There were no apologies.

There were no late items.

Reports of the matters dealt with by way of delegation from the period 1^st July to 1^st August 2006 were submitted separately for the Committee’s information.

RESOLVED

THAT the reports of delegated matters be received.

HC06/41 Gordon/Carmine CARRIED

MEETING HELD THURSDAY 10 AUGUST 2006

RESOLVED

THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Hearings Committee held on Thursday 10 August 2006 be taken as read and confirmed.

HC06/42 Carmine/Bubb CARRIED

OBJECTION TO CONDITIONS OF RESOURCE CONSENT G & S JEFFRIES, 54 MAKO AVENUE, WHIRITOA (82.689.950) (37KB)

On 18 April 2006 consent was granted to the applicant under delegated authority to subdivide Lot 177 DP 17140 located at 54 Mako Avenue, Whiritoa into two greenfields lots.

An objection has been lodged on behalf of the applicant under Section 357 of the Resource Management Act 1991 to conditions 2, 5 and 8.

A detailed report from the Consultant Planner was attached.

A hearing was scheduled for 10.15am. The hearing commenced at 10.15am.

G and S Jeffries (Applicants) and Surveying Services (on behalf of applicants) were not in attendance.

Ms van Steenbergen presented tabled correspondence received from Surveying Services dated 18 September 2006 in support of the applicant’s objection to conditions 2, 5 and 8 of resource consent. The correspondence outlined concerns the applicants had with the conditions and offered suggestions to comply with the conditions.

Mr Eccles outlined the issues surrounding the objection. The applicants do not agree to Condition 2 – requiring them to reduce the area included in Easement A on the plan. They state that their proposed layout will use no more land for manoeuvring than Councils amended design.

The applicants do not agree with Condition 5 requiring them to upgrade the sealed carriageway from 2.8m to 4.8m wide as they considered the ROW receives minimal traffic because most of the dwellings are holiday homes and are generally uninhabited most of the year. To reduce stormwater runoff, they suggested that less hard surfaces be constructed to allow stormwater runoff to drain naturally into the ground. As regards to Condition 8, they considered it unnecessary to increase the width of the entranceway to 6.3m because the ROW is aligned with Mako Avenue and does not require any vehicles entering and exiting the ROW to turn significantly. Due to an existing light pole and manhole being located at the entranceway, this would also cause an obstruction.

Mr Eccles was concerned that as these lots may in future be further subdivided, traffic volume could be increased. Mr Eccles advised the ROW must be able to meet the safety standards which are to allow vehicles to pass along the ROW travelling in opposite directions and also that pedestrians can walk in safety along the ROW.

The Consents Engineer stated that the existing ROW is not wide enough to cater for more than 4 properties and to allow pedestrians to use the ROW safely. The present length of the ROW allows only limited turning room and manoeuvrability for vehicles and could create an increase in noise levels due to the extra vehicles which would be using the ROW.

The Consultant Planner commented that the original ROW distances allowed for this area were proposed in the 1970’s when the density of housing was minimal. The minimum width of the carriageway has now been extended to cater for the increase in traffic use. Therefore, the required width of this ROW must now be wider to allow vehicles to pass safely.

The members and staff considered Surveying Services correspondence proposing to provide a passing bay within the first 15m of the ROW but did not accept the non-widening of the ROW from the present 2.8m. The members did not agree that the carriageway of 2.8m is wide enough and stated that it must be widened to the width required in the District Plan for all properties, in this instance. Therefore, the Committee agreed that the width of the ROW be extended from 2.8m to 4.8m, being the equivalent width to the entranceway.

Ms van Steenbergen stated that due to the increase in applications for further subdivision of lots in the area, the decision on this objection could set a precedent for future subdivisions.

The hearing closed at 11.00am.

The Chairperson advised that Council’s decision was reserved until it had considered the evidence presented and all other relevant matters.

After considering all of the evidence the Committee:

RESOLVED

THAT the report be received

AND THAT pursuant to Section 357 of the Resource Management Act the Hauraki District Council upholds the objection to Condition 2 of the subdivision of Lot 177 DP 17140, Condition 2 is therefore deleted.

AND THAT pursuant to Section 357 of the Resource Management Act the Hauraki District Council refuses the objection to Condition 5 of the subdivision of Lot 177 DP 17140 and that Condition 5 remain unaltered

AND THAT pursuant to Section 357 of the Resource Management Act the Hauraki District Council amends Condition 8 of the subdivision of Lot 177 DP 17140 to read as follows:

The existing vehicle entrance shall be upgraded so that the width at the kerb is 4.8 metres. Concrete specification shall be as per the District Plan specification.

REASONS:

1. Allowing the existing 2.7m wide ROW carriageway formation to remain as sought by the applicant will result in adverse effects on the safety and efficiency of the right of way.
2. The District Plan is required to control the adverse effects of land use and cannot take account of the nature of property ownership nor the frequency of occupation of a site.
3. The Right of Way comes straight off the cul de sac head, no turning movements are therefore required which would necessitate a splay.

Gobi blocks are an acceptable permanent all weather surface for the width extension of the Right of Way formation.

HC06/43 Carmine/Gordon CARRIED

The meeting closed at 11.10am.

CONFIRMED

D M Carmine

19 October 2006