Hamilton · Decisions Report - Chapter 5 Special Character Zones, 9 July 2014 Page 1 of 133 Chapter 5 Special Character Zones and Appendix 4 Decisions 5 Special Character Zones Sub.

Decisions Report - Chapter 5 Special Character Zones, 9 July 2014

Page 1 of 133

Chapter 5 Special Character Zones and Appendix 4 Decisions

5 Special Character Zones

Sub. Name FS. Name

Sub. Point FS. Point

Plan Provision Sub. Type

Summary Decision Reasoning

Noel Henry & Joan Breed

617.001 5 Special Character Zones

Oppose Amend Provisions in Rule 5 Special Character Zones relating density, building height and earthworks for development in the Lake Waiwhakareke Landscape Character Area. Amend the design guide for the Lake Waiwhakareke Landscape Area. Amend the zoning of the area to General Residential Zone.

Reject Defer

1. The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5 relating to Lake Waiwhakareke is rejected as it would

Not support the objectives and polices of the Plan.

Through the Rotokauri Structure Plan it was established that area surrounding Lake Waiwhakareke and the Ridgelines running along the western boundary of Rotokauri has special character that warranted retention. The development of the provisions within the Special Character Zone aim to protect this area from inappropriate urban development that would destroy the character created by these features. Likewise, the development of the Lake Waiwhakareke Design Guide aims to promote good urban design that protects the character of the area as well as ensuring good quality urban development that complements the area.

2. The matter in relation to the zoning is deferred and will be reconvened at a later date.

Gary Richard Wiseman


Oppose Amend the provisions within Section 5 (Special Character Zones) in relation to development within Lake Waiwhakareke Landscape Character Area by increasing the minimum area to 600m2 for all building activity, amending the minimum number of storeys from two to one, deleting the Lake Waiwhakareke Landscape provisions and replacing them with normal residential provisions.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5 relating to Lake Waiwhakareke is rejected as it would



Melanie Jane Wiseman


Oppose Amend the Lake Waiwhakareke Landscape Character Area to increase the minimum area to 600m2 for all building activity, amend the minimum number of storeys from two to one, make amendments to the design guide, and delete the Lake Waiwhakareke Landscape Area so that the area is dealt with as General Residential.

Reject Defer

The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5 relating to Lake Waiwhakareke is rejected as it would



The matter in relation to the zoning is deferred and will be reconvened at a later date.

The House Movers Section of New Zealand Heavy Haulage Association (Inc), Prestige Building Removals Ltd, Willcox Building Removals Ltd and The House Movers (Rotorua) Ltd (together referred to as "House Movers")


Oppose Delete, replace or amend all objectives, policies rules and methods in Chapter 5 and elsewhere relating to Special Character Zones/Dwelling Control Areas that regulates removal and relocation in a “dwelling control area” as a discretionary activity.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5 relating to ‘dwelling control area’ is rejected as it would


Not support the intent of Section 6(f) of the RMA The purpose of the “Dwelling Control Area” is to ensure that the distinct character found in Hamilton East is protected. The main elements of this character being the building style of the pre-1940 dwellings, the relationship to the street the dwellings have, and the setback which creates a distinct streetscape. A Discretionary Activity status has been placed on the demolition and relocation of pre-1940 dwellings located within the Dwelling Control Area as shown in Figure 4-1 in Appendix 4 to ensure that proper consideration is given to the impact the demolition or removal of a pre-1940 dwelling will have on the character of the area. The demolition or relocation of all other dwellings within the Dwelling Control Area is a permitted activity. In considering the above it is not appropriate to make changes as the current provision supports the intent of the objectives and policies of Chapter 5 and Section 6(f) of the RMA.

The New Zealand Historic Places Trust


Support Retain the Special Character Zones with their supporting objectives, polices and rules within chapter 5 - Special Character Zones.

Accept in part

The submission point seeking the retention of Special Character Zones in Chapter 5 is accepted in part as it would

Supports the objectives and polices of the Plan.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints Trust Board


Support Retain Special Character Zones. Accept in part

The submission point seeking the retention of Special Character Zones in Chapter 5 is accepted in part as it would


Decisions Report – Chapter 5 Special Character Zone, 9 July 2014

Page 2 of 133

Housing New Zealand Corporation

FS256.001

Oppose Reject The submission point (1201.003) to which the further submission relates has been accepted in part.

Rakaipaka Puriri FS275.001

Oppose Reject The submission point (1201.003) to which the further submission relates has been accepted.

Lance Harvey 1212.001 5 Special Character Zones

Support Supports the creation of Special Character Zones to protect, maintain and enhance the characteristics of special areas.

Accept The submission point supporting the Special Character Zones in Chapter 5 is accepted as it:


Supports section 6 of the RMA

Supports the RPS


FS256.002


Charles Lowe Hyde Ruwhiu





Supports section 6(f) of the RMA

Supports the RPS


FS256.003


Peter S Thomson 1214.001 5 Special Character Zones





Supports the RPS


FS256.004


Anthony Poutu 1215.001 5 Special Character Zones





Supports the RPS


FS256.005


Wayne Rikki Douglas Te Kira






Supports the RPS


FS256.006


Rawiri Hemi 1217.001 5 Special Character Zones





Supports the RPS


FS256.007


Winifred Rose Hemi






Supports the RPS

Housing New Zealand

FS256.008



Page 3 of 133

Corporation

Sharianne Hinemoa Hemi






Supports the RPS


FS256.009


Jared Ezra Hemi 1220.001 5 Special Character Zones





Supports the RPS


FS256.010


Ngawati Smiler 1221.001 5 Special Character Zones





Supports the RPS


FS256.011


Jack Haki & Mary Elizabeth Daniels






Supports the RPS


FS256.012


Rawiri Russell Hemi






Supports the RPS


FS256.013


Edmund Wilson 1227.001 5 Special Character Zones





Supports the RPS


FS256.014


Hira Te Rangipumanmao Selwyn






Supports the RPS


FS256.015


Tiwini Hemi 1259.001 5 Special Character Zones

Support Supports the creation of Special Character Zones to protect, maintain and enhance the




Page 4 of 133

characteristics of special areas. Supports section 6(f) of the RMA

Supports the RPS


FS256.016


Hene Chase 1260.001 5 Special Character Zones





Supports the RPS


FS256.017


David John Thomson






Supports the RPS


FS256.018


5.1 Purpose

Sub. Name FS. Name




Francis Fitzpatrick 407.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part

The submission point supports the intent of 5.1. However it is accepted in part as its wording has been modified as a result of other submission points with no fundamental change in its intent.

Jared Vaughan Ormsby

408.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Dean Westerlund 409.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Maroni John Westerlund


Accept in part


Glenn Burgess 411.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Jeff Nikoia 412.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Harry Peter Gaastra (Taranaki District)


Accept in part


Mark Green 414.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Jody Walters 415.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Toni Elkington 416.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Dale Pateriki Anderson


Accept in part


Wi Te Kawepo Ormsby


Accept in part


Wayne Rogers 919.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Anthony Shaun 930.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set Accept in The submission point supports the intent of 5.1. However it is accepted in part as its wording has been modified as a result of other submission points


Page 5 of 133

Wilson out in 5.1 Purpose part with no fundamental change in its intent.

Guy Anthony Perrett


Accept in part


Pauline Norma O'Brien


Accept in part


Estonie Jean Funaki


Accept in part


E'stonie Jean Petersen


Accept in part


Bruce Alafoki Kaufana


Accept in part


Heather Margaret Kaufana


Accept in part


Jared Edward Coromandel


Accept in part


Fay Ataarahiora Coromandel


Accept in part


David Edward Coromandel


Accept in part


IFan Wu 954.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Airini Forbes 956.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Lei Sarkovich 964.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Boyd Sarkovich 965.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Gavin Sarkovich 969.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Patsy Karene 970.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Wero Karena 971.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Holly Lin 973.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Karen Hoki Parker 975.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Patrick Taitoko 997.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Lavinia Maria Taitoko


Accept in part


Lynette Ramari Kauluwehi


Accept in part


Erina Dee & Tony Osborne


Accept in part


Daniel Parker 1001.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Tony Elkington 1028.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part



Page 6 of 133

John A Kendall 1029.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Megan Kendall 1031.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


The Errol John Kendall Family -


Accept in part


Rei Kendall (Kendall Family)


Accept in part


Jenna Walmsley 1035.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Alby Tate (The Lost Tribe)


Accept in part


Joe Hay (Hay Family)


Accept in part


Te Waata R Greening


Accept in part


Matai Christian Parata Family


Accept in part


Susan Elizabeth Thomson


Accept in part


Colby Osborne 1042.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Anton Osborne 1043.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Kendall Graham 1044.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Romana Graham 1045.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Vicki Wihongi 1046.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Ashton Frew 1047.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Pamela Mabel Heremaia


Accept in part


Kylie Michelle Birks


Accept in part


Lynette Joyce Williams

1050.016 5.1 Purpose Support in part

Support the inclusions of special character and heritage areas in the District Plan. But 5.1e) incorrectly characterises all the city’s Special Character Areas as ‘primarily for residential purposes’ and this is not the case for the Temple View Character Area. Elsewhere in 5.1 the same inaccurate characterisation can also be found, either explicitly or implicitly e.g. 5.1c). Amend Chapter 5 to adequately describe all of the special character areas that have been, or may be, identified and protected within the Plan. Amend text to place a stronger emphasis on the defining role historic heritage items may play within character

Accept in Part

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.1. is accepted in part as it would

Provide clarity to the plan user

Historic Heritage is more appropriately addressed via Chapter 19 See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


Page 7 of 133

areas and the importance given to their ongoing protection.


FS180.029


Helen Judith Thomson


Accept in part


Rebecca Hippolite 1053.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Alexandra Dee 1054.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Julie Nicole Morley 1055.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Velroy Crystal Matthews


Accept in part


Celeste Sarah Judith Mulipola


Accept in part


Ann Bella Johnson 1058.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Moana Adalene Malissa Rarere


Accept in part


Alan Francis Thomson


Accept in part


Ariana Murphy 1062.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Darnie Eden Paraha


Accept in part


Rachel Elizabeth Thomson


Accept in part


Debbie Solomon 1065.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Alisha Willis 1066.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Marsden Boyd Gaabdora


Accept in part


Dave Hurae Moeke 1068.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Mikala T Watene 1069.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Harrisson Balabat Jull


Accept in part


Emmeline Sunnex 1071.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


William Kent Money (Envision Team)


Accept in part


Ruth Lynne Hamon 1073.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part



Page 8 of 133

Amanda Gayle Watts (Auckland Central Facilities Management)


Accept in part


Garrick Wayne Parr


Accept in part


Owen Purcell 1076.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Noeleen Blanche Forbes


Accept in part


George Kaka 1078.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Janie Edwards 1079.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Lynda Kathleen Parewhakaruku Briggs


Accept in part


Peter Marere Kaio Mete-Smith


Accept in part


Lincoln Ivan Reid 1082.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Tripoli Daniel Tuau 1084.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Shirley T Rago 1085.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Peihana Owen 1086.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Edna Mabel Johnson


Accept in part


R Andrew Joseph 1088.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Marie Pere Joseph 1089.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Kristen Hartley 1090.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Deborah Leigh Brunton


Accept in part


Ken Williams 1092.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Jill Patricia Tuau 1093.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Brian Smith (Spotswood)


Accept in part


Marama Mete 1096.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Roena McCarthy 1097.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Alice Brown-Haenga


Accept in part



Page 9 of 133

Ringihia Te Aroha Watene


Accept in part


Charlotte W Timu 1102.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Edna Rivers Poulava


Accept in part


Annetta Margaret Peihopa


Accept in part


Desiree Joyce Park 1107.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Raymond Russell Park


Accept in part


Waikaraka Emily Ruwhiu


Accept in part


Peter Mete-Smith 1118.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Laitohi Elkington 1119.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Brian James Hollis 1120.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Patricia Helen Going


Accept in part


Edna Rivers Poulava


Accept in part


Manaoterangi Ernest Forbes


Accept in part


Myra Wineera 1127.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Nihe Matilda Goots Enoka Warwick


Accept in part


Ivory Tangaroa 1129.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Te Naera Tangaroa


Accept in part


Googie Pirika Whatu Apiti


Accept in part


Milford Rogers Hamon


Accept in part


Niall Baker 1158.019 5.1 Purpose Support in part

Amend Chapter 5 to accurately describe all of the special character areas that have been, or may be, identified and protected within the Plan. Amend text to also place a stronger emphasis on the defining role historic heritage items may play within character areas and the importance of their ongoing protection.

Accept in Part

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.1. is accepted in part as it would

Provide clarity to the plan user

Historic Heritage is more appropriately addressed via Chapter 19 See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


FS180.05

Oppose Reject. The submission point (1050.016) to which the further submission relates has been accepted


Page 10 of 133

Pahemata Kay Apiti


Accept in part


Percy Te Hira 1162.001 5.1 Purpose Support Retain Rule 5.1 supports the Special Character Zones

Accept in part


Reihana Patrick Nuku


Accept in part


Talmadge Temuera Harris


Accept in part


Luana Wikitoria Paki

1174.001 5.1 Purpose Support Retain Rule 5.1 supports the Special Character Zones

Accept in part


John Charles Paki 1175.001 5.1 Purpose Support Retain Rule 5.1 supports the Special Character Zones

Accept in part


Hata Tipoki 1176.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Kahuwaero Katene 1177.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Mere Marnie Edwards (The NZ Labour Missionary Assn Charitable Trust)


Accept in part


Kathleen Joyce Tipoki


Accept in part


Evan H Smith 1180.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Eve McAnnalley 1181.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Casey Mania Haeata


Accept in part


James Ratana (Genesis Energy)


Accept in part


Ashley Rangitane Hiki Haeata


Accept in part


Verdon Anthony Bartlett


Accept in part


Douglas Kanuela Strother


Accept in part


Robert Andrew Joseph


Accept in part


Mark Brian Hague 1188.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Leslie R Newman 1189.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Strantz Dalton Wihongi


Accept in part


Hineawe Hapuku 1191.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Ripeka Hapuku 1192.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part



Page 11 of 133

Quintin A Hapuku 1193.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Jordyn D H Smith 1194.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Lili-Anne Amelia Hinemoa Kershaw-Smiler


Accept in part


Pirihi Te Ohaki (Bill) Ruwhiu


Accept in part


Maxwell George Horsford


Accept in part


John Hoani Uru Katene


Accept in part


Jeanette Katene 1229.001 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Scott McAnnalley 1230.004 5.1 Purpose Support Supports the Special Character Zones as set out in 5.1 Purpose

Accept in part


Jenna Maria Burgess


Accept in part


Hana Mariea Haeata


Accept in part


Lana Charrell Kershaw-Ryan (Kershaw Training Enterprises)


Accept in part


Esta Vernice Metekingi


Accept in part


Lillian Winifred Kershaw


Accept in part


Charlotte Esther Ferris


Accept in part


Chick Tarawa-Rameka (Kershaw Training Enterprises)


Accept in part


Thomas Tamai Kershaw


Accept in part


5.1.1.1 Claudelands West

Sub. Name FS. Name




Alexander Elliott (Claudelands Neighbourhood Support Groups)

247.001 5.1.1.1 Claudelands West

Support in part

Amend 5.1.1.1 b) to include reference to low-density and medium-density development and historical infilling and construction of apartments to better acknowledge the current moderate housing density (not low density as stated in the plan).

Accept in Part

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.1.1.1 b) is accepted in part as it would:

Support the intent of the Objectives and policies

More fairly describe the environment.

Russelle Knaap 690.002 5.1.1.1 Claudelands West

Oppose Delete 5.1.1.1 Purpose statement - Special Residential Zone - Claudelands West

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.1.1.1 is rejected as it would


The statement is considered appropriate to reflect the zone purpose.


Page 12 of 133

New Zealand Historic Places Trust (General Manager)

FS182.003

Oppose Accept The submission point (690.002) to which the further submission relates has been rejected.

Alexander Elliot (Claudelands Residents)

FS286.046


Claudelands Property Trust


Oppose Amend 5.1.1.1 b) the description of Claudelands West to include activities such as businesses, flats, railway line etc that affect the character of the area. Amend 5.1.1.1 c) by deleting reference to preserving existing character and allow for high density residential development.

Accept in Part

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.1.1.1 b) and c) is accepted in part as:

Amending 5.1.1.1b support the objectives and polices of the Plan

Deletion of 5.1.1.1c would not support the objectives and policies of the Plan

The Claudelands West Area is considered important to the fabric of the City. It clearly has a mix of activities around the fringes of the area, along with containing a variety of housing stock, single and second dwellings and apartment blocks. All of these elements represent housing developments that add to the character of what’s deemed to be the Claudelands West Area today.


FS286.027


City Limits Childcare Co Ltd and Claudelands Property Trust


Oppose Amend 5.1.1.1b) to mention the existence of many businesses, sausage flats, the railway line and arterial roads in the area, and to acknowledge that these significantly affect the character and amenity of Claudelands West. Amend 5.1.1.1c) to refer to the development of Claudelands West as a high density residential and mixed use zone, supporting Claudelands Stadium and the Central City.

Accept in Part

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.1.1.1 b) and c) is accepted in part as:

Amending 5.1.1.1b support the objectives and polices of the Plan

Deletion of 5.1.1.1c would not support the objectives and policies of the Plan

The Claudelands West Area is considered important to the fabric of the City. It clearly has a mix of activities around the fringes of the area, along with containing a variety of housing stock, single and second dwellings and apartment blocks. All of these elements represent housing developments that add to the character of what’s deemed to be the Claudelands West Area today.


FS286.008

Oppose Accept The submission point (1126.006) to which the further submission relates has been accepted in part.

5.1.1.2 Hamilton East

Sub. Name FS. Name




Russelle Knaap 690.003 5.1.1.2 Hamilton East

Oppose Delete Purpose Statement 5.1.1.2 (Hamilton East).

Reject The submission point seeking the removal of Hamilton East from the Special Character Zone is rejected based on:

Does not support the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan The aim of including Hamilton East within the Special Character Zone is to continue to protect the already indentified special character. The Hamilton East area was introduced into the Operative District Plan through Variation 20 which aims to maintain and enhance the distinctive character and amenity values found in Hamilton East. The provisions recognise the existing environment within Hamilton East. It does not seek to stop development occurring, rather to manage how development occurs to ensure it is in keeping with the character of the area. The standards for Hamilton East form a permitted baseline and any development proposal that is unable to meet these standards would be considered through a resource consent process. As a result development proposals may be granted or declined as appropriate on a case by case basis. Therefore the provisions associated with Hamilton East allow for the development of properties to meet today’s lifestyle.


FS256.019

Support Reject The submission point (690.003) to which the further submission relates has been rejected.

5.1.1.3 The Dwelling Control Area

Sub. Name FS. Name





1050.017 5.1.1.3 The Dwelling Control Area

Support in part

Amend Rule 5.1.1.3d) The Dwelling Control Area by either linking it to objectives, policies and rules OR delete. Confirm if "Soldier Cottages" warrant scheduling as heritage items.

Reject The submission seek the amendment to Dwelling Control Area is rejected based on:

Contrary to the objectives and polices The ‘Soldiers’ Cottages’ are a group of Californian bungalow-style dwellings constructed between 1922 and 1935 and are situated within the Hamilton East high density area. These dwellings were determined through Variation 20 “Managing Change and Character in Hamilton East” to the now Operative


Page 13 of 133

District Plan as having visual and architectural character and unity that was worth protection. These houses are, under the Operative District Plan afforded a degree of protection through character protection provision in that plan. They are the same provisions as proposed in the Proposed District Plan. The protection is via character provisions rather than heritage due to a number of these dwellings having been modified, which has meant they do not warrant scheduling as heritage items. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that these buildings as a collective should be protected, and so to provide this grouping of dwellings protection an exception has been made to the Dwelling Control Area (Policy 5.2.3 e)) incorporating them. As a result, alterations and additions forward of the front building line are a restricted discretionary activity (Rule 5.3.1) and removal or demolition a discretionary activity (Rule 5.3.1 kk).

Niall Baker 1158.020 5.1.1.3 The Dwelling Control Area

Support in part

Delete or Amend Rule 5.1.1.3d) - The Dwelling Control Area, by linking it to Objectives, policies and rules. Clarify if "Soldier Cottages" warrant scheduling as heritage items.

Reject The submission seek the amendment to Dwelling Control Area is rejected based on:

Contrary to the objectives and polices The ‘Soldiers’ Cottages’ are a group of Californian bungalow-style dwellings constructed between 1922 and 1935 and are situated within the Hamilton East high density area. These dwellings were determined through Variation 20 “Managing Change and Character in Hamilton East” to the now Operative District Plan as having visual and architectural character and unity that was worth protection. These houses are, under the Operative District Plan afforded a degree of protection through character protection provision in that plan. They are the same provisions as proposed in the Proposed District Plan. The protection is via character provisions rather than heritage due to a number of these dwellings having been modified, which has meant they do not warrant scheduling as heritage items. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that these buildings as a collective should be protected, and so to provide this grouping of dwellings protection an exception has been made to the Dwelling Control Area (Policy 5.2.3 e)) incorporating them. As a result, alterations and additions forward of the front building line are a restricted discretionary activity (Rule 5.3.1) and removal or demolition a discretionary activity (Rule 5.3.1 kk).

Barry Harris (Hamilton City Council)

1146.017 5.1.1.3 The Dwelling Control Area

Support in part

Amend Rule 5.1.1.3 c) by correcting the reference to 4-1.

Accept The submission point seek the amendment to Rule 5.1.1.3 c) is accepted as it would:

Improve plan use and correctly reference. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

5.1.2 Special Heritage Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name




Russelle Knaap 690.018 5.1.2 Special Heritage Zone

Oppose Do not adopt 5.1.2 Special Heritage Zone. Reject The submission seeking that 5.1.2 not be adopted is rejected based on:

Does not support the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan

It being contrary to sections 5 and 6 of the RMA

Special heritage areas have been identified for their historic importance as well as their architectural significance within the City, and in case of Hayes Paddock nationally. The Council is required under Section 6 of the RMA to protect heritage within the City and have done so through the identification of individual heritage items as well as grouping of buildings which encapsulate the historic heritage of the City. Council has protected these areas through the creation of special heritage zones. The provisions that are associated with these areas do not prevent the on-going use of these houses to a standard that meets the needs of today’s society, however, development needs to be sensitive to the heritage values.


FS286.047



1050.018 5.1.2 Special Heritage Zone

Oppose Relocate 5.1.2 Special Heritage Zone to Chapter 19 Historic Heritage.

Reject The submission seeking that 5.1.2 relocated is rejected based on:



Relates better to special character zone objectives and policies.

Chapter 19 Historic Heritage dealt with specific Heritage buildings, Structures and Sites while the Special Character Chapter deals with specific areas that have special character which includes heritage values. The Special Heritage Zones recognizes the heritage of these areas but also identifies other factors that influence the character and historic context of these areas. However, whilst not all buildings within these heritage areas are listed as individual heritage items or have specific heritage value they all still contribute to the overall heritage value of the area. Rule 5.1.2 provides provisions that ensure the retention of the heritage values of these areas but also the character that non-heritage items also contribute.

Niall Baker 1158.021 5.1.2 Special Heritage Zone

Oppose Amend the plan so 5.1.2 Special Heritage Zone is included within to Chapter 19 Historic Heritage.

Reject The submission seeking that 5.1.2 not be adopted is rejected based on:

Does not support the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan.


Relates better to special character zone objectives and policies.

Special heritage areas have been identified for their historic importance as well as their architectural significance within the City, and in case of Hayes Paddock nationally. The Council is required under Section 6 of the RMA to protect heritage within the City and have done so through the identification of


Page 14 of 133

individual heritage items as well as grouping of buildings which encapsulate the historic heritage of the City. Council has protected these areas through the creation of special heritage zones. The provisions that are associated with these areas do not prevent the on-going use of these houses to a standard that meets the needs of today’s society, however, development needs to be sensitive to the heritage values.

5.1.2.1 Frankton Railway Village

Sub. Name FS. Name

Sub. Point

FS. Point




1196.008 5.1.2.1 Frankton Railway Village

Support Retain 5.1.2.1 Purpose Statement for Frankton Railway Village.

Accept The submission point supporting the inclusions of Frankton Railway Village is accepted as it

Supports the intent of the objectives and polices of the plan.

Supports the intent of Section 6 of the RMA

5.1.3 Special Natural Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name




Barry Laurence Flay 350.003 5.1.3 Special Natural Zone

Support Retain Rule 5.1.3 Special Natural Zone Accept in part

The submission seeking the retention of 5.1.3 is accepted in part as another submission point has been accepted which seeks amendments.

George William Holland

840.004 5.1.3 Special Natural Zone

Support Amend 5.1.3 Special Natural Area to ensure that development around Lake Waiwhakareke does not impact on the Lake with particular attention given to drainage, plantings and animals.

Reject The submission point seek amendments to Lake Waiwhakareke Landscape Character Area be rejected as it:

Would not improve the intent of the plan

Adequate protection is provided through current provisions The Lake Waiwhakareke Heritage Park has been identified as an important natural feature and accordingly development around the lake has been managed through the Special Natural Area. The objectives and policies encourages planting schemes on the surrounding land that will complement the park as well as ensure that development is consistent with the Lake Wawhakareke Landscape Character Area Design Guide, whose purpose is to protect and enhance the special character of the Lake Waiwhakareke area. The inclusion of control over activities within or affecting the Peat Lakes, Wetlands and Peat Lake Catchments that would provide further controls over activities such as vegetation removal, earthworks, and stormwater disposal that may have an impact on the Lake Waiwhakareke Reserve have been considered as part of the Natural Environments Chapter. The inclusion of these provisions would provide the controls sought by the submitter to protect Lake Waiwhakareke.


1146.018 5.1.3.1 Lake Waiwhakareke Landscape Character Area

Support in part

Amend 5.1.3.1b) to ensure it refers to the Lake Waiwhakareke Landscape Character Area.

Accept The submission seeking the amendment to 5.1.3.1 b) is accepted as this would:

Improve clarity of the plan and intent of the provision. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

5.1.4 Temple View Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name




Robert W. Belbin 291.006 5.1.4 Temple View Zone

Support Retain 5.1.4 Temple View Zone Accept The submission point seeks the retention of 5.1.4 is accepted


FS180.014

Support Accept The submission point (291.006) to which the further submission relates has been accepted.

Francis Fitzpatrick 407.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



408.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone


Dean Westerlund 409.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone

Support Supports the Temple View Zone as set out in 5.1.4

Accept The submission point seeks the retention of 5.1.4 is accepted





Glenn Burgess 411.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Jeff Nikoia 412.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone




Page 15 of 133





Mark Green 414.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Jody Walters 415.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Toni Elkington 416.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Wi Te Kawepo Ormsby




Rakaipaka Puriri 898.001 5.1.4 Temple View Zone

Oppose Include posts on blog www.saveccnz.wordpress.com as independent submissions against 5.1.4 Temple View Zone.

Reject The submission point is rejected as it does not support the intent of the Temple View Character Area


FS180.026


Wayne Rogers 919.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Anthony Shaun Wilson


Support Supports the Temple View Zone as set out in 5.1.4.


Guy Anthony Perrett 933.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Estonie Jean Funaki 939.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



























IFan Wu 954.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Airini Forbes 956.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Lei Sarkovich 964.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Boyd Sarkovich 965.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone




Page 16 of 133

Gavin Sarkovich 969.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Patsy Karene 970.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Wero Karena 971.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Karen Hoki Parker 975.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Patrick Taitoko 997.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone















Daniel Parker 1001.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Tony Elkington 1028.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



John A Kendall 1029.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Megan Kendall 1031.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone











Jenna Walmsley 1035.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Joe Hay (Hay Family) 1037.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Te Waata R Greening












Colby Osborne 1042.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Anton Osborne 1043.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Kendall Graham 1044.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Romana Graham 1045.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Vicki Wihongi 1046.002 5.1.4 Temple Support Supports the Temple View Zone as set out in Accept The submission point seeks the retention of 5.1.4 is accepted


Page 17 of 133

View Zone 5.1.4

Ashton Frew 1047.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Kylie Michelle Birks 1049.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Rebecca Hippolite 1053.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Alexandra Dee 1054.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Julie Nicole Morley 1055.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone











Ann Bella Johnson 1058.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone











Ariana Murphy 1062.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Darnie Eden Paraha 1063.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Debbie Solomon 1065.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Alisha Willis 1066.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Dave Hurae Moeke 1068.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Mikala T Watene 1069.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Emmeline Sunnex 1071.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Ruth Lynne Hamon 1073.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone




Page 18 of 133





Garrick Wayne Parr 1075.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Owen Purcell 1076.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







George Kaka 1078.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Janie Edwards 1079.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone











Lincoln Ivan Reid 1082.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Tripoli Daniel Tuau 1084.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Shirley T Rago 1085.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Peihana Owen 1086.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Edna Mabel Johnson




R Andrew Joseph 1088.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Marie Pere Joseph 1089.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Kristen Hartley 1090.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone


Accept The submission point seeks the retention of 5.1.4 be accepted





Ken Williams 1092.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Jill Patricia Tuau 1093.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Marama Mete 1096.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Roena McCarthy 1097.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Alice Brown-Haenga 1100.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone




Page 19 of 133





Charlotte W Timu 1102.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Edna Rivers Poulava 1103.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Desiree Joyce Park 1107.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone











Peter Mete-Smith 1118.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Laitohi Elkington 1119.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Brian James Hollis 1120.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Patricia Helen Going 1121.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Edna Rivers Poulava 1124.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Myra Wineera 1127.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Ivory Tangaroa 1129.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Te Naera Tangaroa 1130.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone











Pahemata Kay Apiti 1160.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Percy Te Hira 1162.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone











Luana Wikitoria Paki 1174.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



John Charles Paki 1175.002 5.1.4 Temple Support Supports the Temple View Zone as set out in Accept The submission point seeks the retention of 5.1.4 is accepted


Page 20 of 133

View Zone 5.1.4

Hata Tipoki 1176.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Kahuwaero Katene 1177.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone











Evan H Smith 1180.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Eve McAnnalley 1181.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Casey Mania Haeata 1182.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone























Mark Brian Hague 1188.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Leslie R Newman 1189.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Hineawe Hapuku 1191.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Ripeka Hapuku 1192.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Quintin A Hapuku 1193.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Jordyn D H Smith 1194.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone





Support Retain 5.1.4 Temple View Village Heritage Area.



FS180.06

Support Accept The submission point (1201.004) to which the further submission relates has been accepted in part.

Lili-Anne Amelia Hinemoa Kershaw-





Page 21 of 133

Smiler






Jodhi Ponga FS279.001

Oppose Accept in part

The submission point (1201.004) to which the further submission relates has been accepted.

Temple View Heritage Society

FS284.003


The submission point (1201.004) to which the further submission relates has been accepted in part.

Jodhi Ponga 1205.001 5.1.4 Temple View Zone

Support in part

No relief sought, except to ensure consultation with the Temple View Community

Accept in part

The submission point supports 5.1.4 but seeks no relief therefore has been accepted in part.





Lance Harvey 1212.003 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Peter S Thomson 1214.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Anthony Poutu 1215.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Rawiri Hemi 1217.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Winifred Rose Hemi 1218.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone





Oppose Supports the Temple View Zone as set out in 5.1.4

Accept in part

The submission point seeks the retention of 5.1.4 is accepted in part

Jared Ezra Hemi 1220.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone

Oppose Supports the Temple View Zone as set out in 5.1.4

Accept in part

The submission point seeks the retention of 5.1.4 is accepted in part

Ngawati Smiler 1221.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Rawiri Russell Hemi 1223.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Edmund Wilson 1227.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone







Jeanette Katene 1229.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Scott McAnnalley 1230.001 5.1.4 Temple View Zone




Page 22 of 133

Jenna Maria Burgess 1231.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Hana Mariea Haeata 1232.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone































Tiwini Hemi 1259.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Hene Chase 1260.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



Hene Chase 1260.003 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



David John Thomson 1261.002 5.1.4 Temple View Zone



5.1.4.1 Temple View Heritage Area

Sub. Name FS. Name




Holly Lin 973.002 5.1.4.1 Temple View Heritage Area

Support Support the Temple View Heritage Area set out in 5.1.4.1.

Accept The submission point supporting 5.1.4.1 Temple View Heritage Area is accepted based on:

supports the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan

supports the intent of Section 6 of the RMA


1050.019 5.1.4.1 Temple View Heritage Area

Oppose Delete Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts and instead develop a Structure Plan for Temple View.

Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of 4-5 Temple View is rejected based on:


There would be a loss of clear guidance on the potential development of the area while still protecting historic heritage.


FS180.03


Bruce William Gordon

FS258.004


Niall Baker 1158.022 5.1.4.1 Temple View Heritage Area

Oppose Delete Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts, and develop a Structure Plan for Temple View.

Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of 4-5 Temple View is rejected based on:


There would be a loss of clear guidance on the potential development of the area while still protecting historic heritage.


Page 23 of 133


FS180.051


5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area

Sub. Name FS. Name




Claudia Anne Rebecca Mason

278.001 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area

Support Support the concept of Comprehensive Development Plans and Precincts as set out in 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area. Allow the demolition of current buildings owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Allow for new buildings that retain the distinctive character of Temple View.

Accept in Part

The submission point supporting the Comprehensive Development Plan and precincts in 5.1.4.2 is accepted in part based on:

It supports the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan

Provided clear guidance on the potential development of the area while still protecting historic heritage.

Whilst there has been a reduction in the number of Comprehensive Development Plans from three to two the approach has been refined from having both CDP’s and precincts to only having CDP’s, inclusion of key site information and the addition of general zoning information within the surrounding area context. The streamlining of the CDP areas will assist in ensuring the special character and development in the area is still maintained and enhanced.

See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5


FS182.001

Oppose Accept in Part





Robert W. Belbin 291.010 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area

Support Retain Rule 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area.

Accept in Part




See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


FS180.015

Support Accept in Part


Francis Fitzpatrick 407.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area

Support Support the concept of Comprehensive Development Plans and Precincts as set out in 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area.

Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Dean Westerlund 409.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Glenn Burgess 411.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character

Support Support the concept of Comprehensive Development Plans and Precincts as set out in

Accept in Part




Page 24 of 133

Area 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area. Provided clear guidance on the potential development of the area while still protecting historic heritage.


Jeff Nikoia 412.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part



Provided clear guidance on the potential development of the area while still protecting historic heritage. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

Mark Green 414.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Jody Walters 415.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Toni Elkington 416.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Wi Te Kawepo Ormsby



Accept in Part





Wayne Rogers 919.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part







Accept in Part





Guy Anthony Perrett



Accept in Part






Page 25 of 133




Accept in Part





Estonie Jean Funaki



Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part





IFan Wu 954.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part

The submission point supporting the Comprehensive development plan and precincts in 5.1.4.2 is Accepted in part based on:

It supports the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan Provided clear guidance on the potential development of the area while still protecting historic heritage

Airini Forbes 956.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Lei Sarkovich 964.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part






Page 26 of 133

Boyd Sarkovich 965.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Gavin Sarkovich 969.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Patsy Karene 970.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Wero Karena 971.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Holly Lin 973.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





College Old Boys Rugby League Club


Oppose Oppose map Figure 4-5 and all supporting clauses. Oppose Mixed Use CDP and the Community Facilities CDP as set out in 5.1.4.2. c), h) and i). Increase the heritage ranking of all heritage items within the Temple View Area and require the LDS Church to retain and re-purpose the listed heritage buildings. Undertake a long-term CDP for all of its landholdings in and around Temple View.

Accept in Part

The submission point is accepted in part as although opposing Figure 4-5 and the specifics of activities being identified through the changes to 5.1.4.2 nc) h) i) as a result of other submissions points their concerns are partly addressed.


FS180.027


The submission point (974.001) to which the Further Submission relates has been accepted in part

Karen Hoki Parker 975.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Patrick Taitoko 997.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part




Lynette Ramari 999.003 5.1.4.2 Temple Support Support the concept of Comprehensive Accept in The submission point supporting the Comprehensive Development Plan and precincts in 5.1.4.2 is accepted in part based on:


Page 27 of 133

Kauluwehi View Character Area

Development Plans and Precincts as set out in 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area.

Part It supports the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan






Accept in Part





Daniel Parker 1001.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part




Tony Elkington 1028.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





John A Kendall 1029.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Megan Kendall 1031.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Jenna Walmsley 1035.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part






Page 28 of 133

Te Waata R Greening



Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Colby Osborne 1042.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Anton Osborne 1043.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Kendall Graham 1044.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part




Romana Graham 1045.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Vicki Wihongi 1046.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Ashton Frew 1047.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part






Page 29 of 133



Oppose Delete Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts and develop a Structure Plan for Temple View.5.1.4.2. Amend plan so the Temple View Character Area is elevated to a Heritage Area.

Accept in Part

The submission point seeking the deletion of Figure 4-5 and amendment to the PDP to elevate Temple View Character Area to a Heritage Area is accepted in part based on:

Deleting Figure 4-5 would be contrary to the intent of the objectives and policies of the Plan

The existing application of Heritage and character mechanism in the plan is in accordance with Section 6 of the RMA,

The amendments proposed to 5.1.4.2 assist with the submitters concerns over it being overly descriptive.



FS180.031




FS258.005









Accept in Part





Rebecca Hippolite 1053.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Alexandra Dee 1054.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Julie Nicole Morley 1055.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Ann Bella Johnson 1058.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Page 30 of 133





Accept in Part





Ariana Murphy 1062.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Darnie Eden Paraha



Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Debbie Solomon 1065.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Alisha Willis 1066.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Dave Hurae Moeke 1068.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Mikala T Watene 1069.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Emmeline Sunnex 1071.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character


Accept in Part




Page 31 of 133






Accept in Part





Ruth Lynne Hamon 1073.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Garrick Wayne Parr



Accept in Part





Owen Purcell 1076.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





George Kaka 1078.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Janie Edwards 1079.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part






Page 32 of 133

Lincoln Ivan Reid 1082.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Tripoli Daniel Tuau 1084.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Shirley T Rago 1085.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Peihana Owen 1086.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Edna Mabel Johnson



Accept in Part





R Andrew Joseph 1088.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Marie Pere Joseph 1089.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Kristen Hartley 1090.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Ken Williams 1092.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Jill Patricia Tuau 1093.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Page 33 of 133





Accept in Part





Marama Mete 1096.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Roena McCarthy 1097.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Hata Puriri (Temple View Heritage Society)


Oppose Amend 5.1.4.2 to extend the Temple Heritage Precinct by including the Temple View Character Area. Amend Appendix 1.5 to add Historic heritage to the information requirements for preparing Comprehensive Development Plans to ensure the importance of the city’s historic heritage resources addressed. Delete Appendix 4, Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Area and Precincts. Council to ask the owners maintain the special character of the area by preserving the David O McKay building for use as a Stake Centre. Council to ensure the owners of the buildings and their representatives “take all reasonable and proper care to keep in a state of good order and repair all buildings and other permanent improvements forming part of the Board's property”. Council to ask the owners to consult with the community to determine ways that all of the campus buildings can be repurposed. Amend the Plan to rezone the area opposite the boys dormitories on Tuhikaramea Rd from ‘future residential’ to residential. Council encourages the owners to consider the request of local sports clubs and other community organisations regarding the use of the CCNZ Campus grounds. Council does not approve changes to

Reject Reject Accept in part Reject Reject Reject Reject Reject Reject

The submission point seeking the deletion of Figure 4-5 and amendment to the PDP to elevate Temple View Character Area to a Heritage Area is rejected based on:

Contrary to the intent of the objectives and policies of the Plan


The amendments proposed to 5.1.4.2 that assist with the submitter’s concerns over it being overly descriptive.


Supports the intent of the Plan

Assist with the submitters concerns over it being overly descriptive. The submission point seeking preservation of the David O Mckay Building is rejected based on:

Out side scope of 1st

schedule process. The submission point seeking owners to take care of buildings is rejected based on:


schedule process. The submission point seeking owners to consult with community is rejected based on:


schedule process. The submission point seeking rezoning of land for future residential is rejected based on:

Better done through the development of a structure plan. The submission point seeking the use of facilities by community organisations is rejected based on:


schedule process


Page 34 of 133

Tuhikaramea Road with the addition of two round-a-bouts, parking bays and additional landscaping

The submission point seeking Council does not approve changes to roading be rejected based on:


schedule process


FS180.037


The submission (1098.001) to which this further submission relates has been accepted in part

Alice Brown-Haenga



Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Charlotte W Timu 1102.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Edna Rivers Poulava



Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Desiree Joyce Park 1107.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Peter Mete-Smith 1118.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Laitohi Elkington 1119.003 5.1.4.2 Temple Support Support the concept of Comprehensive Accept in The submission point supporting the Comprehensive Development Plan and precincts in 5.1.4.2 is accepted in part based on:


Page 35 of 133

View Character Area





Brian James Hollis 1120.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Edna Rivers Poulava



Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Myra Wineera 1127.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Ivory Tangaroa 1129.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Te Naera Tangaroa



Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part






Page 36 of 133

Niall Baker 1158.023 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area

Oppose Delete Figure 4-5 and remove references to CDPs at Temple View within Chapter 5. Develop a Structure Plan for Temple View.

Accept in Part


Deleting Figure 4-5 would be contrary to the intent of the objectives and policies of the Plan


The amendments proposed to 5.1.4.2 assist with the submitters concerns over it being overly descriptive.



FS180.052



Pahemata Kay Apiti



Accept in Part





Percy Te Hira 1162.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Elizabeth Patricia Witehira


Oppose 1) Delete reference to Mixed Use and Community Facilities Comprehensive Development Plan in 5.1.4.2 c), h) and i).

2) Retain and re-purpose the heritage listed buildings.

3) Delete 5.1.4.2 f), the Stake Centre on the teacher housing site will destroy the distinctive gateway approach to the Temple.

4) Retain the special character of the teacher housing corridor and reject the realignment of Tuhikaramea Road.

5) Increase the heritage ranking of H106, H107, H109, H133, H134 and H135 from Ranking B to Ranking A in Schedule 8A.

6) List the Matthew Cowley Building and the feature wall and Mendenhall Library as Ranking A in Schedule 8A: Built Heritage.

Accept Reject Reject Reject

The submission point seeking the deletion of reference to CDPs accepted based on:

Supports the intent of the objectives and policies of the Plan


The amendments proposed to 5.1.4.2 that assist with the submitters concerns over it being overly descriptive. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5. The submission point seeking retention and repurpose of heritage buildings is rejected based on:


schedule process.

Better suited to be dealt with through resource consent process The submission point seeking deletion of 5.1.4.2 f) is rejected based on:

Does not support the intent of the objectives and polices The submission point seeking retention of special character of Teacher Housing and opposing road works is rejected based on:


schedule process.

Better suited to be dealt with through resource consent process Submission point is being dealt with in Historic Heritage S42A report Submission point is being dealt with in Historic Heritage S42A report


FS180.058



Pita Witehira 1166.004 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area

Oppose Delete reference to Mixed Use and Community Facilities Comprehensive Development Plan in 5.1.4.2 c), h) and i). 2) Retain and re-purpose the heritage listed buildings.

Accept Reject

The submission point seeking the deletion of reference to CDPs accepted based on:

Supports the intent of the objectives and policies of the Plan


The amendments proposed to 5.1.4.2 that assist with the submitter’s concerns over it being overly descriptive. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5. The submission point seeking retention and repurpose of heritage buildings is rejected based on:


schedule process.

Better suited to be dealt with through resource consent process


Page 37 of 133

3) Delete 5.1.4.2 f), the Stake Centre on the teacher housing site will destroy the distinctive gateway approach to the Temple. 4) Retain the special character of the teacher housing corridor and reject the realignment of Tuhikaramea Road. 5) Increase the heritage ranking of H106, H107, H109, H133, H134 and H135 from Ranking B to Ranking A in Schedule 8A. 6) List the Matthew Cowley Building and the feature wall and Mendenhall Library as Ranking A in Schedule 8A: Built Heritage. 7) Require the LDS undergo consultation and to comply with requirements of LDS Act.

Reject Reject Reject

The submission point seeking deletion of 5.1.4.2 f) is rejected based on:

Does not support the intent of the objectives and polices The submission point seeking retention of special character of Teacher Housing and opposing road works is rejected based on:


schedule process.

Better suited to be dealt with through resource consent process

Submission point is being dealt with in Historic Heritage S42A report Submission point is being dealt with in Historic Heritage S42A report The submission point seeking LDS to consult and comply with LDS Act is rejected based on:


schedule process.


FS180.059






Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part





John Charles Paki 1175.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Hata Tipoki 1176.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Kahuwaero Katene 1177.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Page 38 of 133





Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Evan H Smith 1180.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Eve McAnnalley 1181.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Casey Mania Haeata



Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Mark Brian Hague 1188.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character


Accept in Part




Page 39 of 133



Leslie R Newman 1189.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Hineawe Hapuku 1191.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Ripeka Hapuku 1192.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Quintin A Hapuku 1193.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Jordyn D H Smith 1194.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part







Support in part

Amend the explanations in 5.1.4.2 d), e), f), and g) to provide greater clarity on character and values for the Temple View Character Area, as set out in the submission. Retain 5.1.4.2 h).

Accept in Part

The submission point supporting the Comprehensive Development Plan and precincts in 5.1.4.2 the amendment to 5.1.4.2.d) e) f) and g) is accepted in part based on:


Improve clarity and improve usability of the plan.


It ensures the CDP process is not considered a predetermined process









FS284.004



Pirihi Te Ohaki 1210.003 5.1.4.2 Temple Support Support the concept of Comprehensive Accept in The submission point supporting the Comprehensive Development Plan and precincts in 5.1.4.2 is accepted in part based on:


Page 40 of 133

(Bill) Ruwhiu View Character Area





Lance Harvey 1212.002 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Peter S Thomson 1214.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Anthony Poutu 1215.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Rawiri Hemi 1217.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Winifred Rose Hemi



Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Jared Ezra Hemi 1220.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Ngawati Smiler 1221.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part






Page 41 of 133




Accept in Part





Rawiri Russell Hemi



Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Edmund Wilson 1227.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Jeanette Katene 1229.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Scott McAnnalley 1230.002 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Jenna Maria Burgess



Accept in Part





Hana Mariea Haeata



Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Page 42 of 133





Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part








Accept in Part





Tiwini Hemi 1259.003 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





Hene Chase 1260.004 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area


Accept in Part





David John Thomson



Accept in Part





5.2 Objectives and Policies Special Character Zones

Sub. Name FS. Name




Waikato Chamber of Commerce

698.006 5.2 Objectives and Policies Special Character Zones

Support in part

Amend 5.2 Objectives and Policies 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 5.2.5, 5.2.6 and 5.2.7 - Special Character Zones - by replacing the word "shall" with "must have regard to".

Accept in part

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2 is accepted in part based on:

Changes sought by other submitters seeking the use of the word ‘Should’

Would support the intent of the Plan

Providing clear guidance to plan users See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

Environmental Research Institute, University of

1008.007 5.2 Objectives and Policies Special Character

Support in part

Amend Policy 5.2.5a i) and add a new policy 5.2.1f) protecting and enhancing Lake Waiwhakareke.

Accept

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.5 a) i) is accepted in part based on:

Policy relating to Lake Waiwhakareke better located in 5.2.5 a)

Support the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan


Page 43 of 133

Waikato Zones



1050.021 5.2 Objectives and Policies Special Character Zones

Support in part

Amend Chapter 5 to adequately describe all of the special character areas that have been, or may be, identified and protected within the Plan. Provide stronger emphasis on the defining role historic heritage items may play.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Chapter 5 is rejected based on:

Chapter 5 identifies and describes all current special character areas through the purpose and objectives and policies.

The Historic Heritage role is described in the Purpose and Objectives and Policies and linked to Chapter 19


FS180.032


Niall Baker 1158.024 5.2 Objectives and Policies Special Character Zones

Support in part

Amend Chapter 5 to accurately describe all of the special character areas that have been, or may be, identified and protected within the Plan. Provide stronger emphasis on the defining role of historic heritage.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Chapter 5 is rejected based on:

Chapter 5 identifies and describes all current special character areas through the purpose and objectives and policies.

The Historic Heritage role is described in the Purpose and Objectives and Policies and linked to Chapter 19


FS180.053


5.2.1 Objective and Policies

Sub. Name FS. Name




The Adare Company Ltd

482.008 5.2.1 Objective and Policies

Support in part

Amend Policy 5.2.1a as set out in the submission to address development in the Peacocke Structure Plan area, and include a new policy under Objective 5.2.1 as set out in the submission, along with an additional statement in the Explanation section. Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect. Alternatively the Peacocke area should have its own chapter rather than trying to apply objectives and policies that are genuinely design for ‘special character areas’.

Accept Reject

The submission point seeking the amendment to Policy 5.2.1 is accepted as it would

Better align the policies with the intended development of the Peacocke Special Character Zone. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5. The submission point seeking the introduction of a new Chapter for Peacocke is rejected as it would

Not support the intent of the objectives of the Plan.

Currently the Peacocke area has a rural nature and is zoned as Peacocke Future Urban Area under the Operative District Plan. The Hamilton Urban Growth Strategy identifies the Peacockes Area as one of the City’s main residential growth nodes with development expected to occur, as outlined in HUGS around 2030. The intention has always been that the development within the Peacockes area would take on an urban form. Through the settlement of the appeals to Variation 14 (Peacocke Structure Plan) to the Operative District Plan a number of distinctive natural character were also identified, being the gully area, hill area and terrace area along the Waikato River. These features having been incorporated into a set of enabling plan provisions to allow urban development while protecting the character features of the area. The proposed plan has adopted these development provisions to ensure that the natural character features are translated into the development of the area and not be completely destroyed by development.

Waikato Regional Council


Support in part

Amend Policy 5.2.1e to delete the words 'wherever possible', and Include new policy 5.2.1f under Objective 5.2.1 (Special Character Zones) regarding the protection and enhancement of Lake Waiwhakareke.

Accept Accept in part

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.1 e) is accepted as it would

Support the intent of the Plan

Maintain the plan’s framework and workability

Provide plan users with a clear guidance of the importance of the particular objective and policies See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5. The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.1 e) is accepted in part as it would

Support the protection of Lake Waiwhakareke

Introduced under Objective 5.2.5 Special Natural Zone.


FS272.012

Oppose Reject The submission point (714.024) to which the further submission relates has been rejected.

Property Council New Zealand


Oppose Amend Policies 5.2.1a, b, d and e by replacing the word "shall" with "should".

Accept in part

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.1 a) b) d) and e) be accepted in part based on:

Supporting the intent of the Plan

Maintaining the plan’s framework and workability

Providing plan users with a clear guidance as to the importance of the particular objective and policies


Page 44 of 133


Andrew Yeoman FS2.012

Support Reject FS2.012 is not relevant to submission point 938.042.

Peter John Findlay, et al (Baruchel Developments Ltd)

FS242.001


Peter John Findlay, et al (Peter Findlay, Peter Findlay & Associates Ltd)

FS277.001


McCracken Surveys Limited


Oppose Amend 5.2.1 Objectives and Policies All Special Character Zones by replacing "shall" with "should".

Accept in part

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.1 is accepted in part based on:


Maintains the plan’s framework and workability

Provides plan users with a clear guidance of the importance of the particular objective and policies See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

5.2.2 Objective and Policies

Sub. Name FS. Name




New Zealand Transport Agency


Support in part

Amend Policy 5.2.2a)iv) of Objective 5.2.2 All Special Character Zones to broaden the scope to include the effect of noise generated from roads.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.2 a) iv) is accepted based on:

Support the intent of the Objectives 5.2.2

Provided clear guidance on the potential noise effects See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.



Oppose Amend Policy 5.2.2a by replacing the word "shall" with "should".

Accept in part








FS242.001



FS277.001




Oppose Amend 5.2.2 Objectives and Policies all Special Character Zones by replacing "shall" with "should".

Accept in part





5.2.3 Objective and Policies Special Residential Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name




Property Council 938.044 5.2.3 Objective Oppose Amend Policies 5.2.3a, d, f, g and h by Accept in The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.3 is Accepted in part based on:


Page 45 of 133

New Zealand and Policies Special Residential Zone

replacing the word "shall" with "should". part Supports the intent of the Plan






FS242.001



FS277.001



1206.046 5.2.3 Objective and Policies Special Residential Zone

Oppose Amend 5.2.3 Objectives and Policies Special Residential Zone by replacing "shall" with "should".

Accept in Part

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.3 is Accepted in part based on:






Oppose 5.2.3 Objective and policies Amend objective 5.2.3 and its associated policies, so that they do not apply to Claudelands West; Add new Objective 5.2.3A specifically for Claudelands West; Delete policies 5.2.3e, 5.2.3f and 5.2.3g.

Reject Reject Reject

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.3 is rejected as it:

Does not support the intent of the Plan

Does not support the intent of Sections 5 and 6 of the RMA The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.3 is rejected as it:


Does not support the intent of Sections 5 and 6 of the RMA The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.3 is rejected as it:


Does not support the intent of Sections 5 and 6 of the RMA


FS286.028

Oppose Accept The submission point (1126.) to which the further submission relates has been rejected.



Oppose Amend Objective 5.2.3 and its associated policies so that they do not apply to Claudelands West. Include a new objective relating to Claudelands West and its development as a high density residential and mixed use zone, supporting Claudelands Stadium and the Central City. Delete Policy 5.2.3e regarding pre-1940 dwellings and streetscape facades in the Dwelling Control Area, Pre-1939 dwellings in Claudelands West, and add any individual buildings of genuine heritage value to Schedule 8A. Replace Policy 5.2.3f regarding compatibility with houses constructed before 1939 in

Reject Reject Reject Reject

The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.3 is rejected as it:


Does not support the intent of Sections 5 and 6 of the RMA The submission point seeking a new policy be included in 5.2.3 is rejected as it:


Does not support the intent of Sections 5 and 6 of the RMA The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.3 e) is rejected as it:


Does not support the intent of Section 6 of the RMA The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.3 f) is rejected as it:


Page 46 of 133

Claudelands West, with a policy that requires new buildings be compatible with their immediate surroundings, and the compact city policy. Delete Policy 5.2.3 regarding non-residential activities.


Does not support the intent of Sections 5 and 6 of the RMA

5.2.4 Objective and Policies Special Heritage Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name





938.045 5.2.4 Objective and Policies Special Heritage Zone

Oppose Amend Policies 5.2.4a, b, c and d by replacing the word "shall" with "should".

Accept in part




Providing plan users with a clear guidance of the importance of the particular objective and policies See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

Andrew Yeoman FS2.012 Support Reject FS2.012 is not relevant to submission point 938.045.


FS242.001



FS277.001



1206.047 5.2.4 Objective and Policies Special Heritage Zone

Oppose Amend 5.2.4 Objectives and Policies Special Heritage Zone by replacing "shall" with "should".

Accept in part




Providing plan users with a clear guidance of the importance of the particular objective and policies See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

5.2.5 Objective and Policies Special Natural Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name





714.025 5.2.5 Objective and Policies Special Natural Zone

Support in part

Amend Objective 5.2.5 Special Natural Zone to delete the words 'where possible', Amend associated Policy 5.2.5a) to provide wording as set out in the submission relating to protecting and enhancing ecological connections to Lake Waiwhakareke.

Accept Accept

The submission point seeking the amendment to Objective 5.2.5 is Accepted based on:


Meeting the requirements of the RMA and RPS The submission point seeking the amendment to Objective 5.2.5 a) i) is Accepted based on:

Supporting the intent of the Objectives 5.2.5 of the Plan

Meeting the requirements of the RMA and RPS See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.



Oppose Amend Policies 5.2.5a and 5.2.5b by replacing the word "shall" with "should".

Accept in part








FS242.001



Page 47 of 133


FS277.001




Oppose Amend 5.2.5 Objectives and Policies Special Natural Zone by replacing "shall" with "should".

Accepted in Part





Generation Zero Waikato


Support in part

Supports the establishment of Special Natural Zone Policies 5.2.5a i) and ii).

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Objective 5.2.5 a) i) and ii) is Accepted based on:

Supports the intent of the Objectives 5.2.5 of the Plan

Meets the requirements of the RMA and RPS

490 Grey Ltd as the Trustee of the BDL Commercial Investment Trust and Homes for Living Ltd

FS266.005

Oppose Reject FS266.005 is not relevant to submission point 1284.012

5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone Sub. Name FS. Name




Rakaipaka Puriri 63.002 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Oppose All zoning and land use changes for the Temple View Area be declined.

Reject The submission point seeking all zoning and land use changes in Temple View is rejected as it would



FS180.013


Claudia Anne Rebecca Mason

278.003 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Support Retain 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone. Allow for the demolition of current buildings. New buildings and landscapes to have regard to the special character of the area.

Accept in Part

The submission point seeking the retention of 5.2.6 is accepted in part as it would


Other submitter has sought changes to Rule 5.2.6


FS182.002

Oppose Reject The submission point (278.003) to which the further submission relates has been rejected.

Jodhi Ponga FS279.001 Oppose Reject The submission point (278.003) to which the further submission relates has been rejected.

Maari Rose Thompson


Support in part

Prohibit the following activities within the former CCNZ campus Temple View: Sunday play and trading, gambling, alcohol consumption, use of tobacco products and the sale of alcohol, coffee, tea, tobacco related products.

Reject The submission point seeking the control over activities within Temple View is rejected as it is

Not within the scope of the 1st

schedule process


FS180.021


Chris Thompson 744.001 5.2.6 Objective Support Prohibit the following activities within the Reject The submission point seeking the control over activities within Temple View is rejected as it is


Page 48 of 133

and Policies Temple View Zone

in part former CCNZ campus Temple View: Sunday play and trading, gambling, alcohol consumption, use of tobacco products and the sale of alcohol, coffee, tea, tobacco related products.


schedule process


FS180.022


Stella Neale Kenyon 745.001 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Support in part

Prohibit the following activities, within the former CCNZ campus Temple View: Sunday play and trading, gambling, alcohol consumption, use of tobacco products and the sale of alcohol, coffee, tea, tobacco related products.



schedule process


FS180.023




Oppose Amend Policies 5.2.6a to 5.2.6j by replacing the word "shall" with "should".

Accepted in part







Peter John Findlay, el al (Baruchel Developments Ltd)

FS242.001


Peter John Findlay, el al (Peter Findlay, Peter Findlay & Associates Ltd)

FS277.001




Oppose Amend 5.2.6 Objectives and Policies -Temple View, so that it is consistent with other special character areas so it promotes special character and heritage value rather than development. Do not promote the development plan.

Accept in Part



Provided clear guidance on the potential development of the area while still protecting historic heritage See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


FS180.033



Helena Maddison 1133.002 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Support in part

Prohibit the following activities of Sunday play and trading; gambling; alcohol consumption; use of tobacco products; and the sale of alcohol, coffee, tea, tobacco related products; within the former CCNZ campus Temple View.



schedule process

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

FS180.038



Page 49 of 133

Trust Board

Genevieve Van Eden


Support in part




schedule process


FS180.039


Eileen Phillips 1137.002 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Support in part




schedule process


FS180.04


Sue Nikora 1138.002 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Support in part




schedule process


FS180.041


Kasmin Joy Nikora 1139.002 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Support in part




schedule process


FS180.042


Janelle Moana Nikora


Support in part




schedule process


FS180.043


Sheree Mere Nikora 1141.002 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Support in part

Prohibit the following activities of Sunday play and trading; gambling; alcohol consumption; use of tobacco products; and the sale of alcohol, coffee, tea, tobacco



schedule process


Page 50 of 133

related products; within the former CCNZ campus Temple View.


FS180.044


Wallace Raiti Peter Reihana


Support in part




schedule process


FS180.046


Te Rina Noelani Ngawaka


Support in part




schedule process


FS180.047


Lynette Cassidy 1145.002 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Support in part




schedule process


FS180.048


Christine Makata 1147.002 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Support in part




schedule process


FS180.049


Niall Baker 1158.025 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Oppose Amend 5.2.6 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone, so that they are consistent with provisions of the other special character areas.



schedule process


FS180.054



Page 51 of 133



Support in part

Delete OR Amend Policy Objective 5.2.6b) of Temple View Zone to shift the emphasis from 'compatible' to 'sensitive'.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.6 b)is accepted as it

Provides a clear intent of the policy and support objective 5.2.6.

Better supports the intent of the Plan







FS284.005




Oppose Amend 5.2.6 Objectives and Policies Temple View Zone by replacing "shall" with "should".

Accept in part





5.2.7 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name




Rakaipaka Puriri 63.001 5.2.7 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Oppose All zoning and land use changes for the Temple View Area should be declined based on the treatment of their own church members and the shift from a school that benefits tens of thousands to a development that will only benefits the wealthy.

Reject The submission point seeking all zoning and land use changes in Temple View is rejected as it would


The issues raised are not ones that can be considered through the RMA process and are best addresses through discussions within the Church Community.


FS180.012




Oppose Amend Policies 5.2.7a to 5.2.7j by replacing the word "shall" with "should".

Accept in part







Peter John Findlay, el-al (Baruchel Developments Ltd)

FS242.001


Peter John Findlay, el-al(Peter Findlay, Peter Findlay & Associates Ltd)

FS277.001


College Old Boys Rugby League Club


Support in part

Proposes to prohibit the sale on the former CCNZ campus area of liquor, alcohol, coffee, tea, tobacco related products, prohibit the use of tobacco and alcohol, and prohibit all Sunday play, which are not in keeping with the current special character of the former CCNZ campus area.

Reject The submission point seeking the control over activities within Temple View is rejected as it


schedule process

The Church of FS180.028 Oppose Accept The submission point (974.003) to which the further submission relates has been rejected.


Page 52 of 133

Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints Trust Board



Oppose Amend 5.2.7 Objectives and Policies Temple View so that it is consistent with other special character areas so that it is focused on special character and heritage values not development. Do not promote the development plan.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.7 is rejected as it



FS180.034


Niall Baker 1158.026 5.2.7 Objective and Policies Temple View Zone

Oppose Amend 5.2.7 Objectives and Policies Temple View Zone, so that they are consistent with the provisions of the other special character areas and do not promote a redevelopment plan.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.7 is rejected as it



FS180.055




Oppose Delete Policy 5.2.7h regarding the demolition, removal or alteration of buildings in the Temple View Zone. Amend Policy 5.2.7j so that heritage buildings in the Temple View Zone are used and developed in a manner that maintains their heritage values.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.2.7 is accepted based on:


Allows for the on going use of the land while still ensuring the retention of character See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.






FS284.006




Oppose Amend 5.2.7 Objectives and Policies Temple View Zone by replacing "shall" with "should".

Accept in part





5.2.8 Objective and Policies Peacocke Character Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name




Matthew Taylor 266.005 5.2.8 Objective and Policies Peacocke Character Zone

Support in part

Amend Rule 5.2.8 Objectives and Policies Peacocke Character Zone to include new policy relating to separate pedestrian, cycle and vehicle access.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.2.8 is rejected based on:

More of a rule than an objective or policy.


FS272.001

Oppose Accept The submission that this further submission FS 284.016 oppose has been rejected


482.009 5.2.8 Objective and Policies Peacocke

Support in part

Amend Policy 5.2.8d (Objective and Policies - Peacocke Character Zone) to include reference to the Master Plan Process and

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.2.8 d) is accepted based on:

Will provide for the better administration of the Plan



Page 53 of 133

Character Zone amend explanation of Objective 5.2.8. Peacocke Character Zone to refer to infrastructure capacity limitations. Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect.


J.C Johnson Family Trust

635.001 5.2.8 Objective and Policies Peacocke Character Zone

Oppose Amend Policy 5.2.8d of the Peacocke Character Zone Objective 5.2.8 to include reference to the Master Plan process.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.2.8 d) is accepted based on:

Will provide for the better administration of the Plan

Support the intent of the Plan See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


FS272.006

Support Accept The submission that this further submission FS 284.016 oppose has been accepted

Rex Hannam 935.002 5.2.8 Objective and Policies Peacocke Character Zone

Support Retain provisions within the Proposed District Plan that manage interim and future development within the Peacocke Structure Plan Area.

Accept in part

The submission point seeking the retention of Rule 5.2.8 is accepted in part as other submitters have requested changes to Rule 5.2.8.

5.3 Rules – Activity Status Table

Sub. Name FS. Name





714.026 5.3 Rules – Activity Status Table

Oppose Amend Rules 5.3 and 5.4 as they relate to the special natural zone to enable assessment of subdivision and development impacts on ecological connections to, and ecological functioning of, Lake Waiwhakareke, including by triggering assessment against the design guide in section 1.4.4 OR rezone the ecological stream connection (and an appropriate buffer width) into Lake Waiwhakareke to Natural Open Space Zone.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.3 and 5.4 is rejected based on:

The relief sought is addressed in other parts of the Plan See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5 including 5.4.13 and Appendix 1.4.7.

Rex Hannam 935.003 5.3 Rules – Activity Status Table

Support Retain provisions within the Proposed District Plan that manage interim and future development within the Peacocke Structure Plan Area.

Accept in Part

The submission point seeking the retention of Rule 5.3 – 5.6 is accepted in part as other submitters have requested changes to Rule 5.3 to 5.6

Environmental Research Institute, University of Waikato

1008.008 5.3 Rules – Activity Status Table

Oppose Amend Rules 5.3 and 5.4 as they relate to Lake Waiwhakareke OR rezone ecological stream connection into Lake Waiwhakareke (and an appropriate buffer width) to Natural Open Space Zone, OR identify the ecological stream connection into Lake Waiwhakareke as an esplanade reserve priority in section X of the plan.



5.3.1 Activity Status – Special Residential, Special Heritage and Special Natural Zones

Sub. Name FS. Name





247.004 5.3.1 Activity Status – Special Residential, Special Heritage and Special Natural Zones

Support in part

Amend 5.3.1 Activity Status – Special Residential, Special Heritage and Special Natural Zones relating to Claudelands West as follows: 5.3.1 a - Accessory buildings on the front of properties in Claudelands West should be restricted discretionary activities. Include Claudelands West in the Dwelling

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.3.1 is accepted based on:

Supporting the intent of the objectives and policies

Ensuring the retention of the Character of the area See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5. The Plan gives a clear direction of the expected activity mix in the special residential zone. Plus, in the Claudelands West area the secondary layer of direction, the activity status, protecting the character formed by the large number of buildings constructed before 1940. However, this could presently be too loosely addressed via the activity status listed in 5.3.1. As identified by Alexander Elliot, it is considered that the existing activity status weakens the policy direction for the area. The objective and policy direction in 5.2 has already been addressed in this report and confirmed as being the most


Page 54 of 133

Control Area in Appendix 4. Change section c, in relation to Claudelands West, so all new buildings and alterations on front-facing aspects be RD. Make Apartments NC in Claudelands West, as proposed. Make duplex dwellings NC in Claudelands West, as proposed.

appropriate. Any change to Rule 5.3.1 should not liberalise the activity mix but tighten it to avoid being contrary to the policy framework. Accordingly, a new Rule 5.3.1d is to be inserted to specifically address that the activity status for accessory buildings, additions and alterations as restricted discretionary to ensure protection of the character elements of the area.



Oppose Amend Rules 5.3.1 k)-n) to ensure consistency and certainty with regard to the Activity Status of Managed Care Facilities. Retain Rule 5.3.1z) regarding offices (other than home based business)

Reject Accept

The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.3.1 is rejected as it :

Does not support the intent of the objectives and policies Under Rule 5.3.1 it clearly indicates that a Managed Care Facility for up to 9 residents (Rule 5.3.1 k) would be a permitted activity while a managed care facility beyond that would be a discretionary activity (Rules 5.3.1l) and 5.3.1n). This approach is also consistent with the manner in which managed care facilities are addressed in the Residential zones. The submitter seeks the retention of the Rule be accepted as no other submitter seeks to change the rule.

Andrew Yeoman FS2.012 Support Reject FS2.012 is not relevant to submission point 938.049.


FS242.001



FS242.027

Oppose Reject FS242.027 is not relevant to submission point 938.049.


FS277.001



FS277.027




Oppose Amend Chapter 5 to adequately describe all of the special character areas that have been, or may be, identified and protected. Remove the Permitted activity status in 5.3.1 Activity Status – Special Residential, Special Heritage and Special Natural Zones for demolition of non-residential buildings in Special Character and Heritage Areas.


The relief sought is addressed in other parts of the Plan

Hamilton Central Business Association


Support Retain Rule 5.3.1 z) Activity Status – Special Residential, Special Heritage and Special Natural Zones as offices should be discouraged in residential areas.

Accept The submitter seeks the retention of the Rule is accepted as no other submitter seeks to change the rule.



Oppose 5.3.1 Activity Status Table – Amend the list of activities to promote development of Claudelands West as a future high density residential and mixed use zone, supporting Claudelands Stadium and the Central City as set out in the


Does not support the intent of the objectives and policies


Page 55 of 133

submission.


FS286.029

Oppose Accept The submission point (1126.008) that this further submission oppose has been rejected.



Support in part

Amend 5.3.1 j), k) and mm) Activity Status – Special Residential, Special Heritage and Special Natural Zones as outlined as tracked changes in the submission.

Accept The submission point seeking the introduction of provisions relating to duplex dwelling in Hayes Paddock and the removal of pre-1939 dwellings within Claudeland West is accepted as it would :

Support the intent of the associated Special Residential Zone objectives and policies

Be consistent with the intent of the Plan See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

Niall Baker 1158.027 5.3.1 Activity Status – Special Residential, Special Heritage and Special Natural Zones

Oppose Amend Chapter 5 to accurately describe all of the special character areas that have been, or may be, identified and protected within the Plan. Amend 5.3.1 Activity Status - Special Residential, Special Heritage and Special Natural Zones by removing the Permitted Activity status for demolition of non-residential buildings.


The relief sought is addressed in other parts of the Plan



Oppose Amend 5.3.1 k) to n) within Activity Status – Special Residential, Special Heritage and Special Natural Zones, relating to managed care facilities to clarify and make consistent the activity status; AND retain 5.3.1 z).

Reject Accept

The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.3.1 is rejected based on:

Does not support the intent of the objectives and policies The retention of the Rule is accepted as no other submitter seeks to change the rule.



Oppose Amend Rule 5.3.1 to promote development of Claudelands West as a future high density residential and mixed use zone, supporting Claudelands Stadium and the Central City. Amend Rules 5.3.1a), b), c), d), f) , g, h), i), j), s), w), x), y), aa), cc), dd) so that new buildings, accessory buildings, alterations and additions, apartments, ancillary residential units and structures, detached dwellings (including second and subsequent dwellings), duplex dwellings, childcare facilities (up to 50 children), health care services, home based businesses, home stay accommodation, places of assembly, restaurants, show homes, visitor accommodation, and indoor recreation centres, are Permitted Activities in the Special Residential Zone: Amend Rule 5.3.1 t) so that childcare facilities for 51 or more children are a Restricted Discretionary Activity in the Special Residential Zone Amend Rule 5.3.1 u) so that dairies are a Controlled Activity in the Special Residential Zone Amend Rules 5.3.1 v), z) and bb) so that Tertiary education and specialised training facility, Offices (other than as a home-based business) and Retail activity (other than as a restaurant or home-based business) are Discretionary Activities in the Special


Does not support the intent of the objectives and policies


Page 56 of 133

Residential Zone.


FS286.009




Support in part

Amend 5.3.1 h) Activity Status – Special Residential, Special Heritage and Special Natural Zones, so that new detached dwellings have a restricted discretionary activity status, taking into account factors P4, R9 and S1.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.3.1 is rejected as it does not support the intent of the objectives and policies Under the proposed plan, the establishment of new detached dwellings within the Special Residential Zone and Special Natural Zone are permitted. It is not the intent of the plan to make development within these area overly onerous but rather to ensure that development retains the character of the area through compliance with the General Standards set out in Rule 5.4. It is considered that the introduction of a restricted discretionary activity status would not support the overall intent of the Plan. While, new dwellings within the Special Heriatge Zone are already classed a discretionary activity, this recognises the important of retaining the heritage value of the area.


FS266.005


5.3.2 Activity Status – Peacocke Character and Temple View Zones

Sub. Name FS. Name





1050.025 5.3.2 Activity Status – Peacocke Character and Temple View Zones

Oppose Delete all references to the Comprehensive Development Plans for Temple View within Chapter 5.

Accept in part

The submission seeking the amendment to 5.3.2 to remove the reference to Comprehensive Development Plans is accepted in part:as the changes to the activity table as a result of submission 1146.020 removing the CDP as an activity and relocating into Rule 5.3.2.2 and 5.3.3.2 will improve the administration of the plan and clarity for plan user. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


FS180.035



5.3.2.1 Master Plan – Process within the Peacocke Character Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name


Plan Provision Sub. Type Summary Decision Reasoning


482.010 5.3.2.1 Master Plan – Process within the Peacocke Character Zone

Support in part

Add new clause to Rule 5.3.2.1 Master Plan - Process within the Peacocke Character Area - as follows: d) Land use consents required under Rule 5.4.1.3 shall be incorporated into the consent process for the Master Plan as Discretionary Activities. Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect.

Accept The submission seeking the amendment to 5.3.2.1 is accepted as it will:

Supports the intent of the Objectives and Polices of the plan

Improve the administration of the plan and clarity for plan user

The changes to the activity table, removing the CDP as an activity and relocating into Rule 5.3.2.2 ensures Rules are not ultra vires to the Act (Environment Court Interim Decision No.[2014] NZEnvC93).



1146.020 5.3.2.1 Master Plan – Process within the Peacocke Character Zone

Support in part

Amend 5.3.2.1 Master Plan – Process within the Peacocke Character Zone, by clarifying the relationship between the master plan and resource consent process.

Accept The submission seeking the amendment to 5.3.2.1 is accepted as it will:


Improve the administration of the plan and clarity for plan user See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

5.3.2.2 Comprehensive Development Plan – Process within the Temple View Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name



Barry Harris 1146.021 5.3.2.2 Support in Amend 5.3.2.2 Comprehensive Accept The submission seeking the amendment to 5.3.2.1 is accepted as it will improve the administration of the plan and clarity for plan user


Page 57 of 133

(Hamilton City Council)

Comprehensive Development Plan – Process within the Temple View Zone

part Development Plan – Process within the Temple View Zone, to clarify the relationship between the resource consent process and the Comprehensive Development Plan.

The decoupling of Temple View Zone from Rule 5.3.2.2 as notified and reformatting the provisions for both Temple View Zone and Peacocke Character Zones does not change the expected outcomes of the provisions; and it continues to support the intent of the objectives and policies of the Plan. The changes to the activity table, removing the cap as an activity and relocating, referencing it in Rule 5.3.3.2 (Decision Version) ensures rule is not ultra vires to the Act (Environment Court Interim Decision No. [2014] NZEnvC 93). See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

Niall Baker 1158.028 5.3.2.2 Comprehensive Development Plan – Process within the Temple View Zone

Oppose Delete all references to the CDPs for Temple View in Chapter 5 so as to avoid prejudicing future decision making and consent processes.

Accept in part

The submission seeking the amendment to 5.3.2.1 is accepted in part as the changes to the activity table, as a result of submission 1146.020 removing the CDP as an activity and relocating it into Rule 5.3.3.2 will improve the administration of the plan and clarity for plan users.


FS180.056



5.3.2.3 Master Plan and Comprehensive Development Plan – Status of Activities

Sub. Name FS. Name




482.011 5.3.2.3 Master Plan and Comprehensive Development Plan – Status of Activities

Support in part

Amend Rule 5.3.2.3 Master Plan and Comprehensive Development Plan – Status of Activities by: amending clause a) as set out in the submission to set up a 3-part rule where separate approval for development is only required where development is inconsistent with an approved Master Plan; deleting clause b); amending clause c) for clarification purposes as set out in the submission, and deleting clause f).

Accept in part

The submission seeking the amendment to 5.3.2.3 is accepted in part as it will:


Other submitters have sought changes to Rule 5.3.2.3 See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.



Support in part

That Council provides an undertaking to guarantee that the provisions of Rule 5.3.2.3 (Master Plan and Comprehensive Development Plan – Status of Activities) when applied will operate in a manner consistent with that agreed and settled via previous Environment Court mediation and the consent order entered into.

Reject The submission seeking the amendment to 5.3.2.3 is rejected as it will:

The intent of the Environment Court Consent Order is still retained

Other submitters have sought changes to Rule 5.3.2.3


FS272.007




Support in part

Amend 5.3.2.3 Master Plan and Comprehensive Development Plan – Status of Activities, as outlined as tracked changes in the submission.

Accept in part



Other submitters have sought changes to Rule 5.3.2.3

The changes to the activity table, removing the cap as an activity and relocating, referencing it in Rule 5.3.3.2 (Decision Version) ensures rule is not ultra vires to the Act (Environment Court Interim Decision No. [2014] NZEnvC 93).



FS272.026



5.3.2.4 Activity Status – Peacocke Character and Temple View Zones

Sub. Name FS. Name




Page 58 of 133


482.012 5.3.2.4 Activity Status – Peacocke Character and Temple View Zones

Support in part

Amend Rule 5.3.2.4 Activity Status – Peacocke Character and Temple View Zones. Label each column A, B, C. Amend the headings for the Peacocke Character Area to read follows: - In the absence of a Master Plan; - Forming part of the Master Plan process and approval; - Not provided for in, or inconsistent with, an approved Master Plan. Amend the category status for all activities in the Column B (the second column) from RD or NC to D. Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect.

Accept in part






Oppose Amend Rule 5.3.2.4 Activity Status – Peacocke Character and Temple View Zones. That Council initiates a variation to the Proposed District Plan after undertaking full and meaningful consultation with stakeholders to ensure that the provisions relevant to the Peacocke Character Zone reflect the true intent and spirit of the mediated settlement embodied in the Environment Court Consent Order, or in the alternative That all activities identified in the “with a approved master plan” column be provided for as controlled activities provided that they were approved as part of the master plan process.

Reject The submission seeking the amendment to 5.3.2.4 is rejected as it:

The intent of the Operative District Plan and the Environment Court Consent Order is retained

Has been addressed in the relief sought by other submission points


FS272.008




Support in part

Amend 5.3.2.4 ao) to reflect correct numbering; amend 5.3.2.4 with the column headings provided in the submission; and amend the wording within the Peacocke Character Zone so the relationship between the master plan and consent process are clear.

Accept in part





FS272.027





Support in part

Amend Rule 5.3.2.4 o) and p) to correctly reference the Temple Heritage Precinct. Amend Rule 5.3.2.4 kk) so that changes in use once the Temple Comprehensive

Accept in Part



Supports the intent of the objectives and policies See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


Page 59 of 133

Development Plan has been implemented is a Discretionary Activity.


Oppose Reject FS275.001is not relevant to submission point 1201.008.


Support Accept in part


5.4 Rules – General Standards

Sub. Name FS. Name




714.027 5.4 Rules – General Standards

Oppose Amend Rules 5.3 and 5.4 to enable assessment of subdivision and development impacts on ecological connections to, and ecological functioning of, Lake Waiwhakareke, including by triggering assessment against the design guide in section 1.4.4, or rezone the ecological stream connection into Lake Waiwhakareke (and an appropriate buffer width) to Natural Open Space Zone.



Environmental Research Institute, University of Waikato

1008.009 5.4 Rules – General Standards

Oppose Amend rules 5.3 and 5.4 as they relate to Lake Waiwhakareke OR rezone ecological stream connection into Lake Waiwhakareke (and an appropriate buffer width) to Natural Open Space Zone OR identify the ecological stream connection into Lake Waiwhakareke as an esplanade reserve priority in section X of the plan.



5.4.1 Density Sub. Name FS. Name




247.005 5.4.1 Density Support in part

Amend 5.4.1 Density Table 5.4.1a by increasing site area for detached dwellings on rear lots in Claudelands West to 600m2. Retain other provisions restricting density in the Claudelands West area.

Accept The submission is accepted as it supports the retention of the rule.

The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.1 b) is rejected based on:

Would not support the associated objectives and polices

The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.1 is rejected based on:


The submission is accepted as it supports the retention of the rule.


482.013 5.4.1 Density Oppose Remove Table 5.4.1b (Density – Peacocke Character Area) and remove cross-reference to Table 5.4.1b in Table 5.4.1a. and add new provision to 5.4.1. (Density) such that in the Peacocke Character Area the residential unit net site area shall be consistent with the thresholds set out in an approved Master Plan. Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.1 b) is rejected based on:

Would not support the associated objectives and polices As the Master Plan process is a Discretionary activity and the intention is for the Master Plan to set the develop standards specific to each neighbourhood, the Standards set out in 5.4.1 b), and the Peacocke Structure Plan are a guideline for the preparation and assessment of the Master Plan. However, as activities can still be proposed without a Master plan as a non-complying activity the inclusion of general standards would allow assessing any application to have a baseline to assess the appropriateness of any activity within the Peacocke Area. Therefore Table 5.4.1 b) is retained.

Janice Ann Verran 854.001 5.4.1 Density Oppose Amend 5.4.1 Density within the Special Character Zones by increasing the minimum area for all building activities to 600m2.


Would not support the associated objectives and polices As part of the development of the Rotokauri Structure Plan the ‘Rotokauri Western Hills Landscape Study’, prepared by Boffa Miskell Ltd in 2007 established that the topogarphy found along the western boundary of Rotokauri was significant in the context of the character of the Rotokauri growth cell


Page 60 of 133

as an identifable hill area. The study assisted in the analysis to determine the appropriate lots size for this area that would not undermine the character created by the topography. It is considered that the formation and development of lots of 800m² is required to address and protect the topography from inapproapriate urban development. It is not considered that lots of between 600-750m² would not provide sufficient visual separation between buildings on the hill slopes to enable the visual retention of the topographical character of the area.

Max Walker Verran 855.001 5.4.1 Density Oppose Amend 5.4.1 Density by increasing the minimum area required for all building activity to 600m2.



As part of the development of the Rotokauri Structure Plan the ‘Rotokauri Western Hills Landscape Study’, prepared by Boffa Miskell Ltd in 2007 established that the topogarphy found along the western boundary of Rotokauri was significant in the context of the character of the Rotokauri growth cell as an identifable hill area. The study assisted in the analysis to determine the appropriate lots size for this area that would not undermine the character created by the topography. It is considered that the formation and development of lots of 800m² is required to address and protect the topography from inapproapriate urban development. It is not considered that lots of between 600-750m² would not provide sufficient visual separation between buildings on the hill slopes to enable the visual retention of the topographical character of the area.


FS180.024

Oppose Accept The submission point (855.001) to which the further submission relates has been rejected..


1050.026 5.4.1 Density Oppose 5.4.1 Density - Delete all references to the Comprehensive Development Plans for Temple View within Chapter 5.

Accept in part

The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.1 to delete the reference to CDPs accepted in part based on:



FS180.036



Hounsell Holdings Ltd

1104.023 5.4.1 Density Oppose 5.4.1 Density - Amend 5.4.1a)a) and 5.4.1a)b) relating to Ridgeline Character Area by reducing the minimum net site area from 800m2 to 600m2.


Would not support the associated objectives and polices As part of the development of the Rotokauri Structure Plan the ‘Rotokauri Western Hills Landscape Study’, prepared by Boffa Miskell Ltd in 2007 established that the topogarphy found along the western boundary of Rotokauri was significant in the context of the character of the Rotokauri growth cell as an identifable hill area. The study assisted in the analysis to determine the appropriate lots size for this area that would not undermine the character created by the topography. It is considered that the formation and development of lots of 800m² is required to address and protect the topography from inapproapriate urban development. It is not considered that lots of between 600-750m² would not provide sufficient visual separation between buildings on the hill slopes to enable the visual retention of the topographical character of the area.

Niall Baker 1158.029 5.4.1 Density Oppose Delete all references to the CDPs for Temple View in Chapter 5 so as to avoid prejudicing future decision making and consent processes.

Accept in part

The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.1 to delete the reference to CDPs accepted in part based on:



FS180.057

Oppose Accepted in part


Hamilton JV Investment Company Ltd

1170.023 5.4.1 Density Oppose Amend 5.4.1 Density, by reducing minimum net site area to 600m2 in the Special Natural Zone (Ridgeline Character Area).

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.1 is rejected based on: Would not support the associated objectives and polices As part of the development of the Rotokauri Structure Plan the ‘Rotokauri Western Hills Landscape Study’, prepared by Boffa Miskell Ltd in 2007 established that the topogarphy found along the western boundary of Rotokauri was significant in the context of the character of the Rotokauri growth cell as an identifable hill area. The study assisted in the analysis to determine the appropriate lots size for this area that would not undermine the character created by the topography. It is considered that the formation and development of lots of 800m² is required to address and protect the topography from inapproapriate urban development. It is not considered that lots of between 600-750m² would not provide sufficient visual separation between buildings on the hill slopes to enable the visual retention of the topographical character of the area.

5.4.10 Buildings and Activities within the Temple View

Sub. Name FS. Name



Claudelands 1126.024 5.4.10 Buildings and Oppose Amend Rules 5.4.10 Buildings and Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.10 is rejected based on:


Page 61 of 133

Property Trust Activities within the Temple View Character Area and Temple View Heritage Area

Activities within the Temple View Character Area and Temple View Heritage Area in respect of the Claudelands West Area of the Special Residential Zone to provide for high density high rise residential development.

Would not support the intent of the associated objectives and polices

This rule is solely focused on Temple View. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to insert a Claudelands focus


1201.010 5.4.10 Buildings and Activities within the Temple View Character Area and Temple View Heritage Area

Support in part

Amend Rule 5.4.10 f) to allow more flexibility for new building forms, as set out in the submission.


Would support the associated objectives and polices






FS284.008




Oppose Amend Rules 5.4.2 to 5.4.12 in the Special Residential Zone (Claudelands West) to provide for high density residential and mixed use development supporting Claudelands Stadium and the Central City, with high site coverage and small or no side yards.


Would not support the intent of the associated objectives and polices



Support in part

Amend Rule 5.4.10 f) Buildings and Activities within the Temple View Character Area and Temple View Heritage Area, should take into consideration conditions C9, C20, J1, P4, R7, R9 and S1.


Would add unnecessary duplication of processes to the administration of the plan


FS180.061



FS266.005


5.4.11 Outdoor Living Area

Sub. Name FS. Name



John Elliott Stevenson

18.010 5.4.11 Outdoor Living Area

Support in part

Remove Rule 5.4.11. b) iv in relation to the location of outdoor living areas

Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of Rule b) iv) from Rule 5.4.11 and Figure 5.4.11 e) is rejected based on:


Would not maintain the plan’s framework and workability

Would not provide a clear guidance of the intent of the Rule 5.4.11 It is considered that the orientation of the outdoor living area is important to ensure the end users have an enhanced on-site amenity. Nevertheless, if an applicant wishes to place greater importance on another standard which requires the position of the outdoor living area, other than in a northern direction the resource consent process would enable consideration of the proposal to ensure good quality outcomes are ultimately achieved


Page 62 of 133



Oppose Delete Rule 5.4.11 b) (iv) (Outdoor Living Area) and Figure 5.4.11e







Peter John Findlay, el-al (Baruchel Developments Ltd)

FS242.001


Peter John Findlay, el-al (Peter Findlay, Peter Findlay & Associates Ltd)

FS277.001


Rotokauri Developments Ltd


Oppose Delete (b) (iv) from Rule 5.4.11 Outdoor Living Area. Consequential amendment: Delete Figure 5.4.11e.





Hounsell Holdings Limited

FS248.003

Support Rejects The submission point (1015.010) to which the further submission relates has been rejected.

Hamilton JV Investments Limited

FS254.006




Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.11 Outdoor Living Area in respect of the Claudelands West Area of the Special Residential Zone to provide for high density high rise residential development.

Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of Rule 5.4.11 in respect of Claudelands West is rejected based on:

Does not Support the intent of the Plan

Does not support the objectives and polices

The development provisions set out in the PDP for the special character areas reflect those for general residential while having full regard to the specific character of the area and accommodating those accordingly. It is important to retain the special character focus and avoid modifying any development provisions which would not support the policy framework.


FS286.038




Support in part

Amend Figure 5.4.11e to provide clarity for plan users on the location of Outdoor Living Areas.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Figure 5.4.11 e) is accepted based on:



Provides plan users with a clear guidance of the intent of the associates provisions See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.



Oppose Delete Rule 5.4.11b) iv) and Figure 5.4.11e regarding outdoor living areas.

Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of Rule b) iv) from Rule 5.4.11 and Figure 5.4.11 e) be rejected based on:



Would not provide a clear guidance of the intent of the Rule 5.4.11 The development provisions set out in the PDP for the special character areas reflect those for general residential while having full regard to the specific character of the area and accommodating those accordingly. It is important to retain the special character focus and avoid modifying any development


Page 63 of 133

provisions which would not support the policy framework.






Does not support the objectives and polices


FS286.018


5.4.12 Service Areas

Sub. Name FS. Name




1126.026 5.4.12 Service Areas Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.12 Service Areas in respect of the Claudelands West Area of the Special Residential Zone to provide for high density high rise residential development.



Does not support the objectives and polices The development provisions set out in the PDP for the special character areas reflect those for general residential while having full regard to the specific character of the area and accommodating those accordingly.


FS286.039



1282.019 5.4.12 Service Areas Oppose Amend Rules 5.4.2 to 5.4.12 in the Special Residential Zone (Claudelands West) to provide for high density residential and mixed use development supporting Claudelands Stadium and the Central City, with high site coverage and small or no side yards.



Does not support the objectives and polices The development provisions set out in the PDP for the special character areas reflects those for general residential while having full regard to the specific character of the area and accommodating those accordingly.


FS286.019


5.4.2 Site Coverage

Sub. Name FS. Name




18.006 5.4.2 Site Coverage Support in part

Change site coverage for the Special Residential Zone, Clause 5.4.2 from 35% to 40%.

Reject The submission point seeking the change in the site coverage in Rule 5.4.2 is rejected based on:


Does not support the objectives and polices The provision relating to site coverage has been introduced from the Operative District Plan. As part of the development of the Hamilton East Residential Character Zone it was established that the existing site coverage was low. The intent of the reduced site coverage is to ensure that the current low density development that forms part of the character of these areas is retained.


482.014 5.4.2 Site Coverage Support in part

Amend the tables for Rule 5.4.2 (Site Coverage) to include reference to the Master Plan Process in the Peacocke Character Zone to read as follows: "Standard after Master Plan approval and criteria to assess Master Plan against" to be inserted above four columns (Terrace Area, Hill Area less than 5 degrees, Hill Area greater than 5 degrees and Gully Area).

Accept in part

The submission point seeking the inclusion of a reference to the Peacocke Master Plan process in Rule 5.4.2 is accepted in part based on:

Would improve the administration of the Plan

Better located at the start of Rule 5.4

Support the intent of the Master Plan Process The standards along with the detail contained in the Peacocke Structure Plan are seen as a guideline for the preparation and assessment of the Master Plan. Accordingly, all the standards associated with the Peacocke Zone would be considered as criteria for the assessment of the Master Plan Process and then as standards after the Master Plan has been approved. Therefore, it is considered that the reference proposed by the submitter would be better located before Rule 5.4.1. Therefore reference has been included in Rule 5.4 linking the Standards to the Master Plan Process as assessment criteria as shown in the Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


Page 64 of 133

Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect.


1126.009 5.4.2 Site Coverage Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.2-12 in respect of the Special Residential Zone to provide for high density high rise residential development.

Reject The submission point seeking the change in the site coverage in Rule 5.4.2 with respect to Claudelands West is rejected based on:




FS286.03



1282.009 5.4.2 Site Coverage Oppose Amend Rules 5.4.2 to 5.4.12 in the Special Residential Zone (Claudelands West) to provide for high density residential and mixed use development supporting Claudelands Stadium and the Central City, with high site coverage and small or no side yards.

Reject The submission point seeking the change in the site coverage in Rule 5.4.2 with respect to Claudelands West is rejected based on:




FS286.01


5.4.3 Permeable Surface and Planting

Sub. Name FS. Name




18.007 5.4.3 Permeable Surface and Planting

Oppose Remove Rule 5.4.3 Permeable Surface and Planting.

Reject The submission point seeking removal of 5.4.3 is rejected based on:

Would not ensure good on-site amenity,

The removal of the rule is not in accordance with Objectives and Policies Rule 5.4.3 Permeable Surface and planting assists with the sustainability of the natural resources of the City by ensuring that a degree of stormwater runoff is recharged into the natural system rather than having all stormwater channeled through the public infrastructure (i.e. reticulated stormwater pipes and detention ponds).



Support in part

Amend the table in Rule 5.4.3 Permeable Surface and Planting to include reference to the Master Plan Process in the Peacocke Character Zone to read as follows: "Standard after Master Plan approval and criteria to assess Master Plan against" to be inserted above four columns (Terrace Area, Hill Area less than 5 degrees, Hill Area greater than 5 degrees and Gully Area) Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect.

Accept in part




Support the intent of the Master Plan Process See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.



Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.3a) to require 100% of the specified front setback (excluding access points and manoeuvring areas) to be planted in grass, shrubs or trees. Delete associated Figures 5.4.3a and 4.4.3b.

Accept in part

The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.3 is accepted in part based on:

Ensuring good on-site amenity,

Enabling wider flexibility as to how a resident can utilise the frontage of their site.

The suggested modifications are in accordance with Objectives and Policies. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


Page 65 of 133



Peter John Findlay, el-al(Baruchel Developments Ltd)

FS242.001


Peter John Findlay, el-al(Peter Findlay, Peter Findlay & Associates Ltd)

FS277.001




Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.3. Permeable Surface and Planting by increasing area of front setback required to be planted in grass, shrubs or trees. Delete associated Figures.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.3 is accepted in part based on:






Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.3 Permeable Surface and Planting in respect of the Claudelands West Area of the Special Residential Zone to provide for high density high rise residential development.



The removal of the rule is not in accordance with Objectives and Policies Rule 5.4.3 Permeable Surface and planting assists with the sustainability of the natural resources of the City by ensuring that a degree of stormwater runoff is recharged into the natural system rather than having all stormwater channeled through the public infrastructure (i.e. reticulated stormwater pipes and detention ponds).


FS286.031




Oppose Amend Rule 4.3 a) Permeable Surface and Planting to require 100% of the specified front setback (excluding access points and manoeuvring areas) to be planted in grass, shrubs or trees AND consequential amendments to delete figure 5.4.3a and 4.4.3b.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.3 is accepted in part based on:









The removal of the rule is not in accordance with Objectives and Policies


FS286.011


5.4.4 Building Height

Sub. Name FS. Name




247.010 5.4.4 Building Height Support in part

Support 7m maximum building height in Claudelands West Special Residential Zone in Table 5.4.4. a. Amend Table 5.4.4b (Building height – Temple View and Peacocke Character Zones) so that it refers to 5.4.4a to correct an error.


Supports the intent of the objectives and policies for special character


482.016 5.4.4 Building Height Support in part

Amend the table in Rule 5.4.4 (Building Height) to include reference to the

Accept in part




Page 66 of 133

Master Plan Process in the Peacocke Character Zone. Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect.



Janice Ann Verran 854.005 5.4.4 Building Height Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.4 Building Height to minimum of 1 storey.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.4.4 is rejected based on:

Relief sought is addressed in the plan

Max Walker Verran 855.004 5.4.4 Building Height Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.4. Building Height be amended to minimum of 1 storey.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to 5.4.4 is rejected based on:

Relief sought is addressed in the plan


FS180.025



1126.018 5.4.4 Building Height Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.4 Building Height in respect of the Claudelands West Area of the Special Residential Zone to provide for high density high rise residential development.


Opposes the intent of the objectives and policies for special character The development provisions set out in the PDP for the special character areas reflect those for general residential while having full regard to the specific character of the area and accommodating those accordingly.


FS286.032



1201.009 5.4.4 Building Height Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.4b) by increasing the maximum building height for the Stake Centre Precinct to 16m and correcting the reference to Rule 5.4.4a).


Opposes the intent of the objectives and policies for special character






FS284.007



1282.011 5.4.4 Building Height Oppose Amend Rules 5.4.2 to 5.4.12 in the Special Residential Zone (Claudelands West) to provide for high density residential and mixed use development supporting Claudelands Stadium and the Central City, with high site coverage and small or no side yards.




FS286.012


5.4.5 Height in Relation to Boundary

Sub. Name FS. Name




1126.019 5.4.5 Height in Relation to Boundary

Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.5 Height in Relation to Boundary in respect of the Claudelands West Area of the Special Residential Zone to provide for high density high rise residential development.


Opposes the intent of the objectives and policies for special character The development provisions set out in the PDP for the special character areas reflects those for general residential while having full regard to the specific character of the area and accommodating those accordingly.


FS286.033



Page 67 of 133


1282.012 5.4.5 Height in Relation to Boundary



Opposes the intent of the objectives and policies for special character The development provisions set out in the PDP for the special character areas reflects those for general residential while having full regard to the specific character of the area and accommodating those accordingly.


FS286.013


5.4.6 Building Setbacks

Sub. Name FS. Name




18.008 5.4.6 Building Setbacks

Support in part

Amend Rule 5.4.6 a) to be the same as for the building setbacks rule in the General Residential zone (Rule 4.4.6); and Amend Rule 5.4.6c) to allow garages and carports facing a transport corridor to have a 0m setback.



Potential to impact on safety of the transport network.

Starship Trauma Service


Oppose Amend Rules 5.4.6 a) and b) (Building Setbacks) so that the minimum distance from the transport corridor to the front of the garage or carport be 6m (to accommodate one vehicle).



Potential to impact on safety of the transport network. Overall the setback rules for the Special Character Zones reflect those set in the Operative District Plan along with the general rules set out in Chapter 4 Residential Zones in the proposed plan. To address the same issues raised in the Residential Chapter Council obtained expert transportation advice from Gray Matter Ltd. Gray Matter has advised that there needs to be sufficient space for vehicle queuing to ensure there are no adverse effects on the transport corridor of vehicles queuing or manoeuvring to access off street parking (i.e. in the residential setting access into a garage). A 6m queuing length ensures that a car can be parked with no impact on the transport corridor. However, it is important to also address setbacks to reflect the actual nature of the transport corridor, recognising the lower traffic volumes expected on these corridors. Gray Matter have also advised that the minimum 3m setbacks in the PDP would support the studies into driveway runovers which identify higher risks associated with long driveways and driveways existing onto local roads or cul-de-sacs. Nevertheless, Gray Matter has stated that the corridors that carry higher traffic volumes at higher speeds must have an increased queuing setback. 8m for garaging and 5m for all other buildings set in the PDP is therefore appropriate. The provisions regarding building setback within the Special Residential and Heritage Zones of the Special Character area are such to also ensure that the placement of garages does not negatively impact on the special character of these areas as well as ensuring that there are no adverse effects on the transport corridor. Accordingly, there is no need to alter the setbacks from a transportation corridor to maintain the community’s wellbeing.



Support Retain 5.4.6a (Building setbacks) in relation to Claudelands West.


Support the intent of the objectives and policies for special character

Simon Puttick Friar 294.002 5.4.6 Building Setbacks

Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.6 Building Setbacks to make the setback for building facing a transport corridor 5m.


Opposes the intent of the objectives and policies for special character Potential to impact on safety of the transport network


FS180.019




Support in part

Amend Rule 5.4.6 (Building Setbacks) to include reference to the Master Plan Process in the Peacocke Character Zone. Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect.

Accepted in part





Waikato Child and 1003.031 5.4.6 Building Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.6 Building Setback to Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.6 is rejected based on:


Page 68 of 133

Youth Mortality Review Group

Setbacks reflect a minimum distance from transport corridor to front of garage or carport be 6m.



Elizabeth de Jong 1010.003 5.4.6 Building Setbacks

Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.6 Building Setbacks, remove b).






Oppose Amend rules 5.4.6 Building Setback in respect of the Claudelands West Area of the Special Residential Zone to provide for high density high rise residential development.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.6 in respect to Claudelands West Area is rejected based on:



FS286.034





Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.6 in respect to Claudelands West Area is rejected based on:



FS286.014


5.4.7 Interface Between Public and Private

Sub. Name FS. Name




Page 69 of 133

Blue Wallace Surveyors Ltd

30.003 5.4.7 Interface Between Public and Private

Oppose Remove Rule 5.4.7(b) as part of Interface Between Public and Private.

Accept in Part

The retention of Rule 5.4.7 in its modified form is important to ensure there is a suite of provisions to enable good quality urban design that complements the public interface of the community without hindering individual design. The deletion of 5.4.7c) and d) address the concerns raised by submitters as to the actual ability for a solid door to convincingly promote for better passive surveillance and a safer community or the ability for individual preference to make a home individual. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

Simon Puttick Friar 294.003 5.4.7 Interface Between Public and Private

Oppose Delete Rule 5.4.7 Interface Between Public and Private clause b).

Accept in Part



FS180.02





Oppose Delete Rule 5.4.7 (Interface Between Public and Private) as well as associated Figures.

Accept in Part




Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.7b) to allow for garages to be located forward of the front building line where the wall facing the street consists of at least 20% glazed materials. Delete 4.4.7 c).

Accept in Part




Peter John Findlay, el al(Baruchel Developments Ltd)

FS242.001



FS277.001


Elizabeth de Jong 1010.002 5.4.7 Interface Between Public and Private

Oppose Remove b), e), and f) from rule 5.4.7 Interface Between Public and Private

Accept in Part




Oppose Amend (b) of rule 5.4.7 to allow garages forwards of the dwelling and delete 5.4.7 (d).


Would provide a suite of provisions to enable good quality urban design is accessible to all of the community.

Ensure the retention of the special character of the identified areas

Supports the Plan’s policy direction. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

Hounsell Holdings Limited

FS248.002

Support Accept The submission point (1015.009) to which the further submission relates has been rejected.

Hamilton JV Investments Limited

FS254.005

Support Accept The submission point (1015.009) to which the further submission relates has been rejected.


Page 70 of 133



Oppose Amend rules 5.4.7 Interface Between Public and Private in respect of the Claudelands West Area of the Special Residential Zone to provide for high density high rise residential development.



Would be contrary to the Plan’s policy direction.


FS286.035




Support in part

Amend 5.4.7b) Interface Between Public and Private and the relevant assessment criteria to incorporate greater design flexibility for public/private interfaces.


Would provide a suite of provisions to enable good quality urban design is accessible to all of the community.


Supports the Plan’s policy direction.




Oppose Amend 5.4.7(b) Interface Between Public and Private, to allow for garages to be located forward of the front building line where the wall facing the street consists of at least 20% glazed materials.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.4.7 b) and the deletion of 4.4.7 c) is accepted as it would:

Assist with the site development flexibility while ensuring the integrity of the Plan’s policy direction is maintained.

Support the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan






Would be contrary to the Plan’s policy direction.


FS286.015


5.4.8 Fences and Walls Sub. Name FS. Name




18.009 5.4.8 Fences and Walls

Oppose Remove Rule 5.4.8 Fences and Walls Accept in Part

The modification of this rule by deleting all design and dimension provisions ensures people can provide for their individual visual privacy and acoustic mitigation.

Ian Kenneth Bridge 231.005 5.4.8 Fences and Walls

Oppose Delete Rule 5.4.8 c) Fences and Walls. Fences of a minimum height of 1.8m should be the rule for all open spaces adjacent to residences, schools, play-centres etc.

Accept in Part




Oppose Remove Rule 5.4.8 (Fences and Walls) including associated figures. Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect.

Accept in Part


Russelle Knaap 690.004 5.4.8 Fences and Walls

Oppose Delete 5.4.8 Fences and Walls and retain provisions within Operative District Plan.

Accept in Part




Support in part

Amend Rule 5.4.8 a) regarding Fences and Walls by deleting reference to "boundary".

Accept in part



Page 71 of 133




FS242.001



FS277.001


Elizabeth de Jong 1010.005 5.4.8 Fences and Walls

Oppose Remove b) and c) i) from rule 5.4.8 Fences and Walls

Accept in Part




Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.8 Fences and Walls in respect of the Claudelands West Area of the Special Residential Zone to provide for high density high rise residential development.

Accept in Part



FS286.036


FS286.036 is accepted as submission 1126.022 is accepted in part.



Support in part

Amend Rule 5.4.8a) Fences and Walls by deleting the word "boundary".

Accept in part





Accept in Part



FS286.016


FS286.016 is accepted as submission 1282.015 is accepted in part.

5.4.9 Residential Buildings – Separation and Privacy

Sub. Name FS. Name




938.053 5.4.9 Residential Buildings – Separation and Privacy

Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.9 Residential Building - Separation and Privacy - to allow for reduction in setback in certain circumstances as per the Operative District Plan.

Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of Rule 5.4.9 is rejected based on:

Would be contrary to the objectives and policies of the Plan




FS242.001



FS277.001


Claudelands 1126.023 5.4.9 Residential Oppose Amend Rules 5.4.2 to 5.4.12 in the Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of Rule 5.4.9 is rejected based on:


Page 72 of 133

Property Trust Buildings – Separation and Privacy

Special Residential Zone (Claudelands West) to provide for high density residential and mixed use development supporting Claudelands Stadium and the Central City, with high site coverage and small or no side yards.



FS286.037




Oppose Amend Rule 5.4.9 Residential Building - Separation and Privacy - to allow for reduction in setback in certain circumstances as per the Operative District Plan.

Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of Rule 5.5.3 is rejected based on: Would be contrary to the objectives and policies of the Plan







FS286.017


5.5.10 Visitor Accommodation

Sub. Name FS. Name




1126.011 5.5.10 Visitor Accommodation

Oppose Delete Rule 5.5.10 Visitor Accommodation.


Would be contrary to the objectives and policies of the Plan The submitters have not provided any detail as to why they consider the visitor accommodation provisions are too restrictive, nor have they offered any alternative other than seeking the deletion of the rule. Deleting the rule in its entirety may be problematic. It is an activity listed in the activity list not only under Claudelands West but also within the other special character zones as either a discretionary or non-complying activity. And, if the rule was deleted there would be no guidance as to the acceptable parameters for the establishment of such a development within the special character zone, nor would there be any consistency in the establishment parameters for non-residential activities between those residential areas within the special character zones and the residential zones.


FS286.041




Oppose Amend Rule 5.5.10a) to remove the maximum occupancy for Visitor Accommodation in the Accommodation and Servicing Precinct of the Temple Comprehensive Development Plan area in Appendix 4, Figure 4-5.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.5.3 a) is rejected based on:

The amendments sought are contrary to the policy

The submitters have not provided any detail as to why they consider the visitor accommodation provisions are too restrictive, nor have they offered any alternative other than seeking the deletion of the rule. Deleting the rule in its entirety may be problematic. It is an activity listed in the activity list not only under Claudelands West but also within the other special character zones as either a discretionary or non-complying activity. And, if the rule was deleted there would be no guidance as to the acceptable parameters for the establishment of such a development within the special character zone, nor would there be any consistency in the establishment parameters for non-residential activities between those residential areas within the special character zones and the residential zones.





Oppose Delete Rule 5.5.10 relating to Visitor Accommodation.



The submitters have not provided any detail as to why they consider the visitor accommodation provisions are too restrictive, nor have they offered any


Page 73 of 133

alternative other than seeking the deletion of the rule. Deleting the rule in its entirety may be problematic. It is an activity listed in the activity list not only under Claudelands West but also within the other special character zones as either a discretionary or non-complying activity. And, if the rule was deleted there would be no guidance as to the acceptable parameters for the establishment of such a development within the special character zone, nor would there be any consistency in the establishment parameters for non-residential activities between those residential areas within the special character zones and the residential zones.


FS286.021


5.5.11 Retail activities within the Peacocke Character Zone and Temple View Zone

Sub. Name FS. Name




482.020 5.5.11 Retail activities within the Peacocke Character Zone and Temple View Zone

Oppose Amend Rule (b) of 5.5.11 (Retail Activities within the Peacocke Character Zone and Temple View Zone) to only reference Business Zones 5 and 7. Any consequential and/or similar amendments that would have the same effect.

Accept The submission seeking amendment to 5.5.11 is accepted as it would:

Improve the administration of the plan

Support the objectives and policies of the plan.

Be consistent with the intent of the Peacocke Structure Plan and Chapter 6 Business Zones.


5.5.2 Childcare Facility Sub. Name FS. Name




1126.010 5.5.2 Childcare Facility

Oppose Delete Rule 5.5.2 Childcare Facilities Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of Rule 5.5.3 is rejected based on:



FS286.04



1282.020 5.5.2 Childcare Facility

Oppose Delete Rule 5.5.2 related to Childcare Facilities.

Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of Rule 5.5.3 a) is rejected based on:



FS286.02


5.5.3 Community Centres, Tertiary and Specialised Training Facilities, Schools and Places of Worship Sub. Name FS. Name


Plan Provision Sub. Type Summary

Decision Reasoning

Robert W. Belbin 291.012 5.5.3 Community Centres, Tertiary and Specialised Training Facilities, Schools and Places of Worship

Oppose Amend Rule 5.5.3a) (Community Centres, Tertiary and Specialised Training Facilities, Schools and Places of Worship) by increasing gross floor area of all buildings.


The amendments sought are contrary to the policy The section 32 analysis clearly identifies the need to limit the size to that similar to a large dwelling to maintain the character of the special character areas. The restriction on the size would also ensure that activities carried out on the site are appropriate with the surrounding character areas. Restricting the floor area of community facilities within the Character areas achieves the associated objectives by ensuring amenity and character is retained and that larger community facilities are located in more appropriate business or industrial zones. The submitters do not refer specifically to one of the Special Character areas however as development with Peacocke and Temple View are subject to either a Master Plan process or a Comprehensive Development Plan process (as a Discretionary Activity) the size of any community facility proposed would be assessed via either of these processes to determine the effects and appropriateness. Any proposed community facility outside of this process would need to be controlled to ensure that integrity of the Master Plan and Comprehensive Development Plan processes as well as ensuring the retention of the character of the area.


FS180.016



Page 74 of 133


1146.026 5.5.3 Community Centres, Tertiary and Specialised Training Facilities, Schools and Places of Worship

Support in part

Amend Rule 5.5.3 c) of Community Centres, Tertiary and Specialised Training Facilities, Schools and Places of Worship with regards to hours and frequency of special events.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.5.3 c)is accepted based on:

Assist with the interpretation of Rule 5.5.3 and the general administration of the Plan. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


1201.011 5.5.3 Community Centres, Tertiary and Specialised Training Facilities, Schools and Places of Worship

Oppose Amend Rule 5.5.3a) Community Centres, Tertiary and Specialised Training Facilities, Schools and Places of Worship, by increasing Maximum Gross Floor Area to 500m2.


The amendments sought are contrary to the policy The section 32 analysis clearly identifies the need to limit the size to that similar to a large dwelling to maintain the character of the special character areas. The restriction on the size would also ensure that activities carried out on the site are appropriate with the surrounding character areas. Restricting the floor area of community facilities within the Character areas achieves the associated objectives by ensuring amenity and character is retained and that larger community facilities are located in more appropriate business or industrial zones. The submitters do not refer specifically to one of the Special Character areas however as development with Peacocke and Temple View are subject to either a Master Plan process or a Comprehensive Development Plan process (as a Discretionary Activity) the size of any community facility proposed would be assessed via either of these processes to determine the effects and appropriateness. Any proposed community facility outside of this process would need to be controlled to ensure that integrity of the Master Plan and Comprehensive Development Plan processes as well as ensuring the retention of the character of the area.



5.5.5 Home-based Businesses

Sub. Name FS. Name



Robert W. Belbin 291.014 5.5.5 Home-based Businesses

Oppose Amend Rule 5.5.5 Home-based Business to include home -based professional services as Permitted.


The amendments sought are contrary to the policy direction of the PDP.

A key principle of the proposed plan is to ensure that a residential area is dominated by residential living which is why only the provision of small scale

business operations are permitted to enables people, who wish to establish a small scale business can do that from their residential site where they

actually reside. This also ensures that the size and scale of a home base business is managed along with the residential needs of the occupants, and fits

within the residential environment. And, in the Special character zones, Rule 5.5.5 sets out the parameters to ensure such an activity also does not impact

on the amenity found within the special character areas.

It is important to ensure that the business hierarchy approach of the plan is not eroded through leakage of business activities into the residential areas. This

has occurred in the past with detrimental effects on the business zoned areas of the City, along with eroding the residential amenity of some residential

areas, and including the amenity of the special character areas. Therefore, it is essential that the parameters for home-based business do not stray into a

more quasi business establishment on a residential site without being fully assessed against the objectives and policies of the plan


FS180.017



1201.012 5.5.5 Home-based Businesses

Oppose Amend Rule 5.5.5a) vi for Home-based Businesses to provide for professional services as a Permitted Activity.












Page 75 of 133

more quasi business establishment on a residential site without being fully assessed against the objectives and policies of the plan.





Oppose Amend Rule 5.5.5 a) (i) relating to number of people allowed to be employed in a home-based business.















FS242.001



FS277.001


Hamilton Central Business Association


Oppose Amend Rule 5.5.5 (a) to allow for the employment of people other than people residing on the site.














Oppose Amend Rule 5.5.5 a) i) Home-based Businesses, by requiring at least one person, including the principal operator to reside on the site.











Page 76 of 133



5.5.8 Show Homes

Sub. Name FS. Name




938.056 5.5.8 Show Homes Oppose Delete Rule 5.5.8 c) as no timeframe for the duration of a show home is necessary.

Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of Rule 5.5.8 c) is rejected based on:

The amendments sought are contrary to the policy direction of the PDP. It is recognised that show homes, especially in new subdivisions areas of either Special Natural Areas or Peacocke within the Special Character zones, are important for the marketing and sale of dwellings/sites in these areas. Nevertheless, with the overarching policy direction of the plan to ensure that the residential areas have only limited commercial activities the management of show homes is necessary. This is clearly outlined in the s.32 report which states that in considering the efficient and effectiveness of the Rule 5.5.8 its has been determined that the rule achieves objectives 5.2.1, 5.2.3 and 5.2.5 by: “ ensuring residential activities remain the dominant activity; activities are compatible with residential amenity; residential amenity is retained” Accordingly, to ensure the rule achieves the anticipated outcomes of those above mentioned objectives, is it important to manage the duration of a residential dwelling being used as a showhome. Therefore, although it is considered appropriate at the outset of the release of a new subdivision area to contain showhomes, it is not considered appropriate long term.




FS242.001



FS277.001



1206.058 5.5.8 Show Homes Oppose Delete Rule 5.5.8 a) iii) relating to Show Homes.

Reject The submission point seeking the deletion of Rule 5.5.8 a) iii is rejected based on:


5.5.9 Rest Homes

Sub. Name FS. Name




938.057 5.5.9 Rest Homes Oppose Amend Rule 5.5.9c) to specify what the individual minimum outdoor living requirements area is.

Accept in Part

The amendment sought will assist with plan administration.


Support Reject Reject FS2.012 is not relevant to submission point 938.057.


FS242.001


Peter John Findlay, el al(Peter Findlay, Peter Findlay & Associates Ltd)

FS277.001



1146.027 5.5.9 Rest Homes Support in part

Amend 5.5.9 d) Rest Homes, to clarify that outdoor living shall be provided communally.

Accept The amendment sought would assist in the administration of the PDP. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.


1206.059 5.5.9 Rest Homes Oppose Amend Rule 5.5.9 c) Rest Homes, to specify outdoor living area requirements.

Accept in Part

The amendment sought would assist in the administration of the PDP.


Page 77 of 133

5 Special Character Zones

Sub. Name FS. Name




482.021 5.6 Restricted Discretionary Activities Matters of Discretion and Assessment Criteria

Oppose Amend Rule a) (xxxvii) in 5.6 (Restricted Discretionary Activities: Matters of Discretion and Assessment Criteria) to delete I24 and re-number it ZA9 (to reflect renumbering requested under separate submission point to remove Peacocke area from the Heritage heading umbrella), and to delete point F3 (relating to a Centre Vitality Assessment Report).

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.6 is accepted based on:

Would assist in the administration of the PDP.




Support in part

Amend matters of discretion in Rule 5.6 (Special Character Zones) relating to any sensitive activity to include reverse sensitivity assessment criteria, and amend the following activities xx, xxvi, xxvii – xxxii, xxxv – xxxvii within Rule 5.6 Restricted Discretionary Activities Matters of Discretion and Assessment Criteria to include transportation assessment criteria.

Reject The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.6 is rejected based on:

would not provide any benefit to the administration of the Plan


FS272.022




Oppose Delete Rule 5.6. Add new text to incorporate the full text of relevant matters of discretion. Amend Chapter 5 to make childcare centres and restaurants permitted activities.


would not provide any benefit to the administration of the Plan



Oppose Replace Rule 5.6 (and equivalent rules in other chapters) with new text to incorporate the full text of relevant matters of discretion. Amend Rule 5.3 that childcare centres and restaurants are Permitted Activities and convert relevant matters from Rule 5.6 into development standards in Rule 5.4. Amend Rule 5.6 to clarify all matters of discretion that are not clearly definable and do not have defined outcomes, reconsider the matters of discretion on urban design, with a view to simplifying the approach, reducing jargon, and clarifying the practical outcomes sought and retain only the matters of discretion that are necessary to give effect to objectives and policies.

Reject Reject

The submission point seeking the amendment to Rule 5.6 is rejected based on:

would not provide any benefit to the administration of the Plan The activity status for non residential activities within the Character zones are reflective of those in the Residential zones to ensure consistency and intent with the overall business hierarchy approach of the proposed plan and the ensure the predominant activity in these zones is residential. See Decisions for Appendix 1 Assessment Criteria



Support in part

Amend Rule 5.6a) xxiv so that C9, C20, J1, P4, R7, R9 and S1 are relevant matters for new building and development not complying with Rule 5.4.10f). Amend Rule 5.6a) i to x so that


Would not provide any benefit to the administration of the Plan


Page 78 of 133

S1 and P4 are relevant matters.


FS266.005


5.7 Notification Rule

Sub. Name FS. Name



Robert W. Belbin 291.015 5.7 Notification Rule Oppose Amend Rule 5.7 Notification Rule by making notification of and approval from affected persons a requirement.

Reject The submission seeking the amendment Rule 5.7 is reject ted as it would:

Not support the intent of the plan Chapter 1 Rule 1.1.9 sets out that unless otherwise stated in the District Plan the notification provisions of the RMA apply. Rule 19.6 in Chapter 19 identifies a number of Restricted Discretionary activities that will be considered without notification or the need to obtain approval from affected persons. Decisions on Chapter 1: Plan Over view has resulted in the ruling 1.1.9 be amended to allow the consideration of identified parties as potential affected parties’ regardless if the provisions state that no notification or neighbours consent is required. It is considered that these amendments address the concerns raised by submitters.


FS180.018

Oppose Accept The submission point which FS180.018 opposes was been rejected.


FS272.002



938.058 5.7 Notification Rule Oppose Review Volume 2, Appendix 1 (District Plan Administration) with a view of streamlining and simplifying.

See Decisions for Appendix 1 Assessment Criteria




FS242.001



FS277.001



1126.013 5.7 Notification Rule Oppose Delete Rule 5.7 Notification Rule and include a rule containing a clear statement under s77D of the RMA specifying the activities for which notification is required.

Reject The submission seeking the deletion of Rule 5.7 is rejected as it would:



FS286.042



1201.014 5.7 Notification Rule Support Retain Rule 5.7 Notification Rule. Accept The submission seeking the retention of Rule 5.7 is accepted as it would:

Support the intent of the plan Chapter 1 Rule 1.1.9 sets out that unless otherwise stated in the District Plan the notification provisions of the RMA apply. Rule 19.6 in Chapter 19 identifies a number of Restricted Discretionary activities that will be considered without notification or the need to obtain approval from affected persons. Decisions on Chapter 1: Plan Over view has resulted in the ruling 1.1.9 be amended to allow the consideration of identified parties as potential affected parties’


Page 79 of 133

regardless if the provisions state that no notification or neighbours consent is required. It is considered that these amendments address the concerns raised by submitters.




Oppose Reject The submission point which FS279.001 opposes was been accepted.


FS284.009

Oppose Reject The submission point which FS284.009 opposes was been accepted.


1206.060 5.7 Notification Rule Oppose Oppose Rule 5.7 Notification. Reject The submission seeking the review of Volume 2, Appendix 1be referred.


1282.023 5.7 Notification Rule Oppose Delete Rule 5.7 Notification Rule and substitute a rule containing a clear statement under s77D of the Resource Management Act specifying the activities for which the council - (a) must give public notification of an application for a resource consent: (b) is precluded from giving public notification of an application for a resource consent: (c) is precluded from giving limited notification of an application for a resource consent.

Reject The submission seeking the deletion of Rule 5.7 is reject ted as it would:



FS286.022

Oppose Accept The submission point which FS286.005 opposes was been accepted in part.

Features Map

Sub. Name FS. Name




1126.003 Features Map 37B Oppose Amend Map 37B to exclude existing business and medium density residential development from Claudelands West Area.

Accept in Part

The submission seeking the amendment to the Claudelands West Area boundary is accepted in part as it would:

Support the intent of the objectives and policies

Ensure the protection of the special character in Claudelands West

Better reflect the character of the area along Grey Street See Tracked Changes for Appendix 17.


FS286.003


The submission point which FS286.005 opposes was been accepted in part.


1282.003 Features Map 37B Oppose Amend Map 37B to exclude from the Claudelands West Area the sites of existing businesses and medium density residential development. In particular exclude 729, 731, and 737 Grey St from the Claudelands West Area.

Accept in Part

The submission seeking the amendment to the Claudelands West Area boundary is accepted in part as it would:

Support the intent of the objectives and policies

Ensure the protection of the special character in Claudelands West

Better reflect the character of the area along Grey Street

See Tracked Changes for Appendix 17.


FS286.005


The submission point which FS286.005 opposes was been accepted in part.


1146.142 Features Map 43B Support in part

Amend Features Map 43B to include 'Railway Park' (Lot 1 DP S37471) as part of the Frankton Railway village. Also,

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Features Map 43B is accepted as this would:

Improve the administration of the plan.


Page 80 of 133

add Flood Hazard Areas to parts of Empire and High Streets (transport corridor only).



1146.146 Features Map 45B Support in part

Rezone to Business 7 Zone on the corner of Jellicoe Drive and Plunkett Terrace into the Hayes Paddock Special Heritage Zone.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Features Map 45B is accepted as this would:

Improve the administration of the plan. See Tracked Changes for Appendix 17.


1201.020 Features Map 60B Support Retain Features Map 60B as it relates to Temple View.

Accept The submission seeking the retention of Features Map 60 as it relates to Temple View is accepted as this:



Oppose Reject The future submission point FS 275.001 does not relate to the submission ant therefore is out of scope.

Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts

Sub. Name FS. Name



Claire Millington 65.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts

Oppose Oppose Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precinct.

Accept in part

The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area See Tracked Changes for Appendix 4.

Ukinga AkaitiPonga

66.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Delma Murray-Macgregor



Accept in part


Jodhi Vanessa Ponga



Accept in part


Jill Atkinson 89.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Matthew Shane Watene



Accept in part


Duane Skyes 91.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Shawney mei Atarangi Kahi



Accept in part


Myles Aidan Tipene Watene



Accept in part


Susan Pahuru 94.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive

Oppose Oppose Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan

Accept in part

The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 81 of 133

Development Plan Areas and Precincts

Areas and Precinct. See Tracked Changes for Appendix 4.

Neesha Pahuru 95.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Gabrielle Wilson 96.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Te Aroha Pahuru 97.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rosemary Gordon 98.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Janine Mere Siteine



Accept in part


John Herangi Searancke



Accept in part


Moses Christopher Armstrong (CCNZ Alumni President)



Accept in part


Tessa Siteine 102.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Justin Sonnenberg 103.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Andy Lee 104.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Myles Watene 105.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Stacey Scirkovich 106.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Vanessa Armstrong

107.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan


Accept in part



Page 82 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Ora Neill Kohe 108.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Alma Ruth Paewai Kohe



Accept in part


Merieanna Graham



Accept in part


Kareve Harata Witehira



Accept in part


Lady King 112.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Maria Koroheke 113.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tuini Koroheke 114.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kara Ivy Witehira 115.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kare Eva Pompey 116.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Gwen Kepa 117.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Katarina Koroheke 118.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Arthur Tupou Hettig



Accept in part


Kiritahi Koroheke 120.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part



Page 83 of 133

Terekia Rewiki James Koroheke



Accept in part


John Kieran Hettig 122.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tau Moeke 123.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Heinrich Hettig 124.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Lahaina Moeke 125.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Michael Wilson 126.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Elletta Rachel Hettig



Accept in part


Tainan Evarn Watene



Accept in part


Rebecca Cutler 129.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Renata Immanuel Kahuroa



Accept in part


John Devonshire (Te Wharekura Rakaumanga)



Accept in part


Quintin Glenford Hapuku



Accept in part


Rebecca Hapuku 133.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Edwin Skinner 134.001 Figure 4-5 Temple Oppose Oppose Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 84 of 133

View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts

Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precinct.

part See Tracked Changes for Appendix 4.

Gavin Talmage Joseph Scirkovich



Accept in part


Natalie Renee McNamara



Accept in part


Pera Ratana 137.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Billy Grey 138.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Khan Major 139.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Pawhaure Brown 140.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Pania Waikai 141.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


R Henry 142.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jonelle Henry 143.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Renata Whitley 144.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rave Anthony 145.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tirohia Smith 146.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Flu Waikai 147.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive


Accept in part



Page 85 of 133



Herawini Rangi (Taniwharau Rugby League Club)



Accept in part


Neil T Rose 149.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Misty Kama 150.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Pera Paeka 151.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Laisa Kama 152.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jackson Robin Takiari (Te Iti Rearea RLC)



Accept in part


Senae Mitchell 154.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Colin John Jowles (INwork NZ)



Accept in part


Stuart Poulava 156.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kimberly Rose 157.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Yvette K Rose 158.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ray Bourne (Waikato Referees Association)



Accept in part


Te Awa Anderson 160.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan


Accept in part



Page 86 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Leonard Reid (NZRL)



Accept in part


Zoram Watene 162.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Waimarie Hare (Tigers)



Accept in part


Willy Beazley 164.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jaden Paekan 165.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


TeUranga Waikou 166.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Sash Stosic (Upper Central Zone of NZRL Inc.)



Accept in part


Baz Paama 168.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Robert W. Belbin 291.022 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jodi N. Belbin 298.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Grace McCarthy 302.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kenneth F Alexander


Oppose A directive be issued for all building demolition in Temple View be halted until the Ngapuhi heritage submission is fully investigated.

Accept in part


Lenna Maria Alexander



Accept in part



Page 87 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Jason Brown 386.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Murray Keith McDonald



Accept in part


Robyn & Rodney Dallin



Accept in part


Michael Seth Rose 389.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ewen Macdonald 390.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Manu Waa 391.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Cherry Wainer 392.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Greg Harmeling 393.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ricky Shurtz 394.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Mandy Bishop 395.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Fred H Hughes 396.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Lynn Shomers 397.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ernie Ritz 398.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part



Page 88 of 133

Sarah Shurtz 399.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Nakeya Quezada (Ez-Pawn)



Accept in part


Tony Matthews (Tracvity)



Accept in part


Rebecca Harris 402.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Fannie Ritz 403.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Missy Shurtz 404.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Evangeline Donlon 405.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Francis Fitzpatrick 407.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts

Support Supports Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts.

Accept in part





Accept in part


Dean Westerlund 409.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Glenn Burgess 411.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jeff Nikoia 412.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Harry Peter 413.004 Figure 4-5 Temple Support Supports Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 89 of 133

Gaastra (Taranaki District)


Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts.


Mark Green 414.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jody Walters 415.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Toni Elkington 416.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Vicky Shurtz 420.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kim Shurtz 421.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Diana Shurtz 422.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Linda Shurtz 423.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Robert Christmas (M&R)



Accept in part


Jeff Bartholomew 425.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Joyce Brock 426.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Dolores Barnhill 427.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Esteban Tirado 428.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive


Accept in part



Page 90 of 133



Amanda Sue Ruiz (Tracvity)



Accept in part


Charles Wallace Jr 430.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Paul Raymond Clever



Accept in part


Talbot T Snow 432.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Don Childers 433.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Margaret Corina Sosa



Accept in part


John Edward Garza 435.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Elizabeth Costanzo 436.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Christopher Simmerman



Accept in part


Michelle Lyon 438.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Steve Easley 439.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rhonda O'Hearon 440.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rosie Ibarra 441.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan


Accept in part



Page 91 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Veronica Gaiza 442.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Luis Garcia 443.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Elbert Brown 444.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


John G Hughes 445.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Juliah Albulet 446.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jane Macdonald 447.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Vilma McCreadie 448.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Peter George McCheyne



Accept in part


Lynette Ann McCheyne



Accept in part


Lesley Lomas 451.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Shea Margaret Lawrence



Accept in part


Suzanne Kyd 453.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Trevor- Charles Te Metera Kohu



Accept in part



Page 92 of 133

Jordan Kiro 455.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Miriama Kingi 456.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ina Margaret Kilburn



Accept in part


Kylie Hohaia 458.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


John Jordan Herbert



Accept in part


Colene Herbert 460.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Yana Leah Hemi 461.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Richard Grant Herewini



Accept in part


Roimata Hazel Hall 463.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kingi Dennis 464.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jane Griffin 465.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Whare Dewes 466.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Mylee Gordon 467.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Heidi-Anna Ruth 468.001 Figure 4-5 Temple Oppose Oppose Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 93 of 133

Gordon View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts



Rewa Pahemata Ruthina Tipu Dewes



Accept in part


Keaohiwahiwaofaluanui Kelsey Daniels



Accept in part


Jordan Dennis 471.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Hillary Daniels 472.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Benjamin Dean Bryers



Accept in part


Kellie Brown 475.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Mark Bramley 476.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Christine Bradley 477.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Colin Leslie Bradley 478.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Hemi Arthur 479.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Yorana Arthur 480.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Bruce Gordon 483.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts

Oppose Figure 4.5:Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts - as set out in the submission: Seeks the recognition of the significant historical, religious, educational, social, and cultural values of the Temple View

Accept in part



Page 94 of 133

community as a whole; Delete reference to Temple View Character Area and replace with a Heritage precinct; Recognise that there has been and still is an implicit social contract between the Church and the community in Temple View; The Envision Team/developers need to repurpose all of the current Campus buildings and housing as part of a Heritage precinct.




Mectildah Chikwiri 484.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Peter O'Donnell 485.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Mary Jefferson 486.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tracey Bell 487.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Craig Ormond 488.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Warren Salon 489.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ernie Le Heron 490.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kasey McCarty 491.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Debra Phillip 492.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rob Jacobs 493.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan


Accept in part



Page 95 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Pauline Gaudin 494.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Robert E Rihehert 495.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Huiariki Watene 496.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Brian D Joyce 497.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jocelyn Gush 498.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Nikeita Campbell 499.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Herani Ware 500.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ora Going Richardson



Accept in part


Vatia Toetagata (Auckland Council)



Accept in part


Ota Tuaen (Te Wananga)



Accept in part


Kevin Kewena Tamahou



Accept in part


Margaret Kahui 505.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Francis Peri Adams 506.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part



Page 96 of 133

Charles Sunnex 507.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Andrew Kelvin James



Accept in part


Cedric T Kingi Ngarotata



Accept in part


David Robert Searle



Accept in part


Wendy Joy Sales 511.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Murdoch Jason Tahere



Accept in part


Zan Te Wakaiti Southon



Accept in part


Nicola Hamon 514.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Takiri Zan Southon 515.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rutha Lucy Southon



Accept in part


Sydney Taka Smith 517.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tina Ann Rose-Dutton



Accept in part


Jackie Macdonald 519.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ammon Kerry 520.001 Figure 4-5 Temple Oppose Oppose Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 97 of 133

Shaun Preiss Rose View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts



Deane Pinny 521.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Phillip Shane Ikunui Rose



Accept in part


Kelly Pere 523.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Audrey Pere 524.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Terina Lee Nin 525.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tahir Loy Nin 526.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rosina Aliana Nin 527.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Daphne Parsons 528.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ally Turner 529.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


John Transfield 530.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Pania Lee Nin 531.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Annitta Nin 532.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Yi Li 533.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive


Accept in part



Page 98 of 133



Shui Li 534.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Zhuoying Shi 535.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Maraea Mita 536.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Pamela Joy McLanachan


Oppose Oppose Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts.

Accept in part


Yi Li 538.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts

Oppose Delete Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts; Do not allow any more shops in Temple View.

Accept in part



FS258.001






Dorothy Betty Belbin



Accept in part


Lisa-Marie Watene 545.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Carol Anne Allan 546.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tashena Marie Waru



Accept in part


Cheyanne Alys Southon



Accept in part


Lennox James Southon



Accept in part


Daniel Rei Nin 550.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive


Accept in part



Page 99 of 133



Jasmine Tunstall 551.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Emma Watene 552.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tipare Wharepapa 553.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Adele Wirepa 554.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Arnold David Stoneley



Accept in part


Shannon Asalele Ta'ala



Accept in part


Kimberley Ruth Tahere



Accept in part


Colleen Taylor 558.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


George Tenwolde 559.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jamaal Tuia 560.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Lucy Tuia 561.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Errin Jay Nin 562.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part



Page 100 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Amanda Smiler 564.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kristen Smith 565.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Brenda Price 566.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rebecca Nonoa 567.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rachael Nonoa 568.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kasmin Joy Nikora 569.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ashley Nikora 570.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Folau Paea Tukanua Ngaw



Accept in part


Kerianne Moana Newman



Accept in part


Alfreda Olive Marshall



Accept in part


Marama Karen Leslie Marshall



Accept in part


Hamish Paul McArthur



Accept in part


Megan Rona Kaho 582.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part



Page 101 of 133

Denise Howell 584.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jamie Hemi 585.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jo Leah Takuna Hemi-Nicholson



Accept in part


Apikara Hemi 587.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ripeka C Fruean 588.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Apihei Hemi 589.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Otis J Fruean 590.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Nathaniel Beets 591.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Richard Grey-Edwards



Accept in part


Kimberley Beets 593.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


James Enoka Tapsell



Accept in part


Carolyn Suzan Nin 611.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part



FS258.002






Cherie Clark 613.001 Figure 4-5 Temple Oppose Oppose Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 102 of 133




Seanna Carlile-Clark



Accept in part


Dale Clark 616.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Dean Gauthern 618.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Carly Gauthern 619.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ariane Emma & Stephen Keola Josephs



Accept in part


Vivienne Shona Evelyn Cammock



Accept in part


Tasi Ann Cammock 623.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Charlotte Cammock



Accept in part


Conway Tarawhiti Bradley



Accept in part


Tania Rangirangi Mariana Enoka



Accept in part


Mavis Ruth Duncan



Accept in part


Lloyd Elder Duncan 628.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Julienne Elizabeth Duncan

636.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive


Accept in part



Page 103 of 133



Susan Cribb 637.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


David Anthony Pazi-Cope (Blackout Electrical)



Accept in part


Aimee Carlile-Clark 639.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Shane Carlile 640.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Gaylynn Leigh Tunstall



Accept in part


Valerie Clark 642.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kevin Harold Tunstall



Accept in part


Theresa Albert (Granddaughter of labour missionary)



Accept in part


Margaret Watene (College Old Bous Rugby League Charitable Trust)



Accept in part


Peti Hinewetea Transfield



Accept in part


Linda Ormsby 647.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jaimee Davies 648.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Luke Ormsby 649.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan


Accept in part



Page 104 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Ralph Roland Hamon



Accept in part


Lindsay Hixon Hamon



Accept in part


Sherrill Macdonald Hamon



Accept in part


Janna June Margaret Fesolai



Accept in part


Jared Worth Pease 654.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Amelia Edith Pearse



Accept in part


Nathan Graeme Hamon



Accept in part


Robert Gordon 657.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Isaac Roland Hamon



Accept in part


Belinda R Albulet 659.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Heather Hine (Tracvity)



Accept in part


Katanna Green (Tracvity)



Accept in part


Joshua Montomery (Dollar Flash)



Accept in part



Page 105 of 133

Corey Dunham 663.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Mellissa Castello 664.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Joy Jackson (Dollar Flash)



Accept in part


Walter Kevin Ware 666.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kevin Matthew Wenz



Accept in part


Kenneth Rasor 668.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


John Neil Westerlund Jr



Accept in part


Marina Jane Westerlund



Accept in part


Nihe Matilda Warwick



Accept in part


Lisa Wilson 673.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Shaun Eketona 674.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Richard Herbig 675.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Meri Blakey 676.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Paulette Leef 677.001 Figure 4-5 Temple Oppose Oppose Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 106 of 133




Charmaine Walker-Eketone



Accept in part


Ryan Stacey Harris 679.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Lani Awhimai Michele Emery



Accept in part


Maroea Gaylene Harris



Accept in part


Rakaipaka Harris 682.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Alysha Ann Reti 683.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Penni-Marie Harris 684.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rinaira Gaylene Horsford



Accept in part


Renaira Gaylene Harris



Accept in part


Ra Harris 687.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Sean Harris 688.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Sharen Reti 689.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kel Ormsby 699.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive


Accept in part



Page 107 of 133



Carl Ormsby 700.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Vincent Matthew Heke



Accept in part


Nathalie Lordemans



Accept in part


Darren Siteine 712.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Sherry Watene 713.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ike Ihaka Ormsby 715.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Malakai Watene-Zelezniak (College Old Boys Rugby League)



Accept in part


Lee-anne Paama (COB League)



Accept in part


Britani Watene-Zelezniak



Accept in part


Alexandra Randell 719.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Rawiri Wayne King 720.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Lucinda Atkinson 721.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jeremy Atkinson 722.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan


Accept in part



Page 108 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Dora Ballantyne 723.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Patrice Marama Arkins



Accept in part


Tara Elissa Arkins 725.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Clarissa Charlotte Arkins



Accept in part


Jonathon William Arkins



Accept in part


Richard Thomas Arkins



Accept in part


Samuel Whiteford Arkins



Accept in part


Bethanie Jane Smith



Accept in part


Bruce William Arkins



Accept in part


Penelope Jane Arkins



Accept in part


Debbie Lorraine Neilson



Accept in part


Joanne Vowles 735.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Alfa Blondy Kepu (Youth Justice North-Korowai & Manaaki, CYFS)



Accept in part



Page 109 of 133

Kerryn Etika 737.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Summer Kershaw 738.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ngamhe Te Amo 740.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Barry Dean Clark 741.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Neesha Pahuru 742.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Mike Burton 743.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Chris Thompson 744.002 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts

Support in part

Figure 4-5: Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts - Seek controls over certain retail and recreational activities occurring on the former CCNZ campus through the introduction of specific planning provisions/overlays by : - prohibiting the sale of liquor, alcohol, coffee, tea, tobacco related products; - prohibiting all Sunday Trading and Sunday Play (organised sports practices and games on Sunday); - prohibiting all gambling including housie, lotto, raffles, pokies, scratches etc and the building of casinos; - restrict Sunday Activities on the former CCNZ campus area to quiet family-type activities (which is in keeping with the current special character of the area where Sunday is treated as a day of rest, for families to spend time together while engaging in quiet family time).

Accept in part


Courtney Skinner 746.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Pamela Umuhozu 747.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan


Accept in part



Page 110 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Leilani Uili 748.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Myles Watene 749.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Westly Te haki Howard



Accept in part


Raechel Anne Popping



Accept in part


Casey Clarke 752.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Samuel Nowacki 753.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jackie Noki Tainui 754.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jake Wheki 755.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Michaela Powell 756.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Randall Tannea Kite



Accept in part


Channeary Yean 758.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Peter Clarke 759.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Philip Siteine 760.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part



Page 111 of 133

Brandon Kipa 765.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Christine L Forbes 766.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Joseph Hans Hartog



Accept in part


Matthew Lester Simon



Accept in part


Marilyn Bigland 770.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Cyril Gudeeon 773.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Lillian Singers 774.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Barbara Reneti 775.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Stephen Reneti 776.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Terry Snipler 781.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Mark Metekingi 786.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ariel Piripi Metekingi



Accept in part


Nigel Ballantyne 788.001 Figure 4-5 Temple Oppose Oppose Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 112 of 133




Aaron Atkinson 789.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Philip Ballantyne 790.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Melanie Ballantyne



Accept in part


Marilyn Cecil Hayward



Accept in part


Tanya Lisa Whitehead



Accept in part


Fiona Maxine Greenwood



Accept in part


Justin Greenwood 798.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Lisa Jayne Bust 803.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Aaron Dixon 804.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Hinemoa Peke-Manawaiti



Accept in part


Levi-Che Ngawaka 807.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Erana Roa 809.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Malaea Cossey 810.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive


Accept in part



Page 113 of 133



Waihanea Katarina Timu



Accept in part


Sheree Fryer 812.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


O. Raihania Timu 813.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Lynnette Vincent 815.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


George Hape Chase



Accept in part


Peni Rachel Golder 817.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kay Warrender 818.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Delaine & Cyril Gudgeon



Accept in part


Sherry Te Amohaere Watene



Accept in part


Suzanne Ings 821.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jarom Gudgeon 823.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jenny Jenkins 824.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ruth Robinson (Nemesys Ltd)



Accept in part



Page 114 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Myles Aidan Watene



Accept in part


Eric Oler 829.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Gretchen Cume 830.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jamey Etika 833.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Eddie Willison 834.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Richard Grant Herewini



Accept in part


Baz Paama 837.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Wayne Rogers 919.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Guy Anthony Perrett



Accept in part





Accept in part


Estonie Jean Funaki



Accept in part





Accept in part



Page 115 of 133




Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


IFan Wu 954.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Airini Forbes 956.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Lei Sarkovich 964.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Boyd Sarkovich 965.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Gavin Sarkovich 969.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Patsy Karene 970.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Wero Karena 971.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Holly Lin 973.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


College Old Boys 974.002 Figure 4-5 Temple Oppose Oppose the inclusion of the map Figure Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 116 of 133

Rugby League Club View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts

4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts along with the activities being proposed within each of the Areas/Precincts; Seeks the creation of a 'Smoke Free, Alcohol Free, and No Sunday Trade/Play Precinct' over the entire Church College Campus and Temple grounds; Seeks the zoning of the current sports ground, grandstand and hilled area be recreational.

part Reject Reject

See Tracked Changes for Appendix 4. The submission point seeking the creation of a smoke Free, Alcohol Free area over the entire Church College Campus is rejected based on:

Outsde the scope of the 1st

Schedule process and cannot be considered as part of the District Plan The submission seeking the rezoning of the sports fields be rejected based on:

Contrary to the intent of the objectives and policies

Better dealt with through the Comprehensive Development Plan process

Karen Hoki Parker 975.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jay R Illsley 980.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tyrone Jade Kareitiana



Accept in part


Soleil McDonald 983.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Desmond Hetiri Te Tuhi



Accept in part


Tahuata Nelson Minhinnick



Accept in part


Ron Phillips 987.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Toni Swney 988.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Bethenee Witt 989.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Te Reremoana Nelson



Accept in part



Page 117 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Carol Turahui 991.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Pierce Isaac Te Ngakau Te Moni



Accept in part


Duane Sykes (C.O.B. Rugby League)



Accept in part


Eleni Tuitama (C.O.B. Rugby League)



Accept in part


Darren Siteine 995.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Stephanie Phillips 996.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Patrick Taitoko 997.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Daniel Parker 1001.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tony Elkington 1028.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


John A Kendall 1029.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part



Page 118 of 133

Megan Kendall 1031.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Jenna Walmsley 1035.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Te Waata R Greening



Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Colby Osborne 1042.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Anton Osborne 1043.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kendall Graham 1044.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Romana Graham 1045.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Vicki Wihongi 1046.004 Figure 4-5 Temple Support Supports Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 119 of 133




Ashton Frew 1047.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Rebecca Hippolite 1053.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Alexandra Dee 1054.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Julie Nicole Morley 1055.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Ann Bella Johnson 1058.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Ariana Murphy 1062.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive

Support Supports Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan

Accept in part



Page 120 of 133


Areas and Precincts. See Tracked Changes for Appendix 4.

Darnie Eden Paraha



Accept in part





Accept in part


Debbie Solomon 1065.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Alisha Willis 1066.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Dave Hurae Moeke 1068.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Mikala T Watene 1069.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Emmeline Sunnex 1071.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Ruth Lynne Hamon 1073.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Garrick Wayne Parr



Accept in part



Page 121 of 133

Areas and Precincts

Owen Purcell 1076.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


George Kaka 1078.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Janie Edwards 1079.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Lincoln Ivan Reid 1082.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Tripoli Daniel Tuau 1084.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Shirley T Rago 1085.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Peihana Owen 1086.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Edna Mabel Johnson



Accept in part


R Andrew Joseph 1088.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Marie Pere Joseph 1089.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part



Page 122 of 133

Kristen Hartley 1090.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Ken Williams 1092.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jill Patricia Tuau 1093.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Marama Mete 1096.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Roena McCarthy 1097.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Hata Puriri (Temple View Heritage Society)


Oppose Amend 5.1.4.2 Temple View Character Area by including the area into the Temple Heritage Precinct. Add Historic heritage to the list of information requirements for those parties preparing Comprehensive Development Plans in order to ensure that applicants are aware of the importance of the city’s historic heritage resources. Delete Appendix 4, Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Area and Precincts. Seeks Council to ask the owners to make the changes to the David O McKay building that will enable it to be repurposed as a Stake Centre. Seeks Council to ensure that the owners of the buildings and their representatives, “take all reasonable and proper care to keep in a state of good order and repair all buildings and

Reject Reject Accept in part Reject Reject

The submission point seeking the deletion of Figure 4-5 and amendment to the PDP to elevate Temple View Character Area to a Heritage Area is rejected based on:

Contrary to the intent of the objectives and policies of the Plan


The amendments proposed to 5.1.4.2 that assists with the submitter’s concerns over it being overly descriptive. Historic Heritage is dealt with under Chapter 19. The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area See Tracked Changes for Appendix 4. The submission point seeking preservation of the David O Mckay Building is rejected based on:


schedule process. The submission point seeking owners to take care of buildings is rejected based on:


schedule process.


Page 123 of 133

other permanent improvements forming part of the Board's property”. Seeks Council to ask the owners to consult with the community to determine ways that all of the campus buildings can be repurposed. Seeks the rezoning of the area opposite the boys dormitories on Tuhikaramea Rd that is currently zoned ‘future residential’ as residential. Seeks Council to encourage the owners to consider the request of local sports clubs and other community organisations regarding the use of the CCNZ Campus grounds. Opposes changes to Tuhikaramea Road with the addition of two round-a-bouts, parking bays and additional landscaping.

Reject Reject Reject Reject

The submission point seeking owners to consult with community is rejected based on:


schedule process. The submission point seeking rezoning of land for future residential is rejected based on:

Better done through the development of a structure plan. The submission point seeking owners to consider requests of local sports groups is rejected based on:


schedule process. The submission point seeking council not approve changes to roading is rejected based on:


schedule process.

Alice Brown-Haenga



Accept in part





Accept in part


Charlotte W Timu 1102.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Edna Rivers Poulava



Accept in part





Accept in part


Desiree Joyce Park 1107.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part



Page 124 of 133

Peter Mete-Smith 1118.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Laitohi Elkington 1119.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Brian James Hollis 1120.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Edna Rivers Poulava



Accept in part





Accept in part


Myra Wineera 1127.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Ivory Tangaroa 1129.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Te Naera Tangaroa



Accept in part


Helena Maddison 1133.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Genevieve Van Eden



Accept in part


Eileen Phillips 1137.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Sue Nikora 1138.001 Figure 4-5 Temple Oppose Oppose Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 125 of 133




Kasmin Joy Nikora 1139.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Janelle Moana Nikora



Accept in part


Sheree Mere Nikora



Accept in part





Accept in part


Te Rina Noelani Ngawaka



Accept in part


Lynette Cassidy 1145.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Christine Makata 1147.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Pahemata Kay Apiti



Accept in part


Percy Te Hira 1162.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Elizabeth Patricia Witehira


Oppose Delete Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts. Undertake an assessment of buildings within the former Church College of New Zealand campus and teacher

Accept in part

The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area See Tracked Changes for Appendix 4. Submission point dealt with in Chapter 19 Historic Heritage


Page 126 of 133

housing for inclusion within Schedule 8A: Built Heritage (structure, buildings and associated sites).

Pita Witehira 1166.003 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts

Oppose Delete Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts. Undertake an assessment of buildings in the former Church College of New Zealand campus and teacher housing to be included in Schedule 8A: Built Heritage (structures, buildings and associated sites).

Accept in part

The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area See Tracked Changes for Appendix 4. Submission point dealt with in Chapter 19 Historic Heritage




Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


John Charles Paki 1175.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Hata Tipoki 1176.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Kahuwaero Katene 1177.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Evan H Smith 1180.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Eve McAnnalley 1181.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part



Page 127 of 133

Casey Mania Haeata



Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Mark Brian Hague 1188.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Leslie R Newman 1189.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Hineawe Hapuku 1191.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ripeka Hapuku 1192.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Quntin A Hapuku 1193.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


The Church of 1201.022 Figure 4-5 Temple Support Supports Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 128 of 133

Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints Trust Board











FS284.015



Dean Alexander Crafar (Equlation)



Accept in part


Jodhi Ponga 1205.003 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Lance Harvey 1212.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Peter S Thomson 1214.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Anthony Poutu 1215.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Rawiri Hemi 1217.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Winifred Rose Hemi



Accept in part





Accept in part



Page 129 of 133

Jared Ezra Hemi 1220.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Ngawati Smiler 1221.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part





Accept in part


Rawiri Russell Hemi



Accept in part





Accept in part


Meiana Jenelle Gray



Accept in part



FS258.003






Edmund Wilson 1227.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Joihn Hoani Uru Katene



Accept in part


Jeanette Katene 1229.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Scott McAnnalley 1230.003 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Jenna Maria Burgess



Accept in part


Hana Mariea Haeata



Accept in part


Lana Charrell 1233.004 Figure 4-5 Temple Support Supports Figure 4-5 Temple View Accept in The submission supports the intent of the objectives and polices and provides guidance on the potential development of the area


Page 130 of 133

Kershaw-Ryan (Kershaw Training Enterprises)







Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part





Accept in part


Tiwini Hemi 1259.004 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


David John Thomson



Accept in part


Dennis Harris 1272.001 Figure 4-5 Temple View Comprehensive Development Plan Areas and Precincts


Accept in part


Mary Elizabeth Hamon



Accept in part


Figure 4-6 Temple View Shafts and Temple Entrance

Sub. Name FS. Name




1201.023 Figure 4-6 Temple View Shafts and Temple Entrance

Support in part

Amend Figure 4-6 Temple View Shaft and Temple Entrance as set out in the submission.

Accept The submission point seeking the amendment to Figure 4-6 is accepted based on:

Supports the objectives and policies of the plan

Improves the administration of the plan. See Tracked Changes for Chapter 5.

Rakaipaka Puriri FS275.001 Oppose Reject This further submission does not specifically relate to submission 1201.023 and therefore is out of scope of this submission point.

Temple View FS284.016 Oppose Reject The submission that this further submission FS 284.016 oppose has been accepted


Page 131 of 133

Heritage Society

Zoning Map

Sub. Name FS. Name



Janice Ann Verran 854.004 Zoning Map 24A Oppose Map 24A-Retain land at 173 Rotokauri Road as Residential.

Defer This matter is deferred and the matter will be reconvened at a later date.

Max Walker Verran 855.005 Zoning Map 24A Oppose Map 24A-Retain land at 173 Rotokauri Road as Residential.


Michelle Le Prou 201.001 Zoning Map 33A Support Map 33A and Figure 2-10: Rotokauri Structure Plan - Reserve Network - Confirm Future Reserves surrounding Lake Waiwhakareke.


Myra Evans-McLeod 219.001 Zoning Map 33A Oppose Map 33A-Obtrusive to outlook. Defer This matter is deferred and the matter will be reconvened at a later date.

Barry Laurence Flay 350.004 Zoning Map 33A Support Map 33A and Rotokauri Structure Plan -Retain the Open Space Zoning surrounding Lake Waiwhakareke.


William Wie & Patricia Tekore Moana

352.004 Zoning Map 33A Support in part

Map 33A and Rotokauri Structure Plan - Retain the Open Space Zoning surrounding Lake Waiwhakareke.


Noel Henry & Joan Breed

617.002 Zoning Map 33A Oppose Amend Map 33A by rezoning 173 Rotokauri Road (Lot 2 DP 425316) to Residential Zone.


Barry James Crawshaw

870.001 Zoning Map 33A Support Map 33A and Rotokauri Structure Plan - Confirm future reserves surrounding Lake Waiwhakareke.


Gary Richard Wiseman

941.002 Zoning Map 33A Oppose Map 33A-retain Lot 2 DP 425316 as residential and amend Lot 2 DP 425316 173 Rotokauri Rd from residential to residential reserve.


Melanie Jane Wiseman

958.001 Zoning Map 33A Oppose Map 33A- retain a residential zoning on Lot 2 DP 425316 and rezone Lot 2 DP 425316, 173 Rotokauri Road from Residential to Residential reserve.


Iris & Fred Bryant 972.001 Zoning Map 33A Oppose Map 33A and Rotokauri Structure Plan-confirm the Future Reserves surrounding Lake Waiwhakareke.


Geoff C 12.001 Zoning Map 37A Oppose Change the zoning between the Railway and O'Neil Street to encourage better use.

Reject The submission seeking a change in the zoning has been rejected as it does not:

Align with the objectives and policies of the Plan


1126.002 Zoning Map 37A Oppose Map 37A- rezone sites of City Limits childcare and the Casalinga café from Special Residential Zone to either Business zone 2 or 7; Amend to change the area of the Special Residential Zone at Claudelands.

Reject

See Decision report for Chapter 6 The submission point seeking the change in the zoning is rejected as it



FS286.004

Oppose Reject FS286.004 is accepted in part as submission 1126.002 is rejected.

City Limits Childcare Co Ltd and

1282.002 Zoning Map 37A Oppose Amend Map 37A by rezoning 729, 731, and 737 Grey St, from Special

See Decision report for Chapter 6


Page 132 of 133


Residential Zone to either Business 2 Zone (Events Facilities Fringe) or Business 7 Zone. Amend Map 37A to change the boundaries of the Special Residential Zone at Claudelands by removing existing businesses and medium density residential development and align with the description in 5.1.1.1. Amend zoning map 37A to change the zone (except River Road and George Street) to Residential Intensification Zone, with amendments to the Plan to make childcare centres, visitor accommodation and other business uses Permitted Activities in this area.

Reject Reject

The submission point seeking the amendment to the Special Character Area is rejected as it:

Does not support the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan The submission point seeking the amendment to the zoning on Map 37A is rejected as it:



FS286.002

Oppose Accept The submission point (1282.002) which this further submission opposes has been rejected.

Hamilton East Community Trust

1013.004 Zoning Map 46A Support in part

Map 46A-rezone the area surrounding Steele Park to a mixed use of commercial fringe and residential.

See Decision report for Chapter 6.


1201.019 Zoning Map 60A Support Retain Map 60A as it relates to the Temple View Zone.

Accept The matter regarding the confirmation of the zoning raised in the submission point is already provided for within the Plan, so no amendments are necessary


Oppose Reject The further Submission point relating to submission (1201.019) is out of scope.

Charles Joseph Peter McPherson

173.001 Zoning Maps Support Map 33A-Supports the inclusion of Lot 2 DP 425315 (Corner of Baverstock Road and Rotokauri Road) as part of the Lake Waiwhakareke Natural Heritage Part as shown on Figure 2-8 Rotokauri Structure Plan.


Charles Joseph Peter McPherson

174.001 Zoning Maps Support Map 33A-Confirm the Future Reserves surrounding Lake Waiwhakareke.


1.5.19 Master Plan for Peacocke Character Zone Neighbourhoods

Sub. Name FS. Name




482.025

Peacocke Special Character Zone

Support in part

Amend 1.2 Restricted Discretionary Activities - Matters of Discretion and Assessment by renumber and relocate I16 to I24 relating to Peacocke Special Character Zone.

Accept The submission seeking amendment to Appendix 1 – 1.2 is accepted as this would

Improve plan usability

Improve clarity of the Plan See Tracked Changes for Appendix 1.


924.170

Peacocke Special Character Zone

Support in part

Retain Appendix 1.2 I18 and I19 Peacocke Special Character Zone regarding landscape taking into account the effects of development on the proposed arterial transport corridors with an amendment to clarify whether ‘Peacocke Special Character Zone’ should come under ‘Heritage Values’.

Accept in part

The submission seeking the retention of Appendix 1.2 I18 and I19 and the amendment to Appendix 1-1.2 of the plan is accepted in part as it would:

Be effected by changes sought by other submitters

Support the intent of the Objectives and Policies of the Plan.

Improve plan use

Improve clarity of the Plan



Page 133 of 133

1.5.19 Master Plan for Peacocke Character Zone Neighbourhoods

Sub. Name FS. Name




482.030 1.5.19 Master Plan for Peacocke Character Zone Neighbourhoods

Support in part

Amend Paragraph 3 of Appendix 1.5.19 Master Plan for Peacocke Character Zone.

Accept The submission seeking the amendment to 1.5.19 is accepted as it would:

Improve the administration of the Plan

Improve Usability of the plan. See Tracked Changes for Appendix 1.


924.196 1.5.19 Master Plan for Peacocke Character Zone Neighbourhoods

Support Retain consent application information requirements in Appendix 1.5.19 a) to g) - Master Plan for Peacocke Character Zone Neighbourhoods.

Accept in Part

The submission seeking the retention of 1.5.19 a) to g) is accepted in part as it:

Supports the intent of the objectives and policies within the Plan.

1.4 Design Guides and Design Assessment Criteria

Sub. Name FS. Name




1201.021 1.4 Design Guides and Design Assessment Criteria

Support in part

Amend Appendix 1.4 – Design Guides and Design Assessment Criteria by adding a Temple View Zone - Urban Design Guide as set out in the submission.

See Tracked Changes for Appendix 1

Rakaipaka Puriri FS275.001 Oppose Reject This further submission does not relate to the submission point (1201.021)


FS284.014

Oppose See Tracked Changes for Appendix 1.

Hamilton · Decisions Report - Chapter 5 Special Character Zones, 9 July 2014 Page 1 of 133 Chapter 5 Special Character Zones and Appendix 4 Decisions 5 Special Character Zones Sub.

Documents