marlborough property
TRANSCRIPT
SUPPORTING INFORMATION FOR COASTAL PERMIT PROPOSED NEW JETTY
GL CARRODUS - INNER PELORUS SOUND
1. INTRODUCTION
The Applicant, Mr Graeme Carrodus, owns a coastal property at 450 Moetapu Bay Road (being Lot 3 DP 3403) and wishes to enhance access to the sea for transport, recreational and emergency purposes. This proposal and the site have been assessed by an experienced local Chartered Professional Engineer, and the foreshore accurately surveyed at the time of an extreme low tide. Pursuant of Section 88 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), the Fourth Schedule of that Act and the Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan (MSRMP), the Applicant seeks a Coastal Permit for the following intertwined foreshore facilities to service the above property.
A 26.7 m x 1.8 m fixed jetty of timber construction on driven timber or rail iron piles. Optional steps to the foreshore to enhance public access are also shown on the proposal.
A 9.0 m x 1.2 m aluminium linkspan between the fixed jetty and pontoon, and
A 9.0 m x 3.0 m floating pontoon of timber construction with driven timber poles for positioning.
Refer to Appendix 1: Davidson Group Ltd Drawings No. 25610 sheets R1 to R3 all issue ‘A’. The proposed new jetty will provide facilities for boat access and a collection point for passengers and gear. The new structures will occupy approximately 84 m2 of the Coastal Marine Area. No vegetation clearance, tracking or earthworks on the Foreshore Reserve will be required other than the immediate spot where the jetty meets the land. The proposal is very similar to that established further along Moetapu Bay Road under U080768 (originally Sargent, now Hoods Bay Pontoon Jetty Ltd) but requires additional fixed jetty length due to the gentle slope of the foreshore in this location.
Davidson Ayson House, 4 Nelson St P O Box 256, Blenheim 7240, NZ T: 03-579 2099 / F: 03-578 7028 E: [email protected] W: DavidsonGroup.co.nz Principals Ross Davis, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE Stephen Sheat, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE Leigh McGlynn, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE
25610 2
2. SITE DESCRIPTION
The proposed jetty points North West from the inner Pelorus Sound coastline between Moetapu Bay and Hoods Bay, approximately 22 km or 30 minutes drive from Havelock. There is frequent commercial and private boat traffic using the major navigation route from Havelock to the Pelorus with route markers well offshore beyond a line of moorings. The seabed is Coastal Marine Zone 1 in the Plan. The adjacent landform rises across the Sounds Foreshore Reserve (SFR) to many small allotments developed for residential purposes, and continues to rise steeply above Moetapu Bay Road to a ridge level of 426 m directly above the Applicant’s property. Intensive human development is therefore a feature of the locality but is dwarfed by the natural backdrop.
Figure 1 – wide view of locality, site in the centre, existing boatshed etc. to the right. In the immediate vicinity of the proposed jetty site are several registered moorings, with the closest being that of the Applicant which has a current Resource Consent and is regularly serviced. The proposal does not require any moorings to be moved and will provide efficient and safe access to the sea for the Applicant and others who may make use of the facility for access and emergency purposes. With the site exposure, shallow water, rocky seabed and number of existing moorings, the space inside of the moorings receives little navigational use and will not be used as an overnight anchorage. Other than very small dinghy ramps, the only existing foreshore structures nearby are a small jetty with an associated boatshed and ramp located approximately 180 m to the southwest. Those structures have been established for many years and are currently in the process of being re-consented. A substantial slipway for boat launching from and retrieval to the SFR was proposed by the neighbour adjacent to the jetty, but this was refused by Council. Our reading of these files and feedback received from discussion with Council has highlighted issues that will be addressed in this Submission.
25610 3
There are distinct features of the foreshore either side of the proposed jetty position as demonstrated in the photograph below. West of the site the beach is strewn with angular rocks and boulders along with tree debris. To the east is a more uniform beach made up of predominantly small rocks with a narrow sandy strip and tree debris at the coastline.
Figure 2 – foreshore at proposed jetty site at extreme low tide 14 July 2014. Note rock and debris to the west, and more uniform foreshore with coastline debris to the east.
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
The Applicant wishes to provide a practical and safe foreshore facility for use in association with their Marlborough Sounds property. They seek coastal permit approval for the installation of a 26.7 m x 1.8 m fixed pile timber jetty with a 9.0 m x 3.0 m floating platform and 9.0 m x 1.2 m connecting linkspan. The entire structure will be 43.1 m long and occupy an area of approximately 84 m2. The seaward end of the proposed structure will have a Mean Low Water Springs Depth (MLWS) of approximately 1.4 m. The proposed length of the jetty and associated MLWS depth is consistent with well-established practise for jetty design in Marlborough and with Council guidelines. There is an existing small walking track between the dwelling and jetty which will remain. Rule 35.4 the Plan specifies that the proposed jetty is a discretionary activity. The Applicant accepts that Council will judge whether a notified consent process is required.
25610 4
4.1 Marine Ecology
The adjacent foreshore and Coastal Marine area are a typical Inner Sounds coastal habitat, with a rocky intertidal zone giving way to smaller eroded rock pieces and then mud. The site is not identified in the Plan or Davidson, Duffy etal (2011) as having any particular outstanding landscape value or biological, fisheries or conservation importance. There are no rocky out- crops or other significant natural features on the site of the proposed structure.
The structure is of the usual open-pile type as per many others in the Marlborough Sounds.
The driving of new piles will cause some localised disturbance of the seabed. However, the effects on marine life will be minimal and not ongoing. Pile driving will take place from a barge near high tide so as to cause the least disturbance.
4.2 Foreshore Dynamics The fixed piles are not expected to create any significant barrier or adversely affect the littoral
drift of the foreshore material. Naturally occurring wave action and wake from passing vessels will continue to be the main factor for movement of beach material. The described jetty is not expected to have any immediate, potential or ongoing significant effect on foreshore dynamics.
This section of coastline is clearly subject to tree debris arising from the Pelorus River when floods occur. The jetty will no doubt collect some debris over time, and it will be an ongoing tasks for the owner to clear such material from the jetty so that it does not adversely affect the structure or access along the foreshore or impede any natural process. Jetties are typically robust structures and drifting debris (as can occur anywhere, not just at this site) is unlikely to cause significant damage.
4.3 Recreational Values
The potential effect of the proposed facilities on recreational use of the foreshore is recognised as a significant issue in this case. We have carefully considered this in relation to the local context and commentary that has come out of previous consent processes including file U120516 for a proposed slipway at the Reynders property to the southwest. Our understanding is that the beach is not commonly used for recreation due to the hindrances posed by rocks, boulders and debris. There is no formed public access from the road in this locality and limited clear sandy beach space. The jetty location is on the start of the rocky area and will not occupy the ‘cleaner’ area of beach. This is to not play down the fundamental importance of good foot access along the foreshore; how the proposed jetty may impact upon the movement of persons has been specifically studied. Drawing 25610 sheet R3 issue A shows the surveyed beach profile and heights to the underside of the proposed structure. This shows that at mid tide and below an average male can walk beneath the jetty unimpeded; lower tides are more likely for walking in order to pass more readily the boulders and debris to the west of the site. We have also analysed a month of tide data (using January 2015 as an example) and found from plotting the tide heights that a minimum of 1.5 m clearance will be available 75% of the time. In reality, this means that reasonable access beneath the jetty will be available most of the time, as the accumulation of debris already hinders access along the foreshore at periods either side of high tide. Should it be considered necessary, sets of steps could be installed as indicated on the drawings or the jetty raised slightly to improve foot access past the structure. Jetties have positive recreational value in enhancing access to the foreshore and coastal land. Statutory documents such as the RMA and New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement refer to the need for the maintenance and enhancement of access to the coast and throughout the Sounds jetties are an intrinsic part of that access. The facilities proposed will provide good, safe access for the Applicant and other users, both for casual access and for emergency purposes (especially if the sole access road is closed for any reason).
25610 5
4.4 Landscape Values The broader landscape is dominated by large hill features with man-made influences low down
near the water. Development along the lower landform is continuous and has been established for a number of decades, most obviously with buildings and moored boats. The proposed structure will not introduce or prompt the intensification of a level of development which does not already exist in this landscape, nor impact upon the appreciation of the wider landscape. Boats on moorings are and will be a much greater visual influence when viewed from passing boats compared to the jetty.
4.5 Stability and Structural Integrity
The site has been assessed by a Chartered Professional Engineer with 15 years experience in the inspection, design and consenting of foreshore structures in this region. Conventional construction will be suitable for the site using long-established, simple, robust technologies. Detailed plans and specifications will be prepared for Building Consent in accordance with the New Zealand Building Act 2004, and the construction monitored and certified accordingly.
4.6 Amenity Values
The coastal area in front of the properties is already and established busy commercial and recreational nautical space with a major marine transport route offshore together with numerous moorings. Its amenity values are a mix of natural and human influences and the existence of a significant jetty will simply become part of the day-to-day developed-use nature of the locality.
4.7 Navigational Safety The proposed structure will not protrude into a main navigable route nor interfere with access to
any mooring. Additionally, vessels close into the shore will generally be slow moving in compliance with Maritime Rules that restrict speed to 5 knots within 200 m of shore. Strips of reflective tape can be attached to the most seaward points of the structure if required.
4.8 Character and Cultural Values As with all areas of the Sounds, the locality does have an intrinsic level of natural character
value through the coastal environment, steep and varied land forms and relative isolation. Jetties number in the hundreds in this region and are also part of its character.
A search of the New Zealand Archaeological Association's Archaeological Site Recording Scheme indicates there are no known sites on the subject property or adjacent Foreshore Reserve.
4.9 Cumulative Effects
Residential development has existed in this area for several decades without a proliferation for foreshore structures. There is one other jetty with associated boatshed and ramp nearby, with the jetty being accessible only at a limited range either side of high tide. A jetty such as is proposed is a substantial, expensive undertaking due to the length required, and the potential for its establishment to prompt a run of similar proposals is considered to be remote at best.
5. CONSULTATION
Consultation is being undertaken with a number of adjacent landowners/mooring holders together with the Harbourmaster and Department of Conservation, in order to identify any additional issues or concerns that need to be addressed.
Sheet R1 issue A, Locality Plans
Sheet R2 issue A, Plan
Sheet R3 issue A, Plan and Elevation
DES
REF
ISSUE
From: Anna Eatherley-7530 To: Yvonne Lamb-5381; Vanessa Hantz-5409 Subject: FW: 25610 Application for Proposed Jetty for GL Carrodus Date: Monday, 23 February 2015 7:57:29 a.m. Attachments: 25610 Carrodus RCA.pdf
For you From: Ross Davis [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 20 February 2015 9:20 a.m. To: Anna Eatherley-7530 Cc: 'Graeme & Jane Carrodus' Subject: 25610 Application for Proposed Jetty for GL Carrodus Hello Anna, Please find attached a Resource Consent application submitted on behalf of our client; Mr GL Carrodus (the Applicant) who seeks: 1. Coastal Permit for a new fixed jetty, linkspan and floating pontoon totalling 43.4m in length. The Applicant is the owner of the associated property which features an existing dwelling and wastewater system. He is consulting with several neighbours either side (the extent of consultation is shown on sheet R1, and those owners own the existing moorings also) and the Harbourmaster. Their approval and/or other feedback will be forwarded once these consultations are completed. We understand that a number of Iwi and the Department of Conservation will also be considered to be affected parties. Please proceed to Limited Notify those parties in due course to progress any inputs they may wish to have. Please find attached the completed and signed MDC Application for Resource Consent form, supporting documents and drawings. We have noted a 300mm discrepancy in dimensions on the drawings, and have not corrected this as it is a small difference and those drawings are the ones being used for consultations. 43.4m as per the elevation and Form is correct. The $930.00 processing deposit fee cheque is being dropped off today. If you have any queries or require further information regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you and regards Ross Davis CPEng, MIPENZ, BE (Natural Resources) Hons. Principal Davidson Group Ltd www.DavidsonGroup.co.nz
SUPPORTING INFORMATION FOR COASTAL PERMIT PROPOSED NEW JETTY
GL CARRODUS - INNER PELORUS SOUND
1. INTRODUCTION
The Applicant, Mr Graeme Carrodus, owns a coastal property at 450 Moetapu Bay Road (being Lot 3 DP 3403) and wishes to enhance access to the sea for transport, recreational and emergency purposes. This proposal and the site have been assessed by an experienced local Chartered Professional Engineer, and the foreshore accurately surveyed at the time of an extreme low tide. Pursuant of Section 88 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), the Fourth Schedule of that Act and the Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan (MSRMP), the Applicant seeks a Coastal Permit for the following intertwined foreshore facilities to service the above property.
A 26.7 m x 1.8 m fixed jetty of timber construction on driven timber or rail iron piles. Optional steps to the foreshore to enhance public access are also shown on the proposal.
A 9.0 m x 1.2 m aluminium linkspan between the fixed jetty and pontoon, and
A 9.0 m x 3.0 m floating pontoon of timber construction with driven timber poles for positioning.
Refer to Appendix 1: Davidson Group Ltd Drawings No. 25610 sheets R1 to R3 all issue ‘A’. The proposed new jetty will provide facilities for boat access and a collection point for passengers and gear. The new structures will occupy approximately 84 m2 of the Coastal Marine Area. No vegetation clearance, tracking or earthworks on the Foreshore Reserve will be required other than the immediate spot where the jetty meets the land. The proposal is very similar to that established further along Moetapu Bay Road under U080768 (originally Sargent, now Hoods Bay Pontoon Jetty Ltd) but requires additional fixed jetty length due to the gentle slope of the foreshore in this location.
Davidson Ayson House, 4 Nelson St P O Box 256, Blenheim 7240, NZ T: 03-579 2099 / F: 03-578 7028 E: [email protected] W: DavidsonGroup.co.nz Principals Ross Davis, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE Stephen Sheat, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE Leigh McGlynn, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE
25610 2
2. SITE DESCRIPTION
The proposed jetty points North West from the inner Pelorus Sound coastline between Moetapu Bay and Hoods Bay, approximately 22 km or 30 minutes drive from Havelock. There is frequent commercial and private boat traffic using the major navigation route from Havelock to the Pelorus with route markers well offshore beyond a line of moorings. The seabed is Coastal Marine Zone 1 in the Plan. The adjacent landform rises across the Sounds Foreshore Reserve (SFR) to many small allotments developed for residential purposes, and continues to rise steeply above Moetapu Bay Road to a ridge level of 426 m directly above the Applicant’s property. Intensive human development is therefore a feature of the locality but is dwarfed by the natural backdrop.
Figure 1 – wide view of locality, site in the centre, existing boatshed etc. to the right. In the immediate vicinity of the proposed jetty site are several registered moorings, with the closest being that of the Applicant which has a current Resource Consent and is regularly serviced. The proposal does not require any moorings to be moved and will provide efficient and safe access to the sea for the Applicant and others who may make use of the facility for access and emergency purposes. With the site exposure, shallow water, rocky seabed and number of existing moorings, the space inside of the moorings receives little navigational use and will not be used as an overnight anchorage. Other than very small dinghy ramps, the only existing foreshore structures nearby are a small jetty with an associated boatshed and ramp located approximately 180 m to the southwest. Those structures have been established for many years and are currently in the process of being re-consented. A substantial slipway for boat launching from and retrieval to the SFR was proposed by the neighbour adjacent to the jetty, but this was refused by Council. Our reading of these files and feedback received from discussion with Council has highlighted issues that will be addressed in this Submission.
25610 3
There are distinct features of the foreshore either side of the proposed jetty position as demonstrated in the photograph below. West of the site the beach is strewn with angular rocks and boulders along with tree debris. To the east is a more uniform beach made up of predominantly small rocks with a narrow sandy strip and tree debris at the coastline.
Figure 2 – foreshore at proposed jetty site at extreme low tide 14 July 2014. Note rock and debris to the west, and more uniform foreshore with coastline debris to the east.
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
The Applicant wishes to provide a practical and safe foreshore facility for use in association with their Marlborough Sounds property. They seek coastal permit approval for the installation of a 26.7 m x 1.8 m fixed pile timber jetty with a 9.0 m x 3.0 m floating platform and 9.0 m x 1.2 m connecting linkspan. The entire structure will be 43.1 m long and occupy an area of approximately 84 m2. The seaward end of the proposed structure will have a Mean Low Water Springs Depth (MLWS) of approximately 1.4 m. The proposed length of the jetty and associated MLWS depth is consistent with well-established practise for jetty design in Marlborough and with Council guidelines. There is an existing small walking track between the dwelling and jetty which will remain. Rule 35.4 the Plan specifies that the proposed jetty is a discretionary activity. The Applicant accepts that Council will judge whether a notified consent process is required.
25610 4
4.1 Marine Ecology
The adjacent foreshore and Coastal Marine area are a typical Inner Sounds coastal habitat, with a rocky intertidal zone giving way to smaller eroded rock pieces and then mud. The site is not identified in the Plan or Davidson, Duffy etal (2011) as having any particular outstanding landscape value or biological, fisheries or conservation importance. There are no rocky out- crops or other significant natural features on the site of the proposed structure.
The structure is of the usual open-pile type as per many others in the Marlborough Sounds.
The driving of new piles will cause some localised disturbance of the seabed. However, the effects on marine life will be minimal and not ongoing. Pile driving will take place from a barge near high tide so as to cause the least disturbance.
4.2 Foreshore Dynamics The fixed piles are not expected to create any significant barrier or adversely affect the littoral
drift of the foreshore material. Naturally occurring wave action and wake from passing vessels will continue to be the main factor for movement of beach material. The described jetty is not expected to have any immediate, potential or ongoing significant effect on foreshore dynamics.
This section of coastline is clearly subject to tree debris arising from the Pelorus River when floods occur. The jetty will no doubt collect some debris over time, and it will be an ongoing tasks for the owner to clear such material from the jetty so that it does not adversely affect the structure or access along the foreshore or impede any natural process. Jetties are typically robust structures and drifting debris (as can occur anywhere, not just at this site) is unlikely to cause significant damage.
4.3 Recreational Values
The potential effect of the proposed facilities on recreational use of the foreshore is recognised as a significant issue in this case. We have carefully considered this in relation to the local context and commentary that has come out of previous consent processes including file U120516 for a proposed slipway at the Reynders property to the southwest. Our understanding is that the beach is not commonly used for recreation due to the hindrances posed by rocks, boulders and debris. There is no formed public access from the road in this locality and limited clear sandy beach space. The jetty location is on the start of the rocky area and will not occupy the ‘cleaner’ area of beach. This is to not play down the fundamental importance of good foot access along the foreshore; how the proposed jetty may impact upon the movement of persons has been specifically studied. Drawing 25610 sheet R3 issue A shows the surveyed beach profile and heights to the underside of the proposed structure. This shows that at mid tide and below an average male can walk beneath the jetty unimpeded; lower tides are more likely for walking in order to pass more readily the boulders and debris to the west of the site. We have also analysed a month of tide data (using January 2015 as an example) and found from plotting the tide heights that a minimum of 1.5 m clearance will be available 75% of the time. In reality, this means that reasonable access beneath the jetty will be available most of the time, as the accumulation of debris already hinders access along the foreshore at periods either side of high tide. Should it be considered necessary, sets of steps could be installed as indicated on the drawings or the jetty raised slightly to improve foot access past the structure. Jetties have positive recreational value in enhancing access to the foreshore and coastal land. Statutory documents such as the RMA and New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement refer to the need for the maintenance and enhancement of access to the coast and throughout the Sounds jetties are an intrinsic part of that access. The facilities proposed will provide good, safe access for the Applicant and other users, both for casual access and for emergency purposes (especially if the sole access road is closed for any reason).
25610 5
4.4 Landscape Values The broader landscape is dominated by large hill features with man-made influences low down
near the water. Development along the lower landform is continuous and has been established for a number of decades, most obviously with buildings and moored boats. The proposed structure will not introduce or prompt the intensification of a level of development which does not already exist in this landscape, nor impact upon the appreciation of the wider landscape. Boats on moorings are and will be a much greater visual influence when viewed from passing boats compared to the jetty.
4.5 Stability and Structural Integrity
The site has been assessed by a Chartered Professional Engineer with 15 years experience in the inspection, design and consenting of foreshore structures in this region. Conventional construction will be suitable for the site using long-established, simple, robust technologies. Detailed plans and specifications will be prepared for Building Consent in accordance with the New Zealand Building Act 2004, and the construction monitored and certified accordingly.
4.6 Amenity Values
The coastal area in front of the properties is already and established busy commercial and recreational nautical space with a major marine transport route offshore together with numerous moorings. Its amenity values are a mix of natural and human influences and the existence of a significant jetty will simply become part of the day-to-day developed-use nature of the locality.
4.7 Navigational Safety The proposed structure will not protrude into a main navigable route nor interfere with access to
any mooring. Additionally, vessels close into the shore will generally be slow moving in compliance with Maritime Rules that restrict speed to 5 knots within 200 m of shore. Strips of reflective tape can be attached to the most seaward points of the structure if required.
4.8 Character and Cultural Values As with all areas of the Sounds, the locality does have an intrinsic level of natural character
value through the coastal environment, steep and varied land forms and relative isolation. Jetties number in the hundreds in this region and are also part of its character.
A search of the New Zealand Archaeological Association's Archaeological Site Recording Scheme indicates there are no known sites on the subject property or adjacent Foreshore Reserve.
4.9 Cumulative Effects
Residential development has existed in this area for several decades without a proliferation for foreshore structures. There is one other jetty with associated boatshed and ramp nearby, with the jetty being accessible only at a limited range either side of high tide. A jetty such as is proposed is a substantial, expensive undertaking due to the length required, and the potential for its establishment to prompt a run of similar proposals is considered to be remote at best.
5. CONSULTATION
Consultation is being undertaken with a number of adjacent landowners/mooring holders together with the Harbourmaster and Department of Conservation, in order to identify any additional issues or concerns that need to be addressed.
Sheet R1 issue A, Locality Plans
Sheet R2 issue A, Plan
Sheet R3 issue A, Plan and Elevation
DES
1. Submitter Details
Address for Service (include post code)
Email
Telephone (day) Mobile Facsimile Contact Person (name and designation, if applicable)
2. Application Details
Application Number U
Application Site Address
Description of Proposal
I/we support all or part of the application
I/we oppose all or part of the application
I/we are neutral to all or part of the application
The specific parts of the application that my/our submission relates to are (give details, using additional pages if required)
To: Marlborough District Council PO Box 443 Blenheim 7240
ISO 9001:2008 Document Number: RAF0010-CI1220
Page 2
The reasons for my/our submission are (use additional pages if required)
The decision I/we would like the Council to make is (give details including, if relevant, the parts of the application you wish to have amended and the general nature of any conditions sought. Use additional pages if required)
4. Submission at the Hearing
I/we wish to speak in support of my/our submission
I/we do not wish to speak in support of my/our submission
OPTIONAL: Pursuant to section 100A of the Resource Management Act 1991 I/we request that the Council delegate its functions, powers, and duties required to hear and decide the application to one or more hearings commissioners who are not members of the Council. (Please note that if you make such a request you may be liable to meet or contribute to the costs of commissioner(s). Requests can also be made separately in writing no later than 5 working days after the close of submissions.)
5. Signature
Signature Date
Signature Date
6. Important Information
Council must receive this completed submission before the closing date and time for submission for this application. The completed submission may be emailed to [email protected]
You must also send a copy of this submission to the applicant as soon as reasonably practicable, at the applicant’s address for service.
Only those submitters who indicate that they wish to speak at the hearing will be sent a copy of the hearing report.
7. Privacy Information
The information you have provided on this form is required so that your submission can be processed under the Resource Management Act 1991. The information will be stored on a public file held by Council. The details may also be available to the public on Council’s website. If you wish to request access to, or correction of, your details, please contact Council.
O:\Templatesforms\RegQualitySystems\1ResourceMgmtControlChapter(R)\AF Application Forms\RAF0010-CI1220-Submission on Application for Resource Consent-1.doc
GL CARRODUS - INNER PELORUS SOUND
1. INTRODUCTION
The Applicant, Mr Graeme Carrodus, owns a coastal property at 450 Moetapu Bay Road (being Lot 3 DP 3403) and wishes to enhance access to the sea for transport, recreational and emergency purposes. This proposal and the site have been assessed by an experienced local Chartered Professional Engineer, and the foreshore accurately surveyed at the time of an extreme low tide. Pursuant of Section 88 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), the Fourth Schedule of that Act and the Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan (MSRMP), the Applicant seeks a Coastal Permit for the following intertwined foreshore facilities to service the above property.
A 26.7 m x 1.8 m fixed jetty of timber construction on driven timber or rail iron piles. Optional steps to the foreshore to enhance public access are also shown on the proposal.
A 9.0 m x 1.2 m aluminium linkspan between the fixed jetty and pontoon, and
A 9.0 m x 3.0 m floating pontoon of timber construction with driven timber poles for positioning.
Refer to Appendix 1: Davidson Group Ltd Drawings No. 25610 sheets R1 to R3 all issue ‘A’. The proposed new jetty will provide facilities for boat access and a collection point for passengers and gear. The new structures will occupy approximately 84 m2 of the Coastal Marine Area. No vegetation clearance, tracking or earthworks on the Foreshore Reserve will be required other than the immediate spot where the jetty meets the land. The proposal is very similar to that established further along Moetapu Bay Road under U080768 (originally Sargent, now Hoods Bay Pontoon Jetty Ltd) but requires additional fixed jetty length due to the gentle slope of the foreshore in this location.
Davidson Ayson House, 4 Nelson St P O Box 256, Blenheim 7240, NZ T: 03-579 2099 / F: 03-578 7028 E: [email protected] W: DavidsonGroup.co.nz Principals Ross Davis, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE Stephen Sheat, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE Leigh McGlynn, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE
25610 2
2. SITE DESCRIPTION
The proposed jetty points North West from the inner Pelorus Sound coastline between Moetapu Bay and Hoods Bay, approximately 22 km or 30 minutes drive from Havelock. There is frequent commercial and private boat traffic using the major navigation route from Havelock to the Pelorus with route markers well offshore beyond a line of moorings. The seabed is Coastal Marine Zone 1 in the Plan. The adjacent landform rises across the Sounds Foreshore Reserve (SFR) to many small allotments developed for residential purposes, and continues to rise steeply above Moetapu Bay Road to a ridge level of 426 m directly above the Applicant’s property. Intensive human development is therefore a feature of the locality but is dwarfed by the natural backdrop.
Figure 1 – wide view of locality, site in the centre, existing boatshed etc. to the right. In the immediate vicinity of the proposed jetty site are several registered moorings, with the closest being that of the Applicant which has a current Resource Consent and is regularly serviced. The proposal does not require any moorings to be moved and will provide efficient and safe access to the sea for the Applicant and others who may make use of the facility for access and emergency purposes. With the site exposure, shallow water, rocky seabed and number of existing moorings, the space inside of the moorings receives little navigational use and will not be used as an overnight anchorage. Other than very small dinghy ramps, the only existing foreshore structures nearby are a small jetty with an associated boatshed and ramp located approximately 180 m to the southwest. Those structures have been established for many years and are currently in the process of being re-consented. A substantial slipway for boat launching from and retrieval to the SFR was proposed by the neighbour adjacent to the jetty, but this was refused by Council. Our reading of these files and feedback received from discussion with Council has highlighted issues that will be addressed in this Submission.
25610 3
There are distinct features of the foreshore either side of the proposed jetty position as demonstrated in the photograph below. West of the site the beach is strewn with angular rocks and boulders along with tree debris. To the east is a more uniform beach made up of predominantly small rocks with a narrow sandy strip and tree debris at the coastline.
Figure 2 – foreshore at proposed jetty site at extreme low tide 14 July 2014. Note rock and debris to the west, and more uniform foreshore with coastline debris to the east.
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
The Applicant wishes to provide a practical and safe foreshore facility for use in association with their Marlborough Sounds property. They seek coastal permit approval for the installation of a 26.7 m x 1.8 m fixed pile timber jetty with a 9.0 m x 3.0 m floating platform and 9.0 m x 1.2 m connecting linkspan. The entire structure will be 43.1 m long and occupy an area of approximately 84 m2. The seaward end of the proposed structure will have a Mean Low Water Springs Depth (MLWS) of approximately 1.4 m. The proposed length of the jetty and associated MLWS depth is consistent with well-established practise for jetty design in Marlborough and with Council guidelines. There is an existing small walking track between the dwelling and jetty which will remain. Rule 35.4 the Plan specifies that the proposed jetty is a discretionary activity. The Applicant accepts that Council will judge whether a notified consent process is required.
25610 4
4.1 Marine Ecology
The adjacent foreshore and Coastal Marine area are a typical Inner Sounds coastal habitat, with a rocky intertidal zone giving way to smaller eroded rock pieces and then mud. The site is not identified in the Plan or Davidson, Duffy etal (2011) as having any particular outstanding landscape value or biological, fisheries or conservation importance. There are no rocky out- crops or other significant natural features on the site of the proposed structure.
The structure is of the usual open-pile type as per many others in the Marlborough Sounds.
The driving of new piles will cause some localised disturbance of the seabed. However, the effects on marine life will be minimal and not ongoing. Pile driving will take place from a barge near high tide so as to cause the least disturbance.
4.2 Foreshore Dynamics The fixed piles are not expected to create any significant barrier or adversely affect the littoral
drift of the foreshore material. Naturally occurring wave action and wake from passing vessels will continue to be the main factor for movement of beach material. The described jetty is not expected to have any immediate, potential or ongoing significant effect on foreshore dynamics.
This section of coastline is clearly subject to tree debris arising from the Pelorus River when floods occur. The jetty will no doubt collect some debris over time, and it will be an ongoing tasks for the owner to clear such material from the jetty so that it does not adversely affect the structure or access along the foreshore or impede any natural process. Jetties are typically robust structures and drifting debris (as can occur anywhere, not just at this site) is unlikely to cause significant damage.
4.3 Recreational Values
The potential effect of the proposed facilities on recreational use of the foreshore is recognised as a significant issue in this case. We have carefully considered this in relation to the local context and commentary that has come out of previous consent processes including file U120516 for a proposed slipway at the Reynders property to the southwest. Our understanding is that the beach is not commonly used for recreation due to the hindrances posed by rocks, boulders and debris. There is no formed public access from the road in this locality and limited clear sandy beach space. The jetty location is on the start of the rocky area and will not occupy the ‘cleaner’ area of beach. This is to not play down the fundamental importance of good foot access along the foreshore; how the proposed jetty may impact upon the movement of persons has been specifically studied. Drawing 25610 sheet R3 issue A shows the surveyed beach profile and heights to the underside of the proposed structure. This shows that at mid tide and below an average male can walk beneath the jetty unimpeded; lower tides are more likely for walking in order to pass more readily the boulders and debris to the west of the site. We have also analysed a month of tide data (using January 2015 as an example) and found from plotting the tide heights that a minimum of 1.5 m clearance will be available 75% of the time. In reality, this means that reasonable access beneath the jetty will be available most of the time, as the accumulation of debris already hinders access along the foreshore at periods either side of high tide. Should it be considered necessary, sets of steps could be installed as indicated on the drawings or the jetty raised slightly to improve foot access past the structure. Jetties have positive recreational value in enhancing access to the foreshore and coastal land. Statutory documents such as the RMA and New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement refer to the need for the maintenance and enhancement of access to the coast and throughout the Sounds jetties are an intrinsic part of that access. The facilities proposed will provide good, safe access for the Applicant and other users, both for casual access and for emergency purposes (especially if the sole access road is closed for any reason).
25610 5
4.4 Landscape Values The broader landscape is dominated by large hill features with man-made influences low down
near the water. Development along the lower landform is continuous and has been established for a number of decades, most obviously with buildings and moored boats. The proposed structure will not introduce or prompt the intensification of a level of development which does not already exist in this landscape, nor impact upon the appreciation of the wider landscape. Boats on moorings are and will be a much greater visual influence when viewed from passing boats compared to the jetty.
4.5 Stability and Structural Integrity
The site has been assessed by a Chartered Professional Engineer with 15 years experience in the inspection, design and consenting of foreshore structures in this region. Conventional construction will be suitable for the site using long-established, simple, robust technologies. Detailed plans and specifications will be prepared for Building Consent in accordance with the New Zealand Building Act 2004, and the construction monitored and certified accordingly.
4.6 Amenity Values
The coastal area in front of the properties is already and established busy commercial and recreational nautical space with a major marine transport route offshore together with numerous moorings. Its amenity values are a mix of natural and human influences and the existence of a significant jetty will simply become part of the day-to-day developed-use nature of the locality.
4.7 Navigational Safety The proposed structure will not protrude into a main navigable route nor interfere with access to
any mooring. Additionally, vessels close into the shore will generally be slow moving in compliance with Maritime Rules that restrict speed to 5 knots within 200 m of shore. Strips of reflective tape can be attached to the most seaward points of the structure if required.
4.8 Character and Cultural Values As with all areas of the Sounds, the locality does have an intrinsic level of natural character
value through the coastal environment, steep and varied land forms and relative isolation. Jetties number in the hundreds in this region and are also part of its character.
A search of the New Zealand Archaeological Association's Archaeological Site Recording Scheme indicates there are no known sites on the subject property or adjacent Foreshore Reserve.
4.9 Cumulative Effects
Residential development has existed in this area for several decades without a proliferation for foreshore structures. There is one other jetty with associated boatshed and ramp nearby, with the jetty being accessible only at a limited range either side of high tide. A jetty such as is proposed is a substantial, expensive undertaking due to the length required, and the potential for its establishment to prompt a run of similar proposals is considered to be remote at best.
5. CONSULTATION
Consultation is being undertaken with a number of adjacent landowners/mooring holders together with the Harbourmaster and Department of Conservation, in order to identify any additional issues or concerns that need to be addressed.
Sheet R1 issue A, Locality Plans
Sheet R2 issue A, Plan
Sheet R3 issue A, Plan and Elevation
DES
REF
ISSUE
From: Anna Eatherley-7530 To: Yvonne Lamb-5381; Vanessa Hantz-5409 Subject: FW: 25610 Application for Proposed Jetty for GL Carrodus Date: Monday, 23 February 2015 7:57:29 a.m. Attachments: 25610 Carrodus RCA.pdf
For you From: Ross Davis [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 20 February 2015 9:20 a.m. To: Anna Eatherley-7530 Cc: 'Graeme & Jane Carrodus' Subject: 25610 Application for Proposed Jetty for GL Carrodus Hello Anna, Please find attached a Resource Consent application submitted on behalf of our client; Mr GL Carrodus (the Applicant) who seeks: 1. Coastal Permit for a new fixed jetty, linkspan and floating pontoon totalling 43.4m in length. The Applicant is the owner of the associated property which features an existing dwelling and wastewater system. He is consulting with several neighbours either side (the extent of consultation is shown on sheet R1, and those owners own the existing moorings also) and the Harbourmaster. Their approval and/or other feedback will be forwarded once these consultations are completed. We understand that a number of Iwi and the Department of Conservation will also be considered to be affected parties. Please proceed to Limited Notify those parties in due course to progress any inputs they may wish to have. Please find attached the completed and signed MDC Application for Resource Consent form, supporting documents and drawings. We have noted a 300mm discrepancy in dimensions on the drawings, and have not corrected this as it is a small difference and those drawings are the ones being used for consultations. 43.4m as per the elevation and Form is correct. The $930.00 processing deposit fee cheque is being dropped off today. If you have any queries or require further information regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you and regards Ross Davis CPEng, MIPENZ, BE (Natural Resources) Hons. Principal Davidson Group Ltd www.DavidsonGroup.co.nz
SUPPORTING INFORMATION FOR COASTAL PERMIT PROPOSED NEW JETTY
GL CARRODUS - INNER PELORUS SOUND
1. INTRODUCTION
The Applicant, Mr Graeme Carrodus, owns a coastal property at 450 Moetapu Bay Road (being Lot 3 DP 3403) and wishes to enhance access to the sea for transport, recreational and emergency purposes. This proposal and the site have been assessed by an experienced local Chartered Professional Engineer, and the foreshore accurately surveyed at the time of an extreme low tide. Pursuant of Section 88 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), the Fourth Schedule of that Act and the Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan (MSRMP), the Applicant seeks a Coastal Permit for the following intertwined foreshore facilities to service the above property.
A 26.7 m x 1.8 m fixed jetty of timber construction on driven timber or rail iron piles. Optional steps to the foreshore to enhance public access are also shown on the proposal.
A 9.0 m x 1.2 m aluminium linkspan between the fixed jetty and pontoon, and
A 9.0 m x 3.0 m floating pontoon of timber construction with driven timber poles for positioning.
Refer to Appendix 1: Davidson Group Ltd Drawings No. 25610 sheets R1 to R3 all issue ‘A’. The proposed new jetty will provide facilities for boat access and a collection point for passengers and gear. The new structures will occupy approximately 84 m2 of the Coastal Marine Area. No vegetation clearance, tracking or earthworks on the Foreshore Reserve will be required other than the immediate spot where the jetty meets the land. The proposal is very similar to that established further along Moetapu Bay Road under U080768 (originally Sargent, now Hoods Bay Pontoon Jetty Ltd) but requires additional fixed jetty length due to the gentle slope of the foreshore in this location.
Davidson Ayson House, 4 Nelson St P O Box 256, Blenheim 7240, NZ T: 03-579 2099 / F: 03-578 7028 E: [email protected] W: DavidsonGroup.co.nz Principals Ross Davis, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE Stephen Sheat, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE Leigh McGlynn, CPEng, MIPENZ, BE
25610 2
2. SITE DESCRIPTION
The proposed jetty points North West from the inner Pelorus Sound coastline between Moetapu Bay and Hoods Bay, approximately 22 km or 30 minutes drive from Havelock. There is frequent commercial and private boat traffic using the major navigation route from Havelock to the Pelorus with route markers well offshore beyond a line of moorings. The seabed is Coastal Marine Zone 1 in the Plan. The adjacent landform rises across the Sounds Foreshore Reserve (SFR) to many small allotments developed for residential purposes, and continues to rise steeply above Moetapu Bay Road to a ridge level of 426 m directly above the Applicant’s property. Intensive human development is therefore a feature of the locality but is dwarfed by the natural backdrop.
Figure 1 – wide view of locality, site in the centre, existing boatshed etc. to the right. In the immediate vicinity of the proposed jetty site are several registered moorings, with the closest being that of the Applicant which has a current Resource Consent and is regularly serviced. The proposal does not require any moorings to be moved and will provide efficient and safe access to the sea for the Applicant and others who may make use of the facility for access and emergency purposes. With the site exposure, shallow water, rocky seabed and number of existing moorings, the space inside of the moorings receives little navigational use and will not be used as an overnight anchorage. Other than very small dinghy ramps, the only existing foreshore structures nearby are a small jetty with an associated boatshed and ramp located approximately 180 m to the southwest. Those structures have been established for many years and are currently in the process of being re-consented. A substantial slipway for boat launching from and retrieval to the SFR was proposed by the neighbour adjacent to the jetty, but this was refused by Council. Our reading of these files and feedback received from discussion with Council has highlighted issues that will be addressed in this Submission.
25610 3
There are distinct features of the foreshore either side of the proposed jetty position as demonstrated in the photograph below. West of the site the beach is strewn with angular rocks and boulders along with tree debris. To the east is a more uniform beach made up of predominantly small rocks with a narrow sandy strip and tree debris at the coastline.
Figure 2 – foreshore at proposed jetty site at extreme low tide 14 July 2014. Note rock and debris to the west, and more uniform foreshore with coastline debris to the east.
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
The Applicant wishes to provide a practical and safe foreshore facility for use in association with their Marlborough Sounds property. They seek coastal permit approval for the installation of a 26.7 m x 1.8 m fixed pile timber jetty with a 9.0 m x 3.0 m floating platform and 9.0 m x 1.2 m connecting linkspan. The entire structure will be 43.1 m long and occupy an area of approximately 84 m2. The seaward end of the proposed structure will have a Mean Low Water Springs Depth (MLWS) of approximately 1.4 m. The proposed length of the jetty and associated MLWS depth is consistent with well-established practise for jetty design in Marlborough and with Council guidelines. There is an existing small walking track between the dwelling and jetty which will remain. Rule 35.4 the Plan specifies that the proposed jetty is a discretionary activity. The Applicant accepts that Council will judge whether a notified consent process is required.
25610 4
4.1 Marine Ecology
The adjacent foreshore and Coastal Marine area are a typical Inner Sounds coastal habitat, with a rocky intertidal zone giving way to smaller eroded rock pieces and then mud. The site is not identified in the Plan or Davidson, Duffy etal (2011) as having any particular outstanding landscape value or biological, fisheries or conservation importance. There are no rocky out- crops or other significant natural features on the site of the proposed structure.
The structure is of the usual open-pile type as per many others in the Marlborough Sounds.
The driving of new piles will cause some localised disturbance of the seabed. However, the effects on marine life will be minimal and not ongoing. Pile driving will take place from a barge near high tide so as to cause the least disturbance.
4.2 Foreshore Dynamics The fixed piles are not expected to create any significant barrier or adversely affect the littoral
drift of the foreshore material. Naturally occurring wave action and wake from passing vessels will continue to be the main factor for movement of beach material. The described jetty is not expected to have any immediate, potential or ongoing significant effect on foreshore dynamics.
This section of coastline is clearly subject to tree debris arising from the Pelorus River when floods occur. The jetty will no doubt collect some debris over time, and it will be an ongoing tasks for the owner to clear such material from the jetty so that it does not adversely affect the structure or access along the foreshore or impede any natural process. Jetties are typically robust structures and drifting debris (as can occur anywhere, not just at this site) is unlikely to cause significant damage.
4.3 Recreational Values
The potential effect of the proposed facilities on recreational use of the foreshore is recognised as a significant issue in this case. We have carefully considered this in relation to the local context and commentary that has come out of previous consent processes including file U120516 for a proposed slipway at the Reynders property to the southwest. Our understanding is that the beach is not commonly used for recreation due to the hindrances posed by rocks, boulders and debris. There is no formed public access from the road in this locality and limited clear sandy beach space. The jetty location is on the start of the rocky area and will not occupy the ‘cleaner’ area of beach. This is to not play down the fundamental importance of good foot access along the foreshore; how the proposed jetty may impact upon the movement of persons has been specifically studied. Drawing 25610 sheet R3 issue A shows the surveyed beach profile and heights to the underside of the proposed structure. This shows that at mid tide and below an average male can walk beneath the jetty unimpeded; lower tides are more likely for walking in order to pass more readily the boulders and debris to the west of the site. We have also analysed a month of tide data (using January 2015 as an example) and found from plotting the tide heights that a minimum of 1.5 m clearance will be available 75% of the time. In reality, this means that reasonable access beneath the jetty will be available most of the time, as the accumulation of debris already hinders access along the foreshore at periods either side of high tide. Should it be considered necessary, sets of steps could be installed as indicated on the drawings or the jetty raised slightly to improve foot access past the structure. Jetties have positive recreational value in enhancing access to the foreshore and coastal land. Statutory documents such as the RMA and New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement refer to the need for the maintenance and enhancement of access to the coast and throughout the Sounds jetties are an intrinsic part of that access. The facilities proposed will provide good, safe access for the Applicant and other users, both for casual access and for emergency purposes (especially if the sole access road is closed for any reason).
25610 5
4.4 Landscape Values The broader landscape is dominated by large hill features with man-made influences low down
near the water. Development along the lower landform is continuous and has been established for a number of decades, most obviously with buildings and moored boats. The proposed structure will not introduce or prompt the intensification of a level of development which does not already exist in this landscape, nor impact upon the appreciation of the wider landscape. Boats on moorings are and will be a much greater visual influence when viewed from passing boats compared to the jetty.
4.5 Stability and Structural Integrity
The site has been assessed by a Chartered Professional Engineer with 15 years experience in the inspection, design and consenting of foreshore structures in this region. Conventional construction will be suitable for the site using long-established, simple, robust technologies. Detailed plans and specifications will be prepared for Building Consent in accordance with the New Zealand Building Act 2004, and the construction monitored and certified accordingly.
4.6 Amenity Values
The coastal area in front of the properties is already and established busy commercial and recreational nautical space with a major marine transport route offshore together with numerous moorings. Its amenity values are a mix of natural and human influences and the existence of a significant jetty will simply become part of the day-to-day developed-use nature of the locality.
4.7 Navigational Safety The proposed structure will not protrude into a main navigable route nor interfere with access to
any mooring. Additionally, vessels close into the shore will generally be slow moving in compliance with Maritime Rules that restrict speed to 5 knots within 200 m of shore. Strips of reflective tape can be attached to the most seaward points of the structure if required.
4.8 Character and Cultural Values As with all areas of the Sounds, the locality does have an intrinsic level of natural character
value through the coastal environment, steep and varied land forms and relative isolation. Jetties number in the hundreds in this region and are also part of its character.
A search of the New Zealand Archaeological Association's Archaeological Site Recording Scheme indicates there are no known sites on the subject property or adjacent Foreshore Reserve.
4.9 Cumulative Effects
Residential development has existed in this area for several decades without a proliferation for foreshore structures. There is one other jetty with associated boatshed and ramp nearby, with the jetty being accessible only at a limited range either side of high tide. A jetty such as is proposed is a substantial, expensive undertaking due to the length required, and the potential for its establishment to prompt a run of similar proposals is considered to be remote at best.
5. CONSULTATION
Consultation is being undertaken with a number of adjacent landowners/mooring holders together with the Harbourmaster and Department of Conservation, in order to identify any additional issues or concerns that need to be addressed.
Sheet R1 issue A, Locality Plans
Sheet R2 issue A, Plan
Sheet R3 issue A, Plan and Elevation
DES
1. Submitter Details
Address for Service (include post code)
Telephone (day) Mobile Facsimile Contact Person (name and designation, if applicable)
2. Application Details
Application Number U
Application Site Address
Description of Proposal
I/we support all or part of the application
I/we oppose all or part of the application
I/we are neutral to all or part of the application
The specific parts of the application that my/our submission relates to are (give details, using additional pages if required)
To: Marlborough District Council PO Box 443 Blenheim 7240
ISO 9001:2008 Document Number: RAF0010-CI1220
Page 2
The reasons for my/our submission are (use additional pages if required)
The decision I/we would like the Council to make is (give details including, if relevant, the parts of the application you wish to have amended and the general nature of any conditions sought. Use additional pages if required)
4. Submission at the Hearing
I/we wish to speak in support of my/our submission
I/we do not wish to speak in support of my/our submission
OPTIONAL: Pursuant to section 100A of the Resource Management Act 1991 I/we request that the Council delegate its functions, powers, and duties required to hear and decide the application to one or more hearings commissioners who are not members of the Council. (Please note that if you make such a request you may be liable to meet or contribute to the costs of commissioner(s). Requests can also be made separately in writing no later than 5 working days after the close of submissions.)
5. Signature
Signature Date
Signature Date
6. Important Information
Council must receive this completed submission before the closing date and time for submission for this application. The completed submission may be emailed to [email protected]
You must also send a copy of this submission to the applicant as soon as reasonably practicable, at the applicant’s address for service.
Only those submitters who indicate that they wish to speak at the hearing will be sent a copy of the hearing report.
7. Privacy Information
The information you have provided on this form is required so that your submission can be processed under the Resource Management Act 1991. The information will be stored on a public file held by Council. The details may also be available to the public on Council’s website. If you wish to request access to, or correction of, your details, please contact Council.
O:\Templatesforms\RegQualitySystems\1ResourceMgmtControlChapter(R)\AF Application Forms\RAF0010-CI1220-Submission on Application for Resource Consent-1.doc