District Plan - Hauraki Gulf Islands section

District plan review

<< Back to focus groups

Planning for the future focus group - directions for working party

Introduction

Group members:
Tony Pope
Inga Muller
Chris Lush
Bruce Steele
Leith Duncan
Jo Holmes
Dennis Wright
Sean Deery
Ron Stevenson
Richard Wedekind
Berin Smith
Pirihira Kaio

Group support:
Michelle Rush (Facilitator)
Peter Rawson (ACC)
Michelle Hewitt (ACC)
Kelvin Norgrove (ACC consultant)

The planning for the future focus group at it's three focus group meetings on September 30 2005, November 4 2005 and December 2 2005 considered the following matters:

• Growth, Subdivision and Lifestyle Choice
• Providing for business activity

Directions

The planning for the future focus group wishes to indicate the following directions to the working party as a result of these three focus group meetings. The comments below have been arranged in subheadings based on whether there was total or only part agreement within the group to the matters raised.

1.0 Growth, subdivision and lifestyle choice

Agreement with all members of focus group reached

• Definition of multiple dwellings needs clarifying
• Concept of visual catchments needs defining - so can control and facilitate where intensification goes without destroying natural character/landscape.
• Identify what is special about Waiheke i.e. sense of place and protect this
• Plan should provide direction and performance criteria to encourage sustainable housing and sustainable lifestyles i.e. eco housing, cluster housing
• LU 20 - need to ensure appropriate developments but don't stop legitimate activity
• Map Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) correctly - use local knowledge to do this e.g. catchments
• Get mechanisms / management right for access provisions e.g. esplanade strips, walkways, etcetera
• Amend or check visitor facility and residential dwelling definitions - remove minimum limit for visitor facility numbers but retain '5 or less' ability for boarders, etcetera within dwelling definition
• Ensure LU 20 has same rules as LU 21, 22 with regards to visitor facilities
• Ensure open space and green belt aspects of LU 20 are safeguarded in controls
• Work is needed on how plan could provide for affordable housing (issue is community diversity) - will need very careful consideration - work should examine how plan allows for co-housing, multi units, etcetera, also link with visitor facilities.
• Use values from Essentially Waiheke in determining plan criteria
• Need design guidelines that reflect how people value living on the island
• Need Provide a range of approaches and solutions e.g. co-housing, on site wastewater treatment, etcetera
• Take account of Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act
• Subdivision should provide for public access / opening up of uniform legal roads, etcetera

Agreement with all members of focus group not reached

• Allow for the provision of 'granny' flats - 1 per site
• Support a water focus to future development, e.g. focus around wharves rather than roads (majority did not support this direction)
• Provide for affordable housing within the plan through allowing for greater development opportunity if affordable housing developed
• Maintain existing densities within Plan
• Investigate new village options as part of review
• Intensify / consolidate within existing villages - within walking distance of village centres (group had clear divisions on the above two bullet points)
• Consider options for Eastern-end subdivision.
• Allow for bonus provisions i.e. additional height, density, etcetera for comprehensive developments i.e. innovative housing, eco housing which support sustainability principles
• Allow for 1-step or conjoint process for subdivision and landuse
• Some support for limited discretionary class for visitor facilities for other parts of plan (within all other land units)
• Be more explicit in the understanding of when neighbours 'adversely affected' to increase certainty
• Some concern because of need for neighbours to continue to have a say on developments that may affect them.
• Sense of open space - 800m2 sections and rolling hills - safeguard this
• Some want existing plan as it is
• Some say plan for growth
  • Options include:
    • Higher density pocket in existing urban areas
    • Flexibility in rural areas e.g. cluster development which maintains values and environmental improvements we want to achieve.

2.0 Providing for business activity

2.1 General

Agreement with all members of focus group reached

• Ensure plan protects existing land uses, for example, within rural land units the right to farm on rural land should be clearly reinforced. This means strengthening provisions to deal with reverse sensitivity effects on rural land from adjoining land units i.e. visitor facilities, etcetera.
• Existing bulk and location rules within plan do not allow for significant floorspace within commercial areas because it is constrained by wastewater disposal and parking requirements.
• Allow for combined parking areas for different activities i.e. office / restaurant activities

Agreement with all members of focus group not reached

• Need to develop a structure plan approach for villages which encompasses the opportunities / constraints of the village - need to have a clear understanding of what a 'village centre' should look like

2.2 Ostend Specific

Agreement with all members of focus group reached

• Remove Ostend policy area - Policy area uncertain - bad for landowners
• Allow for larger bulk of buildings i.e. 2 storey's in Belgium Street
• Encourage service type industries
• Safeguard Ostend community market
• Allow for sustainable commercial and mixed use developments
• Incorporate structure plan approach - integrate public transport and public open space
• Allow for parking - don't restrict buildings to street front
• Allow for minimum lot coverage of 45 per cent

Agreement with all members of focus group not reached

• Identify area(s) within close proximity to Ostend which could be developed for future reticulation of the commercial centre of Ostend. Could use a series of small systems rather than one larger system
• Allow for public open space, streetscape design, cafés, etcetera
• Streetscape design shouldn't conflict with bulk and location requirements

2.3 Oneroa Specific

Agreement with all members of focus group reached

• Encourage buildings to face the road and the beach (north). Allow for intensification down towards beach, with terrace shops to have views to beach.
• Protect view shafts from street to the beach
• Encourage linear commercial development on main street near artworks
• Rezone from land unit 11, to a commercial land unit, the block of land bounded by Kuaka Road, Oue Road and Ocean View Road

Agreement with all members of focus group not reached

• Keep retail on south side of Ocean View Road

2.4 Onetangi Specific

Agreement with all members of focus group reached

• Maintain existing plan provisions e.g. commercial zone
• Currently not economically viable - enable commercial / mixed use
• Keep 45 per cent lot coverage.

3.0 General

Agreement with all members of focus group reached

• Council develop a monitoring strategy as part of review - with regard to:
  • functioning of plan itself - its performance
  • State of Environment (S.O.E) monitoring
• Options for better providing for a range of visitor facilities, i.e. changes to definition.
• Vineyards - Retain status quo

4.0 Non district plan matters

Agreement with all members of focus group not reached

• Allow for bypass around Oneroa to remove ferry traffic
• Upgrade Putiki Road for main bypass of Ostend
• Provide public infrastructure e.g. vehicle / public access within Onetangi.