Stormwater DCs: 3 April 2024
My recent learning regarding stormwater and DCs: this is significantly impacting some developments…
I have completed a few developments and screened others. I have found an inconsistency in the application of stormwater contributions depending on typology.
My completed projects have not really suffered from it but one site I did consider (Ray Small Drive in Papakura) would have been hit hard and the project is not feasible.
What I THINK is happening is that the council treats connected houses (3 or more) differently to standalones and I can’t understand why, it doesn’t make sense.
Connected houses get to use the actual increase in impervious surface area and the other gets landed with a 292 m2 coverage per house.
Developments need to add stormwater detention to not increase peak flow, and new houses cover far less ground (usually at least two levels) than old houses.
The difference in contribution is a large magnitude depending on the location with part of Papakura having $24,000 load added per added house if they are freestanding.
Is this not inconsistent with the LGA? Why allowed under the policy. Over recovery is to be avoided yet the policy says they can over recover?
As for driving the wrong behaviour. This encourages connected houses whereas many want freestanding (connected get to use actual impervious area whereas freestanding don’t). A 660 m2 with four houses may be charged as if they cover 1,200 m2. If they were connected they would be charged as if they covered 396 m2. Yet the reality of the planning zone is they can cover no more than 60% of the land irrespective of typology.
I have tested my situation by letter and had a suitable response back exactly as I thought which was, it meets our policy and please make a submission when the policy is next reviewed.
Meanwhile many purchasers (they are the ones that pay in the end) will be paying over the odds. Surely we pay for actual increased demand, not averages that are so far off reality they are the size of TWO sites?
The policy (to me) ‘appears’ to be incongruous with the Local Government Act (2002).
Sometimes I wish that I just worked blindly without asking questions.
Residential construction needs a full once-over!!
