Preferred Options Consultation Q&A Sheet RESIDENTIAL ACTIVITY PERFORMANCE STANDARDS What are the key goals for managing the design of residential buildings in the Second Generation Plan (2GP)? The key strategic goals for managing the design of residential buildings and sites are to protect residential amenity at both the neighbourhood and site level, by ensuring attractive streetscapes and maintaining or enhancing residents privacy, enjoyment of private outdoor space, and access to their sites. Do you agree with the goals for managing residential activity? Are there any other goals you think are important? What changes are being proposed in the 2GP? The current District Plan manages a range of aspects related to building design and site development including the bulk and location of buildings, car parking requirements, open space requirements, and site coverage. All of these standards were reviewed to ensure they were effective and efficient and to align with the development outcomes sought by the different zones. As a result of that review, shortcomings were identified and options considered. The preferred approaches include a mix of changes to: reduce the need for resource consents (garages in front yards, road boundary setbacks, accessory buildings); include tighter controls to reduce the incidence of poor site development practices (outdoor living space); improve the effectiveness of the standard at achieving the outcome intended (height plane envelope / height in relation to boundary as a standard to manage shading, and side boundary setbacks (yards) to manage privacy); and introduce new standards to resolve issues that have become more serious since the last District Plan (impermeable surfaces, fencing).
2 Outdoor Living Space Outdoor living space (previously referred to as amenity open space) performance standards do not currently include any requirements about the location of spaces, which has resulted in unusable spaces being provided, in some cases. The preferred approach proposed for the 2GP is to provide additional performance standards for outdoor living space to ensure the quantity and quality of outdoor living space across a range of residential environments. For residential zones, excluding the Medium Density Zone, it is proposed to require a residential unit at ground level to provide an area of outdoor living space that is directly accessible from a living area, with dimensions calculated as follows. For a residential unit with 1-2 habitable rooms: 25m² and capable of containing a 2.5m diameter circle; For a residential unit with 3-4 habitable rooms: 35m² and capable of containing a 3.5m diameter circle; For a residential unit with 5-7 habitable rooms: 45m² and capable of containing a 4.5m diameter circle; For a residential unit with 7-9 habitable rooms: 55m² and capable of containing a 4.5m diameter circle; and For a residential unit with more than 9 habitable rooms: 70m² and capable of containing a 4.5m diameter circle. The outdoor living space: cannot be used for car parking, vehicle manoeuvring, driveways, accessory buildings, service areas, or access to other units or sites; must be located on te northern, western or eastern side of the dwelling to receive maximum sun; must have a grade not exceeding 1:12 (vertical:horizontal) in any direction; and must be provided as one cohesive area, except where the amount of open space required is 45m² or more, the outdoor living space may be provided as two areas if compliance with the other standards is achieved by both areas. Where a dwelling has the principal living room above ground level, part of the required outdoor living space must include a balcony or roof terrace that: is directly accessible from the principal living room; has a minimum area of 10m² or at least 6m² for residential units with one habitable room; has a minimum depth of 2m; and is on a sunny side of the building (northern, eastern, or western side of dwelling).
3 For the Medium Density Zone, it is proposed to reduce the respective ground-level outdoor living space requirements by 5m². Performance standards related to communal outdoor living space in multi-unit developments, as either additional to, or a partial replacement for, private outdoor living space are also being considered. Fencing To improve the streetscape amenity, safety for pedestrians on the street and in reserves; reduce opportunities for crime, and allow for increased visibility for drivers exiting driveways, the preferred approach is to have new performance standards as follows for fences bordering these areas. Solid fences up to 1.4m high will be permitted. Fences up to 2m will be permitted where the section above 1.4m is made of visually permeable materials, or 40% of the total fence is made of visually permeable materials. Visually permeable material refers to materials such as trellis, lattice, spaced palings or wrought iron. Garages and carports in front yards The current Plan does not provide for garages or carports in the front yard. This rule generates a significant number of resource consents which are often granted, as, due to topography or the age of development in many residential areas, it is difficult to locate garaging behind houses. Even in new residential areas, the placement of a garage at the front of a site can be a more efficient use of a site as it reduces the extent of driveway required, minimises earthworks if required, may reduce the extent of impermeable surfaces, and enables more flexibility around parts of the site to be used for outdoor living space. The preferred approach is to allow garages and carports of a limited size to be constructed in the front yard of the General Residential Zone and other zones where the minimum site area is less than 1000m² as a Permitted Activity and to have performance standards to maintain amenity values. To minimise the effects on amenity values, performance standards will limit the amount of frontage that can be taken up by a garage or carport, manage the percentage of front yard that can be occupied by parking/garaging, and require setbacks to allow for opening garage doors or for landscaping to soften the effect of solid side walls. Parking in front yards New performance standards will specify the percentage of the front yard that can be occupied for parking. This will assist in maintaining amenity values by not allowing the entire front yard of a site to be used for access and parking, as this type of activity does not generally contribute positively to the streetscape environment.
4 Parking requirements Changes to the parking requirements are being considered. Parking requirements reduce design and site development options, particularly for medium density development. Furthermore, the creation of on-site parking often results in a loss of street parking as vehicle accessways remove on-street parks. Vehicle accessways can also create disruption and reduce safety for pedestrians using the footpath. In Medium Density Zones that are close to the Campus and the Central City there may also be lower car-ownership levels. However, there is also much greater competition for on-street car parks, which are also used by commuters and visitors to businesses in the area. Other constraints on on-street parking, in Medium Density Zones and other residential zones, include streets with high traffic volumes, freight corridors, narrow streets, and streets that form part of the Strategic Cycle Network. The alternatives to on-site parking requirements, which we are considering include: not requiring on-site car parking where there are no constraints on on-street parking; or in areas where there is competition for and constraints on on-street parking, not requiring on-site parking but managing on-street parking through a permit or long-stay ticketing option, to give priority first to residents using on-street parking and ensuring there are enough parks for tradespeople and other shorter-stay visitors to these areas, and only if there are still spaces available, providing for commuters; or in areas where there are opportunities to improve the on-street parking resource, explore the option of allowing a financial contribution to be made in lieu of meeting minimum parking requirements. This money would be used to fund improvements to the on-street parking resource. The following performance standards are proposed if on-site car parking is to be required. One car parking space per residential unit with up to three habitable rooms; 1.5 car parking spaces per residential unit with 4-6 habitable rooms (rounded up to the nearest whole number; Two car parking spaces per residential unit with seven or more habitable rooms (round up to the nearest whole number). Which approach to managing car parking do you prefer? Site coverage and impermeable surfaces The current Plan specifies the maximum site coverage (area occupied by buildings on a site) for all residential zones. This ranges from 30% to 60% depending upon the zone. The definition of site coverage only relates to buildings and excludes driveways, paths and paved areas. The Plan does not limit impermeable surfaces (buildings or surfaces which do not let water flow through them).
5 As properties are developed, the areas of impermeable surfaces in an urban environment are increased, reducing ground re-absorption of rainwater and potentially speeding up the flow or amount of storm water runoff. This may result in increased flood and erosion hazards. Pollutants accumulated on impermeable surfaces are also washed into water bodies during, and immediately following, storm events, and can severely degrade water quality and harm aquatic life. The preferred approach in the 2GP is to: continue to specify maximum site coverage standards, varied across the different Residential Zones to reflect the overall built form of development within each zone (between 30% and 60% of the total site); and include new performance standards for permeable surfaces which will vary across the different Residential Zones (between 20-40% of the total site). Minimum residential unit sizes We are considering the option of including minimum unit sizes, to ensure that all residential housing (including student and retirement housing) provides adequate living areas for occupants. The proposed minimum sizes for units excluding car parking, garaging, or balconies are: studio 40m² one bedroom 45m² two bedroom 70m² three or more bedrooms 90m² What other minor changes are being proposed? Setbacks from the road The District Plan has front road boundary setbacks (yards) ranging from 3-4.5m for the majority of residential areas. However, for some streets these setbacks do not reflect the existing pattern of historic development. The preferred approach is to allow reduced setbacks to be consistent with adjacent properties. Front Road Boundary Reduced Yard Allowed 3.0m Front Yard Existing Unit New Unit Existing Unit Figure 1: Example of flexible road boundary setback
6 Where a residential unit is located between two sites with front setbacks of less than the specified minimum, the minimum setback may be reduced to the depth of the larger of the two front setbacks as shown in Figure 1. It is proposed to set the minimum road boundary setback in the Medium Density Zone at two metres. Internal boundary setbacks (previously referred to as side and rear yard setbacks) The preferred approach is to better provide for zero lot boundaries, and for semi-detached or attached housing, across all zones as this will allow more flexibility to maximise the options for outdoor living space. Accessory buildings Small accessory buildings such as dog kennels, chicken coops, or small sheds may be able to be constructed closer to boundaries, rather than having to comply with boundary setbacks, as is the current requirement in the Plan. Management of shading The current Plan specifies performance standards that combine to manage the shading effects of residential buildings on adjoining properties, and privacy. These include maximum height, height plane angle (height in relation to boundary or recession planes) and minimum yard setbacks (boundary setbacks). Height The Plan currently specifies a maximum height of 9m in residential environments. The preferred approach is keep this the same across all Residential Zones apart from parts of the Medium Density Zone in City Rise and the Campus where it will be a 12m height limit due to the topography and taller buildings already existing in these areas. Height in relation to boundaries The methodology for calculating height in relation to boundaries is proposed to change to allow consideration of the site s aspect. The preferred approach is to use the same or a similar approach to Christchurch (see their figure below). The angle of the height plane would differ according to the north/south orientation of the site boundaries and would start 2.5m above ground rather than at ground level (status quo). The approach would also include: not applying height plane angles to road boundaries, or a distance into laneways and rights of way as there is less of a need to protect roads from shading;
7 not applying the height plane where buildings are attached by a common wall; and creating exemptions for some features such as chimneys, aerials, solar panels, and parts of gables. We are also considering whether to apply different angles to slopes of more than six degrees. This approach would more accurately manage any potential shading effect on neighbours and allow for more site layout options that maximise other aspects (such as having more outdoor living space on the north side). Different angles would be applied to different residential environments depending on the density of the areas, as is the approach in the current Plan. 47⁰ 51⁰ 55⁰ 51⁰ 47⁰ 43⁰ 43⁰ 39⁰ 39⁰ 35⁰ North 35⁰ 42⁰ 32⁰ 29⁰ 26⁰ 29⁰ Place tangenetial to inside of boundary Figure 2: Christchurch City Plan Recession Plane Angles Figure 3 on the following page demonstrates what this will mean on the ground, and the difference in the current and proposed approach.
8 Height in relation to boundary Recession plane Current Approach All Boundaries (Residential 1)..................................................................... 2.5m Boundary Ground Level Proposed Approach Northern Boundary Eastern or Western Boundary Southern Boundary..................................................................... Boundary Ground Level Figure 3: Height in relation to boundary
9 Removal of resource consent triggers for reuse and additions to existing buildings Changes are being considered to remove the need for resource consent in situations where existing buildings do not meet performance standards. Additions to existing buildings The first change proposed involves clarifying additions to existing lawfully established residential buildings that do not meet the side and rear boundary setback (yard). These situations arise when existing lawfully established buildings were built to rules that are different to the current Plan and owners want an addition to follow the existing building line. This situation is illustrated in Figure 4. Figure 4: Addition to existing building within side boundary setback In this instance the performance standards (rules) require dwellings to be setback 2m from a side boundary and the existing house is built 1m from the boundary. Under the current Plan, if the owner wants to build this extension, the extension would require resource consent as it does not meet the boundary setback rule. It is proposed to change the Plan rules so that this extension would not require consent as long as it met other standards including height in relation to boundary, site coverage and front boundary setback requirements. Separating land use from building and site development The conversion of a lawfully established building from a non-residential use (such as a former dairy or church) to residential purposes often requires resource consent in the current Plan. This situation arises as the building was built for a different purpose and does not meet the rules relating to residential activities. In the 2GP it is proposed to separate land use from the building and site development rules. This would enable the use of the existing building for residential activities to be undertaken as a Permitted Activity.
8 Additional changes to performance standards for multi-unit developments Multi-unit development is the development of multiple residential units on a site, usually in the form of unit-titled apartments or attached housing, where there is a component of shared ownership in land, buildings, or facilities. As this form of development has issues different to lower density forms of housing, different or additional performance standards need to apply. Landscaping Consideration is being given to requiring landscaping around larger buildings to soften the bulk and visual effect of buildings. This could be in the form of a landscape strip. Privacy In multi-unit developments, dwellings are closer to each other which can result in poor privacy if inadequate consideration is given to this factor during site design. Some Plans include standards to manage privacy such as requiring a certain distance between windows of living space or habitable rooms, not allowing windows to face each other, or requiring screening between windows or outdoor living space. The benefit of standards is that they are easy to understand, but, design based on generic standards can result in poor outcomes in some situations such as designs which do not optimise solar access. Rather than requiring good privacy through specific standards, good design outcomes could be sought through assessment matters to allow greater flexibility to achieve good design outcomes. Which approach to managing privacy do you prefer? Visitor parking Depending on the overall approach taken to parking requirements, if the option is to continue to require on-site parking, additional provisions for visitor parking may be required for multiunit developments. This could be along the lines of 0.2 visitor car parking spaces per three habitable rooms to be calculated using the total number of habitable rooms within the multiunit development, regardless of the number of residential units (rounding up to the nearest whole number). Visitor car parking must be accessible to visitors to any unit within the development, and must be clearly marked. Tell us what you think about the proposed changes Are there any other changes you think we need to consider? See also: Q&A: Residential Zones
Q&A Feedback Please let us know what you think about the proposed options and whether we have missed anything out. Your feedback will help shape and influence provisions before they are included in the Second Generation Plan (2GP) due to be notified in mid-2014. The closing date for feedback is Friday 13 September. You can include this form in the postage-paid reply form attached to the Q&A Introduction sheet. Prefer to do it online? visit: www.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/feedback Do you agree with the goal for managing residential activity? Are there any other goals you think are important? Which approach to managing car parking do you prefer? Which approach to managing privacy do you prefer? Tell us what you think about the proposed changes. Are there any other changes you think we need to consider? Please note that all feedback provided to the DCC is public information. Your name and submission are available to the media and the public, on request, and may be included in future reports prepared on the Second Generation Plan. Your feedback will only be used as part of the Second Generation Plan project.