diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | assignment3/background.tex | 13 |
1 files changed, 11 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/assignment3/background.tex b/assignment3/background.tex index 2e665c1..e9319b7 100644 --- a/assignment3/background.tex +++ b/assignment3/background.tex @@ -73,8 +73,17 @@ those parties who made a submission on a notified application have legal standing to appeal a council's resource consent decision to the Environment Court. -% TODO: who has legal standing in this case? -% Do people have to resort to the Environment Court then? +A review of consent processing performance of selected councils +conducted by the Ministry for the Environment revealed that councils +rarely reject subpar resource consent applications as permitted by +section 88(3) of the RMA; much more often faulty applications are +accepted and gradually improved through requests for additional +information in line with section 92 of the +RMA \parencite{performance}. It is doubtful whether poor quality +assessments significantly improve through this course of action. It is +clear, however, that this approach not only delays the processing of +resource consents, but also increases the likelihood of poor quality +applications slipping through. Often the quality and coverage of activities in the council's plan determine whether or not the expected effects of a development |