SUBMISSION ON IMPROVING OUR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: DISCUSSION DOCUMENT

(1)

1 SUBMISSION ON IMPROVING OUR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: DISCUSSION DOCUMENT

To : The Ministry for the Environment From : Property Council New Zealand

Introduction

The Ministry for the Environment is consulting on proposed changes to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). Property Council broadly supports many of the Ministry’s objectives and proposals. In particular, incorporating the effective functioning of the built environment including the availability of land for urban expansion use and development, the efficient provision of infrastructure, and the risk and impacts of natural hazards, into section 6 is extremely positive. This will help ensure that all relevant matters are appropriately considered and accounted for; and encourages a more holistic, integrated approach to decision making.

Property Council is also strongly supportive of:

 ensuring greater national consistency  the development of national guidance  fewer, and clearer, plans

 increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the consent process

 engagement with local government and other private sector stakeholders to improve processes and practices.

Property Council considers that whilst much of the Ministry’s proposals are positive, they will need to be supplemented with clear national guidance and other practical measures (such as ongoing monitoring and best practice/information sharing by central government) to achieve desired outcomes. Effective engagement with the private sector and local government will be essential to ensure that any steps taken are useful and workable.

(2)

2 In this submission, we:

 Outline possible ways of streamlining the consent process, and making it work better for all parties involved. The issues we raise are for consideration at this stage. Given the short timescales involved for submitting on this discussion document, Property Council’s view is that further engagement is vital, between the private sector and central and local government, to think through the issues and ensure that the Ministry’s proposals will be effective at a practical level.

 Comment on each of the proposals suggested by the Ministry in its discussion document.

Background

Property Council is a not-for-profit organisation representing the country’s commercial, industrial, retail, property funds and multi-unit residential property owners, managers and investors – including thousands of New Zealanders with retirement savings in listed property trusts, unlisted funds and KiwiSaver.

Our 600 member companies, with billions of dollars invested in commercial property, range from leading institutional investors, property trusts and financial organisations to private investors and developers.

Property Council actively involves itself with central, local and other government associated bodies, promoting the views, goals and ideas of our members. Property Council, like other organisations that represent commercial and industrial ratepayers, has an interest in achieving public policy outcomes that:

 enable the delivery of an appropriate level of investment in the services and infrastructure necessary to improve productivity-driven economic growth

 minimise disincentives for commercial investment within any given city, district or region  ensure the equitable and proportionate allocation of cost, which reflects the distribution of

benefits

 achieve a public policy environment that contributes to the long-term economic health of communities throughout New Zealand, as well as the economic prosperity of New Zealand as a whole.

(3)

3 Property Council’s primary goal is the creation of well designed, functional, and economically sustainable built environments in New Zealand including, where appropriate, the preservation and adaptive re-use of heritage buildings. As building owners, developers, consumers, taxpayers and ratepayers, Property Council’s members want to live and work in a built environment which is economically viable, sustainable, vibrant, and a desirable place to be. A vibrant and prosperous built environment, which evolves through better urban design, will attract more economic activity and investment (domestic and foreign), which in turn improves financial returns.

Property Council’s public policy interests fall into three primary areas of analysis: urban strategy and infrastructure; compliance and legislation; and capital markets. Property Council supports the implementation of statutory and regulatory frameworks that enhance (and do not inhibit) productivity-driven economic growth and prosperity. Property Council is also a proponent of urban sustainability and heritage outcomes, which are realised through the active governance and management of the urban environment.

Property Council’s members are significant users, throughout New Zealand, of the resource consent process and Property Council’s suggestions below reflect our members’ experiences with this and other aspects of the Resource Management Act 1991.

The consent process

Property Council supports the Government’s aims to streamline the consent process, make it work better for all parties involved, and provide greater clarity and certainty for users.

Property Council submits that practical changes need to be made to ensure that a robust process is maintained, whilst avoiding undue rigidity and delays. Our members tell us that:

 Currently developers face a range of barriers under the RMA consent processes, when trying to undertake truly innovative projects. Rigid application of RMA requirements results in less innovation and decreased quality in design and delivery.

 The large volumes of information required by district plans and assessment criteria often lead to undesirable delays. Delays and increased costs obviously have impacts on progressing key public sector issues, such as housing affordability.

 As identified by the Ministry, clearer plans are required to achieve less reliance on the consent process for development. Councils must be clear in their plans on what communities want.

(4)

4  Minor resource consent applications should be required to focus on the substantive issues,

not irrelevant matters.

 The lack of a standard template, providing consistent structure, format and definitions for plans, results in substantial duplication, delays and costs for local authorities and submitters.  Council planners often require support and experience in order to fulfil, and feel confident

about, their effectively semi judicial role. They must be able to be objective, and not be subject to undue political pressure.

Greater involvement of industry – a more collaborative process

One way of potentially improving the consent process (assuming conflicts of interest can be avoided) could include encouraging the greater involvement of skilled, experienced people from within the industry, who understand development issues, with assessing/reviewing resource consent applications. They could provide assistance to local authority staff, who would make the final decisions and have particular responsibility for collating information and ensuring the consent application undergoes a robust review process.

Greater involvement of central government

There is also a clear role for central government in providing clear and practical templates and national guidance, monitoring practices across the country, identifying and assisting councils suffering from resource constraints, providing training, and sharing best practice - to help develop consistent national processes.

Use of design panels and permitted baselines

Below is a case study provided by one of our members, where steps have been taken to streamline processes via the use of a permitted baseline. This meant that development could take place within tightly defined parameters (the right rules needed to be in place) without having to go through the whole consent process. It is provided for consideration, as our member’s feedback on this initiative has been positive.

(5)

5 CASE STUDY - USE OF PERMITTED BASELINES

Issue

Most zones within the Auckland region require a resource consent for activities and built form. Only residential zones have permitted baseline’s that, if not breached, allow for a house to be built without the need to obtain a resource consent.

Where a consent is required, complex and extensive rules and assessment criteria applied inevitably require that an AEE be accompanied by robust analysis from multiple disciplines. The detail required for this results in substantial amounts of information accompanying the consent application, and it takes council planning officers significant amounts of time to process the various components of consent - leading to delays that impact subsequent developer related holding costs.

In terms of streamlining the process, to make it more effective and efficient, it is important to consider: 1. Why certain activities need a resource consent at all?

2. Why do most zones not have a permitted baseline? 3. What would be the effect of having a permitted baseline? 4. How would that be implemented?

5. What are the risks and advantages? Use of resource consents and permitted baselines

When council’s re-zone land they must undertake analysis in accordance with section 32 of the RMA. This includes volumes of reports, from multiple disciplines, to consider a wide range of potential effects. It may be appropriate for developers to repeat this at a later date, for a resource consent for a built form and activity, where:

 activities (like supermarkets, bulk retail, etc) create substantial effects and should clearly be subject to detailed analysis

 activities need careful management and planning to avoid effects on other centres (cannibalisation of an effect more than minor, for instance).

However, there are activities where it may be reasonable to assume that they do not create any effects that are substantial and for which modelling (traffic, bulk, landscape, infrastructure, etc) would have been considered at the plan change stage. Appropriate use of a permitted baseline can help ensure a fast tracked, cost effective process for development, as long as the development complies with clearly defined, relevant rules. Developments that do not comply with the rules would be required to obtain a resource consent.

(6)

6 The approach – currently being used by one of our members for a subdivision

 An overarching Design Manual is in place, enforced through covenants on each title. The rules in the manual require specific outcomes. The rules were designed by a developer, and were carefully thought out to make them attractive despite the perception of detailed control of the outcomes. The sites have sold quickly and developments are underway. This proves that well written rules, can be attractive to development; not an obstacle as is often currently the case.

 The Design Manual rules require that developers undergo a design approval process in a way that is not dissimilar to that of the Urban Design Panel. Assessment is made against the Design Manual rules. This process has proven to be very effective in achieving the right outcomes.

 Under the project the council will not assess or approve any design for any buildings that are developed on site. This is, in effect, agreement from council that, if the appropriate rules are applied, they can trust that the appropriate outcomes will be delivered. It is also shows that a permitted baseline status for development that complies with the rules is possible and achievable, whilst protecting all the outcomes that the council desires. Appropriate safeguards ensure quality outcomes, whilst allowing flexibility and a streamlined process.

 This particular arrangement of using covenants to enforce the rules has only occurred because the existing district plan is insufficient to ensure enforcement of the rules. However a unitary plan zoning with the rules of the Design Manual would have the same effect as the covenants.

As such, the Ministry could consider:

 permitted baseline activities for built form in existing urban environments, that would mean that developers do not require a resource consent for built form. Rather, the developer would be required to undergo a short assessment against the rules for the development with the Urban Design Panel of council who would approve or decline the building designs

 rules that would govern permitted baseline consents for each zone.

Next steps

Property Council would appreciate the opportunity to engage with the Ministry, for instance via a working group/workshop/meeting on various methods of potentially streamlining the consent process, in order to ensure it is robust whilst making it more effective and efficient for all stakeholders.

(7)

7 Property Council views on the Ministry’s proposals – Improving our resource management system: Discussion document

PROPOSAL POTENTIAL BENEFITS POTENTIAL ISSUES

3.1.1 Changes to sections 6 and 7 of the RMA – principles and actions New section 6 – principles

(1) In making the overall broad judgment to achieve the purpose of this Act, all persons

exercising functions and powers under it in relation to managing the use, development and

protection of natural and physical resources shall recognise and provide for the following

matters:

(a) the preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment (including the

coastal marine area), wetlands, and lakes and rivers and their margins, and the

protection of them from inappropriate subdivision, use and development;

(b) the protection of specified outstanding natural features and landscapes from

inappropriate subdivision, use and development; (c) the protection of specified areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant

habitats of indigenous fauna;

(d) the value of public access to and along, the coastal marine area, wetlands, lakes and rivers;

(e) the relationship of Māori and their culture and

Strongly support this measure.

Encourages a more holistic approach to decision-making:

 Important for robust decisions that will provide maximum benefits to

communities.

 A fragmented approach to decision-making is more likely to results in sub-optimal outcomes and unintended detrimental consequences.

 Inclusion of the effective functioning of the built environment (including the availability of land for urban expansion, use and development), the efficient provision of infrastructure and the risk and impacts of natural hazards are particularly positive in helping ensure that all relevant matters are

appropriately considered and accounted for in decisions.

Support the inclusion of the word “specified” to help ensure that plans are robust and clear on what should be protected. In this respect:

By nature, principles are high-level and are subject to different interpretation and judgements. As such, it would be useful to provide further clarity on what is meant/intended under this section to assist application and decision making – either in regulations and/or national guidance (e.g. including case study examples, practical information etc).

Central government has a role in

communications/best practice sharing in this respect – to increase knowledge on application of this provision across the country.

(8)

8

traditions with their ancestral lands,

water, sites, waahi tapu, taonga species and other taonga including kaitiakitanga;

(f) the protection of protected customary rights; (g) the benefits of the efficient use and

development of natural and physical resources; (h) the importance and value of historic heritage; (i) the impacts of climate change;

(j) the benefits of efficient energy use and renewable energy generation;

(k) the effective functioning of the built

environment including the availability of land for urban expansion, use and development;

(l) the risk and impacts of natural hazards; (m) the efficient provision of infrastructure; (n) areas of significant aquatic habitats, including trout and salmon;

(2) For the avoidance of doubt section 6(1) above has no internal hierarchy.

Existing matters proposed for deletion: 7(aa) the ethic of stewardship

7(c) the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values

7(d) intrinsic values of ecosystems

7(f) maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the environment

7(g) any finite characteristics of natural and physical resources.

 Aim to avoid blanket protections being implemented and impacts not being appropriately considered.

 Provide transparency and certainty to all parties.

 Suggest that 6(h) is amended similarly to ensure that importance and value of specified historic heritage is considered in decision making.

 It would be worth making clear that “specified” means specified in district/regional/unitary plans. Support the aim for better rules in plans, to decrease reliance on the consent process and obtain greater certainty on projects that can/cannot be taken forward.

Clarification, under section 6(2), that there is no internal hierarchy intended in the section, is useful and appears appropriate. What is of importance is likely to vary depending on the time, locality, context and various issues concerned.

(9)

9

New section 7 – Methods

All persons performing functions and exercising powers under this Act must:

(1) Use best endeavours to ensure timely, efficient and cost-effective resource management

processes;

(2) In the case of policy statements and plans: (a) include only those matters within the scope of this Act;

(b) use concise and plain language; and (c) avoid repetition;

(3) Have regard to any voluntary form of

environmental compensation, off-setting or similar measure which is not encompassed by section 5(2)(c);

(4) Promote collaboration between local authorities on common resource management

issues; and

(5) Achieve an appropriate balance between public and private interests in the use of land.

Changes appear useful. Support measure. Interpretation and application could be assisted through guidance (e.g. including case study examples, practical information etc).

3.1.2 Improving the way central government responds to issues of national importance and promotes greater national direction and consistency Guidelines with criteria to clarify when and how

each national tool (or combination of tools) would be used. Applies to NPS and NES.

Guidelines are useful for transparency and to encourage greater consistency between central Government priorities and objectives and those of local government.

Guidelines should be developed in consultation with stakeholders to help ensure it is clear, covers all the issues, useful, practical and robust.

(10)

10

Could include a national standardised template. If robust, a national template would be particularly helpful for consistency and transparency.

Permit streamlined process for addressing urgent issues – e.g. that allows central government to consult on a proposed rule for a limited period and advise a final decision (without requiring the council to follow the current Schedule 1 process to insert the rule into a plan).

In principle, have concerns with (and some of our members object to) the streamlined process suggestion, as it creates uncertainty. Misuse of such a provision could result in undue political interference and have significant implications for development and the effective functioning of RMA processes.

If this proposal goes ahead, it is essential that the circumstances where a “streamlined approach for urgent issues” would apply must be clearly defined/transparent/explicit and limited, as should the process.

Ministers should be obliged to publicly report on why such steps have been taken and provide information and evidence to support this decision. This is particularly important for transparency, and where there are areas of dispute. It would also assist with accountability and ensuring the desired outcome is achieved.

(11)

11

3.1.3 Clarifying and extending central government powers to direct plan changes Stepped process for central government to direct

plan changes, with criteria in the RMA on the circumstances in which this process could be used.

 Minister could identify issues/outcomes to be addressed in plan.

 Minster direct plan change and matters to be considered and outcomes to be

achieved.

 Minster to directly amend an existing operative plan if local authority has not adequately addressed issues our outcomes in its plans. Similar to a regulation making power. Limited to urgent issues that are nationally or regionally significant.

Could be useful for urgent matters, those requiring a co-ordinated approach across a region or nationally, or where individual authorities are unable to agree on how to address an issue affecting more than one local authority area.

In principle, we have concerns with (and some members object to) this proposal as it increases uncertainty. Uncertainty has negative

implications for planning and development. If the proposal goes ahead, powers must be clear, specific and limited.

In each instance of use of any such powers, Ministers should be obliged to publicly report on why such steps have been taken and provide information and evidence to support this decision. This would be particularly important for transparency and where there are areas of dispute. It would also assist with accountability and ensuring the desired outcome is achieved. The process for central government intervention, and the circumstances where it might apply, must be clearly defined and limited. In non-urgent circumstances, consultation with affected local communities could be required. It may also be important to establish a process for dealing with objections.

3.1.4 Making NPSs and NESs more efficient and effective Allow for establishing a combined NPS and NES

process so guidelines can be given on all components of a plan at one time.

Clarify that NPSs and NESs can be targeted to a

(12)

12

specific region or locality – i.e. issues can be of national significance even if they do not play out across the country.

Further streamlining processes for developing NPSs and NESs.

Non-statutory agenda to indicate matters Government would consider for NPSs and NESs. Agenda published and reviewed every 3 years.

3.2.1 Require single resource management plans using a national template that would include standard terms and conditions All councils have a single plan (covering district plan,

regional plan, and policy documents) in place within 5 years.

Can cover one district or a broader area. National template.

Support this proposal, particularly the standardised national template and terms to help with consistency across the country:

 This would reduce complexity, particularly for those operating in multiple locations, and assist with comparisons across different areas.  Could assist with preventing overly

complicated plans – which currently result in hold-ups for what should be simple processes- and reduce numbers of policies in plans that are wordy, vague and often conflict.

 Helpful to have all relevant information in one document, as long as the

document is clear and easy to navigate.  Opportunity to ensure that clear, robust

Need some flexibility. Must still allow for local circumstances to be taken into account. Local authorities may require support in initial implementation and best practice.

Template should be complemented by guidance. Development of the template and guidance should take place on the basis of robust engagement with local authorities and the private sector/industry.

(13)

13

rules are set out in plans, to reduce reliance on and overuse of the consent process (including the appeal process). Without this, delays will not be reduced.  Consistent structure, format and

definitions for plans should result in less duplication, delays and cost for local authorities and submitters.

At this stage the Auckland model appears to be working.

Template could:

 clearly define what should be in the plan in terms of policy, objectives, rules, assessment criteria

 include definitions of key terms  standardise terms and conditions  standardise zones and rules

 define and provide direction on activity status for development within a plan  consider use of permitted baselines (see

case study above) 3.2.2 An obligation to plan positively for future needs e.g. land supply

Changes to sections 30 and 31 so managing for positive effects is one of councils’ core functions and to require councils to ensure there is adequate land supply to provide for at least 10 years of projected growth in demand for residential land in

In principle, support. Will include identifying existing and future urban settlement, based on likely business growth, movement of people and goods, and impacts of other urban settlements.

Councils should be required to plan to ensure there is adequate land supply for at least 15 years. 10 years is too short a timeframe – particularly given delays between zoning and planning changes becoming active/land

(14)

14

their plans.

Will be supported by guidance, on how to better plan proactively and the future-focused emphasis.

becoming available for use (e.g. if waiting for privately held land to become available); and the timescales of planning reviews.

There should be a positive obligation on councils to conduct regular audits, on how plans are progressing and outcomes are being achieved. This is vital to inform future planning.

Planning for land supply should be done on a regional basis/at a regional level.

This is a complex issue. Councils will need practical support and guidance with this, particularly to help ensure a level of consistency in approach across the country and effective integration with central government policies.

3.2.3 Enable preparation of single resource management plans via joint process with narrowed appeals to Environment Court Plan partnership agreement binds respective

councils to collaborate on development,

implementation, monitoring and review of plan. Pre-notification engagement and collaboration.

Encourages an integrated approach. Could be difficult to implement efficiently, effectively and in a timely manner, where there are areas of dispute.

Independent hearings panel of qualified

commissioners. Has the potential to be a cost effective, timely process. Process for appointing members should be transparent. Panel members must be appropriately qualified and objective, in order to effectively conduct hearings and make robust recommendations.

(15)

15

There must be an efficient, cost-effective process for holding panel members to account for their decisions, and terminating their appointment them if need be.

Hearings process must be transparent, allow for cross examination, oblige council(s) to justify their approach and play an active part in the proceedings.

Narrowed appeals to Environment Court – where council deviates from recommendations of hearings panel. Appeal to High Court on points of law.

Variability in the quality of local decision making has meant the Environment Court has played a vital role in RMA processes.

Understand the rationale behind limiting appeals to the Environment Court, due to the desire to progress plans relatively quickly and the

perception that the appeal mechanism will hold up this process. However, in order to obtain a robust Plan, it may be beneficial to consider some sort of expedited Environment Court appeal process where:

 after hearing submissions, the Panel makes binding decisions (not recommendations to the council)  the council and submitters are both able

to appeal Panel decisions to the Environment Court

 the Environment Court’s decision is final, on the merits.

(16)

16

Alternately the Panel could be given the power to have the final say on the Plan, as it is the Panel, not the council, who would have heard the submissions and managed the hearings process. The Panel’s decision would be final in this respect, on the merits, and there would be no appeals to the Environment Court. However, it will be vital that Panel members are

appropriately qualified, truly objective, and able to be held to account, in order to fulfil this role.

Appeals to Environment Court narrowed to an appeal by way of rehearing – i.e. consider council’s original decision and rehear evidence where appropriate.

Understand aim to encourage earlier

engagement on issues, and not deferring full engagement until reaching the Environment Court stage of the process.

Agree with desire to reduce need for costly appeals and limiting appeals purely to areas of contention.

Require more information on the impacts of such a change before being able to comment on this proposal.

3.2.4 Empowering faster resolution of Environment Court proceedings Increase Environment Court’s existing power to

enforce agreed timeframes (e.g. exchange of evidence)

Strengthen existing provisions to require parties to undertake alternative dispute resolution.

Make law changes to deliver benefits of electronic case management.

Sound reasonable. Courts do have the power now to enforce agreed timeframes but often defer to requested time extensions.

(17)

17

3.3.1 A new 10-working-day time limit for straight-forward, non-notified consents Process prescribed in RMA.

Criteria for applications to be considered for this process listed in regulations.

Obligations on councils in processing these consents reduced commensurately.

Activity types could include non-notified controlled and restricted-discretionary activities which have few rule breaches, including:

 simple bulk and location breaches to residential zone rules, especially where plans anticipate a future increase in housing density

 small-scale infill or unit title subdivisions in residential zones that anticipate such development, where the application demonstrates the necessary servicing is available (e.g. stormwater, wastewater, water supply and roading infrastructure all have capacity)

 district land-use activities which are anticipated by plans, do not alter the character of neighbourhoods but still need to be assessed against district plans before they can proceed.

Quality criteria could include:

 clear and complete application  written approvals provided

 agreement application meets criteria in RMA, regulations and the plan is reached in

Strongly support this measure. Shorter, simpler,

more streamlined process would be beneficial. How councils view these obligations, and practically implement the process, will be vital in order to achieve efficiencies. Clear guidance on the application of this provision is likely to be required.

There needs to be specificity and clarity around what is “straightforward” to ensure that the provision is applied appropriately and consistently – i.e. to ensure that all straight-forward consents are actually considered by councils in accordance with this provision (and not classed as “not straightforward”).

For the 10-working-day time limit to be achievable, requirements that further

information be provided should be limited (or else delays will not be prevented). Councils must also state clearly what is required for an

application to be considered complete. Evidence suggests that, where councils have resource constraints/issues, these measures may not practically result in faster processing of applications. At the moment, in some councils, even the current 20 day limit is not being met. Reasons include not enough staff or expertise to process applications, resulting in backlogs.

(18)

18

a pre-application meeting.

3.3.2 A new process to allow an “approved exemption” for technical or minor rule breaches Activity will be deemed permitted, by councils being

provided a small degree of tolerance to decide on case-by-case basis that full resource consent is not needed (e.g. minor or technical breach, neighbours not affected, environment not affected, objectives and policies not compromised, no other consent permission required, no need for technical conditions to control effects).

Strongly support this measure. Should be supplemented by clear guidance to councils on application of this process and decisions in this respect – otherwise risk some councils could take an overly cautious approach, and not making use of this provision.

Guidelines would also assist with national consistency.

3.3.3 Specifying that some applications should be processed as non-notified Rather than leaving councils to stipulate activities

which will not be notified, regulations could direct non-notification as a nationwide standard for some activity types. Could include activities subject to 10-day resource consent process, small-scale

residential subdivisions, infill housing where plans anticipate increasing densities, house extensions, minor alterations.

Support this measure. Encourages a consistent approach across the country, particularly helpful for those working in multiple locations.

Streamlines processes.

Can assist with delivery of national policy objectives.

Need flexibility to account for specific local issues, where relevant.

3.3.4 Limiting the scope of consent conditions Strengthen RMA provisions that set the types of conditions which can be put on the different classes of consents. E.g. require a condition only be imposed where it directly relates to:

 the provision of the plan which has been breached

 the adverse environmental effects of the proposed activity

Strongly support national clarity in this area, and limiting the scope of consent conditions and ensuring they are appropriately linked to RMA requirements.

May help guard against unreasonably onerous consent conditions e.g. members have advised of instances where they have been provided with

(19)

19

 content volunteered/agreed by applicant 70 pages of conditions. 3.3.5 Limiting the scope of participation in consent submission and in appeals Limit scope of submissions and third party appeals

to only the reasons the application was notified and the effects related to those reasons.

Where neighbour does not give written approval, councils could invite comments on the proposal by a particular date and limit comment to only those aspects of the development that would affect the neighbour.

Support. Better links appeals with the requirements under the RMA.

Increases certainty for applications. Likely to reduce costs and delays.

3.3.6 Changing consent appeals from de novo to appeals by way of rehearing Limit scope of Environment Court appeals on

consent decisions to an appeal by way of rehearing. Variability in the quality of local decision making has meant the Environment Court has played a vital role in the process.

Require more information on the impacts of such a change before being able to comment.

Low cost tribunal style resolution process for minor

matters. In principle support, as long as it is objective, transparent, timely process. Accountability for decisions is key.

3.3.7 Improving transparency around consent processing fees Introduction of requirements for councils to set

fixed charges for certain types of resource consents. E.g. could be based on type of activity, zone, level of non-compliance and/or activity status.

Where fixed charges are not required, councils must

Support the intent of this proposal. Useful for low levels of development, such as minor house extensions or subdivisions. Provides greater certainty around costs, allows for better planning – for all parties involved.

Costs could be too difficult to predict for large, complicated applications.

(20)

20

estimate additional charges to applicant in advance

of application being processed. Makes comparisons across councils made easier. Increased transparency from this proposal will assist with ensuring better accountability for charges, and encourage efficiency in processing consents. Currently, in some areas, it appears that charges may be inflated. For example, we are aware of a case where a subdivision consent was lodged for a rural boundary adjustment. There was no engineering or physical works required. The consultant costs were $3565, there were four conditions and the council’s fee was $2166.

3.3.8 Memorandum accounts for resource consent activities Councils to publish memorandum accounts

(disclosing the accumulated balance of revenue and expenses incurred in the provision of certain outputs or services over a period).

Increased transparency, allow for comparisons across councils, increased accountability.

3.3.9 Allowing a specified Crown-established body to process some types of consents Either call-in provisions be expanded, or new

legislation be developed to enable Minster to designate nationally important issues e.g.

availability of land for housing to be eligible for an alternative consenting process in specified areas or circumstances.

Dedicated board of inquiry or Crown body process consent applications within 3-4 month timeframe.

Understand intent to help with efficiently progressing important policy initiatives. However, issues must be truly national.

Links to existing processes of call-in, EPA and direct referral must be clear.

If implemented, any such process needs to be objective, robust, timely, and transparent. Needs to balance national and specific local issues. Will require strong engagement with affected local authorities and local communities.

(21)

21

Should only be used where it is appropriate that national issues override issues of local

importance. The circumstances where this would be used must be clearly defined. It should not be used unnecessarily and must not create uncertainty with RMA processes.

3.3.10 Providing consent authorities tools to prevent land banking Consenting authorities can set conditions when

approving section 223 survey plans to require construction work must be completed (i.e.

infrastructure built and land made ready for houses to be constructed) in a time less than the current default three years – or else survey plan will lapse.

Do not support. This is unlikely to prevent land banking.

This will not be practical in many circumstances. The market and financing environment can change very quickly - the owner of the land must be free to determine the economic viability of development.

As an example, after a two and a half year (non-notified process), a member was granted a consent for a rural residential subdivision. Under this proposal, the member would have been forced to proceed with that project – whereas, due to changing circumstances, it was deemed

(22)

22

more appropriate to allow the consent to lapse. 3.3.11 Reducing the costs of the EPA nationally significant proposals process

Direction and proposal to be notified, but summary of Minister’s reasons for making direction and a description of the proposal required – rather than reasons in full. Reasons in full available on website or hard copy.

Boards of inquiry required to have regard to cost-effective process and advice of EPA on

administrative matters when determining their procedure.

Parties get documents electronically (hard copies on request).

Delete draft decision stage or reduce period to commenting on draft decision from 20 to 10 working days.

RMA clarify EPA can provide planning advice to board of inquiry.

RMA amended to provide any consent process can be stopped if associated charges for the process to date have not been paid in full. EPA can recover debt as a debt to EPA.

Reduced costs positive. Process must be transparent, objective, timely. Concerns with reducing the period for

commenting on draft decision from 20 to 10 working days.

3.4.1 Learning the lessons from Canterbury Natural hazards added as a matter in the principles of the RMA.

Amend section 106 of the RMA to ensure all natural hazards can be appropriately considered in both subdivision and other land-use consent decisions. The full risk of natural hazards – likelihood and

Sensible to take a holistic approach and better plan for natural hazards – having positive benefits for community resilience.

Will need to be supplemented by practical, clear national guidance on making such decisions – to help ensure consistency in approach and lessen the risk of gold plating.

(23)

23

magnitude of impacts to be considered in these

decisions. this. Central government sharing best practice and monitoring may also be important in ensuring a robust approach across the country. Could have significant cost implications. The level of risk and probability of occurrence needs to be factored in, plus the market should have choice. For example, if you want to live on the coast and there is the risk that a tsunami may occur every 500 – 600 years then you should have the right to live on the coast and not be forced elsewhere.

3.5.1 Enabling more effective iwi/Māori participation in resource management planning Councils required to establish arrangements giving

opportunity for iwi/Māori to directly provide advice during development of plans.

Allow iwi to provide advice on proposed policy ahead of council decisions on submissions and advice having statutory weight under RMA. Existing arrangements in this respect continue. Providing consistent requirements for consultation with iwi on national environmental standards. Improving ease of use of existing tools for participation.

Improving awareness and accessibility of iwi

Appear positive. Important for involvement at the planning stage.

(24)

24

management plans.

3.6.1 Improving accountability measures Central government to provide local authorities with greater clarity on what they are expected to achieve, how performance would be measured and what they are expected to report on.

Central government develop an expectations system in collaboration with councils. Specify key performance indicators to provide greater clarity on what the Government and community expect in relation to the RMA. Could include consumer-centric service delivery, environmental and economic outcomes.

National monitoring system on service delivery. Improved state of environment reporting.

Useful to have collected information made publicly available.

Assist with ensuring councils understand community and Government expectations. Assist with comparisons across councils and identifying and assisting areas suffering resource constraints.

Should be linked to the cycle of plan adoption and interim review. Audits should clearly show whether desired outcomes have been achieved, and the results should inform future decisions.

Stakeholders, e.g. users of the consent process, should be consulted on the development of the relevant key performance indicators.

May need qualitative as well as quantitative information collected to adequately understand issues.

There needs to be clarity and national consistency around key terms (such as the definition of lodgement etc) to ensure accurate results, consistency in reporting and the comparability of results. For instance, our members have dealt with a council that does not note an application as being formally lodged until such time as it has been around all if its respective departments and they have looked it over.

3.7 Addressing housing affordability

Changes to improve planning through greater provision of national direction (including template plans and rules and changes to sections 6 and 7 of RMA), focus on future-focussed planning and requirement to provide adequate land supply for 10 years of growth, requirement to put in place single

As described above, support some of these initiatives. However, on their own, will not address housing affordability.

A number of issues affect housing affordability – some of which are outside the scope of this consultation (e.g. development contributions). Central government should clearly set out its priorities and objectives through appropriate

(25)

25

plans.

Effective intervention tool for issues of national importance. Central government can direct a plan change or amendment to give effect to desired outcomes where local authorities failed/are experiencing difficulties.

Range of changes to consenting processes including streamlined 10 day process for certain consents, limiting scope of submissions and appeals on consents, changing type of appeal for consents, improving transparency of consent fees and establishing alternative Crown-established body to process consents in certain circumstances.

mechanisms, such as NPS, NES, guidance

documents and even a national plan. It needs to work with local government to ensure clarity in understanding and consistency of approach in ensuring that local plans have regard to national issues. This is vital to ensure strong working relationships between central and local government and to minimise the need for central government interventions into local issues – which should only occur in limited circumstances (e.g. disasters) and should not create uncertainty as this will hinder investment and development.

Need to ensure local issues and circumstances are adequately accounted for when central government is making changes or taking steps. I.e. strong engagement and appropriate balancing of local issues and national priorities will be vital.

Local authorities are likely to need central government support (resource, including financial) to help implement national requirements.

(26)

26 Conclusion

Property Council is grateful for the opportunity to provide comments on the discussion document, and wishes to engage with the Ministry to help ensure that its policies and intended outcomes can be achieved going forward.

DATED 2 April 2013.

_________________________________________ Connal Townsend, Chief Executive

On behalf of Property Council New Zealand

ADDRESS FOR SERVICE: PO Box 1033 Auckland, 1140