Part 5: Section 32 Evaluation Report · Section 32 Evaluation Requirements (15) Section 32 of the RMA requires that an evaluation report be prepared before the notification of a plan

Part 5: Section 32 Evaluation Report

2020-05-11 Overall Page Number000182

Porirua City Council

Proposed Plan Change 18 Plimmerton Farm

Section 32 Evaluation Report

5 December 2019


Proposed Plan Change 18 Plimmerton Farm December 2019 Section 32 Report Page i

Contents

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1

SECTION 32 EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................... 3

STATUTORY BASIS FOR THE PROPOSED PLAN CHANGE ............................................................ 5

Part 2 of the RMA ............................................................................................................. 5

Part 4 of the RMA ............................................................................................................. 6

National Environmental Standards ................................................................................. 19

National Planning Standards........................................................................................... 19

Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region ................................................... 19

Regional Plans ................................................................................................................. 23

Porirua District Plan ........................................................................................................ 29

Other District Plans in the Wellington Region ................................................................ 29

Iwi Management Plan ..................................................................................................... 30

STRATEGIC BASIS FOR THE PROPOSED PLAN CHANGE ............................................................ 31

Porirua Suburban Character Study 2005 ........................................................................ 31

Porirua Development Framework 2009 ......................................................................... 31

Porirua Northern Growth Area Structure Plan 2014 ...................................................... 34

Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 ........................................................................................ 37

OVERALL BASIS FOR PROGRESSING THE PROPOSED PLAN CHANGE ....................................... 39

SCALE AND SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION .................................................................................. 40

Evaluation of Factors ...................................................................................................... 42

SITE SPECIFIC RMA ISSUES ....................................................................................................... 45

Economic Impacts ........................................................................................................... 46

Archaeology and Cultural Impact ................................................................................... 48

Stormwater ..................................................................................................................... 51

Transport ......................................................................................................................... 54

Ecology ............................................................................................................................ 59

Landscape and Visual ...................................................................................................... 62

Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control ............................................................. 69

Geotechnical ................................................................................................................... 73

Infrastructure .................................................................................................................. 75


Proposed Plan Change 18 Plimmerton Farm December 2019 Section 32 Report Page ii

Urban Design................................................................................................................... 75

Medium Density Residential Feasibility .......................................................................... 77

Summary and Conclusion as to Suitability of Development and Assessment of Potential Environmental Effects ..................................................................................................... 78

OPTIONS TO PROGRESS THE PLAN CHANGE ............................................................................ 80

Retain Rural Zone ............................................................................................................ 80

Use Operative District Plan Zones and Overlays ............................................................ 80

Rely on the Proposed District Plan Process .................................................................... 80

Bespoke Plimmerton Farm Zone .................................................................................... 81

Preferred Option ............................................................................................................. 81

CONSULTATION ........................................................................................................................ 82

Engagement and Communications preceding the Plimmerton Farm Proposed Plan Change ............................................................................................................................ 82

Plimmerton Farm Phase One Consultation .................................................................... 84

Phase Two – Community, Stakeholder and Mana Whenua Engagement ...................... 84

Engagement with Mana Whenua ................................................................................... 86

Key Stakeholders ............................................................................................................. 86

Post Consultation Precinct Plan Development ............................................................... 91

APPROPRIATENESS, EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROPOSED PLAN CHANGE .... 93

Is the Proposed Plan Change the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA? ............................................................................................................................... 93

Are the proposed provisions the most appropriate way to achieve the objective of the Proposed Plan Change? .................................................................................................. 94

Definitions ....................................................................................................................... 94

Strategic Objectives ........................................................................................................ 94

Stormwater ..................................................................................................................... 96

Transport ......................................................................................................................... 99

Natural Hazards ............................................................................................................ 102

Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity ...................................................................... 105

Earthworks .................................................................................................................... 109

Noise ............................................................................................................................. 114

Subdivision .................................................................................................................... 116

Precinct A ...................................................................................................................... 119

Precinct B ...................................................................................................................... 124

Precinct C ...................................................................................................................... 127


Proposed Plan Change 18 Plimmerton Farm December 2019 Section 32 Report Page iii

Precinct D ...................................................................................................................... 133

Consequential amendments to the Operative District Plan ......................................... 136

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 • Plimmerton Farm Development – Analysis of costs and benefits in partial fulfilment of Section 32 of the RMA – Chris Nixon (NZIER);

Attachment 2 • Rezoning Decision-Making Under Uncertainty – Chris Nixon (NZIER);

Attachment 3 • RE: Plimmerton Farm Proposed Plan Change – Tim Heath (Property Economics)

Attachment 4 • Archaeological Assessment of Effects: Plimmerton Farm Plan Change - Patrick Harsveldt (WSP Opus)

Attachment 5 • Cultural Impact Assessment – Ngāti Toa Rangatira;

Attachment 6 • Stormwater Management Site Assessment – David Wilson (The Urban Engineers);

Attachment 7 • Technical Report Transport – Jamie Whittaker (Stantec);

Attachment 8 • Technical Memorandum District Plan - Parking Provisions – Stuart Crosswell (MRCagney Ltd);

Attachment 9 • Ecological Assessment Report – Dr Paul Blaschke (Blaschke and Rutherford);

Attachment 10 • Landscape and Visual Assessment – Dan Males (Local Landscape Architecture Collective) with Julia Williams (Drakeford Williams);

Attachment 11 • Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control – Andrew Jackson (Envelope Engineering);

Attachment 12 • Geotechnical Assessment Report – Engeo;

Attachment 13 • Infrastructure Report - Andrew Jackson, Alan Blyde and Paul James (Envelope Engineering);

Attachment 14 • Urban Design Report - Lauren White (GHDWoodhead);

Attachment 15 • Medium Density Residential Development Feasibility Assessment – Tom Kane and Ruth Allen (The Property Group);

Attachment 16 • Medium Density Residential Development Feasibility Assessment Study Addendum (site amalgamation) – Ruth Allen and Tom Kane (The Property Group);

Attachment 17 • Letter from Greater Wellington Regional Council

Attachment 18 • Letter from Ngāti Toa Rangatira

Attachment 19 • Consultation under Clause 3 and 4A to the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991


Proposed Plan Change 18 Plimmerton Farm December 2019 Section 32 Report Page 1

Introduction (1) This report evaluates Proposed Plan Change 18 Plimmerton Farm (the Proposed Plan Change),

a change to the Operative Porirua City District Plan, in accordance with Section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA).

(2) The Proposed Plan Change seeks to rezone a 384ha parcel of land, which is currently known as ‘Plimmerton Farm’, from its current Rural zoning to enable urban development.

(3) Specifically, the Proposed Plan Change is to amend the Operative Porirua City District Plan to introduce the Plimmerton Farm Zone including the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan (the Precinct Plan) that identifies four Precincts (named A to D).

(4) Precinct A provides for medium density residential development including a retirement village. Precinct B provides for general residential development. Precinct C provides for large lot residential and clusters of more intensive residential in secluded basins. Precinct D provides for a small commercial area with large and small format retail space with residential above.

(5) Overall, the Proposed Plan Change provides for:

• Additional housing capacity of approximately 2000 dwellings of various typologies (including a retirement village);

• Water sensitive urban design to protect receiving waters;

• Protection and augmentation of Significant Natural Areas and a Special Amenity Landscape;

• A small commercial area; and

• Integrated transport and movement networks.

(6) The Precinct Plan responds to a detailed assessment of constraints and opportunities as well as feedback received from Ngāti Toa Rangatira, stakeholders and the community. Key constraints and opportunities include a Special Amenity Landscape and Significant Natural Areas including wetlands that form part of the Taupō Swamp complex, which is recognised by the Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) as having outstanding indigenous biodiversity values.

(7) The Proposed Plan Change provisions require future subdivision and land use activities to proceed in accordance with the Precinct Plan and give effect to the defined precincts (Precincts A-D) and recognise identified key features. The Precinct Plan provides the framework for landowners or developers to prepare subdivision and development proposals that integrate development with environmental protection and enhancement.

(8) The Proposed Plan Change has been initiated by Porirua City Council (Council). The Proposed Plan Change has been prepared in partnership with the landowner/developer, Plimmerton Developments Limited.

(9) In October 2019, Council applied to the Minister for the Environment to use a Streamlined Planning Process (SPP)1 for the Proposed Plan Change. While the Proposed Plan Change is proposed to be considered under a SPP it does not change the need to meet the requirements of Section 32 of the RMA.

1 Councils can use the streamlined planning process for the preparation of a planning instrument under the RMA if they get approval from the Minister for the Environment, under Part 5 of Schedule 1.



(10) The Proposed Plan Change introduces the following provisions that would apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone only:

• Definitions

• Strategic Objectives

• Stormwater Management

• Transport

• Natural Hazards

• Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity

• Earthworks

• Noise

• Subdivision

• Precinct A

• Precinct B

• Precinct C

• Precinct D

(11) The Plimmerton Farm Zone would also be subject to the following City-wide provisions of the Operative District Plan:

• A Introduction

• B Significant Resource Management Issues

• K Designations

• L Monitoring

• NU Network Utilities

• Z Ngāti Toa Rangatira Claim Settlement.

(12) This Section 32 evaluation report sets out the requirements of Section 32 then presents the statutory, regulatory and policy framework that the Proposed Plan Change must respond to.

(13) The report then discusses the suitability of the site for the proposed urban change, briefly summarising the technical reports that have informed the Proposed Plan Change. It also summarises the consultation undertaken to date.

(14) The report provides a brief overall evaluation then presents and evaluates the Proposed Plan Change’s suite of objectives, policies and rules presented by Proposed Plan Change section topics.



Section 32 Evaluation Requirements (15) Section 32 of the RMA requires that an evaluation report be prepared before the notification

of a plan change by Council. Sections 32(1), 32(2), 32(3) and 32(4) provide direction as to what such an evaluation must examine and consider. These sections are as follows:

(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, national planning standard, 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–

(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 or lesser 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.

(4A) If the proposal is a proposed policy statement, plan, or change prepared in accordance with any of the processes provided for in Schedule 1, the evaluation report must-

(a) summarise all advice concerning the proposal received from iwi authorities under the relevant provisions of Schedule 1; and

(b) summarise the response to the advice, including any provisions of the proposal that are intended to give effect to the advice.

(16) The benefits and costs are defined in Section 2 of the RMA as including benefits and costs of any kind, whether monetary or non-monetary.

(17) Section 32 applies to the entire policy and plan development and change process from issue identification to decision release. As such, Section 32 is applicable:

• When objectives are identified and assessed;

• When examining policies, rules, or other methods;

• After the draft plan or provision is prepared;

• When the decision is made to notify;

• In the officer's report on submissions;

• During deliberations by the council hearings committee; and

• Before the final decision being released.

(18) Section 32 evaluations effectively tell the story of what is proposed and the reasoning behind it. The Section 32 evaluation aims to communicate the thinking behind the proposal to the community and to decision-makers. The evaluation also provides a record for future reference of the process, including the methods, technical studies, and consultation that underpin it, as well as outlining the assumptions and risks2.

2 Ministry for the Environment. 2014. A guide to section 32 of the Resource Management Act: Incorporating changes as a result of the Resource Management Amendment Act 2013. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.



Statutory Basis for the Proposed Plan Change (19) The statutory basis for the Plan Change outlines what any change to a plan must consider, as

well as what the Plan Change must give effect to in terms of the hierarchy of planning documents.

(20) In terms of managing long-term land use associated with urban growth and associated strategic infrastructure, Section 74 of the RMA outlines the requirements for District Councils in terms of the preparation of, and any change to, their district plan in accordance with their functions under section 31 and the provisions of Part 2 of the RMA.

Part 2 of the RMA Section 5

(21) Section 5 sets out the purpose of the RMA, which is to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. Managing the provision for long term land-use and infrastructure aligns closely with that purpose. Section 5 of the RMA defines ‘sustainable management’ as:

managing the use, development and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic and cultural wellbeing, and for their health and safety, while:

(a) Sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations;

(b) Safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil and ecosystems; and

(c) Avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment.

(22) The proposed plan change directly relates to providing land for urban growth in Porirua City. Part 2 requires that this occurs in a way and at a rate which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic and cultural wellbeing, and meeting the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; safeguarding the life supporting capacity of air, water, soil and ecosystems; and addressing adverse effects on the environment.

(23) In achieving this purpose, authorities need also to recognise and provide for the matters of national importance identified in section 6, have particular regard to other matters referred to in section 7 and take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi referred to in section 8.

Section 6 (24) The s6 matters relevant to the proposed plan change are:

Section 6 Matter Relevance

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

The site contains wetlands and streams.



Section 7 (25) The s7 matters relevant to the proposed plan change are:

Section 8 (26) Under s8 Council has a general obligation to its Treaty partner, Ngāti Toa Rangatira, and actively

works in partnership with Ngāti Toa Rangatira.

Part 4 of the RMA (27) The particular statutory functions of the Council in giving effect to the Act, as contained in Part

4 (section 31) of the RMA, also provide a clear direction for addressing long term provision for urban growth and the provision of associated strategic infrastructure in a District Plan.

(28) In particular:

(1)(a) the establishment, implementation, and review of objectives, policies, and methods to achieve integrated management of the effects of the use,

inappropriate subdivision, use, and development

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

There are nine Significant Natural Areas within the site, identified in work undertaken for the wider Porirua District Plan review.

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

The site contains streams.

(e) the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu, and other taonga

The site is within the rohe of Ngāti Toa Rangatira

(h) the management of significant risks from natural hazards

Parts of the site are subject to flood hazard.

Section Relevant Matter

(a) Kaitiakitanga

(aa) The ethic of stewardship

(b) The efficient use and development of natural and physical resources

(c) The maintenance and enhancement of amenity values

(d) Intrinsic values of ecosystems

(f) Maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the environment

(g) Any finite characteristics of natural and physical resources

(i) The effects of climate change



development, or protection of land and associated natural and physical resources of the district:

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

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

(i) the avoidance or mitigation of natural hazards; and

(iia) the prevention or mitigation of any adverse effects of the development, subdivision, or use of contaminated land:

(iii) the maintenance of indigenous biological diversity.

(1)(d) the control of the emission of noise and the mitigation of the effects of noise:

(1)(e) the control of any actual or potential effects of activities in relation to the surface water in rivers and lakes:

(1)(f) any other functions specified in this Act.

(2) The methods used to carry out any functions under subsection (1) may include the control of subdivision.

National Policy Statements National Policy Statements in effect

(29) National Policy Statements (NPS) provide objectives and policies for matters of national significance. All subsequent Resource Management documents, including regional policy statements, regional plans and district plans must give effect to (implement) an NPS.

(30) There are currently five NPSs in effect:

• National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity 2016;

• National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014;

• National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation 2011;

• National Policy Statement on Electricity Transmission 2008;

• New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010.

(31) Of these, the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity, the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement are relevant to the Proposed Plan Change and are assessed below.

National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity 2016

(32) The NPS-UDC came into effect in December 2016. It directs local authorities to provide sufficient development capacity to meet the projected demand for housing and business growth over the short, medium and long term.

(33) The NPS-UDC is an enabling document. It includes objectives and policies that provide guidance to local authorities based on their classification as a low, medium or high growth area. The classification has been determined by Statistics New Zealand’s 2016 population projections.



(34) The NPS-UDC aims to ensure that planning decisions enable the supply of housing needed to meet demand and outlines that local authorities need to provide for the wellbeing of current generations, and they must also provide for the wellbeing of the generations to come. The overarching theme running through the NPS-UDC is that planning decisions must actively enable development in urban environments and do that in a way that maximises wellbeing now and in the future.

(35) Under the NPS-UDC, Porirua is classified as a medium growth area and is therefore subject to all objectives under the NPS as well as policies:

• PA1 – PA4 (Outcomes);

• PB1 – PB7 (Evidence and Monitoring);

• PC1 – PC7 (Responsive Planning);

• PD1 – PD4 (Coordinated Evidence and Decision Making).

(36) The Proposed Plan Change will assist Council to meet its obligations under the NPS-UDC. In particular Objective OA2 and associated policies (PA1, PA3 and PA4) and Objective OC2 and associated policies PC3 and PC4. These are discussed further below

Development Capacity – Objective OA2, Policy PA1

(37) Objective OA2, relating to outcomes for planning decisions is: Urban environments that have sufficient opportunities to meet demand and which provide choices that will meet the needs of people and communities and future generations for a range of dwelling types and locations, working environments and places to locate businesses.

(38) Policy PA1 requires local authorities to ensure that in the short and medium term there is sufficient development capacity that is feasible and zoned in the short and medium term. The policy requires land to be serviced by development infrastructure with respect to short term capacity and either serviced or identified in a Long-Term Plan under the Local Government Act 2002 for the medium term.

(39) As a medium growth area, Porirua is required to complete a housing and business capacity assessment (HBA) at least once every three years. These assessments provide a picture of the current state of demand and capacity for housing and business land, and provides a detailed analysis of the development capacity for Porirua City.

(40) The evidence gathered to inform the HBA indicates that there are currently housing pressures within the City, with these projected to increase. An undersupply of housing over the 2014 to 2018 period has exacerbated pressure on the existing housing stock resulting in higher rents and house sale prices.

(41) Growth projections undertaken to inform the Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 have identified that there is insufficient supply to meet demand in the medium and long term. While the ability to service new development is one component of this, the lack of residentially zoned land to provide for the anticipated population growth is also a significant contributor. This lack of supply has been amplified by the recent growth in the Porirua property market.

(42) In addition to this, as a medium growth area, Porirua is also required to quantify demand for different housing types in Porirua over a 30-year horizon and make sure land is available to service that land. Policy PB6 of the NPS-UDC requires “local authorities to monitor on a quarterly basis a range of indicators in the housing and business market”. The most recent



quarterly monitoring of the housing market (September 2019) has confirmed that house prices are increasing (up 10.4% per annum) at a rate significantly higher than those for New Zealand (1.9%) and the Wellington Region (7.8%). This increase in house prices can be attributed in part to a shortage in residential land supply that has occurred as existing vacant residentially zoned greenfield land has been exhausted.

(43) With respect to the future development capacity the Proposed Plan Change would allow the rezoning of land to provide a yield of approximately 2000 new dwellings. Significant work has been undertaken to establish the constraints and opportunities for the site that has, in turn, determined the yield anticipated from the Proposed Plan Change. This provides Council with a high degree of certainty that the proposed rezoning would deliver a significant contribution to meeting its obligations under PA1.

(44) Timing of the rezoning is critical to meeting Council’s obligations under PA1. For this reason, Council has determined that a separate plan change (proposed to be advanced using the SPP) is appropriate. While the District Plan review will enable rezoning of land to occur, the timeframes within which this could be achieved do not align with the need to provide sufficient development capacity in the medium term.

Housing Choice – Policy PA3

(45) PA3 of the NPS-UDC directs that when providing development capacity local authorities must provide choices that meet the needs of people, communities and future generations. This relates to the range of dwelling types and locations while promoting the efficient use of scarce urban land and infrastructure.

(46) The HBA identifies that of the total 18,300 dwellings in Porirua in 2018, 80.5% were standalone houses, 13% were apartments and 6.5% were terraced housing. The 2014 Growth Strategy signified a move away from traditional low-density housing in Porirua City to focus on compact (medium density) living within the existing urban footprint and around transport hubs. This direction was well received by the community and is embedded as a principle within the Growth Strategy itself:

Principle Toru: A compact and liveable city. Porirua will develop a quality, increasingly compact urban form to accommodate its growth, while ensuring improved environmental outcomes.

(47) The Property Group prepared a feasibility assessment of potential areas for a medium density residential zone within Porirua City (Attachment 15). In summary, the assessment concluded that under current market conditions increasing land and construction costs represent a barrier to sites transitioning from low density to medium density (infill). Essentially the costs associated with building medium density housing within the existing urban area represent a challenge within Porirua. The work undertaken to inform the Proposed Plan Change demonstrates the feasibility of medium density development for Plimmerton Farm to enable housing choice for Porirua’s growing and diverse population. As a greenfield site some of the constraints to developing medium density housing (like maintenance of existing levels of residential amenity) do not exist and therefore Plimmerton Farm presents a unique opportunity for Council to deliver housing choice in a manner that is consistent with the Growth Strategy principle “Compact and Liveable City”.

(48) In light of the The Property Group findings on the feasibility of medium density within the existing urban footprint of Porirua City, together with the strong community desire for Council



to provide more diversity in housing choice, the Proposed Plan Change becomes a critical part of Council’s response to achieving PA3.

(49) PA3 also requires local authorities to limit, as much as possible, adverse impacts on the competitive operation of land markets. While the Proposed Plan Change will advance the rezoning of Plimmerton Farm ahead of the Proposed District Plan it does not preclude rezoning of other land identified in the Growth Strategy as part of the District Plan Review. The availability of feasible development capacity was a determining factor in Council’s decision to initiate the Proposed Plan Change. Growth areas have been identified as Future Urban Zones in the draft version of the Proposed District Plan which was released for feedback in early September 2019.

(50) The Proposed Plan Change will not, in itself, provide all the development capacity required to meet the projected demand for housing in Porirua. Land identified in the Growth Strategy will be required to be rezoned in order to provide for Porirua’s future housing needs and ensure Council’s obligations under the NPS-UDC are met in the long term. The demand for housing in different locations within the City is also an essential factor in the provision of supply within Porirua.

Benefits and Costs of Urban Development – Policy PA4

(51) PA4 requires local authorities to take into account the benefits that urban development will provide with respect to the ability of people, communities and future generations to provide for their social, economic, cultural and environmental wellbeing. It also requires consideration of the benefits and costs of urban development at a national, inter-regional, regional and district scale as well as local effects. The Proposed Plan Change represents an opportunity to provide quality urban development.

(52) For the purposes of PA4 Council the Proposed Plan Change has been subject to a robust and comprehensive assessment to confirm it delivers on the desired outcome of providing housing capacity while ensuring the effects of development are appropriately managed.

Responding to Growth in a Timely Manner – OC2, PC3 and PC4

(53) OC2 requires local authorities to adapt and respond to evidence about urban development, market activity and the social, economic, cultural and environmental wellbeing of people and communities and future generations, in a timely manner.

(54) PC3 requires Council to respond by providing further development capacity and enabling development when the HBA indicates development capacity is not sufficient in the medium or long term. As identified above, the HBA indicates that Council has a shortfall in development capacity in the medium and long term. While long term capacity will be addressed through the District Plan Review, the delivery of sufficient capacity in the medium term will not. The HBA has assumed and accounted for Plimmerton Farm and other land identified within the Growth Strategy when considering greenfield feasible development capacity. Plimmerton Farm is supported by evidence to demonstrate feasibility and provide certainty that it would deliver the housing yield as anticipated by the Growth Strategy, therefore advancing the Proposed Plan Change ahead of the District Plan Review will allow Council to deliver on its obligations to provide further development capacity in the medium term.

(55) PC4 directs local authorities to consider all practicable options for providing sufficient, feasible development capacity and enabling development to meet demand including:



• Changes to plans and regional policy statements including zoning, objectives, policies, rules and overlays that apply in both existing urban environments and greenfield areas;

• Integrated and coordinated consenting processes that facilitate development;

• Statutory tools and other methods available under other legislation.

NPS-UDC Assessment Conclusion

(56) A range of evidence has been gathered to establish housing capacity for Porirua City in the short, medium and long term. This has determined that there will be a shortfall in housing capacity in the medium and long term. While rezoning of land through the District Plan Review will, in time, address this shortfall, advancing the Proposed Plan Change ahead of the District Plan Review will enable Council to meet its obligations under the NPS-UDC by providing both housing capacity and housing choice in the medium term.

National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management

(57) The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM) came into effect in 2014 and was amended in 2017. It directs regional councils, in consultation with their communities, to set objectives for the state of freshwater bodies in their regions, and to set limits on resource use to meet these objectives. The NPS-FM recognises Te Mana o te Wai as an integral part of freshwater management in Objective AA1. Policy AA1 requires every regional council making or changing regional policy statements and plans to consider and recognise Te Mana o te Wai and notes that values identified through engagement and discussion with the community, including tangata whenua, must inform the setting of freshwater objectives and limits.

(58) While the control of water quality is primarily the responsibility of regional councils under the RMA, territorial authorities have a role to play through their control of land use, which has implications for freshwater quality. This can be achieved through appropriate land use controls including erosion and sediment controls, that respect sensitive receiving environments inside and outside of the Proposed Plan Change area, such as Taupō Swamp.

(59) The implementation of the NPS-FM in the Wellington context is outlined below, followed by an assessment of how the Proposed Plan Change will implement the NPS-FM.

Te Awarua-o-Porirua Whaitua Implementation Programme

(60) In December 2014 the Te Awarua-o-Porirua Whaitua Committee (the Committee) was established by GWRC in response to the NPS-FM. The purpose of the Committee was to provide advice and direction on how to manage land and water within Porirua and Northern Wellington’s catchments in order to give effect to the NPS-FM.

(61) Te Awarua-o-Porirua Whaitua Implementation Programme (WIP) was developed over a period of four years in collaboration with Council officials, scientific and technical experts, Ngāti Toa Rangatira and local communities. The WIP contains objectives, strategies and actions that will form a programme of work for the management of land and water in Te Awarua-O-Porirua Whaitua to improve fresh and marine water quality. The Committee has made 75 recommendations in the WIP, comprised of both regulatory and non-regulatory measures that aim to achieve the objectives the Committee has set for the Whaitua.

Freshwater Principles and Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles

(62) The WIP recommendations were published in April 2019. To date, no changes to any regulatory planning documents have been made in response to these recommendations. In response to feedback received through non-statutory consultation on the Proposed Plan Change



(particularly with interested environmental groups) options to acknowledge and incorporate the WIP recommendations into the Proposed Plan Change.

(63) Of particular relevance to the Proposed Plan Change, the WIP acknowledges the obligations on councils to give effect to the NPS-UDC. It identifies that the impacts of future urban development can be reduced (but not eliminated) through environmentally-sensitive approaches to land development, and the adoption of the best possible infrastructure, wastewater and stormwater management practices. Given this, and the other recommendations made in the WIP, two documents have been prepared for the Proposed Plan Change in regard to freshwater management, the Freshwater Principles and Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles. These documents have been prepared in collaboration with Wellington Water, GWRC and Ngāti Toa. Other stakeholders including QEII Trust, Department of Conservation, Friends of Taupō Swamp and the Porirua Harbour Trust have also been provided with copies of the draft documents and the opportunity to provide feedback.

(64) The Freshwater Principles and Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles have evolved, and been refined, as a result of the input of all parties described above. They represent a site specific response for the Proposed Plan Change that will directly influence future urban development of the site to meet the objectives of the WIP and, consequently, the aspirations and values of the community as they relate to freshwater and stormwater management.

(65) The Proposed Plan Change give effect to the Freshwater Principles and Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles through directive policies and by incorporating the principles directly into the Precinct Plan.

The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement

(66) The NZ Coastal Policy Statement is of some relevance to the Proposed Plan Change. While the site is not within the Coastal Environment, there are provisions within the NZ Coastal Policy Statement that guide development that may have an effect on the coastal environment. These provisions include:

• Policy 22: Sedimentation

• (2) Require that subdivision, use or development will not result in a significant increase in sedimentation in the coastal marine area, or other coastal water.

• (4) Reduce sediment loadings in runoff and in stormwater systems through controls on land use activities.

• Policy 23: Discharge of contaminants.

(67) The Proposed Plan Change’s Freshwater Principles and Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles address the matters set out under Policies 22 and 23.

Proposed National Policy Statements currently subject to consideration

(68) In addition, the following proposed National Policy Statements are in development:

• Proposed National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (updated);

• Proposed National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land;

• Proposed National Policy Statement on Urban Development;

• Proposed National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity.



(69) While these proposed national policy statements have no legal effect, and will likely be subject to change following consideration of submissions, they provide indications of the Government’s intent across each of the relevant subject areas. On this basis an assessment of the Proposed Plan Change against the policy direction set out under each of these proposed national policy statements has been undertaken below.

Proposed National Policy Statement on Urban Development

(70) The Government released a discussion document on the draft National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) in August 2019. The draft NPS-UD provides a clear indication of the Government’s intent to ensure local authorities plan when and how their cities provide for growth, and how to do this well. It recognises the need for both infill and greenfield development (‘up and out’) and the importance of good access to existing services and infrastructure. The below table sets out a brief summary of the NPS-UD proposals and how these are considered/ achieved through the Proposed Plan Change:

NPS-UD Proposal NPS-UD Commentary Proposed Plan Change response

Describes the kinds of features that make a quality urban environment

Cities provide a range of housing types, with good access to transport, services and amenities

The Proposed Plan Change seeks to deliver a range of housing typologies including in close proximity to the existing Plimmerton Train Station, existing services and amenities. The Precinct Plan proposes a Local Centre.

Clarifies what is meant by amenity in urban environments

Councils consider the types of amenity that benefit the whole community, not just individual property owners, when making decisions

The Proposed Plan Change includes provisions to deliver a high level of public amenity through walking and cycling networks. Directive policies are proposed to provide for high quality urban development.

Requires councils to provide enough opportunities to meet demand for development

More land is identified and zoned for housing across a range of types and prices

The Proposed Plan Change will provide opportunities to deliver a range of housing types across the 386ha site. The feasibility of the site has resulted in Council choosing to advance the Proposed Plan Change ahead of the District Plan Review to ensure there is housing to meet projected demand in the medium term (3 – 10 years).

Requires councils to describe the type of development they expect and ensure their plans allow for expected levels of development

People have a good understanding of what their community is intended to look like in the future and planning rules align with that vision

The Proposed Plan Change aligns with Council’s Growth Strategy and the preceding documents that considered the City’s response to growth. In addition to being identified as a growth area the development of the Proposed Plan Change has been informed by the




Principles contained within the Growth Strategy. Open days held for the Proposed Plan Change provided the community with information on how the land was proposed to be developed and the type of houses that will be encouraged and provided for. Feedback received at these open days has been considered in the development of the Proposed Plan Change.

Requires councils to enable more dense housing development in certain areas

More compact, multi-unit dwellings are built close to public transport, services and amenities

The Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan provides for medium density housing (Precinct A) on land located close to the Plimmerton Train Station and existing amenities.

Allows consideration of urban development where land has not yet been released or not identified for urban development

Greenfield development can be considered when it doesn’t align with planned growth, provided costs (economic, social, cultural and environmental) can be met

Plimmerton Farm has long been identified as a growth area for Porirua City. Work to inform the Proposed Plan Change has considered economic, social, cultural and environmental effects and provided responses to these to ensure quality urban development.

Limits the ability of councils to regulate the number of car parks required for a development

Reduction in unnecessary carparks so the space can be used more efficiently

No minimum carparking requirements are proposed.

General proposals to require, preclude the use of, or replace particular rules in district plans

Planning rules don’t get in the way of good development

The Proposed Plan Change enables development that responds to the site’s characteristics. This has enabled a sufficient yield to be achieved while ensuring that maintenance and/or protection is afforded to those parts of the site that have been identified as having particular landscape or ecological value.

Engaging in urban planning Provides opportunities for iwi and hapū to identify aspirations and issues of concern, and ensures these are considered

The way our cities grow better reflects the aspirations of iwi and hapū

The Proposed Plan Change has been developed with input from Ngāti Toa. This has resulted in the inclusion of provisions within the Proposed Plan Change that reflect Ngāti Toa’s values and aspirations.




Encourages councils to work together on implementing the NPS-UD and on engaging with iwi/hapū and infrastructure providers

When councils talk to iwi/hapū and infrastructure providers about urban development, they do it in a streamlined and efficient way

Council considers that Proposed Plan Change gives effect to the Regional Policy Statement and does not conflict with the relevant Regional Plans.

Action for Healthy Waterways (proposed amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management)

(71) On 5 September 2019 the Government commenced consultation on “Action for Heathy Waterways”, which includes a proposed new National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management, and a proposed National Environmental Standard for Freshwater.

(72) These documents at a high level seek to achieve:

• Better management of stormwater and wastewater;

• No further loss of wetlands and streams;

• Tighter controls to prevent sediment loss from earthworks and urban development;

• Farmers and growers understanding and managing environmental risks; and

• New standards and limits on some farming activities in some regions or catchments.

(73) The Government’s proposals include an emphasis on the concept of Te Mana o Te Wai and ecosystem health in regard to freshwater management. The Proposed Plan Change is generally aligned with these proposed national direction documents currently out for consultation. In particular, the Freshwater Principles seek to protect the mauri of the waterbody and mahinga kai and ensure that the water is suitable for contact recreation and Māori customary use, preserving the natural character of water bodies and protecting ecosystems and habitats, and reducing stormwater runoff. The management of suspended solids has been identified as a key contaminant of concern from urban development, and management of this is reflected in the Proposed Plan Change provisions. Further the Proposed Plan Change identifies and protects Significant Natural Areas, which include wetlands, and requires the ongoing protection of these areas at the time of subdivision.

Proposed National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land

(74) The proposed National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL) was released for public consultation in August 2019. The purpose of the proposed NPS-HPL is to improve the way highly-productive land is managed under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) to:

• recognise the full range of values and benefits associated with its use for primary production

• maintain its availability for primary production for future generations

• protect it from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development.

(75) The proposed NPS-HPL applies the Land-Use Capability system that categorises land into eight classes according to its long-term capability to sustain one or more productive uses. Class 1 is for the most versatile land, with the fewest limitations on its use. The NPS-HPL proposes to



define highly productive land as that designated as Class 1, 2 or 3. The NPS-HPL would allow councils to consider a range of other factors to exclude some of this land, or to identify other highly productive land. The proposal does not impact on existing urban areas and land that has been identified as future urban zones in district plans. The proposal does not extend to excluding its application to land identified for future urban land use through a non-statutory strategic document (such as the Porirua Growth Strategy 2048).

(76) Further research is required to understand Porirua’s productive soils profile. An existing national Land-Use Capability map indicates that there may be small pockets of these soils in flatter areas of the City’s Rural Zone, although this mapping was done at a national scale and advice received from GWRC has identified that it may be significantly inaccurate if applied at a property level. In the absence of a more detailed map analysis of Plimmerton Farm against the Land-Use Capability map has identified that a small portion of the land has an area of Class 3 soils (being the lower flats indicated by the arrow on Figure 1 below).



Figure 1: Land use capability map for Porirua



(77) The proposed urbanisation of Plimmerton Farm will not compromise the City’s supply of highly productive land given:

• the small area of land identified as being Class 3 soils (noting that the draft NPS-HPL has identified that smaller land parcels are generally not considered to be highly productive);

• Porirua City Council has identified this land as being suitable for urban development since 2009; and

• the uncertainty associated with the scale at which land use capability was assessed.

(78) The land in question comprises low-lying flat land adjacent to the current State Highway 1. The land currently forms part of the larger land holding and does not possess any particular characteristics that would qualify it for long-term protection for the purposes of primary production or horticultural purposes.

Proposed National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity

(79) The proposed National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPS-IB) was publicly notified for comment in November 2019. Submissions on this document are open until 14 March 2020. The proposed NPS-IB will affect the management of biodiversity on all types of land including public, private and Māori land.

(80) The proposed NPS-IB seeks to introduce policy direction to ensure indigenous biodiversity is maintained. It Identifies that partnerships and collaboration between landowners, tangata whenua, communities, councils, and public agencies will be critical to the success of the policy.

(81) The proposed NPS-IB seeks to protect indigenous biodiversity under five key platforms:

• Managing effects on indigenous biodiversity

• Identifying important biodiversity and taonga

• Recognising tea o Māori and the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi

• Restoration and enhancement of biodiversity

• Monitoring and implementation

(82) The proposed NPS-IB requires councils to consistently identify areas with significant vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna and manage their protection through regional and district plans, and consent processes under the RMA. This approach is consistent with that adopted as part of the wider District Plan Review and reflected in the Proposed Plan Change through the identification of Significant Natural Areas following the criteria set out under the RPS.

(83) The proposed NPS-IB does, however, significantly extend the range of protection and controls beyond just the identified Significant Natural Areas. The additional controls include general protection of indigenous vegetation/habitat outside Significant Natural Areas, areas of ‘highly mobile fauna’ (threatened birds), and restoration and enhancement policies which include ‘former wetlands’ as well as existing wetlands. The method of maintaining biodiversity includes classifying Significant Natural Areas as high or medium value.

(84) Maintenance and protection of indigenous biodiversity has been a key factor in the development of the Proposed Plan Change provisions. This includes identifying and providing provisions to protect extensive additional areas deemed by the project ecologist to have ecological value or potential to contribute to the ecology of the site. The Proposed Plan Change applies provisions for their restoration, protection and enhancement.



National Environmental Standards (85) National Environmental Standards regulate specified environmental matters. There are

currently six National Environmental Standards in effect, relating to air quality, drinking water, telecommunication facilities, electricity transmission activities, contaminants in soil to protect human health and plantation forestry. Given National Environmental Standards have effect at resource consent level, they are not determinative as part of the Proposed Plan Change.

National Planning Standards (86) National Planning Standards were introduced in April 2019 with the intention of improving

consistency in resource management document structure, format and content. Porirua City Council has five years to adopt the Planning Standards.

(87) Given the Proposed Plan Change is to the Operative District Plan, the National Planning Standards are not directly relevant. However, the National Planning Standards will be given effect to as appropriate.

Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region (88) Under Section 75(3)(c) of the Resource Management Act 1991, a District Plan must give effect

to any RPS.

(89) The Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region 2013 sets out the regional approach for managing the environment and providing for growth and associated effects. The RPS identifies the significant resource management issues for the region and outlines the policies and methods required to achieve the integrated sustainable management of the region’s natural and physical resources.

(90) The objectives and policies of the RPS most relevant to this plan change are:

Section 3.3 Energy, Infrastructure and Waste

Objective 10 The social, economic cultural and environmental benefits of regionally significant infrastructure are recognised and protected.

Policy 8 Protecting regionally significant infrastructure.

(91) State Highway 1 (St Andrews Rd), immediately west of the site, is regionally significant infrastructure. Council is engaging with NZ Transport Agency regarding appropriate plan provisions. A reverse sensitivity buffer adjoining the road is proposed.

Section 3.4 Freshwater

Objective 12 The quantity and quality of fresh water: (b) safeguard the life supporting capacity of water bodies.

Policy 40 Safeguarding aquatic ecosystem health in waterbodies.

Policy 42 Minimising contamination in stormwater from development

Objective 13 The region’s rivers, lakes and wetlands support healthy functioning ecosystems.

Policy 43 Protecting aquatic ecological function of water bodies.

Objective 8 Public access to and along the coastal marine area, lakes and rivers is enhanced



Policy 53 Public access to and along the coastal marine area, lakes and rivers

(92) The Proposed Plan Change provisions require management of the quality and quantity of stormwater discharge from the site, including through Water Sensitive Design and the protection and enhancement of Significant Natural Areas (including wetlands) as well as adjoining Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas. These solutions will provide for the ecological health and function of receiving waterways.

(93) Public access to and along the site’s waterbodies is provided for in the Proposed Plan Change provisions.

Section 3.6 Indigenous ecosystems

Objective 16 Indigenous ecosystems and habitats with significant biodiversity values are maintained and restored to a healthy functioning state.

Policy 23 Identifying indigenous ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values.

Policy 24 Protecting ecosystems and habitats with significant biodiversity values.

Policy 47 Managing effects on indigenous ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values.

(94) Nine Significant Natural Areas have been identified on the site through the District Plan Review process. In addition, site investigations have identified extensive additional areas titled Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas in the Proposed Plan Change. The Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas provide considerable additional protection and enhancement of indigenous ecosystems, habitats and biodiversity.

Section 3.7 Landscape

Objective 17 The region’s outstanding natural features and landscapes are identified and their landscape values protected from inappropriate subdivision use and development.

Policy 25 Identifying outstanding natural features and landscapes.

Policy 26 Protecting outstanding natural features and landscape values.

Objective 18 The region’s special amenity landscapes are identified and those landscape values that contribute to amenity and the quality of the environment are maintained or enhanced.

Policy 27 Identifying special amenity landscapes.

Policy 28 Managing special amenity landscape values.

(95) The District Plan Review process has identified that the site does not contain outstanding natural landscapes or outstanding natural features but does contain part of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape.

(96) The Proposed Plan Change provisions manage the characteristics of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape.



Section 3.8 Natural Hazards

Objective 19 The risks and consequences to people, communities, their businesses, property and infrastructure from natural hazards and climate change effects are reduced.

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

Policy 51 Minimising the risks and consequences of natural hazards.

Objective 20 Hazard mitigation measures, structural works and other activities do not increase the risk and consequences of natural hazard events.

Policy 52 Minimising adverse effects of hazard mitigation measures.

Objective 21 Communities are more resilient to natural hazards, including the impacts of climate change, and people are better prepared for the consequences of natural hazard events.

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

Policy 51 Minimising the risks and consequences of natural hazards.

(97) The District Plan Review process has identified that the site contains Flood Hazard Areas. The Proposed Plan Change provisions take a risk-based approach to managing subdivision, use and development in respect of the Flood Hazard Areas.

Section 3.9 Regional Form, Design and Function

Objective 22 A compact well designed and sustainable regional form that has an integrated, safe and responsive transport network and:

(e) urban development in existing urban areas, or when beyond urban areas, development that reinforces the region’s existing urban form;

(g) a range of housing (including affordable housing);

(h) integrated public open spaces;

(i) integrated land use and transportation; and

(k) efficiently use existing infrastructure (including transport network infrastructure);

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

Policy 54 Achieving the Region’s urban design principles.

Policy 55 Maintaining a compact, well designed and sustainable regional form.

Policy 57 Integrated land use and transportation.

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

(98) Objective 22 and the associated policies seek to ensure a compact, well designed and sustainable regional form that provides a range of housing options. The area is identified for



residential growth within the Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 as a logical extension of existing urban areas.

(99) Objective 22 and the associated policies seek to ensure that development is undertaken within an existing urban environment in a manner which represents the efficient use of existing infrastructure. The site is located adjacent to transport infrastructure (State Highway 1 and Plimmerton Train Station) and can be serviced by an extension of existing infrastructure and the installation of new infrastructure.

(100) The proposed rezoning would facilitate well-designed residential development within the site that cannot be achieved under the existing zoning. The site is located in proximity to transport links and a number of public amenities (recreational facilities, a school and local shops).

Section 3.10 Resource Management with Tangata Whenua

Objective 23 The region’s iwi authorities and local authorities work together under Treaty partner principles for the sustainable management of the region’s environment for the benefit and wellbeing of the regional community, both now and in the future.

Objective 24 The principles of the Treaty of Waitangi are taken into account in a systematic way when resource management decisions are made.

Objective 25 The concept of kaitiakitanga is integrated into the sustainable management of the Wellington region’s natural and physical resources.

Objective 26 Mauri is sustained, particularly in relation to coastal and fresh waters.

Objective 27 Mahinga kai and natural resources used for customary purposes, are maintained and enhanced, and these resources are healthy and accessible to tangata whenua.

Objective 28 The cultural relationship of Māori with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu and other taonga is maintained.

Policy 48 Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi

Policy 49 Recognising and providing for matters of significance to tangata whenua

(101) As part of the plan change, consultation has been undertaken and is continuing with Ngāti Toa Rangatira. Ngāti Toa Rangatira has provided a Cultural Impact Assessment to inform the Proposed Plan Change and a letter of support for the Proposed Plan Change.

Section 3.11 Soils and Minerals

Objective 29 Land management practices do not accelerate soil erosion

Policy 15 Minimising the effects of earthworks and vegetation clearance

Policy 41 Minimising the effects of earthworks and vegetation disturbance

(102) The Proposed Plan Change provisions, including specific Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles require management of earthworks to manage erosion and sediment. This includes the requirement to use control measures that exceed the design requirements of the Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for the Wellington Region. Additional restrictions apply to earthworks and vegetation clearance in Significant Natural Areas.



Regional Plans (103) Regional Plans are prepared by regional councils to assist them in fulfilling their functions under

the RMA (Section 30). The scope and requirements of regional plans is specified in Sections 63 – 70 of the RMA. There are some areas of overlap between regional and district plans, notably in natural hazard planning, but generally district plans deal with land use and subdivision whereas regional plans deal with water and air discharges, soil, water quality and quantity and coastal provisions below mean high water springs. Stormwater discharges are particularly relevant for urban development, and there is an element of land use control to account for both the quantity and quality of stormwater.

(104) In relation to regional plans:

• the district plan must not be inconsistent with an operative regional plan for any matter specified in s30 (1) [or a water conservation order]; and

• must have regard to any proposed regional plan on any matter of regional significance.

(105) Currently Greater Wellington Regional Council has five regional operative regional plans, these are:

• Regional Coastal Plan (2000)

• Regional Freshwater Plan (1999)

• Regional Soil Plan (2000)

• Regional Air Quality Management Plan (2003)

• Regional Plan for Discharges to Land (1999)

(106) GWRC also notified the Proposed Natural Resources Plan (PNRP) in 2015. The purpose of the PNRP is to replace the five operative regional plans. At the time of writing, decisions have been made by the hearings panel and there are numerous provisions that are under appeal by a wide range of parties. However these provisions have legal effect.

(107) The PNRP is at an advanced stage so the focus is on that document as the operative plans are dated and are in the process of being replaced. It is noted that to implement development in accordance with the Plimmerton Farm Zone, a number of regional resource consents would be required.

(108) The relevant objectives and policies relating to the plan change are addressed below

Proposed Natural Resources Plan

Proposed Natural Resources Plan Objectives / Policies

Comments

Ki uta ki tai: mountains to the sea

Objective O1:

Air, land, fresh water bodies and the coastal marine area are managed as integrated and connected resources: ki uta ki tai – mountains to the sea.

Interconnectivity between land use, water and receiving environments is central to the provisions included within the proposed plan change.



Policy P1: Ki uta ki tai and integrated catchment management

Objective O3:

Mauri, particularly the mauri of fresh and coastal waters is sustained, and where it has been depleted, natural resources and processes are enhanced to replenish mauri.

The provisions of the proposed plan change seek to improve freshwater quality, thereby sustaining and enhancing its mauri. The stormwater policies and freshwater principles require the consideration of mauri.

Objective O4:

The intrinsic values of fresh water and marine ecosystems are recognised and the life supporting capacity of water is safeguarded.

The freshwater ecosystem within and adjacent to the plan change area is recognised, and the provisions seek to safeguard its life supporting capacity.

Beneficial use and development

Objective O9:

The recreational values of the coastal marine area, rivers and lakes and their margins and natural wetlands are maintained and enhanced.

Policy P10: Contact recreation and Māori customary use.

The proposed plan change provisions seek to enable access to and along rivers and wetlands within the plan change area, which provides for recreational opportunities and Māori customary use.

Objective O10:

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

Policy 9: Public access to and along the coastal marine area and the beds of lakes and rivers.

The proposed plan change provisions seek to enable access to and along rivers and wetlands within the plan change area.

Māori relationships

Objective O14:

The relationships of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga are recognised and provided for, including:

(a) maintaining and improving opportunities for Māori customary use of the coastal marine area, rivers, lakes and their margins and natural wetlands, and

(b) maintaining and improving the availability of mahinga kai species, in terms of

Ngāti Toa Rangatira have provided a Cultural Impact Assessment (attachment 5) which informs the proposed plan change. Mauri requires consideration through the proposed Plan Change’s Stormwater Chapter policies and the freshwater principles, which also include provision to avoid the mixing of waters between different catchments.



quantity, quality and diversity, to support Māori customary harvest, and

(c) providing for the relationship of mana whenua with Ngā Taonga Nui a Kiwa, and

(d) protecting sites with significant mana whenua values from use and development that will adversely affect their values and restoring those sites to a state where their characteristics and qualities sustain the identified values.

Policy P17: Mauri

Policy P18: Mana whenua relationships with Ngā Taonga Nui a Kiwa

Policy P19: Māori values

Policy P64: Mixing waters

Objective O15:

Kaitiakitanga is recognised and mana whenua actively participate in planning and decision-making in relation to the use, development and protection of natural and physical resources.

Policy P20: Exercise of kaitiakitanga

Ngāti Toa Rangatira have provided a Cultural Impact Assessment (attachment 5) which informs the proposed plan change.

Natural character, form and function

Objective O17:

The natural character of the coastal marine area, natural wetlands and rivers, lakes and their margins is preserved and protected from inappropriate development.

The proposed plan change proposes that natural wetlands within the site are protected as Significant Natural Areas. River margins are also protected.

Natural hazards

Objective O20:

The hazard risk, and residual hazard risk, from natural hazards and adverse effects of climate change, on people, the community and infrastructure are acceptable.

Policy P28: Hazard mitigation measures

Policy P29: Effects of climate change

Policy P30: Natural buffers

Natural hazards in Porirua have been considered during the development of the proposed plan change. This included the effects of climate change. The proposed plan change reflects this information, and has avoided inappropriate levels of development in areas where natural hazard risk renders development unacceptable.

The potential for climate change to cause or exacerbate natural hazard events has been given particular regard to in determining the



extent of flood hazard. The proposed plan change area is also far enough away from the coastal environment to not be susceptible to anticipated sea level rise.

The proposed plan change provisions include protection and enhancement of wetlands, which can buffer development from natural hazards.

Objective O21:

Inappropriate use and development in high risk areas is avoided.

Policy P27: High risk areas

The proposed plan change has considered the hazard constraints in and adjoining the Plan Change area, and avoids inappropriate levels of development in high hazard areas.

The proposed plan change provisions avoid placing people in high risk areas.

Water quality

Objective O24:

Rivers, lakes, natural wetlands and coastal water are suitable for contact recreation and Māori customary use, including by:

(a) maintaining water quality, or

(b) improving water quality in:

(i) significant contact recreation fresh water bodies and sites with significant mana whenua values and Ngā Taonga Nui a Kiwa to meet, as a minimum, the primary contact recreation objectives in Table 3.1, and

(ii) coastal water and sites with significant mana whenua values and Ngā Taonga Nui a Kiwa to meet, as a minimum, the primary contact recreation objectives in Table 3.3, and

(iii) all other rivers and lakes and natural wetlands to meet, as a minimum, the secondary contact recreation objectives in Table 3.2.

The proposed plan change includes provisions to maintain and enhance the quality of rivers and natural wetlands within the plan change area.

Biodiversity, aquatic ecosystem health and mahinga kai



Objective O25:

To safeguard Biodiversity, aquatic ecosystem health and mahinga kai in fresh water bodies and the coastal marine area are safeguarded such that:

(a) water quality, flows, water levels and aquatic and coastal habitats are managed to maintain biodiversity aquatic ecosystem health and mahinga kai, and

(b) where an objective in Tables 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 or 3.8 is not met, a fresh water body or coastal marine area is improved over time to meet that objective.

Policy P31: Biodiversity, aquatic ecosystem health and mahinga kai

Policy P32: Adverse effects on biodiversity, aquatic ecosystem health, and mahinga kai

Policy P38A: Restoring Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour, Wellington Harbour (Port Nicholson) and Wairarapa Moana

The proposed plan change provisions seek that water quality, flow, level and habitat are maintained and enhanced.

Objective O27:

Vegetated riparian margins are established, maintained or restored to enhance water quality, aquatic ecosystem health, mahinga kai and indigenous biodiversity of rivers, lakes, natural wetlands and the coastal marine area.

The rivers and natural wetlands within the proposed plan change area are typically within protected areas which encourage vegetation maintenance or restoration, being Significant Natural Areas or Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas.

Objective O28:

The extent and significant values of natural wetlands are protected, and their condition is restored. Where the significant values relate to biodiversity, aquatic ecosystem health and mahinga kai, restoration is to a healthy functioning state as defined by Table 3.7.

Policy P37: Values of wetlands

Policy P38: Restoration of wetlands

All natural wetlands within the site are proposed to be protected by being within Significant Natural Areas.

Sites with significant values

Objective O31:

Outstanding water bodies and their significant values are protected and restored. Where the significant values relate to biodiversity,

Two wetland areas in the north of the site are identified as part of the Taupō Swamp Complex, which is identified as a wetland with outstanding indigenous biodiversity values.



aquatic ecosystem health and mahinga kai, restoration is to a healthy functioning state as defined by Tables 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8.

Policy P39: Adverse effects on outstanding water bodies

These wetland areas are protected by being within proposed Significant Natural Areas.

Objective O32:

Outstanding natural features and landscapes and their values are protected from inappropriate use and development.

Two wetland areas in the north of the site are identified as part of the Taupō Swamp Complex, which is identified as a wetland with outstanding indigenous biodiversity values. These wetland areas are protected by being within proposed Significant Natural Areas.

Objective O35:

Ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values are protected, and where appropriate restored to a healthy functioning state as defined by Tables 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8.

Policy P40: Ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values

Policy P41: Managing adverse effects on ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values

Policy P42: Protecting and restoring ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values

Locations within the plan change area which have significant indigenous biodiversity values are protected by being identified as Significant Natural Areas.

Land Use

Objective O44:

The adverse effects on soil and water from land use activities are minimised.

The proposed plan change provisions seek to minimise the adverse effects of the intended land use on water.

Policy P48: Protection of natural features and landscapes

The natural features and landscapes (including seascapes) of the coastal marine area, rivers, lakes and their margins and natural wetlands shall be protected from inappropriate use and development by:

(a) identifying outstanding natural features and landscapes within the region, and

The proposed plan change provisions include measures to protect river margins, protection of natural wetlands, and to avoid significant adverse effects, and avoid remedy or mitigate other adverse effects on other natural features and landscapes.



(b) avoiding adverse effects of activities on outstanding natural features and landscapes, and

(c) avoiding significant adverse effects and avoiding, remedying or mitigating other adverse effects of activities on all other natural features and landscapes.

Discharges to land and water

Objective O47:

The amount of sediment-laden runoff entering water is minimised.

Policy P63: Improving water quality for contact recreation and Māori customary use

Policy P67: Minimising discharges to water or land

The proposed plan change includes erosion and sediment control provisions to minimise potential sources of sediment-laden runoff.

Objective O48:

The adverse quality and quantity effects of stormwater discharges from stormwater networks and urban land uses are improved over time.

Policy P73: Minimising adverse effects of stormwater discharges

The proposed plan change allows for a comprehensive urban development that will need to meet stormwater neutrality requirements. Treatment of stormwater discharges is also provided for.

Porirua District Plan (109) The Proposed Plan Change is to the Operative District Plan, and does not form part of the

developing Proposed District Plan. In saying that, the Proposed Plan Change is intended to align where possible with the draft version of the Proposed District Plan. For example the Proposed Plan Change reflects the layers of protection proposed to be introduced as part of the Proposed District Plan, including Significant Natural Areas, Special Amenity Landscapes and Natural Hazard Areas as well as providing for Medium Density Housing.

Other District Plans in the Wellington Region (110) Section 74 (2) (c) of the RMA requires Council to have regard to the extent to which the

proposed plan change needs to be consistent with the plans or proposed plans of adjacent territorial authorities.

(111) Other councils in the Wellington region have planning policies in place which encourage additional housing growth and housing choice in targeted locations for residential development including high and medium density. The provisions of different councils vary, reflecting the different land use contexts.



(112) The characteristics of Plimmerton Farm Zone particularly the opportunities for urban expansion (greenfield development) and the suitability of the site near public transport, warrant a planning response which varies from neighbouring Councils.

(113) No cross-boundary issues apply in respect to the plan change area, as existing urban areas affected are located within the Porirua City Council jurisdiction. The proposed plan change is therefore considered sufficiently consistent with the operative and/or proposed District Plans of neighbouring authorities.

Iwi Management Plan (114) Ngāti Toa do not currently have an Iwi Management Plan. However, they have produced a

relevant document titled Ngāti Toa Rangatira Statement on the Te Awarua-o-Porirua Whaitua Implementation Programme (2019). The following is an excerpt that outlines Ngāti Toa aspirations for the Harbour, and its catchment:

The harbour is a unique and important part of the Porirua environment and it has a fundamental role in sustaining the physical and cultural needs of all those who live in the region, including Ngāti Toa and our manuhiri (visitors). However, the harbour is now degraded and the younger generation are unable to experience the bountiful environment that once existed. The harbour now serves as a symbol of the need to nurture and protect the harbour, and to ensure that it is restored to sustain our future generations.

(115) While the Regional Plan is the primary RMA instrument to protect and restore the Harbour, the Proposed Plan Change contributes to achieving the aspirations of Ngāti Toa as described above within the parameters of Council’s s31 RMA functions.



Strategic Basis for the Proposed Plan Change (116) Population projections undertaken to inform the Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 show that the

City will not have enough housing for the Porirua residents three years’ time. As discussed in Paragraphs 32-56 above, the Council has an obligation under the NPS-UDC to ensure that sufficient feasible land is provided to meet housing and business demand. The Plimmerton Farm site has been identified as a potential urban growth area for a substantial period of time.

(117) This section identifies and discusses the strategic context which has identified Plimmerton Farm as a potential urban growth area, and then considers the statutory context within which the Proposed Plan Change must be considered.

(118) In giving effect to the statutory basis and context, particularly as set by the NPS-UDC, consideration must be given to strategic documents published by Porirua City Council which outline where urban development is preferred in the City, and the type of residential development which is desired. These documents are summarised as follows.

Porirua Suburban Character Study 2005 (119) The Porirua Suburban Character Study was undertaken in response to community concerns

about the impact of more intensive residential development on amenity and character values of suburban areas.

(120) The Study concluded with a number of recommendations to Council, including:

1. To plan for areas of intensification and strengthen management and control of infill development.

4. Provision and management of suburban open space

5. Develop a city wide greening strategy

5. Consider land use relationship between rural and urban areas

6. Develop a city-wide open space strategy

Porirua Development Framework 2009 (121) The Porirua Development Framework 2009 (“the Framework”) was prepared as a guiding

document that was intended to influence how and where Porirua will physically develop over time. The framework “provides a ‘picture of what the city may eventually look like – areas where people may live, work and play”.

(122) The Framework sets out principles and objectives that guide long-term development. There are a number of objectives that are relevant to the rezoning of Plimmerton Farm. These include:

Business and Employment:

• Objective 2: Ensure there is sufficient land available of a suitable quality to cater for future business needs.

Housing:

• Objective 4: Improve housing choice, by enabling a variety of housing types and form to be built, catering for differing levels of affordability and need.



• Objective 5: Improve housing quality, be promoting sustainable housing and good quality urban design outcomes that integrate with existing communities.

Social Infrastructure

• Objective 6: Advocate to ensure education facilities meet the needs of the local population and businesses, and are located in easily accessible areas.

• Objective 7: Ensure that each community is provided with universally appropriate, accessible, safe public services and facilities that meet the needs of all sectors of society

Culture and History

• Objective 8: Recognise and provide for cultural and historical associations with the natural and built environment.

• Objective 9: Ensure the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi as set out in the Charter of Understanding between Ngāti Toa Rangatira and Porirua City Council, are taken into account when planning for future growth and development.

Transport and Infrastructure

• Objective 10: Improve and better understand the balance between development, and the provision of infrastructure capacity.

• Objective 11: Ensure new development is supported by the provision of appropriate and efficient infrastructure.

• Objective 12: Improve the transport system, by strengthening the links between communities while ensuring they are safe for all users; focusing on the creation of transport nodes; widening the choice of transport modes; future proofing the physical infrastructure; and focusing on the use and provision of public transport and walking/cycling

Recreation:

• Objective 14: Ensure recreational facilities are located in easily accessible areas; are an appropriate form to cater for community needs; and are safe environments for leisure and recreation activities to occur.

Environment:

• Objective 15: Ensure the natural environment is sustainably managed, which includes:

- Indigenous biodiversity is protected through effective management, which includes the protection of indigenous vegetation, important ecosites and habitats for indigenous fauna.

- Strengthen the city’s green and leafy appearance.

- Improve water quality in the Pāuatahanui Inlet, Porirua Harbour and waterways, by ensuring effective management of sediment discharges, pollutants, excess nutrients and other contaminants. This may be achieved through explicit management and advocacy.



- Managing development in the coastal environment through explicit management and advocacy.

- Identify significant landscapes, and ensure they are appropriately managed and protected.

• Objective 16: Ensure new urban development is not exposed to unacceptable risk from natural hazards and impacts of climate change. Further development in existing communities may occur in areas potentially affected by climate change or subject to natural hazards, where appropriate mitigation is achievable.

Planning Places:

• Objective 19: Ensure there is sufficient urban zoned land available for both residential and non-residential purposes, to cater for future demand.

(123) The Framework notes that there will be a conflict between certain objectives and outcomes recommended and that trade-offs are inevitable.

(124) The Framework also includes a framework map (refer Figure 2 below) showing preferred locations for specific development forms and an associated Strategic Study Area Map (refer Figure 3 below). The Framework includes the Porirua Development Framework Detailed Action Plan, which specifies a set of projected actions required to implement the Framework.

Figure 2: Porirua Development Framework 2009 Map



Figure 3: Strategic Study Areas

(125) The Framework identifies north of Camborne as a potential urban growth area. However, it notes that “this area has a range of constraints and limitations that would require further detailed investigation before Council could consider a specific change to its District Plan”. This led to the development of the Porirua Northern Growth Area Structure Plan.

Porirua Northern Growth Area Structure Plan 2014 (126) The Porirua Northern Growth Area Structure Plan was adopted by Porirua City Council in

December 2014 as a strategy for guiding future long-term urban growth between Camborne and Pukerua Bay. The Structure Plan considers this area desirable for growth given the ability to access the current SH1 alignment, along with the presence of established community amenities, and suggests development of some 1,200 to 2,000 new dwellings.





Figure 4: The Northern Growth Area Structure Plan

(127) The key proposals for the Northern Growth Area:

A - Pukerua Bay West Development Area

B - New Village Development Area

C - Camborne North Development Area

D - Rural Residential Areas

E - Open Spaces Areas

F - Rural Deferred Development Areas

(128) The Plimmerton Farm site comprises proposed land use types B, C, D E and F from council’s Structure Plan.

(129) The Structure Plan sets out a scenario for future urban development in this area, considering the following aspects:

• Providing for a range of housing and building options to meet demand from a growing population;

• The opportunity to more-efficiently utilise existing transportation infrastructure including commuter rail services within proximity to the structure plan area;

• Planning and funding essential infrastructure and community facilities (including schools and other community services) needed for this;



• Protecting important natural environmental values including important landscapes and natural features (including Taupō Swamp Wetland and the Porirua Harbour), heritage, and biodiversity; and,

• Feedback from affected landowners, various stakeholder agencies, and the wider community about all of the above.

(130) The Northern Growth Area Structure Plan prepared by Council specifically envisages the following for the Plimmerton Farm site

• A proposed “New Village Area” on the site, which will include small centre shops around a ‘public open space’ and school site(s);

• The ‘Camborne North Development Area’ which is traditional residential development in the same theme as existing residential development to the south of the Plimmerton Farm site;

• ‘Rural Residential Areas’ which allow for larger lots on steeper sites, bush clad sites and areas of where development occurrence will have significant visual impact;

• ‘Open Space Areas’ which will generally be the areas of steeper gully/ watercourses and low-lying flood plain and wetland areas; and,

• Some limited area of ‘Rural Deferred Development Area’ with steeper terrain and vegetation or visual protection zones where protection would be desirable.

Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 (131) The Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 was published in March 2019. The strategy provides some

context around the growth that Porirua City has recently experienced and is forecast to experience over the next 30 years (with projections of between 10,00-12,000 more people living in Porirua over the next 25 years for medium growth projections, and just under 30,000 more people under the high growth projections).

(132) The Growth Strategy also considered the NPS-UDC and quantifies that currently the City only has enough appropriately zoned land to accommodate the next three years of growth. There is not enough supply beyond that. Most of the forecast growth is anticipated to occur in the 3-1-year time horizon, triggered by the Transmission Gully Motorway opening, the new District Plan becoming operative, and Porirua east regeneration commencing.

(133) In order to provide for the forecast growth, the Growth Strategy presents a spatial framework of where it expects growth to occur, and what type of growth is anticipated in those locations. This framework is shown in Figure 5.



Figure 5: Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 Spatial Framework

(134) The spatial framework identifies Plimmerton Farm as being within the Northern Growth Area, as a new residential area in the medium term, with the southwest corner of the site being a new employment area in the medium term, and some parts in the northern and eastern position of the site identified as new rural residential areas in the medium term.

(135) Further, Plimmerton Farm is anticipated in the strategy as providing 2,000 new household units, and that there is a high level of certainty around the provision of these dwellings. In terms of the indicative growth sequencing, Plimmerton Farms is identified as providing new dwellings from the year 2022.



Overall Basis for Progressing the Proposed Plan Change

(136) In considering the statutory and strategic basis outlined in above Plimmerton Farm represents a suitable greenfield growth area for advancing ahead of other urban growth areas, given the following:

• The NPS-UDC requires Porirua City Council to have sufficient land zoned for residential and business purposes to cater for future population projections;

• Plimmerton Farm has been identified as a suitable greenfield growth area for Porirua in the Growth Strategy 2048 (primarily for residential land use, with some employment and some rural residential land use) and its predecessor growth strategy documents;

• Plimmerton Farm is also identified in the Porirua Northern Growth Area Structure Plan 2014 as suitable for greenfield growth;

• Because of the growth strategy and structure plan, using Plimmerton Farm for urban purposes gives effect to Policies 55 and 56 of the RPS; and

• The strategic infrastructure services in the vicinity of the site have been analysed, and this shows that these have sufficient capacity to cater for a change in land use at the site from rural to urban;

• Effects on the site’s ecology and landscapes and the sensitive receiving environments of Taupō Swamp and Te Awarua-o-Porirua are able to be avoided, remedied or mitigated.



Scale and Significance Evaluation (137) Under s32(1)(c) of the RMA, this evaluation report needs to contain a level of detail that

corresponds to the scale and significance of the environmental, economic, social and cultural effects that are anticipated front the implementation of the proposal.

(138) The proposed plan change’s scale and significance evaluation is based on the assessment of eight factors, which is consistent with the Ministry for the Environment’s Guidance on Section 32 Reports3. The eight factors are

(139) The following scale and significance evaluation discuss the Plan Change in terms of 8 factors, and scores each factor out of 5 (where 1 is low and 5 is high). This is consistent with the Ministry for the Environment’s guidance on Section 32 reports. The eight factors, and criteria which are used to evaluate those factors as detailed in the guidance document are:

3

Considerations and Criteria for Determining Scale and Significance

For all except the first criteria, consider all bullet points and make overall assessing of scale and significance for that criterion using ranking, then make overall assessment across all criteria

1. Reason for the change

Choose one or more as appropriate:

• 10-year review

• Giving effect to higher level RMA document

• Ministerial direction/requirement for plan to not be inconsistent with NES

• Responding to a Court decision/direction

• Implementing non-statutory planning initiative (eg, urban growth strategy)

• Initiated locally because of plan effectiveness monitoring, community reaction to resource use, etc

• Assessed as having high significance under the Local Government Act

2. Degree of shift from the status quo (status quo defined as the current approach)

• Addressing existing or new resource management issue

• Proposing a new management regime/minor or major change in rule framework

• Extent and scale of regulatory impact

• Degree of ‘Packaging’ with other plan changes or other interventions

• Discrete provisions, or broader suite of existing provisions

• Changing existing plan objectives, and to what degree



(140) The evaluation concludes with a table summarising the factors and scores, and gives a final overall score for the scale and significance of the Proposed Plan Change.

3. Who and how many will be affected?

• Degree of public interest and engagement in issue

• Degree to which proposal will address identified community outcomes

• How many will be affected? Single landowner/multiple landowners/occupiers/ neighbourhoods/businesses/cities/future generations

• Degree of impact on private property

4. Degree of impact on, or interest from iwi/Māori

• Level of interest from iwi/Māori engagement with iwi on the issue

• Likely degree of impact on iwi/hapū?

• Impact on sites, areas or resources of significance to iwi/Māori

• Degree of consistency with iwi management plans

5. When will effects occur?

• Temporarily (weeks or months) For the next 1–5 years Ongoing into the future

6. Geographic scale of impacts

• Very localised or wide ranging (ie, single site/whole zones/one or more regions/single or multiple natural resources)

7. Type of effect • Acute/chronic/temporary/cumulative/positive/negative/irreversible

• Likelihood and consequence (eg, low probability, high consequence)

• Part(s) of environment affected (ecosystems, infrastructure, amenity)

• Degree of impact on social, cultural or economic well-being

• Degree of impact (positive/negative) on Part 2 matters

8. Degree of policy risk, implementation risk, or uncertainty

• Community reaction

• Whether:

− novel, untested approach

− weak evidence base

− highly uncertain benefits and costs

− dependent on other initiatives (such as non-RMA mechanisms)

− challenging implementation timeframes



Evaluation of Factors Factor 1: Reason for the Change

(141) Having provisions in the District Plan which enable the urban development of Plimmerton farm is required for the following reasons:

• To give effect to Council’s obligations under the NPS-UDC;

• To be consistent with the relevant provisions of the RPS; and

• To implement a non-statutory planning initiative, in providing for the housing and population growth targets and locations identified in the Council’s Urban Growth Strategy 2019.

(142) Factor 1 Reason for Change scores 5 due to the proposed plan change directly giving effect to statutory requirements (NPS-UDC and RPS) and implementing a non-statutory planning initiative (Urban Growth Strategy 2019).

Factor 2: Resource Management Issues / Problem Definition (143) There is one overarching resource management issue addressed by the proposed plan change:

to provide housing capacity and variety that meets the needs of existing and future Porirua city residents.

(144) However rezoning the land from allowing primarily rural uses to allowing primarily urban uses, gives rise to a number of other resource management issues, including:

• Cultural;

• Ecological;

• Landscape and amenity;

• Infrastructure and servicing;

• Stormwater management;

• Geotechnical and land stability;

• Transportation;

• Urban Design;

• Primary production; and

• Economic.

(145) The rezoning can have both positive benefits and negative outcomes on the above matters dependant on how development is managed.

(146) Factor 2 Resource Management Issues/Problem Definition scores 5 for the reasons outlined above.

Factor 3: Degree of Shift from the Status Quo (147) The existing Operative District Plan provisions are inadequate to meet statutory obligations.

The Urban Growth Strategy 2019 is explicit in that there is not enough land zoned for urban purposes to meet forecast population demand increases, and the NPS-UDC requires that this is addressed. Providing a Special Purposes Plimmerton Farm Zone to enable controlled urban



development on land currently zoned for rural purposes is a significant shift from current practice.

(148) Consequently, Factor 3 Degree of Shift from the Status Quo scores 5.

Factor 4: Who and How Many Will be Affected/Geographical Scale of Effects (149) The area proposed for the zone change is limited to the 384ha Plimmerton Farm site, which

comprises 3.2% of Porirua’s 175km2.

(150) Within the site are 10 identified Significant Natural Areas and part of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape. The site is within sensitive receiving environments including Taupō Swamp, Taupō Stream and Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour and is visible from elsewhere in Porirua City

(151) Given the above, Factor 4 Who and How Many Will be Affected/Geographic Scale of Effects scores 4.

Factor 5: Degree of Impact On or Interest from Iwi/Māori (152) The values of Iwi/Māori are explicitly required in assessments of landscape areas by Policy 25

(3)(f) of the RPS, which states:

Shared and recognised factors

Tangata whenua values: Māori values inherent in the feature or landscape add to the feature or landscape being recognised as a special place.

(153) Ngāti Toa Rangatira have been consulted by Council and Plimmerton Developments Limited in the development of the plan change and, at the time of writing, are preparing a Cultural Impact Assessment.

(154) Factor 5 Degree of Impact On or Interest from Iwi/Māori scores 4.

Factor 6: Timing and Duration of Effects (155) The effects of the Proposed Plan Change will be ongoing from the time any of its provisions

become operative.

(156) Factor 6 Timing and Duration of Effects scores 5 due to the ongoing nature of effects.

Factor 7: Type of Effects (157) The Proposed Plan Change will give rise to a number of different effects. The rezoning would

result in the loss of rural land which is currently in pastoral use, but would allow for the urban growth identified as necessary in the Urban Growth Strategy 2019 (which gives effect to NPS-UDC requirements). As such, there are a myriad of economic and associated social wellbeing effects that the Proposed Plan Change would give rise to.

(158) There are also a large number of actual and potential environmental effects anticipated from the Proposed Plan Change, including the aforementioned ecological, landscape, amenity, infrastructure and servicing, stormwater management, geotechnical and land stability, transportation and urban design effects.

(159) Such effects could result in adverse effects that fall locally, on adjoining properties and environment, while the wider benefits would likely fall on the wider community.

(160) Factor 7 Type of Effects scores 5 due to the potential significance of the effects.



Factor 8: Degree of Risk and Uncertainty (161) The degree of risk and uncertainty is low. The Proposed Plan Change requires activities with

more significant actual and potential adverse effects to be considered through the resource consent process, supported by expert guidance. The approach is well understood and widely applied in the Porirua District Plan.

(162) Factor 8 Degree of Risk and Uncertainty scores 2 due to the certainty provided by the site-specific and well-understood approach.

Overall Scale and Significance Determination (163) The table below is a summary of scale and significance and, following the MfE guidance, lists

the factors discussed above and the scores for each factor. The scores are then combined to give a total scale and significance score for the Proposed Plan Change.

(164) The scale and significance of the Proposed Plan Change is

Factor Score

1. Reason for Change 5

2. Problem / Issue 5

3. Degree of Shift from Status Quo 5

4. Who and How Many Affected, Geographic Scale of Effects 4

5. Degree of Impact on or Interest from Māori 4

6. Timing and Duration of Effects 5

7. Type of Effect 5

8. Degree of Risk or Uncertainty 2

Total (out of 40) 35

(165) Total Score Interpretation

• 0-10 Scale and Significance = Low

• 11-20 Scale and Significance = Moderate

• 21-30 Scale and Significance = High

• 31-40 Scale and Significance = Very High

(166) Based on the above, the scale and significance of the Proposed Plan change is very high.



Site Specific RMA Issues (167) The Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan seeks to provide an urban community incorporating mixed

density residential, rural lifestyle, commercial and open space land uses. At present the site is zoned Rural, which essentially provides for farming and does not allow for the intended urban development.

(168) For growth to occur on the site that is consistent with the Growth Strategy 2048, rezoning is required.

(169) The following sections discuss the effects associated with the rezoning of the site. Significant technical investigations and consultation have been undertaken as part of the precinct planning and plan change process in order to fully explore, and adequately assess, the potential effects associated with the development of the site. These technical investigations and consultation have subsequently informed the nature and detail of the Plan Change.

(170) The Plan Change will provide a framework for urban development to be considered in detail in resource consent processes.

(171) Technical advice and assistance was commissioned from external experts on the following matters:

• Plimmerton Farm Development – Analysis of costs and benefits in partial fulfilment of Section 32 of the RMA – Chris Nixon (NZIER) (Attachment 1);

• Rezoning Decision-Making Under Uncertainty – Chris Nixon (NZIER) (Attachment 2);

• RE: Plimmerton Farm Proposed Plan Change – Tim Heath (Property Economics) (Attachment 3);

• Archaeological Assessment of Effects: Plimmerton Farm Plan Change - Patrick Harsveldt (WSP Opus) (Attachment 4);

• Cultural Impact Assessment – Ngāti Toa Rangatira (Attachment 5);

• Stormwater Management Site Assessment – David Wilson (The Urban Engineers) (Attachment 6);

• Technical Report Transport – Jamie Whittaker (Stantec) (Attachment 7);

• Technical Memorandum District Plan - Parking Provisions – Stuart Crosswell (MRCagney Ltd) (Attachment 8);

• Ecological Assessment Report – Dr Paul Blaschke (Blaschke and Rutherford) (Attachment 9);

• Landscape and Visual Assessment – Dan Males (Local Landscape Architecture Collective) with Julia Williams (Drakeford Williams) (Attachment 10);

• Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control – Andrew Jackson (Envelope Engineering) (Attachment 11);

• Geotechnical Assessment Report – Engeo (Attachment 12);

• Infrastructure Report – Andrew Jackson, Alan Blyde and Paul James (Envelope Engineering) (Attachment 13);

• Urban Design Report - Lauren White (GHDWoodhead) (Attachment 14);



• Medium Density Residential Development Feasibility Assessment – Tom Kane and Ruth Allen (The Property Group) (Attachment 15);

• Medium Density Residential Development Feasibility Assessment Study Addendum (site amalgamation) – Ruth Allen and Tom Kane (The Property Group) (Attachment 16);

(172) The specialist technical reports were commissioned throughout the plan change development process to understand the opportunities, constraints, planning issues and concepts for development within the Plimmerton Farm site and to assess the associated environmental effects.

(173) Preliminary technical reports were prepared and included in the consultation material. Since then, as the Precinct Plan change has developed, some of the reports have been updated and additional reports have been prepared to assess further topics.

(174) The issues identified by the external experts are summarised in the following sections. The reports (available in Appendices 1 to 16) should be read in full.

Economic Impacts Work Undertaken Links

NZIER were commissioned to provide an analysis of the costs and benefits of the proposed rezoning of Plimmerton Farm. They provided two reports (Attachments 1 and 2), the second of which focused on Precinct D.

Property Economics also provided commentary (Attachment 3) about the Precinct D commercial area in the Porirua context.

RPS

Plimmerton Farm Development – Analysis of costs and benefits in partial fulfilment of Section 32 of the RMA –NZIER (Attachment 1)

Rezoning Decision-Making Under Uncertainty – NZIER (Attachment 2)

Re: Plimmerton Farm Proposed Plan Change – Property Economics (Attachment 3)

Key Considerations Links

NZIER identifies that an effect of the proposed rezoning is to increase the supply of land available in Porirua City for development of new residential housing and retail sites. Increasing land supply to meet demand for housing lowers the price of building land in the District compared to what it would be in the absence of the plan change. This will lower the cost of building new houses and make them more affordable for residents already in the District, and for those considering moving to the District. However, the land itself will become more valuable as plots supporting houses than paddocks feeding sheep. In that sense the land will be used more efficiently.

With respect to the loss of the primary production activity on the site, NZIER do not include this as a ‘cost’ of the proposed rezoning for the following reasons:



• There are approximately 8 million hectares in New Zealand currently classified as suitable for sheep and beef production. Pastoral production can easily be switched to other sites without detriment to national productivity;

• The location and soils cannot be considered as uniquely suited to sheep and beef farming so loss of farming would not have significant detrimental impact on sheep and beef farming;

• The farming is in a peri-urban environment where there is not a rural community dependent on the activity. Removing this farm would not impact on rural wellbeing i.e. schools would not be affected or community organisations would not lose members etc.

The main findings of the analysis are that the proposed Plan Change has a number of potential benefits:

• It is likely to deliver major benefits for the residents in terms of the quality of accommodation and residential amenity the site can provide;

• There are employment benefits. The impact of these will depend upon the build timing of the housing, retirement village and retail developments;

• NZIER expect environmental and recreational benefits as the development includes:

− Significant Natural Areas on the site that are not currently protected;

− A new wetland at the entry of the development;

− Access to wetlands on the site that have significant ecological value which are currently inaccessible;

− A proposal to retire steep slopes and implement an ecological management plan to:

o Encourage natural regeneration on these slopes;

o Improve the flood management conditions;

o Improve public access to natural areas;

o Create recreational opportunities including a ridgeline trail.

• The proposal supports the draft version of the Proposed District Plan and is in line with the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capability (NPS-UDC).

• Enhances the ability of the Porirua City Growth strategy to increase the housing choice for prospective buyers, increasing the attractiveness of the region and the size of the rateable base.

The analysis takes into account that the development will occur over a number of years, and that the benefits will not be captured immediately.

Costs are around the risk that developers are taking, although the strong demand for housing and strong forecast population growth mitigates this risk. This is a commercial risk that developers take on as a normal part of their business. Given



the growth expected for Porirua there is little risk for the Council that development would not occur once the land is rezoned.

NZIER conclude that the benefits of the proposed Plan Change outweigh the costs and that –

• It is likely to deliver major benefits for the residents in terms of the quality of accommodation and amenities;

• All development has risks and there are substantial costs for developers over time which are likely to be recouped given strong demand for houses;

• Significant environmental benefits;

• Small employment benefits;

• It increases the size of the rateable base.

Property Economics concluded that:

• Eastern Porirua together with Plimmerton Farm will broaden the housing typologies and residential price points available in the Porirua market – a positive outcome for the City.

• The wider catchment is of sufficient scale to justify a commercial (local centre zone) offering at Plimmerton Farm.

• A local centre zone is the appropriate zone for the function of the Precinct D commercial area.

• A trade/ hardware/ building supply store (as opposed to large format retail in general) is not critical to the City Centre’s function and therefore would not compromise the integrity of the City Centre Zone.

Recommendations Links

• The proposed rezoning is appropriate.

• Precinct D should be based on a local centre zone. A trade/ hardware/ building supply store (as opposed to large format retail in general) would be appropriate.

Plimmerton Farm Zone provisions

Archaeology and Cultural Impact Work Undertaken Links

An Archaeological Assessment of Effects Report (Attachment 4) was undertaken by Patrick Harsveldt of WSP Opus to determine what effects and risks, if any, the plan change to rezone and develop Plimmerton Farm might have on archaeological and heritage values. The scope of the report includes:

• the identification of known recorded or potential archaeological sites on or in the vicinity of the property;

RPS Policy 46

Archaeological Assessment of Effects – WSP Opus (Attachment 4)

Cultural Impact Assessment – Ngāti



• the results of a site inspection of the property for evidence of archaeological sites and an assessment of the archaeological values of the property; and

• impacts associated with the rezoning of the site.

The primary purpose of the assessment was to determine whether or not there are any direct impacts on archaeological sites.

A Cultural Impact Assessment (Attachment 5) was commissioned from Ngāti Toa Rangatira.

Toa Rangatira (Attachment 5)


Section 5 of the Archaeological Assessment provides a historical and archaeological background of the site and Section 6 outlines whether there are any recorded archaeological sites on Plimmerton Farm or its vicinity.

Section 8 of the of the Archaeological Assessment provides an assessment of the archaeological values of the site. In summary:

• Archaeological test pit investigations during the site visit of the low-lying southwest corner paddocks indicated organic peat material and a high-water table underneath the extant topsoil. This stratigraphy indicates that the Taupō swamp may have originally extended further eastward towards the base of the foothills in the geological past. On this basis, the entire low-lying paddocks in the southwest corner of the Plimmerton Farm property have the potential for encountering material associated with Early Māori food and resource harvesting. Likewise, the lower hillocks also have potential for Early Māori remains associated with wetland resource harvesting to be found on the dryer slopes immediately elevated above the former extent of Taupō Swamp.

• There are 2 sites located within 300 m to the southeastern perimeter of the Plimmerton Farm property which are not included within the project area and will therefore not be affected by plan change rezoning and future subdivision earthworks.

• Archaeological test pit investigations suggest that while the upper stratigraphy of the project area’s topsoil may have been modified by livestock, the lower natural stratigraphic layer/s appear to be intact. On this basis, there is the potential for unrecorded archaeological remains such as gardening soils and ovens and middens to still be in situ within the remaining natural stratigraphy of the site.

• It is unlikely that any previous topsoil scraping or (modern fence post) earthworks associated with farming practices would have impacted on robust archaeological features such as kumara storage pits. However, more fragile items such as fire scoops or midden deposits may have been impacted by these previous earthworks. Any previously-unrecorded archaeological features within the project area will most likely be in good to fair condition.



• Early Māori midden sites are plentiful around the foreshore of the Pāuatahanui Inlet, which is located less than 600 m away and 35-50 m downhill in elevation from the southeastern boundary of the Plimmerton Farm property. Despite the hills on the southeastern and eastern boundaries of the property being elevated above the inlet, it is unlikely that a hill climb would have prevented such accessible local and fresh fish and shellfish food sources from being considered for work or habitation in the hills. This is evidenced by midden site R26/155 encountered within 300 m of the project area. On this basis, there is potential for further unrecorded midden sites to be encountered at this elevation or higher during works on the Plimmerton Farm property.

• Given the nature of the property and the archaeological features which have been recorded by archaeologists in this part of Porirua, archaeological remains associated with gardening (such as storage pits) are also likely to be encountered during future earthworks at Plimmerton Farm.

• There were no surface remains of pre-1900 Early Māori archaeological features and/or material observed on the Plimmerton Farm property during the site visit. However, there is potential that previously-unrecorded remains associated with Early Māori gardening and freshwater and estuarine resource harvesting may be encountered on the Plimmerton Farm property during future development works.

• In terms of Māori archaeological sites, the wider area is within a landscape of pā and kāinga sites and associated gardening and food/resource harvesting and preparation sites. The contextual values of any previously-unrecorded early Māori archaeological sites which may be encountered in the project area could potentially provide evidence on the timing and spatial pattern over time of the Māori settlement of the area.

• The project area is currently a working farm so there are limited amenity values to the wider general public. The proposed walking tracks and public recreation areas illustrated on the draft precinct plan are therefore of high amenity value to the community with greater amenity values to the wider general public. There is potential for interpretive panels to be installed in prominent locations accessible to the public about the history of the land and the wider landscapes of the Porirua region visible from numerous vantage points on the property. Interpretive panels about local heritage are currently located at key lookout locations in Pāuatahanui and the suburbs of Porirua.

• There is also potential for public interaction with the community to highlight the rich history of the area. This should be discussed with the iwi/hapu representatives and Plimmerton Developments Limited.

Section 9 of the Archaeological Assessment provides an assessment of effects associated with the proposed rezoning and identifies that future earthmoving excavation works for road formation and residential and commercial zone



development will have the most potential to affect any unrecorded archaeological sites on the property.

With respect to potential effects on archaeological sites, while no sites have been recorded on Plimmerton Farm, WSP Opus believes that there is potential that previously unrecorded remains associated with Early Māori archaeological sites may be encountered during future subdivision earthworks. Further, due to the recorded archaeological sites on sites in the vicinity of Plimmerton Farm, including pā and kāinga sites, midden deposits and pit/terrace gardening sites, it is likely that any unrecorded archaeological features encountered during works at Plimmerton Farm will also reflect this archaeological landscape, and that, there is also the potential for subsurface archaeological remains associated with early Māori occupation especially gardening and food gathering activity to be encountered during proposed future subdivision earthworks.

The assessment also identifies that the ti kōuka, or cabbage tree, was observed during a site visit. ti kōuka, have traditionally represented ‘markers in the landscape’ to Māori, either as a representation of death and ancestors, or an indication of a place of significance (for example a grave or placenta burial).


The future subdivision and development works facilitated via the plan change (that will require future resource consents) has the potential to affect further unrecorded archaeological remains and cause below-ground disturbance to these remains.

A recommended method of mitigating the removal of archaeological material is through archaeological recording. Other mitigation could involve the establishment of interpretive materials (digital and hardcopy media, interpretive signage) and/or public education and engagement.

In order to avoid delays in earthworks and construction should archaeological material be revealed during earthworks, WSP Opus recommend that a General Archaeological Authority is sought from HNZPT for the proposed works. This procedure sits outside of the resource consent process administered under the RMA. WSP Opus recommends that the Proposed Plan Change includes accidental discovery protocol.

Earthworks provisions

Stormwater Work Undertaken Links

The Stormwater Management Site Assessment (Attachment 6) was prepared by The Urban Engineers. The scope of involvement included:

• Assessing existing stormwater processes of the site subject to the rezoning;

NPS-Freshwater Management

RPS Policy 42

Stormwater Management Site Assessment – The



• Assessing stormwater management constraints and opportunities of the site;

• In collaboration with other project members, the development of principles for effective stormwater management opportunities into the development of precinct plan options and provisions for Plimmerton Farm;

• Participation in multi-disciplinary team workshops and discussions;

• Involvement in engagement:

− with Ngāti Toa Rangatira representatives as mana whenua;

− with key stakeholders including Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC), Wellington Water Ltd, QEII National Trust, Friends of Taupō Swamp, Porirua Harbour Catchment Trust and Guardians of Pāuatahanui Inlet;

− with the public through attendance at public open days.

As well as site investigations, Urban Engineers outlined that assessment of stormwater values, opportunities and constraints for the site and the development of the Precinct Plan and accompanying provisions has been informed by several ongoing planning processes including:

• GWRC’s whaitua process to set catchment objectives;

• GWRC’s proposed Natural Resources Plan;

• Council’s Proposed District Plan preparation process;

• Wellington Water’s development of Water Sensitive Design Guides.

The Stormwater Management Assessment also outlines that meetings were held with Ngāti Toa Rangatira, Wellington Water land development, stormwater and planning staff, Council Officers and phone conversations with GWRC whaitua and planning staff to confirm possible future requirements based on the above processes

The feasibility of achieving hydraulic neutrality was assessed in consultation with Awa Environmental Ltd and Wellington Water staff and using Wellington Water’s Plimmerton Catchment model developed to map existing flood hazard areas.

Urban Engineers (Attachment 6)


Receiving Environment

Most of the site drains into Taupō Stream, either directly (the southern portion of the site -roughly 170 hectares) or through Taupō Swamp (the northern portion of the site – roughly 152 hectares). The remainder of the site, a small portion to the North East (63 hectares), drains into Kakaho Stream which discharges into the Pāuatahanui Inlet. The ultimate receiving environment for all runoff from the site is Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour.

The implementation of the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan will lead to an increase in impermeable surfaces within the site. Without appropriate mitigation this can



potential increase flood risk and lead to other detrimental effects such of scouring of channels and erosion and effects on downstream receiving environments.

Changes in hydrology that occur with urbanisation can increase sediment yield in catchments. All development within the site will need to implement stormwater treatment measures that target retention and detention of increases of runoff flow and volume.

The Stormwater Management Site Assessment also describes other treatment measures that could be introduced to reduce other contaminants such as copper and zinc. With respect to other contaminants the Stormwater Management Assessment also outlines that headwaters are important for controlling the temperatures with water bodies and that the preservation of cover and riparian areas within headwaters has the potential to have significant impact on maintaining both temperature and baseflow.

The Assessment promotes Water Sensitive Design using the following key principles:

• Promote inter-disciplinary planning and design;

• Protect and enhance the values and functions of natural ecosystems;

• Address stormwater effects as close to the source as possible;

• Mimic natural systems and processes for stormwater management;

• Protect headwaters due to the important freshwater quality benefits they provide, particularly with regard to regulating temperature and baseflow.

Stormwater Quantity Assessment

The development will be designed to avoid increasing stormwater runoff from the site above pre-development levels. This will require:

• Limiting peak flow to pre-development peak flow

• Providing compensatory storage for any flood storage lost due to development within existing inundation areas.


The following are considered suitable stormwater quality design outcomes for the site:

• Manage stormwater runoff - manage stormwater runoff peak flow and volume to pre-development levels, as far as practicable.

• Manage stormwater quality - manage stormwater quality to avoid adverse environmental effects

• Promote ecosystem health - promote the health of regional ecosystems and their associated environmental services through the management of stormwater at the catchment and site scale

Whaitua Implementation Programme

Precinct Plan

Freshwater Principles

Stormwater Provisions



• Manage stormwater quantity – integrate stormwater detention measures into existing natural ecological features

• Deliver best practice - deliver best practice urban design and broader community outcomes as part of stormwater management delivery

These outcomes can be achieved through an integrated approach to stormwater management with an emphasis on onsite, at source, mitigation techniques, an approach in line with Water Sensitive Design.

To prevent any increase in existing inundation levels the following stormwater quantity design outcomes are considered suitable for this site;

• Manage stormwater quantity – achieve ‘hydraulic neutrality’ by reducing stormwater peak flow to predevelopment levels up to the 100 ARI event.

• Manage inundation levels - ensures any development within existing inundation areas does not result in the loss of flood storage.

An additional recommendation to, among other things, align stormwater objectives and outcomes for the site with the Whaitua Implementation Programme is the inclusion of a set of high-level freshwater principles for the integrated catchment management of the site.

The Precinct Plan anticipates road runoff to be captured and treated using raingardens as a result of a requirement to be included in the Plimmerton Farm Zone provisions that any future development follows a WSD process. Raingardens provide treatment that mimic’s natural systems and helps to prevent stormwater runoff generation and captures and treats runoff when it does occur.

The use of stormwater treatment measures will also seek to protect the value of existing sensitive ecological areas within the site and in the receiving environments. In line with WSD principles, an integrated approach to stormwater management continues to be appropriate, with an emphasis on onsite, at source, mitigation techniques.

Overall, the Stormwater Management Site Assessment concludes that the proposed Plimmerton Farm plan change has been developed in line with WSD principles and, with the requirements for future development to follow a WSD approach and the incorporation of suitable stormwater management measures, the site can be rezoned and developed in a manner which is likely to achieve target stormwater contaminate levels within the receiving environment.

Transport Work Undertaken Links

A Technical Report Transport (Attachment 7) was prepared by Stantec to provide commentary on the following matters:

• Site Context and Location;

Links

RPS Policy 57



• Development Proposal;

• Site Traffic Generation and Distribution;

• External Roading Connections;

• Impacts on the Wider Network Operation;

• Internal Roading Hierarchy and Typology.

To determine the likely distribution of external development site trips, the Northern Wellington Area SATURN model (“SATURN Model”) was used. SIDRA was used to evaluate the performance of the existing James St access.

An economic assessment of approaches to car parking (Technical Memorandum District Plan – Parking Provisions) (Attachment 8) was prepared by MRCagney.

Technical Report Transport – Stantec (Attachment 7)

Technical Memorandum District Plan – Parking Provisions - MRCagney (Attachment 8)

Discussion Document NPS – Urban Development


The development envisaged through the rezoning and implementation of the precinct plan will lead to an increase in residential, commercial and employment related transport needs. With respect to site context the transport report outlines that the scheduled opening of the Transmission Gully Motorway in 2020 will have a marked impact on the manner in which both local traffic and ‘through-district’ traffic will distribute across the Porirua road network.

The result of this is that the redistribution of District wide traffic flows has the key outcome of ‘freeing up’ significant capacity on the road network in the vicinity of the site, providing opportunities for trips originating from the Plimmerton Farm Zone to benefit from this removal of through-district traffic from the current SH1 alignment, including along St Andrews Road adjoining the site.

While it is anticipated that the State Highway will be downgraded to a public road, the future nature of the road has not been designed or agreed between Council and NZTA. Any future new access to St Andrews Road would require approval from the appropriate road controlling authority.

Based on the indicated yield for the site, Stantec outline that, once fully developed, around 2,000 – 2,500 vehicle movements are expected to be generated by the site during weekday peak hours, with total daily volumes of around 22,000vpd. Stantec acknowledge that a proportion of these trips will be internal (i.e. between residential and commercial and education activities) and will therefore not generate any movements to and from the external road network adjacent to the site.

The modelling indicates that the scale of development would be best served by at least three external connection points, providing good route choice and distribution across the wider network. This is reflected in the Precinct Plan.

Modelling also indicates that accommodating traffic generation levels can be achieved without triggering any fundamental operation issues.

A short extension of the Mo Street cul de sac is proposed, but will remain a cul de sac.

Precinct Plan



The Precinct Plan shows possible future connections to neighbouring land to the east and north.

Significant benefits could be obtained in providing a pedestrian/cycle connection through the site and through to the Plimmerton village area. This would enable residents of the development to have easier access to additional public transport options.

Section 6.1 of the Transport Report notes that a number of fundamental considerations that have determined the Precinct Plan’s roading hierarchy and indicative alignments, including:

• a legible and connected roading network to support the movement of vehicular traffic, pedestrians and cyclists to, from, and within the site;

• two core primary north-south collector loop roads capable of accommodating public transport services;

• a range of roading typologies that match ‘place’ with ‘function’;

• respect for the topography and visual amenity, with roading routes that follow the contours where achievable;

• high quality streetscape through street designs that constrain speeds; and

• a comprehensive network of off-street walking and cycling routes, including provision of shorter travel distance connections for active modes, where practicable.

The MRCagney memorandum provides a good summary of the costs and benefits of regulating parking in district plans.

Regulating the amount of on-site parking offers the following potential benefits:

• Avoiding parking spill-over – because parking will be provided with new developments and parking will not ‘spill over’ to on-street parking;

• Lower search costs – because people will be able to find a carpark more quickly; and

• Lower parking management costs – because supply will always increase to match demand.

The negative outcomes that result from an over-supply of parking include:

• taking up valuable floor space and increasing development costs;

• increasing housing costs;

• incentivising car ownership and use and stimulating excessive demand for car-based travel and lifestyle;

• negative effects on the economic, social and environmental sustainability of city and town centres;

• an erosion of the sense of place and character of a town centre and/or limiting the potential for public realm enhancement;



• preventing higher value uses establishing on the land, e.g. community facilities / social services or additional commercial and residential development;

• disproportionate costs to low income households;

• undermining of policies aiming for increased public transport or active mode use; and

• undermining investment in public transport and walking and cycling infrastructure

The removal of parking minimums may lead to an increase in parking management costs. Parking management costs include the costs of preparing parking management plans, monitoring and enforcement, and purchasing and servicing parking meters.

The primary economic costs of parking minimums are their effects on:

• Compliance costs, which arise because the presence of parking minimums increases costs of lodging and processing consents. This cost is likely to be comparably small;

• Lower development values, which arise because parking minimums require new developments to provide more on-site parking and subsequently lowers the value of the development;

• Congestion costs, which arise because parking minimums increase the availability of parking and hence reduce the price of driving – this is expressed in relatively low (subsidised) public parking fees.

In MRCagney’s assessment, parking minimums may have relatively large negative economic impacts, which are directly proportional to two key variables:

• the value of floor space; and

• the degree to which parking substitutes for floor space.

These variables are likely to be positively correlated with the density and value of development.

• Inefficient resource consent requirements, involving high numbers of resource consents for minimum parking requirement dispensations being applied for and granted, particularly in the City Centre and Industrial Zones.

• Car parking requirements that are too onerous leading to inefficient land use.

• New development resulting in poor urban design outcomes

• The direction outlined in the Porirua Growth Strategy 2048, that focuses on increasing the development densities within the current urban footprint (creating a more compact city) around public transport hubs to reduce reliance on private cars, facilitating a greater variety of housing



typologies (e.g. apartments), and generally more affordable housing and transport options.

• The manifestation of the Porirua Growth Strategy direction in the draft version of the Proposed District Plan, which includes provisions to:

− Enable higher density housing in greenfield and brownfield areas served by multi-modal transport options and/or located within or near a commercial centre;

− Achieve growth in a planned, cohesive, compact and structured way, ensuring there is a sufficient supply of land available at all times to meet the City’s medium-term housing, commercial, industrial and recreational needs;

− Ensure good quality design is achieved in all urban form and place making.

As well as the quantifiable economic costs of minimum parking requirements, they can also contribute to a sprawling and fragmented urban form. By requiring that parking is provided on a site-by-site basis, minimum parking requirements create a large number of relatively small parking areas that serve a discrete destination. This is less efficient than a situation where consolidated parking areas may be used to access multiple destinations in the surrounding area. The high numbers of vehicle access ways break up the street frontages and reduce safety and security.

From a transport perspective, a compact urban form is associated with reductions in driver mode share, which in turn can lead to significant impacts on uplifting the number of trips carried out by public transport and active transport. Compact urban environments also create shorter distances between destinations, enabling easier access by walking or cycling.

The NPS Urban Development discussion document suggests that minimum parking requirements have led to an oversupply of parking and environmental, social and economic well-being costs including:

• increased traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions from more car use and from people searching for parking;

• cheap or free parking subsidising car use relative to other transport modes;

• adverse effects on the built environment where car parking is visually dominant and impacts on character; and

• more issues for stormwater management and water quality due to more impermeable surfaces and contaminant run-off.


The key recommendation of the Technical Report Transport are:

• Adopt the draft precinct plan and follow any direction in the draft version of the Proposed District Plan transport provisions to achieve an

Transport provisions



appropriate external access and internal site circulation network, for all transport modes, which will provide:

− Appropriate controls to ensure the site’s internal movement network, which has been designed to be cognisant of the topography of the land, to maintain lower vehicles speeds, and reflect current best practise, is developed in accordance with the draft precinct plan and site-specific road typologies;

− A minimum level of Service can be maintained at the James Street roundabout;

− Future connections to St Andrews Road that ensure full site access and connectivity can be achieved;

− Roading and transport development controls to deliver an integrated, well connected and multi-modal development;

• Continued engagement with key stakeholders (Council. GWRC and NZTA), in particular around the SH1 revocation design;

• Liaison with stakeholders regarding a potential ‘Plimmerton Station Access Masterplan”. That can identify an overall access strategy for Plimmerton rail station; and

• Evaluation of the trade-off between provision of Park & Ride or stormwater flood detention, for the parcel of land at the southwest corner of the site (adjacent to James Street and SH1/St Andrews Road).

In addition, MRCagney’s recommendation is that no minimum parking requirements are imposed.

Ecology Work Undertaken

An Ecological Assessment Report (Attachment 9) was provided by Blaschke and Rutherford, reviewed by Ecology NZ and updated in response to matters raised in the review.

Section 4 of the Assessment describes the ecological features and values of the site, including:

• Remnants of old-growth native forests (dominated by kohekohe and tawa, with a small number of podocarp trees).

• Significant areas of regenerating indigenous manuka and kanuka-dominated scrub and low forest in gullies and steep hillsides, developing towards characteristic native forests in threatened land environments. Many of these regenerating areas protect and buffer significant streams and wetlands.

Links

RMA s6(c), s31

RPS Policies 23, 24, 47

Ecological Assessment Report – Blaschke and Rutherford (Attachment 9)



• Important wetland outliers of the Taupō Swamp, one of the most significant wetlands in the Wellington region.

• Numerous streams and wetlands draining into the Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour, a focus for protection at the territorial and regional level.

• Fauna habitat for many native species including freshwater fish, birds and lizards. Some of these species are identified as rare or threatened.

Beyond the site, Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour is recognised as a Habitat of Indigenous Birds in the Coastal Marine Area, and is the subject of a major coordinated management programme and Action Plan. The Taupō Swamp Complex is recognised as a Key Native Ecosystem (KNE) and an Outstanding Natural Wetland in GWRC’s PNRP. Taupō Stream is also recognised as a River with Significant Indigenous Ecosystems in that Plan. Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour and places within the Taupō Stream catchment are recognised as Sites of significance to Ngāti Toa Rangatira.

Key Considerations

The report outlines that the development and use of Plimmerton Farm for pastoral farming over the last century, although of a high standard, has altered and degraded ecological values, for example through the drainage of wetlands and stream channelling in the south-west corner, cumulative erosion and sedimentation from pasture, and the clearance of woody vegetation from steep slopes throughout the farm.

The report further notes that a change of land use from pastoral to residential, commercial and open space offers opportunities for significant ecological protection and restoration while also allowing realisation of development aspirations for the site reflecting its identification as a growth area by Council since 2009.

The report concludes that residential development (including relatively high-density development) on the site can be compatible with protection and enhancement of ecological values of Plimmerton Farm, for several reasons:

• The existence of a number of SNAs and other areas with ecological values that can be protected and as well as enhancing ecological corridors through the site. These can also become open space and recreational feature of planned residential and urban development and support an integration of development and environmental values;

• The relatively large size of the property compared to the size of the most important ecological sites, enabling flexibility in development and protection options, including ecological buffer zones;

• The topography of the property dictates that some significant areas cannot be subject to residential development, and that other areas would support larger rural and hillside living precincts incorporating ecological areas;



• The presence of easier contoured land on the southern and western parts of the property adjacent to existing transport, road and infrastructure linkages, allowing relatively intensive development that will assist in providing a feasible yield whereby less developable areas can be retired and restored. compared to steeper land to the east and north.

• The above factors thereby allow a mix of relatively dense and less dense development as well as protection of important natural areas and natural values;

• Opportunities to integrate ecological site protection with stormwater management (including ensuring hydraulic neutrality as well as requirements to incorporate water sensitive design measures);

• The relatively large size of Plimmerton Farm in relation to the size of the Taupō Stream catchment will enable ecological management of the property to have a significant impact on overall catchment ecology and enhancements of ecological values to be reflected in the health of the ultimate receiving environment, Te Awarua-o-Porirua.”

Based on the assessment of ecological values, opportunities and constraints of the site, the Assessment identified the following potential adverse ecological effects of development of the site, that will need to be avoided, remedied or mitigated:

Construction Effects:

• Effects of sediment generated from earthworks on downstream water bodies and Te Awaroa-o-Porirua

• Loss of stream and wetland habitat (mainly in upper stream sections) through reclamation, stream diversion, and culverting

• Disruption of stream ecosystem function through effects such as weed introduction from development machinery introduced to the site, dust, noise and vibration.

• Clearance of terrestrial native vegetation habitats

• Loss of passage for native fish through stream works

Operational Effects:

• Loss of fauna habitat on former farm and production forestry land

• Ongoing adverse effects of introduced animal pests especially rodents, mustelids, possums, hedgehogs and feral cats

• Potential adverse effects of introduced weeds resulting from residential development and use, especially weeds introduced to the site accidently or purposely by residents

• Ongoing degradation of freshwater habitat or alteration of wetland hydrological regimes through changed stormwater runoff regimes or pollution



Recommendations

The Ecological Assessment Report includes a number of recommendations with respect to the proposed plan change. These are identified as follows:

• Recognise and protect Significant Natural Areas and Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas and provide for their ongoing management;

• Introduce a regime that requires offsetting to be undertaken should disturbance or clearance of any part of Significant Natural Areas occur. The offsetting provisions should require a ‘no-net-loss’ of ecological values.

• Integrate ecological provisions recommended in this report with stormwater management including planning for water sensitive urban design and hydraulic neutrality, particularly in the protection of Significant Natural Areas and the other areas on the site with ecological values;

• Develop a set of high-level freshwater principles for integrated catchment management during the life of the development of Plimmerton Farm. These principles may be appropriately complemented by an integrated Land Management Plans to be developed during subdivision;

• Recognise the high and outstanding values of areas in the catchment and its receiving environment (e.g. Taupō Swamp Complex, Te Awarua-o-Porirua) that could be adversely affected by poorly managed development of Plimmerton Farm;

• The generally steep contour of the site means all earthworks required for development must use best practice methods and standards including those for erosion and sediment control to protect wetlands and streams in the property and catchment from adverse effects of sediment and pollution.

Precinct Plan

Planning Maps

Subdivision provisions

Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity provisions

SNAs, BORAs

Stormwater provisions

Freshwater Principles


Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles

Landscape and Visual Work Undertaken

A Landscape and Visual Assessment (Attachment 10) was prepared by Local Landscape Architecture Collective and Drakeford Williams. The following was carried out:

• Undertake a landscape assessment of Plimmerton Farm and evaluate the visibility of the site from key locations in Porirua;

• Assess landscape and visual constraints and opportunities of the site;

• Review the Proposed District Plan draft chapter on Natural Features and Landscapes and more specifically review the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape with the Council’s landscape experts and ground truth the location of the western Special Amenity Landscape boundary;

Links

RMA s6

RPS Policy 27

Proposed Natural Resources Plan

Porirua Landscape Evaluation 2018

Landscape and Visual Assessment - Local Landscape Architecture Collective and



• Summarise principles for effective incorporation of landscape values and opportunities into the development of Precinct Plan options and provisions for Plimmerton Farm;

• Participate in team workshops and discussions, attend public open days and engage with Council and Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) staff and expert consultants; and

• Prepare the Landscape and Visual Assessment Report.

Drakeford Williams (Attachment 10)


Section 3.9 of the Landscape and Visual Assessment includes and assessment of the landscape and visual constraints of the site with respect to site landform, vegetation cover and water systems and landscape and visibility character. These constraints include:

• The site is on moderate to steep hillslopes, with over 40% of the 384ha site on slopes greater than 40 degrees. Development on these steeper slopes requires control of erosion and sedimentation with particular regard to impacts on water systems;

• The site is divided by 4 major deeply incised gully systems, plus numerous steep-sided tributary gullies, which constrain access across the site and require managed earthworks to create building platforms;

• The most accessible and developable flat land in the southwest corner of the site has a high water table and is covered with a thick layer of peat and or alluvial soils;

• Potential development up into the steep upper slopes is constrained by access;

• The northern catchment on the site drains into the Taupō Swamp, one of the most significant wetlands in the Wellington region, recognised as a Key Native Ecosystem and a Significant Natural Wetland in Greater Wellington Regional Council’s Proposed Natural Resources Plan;

• Many small streams and some of the wetlands drain directly into the Lower Taupō Stream and then into Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour, a focus for protection at the territorial and regional level. Taupō Stream is also recognised as a River with Significant Indigenous Ecosystems in the Proposed Natural Resources Plan;

• Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour and places within the Taupō Stream catchment are recognised as sites of significance to Ngāti Toa Rangatira;

• The steep upper hills form a valued rural backdrop to parts of Porirua, particularly in views from local villages such as Plimmerton, Mana and Paremata. Development on the steep upper slopes will be constrained by their visual prominence;

• Plimmerton Farm forms part of a high visibility gateway for Porirua and the open rural pastoral landscape is important to the experience of



travellers moving in and out of Wellington region along the transport corridor.

Section 3.9 of the Landscape and Visual Assessment includes an assessment of the landscape and visual opportunities of the site with respect to site landform, vegetation cover and water systems and landscape and visibility character. Opportunities include:

• Over half the site is on gentle to moderate slopes with gradients of less than 40%. There are opportunities for more intensive development on the lower, more accessible land;

• Steep gullies provide opportunities for water detention areas;

• Part of the flat land in the southwest corner of Plimmerton Farm provides for onsite stormwater retention/ wetland areas with potential ecological and flood mitigation benefits.

• There is emergent manuka/kanuka shrubland in gullies and colonising native species on the steeper inaccessible hill slopes now that stocking rates have been lowered. Existing vegetation and the relatively low weed infestation indicates there is potential for natural regeneration on the steeper hill slopes; and

• There are opportunities to emphasise the visual and ecological continuum from hilltop to valley by revegetating some gullies and incorporating existing waterways within future open space networks.

• With the removal of grazing there is potential to establish native bush cover across the steeper and most visually prominent hill slopes;

• The spur and gully landform on the higher hillslopes provides for low density development, where visual effects arise from the patterns of division of the landscape rather than from the visibility of dwellings; and

• The lower, flatter slopes are set back from the valley floor and visibility from the transport corridor can be buffered by planting along the western boundary.

Section 5 of the Landscape and Visual Assessment identifies potential significant adverse effects of future development which will need to be avoided, remedied or mitigated. This includes:

• Biophysical effects (landform, water, vegetation)

• Landscape character

• Visual effects

Section 6.0 of the Landscape and Visual Assessment outlines the measures that have been incorporated into the Precinct Plan and accompanying Zone provisions that seeks to avoid or remedy the identified potential adverse effects. These measures include:



• Distribution of built development, density, retention of open space (amongst other features) across valued landform and vegetation, location and design of roads, and native vegetation restoration on retired land.

• A package of avoidance, remediation and mitigation measures incorporated into the proposed Zone provisions.


The Landscape and Visual Assessment identifies important elements of the site to be retained or enhanced.

Precinct A

To maintain the landscape values of the landform and vegetation and to mitigate the impact of built development in close views from Taupō valley by:

• Inclusion of specific provisions at subdivision that will control:

− Earthworks adjoining identified valued gullies, wetlands, streams and areas of native vegetation;

− Building setbacks;

− Site coverage; and

− Street trees / vegetation.

• The inclusion of a requirement to prepare a Land Management Plan that includes public and private open space with the aim of protecting existing gully vegetation and replanting where required, as well as planting a buffer of native vegetation along the edge of lower Taupō Stream.

Precinct A provisions


Precinct Plan Road Typologies


Precinct B

To maintain the landscape values of the landform and vegetation, and to mitigate the impact of built development in close views from Taupō valley by:

• Inclusion of a requirement to prepare a Land Management Plan that includes public and private open space with the aim of retaining and regenerating gully vegetation which may include natural regeneration of indigenous vegetation on retired pasture, as well as measures (including legal mechanisms such as covenants and/or consent notices) to ensure the ongoing maintenance and management of these areas.

• Inclusion of specific provisions at subdivision that will control

− Earthworks

− Building setbacks

− Site coverage

− Street trees

Precinct B provisions







− Planting, including provision of large scale vegetation within lots fronting onto major roads and a vegetation buffer along the western boundary adjoining St Andrews Road

Precinct C

To maintain the landscape values of the steep hillslopes and open ridgeline, particularly the values of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape, and to reduce the visual impacts of built development:

• Adoption of a sub-precinct approach that seeks to provide specific landscape responses based on landscape values and considering landform, elevation and visibility from key public viewpoints:

• Inclusion of a requirement to prepare a Land Management Plan that includes specific and private open space with the aim of retaining existing gully vegetation and regenerating native bush that will re-instate a homogenous vegetation cover across the steep hill slopes which may include natural regeneration of indigenous vegetation on retired pasture as well as measures (including legal mechanisms such as covenants and/or consent notices) to ensure the ongoing maintenance and management of these areas;

• Inclusion of a pathway / track network across Precinct C that provides local connectivity, links to existing and potential tracks/trails outside the site and establishes lookout points;

• Inclusion of sub-precinct subdivision and earthworks guidelines with the aim of managing potential earthworks effects;

• Inclusion of specific provisions relating to each of the sub-precincts that will control

− Coverage

− Location of building platforms


− Building height

− Fencing

− Earthworks

− Planting

Precinct C provisions





Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape

Specific responses to mitigate visual and landscape character effects of development on the upper slopes and ridgeline:

• A sub-precinct plan that identifies:







− Street treatments including lighting treatments on secondary collector roads in order to minimise light glow and point light sources on these elevated hillslopes

− The location of ‘residential areas’ for built development that have been selected based on criteria including:

o Topography, on gradients less than 1V:5H

o Currently in pasture rather than native vegetation

o Accessible from the secondary collector road

o Visibility with locations on spurs rather than the main ridgeline

o Clustered so that lots can share access driveways

o The location of the associated access driveways that are shared where possible;

• Inclusion of specific provisions to control:

− House size, height, design, colour and reflectivity

− Landscape development through the requirement for a landscape concept plan that details earthworks, boundary treatments including fencing and planting, retention of existing site features and vegetation, and the location and type of planting for amenity and restoration.


Kakaho Basin

Specific responses with regard to the Kakaho Basin, which falls within the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape are recommended to mitigate the landscape effects of development on the basin landform and maintain some of the characteristics of the ‘rumpled’ landscape:

• An open space buffer around Kakaho Basin, to buffer and differentiate it from the other 3 sub-precincts and maintain an open and unmodified ridgeline in views from elevated locations to the west;

• Inclusion of specific provisions that will control:

− Site coverage with potential for cluster housing that provides for the required yield over a smaller area of the basin

− Retention of existing landscape features and landform

− Earthworks


− Building height

− Street tree planting

− Light glow from street lighting.








The following recommendations to address the effects identified above are identified in the Landscape and Visual Assessment Report.

• Create certainty in the Precinct C development areas by identifying the boundary between each sub-precinct, noting that the individual development areas are defined by the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape boundary, topography, elevation, aspect and visibility.

• There is a strong preference for access into Precinct C to be from the west, rather than from the south, which would impact on the more visually prominent hillslopes and ridgeline. A landscape and visual assessment should be prepared for any application for earthworks and/or construction of a road as part of subdivision within Precinct C.

• Implement subdivision design criteria for Precinct C, and more specifically for hillside living areas to manage the location and form of development so that adverse effects on the landscape and visual qualities of the area are avoided or mitigated. These should include criteria for location of residential areas in the Hillside Living sub-precinct.

• Adopt the locations for residential areas or building sites as identified on the Precinct C plan. These indicate appropriate building locations on the visually prominent hills in the Kakaho Hillside Living area. every residential site should be evaluated in terms of its visibility and the potential for built development to be seen on the skyline in order to establish maximum permitted building heights for each lot.

• Require a landscape development plan for lots on the Precinct C Kakaho Hillside Living area and for lots in Precinct C Hillside Living.

• Require the identification of building sites in Hillside Living at the time of subdivision.






The Landscape and Visual Assessment concludes that the proposed Plimmerton Farm Zone Precinct plan together with the associated plan change objectives, policies and rules have the potential to avoid, remedy or mitigation significant adverse landscape and visual effects, particularly in the more sensitive Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape area. In addition, the proposed Land Management Plan, has the potential to protect existing valued vegetation and gully features and re-establish a largely native bush cover across the more visually prominent hillslopes so that the pattern of distinctive valleys and open rolling tops is maintained.

The Landscape and Visual Assessment further concludes that the development of the site in the manner outlined out in the Precinct Plan, and in accordance with recommended landscape provisions has the potential to provide a residential and commercial development at a range of densities without significant adverse effects on the landscape character and visual amenity of the Plimmerton Farm site and the wider Taupō valley landscape.



Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Work Undertaken Links

Earthworks are also controlled via regional council rules contained in the Regional Soil Plan, the Regional Discharges to Land Plan and the Proposed Natural Resources Plan (decisions version).

Section 2 of the Infrastructure Report (Attachment 13) proposed an assessment of earthworks likely to be required in order to facilitate future development of the site. Subsequently, Envelope Engineering prepared the Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Memorandum (Attachment 11) outlining a rationale, intentions and outcomes for future earthworks design and associated erosion and sediment control measures.

Engeo prepared a Geotechnical Assessment Report of the site (Attachment 12).

RPS Policy 15, Policy 41

Regional rules in Regional Soil Plan, Regional Discharges to Land Plan, Proposed Regional Natural Resources Plan

Infrastructure Report – Envelope Engineering (Attachment 13)

Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Memorandum – Envelope Engineering (Attachment 11)

Geotechnical Assessment – Engeo (Attachment 12)


Engeo confirmed the suitability of the site for the proposed development.

Envelope Engineering identified the following reasons why earthworks and land modification are necessary:

• Land topography. The varying steepness of the site, sharply incised gullies, and the need to avoid parts of the site with high ecological values.

• Provision of allotments based on existing lot design expectations to achieve an efficient use of the land resource:

• Adequate provision of on-site amenity and to optimize availability of sea views

• Development of relatively flat sites in order to construct standard dwellings able to comply with standard bulk and location standards

• Minimisation of secondary earthworks to construct dwellings

• To provide a total yield that makes the development viable

• Urban design considerations – connectivity, sense of place.

• Road standards – provision of adequate site access.

• Flood mitigation – earthworks required to form attenuation ponds, wetlands, rain gardens, and other measures that will reduce the risk of flooding to downstream properties.



Envelope Engineering advised in the Infrastructure Report that alternative earthworks concepts - ‘low’, ‘moderate’ and ‘high earthworks’ - were considered.

Envelope Engineering outlined that the low earthworks approach results in steeper building sites being provided and a significantly reduced yield. Steeper sites require more complex house foundations and may result in significant secondary earthworks (to create suitable level building platforms etc) after bulk earthworks has been completed.

In determining potential effects associated with earthworks to facilitate future development of the site in accordance with the Precinct Plan, the following site constraints and considerations were identified:

• There is almost 245m vertical height difference from the lowest point on the site beside James Street to the highest point.

• Given its size, elevation and topography parts of the site are highly visible. Accordingly, modification works, if not appropriately designed and controlled, could generate significant visual effects.

• Over the site there are several Significant Natural Areas that were identified as part of the District Plan Review.


The general approach to earthworks design is:

• Minimise earthworks to that necessary to create stable development areas and protect downstream environments from sediment and erosion.

• Encouraging a cut and fill balance (i.e. no excess or import in order to mitigate impacts associated with construction traffic)

• Avoid earthworks within SNAs

• Controlling gradients and rehabilitation of batter slopes

• Requiring bulk earthworks proposal to be accompanied by subdivision plans so that all land development works, including the formation of allotments and building platforms can be considered together;

• Building platforms on each site will be created at bulk earthworks stage in order to minimize the secondary earthworks. This means that the earthworks will be carried out with the protection of comprehensive sediment control devices rather than the lesser controls able to be implemented by builders.

With respect to cut and fill batters, it is acknowledged that, due to the existing topography of the site, the future works will include the creation of batter slopes. In order to control potential erosion, visual and landscape related effects associated with this Envelope Engineering recommend that provisions of the Plimmerton Farm Zone chapter seek to require that batters will be kept at a maximum 1 vertical in 2 horizontal grades (both cut and fill slopes) to allow topsoil to be easily established on the batter slopes allowing for quick revegetation.

Earthworks, Erosion and Sediment Control Principles

Earthworks Section,

Stormwater Section,

Subdivision Section,

Precinct Sections

Precinct Plan including Batter Slope Typologies



Notwithstanding this, Envelope Engineering acknowledge that there will be instances across the site where batters will need to be steeper than this for several reasons:

• Minimising the stream reclamation distance as a roadway crosses an existing stream, where a batter gets close to an SNA or wetland areas to avoid the batter encroaching onto the SNA or wetland

• Where existing slopes are steep, to minimise the height of the batter where appropriate so rather than a very high 1 in 2 batter, the batter could be significantly reduced in height by using a grade of 1 in 1.5 or 1 in 1.

Where steeper batters are proposed, Envelope recommended that provisions of the Plimmerton Farm Zone chapter allow for benching at suitable intervals (no greater than 8m) to allow for planting / vegetation to be quickly and easily established on the benches while the batter face itself will take longer to establish vegetation therefore breaking up the height of the batters with band of quickly established vegetation. Envelope also recommend that all batters be grassed or planted and that provisions be included in the Plimmerton Farm Zone chapter to ensure this.

Introduction of a specific ‘bulk earthworks’ provision to ensure that earthworks are assessed at the time of subdivision. This will ensure that the proposed finished contours can be assessed as they relate to proposed subdivision boundaries. Should all necessary earthworks take place in the bulk earthworks phase, this will limit the necessity to undertake secondary earthworks on the site. Information requirements for a bulk earthworks consent include:

• A draft subdivision scheme plan identifying the location of future allotments with respect to proposed finished contour levels.

• An Earthworks Staging Plan that outlines the staging of the works and identifies the total volume and area of land to be exposed in any one time.

• A Site Management Plan that includes an assessment of the proposal against the erosion and sediment control principles (see below) and details sediment and erosion control, dust control, vibration and noise, traffic, hours of operation, health and safety and any other measures employed to manage the impact on adjacent properties and other sensitive environments such as the Taupō Swamp.

• Landscape Plan prepared by a suitably qualified expert that details batter slope and retaining planting (including plant species, size), on-going management and legal protection of planted batter slopes.

In response to the visibility of the site, the Plimmerton Farm Zone chapter seeks to address additional earthworks controls in relation to gradients, heights and planting of batter slopes, earthworks staging, and site rehabilitation works. The batter provisions specifically reference typical batter slope sections that will form part of the ‘Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan’.



As future development enabled via the rezoning of the site involves carrying out earthworks on moderately steep land adjacent to a number of streams and upstream of the Taupō Swamp, development of robust erosion and sediment controls is important.

Further, Envelope outlined in Section 3.1 of the Infrastructure Report that any disturbance to existing ground removes the existing vegetative cover and potentially allows erosion of the bare ground to occur. The report also notes that hilly sites are particularly prone to this during high rainfall events and without adequate controls in place sediment can be mobilised and that sediment can damage the environment downstream of the site by covering the ground surface including streams beds with silt and clay and directly damaging aquatic life. Envelope considers that the risk of generating erosion is proportional to the surface area exposed, the duration of earthworks, and the rainfall occurrences during the earthworks process.

In order to mitigate potential adverse erosion and sediment control effects and due to the sensitive nature of downstream environments, in addition to the bespoke bulk earthworks provisions, Envelope recommend that more conservative design parameters (in comparison to the guidelines outlined in the ‘Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for the Wellington Region’ for sizing of the erosion and sediment controls are employed. Envelope considers that this will have the effect of making the controls more resilient to rain events that are heavier, higher intensity, or more prolonged than expected and that they will add capacity and flexibility to manage the sediment from typical design level rain events.

The measures, that are proposed to be included in the Plimmerton Farm Zone Chapter as ‘Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles’ include general principles in relation to minimising disturbance, protecting steep slopes, stripping of topsoil, compaction, stabilisation, perimeter controls and erosion controls. Design principles are also proposed that include:

• Sizing sediment retention ponds to hold one third more capacity for the same volume of disturbance

• Installing sediment retention ponds where they can be utilised for multiple catchments

• Including baffles on sediment retention ponds for catchments larger than 1.5ha to improve settling conditions and prevent wind induced movement of sediment.

• Staging of earthworks to ensure that only runoff from the open area of earthworks is diverted to the sediment retention pond.

• Ensuring all controls are installed before the commencement of the land disturbing activity for each stage.

• Sizing decanting earth bunds to be built one third larger than the requirements set out in the Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for the Wellington Region



• Requiring secondary protection (i.e. double silt fences) in high risk areas i.e. where earthworks are situated close to SNAs or wetlands.

Geotechnical Work Undertaken Links

Engeo Ltd was commissioned to provide a Geotechnical Assessment Report (Attachment 12) for the site. The purpose of the Geotechnical Assessment was to specifically comment on potential site geotechnical challenges / constraints relevant to the proposed rezoning of the site and anticipated future development and provide additional information on where these areas are located, while providing potential engineering solutions.

Due to the varied topography of the site, the following maps were prepared:

• A geotechnical constraints map based on slope topography

• A map highlighting areas where cut and fill works may be acceptable.

• A geotechnical features map, indicating geotechnical and geological features that have been observed by aerial geo morphological mapping.

RMA s6(h)

RPS

Geotechnical Assessment Report – Engeo (Attachment 12)


The report identifies potential site hazards, that are summarised below.

Slope Instability

Slope instability may affect future development in some areas and recommend measures to ensure such hazards can be appropriately mitigated (refer following sections).

Global Instability

Deep seated, large scale failures occur where a deep weathering soil profile overlies a non-weathered rock material may potentially occur at the site, due to evidence of large scale historic slip scarps.

Shallow Seated Instability

Shallow surface failures of the soil mantle on the site slopes could potentially occur as a result of prolonged rainfall, or seismic events.

Seismic Hazard – Ground Shaking

The combined earthquake hazard map for Porirua City indicates that the area has a low combined earthquake hazard rating. This is derived from a moderate slope failure hazard, variable ground shaking hazard, no liquefaction hazard and no tsunami hazard. Engeo however note that the maps are regional in nature and that the hazard potential indicated on the maps does not necessarily apply to any specific site.



As a consequence of a high water table and lateral changes from river floodplain and swamp environments, variable foundation conditions impose constraints on building design and construction.

Seismic Hazard – Fault Rupture

There are no known faults on the site and that the likelihood of fault rupture is low.

Liquification

Quaternary sediments, such as the assumed alluvial deposits underlying the flat south-western area, are generally poorly consolidated and that variable foundation conditions, as a consequence of a high water table and lateral changes from stream floodplain and swamp environments, may impose some constraints on building design and construction.

Settlement

At the large flat, low lying area of the site, static settlement will be prevalent. Machine boreholes to the west of the site indicate that alluvial soils may exist to a depth greater than 16 metres below ground level. This indicates that a thick layer of soft, compressible material may exist at the site that will settle depending on water fluctuations, and applied loading conditions.

Erosion

The majority of the loess material will be removed through bulk earthworks, however, if areas are to remain, water flow will need to be controlled over these areas.


The key geotechnical considerations for site development are slope gradient and soft compressible / liquefiable ground.

In response to slope gradient, the Precinct Plan has identified areas of the site that are too steep to develop. In addition, the draft plan change provisions also include limiting the gradients of roads and batter slopes, requiring the planting of batter slopes and requiring the stabilization of earthworks. These approaches are appropriate to avoid and mitigate the topographical constraints of the site.

“Steep slopes” identified in the Geotechnical Assessment have been incorporated into the Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas that are excluded from built development.

The location and extent of precincts illustrated on the Precinct Plan have been developed on the basis of, among other things, the identification of construction opportunities / difficulties as illustrated on the geotechnical constraints map. The map identifies areas A and B that are gentle to moderately grading slopes that will likely be appropriate for cut to fill earthworks to create relatively level flat lot areas, therefore requiring reduced engineering and construction difficulty.

Planning Maps

BORAs


Precinct Plan

Precinct provisions



In summary, the report identifies that there are no geotechnical reasons why future development that will be enabled through rezoning, and the adoption of a precinct plan, cannot occur on the site from a geotechnical perspective.

Engeo also recommend that site / stage specific investigation earthworks design and the identification of suitable building platforms is undertaken at in future resource consent stages.

On the basis of the conclusions reached in the Geotechnical Investigation Report, there are no significant geotechnical constraints that would appear to prevent or pose significant impediments to residential development of the land proposed for rezoning.

Infrastructure Work Undertaken Links

The Infrastructure Report (Attachment 13) was prepared by Envelope Engineering.

In addition, a Stormwater Management Site Assessment was prepared by The Urban Engineers. The Stormwater Assessment is discussed above.

RPS Policy 58


Stormwater Management Site Assessment (Attachment 6)

Key Considerations

The Infrastructure Report evaluates the feasibility of wastewater, water, electricity, gas and telecommunications supply to service development facilitated by the rezoning of the site.

Recommendations

Based on an assessment of the existing infrastructure, investigations on-site, discussions with Council and other service providers, and preliminary design, Envelope Engineering confirm they are satisfied that development enabled via rezoning of the site can be adequately serviced.

Urban Design Work Undertaken Links

An Urban Design Report (Attachment 14) was prepared by GHDWoodhead. Graeme McIndoe of McIndoe Urban reviewed the Urban Design Report.

The assessment sought to, from an urban design perspective, understand and assess the contextual issues and opportunities relating to the future development of the site. The assessment identified opportunities and constraints in relation to the site’s unique location and environment and included recommendations to ensure that the design response gives appropriate regard to such opportunities and constraints.

RPS Objective 22, Wellington Region Urban Design Principles

NZ Urban Design Protocol

Urban Design Report - GHDWoodhead (Attachment 14)



The Urban Design Report was informed by the Urban Design Compendium, New Zealand Urban Design Protocol and the Wellington Region Urban Design Principles of the RPS.


The Urban Design Assessment observed that:

• The site has a close relationship with Plimmerton but considering its size and capacity for urban development, should be seen as part of the greater developed urbanised area around the Porirua Harbour;

• Given the size of the site, development is likely to occur over a long period of time and can support a mix of land uses;

• Approximately half of the site is located within 2km of the Plimmerton train station which provides regular and convenient rail serves into Wellington CBD;

• SH1’s highway status is likely to be revoked upon operation of Transmission Gully, however this portion of road will still function as an important link between Porirua and Paraparaumu and further north. The proximity to high order transport infrastructure is an asset and an opportunity and highlights the need to utilise the land resource in a responsible way;

• The site is incised by numerous drainage corridors which are often vegetated. There are also wetland areas which retain and filter water prior to leaving the site and entering the Taupō Stream or Taupō Swamp;

• With a variation in elevation of approximately 200m, the site forms part of the existing rural backdrop to Plimmerton, which lies between the ridgelines and the coast. As such, it is visible from many publicly accessible viewpoints and contributes to Plimmerton’ s sense of place. The Urban Design Assessment includes a site visibility analysis from 10 surrounding viewpoints. The analysis finds that the middle and higher slopes are predominantly more visible from the majority of the viewpoints; and,

• The topography of the site is varied and is characterised by rolling hills, incised with drainage channels. Only approximately 20% of the site is of a gradient gentler than 1:5. Development will therefore likely require significant earthworks for infrastructure and cutting and filling to provide platforms.


The Urban Design Report recommended:

• Respecting natural drainage patterns where feasible;

• Minimising impervious surfaces on lots;

• Utilising retaining walls to reduce the total amount of grading required;

• Alignment of allotments to follow hillside contours;

Precinct Plan



• Avoiding encroachment of development into areas with sensitive ecological values;

• Cluster development and infrastructure to minimise the need for grading;

• Locating dwellings close together on higher ground and surrounding open space managed collectively in the location shown on the draft Precinct Plan;

• Provide flexibility and allowances for irregular lot sizes and shapes in order to maximise the number of steep hillsides to be preserved; and,

• Locate buildings close to streets with garden space falling to the rear site boundary; integrate buildings within the topography, which includes providing steps in building foundations, and employing varying building platforms.

The Urban Design Report, coupled with evaluations of the other technical experts has culminated in the preparation of a constraints plan and opportunities plan that have formed the basis of the development of the Precinct Plan.

Medium Density Residential Feasibility Work Undertaken Links

The Property Group were commissioned to assess the feasibility of medium density residential development in Porirua, as part of the District Plan Review. The work resulted in two reports:

• Medium Density Residential Development Feasibility Assessment (Attachment 15); and

• Medium Density Residential Development Feasibility Assessment Study Addendum (Site Amalgamation) (Attachment 16).

RPS

Medium Density Residential Development Feasibility Assessment – The Property Group (Attachment 15)

Medium Density Residential Development Feasibility Assessment Study Addendum (Site Amalgamation) – The Property Group (Attachment 16)

Key Considerations

Current challenges in medium density housing in Porirua:

• Medium density housing projects in existing urban areas tend to be logistically and physically more complicated than traditional stand-alone constructions. There are higher design and engineering costs associated with maximising the yield on sites which are often already constrained.

• The rising cost of both land and construction is making it difficult to build new affordable homes in existing urban areas.

• There is limited availability of suitable land in existing urban areas.

Factors behind successful medium density developments

• Smaller, standalone medium density developments in existing urban areas have been successful where land was acquired at a low market rate, for example, where a rundown older property becomes available. Also,



where a development opportunity becomes available on existing property, for example, where a property which has been held in speculation now provides an opportunity due to a change in land use zone or site restrictions become more favourable.

• Construction companies currently undertaking successful medium density development tend to be those that can achieve efficiencies in construction costs, for example by providing most services in house rather than using subcontractors or by using streamlined construction techniques (e.g. prefabricated homes).

• Medium density development undertaken as part of larger scale developments (e.g. Kenepuru Landings on the former hospital site at Kenepuru) have been successful by way of achieving construction efficiencies across the entire site and, unlike developments within existing urban areas, have not been required to fund the demolition and/or removal of existing dwellings.

Recommendations

NA

Summary and Conclusion as to Suitability of Development and Assessment of Potential Environmental Effects

(175) The assessments and analysis undertaken in the accompanying technical reports that are summarised above, confirm that, subject to adherence to recommendations made with respect to the Precinct Plan and proposed Plimmerton Farm Zone chapter, that the site is suitable for urban development.

(176) Overall, the actual or potential adverse effects arising from implementation of the Precinct Plan through the proposed Plan Change can be appropriately managed and mitigated via the implementation of the resource management approach included in the proposed Plimmerton Farm Zone chapter provisions.

(177) In addition, it is considered that the Plan Change will have many positive effects. Anticipated positive outcomes arising from the Plan Change include:

• Enabling a high quality development that will be significant for Porirua City;

• Provision for the continued and coherent expansion of the City and future commercial opportunities will provide positive effects to the City;

• Provision for development that is in accordance with Councils Urban Growth Strategy;

• An integrated open space and reserves network incorporating SNAs and other areas with identified ecological, landscape and open space values;

• The sustainable management of stormwater through the application of Water Sensitive Design techniques;



• Provision for employment opportunities;

• A legible Precinct Plan which provides for connectivity and assists with the establishment of a positive sense of place and identity for Plimmerton Farm;

• Scheduling of SNAs; and,

• The introduction of provisions to maintain the landscape values of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape.

(178) The Precinct Plan development process has identified that Plimmerton Farm is an appropriate area to be utilised for residential and commercial development.



Options to Progress the Plan Change (179) Given Plimmerton Farm is suitable for urban development, analysis is required to outline the

various RMA options and tools to undertake that development, and achieve the objectives for the Proposed Plan Change. These options are discussed in the following sections.

Retain Rural Zone (180) The Rural Zone in the Operative District Plan is concerned with rural activities. It does not

provide for urban development, and as such would not achieve the vision for the Proposed Plan Change. The objectives and policies for the Rural Zone are incompatible with extensive urban development, which mean that achieving resource consent to change land use would be unlikely.

Use Operative District Plan Zones and Overlays (181) Consideration has been given to applying other Operative District Plan zones, such as the

Suburban, Recreation and Public Open Space zones to the Plimmerton Farm Area. However there are a number of problems which could arise from this approach, such as:

• The Suburban Zone provisions do not provide for the range of housing types that the NPS-UDC envisages or the densities that the RPS allows, and the expert analysis confirms the site is capable of accommodating in certain locations;

• There is no provision within the Operative District Plan to appropriately give effect to the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape;

• There is no provision within the Operative District Plan to provide for the Significant Natural Areas within the site;

• There is no provision within the Operative District Plan which appropriately provides for a mix of uses at identified locations within the site;

• There is no provision within the Operative District Plan which provides for Medium Density Housing;

• There is no provision within the Operative District Plan which appropriately manages natural hazards; and

• There is limited provision within the Operative District Plan to enforce best practice stormwater management.

(182) Overall, use of the Operative District Plan Zones and Overlays would not provide the necessary certainty to achieve the objectives for the Proposed Plan Change.

Rely on the Proposed District Plan Process (183) Porirua City Council is currently preparing a proposed District Plan. Engagement commenced

on a draft version of the Proposed District Plan in September 2019. Public notification of the Proposed District Plan is scheduled for 2020.

(184) Consideration was given to including the proposed rezoning of Plimmerton Farm as part of the Proposed District Plan. However, given the potential timing of the Proposed District Plan process, the identified need in the Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 for additional land to be zoned for residential purposes in Porirua City and the Council’s obligation under the NPS-UDC to



ensure that sufficient feasible land is provided for to meet housing demand, rezoning the site through the Proposed District Plan process was not considered to provide for development in a satisfactory timeframe.

(185) In saying that, the Proposed Plan Change has been developed to align with the Proposed District Plan as much as possible. The draft provisions of the proposed plan change reflect the new layers of protection to be introduced as part of the Proposed District Plan, including Significant Natural Areas, Special Amenity Landscapes and Natural Hazard Areas as well as providing for Medium Density Housing.

Bespoke Plimmerton Farm Zone (186) The Plimmerton Farm Zone objectives provide for residential and business development to

meet expected demand, promote appropriate connectivity and emphasise the site’s landscape character and ecological values. The objectives are given effect to through a bespoke zone and precincts detailing how various areas within the zone should be managed.

Preferred Option (187) Given the certainty that the bespoke Zone Chapter and Precinct Plan offers, this is the preferred

option to progress the Proposed Plan Change.



Consultation (188) Consultation and engagement on the urbanisation of Plimmerton Farm commenced in 2008.

Over the course of the last 11 years this conversation with the community and stakeholders has become more targeted, culminating in the most recent consultation and engagement on the draft Plan Change.

(189) The consultation has provided the opportunity for stakeholders, interested groups and the community to find out more, ask questions and give their views on the Proposed Plan Change content including the Precinct Plan as well as on Council’s intention to use the Streamlined Planning Process (SPP). Feedback received has informed the content of the Precinct Plan and the Proposed Plan Change provisions.

(190) In recognition of the absence of appeal rights under the SPP, Council and Plimmerton Developments Limited have applied a comprehensive and targeted consultation and engagement approach. This is to ensure that those either potentially affected by, or interested in, the future development of Plimmerton Farm have had an opportunity to engage in the planning process from the outset, before plans are finalised and subject to a formal statutory process. Taking this approach has enabled more people and organisations to become familiar with the proposal and communicate their thoughts than would typically be achieved through the formal planning process or as part of a city-wide consultation exercise. The Precinct Plan and plan change provisions have been refined to ensure they respond to both the unique characteristics of the site as well as taking into account, the aspirations of those with an interest in the area.

Engagement and Communications preceding the Plimmerton Farm Proposed Plan Change

(191) The urbanisation of Plimmerton Farm has been part of an ongoing and evolving conversation with the community and stakeholders over the course of a number of years. The consultation and engagement undertaken as part of the development of the following documents has been an important precursor to the consultation on the Proposed Plan Change. They have formed part of the narrative when engaging on the Proposed Plan Change, as they establish Council’s continuing intention to rezone Plimmerton Farm to provide additional housing supply in the City. It also provides confirmation of Council’s continual testing of this intention with the community.

(192) In developing the draft Precinct Plan (that was used for initial consultation) the feedback received as a result of consultation on these preceding documents, particularly in relation to the Northern Growth Area, was considered.

Document Comment

Porirua Development Framework (2009)

Prepared to influence how and where the city will physically develop over time.

The Framework identified Plimmerton Farm as a potential future growth area. The recommendations included undertaking a future development study, resulting in the work associated with the Northern Growth Structure Area (see row below). The Framework was prepared following extensive public consultation.



https://poriruacity.govt.nz/documents/1091/Porirua_Development_Framework_2009.pdf

The Northern Growth Area Structure Plan (2016)

Provides a high level spatial plan, as well as a set of investigation and management actions to guide the area’s development for over 20 years. Development of the Structure Plan was influenced by the Porirua Development Framework and Regional plans and strategies including the Wellington Regional Strategy and the Regional Land Transport Strategy. It was prepared in consultation with the community. This included a number of workshops through the different phases of its development.

The Northern Growth Structure Plan anticipated that a district plan change would be progressed to rezone the land within the growth area from rural to a combination of residential, rural residential, and commercial zones.

The implementation plan provided indicated Council’s intention to rezone the land in the short term (note: the recommended timeframe of 2 years to prepare a plan change was not executed).

https://poriruacity.govt.nz/documents/512/Northern_Growth_Area_Structure_Plan_-_November_2014.pdf

Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 (2019)

The Porirua Growth Strategy (The Growth Strategy) was developed through extensive public and stakeholder consultation that commenced in September 2018. This involved working with stakeholders, community members and partners to test the spatial framework and principles of the draft strategy. It also built on the feedback received through the Long-term Plan, District Plan “Make your Mark” processes, informal feedback, as well as through Council’s Village Planning programmes.

The resulting draft Growth Strategy was released for public consultation on 20 December 2018. Public feedback closed on 8 February, respondents were given the opportunity to present their feedback to Council in early March and the final Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 was adopted on the 20th of March 2019.

A concept plan that provided a summary of the draft Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan and assessments undertaken by the Plimmerton Developments Limited consultant group were included in the Draft Growth Strategy documentation as a greenfield development site. This provided interested members of the community and stakeholders with a better understanding of how the site could be urbanised and the opportunities and constraints considered to inform both the anticipated yield and draft precinct plan. The draft growth strategy documentation also included commentary on rezoning and development (including timing) of the ‘Northern Growth Area’.

Council adopted the Growth Strategy at a Council meeting on 20 March 2019. It reconfirmed the Northern Growth Area, including Plimmerton Farm, as a area for urban expansion. This was communicated back to the community through media releases and letters/emails to those who submitted on the draft.

https://poriruacity.govt.nz/documents/2431/Porirua_Growth_Strategy_2048.pdf









Plimmerton Farm Phase One Consultation (193) “Phase One” consultation for the development of Plimmerton Farm was undertaken by the land

owner prior to Council’s decision to initiate a plan change.

Development of the Draft Precinct Plan For Public Consultation (Early 2018 – Early 2019)

(194) On purchase of Plimmerton Farm by Plimmerton Developments Limited, Council officers advised Plimmerton Developments Limited that Council would consider the rezoning of the site. Plimmerton Developments Limited then set up a consultant group was formed to undertake site investigations (including analysis of opportunities and constraints) and undertake a design-led process to develop a concept for the area that would form the basis of a precinct plan that would be released for community consultation.

(195) During this initial process meetings and workshops were held with Ngāti Toa, stakeholders and other interested parties to provide feedback on their expectations for the site and provide advice on key features of the site.

Phase Two – Community, Stakeholder and Mana Whenua Engagement

(196) There has been extensive consultation and engagement on the Proposed Plan Change.

(197) Following its decision to seek approval to use the SPP and the release of the decisions on the Growth Strategy Council commenced targeted public engagement on the Proposed Plan Change and draft Precinct Plan. This initially included the release of information on its intention to progress a plan change for Plimmerton Farm using the SPP and was followed by open days, the provision of material on its website, newspaper articles and meetings with interested parties and identified stakeholders.

Public Open Days, Website and Email Communications and Feedback (198) Opportunities to provide comment on the Draft Precinct Plan were provided through two open

days / drop-in sessions on 6 June 2019 and 29 June 2019. Feedback forms seeking comment on the draft precinct plan were available at the open days and on Council’s website and an email address ([email protected]) created for members of the public to email with comments and questions. In addition, verbal feedback/ comments provided at the open days were also captured and, together with written feedback, used to inform and refine the draft precinct plan.

(199) The open days were advertised via Council’s Facebook Page, on the Council’s website (front page) and local papers. This included an article in Scoop:

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1905/S00632/open-days-for-plimmerton-farm-district-plan-change.htm

(200) The feedback provided at the open days informed further investigations and refinement of the precinct plan and associated plan change provisions.

(201) With over 250 people attending the open days, the targeted engagement enabled a wide spectrum of the community to become familiar with the proposal and have an opportunity to inform the precinct plan. In general, while there were some reservations regarding some of the


mailto:[email protected]




specifics of the proposal, there appears to be a high level of support for rezoning of the Plimmerton Farm site.

(202) Feedback provided through the open days and the online feedback forms is summarised, together with the Proposed Plan Change response, in Figure 6 below:

Figure 6: Feedback summary table



Engagement with Mana Whenua (203) Mana whenua have a special cultural and spiritual relationship with the environment. This

relationship with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu, and other taonga are a matter of national importance under the Resource Management Act 1991. The Local Government Act 2002 also recognises this relationship and requires local authorities to provide opportunities for Māori to be involved in decision making processes and consultation.

(204) Council has actively engaged with its iwi partners, Ngāti Toa, in the development of the Proposed Plan Change. This has included attending a number of meetings, including a Hongoeka Marae Committee meeting, site visits and providing information including draft reports and freshwater principles. At the meeting with the Hongoeka Marae Committee, Ngāti Toa members confirmed that, the Ngāti Toa Rangitira Statement as an appropriate document to use as a basis for incorporating into future water management provisions for the site. Comments received from Ngāti Toa members have been incorporated into the final draft freshwater management principles and provision for cultural harvesting has been incorporated into the rule framework for the Proposed Plan Change.

(205) A Cultural Impact Assessment is currently being prepared by Ngāti Toa for the proposal and is expected to be provided prior to notification of the Proposed Plan Change. A full copy of the draft plan change has been provided to Ngāti Toa for comment. While no specific feedback has been received feedback provided on behalf of Ngāti Toa as part of the District Plan Review has been considered.

(206) Engagement is continuing with Ngāti Toa Rangatira. Feedback to date has centred on provisions for cultural harvesting of, for example, weaving resources including harakeke and kiekie. Council’s implementation of advice received to date is in accordance with Section 32 (4A). Ngāti Toa Rangatira has provided a letter of support for the Proposed Plan Change (Attachment 18) and a Cultural Impact Assessment (Attachment 5).

(207) There is no other iwi participation legislation relevant to the area of the Proposed Plan Change. There is also no relevant iwi participation legislation or Mana Whakahono ā Rohe iwi participation arrangement entered into under subpart 2 of Part 5 of the RMA.

(208) Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira was formally provided with a copy of the draft Proposed Plan Change under Clause 3 and 4A to the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991. No additional advice was received.

Key Stakeholders (209) Stakeholder consultation has also been central to the development of the Proposed Plan

Change.

(210) Details of the Key Stakeholders, their role and the engagement undertaken is discussed below:

Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) (211) In recognition of GWRC’s dual role within both the policy setting (Wellington Regional Policy

Statement and Proposed Natural Resources Plan) as well as its regulatory functions (regional consents) a number of meetings have been held with GWRC.

(212) Engagement with GWRC has included meetings, information sharing (draft reports, stormwater principles, draft provisions), workshops.



(213) GWRC were provided copies of the draft stormwater, subdivision, ecology, natural hazard and earthworks sections of the draft Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan chapter as well as the Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles and the Stormwater Principles. The latter was workshopped with Council and WWL in mid-August 2019.

(214) Comments were received from GWRC in relation to the freshwater principles and earthworks principles and have been incorporated into the final principles that form part of the plan change application.

(215) GWRC officers were also involved in meetings with Council and NZTA to discuss multi-modal transport namely the provision of opportunities in relation to walking and cycling and to provide better connectively to existing public transport networks.

(216) A paper went to the GWRC Environment Committee on 8 August 2019 recommending that GWRC provide a letter of support for Council’s application to use the SPP. A full copy of the paper is available on the GWRC website4. A resolution was made to accept the recommendation and a letter of support has been provided (Attachment 17).

(217) A copy of the Draft Plan Change was sent to GWRC as a Clause 3 to the First Schedule of the RMA party for comment. Further meetings were held to discuss the comments and subsequent amendments were made in response to a number of the matters raised. A summary of the matters raised, and the Plan Change’s responses are provided as Attachment 19.

Minister of Transport, New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) (218) Consultation with NZTA has included meetings and the provision of information (draft reports,

draft provisions), workshops.

(219) NZTA were provided, for comment, a copy of the draft Transport Assessment, the draft transport section of draft Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan chapter, roading typologies, road construction standards, indicative concepts of future access to the site from SH1 and indicative plans of the flood detention basins in the southern portion of the site.

(220) A copy of the Draft Plan Change was sent to Minister of Transport as a Clause 3 to the First Schedule of the RMA party for comment. On behalf of the Minister, the Ministry of Transport did not provide comment but referred the Draft Plan Change to NZ Transport Agency. NZ Transport Agency provided additional feedback on the plan change provisions. A summary of the matters raised and the Plan Change’s responses are provided as Attachment 19.

Department of Conservation (DOC) (221) Consultation with DOC has been undertaken in acknowledgement of the ecological values of

the site and DOC’s role in conservation and management of wetland areas.

(222) Engagement has included the provision of information (Freshwater Principles, stormwater chapter and background reports), a briefing meeting and a site visit. The key matters discussed with DOC related to on-site ecological management and protection and water management. DOC also provided comment on the proposed Statement of Expectations to be put forward in the SPP application for consideration. The comments resulted in changes to the Freshwater Management Statement.

(223) A copy of the Draft Plan Change was sent to DOC as a Clause 3 to the First Schedule of the RMA party for comment. Comments received from DOC were considered and a number of

4 http://www.gw.govt.nz/assets/council-reports/Meeting_Documents/7538_Agenda_Environment%20Committee%208%20August%202019,%20Order%20Paper.pdf



amendments to the plan change provisions undertaken in response. A summary of the matters raised and the Plan Change’s responses are provided as Attachment 19.

Ministry of Education (224) A draft version of the Precinct Plan identified land that was considered suitable for a primary

school. Education and the pressure growth would place on existing schools within the area was a matter that was raised regularly during the open days.

(225) A number of meetings have been held between Council and Ministry of Education. Some of these have been to discuss growth within Porirua City and others more specifically in relation to Plimmerton Farm and the Northern Growth Area. Feedback from the open days in relation to education and schools has been provided to Ministry of Education and a meeting for Council to present to the reference group is scheduled for October 2019.

(226) A copy of the Draft Plan Change was sent to the Minister of Education as a Clause 3 to the First Schedule of the RMA party for comment. Comments received were considered and amendments to the precinct plan undertaken in response. A summary of the matters raised and the Plan Change’s responses are provided as Attachment 19.

Ministry for the Environment (227) Engagement with Ministry for the Environment officials has been primarily in relation to

Council’s intent to make an application to use the SPP. This has involved meetings, site visits and providing progress updates and material on the Proposed Plan Change. Council has also been engaging with Ministry for the Environment with respect to the use of the National Planning Standards. A copy of the draft Plan Change was provided to the Minister for the Environment in accordance with Clause 3 to the First Schedule of the RMA – no feedback was received.

Minister for Māori Development (228) A copy of the draft Plan Change was provided to the Minister for Māori Development and Te

Puni Kōkiri in accordance with Clause 3 to the First Schedule of the RMA. A summary of the matters raised and the Plan Change’s responses are provided as Attachment 19. Te Puni Kōkiri’s response noted:

Our preference is that the Council continues to engage directly with whānau, hapū, iwi and Māori entities (including urban Māori) on changes to your District Plan, as they are the most likely to be impacted (or not) by your proposals, and will likely prefer to have direct engagement with you on the proposals, but we appreciate your update.

Ministers for Housing and Urban Development (229) A copy of the draft Plan Change was provided to the Minister for Urban Development and the

Minister for Housing in accordance with Clause 3 to the First Schedule of the RMA. A summary of the matters raised and the Plan Change’s responses are provided as Attachment 19. The Minister’s response noted:

It is encouraging to see local authorities recognising the need to increase housing capacity.



Neighbouring Councils (230) A copy of the draft Plan Change was provided to neighbouring city and district councils in

accordance with Clause 3 to the First Schedule of the RMA. No comments were received.

(231) Consultation also included presenting at the Wellington Regional Planning Managers Forum, providing an overview of the Plimmerton Farm Proposed Plan Change and the Streamlined Planning Process and providing a copy of the draft Plan Change for comment.

(232) Meetings with Greater Wellington Regional Council also took place.

Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust (QEII) (233) Engagement commenced between Plimmerton Developments Limited and QEII prior to

Council’s decision to initiate the proposed plan change. QEII was identified early on as a key stakeholder given that it owns the majority of Taupō Swamp (see Figure 10 below), which was recognised by Plimmerton Developments Limited’s ecologist as being a wetland with outstanding indigenous biodiversity value (and is now identified as such in the PNRP as a result of decisions on submissions).

(234) A number of meetings and a site visit have taken place. QEII has been provided, for comment, draft ecology, natural hazard and stormwater sections of the draft Plimmerton Farm provisions, memorandums discussing the earthworks rationale for future development, draft Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles and Freshwater Principles. Council has responded to a number of emails from QEII in relation to this material.

(235) Through the engagement process QEII staff have voiced their concerns to Council about its intention to use the SPP and the potential effects of development of Plimmerton Farm on Taupō Swamp. This has been recorded in written correspondence to Council and in a statement to GWRC. Part of the opposition to the Proposed Plan Change stemmed from the extent to which Plimmerton Farm was located within the Taupō Swamp Catchment. This matter was resolved in October 2019 when QEII acknowledged the Taupō Swamp catchment extent as identified by David Wilson, stormwater engineer: The Urban Engineers for Plimmerton Developments Limited.

(236) Feedback provided by QEII has informed changes to the draft plan change provisions.

Friends of Taupō Swamp and Catchment (FOTS) (237) Friends of Taupō Swamp and Catchment is a not for profit Incorporated Society and also a

registered Charity (Number CC56756). FOTS is interested in the protection and enhancement of the Taupō Swamp and catchment, including its ecosystems.

(238) Engagement with FOTS has included meetings, site visits and information sharing. In addition to this, members of FOTS attended the first public open days and discussed ecology and water management issues with project team experts that were in attendance at the open days.

(239) Porirua Harbour Trust members were also included a workshop session to discuss the proposed water management aspects of the proposal with representatives from Porirua Harbour Trust, and Guardians of Pāuatahanui Inlet, Council officers and ecology and stormwater management experts from the project team.

(240) FOTS were also provided, for comment, draft ecology, natural hazard and stormwater sections of the draft Plimmerton Farm Zone chapter, memorandums discussing the earthworks rationale



for future development, draft Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles and Stormwater Principles.

(241) Council understands that FOTS and GWRC had agreed that an independent assessment of wetlands would be undertaken by an ecologist. Recent correspondence from GWRC has confirmed that this is still being progressed (however has yet to take place).

Porirua Harbour Trust (PHT) & Guardians of Pauatahanui Inlet (GOPI) (242) PHT and GOPI represent two other community groups with a focus on the effects of

development on the Porirua Harbour and other related water bodies.

(243) Porirua Harbour Trust members were included a workshop session to discuss the proposed water management aspects of the proposal with representatives from FOTS, and GOPI, Council officers and ecology and stormwater management experts from the project team.

(244) FOTS were also provided, for comment, draft ecology, natural hazard and stormwater sections of the draft Plimmerton Farm Zone chapter, memorandums discussing the earthworks rationale for future development, draft Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles and Stormwater Principles. Feedback on these documents was provided from a representative of the Porirua Harbour Trust via email.

Saint Teresa’s Primary School and Saint Teresa’s Church (245) Saint Teresa’s Primary School and Saint Teresa’s Church are two separate entities. They are

located on James Street, separated from Plimmerton Farm by land owned by Jennian Homes and James Street.

(246) Engagement with Saint Teresa’s Primary School included meetings, sharing of information and follow up consultation.

(247) At the meeting, held at St Teresa’s Primary School, the key matters for discussion included flood issues and concerns as well as water management more generally (including provision for wastewater servicing).

Adjacent Landowners (248) Engagement with Saint Teresa’s Primary School, Saint Teresa’s Church and QEII National Trust

(all adjacent landowners) is described above.

(249) Council and project teams have also been involved in discussions with representatives of the owners of the ‘Grays Block’, a greenfield development site adjoining the sites south eastern boundary. While conversations regarding the relationship of development of Plimmerton Farm and future development of the Grays Block are ongoing, initial conversations with these parties has resulted in the inclusion of an indicative access point that will connect development of the two sites.

(250) A meeting was also held with representatives of the landowners undertaking a residential development of 5 James Street, a property that was previously part of the site until it was subdivided in 2015 following SH1 upgrades works that included the construction of James Street that cut off the development site from the main Plimmerton Farm site.

(251) A number of residents from surrounding area also attended the open day. Matters raised by these neighbouring property owners related primarily to potential construction effects and loss of views. A copy of the register of those who attended the open days is available on request



but has not been included due to contact details being included (names, telephone numbers, address and email).

Other Infrastructure Providers The Gas Hub/PowerCo

(252) Plimmerton Developments Limited consultants met with The Gas Hub early this 2019 and discussed the proposed development. The concept for Stage 1 and the draft Precinct Plan were shared. Advice was received about maintaining depths to the existing gas main that runs West to East through the site in terms of acceptable cover levels. Agreement to the proposal to relocate the gas main where it currently crosses the Precinct D and place it in the new proposed road was reached.

(253) Confirmation received that there is good capacity in the area to be able to supply the development with gas. Further consultation will take place at the resource consent / subdivision stage for Stage 1.

Wellington Electricity

(254) A meeting between Plimmerton Developments Limited consultants and Wellington Electricity took place in mid June. The proposal to underground the existing overhead transmission lines across the South Eastern corner of the site was discussed as well as the reticulation of the development itself.

Chorus New Zealand Limited

(255) No direct consultation with Chorus has taken place as this will take place as part of the resource consent design stage.

Post Consultation Precinct Plan Development (256) Further assessments have been undertaken with respect to stormwater, servicing, ecology,

urban design and landscape values. All of this information, together with feedback received during consultation and engagement, has informed the development of the Precinct Plan and the accompanying Plimmerton Farm Zone provisions.

(257) The feedback received led to the following refinements of the Draft Precinct Plan:

• Revision of the Precinct boundaries to align with the revised Special Amenity Landscape boundaries

• Identification of development areas within Precinct C

• All Significant Natural Areas have been identified on the Precinct Plan

• Creation of a proposed ecological corridor extending from the proposed new open space / wetland area to the new ecological wetland.

• Development of freshwater management principles that will apply to the site.

• Refinement of the movement network

• Further consideration of land use and subdivision effects to ensure amenity effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated for existing properties and within the new development itself.



• Reference to Taupō Swamp in the objectives and policies, recognising it’s elevated status as a wetland of outstanding indigenous biodiversity.

• Inclusion of a permitted activity rule for cultural harvesting.



Appropriateness, Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Proposed Plan Change Is the Proposed Plan Change the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA?

(258) The work completed in terms of implementing the NPS-UDC, including the subsequent HBA, confirms the serious shortage of residential housing and residential land supply in Porirua, particularly in the medium and long term.

(259) The Porirua Growth Strategy 2048 identifies greenfield opportunities for additional residential housing capacity in the City. These opportunities include the Northern Growth Corridor. Plimmerton Farm is a 384ha site at the southern end of the Northern Growth Corridor.

(260) Initial analysis indicated that the site is suitable for residential housing given it possesses a number of positive attributes for urbanisation, including:

• Proximity to Plimmertion Train Station;

• Accessibility to State Highway 1

• Adjoining existing Suburban Zone land;

• Proximity to existing Plimmerton amenities;

• Accessibility to Porirua City Centre; and

• Logical extensions from existing services and infrastructure.

(261) In depth investigation undertaken as part of informing the Proposed Plan Change has assessed the site’s constraints and attributes to determine its suitability for urban development. The investigations have identified:

• The ground conditions are suitable for built development;

• Natural hazards can be avoided or mitigated;

• Development can respect the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape;

• Development can protect Significant Natural Areas and enhance indigenous biodiversity opportunities more widely through the site;

• Development can respect cultural and archaeological heritage

• Development can maintain or enhance receiving environments, through high quality stormwater management and erosion and sediment;

• All modes of transport can be provided for; and

• Placemaking to create communities where people want to live through high quality urban design and diverse housing types that cater for a range of community needs.

(262) The investigations demonstrate that the site is suitable for extensive urban development in conjunction with the protection and enhancement of extensive areas of indigenous vegetation and habitats, wetlands, and Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape.



(263) The delivery of the Proposed Plan Change’s strategic objectives requires a District Plan framework that drives a detailed analysis within development proposals to result in high quality urban environments together with protected and enhanced landscapes and ecosystems.

(264) The existing Rural Objectives and Policies that apply to the site are incompatible with the desired level of urban development and environmental protections and enhancements. Therefore, a plan change to deliver the strategic objectives is the only realistic option.

(265) Using an existing zone in the Operative District Plan, such as Suburban, would not provide a suitable framework for delivering both housing and the range of environmental safeguards, protections and enhancements.

(266) Consequently, the creation of a new zone which builds on the extensive information base to create bespoke, targeted provisions that deal with the constraints and attributes within the site is appropriate.

(267) Different parts of the sites have different characteristics. Some areas are relatively flat and secluded, other parts are steep and highly visible from beyond the site. The southwestern part of the site is located within walking distance of Plimmerton Train Station and is capable of having higher residential densities than other parts of the site. The potential density can also support commercial and community services and facilities.

(268) Given these different characteristics, the new zone is to be split into different precincts, which provide for a range of appropriate urban development responses and housing types.

(269) The Proposed Plan Change achieves the sustainable management purpose of the Act by setting a relevant objective of providing for much needed residential housing while ensuring Part 2 matters are addressed.

Are the proposed provisions the most appropriate way to achieve the objective of the Proposed Plan Change?

(270) The Proposed Plan Change provisions are tailored to the site’s constraints and attributes, and set a framework for high quality residential and urban development while sustainably managing identified ecological and landscape attributes, and receiving environments.

(271) The appropriateness of the provisions are evaluated in the following sections.

Definitions (272) The Plimmerton Farm Zone uses its own set of definitions, which are the definitions of the draft

Porirua District Plan supplemented by Plimmerton Farm Zone-specific definitions needed to support the Plimmerton Farm Zone provisions plus definitions from the Operative District Plan needed to support the Operative District Plan provisions that apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone. The approach is necessary to prevent conflict between Operative Plan definitions and new Plimmerton Farm Zone definitions.

Strategic Objectives OBJECTIVES

PFZ-O1 Integrated Development

Development of Plimmerton Farm occurs in a comprehensive, structured and integrated way to increase housing supply, housing diversity and employment opportunities, resulting in:



1. Implementation of the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan;

2. A range of housing densities and typologies;

3. Compatible non-residential activities; and

4. High levels of amenity.

PFZ-O2 Landscapes and ecosystems

Landscapes and ecosystems are identified on the Planning Maps and managed through objectives, policies and rules.

PFZ-O3 Water Quality

Subdivision, use and development in Plimmerton Farm contribute to high water quality of receiving waters including Taupō Swamp, Taupō Stream, Kakaho Stream and Te Awarua-o-Porirua.

Why these provisions are included in the plan Links

The purpose of the Strategic Objectives for the Plimmerton Farm Zone is to:

1. Enable high quality urban development that includes a range of housing types and provides for higher-density residential development in locations close to employment, amenities and infrastructure.

2. Increase the supply and range of housing available in Porirua, providing sufficient development capacity for a housing yield of at least 1990 residential units;

3. Provide for high quality open space in a way that incorporates and protects Significant Natural Areas and Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas and respects the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape;

4. Incorporate freshwater management measures that provide for the recommendations included in the Te Awarua-o-Porirua Whaitua Implementation Programme (WIP) where they fall within the jurisdiction of Porirua City Council.

The Plimmerton Farm Zone recognises the need to balance the demands for residential development, environmental protection and provision of infrastructure to achieve sustainable management.

Subdivision, use and development are required to proceed in accordance with the Zone provisions.

How these provisions achieve the purpose of the RMA Links

The provisions make efficient use of a well-located land resource suitable for housing to achieve social and economic wellbeing while addressing Section 6 and 7 matters.

RMA s5, s6, s7

Costs and Benefits including Opportunities for Economic Growth and Employment

Links



• Enabling urban development provides for economic growth and employment, both during the construction phase and ongoing.

• Increases housing supply in an area with good access to public transport.

• In NZIER’s view the loss of the pastoral land for primary production is not significant.

• Provides the opportunity to secure the protection and ongoing active restoration and management of Significant Natural Areas and Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas.

Plimmerton Farm Development – Analysis of costs and benefits – NZIER (Attachment 1)

Risk of Acting or Not Acting if Information is Uncertain or Insufficient • Sufficient information is available to act on. The Housing and

Business Assessment shows that Council faces a shortfall in housing capacity in the medium and long terms. The plan change contributes to addressing the shortfall.

Housing and Business Assessment

Efficiency and Effectiveness

The efficiency of the proposed provisions is high because the benefits outweigh the costs.

The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high because the goals of providing for housing supply and housing diversity while protecting identified biodiversity and landscape values and water quality are achieved through the Precinct Plan and plan provisions.

Other Reasonably Practicable Options for Achieving the Objectives

Alternative strategic objectives are not reasonably practicable because they would fail to promote housing while safeguarding the environment.

Stormwater OBJECTIVES

SWPFZ-O1 Water Sensitive Design

Subdivision, use and development contribute to maintaining or improving the water quality of receiving waters, including Taupō Swamp, Taupō Stream, Kakaho Stream and Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour.

SWPFZ-O2 Hydraulic Neutrality

Subdivision, use and development achieve hydraulic neutrality.

POLICIES

SWPFZ-P1 Water Sensitive Design

Require all subdivision, use and development to incorporate water sensitive design that:



1. Is in accordance with the Regional Standard for Water Services dated May 2019 and the Water Sensitive Design for Stormwater: Treatment Device Design Guideline 2019, including ensuring they are designed to accommodate the volume and rate of stormwater runoff identified in those documents;

2. Retains and uses existing natural systems of stormwater management, without exceeding their existing capacities, so that stormwater is also naturally treated in accordance with mātauranga Māori to maintain and enhance its mauri before it is released into the receiving waters of Taupō Swamp, Taupō Stream, Kakaho Stream and Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour;

3. Avoids mixing waters of different catchments;

4. Provides for, protects and maintains overland flow paths;

5. Provides for access to and along waterbodies for maintenance;

6. Provides for stormwater treatment devices that are appropriately located and designed to ensure continued access for device inspection, maintenance and upgrade;

7. Require stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces in Precinct D and from all roads in Plimmerton Farm Zone to be treated to remove contaminants prior to discharge; and

8. Where feasible, may be used for other purposes (such as recreational facilities).

SWPFZ-P2 Hydraulic Neutrality

Require all scales of subdivision, use and development to achieve hydraulic neutrality as follows:

1. Provide for hydraulic neutrality facilities at catchment and sub-catchment scale that are designed to cater for all subsequent development in the catchment or sub-catchment;

2. Design the hydraulic neutrality facilities to cater for the following proportions of impervious surfaces:

a. 100% impervious roads in all Precincts and all development in Precinct D;

b. 70% impervious individual residential properties in Precinct A, B and C.

3. Require any increase in impervious surfaces in individual residential properties above 70% to address any impact on hydraulic neutrality by demonstrating the existing hydraulic neutrality facilities have capacity or by providing sufficient water storage for hydraulic neutrality on the residential property;

4. Provide for hydraulic neutrality facilities that are appropriately located and designed to ensure continued access for device inspection, maintenance and upgrade.

SWPFZ-P3 Building Materials

Require buildings and structures with copper or zinc building, cladding and roofing materials (including guttering and spouting) to achieve one of the following:

1. The building material must be finished in a manner that prevents water runoff from containing copper or zinc; or

2. The water runoff from the building materials must be treated to remove copper or zinc.


The approach to stormwater within the Plimmerton Farm Zone is to manage stormwater quantity and quality to protect receiving waters. Land use and development are required to be stormwater neutral and to treat all stormwater to remove contaminants prior to discharge to receiving waters including Taupō Swamp, Taupō Stream and Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour.

All scales of subdivision, use and development are required to use water sensitive design in accordance with regional standards, specifically designing to manage and treat stormwater to protect water quality.

Stormwater Management Assessment (Attachment 6)

Precinct rules and standards



Copper and zinc building materials are key sources of water contaminants so are required to be finished to avoid contamination or to have water runoff treated to remove the copper and zinc.

The rules that implement the Stormwater objectives and policies are located in the Precinct Sections.


The stormwater provisions give effect to the NPS Freshwater Management. NPS Freshwater Management


Links

• Managing stormwater quantity and quality close to source at the appropriate scale, making best use of natural systems, reducing volumes of peak runoff and avoiding contamination, is significantly more cost effective than building pipe networks to deal with maximum volumes of runoff from impervious surfaces and removing contaminants at the point of discharge to receiving waters.

• Water sensitive design and removing contaminants supports receiving waters.

• Hydraulic neutrality assists in flood hazard management, reducing costs that may be incurred from flooding.

Te Awarua-o-Porirua Whaitua Implementation Programme

Risk of Acting or Not Acting if Information is Uncertain or Insufficient Links

• Information about the benefits of water sensitive design and addressing stormwater quantity and quality close to source is well understood and implementable.

Efficiency and Effectiveness Links

• The efficiency of the proposed provisions is high because the benefits outweigh the costs.

• The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high because the goals are achieved.

Other Reasonably Practicable Options for Achieving the Objectives Links

Stormwater systems have traditionally been focused on pipe infrastructure to take water from source to receiving waters as rapidly as possible, without any treatment of contaminants. Such an approach is possible but is increasingly costly and fails to contribute to flood management or address water quality and aquatic habitats.



Transport OBJECTIVES

TRPFZ-O1 Transport Network

A safe, efficient, resilient and well-connected transport network that:

1. Is integrated with land use;

2. Meets local, regional and national transport needs;

3. Enables urban growth and economic development; and

4. Provides for all modes of transport.

TRPFZ-O2 High Trip Generating Use and Development

The safety and efficiency of the transport network is not significantly affected by use and development that generate high numbers of vehicle trips.

TRPFZ-O3 On-Site Transport Facilities

A transport network with safe and efficient on-site transport facilities.

POLICIES

TRPFZ-P1 Road Classification

Classify new roads based on their purpose, function and anticipated volume of traffic, using the New Zealand Transport Agency’s One Network classification.

TRPFZ-P2 New Roads and Movement Network

Provide for new road, cycle and pedestrian networks that are consistent with the movement network and road typologies in the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan, and:

1. Integrate and coordinate with the transport network including proposed transport infrastructure and service improvements;

2. Respond to site and topographical constraints;

3. Achieve the safe, efficient and effective functioning of the transport network;

4. Provide for public health and safety; and

5. Achieve the management of stormwater quality and quantity set out in SWPFZ-P1 and SWPFZ-P2.

TRPFZ-P3 High Trip Generating Use and Development

Provide for high trip generating use and development, where these:

1. Integrate and coordinate with the transport network, including proposed transport infrastructure and service improvements;

2. Consider alternatives for access or routes;

3. Encourage public transport and active transport; and

4. Consider opportunities for positive transport effects.

TRPFZ-P4 Transport Facilities

Enable new vehicle accesses and on-site parking and loading areas that meet specified industry standards.

Where industry standards are not met, provide for new vehicle accesses and on-site parking and loading areas that:

1. Respond to site and topographical constraints;

2. Do not compromise the safe, efficient and effective functioning of the transport network; and


http://eplan.huttcity.govt.nz/Pages/Plan/Book.aspx?exhibit=HCC_ePLAN_uvhKbBnLwRBWYsLvOrpg


3. Do not compromise public health and safety, including the safety of pedestrians walking on footpaths or through parking areas.

TRPFZ-P5 Vehicle Crossings to St Andrews Road

Avoid new private vehicle crossings to St Andrews Road.

RULES

TRPFZ-R1 All Activities

TRPFZ-R2 New Walkways, Cycleways and Shared Paths Not Located Within a Road Corridor

TRPFZ-R3 New Roads

TRPFZ-R4 Private direct vehicle access to St Andrews Road [State Highway or Limited Access Road]


The approach of the Transport Section is to seek the outcome of a safe, efficient, resilient and well-connected transport network that is integrated with land use and provides for all modes of transport including active modes such as walking and cycling.

Use and development are enabled, with a management focus on activities that generate high volumes of traffic. High trip generating activities may affect the safe and efficient use of the transport network by increasing traffic where the network lacks the capacity to cater for it. This objective enables policies and rules that require case-by-case assessment of high trip generating activities so that appropriate measures can be applied to avoid, remedy or mitigate the effects on the transport network.

Classifying roads using the NZ Transport Agency’s One Network system assists in road management and funding decisions. There are no minimum car parking requirements, reflecting economic advice that such requirements are distortionary and lead to unsatisfactory urban design outcomes. This approach is also signalled in the discussion document of the forthcoming National Policy Statement on Urban Development.

The policies require transport infrastructure to be constructed in accordance with industry standards and provide guidance for circumstances when departing from standards may be satisfactory.

On-site transport facilities are at the interface of land use and transport network integration. Where engineering standards are not met for on-site transport facilities, the safety and efficiency of the transport network can be adversely affected. This can include poor visibility at access points and limited space for vehicle movements and can lead to inefficient use of space on the transport network itself (such as service vehicles using road space to undertake loading activities), or unsafe vehicle access points. As such, provisions that control how land uses provide for on-site transport facilities have a positive effect on the safety and efficiency of the transport network.

Technical Report Transport (Attachment 7)




• The transport network is a significant physical resource that is critical in providing for the social, economic and cultural well-being of people and the community.

• A safe transport network contributes towards protecting the health and safety of people and communities.

• Section 106 requires new developments to have legal and physical access.

RMA s5, s106

Regional Land Transport Plan?


Links

• An efficient transport network is essential to social and economic activity.

• Integrating the transport network with land use improves efficiency and offers opportunity for modes other than motor vehicles.


• The transport sector is evolving rapidly but provision for motor vehicles is still required for the foreseeable future.


• The efficiency of the proposed provisions is high because the benefits outweigh the costs.

• The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high because they will deliver a functioning transport network that connects to the existing network.


An alternative approach to Rule TRPFZ-R4 would be to leave the control of access to the road corridor to the road controlling authorities (NZTA for state highways, Porirua City Council for Council roads). However, the road controlling authorities prefer the additional certainty of control through district plan rules.

The design of on-site transport facilities could be left to property owners. However, this could lead to unsatisfactory parking and manoeuvring areas in commercial areas used by the public and consequential safety issues when connecting with public roads. Provision for active transport modes has historically been left to property owners, frequently with the results that pedestrians and cyclists have been poorly catered for.



Natural Hazards OBJECTIVES

NHPFZ-O1 Subdivision, Use and Development

Subdivision, use, development in the identified flood hazard areas within Plimmerton Farm do not increase the natural hazard risk to people and property.

NHPFZ-O2 Natural Systems

Natural systems that reduce the susceptibility of damage to people, communities, property and infrastructure from natural hazards are maintained, enhanced and protected.

NHPFZ-O3 Risk to Life

There is reduced risk to life and property from flood hazards through natural hazard mitigation activities by Central Government Agencies, Porirua City Council, Greater Wellington Regional Council and their agents.

POLICIES

NHPFZ-P1 Identification of Flood Hazard Areas

Identify and map flood hazards based on the relative level of hazard, as follows:

1. Stream Corridor - High Hazard Area, where fast flowing or deep water is highly likely to occur and is a hazard to human life and property;

2. Overland Flow Path - Medium Hazard Area, where moderate to fast flowing or deep water is likely to occur in heavy rain events and is a hazard to human life and property;

3. Ponding Area - Low Hazard Area, where slow flowing and shallow water may occur and is a hazard to property.

NHPFZ-P2 Activities within the Overland Flow Paths (Medium Hazard Areas) and Ponding Areas (Low Hazard Areas)

Provide for activities within the Overland Flow Paths and Ponding Areas that manage risk to people, property and emergency management.

NHPFZ-P3 Less-Hazard-Sensitive Activities within the Stream Corridors (High Hazard Areas)

Only allow for Less-Hazard-Sensitive Activities within the Stream Corridor that:

1. Do not impede or block stream and flood water pathways; and

2. Manage risk to people, property and emergency management.

NHPFZ-P4 Hazard-Sensitive and Potentially-Hazard-Sensitive Activities within Stream Corridors (High Hazard Areas)

Avoid Hazard-Sensitive and Potentially-Hazard-Sensitive Activities within Stream Corridors, unless the activity:

1. Has an operational or functional need to locate within the Stream Corridor; and

2. Manages the risk to people and property.

NHPFZ-P5 Natural Hazard Mitigation Activity

Provide for natural hazard mitigation activities undertaken by Central Government Agencies, Porirua City Council, Greater Wellington Regional Council or their agents within Flood Hazard Areas where the activities decrease the risk to people and property or maintain stormwater systems and natural processes.

NHPFZ-P6 Soft-Engineering Measures

Encourage soft engineering measures when undertaking natural hazard mitigation activities within Flood Hazard Areas to reduce the risk from flooding.

NHPFZ-P7 Earthworks in Overland Flow Paths (Medium Hazard Areas) and Ponding Areas (Low Hazard Areas)



Allow for earthworks in Overland Flow Paths and Ponding Areas that do not increase the risk from flooding to other properties through the displacement of flood waters.

NHPFZ-P8 Earthworks in Stream Corridors (High Hazard Areas)

Avoid earthworks in Stream Corridors that would increase the risk from flooding to people and property.

RULES

NHPFZ-R1 Natural Hazard Mitigation Activities and Soft Engineering Works in Flood Hazard Areas undertaken by either a Central Government Agency, Greater Wellington Regional Council, Porirua City Council or their agent

NHPFZ-R2 Buildings and Activities in Ponding Areas (Low Hazard Areas)

NHPFZ-R3 Buildings and Activities in Overland Flow Paths (Medium Hazard Areas)

NHPFZ-R4 Buildings and Activities in Stream Corridors (High Hazard Areas)


Parts of the Plimmerton Farm Zone are susceptible to flood hazard. Due to its location, the Plimmerton Farm Zone has little susceptibility to tsunami, coastal erosion or coastal inundation. Slope stability is addressed through the earthworks provisions. Other natural hazards such as severe winds, wildfires, and ground shaking from earthquakes are managed by other statutory instruments or processes, such as the Building Act 2004, Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 and the Local Government Act 1974.

Flood hazards can result in damage to property and infrastructure, and potentially lead to a loss of human life. The risk from a natural hazard results from both the likelihood of the hazard occurring and the consequences of it occurring. The provisions take a risk-based approach - allowing for people and communities to use property and undertake activities, while also helping to protect lives and significant assets from natural hazard events.

The objectives seek outcomes of:

• Protecting people from loss of life and injury;

• Maintaining key infrastructure (such as wastewater treatment systems) to ensure the health and safety of communities;

• Maintaining the functionality of buildings after a natural hazard event and the ability for communities to recover.

The policies identify High, Medium and Low Flood Hazard Areas based on the relative level of hazard, and provide for use and development depending on the level of hazard-sensitivity of the activity. Public agencies are enabled to undertake natural hazard mitigation activities, with soft engineering approaches encouraged. Earthworks in Flood Hazard Areas are managed because earthworks on one site may displace floodwaters or disrupt overland flow paths and create or exacerbate problems on other sites.

The objectives, policies and rules seek that the following:



• Subdivision, use and development (that includes earthworks) in the identified flood hazard overlays in the Plimmerton Farm Zone do not increase the natural hazard risk to surrounding properties or to future occupants of any buildings.

• Only allow development within overland flowpaths and ponding areas where it can be demonstrated that the risk to people and property is avoided and where the development does not increase the risk in flooding to neighbouring properties through the displacement of flood waters.

• Provide for earthworks in the flood hazard areas, only where it can be demonstrated that:

The earthworks do not increase the risk from flooding to neighbouring properties through the displacement of flood waters; and

The earthworks do not impede or reduce the capacity of the Stream Corridors or the Overland Flow Paths in manner that increases the risk of flooding off site, or reduces the capacity for flood waters to be conveyed away from the site; and

The earthworks reduce the risk to development through achieving a minimum floor level, protecting infrastructure or enabling flood free access to a site; and

• Mitigation measures are included for earthworks in the Overland Flow Paths and Stream Corridors to maintain flood flows and to not increase the flood risk to the surrounding environment.

• Enable natural hazard mitigation works within the flood hazard overlay areas where these decrease the risk to people and property.


Section 6(h) of the RMA requires

the management of significant risks from natural hazards

as a matter of national importance.

Section 31 (1)(b) requires:

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

(iii) the avoidance or mitigation of natural hazards.

The provisions specifically take a risk-based approach to the avoidance and mitigation of flood hazard.

RMA s6(h), s31




Links

• The risk-based approach enables less-hazard-susceptible activities to be undertaken, enabling social and economic activity.

• The risk-based approach also means that hazard-susceptible activities do not establish in higher hazard areas, avoiding the costs of property damage or loss of life.


There is certainty that flooding will occur in the Flood Hazard Areas, therefore action is essential.


The efficiency of the proposed provisions is high because the benefits outweigh the significant costs that can arise from flood events affecting use and development in Flood Hazard Areas.

The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high as they actively control susceptibility to flood hazard.


Slope stability is addressed through the earthworks provisions. Other natural hazards such as severe winds, wildfires, and ground shaking from earthquakes are managed by other statutory instruments or processes, such as the Building Act 2004, Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 and the Local Government Act 1974.

Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity OBJECTIVES

ECOPFZ-O1 Significant Natural Areas

Significant Natural Areas are protected from the adverse effects of subdivision, use and development and, where appropriate, are enhanced.

ECOPFZ-O2 Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas

Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas are identified to provide opportunities for biodiversity offsetting and for protection and enhancement to provide ecological, hydrological and amenity value.

ECOPFZ-O3 Ecological Function

The ecological function and protective buffering of hydrological and ecological systems are maintained and enhanced.

POLICIES

ECOPFZ-P1 Effects-management hierarchy for Significant Natural Areas

Protect the biodiversity values of Significant Natural Areas in ECOPFZ-Appendix-1 that have been identified using the criteria in Policy 23 of the Regional Policy Statement, by requiring subdivision, use and development to:



1. Avoid significant adverse effects on indigenous biodiversity values;

2. Remedy adverse effects on the identified biodiversity values where avoidance is not practicable;

3. Mitigate the adverse effects where they cannot be avoided or remediated; and

4. Only consider the biodiversity offsetting for any residual effects that have not been mitigated within the site through protection, restoration and enhancement measures; and

5. Only consider biodiversity compensation after implementing biodiversity offsetting.

ECOPFZ-P2 Subdivision, Use and Development in Significant Natural Areas

Provide for subdivision, use and development in Significant Natural Areas, as follows:

1. Apply the effects-management hierarchy of ECOPFZ-P1;

2. Require an ecological assessment from a suitably qualified ecologist to determine the significance of the indigenous biodiversity, the impact of the activity on biodiversity values, and the appropriate application of ECOPFZ-P1;

3. Require formal protection and ongoing active management of the Significant Natural Area;

4. Limit the fragmentation of Significant Natural Areas that would constrain ongoing active management;

5. Avoid locating building platforms and vehicle accessways in Significant Natural Areas;

6. Minimise trimming or removal of indigenous vegetation to avoid loss, damage or disruption to ecological processes, functions and integrity of the Significant Natural Area;

7. Minimise earthworks in Significant Natural Areas; and

8. Enable tangata whenua to exercise traditional cultural harvesting practices.

ECOPFZ-P3 Biodiversity Offsetting

Only provide for biodiversity offsetting where:

1. The biodiversity offset addresses residual adverse effects that cannot otherwise be avoided, remedied or mitigated within the site in accordance with ECOPFZ-P1;

2. The biodiversity offset’s restoration, enhancement, and protection actions are additional to any avoidance, remedy or mitigation of the adverse effects of the activity;

3. The residual adverse effects are capable of being offset and will be fully offset to ensure no net loss, and preferably a gain, of biodiversity;

4. The biodiversity offsets are formally protected;

5. The biodiversity offset actions are undertaken close to the location of the activity and are applied so that the biodiversity values being achieved through the offset are the same or similar to the biodiversity values being lost;

6. The biodiversity offset re-establishes or protects the same type of ecosystem or habitat that is adversely affected, unless an alternative ecosystem or habitat will provide a net gain for indigenous biodiversity; and

7. The biodiversity offset assessment from a suitably qualified ecologist:

a. Contains an explicit loss and gain calculation and demonstrates how no net loss, and preferably a net gain, in biodiversity can be achieved in practice; and

b. Addresses any sources of uncertainty or risk in delivering no net loss of biodiversity.

ECOPFZ-P4 Public Roads within Significant Natural Areas

Provide for public roads in a Significant Natural Area where the roads are consistent with the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan and adverse effects are addressed in accordance with ECOPFZ-P1.

ECOPFZ-P5 Subdivision, Use and Development in Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas



Provide for subdivision, use and development in Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas that:

1. Provide opportunities for biodiversity offsetting;

2. Protect, restore and enhance ecology, hydrology and amenity, as follows:

a. Require planting regimes and ongoing pest and weed management;

b. Encourage water sensitive design; and

c. Prepare or implement Land Management Plans in accordance with SUBPFZ-P5.

ECOPFZ-P6 New Plantation Forestry

Avoid the establishment of new plantation forestry within Significant Natural Areas and Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas.

RULES

ECOPFZ-R1 Trimming or Removal of Indigenous Vegetation within a Significant Natural Area

ECOPFZ-R2 Trimming or Removal of Indigenous Vegetation to Operate, Repair and Maintain Infrastructure or Renewable Electricity Generation Activities within a Significant Natural Area

ECOPFZ-R3 Enhancement and Management of Significant Natural Areas and Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas

ECOPFZ-R4 Trimming or Removal of Indigenous Vegetation within a Significant Natural Area Associated with the Construction of a Public Road Identified on the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan

ECOPFZ-R5 New plantation forestry within a Significant Natural Area or a Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Area

ECOPFZ-R6 Any activity not otherwise provided for as a permitted, controlled, restricted discretionary, or discretionary activity


The ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity provisions relate to Significant Natural Areas (“SNAs”) and Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas (“BORAs”).

The method of identifying SNAs is consistent with the criteria of Policy 23 of the Wellington Regional Policy Statement.

The objectives, policies and rules provide the framework for managing the effects of activities on the biodiversity values of the Plimmerton Farm Zone. The rules recognise some activities that have limited impacts on identified values can occur within SNAs. Such activities are provided for as permitted activities. Other activities could result in a greater level of effect and therefore the rules identify the need for resource consent in order to enable assessment against the SNA values.

This section also includes provisions that seek to encourage the maintenance, enhancement and ongoing protection of the ecological function and biodiversity values of the site. The provisions provide for biodiversity offsetting opportunities as well as the restoration and assisted natural revegetation of areas identified as Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas.

RMA s6(c), s31

RPS Policies 23, 24, 47

Ecological Assessment Report – Blaschke and Rutherford (Attachment 9)



Provisions are also included to address site constraints in relation to the provision of a transport network through the Plimmerton Farm Zone. Clearance of vegetation within an SNA is likely to be required to construct the proposed roading network in accordance with the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan. Provisions in this section will ensure the ecological effects of such activities will be appropriately addressed.

Specific provisions enable trimming and small-scale vegetation removal to maintain buildings, tracks and fences, and provide for cultural harvesting.


Section 6(c) of the RMA requires

the protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna.



(iii) the maintenance of indigenous biological diversity.

The provisions provide for protection, restoration and ongoing management of vegetation, habitats and biodiversity.

RMA s6, s31


Links

• May hinder economic growth and employment by restricting opportunities for land development.

• May support economic growth based on tourism and the City's 'sense of place'.

• Economic benefits include those arising from the ecosystem services afforded by indigenous biodiversity, such as improved water quality, carbon sequestration, erosion mitigation and improved landscape, character and amenity values.

• May provide opportunities for economic growth and employment by leveraging off the amenity provided by protecting SNAs and BORAs.

• Restricts activities on private land affected by SNAs or BORAs.

• Imposes compliance costs for resource users which may include:

administrative costs, such as those associated with applying for consent or providing additional information as part of consent applications;

substantive costs, such as costs associated with the curtailment of development rights or the costs of complying with conditions.




• The Environment Court (NZEnvC219) has found that reliance on community attitudes alone to protect significant natural areas is not adequate because it does not take account of differences in community attitudes and the high vulnerability of some significant sites. Therefore regulatory intervention may be appropriate.

• There is a risk that some landowners may be strongly opposed to regulations protecting significant sites on their land

NZEnvC219


The efficiency of the proposed provisions is high because the benefits of protecting indigenous biodiversity for current and future generations outweigh the costs imposed on individual landowners.

The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high as the objectives of identifying, protecting and managing SNAs and BORA are achieved.


Non-regulatory approaches that rely on voluntary efforts from landowners can be useful adjuncts to regulation but are generally uneven and unsatisfactory alone in terms of meeting objectives.

Earthworks OBJECTIVES

EWPFZ-O1 Earthworks

Earthworks achieve the following:

1. Landform modification from earthworks provides for the intended land use of the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan;

2. The receiving environments including Taupō Swamp, Taupō Stream and Te Awarua-o-Porirua Harbour are protected from erosion and sediment effects;

3. Adverse effects on amenity values are minimised;

4. The safety of people, property and infrastructure is protected.

POLICIES

EWPFZ-P1 Earthworks in Precincts A, B and D

Provide for earthworks associated with subdivision, use and development in a coordinated and integrated manner as follows:

1. Address adverse visual effects associated with any cut or fill faces by restricting heights, and gradients of batter slopes and requiring the treatment and rehabilitation of these slopes with screening, landscaping or planting in accordance with the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan;

2. Address erosion and sediment control for earthworks areas not exceeding 3,000m2 following the guidance of in the Greater Wellington Regional Council publication Erosion and Sediment Control for Small Sites (June, 2006).



3. Address erosion and sediment control for earthworks areas exceeding 3,000m2 through an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as follows:

a. Stage the earthworks to minimise the total area of exposed soils at any point in time;

b. Minimise disturbance of existing vegetation;

c. Avoid long continuous exposed slopes;

d. Use erosion control to prevent sediment generation rather than attempting to catch unnecessarily generated sediments downstream;

e. Ensure that control measures are installed before commencement of each stage of earthworks;

f. All topsoil must be stripped from the earthwork areas with the stripped area being kept to the practical minimum at any one time. Topsoil must be stockpiled and used in the rehabilitation of the site;

g. All fill areas must be re-worked and compacted in accordance with a design that is appropriate to soil conditions and geology;

h. All fills must be compacted to reduce erosion and sedimentation;

i. Stabilise exposed areas as soon as practicable;

j. Use vegetated ground cover to stabilise where appropriate;

k. Install diversion drains, silt fences and decanting earth bunds to divert clean water runoff away from worked areas and keep separate from sediment prone water;

l. Sediment retention ponds are to be sized to hold one third more capacity for the same volume of disturbance than the requirements set out in the Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for the Wellington Region (June, 2006). All other design requirements for sediment retention ponds must remain compliant with the guidelines;

m. Sediment retention ponds must be used for multiple catchments where possible;

n. Sediment retention ponds for catchments larger than 1.5ha must have baffles installed to improve settling conditions and prevent wind induced movement of sediment;

o. Earthworks must be staged to ensure that only runoff from the open area of earthworks is diverted to the sediment retention pond; and that the open area does not exceed the design capacity of the sediment retention pond. Only once an area/stage of works is complete, the surface stabilised and the subsequent clean water from the completed area is diverted so that it no longer flows into the sediment retention pond; can the area of the completed area/stage be removed from the total area of contributing catchment going to an sediment retention pond;

p. Decanting earth bunds are to be built one third larger than the requirements set out in the Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for the Wellington Region (June, 2006);

q. Secondary protection including double silt fences must be installed to manage earthworks in relation to high risk areas;

r. Each stage of earthworks (and the overall site) must be designed to achieve a cut/fill balance but gullies, wetlands and stream corridors must not be used solely to dispose of fill;

s. Each area of earthworks must be stabilised as early as possible upon completion and not just at the end of the stage to minimise the area exposed at any one time;

t. Batter faces must be stabilised at intervals during the construction (likely maximum 5m height) to avoid the full face of the batter being exposed until the top of the batter construction is reached;

4. Address the effects of earthworks in Flood Hazard Areas in accordance with NHPFZ-P7 and NHPFZ-P8;

5. Do not compromise the safety and stability of land, infrastructure or buildings;

6. Avoid, remedy or mitigate any adverse dust or vibration beyond the site; and

7. Recognise and provide for Tangata Whenua cultural values and practices.



EWPFZ-P2 Site boundary earthworks in Precincts A, B and D

Earthworks at site boundaries must not result in abrupt changes in ground level between adjoining sites.

EWPFZ-P3 Earthworks in Precinct C

Provide for earthworks associated with subdivision, use and development as follows:

1. Avoid significant adverse effects and avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on any identified characteristics and landscape values including those of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape and the prominent ridgeline identified on the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan; and

2. Demonstrate that:

a. The effects on any landscape values are appropriately avoided, mitigated or remedied through restoration or rehabilitation;

b. The alignment and location of the earthworks minimise changes to the landform and, where relevant, maintain the identified values of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape;

c. Erosion is minimised and sediment or soil loss are avoided, in accordance with the applicable area of earthworks addressed in EWPFZ-P1-2 or EWPFZ-P1-3;

d. The earthworks avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on indigenous vegetation;

e. The earthworks provide for water sensitive design;

f. Effects on the stability of land are avoided, remedied or mitigated;

g. Avoid, remedy or mitigate any dust or vibration effects beyond the site; and

3. Address the effects of earthworks in Flood Hazard Areas in accordance with NHPFZ-P7 and NHPFZ-P8.

EWPFZ-P4 Earthworks to construct roads in Precinct C

Provide for earthworks to construct roads in Precinct C as follows:

1. Undertake in accordance with the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan;

2. Avoid, remedy or mitigate significant landscape, visual amenity and character effects including by controlling heights, gradients and the treatment of batter slopes;

3. Rehabilitate exposed slopes with screening or landscaping;

4. Maintain the identified landscape values where located within the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape;

5. Avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the stability of land;

6. Minimise erosion and avoid sediment or soil loss, in accordance with the applicable area of earthworks addressed in EWPFZ-P1-2 or EWPFZ-P1-3;

7. Mitigate adverse effects in relation to stormwater management; and

8. Recognise and provide for Tangata Whenua cultural values and practices.

9. Address the effects of earthworks in Flood Hazard Areas in accordance with NHPFZ-P7 and NHPFZ-P8.

EWPFZ-P5 Traffic movements from earthworks

Manage earthworks that generate traffic movements to minimise adverse effects on the transport network and on local amenity values.

RULES

EWPFZ-R1 Earthworks

EWPFZ-R2 Earthworks for the construction and maintenance of walkways, footpaths, bridle paths and cycleways

EWPFZ-R3 Earthworks for the installation of infrastructure



EWPFZ-R4 Earthworks for construction and maintenance of farm tracks

EWPFZ-R5 Earthworks (except for the construction of roads) in the Kakaho Hillside Living Area, Hillside Living Area and Kakaho Basin North

EWPFZ-R6 Earthworks (except for the construction of roads) within the Kakaho Basin

EWPFZ-R7 Earthworks associated with the construction of a road illustrated on the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan in Precinct C

EWPFZ-R8 Earthworks within Stream Corridors (High Hazard Areas)


Extensive earthworks will be required to enable the residential development anticipated by the Precinct Plan. Earthworks have the potential to mobilise sediment that can contaminate waterways. Exposed earthworks may have significant adverse visual effects and can lead to erosion.

Approximately 20% of the site is of a gradient gentler than 1:5. Development will therefore likely require extensive earthworks for roading and other infrastructure and cutting and filling to provide building platforms. The overall site will achieve a balance of cut and fill so that no cut or fill material is transported to or from the site.

The proposed provisions require earthworks to exceed the requirements of accepted best industry practice.

The initial bulk earthworks are encouraged to achieve the final contours of the development sites and secondary earthworks are discouraged. Abrupt changes in ground level between residential sites are discouraged to avoid a series of retaining walls.

Creating building platforms on each site at bulk earthworks stage and minimising secondary earthworks means that earthworks will be carried out with the protection of larger sediment control devices.

With respect to cut and fill batters, it is acknowledged that, due to the existing topography of the site, the future works will include the creation of batter slopes. In order to control potential erosion, visual and landscape related effects associated with this the Infrastructure Report recommends that provisions of the Plimmerton Farm Zone chapter seek to require that batters will be kept at a maximum 1 vertical in 2 horizontal grades (both cut and fill slopes) to allow topsoil to be easily established on the batter slopes allowing for quick revegetation.

Future development enabled via the rezoning of the site involves carrying out earthworks on moderately steep land within sensitive receiving environments including Taupō Swamp. Therefore effective erosion and sediment controls are important.

The risk of generating erosion is proportional to the surface area exposed, the duration of earthworks, and the rainfall occurrences during the earthworks process. Erosion and sediment controls are proposed to be more stringent and effective than the design parameters of the ‘Erosion and

Geotechnical Assessment Report – Engeo (Attachment 12)


Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles



Sediment Control Guidelines for the Wellington Region’. This make the controls more resilient to rain events that are heavier, higher intensity, or more prolonged than expected and will add capacity for managing the sediment from typical design level rain events.

The Earthworks and Erosion and Sediment Control Principles include general principles in relation to minimising disturbance, protecting steep slopes, stripping of topsoil, compaction, stabilisation, perimeter controls and erosion controls.


Section 6(h) of the RMA requires

the management of significant risks from natural hazards

as a matter of national importance.



(iv) the avoidance or mitigation of natural hazards.

Well-designed earthworks provide safe areas for built development, for example by improving slope stability.

Section 7(b) requires the efficient use and development of natural and physical resources. Well-designed earthworks will greatly increase housing yield while avoiding the development of sensitive areas including Significant Natural Areas.

RMA s6(h), s31

NPS Freshwater Management


Links

• Earthworks are highly expensive to carry out but lead to considerably greater housing yield.

• Applying higher standards of erosion and sediment control increases the costs of development.


• The effects of earthworks are well understood and readily manageable using available methods and technologies.


The efficiency of the proposed provisions is high because the benefits arising from well-managed earthworks outweigh the costs.

The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high because the erosion and sediment control measures exceed industry standards.




Costs could be reduced by relying on the industry standard GWRC erosion and sediment control guidelines. However, this would not achieve the greater certainty provided by the proposed approach.

Noise OBJECTIVES

NOISEPFZ-O1 Emission of Noise

The effects of the emission of noise are compatible with the role, function and character of each Precinct and do not compromise public health or safety.

NOISEPFZ-O2 Reverse sensitivity

Noise sensitive activities are designed and located to minimise reverse sensitivity effects.

POLICIES

NOISEPFZ-P1 Emission of Noise

Provide for noise from use and development that is compatible with the amenity anticipated for each Precinct by:

1. Setting noise levels appropriate to the noise-sensitivity of each Precinct’s activities;

2. Enabling noise emissions that are internalised to the site;

3. Encouraging noise-emitting activities to adopt the best practicable option; and

4. Limiting the frequency, intensity, duration and offensiveness of the noise emitted.

NOISEPFZ-P2 Emission of Noise from Building Activity

Provide for noise from building activity that is not compatible with the amenity anticipated for each Precinct where the best practicable option is adopted.

NOISEPFZ-P3 Reverse sensitivity

Require noise sensitive activities locating in Precinct B adjacent to St Andrews Road or in Precinct D to design habitable rooms to attenuate external noise.

RULES

NOISEPFZ-R1 Emission of Noise

NOISEPFZ-R2 Noise from building activities

NOISEPFZ-R3 New buildings and alterations to existing buildings for use by a noise sensitive activity.


Section 16 of the RMA imposes a duty to avoid making unreasonable noise. The provisions set noise limits for reasonable noise.

Noise sensitive land uses in proximity to the transport network have the potential to create reverse sensitivity effects, potentially hindering the efficient operation of the network. These effects need to be recognised to ensure that both land use and the transport network are sustainably managed.



Modern construction materials and techniques can appropriately mitigate reverse sensitivity effects on the transport network from sensitive activities. Under the RPS, the District Plan must protect ‘regionally significant infrastructure’ (which includes the state highway) from reverse sensitivity effects.

The provisions give effect to the RPS through the recognition and protection of Regionally Significant Infrastructure (RPS Policies 7, 8 and 39).

The provisions also require noise sensitive activities in Precinct D to design habitable rooms to reduce external noise, thereby mitigating reverse effects on commercial activities.


Section 7(c) requires the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values.

Section 16 of the RMA imposes a duty to avoid making unreasonable noise.

RMA s7, Section s16


Links

• Noise environments appropriate to each precinct contribute to high levels of amenity and wellbeing.

• Meeting reverse sensitivity requirements imposes additional building costs.

• Achieving best practicable option for emissions of noise may impose additional costs on activities.

• Mitigating reverse sensitivity effects reduces the risk of additional costs to commercial activities (e.g. reduced hours or additional noise insulation.


• The effects of noise and methods of noise attenuation are certain and well understood and able to be managed.



In respect of reverse sensitivity, the benefits fall to both the noise-emitting infrastructure and the sensitive receiving activity, which enjoys a higher level of amenity than would be the case without the provisions.

The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high.


Reliance on s16 of the RMA for noise emissions is possible but more difficult to enforce.



Subdivision OBJECTIVES

SUBPFZ-O1 Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan Implementation

Subdivision is consistent with the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan and creates allotments and patterns of land development that are compatible with the physical features of the site.

SUBPFZ-O2 Integration of Land Use and Transport

Land use is integrated with the transport network.

SUBPFZ-O3 Integration with Infrastructure

Allotments are serviced by infrastructure that has been planned and provided for in a comprehensive and integrated manner and has sufficient capacity for development.

SUBPFZ-O4 Protection of Significant Natural Areas and Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas

Significant Natural Areas and Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas are protected and provided for through subdivision.

SUBPFZ-O5 Maintenance of the Values of Special Amenity Landscapes

The significant landscape characteristics and values of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape are maintained through subdivision.

POLICIES

SUBPFZ-P1 Creation of Allotments

All precincts Require subdivision to result in allotments that:

1. Give effect to the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan;

2. Are of a size and shape that is sufficient to accommodate the intended or anticipated use and development form for the precinct;

3. Are able to be serviced by reticulated network infrastructure or on-site servicing;

4. Provide for built development to occur outside any Significant Natural Areas or Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas that fall within an allotment; and

5. Take account of the Flood Hazard Areas identified through NHPFZ-P1.

SUBPFZ-P2 Boundary Adjustments

All precincts Enable boundary adjustments that achieve an efficient and effective use of land.

SUBPFZ-P3 Functioning of the Transport Network

All precincts Require subdivision to promote the safe and efficient functioning of the transport network by:

1. Providing for roads, access lots and rights of way that achieve safe and efficient traffic movements;

2. Providing for a variety of travel modes that reflect the role, function and character of the Precinct, including the provision of safe walking and cycling and access to public transport;

3. Providing for legal and physical access;

4. Providing for safe and efficient road access to St Andrews Road;

5. Providing for safe and efficient walking and cycling access to St Andrews Road;

6. Avoiding direct private property access onto St Andrews Road; and

7. Avoiding development that hinders future connections to the north and east of Plimmerton Farm.



SUBPFZ-P4 Integration with Infrastructure

All precincts Require infrastructure that:

1. Is provided at or before the time of allotment creation;

2. Meets Council standards;

3. Integrates with the wider network;

4. Has the capacity to accommodate anticipated future development; and

5. Achieves the management of stormwater quality and quantity set out in SWPFZ-P1 and SWPFZ-P2.

SUBPFZ-P5 Subdivision of an Allotment with a Significant Natural Area or Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Area

Precincts A, B and C

In respect of subdivision of an allotment that includes a Significant Natural Area or Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Area, require the preparation of a Land Management Plan that gives effect to the Land Management Principles of the Precinct Plan as follows:

1. Promote integrated management of vegetation, animals and landscapes;

2. In Significant Natural Areas, protect significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous animals;

3. In Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas, buffer and augment Significant Natural Areas;

4. Give effect to ECOPFZ-P2 and ECOPFZ-P5;

5. Recognise that Plimmerton Farm is part of a wider landscape-scale natural ecosystem. The management and restoration of landform and vegetation cover must reflect this context;

6. Recognise that vegetation across Plimmerton Farm is continually changing, including through natural succession and reversion, the introduction of new vegetation elements through changing land use and the effects of climate change

7. In the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape, maintain and enhance its characteristics and values;

8. Contribute to the protection, enhancement and buffering of the Taupō Swamp complex, Taupō Stream and Te Awarua-o-Porirua;

9. Retain existing gully vegetation and regenerating native bush that will assist in the reinstatement of vegetation cover, particularly across steep hill slopes. Restoration may be promoted via natural regeneration of indigenous vegetation on retired pasture and other areas;

10. Integrate the following elements:

a. Landform;

b. Catchments, water runoff and erosion;

c. Landscape character;

d. Vegetation and animal habitats;

e. Freshwater habitats;

f. Indigenous biodiversity values;

11. Require Land Management Plans to detail the following:

a. Vegetation establishment, maintenance and harvesting;

b. The relationship between indigenous and introduced species present;

c. Provision for cultural harvesting;



d. Weed and animal pest control;

e. Animal habitats

f. The relationship of SNAs and BORAs across Plimmerton Farm including buffering areas and potential ecological corridors;

g. The potential to contribute to sediment control and the maintenance of water quality;

h. Fencing to exclude stock;

i. Sources of plants;

j. Any public access and tracks;

k. Mechanisms for ongoing legal protection and active management.

SUBPFZ-P6 Subdivision in Kakaho Hillside Living Area, Hillside Living Area and Kakaho Basin North

Precinct C –

Kakaho Hillside Living Area,

Hillside Living Area, and

Kakaho Basin North

Provide for subdivision where:

1. The overall shape of the allotment boundaries coincides with and avoids dividing existing natural edges in the landscape including spurs, ridges and gullies;

2. The building platforms in the Kakaho Hillside Living Area are located in the identified development areas of the Precinct C Plan;

3. The building platforms are identified for any subdivision in the Hillside Living Area or Kakaho Basin North; and

4. Vehicle accessways respect landform.

SUBPFZ-P7 St Andrews Road Planted Buffer

Precinct B Require the creation and ongoing management of a planted buffer strip along Plimmerton Farm property boundaries with St Andrews Road to visually screen the properties from St Andrews Road.

RULES

SUBPFZ-R1 Boundary Adjustments

SUBPFZ-R2 All Subdivisions (Excluding Boundary Adjustments)

SUBPFZ-R3 Subdivision of a Site Containing a Significant Natural Area or a Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Area

SUBPFZ-R4 Subdivision in the Kakaho Hillside Living Area

SUBPFZ-R5 Subdivision in the Hillside Living Area and Kakaho Basin North

SUBPFZ-R6 Subdivision in Kakaho Basin


Any subdivision within the Plimmerton Farm Zone is a restricted discretionary activity to provide for consistency with the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan. Some of the key structural features of the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan will be delivered at subdivision stage, including provision for roading, walking, cycling connections and routes, public open spaces, and protection of indigenous biodiversity.




Subdivision provides for use and development that is consistent with the purpose of the RMA as outlined in section 5.


Links

• Subdivision provides for a range of allotment sizes that deliver at least 1990 residential units.

• Subdivision provides for subsequent use and development in a way that respects the landscape, ecological values and potential effects on receiving waterways.

• Subdivision costs are increased by providing for protection of landscapes, SNAs and BORAs.


• The constraints and attributes of the site have been comprehensively assessed and are able to be dealt with through appropriate subdivision provisions.

• The subdivision provisions are well understood and provide a high level of certainty of providing the outcomes sought.



The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high because the outcomes sought are achieved.


Controlled activity subdivision rules would be an alternative to the restricted discretionary activity subdivision rules framework proposed. Controlled activities may provide more certainty for applicants but not necessarily for the outcomes sought in the objectives.

Precinct A OBJECTIVES

PAPFZ-O1 Purpose of Precinct A

Precinct A:

1. Primarily provides for medium density residential activities; and

2. Provides for a range of non-residential activities that support the health and wellbeing of people and communities, and are compatible with the character and amenity values of Precinct A.

PAPFZ-O2 Character and Amenity Values of Precinct A



The scale, form and density of subdivision, use and development in Precinct A is characterised by:

1. A built form of predominantly two-storey and three-storey buildings, detached, semi-detached and terraced housing and low-rise apartments;

2. High quality urban design and residential amenity; and

3. An urban environment that is visually attractive, safe, easy to navigate and convenient to access.

POLICIES

PAPFZ-P1 Residential Activities

Enable residential activities and a diverse range of residential unit types and sizes that are compatible with the built form, character and amenity values anticipated in Precinct A and are suitably serviced by infrastructure.

PAPFZ-P2 Non-Residential Activities

Enable non-residential activities that:

1. Contribute to the social, cultural and economic wellbeing of people and communities;:

2. Are of a type and scale compatible with the character and amenity of the area;

3. Avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the amenity values beyond the site including from signs and the location and scale of utility and external storage areas;

4. Avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the amenity values beyond the site from the movement of people and vehicles associated with the activity;

5. Have hours of operation compatible with residential amenity;

6. Have an operational need to locate in the Precinct; and

7. Are suitably serviced with infrastructure.

Avoid non-residential activities that are incompatible with the character and amenity values anticipated in Precinct A.

PAPFZ-P3 Integration and Connectivity

Provide for built development that integrates and connects with the surrounding environment.

PAPFZ-P4 Buildings and Structures

Provide for buildings and structures that are of a form, scale and design that achieve the character and amenity anticipated for Precinct A.

PAPFZ-P5 Urban Design

Require development in Precinct A to achieve high quality urban design by taking an integrated, comprehensive site planning and design approach to achieve the following:

1. Site planning that:

a. Integrates building form and open space;

b. Achieves a consistent pattern of building alignment;

c. Provides access to sunlight and daylight and outlook from residential units;

d. Provides a positive frontage to the street;

e. Provides convenient, safe and legible connections and circulation;

f. Provides front doors that are clearly legible from the street or accessway;

g. Achieves passive surveillance of the street or accessway;

h. Minimises the visual impact of car parking and garaging on the streetscape;

2. Building design that:



a. Achieves visual interest and avoids visual monotony while also achieving aesthetic coherence and integration;

b. Provides internal visual privacy for all units within a development;

c. Provides for servicing that is suitable, convenient and visually discreet;

3. Open space and landscape design that:

a. Ensures all outdoor living areas in the development are well located and accessible;

b. Ensures any shared outdoor living areas are well located and of high quality;

c. Uses planting to achieve visual amenity, safety and functionality;

d. Includes driveways, manoeuvring and parking areas that are safe, convenient and attractive; and

4. Lighting that enhances safety and security without adversely affecting the amenity of other sites.

PAPFZ-P6 Retirement Villages

Provide for a retirement village in Precinct A, where:

1. It is consistent with the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan;

2. Significant adverse effects on the residential amenity values of adjoining sites and the surrounding area are avoided;

3. Other adverse effects on residential amenity values are minimised, including effects from:

a. The movement of vehicles and people;

b. The overall layout and scale of the retirement village including fencing, location and size of utility areas and external storage areas;

4. The overall scale, form, composition and design of buildings is consistent with the character and amenity of the area.

RULES

PAPFZ-R1 Residential Activities

PAPFZ-R2 Building Activity

PAPFZ-R3 Impervious Surfaces Except Roads

PAPFZ-R4 Signs

PAPFZ-R5 Home Business

PAPFZ-R6 Supported Residential Care Activities

PAPFZ-R7 Education Facility

PAPFZ-R8 Visitor Accommodation

PAPFZ-R9 Retirement Village as Identified on the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan

PAPFZ-R10 Emergency Service Facilities

PAPFZ-R11 Community Facilities

PAPFZ-R12 Healthcare Activities

PAPFZ-R13 Hospital

PAPFZ-R14 Industrial Activities

PAPFZ-R15 Rural Industries

PAPFZ-R16 Primary Production

PAPFZ-R17 All Other Activities




Precinct A is located at the southern end of the Plimmerton Farm Zone, close to Plimmerton Village and existing public transport networks. The purpose of this Precinct is to provide for medium density residential development in a built form of predominantly two-storey and three-storey buildings, detached, semi-detached and terraced housing and low-rise apartments. A retirement village is also anticipated.

Porirua’s housing stock does not match the needs of current and future residents. There is an overall shortfall in housing capacity and a particular shortage of one bedroom and two bedroom dwellings. The Precinct A provisions respond to that need.

The Precinct A objectives, policies and rules provide the framework for managing the effects of development and providing for high levels of residential amenity and a high quality built environment. Prescriptive policy for urban design directs high quality outcomes for more intensive housing.

Home business and other non-residential activities that support the social and economic health and wellbeing of the community may also occur in Precinct A, where they minimise adverse effects on residential character and amenity values.

The Precinct takes a listed activity approach in preference to a fully effects-based approach because this provides:

• Certainty;

• Familiar, established concepts;

• Tested thresholds;

• Ease of enforcement;

• Straightforward application of standards; and

• Greater control of activities with effects that are more likely to cause significant adverse effects, particularly on residential amenity.

Precinct Plan

House and Business Assessment


The provisions provide for:

• Social, economic and cultural wellbeing.

• The efficient use of land and supporting infrastructure.

• The section 7(c) requirement for the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values.

• Council’s obligation under Section 31 (1)(aa) for “the establishment, implementation, and review of objectives, policies, and methods to ensure that there is sufficient development capacity in respect of housing and business land to meet the expected demands of the district”.

RMA s5, s7, s31(1)(aa)

NPS Urban Development Capacity




Links

• Increases housing supply by at least 930 residential units.

• Increases housing diversity by enabling medium density housing.

• Medium density housing makes efficient use of the finite land resource.

• Increases Porirua’s rating base and ability to fund community facilities and services.

• Economic growth and employment opportunities would arise from construction activity.

• A retirement village meets a particular housing need and provides ongoing employment opportunities.

• Enables medium density housing in close proximity to services and the Plimmerton Train Station.

• Shops and businesses in northern Porirua suburban centres may benefit from having more people living in close proximity and using their services.

• Use of building envelope standards provides certainty and enables many buildings to be permitted activities, avoiding the costs of resource consent processes.

• May require investment in public spaces to make up for relatively limited private open space.

• May require public investment in infrastructure beyond the site.

• Cost of protecting amenity is that it may reduce development potential.


• The Precinct A provisions, including those for building bulk and location and non-residential activities, are well understood and provide a high level of certainty of providing the anticipated housing yield and medium density residential amenity.


• The efficiency of the proposed provisions is high because the benefits of increasing housing supply while addressing environment matters outweigh the development costs.

• The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high because the objectives of providing medium density housing are achieved.




Alternative provisions could be more permissive towards non-residential activities or set purely effects-based standards for non-residential activities in particular. That would lead to greater uncertainty, increased transaction costs and greater risk of adversely affecting residential amenity.

Precinct B OBJECTIVES

PBPFZ-O1 Purpose of Precinct B

Precinct B:

1. Primarily provides for general residential activities; and

2. Provides for a range of non-residential activities that support the health and wellbeing of people and communities, and are compatible with the character and amenity values of Precinct B.

PBPFZ-O2 Character and amenity values of Precinct B

The scale, form and density of subdivision, use and development in Precinct B is characterised by:

1. A built form of single-storey and two-storey buildings;

2. A lesser density of buildings than anticipated in Precinct A;

3. Landscaping and trees, especially on street frontages and within road corridors; and

4. High quality urban design and residential amenity.

POLICIES

PBPFZ-P1 Residential Activities

Enable residential activities and a diverse range of residential unit types and sizes that are compatible with the built form, character and amenity values anticipated in Precinct B and are suitably serviced by infrastructure.

PBPFZ-P2 Non-Residential Activities

Enable non-residential activities that:

1. Contribute to the social, cultural and economic wellbeing of people and communities;

2. Are of a type and scale compatible with the character and amenity of the area;

3. Avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the amenity values beyond the site, including from signs and the location and scale of utility and external storage areas;

4. Avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the amenity values beyond the site from the movement of people and vehicles associated with the activity;

5. Have hours of operation compatible with residential amenity;

6. Have an operational need to locate in the Precinct; and

7. Are suitably serviced with infrastructure.

Avoid non-residential activities that are incompatible with the character and amenity values anticipated in Precinct B.

PBPFZ-P3 Integration and Connectivity

Provide for built development that integrates and connects with the surrounding environment.



PBPFZ-P4 Buildings and Structures

Provide for buildings and structures that are of a form, scale and design that achieve the character and amenity anticipated for Precinct B.

PBPFZ-P5 Urban Design

Require development in Precinct B to achieve high quality urban design by taking an integrated, comprehensive site planning and design approach to achieve the following:





d. Provide a positive frontage to the street;










a. Ensures all outdoor living areas in the development are well located and accessible;





RULES

PBPFZ-R1 Residential Activities

PBPFZ-R2 Building Activity

PBPFZ-R3 Impervious Surfaces Except Roads

PBPFZ-R4 Signs

PBPFZ-R5 Home Business

PBPFZ-R6 Supported Residential Care Activities

PBPFZ-R7 Education Facility

PBPFZ-R8 Visitor Accommodation

PBPFZ-R9 Emergency Service Facilities

PBPFZ-R10 Community Facilities

PBPFZ-R11 Healthcare Activities

PBPFZ-R12 Hospital



PBPFZ-R13 Industrial Activities

PBPFZ-R14 Rural Industries

PBPFZ-R15 Primary Production

PBPFZ-R16 All Other Activities


Precinct B is located at the northwestern end of the Plimmerton Farm Zone and provide for low to medium density residential development.

The Precinct B objectives, policies and rules provide the framework for managing the effects of development and providing for high levels of residential amenity and a high quality built environment.

Home business and other non-residential activities that support the social and economic health and wellbeing of the community may also occur in Precinct B, where they minimise adverse effects on residential character and amenity values.

Precinct Plan

House and Business Assessment







RMA s5, s7, s31(1)(aa)


Links


• Increases housing diversity by enabling general residential housing.

• General residential housing in appropriate areas makes efficient use of the finite land resource.








• Cost of protecting amenity is that it may reduce development potential.


• The Precinct B provisions, including those for building bulk and location and non-residential activities, are well understood and provide a high level of certainty of providing the anticipated housing yield and residential amenity.



• The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high because the objectives of providing general residential housing are achieved.


Alternative provisions could be more permissive towards non-residential activities or set purely effects-based standards for non-residential activities in particular. That would lead to greater uncertainty, increased transaction costs and greater risk of adversely affecting residential amenity.

Precinct C OBJECTIVES

PCPFZ-O1 Purpose of Precinct C

Residential development is sensitively located in relation to identified natural and landscape features and in accordance with the Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan.

PCPFZ-O2 Landscape values

The landscape characteristics and values of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape are maintained or enhanced.

PCPFZ-O3 Character and Amenity Values of the Kakaho Hillside Living Area

An expansive, green, amenity landscape of rolling and rugged terrain interspersed with defined clusters of residential development and sensitively located supporting infrastructure.

PCPFZ-O4 Character and Amenity Values of the Hillside Living Area



An expansive, green landscape of rolling and rugged terrain containing low density residential development and sensitively located supporting infrastructure.

PCPFZ-O5 Character and Amenity Values of Kakaho Basin North

A green landscape of gentle spurs and gullies containing large lot residential development and sensitively located supporting infrastructure.

PCPFZ-O5 Character and Amenity Values of the Kakaho Basin

An enclave of medium density residential development secluded in a natural hilltop basin framed by hillslopes and ridges to the north, west and south.

POLICIES

PCPFZ-P1 Natural, Landscape and Open Space Values

Maintain, protect and enhance the natural, landscape and open space values of:

1. The Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape described in PCPFZ-Appendix-1;

2. Significant Natural Areas; and

3. Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas;

by requiring development to be in located accordance with the Precinct C Plan.

PCPFZ-P2 Residential Use and Development within the Kakaho Hillside Living Area

Provide for residential use and development within the Kakaho Hillside Living Area where:

1. Built development is within the identified development areas of the Precinct C Plan;

2. There is appropriate infrastructure available to service the use or development, including on-site servicing where reticulated services are not available;

3. The use or development avoids significant adverse effects and avoids, remedies or mitigates any other adverse effects on the identified characteristics and landscape values described in PCPFZ-Appendix-1;

4. The measures proposed to mitigate adverse effects on the characteristics and values address:

a. The location, design and scale of any building or structures;

b. The visibility, reflectivity and colour of any buildings or structures;

c. Earthworks and access for driveway construction;

d. Landscaping or fencing especially on allotment boundaries; and

e. Visibility and similarity with surrounding colours, textures, patterns and forms.

Only provide for built development outside the identified development areas of the Precinct C Plan where the characteristics and values of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape are not compromised.

PCPFZ-P3 Residential Use and Development within the Hillside Living Area

Provide for residential use and development in the Hillside Living Area where:

1. The site design, layout and scale of the activity is compatible with the character and amenity values of the Hillside Living Area;


3. Areas of indigenous vegetation are retained, where practicable; and

4. Areas that are not feasible to develop are retired and revegetated, where practicable, which may include natural regeneration of indigenous vegetation on retired pasture.

PCPFZ-P4 Residential Use and Development within Kakaho Basin North

Provide for residential use and development in Kakaho Basin North where:



1. The site design, layout and scale of the activity is compatible with the character and amenity values of Kakaho Basin North;


3. The use or development avoids significant adverse effects and avoids, remedies or mitigates any other adverse effects on the characteristics and landscape values described in PCPFZ-Appendix-1;

4. Areas of indigenous vegetation are retained, where practicable;

5. Areas that are not feasible to develop are retired and revegetated, where practicable, which may include natural regeneration of indigenous vegetation on retired pasture;

6. The measures proposed to mitigate adverse effects on the characteristics and values address:

a. The location, design and scale of any building or structures;

b. The visibility, reflectivity and colour of any buildings or structures;

c. Earthworks and access for driveway construction;

d. Landscaping or fencing especially on allotment boundaries; and

e. Visibility and similarity with surrounding colours, textures, patterns and forms.

PCPFZ-P5 Residential Use and Development within the Kakaho Basin

Require residential use and development in the Kakaho Basin to achieve high quality urban design by taking an integrated, comprehensive site planning and design approach to the following:





d. Provide a positive frontage to the street;










a. Ensures all outdoor living areas in the development are well located, accessible and sunny;





PCPFZ-P6 Roading and Access

Provide for roading, access and associated lighting that avoid significant adverse effects on the landscape values of the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape.



PCPFZ-P7 Plantation Forestry

Avoid the establishment of new plantation forestry within Precinct C.

PCPFZ-P8 Non-Residential Activities

Provide for non-residential activities that:

1. Contribute to the social, cultural and economic wellbeing of people and communities;

2. Are of a type and scale compatible with the character, landscape and amenity values of the Precinct;

3. Avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the amenity values of adjoining sites, including from signs and the location and scale of utility and external storage areas;

4. Avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the amenity values of adjoining sites or the landscape from the movement of people and vehicles associated with the activity;

5. Have hours of operation compatible with residential amenity; and

6. Have an operational need to locate in Precinct C.

Avoid non-residential activities that are incompatible with the character, landscape and amenity values anticipated in Precinct C.

RULES

PCPFZ-R1 Building Activity within the Kakaho Hillside Living Area

PCPFZ-R2 Building Activity within the Hillside Living Area and Kakaho Basin North

PCPFZ-R3 Building Activity within the Kakaho Basin

PCPFZ-R4 Impervious Surfaces Except Roads in Precinct C

PCPFZ-R5 Signs in Precinct C

PCPFZ-R6 Residential Activity within the Kakaho Hillside Living Area, Hillside Living Area and Kakaho Basin North

PCPFZ-R7 Residential Activities within the Kakaho Basin

PCPFZ-R8 Home Business within the Kakaho Hillside Living Area, Hillside Living Area and Kakaho Basin North

PCPFZ-R9 Home Business within the Kakaho Basin

PCPFZ-R10 Supported Residential Care in Precinct C

PCPFZ-R11 Educational Facility in Precinct C

PCPFZ-R12 Visitor Accommodation in Precinct C

PCPFZ-R13 Emergency Services Facilities within the Kakaho Basin

PCPFZ-R14 Healthcare Activity within the Kakaho Basin

PCPFZ-R15 Community Facilities within the Kakaho Basin

PCPFZ-R16 Retirement Villages within the Kakaho Hillside Living Area, Hillside Living Area and Kakaho Basin North

PCPFZ-R17 Commercial Activities within the Kakaho Hillside Living Area, Hillside Living Area and Kakaho Basin North

PCPFZ-R18 Primary Production within the Kakaho Basin

PCPFZ-R19 Industrial Activities in Precinct C

PCPFZ-R20 Rural Industries in Precinct C

PCPFZ-R21 Hospital Activity in Precinct C



PCPFZ-R22 New plantation Forestry in Precinct C

PCPFZ-R23 Quarry or Mining Activities in Precinct C

PCPFZ-R24 Intensive Indoor Primary Production in Precinct C

PCPFZ-R25 All Other Activities in Precinct C


Precinct C provides for residential development while maintaining and enhancing the area’s natural and physical characteristics, including the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape, Significant Natural Areas and Biodiversity Offsetting and Restoration Areas.

The Plimmerton Farm Precinct Plan and the Precinct C provisions require residential development to be clustered or concentrated in identified locations, to prevent sprawl across the landscape. Precinct C is split into four distinct areas as follows:

• Kakaho Hillside Living Area is located within the Kakaho Significant Amenity Landscape. To protect the landscape values, the Precinct C Plan specifies a limited number of small development areas where future residential development is appropriate.

• Hillside Living Area is outside of the Kakaho Significant Amenity Landscape. The spur and gully landform of this area provides opportunities for low density residential development across the flatter, more accessible spurs and saddles, and restoration of steeper areas.

• Kakaho Basin North also has a spur and gully landform and provides for rural lifestyle living at greater density due to its limited visibility. However, as the area is partly within the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape its development needs to reflect sensitive landscape values.

• Kakaho Basin is located within the Kakaho Special Amenity Landscape Area in a natural basin with relatively gentle slopes. The Kakaho Basin is not visible from areas to the south or west, and has limited visibility from the north and east. The lack of visibility and the easier topography make this area suitable for conventional residential development.

The concentration of development in identified locations provides opportunities to maintain key landscape values, provide open space, walkways and cycleways as well as to restore and protect regenerating native vegetation. The clustering of developments also reduces roading and utility service infrastructure requirements.


The provisions provide for: RMA s5, s7(c), s31(1)(aa)








Links


• Increases housing diversity by enabling a range of housing types and densities.






• Cost of protecting landscape and amenity is that it may reduce development potential.

• Development costs are higher on steep land with landscape values. Lower yields also mean lower returns to offset the higher development costs.


• The Precinct C provisions, including those for building bulk and location and non-residential activities, are well understood and provide a high level of certainty of providing the anticipated housing yield and residential amenity while respecting the sensitive landscape and ecological values.





• The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high because the objectives of providing housing are achieved.


Alternative provisions could be more permissive towards non-residential activities or set purely effects-based standards for non-residential activities in particular. That would lead to greater uncertainty, increased transaction costs and greater risk of adversely affecting residential amenity, ecological and landscape values.

Precinct D OBJECTIVES

PDPFZ-O1 Purpose of Precinct D

Precinct D is characterised by commercial, retail and residential activities in accordance with the Precinct D Plan, with associated employment opportunities.

PDPFZ-O2 Character and Qualities of Precinct D

Precinct D is a safe and attractive environment containing buildings and areas that are well-designed and contribute positively to the urban space.

PDPFZ-O3 Scale of Built Development at the Precinct Interface

Built development at the interface with other Precincts is of a scale and proportion that is compatible with the adjoining precincts.

POLICIES

PDPFZ-P1 Activities

Enable a range of commercial, retail and residential activities that:

1. Are compatible with the role, function and character of Precinct D;

2. Avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the amenity of adjoining residential and open space areas; and

3. Do not undermine the role and function of the City Centre Zone.

PDPFZ-P2 Residential Activity

Enable residential activity where:

1. It is located above ground floor;

2. The building is designed to:

a. Ensure that indoor noise and ventilation levels are appropriate for residents, to mitigate reverse sensitivity to other Precinct D Local Centre activities; and

b. Achieve sunlight and daylight to, and outlook from, residential units;

c. Provide internal privacy for all residential units;



d. Ensure access both to and within the building is convenient, legible and efficient;

e. Ensure any shared outdoor living area is well located and of high quality;

f. Provide for servicing that is suitable, convenient and visually discreet; and

g. Ensure private balconies are readily accessible and of high quality to attract occupation and use.

PDPFZ-P3 Buildings and Structures (Except Buildings for Large Format Retail Activities)

Provide for built development that is:

1. Consistent with the Precinct D Plan;

2. Compatible with the character and amenity of the adjoining precincts; and

3. Suitably serviced by infrastructure.

PDPFZ-P4 Public Space Interface

Require new use and development (except Buildings A and B as shown in the Precinct D Plan) to provide:

1. A positive interface with public space;

2. A veranda or other forms of shelter for pedestrians;

3. Transparent glazing that allows visibility into and out of building frontages;

4. An obvious public entrance; and

5. A visually unobtrusive storage and servicing areas.

PDPFZ-P5 Large Format Retail Activity and Building

Provide for large format retail activities and buildings that:

1. Are consistent with the Precinct D Plan;

2. Avoid, remedy or mitigate any significant adverse effects;

3. Provides coherent design and appearance that integrates visual interest and mitigates visual dominance;

4. Have transparent glazing that allows visibility into and out of building frontages;

5. Have obvious public entrances;

6. Design and locate parking areas, vehicle access, outdoor storage and servicing arrangements to maintain streetscape and visual amenity and pedestrian safety;

7. Do not undermine the role and function of the Porirua City Centre in respect of nature and scale of activity;

8. Incorporate landscaping consistent with the Precinct D Plan, including high-quality landscape treatment that integrates with any adjoining landscape treatment along St Andrews Road including the drainage corridor. The landscape treatment must partially screen Buildings A and B (in the Precinct D Plan) and any service and loading facilities from St Andrews Road;

9. Design all spaces accessible to the public to be safe and minimise the opportunities for crime;

10. Respond to operational needs; and

11. Are suitably serviced by infrastructure.

PDPFZ-P6 Light Spill

Provide for external lighting that:

1. Has a functional or operational need;

2. Contributes to safety;

3. Avoids adverse effects on traffic safety; and

4. Avoids conflict with permitted sensitive activities in Precinct A.



PDPFZ-P7 Signs

Provide for signs that:

1. Have a functional or operational need, including large signs that need to be located at a Primary Sign location indicated on the Precinct D Plan;

2. Contribute to social and economic wellbeing;

3. Avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on traffic safety; and

4. Avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on amenity including in Precinct A.

RULES

PDPFZ-R1 Retail Activity

PDPFZ-R2 Commercial Service Activity

PDPFZ-R3 Healthcare Activity

PDPFZ-R4 Entertainment and Hospitality Activity

PDPFZ-R5 Educational Facility

PDPFZ-R6 Community Facility

PDPFZ-R7 Residential Activity

PDPFZ-R8 New Buildings and Structures Excluding Large Format Retail

PDPFZ-R9 Large Format Retail Activity and Buildings

PDPFZ-R10 Additions or Alterations to Buildings or Structures That Are Visible from Public Spaces

PDPFZ-R11 Signs

PDPFZ-R12 All Other Activities


The purpose of Precinct D is to provide a small, local centre with a compatible mix of residential, commercial and retail activities. The Precinct D plan includes a Large Format Area for large format retail and a Small Format Area for smaller retail and commercial service activities with residential apartments above. The buildings and activities respond positively to the streetscape and surrounding residential development.

The policies promote a range of commercial activities that are compatible with each other and with residential activities.

The Precinct D Plan in the Precinct Plan provides certainty about the anticipated development outcomes for the Precinct and its interface with adjacent roads and the medium density residential development in Precinct A.





RMA s5, s7(c), s31(1)(aa)






Links

• Provides shops and services for local residents.

• Precinct D is well located in relation to the wider transport network.

• Economic and employment opportunities would arise from construction activity and from the ongoing shops and services.

• Mixed use areas have potential for incompatible uses to come into conflict.

Re: Plimmerton Farm Proposed Plan Change – Property Economics (Attachment 3)

Risk of Acting or Not Acting if Information is Uncertain or Insufficient

• The Precinct D provisions, including those for building bulk and location and residential activities, are well understood and provide a high level of certainty of providing the outcomes sought.



The effectiveness of the proposed provisions is high because the objective of providing for commercial and residential activities is achieved.


Permitted activity rules would be an alternative to the resource consent framework proposed and would provide certainty of outcome but not necessarily the high quality urban design and amenity outcomes sought.

Consequential amendments to the Operative District Plan AMENDMENT 1 [TABLE OF CONTENTS]

Update Add Plimmerton Farm Zone to Table Of Contents PFZ Plimmerton Farm Zone

AMENDMENT 2 [A5 Identification of Zones]

Add text identifying zones Eight Nine distinct zones have been identified within Porirua City: the City Centre, the Industrial, the Suburban, the Aotea Supermarket, the Judgeford Hills, the Rural, the Recreation, and the Open Space and the Plimmerton Farm zones. These zones have been defined by quite different rules, standards and assessment criteria.



AMENDMENT 3 [A5 Identification of Zones]

Add heading and text identifying zones Plimmerton Farm Zone The Plimmerton Farm Zone is described in Chapter PF - Plimmerton Farm.

AMENDMENT 4 [B1 General Issues]

Add to list of zones The environmental issues addressed by the Plan for the eight nine zones include the following: (vii) To recognise and provide for development in the Plimmerton Farm Zone in accordance with specific criteria.

AMENDMENT 5 [C6 Subdivision]

Add statement that C6 does not apply to Plimmerton Farm C6 does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone, which contains zone-specific subdivision provisions.

AMENDMENT 6 [C7 Transport]

Add statement that C7 does not apply to Plimmerton Farm C7 does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone, which contains zone-specific transport provisions.

AMENDMENT 7 [C9 Landscape and Ecology]

Add statement that C9 does not apply to Plimmerton Farm C9 does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone, which contains zone-specific landscape and ecology provisions.

AMENDMENT 8 [C11 Noise]

Add statement that C11 does not apply to Plimmerton Farm C11 does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone, which contains zone-specific noise provisions.

AMENDMENT 9 [C12 Natural Hazards]

Add statement that C12 does not apply to Plimmerton Farm C12 does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone, which contains zone-specific natural hazards provisions. AMENDMENT 10 [C13 Signs]

Add statement that C13 does not apply to Plimmerton Farm C13 does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone, which contains zone-specific signs provisions.

AMENDMENT 11 [C15 Hazardous Substances]

Add statement that C15 does not apply to Plimmerton Farm C15 does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone.

AMENDMENT 12 [D Rules and Standards, Guide to the Maps and Rules, The Map Volume]

Add statement under the heading “The Map Volume” explaining Plimmerton Farm Zone mapping 4. The Plimmerton Farm Zone is shown on Maps A7 and A12 and, for convenience of use, repeated on a single Map A-PFZ.

AMENDMENT 13 [E Financial Contributions]

Add statement that E does not apply to Plimmerton Farm E does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone.

AMENDMENT 14 [F Information to be Supplied]

Add statement that F does not apply to Plimmerton Farm F does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone.

AMENDMENT 15 [H Car Parking, Vehicle Movements and Roads]

Add statement that H does not apply to Plimmerton Farm H does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone, which contains zone-specific transport provisions.



AMENDMENT 16 [NU Network Utilities]

Add Plimmerton Farm Zone to table of rules for roading 6.1.34-6.1.39 Roading and Traffic and Transport Structures New roads in the Plimmerton Farm Zone are subject to Rule TR-R3 in the Plimmerton Farm Zone, Transport Section.


Add Plimmerton Farm Zone to table of standards for height 7.2 Height All Shopping Centre Areas and Aotea Supermarket Zone and Plimmerton Farm Zone


Add Plimmerton Farm Zone to table of standards for size and diameter 7.3 Size and Diameter Suburban or Aotea Supermarket Zone or Plimmerton Farm Zone


Add Plimmerton Farm Zone to table of standards for separation distance and setbacks 7.4 Separation distance and setbacks 7.4.6 - Plimmerton Farm Zone – No less than 10m from any property boundary – No less than 2m too all boundaries


Add statement that earthworks in the Plimmerton Farm Zone must meet the requirements of Section EW Earthworks of the Plimmerton Farm Zone. 7.6 Earthworks 7.6.1 Earthworks in the Plimmerton Farm Zone Earthworks in the Plimmerton Farm Zone must meet the requirements of Section EW Earthworks of the Plimmerton Farm Zone.


Add statement that native vegetation clearance in the Plimmerton Farm Zone must meet the requirements of Section ECO Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity of the Plimmerton Farm Zone. 7.7 Vegetation 7.7.1 Native vegetation clearance in the Plimmerton Farm Zone Native vegetation clearance in the Plimmerton Farm Zone must meet the requirements of Section ECO Ecosystems and Indigenous Biodiversity of the Plimmerton Farm Zone.


Add Plimmerton Farm Zone to table of standards for noise. 7.8 Noise Plimmerton Farm - Plimmerton Farm Zone, Noise Section, Standard NOISE S1

AMENDMENT 23 [PFZ Plimmerton Farm Zone]

Insert new chapter Plimmerton Farm Zone

AMENDMENT 24 [I Hazardous Facility Screening Procedure]

Add statement that I does not apply to Plimmerton Farm I does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone.

AMENDMENT 25 [M Interpretation]

Add statement that M does not apply to Plimmerton Farm M does not apply to the Plimmerton Farm Zone, which contains zone-specific definitions.



Why these provisions are included in the plan

To ensure that existing district wide provisions apply or do not apply as appropriate to Plimmerton Farm Zone, and to ensure that Plimmerton Farm Zone is referenced in the zoned based provisions of the Network Utility chapter.

How these provisions achieve the purpose of the RMA





• The consequential amendments continue the established district wide approach in Porirua, unless more specific provisions have been proposed for the Plimmerton Farm Zone.

Risk of Acting or Not Acting if Information is Uncertain or Insufficient

• The district wide approach is well understood and provide a high level of certainty.


The efficiency of the provisions is high because the benefits outweigh the costs.

The existing approach has been proven to be effective in enabling network utilities across Porirua City. The amendments will ensure that the existing approach is used for the Plimmerton Farm Zone.


Additional Plimmerton Farm Zone specific provisions for network utilities could have been proposed. However the existing provisions have proven to be satisfactory.


Proposed Plan Change 18 Plimmerton Farm December 2019 Section 32 Report

Attachments
