FURTHER SUBMISSION IN SUPPORT OF, OR IN OPPOSITION, TO SUBMISSION
ON THE PUBLICLY NOTIFIED PROPOSED HASTINGS DISTRICT PLAN
Clause 8 of the First Schedule, Resource Management Act 1991
Further submissions end of day close Friday 9 May 2014
Contact Details:
Full name
of
submitter:
HB Fruitgrowers Association Inc
Postal
address for
service
(including
postcode):
P O Box 689
Agent/
company/
organisation
name:
Executive Officer
Hastings 4156
Phone:06 870 8541
Mobile:
Email: [email protected]
Preferred method of contact:
X
Email
☐
Post
Further Submitter Relevance:
I am: (please select one)
x
A person representing a relevant aspect of the public interest*; or
☐ A person who has an interest in the proposal that is greater than the interest the general public has; or
☐ The local authority for the relevant area.
Do you wish to be heard in support of your further submission?
x Yes ☐ No
If others make a similar submission, I will consider presenting a joint case with them as a hearing?
X
Yes
☐No
Trade Competition
Submissions cannot be made to gain an advantage through trade competition as per Clause 6 of the First
Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991.
Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987
The information contained in your submission will become publicly available official information held by the
Council under the above Act. By taking part in this public submission process, submitters will be deemed to have
waived any privacy interests in respect of that information.
Declaration
I acknowledge that by taking part in this public submission process that my submission (including personal
details, names and addresses) will be made public.
………………………………………………...
Signature of submitter
01 May 2014.
Date
(or person authorised to sign on behalf of submitter)
1
ENV-9-1-14-380
SUBMISSION DETAILS
Details of Original Submitter who you are making a further submission on
(Provided in the Summary of Decisions Requested)
Submitter
Number
115
226
Submitter Name and Address
Horticulture NZ
Rayonier NZ Ltd
Plan Section Reference that the
original submission relates to
Details of Further Submission
(You may use additional paper but please ensure you follow this format)
Support/ Oppose
the decision sought
by the original
submitter
Reason for Support or
Opposition
Part A - Introduction
Part B - Strategic Management Units
Part C - District Wide Activities
Part D Subdivision and Land
Development
Part E - Designations and Monitoring
Part F - Definitions
Schedule Seven - Appendix
Support
Horticulture is the national
representative body for
Horticulture businesses and
has expertise, knowledge and
experience working with
District Plans, Regional
Plans, RMA matters
nationally.
HB Fruitgrowers was
consulted with in the
formulation of the Horticulture
NZ submission and generally
agrees with the overall
content included.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be allowed:
With amendments to:
Amend requested
explanation PPP12
All references to “the right to farm”
6.2 Plains Production Zone
PPP2
6.2.6A
Oppose
The right to farm is a specific
reference to enable land
based production to be
carried out. Replacing “right
to farm” with the words land
based primary production
does not make sense.
Forestry contributes greatly to
the local economy, provides
employment for local people
and attracts investment.
We seek that the parts of
the submission be
disallowed.
State in summary the reasons
WHY you support or oppose
this submission
Forestry activities require
economically priced land and
I seek that the whole (or
part [describe part]) of the
submission be allowed (or
disallowed: Give precise
details.
Where the word “ rural” is
used, replace with the word
“primary”
2
therefore forestry production
is located mainly in hill
country. Production activity is
very unlikely to establish to
any great extent in the Plains
Zone.
The Heretaunga Plains is
such a valuable asset for food
production that there seems
no obvious reason to enable
this type of activity and its
attached service provision
industries to establish as of
right in the Plains Production
Zone.
65
Fonterra Co-operative Group
Limited
2.3.21 Greater living for…………
2.3.22
UDP8, UD04, UDP9 and UDP10
PSMP2/PSMP3/PSMP4/6.2.2
PP5/PPP3/PPP7PPP126.2.4
PP23/6.2.8E
6.2.3 Objectives
6.204 Rules
6.2.2 Anticipated outcomes
(and any other consequential
amendments to the Proposed Plan
that would give effect to the
submission)
Industrial 14.1.1 including policies and
objectives
Oppose
2.3.21 Should also recognise
that Dairy based industrial
uses are not appropriate on
the Plains Production land.
2.3.22 - UDP8, UD04, UDP9
and UDP10
PSMP2/PSMP3/PSMP4/6.2.2
PP5/PPP3/PPP7PPP126.2.4
PP23/6.2.8E Industrial
activities are provided for
within the District Plan. Dairy
based industrial uses are not
appropriate on the Plains
Production land.
We seek that the parts of
the submission be
disallowed.
Large Scale Industrial
activities such as dairy
processing plants should be
located in areas designated
for industrial purposes with
adequate infrastructure to
provide for requirements.
Dairy produce in Hawke’s Bay
3
is derived from the Rural
Zone. It is difficult to
establish why the productive
Heretaunga Plains growing
resource is required to
process Dairy product.
The requested change is not
consistent with the HPUD
strategy.
Industrial 14.1.1 including
policies and objectives
Industrial zones are the
appropriate area for industrial
developments. They have
infrastructure capability and
are in most cases linked well
to the transport networks - i.e.
Omahu, Irongate and
Whakatu and are located
within the Heretaunga Plains.
Opportunities exist for wet
and dry industrial activities in
existing appropriately zoned
areas. For Example Whakatu-Tomoana area and
the Irongate Triangle and are
consistent with the HPUD
Strategy
60
Farmers Transport
6.2.2 Anticipated outcomes
6.2.2 Outcome PP5
6.2.6C
6.6.6E
Plains Zone suggested addition
Oppose
While we agree on the
importance of a rural service
industry. Industrial activities
of the size and scale
described are provided for in
areas designated for
commercial and industrial
developments.
We seek that the parts of
the submission be
disallowed.
Enabling activities across the
productive plains zone to the
scale required would not be
4
an efficient or sustainable use
of our natural resources.
Effluent disposal poses
problems which are not easily
dealt with in the plains zone
which is a food production
environment.
Large Scale Industrial
activities to accommodate
Rural services should be
located in areas designated
for industrial purposes with
adequate infrastructure to
provide for requirements.
The individual requirements
for Farmers Transport
activities should not set a
precedent across the
productive Plains zone
environment.
222
Puketapu Tractors
6.2.2 Anticipated outcomes
6.2.2 Outcome PP5
6.2.6C
6.6.6E
Plains Zone suggested addition
Oppose
While we agree on the
importance of a rural service
industry. Industrial activities
of the size and scale
described are provided for in
areas designated for
commercial and industrial
developments.
We seek that the parts of
the submission be
disallowed.
Large Scale Industrial
activities to accommodate
Rural services should be
located in areas designated
for industrial purposes with
adequate infrastructure to
provide for requirements.
211
Pan Pac Forestry and Logistics
All references to “The right to farm”
Oppose
The right to farm protects
We seek that the parts of
5
Division
_______
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Forestry - controlled activity
6.2.8A Assessment Criteria
existing lawfully operating
primary production units to
operate when a new or
conflicting activity establishes
nearby.
The term is extremely
important to activities in the
Plains zone where
neighbours can be closer
than desired. Multiple
subdivisions have occurred
and conflicting activities have
been able to establish side by
side.
Pan Pac have asked for
clarity for the words “right to
farm” and it could be given
by providing a definition for
“right to farm” in the
definitions section.
_________
Forestry contributes greatly to
the local economy, provides
employment for local people
and attracts investment.
the submission be
disallowed.
Forestry activities require
economically priced land and
therefore forestry production
is located mainly in hill
country. Production activity is
very unlikely to establish to
any great extent in the Plains
Zone.
The Heretaunga Plains is
such a valuable asset for food
production that there seems
no obvious reason to enable
this type of activity, and its
attached service provision
industries, to establish as of
6
right in the Plains Production
Zone.
37
Cottages NZ Limited
6.2.6C
6.2.6F
Oppose
We support the District Plan
approach in minimising the
supplementary
accommodation size. It
encourages minimal footprint
and smart design.
We seek that the parts of
the submission be
disallowed.
6.2.6F Support total site area
restrictions and direct links to
Plains zone activities.
96
Hawke’s Bay Golf Club Inc
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
We support the District plan
approach to recreational
activities and Gross floor area
limits.
We seek that the
submission be disallowed.
Bridge Pa Aerodrome is
important to horticulture and
the Contractors who use the
Aerodrome to provide
services to the industry. For
example: Frost protection and
aerial spraying in adverse
conditions.
It is critical that the integrity of
the Aerodrome is maintained
for the continuation of
providing services.
50
Egg Producers Federation of NZ
Inc
6.2.3 Objectives and Policies
Objective PP01
Policy PPP4
Objective PP04
Policy PPP12
61
Federated Farmers of NZ
Methods 2.8.5
6.2 Plains Productions Zone
Support
Support
The proposed wording
changes make sense.
We support the use of the
words “primary production” in
relation to PP04 and PPP12
Submissions are similar to
those made by Horticulture
NZ in these matters.
We seek that the parts of
the submission be allowed.
We respect Federated
Farmers views and requests
We seek that the whole of
the submission be allowed.
7
All policies objective and rules
220
Progressive Enterprises
2.10.5 Objectives and Policies
5.2 Rural Zone
outlined in the submission.
Object
The changes requested
appear to be aimed at
supporting the ability for
supermarkets to establish as
of right outside of urban
areas.
We seek that the parts of
the submission be
disallowed.
Supermarkets in are not an
appropriate activity to be
carried out in the plains zone.
129
Johnny Appleseed Holdings’
Section 6.2.5J
Support
Supports a more sustainable
approach to preserving the
productive capacity of food
production land.
We seek that the part of the
submission be allowed.
196
Ngati Kohungunu Iwi Inc
2.4 Papakainga Development
6.2.2 Anticipated outcomes
Oppose
2.4
Allowing this change poses a
risk to the plains production
land. Residential/commercial
and industrial developments,
within the productive land
resource, contribute to
reverse sensitivity issues and
are unlikely to support the
preservation of the productive
land resource for future
generations.
6.2.2
Regional Council is
responsible for the
management of the water
resource in HB,
We seek that the part of the
submission be disallowed.
105
Henderson, Collier & Sophie
6.2 Plains production Zone
Oppose
The land sits within the plains
zone. Rules should be
applied consistently for all
properties across zones.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
9
Balance Agri-Nutrients Ltd
Plains production Zone
PP08
Oppose
The objective to retain the
existing rural character and
amenity of the zone is
We seek that the part of the
submission be disallowed.
8
PPP16
Any similar amendments and
consequential amendments
supported and rules around
site coverage, yards and
height should be applied
constantly across the zone.
109
Holcim NZ Ltd
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Objective PP03
Oppose
PP03 is to enable existing
activities to be recognised.
We seek that the part of the
submission be disallowed.
25
Cardno
6.2 Plains Production Zone
6.2.6F
Oppose
We support the District Plan
approach in minimising the
supplementary
accommodation size. It
encourages minimal footprint
and smart design.
We seek that the part of the
submission be disallowed.
263
Witchalls, Michell
6.2.6
Oppose
There is empathy for the
submitter and the issues they
are facing. However we are
unable to condone changing
the zone wide Performance
Standards and terms to rectify
an individual situation.
We seek that the
submission be disallowed.
Lucknow Properties
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Productive capacity of the
land.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
Malcolm Lloyd Ingpen
13.2 HB regional Sports Park
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Productive capacity of the
land.
The Regional Sports Park
was not intended to promote
further creep.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
HASTINGS
Requested Zone Changes
152
120
9
This application should be
dealt with separately, if and
when the existing sports park
land area is fully utilised and
further land is required for the
regional sports facility.
76
Golden Oak
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Productive capacity of the
land.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
20
Bunnings Limited
6.2 Plains Production Zone
33.1.2 Definitions
7.3.3 Objectives and Policies
14.1.5.1 Light industrial Zone
14.1.3 Objectives and Policies
Oppose
The application is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
The submitter has previously
applied to change the zoning
of the land in question. That
application was considered by
Council and declined. The
decision to decline was
reinforced following an
Environment Court Appeal in
2011.
All of the valid reasons
outlined in the Environment
Court decision still stand.
There are no new reasons to
support the application.
All amendments requested in
support of this application
should be declined.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
52
Elwood Road Holdings
14.1.5.5 Tomoana Food industry
Zone
14.1.6 General Performance
Standards
14.1Industrial
Oppose
An original Plan change was
granted in 2012 with specific
terms and conditions re the
purpose of the zoning and
future development. The
decisions still stand.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
10
27.1.6 General Performance
Standards & terms
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Productive capacity of the
land.
All amendments requested in
support of this application
should be declined.
182
Mountcastle, Gaylene
2.4 Urban strategy
Oppose in part
During the formation of the
HPUD Strategy this
organisation objected to the
inclusion of the Kaiapo rd
planned development area.
The reasons being: reverse
sensitivity, right to farm
concerns, drainage issues
and the ongoing viability of
the Southland Drain.
There are possible options for
the development which may
offer better solutions for a
portion of the area outlined in
the HPUD Strategy. For
example limiting the size of
the proposed area to between
Hastings urban and the
northern side of Kaiapo Road.
We seek that the
submission be allowed in
that a portion of the area
could be suited to future
development if drainage
solutions are found and the
demand for redevelopment
of the land is proven.
145
Lansdale Development
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Productive capacity of the
land.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
132
K Stone & D Whiting
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Productive capacity of the
land.
11
71
Geor Family Trust
30.1.6 Subdivision Site Standards and
Terms
Oppose
The land sits within the plains
zone. Rules should be
applied consistently for all
properties across zones.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
HAVELOCK NORTH
Requested Zone Changes
16
Bourke, M
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Current and potential
productive capacity of the
land.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
69
GF & JE Donovan
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Current and potential
productive capacity of the
land.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
146
Lansdale Development
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Current and potential
productive capacity of the
land.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
43
Donovan, Jill & Geoff
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Current and potential
productive capacity of the
land.
Rezoning this area of land
would remove a number of
existing lifestyle sites in the
highly sought after Havelock
North Area. This in turn would
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
12
drive demand for new lifestyle
sites to be provided for.
170
McNamara, Steve & Julia
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Current and potential
productive capacity of the
land.
Rezoning this area of land
would remove a number of
existing lifestyle sites in the
highly sought after Havelock
North Area. This in turn would
drive demand for new lifestyle
sites to be provided for.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
286
Wezel, Carl & Caron
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
Current and potential
productive capacity of the
land.
Rezoning this area of land
would remove a number of
existing lifestyle sites in the
highly sought after Havelock
North Area. This in turn would
drive demand for new lifestyle
sites to be provided for.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
142
Lansdale Developments
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Support with
amendments
The proposed area rounds off
the end of the proposed
Arataki Subdivision and could
be added to the deferred
zone.
The main concern is the
eastern boundary which
protrudes in to the plains
zone and would be difficult to
buffer effects on adjoining
plains zoned sites. An
opportunity exists to
We support the change in
zoning as requested;
however we would like to
see the eastern boundary
adjusted to a straight line.
Squaring off the end of the
area would provide a more
manageable boundary
between the adjoining
zones.
13
amalgamate the odd shaped
end into the adjoining plains
sites to create more regularly
shaped boundaries and
buffers.
252
Te Aute Holdings
2.4.3 Objectives and Policies
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
Council have previously
declined this area for
development for reasons that
remain valid today.
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
122
J E Lowe
2.4 Urban Strategy
Support in part
The application area is not
inconsistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
The land within the area for
rezoning is contoured, an
irregular shape, bounded by
two roads. The productive
capacity of the land for
horticulture is limited.
Should the deferred change
to the zone be granted,
increased density will enable
more homes to be
established in the area and
decrease demand for further
plains zone subdivision. This
is consistent with the HPUD
Strategy for intensification.
We seek that the change in
zoning of the site be
amended to deferred
Havelock North Residential
and that the minimum site
sizes and dimensions (table
30.1.5A) be applied to the
site.
77
Graeme Lowe Properties &
Lowe Family Holdings
8.3 Havelock North Rural Residential
Zone
Support in part
Subdivision to smaller lots
gives opportunity to
accommodate more homes
and families.
The request is consistent
with the HPUD Strategy for
intensification.
We seek that the part that
would enable the site size
of this unit of land to be
reduced of the submission
be allowed
FLAXMERE/IRONGATE Requested Zone Changes
14
22
Campbell, Hamish
30.1.8.1 General Assessment
Criterea
Support
Land owners in the Omahu
Road Strip wish to be able to
make the best decisions for
their commercial enterprises.
Although some opportunities
may exist for amalgamation of
residual plains zoned sites,
this could be problematic for
others. People positioned in
the effected deferred
industrial zone will be
responsible for significant
development contributions for
the new zone. Site size will
impact on the economic
viability of both the new
development and the existing
enterprises.
In our submissions to the
original plan change we
sought to: “Ensure that the
industrial development
boundaries match as closely
as possible the soil type
boundary to minimise
operational and management
issues arising where residual
pockets of lesser quality soils
remain in a residual plains
zoned site”.
We seek that the parts of
the submission be allowed
where the boundary
adjustment requested
matches more closely the
underlying lesser quality
soils.
210
Osborne, David
2.9.2.4 Omahu Road strip Industrial
Area
Oppose
“The deferred zone is
intended to provide a clear
signal of the Council’s
intention to progressively
develop this land for
industrial use.”
We seek that the part of the
submission relating to
lifting the deferment be
disallowed
Which supports the planned
and strategic approach of the
HPUD strategy
15
119
Hustler Equipment
14.1.2 Anticipated Outcomes
Support
Land owners in the Omahu
Road Strip wish to be able to
make the best decisions for
their commercial enterprises.
Although some opportunities
may exist for amalgamation of
residual plains zoned sites,
issues and problems arise for
others. Land owners
positioned in the effected
deferred industrial zone will
be responsible for significant
development contributions for
the new zone. Site size will
impact on the economic
viability of both the new
development and the existing
enterprises.
In our submissions to the
original plan change we
sought to: “Ensure that the
industrial development
boundaries match as closely
as possible the soil type
boundary to minimise
operational and management
issues arising where residual
pockets of lesser quality soils
remain in a residual plains
zoned site”.
We seek that the parts of
the submission be allowed
where the boundary
adjustment requested
matches more closely the
underlying lesser quality
soils.
259
The Bayley Family Trust, Rimu
Hastings Ltd, Totara Hastings
Ltd, K&K Bayley
14.1.3 Objectives and Policies
Support
Land owners in the Omahu
Road Strip wish to be able to
make the best decisions for
their commercial enterprises.
Although some opportunities
may exist for amalgamation of
residual plains zoned sites,
this could be problematic for
others. People positioned in
the effected deferred
industrial zone will be
responsible for significant
We seek that the parts of
the submission be allowed
where the boundary
adjustment requested
matches more closely the
underlying lesser quality
soils.
16
development contributions for
the new zone. Site size will
impact on the economic
viability of both the new
development and the existing
enterprises.
In our submissions to the
original plan change we
sought to: “Ensure that the
industrial development
boundaries match as closely
as possible the soil type
boundary to minimise
operational and management
issues arising where residual
pockets of lesser quality soils
remain in a residual plains
zoned site”.
229
Roil, John
6.2 Plains Production Zone
Oppose
The application area is not
consistent with the
Heretaunga Plains Urban
Development Strategy.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
157
Maraekakaho Properties Ltd
Industrial Zone 6
Appendix 26
Subdivision and Land development
Oppose
The wording for Industrial
zone 6 should remain the
same.
With regards to the 12ha rule
- Plains Zone rules should be
applied consistently across
the Zone.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
187
Navilluso Holdings
Industrial Zone 6
Appendix 26
Subdivision and Land development
Oppose
The wording for Industrial
zone 6 should remain the
same.
With regards to the 12ha rule
- Plains Zone rules should be
applied consistently across
the Zone.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
157
Maraekakaho Properties
Industrial Zone 6
Appendix 26
Subdivision and Land development
Oppose
The wording for Industrial
zone 6 should remain the
same.
With regards to the 12ha rule
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
17
- Plains Zone rules should be
applied consistently across
the Zone.
174
Mike Walmsley Ltd
Industrial Zone 6
Appendix 26
Subdivision and Land development
Oppose
The wording for Industrial
zone 6 should remain the
same.
With regards to the 12ha rule
- Plains Zone rules should be
applied consistently across
the Zone.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
6.1 plains Strategic management
Area
Oppose
14-80 Raymond Road should
remain within the Plains
Production Zone.
The plains zone site
requested is not consistent
with the Heretaunga Plains
Urban Development Strategy.
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
6.2.6F
Oppose
Granting the request would
incorrectly indicate that any
Class III soils have no
productive capacity.
6.2.5B 1 9(a)
Plains Zone 30.1.6a
Oppose
The land sits within the plains
zone. Rules should be
applied consistently for all
properties across zones.
Whakatu/Haumoana/Te
Awanga
140
105
KOA Limited
Henderson
We seek that the whole of
the submission be
disallowed
18
Relevant Aspect of Public Interest
Who we are
The Hawke’s Bay Fruitgrowers’ Association (HBFA) is an industry representative body for fruit growers based in the Hawke’s Bay region.
It is a voluntary membership organisation formed over 100 years ago on June 7, 1899.
The Association’s structure currently consists of three sectors - Pipfruit, Kiwifruit and Summerfruit. The Association also is affiliated to
Horticulture NZ, which is recognised as the national horticulture body.
HBFA carries out a range of services for its members including education, research, promotions, events and advocacy. It is the HBFA
role to represent the views and interests of Hawke’s Bay fruit grower members. As the largest Fruitgrower Association in New Zealand,
It provides Fruitgrowers the opportunity to participate in the formation of policy affecting our industry.
View on Planning
The Fruitgrowers Association takes a long term view to planning. Members are definitely not opposed to growth and
development; however we do believe a consultative and strategic approach is the best way forward for a sustainable future.
During the consultation period, the Fruitgrowers’ Association along with others, took the opportunity to contribute to the Heretaunga Plains
Urban Development Strategy (HPUD Strategy) and also the Industrial Zoning and Regional Transport strategies, in the belief that this is the way to
achieve a structured plan for future development, in the Hastings area.
 As an industry, we have accepted the HPUD Strategy .
 The Strategy has been accepted by Hastings and Napier District Councils and HB Regional Council and is to be implemented through the relevant
Plans.
Productive Land
The elements that constitute a desirable and productive horticulture environment are many, and not limited to, the presence of good soil. Factors
Including: soil, temperature, climate, sunshine, like minded neighbours, access to water and labour, to mention just a few of the factors that should be
taken into account in planning and decision making.
19
Tensions have long existed at the Urban/Production boundaries and in recent years we have seen increased requests for Out of Zone Plan Change requests
for urban developments.
This excerpt from Lawyer, Mark von Dadelsen’s submission to the Bunning’s Environment Court appeal, describes the cost of the cumulative loss of
productive land.
“The Plains zone is generally reckoned to occupy about 26,000ha of the District, so 30ha represents about 0.115% of it — a very small amount. Probably its
lost production would hardly be noticed in the overall scheme of things, and could be made up by more intensive or efficient production elsewhere. …………
even if no more than 0.5% of soils of this quality is lost per year, our descendants will find, 100 years from now, that half of it no longer exists as a
productive resource. In other words we need to think in terms of accumulative, as well as immediate, effects.”
Included in the submissions to this review of the Hastings District Plan are 25 individual requests to rezone approximately 156ha Plains Zoned land.
It is any person’s right to request a land use change, however the total land area currently in question, highlights how quickly a land resource could be
eroded.
There is evidence that there is an increase in demand for and value of the produce coming from the Plains land. New varieties and emerging markets are
changing the game and productive capacity of the land is increasing to reflect this.
20