Report to COUNCIL for decision

17 058 Title: Section: Prepared by: Urban Design Plan Guidelines Strategic Planning Janic Slupski (Policy Planner) Meeting Date: 23 February 2017 Report to COUNCIL for decision Legal Financial Significance = low The purpose of this report is to seek Council s decision to adopt Plan Change 50 (PC 50) relating to the proposed Urban Design Guide. The Plan Change proposes two amendments to Gisborne s District Plan: a new urban design guide for commercial zones to replace the existing design guidelines in Appendix 23, and a change in the activity status for new buildings and alterations to existing external facades of buildings over 15m² from controlled to restricted discretionary (Chapter 18). The Plan Change was notified in May 2016 and three submissions and one further submission were received. All submissions supported the proposed changes. An Officer s Report was prepared to consider the submissions under Section 42A of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). Because all submissions supported the proposed changes, the report recommended that PC 50 be adopted through a Council decision rather than a formal hearing process. Schedule 1 clause 8(c) of the RMA allows local authorities to adopt a plan change without a hearing where submissions are made but no person indicates they wish to be heard, or the request to be heard is withdrawn. Submitters have agreed to withdraw the requests to be heard in order to proceed to adoption without a hearing. In doing so, no additional costs would be required for a hearing and this would further improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the plan change. The decisions or matters in this report are considered to be of low significance in accordance with the Council s Significance and Engagement Policy. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Council: 1. Notes the contents of this report 2. Adopts Plan Change 50 to become an operative part of the Gisborne Combined Regional Land and District Plan. Authorised by: David Wilson Strategic Planning Manager Nedine Thatcher Swann Group Manager Planning & Development Keywords: Plan Change 50, Urban Design Guide A732004 Page 1

OVERVIEW 1. Council has been progressing Plan Change 50 relating to improving urban design guidance within the Combined Regional Land and District Plan for the Gisborne District (District Plan). 2. The plan change was publically notified in May 2016 following Council s approval on 25 February. An evaluation of options under section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) proposes two targeted amendments to the District Plan: a new Urban Design Guide for commercial zones to replace the existing design guidelines in Appendix 23, and a change in the activity status for new buildings and alterations to existing external facades of buildings over 15m² from controlled to restricted discretionary (Chapter 18). 3. These rules apply to the Inner, Fringe, Amenity, Outer and Suburban Commercial zones. 4. Following notification, three submissions were received by: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga (Heritage New Zealand) Harvey Norman Properties (NZ) Limited (Harvey Norman) Z Energy Ltd, BP Oil NZ Ltd, and Mobil Oil NZ Ltd (the Oil companies ) 5. One further submission was received from Progressive Enterprises Ltd supporting the submission made by Harvey Norman. 6. All submitters indicated a wish to be heard. 7. Heritage New Zealand, Harvey Norman Properties and Progressive Enterprises supported the Plan Change as notified. The Oil Companies supported the Plan Change but also sought to include further design guidance recognising the specific functional and operational requirements of service stations. 8. Following close of submissions, an officer s report was prepared to consider the submissions under Section 42A of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). 9. The analysis accepted the submission by the Oil Companies that there is a need to consider the unique requirements of service station developments through more specific direction in the Guide. The Urban Design Guide recognises more specific guidance for heritage buildings, large scale commercial development and mixed use development. Providing specific guidance for service station developments would be consistent with the Urban Design Guide and with the overall Plan Change. 10. On the basis of the analysis, the report recommended that all decisions sought by the submitters are accepted. 11. Each submission can be accepted on the basis that they are consistent with the aims and intent of the plan change. The specific relief sought by the Oil Companies supports the Urban Design Guide design principles and contributes to achieving the overall goal of making Gisborne s commercial zones more successful through quality urban design. 12. Because all submissions support the proposed changes, this report recommends that the Plan Change be adopted through a Council decision rather than a formal hearing process. Schedule 1 clause 8(c) of the RMA allows local authorities to adopt a plan change without a hearing where submissions are made but no person indicates they wish to be heard, or the request to be heard is withdrawn. A732004 Page 2

13. In doing so, no additional costs would be required for a hearing and this would further improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the plan change. ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Criteria This Report The Process Overall The effects on all or a large part of the Gisborne district Low Low The effects on individuals or specific communities Low Low The level or history of public interest in the matter or issue Low Medium Inconsistency with Council s current strategy and policy Low Low Impacts on Council s delivery of its Financial Strategy and Long Term Plan. Low Low 14. The decisions or matters in this report are considered to be of low significance in accordance with Council s Significance and Engagement Policy. POLICY and PLANNING IMPLICATIONS 15. This plan change has been consistent with the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991. 16. This plan change aims to support the objectives and policies for commercial development under Chapter 18 of the District Plan. NEXT STEPS Date Action/Milestone Comments tbc Operative date Public notification of the date on which the plan change becomes operative, in accordance with Schedule 1 clause 10(5) of the RMA. Council must also send a copy of the public notice to each submitter under Schedule 1 clause 11(1). APPENDICES Appendix 1: Section 42A report to consider submissions on Proposed Plan Change 50 relating to the proposed Urban Design Guide. Appendix 2: Section 32A report to set out an evaluation of proposed amendments to the District Plan. A732004 Page 3

Appendix 1 ` Section 42A Report of the Resource Management Act 1991 Date: 8 November 2016 Reporting Planner: Report to: Subject: Janic Slupski (Policy Planner) David Wilson (Strategic Planning Manager) Section 42A report to consider submissions on Proposed Plan Change 50 relating to the proposed Urban Design Guide Affected Plans: Part Operative Combined Regional Land and District Plan for the Gisborne District (District Plan) 1 Introduction 1.1 This report is prepared under the provisions of Section 42A of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) to consider submissions and further submissions on Proposed Plan Change 50 (Urban Design Guide and related rule changes) to the District Plan and to make recommendations to Council on those submissions. 1.2 This report provides: an overview of the background to proposed Plan Change 50 an analysis of decisions requested in the submissions a recommendation on the basis of the analysis. 1.3 This report should be read alongside the Section 32 report for Proposed Plan Changes 50 (appended following this report). 2 Background 2.1 Council officers have observed that development in Gisborne s commercial zones has not always contributed to the level of amenity, connectivity and perceived safety that is expected in the city. The social, cultural, economic and environmental outcomes are at times inconsistent with the aims and intentions of the District Plan and the Urban Development Strategy. Issues include: development which is not sympathetic to or consistent with its surrounds imitation of the traditional Edwardian vernacular with outcomes that lack creativity and authenticity, and fail to celebrate contemporary approaches to architectural design false facades that have low visual interest and appeal from the street the loss of single storey developments poor building design creating inactive street frontages poor pedestrian linkages and missed opportunities for shared car parking high visibility of corporate colours creating an overwhelming feature in the landscape overly large or too many shop signs detracting from the pedestrian environment. A732004 Page 4

2.2 An evaluation of options under section 32 of the RMA proposes two targeted amendments to the District Plan: a new Urban Design Guide for commercial zones to replace the existing design guidelines in Appendix 23, and a change in the activity status for new buildings and alterations to existing external facades of buildings over 15m² from controlled to restricted discretionary (Chapter 18). 2.3 These rules apply to the Inner, Fringe, Amenity, Outer and Suburban Commercial zones. The proposed changes aim to maintain a high quality standard in commercial development in Gisborne through updated guidance and support to both developers and Council staff. 3 Submissions Overview of submissions 3.1 Three submissions were received by: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga (Heritage New Zealand) Harvey Norman Properties (NZ) Limited (Harvey Norman) Z Energy Ltd, BP Oil NZ Ltd, and Mobil Oil NZ Ltd (the Oil companies ) 3.2 Submissions from Heritage New Zealand and Harvey Norman support the plan change as notified. The submission from the Oil Companies seeks to amend the proposed Urban Design Guide through additional design guidance relating to service stations. 3.3 All three submitters have indicated a wish to be heard. Further Submissions 3.4 One further submission was received from Progressive Enterprises Ltd supporting the submission made by Harvey Norman. 3.5 The submitter has also indicated a wish to be heard. Matters raised by submitters 3.6 This part of the report outlines the issues raised by each of the submitters and considers each submission in respect to Section 32 of the RMA. Where relevant, any further changes as a result of submissions will be assessed in the analysis below as part of the Section 32AA requirements. 3.7 There were six submission points made in regard to the proposed Plan Change. Table 1 below summarises the issues raised in each of those submission points. Table 1: Submission points - Plan Change 50 Submission point Submitter Submission Type Decision Requested 1 Heritage New Zealand 2 Heritage New Zealand 3 Harvey Norman 4 Harvey Norman 5 Harvey Norman Support Support Support Support Support Amend the District Plan to include the change in the activity status for new buildings and alterations to existing external facades. Amend the District Plan to include the proposed Urban Design Guide. Retain Rules 18.11.3.2 and 18.11.3.3 as notified. Retain Rules 18.12.3.4 and 18.12.3.5 as notified. Retain the introductory paragraph on page 24 of the Urban Design Guidelines as notified. A732004 Page 5

Submission point Submitter Submission Type Decision Requested 6 The Oil Companies Amend Amend the Urban Design Guide to recognise the functional and /or operational requirements of service stations which impact on their ability to meet the typical urban design outcomes envisaged in the Urban Design Guide. 3.8 Submission points 1 5 support both the change in activity status and the Urban Design Guide. Submission point 6 seeks that further guidance regarding service station developments be added to the proposed Urban Design Guide. 3.9 Heritage New Zealand s interest in the plan change relates to the potential to provide an improved environment to the listed and scheduled heritage buildings and items within the commercial zones of Gisborne s CBD. It considers the change in activity status will enable a more thorough consideration and improved outcomes for urban development. Heritage New Zealand also supports the Urban Design Guide s role in recognising the contribution that nonstatutory heritage buildings make to good development outcomes. 3.10 Harvey Norman s submission relates more specifically to the rules for the Inner and Fringe Commercial zones, and to the part of the Urban Design Guide that refers to large scale commercial developments. Harvey Norman supports the change in activity status for these rules provided the Council retains its discretion to matters set out under those rules and retains the introductory paragraph relating to large scale commercial developments on page 24 of the Urban Design Guide. 3.11 The Oil Companies submission argues that while the proposed Urban Design Guide provides many relevant considerations in the design and layout of service stations, such developments do not fit neatly into the guidance currently provided. 3.12 Similar to the more specific guidance given to large scale commercial developments, there is a need to recognise the level of existing investment in, and the operational and functional needs of service stations. Lack of such guidance may prove problematic when resource consents are required for the redevelopment of, or additions and alterations to, a service station site. 3.13 Consequently the submission point seeks to amend the Urban Design Guide to recognise the specific functional and operational requirements of service stations and to make any changes necessary to give effect to the submission. 3.14 The specific relief sought in their submission is to introduce a new page into the Urban Design Guide and provide design solutions to ensure service station developments contribute positively to the streetscape. This is attached separately in Appendix 1. Analysis 3.15 I accept the submission by the Oil Companies that there is a need to consider and address the unique requirements of service station developments through more specific direction in the guide. The Urban Design Guide recognises more specific guidance for heritage buildings, large scale commercial development and mixed use development. I agree that service station developments have unique requirements and constraints within an urban context and specific guidance for such developments would add value to the proposed plan change. A732004 Page 6

4 Recommendation 4.1 On the basis of the analysis, I recommend that all decisions sought by the submitters are accepted. 4.2 Each submission can be accepted on the basis that they are consistent with the aims and intent of the plan change. The specific relief sought by the Oil Companies supports the Urban Design Guide design principles and contributes to achieving the overall goal of making Gisborne s commercial zones more successful through quality urban design. 4.3 Because all submissions support the proposed changes, this report recommends that the Plan Change be adopted through a Council decision rather than a formal hearing process. Schedule 1 clause 8(c) of the RMA allows local authorities to adopt a plan change without a hearing where submissions are made but no person indicates they wish to be heard, or the request to be heard is withdrawn. 4.4 In doing so, no additional costs would be required for a hearing and this would further improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the plan change. 5. Conclusion: Summary of Recommendations to Submissions Table 2: Recommendations to Submissions Submission Point Plan Section Provisions Decision Requested Officer Recommendation 1 Chapter 18, All rules relating to: That Council amend these Accept Commercial Zones a) The erection of new buildings visible from any street, public provisions as proposed. place or land zoned residential or reserve, and b) Alterations or additions to existing external facades of buildings (not listed in Appendix 3 or 4) that do not comply with the general rules 2 Appendix 23 Urban Design Guide That Council include the new Urban Design Guide as proposed. Accept 3 Chapter 18, Proposed rules 18.11.3.2 and 18.11.3.3 That Council retains these Accept Commercial rules as notified. Zones 4 Chapter 21, Proposed rules 18.12.3.4 and 18.12.3.5 That Council retains these Accept Rural Zones rules as notified. 5 Appendix 23 Urban Design Guide That Council retains the introductory paragraph on page 24 of the Proposed Urban Design Guide as notified. 6 Appendix 23 Urban Design Guide That Council amend the Urban Design Guide to recognise the functional and /or operational requirements of service stations Accept Accept A732004 Page 7

Appendix 1 Specific relief sought by the Oil Companies Service stations Like large scale commercial developments, service stations can contribute to the function, role and viability of commercial areas but have functional and operational requirements that require a non-traditional main street built form. Service stations have relatively small building footprints compared to the area of hardstand. The buildings are set back off the road, there is generally extensive signage and there is no continuous pedestrian shelter across the frontage of the site. Service stations are primarily aimed at car borne customers, with very little foot or bicycle traffic. This tends to favour a peripheral location in the Fringe and Outer Commercial Zones. While service stations are at a human scale and promote good passive surveillance, they can be difficult to integrate visually and spatially into the built environment due to their layout and the dominance of the hardstand (including forecourt) area. Designers should aim to achieve a development which: contributes positively to streetscape and character Design Solutions: Layout and Design Buildings should have clearly defined frontages. An accessible pedestrian entrance should be clearly defined and conveniently located. Landscaping can be used to enhance the visual appearance of the site from the street, although it should not inhibit either visibility into the site or traffic safety. Parking should be consolidated in and around the forecourt and shop, to the extent practicable. Queuing of vehicles should be accommodated within the site. Mechanical plant and equipment should be screened. Providing Active Frontage Mitigate the impact of any large unrelieved facades visible from the street. Recognise the forecourt s role in enabling passive surveillance over the street. Use landscaping to spatially define the street edge, with the exception of the vehicle crossings. A732004 Page 1

Appendix 2 Plan Change 50 to the Part Operative Combined Regional Land and District Plan Gisborne Urban Design Guide May 2016 Section 32 Report A732004 Page 1

GISBORNE DISTRICT COUNCIL Urban Design Guide Section 32 Report May 2016 CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Purpose 3 2.0 BACKGROUND 3 2.1 What is urban design? 3 2.2 Context 4 3.0 STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS 5 3.1 Section 32 requirements 5 3.2 Current provisions in the District Plan 5 3.3 Other Council projects and strategies 6 4.0 PROBLEM STATEMENT 7 4.1 Introduction to problem 7 4.2 Poor layout and design in Gisborne s commercial zones. 7 4.3 Statutory timeframes and lack of Council influence 9 5.0 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS 9 5.1 Replace existing guide in Appendix 23 with a new guide 9 5.2 Amend rules and activity status of rules relating to new buildings and alterations to existing facades greater than 15m2. 10 6.0 EVALUATION APPROACH 10 6.1 Scale and significance of the proposal 10 6.2 Assessment of objectives 11 6.3 Options 11 6.4 Evaluation of options 13 6.5 Risks or Acting or Not Acting if there is Uncertain or Insufficient Information 17 7.0 CONCLUSION 17 8.0 REFERENCES 17 A732004 Page 2

1. Introduction This report provides an evaluation under section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act) of proposed amendments to the Gisborne Combined Regional Land and District Plan (the District Plan). 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this report is to set out an evaluation of proposed amendments to the District Plan. The amendments introduce: a new urban design guide for commercial zones to replace the existing design guidelines in Appendix 23, and a change in the activity status for new buildings and alterations to existing external facades of buildings over 15m² from controlled to restricted discretionary (Chapter 18). These rules apply to the Inner, Fringe, Amenity, Outer and Suburban Commercial zones. The proposed changes aim to maintain a high quality standard in commercial development in Gisborne through updated guidance and support to both developers and Council staff. 2. Background 2.1 What is urban design? Urban design regards the design of buildings, places and networks that make up our towns and cities and the ways people use them. While there is relatively little quantitative evidence around what kind of value urban design offers, there is a wide range of international and local documentary evidence about the range of benefits and costs associated with urban design. Some general points can be made about the benefits of urban design in the New Zealand context: Good urban design can offer significant benefits to the community; conversely, poor design can have significant adverse effects on the urban environment, society and economy. While good urban design is sometimes perceived as more costly upfront, this is not always the case; moreover, long-term costs can be avoided. Communities value the better quality of life that good urban design can deliver. Urban design can affect people's ability and willingness to undertake physical exercise: good design can offer health benefits. Urban design can help make towns and cities safer and more secure. Urban design elements are interconnected: urban design is most effective when a number of elements come together (eg, mixed use, density and connectivity). (McIndoe, Chapman, McDonald, Holden, Howden-Chapman and Sharpin, 2005). A732004 Page 3

2.2 Context Gisborne city is the largest settlement and only city in the Gisborne district. It has six types of commercial zones that work as focal points for a range of economic and social activities for the majority of the district s people who live within the city. These zones are close to where people live and they are spaces where people work and interact with one another. Amenity plays an important role in making these zones work as places for people. It is especially important to the central business district where the scale of development, the continuous street façade and heritage character make it ideal for pedestrian activity. It is an area made up of a number of distinct character precincts and special streetscapes adjoined with many examples of Victorian, Edwardian, Art Deco and architecture. Of the 80 historic buildings located within the city s commercial zones, 58 are located within the Inner Commercial Zone. The region attracts significant revenue from national and international tourism each year and Gisborne city is a major focal point for this activity. The value of visitors to the local economy for 2011 was $130 million. Of this, 21% ($27.3 million) of visitor expenditure was on retail sales (Tourism Eastland, n.d). As a destination, Gisborne city also benefits from the cruise sector which generated $2 million in expenditure for the 2013-14 season. This is forecasted to increase to $5 million for the 2015-16 season (http://business.scoop.co.nz). The quality of the urban environment, especially the Inner Commercial Zone, is a key factor in maintaining Gisborne s as a destination for these visitors. The city s commercial zones are places where private and public domains intersect. Gisborne District Council is committed to making sure both of these domains are working for the benefit of the community as a whole. Aiming for a quality urban environment is consistent with the goals of the 2015 Urban Development Strategy ( UDS ). Adopted in December 2015, the UDS identifies the need to create and maintain good quality and vibrant public and open spaces. The Strategy provides some key principles for urban development and outlines actions to make sure those objectives are achieved. Council implements many of these actions within the public domain but it cannot create a good interface from private sites except by regulating the way those sites are developed. This is done through provisions within Chapter 18 and Appendix 23 of the Combined Regional Land and District Plan (the District Plan). Chapter 18 of the District Plan has objectives, policies and rules for the location and nature of development in each of the commercial zones. They state Council s goals for each zone, how to achieve those goals and what kind of development might be undertaken there. Appendix 23 of the District Plan holds the Central Business District Inner Commercial Design Guidelines (the Guidelines). The Guidelines inform Council staff and developers of what is appropriate in terms of the design of buildings in the CBD. They are considered and used as assessment criteria for resource consent applications for new buildings and alterations to existing buildings in the Inner Commercial and Amenity Commercial Zones. The Guidelines were prepared in 1997. In 2007 the city suffered a major earthquake which required Council to review its earthquake strengthening policy. More stringent policy led to an increase in city centre development as building owners sought to repair and strengthen their buildings. These changes prompted a review of the Guidelines. A732004 Page 4

A report to the Environment and Policy Committee in December 2010 outlined a process for the review. Officers initiated the process with a CBD character analysis to enable understanding of the built environment in the CBD and to help define the character and heritage values of the city centre. The analysis and subsequent review identified several issues that affected built form and amenity values in Gisborne s commercial environment. In 2011 a technical advisory group was established made up of local architecture, planning and development professionals as well as two Councillors, Council planning, consents and building staff. The role of the group was to provide feedback about the content and application of the current design guidelines and future directions for urban design guidance in Gisborne. This group has reconvened several times since 2011 to inform an appropriate response to the issues, including the development of this proposal. 3. Statutory considerations 3.1 Section 32 requirements Section 32 of the Act states that an evaluation must examine whether the provisions in the proposal are the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives by: identifying other reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives; and assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of the provisions in achieving the objectives; and summarising the reasons for deciding on the provisions. The evaluation must also contain a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the proposal. When evaluating the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives, the assessment must also: identify and assess the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the provisions. This includes the opportunities for economic growth and employment; if practicable, quantify the benefits and costs and assess the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information about the subject matter of the provisions. Section 32 also clarifies that if the proposal is to amend an existing document (in this case the District Plan), the assessment must relate to the provisions being proposed and the objectives of the Plan. 3.2 Current provisions in the District Plan The objectives and policies for commercial development under Chapter 18 seek to: Contain commercial development within a defined central area; Focus high intensity pedestrian focused activities in the Inner Commercial Zone; Generally locate higher traffic generating uses in the Fringe and Outer Commercial Zone; Maintain and enhance the amenity values in all commercial zones; Maintain and enhance the vitality and vibrancy of the city centre; A732004 Page 5

Ensure the scale, form and design and appearance of new development is compatible and in context; Respect the character and existing built form of the Inner Commercial Zone; Protect important views; Improve linkages; Facilitate vehicle movement through the city centre and alleviate pedestrian and vehicle conflicts. Rules for commercial zones are generally permissive, allowing (at certain scales and locations) a range of uses including residential and visitor accommodation, retail, offices, educational, small alterations and new buildings that are located out of public view. Alterations and additions greater than 15m² and new buildings in public view are controlled activities. In the Inner Commercial Zone and Amenity Commercial Zone these activities are subject to assessment against the Central Business District (CBD) Design Guidelines contained in Appendix 23, and amenity values. In the other Commercial Zones the same activities are only assessed against amenity values. The hierarchy of activities also set size thresholds for retail. Small scale retail units are permissible in the Inner Commercial Zone while larger scale development is favoured in the Fringe and Outer Commercial Zones. Appendix 23 contains the CBD Design guidelines which sets design policies for new commercial development in the Inner Commercial and Amenity Commercial Zones. The policies relate to: Maintaining a continuous building line Encouraging pedestrian activity Building widths and heights Building facades Windows and walls on the façade Windows and walls on the rear façade Maintaining roof character Appropriate use of colour 3.3 Other Council projects and strategies Other Council projects and strategies are relevant to urban design outside of the District Planning framework. Key urban projects identified through the UDS include a CBD masterplan and the Navigations / Inner Harbour development which will play a corollary role in supporting urban design outcomes within the city s CBD. Similarly, a recent initiative to beautify the city s urban precincts through customised planting themes feeds into the wider goals associated with this plan change. These projects reflect Council s substantial focus on improving the urban environment in Gisborne and the need to integrate across several domains. A732004 Page 6

4. Problem statement 4.1 Introduction to problem Council officers and others have observed that development in Gisborne s commercial zones has not always contributed to the level of amenity, connectivity and perceived safety that is expected in the city. The social, cultural, economic and environmental outcomes are at times inconsistent with the aims and intentions of the District Plan and the UDS. The issues identified within these zones relate largely to the layout and design of new buildings and the spaces around them. Layout Layout regards the organisation and placement of buildings on a site and is important to its function, appearance and compatibility with adjoining landuses. Addressing layout involves thinking about: Placing service and storage areas away from highly visible locations; Locating noisy activities or lighting away from neighbouring residents or other sensitive landuses; Locating large buildings where they won t be obtrusive, cast excessive shadows or create uncomfortable or unsafe spaces; Designing carparking that provides for safe and efficient pedestrian access; Avoiding inward-facing developments or the placement of large carparks to the front of commercial buildings. Building design Building design is concerned with: The external appearance of a building; How well it fits with its surroundings in terms of its size and shape, façade detailing, placement of doors and windows, colour and materials; and How well it functions and performs. Good building design creates attractive and active building frontages that address the street well and contributes to a vibrant street environment. Detailed building design can also help mitigate the visual effects of development. Some development within the commercial zones has been substandard and to the detriment of the overall character and amenity of the receiving environment. 4.2 Poor layout and design in Gisborne s commercial zones. In some cases, a poor understanding of site context has led to some development which is not sympathetic to or consistent with its surrounds. In others, development has attempted to imitate the traditional Edwardian vernacular with outcomes that lack creativity and authenticity, and fail to celebrate contemporary approaches to architectural design. A732004 Page 7

False facades have also become a growing trend. This has come about from Council requiring building owners to strengthen buildings that are at potential risk to public safety in an earthquake. In some cases building owners have argued that retaining and strengthening existing buildings (mostly multi storey heritage buildings) are economically unviable and the only solution is to replace with a single storey development. False facades have been erected to meet the minimum height rules of the District Plan, in this case 8 metres. This has resulted in buildings with no windows in the upper part of the façade. This lack of detail has limited visual interest and appeal from the street. The growing trend of replacing multi storey buildings in the Inner Commercial Zones with single storey developments also results in the loss of floor space that could be used for a range of uses including residential and commercial uses. The loss impacts on the ability to provide mixed use development and on the city s potential to become more vibrant, competitive and economically successful in the long term. Building owners are unlikely to construct upper floor space on single storey developments in the future even if there was greater demand. Feedback from developers indicate the adaptation and reuse of upper floor space is viable provided the development is of a high standard, meets the Building Code in terms of earthquake strengthening and fire rating, and is accessible (preferably with an elevator). In the Inner Commercial and Suburban Commercial Zones, poor building design creates inactive street frontages. In these areas there are recent cases of buildings with long blank facades with no windows and doors, signage obstructing significant glazing areas, inactive floor uses and undesirable car parking structures facing directly onto the street. There have been numerous examples where developments across the city s commercial zones have failed to deliver active building frontages. This outcome adversely affects amenity values, connectivity, vitality and viability. Other issues in the Gisborne commercial areas include poor pedestrian linkages between separate developments. Poor layouts have resulted in missed opportunities for co-locating and sharing car parking, particularly in the Customhouse Street/Lowe Street areas. Large scale buildings in the fringe areas are out of scale at the street edge or set back behind car parking, and design outcomes lack vibrancy and visual interest. Very few commercial developments provide any form of dedicated cycle parking, making it less attractive to cycle. This tends to conflict with the Urban Development Strategy, Urban Coastal Strategy and Walking and Cycling Strategy which strongly advocate for better walking and cycling routes, particularly between the CBD and the City Beaches. Some retail chains have used strong corporate colours to identify buildings. Such colours are instantly recognisable and can identify the buildings at considerable distance. They have a high degree of colour saturation and for this reason stand out from the usual building materials such as brick and concrete or more usual recessive colours. In effect, the strong colour turns the building into a sign. Whilst this may be beneficial to the shop there is a point that the scale can become an overwhelming feature in the landscape. It is worsened by the design of big box stores which offer large expanses of colour with little or no detail to the facade. If the colour is dominant it can also draw attention to a poor quality building. A732004 Page 8

Overly large signs aimed at motorists can detract from the pedestrian environment as they are out of scale with a varied and pleasant street scene. Similarly, a proliferation of signs and sandwich board signs can overwhelm the pedestrian experience and conflict with access and movement. The placement of signs in windows can also detract from the buildings ability to provide an active street frontage. Examples of this can be found across all commercial zones. 4.3 Statutory timeframes and lack of Council influence Reforms to the Resource Management Act have reduced the opportunity for Council planning staff to be able to negotiate better urban design outcomes once an application has been lodged. This is due to tighter statutory timeframes and control on the number of times Council can request information from the applicant. While some developers meet with a Council officer before lodging a resource consent application, unfortunately this good practice is not the norm. This can be an opportunity for all issues to be raised at an early stage so the process is more efficient and provides more certainty for the applicant. The design and external appearance of most forms of development in the commercial zones fall within the controlled activity status. This means Council cannot publicly notify this type of resource consent and must grant approval with the ability to impose conditions. Council cannot decline a controlled status resource consent purely on design grounds. Demolition of heritage buildings triggers the requirement for resource consent for a discretionary activity. The discretionary activity status gives Council the opportunity to publically notify the application if the effects are more than minor and Council can decline the application. However, where the site involves the subsequent construction of a new building, there have been recent cases where developers split the issues and apply for two separate consents: one for the demolition and one for the new build; knowing that Council must grant consent for the new build. 5. Proposed amendments The proposed amendments seek to address these issues in two ways: Replace the existing design guidance in Appendix 23 with a new guide; and Change the activity status for new buildings and alterations to existing external facades of buildings over 15m² from controlled to restricted discretionary (Chapter 18). 5.1 Replace existing guide in Appendix 23 with a new guide The proposal involves creating a new urban design guide for Appendix 23 that responds to current urban design issues and can be applied to Gisborne s key commercial zones. The guide will establish a new set of design principles that inform developers on how to achieve good design and layouts for future commercial developments. It will also serve as a reference for Council officers when assessing resource consent applications. A732004 Page 9

5.2 Amend rules and activity status of rules relating to new buildings and alterations to existing facades greater than 15m2. The proposal seeks to change the activity status for new buildings and alterations to existing external facades of buildings over 15m² from controlled to restricted discretionary. This is a minor change to the content of the plan but one that effectively focuses on the prominent issues highlighted above. Current rules refer to the Design Guidelines in Appendix 23 for the Inner and Amenity commercial zones only. This reference would be extended to include Fringe, Outer and Suburban commercial zones. Similarly, the change in activity status will apply to these five commercial zones. This avoids incentivising inappropriate development in zones not affected by the rule change. The amendments do not apply to two commercial zones: Rural and Aviation. The Rural commercial zone has been excluded because the focus of urban design has been on Gisborne city, where the urban design issues have been identified and are better understood. Aspirations for rural commercial environments may also be better taken up and articulated through township plans which guide Council in planning future development for its rural towns. The Aviation commercial zone is not included in the amendment because of its limited capacity for commercial development. Any proposal for commercial development not related to airport operations is already likely to trigger consent for a restricted discretionary activity, with amenity being one of the matters reserved for discretion. In the case of any future airport expansion, amendments could be made within the context of a related plan change to broaden capacity for considering urban design. 6. Evaluation approach 6.1 Scale and significance of the proposal Section 32(1)(c) requires an evaluation report to contain a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of the environmental, economic, social and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the proposal. Scale means the anticipated size or magnitude of the effects. Significance refers to the importance or impact of the anticipated effects. This plan change proposal is considered to be of low scale and significance for the following reasons: Factors for consideration Reasons for change. Degree of shift away from the status quo. Who and how many will be affected? Response The reasons for amending District Plan provisions are moderately important. There have been several instances of poor commercial development over recent years within the city s commercial zones. These developments have not contributed to the level of amenity expected of these zones through the objectives of the District Plan. The proposal represents a minor shift away from the status quo. The proposed changes only relate to the amendment of one rule across five commercial zones in Chapter 18, and the updating of current urban design guidance in Appendix 23. The proposed changes will only affect a relatively small number of landowners within the five commercial zones of Gisborne City. Effects of the proposal only relate to a relatively small proportion of consent applications that Council receives each year (less than 15). A732004 Page 10

Factors for consideration Degree of impact on iwi. Geographic scale of impacts. Type of effect. Response The level of interest from iwi is likely to be relatively low. The proposal will have no more adverse effect on sites of significance than the status quo. The geographic scale of the proposal is small and the impacts are likely to be minor. The proposal affects a relatively small area of the overall urban environment. The five zones affected by the proposal comprise 104 of 2835 hectares or 3.6% of the total urban area defined by Gisborne s reticulated services boundary. The overall effects of the proposal are likely to be largely positive in nature. Environmental the anticipated environmental effects are to maintain or enhance the amenity of the commercial zones. Economic the proposal is unlikely to impose any unreasonable costs on individual developments. A change in activity status (from controlled to restricted discretionary) does not impose any new requirements or compliance costs on developers. Instead, the proposal improves design guidance and seeks an appropriate level of discretion to be reserved for Council to minimise or avoid poor development outcomes which are not consistent with current plan objectives. The long term economic effects of this proposal are likely to be beneficial, with a higher urban amenity supporting vibrant commercial activity. Social the positive effects from this proposal are consistent with the use of the inner commercial zone as a social hub. Cultural the proposal will provide developers with better guidance around the protection and enhancement of heritage architecture within the city s commercial zones. Degree of policy risk. The proposal is considered to have a low level of policy risk. It is unlikely to be a significant community issue and the uncertainty around the costs and benefits are relatively low. 6.2 Assessment of objectives As detailed above, Section 32 requires an evaluation as to the extent to which the objectives are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA. For Gisborne s commercial zones, it is proposed to retain the existing objectives in the District Plan. As the Proposed Plan Change does not involve any change or amendment to the existing District Plan objectives, no evaluation has been made in this regard. 6.3 Options An evaluation report must examine whether the provisions in the proposal are the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives by identifying other reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives. The following options have been considered as to how to address the identified issues relating to urban design in Gisborne city. Option 1: Do nothing In making an appropriate assessment of the guide s policy integration it is important to consider all options including the option of making no changes to the District Plan. The existing guide in Appendix 23 would remain and any provisions related to urban design in the plan would continue to refer to this document. No new provisions to the Plan would be added. A732004 Page 11

Option 2: Replace existing guide in Appendix 23 with the new guide; no changes to relevant objectives and policies. This option involves Council staff preparing a proposed plan change to incorporate an updated Urban Design Guide into the Guidelines in Appendix 23 of the District Plan. The role of Appendix 23 would remain the same, being referred to as a way of assessing resource consent applications for future development in the city commercial zones. The new guide would provide direction on matters relating to site planning, design and appearance, signage, mixed use development and crime prevention. Option 3: Replace existing guide in Appendix 23 with the new guide; amendment to rules for new buildings and alterations to existing facades (>15m²). Members of the Technical Advisory Group have agreed that a less prescriptive approach to managing commercial development is more desirable in terms of gaining wider support from both in and out of Council and in reinforcing the Guide s main role as an advocacy tool. Option 3 involves incorporating the updated Urban Design Guide into Appendix 23 of the District Plan as well as making a small number of targeted changes to the rules. Currently the District Plan status of alterations and additions greater than 15m² and new buildings in public view are controlled activities. Under this status, the rules impose conditions that require the consent applicant to consider, among other things, amenity values, building design and the existing design guidelines in Appendix 23. However, Council officers are obliged to grant consent regardless of the quality of the design outcome. This option proposes to change the activity status of these rules from controlled to restricted discretionary. This gives consenting officers the discretion to consider a development application on the basis of its consistency with the principles held in the urban design guide. Elevating the activity status would establish a stronger link to the design guide. Changes to the rules will also include a reference to the new guide. While building design and treatment to external facades is an issue that relates mostly to the Inner Commercial zone, where building density and pedestrian activity are greatest, amending the above rule would need to be applied across the five commercial zones in the city where there is reasonable potential for commercial development: Inner, Fringe, Outer, Amenity and Suburban. Option 4: Replace existing guide in Appendix 23 with the new guide, and comprehensive changes to Ch. 18 provisions. This option introduces the proposed Guide into the Plan as well as a comprehensive suite of changes to rules for most of the commercial zones. The changes would seek to make many of the design concepts in the Guide an explicit part of the Plan. This might include: Requiring site and contextual analysis for any proposed development; Requiring pre-lodgement meetings between the applicant and Council; Providing rules for building materials and colours; New glazing requirements to promote active street frontage; Providing urban design criteria for restricting discretion for new buildings or alterations and additions to existing facades; New landscaping requirements for carparking; A732004 Page 12

Requirements for the provision of cycle and pedestrian access and cycle parking/storage for large format commercial development. 6.4 Evaluation of options The evaluation of appropriateness assesses the alternative policy options under the headings of efficiency, effectiveness, benefits, costs, and the risk of acting and of not acting. A range of criteria/matters have been used to assist in undertaking the evaluations: Efficiency: the ratio of inputs to outputs. Efficiency is high where a small effort/cost is likely to produce a proportionately larger return. Includes the ease of administration/administrative costs e.g. if the cost of processing a grant or collecting a fee exceeds the value of the grant or fee, that is not very efficient; Effectiveness: how well it achieves the objective or implements the policy relative to other alternatives. The likelihood of uptake of a method; Benefits: social, economic, environmental - as both monetary and non-monetary cost/benefits; Costs: social, economic, environmental - as both monetary and non-monetary cost/benefits; and Risk: the risk of taking action and not taking action in say the next 10 years because of imperfect information. The following table provides an evaluation of the costs and benefits of the proposed policies, and considers whether these policies are the most appropriate for achieving the objectives, having regard to their efficiency and effectiveness. The terms efficiency and effectiveness are not defined in the RMA and, therefore, the criteria outlined above have been used to help focus the analysis. Costs and benefits have largely been assessed subjectively and or comparatively. A732004 Page 13