| Submission point number/s: | S279.001 S279.002 S279.003 S279.004 S279.005 S279.006 |
Click on each heading to view the submission details
-
Submitter and address for service details
Reference: 809301
Name Victor and Fiona Nicholson Organisation (if applicable) Contact person/agent (if different to submitter) Vyvienne Evans, Paterson Pitts Group Postal address (address for service)
PO Box 5933 Dunedin 9058 Email address: vyvienne.evans@ppgroup.co.nz Contact phone number: -
Hearings
Do you wish to speak in support of your submission at a hearing Yes If others make a similar submission, would you consider presenting a joint case at a hearing Yes -
Trade competition
I could gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission No My submission relates to an effect that I am directly affected by and that: a. adversely affects the environment; and b. does not relate to trade competition or the effects of trade competition. -
Submission
Variation 2 change ID A1, A2, A3, B1, B3, B4, B6, E9, A1-Alt1, A2-Alt3, Rejected site #169 Provision name and number, or address and map layer name As relate to the above Change IDs My/our submission seeks the following decision from the Council: Accept the change with amendments outlined below Details Accept all of the changes proposed by the following Change ID's: A1, A2, A3, B1, B3, B4, B6, E9. Accept Council's proposal to reject the following Change ID's: A1-Alt1, A2-Alt3. Oppose the Council's decision to reject rezoning 41 Emerson St from Rural to General Residential 1 (Rej. #169). Reasons for these views We believe that the proposed changes to the minimum size, density and family flats standards will be effective in addressing the projected shortfall in Dunedin's residential development capacity over the short and medium term. Regarding 41 Emerson St specifically, we oppose the Council's decision not to rezone the site to General Residential 1 due to it being too steep to provide sufficient housing yield. The existing driveway and commercial building on the site demonstrate that its slope does not make it too challenging to develop. Additionally, the Council’s decision is inconsistent with Change GF07, as 33 Emerson St is adjacent to 41 Emerson St and the two sites are similarly steep. They also share many of the same advantages, such as being both close to public transport and a variety of services and having relatively few issues associated with developing them. For all the above reason reasons, we consider 41 Emerson St suitable for residential development at General Residential 1 density.
Submission documents
Submission that have been deemed to have 'Out of scope' submission points have had a pdf attached showing the Out-of-scope points highlighted.