BEFORE A HEARINGS COMMISSIONER STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE BY RUSSELL JAMES MORTIMER

Transcription

1 1 IN THE MATTER AND of the Resource Management Act 1991 IN THE MATTER of an application to establish and operate a campground to accommodate 280 persons at Pataua Rd North. BETWEEN L Vincent Submitter AND Whangarei District Council Consent Authority BEFORE A HEARINGS COMMISSIONER STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE BY RUSSELL JAMES MORTIMER INTRODUCTION 1 My name is Russell James Mortimer. I hold a Master of Science degree with honours in Environmental Science and Zoology from Auckland University. I also hold a Diploma in Business Studies and a Bachelor of Science degree from Massey University. I am a full member of the New Zealand Planning Institute and a member of the Resource Management Law Association. I have worked in central government and for private consultancies on issues associated with the Resource Management Act since Since 1998 I have been a director of Resource Management and Assessment Limited (RMAL), a Northland based resource management consultancy. I am certified under the Making Good Decisions Programme for Resource Management Act Decision Makers. 2 My experience includes Preparation of applications for resource consents (Land Use, Subdivisions, Discharge Consents) Assessments of environmental effects Preparation of conservation assessments

2 2 Presenting evidence at Environment Court and Council hearings Providing affidavits to the Court Lodging submissions and references associated with the development of district and regional plans and regional policy statements Lodging submissions on consent applications Review of and appeal of consent decisions Appeal of abatement notices Preparation of change of conditions applications Iwi liaison and consultation Providing advice, submissions and evidence on policy documents, for example Whangarei District Council s Long Term Plan and Development Contributions Policy Representation at mediation meetings (Environment Court, consent authority or self initiated) and public consultation meetings Commissioning and reviewing professional reports: surveyors, engineers (civil, geotechnical, acoustic, traffic), landscape architects, archaeologists. 3 This statement of evidence relates to an application by J Coote to establish and operate a campground to accommodate 280 persons at Pataua North Rd. The property is located in the Countryside Environment of the Whangarei District Plan. 4 I appear at this hearing in support of submissions RMAL made on behalf of Mr Jon and Mrs Lesley Vincent. Mr J Vincent has passed away since the lodging of the submission. Mrs L Vincent has decided to continue with the submission. 5 L Vincent owns 1093 Pataua North Road (Lot 2 DP ) which is an adjoining property immediately to the North of the Coote property - on the coastal side of Pataua North Rd. 6 The Council sought advice on whether Mrs Vincent wished to alter any aspects of her submission in March It was confirmed that Mrs Vincent wished to retain the original submission but sought also to raise supplementary concerns associated with potential contamination of groundwater as a result of wastewater disposal and the water take. Mrs Vincent has a bore which provides potable water to her house. 7 The evidence I present is within my area of expertise and I confirm I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from

3 3 the opinions expressed in this evidence. I have visited the area around the subject site. 8 At various stages in my evidence I will refer to the application, the Council Planning report and the evidence prepared by the applicant s representatives, in order to avoid unnecessary repetition. 9 My evidence is arranged in the following manner: The site and receiving environment The proposal The District Plan Objectives and policies of the District Plan Future patterns of development Proposed Regional Policy Statement for Northland Whangarei Coastal Management Strategy and Pataua Structure Plan Ecological Features NZ Coastal Policy Statement Wastewater and Water Supply Resource Management Act Summary and Recommendation THE SITE AND RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT 10 The site is well described in the application, reporting planners report and evidence of Mr Hood. I will not repeat that information although I provide a point of clarification and highlight another aspect. 11 The point of clarification relates to the width of the adjoining Living 1 zone where it is suggested it is band some 190m wide 1 in fact it is less. The boundary of the Living 1 approaches 190m against the Coote site, but that is on an angle. The actual width of the band at that point is some 165m, with the width decreasing in a gradual taper back towards the built area of Pataua North i.e. approx. 145m wide at the northern end of the formed Kaye Rd The aspect I seek to highlight is the District Plans zoning and resource overlays of the land immediately to the south west (inland side) of the Living 1 area discussed above. That area is zoned Countryside Environment with Notable Landscape and Flood Susceptible overlays 3. While the zoning and 1 Sections 2.2 of the application Page 62 of Agenda - and paragraph 25 of B Hood Evidence 2 Dimensions taken from WDC GIS Maps 3 Page 118 and 119 of Agenda

4 4 overlays are not fatal to future development schemes being advanced they do impose significant constraints on proposals. 13 As noted earlier the Vincent property adjoins the proposed development. It is immediately to the North of the Coote property on the coastal side of Pataua North Rd and is some ha in area. It is a long narrow property approx. 440m long and 68m wide and has an elevated plateau towards the coastal end where a residence is located. The north eastern boundary borders an esplanade reserve with associated sand dunes. 14 The next 6 properties to the North are similar in shape, being long and narrow, and range in size from 1.7 ha to 6.8 ha. Three contain built development of a single residence at the coastal end of the property. 15 As detailed in the Vincent submission the dune area on the esplanade reserve at the coastal side of the property is identified as part of site Q07114 (Parawanui Beach) in the Department of Conservation reconnaissance survey report for the Protected Natural Areas Programme - Whangaruru Ecological District. THE PROPOSAL 16 It is not my intention to repeat a full description of information as the proposal is well described in the application, reporting planners report 4 and evidence of Mr Hood. As much of my evidence relates to the scale of the proposal against the characteristic rural environment envisaged in the District Plan I feel compelled to briefly identify some key aspects of the proposal. 17 Key aspects of the proposal include: Construction and operation of a campground to accommodate 280 persons Construction of 23 Cabins 9m x 5m plus decking Construction of 3 amenities buildings of up to 130m 2 each They will contain male and female toilet facilities, showers and washbasins, along with a communal kitchen and social space Construction of an interim office/shop building of approximately 80m 2 on the coastal side of the property which will be removed following completion of the second stage development on the inland property. 4 Pages 3 and 4 of Agenda

5 5 Construction of a main office/ reception building incorporating a shop/café of up to 150m 2, with the shop less than 50 m 2 and a max patronage of 40 persons at any one time in the café Provision of beach access with a fenced board walk and associated dune restoration and management plan. 53 campsites (9m x 9m) 2 pup tent areas Etc, etc, etc Mr Hood has gone to some effort to explain that the proposal is not a residential development as defined in the District Plan 5. I accept that is a correct interpretation of the provisions. While not meeting that definition I also consider that many of the effects associated with the proposal are based around the issue than many people may choose to live on the site for various lengths of time. Should consent be granted that occupancy a capacity of 280 patrons on site at any one time is sought. 19 It is clear from the above that the proposal being advanced is for a significant commercial enterprise. The applicant and his advisors have recognised this and have supported the application with various reports seeking to address concerns and mitigate effects associated with traffic, noise, landscape, wastewater disposal, water take, visual and privacy effects that may result in adverse effects on the use of neighbouring properties - such as Mrs Vincent. THE DISTRICT PLAN 20 The proposal is in an area zoned Countryside in the Whangarei District Plan and does not meet controlled or permitted activity status under Rules (e) and (b). Rule (e) is triggered as it is a commercial activity 6 being undertaken within 100m of a residential dwelling on a separate site (the Vincent house) and the application moving to discretionary status. Rules (b) relates to an increase of above 30 traffic movements in a 24 hour period with that breach associated with a restricted discretionary status. Overall the application is to be considered under discretionary status. 5 Paragraphs of Hood Evidence 6 The definition of Commercial Activity, as set out in the District Plan, is provided below. Commercial Activity means the use of land and buildings for the display, offering, provision, sale or hire of goods, equipment or services, and includes shops, markets, showrooms, restaurants, take-away food bars, professional, commercial, and administration offices, service stations, motor vehicle sales, visitor accommodation, the sale of liquor and parking areas associated with any of the above.

6 6 21 Chapter 5 of the District Plan (Amenity Values) provides an outline of characteristics associated with the various Environment zonings imbedded in that Plan. Below I provide the extract from that Chapter of its overview of the Countryside and Costal Countryside Environments (for reasoning that will become apparent later) The Countryside Environment tends to be used predominantly for primary production, but is also used for low-density residential purposes. When choosing to live in a rural area, people must expect and accept a certain level of odour, noise and other effects which are characteristic of primary production, recognising the scale and intensity of these activities which contribute to rural character. Rural areas do, however, tend to have high amenity values, due primarily to the following characteristics: The intermittent nature of most agricultural activities; Open landscapes and views; A low intensity of development; Feelings of remoteness and community; Low noise levels, particularly at night; A high degree of privacy; Daylight and sunlight access; Low levels of vehicular traffic; Green 'unspoiled' landscape with indigenous vegetation. The Countryside Environment is sensitive to activities which have continuous or ongoing effects, or that are located in close proximity to other land uses such as residential units. The Coastal Countryside Environment has similar values and qualities as the Countryside Environment, in addition to those particular values of the coastal environment. The Coastal Countryside and Open Space Environments usually have high amenity values. These areas are used by the public to interact socially and relax. The key elements of this amenity are: Low intensity of development; Provision of public facilities; High landscape qualities; Public places can be exciting and vibrant; Recreational qualities; Access to daylight and sunlight; Limited vehicular traffic. While they can be very busy places in terms of human activity, such areas tend to be devoid of commercial or industrial activities, and therefore create a sense of tranquility in which people can relax. The amenity values of these areas are sensitive to the effects of activities both within them and on adjoining sites, particularly activities that affect the ability of people to relax in these areas. The interface between the different Environments is often an area of conflict, due to activities affecting the amenity values of adjoining sites. Activities in such

7 7 areas should therefore be carried out in a manner that seeks to maintain the amenity of adjoining sites. (Last paragraph my emphasis) 22 I acknowledge that the Countryside Zone comprises a mixture of low density residential and commercial operations - generally based in and supporting primary production. I myself live in an area zoned Countryside and accept that people living in a rural area, must expect a certain level of odour, noise and other effects which are characteristic of primary production or directly supportive industries, recognising the scale and intensity of these activities which contribute to rural character. In my opinion the scale of this proposal with up to 280 persons occupying the property on a daily basis (and the nature and level of effects it generates) is far beyond that anticipated in a rural environment. 23 As shown above, the District Plan identifies 9 characteristics which in combination contribute to levels of amenity experienced in Countryside Environment. In analysing of the effects of the proposal I prepared a table which identifies the specific natural and physical qualities and amenity characteristics that the District Plan are prevalent in the Countryside. The Table compares the level of amenity currently enjoyed in the local receiving environment against amenity changes anticipated as a result of the current proposal. My conclusion that the proposal will lead to a significant change to the area s amenity values. 24 Set out below is a specific assessment of those characteristics with respect to the surrounding Countryside Environment and the proposal. Table 1 Amenity Characteristics Identified in Plan vs Proposal Amenity Level The intermittent nature of most agricultural activities; Open landscapes and views; Receiving Environment - Countryside Environment High amenity Occasionally lower through intermittent farming operations. Commercial activities are permitted subject to controls on vehicle movements and gross floor area. High amenity Anticipated Change as a Result of Coote Proposal Major change Effectively a residential occupation of the site by up to 280 persons on site. Major change

8 8 Amenity Level A low intensity of development; Feelings of remoteness and community; Low noise levels, particularly at night; Receiving Environment - Countryside Environment Lot sizes in and around the site are generally smaller than average primary productions lots. Band of land to the South zoned Living 1. Moderate to high amenity Lot sizes in and around the site are generally smaller than average primary productions lots. A band of adjoining land is zoned Living 1 Moderate to high amenity The site is located at a popular holiday destinations Moderate to high amenity Anticipated Change as a Result of Coote Proposal Built development will extend back to the Pataua North Rd and on opposite side Major change Effectively a residential occupation of the site with up to 280 persons on site. More than minor change generally and a major change to the Vincent neighbouring property Effectively a residential occupation of the site with up to 280 persons on site. Acceptable change - proposal meets permitted activity criteria provided site management is effective in controlling noise. A high degree of privacy; Daylight and sunlight access; Low levels of vehicular traffic; Green 'unspoiled' landscape with indigenous vegetation. High amenity High amenity with a predominantly rural aspect Moderate amenity Pataua North Rd is a moderately busy road over Summer and the effect of this operation will increase total volume of traffic using the roading network but within its capacity to cater Moderate amenity Mrs Vincent is concerned that effective ongoing management to control noise is likely to be unsuccessful in reality. Minor change Landscape plantings will largely screen the site. No change More than minor change The venue will be a destination for targeted trips outside the immediate locality Moderate Change Significant built development Built development will extend back to the Pataua North Rd and on opposite side Built development is mitigated to some extent by the extensive landscape and restoration planting proposed.

9 9 25 I am of the view that the proposed development is not consistent with and does detract from the character and amenity of the Countryside Environment. OBJECTIVES AND POLICES OF THE DISTRICT PLAN 26 In the submission I prepared on behalf of the Vincent s I considered the proposal was inconsistent with and contrary to the overall direction of objectives and policies as expressed in the District Plan. In particular, I identified objectives I considered antagonistic to the proposal. I have had the opportunity to read the evidence prepared on behalf of the applicant and the divergent assessment that finds support from those provisions. Below I provide my reasoning as to why I remain of the opinion that the overall direction of the objectives and policies of the District Plan are incompatible with the proposal The characteristic amenity values of each Environment are maintained and, where appropriate enhanced Activities that demand a high level of amenity do not unduly compromise other land uses The amenity values of the coast and open space are maintained and enhanced. 27 In the section immediately prior to this I have commented on characteristic amenity values of the Countryside Environment. I do not consider the occupation of the site by up to 280 patrons at any one time maintains or enhances those values The actual or potential effects of Subdivision use and development is appropriately controlled and those activities located and designed, are to be compatible with existing and identified future patterns of development and levels of amenity in the surrounding environment Countryside Environments To ensure rural amenity values in the Countryside Environments are protected from subdivision, use or development that is sporadic or otherwise inappropriate in character, intensity, scale or location Subdivision and development that ensures consolidated development in appropriate locations and avoids sprawling or sporadic subdivision and ribbon development patterns in the coastal and rural environment.

10 10 28 The section immediately following this discusses identified future patterns of development in detail. The proposal is not aligned with those patterns. 29 In the submission made on behalf of the Vincent s I took the opportunity to comment on some of the statements made in the assessment section of the application relating to sprawl. One of those was that it appeared oxymoronic to acknowledge that Pataua North settlement area exhibits a sprawling pattern of development and that by including the subject property in an extension of that settlement pattern it will help prevent a continuation of that sprawling pattern of development. I expand on that with regards to the suggestion that the development bookends further development. Under the current planning provisions (and future patterns of development as set out in strategy documents) residential development is limited to a 65 metre band at the northern end of Pataua village. Some development may occur behind (south west of) that band but will likely be constrained by being within a Flood Susceptible Area. The suggestion that this development provides a bookend of built development and commercial use extending 400m back from the coast to Pataua North Road and a further 400m back from the Road also does not withstand scrutiny Avoid urban development in sensitive areas (i.e. natural hazard areas, outstanding natural features and landscapes, areas of significant ecological habitats, sites of significance to Maori) Policies - Rural-Urban Interface i) To carefully manage the interface between rural areas and adjacent residential or Urban Transition Environments and between rural land and the land managed for conservation purposes. 30 I discuss later in this evidence the ecological habitat associated with the foreshore and dunes. In my opinion the proposal will have an adverse effect on a sensitive ecological habitat Subdivision and development that achieves the sustainable management of natural and physical resources whilst avoiding, remedying or mitigating adverse effects on the environment Subdivision and development that does not detract from the character of the locality and avoids conflicts between incompatible land use activities. 31 I have earlier outlined the effects of the proposal on the characteristic values of the underlying Countryside Environment. In my opinion the occupation and

11 11 use of the site is by up to 280 persons is an incompatible land use with the Countryside Zone. As previously stated the Countryside environment is envisaged to comprises a mixture of low density residential and commercial operations - generally based in and supporting primary production Preservation and protection of the natural character of the coastal environment from inappropriate subdivision, use or development The maintenance or, where appropriate, enhancement of the amenity, landscape, cultural, intrinsic and ecological values of the coastal environment by taking account of the cumulative effects of subdivision development. 32 Provisions of the NZCPS relevant for consideration against the application are discussed later in this statement. As the proposal does not take into account identified future patterns of settlement and imposes adverse ecological effects it is considered that that the proposal detracts from the natural character of the coast and is inappropriate Maintain and enhance public access, where appropriate, to and along coastal areas Preservation of the natural character of riparian margins and the coastal environment Protection of Significant Ecological Areas, Heritage Buildings, Sites and Objects, Sites of Significance to Maori, riparian habitats and Outstanding Landscapes and natural features, within the coastal environment and alongside rivers and streams Protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna from inappropriate subdivision, use and development. 33 I acknowledge that the proposal directly supports public access to and along the coast. Given the sensitive environment such enhanced access is not appropriate Open Space Values To ensure that the values of the Open Space Environment are not compromised by subdivision, use or development of it, or of adjoining land Notable Landscapes Landscapes having a sensitivity rating of 6 are regarded as 'notable' and should be protected against inappropriate subdivision, use and development. 34 I acknowledge the substantive landscape and restoration planting regime provided as mitigation integrating the proposal into the background and reduce the impact of built form.

12 12 FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT Proposed Regional Policy Statement for Northland 35 In the Vincent submission I confirmed that the Proposed Regional Policy Statement for Northland (PRPS) has advanced through Council hearings and decisions and appeals have been lodged. The Proposed Policy Statement included a mapping program that identifies the Coastal Environment. The maps have been developed to meet requirements under the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement The maps form part of the Regional Policy Statement and are to be given effect to in district and relevant regional plans. My understanding is that no appeals have been lodged that would alter the boundary of the Coastal Environment in this area. 36 Not unsurprisingly due to its location, the Coote property falls within the Coastal Environment overlay as set out in the PRPS. This has the obvious implications as to relevance of the NZCPS which is discussed later. 37 It also has subsequent flow on consequences as the District Plan must give effect to the RPS 7. I suggested that the most likely outcome is that the land identified as Countryside in the District Plan and within the Coastal 7 RMA s75(3)

13 13 Environment overlay of the RPS will change to a Coastal Countryside Environment (and vice versa with CCE outside the overlay becoming CE). 38 You will recall that the District Plan identifies Coastal Countryside areas as trending to being devoid of commercial or industrial activities. Additionally the amenity values of these areas are considered sensitive to the effects of activities both within them and on adjoining sites. I can also advise that built development controls are more stringent in the Coastal Countryside Environment 8 39 In Mr Hood s evidence he has commented that my implication that the property was that as good as having already been rezoned Coastal Countryside was not correct 9. I accept that the land is not yet zoned Coastal Countryside and for that matter may never be. However as the legislation requires consideration under against such a document I felt it remiss of me to exclude it. 104 Consideration of applications (1) When considering an application for a resource consent and any submissions received, the consent authority must, subject to Part 2, have regard to (a) any actual and potential effects on the environment of allowing the activity; and (b) any relevant provisions of (i) a national environmental standard: (ii) other regulations: (iii) a national policy statement: (iv) a New Zealand coastal policy statement: (v) a regional policy statement or proposed regional policy statement: (vi) a plan or proposed plan; and (c) any other matter the consent authority considers relevant and reasonably necessary to determine the application. (my emphasis) 40 The Commissioner may consider that little weight should be applied to the zone changes yet to be advanced. However in this area, no appeals have been lodged that would alter the boundary of the Coastal Environment in the RPS. Furthermore, on the balance of probability I consider it more likely than not that zone change equivalent to Coastal Countryside Environment will occur in the relatively short term (1-2 years). I therefore consider this matter 8 E.g. the construction of a residential unit on each site is a permitted activity in the Countryside Environment but a restricted discretionary activity in the Coastal Countryside 9 Hood Evidence paragraph 145. Note Hood quote marks not mine.

14 14 should be not be disregarded in totality, as it is only one of several indications that zone changes are imminent in the area. Whangarei District Council s Coastal Management Strategy and the Pataua Structure Plan 41 The Whangarei District Council s Coastal Management Strategy and the Pataua Structure Plan also provide insights where development controls may be forthcoming and guidance as to future patterns of development in the area. Those documents were adopted by Council in February The Plan identified growth areas and potential zone changes in and around Pataua North and South. The Coote property is identified as being included in the Coastal Countryside Environment adjacent to a strong urban boundary (as represented in the dotted lines in the map provided below). 42 I accept that these documents are non-statutory policy documents that are not required or enforced within the Resource Management Act However, they may be considered relevant to consider under section 104(c) of the RMA. Structure plans are a useful technique to promote and alert decision makers and the public in general to anticipated changes in underlying environments

15 15 and have gained acceptance as a way of promoting integrated resource management. 43 Obviously the level of input and the degree of consultation that has gone into preparing a document will determine how much weight can be applied to it. The Coastal Management Strategy and associated structure plans which feed into and flow out of that process, have had an exceptional level of input and consultation. I note that the New Zealand Planning Institute presented the Whangarei District Council and Beca Planning with an Award of Merit. In recognition to the meritorious contribution made to the theory and practice of planning. Figure 2 NZ Planning Institute Award of Merit 44 These documents have been the recipients of various other accolades. The Quality Planning 10 website (which has the purpose of promoting best practice 1 10 The Quality Planning Project is a partnership between the New Zealand Planning Institute, the Resource Management Law Association, Local Government New Zealand, the NZ Institute of Surveyors and the Ministry for the Environment. A Steering Group manages it and it has an editorial panel of practitioners. The Ministry for the Environment currently owns and administers the website. The project is funded by the Ministry for the Environment.

16 16 by sharing knowledge about all aspects of practice under the Resource Management Act (RMA), uses the structure plans as an example of excellence in consultation. Whangarei coastal management strategy structure plans These are a series of structure plans prepared as part of a District Coastal Management Strategy. The consultation process was extensive and varied, with a high degree of community participation resulting in community ownership of the outcomes. The structure plans were intended to be non-statutory implementation tools for use under the LGA They are intended to be implemented through specific actions detailed in the district plan, infrastructure studies and asset planning, as well as capital works, recreation planning and community-run projects. 45 These documents also form a background in directing policy and rule development in the District Plan. In particular, they may assist in directing the development of plan changes when and if they occur and where relevant objectives and policies refer to such matters as... identified future patterns of development e.g. objective Chapter 10 outlines the issues of significance on The Coast. Policy relates to matters to be considered in assessing future development options in that area. The explanation and reasons section of that policy states Explanation and Reasons: It is important to avoid sporadic and sprawling residential and business development in the coastal environment, due to the adverse effects that such development can have, particularly on the natural character of the coastal environment. Intensive or large scale development should therefore be confined to those areas that are already within the bounds of existing coastal settlements. Structure Plans and the Whangarei Coastal Management Strategy help to identify appropriate future development areas. (emphasis added) 47 That section of the plan goes on to discuss appropriate documents to be considered in analysing applications that may have an effect on the Coast. Documents specifically referred to are The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (Policies to ). The Regional Policy Statement for Northland (Policies to ). The Northland Regional Coastal Plan (Policies to ). Iwi/Hapu Environmental Management Plans (Policy ). Coastal bylaws (Policy ). Whangarei Coastal Management Strategy (Policies )

17 17 48 Although the Coastal Management Strategy and Pataua Structure Plan, are not statutory documents, they were compiled following considerable public input including public meetings and opportunity for submission. They provide extremely useful background material are intended to set the direction for the management, future development and use in this area. In my opinion, the guidance they provide is relevant and reasonably necessary to be given influential weighting on the determination of this application. ECOLOGICAL FEATURES 49 The dune area of the esplanade reserve at the coastal side of the Vincent and Coote properties is identified as part of site Q07/114 (Parawanui Beach) in the Department of Conservation reconnaissance survey report for the Protected Natural Areas Programme - Whangaruru Ecological District (Attachment 1). Q07114 is some 10 ha in area. It is long and narrow, following Parawanui Beach, with the Coote property located near the centre. The site description (page of that report) identify it significance as One of the largest and least modified dune habitats in the Ecological District. Representative site for type (a) Spinifex grassland. Presence of threatened and regionally significant species Fauna identified was Northern NZ Dotterel (Nationally Vulnerable) variable oystercatcher (Regionally Significant). Significant flora identified was Large area of Pimelea arenaria (Gradual Decline) on the dunes, with at least 600 recorded plants recorded in and this site contains the largest known population of this northern taxon 50 I visited the esplanade reserve in front of the Coote property on the 17 June 2014, accompanied by John Craig (who I understand will be speaking in his submission on this issue). During that site visit of about 20 minutes NZ dotterel (Charadrius obscurus) were observed on the proposed camp site (a single bird and approx 10 minutes later a pair of birds). Four sand daphne (Pimelea arenaria) plants were located and I also observed a skink in the esplanade area in front of the Coote property.

18 18 51 I consider the active management of the dune area as set out in application would likely have a positive effect on the sand daphne (Pimelea arenaria) and other indigenous plants present. 52 Several of the dune management measures proposed, in particularly predator control and directing patrons to boardwalk areas, do mitigate adverse effects of the proposal on the population of NZ dotterel. The AB Ecology report advises that a predator control programme is already in place in the area, so the benefits of additional predator control is likely to be marginal. 53 I have read the evidence provided by Mr Mark Poynter. My interpretation of that is that he considers that the existing pressure on nesting activity of shorebirds is already high due to the high seasonal presence of humans and that the proposed campground use does not pose a significant incremental risk. 54 Given the nesting season for NZ dotterel is spring and summer with chicks hatching about 28 days after the eggs have been laid and unable to fly until 6 8 weeks later, I have concerns the impact that 280 patrons visiting the beach potentially multiple times during the day is likely to have on these nationally vulnerable species. While signage and fences will guide and direct the majority campground users to exclusive use of the boardwalk, inevitably a minority will ignore such directions or will inadvertently enter the dune area e.g. to retrieve balls, kites or other play equipment; children exploring; tourists unfamiliar with English. 55 Furthermore the location of the development towards the centre of the PNA area, and the likely migration along the beach (in both directions) by patrons of the campground, disproportionately increase the impact those visitors may have. 56 Due to the location of this proposal relative to the identified PNA site, the volume of people associated with the proposal, particularly as the majority of visits will coincide with the nesting and fledgling stage, my opinion is that the proposal will have a more than minor adverse effect on shore birds such as the NZ dotterel within the area identified as PNA Q07/114.

19 19 NZ COASTAL POLICTY STATEMENT 57 The application undertook analysis of the proposal against the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement. While that analysis has accepted that the proposed campground would significantly alter the existing characteristics of the site it infers that mitigation measures proposed address the policy direction of the NZCPS. I disagree and consider the proposal is inconsistent with and contrary to the overall directions expressed in the NZCPS. I have previously provided my rationale as to why I consider the proposal does not take into account identified future patterns of settlement and why it imposes adverse ecological effects. Examples of NZCPS policies which I consider are in conflict to the proposal are provided below: Policy 3: Precautionary approach 1. Adopt a precautionary approach towards proposed activities whose effects on the coastal environment are uncertain, unknown, or little understood, but potentially significantly adverse. Policy 6: Activities in the coastal environment 1. In relation to the coastal environment: a.... b. consider the rate at which built development and the associated public infrastructure should be enabled to provide for the reasonably foreseeable needs of population growth without compromising the other values of the coastal environment; c. encourage the consolidation of existing coastal settlements and urban areas where this will contribute to the avoidance or mitigation of sprawling or sporadic patterns of settlement and urban growth; Policy 11: Indigenous biological diversity (biodiversity) To protect indigenous biological diversity in the coastal environment: a. avoid adverse effects of activities on: i. indigenous taxa that are listed as threatened or at risk in the New Zealand Threat Classification System lists; ii. taxa that are listed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources as threatened; iii. indigenous ecosystems and vegetation types that are threatened in the coastal environment, or are naturally rare; iv. habitats of indigenous species where the species are at the limit of their natural range, or are naturally rare; v. areas containing nationally significant examples of indigenous community types; and vi. areas set aside for full or partial protection of indigenous biological diversity under other legislation; and

20 20 b. avoid significant adverse effects and avoid, remedy or mitigate other adverse effects of activities on: i. areas of predominantly indigenous vegetation in the coastal environment; ii. habitats in the coastal environment that are important during the vulnerable life stages of indigenous species; iii. indigenous ecosystems and habitats that are only found in the coastal environment and are particularly vulnerable to modification, including estuaries, lagoons, coastal wetlands, dunelands, intertidal zones, rocky reef systems, eelgrass and saltmarsh; iv. habitats of indigenous species in the coastal environment that are important for recreational, commercial, traditional or cultural purposes; v. habitats, including areas and routes, important to migratory species; and vi. ecological corridors, and areas important for linking or maintaining biological values identified under this policy. Policy 13: Preservation of natural character 1. To preserve the natural character of the coastal environment and to protect it from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development: a. avoid adverse effects of activities on natural character in areas of the coastal environment with outstanding natural character; and b. avoid significant adverse effects and avoid, remedy or mitigate other adverse effects of activities on natural character in all other areas of the coastal environment; WASTE WATER DISCHARGE AND WATER TAKE 58 When the hearing for this matter was reset WDC sought advice on whether Mrs Vincent wished to alter any aspects of her submission in March I confirmed that Mrs Vincent wished to retain the original submission and sought also to raise supplementary concerns associated with potential contamination of groundwater as a result of wastewater disposal and the water take. Mrs Vincent has a bore which provides potable water to her house. 59 I have advised Mrs Vincent that as the applicant has received consent from Regional Council these matters may be outside of the jurisdiction of the Commissioner. I understand that there is still ongoing dispute on whether the information supporting the wastewater disposal and the water take contain inaccuracies which materially influenced the decision made on those applications and which may affect the exercise of the consent. While Mrs Vincent has not sought expert advice on this issue, she has requested I advise the Commissioner that she remains concerned about potential contamination of her water supply.

21 21 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) sets out a hierarchy of legislation, policy statements and plans in order to assist in the assessment of applications for resource consent. Part II of the Resource Management Act 1991 states its purpose and principles. These statements outline the intent of the RMA and guide decision makers. 61 The purpose of the RMA is the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. Section 5(2) states: In this Act, sustainable management means managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and their communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural well being and for their health and safety while: a) Sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and b) Safeguarding the life supporting capacity of air, water, soil and ecosystems; and c) Avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment. 62 In determining any application for consent the key component to be addressed is, does the decision achieve the purpose of the Act - being the sustainable management of natural and physical resources (as those terms are defined). For the reasons outlined in this evidence, in my opinion the proposed campground does not meet the purpose of the RMA SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION 63 The proposal being advanced is for a significant commercial enterprise in a Countryside Environment. It is proposed that up to 280 people will be occupying a Countryside property of less than 10 ha. 64 I am satisfied that the existing amenity levels of the area will adversely change, those changes are not compatible with the underlying Countryside zoning and the effect will be more than minor. 65 Future patterns of development set out in credible strategic documents do not envisage development of the type applied for in this locality.

22 22 66 In my opinion, while several positive mechanisms are being advanced to mitigate adverse ecological effects, there will still be an adverse effect on indigenous fauna, in particular the NZ Dotterel that is recognised as Nationally Vulnerable. 67 The proposal is in conflict with the NZ Coastal Policy Statement. 68 In my opinion the proposal does not support and give effect to the District Plan s objectives and policies. 69 I recommend that the application be declined. R Mortimer 8 June 2015

23 23 Attachment 1 PNA REPORT Q07/114