Skip to main content.

11 Open space findings

The following cases were reviewed that included references to the subject of urban open spaces:

  • Inner City East Neighbourhood Group v Christchurch City Council (C14/06)

  • Intercontinental Hotel and Others v Wellington Regional Council and Waterfront Investments Ltd (W15/08)

  • Mitchell v Waitakere City Council (A21/00)

  • North Shore City Council v Auckland Regional Council [1997] NZRMA 59.

Some cases also referenced other urban subjects and, accordingly, may or may not be referred to under those subjects. Each case is summarised in Appendix 1.

In terms of open space, the review considered the importance of street quality as well as the quality of large urban public spaces and urban edge open space. Few cases appear to address this particular area.

11.1 Urban edge open space

The Court has found that the values associated with open landscape located at the edge of an urban growth area can be sufficiently important to protect it from urban development. In the case of North Shore City Council v Auckland Regional Council, a landscape assessment identified two types of landscape and the Court held that one had open space values that were important to maintain. In another case (Mitchell v Waitakere City Council), the Court reconciled the pressure for development with open space and other values through the application of specific density controls.

11.2 Urban open space

In one case involving urban open space, the Court found it was important to maintain the value of a high amenity walking priority area by restricting vehicles. The Court disallowed a development that would have required access for service and other vehicles across a highly used open space (Intercontinental Hotel and Others v Wellington Regional Council and Waterfront Investments Ltd). This decision confirmed that, although an area used and valued as public open space may not be protected by a design guide or district plan rule, its associated values could be determined by real-time assessment.

11.3 Open space policy

There are other provisions outside of the RMA that can also impact on open space. Under the Reserves Act 1977, for instance, reserve management plans and other requirements concerning changes to open spaces are common considerations for councils.

Another consideration in respect of open space is the value that can be attributed to roads or road reserves. This extends from ‘streetscape’ value through to the recreational amenity of road spaces. In Inner City East Neighbourhood Group v Christchurch City Council there was an interesting link between the road stopping process and district plan policies and provisions for open space. In this case, the Court utilised the district plan provisions to test the proposed road stopping and found it to be consistent with the plan’s aspirations. The Court allowed the stopping on the basis that it would act as a connection to a large open space, thus promoting the council’s objective of providing additional open space where deficiencies were identified.

11.4 Open space character

The character of urban open space being seen or ‘read’ as ‘public’ was also an important determinant in one case. In Intercontinental Hotel and Others v Wellington Regional Council and Waterfront Investments Ltd, the effect that a proposed hotel development might have on people’s impression of the privatisation of the ground-floor public space around the building was a consideration of the Court in disallowing the proposal.

 

[ |