New Page

VISION KERIKERI SUBMISSION ON THE KERIKERI WAIPAPA STRUCTURE PLAN– JUNE 2007)

Council
• Promote site intensification with good quality and aesthetically pleasant buildings and open spaces, within the existing height limit.
• Promulgate urban design guidelines
• Limit HD1 to predominantly easy contour land areas
• Ensure adequate winter sun for all residential buildings
• Promote mixing residential use with commercial activities while ensuring residential amenity, especially noise.

9.0 Main Street Policy Area (MS1) (Item 3.2.9 – pg 31)

Issues / comments
• Kerikeri Main Street is virtually a dead area at night. This area is currently under developed and has very little interconnectivity with Homestead Road.
• Requirement for provision of car parking by individual property owners is a draw back to development of CBD and Main Street. Request to Council
• Prepare an integrated main street and CBD development plan with sustainable urban design promoting the key elements identified as methods and with community participation. E.g. as a design competition.
• More innovative methods of providing car parking such as aggregating parking requirements from a number of sites, not necessarily on site, should be considered. 10.0 Industrial and Employment Centre Policy Area (EC1) (Item 3.2.10 –pg 32) Issues/Comments
• The current Waipapa industrial area/business park is predominantly a retail and commercial area. The development lacks character and amenity. Request to Council
• Identify the existing development area (Business Park) as a ‘retail and commercial’ (RC) area.
• Ensure that the future development area is well planned to include adequate public green spaces, amenity planting and other sustainable urban design principles.
• Add a local distribution centre that will ease heavy traffic on Kerikeri Road and eliminate the need for a heavy traffic bypass to Mill Lane. 11.0 Local Retail Policy Areas (LR1, LR2 & LR3) (Item 3.2.11- pg 33) Issue/comments
• The purpose of local retail areas is to serve populations that otherwise have to travel a considerable distance for day to day items. In that respect, LR3 is too close to Waipapa Retail Commercial area (RC2)
• LR1 in the vicinity of Landing Road has a good catchment area. However the proposed location is on already developed residential properties.
• Kerikeri East at end of Inlet Road does not have a local retail facility. Request to Council
• Reconsider the location of LR3 (Waipapa Road). • Shift LR1 to the opposite side of Waipapa Road where there is vacant land.
• Provide a local retail area to serve the Inlet Road East area. 12.0 Retail and Commercial Centre Policy Areas (RC1, RC2, RC3, RC4 & RC5) (Item 3.2.12- pg 34) Issues /Comments
• There is no supporting information in the Draft Structure Plan to show the extent of future demand for retail commercial activities in Kerikeri. A strong CBD area is a quality of sustainable urban planning. Large scale secondary retail areas tend to kill the traditional town centre. Providing suitable definitions for commercial and industrial activities will be helpful in clarifying what activities are promoted in each of the RC areas.
• RC1 (CBD Kerikeri) More identity has to be given to this area as the CBD of Kerikeri. It should be different from the Mill Lane and Waipapa retail and commercial areas as these areas co-exist with light industries. The mixed use centre must be part of the CBD. Mixed retail, commercial and residential should be promoted in the CBD area.
• RC2 (Waipapa) The development of RC2 along SH10 has limitations. A suitable service lane is required to limit access from SH10. Since the existing Waipapa Industrial area/ business park is predominantly of retail and commercial activities, this area has to be identified as a separate retail commercial area.
• RC 3 (Mill Lane) The change from Industrial zoning in Mill Lane to retail and commercial is supported as this has a potential to reduce heavy traffic. This area should include existing commercial premises along Cobham Road between Mill Lane and ‘The Centre’.
• RC4 (SH10 to Mill Lane) A lVision Kerikeri (VKK) supports the Draft Structure Plan in principle. In the recent past, VKK has advocated strongly the need to develop a structure plan to achieve sustainable development in the fast growing areas of Kerikeri and Waipapa. When Council initiated the community consultation process, VKK actively participated in the open forum and discussions at focus group meetings on all aspects of the structure plan for the benefit of the community. VKK recognized Option 4 (Precinct Plan) as the most suitable option to develop a broad framework to guide future development of the area. VKK therefore welcomes the Draft Structure Plan based on the Option 4 approach. It will be the forerunner to a District Plan that guides the community towards more sustainable development and enable protection and enhancement of the character and amenity of Kerikeri and Waipapa areas. We believe, in the words of the Draft Structure Plan (pg 4), “that the qualities that attract people to live in Kerikeri-Waipapa will be lost if the projected growth is not planned for in a managed way”. VKK acknowledges that the current ‘effects based plan’ is based on the principle of Section 5(2)(c) of the RMA, i.e. avoiding remedying or mitigating the adverse effects of activities on the environment. However, experience of plan implementation during the last 5-6 years has shown that sole dependence on the ‘effects of activities on the environment’ is an impediment to guiding sustainable development/management. VKK therefore supports a more regulatory approach. VKK however is concerned about certain aspects of the plan. This submission is intended to raise these concerns and make suggestions to improve the plan. We strongly recommend that Council takes these suggestions into consideration when preparing the Final Structure Plan. VKK issues are discussed below under the relevant policy areas. 1.0 Principles for Future Network Development (Item 3.2.1 - pg 21)
Issues /Comments • VKK supports the principles of ‘Passenger Transport’ and ‘Cycleways’ and ‘Walkways’.
It is suggested that in some areas it could be appropriate to modify the footpath programme to incorporate a cycle path at the same time. This would more quickly enable reduced vehicle journeys for school children and the like and assist in promoting health and fitness.
• VKK is concerned about some aspects of the ‘Road Networks’, particularly the proposed new link from SH10 to Kerikeri.
• The link from SH10 appears to cut through productive land including 2 organic certified properties (Kerikeri & Shepherds Hall Estates – some of the first in NZ to be certified organic). In designing the road, contour and land use capability mapping must be undertaken. Such further analysis is necessary to ascertain the effects of the road and related development on retaining and enhancing the life supporting capacity of soil.
• We do not support that this proposed road should allow a ribbon development of industrial and commercial properties along it (RC4). It would pass through an area with rural amenity values and we consider that all strategic and arterial roads leading into Kerikeri should be have high landscaped visual amenity. We oppose any development that could potentially lead to an approach road such as the often quoted Te Rapa straight into Hamilton. See our further comments about RC4 in paras 3.0 and 12.0
• A link from Kerikeri Road to Mill Lane via Hall Road or Maraenui Drive could be the logical town bypass for heavy traffic coming to Mill Lane and Kerikeri East. It is considered that the most logical (cost effective and easy to construct) alternative access to Mill Lane is via Hall Road. A ROW already exists for this purpose. • Other alternatives are very costly and may not be achievable in the foreseeable future.
• It should be noted that the by-pass alone cannot stop heavy traffic coming along Kerikeri Road and on to the CBD area as the CBD activities and future activities in the HD1 policy area also need delivery of goods. New roads have a tendency to destroy the existing amenity values. Town by-pass roads lead people away from the commercial hub. A centralised distribution centre that serves both Waipapa and Kerikeri is an option that can be looked into so that large trucks can be systematically removed from Kerikeri roads. This would mitigate impacts of noise, traffic congestion etc. in the Kerikeri residential and light commercial areas to help retain its village image and aesthetics. • The percentage of heavy traffic in Mill Lane Traffic counts will give an idea of the extent of the problem that has to be addressed.
• VKK supports the ring road from Butler Road to the Heritage by-pass to relieve congestion in Kerikeri CBD and provide access to commercial development. Request to Council • Focus on relieving congestion in Kerikeri CBD with the Butler Road Town by-pass before implementing the Paihia link.
• Implement a link from Kerikeri Road to Mill Lane on a priority basis.
• A road from SH10 to Mill Lane needs careful investigation to minimise impact on an area of rural amenity and productive soils and should not be a ribbon of commercial and industrial development • Include service lanes in the retail commercial areas
2.0 Principles of Water and Landscape Protection (Item 3.2.2 - pg 22)
Issues/comments • VKK supports the recommendation to develop advocacy and policy documents on ‘principles of water and landscape protection’ as indicated on page 23 in the structure plan.
• Attention to preserving the water quality of our irrigation reservoirs is necessary. If irrigation water becomes contaminated with sewerage, export markets will be out of bounds for our growers. Furthermore irrigation water would be the major source of water for an expanding population. Request to Council
• Variations to the District Plan must ensure compatibility with the NRC Policies and Plans where applicable.
• Care is needed in land use planning to ensure that irrigation water is not contaminated
• A buffer zone around the reservoirs should be considered.
3.0 CBD Surrounds Policy Area (CBDS1 and CBDS2) (Item 3.2.3 - pg 23) Issues/comments  The name ‘CBD Surrounds’ does not reflect the intention of the policy area that seeks to promote and protect the rural and landscape amenity along key arterial routes that approach the town centres of Kerikeri and Waipapa.  We strongly advocate joining CBDS1 and CBDS2 together and thereby having continuous landscaped amenity along the roadside from Bulls Gorge to Waipapa  The proposed road from SH10 to Mill Lane should be landscaped to the same standard  The shelter belts contribute favourably to the microclimate and also to the amenity values and our historic values but are tending to disappear.  Effects based planning approvals for activities such as car yards, commercial developments, industrial units etc. in this area tend to negate the intended purpose of the policy area.  Similar protection areas are needed along an eastern bypass road and along Mill Lane approach roads. Request to Council
• Change the policy area name to be commensurate with its intent. Suggested names are: Rural Amenity Landscape Rural Amenity Protection Area Gateway Landscape Amenity Area
• Amalgamate CBDS1 & CBDS2 to provide a continuous amenity strip from Bulls Gorge to Waipapa as well as from the airport to Kerikeri
• Encourage the retention of road side shelter belts, where they exist, for as long as possible
• Include with ‘Other methods’ - Council to propose in discussion with landholders a landscaping plan for landowners for voluntary landscaping of road frontage of affected properties in line with the approved landscape guidelines. - Council could consider a number of options o Providing a landscaping plan o Providing owners with plants for the landscaping plan o Council undertake the entire landscaping
• Include with ‘environmental outcomes expected’ that activities such as motels, B&B, cafes, arts and crafts shops are promoted in this area. • Include to ‘Rules’, - specific activities that are prohibited in this area.

4.0 Coastal Conservation Policy Area (CC1 & CC2) (Item 3.2.4 - pg 24)
Issues/comments • Special emphasis should be given for the existence of kiwi and their protection in this area.
• The coastal area to the east of CC2 (Wharau Road) that has similar characteristics of coastal lands towards the end of Kerikeri Inlet Road has been left out of the Structure Plan boundary. Request to Council
• Identify ‘high kiwi concentration’ areas in the District Plan maps • Add the area surrounding the Wharau Road (as shown in the attached plan) within the Structure Plan boundary. • Outcomes sought from this policy area, its objectives and policies should specifically address the protection of kiwi.
• Conditions requiring the keeping of dogs and cats that will have adverse effects on kiwi habitat shall be introduced in future subdivision of properties within the areas of kiwi habitat. • Add rules that: - All structures to be of recessive colours with no mirrored glass and the reflectivity to be within the standards specified by the Council. - Vegetation removal to be under strict control compared to other zones. Rules to specify the replanting of sites preferably with native plants but not invasive plants when the vegetation is removed for new developments. - All earthwork activities to have strict control of silt and run-off from building sites. - Sewerage disposal for new development to be by on-site wastewater treatment plant only (no septic tanks). When old septic tanks are due for replacement, these are to be replaced by on-site wastewater treatment plants. - Construction to be below the ridge line

5.0 Coastal Living Policy Area (CL1) (Item 3.2.5 – pg 26)
Issues/comments • This area with small lots is currently zoned ‘Coastal Residential’ in the RPDP. • Naming this special area as ‘Coastal Living’ will be confused with other currently zoned coastal living zones. Request to Council
• Rename this area as ‘Coastal Lifestyle’.

6.0 Community Services Policy Area (RL4/CS1) (Item 3.2.6 - pg 27)
Issues/comments •
VKK supports this policy area.
• It is understood that a considerable extent of land in this area is now subject to a resource consent for subdivision.
• Therefore the identification of lands for community services such as education and medical facilities is considered to be a priority issue. Request to Council
• Amend Table 3.4 to state that ‘Identification of land for Civic and Community Space’ will have High (H) priority as a method of implementation.

7.0 Heritage Conservation Protection Policy Area. (Item 3.2.8 –pg 28)
Issues/comments • It is noted that this are contains some established residential developments outside the core area of heritage features and sites that is currently subject to a separate Sustainable Development Plan.
• Specific objectives, policies and rules for such areas are necessary to achieve the intended purpose of this policy area. Request to Council
• In developing a ‘Zone’ for this Policy Area in the Precinct Plan, consideration shall be given to the following. - Introduction of objectives and policies to reflect the outcomes being sought for this Policy Area specifically to recognize and protect the heritage and cultural values and special historical and conservation character of the area, and that the type, nature and scale of developments are limited to ensure the retention of such heritage and conservation character of the Policy area. - Rules that reflect and strengthen the above objectives and policies

8.0 High Density Residential and High Density Mixed Use Centre Policy Area (HD1) (Item 3.2.8 – pg 29)
Issues/comments • Site intensification without thorough planning guidance can deteriorate the urban amenity values in the existing residential areas.
• The urban design protocol gives useful guidance on benefits of quality design
• Development should be limited in height to 12 Metres to avoid out of scale development Request toinear (ribbon) development of retail/commercial activity is not good urban planning. We advocate that all access roads into Kerikeri and all roads in Kerikeri must be able to retain a pleasant environment. This approach route is through a rural landscape and an area of generally high quality horticultural soils and should not be compromised by linear retail/commercial development. Te Rapa straight entry into Hamilton would be an example of an unsatisfactory outcome. High quality soil and its retention has a strategic purpose with increasing concern about climate change and increasing scarcity and demand for liquid fossil fuels. A new large area of retail/commercial activities will attract more heavy traffic coming to Kerikeri and add to the existing problem. There is still under utilised and undeveloped land in the Mill Lane area. Intensification of the existing area to enable improvements to businesses and allowing space for environmental improvements is a better option rather than expanding the area with RC4 and deteriorating the existing amenity values. With the intensification of RC1 (CBD) and RC3 (Mill Lane) areas there may not be a demand for another retail commercial area shown as RC4. If demand is shown to exist then a modest extension in the vicinity of Mill Lane RC3 could be contemplated.
• RC 5 (near airport) This policy area is not described in the structure plan. It is also not included in Table 3-10 as a sub-area. It is noted from the plan that RC5 is located within the Airport designation. Therefore it is assumed that RC5 is meant for airport related commercial activities and this area should be designated accordingly. Request to Council • RC1 (CBD Kerikeri) – - Focus on relieving traffic congestion in CBD as a priority. - Investigate opportunities for optimum development of this currently under developed retail commercial area, as a strong central business district and rename it as CBD (Kerikeri). The Butler Rd/Homestead Road/Clarke Road is important for providing CBD access and development with a subsequent link to the new bridge. -
• RC2 (Waipapa) - Provide a service lane from SH10/Waipapa Road.
• RC3 (Mill Lane) - Support change of zone in Mill Lane area to retail/commercial. Limit RC3 to existing developed area including commercial developments along Cobham Road between Mill Lane and ‘The Centre’. • RC4 (SH10 to Mill Lane) - Remove RC4 area.
• Redefine RC5 not as a ‘Retail and Commercial’ area but as an Airport Support Activities ( ASA) policy area.
• Attention to be given to the impact of retail commercial areas on existing and future residential areas in terms of traffic, noise, glare and urban landscape amenity in formulating objectives, policies and rules for these policy areas.

13.0 Rural Greenbelt Policy Area (RG1 & RG2) (Item 3.2 .13-pg 36)
Issue/Comments VKK does not support this policy area. There seems little distinction between it and Rural Production Areas. We believe that sub-division and development in this area can be managed effectively as Rural Production Zone by the amended RFDP policies and rules recently approved by the Environment Court, after six years of negotiations with 10 affected parties. Request to Council
• That Rural Greenbelt policy area is unnecessary and can be managed as Rural Production Zone under the amended RFDP policies and rules recently approved by The Environment Court.
14.0 Rural Production/ Horticultural Policy area (Item 3.2.14 – pg 36)
Issue/Comments • We consider that the amended RFDP policies and rules recently approved by the Environment Court, after six years of negotiations with 10 affected parties, are sufficient to manage sub-division and development in the Rural Production Zone without further change
• The Rural Production/ Horticultural Policy area between the north western boundary of CC1 (Coastal Conservation) and the structure plan boundary is currently zoned General Coastal, Coastal Living and Mineral. The areas to the north of this part of the structure plan boundary is also currently zoned General Coastal. It is appropriate therefore to include this Rural Production/Horticultural policy area into the adjoining CC1. Request to Council
• Subdivision and development within the Rural Production Zone be managed by the recently approved amendment by The Environment Court to the RFDP • Include the Rural Production/ Horticultural Policy area between the north western boundary of CC1 and the structure plan boundary (excluding the current mineral zoned area) into the adjoining CC1.

15.0 Rural Lifestyle Policy area ( RL1,RL2,RL3, RL4) (Item 3.2.15 – pg 37 )
Issue/Comments • VKK supports this policy area. 16.0 Urban Residential (Medium Density) Policy area (UR1 – UR6) (Item 3.2.16 - pg 39)
Issue/Comments • The proposed intensity of development is similar to the current permitted residential intensity in the Residential zone areas and may not be suitable for some parts of the policy areas. This will require investigation of land profile, land use capability, ecology etc. to determine its effects on existing built and natural environments and the ability to provide infrastructure. For example UR4 Policy area is located on either side of Kerikeri River and is partly within the iconic eucalyptus tree forest. Request to Council • Further investigate site suitability of parts of UR1 (end of Access Road) and UR4 areas to determine the site suitability.
• Part of UR4 adjacent to the Kerikeri river bank with its iconic eucalyptus backdrop to the town would be very suitable for park land • Apply the proposed intensity of development to the areas of UR2, UR3, UR5 & UR6 17.0 Airport Protection area (Item 3.2.17 – pg 40) Issue/Comments
• VKK supports this policy area.

18.0 Other matters 18.1 Recreation Areas and Public Open spaces Issue/Comments • Existing or proposed recreation areas are not shown in the plan (eg Golf Course, Waipapa Sports Complex etc). Plan shows only conservation and riparian and stream management areas.
• The structure plan area has the unique quality of two main rivers and several streams running through it. • There is no information regarding the amount of open space that could be made available based on a per capita ration for the future population.
• Small public open pockets as ‘green lung spaces’ within the CBD area and another town park (apart from the Domain) will be useful for those working in the CBD as well as general public. Request to Council
• Identify existing and future recreation areas as separate policy area as part of the District Plan.
• Provide small pockets of green spaces within the CBD areas.
• Consider a park in the UR4 area as a suitable location for a town park.
• Investigate open space requirement for the projected population and provide public green spaces accordingly.
• Investigate possibilities to provide additional recreational areas between SH10 and Golf Course area currently zoned as Rural Production.
• Formulate rules that creating public open spaces become part of large scale residential subdivisions. The rules should address the suitability of such lands in terms of their extent, accessibility, geographical nature etc.
• Ensure that the continuous riparian strips are preserved, made wider where possible than at present, and create a buffer zone along Kerikeri River

18. 2 Infrastructure Issue/Comments
• Plan does not identify infrastructure priority areas specifically the provision of wastewater and water supply to enable guidance of development. Request to Council • Consider CBD, and existing Residential zoned areas which are more easily able to be developed with infrastructure as the priority areas. • Phase the priority areas for all infrastructure provisions.

18.3 Schools and other Designated sites Issue/Comments
• Plan does not identify schools and other designated sites Request to Council • Identify schools and other designated sites such as recycling centre on the plan. 18.4 Formulation of Objectives, Policies and Rules. Issue/Comments • The RMA requires effects based assessment of activities. In order to achieve the overall outcome of the Structure Plan clear policies, objectives and rules should be formulated for all Policy Areas. The rules should be drafted in such a way that they will link and fit the intended objectives and policies of the relevant policy area. It is noted that the current Far North Revised Proposed District Plan demonstrates many shortcomings in this regard. 18.5 Financial provision Issue/Comments It is important that Council makes financial provision in the Annual Plan and LTTCP for The Kerikeri-Waipapa Structure Plan to be implemented .

R.E.Brown Chairperson Vision Kerikeri 18 July 2007