Significant sites pinned in Timaru District plan
Changes to the Timaru district plan have designated large areas of land as sites of significance to Māori, with implications for the ways some of that land can be managed.
About 4000 landowners in the district will now have a planning overlay indicating a site or area of significance to Mā ori (SASM) applied in part or full over their property, though some may not be aware of the changes.
It is one of nine chapters of the new district plan, implemented in September 2022, which have already come into effect.
Timaru District Council planning manager Hamish Barrell said not every landowner impacted by the SASM rules had been notified, as the council wanted to avoid ‘‘deluging people’’, and the rules will not apply to all properties.
Most SASM overlays would have no impact on properties under 750 square metres, and existing use rights apply, he said.
‘‘People’s everyday activities are protected anyway under existing use rights, but in the future there may be some activities that get picked up for these rules,’’ he added.
Barrell said the changes had been on their way for years, and the council had placed information in the public notices section of the community newspaper.
‘‘The fact remains that it’s been sitting there in the draft plan for two years, and wasn’t given immediate legal effect – people could have contacted us.
‘‘We have done what’s required of us and more, we’ve gone beyond . . . it’s a bonus that we’ve sent out the letters at all,’’ he said.
The council could have sent letters to every household in the district regarding the new district plan, ‘‘and not just about this issue,’’ he said.
‘‘The proposed plan affects everybody, it just affects everybody in slightly different ways.’’
‘‘People might be just as concerned about other rules, but we have chosen – because we’re adopting this slightly different approach – to focus on that particular issue, and just to advise people.’’
Under the Resource Management Act (RMA), councils must recognise and provide for the relationship of Mā ori culture and traditions of ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu (sacred place or site), and other taoka (treasure, especially items of historical cultural significance) through their district plan.
The current, or operative, district plan does not identify any sites or areas of significance to Mā ori or include provisions to manage them, and while the council’s report on the changes says there is ‘‘limited provision’’ for SASM in the existing plan, it also states the provisions focus on consultation, provide no direction on process, and do not contain rules requiring any action.
Apart from general references to archaeological sites, the council’s report emphasises that before the development of the SASM there were ‘‘no rules requiring protection of the few archaeological sites ... referenced by the Plan.’’
Te Rū nanga o Arowhenua upoko Te Wera King said the process of identifying sites and areas of significance to Mā ori is part of wider national planning standards.
‘‘Te Rū nanga o Arowhenua worked with whā nau and historical records in going through our identification process.’’
The rū nanga also used a wide range of information from historic maps, oral histories, and document archives, he said.
Sites identified included locations where ‘‘mana whenua lived, stayed, fought battles, gathered kai and of course, our urupā [graveyards].
‘‘All sites were looked at closely and then mapped out to identify how these sites could be protected for future generations to know about and see,’’ King said.
Barrell said even though sites had not been formally identified in previous district plans, that ‘‘doesn’t mean they weren’t taken into account’’.
He said SASM overlays in the new plan reflect evolving planning practises, and will reduce ambiguity.
‘‘It’s just a better approach, which provides more certainty for landowners.
‘‘For the first time, there are rules specific to this issue, whereas previously, the values could be taken into account, but there weren’t specific rules. The RMA has been in for a while now, and at the start, people didn’t really know how to implement it, so it’s taken a lot of time and this is kind of best practise.
‘‘Otherwise things would just fall between the cracks, because if we didn’t have something clearly in the plan,
‘‘People’s everyday activities are protected anyway under existing use rights, but in the future there may be some activities that get picked up for these rules . . . The proposed plan affects everybody, it just affects everybody in slightly different ways.’’
Hamish Barrell
Council planning manager
‘‘All sites were looked at closely and then mapped out to identify how these sites could be protected for future generations to know about and see.’’
Te Wera King
Te Rūnanga o Arowhenua upoko
then it didn’t necessarily get picked up.’’
Barrell said plan changes also improve protection of additional ‘‘European sites’’.
He said the approach taken by local government to areas of significance to Mā ori varied around the country.
‘‘It is very much contextual to tangata whenua, and how they related to taonga/taoka in the past – there will be different approaches in different parts of the country.
‘‘In this part, there was a lot of nomadic activity in the inland routes over to greenstone country in the west ... but the predominant activity was focused around coastal areas, because of the kai.’’
The council’s report states the geographic scale of impacts encompassed ‘‘large areas of the district under the wāhi tupuna provisions and more specific areas under the other more detailed overlays’’.
The report says about 4000 landowners have a SASM on their property, although not all impacts of this are new, as provisions of the Operative District Plan often had a similar effect’’.
The number of affected landowners range from those who may just have a metre along a fence line fall under a SASM, to those whose entire properties will be implicated, Barrell said.
He said ‘‘lots of people’’ had come into council offices to discuss changes in the proposed plan, and he encouraged people to seek an appointment.
‘‘We’ve got a whole team of people who can talk you through these issues.’’
He said nothing about the plan changes have any impact on ownership rights, although they could affect development rights, and may incur a cost.
But he added many of those costs already existed under different plan frameworks such as archaeological assessments, heritage assessments, and other requirements.
‘‘It’s not that people are necessarily going to be stopped or prevented [from gaining consents]. But there is a transaction cost that goes with having ... expert advice.’’
Barrell said the existing arrangement for Aoraki Environmental Consultancy, the resource management agency of Te Rū nanga o Arowhenua, to advise the council has not changed.
In their response to public submissions, Aoraki Environmental Consultancy Limited (AECL), notes feedback received by the council questioning the extent of the SASM overlays and how they were determined.
AECL consultant John Henry refers to the 60-page report prepared by the company – in conjunction with the council and agreed to by the rū nanga – which drew on consultants’ expertise in tikanga Mā ori as well as the history and knowledge of Arowhenua and Ngāi Tahu to determine SASM.