HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_BLACK_AGENDA_COVER

 

 

Komiti Iti Arotake Mahere ā-Rohe |

District Plan Review Subcommittee

 

 

29 November 2021

 

 

 

Order Paper for the meeting to be held in the

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

on:

 

 

 

Monday 6 December 2021 commencing at 1.00pm

 

 

 

 

Membership

 

 

                                      Cr  S Edwards (Chair)

 

Cr K Brown

Cr B Dyer

Deputy Mayor T Lewis (Deputy Chair)

Cr N Shaw

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

 

 

 

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

 

Have your say

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


HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_SCREEN_MEDRES

DISTRICT PLAN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE

 

Membership:                   Chair of Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee

                                     4 other councillors

                                                 Up to 2 representatives appointed by Iwi

 

NOTE:

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

The Chair should in addition hold Chair certification.

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

 

Meeting Cycle:               As required

Quorum:                      4

                                        

Reports to:                         Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee

 

PURPOSE:

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

Provide:

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

·         scoping and investigation of the issues

·         engagement on possible content

·         development of discussion documents and other draft documents for consultation

·         development of a Draft District Plan for consultation

·         development of a Proposed District Plan for statutory consultation.

General:

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

    


HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Komiti Iti Arotake Mahere ā-Rohe |

District Plan Review Subcommittee

 

Meeting to be held in the Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt on Monday 6 December 2021 commencing at 1.00pm.

 

ORDER PAPER

 

Public Business

 

1.       OPENING FORMALITIES - KARAKIA (21/1637)

Ki a tau ki a tātou katoa

Te atawhai o tō tatou

Ariki o Ihu Karaiti

Me te Aroha o te Atua

Me te whiwhinga tahitanga

Ki te wairua tapu

Ake ake ake

Amine

 

2.       APOLOGIES

3.       PUBLIC COMMENT

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

4.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS

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

5.       Minutes

Meeting minutes District Plan Review Subcommittee, 4 November 2021              5

6.       Strategic Directions - Draft Chapter (21/1791)

Report No. DPRS2021/5/284 by the Divisional Manager, District Plan Policy    17

CHAIR’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed”

 

7.       Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua - Draft Chapter and Other Matters (21/1922)

Report No. DPRS2021/5/286 by the Divisional Manager, District Plan Policy    29

CHAIR’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

8.       Historic Heritage (21/1881)

Report No. DPRS2021/5/285 by the Policy Planner                                              67

CHAIR’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

9.       Noise - draft chapter (21/1986)

Report No. DPRS2021/5/287 by the Policy Planner                                              99

CHAIR’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

10.     Natural Hazards - Draft Chapter (21/2028)

Report No. DPRS2021/5/289 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst       126       

  CHAIR’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

11.     QUESTIONS

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

 

 

 

Annie Doornebosch

Democracy Advisor

 

 

 


                                                                       1                                          4 November 2021

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

            Komiti Iti Arotake Mahere ā-Rohe | District Plan Review Subcommittee

 

Minutes of a meeting held in the Council Chambers,

2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt on

 Thursday 4 November 2021 commencing at 1.00pm

 

 

PRESENT:                       

Cr S Edwards (Chair)

Cr K Brown

Cr B Dyer (from 1.13pm)

Deputy Mayor T Lewis

Cr N Shaw

Ms M Dentice

 

APOLOGY:                      Cr Dyer for lateness.

 

IN ATTENDANCE:        Ms H Oram, Director Environment and Sustainability

Ms P Rotherham, Head of Planning

Mr H Wesney, Policy Planner

Mr N Geard, Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

Mr B Haddrell, Policy Planner

Ms A Doornebosch, Democracy Advisor

Ms H Clegg, Minute Taker

 

 

 

PUBLIC BUSINESS

 

1.       OPENING FORMALITIES - Karakia Timatanga     

Kia hora te marino

Kia whakapapa pounamu te moana

He huarahi mā tātou i te rangi nei

Aroha atu, aroha mai

Tātou i a tātou katoa

Hui e Tāiki e!

May peace be wide spread

May the sea be like greenstone

A pathway for us all this day

Let us show respect for each other

For one another

Bind us together!

 

 

2.       APOLOGIES

Resolved(Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                        Minute No. DPRS21501

“That the apology for lateness received from Cr B Dyer be accepted.”

3.       PUBLIC COMMENT

Comments are recorded under the item to which they relate.

 

Cr Dyer joined the meeting at 1.13pm.

 

4.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS

Cr Brown declared a conflict of interest in Item 6, Tertiary Education Zone – Draft Chapter and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

Ms Dentice declared a conflict of interest relating to item 8, Infrastructure – Draft Chapter and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

 

5.

Minutes

Report No. DPRS2021/5/126 by the Democracy Advisor

 

Resolved:  (Cr Edwards/Cr Dyer)                                             Minute No. DPRS 21502

 

“That the minutes of the meeting of the District Plan Review Subcommittee meeting held on Thursday 1 July 2021, be confirmed as a true and correct record.”

 

 6.

Tertiary Education Zone - Draft Chapter (21/1552)

 

Report No. DPRS2021/5/235 by the Policy Planner

 

Cr Brown declared a conflict of interest and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

 

The Policy Planner elaborated on the report.  He advised that a conversation had taken place with the Learning Connexion management resulting in the requirement for a Tertiary Precinct for that site no longer being necessary.  He also advised that any future development of the site could be provided for by the underlying zoning of the land.

 

In response to questions from members, the Policy Planner advised a recent resource consent application from WelTec concerning the block of land on the corner of Britannia and Udy Streets had been granted.  He believed the land could revert to its underlying zoning of residential as it had been proven that it was no longer required for carparking purposes. He said that no public consultation had occurred and that discussions with all tertiary institutions, apart from Te Wānanga o Aotearoa, had occurred. He confirmed no issues had been raised with the current provisions of the District Plan for these institutions. He added that at the Polytechnic site, future development plans could not be provided for by the current underlying zoning, and that a Precinct zoning would better suit the use of that land.  He clarified that it was proposed to replace the underlying residential zoning of the main WelTec site with a Tertiary Precinct zoning. He noted other campuses (eg engineering and construction) were on different sites with different zonings.

 

The Policy Planner advised that a design study assessment for residential developments was still being developed and that until that was complete, he could not comment on possible controls for providing for six storey buildings upon WelTec land close to residentially zoned land. He noted that it was likely some of the surrounding residential land would be zoned medium to high density, which could provide for six storey developments.

 

He also advised the height controls for the WelTec Precinct would be drafted once the design study assessment had been completed.  He said that WelTec had advised it would be utilising it facilities for the foreseeable future. He confirmed a Tertiary zoning and a Precinct operated together. He clarified that if the WelTec construction campus site on the Western Hutt Road was expanded by the purchase of adjacent land, the current zoning would not provide for such a use. He added that if WelTec advised Council of the purchase of that land within the next six months, provision for the use of the land could be reflected in the draft District Plan.

 

RESOLVED:   (Cr Edwards/Cr Dyer)                                            Minute No. DPRS 21503

 

“That the Subcommittee:

 

(1)      notes and receives the draft Tertiary Education chapter, draft Precinct and the information contained in the report; and

 

(2)   directs officers to make subsequent changes to the draft chapter and/or further consideration of specific matters.”

 

 

7.

Hospital Zone - Draft Chapter (21/1656)

Report No. DPRS2021/5/240 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

 

The Senior Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report.

 

In response to questions from members, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst advised he would look into seeing if the land affected by the recent land sale of some of the Mitchell Park tennis courts land to the medical sector had been included in the draft Hospital Zone.  He further advised that the definition of “other permitted activities” in the draft Hospital Zone had been deliberately kept broad to reflect the number of associated activities that could occur within the Zone.  He explained that the draft policy stipulated that any non-health care operations should not compromise the health care activities on site.  He acknowledged concerns that the policy may provide for a subdivided portion of the site being sold to another party and an activity such as a dairy may be permitted.

 

In response to questions from members, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst advised that the likelihood of Boulcott Hospital having a Hospital Zone if it were not situated adjacent to Hutt Hospital, would probably not, as a commercial zoning, be able to continue to operate.  He added that given there was a collection of health care facilities in close proximity, a Hospital Zone was appropriate for the entire area.  He noted that currently the underlying zoning for Boulcott Hospital was residential which was inappropriate.  He advised parking and transport issues associated with the hospital area requiring carparking for an activity was no longer permitted,  He noted that screening of outdoor areas and landscaping requirements could be specified for the Hospital Zone. 

 

In response to questions from members, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst advised that the Transport chapter would have controls relating to catering for cyclists and confirmed that the District Plan could not prevent the hospital from developing its carpark areas for other healthcare uses.  He advised that a proposal could be assessed against the existing transport network.  He confirmed the YMCA building was not included in the Hospital Zone and the YMCA building was not used for healthcare purposes.  He agreed to talk with the building owners to assess their future plans for the building.

 

Resolved:   (Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                       Minute No. DPRS 21504

 

“That the Subcommittee:

(1)   notes and receives the draft Hospital Zone chapter and information contained in the report; and

(2)   directs officers to make subsequent changes to the draft chapter and/or further consideration of specific matters as outlined at the meeting.”

 

 

 

 

 

8.

Infrastructure - Draft Chapter (21/1640)

Report No. DPRS2021/5/239 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

 

Ms Dentice declared a conflict of interest and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.  Ms Dentice left the table for the duration of the item.

 

Ms Hannah Van Haren-Giles, consultant from Hill Young Cooper was in attendance for the item.

 

In response to a question from a member regarding heights for masts and aerials,
Ms Van Haren-Giles advised these were consistent with the provisions in the proposed Porirua District Plan.  She added that other provisions were designed to also be regionally consistent.  

 

In response to a query from a member regarding the different requirements for upgrading or replacing an existing mast or pole versus construction of a new one in a different location, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst agreed to report back on the matter. 

 

Cr Brown left the meeting at 1.57pm and rejoined the meeting at 1.59pm.

 

In response to question from a member, Ms Van Haren-Giles agreed to insert a placeholder into INF – R20 concerning intersection designs and road classifications. 

 

In response to questions from a member regarding electric vehicle charging stations (EV chargers), the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst advised that current provisions enabled EV chargers.  Ms Van Haren-Giles added that there were currently draft standards for EV chargers included in the draft chapter noting the relevant sections of the transport chapter were still being drafted.

 

The Director Environment and Sustainability advised that officers did not require specific EV charger wiring be installed in all future buildings and developments as the District Plan was designed to be future proofed.  She added that with government mandating no onsite carparking had to be provided for any developments, it would be difficult for the District Plan to then require EV chargers onsite. 

 

In response to a question from a member regarding the enabling of EV chargers in the road corridor, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst agreed to report back on the matter.  Ms Van Haren-Giles noted that EV chargers were specifically provided for in Infrastructure Rules 8, 9 and 13. 

 

Resolved:   (Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                       Minute No. DPRS 21505

 

“That the Subcommittee:

(1)   notes and receives the draft Infrastructure chapter and information contained in this report; and

(2)   directs officers to make subsequent changes to the draft chapter and/or further consideration of specific matters as outlined at the meeting.”

9.

Transport - Draft Chapter (21/1620)

 

Report No. DPRS2021/5/238 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

 

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Matt Young asked for a more thorough review of the District Plan’s Transport chapter.  He noted that in the period between the reviewed chapter becoming operative, Council had declared a climate change emergency.  He expressed concern that whilst the operative chapter acknowledged the need to uptake active modes of transport, that was not enough.

 

Mr Young presented Powerpoint slides depicting examples of the proliferation of vehicle crossings attached as pages 9-11 to the minutes.

 

In response to questions from members, Mr Young acknowledged the positive aspects of electric vehicles.  He noted that having more electric vehicles in existence would not significantly reduce carbon emissions.  He believed that green public spaces would not be significantly impacted by the transport provisions, noting that public footpath areas would be.

 

The Senior Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report. 

 

In response to questions from members, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst advised prescribing rigid standards for vehicle access was not possible due to the various road/berm/footpath and gradient configurations in existence across the city.  He added the Integrated Transport Strategy would ultimately inform the provisions of the transport chapter noting that a Kerbside Management Plan was required.

 

In response to members’ concerns regarding provision of bus stops if there was a high demand for on-street carparking, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst advised that sometimes traffic engineers supported using driveways as bus stops.  He noted that Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) managed bus stops.

 

In response to concerns from members regarding the lack of vehicle parking space onsite due to reduced front yard widths, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst acknowledged the District Plan may require a stronger direction to officers regarding pedestrian safety and driveway widths and lengths.  He advised the Operative District Plan had requirements for loading spaces for developments over a certain number of residential units.  He acknowledged that these provisions did not cater for developments of less than that.

 

The Director Environment and Sustainability added that the situation may only be short term as society changed from being reliant on private vehicles.  She noted that one blanket rule would not necessarily be suitable for all circumstances. 

 

The Policy Planner reminded members that the key focus for the District Plan controls had to be “what was the outcome being sought; what was the desired street environment.” He acknowledged concerns in this area.  He noted it could require all users of the roading network be considered when a new subdivision incorporating roading was proposed.

 

 

 He confirmed Council’s Spatial Planning Team was continuing to work closely with Council’s District Planning Team especially in the area of enabling more people to live within transport hub catchments and making the walking commute more enjoyable. He advised that currently large commercial operations and places of assembly were required to provide for cyclists (both employees and visitors) but supermarkets were not.  He added that “High Trip Generator” activities were assessed on the extent to which they provided for or encouraged active transport.  He agreed these requirements could be strengthened.  He noted the existing built environment did not always cater for cyclists in a safe manner. 

 

The Director Environment and Sustainability advised that a balance was required between providing for vehicles and accessways and safety of all road and footpath users. 

 

Ms Hannah Van Haren-Giles, consultant from Hill Young Cooper elaborated on the report.

 

In response to a question from a member regarding enabling micro mobility options,
Ms Van Haren-Giles advised officers were currently assessing Wellington City Council’s draft District Plan provisions.

 

The Senior Environmental Policy Analyst added that calculations for assessing the number of different forms of micro mobility requirements could utilise potential employee numbers in a building or the site coverage of the actual building. 

 

Cr Shaw left the meeting at 2.51pm and rejoined the meeting at 2.53pm.

 

 

RESOLVED:   (Cr Edwards/Cr Dyer)                                            Minute No. DPRS 21506

 

“That the Subcommittee:

 

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

 

(2)     directs officers to make subsequent changes to the draft chapter and/or further consideration of specific matters as outlined at the meeting.”

 

 

10.

Renewable Electricity Generation - Draft Chapter (21/1591)

Report No. DPRS2021/5/236 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

 

Ms Hannah Van Haren-Giles, consultant from Hill Young Cooper was in attendance for the item.

 

The Senior Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report.

 

Resolved:   (Cr Edwards/Cr Shaw)                                           Minute No. DPRS 21507

 

“That the Subcommittee notes and receives the draft chapter and information contained in the report.”

 

11.

Hazardous Substances and Contaminated Land - Draft Chapter (21/1592)

Report No. DPRS2021/5/237 by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

 

Ms Hannah Van Haren-Giles, consultant from Hill Young Cooper was in attendance for the item.

Ms Van Haren-Giles advised that the chapter had been completely overhauled as relevant legislation had changed significantly since the District Plan had become operative.

The Senior Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst advised all lawfully established current operations would have existing use rights to continue to operate.   

Ms Van Haren-Giles added that the proposed provisions were consistent with those of Porirua and Wellington City Councils.  She highlighted that all Councils were required to meet the National Environmental Standards.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Van Haren-Giles explained that some existing operators were within an existing risk management contour and that if they altered their operations, they could have adverse effects on other existing facilities in the area.

 

Resolved:   (Cr Edwards/Cr Brown)                                         Minute No. DPRS 21508

 

“That the Subcommittee notes and receives the draft chapters and information contained in the report.”

 

 

12.     QUESTIONS

          There were no questions.

 

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 3.24pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cr S Edwards

CHAIR

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 6th day of December 2021

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


                                                                                       1                                                  06 December 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

18 November 2021

 

 

 

File: (21/1791)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2021/5/284

 

Strategic Directions - Draft Chapter

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to present the draft Strategic Directions chapter that has been prepared for the draft District Plan and to receive feedback from the Subcommittee on the draft.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

(1)   notes and receives the draft Strategic Direction chapter and information contained in the report; and

 

(2)   directs officers to make subsequent changes to the draft chapter and/or further consideration of specific matters.

 

Background

2.    At a Council briefing on 22 July 2021, the Mayor and Councillors were presented with a compilation of strategic directions from a range of high-level planning or policy directions as summarised below. Questions and comments from the Mayor and Councillors at this briefing have been used to inform the preparation of the draft chapter attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

3.    Preparation of this draft chapter has been informed by feedback from community and stakeholder engagement undertaken since the commencement of the District Plan Review.  This feedback is from plans and processes aligned with the District Plan Review, such as the integrated transport strategy, community climate change response and local neighbourhood spatial plans. This feedback relates to strategic level matters, such as housing choice, transport modes and the natural environment.

Discussion

4.    The National Planning Standards directs Councils to include a ‘Strategic Direction’ section in the District Plan. The National Planning Standards state that the purpose of the Strategic Direction chapter is to “guide decision making at a strategic level”. The National Planning Standards require one chapter in this section, being on Urban Form and Development. However, Councils can choose to address other strategic matters in this section. 

5.    The Strategic Direction chapter sets out the overarching direction for the District Plan as expressed through Strategic Directions. These directions reflect those factors which are considered to be key to achieving the overall vision for land use, subdivision and development within Lower Hutt. In addition, the Strategic Direction chapter is based on national and regional policy direction, such as the National Policy Statement for Urban Development and Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region.

6.    Summarised below are the strategic priorities or direction in a range of high-level planning or policy documents for Lower Hutt.

Long Term Plan 2021 - 2041

In the Long Term Plan 2021 – 2041, Council identified six key priorities to focus investment in the city. These six priorities are:

·    Whakangao i ngā poupou hapori – Investing in Infrastructure

·    Hei Āhuru Mōwai mō te Katoa – Increasing housing supply

·    Tiaki Taiao – Caring for and protecting our environment

·    Taunaki Ōhanga Auaha, Tāone Whakapoapoa – Supporting an innovative, agile economy and attractive city

·    Tūhono Hapori – Connecting communities

·    Whakauka Ahumoni – Financial sustainability

Urban Growth Strategy 2012 - 2032

In the Urban Growth Strategy 2012 - 2032, Council identified five goals for urban growth, which are:

·    Capacity and demand for great living and a thriving commercial sector

·    An economy that can compete in our world in 2040

·    Thriving and distinctive centres that anchor Hutt City

·    Fantastic recreational opportunities, the natural environment, and character urban environment underpin Hutt City’s quality of life

·    A city that is connected, driving opportunities for commerce, living and playing

Wellington Regional Growth Framework 2021

The Wellington Regional Growth Framework identifies six objectives for the Wellington-Horowhenua region:

·    Increase housing supply, and improve housing affordability and choice

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

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

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

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

·    Create employment opportunities.

To achieve these objectives, the Framework identifies six key moves:

·    Harness growth to make the region’s housing and urban areas more affordable and liveable and provide more housing choice – ‘walkable neighbourhoods’

·    Make better use of the region’s limited supply of well-located greenfield land

·    Fully unlock the urban development potential of current and future rapid transit orientated corridors particularly the Let’s Get Wellington Moving corridor.

·    Unlock new areas for housing and urban development and deliver greater regional resilience with a major west-east multi-modal corridor

·    Deliver transformational housing and development outcomes for iwi/Māori

·    Address the urban development challenges of climate change and transitioning to a zero-carbon economy at a regional scale

Summary of the draft chapter

7.    The Operative District Plan does not contain a Strategic Directions section or chapter per se. However, Section 1.10 Area Wide Issues in the Operative District Plan addresses city-wide level issues, such as main areas of land use activities, as well as natural hazards, the natural environment and transportation.

 

8.    In reviewing the strategic priorities and direction from the existing high-level and strategic planning and policy as well as from community and stakeholder feedback, the following key themes or groups of strategic directions have been identified (in alphabet order):

·    Climate Change and Natural Hazards

·    Infrastructure

·    Natural Environment

·    Tangata Whenua

·    Urban Form and Development

9.    As the Strategic Directions section relates to high-level matters, this section of the District Plan only contains objectives and not policies or rules. The objectives are drafted as outcomes statements – that is, they are intended to reflect the outcomes that the District Plan seeks to achieve. The objectives in the Strategic Directions section would be achieved through policies, methods and rules set out in other chapters in the District Plan.

10.  There is no hierarchy between the stated objectives in the Strategic Direction i.e. no one Strategic Direction objective has primacy over another Strategic Direction objective and the Strategic Direction objectives should be read as a whole. In addition, there is no hierarchy between objectives in the Strategic Direction chapter and objectives in the Activity (eg Zones) and District-Wide chapters (e.g. Natural Environment).

11.  The above approach and themes are similar to other District Plans in the region, notably the Proposed Porirua District Plan and Draft Wellington District Plan.

12.  The Draft Chapter attached to this paper shows tracked changes. These tracked changes show the amendments to the objectives following the Council briefing on 22 July 2021.

Areas for further work

13.  Integration with other chapters will be required as they are developed. Other chapters will implement the strategic direction objectives, but some iterative review of the Strategic Direction objectives may be required as the full plan is developed.

14.  Initial feedback from iwi through our consultant have been incorporated into the Tangata Whenua objectives.  Further discussions with iwi partners on the Strategic Direction objectives will ensure that they reflect the aspirations of those partners.

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.

16.  The draft Strategic Direction chapter includes a theme on climate change and natural hazards recognising the significance of this issue in the district. The objectives within this theme reflect the direction Council has set (ie: Lower Hutt is carbon neutral by 2050), applying this direction to a land use planning context in the District Plan. Policies and rules to achieve these objectives will be determined through other chapters in the District Plan.

Engagement

17.  In preparing this draft chapter, feedback from other engagement has been used. This engagement includes for the preparation of the high-level and strategic documents referred to earlier in this report.

18.  Once the draft District Plan has been completed, officers will use the draft as an engagement tool, and engage with iwi, the community and other stakeholders on what has been included in the draft. This engagement will take place in early 2022.

Legal Considerations

19.  While there are no legal considerations associated with this report, the key legal consideration for the review of the District Plan is the necessity for Council to meet its legal obligations under the Resource Management Act (RMA).

Financial Considerations

20.  There are no financial considerations associated with the content of this report.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Strategic Directions chapter - DRAFT

22

 

 

 

Author: Hamish Wesney

Policy Planner

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Parvati Rotherham

Head of Planning

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability


Attachment 1

Strategic Directions chapter - DRAFT

 








                                                                                       1                                                  06 December 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

09 November 2021

 

 

 

File: (21/1922)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2021/5/286

 

Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua - Draft Chapter and Other Matters

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to present the draft Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua chapter that has been prepared for the draft District Plan and to receive feedback from the District Plan Review Subcommittee (the Subcommittee) on the draft.

2.    In addition, this report provides an update on the framework for identifying and protecting sites and areas of significance to Māori and the Māori Purpose Zone.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

(1)   notes and receives the draft Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua chapter and update on the framework for identifying and protecting sites and areas of significance to Māori and the Māori Purpose Zone contained in this report; and

(2)   directs officers to make subsequent changes to the draft chapter and/or further consideration of specific matters.

 

Background

3.    The review of the District Plan involves partnering with Tangata Whenua. This partnership involves working with Tangata Whenua at a governance level with Mana Whenua representatives on the District Plan Review Sub-Committee. At an operational level, officers are working with Tangata Whenua representatives on the detail in the District Plan Review. 

 

4.    Jade Wikaira and team at Wikaira Consulting (a consultancy with tikanga Maori and planning experts) has been engaged to assist with the Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua  components of the District Plan Review. Ms Wikaira has prepared the draft Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua chapter (attached as Appendix 1 to the report) and provided the information for the discussion below.

5.    Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua aspirations and views are to be integrated throughout the District Plan. In addition to this integration throughout the District Plan, under the National Planning Standards, the District Plan must contain a Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua chapter in Part 1 of the District Plan. This chapter must only include context and process-related provisions, with other Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua provisions integrated throughout the other chapters in the District Plan.

6.    Under the National Planning Standards, the Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua chapter must consider the following matters:

·        Recognition of hapū and iwi, such as history and description of resources of significance to Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua

·        Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua and local authority relationships

·        Hapu and iwi planning documents

·        Involvement and participation with Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua

 

7.    In addition to the Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua chapter, Council can choose to have chapters on Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori and a Māori Purpose Zone. As part of the initial scoping of the District Plan Review, the Subcommittee gave direction it supported the inclusion of these two chapters in the District Plan. The framework for reviewing these two chapters is discussed below.

Discussion

Summary of draft Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua Chapter

8.    The contents of the draft Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua Chapter (attached as Appendix 1 to the report) is based on the direction contained in the National Planning Standards referred to above. The draft chapter sets out the entities that represent Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua interests in Lower Hutt. In addition, it outlines the history of the hapū and iwi within the rohe (district). Furthermore, this draft chapter describes the resources of significance to Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua. Lastly, the draft chapter outlines the relationships between Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua and Hutt City Council. In terms of these relationships, it is noted there are currently ongoing organisation wide discussions between iwi partners and Council. The outcome of these discussions will be reflected in the final chapter.

9.    The draft chapter attached to the report is still to be reviewed and confirmed by Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua. In addition, the involvement and participation of Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua in Resource Management Act processes (eg District Plan Changes, resource consent applications) is still to be discussed and added to the chapter.

10.  A matter to be determined is the name of this chapter and references to Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua throughout the District Plan. The National Planning Standards direct Councils to determine an appropriate term in the District Plan when using the terms Tangata Whenua or Mana Whenua. Under the Resource Management Act 1991, these two terms are defined as:

·           Mana Whenua means customary authority exercised by an iwi or hapu in an identified area

·           Tangata Whenua, in relation to a particular area, means the iwi, or hapu, that holds mana whenua over that area

11.  The appropriate term is to be determined through engagement with relevant groups, and may vary depending on the context. The National Planning Standards state that if agreement on an appropriate term cannot be reached through engagement, local authorities must use the term ‘Tangata Whenua’. At this time, officers have not confirmed with relevant groups the appropriate term to be used.

Framework for the Māori Purpose Zone

12.  The Māori Purpose Zone effectively correlates with the current Community Activity Area in the Operative District Plan. The Community Iwi Activity Area chapter (Chapter 10) in the Operative District Plan applies to sites that are mainly used by Iwi in association with cultural and traditional practices or activities including Marae, Urupa and Kokiri Centres – see Appendix 2 attached to the report for a list of sites covered by the Community Iwi Activity Area in the Operative District Plan. The purpose of this Activity Area is to provide for these uses, while ensuring the amenity of the surrounding areas is maintained.

13.  To review this current chapter and prepare the new Māori Purpose Zone, the following would be undertaken for the review:

·    Collaboration with Mana Whenua and iwi authorities with interests in these sites (eg Marae Committee) and Māori land generally. Formation of objectives, policies and rules relevant to these sites in the draft District Plan.

·    Ensure that traditional practices and uses are provided for and that those uses and the uses of surrounding areas are congruent.

·    Enabling of associated compatible development on zoned sites so that future aspirations can be provided for.

Framework for Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori

14.  This chapter will provide for the inclusion of sites and area of historic/cultural significance to Māori and includes provisions to protect them. It correlates with parts of Chapter 14E (Significant Natural, Cultural and Archaeological Resources) of the Operative District Plan. It includes appendices listing 24 Cultural Resources (SCR) of significance to Māori and approximately 66 Archaeological Resources (SAR) (many of which are associated with Māori occupation).

Appendix 3 attached to the report contains a map showing the location of the sites identified in the Operative District Plan. Under the Operative District Plan, all activities within these areas are restricted discretionary activities.

15.  To review this current chapter and prepare the new Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori, the following would be undertaken for the review:

·    Work with Mana Whenua partners to identify sites/areas of significance to Māori. Involves confirming methodology, undertaking research into sites/areas and engaging with property owners.

·    Developing methods to protect sites/areas of significance to Māori.

·    Consideration of important cultural landscapes which recognise and provide for the relationship of Māori and their culture and tradition with their ancestral lands, sites, wāhi tapu and other taonga.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

17.  Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua views on climate change will be integration throughout the District Plan. 

Engagement

18.  As outlined earlier, Council is working in partnership with Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua on the District Plan Review, both at a governance and an operational level. Discussions to date with Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua have informed the draft chapter attached to this paper and the frameworks outlined in this paper. Ongoing discussions with Mana Whenua/Tangata Whenua will continue to ensure their aspirations and views are reflected in the draft District Plan.

19.  Once the draft District Plan has been completed, officers will use the draft as an engagement tool, and engage with iwi, the community and other stakeholders on what has been included in the draft. This engagement will take place in early 2022.

Legal Considerations

20.  The legal considerations associated with this report are the requirements to consult with Tangata Whenua in reviewing the District Plan and preparing the new District Plan. The details outlined in this report demonstrate how these obligations under the Resource Management Act (RMA) are being met.

Financial Considerations

21.  There are no specific financial considerations associated with the content of this report. The work to identified Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori is included in the District Plan Review budget.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 DRAFT Tangata Whenua Chapter November 2021

34

2

Appendix 2 Sites Zoned Community Iwi Activity Area in the Operative District Plan

65

3

Appendix 3 Sites of Significance to Māori and Archaeological Sites Identified in the Operative District Plan

66

 

 

 

 

Author: Hamish Wesney

Policy Planner

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Parvati Rotherham

Head of Planning

 

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 DRAFT Tangata Whenua Chapter November 2021

 
































Attachment 2

Appendix 2 Sites Zoned Community Iwi Activity Area in the Operative District Plan

 


Attachment 3

Appendix 3 Sites of Significance to Māori and Archaeological Sites Identified in the Operative District Plan

 


                                                                                       1                                                  06 December 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

05 November 2021

 

 

 

File: (21/1881)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2021/5/285

 

Historic Heritage

 

Purpose of Report

1.    To present and receive feedback on the draft Historic Heritage chapter for inclusion in the draft District Plan.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

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

(2)   accepts the draft Historic Heritage chapter provided in the report for inclusion in the draft District Plan; and

(3)   directs officers to make subsequent changes to the draft chapter and/or further consideration of specific matters.

For the reason that the draft Historic Heritage chapter:

a.       Gives effect to statutory requirements and the Heritage Policy – Taonga Tuku Iho.

b.       Provides a balance between protecting significant historic heritage values and providing for use and development.

c.       Relatively consistent with the approach of other district plans in the Wellington region.

d.      Provides a balanced approach that aims to address the range of views held by the community and stakeholders.

Background

2.    The District Plan Review Subcommittee (the Subcommittee) resolved the following at its 11 November 2020 meeting:

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

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

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

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

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

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

3.    History is important to people’s sense of identity and belonging. Personal and shared history is tied to the places and buildings which survive from our past. For mana whenua, sites associated with history and ancestry are of great cultural and personal value.

4.    The protection and enhancement of historic heritage ensures that our sense of identity, place and belonging can be retained and celebrated.

5.    At the same time, ensuring continued use and adaptive reuse is critical for enabling ensure ongoing economic viability, appreciation and continued usability of built heritage and heritage sites.

Scope of report and draft Historic Heritage chapter

6.    The draft Historic Heritage chapter does not address sites of significance to  Māori and archaeological sites, as the assessment of sites of significance to Māori will be undertaken through a separate process alongside Mana Whenua partners. The provisions that relate to these sites will also be developed through a separate part of the District Plan alongside Mana Whenua partners. Officers are engaging with Mana Whenua partners to assist in finalising the heritage inventory review referred to in the report.

 

7.    The draft Historic Heritage chapter will apply to the buildings, structures and areas identified in a schedule of historic heritage. A review of the current historic heritage schedule and of new historic heritage buildings is underway. Officers are currently engaging with property owners who have properties identified in the initial draft assessment. Once the initial engagement period is complete, the draft Historic Heritage schedule for inclusion in the draft District Plan will be considered by the Subcommittee.

8.    The qualifying matters assessment that’s required under the National Policy Statement – Urban Development (NPS-UD) is not  considered in the report. Subsequent zoning changes will be done through the residential chapters. However, provisions relating to new development     in heritage areas are provided in the chapter and the general protection of significant historic heritage values are provided in draft Historic Heritage chapter.

 

Engagement to date

9.    Feedback from the community was received through the District Plan issues and options consultation process. A range of perspectives regarding the identification and protection of heritage was received, both in support and some in opposition (summary of feedback attached as Appendix 1 to the report).

10.  Feedback was also received through the Taonga Tuku Iho consultation process.  This feedback was varied, with a number of respondents in support and opposed to the identification and protection of historic heritage through the District Plan. A number of respondents were particularly concerned about the identification of historic heritage on private property without landowner permission. Taonga Tuku Iho directs that historic heritage with significant values is to be identified in the District Plan. The identification assessment and process involves engagement with property owners, and feedback from property owners will be considered in confirming the heritage schedules to be included in the District Plan. 

11.  Officers have been engaging with property owners with properties identified in the draft Historic Heritage Inventory Review. These discussions are ongoing, and a verbal update will be provided at the Subcommittee meeting.

Statutory Requirements and Policy Context

12.  The following legislative and strategic documents provide direction for the draft Historic Heritage chapter.

Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991

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

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

National Planning Standards

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

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

a)    identification of historic heritage    

b)    provisions to protect and manage historic heritage

c)     heritage orders

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

National Policy Statement on Urban Development

15.  The National Policy Statement on Urban Development recognises the national significance of:

a.    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.

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

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

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

 

18.  The Historic Heritage chapter sets objectives, policy and rules for protecting identified Historic Heritage values however the zoning changes to protect heritage will be done through the Residential chapter. The District Plan Sub-committee will be given recommendations on how to address qualifying matters through the residential chapter. However, provisions relating to new development in heritage areas are provided in the chapter. These provisions will require assessment of new buildings and structures and the effects this will have on the significant values historic heritage areas.

Greater Wellington Regional Policy Statement

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

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

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

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

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

20.  As the historic heritage provisions of the District Plan have not been fully reviewed since the Regional Policy Statement was made operative the existing provisions will need to be reviewed to give effect to these policies.

 

 

 

21.  Policy 21 of the RPS has been used to provide the criteria to identify places, sites and areas with significant historic heritage values to be included draft District Plan. Heritage experts are underway with an assessment of significant historic heritage values against the Policy 21 criteria. Officers are     currently engaging with property owners who have properties that are identified in the initial draft assessment.

 

22.  Policy 22 of the RPS states:

i.   District and regional plans shall include policies, rules and/or other methods that:

(a)   protect the significant historic heritage values associated with places, sites and areas identified in accordance with policy 21, from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development; and

(b)   avoid the destruction of unidentified archaeological sites and wāhi tapu with significant historic heritage values

23.  This policy provides direction on how the draft District Plan must protect identified significant historic heritage values. Key points relating to this policy are:

a.    The policy does not preclude subdivision, use and development.

b.    The policy requires council to provide for appropriate subdivision, use and development that protects identified historic heritage values (eg appropriate repairs and maintenance).

c.     The policy requires council to only allow or restrict inappropriate subdivision, use and development (eg inappropriate additions, alterations, relocation or demolition).

d.    The District Plan must include policies, rules and/or other methods to protect Historic Heritage.

Hutt City Council Taonga Tuku Iho - Heritage Policy

24.  The vision of the Toanga Tuku Iho is:

Council recognises that a city where everyone has opportunities to thrive is a city where all our communities value, promote, protect, celebrate and conserve their stories and heritage.  Council’s role is to:

 

i.   work with our communities to ensure that locally significant heritage in all its forms is identified, managed, preserved and conserved for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations; and

ii.  delivers on its legislative responsibilities.

 

 

 

25.  The policy sets the following actions for the District Plan review:

i.   Council will conduct a full review and re-write of historic heritage provisions in the District Plan to ensure that they adequately protect identified places, sites and areas with significant historic heritage values, in accordance with 6(f) of the RMA, and Policy 22 of the Regional Policy Statement.

ii.  Council will work with mana whenua and Iwi Authorities alongside land owners, to appropriately identify, protect and manage sites of particular significance to Māori.

26.  The draft Historic Heritage chapter provisions give effect to the vision, goals and actions of Toanga Tuku Iho.

Current District Plan

Current District Plan Approach to Historic Heritage

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

 

·      Chapter 14F Heritage Buildings and Structures

·      Chapter 14E Significant Natural, Cultural and Archaeological Resources

·      Chapter 4C Historic Residential Activity Area.

 

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

 

·      Chapter 5B Petone Commercial Activity Area

·      Chapter 5D Special Commercial Activity Area.

Chapter 14F Heritage Buildings and Structures

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

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

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

i.   Jackson Street, Petone;

ii.  Patrick Street and Adelaide Street, Petone; and 

iii. The Lower Hutt civic centre.

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

 

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

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

Chapter 14E Significant Natural, Cultural and Archaeological Resources

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

33.  A separate report will be considered by the Subcommittee at a future meeting for direction on the topic of sites and areas of significance to Māori. This aspect of historic heritage is not considered in this report.

Chapter 4C Historic Residential Activity Area

34.  The Historic Residential Activity Area applies to two areas - Patrick Street, and Riddlers Crescent, both in Petone.  This Activity Area (zone) recognises these areas of the City have a collection of buildings with distinctive form, style and character, based on their historical significance, and the Operative District Plan seeks to ensure these areas are protected from inappropriate development.

35.  It is a stand-alone zone providing a full set of objectives, policies, and rules.  This zone makes re-development, alterations, and modifications of buildings a restricted discretionary activity (needing a resource consent) and has development standards which restrict the scale of development so that it is fitting with the existing buildings.

The draft Historic Heritage chapter

Issues

36.  Two primary resource management issues have been identified as relevant to the draft Historic Heritage chapter:

a.    Significant historic heritage must be identified and must be protected against inappropriate subdivision use and development; and

b.    Continued use and adaptive reuse of historic heritage should be provided for and enabled.

Objectives

37.  Objectives address the issues and describe the outcomes sought by the Historic Heritage chapter provisions.

38.  The objectives seek to protect significant values while providing for the continued use and adaptive re-use:

a.    HH-01 – Significant historic heritage values associated with buildings, items and areas are recognised and are protected from inappropriate, subdivision, use and development; and

b.    HH-02 – Historic heritage buildings, items and areas are used appropriately and maintained.

Structure

39.  The draft Historic Heritage chapter includes objectives, policies rules and other methods that address the identified resource management issues.

40.  The objectives in the draft chapter apply to all historic heritage while the policies rules and other methods apply differently to individually identified historic heritage, historic heritage areas and archaeological sites.

41.  Individual heritage buildings and structures, and heritage areas, are identified and valued in different ways. Therefore, the approach to protection requires minor variation in the policy and rule framework.

Options for draft Historic Heritage Chapter

42.  There are a number of options available to Council to protect significant historic heritage against inappropriate subdivision use and development.

43.  The following are three reasonably practical options:

a.    Option 1: Enabling approach

b.    Option 2: Balanced approach (recommended)

c.     Option 3: Restrictive approach

44.  All options address the identified resource management issues, but they differ in how they address use and development activities.

45.  All provisions would be applied to a schedule of buildings, items and areas with significant historic heritage values. The schedule will include a range of buildings, items and heritage areas, on both public and private property, that hold significant historic heritage value. As discussed above, the draft schedule will be considered by the Subcommittee following engagement with property owners.

46.  The three reasonably practicable options are discussed in the following paragraphs.

Option 1: Enabling Approach:

47.  The purpose of this option is to provide a relatively enabling approach to the continued use and adaptive reuse of identified historic heritage while protecting historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision use and development.

48.  Under this option, a broader range of activities would be enabled. These would include any activity internal to built heritage (including repairs, maintenance, and alterations) and repairs and maintenance. Unlike other options, minor alterations and additions would also be permitted (‘minor’ would be determined through permitted activity standards). Resource consent would not be required to undertake these activities provided permitted activity standards are met.

49.  New buildings and structures in heritage areas and on the sites of heritage buildings or structures would not require resource consent, provided certain bulk and location standards are met.

50.  Seismic strengthening, fire safety and accessibility alterations and additions would be enabled but compared to other options, the activity status would be controlled with a number of standards.

51.  Major alterations and additions would require resource consent and activities such as demolition and relocation would only be allowed where certain standards or requirements are met. However, the policy direction, matters of discretion and activity status would provide for a wider range of options and broader pathways for when demolition and relocation is appropriate.

Option 2: Balanced approach (recommended)

52.  The purpose of this option is to provide a balanced approach between the range of options presented.

53.  The option is recommended and has been formulated into a draft chapter.

54.  Under this option, repairs and maintenance and any repairs, maintenance and alteration to the interior would be enabled and resource consent would not be required.

55.  Seismic strengthening, fire safety and accessibility alterations and additions would be enabled but require resource consent.

56.  New buildings and structures on the site of a heritage building, or structures or buildings on a site within a heritage area, would be provided for where the bulk and location of the building or structure is appropriate, but resource consent would be required.

57.  Resource consent would be required for alterations, additions and relocation. These activities would only be allowed where it can be demonstrated that the historic heritage values will be protected and where the activity provide for the continued use and adaptive reuse.

58.  Under this option, the draft District Plan would seek to avoid demolition unless the building or item is an immediate threat to human life or it can be demonstrated that there has been sufficient consideration of all alternatives to demolition (such as repairs, maintenance, earthquake strengthening, relocation etc.).

59.  The draft Historic Heritage chapter formulates this option attached as Appendix 2 to the report.

Option 3: Protective approach

60.  The purpose of this option is to provide stronger protection for historic heritage through the District Plan provisions.

61.  Under this option repair and maintenance would be permitted. However, internal alterations where significant internal heritage features are specifically identified, could require resource consent. However, significant internal features have not been assessed as part of the inventory review.

62.  Seismic strengthening, fire safety and accessibility alterations and additions would be provided for but require resource consent.

63.  Resource consent would be required for alterations, additions and new structures and buildings. These activities would only be allowed where it can be demonstrated that the historic heritage values will be protected and where the activity provides for the continued use and adaptive reuse. However, with this option, the plan would provide limited pathways for these activities particularly with the placement or construction of certain structures and buildings.

64.  Under this option, relocation and the placement or construction of certain structures and most buildings on historic heritage sites would be avoided and a non-complying activity. There would be a limited number of opportunities where relocation and new structures and buildings would be appropriate.

65.  Demolition would be further restricted and limited set of pathways would be available for appropriate demolition. Alternatively, demolition could be a prohibited activity.

 

 

Conservation incentives

66.  All options would be complemented by a range of conservation incentives.

67.  Incentives are designed to make heritage conservation more economically viable and to reduce the risk of demolition.

68.  The Built Heritage Incentive Fund enables landowners to seek financial support and other support for the maintenance and enhancement of identified historic heritage buildings, sites or areas.

69.  The full suite of conservation incentives that relate to the fund are outlined in Appendix 3 attached to the report.

70.  The conservation incentives outlined in Appendix 3 attached to the report include two methods that relate directly to District Plan provisions. These include the heritage tradeoffs and development bonuses for approved projects. Officers recommend that these methods are not employed in the draft Historic Heritage chapter.

71.  While the development bonuses intend to provide a benefit to landowners through enabling more development, the benefits will not be as effective as other methods because of the changes that will come through the NPS-UD. The NPS-UD will already bring significant changes that will enable increased bulk and location standards for new buildings.  

72.  Heritage trade-offs intend to provide a benefit to property owners by allowing heritage offsets. While this may provide a benefit for some property owners, the trade-offs may not provide for the protection of historic heritage values. Within the provisions provided in the draft Historic Heritage chapter, there is already scope for landowners to apply for a resource consent to undertake alterations, additions and partial demolition. These provisions provide scope for property owners to undertake works on properties provided heritage values are protected.

Jackson Street Precinct

73.  The draft Historic Heritage chapter includes a placeholder for Jackson Street Precinct.

74.  A precinct is defined in the national planning standards as:

a.     A precinct spatially identifies and manages an area where additional place-based provisions apply to modify or refine aspects of the policy approach or outcomes anticipated in the underlying zone(s).

75.  Unlike other heritage areas, Jackson Street requires provisions that provide for commercial activities and commercial business opportunities while protecting the unique historic heritage values.

76.  A precinct will be the most appropriate option for providing for these unique set of provisions.

77.  The draft Historic Heritage chapter has not yet developed with the Jackson Street Precinct as these provisions will be developed alongside the development of the commercial and industrial zones.

78.  It is likely many provisions form the existing Petone Commercial Activity Area and other heritage chapters will guide the development of these provisions.

Archaeological sites

79.  The draft Historic Heritage chapter also includes a placeholder for the identification and protection of archaeological sites.

80.  These provisions will be developed and considered by the Subcommittee at a future date. 

Changes from existing district plan

81.  The recommended draft Historic Heritage chapter has a number of similarities and differences when compared to the current District Plan heritage provisions.

82.  The 11 November 2020 report described a number of issues with the existing heritage chapter. The aim of the review has been to simplify provisions, give effect to new statutory requirements, and provide clear direction and reduce complexity for plan users.

83.  All current individual listings and heritage areas have been reviewed and reassessed against the Policy 21 criteria of the RPS. Some have been retained while others failed to meet the Policy 21 criteria. A number of new buildings, sites and areas throughout Lower Hutt will also meet the Policy 21 criteria. Under the Policy 21 criteria, the new schedule will change considerably in terms of the number and types buildings and structures identified.

84.  The draft Historic Heritage chapter is similar to Chapter 14F of the current plan. Many of the provisions in the existing chapter have been rolled over. However, the following are key changes:

a.    Key terms have been defined (eg alteration, additions, repairs and maintenance)

b.    New rules to protect heritage and enable continued use and adaptive reuse have been provided (eg seismic strengthening, placement and construction of new structures and buildings).

c.     Specific policy direction relating to key provisions is provided.

d.    Refined approach to provisions like repairs and maintenance, alterations, additions, relocation and demolition and how they apply to identified historic heritage.

85.  These changes provide more certainty, reduce complexity and ensure statutory requirements are given effect to.

 

 

86.  The Historic Heritage Activity Area zone has been removed and these areas will be managed through the draft Historic Heritage chapter. The National Planning Standards prescribe a limited set of zones that may be used in the District Plan. ‘Special purpose zones’ which depart from the standard set of zones can only be used if they are to address issues that are impractical to be managed through a combination of spatial layers. This limits the ability of council to use the Historic Residential Activity Area in the reviewed district plan.

87.  The provisions for Jackson Street will largely be rolled over but the heritage area provisions, and provisions and the Petone Commercial Activity Area, will be simplified into a precinct.

Conclusions

88.  In considering the information provided in this report, it is recommended that the Subcommittee proceed with Option 2.

89.  Recommendations are detailed at the beginning of the report.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

91.  It is likely that the buildings, structures and areas with significant historic heritage value will be affected by a changing climate, particularly in relation to the intensity and likelihood of natural hazard events. The risk to people and property associated with natural hazard events will be addressed through the Natural Hazards chapter of the draft District Plan.

92.  Provisions in the draft Historic Heritage chapter also address natural hazards in relation to heritage buildings, structures, and areas as they relate to relocation activities.

Consultation

93.  The consultation and engagement to date is described in section 13, 14 and 15 above.

94.  Further consultation and engagement on the provisions of the draft Historic Heritage chapter will occur through the draft District Plan process.

95.  Following the draft District Plan consultation process, all feedback will be considered before notifying the District Plan. Council will then engage with the public again once submissions are open on the notified District Plan.

Legal Considerations

96.  The key legal consideration for the review of the District Plan is the need for Council to meet its legal obligations under the Resource Management Act (RMA) and Wellington Regional Policy Statement.

Financial Considerations

97.  There are no specific financial considerations that relate to the review of the District Plan for historic heritage.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 - District Plan consultation on Historic Heritage

81

2

Appendix 2 - Draft Historic Heritage chapter

83

3

Appendix 3 - Range of Conservation Incentives

97

    

 

 

 

 

 

Author: Benjamin Haddrell

Policy Planner

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Parvati Rotherham

Head of Planning

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 - District Plan consultation on Historic Heritage

 



Attachment 2

Appendix 2 - Draft Historic Heritage chapter

 















Attachment 3

Appendix 3 - Range of Conservation Incentives

 



                                                                                       1                                                  06 December 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

15 November 2021

 

 

 

File: (21/1986)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2021/5/287

 

Noise - draft chapter

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is:

a.    To present options for the Noise component of the review of the City of Lower Hutt District Plan;

b.    To present a draft Noise chapter, based on the recommended option for feedback;

c.     Receive feedback and direction from the District Plan Review Subcommittee (the Subcommittee) on the draft; and

d.    Approve a noise chapter to be included in the draft district plan for the purpose of public engagement.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

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

(2)       proceeds with the review of the City of Lower Hutt District Plan regarding noise through the recommended option, being use of the draft Noise chapter for engagement.

 

Background

Noise and the Resource Management Act (RMA)

2.    The issue of noise has not previously been before the Subcommittee.  However, members have previously been briefed and discussed the issue with officers.

3.    Excessive noise can have a large range of adverse effects, ranging from simple annoyance, to interference with speech and job performance, ranging up to direct impacts on mental and physical health, including through stress and sleep disturbance.

4.    Noise has a special treatment in both the Resource Management Act (the Act) and under the National Planning Standards, the combination of which largely dictates the form that noise provisions must take in the plan.

5.    The overall issue that noise provisions in the plan seek to address is likely to be uncontroversial and follows the issue as identified in the operative plan. This is to balance the protection of people’s health and safety, and amenity values, while still providing for activities that inevitably cause noise.

6.    The Act places a direct duty on people undertaking activities to avoid unreasonable noise. The district plan can provide more details about limits for noise, specify noisy activities that require resource consent, and specify how to manage noise to reduce its impact.

7.    The policy decisions around noise available to Council are chiefly around what level and type of noise to enable in different areas, and from which sort of activities, and what matters to consider for resource consents for breaches of noise standards.

8.    District plans can also use a noise chapter to deal with the issue of “reverse sensitivity”.

9.    This protects existing noisy activities, or future noisy activities that are anticipated in an area, from limits on their operation that could be required to protect new, noise-sensitive activities (such as homes, marae, childcare centres, or other places where people sleep).

10.  This is generally achieved, and is achieved in the operative plan, by requiring noise insulation for new buildings where noise-sensitive activities happen, where they are close to some existing or proposed noisy activities.

11.  The noisy activities that are currently protected are state highways, railways, and the major commercial areas in the city centre and Petone.

12.  It is up to Council to decide which scenarios reverse sensitivity issues should be addressed in, if any.

13.  Noise as defined in the RMA also includes vibration, and the proposed draft chapter addresses effects from vibration.

Drivers for change

14.  In reviewing the existing noise chapter, officers commissioned from an external acoustic engineer a report covering an assessment of the existing district plan noise chapter, and an environmental noise survey.

 

15.  That assessment was used to inform the creation of the draft chapter, and the engineer has reviewed the draft chapter and is able to support it as written, bearing in mind minor wording changes may be needed as placeholders are filled in and to integrate with other chapters.

16.  The noise survey measured background noise levels in 22 different locations in a wide range of the district to provide context for this review, and a baseline against which Council can monitor the outcomes of the new district plan in years to come. The noise survey also incorporated the results of traffic noise monitoring at an additional 4 sites near State Highway 2 conducted for the Riverlink project in 2020.

17.  The noise survey aimed to find typical values for noise across the city, rather than being specific to their sites, by averaging results across measurements made in different locations but likely to have similar characteristics – such as locations in residential areas, locations in suburban commercial areas, locations near the rail corridor, etc.

18.  Noise results generally find the lowest daytime noise levels in rural and residential areas, and higher daytime noise in commercial and industrial areas. Night-time results also show the lowest noise in rural and residential areas, but also lower noise in commercial areas and the rail corridor. Industrial areas tend to still have elevated noise at night.

19.  Residential areas perform well compared to target noise levels from guidelines in the relevant New Zealand Standard and guideline from the World Health Organisation (WHO). Eight out of nine sites met the daytime noise standard in the New Zealand Standard, and all sites met the evening and night-time standards. Six out of nine sites also met the more ambitious WHO night-time noise standard.

20.  Further details of the noise survey are provided in the table below in paragraph 27.

21.  The assessment of the existing noise chapter outlined elements of the operative plan that need to be changed, and other optional opportunities to improve the plan or change the policy approach.

22.  The one mandatory factor requiring an update to the existing noise provisions is the National Planning Standards. In addition to the change in format required for all parts of a district plan, it also requires plans to use the most up-to-date versions of relevant technical standards for measuring and assessing noise and specifies a different unit of measurement than that used in the operative plan.

23.  The assessment also identified several other opportunities to incorporate new methods of noise controls and reverse sensitivity management based on new technical standards, experience in other plans particularly elsewhere in the region, and integration with strategic and zone objectives in the district plan. The major recommendations are all implemented in the draft plan and are set out in paragraphs 25 and 26.

Discussion

24.  The proposed draft chapter is based on:

a.    recommendations from Council’s acoustic expert;

b.    existing direction from Council;

c.     the requirements of the RMA and the National Planning Standards;

d.    guidance from the Ministry of Health and World Health Organisation; and

e.     effort to be regionally consistent, particularly with respect to recently reviewed noise provisions for Wellington City and Porirua City.

25.  The proposed draft chapter updates the approach of the operative plan, with the following being the most important ways:

a.    Updates the referenced New Zealand Standards for measuring and assessing noise to the most recent versions (required by the National Planning Standards).

b.    Provides new noise limits that use the unit of dB LAeq(15min), which is accepted by the industry as the best available standard and is required by the National Planning Standards.

c.     Simplifies the existing patchwork of site-specific and area-specific noise limits to new standards based on best-practice guidance and the outcomes sought in each district plan zone.

d.    Standardises the times-of-day at which different noise levels apply, including in most cases removing the special treatment of Sundays (except where this special treatment is included in national standards), and introducing evening noise levels that provide an intermediate level of protection between that allowed in the daytime and that allowed in the night-time.

e.     Provides for a higher level of noise for a few major events each year in McEwan Park, Williams Park, and the Hutt Recreation Ground, in line with an existing “global” resource consent. The details of this provision are still a placeholder pending some technical work about the best method for ensuring adequate operational management of major events, and options will be put to the Subcommittee at a later date.

f.     Standardises the performance standard for acoustic insulation and ventilation in different situations, and extends the protection provided in the plan from highway and railway corridor buffers, the city centre, and Petone, to also include other neighbourhood commercial centres (eg Naenae, Eastbourne), and expands the definition of noise-sensitive activities to include a wider range of places where people might sleep or where a good listening environment is particularly important.

g.    Simplifies provisions around vibration that had proved difficult both to enforce and to show compliance with.

26.  New noise limits are informed by the guidelines in applicable technical standards:

Source

Situation

Recommended upper limit (dB LAeq)

New Zealand Standard 6802:2008, WHO guidelines

Daytime residential outdoor noise limit to protect against serious annoyance

55

New Zealand Standard 6802:2008

Evening residential outdoor noise limit (where the local authority thinks a separate evening limit is warranted)

50

New Zealand Standard 6802:2008

Night-time residential outdoor noise limit to protect against sleep disturbance

45

EU/WHO guidelines

Night-time residential outdoor noise limit to protect against sleep disturbance (aspirational)

40

 

27.  Existing ambient noise levels from the environmental noise survey in Lower Hutt are:

Area

Day (dB LAeq(15min))

Evening (dB LAeq(15min))

Night (dB LAeq(15min))

Industrial areas (3 sites)

59.8

56.3

55.5

Suburban commercial centres (4 sites)

58.6

54.5

50.0

(3 out of 4 sites meet the 45 dB residential guideline)

Residential (9 sites)

50.8

(8 out of 9 sites meet the 55 dB daytime guideline)

45.6

(all sites meet the 50 dB evening guideline)

38.0

(all sites meet the 45 dB guideline and 6 out of 9 meet the 40 dB aspirational target)

City Centre (1 site)

54.8

47.7

40.5

Railway corridor (3 sites)

58.8

(1 out of 3 sites meets 55 dB daytime guideline)

52.0

(2 out of 3 sites meet 50 dB evening guideline)

47.5

(No sites meet the 45 dB night-time guideline)

 

28.  Higher noise limits can be justified in commercial, business, or recreation areas, or where the noise is only for a short-term period, or where buildings have noise insulation above Building Code minimums.

29.  The draft chapter is presented as a largely complete document. Some provisions are left as placeholders as their exact wording depends on the details of integration with other chapters. The different treatment of zones is also provided as a guide for discussion, although the Subcommittee has yet to decide on the exact range of zones and precincts to be included in the draft plan.

30.  In particular, the Māori Purpose zone is not included, as the question of whether to use such a zone, and the treatment of the zone if it is used, is still subject to engagement with Mana Whenua. Officers would recommend, however, that for the purpose of the noise chapter, the Māori Purpose zone be treated together with one or more other zones where there are similar anticipated outcomes for amenity and range of activities.

Options

Recommended option

31.  The recommended option is to consult on the draft in its current form, subject to possible minor technical corrections and filling out placeholders once the detail of other related chapters is set, such as zones to be used.

32.  Setting details in the draft noise chapter does not commit the Council to any of those details for the notified plan, and Council can make any alterations it sees fit after receiving feedback on the draft.

Site- and activity-specific noise provisions

33.  The draft chapter also removes almost all of the more than 60 site-specific or activity-specific noise limits in the operative plan.

34.  The only exceptions are for the particular situations of the quarries, temporary activities including major events, construction work, helicopter landing areas, wind farms, and some infrastructure, as these have specific mandatory or recommended national standards or are impractical to manage in the same way as other noise sources.

35.  While many of these came out of consultation or appeals in the operative plan process from 1995 to 2004, others simply reflect differences in the predecessor district schemes from the pre-1989 councils. The site-specific rules cannot also be reliably translated from their existing limits into the new LAeq(15min) unit, without site-specific measurement and analysis, although rough rules of thumb are available.

36.  Many sites are also no longer in use for the purpose anticipated by the noise chapter in the operative plan, or the activity has changed substantially in its characteristics.

37.  The recommendation from officers is thus for the site-specific limits not to be incorporated in the draft. Performance standards are based on general health and wellbeing guidelines and existing ambient noise levels averaged across the district.

38.  Council can then through the draft engage with operators of local noise-producing activities who still desire site-specific treatment of noise. Council can make a final decision about which sites or activities should be treated in a special way based on that feedback.

39.  However, Council could choose to attempt to roll over existing noise provisions using rules of thumb about conversion of units.

Other options

40.  The Subcommittee also has options to alter the chapter for consultation, either to frame the debate, or to highlight options where feedback would be particularly sought. Options could include different treatment of different zones, or different noise levels.

41.  The recommended option includes provision for acoustic insulation for homes and other noise-sensitive activities in suburban commercial centres, anticipating that suburban centres will become busier because of residential intensification in and around centres.

42.  However, existing ambient noise in suburban centres is generally not at a level that would require acoustic insulation, so an alternative option would be not to require acoustic insulation in those centres for now and revisit the issue in future if noise becomes a more serious issue for the centres later.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

44.  Climate change has extremely limited direct relevance to the control of noise.

45.  However, good management of noise effects and reverse sensitivity can increase the appeal of urban intensification and thereby help in achieving a compact urban form and resulting reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from transport.

Consultation

46.  Once the Draft District Plan has been completed, Council officers will use the draft as an engagement tool, and engage with iwi, the wider community, and other stakeholders on what has been included in the draft. This engagement will take place in early 2022.

47.  The noise chapter draft district plan can be presented either as an entire suggested chapter or can include places where various options are suggested, and feedback is sought on specific issues.

Legal Considerations

48.  While there are no legal considerations associated with this report, ultimately the key legal consideration for the review of the District Plan is the need for Council to meet its legal obligations under the RMA.

49.  It should be noted that Council has the specific function under the RMA of “control of the emission of noise and the mitigation of the effects of noise” and must use this function to achieve the sustainable management purpose of the Act.

Financial Considerations

50.  No financial considerations are associated with this report. The recommended option can be accommodated within the existing budget for the District Plan review.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Proposed noise chapter for the draft district plan

107

    

 

 

 

 

 

Author: Stephen Davis

Policy Planner

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Parvati Rotherham

Head of Planning

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability


Attachment 1

Proposed noise chapter for the draft district plan

 




















                                                                                       1                                                  06 December 2021

District Plan Review Subcommittee

19 November 2021

 

 

 

File: (21/2028)

 

 

 

 

Report no: DPRS2021/5/289

 

Natural Hazards - Draft Chapter

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is:

·    To present options for the Natural Hazards component of the review of the City of Lower Hutt District Plan;

·    Present a draft Natural Hazards chapter, based on the recommended option; and

·    Receive feedback and direction from the District Plan Review Subcommittee (the Subcommittee) on the draft.

Recommendations

That the Subcommittee:

(1)   proceeds with the review of the City of Lower Hutt District Plan regarding natural hazards through Option 2: A balanced approach, including:

(a)     requiring resource consent for activities that are sensitive to the risks from natural hazards within identified hazard risk areas; and

(b)     permitting activities where the types of activity would have minimal risk or consequences within identified hazard risk areas;

       complemented by both regulatory and non-regulatory methods outside of the District Plan;

(2)   notes and receives the draft Natural Hazards chapter and information contained in the report; and

(3)   directs officers to make subsequent changes to the draft chapter and/or further consideration of specific matters.

 

Background

2.    Council’s District Plan Review includes a review of the District Plan’s approach to managing natural hazard risk. Natural hazard risk is a combination of the likelihood of a natural hazard event occurring and the expected outcome of that event.

3.    Lower Hutt is susceptible to several natural hazards, including:

·    Earthquake hazards (including surface fault rupture, ground shaking, subsidence, liquefaction, landslides and tsunami hazards);

·    Land instability hazards;

·    Flooding hazards; and

·    Coastal hazards.

4.    The Subcommittee received an initial briefing on the natural hazard risk component of the District Plan Review at its 15 December 2020 meeting. In response to that briefing, the Subcommittee directed officers to:

·    Fully review the District Plan approach on earthquake, land instability, and flooding hazards, including:

Working with Wellington Water Limited (WWL) and Greater Wellington Regional Council (GRWC) to source information on flood risk across Lower Hutt;

Investigating the feasibility of a strategic flood risk assessment for Lower Hutt for the next 100 years;

Commissioning technical assessments on slope stability and tsunami hazard risk; and

Engaging with the community and stakeholders on natural hazard risk.

5.    As part of this review, officers have now prepared three high-level options for the Natural Hazards chapter of the draft District Plan, and a draft Natural Hazards chapter, based on the recommended option (attached as Appendix 1 to the report).

Discussion

Legislative requirements

6.    The approach of the District Plan on managing natural hazard risk needs to be informed by the direction of the Resource Management Act (the RMA) and Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region (the RPS).

7.    Under s6 of the RMA, Council must recognise and provide for the management of significant risks from natural hazards.

8.    Under s31 of the RMA, Council has the function of controlling any actual or potential effects of the use, development, or protection of land, including for the purpose of the avoidance or mitigation of natural hazards.

9.    Under s75(3) of the RMA, the District Plan must give effect to the RPS. The RPS directs district plans to:

·    Identify areas at high risk from natural hazards, and to include polices and rules to avoid inappropriate subdivision and development in those areas (Policy 29).

·    Minimise risks and consequences of natural hazards on people, communities, their property and infrastructure (Policy 51).

·    Give particular regard to a list of hazard mitigation measures when considering applications for resource consents, notice of requirements, or changes, variations or reviews to district and regional plans (Policy 52).

Wellington Region Natural Hazards Management Strategy

10.  The Wellington Region Natural Hazards Management Strategy (the NHMS) is strategy of GWRC, the five metropolitan councils of the Wellington region and the Wellington Region Emergency Management Group. The NHMS gives direction on the management of natural hazard risk, and addresses the 4R’s of hazard management:

·    Reduction - Identifying and analysing long-term risks to human life and property from hazards; taking steps to eliminate these risks if practicable, and, if not, reducing the magnitude of their impact and the likelihood of them occurring.

·    Readiness - Developing operational systems and capabilities before a civil defence emergency happens.

·    Response - Actions taken immediately before, during or directly after a civil defence emergency to save lives and protect property, and to help communities recover.

·    Recovery - The coordinated efforts and processes to bring about the immediate, medium-term and long-term holistic regeneration of a community following a civil defence emergency.

11.  The NHMS gives the following key direction for the preparation of a Natural Hazards chapter for the District Plan:

·    Develop regionally consistent and coordinated city, district and regional plan provisions, including agreed objectives, policies, rules and methods.

·    Cooperate on common natural hazard issues and possible hazards management policy approaches.

 

12.  Since the development of the NHMS, planners from Councils of the Wellington region have formed a working group to work collaboratively on an approach to managing natural hazard risk. To date, this work has informed the natural hazard chapter in the proposed Porirua District Plan (notified for submissions in August 2020) and the draft Wellington District Plan (released for public engagement in November 2021).

13.  Work to date on the review of the City of Lower Hutt District Plan has also been informed by the work of the working group.

Options

14.  Three high-level options are presented below on the approach for the Natural Hazards chapter:

·    Option 1: A conservative approach

·    Option 2: A balanced approach

·    Option 3: A permissive approach

15.  These three options effectively sit on a continuum, with the more restrictive option (Option 1) sitting at one end of the continuum, the more enabling option (Option 3) sitting at the other end, and an additional option sitting between the two.

16.  These options are described more fully in the following paragraphs.

Option 1: A conservative approach

17.  Under Option 1 (a conservative approach), very few activities would be permitted in any natural hazard area. This approach would result in nearly all developments (including new buildings and changes in the use of a site) requiring a case-by-case assessment through a resource consent process of whether the proposal avoids or mitigates the risks of natural hazards.

18.  While this approach would ensure natural hazard risk is assessed for the vast majority of new activities, it would result in some activities needing to obtain a resource consent for little or no benefit.

 

 

19.  This approach would be effective in responding to the natural hazard risk and avoiding inappropriate subdivision, use and development in high risk areas. However, it would potentially have low benefits in achieving other objectives in the District Plan, such as the vitality and vibrancy of commercial areas and neighbourhoods and provision of housing.

20.  This approach would be less efficient than the other two options and would have higher administration and compliance costs associated with requiring resource consents for a greater number of activities. In addition, some activities or developments may not occur because of the natural hazard requirements, which could have costs in terms of employment opportunities and economic activity.

Option 2: A permissive approach

21.  Option 2 (a permissive approach) is effectively at the other end of the continuum from Option 1. Under this option, only the most hazard sensitive activities (such as hospitals and childcare facilities) in high risk natural hazards areas would require resource consent, with most other activities being permitted.

22.  This approach would be effective in enabling more development in areas subject to natural hazards. However, it would potentially result in an increase in natural hazard risk. As a result, while this approach may more effectively achieve the broader objectives of the District Plan, the benefits from a natural hazard perspective would be limited.

23.  The costs of this approach would be potentially higher impacts on people and property from a natural hazard event. However, the administrative and compliance costs would be lower than the other options. This approach places greater reliance on the non-District Plan regulatory and non-regulatory methods, such as the Building Act and civil defence and emergency management responses.

Option 3: A balanced approach (recommended option)

24.  Option 3 (a balanced approach) is effectively a mid-point between the conservative and permissive approaches. Under this option, many activities would require resource consent. However, activities would be permitted where Council is satisfied that the type of activity would not increase the natural hazard risk.

25. This approach would be effective in enabling some types and scale of development which is commensurate with the nature and level of natural hazard risk, including development that would contribute to achieving the broader objectives in the District Plan (such as objectives on vitality and vibrancy of commercial areas and housing supply) while also achieving the natural hazard objective of avoiding inappropriate subdivision, use and development.

 

 

26. The cost of this approach is the restriction on the use of land subject to natural hazard risks for some types and scale of activities. In addition, as resource consent is required for many activities, there are moderate administration and compliance costs.

27.  Option 3 is recommended for the following reasons:

·    Inappropriate subdivision, land use and development would be avoided in areas of high hazard risk (a requirement of the Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region).

·    Subdivision, land use and development would still be enabled where it is demonstrated that natural hazard risk would not increase, either as a permitted activity or on a case-by-case basis through a resource consent process.

·    Permitted activity rules would enable specified subdivision, land use and development without imposing an unnecessary regulatory cost.

Draft Natural Hazards chapter

28.  Officers have prepared a draft Natural Hazard chapter (attached as Appendix 1 to the report) based on Option 3 (a balanced approach), as recommended above.

29.  As stated above, a working group of planners from councils of the Wellington region have been collaborating on an approach to managing natural hazard risk. The draft Natural Hazards chapter has been informed by the work of the working group.

30.  The draft Natural Hazard chapter has a single objective:

Subdivision, use and development in the Natural Hazard Overlays reduce or do not increase the risk from natural hazards to people, property and infrastructure.

 

31.  To implement this objective, the draft Natural Hazard chapter includes policies on:

·    Identifying and mapping natural hazard areas;

·    A risk-based approach to managing subdivision, land use and development in the areas identified, based on the likelihood of natural hazard events and sensitivity of different activities;

·    Managing land use activities, buildings and structures in hazard areas; and

·    Providing for hazard mitigation, including natural features and hazard mitigation structures.

 

 

32.  To implement these policies:

·    Areas susceptible to natural hazards will be identified and categorised as high, medium or low hazard areas, depending on the likelihood of a hazard event and potential impacts of the event;

·    The identified areas will be mapped as overlays on the District Plan maps;

·    Activities have been categorised as hazard sensitive, potentially hazard sensitive or less hazard sensitive;

·    The rules of the draft Natural Hazard chapter:

Permit less-sensitive activities in all hazard areas;

Require resource consent for hazard sensitive and potentially hazard sensitive activities in all hazard areas, but as a non-complying activity for hazard sensitive activities and in high and medium hazard areas (as illustrated in Table 1);

Permit some buildings and additions to existing buildings, based on:

§ the risk the hazard presents (for additions to buildings, this is the change in risk); and

§ whether the design of building/addition addresses the risk (including limiting the size of the addition or floor heights).

33.  To date, the natural hazard areas that have been identified and are currently being mapped are:

High Hazard Areas

Wellington Fault Rupture overlay

Stream Corridor overlay

100 Year Tsunami overlay

Medium Hazard Areas

Overland Flowpath overlay

500 Year Tsunami overlay

Low Hazard Areas

Ponding overlay

1000 Year Tsunami overlay

 

34.  The flood hazard overlays (Stream Corridor, Overland Flowpath and Ponding overlays) and tsunami hazard overlays have all been identified through a similar methodology to that used by other councils in the Wellington region (GWRC and WWL have prepared the flood hazard overlays and GNS Science have prepared the tsunami hazard overlays).

 

35.  While Lower Hutt is susceptible to other natural hazards, some hazards are already addressed through other legislation (for example, ground shaking and liquefaction can be addressed through Building Code requirements). In addition, Council can address natural hazard risk in some areas through zoning requirements (for example, as coastal hazard areas are mostly in open space zones, risk from coastal hazards can be in part addressed through zone rules.

36.  The activities that have been categorised as hazard-sensitive, potentially hazard-sensitive or less hazard-sensitive activities are:

Hazard-sensitive activities

Childcare Facility

Community Facility

Educational Facility

Emergency Service Facilities

Healthcare Activity

Hospital

Marae

Multi-unit housing

Places of Worship

Residential Units and Minor Residential Units

Retirement Village

Visitor Accommodation

Potentially hazard-sensitive activities

Buildings associated with primary production

Commercial Activity

Commercial Service Activity

Community Corrections Activity.

Entertainment Facility

Food and Beverage Activity

Industrial Activities

Integrated Retail Activity

Large Format Retail Activity

Major Sports Facility

Offices

Retail Activities

Rural Industrial Activities

Less hazard-sensitive activities

Accessory buildings used for non-habitable purposes

Buildings associated with marina operations

Parks Facilities

Parks Furniture

 

37.  The table below illustrates the activity status for different activities, based on the type of natural hazard area and the category of the activity. For example:

·    If a childcare facility was proposed on a site in the Wellington Fault Rupture overlay, as the Wellington Fault Rupture overlay is a High Hazard Area and a childcare facility is a hazard-sensitive activity, the activity would be a non-complying activity.

·    If a retail activity was proposed on a site in the ponding overlay, as the ponding overlay is a Low Hazard Area and a retail activity is a less hazard-sensitive activity, the activity would be permitted.

 

 

 

Low Hazard Area

Medium Hazard Area

High Hazard Area

Less Hazard Sensitive Activities

Permitted

Permitted

Permitted

Potentially Hazard Sensitive Activities

Restricted discretionary

Restricted discretionary

Non-complying

Hazard Sensitive Activities

Restricted discretionary

Restricted discretionary

Non-complying

 

38.  This is largely consistent with the approach of the proposed Porirua District Plan. The main difference is that under the proposed Porirua District Plan, Hazard-sensitive activities and Potentially hazard-sensitive activities in Medium Hazard Areas are a discretionary activity, rather than a restricted discretionary activity.

Differences from the operative District Plan

39.  The draft Natural Hazards chapter is significantly different to the Natural Hazards chapter of the operative District Plan.

40.  While the operative District Plan has a range of objectives and policies on avoiding and reducing natural hazard risk from a range of natural hazards, the chapter includes a single rule that only addresses the risk associated with habitable buildings from a rupture of the Wellington Fault. The operative District Plan primarily relies on non-District Plan regulatory and non-regulatory methods to achieve the natural hazard objectives.

41.  As a result, the rules of draft Natural Hazards chapter would address a wider range of natural hazards and a wide range of activities that are sensitive or potential sensitive to the impacts of natural hazard events.

Next Steps

42.  Regardless of which option is chosen by the Subcommittee, the District Plan Review will involve the following work in the coming months:

·    Engagement with the community and other stakeholders on the draft District Plan (early 2022);

·    Responding to the outcomes of the engagement; and

·    Preparation of evaluation reports for a proposed District Plan.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

43.  The draft Natural Hazards chapter includes objectives, policies and rules for natural hazards, including hazards that will be impacted by climate change.

44.  Some natural hazards for Lower Hutt will be exacerbated by climate change, including flood hazards.

45.  The identification of areas at risk to flood hazards has taken the impacts of climate change into account, including sea level rise and increase in rainfall intensity during storms. The identification of areas at risk to tsunami hazards has also taken account of sea level rise.

46.  Other climate change considerations, such as the appropriate District Plan measures to reduce the city’s impact on the climate by reducing emissions of greenhouse gases, are addressed through other parts of the District Plan Review, particularly parts of the Review on different zones and transport.

Engagement

47.  To date, engagement for the natural hazard component of the District Plan Review has involved the following:

·    An initial round of engagement on the issues for the District Plan Review (April 2021);

·    In conjunction with WWL and and GWRC, community engagement on draft flood maps (August 2021); and

·    Meetings with key stakeholders (throughout 2020 and 2021).

48.  Once the draft District Plan has been completed, Council officers will use the draft as an engagement tool, and engage with iwi, the community and other stakeholders on what has been included in the draft. This engagement will take place in early 2022.

49.  Officers are also looking at engaging directly with owners of properties within Medium and High Hazard Areas.

Legal Considerations

50.  While there are no legal considerations associated with this report, the key legal consideration for the review of the District Plan is the necessity for Council to meet its legal obligations under the Resource Management Act.

51.  Specifically, s31 of the Resource Management Act sets Council’s functions under the Act. This includes the function of controlling any actual or potential effects of the use, development, or protection of land, including for the purpose of the avoidance or mitigation natural hazards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

52.  More widely, Council has obligations for natural hazard management under other legislation, as summarised in the following table:

Local Government Act 2002

The LGA sets the purpose of local government, as well as the general framework, obligations, restrictions and powers under which local authorities operate.

With particular regard to natural hazards, the LGA:

·      Directs local government to, in performing its function, have particular regard to the avoidance and mitigation of natural hazards.

·      Describes activities of local authorities, which can include actions to manage the effects of natural hazards and climate change.

·      Gives local authorities powers to make bylaws for the purpose of protecting, promoting or maintaining public health and safety.

·      Gives regional councils the power to make bylaws for flood protection and flood control works.

Building Act 2004

The Building Act provides for the regulation of building work, the licensing regime for building practitioners, and the setting of performance standards for buildings. It manages natural hazards in relation to the construction and modification of buildings.

The Act also include requirements in relation to building consent limitations and restrictions for the construction of buildings on land subject to natural hazards.

Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002

The CDEMA aims at the comprehensive management of hazards and risks, and emergency response and recovery, through coordinated and integrated policy, planning and decision-making processes at the national and local level. It sets out the duties, functions and powers of central government, local government, emergency services, lifeline utilities and the general public.

Financial Considerations

53.  There are no financial considerations associated with the content of this report. The costs of the next steps outlined in this report (community engagement and preparation of evaluation reports) will be covered by the existing budget for the District Plan Review.

54.  However, if additional potential natural hazards are identified as the review of the District Plan proceeds, there may be additional costs associated with investigating the location and level of risk for these hazards.

 

 

 

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Natural Hazards chapter - DRAFT

138

    

 

 

 

 

 

Author: Nathan Geard

Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Parvati Rotherham

Head of Planning

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability


Attachment 1

Natural Hazards chapter - DRAFT