Tag Archives: Stradegy

Policy changes come into force

Posted on by
Reply

August and September saw several new pieces of legislation come into force. Two of these include:

1. The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020

2. The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020

The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 came into effect on 20 August 2020. It replaced the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity 2016.

The NPS-UD 2020 recognises the national significance of having well-functioning urban environments now and into the future and providing sufficient development capacity to meet the different needs of people and communities.

It requires Councils to plan for growth and ensure a well-functioning urban environment for all people, communities and future generations by:

  • Ensuring urban development occurs in a way that takes into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (te Tiriti o Waitangi)
  • Ensuring that Plans make room for growth both ‘up’ and ‘out’, and that rules are not unnecessarily constraining growth
  • Developing, monitoring and maintaining an evidence base about demand, supply and prices for housing and land to inform planning decisions
  • Aligning and coordinating planning across urban areas.

Key points include:

  • Policies pertaining to intensification seek to improve land-use flexibility in the areas of highest demand – areas with good access to the things people want and need, such as jobs and community services, and good public transport services.
  • Minimum parking rates in District Plans are to be removed as a means to improve landuse flexibility in urban environments.
  • Removing minimum parking rates in District Plans is anticipated to allow more housing and commercial developments, particularly in higher density areas where people do not necessarily need a car to access jobs, services or amenities. Urban space can then be used for higher value purposes than car parking. Some degree of car parking will still be required however – certainly for accessible car parking, but the intent is for the number of car parks to be driven by market demand.
  • Although minimum rates may be removed from District Plans, car parking is still likely to be a major consideration for any resource consent process, and it may be that losing this sort of guidance (or ‘acceptable solution’) from District Plans will have unintended consequences on streamlining the process. Have we just leapt to the other end of the spectrum?

The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 came into force on 3 September. It succeeds the 2014 and 2017 versions and provides local authorities updated direction on how they should manage freshwater under the Resource Management Act 1991.

Managing freshwater in a way that ‘gives effect’ to Te Mana o te Wai is the central principle. This is all about:

  • Involving tangata whenua
  • Working with tangata whenua and communities to set out long-term visions
  • Prioritising the health and wellbeing of water bodies, then the essential needs of people, followed by other uses.

Core objectives are to improve degraded water bodies and maintain or improve all others using bottom lines defined in the NPS. Key points include:

  • Threatened species and mahinga kai join ecosystem health and human health for recreation, as compulsory values
  • Councils must develop plan objectives that describe the environmental outcome sought for all values
  • Councils will have to develop action plans and/or set limits on resource use to achieve specific attributes.
  • There are tougher national bottom lines for the ammonia and nitrate toxicity attributes

With the Plan Change 9 (TANK) being notified just prior to this new version of the NPS, it is unclear as to how and when the new NPS will be implemented, or how it may affect the TANK process. Whatever the case, it is sure to have a significant influence on future planning processes and the way everyone manages land and freshwater.

It seems change in this sector is coming at a rate where policy approaches are almost immediately redundant upon development, and that initiatives are continuously needing to change before substantial progress is even made.

Napier begins review of District Plan

Posted on by
Reply

Napier City Council has recently launched its District Plan review process, which at this early stage is looking to be based around the following six key outcomes:

1. Putting people first,
2. Open for business,
3. A port and coastal city, 4. Our people our stories, 5. Ecological excellence, 6. Pedal power.

Too often the Plan development process falls into an academic exercise where the direction of a District Plan gets forced to respond to only resource management issues, which risks a framework focused around the status quo, or worst still, the past.

The District Plan development process is supposed to be a creative exercise, where we can do some blue sky thinking and dare to be bold and consider what could be.

The way Napier City Council is approaching this review is refreshing, and while there are obviously certain processes and legal frameworks that need to be followed, this doesn’t mean one can’t create or feel free to suggest ideas, after all, that’s what Planning is all about.

All too often we fall into the trap of thinking it’s all about creating and ticking boxes and following the way it was done in the past, or trying to put different issues or proposals in the one box as we think we need to drive towards the same sort of outcome for everything in the one environment. This happens when the theme or tone of a process or planning document is inherentlyuncreative or not interested in thinking about things. The result is often a regulatory environment where it seems hard to get things done or to introduce new ideas, let alone get excited about them.

Napier has some great opportunities. We have people visiting from all over the world, and having been to a few different places in the world myself, Napier is right up there through the lens of a tourist, and easily comparable to memories of the Mediterranean with its small towns, novel architecture, vibrant centers, coffee shops and eateries. Napier has this potential.

The ecological excellence idea is a great opportunity. Although some may think this gets borne out in greater regulation, its actually the clean streets, water bodies, harbour and coastline, and the well- developed and planted parks and reserves that we all enjoy spending time in. Focusing on ecological excellence is actually one of the easiest things to do to enable our community to unload and spend quality time with our friends and family. Ecological excellence benefits all of us.

So what can you expect in a District Plan process. Well Napier City Council have announced it intends to notify a draft plan in 2020. Between now and then there will be a number of informal ways to contribute ideas and feedback to inform that initial draft. There will then be time to make a submission on the draft prior to the formal Plan being notified.

Once formally notified, the process gets a little more organised. A first round of submissions enables you to make a submission on the plan. A summary of these submissions is then notified, and there is an opportunity to make a further submission as to whether you are in support of, or in opposition to an original submission. There may be opportunities to discuss or mediate on different issues to reach a resolution, but the next step is generally for a report, or series of reports to be prepared that makes a recommendation to a hearing panel. A hearing, or series of hearings is then held where all the outstanding issues are heard and decided on. The Plan will then become operative as all appeals, if there are any, are resolved.

Although managed in a quasi-legal sense, the process is purposely informal so as to encourage participation. This is important, as while the more academic part of a District Plan review sets down what ‘must be’ included, it’s an opportunity to think about what we ‘want’ to include for our City – and who knows, this may influence how we manage those things that must be included.

I think the direction Napier City Council is looking to take our city, and more importantly the manner in which they are wanting to do it, is the way it should be, and while there will no doubt be competing interests and debate around the detail, future outcomes seem exciting – and they’re the ones we can only imagine at the moment.

What’s New in Planning?

Posted on by
Reply

Proposals for developing a ‘national planning template’ were first introduced following a 2013 discussion document ‘Building Competitive Cities: Reform of the Urban and Infrastructure Planning System’, with consultation on the development of National Planning Standards commencing on 6 June 2018 and submissions on Draft Standards closing on 17 August 2018.

The themes emerging from the consultation indicated that:

  • current plans needed to be made simpler, more consistent, less complex and uncertain and;
  • in general people wanted to make sure that councils are not a barrier to them getting on with what they want to do.

In response, changes to the Resource Management Act during 2017 require the Ministry for the Environment to have the first set of Planning Standards gazetted by April 2019. These Standards will then apply across New Zealand’s 67 territorial authorities and 11 regional councils.

The outcomes sought by the National Planning Standards are:

  • Less time and fewer resources required to prepare and use plans.
  • Plan content to be easier to access, and relevant content easier to find.
  • National direction to be incorporated in plans, resulting in better implementation on the ground.
  • Councils able to focus their resources on content that influences local resource management outcomes and their importance to the community.
  • Good planning practice to be shared by councils or applied quickly across councils.

The planning standards will improve the accessibility of district and regional plans for plan users. For example, they will provide greater understanding of what a ‘commercial zone’ does and will identify heritage items with the same symbol across all planning maps nationwide

Plan users will have confidence that they understand the key purpose of different planning tools used in plans (e.g. zones, overlays,andprecincts),andtheywon’thave to figure out what a planning tool means in the context of every different plan. Plans won’t be ‘cookie cutter’ documents or the same in every setting. They will still focus on specific provisions to manage local issues of significance to meet the needs and expectations of local communities.

The first set of Plans developed by Councils will establish the structure and form of plans, how national policy statements, national environmental standards and regulations are referenced and will require councils to adopt more standardised spatial planning tools, zone frameworks, mapping, and measures – such as those for noise levels and sediment control. Mandatory elements of the standards are required to be implemented into council plans within one year, or for Councils having new plans, such as Hastings District Council, two years, with remaining provisions incorporated within five years.

With any change there are implications and opportunities.

Implications:

  • Unanticipated or unscheduled costs to councils to undertake changes or variations to plans.
  • Initial uncertainty for plan users, landowners and or developers.
  • Potential loss of existing use rights, unless specifically secured by resource consent or certificate of compliance (for permitted activities).

Opportunities:

  • Greater opportunity for better alignment for district plans – such as the Central Hawkes Bay, Hastings and Napier District Plans, and better consistency between those plans and the Hawkes Bay Regional Plan.
  • More efficient and cost-effective implementation.

Within Hawkes Bay the three main District Plans present as distinctly different documents, with each being presented having a distinctly different format and structure despite many of the overriding key resource management principles being shared between the councils. The recently developed Hastings District Plans has introduced higher levels of specificity across particular resource management areas with feedback from the wider community being that the complexity and broad range of provisions has made the plan difficult to navigate and applications processes more costly.

From April 2019, the introduction of the National Planning Standards will introduce a new challenge to Hawkes Bay Councils. This will be to work together, between each other and with communities to establish common, simple and understandable plan structures for the management of common principle and overriding issues, while still retaining flexibility to retain specific and likely more complex, management outcomes for particular environmental resources, features and communities of interest.

Given the outcome of the recent Amalgamation Referendum, the mandate for such change may be at best ‘on-balance’ and will require substantial buy in and feed back from the community. However, if the outcomes of simplification and efficiency are as important as expressed by the community the goal should be achievable to the positive benefit for the entire Hawkes Bay Region.

As an RMA practitioner any opportunity to facilitate growth and development whilst maintaining anticipated environmental outcomes would be welcomed. More change for the ever changing resource management sector however.

Recognised Seasonal Employer Scheme

Posted on by
Reply

The RSE Scheme allows the horticulture and viticulture industry to recruit overseas workers for seasonal work to supplement shortages of New Zealand workers. Across a number of regions’ the Scheme initially provided 5,000 workers, increasing to 11,100 during 2017/18 in response to worker shortfalls.

Further labour shortfalls are projected for and beyond 2018/19, and the cap on RSE worker numbers is expected to be raised to ensure a reliable supply of labour to support industry growth and regional economic development. The Industry projects that RSE worker numbers may double by 2022.

This increasing seasonal influx of RSE workers raises a number of issues for the regions Councils, including;

  • How to support provision for extra seasonal accommodation in an already constrained housing/accommodation market.
  • How to reconcile extra accommodation within the current planning framework, (noting that HPUDS seeks to consolidate urban environments and to restrict growth/sprawl onto valuable soils resources).
  • How much land should be used to support housing for seasonal workers, and what land should be used?
  • Should RSE accommodation be encouraged to utilise existing housing in existing residential communities, and if so in what form, what density, and how would effects be managed, such as residential amenity and traffic.
  • How to ensure quality living environments for workers.
  • How to achieve consistency between RMA Planning, Building Act Compliance and Housing Regulations 1947, and consideration of National Environmental Standards (Contaminated Soils),
  • Reconciling Council roles against Ministry roles (Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) and the Ministry of Social Development (MSD)). With most of the demand for RSE workers in Hastings, the Hastings District Council is consulting with Industry and RSE accommodation providers to investigate RSE accommodation options to address some of these issues.

Existing RSE accommodation comprises a mix of orchard-based accommodation, residential rentals (houses), Motel’s, Hostel type accommodation and re-fitted buildings in industrial areas. Alternative options being considered by Council include:

• Onsite Accommodation Model:

Located either on orchards, or close to or on coolstore/packhouse sites, these would involve sleeping rooms clustered around a central facilities block supporting up to 80 Workers with onsite servicing (wastewater, water supply etc).

• Off Site Camp Model:

Larger community facilities accommodating up to 300 workers, including dormitories, kitchen/dining and recreation facilities. Off-site Camps would need to be located at the city edge on Plains Zoned or futureuUrban land or in Industrial Zones and would need connections to city wastewater disposal and water supply services.

Selected options are expected to be implemented through the Council initiating a Variation or Change to the Hastings District Plan, a process that would be open for public consultation.

Both Onsite or Offsite Models are likely to require site specific resource consents. This would involve the consideration of a range of matters such as servicing, proximity to work locations, effects on the soils resource, effects on rural amenity, transport effects, scale and compatibility with surrounding activities, and noise, dust, glare and traffic safety effects.

It is clear that the accommodation of RSE Workers is a matter of significance for the region and these workers are required to support the Region’s economic horticultural and viticultural productivity. It is also clear that whichever Model is selected for inclusion in the District Plan, the existing range of accommodation options will also remain and will also be likely to seek increased capacity.

RSE Workers are an increasingly important and integral part of our Community and our economy, and as legitimate residents, albeit under short terms Visa’s, RSE Workers are entitled to acceptance within our Communities, adequate accommodation and a fair appreciation for their contribution toward our Region.

Whatever model or range of models that may be determined, it is just as important that the Council, MBIE. MSD and industry groups work together to increase community and social acceptance and understanding of RSE accommodation within our environments through communication, public education and recognition.

The District Plan has a heavy focus to preserving and maintaining the productivity of our rural environments, however just like these environments require certainty around water rights to actually to grow produce, they also need certainty and provision for a labour force to service them. Providing for RSE workers is therefore all part of the system to deliver the outcomes sought by our guiding planning documents.

Statutory acknowledgements & RMA

Posted on by
Reply

A number of different co- management initiatives have been established in recent times, however in the world of resource management it’s the Statutory Acknowledgements framework that is likely to be encountered on an everyday basis.

Statutory Acknowledgements have arisen from a number of Treaty of Waitangi settlements around the country as part of cultural redress for Maori. They relate to specific areas of importance to a claimant group and affect processes under the Resource Management Act – including applications for resource consents and local authority responsibilities. They may apply to land, rivers, lakes, wetlands, landscape features or particular parts of the coastal marine area.

The purpose of Statutory Acknowledgements is to ensure:

  • that a particular claimant group’s association with a certain significant area is identified, and that the relevant claimant group is informed when a proposal may affect one of these areas,
  • and that consent authorities have regard to these Statutory Acknowledgements when identifying affected parties in relation to resource consent applications

    Hawke’s Bay has over 70 Statutory Acknowledgement Areas across (7) iwi including Ngai Tāmanuhiri, Ngati Manawa, Ngati Whare, Ngati Pāhauwera, Rongowhakaata, Maungaharuru-TangitŪ Trust and Ngāti Hineuru. Most are located north of Bayview between the southern extents of Poverty Bay and Taupo.

    Generally speaking, Councils must forward summaries of resource consent applications to the relevant iwi where activities will affect these areas and must also have regard to the Statutory Acknowledgement when forming an opinion as to whether the relevant iwi is an affected party.

    Its therefore a matter being aware of this and identifying when a site or area in question is subject to a Statutory Acknowledgement in a similar manner as checking the District Plan for any waahi tapu sites or the New Zealand Heritage List/ Rārangi Kõrero for any significant and valued historical and cultural heritage places.

    Best practice is to undertake this exercise as early as possible. It need not be considered an issue or potential barrier to a project. In fact it can enhance your understanding of a site or area and contribute to design outcomes. At the end of the day, the best position to be in when starting a new project is having knowledge across all aspects so that surprises and unexpected delay can be avoided.

    From our experience it’s a matter of considering cultural values at the same level, or alongside what maybe more familiar matters such as geotechnical stability and engineering servicing in the case of a subdivision, or effects on allocation and ecological effects in the case of a surface water take.

    Although this isn’t necessarily a new concept, the Statutory Acknowledgments framework brings a little more organisation and prescription to the matter. Councils, consultants and iwi groups will still need to establish new processes, and there will no doubt be a teething phase where understandings and expectations are not aligned. The purpose of the Statutory Acknowledgements framework is ‘a’ just, and respectful one however, and like any change, it will be a better and more fruitful experience if everyone works together and applies patience and a willingness to engage and learn in understanding different perspectives and transitioning to this new norm.