Structure planning
Abstract
Structure planning is a valuable way to achieve integrated management of the effects of (re)developing larger land areas held in multiple ownerships. It is a key tool in addressing sustainable management of natural physical resources, particularly in an urban context.
This guidance note provides guidance on:
- the relationship between structure plans, district plans and Long Term Council Community Plans (LTCCPs).
This guidance note links to both the Subdivision guidance note and the Infrastructure Planning Guidance Note (under preparation).
Guidance note
Defining a structure plan
A structure plan is a framework to guide the development or redevelopment of a particular area by defining the future development and land use patterns, areas of open space, the layout and nature of infrastructure (including transportation links), and other key features for managing the effects of development.
Structure plans comprise one or more maps, plans or diagrammatic representations of the proposed layout, features, character and links for areas being developed or redeveloped (see Long Bay structure plan extract example). The maps or plans do not typically go into such detail as to define individual lot boundaries or the physical from of buildings and structures. The maps, plans or representations are usually supported by text explaining the background to the issues which initiated the structure plan and the management approaches to be used to deal with those issues.
Features that may be represented in, and managed through, a structure plan, include:
- areas of contamination and the rehabilitation standards required.
Reasons for structure planning
Structure planning is a tool for managing the effects and demands of development or redevelopment in an integrated, holistic and orderly way. A structure plan may be particularly useful when there is a need or desire to:
Structure plans are often associated with greenfield growth areas but can also be used in areas being redeveloped (so-called “brownfield” developments). In looking at elements of design, structure plans complement other tools such as urban design guides and frameworks, and precinct plans.
Some councils also use structure plans as an input into calculating the appropriate level of financial contributions or development contributions to be charged in areas subject to development or redevelopment pressures. Structure plans are able to provide a degree of certainty about future levels of development from which the cost of infrastructure and services, and any effect mitigation measures that will be required, can be quantified.
Components in developing a structure plan
There is no one set way to develop a structure plan. In any individual case the process will depend on the scale and complexity of the area, the issues to be managed, the anticipated level of stakeholder and public interest, and the purpose for which the structure plan is to be used. That said, most structure planning exercises do incorporate the following phases or components:
- Finalisation of plan and implementation.
The Auckland Regional Council publication Structure planning: A regional practice and resource guide contains a detailed example of a structure planning process that incorporates these components (see Auckland Regional Council structure planning process chart). We discuss each of them in more detail below.
1. Scoping and project planning
The decision to prepare a structure plan may be the result of development pressures in a particular geographical area, or predetermined through a wider urban growth study which has selected a particular area for development from a range of options.
It is important that rationale for the structure plan is clearly established before embarking on the structure planning exercise, and that the outcomes sought are clearly identified beforehand. These are key components which should form part of the scoping exercise.
The scoping and project planning phase of structure planning should include the following considerations.
- Risk assessment: an assessment needs to be made on what risks (including legal, political and cost) may impact on the successful development and implementation of the structure plan, and how these may be managed.
2. Stakeholder identification and consultation
The number and type of stakeholders to be identified and consulted will depend on the scale and characteristics of the area and the issues to be managed. Consultation should occur throughout the structure plan development process. When it comes to generating, evaluating and refining the design of the structure plan, consultation could be iterative (see, for example, the Wanaka structure plan process).
Commencing consultation early in the process is important, and can help with:
- identifying constraints and opportunities.
Good practice tips for stakeholder consultation when carrying out structure planning:
Use a communications or consultation plan to ensure that all relevant stakeholders are identified, and that consultation and publicity are managed in an integrated and co-ordinated way.
Remember to consult with both external and internal stakeholders; for example:
Network utility providers operate under legislative requirements and constraints which will differ from those of councils or developers. Early consultation with network utilities is important because the ability and timing of infrastructure provision can be critical in determining options for how the structure-planned area is to be managed and development staged.
If consulting tangata whenua, allow sufficient time for them to meet their own timeframes and obligations (they may need to conduct their own consultation with iwi, hapu or runanga members before they can take an active part).
Use existing forums or means of communication to assist consultation with the wider community. Charrettes, open days, public workshops, focus groups and other interactive forms of consultation allow for open, detailed and interactive discussion consistent with recognised principles of good consultation.
Draw up a list of issues to be resolved, opportunities, and information gaps that need to filled to progress issues further, or look at solutions to possible issues
For further information on good practice in consultation, refer to the consultation process. For an example of consultation in the development of a structure plan see also Palmerston North industrial land use study (PDF 218KB).
3. Research and information analysis
The research and analysis phase builds on the work carried out in the scoping phase and may run parallel to consultation, with each helping inform the other. Detailed information obtained during this phase can also be used to refine the final design.
Research and analysis may require a review of all available existing information on the area being structure planned. Further research and investigation may need to be undertaken where critical information gaps are identified. Depending on the issues identified, the outcomes desired and the information already available, research and investigation may need to be carried out into:
A key part of the research phase (for both new development and redeveloped areas) will be the examination of the existing patterns of development both within and adjoining the subject area. This will help indicate the potential for change, key linkages and connections (for transport and infrastructure and the urban design quality of existing development. This analysis could take the form of an urban design analysis with expert input.
Information obtained from the research and analysis phase will often have a geographical element that can be mapped or represented graphically in some way. Maps and plans are good for looking at constraints and opportunities in an integrated way (through such techniques as overlays, sieve-mapping or GIS mapping), and for communicating with interested parties.
4. Generation and evaluation of alternatives
The generation of alternatives for the structure planning process can be done with or without direct community input. However, a collaborative approach involving the community (for example workshops or charrettes) is more likely to maintain community buy-in and confidence in the final outcome.
The alternatives developed need not be developed to a highly detailed level, and could take the form of concept drawings or sketches (and an accompanying statement or explanation) until such time as they are either discarded or selected for further work or refinement.
The development of alternatives should be guided by:
- any relevant statutory duties, such as those under the Resource Management Act, or Local Government Act.
Evaluation of which alternative will be used as the basis for the final structure plan should be guided by a number of criteria. These will vary according to the goals and priorities set by the council, the community (or the developer if the structure plan is being developed as part of a private proposal). Criteria could include the how well each alternative meets each of the stakeholder goals, the degree to which adverse environmental effects are avoided, and which alternative is the most cost-effective.
The evaluation process could be carried out in the form of a table whereby each alternative (in table rows) is measured against the criteria (in columns) and given a score, matrix-style. Clear guidelines need to set for allocating scoring for each criterion. Not all evaluation criteria will be of equal significance, so a weighting system may be employed to denote differing levels of importance (see matrix assessment example). A weighted and unweighted evaluation should be used to demonstrate the effects of weighting in the selection/evaluation process.
5. Implementation
A structure plan may be implemented through a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory methods. Further guidance on the use of district plan methods and non-district plan methods in implementing structure plans can be found in Regulatory vs. non-regulatory means of giving effect to structure plans.
In implementing the structure plan, an array of tasks may need to be completed, including:
- associated statutory documentation (including a section 32 evaluation if the structure plan is to be implemented by way of a plan change).
If the structure plan requires changes to be made to an RMA planning document, the normal RMA plan change process will need to be followed (for further information on this, see Guidance on the plan development process.
Remember to brief everyone who will be involved in the implementation of the structure plan, or who may be asked questions about it. For councils, this should include resource consent processing staff, front counter and call centre customer service staff, and staff who manage infrastructure provision or asset management.
If the structure plan covers a large area which will be taken up over a lengthy time period, consider provisions that stage the development to minimise adverse effects and promote co-ordination and efficiency in service provision and utilisation (see Lessons learnt in the Albany structure plan case study).
Other processes and procedures that may need to be considered as part of the implementation of the structure plan include:
The contents of a structure plan
The existence or content of structure plans is not prescribed in New Zealand legislation. The use of structure plans and their content is therefore variable in this country, and readily open to adaptation to meet local issues and circumstances. In addition to those aspects listed at the start of this guidance note, structure plans may also seek ways to manage:
- issues of urban density and greenfield expansion.
These latter issues may raise further issues that require consideration or further study, as follows.
Urban design
Structure plans can play an important part in achieving good urban design and promoting quality outcomes. As a starting point for promoting good urban design the New Zealand Urban Design protocol identifies seven essential design qualities that can also act as guiding considerations in the structure planning process: the seven Cs. They are: Context, Character, Choice, Connections, Creativity, Custodianship and Collaboration. In relation to structure plans:
- Collaboration: Quality urban design requires good communication and co-ordinated actions from all decision-makers: central government, local government, professionals, transport operators, developers and users.
More information on each of the seven “C”s can be found in the Ministry for the Environment's Urban Design Protocol.
Network utilities
The ability to extend network infrastructure such as roads, water, gas, electricity and telecommunication can significantly affect the availability and viability of land-use options for the area being structure planned. Network utility providers can therefore hold considerable influence in the successful implementation of a structure plan.
Where structure plans are to be implemented via a district plan, early canvassing of possible structure plan provisions which meet both the objectives of the council and the network utility provider can help provide certainty in the development of the structure plan, and avoid delays in its implementation.
Transport and infrastructure networks
A good understanding of transport patterns and behaviours in both rural and urban settings is important to achieve good integration between land-use and transport outcomes, such as:
- promoting the safe and efficient movement of people and vehicles while successfully resolving tensions between the needs and objectives of pedestrians, public transport users and motorists.
Implementing structure plans through district plans can present a challenge because the preferences of developers, unforeseen site constraints or some engineering requirements may mean development takes on a different form to that envisaged by the structure plan. It is therefore important to set minimum standards to ensure that the capacity of infrastructure to be provided matches the level of development that is likely to result.
Some district plans get around the problem of not knowing the precise alignment of infrastructure such as roads by providing indicative roading layouts and transport links on structure plans. These then form a matter of discretion over which a council may retain control when subdivision consent is applied for. This can provide an element of design flexibility to meet both the objectives of the council and the developer.
To address the effects of traffic, the early and ongoing involvement of transport planners and engineers (including those from Transit New Zealand, where appropriate) is important to provide sound analysis and advice.
Where structure plans are implemented through district plans, transport provisions should be prepared in such a way as to provide certainty over the general routes that are to be followed to link proposed land uses, but retain enough discretion to allow flexibility in the final design and layout of the links.
Reserves and open space networks
Reserves and open space networks may be used in structure plans as a way of providing for the recreational needs of the future population, as a way of creating urban form or managing hazards, or for the protection of natural or historic heritage, landscape character or water quality (see Jacks Point structure plan case study).
Reserves may be indicated in a variety of ways, such as through designations, or notations on the plan or map showing the general area in which a future reserve is proposed but for which the final details are still open to negotiation.
In planning reserves it is good practice to:
The needs assessment should relate to the council’s policy or position on the level of service for active and passive reserves relative to the population size and character. This is usually expressed in terms of the range of reserve types that may be applicable to the local conditions.
Community facilities
The nature and scale of the community infrastructure provided for in a structure-planned area will be dependent on the type of development being contemplated. A needs assessment may be required as part of the structure plan process to inform, supplement or evaluate stakeholder aspirations. The needs assessment could determine if specific facilities should be provided based on criteria such as future population growth and demographics, the needs of the population, and the extent to which current facilities can meet those needs.
In an urban situation, consultation with schools and the Ministry of Education may be needed to determine whether additional schools are needed, if there is capacity in existing schools, or if the structure plan adversely affects a school’s catchment through changing land uses. Other parties who may have an interest in how the structure plan could impact on the way they provide community services could include health providers and emergency service providers.
Structure plans and legislation
Structure plans are rarely stand-alone documents. They often originate from, or interact with, other plans, particularly those produced under the RMA and LGA.
Structure plans and the Resource Management Act
Structure plans represent one method by which councils can carry out their functions under sections 30 and 31 of the RMA. They are a technique that has gained acceptance in the Environment Court as a way of promoting the integrated management of environmental effects, and to enable provision for the wellbeing, health and safety of existing and future residents (see, for example, P & K Mitchell and Ors v Waitakere City Council A21/2000; or Omokoroa Ratepayers Association v Western Bay of Plenty District Council and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council (A102/2004)).
Structure plans do not have any explicit legal status or statutory effect unless they are provided for as part of a statutory planning document such as a district plan (eg as policies and rules, or a zone). They may be considered as an “other matter” when assessing a resource consent however. Care needs to be taken when drafting district plan provisions as not all the matters a structure plan seeks to manage will be matters relevant to the RMA (such as ensuring that a full range of educational opportunities is provided). Some district plans ensure that the overall context is understood by referring to documents that deal with non-RMA matters by way of an explanatory note.
Relationship with the Local Government Act
The preparation and implementation of structure plans will be influenced by the requirements of the LGA. Councils are obliged to have ‘community outcomes’ specified and mandated in their Long Term Council Community Plan (LTCCP) by 2006. The community outcomes themselves may become a direct input into a structure plan development process (such that the structure plan becomes a tool for implementing the LTCCP). Alternatively, outcomes from the LTCCP may be incorporated into a district plan as provisions. These district plan provisions may then feed into, or influence, the development of a structure plan.
By 2006 there is an obligation under the LGA to have activity/asset plans in place. The impact of structure plan proposals on existing assets and services, and defining appropriate funding and financial contributions regimes, will need to be taken into account. Conversely, decisions made in activity and asset plans could impact on infrastructure and service delivery issues in future structure plans (see schedule 10, LGA 2002).
In scoping the issues and objectives to be dealt with by a structure plan there should be consistency with community outcomes specified in any adopted or proposed Long Term Council Community Plan (LTCCP) developed under the LGA.
For further information on the LGA, see the FAQ sheet on the Relationship between the Local Government Act and Resource Management Act.
Documentation of structure plan development
Documentation of structure-planning processes is important in:
Local government also has to justify public investments in infrastructure, particularly where there is significant investment concerned. LGA decisions may require additional and more thorough evaluations of social, economic and cultural dimensions (see section 76 onwards and schedule 10 of the LGA) than the corresponding RMA section 32 requirements.
Documentation of the development of a structure plan does not need to be included in the structure plan itself (although a summary can be helpful), especially when the provisions from the structure plan are to be integrated into a district or regional plan. However, for completeness, private plan change applications will often combine the structure plan and the supporting documentation.
Best practice structure plans typically cross-reference to, or may contain, supporting documentation which covers:
- text describing (where appropriate) how, where and when services such as utilities, social and recreational facilities, transport links and other physical infrastructure are to be provided and the levels of service to be achieved.
For examples of a comprehensive structure which is being implemented through a statutory plan, see the Manukau City Council's Flatbush structure plan variation or the Pyes Pa structure plan case study.
Practice examples
Pyes Pa structure plan
The Pyes Pa structure plan covers an area of 430 hectares across the boundary between Tauranga City and Western Bay of Plenty District, and incorporates residential, commercial, industrial and recreational land uses. It includes water catchment modelling and traffic modelling. For consistency in planning approach and development, Western Bay of Plenty District Council adopted the provisions of the Tauranga District Plan as they applied to the area. Financial contribution provisions were prepared, which covered the cost of infrastructure within the growth area but also those off-site which were required to support the new suburb.
For more information, see Pyes Pa structure plan case study.
Whangarei coastal management strategy structure plans
These are a series of structure plans prepared as part of a District Coastal Management Strategy. The consultation process was extensive and varied, with a high degree of community participation resulting in community ownership of the outcomes. The structure plans were intended to be non-statutory implementation tools for use under the LGA 2002. They are intended to be implemented through specific actions detailed in the district plan, infrastructure studies and asset planning, as well as capital works, recreation planning and community-run projects.
For more information, see Whangarei Coastal Management Strategy structure plan case study.
Albany structure plan
This is a structure plan, originating in the 1990s, based on a series of comprehensive objectives. The structure plan is being implemented and provides useful lessons on mixed land uses, the detail of planning carried out, and staging of development.
For more information, see Albany structure plan case study.
Flatbush structure plan – Manukau City Council
The Flatbush Variation structure plan covers an area of 1700 hectares and encompasses plans for a community of 40,000 people.
The structure plan went through a two-stage process. The first stage consisted of a concept plan with no statutory effect, which identified the general principles. This stage was undertaken in conjunction with the development of the Regional Growth Strategy for Auckland.
The second stage was a more comprehensive analysis which led to a structure plan being incorporated into the Manukau City Council District Plan via Variation 13. The comprehensive approach included canvassing the local community for their aspirations and views, water catchment modelling, urban design input, ecological assessment, transport modelling and economic analysis. The need to screen for a wide variety of hazards became apparent when part of the area was under scrutiny for asbestos dumping.
The process took five years to progress to the stage of all decisions being released. A further 18 months was spent negotiating appeals to the Environment Court. All appeals have been resolved without need for a hearing.
For more information, see Flatbush structure plan variation.
North Shore City Council: Northcote urban redevelopment
The Northcote Centre Redevelopment provides an alternative model to more conventional community consultation methods. Consultation was carried out by way of the establishment of a community trust to foster understanding and discussion on a proposed urban redevelopment project.
It was noted during the project that for potentially contentious growth issues even using mechanisms such as community trusts may not avoid some stakeholders voicing dissatisfaction over process, or claiming that their views have not been adequately represented.
For more information, see Northcote Community Trust and consultation.
Jacks Point structure plan
This is a structure plan prepared to satisfy a consent order which required detailed assessments of landscape and amenity values, protection of the Lake Wakatipu margin, transportation, servicing and integrated development and design. The structure plan formed the foundation of new zone provisions to enable the development of a resort with a range of recreational opportunities, residential uses and visitor accommodation, as well as providing for the Remarkables Station to be run as a viable working farm.
For more information, see Jacks Point structure plan case study.
Palmerston North City Council North East Industrial
Comprehensive consultation was undertaken for the planning of a new industrial area adjacent to Palmerston North Airport. The site of the proposed industrial area was also close to an increasing number of lifestyle blocks. Consultation followed on from a comprehensive study that addressed the existing industrial land resource and its constraints and opportunities; identified economic trends and the likely long-term demand for industrial land, and shortfalls between demand and supply; and identified and evaluated possible options to meet supply needs.
Consultation included recognition of, and methods to consult with, key informants (including business associations, real estate agents and valuers, businesses), tangata whenua, affected parties (land owners and potential developers/users) the general public and statutory agencies. The Palmerston North industrial land use study (PDF 218KB) provides details of the processes used, and information obtained through consultation.
Northwood residential area – Christchurch
The Northwood residential area was developed over five years based on a plan with strongly articulated new urbanism design principles. It has proved a commercial success.
The key features and design were:
- a stormwater management system that included swales along the boulevard.
For more information see Northwood Residential Area - Christchurch from Urban Design Case Studies on the MfE website.
RMA provisions
Part II, sections 5-8 Purpose, matters of national importance, other matters and Treaty of Waitangi;
- first schedule.
In addition, the following provisions of the LGA 2002 should be referred to:
- 10th schedule.
Case law
Kitewaho Bush Reserve Company Limited, Waitakere Forestry Park Limited and Successors v Waitakere City Council (A109/2003)
This case examines the appropriateness of structure planning as a planning method, and examines the issue of expert input desirable for integrated management of effects.
P & K Mitchell & Others v Waitakere City Council (A21/2000)
This case addresses the appropriateness of structure planning in an environmentally sensitive area (Oratia), and concludes in favour of the technique on the basis of the evidence presented. The Court made amendments to the plan regarding matters of activity status, and the inclusion of some extra land to be included in the structure plan only.
Omokoroa Ratepayers Association v Western Bay of Plenty District Council and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council (A102/2004)
In this case the Court did not accept the Omokoroa Ratepayers Association’s case that the structure planning and zoning contained in Plan Change 20 was inconsistent with the RMA. The Plan Change and designation for road widening were appropriate to enable provision for the wellbeing, health and safety of the existing and future residents of Omokoroa and the Western Bay of Plenty district, and to assist the Western Bay of Plenty District Council in integrated management and control of the effects of urban development. The appeal was disallowed.
Keep Okura Green Society Inc and Others v North Shore City Council (A095/2003)
In examining land subject to structure planning, the Court acknowledged “a degree of change must be planned for and accommodated, the task before use involves identification of the “appropriate levels, so called, consonant with the special nature and character of the area”.
I.J. Adams and R. L. Adams v Thames Coromandel District Council (A33/04)
This case establishes that a territorial authority does not have the power, via a structure plan, that would anticipate or predetermine a decision on financial contributions for a resource consent for subdivision (see page 5, paragraph 18).
Related guidance notes
Work in progress
Infrastructure Guidance Note (under development)
Useful links
Auckland Growth Forum Structure Plan Guidance Booklet
An ARC Guide To Structure Planning: A Regional Practice and Resource Guide 2005.
Relevant publications
Superb or suburb? International case studies in management of icon landscapes
Published by Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment - April 2003
What can New Zealand learn from overseas experience about the management of icon landscapes in peri-urban areas? Three locations were chosen to examine land use planning in the context of sustainable development: the Oak Ridges Moraine in Ontario, Canada; the Cape Peninsula in South Africa; and the Peak District in the United Kingdom.
Consultative, collaborative and comprehensive: councils, developer and
consultants work as a team within the RMA to produce an acceptable structure
plan for a new suburb at Pyes Pa West
Author: Ralph C. and Frentz K. [Planning Quarterly
154].
Date: September 2004
Beware of the master plan
Author
Reeves J. [Planning
Quarterly 154]
Date: September 2004
Creating Great Places to Live + Work + Play: Liveable Urban Environments: Process, Strategy, Action
Published June 2002
This Urban Amenity Guide includes a summary document and CD Rom with examples and templates that could assist with consultation processes with communities.
New Zealand Urban Design Protocol
Published by Ministry for the Environment - March 2005
The New Zealand Urban Design Protocol provides a platform to make New Zealand towns and cities more successful through quality urban design. It is part of the Government's Sustainable Development Programme of Action and Urban Affairs portfolio.
Urban Design Case Studies
Published by Ministry for the Environment - March 2005
The Urban Design Case Studies support the New Zealand Urban Design Protocol by showing practical examples of successful urban design.
Current challenges in practice
Appropriate and realistic resourcing at the council level
Adequate resources to ensure the robust evaluation of all relevant issues are essential and need to be secured from the outset. The true costs of developing a structure plan are easy to underestimate, with costs beyond the basic consultation, research and evaluation often overlooked. Additional cost and time may arise from the need to deal with unexpected issues, or deal with challenges to the outcomes produced.
Diversity of stakeholder views
Structure plans can cover relatively large land areas with many owners, may include resources of importance, or require the input of many to develop them. It can be difficult to get all stakeholders to agree on the way forward, particularly over matters of detail, and this can lead to challenges against the processes, recommendations or outcomes at any stage.
Clarity is required from the start and right throughout the process that a governance decision will be required and that not all points of view may be satisfied. It is important to be clear about the objectives and outcomes at all stages of the project. It is helpful to have ‘champions’ of the process in the form of senior councillors and management team representatives. Most effective of all is to have opinion leaders from the local community happy to endorse the process.
Timeliness and the potential for litigation
Where a structure plan is intended to have regulatory controls via a district plan, the complex evaluation and consultation processes can mean the exercise may take several years to complete in cases where there are numerous stakeholders. Practitioners report a common challenge being frustration among landowners and councillors due to expectations raised by the setting of overly optimistic timeframes.
Another risk is that of turnover of residents (over a third of New Zealanders move house every five years - more in growth areas). This can result in significant numbers of new land owners moving into the structure plan area if the process extends over several years. To avoid resulting claims of lack of consultation, these dynamics need to be recognised and factored into a robust communications plan (see also Fragmentation of proposed sites, below).
Role of permitted baseline
The issue for development of structure plans is that if specific development opportunities are assigned it enables a ‘permitted baseline’ application to be proposed. The scope for interpretation before the Environment Court may give rise to unanticipated development outcomes. A question for the structure planning process is whether consideration should be given to the use of prohibited activity status for some activities to avoid this uncertainty. W3/2002 Alan James Bell and others v Tasman District Council is relevant as to the Court’s current position that total prohibition as a method of control should be used very sparingly in sustainable management terms.
Detail versus flexibility
Some structure plans are very detailed in terms of specifying exactly what services, facilities and spatial layouts are intended for the area. This provides a great degree of certainty, but may result in a lack of flexibility. This can be problematic if unforeseen circumstances arise which require changes to be made to the structure plan, particularly when the structure plan has been incorporated into a statutory document. The resulting plan changes can reopen the structure plan to challenges, and may be costly in terms of delays.
Fragmentation of proposed sites
The structure planning process can take considerable time to progress from inception to implementation. In this time landowners and speculators can make implementation difficult by subdividing and selling land in the area to be structure planned. The new land parcels may be of a size, shape or ownership pattern incompatible with future uses. In some cases there may need to be mechanisms or incentives put in place to reduce such fragmentation. In some cases the market may provide opportunities through all available land being bought by one developer, while in other circumstances education, incentives or regulatory provisions (such as ‘future development zones’) may be able to restrict fragmentation until such time as the structure plan is ready to be implemented.
Acknowledgements
This guidance note was prepared by the Ministry for the Environment based on ideas developed by Graeme Spargo of GSP. The Ministry would also like to acknowledge those who provided input into the development of the guidance note and peer reviewed the drafts:
- Gina Sweetman and Luke Troy, Ministry for the Environment.
