| Submission point number/s: | S276.001 |
Click on each heading to view the submission details
-
Submitter and address for service details
Reference: 809308
Name Christopher and Allison Stewart Organisation (if applicable) Contact person/agent (if different to submitter) C/- Paterson Pitts Group Postal address (address for service)
PO Box 5933 Moray Place Dunedin 9058 Email address: andrew.robinson@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 Site ID #165 - Rejected Sites - Schedule 4 Provision name and number, or address and map layer name 750 Highcliff Road My/our submission seeks the following decision from the Council: Reject the change Details Our property was assessed for transition to the General Residential 1 zoning. Schedule 4 records that "This site is subject to SNL and ONL overlays and is considered inappropriate for residential development due to the significance of the landscape values and their protection under the 2GP policy framework." The locality has a pleasant although unmemorable landscape, but is able to provide good building platforms, that through careful design, could offer appealing views for residents whilst mitigating effects on the landscape. The baseline is provided by numerous transmitter masts and utilitarian buildings containing support infrastructure. In the wider area, there are numerous dwellings situated on relatively small land-holdings. No specific Natural Hazards appear to have been mapped against the subject property. Topoography is relatively easy on this part of the peninsula. The altitude is very similar to that of Dunedin's hill suburbs. We feel that developing our property in a manner that maintains visual amenity whilst expanding urban capacity is advantageous to the city. Reasons for these views It is disappointing that council's assessment of our property is so sparse in terms of detail, as it makes it difficult to respond to concerns that council may have about the proposal that haven't been identified in their reporting. However, we are confident that a sustainable development can be created on our property, to allow additional residential capacity to be created; whilst maintaining the character of the locality. No difficulty appears to have been encountered by residents of adjacent properties, who in many cases have lived in the locality for decades. A structure plan and consent conditions could be useful tools to ensure that development on the site creates effects that are less than minor. This and surrounding properties are generally unproductive in terms of primary industry, therefore allowing residential development at this locality will result in no significant loss in food production capacity. Therefore, we request that our property and adjoining properties be reconsidered for residential rezoning.
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.
No associated documents with this submission.