DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”

2GP banner

Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

If you’re struggling with the Proposed 2GP webpages and how they tie together, whatifdunedin STRONGLY ADVISES you sight a paper copy of the full document at the DCC 2GP drop-in centre (11 George Street), DCC service centres or public libraries before setting out to write your individual or group submissions. Note you may also submit further submissions in discovery, utilise this opportunity fully.

DCC in providing the online Proposed 2GP “eplan” is depending on you The Public to ‘give up’ on the district plan document – to drive through the DEVELOPMENT CHANGE in effect, unopposed. Nothing could be clearer. Don’t let this happen. Talk to family, friends, colleagues, lawyers, planners, RMA professionals, anyone (!!) and hard grill the DCC chief executive, group and general managers, and City Planning officers as soon as possible to help frame your response(s).

Useful 3.10.15 banner 2

Received.

Diane Yeldon
Submitted on 2015/10/03 at 6:54 pm

I have come to the sad conclusion that city planning is now just broken and unfixable. 2GP depends conceptually on the Spatial Plan and here are the Strategic Directions from the Spatial Plan (quoting):

The Spatial Plan is based on six key Strategic Directions: 1) A liveable city and 2) An environmentally sustainable and resilient city, (which) are supported by four strategic directions: 3) A memorable and distinctive city; 4) A vibrant and exciting city; 5) An accessible and connected city; and 6) A city that enables a prosperous and diverse economy. (ends)

Just as people say about using computers: GIGO (garbage in, garbage out), if you start a plan with GARBAGE, you can’t possibly end up with anything but garbage. 2GP just lifts this ‘vibrant’ and ‘exciting’ woolliness from the Spatial Plan and will give specific Rules supposedly derived from it the force of law in the new District Plan.

And no longer are explanations for District Plan Policies and, more critically, Rules required by law. So the local authority doesn’t have to justify the existence of a Rule at all, let alone in any accountable way. Rules can now exist just because they say so. (Definitely more authoritarian.)

If anyone wanted to understand what kind of city 2GP is likely to result in when operative, then a useful approach might be to work backwards from the Rules. I am quite certain that the Rules will not result in these green Utopian, ‘affluence and fun-for-all’ Strategic Directions becoming anything like a reality. Especially when you take into account how little money is likely to be around in both the private and public sectors to make some of these wish-list items happen.

More likely, there will be plenty of business for planning professionals and lawyers to try to clarify and argue how Rules etc might be applied to a specific site and proposed use. All trying to make sense (for a fee!) of what will appear to the vast majority of people as a chaotic and incomprehensible mess.

[ends]

█ For related posts and comments on the Proposed 2GP enter the term *2gp* in the search box at right.

Dunedin City Council
Public Notification of Proposed Second Generation Dunedin City District Plan

This item was published on 26 Sep 2015

The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requires the Dunedin City Council (DCC) to prepare a district plan to manage Dunedin’s natural and physical resources to meet the needs of Dunedin’s current and future generations and to provide for their social, economic and cultural wellbeing. The DCC has prepared the Proposed Second Generation Dunedin City District Plan (2GP), which is proposed to replace the current and operative Dunedin City District Plan. The DCC is now notifying the Proposed 2GP for public submission pursuant to clause 5, schedule 1 of the RMA.

█ Submissions must be lodged before 5pm on Tuesday, 24 November 2015.

There are many differences between the current District Plan and the Proposed 2GP. The Proposed 2GP affects all properties in the DCC area and may change what you and your neighbours can do with your properties. We encourage you to take a look to see what it means for you.

In summary, here are some of the key changes. The Proposed 2GP:
● includes a new strategic directions section that sets out key issues for the city, ‘big picture’ outcomes to be achieved, and sets up the plan’s zoning and other methods
● includes new hazard management areas, where it is proposed to manage development to better protect people and property from natural hazard events
● identifies some new coastal and other landscape management areas where limitations on new buildings are proposed
● strengthens the rules for indigenous vegetation clearance
● increases the number of rural and rural residential zones, and increases the minimum site size for subdivision in most of the rural zones
● includes nine new medium density areas, where development density can be increased
● proposes a more enabling approach to earthquake strengthening and additions and alterations necessary for the re-use of heritage buildings
● includes two new residential heritage precincts (Queen Street and Arthur Street areas) and a reduction in the area of commercial heritage precincts
● makes it easier to build family flats in most zones to provide more housing options for extended families, particularly in response to an ageing population
● includes new rules related to public amenities and temporary activities, to enable smaller events to be held, and some public amenities to be built, without the need for resource consent
● manages the height of fences along the boundaries with roads and reserves to maintain a visual connection with these spaces, to improve safety and maintain amenity values
● reduces some on-site car parking requirements for residential properties and other activities to enable people to have more choice in deciding how much car parking is needed
● allows garages and carports to be built in the front yards of houses, with some limitations, rather than always requiring a resource consent.

█ WHERE TO GO FOR MORE INFORMATION

To understand in more detail how the Proposed 2GP affects you, we encourage you to check out the full version. The Proposed 2GP has been prepared as an electronic plan (eplan) and is most easily viewed online at http://www.2gp.dunedin.govt.nz.

A list of the material incorporated in the Proposed 2GP by reference, and details of where this material can be purchased, are also available at http://www.2gp.dunedin.govt.nz and form part of this public notice. This material is available for inspection at the 2GP drop-in centre, 11 George Street, Dunedin.

Printed copies of the Proposed 2GP and reports prepared under section 32 of the RMA are available for inspection until 5pm, Tuesday 24 November at:
● the 2GP drop-in centre, 11 George Street, Dunedin, 8.30am to 5pm, Monday to Friday.
● public libraries and service centres at Dunedin, Middlemarch, Mosgiel, Port Chalmers, Blueskin Bay (Waitati) and Waikouaiti.

At our drop-in centre, DCC staff will be available to answer questions about the Proposed 2GP and help you understand how to make a submission. Alternatively, you can call 477 4000.

Community presentations will also be held as follows:

MOSGIEL: Tuesday, 13 October, 7 – 9pm
Lounge Room, Mosgiel Coronation Hall, 97 Gordon Road

MIDDLEMARCH: Thursday, 15 October, 7 – 9pm
Strath Taieri Community Centre, 11 Swansea Street, Middlemarch

PORTOBELLO: Tuesday, 20 October, 7 – 9pm
Portobello Hall, Portobello Road (Latham Park)

PORT CHALMERS: Thursday, 22 October, 7 – 9pm
Port Chalmers Town Hall, Grey Street

BRIGHTON: Tuesday, 27 October, 7 – 9pm
Ocean View Hall, 812 Brighton Road, Dunedin

WAIKOUAITI: Thursday, 29 October, 7-9pm
East Otago Events Centre, Main Road, Waikouaiti.

█ LEGAL EFFECT

The Environment Court has ordered that the rules listed in Table 1 below have immediate legal effect from notification of this proposed plan ([2015] NZEnvC 165). As part of this order the Court has stated that any person affected by it may apply to the Environment Court to have this order set aside in respect of part or all of any of the rules in Table 1. Any application to have the order set aside is required by the Environment Court to be supported by a full explanatory affidavit and sent to the Environment Court in Christchurch and to the DCC.

Table 1: Rules that have immediate legal effect (RMA s86D)
Proposed 2GP - Table 1 Rules that have immediate legal effect (RMA s86D)[click to enlarge]

There are some rules that the RMA deems to have legal effect when the proposed plan is notified (s86B(3)). These rules protect or relate to water, air, or soil (for soil conservation); or protect areas of significant indigenous vegetation; or protect areas of significant habitats of indigenous fauna; or protect historic heritage; or provide for or relate to aquaculture activities. The Council has resolved that they will only have legal effect once the Proposed 2GP is made operative. The rules are listed at http://www.2gp.dunedin.govt.nz and form part of this public notice. The rules are also identified in the 2GP. The remainder of the rules in the Proposed 2GP will not have legal effect when the plan is notified. These rules will have legal effect when decisions have been made on submissions, unless the RMA deems any rules to be operative earlier.

█ SUBMISSIONS

Any person may make a submission on the Proposed 2GP (subject to clause 6(4), schedule 1 of the RMA, which limits submissions relating to trade competition).

To make a submission please go to http://www.2gp.dunedin.govt.nz. We encourage you to make an online submission using the form and guidelines on the website. Submissions may also be made in hard copy. Submissions must be made in the prescribed form (see Form 5, Schedule 1 RMA (Forms, Fees and Procedure) Regulations 2003) and state whether or not you wish to be heard. Submission forms can be downloaded, filled out and submitted at the above website or picked up in hard copy from the drop-in centre.

For written submissions:

POST TO: Dunedin City Council, PO Box 5045, Moray Place, Dunedin 9058 – Attention Submission on 2GP

DELIVER TO: DCC Customer Services Agency, Ground floor, Civic Centre, 50 The Octagon, Dunedin – Attention Submission on Proposed 2GP

EMAIL TO: planning @dcc.govt.nz

█ Submissions must be lodged before 5pm, Tuesday, 24 November 2015.

After submissions have closed, the DCC will prepare a summary of submissions and publicly notify the availability of that summary.

There will be an opportunity for:
● any person representing a relevant aspect of the public interest;
● any person that has an interest that is greater than that of the general public; and
● the DCC

to make a further submission either supporting or opposing a submission or submissions already made.

If any person making a submission asks to be heard in support of his or her submission, a hearing must be held.

The Council will give its decision on the Proposed 2GP (including its reasons for accepting or rejecting submissions). People that have made a submission on a provision have the right to appeal any decision related to that provision, except for if a submission seeks to withdraw the whole proposed plan.

Public Notice (PDF, 39.5 KB)
A copy of the public notice as a pdf document

Contact DCC on 477 4000.
DCC Link

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Advertisements

14 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, LGNZ, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, SFO, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Urban design, What stadium

14 responses to “DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”

  1. Elizabeth

    Citing a proposed rule for front fences full of ”major failings”, Dunedin city councillor Hilary Calvert urges citizens to examine and make submissions on the new draft district plan.

    ### ODT Online Mon, 5 Oct 2015
    Don’t be fenced in by the district plan
    OPINION Buried in the proposed new rules in the 2GP (the replacement for the current district plan) is a rule about fencing that has little claim to having any right in it. This rule in the 2GP proposes fences built on the street in a residential area will be either no higher than 1.4 metres, or will be see-through over that height.
    Read more

    Despite what the proposed rule says, I suggest we don’t want builder special ZINCALUME® perimeter fencing that creates the Gang Fortress appearance when used in ostensibly garden suburbs. Been to Twizel lately? – fortress fencing is a growing trend that denies any civil or welcoming on-street character presence – it’s bleak, monolithic and reductive. Further, try that around all four sides of your property to 2m, maybe with a 0.5m step down for the front fence. A shocker – but it happens. Local authorities need to address rules that deny this ‘pleasure’ in urban residential streets. Or, according to street context, rule that a registered architect or landscape architect design the ‘height’, modulation and sunlight effects and selection of appropriate materials and or plantings. Or else.

    But maybe Hilary Calvert likes her privacy.

    • The submission form is pretty scary, with mandatory fields where a submitter is supposed to identify the specific provision(s) of the proposed Plan which their submission relates to via Provision name and number, section name, map layer name or scheduled item number. Then tick one of the following boxes: I support the provision, I oppose the provision, I seek to have the above provision amended. For the last option, you are prompted to suggest amended wording.
      I think very few people could do this without the assistance of a planning professional.

      I did find some good stuff though. The ‘stakeholders’ meetings and invitation only workshops used in developing the plan have been well-documented in the reports attached to the plan. So the process used is actually reasonably transparent.
      And the librarians in the NZ Room printed out a nice colour map for me plus a colour print-out of the map legends. I suppose the e-maps work well enough for looking up a specific property address. And the computers on the first floor of the library are free to use and you could book one to look at the plan maps.

      • Elizabeth

        There is no need to put all in the submission form – just say “See attached.” on the form. Then attach a Word document with your text set out clearly in reference to relevant numbered section(s)* of the proposed 2GP. You can also attach (appendices) any photos, maps and overlays or whatever make sense for your submission.

        In fact I would avoid using the online form for any individual submission that has detail – their forms refuse to retain paragraph setout – a total abortion results.

        *which might also include cross-referencing to other sections of the proposed 2GP and or the current Dunedin City District Plan.

        This is why the public needs longer than 2 months for submission and a fully INDEPENDENT hearings panel.

    • Peter

      I have no problem with rules on fencing, particularly related to height restrictions. Allowing very high fences has the unintended consequence of social interaction/isolation being created in the community. People can no longer interact with each other…..or interface as the jargon goes.
      Go down Forbury Rd, St Clair. Over the years fences have gone upwards in increasing numbers. It is as much a wealthy peoples’ phenomenon as our gang bros who like corrugated iron and barbed wire. Just a classier form of social exclusion. High fences for the nobs is of course designed to keep the riff raff out.
      Added to that is the plain ugliness of high fences. Do we really want to create tunnelled streets lined with high fences?
      If you want to walk around your house starkers or drink booze at 7am, shag in the front living room, get yourself some lace curtains.

      • Hype O'Thermia

        I’m with Hilary Calvert on this one.
        Peter: “Allowing very high fences has the unintended consequence of social interaction/isolation being created in the community. People can no longer interact with each other” – but how often do they now? There are very few pedestrians on the footpaths in most residential streets, and not many people at home, even fewer out in the front garden to be interacted with.

        Certain fences are not attractive enough, Elizabeth, so “Local authorities need to address rules that deny this ‘pleasure’ in urban residential streets. Or, according to street context, rule that a registered architect or landscape architect design the ‘height’, modulation and sunlight effects and selection of appropriate materials and or plantings.” Compulsory “good taste”? {Shudder}

        I’m against solid fences, as a gardener, because they result in turbulence and give the plants a harder time than they were supposed to be protected from – but if someone wants privacy and protection from ever-louder car and home stereos, or they have a dog (or child with behavioural / mental health issues) that has to be kept secure on the property – jeez, let’s cancel the order for another shipping container of red tape… please!

        • Elizabeth

          Checkout Twizel, and Otematata for the DAMAGE. Smacks you in the face. A housing grotesque emerges thanks to no architects and landscape architects being present whatsoever. Just boys in shorts with a metal bent for crud.

          Hype – whatever happened to designing in sympathy with prevailing contextual patterns. This is not about red tape – it’s for the avoidance of Idjots without sensitivity to neighbourhood, taste or sense.

          Time to read A Pattern Language by Christopher Alexander, or its derivatives.

        • Hype O'Thermia

          Fences are short-term, they are eminently suited to permission for people to make up their own minds. The next owners are likely to want a change. Even the people who put up the zincalume fences will in a few years decide it’s way out of fashion, time for a change of style. It’s not like bulldozing a beautiful garden that has taken decades to bring to maturity, it’s not like replacing a heritage building with a block of apartments from the battery hen school of Aaaaagh-itecture.

          If streets lined with tall fences were the ugliest things I saw in a town I’d be well pleased. There may be an increase in littering, true, since throwing fast food wrappers and cans and bottles wouldn’t be as easy as kicking them into the base of a hedge or dropping them over a low fence, and that would be a disadvantage for the Streetscape Appreciation League, just as it would be a welcome change for the householder behind the fence.

          I put the wishes of people who want a high fence, whatever their reason, ahead of those who want to be able to peer over and through. The suggestion that people who want to get on with their own lives in their own homes without being gawped at should buy lace curtains is to me downright offensive. And what of the freedom to garden or fix the car or have afternoon tea with friends or with a book, without nosy parkers or worse, people who assume that if you’re in view you must surely be in need of someone with nothing better to do than natter to you?

    • The critical issue with planning is to what extent you curtail people’s freedom for the sake of the public good. So it doesn’t surprise me that Cr Calvert with her ACT background is coming down here on the side of individual freedom and choice. I’m inclined to come down on the side of choice unless an issue really, clearly, seriously affects the public interest – just to make the Plan smaller, simpler and so more understandable.
      I notice that there’s provision for ‘family flats’ which can be used only by a member of an extended family, ie ‘granny flats’. That’s going to be a can of worms, because once built how do you police them, that they are in fact being used only for a relative? And if you do police them, wouldn’t this apparently justify official intrusion into people’s personal lives?

  2. Peter

    Hype. Fences are expensive. They are not short term and something changed according to the dictates of fashion.
    Sad that you say if people see you on your property they assume you want to chat when you’d prefer them not to. There are the usual ways people signal they are ‘busy’ without building high fences to shut them out. How do you cope when you leave your property with all the nosey parkers around?
    Building high fences shows a particular attitude to life and people. It is similar to living in secured apartment blocks with locks and codes to get in. It might make sense in high crime areas, but social disintegration has already taken hold.

    • Hype O'Thermia

      Peter, the majority of passers-by don’t want to chat, but you knew that already didn’t you. “Building high fences shows a particular attitude to life and people.” True, except when it shows a particular attitude to dog control regulations i.e. preventing their pet from escaping or alarming pedestrians by barking at them which often frightens people even when the dog’s barking is its attempt at friendly conversation.
      People vary in their innate ability to tolerate interaction with other humans without feeling stressed and exhausted. For those of you whose temperament is hugely sociable there are vast numbers of ways you can spend most of your waking hours with others in addition to your own family and close friends. You can choose a low fence or none for your own home, as well as joining clubs and going out and about among humanity in general.
      Other people do indeed have that different attitude to which you object. People’s needs for “me time” vary. Some people feel stressed if they go a whole afternoon without talking with another person. For others it’s the exact opposite, which is why some people choose to live in isolated places coming into “civilization” only when absolutely necessary.
      Peter, you clearly don’t understand why some people regard their home as a place where they can be peaceful, relax and indulge in the recreation that renews their energies – even if that’s physical work that’s a welcome change from office or clinic. Having been on show all day, going home can feel like kicking their shoes off, letting their feet (and their spirit) stretch.

      That said, I’d like to have been outside Jeff Dickie’s house this morning to watch his face while he read Cr Chris Staynes’ response to his Letter to the Editor in today’s ODT!

    • Hype O'Thermia

      Fences are not all that expensive if you build your own. As for changing them according to fashion, aren’t you aware of the way people replace kitchens including fridge-freezers and stoves that work perfectly but are no longer stylish? Believe me, it happens.

  3. Thank you. I had seen 2GP and thought it was a Maquarrie Group radio Station. Whatever happened to 4XW? I never heard them, but they had cars carrying that callsign.

  4. Elizabeth

    Douglas Field in response to (2GP) fence rule revision:

    Douglas Field - gang head quarters2

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s