PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL PROPOSED PLAN CHANGE 19: CACCIA BIRCH ZONE UNDER PART 1 SCHEDULE 1 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991

Transcription

1 PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL PROPOSED PLAN CHANGE 19: CACCIA BIRCH ZONE UNDER PART 1 SCHEDULE 1 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991 DECISION OF THE HEARING COMMISSIONERS Commissioners: Chris Mitchell (chair), Stuart Kinnear and Robert Schofield Date of Hearing: 5 March 2015 Date of decision: 28 May 2015

2 Introduction 1. We have been appointed by the Palmerston North City Council (the Council) as commissioners under section 34A Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) to hear and determine Proposed Plan Change 19 to the Palmerston North City District Plan (which we will refer to as PPC19 ), and the submissions and further submissions on it. 2. PPC19 is one of a series of changes proposed to the District Plan ('the Plan') by the Council under its sectional review. PPC19 reviews Section 16 of the Plan which contains the provisions relating to the Caccia Birch Zone. It also proposes a small amendment to the zoning map (Map 17) rezoning a small area of land from Caccia Birch to 'Residential'. 3. The text of PPC19 is included in Part 1 of the Plan Change and section 32 report prepared by the Council in September Our decision is structured as follows: a) Formal decisions b) Record of the hearing and attendances c) Background: approach to management of the Caccia Birch Zone and the reasons for plan change d) Legal framework e) Report under section 42A f) Submissions g) Main issues for determination h) Assessment and determination of submissions i) Further evaluation under section 32AA j) Conclusions Decisions 5. Proposed Plan Change 19 is confirmed subject to the specific amendments recorded in the determinations in paragraphs below. 6. The submissions and further submissions are accepted, accepted in part or rejected for the respective reasons given in paragraphs below. 7. Note: a copy of Section 16 with proposed PPC19 changes showing the annotated amendments made by this decision is included as Appendix 1. An unannotated (or 'clean') copy of Section 16 as amended by PPC19 following this decision is included as Appendix 2. 1

3 Formal Record of Hearing and Attendances 8. The hearing of PPC19 was held at the Council Chambers in Palmerston North on Thursday 5 March The Commissioners were assisted by Committee Administrator Penny Odell. 10. The following parties appeared or were represented at the hearing: Council Andrea Harris, Consultant Planner, employed by Opus International Consultants Limited, Nigel Lloyd, Acoustic Consultant, and David Murphy, City Planner. Submitters Peter Jenkin, Mark Wadham, Patrick Higgins, John Farquhar, Robin Kidd, Peter Calder, Teresa Calder, Sandra Stuart, Rachel Lohrey and Russell Walker, Lorna Black, Colin and Katherine Scott, Deborah and Roger Kennedy, and Jocelyn Vertongen: all represented by Mark Wadham. Mr and Mrs Calder, Mr Walker and Ms Lohrey, Mr Jenkin and Mr Farquhar all spoke to their own submissions as well. Caccia Birch Trust Board: represented by Nicky Birch (Facility Manager), Grant O'Donnell and John Hornblow (both Trust Board members) and Christine Foster (Planning Consultant, EMS) Verdon Chettleburgh: further submitter Background 11. PPC19 was publicly notified on 1 October The Council received 15 submissions and 2 further submissions. Prior to notification PPC19 had been consulted on in draft form during PPC19 is a review of the provisions of Section 16 of the operative District Plan. Those provisions were settled by a consent order from the Environment Court in 1999, and though we were not told the date on which the Council adopted them, they are clearly due for review under section 79 RMA. 13. The Caccia Birch Zone is a small area (approximately 2ha) containing the historic Caccia Birch House, stable building and grounds. It is bounded on three sides by the Residential Zone which includes some of the City's premier housing. Its eastern boundary is the Hokowhitu Lagoon which is in the Flood Protection Zone. 14. The Council acquired the Caccia Birch property from the Crown in Under a review of its (then) District Scheme, the Council proposed a specific zone for the property. By the time an appeal concerning the provisions of this proposed zone was considered by the Planning Tribunal in 1990, the Council had subdivided some of the Caccia Birch land for residential development. This is the area now developed along Caccia Birch Lane. The Planning Tribunal's interim decision in June 1990 (attached as pages of the Hearing Agenda) directed some specific amendments to the list of 'predominant uses' (now permitted activities under RMA). 2

4 15. A presently relevant feature of the amendments directed by the Planning Tribunal in 1990 was a 10.30pm limit for 'social functions such as weddings, birthdays and anniversaries'. 16. This provision has been largely maintained in PPC19 and a major point for all the submitters who appeared at the hearing was the extent, if any, to which there should be some relaxation of this 'curfew'. Rule R16.5.1(d) reads in full: (d) Hours of Operation (i) All non-residential activities undertaken on the site must cease between the hours of 11:00 pm and 7:00 am the following day. (ii) Functions and events undertaken in the Coach House or grounds of Caccia Birch must cease by 10:30 pm. [Note: Activities includes complete clearance of people from the site]. Explanation The hours of operation performance condition helps to avoid late night nuisance to residences by ensuring that larger numbers of people attending social functions of a festive nature such as weddings vacate the site by a set time. 17. The purpose and ambit of PPC19 is stated as follows in the Council's Section 32 report: 1.5 The primary purpose of PPC19 is to review the existing provisions and the current zoning extent for Caccia Birch. Of particular focus is the issue of noise resulting from the activities that take place at Caccia Birch and potential effects on the surrounding residential area. 1.6 A review of the current provisions has been undertaken and changes to the noise limits (and their measurement) are recommended to ensure consistency with the NZ Standard for noise. A new section has been included allowing no more than 5 special events per year where noise limits are relaxed. This is to allow the zone to be used for one off events, such as an outdoor concert. 1.7 A minor rezoning is required to recognise land that is currently used for residential purposes and should no longer have the Caccia Birch Zone. 1.8 There has been no significant change within the Caccia Birch Zone, the activities permitted onsite, nor to the surrounding environment since the District Plan become operative. On that basis, no additional changes have been proposed to the Zone. 18. The key change is to Rule R16.5.1(e) as follows (proposed new text is underlined and text to be removed is struck through): (e) Noise (i) Sound emissions from any non-residential activity and from mechanical plant items such as heating and ventilating plant and generators, when 3

5 measured at or within the boundary of any site in the Residential Zone (other than a road) shall not exceed the following: 7.00am to 10.00pm 10.00pm to 7.00am 10.00pm to 7.00am 45dB L Aeq (15mins) 40 db L Aeq (15mins) 65dBA L max (ii) The standards set out in (i) above may be exceeded not more than 5 times in any twelve month period for special events relating to the use of the Caccia Birch Zone. Each special event shall take place between the hours of 7.00am and 10.30pm with no more than one special event taking place in any five day period. The permitted noise level for such events shall not exceed 80dB L Aeq(5mins) at the Residential Zone boundary of the Caccia Birch Zone. Such events shall be notified to all immediate neighbours, by letter box drop, at least seven days prior to the dates of those events. For the purpose of this rule, special events means an event that takes place on one day that would otherwise meet the permitted activity standards for community, recreational or cultural activities, administrative and educational purpose and social functions in Rule , except that the activity exceeds the noise limits in condition (i) above. shall not exceed the following limits when measured at or within the boundary of any land zoned for residential purposes (other than the land from which the noise is emitted or a road). 7.00am pm 45dBA L pm 7.00am 40 dba L 10 and 65 dba Lmax 19. While there is no definition of special event, it is clear that the term would not apply to those activities which regularly occur within the premises, such as weddings, meetings, conferences and seminars. 20. As discussed below, there is no specific opposition to these proposed changes. However, the Caccia Birch Trust Board requests further provisions to afford it significantly greater flexibility in allowing the use of the land and buildings for functions which do not comply with the current and proposed controls particularly on noise. These further provisions are discussed later in this decision. Legal Framework 21. In this section, we outline the legal framework which governs the process of hearing and decision-making on PPC19. This framework is fundamentally the same for all the plan changes proposed as part of the sectional review (referred to in the preceding paragraphs) and for that reason we have endeavoured to take a similar approach to this part of our decision to that used in decisions on those earlier plan changes. 22. This framework has two major components statutory and planning. The statutory framework is set out in the RMA and applies to all plan review and change proposals. 4

6 The planning framework is a mix of policies, plans and other documents some of which must always be considered in this context, and some which may be relevant only in particular topics or circumstances. 23. The statutory framework consists of a number of inter-related provisions in the RMA, the key elements being the following: Part 2: Section 5 sets and defines the purpose of the RMA, and sections 6-8 contain a hierarchy of matters which must be specifically considered by decision makers in this context; Section 31 sets out the functions of the Council under RMA; Section 32 directs the Council to evaluate whether each of its objectives is the most appropriate way of achieving the purpose of the RMA, and then whether the policies and rules are the most appropriate way of achieving those objectives; Section 32AA specifies the circumstances where a further evaluation under s.32 is required; Sections contain the provisions on the purpose of the Plan, Plan preparation and change, the matters to be considered by the Council, and the contents of the Plan; Schedule 1 Part 1 contains the detailed process under which new Plans and plan changes are prepared, notified for submissions and further submissions, heard and decided, and then formally adopted. Schedule 1 Part 3 contains provisions which apply where external documents are to be referred to and have legal effect in the Plan. 24. All planning decisions under the RMA must collectively achieve the statutory purpose of sustainable management of the City s natural and physical resources (as defined in section 5) and, in doing so, give effect to the requirements of sections 6 to 8. These provisions are collectively referred to as 'Part 2 RMA'. Section 6 sets out matters of national importance which the Council must recognise and provide for in exercising its powers and functions. Section 7 sets out matters which the Council must have regard to in exercising its powers and functions. Section 8 requires the Council, when exercising functions and powers of the RMA, to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi). 25. In the context of the review of the Caccia Birch Zone, a number of provisions in Part 2 are particularly relevant: Section 5(2): a key element of the definition of sustainable management of natural and physical resources is health and safety and 'avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment Section 6(f): protection of historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use and development Section 7(b): the efficient use and development of natural and physical resources Section 7(c): the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values Section 7(f): the maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the environment 26. A number of aspects within the provisions above are defined in section 2 RMA (specifically, 'natural and physical resources', 'amenity values' and 'environment') and 5

7 these definitions are also part of the statutory context. The word 'use' in section 9 is also defined. 27. We will consider Part 2 RMA as part of our overall evaluation of PPC19, and will return to it below. 28. The Council has the functions set out in section 31. In terms of the functions created by section 31, we look specifically in this context at s.31(1)(d): the control of the emission of noise and the mitigation of the effects of noise 29. We note that section 32 was amended in 2013 and that those amendments came into force in December 2013, and are therefore applicable to PPC19. Section 32AA requires a further evaluation of any changes to PPC19 made since the initial evaluation under s The further evaluation under s.32aa must consider in relation to any such changes: a) The extent to which each objective is the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the Act; b) Whether, having regard to their efficiency and effectiveness, the policies, rules or other methods are the most appropriate for achieving the relevant objectives (which include both any proposed objectives and any relevant existing objectives); c) The assessment under (b) above must identify anticipated benefits and costs including opportunities for economic growth and employment that may be provided or reduced and, if practicable, quantify those benefits and costs; d) The risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information about the subject matter of the policies, rules or other methods. 31. Sections 72 to 77D contain the provisions dealing with the purpose of District Plans, their preparation and change, the matters to be considered by the Council, the contents of the District Plan and the powers to make rules. 32. The District Plan exists (and must be created) within a context of other statutory plans and policies which may be relevant to the same resource management issues. Under section 74, these include the Regional Policy Statement, Regional Plan, management plans and strategies prepared under other Acts, and any relevant entry on the New Zealand Heritage List/Rārangi Kōrero required by the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act In respect of the latter, Caccia Birch is registered as a Historic Place Category 1. The Council does have an Events and Festivals Strategy but this is generally high level and makes no specific reference to Caccia Birch. 33. Section 75 sets out the requirements for the contents of District Plan: at the minimum, the District Plan must include the objectives for the district, the policies to implement the objectives, and the rules (if any) to implement the policies. 34. Section 79 requires District Plans to be reviewed on a periodic basis. Council may either review its plan as a whole, or in sections - a 'sectional' review. The approach taken by the Council to the Palmerston North District Plan is outlined as follows in the section 32 report accompanying PPC19: The Sectional District Plan Review breaks down the review of the District Plan into sections that will be reviewed over a five-year period. 6

8 The current District Plan was prepared in the early 1990s and became fully operative March The Council is required to commence a review of those provisions in the District Plan that have not been reviewed in the last 10 years, pursuant to section 79 of the RMA. 35. As with all decision-making in this context we are ultimately required to consider whether the proposed provisions represent the best option for achieving the purpose of the RMA. The statutory purpose of sustainably managing the City's natural and physical resources (defined in s.5(2)) has to be applied in the PPC19 context with due regard to the relevant provisions of Part Where a submission requests that we take a different approach to that proposed in PPC19, then we must look at that request in the context of the other parts of PPC19 and the Operative Plan, other relevant plans and policies, and also the overarching provisions of Part 2 referred to above. 37. Schedule 1 Clause 10 states that we must give reasons for accepting or rejecting any submission, but also states that we are not required to address each submission individually and may instead group submissions according to the topic(s) or provision(s) to which they relate. 38. With that background, we turn now to outline the policy context for the issues raised by PPC19 and the submissions and further submissions on it. 39. As we noted above at paragraphs 32 and 33, sections 74 and 75 state the matters which must be considered by the Council in preparing or changing a Plan, and the contents of the Plan. Section 75 includes the requirement to either 'give effect to' or 'not be inconsistent with' certain other policies made under the RMA. The plans, policies and other documents listed in or encompassed by these two provisions are the policy context for our assessment of PPC The RMA sets out a hierarchy of plans/policy statements which must be considered in in relation to PPC19 (we have listed only those which are potentially relevant): it must give effect to any national policy statement and the Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Policy Statement ('RPS'); it must not be inconsistent with a regional plan for any matter under section 30(1); and in preparing it Council must have regard to any proposed regional policy statement and any proposed regional plan. 41. In relation to the policies and plans listed above which must be given effect to, we have not identified any directly relevant national policy statements, and the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement applies only to the coastal environment. 42. The Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council's proposed 'One Plan' (which includes a proposed regional policy statement) is now, for all relevant purposes, beyond challenge and we have regarded it as both the RPS and the relevant regional planning provisions for the purposes of section 75(3) and (4). It does not contain anything of immediate relevance. 43. The other significant element of policy context arises from the City View Issues and Objectives in Section 2 of the District Plan (recently reviewed and updated as part of Plan Change 8). The relevant provisions are Issues 14 and 25 and Objectives 16 and 7

9 22. These City View provisions collectively guide the Plan's more specific objectives, policies and methods. 44. There are no other Council strategy or policy documents which are particularly relevant. However, we have read and taken into account background material given to us by the submitters relating to the history of the land and the development of the current controls. 45. Finally, we note that, as with any proposed plan change, the District Plan itself (and possibly other proposed changes) may be highly relevant, particularly in terms of ensuring an overall consistency of objectives and policies. In this category, the Plan provisions of primary relevance are Section 2 containing City View Issues and Objectives (referred to above) and those provisions relating to the City's business, industrial, institutional precinct and residential areas. Section 42A Report 46. The Council's report under section 42A was circulated to all submitters prior to the hearing and posted on the Council website. The report was prepared by Council's consultant planner, Andrea Harris. Ms Harris was the primary author of the PPC19 'new' provisions from early stages and is thus familiar with the issues which have arisen though the submissions. 47. We do not need to summarise Ms Harris report as it is part of the record, and was, as noted above, available to all interested persons. We will consider those aspects of her opinions which relate to the key issues outlined below in the course of our evaluation of those issues. 48. The essential aspects of Ms Harris report were that PPC19: Seeks to flow on from and reinforce the strategic direction set by previous Sectional District Plan Review plan changes; Provides an integrated framework of provisions that will ensure the efficient use and development of physical resources by providing for the continuation of existing activities; Recognises the importance of protecting residential amenity; Provides for a limited number of additional social and/or community events to occur notwithstanding non-compliance with existing noise limits; Is the most appropriate means of sustainably managing the physical resources of the zone. Submissions 49. There were 15 submissions and 2 further submissions on PPC19. We will briefly summarise the submissions below. In doing so we have used the name of the person making the submission, accepting that another person or entity (e.g. a spouse or family trust) may have an interest in the submission. 50. All but one of the submissions support PPC19 as notified, and those submitters who spoke in support of their submissions were clear that they opposed the decisions requested by the remaining submitter - the Caccia Birch Trust Board. We have 8

10 therefore approached our analysis of the submissions by concentrating on the specific requests to change PPC19 by the Board. 51. We have generally not evaluated further submissions in detail. The reason for this is that the scope of a further submission is limited to support of or opposition to a submission. A further submission cannot advance a different request on the plan change. However, a further submission may contain detailed reasons of grounds for support or opposition, and where this has occurred we have taken those into account. 52. The submissions can thus be summarised as follows: a) PB Jenkin, MR Wadham, M Higgins, JR Farquhar, R Kidd, PA Calder, T Calder, KB and SM Old, SJ Stuart, R Lohrey and R Walker, LM Black, C and K Scott, DP and RM Kennedy and J Vertongen: all support PPC19 as notified. b) Caccia Birch Trust Board: requests a number of amendments as follows: to Rule (e) to permit up to 40 functions per year until 11.30pm (having opposed the proposed noise levels); to Rule to align the specific performance conditions with the areas of discretion; to Rule by deleting it and making all aspects of non-compliance with performance conditions a restricted discretionary activity. The submission also challenges the adequacy of the Council's evaluation report under section In relation to further submissions we note that Clause 8(1) limits the persons who may make further submissions, and Clause 8(2) limits them to support or opposition to a submission. A further submission cannot be an opportunity to make entirely new requests or to amplify a submission. 54. The further submissions were recorded as follows: a) Caccia Birch Trust Board: supports the other submitters' support for the proposed allowance of 5 special events per year which exceed to day time noise limits and opposes their support for retention of hours of operation; and b) Verdon Chettleburgh: supports the Trust Board's request for an extension of operating hours. 55. At the hearing, the Caccia Birch Trust Board reduced the number of permitted functions requested in its submission from 40 to 20, and our determination is therefore based on this reduced number. Main Issues for Determination 56. For the purposes of our assessment of PPC19 and the submissions on it, we have grouped the issues for decision into the following questions: a. Should a specified number of activities be permitted beyond the current hours of operation that exceed the noise standards? b. Should non-compliance with performance conditions for noise be classified as a restricted discretionary, discretionary, or non-complying activity? c. Was the section 32 evaluation adequate? 57. Following our conclusions on these matters, we then turned to whether the plan change is consistent with the purpose and principles of the Act under Part 2. 9

11 Assessment and Determination of Submissions Context 58. The context for the first two issues above is the proposed noise controls. Before we address the specific questions, we provide an outline of the background to the noise controls in the Caccia Birch Zone. 59. PPC19 proposes a change from the current maximum limits of 45dB L10 (daytime) and 40dB L10 (night time) to 45dB LAeq and 40 db LAeq respectively. The night-time limit of 65dB Lmax (10pm to 7am) is proposed to remain unchanged. The rationale for the change is that the measurement brings the Plan into line with the current version of the relevant New Zealand Standard (NZS6802:2008 Acoustics - Environmental Noise). Mr Lloyd told us that the effect of the change would be to make the new limits marginally more permissive, but not to an extent that is readily perceptible. The change is part of the progressive updating of the District Plan noise standards as the Plan is reviewed in sections. 60. The Trust Board is seeking greater flexibility in the use of its premises past the 10pm change in noise limits. There are strong contextual factors in our assessment of the Trust Board's request. 61. It is important to note that the proposed noise provisions have, in substance, been in place for 25 years through earlier planning controls. The section 42A report contained a copy of the Planning Tribunal's interim decision of June 1990 which set a range of 'predominant uses' (now permitted activities) which remain in the current Plan and are proposed to be largely unaltered by PPC19. In noting this, however, we do not suggest that the history of the Zone should necessarily determine its future: physical, social and economic aspects of the environment change over time and planning is inherently concerned with the future. Nevertheless, we recognise that the history of the Zone has created strong expectations which are part of the social environment, and the Council's own stewardship of the Caccia Birch land involved a significant subdivision which changed the physical and social aspects of the environment. 62. We note that while the Board s submission referred only to Rule (e) Noise, the relief it sought would necessarily entail changes to Rule (d) Hours of Operation, as any extended use of the premises for 20 times a year beyond 11pm would require the limits on the hours of operation to be amended: there is scope for such a change as the Board s submission sought such further or other alternative relief that addresses the issues raised by this submission. 63. Although the Trust Board opposed the proposed noise limits in Rule (e), it did not propose any other or alternative limits, nor did it give us any acoustic evidence to challenge Mr Lloyd's report (in the section 32 evaluation) or his evidence. We therefore have no expert challenge to Mr Lloyd's evidence, and nor do we have any basis for believing that some other limits may be more appropriate. Indeed, in reviewing the other Sections of the Plan, and in our experience generally, the proposed limits (and particularly the night-time limit) appear conventional and generally accepted as a baseline for residential amenity nationally. 64. We note the proposal for the 5 special events per year has an alternative limit of 80dB LAeq(5mins) which applies partly within the night-time period of 10pm to 7am (in that the events must finish by 10.30pm). However, while this change is supported by all submitters, we do not regard this position as indicating that there should be a greater 'tolerance' for later and/or more frequent activities which do not meet the proposed 10

12 noise limits. Indeed, the neighbour submitters were generally emphatic that they opposed any such extension. 65. These are strong contextual factors in our assessment of the Trust Board's request. 66. We return now to the considerations under Part 2 RMA which we referred to at paragraphs 24 and 25 above with particular reference to the relevant provisions of sections 6 and In relation to section 6(f) although the Caccia Birch house and land has high heritage value in the City, we do not regard the issues here as directly engaging the obligation to protect them from inappropriate use, development and subdivision. No-one has suggested that PPC19 directly or indirectly raises such a possibility. Accordingly this provision carries no weight in our assessment. 68. In relation to section 7(b), we do not see the provisions of Section 16 as amended by PPC19 as constraining the efficient use and development of the Caccia Birch land. An efficient use is, of course, not the same as an intensive or maximum use. In our view, there would be nothing efficient about using the Caccia Birch property in a way which adversely affects its neighbours. Within the current limitations of its environment, both physical and social, we think that the property is managed and used efficiently by the Trust Board. 69. In relation to section 7(c), as we have discussed above, without a much greater understanding and more detailed proposals over noise management, we do not see the Trust Board proposals as likely to maintain, let alone enhance, the amenity values of the relevant environment. 70. In relation to section 7(f), we accept that the definition of 'environment' requires a significantly wider assessment that just amenity values. We would accept that the ability for the wider community to make greater use of this beautiful and historic property could be regarded as a 'positive' to the environment, as would the resulting reduction in the need for direct public funding to maintain the property. Nevertheless, this is an environment that is primarily a quiet and pleasant residential area, and those amenity values are a part of the environment that cannot be discounted simply because they are specifically recognised in section 7(c). Overall, however, we see the conclusions we have reached below as being consistent with section 7(f). 71. Looking at the sustainable management of this physical resource in this context, we have concluded that the existing provisions of Section 16 as amended by PPC19 achieve the purpose of the Act. We have nevertheless taken a slightly different approach to one of the methods for managing this resource, having regard to the possibility that changes to the physical environment may occur within the 'life' of the new provisions. We now turn to discuss our approach to the issues outlined in paragraph 56. Permitted activities beyond 10.30pm? 72. The evidence from Ms Birch was that the current restrictions are a significant disadvantage in promoting Caccia Birch house as a wedding and function venue. We understand and acknowledge this hindrance. However, we were left a little unclear as to the financial consequences of this disadvantage, but it may lie in the range of $20,000 - $40,000 pa opportunity cost, based on the Trust s response to this question at the Hearing. The consequence of this is that the Trust Board remains reliant on the Council to top up its funding by direct grants, and this is not only inherently 11

13 unpredictable (with other Council commitments) but a constraint on investment in improvements which could improve the facilities and reduce noise. However, although any increase in income from the hire of the venue would assist the Trust board's financial position, it was not clear to us whether ongoing significant support from the Council would remain even with opportunities to offer the venue for extended hours. 73. The neighbours made it very clear that a 10.30pm 'curfew' is important to them because they know the noise will stop then or shortly after. Several noted that noise from the carpark could be significant particularly for neighbours on the southern boundary, with slamming doors, engines revving and noisy goodbyes. Children can be more affected by late noise. Second storey bedrooms are unprotected, in noise terms, by some acoustic barriers. 74. In the context we have described above, it is difficult to justify a permitted activity classification for a specified number of events which will run until 11.30pm midnight, notwithstanding the absence of any reported noise complaints over the last 10 years. 75. It is implicit in the request that the problem is not just the hours of operation, but the noise limits. If the anticipated activities were to comply fully with the noise performance conditions then a completion time after would simply classify them as restricted discretionary activity: this provision remains unchanged under PPC19. But the present physical environment makes it highly unlikely that the kind of activities contemplated by the Trust Board (such as weddings and social functions) would generally, if ever, comply with the night-time noise conditions. We accept Mr Lloyd's evidence on this point. Thus any of the anticipated activities extending beyond 10pm (the start of the night-time noise limits) would become non-complying activities. 76. Another complication is that the premises are let on a self-catering basis. The Trust Board does not have a supervisory role in activities. The Trust Board can (and we accept would) make users familiar with the curfew and noise controls, and the manager is able to respond to events when she is made aware of them but, in large functions in particular, the human element may prevail, and as Mr Lloyd noted we have to recognise that alcohol consumption will exacerbate this. 77. For us to consider classifying 20 (the Board's reduced number) activities such as weddings and social functions per year to occur to 11.30pm (with all guests required to vacate the site no later than midnight), we would need to be satisfied that the neighbours' amenity values would not be significantly reduced. These amenity values and expectations are well established. We do not regard the neighbours' expectations as unreasonable, in any sense. We are not satisfied that a permitted classification for a specific number of activities would be consistent with maintaining those amenity values and expectations. 78. We note that Trust indicated that, in its strategic planning, there are a number of undertakings that it potentially intends to fund to improve noise management, such as acoustic fencing and air conditioning. However, these are all actions that may occur sometime in the future, with no certainty at present. 79. We understand that the Trust Board has an obligation to maintain a building and property of both historic heritage value and significant amenity value to the City. Realistically it can only do this by using the land and buildings to generate income to pay for their upkeep and gradual improvement. And, as Ms Birch said, it must do so in market which is competitive and changing. Conditions 10 or 20 years ago are different to those today and will almost certainly be different again in another 10 years. This is the further context within which we should assess the second issue. 12

14 Which classification? 80. Under PPC19 as notified, any activity which does not comply with the noise standards for permitted activities is a non-complying activity. The evidence is that most extended activities past 10.30pm could not comply with the night-time noise levels, particularly where the consumption of alcohol is involved. This has been the position since the Caccia Birch Zone was created. The Trust Board's submission requests that noise exceedances should be added to the restricted discretionary classification. (Indeed the submission requests that all activities which are non-compliant with permitted activity performance standards should be classified as restricted discretionary: the other standard where non-compliance is a non-complying activity is signs which we will address later in this decision). In considering this requested change of classification, we note that another potential activity classification for noise exceedances (and one that is within the scope of the Board s submission) would be full discretionary. 81. We do not think that non-compliance with noise conditions should be a restricted discretionary activity. Classification as a restricted discretionary activity suggests that there is some further tolerance within which a consent might be granted, if adverse effects could be avoided or sufficiently mitigated. However, we simply do not have any evidence on which we could conclude that there should be such a tolerance, and if so, what its limits are. In contrast, the matters that are currently restricted discretionary activities are for areas of non-compliance with permitted activity standards where a level of tolerance could more readily be contemplated, subject to conditions: building height, building site coverage, separation distances, hours of operation and parking. All such aspects of potential non-compliance would have to maintain the noise limits imposed on the use of the site, which is the critical baseline level of amenity protection for the Zone. 82. Mr Lloyd's evidence suggests strongly that there is little or no scope to relax night time noise conditions without compromising the amenity values they are designed to protect. On that basis, we think that classifying non-compliance with noise conditions as restricted discretionary would send a false signal that we believe that relevant effects could be readily managed consistently with the Zone's Objective 2 and Policy 2.1 (which are not in dispute). 83. We then considered whether a discretionary classification might be more apt than noncomplying. This evaluation involves a number of factors: a) It is very unlikely that a resource consent would be sought to allow a single function the combination of cost and uncertainty makes this an impractical option. It is more likely that a consent would be sought to allow a number of functions over time such a consent, if granted, would have commercial utility to the Trust Board and would be more likely to justify the cost and uncertainty referred to above. b) Should the zone provisions generally enable or generally discourage this kind of application? And, if the former, with what limitations if any? c) Does the discretionary or the non-complying classification best fit the response to the questions above? 84. The Trust Board was unable to give us a generic 'value' of the activities or functions which they sought to make permitted, although we were given to understand that the value of 20 functions per year might be up to $40,000 in total. In our experience, the cost of resource consent for a bundle of functions might easily be of this order. Accordingly, any discretionary activity rule would have to recognise the possibility that 13

15 consent would or could be sought for a significant number of functions over a period of years. 85. Whether such an application should be enabled (we do not say 'encouraged') is a finely balanced judgment. On balance, we have concluded that an application to have up to 12 events or functions extend to 11.30pm per year (with all guests required to vacate the site no later than midnight) and which does not comply with the permitted activity noise conditions should be a discretionary activity for the following reasons: a) It is possible that the Trust Board will be able to make some significant changes to both the building and operations to allow for much improved management of noise: we were presented with a number of actions the Board are considering at the Hearing. Without these changes, we think it is unlikely that consent would be granted to any significant number of activities. But if changes are made and are effective, then we also think that the Trust Board should be able to apply for consent within a classification under which all relevant matters can be considered. b) Whilst we accept that a non-complying classification sends an appropriate 'signal' about the challenge of consenting activities which exceed night time noise conditions, and the importance of maintaining amenity values from adverse noise effects, we must consider the effect of section 104D of the Act. There is a risk that the kind of application for consent contemplated above as a non-complying activity is simply blocked by s.104d. It is of course fair to conclude that an application which would fail both gateway elements of s.104d may be unlikely to be consented as a discretionary activity, but the latter classification does allow a more complete assessment of effects on the environment, including beneficial effects on the economic performance of the activities of the Trust Board. However, the Rule we have created below does maintain some significant restrictions on the ambit of the discretionary classification. c) We think that appropriate noise limits can be set as conditions of consent, and can be enforced and monitored so that any failure to comply with those conditions puts the future utility of the consent in danger. Conditions can also include review process to determine whether the efficacy of noise management can be improved. d) We consider that 12 events/functions per year is a more suitable limit than 20 as this equates to one per month, which we consider is an appropriate upper limit. e) It is possible that the Trust Board may find a market for quieter activities. Putting the point into context, we doubt that Caccia Birch House will ever be an appropriate venue for noisy late night revelry. 86. On this basis we have concluded that the following rules should be added to section 16: R Discretionary Activities Any activity, building or structure that is not a Permitted, Controlled, or Restricted Discretionary Activity shall be a Discretionary Activity, subject to compliance with the performance standards below. Performance standards Any activity which does not comply with the performance standards in R16.5.1(e) must comply with the following standards 14

16 a b c d Hours of operation: The activity must cease and all vehicles must leave the site before 11.30pm, and all persons associated with the activity must leave the site by midnight. Activity to occur indoors: The activity must occur inside Caccia Birch house from 10.30pm onwards. Maximum number of activities per year and minimum intervals: Any activity to which this rule applies may occur no more than 12 times in any calendar year, and no activity to which this rule applies shall occur within 14 days of another such activity. Sundays and public holidays: No activity to which this rule applies may occur on a Sunday or on any public holiday which is followed by a working day. Explanation Any activity which will not comply with the noise standards for permitted activities will require a resource consent. As it is unlikely that consent will be sought for a single event, the Rule allows for consent to be sought for a number of events which may occur over a period of years. The Rule does not stipulate a maximum noise level but the noise conditions (and any associated monitoring and review conditions) for activities consented under this Rule would be set at a level that is considered appropriate to protect the amenity of neighbours. Under Rule , any application seeking consent to exceed noise levels permitted under Rule (e) is to be notified to all the owners and occupiers within the area mapped in Appendix 16A. R Notification Any application for consent to any activity under Rule shall not be publicly notified, but limited notification of any application for consent to an activity which does not comply with Rule (e) shall be given to all the owners and occupiers of land within the area mapped in Appendix 16A. R Non-Complying Activities Any activity, building or structure that is not a Permitted, Controlled, Restricted Discretionary or Discretionary Activity shall be a Non-Complying Activity. Explanation The rules for the Caccia Birch Zone identify activities, and the effects generated by those activities, which Council consider to be appropriate for the area. It should be acknowledged that the Caccia Birch Zone is surrounded on three sides by residential properties and the fourth by the Centennial Lagoon. By identifying a limited range of activities and controlling the effects of those activities, it is the intention of the Council to enable the continued operation of Caccia Birch as a city-wide community resource while avoiding or mitigating 15

17 any adverse effects of activities within the Zone on surrounding residential and recreational zoned properties. Appendix 16A Owners and Occupiers to receive limited notification under Rule We now turn to consider the Trust Board s submission on the section 32 evaluation. Adequacy of evaluation under Section The Trust Board's submission states that: There are material errors in the section 32 report which result in the actual and potential future requirements of activities in the Zone being incorrectly described. In addition, the evaluation of alternatives fails to consider all reasonable practical alternatives and ignores alternatives expressly requested by the Trust Board prior to notification of proposed Plan Change 19. The evaluation fails to assess (and to quantify) the actual and potential benefits of the proposed District Plan amendments. The evaluation fails to establish that the proposed District plan provisions are the most appropriate way of to achieve the District Plan objectives by reference to other reasonably practical alternatives. The proposed provisions do not provide for the sustainable management of existing and future activities within the Zone. 89. Ms Foster's evidence reinforced these criticisms. She said, in essence, that the Section 32 evaluation had not looked beyond the status quo to the future, and not 16

18 looked at the potential use of the property from the perspective of the Trust Board, but only from that of the neighbours. 90. Ms Harris' evidence on this issue is contained in Sections 4 and 5 of her report. She said, in essence, that the requests made by the Trust Board (for more relaxed provisions on events) would not achieve the objectives of the Zone. 91. In our view the Section 32 evaluation's formal identification of only two options was unfortunate in the circumstances. The two options identified were the status quo and the modest range of amendments proposed by PPC19. One or more further options, including the changes requested by the sole owner of land in the Zone were not listed. In our opinion, at least one further option, involving an expanded range of activities as requested ought to have been identified. 92. However, we do not regard the consequence of failure to do this as significant. The reasons for our conclusion are as follows: a) The specific requests made by the Trust Board were unsupported by expert evidence, and, on the contrary, Mr Lloyd's expert view was that the requests would be incompatible with Objective 2 (which as we have noted before was not in dispute). b) On that basis, the Trust Board's requests (initially for 50 non-complying events per annum, and then, through its submission 40 such events) could not be regarded as reasonable alternatives for section 32 purposes. c) The identification and comparison of costs and benefits is notoriously difficult when factors which are quantifiable are to be balanced with factors which are inherently not. It is even more difficult when factors that can be quantifiable have not been quantified. If a compelling business case existed for the requests made by the Trust Board we think that it was, at least partly, for the Board to make it, as it is the best placed to have that information. d) The economic and employment considerations referred to in section 32(2)(a) should not be conflated with the narrower impact of proposals of a single owner (albeit the only one in the Zone). In our view, the Council rightly took the view that the likelihood was that any business opportunity loss to the Trust Board would simply be taken up elsewhere in the City. We did not hear any evidence to suggest otherwise. 93. Accordingly, while we would have preferred a more balanced formal identification and evaluation of options, we have no doubt that, on the evidence reasonably available to the Council, the preferred option would have remained the same. For these reasons, we do not accept that the section 32 evaluation was significantly deficient to the extent that it undermines PPC We now turn to our own evaluation under section 32AA. Evaluation under Section 32AA 95. A further evaluation is required in respect of any changes to PPC19. That further evaluation 'must be undertaken in accordance with s.32(1)-(4)', and must be 'at a level of detail that corresponds with the scale and significance of the changes'. (Section 32AA(1)(a)-(c).). For present purposes, section 32(3) does not come into play as there is no change to the proposed objective in PPC19, and section 32(4) is not relevant. 17

19 96. We have made one significant change to the provisions of Section 16 proposed by PPC19. This is the re-classification of a limited number of activities which will not, or may not, comply with permitted noise conditions from non-complying to discretionary. 97. In our view, this re-classification is a better way of achieving the two Zone objectives and subordinate policies 1.2 and 2.1. We do not regard the change as very significant. The obstacles to consent for any significant number of events remain formidable. But we can see circumstances in which the adverse effects of noise could be avoided to an acceptable degree through the consent process, and we think that a discretionary classification is more consistent with enabling that possibility than a non-complying classification. 98. We note that our decision also has the effect that any activity which does not comply with the permitted activity performance standards for signs will be a discretionary activity. This outcome is generally consistent with our approach to the choice between discretionary and non-complying classifications described earlier in the decision. In our view retaining non-compliant signs as the sole non-complying activity in the Zone would be anomalous, and would be unnecessary to implement the relevant objectives and policies. 99. In Section 32AA terms we anticipate that our change could result in the better use of a public facility without compromising the amenity values that its neighbours are entitled to continue to enjoy. Conclusion 100. Plan Change 19 maintains substantially the same provisions that have applied to this Zone since it was established. In our view, this is an approach which correctly reflects that the only changes to the physical and social environment over this time has been a strengthening of the residential character of the surrounding area However, as we noted above, planning is also concerned with looking to the future, and enabling physical resources such as Caccia Birch to be managed on a sustainable basis. We concluded that maintaining a non-complying classification for any use of the Zone that does not meet the relevant noise conditions could be too restrictive for its future operation. The discretionary classification does not affect the Trust Board's ability to seek resource consent(s) for such activities (that has always existed) but it does set an appropriate decision-making context where all relevant factors can be considered Finally, we thank all those who have made submissions on PPC19, and particularly those who came to the hearing to present and explain them to us. Chris Mitchell Chair 18

20 Stuart Kinnear Commissioner Robert Schofield Commissioner 19

21 Palmerston North City Council District Plan APPENDIX 1 Marked-up version Amendments included in Proposed Plan Change 19 as publicly notified and any consequential or minor amendments are shown in underline and strikethrough New planning provisions added to Proposed Plan Change 19 as a result of the decision are shown in black with grey shading (Discretionary Activity Rule and Notification Rule )

22 Palmerston North City Council District Plan Section 16: Caccia Birch Table of Contents 16.1 Introduction Resource Management Issues Objectives and Policies Objective Policies Objective Policy Methods Environmental Results Anticipated Rules: Permitted Activities R Permitted Activities Rules: Controlled Activities R Controlled Activities Rules: Restricted Discretionary Activities (Restricted) R Restricted Discretionary Activities (Restricted) Rules: Discretionary Activities R Discretionary Activities Non-Complying Activities R Non-Complying Activities Appendix 16A Owners and Occupiers to receive limited notification under Rule

23 Palmerston North City Council District Plan

24 Palmerston North City Council District Plan 16. CACCIA BIRCH ZONE 16.1 Introduction Caccia Birch House in Te Awe Awe Street is one of the first large homes built in Palmerston North in the late 1890 s, that remains today. Since transferral of the property, including both the grounds and house, to public ownership in the 1940 s, Caccia Birch has accommodated a range of government and community activities. The Palmerston North City Council, through the Caccia Birch Trust Board, continues to actively promote the use of the premises for a range of community activities and also private functions such as weddings. In this respect Caccia Birch functions as a civic resource not unlike a community hall where use of the premises are made available to all the community whether for public or private use. As a heritage resource it is important that public access to view the property is not unduly compromised and this responsibility lies with the Trust Board in its management of the property. The property also comprises important landscape features, including mature tree specimens and other garden features such as the wisteria walks. The property also overlooks the Hokowhitu Lagoon. These features complement the historic buildings on the property. Caccia Birch is located within an established residential area and there is potential for activities on site to adversely affect the amenity values of that surrounding area, particularly noise effects. For this reason activities on site are expected to comply with performance conditions to protect the existing level of residential amenity Resource Management Issues The following resource management issues have been identified with regard to the Caccia Birch Zone: 1. How to accommodate a range of activities on the property without compromising its heritage and landscape values. 2. Ensuring an appropriate level of control over activities in order to protect the amenity values of the surrounding residential community Objectives And Policies Within the broad framework of the City View objectives, the following specific objectives and policies have been identified for the Caccia Birch Zone: Objective 1 To recognise Caccia Birch as a community resource to be managed in a way which enables the people of Palmerston North and surrounding districts to appreciate and enjoy its heritage and landscape values without compromising those values for future generations. Policies 1.1 To preserve and enhance the existing heritage and landscape character of the Caccia Birch property.

25 Palmerston North City Council District Plan 1.2 To permit use of the buildings and grounds at Caccia Birch for a range of community activities and private functions. Explanation The heritage values of Caccia Birch are well recorded but there is also a unique landscape character created by the grounds, the relationship between the grounds and buildings, and the relationship between the grounds and the Hokowhitu Lagoon. The Caccia Birch Zone provisions will maintain that special character through siting and amenity conditions. Caccia Birch is a community resource, the use of which is to be encouraged, whether this be for public or private functions. The District Plan focuses on the effects of activities on the environment rather than the activities themselves. For this reason, it is more appropriate for the authority responsible for the management of the property, currently the Caccia Birch Trust Board, to ensure an appropriate balance in the types of activity occurring on the property and to ensure public access to the grounds is not unduly compromised. The District Plan through the performance conditions applying to activities permitted on site, controls the effects of those activities. Objective 2 To recognise the residential location of Caccia Birch and ensure that the amenity values of surrounding residences are not adversely affected. Policy 2.1 To avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects of activities on the existing quality of environment enjoyed by surrounding residents. Explanation Performance conditions such as maximum noise limits and hours of operations shall apply to all permitted activities to ensure surrounding residential amenities are not adversely affected. Although permitted activities are listed in some detail, compliance with the performance conditions is also necessary. Any expansion of parking areas or building to accommodate additional capacity at Caccia Birch will be subject to resource consent assessment Methods Zoning The management activities of the Caccia Birch Trust Board The specific zoning of the Caccia Birch property and the rules which apply within that Zone will partly assist in achieving the objectives and policies of that Zone. In this respect the Zoning and rules provide an effective and cost-efficient means of controlling effects. The Caccia Birch Trust Board will however, through their activities, determine the types of activities which establish on the site, and as day-to-day managers of the site, are the most efficient method for determining this mix Environmental Results Anticipated It is anticipated that the objectives, policies and methods of this Section will achieve the following results: Protection of the heritage and landscape values associated with the Caccia Birch property.

26 Palmerston North City Council District Plan Controls on the potential adverse effects of activities of the site on surrounding residential neighbourhoods. Provision for a range of activities complementary to the historic and community resource represented by the property and compatible with the surrounding residential neighbourhood Rules : Permitted Activities R Permitted Activities The activities identified below are Permitted Activities, provided they comply with the following Performance ConditionsStandards: (a) (b) (c) (d) Residential accommodation within the existing buildings. Use of the buildings and grounds for community, recreational or cultural activities, administrative and educational purposes, and social functions. Eating facilities to cater for Permitted Activities. Activities necessary for the maintenance of the property. Performance ConditionsStandards (a) Height Compliance with Rule (a). Explanation The use of the residential height performance condition standard ensures that any buildings remain in a similar scale to the existing house and the surrounding residential area. (b) Site Coverage The total site coverage by all buildings and structures (including Caccia Birch House and Stables - also called the Coach House) shall not exceed 7%. Explanation A low site coverage applies to Caccia Birch to ensure that buildings do not compromise the aesthetic and historic relationship of the building to the surrounding grounds. (c) (i) Separation Distances No building shall be located closer than 10 metres from a residentially zoned property. This shall not apply to any boathouse erected on that part of the site bordering the Hokowhitu Lagoon.

27 Palmerston North City Council District Plan Explanation There are already satisfactory separation distances between buildings on the site and adjoining residences and the minimum yard requirement serves to ensure a reasonable separation of any new buildings. (d) (i) (ii) Hours of Operation All non-residential activities undertaken on the site must cease between the hours of 11:00 pm and 7:00 am the following day. Functions and events undertaken in the Coach House or grounds of Caccia Birch must cease by 10:30 pm. [Note: Activities includes complete clearance of people from the site]. Explanation The hours of operation performance condition standard helps to avoid late night nuisance to residences by ensuring that larger numbers of people attending social functions of a festive nature such as weddings vacate the site by a set time. (e) (i) Noise Sound emissions from any non-residential activity and from mechanical plant items such as heating and ventilating plant and generators, when measured at or within the boundary of any site in the Residential Zone (other than a road) shall not exceed the following: 7.00am to 10.00pm 45dB L Aeq (15mins) 10.00pm to 7.00am 40 db L Aeq (15 mins) 10.00pm to 7.00am 65dBA L max (ii) The standards set out in (i) above may be exceeded not more than 5 times in any twelve month period for special events relating to the use of the Caccia Birch Zone. Each special event shall take place between the hours of 7.00am and 10.30pm with no more than one special event taking place in any five day period. The permitted noise level for such events shall not exceed 80dB L Aeq(5mins) at the Residential Zone boundary of the Caccia Birch Zone. Such events shall be notified to all immediate neighbours, by letter box drop, at least seven days prior to the dates of those events. For the purpose of this rule, special events means an event that takes place on one day that would otherwise meet the permitted activity standards for community, recreational or cultural activities, administrative and educational purpose and social functions in Rule , except that the activity exceeds the noise limits in condition (e) (i) above. shall not exceed the following limits when measured at or within the boundary of any land zoned for residential purposes (other than the land from which the noise is emitted or a road.) 7:00 am - 10:00 pm 45 dba L 10 10:00 pm - 7:00 am 40 dba L 10 and 65 dba L max (f) Parking Compliance with Rules Parking Spaces for People with Disabilities; Parking Provision of All Zones Except the Inner Business Zone; Car Park Landscape Design

28 Palmerston North City Council District Plan Formation of Parking Spaces. (g) Signs Compliance with Rule Rules : Controlled Activities R Controlled Activities The activities identified below: (i) (ii) (iii) New Parking Areas Public Conveniences New or Relocated Buildings are Controlled Activities in respect of: Design and Appearance Vehicle Access Effects on Adjoining Residential Areas provided they comply with the Performance Conditions Standards to Rule (a) - (d). In determining whether to grant consent and what conditions to impose, if any, Council will, in addition to the City View objectives in Section 2 and Caccia Birch Zone objectives and policies, assess any application in terms of the following further policies: (i) (ii) (iv) (v) To ensure any new or relocated building and structures are in keeping with the historic character of the property and are in satisfactory external condition. To ensure that new or relocated buildings are placed on the site in such a way as to avoid disrupting the design relationship between the Caccia Birch House and Stables (Coach House). To ensure the size and location and arrangement of car parking areas are compatible with the heritage character of the site and the amenity values and ambience of the adjoining residential area. To utilise screening and amenity planting to mitigate, any adverse visual effects of development Rules : Restricted Discretionary Activities (Restricted) R Restricted Discretionary Activities (Restricted) Any Structure or Activity which does not Comply with the Performance Conditions Standards for Permitted or Controlled Activities in Relation to: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Height Site Coverage Separation Distances Hours of Operation Parking is a Restricted Discretionary Activity (Restricted) with regard to:

29 Palmerston North City Council District Plan Design and appearance Effects on adjoining residential areas The safe and efficient operation of the roading network In determining whether to grant consent and what conditions to impose, if any, Council will, in addition to the City View objectives in Section 2 and Caccia Birch Zone objectives and policies, assess any application in terms of the following further policies: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) To avoid, remedy or mitigate the effects of noise, hours of operation and other environmental disturbance on surrounding residential neighbourhoods. To take into account the limitation on siting which may be imposed by the existing site layout and topography. To avoid any compromising of the historic character of the site and its buildings. To ensure the design and appearance of any structure is in character with and complementary to the ambience and amenity values of the adjoining residential neighbourhood. To avoid, remedy or mitigate the effects of additional traffic and parking on adjoining residential areas by providing effective and visually buffered parking areas. The further policies contained within Rule of the Transportation Section Rules: Discretionary Non-Complying Activities R Discretionary Activities Any activity, building or structure that is not a Permitted, Controlled or Restricted Discretionary Activity shall be a Discretionary Activity, subject to compliance with the performance standards below. Performance Standards Any activity which does not comply with the performance standards in R (e) must comply with the following standards (a) Hours of operation The activity must cease and all vehicles must leave the site before 11.30pm, and all persons associated with the activity must leave the site by midnight. (b) Activity to occur indoors The activity must occur inside Caccia Birch House from 10.30pm onwards. (c) Maximum number of activities per year and minimum intervals Any activity to which this rule applies may occur no more than 12 times in any calendar year, and no activity to which this rule applies shall occur within 14 days of another such activity. (d) Sundays and Public Holidays No activity to which this rule applies may occur on a Sunday or on any public holiday which is followed by a working day. Explanation Any activity which will not comply with the noise standards for permitted activities will require a resource consent. As it is unlikely that consent will be sought for a single event, the Rule allows for consent to be

30 Palmerston North City Council District Plan sought for a number of events which may occur over a period of years. The Rule does not stipulate a maximum noise level but the noise conditions (and any associated monitoring and review conditions) for activities consented under this Rule would be set at a level that is considered appropriate to protect the amenity of neighbours. Under Rule , any application seeking consent to exceed noise levels permitted under Rule (e) is to be notified to all the owners and occupiers within the area mapped in Appendix 16A. R Notification Any application for consent to any activity under Rule shall not be publicly notified, but limited notification of any application for consent to an activity which does not comply with Rule (e) shall be given to all the owners and occupiers of land within the area mapped in Appendix 16A Rules: Non-Complying Activities R Non-Complying Activities Any activity, building or structure that is not a Permitted, Controlled, Restricted Discretionary Activity (Restricted) or Discretionary Activity shall be a Non-Complying Activity. Explanation The rules for the Caccia Birch Zone identify activities, and the effects generated by those activities, which Council consider to be appropriate for the area. It should be acknowledged that the Caccia Birch Zone is surrounded on three sides by residential properties and the fourth by the Centennial Lagoon. By identifying a limited range of activities and controlling the effects of those activities, it is the intention of the Council to enable the continued operation of Caccia Birch as a city-wide community resource while avoiding or mitigating any adverse effects of activities within the Zone on surrounding residential and recreational zoned properties. Note to Plan Users: Also refer to Rule Radiofrequency Field Exposure

31 Palmerston North City Council District Plan Appendix 16A Owners and Occupiers to receive limited notification under Rule

32 A RI TO VI C V E A PA T RA IHA K T AS A ST TE EC N SO AW ER E AW D AN T ST AW ES T CA CC TE W EA IA B IR CH N LA E MA NU KA Appendix 16A: Owners and occupiers to receieve limited notification under Rule ST Caccia Birch Zone MO T AS AN Metres 80 Owners and occupiers to receive limited notification under Rule

33 Palmerston North City Council District Plan APPENDIX 2 Clean version

34 Palmerston North City Council District Plan Section 16: Caccia Birch Table of Contents 16.1 Introduction Resource Management Issues Objectives and Policies Objective Policies Objective Policy Methods Rules: Permitted Activities R Permitted Activities Rules: Controlled Activities R Controlled Activities Rules: Restricted Discretionary Activities R Restricted Discretionary Activities Rules: Discretionary Activities R Discretionary Activities Non-Complying Activities R Non-Complying Activities Appendix 16A Owners and Occupiers to receive limited notification under Rule

35 Palmerston North City Council District Plan

36 Palmerston North City Council District Plan 16. CACCIA BIRCH ZONE 16.1 Introduction Caccia Birch House in Te Awe Awe Street is one of the first large homes built in Palmerston North in the late 1890 s, that remains today. Since transferral of the property, including both the grounds and house, to public ownership in the 1940 s, Caccia Birch has accommodated a range of government and community activities. The Palmerston North City Council, through the Caccia Birch Trust Board, continues to actively promote the use of the premises for a range of community activities and also private functions such as weddings. In this respect Caccia Birch functions as a civic resource not unlike a community hall where use of the premises are made available to all the community whether for public or private use. As a heritage resource it is important that public access to view the property is not unduly compromised and this responsibility lies with the Trust Board in its management of the property. The property also comprises important landscape features, including mature tree specimens and other garden features such as the wisteria walks. The property also overlooks the Hokowhitu Lagoon. These features complement the historic buildings on the property. Caccia Birch is located within an established residential area and there is potential for activities on site to adversely affect the amenity values of that surrounding area, particularly noise effects. For this reason activities on site are expected to comply with performance conditions to protect the existing level of residential amenity Resource Management Issues The following resource management issues have been identified with regard to the Caccia Birch Zone: 1. How to accommodate a range of activities on the property without compromising its heritage and landscape values. 2. Ensuring an appropriate level of control over activities in order to protect the amenity values of the surrounding residential community Objectives And Policies Within the broad framework of the City View objectives, the following specific objectives and policies have been identified for the Caccia Birch Zone: Objective 1 To recognise Caccia Birch as a community resource to be managed in a way which enables the people of Palmerston North and surrounding districts to appreciate and enjoy its heritage and landscape values without compromising those values for future generations. Policies 1.1 To preserve and enhance the existing heritage and landscape character of the Caccia Birch property.

37 Palmerston North City Council District Plan 1.2 To permit use of the buildings and grounds at Caccia Birch for a range of community activities and private functions. Explanation The heritage values of Caccia Birch are well recorded but there is also a unique landscape character created by the grounds, the relationship between the grounds and buildings, and the relationship between the grounds and the Hokowhitu Lagoon. The Caccia Birch Zone provisions will maintain that special character through siting and amenity conditions. Caccia Birch is a community resource, the use of which is to be encouraged, whether this be for public or private functions. The District Plan focuses on the effects of activities on the environment rather than the activities themselves. For this reason, it is more appropriate for the authority responsible for the management of the property, currently the Caccia Birch Trust Board, to ensure an appropriate balance in the types of activity occurring on the property and to ensure public access to the grounds is not unduly compromised. The District Plan through the performance conditions applying to activities permitted on site, controls the effects of those activities. Objective 2 To recognise the residential location of Caccia Birch and ensure that the amenity values of surrounding residences are not adversely affected. Policy 2.1 To avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects of activities on the existing quality of environment enjoyed by surrounding residents. Explanation Performance conditions such as maximum noise limits and hours of operations shall apply to all permitted activities to ensure surrounding residential amenities are not adversely affected. Although permitted activities are listed in some detail, compliance with the performance conditions is also necessary. Any expansion of parking areas or building to accommodate additional capacity at Caccia Birch will be subject to resource consent assessment Methods Zoning The management activities of the Caccia Birch Trust Board The specific zoning of the Caccia Birch property and the rules which apply within that Zone will partly assist in achieving the objectives and policies of that Zone. In this respect the Zoning and rules provide an effective and cost-efficient means of controlling effects. The Caccia Birch Trust Board will however, through their activities, determine the types of activities which establish on the site, and as day-to-day managers of the site, are the most efficient method for determining this mix Rules: Permitted Activities R Permitted Activities The activities identified below are Permitted Activities, provided they comply with the following Performance Standards: (a) (b) Residential accommodation within the existing buildings. Use of the buildings and grounds for community, recreational or cultural activities, administrative and educational purposes, and social functions.

38 Palmerston North City Council District Plan (c) (d) Eating facilities to cater for Permitted Activities. Activities necessary for the maintenance of the property. Performance Standards (a) Height Compliance with Rule (a). Explanation The use of the residential height performance standard ensures that any buildings remain in a similar scale to the existing house and the surrounding residential area. (b) Site Coverage The total site coverage by all buildings and structures (including Caccia Birch House and Stables - also called the Coach House) shall not exceed 7%. Explanation A low site coverage applies to Caccia Birch to ensure that buildings do not compromise the aesthetic and historic relationship of the building to the surrounding grounds. (c) (i) Separation Distances No building shall be located closer than 10 metres from a residentially zoned property. This shall not apply to any boathouse erected on that part of the site bordering the Hokowhitu Lagoon. Explanation There are already satisfactory separation distances between buildings on the site and adjoining residences and the minimum yard requirement serves to ensure a reasonable separation of any new buildings. (d) (i) (ii) Hours of Operation All non-residential activities undertaken on the site must cease between the hours of 11:00 pm and 7:00 am the following day. Functions and events undertaken in the Coach House or grounds of Caccia Birch must cease by 10:30 pm. [Note: Activities includes complete clearance of people from the site]. Explanation The hours of operation performance standard helps to avoid late night nuisance to residences by ensuring that larger numbers of people attending social functions of a festive nature such as weddings vacate the site by a set time. (e) (i) Noise Sound emissions from any non-residential activity and from mechanical plant items such as heating and ventilating plant and generators, when measured at or within the boundary of any site in the Residential Zone (other than a road) shall not exceed the following: 7.00am to 10.00pm 10.00pm to 7.00am 45dB L Aeq (15mins) 40 db L Aeq (15 mins)

39 Palmerston North City Council District Plan 10.00pm to 7.00am 65dBA L max (ii) The standards set out in (i) above may be exceeded not more than 5 times in any twelve month period for special events relating to the use of the Caccia Birch Zone. Each special event shall take place between the hours of 7.00am and 10.30pm with no more than one special event taking place in any five day period. The permitted noise level for such events shall not exceed 80dB L Aeq(5mins) at the Residential Zone boundary of the Caccia Birch Zone. Such events shall be notified to all immediate neighbours, by letter box drop, at least seven days prior to the dates of those events. For the purpose of this rule, special events means an event that takes place on one day that would otherwise meet the permitted activity standards for community, recreational or cultural activities, administrative and educational purpose and social functions in Rule , except that the activity exceeds the noise limits in condition (e) (i) above. (f) Parking Compliance with Rules Parking Spaces for People with Disabilities; Parking Provision of All Zones Except the Inner Business Zone; Car Park Landscape Design Formation of Parking Spaces. (g) Signs Compliance with Rule Rules: Controlled Activities R Controlled Activities The activities identified below: (i) (ii) (iii) New Parking Areas Public Conveniences New or Relocated Buildings are Controlled Activities in respect of: Design and Appearance Vehicle Access Effects on Adjoining Residential Areas provided they comply with the Performance Standards to Rule (a) - (d). In determining whether to grant consent and what conditions to impose, if any, Council will, in addition to the City View objectives in Section 2 and Caccia Birch Zone objectives and policies, assess any application in terms of the following further policies: (i) (ii) (iv) To ensure any new or relocated building and structures are in keeping with the historic character of the property and are in satisfactory external condition. To ensure that new or relocated buildings are placed on the site in such a way as to avoid disrupting the design relationship between the Caccia Birch House and Stables (Coach House). To ensure the size and location and arrangement of car parking areas are compatible with the heritage character of the site and the amenity values and ambience of the adjoining residential area.

40 Palmerston North City Council District Plan (v) To utilise screening and amenity planting to mitigate, any adverse visual effects of development Rules: Restricted Discretionary Activities R Restricted Discretionary Activities Any Structure or Activity which does not Comply with the Performance Standards for Permitted or Controlled Activities in Relation to: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Height Site Coverage Separation Distances Hours of Operation Parking is a Restricted Discretionary Activity with regard to: Design and appearance Effects on adjoining residential areas The safe and efficient operation of the roading network In determining whether to grant consent and what conditions to impose, if any, Council will, in addition to the City View objectives in Section 2 and Caccia Birch Zone objectives and policies, assess any application in terms of the following further policies: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) To avoid, remedy or mitigate the effects of noise, hours of operation and other environmental disturbance on surrounding residential neighbourhoods. To take into account the limitation on siting which may be imposed by the existing site layout and topography. To avoid any compromising of the historic character of the site and its buildings. To ensure the design and appearance of any structure is in character with and complementary to the ambience and amenity values of the adjoining residential neighbourhood. To avoid, remedy or mitigate the effects of additional traffic and parking on adjoining residential areas by providing effective and visually buffered parking areas. The further policies contained within Rule of the Transportation Section Rules: Discretionary Activities R Discretionary Activities Any activity, building or structure that is not a Permitted, Controlled, or Restricted Discretionary Activity shall be a Discretionary Activity, subject to compliance with the performance standards below. Performance Standards Any activity which does not comply with the performance standards in R (e) must comply with the following standards (a) Hours of operation

41 Palmerston North City Council District Plan The activity must cease and all vehicles must leave the site before 11.30pm, and all persons associated with the activity must leave the site by midnight. (b) Activity to occur indoors The activity must occur inside Caccia Birch House from 10.30pm onwards. (c) Maximum number of activities per year and minimum intervals Any activity to which this rule applies may occur no more than 12 times in any calendar year, and no activity to which this rule applies shall occur within 14 days of another such activity. (d) Sundays and Public Holidays No activity to which this rule applies may occur on a Sunday or on any public holiday which is followed by a working day. Explanation Any activity which will not comply with the noise standards for permitted activities will require a resource consent. As it is unlikely that consent will be sought for a single event, the Rule allows for consent to be sought for a number of events which may occur over a period of years. The Rule does not stipulate a maximum noise level but the noise conditions (and any associated monitoring and review conditions) for activities consented under this Rule would be set at a level that is considered appropriate to protect the amenity of neighbours. Under Rule , any application seeking consent to exceed noise levels permitted under Rule (e) is to be notified to all the owners and occupiers within the area mapped in Appendix 16A. R Notification Any application for consent to any activity under Rule shall not be publicly notified, but limited notification of any application for consent to an activity which does not comply with Rule (e) shall be given to all the owners and occupiers of land within the area mapped in Appendix 16A Rules: Non-Complying Activities R Non-Complying Activities Any activity, building or structure that is not a Permitted, Controlled, Restricted Discretionary Activity or Discretionary Activity shall be a Non-Complying Activity. Explanation The rules for the Caccia Birch Zone identify activities, and the effects generated by those activities, which Council consider to be appropriate for the area. It should be acknowledged that the Caccia Birch Zone is surrounded on three sides by residential properties and the fourth by the Centennial Lagoon. By identifying a limited range of activities and controlling the effects of those activities, it is the intention of the Council to enable the continued operation of Caccia Birch as a city-wide community resource while avoiding or mitigating any adverse effects of activities within the Zone on surrounding residential and recreational zoned properties. Note to Plan Users: Also refer to Rule Radiofrequency Field Exposure

42 Palmerston North City Council District Plan Appendix 16A Owners and Occupiers to receive limited notification under Rule

43 A RI TO VI C V E A PA T RA IHA K T AS A ST TE EC N SO AW ER E AW D AN T ST AW ES T CA CC TE W EA IA B IR CH N LA E MA NU KA Appendix 16A: Owners and occupiers to receieve limited notification under Rule ST Caccia Birch Zone MO T AS AN Metres 80 Owners and occupiers to receive limited notification under Rule