Western Bay of Plenty District
Council
Change to the District Plan –
First Review
Plan Change 48
Future Urban and Rural Residential
Yards for Habitable Buildings
Section 32 Report
Prepared by: Shae Crossan, Senior Planner – Stratum Consultants Ltd
1.0
Introduction
1.1.
General Introduction and Background
This report has been prepared to review the yard setback requirements in
the Future Urban and Rural-Residential Zones. There are two particular
issues addressed. Firstly, an oversight within the rules which allows
landowners the unintended opportunity to use the written approval rule to
avoid obtaining resource consents for dwellings and other habitable
buildings. Secondly, the removal of a rule that is no longer necessary which
allows exemptions from the 5m yard for bulk and location standards
approved through historical subdivision consents.
2.0
Resource Management Act 1991
2.1.
Section 32
Before a proposed plan change can be publicly notified the Council is
required under section 32 (“s.32”) of the Act to carry out an evaluation of
alternatives, costs and benefits of the proposed review. With regard to the
Council’s assessment of the proposed plan change s.32 requires the
following:
1) An evaluation report required under this Act must—
(a) examine the extent to which the objectives of the proposal being
evaluated are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of this
Act; and
(b) examine whether the provisions in the proposal are the most appropriate
way to achieve the objectives by—
(i) identifying other reasonably practicable options for achieving the
objectives; and
(ii) assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of the provisions in
achieving the objectives; and
(iii) summarising the reasons for deciding on the provisions; and
(c)
contain a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of
the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are
anticipated from the implementation of the proposal.
(2) An assessment under subsection (1)(b)(ii) must—
(a) identify and assess the benefits and costs of the environmental,
economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the
implementation of the provisions, including the opportunities for—
(i) economic growth that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and
(ii) employment that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and
(b) if practicable, quantify the benefits and costs referred to in paragraph
(a); and
(c)
assess the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient
information about the subject matter of the provisions.
3) If the proposal (an amending proposal) will amend a standard, statement,
regulation, plan, or change that is already proposed or that already exists (an
existing proposal), the examination under subsection (1)(b) must relate to—
(a) the provisions and objectives of the amending proposal; and
(b) the objectives of the existing proposal to the extent that those
objectives—
Change to the District Plan – First Review – November 2014
Section 32 Report - Plan Change 48 – Rural Residential Yards
Prepared by: Shae Crossan – Senior Planner, Stratum Consultants Ltd
Page 2 of 7
(i) are relevant to the objectives of the amending proposal; and
(ii) would remain if the amending proposal were to take effect.
4) If the proposal will impose a greater prohibition or restriction on an activity to
which a national environmental standard applies than the existing prohibitions or
restrictions in that standard, the evaluation report must examine whether the
prohibition or restriction is justified in the circumstances of each region or district in
which the prohibition or restriction would have effect.
The Section 32 assessment reflects the minor nature of the Plan Change
and is consistent with the significance of potential effects of it.
2.2.
Section 74
In accordance with Section 74(2A) of the Act, Council must take into
account any relevant planning document recognised by an iwi authority
lodged with Council.
None of the iwi management plans that have been lodged with Council
raised any issues which are of relevance to this Plan Change.
3.0
Consultation
Due to the minor and technical nature of this proposed change there has
been no specific consultation with the public.
Council engaged with the surveying and planning community in the Western
Bay of Plenty and Tauranga area via the “Surveyors Newsletter”.
4.0
Issue 1 – Unintended opportunity to use the written
approval rule to avoid obtaining resource consents
for dwellings and other habitable buildings
At present, the Future Urban and Rural Residential yard provisions require
all buildings to be sited a minimum of 5m from the cadastral site boundary;
however the yard may be reduced to less than 5m if the written approval of
the adjoining property owner is obtained. The rule is as follows;
(c)
Yards
(i)
All – 5m.
Provided that:
A building may be located within and up to a side or rear
boundary where the written approval of the owner of the
immediately adjoining property to a specified lesser distance
is obtained.
The intention is that non-habitable buildings such as sheds and other
structures can be located closer to the adjoining boundary as a permitted
activity if the adjoining neighbour provides their written approval, but that
Change to the District Plan – First Review – November 2014
Section 32 Report - Plan Change 48 – Rural Residential Yards
Prepared by: Shae Crossan – Senior Planner, Stratum Consultants Ltd
Page 3 of 7
dwellings, minor dwellings, accommodation and education facilities must
remain 5m from adjoining boundaries unless a resource consent is obtained
to go closer. However, the rule fails to separate these two different types of
activities and because the term “buildings” by definition captures dwellings,
minor dwellings, accommodation and education facilities, the written
approval option unintentionally applies to these habitable buildings as well.
This oversight is at odds with what was intended for each of these zones. In
the Future Urban Zone, the 5m yard seeks to retain amenity values
associated with the current rural setting and to minimise reverse sensitivity.
In the Rural-Residential Zone, the 5m yard seeks to provide a lower density
environment with greater separation distances between dwellings than
standard residential development. This ensures greater amenity and privacy
for residents. Rural Residential Zones also often adjoin Rural Zones where
there may be potential for reverse sensitivity effects if dwellings are located
closer to boundaries.
Providing clarification that the written approval option only relates to nonhabitable buildings is necessary to ensure the intended separation of
dwellings from boundaries in both zones. This will also make the Future
Urban and Rural-Residential yard provisions consistent with other zones in
terms of written approval. It is considered that dwellings, minor dwellings,
education and accommodation facilities that do not meet the required 5m
setback should require resource consent as a restricted discretionary
activity.
4.1.
Option 1 – Status Quo
Benefits
Costs
Effectiveness/
Efficiency
Risks of Acting/
Not Acting if there is
uncertain or
insufficient
information about
the subject matter
 More flexibility for landowners to situate houses.
 No requirements for resource consent (if written
approval is received) which reduces costs and
timeframes for landowners.
 Reduces separation distances between dwellings and
therefore reduces the open space character of the
Future Urban and Rural-Residential Zones.
 The current provisions are effective and efficient for
other buildings such as sheds, where resource consent
is not necessary if written approval can be obtained
from a neighbour.
 Not effective if dwellings, minor dwellings, education
or accommodation facilities are to be constructed
closer than 5m to the boundary as does not achieve
the intention of the zones.
 N/A – sufficient information is available.
Change to the District Plan – First Review – November 2014
Section 32 Report - Plan Change 48 – Rural Residential Yards
Prepared by: Shae Crossan – Senior Planner, Stratum Consultants Ltd
Page 4 of 7
4.2.
Option 2 – Amend Performance Standards 15.4.1(c) and 16.4.1(c)
to make dwellings, minor dwellings, accommodation facilities and
education facilities not complying with the 5m yard a Restricted
Discretionary Activity.
Benefits
Costs
Effectiveness/
Efficiency
Risks of Acting/
Not Acting if there is
uncertain or
insufficient
information about
the subject matter
4.3.
 Will still allow for other non-habitable buildings such as
sheds to be located closer than 5m to an adjoining
boundary if the written approval of the adjoining
neighbour is obtained but will provide for a more
stringent test requiring dwellings, minor dwellings,
accommodation and education facilities located closer
than 5m to adjoining boundaries to obtain resource
consent.
 Will also bring the yard provisions in line with the
other zones of the District in terms of written approval.
 Landowners lose the existing flexibility that is afforded
by the current rules.
 Will result in an appropriate level of assessment
required to assess dwellings closer than 5m to the
boundary and will achieve the intention of the zones.
 N/A – sufficient information is available.
Preferred Option
The preferred option is:
Option 2 – Amend Performance Standards 15.4.1(c) and 16.4.1(c) to make
dwellings, minor dwellings, accommodation facilities and education facilities
not complying with the 5m yard a Restricted Discretionary Activity.
These changes are shown in Attachment A.
4.4.
Reasons
Option 2 has been chosen as it will still allow for sheds and other buildings
to be located closer than 5m to boundaries where neighbour’s approvals are
obtained, but will require resource consents for dwellings, minor dwellings,
accommodation facilities and education facilities closer than 5m to the
boundary through which the full effects of this can be assessed.
This will provide an outcome sought by the Future Urban Zone which is to
retain the amenity values associated with the current rural setting. It will
also provide the outcomes sought by the Rural Residential Zone which is to
retain a lower density and separation of dwellings. New restricted
discretionary activities have been added in both zones for dwellings, minor
dwellings, accommodation facilities and education facilities that do not
Change to the District Plan – First Review – November 2014
Section 32 Report - Plan Change 48 – Rural Residential Yards
Prepared by: Shae Crossan – Senior Planner, Stratum Consultants Ltd
Page 5 of 7
comply with the 5m yard, because otherwise they would default to noncomplying activities.
It is considered that the restricted discretionary activity matter of discretion
identified in Rules 15.5.1 (Future Urban) and 16.6.1 (Rural-Residential) are
adequate to assess the effects of non-compliance with the 5m yard. The
wording from these rules is as follows; “Council’s discretion is restricted to
the actual or potential adverse effects arising from the particular noncompliance, having regard to the extent and nature of the non-compliance.”
5.0
Issue 2 – Exemption for existing bulk and location
standards within Rural-Residential yard rules
A further and minor issue within the Rural-Residential yard rule is that the
leading sentence giving an exemption to existing bulk and location
standards approved through subdivision is no longer relevant. “Bulk” is not a
relevant consideration of yard rules. There is also no apparent need to state
that approved building sites are exempted from the yard rules. The whole
rule is shown in context below.
“(c)
Yards
Where no bulk and location standards have been established
pursuant to a ‘building site’ approved on a scheme plan of
subdivision, the bulk and location requirements shall apply as
follows:
(i)
All – 5m.
Provided that:
A building may be located within and up to a side or rear
boundary where the written approval of the owner of the
immediately adjoining property to a specified lesser distance
is obtained.”
5.1.
Option 1 – Status quo
Benefits
Costs
Effectiveness/
Efficiency
Risks of Acting/
Not Acting if there is
uncertain or
insufficient
information about
the subject matter
 None
 The rule is not necessary. “Bulk” is not a relevant
consideration of yards. There is no need to provide an
exemption for historic approved building sites.
 Does not influence the effectiveness of the rule.
 Is inefficient because the wording is unnecessary and
should not require consideration.
 N/A – sufficient information is available.
Change to the District Plan – First Review – November 2014
Section 32 Report - Plan Change 48 – Rural Residential Yards
Prepared by: Shae Crossan – Senior Planner, Stratum Consultants Ltd
Page 6 of 7
5.2.
Option 2 – Delete the following sentence from the RuralResidential yard rule;
“Where no bulk and location standards have been established pursuant to a
‘building site’ approved on a scheme plan of subdivision, the bulk and
location requirements shall apply as follows:”
Benefits
Costs
Effectiveness/
Efficiency
Risks of Acting/
Not Acting if there is
uncertain or
insufficient
information about
the subject matter
5.3.
Removes a rule which is no longer required.
None
Does not influence the effectiveness of the rule.
Is efficient because the wording is unnecessary and
should not require consideration.
 N/A – sufficient information is available.




Preferred Option
The preferred option is;
Option 2: Delete the following sentence from the Rural-Residential yard
rule;
“Where no bulk and location standards have been established pursuant to a
‘building site’ approved on a scheme plan of subdivision, the bulk and
location requirements shall apply as follows:”
This change is shown in context in Attachment A.
5.4.
Reasons
Option 2 has been chosen because the exemption for bulk and location
standards established via an approved building through subdivision is not
necessary. “Bulk” is not a relevant consideration of yard rules. There is also
no apparent need to state that approved building sites are exempted from
yard rules.
Change to the District Plan – First Review – November 2014
Section 32 Report - Plan Change 48 – Rural Residential Yards
Prepared by: Shae Crossan – Senior Planner, Stratum Consultants Ltd
Page 7 of 7
Attachment A
Future Urban
Amend Performance Standard 15.4.1(c) so it reads as follows:
“(c)
Yards
(i)
All Dwellings, minor dwellings, accommodation
facilities, education facilities – 5m minimum;
(ii)
All Other “Structures” – 5m minimum;
Provided that:
A building may be located within and up to a side or
rear boundary where the written approval of the
owner of the immediately adjoining a property to a
specified lesser distance is obtained.”
Add a restricted discretionary activity for dwellings, minor dwellings,
accommodation facilities and education facilities not meeting the minimum
yard setback of 5m, as follows;
“15.3.3 Restricted Discretionary Activities
(X)
Any dwelling, minor dwelling, accommodation facility or
education facility that fails to comply with performance
standard 16.4.1(c)(i).”
Rural-Residential
Amend Performance Standard 16.4.1(c) so it reads as follows:
“(c)
Yards
Where no bulk and location standards have been established
pursuant to a ‘building site’ approved on a scheme plan of
subdivision, the bulk and location requirements shall apply as
follows:
(i)
All Dwellings, minor dwellings, accommodation
facilities, education facilities – 5m minimum;
(ii)
All Other “Structures” – 5m minimum;
Provided that:
A building may be located within and up to a side or
rear boundary where the written approval of the
owner of the immediately adjoining a property to a
specified lesser distance is obtained.”
Attachment A
Add a restricted discretionary activity for dwellings, minor dwellings,
accommodation facilities and education facilities not meeting the minimum
yard setback of 5m, as follows;
“16.3.3 Restricted Discretionary Activities
(X)
Any dwelling, minor dwelling, accommodation facility or
education facility that fails to comply with performance
standard 16.4.1(c)(i).”