Ruakura Variation to Hamilton City Proposed District Plan
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Ruakura Variation to Hamilton City Proposed District Plan Section 42A Hearing Report 3rd August 2016 Report on Submissions and Further Submissions Chapter 25.8 Noise and Vibration Appendix 14 Noise and Vibration Table of Contents Page Number 1. Introduction 1 2. Background 1 3. Submissions 2 4. Analysis 2 a. Key Issues 5. Conclusions 3 Appendix A – Analysis and Recommendations Appendix B – Tracked Changes – Chapter 25.8 Noise and Vibration Appendix 14 Noise and Vibration Appendix C – Malcolm Hunt Associates, Noise & Environmental Associates Appendix D – List of Submitters and Further Submitters 1 Introduction 1.1 My name is Paula Jane Rolfe. I hold the qualifications of the New Zealand Certificate in Town Planning, Diploma of Business Studies Waikato University and am a member of the New Zealand Planning Institute and Resource management Law Association. I have had over 25 years’ experience in planning and management roles in Local Government which has related to regulatory and policy development roles under the Resource management Act 1991 (RMA) as well as under the Local Government Act 2002. 1.2 At present I hold the position of Project Manager for the District Plan Review for Hamilton City Council and have held this position since February 2010. As part of this role I worked collaboratively with landowners, other Units within Council, the Waikato Regional Council, Future Proof and NZTA to develop the Proposed District Plan (PDP) provisions for Ruakura. 1.3 My role in preparing this report is that of an expert policy planner. Although this is a Council Hearing, I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the Environment Court Practice Note 2014. I have complied with that Code when preparing my evidence and I agree to comply with it when I give any oral evidence. 1.4 The scope of my evidence relates to comments on submissions and further submissions received in relation to Chapter 25.8 Noise and Vibration for the Hamilton City Proposed District Plan Variation 1 (notified 11 November 2015) 1.5 The data, information, facts and assumptions I have considered in forming my opinions are set out in my evidence. Where I have set out opinions in my evidence, I have given reasons for those opinions. I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from the opinions expressed. 1.6 No formal pre-hearing meetings concerning submissions covered by this evidence have been undertaken pursuant to Clause 8AA of the First Schedule of the RMA. 1.7 In preparing this report I rely on the expert advice sought from Malcolm Hunt Associates Noise and Environmental Consultant along with the Final Report and Decision of the Board of Inquiry into the Proposed Ruakura Development Plan Change. 1.8 Giving effect to the Board of Inquiry Decision is a guiding principle of the Variation. As part of consideration of all submissions made on the PDP and the Variation, where alignment with the BOI Decision is recommended this has taken into account the evaluation of the submission points and the relief sought in the context of the Variation. 2 Background 2.1 Chapter 25 is a City-wide chapter providing City-wide objectives, policies and standards that are applicable to activities in the zone chapters. This includes Noise and Vibration. The following are the objectives of the provisions. 2.1.1 Activities have minimal noise and vibration effects on other activities and sites, consistent with the amenity values of the receiving environment. 2.1.2 Reduce reverse-sensitivity effects arising from new noise-sensitive activities locating: 1 i. Within the Central City, Business, Industrial, Te Rapa North Industrial, Ruakura Logistics and Ruakura Industrial Park Zones. ii. Near to transport networks iii. Within a defined helinoise boundary. iv. Within the noise emission boundary of the Te Rapa Dairy Factory. 2.1.3 Reduce reverse-sensitivity vibration effects arising from new development locating near to the rail transport network. 3 Submissions 3.1 Eight submissions with 12 points of submission were received in relation to Chapter 25.8 Noise and Vibration as part of the notified variation. Six further submissions with 21 further submission points have been received in relation to principal submissions. 3.2 In addition to the above there are 29 deferred submissions with 29 points of submission which were received as part of the Proposed District Plan (PDP). Nine further submissions with 9 further submission points have been received in relation to these principal submissions. One submission has since been withdrawn. 3.3 Appendix D lists submitters and further submitters referred to in this report. 4 Analysis 4.1 Appendix A contains an analysis and recommendations on submissions related to Chapter 25.8 Noise and Vibration. 4.2 The analysis that follows has grouped submissions as follows: • General • 25.8.3.7 Noise Performance Standards for all Zones except Major Facilities, Knowledge, and Open Space Zones, Ruakura Logistics and Ruakura Industrial Park Zones • 25.8.3.11 – Noise Sensitive Activities – Ruakura Logistics Zone, Rukaura Industrial Park Zone and Precinct C Knowledge Zone • 25.8.3.8.12 Operational Vibration from Rail Lines • 25.8.3.8.13 Noise Performance Standards for Activities in the Ruakura Logistics and Ruakura Industrial Park Zone • 25.8.3.8.14 Non-conformity with Standards in the Ruakura Logistics Zone • Appendix 14 Noise and Vibration 4.3 Key issues 4.4 Many of the submissions are deferred and were lodged as part of the PDP (71%). Landscaped wide buffers, high bunds and amenity planting were requested to assist with visual and noise mitigation. This matter was extensively considered by the Board of Inquiry (BOI) for the development of the Inland Port as well as the impacts from the Ruakura Logistics Zone (RLZ) and Ruakura Industrial Park Zone (RIPZ) on the residential areas and they were satisfied that the noise levels promote best practicable options to minimise adverse noise effects on unrelated neighbouring activities such as residential sites and residential zones. 2 4.5 The RIPZ adjacent to Fairview Downs that has been added into the plan through the variation, Malcolm Hunt, Councils Acoustic Consultant advises that a daytime noise level of 55dB is within the NZ Standard recommendations and the additional 5dB from other city wide noise rules is less than minor. 5 Conclusion 5.1 On the basis of my analysis, I recommend that the changes within the Tracked Changes Version (Appendix B) are accepted. 5.2 The changes will improve the clarity and administration of the Plan; contribute towards achieving the objectives of the Plan in an effective and efficient manner; and give effect to the purpose and principles of the RMA and the Regional Policy Statement. PJ Rolfe Project Manager District Plan Review 8 July 2016 3 Appendix A Appendix A S42A Report Chapter 25.8 Noise and Vibration Analysis: 25.8 Noise and Vibration - General Jennifer West has requested that the noise limits are the same for the whole City and others have requested that the Ruakura Industrial Park Zone are the same as other industrial areas in the City. The BOI determined that the noise levels were suitable for the RLZ and RIPZ as is proposed within the variation. The variation extends the RLZ from the railway to a line running from the northern boundary of the knowledge zone across to the northern boundary of the Percival/Ryburn Road LLRZ, and extends the RIPZ from this line north to the residential zoning in the north, south of the Greenhill Road Interchange. Between the industrial zonings (RLZ and RIPZ) and the existing residential zoning at Fairview Downs and the Knowledge Zone exists a 50m wide open space corridor which have daytime noise levels at 55dB, being the same daytime level as for the RLZ and RIPZ, and a night time level of 40dB with a one hour shoulder difference between 6am and 7am of 45dB. Councils Noise Consultant Mr Malcolm Hunt advises (See Appendix C) that a daytime noise level of 55dB is within the NZ Standard recommendations and the additional 5dB is less than minor. The night-time noise level for industry will be the controlling factor and the greater level during the day is to account for the likes of daytime activities and on-site movement. As stated within the section 32 analysis “Provisions specifically developed during Board process and are affirmed in the Expert Conferencing Joint Witness Statement – Noise and Vibration of 1 April 2014. They address the potentially unique acoustic environment associated with the 24/7 operational activity of the inland port and its associated services. They will promote best practicable options to minimise adverse noise effects on neighbouring activities unrelated (ie residential) to the port’s operations.” For these reasons and the reasons outlined above it is recommended that the noise levels as proposed be retained. It is sought that the Noise Management Plan (NMP) should refer to the overall effect of the whole Ruakura Structure Plan incrementally. Rule 10.5.2 being a specific standard for the Ruakura Logistics Zone requires noise to be managed in accordance with an approved Noise and Vibration Management Plan. The Noise and Vibration Management Plan information requirements as identified in 1.2.2.20 Vol 2 is only required for the Freight handling activities and Logistics and Freight Handling Infrastructure within the Inland Port. This was determined by the BOI. As part of the assessment criteria for Land Development Plans noise is an issue to be dealt with, in particular construction noise. It is proposed that noise be managed on an activity basis, except for the Inland Port, and as such the levels identified within the plan will apply.