Residents oppose visitors over district plan rules

Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 14, Issue 670, 21 January 1997, Page 1

Residents oppose visitors over district plan rules

Appeals against the new Ruapehu Dis trict Plan include one that would see major changes to the residential low density zone of Ohakune — something that has a number of residents upset. The plan came into force in December and people had the opportunity to appeal to the Envi-

ronment Court against all or parts of the plan. The court supersedes the old Planning Tribunal. John Katz and his wife, who the Bulletin understands own a property in Tawhero Street which is within the zone, have appealed against parts of the plan. Mr Katz is a lawyer from Auckland. They had earlier made a submission to the plan

calling for a number of changes, some to the Residential Low Zone, which would disallow tourist accommodation, hospitals, schools, commercial activities, recreation and community activities as well as retain the maximum density of one dwelling per two hectare lot and restrict building heights to five metres. They called for the zone to

be restricted to the area between the town and Tainui Street. Having failed to see their submissions included, they had appealed to the Environment Court to have the changes imposed on the council plan. And that has angered a group of residents, who Turn to Page 2

Residents oppose visitors over district plan rules

FROM PAGE 1 have a number of concerns if the appeal is successful. "We are worried that we will not be able to subdivide our land to under two hectares when the council has already decided that one hectare is the minimum size," said Sandra Eades, whose property would be affected by the change. "This would set Ohakune back becau se it would mean that no real growth would be possible in the large area (of the zone). Scarcely any properties could be subdivided." She said they can't see any reason in Mr Katz's submission to support a 2hectare minimum. They are also concerned that a five-metre height restriction would mean all houses in the zone would have to be single-storey. "It i s absurd that one man can stop all those who will want to build slightly higher buildings, even chalets," she said. "We are concerned also because Mr Katz doesn't want any land in the area used for educational purposes. What if we need another school in the area, or

Ruapehu College wants to expand?" Mrs Eades said they did not think Mr Katz, who they say only uses his holiday home about 30 days a year, should override the wishes of residents. Mrs Eades group is also angry about the appellant' s suggestions regarding trees, saying "it is absurd to ask that there be laws to remove all the trees that he has listed". The group believes the appellants want certain trees, including eucalyptus, acacia, pri vet, Norfolk pine, willow and fruit trees removed from the zone. However, rather tha'n calling for the compulsory removal of such trees, it appears that the appellants have identified such trees as being exempt from protection*They call for greater protection of trees, both exotic and indigenous, "with appropriate exemptions ... (which) allow for the destruction" of species including those mentioned above. Ruapehu District Council planner Jeff Page said if the environment court upholds the appeal, the council has to rrtake the changes

that the court orders, or take the matter to the high court but only then on a point of law. He said in the past only those people who had already made submissions to the plan would be heard at the hearing, but that this was not always the case under the environment court where the trend had been to listen to others as well. He said the council was obliged to reply to the appeal at the hearing. About 13 appeals to the plan had been lodged, which covered matters including yard requirements in the Ohakune medium residential zone, subdivision rules, forestry, the Rotoaira tourist development proposal, and rules covering utility. companies.