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 Stage 3 Proposal MEMORANDUM OF COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL 7 MARCH 2016 Barristers & Solicitors Simpson Grierson 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 MAY IT PLEASE THE PANEL: 1. This memorandum is filed on behalf of the Christchurch City Council (Council) in response to the Minute of the Panel dated 3 March 2016 regarding the Natural and Cultural Heritage Proposal (Minute). This memorandum addresses matters relating to Topic 9.3: Historic Heritage and Topic 9.4: Significant Trees. TOPIC 9.4: SIGNIFICANT TREES 2. The Minute granted leave for the Council to file a memorandum by 7 March 2016 confirming any request for leave to file supplementary evidence. Mediation on Thursday 3 March was helpful, and the Council does not consider that supplementary evidence or further formal engagement with interested parties will be necessary in relation to Topic 9.4 except to the extent envisaged by the timetable proposed below. While not all matters have been resolved, the Council anticipates that, by the time closings are filed, the points of disagreement will be reduced and clearly defined. The proposed process set out below is similar to that which was sought for Topic 9.1: Indigenous Biodiversity. 3. A proposed timetable for this process is set out below, and the Council respectfully requests its confirmation by the Panel: (a) By 16 March 2016 – Council to update the provisions to reflect the matters agreed at mediation and the Council’s position on the matters that are not agreed, and circulate a draft revised proposal to the mediation participants. This timeframe is anticipated to be sufficient to conclude informal engagement with submitters in relation to site specific requests that were discussed at mediation on 3 March 2016 (including site visits by the Council and submitters and provision of information by one submitter). (b) By 23 March 2016 – mediation participants to provide Council with any corrections and clarifications in relation to the draft revised provisions, as well as confirmation of which provisions are agreed by those participants and which provisions are not. 1 27443978_3.docx (c) By 6 April 2016 – Council to file a revised proposal with the Panel, identifying provisions about which there is a known disagreement. (d) By 20 April 2016 – submitters to file written closings. (e) By 28 April 2016 – Council to file written closing. 4. The Council respectfully considers that, with the above steps, resumption of the hearing in relation to Topic 9.4 should not be necessary, but acknowledges that will ultimately be a matter for the Panel to decide. TOPIC 9.3: HISTORIC HERITAGE Interiors 5. In accordance with the directions at paragraph 22(c) of the Minute, the Council seeks leave to adduce supplementary heritage and planning evidence about interior heritage fabric of specified scheduled buildings, and presenting updated provisions to address interior heritage fabric. The purpose of filing this supplementary evidence is to provide: (a) detail on heritage items of the schedule that have no interiors (eg monuments), and those heritage items for which Council has been able to establish that there is no interior heritage fabric such that it is not warranted to list and protect the interior of the building (ie protection would apply to the exterior only); (b) context for the Panel in relation to existing level of protection of interior heritage fabric in the operative district plans; (c) clarity for the Panel and landowners about which interior heritage fabric of scheduled buildings is known about and identified in Council records (both within the existing Statements of Significance and other information available to Council), thereby reducing as far as possible any uncertainty about the interior fabric that is protected by the pRDP provisions; 2 27443978_3.docx (d) detailed information on the number and categorisation (eg significant vs high significant; public vs private buildings) of the 'balance' of heritage buildings not accounted for in (a) and (c) above; and (e) updated provisions to address interior heritage fabric in light of the matters above. 6. The Council proposes that the schedule of buildings within the pRDP will be amended to identify where interior heritage fabric is to be protected, but it does not seek that the details of those interior features be set out in the pRDP itself (rather, these details will be contained in the Statements of Significance). However, the provision of this supplementary evidence would make the approach of including those details within the pRDP possible if that was what the Panel ultimately preferred to do. 7. A list of the scheduled buildings that this supplementary evidence would cover is provided in Appendices A, B and C to this memorandum. These appendices specify those buildings discussed at paragraphs 8-10 of the Council's memorandum dated 26 February 2016.1 (a) Appendix A lists the buildings where information on heritage interiors is already contained within the relevant Statements of Significance. (b) Appendix B lists the buildings where the Council has identified existing information held in Council files about heritage interior fabric, but this is not contained within the relevant Statements of Significance. (c) Appendix C lists the buildings where the Council has no information about heritage interior fabric, but where the building would be subject to the revised approach set out in paragraph 5(d) and (e) above (excluding buildings that do not have an interior, such as monuments and bridges). 1 Memorandum of Counsel on behalf of Christchurch City Council, 26 February 2016. This memorandum explained that for approximately 25% of the scheduled heritage buildings, information on heritage interiors is already contained within the buildings' statements of significance. For approximately 100 scheduled heritage buildings, the Council has identified existing information held in Council files about heritage interior fabric. 3 27443978_3.docx 8. If this request is granted, the Council's supplementary evidence would: (a) confirm which heritage buildings proposed to be scheduled in the pRDP are currently scheduled in the operative district plans (under which interiors of heritage buildings are already protected); (b) set out the landowner engagement that has already occurred to date in relation to all scheduled heritage buildings, which includes sending copies of the statements of significance to building owners, meetings with building owners, site visits, and public notification; (c) identify the known interior features of those scheduled heritage buildings that are listed in Appendices A and B (as contained in the Statements of Significance and/or information known to Council); and (d) set out the revised proposed approach to address interior heritage fabric (for heritage items where interiors heritage fabric has been specified and where it has not). Landowner engagement 9. The Council is conscious of the overall timeframe pressure and accordingly the approach for landowner engagement described in the Council's 26 February 2016 memorandum was based on what is realistically achievable within the time constraints of this hearings process. 10. In the event the request for leave to provide supplementary evidence is granted, the Council proposes to take the following steps in relation to landowner engagement: (a) The Council would write to the owners of all of the buildings listed in Appendices A and B and C. The letter would: (i) record that, as per previous indications to the owner, they are the owner of a heritage building proposed to be listed in the pRDP; 4 27443978_3.docx (ii) confirm that interiors of heritage buildings are protected under the operative district plans and the pRDP (as notified); (iii) include a list of interior heritage fabric features of the owner's building (where known); (iv) invite comment from the owner about the correctness of the list of identified interior heritage fabric (where applicable); and (v) provide information about the options available to the owner to engage in further dialogue with the Council about the list of interior heritage fabric and the way in which the pRDP provisions would regulate activities affecting that heritage fabric (discussed below) and invite the owner to make use of these options for dialogue. (b) The options available to building owners for further engagement include: (i) a 'dial a planner' service (a phone line service for landowners to call with queries); (ii) utilisation of the existing free heritage advice service available to all heritage building owners; (iii) a drop-in service where Council experts will be available at set times during the week for meetings with landowners; and (iv) an offer to undertake site visits to inspect the interiors of scheduled heritage buildings at the request of landowners. Timing for supplementary evidence 11. The Council respectfully requests that supplementary evidence be filed 8 weeks from the date leave is granted (if leave is granted by the Panel) to allow time for landowner engagement. The reason for requesting this time is because the preparation and sending of the letters would require two weeks, 5 27443978_3.docx and the Council wishes to allow at least four weeks for engagement with building owners before proceeding to prepare and complete its supplementary evidence (another two weeks). 12. If the Panel wishes to conclude the hearing of this topic sooner than the above process and timeframe would allow, the Council recognises that the time period available for landowner engagement would be shorter, and that may be a relevant factor for the Panel's conclusion about whether to grant leave.