Agenda of Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee Meeting

Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee Meeting Agenda

12 September 2024

9 Pūrongo | Reports

9.1 Decisions on omnibus plan changes 1D, 1F, 1K, and 1L to the Operative Kapiti Coast District Plan

Kaituhi | Author: Jason Holland, District Planning Manager

Kaiwhakamana | Authoriser: Kris Pervan, Group Manager Strategy & Growth

Te pūtake | Purpose

1 To seek the Committee’s decision to approve (make operative) four omnibus plan changes to the Operative Kapiti Coast District Plan 2021 (District Plan / the Plan), under clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA).

He whakarāpopoto | EXecutive summary

2 This report seeks further decisions from the Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee (“the Committee”) in relation to four proposed plan changes:

2.1 Plan Change 1D (Reclassification of Arawhata Road, Tutanekai Street, and Ventnor Drive)

2.2 Plan Change 1F (Modification of Indigenous Vegetation and Update to Key Indigenous Tree Species List)

2.3 Plan Change 1K (Electoral Signage); and

2.4 Plan Change 1L (Council Site Rezonings) to the District Plan.

3 The further decisions sought are to approve the plan changes. Once these decisions are made and subsequent steps are taken by staff under delegated authority, these four plan changes will be formally completed.

Te tuku haepapa | Delegation

4 Clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the RMA requires a local authority to complete the plan change process by “approving” a proposed plan change, once the preceding steps of the process are completed. It states:

(1) A local authority shall approve a proposed policy statement or plan (other than a regional coastal plan) once it has made amendments under clause 16 or variations under clause 16A (if any).

(2) A local authority may approve part of a policy statement or plan, if all submissions or appeals relating to that part have been disposed of.

(3) Every approval under this clause shall be effected by affixing the seal of the local authority to the proposed policy statement or plan.

5 The Committee has delegated authority to consider these matters.

Taunakitanga | RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee:

A. Approves the following plan changes under clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA):

A.1 Proposed Plan Change 1D (Reclassification of Arawhata Road, Tutanekai Street, and Ventnor Drive), as set out in Attachment 1.

A.2 Proposed Plan Change 1F (Modification of Indigenous Vegetation and Update to Key Indigenous Tree Species List), as set out in Attachment 2.

A.3 Proposed Plan Change 1K (Electoral Signage), as set out in Attachment 3.

A.4 Proposed Plan Change 1L (Council Site Rezonings), as set out in Attachment 4.

Tūāpapa | Background

6 The four plan changes that are the subject of this report address specific resource management issues:

6.1 Proposed Plan Change 1D (Reclassification of Arawhata Road, Tutanekai Street and Ventnor Drive) corrects existing errors in the District Plan Maps, and in particular the classifications on the Transport Network hierarchy of Arawhata Road, Tutanekai Street, and Ventnor Drive.

6.2 Proposed Plan Change 1F (Modification of Indigenous Vegetation and Update to Key Indigenous Tree Species List) amends rule ECO-R6 in response to an implementation issue that had resulted in unintended adverse effects on indigenous vegetation; it also introduced coastal kānuka to ECO-Table 1 (Key Indigenous Tree Species by Size) enabling its protection under the rules in the District Plan.

6.3 Proposed Plan Change 1K (Electoral Signage) amends the electoral signage rule (SIGN-R2) in the District Plan to align with the Electoral (Advertisements of a Special Kind) Regulations 2005 requirements.

6.4 Proposed Plan Change 1L (Council Site Rezonings) rezones a number of council-owned sites to better reflect and provide for their community use.

7 The four plan changes began as part of a wider “omnibus” package of plan changes.^{^[1]} Following public consultation on a draft of these plan changes, the four plan changes progressed together as a package through the key stages of the statutory plan change process, which included:

7.1 Public notification on 14 July 2022 of the opportunity to submit on the plan changes (following a Council decision approving notification on 30 June 2022)^{^[2]}

7.2 Public notification on 21 September 2022 of the opportunity to make further submissions^{^[3]}

7.3 Public notification on 10 July 2024 of Council’s decisions on these plan changes (these decisions were made at Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee on 4 July 2024).^{^[4]}

8 As explained in the staff report to Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee on 4 July 2024, a hearing was not required for any of these plan changes as no submitter wished to be heard in support of their submission. However, the Resource Management Act 1991 allows for the possibility of any submitter to appeal Council’s decision on provisions and matters raised in submissions – including where a submission expresses support of a plan change, and where a submitter has stated they do not wish to be heard. Accordingly, where any submission is made on a plan change, it is necessary for a Council to separate its decisions on the provisions of that plan change from its final decision to give approval to the plan change.

9 The closing date for appeals on Council decisions on the provisions of a plan change is 30 working days after public notification of that decision. This period expired on 21 August 2024.^{^[5]} No appeals were lodged with the Court on any of the plan changes.

Final steps

10 All necessary statutory process steps for these four plan changes have now been completed to enable Council to approve each of them under clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the RMA. Following this, staff will then exercise their delegated authority to complete the remaining steps required for these plan changes to be formally incorporated into the District Plan.

He kōrerorero | Discussion

He take | Issues

11 No issues have been identified. All four plan changes have been subject to considerable due diligence through the plan change process, including several opportunities for public feedback. Council has previously made its substantive decisions on these plan changes, leaving only this final procedural step (a decision to approve the plan changes under clause 17 of Schedule 1) to complete them.

Ngā kōwhiringa | Options

12 While Council was required to publicly notify its decisions on provisions and matters raised in submissions within two years of publicly notifying these plan changes, there is no statutory timeframe within which it must give final approval under clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the RMA. This provides Council (and this Committee) with some discretion about when to make this decision.

13 When considering the timing of making this decision, the Committee should be aware of the general requirement under section 21 of the RMA which requires that all persons exercising functions, duties and powers must act promptly to avoid unreasonable delays. Staff are also unaware of any reason why this decision should be delayed.

14 It is therefore recommended that the Committee approves Plan Changes 1D, 1F, 1K, and 1L under clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the RMA.

Mana whenua

15 The recent Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee’s report of 4 July 2024 which sought decisions on provisions and matters raised in submissions for Plan Changes 1D, 1F, 1K, and 1L, noted that the District Planning team engaged with mana whenua on these plan changes, and that iwi did not lodge any submission.

Panonitanga Āhuarangi me te Taiao | Climate change and Environment

16 The completion of the plan changes covered by this report are anticipated to have minor climate change and environmental benefits, particularly as Proposed Plan Change 1F (Modification of Indigenous Vegetation and Update to Key Indigenous Tree Species List) manages some risks to indigenous vegetation.

Ahumoni me ngā rawa | Financial and resourcing

17 The operational implications of the decisions being sought are very limited. In accordance with clause 17(2) of Schedule 1 of the RMA, staff will prepare common seals to be incorporated into the District Plan. Under clause 20 of the same schedule, staff will prepare and arrange for the publication of a public notice specifying the date that these plan changes will become operative. The resourcing to complete these statutory requirements will come from within baseline operating expenses for the District Planning.

Tūraru ā-Ture me te Whakahaere | Legal and Organisational Risk

18 All necessary procedural steps required for the Committee to make the requested decisions have been satisfied.

Ngā pānga ki ngā kaupapa here | Policy impact

19 The policy impact of the four plan changes covered in this report is limited. Each plan change addresses a relatively discrete matter, and none of the plan changes fundamentally amend the District Plan’s intended outcomes or its strategic direction.

TE whakawhiti kōrero me te tūhono | Communications & engagement

Te mahere tūhono | Engagement planning

20 An engagement plan is not required for these decisions.

Whakatairanga | Publicity

21 The Committee’s decisions to approve these plan changes will be publicly notified in accordance with requirements set out in clause 20 of Schedule 1 of the RMA. Those requirements include that the public notice must specify the date from which the plan changes will become operative.

22 The decision to issue the public notice and set this date rests with staff with delegated authority. However, as it may be of interest to the Committee, please note that the operative date for these plan changes (subject to the Committee giving the approval being sought at this meeting) is likely to be 1 October 2024.

Ngā āpitihanga | Attachments

1. Plan Change 1D (Reclassification of Arawhata Road, Tutanekai Street, and Ventnor Drive) ⇩

2. Plan Change 1F (Modification of Indigenous Vegetation and Update to Key Indigenous Tree Species List) ⇩

3. Plan Change 1K (Electoral Signage) ⇩

4. Plan Change 1L (Council Site Rezonings) ⇩

Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee Meeting Agenda

12 September 2024

9.2 Dangerous, Affected, and Insanitary Buildings Policy - Statement of Proposal and approval to consult

Kaituhi | Author: Chris Worth, Principal Policy Advisor

Kaiwhakamana | Authoriser: Kris Pervan, Group Manager Strategy & Growth

Te pūtake | Purpose

1 This report seeks the Committee’s approval to consult on the Proposed Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy 2024.

He whakarāpopoto | EXecutive summary

2 An executive summary is not required.

Te tuku haepapa | Delegation

3 Under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and consistent with Council’s Governance Structure and Delegations Te Hanganga me ngā Kanohi Kāwanatanga for the 2022-2025 Triennium, the Committee is delegated authority to approve draft policy for consultation.

Taunakitanga | RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee:

A. Approve the Statement of Proposal and proposed Dangerous, Affected, and Insanitary Buildings Policy 2024 for public consultation from 18 September to 18 October 2024 (refer to Attachment 1 and 2).

B. Delegate authority to the Mayor and Chief Executive to approve any minor and technical editing changes to the consultation documents.

Tūāpapa | Background

4 The Kāpiti Coast District Council has an existing Dangerous, Affected, and Insanitary Buildings Policy (2018). This policy must be reviewed every five years. The Council’s policy is now up for review, as it was last reviewed and adopted in 2018.

5 Committee members were briefed on the background and proposed approach to review the current Policy (2018) on 15 August 2024. Of note:

5.1 Section 131 of the Building Act 2004 (Act) requires territorial authorities, to develop and maintain a policy for administering dangerous, affected and insanitary buildings.

5.2 A Dangerous, Affected, and Insanitary Buildings Policy provides clarity and guidance to council officers, stakeholders and the public as to how Council will implement the Building Act’s requirements for managing dangerous, affected, and insanitary buildings within the Kāpiti Coast District.

5.3 The Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy 2018 (current) Policy’s objective is reflected in the purpose of section 3 of the Building Act 2004, which states:

5.3.1 people who use buildings can do so safely and without endangering their health, and

5.3.2 buildings have attributes that contribute appropriately to the health, physical independence, and well-being of the people who use them, and

5.3.3 people who use a building can escape from the building if it is on fire.

5.4 The current Policy (2018) does not cover Dams and Earthquake-prone buildings. The management of earthquake-prone buildings is addressed under separate requirements in the Act introduced in 2017 following the government’s response to the Christchurch and Kaikoura earthquakes.

5.5 An internal review of the current Policy (2018) was undertaken in 2023. This was followed by a review of Council’s current Policy on Dangerous, Affected, and Insanitary Buildings function by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE).

6 MBIE advised that additional changes would need to be made to the current Policy (2018) to:

6.1 Link decision making to Council’s wider social, economic, and heritage/cultural policy context.

6.2 Provide more explicit linking of process to the requirements of the Act, and some best practice inclusions to the policy.

6.3 Incorporate the “affected” buildings, as a result of recent changes to the Act.

He kōrerorero | Discussion

He take | Issues

Policy considerations and approach

7 In reviewing the current Policy (2018), consideration was given to:

7.1 Ensuring buildings are safe and can perform their functions.

7.2 Providing clarity and guidance to Council officers, building owners and users, and the public, on the process and criteria to be used in an assessment.

7.3 Council’s approach to heritage buildings.

7.4 Applying a pragmatic balanced risk-based assessment approach to safeguard buildings as structurally sound, and not posing health risks.

Key changes to meet regulatory requirements

8 The 2024 Statement of Proposal and proposed Dangerous, Affected, and Insanitary Buildings Policy 2024 are attached for your consideration in Attachment 1 and 2, respectively. Of note:

8.1 A definition for Dangerous, Affected, and Insanitary Buildings is set out in the Policy.

8.2 The review identified that the current Policy approach remains fit-for-purpose and this has been carried forward into the proposed new Policy.

8.3 The proposed new Policy also reflects recommendations made by MBIE, including a widened consideration of social, economic, and heritage/cultural matters alongside safety to balance considerations.

8.4 Better reflects regulatory requirements through inclusion of the additional ‘affected’ buildings category, policy recommendations from MBIE, and the greater detail outlining the process and criteria to be used in assessment.

9 The proposed new Policy continues to take a pragmatic approach that:

9.1 Applies a pragmatic risk assessment approach based on the likelihood of harm occurring and the degree of that harm if it did occur. In practice this includes investigating buildings only when information of concern is received.

9.2 Uses a balanced assessment that includes considering the building age, structural integrity, moisture ingress/tightness, specified systems, building functions, and life, balanced against the wider social, economic, heritage, and cultural impacts of determining the building as dangerous, affected, or insanitary.

9.3 Ensures targeted investigation optimises Council resource whilst balancing risk to the community when compared to more risk averse approaches (for example, if systematic districtwide surveys/audits were set in place, a higher level of resource would be needed).

9.4 Results in Council issuing a section 124 Notice^{^[6]} if a building is determined to be dangerous, affected or insanitary, which requires work to be done on the building to make it safe.

Ngā kōwhiringa | Options

10 No options are set out.

Mana whenua

11 As well as a general interest in the Policy as it applies to buildings, Mana whenua may have a specific interest in relation to buildings of high heritage/cultural value which are built to traditional techniques and may therefore be of higher risk to safety.

12 Our iwi partners have been informed that the current Policy (2018) is being reviewed though discussions with the Iwi Partnerships Team, and we will notify iwi partners on the proposed Policy as part of the consultation process.

Panonitanga Āhuarangi me te Taiao | Climate change and Environment

13 While the main impact of this policy is to limit and mitigate potential impact and harm of dangerous and insanitary buildings on people, the policy also enables any potential impacts from dangerous and insanitary buildings on the environment to be mitigated.

Ahumoni me ngā rawa | Financial and resourcing

14 There are no additional financial and resourcing costs associated with this Policy review. However, administering the regulatory requirements of the Policy is a core function of Council’s Building team and is funded within baseline.

15 Should a natural hazard event occur where a significant number of buildings are affected the team will require additional resourcing or reprioritisation of resources in order to meet its functions and responsibilities under the Act and this Policy. In an extreme event, resources from outside the District may be called on, as when Council’s Building team has provided additional resources to other Councils.

Tūraru ā-Ture me te Whakahaere | Legal and Organisational Risk

16 Managing the dangerous, affected, and insanitary building requirements under the Act and this Policy present some legal and organisational risks for Council to manage. There are two main risks associated with the proposed new Policy:

16.1 There is inherent underlying risk that a dangerous, affected, or insanitary building exists, is not reported, and fails in some way causing harm to people or damage to other buildings. This potential risk is mitigated by:

· Monitoring of data which indicates that the overall frequency of dangerous, affected, and insanitary buildings in the District is very low, with only two complaints being reported in last 10 years (with neither upheld).

· Council being proactive in conditions where building failures are possible and/or likely (eg natural hazard event).

16.2 Council could also be subject to legal and financial risk should Council’s determination that a building is dangerous, affected, or insanitary be contested through a determination from the Chief Executive of MBIE (s.177(30(f)). This risk is managed and mitigated through Council:

· Following the Act’s requirements and having clear criteria for assessing potential risk posed by buildings.

· Being thorough in its processes and seeking independent expert advice where required. For example, Council officers would seek advice from legal counsel where a building is high-profile, or a situation has greater risk to public safety (see s. 2.1.3 of proposed Policy).

Ngā pānga ki ngā kaupapa here | Policy impact

17 This review ensures that Council is compliant with the Building Act 2004 (Act). It also provides assurance that Kāpiti District’s building stock is fit-for-purpose, an objective of Council’s Housing Strategy.

TE whakawhiti kōrero me te tūhono | Communications & engagement

Te mahere tūhono | Engagement planning

18 Officers have identified a range of stakeholders that may have an interest greater than the general public in this Policy. They will be contacted directly or targeted with specific invitations to engage where not represented by an industry organisation.

19 The Statement of Proposal will form the basis of our Special Consultative Procedure. A consultation period of one month from 18 September to 18 October 2024 is proposed.

Whakatairanga | Publicity

20 A communications plan has been developed to inform the community and key stakeholders on the review process and consultation on the proposed Policy.Advertising and publicity will occur through Council’s advertising and publicity channels. The Consultation will have its own ‘Have your say’ page where the Statement of Proposal, proposed Policy and Submission form will be available. Submissions will be received online, by email, through the post, and by drop-box at Council’s service Centres.

Ngā āpitihanga | Attachments

1. Statement of Proposal - Proposed Dangerous, Affected, and Insanitary Buildings Policy 2024 ⇩

2. Proposed Dangerous, Affected, and Insanitary Buildings Policy 2024 ⇩

Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee Meeting Agenda

12 September 2024

9.3 Seeking Approval for Public Notification of Proposed District Plan Change 3

Kaituhi | Author: Jason Holland, District Planning Manager

Kaiwhakamana | Authoriser: Kris Pervan, Group Manager Strategy & Growth

Te pūtake | Purpose

1 To seek the Committee’s approval to publicly notify Proposed Plan Change 3 (‘PC3’ or ‘the Plan Change’) to the Kapiti Coast District Plan 2021 (‘the District Plan’) under clause 5 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (‘RMA’ or ‘the Act’).

He whakarāpopoto | EXecutive summary

2 The purpose of PC3 is to recognise and provide for Kārewarewa urupā as a site of significance to Māori within the District Plan. Kārewarewa urupā is located to the east of the confluence of the Waikanae River and the Waimeha Stream. It is a place of significant spiritual, cultural, and historic heritage value to tangata whenua, including Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai. It has been used as an urupā from the mid-19^th century and is regarded by Te Ātiawa as wāhi tapu.

3 PC3 has been prepared in response to a decision by the High Court to quash the recognition of Kārewarewa urupā in the District Plan as part of Plan Change 2 (‘PC2’)^{^[7]}. The Court found that PC2 could not be used to incorporate Kārewarewa urupā into the District Plan because it was an ‘Intensification Planning Instrument’. This decision means that the urupā, and the values associated with it, are vulnerable to further development enabled by the MDRS.

4 The Court’s decision was not about the merits of scheduling the urupā in the District Plan, rather it was about whether the Council had the legal power to this as part of PC2. An outcome of the Court’s decision is that protection of the urupā in the District Plan requires a separate ‘ordinary’ plan change under Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the RMA.

5 PC3 achieves this purpose and will have immediate legal effect. This means that subdivision, land use, and development at Kārewarewa urupā will be managed by the District Plan, and resource consent would be required for further development at the urupā, from the date that PC3 is publicly notified.

6 PC3 has been prepared with urgency in recognition of vulnerability of Kārewarewa urupā to further development enabled by the MDRS. While it is not required by Schedule 1 to the RMA, Council’s recent practice has been to consult with the public on draft versions of plan changes prior to public notification. Because of the urgent need to protect Kārewarewa urupā, the Council has not consulted with the public on a draft of PC3. Recognising this, an extended public submissions period of 30 working days is proposed (rather than the usual 20 working days), alongside direct notification of all landowners in the area.

7 In accordance with the requirements of Schedule 1 to the RMA, the Council has consulted with the district’s iwi authorities as part of preparing PC3 and has received support for the proposal from Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangātira, Ngā Hapū o Ōtaki and Āti Awa ki Whakarongotai Charitable Trust.

8 Should the Committee approve public notification of this plan change, the recommended notification date is 18 September 2024. The subsequent steps of public submissions, further submissions, hearings, and notification of a decision on submissions by the Council must all be completed within 2 years of the notification date.

Te tuku haepapa | Delegation

9 Section 73(1A) of the RMA provides that a district plan may be changed in the manner set out in the relevant part of Schedule 1 to the RMA.

10 Clause 5(1)(b)(i) of Schedule 1 to the RMA requires that if a local authority decides to proceed with a proposed plan change then it must publicly notify the proposed plan change.

11 The Committee has delegated authority to consider this under Section B.1 of the 2022 – 2025 Triennium Governance Structure and Delegations ‘Preparation of the District Plan and Plan Changes’.

Taunakitanga | RECOMMENDATIONS

The Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee:

A. Agrees to proceed with Option A, to ‘recognise and provide for Kārewarewa urupā by incorporating the urupā into Schedule 9 of the District Plan (Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori)’.

B. Endorses the content of the Section 32 Evaluation Report for Proposed Plan Change 3 (Attachments 2 to 6).

C. Agrees to proceed with Proposed Plan Change 3 (Attachment 1), and subject to the correction of any minor errors, approves public notification of the proposed plan change in accordance with Clause 5 of Schedule 1, on 18 September 2024.

D. Directs staff to serve public notice of Proposed Plan Change 3 on:

D.1 Iwi authorities in the district; and

D.2 All landowners within the area identified as Kārewarewa urupā as part of Proposed Plan Change 3.

E. Agrees the date for the close of submissions on Proposed Plan Change 3 is 30 working days after the date that it is publicly notified.

Tūāpapa | Background

12 PC3 has been developed following the High Court’s recent judicial review decision to quash (or cancel) the incorporation of Kārewarewa urupā into the District Plan as part of PC2^{^[8]}.

13 The following paragraphs briefly summarise the steps that have led to the preparation of PC3.

Kārewarewa urupā

14 Kārewarewa urupā is located to the east of the confluence of the Waikanae River and the Waimeha Stream (see Figure ). The history of the urupā and its significance are described in the Waitangi Tribunal’s Kārewarewa Urupā Report. This report is contained in Appendix A to the Section 32 Evaluation Report (which is Attachment 3 to this report).

A map of a neighborhood

Description automatically generated

Figure 1: the extent of Kārewarewa urupā proposed to be incorporated into Schedule 9 of the District Plan. The area shown in red is proposed to be subject to the District Plan’s ‘wāhanga tahi’ provisions. The area shown in grey is proposed to be subject to the District Plan’s ‘wāhanga rua’ provisions.

15 Kārewarewa urupā is a place of significant spiritual and cultural value to tangata whenua. In 1839, the historically important battle of Kuititanga occurred in the Waikanae district, and many of those who died in this battle were buried at the urupā. Te Ātiawa have described Kārewarewa urupā in the following terms:

The area was then no longer appropriate for occupation or food cultivation and was thus abandoned and deemed waahi tapu. From the mid-19th century the site has been used as an urupā. Several very significant tūpuna of Te Ātiawa are recorded as being buried there, as well as Pākehā that had some connection to Te Ātiawa. Te Kārewarewa is still regarded as an urupā and waahi tapu.^{^[9]}

16 In 1919, the block of land containing the urupā was partitioned off from a larger block of Māori freehold land. In 1969, the block of land was acquired by a developer and partially developed for housing as part of the development of the wider area. To enable development, the developer successfully applied to the Horowhenua County Council to have the ‘Maori Cemetery’ that applied to the site removed from the Horowhenua County District Scheme (the ‘Maori Cemetery’ is shown in Figure 1).

17 Since this time approximately half of the land has been subject to residential urban development, around Te Ropata Place, Barrett Drive and Marewa Place. 45 residential properties have been subdivided and developed in this area, alongside the road network comprising Barrett Drive, Marewa Place, Te Ropata Place, and Tamati Place. The remainder of the land (a large block of land located on Tamati Drive, a portion of the reserve accessed from the corner of Barret Drive and Marewa Place, and a smaller block of land at 6 Barrett Drive) has remained largely undeveloped.

18 Kōiwi/human remains were discovered during development works in 2000. No further development has occurred since this time.

Figure 1: Horowhenua County District Scheme map, showing the ‘Maori Cemetery’ designation. Source: Waitangi Tribunal (2020), p.26.

Plan Change 2

19 Plan Change 2 was publicly notified by the Council in August 2022. PC2 was the Council’s ‘Intensification Planning Instrument’^{^[10]}, which was required by the government as part of its direction to Councils to incorporate the Medium Density Residential Standards (‘MDRS’) into their District Plans.

20 To protect Kārewarewa urupā from further development enabled by the MDRS, the Council proposed to recognise and provide for Kārewarewa urupā by incorporating it into Schedule 9 of the District Plan as a ‘qualifying matter’^{^[11]}. The effect of doing this would be to introduce restrictions on further development at the urupā, including by introducing a requirement to obtain a resource consent prior to undertaking any of a range of activities at the urupā (such as land disturbance, additions and alterations to existing buildings, new buildings, and subdivision). The Council’s reasons for incorporating the urupā into the District Plan as part of PC2 are described in the Council’s Section 32 Evaluation Report for PC2^{^[12]}.

21 In March and April 2023, an Independent Hearings Panel (the Panel) conducted a hearing of submissions on PC2. This included hearing submissions on Kārewarewa urupā. On 20 June 2023, the Panel provided a report to the Council setting out its recommendations on PC2^{^[13]}. The Panel’s findings on the values of the urupā are summarised at paragraph [159](a) and (b) of their report:

The Kārewarewa Urupā Block values are historical, spiritual and cultural associated with the occupation of Te Ātiawa and events associated with that land. These are not solely burial values as an urupā but importantly include those values. That includes the remains of esteemed ancestors that engage the highest obligations for protection and care following Te Ātiawa’s tikanga.

The Kārewarewa Urupā Block was demarcated and deemed sacred by Te Ātiawa elders since at least 1839 onwards as wāhi tapu.

22 The Panel recommended that the Council incorporate Kārewarewa urupā into Schedule 9 of the District Plan. At its meeting on 10 August 2023, the Council accepted the Panel’s recommendations, and on 1 September 2023, the incorporation of Kārewarewa urupā into the District Plan became operative.

Judicial review of Plan Change 2

23 In 2024, the Council’s decision to incorporate Kārewarewa urupā into the District Plan as part of PC2 was judicially reviewed by the High Court. The judicial review was brought by the Waikanae Land Company, the owner of the undeveloped land within the urupā area.

24 The judicial review was not about the merits of incorporating Kārewarewa urupā into Schedule 9 of the District Plan. Rather, the Court was asked to determine whether the Council had the legal power to do so as part of PC2. This is because PC2 was a unique ‘one-off’ plan change required by the government as part of its direction to councils across New Zealand to incorporate the MDRS into their district plans. As an Intensification Planning Instrument, PC2 was subject to limitations on its scope set out in the RMA^{^[14]}. The Court was asked to determine whether incorporating Kārewarewa urupā into Schedule 9 breached these limits.

25 The Court delivered its decision on 21 June 2024^{^[15]}. The Court found that the Council did not have the power to incorporate Kārewarewa urupā into the District Plan as part of PC2 in the manner that it did, because it was outside the scope of what could be included in an Intensification Planning Instrument under the RMA. As a result, the Court quashed (or cancelled) the scheduling of the urupā^{^[16]}.

26 However, the Court also recognised that the Council could incorporate Kārewarewa urupā into the District Plan through an ‘ordinary’ plan change under Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the RMA^{^[17]}. PC3 achieves that purpose.

He kōrerorero | Discussion

He take | Issues

Higher-order planning direction

27 Under the RMA, the District Plan must recognise and provide for, or give effect to, a range of higher order planning direction including Part 2 of the RMA, National Policy Statements and the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement, and the Regional Policy Statement.

28 Recognising and providing for Kārewarewa urupā within the District Plan, as proposed by PC3, is consistent with the Council’s duty to recognise and provide for, or give effect to, higher order planning direction including (but not limited to):

28.1 Section 6(e) of the RMA, which requires that the Council recognise and provide for the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga;

28.2 Section 6(f) of the RMA, which requires that the Council recognise and provide for the protection of historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development;

28.3 Objectives 3 and 6, and Policy 2, of the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010 (‘NZCPS’), which provides for the recognition of sites of significance to Māori within the coastal environment;

28.4 Objectives 1 and 5, and Policy 9, of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (‘NPS-UD’), which provides that the District’s urban environments enable all people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing, take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi), and take into account the values and aspirations of hapu and iwi;

28.5 Objective 15 and policies 21 and 22 of the Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region (‘RPS’), which provides that the District Plan identify and protect places with significant historic heritage values, including sites of significance to Māori;

28.6 Objective 28 and policy 49, which provide that the District Plan recognise and provide for matters of significance to tangata whenua.

29 The higher order planning direction and other relevant statutory and policy direction considered during preparation of PC3 is set out in Section 2 of the Section 32 Evaluation Report.^{^[18]}

Information on Kārewarewa urupā

30 There is now a significant body of information available to the Council about the history of Kārewarewa urupā, the circumstances surrounding its development, and its significance to tangata whenua, including Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai. This information is set out in Section 3.2 of the Section 32 Evaluation Report, and includes:

30.1 The Kārewarewa Urupā Report, published by the Waitangi Tribunal in 2020^{^[19]};

30.2 Information from PC2 relevant to Kārewarewa urupā^{^[20]}, including:

30.2.1 Feedback from the public and iwi authorities on draft PC2;

30.2.2 The parts of the Section 32 Evaluation Report for PC2 that relate to Kārewarewa urupā;

30.2.3 Submissions and further submissions on PC2 that relate to Kārewarewa urupā

30.2.4 Written and oral statements and evidence relevant to Kārewarewa urupā presented by submitters at the hearing on PC2;

30.2.5 Council officer evidence and recommendations on Kārewarewa urupā presented at the hearing on PC2.

30.3 The report of the Independent Hearings Panel on PC2^{^[21]}, specifically the parts of the report that relate to Kārewarewa urupā.

31 Collectively, this body of information provides sufficient certainty about the location of Kārewarewa urupā, and the significance of the tangible and intangible cultural, spiritual, and historic heritage values associated with the urupā, to justify the management of subdivision, land use, and development in relation to the urupā through the District Plan.

Effect of incorporating Kārewarewa urupā into the District Plan

32 PC3 proposes to incorporate Kārewarewa urupā into Schedule 9 of the District Plan. Schedule 9 is the District Plan’s schedule of Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori. Schedule 9 contains a range of types of sites, including urupā, pā, papakāinga, and marae. The spatial extent of Kārewarewa urupā proposed by PC3, and the District Plan provisions that would apply to it, are the same as those recommended by the Independent Hearings Panel on PC2.

33 Sites identified in Schedule 9 are subject to the objectives, policies, and rules set out in the Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori (‘SASM’) chapter of the District Plan. The SASM chapter classifies sites into one of five “wāhanga”, each associated with a set of rules that manages subdivision, land use and development to various degrees depending on the sensitivity of the values present. These rules apply as an overlay, meaning that the rules in the SASM chapter apply to sites identified in Schedule 9 in addition to the rules of the underlying zone.

34 PC3 proposes to apply two different overlays to Kārewarewa urupā:

34.1 The wāhanga tahi overlay is proposed to apply to the parts of Kārewarewa urupā that have not yet been developed for housing. These provisions are intended to provide a high degree of protection to largely undeveloped sites of significance.

34.2 The wāhanga rua overlay is proposed to apply to the parts of Kārewarewa urupā that have already been developed for housing. These provisions are intended to provide a moderate degree of protection while also recognising that the land is currently occupied by residents by allowing a reasonable level of modification.

35 The parts of the site subject to the wāhanga tahi and wāhanga rua overlays are shown in Figure .

36 The following table summarises the general approach taken by the District Plan to the management of subdivision and development within these areas:

Activity	Wāhanga tahi overlay	Wāhanga rua overlay
Land disturbance/ earthworks	· Permitted land disturbance is limited to fencing of the site perimeter. · All other land disturbance and earthworks requires a resource consent as a ‘restricted discretionary activity’.	· Up to 10m³ of land disturbance or earthworks is permitted per year, subject to an accidental discovery protocol. · All other land disturbance and earthworks requires a resource consent as a ‘restricted discretionary activity’.
Additions/ alterations of existing lawfully established buildings	· Additions and alterations require resource consent as a ‘restricted discretionary activity’.	· Additions and alterations are permitted, subject to not including a basement or in-ground swimming pool.
Construction of new buildings	· New buildings require resource consent as a ‘non-complying activity’.	· New buildings ancillary to existing activities are permitted, subject to not including a basement or in-ground swimming pool. · Other new buildings require resource consent as a ‘restricted-discretionary activity’.
Subdivision	· Subdivision that increases the number of allotments within which the site of significance is located requires resource consent as a ‘discretionary activity’.

37 These rules will enable the Council to consider the actual or potential effects of subdivision, land use, and development on the values associated with Kārewarewa urupā when deciding whether or not to notify any resource consent application and when deciding whether to grant or decline the consent. The Council will also be required to consider whether the application must be publicly notified, or whether affected persons (including tangata whenua) must be given limited notification of the application.

38 Section 86B(3) provides that rules that protect historic heritage have immediate legal effect. This means that the rules that apply to Kārewarewa urupā as set out in PC3 will have immediate legal effect from the date that PC3 is publicly notified.

Consultation

39 Clauses 3(1) and 4A of Schedule 1 to the RMA requires the Council to undertake mandatory consultation with certain parties prior to the public notification of a plan change. In the case of PC3, this included seeking feedback on a draft version of PC3 from iwi authorities, and seeking feedback from the Minister for the Environment, the Minister for Housing, and the Minister for Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti. The Council received feedback from iwi authorities, which is discussed in the Mana Whenua section of this report. No feedback was received from the Ministers.

40 On top of RMA process requirements, Council’s recent practice has been to consult with the public on draft versions of plan changes prior to public notification. However, because of the urgent need to protect Kārewarewa urupā from further development enabled by the MDRS, the Council has not consulted with the public on a pre-notification draft of PC3. Recognising this, an extended public submissions period of 30 working days is proposed, alongside direct notification of all landowners in the area.

41 Notwithstanding this, the Council received feedback from the public on the proposal to incorporate Kārewarewa urupā into the District Plan as part of PC2, and this continues to be relevant to PC3^{^[22]}.

Next steps

42 A decision by the Committee to publicly notify PC3 will initiate the plan change process set out under Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the RMA. This includes the following next steps:

Step	Timeframe
Step 1: Public notification. Council staff will prepare and publish a public notice of proposed PC3. The public notice will set out how submissions can be made, and the closing date for submissions. PC3 will have immediate legal effect from the date of public notification.	There is no statutory timeframe by when notification must occur after Council’s decision, but it is recommended to occur on 18 September 2024.
Step 2: Public submissions. Once the plan change is notified, the public may make submissions on the plan change under clause 6 of Schedule 1 of the RMA.	The minimum (and typical) period for submissions is 20 working days after public notification,^{^[23]} but 30 working days is recommended for this plan change.
Step 3: Summary of decisions requested. Following the closing date for submissions, the Council must summarise the decisions requested by submitters and then publicly notify the summary.	There is no statutory timeframe for preparing the summary document and notifying it. The amount of time required will depend on the quantity and complexity of submissions.
Step 4: Further submissions. Some people or groups (including the Council) can make further submissions on the plan change.	The period for further submissions is 10 working days after the public notification of the summary of decisions requested.^{^[24]}
Step 5: Hearing. Following any pre-hearing dispute resolution that may occur, the Council must conduct a hearing on submissions. The Council may choose to delegate this task to an Independent Hearings Panel.	There is no statutory timeframe for completing the hearing. The amount of time required will also be influenced by the quantity and complexity of submissions.
Step 6: Council decision on submissions. Following the hearing, the Council must decide on the matters raised in submissions. If the Council has delegated the hearing to an Independent Hearings Panel, its decision may be on the recommendations of the Panel. The Council must publicly notify its decision.	Public notification of the Council’s decision must occur no later than 2 years after the plan change was publicly notified under Step 1.^{^[25]}
Step 7: Appeals to the Environment Court (if any). Once the Council has publicly notified its decision, those who submitted on the plan change may lodge an appeal on the decision with the Environment Court.	Appeals must be lodged within 30 working days of the public notice of Council’s decision on submissions under Step 6.^{^[26]}
Step 8: Council approves plan change. The Council approves the plan change once decisions have been made on submissions and appeals (if any) have been resolved. Once the Council has approved the plan change, it becomes operative.	No statutory timeframe.

Ngā kōwhiringa | Options

43 Two broad options have been considered (see Table 1):

43.1 Option A: act by recognising and providing for Kārewarewa urupā by incorporating the urupā into Schedule 9 of the District Plan (Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori).

43.2 Option B: do not act. Maintain the status quo and do not recognise and provide for Kārewarewa urupā in the District Plan.

44 Option A is recommended on the basis that this is the only option that provides for the Council to meet its obligations under Part 2 of the RMA to provide for the sustainable management of natural and physical resources in relation to Kārewarewa urupā. The matters in Part 2 of the RMA that are particularly relevant include:

44.1 Section 6(e) of the RMA, which requires that the Council recognise and provide for the relationship between Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu, and other taonga;

44.2 Section 6(f) of the RMA, which requires that the Council protect historic heritage^{^[27]} from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development.

45 As part of implementing Option A, a range of reasonably practical alternatives have been evaluated consistent with the requirements of section 32 of the RMA. The evaluation is set out under section 7.0 of the Section 32 Evaluation Report for PC3 (Attachment 2).

Table 1: Options

Kōwhiringa \| Options	Hua \| Benefits	Tūraru \| Risks
Option A: act (recommended) · Recognise and provide for Kārewarewa urupā by incorporating the urupā into Schedule 9 of the District Plan (Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori).	· Protection of tangible and intangible cultural, spiritual, and heritage values for past, present and future generations. · Contributes to restoring the relationship between Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai and their ancestral land, sites, and wāhi tapu. · Provides certainty for present and future generations of landowners about the status of Kārewarewa urupā as a wāhi tapu and as a site of significance to Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai. · Enables the Council to meet its obligations under Part 2 of the RMA.	· Reduction in theoretical plan-enabled residential development capacity (estimated at 318 residential units), although the District Plan will continue to provide for sufficient development capacity over the short, medium and long terms (the operative District Plan enables a surplus of 18,785 residential units). · Opportunity costs associated with reduced development potential (although it is difficult to determine whether these costs are a result of the land being an urupā, or a result of the District Plan recognising that the land is an urupā).
Option B: do not act (not recommended). · Maintain the status quo and do not recognise or provide for Kārewarewa urupā in the District Plan.	· Land may be able to be developed for housing (although this may be frustrated by other regulatory regimes, including the need to obtain an archaeological authority under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act).	· Risk of further irreversible damage to the cultural, spiritual, and heritage values associated with the urupā. · Risk of further damage to the relationship between Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai and Kārewarewa urupā. · Risk of damage to the relationship between Council and iwi partners. · Ongoing regulatory uncertainty for current and future landowners. · Council would not be meeting its obligations under Part 2 of the RMA.

Kōwhiringa | Options

Hua | Benefits

Tūraru | Risks

Option A: act (recommended)

· Recognise and provide for Kārewarewa urupā by incorporating the urupā into Schedule 9 of the District Plan (Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori).

· Protection of tangible and intangible cultural, spiritual, and heritage values for past, present and future generations.

· Contributes to restoring the relationship between Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai and their ancestral land, sites, and wāhi tapu.

· Provides certainty for present and future generations of landowners about the status of Kārewarewa urupā as a wāhi tapu and as a site of significance to Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai.

· Enables the Council to meet its obligations under Part 2 of the RMA.

· Reduction in theoretical plan-enabled residential development capacity (estimated at 318 residential units), although the District Plan will continue to provide for sufficient development capacity over the short, medium and long terms (the operative District Plan enables a surplus of 18,785 residential units).

· Opportunity costs associated with reduced development potential (although it is difficult to determine whether these costs are a result of the land being an urupā, or a result of the District Plan recognising that the land is an urupā).

Option B: do not act (not recommended).

· Maintain the status quo and do not recognise or provide for Kārewarewa urupā in the District Plan.

· Land may be able to be developed for housing (although this may be frustrated by other regulatory regimes, including the need to obtain an archaeological authority under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act).

· Risk of further irreversible damage to the cultural, spiritual, and heritage values associated with the urupā.

· Risk of further damage to the relationship between Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai and Kārewarewa urupā.

· Risk of damage to the relationship between Council and iwi partners.

· Ongoing regulatory uncertainty for current and future landowners.

· Council would not be meeting its obligations under Part 2 of the RMA.

Mana whenua

46 Kārewarewa urupā is a place of significant spiritual, cultural, and historic heritage value to tangata whenua. The purpose of PC3 is to recognise and provide for these values within the District Plan.

47 In accordance with the requirements of Schedule 1 to the RMA, the Council has consulted with Te Rūnanga O Toa Rangātira, Ngā Hapū o Ōtaki and Āti Awa ki Whakarongotai Charitable Trust as part of the preparation of PC3, by providing each iwi authority with a draft version of the plan change. The Council has received written feedback in support of PC3 from all iwi authorities. This feedback is contained in Attachment 6.

Panonitanga Āhuarangi me te Taiao | Climate change and Environment

48 PC3 does not directly relate to issues associated with climate change mitigation or adaptation.

Ahumoni me ngā rawa | Financial and resourcing

49 Financing and resourcing for PC3 will be provided for within the Districtwide Planning baseline. The level of cost associated with PC3 may vary depending on a range of factors, including the number and complexity of submissions, hearing related costs (including the appointment of hearing commissioners), preparing expert evidence, and costs associated with appeals to the Environment Court (if any).

Tūraru ā-Ture me te Whakahaere | Legal and Organisational Risk

50 The High Court confirmed that the Council could include the provisions set out in PC3 in a plan change under Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the RMA^{^[28]}.

51 The principal legal risk associated with PC3 is that the Council’s decisions on submissions can be appealed to the Environment Court. A right of appeal to the Environment Court is available to all submitters on any plan change undertaken under Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the RMA.

Ngā pānga ki ngā kaupapa here | Policy impact

52 PC3 is consistent with the strategic direction set out in the Council’s Long-term Plan, which provides that the Council will work in partnership with mana whenua, and address and prioritise issues of importance to the Council’s iwi partners.

TE whakawhiti kōrero me te tūhono | Communications & engagement

Te mahere tūhono | Engagement planning

53 Once PC3 is publicly notified, engagement with tangata whenua and the community on PC3 will be subject to the requirements of Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the RMA. This includes:

53.1 Inviting submissions from the public on the Plan Change. A period of 30 working days is proposed for the public submissions period. Council staff will be available to undertake further engagement with the public during the public submissions period.

53.2 Once the Council has received submissions, and summarised the decisions requested in submissions, the Council will publish a summary of the decisions requested along with the submissions received. The Council will then invite further submissions on the Plan Change from certain parties prescribed in Schedule 1 of the RMA, which include:

(1) any person representing a relevant aspect of the public interest;

(2) any person that has an interest in the proposed policy statement or plan greater than the interest that the general public has (which may include landowners and tangata whenua);

(3) the Council.

53.3 A hearing will be held if submitters have requested to be heard. The timing and duration of any hearing will depend on the quantity and complexity of submissions received.

Whakatairanga | Publicity

54 There are minimum requirements for the publicity of a plan change under the RMA. These include:

54.1 Preparing public notice of the proposed plan change in accordance with the prescribed form for public notices;

54.2 Publishing the public notice on the Council’s website, and publishing a short summary of the public notice in the Kāpiti News;

54.3 Sending a copy of the public notice to all ratepayers or any other person that is likely to be directly affected by the plan change (which in this case includes all landowners within the area proposed to be scheduled as Kārewarewa urupā);

54.4 Providing a copy of the plan change to:

54.4.1 The Minister for the Environment;

54.4.2 The regional council and adjacent territorial authorities (which, for simplicity, will include all territorial authorities in the Wellington region, and Horowhenua District Council);

54.4.3 Tangata whenua, through iwi authorities.

Ngā āpitihanga | Attachments

1. Proposed Plan Change 3 (Kārewarewa Urupā) (under separate cover)

2. Section 32 Evaluation Report (under separate cover)

3. Section 32 Evaluation Report - Appendix A - Waitangi Tribunal Report (under separate cover)

4. Section 32 Evaluation Report - Appendix B - Relevant Information from PC2 (under separate cover)

5. Section 32 Evaluation Report - Appendix C - PC2 Independent Hearing Panel's Report (under separate cover)

6. Section 32 Evaluation Report - Appendix D - Iwi Feedback on Draft PC3 (under separate cover)

[1] See 21 October 2021 Strategy and Operations Committee agenda and minutes, available at: https://kapiticoast.infocouncil.biz/Open/2021/10/SAOCC_20211021_AGN_2321_AT_WEB.htm.

[4] This public notice is available at: https://www.kapiticoast.govt.nz/council/have-your-say/public-notices/?noticeid=146#C146Gc0d58f76. For the Council decision associated with this notice, see 4 July 2024 Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee agenda and minutes, available at: https://kapiticoast.infocouncil.biz/Open/2024/07/SOF_20240704_AGN_2623_AT_WEB.htm.

[5] Now that the time for lodging appeals has passed, please note that under section 86F of the RMA (When rules in proposed plans must be treated as operative), the rules in Plan Change 1F (ECO-R6) and 1K (SIGN-R2) must be treated as operative, and the previous versions of those rules as inoperative.

[6] Council last issued a s.124 notice in 2010, and in the period 1 September 2020 to 1 September 2023 has received only two complaints and/or notifications for potentially dangerous, affected or insanitary buildings (one for dangerous and one for insanitary).

[7] Kāpiti Coast District Council v Waikanae Land Company Ltd [2024] NZHC 1654. See: https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/assets/cases/2024/2024-NZHC-1654.pdf

[8] Kāpiti Coast District Council v Waikanae Land Company Ltd [2024] NZHC 1654. See: https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/assets/cases/2024/2024-NZHC-1654.pdf

[9] Waitangi Tribunal. (2020). The Kārewarewa Urupā Report, p.5.

[10] The definition of ‘Intensification Planning Instrument’ is set out in section 80E of the RMA.

[11] Qualifying matters are defined under section 77I of the RMA and include wāhi tapu sites. The Council may make the District Plan less enabling of development than otherwise required by the MDRS in order to accommodate a qualifying matter.

[12] Refer in particular to sections 6.1.4 and 8.3.3 of the Section 32 Evaluation Report for PC2. See: https://www.kapiticoast.govt.nz/media/xmzfukmb/pc2_s32.pdf

[13] Independent Hearings Panel on PC2. (2023). Report of the Independent Hearings Panel on PC2. See Attachment 5, Appendix C.

[15] Kāpiti Coast District Council v Waikanae Land Company Ltd [2024] NZHC 1654. See: https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/assets/cases/2024/2024-NZHC-1654.pdf

[16] Kāpiti Coast District Council v Waikanae Land Company Ltd at para [68].

[17] Kāpiti Coast District Council v Waikanae Land Company Ltd at para [64](b).

[18] The Section 32 Evaluation Report is Attachment 2.

[19] Refer to Appendix A of the Section 32 Evaluation Report for PC3, contained in Attachment 3.

[20] Refer to Appendix B of the Section 32 Evaluation Report for PC3, contained in Attachment 4.

[21] Refer to Appendix C of the Section 32 Evaluation Report for PC3, contained in Attachment 5. Refer to paragraph [9] and Section 6 of the Panel’s report for matters related to Kārewarewa urupā.

[22] Refer to Appendix B of the Section 32 Evaluation Report for PC3, contained in Attachment 4.

[23] See clause 5(3)(b) of Schedule 1 to the RMA.

[24] See clause 7(1)(c) of Schedule 1 to the RMA.

[25] See clause 10(4)(a) of Schedule 1 to the RMA.

[26] See clause 14(4) of Schedule 1 to the RMA.

[27] The definition of ‘historic heritage’ under section 2 of the RMA includes wāhi tapu.

[28] Kāpiti Coast District Council v Waikanae Land Company Ltd [2024] NZHC 1654, at para [64](b).


RĀRANGI TAKE AGENDA Rautaki, Whakahaere, me te Ahumoni \| Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee Meeting
I hereby give notice that a Meeting of the Rautaki, Whakahaere, me te Ahumoni \| Strategy, Operations and Finance Committee will be held on:
Te Rā \| Date:	Thursday, 12 September 2024
Te Wā \| Time:	9.30am
Te Wāhi \| Location:	Council Chamber Ground Floor, 175 Rimu Road Paraparaumu
Kris Pervan Group Manager Strategy & Growth

Cr Sophie Handford	Chair
Cr Liz Koh	Deputy
Mayor Janet Holborow	Member
Deputy Mayor Lawrence Kirby	Member
Cr Glen Cooper	Member
Cr Martin Halliday	Member
Cr Rob Kofoed	Member
Cr Jocelyn Prvanov	Member
Cr Shelly Warwick	Member
Cr Nigel Wilson	Member
Cr Kathy Spiers	Member
Ms Kim Tahiwi	Member
Mr Huriwai Paki	Member
Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai Representative	Member