‘Brutal’ and ‘unattractive’ duplex gets green light amid housing shortage

MAIA HART Local Democracy Reporter

An “unattractive” and “brutal” duplex of “basic building materials” has been given the go-ahead in Blenheim despite opposition from a council staffer and neighbours.

The two-storey duplex of two four-bedroom homes on Buick St, a cul-de-sac in the suburb of Redwoodtown, both have a footprint of 140m2. Bedrooms are to be upstairs, living areas on the ground floor, and each dwelling will have two off-street car parks. Marlborough District Council environment planner Ian Sutherland recommended the consent be declined, raising issues with the “unattractive” structure, described as having “little interesting features”.

Ian says, according to the resource consent decision released this month, the “doubling of density” would have adverse effects on the amenity values and character of the street, such as extra noise and reducing neighbours’ privacy. His concerns were in line with neighbours who opposed it over concerns of increased noise and traffic, shade from the building’s height, parking congestion, and the building’s appearance.

A resource management consultant on behalf of a resident also recommended the application be declined, saying the development’s density was too high, given the “existing character” of the area.

He says the design is “brutal”, lacked visual interest and is “essentially a square shape”. His submission says it will also set a “dangerous precedent” for similar sites in Marlborough because the proposal does not meet requirements of the Proposed Marlborough Environment Plan (PMEP).

Under the PMEP, sections in the Urban Residential Zone 2 have to be a minimum size of 400m2. Subdividing the Buick St site will make each section 300m2.

After a resource consent hearing, independent commissioner Antoinette Besier said in her decision she thought the landscape plan provided by the developer would “soften” the appearance of the building.

The owner also volunteered to frost the second storey windows on the eastern side to improve privacy, which one of the neighbours accepted was “adequate”.

Antoinette says the PMEP does not control urban design features to the level raised by residents –and while she somewhat agrees with concerns, she does not consider it is enough to decline the consent.

While she agrees the proposal is inconsistent with elements of the PMEP, such as catering to a lower population density, larger lot sizes and greater privacy, she notes it is consistent with other elements. This included location, intensification and access to services, she says.

In granting the consent, Antoinette referred to the Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment 2021, released last year.

It predicts Marlborough will run out of land zoned for housing within 30 years – leading to a shortfall of 900 dwellings.

Council chief executive Mark Wheeler last year said to councillors it was possible that residential-zoned land will not be developed soon enough to meet demand over the next five years, and landowners hold the key to unlocking this.

She does not think the consent will set a “dangerous precedent” given there are national directives to promote residential intensification and avoid residential development on productive land. As part of the consent, construction is limited to between 7.30am and 5.30pm, Monday to Friday. This could be extended to Saturdays once the build is “closed in”, meaning cladding, windows and external doors are completed. No radios or speakers are to be used during construction, and construction noise should not exceed the recommended limits. Minor changes could be made to the internal layout and location of windows and doors, but no living areas could be upstairs. The height of the dwellings should match what is already planned, but the consent holder or future owners could improve the external appearance of the building. The consent also requires the upstairs windows on the eastern side to be frosted.

Landscaping should be maintained until all planting is established and “self-sufficient”, and any plants that do not survive should be replaced.

The council could review the consent at any time, particularly if complaints are made by neighbours or members of the public. Public Interest Journalism funded through to NZ on Air.