|
Attachment 1
|
Planners Section 42a Hearing Report
|
Officer’s section 42a
report for resource consent application to construct 13
residential units and undertake a 15 lot subdivision in the Suburban Commercial
Activity Area at 11 Randwick Road, Moera. (RM170302)
Address: 11
Randwick Road, Moera
Applicant: RSMG
Investments Limited
1. Dan Kellow states
1.1 I am an
Environmental Planner contracting to Hutt City Council. I have previously
worked for Hutt City Council as the Team Leader Resource Consents and as the
Divisional Manager District Plan. I have a Masters of Environmental Studies
degree from Victoria University as well as a Bachelor of Commerce. I have
15 years experience in land use planning, regulatory and policy, spending most
of that time within local government
1.2 I have visited
the site and am familiar with the surrounding area.
2. Summary of the proposal
2.1 The applicant
seeks resource consent to construct 13 residential units and undertake a 15 lot
subdivision at 11 Randwick Road, Moera. The proposal will create 13 residential
allotments, an access lot with the balance lot containing the Hutt Park Hotel.
2.2 The applicant
proposes to undertake earthworks across the entire site to raise the site so
that all the dwellings will be above the 1:100 flood level of the Awamutu
Stream. The fill would be up to 1m high which would be supported by low
retaining walls around the perimeter of the site. This work requires
approximately 2200m3 of fill to be imported onto the site. All areas
of fill would be either covered by dwellings, the access ways or landscaping.
2.3 Of the 13
residential units 11 would be two-storey with the other two
single-storey. Eight units would be freestanding and 4 would be attached
with vehicle access off the proposed Right of Way. Lot 1 will have direct
access onto Pitt Street and Lot 15 (Hutt Park Hotel) will retain access to
Randwick Road. Two visitor carparks will be provided. The floor area of
each unit will be between 98m2 and 145m2. Each unit
has outdoor space accessed of the main living/dining area. The
application provides an indication of the landscaping and has offered a
condition of consent requiring detailed landscaping plans.
2.4
3. The site
and locality
3.1 The following
site description is adopted from the AEE.
“The application site is a 3963m² irregular
shaped allotment, located on the western side of Randwick Road, Moera. The site
features double road frontages, as it also has a 20m frontage at the western
boundary which adjoins Pitt Street. The topography of the site is flat. With
regard to built form, the site currently contains the two storey Hutt Park
Hotel in the south-eastern corner. Several single storey buildings are also
located in this eastern portion of the site, to rear of the hotel building and
also to its’ north (directly behind the adjoining liquor store). These
additional buildings would be removed as part of the development of the site.
The remainder of the site is a vacant expanse of impervious surface that
affords an informal parking arrangement to the sites’ activities.”
3.2 The
site is in the Suburban Commercial Activity Area (SCAA) of the city’s
district plan. There are no other notations within the district plan that apply
to this site.
3.3 The
site’s legal description is Lot 1 DP 30268 and Lot 2 DP 34172. There are
no interests which affect the proposal.
3.4 To the north of
the site is residential activity with large rear yards adjoining the northern
most part of the site (3 and 5 Pirie Crescent). To the east of the northern arm
of the site is a suburban commercial zoned site used for retail purposes
(liquor store). To the south along Randwick Road is suburban commercial zoning
with a mix of residential and retail use occurring. Directly south of the
site there is suburban commercial and residential zoning with residential
activity occurring on 19 and 20 Croft Grove. The site wraps around two
residentially zoned and used sites (2 and 6/2 Pitt St) as well as 6/1 Pitt
Street. To the west of the northern arm are two residential sites - 8 and 10
Pitt Street. Both of these sites contain single dwellings with large rear yards
adjacent to the application site. To the west across Pitt Street are
single storey dwellings.
Site history
3.5 A hotel was first
established on the site in the late 1960’s.
3.6 Resource consent
has been granted for signs relating to the hotel, erection of a rear extension,
establishment of an off licence and the subdivision of the site. None of
the resource consents have any bearing on the current proposal.
3.7 Flooding has occurred
in the area during 1:100 flood events with a 2004 event the most recent. Both
Pitt Street and Randwick Road are subject to flooding.
4. Consents
sought
4.1 The
appropriate planning instrument for assessing the proposed activity is the City
of Lower Hutt District Plan. The site is within the Suburban Commercial
Activity Area. The relevant rules are contained within Chapters 5C (Suburban
Commercial), Chapter 11 (Subdivision) and Chapter 14 (general rules including
earthworks and transport).
4.2 The activity
status of the land use application is Discretionary (Unrestricted) in
accordance with Rule 5C 2.3(a) which states:
Except where stated in the General
Rules, any Permitted or Restricted Discretionary Activity which fails to comply
with any of the relevant Permitted Activity Conditions, or relevant
requirements of Chapter 14 - General Rules.
4.3 Residential
Activity is permitted activity however in this case the proposal does not
comply with several permitted activity conditions and consequently becomes a
Discretionary Activity.
4.4 The permitted
activity conditions that the proposal does not meet include 5C 2.1.1:
(a) minimum
yard requirements
(b) recession
plans
(e) landscaping
(no landscaping proposed on Randwick Rd frontage)
(f) buildings
must be built to the front of the site
(h) verandahs
(no verandahs on Pitt Street frontage proposed)
(j) residential
activities – residential activities are proposed at the ground floor and
not to the rear of a shop
(o) General
rules - does not comply with earthworks and car parking (for the Hotel)
4.5 In
regard to General Rules the proposal does not meet 4A(iii) Car and
Cycle Parking as the proposal results in a shortfall of 7 car parks at the
Hutt Park Hotel as well as rule 14l 2.1.1 (b) Earthworks as the proposal
includes bringing 2200m3 of fill onto the site.
4.6 The subdivision
proposal does not meet the minimum allotment design as the minimum size for a
controlled activity subdivision (11.2.2.1(a)) is 300m2 and
several proposed lots are less than 200m2. Furthermore the
proposal does not comply with Right of Way standards specified under
11.2.2.1(b). The earthworks also require resource consent as part of the
subdivision application.
4.7 Overall the
subdivision is a Discretionary Activity under rule 11.2.4 (i) due to the
proposal not complying with allotment design standards
5. Consideration under the
Resource Management Act 1991
5.1 As a
Discretionary Activity the application must be assessed in accordance with the
provisions of sections 104 and 104B of the Resource Management Act 1991 (the
Act). The process for considering a Discretionary Activity is as follows:
(i) To
identify the relevant section 104 matters;
(ii) As
part of the overall discretion in section 104B, weigh the relevant matters
under section 104.
5.2 I consider that
the relevant section 104 matters are as follows:
§ Any
actual and potential effects on the environment of allowing the activity:
§ The
relevant provisions of the District Plan, objectives, policies and rules; and
§ Part
II of the Act.
5.3 An assessment of
effects of the proposal on the environment and the identification of the
issues/matters raised by submitters is detailed in sections 6 and 7 below. The
District Plan’s objectives, policies and rules are of particular
relevance in terms of section 104(1)(b), and together with the Part II criteria
listed in section 9 of this report, form the basis of determining any adverse
effects.
5.4 Written approval
from Housing New Zealand as owner, and on behalf of the occupants, was provided
in relation to 3 and 5 Pirie Street. Consequently, there can be no
consideration of the adverse effects of the proposal on those sites.
6. Submissions
6.1 The application
was limited notified on the 12th of December 2017 to the owners and
occupiers of 19 and 20 Croft Grove and 2, 1/6, 2/6, 8 and 10 Pitt Street.
6.2 Four submissions
were received all of which were in opposition. However two parties have
met with the applicant and due to revisions to the proposal they have both
withdrawn their submissions. The amendments to the scheme due to the
submissions are reflected in the current drawings.
6.3 The remaining
submissions in opposition are from James Taylor (8 Pitt Street) and (Mark) Zuo
Zheng (6/1 Pitt Street). James Taylor does not wish to be heard.
6.4 The key issues
raised in the submission from Mr Zheng are as follows:
· The potential for loss of
sunlight/solar gain to 6/1 Pitt Street leading to poor living conditions
· Adverse construction
effects, namely noise and air pollution from the earthworks affecting his
families health.
6.5 Mr Zheng requests
that the proposal is amended to ensure the issues he raises are addressed.
6.6 The key issues
raised by James Taylor are as follows:
· The noise effects of
earthworks
· Potential flooding of his
site due to earthworks raising ground level
· The density and design of
the development is not in character with the neighbourhood
· The potential effect of
additional vehicles on Pitt Street
· Minimum yard setbacks are
not provided
6.7 James Taylor
opposes the application and seeks assurances regarding the raised ground level
and traffic on the surrounding area. James Taylor would support the
proposal if it was for 5 – 6 houses.
Pre-hearing meeting
6.8 A pre-hearing
meeting was held on 15 February 2018. The chairpersons’ report is
attached as attachment 1.
6.6 The matters
raised within the submissions will be addressed within section 7 below.
7. Assessment of actual
and potential environmental effects
An assessment of effects on the environment, including
the issues/matters raised by submitters, is detailed within the assessment
below. The District Plan’s objectives, policies and rules are of
particular relevance in terms of section 104(1)(b), and together with the Part
II criteria listed in section 9 of this report, form the basis of any
determination as to whether an adverse effect may be regarded as acceptable (or
otherwise).
7.1 The following
definitions contained in the Act apply in this case:
“Environment” is defined as
(a) Ecosystems
and their constituent parts, including people and communities; and
(b) All
natural and physical resources; and
(c) Amenity
values; and
(d) The
social, economic, aesthetic, and cultural conditions which affect the matters
stated in paragraphs (a) to (c) of this definition or which are affected by
those matters.
“Amenity values” are defined as
those natural and physical qualities
and characteristics of an area that contribute to people’s appreciation
of its pleasantness, aesthetic coherence and cultural and recreational
attributes.
7.2 The environmental
effects which Council considers relevant when assessing this proposal are as
follows:
· Urban Design Effects
· Residential Amenity Effects
· Traffic effects
· Flooding effects
· Earthwork effects
· Construction effects
· Reverse sensitivity
· Subdivision
· Loss of commercial land
· Positive effects
Permitted baseline
7.3 Section 104(2) states
“…when forming an opinion for the purpose of subsection 1(a), a
consent authority may disregard an adverse effect of the activity on the
environment if [[a national environmental standard or]] the plan permits an
activity with that effect.”
7.4 Minor
boundary adjustments are permitted provided that the conditions for the
activity can be met and no additional allotments are created. The
proposal creates 15 lots so it is considered there is no relevant permitted
baseline for the subdivision.
7.5 The land use
permitted baseline for the site is the construction of a building no greater
than 500m2 gross floor area which is built up to the front boundary
of the site. Residential activity is permitted on the ground floor to the
rear of a shop or at first floor level. The maximum height of a building
is 8m, compliance with the recession plane of 2.5m + 45 degrees is necessary.
Side yards abutting a residential area must be at least 3m.
7.6 Earthworks
can be no greater than 50m2 and must have cut or fill no greater
than 1.2m3. In this case the permitted baseline is of
relevance and has been taken into account when considering the adverse effects
of the proposal. It is noted that the existing hotel on the site is a larger
than what could be erected as of right. The existing environment has also
been taken into account when assessing adverse effects.
The existing environment
7.7 The site
currently contains the Hutt Park Hotel as well as a portion of a building that
straddles the boundary with 15 Randwick Road - the part of the building on 11 Randwick
Road will be removed. The remainder of the site is an asphalt covered car
park that serves the Hutt Park Hotel. There is solid wall/fencing around the
southern, western and northern perimeter of the site.
Assessment of environmental effects
Urban Design effects
7.8 The proposal was
assessed by Council’s Urban Design Consultant Morten Gjerde and his full
assessment is attached as attachment 2. Mr Gjerde also provided pre application
advice on the scheme. Mr Gjerde’s report should be referred to for the
full urban design assessment.
7.9 Mr Gjerde notes in his
assessment that because the site is in the SCAA that the Design Guide Medium
Density Housing does not strictly apply. I concur with this comment
as there is no reference to the Design Guide in the SCAA provisions. Despite
this I consider that the Design Guide is a useful framework for assessing the
application and that it can be taken into account under section 104 (1)(c).
7.10 Mr Taylor’s submission
in opposition includes comment that the proposal is not in character with the
area due to the density and design.
7.11 In the analysis of urban
design outcomes Mr Gjerde states
“Overall, the project will provide much needed
housing in the city. The dwellings are designed and arranged on the site
in a rational manner. The site is appropriately landscaped and will fit
appropriately with the surrounding area. In this particular setting, the
standard of the development is appropriate. I am pleased to be able to
recommend that the proposed development meets the objectives and guidelines of
the DGMDH”.
7.12 In relation to Mr
Taylor’s submission that the proposal will not fit into the character of
the area I note Mr Gjerde’s comments that that most significant aspect of
the proposal is the development of Lot 1 which fronts Pitt Street. I consider
that it is necessary to have regard to the fact that there is no design guide
for single dwellings within residential sites. This means any site in the
residential area can be developed with a modern two storey dwelling without
resource consent being required. In a street with a uniform age and design of
dwelling the new dwelling could be out of keeping however this is an outcome
anticipated by the district plan.
Overall I agree with Mr Gjerde's analysis and therefore
consider that the proposal has acceptable urban design outcomes.
Residential Amenity Effects
7.13 Residential development has
the potential to affect the amenity of the surrounding residential sites through
building bulk and location of buildings as well as the density of the
development.
Loss of sunlight
7.14 In regard to shading the
proposal breaches the recession plane permitted activity conditions on external
boundaries. Unit 13 breaches the recession plane in relation to 3 and 5 Pirie
Crescent however written approval was obtained from the owners (also signed on
behalf of occupiers) of this site so any adverse effects must be
disregarded. There are also breaches on 6/1, 6/2 and 2 Pitt Street and 19
and 20 Croft Grove. The effects of shading are shown on the Sun Study
Diagrams provided by the applicant along with a summary of the shading effect
by the applicant.
7.15 In relation to 6/1 and 6/2 Pitt
Street the shading effect is considered to be limited as the proposal is
located directly to the south of these dwellings. It is noted that a
driveway runs along the southern boundary of 6/1 Pitt Street resulting in the
dwelling being set off the boundary. The submission from Mr Zheng opposes the
proposal due to the potential loss of sunlight to a bedroom, bathroom and
laundry. Because the proposal is to the south any potential shading is
limited to late evening in mid-summer. There is no shading effect in
winter. The high solid wall along the southern boundary of 6/1 and 6/2
Pitt Street means much of the shading would fall on the wall and onto the
driveway that provides access to 6/2 Pitt Street. Overall due to shading
only occurring during mid-summer and in the late evening any shading effect on
6/1 and 6/2 Pitt Street is considered less than minor.
7.16 In relation to 2 Pitt Street and
19 and 20 Croft Grove the recession plan breaches are small as the proposed
dwellings on lots 5, 6 and 7 are single storey. Shading of 20 Croft Grove will
fall largely on the rear wall of a double garage and against a solid
fence. The worst shading occurs mid-winter and at this time shading does
not reach the dwelling on 20 Croft Grove except for early morning. The
shading effect on 20 Croft Grove is considered to be a less than minor adverse
effect.
7.17 The dwelling and garage on
19 Croft Grove are located close to the application site boundary. There
is a small rear yard with the main outdoor area being located outside the
western end of the dwelling. The shading of this site is small with only the
eaves of the proposed single storey dwelling breaching the recession
plane. Shading is limited to the winter months and shading will fall
against part of the northern elevation of 19 Croft Grove. Because of the
small size of the breach and due to it only falling against part of the
dwelling during winter any shading effects are considered minor.
7.18 In relation to 2 Pitt Street
there is a small recession plane breach against its eastern boundary.
Shading is limited to early morning in the winter months and would fall mostly
against the rear fence and vegetation within 2 Pitt Street. It is noted that
the owner of this site withdrew their submission prior to the Hearing.
Any shading effects on this site are considered to be less than
minor.
7.19 There are no recession plan standards or yard requirements
in relation to adjacent sites within the Suburban Commercial Activity
Area. Because of this the shading effects on 15 Randwick Road are
considered to be within what could occur from a permitted development. It is
noted that shading of 15 Randwick Road falls on to the rear blank façade
of the retail building.
Loss of privacy
7.20 There is the potential for
overlooking from the two storey components of the proposed dwellings. This was
a matter raised by the owners of 2/6 Pitt Street who withdrew their submission
following the alteration of the proposal through lifting the sill height of
windows on the top floor of units 9 and 10.
7.21 Because residential activity is
permitted at first floor level in the Suburban Commercial Activity Area it is
considered that the two storey dwellings will generally maintain the level of
privacy that is anticipated by the district plan. The district plan
requires 3m side yards in the SCAA and the two storey dwellings comply with
this except for part of the dwelling on Lot 1. The part of the dwelling that
does not comply contains a bedroom which due to the type of use will not result
in unacceptable privacy effects.
7.22 The potential for loss of
privacy due to units 9 – 13 are considered to be within the permitted
baseline and can therefore be disregarded.
Density of development
7.23 The proposal will result in
a density of development that could not occur as of right on this site.
The submission in opposition by Mr Taylor includes comment that the proposal
will result in a level of density that is excessive and detrimental. As
well as the effects of building bulk denser development can result in a higher
level of noise and disturbance due to increased activity.
7.24 From the public realm it
would be difficult to discern the density of development due to the shape of
the site. From Mr Taylor’s site it would largely be units 9 –
13 that are visible. These units are comparable to what could be built as
of right (with residential activity at first floor) and accordingly this aspect
of the proposal can be disregarded.
7.25 The proposed dwellings on
Lots 5 and 6 are not set 3m off the side yard with 2 Pitt Street and 19 and 20
Croft Grove. However because they are single storey and will be used for
residential purposes there will not be adverse effects that are unacceptable on
the amenity of the adjoining sites.
7.26 It is acknowledged that the
density of development is greater than the surrounding residential are but this
is not considered to have unacceptable effects on any individual sites amenity
or on the wider character of the area.
Traffic effects
7.27 The application includes an
assessment by a traffic engineer (Harriet Fraser) and this report has been
assessed by a traffic engineer (Bill Barclay) on behalf of Hutt City
Council. Mr Barclay has also provided an assessment post reviewing the
submissions.
7.28 Mr Barclay’s
assessment is attached as attachment 3. The proposal complies with
parking requirements as each dwelling will have a compliant car parking
space. Mr Barclay did express concern that the occupants of units 9
– 12 could not turn without using private turning facilities. He did
however overall support the proposal as there would be adequate visibility and
the site is flat. The ROW is under width by 0.5m but is still considered
to be functional and therefore the proposal is supported by Mr Barclay.
7.29 The proposal results in the
loss of car parking spaces for the hotel. Since lodging the resource consent
application District Plan Change 30 has become operative. The car parking
requirements are set out in table 4-1 (page 7 Transport Chapter) and do not
require car parks for the first 400m2 of licensed premises.
The Hutt Park Hotel is approximately 400m2 gross floor area.
The applicant states the hotel provides long stay accommodation (boarding
house) with a total of 32 rooms. The requirement is 0.5m car parks per
resident of a boarding house. Nine car parks will be provided on the hotel site
resulting in a shortfall of 7 car parking spaces. There is kerbside
parking available in the area and this is not heavily utilised with the application
stating there were 36 car parking spaces available kerbside during a parking
survey. Because of the availability of kerbside parking the parking
shortfall is considered acceptable.
7.30 Mr Taylor’s submission
stated that he was concerned about the effect of 13 vehicles on Pitt Street. Mr
Barclay reviewed the submissions and commented that “the amount of
traffic generated by the development will be small in relation to general
volumes in the vicinity.” Mr Barclay confirmed his support for
the proposal.
7.31 Overall the traffic and
parking effects are considered acceptable.
Flooding effects
7.32 The site and surrounding
area is known to flood during a 1:100 year rainfall event. The applicant
proposes to raise the ground level of the site which will allow dwellings to be
built above the flood level. The submission by Mr Taylor states that he is
concerned about the potential impact of raising the ground level on his site
during a flood event.
7.33 The impact on adjacent sites
due to raising the ground level was assessed by DHI Water and Environment Ltd
on behalf of the applicant. The report concludes the effect of filling is
almost imperceptible and the modelling shows a 1mm increase in depth elsewhere
on the flood plain.
7.34 Advice has been obtained
from Greater Wellington Regional Council’s senior engineer for flood
protection (James Flanagan) who confirms that the assessment by DHI Water and
Environment Ltd is valid.
7.35 In regard to minimum floor
levels the applicant sought advice from James Flanagan in March 2017 when
designing the development. The advice provided in March 2017 suggested
the dwellings needed to be built to 2.34m above Mean Sea Level (Wellington 1953
Datum). This figure relates to the underside of floor joists or to the base of
the concrete floor slab. Since that time GWRC have increased the amount
of sea level rise that they include in their calculation of flood levels (sea
level rise is now assumed as 800mm to 2090 rather 500mm) and they now recommend
2.6m above MSL.
7.36 Council’s subdivision
engineer has recommended that the minimum floor level is 2.3m above MSL.
Due to the uncertainty inherent in these calculations and because the proposal
was based on the appropriate advice at the time it was designed the relevant
recommended consent conditions takes the ‘middle ground’ of 2.34m
above MSL. It is noted that the Building Act only requires buildings to
be built so they do not flood in a 1 in 50 year flood event whereas the above
relates to the 1 in 100 flood event.
7.37 Given the negligible impact
on flooding the proposal is considered acceptable in relation to natural
hazards.
Earthworks.
7.38 The fill that will be
brought onto the site to raise the ground level will average 0.6m and will be
supported by engineer designed retaining walls. The maximum fill height will be
1m.
7.39 Once the development is
complete the effects of the earthworks on the flat site will not generate any
adverse visual effects. The site is not known to contain any historical
or cultural resources and has no natural character. Any temporary effects
due to earthworks, such as dust or sediment control, can be mitigated through
the construction management plan that the applicant has proffered. Overall any
adverse effects of earthworks are considered to be less than minor.
Construction effects
7.40 During construction there is
the potential for adverse effects to be generated. Mr Zheng raised
construction effects as an issue that he is concerned about, in particular
noise and air pollution from earthworks. The applicant has offered to provide
a Construction Management Plan to council for certification and to limit
construction hours to 7am to 5pm Monday to Friday with no weekend or public
holiday work. The CMP will also include measures for controlling
dust.
7.41 Construction effects cannot
be fully avoided and the hours offered by the applicant are more restrictive
than the construction hours contained in the NZS 6803P “Measurement and
Assessment of Noise from Construction, Maintenance and Demolition Work”
which allows louder construction work to continue on the 6pm.
7.42 It is acknowledged
construction may disturb adjacent property owners, particularly when they are
at home during the weekdays, as is the case with Mr Zheng’s family.
However the applicant has restricted hours of construction and will be required
to undertake measures outlined in the Construction Management Plan that will
mitigate the potential for adverse effects, including dust mitigation.
7.43 The construction effects
will be appropriately mitigated and are considered acceptable.
Reverse sensitivity
7.44 Because of the proximity to
the SCAA the applicant has stated that the townhouses will be constructed to
meet the noise standard DnT, w Ctr > 30 dB2 to ensure reverse
sensitivity issues do not arise once the townhouses are occupied.
Mechanical ventilation will also be installed to allow rooms to receive fresh
air while windows are closed. This is considered to adequately address
potential reverse sensitivity effects.
Subdivision
7.45 The proposal will result in
13 residential Lots, a ROW Lot with the balance Lot containing the Hutt Park
Hotel.
7.46 The Lot sizes are under the
District Plan requirement for Lots in the SCAA. The Lots align with the
proposed residential use and because of this they are considered to be an
appropriate size and shape given their future use. All sites will
have legal access from the road and can be supplied with power and
telecommunications.
7.47 The proposal has been
assessed by a council subdivision engineer who did not raise any concerns with
the proposal subject to suitable conditions being imposed. The proposal
will have adequate water supply and storm and waste water disposal.
7.48 Standard subdivision consent
conditions have been suggested by the subdivision engineer and these are
included in the list of suggested consent conditions. Overall the
subdivision proposal is considered acceptable.
Loss of commercial land
7.49 The proposal will result in
a reduction of the amount of suburban commercial land available in this
area. The site has been used as a hotel since the late 1960’s and
zoning has reflected this use since. I could not find historical records
relating to the need or otherwise for this site as a suburban commercial
centre. In the absence of any information to the contrary it is
reasonable to conclude the zoning reflects the use of the site rather than the
need for a suburban commercial centre to extend from Randwick Road through to
Pitt Street.
7.50 Six hundred metres to the
north of the site is another Suburban Commercial Activity Area which contains
the Moera shopping centre. The Moera shops are more extensive than around the
application site and provide typical suburban commercial shops and services.
The application states that this area had vacant shops during a site visit
prior to lodging the application. This area still had several vacant
shops in late April 2018.
7.51 The use of the rear part of the
11 Randwick Road for residential use will not remove any existing commercial
activities from the area. The Moera shops and remaining land from 1 – 15
Randwick Road will be able to provide suburban commercial services to the local
community and because of this it is considered acceptable to use the
application site for residential purposes.
8. Relevant plan
provisions
District Plan
8.1 The relevant
objectives and policies for the Discretionary Activity in the Suburban
Residential Activity Area relate primarily to the provision of commercial
activity areas and the protection of the amenity of adjoining residential
activity areas.
8.2 Objective 5C 1.1.1
To maintain Suburban Commercial
centres close to residential areas, and support where possible, the community
focus associated with such centres.
Policy (a) That a range of retail and
commercial activities be provided for in Suburban Commercial centres to meet
the needs of residents
Objective 5C 1.1.2 To avoid, remedy or
mitigate the adverse effects of activities in Suburban Commercial centres on
the amenity values of residential areas.
Policy (a) That activities at Suburban
Commercial centres are of a character, scale and intensity that the amenity
values of adjoining residential activity areas are not affected adversely.
Objective 5C 1.2.1
To avoid, remedy or mitigate the
adverse effects of the size, scale, location, design and external appearance of
buildings and structures on the amenity values of adjoining residential areas.
Policy (a) That the size, scale and
location of buildings and structures be designed to be compatible with the
amenity values of surrounding residential areas.
Policy (b) That where an activity
abuts a residential area there will be a separation distance to avoid or
mitigate any adverse effects on the amenity values of the residential area
8.3 The effect of the
proposal on the character of the neighbourhood and amenity of the surrounding
residential sites has been assessed in sections 7.8 – 7.26. The
effects have been found to be acceptable due to the bulk and location of the
proposal and therefore the proposal is considered to be consistent with the
above objectives and policies.
8.4 The objectives
and policies that relate to earthworks are:
Objective 14l 1.1 To ensure that
earthworks are designed to maintain the natural features that contribute to the
City’s landscape.
Policy (a) To ensure that earthworks
are designed to be sympathetic to the natural topography
Objective 14l 1.2 To ensure earthworks
do not affect adversely the visual amenity values, cultural values or
historical significance of an area, natural feature or site.
Policy (b) That rehabilitation
measures be undertaken to mitigate adverse effects of earthworks upon the
visual amenity values
Policy (c) To protect any sites with
historical significance from inappropriate earthworks
Policy (d) To recognise the importance
of cultural and spiritual values to the mana whenua associated with any
cultural material that may be disinterred through earthworks and to ensure that
these values are protected from inappropriate earthworks
8.5 The effects of
the earthworks has been discussed in section 7.38 – 7.39. The effects
are considered to be consistent with the above-mentioned objectives and
policies.
8.6 The relevant
subdivision objectives and policies are:
Objective 11.1.1 To ensure that land
which is subdivided can be used for the proposed use or development
Policy (a) To ensure that allotments
have minimum design standards such as, minimum size, shape and frontage, which
are suitable for the proposed use or development.
8.7 The subdivision
has been designed in conjunction with specific buildings resulting in Lots of
an appropriate size and shape.
Objective 11.1.2 To ensure that
utilities provided to service the subdivision protect the environment and that
there are no adverse effects on the health and safety of residents and
occupiers.
Policy (a) To ensure that utilities
provided comply with specified performance standards relating to such matters
as access, street lighting, stormwater, water supply, wastewater, gas,
telephone, electricity and earthworks.
8.8 All required
utilities can and will be provided to the Lots if appropriate conditions are
imposed.
Objective 11.1.3 To ensure that
land subject to natural hazards is subdivided in a manner that the adverse
effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated.
Policy (b) Subdivision of land subject
to flooding is discouraged as this can lead to greater intensity of use and
development and have adverse effects on the environment.
8.9 The applicant has
demonstrated that by raising the ground level by 600mm on average that
adverse effects due to flooding are avoided to an acceptable extent.
8.10 The relevant Transport
Chapter objectives and policies are:
Objective 14A 3.4 Adverse effects on
the safety and efficiency of the transport network from land use and
development that generate high volumes of traffic are managed
Objective 14A 3.5 Adverse effects on
the safety and efficiency of the transport network from onsite transport
facilities (vehicle access, parking, manoeuvring and loading facilities) are
managed.
Policy 14A 4.2 Land
use, subdivision and development should not cause significant adverse effects
on the connectivity, accessibility and safety of the transport network, and,
where appropriate, should:
· seek to improve
connectivity within and between communities; and
· enable walking,
cycling and access to public transport.
Policy
14A 4.6 Vehicle access, parking, manoeuvring and loading facilities should be
designed to standards that ensure they do not compromise the safety and
efficiency of the transport network
8.11 The proposal has been
assessed by a traffic engineer on behalf of council and he supports the
application. The proposal is not considered to be contrary to the above
policies and objective.
8.12 Rules 5C 2.3 .1 states the
matters contained in sections 104 and 105, and in Part II of the Act shall
apply and the degree of compliance or non-compliance with any relevant
Permitted Activity Conditions are assessment matters for discretionary
activities
8.13 Assessment in accordance
with section 104 and 105 of the Act is contained within section 7 of this
report. Part II assessment can be found in section 9.
8.14 The relevant permitted
activity conditions are recession planes, yards and height. The proposal
complies with the 8m height but does not met the 3m side yard requirement
for a small portion of the proposed dwellings on Lot 1, Lot 5 and 6. The
effect of these breaches have been assessed in section 7.23 – 7.26.
Similarly the breach of the recession planes has been assessed in section 7.14
– 7.19 and have been found to be acceptable.
Other plans
8.15 I have given regard to the
relevant national environmental standards; other regulations; national policy
statements; New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010; regional policy
statement/proposed regional policy statement; or plan/proposed plan.
8.16 Objective 22 of the Regional
Policy Statement relates to maintaining a compact, well designed urban form.
This proposal helps to achieve that objective through infill development.
8.17 Objective 20 relates to
hazard mitigation measures and their consequences. This proposal has
demonstrated that it will adequately reduce the impact of natural hazards on
the application site while avoiding exacerbating the effect on the surrounding
area.
8.18 The National Policy
Statement for Urban Development capacity is relevant to the application. In
particular Policy PA4 which states:
When considering the effects of urban
development, decision-makers shall take into account:
a) The benefits that urban development
will provide with respect to the ability for people
and communities and future
generations to provide for their social, economic, cultural
and environmental wellbeing; and
b) The benefits and costs of urban
development at a national, inter-regional, regional and district scale, as well
as the local effects.
8.19 This proposal achieves this
policy through providing infill housing with minimal adverse effects (costs) on
the surrounding area.
Other matters
8.20 This proposal is considered
unlikely to create a precedent or to undermine the integrity of the district
plan as residential activity is permitted and this site is unusual because it
is an underutilised through site.
9. Part II of the Act
9.1 Part II sets out
the purpose and principles of the Act (section 5); matters of national
importance the consent authority must recognise and provide for when
determining a resource consent (section 6); other matters the consent authority
must have particular regard to (section 7); and provision for the principles of
the Treaty of Waitangi (section 8).
9.2 The purpose of
the Act as set out in section 5 is to promote “the sustainable
management of natural and physical resources while managing the use, development,
and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which
enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic and
cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety while… avoiding,
remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the
environment.”
9.4 It is considered
the proposal has positive effects in that it will provide infill housing on an
underutilised site.
9.5 Given the above
factors, the proposal is considered that the proposal is consistent with
section 5 of the Resource Management Act 1991.
9.6 Section 6 of the
Act lists matters of national importance. It is considered that none of the
matters of national importance are relevant to this proposal.
9.7 Section 7 of the
Act lists a number of other matters that Council shall have particular regard
to when considering such an application. Under section 7 the following matters
are considered applicable:
(b) The
efficient use and development of natural and physical resources:
(c) The
maintenance and enhancement of amenity values:
(f) Maintenance
and enhancement of the quality of the environment:
It
is considered that the proposal is not contrary to section 7 of the Act for the
reasons discussed in the assessment of effects.
9.8 It is considered
that section 8 of the Act requires that the Council, in achieving the purpose
of the Act, in managing the use, development and protection of the natural and
physical environment, shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of
Waitangi. It is considered the proposal is not contrary to section 8 of the
Act. It is noted the subject site is not adjacent to any land subject to the
Port Nicholson Block Settlement Act 2009 that would warrant notification of the
application to the Port Nicholson Settlement Trust.
9.9 Overall I
consider the land use and subdivision consent application for 13 residential
lots and two ancillary Lots along with dwellings will be consistent with Part
II of the Resource Management Act 1991.
10. Conclusion
10.1 The proposal is consistent
with the relevant objectives and policies and will not generate unacceptable
adverse effects. The proposal is consistent with Part 2 of the Act.
10.2 I recommend that resource
consent is granted for the land use activity and subdivision subject to the
following conditions of consent.
11. Suggested conditions of consent
If the committee resolves to grant resource consent, the
following may be considered as conditions of the landuse consent:
1. That
the proposal is carried out substantially in accordance with the information
and approved plans (Scheme plans: 105 – 108, 301, 302, 601 – 610;
29336SCH 1 – 4 Rev C) submitted with the application held on file
at council.
2. That
the consent holder advises the council (enforcement@huttcity.govt.nz or (04)
560 1044) at least two working days before starting any work on site; and that
the consent holder also supplies the name, phone number and address of the main
contractor and, if applicable, the same details for the earthworks company.
Important note: When given notice of a
start date, a compliance officer will suggest an on-site meeting to run through
a checklist of things to make sure the project runs as smoothly as possible.
This service is included in the resource consent application fee. Using it
could avoid difficulties later on.
3. That
the consent holder undertakes all earthworks (including for trenching purposes)
in such a way that no sediment leaves the site or enters streams or the
stormwater system; and that the consent holder installs and maintains sediment
control measures in compliance with Greater Wellington regional council’s
erosion and sediment control guidelines (issued in April 2003).
4. That
the consent holder paves, metals, re-grasses, hydro-seeds or plants all areas
exposed by earthworks, trenching or building work as soon as possible after
excavation or, at the latest, within a month of completing earthworks to the
satisfaction of the council subdivision engineer; and that the consent holder
repeats any seeding or planting that fails to become fully established within
12 months of the completion of earthworks.
5. That
the consent holder ensures all earthworks are carried out in a way that
prevents dust blowing beyond site boundaries. Control measures may include use
of a water cart, limiting the vehicle speed to 10 kilometres an hour, applying
water to exposed or excessively dry surfaces, or applying a coating of
geotextile, grass, mulch or the like.
6. That
the consent holder ensures vehicles and machinery leaving the site do not drop
dirt or other material on roads or otherwise damage road surfaces; and that if
such spills or damage happen, the consent holder cleans or repairs roads to
their original condition, being careful not to discharge the material into any
stream, stormwater system or open drainage channel in the process. (The term
“road” includes footpaths, vehicle crossings and berms.)
7. That
the consent holder compacts all earthwork fill areas in accordance with the
Code of Practice for Earth Fill for Residential Development (NZS4431:1989) and
meets the code’s obligations on final documentation and certification,
which state the suitability of earthworks for residential development.
8. A
final Landscaping Plan must be submitted to council for certification prior to
development commencing.
9. That
landscaping is in accordance with the above landscaping plan and that planting
is completed as soon as seasonally practicable, but must be completed prior to
an application for 224 certification.
10. That the consent
holder replaces any dead or dying plants for a period of four years from the
date of planting.
11. That a
Construction Management Plan is submitted to council for certification prior to
development commencing. The CMP must include/state the measures proposed
to manage effects related to
· Construction hours of 7am
to 5pm Monday to Friday with no weekend or public holiday work.
· Construction traffic
· Dust
· Noise
· Sediment control vibration
· Contact details of a person
responsible for dealing with any concerns of local residents relating to
construction activity
12. The consent
holder shall ensure that the proposed residential units are protected from
noise arising from outside the building by ensuring that the external sound
insulation level achieves the following minimum performance standard
DnT.w+Ctr<30dBA. A certificate from a suitably qualified acoustic engineer
shall be submitted to the Team Leader Resource Consents to state that the above
design standard has been achieved prior to the occupation of the residential
units.
13. The consent
holder shall ensure that where bedrooms with open able windows are proposed, a
positive supplementary source of fresh air ducted from outside or plenums is
required at the time of fit-out. For the purposes of this requirement, a
bedroom is any room intended to be used for sleeping. The supplementary source
of air is to achieve a minimum of 7.5 litres per second per person.
Subdivision consent
1. That
the consent holder pays Council an engineering fee to meet the cost of work
carried out by Council subdivision engineer in assessing, inspecting, testing
and approving water, sewer and stormwater services, access or any other aspect
of the proposal so assessed by the engineer or any representatives of the
engineer (as distinct from work which must be monitored as a result of any
building consent). That fee is 2.59 per cent of the consent
holder’s construction costs (including GST) and is calculated using a
scale of engineering fees based on the number of new lots created. The minimum
fee is $150.00, irrespective of whether any construction work is
necessary. Payment is necessary before or at the time of applying for a section
224(c) certificate.
2. That
the consent holder compacts all earthworks fill areas in accordance with the
Code of Practice for Earth Fill for residential Development (NZS4431:1989). A
completion certificate from a suitably qualified and experienced geotechnical
engineer stating the earthworks have been completed to a satisfactory standard
is to be provided at time of application for 224c certification. Where the
completion report identifies any limitations or specific requirements such as
specific foundation design, consent notices in accordance with section 221 of the
Resource Management Act 1991.
3. That
the consent holder undertakes all earthworks (including for trenching purposes)
in such a way that no sediment leaves the site or enters streams or the
stormwater system; and that the consent holder installs and maintains sediment
control measures in compliance with Greater Wellington Regional Council’s
erosion and sediment control guidelines (issued in April 2003).
4. That
the consent holder ensures vehicles and machinery leaving the site do not drop
dirt or other material on roads or otherwise damage road surfaces; and that if
such spills or damage happen, the consent holder cleans or repairs roads to
their original condition, being careful not to discharge the material into any
stream, stormwater system or open drainage channel in the process. (The term
“road” includes footpaths, vehicle crossings and berms.)
5. That
the consent holder constructs the private way, including a heavy-duty vehicle
crossing and necessary stormwater control in accordance with Council’s
codes and standards. Before building any retaining walls subject to traffic
loading (or other surcharge) or are more than 1.5 metres high, the consent
holder must obtain a building consent. The consent holder must submit a design
prepared by a chartered professional engineer with the building consent
application, followed by a producer statement on completion of the walls.
6. That
the consent holder installs the reticulation as necessary and connects separate
minimum 100mm NB sewer and stormwater service leads to the public mains (or to
the road kerb or other approved disposal point in the case of stormwater) for
each residential lot (and adjust existing services where necessary) in
accordance with Council’s codes and standards.
Please
note:
§ All water, stormwater and sewer
reticulation services shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the
‘Regional Standard for Water Services’, the ‘Regional
Specification for Water Services’ and the ‘Approved Products
Register’, including all associated amendments. Copies of the
latest version of these documents are available on the following website:
https://wellingtonwater.co.nz/contractors/technical-information.
§ It is now Council policy that only
existing sewer and stormwater laterals less than 25 years old can be utilised
for a new dwelling or new vacant lot, otherwise they are to be renewed or
sealed off at the mains if not replaced in the same location.
7. The
consent holder arranges for a suitably qualified engineer to provide a
stormwater design report for the suitable disposal of stormwater from the site,
including the design of any proposed stormwater attenuation. Where it is
determined that there is insufficient, or no additional, capacity available
within Council stormwater mains to cater for the proposed development then the
development shall be designed to be stormwater neutral so that the stormwater
runoff from the fully developed site is no more than existed prior to the
development. Where storage attenuation tanks, pipes or similar are
proposed a consent notice, in accordance with section 221 of the Resource
Management Act 1991, shall be placed on the affected lots including details of
the size of the tank, the size of the discharge pipe (orifice) et cetera.
8. That
the consent holder supplies water reticulation as necessary and supplies
separate minimum 20mm NB connections for each residential lot that meets
Council’s code for domestic supply and the firefighting capability
required under the New Zealand Fire Service code of practice (SNZ PAS
4509:2008).
Please
note:
§ It is now Council policy that only
existing laterals of polyethylene material can be utilised for a new dwelling
or new vacant lot. All existing non-polyethylene laterals, including the
tobies, are to be renewed and sealed at the main if not replaced in the same
position.
§ The consent holder must apply for new
water connections at the customer services counter of Council Building, 30
Laings Road, Lower Hutt. These applications are processed by Wellington Water
Ltd., which is a Council-controlled company in charge of Council water and
drainage assets. Their contact person is Chandra Koswatte (ph 04 912 4534).
Wellington Water Ltd. may impose special requirements or conditions for new
connections depending on, among other things, the existing reticulation
system’s condition and layout, flow rates, pressure zones and proposed
future work. It is important the consent holder makes an application early in
the design or construction phase. Council recommends that the consent holder
makes this application before submitting engineering plans to Council
subdivision engineer.
9. That
the consent holder submits a copy of the approved water connection application
form (signed by Wellington Water Ltd.) when applying for the section 224(c)
certificate.
10. That
the consent holder constructs a standard concrete vehicle crossing to serve lot
1 in accordance with Council’s codes and standards.
11. That
the consent holder severs all cross-boundary services, including any power,
water and stormwater.
12. That
the consent holder submits two copies of engineering plans for the above
construction work to Council subdivision engineer for approval; that the plans
provide information on the materials to be used, including the size, type and
class of pipes, as well as indicate pipe gradients; and that all this work is
carried out in accordance with the approved plan.
Please
note:
§ This condition is necessary, even for
minor works, as the engineering approval letter will list further engineering
requirements in regard to Corridor Access Requests, pipe materials,
inspections, as-built information, etc.
§ Engineering approval of the proposed
services and access up to the individual lot boundaries is completely separate
from any approval given under building consent and must be requested prior to
installation, irrespective of any building consent being issued.
13. That
the consent holder appoints a representative to carry out the design and
supervision of construction work, as well as certification upon completion, as
provided for by clause 1.4.1 of NZS 4404:2004; and that the consent holder
submits the name, contact details and experience of the representative to
Council subdivision engineer for approval before submitting engineering plans.
The consent holder must document the representative’s experience in a
resume and show the relevance of that experience to the works and services
required under this consent. The certification must include confirmation that
the materials, installation and testing meet Council’s codes and
standards.
14. That
the consent holder appoints an approved contractor or contractors to complete
the works to the approved design; and that the consent holder submits to
Council subdivision engineer for approval the name, contact details and
experience of the contractor(s) at the time of submitting engineering plans for
approval. The approved contractor(s) must give a minimum of 24 hours’
notice to Council subdivision engineer before starting work.
15. That
the consent holder provides underground telephone and electrical services to
each lot in accordance with the specifications and requirements of the relevant
authority.
16. That
the consent holder provides Council with written confirmation from Chorus (or
the equivalent network supplier) and Wellington Electricity Lines Ltd that they
are satisfied with the supply of their utilities to each lot.
17. That
the consent holder provides Council with written confirmation from a surveyor
that all existing services have been adjusted so they are contained within the
lot (or are protected by an appropriate easement) and that the ends of all abandoned
lines have been sealed in accordance with council requirements, or
alternatively that the consent holder provides Council with written
confirmation from a surveyor that no such adjustments and sealing are
necessary.
Please
Note: This will apply to the water connection off Pitt Street if it exists.
18. That
the consent holder provides appropriate easements for public and private
services where necessary, with the easements shown as a memorandum of easement
on the land transfer title plan. The consent holder must show easements for
public services on a plan with a minimum three-metre width centred over the
service, or twice the depth of the trench, whichever is greater; show Council
as the grantee in gross; and engage a lawyer at the consent holder’s
expense to prepare easement documents. Please note that, in accordance
with the Regional Standard for Water Services, the easement width shall be an
increased where there is more than one service within that easement.
19. That
the consent holder provides appropriate easements of rights of way, shown as a
memorandum of easements on the land transfer title plan; and that the consent
holder engages a lawyer at the consent holder’s expense to prepare
easement documents.
20. That
the consent holder gives the new private access road a name after first
contacting Council’s road and traffic administration co-ordinator about
the procedures to follow to formalise the suggested name. (This is now a
requirement of LINZ, which states “A private road, private way, right
of way, or access lot needs to be named if six or more addressable sites are
accessed off it - or are likely to be accessed off it in the future”.).
The process can take several months, so an early application is encouraged. A
payment of $250.00 (GST incl.) to meet the cost of making and installing
each street name sign is to be made to Council at time of application for the
224(c) certificate.
21. That
the consent holder moves all buildings clear of the new boundaries before
applying for a section 224(c) certificate.
22. That,
at the time of requesting a section 224(c) certificate, the consent holder
provides a schedule of assets detailing each item to be transferred to Council
ownership as part of the subdivision process; and that the consent holder
supplies a full description of the item, material type, size, length, area,
volume, et cetera, following the format set out in Council form RAS-FORM-014.
23. That
the consent holder sets out the value of services to be taken over by Council
to enable the creation of a buyer-created tax invoice, with the details
provided to be in accordance with Council buyer-created tax invoice form
RAS-FORM-015.
24. That,
in accordance with section 221 of the Resource Management Act 1991, Council
registers a consent notice on the certificate of title of lots 1 to 13 to
ensure any dwellings built on these lots have a minimum under-floor level of RL
2.34 m (MSL Wellington Vertical Datum 1953) to mitigate possible flooding from
the nearby Waiwhetu Stream. This level refers to the underside of timber floor
joists or the base of a concrete slab.
25. That
the consent holder provides a benchmark in the form of a new survey peg or
other permanent mark so the site’s minimum floor level can be easily
determined; and that the consent holder records this benchmark – and the
known reduced level – on the as-built and title plans.
26. That,
in accordance with section 221 of the Resource Management Act 1991, Council
registers a consent notice on the titles of lots 2 to 13 inclusive stating that
the right-of-way has no footpath and has a lesser width being a departure from
Council’s usual right of way construction standard.
27. That
the consent holder meets the cost of registering consent notices.
28. That
the consent holder provides Council with two copies of the as-built plan,
certified by a surveyor or engineer, showing, where applicable, the levels and
alignment of all the mains and road work, and the location of all service
connections (and, if applicable, new work within private property) relative to
the lot boundaries.
29. The consent
holder shall pay a contribution to Council’s Reserves Purchases and
Development Account at Council’s standard rate of 7.5% of the value of
the additional residential allotments or capped at $10,000 per allotment
whichever is the lesser. The amounts required will be determined on the basis
of a market value assessment from a registered valuer. It is the consent
holder’s responsibility to instruct the valuer and supply Council with
this assessment. The amount to be paid will be determined when the consent
holder submits the qualified valuer’s assessment.
Notes
If the committee resolves to grant resource consent, the
following may be considered as notes on the consent:
§ The
applicant for resource consent, consent holder or any person who made a
submission on the application may also appeal this decision to the Environment
Court within 15 working days of notice of the decision being received.
§ This
resource consent is subject to payment of a Development Contribution Fee under
the Council's Development and Financial Contributions Policy.
§ In
accordance with section 125 of the Resource Management Act 1991, the consent
lapses if not given effect to within five years from the date of the
application being granted.
§ This
resource consent is specific to the application received by Council. Any
changes to the proposal may require a new resource consent and additional
application fee.
§ Plans
submitted with the application have only been checked for compliance with the
City of Lower Hutt District Plan.
§ Any
building work associated with the proposed activity should not commence until a
building consent has been obtained under the Building Act 2004.
§ The
consent holder is reminded that this resource consent is not a licence to
create adverse effects. You still have a duty under the Act to avoid,
remedy or mitigate adverse effects. Notwithstanding any resource consents
held, section 17 of the Act continues to apply and will take enforcement action
where necessary.
§ Council
may issue an abatement notice if the conditions of this resource consent are
not complied with. Contravention of an abatement notice may incur a fine
up to $300,000 or two years imprisonment for a natural person and a fine of up
to $600,000 to a person other than a natural person.
§ The property has, or is
likely to have been occupied prior to 1900. Any disturbance of land or damage
or destruction of any building or structure associated with human activity
prior to 1900, may require an archaeological authority from Heritage New
Zealand under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014. Please contact
Heritage New Zealand for further information.
