HOT ISSUES

Fire restrictions here

HELPFUL INFO

Ecan Approved Woodburners here

Overnight Camping here

Water conservation tips here

Employment Opportunities - To find out more click here

What to do if you have a dog or noise problem here

Web Site Problems - Tell us here

QUICK LINKS

Council and Community Board meeting times and agendashere

Council and Community Board Meeting Minutes here

Aoraki Mt.Cook Mackenzie Website here

Twizel Website here

Fairlie Website here

Lake Tekapo Website here

Road Conditions  Check out the latest State Highway conditions here

Plan Change Submissions - Summaries

Summary of Submissions - Plan Change 12

 

Note: S Support

  S (with amdmt) Support with Amendment

  O - Oppose

SID:

Submitter

RID

S/O

Request

Reason/s

Heard?

1

The Burkes Pass

Heritage Trust

C/- Jane Batchelor,

41 Kirkwood Avenue,

Christchurch

1

S

- To approve Plan Change 12.

- To explore further policies to

encourage owners to consent to

listing their heritage items in the

future.

- To develop a range of nonregulatory

measures to assist those

who currently opt out of a schedule

listing, but may in future consent to

listing, for example waive the

current fee of $105 presently

charged in addition to the building

consent fee for listed heritage items

Heritage protection is an important

responsibility of local government.

Both policy and items listed on the

schedule need to be reviewed at

regular intervals to respond to

ongoing research and increasing

knowledge.

Addition of items is essential to

improve the accuracy of the ‘stocktake’

and hence the ability of the

Council to plan and advocate for

these items.

Encouragement of owners is

essential for ‘buy-in’.

 

2

Jane and Graham

Batchelor

41 Kirkwood Avenue,

Christchurch

1

S

To approve Plan Change 12

To develop further incentives for

owners who have items on the

Heritage Schedule, e.g. remission of

fees for consents/rates for work

enhancing heritage value, facilitating professional advice i.e. conservation. archeology, or access to other

expertise from Council staff or their

contacts.

Local government has the primary

responsibility for heritage protection.

The major mechanism for this is via

the Heritage Schedule. The

schedule must be expanded to

contain all items of significant worth

in a timely manner (preferably with

owners consent).

Education and encouragement of

owners is vital to success

Regular review should occur of

potential new items.

Policy should be reviewed to ensure

it is meeting its aims and reflect the

highest standards of heritage

protection.

Access to heritage fund is not

enough to mitigate the requirements

of resource consents and monitoring

and having to pay at every stage.

 

3

Jeremy Thomas Gray

Sutherland

Cavanawera,

Te Ngawai, Albury,

R.D. 17, Fairlie 7987

1

O

I agree that RM Act should be in place for demolition, but not for alteration. That the RM Act be

removed from the Plan in regard to

alterations of sites/buildings and be

replaced by consultation involving MDC and NZHPT.

Support in general for Plan Change

12, but note the following points.

The only negative comments about

the heritage process is the Resource

Management Act content. We have

lost at least one building from the

Plan as a result.

I question its necessity, Historic

Places Trust (NZ) have clear

guidelines regarding alterations. We

should incorporate possible dialogue

with owners of historic

sites/buildings. The RM Act does not

appear to encourage this, after all

the Plan is to preserve history.

 

4

New Zealand Historic

Places Trust

P.O. Box 4403,

Christchurch

1

O

That the following items are

amended to identify the

archaeological significance that they

have in relation to the Historic Places

Act:

- Gothic Style Cemetery Post

- Glendonald Sod Hut

- Former Railway Hotel (Albury

Tavern)

- Burkes Pass Hotel Stables

- Burkes Pass School

- Brackens Barn

- Annis Cob Cottage

- Albury Park Lime Works

That the items proposed for listing in

the District Plan be assigned to

Category Y to ensure that the

protection afforded them is

consistent with the purposes of the

Resource Management Act.

That all presently known flaws in the

plan listing be addressed as part of

this proposed plan amendment, to

avoid future difficulties and to ensure

the most effective outcome is

achieved as a consequence of this

change.

That a commitment is given to

setting aside funding to initiate a

more comprehensive overview

approach to the identification of

historic heritage in the district.

The proposed minor alterations for

the purposes of clear identification

be supported.

That the introduction of descriptive

criteria for listing be supported

The proposed listings identify

specific criteria for significance.

These criteria include archaeological

potential. In all of the items listed,

this listing is crossed as being not

relevant. It is the view of the Trust

that this is misleading and has the

potential to confuse present and

future owners about the way in

which the provisions of the Historic

Places Act apply to these places.

Creates tension between this plan

amendments and the purposes of

the Historic Places Act. The

situation is exacerbated by the

Category Z listing.

The proposed amendments to

current listings are supported, as

they provide more accurate

descriptors.

The proposed change is incomplete

in that there has been no systematic

process of identification.

The proposed change fails to

address known difficulties that exist

within the present listings, with

particular reference to the lack of

clarity as to which building are

“heritage” in groups of buildings that

have been identified (e.g. Haldon

Station).

Present provisions in the plan are

insufficient to prove appropriate

protection for the places that are

listed as Category Z. They identify

activities such as demolition or

removal as a permitted activity and

require only that the places are

documented before destruction. This

is inconsistent with best practice and

the decision to list new places under

this category fails to meet the

requirements of the RMA.

 

 

MoST Content Management V3.0.3463