District Plan Hauraki Gulf Islands Section - Proposed 2006

(Notified version 2006)

Street index | Planning maps | Text | Appendices | Annexures | Section 32 material | Plan modifications | Help | Notified - Home | Decision - Home

Hearing reports index

Commercial 3 (local shops)

1.0 Introduction

This report considers submissions and further submissions ('submissions') that were received by the council in relation to Commercial 3 (local shops) of the Auckland City District Plan: Hauraki Gulf Islands Section - Proposed 2006 ('the Plan'). The Plan was publicly notified on 18 September 2006. The closing date for lodging submissions was 11 December 2006. The submissions and summary of decisions requested were publicly notified for further submission on 29 April 2007. The closing date for lodging further submissions was 28 May 2007.

This report has been prepared under section 42A of the Resource Management Act 1991 ('the RMA'), to assist the hearings panel to consider the submissions on Commercial 3 (local shops). This report discusses the submissions (grouped by subject matter or individually) and includes recommendations from the planner who prepared this report. The recommendations identify whether each submission should be accepted or rejected (in full or in part) and what amendments (if any) should be made to the Plan to address matters raised in submissions. Further submissions are not specifically addressed but are dealt with in conjunction with the submissions to which they relate.

The recommendations contained in this report are not decisions of the council. The council will issue its decisions following consideration of the submissions, further submissions, any supporting evidence presented at the hearing, and this report. The council's decisions will be released after all the hearings to the Plan have been completed.

2.0 Statutory framework

This section of the report briefly sets out the statutory framework within which the council must consider the submissions. In preparing this report the submissions and, in particular, the decisions requested in the submissions, have been considered in light of the relevant statutory matters. These were summarised by the Environment Court in Eldamos Investments Limited v Gisborne District Council W 047/05 where the court set out the following measures for evaluating objectives, policies, rules and other methods in district plans:

1. The objectives of the Plan are to be evaluated by the extent to which they:
   1. Are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA (s32(3)(a)); and
   2. Assist the council to carry out its functions in order to achieve the purpose of the RMA (s72); and
   3. Are in accordance with the provisions of part 2 of the RMA (s74(1).
2. The policies, rules, or other methods in the Plan are to be evaluated by the extent to which they:
   1. Are the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives of the Plan (s32(3)(b)); and
   2. Assist the council to carry out its functions in order to achieve the purpose of the RMA (s72); and
   3. Are in accordance with the provisions of part 2 of the RMA (s74(1)); and
   4. (If a rule) achieve the objectives and policies of the Plan (s76(1)(b)).

The purpose of the RMA is "to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources", and "sustainable management" is defined in section 5(2) as meaning:

"... managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety while—

(a) Sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and

(b) Safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil, and ecosystems; and

(c) Avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment."

Along with section 5, part 2 of the RMA includes sections 6 (matters of national importance), 7 (other matters) and 8 (Treaty of Waitangi), which set out a range of matters that the council needs to recognise and provide for in achieving the purpose of the RMA. Those matters are also relevant when considering submissions.

The Plan must assist the council to carry out its functions under section 31 of the RMA. These functions are:

"(a) The establishment, implementation, and review of objectives, policies, and methods to achieve integrated management of the effects of the use, development, or protection of land and associated natural and physical resources of the district:

(b) the control of any actual or potential effects of the use, development, or protection of land, including for the purpose of—

(i) the avoidance or mitigation of natural hazards; and

(ii) the prevention or mitigation of any adverse effects of the storage, use, disposal, or transportation of hazardous substances; and

(iia) the prevention or mitigation of any adverse effects of the development, subdivision, or use of contaminated land:

(iii) the maintenance of indigenous biological diversity:

(c) ...

(d) The control of the emission of noise and the mitigation of the effects of noise:

(e) The control of any actual or potential effects of activities in relation to the surface of water in rivers and lakes."

In addition to the matters listed above from the Eldamos decision:

1. The Plan must "give effect to" any national policy statement and any New Zealand coastal policy statement (s75(3)(a) and (b)).
2. The Plan must "give effect to" the regional policy statement (made operative after 10 August 2005) (s75(3)(c)).
3. The Plan must be "not inconsistent with" any regional plan (s75(4)).
4. The council must ensure that that the Plan does not conflict with sections 7 and 8 of the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 ("the HGMPA").  Section 10 of the HGMPA requires that sections 7 and 8 of that Act be treated as a New Zealand coastal policy statement under the RMA.

3.0 Background

This section of the report sets out background information about the topic under consideration. It identifies how the Plan deals with Commercial 3 (local shops).

"This land unit applies to the small scale neighbourhood shops on Waiheke at Surfdale, Onetangi, Rocky Bay, Palm Beach, Little Oneroa and Ostend. Land at Beatty Parade which is currently used for a range of semi-industrial uses has been classified as commercial 3 to provide for a more appropriate range of uses in an area surrounded by residential activity.

These shops have a smaller scale than retail activities within the main commercial centres of Oneroa and Ostend, and generally service the retail requirements of the surrounding local community.

These shops play a role as a place where residents of the local community can meet and interact.

The resource management strategy is to enable small scale retail and restaurant opportunities outside the main commercial areas of Oneroa and Ostend without compromising the character and amenity of the surrounding residential areas."

4.0 Analysis of submissions

4.1  Introduction

This section of the report discusses the decisions requested in submissions about Commercial 3 (local shops) and recommends how the panel could respond to the matters raised and decisions requested in submissions. The submissions are addressed under subject headings. While the relevant statutory matters (identified in section 2.0 of this report) will not necessarily be referred to directly, the discussion and recommendations have given appropriate consideration to these and any other relevant matters.

A list of the submissions which raise issues about Commercial 3 (local shops) together with the related further submissions is contained in appendix 1. Appendix 2 contains the summary of the decisions requested by the submissions considered in this report. Any amendments to the Plan recommended in response to submissions are identified in this section of the report and are further detailed in appendix 3.

The list of submissions contained in appendix 1 may include some submissions and further submissions which were received 'late', ie they were received after the closing date for lodging submissions (11 December 2006) or further submissions (28 May 2007).  All late submissions were considered by the hearing panel at the start of the hearing process and the panel has already waived the failure to comply with the time limit for any late submissions or further submissions listed in appendix 1. This has been done in accordance with sections 37 and 37A of the RMA.

4.2  Submissions about the entire Commercial 3 (local shops) land unit

Submissions dealt with in this section: 3061/87, 3709/3, 3709/4

4.2.1 Decisions requested

Submission 3061/87 relief states that the states that the overriding consideration of the land unit does not contain provisions which permit development / subdivision that is contrary to maintaining the essential character and heritage of the island and the type, style and scale of buildings recognised within that character and island scale in particular.

Submission 3709/3 states:

The Plan is focused about the motor car, and in these village shopping centres or places does not seek to enhance visitor activity. Provide for viable businesses in these areas by making those places, places of great enjoyment quality public spaces. Encourage retail shopping in the various villages. This will involve negative incentives to the use of the motor car, and provide positive incentives to provide for quality public space. Including, traffic separation, mixed use development, design and appearance of streetscape and matters that enhance retail ambience and profitability, including achieving a separation of retail activities from other activities such as land agents, in the operative Plan for Oneroa.

Submission 3709/4 seeks that the same public space considerations sought by the submitter for Oneroa, apply to Surfdale village, Onetangi village and Rocky Bay Village.

4.2.2 Planner's analysis and recommendations

4.2.2.1  Submission 3061/87 – the overriding consideration of the land unit

The provisions under clause 10a.13 commercial 3 (local shops) identify the characteristics of local shops as being a small scale neighbourhood shops which service the retail requirements of the surrounding local community. The objectives and policies within the land unit seek to provide for the needs of the local residents and ensure that the scale, form and location of buildings provides a high level of amenity.

Generally, the commercial 3 land unit occurs amongst island residential land units. The land unit seeks to provide for small scale retail activity outside the main centres of Oneroa and Ostend to service the needs of local residents without compromising the amenity of the surrounding land units.

The land unit is generally located amongst residential land units and it is therefore important that the scale, location and form of the buildings within the land unit provide a high level of amenity and that any adverse effects of the activities are avoided or mitigated so as not to impact negatively on nearby residential dwellings.

The submission is not particularly clear and the submitter is encouraged to attend the hearing to expand on this submission but at this time, the submission cannot be analysed further and as such, it is recommended that the submission be rejected.

4.2.2.2  Submission 3709/3 – the focus of the Plan

Commercial 3 provides for activities, which are intended to service the existing local community rather than the visitor or tourist population which visits Waiheke. The submission suggests that shopping centres should seek to enhance visitor activity however, within commercial 3, enhancing the visitor activity is not an intentional focus and instead it is important to provide for the needs of the local residents when considering what activities are appropriate within the land unit.

The submitter suggests that the Plan is focussed on the motor car however it is considered that providing 'local shops' to meet the day to day needs of residents on the island, which are easily accessible from island residential land units, encourages residents to walk to these conveniences and therefore, reduces the use of motor cars.

The resource management strategy for the land unit is to provide for small scale retail activity outside the main retail centres of Oneroa and Ostend. The strategy is achieved by listing retail activities as permitted activities and certain non-retail activities as restricted discretionary or discretionary activities. The submission suggests that provision within the land unit should be made for viable businesses and that retail shopping is encouraged. Commercial 3 requires that non-retail activities are not located at street level, unless a retail unit fronts the street and the non-retail activity is located behind it in order to ensure that practical retail businesses are provided for within the land unit. This rule also seeks to ensure that non-retail activities are appropriately located to maintain an active retail ground floor and that the retail character of the land unit is maintained. It is considered that these rules ensure that the land unit does encourage viable retail businesses and retail shopping although it is recognised that the variety and number of activities is less than in the larger commercial areas of Oneroa and Ostend.

The submission seeks that the amenity of the land unit be enhanced. It is considered that the design and appearance of the streetscape is controlled by the development controls within clause 10a.13.6 such as building location, retail frontage control, noise and screening as well as the additional controls contained within part 10c. Development controls for land units and settlement areas. Included within part 10c are controls on the bulk and location including height, yards, building coverage and building footprint. These controls are in place to ensure that the streetscape appearance is maintained to an acceptable standard within the land unit therefore enhancing the amenity and public enjoyment of the land unit.

It is recommended that submission 3709/3 be rejected.

4.2.2.3  Submission 3709/4 – public space considerations

The submitter seeks that public open space considerations, as suggested by the submitter for Oneroa village, be applied to Surfdale, Onetangi and Rocky Bay villages, all of which are commercial 3 (local shops). Commercial 1 (Oneroa village) and commercial 3 (local shops) have very different characteristics and amenity values that are required to be addressed and maintained and it is considered that applying the same requirements for public open space in these two land units would not successfully achieve the objectives and policies contained within each individual land unit. In commercial 3 the public area is the street frontage and there are development controls, which address the building location in relation to the street, along with the retail frontage control, which sets out specific requirements for the location of activities with the intention of maintaining the retail character of the land unit.

It is therefore recommended that this submission be rejected.

4.3  Submissions about reclassification of parts of Beatty Parade

Submissions dealt with in this section: 66/1, 66/2, 66/3, 518/19, 753/25, 821/28, 836/16, 1044/1, 1190/24, 1244/1, 1260/1, 1596/25, 3692/1

It is noted that at the time of notification of the Plan, the uses of 2-12 Beatty Parade were as follows:

2-6 Beatty Parade – garage and truck storage

8 Beatty Parade – timber products

10 Beatty Parade – concrete manufacture and office

12 Beatty Parade – Surfdale motors

4.3.1 Decisions requested

Submission 66/2 seeks to reclassify 5, 9 & 11 Beatty Parade from island residential 2 (bush residential) to Commercial 5 (industrial).

Submissions 1260/1 and 3692/1 seek to reclassify 5 and 9 Beatty Parade respectively, from island residential 2 (bush residential) to commercial 3 (local shops).

Submission 1596/25 supports the classification of 2-6, 8, 10 & 12 Beatty Parade as commercial 3 (local shops)

Submissions 66/1 , 518/19, 753/25, 821/28, 836/16, 1044/1, 1190/24 seek to reclassify 2-6, 8, 10 & 12 Beatty Parade from commercial 3 (local shops) to commercial 5 (industrial).

Submission 1244/1 seeks to reclassify 2-6, & 8 Beatty Parade from commercial 3 (local shops) to island residential 2 (bush residential)

Submission 66/3 seeks that the Council join with landowners to landscape the frontages of 2-6, 8, 10 & 12 Beatty Parade.

4.3.2 Planner's analysis and recommendations

4.3.2.1  Submissions 66/1, 518/19, 753/25, 821/28, 836/16, 1044/1, 1190/24, 1244/1 -  reclassify 2-6, 8, 10 &12 Beatty Parade to commercial 5

It is recognised that this area of commercial 3 is unique from the rest of the land unit. The properties at 2-6, 8, 10 & 12 Beatty Parade are classified land unit 15 (industrial) in the Operative Plan. In the proposed plan, these sites have been classified as commercial 3 (local shops) rather than commercial 5 (industrial) because it was considered that due to the close proximity of the sites to residential land units, the continued use of the sites for industrial purposes was not desirable.

It is also recognised that a change in the land unit will not result in an immediate change in the use of the sites but that it lays the foundation for the future direction of the area. Where existing use rights apply, a resource consent provides for the continuation of established uses.

It is considered that the commercial 3 land unit is more suitable for these sites as it provides for their conversion and redevelopment into small scale local shops to service the retail requirements of the surrounding local community.

Reclassifying the sites back to industrial, as requested in submissions 66/1, 518/19, 753/25, 821/28, 836/16, 1044/1, 1190/24 would allow the continuation and further development of the sites as industrial. It is considered that this is in opposition to the uses considered suitable for the sites, bearing in mind their close proximity to neighbouring residential activity. It is therefore recommended that the above submissions be rejected.

Submission 1244/1, seeks the reclassification of the commercial 3 sites to island residential 2. The sites are located amongst island residential 2 (bush residential) land units. Due to past industrial uses, the sites are potentially contaminated, and would require further investigation and possible suitable remediation works to be undertaken, in accordance with clause 9.6 Rules – contaminated land, prior to residential dwellings being constructed. While island residential 2 may be a suitable land unit for the sites, it is considered that as dwellings are provided as permitted activities within the commercial 3 land unit, the reclassification of the sites to island residential 2 would provide no further benefits in the future of the site.

It is noted that within commercial 3, special consideration has been given to the possibility of dwellings in Beatty Parade. Clause 10a.13.6.5 states that dwellings are considered a non-complying activity on sites identified as contaminated or potentially contaminated and cannot be established until any existing soil contamination is appropriately remediated. Reclassification of the sites to island residential 2 would be dependent on investigations and similar remediation of any contamination.

It is therefore recommended that submission 1244/1 be rejected.

4.3.2.2  Submissions 66/2, 1260/1 and 3692/1 – reclassification of 5, 9 & 11 Beatty Parade from island residential 2

The above submissions seek to reclassify the land at 5, 9 & 11 Beatty Parade, which is located directly across the road from the commercial 3 (local shops) land unit. Currently the properties are contained within the island residential 2 (bush residential) land unit and the submission seeks reclassification of the property to commercial 3 (local shops) and commercial 5 (industrial)

Currently, 5 Beatty Parade is vacant land. Submission 1260/1 from the landowner of 5 Beatty Parade seeks the reclassification of the property to commercial 3 to enable more flexibility for the use of the land.

9 Beatty Parade consists of a garage and carport and submission 3692/1 requests the reclassification of the property to commercial 3 (local shops) in order to develop an art gallery and café for the sale of items created by the Giant Leap Foundation Charitable Trust (submitter and landowner). The submission states that the existing garage/workshop would be converted into the art studio/gallery and that a small shop/café would be built. Currently both the island residential 2 (bush residential) and the commercial 3 (local shops) land units include art galleries and museums as discretionary activities. Commercial 3 provides for restaurant, café and other eating places as a restricted discretionary activity, however this is not provided for within island residential 2 and therefore it would be considered a non-complying activity.

The property at 11 Beatty Parade contains a residential dwelling and together with 5 & 9 Beatty Parade, submission 66/2 suggests that these properties should be reclassified to commercial 5 (industrial) to allow for light commercial business to be compatible with the existing uses in the area. As stated in section 4.3.2.1 of this report, the existing light industrial uses at 2-6, 8, 10 & 12 Beatty Parade are not considered to be suitable activities for the sites due to the close proximity to residential dwellings. It is noted that the properties of 5, 9 and 11 Beatty Parade are also located close to residential dwellings and therefore non-residential activities on the sites have the potential to adversely affect these dwellings.

While it is recognised that the classification of the properties as 2-6, 8, 10 & 12 Beatty Parade to commercial 3 will not result in an immediate change to the activities on site, it represents the future direction for the area.

It is not considered that the extension of the commercial 3 land unit, to include 5, 9 & 11 Beatty Parade would be suitable despite the implication from the submissions that the sites are currently of low ecological and amenity value. The commercial 3 area at Beatty Parade already has the potential to provide for the needs of the immediate community in the future and the local shops located on the corner of Miami Avenue and Hamilton Road are located within an adequate distance to provide for local residents' current needs. It is therefore recommended that the submissions 66/2, 1260/1 and 3692/1 be rejected.

4.3.2.3  Submission 1596/25 – supports classification of 2-6, 8, 10 & 12 Beatty Parade

This submission is accepted in that it directly supports a rule in the Plan. No alterations to the Plan are required in order to give effect to this submission

4.3.2.4  Submission 66/3 - landscape frontages

The submission seeks that the Council join with landowners to landscape the frontages of 2-6, 8, 10 & 12 Beatty Parade. This matter is not something that can be addressed through the District Plan review process. It is recognised however that landscaping and planting may help reduce any adverse effects of the current activities on the neighbouring residential and recreational land units. Clause 10a.13.6.4 addresses the matter of screening  and this clause can be applied when the Council receives any resource consent applications for development on the sites.

It is therefore recommended that submission 66/3 be rejected.

4.4  Submissions about Clause 10a.13.5 Rules – activity table

Submissions dealt with in this section: 1250/48, 1596/26

4.4.1 Decisions requested

Submission 1250/48 seeks to include education facilities as discretionary activity within clause 10a.13.5

Submission 1596/26 disagrees with the provision for educational facilities as permitted activities and suggests that the activity be appended as for dwellings (regarding the contamination on Beatty Parade) and in particular refers to childcare facility being a permitted activity.

4.4.2 Planner's analysis and recommendations

Both of the above submission raise concerns regarding the permitted status of educational facilities particularly, in the case of 1596/26, where contaminated land within the Beatty Parade part of the land unit is concerned.

It is noted that child care facilities, as mentioned in submission 1596/26, are considered to fall within the definition of care centre for the purposes of the Plan. Part 14 –definitions, defines care centre as follows:

"Care centre means land or buildings where any of the following apply:

1. Three or more children (in addition to the children of the person in charge) aged 5 years or younger are educated and cared for. It may be licensed as such by regulation.
2. Three or more children aged 5 years or older (in addition to the children of the person in charge) are cared for out of school hours.
3. Elderly people are cared for during the day.
4. People with disabilities are cared for during the day.

It includes creches, playcentres, kindergartens, childcare centres, kohanga reo, and play groups."

Care centres are provided as a discretionary activity within commercial 3 and are therefore not permitted as the submitter suggests.

It is recognised however, that submission 1596/26 expresses concern over the potentially contaminated nature of the sites at Beatty Parade and the implications this could have on future development.

Part 9 of the Plan deals with hazardous facilities and contaminated land. In particular, clause 9.6.3 states that the following are restricted discretionary activities:

"1. Any activity which remediates contaminated land or removes underground storage tanks.

2. Any redevelopment of contaminated or potentially contaminated land. Redevelopment includes the addition of new buildings or additions to existing buildings. It does not include the ongoing activities or occupation of the site for the same activity and minor additions and alterations to existing dwellings."

It is therefore considered that development on contaminated land is addressed within Part 9 and any issues regarding public safety or suitability of the sites for their proposed end use are covered within this part.

Submission 1250/48 seeks that the activity status of educational facilities within the land unit be reduced to discretionary. It is recognised that educational facilities can apply to a range of institutions with varying scale and intensities. It is also recognised that the objectives and policies within the land unit seek to provide for retail activities within the land unit and certain non non-retail activities, which support the primary retail function of the land unit and service the needs of the local residents.

It is considered that the potential for large scale educational facilities within the land unit suggests that the permitted activity status could result in development that is against the objectives and policies of the land unit, which seek to provide for retail and certain non-retail activities at a similar scale and intensity to adjoining residential land units.

It is noted that should the Ministry of Education wish to establish a new school within the commercial 3 land unit, they would have the opportunity to designate the land for the purpose of the school, which would therefore deem the controls of the land unit irrelevant.

It is therefore recommended that the submissions be accepted and that the current permitted status for educational facilities be reduced to a discretionary status.

4.5  Submissions about 10a.13.6 Rules – development controls

Submissions dealt with in this section: 593/5, 603/3, 772/2, 830/4, 1250/49, 1250/50, 1275/4, 3300/4, 3399/5

4.5.1 Decisions requested

Submissions 593/5, 603/3, 772/2 seek to remove clause 10a.13.6.1 Building location, while submission 1250/49 seeks to alter clause 10a.13.6.1 to provide a building setback for all sites fronting the road.

Submissions 830/4, 1275/4, 3300/4, 3399/5 all seek amendments to clause 10a.13.6.3 relating to noise controls between activities

Submission 1250/50 seeks that clause 10a.13.6.4 Screening be altered to require the planting of indigenous vegetation to buffer the appearance of any solid wall or fence from public view e.g. roads.

4.5.2 Planner's analysis and recommendations

4.5.2.1  Submissions 593/5, 603/3, 772/2 – remove clause 10a.13.6.1 – Building location

Submissions 593/5, 603/3 and 772/2 seek the removal of Clause 10a.13.6.1 Building location. The clause requires buildings with a road frontage to be built up to the road, and provide a verandah of certain specifications in order to achieve continuous pedestrian coverage. There is also a requirement within building location for all buildings fronting the road to contain display areas or windows on a minimum of 75% of the site frontage.

It is unclear from the submissions exactly why the request for the removal of this clause has been made however, it is mentioned in other parts of the submissions that building setback and the requirement for public space is desirable.

Commercial 3 (local shops) land unit is made up of shops which are small in scale and generally provide for the needs of local residents, in close proximity to their homes. These shops are much lower in intensity than those located within the commercial 1 or 2 land units in Oneroa and Ostend and it is therefore considered that the effects of these shops, on the surrounding residential and recreational land units is likely to be less than the larger scale shops contained commercial 1 & 2.

It is noted that the objectives and policies of the land unit seek to provide retail and certain non-retail activities at a limited scale and intensity, similar to that of the adjacent residential activities. It is also noted that there is additional requirements for screening for buildings where they adjoin or face island residential or recreational land units.

Submission 1250/49 seeks that a setback be required for all buildings fronting the road. The land unit generally, at present, contains a mix of buildings built up to the road boundary and those which have a setback. It is considered that the approach of being built up to the road boundary with verandahs provides for the greatest coverage and protection for pedestrian and the uniform approach allows buildings to connect with buildings around them to provide a continuous frontage.

It is considered that unlike Oneroa Village where there are amenity values such as views to consider, the scale and location of the commercial 3 (local shops) land unit is such that it is intended that the impact of development on these properties has as little impact as possible on the surrounding residential neighbourhood.

It is therefore considered that the submissions be rejected and that the clause 10a.13.6.1 – building location be retained with no setback requirement.

4.5.2.2  Submissions 830/4, 1275/4, 3300/4, 3399/5 – clause 10a.13.6.3 Noise controls between activities

Clause 10a.13.7.4 relates to allowable noise levels between activities within the commercial 3 land unit. This control is not included in the Operative Plan and provides additional protection for the activities within the land unit.

The purpose of this control is to limit any excessive noise levels that may arise as a result of activities being carried out within the land unit. It allows for items such as refrigeration units, music in cafés and restaurants, machinery etc to be used within the land unit but to be controlled to a level that is acceptable and is not considered damaging to public health.

It is recognised that due to the size and population of Waiheke, noise levels experienced on the island are generally lower than those experienced within parts of the Isthmus. It is also considered however, that commercial 3 is a mixed use land unit and can therefore contain activities which create a higher level of noise than a purely residential land unit.

The noise levels allowed in this clause are taken from recommendations of the New Zealand standard 6802:1999 (Acoustic-Assessment of Environmental Sound). The Standard is concerned with background sound and the assessment of sound from steady and time-varying sources.

It is considered that the noise levels contained within Clause 10a.13.7.3 represent a realistic level of noise for activities within the land unit. Noise levels take into account the following:

• the land unit is a commercial land unit
• the levels relate to the noise between activities within the land unit
• residential uses in other land units are provided with controls that are more stringent (these are outlined in Clause 10c.5.4 of the Plan).

It is therefore recommended that submissions 830/4, 1275/4, 3300/4 and 3399/5 be rejected.

4.5.2.3  Submission 1250/50 – clause 10a.13.6.4 - Screening

The above submission seeks to retain Clause 10a.16.6.4 relating to the screening of outdoor storage, refuse disposal areas, service or parking areas that adjoin or directly face a road or land that is classified as an island residential or recreational land unit. The submission seeks to include that screening from indigenous plants be required in order to buffer the appearance of any wall or fence erected for screening purposes.

Screening within this land unit can either be by way of a solid wall or fence not less than 1.8m in height or densely planted indigenous vegetation which is capable of reaching a height of 1.8m. The option provided for landowners allows for site suitability and personal preference to be considered in cases where screening is required.

It is considered that to require vegetative screening, in addition to a solid wall or fence structure, would be onerous on the landowner and unnecessary in order to achieve the purpose of the screening rule.

It is therefore recommended that submission 1250/50 be rejected.

5.0 Conclusion

This report has considered the decisions requested in submissions lodged regarding Commercial 3 (local shops) of the Proposed Auckland City District Plan: Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2006.

The report recommends whether submissions should be accepted or rejected and how associated further submissions should be dealt with, and how the Plan should be modified as a result. These recommendations are made prior to the hearing of submissions and therefore without the benefit of evidence which may be presented at that time. At this stage before the hearing, it is recommended that this part of the Plan be approved, with amendments (as outlined in appendix 3), for the reasons outlined in this report.

Appendix 1

List of submissions and further submissions

Appendix 2

Summary of decisions requested

Appendix 3

Recommended amendments to the Plan

Appendix 4

Site Plan – Beatty Parade