Expert Witness Evidence

IN THE MATTER OF the Resource Management Act 1991 AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by Heathcliff Family Trust EVIDENCE OF CHARLOTTE MURPHY: BA (Hons), MLA Introduction: 1. My name is Charlotte Murphy. I have completed a Master of Landscape Architecture at Lincoln University. I hold a Bachelor of Arts (Honours).

2. I have been resident in Christchurch for most of my life and, previous to this assessment, I was familiar with the general area in which the project is sited, but not the specific site.

3. I am presenting evidence on behalf of the Selwyn District Council. The following evidence is within my area of expertise. I have not omitted to consider material facts known to myself that might alter or detract from the opinions I express here. I have read the Expert Witness Code of Conduct and agree to comply with it.

The proposal: 4. The proposal is to construct a private dwelling with a gross footprint of approximately 250m2. The house is on two levels and has a roof terrace. It will be approximately 8.5m high.

5. The application is a restricted discretionary activity according to rules 3.2.1 and 3.2.4.1 because it is within lower slopes of the Port Hills Area, under the 160m contour and has: (a) A maximum gross floor area exceeding 40m2; (b) A maximum height exceeding 4m.

6. The exterior building features include: 1

- Local stone; - Large sections of glass; - Highly reflective painted surfaces (white and red); - Less reflective painted surfaces (grey and blue).

7. The building will require an access way from the Private Right of Way, but has an integral garage.

The site: 8. I have considered the application in relation to Section 104, (a) and (b) of the RMA. I have consulted the Selwyn District Plan.

9. I carried out site visits on 30 April, 8 May and 14 May 2012. I undertook these visits in order to carry out landscape and visual assessments of the area and of the proposal. On each of these visits I took photographs, some of which I have included here in Appendix A. From these, I have created photographic montages of the proposed dwelling on the site to illustrate the effects of the proposal.

10. The site is easily viewed from a small number of public roads to the South, as evident in Figure 4. It is part of a new subdivision in which houses are currently being built. It is screened to the North by a large forestry block. To the South, the land descends into a valley into which the subdivision extends.

The house will also be visible from the East, including from the Port Hills.

Landscape Character: 11. The landscape is part of the lower slopes of the Port Hills. The hills in this area are the outer slopes of a volcano and are formed into fingers that fan outwards towards the sea and the Canterbury Plains. While the slopes were once thickly vegetated, they have been progressively denuded. There is now little native vegetation present and the land has been grazed by stock. The site and the surrounding landscape can now be considered to be moderately modified, but are not yet approaching urban levels of modification.

2

Visual Assessment: 12. The proposed design is a ‘box’ shaped elongated building. The exterior surfaces are predominately reflective. There are large areas of glass, as well as considerable areas of white painted surfaces. The white painted surfaces are largely to the East side of the house, which will be the side most exposed to other properties and to vehicles descending West down the private Right of Way. This can be seen in Figure 2. The design does incorporate some local stone and colours that will blend into the landscape more easily, but these form the minority of the exterior surface.

13. I believe that the properties immediately adjacent, especially to the North and East would have a high visibility of this dwelling and its white reflective surfaces, as visible in Figure 2. Properties in the subdivision in the valley to the South would have high visibility of the reflective glass surfaces. This can be seen in Figure 3.

14. I consider that the design of the form of the building is too bulky and will unnecessarily impose on the landscape. The building is very elongated and square, in a manner that clashes with the rolling slopes of the landscape. This would be to the detriment of other residents in the surrounding area.

Assessment of Effects: 15. According to Policy B1.4.5.9, it is required that, “buildings and structures, access and utilities are designed, sited, landscaped and finished to blend with the surrounding landscape and maintain the visibility of listed landforms”. I consider that this design does not meet this requirement, because of: -

The reflective qualities of the exterior building materials;

-

The excessively square form of the building in relation to the landscape.

I consider the potential effect of the reflectivity to be moderate.

16. I consider that the proposal fails to satisfy Rule 3.2.5.4 because: 3

-

It will unnecessarily dominate the skyline for residents in the subdivision to the South.

-

This dominance will interrupt the openness and legibility of the landscape

-

This will ultimately affect the amenity values of adjoining properties.

I consider the potential effect of the bulk of the building to be moderate.

17. I consider that the proposal will satisfy Rule 3.2.5.7 because, although earthworks will be required to provide access to the site, this access will largely be screened by the forestry block to the North. I consider the potential effects of the earthworks and new access ways to be minor.

Mitigation: 18. While the siting of the house is not inappropriate, the exterior building materials and the bulk of the building are. This proposal could mitigate the potential negative visual effects of the reflective building materials, by: -

Selecting paint colours of lower reflectivity

-

Reducing the proportion of exterior glass surfaces

-

Employing ‘green walls’ on the exterior surfaces

-

Plant the site in a manner that screens the building

I believe that at minimum a planting plan should be a requirement of granting consent.

19. This proposal could mitigate the potential negative visual effects of the bulk of the building by: -

Setting the Southern facade of the building back in a stepped fashion

-

Cutting into the hillside and setting the entire building back into the hillside in a northerly direction

-

Altering the design to be single storied.

-

Planting to incorporate the appearance of the house into the landscape

4

Conclusions 20. I consider that the proposal does not satisfy the requirements in Rule 3.2.5 and Policy B1.4.5.9 in the Selwyn District Plan to blend in with the surrounding landscape because: -

The reflective nature of the exterior surface

-

The form of the building.

I consider therefore that the proposal does not meet the requirements under the RMA 91 in Section 6 (b) to protect outstanding natural features and landscapes from inappropriate subdivision, and the requirement in Section 7 (c) to protect amenity value.

21. I believe that with certain alterations the design could be made to be acceptable in the terms of the District Plan.

5

Appendix A – Graphic Supplement Figure 1: Site Map

Numbers indicate location each photograph Figure was taken from. An arrow marks the direction towards which each photograph was focused.

Figure 2: Eastern Panorama

6

Figure 3: Southern Panorama

Approximate Site of Proposed Dwelling

Figure 4: Rhodes Road Approximate Site of Proposed Dwelling

7

Appendix B – Statutes and District Plan Policies, Rules and Objectives Resource Management Act 1991 6. Matters of national importance •

In achieving the purpose of this Act, all persons exercising functions and powers under it, in relation to managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources, shall recognise and provide for the following matters of national importance: (b) the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development; (f) the protection of historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development.

7. Other matters •

In achieving the purpose of this Act, all persons exercising functions and powers under it, in relation to managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources, shall have particular regard to— (c) the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values.

104. Consideration of applications •

(1) When considering an application for a resource consent and any submissions received, the consent authority must, subject to Part 2, have regard to– (a) any actual and potential effects on the environment of allowing the activity; and (b) any relevant provisions of— (i) a national environmental standard: (ii) other regulations: (iii) a national policy statement: (iv) a New Zealand coastal policy statement:

8

(v) a regional policy statement or proposed regional policy statement: (vi) a plan or proposed plan; and (c) any other matter the consent authority considers relevant and reasonably necessary to determine the application.

Selwyn District Plan 3.2.1 Erecting any building or any additions or alterations to, or modification or demolition of, any building shall be a permitted activity if all of the following conditions are met: 3.2.1.1 In the areas shown on the Planning Maps as the Port Hills Area and as the Areas of Outstanding Landscape in the Malvern Hills and the High Country, no building has: (a) A maximum gross floor area exceeding 40m2; (b) A maximum height exceeding 4m; and (c) A maximum reflectance exceeding 37%; 3.2.4 Any building which does not comply with Rule 3.2.1 shall be a restricted discretionary activity if all of the following standards and terms are met: 3.2.4.1 The building is within the Lower Slopes of the Port Hills Area (as identified in the Planning Maps) 3.2.5 Under Rule 3.2.4, the Council shall restrict its discretion to consideration of: 3.2.5.1 The design of the building including height, size/scale, external finish, colour and reflectance value; 3.2.5.2 The appropriateness of the building site and its access having regard to geotechnical conditions and site stability; 3.2.5.3 The visibility of the building from land which is publicly owned and freely accessible by the public, including any area of curtilage if the building is a dwelling; 9

3.2.5.4 The extent to which the building, and if a dwelling, any associated curtilage may: (a)

Dominate or detract from openness, visual coherence, legibility

or integrity of the landscape; (b)

Include earthworks or new planting to assist in mitigation of any

adverse landscape effects; (c)

Use topography or vegetation to assist in mitigation or

containment of visual effects; (d)

Break the skyline or interrupt the form of any ridges, hills or

prominent slopes; (e)

Be visually prominent in an area characterised by high natural

values; (f)

Affect the amenity values of adjoining properties.

3.2.5.5 Whether the landscape has further capacity to absorb change having regard to existing and consented development on adjoining sites and in the locality, and any benefits that can be obtained from clustering buildings.

3.2.5.6 Whether the proposal creates opportunities to protect open space, indigenous vegetation or nature conservation values.

3.2.5.7 The design and siting of any access to the building, and the visibility of that access, including any contrast with natural contours and the proposed revegetation of any earthworks.

3.2.5.8 The siting of any utilities installed to serve the building, including whether any water storage tanks, cables or pipes are to be placed underground.

3.2.5.9 Any positive effects to be created by the proposed building and its associated accessway.

3.2.5.10 Any monitoring or review conditions.

Selwyn District Plan - Proposal Plan Change 6 Objective B1.4.1 Policy B1.4.5.7 – restrict subdivision and residential development on the Port Hills, recognising that these types of activities are more appropriate below the 160m contour (Lower Slopes); 10

Policy B1.4.5.8 – keep residential density and site coverage at a low level and maintain a predominance of vegetation and sense of low level of built development; Policy B1.4.5.9 - ensure that buildings and structures, access and utilities are designed, sited, landscaped and finished to blend with the surrounding landscape and maintain the visibility of listed landforms; Policy B1.4.5.11 – avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse visual effects in relation to earthworks by limiting the volume of earthworks and requiring rehabilitation.

11