Submission on Palmerston North City Council Proposed Plan Change 15A-H
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Submission on Palmerston North City Council Proposed Plan Change 15A-H To: Team Leader – Governance and Support City Corporate Palmerston North City Council Private Bag 11-034 PALMERSTON NORTH Email: [email protected] From: Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council (Horizons) Private Bag 11-025 Manawatu Mail Centre PALMERSTON NORTH 1. Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission on Palmerston North City Council‟s Proposed Plan Change (PPC) 15A-H. Horizons would like to appear in support of its submission. 2. Horizons generally supports this proposed plan change. The following submission focuses principally on the relationship between Horizons‟ One Plan (combined regional policy statement and regional plans) and the need for the District Plan to give effect to the regional policy statement components and not be inconsistent with regional plan provisions, as set out in section 75 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). The One Plan became fully operative on 19 December 2014. All references to the One Plan in this submission are to the operative version of the Plan. 3. A copy of all One Plan provisions cited in this submission are included for your information as Annex A. General Comments 4. The PPC documents make numerous references to Horizons‟ One Plan. The operative version has been renumbered; the PPC references are to the Proposed One Plan provision numbers and we request that they be updated. A cross-referencing guide to assist with this is available on Horizons‟ website at http://www.horizons.govt.nz/about- us/one-plan/one-plan-operative-version/one-plan-cross-referencing-guide/. References to the Regional Land Transport Strategy (2010) 5. While the Regional Land Transport Strategy remains operative, please note that the document will be replaced by the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP), which is expected to be adopted on the 24th of March 2015. Due to legislative changes to the Land Transport Management Act (2003) in mid-2013, the RLTP will set the transport priorities for the Manawatu-Wanganui Region over the next ten years. While Palmerston North District Plan sections make references to the Strategy, the RLTP will become operative by 30 June 2015 when the current Strategy and Regional Land Transport Programme expire. 1 Rule 20.3.5.1 & Appendix 20 Roading Hierarchy 6. Horizons acknowledges the District Plan Roading Hierarchy, including the road hierarchy change for the Boundary Change area, and considers the hierarchy to be generally aligned with the RLTP. It is important to ensure that the roading hierarchy matches and supports the long term planning direction for the City, with respect to their proposed urban growth areas, potential industrial development earmarked for the NEIZ and Longburn industrial areas, and implementation of the Palmerston North-Manawatu Strategic Joint Transport study. Also, alignment with the New Zealand Transport Agency‟s One Network Road Classification is important for the wider transportation network. Plan Change 15A: Rural Zone and Rural Subdivision Versatile Soils 7. Horizons supports the inclusion of provisions in relation to versatile soils in the District Plan. These provisions give effect to One Plan Objective 3-4: To ensure that territorial authorities consider the benefits of retaining Class I and II versatile soils for use as production land when providing for urban growth and rural residential subdivision. and Policy 3-5: In providing for urban growth…, and controlling rural residential subdivision (“lifestyle blocks”), Territorial Authorities must pay particular attention to the benefits of the retention of Class I and II versatile soils for use as production land in their assessment of how best to achieve sustainable management. Surface water bodies 8. In some of the proposed provisions, the potential effects of the activity on in-stream water quality or values are addressed. This is the case for proposed Policy 3.4, “To encourage the protection of the in-stream values of spawning rivers and streams”, and Rule 9.8.3 Assessment Criteria (h): In relation to quarrying activities undertaken near a river or stream, the extent to which any potential effects on water quality and river or stream habitats are avoided, remedied or mitigated. Rule 9.5.2 (production forestry permitted activity rule) Performance Standard (b) includes a requirement that plantation forestry plantings must not come within 10 metres of three named streams, and the rule explanation states that this is included as “Harvesting, extraction and loading activities may affect the in-stream values” of these streams. Assessment Criteria (d) of Rule 9.7.4 (restricted activity rule for production forestry not meeting the permitted activity rule standards) is: The extent to which the harvesting, extraction and loading activities safeguard the in-stream values of the Turitea Stream and Kahuterawa Stream for Trout Spawning and as a Trout Fishery. 9. Although section 7 of the RMA includes a general requirement to have particular regard to the protection of trout habitat, section 30(c) provides for the maintenance of water quality and the ecosystems of water bodies through land use controls as a function of regional councils. Territorial authorities are responsible for the effects of activities in relation to the surface of water bodies only (section 31(e)). 10. Horizons acknowledges that territorial authorities may also wish to include provisions to support their consideration of these matters when making decisions about consents for 2 activities that are outside regional council functions, such as subdivision. Section 7 (Subdivision), Policy 3.1 clause 4 is such a provision. 11. In the One Plan there is a policy framework set out in Part I (Regional Policy Statement), and rules in Part II (Regional Plan) to give effect to section 30. In particular, the rules in Chapter 13 of the One Plan address the effects of land disturbance and forestry on water quality, and in-stream values including Trout Spawning and Trout Fishery1, through rule standards and/or the ability to set consent conditions. 12. Horizons seeks the deletion or amendment of the following proposed provisions in Section 9 that address in-stream values: Policy 3.4 Rule 9.5.2 Assessment Criteria (b), third bullet point (and consequentially an amendment to the fourth paragraph of the rule explanation to remove the sentence “Harvesting, extraction and loading activities may affect the in-stream values of the Turitea Stream and the Kahuterawa Stream.”) Rule 9.7.4 Assessment Criteria (d) Rule 9.8.3 Assessment Criteria (h) for the following reasons: these provisions are an unnecessary duplication of the One Plan provisions; they do not fulfill a function of territorial authorities; in the case of Rule 9.5.2 Performance Standard (b), the provision is inconsistent with One Plan Rule 13-3 Forestry (permitted activity) condition (b); and Section 7 (Subdivision), Policy 3.1, clause 4 provides for consideration of the effects of subdivision on spawning values. Rural subdivision 13. Rule 7.15.1.1 provides for any subdivision for the purpose of accommodating any network utility where the maximum area of the allotment does not exceed 200 m2, as a controlled activity. Policy 9-3 of the One Plan is to avoid the placement of new critical infrastructure in an area likely to be inundated by a 0.5% AEP (1 in 200 year) flood event (including floodways), or in an area likely to be adversely affected by another type of natural hazard, …unless there is satisfactory evidence to show that the critical infrastructure: a. Will not be adversely affected by floodwaters or another type of natural hazard, b. Will not cause any adverse effects on the environment in the event of a flood or another type of natural hazard, c. Is unlikely to cause a significant increase in the scale or intensity of natural hazard events, and d. Cannot reasonably be located in an alternative location. 14. Horizons therefore requests that subdivision for the purposes of accommodating a network utility activity be reclassified as a restricted discretionary activity and include the matters set out in One Plan Policy 9-3 as matters of discretion, as well as those matters already included under Proposed Rule 7.15.1.1. 15. Rule 7.15.2.1 and Rule 7.15.3.1 include a Note to Plan Users which states: The approach adopted by the Council is to decline a subdivision resource consent application where the written consent of the Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council cannot be obtained. 1 As set out in Schedule B, Figures B:8 and B:9 and Tables B.8 and B.9. 3 Similarly, the explanation note following Section 7.2 Resource Management Issues, issue 4, states: To promote greater utilisation of this land resource and also to meet industry demand for appropriately sized lots, smaller lot subdivision is provided for as a Restricted Discretionary Activity in the Flood Protection Zone for horticultural activities, subject to obtaining the written consent of the Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council [emphasis added]. 16. The One Plan contains objectives and policies in relation to natural hazards, including a strong policy direction to avoid new and increased development in floodways (Policy 9- 2(a)). However, Horizons does not have a decision-making role in subdivision consent processes. While Horizons can provide advice regarding whether a proposal is consistent with One Plan Policy 9-2(a), it neither approves or declines consent for such a proposal, as implied by the advice note and explanation. As this decision rests entirely with the territorial authority, we request the deletion of the advice notes and the text emphasised in the above quote from Section 7.2. Onsite Wastewater 17. One Plan Rule 14-14 specifies a minimum lot size requirement of 5,000 m2 for new parcels created by subdivision that are to accommodate an on-site wastewater disposal systems as a permitted activity.