Office Use Only Application Number:

APPLICATION FOR RESOURCE CONSENT OR FAST-TRACK RESOURCE CONSENT (Or Associated Consent Pursuant to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA)) (If applying for a Resource Consent pursuant to Section 87AAC or 88 of the RMA, this form can be used to satisfy the requirements of Form 9) Prior to, and during, completion of this application form, please refer to Resource Consent Guidance Notes and Schedule of Fees and Charges – both available on the Council’s web page. 1. Pre-Lodgement Meeting Have you met with a Council Resource Consent representative to discuss this application prior to lodgement? No 2. Type of Consent being applied for (more than one circle can be ticked):

O Land Use O Fast Track Land Use* ; Subdivision O Discharge O Extension of time (s.125) O Change of conditions (s.127) O Change of Consent Notice (s.221(3)) O Consent under National Environmental Standard (e.g. Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil) O Other (please specify) *The fast track for simple land use consents is restricted to consents with a controlled activity status and requires you provide an electronic address for service. 3. Would you like to opt out of the Fast Track Process? No 4. Applicant Details: Name/s: %HDXDQG0RQLTXH'LFNLQV

Electronic Address for EHDXGLFNLQV#KRWPDLOFRP Service (E-mail):

Phone Numbers: Work: ______Home: ____________

Postal Address: ______.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD______(or alternative method of service under ______section 352 of the Act) ______Post Code: ______

5. Address for Correspondence: Name and address for service and correspondence (if using an Agent write their details here). Name/s: 1LQD3LYDF7$7RKX&RQVXOWLQJ

Electronic Address for Service (E-mail): QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]

Phone Numbers: Work: Home: 

Postal Address: (or alternative method of service under section 352 of the Act) Post Code: All correspondence will be sent by email in the first instance. Please advise us if you would prefer an alternative means of communication. 6. Details of Property Owner/s and Occupier/s: Name and Address of the Owner/Occupiers of the land to which this application relates (where there are multiple owners or occupiers please list on a separate sheet if required)

Name/s: %HDXDQG0RQLTXH'LFNLQV

Property Address/: .RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD Location

7. Application Site Details: Location and/or Property Street Address of the proposed activity:

Site Address/ .RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD Location:

Legal Description: 6HF%ON,9$KLSDUD6XUYH\'LVWULFW Val Number: _

Certificate of Title: 1$ Please remember to attach a copy of your Certificate of Title to the application, along with relevant consent notices and/or easements and encumbrances (search copy must be less than 6 months old)

Site Visit Requirements: Is there a locked gate or security system restricting access by Council staff?

&DOODSSOLFDQWVWRDUUDQJHVLWHYLVLW

8. Description of the Proposal: Please enter a brief description of the proposal here. Attach a detailed description of the proposed activity and drawings (to a recognized scale, e.g. 1:100) to illustrate your proposal. Please refer to Chapter 4 of the District Plan, and Guidance Notes, for further details of information requirements.

'LVFUHWLRQDU\VXEGLYLVLRQLQWKH5HVLGHQWLDO=RQHWRFUHDWHRQHDGGLWLRQDODOORWPHQW

If this is an application for an Extension of Time (s.125); Change of Consent Conditions (s.127) or Change or Cancellation of Consent Notice conditions (s.221(3)), please quote relevant existing Resource Consents and Consent Notice identifiers and provide details of the change(s) or extension being sought, with reasons for requesting them.

9. Would you like to request Public Notification No 10. Other Consent required/being applied for under different legislation (more than one circle can be ticked): O Building Consent (BC ref # if known) O Regional Council Consent (ref # if known)

O National Environmental Standard consent O Other (please specify)

11. National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health: The site and proposal may be subject to the above NES. In order to determine whether regard needs to be had to the NES please answer the following (further information in regard to this NES is available on the Council’s planning web pages):

Is the piece of land currently being used or has it historically ever been O yes ; no O don’t know used for an activity or industry on the Hazardous Industries and Activities List (HAIL) Is the proposed activity an activity covered by the NES? (If the activity is O yes ;no O don’t know any of the activities listed below, then you need to tick the ‘yes’ circle). ;Subdividing land O Changing the use of a piece of land O Disturbing, removing or sampling soil O Removing or replacing a fuel storage system 12. Assessment of Environmental Effects: Every application for resource consent must be accompanied by an Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE). This is a requirement of Schedule 4 of the Resource Management Act 1991 and an application can be rejected if an adequate AEE is not provided. The information in an AEE must be specified in sufficient detail to satisfy the purpose for which it is required. Your AEE may include additional information such as Written Approvals from adjoining property owners, or affected parties.

Please attach your AEE to this application.

13. Billing Details: This identifies the person or entity that will be responsible for paying any invoices or receiving any refunds associated with processing this resource consent. Please also refer to Council’s Fees and Charges Schedule.

Name/s: (please write all names in full) 0RQLTXHDQG%HDX'LFNLQV

Email: EHDXGLFNLQV#KRWPDLOFRP Postal Address: .RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD

Post Code:

Phone Numbers: Work: Home:  Fax:

Fees Information: An instalment fee for processing this application is payable at the time of lodgement and must accompany your application in order for it to be lodged. Please note that if the instalment fee is insufficient to cover the actual and reasonable costs of work undertaken to process the application you will be required to pay any additional costs. Invoiced amounts are payable by the 20th of the month following invoice date. You may also be required to make additional payments if your application requires notification.

Declaration concerning Payment of Fees: I/we understand that the Council may charge me/us for all costs actually and reasonably incurred in processing this application. Subject to my/our rights under Sections 357B and 358 of the RMA, to object to any costs, I/we undertake to pay all and future processing costs incurred by the Council. Without limiting the Far North District Council’s legal rights if any steps (including the use of debt collection agencies) are necessary to recover unpaid processing costs I/we agree to pay all costs of recovering those processing costs. If this application is made on behalf of a trust (private or family), a society (incorporated or unincorporated) or a company in signing this application I/we are binding the trust, society or company to pay all the above costs and guaranteeing to pay all the above costs in my/our personal capacity.

Name: %HDX 0RQLTXH'LFNLQV (please print)

Signature: (signature of bill payer – mandatory) Date:  14. Important Information:

Note to applicant You must include all information required by this form. The information must be specified in sufficient detail to satisfy the purpose for which it is required. You may apply for 2 or more resource consents that are needed for the same activity on the same form. You must pay the charge payable to the consent authority for the resource consent application under the Resource Management Act 1991.

Fast-track application Under the fast-track resource consent process, notice of the decision must be given within 10 working days after the date the application was first lodged with the authority, unless the applicant opts out of that process at the time of lodgement. A fast-track application may cease to be a fast-track application under section 87AAC(2) of the RMA.

Privacy Information: Once this application is lodged with the Council it becomes public information. Please advise Council if there is sensitive information in the proposal. The information you have provided on this form is required so that your application for consent pursuant to the Resource Management Act 1991 can be processed under that Act. The information will be stored on a public register and held by the Far North District Council. The details of your application may also be made available to the public on the Council’s website, www.fndc.govt.nz. These details are collected to inform the general public and community groups about all consents which have been issued through the Far North District Council.

Declaration: The information I have supplied with this application is true and complete to the best of my knowledge.

Name: 1LQD3LYDF (please print)

Signature: (signature) Date:  (A signature is not required if the application is made by electronic means)

Checklist (please tick if information is provided) o Payment (cheques payable to Far North District Council) o A current Certificate of Title (Search Copy not more than 6 months old) o Copies of any listed encumbrances, easements and/or consent notices relevant to the application o Applicant / Agent / Property Owner / Bill Payer details provided o Location of property and description of proposal o Assessment of Environmental Effects o Written Approvals / correspondence from consulted parties o Reports from technical experts (if required) o Copies of other relevant consents associated with this application o Location and Site plans (land use) AND/OR o Location and Scheme Plan (subdivision) o Elevations / Floor plans o Topographical / contour plans

Please refer to Chapter 4 of the District Plan for details of the information that must be provided with an application. Please also refer to the RC Checklist available on the Council’s website. This contains more helpful hints as to what information needs to be shown on plans.

Only one copy of an application is required, but please note for copying and scanning purposes, documentation should be:

UNBOUND SINGLE SIDED NO LARGER THAN A3 in SIZE

SUBDIVISION RESOURCE CONSENT

5 KOTARE STREET, AHIPARA SEC 11 BLK IV AHIPARA SD

ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

PREPARED FOR: BEAU & MONIQUE DICKINS

Rev A 18 May 2020 Table of Contents 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS ...... 3 2.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 4 2.1 Overview ...... 4 3.0 SITE CONTEXT ...... 4 3.1 Description of the Site ...... 4 3.2 Zoning and Resources ...... 5 3.3 Certificate of Title ...... 7 3.4 Existing Built Development and Servicing ...... 7 3.5 Access ...... 7 3.6 Vegetation ...... 7 3.7 Surrounding Environment ...... 8 4.0 DISTRICT PLAN RULES ASSESSMENT ...... 8 4.1 District Plan Rules ...... 8 4.2 Overall Activity Status ...... 8 4.3 National Environmental Standards for Contaminated Soils (NES Contaminated Soils) ...... 9 5.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION ASSESSMENT (SECTIONS 95A, 95C TO 95D) ...... 9 5.1 Assessment of Steps 1 to 4 (Section 95A) ...... 9 5.1.1 Step 1: Mandatory public notification is required in certain circumstances ...... 9 5.1.2 Step 2: If not required by Step 1, public notification precluded in certain circumstances ...... 9 5.1.3 Step 3: Public notification in certain circumstances ...... 10 5.1.4 Step 4: Public notification in special circumstances ...... 20 5.2 Public Notification Conclusion ...... 20 6.0 LIMITED NOTIFICATION ASSESSMENT (SECTIONS 95B, 95E TO 95G) ...... 21 6.1 Assessment of Steps 1 to 4 (Section 95B) ...... 21 6.1.1 Step 1: Certain affected protected customary rights groups must be notified ...... 21 6.1.2 Step 2: If not required by step 1, limited notification precluded in certain circumstances ...... 21 6.1.3 Step 3: If not precluded by step 2, certain other affected persons must be notified .. 21 6.1.4 Step 4: Further notification in special circumstances ...... 22 6.2 Limited Notification Conclusion ...... 22 7.0 CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATIONS (SECTION 104)...... 22 7.1 Actual and Potential Effects on the Environment (Section 104(1)(A)) ...... 23 7.2 Regional Policy Statement for Northland ...... 23

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 1

7.3 New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement ...... 27 7.4 Operative Far North District Plan – Objectives and Policies ...... 28 7.5 Other Matters ...... 28 8.0 PART 2 ASSESSMENT ...... 28 9.0 CONCLUSION ...... 28

Appendices:

Appendix 1 – Scheme Plan Appendix 2 – Certificate of Title Appendix 3 – District Plan Assessment Appendix 4 – Objectives and Policies Assessment Appendix 5 – Written Approvals Appendix 6 – Correspondence with FNDC IAMs and RC, Top Energy and Chorus

Appendix 7 – Correspondence with Heritage New Zealand Appendix 8 – Correspondence with Te Rarawa Iwi Appendix 9 – Stormwater Management Report prepared by Haigh Workman Appendix 10 – Archaeological Assessment by Geometria

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 2

1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS Applicant/s: Beau & Monique Dickins

Site Address: 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara

Legal Description: Sec 11 Blk IV Ahipara SD

Site Area: 999m2

Site Owner: Beau Dickins

Operative District Plan: Far North District Plan

Operative Zoning: Residential Zone

District Plan Resource Overlays: Site of Cultural Significance MS04-02 located in close proximity to subject site.

NRC Overlays: Coastal Environment

Brief Description of Proposal: To undertake a subdivision of Sec 11 Blk IV Ahipara SD to create one additional allotment in the Residential Zone. The proposed lots are as follows: Lot 1 – 500m2 Lot 2 – 499m2

Summary of Reasons for Consent: Overall, resource consent is required as a Discretionary Activity in accordance with 13.9 Discretionary (Subdivision) Activities, of the Far North District Plan. Agent/Address for Service: Nina Pivac T/A Tohu Consulting 71 Masters Access Road RD1 Ahipara 0481

We attach an assessment of environmental effects that corresponds with the scale and significance of the effects that the proposed activity may have on the environment.

AUTHOR

Nina Pivac Director l BAppSC l PGDipPlan l Assoc. NZPI Date: 18 May 2020

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 3

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Overview

The applicants, Beau and Monique Dickins, propose to undertake a discretionary subdivision in the Residential Zone, to create one additional allotment. A copy of the scheme plan has been provided in Appendix 1. The proposal will result in the following allotments: x Lot 1 – 500m2 x Lot 2 – 499m2

A Stormwater Management Report has been prepared by Haigh Workman, referenced 20 056 and dated May 2020, in support of the application (see Appendix 9).

As per recommendations made by Heritage New Zealand (see Appendix 7), an Archaeological Assessment has been prepared in support of the application by Geometria, titled ‘Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision of Section 11 Block IV, 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara’, and dated 17 May 2020 (see Appendix 10).

A Site of Cultural Significance (MS04-02) is located in proximity to the site. Therefore, comments were sought from Te Rarawa iwi as mana whenua (see Appendix 8). The iwi have expressed no immediate concerns with the proposal. However, a Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) is currently being prepared by the iwi with the expected completion date of 22 May 2020. This will be provided to Council in due course.

Pre-consultation has also been undertaken with Council’s Infrastructure and Asset Management Department, Council’s Resource Consents and Building Departments, Chorus, Top Energy, and the owners of all adjacent properties. Written approval has been provided by all parties (see Appendix 6)

The subject site is zoned Residential and the proposal has been assessed as a Discretionary Activity under the Operative Far North District Plan (District Plan).

The Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 88 of and Schedule 4 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act) and is intended to provide the information necessary for a full understanding of the activity for which consent is sought and any actual or potential effects the proposal may have on the environment.

3.0 SITE CONTEXT

3.1 Description of the Site

The subject site is situated at 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara, being part of the Ahipara village. The site currently contains 999m2 and is bound to the north by Kotare Street, to the east by Kakapo Street and to the south and west by Residentially-zoned land.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 4

The site is legally described as Section 11 Block IV Ahipara Survey District (CFR NA842/268). There are no relevant legal interests registered on the title. A copy of the Certificate of Title has been provided in Appendix 2. The site is fully fenced providing effective screening from all public viewing points, and is generally flat with the highest elevation on the eastern site boundary with Kakapo Street. Figure 1 below shows the subject site and immediate surrounds.

Figure 1: Aerial photograph of the subject site (FNDC Intramaps)

3.2 Zoning and Resources

The site is located within the Residential Zone. A Site of Cultural Significance (reference MS04-02) is located in close proximity to the site (approximately 50m to the west) as shown in Figure 2 below (discussed further in section 5.1.3 below). Figure 2 also shows that the subject site is located outside of the Coastal Hazard Areas.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 5

Figure 2: Map showing location of MS04-02 and Coastal Hazard Areas (purple and green dotted line) (FNDC Intramaps)

The site is located within the NRC Coastal Environment as per Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Map showing site located within NRC Coastal Environment (NRC Maps) The site is not subject to any other resource overlays or planning notations.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 6

3.3 Certificate of Title

The site is comprised of one Computer Freehold Register (CFR – see Appendix 2), the details of which are set out in the table below:

Title Area Ownership Relevant Interests Legal Description Reference Section 11 Block IV NA842/268 999m2 Beau James Dickins Nil Ahipara Survey District

The site is not subject to any Consent Notices. 3.4 Existing Built Development and Servicing

Proposed Lot 1 contains an existing dwelling with a total floor area of 125m2 and a deck of approximately 47m2. The original dwelling was lawfully constructed in the 1930s, and subsequently altered in 1986 and 1987 (refer BP84 and BP3082669). The existing dwelling is currently connected to Council’s reticulated sewer scheme, and roofwater is currently collected via a 20,000-litre water tank for potable supply with overflow diverted to stormwater drains via natural overland flowpaths. Proposed Lot 1 is adequately serviced for electricity and telecommunications.

Proposed Lot 2 is currently vacant and has the ability to connect to power, telecommunications and Council’s reticulated sewer scheme (see Appendix 6). It is anticipated that service requirements will form a condition/s of consent.

As shown on the attached scheme plan, a sewer easement (marked A) is proposed with proposed Lot 1 being the dominant tenement and proposed Lot 2 being the servient tenement. This is discussed in further detail in section 5.1.3 below. 3.5 Access

The existing dwelling on Lot 1 currently gains access via an existing crossing off Kotare Street. Access to proposed Lot 2 is currently gained via a separate entrance off Kotare Street. Both crossings will be upgraded to council engineering standards as part of this subdivision. 3.6 Vegetation

The site is primarily covered in mowed grass with some mature vegetation spanning the north- eastern boundary of the site (Kotare Street boundary). There are no sites of significant indigenous flora or habitats of indigenous fauna located within or near the site.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 7

3.7 Surrounding Environment

The subject site is situated at 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara, being part of the wider Ahipara Village. The surrounding environment is made up of similarly-sized, or smaller allotments that contain residential dwellings with various forms of other activities interspersed including tourist accommodation, cafes, recreational facilities, and community facilities. The level of the proposed development is considered consistent with that in the immediate surrounds of the site, being primarily of medium to high-density residential development. All adjoining sites are similarly zoned Residential Zone.

4.0 DISTRICT PLAN RULES ASSESSMENT

4.1 District Plan Rules

A comprehensive assessment of the proposal against the relevant subdivision, land-use and district- wide provisions of the Far North District Plan has been completed and is attached to this report as Appendix 3. In summary, the proposal does not trigger consent under any land-use or district-wide. However, resource consent is required under the following subdivision rules:

CHAPTER 13 - SUBDIVISION

As shown in Table 13.7.2.1(v) Minimum Lot Size (Residential Zone) below, the proposal is able to comply with the Discretionary Activity standards as proposed Lot 1 is sewered, and Lot 2 has the ability to connect to Council’s reticulated sewer scheme (see Appendix 6), with lot areas of 500m2 (Lot 1) and 499m2 (Lot 2).

In regard to Rule 13.7.2.2 Allotment Dimensions, proposed Lot 1 contains a dwelling which has existing use rights in relation to the setback breach on the Kakapo Street boundary (refer BP84 and BP3082669). Proposed Lot 2 is able to accommodate the minimum required building envelope of 14m x 14m, as shown on the Scheme Plan.

The proposal is able to comply with all other aspects of Chapter 13 and Rule 13.9 Discretionary (Subdivision) Activities.

Based on the above, the subdivision is a Discretionary Activity in accordance with Rule 13.8.1(b). 4.2 Overall Activity Status

Overall, the proposal requires resource consent as a Discretionary Activity.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 8

4.3 National Environmental Standards for Contaminated Soils (NES Contaminated Soils)

All applications that involve subdivision, or an activity that changes the use of a piece of land, or earthworks are subject to the provisions of the NES Contaminated Soils. The regulation sets out the requirements for considering the potential for soil contamination, based on the Hazardous Activities and Industries List (HAIL) and the risk that this may pose to human health as a result of the proposed land use.

Based on a search of Council records, historic aerial images, and the documentation provided in support of this application, there is no evidence to suggest that a HAIL activity is, has been, or is more than likely to not have been undertaken on any part of the site. Therefore, the NES Contaminated Soils is not applicable in this instance.

5.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION ASSESSMENT (SECTIONS 95A, 95C TO 95D) 5.1 Assessment of Steps 1 to 4 (Section 95A) Section 95A specifies the steps the council is to follow to determine whether an application is to be publicly notified. These are addressed in statutory order below. 5.1.1 Step 1: Mandatory public notification is required in certain circumstances Under Section 95A(3) an application must be publicly notified if:

a) the applicant has requested that the application be publicly notified; b) public notification is required under Section 95C.

The applicant is not requesting public notification under clause (a). Clause (b) provisions relate to where an applicant does not provide further information formally requested under Section 92, which is not applicable in this case.

Public notification is not required and therefore Step 2 must be considered.

5.1.2 Step 2: If not required by Step 1, public notification precluded in certain circumstances Under Section 95A (4) an application must not be publicly notified if:

a) the application is for a resource consent for 1 or more activities, and each activity is subject to a rule or national environmental standard that precludes public notification; b) the application is for a resource consent for 1 or more of the following, but no other, activities: i. a controlled activity; ii. a restricted discretionary activity, but only if the activity is a subdivision of land or a residential activity; iii. a restricted discretionary, discretionary, or non-complying activity, but only if the activity is a boundary activity: iv. a prescribed activity (see Section 360H(1)(a)(i))

None of the above are applicable. As such, Step 3 must be considered.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 9

5.1.3 Step 3: Public notification in certain circumstances

An application must be publicly notified if one of the following circumstances are met;

i. There is a rule in the District Plan or a National Environmental Standard requiring public notification of the application (s95A(8)(a)). ii. The activity has or is likely to have effects on the environment that are more than minor in accordance with s95D.

The proposed activity is not precluded from public notification, and public notification is not required under s95A(7) and (8). Accordingly, an assessment in accordance with s95D is required to determine if the proposal has or is likely to have effects on the environment that are more than minor. EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT – SECTION 95D Effects that must be disregarded

Under s95D(a), Council must disregard any effects on the land in, on, or over which the activity will occur, and on persons who own or occupy any adjacent land. All land adjacent to the subject site are shown in Figure 4 below, and identified as follows:

x Lot 12 DP 101232 x Sec 10 Blk IV Ahipara SD x Sec 186 Blk IV Ahipara SD x Sec 185 Blk IV Ahipara SD x Sec 12 Blk IV Ahipara SD

Figure 4: A map showing properties adjacent to the subject site (marked yellow stars), written approvals obtained (WA)

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 10

Under s95D(e), any effect on persons who have given their written approval must also be disregarded. In this instance, written approvals have been obtained from all owner/occupiers of the properties marked WA in Figure 2 above. It is noted that consultation has also been undertaken with the following parties:

x Heritage New Zealand (HNZ) – comments were sought from HNZ (see Appendix 7) as a Site of Cultural Significance (MS04-02) is located in close proximity to the site. While there are no registered archaeological sites on the subject property as per FNDC Maps, there is a high likelihood that there are unrecorded archaeological sites in the vicinity given the area’s history of early Maori occupation. An Archaeological Assessment was therefore commissioned in accordance with recommendations made by HNZ (see Appendix 10).

x Te Rarawa Iwi – Te Rarawa iwi were initially contacted via email on 27 April 2020 where comments were sought in relation to Site of Cultural Significance MS04-02. A number of informal phone and email discussions were subsequently undertaken with John Paitai (Marae Takiwa o Ahipara Committee) where the iwi have expressed no immediate concerns in regard to the proposed subdivision (see Appendix 8). A Cultural Impact Assessment is currently being prepared by Te Rarawa iwi, with expected completion date being 20 May 2020. This will be provided to Council as soon as it is complete.

x FNDC Infrastructure and Asset Management Department – Council’s Development Engineer, Sujeet Tikaram, was initially contacted on 6 April 2020 in relation to the ability of proposed Lot 2 to connect to Council’s reticulated sewer scheme (see Appendix 6). It was confirmed that, in principle, Lot 2 has the ability to connect subject to engineering design. It is anticipated that wastewater connection requirements will form a consent notice condition to be addressed at the time of future development on proposed Lot 2.

x FNDC Resource Consents and PIMS Departments – see correspondence in Appendix 6 regarding the proposed private sewer easement on Lot 2. This matter is discussed further in section 5.1.3 below.

x Chorus – see correspondence in Appendix 6 which confirms that telecommunication connections are available for Lot 2 and that no physical works are required.

x Top Energy – see correspondence in Appendix 6 which confirms that proposed Lot 2 has the ability to connect to electricity.

Effects that may be disregarded - Permitted Baseline Under Sections 95D(b) and 104(2), the permitted baseline may be taken into account as the Council deems relevant. There are three categories to the permitted baseline test, these being: 1. What lawfully exists on site at present; 2. Activities (being non-fanciful activities) which could be conducted on the site as of right i.e. without having to obtain a resource consent; and

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 11

3. Activities which could be carried out under a granted, but as yet unexercised, resource consent. In this instance, the existing environment consists of a single site containing approximately 999m2. The site is zoned Residential Zone, and therefore provides for medium to high density residential development in accordance with the zone rules. The proposed subdivision will not result in any new land-use rule infringements in relation to the existing dwelling. In addition, the Residential Zone provides for the construction of one residential unit per site as a permitted activity provided that all other permitted standards are complied with. As shown on the scheme plan, the proposed subdivision layout provides sufficient space to allow for the construction of one residential unit on proposed Lot 2 as a permitted activity. Assessment Criteria In considering whether or not to grant consent or impose conditions for discretionary (subdivision) activities, the Council can take into account any relevant matters including the assessment criteria outlined in section 13.10 of the District Plan. An assessment that corresponds with the significance of the effects on the environment is provided below:

13.10.1 Allotment sizes and dimensions The proposed subdivision will create one additional residential allotment in the Residential Zone and will result in the following lot areas:

x Lot 1 – 500m2 x Lot 2 – 499m2 While the proposed subdivision is a discretionary activity, the proposed lot sizes are only 100m2 less than the minimum lot size required as a controlled subdivision (600m2 for a sewered site), and at least 199m2 greater than the minimum required by a discretionary subdivision. As such, it is considered that the magnitude of effects in terms of allotment sizes and dimensions is more similar to that generated by a controlled subdivision rather than a discretionary subdivision. As outlined in the District Plan, the Residential Zone provides for medium-density residential living and encourages development of residential areas at a level that is consistent with the densities prevailing at present. The surrounding environment, and the wider Ahipara Village, is largely characterised by residential development in a coastal setting with various forms of other activities including those associated with the hospitality (B&B accommodation), recreation (golf course and sports club) and education (Ahipara School) sectors. The immediate surrounds of the subject site is similarly zoned Residential and contain properties with lot sizes similar to, or smaller than, those proposed by this subdivision. On this basis, it is considered that the proposed subdivision is consistent and compatible with the current pattern of development in this area.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 12

As discussed in further detail below, it is considered that the proposed allotment sizes and dimensions are sufficient for operational and maintenance requirements in terms of stormwater and sewage disposal, and other services including electricity and telecommunications. To avoid repetition, cumulative effects on the coastal environment have been addressed below. 13.10.2 Natural and other hazards The site lies approximately 330m to the east of the Ahipara Bay Coastal Marine Area (CMA). The site is not mapped as subject to flooding by NRC or FNDC online flood maps. The site is also located outside of the Coastal Hazard 1 and 2 Areas. However, like most properties located within the coastal environment, NRC maps indicate that the site lies within a Tsunami Zone. The Stormwater Management Report comprehensively describes the effect of the proposal on natural hazards in relation to flooding and tsunami inundation. It is considered that the findings of this report can be relied upon for the purposed of this assessment. In summary, the findings conclude that engineering is not required to mitigate tsunami risk, rather reliance is placed on the Civil Defence Emergency system. In regard to coastal and river flood risk, the Stormwater Management Report concludes that any future development on Lot 2 is likely to result in a minimal increase of stormwater discharge and runoff and will not exacerbate natural hazards. The report also concludes that flood susceptibility is low at the site subject to the implementation of appropriate measures for surface water management. It is anticipated that the Stormwater Management Report will form the basis of a consent notice condition in relation to stormwater management on proposed Lot 2. In terms of other hazards, there are no large areas of naturally occurring or deliberately planted vegetation located within close proximity to the site. The proposal will therefore not exacerbate fire risk. Proposed Lot 2 is generally flat in topography, providing a suitable building platform for any future development without the need for any significant earthworks. Any effects on the stability of the site will therefore be less than minor. Based on the above, it is considered that any effects of the proposal in relation to natural and other hazards will be less than minor. 13.10.3 Water supply There are no reticulated water supply connections available. Proposed Lot 1 contains an existing dwelling with all roof water collected in a 20,000 litre water tank for potable water supply and all overflow directed to following the natural topography of the site, generally soaking through the ground. The Stormwater

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 13

Management Report confirms that the current means of water supply for Lot 1 is sufficient, and that adequate water supply is achievable for Lot 2 but best addressed at building consent stage when impermeable surface areas are known. It is anticipated that a consent notice condition will apply to Lot 2 at the time of constructing a habitable building to provide a potable water supply for drinking and fire mitigation. Based on the above, it is considered that any adverse effects in relation to natural and other hazards will be less than minor. 13.10.4 Stormwater disposal As previously discussed, proposed Lot 1 contains an existing dwelling with all roof water collected in a 20,000 litre water tank for potable water supply and all overflow following the natural topography and eventually draining into the soil. Proposed Lot 2 is vacant and anticipated for future residential development. The proposed subdivision will result in a total impermeable surface area in Lot 1 of 45% (the water tank has been excluded from this calculation as per the District Plan). The proposal is therefore able to comply with the permitted land use standards for stormwater management. A Stormwater Management Report has been prepared by Haigh Workman (referenced 20 056 and dated May 2020) in support of this application, which includes an assessment against criteria 13.10.4 Stormwater Disposal (see Appendix 9). In summary, the findings of the report conclude that the existing stormwater management system for proposed Lot 1 is sufficient, and that adequate stormwater management for proposed Lot 2 can be achieved and is best addressed at the time of construction when impermeable surfaces are known. It is anticipated that the Stormwater Management Report will form the basis of a consent notice condition in relation to future residential development on proposed Lot 2. 13.10.5 Sanitary sewage disposal Proposed Lot 1 has an existing connection to Council’s reticulated sewer system. Proposed Lot 2 also has the ability to connect to the Council sewer scheme, as confirmed in the correspondence provided in Appendix 6. It is understood that any future connection on Lot 2 may be subject to specific engineering requirements and that consent notice conditions may be imposed to address this at building consent stage. As previously discussed, a private easement is proposed (as marked A on the scheme plan) for the purpose of sewage drainage with proposed Lot 1 being the dominant tenement and proposed Lot 2 being the servient tenement. Correspondence with Council’s Infrastructure and Asset Management and Resource Consents Departments (see Appendix 6) confirms that this easement is appropriate provided that any future development on Lot 2 is designed so as to provide sufficient setback distance from the easement, and that all boundary setback requirements are also met. While the proposed building envelope, as shown on the scheme plan, provides for a 196m2 building footprint which complies with boundary setback requirements, the applicant intends to construct a dwelling with a floor area of less than

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 14

196m2. On this basis, it is considered that the layout of the proposed subdivision provides for sufficient space for future development outside of the easement area, as well as well as the ongoing operation and maintenance of the current and future sewage disposal systems, whilst complying with all relevant permitted bulk and location standards.

13.10.6 to 13.10.8 Energy supply and telecommunications Proposed Lot 1 is currently adequately serviced for electricity and telecommunications. Correspondence with Top Energy and Chorus (see Appendix 6) confirms that connections are available for proposed Lot 2, and that no physical works are required for the installation of telecommunications as there is already a connection at the boundary. It is anticipated that a consent condition will be imposed to require connections to be installed for Lot 2. The subject site is not located near any Top Energy transmission lines operating at or above 50kV. 13.10.9 Easements for any purpose As previously discussed, a private easement is proposed (as marked A on the scheme plan) for the purpose of sewage drainage with proposed Lot 1 being the dominant tenement and proposed Lot 2 being the servient tenement. Correspondence with Council’s Infrastructure and Asset Management and Resource Consents Departments (see Appendix 6) confirms that this easement is appropriate provided that any future development on Lot 2 is designed so as to provide sufficient setback distance from the easement, and that all boundary setback requirements are also met. While the proposed building envelope, as shown on the scheme plan, provides for a 196m2 building footprint which complies with boundary setback requirements, the applicant intends to construct a dwelling with a floor area of no more than 100m2. On this basis, it is considered that the layout of the proposed subdivision provides for sufficient space for future development outside of the easement area, as well as well as the ongoing operation and maintenance of the current and future sewage disposal systems, whilst complying with all relevant bulk and location controls. No other easements are required.

13.10.10 Provision of access The existing dwelling on Lot 1 currently gains access via an existing crossing off Kotare Street. Access to proposed Lot 2 is currently gained via a separate entrance off Kotare Street. Both crossings will be upgraded to council engineering standards as part of this subdivision.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 15

13.10.11 Effects of earthworks and utilities No earthworks are proposed as part of this application, and it is anticipated that very minimal earthworks will be required to upgrade vehicle crossings, and to create a suitable building platform on proposed Lot 2 as the topography of the site is already flat. Proposed Lot 1 is currently serviced for electricity and telecommunications. Top Energy and Chorus have confirmed that electricity and telecommunication connections are available for proposed Lot 2, and that no physical works will be required for telecommunications installation as there is already a connection at the boundary. It is therefore anticipated that minimal physical works will be required to install connections for Lot 2, and that any adverse effects of earthworks and utilities will be less than minor. 13.10.12 Building locations Proposed Lot 1 contains an existing dwelling while proposed Lot 2 is vacant and is intended for future residential development. Proposed Lot 2 is flat in topography and provides for multiple suitable building sites without the need for significant earthworks. The shape factor shown on the scheme plan shows a potential 14m x 14m building envelope on proposed Lot 2 which complies with all boundary setback requirements. As previously discussed, the applicant intends to design any future residential development on proposed Lot 2 so as to comply with all relevant bulk and location controls, as well as setback requirements from Easement A as marked on the scheme plan. Correspondence with Council’s Infrastructure and Asset Management and Resource Consents Departments (see Appendix 6) supports this approach, and it is anticipated that this will be addressed at building consent stage. FNDC and NRC Maps show that the subject site is not susceptible to flooding or any other coastal hazards.

13.10.13 Preservation and enhancement of heritage resources, vegetation, fauna and landscape, and land set aside for conservation purposes The subject site does not contain any known areas of protected indigenous flora and fauna or outstanding landscapes or natural features. The site is not known to have kiwi present. The site is located in the NRC coastal environment which is discussed in further detail below. There are no known heritage or archaeological sites contained within the property, nor in close proximity to the site. However, comments were sought from Heritage New Zealand due to a Site of Cultural Significance (reference MS04-02) being located within 50m to the north-west of the subject site, as shown in Figure 5 below.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 16

Figure 5: Map showing location of MS04-02 in relation to the subject site (FNDC Intramaps)

The following response was received from Heritage New Zealand on 14 April 2020 (see Appendix 7): “Archaeological Values: From the documentation provided, I can confirm that archaeological midden site N04/10 is located within the property, with at least two exposures of shell along the beach access track. Considering that these middens were probably recorded by archaeologists walking the track, there is a real possibility that further unrecorded midden are present elsewhere on the property. It is presumed that the proposed subdivision is to enable further development of the land. As such Heritage New Zealand recommends that you contact a professional archaeologist who will be able to identify and assess the site in question, and others which may be in the vicinity, and advise on avoidance of the sites, as well as the preparation of an application for an Authority if needed…

Cultural Significance:

In addition to the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act legislation that protects archaeological sites, the Far North District Council NDC Operative Plan provides for protection of sites of cultural significance to Maori. In the vicinity of your clients’ property there is a site numbered MS04-02 in Appendix 1 of the plan that is protected by FNDC. MS04- 02 is identified as being within the original Rapata and Wairoa land blocks and is identified as the ‘Rapata Kariri Tribal Reserve and waahi tapu’. Heritage New Zealand recommends that you contact FNDC to determine what council planning protection provisions may be in place regarding MS04-02; whether your clients property is included within the area of this site of cultural significance; and FNDC can advise you which tangata whenua group you should contact to discuss the proposed development.”

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 17

As per the above recommendations, an Archaeological Assessment has been prepared by Geometria in support of the application (see Appendix 10). Overall, the assessment concludes that there will be no adverse archaeological effects as a result of the proposal, and that an archaeological authority is not required. In addition, comments were sought from Te Rarawa iwi as mana whenua of the Ahipara area (see Appendix 8). The iwi have expressed no immediate concerns with the proposal, however, they insist on providing a Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) in support of the application. This is currently being prepared with the expected completion date being 22 May 2020. This will be provided to Council as soon as it is received. Based on the above, it is considered that the implementation of the recommendations outlined in the Archaeological Report and the CIA (if any) will ensure the preservation of any archaeological features and cultural values in the area. It is anticipated that this will form a consent notice condition and advice note, applicable to any future development on proposed Lots 1 and 2. 13.10.14 Soil The Stormwater Management Report describes the soils as ‘well to moderately well drained’ Tangitiki sandy loam and sand (TT) and ‘imperfectly to very poorly drained’ Te Kopuru sand (TEK) and Ruakaka peaty sandy loam (RK). The subject site and surrounding area is not known to contain highly productive soils. Proposed Lot 1 will continue to be used for residential purposes, while proposed Lot 2 is intended for future residential development. No earthworks are proposed as part of this application, and it is anticipated that minimal earthworks will be required for any future development on proposed Lot 2 due to the flat topography providing a suitable building platform. On this basis, it is considered that the proposed subdivision will have negligible effects on the life supporting capacity of soil. 13.10.15 Access to waterbodies The subject site is located at least 160m from the coastal marine area, being the Ahipara Beach. There are multiple access points providing pedestrian and vehicle access to the beach which will not be affected by the proposed subdivision. 13.10.16 Land use incompatibility The proposed development will result in one residential additional allotment in the Residential Zone which is anticipated for medium-density development. The surrounding environment is similarly zoned Residential, containing similarly sized, and smaller, properties to those proposed by this subdivision. On this basis, it is considered that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the present level of development in the Ahipara area and will not give rise to any reverse sensitivity effects.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 18

13.10.17 Proximity to airports Not applicable There are no airports in close proximity to the site. 13.10.18 Natural character of the coastal environment As previously discussed, the subject site is located within the NRC Coastal Environment. Policy 4.6.1 of the Northland Regional Policy Statement (RPS) requires that all subdivision, use and development within the coastal environment avoid significant adverse effects and avoid, remedy or mitigate other adverse effects on the natural character, natural features and natural landscapes. The policy goes on to say that methods which may achieve this include: i. Ensuring the location, intensity, scale and form of subdivision and built development is appropriate having regard to natural elements, landforms and processes, including vegetation patterns, ridgelines, headlands, peninsulas, dune systems, reefs and freshwater bodies and their margins; and ii. In areas of high natural character, minimising to the extent practicable indigenous vegetation clearance and modification (including earthworks / disturbance, structures, discharges and extraction of water) to natural wetlands, the beds of lakes, rivers and the coastal marine area and their margins; and iii. Encouraging any new subdivision and built development to consolidate within and around existing settlements or where natural character and landscape has already been compromised The subject site is located in an area that is primarily characterised by medium-density residential development in a coastal setting. The surrounding environment is similarly zoned Residential and contains allotments of a similar size to those proposed, and smaller. The proposed subdivision will therefore occur in an existing settlement where natural character and landscape has already been compromised. The site is not located in an area with an Outstanding Natural Landscape or Feature nor is the site in an area of high natural character, as per NRC Maps. There are also no known significant areas of indigenous fauna or habitats of indigenous fauna located within or near the subject site. Further, the proposal does not require any vegetation clearance, and only minimal physical works are anticipated as part of this subdivision. The site is setback a sufficient distance from the Ahipara Bay Coastal Marine Area (CMA), being at least 300m to the west of the site. The site is also fully fenced, providing adequate screening of the site when viewed from the CMA. It is noted that there are rear low-lying dune wetlands located between the site and the Wairoa Stream, which separates the site from the CMA. The Stormwater Management Report confirms that site stormwater primarily soaks through the ground due to underlying sandy soils. However, in heavy rainfall events, stormwater from the area will generally drain south west following natural topography, naturally ponding and soaking away at the rear

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 19 dune wetlands on Rapata block. It is therefore unlikely that stormwater from the site will reach the Wairoa Stream. Based on the above, it is considered that the proposed development is appropriate in the surrounding context, and provides for the protection of the natural character of the coastal environment. 13.10.19 Energy efficiency and renewable energy development/use Not applicable. 13.10.20 National Grid Corridor Not applicable. The subject site is not located within or near the National Grid Corridor. Conclusion Based on the above, any adverse effects arising from the proposed subdivision are considered to be less than minor.

5.1.4 Step 4: Public notification in special circumstances Section 95A(9) sets out that the council is required to determine whether special circumstances exist that warrant it being publicly notified.

Special circumstances are those that are:

x exceptional or unusual, but something less than extraordinary; or x outside of the common run of applications of this nature; or x circumstances which make notification desirable, notwithstanding the conclusion that the adverse effects will be no more than minor. If the answer is yes, then those persons are required to be notified. In this case, the proposal is for a subdivision activity within a zone anticipated for medium to high density development. As such, it is considered that this level of development is anticipated by the Far North District Plan and that there is nothing out of the ordinary that could give rise to special circumstances. 5.2 Public Notification Conclusion Having undertaken the s95A public notification tests, the following conclusions are reached:

x Under step 1, public notification is not mandatory; x Under step 2, public notification is precluded; x Under Step 3, public notification is not required as effects are less than minor; and x Under step 4, there are no special circumstances. Therefore, this application can be processed without public notification.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 20

6.0 LIMITED NOTIFICATION ASSESSMENT (SECTIONS 95B, 95E TO 95G) 6.1 Assessment of Steps 1 to 4 (Section 95B) Under Section 95B, if an application is not publicly notified, the Council must decide if there are any ‘affected persons’ and undertake limited notification to those persons. Under Section 95E(1) a person is considered ‘affected’ if the adverse effects of the activity on that person are ‘minor or more than minor’. If the application is not publicly notified, the consent authority must follow the following steps to determine whether to give limited notification of an application. 6.1.1 Step 1: Certain affected protected customary rights groups must be notified Step 1 requires limited notification where there are any affected protected customary rights groups or customary marine title groups, or affected persons under a statutory acknowledgement affecting the land.

The above does not apply to this land. 6.1.2 Step 2: If not required by step 1, limited notification precluded in certain circumstances Step 2 describes that limited notification is precluded where all applicable rules and NES preclude limited notification; or the application is for a controlled activity (other than the subdivision of land) or a prescribed activity under section 360H(1)(a)(ii).

The above does not apply to the proposal, and therefore limited notification is not precluded. 6.1.3 Step 3: If not precluded by step 2, certain other affected persons must be notified Step 3 requires that where limited notification is not precluded under step 2 above, a determination must be made as to whether any of the following persons are affected persons:

x In the case of a boundary activity, an owner of an allotment with an infringed boundary; x In the case of a prescribed activity under s360H(1(b), a prescribed person; and x In the case of any other activity, a person affected in accordance with s95E. The application is not for a boundary or prescribed activity as defined in the Act or a prescribed activity under s360H(1)(b), and therefore an assessment in accordance with S95E is required, of which is set out below. A person is affected if the effects of the activity on that person are minor or more than minor (but not less than minor). AFFECTED PERSONS – SECTION 95E

In undertaking an assessment of the effects of the proposal, due consideration has been given to the extent of actual and potential adverse effects on the adjacent landowners identified in Figure 2 above. It is noted that written approvals have been provided by all owner/occupiers of the following properties: x Sec 10 Blk IV Ahipara SD x Sec 186 Blk IV Ahipara SD x Sec 185 Blk IV Ahipara SD x Sec 12 Blk IV Ahipara SD

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 21

Written approval has also been obtained from:

x Heritage New Zealand (subject to the commission of an Archaeological Assessment) x Te Rarawa Iwi (subject to the preparation of a Cultural Impact Assessment)

Effects on the above parties must therefore be disregarded (s95E(3)(a)).

It is noted that consultation has also been undertaken with the following parties, with no immediate concerns expressed, as outlined in the section 95D assessment above:

x FNDC Infrastructure and Asset Management Department x FNDC Resource Consents and PIMS x Chorus x Top Energy

The s95D assessment of effects provided in section 6.1.3 above is largely applicable to localised environment. Given the permitted baseline assessment, the conclusion that any adverse effects arising from the proposed subdivision will be less than minor, and that the proposal will not result in any land use infringements in relation to the existing dwelling, no other persons are considered to be adversely affected to a minor or more than minor extent by the granting of consent.

6.1.4 Step 4: Further notification in special circumstances In addition to the findings of the previous steps, the council is also required to determine whether special circumstances exist in relation to the application that warrant notification of the application to any other persons not already determined as eligible for limited notification.

In this instance, having regard to the assessments in Sections 6.1.3 and 7.1.3 above, special circumstances are not considered to apply to this proposal. 6.2 Limited Notification Conclusion Having undertaken the s95B limited notification tests, the following conclusions are reached:

x Under step 1, limited notification is not mandatory; x Under step 2, limited notification is not precluded; x Under step 3, limited notification is not required as it is considered that the activity will not result in any adversely affected persons; and x Under step 4, there are no special circumstances. Therefore, it is recommended that this application be processed without limited notification.

7.0 CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATIONS (SECTION 104) Subject to Part 2 of the Act, when considering an application for resource consent and any submissions received, a council must, in accordance with section 104(1) of the Act have regard to:

x any actual and potential effects on the environment of allowing the activity;

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 22

x any relevant provisions of a national environmental standard, other regulations, national policy statement, a New Zealand coastal policy statement, a regional policy statement or proposed regional policy statement; a plan or proposed plan; and x any other matter a council considers relevant and reasonably necessary to determine the application. 7.1 Actual and Potential Effects on the Environment (Section 104(1)(A)) Sections 6.1.3 and 7.1.3 above include assessment of effects in relation to the wider environment and adjacent properties. Overall, the assessment concluded that any adverse effects will be less than minor. Some positive effects will also arise from the development including:

x Enabling of the efficient use of surplus land zoned for residential purposes; x Enabling the provision of additional housing addressing the current housing shortage crisis; and x Enabling the support of the Far North’s economic well-being through the use of local contractors during the construction phase.

Overall, it is considered that when taking into account the positive effects, any actual and potential adverse effects on the environment of allowing the activity are acceptable in the receiving environment. 7.2 Regional Policy Statement for Northland The Northland Regional Policy Statement (RPS) covers the management of natural and physical resources across the Northland region. The provisions within the RPS give guidance at a higher planning level in terms of significant regional issues, therefore providing guidance to consent applications and the development of District Plans on a regional level. The following objectives and policies of the RPS are considered relevant to the proposal:

3.5 Enabling economic wellbeing

Northland’s natural and physical resources are sustainably managed in a way that is attractive for business and investment that will improve the economic wellbeing of Northland and its communities.

Comment: The proposal allows for the continued use of an existing dwelling, as well as the development of vacant land in a sustainable manner. The proposed development will promote economic growth and wellbeing with many service providers and industries required to complete the development.

3.6 Economic activities – reverse sensitivity and sterilisation

The viability of land and activities important for Northland’s economy is protected from the negative impacts of new subdivision, use and development, with particular emphasis on either:

(a) Reverse sensitivity for existing:

(i) Primary production activities;

(ii) Industrial and commercial activities;

(iii) Mining*; or

(iv) Existing and planned regionally significant infrastructure; or

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 23

(b) Sterilisation of:

(i) Land with regionally significant mineral resources; or

(ii) Land which is likely to be used for regionally significant infrastructure.

*Includes aggregates and other minerals.

Comment: Given the location and context of the development proposed, being the provision for residential development within the Residential Zone, there are very minimal avenues for reverse sensitivity or land use incompatibility. The proposal does not promote the sterilization of land or significant resources.

3.11 Regional form

Northland has sustainable built environments that effectively integrate infrastructure with subdivision, use and development, and have a sense of place, identity and a range of lifestyle, employment and transport choices.

Comment: As previously discussed, the proposed subdivision will enable further residential development within the Residential Zone which is anticipated for medium-density residential development. The proposal is therefore considered appropriate in the current context of the surrounding environment, and promotes the efficient use of existing infrastructure whilst remaining compatible with other land use activities that contribute to a sense of place, identity and character.

3.14 Natural character outstanding natural features, outstanding natural landscapes and historic heritage

Identify and protect from inappropriate subdivision, use and development;

(a) The qualities and characteristics that make up the natural character of the coastal environment, and the natural character of freshwater bodies and their margins;

(b) The qualities and characteristics that make up outstanding natural features and outstanding natural landscapes;

(c) The integrity of historic heritage.

Comment: As per the assessment in section 5.1.3, any adverse effects on the natural character of the coastal environment and adjacent freshwater bodies will be less than minor. There are no outstanding natural features or landscapes located within or in close proximity to the site. A Site of Cultural Significance (MS04-02) is located near the site. An Archaeological Assessment and Cultural Impact Assessment has therefore been provided in support of the proposal. Overall, it is considered that the proposal promotes the protection of the integrity of historic heritage.

4.6.1 Policy – Managing effects on the characteristics and qualities natural character, natural features and landscapes

(1) In the coastal environment:

a) Avoid adverse effects of subdivision use, and development on the characteristics and qualities which make up the outstanding values of areas of outstanding natural character, outstanding natural features and outstanding natural landscapes.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 24

b) Where (a) does not apply, avoid significant adverse effects and avoid, remedy or mitigate other adverse effects of subdivision, use and development on natural character, natural features and natural landscapes. Methods which may achieve this include:

(i) Ensuring the location, intensity, scale and form of subdivision and built development is appropriate having regard to natural elements, landforms and processes, including vegetation patterns, ridgelines, headlands, peninsulas, dune systems, reefs and freshwater bodies and their margins; and

(ii) In areas of high natural character, minimising to the extent practicable indigenous vegetation clearance and modification (including earthworks / disturbance, structures, discharges and extraction of water) to natural wetlands, the beds of lakes, rivers and the coastal marine area and their margins; and

(iii) Encouraging any new subdivision and built development to consolidate within and around existing settlements or where natural character and landscape has already been compromised.

Comment: The subject site is located in an area that is primarily characterised by medium-density residential development in a coastal setting. The surrounding environment is similarly zoned Residential and contains allotments of a similar size to those proposed, and smaller. The proposed subdivision will therefore occur in an existing settlement where natural character and landscape has already been compromised.

The site is not located in an area with an Outstanding Natural Landscape or Feature nor is the site in an area of high natural character, as per NRC Maps. There are also no known significant areas of indigenous fauna or habitats of indigenous fauna located within or near the subject site. Further, the proposal does not require any vegetation clearance, and only minimal physical works are anticipated as part of this subdivision.

The site is setback a sufficient distance from the Ahipara Bay Coastal Marine Area (CMA), being at least 300m to the west of the site. The site is also fully fenced providing effective screening when viewed from the CMA.

It is noted that there are rear low-lying dune wetlands located between the site and the Wairoa Stream, which separates the site from the CMA. The Stormwater Management Report confirms that site stormwater primarily soaks through the ground due to underlying sandy soils. However, in heavy rainfall events, stormwater from the area will generally drain south west following natural topography, naturally ponding and soaking away at the rear dune wetlands on Rapata block. It is therefore unlikely that stormwater from the site will reach the Wairoa Stream.

Based on the above, it is considered that the proposed development is appropriate in the surrounding context, and provides for the protection of the natural character of the coastal environment.

4.6.2 Policy – Maintaining the integrity of heritage resources

(1) Protect the integrity of historic heritage resources that have been identified in plans in accordance with Policy 4.5.3 and Method 4.5.4(3):

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 25

a) By avoiding significant adverse effects of subdivision, use and development and avoiding, remedying or mitigating other adverse effects (including cumulative adverse effects) on historic heritage in the following way:

(i) Requiring careful design and location of subdivision, use and development to retain heritage buildings and other physical elements of historic heritage and where practical enhance public use and access;

(ii) Restricting the demolition / relocation of and / or inappropriate modifications, additions or alterations to physical elements of historic heritage;

(iii) Recognising that the integrity of many historic heritage resources relies on context and maintain these relationships in the design and location of subdivision, use and development;

(iv) Recognising the collective value of groups of heritage buildings, structures and / or places, particularly where these are representative of Northland’s historic settlements, architecture or periods in history and maintain the wider character of such areas; and

(v) Restricting activities that compromise important spiritual or cultural values held ďLJDĈŽƌi / Mana Whenua and / or the wider community in association with particular heritage places or features.

(2) Despite the above:

a) Clause 1 does not apply where natural hazards threaten the viability of regionally significant infrastructure and / or public health and safety; or

b) Regionally significant infrastructure proposals that cannot meet 4.6.2(1) may still be appropriate after assessment against the matters in Policy 5.3.3(3).

Comment: A Site of Cultural Significance (MS04-02) is located in close proximity to the site. Therefore, comments were sought by Heritage New Zealand as well as Te Rarawa iwi in relation to heritage and cultural impact. An Archaeological Assessment has been prepared in support of the application (see Appendix 9) which concludes that the proposal will not result in any adverse archaeological effects. A Cultural Impact Assessment is currently being prepared in support of the application, and will be provided to Council in due course. It is anticipated that the recommendations outlined in these reports will form a consent notice condition to ensure the protection of any archaeological sites, and cultural values.

5.1.2 Policy – Development in the coastal environment

Enable people and communities to provide for their wellbeing through appropriate subdivision, use, and development that:

(a) Consolidates urban development within or adjacent to existing coastal settlements and avoids sprawling or sporadic patterns of development;

(b) Ensures sufficient development setbacks from the coastal marine area to;

(i) maintain and enhance public access, open space, and amenity values; and

(ii) allow for natural functioning of coastal processes and ecosystems;

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 26

(c) Takes into account the values of adjoining or adjacent land and established activities (both within the coastal marine area and on land);

(d) Ensures adequate infrastructure services will be provided for the development; and

(e) Avoids adverse effects on access to, use and enjoyment of surf breaks of national significance for surfing.

Note: in determining the appropriateness of subdivision, use and development, all policies and methods in the Regional Policy Statement must be considered, particularly policies relating to natural character, features and landscapes, heritage, natural hazards, indigenous ecosystems and fresh and coastal water quality

Comment: The surrounding environment is similarly zoned Residential, and is primarily characterised by medium-density residential development in a coastal setting. The proposal therefore promotes consolidation of urban development and avoids urban sprawl or sporadic development patterns.

The site is setback at least 300m from the coastal marine area and there are multiple public access points to the beach for both pedestrians and vehicles. These will not be affected by the proposed subdivision.

As discussed in the assessment of effects, any adverse effects on neighbouring properties will be less than minor, and adequate services will be provided to the site.

7.3 New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement

The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS) is directly relevant to the proposal given its location within the Coastal Environment. Objectives 2, 3 and 6, and Policies 2, 6, 13, and 17 are considered directly relevant to the proposal.

As per the assessment of effects, any adverse effects on the natural character of the coastal environment will be less than minor. The subdivision will enable further residential development in an area primarily characterised by medium-density residential development in a coastal setting. The proposal is therefore considered appropriate given that the development will take place in an area where the natural character of the coastal environment is already compromised.

Tangata whenua have been involved in the subdivision process, whereby consultation was undertaken with Te Rarawa iwi in relation to the proposal. In response, the iwi insisted on providing a Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) in support of this application. This is currently being prepared with the expected completion date of 22 May 2020. This will be provided to Council in due course.

As per recommendations by Heritage New Zealand, an Archaeological Assessment has been prepared by Geometria in support of the proposal. This report concludes that the proposal will not result in any adverse archaeological effects, and will ensure the protection of historic heritage.

Based on the above, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the objectives and policies outlined in the NZCPS.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 27

7.4 Operative Far North District Plan – Objectives and Policies The relevant objectives and policies of the District Plan can be found in the Urban Environment, Residential Zone, and Subdivision Chapters. A comprehensive assessment of all relevant objectives and policies has been provided in Appendix 4. Overall, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with all relevant objectives and policies of the Operative Far North District Plan. 7.5 Other Matters Section 104(1)(c) provides for consideration of any other matters that may be relevant to the activity. There are no other matters considered relevant to the proposal.

8.0 PART 2 ASSESSMENT Section 5 of Part 2 identifies the purpose of the RMA as being the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. This means managing the use, development and protection of natural and physical resources in a way that enables people and communities to provide for their social, cultural and economic well-being and health and safety while sustaining those resources for future generations, protecting the life supporting capacity of ecosystems, and avoiding, remedying or mitigating adverse effects on the environment.

Section 6 of the Act sets out a number of matters of national importance including (but not limited to) the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes and historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use and development.

Section 7 identifies a number of “other matters” to be given particular regard by Council and includes (but is not limited to) Kaitiakitanga, the efficient use of natural and physical resources, the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values, and maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the environment.

Section 8 requires Council to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

Overall, the effects of the proposal are considered to be less than minor, and the proposal accords with the relevant objectives and policies of the RPS, New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement, and the Operative District Plan provisions. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal will not offend the general resource management principles set out in Part 2 of the Act.

9.0 CONCLUSION The application lodged for Beau and Monique Dickins at 5 Kotare Street provides for a two-lot residential subdivision which will be fully serviced. The subdivision has been assessed as a Discretionary Activity and will not result in any land-use rule infringements.

The applicant accepts that the following conditions of consent may be imposed: x A ‘general accordance’ condition to ensure that the subdivision is undertaken in accordance with the application presented. x A consent condition to require the installation of electricity and telecommunication connections.

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 28

x A consent condition to ensure that access to Lots 1 and 2 are upgraded to council’s engineering standards. x Consent notice conditions to ensure any future development on proposed Lots 1 and 2 is undertaken in accordance with the technical reports provided with the application including the Stormwater Management Report and Archaeological Assessment.

Based on the above report it is considered that:

x Public notification is precluded as the effects are less than minor;

x Limited notification is not required as any potential adverse effects are considered to be less than minor, and all affected parties have provided written approval;

x The proposal accords with the relevant objectives and policies of the RPS, New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement and the FNDC District Plan; and x The proposal is considered to be consistent with Part 2 of the Act.

It is therefore concluded that the proposal satisfies all matters the consent authority is required to assess, and that the application for resource consent can be granted on a non-notified basis.

AUTHOR

Nina Pivac Director l BAppSC l PGDipPlan l Assoc. NZPI

Date: 18 May 2020

Subdivision Resource Consent Application: B & M Dickins – 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara 29

Appendix 1 – Scheme Plan

Appendix 2 – Certificate of Title

Appendix 3 – District Plan Assessment APPENDIX 3: COMPLIANCE WITH RELEVANT PLANNING PROVISIONS

Subdivision:

Residential Zone Rule Permitted Standards Compliance

13.8.1 Subdivision within the A subdivision is a discretionary Discretionary Activity – Proposed Lot Residential Zone activity where the minimum lot 1 is currently connected to Council’s size for sewered sites is 300m2. reticulated sewer system and has an area of 500m2. Proposed Lot 2 has the ability to connect to Council’s reticulated sewer system and has an area of 499m2.

13.7.2.2 Allotment Dimensions A minimum square building Complies – Proposed Lot 1 contains a envelope of 14m x 14m is dwelling which has existing use rights required and should not in relation to the setback breach on encroach into the permitted the Kakapo Street boundary (BP84 activity boundary setbacks for and BP3082669). Proposed Lot 2 is the relevant zones. able to accommodate the minimum required building envelope, as shown on the Scheme Plan.

Land Use:

Residential Zone Rule Permitted Standards Compliance

7.6.5.1.1 Relocated Buildings Permitted provided that they Not applicable comply with all permitted standards in the District Plan, and provided that reinstatement works are completed within six months of the building being delivered to the site.

7.6.5.1.2 Residential Intensity One unit per 600m2 for sewered Complies – Proposed Lot 1 contains sites. one residential unit. Proposed Lot 2 is vacant.

7.5.5.1.3 Scale of Activities 2 persons per 600m2 for sewered Complies – The site will be used for sites (excluding household residential purposes only. members).

8.6.5.1.8 Building Height The maximum height of any Complies – The existing dwelling on building shall be 8m. Lot 1 is less than 8m in height and has existing use rights (BP84 and BP3082669). Lot 2 is vacant.

8.6.5.1.2 Sunlight No part of any building shall Complies - Proposed Lot 1 contains a project beyond a 45-degree dwelling which has existing use rights recession plane as measured in relation to the setback breach on inwards from any point 2m the Kakapo Street boundary (BP84 vertically above ground level on and BP3082669). The dwelling is any site boundary except that: setback at least 9.5m from the new boundary and will therefore easily a) a building may exceed this comply with the sunlight rule. standard for a maximum Proposed Lot 2 is vacant. distance of 10m along any one boundary other than a road boundary and provided that the maximum height of any building where it exceeds the standard is 2.7m; and b) where a site boundary adjoins a legally established entrance strip, private way, access lot, or access way serving a rear site, the measurement shall be taken from the farthest boundary of the entrance strip, private way, access lot, or access way.

7.6.5.1.6 Stormwater The maximum proportion of the Complies – The total impermeable Management gross site area covered by surface area within Lot 1 is 235m2 buildings and other impermeable (47%). Proposed Lot 2 is vacant. surfaces shall be 50%.

7.6.5.1.7 Setback from Minimum 3m from all road Complies - - Proposed Lot 1 contains a Boundaries boundaries dwelling which has existing use rights Minimum 1.2m from all other in relation to the setback breach on boundaries the Kakapo Street boundary (BP84 and BP3082669. The dwelling is setback at least 9.5m from the new boundary and therefore easily complies with the 1.2m setback requirement. Proposed Lot 2 is vacant.

7.6.5.1.8 Screening for n/a n/a – the site will continue to be used Neighbours – Non-Residential for residential activities only. Activities

7.6.5.1.9 Outdoor Activities n/a Complies – the site will continue to be used for residential activities only.

7.6.5.1.10 Visual Amenity n/a n/a – The site is not identified as any of those outlined in this rule.

7.6.5.1.11 Transportation Refer to Chapter 15 – Complies – Site area is large enough to Transportation for Traffic, provide sufficient off-street parking Parking and Access and manoeuvring space on Lots 1 and 2. Access to Lots 1 and 2 will be upgraded to Council Engineering Standards.

7.6.5.1.12 Site Intensity – Non- n/a n/a – The site will continue to be used Residential Activities for residential purposes only.

7.6.5.1.13 Hours of Operation – n/a n/a – The site will continue to be used Non-Residential Activities for residential purposes only.

7.6.5.1.14 Keeping of Animals No site shall be used for factory Complies – No such activity will be farming, a boarding or breeding undertaken on site. kennel or a cattery.

7.6.5.1.15 Noise 0700 to 2200 hours 50 dBA L10 Complies – Noise will not exceed

2200 to 0700 hours 45 dBA L10 these limits. No physical works are and 70 dBA Lmax proposed as part of this application.

Rule 7.6.5.1.16 Helicopter Not permitted. n/a Landing Area

7.6.5.1.17 Building Coverage Any new building or Complies – Total building coverage alteration/addition to an existing including the dwelling and deck area is building is a permitted activity if 171m2 or 34%. the total Building Coverage of a site does not exceed 45% of the gross site area.

District Wide:

District Wide Provisions Compliance? Comment

12.1 Landscapes and Natural Yes The subject site is not identified as an Features Outstanding Landscape.

12.2 Indigenous Flora and Yes The subject site does not contain Fauna indigenous vegetation, nor does the proposal involve any clearance of indigenous vegetation.

12.3 Soils and Minerals Yes The proposal does not involve any earthworks.

12.4 Natural Hazards Yes The site is not located within either the Coastal Hazard 1 or 2 Areas. There are no existing or proposed areas of scrub, shrubland, woodlot or forest located within 20m of the subject site.

12.5 Heritage Yes The site does not contain any heritage resources, nor are any located in close proximity.

12.7 Lakes, Rivers, Wetlands Yes The site readily conforms to the 26m and the Coastline setback requirement from the Coastal Marine Area.

12.8 Hazardous Substances Yes Nil proposed

12.9 Renewable Energy Yes No solar or other energy infrastructure is proposed initially, but may be included at a later stage.

13.0 Subdivision No – Discretionary Activity Refer to subdivision assessment above.

14.0 Financial Contributions Yes Not relevant.

15.0 Transportation Yes Access to proposed Lots 1 and 2 will be upgraded to Council engineering standards. Parking and manoeuvring can readily be provided on both proposed Lots 1 and 2.

16.0 Signs and Lighting Yes No signs or lighting required or proposed.

17.0 Designations and Utility Yes Not relevant. Services

18.0 Special Areas Yes Not relevant.

19.0 Genetically Modified Yes Not relevant. Organisms

Appendix 4 – District Plan Objectives & Policies Assessment OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES ASSESSMENT

Urban Environment

OBJECTIVES Objective Comment

7.3.1 To ensure that urban activities do not The assessment of effects in section 5.1.3 of the cause adverse environmental effects on the application concludes that no adverse effects will arise as natural and physical resources of the District. a result of the proposal.

7.3.2 To enable the continuing use of buildings Proposed Lot 1 contains an existing dwelling with well- and infrastructure in urban areas, particularly formed access and adequate electricity and where these are under-utilised. telecommunication services. The proposal will enable the continued residential use of the dwelling, whilst allowing vacant land that is surplus to requirements to be used for residential development.

7.3.3 To avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse The proposal will enable the creation of one residential effects of activities on the amenity values of allotment in an area primarily characterised by medium- existing urban environments. density residential development. The proposal is therefore consistent with the amenity values of the existing urban environment in the Ahipara area.

7.3.4 To enable urban activities to establish in The proposal will enable the creation of one residential areas where their potential effects will not allotment in an area primarily characterised by medium- adversely affect the character and amenity of density residential development. The proposal is those areas. therefore consistent with the character and amenity values of the existing urban environment in the Ahipara area.

7.3.5 To achieve the development of Not applicable community services as an integral and complementary component of urban development.

7.3.6 To ensure that sufficient water storage is Proposed Lot 1 contains an existing dwelling where water available to meet the needs of the community storage is achieved by way of water tank. The all year round. Stormwater Report concludes that no extra attenuation is required, and that proposed Lot 2 will be able to achieve adequate water supply subject to the recommendations outlined in the report. It is anticipated that this will form a condition of consent. POLICIES Policy Comment

7.4.1 That amenity values of existing and newly The proposal will enable the creation of one residential developed areas be maintained or enhanced. allotment in an area primarily characterised by medium- density residential development. Similarly-sized allotments are located within the immediate vicinity of the subject site. The proposal is therefore consistent with the amenity values of the existing urban environment in the Ahipara area.

7.4.2 That the permissible level of effects As discussed in section 5.1.3 of the application report, created or received in residential areas reflects the proposed subdivision can easily provide for the those appropriate for residential activities. construction of one residential development on proposed Lot 2 as a permitted activity. 7.4.3 That adverse effects on publicly-provided No public services are considered to be affected by this facilities and services be avoided or remedied proposal. by new development, through the provision of additional services.

7.4.4 That stormwater systems for urban The Stormwater Management Report concludes that the development be designed to minimise adverse existing stormwater disposal system on proposed Lot 1 is effects on the environment. sufficient, and that proposed Lot 2 is able to achieve adequate stormwater management subject to recommendations.

7.4.5 That new urban development avoid: As per the assessment of effects in section 5.1.3, any (a) adversely affecting the natural character of adverse effects in relation to those matters listed in the coastal environment, lakes, rivers, policies 7.4.5(a) to (h) will be less than minor. wetlands or their margins; (b) adversely affecting areas of significant indigenous vegetation or significant habitats of indigenous fauna; (c) adversely affecting outstanding natural features, landscapes and heritage resources; (d) adversely affecting the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga; (e) areas where natural hazards could adversely affect the physical resources of urban development or pose risk to people’s health and safety; (f) areas containing finite resources which can reasonably be expected to be valuable for future generations, where urban development would adversely affect their availability; (g) adversely affecting the safety and efficiency of the roading network; (h) the loss or permanent removal of highly productive and versatile soils from primary production due to subdivision and development for urban purposes.

7.4.6 That the natural and historic heritage of The site is not known to contain any natural and historic urban settlements in the District be protected heritage resources. (refer to Chapter 12).

7.4.7 That urban areas with distinctive The Ahipara area is largely characterised by medium- characteristics be managed to maintain and density residential development in a coastal setting. The enhance the level of amenity derived from proposed development will result in the creation of one those characteristics. residential allotment considered to be consistent with the existing level of amenity in the area.

7.4.8 That infrastructure for urban areas be Minimal physical works will be required to designed and operated in a way which: install/upgrade any infrastructure associated with the (a) avoids remedies or mitigates adverse development such as vehicle crossings, and electricity effects on the environment; and telecommunications connections. (b) provides adequately for the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and (c) safeguards the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil and ecosystems.

7.4.9 That the need for community services in Not applicable urban areas is recognised and provided for.

Residential Zone

OBJECTIVES Objective Comment

7.6.3.1 To achieve the development of new The surrounding environment is primarily characterised residential areas at similar densities to those by medium-density residential development and is prevailing at present. similarly zoned Residential. The proposed development is therefore considered to be consistent with the current level of development in the area.

7.6.3.2 To enable development of a wide range The Ahipara Village contains an array of land use of activities within residential areas where the activities including education, community, health, effects are compatible with the effects of tourism, hospitality and residential. The proposal will residential activity result in the creation of one additional residential allotment in an area primarily characterised by medium- density residential development. It is therefore considered that the proposal is compatible with the existing activities occurring in the area.

7.6.3.3 To protect the special amenity values Not applicable of residential sites on the urban fringe, specifically Lot 1 DP 28017, Lot 1 DP 46656, Lot 1 DP 404507, Lot 1 DP 181291, Lot 2 DP 103531, Lot 1 DP 103531, Lot 2 DP 58333, Pt Lot 1 DP 58333 (and any sites created as a result of a subdivision of these lots), and those having frontage to Kerikeri Road between its intersection with SH10 and Cannon Drive. POLICIES Policy Comment

7.6.4.1 That the Residential Zone be applied to The subject site is located in the Residential Zone, in an those parts of the District that are currently area primarily characterised by medium-density predominantly residential in form and residential development. character.

7.6.4.2 That the Residential Zone be applied to The proposal will enable surplus land in the Residential areas which are currently residential but where Zone to be utilised for residential development. there is scope for new residential development. 7.6.4.3 That the Residential Zone be applied to The assessment of effects in section 5.1.3 concludes that areas where expansion would be sustainable in any adverse effects on the environment will be less than terms of its effects on the environment. minor, and that the Residential Zone provides for such level of development to occur in a sustainable manner.

7.6.4.4 That the Residential Zone provide for a Proposed Lot 1 contains an existing dwelling which could range of housing types and forms of easily accommodate residents as well as B&B style accommodation. accommodation as a permitted activity. The creation of an additional allotment will enable surplus land to be utilised for modest residential development. It is considered that such level of development will not adversely affect existing forms of accommodation in the immediate surrounds of the site.

7.6.4.5 That non-residential activities only be Not applicable allowed to establish within residential areas where they will not detract from the existing residential environment.

7.6.4.6 That activities with net effects that Not applicable. The proposed subdivision will enable the exceed those of a typical single residential unit, construction of one residential unit which will easily be be required to avoid, remedy or mitigate those able to comply with the permitted standards. effects with respect to the ecological and amenity values and general peaceful enjoyment of adjacent residential activities.

7.6.4.7 That residential activities have The proposed subdivision will result in a total of two sufficient land associated with each household allotments of 500m2 (Lot 1) and 499m2 (Lot 2) in area, unit to provide for outdoor space, planting, and will not result in any new land-use rule parking and manoeuvring. infringements. The proposed allotment sizes also provide for adequate outdoor space for existing and future residents, as clearly demonstrated by the current building coverage of the existing dwelling on proposed Lot 1 which equates to only 171m2 (34% of the proposed site area).

7.6.4.8 That the portion of a site or of a Proposed Lot 1 contains an existing dwelling and is able development that is covered in buildings and to comply with the permitted impermeable surface other impermeable surfaces be limited so as to standards. There is also sufficient open space around the provide open space around buildings to enable building as shown on the scheme plan. Proposed Lot 2 is planting, and to reduce adverse hydrological, vacant ecological and amenity effects.

7.6.4.9 That sites have adequate access to The proposed subdivision will not result in any new sunlight and daylight. boundary or sunlight infringements. As discussed in the application report, this infringement has existing use rights in relation to the existing dwelling and a setback infringement on the Kakapo Road boundary (see BP84 and BP3082669). The new allotment (Lot 2) also contains sufficient space so as to allow for a residential unit to be constructed and comply with the permitted boundary and sunlight standards.

7.6.4.10 That provision be made to ensure a Proposed Lot 1 contains an existing dwelling with living reasonable level of privacy for inhabitants of areas orientated towards the coastal marine area, buildings on a site. similarly to most residential units in the area. It is anticipated that any future development on proposed Lot 2 will also be orientated in a similar manner. The proposed allotments are considered to be of sufficient size to provide for adequate setbacks and space for fencing and/or landscaping to maintain privacy for existing and future inhabitants of the site.

7.6.4.11 That the built form of development Not applicable. allowed on residential sites on the urban fringe, specifically Lot 1 DP 28017, Lot 1 DP 46656, Lot 1 DP 404507, Lot 1 DP 181291, Lot 2 DP 103531, Lot 1 DP 103531, Lot 2 DP 58333, Pt Lot 1 DP 58333 (and any sites created as a result of a subdivision of these lots), and those with frontage to Kerikeri Road between its intersection with SH10 and Cannon Drive remains small in scale, set back from the road, relatively inconspicuous and in harmony with landscape plantings and shelter belts.

Subdivision

OBJECTIVES Objective Comment

13.3.1 To provide for the subdivision of land in The proposal will provide for the creation of one such a way as will be consistent with the additional residential allotment in the Residential Zone. purpose of the various zones in the Plan, and The surrounding environment is primarily characterised will promote the sustainable management of by medium-density residential development and is the natural and physical resources of the similarly zoned Residential. As concluded in the District, including airports and roads and the assessment of effects, the proposal will not adversely social, economic and cultural well-being of affect any natural and physical resources. Further, the people and communities. subdivision will allow for the efficient use of vacant land in a manner which will promote the social, economic and cultural well-being of the Ahipara and wider Far North community.

13.3.2 To ensure that subdivision of land is As discussed in the assessment of effects, the proposed appropriate and is carried out in a manner that subdivision will not compromise the life-supporting does not compromise the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil or ecosystems. The site is not capacity of air, water, soil or ecosystems, and known to be subject to any natural hazards. The creation that any actual or potential adverse effects on of one additional residential allotment is also considered the environment which result directly from to be consistent and compatible with the current level of subdivision, including reverse sensitivity effects development in the surrounding environment. All and the creation or acceleration of natural adjacent properties are similarly zoned Residential. It is hazards, are avoided, remedied or mitigated. therefore considered that no reverse sensitivity effects will arise as a result of the proposal.

13.3.3 To ensure that the subdivision of land The site is not known to contain any outstanding does not jeopardise the protection of landscapes or natural features. outstanding landscapes or natural features in the coastal environment.

13.3.4 To ensure that subdivision does not The site and immediate surrounding environment do not adversely affect scheduled heritage resources contain any scheduled heritage resources. through alienation of the resource from its immediate setting/context. 13.3.5 To ensure that all new subdivisions There are no connections to reticulated water supply provide a reticulated water supply and/or on- available. However, water storage is currently achieved site water storage and include storm water by way of water tank which supplies potable water to the management sufficient to meet the needs of existing dwelling on proposed Lot 1. A stormwater the activities that will establish all year round. management report has been provided which concludes that adequate water supply and stormwater management can be achieved on both allotments, subject to the implementation of recommendations outlined in the report.

13.3.6 To encourage innovative development Not applicable and integrated management of effects between subdivision and land use which results in superior outcomes to more traditional forms of subdivision, use and development, for example the protection, enhancement and restoration of areas and features which have particular value or may have been compromised by past land management practices.

13.3.7 To ensure the relationship between A Site of Cultural Significance is located in close proximity Maori and their ancestral lands, water, sites, to the subject site (MS04-02). Comments were sought wahi tapu and other taonga is recognised and from Te Rarawa iwi as mana whenua. In response, a provided for. Cultural Impact Assessment is currently being prepared. An archaeological report is also being prepared to ensure that all archaeological sites will not be adversely affected by the proposal. These reports will be provided to Council in due course.

13.3.8 To ensure that all new subdivision Proposed Lot 1 has an existing electricity connection. provides an electricity supply sufficient to meet Top Energy have confirmed that connections are the needs of the activities that will establish on available for proposed Lot 2. It is anticipated that the the new lots created. installation of electricity will form a condition of consent.

13.3.9 To ensure, to the greatest extent Like most residential units in this particular area of the possible, that all new subdivision supports Ahipara village, the existing dwelling on proposed Lot 1 is energy efficient design through appropriate north-facing. It is also anticipated that any future site layout and orientation in order to residential unit on proposed Lot 2 will also be north- maximise the ability to provide light, heating, facing. The proposed subdivision will not result in any ventilation and cooling through passive design new boundary or sunlight infringements which may strategies for any buildings developed on the impact access to sunlight. site(s).

13.3.10 To ensure that the design of all new Not applicable. subdivision promotes efficient provision of infrastructure, including access to alternative transport options, communications and local services.

13.3.11 To ensure that the operation, Not applicable. The subject site is not located in or near maintenance, development and upgrading of the National Grid Corridor. the existing National Grid is not compromised by incompatible subdivision and land use activities

POLICIES Policy Comment

13.4.1 That the sizes, dimensions and As discussed in the assessment of effects, it is considered distribution of allotments created through the that any cumulative effects will be less than minor. subdivision process be determined with regard to the potential effects including cumulative effects, of the use of those allotments on: (a) natural character, particularly of the coastal environment; (b) ecological values; (c) landscape values; (d) amenity values; (e) cultural values; (f) heritage values; and (g) existing land uses.

13.4.2 That standards be imposed upon the Proposed Lot 1 will continue to be accessed by the subdivision of land to require safe and existing vehicle crossing which is considered to be effective vehicular and pedestrian access to formed to a good standard. A new crossing will be new properties. required for proposed Lot 2; however, it is requested that the construction of this crossing be deferred via consent notice as the design largely depends on the location and design of the future residential unit.

13.4.3 That natural and other hazards be taken The site is not known to be subject to any natural into account in the design and location of any hazards. subdivision.

13.4.4 That in any subdivision where provision The existing dwelling on proposed Lot 1 contains existing is made for connection to utility services, the telecommunication and electricity connections. Chorus potential adverse visual impacts of these and Top Energy have confirmed that such connections services are avoided. are available for proposed Lot 2. It is anticipated that minimal physical works will be required to install these services, therefore avoiding any long-term visual impact.

13.4.5 That access to, and servicing of, the new Proposed Lot 1 will continue to be accessed by the allotments be provided for in such a way as will existing vehicle crossing which is considered to be avoid, remedy or mitigate any adverse effects formed to a good standard. A new crossing will be on neighbouring property, public roads required for proposed Lot 2; however, it is requested (including State Highways), and the natural and that the construction of this crossing be deferred via physical resources of the site caused by silt consent notice as the design largely depends on the runoff, traffic, excavation and filling and location and design of the future residential unit. removal of vegetation. Minimal physical works will be required to fulfil access requirements, therefore avoiding any adverse effects on neighbouring properties, public roads and natural and physical resources of the site.

13.4.6 That any subdivision proposal provides As per the assessment of effects, the subdivision provides for the protection, restoration and for the protection of Site of Cultural Significance MS04- enhancement of heritage resources, areas of 02, archaeological sites located on and near the subject significant indigenous vegetation and site, and the natural character of the coastal significant habitats of indigenous fauna, environment. threatened species, the natural character of the coastal environment and riparian margins, and outstanding landscapes and natural features where appropriate.

13.4.7 That the need for a financial Not applicable contribution be considered only where the subdivision would: (a) result in increased demands on car parking associated with non-residential activities; or (b) result in increased demand for esplanade areas; or (c) involve adverse effects on riparian areas; or (d) depend on the assimilative capacity of the environment external to the site.

13.4.8 That the provision of water storage be There are no connections to reticulated water supply taken into account in the design of any available. However, water storage is currently achieved subdivision. by way of water tank which supplies potable water to the existing dwelling on proposed Lot 1. A stormwater management report has been provided which concludes that adequate water supply and stormwater management can be achieved on both allotments, subject to the implementation of recommendations outlined in the report.

13.4.9 That bonus development donor and Not applicable recipient areas be provided for so as to minimise the adverse effects of subdivision on Outstanding Landscapes and areas of significant indigenous flora and significant habitats of fauna.

13.4.10 The Council will recognise that Not applicable subdivision within the Conservation Zone that results in a net conservation gain is generally appropriate.

13.4.11 That subdivision recognises and A Site of Cultural Significance is located in close proximity provides for the relationship of Maori and their to the subject site (MS04-02). Comments were sought culture and traditions, with their ancestral from Te Rarawa iwi as mana whenua. In response, a lands, water, sites, waahi tapu and other Cultural Impact Assessment is currently being prepared. taonga and shall take into account the An archaeological report is also being prepared to ensure principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. that all archaeological sites will not be adversely affected by the proposal. These reports will be provided to Council in due course.

13.4.12 That more intensive, innovative Not applicable development and subdivision which recognises specific site characteristics is provided for through the management plan rule where this will result in superior environmental outcomes.

13.4.13 Subdivision, use and development The proposed subdivision is located within the shall preserve and where possible enhance, Residential Zone which is anticipated for medium-density restore and rehabilitate the character of the residential development. The surrounding environment applicable zone in regards to s6 matters. In is largely characterised by medium-density residential addition subdivision, use and development development in a coastal setting, with all adjacent properties similarly zoned Residential. shall avoid adverse effects as far as practicable by using techniques including: As per the assessment of effects, any adverse effects in (a) clustering or grouping development within relation to visual amenity, subdivision design, sites of areas where there is the least impact on cultural significance, heritage, and development within natural character and its elements such as the coastal environment will be less than minor. indigenous vegetation, landforms, rivers, streams and wetlands, and coherent natural patterns; (b) minimising the visual impact of buildings, development, and associated vegetation clearance and earthworks, particularly as seen from public land and the coastal marine area; (c) providing for, through siting of buildings and development and design of subdivisions, legal public right of access to and use of the foreshore and any esplanade areas; (d) through siting of buildings and development, design of subdivisions, and provision of access that recognise and provide for the relationship of Maori with their culture, traditions and taonga including concepts of mauri, tapu, mana, wehi and karakia and the important contribution Maori culture makes to the character of the District (refer Chapter 2 and in particular Section 2.5 and Council’s “Tangata Whenua Values and Perspectives” (2004); (e) providing planting of indigenous vegetation in a way that links existing habitats of indigenous fauna and provides the opportunity for the extension, enhancement or creation of habitats for indigenous fauna, including mechanisms to exclude pests; (f) protecting historic heritage through the siting of buildings and development and design of subdivisions. (g) achieving hydraulic neutrality and ensuring that natural hazards will not be exacerbated or induced through the siting and design of buildings and development.

13.4.14 That the objectives and policies of the Refer to assessment of objectives and policies contained applicable environment and zone and relevant within the Residential Zone. parts of Part 3 of the Plan will be taken into account when considering the intensity, design and layout of any subdivision.

13.4.15 That conditions be imposed upon the Not applicable design of subdivision of land to require that the layout and orientation of all new lots and building platforms created include, as appropriate, provisions for achieving the following: (a) development of energy efficient buildings and structures; (b) reduced travel distances and private car usage; (c) encouragement of pedestrian and cycle use; (d) access to alternative transport facilities; (e) domestic or community renewable electricity generation and renewable energy use

13.4.16 When considering proposals for Not applicable. The subject site is not located in or near subdivision and development within an the National Grid Corridor. existing National Grid Corridor the following will be taken into account: (a) the extent to which the proposal may restrict or inhibit the operation, access, maintenance, upgrading of transmission lines or support structures; (b) any potential cumulative effects that may restrict the operation, access, maintenance, upgrade of transmission lines or support structures; and (c) whether the proposal involves the establishment or intensification of a sensitive activity in the vicinity of an existing National Grid line.

Appendix 5 – Written Approvals

Appendix 6 – Correspondence with: x FNDC IAMs x FNDC RC/PIMs x Top Energy x Chorus  7RKX&RQVXOWLQJ0DLO&KRUXV1R%XLOG$3$.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD/RWV /RW1HZ/RW([LVWLQJ

1LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]!

&KRUXV1R%XLOG$3$.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD/RWV /RW1HZ/RW ([LVWLQJ PHVVDJH

&KRUXV3URSHUW\'HYHORSPHQWV GHYHORS#FKRUXVFRQ]! $SULODW 7RQLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ] QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]!

+HOOR1LQD



:HDUHSOHDVHGWRFRQILUPWKDWZHGRQ¶WQHHGWRGRDQ\SK\VLFDOEXLOGZRUNWRFRQQHFW\RXU GHYHORSPHQWWRRXUQHWZRUNDVFRQQHFWLRQSRLQWVDOUHDG\H[LVWDWWKHERXQGDU\RI\RXUQHZORW V 



,I\RXQHHGWKLVLQIRUPDWLRQLQDOHWWHUIRUPDWSOHDVHDGYLVHLI\RXZRXOGOLNHD



6LPSOHHVWLPDWHOHWWHUFRQILUPLQJQRFRVWVUHTXLUHGRU $QRIILFLDOOHWWHUFRQILUPLQJZHGRQ¶WQHHGWRGRDQ\SK\VLFDOEXLOGZRUNDVFRQQHFWLRQ SRLQWV V DOUHDG\H[LVWDWWKHERXQGDU\7RVXSSO\WKLVZH¶OOQHHG\RXUGUDIW/DQG7LWOH /7 SODQVKRZLQJDQ\HDVHPHQWV$QH[DPSOHRIWKH/DQG7LWOHSODQVLVDWWDFKHG



:H¶UHKHUHWRKHOS±VRSOHDVHOHWXVNQRZLI\RXQHHGDQ\IXUWKHULQIRUPDWLRQ



.LQG5HJDUGV

-DUUHG+HEGHQ 3URSHUW\'HYHORSPHQW&RRUGLQDWRU

7 237 ('HYHORS#FKRUXVFRQ]

32%R[ +DPLOWRQ ZZZFKRUXVFRQ]

33OHDVHFRQVLGHUWKHHQYLURQPHQWEHIRUHSULQWLQJWKLVHPDLO



7KHFRQWHQWRIWKLVHPDLO LQFOXGLQJDQ\DWWDFKPHQWV LVLQWHQGHGIRUWKHDGGUHVVHHRQO\LVFRQILGHQWLDODQGPD\EH OHJDOO\SULYLOHJHG,I\RX¶YHUHFHLYHGWKLVHPDLOLQHUURU\RXVKRXOGQ¶WUHDGLWSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHLPPHGLDWHO\GHVWUR\ LWDQGGRQRWFRS\RUXVHDQ\RIWKHFRQWHQWRIWKLVHPDLO1RFRQILGHQWLDOLW\RUSULYLOHJHLVZDLYHGRUORVWE\DQ\PLV WUDQVPLVVLRQRUHUURU7KLVFRPPXQLFDWLRQGRHVQRWGHVLJQDWHDQLQIRUPDWLRQV\VWHPIRUWKHSXUSRVHVRI3DUWRIWKH &RQWUDFWDQG&RPPHUFLDO/DZ$FW$OWKRXJKZHKDYHWDNHQUHDVRQDEOHSUHFDXWLRQVWRHQVXUHQRYLUXVHVDUH SUHVHQWLQWKLVHPDLOZHFDQQRWDFFHSWUHVSRQVLELOLW\IRUDQ\ORVVRUGDPDJHDULVLQJIURPWKHXVHRIWKLVHPDLORULWV DWWDFKPHQWV

([DPSOH/73ODQSGI .

KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN F YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« 

 7RKX&RQVXOWLQJ0DLO):3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD

1LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]!

):3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD PHVVDJH

6XMHHW7LNDUDP 6XMHHW7LNDUDP#IQGFJRYWQ]! $SULODW 7R1LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]! &F0DUN.HHKQ 0DUN.HHKQ#IQGFJRYWQ]!

+L1LQD

%DVHGRQWKHIDFWWKDWWKHSURSHUW\LVZLWKLQWKHZDVWHZDWHU$R%LV]RQHGUHVLGHQWLDODQGLVSD\LQJVHZDJHUDWHV LQSULQFLSOHWKH\FDQFRQQHFWWRZDVWHZDWHUVXEMHFWWRHQJLQHHULQJGHVLJQ

7KHUHPD\EHFDSDFLW\FRQVWUDLQWVZLWKLQWKHH[LVWLQJQHWZRUNWKDWPD\LQKLELWDFRQQHFWLRQRUUHTXLUHXSJUDGHV ZLOOGLVFXVVZLWKWKHDVVHWPDQDJHUDQGJHWEDFNWR\RX

$VWKHVHZHUHDVHPHQWLVSULYDWHWKLVZLOOEHDVVHVVHGWKURXJKWKH5&%&SURFHVVDQGGRHVQRWQHFHVVDULO\ DIIHFWWKH)1'&,QIUDVWUXFWXUHGHSDUWPHQW



&KHHUV



6XMHHW7LNDUDP

'HYHORSPHQW(QJLQHHU

,QIUDVWUXFWXUH $VVHW0DQDJHPHQW)DU1RUWK'LVWULFW&RXQFLO_KRXU&RQWDFW&HQWUH

GGL_P_6XMHHW7LNDUDP#IQGFJRYWQ]

 :HEVLWH_)DFHERRN_/LQNHG,Q_&DUHHUV



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

3OHDVHFRQVLGHUWKHHQYLURQPHQWEHIRUHSULQWLQJWKLVHPDLO

)URP1LQD3LYDF>PDLOWRQLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]@ 6HQW0RQGD\$SULODP 7R6XMHHW7LNDUDP 6XEMHFW3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD



+L6XMHHW



KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN F YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGD$U&PVJI$«   7RKX&RQVXOWLQJ0DLO):3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD +RSH\RXDUHPDQDJLQJRND\ZLWKLVRODWLRQ



,KDYHDWWDFKHGDSURSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQVFKHPHSODQIRUP\FOLHQWVDW.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD



3OHDVHFDQ\RXFRQILUPZKHWKHUSURSRVHG/RWZLOOEHDEOHWRFRQQHFWWR&RXQFLO VUHWLFXODWHGVHZHUV\VWHP"





$Q\RWKHUIHHGEDFNZRXOGEHJUHDWO\DSSUHFLDWHG

1JƗ0LKL



1LQD3LYDFO%$SS6FO3*'LS3ODQQLQJO$VVRF1=3,O'LUHFWRU



0

(QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]

:KWWSWRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]



D&RPPHUFH6WUHHW.DLWDLD

0HHWLQJE\DSSRLQWPHQWRQO\



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

KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN F YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGD$U&PVJI$«   7RKX&RQVXOWLQJ0DLO):3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD

3OHDVHFRQVLGHUWKHHQYLURQPHQWEHIRUHSULQWLQJWKLVHPDLO

'LFNLQV6FKHPH3ODQYSGI .

KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN F YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGD$U&PVJI$« 

7 April 2020

Nina Pivac 39a Commerce Street KAITAIA

Email: [email protected]

To Whom It May Concern:

RE: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION – M & B Dickens, 5 Kotare Street, Ahipara. Sec 11 Blk IV Ahipara SD.

Thank you for your recent correspondence with attached proposed subdivision scheme plans.

Top Energy’s requirements for this subdivision are provision for an electricity supply at proposed Lot 2. Top Energy advises that proposed Lot 1 has an existing power supply but that a Network Capacity Charge would be applicable for the proposed additional load at Lot 2. Costs to supply power would be provided after application and an on-site survey have been completed. In order to get a letter from Top Energy upon completion of your subdivision, a copy of the resource consent decision must be provided.

Yours sincerely

Aaron Birt Planning and Design T: 09 407 0685 E: [email protected]

1

Appendix 7 – Correspondence with Heritage New Zealand HP 11013-028 14 April 2020

Tohu Consulting Attn.: Nina Pivac 39a Commerce St Kaitaia [email protected]

Tena koe Ms Pivac

Re: 5 Kotare St, Ahipara, Section 11 Block IV Ahipara Survey District: Archaeological and traditional values.

Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga is the statutory authority established under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act (the Act) to promote the identification, protection, preservation, and conservation of New Zealand’s historic and cultural heritage. Heritage New Zealand s powers extend to all land in New Zealand.

Thank you for your email with regard to the above property at Ahipara that your client wishes to subdivide, and the archaeological and traditional sites in the vicinity of the above property.

Under Section 6 of the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 (the Act), an archaeological site is defined as any place in New Zealand, including any building or structure (or part of any building or structure) that was associated with pre-1900 human activity, where through archaeological methods evidence relating to the history of New Zealand can be uncovered. The Act provides protection for all archaeological sites, whether recorded or not. It is unlawful to modify or destroy an archaeological site, and by careful design, it is frequently possible to avoid any such damage. However, where avoidance of the site is not possible, an Archaeological Authority to modify or destroy under section 44 of the Act will be required. An Authority is also required if there is reasonable cause to suspect that an archaeological site may be modified or destroyed, where a resource or building consent has been already granted, or where the land is designated. All applications for Authorities must be made to Heritage New Zealand.

Archaeological Values: From the documentation provided, I can confirm that archaeological midden site N04/10 is located within the property, with at least two exposures of shell along the beach access track. Considering that these midden were probably recorded by archaeologists walking the track, there is a real possibility that further unrecorded midden are present elsewhere on the property. It is presumed that the proposed subdivision is to enable further development of the land. As such Heritage New Zealand recommends that you contact a professional archaeologist who will be able to identify and assess the site in question, and others which may be in the vicinity, and advise on avoidance of the sites, as well as the preparation of an application for an Authority if needed. A list of archaeological consultants who can undertake this work is attached to this email and can also be found on the New Zealand Archaeological Association website. http://nzarchaeology.org/cms/index.php/consultant- directory.

Northland Area Archaeologist | Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga | PO Box 836, Kerikeri 0245 | PH: (64 9) 407 0470 | DDI: (64 9) 407 0473 | MOBILE: 027 249 0864 | EMAIL: [email protected]

Cultural Significance: In addition to the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act legislation that protects archaeological sites, the Far North District Council NDC Operative Plan provides for protection of sites of cultural significance to Maori. In the vicinity of your clients property there is a site numbered MS04-02 in Appendix 1 of the plan that is protected by FNDC. MS04-02 is identified as being within the original Rapata and Wairoa land blocks and is identified as the ‘Rapata Kariri Tribal Reserve and waahi tapu’. Heritage New Zealand recommends that you contact FNDC to determine what council planning protection provisions may be in place regarding MS04-02; whether your clients property is included within the area of this site of cultural significance; and FNDC can advise you which tangata whenua group you should contact to discuss the proposed development.

Yours sincerely,

Dr James Robinson

Northland Area Archaeologist | Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga | PO Box 836, Kerikeri 0245 | PH: (64 9) 407 0470 | DDI: (64 9) 407 0473 | MOBILE: 027 249 0864 | EMAIL: [email protected]

Appendix 8 – Correspondence with Te Rarawa Iwi  7RKX&RQVXOWLQJ0DLO5H3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ%HDX'LFNLQV.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD

1LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]!

5H3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ%HDX'LFNLQV.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD PHVVDJH

1LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]! $SULODW 7R-RKQ3DLWDL MRKQSDLWDL#JPDLOFRP!

7KDQN\RX0U3DLWDL,ORRNIRUZDUGWRKHDULQJIURP\RXVRRQ

1JƗ0LKL 1LQD3LYDF 0

2QDW30-RKQ3DLWDL MRKQSDLWDL#JPDLOFRP!ZURWH

.LDRUD1LQD ,DPILQHWKDQNV,WLVJRRGWRKHDUIURP\RX,ZLOOFHUWDLQO\FLUFXODWHWKLVSURSRVDODPRQJVWRXU$KLSDUD 0DUDH7DNLZD&RPPLWWHHDQGJHWEDFNWRDVVRRQDV,FDQ

.LQGUHJDUGV -RKQ3DLWDL

2Q0RQ$SUDW301LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]!ZURWH .LDRUD-RKQ

,KRSH\RXDUHZHOO

,MXVWWULHGWRFDOO\RXEXW,DPQRWVXUHLI,KDYHWKHFRUUHFWQXPEHU

0\FOLHQW%HDX'LFNLQVLVZDQWLQJWRVXEGLYLGHKLVSURSHUW\DW.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUDWRFUHDWH RQHDGGLWLRQDODOORWPHQWRQZKLFKKHKRSHVWREXLOGDVPDOOGZHOOLQJIRUKLPVHOIDQGKLVJURZLQJ ZKDQDX,QRWHWKDWD6LWHRI&XOWXUDO6LJQLILFDQFHLVORFDWHGQHDUKLVSURSHUW\ UHIHUHQFH06 DVVKRZQLQWKHPDSEHORZ$VVXFK,IHHOLWLVRQO\DSSURSULDWHWRFRQVXOWZLWKWKH7H5DUDZDLZLWR HQVXUHPLQLPDOLPSDFWRI%HDX VSURSRVDORQFXOWXUDOYDOXHV,KDYHDWWDFKHGWKHSURSRVHGVFKHPH SODQIRU\RXULQIRUPDWLRQ

3OHDVHFDQ\RXUXQWKLVE\DQ\UHOHYDQWLZLUHSUHVHQWDWLYHVDQGDGYLVHZKHWKHUWKHLZLKDYHDQ\ FRQFHUQVZLWKWKHGHYHORSPHQW)HHOIUHHWRFRQWDFWPHLI\RXZRXOGOLNHWRGLVFXVVWKLVIXUWKHU,DP FXUUHQWO\ZRUNLQJIURPKRPHVRDQ\WLPHVXLWV

LPDJHSQJ!

0\DSRORJLHVLI\RXDUHQRWWKHFRUUHFWSHUVRQWRFRQWDFWEXWLI\RXFRXOGSRLQWPHLQWKHULJKW GLUHFWLRQWKDWZRXOGEHDZHVRPH

1JƗ0LKL

1LQD3LYDFO%$SS6FO3*'LS3ODQQLQJO$VVRF1=3,O'LUHFWRU

0 (QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ] :KWWSWRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]

D&RPPHUFH6WUHHW.DLWDLD 0HHWLQJE\DSSRLQWPHQWRQO\

KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN F YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGD$U&PVJI$«   7RKX&RQVXOWLQJ0DLO5H3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ%HDX'LFNLQV.RWDUH6WUHHW$KLSDUD

KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN F YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGD$U&PVJI$«   7RKX&RQVXOWLQJ0DLO5H3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ%HDX'LFNLQV.RWDUH6WUHHW

1LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]!

5H3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ%HDX'LFNLQV.RWDUH6WUHHW PHVVDJH

7XL4DXTDX WXLTDXTDX#JPDLOFRP! 0D\DW 7R1LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]! &F-RKQ3DLWDL MRKQSDLWDL#JPDLOFRP!

0RUHQD7KHWRWDOFRVWLVDQGWKDWLQFOXGHVJVW

QJDPLKL

7XL

2Q:HG0D\DW301LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]!ZURWH 6RXQGVJUHDWZKDWZLOOWKHWRWDOFRVWEHSOHDVHVR,FDQSDVVRQWRWKHFOLHQW"

1JƗ0LKL

1LQD3LYDFO%$SS6FO3*'LS3ODQQLQJO$VVRF1=3,O'LUHFWRU

0 (QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ] :KWWSWRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]

D&RPPHUFH6WUHHW.DLWDLD 0HHWLQJE\DSSRLQWPHQWRQO\

2Q:HG0D\DW7XL4DXTDX WXLTDXTDX#JPDLOFRP!ZURWH 7KDQNV1LQDZHFDQKDYHD&,$UHDG\E\WKHHQGRIQH[WZHHN0D\

QJDPLKLQXL

7XL

2Q0RQ0D\DW$07XL4DXTDX WXLTDXTDX#JPDLOFRP!ZURWH 7KDQNV1LQD,ZLOOKDYHDJRRGORRNDWWKLVWRGD\,ZLOOJHWEDFNWR\RX1JDPLKL7XL

2Q6XQ0D\SP1LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]!ZURWH 6RUU\MXVWIRUFODULILFDWLRQWKHDUFKDHRORJLFDODVVHVVPHQWKDVQRWEHHQSUHSDUHG\HWDVWKHDUFKDHRORJLVWLV XQDEOHWRXQGHUWDNHDVLWHYLVLWXQWLOZHGURSWRDOHUW/HYHO

1JƗ0LKL

1LQD3LYDFO%$SS6FO3*'LS3ODQQLQJO$VVRF1=3,O'LUHFWRU

0 (QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ] :KWWSWRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]

KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN F YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$«   7RKX&RQVXOWLQJ0DLO5H3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ%HDX'LFNLQV.RWDUH6WUHHW D&RPPHUFH6WUHHW.DLWDLD 0HHWLQJE\DSSRLQWPHQWRQO\

2Q6XQ0D\DW1LQD3LYDF QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]!ZURWH .LDRUD7XL

7KDQNVIRU\RXUHPDLODQGIRUWKHOLQNWRWKH$KLSDUD0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ:KDWDEHDXWLIXOGRFXPHQW

,DPVXUHWKHFOLHQWVZLOOEHKDSS\IRUWKH7DNLZDWRSURYLGHD&,$&9$EXWMXVWWRFODULI\LVWKHWRWDOFRVWWR SUHSDUHD&,$&9$SOXVJVW"

,VKRXOGDGYLVHWKDWZHKDYHDOVRHQJDJHGZLWK*HRPHWULDWRSUHSDUHDQDUFKDHRORJLFDODVVHVVPHQWWR GHWHUPLQHZKHWKHUWKHUHDUHDQ\XQGLVFRYHUHGDUFKDHRORJLFDOVLWHVRQWKHFOLHQW VSURSHUW\DVSHU UHFRPPHQGDWLRQVIURP+HULWDJH1= VHHDWWDFKHG ,HQYLVLRQ\RXU&,$&9$FRPSOHPHQWLQJWKH LQIRUPDWLRQSURYLGHGE\*HRPHWULD+RZHYHUWRDYRLGGRXEOHXSVLQLQIRUPDWLRQ,ZRQGHUHGLIWKH-XGJH DQG*D\ODUG  DVVHVVPHQWDVUHIHUHQFHGLQVHFWLRQRIWKHPDQDJHPHQWSODQFRYHUHGWKH .RWDUH.DNDSR6WUHHWDUHDDWDOO"

$SSUHFLDWH\RXUIHHGEDFN

1JƗ0LKL

1LQD3LYDFO%$SS6FO3*'LS3ODQQLQJO$VVRF1=3,O'LUHFWRU

0 (QLQD#WRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ] :KWWSWRKXFRQVXOWLQJQ]

D&RPPHUFH6WUHHW.DLWDLD 0HHWLQJE\DSSRLQWPHQWRQO\

2Q6XQ0D\DW7XL4DXTDX WXLTDXTDX#JPDLOFRP!ZURWH dĞŶĂŬŽĞEŝŶĂ͕ƚŚĂŶŬLJŽƵĂŐĂŝŶĨŽƌĐŽŶƚĂĐƟŶŐƚŚĞŚŝƉĂƌĂdĂŬŝǁĈ͘/ŚĂǀĞĂĚĚĞĚƚŚĞůŝŶŬƚŽƚŚĞ ŚŝƉĂƌĂŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚƉůĂŶ͗ KWWSVGULYHJRRJOHFRPILOHG=BRKH,'R:5K$(-ZP33FYB5N30-:('VYLHZ" XVS VKDULQJ tĞŚĂǀĞůŽŽŬĞĚĂƚƚŚĞƐĐŚĞŵĞƉůĂŶIRUWKHƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJůŽĐĂƚĞĚĂƚ .RWDUH6WUHHW͕ŚŝƉĂƌĂ͕ĨŽƌLJŽƵƌĐůŝĞŶƚĞĂƵŝĐŬŝŶƐ͘ dŚĞdĂŬŝǁĈǁŽƵůĚůŝŬĞƚŽƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĂƐŚŽƌƚĨŽƌŵĐƵůƚƵƌĂůŝŵƉĂĐƚĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚͬĐƵůƚƵƌĂůǀĂůƵĞƐ ĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĂů͘

KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN F YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$«   7RKX&RQVXOWLQJ0DLO5H3URSRVHGVXEGLYLVLRQ%HDX'LFNLQV.RWDUH6WUHHW ƐƚŚĞdĂŬŝǁĈDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚWůĂŶŝŶĚŝĐĂƚĞƐƚŚĞƌĞŝƐĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƟŽŶĨĞĞƚŽĐŽǀĞƌĐŽƐƚƐ͕ƟŵĞƐƉĞŶƚĂŶĚ ĂŶLJŽƚŚĞƌĐŽƐƚƐŝŶĐƵƌƌĞĚŝŶĚŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŶŐĂŶĚƉƌĞƉĂƌŝŶŐƚŚĞ/ͬs͘dŚĞĨĞĞĨŽƌƚŚŝƐǁŽƌŬǁŽƵůĚďĞ ΨϮϬϬƉůƵƐŐƐƚ͘  WůĞĂƐĞĨĞĞůĨƌĞĞƚŽĐŽŶƚĂĐƚŵĞǀŝĂĞŵĂŝůŽƌŵLJƉŚŽŶĞŶƵŵďĞƌ;ŝŶĐůƵĚĞͿŝĨLJŽƵǁŝƐŚƚŽĚŝƐĐƵƐƐĨƵƌƚŚĞƌ͘ Ğůů͗ϬϮϳϯϬϴϱϵϴϲĞŵĂŝů͗WXLTDXTDX#JPDLOFRP  EŐĂŵŝŚŝŶƵŝ dƵŝYĂƵƋĂƵdĞWĂĂ 

KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN F YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$«  Appendix 9 – Stormwater Management Report, Haigh Workman Appendix 10 – Archaeological Assessment, Geometria Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision of Section 11 Block IV 5 Kotare St, Ahipara 17 May 2020

Prepared for:

M. and B. Dickens c/o- Tohu Consulting Kaitaia

Prepared by:

Geometria Limited PO Box 1972 Whangarei 0140 Page 2 – Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara Quality Information

Document: Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV. 5 Kotare St, Ahipara

Ref: 2020-117

Date: 17 May 2020

Prepared by: Jonathan Carpenter

Revision History Revision Revision Date Details Authorized Name Client draft 17 May 2020 J. Carpenter

© GEOMETRIA Limited 2020

The information contained in this document produced by GEOMETRIA Limited is solely for the use of the Client identified on the cover sheet for the purpose for which it has been prepared and GEOMETRIA Limited undertakes no duty to nor accepts any responsibility to any third party who may rely upon this document.

All rights reserved. No section or element of this document may be removed from this document, reproduced, electronically stored or transmitted in any from without the written permission of GEOMETRIA Limited. File ref.: C:\Users\Jono\Documents\2020\2020_117_Section_11_Block_IV_Ahipara\Reports\Working\20200515_LSection_11_B lock_IV_Ahipara_Subdivision_Archaeological_Assessment.docx

Geometria Ltd Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara - Page 3 Contents Figures ...... 3 1.0 Introduction...... 5 1.1 The Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 ...... 5 1.2 The Resource Management Act 1991...... 6 2.0 Location ...... 6 3.0 Proposal ...... 6 4.0 Methodology ...... 7 4.1 Desktop and Field Assessment ...... 7 4.2 Significance Assessment Criteria ...... 7 5.0 Background ...... 8 5.1 Archaeological Context ...... 8 5.2 Historic Background ...... 10 6.0 Site Visit ...... 16 7.0 Significance Assessment ...... 18 8.0 Assessment of Effects ...... 18 9.0 Recommendations ...... 18 10.0 Summary ...... 18 11.0 References ...... 18 Appendix A – Archaeological Site Record Forms ...... 20

Figures Figure 1: Proposed scheme plan, subdivision of Section 11 Block IV Ahipara...... 7 Figure 2: Archaeological sites in the vicinity of the subdivision (ArchSite)...... 10 Figure 3: Detail from ML 8628 (1911), showing settlement on Mapere Block, and other Maori blocks south and west of the Wairoa...... 12 Figure 4: Detail from Allotments in Mongonui County, around Kaitaia (1880s; APL NZ Map 4249)...... 12 Figure 5: Detail from Ahipara Survey District (1928)...... 13 Figure 6: Subject property in 1950 (www.retrolens.co.nz)...... 14 Figure 7: Subject property in 1958 (ATL WA-45728)...... 15 Figure 8: Subject property in 1958 (ATL WA-45729)...... 15 Figure 9: Subject property in 1958 (ATL WA-45727) ...... 16 Figure 10: Looking east over proposed Lot 2 towards existing dwelling on proposed Lot 1...... 17 Figure 11: Exemplary test unit, eastern end of Lot 2...... 17 Figure 12: Exemplary test unit, western end of Lot 2...... 17

Tables Table 1: Recorded Archaeological sites within 100m of the subject property ...... 10

Geometria Ltd Page 4 – Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara 0.0 Glossary Classic The later period of New Zealand settlement Fire scoop Fireplace used for various reasons (cooking, warming, etc.) Hangi An earth oven for cooking food Midden The remains of food refuse usually consisting of shells, and bone, but can also contain artefacts Pa A site fortified with earthworks and palisade defences Pit Rectangular excavated pit used to store crops by Maori Radiocarbon Method of absolute dating using known rates of decay of a carbon isotope Terrace A platform cut into the hill slope used for habitation Wahi tapu Sites of spiritual significance to Maori

Geometria Ltd Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara - Page 5 1.0 Introduction

N. Pivac of Tohu Consulting commissioned Geometria Ltd to undertake an archaeological assessment of a proposed subdivision of Section 11 Block IV at Ahipara for her clients M. and B. Dickens. The area contains a large number of archaeological sites, and several sites are recorded to in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.

Under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014) all archaeological sites are protected from any modification, damage or destruction except by the authority of the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga.

This assessment uses archaeological techniques to assess archaeological values and does not seek to locate or identify wahi tapu or other places of cultural or spiritual significance to Maori. Such assessments may only be made by Tangata Whenua, who may be approached independently of this report for advice.

Likewise, such an assessment by Tangata Whenua does not constitute an archaeological assessment and permission to undertake ground disturbing activity on and around archaeological sites and features may only be provided by Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga, and may only be monitored or investigated by an qualified archaeologist approved through the archaeological authority process.

1.1 The Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014

Under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 (HNZPTA; previously the Historic Places Act 1993) all archaeological sites are protected from any modification, damage or destruction except by the authority of the Historic Places Trust. Section 6 of the HNZPTA defines an archaeological site as:

" any place in New Zealand, including any building or structure (or part of a building or structure), that—

(i) was associated with human activity that occurred before 1900 or is the site of the wreck of any vessel where the wreck occurred before 1900; and

(ii) provides or may provide, through investigation by archaeological methods, evidence relating to the history of New Zealand; and

(b) includes a site for which a declaration is made under section 43(1)”

To be protected under the HNZPTA an archaeological site must have physical remains that pre-date 1900 and that can be investigated by scientific archaeological techniques. Sites from 1900 or post-1900 can be declared archaeological under section 43(1) of the Act.

If a development is likely to impact on an archaeological site, an authority to modify or destroy this site can be sought from the local Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga office under section 44 of the Act. Where damage or destruction of archaeological sites is to occur Heritage New Zealand usually requires mitigation. Penalties for modifying a site without an authority include fines of up to $300,000 for destruction of a site.

Geometria Ltd Page 6 – Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara Most archaeological evidence consists of sub-surface remains which are often not visible or obvious and indications of an archaeological site are often very subtle and hard to distinguish on the ground surface. Sub-surface excavations on a suspected archaeological site can only take place with an authority issued under Section 56 of the HNZPTA issued by the Heritage New Zealand.

Likewise, such an assessment by Tangata Whenua does not constitute an archaeological assessment. Permission to undertake ground disturbing activity on and around archaeological sites and features may only be provided by Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga, and may only be monitored or investigated by a qualified archaeologist approved through the archaeological authority process.

1.2 The Resource Management Act 1991.

Archaeological sites and other historic heritage may also be considered under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). The RMA establishes (under Part 2) in the Act’s purpose (Section 5) the matters of national importance (Section 6), and other matters (Section 7) and all decisions by a Council are subject to these provisions. Sections 6e and 6f identify historic heritage (which includes archaeological sites) and Maori heritage as matters of national importance.

Councils have a responsibility to recognise and provide for the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wahi tapu, and other taonga (Section 6e). Councils also have the statutory responsibility to recognise and provide for the protection of historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use and development within the context of sustainable management (Section 6f). Responsibilities for managing adverse effects on heritage arise as part of policy and plan preparation and the resource consent processes.

2.0 Location

The subject property is located at 5 Kotare St, Ahipara, within an existing suburban landscape established over the dune lands at the southern end of Oneroa-a-Tohe/90 Mile Beach. A house, water tank, services, landscaping and curtilage are already present on the property, which has been in its current form more or less since the mid- 20th century.

3.0 Proposal

The scheme plan calls for subdivision of the underlying 999m2 property into two new lots. The proposed Lot 1 will 500m2 in size and will contain the existing dwelling, while Lot 2 is 499m2 and is currently in lawn. An existing wastewater line runs from the house on Lot 1, across Lot 2.

Geometria Ltd Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara - Page 7

Figure 1: Proposed scheme plan, subdivision of Section 11 Block IV Ahipara.

4.0 Methodology

4.1 Desktop and Field Assessment

The methods used to assess the presence and state of archaeological remains on the site included both a desktop review and field survey. The desktop survey involved an investigation of written records relating to the history of the area. These included regional archaeological publications and unpublished reports, New Zealand Archaeological Association Site Record Files or NZAA SRF (via the ArchSite online, and the digitised NZAA Northland report library curated by the Whangarei District Library), Heritage New Zealand digital library, historic survey plans accessed through QuickMap, and aerial and terrestrial imagery (Retrolens, Auckland Public Library, Alexander Turnbull Library). The field survey methodology included spade test units and soil probing.

4.2 Significance Assessment Criteria

Archaeological significance of any identified sites and features is assessed using the following criteria:

The first set of criteria assess the potential of the site to provide a better understanding of New Zealand’s past using scientific archaeological methods. These categories are focussed on the intra-site level.

How complete is the site? Are parts of it already damaged or destroyed? A complete, undisturbed site has a high value in this section, a partly destroyed or

Geometria Ltd Page 8 – Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara damaged site has moderate value and a site of which all parts are damaged is of low value.

How diverse are the features to be expected during an archaeological excavation on the site? A site with only one or two known or expected feature types is of low value. A site with some variety in the known or expected features is of moderate value and a site like a defended kainga which can be expected to contain a complete feature set for a given historic/prehistoric period is of high value in this category.

How rare is the site? Rarity can be described in a local, regional and national context. If the site is not rare at all, it has no significance in this category. If the site is rare in a local context only it is of low significance, if the site is rare in a regional context, it has moderate significance and it is of high significance it the site is rare nationwide.

The second set of criteria puts the site into its broader context: inter-site, archaeological landscape and historic/oral traditions.

What is the context of the site within the surrounding archaeological sites? The question here is the part the site plays within the surrounding known archaeological sites. A site which sits amongst similar surrounding sites without any specific features is of low value. A site which occupies a central position within the surrounding sites is of high value.

What is the context of the site within the landscape? This question is linked to the one above, but focuses onto the position of the site in the landscape. If it is a dominant site with many features still visible it has high value, but if the position in the landscape is ephemeral with little or no features visible it has a low value. This question is also concerned with the amenity value of a site and its potential for on-site education.

What is the context of the site within known historic events or people? This is the question of known cultural association either by tangata whenua or other descendant groups. The closer the site is linked with important historic events or people the higher the significance of the site. This question is also concerned with possible commemorative values of the site.

An overall significance value derives from weighing up the different significance values of each of the six categories. In most cases the significance values across the different categories are similar.

5.0 Background

5.1 Archaeological Context

There are a number of archaeological sites recorded at Ahipara and site density at Ahipara is high in general. (Figure 2), although a review of reports held by Heritage New Zealand suggests that few have been investigated.

There is only one recorded archaeological site within 100m of the project area (Table 1). N04/10 is a shell midden located on the inland side of the Wairoa Stream mouth. The site was recorded by J. Maingay in 1986 at which time it comprised two areas of shell midden trampled by walkers using a track through the dunes to the beach. Maingay says the track was on the south side of Kotare Street, with the midden 80 and 100m along the track, consisting of eroded areas of crushed tuatua, charcoal and fire cracked rock. There was no site location map and it is not clear exactly where the site

Geometria Ltd Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara - Page 9 is located, based on the information in the site record, however a foot track is visible in aerial imagery leading off from the vicinity of what is now the cul de sac at the western end of Kotare St in aerial imagery from 1986, more than 100m west of the subject property.

The next nearest sites is midden N04/11, on the beach track 20m north of the end of Tui Street, and several hundred metres south west of the subject property. The site was recorded by Maingay at the same time as N04/11, and comprised a 20 x 8m scatter of tuatua shell midden in dark garden soil on a bank above the Wairoa Stream.

Five hundred metres southwest of the subject property is N04/49, an urupa or burial ground on the western side of the Wairoa Stream. In 2000, bones were reported eroding out of the stream bank and an initial inspection suggested they were Maori remains from the historic period, due to the presence of one mandible with the characteristic Polynesian ‘rocker jaw’ profile, in association with a spade blade and ‘pig snout’ case gin bottle. At that time, other previously eroded human remains had been reburied 20m inland of the stream.

Subsequently, other remains were removed with the support of University of Auckland osteoarchaeologist J. Littleton (Littleton and McCracken 2001) and reburied in the cemetery adjacent to Roma Marae. A minimum number of 24 individuals including nine children younger than 17 were excavated, but the remains probably represented 33 people based on close examination of jaw bones/teeth. There were ten adult females, five adult males, and two adults unidentifiable as to sex. Littleton and McCracken (2001: 22-25 hypothesised that the burial resulted from a disease epidemic in the early to mid-19th century.

Other sites located to the southwest with 30 sites in the vicinity of Foreshore Road, including 11 pa. Midden sites predominate on the coast and inland immediately behind the beach, with numerous pa sites on the high points. Urupa at the river mouth and shipwrecks on the beach are also recorded. Many more sites are recorded around Tauroa Point and to the north on the other side of the Wairoa River, including extensive midden, and drainage systems on the low lying gum lands. The climate, fish and shellfish resources, moderately fertile soil and the opportunities provided by the Wairoa River (which is navigable along its lower reaches) and the fresh water streams which flow into it meant the area was highly desirable for occupation in prehistoric times.

Despite the large number of sites, a review of reports held in the Northland site recording file of the New Zealand Archaeological Association and the digital library of the Historic Places Trust suggest very little formal site recording has been undertaken in the area; most sites have largely been recorded on an ad-hoc basis.

Leahy and Walsh (1979) undertook the only major survey in the area but it did not include the Ahipara settlement itself, but rather focussed on the coast and hinterland between Tauroa Point and Herekino. Small assessments for development have been undertaken north of the Wairoa River (e.g. McFadgen 1978 and Hensley 1998) with an assessment and subsequent archaeological investigation around the historic Reid homestead just west of Tasman Heights (Best 2004, and Best and Clough 2008).

Geometria Ltd Page 10 – Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara Table 1: Recorded Archaeological sites within 100m of the subject property Metric Site # Imperial Site # Easting (NZTM) Northing (NZTM) Site Type Q05/405 N15/95 1700174 6093122 Midden/Terrace

Figure 2: Archaeological sites in the vicinity of the subdivision (ArchSite).

5.1.2 Other Heritage Listings

There are no Listed heritage sites in the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga List but the Far North District Plan schedules a Site of Significance to Maori, MS-04-02 or the Rapata Kariri Tribal Reserve nearby, comprising parts of the Rapata, Wairoa and Te Neke blocks. This scheduled place will not be affected by the subdivision but indicates the cultural sensitivity of the area, and suggests possible archaeological sensitivity.

5.2 Historic Background Te Aupouri were the inhabitants of the area in the 17th and early 18th century. Te Aupouri, first known as Ngati Ruanui, originally landed at the Hokianga on the Mamari canoe. They settled on the north shore of the harbour and ultimately extended as far as Whangape. After coming into conflict with people already resident at Whangape and Mitimiti, a series of tragic events culminated in 1824 when Te Aupouri fought Ngapuhi, Te Rarawa and Ngati Kahu under Hongi Hika of Ngapuhi and Nopera Panakaraeo of Te Rarawa at Hukatere Hill on 90 Mile Beach. Te Aupouri were outnumbered and retreated east to Houhoura and then north to the centre of their rohe fighting a number of rear-guard actions. This led to the iwi taking on the name of Te Aupouri and moving north, via Herekino, Ahipara, and Pukepoto, to Te Kao. Here they were given the pa Tawhitirahi (Te Kao Pa) by their Ngai Takoto relatives and Te Kao, named after the local process used to dry and preserve kumara, is still the heart

Geometria Ltd Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara - Page 11 of Te Aupouri (Cloher 2002). Te Rarawa subsequently settled the land around Tauroa Point.

Te Rarawa emphasise descent from the Tinana canoe, captained by Tūmoana. Tūmoana's descendants spread throughout the northern Hokianga and eastward to Maunga Taniwha. Tūmoana later returned to Hawaiki, leaving his son Tamahotu and daughter Kahutianui-o-te-rangi at Tauroa. Te Rarawa also trace descent from the canoes Matawhaorua, captained by Kupe, Kurahaupō, captained by Pōhurihanga, Ngātokimatawhaorua, captained by Nukutawhiti and Māhuhu-ki-te-rangi, captained by Rongomai and Whakatau.

The Te Rarawa chief Panakaraeo who bested Te Aupouri at Hukatere Hill welcomed the first missionaries to the area and supported European settlement for the economic benefits to his lands and people. He signed the Treaty of Waitangi, although he became increasingly disillusioned as government purchases after the treaty saw the loss of 131,000ha between 1840 and 1865 on top of the 60,000ha of pre-treaty purchases subsequently confirmed and granted by the Crown.

The Crown purchase of the Ahipara Block around 1859. There are few particulars about these purchase but it was arranged by White and Kemp and the effect of the purchases was to secure almost all the remaining part of the Ahipara-Kaitaia-Awanui flats and the bordering hills. Maori were left with small areas at Ahipara and Pukepoto and steeper hills and rugged country south of Kaitaia. Those remaining lands which were mainly in the south-east were acquired by the Crown in the intensive land purchasing programme of the 1870s to 1890s (see chapter 5 of this report). Certain forest land, known as the Kokohuia Block, was added to the Ahipara block in a later acquisition in 1861. In this acquisition 800 acres was acquired from eight Maori for £50.

The only reserves set aside were some very small ones from the Ahipara purchase. Maori negotiated to exclude a coastal strip from the Ahipara block (just as they had in the purchases involving the Okiore and Awanui blocks). It is possible that Maori were concerned to retain the coastal strips in order to keep up their interests in Te Oneroa- a-Tohe. However, most of the Ahipara coastal strip was sold in 1877 (Te Uira Associates 2004: 21, 64).

Settlement during the historic period at Ahipara was concentrated around the Wairoa River and around Paripari Stream in the late 19th century, and in particular on the Mapere Block southwest of the Wairoa mouth. A school and courthouse were established there in the 1870s. The lines of the major roads north of the river were laid out in the 1880s but development does not seem to have occurred in the dune lands until the 1920s, with a number of houses present in the area. This includes the subject property where a house is already present by 1950 and windbreak trees are already well-established.

Geometria Ltd Page 12 – Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara

Figure 3: Detail from ML 8628 (1911), showing settlement on Mapere Block, and other Maori blocks south and west of the Wairoa.

Figure 4: Detail from Allotments in Mongonui County, around Kaitaia (1880s; APL NZ Map 4249).

Geometria Ltd Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara - Page 13

Figure 5: Detail from Ahipara Survey District (1928).

Geometria Ltd Page 14 – Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara

Figure 6: Subject property in 1950 (www.retrolens.co.nz).

Geometria Ltd Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara - Page 15

Figure 7: Subject property in 1958 (ATL WA-45728).

Figure 8: Subject property in 1958 (ATL WA-45729).

Geometria Ltd Page 16 – Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara

Figure 9: Subject property in 1958 (ATL WA-45727)

6.0 Site Visit

The project area was visited over the course of an hour on 15 May 2020. The property and surrounding accessible public areas were walked over. Six spade test units were excavated at approximately 5m spacings in the central and northern part of the property to become Lot 2, avoiding the line of the wastewater pipe. Probing was undertaken at approximately 1.5m intervals.

There was no indication of archaeological features surface or subsurface archaeological features. The test units contained 10-40cm of dark brown sandy silt over a sand hard pan, with no obvious archaeological material such as layers or lenses of charcoal or charcoal stained soil, or shell midden.

No archaeological sites or features were identified in areas likely to be affected by the subdivision, or subsequent development.

Geometria Ltd Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara - Page 17

Figure 10: Looking east over proposed Lot 2 towards existing dwelling on proposed Lot 1.

Figure 11: Exemplary test unit, eastern end of Lot 2.

Figure 12: Exemplary test unit, western end of Lot 2.

Geometria Ltd Page 18 – Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara

7.0 Significance Assessment

There are no archaeological sites or features to be assessed.

8.0 Assessment of Effects

There are no archaeological effects from the proposed subdivision of Section 11 Block IV and subsequent development on the new lots. An archaeological authority is not required.

9.0 Recommendations

1) There is no archaeological impediment to the proposed subdivision.

2) An archaeological authority under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 is not required.

3) A standard archaeological accidental discovery protocol should be in place in the course of the project, and subsequent development of the Lots. If other archaeological remains or buried cultural deposits (layers of shell midden, oven stones, artefacts etc) are encountered in the course of other activities on the property, the Smiths or their agents or other landowners should cease work in the immediate vicinity and contact Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga and Geometria Ltd for advice on how to proceed.

10.0 Summary

Geometria Ltd was commissioned by Ni. Pivac of Tohu Consulting on behalf of her clients M. and B. Dickens to undertake an archaeological survey and assessment of the proposed subdivision of Section 11 Block IV at 5 Kotare St, Ahipara.

There are a number of archaeological sites recorded in the vicinity, along with a site of significance to Maori scheduled in the Far North District Plan but these will not be affected.

No archaeological sites or features were observed in the proposed subdivision and an archaeological authority under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 is not required for any subsequent development on the identified building sites.

11.0 References

Berghan, P., 2006. Berghan, P., 2006. Northland Block Research Narratives, Volume II: Old Land Claims. Unpublished report for the Crown Forestry Rental Trust’s Northland Research Assistance Project. Walghan Partners Ltd, Upper Hutt.

Best, S., and C. Clough, 2004. Ahipara: Archaeological Assessment of Proposed Subdivision, HPT section 18 Report.

Best, S., 2006.Greenstone Cowboy : history & Archaeology of a terrace at Ahipara (Site N05/383).

Geometria Ltd Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara - Page 19 Carpenter, J., 2010. Archaeological Survey and Assessment of a Proposed Storm Water System at Tasman Heights, Ahipara. Unpublished report for Far North District Council. Geometria Ltd, Whangarei.

Hensley, V. H. Hensley, 1998. Property Inspection for Archaeological or Historical Evidence. Ahipara.

Leahy, A. L and W.D. Walsh, 1979. Ahipara, North Hokianga, Kaitaia Area: Archaeological Site Survey Report.

McFadgen, Bruce G. Report on the Quilter Site, Ahipara Bay.

Te Uira Associates, 2004. Te Rarawa Historical Overview. Unpublished report for Te Runanga o Te Rarawa.

SO 21783 (1921).

ML 1739 (1870).

ML 2961 (1873).

ML 3556 (1877).

ML 7267 (1906).

ML 8268 (1911).

ML 13723 (1955).

Geometria Ltd Page 20 – Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Subdivision Section 11 Block IV Ahipara Appendix A – Archaeological Site Record Forms

Geometria Ltd NEW ZEALAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

NZAA SITE NUMBER: N04/49

Site Record Form SITE TYPE: Burial/ cemetery SITE NAME(s):

DATE RECORDED:

SITE COORDINATES (NZTM) Easting:1613477 Northing: 6108181 Source: CINZAS

IMPERIAL SITE NUMBER: METRIC SITE NUMBER: N04/49

Scale 1:2,500

Finding aids to the location of the site

Brief description KOIWI

Recorded features Skeletal remains - human

Other sites associated with this site

Printed by: jonocarpenter 13/05/2020

1 of 4 NEW ZEALAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

SITE RECORD HISTORY NZAA SITE NUMBER: N04/49

Site description

Condition of the site

Statement of condition

Current land use:

Threats:

Printed by: jonocarpenter 13/05/2020

2 of 4 NEW ZEALAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

SITE RECORD INVENTORY NZAA SITE NUMBER: N04/49

Supporting documentation held in ArchSite

Printed by: jonocarpenter 13/05/2020

3 of 4 NEW ZEALAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

Printed by: jonocarpenter 13/05/2020

4 of 4 NEW ZEALAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

NZAA SITE NUMBER: N04/11

Site Record Form SITE TYPE: Midden/Oven SITE NAME(s):

DATE RECORDED:

SITE COORDINATES (NZTM) Easting:1613776 Northing: 6108282 Source: CINZAS

IMPERIAL SITE NUMBER:N9/160 METRIC SITE NUMBER: N04/11

Scale 1:2,500

Finding aids to the location of the site

Brief description MIDDEN

Recorded features Midden

Other sites associated with this site

Printed by: jonocarpenter 13/05/2020

1 of 3 NEW ZEALAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

SITE RECORD HISTORY NZAA SITE NUMBER: N04/11

Site description

Condition of the site

Statement of condition

Current land use:

Threats:

Printed by: jonocarpenter 13/05/2020

2 of 3 NEW ZEALAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

SITE RECORD INVENTORY NZAA SITE NUMBER: N04/11

Supporting documentation held in ArchSite

Printed by: jonocarpenter 13/05/2020

3 of 3 NEW ZEALAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

NZAA SITE NUMBER: N04/10

Site Record Form SITE TYPE: Midden/Oven SITE NAME(s):

DATE RECORDED:

SITE COORDINATES (NZTM) Easting:1613975 Northing: 6108682 Source: CINZAS

IMPERIAL SITE NUMBER:N9/159 METRIC SITE NUMBER: N04/10

Scale 1:2,500

Finding aids to the location of the site

Brief description MIDDENS

Recorded features Midden

Other sites associated with this site

Printed by: jonocarpenter 13/05/2020

1 of 3 NEW ZEALAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

SITE RECORD HISTORY NZAA SITE NUMBER: N04/10

Site description

Condition of the site

Statement of condition

Current land use:

Threats:

Printed by: jonocarpenter 13/05/2020

2 of 3 NEW ZEALAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

SITE RECORD INVENTORY NZAA SITE NUMBER: N04/10

Supporting documentation held in ArchSite

Printed by: jonocarpenter 13/05/2020

3 of 3