Description: sdclogo

 

 

Resource Management Committee

UNCONFIRMED

 

OPEN MINUTES

 

 

 

Minutes of a meeting of Resource Management Committee held in the Council Chambers, 15 Forth Street, Invercargill on Friday, 26 June 2015 at 10.08 am.

 

present

 

Chairperson

Paul Duffy

 

Councillors

Lyall Bailey

 

 

Rodney Dobson

 

 

John Douglas

 

 

Julie Keast

 

 

Gavin Macpherson

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE

 

Manager Resource Management Simon Moran, Senior Resource Management Planner Courtney Ellison and Committee Advisor Debbie Webster.


Resource Management Committee

26 June 2015

Description: sdclogo

 

1          Apologies

 

            An apology for absence was received from Crs Dobson and Douglas.

 

Moved Cr Keast, seconded Cr Bailey and resolved:

That the Resource Management Committee accept the apologies.

 

2          Leave of absence

 

There were no requests for leave of absence.

 

3          Conflict of Interest

           

            There were no conflicts of interest declared.

 

4          Public Forum

                  

            There was no public forum

 

5          Extraordinary/Urgent Items

There were no Extraordinary/Urgent items.

 

6          Confirmation of Minutes

 

Resolution

Moved Cr Macpherson, seconded Cr Keast  and resolved:

That the meeting minutes of Resource Management Committee, 12 June 2015 be confirmed.

 

 

Reports for Recommendation

 

 

7.1

Potential Variations to Proposed District Plan 2012 - Implementation matters

Record No:         R/15/5/8828

 

Senior Resource Management Planner Courtney Ellison was in attendance for this item.  She said the purpose of the report was to outline some potential changes to be made to the Proposed District Plan, in particular around some implementation matters which had arisen since the plan has had legal effect and been implemented by the Resource Management team.

2        With the implementation of the Proposed District Plan, some potential improvements that could be made to the plan have been identified.

3        To make the changes suggested in the report, a variation would have to be undertaken in accordance with the process outlined in the Resource Management Act 1991.  The process included public notification with two opportunities for the public to make submissions, and holding hearings for the submitters to speak on their submission.

Mrs Ellison outlined the background and noting some small changes could be made to the plan to improve the clarity and efficiency of the rules in achieving the outcomes intended with the plan.

There was discussion over issues around height and boundary of above ground effluent pools.  It was agreed that consistency with Environment Southland rules on this would be beneficial. 

It was noted, point 14 in the report incorrectly stated Option 1 was endorsed, however it should read “It is recommended that Option 2 is endorsed and that a draft variation is prepared to address those issues outlined in this report.”

 

 

 

 

Moved Cr Bailey, seconded Cr Keast  and resolved:

That the Resource Management Committee:

a)         Receives the report titled “Potential Variations to Proposed District Plan 2012 - Implementation matters” dated 19 June 2015.

b)         Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

c)         Determines that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.

d)         Endorse staff continuing with the preparation of a draft variation to the Proposed District Plan.

 

 

 

7.2

Potential Variation to the Proposed District Plan 2012 - Rural Settlement Areas

Record No:         R/15/6/10262

 

Senior Resource Management Planner Courtney Ellison was in attendance for this item.  She noted the purpose of the report was to outline a potential change to be made to the Proposed District Plan, to create a new ‘Rural Settlement Area’ providing for townships that are currently within the Rural Zone.

2       Decisions on the Proposed Southland District Plan 2012 were released in October 2014 and identified that a future piece of work was required to address how townships such as Orepuki which are currently zoned Rural could be better provided for.

3       The new plan imposes some constraints for these townships in terms of setbacks from other dwellings and some boundaries as well as other activities in the Rural Zone.  It was suggested that a variation could be progressed to establish a Rural Settlement Area overlay for the Rural Zone to provide for townships such as Orepuki.

4       Matters that would need to be considered include the boundaries of any settlement areas, effluent disposal, servicing, setbacks from other dwellings or property boundaries, hazards, and provision for the continuation of rural activities.

5       The different options available to the Resource Management Committee are outlined in the report along with the process that would need to be followed, including requirements under the Resource Management Act (RMA), should a variation be progressed. 

Mrs Ellison said she had spoken with the Orepuki CDA in May and they were in support of the variation.  She had also spoken with the Lumsden CDA who said that if it were to be progressed they wanted it to be done in consultation with the community.  Mrs Ellison noted that Orepuki had mostly rainwater tanks making it easier whereas Lumsden have a number of ground water bores which created greater difficulty.

Cr Duffy asked if the rural settlement rules were new to the Southland District Council.  Mrs Ellison replied yes they were however they are in other districts but with differing factors to be considered. 

There was discussion on where the responsibility for services should be placed, on developers or owners of a section.  It was noted with smaller sections power should be to the boundary however this raises the question if copper lines should be at the boundary, owners may choose to use cell phone cover only.  It was suggested it could be included on the LIM that Council does not guarantee power/phone to a section. 

Cr Keast queried towns like Niagara and Dipton that aren’t likely to be built on.  Cr Duffy asked what was the reason for going with Option 2 of just Orepuki and why not Option 3 to include more areas?  Mrs Ellison responded it was mostly from demand, she said Option 2 did not preclude Council from rolling this out to other areas.  Mr Moran suggested there could be a selection on towns the Committee could consider.  Orepuki is currently driving it however it could be used as a pilot for other areas.   Mr Moran commented that Council staff could look at what consents are in other areas, consider the constraints in each area and comment on such.  Creating a bigger picture for the current growth in those areas, for the Committee to consider.  

It was agreed to go with Option 2 to proceed with variation for Orepuki. And to add into the recommendation to investigate Gorge Road.

Mr Moran updated the Committee on the proposed Forestry submission led by the Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI) for the National Environmental Standard.  He commented there was a meeting several months ago with MPI and other territorial organisations and Councils.  The meeting covered series of rules, categorizing regions into low, medium and high risk.  Considering erosion in most part, noting Southland was considered mostly low risk.  He mentioned Council needed to make sure conditions in our District Plan connect clearly with this.  Mr Moran said he would send the electronic link of the National Environmental Standard Document to the Committee and would endeavour to get back to the Committee with the completed submission.

 

 

 

Moved Cr Bailey, seconded Cr Keast  and resolved recommendations a, b and c and d with the new words as underlined:

That the Resource Management Committee:

a)         Receives the report titled “Potential Variation to the Proposed District Plan 2012 - Rural Settlement Areas” dated 16 June 2015.

b)         Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

c)         Determines that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.

d)         Recommends to Council the scoping and drafting of a variation to the Proposed District Plan to create a new Rural Settlement Area for Orepuki and to investigate a new Rural Settlement Area for Gorge Road.

 

    

 

 

 

The meeting closed at 11.11 am       CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD AT A MEETING OF THE Resource Management Committee HELD ON

26 JUNE 2015

 

 

DATE:...................................................................

 

 

 

CHAIRPERSON:...................................................