Pauatahanui Inlet Community Trust

lyricalwillingMécanique

22 févr. 2014 (il y a 3 années et 6 mois)

61 vue(s)

Submission from Pauatahanui Inlet Community Trust

1






17 August 2012



Submission
on Proposed Pauatahanui Judgeford Structure Plan and
Supporting Documents


To:

Porirua City Council


Cobham Court


PO Box 50
-
218


Porirua City



Attention
:

P.Matich


Submitters Details:


Pauatahanui Inlet Community Trust


PO Box 57 124


Mana


Porirua 5247



This submission addresses those elements of the
Proposed
P
auatahanui
Judgeford Structure Plan that

are relevant to the mandate of the
Pauatahanui inlet Community Trust


the Pauatahanui Inlet and its
catchment and the broader Porirua Harbour.


Our comments relate to the

documents

‘Proposed Pauatahanui Judgeford
Structure Plan’ (SP) and the ‘Pauatahanu
i Judgeford Structure Plan
Technical Report) (TR)
.


The Trust supports the following;


1.

The need to have a comprehensive

and

integrated
approach to
plan
ning

for future growth an
d development of the rural area.



Pauatahanui Inlet Community

Trust


PO Box 57
-
124

Mana, Porirua City

New Zealand


Submission from Pauatahanui Inlet Community Trust

2


2.

T
he overall objective of this Plan to provide a framework to guide
development

in the are
a

over the next 30+ years which improves
the
health

of the natural environment.

(SP p2)


3.

The Plan correctly notes PICT’s
belief in integrated management

(TR
p80
)
; this
is the raison d

être of PICT and is its over
-
riding premise.

This is a particularly important perspective because the

area is

managed by

various agencies with statutory responsibilities
,
including

NZTA,
, Transit, Porirua City Council, Greater Wellington

Regional Council, Ministry of Fisheries, Depart of Conservation
,
TransPower and

Natural
Gas Corporation NZ.



4.

Sedimentation rates of the Inlet are high
(SP p3, TR p4)
and any
further development must ensure there is a reduction of sed
iment
inputs and
pollutants.


5.

Any further development must ensure
there is an inc
rease in
ecological restoration to mitigate the effects

of developments
. (
TR
p37)


6.

The
management of

the effects of acti
vities
-

to mitigate the
effects
of silt run
-
off and any other adverse
e
ffects

on the coastal
environment and
coastal

marine

systems (TR p37)


7.

The
identifi
cation of

no
-
go development areas (TR p 37)


8.

No further subdivision and additional dwellings on low
-
lying land.
When water tables rise, the ability of wastewater systems to
function adequately is compromised.



9.

The Poriru
a Harbour Strategy, especially its key objectives (TR p 22);

a.

Reducing
sedimentation
rates through improve land management
and land use practices,
catchment

protection and re
-
vegetation.
Management of marine sandbank
s and improved harbour
flushing
.


b.

Reducing pollution by
reducing

faecal inputs,
toxicant
inputs
,
litter

management and
cap
ping
nitrogen

inputs.

c.

Ecological restoration through estuary revegetation
and
stream bank re
-
vegetation and
habitat

enhancement. In
Submission from Pauatahanui Inlet Community Trust

3


particular we support the plan for riparian plant cover over
the majority of the length of streams.


10.


Consideration of the Pauatahanui Re
-
vegetation Framework

(TR p
69
)


11.


There is a variety of op
en space and recreation opportunities.

(TR
8.8 p 109)


12.


The promotion of topographic
catchment
subdivision.


13.


The control of stormwater in rural areas (TR p66). Stormwater in
rural areas is complicated by the fact that rural properties, unlike
their urba
n cousins, do not have piped wastewater systems. There
are no rules governing how one landowner’s run
-
off is dealt with by
the downhill neighbour who receives it across a boundary. Given
the hilly nature of the area there needs to be some guidance on
how
to deal with this. Whilst one neighbour may take pride in
achieving near zero nitrogen/toxin/pollutant levels from his site it
may well be contaminated by the runoff from adjacent properties.
The existing District Plan does not deal with this issue at al
l and this
Plan is an opportunity to introduce some helpful Rules and
Standards for stormwater management. The success of on
-
site
systems in hilly rural terrains are only as successful as the ability to
collect the water from the site. The main practical
solution is to
draw boundaries with stormwater run
-
off in mind
and
only create
sites which CAN collect all of their stormwater.



The Trust opposes

the following
;


1.

The further development of Pauatahanui

Village without careful
consideration of the provision of water. The Plan allows for
reticulation to 28 existing dwellings and commercial properties, but
does not allow for any future development.
The preferred option
for sites outside of town supply is

private water supply.
Careful
consideration

needs to be given to the source of water for
these
sites. PICT has a strong interest in ensuring that the flushing of the
inlet
is improved

and urges that Porirua City Council should
communicate with Greater W
ellington Regional Council about any
Submission from Pauatahanui Inlet Community Trust

4


further water
extraction

from the Pauatahanui and

Horoki
r
i
Streams. There is now evidence that the take from th
ese streams
ha
s either reach
ed

or is
exceeding levels required to maintain
stream ecosystems
.



2.

The devel
opment of Lanes Flat Compound Site
after completion of
the Transmission Gully Project
for light commercial or highway
related
service

centre.
This area, whilst it will be elevated
approximately one metre above its existing height, is still within the
flood plain, and on land liable to liquefaction in an earthquake. PICT
has already negotiated
with NZTA and PCC
that the land to
the
west

of

this
compound become reserve/wetland post TG construction
and would prefer a similar approach be taken to the compound site.
However we recognise that the Pauatahanui Village has a shortage
of flat land and urge that any development of this Compound area
be li
mited to appropriate

public use.


3.

The development of
a
hamlet at the intersection of SH58 and
Moonshine Road. Our opposition to this is
based on

concerns about

water supply to any furt
her

dev
el
opment.


4.

The development of a

Logistics H
ub


given the lack o
f services
(water supply, wastewater treatment)
. However
,

we

appreciate
that the Plan also acknowledges th
ese requirements

as a
necessary
feature of any such development.


5.

The
d
esign guideline
d
iagrams (TR p226
-
230) fail to mention the
possible sit
es

or existence of private water supplies and septic
tanks.



The Trust asks Porirua City Council to make the following decision
s

or
changes to the Pl
an:


1.

That the Council take a wider view of its responsibilities

in the are
a

cov
ered by

the

Plan

and assumes

an
integrated

management
respons
e

and that it communicates

closely with the

Greater
W
ellington R
egional
Council
regarding

the

v
iability of the Pauatahanui
and
Horokiri

Stream
s


and their
tributaries

and the effects that any development will have on
them.

Submission from Pauatahanui Inlet Community Trust

5




2.

That the council take a

similar

‘integrated managem
e
nt’ view of its
responsibilities regarding the supply of potable water
. The Plan
suggests connection into the Regional Council mains but this may not
be feasible for those sites further away from this
pipeline, in which
case care needs to be exercised in water take from nearby waterways.


3.

That the Plan includes clear guidelines/rules
for

smaller sites
in order

to decrease the possibility of cross contamination of water bores from
sewage tanks on nearby
sites. The geology of this area is such that the
ability to put down good deep well bores producing potable water is
compromised by the fractured nature of the underlying land structure.


4.

That the Plan gives guidelines for limiting the planting of exotic pine
forests, with
preference being given to other plants for re
-
vegetation
given the negative effects that harvesting can create.


The Trust wishes to be heard in support of its submission
.


Con
t
act person
:


Dr
John

McKoy

Chair

Pauatahanui I
n
let

Community Trust


Email
:

realmckoy@xtra.co.nz