16.87 16.88 R Dalley and L Shaw 118.49 C and W McDonald 136.8 House Movers 141.1 B Cole 171.4 M Ruda 196.2 E Campbell 221.2 244.60 Riverton/Aparima Community Board 181.2 The Air Quality chapter of the PSRPS 2012 e.g. Method AQ.4 (District Plans) makes provision for District Plans helping to manage the effects of air quality including in urban areas. That the District Plan be amended to be in accordance with the Air Quality chapter of the PSRPS 2012. Seek further reference to stormwater. That within the Urban Zone chapter further reference to stormwater is included within the policy framework to address PSRPS 2012 Policy URB.1. Additional policy and rules are required regarding cats. Include Policies and Rules outlining: Number of domestic cats permitted per household. Microchipping of all domestic cats over three months old. Registered cat breeders to microchip their animals prior to sale. Night curfews on domestic cats, especially within Oppose this section. The Plan if implemented will be impractical and potentially detrimental to the efficient operation of properties affected by it. It will add yet another unnecessary layer of bureaucracy and cost to our business. Consultation has been inadequate, either as a group or individual. We feel that the effects of this section could have a detrimental effect on our farming operation and impinge on our existing use rights as freehold property owners. The proposed District Plan does not distinguish between new and relocated buildings i.e. the controls are the same, regardless of whether the building is new or second hand. The House Movers support this approach. However, if Council did consider that basic controls (as a permitted activity) were appropriate for the relocation of dwellings into urban areas and townships (not rural areas), then the type of controls applied by the decision of the court provide a suitable template. See New Zealand Heavy Haulage Association Inc v The Central Otago District Council ( Court, C45/2004, Thompson EJ presiding). The Court held in the Central Otago case that there was no real difference in effect and amenity value terms between the in situ construction of a new dwelling and relocation of a second hand dwelling, but agree with the House Movers Association it was appropriate to impose minimum activity performance standards. Template and proposed rules are attached to Submission 141. Support the concept of making it easier for people to establish commercial and industrial activities within their respective zones. This should encourage commercial and industrial growth in Riverton and other towns. townships and business areas. Introduce registration of all domestic and professionally breed cats within the next four years. Feral Cats: To be controlled at offal pits, rubbish collection sites, camping areas and reserves. Support all efforts to control feral cat breeding within the area. Control feral cats within Central Business Areas. Ensure there is not a catch and release loop hole. Not stated. Not stated. It is considered that the submitter requests the Retain existing approach to relocated buildings across the Plan. Or, if Council considers basic controls were appropriate, that the template from the Central Otago case is used as the basis of developing permitted activity and restricted discretionary activity rules. Not stated. It is assumed that the submitter requests these zones be retained with the exception of the Riverton Industrial Zone as noted in other submission points. Oppose staying the same. Unsympathetic to amenity values and character of residential areas. Tighten up rules for industry amongst residential areas. The natural aspects of the environment in Riverton s hilled areas should be preserved and protected from development of urban residential and commercial purposes. Provisions included to protect Riverton from urban development of subdivisions and other residential development on the hilled areas of the town. Support Objectives and Policies. Not stated. It is considered that the submitter requests the Retain as stated. - commercial precincts Support. That Council endorse the proposal for the establishment of a Commercial precinct zone in Riverton along Palmerston Street. Summary of Submissions and Decisions Requested by Plan Section 189
Federated Farmers 268.102 8.1 16.89 128.21 8.2 16.90 128.22 Federated Farmers 268.103 8.3 128.23 128.24 8.4 128.25 H W Richardson Group 263.16 Introduction Introduction Support. It is important and appropriate that Council recognises the potential adverse impacts of ad-hoc growth. Adopt the introduction as proposed. Objective URB.1 Objective URB.1 Oppose in part. The objective is too narrow in the context of this zone. The Urban Zone contains commercial, accommodation, rural service and entertainment facilities and activities, some of which are located outside the commercial precincts. The objective should be reworded as follows: Subdivision, land use and development in the Urban Zone shall maintain and / or enhance urban amenity. Objective URB.1 The PSRPS 2012 Objective URB.1 seeks to provide for positive environmental, social, economic and cultural outcomes. That new wording is inserted into Objective URB.1 to include reference to positive environmental, social, economic and cultural outcomes. Objective URB.1 Support. Retain objective. Objective URB.2 Objective URB.2 Support in principle. Where sites are not available for large retail operations such as supermarkets there is a need for some flexibility to enable alternative locations at the edge of the centre to be considered. Amend the objective to: Where they are defined, Commercial Precincts shall generally accommodate the principal retail and service functions of the Urban Zone. Policy URB.1 Policy URB.1 Support as it discourages urban sprawl. That Policy URB.1 be retained. Policy URB.1 Support. Retain objective. Policy URB.1 Policy URB.2 Policy URB.2 Support. Well planned urban areas can provide benefits while at the same time minimising or avoiding some of the negative impacts on the Districts agricultural productive capacity and infrastructure. Support in principle. This support is conditional on appropriate recognition being given to the functional and operational characteristics of supermarkets, which by their nature are high traffic and customer generators. Policy URB.2 Support. Retain policy. Policy URB.3 Policy URB.3 Support. Retain policy. Policy URB.4 Policy URB.4 Support in principle. Commercial precincts, where appropriately sized, are the appropriate location for retail and commercial activities. Policy URB.5 Policy URB.5 Support. Retain policy. Adopt the policy as proposed. Policy URB.5 Support. Retain the policy. Not stated it is considered that the submitter requests the Adopt Policy URB.2. Not stated it is considered that the submitter requests the Adopt Policy URB.4 Summary of Submissions and Decisions Requested by Plan Section 190
Fish & Game 195.65 NZ Historic Places Trust 108.17 Transpower NZ 190.27 A and S Mouat 147.2 Totally Tourism 235.3 Heliworks Queenstown Helicopters and Southern Lakes Helicopters 213.3 N Humphries 204.1 The Oil Companies 176.7 G and R Cockburn 107.10 M Maxwell 183.1 Te Anau Community Board 216.10 128.26 Policy URB.6 Policy URB.6 Support in part. The explanation accompanying Policy URB.6 is focused on avoiding, remedying or mitigating the adverse environmental effects of earthworks. Policy URB.6 requires amendment to recognise this. Policy URB.6 Policy URB.7 Policy URB.7 Rule URB - Rule URB - general Support in part. As in rural areas, earthworks in urban areas do have the potential to adversely affect historic heritage values, particularly archaeological sites. The policy should be amended to create consistency with Policy RURAL. 9 and support Rule URB.5(1)(c). Support the intent of the policy but it should not be restricted to the transmission corridors as other significant infrastructure also requires protection. Would like to see house heights restricted to 6m high. This would still allow a sizable house to be built. Manapouri is unique in that we mainly have low housing heights especially in the Village. This would be an attraction to potential buyers knowing they will not be shaded by an over imposing building. Amend Policy URB.6 to provide: Avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse environmental effects of earthworks. Amend the explanation as follows: Explanation: Earthworks can give rise to a range of adverse effects on the environment, including effects on slope and soil stability, biological diversity, visual amenity, historic heritage (including archaeological sites), changes to stormwater flows and water quality... Amend policy as follows: Avoid, remedy or mitigate reverse sensitivity effects on the transmission network in identified transmission corridors. Include a height limit rule in the Urban Zone specifically for Manapouri Village restricting houses to 6 metres in height. Rule URB.1 Rule URB.1 Informal airports can be used on occasion, for community purposes, and therefore may be appropriate that a temporary activity Add to rule: exemption is provided for in the Plan for informal airports for rotary wing aircraft landings that are ancillary to community events. h) Informal airports for rotary wing aircraft flights in These events are considered rare enough that the exemption to the noise rules to allow them to occur for a limited duration is association with temporary public events provided that: appropriate. The informal airport is only used during the hours 8 am - 6 pm; No more than five flights shall occur for each day that the event runs; The operator has notified Council s compliance department of the use of the informal airport; and For the purpose of this Rule the relevant noise standards of the Zone and Section 2.11 Noise shall not apply to informal airports. Rule URB.1 Support accommodation being required to comply with the Urban Standards. That Council enforce this rule. Rule URB.1 - New Rule URB.1(2) Rule URB.1(2) Rule URB.1(2) Rule URB.1(3) and (4) Existing Services Stations should be provided for as scheduled permitted activities in the Urban Zone. They should be permitted but still subject to the hazardous substances rules in the District Plan. Any ongoing maintenance and upgrading activities should not be captured and made non-complying. It is important that existing service stations can continue to operate and any routine maintenance works should not be constrained so that they can continue to provide a necessary service for the community. (See also Section 2.8 summary sheet). Support. This activity would have the same pressure as a family living full time in the house even at 100% occupancy. Support visitor accommodation for up to five people being permitted, as it is no more than the number that might reasonably be expected to normally use residential properties. Oppose visitor accommodation being a permitted activity. It is the right of every resident to expect neighbouring properties to exist for the purposes of housing residential accommodation activity. There are no controls to ensure the activity does not become to intense. Support. Insert New Rule into Urban Zone and cross reference to Hazardous Substances Rules to cover the All existing service stations within the Urban Zone are provided for as Permitted Activities with any alterations and upgrading to be subject only to the Standards of the Urban Zone and the Hazardous Substances Rules. That Rule URB.1(2) be retained. Adopt this rule. Amend rule to remove visitor accommodation, and include it as a restricted discretionary activity. Retain rule. Summary of Submissions and Decisions Requested by Plan Section 191
Transpower NZ 190.28 Rule URB.1-4 Support with additional earthworks rules to specifically over earthworks undertaken within a transmission yard to better achieve Policy URB. 7. Restricted discretionary status of any activity within transmission corridors is overly restrictive and would require resource consent for many routine activities. Amendments are required to Rule URB. 1 to allow certain activities within the transmission yard, Rule URB. 2 to delete the restricted discretionary requirement within transmission corridors, Rule URB. 3 to introduce a discretionary status for certain activities within a transmission yard and Rule URB.4 to provide for sensitive activities within a transmission yard. Add the following provision to Rule URB. 1 7. Earthworks within a Transmission Yard: (a) Are no deeper than 300 mm within 2.2 m of a transmission pole support structure or stay wire; and (b) Are no deeper than 750 mm between 2.2 m and 5 m from a transmission pole support structure or stay wire. (c) Are no deeper than 300 mm within 6 m of the outer visible edge of a transmission tower support structure; and (d) Are no deeper than 3 m between 6 m to 12 m from the outer visible edge of a transmission tower support structure. (e) Do not create an unstable batter that will affect a transmission support structure; and / or (f) Do not result in a reduction in the ground to conductor clearance distances as required by table four of NZECP34. Provided that the following activities are exempt from (a) and (b) above: (i) earthworks undertaken by a Network Utility Operator; or, (ii) Earthworks undertaken as part of agricultural or domestic cultivation, or repair, sealing or resealing of a road, footpath or driveway. 8. Activities within a Transmission Yard Within any part of a Transmission Yard the following are permitted: (a) Buildings less than 2.5 m high and 10 m 2 in area; (b) Alterations and additions to existing buildings that do not involve an increase in floor space; (c) Mobile machinery and equipment; (d) Network utilities and energy facilities; (e) Any fence up to 2.5 m high; (f) Recreational activities; Delete Rule URB.2(3) Activities or buildings within a transmission corridor. That there be an addition to Rule URB.3 as follows: 3. Within any transmission yard, any building or structure associated with commercial or industrial activities on an existing site. That there be additions to Rule URB.4 as follows: 4. Within a Transmission Yard: (a) Any building or addition to a building for a sensitive activity. (b) A change of use to a sensitive activity or the establishment of a new sensitive activity. (c) Any building or structure (except fences) located less than 12 m from the outer edge of a transmission line support structure. Summary of Submissions and Decisions Requested by Plan Section 192
244.61 8.5 B Cole 171.2 B Cole 171.3 The Oil Companies 176.6 128.27 16.91 New Zealand Fire Service 180.4 District Council 217.15 (d) Any building or structure over 1.5m high unless it is demonstrated that safe separation distances under NZECP34 are maintained under all transmission line operating conditions. (e) Any earthworks that cannot comply with Rule URB.1.7. (f) Any building or structure that is not a permitted activity in Rule URB.1, or discretionary in Rule URB.3. Rules URB.1-5 Support in general. The code of Practice should be attached as an appendix to the District Plan. Attach as an appendix the Code of Practice NZECP34:2001. Rule URB.2 Rule URB.2(1) Rule URB.3 Rule URB.3 Rule URB.3 Rule URB.4 Rule URB.4 Oppose. Non-compliance with no more than one Urban Standard is too restrictive. Further, the way the rule is worded allows for one standard not to be met, but does not provide any status for an application in such cases. The standards to be met are such that the effects of non-compliance can appropriately be addressed by introducing assessment criteria. Understand that it will still be possible to apply for resource consent to establish industrial or commercial activities in the urban zone. These applications should be publically notified. notification does not ensure that enough people are given a say to accurately gauge how the community feels about the proposed application. If an industrial or commercial activity received consent to establish outside of their defined zones, there is the possibility that overtime multiple businesses could locate and operate together from the same site. The original consent or neighbours wouldn t have contemplated this happening at the time they submitted on the proposal. Oppose. Delete the rule. This rule would mean that all service stations would be considered Non-Complying and contradicts Rule HAZS.2. Further it may result in any upgrading works related to existing service stations would be considered Non-Complying. This would create unnecessary disruption to continuation of supply for rural communities who reply on this service. Reword to the Any Permitted Activity which fails to comply with one or more Urban Standard. Not stated. It is assumed that the submitter requests the Insert notification clause into rule URB.3 to ensure that all applications for such activities are publically notified. Not stated. It is assumed that the submitter requests the Restrict the ability for consented activities to change or add further businesses without providing for further comment from affected neighbours. Amend Rule URB.4 to delete: 2. Hazardous Facilities Rule URB.4 Support. It is considered the submitter requests the Retain rule. Rule URB.5 Rule URB.5 Support the Urban Standards in respect of earthworks. That Rule URB.5 be retained. Rule URB.5 The fires service requires a width of four metres for all street types to gain access for firefighting purposes. Currently the Plan provides for a carriageway width of 3.5 metres down private ROW s that service no more than 6 units. That the following be inserted after Rule URB.5 - Urban Standards: Provided the minimum formed width of Private ROW s shall not be less than 4 metres to ensure fire service appliances have sufficient vehicular access to the properties. Rule URB.5 Rule needs rewording for the sake of clarity. Amend rule to read: All permitted activities within the Urban Zone shall comply with the following general urban standards except where otherwise permitted as discretionary activities. Summary of Submissions and Decisions Requested by Plan Section 193
The Oil Companies 176.14 Chorus 198.18 Telecom 199.17 174.9 244.62 NZ Historic Places Trust 108.18 District Council 217.16 128.28 244.67 174.3 244.63 J Stewart 148.1 174.10 E Campbell 221.1 J McKay 242.1 244.64 Rule URB.5(1) Rule URB.5(1) Rule URB.5(1)(b) Rule URB.5(1)(b) The earthworks controls have the potential to unnecessarily constrain the permitted activities provided for under the NES in relation to retanking activities. An exemption to compliance with the earthworks provisions which generally relate to separation from boundaries and depth of excavation is requested. This is considered appropriate as with timely, efficient procedures in place as required under HSNO and the NES any effects are temporary. There are no changes to ground level and the surface of the area affected is reinstated. Proposed Rule URB.5.1 states that the earthworks provisions within the Urban Zone do not apply to permitted infrastructure activities. However, there are no other rules in the proposed Plan which specifically provide for such earthworks. There is therefore a gap in the proposed Plan provisions. Oppose. Normal urban development with access, fencing, planting would exceed this. Typically approx 200 m 3 is provided for in other areas and would be more typical of the potential excavations. Oppose. The rule is very restrictive, particularly for sloped sites such as Riverton and Oban. The volume of earthworks permitted will require almost all proposed new dwellings in all towns to obtain land use consent. Rule URB.5(1)(c) Support. Adopt rule. Amend Rule URB.5(1) to add the following exemption: These standards do not apply to activities permitted under Rule INF.1 - Permitted Activities or to the removal and replacement of underground petroleum storage tanks. OR Amend the definition of earthworks as outlined in the Definitions section submission point 176.17 Provide for earthworks associated with Telecommunication Facilities in a standalone rule within Section 2.9 - Energy, Minerals and Infrastructure (see submission points 198.13 and 199.12 in summary sheet for section 2.9). Delete existing provisions relating to earthworks associated with activities permitted under Rule INF.1 within the Urban Zone. Amend rule to provide for 200 m 3. Not stated. It is considered that the submitter requests the The permitted earthworks volumes be increased. Rule URB.5(10) Main Frontage Control Line relates to the provisions of Verandahs within specified areas. Rewording is needed to clarify this. Amend terminology to refer to the Verandah Requirement Area and clarify when this rule applies. Rule URB.5(13) Oppose. Transport Standards including access part as it refers the proposed bylaw which has parking requirements and other transport standards that differ significantly from the existing District Plan. Amend rule as below: Except for Requiring Authorities all activities shall comply with District Council Subdivision, Land Use and Development Bylaw 2012. Rule URB.5(13) The proposed Bylaw provisions do not allow Council discretion to approve works that vary from the Bylaw. Include provision for Council discretion on activities that do not comply with the bylaw. Rule URB.5(2) Oppose. These don t allow to alter existing housing and a decent recession rule protects the neighbours and built environment. Retain the existing 1 m side yard and an amended height rule as requested under Submission Point 174.2, along with Stepping building 0.5 m for lengths over 14 m. Rule URB.5(2) Rule URB.5(4) and Table URB.5(4) Rule URB.5(4)(a) Oppose. The side and rear yard setbacks for residential activity should be 1 m. Residential amenity should be controlled by stronger recession planes rules rather than an arbitrary setback. Oppose the maximum height of dwellings in the Riverton Urban area being 9m. Consider that Riverton falls within the description of outstanding natural features and landscapes and that all building within the area should enhance this landscape. Consider that Riverton has similar characteristics to Stewart Island with its hills, river and sea and therefore that the height regulations should be dropped to the same as Stewart Island. Oppose for Urban area and Steward Island. Accessory buildings should be treated as dwellings with an effective recession plane not an arbitrary height. Amend setbacks table, to provide at least one side or rear yard boundary to have a minimum setback of 1 m (within the Urban and Rakiura Zones). That the height rules be amended to allow a maximum height of 7.5 metres for dwellings. Amend rule to apply the same maximum height as for dwellings. Rule URB.5(4)(a) Riverton has a similar coastal landscape to Stewart Island with hills, some areas of bush and views and should therefore have the same building height restrictions to ensure buildings remain in keeping with the coastal landscape. Building heights in Riverton reduced from a maximum of 9 metres to 7.5 metres. Rule URB.5(4)(a) Riverton has a special significance similar to Stewart Island and should therefore have the same building height regulation. Building heights in Riverton reduced from a maximum of The natural slope of the land from the sea to surrounding hills provide elevated building sites without building to 9 metres, and 9 metres to 7.5 metres. buildings of that height detract from the village/holiday type atmosphere that Riverton is renowned for. Rule URB.5(4)(a) Oppose. Stronger recession plane rules could replace maximum heights with a better outcome. The maximum heights be reviewed. Summary of Submissions and Decisions Requested by Plan Section 194
174.2 244.65 174.4 P Hicks 247.1 Ralph Moir and Associates 282.13 244.66 8.6 New Zealand Fire Service 180.8 Rule URB.5(5) Oppose. This recession plane is too generous and is not consistent with other areas or within the existing SDC built environment. Amend rule to be a recession at 2.5 metres vertical at boundary and 30 degree OR Recession Plane diagram as per ICC or GDC Rule URB.5(5)(b) Oppose. Consideration needs to be given to strengthen the recession plane rules. Use the recession plan clock diagram as per the ICC and (See also submission points 244.59 in the rural summary sheet, and 244.69 in the industrial zone summary sheet). GDC plans. Consider replacing the 3.5 metre maximum height along the boundary with 2.5 metre maximum height Rule URB.5(6) Oppose the 5 x 10 m outdoor living space as it does allow for irregular shaped sections or existing dwellings. Amend current rule and table to provide for an 8 metre in diameter circle or a shape of equivalent area. Rule URB.5(6) Oppose entire section 6. It interferes with private property rights of the land holder and is not necessary Remove entire Clause 6 Outdoor Living. Rule URB.5(6) The minimum dimensions for the outdoor living space should coincide with the minimum front yard requirements Amend the minimum dimensions for the outdoor living space for detached dwellings and multi unit developments from 5 metres to 4.5 metres. Rule URB.5(6)(a) Oppose. The minimum dimensions of the outdoor living space for detached dwellings is too restrictive as a shape factor and does not Not stated. provide flexibility for alternatives. Rule URB.5(8) Table URB.5 in Rule URB.5(4) Rule URB.6 Method URB.1 Oppose in part. The restriction of 8 lux light spill at or within the boundary of any other site is unnecessary for development within the Commercial precinct where adjoining other sites in the precinct. The effect to be managed should be at the boundary of any land used for residential purposes. As well, 8 lux is very low in a commercial environment and provision should be made for this to be increased to a more realistic figure - say 12 lux. Fire station buildings (typically up to 9m) and hose drying towers (typically 12-15m) may not comply with height limits set out in the Proposed Plan, and therefore an exclusion is requested for the height of hose drying towers. No submissions were received on this provision. No submissions were received on this provision. Seeks the following addition to the rule (c) and an amendment to (a) as follows: (a) The spill of light from artificial lighting (excluding street lights and traffic signals) on to any site used for residential purposes shall not exceed 8 lux (horizontal and vertical) when measured at or within the boundary of that site. (c) The spill of light from artificial lighting (excluding street lights and traffic signals) on to any other site within the commercial precinct shall not exceed 12 lux (vertical and horizontal) when measured at or within the boundary of that site. That the following be inserted after Table URB.5 in Rule URB.5(4): Except: that the maximum building height for hose drying towers associated with fire stations is 15 metres. Summary of Submissions and Decisions Requested by Plan Section 195