Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane - Natural Hazard Review

Share Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane - Natural Hazard Review on Facebook Share Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane - Natural Hazard Review on Twitter Share Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane - Natural Hazard Review on Linkedin Email Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane - Natural Hazard Review link

About the Natural Hazard Review

Queenstown Lakes District Council (QLDC) has been investigating risk from natural hazards in the Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane areas. Assessments show there is a range of risk levels in these areas, with elevated levels of risk in some places. We've also been investigating potential options for managing this risk to ensure that people and property are safe.


Preferred response package

Using all the information collected to date, a preferred response package has been developed to manage rockfall and debris flow risk across Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane. This package was endorsed by Councillors at the Thursday 30 June Full Council meeting. Endorsement of the package signals Councillor support for the different elements that make up the preferred response package and a further work programme to develop the package. The preferred response package addresses risk to life and property from rockfall and debris flow hazards, and brings together different elements of the four original risk management options Council and the community has previously considered.

Click here for a summary of the preferred response package and the elements proposed to manage rockfall and debris flow risk across Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane.

The further work programme will need to be undertaken to inform where different elements recommended by the preferred response package will be applied, and their detailed design. This work will need to be progressed before the costs and benefits of the preferred package are fully understood, and before the package can be ready for implementation. Importantly, further decisions will be needed from Councillors ahead of any on the ground implementation of the package.


What's next?

Council staff are now working on a further work programme to inform where the different elements recommended by the preferred response package will be applied, and their detailed design. This further work will address engineering, legal, financial, and funding matters, as well as responsibilities for and the timing of implementation.

Detailed planning and scheduling of the further work programme is estimated to take 18 – 24 months to complete, before the preferred response package will go before Councillors to decide on its implementation.


Want to stay in the loop?

We're launching a newsletter to share updates on the further work programme as it progresses. Sign up to receive your own updates here.


Got a question?

If you have any questions on the consultation report, technical information, the preferred response package, or the next steps for the natural hazards plan review, QLDC staff are available to answer any questions. You can ask your question at the bottom of this page and we'll get a member of our Planning team to respond as soon as possible, or fire us an email at letstalk@qldc.govt.nz and we'll respond via email.

About the Natural Hazard Review

Queenstown Lakes District Council (QLDC) has been investigating risk from natural hazards in the Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane areas. Assessments show there is a range of risk levels in these areas, with elevated levels of risk in some places. We've also been investigating potential options for managing this risk to ensure that people and property are safe.


Preferred response package

Using all the information collected to date, a preferred response package has been developed to manage rockfall and debris flow risk across Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane. This package was endorsed by Councillors at the Thursday 30 June Full Council meeting. Endorsement of the package signals Councillor support for the different elements that make up the preferred response package and a further work programme to develop the package. The preferred response package addresses risk to life and property from rockfall and debris flow hazards, and brings together different elements of the four original risk management options Council and the community has previously considered.

Click here for a summary of the preferred response package and the elements proposed to manage rockfall and debris flow risk across Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane.

The further work programme will need to be undertaken to inform where different elements recommended by the preferred response package will be applied, and their detailed design. This work will need to be progressed before the costs and benefits of the preferred package are fully understood, and before the package can be ready for implementation. Importantly, further decisions will be needed from Councillors ahead of any on the ground implementation of the package.


What's next?

Council staff are now working on a further work programme to inform where the different elements recommended by the preferred response package will be applied, and their detailed design. This further work will address engineering, legal, financial, and funding matters, as well as responsibilities for and the timing of implementation.

Detailed planning and scheduling of the further work programme is estimated to take 18 – 24 months to complete, before the preferred response package will go before Councillors to decide on its implementation.


Want to stay in the loop?

We're launching a newsletter to share updates on the further work programme as it progresses. Sign up to receive your own updates here.


Got a question?

If you have any questions on the consultation report, technical information, the preferred response package, or the next steps for the natural hazards plan review, QLDC staff are available to answer any questions. You can ask your question at the bottom of this page and we'll get a member of our Planning team to respond as soon as possible, or fire us an email at letstalk@qldc.govt.nz and we'll respond via email.

Ask a Question

Got a question about natural hazards in the Brewery Creek and Reavers Lane areas? Ask it here and a member of QLDC's Planning team will respond as soon as possible.

loader image
Forgot password?
Didn't receive confirmation?
Register Now
Seems like you are already registered, please provide the password. Forgot your password? Create a new one now.
  • Share Why is the Ngai Tahu site not under review yet falls in the same area? on Facebook Share Why is the Ngai Tahu site not under review yet falls in the same area? on Twitter Share Why is the Ngai Tahu site not under review yet falls in the same area? on Linkedin Email Why is the Ngai Tahu site not under review yet falls in the same area? link

    Why is the Ngai Tahu site not under review yet falls in the same area?

    Clinton asked over 2 years ago

    Hi there Clinton - The site of the previous Wakatipu High School is located outside of the area being reviewed because it is not located on the surface of either the Brewery Creek or Reavers Lane alluvial fans. It's located between the two fan surfaces, which means the site isn't subject to the same types of natural hazards (e.g., debris flow and rockfall) that the fan surfaces are. Even so, any future development on the old school site will need to consider the effects of natural hazard events.

  • Share I can see a question asked by "jojo" about why Hylton Place isn't included in the risk area, and your response confirming that it isn't part of the overall alluvial fan landforms. Can you please tell me why 62-70 Robins Road IS included in the risk area??? These houses are on the other side of the creek to the houses in Huff St, Fryer St, etc and the only way the houses at 62-70 Robins Rd could be affected is if rock slides went through Hylton Place. So if Hylton Place is outside the risk area then 62-70 Robins Rd surely is. This was raised by the residents at the initial town meetings but no answer was given except to say that all areas are effected differently and they had to put the boundary somewhere. Needless to say we weren't satisfied with such an unscientific and lazy answer. on Facebook Share I can see a question asked by "jojo" about why Hylton Place isn't included in the risk area, and your response confirming that it isn't part of the overall alluvial fan landforms. Can you please tell me why 62-70 Robins Road IS included in the risk area??? These houses are on the other side of the creek to the houses in Huff St, Fryer St, etc and the only way the houses at 62-70 Robins Rd could be affected is if rock slides went through Hylton Place. So if Hylton Place is outside the risk area then 62-70 Robins Rd surely is. This was raised by the residents at the initial town meetings but no answer was given except to say that all areas are effected differently and they had to put the boundary somewhere. Needless to say we weren't satisfied with such an unscientific and lazy answer. on Twitter Share I can see a question asked by "jojo" about why Hylton Place isn't included in the risk area, and your response confirming that it isn't part of the overall alluvial fan landforms. Can you please tell me why 62-70 Robins Road IS included in the risk area??? These houses are on the other side of the creek to the houses in Huff St, Fryer St, etc and the only way the houses at 62-70 Robins Rd could be affected is if rock slides went through Hylton Place. So if Hylton Place is outside the risk area then 62-70 Robins Rd surely is. This was raised by the residents at the initial town meetings but no answer was given except to say that all areas are effected differently and they had to put the boundary somewhere. Needless to say we weren't satisfied with such an unscientific and lazy answer. on Linkedin Email I can see a question asked by "jojo" about why Hylton Place isn't included in the risk area, and your response confirming that it isn't part of the overall alluvial fan landforms. Can you please tell me why 62-70 Robins Road IS included in the risk area??? These houses are on the other side of the creek to the houses in Huff St, Fryer St, etc and the only way the houses at 62-70 Robins Rd could be affected is if rock slides went through Hylton Place. So if Hylton Place is outside the risk area then 62-70 Robins Rd surely is. This was raised by the residents at the initial town meetings but no answer was given except to say that all areas are effected differently and they had to put the boundary somewhere. Needless to say we weren't satisfied with such an unscientific and lazy answer. link

    I can see a question asked by "jojo" about why Hylton Place isn't included in the risk area, and your response confirming that it isn't part of the overall alluvial fan landforms. Can you please tell me why 62-70 Robins Road IS included in the risk area??? These houses are on the other side of the creek to the houses in Huff St, Fryer St, etc and the only way the houses at 62-70 Robins Rd could be affected is if rock slides went through Hylton Place. So if Hylton Place is outside the risk area then 62-70 Robins Rd surely is. This was raised by the residents at the initial town meetings but no answer was given except to say that all areas are effected differently and they had to put the boundary somewhere. Needless to say we weren't satisfied with such an unscientific and lazy answer.

    MP asked over 2 years ago

    The land from 62 to 70 Robins Road has been identified as part of the assessment area due to its association with the surface of the Reavers Lane alluvial fan. However, our risk assessment has shown that the land in this area is outside of the elevated levels of rockfall and debris flow risk. This is shown on our interactive life risk contour map available here: https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=47539c9e9ba1458682033ea99f36de0d.

    If the preferred response package going before Councillors on Thursday 30 June is endorsed, there are no recommended specific actions to manage rockfall or debris flow risk in the area of 62 to 70 Robins Road.

    rockfall,risk,debris flow,robins road
    rockfall risk debris flow robins road
  • Share There is concern that not one of the options presented at the Memorial Hall presentation outlined the downstream effects of each option on the property owners in terms of future development rights or effects property values, nor how these effects will be addressed. The risks are on council land and it is for the council to address those risks, and the costs (either direct or indirect) should not be passed back to individual property owners. Equally there is concern that simple saying property owners are protected by the district plan is deceptive, as the district plan is subject to change. Property owners cannot be expected to provide feedback on a preferred option without understand what the effects of each option would be. This type of feedback gathering is very disingenuously. on Facebook Share There is concern that not one of the options presented at the Memorial Hall presentation outlined the downstream effects of each option on the property owners in terms of future development rights or effects property values, nor how these effects will be addressed. The risks are on council land and it is for the council to address those risks, and the costs (either direct or indirect) should not be passed back to individual property owners. Equally there is concern that simple saying property owners are protected by the district plan is deceptive, as the district plan is subject to change. Property owners cannot be expected to provide feedback on a preferred option without understand what the effects of each option would be. This type of feedback gathering is very disingenuously. on Twitter Share There is concern that not one of the options presented at the Memorial Hall presentation outlined the downstream effects of each option on the property owners in terms of future development rights or effects property values, nor how these effects will be addressed. The risks are on council land and it is for the council to address those risks, and the costs (either direct or indirect) should not be passed back to individual property owners. Equally there is concern that simple saying property owners are protected by the district plan is deceptive, as the district plan is subject to change. Property owners cannot be expected to provide feedback on a preferred option without understand what the effects of each option would be. This type of feedback gathering is very disingenuously. on Linkedin Email There is concern that not one of the options presented at the Memorial Hall presentation outlined the downstream effects of each option on the property owners in terms of future development rights or effects property values, nor how these effects will be addressed. The risks are on council land and it is for the council to address those risks, and the costs (either direct or indirect) should not be passed back to individual property owners. Equally there is concern that simple saying property owners are protected by the district plan is deceptive, as the district plan is subject to change. Property owners cannot be expected to provide feedback on a preferred option without understand what the effects of each option would be. This type of feedback gathering is very disingenuously. link

    There is concern that not one of the options presented at the Memorial Hall presentation outlined the downstream effects of each option on the property owners in terms of future development rights or effects property values, nor how these effects will be addressed. The risks are on council land and it is for the council to address those risks, and the costs (either direct or indirect) should not be passed back to individual property owners. Equally there is concern that simple saying property owners are protected by the district plan is deceptive, as the district plan is subject to change. Property owners cannot be expected to provide feedback on a preferred option without understand what the effects of each option would be. This type of feedback gathering is very disingenuously.

    Alastair asked about 3 years ago

    Hey there! Thanks for your query. We did have information available at the 'Hear about the Hazard' sessions on development rights and property values under the four options. Information on where the costs fall for each of the options was also available. We're sorry if you missed this - but we now have this information available here on Let's Talk too! On the Natural Hazards page, you'll find a heading called ‘Hear about the Hazard Technical Information’. Please refer to the ‘Costs & Benefits Analysis’ file and the three ‘Social Outcomes’ files. You may also find some of the videos helpful, particularly the economic and social ones (when they are posted). The Market Economics Social and Economic Impacts Assessment report, under the heading ‘Technical Assessments’ on this webpage also provides detailed analysis of these issues. We are aware that this information is not necessarily straight forward to understand, and we are happy to explain it in more detail to you over the phone or in person. If you are in the elevated risk area shown in yellow on the Risk Map (also on this website), we have another opportunity next week for you to understand the impacts of the options on you, via Risk Response Discussions. We will be explaining the impact of the options in more detail at these session. Please email Emily or Luke at letstalk@qldc.govt.nz if you would like to come to a Risk Response Discussion or discuss your concerns in person.

  • Share I live in 18 Fryer street for nearly 40 years and in your map showing that part of my property you consider is at risk, I am in the process of selling my property for development and if this goes through will that mean they cannot develop any future complex? You have given 14 fryer and 20 Fryer Street consent and I am in the middle of both properties it is ridiculous that you allowed both properties consent and and that due to your risk boundary that a probability that you will decline any future development on 18 Fryer Street? In my time I have never seen any flow of debris nor flooding, how has this come about? I cannot understand why just across the road from my place is considered low risk when it is just a few steps across the road? on Facebook Share I live in 18 Fryer street for nearly 40 years and in your map showing that part of my property you consider is at risk, I am in the process of selling my property for development and if this goes through will that mean they cannot develop any future complex? You have given 14 fryer and 20 Fryer Street consent and I am in the middle of both properties it is ridiculous that you allowed both properties consent and and that due to your risk boundary that a probability that you will decline any future development on 18 Fryer Street? In my time I have never seen any flow of debris nor flooding, how has this come about? I cannot understand why just across the road from my place is considered low risk when it is just a few steps across the road? on Twitter Share I live in 18 Fryer street for nearly 40 years and in your map showing that part of my property you consider is at risk, I am in the process of selling my property for development and if this goes through will that mean they cannot develop any future complex? You have given 14 fryer and 20 Fryer Street consent and I am in the middle of both properties it is ridiculous that you allowed both properties consent and and that due to your risk boundary that a probability that you will decline any future development on 18 Fryer Street? In my time I have never seen any flow of debris nor flooding, how has this come about? I cannot understand why just across the road from my place is considered low risk when it is just a few steps across the road? on Linkedin Email I live in 18 Fryer street for nearly 40 years and in your map showing that part of my property you consider is at risk, I am in the process of selling my property for development and if this goes through will that mean they cannot develop any future complex? You have given 14 fryer and 20 Fryer Street consent and I am in the middle of both properties it is ridiculous that you allowed both properties consent and and that due to your risk boundary that a probability that you will decline any future development on 18 Fryer Street? In my time I have never seen any flow of debris nor flooding, how has this come about? I cannot understand why just across the road from my place is considered low risk when it is just a few steps across the road? link

    I live in 18 Fryer street for nearly 40 years and in your map showing that part of my property you consider is at risk, I am in the process of selling my property for development and if this goes through will that mean they cannot develop any future complex? You have given 14 fryer and 20 Fryer Street consent and I am in the middle of both properties it is ridiculous that you allowed both properties consent and and that due to your risk boundary that a probability that you will decline any future development on 18 Fryer Street? In my time I have never seen any flow of debris nor flooding, how has this come about? I cannot understand why just across the road from my place is considered low risk when it is just a few steps across the road?

    Standfield asked about 3 years ago

    Hi there! Council is currently considering options to address risk, and there is no actual change proposed yet. A decision on whether Council moves forward with any of the options will be made sometime in 2022, and it would take time to implement any of the options (apart from the 'status quo' option). The level of risk on your property is at the lower end of what Council is considering, and our general approach is that any intervention matches the level of risk. If you weren't able to make one of the drop-in sessions we hosted in the weekend just been, email our team at letstalk@qldc.govt.nz and we can organise to talk with you at a time that suits you.

  • Share Hi, It would be great to know why the properties at the cul de sac end of Hilton Place are not within the study area. The area studied contains a diversity of home owners & occupants, including young families attending nearby schools etc. Will there be clear separated risk levels identified? it seems the far right of the area studied is further away than some of the areas that are NOT in the area studied. (ie hylton place cul de sac) Thanks for any clarification on Facebook Share Hi, It would be great to know why the properties at the cul de sac end of Hilton Place are not within the study area. The area studied contains a diversity of home owners & occupants, including young families attending nearby schools etc. Will there be clear separated risk levels identified? it seems the far right of the area studied is further away than some of the areas that are NOT in the area studied. (ie hylton place cul de sac) Thanks for any clarification on Twitter Share Hi, It would be great to know why the properties at the cul de sac end of Hilton Place are not within the study area. The area studied contains a diversity of home owners & occupants, including young families attending nearby schools etc. Will there be clear separated risk levels identified? it seems the far right of the area studied is further away than some of the areas that are NOT in the area studied. (ie hylton place cul de sac) Thanks for any clarification on Linkedin Email Hi, It would be great to know why the properties at the cul de sac end of Hilton Place are not within the study area. The area studied contains a diversity of home owners & occupants, including young families attending nearby schools etc. Will there be clear separated risk levels identified? it seems the far right of the area studied is further away than some of the areas that are NOT in the area studied. (ie hylton place cul de sac) Thanks for any clarification link

    Hi, It would be great to know why the properties at the cul de sac end of Hilton Place are not within the study area. The area studied contains a diversity of home owners & occupants, including young families attending nearby schools etc. Will there be clear separated risk levels identified? it seems the far right of the area studied is further away than some of the areas that are NOT in the area studied. (ie hylton place cul de sac) Thanks for any clarification

    jojo asked about 3 years ago

    Hi there - for your question. The properties on Hilton Place are not included in the study area as these are on lower lying land that is not part of the overall alluvial fan landform. The Hilton Place land was rezone Business Mixed Use as part of Stage 1 of the District Plan review, which was notified in 2015. We have clear separated levels of risk identified, and only part of the area under review is subject to elevated areas of risk.

    risk,hazards
    risk hazards
  • Share An aerial view plan of the stream positions and properties affected would be a very useful tool to visualise what it is this is all about. on Facebook Share An aerial view plan of the stream positions and properties affected would be a very useful tool to visualise what it is this is all about. on Twitter Share An aerial view plan of the stream positions and properties affected would be a very useful tool to visualise what it is this is all about. on Linkedin Email An aerial view plan of the stream positions and properties affected would be a very useful tool to visualise what it is this is all about. link

    An aerial view plan of the stream positions and properties affected would be a very useful tool to visualise what it is this is all about.

    Brian asked over 3 years ago

    An aerial view of the stream positions, properties affected and risk probabilities can be found here: https://www.qldc.govt.nz/media/k5nnfzkj/3b-attachment-b-slope-stability-annual-individual-life-risk-contours.pdf

    We're also working on an aerial view of the affected locations with a tolerability overlay. We'll share this soon!

  • Share Hi there, just wondering where things are at with this project and whether there are any indicative timeframes on notification of options/plan changes? on Facebook Share Hi there, just wondering where things are at with this project and whether there are any indicative timeframes on notification of options/plan changes? on Twitter Share Hi there, just wondering where things are at with this project and whether there are any indicative timeframes on notification of options/plan changes? on Linkedin Email Hi there, just wondering where things are at with this project and whether there are any indicative timeframes on notification of options/plan changes? link

    Hi there, just wondering where things are at with this project and whether there are any indicative timeframes on notification of options/plan changes?

    MorganS asked over 3 years ago

    Queenstown Lakes District Council is currently in the final stages of analysing risk management options. Once complete, we’ll be hosting a number of community sessions in the latter half of 2021 to help guide selection of risk management options.

Page last updated: 11 Oct 2024, 10:01 AM