Plan Change 29: How easy will it be to build six storeys?

A plan change in Nelson wants to promote housing intensification in the city. But, with buildings of up to six storeys planned in high density zones, just how easy will it be to get one built? Katie Townshend sat down with Nelson City Council planners to find out.

For those living in proposed new high-density zones, Nelson City Council’s Plan Change 29 is a daunting document.

Opponents to the plan have likened it to daylight robbery, warning of developments cropping up without any need for resource consent.

Under the proposed new rules, there would be three residential zones: the general residential zone will allow up to three residential units of up to two storeys, or 8m, tall; medium density would allow up to three units of up to three storeys, or 12m; and high density up to three units of up to six storeys, or 19m.

The biggest fear is around the six-storey buildings, with many people concerned one could be built next-door without so much as a heads-up before the builders move in.

That was a possibility in a black and white world, but in reality the rules were a lot more grey, council’s senior planning advisor Coralie Barker said.

There were 185 planning rules a development had to meet, and much of it would come down to the site being built on.

“What you can build on a site is really, really dependent on the site that you have available to you.”

Those 185 rules are particularly important when it comes to the six-storey buildings.

One rule was a maximum of three units per site – so three homes. Any more triggers the requirement for a resource consent.

Realistically, any six-storey development will be more than three units to make it financially viable for a developer.

“It’s likely that the six-storey building is going to need resource consent for that rule alone,” council group manager environmental management Mandy Bishop said.

And that’s just one rule – fail to meet any of the rules, and it will require a resource consent.

That includes things like the amount of the site covered by the building – for six-storey buildings it was a maximum of 50% – and whether there were any natural hazards impacting the site.

Also, the distance from the boundary, and how much of the building was at the maximum height, as the design was required to get shorter towards the back of the property to protect daylight angles for neighbours.

The planners point out that many factors come into play when looking at the impact on the daylight for neighbouring properties.

For starters, the sun moves.

“The impact from a building changes throughout the day and throughout the year,” Barker said.

“So the shade impacts that the building will have really depends on the orientation of the site. And whether it’s flat or on a hill, what direction that hill faces, and the severity of the shade changes as well.”

The rules in the plan change protect a property’s right for access to daylight between 10am and 2pm in the middle of winter – the darkest time of the year and therefore when a development’s impacts would be most extreme.

But, Bishop said, access to daylight was not the same as having direct sunlight.

“You don’t need to have them without shade, but you need to have the light being able to reach your property.”

It’s a difficult distinction to explain, but one way example was that in the middle of the day you don’t need to turn the lights on.

Once a developer had come up with a project it will be assessed by the council planners to determine whether it needs resource consent, and if it does, what process it goes through.

Many in the community are worried it would go through without the neighbours getting to have a say.

For that to happen the council would grant a resource consent as a restricted discretionary activity – but that’s “quite a narrow category”, Barker said.

Any development that breached rules like daylight angles, site coverage or closeness to boundaries would lead to notifications and discussions with the affected neighbours, she said.

“If an effect is going to be on a neighbouring property, you will likely be able to notify that neighbouring property,” Barker said.

In adding to that, Bishop said, “or require them to provide their written approval for us to carry on with the process basically.”

Notified or not, Barker and Bishop were keen to point out that these rules were still a proposal.

Many submissions have already landed, but Barker said they didn’t just want submissions telling them what they don’t like about the plan.

“We are getting submissions from people telling us what they don’t want, but we’re not necessarily getting a very clear picture of what they do want.”

The existing rules were 20 years old and had to be updated to fit with the changing community needs, Bishop said.

“These rules, trying to meet the different choices that people need these days.”

Submissions can be made until October 31.

A “friend of submitters” was also available to talk people through the process if they want help, and there are public meetings and drop-in sessions where people can talk to the council staff to ask questions.