Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 4


S.96 Resource Management Act 1991




This is a submission on an application from Bunnings Limited for a resource consent to construct and establish a building improvement centre at 272-302 Great North Road, Grey Lynn.


The specific parts of the application that this submission relates to are the application in its entirety.


The submission is: (a) The proposed activity is intended to occupy land in the Mixed Use Zone which has as its purpose the development of vibrant urban areas enabling a diverse and compatible mix of residential, business, educational and leisure activities across the city. The proposal fails to meet this purpose. (b) The Mixed Use Zone is intended to ensure that adverse environmental and amenity impact of activities within the zone and on adjacent residential zones are avoided or mitigated. The proposal fails to meet this purpose. (c) The Mixed Use Zone is intended to encourage mixed use development which contributes to the amenity of surrounding neighbourhoods in terms of

streetscape appearance, pedestrian amenity and general safety. It is intended to be a mixture of business activities and intensive residential development. The proposal fails to meet this purpose. (d) The relevant zone strategy seeks to provide a mixed development zone in close proximity to major transport corridors where intensive residential development can be accommodated in association with business activities. The intention is to maintain a compatible relationship between business, intensive residential and adjoining traditional residential areas. The proposal fails to meet this zone strategy. (e) The cul-de-sac end of Dean Street has a narrow carriageway and a compact late 19th/early 20th century settlement pattern of villas and cottages located in the Residential 1 Zone. This environment has a pleasant amenity level which would be enhanced if development on the subject site followed the purpose and prescription of the Mixed Use Zone. The proposal defeats the intended purpose of the zonal interface at Dean Street. (f) The scale of the proposal is significantly out of context with the intention of the Mixed Use Zone which seeks compatible business development with residential amenity; in this case Residential 1 Zone amenity. (g) The redevelopment of the subject site arises because the former industrial activities now superseded by the purpose of the Mixed Use Zone have come to the end of their economic life. The opportunity arises for the subject site to be redeveloped in accordance with the purpose of the Mixed Use Zone in a manner which is compatible with the zone structure of the neighbourhood. The proposal fails to achieve this zone purpose. (h) The proposal to use Dean Street as the commercial goods delivery route for the proposed development will create an incompatible traffic arrangement

with heavily laden articulated transport units competing for space in a narrow residential street where on-street parking is an important and essential neighbourhood amenity. (i) The scale of the proposed development rising above the Dean Street frontage on the subject site does not protect or enhance the privacy and amenity of occupants in the adjoining Residential 1 Zone fronting the east side of Dean Street. (j) For the reasons set out above, the proposal is contrary to the objectives and policies of the plan relative to the subject site and neighbourhood. (k) The proposal creates adverse effects arising from heavy transportation traffic movements in a narrow residential cul-de-sac, and an oppressive and overbearing physical domination of the adjoining Residential 1 Zone. These adverse effects cannot be avoided, remedied or mitigated. (l) Accordingly, the proposal fails to meet the threshold gateways of s.104D of the Act and must be declined. (m) Overall, the proposal is contrary to the purpose of the Act because it does not provide for the sustainable management of the inner city urban resources apparent in the neighbourhood bounded by Great North Road, King Street, Dean Street and Bond Street and as provided for in the Plan.


I seek the following decision from the consent authority: Decline the application in its entirety.


I wish to be heard in support of this submission.


If others make a similar submission, I will consider presenting a joint case with them at a hearing.

Signature of Submitter................................................................................... Date: April 2013


Telephone No.: Fax No. Email: