISTRICT PLAN CHANGE (20/1129) Report No. DPRS2020/6/321 by the Head of District Plan Policy
		Mr Alan McLellan, Chief Executive of Seaview Marina Limited was in attendance for the item. The Divisional Manager District Plan Policy elaborated on the report. Mr McLellan outlined the future aspirations of the Seaview Marina. He explained that the current limitations placed on development at the marina were not fit for purpose for a modern marina and were more onerous than restrictions placed on marinas in other parts of the country. Cr Dyer left the meeting at 4.09pm. Mr McLellan suggested a minimum building height limit of 15m for the marina and an increase of the current 1000m² maximum floor area to at least 2000m² to enable developments to proceed. Cr Dyer rejoined the meeting at 4.10pm. Mr McLellan further explained that the marina was now home to residents living on 60 boats and asked that a range of service businesses be permitted. He believed that many non-marine related businesses would be attracted to the marina which would benefit all businesses and visitors in the area. He outlined plans for a gateway building to be constructed in association with the Lowry Bay Yacht Club to house retail and shared office facilities. In response to a question from a member regarding the process, the Divisional Manager District Plan Policy advised if the plan change for Seaview Marina was progressed and became operative, the full District Plan review could still require changes to it as a result of more detailed investigations. He added that as the review was assessing the wider picture it was likely that new information would come to light. In response to questions from a member, the Divisional Manager District Plan Policy confirmed either continuing with the plan change or placing it on hold and progressing with the full District Plan review would result in a similar outcome, approximately four years down the track. He acknowledged a plan change might provide short term relief for the marina however that was dependent on the submissions received and the outcomes of any appeals. He added that the plan change could be viewed as an interim step to what would be covered by the full review process. He advised that the hazardous substance aspects of the area were not yet fully understood and that a resource consent process was potentially cheaper than a plan change process. In response to a question from a member, Mr McLellan acknowledged the Seaview Marina Board would be content with making a resource consent application for immediate plans, with the knowledge that a full review would reassess the marina and activities permitted within it. In response to a question from a member regarding the likelihood of approval for a resource consent for a large building at the marina site, the Divisional Manager District Plan Policy advised the objective for the current marina zone was to ensure development was compatible with the surrounding environment. He advised any proposed development would need to be fully assessed against the objective. Cr Dyer express support for the recommendation. He expressed concern that it may not result in the optimal result for the Seaview Marina Board. The Chair commented that the Seaview Marina Board had delivered a prime asset for the city. He believed, on balance, that a full review of all elements to the area, including hazardous substances and natural hazards would be advantageous.
		RESOLVED: (Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Lewis) Minute No. DPRS 20603 “That the Subcommittee directs officers to proceed with Option 1 contained within the report that the short and long term aspirations of the Seaview Marina are addressed through the full District Plan review.” For the reason that it is efficient use of Council and community resources and time. Short-term development aspirations at the marina can be met progressively via a resource consent process.

Natural Hazards - Earthquake and Land Instability (20/1537)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/322 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

The Senior Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report.

In response to questions from a member, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst confirmed the current knowledge gap regarding liquifaction particularly on a site specific scale. He advised liquifaction was a matter for discretion in Discretionary Activity applications. With regard to the budget for the review, he advised initial assumptions were made regarding possible technical reports required. He further advised a liquifaction study was not identified as a priority, given the upcoming Building Code amendments, and that the risks associated with earthquakes, land instability and tsunamis were considered priorities.

In response to a question from a member regarding the risk from the Wellington faultline, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst explained that the areas most at risk of a rupture of that faultline had been identified.

In response to questions from a member, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst explained that the current tsunami report was commissioned from an evacuation point of view. He explained that building heights were currently determined by factors other than possible liquifaction risk. He confirmed a regional group of planners regularly met to discuss approaches to various matters, including liquifaction information. He added that no other local authorites in the region had commissioned liquifaction reports.

In response to a question from a member regarding land stability versus liquifaction, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst confirmed it was an easier task to determine areas of land instability, as liquifaction risks required site by site analyses.

In response to a question from a member regarding the process, the Divisional Manager District Plan Policy advised initial public consultation would commence in February 2021. He said this would continue throughout the first half of the new year for each topic, with a series of issues being published for feedback, followed by reports back to members with additional technical information as it was received. Direction would be sought from members to allow for options to be formed, more public consultation would be undertaken and reports back to members resulting in the formulation of draft District Plan provisions and the formal advertising of the Draft District Plan. He added this was when the legally required public consultation timeframes would come into effect.

The Director Environment and Sustainabilty added that the Heritage Chapter review was aligned with the city wide heritage consultation exercise.

In response to a question from a member, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst confirmed that the results of any new studies could not be retrospectively applied to existing situations and that Existing Use Rights would apply.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Brown) Minute No. DPRS 20604

“That the Subcommittee:

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

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

A full review of the District Plan approach on earthquake and land instability natural hazards, with additional technical assessments; and

(iii) directs officers to commission technical assessments on slope stability and tsunami hazard risk.”

Natural Hazards - Flooding (20/1227)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/323 by the Environmental Policy Analyst

Mr Ben Fountain from Wellington Water Ltd (WWL) and Mr Andy Brown, Flood Protection Team Leader from Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) were in attendance for the item.

The Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on then report.

Mr Brown explained that GWRC was hoping to work with communities and other partners (eg WWL) to create management plans for residential areas at risk of a 1:100 year flood, and a 1: 20 year flood in rural areas. He advised such management plans could include implementation management practices. He further advised the current Hutt River/Te Awa Kairangi remodelling project was expected to be completed in early 2021, with the Wainuiomata River project due for completion towards the end of 2021.

Mr Fountain explained that the District Plan was a vital tool in managing flood risk, suggesting that higher minimum floor level requirements and protection of overland flow paths to allow water to flow naturally would greatly assist with flood risk management.

In response to questions from a member, the Environmental Policy Analyst confirmed the current flood information was the most up to date available and that as new information came to light it would be incorporated into reports to the subcommittee. She also confirmed there was collaboration between all parties. She advised the first level of public consultation would be designed to make the public aware of flood risks, and to determine acceptance levels eg permitting an uninhabitable building in a flood risk area, such as a garage, may be more acceptable than permitting a dwelling.

In response to a question from a member regarding availability of flood mapping, the Director Environment and Sustainability explained that for developments requiring a building or resource consent, even in areas without flood maps available, sign-off from WWL was required and that if their requirement was for a certain minimum floor height, then that was the standard officers would require.

Cr Shaw left the meeting at 5.23pm.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Fountain explained that Hydraulic Neutrality was designed to ensure developments did not exacerbate any flooding issues. He added that WWL was trying to implement this requirement across the region.

Cr Shaw rejoined the meeting at 5.25pm.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Shaw) Minute No. DPRS 20605

“That the Subcommittee:

(i) agrees to undertake a review of the natural hazards (flood hazards and related stormwater) in line with the details set out in Option 3 within the report;

(ii) agrees to work with Wellington Water Limited and Greater Wellington Regional Council to source information on flood risk across the district;

(iii) agrees to investigate the feasibility of undertaking a strategic flood risk assessment for the whole district for the next 100 years taking into account all forms of flooding and climate change; and

(iv) agrees to the engagement approach for the review of natural hazards (flood hazards and related severe weather) as summarised in section 7 within the report.”

For the reasons of efficient use of Council resources; reflects the issues facing the district and city with respect to flood hazards; will utilise the most up to date information on flood risk available; will provide for measures to assist with avoiding, remedying and mitigating the natural hazard risks facing the district; supports the Council’s aims of developing a resilient community and development of adaptation strategies; gives effect to the RMA, RPS and National Planning Standards; achievable timeframes; aligning the District Plan with national and global best practice; and ensuring an appropriate level of engagement and consultation.

Rural Zones (20/1125)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/324 by the Environmental Policy Analyst

Cr Dyer left the meeting at 5.27pm.

The Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report.

Cr Dyer rejoined the meeting at 5.29pm.

In response to questions from members, the Environmental Policy Analyst advised the current Urban/Rural boundary was not reflective of current demands.

Deputy Mayor Lewis expressed concern with urban pressures on rural areas and the possible adverse environmental effects.

Cr Brown anticipated public consultation on this topic would be passionate and requested a fully comprehensive process. The Environmental Policy Analyst acknowledged these comments and added that officers had recently commenced dialogue with Wainuiomata Rural representatives and would consult on a range of subtopics.

Cr Dyer commented that rual ratepayers should be relatively easy to identify and contact as they all paid rural rates. He asked officers to be pro-active.

The Chair noted that privacy laws potentially hampered contacting ratepayers through their rates notice information for anything other than rates related items, unless prior permission had been given by the ratepayer.

Cr Brown left the meeting at 5.37pm.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Dyer) Minute No. DPRS 20606

“That the Subcommittee:

(i) agrees to undertake a review of the Rural Activity Areas Chapter and zoning in line with the details set out in Option 2 within the report; and

(ii) agrees to the engagement approach for the review of the Rural Activity Areas Chapter as outlined in section 7 within the report.”

For the reasons of efficient use of Council resources; reflects the nature, qualities and pressures on rural areas; current rural activity areas match fairly closely to the new rural zones in the National Planning Standards; consideration of national or regional policy to be implemented specifically for or affecting rural areas; and ensure engagement and consultation that aims to work with the rural community to develop an effective District Plan.

Commercial and Mixed Use Zones (20/1220)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/325 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

Cr Brown rejoined the meeting and Cr Dyer left the meeting at 5.39pm.

The Senior Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report.

Cr Dyer rejoined the meeting and Cr Brown left the meeting at 5.40pm.

In response to questions from members, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst confirmed future commercial and mixed use zones would reflect the National Policy Statement (NPS) requirements.

Deputy Mayor Lewis expressed concern with interface areas between zones.

Cr Brown rejoined the meeting at 5.42pm.

Cr Shaw noted that Plan Change 43 had introduce mixed zones in eight key areas around train stations, as well as in Stokes Valley, Avalon and Wainuiomata.

The Senior Environmental Policy Analyst advised an option to deal with mixed use zones may be to have a spatial layer relating to height or to add a variation within a zone. He noted that the initial basis for introducing the mixed zones of Plan Change 43 had been “walkable distances” and that this premise was also used in the NPS.

The Director Environment and Sustainability reminded members that details had not yet been finalised and that officers were looking to hear from the community first.

Cr Edwards considered Melling Station was now regarded as a rapid transit station, and that Stokes Valley could be suited to a suburban mixed use zone. He queried how the mixed use zones would relate to the natural hazard areas, if such areas were excluded from NPS-Urban Development requirements. The Divisional Manager District Plan Policy advised all chapters would be inter-related in the final product and that in the process zones might need to be altered or changed.

Deputy Mayor Lewis asked for assurance that already held information would be utilised. The Divisional Manager District Plan Policy confirmed this was the case.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Lewis) Minute No. DPRS 20607

“That the Subcommittee:

(i) receives the information in the report; and

(ii) directs officers to undertake the commercial and mixed use topic of the District Plan Review through the following approach:

(a) carry out engagement with key stakeholders;

(b) review all existing provisions of the commercial zones;

(c) review the extent of all commercial zoning and determine if there are any areas that could be rezoned to an alternative zoning, or if any new areas of commercial or mixed use zoning are required;

(d) develop high level options for the commercial zones that give effect to the national planning standards, the National Policy Statement – Urban Development, and that address the key issues identified in this report; and

(e) develop district plan provisions for the commercial zones that give effect to the selected high level option.”

10.

Industrial Zones (20/1442)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/326 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

The Senior Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member regarding the extent to which Council was required to be cognisant of activities outside of its boundaries, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst advised all local authorities were required to undertake an assessment of all business lands.

The Director Environment and Sustainability added that the Seaview industrial area contained hazardous substances and activities which were not conducive to residential activities.

Deputy Mayor Lewis requested that the intent of Plan Change 29 with regard to residential activities be noted, as the plan change had enabled some residential activity, however that had not eventuated.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Dyer) Minute No. DPRS 20608

“That the Subcommittee:

(i) receives the information in the report; and

(ii) directs officers to undertake the industrial zone topic of the District Plan Review through the following approach:

(a) carry out engagement with key stakeholders;

(b) review all existing provisions of the industrial zones;

(c) review the extent of all industrial zoning to determine if there are any areas that could be rezoned to residential or commercial uses;

(d) develop high level options for the industrial zones effect to the national planning standards, the National Policy Statement – Urban Development, and that address the key issues identified in this report; and

(e) develop district plan provisions for the industrial zones that gives effect to the selected high level option.”

11.

Hazardous Substances (20/1549)

Report No. DPRS2020/6/327 by the Divisional Manager District Plan Policy

The Divisional Manager, District Plan Policy elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Divisional Manager, District Plan Policy confirmed that there were hazardous substances present in all industrial areas of the city.

In response to a question from a member regarding paragraph 40 of the report, the Divisional Manager, District Plan Policy advised this work was not specifically required in relation to hazardous substances.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Dyer) Minute No. DPRS 20609

“That the Subcommittee agrees to undertake a review of the Hazardous Substances Chapter in line with the details set out in Option 2 contained within the report.”

For the reasons of efficient use of Council resources; reflects the nature, qualities and pressures on hazardous substances; current approach for hazardous substances is generally effective, though requires refinement to align with the National Planning Standards and hazardous substances legislation and regulations; and ensure engagement and consultation that relates to those parties with specific interest or relevant to hazardous substances.

12. QUESTIONS

There were no questions.

Cr S Edwards

CHAIR

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 18th day of February 2021

31 18 February 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

19 January 2021

File: (20/1313)

Report no: DPRS2021/1/5

Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to review the provisions relevant to Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity in the City of Lower Hutt District Plan (District Plan). It includes a review of the existing approach and the effectiveness and efficiency of the operative District Plan provisions in light of the current statutory context and identifies issues, opportunities and options for the review of this topic. The review considers whether the outcomes in the plan have been achieved and how usable the plan is.

2. The outcome of this review is to discuss the issues that will need to be addressed in the District Plan review for Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity and identify options to assist in determining the approach for the Proposed District Plan.

3. The ecosystems and biodiversity of Lower Hutt are diverse in form and use and as such have a range of differing issues and management needs. This topic will also cross over into other land use zones such rural and residential zones, the coast and open spaces as well as subdivision and earthworks. As such this topic needs to integrate with a range of topic areas, with some aspects more fully covered in the other specific topic papers including natural character, features and landscapes, the coastal environment and open spaces.

1.2 Key Points

· Dominant land forms and processes influence the natural environment in this district, there are four key ecosystem types;

- River valley wetlands;

- Eastern Hills beech and broad-leafed forest;

- Western Hills blockfields;

- Coastal cliffs, terraces, shingle and sand beaches.

· The District Plan has some protection for identified Significant Natural Resources but this protection currently only applies to publicly owned and administered land. There are no specific District Plan provisions for significant indigenous vegetation (especially trees) and habitats of indigenous fauna on private land, or public land that does not have a SNR notation, beyond limits on indigenous vegetation clearance and notable trees in residential areas.

· The Council has a range of other methods it is using to maintain and enhance the districts ecosystems and biodiversity, including pest control, community regeneration projects, beach care and the recently established biodiversity incentive fund.

· A previously prepared draft plan change (46) proposed protection of Significant Natural Areas across the district on publicly and privately owned land. The Council decided not to notify this plan change in November 2018. This decision not to notify the plan change is currently subject to an application for a declaration in the Environment Court – the processing of this application in the Court is currently on-hold pending the outcome of the appeal on Plan Change 36.

· New Zealand’s indigenous species and ecosystems are threatened and within the Lower Hutt District there are a significant number of rare and endangered species and habitats.

· The protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna is a matter of national importance under the RMA.

· The Regional Policy Statement (RPS) does, and the proposed National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPS-IB) is likely to, require district plans to identify and protect areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna. Government has advised that the timeframe for the delivery of the new NPS-IB is April 2021.

· The operative District Plan does not fully give effect to these statutory requirements.

· The primary aim of this process is to:

work with the community and landowners to develop mechanisms to identify, protect and enhance significant indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna and to enrich the ecosystems and biodiversity of Lower Hutt District while providing for their social and economic wellbeing

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

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

(2) agrees to working with affected landowners, community interest groups, GWRC, Forest and Bird and the Department of Conservation to determine a way forward in line with Option C;

(3) agrees to the engagement approach for the review of Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity as summarised in section 7 and Option C of this report;

(4) develops an approach for identifying and protecting significant areas of indigenous biodiversity in consultation with the community and stakeholders; and

(5) if/when a National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity is released, reviews the topic in light of any requirements, including with input from stakeholders and landowners.

For the reason(s)

· Ensure appropriate and effective engagement and consultation with land owners and wider community from the beginning of the process;

· Work with the community to address concerns and determine a way forward;

· To give effect to RMA, RPS, the National Planning Standards, and upcoming national policy statements specifically for ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity and any relevant Environment Court Decisions and declarations;

· Efficient use of Council resources.

3. Background

3.1 General Overview

4. The presence of a number of dominant land forms influence the character and amenity values of the natural environment in this district including the major river valleys, the Hutt, Wainuiomata and Orongorongo, and the coast together with the surrounding hill country and the fault lines.

5. Much of the environment in Lower Hutt is highly modified especially in the Hutt River valley floor and in and around Wainuiomata. However, beyond the Hutt River Valley and the settlements of the Eastern Bays and Wainuiomata there has been less human intervention and these areas have a more natural appearance and higher biodiversity value than the more urban and modified parts of the district.

6. A report by Wildlands in 2018^{^[1]} outlines the particular value of the district’s indigenous biodiversity and describes vegetation cover prior to human settlement:

Prior to human settlement the valley floors of the Hutt River and Wainuiomata River were home to extensive kahikatea and pukatea swamps, with tōtara, mataī and ribbonwood forests in drier areas, and raupō swamps at the Hutt River mouth. The forests on the Western Hills were mosaics of kohekohe, tawa, kāmahi and rewarewa with grand, ancient podocarps, such as rimu, tōtara, and miro, and climbers like northern rātā. The Eastern Hills were covered by widespread beech forests and kāmahi interspersed with many rātā species and indigenous podocarps. Exposed coastal cliff faces provided habitat for diverse communities of windswept shrubs such as matagouri and tauhinu (cottonwood), speargrass, and pōhuehue vines. These forests and wetlands and coastal cliffs were home to a diverse range of bird, lizard, bat, fish, and insect species.

7. Protecting existing indigenous ecosystem types is important if the biodiversity and ecosystems that characterise the district are to be retained.

3.2 Operative District Plan

8. The topic of Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity does not have a specific section in the operative District Plan - rather there are a number of provisions throughout the plan that relate to the protection of indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna as setout below:

· Chapter 1 (amenity 1.10.2, significant natural resources 10.10.9);

· The residential chapters include provisions on general vegetation clearance especially Chapters 4A General, 4B Special, 4D Hill and 4E Landscape Protection, Chapter 8B General Rural Activity Area (Coastal Environment) (these consider indigenous vegetation removal in general terms as no distinction is made within the plan between significant indigenous vegetation and habitats and indigenous vegetation as a whole and this protection is limited by the restrictions of section 76(4A-D) of the RMA that prevents blanket protection of trees on urban environment allotments);

· Significant Natural Resources (SNR), on public land, are identified and protected through Chapter 14E Significant Natural, Cultural and Archaeological Resources these include some sites with significant ecosystem and biodiversity value; and

· There are also many sites with significant indigenous biodiversity value located on public reserves (both Council and GWRC) and within crown land administered by the Department of Conservation. As such, these public areas are protected by Open Space Activity Area provisions and SNRs (Chapters 7A, C and 14E) and other relevant legislation such as Conservation Act 1987, Reserves Act 1977, Wildlife Act 1953 as well as specific management plans.

9. Overall, the current District Plan has some protection for identified Significant Natural Resources but this is limited to publicly owned and administered land. There is no specific protection for significant indigenous vegetation (especially trees) and habitats of indigenous fauna on privately owned land.

3.3 Relevant Plan changes (including prepared, proposed and not progressed)

10. There are two operative plan changes and one that is legally operative in part, that have made changes to the relevant parts of these chapters outlined above for Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity. These plan changes are as follows.

11. Plan Change 16 (Notification Provisions and Miscellaneous Changes), which moved the location of an appendix relating to Baring Head from Chapter 14E to Chapter 3.

12. Plan Change 36 (Notable Trees and Vegetation Removal Provisions) which changed the provisions with respect to indigenous vegetation clearance in the Residential Activity Areas – this Plan Change is currently subject to an appeal in the Environment Court.

13. Plan Change 43 (Residential and Suburban Mixed Use), which replaced Chapter 4A General Residential Activity Area thus removing provisions with respect to vegetation clearance.

14. The proposed Draft Significant Natural Areas, Outstanding Natural Landscapes, Outstanding Natural Features and Coastal Natural Character Areas plan change was prepared to protect the following identified areas from inappropriate subdivision, use and development, in accordance with the legal requirements of the RMA and RPS:

· Areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats

· Outstanding natural features and landscapes, and

· Areas of high natural character values in the coastal environment.

15. On 28 November 2018 Council agreed to take a non-regulatory approach and as such this draft plan change was not publicly notified. The decision not to notify is currently subject to an application by Forest and Bird for two declarations to the Environment Court. This declaration seeks that the decision not to proceed with the draft plan change:

1. contravenes Council’s duty to protect areas of significant indigenous vegetation and habitat of indigenous fauna (pursuant to section 6(c) of the RMA), and

2. fails to give effect to the statutory requirements of the NZCPS and the RPS.

Depending on the outcome of this Environment Court process, it may influence how Council proceeds with addressing these matters in the district plan review.

3.4 Other methods and non-regulatory methods

16. Beyond the District Plan, Council protects, maintains and enhances indigenous biodiversity through other methods.

17. Councils and other government agencies provide protection to open spaces, including areas of significant indigenous vegetation and habitat of indigenous fauna on public land through reserve/conservation status and management plans.

18. Council has developed an indigenous biodiversity fund and provides grants to help Lower Hutt landowners/managers protect, enhance and manage indigenous habitats on their land. The grants support a range of activities including pest and weed control, fencing, indigenous revegetation planting and may include providing materials or expertise for larger scale projects.

19. Voluntary covenants can also be used to legally protect indigenous habitats in perpetuity by identifying sites and placing restrictions on the records of title. These covenants are generally put in place by the landowner or with consent of the landowner and the Council has no role in their creation, management or monitoring.

20. Council and GWRC support a range of groups and organisations that are working to improve the environment, including:

· Predator Free Hutt Valley.

· Greater Wellington Regional Council has identified 10 key native ecosystems in Lower Hutt, which cover approximately 11,622 hectares of important native ecosystems, predominately on public land and have developed operational plans for their management and enhancement.

· Council provide funding support for the Remutaka Conservation Trust’s Kiwi Project, which aims to release Brown Kiwi into predator-controlled areas of the Remutaka Forest Park.

· Council has a reserve dedicated to the protection of Little Blue Penguin habitat.

· Enviroschools – 33 schools in the district belong to the program where the school commits to a long-term sustainability journey, where tamariki/students connect with and explore the environment, then plan, design and take action in their local places in collaboration with their communities.

· Restoration projects and groups for our parks and beach care.

4. Discussion

4.1 Current state of Indigenous Biodiversity in New Zealand

21. In summary:

· Most of New Zealand indigenous species are found nowhere else in the world.

· Many important ecosystems and habitats, especially wetlands and lowland forest, are not protected and are in a modified state.

· 468,000 hectares (82%) of priority 1 habitat (those that have less than less than 20% of indigenous cover remaining) is not protected by public ownership or covenant, with 284,238 ha in the North Island (see map of priority one habitats) (https://www.mfe.govt.nz/more/biodiversity/national-policy-statement-biodiversity/statement-national-priorities-biodiversit-1)

· Biodiversity in New Zealand is declining with large losses of indigenous forest and wetlands on private land. Almost two-thirds of rare ecosystems are threatened with collapse.

· Of the species assessed, 79 percent (174 of 220 species) of indigenous terrestrial vertebrate species (bats, terrestrial birds, frogs, and reptiles) were classified as either threatened with or at risk of extinction.

· 62% of threatened species are located outside of the conservation estate and statistics show a steady decline in species with more becoming threatened and the vulnerability of species increasing.

4.2 The state of Indigenous Biodiversity in Lower Hutt

22. The Landcare Research Our Environment Land Atlas Maps provide information on vegetation and ecosystems across the country and in Lower Hutt. Excerpts from the maps are found at Appendix 1 and these include reports specific to Lower Hutt.

(Please note that these maps are done on a national scale so are indicative only providing a general overview of the state of the environment).

23. These indicative maps and reports show that the city as a whole has a high cover of indigenous (native) forest and scrubland (covering approximately 63% of the city) of which approximately 30% is protected (ie within regional and forest parks) and large areas are regenerating. However, not all of the reserve land within Lower Hutt district is shown and the figure within the public estate could be closer to 37%. Exotic vegetation makes up some 21% of vegetation cover, much of which is pasture and forestry, and the urban area amounts to approximately 12% of the land area of the city.

24. Regionally it appears that indigenous forest cover has decreased slightly (losing some 600ha) between 45% cover and 36% cover between 1996 and 2012 (Appendix 2 - showing land cover change from 1996 and 2012 (https://www.lawa.org.nz/explore-data/land-cover/)) with little change in indigenous shrub and grass lands.

25. The Wildlands report – Indigenous Biodiversity in Hutt City 2018¹ provides an overview of the biodiversity values and important habitats in the district. It outlines the most significant indigenous ecosystems in the city and their state:

· Wetlands in the Hutt, Wainuiomata, Moores and Orongorongo River Valleys – The maps and reports at Appendix 3 show that pre-human occupation wetlands covered approximately 15% of the city between Stokes Valley, Wainuiomata and the coast. Wetlands now constitute 0.3% of the ecosystem/habitat types in the district. Due to the small extent of remaining wetlands they are considered ecologically significant and include habitat of 26 bird species that are classified as threatened or at risk.

· Eastern Hills and Eastbourne – which forms part of a large tract of forest connecting East Harbour Regional Park and the Remutaka/Tararua ranges. The mature forest is beech while regenerating hillsides consist of predominantly broad-leafed tree species. This interconnected habitat is important for many threatened and at risk plant, bird, insect and lizards species. The waterways in these areas are less modified so also provide critical habitat for endangered freshwater species such as lamprey. These areas are also providing habitat for reintroducing species such as the brown kiwi.

· Western Hills – This area is a regionally important landscape of block fields and slow moving slips. There are still pockets of kohekohe and tawa forests that provide habitat for threatened and at risk indigenous species such as ramarama, rata, bush falcon, and giant kòkopu.

· Beaches, coastal cliffs and shingle beaches – unmodified coastal habitat is rare and parts of the districts coastline are of national geological significance (Turakirae Head is of international significance). These varied ecosystems are home to some of the countries rarest plant species and provide habitat for a large number of indigenous birds (at least 68) and animal species many of which are threatened or at risk.

26. The district does have large areas of regenerating indigenous vegetation. These areas help to maintain and buffer original forest and wetland remnants and in places provide connectivity between important ecosystems and protected habitats. Over time these regenerating areas could become more established habitat and enhance biodiversity.

4.3 Efficiency and effectiveness monitoring of existing Plan provisions

27. The policy framework of the current District Plan for the protection of indigenous biodiversity is limited in where it applies. Rules on vegetation clearance only apply in the residential activity areas and there are no specific rules for indigenous biodiversity in the rural activity areas. It would appear that these rules with respect to vegetation clearance have been partially effective in this context in that the applications granted in the residential activity area accord with the objectives. However, there is limited attention to impacts on indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna in most resource consents/application, which in part appears to be due to limited reference on these matters in the rules.

28. Furthermore, there is limited coverage for the entirety of Lower Hutt in terms of where existing provisions apply. Chapter 14E Significant Natural Resources (SNRs) Appendix 1 lists 68 sites. In the last 10 years, nine resource consent applications have been received for these sites, and most of these applications were for works associated with maintaining or improving public access, such as earthworks. These works were assessed to have a limited impact on the indigenous ecosystems and biodiversity values of these sites. Therefore, these provisions appear to have been effective at managing the effects of these types of works for the identified sites.

29. The small number and type of resource consent applications made within SNRs indicates there is limited pressure on these sites, and/or that the current provisions are deterring inappropriate activities. In addition, it is noted that SNRs and open spaces only apply to public land, with most of this land either reserve land or protected by other mechanisms.

30. It should be also noted that although the operative district plan provisions, especially in the residential and open space zones, cover general indigenous vegetation clearance they make no distinction between significant indigenous vegetation and habitats and those of lesser value. The current provisions also predominately consider vegetation removal and limited scope to consider the impact of activities within/adjacent to these areas, nor the cumulative effects of land uses and vegetation loss.

31. While there are some links between objectives and policies within each chapter, overall there are few linkages between individual chapters. Also in some instances the objectives are so broad that it is difficult to accurately assess the effectiveness of the policies and rules in achieving them. In other instances there are no rules addressing the objectives and policies related to indigenous vegetation protection (open space and rural chapters), thereby, making the objectives and policies ineffective as there are no methods by which they can be achieved. Also within the General Residential chapter there will be rules inserted by Plan Change 36 that have no objectives or policies.

32. There is little consistency in approach across the plan in dealing with the protection with indigenous vegetation and little or no provision addressing protection of ecosystems or habitats.

33. In addition, the current plan provisions have limited recognition of the cultural values of ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity, as well as provision for traditional use or management of natural resources.

34. In summary, the current provisions appear to be partially effective where they apply (e.g. general residential and open space areas). However, due to the spread and vagueness of the provisions themselves, as well as the lack of coverage in a number of areas, it is uncertain and difficult to determine the effectiveness of the current provisions. However, notwithstanding this conclusion on whether the current District Plan is achieving its objectives for protecting the indigenous biodiversity and habitats of indigenous fauna, it is not giving effect to the RMA, RPS and NZCPS.

4.4 Statutory and Policy context

35. The RMA has included since its inception the direction to protect indigenous biodiversity: Section 6 of the RMA states that protection of indigenous biodiversity is a matter of national importance.

In achieving the purpose of this Act, all persons exercising functions and powers under it, in relation to managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources, shall recognise and provide for the following matters of national importance:

(c) the protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna:

36. In addition, the RMA sets out ‘other matters’ - Section 7 of the RMA states that in achieving the purpose of the Act these matters shall also be had regard to:

(a) kaitiakitanga:

(aa) the ethic of stewardship:

(b) the efficient use and development of natural and physical resources:

(d) intrinsic values of ecosystems:

(f) maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the environment:

(g) any finite characteristics of natural and physical resources:

37. There have been a number of national, regional and local policy and plan changes since provisions relating to ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity were developed in the current District Plan. These policy directions and changes will influence the objectives, policies and rules relating to indigenous biodiversity and ecosystems in the District Plan review. The most significant are:

· The National Planning Standards 2019 provide direction to Councils for defining terms, formatting and structuring District Plans. The NPStds require that ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity shall be dealt with in part 2 of the plan within the section dealing with Natural Environment Values. Chapter 7 paragraph 19 of the National Planning Standards states that:

If the following matters are addressed, they must be located in the Ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity chapter:

a. identification and management of significant natural areas, including under s6(c) of the RMA

b. maintenance of biological diversity

c. intrinsic values of ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity.

This differs from the approach taken in the operative District Plan where the ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity are not specifically dealt with as a separate issue or section except for the identification and protection of SNRs on public land in Chapter 14E.

· New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010 provides direction for the management of the effects of activities in the coastal environment and indigenous biodiversity (Policies 6 and 11) and must be given effect to by district plans.

· The Wellington Regional Policy Statement 2013 (RPS) requires Territorial Authorities to identify and protect significant indigenous vegetation and habitats with significant biodiversity values within their District Plans (Objective 16, Policies 23 and 24). Section 4.3 states that the City Council has the primary responsibility for controlling the use of land to maintain indigenous biodiversity through the creation of objectives, policies and rules in the District Plan. Policy 23 sets out the assessment criteria for identification of indigenous ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values.

As such the Council is required to identify and protect significant indigenous vegetation and habitats and the intrinsic values of these ecosystems and make provision for their protection to avoid, remedy or mitigate the effects of subdivision and land use activities. Council is also required to control use, development and protection of land to maintain indigenous biodiversity, generally.

· The Hutt City Council Environmental Sustainability Strategy (‘the ESS’) gives direction for Council to protect, enhance and/or repair the environment in particular key areas and species (Appendix I of the ESS gives a summary of the issues and responses for the biodiversity focus area).

· The Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity is still in draft form and as such currently carries no weight in the decision making or policy formation process. However, it provides an indication as to the direction that national policy is likely to take and once adopted the district plan will need to give effect to its objectives and policies. Its overriding principles are to:

- protect, maintain and enhance indigenous biodiversity in a way that recognises that reciprocity is at the heart of the relationship between people and indigenous biodiversity; and

- develop meaningful and tailored objectives, policies and methods to operationalise Hutia Te Rito.

When implemented it will require Territorial Authorities to identify and classify areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna (SNAs) in a manner outlined in the NPS and avoid/manage adverse effects of the subdivision, land use and development within and adjacent to the identified SNAs as well as providing for restoration and enhancement.

4.5 Resource Management Analysis

38. The primary issue is the loss of significant ecosystems and declining indigenous biodiversity which makes the identification of areas/sites of significant indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna and their protection and management of their character, values and amenity a matter of national importance.

39. There are also a number of implementation issues including:

· How indigenous biodiversity can be protected while allowing communities and landowners to provide for their social and economic wellbeing?

· Identification, classification and mapping of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna with landowners and communities.

· Determining the most appropriate regulatory and non-regulatory methods to protect, maintain and enhance indigenous vegetation and ecosystems.

40. The primary outcome of this review process for Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity is:

Working with the community and land owners to develop mechanisms to identify, protect and enhance significant indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna and to enrich the ecosystems and biodiversity of Lower Hutt District while providing for their social and economic wellbeing.

5. Options

41. Set out below are options for the nature, scale and extent of the scope of the initial phase of Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity topic. The options are focused on engagement and reflect the pending outcome of processes outside of Council (i.e. government in setting national policy and Environment Court on earlier District Plan Change appeal and declaration). Three options are put forward predominately relating to engagement at this stage.

5.1 Option A – wait until the National Policy Statement on Indigenous Biodiversity is released

42. The draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPS-IB) was consulted on in early 2020. The government has indicated the final NPS-IB will be released and take effect in April 2021. The content of this document will provide national policy direction as to how indigenous biodiversity should be identified and protected. This policy statement will direct the approach taken by the District Plan review on indigenous biodiversity. In addition, the NPS-IB may set out the process, including engagement, for its implementation. This process is anticipated to include engagement with land owners, affected persons, stakeholders and interested parties.

43. Under Option A, engagement with the community and stakeholders would occur following release of the National Policy Statement – i.e. after April 2021. However, there is a risk that the National Policy Statement may not be released in April 2021 which may delay this engagement and impact on the overall timeframe for the District Plan Review.

5.2 Option B – wait until the Environment Court decision on plan change 36 with respect to vegetation clearance and the declaration application on the non-notification of plan change 46 are determined.

44. This option will implement the direction potentially set by the Environment Court. Similar to Option A, the timeframe for these decisions are unknown, which may delay this engagement and impact on the overall timeframe for the District Plan Review.

45. This option may limit the amount of public engagement that can be undertaken as the timeframes and any direction is unknown at this stage.

5.3 Option C - Initiate public engagement ahead of the National Policy Statement on Indigenous Biodiversity and Environment Court decisions

46. The intention would be to initiate early discussions with landowners and the wider community as to what they see as the issues and how they would like to see them addressed. It would provide an opportunity to discuss their concerns and aspirations and develop an approach to the identification and management of indigenous biodiversity and ecosystems. It may provide a way to work with the community to develop a range of additional options for moving forward on this issue ahead of the release of the NPS-IB.

47. This option would allow for early and comprehensive engagement with landowners, affected persons, interest groups and statutory consultees to determine mechanisms to identify and protect indigenous biodiversity. It would also provide more opportunities for public participation and engagement.

48. However, the decisions on Plan Change 36 and 46 appeals and NPS-IB will give direction to Council as to how the identification and protection of indigenous biodiversity should be addressed in the District Plan.

5.4 Matters to be considered once the outcomes of the NPS-IB and Environment Court decisions are known.

49. Ultimately the NPS-IB and the Environment Court decision on PC36 and the declaration on PC46 will provide direction to the Council as to how the identification and protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna. As such early/pre-engagement with stakeholders and communities would need to focus on identifying issues and putting in place processes for working with them to develop mechanisms for identification and protection in the light of these matters,

50. Future options for deliberation will be to consider the merits of regulatory and non-regulatory approaches. Options on how to progress this topic will depend on the outcomes of public consultation, the NPS-IB and the Environment Court decision on PC36 and the declaration of PC46 and may include:

· Updating the current approach;

· Review and update the current evidence base along with, objectives, policies and rules to give effect to the national and regional policy direction; or,

· In-depth review of the District Plan approach to identifying and protecting indigenous biodiversity and ecosystems. A clear appraisal of the district’s indigenous biodiversity and habitats including mechanisms and proposed management and improvement potential.

6. 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. Activities within ecosystems and areas of indigenous vegetation can have positive and negative impacts on climate change – for example, planting and maintaining indigenous vegetation can be a carbon sink, and improve biodiversity and protecting ecosystems. Conversely, clearing these areas can remove this carbon sink.

53. In addition, ecosystems and biodiversity will be adversely affected by the impacts of climate change, such as changes in rainfall causing increased flooding and erosion or droughts. Climate change matters could be considered as part of the review of the ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity, whichever option is selected.

7. Consultation

54. Engagement will be a key component for this topic. In particular, engaging with landowners, parties with specific interest in biodiversity and the wider community. Initial meetings have taken place with landowners on the working group for the Council’s biodiversity incentive fund to discuss the District Plan Review and how engagement could occur. Feedback from this group was that early and regular engagement should occur. No further engagement or consultation has been undertaken so far specifically on issues relating to the Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity.

55. Irrespective of the option selected above for initial engagement, a significant level of engagement and public information will be required for this topic once the NPS-IB and Environment Court outcomes are known. Key principles of this engagement include:

· Understanding and recognition of differing views and opinions on ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity.

· Ensuring clear and accurate information provision.

· Working directly with those people with an interest in this matter.

· Avoid “consultation fatigue” by piggy-backing on other consultation opportunities for stakeholders with multiple issues

56. This engagement is anticipated to take place via a range of methods, including:

· Individual meetings, such as on-site meetings with landowners.

· Online surveys/forums considering ecological and biodiversity value and land uses.

· Consultation events or workshops for key stakeholders and affected parties alongside other district plan topics.

· Public meetings or open days on the whole plan review.

57. The primary consultees that have been identified, in no particular order, are:

· Affected land owners

· Community interest groups

· Forest and Bird

· Department of Conservation (as land owners/managers)

· Mana Whenua

· Greater Wellington Regional Council (as land owners/managers)

· Wider community

8. Legal Considerations

58. 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.

59. 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 (by April 2024).

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

61. The RMA part 2 section 6 states that protection of indigenous biodiversity is a matter of national importance. Section 31(1(b) states:

the control of any actual or potential effects of the use, development, or protection of land, including for the purpose of—

(iii) the maintenance of indigenous biological diversity:

9. Financial Considerations

62. As outlined above, all options would be undertaken within the current District Plan Review budget.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Appendix 1a map actual vegetation cover	34
2 ⇩	Appendix 1a2 - key actual cover	36
3 ⇩	Appendix 1b - map Threatened Ecosystems	37
4 ⇩	Appendix 1b2 - key threatened environment	39
5 ⇩	Appendix 1c map Protected Areas	40
6 ⇩	Appendix 1c2 - key protected areas	42
7 ⇩	Appendix 1d - map Ecosystem	44
8 ⇩	Appendix 1d2 - key Ecosystem	46
9 ⇩	Appendix 2 Land cover change 1996-2012	48
10 ⇩	Appendix 3a - Pre-human wetland cover	49
11 ⇩	Appendix 3b - Current wetland cover	51
12 ⇩	Appendix 3c - Current wetland cover 1:100,000	53

Author: Cathy McNab

Environmental Policy Analyst

Author: Benjamin Haddrell

Policy Planner

Reviewed By: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

66 18 February 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

19 January 2021

File: (20/1539)

Report no: DPRS2021/1/6

Natural Character, Natural Features and Landscapes

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to review the provisions relevant to areas of significant natural character, natural features and landscapes in the City of Lower Hutt District Plan (District Plan). It includes a review of the existing approach and the effectiveness and efficiency of the operative District Plan provisions in light of the current statutory context and identifies issues, opportunities and options for the review of this topic. The review considers whether the outcomes in the plan have been achieved and how usable the plan is.

2. The outcome of this review is to discuss the issues that will need to be addressed in the District Plan Review for natural character, natural features and landscapes and to identify options to assist in determining the approach for the Proposed District Plan.

3. This part of the Natural Environment topic has several aspects, which will be dealt with both separately and together throughout this report as they are interlinked:

· The natural character of the coastal environment, wetlands, lakes, rivers and other waterbodies

· Outstanding, Significant or other valued Landscapes

· Outstanding, Significant, or other valued Natural Features

· Landscape character and Special Amenity Landscapes

4. Separate reports address Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity and Public Access.

5. The natural character, natural features and landscapes of Lower Hutt are diverse in form and use and as such have a range of differing issues and management needs. This topic will also cross over into other land use zones such rural and residential zones, the coast and open spaces as well as subdivision and earthworks. As such this topic needs to integrate with a range of topic areas, with some aspects more fully covered in the other specific topic papers including ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity and the coastal environment.

1.2 Key Points

· Dominant land forms and processes influence the natural environment in Lower Hutt which is reflected in its variety of landscapes and natural features and character. Some of the environments are highly modified and some remain in or are regenerating to a more natural state. Many of them are strongly influenced by the coastal environment and river valleys.

· The District Plan has some protection for identified Significant Natural Resources (SNR), which includes sites of natural features, landscapes and character but this protection currently only applies to publicly owned and administered land. There are no specific protections for natural character, features or landscapes beyond SNR’s. Some of the residential zones have rules with respect to earthworks and indigenous vegetation clearance that consider landscape and character.

· A previously prepared draft proposed plan change (46) proposed protection of Outstanding Natural Landscapes, Outstanding Natural Features and Coastal Natural Character Areas across the district on publicly and privately owned land. The Council decided not to notify this plan change. The decision not to notify the plan change is currently subject to an application for a declaration in the Environment Court – the processing of this application in the Court is currently on-hold pending the outcome of the appeal on Plan Change 36.

· The landscapes and natural features of this district provide significant amenity to the area and some of them are nationally important.

· The RMA provides for the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes and the preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment, wetlands, and lakes and rivers and their margins as matters of national importance (section 6(a)&(b)).

· The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS) policies 13 and 14 direct preservation and restoration of the natural character of the coastal environment. Policy 15 requires protection of natural features and landscapes in the coastal environment.

· The Regional Policy Statement (RPS) requires District Plans to identify and protect outstanding natural features and landscapes (Objectives 17, Policies 106 and 107) and provides scope for Territorial Local Authorities to identify and manage Special Amenity Landscapes (Objective 18 Policies 27 and 28).

· The operative District Plan does not fully give effect to these statutory requirements.

· The primary aim of this process is to:

Work with the community and landowners to develop mechanisms to identify, protect and enhance significant areas of natural character and natural features and significant landscapes of Lower Hutt District while providing for social and economic wellbeing.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

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

(2) agrees to undertake a review of the Natural Character, Natural Features and Landscape topics in line with the details set out in Option 2;

(3) agrees to working with affected landowners, community interest groups, GWRC and the Department of Conservation to determine a way forward;

(4) agrees to the engagement approach for the review of Natural Character, Natural Features and Landscapes as summarised in section 7 of this report; and

(5) develops an approach for identifying and protecting significant sites of Natural Character, Features and Landscapes in consultation with landowners, the community and stakeholders.

For the reason(s)

· Ensure appropriate and effective engagement and consultation with land owners, communities, stakeholders and the public from the beginning of the process;

· Reflect the nature, qualities and pressures on significant areas of Natural Character, Natural Features and Landscapes;

· To give effect to RMA, RPS, NZCPS and the National Planning Standards;

· Aims to protect the value of areas for future generations; and

· Efficient use of Council resources.

3. Background

3.1 General Overview

6. The presence of a number of dominant land forms and processes influence the character and amenity values of the natural environment and landscape in this district – the major river valleys, and the coast dominate together with the surrounding hill country and the fault lines. The four main natural environment features identified by the Hutt Landscape Study 2012 are:

The coast: Although much of the coastal environment is highly modified especially along Petone seafront and Seaview industrial area, beyond Eastbourne there has been less human intervention in the coastal environment so it has a more natural appearance and higher natural value. Throughout the coastal environment topographical features such as the beaches, the sea cliffs, the sloping marine terraces, the higher eroded terraces and the hills retain elements of their natural character. Along the southern coast the 1855 and earlier earthquakes created raised beaches creating the areas from Baring Head to Turakirae Head/Scientific Reserve: Turakirae Head is a very high impact landscape with its dramatic boulder fields, raised beaches, rocky land/sea interface and its headland. Climate change, recreation and continuing development pressure impact on these areas.

The river valleys: Lower Hutt comprises of three primary river valleys (The Hutt, Wainuiomata and Orongrongo River Valleys) with ridges and smaller catchments in between them. Much of this flat fertile land has been developed, meaning that some of these waterbodies and their catchments are highly modified and others are almost fully in a natural state such as the Parangārahu Lakes. Wetlands and lowland forests and associated species are poorly represented in the district and remain as small remnants. Threats to these areas include further loss of remnants, pollution and sedimentation from land use and development.

Hill country makes up approximately half of the district and is formed from uplifted river terraces and flood plains. The hill country in the district is quite diverse and was extensively cleared for timber and farming. However, poor productively means that much of this land has been left to revert to gorse and native shrubland. The gentle toe slopes are under pressure for residential and rural residential development.

Ranges – formed by glacial and tectonic events with active fault lines. These areas are still experiencing uplift which in combination of steep slopes and the weak nature of the underlying greywacke rock results in them being highly susceptible to erosion except where vegetation cover remains undisturbed. In general most of the Ranges retain original indigenous vegetation cover due to its low productive potential. The major threats are grazing and damage by pest species (deer, goats, possum).

7. Due to the hills and steep nature of many of the slopes, development has been focused on the valley floors of the Hutt and Wainuiomata Rivers. The hills that surround these valleys have some forest coverage much of which is regenerating indigenous vegetation having been previously cleared and grazed. These hills provide a green backdrop to the urbanised areas on the valley floors.

3.2 Operative District Plan

8. While Outstanding Natural Landscapes and Features, Special Amenity Landscapes and Areas of Outstanding Natural Character are not directly addressed in the operative District Plan, some sites and features that could be considered as outstanding natural features and valued landscapes are listed and addressed as Significant Natural Resources in Chapter 14E of the District Plan. There are also provisions in the Residential Activity Areas that address landscape.

9. Chapter 14E was an original chapter of the plan so has been predominately operative since June 2003 except Rule 14E2.2, which became operative in March 2004. Chapter 14E has not been reviewed since the Plan was made operative apart from some minor changes made by Plan Change 16 to relocate an appendix between chapters.

10. Other chapters/zones of the plan that address amenity and landscape to some degree are:

· Section 1.10 notes the importance of protecting and enhancing landscape and natural character.

· Hill Residential Activity Area 4D has an objective of maintaining and enhancing the distinct characteristics and amenity values of this area. Policies and rules relating to the impact of earthworks, vegetation removal and buildings on the visual appearance, amenity values and the skyline of these areas.

· Landscape Protection Residential Activity Area 4E 1.1.1 notes that: The skyline also has an important amenity value to the City, and it is essential that this be protected from unsympathetic development.

· General Rural 8B 1.1.2 Coastal Environment – recognises the unique character, amenity and ecological value of the coastal environment and aims to protect its values.

· Chapter 14E Significant Natural Cultural and Archaeological Resources –identify and protect significant natural, cultural and archaeological resources from inappropriate subdivision and development. The rules allow Council to consider the extent and effects of the proposed activities/development on identified sites. Much of the undeveloped and less developed hill and coastal environment with in the public estate is listed in Appendix 1 to this chapter.

11. Overall, the District Plan has some protection for identified Significant Natural Resources but this is limited to specific areas of publicly owned and administered land. There are no specific protections for landscapes or features on privately owned land.

3.3 Relevant Plan changes

12. There is one operative plan change that has been made relevant to parts of these chapters, as follows.

13. Plan Change 16 (Notification Provisions and Miscellaneous Changes), moved the location of an appendix from one chapter to another chapter.

· Areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats

· Outstanding natural features and landscapes, and

· Areas of high natural character values in the coastal environment.

15. The preparation of the plan change was informed by research to identify the areas and sites of value (significance). The plan change would have introduced 3 new chapters with objectives, policies and rules to address the above matters including:

· 14M Significant Natural Areas

· 14N Outstanding Natural Landscapes and Outstanding Natural Features

· 14O Coastal Natural Character Areas

16. On 28 November 2018 Council agreed to take a non-regulatory approach and as such the drafted plan change was not publicly notified. The decision not to notify is currently subject to an application by Forest and Bird for two declarations to the Environment Court on matters relating to identification and protection of Significant Natural Areas.

4. Discussion

4.1 State of the Environment monitoring

The Council has commissioned a number of reports on landscapes and the coastal environment. These reports assessed the current state of landscapes and the coastal environment as well as making recommendations as to areas of high value and outstanding and significant natural areas, features and landscapes.

17. The Hutt Landscape Study 2012^{^[2]} Landscape Character Description (Boffa Miskell). This study identified the primary landscape areas and described them. The study provides information to assist in the long term management of landscape change and the development of objectives, policies and rules in the district plan to ultimately comply with the requirements of the RPS. The landscapes of the Upper and Lower Hutt Districts were identified and characterised into separate typographies which were then individually described.

The Study identified the primary four primary landscape types as:

· Hill country, steeper and rolling hills that side the river valleys, while they have been cleared for timber and farming low productivity means they are reverting to exotic and indigenous shrubland.

· River valleys, these flat fertile wetland soils have been gradually taken over by urbanization.

· Coast shows clearly its geological history of tectonic uplifts and sedimentation and gravel from rivers and streams.

· Ranges – elevated steep lands predominately covered in native vegetation and in public ownership.

18. Wellington City and Hutt City Coastal Natural Character Assessment 2016 (Boffa Miskell). This assessment identifies the extent of the coastal environment (including the inland extent) and evaluated the natural character values to assist the Council in giving effect to the RPS policies. It found that:

· Some of the coastal areas including the Petone foreshore are highly modified,

· While the eastern bays contain dwellings on the lowers slopes there is a belt of significant regenerating lowland beech forest.

· Further to the south the area including the harbour Islands and Pencarrow Head have high value although mining and farming have impacted on the natural character of the area in places.

· The area from Baring Head to the southeastern edge of the district including Turakirae Head has very high natural character overall due to its remote wild location.

19. Hutt City Landscape Evaluation 2016 (Boffa Miskell) - The landscape evaluation process essentially identified, mapped and described those landscapes and features in the district that are significant and highly valued to assist the Council in giving effect to regional and national policy. Many of these are in the coastal environment.

20. Greater Wellington Regional Council identifies the primary and secondary water courses and their values – (Table 16 of the RPS):

· The Hutt River/Te Awa Kairangi was a ribbon river that formed most of the Hutt basin and Wellington Harbour. Due to its low lying flat fertile soils it is highly modified. Within this district it runs through urban areas lined with flood protection banks and works. While work is being undertaken to improve the ecological values, it currently has little natural character although provides habitat for threatened fish species and has high recreation value.

· The Wainuiomata River runs through a mix of environments being indigenous vegetation, farmland and the urban area of Wainuiomata, overall it has a more natural form with less modification. The RPS identifies that it has high ecosystem values especially as habitat for indigenous species.

· The Orongorongo River runs through a forest park and water catchment protection area and has very little modification and as such has a high natural character and high habitat values.

· Parangārahu Lakes and their tributaries Cameron Creek and Gollans Stream have high habitat value for fish species as well as supporting a range of indigenous flora and fauna especially wetland species. The lakes and lower reaches of the streams are identified as having outstanding indigenous biodiversity and are considered outstanding natural features.

4.2 Efficiency and effectiveness monitoring of Operative Plan provisions

21. The policy framework of the District Plan for the natural environment is limited. Where provision is made in the District Plan it is spread throughout the plan as noted in section 3.3 of this report.

22. Chapter 14E Significant Natural Resources Appendix 1 lists 68 significant natural resources, which includes areas of natural character, landscapes and features. In the last 10 years, nine resource consent applications have been received and most of these were for works associated with public access works. These works can have a limited impact on the SNR and as such on the landscapes and features that they protect. Therefore, the SNR provisions appear to have been effective at managing the impacts of these works on the values of the identified SNR sites. The small number and type of resource consent applications made within SNRs also indicate there is limited development pressure on public land. However, it should also be noted that SNRs provisions only apply to public land much of which is reserve land or protected by other mechanisms so it is not indicative of what is occurring on private land or as a permitted activity.

23. Apart from SNRs there is no consistent approach across the plan for identifying and protecting natural features, character or landscapes or managing development and protecting these features of the natural environment. While there are some links between objectives and policies within other chapters of the plan, overall there are few linkages between individual chapters. Also in some instances the objectives are so broad that it is difficult to accurately assess the effectiveness of the policies and rules in achieving them. In other instances there are no rules addressing the objectives and policies, thereby, making the objectives and policies ineffective as there are no methods by which they can be achieved.

24. In summary, there is little information available to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of provisions throughout the plan due to their spread and the vagueness of the provisions themselves. It is, therefore, unclear if the district plan and the resource consent process is effectively managing development and protecting significant Natural Features, Character and Landscapes.

25. The review has also shown that the plan could be improved in providing for Mana Whenua and Maori specific activities and particularly for the protection of Mana Whenua values against adverse effects with respect to natural resources and there is little provision made for traditional use or management of natural resources.

26. It is clear that the objectives policies and rules of the operative plan are not giving effect to the requirements of the RMA nor the objectives and policies of the NZCPS and RPS. The District Plan Review will need to address these matters.

4.3 Statutory and Policy context

27. Section 31(1)a of the RMA requires Territorial Authorities to establish, implement and review objectives, policies, and methods to achieve integrated management of the effects of the use, development, or protection of land and associated natural and physical resources of the district.

28. The RMA part 2 section 6 states that protection of the natural environment is a matter of national importance:

a) the preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment (including the coastal marine area), wetlands, and lakes and rivers and their margins, and the protection of them from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development:

b) the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development:

Section 7 states that in achieving the purpose of the Act these matters shall also be had regard to: the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values and the quality of the environment.

29. There have been a number of national, regional and local policy and plan changes since provisions relating to SNR’s were developed. These policy directions and changes will impact on the identification of areas, objectives, policies and rules relating to significant areas in the District Plan review. The most relevant are:

New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010 (NZCPS) - The District Plan must give effect to the objectives and policies of the NZCPS. The objectives of particular note relate to the protection of landscape, character and the natural environment.

The Greater Wellington Regional Policy Statement 2013 (RPS) - requires District Plans to identify and protect outstanding natural features and landscapes (Objectives 17, Policies 106 and 107) and provides scope for Territorial Local Authorities to identify and manage Special Amenity Landscapes (Objective 18 Policies 27 and 28)

Proposed Natural Resources Plan for Greater Wellington Regional Council – In particular Objective O32 which states outstanding natural features and landscapes and their values are protected from inappropriate use and development.

The National Planning Standards - require that the Natural Environment (including the identification of features and landscapes that are outstanding, significant or values and the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes and area of outstanding natural character) be dealt with in part 2 of the plan within the section dealing with Natural Environment Values.

30. As such the Council is required to identify outstanding natural features, outstanding landscapes and significant areas of natural character. It must make provision for their protection to avoid, remedy or mitigate the effects of inappropriate land use, subdivision and development in these areas.

4.4 Resource Management Analysis

31. The natural character of the coastal environment and valued landscapes within the district have been, and continue to be, adversely affected by human development activities such as earthworks, roads, infrastructure, permanent structures and vegetation clearance. Pre-European settlement indigenous vegetation cover would have been a significant feature of the natural environment. Much of the environment has been heavily modified by vegetation clearance, farming and urban expansion.

32. The primary issue is the degradation or damage to significant natural features, natural character and landscapes resulting from inappropriate subdivision, land uses and development.

33. The intent of the review is therefore to:

· Work with the community and land owners to develop mechanisms to identify, protect and enhance significant natural features, character and landscapes.

· Ensure that the significant natural character, natural features, and valued landscapes of the district’s natural environment are protected from inappropriate subdivision, use and development.

· Providing for protection of these features and values while enabling appropriate levels and types of use and development of land within these areas.

5. Options

34. Set out below are options for the nature, scale and extent of the scope of the review for natural character, features and landscapes.

5.1 Option 1: Targeted review focusing on applying the framework in the National Planning Standards.

35. Retain current approach with refinements to align with National Planning Standards and improve the wording of provisions. Under this option, there would be little if any review of the existing District Plan’s approach. Council would effectively adapt the relevant objectives, policies and rules in chapters 4D, 4E, 8 and 14E of the operative District Plan into a new district plan format (as required by the National Planning Standards). This option would still necessitate a desktop review of the current provisions to update and retrofit them to the requirements of the Planning Standards.

36. The main reason for adopting this option is the time and resources that a more complete review would take. However, the provisions have not been reviewed since becoming fully operative in 2004 and there has been a change in policy direction since then. Without a more complete review the existing approach would not give effect to the NZCPS, RPS, or RMA. It also provides little protection to natural character, features and landscapes and would not address the extent of the natural environment values of the district as identified in the Coastal Natural Character Assessment, Hutt Landscape Evaluation and Hutt Landscape Study.

37. Under this option, it is expected that Council would still include many of the rolled-over provisions as part of a proposed district plan, and these would also be open to submission and appeal.

5.2 Option 2: Complete review addressing strategic issues. Review of all of the existing objectives, policies and rules alongside specialist reports and assessments.

38. This option would necessitate a desktop review of the all of the current evidence base along with, objectives, policies and rules to ensure provisions fit with the more recent evidence and policy requirements. Consideration would be given to reviewing, updating and implementing the findings of recent specialist assessments (Hutt Landscape Study 2012 and the Hutt City Landscape Evaluation 2016 and Coastal Natural Character Assessment 2016) in particular with respect to:

· Identification, mapping and protection of outstanding natural features, landscapes and natural character.

· Consideration of identifying and protecting Amenity Landscapes.

· Incorporation of any work done by GWRC with respect to the natural character of inland waterbodies.

· Early engagement with landowners, affected persons and statutory consultees to determine mechanisms to identify and protect these features.

39. This option would provide for a review of the landscapes, natural features and character as a predominately desktop assessment with any additional field work or updating of assessments identified as necessary. It would ensure that this aligned with the current National Planning Standards and that the plan gave effect to, and was consistent with legislation, NZCPS, RPS, site specific management plans and other Regional and City Council policies.

40. However, it may not fully address natural character in particular those associated water bodies away from the coast nor would it substantially update the specialist assessments done between 2012 and 2016.

5.3 Option 3 - Comprehensive review, involving an all-encompassing approach and addresses a number of Council’s wider aspirations for the District

41. This option includes the review scope outlined in option two as a starting point and there would be a full review of the District Plan approach to the Natural Environment, potentially with significant investigations into:

· Updating of the specialist reports (done between 2012 and 2016) with respect to landscape, natural features, and natural character as needed.

· Assessment of water bodies and their margins with respect to their natural character in additional to the work done in the Coastal Natural Character Assessment 2016 and Hutt Landscape Study 2012. Note that this work is likely to be undertaken in conjunction with GWRC.

· A full landscape character appraisal for the whole district to classify all parts of the district and consider all aspects including amenity, ecology, character, heritage, interventions and propose management and improvement potential.

· Identification of outstanding and valued landscapes and areas with outstanding natural character and identification of mechanisms for their protection and enhancement.

· Identification, mapping and inclusion of provisions.

42. As such the review would aim to address those matters identified within the current and proposed specialist reports and the RPS, NZCPS the RMA, as well as wider issues identified in other national, regional and local documents and may include Council activities outside the plan.

43. This option would require more resources than other options. In resource management terms it would be unlikely to achieve substantially more than option 2 except for the identification and classification of areas of outstanding natural character associated with inland water bodies and identification of all landscapes within the district and some provisions for their management and improvement. It may also provide more opportunities for public participation and engagement with the development of provisions and identification of areas.

6. Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

45. Activities within the natural environment can have positive and negative impacts on climate change – for example, planting and maintaining vegetation cover can be a carbon sink, and protecting significant landscapes can protect areas of high land instability and flood risk from development. Conversely, landscapes and natural features, especially along the coast, will be adversely affected by the impacts of climate change, such as changes in sea levels causing increased flooding and erosion.

7. Consultation

46. No specific engagement or consultation has been undertaken so far specifically on issues relating to the natural character, natural features and landscapes.

47. Depending on the option selected for reviewing this topic, the following level and nature of engagement is anticipated to be incorporated within the wider District Plan consultation and engagement processes with strategic partners, rural communities, affected land owners, interest groups and the wider community.

48. The intention would be to initiate early discussions with landowners and communities as to what they see the issues as and how they would like to see them addressed. It would provide an opportunity to discuss their concerns and aspirations and develop an approach for the identification and management of natural character, natural features and landscapes. It may provide a way to work with the community to develop a range of additional options for moving forward.

49. Engagement will be a key component for this topic. In particular, working with the community and experts to identify significant sites and develop provisions to protect these sites. There is likely to be a significant level of engagement and public information required:

· Engage with community interest groups, key stakeholders and affected communities about the issues and requirements with regard to natural character, natural features and landscapes and the District Plan review’s role in addressing the issues.

· Ensuring clear and accurate information provision and spread.

· Avoid “consultation fatigue” by piggy-backing on other consultation opportunities for stakeholders with multiple issues

50. This engagement is anticipated to take place via a range of methods, including:

· Individual meetings, such as on-site meetings with landowners.

· Online surveys/forums considering landscape value, land use, amenity, character and values.

· Consultation events or workshops for key stakeholders and affected parties alongside other district plan topics.

· Public meetings or open days on the whole plan review.

51. The primary consultees that have been identified, in no particular order, are:

· Mana Whenua

· Affected land owners

· Community interest groups

· Department of Conservation (as land owners/managers)

· Greater Wellington Regional Council (as land owners/managers)

· Te Roopu Tiaki (Lakes Kohangapiripiri and Kohangatera)

· Harbour Islands Kaitiaki Board as land mangers

· Whaitua te Whanganui-a-Tara Committee

· Local communities and Community Boards.

· Wider community.

8. Legal Considerations

52. 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.

53. The National Planning Standards set 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 (by April 2024).

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

55. The RMA part 2 section 6(a) and (b) states that the preservation and protection of the natural character of the coastal environment, waterbodies and their margins, and the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes is a matter of national importance.

9. Financial Considerations

56. As outlined above, Options 1 and 2 would be undertaken within the current District Plan Review budget. Additional budget may be required for Option 3 unless there was reduced scope for the review of other topics.

Appendices

There are no appendices for this report.

Author: Cathy McNab

Environmental Policy Analyst

Author: Benjamin Haddrell

Policy Planner

Reviewed By: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

77 18 February 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

19 January 2021

File: (20/1746)

Report no: DPRS2021/1/7

Coastal Environment

Purpose of Report

1.1 Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to review the provisions relevant to the Coastal Environment in the City of Lower Hutt District Plan (District Plan). It includes a review of the existing approach and the effectiveness and efficiency of the operative District Plan provisions in light of the current statutory context and identifies issues, opportunities and options for the review of this topic. The review considers whether the outcomes in the plan have been achieved and how usable the plan is.

2. The outcome of this review is to discuss the issues that will need to be addressed in the District Plan Review for the Coastal Environment 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 Coastal Environment chapter of the District Plan.

3. The Coastal Environment has several aspects, which will be dealt with both separately and together throughout this report as they are interlinked:

 Identification of the extent (in particular inland extent) of the terrestrial coastal environment and inland coastal processes

 The natural character of the coastal environment

 The natural coastal environment in relation to biodiversity

 The landscape character and amenity value of the coastal environment

 Cultural values of the coastal environment

 Hazards with respect to coastal erosion, inundation and sea level rise

 Public access to the coastal environment

4. The topics, issues and options discussed in the report have cross overs with those discussed in other reports prepared as part of the District Plan review, these reports may provide more specific detail than this report - particularly the reports that will review:

 Natural Hazards

 Ecosystems and Biodiversity

 Natural Character, Natural Features and Landscapes

 Public Access

 Historical and Cultural Values (esp. Sites of Significance to Maori)

 Open Spaces

1.2 Key Points

 Dominant land forms and processes influence the coastal environment in this district, which are reflected in its variety of landscapes and natural features and character. Some of the coastal environment is highly modified and much of it remains in or is regenerating to a more natural state.

 RMA part 2 section 6 states that protection of, and public access to, the coastal environment is a matter of national importance.

 The District Plan must give effect to the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS) and the Regional Policy Statement (RPS). This includes identifying the inland extent of the coastal environment and managing coastal hazards, indigenous biodiversity, heritage, public access and natural character, features, landscapes and habitats within this extent.

 The District Plan has some protection for significant parts of the coast environment, including archaeological resources and heritage in identified Significant Natural Cultural and Archaeological Resources. However, this protection currently only applies to publicly owned and administered land and identified cultural and archaeological sites. There are no provisions providing for other matters such as natural hazards or public access. Therefore, the operative District Plan does not give full effect to the requirements of the NZCPS and RPS and does not currently define the extent of the Coastal environment.

 The Coastal Environment has significant ecological, economic and amenity value in Lower Hutt District and is under pressure from use and development.

 The initial aim of community consultation would be to inform and engage with key stakeholders and affected communities about the issues and risks facing the coastal environment.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

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

(2) agrees to undertake a review of the Coastal Environment topic in line with the details set out in Option 2; and

(3) agrees to the engagement approach for the review of Coastal Environment as summarised in section 8 of this report.

For the reason(s)

 Ensure appropriate and effective engagement and consultation from the beginning of the process;

 Reflect the nature, qualities, hazards and pressures on/in the Coastal Environment;

 To give effect to RMA, NZCPS, RPS, and the National Planning Standards;

 Efficient use of Council resources.

3. Background

3.1 Introduction

5. The coast is a dynamic ever changing environment and its character is formed by the interaction of the water and land along with the vegetation, wildlife and surrounding land uses. Lower Hutt has a 45.5km shoreline consisting of beaches, bays, seawalls and rocky headlands and residential, recreation, commercial and rural uses along with open spaces and protected sites.

6. The Coastal Environment is a desirable place for people and communities to live, work and play but at the same time, much of the coast holds significant natural, cultural, heritage and amenity value. Human pressure can have significant adverse effects on the coastal environment and its wildlife in particular with loss of habitat, disturbance to natural processes and pollution. In addition, some areas are hazard prone with coastal erosion and inundation from storms and rising sea levels having the potential for significant impacts on human activities within this environment.

7. Nearly 18km of the coastal environment in Lower Hutt is highly modified especially along the Petone seafront and Seaview industrial area and, although slightly less modified, the coastal environment of the Eastern Bays, has been developed with many structures and human activities including seawalls, jetties, toilet blocks, the road and associated infrastructure. Beyond Eastbourne there has been less built use and development in coastal environment, although much of the land is either farmed or has been and is slowly regenerating; it still has a more natural appearance and higher biodiversity, natural and aesthetic value than the more urban sections of the coast.

8. It should be noted that much of the policy direction for the coastal environment overlaps with a number of other topics (e.g. Public Access, Ecosystems and Biodiversity, Natural Hazards). The policy direction for other topics usually applies beyond just the coastal environment. A substantive amount of work will be undertaken outside of this topic that will ultimately need to be integrated into the Coastal Environment.

3.2 Statutory requirements

9. The RMA part 2 section 6 states that protection of the coastal environment is a matter of national importance:

d) the maintenance and enhancement of public access to and along the coastal marine area, lakes, and rivers:

10. Sections 28(a) and 57(1) of the RMA require the Minister of Conservation to prepare a New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS). The latest NZCPS was prepared in 2010 and requires district plans to give effect to the NZCPS. Regional Councils are also required to prepare Coastal Plans and include policies in their Regional Policy Statements (RPS) with respect to the Coastal Environment and its management.

11. The 2013 RPS, which is in-line with the NZCPS, has introduced requirements with respect to the coastal environment that are currently not addressed in the District Plan. The review of the District Plan is required under the RPS to:

 Identify the inland extent of the coastal environment.

 Identify coastal hazards and use policies and rules to avoid inappropriate subdivision and development in areas at high risk from coastal hazards.

 Identify and protect the natural character of the coast including protecting indigenous biodiversity and habitats.

 Identify and protect any outstanding or special natural features or landscapes and provide them with appropriate protection.

 Identify and protect any heritage and cultural sites/features of the coastal environment.

3.3 Responsibilities for the Coastal Environment

12. The Coastal Environment includes the coastal marine area (i.e. sea) and the adjacent landward environment that is affected by active coastal processes and dominated by coastal vegetation or habitat including coastal escarpments, structures and areas of heritage value associated with the coastal or sea.

13. The Coastal Environment is split into two jurisdictions under the RMA:

 City/District Councils are responsible for the landward part of the Coastal Environment which extends inland from the Mean High Water Springs (MHWS) line. The MHWS is essentially the high tide mark.

 Regional Councils are responsible for the area below MHWS – referred to as the Coastal Marine Area.

3.5 Operative District Plan

14. The Coastal Environment is not dealt with comprehensively in the plan. However, aspects of it are covered by provisions in Chapter 1, Chapter 7 Recreation and Open Space, Chapter 8B General Rural Activity Area, Chapter 14E Significant Natural, Cultural and Archaeological Resources and Chapter 14H Natural Hazards.

 Chapter 7B(i) and (ii) Recreation and Open Space - has specific policies on the Petone Foreshore and Seaview Marina, both of which make up a part of the district’s coastal environment and which includes some controls within the areas identified.

 Chapter 8B1.1.2 General Rural – recognises the unique character, amenity and ecological value of the coastal environment and aims to protect its values.

 Chapter 14E Significant Natural Cultural and Archaeological Resources –much of the undeveloped and less developed coastal environment is listed as SNR’s in Appendix 1 to this chapter, including the harbour islands. The appendix also lists a number of cultural and archaeological resources many of which are also located within the coastal environment.

 Chapter 14H Natural Hazards - Coastal hazards - erosion of areas adjoining the coast, inundation of land due to sea level rise, and effects on property and development from storms, cyclones and tsunamis, however there are no specific rules for coastal hazards.

15. Ultimately the District Plan is seeking to provide protection to the natural and cultural resources of the coast while also protecting residents, businesses and infrastructure that are located in the coastal environment from hazards related to the natural and man-made coastal processes to a limited extent. The plan provisions also seek to maintain and enhance the open space and recreation values of the coastal environment.

4. Discussion

4.1 State of the Environment

16. There has recently been a significant amount of research undertaken in the Coastal Environment to identify its extent, consider its natural features, landscapes and character as well as its important ecosystems and biodiversity, to identify hazards resulting from storm surge and sea level rise and identify and describe some sites of significance to Maori. These reports and their findings are discussed below.

Coastal environment

17. Greater Wellington Regional Council monitors the health of water in the Wellington Harbour and the adjacent waterbodies such as Parangarahu Lakes. Monitoring results in the State of the Environment Report 2012 indicated that most coastal environments in the Wellington region were generally in good condition^{^[3]} at that time. Around Petone and along the Eastbourne coast, sites are graded ‘fair’ – these sites tend to breach guidelines more often, especially after rainfall.

18. There appears to have been little specific recent work undertaken on the terrestrial coastal environment with respect to coastal processes and the natural environment. Some work was done assessing the impacts of the new coastal Eastern Bays Shared Path and associated seawalls as part of the resource consent application the reports give some indication of the state of the coastal environment along the route of the path.

Natural Environment

19. The Council has previously in conjunction with other organisations commissioned a number of reports into the natural environment. This work has included consideration of sites with significant ecological values by Wildlands which included sites in the coastal environment.

20. The Wellington City and Hutt City Coastal Natural Character Assessment 2016 identifies the extent of the coastal environment and evaluates its natural character. The review includes both the terrestrial and marine environments in the coastal area. The Coastal Environment includes the coastal marine area (CMA) and a relatively narrow fringe of coastal land of Wellington and Hutt City Council.

21. The assessment considered also the current state of the environment and noted that some of these areas including the Petone foreshore are highly modified, while the Eastern Bays contain dwellings on the lowers slopes and a belt of significant regenerating lowland beech forest. Further to the south, the area including the harbour islands and Pencarrow Head has high value, although mining and farming have impacted on the natural value of the area in places. The area from Baring Head to the southeastern edge of the city, including Turakirae Head has very high natural value overall due to its remote wild location.

22. Hutt City Landscape Evaluation 2016 identified, mapped and described those landscapes and features in the district that have significant value. Most of these are in the coastal environment. The report will assist in defining the significant landscapes and Features in the coastal environment.

23. Hutt Landscape Study 2012 assessed and described the primary character of the Hutt Valley’s landscapes.

Heritage

24. Māori settlement and occupation of the district was concentrated along the coast and as such the coastal environment has special significance, not just as a place for mahinga kai, but with the association and stories that provide Mana Whenua with a sense of place and connection to their land. Work on Sites of Significance for Maori in 2015 identifies some within the coastal environment.

Natural Hazards

25. The political and policy environment with respect to coastal hazards and climate change are rapidly changing as the knowledge base grows and events occur.

26. A review of natural hazard information was completed in 2016 which concluded that sea level rise may have a significant impact on low lying areas including Seaview, Waiwhetu, Petone, Alicetown and Moera and parts of the Eastern Bays.

27. GWRC has recently (2019) provided high level sea level rise and storm surge modelling for the coastline which shows that significant amounts of the coastal environment are under threat from sea level rise.

4.2 Operative District Plan Efficiency and Effectiveness

28. A preliminary review of the current District Plan found that the objectives are broad and relate to the coast only in general terms in most instances. This generality makes it difficult to accurately assess the effectiveness of the policies and rules in achieving the objectives. In many instances there are no relevant methods or rules to relate to objectives and policies such as in the Natural Hazards chapter. Therefore, the policies and objectives cannot be said to be effective as they are unachievable.

5. Resource Management Issues

29. The key resource management issue for the coastal environment is to provide for the communities social, economic and cultural wellbeing while also protecting natural, amenity, recreation heritage and cultural values in the Coastal Environment.

6. Options

Option 1: Targeted review focusing on applying the framework in the National Planning Standards.

30. Under this option, there would be a targeted review of the existing District Plan approach to the Coastal Environment.

31. Council would effectively adapt the relevant objectives, policies and rules in chapters 7, 8 and 14E of the operative District Plan into a new District Plan format (as required by the National Planning Standards). This option would still necessitate a desktop review of the current provisions and retrofit them to the requirements of the Planning Standards. It addition, the provisions would integrate with the other topics relevant to the coastal environment (e.g. natural hazards, open space, cultural, heritage).

32. The main reason for adopting this option is the time and resources that a more complete review would take. However, there has been a change in policy direction since the District Plan was adopted with the NZCPS and RPS and without a more complete review the existing approach is insufficient and inconsistent with more recent policy and guidance. It would also not address the extent of the coastal environment as identified in the Coastal Natural Character Assessment and required by the NZCPS. Nor would it address issues relating to climate change.

33. Under this option, it is expected that Council would still include many of the rolled-over provisions as part of a proposed District Plan, and these would be open to submissions.

Option 2: Complete review addressing strategic issues. Review of all of the existing objectives, policies and rules alongside specialist reports and assessments.

34. Under this option, Council would review the existing objectives, policies and rules of the District Plan along with the information in more recent specialist reports with respect to landscape and coastal natural character and natural area reviews as well as the most up to date information available on sea level rise and climate change.

35. This option would necessitate a desktop review of the entire current evidence base. Consideration would be given to reviewing and implementing the relevant changes based on community engagement and technical information, including:

a. Identification and mapping of the inland extent of the coastal environment.

b. Identification and protection of outstanding and significant landscapes and features and areas of high natural character.

c. Identification and protection of areas of important indigenous habitat and indigenous wildlife sites in the coastal environment.

d. Identification of areas with high natural hazards risks particularly those areas at most at risk from inundation from severe weather and sea level rise and erosion.

e. Maintain and enhance public access to the coast.

f. Identify and protect important archaeology, sites and areas of cultural and heritage significance.

g. Integrate with other topics.

36. The main reasons for adopting this option are to give effect to changes in policy direction since the adoption of the District Plan, including the NZCPS and Regional Policy Statement and other guidance, and ensuring the District Plan reflects the community’s current view and aspirations for the coastal environment.

Option 3: Comprehensive review, involving an all-encompassing approach and addresses a number of Council’s wider aspirations for the District

37. Under this option, there would be a full review of the District Plan approach to the Coastal Environment, potentially with significant investigations into:

a. The matters set out in option two with a review and update (if needed) of specialist reports previously done,

b. Identification and protection of significant indigenous coastal habitats and wildlife including addressing gaps in the biodiversity network,

c. Consideration and implementation of relevant outcomes of the climate change adaption strategy for the coast,

d. Identification, mapping and inclusion of provisions with respect to coastal hazards.

38. This option would require more resources than other options and while it will provide for additional opportunities given the wider scope of investigations in resource management terms it is unlikely to achieve more and is unlikely to be achieved within the time frames outlined for the plan review due to the complexity of the issues involved and the need to wait for the outcomes of the climate change adaptation consultation/strategy.

39. As such, at this time, Option 3 is not recommended due to the time and costs involved.

7. Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

41. The human and natural environments in coastal areas are likely to be impacted on by climate change. The coastal environment is likely to suffer the greatest and most obvious impacts of climate change through sea level rise and more severe weather events, changes in coastal processes and associated erosion and loss of vegetation cover and habitats.

42. The District Plan Review will be undertaken as part of the Council’s approach to climate change in that it will assist in working with affected communities about how to respond to forecasted climate change impacts.

43. It will aim to assist in avoiding, remedying and mitigating climate change impacts from sea level rise, flooding from severe weather events, erosion and habitat loss by developing objectives, policies and rules in the District Plan.

8. Consultation

44. Depending on the option selected for reviewing this topic, the following level and nature of engagement is anticipated to be incorporated within the wider District Plan consultation and engagement processes. The key objectives are:

 The initial aim would be to inform and engage with iwi, community interest groups, key stakeholders and affected communities about the issues with regard to the coastal environment and the District Plan review’s role in addressing the issues.

 Ensuring clear and accurate provision of information.

 Gain an understanding of the level of concern and interest with respect to Coastal Environment that stakeholders and the community have.

 Identification of the inland extent of the coastal environment.

 Avoid “consultation fatigue” by combining with other consultation opportunities for stakeholders with multiple issues and with the wider community in particular on other Natural Hazards and the Natural Environment topics.

45. This engagement is anticipated to take place via a range of methods, including:

 Iwi, internal and strategic partners via targeted meetings.

 Consultation events or workshops for key stakeholders and affected communities alongside other consultations on the natural environment and natural hazards particularly flooding.

 Public meetings or open days on the whole plan review.

46. The primary parties that have been identified, in no particular order, are:

 Mana Whenua, including Te Roopu Tiaki (Lakes Kohangapiripiri and Kohangatera) and Harbour Islands Kaitiaki Board as land mangers

 Greater Wellington Regional Council as land owners/managers and with responsibility for natural hazards

 Property owners/residents particularly in Petone, Seaview, the eastern bays and Eastbourne and along the south coast.

 Local communities in coastal areas

 Forest and Bird

 Department of Conservation

 Transport and infrastructure providers

 The wider community

9. Legal Considerations

47. 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.

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.

49. The RMA part 2 section 6(a) and (b) states that the preservation and protection of the natural character of the coastal environment, waterbodies and their margins, and the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes is a matter of national importance.

50. District plans must give effect to this NZCPS (sections 62(3), 67(3)(b), 75(3)(b)).

51. New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010 provides a national framework to assist regional councils, territorial local authorities and communities to more consistently and transparently plan for the coastal marine environment.

19. Financial Considerations

52. As outlined above, Options 1 and 2 would be undertaken within the current District Plan Review budget. Additional budget may be required for Option 3 unless there was reduced scope for the review of other topics.

Appendices

There are no appendices for this report.

Author: Cathy McNab

Environmental Policy Analyst

Author: Benjamin Haddrell

Policy Planner

Reviewed By: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

84 18 February 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

20 January 2021

File: (20/1526)

Report no: DPRS2021/1/8

Activities on the Surface of Water

Purpose of Report

1) The purpose of this report is to provide context, to outline issues and options, and make a recommendation to the District Plan Review subcommittee as to how Council should proceed with the review of the Activities on the Surface of Water topic of the District Plan.

Key Points

2) From the information already gathered, it appears there are minimal high impact surface water activities currently operating in Lower Hutt.

3) Most activities undertaken are generally low impact recreation activities (swimming, fishing, kayaking).

4) However, the plan does not specifically provide for activities on the surface of water that recognise and provide for the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga.

5) Council should engage with Mana Whenua and Māori to understand how the plan could provide for customary activities.

6) Due to the relatively low scale and significance of issues related to this topic, the following recommendation is made to the District Plan Review subcommittee.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

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

(2) agrees to undertake the review of Activities on the Surface of Water topic as set out in Option 1 contained in the report; and

(3) agrees to undertake engagement, in regard to Activities on the Surface of Water, as set out in Option 1 of the report.

For the reason(s) that:

· It is an efficient use of Council resources;

· It will ensure Council can continue to give effect to statutory requirements;

· Consultation and engagement will be undertaken with stakeholders, particularly Mana Whenua, and the community;

· It will allow officers and Council to understand the most appropriate means to address the issues outlined in this report and raised through the engagement; and

· Can be undertaken within the current budget.

Background

7) Activities on the surface of water generally include swimming, non-motorised boating (kayaking or rafting), motorised boating, fishing, the placement, maintenance or removal of temporary or permanent structures, dredging or extraction, council specific activities (water quality monitoring and flood management) and customary activities.

8) While these activities provide significant recreation opportunities and contribute toward social and cultural wellbeing, they can also have varying effects on ecological values, water quality, amenity values, Mana Whenua values, natural and landscape character, and the capacity for flood and river protection.

9) However, most surface water activities in the District are low impact recreation activities (swimming, fishing, etc) and these have limited effects, while a number of other activities, such as commercial operations, motorised boating or extraction, have the potential for more substantive effects (although these are uncommon).

Statutory context

10) Section 31(1)(e) of the Resource Management Act (RMA) states Territorial Authorities have the following function:

a) The control of any actual or potential effects of activities in relation to the surface of water in rivers and lakes:

11) Therefore, Council is required to control effects of activities on the surface of water in relation to rivers and lakes (note, section 31(1)(e) does not mention the coast as the Greater Wellington Regional Council controls activities on the surface of water in the coastal marine area.)

12) Section 7 of the National Planning Standards requires the following:

a) If provisions for managing activities on the surface of water are addressed, they must be located in the Activities on the surface of water chapter

13) Therefore, if provisions relating to activities on the surface of water are addressed in the new District Plan, they must be located in a single chapter as part of the General District-Wide Matters section.

The current District Plan

14) Activities on the surface of water are currently managed across multiple activity areas (zones) and the objectives, policies and rules are slightly different between them, particularly between the recreation specific activity areas and the rural activity areas.

15) Activities on the surface of water are managed in the following activity areas:

a) River Recreation Activity Area

b) General Rural Activity Area

c) General Residential Activity Area

d) Rural Residential Activity Area.

16) Across all activity areas most low impact surface water activities are permitted activities, including activities such as swimming, kayaking, and fishing. Alongside these, stream and river management undertaken by the Council or Greater Wellington Regional Council and an extraction activity in the Orongorongo river mouth are also permitted in the river recreation activity areas.

17) Resource consent is required for activities that may have a more substantive effect, such as activities like motorised boating, structures (particularly those that may affect flooding infrastructure), commercial recreation activities, and some extraction activities.

18) Again, the requirement for consent varies across activity areas. For example, motorised boating on the surface of water on the Hutt River requires resource consent but motorised boating on the Orongorongo River does not, provided it is undertaken by the owner of the property. The rules and requirements within each zone are provided in Appendix 1.

19) The current District Plan also regulates two specific extraction activities in the Hutt River mouth and the Orongorongo River mouth.

20) It should be noted that the current District Plan does not specifically provide for activities on the surface of water that recognise and provide for the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga.

Discussion

21) Overall, the scale and significance of activities on the surface of water is limited across the city.

22) An assessment of resource consent applications over the last 10 years, show no applications for activities on the surface of water have been received or processed by Council within all of the activity areas that contain rivers or lakes. At the same time, no complaints have been received or enforcement action taken in relation to activities on the surface of water in the last 10 years.

23) This lack of consents is likely due to the most popular activities being permitted and not requiring resource consent. The lack of resource consents could also indicate that there is limited demand to undertake those activities on the surface of water that are restricted under the plan.

24) However, there is no data directly collected on permitted recreation activities, but there is some information available from the Council, GWRC, Fish and Game and the Department of Conservation, which highlights the nature, scale and location of these activities. A summary of this data is shown in Appendix 2.

25) The data reveals that overall, there has not been a substantive increase in the nature and scale of fishing activities on some rivers in the District and that activities like swimming, fishing and kayaking only make a small percentage of total activities undertaken in the Hutt River corridor.

26) The data also reflects that permitted surface water activities (e.g. swimming, fishing, and kayaking) are not undertaken at a significant scale and therefore, have limited effect.

Resource Management Issues

27) The following resource management issues should be addressed through the review of this topic.

28) Providing for appropriate activities on the surface of waterbodies

Activities on the surface of water can provide recreation and commercial opportunities, and for the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga.

29) Managing effects of activities on the values of waterbodies

Activities on the surface of water can create adverse effects, particularly on values of waterbodies. The District Plan review should consider the most appropriate way to manage potential adverse effects on the values of waterbodies.

30) Recognising and providing for the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga.

Specific Māori and Mana Whenua activities in relation to activities on the surface of water are not currently specifically provided for in the District Plan. In giving effect to the RMA, Council must recognise and provide for Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga.

Through partnership with Mana Whenua, the District Plan review should explore how the future Plan could provide for this.

Options

Option 1: Small-scale review

31) Under this option, there would be a minor review of how the existing District Plan manages the effects of activities on the surface of water and how the District Plan recognises and provides for Māori or Mana Whenua specific activities. This option would involve the following:

a) Council officers would engage with key stakeholders, the community (though consultation events on the whole plan), and work in partnership Mana Whenua throughout the process to understand key issues and to provide a better understanding of the nature, scale and location of activities on the surface of water. We would work with Mana Whenua to develop provisions to provide for the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands and traditions in the context of surface water activities.

b) The current provisions would be reviewed in light of the engagement undertaken with the wider community, to align provisions with the National Planning Standards and to ensure the District Plan establishes a consistent management framework for managing the effects of activities on the surface of water.

c) This option will primarily use the information readily available to Council or that is gathered through engagement with key stakeholders and the community to inform the review.

Option 2: Full review

32) Under this option, Council would undertake a full review of how the current District Plan manages the effects of activities on the surface of water and how the District Plan recognises and provides for Māori or Mana Whenua specific activities. This option would involve the following:

a) Council officers would undertake extensive consultation with key stakeholders, recreation groups and the wider community to understand key issues with surface water activities. As with Option 1, officers would partner and work with Mana Whenua in the review process.

b) As with Option 1, this option will utilise the information previously gathered and expand understanding through engagement with the community, stakeholders and Mana Whenua.

c) This option would also involve information gathering through other avenues, which could include surveys, public meetings or focus groups. This approach will be primarily focused on those recreation activities that are permitted under the plan. Information gathering would provide a comprehensive understanding of the nature, scale and location of surface water activities.

d) This option would also review the fragmented approach in the current plan, along with extraction activities and land use adjacent to waterbodies.

33) While additional information through the methods in Option 2 would expand knowledge, the scoping exercise has shown that the issues for this topic are not at a significant scale. The research so far has shown that the intensity and scale of effects of these activities are limited. Therefore, it is likely that additional research would not provide additional value or benefit to the plan review process.

34) This option would require more time and resource compared to other options and for this specific topic area and is unlikely to provide more information nor would it be an efficient use of time or resource.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

36) Climate change may impact upon waterbodies in the district and therefore on the activities that take place on and adjacent to them. This will be considered through the review process predominately in other topic papers, such as flooding. It is unlikely that any decisions made at this stage require consideration in regard to climate change.

37) Climate change considerations will be more relevant once the District Plan review process moves into the phase of developing provisions related to this topic.

Consultation

38) Engagement with Mana Whenua is key in this area, as described above. Engagement with the community, including key stakeholders with specific interests in surface water activities, will be undertaken as outlined in each option above. Through engagement, we will be able to better understand the potential issues the community has with how the District Plan manages the effects of activities on the surface of water.

39) At the same time, engagement is expected to provide a better understanding and expand knowledge of the nature, scale and location of activities on the surface of water.

Legal Considerations

40) 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.

41) Other requirements are set out in the statutory requirements section of this report.

Financial Considerations

42) 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 - Summary of Relevant Provisions	86
2 ⇩	Appendix 2 - Nature, Scale and Location of Surface Water Activities	90

Author: Benjamin Haddrell

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

Attachment 1

Appendix 1 - Summary of Relevant Provisions

Appendix 1: Summary of provisions relating to Activities on the Surface of Water

topic	Issue	objective	policies	rules	outcomes
7C 1.1.1 Surface and Margins of River	Activities on the surface of rivers and adjoining banks need to be managed so that natural and ecological qualities are maintained and enhanced.	To ensure that activities that occur on the surface of rivers and margins have adverse effects which are no more than minor on natural and ecological qualities and access to these areas is maintained.	a. To allow a wide range of low impact recreation activities such as fishing, swimming and other informal recreation and leisure activities. b. To control the use of motorised boating activities on the surface of rivers. c. To ensure that recreation and leisure activities on the surface of rivers and margins have adverse effects which are no more than minor on the stability of river banks. d. To ensure that public access to and along the coastal marine area, lakes and rivers is maintained and enhanced. e. To ensure that recreation activities have effects that are no more than minor on the natural and ecological qualities of river beds, banks and margins	7C2.1 permits: river/stream management/maintenance by Councils, recreation activities except motorised ones, landscape furniture and extraction on an identified area of the Orongorongo river – subject to conditions on operations. 7C2.2 discretionary activity motorised vehicles, extraction on identified area of Hutt River bank, buildings apart from flood works 72.3 all other activities are non-complying	Activities carried out on the surface and margins of rivers will have adverse effects which are no more than minor on ecological values. .
7C 1.1.2 Managing Adverse Effects on Adjoining Residential Activity Areas	Recreation and leisure activities on the surface of rivers and margins can have adverse effects on adjoining residential activity areas. It is important that such adverse effects are managed, avoided or mitigated.	To ensure that river recreation activities have adverse effects which are no more than minor on the amenity values of residential activity areas.	a. To ensure that adverse effects, such as noise, light spill, dust and signs, are managed, avoided or mitigated. b. To control the scale, character and intensity of activities occurring on the surface of rivers and margins adjoining residential activity areas.		Activities carried out on the surface and margins of rivers will have adverse effects which are no more than minor on adjoining residential activity areas.
7C 1.1.3 Flood and River Protection	The River Recreation Activity Area that is contained within the Primary and Secondary River Corridors is exposed to a significant flood hazard. Activities need to avoid or mitigate potential adverse flood hazard effects associated with these higher-risk areas. It is important that recreation activities on the surface of rivers and margins have adverse effects which are no more than minor on flood and river protection works, and that flood waters are not impeded. Any extraction activities that occur are for the purposes of flood control.	1. To ensure that flood and river protection works are not affected adversely by recreation activities and that extraction activities are for the purposes of flood control. 2. To ensure that the flood carrying capacity of the river channel and margins is not reduced.	a. To ensure that recreation activities on the surface of rivers and margins have no more than minor adverse effects on flood protection structures. b. To ensure that recreation activities on the surface of rivers and margins have no more than minor effects on the flow of flood waters during flood events. c. To ensure extraction activities are carried out only for the purposes of flood control. d. To provide for activities associated with the protection of the hydraulic capacity of the Hutt River mouth. e. To ensure that any other activities in the Primary or Secondary River Corridor of the Hutt River have no more than minor adverse effects on flood protection structures.		Activities carried out on the surface and margins will have no more than minor effects on flood protection measures and river works.
7C1.2.1 Buildings and Structures	The visual amenity values of the City are enhanced by the open space character and natural qualities of its rivers and margins. The River Recreation Activity Area also provides places for people to participate in informal recreation and leisure activities. Buildings and structures can significantly detract from the visual amenity values of the River Recreation Activity Area, and reduce the area available for recreation and leisure purposes. Except for buildings and structures relating to river and flood protection works, the development of all other buildings and structures is controlled. It is also necessary to ensure that buildings and structures are sited to avoid or mitigate the adverse effects of flood hazards.	To control the number, location and external appearance of all buildings and structures not associated with flood protection measures and river works and ensure that buildings and structures are sited to avoid or mitigate the adverse effects of flood hazards.	a. To limit the number of buildings and structures not associated with flood protection measures and river works. b. To control the design and external appearance of all buildings and structures not associated with flood protection measures and river works. c. To allow buildings and structures associated with flood protection measures and river works. d. To ensure that public access to and along the coastal marine area, lakes and rivers is maintained and enhanced. e. To ensure that buildings and structures are sited to avoid increasing the flood risk.		The adverse effects of buildings and structures on amenity values will be avoided, remedied or mitigated Activities carried out on the surface and margins will have no more than minor effects on flood protection measures and river works.
8B1.1.5	It is appropriate to allow a range of recreation and leisure activities in rural areas where amenity values and character can be maintained.	To allow rural areas to be used for recreation and leisure activities where amenity values and character are not adversely affected.	a. To allow for activities which provide recreational opportunities or ancillary facilities that support recreational activities.	8B 2.1.1 Permitted Conditions – (m) Recreation: (i) No motorised recreational activity shall be permitted except for the enjoyment of those residents on the site and their visitors, or in the case of the Rimutaka Forest Park where the Department of Conservation has granted consent for motor vehicles within the Park. (ii) No buildings may be used for or in association with a recreation activity; and (iii) Recreation includes garden tours where there are no associated sales or services. B 2.2 Restricted Discretionary Activities (a)Commercial recreation	Recreation activities, including those on the surface of water, are allowed in the General Rural zones. Amenity and Character values are not adversely affected through rules set out in 8B
7A 1.1.1	General Recreation Activity Areas are located throughout the City, with many adjoining Residential Activity Areas. Activities in recreation areas can generate adverse effects, which detract from the amenity values of adjoining residential areas.	To ensure that recreation activities have adverse effects, which are no more than minor on adjoining residential activity areas.
7A 1.1.2	The type of activities carried out should be compatible with the physical characteristics of the land. Areas which are generally flat and not covered with bush should be developed for more active and formal recreation purposes. Areas covered in bush and steeper areas should be protected from inappropriate use and development.	To ensure that recreation activities carried out are compatible with the physical characteristics of the land.	a) To encourage land of suitable topography to be developed and used for formal and active forms of recreation. b) To avoid bush-clad areas of high amenity values from being used and developed for formal and active forms of recreation. c) To ensure that bush-clad areas are protected from inappropriate use and development. d) To ensure that recreation activities carried out in bush-clad areas do not compromise visual amenity values.	All recreation activities are permitted. Motorised rec activities are not. Adverse effects of non rec activities on character and open space are restricted Effects of buildings and structures are controlled
7A 1.1.4	Non-recreational activities in recreation areas can generate adverse effects which detract from the open space character and amenity values of recreation areas. It is important that any non-recreational activity be managed to ensure such detraction is no more than minor.	To ensure that non-recreational activities have adverse effects which are no more than minor.	To restrict the range and nature of non-recreational activities to those which will not affect adversely the open space character and amenity values of Recreation Activity Areas.
7A 1.2.1		To control the size, scale, character, location and external appearance of buildings and structures.	To control the size, scale, character, location and external appearance of buildings and structures.
8A 1.1.4	It is appropriate to allow a range of recreation and leisure activities in rural residential areas, where amenity values and character can be maintained.	To allow rural residential areas to be used for recreation and leisure activities, where amenity values and character are not adversely affected.	To allow for activities that provide recreational opportunities or ancillary facilities that support recreational activities.		Recreation activities, including those on the surface of water, are allowed in the General Rural zones. Amenity and Character values are not adversely affected through rules set out in 8B

99 18 February 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

21 January 2021

File: (20/1747)

Report no: DPRS2021/1/9

Hospital Zone

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to:

a. Provide the District Plan Review Subcommittee of the issues for the District Plan with regard to a Hospital Zone, and

b. Seek direction from the Subcommittee on how the District Plan Review should proceed with regard to a Hospital Zone.

Key Points

· There are three large scale healthcare facilities on adjoining sites in Boulcott: Hutt Hospital, Boulcott Hospital and the Hutt Valley Health Hub.

· In the current District Plan, the Hutt Hospital and Hutt Valley Health Hub are in the Community Health Activity Area, a zone that solely applies to these two facilities. The Boulcott Hospital is in the General Residential Activity Area.

· The National Planning Standards, which set the format and structure for future district plans, provides for a Hospital Zone, which is analogous to the Community Health Activity Area.

· The key resource management issues that have been identified for the Hospital Zone are:

o The healthcare facilities of Boulcott provide for essential healthcare services for the Hutt Valley and Wellington region, and the efficient use and development of these facilities supports the social wellbeing of the community.

o The District Plan needs to strike a balance between enabling land use and development within the Community Health Activity Area, while managing the effects of the land use and development on properties in the surrounding area.

o The site of the Boulcott Hospital is currently in the General Residential Activity Area. A residential zone may not appropriately provide for the on-going use and development of the site.

· It is recommended that the District Plan Review includes a review of the existing objectives, policies and rules of the District Plan for the Community Health Activity Area, with added investigation into whether the site of the Boulcott Hospital should be included in the Hospital Zone.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

(1) notes and receives the information contained in the report, and

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

A review of the existing objectives, policies and rules, with a focus on the balance between:

· The types and scale of land use development that is provided for within the Hospital Zone,

· The effects of land use and development on the surrounding area, and

an investigation into whether the site of the Boulcott Hospital should be included in the Hospital Zone.

Background

2. In 2019, the Government introduced the National Planning Standards. The purpose of the National Planning Standards is to improve consistency in council plans and policy statements.

3. The National Planning Standards set the format and structure that all future district plans, regional plans and regional policy statements must follow. This includes a list of the zones that may be included in a district plan.

4. One of the zones that the National Planning Standards provides for is a Hospital Zone, which is described in the Standards as:

Areas used predominantly for the operation and development of locally or regionally important medical, surgical or psychiatric care facilities, as well as health care services and facilities, administrative and commercial activities associated with these facilities.

5. The current District Plan includes the Community Health Activity Area, which meets this description. It is a zone that applies to connected properties in Boulcott, and specifically provides for the Hutt Hospital and Hutt Valley Health Hub.

6. Council’s District Plan Review includes a review of the District Plan’s approach to managing this area.

7. This report is the first briefing of the District Plan Review Subcommittee for the Hospital Zone. It includes:

a. General information on the Zone,

b. The current approach of the District Plan for managing land use and development in the Zone,

c. The key resource management issues for the Zone,

d. High level options for how the Review could proceed with regard to the zone.

Discussion

Introduction

8. The suburb of Boulcott includes three larger-scale healthcare facilities:

· Hutt Hospital: The district’s public hospital that provides a wide range of health and medical services. This is the largest healthcare facility in the district.

· Boulcott Hospital: A private hospital on a site that adjoins the site of the Hutt Hospital.

· Hutt Valley Health Hub: A relatively new healthcare facility that is also on a site that adjoins the site of the Hutt Hospital. This site was rezoned to Community Health Activity Area in March 2018 to enable the development of the new healthcare facility.

9. The locations of these healthcare facilities are shown on the map in Appendix 1.

10. While the sites of the Hutt Hospital and Hutt Valley Health Hub are in the Community Health Activity Area, the Boulcott Hospital is currently in the General Residential Activity Area.

11. While a number of zones in the District Plan provide for healthcare facilities (particularly commercial activity areas) the Community Health Activity Area is the only zone that specifically provides for healthcare facilities of the large-scale of the Hutt Hospital and Hutt Valley Health Hub.

12. The area surrounding the Community Health Activity Area is mostly residential in nature, with low to medium density built development. However, there are small areas of suburban commercial land on the opposite side of High Street and further to the east and Council-owned recreation land (Mitchell Park) immediately adjacent to the east.

13. While there have been several new buildings and extensions to existing buildings within the Activity Area since the District Plan became operative, most activities and built development in the Community Health Activity Area have been permitted. However, resource consent was required for a childcare centre, carparking building, signage and works under a protected tree.

14. Significant developments within the Activity Area that have occurred since the District Plan became operative in 2003 include:

· The Hutt Hospital’s carparking building,

· The Hutt Hospital’s Theatre and Emergency Department Block, and

· The Hutt Valley Health Hub.

Current District Plan approach

15. The Community Health Activity Area is addressed in Chapter 9A of the District Plan. Chapter 9A includes the following objectives:

· Objective 9A 1.1.1: To accommodate a range of activities on the site in a manner which does not affect adversely amenity values of the surrounding area.

· Objective 9A 1.1.2: To ensure opportunities are available for residential activities on the site, in a manner which does not affect adversely the amenity values or character of the surrounding area.

· Objective 9A 1.2.1: To ensure that all structures and buildings are designed and maintained to ensure the amenity values of surrounding residential and recreation activity areas, and the streetscape are maintained and enhanced.

· Objective 9A 1.2.2: To ensure provision made for on-site parking does not affect adversely the amenity values of adjacent activity areas.

16. The policies of Chapter 9A implement these objectives by giving direction on:

· Providing for activities related to health services,

· Providing for residential activities and home occupations,

· Managing effects of land use, subdivision and development on the character and amenity values of the surrounding recreation and residential areas, including through the bulk and location of buildings,

· Screening on site car parking areas from surrounding areas.

17. Table 1 summarises the rules of Chapter 9A that implement these policies.

Table 1. Rules of Chapter 9A: Community Health Activity Area of the City of Lower Hutt District Plan.

Permitted activities

· Health care services and ancillary activities of a commercial nature.

· Additions to existing buildings and new buildings and structures.

· Dwelling houses.

· Home occupations.

· Child care and Kōhanga Reo facilities.

· Accessory buildings to the above Permitted Activities.

Subject to permitted activities on:

· Boundary setbacks (both minimum yard and recession plane requirements)

· Maximum building height and length,

· Dust and odour,

· Light spill and glare,

· Vibration, and

· On site parking.

Dwelling houses, home occupations, child care and kōhanga reo facilities and accessory buildings are also subject to the permitted activity conditions for the General Residential Activity Area.

Discretionary activities

· Activities that would be permitted but breach the permitted activity conditions (unless provided for in the general rules chapters of the District Plan).

· Offices not associated with a permitted activity.

Non-complying activities

· All other activities.

18. While the District Plan approach for the Community Health Activity Area has not been reviewed since the Plan first became operative in 2003, the site of the Hutt Valley Health Hub (formerly the site of the Naenae Bowling Club) was re-zoned to the Community Health Activity Area in 2018 (through Plan Change 50).

Statutory and Policy Context

19. Other than the National Planning Standards (discussed in paragraphs 2 to 5 of this report) the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 is the only key statutory/policy document for the Hospital Zone for the District Plan Review.

National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020

20. The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (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, and

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

21. Objective 6 of the NPS-UD seeks the following outcome:

Local authority decisions on urban development that affect urban environments are:

a) integrated with infrastructure planning and funding decisions; and

b) strategic over the medium term and long term; and

c) responsive, particularly in relation to proposals that would supply significant development capacity.

22. The policy direction from the NPS-UD varies for different tiers of local authorities. The councils of the Wellington metropolitan area are Tier 1 local authorities.

23. The NPS-UD includes policies that apply to additional infrastructure, which includes healthcare facilities. These policies are listed in Table 2:

Table 2. Policies on additional infrastructure from the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020.
Policy 10(b)	Local authorities are to engage with providers of development infrastructure and additional infrastructure to achieve integrated land use and infrastructure planning.
Clause 3.5	Local authorities are required to provide for sufficient development capacity in their district plans, and must be satisfied that the additional infrastructure to service the development capacity is likely to be available.
Clause 3.13(2)(b)	Local authorities must prepare future development strategies (FDSs), a type of regional spatial plan with the purpose of long-term strategic planning. Amongst other things, the FDSs must spatially identify the development infrastructure and additional infrastructure required to support or service development capacity.
Clause 3.15(2)(d)	When preparing an FDS local authorities must engage with providers of additional infrastructure.
Clause 3.21	Local authorities must assess housing and business development capacity. In preparing the assessment, local authorities must seek information and comment from providers of development infrastructure and additional infrastructure.

Key Resource Management Issues

24. The following key resource management issues have been identified for the Hospital Zone:

a. The healthcare facilities of Boulcott provide for essential healthcare services for the Hutt Valley and Wellington region, and the efficient use and development of these facilities supports social wellbeing of the community.

b. The District Plan needs to strike a balance between enabling land use and development within the Community Health Activity Area while managing the effects of the land use and development on properties in the surrounding area.

c. The site of the Boulcott Hospital is currently in the General Residential Activity Area. A residential zone may not appropriately provide for the ongoing use and development of the site.

Options

25. The following options have been identified to enable Council to address the issues identified through the District Plan Review:

Option 1: A review of the existing objectives, policies and rules, with a focus on the balance between:

· The types and scale of land use development that is provided for within the Activity Area, and

· The effects of land use and development on the surrounding area.

26. Option 1 would be a relatively straight forward review of the current objectives, policies and rules of the District Plan for the Community Health Activity Area.

27. This option would be relatively cost effective while ensuring that Council meets the requirements of the Resource Management Act to review all provisions of the District Plan. The main tasks under this option would be:

· Engaging with the owners and operators of the Hutt Hospital and Hutt Valley Health Hub, to discuss the possible objectives, policies and rules for the District Plan, including whether they consider that the existing objectives, policies and rules are appropriate, or whether there are additional opportunities that could be enabled through a new approach in the District Plan.

· Engaging with the community in the surrounding area to discuss the potential effects of ongoing use and development of the healthcare facilities in the area, under the existing District Plan and other reasonably practicable approaches.

Option 2: A review of the existing objectives, policies and rules, with a focus on the balance between:

· The types and scale of land use development that is provided for within the Activity Area,

· The effects of land use and development on the surrounding area, AND

an investigation into whether the site of the Boulcott Hospital should be included in the Hospital Zone.

28. Option 2 is effectively the same as Option 1, but with an additional piece of work to look at whether the site of the Boulcott Hospital should also be in the Hospital Zone.

29. While this option would require more resources than Option 1, the investigation into the appropriate zoning for the Boulcott Hospital site would be relatively minor. The investigation would likely involve:

· Targeted engagement with the owners and operators of the Boulcott Hospital to discuss their future plans (if any) for use and development of the site,

· Through the engagement with the community in the surrounding area, an additional discussion on the implications of including the Boulcott Hospital in the Hospital Zone.

Recommended Option

30. Option 2 is the recommended.

31. While the additional investigation in Option 2 would require additional resources, it would likely be a small scale investigation that would mostly involve engagement with people that we would need to engage with under Option 2, albeit with a narrower focus.

32. Option 2 ensures Council will meet the requirements of the Resource Management Act to review the District Plan while also enabling Council to identify additional opportunities for enabling land use and development in the area while managing the effects of that land use and development.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

Engagement

34. Engagement on this topic would largely involve discussions with the owners and operators of the Hutt Hospital, Boulcott Hospital and Hutt Valley Health Hub. The focus of this engagement would be on:

· Their current activities and future aspirations for use and development at their facilities, and

· Whether the approach of the existing District Plan causes any issues for their current activities and future aspirations

35. These issues have already been discussed with the Hutt Valley District Health Board, and will be discussed further in the coming months.

36. There would also be engagement with the communities in the surrounding area, to get their thoughts on the healthcare facilities and potential effects of ongoing use and development of the facilities.

Legal Considerations

37. The legal consideration for this decision is the necessity for Council to meet its legal obligations under the RMA.

Financial Considerations

38. The costs associated with the District Plan Review with regard to the Hospital Zone would mostly be associated with:

a. Engagement, including community engagement and engagement with owners and operators of facilities within the zone, and

b. Preparing evaluations reports for a proposed district plan.

39. Options 1 and 2 would be covered by the existing District Plan Review budget.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Appendix 1 - Community Health Activity Area Map	101

Author: Nathan Geard

Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

Reviewed By: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

105 18 February 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

20 January 2021

File: (20/1688)

Report no: DPRS2021/1/10

Tertiary Education

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to:

a. Inform the District Plan Review Subcommittee on the issues for the tertiary education topic of the District Plan Review, and

b. Seek direction from the Subcommittee on how the Review should proceed with regard to the tertiary education topic.

Key Points

· The City of Lower Hutt has three main tertiary education facilities: WelTec in Petone, The Open Polytechnic of New Zealand in Waterloo, and Te Wananga o Aotearoa in Waiwhetu.

· The Tertiary Education Precinct in the operative District Plan sets out site specific provisions that apply to the main WelTec campus in Petone.

· The Open Polytechnic in Waterloo, and Te Wananga o Aotearoa in Waiwhetu do not have site specific provisions in the operative District Plan.

· It is recommended to undertake the district plan review for this topic by engaging with key stakeholders, reviewing all existing district plan provisions that apply to tertiary education facilities, and developing new district plan provisions that address the issues identified.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

(1) receives the information in the report; and

(2) directs officers to undertake the tertiary education topic of the District Plan Review through the following approach:

(a) carry out engagement with key stakeholders;

(b) review all existing provisions of the tertiary education precinct in the operative district plan;

(c) review all other district plan provisions that apply to sites with significant tertiary education facilities in Lower Hutt;

(d) develop high level options for the tertiary education topic that address the key issues identified in this report; and

(e) develop district plan provisions for the tertiary education topic that give effect to the selected high level option.

Background

1. Tertiary Education is addressed in the District Plan through the Tertiary Education Precinct. The Tertiary Education Precinct was introduced by Plan Change 25 which became operative in 2013. The Tertiary Education Precinct was partially reviewed by Plan Change 43 which became operative in part in April 2020.

2. The Tertiary Education Precinct applies to the main campus of the Wellington Institute of Technology (WelTec) in Petone, and a number of nearby sites. Most of the precinct has a General Residential zoning, while a smaller part has a General Business zoning. The Tertiary Education Precinct sets out site specific provisions which modify these underlying zonings. Maps showing the areas show that the Tertiary Education Precinct applies to are included in Appendix 1 of this report.

3. WelTec also has a separate site at Western Hutt Road outside the Tertiary Education Precinct that is zoned General Business.

4. Plan Change 25 also introduced a number of parking provisions that applied to the Tertiary Education Precinct area through the Transport chapter of the district plan. These provisions were fully reviewed by Plan Change 39 Transport which became operative in 2018.

5. The Open Polytechnic of New Zealand has a campus in Lower Hutt located in Waterloo. However the operative District Plan does not have any specific provisions which apply to this site. The site is currently in the General Residential Activity Area.

6. Te Wananga o Aotearoa has a campus in Waiwhetu which was established by resource consent granted in 2015. There are no site specific provisions for this site in the operative District Plan. The site is currently in the General Business Activity Area.

Discussion

Statutory and Policy Context

National Planning Standards

7. The National Planning Standards set out a standard set of zones that may be used in a District Plan. One of the zones provided by the planning standards is the Tertiary Education Zone, which is defined as “areas used predominantly for the operation and development of tertiary education facilities and associated activities”.

8. Additionally the planning standards set out a number of spatial layers that can be used to modify the provisions of the underlying zone in specific areas. These include precincts, and specific controls.

9. Tertiary Education activities could be provided for in the District Plan either through the Tertiary education zone, or through using a precinct or specific controls to modify any other underlying zone.

National Policy Statement on Urban Development

10. The National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) took effect on 20 August 2020. Under Policy 11 of the NPS-UD, Council is required to remove from its district plan any rules that set minimum car parking requirements. Instead, territorial authorities are encouraged to manage effects associated with the supply and demand of car parking through comprehensive parking management plans.

11. Hutt City Council removed its district plan minimum parking requirements on 29 September 2020 in response to the NPS-UD, including the parking provisions relating to the tertiary education precinct in Petone.

12. Council is reviewing its parking policy to manage on street parking in response to the changes brought about by the NPS-UD.

Issues

13. The following key issues have been identified for the tertiary education topic:

Issue 1: How should potential future changes of use and development of the WelTec site be provided for?

Issue 2: To what extent should the existing amenity of the surrounding area of WelTec be protected? How should this be balanced with enabling ongoing operation and potential further development of the WelTec site?

Issue 3: What uses should be enabled on the WelTec site that don’t directly relate to Tertiary Education?

Issue 4: How should the Open Polytechnic and Te Wananga o Aotearoa sites be addressed in the district plan?

Options

14. The recommended process for the district plan review of the tertiary education topic is as follows:

a. carry out engagement with key stakeholders;

b. review all existing provisions of the tertiary education precinct in the operative district plan;

c. review all other district plan provisions that apply to sites with significant tertiary education facilities in Lower Hutt;

d. develop high level options for the tertiary education topic that address the key issues identified in this report; and

e. develop district plan provisions for the tertiary education topic that give effect to the selected high level option.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

Consultation

16. It is anticipated that the level and nature of engagement for this topic would be targeted at primary stakeholders. The primary stakeholders for this topic are:

· WelTec Tertiary institute.

· Residents and businesses in the vicinity of the WelTec and Open Polytechnic site.

· Waterloo Open Polytechnic.

· Waiwhetu Te Wananga o Aotearoa.

· Petone Community Board

17. There would also be engagement with the wider community for this topic in combination with the wider district plan review engagement. 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

18. 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.

19. 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).

20. 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

21. The recommended option can be carried out within the existing budget for the District Plan review.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Appendix 1 - Maps of the Tertiary Education Precinct in the Operative District Plan	107

Author: Joseph Jeffries

Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

Reviewed By: Hamish Wesney

Head of District Plan Policy

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

[1] A van Meeuwen-Dijkgraaf 2018 - Wildlands- Indigenous Biodiversity in Hutt City

	2014/15	2007/08	2001/02	1994/95
Hutt River	5,500 ± 710	3,790 ± 610	6,160 ± 830	19,960 ± 2,020
Orongorongo River	no effort was recorded	no effort was recorded	40 ± 40	no effort was recorded
Wainuiomata River	210 ± 80	1,560 ± 400	750 ± 170	2,390 ± 590
Korokoro Stream	no effort was recorded	no effort was recorded	no effort was recorded	20 ± 20