Notifying proposed plans

Abstract

The notification of a plan (or plan change), occurring after an extensive period of consultation and policy analysis, triggers the formal process of submissions, hearings and decision-making; a huge investment for many people. While there is a statutory process for publicly notifying proposed plans, there is also wide discretion for local authorities to promote constructive involvement and input from all involved in the process.

This guidance note provides an overview of best practice:

before a plan is notified,
after a plan is notified including effective ways of "spreading the word" through brochures, the media, meeting with the local community, workshops, and staff training, and
notifying for further submissions.

See Consultation for plan development for further details of consultation during the plan development process.

Before you notify do your preparation

The preparation of a proposed plan, or even a plan change, involves a huge investment of resources, time and energy (refer to policy framework guidance note). Notifying a proposed plan sets off the formal RMA process and requires the commitment of significant resources, time and energy. It is vital therefore to get things right before a plan is notified:
- Develop an overall project strategy well before notification, including timeframes, resources, systems and programmes.
- Link with the Annual Plan to ensure the process is well resourced, particularly in terms of staff, to provide that all tasks will be adequately undertaken (even for plan changes).
- Make sure everyone involved understands and is fully informed about the full process, including Councillors, and Council and administration staff. Familiarisation should reduce the potential for problems and mistakes. Flowcharts are a good way to show steps and statutory requirements.
- Have a publicity strategy for information dissemination, education and involvement. Aside from the formal statutory requirements involved with notification (see Schedule 1, Part 1), a strategy for publicising a plan is essential. Councillors full involvement in this preparation is critical, as they will need to work with the community and stakeholders throughout the process.
- Obtain Councillor buy-in to the process before notification. They must be part of the process of preparing for notification. Brief all councillors about the process and protocols. For example speaking to the media about the Plan may prevent Councillors from hearing submissions and making decisions (refer to making decisions on a plan guidance note).
- Upskill the community beforehand - generally, the more involved a community is with preparing a proposed plan before notification, the better the post-notification process: for example, submissions tend to be more focused and constructive. There are many different techniques that can be used. Some are listed below. Refer also to the guidance note Consultation for plan development.
- A good tracking and recording process is needed, for the pre-notification consultation process as much as the formal submission process.
The draft plan is a consultation technique used by many local authorities prior to notifying their proposed plan. While issuing a non-statutory document can create costs and time delays, it provides a means for addressing issues outside the formal legal process subsequent to notification. It may also have some benefits in terms of reducing costs over the longer term if done well. Some local authorities limit the release of draft plans (or sections thereof) to targeted stakeholder groups and representative persons (for example, Wellington City Council did a limited release to about 100 groups). It is important that the draft plan has the level of detail necessary for constructive feedback for example, objectives and policies are insufficient on their own. While it is less likely that the draft plan process will be used in the review of first-generation plans, it could remain useful for plan changes.
The process for incorporating requirements into the District Plan must be followed correctly prior to notification (refer to clause 4, Part 1 of the First Schedule). While often perceived as a side technical exercise, errors in following the procedures for including designations can result in significant delays and problems for notifying a plan (see the guidance note on Designations and requirements in proposed district plans and Notice of requirements and outline plans for further information). It is important not to underestimate the time involved in this part of the process.

After you notify - spreading the word

The notification process is one way of letting people know about the existence and potential impact of a proposed plan. Notification should be supported by the use of non-statutory methods to promote knowledge and understanding about a proposed plan, its provisions and its likely impact on the community. At the very least, all stakeholders should be informed and given the opportunity to be involved. Possible techniques include:
- Brochures/pamphlets summarising key parts, sometimes several according to topic areas for example, Hutt City Council information sheet (PDF 7.97MB).
- Meetings with sector groups (with proposed plan authors there to explain), an approach used by the Tasman District Council
- Media releases/articles/spreads, with succinct summaries of hot topics and the proposed plan 's policies - for example, Waimakariri District Council released a series of media releases on potentially hot topics.
- Meetings with media to discuss aspects of proposed plan for example, Christchurch City Council before the release of the Plan to promote a good understanding of the policies and their effect.
- Workshops with stakeholders (surveyors, land agents, etc) for example, Tasman District Council held workshops with Plan user groups such as real estate agents, surveyors and other consultants (refer to Consultation for plan development)
- Copies of proposed plans at appropriate locations for example, libraries, service centres (multiple copies at each, rather than one only).
- Online versions of the proposed plan and how to make a submission for example, Gisborne District Council District Plan variations and changes.
- How to make a submission information, particularly emphasising the decision requested.
- Training of staff on the new proposed plan prior to notification not just front counter staff, but all staff that need to know, such as those in call-centres and staff in operational services.
In particular, the regulatory aspects of a proposed plan need good communication. Understanding the need for, and purpose of, proposed rules should be one of the key elements of marketing a notified proposed plan. One of the problems, however, is how to inform people how rules affect them individually. While there is no statutory requirement to notify specific properties about changes in zoning or rules that impact on them, it is important a Council consciously consider this matter as part of its communications strategy for a proposed plan. The difficulty is how wide a net to cast, and there is no hard criteria or guidance on this matter it depends on a host of circumstances (this issue also arises under notifying for further submissions, below).
Inform people about the process itself, to lessen confusion and potential problems. For example, people sometimes have unrealistic expectations about what can come out of their submissions - new traffic lights, lower rates, etc. Potential submitters need to understand what councils can and cannot deliver under its District Plan, and how to have input into other areas of Council's functions. This includes the limitations on making submissions on matters relating to trade competition under clause 6 of Schedule 1 of the RMA.

Notifying for further submissions

Summarising submissions for notifying for further submissions is an important part of the process: errors can ripple out for years. The golden rule of summarising submissions is check, check and check again. It must be done by professionals with appropriate skills. In particular, decisions requested by submitters must be summarised verbatim, even if the wording is unclear, poor or incorrect (for example, incorrect rule numbers used). Avoid interpreting or correcting submissions. Potential errors should be identified early, and corrected only after the written agreement of the submitter.
Support the formal notification process with a good summary of decisions requested by submitters, indexed and easy to check: for example, submissions should be sorted by the type of relief sought, and the summary indexed both alphabetically and numerically.
The summary should be generally accessible to the community. Councils must publicly notify the availability of the summary of decisions to all submitters. The notice must also indicate where the summary can be inspected. One technique is to have multiple copies available at libraries, for lending as well as reference. Online versions can be used as well, especially if supplemented with a search system. In addition, people often want to see the full submission, so copies need to be made available as well.
Inform people about the purpose of further submissions, to avoid confusion and later problems. People need to understand they cannot make fresh submissions, but must submit in opposition to, or in support of, specific requests for decisions made by submitters. People also need to be clear of the limitations on who can make further submissions (see Submissions on a plan for further information)
The decisions sought by submitters can have significant repercussions, about which a public notice may not be particularly good at disseminating. For example, submissions seeking a rezoning of land may have implications for landowners/residents in the vicinity. However it would be inappropriate to simply directly notify people. A council needs to consider ways of raising awareness about matters raised in submissions. One technique is to produce a map of rezoning requests in a city or district for media release

Other tips

Network with neighbouring local authorities and convene meetings with peers in other councils. While such contact is good practice generally (for example, to address cross-boundary issues), it is also a good way of obtaining ideas on the approach to the whole notification programme.
Ensure council staff (including regulatory staff) are regularly updated on plan changes, progress and timeframes.

Best practice examples

The following examples illustrate best practice in particular aspects of plan preparation, as described in the guidance note.

Notification notices for local newspapers: Hutt City Council (PDF, 1.30 MB)
Notification information sheets: Hutt City Council (PDF, 7.97 MB)
Postcard notification: Some councils have used small postcards with the ratepayer 's address printed on the front, providing a combined summary of the plan change and an inspection notice.
Online notification: Western Bay of Plenty District Council uses the council website for online notification of plan changes.
Email updates: Auckland City Council provides an email subscription service to advise on changes to the district plan.

RMA provisions

Provisions of the RMA relevant to the notification of plans include:
Sections 60, 64, 65, 73.

First Schedule, Part 1, clauses 4-8, 11, 26.

Case law

The section 32 analysis should be complete by the stage a plan or plan change is adopted and before it is notified (Countdown Properties (Northlands) Ltd and Ors v Dunedin City Council, High Court No. AP214/93 No2 AP215/93 No2) note, adopting a privately requested plan change is that point at which the Council decides, after hearing all submissions, that it should adopt the plan change.

In regard to the public notice for plan changes, some description of the nature of change beyond a simple numerical one (for example, Change No.13) is necessary, such description, while not having to be detailed, should be fair and accurate (Hodge P & KM & Or v Christchurch City Council C001A/96 (1996) NZRMA 127).

In regard to the notice for further submissions the summary of submissions is a concise statement of the decisions requested in the submissions, not a summary of submissions; it must be sufficient to alert the reasonable non-expert reader of the summary to the fact that they should go to the submissions in full (Christchurch City Council C071/99, 4 NZED 471, from Wellington City Council v Cowie, (1971) NZLR 1089 at 1116(CA)).

In regard to the adequacy of a Council's summary of submissions to the plan: "The barrier for participation (in the RMA) should not be unreasonably high... The test should be that of a reasonably informed reader or citizen, not someone with the knowledge of planning matters well above the informed citizen" (see para 30, p10 Healthlink South Ltd v Christchurch International Airport, 41/12/1999, AP14/99, 5 NZED 114).

In preparing a summary of submissions, each submission must be assessed for it may contain submissions which, in themselves, suggest relief (see para 17, p11 Christchurch City Council, C071/99, 4 NZED 471). A summary should also give the reader a clear idea about whether the submission refers to the whole district, a zone, or some specific area of land (Ibid). Refer to guidance note on Decision-making in regard to case law on whether a submission reasonably and fairly raises any particular relief.

In regard to omissions in a summary of submissions, the Council was able to notify the relief sought by a submitter that was omitted from the notified summary without renotifying the entire summary, given that the issue was separate from other issues (see Palmerston North City Council, w126/97).

Related guidance notes

The following guidance notes are related:

Current challenges in practice

Impacts of policies

A continuing challenge is how to enable people to find out how a proposed plan may impact on them. Typically this means, how does this affect my property(ies)? The use of websites can allow anyone to identify provisions affecting a particular property, but establishing such databases requires significant resources.

A concurrent challenge is allowing people to easily understand and become involved in setting the broader policies of a proposed plan, where such policies may not directly affect them. One common technique has been the use of issues and options documents. These can help identify issues and show the likely nature of policies. However, in general, people only get involved in the planning process if there are rules that impact on their lifestyle and investment opportunities. While draft plans have been used to illustrate rules, focusing on minor matters often sidetracks the wider debate. The challenge remains of engaging people effectively in drafting broader policies in the plan process.

Community engagement

Getting the community engaged in the proposed plan process is an important yet sometimes hard task. Even the best participation processes might make only 20% of the community aware of a proposed plan fewer actually would make submissions. Equally challenging is retaining the level of interest throughout the process: one key factor is therefore not to drag the process on too long. Community participation can be a resource-hungry process, and can result in consultation overload. The process can also be strategically manipulated by swamping councils with form submissions.

However, considerable experience has now been built up in using methods for getting the public informed, interested and involved, both before and after notification (refer to the consultation process guidance note). The challenge will therefore be to continue to apply and develop participatory methods according to the circumstances of each district/ region.

Consistency in process

After more than a decade of practice, with every local authority going through the proposed plan preparation process, and learning as it went, often on its own, there have been calls for consistency across the country. Many practices could be standard for all local authorities, including computer database systems, report preparation and notice/advertisement templates.

Role of plans in environmental management

The lay public often misunderstands the role and powers of plans under the RMA. Typically such misunderstanding relates to the powers to undertake actions other than regulatory methods (for example, installing traffic lights and cycleways). Even well informed people can confuse the powers of plans, and the interrelationship and overlapping nature of responsibilities under the RMA. Education and information programmes surrounding the notification of a plan can help avoid this problem.

The Local Government Act 2002 may exacerbate such confusion. There will need to be a good level of community understanding of the difference between RMA plans and community plans under the Local Government Act, and what can be achieved in both, especially if combined consultation is used. Councils will have to think about preparing new messages when educating the community about RMA plans.

Acknowledgements

This guidance note was prepared by Robert Schofield from Boffa Miskell Limited in February 2003 and updated in March 2006 by Vicki Barker and Matthew McCallum-Clark of Incite. It was further updated to reflect the RMAA 2009, by Kirsty Austin of Corydon Consultants in November 2009.

Within this page