Skip to main content.

Appendix 1: Research Methodology

MWH New Zealand Ltd consultant team

Andrew Guerin (Project Manager)
Penelope Laurenson
Kirsty van Reenen
April Peckham
Caroline van Halderen

Assessment process

The consultants developed a questionnaire in the form of a matrix to guide the assessment of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) documents. The questionnaire was based on established urban design principles as set out in the New Zealand Urban Design Protocol and the Review of Urban Design Case Law. This resulted in a list of 10 ‘headline’ criteria. Although there are many ways of representing urban design principles, this combination was chosen because it provided a pragmatic framework for assessing RMA plans for the purposes of this research. The criteria were based on existing published criteria in the Urban Design Protocol, and more recent refinements of these in the Review of Urban Design Case Law.

A brief description of the headline criteria is included as Table A1.

Table A1: Headline criteria

Headline criteria Brief description Links to the Urban Design Protocol’s seven ‘Cs’ Source document Links to The Value of Urban Design
Amenity The qualities and characteristics of an [urban] place or area that contribute to people’s appreciation of its pleasantness, aesthetic coherence, and cultural and recreational attributes. Choice, context, character Review of Urban Design Case Law, section 2 RMA High-quality public realm
Character The physical qualities of an urban place or area as determined by the combination of building types, age, street pattern, open space, slope, vegetation pattern, mix of land uses, and climate. Character Urban Design Protocol Local character
Choice Quality urban design fosters diversity and offers people choice in the urban form of our towns and cities, and choice in densities, building types, transport options and activities. Choice Urban Design Protocol, Review of Urban Design Case Law (density) Adaptability, mixed use, density
Collaboration Quality urban design requires good communication and coordinated actions from all decision makers: central government, local government, professionals, transport operators, developers and users. Collaboration Urban Design Protocol User participation, integrated decision making
Commerce The type, location and interaction of businesses within an urban place or area that influences employment opportunities, viability, services and opportunities for growth. Choice, context Review of Urban Design Case Law Mixed use, connectivity
Connectivity The way in which people and goods are conveyed within and to urban places and areas, including by walking, motorised and self-propelled means and the infrastructure required to facilitate it. Connections, choice Urban Design Protocol, Review of Urban Design Case Law Connectivity
Custodianship Quality urban design reduces the environmental impacts of towns and cities through environmentally sustainable and responsive solutions. Custodianship recognises the lifetime costs of buildings and infrastructure, and aims to hand on places to the next generation in as good or better condition. Custodianship Urban Design Protocol Local character, connectivity, density, mixed use, adaptability
Heritage Includes historic sites, structures, places and areas; archaeological sites; and sites of significance to Māori, including wāhi tapu and surroundings associated with natural and physical resources [in an urban area]. Character, context, custodianship Review of Urban Design Case Law, section 2 RMA Local character

Open space

The provision of, or changes to, open spaces within an urban place or area that may be for recreational, aesthetic or natural values.

Character, context

Review of Urban Design Case Law

High-quality urban realm, local character, density
Urban growth management The definition of the extent and location of new and existing urban areas, including the process and mechanisms for planning the form and patterns of these areas and the implications for change in land use, such as transport. Context, choice, character, connections, custodianship Review of Urban Design Case Law All

The MWH consultants developed the following sub-criteria to expand and clarify the headline criteria. This included plan provisions the consultant team expected to find in RMA planning documents. The sub-criteria were based on the details of the Urban Design Protocol and experience of the consultant team from working with a variety of RMA documents across the country. They were developed to be generic enough to compare across plans, but detailed enough to elaborate on the headline criteria. The sub-criteria were developed for the purposes of this research only and do not represent a comprehensive set of criteria for assessing the general quality of urban design provisions in plans.

The sub-criteria are shown in Table A2.

Table A2: Sub-criteria

Headline criteria Sub-criteria
Amenity
  • Provisions that promote the retention of urban amenity values – that is, pleasantness, aesthetic, coherence, cultural and recreational.
Character
  • Provisions that retain a sense of place, for example, retaining architectural style of character areas.
  • The protection and enhancement of urban water bodies.
  • The identification and protection of distinctive landforms.
  • The identification, protection and enhancement of indigenous vegetation.
Choice
  • Reward/allow increasing densities in association with provision of open space.
  • Maximum parking standards.
  • Ensures public spaces are accessible by everybody, including people with disabilities.
  • Provision for a variety of housing types.
  • Provision for a variety of section sizes.
  • The provision of higher density subdivision and development around town centres and public transport modes.
  • Variety of permitted maximum building heights.
  • Site coverage that can affect housing density and design.
Collaboration
  • Uses a collaborative approach to long-term structure planning including subdivision design that acknowledges the contributions of many different disciplines and perspectives.
  • Involves communities in meaningful decision-making processes for developments with high community interest, for example, through incorporation of consultative methods in design guides.
  • Forges public–private sector partnerships.
Commerce
  • Provisions of mixed-use opportunities in town and neighbourhood centres.
  • Design controls to enhance shopping/working/living experiences in town and neighbourhood centres.
  • Management of large format retail developments.
  • Provision of home-based businesses.
Connectivity
  • Provisions that promote walking, cycling and different modes of transport.
  • Constraints and opportunities to provide for connectivity of transport network connections with other streets, for example, limitations on connecting to major roads (constraint).
  • Provisions to reduce the level of vehicular traffic and/or traffic speed.
  • Provisions to encourage safe, attractive and secure pathways and links between landmarks and neighbourhoods.
  • Facilitates green networks that link public and private open space.
  • Streets and other thoroughfares are designed as positive spaces with multiple functions.
  • Provides for environments that encourage people to become physically active.
Custodianship
  • Incorporates and encourages renewable energy sources in subdivision and development, for example, passive solar gain.
  • Incorporates water-saving devices in subdivision and development.
  • Incorporates noise mitigation to reduce noise impacts from major infrastructure, airports, ports, new roads.
  • Incorporates noise mitigation to reduce noise impacts from town centres.
  • Encourages buildings, spaces, places and transport networks that are safer, with less crime and fear of crime, for example, crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED).
  • Provision to consider residential building in relation to the street, for example, minimum front yard standard for living areas.
  • Avoids or mitigates natural and man-made hazards.
  • Considers the ongoing care and maintenance of buildings, spaces, places and networks.
  • Uses design to improve environmental performance and infrastructure.
  • Considers the impact of design on people’s health, for example, provision of outdoor living courts.
Heritage
  • The provision of a heritage place register and an indication of its main focus.
  • Basis for the heritage registers.
  • Level of protection.
  • Inclusion of non-regulatory provisions.
  • Responding to heritage values of an area – reuse, maintain, enhance.
Open space
  • Policy framework to provide for open spaces, including the provision of a wide range of reserves.
  • Provision of policies and standards to promote better designed streets and streetscapes and promote as open spaces with public surveillance, for example, landscaping/tree planting requirements, traffic calming.
  • Open space areas associated with stormwater/utilities/streets, for example, integration of stormwater and provision/retention of open space.
  • Having clear boundaries between public and private open spaces, for example, through appropriate use of fencing.
Urban growth management
  • Provisions that provide for the management of urban growth.
  • Inclusion of structure plans in relation to urban growth management strategies/studies.
  • Provisions that provide for the reuse of brownfield sites/reuse of buildings, urban renewal.
  • Collaboration policy, with region and/or territorial local authority/ies in relation to growth areas.

Each RMA document was then assessed based on the extent to which these sub-criteria could be found reflected in various plan provisions. Plan provisions counted included:

  • issues
  • objectives
  • policies
  • rules
  • standards
  • other methods identified in the plan (such as regulatory design guides, structure plans)
  • references to other methods not in the plan (such as urban design strategies, local area guides).

Only the chapters of each document relevant to urban design were assessed. These included the commercial, town centre, residential, open space and recreation chapters. Rural chapters were not assessed.

A weighting system was applied based on the number of plan provisions identified under each sub-criterion. It was assumed that the more times a document mentioned a particular urban design sub-criteria, the more in-depth its consideration. The extent to which each document dealt with the urban design sub-criteria was then categorised as high, medium, low or none.

Choosing the documents

The RMA documents for assessment were selected on a regional basis to help identify any linkages between regional and district planning documents. A pilot study was undertaken based mostly on documents for local authorities in the Wellington region. Other regions were chosen to include areas facing a range of urban growth scenarios – some under significant pressure from urban growth and other areas in decline. Metropolitan, provincial and rural areas with a range of population sizes were represented in the selection. The combined plans from three unitary authorities were selected. In all other regions, the regional policy statement plus a selection of district plans were assessed.

The 25 selected plans were as follows.

Auckland Region

  • Auckland Regional Policy Statement
  • Manukau City District Plan
  • Waitakere City District Plan
  • Papakura District Plan
  • Rodney District Plan

Bay of Plenty Region

  • Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement
  • Tauranga District Plan
  • Western Bay of Plenty District Plan
  • Opotiki District Plan

Gisborne

  • Gisborne Combined Regional Land and District Plan

Wellington Region

  • Wellington Regional Policy Statement
  • Wellington City District Plan
  • Kapiti Coast District Plan

Manawatu–Wanganui Region

  • Rangitikei District Plan

Tasman

  • Tasman Resource Management Plan

Nelson

  • Nelson Resource Management Plan

Canterbury Region

  • Canterbury Regional Policy Statement
  • Timaru District Plan
  • MacKenzie District Plan

Otago Region

  • Otago Regional Policy Statement
  • Dunedin City District Plan
  • Waitaki District Plan
  • Queenstown Lakes District Plan

West Coast Region

  • West Coast Regional Policy Statement
  • Buller District Plan