Private Plan Change 37 – Patumahoe Hill Structure Plan


Open Community Meeting – Thursday 13th September 2012
7.00 – 8.30pm
Venue: Patumahoe Junior Boys Clubrooms
All welcome

Many of you will be aware that at present there is a resource consent application in for a Private Plan Change on Patumahoe Hill – owned by the McMiken family – which includes long-time locals Bruce & Trevor McMiken.

This resource consent has already been the subject of two initial community meetings which took place before the application was lodged.  It was publically notified, with submissions closing on 31 July 2012.

The first meeting was arranged by the consultant planning firm – MRCagney in 2010 and it was a topic on a meeting for PVI soon afterward.

Given the interest shown and questions raised on this issue directed to PVI, an open community meeting is to be held next week on Thursday 13 September at Patumahoe Junior Clubrooms at 7.00pm.

Permission has been given by Trevor and Bruce to submit questions from the community to the planners previous to that meeting so please add them to the comments section of this page – or send them directly to patumahoevillage2050@gmail.com

There is a considerable amount of documention that has been collated and compiled in regards to this consent application.  You can view all the public documention on the Auckland Council website:

Private Plan Change 37 – Patumahoe Hill Structure Plan

If you follow the link – you may be overwhelmed with the amount of documents relating to this matter – but we recommend that if interested, you take your time to view them all.

However, below are links to some of those documents that relate to most of the comments and questions that we know of in the community:

Legislative changes:

Private Plan Change 37: Text & Diagrams

Private Plan Change 37: - Zoning Map & Legend

 

Design Brief:

Appendix 2: Design Brief

Reports:

Appendix 13: Cultural Assessment Report

Appendix 3: Land Use - Soil Capacity Report

 

Appendix 5: Archaelogical Assessment

Appendix 9: Integrated Transport Assessment

Appendix 8: Landscape and Visual Assessment

Appendix 6: Stormwater Modelling Report

Appendix 6: Stormwater Modelling Report

 

Submissions

There were 19 submissions in response to the public notification. The Summary of Submissions was notified on 31 July 2012. The period for further submssions closed on Tuesday 14 August 2012.

Summary of submissions

 


Reponse from MRCagney to submissions

PPC37 Further submission - MRCagney response to submissions


Apologies for the pagination – this is how document was received from Auckland Council. Use rotate view on Adobe Reader to aid ease of reading.

Comments

  1. Andrew Sinclair says:

    I have a question for the development plan.
    The area of the subdivision is recognised as a significant local volcanic feature especially with it’s very close proximity to the centre of the Village. This is primarily due to it’s height compared to the surrounding lanscape and the views that are offered. Also it is highly likely in my opinion, that this area was part of the 702 acres in Patumahoe confiscated in the Maori Land Wars. At times there would have been significant Maori settlement. All around the wider area including our own proerty there is plenty of evidence of ruas and fortification on all hill tops and ridgelines. This hill top I expect would be no exception especially with the added benefit of being one of NZ’s finest market gardening soil types much prized by maori.
    If everyone agrees that it is a significant site then in my opinion a key feature to retain the ‘value’ of the site to the wider community is to at least permit public access for 360 degree views from the summit. Given that the summit is gentle and houses etc can be in excess of 6m high, how can this be guaranteed to be provided for with just a narrow strip 20m wide leading up to the summit? Is the significant site with a view going to be lost to the community forever? This is a key issue that needs to be resolved by all now, rather than later. There are issues such as increasing the summit reserve area to consider. Raised viewing platforms could be considered combined with building and tree height restrictions but this would need to be agreed before the subdivision approval Once approved then it would be natural that new residents would object to any raised feature where people could overlook their back yard. What is suggested to ensure that the value of this significant feature is not lost to the wider community forever?
    Regards
    Andrew Sinclair

    • Patumahoe Village Inc says:

      Thanks Andrew, your question has been forwarded on to the planners with permission from the applicators. Paula

Speak Your Mind

*