The proposed eight-unit development in Marlow St, St Kilda, did not comply with Dunedin City Council density and site coverage standards, but lack of adherence was considered to be technical and the proposal was found to be consistent with planning objectives and policies overall.
Subdivision and land use consents were granted on September 20, which was two weeks before surface flooding caused damage in the area.
A reminder of risks posed by natural hazards exists at a property just down the street, as a temporary work site notice applies there after flooding.
The proposed multi-unit development consists of two separate two-storey buildings — adding up to eight two-bedroom units overall.
It would replace two dwellings and the new units would be "in keeping with the in-fill development and increased level of density that has emerged in the surrounding environment, and South Dunedin generally, in recent years", the report to the senior planner said.
Concerning natural hazards, Stantec civil engineer Edward Guerreiro said there were significant flood and liquefaction hazards at the site and surrounding area, but this should not preclude development.
"He advises that the hazards of the site are related to the ground being predominantly underlain by poorly consolidated marine or estuarine sediments with a shallow groundwater table, but these hazards can be mitigated by increased floor levels and specific engineering design to address potential liquefaction hazards," the report said.
Enabling multi-unit housing is part of the city’s strategy for meeting its housing capacity needs, but the emergence and design of such developments has been a source of some contention in neighbourhoods.
The extent of hard surfacing has also been a discussion point, because this puts pressure on the stormwater network.
The Marlow St development would slightly exceed a rule about building site coverage and one of the lots would be just over the limit for building and impermeable surface site coverage.
Four lots would not comply with the density standard, but it was argued the proposal complied with "overall density".
