The Queenstown Lakes District Council has been directed by Environment Court Judge Jon Jackson to correct an acknowledged error in its operative district plan.
In his decision last month, Judge Jackson said the council needed to reinstate assessment matters relating to the low-density residential zone and residential Arrowtown historic management zone.
The Environment Court registrar received an application by the council on January 26 under the Resource Management Act for an order that it be directed to correct an "error" in the plan.
"The council sought reinstatement of assessment matters relating to [the two zones] it says were incorrectly removed when plan change 10 (improving amenity in the high-density residential zones) was made operative in March 2010," Judge Jackson said.
The change was intended to alter the plan relating to provisions for the high-density residential zones.
However, because of a "drafting error", plan change 10 replaced assessment matters for the low-density residential zone and the residential Arrowtown historic management zone, which were operative.
To correct the error, the relevant provisions for both zones needed to be reinstated.
"The council contends that as the removal of assessment matters for the [two zones] was never intended, and arguably never authorised by plan change 10, it would be within the court's powers and appropriate ... for it to order the reinstatement without the need for notification," Judge Jackson said.
There was a risk public notification would cause confusion, which was one reason the council had deemed it unnecessary.
However, at a prehearing conference in Queenstown on April 14, the council agreed it would be "prudent" to notify the public, and later circulated print media in the district. A copy was also given to the Arrowtown Village Association Incorporated.
While the council had the power to amend any minor errors in its operative policy statements or plans, council senior policy analyst Scott Figenshow said the council found it "inappropriate" to use the power on this occasion "since the correction does not qualify as a minor error".
Judge Jackson said it seemed "clear" an "inadvertent drafting error" had been made and directed the council to make the changes as sought.
