Farmers of New Zealand Newsletter

We have completed our submission to the Proposed Kaipara District Plan and the Kaipara Citizens and Ratepayers Association Inc. and the Pouto Topu A Trust are joint parties to the Farmers of New Zealand submission. This effectively means that Farmers of New Zealand along with our membership represent approximately 6,000 individuals.

It is considered that the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) does not adequately reflect the aspirations of key stakeholders, as outlined in the Section 32 analysis

The Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) has been prepared at a significant cost to ratepayers. The Kaipara District Council Long Term Council Community Plan (LTCCP) „Kaipara••s Future – Working Together•• (2004-2014) outlines four specific community outcomes. The community outcomes listed in the LTCCP promote the social and economic development of the district as a primary requirement.

Farmers of New Zealand Inc consider that the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) does not satisfactorily provide for the social, cultural and economic well-being of the different communities of interest. The rules of the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009), particularly in relation to subdivision are prohibitive. It is also recognised that the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) will indirectly increase costs to ratepayers as the monitoring and administration requirements of the new Plan will increase as a result of the implementation of the Plan.

It is of grave concern to our members that farming is no longer unequivocally provided for as a Permitted Activity under the Plan. While the activity of Farming is not explicitly excluded from the Plan, activities such as constructing glasshouses, kumara packing sheds and wintering barns will require consent. In addition, the activities such as the application of effluent as a means of fertilization, earthworks and vegetation clearance also have the potential to compromise or restrict farming activities. It needs to be recognised that farming is an integral component of the Kaipara District and is a major financial contributor to the economy. In no way should the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) or Kaipara District Council Engineering Standards (2009) compromise this activity.

The Section 32 analysis notes:It is clear that a full review of the District Plan is the only option that addresses all four of the desired outcomes. However, while this is the preferred option, and is considered to be the most appropriate mechanism to provide strong district guidance, it is acknowledged that many elements of the operative District Plan are effective. It is therefore recommended that where possible, effective provisions of the operative District Plan are „rolled-over•• into the proposed District Plan. Given the nature of these concerns and the likely consequential changes to the structure of the Plan, a full review was preferred by Council to a “rolling” review of selected chapters.

Although stating that effective provisions of the Operative District Plan have been „rolled-over•• into the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009), it is unclear as to what these provisions actually are.

The Proposed Kaipara District Plan (209) has adopted an effects-based approach for future planning and development of the district, which is a different approach than that of the Operative District Plan, which is prescriptive by nature. The subdivision provisions of the plan have been completely re-written, with the thresholds for Controlled Activity subdivisions increased. There are now no longer any „permitted activities•• within the District, but rather a series of „thresholds•• for landowners to comply with.

While in some instances the effect-based regime will assist in facilitating business growth within the District, the ambiguity in the rules as written, coupled with the level of discretion introduced to the assessment criteria, it is considered that the task of obtaining resource consent will be onerous, costly and certainly not guaranteed.

Farmers of New Zealand Inc. consider that a complete review and re-write of the Operative District Plan was not necessary, particularly now given the issues the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) raises.

The Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) has a very strong environmental focus however is lacking when it comes to promoting social, cultural and economic enhancement tools

Said to mirror the Waitakere City Council Plan, the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) has a strong environmental focus which seeks to limit urban and semi-urban growth to specific areas within the district.

The Kaipara District has its own unique characteristics that make it very different to other regions in the area. Encouraging growth and development is paramount to the survival and success of both the future development of the Kaipara but retaining the resources (in the form of people and business) that it already has.

The Kaipara District does not share the same social, economic or environmental concerns as the Waitakere Whangarei, Far North or Rodney Districts. The Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) should be reflective and relevant to Kaipara••s issues – no one else••s.

In the formulation of a District Plan, it is imperative to take heed of the stated purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991 (as contained in Section 5 of the Act), that being to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. For the purposes of the RMA, sustainable management means:

Managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety while –

A number of the provisions (incorporating issues, objectives, policies and rules) of the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) seek to manage and undertake functions that other authorities or legislation already covers. The plan needs to recognise the function of the Northland Regional Council and the regional plans that have been written by this entity which seek to manage the effects of activities on the soil, water and air of the District. It is not appropriate that the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) contains rules that are already covered by the relevant regional plans of the district.

In addition, there are a number of rules and standards which have been adopted into the Kaipara District Council Engineering Standards (2009) which also seek to undertake functions of other legislation, including the Property Law Act and the Building Act. This is not appropriate and any condition imposed on a resource consent which seeks to deal with matters outside the scope of the Resource Management Act 1991 are unlawful and ultra vires.

Farmers of New Zealand Inc are very concerned with the rationale provided for general rural subdivision within the Section 32 analysis. The fundamental difference between the Operative District Plan and the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) is that the rural subdivision provisions have gone from being relatively flexible and focussed on the needs of the Kaipara community to almost prohibitive.

• On balance, it is considered appropriate that the 20ha subdivision limit is retained as the controlled activity standard for sensitive receiving environments. This is particularly relevant given the limited mapping of Part 2 matters in the Plan (e.g. ecological areas) and the status of structure planning of coastal and harbour areas.

• A more permissive 12ha controlled subdivision standard is considered effective for other rural areas of the District, recognising the Heartland outcomes to maintain opportunities for economic and social development, but providing sufficient incentive to encourage development to use other subdivision methods which better achieve the Plan outcomes.

• Potential for adverse effects on harbour and coast overlay environments – impacts on natural character of coastal environments, vegetation protection and amenity – of cost to community at large

Farmers of New Zealand Inc does not support any of the abovementioned reasons as they are not valid concerns and are certainly not held by members who comprise a large portion of the district••s ratepayers.

Farmers of New Zealand Inc are strongly opposed to the contention that [the 4-hectare provision] is an “inconsistent approach with neighbouring councils and decisions by the environment [court]”.

In formulating its rules, the Council needs to recognise that the Kaipara District does not share the same growth pressures as its neighbouring counterparts and as such, it is not appropriate to mirror subdivision and development planning provisions as a means of managing their district.

It is contended that the general rural subdivision provisions promoted by the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) will have a significant and detrimental effect on the District••s growth if they are retained.

Farmers of New Zealand Inc. are totally opposed to the Kaipara District Council making any move to introduce into the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) the two types of landscape classification – Outstanding Landscape Areas and Visual Amenity Areas.

Farmers of New Zealand Inc. support the management of private land being left to landowners. It is considered that the provisions of the notified Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) are sufficient to protect the environment and ensure positive growth for the district.

It is considered that the defining of a significant landscape is too subjective and certainly to date, Farmers of New Zealand has Inc. has not seen or been privy to any comprehensive analysis of what constitutes a significant landscape. A number of our members will be directly affected by the introduction of the significant landscape „overlay••, however they have not been personally consulted, nor do they understand, based on the information that they have been provided, what kind of implications these „overlays•• will have on them.

Farmers of New Zealand Inc. are vehemently opposed to the introduction of such landscape areas as a result of the submission process. Prior to the introduction of any such landscape „overlays••, the Council must undertake consultation with the necessary parties, prepare a Section 32 analysis and then, if necessary, notify this particular issue as a variation to the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009).

Farmers of New Zealand Inc. support the Northland Regional Council••s recommendation that the Kaipara District Council does not progress or make the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) operative until the Northland Regional Council have reviewed and completed their public consultation process on the Regional Policy Statement (“RPS”). The proposed changes to the RPS will have a significant effect on the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) as proposed and will likely require changes to this plan.

It is not appropriate that the Kaipara Engineering Standards 2009 have been prepared by the same Consultants that enforce these standards. The standards have been reviewed and raise serious concerns in relation to the design and post-approval process associated with resource consents. In a number of instances, the requirements are onerous, technically incorrect, unlawful or ultra vires. Despite these standards having been adopted by the Council, an independent review of these standards is sought, prior to their reference being incorporated into the District Plan.

Council and their consultants have been working on the Proposed District Plan for some four years. Although the Section 32 suggests that significant consultation has been undertaken throughout the development of the Plan, this consultation has been focused on overarching, high-end principles rather than the „nuts and bolts•• which comprises the Issues, Objectives, Policies and Rules of the now Proposed District Plan.

The Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) as notified equates to over 1500 pages of documentation, comprising the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009), Planning Maps, Engineering Standards and the Section 32 analysis. Ratepayers have been given just under two months to review and comprehend this information and formulate a submission which identifies all concerns in a comprehensive manner.

To complicate this issue further, is the fact that the submission period closes seven days before Christmas, at a time where people are busy and stress levels are high. The timing of the notification period is seen to be unfair and disadvantageous and certainly a ploy by Council to restrict their ratepayers from promoting their views of the Plan.

The Council is urged in the first instance to review its decision on the notification period for making a submission on the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) and associated documentation. It would be appropriate that the submission period is extended to at least 28 February 2010 to give people sufficient time to review and rationalise the information presented and make an informed submission accordingly.

If Council proceeds with the Plan, we would also like the Council to extend the further submission period by up to double the timeframes to allow our members to review the submissions received and submit accordingly.

Upon reviewing the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009), it is clear that there are fundamental issues with a number of Chapters contained within it. The Plan does not have the support of a number of key stakeholders, including Farmers of New Zealand Inc.

It is acknowledged that there are Chapters within the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) that have been comprehensively written and suit their intended purpose, however there are others which fall well short of both the requirements of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the desires of ratepayers.

It is contended that the Proposed Kaipara District Plan (2009) as notified will cost the ratepayer of Kaipara District a significant sum of money (certainly more than what Council••s Consultants are promoting) to fix.

The Council is urged to withdraw the Plan as notified and re-notify the Plan as a draft. This will give ratepayers and key stakeholder groups the opportunity to raise their concerns and for the Council to review the plan accordingly, outside of the judicial forum.

This Plan is the residents and ratepayers Plan. The residents and ratepayers are not happy with the entire document as it stands and as such, it would be prudent of the Council to listen to them, withdraw the Plan and amend accordingly. A comprehensive assessment of the Plan has been undertaken and should be read in conjunction with the matters raised in this document.

Farmers of New Zealand Inc. representing 1,000 members throughout Northland fully supports the North Rodney residents and ratepayers•• petition and submissions to the Select Committee which state that they do not want to be part of the Auckland Supercity. The petitioners have made it very clear that they want the Government to keep North Rodney out of the Supercity and to become part of the Northland Regional Council area. Farmers of New Zealand wish to remind the Select Committee that 6,200 citizens and ratepayers of North Rodney have signed the abovementioned submission.

Farmers of New Zealand and our rural membership are totally opposed to Clause 59 of Part 3 sub part 3 which would prohibit any further boundary changes for a period of three years. This would effectively lock north Rodney into the Auckland area permanently. This is because they would not have an opportunity to become part of Northland unless there was a move by the Local Government Commission to restructure the political makeup of the Northland Regional Council area. e.g. into a single unitary authority.

Farmers of New Zealand and its membership clearly believe that the Local Government Commission in 1990 got it wrong when they fixed the northern boundary between the north of Wellsford and the current Kaipara District Council area. The Kaipara District Council with a population of 17,000 would greatly benefit by having a further 20,000 people coming into a new Kaipara District Council. This would improve the economy of scales of the Kaipara District Council and also would ensure that north Rodney maintains a strong rural voice in dealing with central and local government. This would be in the best interest of the Northland region and rural north Rodney.

North Rodney residents and ratepayers have not been consulted by way of a referendum and effectively the original Select Committee recommendation that north Rodney become part of the Northland Regional Council area was hijacked by a number of Auckland Regional councillors who attended a meeting organised by the Hon. Lockwood Smith at an Warkworth winery. At that meeting which the Hon. Lockwood Smith chaired he recommended strongly to those present that they keep out of the Auckland Supercity and go north.

Subsequent to this meeting, a further meeting was held at Wellsford and north Rodney ratepayers and residents mobilised their support and with the support of Farmers of New Zealand and the Mayor of Kaipara Mr Neil Tiller, presented their submission to the Hon. Dr Lockwood Smith, MP John Carter and the Hon. Rodney Hyde on Wednesday 10 February 2010. The north Rodney citizens and ratepayers believe that they have no affinity with the Auckland urban metropolis. Being part of Northland would give northern Rodney a strong rural representation and more control over their future destiny.