Worked example · A clean result is evidence, not a guarantee
This is a real PropertyKete report for a council site on Memorial Drive in New Lynn, west Auckland. Every hazard check we run came back with nothing detected. That is genuinely useful information — and it is also the result most likely to be misread, so this example is about reading it properly.
A report full of warnings tells you what to do next. A report with nothing in it tells you almost nothing about what to do next, and it is very easy to translate that silence into "this property is fine". It is not the same statement, and the gap between them is where people get hurt.
What a clean hazard section actually says is narrow and precise: for each dataset we hold, this property does not fall inside the mapped area that dataset describes. That is a fact about maps. Whether it is also a fact about the ground depends on what the map covers, at what scale, when it was made, and what it was made for.
This page walks through the same report you would get for any address, and then does the thing a clean result most needs: sets out exactly what it did and did not establish.
Seven hazard checks ran against this parcel. None returned a detection. Here they are in full — a clean result is only meaningful if you can see which checks produced it.
No active fault trace is mapped within 500 metres of this property in GNS Science's NZAFD-AF250 database. That is a real result and worth having, but it is not an earthquake-risk clearance: it means one regional-scale dataset has no mapped trace within 500 metres, and it says nothing about ground shaking, liquefaction, landslide or tsunami.
Source: GNS Science — Active Faults (NZAFD-AF250) · NZAFD-AF250 · higher = more risk
This property is not within Auckland Council's modelled 1% AEP flood plain. Modelling is at catchment scale and updated over time; site-specific risks (e.g. local drainage, overland flow) may still apply.
Source: Auckland Council — Flood Plains · 2025-01-16 · higher = more risk
No mapped overland flow paths cross this property. OFP mapping is based on 2016–2017 LiDAR; very minor surface flow not captured at that resolution may still exist.
Source: Auckland Council — Overland Flow Paths · 2025-01-05 · higher = more risk
This property is not within Auckland Council’s modelled 1% AEP coastal inundation extent at present sea level. Coastal modelling is at catchment scale; site-specific factors (local drainage, ground level) may still apply.
Source: Auckland Council — Coastal Inundation (1% AEP) · 2025-01 · higher = more risk
This property is not within Auckland Council’s modelled 1% AEP coastal inundation extent under +1m sea-level rise. Note this only covers one SLR scenario; higher rises are possible under some climate trajectories.
Source: Auckland Council — Coastal Inundation (1% AEP +1m SLR) · 2025-01 · higher = more risk
No material shallow landslide susceptibility classification was found for the parcel location. PropertyKete ingests Auckland Council’s Moderate, High, and Very High shallow classes — parcels in Low or Very Low classification areas, or outside the gridded mapping (e.g. coastline or water body), fall into this category. Local site conditions may still apply.
Source: Akl Landslide Susceptibility Shallow · 2025-05 · higher = more risk
This property's slope unit is classified as very low susceptibility to large-scale landslides under Auckland Council's 2025 regional mapping (TR2025/7). That sits in the background-risk band — no material landslide-hazard finding is flagged here. Ground conditions can still vary at site level; the mapping is at regional scale and is not intended for site-specific assessment.
Source: Akl Landslide Susceptibility Large Scale · 2025-05 · higher = more risk
Read that list again, because the list is the finding. What this report establishes is that this parcel does not intersect Auckland Council’s modelled flood plain, does not have a mapped overland flow path across it, does not fall in the modelled coastal inundation extent under either scenario we check, is not in an area classed as susceptible to shallow or large-scale landslides in the council’s 2025 regional mapping, and has no active fault mapped within 500 metres of it in the GNS database.
Each of those is a real, checkable statement with a source and a date attached, and together they are worth having. A buyer who has read this page knows that six specific, commonly-encountered hazards do not show up here — which is a materially better position than not knowing.
Now the part that matters more. Every one of those checks has a resolution. The landslide mapping is explicitly regional-scale and Auckland Council says it is not intended for site-specific use. The flood modelling is done at catchment scale. The fault check is a 500-metre proximity test against a database mapped at 1:250,000 — a scale at which a single property is smaller than the width of the line on the map. None of these were built to answer "is this particular section safe", and a clear result from them is not that answer.
And the checks we run are not the hazards that exist. Nothing here looked at ground contamination, the condition of a retaining wall, whether a previous owner built without consent, drainage that fails in a downpour, or the dozens of other things that turn up in a building report and a LIM. A hazard nobody has mapped produces exactly the same clean result as a hazard that is genuinely absent, and this report cannot tell those two situations apart.
So the honest summary of this page is: nothing we checked flagged this property, we have named every check we ran and where it came from, and the next move is the same as it would be for any purchase — a LIM, a building inspection, and a solicitor reading the title.
The planning section behaves the same way on a clean report as on any other: it describes the rules that apply to the land, and stops short of telling you what you could do with it.
This property sits within Auckland. The council is responsible for building consents, resource consents, district / unitary plan rules, and Land Information Memoranda (LIMs) at this address. The council's planning information is available at https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/Pages/default.aspx.
What to do: When you go unconditional, request a LIM from the council and check the district / unitary plan rules that apply to this address. The council can also tell you about any consents granted, infringements, or special features on the property file.
Source: Stats Nz Ta 2025 Clipped · TA2025 · higher = better outcome
Under the Auckland Unitary Plan, this property sits within the Business - Metropolitan Centre Zone (Auckland Council zone code 10), which Auckland Council records as operative. Each zone has its own rules covering permitted activities, building height, site coverage, and development standards. We checked the Special Character, Historic Heritage, Significant Ecological Areas, Notable Trees, and Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua overlays and none intersect this property in our data. Other Unitary Plan overlays and controls exist that PropertyKete does not yet check. The current zone description and rules are at https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/Pages/default.aspx.
What to do: Confirm the zone and any active overlays with Auckland Council before going unconditional. A LIM from the council lists the zone, overlays, and any consents on the property file. For a development question, a resource-management planner can read the rules against your specific plans.
Source: Akl Unitary Plan Zones · Auckland Unitary Plan zone layer — this feature: Operative · higher = more risk
A zone with no overlays flagged is another narrow, useful fact: none of the overlays PropertyKete checks intersects this property in our data. The report names which overlays those are rather than implying it checked all of them, because the Unitary Plan contains many more controls, designations and precinct rules than we hold.
As on any PropertyKete report, a zone is not development capacity. If what you want to know is "could I build a second dwelling here", that is a question for a resource-management planner reading the operative rules against your actual plans, with a LIM in front of them.
School findings are context, and they behave identically regardless of hazard results.
This address is inside the enrolment zone for 4 schools (confirm directly with each school — zone boundaries change over time). In-zone schools (priority enrolment): • New Lynn School (700 m) — EQI 451 • Kelston Girls' College (1.7 km) — EQI 507 • Kelston Boys' High School (1.8 km) — EQI 505 • Kelston Intermediate (2.1 km) — EQI 504 Nearby schools (not in-zone): • Iqra School (250 m) — EQI 409 • Oaklynn Special School (1.1 km) — EQI 453 • St Mary's Catholic School (Avondale) (1.1 km) — EQI 447 • Chaucer School (1.2 km) — EQI 429 • Jireh Christian School (1.2 km) — EQI 387 • Blockhouse Bay Intermediate (1.5 km) — EQI 401 • Glenavon School (1.6 km) — EQI 494 • Fruitvale Road School (1.7 km) — EQI 440 • Kelston School (1.7 km) — EQI 479 • Arahoe School (1.8 km) — EQI 385 • St Dominic's Catholic School (Blockhouse Bay) (1.8 km) — EQI 356 • Avondale Primary School (Auckland) (1.9 km) — EQI 444 • Avondale College (2.0 km) — EQI 439 • Avondale Intermediate (2.1 km) — EQI 474 • St Leonards Road School (2.2 km) — EQI 481 • Te Kura o Pātiki Rosebank School (2.3 km) — EQI 476 About the Equity Index (EQI): it is the Ministry of Education's estimate of the socioeconomic barriers a school's students face as a group (roughly 344–569; a higher number means greater barriers). It informs how equity funding is allocated and is not a measure of school quality, teaching, or student results.
What to do: Confirm with each school that this address is in-zone and that the boundary has not changed since this data was published. Zone maps are on the Ministry of Education's School Finder (schoolfinder.education.govt.nz).
Source: Ministry of Education — Enrolment Zones · 2025 · higher = better outcome
In-zone means the address sits inside a Ministry of Education enrolment scheme boundary. Nearby means proximity and nothing else — it confers no entitlement, and zone boundaries are reviewed and moved by schools over time.
If a particular school is part of why you are buying, confirm the address with that school directly. That is true whether the rest of the report is clean or not.
Neighbourhood findings describe the surrounding statistical area rather than the property, and the report labels them as area-level for exactly that reason.
The statistical area (SA1) containing this property falls in the most deprived (deciles 9–10) of the NZDep2023 index (decile 9 of 10, where 1 is least deprived and 10 is most deprived). NZDep2023 combines eight dimensions of 2023 Census data to measure socioeconomic deprivation at the neighbourhood level. This is an area-level measure — it reflects the SA1 population, not this property specifically. Underlying 2023 Census measures for this area: adults with no formal qualification 15.8%; unemployment rate 6.7%; adults receiving a main benefit 13.6%; adults who do not own their home 84.2%; households without internet access 20%; households without a motor vehicle 30% (Stats NZ 2023 Census; area-level, counts randomly rounded).
What to do: This is a higher-deprivation area on the NZDep2023 index. If that matters to you, consider a local visit and talk to a real estate agent or property manager familiar with the area for current, ground-level context.
Source: University of Otago — NZDep2023 · 2023 · higher = better outcome
This address has a wide range of everyday amenities within about a 1 km walk (8 of 8 categories tracked): • Supermarket: nearest approx 150 m from this address • Convenience store: nearest approx 70 m from this address • Pharmacy: nearest approx 44 m from this address • GP / medical clinic: nearest approx 37 m from this address • Park: nearest approx 100 m from this address • Café: nearest approx 43 m from this address • Childcare / kindergarten: nearest approx 400 m from this address • Library: nearest approx 39 m from this address Amenity locations are sourced from OpenStreetMap and may not reflect every shop or service — newer or smaller places can be missing.
Source: OpenStreetMap — Amenities · higher = better outcome
These figures describe thousands of people across many properties. They are not a measure of this address, and they are not a measure of anyone living at it. Stats NZ randomly rounds published counts and suppresses very small areas, so they are also deliberately imprecise at the fine grain.
Used well, they answer one narrow question about the wider context. Used badly, they become a proxy for judgements the data cannot carry.
Each finding above cites its dataset and, where we hold one, the date that dataset was current. These are the sources behind this report:
Every dataset PropertyKete uses — with its owner, licence, refresh schedule and coverage — is published in full, and what guides the build explains why missing data is reported as missing rather than treated as a clear result.
Each of these guides uses this report to illustrate a point, and explains the finding in more depth than a worked example can.
The reason this example exists is that a clean report is the easiest one to over-read, and the hardest one to write honestly. It would be simple to present "no hazards detected" as reassurance and let a buyer draw the comfortable conclusion. What the report actually says — and what this page insists on — is narrower and more useful: here is precisely what was checked, here is where each check came from, and here is what remains unknown.
That is the difference between a screening tool and a verdict. PropertyKete is the first, and it is built to keep saying so.
Run this on an address you care about
Free, no sign-in, and usually ready in seconds.
Search an addressFor information only. PropertyKete is not a LIM, registered valuation, engineering report, building inspection, insurance assessment, legal advice, or planning approval. Verify material matters with your solicitor, council, insurer, builder and other qualified professionals before making any property decision.
