Council is deciding whether to offer bach owners a licence to occupy the legal road (public road reserve) at Taylors Mistake, Hobsons Bay and Boulder Bay. If a licence is offered, we also need to decide what the licence conditions will be.
Project status: Decision made
Open for feedback: 23 November 2018 to 14 January 2019
Share this
Consultation has closed
Summary of feedback
Consultation ran for just over seven weeks from 23 November 2018 to 14 January 2019 and we received 171 submissions. Submissions were received in support for the proposal, in support of more baches being retained (or for longer), and in support of fewer baches being retained.
Key topics raised were:
- The heritage of the baches
- The unique identity of the baches
- The custodianship over the local environment by bach owners
- Natural hazards
- Licence conditions
You can read the analysis of all submissions. [PDF, 108 KB]
Meeting details and decision making process
The staff report on the proposal for baches in Boulder Bay, Taylors Mistake and Hobsons Bay was presented to the Hearings Panel on Monday 11 February. Submitters spoke to the Hearings Panel and following this a series of recommendations were developed by the panel. You can read the meeting minutes(external link).
A final decision was made by Council on Thursday 11 April and the report and meeting minutes are available at christchurch.infocouncil.biz.
Why we are consulting
A bach at Boulder Bay
The question of what should be done about the baches has been considered for many years. However, because of changing circumstances, no final resolution has been reached. A decision would give bach owners, the Council and others in the community certainty about the baches and how they might be used today and in the future.
Summary of public feedback
In October 2018 a discussion document was released for public comment, to help the Council understand community views and preferences. Feedback was received from 214 people and most supported the retention of baches, in Boulder Bay, Taylors Mistake, and Hobsons Bay.
People wanted to see heritage and character of the baches retained. To a lesser extent people felt family history and bach owner custodianship of the local area were reasons for the baches to be allowed to remain.
Of those who were unsure or opposed to the retention of baches, most felt hazards required mitigation, or that baches should be removed or not occupied. Hobsons Bay received significantly more feedback regarding the presence of hazards than the other two areas. You can read all feedback [PDF, 1.1 MB] and the staff analysis of feedback [PDF, 65 KB].
Preferred option – managed retention of most baches for heritage (some stay, some go)
A 35-year licence for the bach to stay and be used for holiday accommodation is offered to owners of baches with heritage value (that is those that are scheduled within the District Plan and those which meet the heritage criteria), except where there is a moderate to high risk from natural hazards that are not mitigated by the bach owner. Baches that are not offered a licence are demolished or, where possible, relocated to the new bach zone behind the ‘Rotten Row’ baches at Taylors Mistake. There is room in the new bach zone to relocate or rebuild all baches not offered a licence.
Note: Public access was assessed by a Council Officer who considers that none of the baches unreasonably impeded pedestrian access along the road reserve.
Potential advantages
Taylors Mistake bach
- Gives certainty to bach owners and to the wider community and preserves the legacy of the baches
- Supports owner upkeep of baches and the heritage and character that the baches offer the area is maintained
- Reduces life-safety risk from natural hazards
- Revenue collected from the licence fee could be used to enhance the local environment and recreational opportunities
Potential disadvantages
- Minimal improvement to the natural character of the coastal environment and public use of the land currently occupied by baches
- Loss of bach owner custodianship over the local area from those not offered a licence and unable to rebuild or relocate within the new bach zone
- Some heritage buildings may be lost
Other options considered but not preferred
Description |
Outcome |
All baches stay and can be used |
|
|
Managed retention of all baches. A 35-year licence is offered to all bach owners for their use for holiday accommodation only
|
This option maintains the heritage and character that the baches contribute to the area. Gives certainty to bach owners and to the wider community and preserves the legacy of the baches. Supports investment and stewardship from bach owners. Bach owner's custodianship over the local area is maintained and revenue collected from the licence fee could be used to enhance the local environment and recreational opportunities. However, this option presents a life-safety risk to those occupying a bach subject to moderate to high risk from natural hazards, where this risk is not mitigated. There is also no improvement to the natural character of the coastal environment and public use of the land currently occupied by the baches. |
Some stay and can be used; some baches stay but can’t be used, or they go |
|
|
A 35-year licence is offered to bach owners for their use for holiday accommodation only, where the bach is of heritage value. Where there is a moderate to high life-safety risk from natural hazards that are not mitigated, or the bach does not have heritage value then the bach will either be demolished or relocated to the new bach zone. A scheduled heritage bach may be retained and maintained by the Council (at a cost to ratepayers but potentially recoverable through the licence revenue from other baches). |
This option maintains the heritage and character that the baches offer the area. It gives certainty to bach owners and to the wider community and preserves the legacy of the baches. Supports owner investment and upkeep of the retained baches. Revenue collected from the licence fee could be used to enhance the local environment and recreational opportunities. However, there is minimal improvement to the natural character of the coastal environment through the removal of baches. The Council (ratepayers) would incur costs to maintain scheduled heritage baches that are not occupied, unless costs are met through the licence revenue from other baches. There is a loss of custodianship over the local area from those not offered a licence and unable to rebuild or relocate within the new bach zone. The District Plan allows for a total of 45 dwellings within the three areas. If a bach remains but cannot be occupied, the owner is not allowed to rebuild in the new bach zone unless another bach owner forfeits their right to use the zone. |
Some baches stay and can’t be used; some go |
|
|
No licence to occupy is offered to any bach owner. Baches are either retained and maintained by the Council if they are scheduled heritage (but not occupied), or they are demolished or relocated to the new bach zone. The new bach zone has room for 18 baches. The remaining 27 bach owners would have no option to rebuild or relocate within the area.
|
This option improves the natural character of the coastal environment. Heritage and the character of the area is maintained, which gives certainty to bach owners and to the wider community, and preserves the legacy of the baches. However, there is a heightened cost to the Council (ratepayers) to maintain the baches and custodianship over the local area by those not offered a licence and unable to rebuild or relocate within the new bach zone. The District Plan allows a total of 45 dwellings (the current number) within the three bays. If a bach is kept as an unoccupied heritage item, the owner would not be able to rebuild in the new bach zone, unless another bach owner forfeits their right to use the zone. |
All baches go |
|
|
No licence to occupy is offered to any bach owner and the Council seeks removal of all baches. Up to 18 may be rebuilt on or relocated to the new bach zone, and the rest are demolished. |
This option significantly restores the natural character of the coastal environment. However, heritage and the character the baches offer the area, is lost. There is not enough room in the new bach zone for all bach owners to relocate or rebuild and custodianship over the local area is reduced. |
Summary of technical information for each bach
Public access was assessed by a Council Officer who considers that none of the baches unreasonably impeded pedestrian access along the road reserve.
All hazard information is subject to further and more detailed geotechnical assessment of the level of hazard. Consideration of whether hazard mitigation is feasible will be the responsibility of bach owners and negotiated with Council Officers.
Summary of technical information for each bach [PDF, 194 KB]
View a map showing the technical information, location and a photo for each bach(external link).
If you're using a mobile device this mobile-friendly map(external link) will provide a better experience.
Further Information
Licence conditions
A licence is an agreement between the Council and bach owners about the terms and conditions under which they are permitted to occupy public land.
This will include, but is not limited to, the length of the licence (the Council is not able to offer a licence over legal road that exceeds 35 years), whether a bach can be sold or passed on to other family members, maintaining the heritage value of a bach, maintaining public access around the bach, whether a bach can or should be available to rent and what the bach can be used for, such as short-term holiday accommodation and to what extent a bach can be repaired or rebuilt.
Licence fee revenue
Any fee charged for a licence would be used for the enhancement of the local area.
New bach zone
The Taylors Mistake Association Land Company Ltd (a sub-group of bach owners) owns a parcel of land behind ‘Rotten Row’ which can accommodate up to 18 baches. These can be either existing baches that are relocated, or new buildings. Not all bach owners are currently eligible to relocate or rebuild to this site.
Any new buildings will require resource consent. The Council controls aspects including the design, appearance and location of the new bach, landscaping, required connection to a reticulated sewer system, access to the bach, water supply for firefighting purposes, and the rehabilitation of the existing bach site.
Other standards that apply include restrictions on the size and height of the bach, and total area of the site able to be covered by buildings, decks and impervious surfaces. Depending on where a bach is located, standards relating to the rockfall management may also apply.
Under the District Plan only 45 baches are allowed in the bays. This means that if a bach is not demolished, but maintained as a non-occupied heritage item, the owner will be able to rebuild in the new bach zone only if an owner of a demolished bach forfeits this right.
71 hectare land gift
Hobsons Bay baches
The Taylors Mistake Association Land Company Ltd also owns a 71-hectare parcel of land in the upper Taylors Mistake Valley. They are willing to gift this land to the Council for recreational purposes, if the terms of a licence to occupy can be agreed.
The Christchurch City Council Parks Unit is interested in the land, should it be offered. Ultimately acceptance of the land will need to be approved by the Council.
Mitigation of hazards
Many of the baches are within hazard management areas for rockfall, cliff collapse, and mass movement. Hazard risk considers both the probability and the consequences of the hazard occurring (risk to life, property and infrastructure).
In some cases hazards can be mitigated. This can involve stabilising a slope or removing material from an area. The cost of mitigation is usually in the tens of thousands if not more and costs would need to be met by the bach owners.
Relocation or demolition of baches
Relocation or demolition of baches would take time. Relocating baches may be problematic because of the topography of the area and lack of vehicle access.
If a scheduled heritage building demolition will require a resource consent, it will need to take account of a range of matters including the presence of hazards,
It is expected that bach owners will meet the costs of either removing or relocating their bach.
Public access across legal road
Should the baches remain in part or in full, the Council will assess how public access around the baches could be improved for low or no cost. This might include an audit of all signs, print, and digital information about walking tracks in the area.
Talk to the team
Staff are available for an informal chat and to answer questions at the following locations:
Tuesday 4 December 2018
1pm to 2pm
At Turanga, ground level Central Library,
60 Cathedral Square, City Centre
Sunday 9 December 2018
11am to 1pm
At Sumner Market,
Cnr Marriner Street and Esplanade, Sumner
Tuesday 8 January 2019
1pm to 3pm
At Taylors Mistake Surf Lifesaving Club,
Taylors Mistake Beach
Or contact us anytime