Application for Resource Consent Under clause 2(1) of Schedule 6 of the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020
This form is to be used to apply for a resource consent(s) for listed projects and referred projects under clause 2(1) of Schedule 6 to the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 (“the Act”). If the project also includes a Notice of Requirement please also complete the separate Notice of Requirement form.
All legislative references relate to the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 unless otherwise stated.
Resource consent applications cannot be lodged with the EPA or determined by a panel if they relate to an activity that: • is classified as a prohibited activity in a relevant plan or proposed plan, or in regulations made under the Resource Management Act 1991 (including any national environmental standard); and • is to occur within a customary marine title area, unless agreed in writing with the appropriate customary marine title group.
The information required for resource consent applications are prescribed in clauses 9-12 of Schedule 6 of the Act.
Your application must: • Include the information required (which is listed in the Resource Consent Application checklist on this form); and • Comply with any restrictions or obligations, such as any information requirements included in Schedule 2 or 3 of the Act, as applicable.
The information you provide must be in sufficient detail that corresponds with the scale and significance of the effects that the activity may have on the environment, taking into account any proposals to manage the adverse effects through conditions. If these information requirements are not met, the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) must return your application.
If the project is planned to proceed in stages, please provide details of the nature and timing of the staging and indicative lodgement dates for each stage. Note that a new application should be lodged for each separate stage.
We recommend that you discuss your application with the EPA before lodging the application. Please contact the EPA: By phone: 0800 080 065; or By Email: [email protected]
EPA0410 Fast track Consent ng Resource Consent App cat on Form v2 Page 1 of 8
Applications must be submitted to the EPA by email [email protected] and in hard copy (six hard copies required). Hard copies are to be sent to the Environmental Protection Authority, Level 10, 215 Lambton Quay, Wellington.
Please also provide one copy of a redacted version (clearly labelled) that does not disclose personal contact details for you (the applicant) and any other individual, including persons identified as owners or occupiers of land or affected persons.
If your application includes or is for a coastal permit to undertake an aquaculture activity, an additional copy of the application documents must be included for the EPA to provide to the Director-General of the Ministry for Primary Industries.
All documents lodged with this application, must be indexed.
Electronic documents shall be separated into smaller files less than 30MB.
Your personal and company information will be held by the EPA and used in relation to this application. You have the right to access and correct personal information held by the EPA.
If your application is accepted as complying with the requirements of clause 3 of Schedule 6 of the Act, it will be provided to specified parties invited to comment by the expert consenting panel. Any personal contact details (phone number, address and email) including any owners and occupiers listed in application documents, will not be made publicly available.
Your full application (including business contact details) will be publicly available on our website.
All information held by the EPA is subject to the Official Information Act 1982.
We will recover from you the actual and reasonable costs incurred in respect of this application. We may suspend processing your application for non-payment of costs. A copy of the EPA Cost Recovery Policy is available on the EPA website: https://www.epa.govt.nz/fast-track-consenting/making-an- application/
EPA0410 Fast track Consent ng Resource Consent App cat on Form v2 Page 2 of 8
Part 1: Applicant details
Project Name and identifier (as named in Schedule 2 or referral order): LP08 – Papakāinga Development - Kaitaia
Person or ent ty author sed to undertake project (as named n Schedu e 2 or referra order): H
Key contact name:
Phone:
Ema address for serv ce:
Posta Address ( f preferred method of serv ce):
Consultant details
Company:
Fu name of consu tant:
Phone:
Ema address for serv ce:
Posta Address ( f preferred method of serv ce):
If you are making this application on behalf of the applicant please attach evidence that you are authorised to make this application.
Please direct all correspondence from the EPA to: ☒ Applicant ☒ Consultant
Part 2: Type of application for resource consent This application is for the following type(s) of resource consent (please tick all that apply): ☒ land-use consent ☐ subdivision consent ☐ water permit ☐ discharge permit ☐ coastal permit: ☐ for reclamation ☐ aquaculture activities ☐ other
EPA0410 Fast track Consent ng Resource Consent App cat on Form v2 Page 3 of 8
Part 3: Brief description of the application Please provide a brief description of the application and the consents sought:
Attach add t ona pages f requ red
Land use consent (District and Regional) sought to carry out a 24 house development in Kaitaia
Part 4: Schedule of application documents List all documents submitted with the application
Attach add t ona pages f requ red
Attachment Document name and date Author Document number versions
01 Assessment of Env ronmenta Effects Rev A
02 Record of T t e N/A N/A
03 Re evant Maps Var ous N/A
04 Prev ous Author sat ons N/A
05 Ru e Assessment Tab es N/A
06 Re evant Persons N/A
07 Treaty Sett ement Redress Var ous N/A
08 Assessment Cr ter a N/A
09 Māor Land Court H story N/A
10 Land Deve opment Report & P ans 0
11 Traff c Impact Assessment F na
12 Geotechn ca Eng neer ng 1 Invest gat on
13 S te P an A
14 Proposed Consent Cond t ons N/A
15 CDM Notes & Feedback Var ous N/A
16 NESC Consu tat on Var ous N/A
17 Wr tten Approva N/A N/A
18 Addendum 1 N/A
EPA0410 Fast track Consent ng Resource Consent App cat on Form v2 Page 4 of 8
Sanson & Associates Ltd Planners & Resource Consent Specialists
Application For Resource Consent He Korowai Trust
Application for Resource Consent for the development of 24 residential dwellings in Kaitaia prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency under the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast Track Consenting) Act 2020
Prepared for: He Korowai Trust (Supported by Te Puni Kōkiri) Prepared by: Steven Sanson | Consultant Planner 14th November 2020
Resource Consent Rev A Page 1 of 35
Table of Contents 1. Applicant & Property Details ...... 4 2. Summary of Proposal ...... 5 3. Introduction ...... 6 4. Description Of The Proposal ...... 6 5. Site & Surrounding Environment ...... 9 6. Compliance With Clause 3(1) ...... 11 7. Relevant Persons ...... 12 8. Consent Requirements ...... 12 9. Statutory assessment ...... 14 9.1 Section 5 - Purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991 ...... 14 9.2 Section 4 - Purpose of the Act ...... 14 9.3 National Environmental Standards ...... 15 9.4 Other Regulations ...... 16 9.5 National Policy Statements & New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement ...... 16 9.6 Northland Regional Policy Statement ...... 17 9.7 Far North District Plan ...... 19 9.8 Iwi / Hapū Management Plans ...... 22 9.9 Relevant Treaty Settlements ...... 24 10. Assessment of effects ...... 25 10.1 Actual and Potential Effects ...... 25 10.2 Hazardous Installations ...... 30 10.3 Discharges ...... 30 10.4 Mitigation Measures ...... 30 10.5 Potentially Affected Persons ...... 31 10.6 Iwi / Hapu ...... 32 10.7 Monitoring ...... 32 10.8 Protected Customary Rights ...... 33 11. Cultural Impact Assessment ...... 33 12. Permitted Activities ...... 34 13. Customary Marine Title ...... 34 14. Proposed Conditions Of Consent ...... 35
Resource Consent Rev A Page 2 of 35
15. Conclusion ...... 35
Resource Consent Rev A Page 3 of 35
3. INTRODUCTION
1. This report has been prepared on behalf of He Korowai Trust, in support of their application through the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 (“Act”). It has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Schedule 6 of the Act. The information provided is considered to correspond to the scale and significance of the effects that the activity is anticipated to have on the environment.
2. The purpose of the application is for an additional 24 papakāinga houses on Māori Freehold Land at 23 Kohuhu Street Kaitaia.
3. The proposal has been discussed with both the Far North District Council and Northland Regional Council prior to lodging this application. Feedback / notes from such meetings are located in Appendix 14.
4. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
4. “LP08 – Papakāinga Development – Kaitaia” is a Listed Project under Schedule 2 of the Act. The listed project relates to 24 new dwellings to the existing papakāinga development located at 23 Kohuhu Street, Kaitaia. He Korowai Trust, supported by Te Puni Kōkiri are authorised to make this application.
5. The 24 houses to be relocated, are ex-Kainga Ora stock that are being saved from demolition in Auckland for re-use. This approach means that not all 24 houses will be on the site at once, rather they will be sent to the site once they become available. Additionally, this means that the actual specifications for each house is not yet known.
6. Notwithstanding the above, the typical specifications of the dwellings brought to site are as follows:
a. Single storey;
b. 3 bedroom (although some may be larger/smaller); and
c. Weatherboard cladding and iron roof.
7. These typical specifications come from the existing stock on the site, which provide a example of the likely ‘finished product’ following refurbishments and reinstatement.
8. The Site Plan outlining the location of current and proposed dwellings is located in Appendix 12.
Resource Consent Rev A Page 6 of 35
5. SITE & SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT
Source: Far North Maps
Legal Description & Zoning 11. The legal description, title reference and size of the site is outlined in Schedule 1. A copy of the record of title and relevant instruments are located in Appendix 1. The land’s tenure is Māori Freehold Land.
Location & Access 12. The site is located at 23 Kohuhu Street, Kaitaia and is approximately c.1-2km from the northern and southern (main street) commercial/industrial areas of the township. Kohuhu Street comes off North Road, which provides access north and south of Kaitaia.
Resource Consent Rev A Page 9 of 35
18. The site is not identified in the Northland Regional Council’s Selected Land Use Register, and feedback from both the Northland Regional Council and Far North District Council confirms that the site is not. HAIL in terms of the relevant National Environmental Standard.
19. The site has no identified heritage items, resources or buildings on site. No archaeology has been identified through previous development on the site.
Surrounds 20. The site is flanked on three sides by existing residential development. The houses to the south of the site, Grigg Street, have screening in the form of fencing and landscaping on the boundary. To the north of the site are the relatively new residences of brick and tile of Taupata Street. These houses have a 1.8m to 2m high solid timber fence along their property boundaries.
21. A Far North District Council drainage reserves buffers the site to the north from these residences. The width of this reserve is at least 10m along most part of the northern boundary, although a smaller buffer also exists for a small portion. A small unnamed Far North District Council reserves adjoins the site near the Kohuhu Street entrance.
22. Kaitaia Intermediate and Kaitaia Abundant Life School are located in the surrounds. The Northerner Motor Inn and Loredo (accommodation services) are also located near the end of Kohuhu Street. Overall, the immediate surrounds is characterised by residential use which contains a rural outlook. This characterisation is supported by FNDC zoning arrangements whereby, the Residential and Rural Production Zoning is prevalent in the area.
23. Taking a broader view, the site is between c. 1-2km from a range of activities and uses, including access to Kaitaia’s Main Street as well as the recently commercialised and industrial areas of North Park. The site also has ready access to many small and large scale reserves and recreational assets in the Kaitaia township. State Highway 1 does not provide access to the site, however is in close proximity, providing access both north and south through Kaitaia.
6. COMPLIANCE WITH CLAUSE 3(1)
24. Clause 3(1) states:
3 EPA to refer consent applications and notices of requirement to panel (1) Within 5 working days of receiving a consent application or notice of requirement, the EPA must determine whether the application or notice— (a) relates solely to 1 or more of the listed projects or referred projects; and (b) does not breach clause 2(3)(c) or (4); and (c) contains all the information required under clauses 9 to 13.
Resource Consent Rev A Page 11 of 35
25. The project has been confirmed as meeting Clause 3(1)(a) as the project relates to “LP08 – Papakāinga Development – Kaitaia” and is a Listed Project under Schedule 2 of the Act.
26. In respect of Clause 2(3)(c), this application/report provides for the requirements outlined in Schedule 2 as it relates to a 24 dwelling papakāinga development.
27. In terms of Clause 4, the assessment against relevant rules found in Appendix 4, confirms that the application is not a Prohibited Activity as outlined in the relevant plans and regulations made under the Resource Management Act 1991.
28. In terms of Clause 3(1)(c), this report contains all the information required under Clauses 9 to 13.
7. RELEVANT PERSONS
29. As required by Clause 9(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Act, a list: a. Of the owners of the application site; b. Owners of land adjacent to the application site; and c. Each occupier of the application site and adjacent land to the site.
30. This list is provided in Appendix 5.
8. CONSENT REQUIREMENTS
31. But for the consent pathway provided through the Act, the following consents and authorisations would be required to give effect to the proposed development:
Far North District Council
32. An assessment of the relevant rules and requirements of the Far North District Plan has been undertaken. This is provided in Appendix 4. In summary, the proposal would have required consent for the following reasons: a. Breaches to Rule 8.6.5.1.1 Residential Intensity (Non Complying Activity); b. Breaches to Rule 8.6.5.1.5 Transportation (Discretionary Activity); c. Breaches to Rule 8.6.5.2.2 Papakāinga Housing (Non Complying Activity); d. Breaches to Rule 8.6.5.4.2 Integrated Development (Non Complying Activity); e. Breaches to Rule 12.3.6.1.1 Excavation and/or Filling in the Rural Production Zone (Restricted Discretionary);
Resource Consent Rev A Page 12 of 35
f. Breaches to Rule 12.7.6.1.1 Setback from Lakes, Rivers and the Coastal Marine Area (Discretionary); g. Breaches to Rules 15.1.6A.1.1 Traffic Intensity (Discretionary); and h. Potential breaches to Rule 15.1.6B.1.1 Parking; i. Breaches to Rules 15.1.6C.1.1(c) and (d) Private Accessways in All Zones (Discretionary).
33. Overall, the proposal would be a Non-Complying Activity, and require resource consent from the Far North District Council.
Northland Regional Council
34. An assessment of the relevant rules and requirements of the Northland Regional Plan (Appeals) and Operative Regional Plan (Water and Soil) has been undertaken. This is provided in Appendix 4.
35. In summary, the proposal would have required consent for the following reasons: a. Breaches to Rule 33.1.3 Rules for Land Disturbance Activities (Controlled Activity) of the Water & Soil Plan for Northland; and b. Breaches to Rule C.8.3.1 Earthworks (Controlled Activity) of the Northland Regional Plan (Appeals).
36. Overall, the proposal would be a Controlled Activity, and require resource consent from the Northland Regional Council.
National Policy Statements, National Environmental Standards, and Regulations
37. There are no consent requirements that arise from National Policy Statements.
38. In this instance, the relevant National Environmental Standard for the proposed development is the National Environment Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health.
39. There are no relevant regulations as per Section 360 of the Resource Management Act 1991.
Resource Consent Rev A Page 13 of 35
9. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT 9.1 Section 5 - Purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991
40. Section 5 in Part 2 of the Resource Management Act 1991 identifies the purpose as being the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. This means managing the use of natural and physical resources in a way that enables people and communities to provide for their social, cultural and economic well-being which sustain those resources for future generations, protecting the life supporting capacity of ecosystems, and avoiding remedying or mitigating adverse effects on the environment.
41. The proposed activity is considered to meet the purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991 for the following reasons: a. The development has been designed to minimse effects to natural and physical resource located on the site. b. Social wellbeing is enhanced through the proposal, providing a continued pipeline of on the job training experience and opportunities for youth involved in the trades training academy. Social wellbeing is also enhanced for families who have an opportunity to move from homeless, emergency, or transitional housing spaces into more permanent housing opportunities. c. Cultural wellbeing is enhanced through the continued development of Māori land for housing purposes. He Korowai Trust are a Kaupapa māori organisation and kaitiaki of the land. d. In terms of economic wellbeing, the continued investment in housing, whilst supplemented by a trades training academy, requires investment, goods and services across the construction sector. This will help to stimulate jobs and economic development in the Kaitaia township. e. Housing is considered as an appropriate physical resource to pass on to future generations. This is particularly true given the re-use aspect of the houses coming from Auckland, providing another generation of housing for families and individuals. f. Similarly, the infrastructure being provided to service the development will provide for future generations. g. The life supporting capacity of ecosystems are only slightly impacted upon as a result of the development. Mitigation measures ensure the effects are no more than minor.
9.2 Section 4 - Purpose of the Act
42. The purpose of the Act is to:
“urgently promote employment to support New Zealand’s recovery from the economic and social impacts of COVID-19 and to support the certainty of ongoing investment across New
Resource Consent Rev A Page 14 of 35
54. Given the location of the proposed development the following Treaty Settlements are considered relevant: a. Ngāti Kuri Claims Settlement Act 2015; b. Te Rarawa Claims Settlement Act 2015; c. NgāiTakoto Claims Settlement Act 2015; and d. Te Aupouri Claims Settlement Act 2015. Relevant Provisions
55. Having considered the four Iwi settlements, particularly in context of the redress properties, statutory acknowledgement areas, and joint management approaches (see Te Oneroa-a-Tōhe Beach Board and Korowai Conservation Areas) there was nothing obvious that required further consideration or assessment, over and above, what has been prescribed through this consenting pathway.
Redress / Statutory Acknowledgements
56. Appendix 6 contains the relevant redress properties/areas and statutory acknowledgements for the four Iwi outlined above. Properties of relevance i.e in close proximity are likely to be lands currently held by Housing New Zealand and the Ministry of Education. However, there are no particular provisions that would require any further assessment or consideration outside of the current consent pathway being considered in this Report. These lands are typically held as land with Rights of First Referral (“RFR”) on their Record of Title.
57. The Awanui River is of some relevance. With respect to effects on areas of importance to Iwi, the proposal has been designed to consider stormwater effects and these have been developed in accordance with recognised engineering design principles. There is high confidence that the proposal will incur no more than minor effects to the Awanui River by virtue of the stormwater approach which seeks hydraulic neutrality.
58. Overall, the proposal has been considered against the relevant Treaty Settlement Legislation, and it is considered that the proposal is consistent with its intents and aims.
10. ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS 10.1 Actual and Potential Effects Positive Effects 59. The proposal promotes the following positive effects: i. Increased housing supply and options in Kaitaia.
Resource Consent Rev A Page 25 of 35
ii. Increased economic growth and employment in Kaitaia, following COVID-19 via service providers and contractors. iii. Trades training opportunities for youth in Kaitaia. iv. Appropriate use of ancestral Māori Land, providing housing and other symbiotic uses on the site.
Neighbourhood Effects
60. In order to consider neighbourhood effects, Chapter 11 – Assessment Criteria of the Far North District Plan has been considered. The full list of criteria are provided in Appendix 7. a. Residential Intensity: i. The character and appearance of buildings will be similar to those already located on site. ii. The proposed dwellings are sited to mirror the previous development, with sufficient areas for outdoor living, privacy, and sunlight. There are no breaches to the bulk and location rules of the Far North District Plan. There is implicit support of the proposed design of the proposed development from Far North District Council, given their approval for existing development. As it is proposed to ‘flip’ or ‘mirror’ this development, amenity effects are considered to be appropriate. iii. The majority of the site remains in open space and in pasture. Each development area has a central open space where it is open to all to use. iv. Vehicular and pedestrian traffic has been considered through the Traffic Impact Assessment found in Appendix 10. The proposal is considered to generate an additional 24 trips during morning peak. v. Hours of operation are not relevant as the proposed use is residential in nature. vi. The is considered to be able to be adequately serviced. A Concept Development Meeting was held with FNDC which confirmed connection capability to reticulated services (except for stormwater). vii. Separation distances between each dwelling ensure that visual and aural privacy between units is achieved. In any event, this assessment criteria goes against the principles of a papakāinga which is to increase social cohesion. b. Building Height, Scale, Sunlight i. The dwellings will reflect previous developments in terms of building height, scale and ability to receive sunlight. Effects are considered to be less than minor. c. Stormwater Management i. The Land Development Report in Appendix 9 assesses the relevant assessment criteria associated with stormwater. Overall, effects are considered to be no more than minor.
Resource Consent Rev A Page 26 of 35
d. Setback from Boundaries i. All of the proposed dwellings meet the bulk and location standards of the Far North District Plan. The alignment of the dwellings are similar to that of existing development on site, with the proposed relocatable buildings being of a similar nature. ii. Given the location of development, the proposed buildings do not intrude into the street scene. Given the separation distances between the proposed dwellings and adjoining sites, privacy of adjacent properties is not considered to be an issue. iii. Vehicle manoeuvring has been designed to ensure that the proposed buildings do not impact sight lines or visibility. iv. Street planting is not currently proposed, but can be conditioned if considered as necessary. e. Traffic Intensity, Parking, and Access i. See the Traffic Impact Assessment in Appendix 10 for consideration of the traffic, parking and access effects. Overall, effects are considered to be less than minor from a traffic engineering perspective. ii. Although there is a potential parking deficit, the provision of 32 car parks is considered appropriate for the proposed development. iii. In terms of access, the breaches are associated with the fact that the proposed ring road extension is not to be vested in Council. Following the authorisations associated with previous development, Council is happy for the ring road approach to remain in private ownership, with maintenance responsibilities to lie with the landholder. f. Land Use Incompatibility i. Existing lawfully established activities in the surrounds are characterised by residential use and pastoral rural production. The proposed development has been designed to ensure that there are minimal effects to both existing uses. g. Building Coverage i. Landscaping can be undertaken on the site. ii. The proposed relocatable dwellings, once reinstated and refurbished will be consistent with the scale and character of the existing residences on the site and surrounds. iii. The bulk and scale of the development is broken up with appropriate spacing between each dwelling. iv. The majority of the site will remain as rural pasture and in open space. v. All of the buildings have been sited to meet bulk and location standards of the Plan. h. Setback from Waterways
Resource Consent Rev A Page 27 of 35
i. Some of the proposed dwellings are within 30m of the existing and proposed waterways / stormwater ponds. Cultural and spiritual values are not impacted as follows: 1. Wastewater is not discharged to land or water on the site. 2. Erosion and sediment controls will be established prior to works commencing. ii. Natural hazards have been appropriately mitigated as outlined in the Land Development Report in Appendix 9. The minimum finished floor levels for all new dwellings must be 11.75RL. iii. The site has been largely modified by human intervention. The site, as with most of Kaitaia and surrounds, were heavily drained via ditches in earlier settlement periods. The site still contains some modified overland flowpaths which cross the site.
Physical Effects
61. The development will includes changes to the existing landscape and result in visual changes from pasture to a papakāinga village. The landscape will first be altered through the earthworks required to give effect to the development, however these effects are typically temporary and conditions of consent usually seek the reinstatement of vegetation (usually grass) as soon as practicably possible. This temporary effect is typical of development and the earthworks proposed, do not drastically alter the landscape, rather is required to provide adequate and appropriate infrastructure to service the papakāinga village.
62. The relevant impacts associated with earthworks are provided in the Land Development Report in Appendix 9. In summary, subject to appropriate erosions and sediment controls measures the proposed earthworks will not result in more than minor adverse effects.
63. Following earthworks, roading, housing and other constructions works will be visible and characterise the change in landscape from pasture to an urban papakāinga village. Viewshafts to the development from public areas, such as the nearby Kohuhu Street and FNDC reserve would result in a consistent view of housing development, coupled with open space.
64. Visual changes for persons along Taupata Place and Grigg Street are minimal as dwellings along these roads are typically situated towards the road frontage, with appropriate fencing already. Overall, physical effects are considered to be no more than minor.
Effects to Ecosystems
Resource Consent Rev A Page 28 of 35
65. Any development impacts or has effects upon ecosystems. In the context of this development, effects to ecosystems are largely those associated with earthworks, stormwater management, and increased human interaction with areas that were previously in pasture.
66. Notwithstanding the above, the site is not known to have any significant flora or fauna frequenting the site, there is no vegetation clearance required and any damage to ecosystems will be temporary in nature and eventually co-exist or return once the proposed development has been delivered.
67. The stormwater ponds proposed may result in positive ecosystem effects, providing a habitat for fauna and flora to use. Overall, effects to ecosystems are considered to be no more than minor.
Effects to Natural and Physical Resources
68. The site has no resources that are considered to have an aesthetic, recreational, scientific or historical value.
69. From a cultural perspective, the Trust is seeking to use land for housing purposes, with the general intention of supporting māori and others with housing issues in the Far North. This is a positive effect associated with the proposed development.
Discharges
70. Given the infrastructure approach to development, the only relevant discharge is that associated with stormwater. The engineering approach in this instance is detailed in the Land Development Report provided in Appendix 9. The Land Development Report and Plans details the management of sediment and erosion control, which is considered to be an appropriate mitigation method for stormwater discharge on the site.
71. Effluent disposal is being achieved through connection to the public reticulated system and it is assumed that as a result of this connection, the Far North District Council is happy with its current wastewater discharge consents and arrangement for Kaitaia with the Northland Regional Council.
Emission of Noise
72. The current emissions of noise are associated with typical residential use, a legally existing Puna Reo (early childcare facility) and trades training education facility. In the context of the proposed
Resource Consent Rev A Page 29 of 35
development, which is entirely residential, the emissions of noise will be typical of further residential activity.
73. There is nothing inherent within the proposal to suggest that noise will be an issues, except for at time of construction, where a formal Construction Management Plan will be necessary to ensure that construction noise and associated activities are managed in accordance with appropriate standards i.e NZS 6803:1999.
74. If the emissions of residential noise is of concern, review conditions in accordance with s128 of the RMA may be appropriate, however it is noted that regardless of meeting permitted standards for noise, s16 of the RMA provides a duty to avoid unreasonable noise and this can be relied upon also.
75. Overall, noise effects are considered to be no more than minor.
Hazards 76. The Geotechnical Report prepared in Appendix 11 confirms that the land is suitable for development from a land stability and geotechnical perspective.
77. According to the Northland Regional Council Maps, the site is also subject to flooding. The Land Development Report provided in Appendix 9 recommends that subject to development controls associated with finished floor levels, the known hazard effect associated with flooding will be mitigated.
10.2 Hazardous Installations
78. There are no hazardous installations proposed.
10.3 Discharges
79. Except for wastewater disposal to a reticulated public network and internal stormwater discharges to engineered stormwater ponds, there are no other discharges of concern that relates to the development that has not been appropriately addressed.
10.4 Mitigation Measures
80. The following mitigation measures are provided: a. Engineering (Roading) i. Upgrade the existing vehicle crossing to 6m; ii. Submission of a Construction Management Plan to ensure mitigation of construction traffic. This will be approved by Council prior to works beginning.
Resource Consent Rev A Page 30 of 35
iii. Provide a 1.5m wide pedestrian pathway to service the entire development, with connections to Council’s existing footpath network. iv. Provision of security lighting (to be confirmed via conditions of consent). v. Provision of directional markings around the road network and the inclusion of speed platforms spaced at regular intervals around the internal road network. vi. Provision of traffic calming measures. b. Engineering (Civil) i. Water: Create an additional looped network to service the development and carry out hydrant testing to ensure appropriate pressure / flows. ii. Wastewater: Extend the existing network to service the development with storage tanks proposed to manage additional loading on Council’s system during peak flows. iii. Stormwater: Provision of a piped network to convey primary flows, for both 1in10 and 1in100 year events via two detention ponds. iv. Hazards: Development in accordance with Geotechnical Reports and finished floor levels for dwellings above the potential flooding levels. v. Earthworks: Appropriate erosion and sediment controls, before, during and after earthworks. c. Planning i. Provision of a Landscape Plan for the proposed development. ii. 6 month timeframe to reinstate relocatable dwellings brought to the site.
10.5 Potentially Affected Persons
81. Appendix 5 outlines the persons adjacent/adjoining the development site. For the purposes of assessment, persons have been grouped as detailed below, with an assessment carried out against the specifics of the development. No persons on the list of persons found in Appendix 5 have been consulted with.
Persons: Kohuhu Street 82. Given the substantial separation distances from these properties, the only relevant effects are those associated with traffic. The Traffic Impact Assessment confirms that the proposed development creates less than minor adverse effects to adjoining persons along Kohuhu Street.
Persons: North Road 83. The development does little to impact persons who use the Kaitaia Abundant School, or the users of the narrow strip which adjoins the site to the north. These uses do not gain access off Kohuhu Street and are considered to be sufficiently separated with minimal impacts resulting from the proposed development. Effects are considered to be less than minor.
Resource Consent Rev A Page 31 of 35
Persons: Bonnett Road 84. The development does little to impact persons on the Bonnett Road property of relevance, which adjoins the site at its south western corner. This property is well screened and in pastoral use, with sufficient separation distances to be affected by the proposal. Effects are considered to be less than minor.
Persons: Grigg Street 85. Although the site adjoins a number of properties along Grigg Street, in the context of the proposed development, the relevant extent of those persons who may be potentially affected from the proposal should be limited to 39- 81 Grigg Street as these properties more or less align with the mirrored development design.
86. Similar to previous authorisations, fencing and landscaping is expected along the boundaries and this will be a primary mitigation measure promoted to deal with any interface issues. The proposed buildings meet the required bulk and location standards, and on a flat site, there are little concerns with adequate access to sunlight.
87. Viewers from Grigg Street, will see a number of housing elevations, as well as extensive open space and landscaping. This is not too dissimilar to the existing views in and along Grigg Street. The only contrast in views is that no internal fencing or demarcation is proposed for the papakāinga village.
88. In terms of noise, typical residential noise is considered to occur, resulting from the development. Construction noise during earlier stages is envisaged and will need to meet construction noise standards. Nosie from the new ring road that services the development is not considered to be too dissimilar to the effects of drivers along Grigg Street. Considering the above, it is considered that the effects of the proposal are less than minor.
Persons: Taupata Street 89. The persons in the relevant Taupata Street residences will not incur any associated adverse effects from the proposal. They are located far from the development area and will unlikely have any viewing opportunities towards the proposed development. They have sufficient board fence screening and typically front Taupata Street as opposed to fronting the application site currently in pasture Effects are considered to be less than minor.
10.6 Iwi / Hapu
90. The relevant Iwi and Hapū in relation to the application site have been considered throughout this report.
10.7 Monitoring
Resource Consent Rev A Page 32 of 35
91. But for the consenting pathway provided for this development, monitoring for this type of proposal would generally sit within the realm of the Far North District Council and Northland Regional Council. This approach remains appropriate in this instance.
92. Whilst there is likely to be minimal ongoing conditions of consent associated with the development, conditions proposed put the onus on the applicant to provide evidence to Council that the development has been undertaken in accordance with approved plans and details.
93. Notwithstanding the above, ongoing monitoring may be required for the following: a. Implementation of a Landscape Plan and ensuring compliance over a specific time period. b. Maintenance agreements between the applicant and providers for the proposed infrastructure and the provision of any reports to Council to ensure the effectiveness of the infrastructure i.e stormwater devices and wastewater holding tank.
10.8 Protected Customary Rights
94. There are no protected customary rights of relevance that impact the development.
11. CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
95. A Cultural Impact Assessment is not provided for this application. In this instance there are a number of unique factors which have led to the approach for not providing a Cultural Impact Assessment from relevant Iwi.
96. One of the unique factors is that the land is Māori Freehold Land, with the land changing tenure in 2013 by the founders of He Korowai Trust. The founders have proven their whakapapa links to the land, and by virtue of this whakapapa connection to the land are asserting their mana whenua and whakapapa connection through the proposed development which has various positive effects for tangata whenua.
97. Appendix 8 contains some history of the change of tenure process, including minutes from the Māori Land Court hearing of relevance.
98. As is reflected in the Court minutes, He Korowai Trust has the express aims of advancing the wellbeing of tangata whenua and the proposed development is in line with intents and aims of the Trust.
Resource Consent Rev A Page 33 of 35
99. The proposal has been considered against cultural imperatives and requirements (tikanga), and has been designed as such to ensure that the entire project meets not only Council and community environmental standards, but also meets the standards the Trust hold as kaitiaki of the land as a Māori Trust with key members who can directly whakapapa to the land.
100. In this instance: a. The land does not contain any known sites of significance to tangata whenua or any of the Mandated Iwi Organisations in the area (note: given the recency of Treaty Settlements, these sites of significance would have been mapped and formed part of Treaty Settlement redress). b. The development area is largely in pasture, with no known significant areas of indigenous vegetation or significant habitats for indigenous fauna. c. Bulk earthworks can be managed by Accidental Discovery Processes. d. There are no known archaeological sites or features on the property. e. The proposed earthworks will not impact any known wāhi tapu, sites and/or areas of significance to tangata whenua, as none have been identified on the property.
101. To augment the above approach, He Korowai Trust have, instead of receiving a Cultural Impact Assessment, received the support of Te Rarawa via their written approval to the development. This written approval is provided in Appendix 16. No other written approvals from Iwi were sought or received.
12. PERMITTED ACTIVITIES
102. In context of the proposed development already on site, the permitted baseline and any potential permitted activities are not considered relevant in this instance and any attempt to characterise potential permitted activities would be fanciful in this instance.
103. This is particularly true in the context of the Far North District Plan, which is effects based in nature with minimal specific activities listed that are either permitted or require consent.
13. CUSTOMARY MARINE TITLE
104. The site is not located near/adjacent to the Coastal Marine Area. Customary Marine Titles are not relevant in relation to the proposed development.
Resource Consent Rev A Page 34 of 35
14. PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF CONSENT
105. Proposed conditions of consent for the development are located in Appendix 13.
15. CONCLUSION
106. In conclusion, the proposal enables appropriate urban development on Māori Freehold Land, with numerous positive effects for the Far North community of Kaitaia.
107. As evidenced in this report, the proposal is considered consistent with the relevant objectives and policies provided within Clause 6 of the Act.
108. The proposed papakāinga development will have actual or potential effects on the environment which, once assessed by decision makers, are considered to be no more than minor on the environment, and less than minor to relevant persons. This is achieved through the design of the proposal, proposed mitigation measures and conditions of consent.
109. The proposal is considered to meet the purpose of the Act and the RMA and is consistent with the sustainable management ethos of the RMA. The fast track criteria of the Act is considered to be met, with the proposal meeting a number of criteria associated with boosting economic growth and employment as a result of COVID-19.
110. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed development can be granted through the Act, being “LP08 – Papakāinga Development – Kaitaia”, a Listed Project under Schedule 2 of the Act.
Ngā mihi,
Steven Sanson BPlan (Hons)
Consultant Planner
NZPI Member No 4230
Resource Consent Rev A Page 35 of 35 SANSON & ASSOCIATES LTD Planners & Resource Consent Specialists
Appendices
APPENDIX 1 – RECORD OF TITLE
RECORD OF TITLE UNDER LAND TRANSFER ACT 2017 FREEHOLD Guaranteed Search Copy issued under Section 60 of the Land Transfer Act 2017
Identifier NA35B/367 Land Registration District North Auckland Date Issued 10 September 1976
Prior References NA466/3 Estate Fee Simple Area 18.6177 hectares more or less Legal Description Part Lot 2 Deposited Plan 12051 Registered Owners He Korowai Trust
Interests
9315495.1 Notification that a building consent issued pursuant to Section 72 Building Act 2004 identifies flooding as a natural hazard - 19.2.2013 at 7:00 am 9364998.1 Status Order determining the status of the within land to be Maori Freehold Land - 11.4.2013 at 7:00 am 11678989.1 Notification that a building consent issued pursuant to Section 72 Building Act 2004 identifies inundation as a natural hazard - 10.2.2020 at 7:00 am
Transaction Id Guaranteed Search Copy Dated 12/10/20 12 39 pm, Page 1 of 2 Client Reference Quickmap Register Only Identifier NA35B/367
Transaction Id Guaranteed Search Copy Dated 12/10/20 12 39 pm, Page 2 of 2 Client Reference Quickmap Register Only SANSON & ASSOCIATES LTD Planners & Resource Consent Specialists
Appendices
APPENDIX 2 – RELEVANT MAPS