3. Results
3.10 West Coast Region
3.10.1 West Coast Regional Policy Statement
West Coast Regional Council has reviewed and verified the questionnaire and summary assessment of the West Coast Regional Policy Statement and requested some minor amendments. The Council also noted that urban design has not specifically been addressed in the Regional Policy Statement as it is not a core function under the RMA, and not a significant issue in the West Coast region.
3.10.1.1 Context
The West Coast Regional Council has a population of approximately 31,500 residents (Census 2006). The population grew 3.4% between 2001 and 2006. With 86% of the region in Crown Conservation Estate and 75% of the region is in native forest, it leaves only 14% of its land rateable. This makes the West Coast region the highest rated region in the country. This places financial pressures on local authorities and communities. The economic base of the region is largely in the primary sector (farming, forestry, fishing and mining) with the fastest growing tourism industry resulting in increased development in some areas. The region is characterised by a number of small separated towns with limited infrastructure. Main urban design issues are retention of built heritage to maintain the townships' unique character and addressing natural hazards in some of the coastal settlements. The Council has a projected income under its 2008/2009 Annual Plan of $166 million. This is a per capita income of $5354. Eleven per cent of that income comes from rates, 62% from vector management, 6% from investments, and 5% from user charges.
3.10.1.2 Plan Provisions
The West Coast Regional Policy Statement (RPS) became operative in 2000. The following provides a summary of the nature and extent of provisions under the Plan that incorporate and promote the urban design criteria under the questionnaire.
Amenity
There are no relevant provisions under the RPS.
Commerce
There are no relevant provisions under the RPS.
Choice
The RPS provides for public access to the coast and other water bodies. There are no provisions addressing the other sub-criteria under choice.
Custodianship
The RPS promotes the issue of sustainable energy resources and promoting energy efficient design. There are a number of provisions for avoiding loss of life and damage to property from natural and man-made hazards. This includes avoiding new development in coastal erosion prone areas in particular. There are no provisions addressing the other sub-criteria under custodianship.
Collaboration
The RPS recognises the need for an integrated approach to cross boundary issues and promotes inter-agency cooperation and information sharing. The Council also has a policy for consulting communities over natural hazards. There are no provisions relevant to public/private partnerships.
Character
There are no provisions for the retention or promotion of character of a 'sense of place'. However, there are a medium number of provisions for each of the identification and protection of water bodies, landforms, and indigenous vegetation, in use, development and subdivision planning and design.
Heritage
The RPS promotes the identification and scheduling of heritage places and areas, and archaeological sites, and provides assessment criteria for identifying heritage items. Provisions also promote the protection of heritage values and avoiding adverse effects on heritage and archaeological sites.
Open Space
There are no relevant provisions under the RPS.
Connectivity
There are no relevant provisions under the RPS.
Urban Growth
There are no relevant provisions under the RPS.
3.10.1.3 Summary
The West Coast Regional Policy Statement has a relatively low number of urban design provisions. Under the RPS, 22% of the questionnaire sub-criteria are addressed through the Plan provisions. The following graph illustrates the proportion of those sub-criteria for which the number of relevant provisions was high, medium or low, or for which there were no relevant provisions.
Read a description of this figure
Extent of relevant provisions in operative RPS
The graph shows the extent to which the sub-criteria have been incorporated in West Coast Regional Council’s RPS. Seventy eight percent of the relevant provisions do not address the sub-criteria. Twenty two percent of the relevant provisions address the sub-criteria. These are addressed as follows: 10% at a low weighting and 12% at a medium weighting.
The above graph shows that for over three quarters of the sub-criteria there were no relevant provisions, and none of the sub-criteria have a ‘high’ number of relevant provisions under the RPS.
Some sub-criteria under choice, custodianship, collaboration, character and heritage are addressed through the Regional Policy Statement. Amenity, commerce, open space, connectivity and urban growth management are not addressed under the Regional Policy Statement. Gaps include:
- no provisions promoting the retention of amenity values
- no provisions addressing commerce issues
- no promotion of a range of living opportunities
- no provisions encouraging water saving devices, acoustic treatment, crime prevention through environmental design principles, low impact stormwater, or the ongoing maintenance of buildings and spaces
- no provisions encouraging the retention or promotion of urban character and identity
- lack of non-regulatory incentives to manage heritage resources
- no provisions addressing open space requirements and design
- no promotion of connectivity, cycling and walking
- no urban growth management or encouragement of structure planning and brownfield reuse.
3.10.2 Buller District Plan
Buller District Council was provided with the questionnaire and summary assessment of the Buller District Plan. They chose not to make any comments or request any changes.
3.10.2.1 Context
Buller District Council is a rural council with a population of 9700 residents (Census 2006). The district is sparsely populated with an average of 1.2 people per sq/km, compared to the national average of 14.1 per sq/km (2001 Census). The population grew less than 1% between 2001 and 2006. Eighty-seven per cent of the land in Buller is vested in the Department of Conservation, with a further 3-4% vested in Council. Ninety per cent of the land in Buller is in public ownership. The Buller district covers an area of 8574 sq/km, stretching from Punakaiki in the south to Karamea in the north and inland as far as Springs Junction. The Council has undertaken revitalisation projects including upgrading the Westport town centre and approaches to the town. The landscaped areas reflect the natural and historic heritage of the town and its unique sense of place. Retention of heritage buildings which provides a link to the past is also an issue. The Council has a projected operating income under its 2008/2009 Annual Plan of $29 million. This is a per capita income of $2990. Thirty-six per cent of that income comes from rates, 5% from investments, and 58% from other income sources.
3.10.2.2 Plan Provisions
The Buller District Plan became operative in 2000. There are no relevant plan changes. The following provides a summary of the nature and extent of provisions under the Plan that incorporate and promote the urban design criteria under the questionnaire.
Amenity
The Plan includes a medium number of provisions aimed at maintaining amenity.
Commerce
The Plan encourages the ‘intermingling’ of activities within the urban environment, so long as conflicts between activities are avoided. There is a requirement for verandahs in the town centre, but no controls on large format retail, or provision for home-based businesses.
Choice
The Plan provides for flexibility in lot sizes so long as they can practically accommodate a dwelling/building, and meet relevant activity standards. The Plan aims for a diversity of living opportunities. Different permitted heights are provided for residential and commercial areas.
Custodianship
There are few provisions relating to custodianship under the Plan. Provisions do promote avoiding the risks of natural hazards on communities and maintaining building and land to preserve amenity. However, there are no provisions addressing issues of energy efficiency, water saving, low impact stormwater, crime prevention through environmental design, acoustic insulation or the impact of design on people's health.
Collaboration
There are no relevant provisions under the Plan.
Character
The Plan has a medium number of provisions promoting the retention of street character, and the identification and protection of indigenous vegetation. There are also some provisions protecting the character of outstanding landscapes and wetlands. There are no provisions for the promotion of identity in new developments.
Heritage
A high number of provisions address the management of heritage items, including controls on subdivision, destruction and modification. Archaeological sites, historic buildings, places and items, waahi tapu, and notable trees, are identified and included in the heritage schedule of the Plan. There are no non-regulatory methods or incentives for heritage management.
Open Space
There are no relevant provisions under the Plan.
Connectivity
There are no relevant provisions under the Plan.
Urban Growth
There are a few provisions requiring the definition of an urban edge and avoiding adverse effects of growth. There are no provisions relating to structure plans, reuse of brownfield sites, of collaboration with other councils.
3.10.2.3 Summary
The Buller District Plan has a relatively low number of urban design provisions. Under the District Plan, 37% of the questionnaire sub-criteria are addressed through the Plan provisions. The following graph illustrates the proportion of those sub-criteria for which the number of relevant provisions was high, medium or low, or for which there were no relevant provisions.
Read a description of this figure
Extent of relevant provisions in operative District Plan
The graph shows the extent to which the sub-criteria have been incorporated in Buller District Council’s District Plan. Sixty three percent of the relevant provisions do not address the sub-criteria. Thirty seven percent of the relevant provisions address the sub-criteria. These are addressed as follows: 29% at a low weighting, 6% at a medium weighting, and 2% at a high weighting.
The above graph shows that for nearly two-thirds of the sub-criteria there were no relevant provisions, and for nearly a third there were a ‘low’ number provisions under the Buller District Plan.
The urban design criteria that are addressed relatively well under the Plan include amenity, character, and heritage.
Some sub-criteria under commerce, choice, custodianship and urban growth management are addressed through the Plan.
Collaboration, open space and connectivity are not addressed under the Plan. Gaps include:
- no provisions addressing home-based businesses, or controls on large format retail
- no maximum car parking controls, or encouragement of higher densities around town centres
- no provisions encouraging renewable energy, water saving devices, acoustic treatment, crime prevention through environmental design principles, low impact stormwater, or the ongoing maintenance of buildings and spaces
- no provisions encouraging collaboration
- no provisions promoting character and identity in new developments
- lack of non-regulatory incentives to manage heritage resources
- no provisions addressing open space requirements and design
- no promotion of connectivity, cycling and walking
- no encouragement of structure planning, or brownfield reuse.
