The council’s interpretation of rules about potential contamination has been criticised as overly cautious — adding to development costs for arguably negligible health or environmental gains — and it reaffirmed its stance last week.
Staff faced questions from councillors, especially from Cr Russell Lund, about the council’s approach being an outlier and how it might be more pragmatic.
Cr Andrew Simms suggested an urgent hui of developers, interested parties and the council and asked if staff would be open to that.
"Absolutely," corporate and regulatory services general manager Paul Henderson said.
At issue is the historical use of lead-based paint resulting in lead being present in soil and how residential development might be feasible in such situations.
The Otago Daily Times asked a couple of people in the industry if they could see value in a hui.
Terramark resource management planner Darryl Sycamore said dialogue was a good thing.
He did not believe councillors had a good understanding of the issues.
A roundtable discussion might be useful, assuming the council listened.
Mr Sycamore said developers in the city were looking to move to places such as Hamilton and Christchurch, because their councils were easier to deal with.
"We lose that competitive edge and it’s driving people away who actually get things done.
"It is frustrating."
Blue Sky Property Group director Lyndon Fairbairn said he would be interested in a hui.
"The current rules are stifling development and it’s obviously not a good thing for the city.
"It’s just these settings are so strict, they’re impeding development."
Cr Lund led an effort to again prompt staff to review their position, but a motion to that effect was defeated 8-7.
The council then decided to continue with its existing approach, voting 9-6 to do so.
A staff report for the meeting highlighted lead was a persistent pollutant that did not degrade in the environment and exposure to it could have implications for human health.
The council was "on notice as to possible contamination at sites with pre-1945 painted buildings".
The staff report said data captured so far confirmed it was considered "more likely than not" that sites with pre-1945 painted wooden or roughcast houses could pose a risk to human health or the environment.
Staff noted the Ministry for the Environment had not indicated the council was overreacting to the risk posed by historical use of lead-based paint in residential settings and there was no indication the ministry opposed the council’s approach.
However, former councillor Andrew Whiley said the Dunedin City Council had "raised the bar" higher than others.
"The DCC implemented something that is out of step with the rest of the country."
The vote
That the council directs staff to review legal advice about the lead-in-soil issue.—
For (7): Crs Cherry Lucas, Russell Lund, Benedict Ong, Jules Radich, Andrew Simms, Lee Vandervis, Brent Weatherall.
Against (8): Mayor Sophie Barker, Crs John Chambers, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Marie Laufiso, Mandy Mayhem, Mickey Treadwell, Steve Walker.
