We’re seeking early feedback on our proposal so we can weigh up the potential environmental, economic, social and cultural impacts before notifying the plan change for submissions later this year.
Ōtautahi Christchurch’s central-city area – bordered by the four avenues of Fitzgerald, Bealey, Harper and Moorhouse – is intended to be the main focal point for the city, providing a vibrant urban environment filled with a wide range of activities. This includes music and hospitality venues, and other activities, which tend to put out higher levels of noise from music, for example, or the machinery they need to operate, such as kitchen extractor fans. These venues form a large part of the district’s night-time economy and its social life, too.
The central city is also a place where we want more people to live, with the number of residents expected to grow significantly over the coming decades. People’s homes are sensitive to noise, especially overnight, which is when music and hospitality venues tend to operate.
In the last few years, the increase in residents, particularly in mixed-use zones in the central city where venues have already set up, has created tensions around the issue of noise, and greater housing growth in these areas is likely to only increase these tensions. Furthermore, venues haven’t been able to set up in the areas enabled in the recovery plan for the central city, which were identified at a time when the city was still in its early recovery following the 2011 earthquake. There are a number of reasons for this, including land availability and other drivers that affect business decisions.
It's important to ensure that people who live in the central city have a reasonable level of comfort, and that their health isn’t put at risk by noise, particularly when it comes to sleep. This can be achieved through sound insulation for residential buildings (e.g. more internal plasterboard, double glazing, denser insulation in outer walls) and for businesses (e.g. insulation throughout the building, having a lobby entrance, facing loudspeakers away from doors, windows and outer walls), but there are costs associated with this, and it’s important such costs don’t act as a barrier for businesses to operate or for more housing to be developed.
The District Plan currently manages noise in the central city through policies and rules targeted at different areas:
One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha
Around One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha there’s an Inner Noise Insulation Area and an Outer Noise Insulation Area. There are noise limits for events at the stadium, and different sound insulation requirements for noise-sensitive activities in each of the insulation areas. Because these rules only recently became operative, in 2022, we’re not considering changing them in this proposal.
Over September and October 2023, we heard from a total of 3,399 survey respondents about their views on central-city noise and related aspects, including current noise levels, zoning and sound insulation. Two thirds of the survey’s respondents were residents living in the broader Christchurch area, one third were central-city residents, and three per cent were representatives of 92 central-city businesses.
The main purpose of the survey was to get an understanding of community expectations around central-city noise levels – at what times and in what locations – and to figure out what kind of support we might need to provide residents and businesses.
Generally, the survey’s respondents were supportive of Christchurch’s night-time economy, expressing a clear expectation that any changes to the District Plan should help to support it:
The feedback from this initial survey has helped to inform the changes we’re considering to the District Plan in this proposal.
We want to manage noise in the central city in a way that:
1. Supports a vibrant night-time economy
2. Reflects the expected appeal of different areas within the central city
3. Protects activities that are sensitive to noise overnight.
To achieve this, the key change we’re considering to the District Plan is to allow louder night-time noise in some areas of the central city – generally, the city centre surrounding Cathedral Square, areas surrounding One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha, and commercial areas south of Lichfield Street. This means increasing the noise limits in these areas so they better match the sound insulation rules already in place for noise-sensitive activities like housing, visitor accommodation, education activities, and healthcare facilities.
We’re considering whether these higher noise limits should only apply to entertainment activities, which need to operate with higher noise levels due to the nature of their business, or whether the same noise limits should apply to any activity.
We’re also looking into whether the proposed boundaries for areas with higher noise limits should be adjusted to include or exclude areas that are more, or less, sensitive to noise. For example, it might be better to exclude some areas from the increased noise limits because they’re close to older housing which might not have much insulation. It might also be better to include some areas within the limits, such as those areas that already have a cluster of entertainment venues.Our proposed approach is based on continuing to divide the central city into three different categories, each with its own set of noise rules.
It seeks to better provide for new music and hospitality venues to set up in appropriate locations – and to allow them to operate in a way that attracts and keeps patrons – while also ensuring that the costs associated with managing or reducing noise are not a barrier.
They also seek to ensure that, for areas of the central city where noise-sensitive activities are expected, these are not subject to an unreasonable level of internal noise, and where sound insulation is required to achieve this, the costs or design requirements are reasonable and workable.
Category 1 (orange area on the map below)
Category 2 (green area on the map below)
Category 3 (yellow area on the map below)
Road noise
Where the categories apply
Our proposed approach would extend the Category 1 area to cover the existing Category 1 and 2 areas, and some parts of the central city that are currently Category 3 would become Category 2. See the maps below to compare what is proposed to the current situation.
Rules within each category
The following tables compare the draft rules for noise limits and sound insulation with the current rules in the District Plan. Note that LAeq means a sound level that’s averaged over a period of time.
| Current rules (night time) | Draft rules (night time) | |
| Category 1 | 60 dB LAeq | 65 dB LAeq |
| Category 2 | 50 dB LAeq | 60 dB LAeq |
| Category 3 | 45 dB LAeq | 45 dB LAeq |
| Current rules | Draft rules | |
| Category 1 | Residential and visitor accommodation not permitted | Outside-to-inside noise reduction of 35 dB for bedrooms and 30 dB for
other habitable spaces Mechanical ventilation required |
| Category 2 | Outside-to-inside noise reduction of 35 dB for bedrooms and 30 dB for other habitable spaces | Outside-to-inside noise reduction of 35 dB for bedrooms and 30 dB for other habitable spaces Mechanical ventilation required |
Category 3 areas where:
| Outside-to-inside noise reduction of 30 dB for bedrooms | Outside-to-inside noise reduction of 30 dB for bedrooms Mechanical ventilation required |
| Category 3 areas not covered above | None, except where required for traffic noise | None, except where required for traffic noise |
| One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha Insulation Areas | Outside-to-inside noise reduction of 35 dB for bedrooms and 30 dB for other habitable spaces | Outside-to-inside noise reduction of 35 dB for bedrooms and 30 dB for other habitable spaces |
| Sensitive activities within 40 metres of arterial, main distributor, and local distributor roads | Outside-to-inside noise reduction of 30 dB for any habitable
space OR Target noise level of 40 dB LAEq (24 hours) for traffic noise | Align with Rule 6.1.7.2.1 Target noise level of 40 dB LAEq (24hr) for traffic noise AND |
Description
Noise limits are applied based on activities already set up, not based on zoning or categories (e.g. a higher limit applying to boundaries with non-sensitive activities, and lower limits applying where a site contains a noise-sensitive activity, relative to the sound insulation of the receiver).New noise-sensitive activities would then provide a level of sound insulation relative to the permitted levels of noise-producing activities that are already set up.
Why it isn't the preferred option
This option would allow for an assessment of actual noise levels on a site-by-site basis – with noise limits and sound insulation requirements corresponding to that – and place the cost of managing noise onto the new activity, the ‘agent of change’, rather than on all activities. However, a key downside to this option are the costs associated with it, such as an extensive recording system to catalogue existing activities, including existing noise levels, and the amount of sound insulation installed. Any new activity looking to set up would need to undertake an assessment of all existing noise sources and insulation before being able to determine the requirements that apply, and this could be difficult to achieve when trying to make decisions such as whether a site is suitable for a specific activity. This would likely be a costly exercise and would lack certainty for new activities when it comes to figuring out which requirements apply. Furthermore, over time, it’s likely to become more costly or unworkable to set up new venues, given the expected increase in residential activities in the central city. On the other hand, the costs associated with sound insultation could be a major barrier for new residential activities. It could also result in a wide variation in noise levels, even within the same zone.
Description
Noise-generating activities are subject to fixed noise limits which apply at the boundary with other sites. Noise limits relate to the zone or area within which the noise is received. Sound insulation requirements are relative to the noise limits.
Why it is the preferred option
This option provides clear expectations around levels of noise generated across different areas, and the costs required to manage noise – for venues and for sound insulation – are the same within the same area.
Description
Keep the current categories.
Why it isn't the preferred option
This option doesn’t really support the development of music and hospitality venues in the central city, which are an important part of the city’s vibrancy and vitality. It provides limited opportunities for new venues to set up outside of Category 1 areas. This is made worse by the majority of the Category 1 area having been redeveloped in ways which mean the likelihood of it becoming a hub for current or future music and hospitality activities is low. Issues are likely to arise in areas where music venues have set up near to noise-sensitive activities that weren’t required to install sound insulation.
Description
Keep the noise categories but expand them to include established venues.
Why this isn't the preferred option
This option provides greater certainty and flexibility for venues that have set up in Category 2 or 3 areas and it better allows for clustering of these types of activities. However, it doesn’t address issues where noise-sensitive activities have been set up without sound insulation, and it provides only limited opportunities for more venues to set up. As such, this option isn’t preferred. It’s considered a short-term fix only, lacking any future-proofing for the setting up of new venues in other locations.
As a part of this option, the boundaries for the new category areas could be expanded, including a wider area to provide some future-proofing for new venues to set up in other locations. However, this would basically mean guessing where future venues might set up, which hasn’t worked well in the past, creating the current issues. Also, the impacts would be wider for noise-sensitive activities that have set up without sound insulation.
Description
Remove the noise categories and apply a higher noise limit and related sound insulation requirements across the whole central city.
Why it isn't the preferred option
This option provides the same noise environment across the whole of the central city, and the greatest flexibility for venues to set up and operate. However, there would be negative effects on the health and comfort of building occupants within noise-sensitive activities that have been set up without sound insulation, and this could happen across a very large area. This option also involves the greatest costs for new noise-sensitive activities. It isn’t preferred, because it doesn’t solve the problems between noise-making activities and noise-sensitive activities. It would also probably mean some new residential activities would have to pay for sound insulation they didn’t need if new venues didn’t actually set up nearby.
Description
Keep noise categories but change the boundaries to align them with those areas where sound insulation is currently required, and increase noise limits in new Category 1 and 2 areas.
Why it is the preferred option
This option would provide greater certainty and flexibility for venues and generally allow them to set up over a much wider area. Allowing for higher noise limits in areas where sound insulation is already required is a targeted approach which doesn’t increase costs related to insulation requirements beyond those already in place.
The proposed Category 1 area follows the existing Category 1, 2, and stadium noise contour boundaries, where the highest standard of insulation is currently required within the central city. The proposed Category 2 areas follow the existing boundaries where insulation is currently required in bedrooms, encompassing both commercial zones and residential areas located within 75 metres of the current Category 1 and 2 areas.
We acknowledge that sensitive activities in the expanded Category 1 and 2 areas, set up before the insulation requirements were put in place, may be negatively affected by the increased noise limits. This is a key trade-off in better providing for entertainment venues – and the benefits they bring – within the central city. Over time, redevelopment will improve the housing. As part of the preferred option, we are looking into whether there might be pockets of existing, older residential activities that could be excluded from the expanded boundaries. The proposed Category 1 boundaries could also be adjusted to include other areas currently within the Category 2 or 3 boundaries which have lower noise limits.To ask a question you must create an account or log in.
These are the people that are listening and responding to your questions.
{{question.description}}
Have questions or want to learn more about a project? Contact us:
| letstalk@ccc.govt.nz |
