SUBMISSION ON AN APPLICATION FOR RESOURCE CONSENT UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991
To: Porirua City Council
DETAILS OF SUBMITTER
Sven Kristian Frederick Ericksen
President
Wellington Hang Gliding and Paragliding Club
c/o 11 Koromiko Road
Highbury
Wellington
1. DETAILS OF RESOURCE CONSENT APPLICATION
This submission relates to an application for a Resource Consent made by:
Applicant’s Name: UPPER HUTT DEVELOPMENTS NO 6 LIMITED
For: subdivision and earthworks resource consents
To: complete a subdivision and earthworks at 1227 Paekakariki Hill Road, Paekakariki, Porirua (being lot 1, dp 77652, part lot 1, dp 77652, lots 1 & 2, dp 81875), also known as ‘Tunapo’.
2. SUBMISSION DETAILS
I oppose the application made by Upper Hutt Developments No 6 Limited
The particular part or parts of the application I oppose are:
The proposals to undertake a subdivision and earthworks at 1227 Paekakariki Hill Road, Paekakariki, Porirua, which will result in buildings, structures, access roads, and driveways being built on the top of the Pukerua Bay – Paekakariki escarpment.
3. REASONS FOR SUBMISSION
The reasons for making my submission are:
The proposal is contrary to Section 6 of the Resource Management Act, which requires that in achieving the purpose of this Act, all persons exercising functions and powers under it, in relation to managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources, shall recognise and provide for the…(b) The protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development: The Pukerua Bay – Paekakariki escarpment is a nationally recognized outstanding landscape.
The proposal is contrary to Section 7 of the Act, which requires all persons exercising functions and powers under it, in relation to managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources, shall have particular regard to … (c) The maintenance and enhancement of amenity values: “Amenity values” means those natural or physical qualities and characteristics of an area that contribute to people's appreciation of its pleasantness, aesthetic coherence, and cultural and recreational attributes.
The proposal is contrary to the following policies of the Porirua City Council:
C4.1.1 To preserve the contrast between the rural and urban areas of Porirua City. The proposal will result in a significant dilution in the contrast between rural and urban areas.
C4.1.2 To encourage primary production activities in the Rural Zone. The proposal will result in a significant diminution in the primary production activities of the Rural Zone and a reduced range of feasible rural activities. The efficacy of small holdings will be significantly less that that of large management units.
C4.1.8 To protect the long term potential of the rural land resource by ensuring that the new allotments for which a certificate of title can be issued are capable of accommodating a range of primary production activities. The proposal will result in numerous small allotments that will not be suitable for efficient or effective grazing of cattle or sheep, which is the only primary production activity suitable for this land area.
C4.2.4 To encourage the maintenance and enhancement of the ecological integrity and natural character of the Rural Zone. The proposal will significantly reduce the natural character of the Rural Zone. The District Plan states: “Although modified, the Rural Zone has a strong natural character. The natural character of the Rural Zone is derived from a combination of ridgelines, open spaces, rivers and streams, wetlands, coastal landforms, and native and exotic flora and fauna. Ecosystems and ecological processes are an integral part of natural character. Ecological integrity and rural character contributes to the community's sense of identity, health and well-being, and should therefore be protected for present and future generations.
C6.1.5 To protect the long-term potential of the rural land resource by controlling subdivision which does not directly contribute to the long-term sustainable management of the rural resource. The proposal will result the reduced long-term sustainable management of the rural resource and result in a greater demands for services, and a reduced range of feasible rural activities. The District Plan states: “Subdivision which provides for the more efficient and effective management of the rural resource is very different to subdivision which creates a higher level of built development, greater demands for services, and a reduced range of feasible rural activities.”
C9.1.1 To prevent urban encroachment into sensitive ecological and landscape areas. The proposal will result in urban encroachment in sensitive landscape areas. The District Plan notes that Part II of the RMA places particular emphasis on safeguarding against the loss or destruction of ecosystems and the protection and enhancement of landscapes.
C9.1.5 To protect the visual and ecological character of the Rural Zone. The proposal will significantly alter the visual character of the Rural Zone. The District Plan states: “Much of the Rural Zone is highly visible and the landscape vulnerable to development changes.”
C9.1.11 To protect the natural character of the Coastal Scarp north of the Pukerua Bay settlement. The proposal will significantly detract from the natural character of the coastal scarp. The District Plan notes that: “The Landscape Study identified landscape units within the City on the basis of landform, land cover and land use. Some of these "units" have been identified on the Planning Maps as "Landscape Protection Areas" for which specific policies and rules have been formulated to ensure the particular landscape merits of these areas are recognised, and due regard given in the assessment of particular development proposals. Not all of the 13 recommended landscape units have however been adopted as landscape protection areas. This is on the basis that because of land ownership reasons or topographical constraints e.g. the coastal scarp north of Pukerua Bay, the land is unlikely to be developed for urban purposes and therefore the landscape character altered or destroyed.” (page C9-2)
The proposal is contrary to the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 1994. Policy 1.1.3 states that it is a national priority to protect the following features, which in themselves or in combination, are essential or important elements of the natural character of the coastal environment:
(a) landscapes, seascapes and landforms, including:
(i) significant representative examples of each landform which provide the variety in each region;
(ii) visually or scientifically significant geological features; and
(iii) the collective characteristics which give the coastal environment its natural character including wild and scenic areas;
4. COMMENTS ON DECISION OF AUTHORITY
I wish the consent authority to make the following decision:
That the consent authority declines both the subdivision and earthworks consents in full.
That in the event that all or part of the application is approved that a mechanism is provided to advise all initial and subsequent purchasers of properties within the subdivision that the coastal scarp is an internationally recognised hang gliding and paragliding flying area, and that flights over the properties can be expected on a regular basis.
5. HEARING
I wish to be heard in support of my application.
Designation: _______________________________
Date:
Address for service of person making submission:
Kris Ericksen
President
Wellington Hang Gliding and Paragliding Club
C/o 11 Koromiko Rd
Highbury
Wellington
Telephone: 04 938 6539
Copied to:
Lynley Fletcher
Connell Wagner Limited
PO Box 1591
WELLINGTON
Back to May newsletter
