BEFORE THE CHRISTCHURCH REPLACEMENT DISTRICT PLAN HEARINGS PANEL

IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Canterbury Earthquake (Christchurch Replacement District Plan) Order 2014

AND

IN THE MATTER of the Natural and Cultural Heritage Proposal including provisions from other proposals

MEMORANDUM OF COUNSEL SETTING OUT UPDATED STATEMENT OF ISSUES FOR NATURAL AND CULTURAL HERITAGE (STAGE 3) INCLUDING PROVISIONS FROM OTHER PROPOSALS THAT WILL BE HEARD ALONGSIDE THIS PROPOSAL

29 OCTOBER 2015

Barristers & Solicitors M G Conway / M J Jagusch Telephone: +64-4-499 4599 Facsimile: +64-4-472 6986 Email: [email protected] / [email protected] DX SX11174 PO Box 2402 WELLINGTON

26932875_2.docx Page 1

MAY IT PLEASE THE PANEL

1. This memorandum of counsel is filed on behalf of the Christchurch City Council (Council) as directed at the pre-hearing meeting for the Stage 3 Natural and Cultural Heritage Hearing held at 4pm on Wednesday 28 October 2015. The purpose of this memorandum is to:

1.1 provide an updated Statement of Issues for the hearing (at Attachment A);

1.2 provide an updated list of relevant definitions for the hearing, including definitions from other hearings that will be heard alongside this proposal (at Attachment B);

1.3 provide an updated Statement of Issues from other hearings that will be heard alongside this proposal (at Attachment C); and

1.4 provide an updated list of site specific requests to add, amend or delete specific scheduled ecological or heritage items (at Attachment D).

DATED this 29th day of October 2015

______M G Conway / M J Jagusch Counsel for Christchurch City Council

26932875_2.docx Page 1

ATTACHMENT A

UPDATED STATEMENT OF ISSUES – NATURAL AND CULTURAL HERITAGE CHAPTER

The list below sets out the issues identified for the Natural and Cultural Heritage chapter, with updates following the pre-hearing meeting on 28 October 2015 shaded in grey.

GENERAL / ALL OF CHAPTER MATTERS

STATEMENT OF EXPECTATIONS

Issue 1(a) Is the proposal consistent with the Statement of Expectations?

As an example, do the objectives and policies clearly state the outcomes intended and is the plan clear?

Issue 1(b) Is the structure of the plan easy to use? Is the split and cross- linkages between chapter 9 and other chapters, in particular chapter 8 subdivision and earthworks, chapter 11 utilities and chapter 19 clear?

CONSISTENCY WITH STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AND RECOVERY PLANS,

Issue 1(c) Is the proposal consistent with the Strategic Decisions decision and any relevant Recovery Plans?

NGĀI TAHU MANAWHENUA

Issue 1(d) Is Chapter 9 consistent with the strategic directions objective for Ngāi Tahu Manawhenua, in particular have historic and contemporary connections, and cultural and spiritual values, associated with the land, water and other taonga of the district been recognised and provided for?

26932875_2.docx Page 2

Issue 1(da) Do the objectives, policies, rules and matters of discretion proposed by Ngai Tahu appropriately recognise and provide for the protection of sites and practices of Ngai Tahu cultural significance?

DEFINITIONS

Issue 1(e) Are there any defined terms deleted as part of Stage 1 that should be reinstated as part of this Proposal?

MAPPING

Issue 1(f) Are the matters relevant to the Proposal shown on the planning maps clear and easy to use?

UTILITIES

Issue 1(g) Should amendments be made to the Proposal to make it clear all rules relating to utilities are provided in Chapter 11?

GENERAL

Issue 1(h) Do the strategic directions appropriately cover off matters relating to water quality including the protection of freshwater features and values and the life supporting capacity of water, or should a new Strategic Direction Objective be added?

26932875_2.docx Page 3

CHAPTER TOPIC 9.1 - INDIGENOUS BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEMS

PROCESS AND APPROACH TO PROTECTION OF SIGNIFICANT INDIGENOUS VEGETATION AND HABITATS OF SIGNIFICANT INDIGENOUS FAUNA

Issue 2(a) Is the approach adopted in the Proposal appropriate to manage indigenous biodiversity under section 6(c) and 31 of the RMA?

Submitters have raised issues relating to the balance between non- regulatory methods, as opposed to a rule based approach.

Issue 2(b) Was the process for identification of sites of ecological significance appropriate?

Issue 2(c) Should the location and information regarding a site of ecological significance on private land be publically available or held in a silent file?

OBJECTIVE AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

Issue 2(d) Do the objectives and policies give effect to the Canterbury Regional Policy Statement (CRPS) and the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), or should they provide for more or less protection/recognition?

Issue 2(e) Are the objectives and policies appropriate with reference to section 6(c) of the RMA?

Submissions seek the inclusion of reference to "avoid, remedy or mitigate".

Issue 2(f) Do the policies clearly express the approach to protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna?

In particular, submissions seek amendments to provisions relating to differentiation between management of sites of ecological significance and other indigenous vegetation.

26932875_2.docx Page 4

Issue 2(g) Is biodiversity offsetting appropriately provided for in the Proposal?

This includes consideration of:

- Is a policy necessary to provide guidance or can the RMA or national policy guidance be relied on? - If retained, should the policy be linked to other policies? - If retained, what improvements are necessary to make the policy more relevant and clear, address residual effects and provide guidance around when the policy applies?

Issue 2(h) Should the policies include broader recognition of ecosystem functions, ecological corridors and effects of activities occurring outside a site of ecological significance?

Issue 2(i) Do the policies need to better reflect the provisions and ensure the language and intent is clear?

Issue 2(j) Is the terminology and references to indigenous biodiversity used in the policies appropriate? Should reference be limited to indigenous biodiversity or to biodiversity generally?

Issue 2(k) Is there a need to give particular recognition to indigenous biodiversity in the coastal environment or other specific areas?

Issue 2(l) Should the policies clearly express that the schedule is not comprehensive and is a work in progress?

In particular, does there need to be recognition in the policies of the on-going work of adding to the schedule and working with landowners and other groups?

Issue 2(m) Is it appropriate to link indigenous vegetation clearance outside of a site of ecological significance to a requirement for an ecological assessment as part of the process?

26932875_2.docx Page 5

Issue 2(n) Do the policies sufficiently recognise non-regulatory methods? Should there be additional non-regulatory methods included?

MANAGING ACTIVITIES WITHIN A SITE OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Issue 2(o) Do the rules sufficiently recognise existing activities and the ability for landowners to continue to undertake appropriate activities in a site of ecological significance?

Issue 2(p) Do the exemptions for indigenous vegetation clearance sufficiently allow for activities that may be necessary for farming operations, flood protection works, hazard mitigation works, walking tracks, maintenance and upgrade of road corridors and other strategic infrastructure?

Issue 2(q) Do the provisions provide sufficient certainty that grazing can continue within a site of ecological significance?

As part of this issue, submissions have sought new definitions for improved pasture or regenerating indigenous vegetation.

Issue 2(r) Are the provisions managing sites of ecological significance appropriate?

In relation to this issue, submissions have raised issues relating to:

(a) whether the exemptions for fencing should only allow maintenance of existing fencing rather than construction of new fencing;

(b) should a new provision be included to manage plantation forestry within a site of ecological significance; and

(c) is the activity status appropriate for indigenous vegetation clearance in sites of ecological significance.

Issue 2(s) Are the definitions related to indigenous biodiversity and ecosystems appropriate and clear?

26932875_2.docx Page 6

MANAGING INDIGENOUS VEGETATION CLEARANCE OUTSIDE OF A SITE OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Issue 2(t) Are the minimum areas for clearance and indigenous vegetation types specified for clearance of indigenous vegetation outside of a site of ecological significance appropriate?

Issue 2(u) Should the list of vegetation/habitat types be relocated to a policy or appendix?

Issue 2(v) Are the provisions relating to management of indigenous vegetation outside of Significant Ecological Sites clear in how and where they apply?

This should include consideration of whether the clearance of indigenous vegetation is appropriately provided for (e.g. should a time frame for yearly clearance allowed be included), and whether the provisions should apply to all zones in the District (including both urban and rural areas).

MATTERS OF DISCRETION FOR MANAGING THE EFFECTS OF ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING CLEARANCE, ON INDIGENOUS BIODIVERSITY

Issue 2(w) Is it necessary to add further matters of discretion to manage the effects of activities on indigenous biodiversity, including water bodies?

RECOGNITION OF NGĀI TAHU VALUES IN RELATION TO INDIGENOUS BIODIVERSITY

Issue 2(x) Does the policy framework sufficiently reflect Ngāi Tahu values and relationship with indigenous biodiversity?

Issue 2(y) Are the provisions for customary harvesting (including relevant definitions) appropriate?

26932875_2.docx Page 7

MANAGING THE RISK OF WILDING TREE SPREAD

Issue 2(z) Should a new provision be included to manage the planting of certain tree species in the District to reduce wilding tree spread?

LYTTELTON PORT

Issue 2(aa) Can the provisions of the Specific Purpose (Lyttelton Port) Zone developed through the Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan be relied on for managing indigenous biodiversity on land within the zone?

IDENTIFICATION AND MAPPING OF SITES OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE (APPENDIX 9.1.4.1)

Issue 2(ab) Does the schedule in Appendix 9.1.4.1 include all habitats and vegetation types that have been identified, including aquatic habitats and significant habitats of indigenous fauna?

As part of this issue consider whether a statement should be included outlining that the schedule is not comprehensive and will be updated.

SITE SPECIFIC ISSUES

Issue 2(ac) Are the identified sites of ecological significance on the sites specified in Attachment D to the memorandum appropriate?

Submissions have requested amendment of boundaries or removal of specific sites of ecological significance.

Issue 2(ad) Is restricted discretionary activity status appropriate for indigenous vegetation clearance within the Templeton Golf Course site?

26932875_2.docx Page 8

CHAPTER TOPIC 9.2 - OUTSTANDING NATURAL FEATURES AND LANDSCAPES, SIGNIFICANT FEATURES AND LANDSCAPES AND AREAS OF NATURAL CHARACTER IN THE COASTAL ENVIRONMENT

NATURAL CHARACTER

Issue 3(a) Should chapter 9.2 in addition to natural character in the coastal environment address natural character of ‘wetlands, and lakes and rivers and their margins’ or has this been adequately addressed in other chapters and zones?

MAPPING OVERLAYS

Issue 3(b) Should natural character in the coastal environment be mapped as an overlay? On Banks Peninsula should this replace the significant landscape overlay?

Issue 3(c) Are there additional areas of High Natural Character in the coastal environment that meet the criteria?

Issue 3(d) Have some sites been included within overlays when they have an underlying residential or special purpose zoning?

Issue 3(e) Is it appropriate to identify Worsley’s Spur1 and Kennedy’s bush land as part of a significant and outstanding landscape respectively when those sites are zoned for residential purposes?

Issue 3(f) Are there sites that with ‘ground truthing’ do not meet the criteria to be included in an overlay?

Issue 3(g) Are additional maps necessary to better show the boundaries of the overlays, such as the Avon River in the Canterbury University grounds?

1 To the extent this issue relates to the submission by Graeme and Joy McVicar and Christ’s College Canterbury (submission 3677), it has been resolved as between the submitter and the Council as recorded in the joint memorandum of counsel for those parties filed on 28 October 2015.

26932875_2.docx Page 9

POLICIES AND ACTIVITIES

Issue 3(h) Has the role of farming activities, particularly on Banks Peninsula, been adequately acknowledged and activities provided for?

In considering this issue, submitters have sought that the operative District Plan term “rural amenity landscape” be reinstated on Banks Peninsula.

Issue 3(i) Could recreation and conservation activities be better recognised in the policies?

Issue 3(j) Should access tracks be a permitted activity in some landscape overlays (eg relating to critical infrastructure)?

Issue 3(k) Should policies and activity status be retained and strengthened to protect landscapes and natural character in the coastal environment?

Issue 3(l) Is the reference to ‘enhancement’ in significant feature and landscape policies unduly onerous?

Issue 3(m) How can the integrated management of the Summit Road Protection Area be best achieved?

Issue 3(ma) Do the policies clearly express the distinction between different overlays?

Issue 3(mb) Are activities with similar effects treated consistently in rules?

Issue 3(mc) Is road maintenance and construction appropriately provided for?

Issue 3(md) Are matters for discretion 9.2.4 appropriate?

26932875_2.docx Page 10

NGĀI TAHU / CULTURAL AND HISTORIC LANDSCAPES

Issue 3(n) Should landscape and natural character in the coastal environment overlays be deleted from the Papakainga zones and sites of Ngāi Tahu cultural significance?

Issue 3(o) Should customary use of land or other natural resources be listed as a permitted activity?

Issue 3(p) Should the policies be amended to emphasise the significance of Mahinga kai in Lyttelton harbour and cultural initiatives and spiritual significance through education?

Issue 3(q) Is the policy on future work on cultural landscapes sufficiently detailed?

Issue 3(r) Should criterion for Historic Landscape be included?

WAIMAKARIRI RIVER

Issue 3(s) Should the provisions applying to the Waimakariri River outstanding natural landscape be amended to permit quarrying and plantation forestry for river management purposes?

PLAN LAYOUT AND STRUCTURE / GENERAL

Issue 3(t) Is the proposed layout and structure of section 9.2 appropriate?

Submissions have sought amendments relating to matters such as whether the Port Hills be merged with Banks Peninsula as Port Hills form part of Banks Peninsula landform.

Issue 3(u) Should qualities of outstanding natural landscapes, significant features etc. be moved from the policies to an appendix?

26932875_2.docx Page 11

CHAPTER TOPIC: 9.3 HISTORIC HERITAGE

RECOGNITION, IDENTIFICATION AND PROTECTION OF SITES OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR NGĀI TAHU.

Issue 4(a) Is the recognition, identification of, and protection for sites of significance for Ngāi Tahu (including policy framework for future work to identify culturally significant landscapes, wāhi tapu), appropriate (including the provisions for Silent File Areas in Section 9.3)?

This issue predominantly relates to the use of mapping and provisions for 'Silent File Areas' (and the extent of those areas).

ASSESSMENT AND IDENTIFICATION ON HERITAGE ITEMS AND HERITAGE SETTINGS FOR LISTING IN THE DISTRICT PLAN.

Issue 4(b) Was the methodology for determining what are Significant Historic Heritage items and settings appropriate?

This includes consideration of: (i) Whether interiors of heritage items should be included in listings, and whether parts of interiors that are significant should be specifically identified in the listings in the Schedule; (ii) The approach to determining the extent of heritage settings around a heritage item; (iii) Degree to which damage incurred to buildings as a result of the Canterbury earthquakes has been factored into whether a place should be listed (included on the Schedule); (iv) The appropriateness of categorisation of heritage items into two groups; and (v) Whether international and national significance should be taken into account in the methodology.

Issue 4(c) Should archaeological sites be included in the Schedule?

26932875_2.docx Page 12

Issue 4(d) Should a 'date field' and specific sections for interiors be included in the Schedule?

Issue 4(e) Should specific proposed listed heritage items and settings listing be removed from the schedule, or their significance level (i.e. categorisation as either High Significance - Group 1, or Significant - Group 2), or extent of the listings be amended (relating to heritage items or heritage settings)?

Relevant submissions are listed in Attachment D to this memorandum.

Issue 4(f) Should further listings be added to the schedule?

A number of submitters seek new listings, as listed in Attachment D. These range in nature and size of item/setting, from features such as gates, to individual buildings or groups of buildings, and the recognition of Hagley Park. In addition, a submission seeks recognition of Victoria Square as a heritage landscape.

A number of submitters request a change to the details of the listing setting, such as the boundary of the 'heritage setting'. Others seek a change in the categorisation of significance. For those seeking changes or new listings the reasons vary, including opposing aspects of how the assessment was undertaken overall or on site specific basis.

There is opposition to including only parts of buildings in the listings, whereas a number of submitters are concerned with how interiors are managed (refer to issue identified below). A number of submitters consider that the identification for some places has not adequately taken into account extent of damage incurred following the Canterbury earthquakes (refer to related issue under the management of heritage items and settings below).

Submissions also relate to how settings have been identified. For example, should they cover more or less land around a heritage item,

26932875_2.docx Page 13

and a submission has been received on whether non-contributory elements should be excluded.

Although the Statements of Significance for heritage, within the Section 32 Report for the Proposal do not form part of the Proposal, a number of submissions have been received on these, regarding the overall approach taken to what is contained within them, or concerns raised, or changes sought on specific Statements.

HISTORIC HERITAGE AREAS

Issue 4(g) Should there be identification of Heritage Areas within the Plan (including the Heritage New Zealand recognised areas for Akaroa and Lyttelton), and appropriate policies and rules to manage development in these areas?

Submissions have sought the identification of Heritage Areas as opposed to the policy approach and future work identified to be undertaken as set out in the notified proposal.

DISTINCTION WITHIN THE POLICY FRAMEWORK AND RULES FOR ITEMS OF HIGH SIGNIFICANCE (GROUP 1) AND SIGNIFICANT (GROUP 2)

Issue 4(h) Do the policies for heritage items and heritage settings adequately distinguish between why items have been assessed to be High Significance (Group 1) and Significant (Group 2)?

Issue 4(i) Should there be only one group of heritage items, given there is limited differentiation in activity status between the two groups?

PROVISIONS FOR DEMOLITION, INCLUDING DAMAGE INCURRED FROM THE CANTERBURY EARTHQUAKES - RETENTION, ONGOING USE, AND VIABILITY.

Issue 4(j) Are the policies and rules framework appropriate with respect to recognising damage incurred to heritage items from the Canterbury earthquakes (particularly in the case of demolition of heritage items)?

26932875_2.docx Page 14

Issue 4(k) Should replacement buildings (which are not listed) be provided for as permitted subject to them closely resembling the damaged item in nature and scale?

Issue 4(l) Should the rules for demolition be amended from non-complying to a less restrictive activity status?

Submissions have been received seeking changes to the policy framework, in particular the Objective for historic heritage and the policy for demolition to recognise and provide for damage from the earthquakes. In addition submissions have been received seeking a change in activity status for demolition. Other submissions seek changes to the activity status for demolition, including some site specific requests, and a change for Group two heritage items to be a discretionary activity status.

HERITAGE CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES - INCORPORATION OF ICOMOS PRINCIPLES AND HERITAGE NZ GUIDANCE

Issue 4(m) To what extent should the provisions be in alignment with or take account of the principles of ICOMOS Charter and Heritage New Zealand best practice guidance?

Submissions range from those seeking greater consistency to full alignment with ICOMOS principles and/or Heritage New Zealand guidance. These submissions included to the policies, rules and matters of control and discretion and definitions.

PROVISIONS FOR HERITAGE ITEMS AND SETTINGS

Issue 4(n) To what extent are the provisions for the management of heritage items appropriate, and sufficiently enabling?

Issue 4(o) To what extent are the provisions for the management of the activities and development that can be undertaken in heritage settings appropriate and sufficiently enabling?

26932875_2.docx Page 15

Issue 4(p) Are some of the standards for repairs and maintenance necessary or require amending, including in conjunction with Health and Safety requirements for scaffolding?

A number of submitters are concerned about the way in which the provisions (including rules and definitions) provide for the management of heritage items, particularly interiors. This relates for example to what is included in the definition of heritage fabric, and what the triggers are for requiring a resource consent. Areas of concern, cover, for example, operational requirements within heritage buildings, and having the flexibility to make changes without the need for a resource consent.

A submission has been received seeking amendments to the provisions for open space heritage items. This relates to the provisions for removal and transplanting of mature trees in heritage items which are open space items. Other submissions request changes to rules for others activities, such as for signage on heritage items, and provisions for temporary structures (such as containers and marquees).

Submissions have been received concerning what is controlled in settings, for example, whether the provisions for signage, (including the permitted standards), sufficiently take into account operational needs associated with managing events, directional signage, and day to day need of business, and churches.

Submissions have been received on the matters of control and matters of discretion. These range from seeking that the matters be more targeted, or to increases in the range of matters to consider.

PROVISIONS FOR HERITAGE AND ITEMS - CONSERVATION PLANS AND CERTIFICATION PROCESSES

Issue 4(q) Should the provisions provide recognition and use of conservation plans (for example within matters of discretion)?

Issue 4(r) Can certification processes be utilised?

26932875_2.docx Page 16

Consideration includes whether provision of certification processes to amend the extent of heritage settings without the need for a plan change, should be included in the Proposal.

CLARITY AND EASE OF USE, INCLUDING DEFINITIONS

Issue 4(s) Are the provisions sufficiently clear in defining different components of heritage?

Issue 4(t) Are the provisions for heritage settings clear in determining what requires resource consent and what is permitted?

A number of submitters have commented on the rules and activities, sought amendments to notified definitions, or new definitions.

Issue 4(u) Are matters for control and matters of discretion clearly expressed and appropriately targeted?

Issue 4(v) To what extent do the provisions support the continued use and viability of heritage?

Issue 4(w) Do Statements of Significance clearly identify what is significant, to an extent that is helpful to guide assessment of proposals?

HERITAGE PROTECTION FOR BUILDINGS WHICH PRE-DATE 1940

Issue 4(x) Should there be a new policy and rules to protect pre 1940s buildings, including to demolish these buildings, or to significantly alter the street scene appearance of a building?

ROLE OF ASSISTANCE AND INCENTIVES

Issue 4(y) What role should assistance and incentives play in the management of historic heritage?

This issue relates to Policy 9.3.2.11.

26932875_2.docx Page 17

CHAPTER TOPIC 9.4 – SIGNIFICANT TREES

OVERALL APPROACH TO LISTING OF SIGNIFICANT TREES (I.E. LISTING WITHIN THE SCHEDULE OF SIGNIFICANT TREES)

Issue 5(a) Is the overall approach taken to which trees were selected for assessment, and then listing in the Schedule of Significant trees appropriate?

In particular is the approach taken appropriate given that there is a significant reduction in number of trees listed compared to the Operative District Plan?

A high number of submitters on the Significant Trees topic have expressed concern about the approach taken as to which trees were assessed for listing in the Plan and seek that more trees should be included. Such requests range from seeking more trees on Council owned land, and more trees be included that are listed in the Operative Plan. The decisions sought are primarily derived from a concern about the reduction in numbers proposed for inclusion on the list.

IDENTIFICATION OF SIGNIFICANT TREES - ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY FOR PROPOSED LISTING IN THE DISTRICT PLAN.

Issue 5(b) Is the assessment methodology adopted for how trees were identified (including Groups of trees), and listed in the District Plan appropriate?

Submitters expressed concern, or made recommendations regarding the methodology, in its entirety or aspects thereof. These include: (i) Requests to reassess trees using either STEM or the system which was used for the Operative Plan. (ii) Whether those undertaking the assessments had sufficient experience to avoid bias in their assessment. (iii) Where adequate peer review had been undertaken.

26932875_2.docx Page 18

(iv) With respect to the selection criteria, were aspects too tough (i.e. tree height or width, condition, shape, longevity in landscape, suitability in landscape, points score threshold)?

PROTECTION OF TREES IN THE PUBLIC REALM - THE APPROACH TO THE PROTECTION OF TREES WHICH ARE NOT IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE SCHEDULE OF SIGNIFICANT TREES

Issue 5(c) Is the approach taken to protecting trees in streets, parks, reserves and open spaces, and the respective criteria to determine protection of these trees within the public realm, appropriate?

A second component of identifying and protecting trees in the Proposal is the protection of trees, subject to certain parameters, in road corridors (in urban areas), parks, reserves and public open spaces. This protection differs to the identification of specific individual (or groups of trees) within the Schedule (Appendix 9.4.5). Areas of concern with this approach include: that they have not had the same assessment as the Significant Trees in the Schedule; the use of height as the sole assessment for significance is not enough; whether there is consistency in approach with the Central City Recovery Plan; and implications for maintenance and removal of trees in the State Highway road corridors.

In addition, Helen Lowe (submitter 3211) has requested consideration of whether appropriate consideration has been given to the significance and role of trees in the public realm within Character Areas.

SCHEDULE OF SIGNIFICANT TREES - SUBMISSIONS ON SITE SPECIFIC LISTINGS

Issue 5(d) Should specific trees be removed from the Schedule?

Submitters request the removal of identified trees from the Schedule.

Issue 5(e) Should specific trees, individual, and groups of trees that are not proposed for listing be included on the list?

26932875_2.docx Page 19

This issue relates to trees which are already identified in the Operative Plan, and trees which are not identified in the Operative Plan.

OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES

Issue 5(f) Are the objectives and policies sufficiently directive?

This includes whether there should be more reference within the objectives and policies to matters such as: (i) the values of trees, e.g. historic, cultural, social; (ii) whether reference should be made within the objectives and policies of the applicability of certain policies to private properties; (iii) defining what is meant by 'environmental services' and (iv) to reflect consideration of strategic infrastructure.

Issue 5(g) Should the policy for the felling of Significant Trees refer to avoid 'where practicable'?

PROVISIONS FOR MANAGING WORKS TO TREES, AND IN AROUND THE DRIP LINE OF TREES, AND FOR THE FELLING OF TREES

Issue 5(h) Are the provisions for managing trees appropriate taking into account the requirements of the Electricity Regulations (Hazards from Trees) Act?

Issue 5(i) Are the minor pruning provisions (including permitted standards and activity status) appropriate with respect to works (and who they are carried out by) including taking into account utilities?

Issue 5(j) Should other contractors (beyond Christchurch City Council contractors) be given scope to undertake work to trees (pruning and felling)?

Issue 5(k) Are the provisions for managing earthworks within the dripline of a significant tree appropriate?

26932875_2.docx Page 20

Issue 5(l) Are the definitions for trees appropriate (including for minor pruning)?

Issue 5(m) Should the list of trees restricted from felling as permitted activity (under P2(a)(iv)) contain more exotic species?

Issue 5(n) Are the provisions appropriate to reflect works that might be needed to trees (including felling) in respect of emergency situations, and damage to buildings that can be caused by trees?

Issue 5(o) Are additional controls required for management of trees in areas adjoining Riccarton Bush?

This includes controls (including regarding notification) within the Operative Plan via Plan Change and a specific provision relating to a single property adjoining the Bush).

Issue 5(p) Should additional matters of discretion be provided?

This includes consideration of: (i) The relationship of protecting trees, with use of land for residential purposes (medium density); and (ii) Should the matter of discretion proposed covering emergency situations also be extended to include the strategic transport network'.

TREES AND CHARACTER AREAS

Issue 5(q) Are the provisions appropriate in the extent that they protect trees in Character Areas?

This includes consideration of whether more trees be protected drawing on character Areas within the Operative Plan, and trees located on Dudley Street.

26932875_2.docx Page 21

ATTACHMENT B

Stage 3 Natural and Cultural Heritage Chapter hearing: definitions

Proposal number 9 Stage 1 definitions Stage 2 definitions Stage 3 definitions Relevant Stage 3 Definitions deferred * = subject to Stage 1 submissions * = subject to Stage 2 * = subject to Stage 3 submitter-requested from Stages 1 and 2 Council's position on definition as at submissions submissions definitions 23/07/15: (NC) = No change (D) = Delete (A) = Amend (ABB) = relocated to Abbreviations (DF2/3) = Defer to Stage 2 or 3  Adjoining (NC)  *Building  *Alteration of a heritage  Conservation plan  Cultural heritage  Amenity values (NC)  *Care facilities item  Customary use  Cultural heritage sites  Banks Peninsula (NC)  *Community facility  *Alteration of a heritage  Environmental service  Heritage  Central City (NC)  *Conservation activities setting  Golf amenity  Indigenous fauna  *Commercial services (A)  *Customary harvesting  Christchurch City management activities  Indigenous vegetation  Convenience activities (NC)  *Education activity  *Demolition  Heritage area  Indigenous vegetation  Council (NC)  *Emergency  *Dripline  Heritage conservation clearance  Development (D)  Farm building  *Earthworks  Improved pasture  Significant indigenous  District Plan (NC)  *Farming  *Heritage fabric  Maintenance2 vegetation  *Food and beverage outlet  Formed/Formation  *Heritage investigative  Naturally uncommon  Site of Ngāi Tahu (A)  *Health care facility and temporary works ecosystems cultural significance  *Gross leasable floor area  *Height  *Heritage item  Partial demolition (A)  *Identified building area  *Heritage setting  Preservation  Ground floor area (NC)  Indigenous biodiversity  *Heritage upgrade  Preservation (Heritage)  *Guest accommodation  Park management works  Protective material (A) activities  *Heritage values  Regenerated indigenous

2 With respect to indigenous vegetation-related fencing, etc, as opposed to the existing Stage 3 Maintenance definition specific to heritage items and settings.

26932875_2.docx Page 27

 *Home occupation (NC)  Park management  *Historic heritage vegetation  Indigenous vegetation facility  *Historic heritage place  Reinstatement clearance (NC)  *Place of assembly  *Indigenous vegetation  Sites of ecological  *Loading (NC)  *Planation forestry  Landscape significance  Loading area (NC)  *Pre-school facility  *Maintenance  Stabilisation  *Net floor area (NC)  Public open space  *Minor pruning  *Ngai Tahu/ Manawhenua  *Quarrying activity  Naturalness (D)  Recreation activity  *Reconstruction  *Office (NC)  Sign/Signage  Recreation facility  Outdoor living space (NC)  *Site  *Relocation of a heritage  Outdoor service space (NC)  *Substance item  Reserve NC)  Unformed legal road  *Repairs  *Residential activity (A)  *Utility  *Restoration  *Residential unit (A)  Silent files  *Retail activity (NC)  *Site of Ngāi Tahu  Retailing (NC) cultural significance  *Reverse sensitivity (A)  Road NC)  Setback (NC)  *Spiritual facility (A)  *Supermarket (A)  Veterinary care facility (NC)  *Wahi tapu (D)  *Wahi taonga (D)

26932875_2.docx Page 28

Stage 3 Utilities and Energy Chapter hearing: definitions

Proposal 11 Stage 1 definitions Stage 2 definitions Stage 3 definitions Relevant Stage 3 Definitions deferred * = subject to Stage 1 submissions * = subject to Stage 2 submissions * = subject to Stage 3 submitter-requested from Stages 1 and 2 Council's position on definition as submissions definitions at 23/07/15: (NC) = No change (D) = Delete (A) = Amend (ABB) = relocated to Abbreviations (DF2/3) = Defer to Stage 2 or 3  Access (A)  *Site  *Dripline  Access track  None  *Utility  *Heritage item  Ancillary equipment  *Heritage setting  Landscape

Stage 3 Rural Hearing: Definitions Proposal number 17 Stage 1 definitions Stage 2 definitions Stage 3 definitions Relevant Stage 3 Definitions deferred * = subject to Stage 1 submissions * = subject to Stage 2 submissions * = subject to Stage 3 submitter-requested from Stages 1 and 2 submissions definitions

 *Building  None.  None.  None.

Stage 3 Subdivision, Development and Earthworks Chapter hearing: definitions

Proposal number 8 Stage 1 definitions Stage 2 definitions Stage 3 definitions Relevant Stage 3 Definitions deferred submitter-requested from Stages 1 and 2 definitions  None.  None.  None.  Environmental  None. compensation

26932875_2.docx Page 27

ATTACHMENT C

ISSUES RELEVANT TO NATURAL AND CULTURAL HERITAGE CHAPTER IDENTIFIED AS PART OF THE SUBDIVISION (STAGE 3), RURAL (STAGE 3) AND UTILITIES & ENERGY (STAGE 3) ISSUES STATEMENTS AND TRANSPORT (STAGE 3) PRE-HEARING MEMORANDUM

SUBDIVISION, DEVELOPMENT AND EARTHWORKS, STAGE 3 AND INDUSTRIAL GENERAL (NORTH BELFAST) ZONE

Issue 1 Should the proposal include provisions to protect trees through subdivision?

Issue 2 Should the proposal include policies providing policy direction for earthworks in outstanding landscapes and features, areas of significant indigenous vegetation, in or near heritage items or near significant trees?

Issue 3 Are the following objectives, and policies and rules identified in the memorandum to the Panel dated 5 June 2015 appropriate?

(a) The deferred provisions relevant to Proposal 8 identified in the memorandum to the Panel dated 5 June 2015 are Objectives 8.1.1 and 8.1.2(b), Policies 8.1.1.1, 8.1.1.2 and 8.1.1.3, rules at section 8.3.7, assessment matters at 8.5.2 and provisions relating to the Industrial General (North Belfast) Zone at 8.4.1.1 RD4 and 8.4.1.3(18) and identified in the Minute dated 15 May 2015 are inclusion of RD activity 8.3.7.1 and related matter of discretion 8.3.7.3(4)(a). (b) The deferred provisions relevant to Proposal 16 identified in the Minute dated 6 May 2015 are Rule 16.2.7.1.1 P1 (a)(iii) and (iv); Rule 16.2.7.1.2 RD1; Rule 16.2.7.2.4; Matter of Discretion 16.2.7.3.1 (d), (e), (f), (g) and (h) (Outline Development Plan); Matter of Discretion 16.2.7.3.3 (Silent File); and Matter of Discretion 16.2.7.3.4 (Springs).3

Issue 4 Do the objectives and policies regarding earthworks, and rules and matters of discretion appropriately recognise and provide for the protection of sites of Ngai Tahu cultural significance?

3 Provisions referenced are from the Council’s Industrial proposal (Proposal 16) dated 8th April 2015 with the exception of 16.2.7.3.4 which is in the notified version of the proposal and subsequently deleted in the 8th April 2015 version.

26932875_2.docx Page 40

Issue 5 What, if any, are the cultural values associated with the NE Belfast Industrial General Zone?

(a) More particularly, are these values confined to identified sites within the Zone? (b) Are all springs identified within the Zone of equal cultural value?

Issue 6 If other cultural values do exist within the NE Belfast Zone, what are these values, and how significant are they?

(a) Are they capable of more precise identification on the Planning Maps?

26932875_2.docx Page 41

UTILITIES AND ENERGY (STAGE 3)

LOCATION OF RULES

Issue 1 Should the rules in Chapter 11 that include activity specific standards relating to sites of Outstanding Natural Landscapes, Outstanding Natural Features, Significant Features or Significant Landscapes, Important Ridgelines, Areas of Outstanding, Very High or High Natural Character, Sites of Ecological Significance, heritage items or settings, or significant trees be relocated into Chapter 9?

Note this is also a consideration for the relationship between Chapter 13.13 (Stage 3) and Chapter 9 (Natural and Cultural Heritage).

Issue 2 If the activity specific standards referred to in Issue 1 are not relocated to Chapter 9, how should the rules in Chapters 9 and 11 be applied in relation to utilities?

HIGHER ORDER NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND POLICY STATEMENTS

Issue 3 How should the National Environmental Standard for Telecommunications Facilities (NESTF) be implemented in the Utilities and Energy Stage 3 proposal?

Issue 4 How should the National Policy Statement for Electricity Transmission (NPSET) be implemented in the Utilities and Energy Stage 3 proposal?

Issue 5 Is Policy 11.1.2.1 as amended by the Stage 3 Utilities and Energy proposal sufficiently aligned with the Strategic Directions objectives?

Issue 6 To what extent should there be duplication or cross-over in assessment matters between Chapter 11 and Chapter 9?

Issue 7 What are the appropriate activity standards and assessment criteria for access tracks within Outstanding Natural Landscapes, Outstanding Natural Features, Significant Features or Significant Landscapes, Important Ridgelines, Areas of Outstanding, Very High or High Natural Character, Sites of Ecological Significance, the dripline of significant trees or within 20 metres of an heritage item or setting?

Issue 8 Are the permitted activity provisions for installing electricity lines and utility poles within Outstanding Natural Landscapes, Outstanding Natural Features, Significant Features or Significant Landscapes, Important Ridgelines, Areas of Outstanding, Very High or

26932875_2.docx Page 42

High Natural Character, Sites of Ecological Significance, the dripline of significant trees, within 20 metres of an heritage item or setting, or within buffer zones to these features, appropriate?

Issue 9 How should locating and upgrading of freestanding communication utilities be provided for Outstanding Natural Landscapes, Outstanding Natural Features, Significant Features or Significant Landscapes, Important Ridgelines, Areas of Outstanding, Very High or High Natural Character, Sites of Ecological Significance, the dripline of significant trees, within 20 metres of an heritage item or setting or within buffer zones to these features?

Issue 10 Are the permitted activity standards for marine navigation aids in Outstanding Natural Landscapes, Outstanding Natural Features, Significant Features or Significant Landscapes, Important Ridgelines, Areas of Outstanding, Very High or High Natural Character, Sites of Ecological Significance, the dripline of significant trees or within 20 metres of an heritage item or setting appropriate?

Issue 11 What is the appropriate activity status if the permitted activity standards referred to in Issue 10 for marine navigation aids are not met?

Issue 12 What is the appropriate level of recognition in Policy 11.1.2.1, Rule 11.3.2.1 (P1) and 11.4 Assessment Matters for sites of Ngāi Tahu cultural significance?

26932875_2.docx Page 43

RURAL PROPOSAL (STAGE 3)

Issue 1 Should a rule be included requiring a building setback from Mean High Water Springs (MHWS) in the Rural Banks Peninsula Zone?

Issue 2 Should buildings located within an identified building area be excluded from the provisions of Rule 17.2.3.4?

Recognition of Ngai Tahu sites of cultural significance

Issue 3 Should there be additional recognition of Ngai Tahu sites of cultural significance in Rule 17.2.3.4?

Issue 4 Should additional matters of discretion be added relating to sites of Ngai Tahu cultural significance?

Matters of discretion

Issue 5 Should additional matters of discretion be added to address the effects of activities adjacent to sites of ecological significance or areas of indigenous vegetation?

Issue 6 Are the matters of discretion relating to natural and cultural heritage relevant to the activities as listed?

Clarification and consistency of matters relating to natural and cultural heritage

Issue 7 Can clarity and consistency be improved in the Proposal by removing relevant matters of discretion and replacing them with cross-referencing linkages to those relevant matters located in Chapter 9?

26932875_2.docx Page 40

TRANSPORT PROPOSAL (STAGE 3)

Issue 1: Whether the matters of discretion for the formation of unformed legal roads in the Coastal Environment should provide a cross-reference to a list of matters of discretion in Chapter 9.

Note: This issue was identified at paragraph 8 of the memorandum of counsel for the Council filed in advance of the pre-hearing meeting for Transport Stage 3 (part) on 19 October 2015. The issue was raised in a submission by the Crown on Matters of Discretion 7.3.21.4 to 7.3.21.8 Formation of unformed legal roads (which were notified in Stage 3, Chapter 7, Transport) but are within the scope of this Proposal 9 hearing.

26932875_2.docx Page 41

ATTACHMENT D

SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS

The following tables set out site specific requests by submitters to add, amend or delete specific scheduled ecological or heritage items.

SITES OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Submitter number Submitter name Site of ecological significance 3007 James and Victoria SES/H/13 Howdens Howden 3109 Theresa Simpkins SES/A/14 Okuti Valley 3110 Heidi Morrow SES/LP/3 - No 2 and Old No 2 Drain 3214 R and L Holloway SES/H/11 Goodwin Reserve and Bluffs 3242 Hamish & Annabel Craw SES/A/16 View Hill SES/A /15 Raupo Bay SES/A /27 Stony Beach 3257 Gregory Schonland SES/A/14 Okuti Valley 3281 Karina Hay SES/LP/6 - Christchurch Coastal Strip 3283 Denis de Pass SES/H/23 Okana Valley, Kaituna 3285 Michael Bayley SES/E/1 Lake Ellesmere/Te Waihora and Margins, SES/E/2 Kaitorete Spit 3293 Bryan Hutchinson SES/E/1 Lake Ellesmere/Te Waihora and Margins, SES/E/2 Kaitorete Spit, SES/H/18 Lake Forsyth North Side 3325 Mike Percasky SES/LP/24 - Avon River/ Otakaro and Tributaries 3381 Martin Stanbury SES/H/24 Waipuna Saddle 3437 Pam Richardson SES/H/26 Wild Cattle Hill and Maroi Gully SES/H/27 Northern side of Holmes Bay 3444 Burwood Resource SES/LP/6 - Christchurch Coastal Strip Recovery Park Limited 3482 Fulton Hogan Ltd SES/LP/15 - Templeton Golf Course & Ruapuna Speedway 3554 Castle Rock Ltd - 125 SES/LP/14 - Avon Heathcote Estuary and Scruttons Rd Environs 3581 Southern Forestry No 26 SES/H/24 Waipuna Saddle Ltd 3646 GT Developments (2011) SES/A/20 Wainui / Carews Peak Ltd 3658 James & Sarah McIntosh SES/LP/1 Waimakariri Reserves Dry Plains Grasslands Lease Land 3670 Church Properties SES/A/13 Okains Estuary Trustees 3694 The University of SES/LP/24 - Avon River/Otakaro and Canterbury Tributaries) 3698 Brent Thomas, Willesden SES/H/20 Western Slopes of Mid Prices Valley, Farms Ltd, Wongan Hills SES/H/23 Okana Valley, Kaituna Ltd 3721 Canterbury Earthquake SES/LP/22 - Wilmers Road Dry Grassland

26932875_2.docx Page 40

Submitter number Submitter name Site of ecological significance Recovery Authority 3723 Christchurch City Council SES/LP/6 Christchurch Coastal Strip, SES/H/20 Western Slopes of Mid Prices Valley, SES/A/20 Wainui/ Carews Peak 3969 Peter Overton and SES/H/14 Birdlings Flat Shrublands Colleen Arnold-Overton 3979 Penelope Hargreaves SES/LP/36 - Lower Styx Road Ephemeral Ponding

26932875_2.docx Page 41

NEW HERITAGE ITEMS /SETTINGS LISTINGS

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number 3615 Jenny Betts 2 Norwich Quay, Lyttelton Heritage Item and setting 3711 Hands off Hagley Inc Hagley Park Heritage Item and setting 3643 Li Jun Xue 79 Carmen Road Heritage Item and setting 3675 Historic Places Godley Head Battery and Heritage Items and Canterbury associated camp Settings 3675 Historic Places St Cuthbert's Vicarage, 8 Heritage Item and setting Canterbury Governors Bay- Teddington Road 3260 Antony Charles and 51 Radley Street Heritage Item and setting Frances Maria Johnson 3525 Taylors Mistake Taylors Mistake/Boulder Heritage Items and Association Bay Baches Settings 3598 Martin Scott Taylors Mistake/Boulder Heritage Items and Bay Baches (bach 1, 2, 4, Settings 8,9,10,30,31,32,60,62, 63, 64, 67, 68) 3672 Chris and Janet Abbott Taylors Mistake/Boulder Heritage Items and Bay/Hobsons Bay Baches Settings 3597 M Slemint Taylors Mistake/Boulder Heritage Items and Bay Baches Settings 3601 Rik Tindall Every other place that can Heritage Items and reasonably be included Settings 3601 Rik Tindall Waltham Park Memorial Heritage Item and Setting Gates, Fifield Terrace 3601 Rik Tindall Spreydon Borough Heritage Items and Memorial Gates, Settings Barrington Park 3601 Rik Tindall Coronation Hall, 71 Heritage Item and Setting Domain Terrace 3579 Richard Menzies Dry stone wall, Menzies Heritage Item and Setting Bay 3601 Rik Tindall Sign of the Kiwi Heritage Item and Setting (note this is already scheduled) 3601 Rik Tindall Sign of the Takahe Heritage Item and Setting (note this is already scheduled) 3601 Rik Tindall Cracroft Community Heritage Item and Setting Centre Old Stone House (note this is already scheduled) 3233 Peterborough Village St Mary's Pro-Cathedral Heritage Item and Setting Incorporated Society 3233 Peterborough Village Victoria Square Heritage Landscape Incorporated Society 3233 Peterborough Village Aberdeen Cottages Heritage Items and Incorporated Society Settings 3233 Peterborough Village Manchester Street Manor Heritage Items and Incorporated Society Houses Settings 3233 Peterborough Village St Lukes Vicarage Heritage Items and Incorporated Society Settings (note this is

26932875_2.docx Page 42

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number already scheduled) 3233 Peterborough Village St Lukes Belltower Heritage Items and Incorporated Society Settings (note this is already scheduled) 3233 Peterborough Village Edmonds Band Rotunda Heritage Items and Incorporated Society Settings (note this is already scheduled) 3233 Peterborough Village The Bricks Heritage Items and Incorporated Society Settings (note this is already scheduled) 3233 Peterborough Village McLeans Mansion Heritage Items and Incorporated Society Settings (note this is already scheduled) 3233 Peterborough Village Rose Chapel Heritage Items and Incorporated Society Settings (note this is already scheduled) 3233 Peterborough Village Town Hall Heritage Items and Incorporated Society Settings (note this is already scheduled) Clock and shelter Heritage Items and Settings (note this is already scheduled) 3633 Ian and Lynne Lochhead 159 Manchester Street Heritage Item and Setting 3633 Ian and Lynne Lochhead St Cuthbert's Vicarage, 8 Heritage Item and Setting Governors Bay- Teddington Road 3565 Helen Brown - Okains Bay Slab Cottage, Okains Bay Re-listing of Heritage Item Maori and Colonial and Setting Museum Board 3674 Heritage New Zealand Port Levy Maori Church Re-listing of Heritage Item Pouhere Taonga Site and Setting 3674 Heritage New Zealand Robinsons Bay Sawmill Re-listing of Heritage Item Pouhere Taonga Site and Setting 3674 Heritage New Zealand Ferrymead Wharf and Re-listing of Heritage Item Pouhere Taonga Railway Embankment and Setting 3674 Heritage New Zealand Puari Pa urupa Wahi Tapu Pouhere Taonga 3674 Heritage New Zealand Tautahi pa Wahi Tapu Pouhere Taonga 3674 Heritage New Zealand Tautahi Rue Koiwi Wahi Tapu Pouhere Taonga 3674 Heritage New Zealand Te urupao kati mamoe ki Wahi Tapu Pouhere Taonga Onuku 3674 Heritage New Zealand Tuhiraki Wahi Tapu Pouhere Taonga 3674 Heritage New Zealand Oruaka Wahi Tapu Pouhere Taonga 3674 Heritage New Zealand Takapuneke Wahi Tapu Pouhere Taonga 3674 Heritage New Zealand Omaru puna Wai Wahi Tapu Pouhere Taonga 3674 Heritage New Zealand Onawe Pa Wahi Tapu Pouhere Taonga 3674 Heritage New Zealand Oteauheke Wahi Tapu

26932875_2.docx Page 43

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number Pouhere Taonga 3674 Heritage New Zealand Places associated with Future work programme Pouhere Taonga Christchurch's experience during the Canterbury Earthquakes 3090 Diamond Harbour Stoddart Cottage Heritage item (note this is Community Association already scheduled)

26932875_2.docx Page 44

REMOVAL OF HERITAGE ITEMS/SETTINGS LISTINGS

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number 3154 David John Owers 20 Mona Vale Avenue Heritage Item HID 384 3486 N&T Tyler 41 Ranfurly Street Heritage item and setting HID 454 3670 Church Property Trustees 185 Kilmore Street Heritage Item and setting HID 315 Setting number 344 3670 Church Property Trustees 248 Manchester Street Heritage Item and setting HID 1290 Setting number 344 3639 Greg and Mia Gaba 25 Helmores Lane Heritage Item and setting HID 253 Setting number 317 3718 Tailorspace Property 152 Oxford Terrace Heritage Item and setting Limited HID 414 Setting number 317 3242 Hamish and Annabel 971 Chorlton Road Heritage Item Craw HID 699 3214 R and L Holloway 78 Starvation Gully Road Heritage item HID 1299 3214 R and L Holloway 78 Starvation Gully Road Heritage Item HID 685 3630 Annandale Enterprises 12 & 67 Starvation Gully Heritage Item Limited Road HID 398 3963 Malcolm Hathaway and 19 Exeter Street Heritage Item Keri Whaitiri HID 1297 3323 Lyttelton Port Company 3212 Christ's College 32 Armagh Street/ 325 Heritage Item and setting Montreal Street HID 390 3349 Anglican Living 100 Park Terrace Heritage item and setting HID 436 Setting 470 3397 Richard Schneidemann 48A Fendalton Road Heritage item and setting Investment Trust HID 181 Setting 225 3420 College House 100 Waimairi Road Heritage item HID 1336

3420 College House 100 Waimairi Road Heritage item HID 1341

3647 Trevor John Burt and 58 Old tai Tapu Road Heritage item Fiona Leigh Glassey HID 1363 3666 Rafe Hammett 35 Knowles Street Heritage item HID 323 3682 The Elmwood Club Inc. 83 Heaton Street Heritage item HID 243

26932875_2.docx Page 45

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number 3707 The Tait Foundation and 558 Wairakei Road Heritage item and setting tait Limited HID 1347 3720 Orion New Zealand Ferry Road Heritage item and setting Limited HID 201 3720 Orion New Zealand Gasson Street Heritage item and setting Limited HID 207 3720 Orion New Zealand Millar Street Heritage item and setting Limited HID 489 3720 Orion New Zealand Woodard Terrace Heritage item and setting Limited HID 544 3720 Orion New Zealand Retreat Road Heritage item and setting Limited HID 600

3720 Orion New Zealand Linwood Avenue Heritage item and setting Limited HID 624 3625 Rosemary Lyon 16 Aubrey Street Heritage item and setting HID 1037 Heritage setting 42 3627 Akaroa Civic Trust Heritage New Zealand Heritage Area Akaroa Historic Area 3722 Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu 389 Onuku Road Heritage item and setting Karaweko HID 1174 Setting number 152 3722 Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu 392 Onuku Road Heritage item and setting Te Whare Karakia o Onuku HID 683 Setting number 500

3346 Girl Guiding New Zealand 217 Armagh Street Heritage item HID 44 3455 Canterbury Cricket Hagley Park Oval Heritage setting Association Inc Setting number 242 3602 Carter Group Limited High Street Heritage item and setting HID 1282 3602 Carter Group Limited High Street Heritage item and setting HID 1362 3602 Carter Group Limited High Street Heritage item and setting HID 1281 3602 Carter Group Limited High Street Heritage item and setting HID 1279 3602 Carter Group Limited High Street Heritage item and setting HID 1359 3602 Carter Group Limited High Street Heritage item and setting HID 272 3692 The Roman Catholic 136 Barbadoes Street Heritage setting Bishop of the Diocese of Setting number 368 Christchurch 3693 Albert Hall Ltd. 176 Oxford Terrace Heritage item and setting HID 416 Setting number 610 3323 Lyttelton Port Company 45 Godley Quay Heritage setting Limited HID 773

26932875_2.docx Page 46

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number Setting number 515 3323 Lyttelton Port Company 1 Norwich Quay Heritage setting Limited HID 1094 Setting number 519

26932875_2.docx Page 47

CHANGE TO LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE OF HERITAGE ITEM/SETTING

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number 3414 Canterbury Jockey Club 165 Racecourse Road Change from High HID 453, HID 452 Significance (Group 1) to Significant (Group 2) 3420 College House 100 Waimairi Road Change from High HID 534, HID 1337, HID Significance (Group 1) to 1339, HID 1340 Significant (Group 2) 3420 College House 100 Waimairi Road Change from High HID 1337 Significance (Group 1) to Significant (Group 2) 3420 College House 100 Waimairi Road Change from High HID 1339 Significance (Group 1) to Significant (Group 2) 3420 College House 100 Waimairi Road Change from High HID 1340 Significance (Group 1) to Significant (Group 2) 3633 Ian and Lynne Lochhead 663 Main North Road Change from Significant HID 352 (Group 2) to High Significance (Group 1) 3633 Ian and Lynne Lochhead 25 Yaldhurst Road Change from Significant HID 1314 (Group 2) to High Significance (Group 1) 3633 Ian and Lynne Lochhead 20 Lychgate Close Change from Significant HID 1358 (Group 2) to High Significance (Group 1) 3105 Banks Peninsula 39 Rue Lavaud Change from High Presbyterian Church HID 725 Significance (Group 1) to Significant (Group 2) 3723 Christchurch City Council 217 Armagh Street Change from Significant HID 44 (Group 2) to High Significance (Group 1)

26932875_2.docx Page 48

CHANGE TO EXTENT/ BOUNDARY OF THE HERITAGE ITEM/SETTING

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number 3234 Nic Hill 39 Kahu Road Heritage Item - decrease HID 506 3235 John Osborne 39 Kahu Road Heritage Item - decrease HID 506 3242 Hamish and Annabel 971 Chorlton Road Heritage Setting - Craw HID 699, decrease Setting number 155 3214 R and L Holloway 78 Starvation Gully Road Heritage Setting - HID 1299 decrease Setting number 540 3214 R and L Holloway 78 Starvation Gully Road Heritage Setting - HID 685 decrease Setting number 541 3630 Annandale Enterprises 12 & 67 Starvation Gully Heritage Setting - Limited Road decrease HID 698 Setting number 535 3626 Ngai Tahu Property Ltd. 66H Clarence Street Heritage Setting - HID 96 decrease Setting number 222

35 Mustang Avenue/ 71 Corsair Drive HID 628, 629, 1306 Setting number 184 3349 Anglican Living 100 Park Terrace Heritage Setting - Setting 470 decrease 3025 Lawrence John Allpress 30 Acacia Avenue/74 Heritage Setting - Middleton Road/47A decrease Arthur Street

Delete 47A Arthur Street from setting number 200 3277 Christchurch Polytechnic HID 1366 Heritage Setting - Institute of Technology Setting number 632 decrease 3668 Rochford Group Holdings 387 Manchester Street Heritage Setting - Limited HID 373 decrease Setting number 332 3694 The University of 90 Ilam Road Heritage Setting - Canterbury HID 300 decrease Setting number 201 3694 The University of 129 Ilam Road Heritage Setting - Canterbury HID 301 decrease Setting number 620 3697 Rangi Ruru Girl's School 59 Hewitt's Road Heritage Setting - HID 271 decrease Setting number 239 3697 Rangi Ruru Girl's School 59 Hewitt's Road Heritage Setting - HID 270 decrease Setting number 240

26932875_2.docx Page 49

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number 3703 The Tait Foundation and 558 Wairakei Road Heritage item - decrease Tait Limited HID 1347 'That part of the original circular saw shape of the exterior of the building that is unmodified as at 25 July 2015' 3654 Alistair Douglas Cocks 81 Grehan Valley Road Heritage setting decrease HID 669 Setting number 15 3670 The Roman Catholic 24 Main South Road Heritage setting decrease Bishop of the Diocese of Setting number 193 Christchurch and Alpine Presbytery, Church Property Trustees 3275 The Arts Centre of 2 Worcester Street Heritage item - decrease Christchurch Trust Board HID 562 3351 Canterbury Museum Trust 11 Rolleston Avenue Heritage item - decrease Board HID 474 3455 Canterbury Cricket Hagley Park Oval Heritage setting - Association Inc Setting number 242 decrease 3670 The Roman Catholic 243 Durham Street South Heritage setting - Bishop of the Diocese of Setting number 307 decrease Christchurch and Alpine Presbytery, Church Property trustees 3323 Lyttelton Port Company 231 Old Sumner - Heritage item - decrease Lyttelton Road HID 1229 3721 Crown Commercial buildings and Heritage setting - change setting, Lawrie and Wilson auctioneers HID 514 Setting 378 3721 Crown Former Tuam Street Hall Heritage setting - change and Setting HID 515 Setting 606 4002 Penelope Wenlock HID 449 Heritage setting - Setting number 395 decrease 3723 Christchurch City Council HID 1367 Amend to add notation HID 351 that these are HID 760 underground heritage items 3723 Christchurch City Council 83 Heaton Street Heritage setting - increase HID 246 Setting number - N/A 3723 Christchurch City Council 5 St Barnabas Lane Increase heritage setting HID 189 of 5 St Barnabas Lane, Setting number 211 and decrease heritage and setting of 12 Glandovey 12 Glandovey Road Road HID 208 Setting number 210 3723 Christchurch City Council 228 Kilmore Street Heritage setting - increase HID 316 Setting number 367

26932875_2.docx Page 50

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number 3723 Christchurch City Council 159 Oxford Street Heritage setting - increase HID 415 Setting number 581 3723 Christchurch City Council 280 Durham Street Heritage setting - increase HID 638, 172 and 1345 Setting number 625 3723 Christchurch City Council 14 Wise Street Heritage setting - HID 541 decrease Setting number 226 3723 Christchurch City Council 30 Acacia Avenue Heritage setting - HID 27 decrease (Decrease Setting number 200 relates to removing 47B Arthurs Road) 3723 Christchurch City Council 26a Nash Road Heritage setting - HID 402 decrease to remove 60 Setting number 191 and 62 McMahon Drive 3723 Christchurch City Council 2a Cave Terrace Heritage setting - HID 1367 decrease Setting number 633 3723 Christchurch City Council 338 Lincoln Road Heritage setting - HID 338 decrease Setting number 230 3723 Christchurch City Council 176 Oxford Club (Midland Heritage item - decrease Club Setting) HID 416 3723 Christchurch City Council 387 Manchester Street Heritage setting -decrease HID 373 Setting number 332 3723 Christchurch City Council 136 Barbadoes Street Heritage setting - HID 46 decrease Setting number 368 3723 Christchurch City Council 26 Godley Head Heritage setting - HID 1134 decrease Setting number 122 3723 Christchurch City Council 6 Peartree Lane Heritage setting - increase HID 449 Setting number 395 3723 Christchurch City Council 5 Cracroft Terrace Heritage setting - increase HID 156 Heritage setting 312

26932875_2.docx Page 51

SHOW HERITAGE ITEM IN NEW LOCATION

Submitter Submitter Name Location Item and/or Setting Number 3723 Christchurch City Council Notified as relating to 95 Heritage Item - amend Cashel Street maps and schedule to HID 256 show in new location at Setting number N/A Manchester Street

CHANGE SOUGHT TO HERITAGE SETTINGS - WHICH MAY INCLUDE MINOR ADJUSTMENTS TO HERITAGE SETTINGS

A Christchurch City Council (Submitter number 3723) - specific submission point relating to multiple heritage settings is described below:

Amend detail on the heritage settings as shown on the Schedule Reference maps - significant heritage items and settings, and planning maps to provide more definition about extent of settings, through for example GPS, and/or use of dimensions, and/or descriptions, with any associated minor adjustments (reductions only) to the extent of settings. Associated changes to planning maps.

For the purposes of understanding which heritage settings this submission point relates to, refer to Christchurch City Council submission point 76 contained at Attachment 1 - Pages 25-30 of the Council submission.

26932875_2.docx Page 52