Flooding in Nelson street, South Dunedin. PHOTO: STEPHEN JAQUIERY Development rules for South Dunedin have been deemed inadequate for managing risk from natural hazards, but no move is imminent to change them. The Dunedin City Council has decided against initiating a plan change, citing the government’s resource management reforms as a reason to hold off. A review found risk from natural hazards such as flooding was greater than previously understood and some areas were subject to significant risk — and risk increasing over time. That created a mismatch with Dunedin’s district plan, which had an overlay zone indicating a low risk to people and property from coastal inundation. A report for the city council said district plan provisions for South Dunedin ‘‘no longer reflect the best available understanding of natural hazard risk and are not effectively managing that risk for new development’’. A standard relating to relocatable buildings is not working as intended and the planning framework does not adequately manage intensification in areas subject to increasing hazard risk, the report states. However, council staff did not recommend pursuing a plan change. This was partly because of the short remaining life of the second-generation district plan under resource management reform, when a full review would happen under the new system. ‘‘A separate plan change would be costly and there would be no guarantee of its longevity under the new system,’’ the council said. At a meeting on Thursday, councillors agreed they should not initiate a plan change at this time. Cherry Lucas. PHOTO: GREGOR RICHARDSON Deputy mayor Cherry Lucas said the review highlighted the overlay signalled a level of risk no longer supported by the evidence. ‘‘We are still enabling development in areas where long-term risk is increasing.’’ However, it was practical and responsible not to pursue a plan change, she said. ‘‘We’re in the middle of major resource management reform,’’ Cr Lucas said. ‘‘Any plan change we undertake now could quickly become redundant or be revisited.’’ The review was prompted by new hazards information becoming available through a risk assessment for the South Dunedin Future programme run by the city council and Otago Regional Council. The regional council completed its assessment in April. South Dunedin was highly vulnerable to severe weather and climate change due to a combination of mostly flat low-lying land, its function as a basin collecting water from surrounding hills and patterns of development that began in the 19th century, it said. ‘‘The risk assessment showed that there are currently widespread areas of medium risk to buildings from rainfall events, and smaller areas at high risk from groundwater, with most of South Dunedin being exposed to significant (high or medium) risk due to rainfall, coastal inundation and groundwater hazards by 2100,’’ the review states. New buildings complying with minimum floor-level regulations would fare better than older buildings closer to ground level. ‘‘However, these minimum floor levels do not protect people from the wider impacts of floodwater on the surrounding land and from effects on health and safety. ‘‘Potential impacts include damage to other buildings and property, limiting road access, floodwater carrying pollutants and leaving behind hazardous residue, as well as longer term impacts on the physical and mental health of residents.’’ The review highlighted climate adaptation planning was being undertaken as part of the South Dunedin Future programme. ‘‘While adaptation measures that result from this programme will change the risk environment, the adaptation master plan has not yet been confirmed or funded.’’ This created uncertainty about precisely where land use might change. The city council staff report said density rules in South Dunedin had enabled a relatively high level of residential intensification. The relocatable buildings standard have not effectively ensured buildings can be relocated in a practical and cost-effective way, the report states. ‘‘As a result, multi-unit development and other forms of intensification have occurred in buildings that may have a low likelihood of being able to be cost-effectively relocated if required.’’ The council said some existing tools remained relevant for managing the situation. The Resource Management Act allowed the risk of natural hazards to be considered when subdivision and land-use consents were required, and consents could be refused or granted subject to conditions where there was a significant risk from natural hazards, it said.
