State of the Environment Report 2017/18 Contents 1. The People in Our District ........................................................................................... 1 2. Amenity ....................................................................................................................... 6 3. Our Economy ............................................................................................................ 13 4 Heritage .................................................................................................................... 16 5. Incompatible Activities .............................................................................................. 20 6. Natural Environment ................................................................................................. 23 7. Natural Hazards ........................................................................................................ 29 8. Works and Network Utilities ...................................................................................... 33 9. Residential Growth .................................................................................................... 39 10. Riparian Management ............................................................................................... 45 11. Rural Area Development ........................................................................................... 51 12. Waste ........................................................................................................................ 58 13. Tangata Whenua ...................................................................................................... 64 14. Transport................................................................................................................... 68 The People in Our District Growth There was a 3.3 percent population growth in Matamata-Piako between 2001 and 2006, to 30,483, and 3.5 percent growth between 2006 and 2013, to 31,536. Between 1991 and 2001 the population of the district was declining. The Matamata, Morrinsville and Te Aroha townships all increased in size between 2006 and 2013. Morrinsville increased by 6 percent, Matamata by 12.4 percent and Te Aroha by 3.7 per cent. 2013 Census figures Total population 31,536 • Morrinsville 6,999 • Matamata 7,089 • Te Aroha 3,906 • 18% of district over 65 years of age • 21.5% percent aged less than 15 years • 86.3% European, 14.8% Maori • Rural/Urban mix: 43% rural, 57% urban In May 2017, infrastructure strategy specialists Rationale Limited delivered a review of growth projections for Matamata-Piako District Council. The main purpose of the review was to provide population, and dwelling projections for the District out to 2048. Council has adopted this report as the basis for its Long Term Plans and future District Plan Changes. Below is an overview of the predicted population data for the District for 2018 as supplied by Rationale: 2018 Rationale medium growth projection • Total population 34,980 • Morrinsville 7,839 • Matamata 8,297 • Te Aroha 4,258 Town Populations The following graphs record the population census figures between 1991 and 2013, and include the Rationale prediction for 2018 for each of our three mains towns. 1 Morrinsville Township 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1991 1996 2001 2006 2013 2018 Matamata Township 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1991 1996 2001 2006 2013 2018 2 Te Aroha Township 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1991 1996 2001 2006 2013 2018 Matamata-Piako Population Age Structure 2013 85+ 80-84 75-79 70-74 65-69 60-64 55-59 50-54 45-49 40-44 35-39 Age range Age 30-34 25-29 20-24 15-19 10-14 5-9 0-4 0123456789 % of Population 3 Change in Matamata-Piako age structure based on projections The light blue bars show the low growth scenario, darker blue the medium growth and the navy bars depict the highest growth scenario. Matamata-Piako District Population projections 2013 - 2048 50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 High 25,000 Medium 20,000 Low 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 2013 2018 2028 2038 2048 Source: Rationale Limited for both the above graphs 4 Ethnicity 2013 0.6% 3.9% 1.8% 1.6% 14.8% European Maori Pacific Peoples Asian MELAA Other 86.3% (Total percentage is greater than 100% as more than one ethnicity can be chosen Rural/Urban Mix of Matamata-Piako District 20,000 17,994 18,000 16,677 16,008 16,000 13,458 13,794 13,542 14,000 12,000 2001 10,000 2006 8,000 2013 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Rural Urban (Source of all data unless otherwise noted: Statistics New Zealand) Useful Links http://www.mpdc.govt.nz/MPDC Growth Projections to 2048 http://www.mpdc.govt.nz/pdf/OurCommunity/SocioDemographicProfile.pdf http://www.stats.govt.nz 5 Amenity Amenity Indicators Overview Amenity values are natural or physical qualities and characteristics of an area that contribute to people’s appreciation of its pleasantness, and cultural and recreational values. Having a safe and healthy environment for living, working and recreation is important for Matamata-Piako residents. This involves maintaining generous access to daylight and private open space, especially in urban areas. Amenity values can differ in rural areas to those in urban areas, as people in rural areas commonly both live and work on the land, and can be involved in activities that generate noise, odour, dust and other effects. Pressures The amenity and heritage values of Matamata, Morrinsville and Te Aroha could be adversely affected by unsuitable development. Amenity in rural areas can also be compromised by rural activities that generate noise, odour, dust and other effects. In general, disturbance to amenity values as a result of legitimate farming activities undertaken in accordance with best practice is acceptable; however in urban areas and near large-scale rural industry, it is expected that any significant negative effects on amenity values will be avoided, remedied or minimised. Our Situation Development Controls The number of resource consent applications to breach Council's development control rules in the District Plan had decreased since 2009/10, but increased again since 2015/16. This is likely due to the relative number of dwellings being constructed, which has increased over the past two years. In 2015/16 44 of 50 resource consents to breach development controls were for yard encroachments and in and in 2016/17, it was 40 of 49 of resource consent applications. In 2017/18, 39 of 45 consents to breach development controls were for yard encroachments. The other six consent applications were for five applications to encroach upon the height-to-boundary rules and one application to encroach on recreational space requirements. The 6 ongoing volume of applications to breach development control rules is in line with the overall increase in the number of building consent applications. Yard areas provide space for outdoor activities and landscaping, and also create a pattern of open space and built up space, which forms the character of the district. The Council’s Plan Change 47 – Plan Your Town reviewed the sections of the District Plan relating to the planning rules and zoning for each of the district’s largest three towns and the areas around them. Rule changes included a reduction in the building setback distances from some boundaries for residential and rural-residential properties, changes to residential infill subdivision around town centres and identifying likely future urban growth areas. A hearing was held in June 2017 and a decision was notified in April 2018, allowing the plan change to become part-operative. Number of resource consent applications to breach development standards (e.g. daylight admission and bulk and location requirements) 70 60 50 49 50 44 46 45 39 40 37 36 30 26 24 20 10 0 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 Offsite Signage Increased signage and advertising can also impact upon the visual amenity and traffic safety of the environment; however, the number of resource consent applications for off-site signage has remained low since 2008/09. There have been only two applications received since 2012/13. One application was received in 2015/16 for a billboard in Thames Street, Morrinsville, predominantly used for community or local advertising. The only other application in the last six years was for a petrol station price display sign to be located on a neighbouring property. Number of resource consent applications received for off-site signage 2 111 1 1 1 000 0 0 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 7 Complaints about signage can relate to the size of text, content, location and size of a sign. In 2015/16, six complaints were received about signage, four of which related to signage for business activities. 10 complaints were received in both the 2016-17 and 2017/18 years about signage; mainly about real estate or business’s sandwich-board style signs. Protected Trees Removing trees can also have an impact on amenity values. As of 2017/18, there are 97 scheduled protected tree sites in the district. Very few resource consents have been granted for the removal of protected trees since two were granted in 2008/09, as shown below: Number of Resource Consents granted for removal of protected trees 20 18 Number 16 of trees 14 removed 12 10 8 6 Number of 4 consents 2 granted 0 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 During 2008, Council completed a plan change to amend the tree protection provisions within the