AGENDA
Ordinary meeting of the
Joint Committee of Tasman District and Nelson City Councils
Tuesday 8 March 2022
Commencing at 9.30a.m.
via Zoom
Chairperson His Worship the Mayor of Tasman Tim King
Alternating Chairperson Her Worship the Mayor of Nelson Rachel Reese
Members
Tasman District Council:
Deputy Mayor Stuart Bryant, Councillors Barry Dowler, Mark Greening, Dean McNamara, Kit Maling, David Ogilvie, Trevor Tuffnell, Anne Turley, Dana Wensley, Celia Butler, Chris Hill, Trindi Walker and Christeen MacKenzie
Nelson City Council:
Deputy Mayor Judene Edgar, Councillors Yvonne Bowater, Trudie Brand, Mel Courtney, Kate Fulton, Matt Lawrey, Brian McGurk, Gaile Noonan, Rohan O’Neill-Stevens, Pete Rainey, Rachel Sanson and Tim Skinner
Quorum: 14 - at least five must be from each local authority
· Matters relating to Statements of Expectation for all jointly owned Council Controlled Organisations and Council Controlled Trading Organisations
· Receipt of six monthly presentations from Port Nelson Limited, Nelson Airport Limited and Tasman Bays Heritage Trust and from the Nelson Regional Development Agency (owned solely by Nelson City Council).
· Discussion of policies, initiatives or directives stemming from central Government or external agencies, that involve cross-boundary issues
· To determine the strategic direction to be given to jointly owned CCOs and CCTOs through Statements of Expectation
· All other matters requiring decision will be recommended to Nelson City and Tasman District Council, subject to an equivalent resolution being adopted by the other Council
· The quorum at a meeting of the Joint Committee is set at 14, being a majority of members as the membership is an odd number.
· Of that quorum of 14 members, at least five must be from each local authority.
· The Standing Orders of the Council providing administration to the committee will be applied at each meeting.
· The Chairperson will alternate each meeting between the Mayor of Nelson City Council and the Mayor of Tasman District Council. In the absence of either Mayor, the committee will elect a chair as its first item of business for that meeting. No deputy chairperson will be appointed.
· The Chairperson will not have a casting vote
· These delegations/terms of reference may be varied by resolution of both Councils and any such resolution will be subject to adoption by the other Council unless it is a matter specific to one Council only
· Copies of minutes of meetings of the Joint Committee will be retained by each Council for record keeping purposes
Joint Committee of Tasman District and Nelson City Councils
8 March 2022
1. Apologies
Nil
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
3.1 Updates to the Interests Register
3.2 Identify any conflicts of interest in the agenda
5. Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy 6 - 199
Document number R26543
Recommendation
That the Joint Committee of Tasman District and Nelson City Councils 1. Receives the report Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy (R26543) and its attachments (A2840178, A2840161); and 2. Agrees that a Summary of Information is required for consultation on the draft Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy 2002 in accordance with section 83(1)(a)(ii) of the Local Government Act 2002; and 3. Agrees that the Summary of Information contained in the Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy 2022 Statement of Proposal is a fair representation of the matters in the draft Strategy and is in an appropriate form to assist the consultation process in accordance with section 83AA of the Local Government Act 2002; and 4. Approves the draft Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy 2022 for consultation; and 5. Approves the consultation approach (set out in attachment 1) and agrees: (a) the approach includes sufficient steps to ensure the Summary of Information contained in the Statement of Proposal will be widely accessible and will be publicised in a manner appropriate to its purpose and significance; and (b) the approach will result in the Summary of Information contained in the Statement of Proposal being as widely publicised as is reasonably practicable as a basis for consultation; and 6. Adopts the Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy 2022 Statement of Proposal (containing the Summary of Information and the draft Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy) in Attachment 1 (A2840178) for use in this special consultative procedure in accordance with sections 83 and 87 of the Local Government Act 2002; and 7. Approves the commencement of a special consultative procedure on the Statement of Proposal in Attachment 1 (A2840178) with the consultation period to run from 14 March to 14 April 2022; and 8. Approves the Technical Document in Attachment 2 (A2840161) as supplementary information to be made available to the public during the consultation period; and 9. Notes that Mayor King of Tasman District Council is unavailable for membership to the Joint Committee Subcommittee; and 10. Confirms the membership of the Joint Committee Subcommittee to oversee the Special Consultative Procedure for the Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy 2022: · Councillor Stuart Bryant (TDC) · Councillor Kit Maling (TDC) · Councillor David Ogilvie (TDC) · Mayor Rachel Reese (NCC) · Councillor Judene Edgar (NCC) · Councillor Brian McGurk (NCC) · Up to three Mātauranga Māori representatives 11. Updates the Joint Committee Subcommittee Terms of Reference (A2772759); and
11. Delegates to the Tasman District and Nelson City Mayors (or their delegates) the ability to approve any minor edits or amendments to the Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy Statement of Proposal prior to consultation.
|
Item 5: Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy
|
|
Joint Committee of Tasman District and Nelson City Councils
8 March 2022
Report Title: Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy
Report Authors: Chris Pawson - Senior Analyst Environmental Management & Jacqui Deans – Urban Growth Co-ordinator
Report Number: R26543
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To approve the draft Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy (draft NTFDS) for consultation.
1.2 To approve the commencement of public consultation on the draft NTFDS by way of a special consultative procedure, in accordance with the proposed consultation approach.
1.3 To adopt the draft NTFDS Statement of Proposal for public consultation by way of the special consultative procedure and to approve the Technical Document in Attachment 2 as supplementary information to be made available to the public during the consultation period.
1.4 To determine that a summary of information is necessary to enable public understanding of the proposal.
2. Summary
2.1 The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS-UD) came into effect in August 2020, replacing the former National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity 2016. This change results in the requirement for a new Future Development Strategy (FDS) to be developed and adopted.
2.2 The draft NTFDS is a 30 year high level strategic plan that indicates future housing and business growth areas in the region that may be suitable for rezoning under the Councils’ Resource Management Plans and servicing via funding in the Councils’ Long Term Plans and planning in the Infrastructure Strategies.
2.3 The NPS-UD requires all Tier 2 councils that share jurisdiction over an urban environment to work together to produce an FDS which sets out a long-term vision for accommodating urban growth, in time to inform the Councils’ 2024 long term plans. Nelson City and part of Tasman District form the tier 2 Nelson Tasman Urban Environment in the NPS-UD.
2.4 The NTFDS will ensure both Councils are well placed with an evidence base to inform reviews and changes to unitary plans, infrastructure strategies and to facilitate the next round of long-term plans and will be used to inform other relevant strategies and plans. The NTFDS will:
· promote long-term strategic planning by setting out how well-functioning urban and rural environments will be achieved;
· provide at least sufficient development capacity over the next 30 years (to meet expected housing and business demand);
· assist with integrating planning decisions regarding infrastructure planning and funding decisions;
· spatially identify where capacity will be provided, what infrastructure is required to support the capacity and any constraints on development; and
· provide a statement of hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development.
2.5 The core part of the proposal in the draft NTFDS can be summarised as a strategy of consolidated growth largely focussed along State Highway 6. This proposal:
· prioritises intensification in Nelson as well as Richmond, Brightwater, Wakefield, Māpua and Motueka;
· provides for managed greenfield expansion around Nelson, Richmond, Brightwater, Wakefield and Māpua, including opportunities for rural residential development;
· provides for managed greenfield expansion around the Tasman rural towns of Murchison and Tapawera, and in Golden Bay, as well as some further development in St Arnaud;
· provides for commercial and residential growth within existing centres and mixed use areas that will have a combination of residential and commercial activities; and
· provides for other business growth (commercial and light industrial) in Richmond, Brightwater and Wakefield and within the Tasman rural towns of Murchison, Tapawera, St Arnaud, Takaka and Collingwood, where it is needed to meet local demand.
2.6 The draft NTFDS also invites submissions on the secondary part of the proposal for growth, including:
· a potential new community at Hira to the north of the Nelson City Centre; and
· a potential new community in the Tasman Village/Lower Moutere area (Braeburn Road).
2.7 The FDS does not set out the detail of how housing and business areas will be developed. This detail will be developed through a subsequent series of more detailed plans and strategies that the Council will prepare and consult on.
3. Recommendation
4. Background and Discussion
1. 2019 Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy
4.1 On 26 July 2019 the Joint Committee of the Nelson City and Tasman District Councils adopted the Nelson-Tasman Future Development Strategy 2019 (2019 NTFDS) under the former National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity (NPS UDC).
4.2 The 2019 NTFDS identified capacity was required for a further 14,249 houses through a mix of intensification and greenfield expansion. It also identified locations for new business land (commercial and industrial) at Richmond, Māpua, and Murchison as well as mixed use opportunities in Nelson.
4.3 The final NTFDS will replace the 2019 NTFDS.
4.4 The Joint Nelson Tasman Committee resolved on 10th November 2020 that the Nelson Tasman Urban Environment comprises the following city and towns: Nelson, Richmond, Motueka, Māpua, Wakefield, Brightwater, Cable Bay and Hira, in recognition that these communities are part of the same labour and housing market, and these areas are or are intended to be predominantly urban in character.
4.5 The draft NTFDS has considered what growth might look like under medium and high population scenarios. Since these are projections the actual rate at which the regions grow could be different depending on economic conditions, changes to immigration settings and internal migration patterns. This is why the draft NTFDS uses two growth scenarios and plans for capacity to meet the higher growth demand scenario. The medium growth scenario is the same population growth scenario of both Councils’ Long Term Plans 2021-2051. The NTFDS must be flexible to respond to growth as it occurs.
4.6 The draft NTFDS anticipates that, within the combined Nelson Tasman Urban Environment, there is a need to provide for an extra 17,000 homes under a medium growth scenario and an extra 24,000 homes under a high growth scenario over the 30 year assessment period. Within the remaining Tasman rural towns there is a need to provide 4,026 homes under a medium growth scenario and 5,179 homes under a high growth scenario.
4.7 The draft NTFDS identifies demand for around 47.8ha of commercial land and 19.6ha of industrial land over the next 30 years in the Nelson Tasman Urban Environment under the high growth scenario.
4.8 While the draft NTFDS plans for the long term high growth scenario, a three-yearly review of the NTFDS and on-going monitoring of development provides the opportunity to evaluate how fast the urban area is growing and speed up or slow down the zoning and servicing of land in response to demand.
2. Outcomes
4.9 A series of development outcomes have been developed to guide the direction of the draft NTFDS and assist with determining the most appropriate direction for growth.
4.10 These outcomes have been developed with input from iwi, elected members and stakeholders and are informed by each Council’s Long Term Plans (LTP) and feedback received to date on each Council’s resource management plan review.
4.11 The draft NTFDS seeks to broadly achieve all of the following outcomes:
1. Urban form supports reductions in GHG emissions by integrating land use and transport.
2. Existing main centres including Nelson City Centre and Richmond Town Centre are consolidated and intensified, and these main centres are supported by a network of smaller settlements.
3. New housing is focussed in areas where people have good access to jobs, services and amenities by public and active transport, and in locations where people want to live.
4. A range of housing choices are provided that meet different needs of the community, including papakāinga and affordable options.
5. Sufficient residential and business land capacity is provided to meet demand.
6. New infrastructure is planned, funded and delivered to integrate with growth and existing infrastructure is used efficiently to support growth.
7. Impacts on the natural environment are minimised and opportunities for restoration are realised.
8. Nelson Tasman is resilient to, and can adapt, to the likely future effects of climate change.
9. Nelson Tasman is resilient to the risk of natural hazards.
10. Nelson Tasman's highly productive land is prioritised for primary production.
11. All change helps to revive and enhance the mauri of Te Taiao
3. Iwi and hapū values and aspirations
4.12 The NPS-UD 2020 requires the NTFDS to include a clear statement of hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development.
4.13 Additionally, Section 77(1)(c) of the LGA requires any significant decision making in relation to land or a body of water, take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water, sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna, and other taonga.
4.14 The draft NTFDS has been prepared by the Councils in collaboration with Te Tauihu iwi and hapū. To prepare the draft NTFDS the project team reached out to representatives from iwi and hapū including:
· Manawhenua Ki Mohua
· Ngāti Kuia
· Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō
· Ngāti Koata
· Ngāti Rārua
· Ngāti Tama
· Ngāti Tōa Rangatira
· Rangitāne
· Te Ātiawa
· Ngāti Tahu
· Ngāti Waewae
· Te Āwhina Marae
· Onetahua Marae
· Whakatu Marae
4.15 The approach has included early and ongoing kōrero, engagement and hui with iwi and hapū who expressed an interest in engagement on the draft NTFDS. Several hui were held at key stages to discuss the background of the FDS, specific criteria for iwi and hapū values, site selection, and iwi and hapū aspirations over the next 30 years.
4.16 Te Ātiawa has significant concerns over the three Tasman sites, that these sites are very sensitive due to along history of spiritual/cultural issues, how the Councils have obligations to iwi to take into account their spiritual and cultural views and that careful consideration is being given to the concerns raised.
4.17 Good faith dialogue is continuing with Te Ātiawa with a view to finding out whether a solution can be achieved which benefits all parties and takes into consideration the cultural sensitivities Te Ātiawa have raised.
4.18 The final decision whether to include these three sites in the FDS will only be made following the consultation process and the further discussions with Te Ātiawa. Section 4 of the draft NTFDS sets out the statement of iwi and hapū aspirations, prepared collaboratively with those iwi who participated in the process.
4.19 Iwi and hapū expressed that the timeframes for the engagement and preparation of the draft NTFDS were challenging. This meant that not all iwi and hapū participated in the process, despite all being contacted and offered the opportunity to participate, with resourcing provided to support their meaningful engagement. This is largely due to already limited resources for iwi and hapū and these being stretched given the exceptional amount of regulatory change currently being pursued at both the central and local government level. Notwithstanding this, every effort was made throughout the process to date to facilitate their engagement.
4.20 It also proved unachievable within the timeframe to get a full consensus on the statement of iwi and hapū values and aspirations. While the general structure seemed to be accepted, the precise wording was not fully agreed and as mentioned above, there was not full participation in the process. The statement included within the draft NTFDS notes this, and there is further opportunity for iwi and hapū to provide additional comment once the draft NTFDS is notified through the Special Consultative Procedure process.
4. Legislation and National Policy Statements
4.21 The NPS-UD 2020 specifies that the final NTFDS must be considered when preparing or changing the Council’s resource management plans and ‘it is strongly encouraged’ that it is used to inform decision making on policies and strategies and specifically, the LTP and infrastructure strategy under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), and the regional land transport plans under the Land Transport Management Act 2003 (LTMA).
4.22 The draft NTFDS has been informed by the following Legislation and National Policy Statements:
4.22.1 National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020
4.22.2 The Resource Management Act 1991
4.22.3 New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010 (NZCPS)
4.22.4 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (NPSFM)
4.22.5 National Policy Statement on Electricity Transmission 2008 (NPSET)
4.22.6 Local Government Act 2002
4.23 In addition, the draft FDS has considered the broad direction set in the draft and discussion reports for the following proposed NPSs:
4.23.1 National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB)
4.23.2 National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPSHPL)
5. Infrastructure
4.24 Under the NPS-UD 2020 the FDS must spatially identify the additional infrastructure required to support or service that development capacity, along with the general location of the corridors and other sites required to provide it.
4.25 Section 16.2 of the draft NTFDS details the larger trunk infrastructure required to support each of the proposed growth areas. Further detail regarding the infrastructure requirements is contained in the supporting FDS Technical Report in attachment 2 and additional work to understand the costs of servicing these areas is being undertaken currently. This cost information is expected to be available for the deliberation stage of the project, which will be particularly important as the costs of servicing the possible new towns in the Hira and Tasman/Lower Moutere area are likely to be high.
6. Spatial scenarios
4.26 Objective 3 of the NPS-UD 2020 requires that regional policy statements and district plans enable more people to live in, and more businesses and community services to be located in, areas of an urban environment in which one or more of the following apply:
· the area is in or near a centre zone or other area with many employment opportunities;
· the area is well-serviced by existing or planned public transport; and
· there is high demand for housing or for business land in the area, relative to other areas within the urban environment.
4.27 Spatial scenarios in the draft NTFDS visually shows a proposal for Nelson and Tasman that provide capacity, choice and incorporate strategic supporting infrastructure.
4.28 Along with the outcomes identified above, the spatial scenarios assist in identifying and understanding trade-offs at a strategic level and working out how new growth areas and sites considered for growth are distributed.
4.29 The core part of the proposal in the draft NTFDS can be summarised as one that:
· prioritises intensification in Nelson as well as Richmond, Brightwater, Māpua, Wakefield and Motueka;
· provides for managed greenfield expansion around Nelson, Richmond, Brightwater, Wakefield and Māpua, including opportunities for rural residential development;
· provides for managed greenfield expansion around the Tasman rural towns of Murchison and Tapawera, and in Golden Bay, as well as some further development in St Arnaud;
· provides for commercial and residential growth within existing centres and mixed use areas that will have a combination of residential and commercial activities; and
· provides for other business growth (commercial and light industrial) in Richmond, Brightwater and Wakefield and within the Tasman rural towns of Murchison, Tapawera, St Arnaud, Tākaka and Collingwood where it is needed to meet local demand.
4.30 The core part of the proposal for the combined Urban Environment as shown in section 7 of the draft NTFDS provides for capacity for 26,000 dwellings made up of 46% intensification/ infill, 42% residential greenfield, 4% rural residential and 8% from existing zoned housing capacity outside FDS areas. This identified capacity meets the identified demand for housing over the 30 year period of the FDS.
4.31 The draft NTFDS contains a secondary part of the proposal for consideration, including:
· the potential for a new community at Hira to the north of the Nelson City Centre; and
· the potential for a new community in the Tasman Village/Lower Moutere area (Braeburn Road).
4.32 During early engagement, Te Ātiawa raised concerns about the Tasman Village/Lower Moutere proposal. The nature of the concerns relate to a long history of spiritual/cultural issues associated with an area of battle and it is therefore a very sensitive area. The Councils have obligations to iwi to take into account their cultural and spiritual views. Careful consideration is being given to the concerns raised. Several meetings with Te Atiawa were held by staff and elected members to discuss these concerns.
4.33 While the three sites are not part of the Councils’ draft NTFDS core part of the proposal, the decision has been made to include the three sites in the draft NTFDS as a secondary part of the proposal during the consultation process to obtain the wider community views.
4.34 The managed expansion of other Tasman towns in Murchison, Tapawera and St Arnaud and in Golden Bay will provide enough capacity to meet demand for each town under a high growth scenario for both residential and business uses.
4.35 The draft NTFDS identifies demand for around 47.8ha of commercial land and 19.6ha of industrial land over the next 30 years in the Nelson Tasman Urban Environment under the high growth scenario. Capacity analysis undertaken for the area shows that there is adequate capacity already zoned so no further development areas are needed for these activities.
7. Potential development sites and constraints
4.36 Nearly 200 potential development sites for housing or business were assessed as part of the draft NTFDS, 148 in Tasman and 41 in Nelson. A number of these came from earlier engagement in the FDS development process that had been undertaken with the developer community, as well as private landowners and the community, and sites assessed for the 2019 FDS were reassessed. Some sites were also identified through the early constraints and opportunities mapping exercise.
4.37 The difference in the number of sites identified in each local authority area is reflective of the difference in geographical size as well as the constraints of topography relative to each area.
4.38 The draft NTFDS does not include sequencing or timing for when growth areas will be rolled out over the next 30 years, given the need to be responsive to changing market dynamics in the NPS-UD 2020. This is one of the differences between the NPS-UDC and the NPS-UD2020.
4.39 Coordinating development with infrastructure provision for the growth areas identified in the draft NTFDS will be a critical component of the implementation plan. The Councils intend to achieve this through a number of approaches, including by:
· undertaking structure planning for key greenfield areas;
· undertaking neighbourhood planning for key intensification areas;
· enabling development through zoning and rule changes to the Councils Resource Management Plans (RMPs); and
· planning for and funding the infrastructure through the range of tools available to the Councils.
4.40 To assist in informing the assessment of potential development sites, constraints and opportunity mapping and analysis was undertaken across the whole of the two districts. Understanding Nelson and Tasman’s environmental opportunities and constraints has helped with identification of suitable locations for growth shown in section 15 of the draft NTFDS.
4.41 Key features that limit future expansion include the highly productive land in the Waimea and lower Moutere/Motueka plains, natural hazards in areas close to the coast and rivers, and the steep hills in the east. There are strategic opportunities for future growth in accessible locations within the urban area, and in locations where the land has limited productive value.
8. Multi Criteria Analysis
4.42 A Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) was used to assess growth areas in the 2019 FDS and a similar approach has been used for the new draft NTFDS, although the assessment criteria themselves are different, reflecting legislation and National Policy Statements since 2019.
4.43 Criteria were formed to reflect the outcomes in section 4.11 above that were developed with elected members of both Councils. The individual criteria were then applied to each potential growth site and these individual scores collated to provide an overall score for the site. All of the potential growth sites have then been ranked according to the MCA scores and then sites chosen to meet the required capacity.
4.44 The scoring of the sites was undertaken by Council officers along with external specialists where required. Assessment of Iwi cultural and environmental criteria were undertaken in consultation with Iwi through a series of hui over the duration of the project to date.
4.45 MCA have several important characteristics that have influenced the draft NTFDS development and site selection. In particular, if there are a large number of criteria, any one criterion can sometimes not influence the total score as much as desirable. With this in mind, key criteria such as Iwi values, inundation, coastal hazards and highly productive soils have been weighted individually to determine whether sites are included. These key criteria are seen as critical to the viability of development in growth areas and are outlined in more detail in section 6 of the FDS Technical Report in attachment 2.
9. Consultation and engagement
4.46 The initial phase of public engagement ran from 4th – 26th October 2021. The aim of this engagement was to introduce the project to the community, gain feedback on the overarching FDS strategic outcomes, explain the themes of the multi-criteria analysis and for the community to put forward any potential growth sites.
4.47 Community engagement included a mix of webinars, workshops, Youth Council meetings, media releases, council newsletters, website updates and social media posts.
4.48 The NPS-UD 2020 requires Council to engage with an identified list of stakeholders during the preparation of the draft FDS. A core stakeholder group was identified with representatives from government agencies, industry groups, large employers in the region and council-controlled organisations across both Nelson and Tasman. One online workshop was held with stakeholders as a group on 23 September 2021 followed by individual workshops and meetings with stakeholders that wished to be involved further in the process.
4.49 Key themes have emerged through this, which the draft NTFDS reflects, and which have informed the development of the draft NTFDS outcomes. These include:
· make efficient use of infrastructure by intensifying within existing urban areas;
· many stakeholders favoured providing for growth through intensification rather than new greenfield development to support reduced emissions and improve accessibility, but they acknowledged that a mix of housing choices is needed;
· natural hazards, effects on the natural environment, protecting highly productive land and accessibility are important considerations for criteria for assessing potential growth areas; and
· the FDS should be able to respond to changes in the market
4.50 Each Council has been engaging with developers throughout the year for other Council strategies including the Housing and Business Land Assessment, pre-application discussions and the Infrastructure Acceleration Fund applications. All of these development sites were included for consideration and assessment in the draft NTFDS process following these discussions.
10. Special consultative procedure
4.51 Under the NPS-UD when preparing a FDS councils are required to use the special consultative procedure in sections 83 and 87 of the Local Government Act 2002.
4.52 Section 83(1)(a)(ii) requires local authorities to include a “summary of information” if it considers it necessary “to enable public understanding of the proposal”. The draft NTFDS forms part of the Statement of Proposal and contains a large amount of complex information with language and terminology that may not be familiar to the public. It is therefore appropriate to include a Summary of Information in the Statement of Proposal.
4.53 The Summary of Information contained in the Statement of Proposal, the draft NTFDS, and Technical Report supporting the draft NTFDS are included in Attachment 1 and Attachment 2. The Statement of Proposal will be available for distribution throughout the community, for inspection at Council offices, at the libraries and on the Councils’ websites.
4.54 Due to the current red setting in the Covid protection framework and to keep everyone safe, in person community consultation events on the draft NTFDS will not take place. Instead, a comprehensive online consultation programme is planned with details provided in the Statement of Proposal. In summary, the consultation will take the form of the following:
· nine webinars targeting each of the main Tasman District towns and geographical areas affected by the draft NTFDS;
· three webinars targeting specific groups such as older residents, young people and development interest groups;
· four webinars for general community attendance;
· social media campaign utilising both Councils’ Facebook sites and websites; and
· the public notice of the Statement of Proposal will be published in the Nelson Mail newspaper.
· Articles will be placed in Tasman rural newspapers
4.55 To ensure continuity with the pre-engagement that has been undertaken to date, all stakeholders involved or invited to the previous stakeholder meetings will be sent a copy of the consultation material and a webinar will be held with them.
4.56 All owners of land within greenfield growth areas identified in the draft NTFDS have been sent letters alerting them to the upcoming consultation so they will be aware of it and more likely to make a submission if they so desire.
4.57 The methods summarised above ensure that proposal is widely accessible in both the Nelson and Tasman regions to a wide range of demographics and stakeholders in the community in recognition of the purpose and significance of the NTFDS.
4.58 As required in the Local Government Act 2002 section 83 the consultation period for submissions will run for at least one month, in this case it will be from 14 March – 14 April 2022 (32 days).
4.59 On 2 November 2021 the Joint Committee of Tasman District and Nelson City Councils resolved the following:
· Agrees to appoint a Subcommittee to oversee the Special Consultative Procedure for the draft Future Development Strategy 2022; and
· Agrees that it would be appropriate for the Subcommittee to have the skills and experience relating to Mātauranga Māori; and
· Notes that officers will be preparing a report for a meeting with Iwi Chairs seeking their views on the appointment process for up to three Mātauranga Māori representatives to the Subcommittee and that the outcomes of that discussion will be reported back to the next Joint Committee in 2022; and
· Agrees that the Subcommittee is made up of three Elected Members of each Council; including its Mayor, Deputy Mayor and one other member, and up to three Mātauranga Māori representatives to be confirmed at the next Joint Committee meeting; and
· Adopts the draft Terms of Reference for the Subcommittee, as attached (A2772759); and
· Notes the Subcommittee will cease to exist once the Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy 2022 is adopted.
4.60 Following this meeting, the Mayor of Tasman became unavailable for appointment to the subcommittee. The recommendations in this report reflect this change to the makeup of the subcommittee.
11. Iwi representatives
4.61 The original resolution at the 2 November 2021 Joint Committee meeting referred to “Mātauranga Māori representatives” being appointed to the subcommittee to hear submissions and deliberate on the final FDS document.
4.62 At the subsequent Iwi-Council Partnership Group meeting on 1 December 2021, it was requested that “Iwi representatives” rather than “Mātauranga Māori representatives” be appointed to reflect the wider governance representation that Iwi would have in the subcommittee. The role description sent to Iwi following this meeting reflected this request.
4.63 Staff are expecting the nominations prior to the Joint Council meeting and will update the committee at the meeting.
12. Implementation
4.64 If adopted, the FDS will be delivered through a comprehensive implementation plan prepared by both Councils in partnership with Iwi, key stakeholders and other infrastructure providers. The implementation plan will sit alongside the FDS and will be reported on and updated annually.
4.65 Work on the FDS implementation plan will begin soon after adoption of the final version of this FDS.
4.66 It is noted that the Spatial Planning Act is expected to be operative at the time of the next FDS review in three years’ time. That review will need to reflect the requirements of the new Act at that time.
5. Options
5.1 The Joint Committee has the option of approving, or not, the draft FDS for Consultation or amending the draft before Consultation.
Option 1: |
|
Advantages |
Ensures compliance with the NPS-UD 2020, which requires local authorities that share jurisdiction over an urban environment to work together on an FDS and that the FDS is prepared in time to inform preparation of the councils’ next Long Term Plan
Enables the Councils to coordinate infrastructure investment across the territorial authority boundary to ensure they provide sufficient residential capacity via an infrastructure programme that the community can afford.
|
Risks and Disadvantages |
None. |
Option 2: Amend the draft NTFDS before consultation |
|
Advantages |
Gives the Nelson Tasman Joint Committee the opportunity to have the draft NTFDS reflect its preferences more closely. |
Risks and Disadvantages |
Depending on the scope of the amendments, risks the deadline for completion of the NTFDS not being met.
Potential for inconsistencies between the final content of the FDS and the analysis undertaken by the consultants and staff. |
Option 3: Do not approve the draft FDS for Consultation |
|
Advantages |
None. |
Risks and Disadvantages |
Noncompliance with NPS-UD 2020.
Will result in the project timeline extending past local body elections delaying the adoption of the final FDS.
Councils would not have an FDS to inform the next round of long term plans as there will be insufficient time for any later FDS to meaningfully influence the long term plan development.
If an FDS is not adopted at a later date: · Nelson Tasman Urban Environment may be unable to provide sufficient feasible development capacity over the next 30 years for housing and business land; and · Development may occur in an ad hoc manner creating infrastructure inefficiencies and potentially affecting the cohesiveness of the community. Each Council would have less influence over the other’s future release of land for development. |
5.2 Council officers recommend that option one, approval of the draft FDS for consultation, be adopted.
6. Conclusion
6.1 Continued high rates of population growth for Tasman and Nelson combined is contributing to sustained pressure on the housing market and in some places business land. The draft NTFDS enables a regional approach to managing growth and infrastructure investment, maximising efficiencies and contains a spatial growth areas and housing types in accordance with the views expressed by the communities.
Authors: Chris Pawson - Senior Analyst Environmental Management & Jacqui Deans – Urban Growth Co- ordinator
Attachments
Attachment 1: A2840178 - 2022 Draft NTFDS and SOP - March 2022 ⇩
Attachment 2: A2840161 - 2022 NTFDS - Draft Technical Document - March 2022 ⇩
Important considerations for decision making |
7.1 Fit with Purpose of Local Government The matters in this report support the Nelson City and Tasman District Councils’ work to provide capacity for future growth and discusses the Government’s requirements of local authorities for growth planning as set out in sections 30 and 31 of the RMA and its National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020. |
7.2 Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy
The draft FDS is consistent with the community outcomes and will assist Council to achieve them, particularly: - Our urban and rural environments are people friendly, well planned and sustainably managed. - Our infrastructure is efficient, cost effective and meets current and future needs. - Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and community engagement - Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy The Nelson Urban Growth Strategy (NUGS) was developed in 2006 and guided growth decision making until the 2019 NTFDS was adopted. The key differences between the NUGS and the draft NTFDS are that the draft NTFDS now includes a development area in the Maitai Valley and does not anticipate a new township in Hira. The inconsistency between these strategies is related to the requirement of the NPS-UD 2020 to consider accessibility as a priority as well as the high cost of servicing an area without the necessary infrastructure. It is not intended to update the NUGS but instead have the NTFDS replace it.
|
7.3 Risk There is some risk that if the Subcommittee recommends to the Joint Committee to adopt an FDS that is unacceptable to the Joint Committee, another special consultative procedure would need to be undertaken for the draft FDS. This will push timelines for the FDS beyond local body elections and will mean the councils do not have an FDS to inform their next Long Term Plans. |
7.4 Financial impact The implementation and review of the FDS, as well as integration across both Councils’ other planning documents (LTP, AMPs RPS, district plans), will occur as part of business as usual. Continuing to develop an FDS enables the Councils to eventually coordinate infrastructure investment across the territorial authority boundary to ensure they provide sufficient residential capacity via an infrastructure programme that the community can afford. |
7.5 Degree of significance and level of engagement This matter is of high significance and as a result, a special consultative procedure is being undertaken. The reasons why the decision is considered to be of high significance are that the proposals contained in the report: • are likely to have a high level of public interest • are likely to be of high interest to iwi and Māori as they relate to land within the regions • may lead to future impacts on a large number of people within the Nelson and Tasman communities • will have a moderate impact on community well-being, including provision of housing • are likely to have moderate to high future implications for the level of infrastructure provided in the regions • are likely to lead to future moderate to high financial implications for the Councils in terms of rates, debt and development (and financial) contributions, if the proposals are accepted and proceed. |
7.6 Climate Impact The draft FDS considers climate change in its consideration of minimising greenhouse gas emissions and treatment of the risks associated with coastal hazards relating to sea level rise. |
7.7 Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process Section 4.12-4.19 of this report details the Iwi engagement that has taken place during development of the draft NTFDS to date. |
7.8 Delegations The Joint Committee of Tasman District and Nelson City Councils has the following delegations to consider the Future Development Strategy Areas of Responsibility: a) Implementation of the Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy Powers to Decide: b) To adopt, approve, review and amend the Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy and Implementation Plan. c) In matters relating to the Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy, undertake community engagement, including all steps relating to Special Consultative Procedures or other formal consultation processes. |