The Dunedin City Council is considering changes to proposed
new rules on natural hazards, amid community concern about
the impact the ''broad brush'' proposals could have on
More than 400 people have attended public meetings across the
city to discuss the proposed changes, and submissions, phone
calls and emails have been rolling in to the council.
The council has already responded by extending the deadline
for people to have their say, to September 1, and council
staff said yesterday they remained open to changing the draft
The pledge came as Saddle Hill Community Board chairman Scott
Weatherall yesterday told the Otago Daily Times
residents in his area had ''reasonably strong'' concerns
about the council's ''broad brush'' proposals.
That included in the coastal township of Ocean View, where a
coastal hazard ''extreme risk'' zone - banning all new
development - would cover a cluster of homes, and some vacant
sections, on the seaward side of Brighton Rd.
A public meeting organised by council staff in Brighton drew
a crowd of 80 people on June 26, while a follow-up meeting on
July 1 - organised by the Saddle Hill board to discuss the
community's response to the first meeting - attracted another
''There's genuine concern, for sure. What does it mean for
people? What does it mean for people's homes?
"What does it mean for people's potential developments? What
does it mean for people's potential lifetime dreams?
''That's quite significant,'' Mr Weatherall said.
As a result, residents and the board were collaborating on a
submission that would call for changes to the council's
proposals, he said.
That included adjusting the boundaries of the coastal extreme
risk zone in Ocean View, based on individual assessments of
the threat to specific properties, he said.
The board also wanted the council to commission an
independent assessment of the threat posed by a landslip
zone, also in Ocean View, he said.
Council staff had visited the area at the board's invitation,
and had also offered to conduct site visits to individual
homes, which was ''a bit of a win'', Mr Weatherall said.
''I guess what the community feel is extreme, and what the
council feel are extreme, we want to see if we can't get them
lined up just a wee bit better.''
His concerns came after the council unveiled its proposals in
June, to add new hazard maps and planning rules to the
second-generation district plan.
Up to 8600 of the city's 46,600 homes could be affected, and
about 1500 commercial and industrial properties, although the
most extreme rules would apply to only 282 residential
In extreme risk areas, homes could remain as of right, but
new developments - or significant expansions - would be
prohibited, prompting concerns property prices and insurance
cover could be affected.
Aramoana resident John Davis was another to express concern
at the proposals yesterday.
The proposed new rules classified much of the settlement as a
high-risk coastal hazard area, making consents for new
developments more difficult - but not impossible - to obtain.
Mr Davis said the threat of flooding in Aramoana was already
well known, and it should be a case of ''buyer beware''.
The new rules would reduce property prices for those in the
area looking to sell, and could affect insurance cover, Mr
''Who's going to want to buy with those restrictions?''
Mr Davis said 42 people had attended the council's meeting on
the proposed changes in Aramoana, which was ''pretty good''
for the settlement.
''I think there is concern.''
Members of the Aramoana League, of which he is secretary,
would also meet tonight to consider their position, he added.
Council policy planner Sally Dicey was pleased with public
consultation to date, which had prompted 433 people to attend
12 public meetings between June 24 and July 23.
Another ''80 to 100'' inquiries, and ''about 50''
submissions, had also been received by the council, she said.
Feedback had been mixed. Some people were ''really positive''
while others thought the proposals were ''a bit
heavy-handed'', she said.
As a result, the council was ''reconsidering the approach''
in some areas, although it was too soon to say what changes
could follow, she said.
''We do want to get it right ... We will be looking at
feedback and looking at our approach very carefully,'' she