Local authorities on New Zealand’s West Coast are considering significant updates to regional hazard planning, a move that could have wide-ranging implications for property owners and the insurance industry.
The Tai o Poutini Plan (TTPP) committee, which includes representatives from district councils and iwi, is currently reviewing the latest recommendations from independent commissioners.
These recommendations follow extensive public submissions on the comprehensive TTPP, a planning framework that has taken five years to develop and has cost nearly $8 million.
The TTPP is set to establish consistent rules across the Westland, Grey, and Buller District Councils. Its natural hazards section, which identifies areas at risk from events such as flooding, landslides, coastal surges, and earthquakes, has generated considerable debate.
Senior planner Lois Easton told the committee that many residents are concerned about the potential impact of hazard classifications on both property values and access to insurance.
“We had a lot of community members and landowners concerned about the impact of hazard identifications on their property values and their ability to insure,” she said.
Insurers and regulators take independent approach to risk
The Natural Hazards Commission (NHC), formerly known as EQC, has advocated for a more robust approach to risk management.
Easton noted that insurance providers are increasingly relying on their own hazard assessments, rather than depending solely on council-designated overlays.
“So, the arguments from submitters saying if you put a hazard overlay on our property it’s going to devalue it, actually the purpose is to stop people putting things in places where they won’t be able to get insurance,” she said.
She clarified that the proposed rules would apply only to new construction or additions in designated hazard areas, not to existing buildings.
However, she acknowledged that the issue remains sensitive for many homeowners, as their properties often represent their largest financial asset.
Hazard mapping revisions and community feedback
The process of updating hazard maps has not been without controversy. During the plan’s development, new LiDAR data became available, leading to changes in hazard mapping after the public submission period had closed. This led to public protests and calls for greater transparency.
In response, the hearings panel has recommended removing certain “flood susceptibility” overlays from areas where scientific evidence is lacking. These areas include Haast, Inangahua, Karamea, and parts of Franz Josef, among others.
“It undermines the credibility of the plan if we have big fat pen marks that aren’t well justified, and it’s unnecessarily punitive on landowners,” Easton said.
Despite the removal of some overlays, Easton cautioned that this does not mean the hazards themselves have disappeared. In Franz Josef, for example, while some flood susceptibility areas have been removed, a severe flood hazard designation remains in place.
Westland Mayor Helen Lash expressed concern about the changes, particularly regarding the potential for river breaches to affect the township.
Implications for insurance and property risk
Additional changes to the hazard maps include replacing previous buffer zones along the Alpine Fault with two new earthquake risk overlays, reflecting updated geological data.
These overlays now more accurately represent areas of severe and susceptible earthquake risk, including critical infrastructure such as the Franz Josef Police station and the Taramakau stopbanks.
Community leaders have raised questions about the scientific basis for some hazard designations. Makaawhio leader Paul Madgwick questioned the classification of land around the Tatare stream, while Lash highlighted concerns about the removal of a tsunami hazard overlay from Lake Mapourika.
Survey reveals homeowner demand for risk transparency
The discussion over hazard planning coincides with new research from Tower, which indicates that many New Zealand homeowners are seeking clearer information about property risks.
According to Tower’s “Weathering change: attitudes to climate risk and resilience in New Zealand” report, 46% of respondents want more detailed information about their property’s exposure to natural hazards.
The survey also found that 86% of participants view property-specific risk data as essential.
Furthermore, 70% support the idea of insurance premiums being set according to individual property risks, and 68% agree that higher-risk properties should face higher premiums.
The outcome of the TTPP process is expected to influence not only future property development but also underwriting practices and risk assessment standards across the region.
Insurance Business NZ
