Subdivision
Abstract
This guidance note outlines how subdivision provisions are a useful method available to territorial authorities in controlling the environmental effects of land use. This note emphasises that if you are intending to use subdivision controls as a method that you need to understand the effects of subdivision itself, and its relationship to potential changes in land use and subsequent environmental effects. Where subdivision is used as a method, plan provisions must be effective and robust given all subdivision requires a resource consent, unless specifically permitted by a plan.
This guidance note provides an overview of how subdivision can be managed in the district plan. It then addresses the application of subdivision controls to address strategic planning issues, following through into the development of objectives, policies and rules.
An introduction to subdivision provides background information on the subdivision process. The structure planning guidance note provides more in-depth guidance on developing and implementing structure plans. Future guidance is currently being developed on more specific subdivision related issues such as financial contributions and esplanade provisions.
Guidance note
Managing subdivision in the district plan
Subdivision is primarily concerned with the changing ownership of land and defining and redefining property rights. Many subdivision activities have only a minor impact on land use. However, the creation of new parcels of land is accompanied by expectations of associated land use (e.g. a dwelling on a new residential or rural lot). For major subdivisions such as those for greenfield sites, or new rural residential developments, subdivision provides a vital framework for managing land development.
Subdivision provisions in plans are one tool that can be used to control the use, development and protection of land and associated natural and physical resources in a district. Subdivision provisions can be implemented through a choice or combination of:
There needs to be clear linkages to related district plan rules dealing with land use, particularly to ensure a consistency in approach. Subdivision rules may also be a method (usually in conjunction with land-use controls) to achieve other land use objectives, such as managing growth, through defining minimum site areas and shapes required on subdivision.
The first important step in deciding when and how to use subdivision controls in your plan is determining what issues need to be managed.
1) Identifying subdivision Issues
The first step is to identify what land use issues are relevant to the district, and whether subdivision controls can be used as a method to effectively address these. This should also form the first part of any section 32 analysis.
The issues for the district are identified through research and monitoring, carried out in association with the plan or policy development. When researching land use issues, where subdivision control may be an appropriate method, particular consideration should be given to the following:
Research may also assist in determining whether a district-wide, or an area specific approach may be required. In some cases, if the issues are site or area specific, such as infrastructural constraints, a structure plan approach may be more appropriate than generic subdivision provisions. In other cases, such as general urban or rural infill and subdivision, the issues may be generic to the whole district or "zone" related, and it is more appropriate to have relevant objectives and policies contained in the general subdivision provision section(s) of the district plan. Such subdivisions may, however, generate cumulative effects over time.
New or amended subdivision provisions may be investigated as a result of operational (existing plan implementation) issues, or in response to a strategic issue. The following are the main strategic planning issues where plan provisions on subdivision are particularly important:
How subdivision can be used as a method for addressing these issues is addressed under Using subdivision provisions to address strategic planning issues.
2) Identifying effects associated with managing subdivision
Effects associated with subdivision and the development that may follow it can be both direct and indirect. The effects will vary depending on the characteristics of the receiving environment and the nature and purpose of the development proposed. As such, it is necessary that the district plan provides clear linkages between those parts of the plan containing the technical subdivision requirements (e.g. provision of services or financial contributions) and the sections of the plan addressing land use activities (e.g. density standards, disturbance of culturally significant sites, location of natural hazards, provision of car parking or road safety).
The planning maps should play an important role in identifying site-specific characteristics that should be considered at the time of subdivision (for example, natural hazards, sites of historic or archaeological significances, amongst others). Set out below is a summary of effects that subdivision provisions in a district plan might seek to manage, and the possible linkages to other parts of the plan.
a) Potential direct effects arising from subdivision:
The plan should clearly identify which issues are to be managed through land use controls, which are to be controlled through subdivision controls, or which will be managed through a combination of these (including where issues are intended to be managed in conjunction with regional council controls).
b) Indirect effects arising from subdivision
There is a need to be aware of the indirect effects that can result from the subdivision of land. These may include:
Little or no change to the existing environment may arise from many subdivision applications. Examples include where the land has already been developed and the subdivision is merely altering the legal configuration of property boundaries (e.g. transferring from a cross-lease to a freehold title); or where the purpose of the subdivision is for asset management that does not necessarily result in new development (e.g. for family estates); or for creation of minor utility sites or for minor boundary adjustments.
3) Framework for managing subdivision in the district plan
In developing district plan policy, it is important to keep in mind that subdivision can occur in stages and for different reasons, and that the plan needs to anticipate these different circumstances. The majority of subdivision applications that are likely to be received can be grouped into the following broad categories:
(a) Major residential and/or business development
E.g. Greenfield, peri-urban development, new settlements or resort developments.
Subdivisions of this nature generally have a major impact individually and raise a range of issues associated with provisions throughout the plan. A subdivision for this purpose generally invokes an assessment of the relevant objectives and policies to ascertain the merits of the type and density of development proposed. The council should ensure that the subdivision layout is in accordance with any structure or concept plan that may have been approved at the time of a zone change. It should also consider wider strategic issues, such as roading linkages, provision of reserves, protection of natural areas, and how the subdivision is to be staged to promote the coordinated and efficient provision of infrastructure.
(b) Infill development
E.g. subdividing existing residential sections or the redevelopment of former commercial sites.
A subdivision for this purpose will generally have minor effects in isolation, but may contribute to significant cumulative effects that need to be addressed at a policy level. The district plan should provide a clear policy framework for addressing the cumulative effects of infill development on the character and amenity of the surrounding area, and subsequent pressure on infrastructure, including roading networks, sewerage and stormwater and the provision of reserves. Design guidance may be a useful supplementary method.
(c) Rural subdivision
E.g. the creation of lifestyle blocks or to provide for higher intensity land use.
Like residential infill development, a subdivision for this purpose will generally have minor effects in isolation, but may contribute significant cumulative effects that need to be addressed at a policy level. The district plan should provide a clear policy framework for addressing the cumulative effects of rural subdivision on the character and amenity of the surrounding area, and subsequent pressure to upgrade roading and other services (e.g. water supply, effluent disposal, rubbish collection). The creation of lifestyle-type allotments can also create reverse sensitivity effects on existing land use activities that are commonly located in the rural environment (e.g. intensive pig and poultry farming operations).
(d) Subdivision within sensitive landscapes
E.g. within an area identified as an outstanding natural landscape or feature, or within coastal/riparian margins.
A subdivision within a sensitive landscape area has the potential to create significant visual effects due to a change, or establishment of new, boundary plantings, buildings, accessways or through the associated intensification in land use which follows. Such effects are likely to be greater than for rural subdivisions generally. The creation of new allotments within such areas may also require the consideration of issues associated with the maintenance and enhancement of public access to and along the coastal marine area, lakes and rivers; and whether 'environmental compensation' (e.g. protection of indigenous vegetation) may offset any adverse effects associated with the development. Particular consideration must be given to the matters in s6 of the Act, preferably supported by specific policies in the plan (for example, areas of coastline with particularly important natural character values).
(e) Specialised subdivision activities
E.g. changes in types of tenure, or allotments for utility or reserve purposes.
A subdivision for this purpose will generally (although not in every case) have minor effects and tend to primarily relate to a change in land tenure, such as within an established commercial or industrial development; or to accommodate specific infrastructural or community based facilities, including utility structures and reserves. In these instances, it may be appropriate for the district plan to provide an exemption to any minimum allotment size or servicing requirements that would otherwise apply to a 'standard' subdivision. Exemptions to promote the protection of historic heritage or natural values may also be appropriate.
(f) Boundary adjustments
E.g. rationalising of property boundaries, asset management.
A boundary adjustment is a form of subdivision involving the reconfiguration of lot boundaries, rather than the creation of additional allotments. A subdivision for this purpose will generally have minor effects; however, it may facilitate a change in land use (e.g. by realigning the parcel boundaries into a more useable area and shape, or by providing a wider road reserve) or represent the first stage in a larger development proposal. As no additional allotments are being created it is often difficult to assume a change in land use. In order to avoid potential adverse effects associated with a more intensive land use, the district plan may require that no new allotment is smaller than that which existed prior to the boundary adjustment or is not less than the minimum allotment size for that zone.
Using subdivision provisions to address strategic planning Issues
a) Urban growth management
Some regional and city/district councils with large urban areas, and/or in areas subject to rapid growth, promote strategies of urban consolidation. These strategies may adopt a restrictive management approach for subdivision outside urban boundaries and a flexible approach allowing for higher densities within urban boundaries, such as around town centres and public transport routes. Refer to best practice example – Auckland City Council Residential 8 zone.
Growth strategies are normally based on district wide or region wide issues such as:
If the plan review process has identified a need to target growth to a specific area, it is important to consider:
The management of subdivision in targeted growth areas may be achieved through a simple rezoning of the area to allow standard plan subdivision provisions for higher levels of development to apply, or through a more detailed structure plan approach. The structure plan approach is particularly useful when the standard subdivision provisions and associated development controls are not likely to produce the outcome desired for the area. In this context, structure planning may be preferred to the ‘traditional’ zoning approach, especially where land areas are large or land ownership is fragmented. A structure plan and any associated provisions can be inserted into a district plan well in advance of anticipated growth, either at the time a district plan is being prepared or as a plan change when it becomes apparent that there is strong pressure building for development in a given area.
Section 32 duties will require a Council to take account of the costs of particular controls and their effects on the supply and affordability of land, although the primary determinant of this will be at the zoning stage.
For guidance on issues arising from urban growth pressures-see Suburban Estates and Others v Christchurch City Council, C217/2001.
b) Urban growth and effects on urban form
The way subdivision is managed can affect:
In addition to any specific requirements of a structure plan, a council may choose to apply a standard form of approach to all subdivision design, such as:
If councils are to require particular forms of subdivision design, they need to:
The formulation and administration of design guidelines is a more technically demanding approach, and care must be taken to achieve the right balance between achieving reasonable certainty for developers, while allowing a reasonable degree of flexibility.
c) Managing rural subdivision
Many councils experience pressure to allow for subdivision in rural areas, particularly in locations close to existing urban areas or in coastal areas. The importance of protecting and managing development in coastal areas is articulated in the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement. As with any national policy statement, the objectives and policies in the NZCPS need to be given effect to in any regional policy statement or plan, and any district plan.
In areas where the density of dwellings is an issue, then the district plan will need to state why dwelling density needs to be controlled through subdivision. This can be important in determining the nature of the urban / rural interface (e.g. a "hard" urban edge) or where special factors, such as airport noise, apply. Issues that will often need to be addressed when considering rural subdivision include:
Consideration should also be given to wider regional or district planning concerns such as urban consolidation strategies that seek to limit development in rural areas or areas with special rural characteristics.
An indirect effect of an increasing residential density in the rural area is that of 'reverse sensitivity'. Reverse sensitivity "occurs when a lawfully established and pre-existing land use adversely affects a new land use. The issues arise from the incompatibility of uses, although both may be legally established" (Sugrue and Sadler vs Selwyn District Council, C43/2004). In Auckland Regional Council v Auckland City Council A10/97, the Environment Court describes reverse sensitivity as "the effects of the existence of sensitive activities on other activities in their vicinity, particularly by leading to restraints in the carrying on of those activities". While there are many examples of reverse sensitivity effects, the risk of conflict between activities in the rural environment is significantly increased where subdivision results in an increase in the number of small blocks located close together and where subsequent intensification of rural dwellings occurs as a result. While it is unlikely that the management of subdivision alone will avoid the potential for land use incompatibilities, it is a relevant factor to consider in determining the way in which subdivision is managed in the rural area. In particular, regard should be given as to whether, or where, the creation of lifestyle blocks is appropriate in order to minimise the risk of reverse sensitivity effects occurring (see "Managing Rural Amenity Conflicts" for more information).
Refer to the Relevant case law section: Olliver v Marlborough District Council, W54/2004 with regard to issues of servicing, infrastructure and aquifers; and George & Copland v Queenstown Lakes District Council, C03/05 with regard to issues of cumulative effects and visual amenity, in a visual amenity landscape.
d) Subdivision within sensitive landscape areas
These subdivisions primarily occur in rural locations and are strongly sought after because of the quality of the residential environment that can be obtained. Such areas include coastal, alpine, lakeside or river margin environments. They can be differentiated from 'ordinary' rural subdivisions by the sensitivity of the receiving environment, particularly in terms of visual impacts. Other effects which are particularly significant to subdivision in sensitive landscapes are public access, cumulative effects, possible erosion / flooding issues and ecological issues, because the physical character of such environments makes the presence of these constraints more likely.
In the context of sensitive landscape areas, the application of Sections 6(a) and 6(b) of the Act are important.
Refer to the Case law section: Just One Life v Queenstown Lakes District Council C136/2004 with regard to issues of outstanding natural features, amenity and subdivision. Manger vs Banks Peninsula District Council C114/2004 with regard to building location, visual impact and precedent. See the guidance note on Landscapes for more information on landscape protection.
Integration with other plans
Sections 74(2)(c) and 75(2)(h) of the Act require that a territorial authority shall have regard to the extent to which the district plan needs to be consistent with the plans or proposed plans of adjacent territorial authorities, and address cross-boundary issues.
a) Other district plans
Different district plans can have varying subdivision provisions, even in one region where land having similar characteristics crosses territorial boundaries. Wide differences can occur in the area of minimum site sizes, subdivision consent categories and provisions relating to detailed matters such as permitted earthworks and infrastructure standards. These differences can distort the supply of land, and result in uncoordinated development patterns (including the "leap-frogging" of development over the boundary of a local authority into that of a neighbour with more permissive controls).
b) Regional Plans
Section 75(4) of the Act requires that the district plan must not be inconsistent with any regional plan. A regional plan or plans do not directly control subdivision, but will impact on related issues of urban growth, soil conservation (particularly earthworks controls), quantity and quality of water and natural hazards. However, district plans may also manage effects in the same areas, so there is potential for overlap between regional and district plans. District and regional councils need to carefully assess if they need to control what the other council may be able to manage more effectively. However, in some cases overlap is unavoidable because of the complementary nature of district and regional functions. For example, earthworks may have both visual effects (district council) and land stability and discharge effects (regional council).
- Ensure that overlapping controls between regional and district plans are avoided, or if necessary, then provisions should be integrated as far as possible to ensure that they are consistent and complementary.
Developing subdivision objectives and policies
Section 75(1) of the Act requires that the district plan contain objectives and policies to manage the identified issues.
- The objectives and policies relating to subdivision should not be too generalised such as to be open to wide interpretation. They should be sufficiently detailed so as to give a clear indication of the district plan’s expectations for each given part of the district, including the management of cumulative effects.
The objective and policy framework is particularly important for rural and peri-urban areas, which can contain a diverse mix of landscapes, natural resources, natural hazards, servicing constraints, existing patterns of subdivision and land use activities. If rural areas with quite different characteristics are managed through the same or similar subdivision provisions, such as minimum site sizes, then the district plan should clearly explain why those same provisions apply. Explanations as to why areas are differentiated or managed as a whole should be incorporated into issues or objectives, policies, or explanation of policies or a combination of these. Care is needed to ensure that explanations and reasons do not qualify the actual policy wording, but rather expand on it, to the extent that the intent behind the provisions is clear.
Structure plans will also help in providing for integrated development, clarity of intent and certainty of outcome (refer to section on Structure Plans).
Some plans contain issues, objectives, policies and rules together; others have separate issues, objective / policy and rules chapters. Either approach has its advantages, but in all cases careful consideration is needed to cross-referencing, as subdivision "links" to numerous categories of land use matters in plans.
If you intend to have a separate subdivision section in the plan, and the subdivision objectives and policies relate to process issues only, then there will need to be clear linkages to those other sections of the plan that address the relevant land use considerations, such as residential densities, heritage protection, transportation, natural hazards or infrastructure. Care is required to ensure that where land use issues are covered within the subdivision objectives and policies, the potential for conflicting provisions is avoided, or that critical objectives and policies contained in other parts of the Plan are not overlooked when a subdivision application is being assessed.
For more information on writing objectives and policies, refer to the guidance note 'Policy Framework' and the MfE publication Issues, objectives, policies, methods and rules. See Best Practice Examples for examples of subdivision objectives and policies.
Developing subdivision rules
The category of activity – permitted, controlled, restricted discretionary, discretionary, non-complying or prohibited - should closely follow the requirements of the rule making power in section 76 of the RMA. Refer to the guidance note Writing provisions for regional and district plans. Careful consideration should be given to the definition of "site" and how this relates to the implementation of subdivision provisions and to land use controls.
a) Permitted activity subdivision
A major difficulty with the permitted activity category is that permitted activity standards and conditions need to be certain and not contain any element of discretion. Setting subdivision conditions can often involve the exercise of value judgements and it can be difficult to state all the standards that might need to be covered as a permitted activity given the great variations in circumstances between different subdivisions. There can also be difficulties in monitoring and enforcing permitted activity subdivisions. Consequently, there is only very limited scope for this category of subdivision activity.
The permitted activity category may be appropriate for:
Even in these circumstances, great care would be required to anticipate likely standards applicable for such subdivisions, such as protection of easements.
b) Controlled activity subdivision
The controlled activity category gives certainty of an approval but allows control to be exercised in respect of matters nominated in the district plan. Any assessment of effects on the environment is confined to nominated matters only and conditions may be imposed on a range of specified matters. Unlike controlled activity land use applications, a controlled activity subdivision application can be declined in certain circumstances set out in s106 of the RMA. The district plan may also allow for non-service of controlled subdivision applications.
For most subdivisions, a robust district plan will make it clear that the type of development which will follow subdivision is anticipated by the plan. If the district plan has clearly indicated standards such as minimum site size and shape, access and suitability of building platforms, then the controlled activity category may well be the most appropriate category within which subdivisions should be placed. This would avoid administration and compliance costs such as lot size or density concerns being the subject of a separate assessment on each and every subdivision.
The district plan can reserve control over the ability to impose conditions on such matters as future building location (and even building design, but only in certain sensitive environments), earthworks, landscape treatment, provision of access and utility services, and any financial contributions payable. A controlled activity status would not, however, allow a Council to reduce or enlarge the scale of a proposed subdivision or the number of lots therein. For all controlled activities, the council will need to be certain of the infrastructure capacity for that area, and have a well-developed zoning and rules framework.
The controlled activity category may be appropriate for:
c) Restricted discretionary activity subdivision
The restricted discretionary activity category gives applicants less certainty because consents can be refused. However, the matters subject to discretion must be specified in the district plan. From a council's perspective, it does provide the option of refusal if an important standard is not met, and the imposition of conditions is not enough to mitigate any adverse effects. The district plan may also allow for non-notification and non-service of restricted discretionary subdivision applications.
The restricted discretionary category may be appropriate for:
d) Discretionary activity subdivision
The discretionary activity category enables wider discretion in considering the effects of subdivision. An application may be notified and consent may be refused.
If the district plan has been prepared in a thorough manner, and clearly envisages subdivision subject to justified standards, then it should not be necessary to make wide use of the discretionary activity category.
However, the discretionary activity category may be appropriate for:
e) Non-complying activity subdivision
The non-complying activity category means that either the district plan will state the activity is non-complying, or the application does not meet the district plan’s performance standards. Many district plans will impose a threshold, often in terms of site size, below which subdivision becomes a non-complying activity. In such cases it is very important for district plan policies in particular to clearly articulate how those thresholds have been arrived at, why it is important that they not be threatened; and why those thresholds apply in the relevant zone or area. Non-complying subdivisions will be subject to the Act’s s104D test of either not being inconsistent with the objectives and policies, or having effects which are no more than minor. Such applications will not normally derive support from objectives and policies. Non-complying activity applications are often notified and consent may be refused.
The non-complying activity category should be used judiciously, but may be appropriate for:
Refer to case law: Gould v Rodney District Council, A163/03 – This case deals with plan integrity, with the Court making it clear that it would not consider a non-complying activity proposal as something closer to a prohibited activity.
f) Prohibited activity subdivision
The prohibited activity category means that there is no ability to apply for the particular type of subdivision once the rule is beyond challenge. The Environment Court has stated that the total prohibition of subdivision as a method of control should be used extremely sparingly in sustainable management terms. See Bell and Others v Tasman District Council W003/02.
- The prohibited activity subdivision could be used in areas subject to serious risk of natural hazards and in relation to historic places to avoid cutting off the curtilage from a building.
See Best Practice Examples for examples of subdivision rules.
Supporting components for subdivision rules
Design guides and engineering codes of practice are often used as a method of providing additional guidance and certainty for assessing subdivision applications.
1) Engineering requirements
Most councils have a set or code of engineering standards covering such matters as servicing and infrastructure standards, road widths, earthworks, New Zealand Standards, etc. Some district plans will include engineering standards as part of the plan, and others will have a Code of Practice that stands outside the district plan. (reference to external documents for more information).
While having engineering standards as part of a district plan provides certainty this approach does have some disadvantages. These include:
Issues of asset transfer from a developer to a council may be best managed outside of the Plan. This is to be contrasted to the fundamental health and safety requirements being met in subdivision design and the role of the District Plan in setting out these expectations. The approach taken to engineering design can be influential in the design outcome of a subdivision.
It is important that careful consideration is given to how engineering standards will impact on the outcome, and it may be possible for effects to be managed in a way different to prescribed standards.
This will leave it open for the developer and the council to agree on an alternative standard, perhaps through a controlled or restricted discretionary activity process, which may better manage effects than the prescribed standards.
Changing technologies, for instance in the area of stormwater management (refer to best practice examples: NZWERF Onsite Stormwater Management Guide and Auckland City Council’s on-site stormwater management manual) are able to be more easily considered when the engineering code is not part of the plan. It is helpful for the District Plan to contain criteria against which alternative standards can be assessed. It is also important to ensure that the engineering standards are appropriate and do not create outcomes that conflict with the land use objectives and policies. For example, there may be situations where it is appropriate to provide for a lesser width of road to achieve better urban design.
2) Codes and standards
Published New Zealand Standards that can be referred to within the District Plan are:
3) Design guides
Subdivision design guides provide assistance to applicants in interpreting assessment criteria. They are non-prescriptive and may form part of, or sit alongside, the district plan.
A design guide could include:
Refer to the section on best practice examples for examples of design guides.
4) Information requirements
In accordance with section 75(2)(g) of the RMA, the district plan may state the information to be submitted with an application for a resource consent. Further information may be required under section 92 of the RMA.
The district plan should clearly outline the extent to which engineering detail will be required at subdivision consent application stage. It may be appropriate for a district plan to require only that level of detail at consent application stage that is required to give confidence that the effects of subdivision can be adequately avoided, mitigated or remedied. This could be in the form of concept drawings that enable an assessment of effects to obtain the resource consent.
Using structure plans
A structure plan is a plan that guides the development or redevelopment of a particular area of land by defining the basic geographical and management frameworks around which future land uses, provision of infrastructure, open space networks, transportation linkages, and other features for managing the effects of development or redevelopment will be based. Structure plans are particularly useful for managing the development of large areas of land and areas of land in multiple ownership, so as to avoid uncoordinated patterns of development and provision of services.
Structure plans comprise one or more maps, plans or diagrammatic representations of the proposed layout, features and linkages for areas being developed or redeveloped. The maps, plans or representations are usually supported by text explaining the background to the issues which gave rise to the structure plan and the proposed management approach to deal with those issues. The management approach may be implemented through any combination of subdivision controls, land use controls, or agreements.
Structure plans, if sufficiently detailed and incorporated into the district plan, may allow for a lower category of consent for subdivision, for instance restricted discretionary rather than discretionary, than otherwise may have been the case. This is because they logically accompany rezoning proposals where major issues of concern can be addressed through public submissions and hearings on plan reviews, variations or changes.
Structure plans may also provide for different densities and subdivision standards to be adopted, as structure planning provides the council with the ability to develop an area in a comprehensive and integrated manner. This is particularly relevant in the case of greenfield sites and planning for mixed use developments (commercial, industrial, residential, open space) and the provision of services.
Structure plans can ensure that areas with a highly fragmented title structure are developed in a coordinated manner over a short time-span, such as the full urbanisation of areas that were once lifestyle blocks. However, structure plans may be less appropriate when contemplating larger areas over a longer term as the structure plan may become superseded by changing circumstances requiring ongoing resource consent procedures. Similarly caution needs to be exercised where future development is speculative and may or may not happen. A more appropriate technique may be deferred or staged zoning for such areas, with intentions broadly expressed.
Esplanade provisions and subdivision policy
Where a council chooses to develop policies and provisions relating to esplanade reserves and esplanade strips beyond the provisions contained in sections 229 to 237 of the RMA, these need to be carefully drafted in the District Plan.
Esplanade reserves will be the subject of a future guidance note.
Subdivision and financial/development contributions
The RMA allows for councils to require the payment of financial contributions to achieve the environmental outcomes expressed through its objectives and policies. The use of subdivision provisions in plans has been one of the key ways that councils have been able to assess the need for a contribution to be paid, and for collection to occur. Generally, the need for a financial contribution would be identified through a subdivision consent application, and collection would occur prior to the release of any s224C from the council. The introduction of the Local Government Act 2002 has provided a new avenue for councils to require development contributions. However, the Council cannot elect to have overlapping contribution requirements under both the LGA 2002 and the RMA.
For more information on financial and development contributions, refer to the LGNZ Knowhow and the FAQ on RMA/LGA interface.
Best practice examples
The following examples illustrate best practice in particular aspects of plan preparation, as described in the guidance note.
Design guides: Hurunui District rural subdivision guidelines - landscape [Reveal/Hide]
These rural subdivision guidelines provide a list of specific assessment criteria and a subdivision design checklist. This enables clear interpretation of the Plan’s requirements by the applicant as well as consistent application of the provisions to specific proposals.
Contact: Andrew Feierabend
Council: Hurunui District Council
Description of best practice example: These rural subdivision guidelines provide a list of specific assessment criteria and a subdivision design checklist. This enables clear interpretation of the Plan's requirements by the applicant as well as consistent application of the provisions to specific proposals.
Challenge: To encourage design innovation in subdivision proposals as well as encouraging consideration of landscape and ecological matters.
Solution: The council developed the Hurunui District Rural Subdivision Guide to provide landscape guidelines and design ideas for those involved in assessing and designing rural subdivisions in the Hurunui District. The guide outlines the importance and definition of amenity values, natural character and rural character. This guide highlights design approaches and techniques that can be incorporated into subdivision plans.
Benefits: This design guide encourages innovative design solutions and recognises that the characteristic of sites differ and there is a range of ways of satisfying the assessment criteria.
Refer to Hurunui District rural subdivision guidelines (PDF 745KB).
Design guides: NZWERF onsite stormwater management guide [Reveal/Hide]
The guideline focuses on the use of on-site mechanisms to control stormwater runoff volumes and quality on individual sites. It aims to help stormwater practitioners and regulators to assess which mechanisms would provide the best solution for a particular situation.
Contact: Michael Hughes
Organisation: New Zealand Waste
Description of best practice example: The guideline focuses on the use of on-site mechanisms to control stormwater runoff volumes and quality on individual sites. It aims to help stormwater practitioners and regulators to assess which mechanisms would provide the best solution for a particular situation. These are derived from technical documents and current research being carried out by the major research institutions of New Zealand and overseas agencies and the guideline will show how to adapt their work to New Zealand environments.
Please note that the current draft is incomplete and contains some gaps and errors which are highlighted for further work.
Challenge: To develop guidance on on-site mechanisms for stormwater management that draw upon the variety of different information available and reflect the requirements of different legislation.
Solution: These guidelines outline a decision-making and design process that enables practitioners to use onsite stormwater management devices that are appropriate to different land uses, receiving environments, soils and climates around New Zealand.
Benefits: These guidelines include requirements of the RMA, the Building Act and the Local Government Act. Because these are guidelines and not a standard, councils can tailor the information to their own approach depending on policy, regulation, education and other stormwater management tools.
Refer to On-Site Stormwater Management Guideline.
Design Guides: Queenstown Lakes District good practice guide – Rural subdivision and landscape [Reveal/Hide]
This design guide contains examples of good design including lot layout, building location, landscape and rural character, roading, planting, earthworks, ecology and infrastructure.
Contact: Vicki Jones, Manager Strategy and Planning
Council: Queenstown Lakes District Council
Description of best practice example: This design guide contains examples of good design including lot layout, building location, landscape and rural character, roading, planting, earthworks, ecology and infrastructure. It also has a guide to the basic district plan structure.
Challenge: To achieve innovative subdivision approaches that are appropriate to the landscape.
Solution: Subdivision in the Rural General Zone is a discretionary activity with no minimum allotment size. Assessment matters are used to guide subdivision and development. The purpose of this guide is 'to promote good practice in rural subdivision design in order to achieve development that complements the natural environment'.
Benefits: The guide uses a very clear and simple diagram to convey good and bad practice.
Policy approaches to rural subdivision - Tasman District Council [Reveal/Hide]
Tasman District Council is in the process of capturing the spatial variability within their rural landscape in order to develop effective performance regimes to address thresholds and limits of change. The development of a design guide is one way to encourage good subdivision design.
Contact person: Steve Markham
Council: Tasman District Council
Description of best practice example: Tasman District Council is in the process of capturing the spatial variability within their rural landscape in order to develop effective performance regimes to address thresholds and limits of change. The development of a design guide is one way to encourage good subdivision design.
Challenge: Tasman District Council have found that as the rural areas vary in terms of resource values, rural landscape character or productive value, neither minimum nor average lot rules are the best way of regulating the cumulative effects of subdivision.
Solution: Tasman District Council have a performance regime for rural subdivision under the 12ha threshold which involves a design and location led approach. The Council have developed a comprehensive design guide and transferable development opportunity.
Benefits: The design guide is very detailed, whilst also providing a flexible framework within which developers can work. The guide was developed after consultation with the community, which resulted in a more detailed zoning pattern.
Structure Plans: Flat Bush structure plan – Manukau City Council [Reveal/Hide]
This is one of the most comprehensive and detailed structure planning exercises undertaken in New Zealand.
Contact: Bruce Harland
Council: Manukau City Council
Description of best practice example: This is one of the most comprehensive and detailed structure planning exercises undertaken in New Zealand. This process has involved establishing the local community’s aspirations and views, modelling the water catchment, incorporating urban design and ecological assessment, modelling transport and including economic assessment.
Challenge: Developing a statutory structure plan within timeframes and defined resources.
Solution: This is a statutory structure plan via inclusion in the District Plan.
Benefits: This is a comprehensive basis to address planning for a community of over 40,000 people. The council has achieved a good level of acceptance from most of the community and the objectives of the District Plan, incorporating the structure plan, are consistent with regional growth objectives.
Costs: This plan had a long lead time (5 years) to progress to the stage of confirmation via the Environment Court, and an upfront investment from the Council in excess of $200,000.
Refer to Flat Bush – New Zealand's newest town coming to Manukau.
Subdivision objectives and policies - Manukau City Council [Reveal/Hide]
The objectives of the Manukau City Council District Plan reflect the effects based management approach of the RMA.
Contact: Bruce Harland
Council: Manukau City Council
Description of best practice example: The objectives of the Manukau City Council District Plan reflect the effects based management approach of the RMA.
Challenge: To develop objectives that reflect the effects based approach, as well as being directly relevant to the assessment of resource consents.
Objectives:
'To enable land modification, development and subdivision to proceed in a manner that will maintain or enhance the environmental qualities of the City'.
To ensure new subdivisions have a character which is compatible with the environmental quality of surrounding land and with the amenity values and character of existing development in the area.
To protect areas or features of heritage value.
To ensure that land modification, development and subdivision are protected from adverse effects of natural hazards as far as practicable and that they do not increase the potential for natural hazards to adversely affect the environment.
To ensure the provision of adequate standards of infrastructure and public utility services at the time land is modified, developed or subdivided to avoid, remedy or mitigate any adverse effect on the environment, and to ensure that the cost of providing or upgrading services is borne largely by those undertaking land modification development or subdivision'.
Benefits: The objectives are clear and directive in ensuring that all relevant environmental and infrastructural constraints associated with subdivision are addressed and the effects of a potential change in land use are included in the subdivision assessment. The objectives describe the environmental outcomes sought within the wider environment, as well as dealing with site specific issues, providing a comprehensive policy framework for all types of subdivision.
Auckland City Council Residential 8 Zone – Urban subdivision, redevelopment and infilling
Residential Design Guide
The Residential 8 Zone (Plan Change 58) is in
response to pressures in Auckland’s CBD, as well as ensuring quality urban
design.
District Plan Change: Wellington City Council – Rural Subdivision Design Guide
Rural
Area Design Guide (PDF 826KB)
Wellington City Council has recently notified a plan change dealing with
many changes to subdivision in the rural chapter. In particular, this
change is to strengthen the Council’s policy on minimising land fragmentation
and the use of a rural area design guide to provide greater certainty
and clarity in rural subdivision for applicants and the Council.
Section 32 Assessment for Residential 8 Zone (1999) - Auckland City Council
Section 32 Analysis of the Application of the Residential 8 Zone to the
Talbot Reserve Precinct, Glen Innes (PDF 227KB)
This assessment links issues
to a number of council strategies, including the Regional Growth Strategy.
By linking to the Regional Growth Strategy, the assessment clearly explains
the need to provide for increases in residential density, and assesses
all proposed objectives, policies, methods and rules.
Structure Plans: Pyes Pa West Urban Growth Area: Proposed plan change for Tauranga District Council
Western Bay of Plenty District Plan, appendix (x) (PDF 468KB)
The proposed plan change aims to take an identified urban growth area
and provide a comprehensive and integrated Structure Plan for the whole
of the area that can guide future development.
Subdivision rural rules for achieving positive environmental enhancement – Franklin District Council
Franklin District, part 22 (PDF 1.30MB)
Franklin District Council provides for subdivision entitlements based
on environmental enhancement.
Subdivision rural rules, average lot size – Manawatu District Council
Manawatu District, section 2.4 and 2.5 (PDF 36KB)
Manawatu District Council assessed the impacts of rural subdivision and
determined that protecting rural character was the key objective.
RMA provisions
Case law
District plan provisions
Suburban Estates and others and Canterbury Regional Council and Apple Fields Ltd v Christchurch City Council C217/2001 - urban growth issues - effects on energy use, air pollution, traffic congestion and soils; importance of an integrated set of objectives, policies, methods and rules; section 32 - planning and economic evaluations. Importance of carefully designed subdivisions in new greenfields areas.
Wakatipu Environmental Society Inc. v Queenstown Lakes District Council - C180/99 – Outstanding Natural Landscapes, Landscape Protection, Amenity Values, Matters of National Importance. Importance of relationship with provisions relating to subdivision, development and financial contributions.
Lakes District Rural Land Owners Society Inc. and Others v Queenstown Lakes District Council – C75/2001 – this was a CL14 reference relating to rules controlling the scope for residential development in a rural zone containing outstanding natural landscapes. Identified the need for area/zone specific objectives and policies, as well as district wide ones.
Lakes District Rural Land Owners Society Inc. v Queenstown Lakes District Council - C100/2001 – whether subdivision consents can contain land use conditions. Subdivision of land does have effects on the management of resources. A consent authority needs to have regard to any actual or potential effects of allowing the activity and that includes any cumulative effects when considering a subdivision consent. Where there are land use controls on the exterior appearance of buildings, it is lawful for the plan to contain subdivision rules which allow the Council to consider, and, if necessary, impose similar conditions as conditions of subdivision consent.
Bell and Others v Tasman District Council - W003/02 – zoning of sensitive strip of coastal land. Appeal sought imposing a prohibited status of subdivision. Relief sought refused, amendments made to minimum lot sizes.
Awarua Farm (Marlborouch) Ltd v Marlborough DC – W70/2004 – Reference on the rezoning of land from Rural 4 to Rural Residential. The main issues of contention with sewage disposal, water supply, landscape and the site being located on a wetland. The Court considered that on the issue of landscape, that leaving the zoning as it was would likely lead to the destruction of highly valued biological and geological systems. The rezoning, and subsequent subdivision (a plan of subdivision was submitted with the proceedings) would allow for some protection of pieces of the wetland, but for the ridges. The Court found that the councils concerns relating to water supply and effluent disposal could be met. However, the Court noted that if the rezoning did not occur, and rules in the proposed plan were not changed, that there would be increased potential for contamination from effluent discharge. The Court held that as there was no special zone proposed in this case, but just the general rural-residential zone, then any rule would affect all rural-residential zones in the district, which was outside of the submission and reference. The reference was disallowed.
Resource consents
Manger, P v Banks Peninsula District Council – C114/04 – Residential subdivision in an outstanding landscape area, with associated earthworks, and a proposed landscape mitigation plan. The Court was not satisfied on the mitigation proposed and considered that the proposed dwelling locations were elevated and obvious, the earthworks would further heighten the visual impact. The Court also expressed concern over precedent, stating that it would be difficult for the council to decline similar applications for the establishment of residential development in areas susceptible to visual intrusion.
Wakatipu Environmental Society Inc. v Queenstown Lakes District Council - C135/02 – Subdivision in a visual amenity landscape, involving 15 rural-residential lots proposed, a common farm lot, an amenity protection area and a wetland enhancement area. The decision stressed the importance of landscape evaluation.
Waitakere Ranges Protection Society v Waitakere City Council – A89/00 – proposed subdivision of 14 residential lots out of a 6.95 ha site, almost entirely covered in native vegetation comprising largely puriri composite forest. Even though the proposal was found not to be contrary to the district plan, it was found that the effects would be more than minor, and it would be inconsistent with the purposes and principles of the RMA.
Neil Construction Ltd v Manukau City Council - A078/93 – proposed subdivision of a 24ha site into 4 lots, as an interim subdivision, in a residential zone. Consent had been refused by the council, and this was upheld by the Environment Court, as the interim proposal was felt to risk compromising the district’s strategy for an orderly residential growth pattern, and maintaining potential for future urban subdivision.
Portmain Properties (No. 7) Ltd - C121/97 – This was an application for a declaration following an application for subdivision consent of an existing building, where issues about upgrading of the building to meet the Building Act 1991 requirements were raised. The Court found that it was a misuse of s108RMA to impose a condition requiring that the building was upgraded to meet the standards of the Building Act 1991, as this was a matter exclusively under the control of the Building Act.
Arrigato vs Auckland Regional Council – CA84/01; A115/99 - Joint land use and subdivision of 6 rural coastal properties into 14 rural residential lots, with associated building platforms. The issue of the permitted base line was raised in terms of comparison to an approved yet unimplemented subdivision consent. There was consideration in terms of consistency with the district plan, regional policy statement and regional coastal plan. See To Notify or Not to Notify for more information on the permitted baseline.
Whistler, R B & R J v Rodney District Council - A228/02 – This was an appeal against the refusal of consent to subdivide a 19.99ha block into 4 rural residential lots, an access lot, and a lot containing a packing shed. Consideration was given to precedent and cumulative effects, and the relationship between rules, objectives and policies, and the characteristics of a given area.
Kotuku Parks Ltd and Others v Kapiti Coast District Council – A73/2000 – Subdivision of an area approved under a concept plan approved in 1989. The proposal involved significant earthworks. It was found that even though there were positive benefits from the proposal, the longstanding residential zoning and the earlier concept plan approval; these were outweighed by the cumulative effects of damage to the natural character of the coastal environment, failure to protect the adjacent significant habitat of indigenous fauna, the adverse visual effects, and the impairment to kaitiakitanga.
Dye v Rodney District Council - A22/2000 – This case is a leading case relating to cumulative and precedent effects associated with non-complying subdivision. The proposal involved the promotion of land rehabilitation/enhancement through subdivision.
Gargiulo v Christchurch City Council – C137/2000 – Appeal against the refusal of a subdivision and land use consent to subdivide a 4.6ha lot into two 2.3ha lots and to erect a new dwelling on the vacant lot. The site was located within the 50dBA Ldn noise contour of the Christchurch International Airport and as such, the Court found that there was a potentially serious reverse sensitivity effect. The Court considered that allowing the subdivision would create a precedent which would have the cumulative effect of an increased level of residential development, leading to pressure to reduce noise from the operations of the Airport particularly at night, and curfewed operations would be the probable outcome. The Court therefore held that resource consents should be refused.
George & Copland v Queenstown Lakes District Council - C05/05 – Appeal against refusal of a consent for the subdivisions of an 8.7ha rural property into two lots of 5.87 and 2.10ha. The site was located in a visual amenity landscape. The Court found that both the visual effects would be more than minor and that it was inconsistent with the objectives and policies of the plans. In terms of the visual effects, the Court was not satisfied that planning would mitigate those effects. The Court was also concerned that the area was beginning to develop characteristics of a rural-residential area, and that this proposal would exacerbate that trend and produce an unacceptable level of cumulative effects.
Just One Life v Queenstown Lakes District Council – C136/2004 – Appeal against the decision to grant a consent to subdivide and erect a residential unit at Roys Peninsula, Lake Wanaka. Concerns raised related to amenity impact and landscape effects. Roys Peninsula is identified as being an outstanding natural feature, and its protection is a matter of national importance. The Court raised concerns about the relatively small size of one lot, the potential for part of the development to be visible, the potential for exotic vegetation to be introduced, and the colour and texture palette, cumulative effects of buildings, cartilage areas and exotic plantings, and the effects on amenity. The decision to grant consent was cancelled.
Gould v Rodney District Council – A163/03 – Appeal against the refusal of consent to subdivide a 2.34ha property into two lots of 1.1 and 1.24ha. Application was a non-complying activity in terms of the transitional and proposed plans, and a proposed plan change. Written approval had been obtained from all adjoining property owners. The Court considered issues of precedent, plan integrity and adverse effects on community expectations. Precedent is not relevant for the purposes of s104(1)(a) and s105(2A)a. Cumulative effects do not include effects o community expectations or a perception that to grant consent would have the potential effect of causing people to have an altered expectation for the zone. Precedent and plan integrity should be considered in the context of s104(1)(d) and s104(1)(i). The Court declined to consider a non-complying activity proposal as something closer to a prohibited activity.
Related guidance notes
The following guidance notes are related:
Work in progress
Guidance notes are currently being prepared on, earthworks, esplanade provisions and financial contributions.
Relevant publications
Structure Planning: A regional practice and resource guide 2005 (1.11MB)
Published by Auckland Regional Council - March 2005
This second edition of Structure Planning: A Regional Practice and Resource Guide 2005 seeks to support good practice and a consistent approach to Structure Planning across the Auckland region.
Superb or suburb? International case studies in management of icon landscapes
Published by Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment - April 2003
What can New Zealand learn from overseas experience about the management of icon landscapes in peri-urban areas? Three locations were chosen to examine land use planning in the context of sustainable development: the Oak Ridges Moraine in Ontario, Canada; the Cape Peninsula in South Africa; and the Peak District in the United Kingdom.
People, Places, Spaces: A design guide for urban New Zealand
Published by Ministry for the Environment - June 2001
This guide provides a broad overview of urban design processes and principles appropriate to New Zealand. It seeks to increase awareness and discussion of the role and value of urban design, what is valued about New Zealand urban settlements, and how these cities and towns should develop.
Subdivision for people and the environment (PDF 1 MB)
Published by Standards New Zealand - August 2001
This Handbook on Subdivision for People and the Environment uses the concepts of eco-villages and cohousing to provide guidelines for alternative design and use of technologies in land development and subdivision in New Zealand.
Managing Rural Amenity Conflicts
Published by Ministry for the Environment - February 2000
This report identifies the amenity issues that commonly concern rural communities and describes a number of typical examples of rural amenity conflicts. The accompanying booklet is designed for District Councils who encounter frequent conflicts between people who live and work in the rural area about amenity issues.
Curbing the sprawl: Urban growth management in the United States - lessons for New Zealand
Published by Ministry for the Environment - April 2000
The Ministry for the Environment's Deputy Chief Executive Lindsay Gow undertook sabbatical study in Minneapolis St Paul, Portland and Seattle to find out how growing metropolitan areas in the US manage their urban growth and development. This report is an account of the issues and trends in urban growth and management in the United States and how these issues relate to New Zealand.
The impact of development on rural landscape values
Published by Ministry for the Environment - June 2000
This report aims to assist planners working on the development of district plans to deal with the landscape implications of rural subdivisions and associated developments. It may also be relevant for those involved with resource consent applications where there are landscape issues. The report focuses on some of the technical issues associated with landscape assessment and examines a variety of approaches to dealing with landscape issues in district plans.
Current challenges in practice
Minimum site area rules
The use of minimum lot area standards raises a number of ongoing issues. At least one council, which has a district plan having no minimum site area requirements, is facing concerns from its community regarding the densities of development being established. Other councils regularly "depart" from minimum lot requirements, raising questions regarding the founding policies. It appears that there may well be a place for minimum site area requirements, but the basis for those requirements needs to be clearly outlined in the district plan, including the circumstances under which minimum site area requirements may be relaxed. This will also assist in the consideration of non-complying activity applications.
Some degree of flexibility is being sought by councils to promote innovative subdivision designs. A number of Councils are finding that using an average minimum lot area requirement can potentially achieve a better environmental outcome than solely minimum site area requirements. This can result in clustering of development, which may in some cases result in the protection of the balance of a site from development. In these circumstances landscape, amenity and servicing implications will need to be anticipated.
Land in multiple ownership
Where structure plans are contemplated, there can be major difficulties where the owner of a strategically located property may be unwilling to develop their land, or may seek financial returns that render a coordinated subdivision layout uneconomic. This can result in the intent of the structure plan being frustrated, through a distorted subdivision layout or major delays in the release of land.
Urban consolidation
There is a concern that, even though higher density development may be provided for in district plans, developers may prefer to establish lower density development, if that is also allowed for. Consideration may need to be given in district plans to specify minimum densities, or maximum site size requirements.
Rural/coastal subdivision
Some councils are under increasing pressure to allow rural residential or lifestyle blocks and rural areas, and particularly coastal locations. The strength of district plan objectives and policies is, at times, being questioned - particularly where policies are not area-specific and where there is no structure planning or other mechanism identifying desired environmental outcomes at a detailed or local level. Subdivision is not necessarily inappropriate in these locations and the plan needs to be clear if, and subject to what conditions, subdivision is appropriate, particularly in regard to Sections 6(a), (b) and (f) of the Act. However, prohibiting or restricting subdivision may not allow for innovative and carefully designed subdivision and development.
Financial contributions versus LGA development contributions
Whether to use financial contributions or LGA development contributions is a current challenge that many councils are facing. Both have their pros and cons. See the FAQ on the RMA/LGA Interface for information.
Acknowledgements and editorial comments
This guidance note is based on original material prepared by Peter Reaburn, Cato Bolam Consultants, and has been further developed and shaped by Gina Sweetman (Ministry for the Environment) through practitioner input from the following people: Stuart Kinnear (Stuart Kinnear Consultancy Limited), Richard Blakey, Kelly Whyte, Rob Scott and Liz Stewart (Harrison Grierson), Nick Williamson (Xplan), Dion Douglas (Selwyn District Council), Stephen Colson (Rotorua District Council), and Bob Nixon and Justine Ashley (Planit). The feedback and guidance provided by the Quality Planning Editorial Panel: Helen Atkins, Jan Crawford and Robert Schofield is gratefully acknowledged. This guidance note was updated in 2006.
