Sustainable Urban Development: Bioregionalistic Vision for Small Towns
Assignment 2 - Final Report
1. ERST340 Assignment 2 – Sam Cooper (1114581)
Waimakariri Red Zone Theorist Perspective Plan
2016
2. Preface
It ismy pleasure to be able to introduce the ‘Waimakariri RedZone TheoristPerspective Plan’that
lie asalternate optionsof regeneratingthe Waimakariri RedZone areasof Kaiapoi East,Kaipoi South
and Kairaki.PartA of thisreport will coverthe underlyingplanningtheories/approachesfrom which
the designsforthe areasoriginated,inthisinstance,IanMcHarg, andEbenezer Howard.PartB and
C of thisreportincludes awrittenexplanationof the application of ‘Geomancy’and‘GreenSpaces’
planningapproachesto eachof the three regenerationareasinthe Waimakariri RedZone,
accompaniedbya setof provisionsforeachplanningapproach. These planningprovisionswill be
supportedbymapsthat are attachedto the endof this report,andcan be pulledouttohelpwhen
readingthe plan. Itis importanttonote that ‘Kaiapoi West’ and‘The Pines’RedZone areasare of
future landuse forthe overall regenerationproject.
Sam Cooper
Lead PlanneratWaimakariri DistrictCouncil
16/5/16
3. Part A
First Contrasting Theory: ‘GreenSpaces’– (combinationof Nature and GardenCities)
Theorists:Ian McHarg (Design withNature);EbenezerHoward (Garden Cities)
McHarg and Howard’stheories promote a‘greenspaces’ approachtowardsplanning,withcities
beingpopulated withnature andgardens amongstafunctioningcommunity.While itcanbe argued
that Howard’sand McHarg’s theoriesare contrasting, the presence of ‘nature andgreenery’incities
isverymuch the highest commonalityamongstthesetwo theorists.Theyalso believe in building
citieswith communitiessurroundedbygreenbelts,witheachcommunity containingstructuresthat
include safety,andhealthyliving.BothMcHarg and Howard advocate low densitycitiespopulated
withtreeswhichwill furthercontribute tothe citieshealth andattractiveness.
McHarg’s contributionto the ‘greenspaces’ planningapproach isshowninhisfamousbook, ‘Design
with Nature’,publishedin1969. McHarg’s passion fornature is made clearfrom the beginningof the
book,where he explainsthat the ‘landof the free’or‘home of the brave’isinthe vicinityof cities
that include nature (McHarg,1969, p.23). McHarg’s theoryisbuilt on designingcitiesthatare an
appreciationof beauty whichMcHarg calls‘aesthetic’,tingedwith highresidential health andsafety,
and the abilityforresidentstoachievetheirhopesanddesires (McHarg,1969, pp. 29, 188, 197).
McHarg definesbeautyasgreenbelts, ‘oldtrees’, neighbourliness andaworthy,respectable City
Council (McHarg, 1969, pp. 35, 23, 80). Moreover,McHarg arguesthat greenery andnature can
improve the health andsafety of a community,asgreenenvirons canreduce distress,andcanhelp
contribute togood‘physical,mental andsocial health’ (McHarg,1969, pp. 187-188). Anotherfactor
McHarg statesthat can improve healthislow densitycities,ashighdensitylivinghasthe potentialto
cause social pressure leadingto healthproblems,suchas heartandkidneydisease,aswell assuicide
and alcoholism(McHarg,1969, pp. 194). Ultimately,these aspectsrepresent McHarg’sgoal for cities
to have a ‘harmonybetweenmanandnature’ (McHarg, 1969, p. 29). McHarg findsareasfor
developmentsof cities thatare of ‘leastsocial value andcost’, locatedawayfromgreenbeltsand
nature (McHarg, 1969, p. 35). To findthese ideal locations,McHargusesgeographiclandoverlaysin
orderto pinpointareasof the landthat are of value (historic,water,scenic,recreation,residential,
wildlife,institutional areas,andgoodsoil).McHargbelievesthatvacantlandareasnot of value
(followingthisanalysis), are the appropriate landsforinfrastructure(McHarg,1969, pp. 36-41).
Howard’sfamous‘gardencities’theory, isemphasisedgreatlyinhiswell renownedbook, Garden
Cities of To-morrow.Thishasa majorsimilaritytoMcHarg’s design withnature theory,onthe
subjectsof healthandsafety,acity’s beautiful appearance,andgreenbelts.Additionally,Howard
advocatedsmall communities(Fishman,2012, p. 38) and designingforcooperation,particularly
combiningtownandcountry.Howardpromotestwo typesof gardencities- a ‘neighbourhood
centre’andone ‘civiccentre’(forrecreation) (Fishman,2012,p. 40) so that citiescanbe
appropriatelyproportional.Howard’ssmall community or‘neighbourhoodarea’ isrepresentedby
hisideafor aroundsix small communitiesaroundalarge city, witheachcommunity tohave 1,000 to
30,000 people,dependingonthe land conditionsandgeography.Inbetweenthem, there wouldbe
greenbeltsandfarmlandwhichwouldbringtogethertownand country (Fishman,2012, pp. 40-41).
Howard believesthisapproachallowspeople tohave theirownpersonal space,whichwouldinclude
a gardenin eachhome backyard,exemplifying‘maximumutilityand convenience’(Fishman,2012, p.
40). Howard’snotionfordesigningforcooperationissimilartoaspectsof McHarg’s theory,as
Howard advocatedhisgardencities tobe the ‘healthiestinthe nation’and torepresenta
1
4. ‘harmonioussociety’.Howardbelievedahealthyandharmonioussociety couldbe achieved through
the make-upof a lowpopulationdensityineachcommunitythatwassurroundedbygardens,
schools,libraries,meetinghallsandchurches (Fishman,2012,p. 40-42). Additionally,roads,water
plantsand powerwere infrastructuresthatHowardbelievedwouldattractpeople tolive inhiscity,
as there wasmuch povertyat the time of hisbookspublishing.Howard’s‘civiccentre’includesparks
whichare providedtothe communityatshortwalkingdistancesforrecreationalactivities.
SecondContrasting Theory: Spiritual & AuspiciousGeomancyPlanningApproach (‘Chosan Pibo’&
Maori Spirituality)
Theorists:Hong-KeyYoon(ChosanPiboinKorea);JohnGray (Nepal’sAuspicioushousing); Glenis
Mark & AntoniaLyons(Maori Spirituality).
It iswidelyknownthat the alternate planningapproach‘Geomancy’isverybroad,andcan be used
inentirelydifferentways.However,these three versionsof Geomancy - ‘ChosanPibo’, ‘Nepal’s
Auspicioushousing’,and‘Maori Spirituality’- are all verysimilarintheirreligiousandspiritual values
aroundland.Moreover,these three cultureshave unique relationshipswiththeirrespective
landscapes, asall of theirlandplanningdecisionsandeventual designsdependonthe contentsof
theirspiritual andsymbolicideologies, andbeliefs.The ideaof ‘auspicioussites’is usedin‘Chosan
Pibo’geomancyidealsandin‘Nepal’sAuspicioushousing’.Hong-KeyYoondefines‘auspicious’asan
ideal environmentforhumanoccupancybasedon symbolicbeliefswhichwill helpmodifyKorean
landforms,asan auspicioussite ‘blessesoccupants’,andhills. (Yoon,2011, p. 244). Similarly, Gray
explainsthat‘auspiciousness’intermsof housingisconnectedwithplaces,objectsandpersons,and
specifictimingof constructionwhichwill be undertakenwithspecialreligiousrituals.Furthermore,
Gray statesthat spatial settings have anaspectof ‘sacredgeography’,withdirectionsforparticular
housingconstruction(Gray,2011, pp. 74-76). While the word‘auspicious’doesnotspecifically
feature inanyMaori planningapproaches,there are manyinterrelationshipsinMaori’sapproachto
resource managementplanning relatingtoauspiciouslands,inparticularthe ‘sacred’MahingaKai
placesthat have ancestral spiritual valuestoMaori Culture.
Hong-KeyYoonoutlines‘ChosanPibo’ asthe creationof auspicioussitesby reducing‘inadequacies’
of landscapesby ‘buildingsmallmoundsof earthorstone’,whichin Korea’scase,isconstructing
hills,inwhichthe communitywill be ‘blessed’andexperience ‘auspiciousenergy’to the peopleon
the land,and will ‘modifythe environment’ (Yoon,2011, pp. 243-244). These hillsrepresentKorea’s
cultural idealsandartworksin‘concrete form’, inorderfora communitytofeel avisual unity.The
spiritualityinYoon’sauspicious‘ChosanPibo’landformisrepresentedbythe three differenthill
sides(withspirituallysymbolicnames) thatprotectthe communityfromwinds,andwaterways
(Yoon,2011, p. 246). A keysymbolicaspectto‘ChosanPibo’is forwaterwaystobe screenedoff
fromthe view of the community’s village(Yoon,2011, p. 255), the constructionof whichwouldbe
done bythe whole community.The communitydoingthisworktogetherwasdrivenbythe religious
beliefsthattheywouldbe ‘protected frommisfortune,suchasepidemicsandnatural disasters’
(Yoon,2011, p. 256).
Maori formsof geomancyand spiritualityare similartothatof ‘ChosanPibo’. Mark& Lyons (2010)
explainthatthe protectionof particularlandresources andmonuments (e.g. cleanwaterand
mountains) accordingtoMaori spiritual andreligiousbeliefswill eliminate anxietyandmiseryand
enhance ‘physical, emotional andspiritualhealth’(Mark& Lyons,2010, p. 1756). Furthermore,
Maori geomancyisshowninthe constructionof a Maori home (‘Whare’),whichisfoursides,with
each of the sides havingcultural recognition –Whanau(family),Hinengaro(mental),Tinana
(physical) andWairua(spiritual) (Mark&Lyons,2010, p. 1757). Additionally,Maori geomancyis
2
5. reflected bythe ‘eighttentacleoctopusmetaphor’whichaimstoillustrate independence inMaori
culture, whichIwill explainfurtherinmyplanssectioninthis report(Mark & Lyons,2010, p. 1757)
Likewise, geomanticauspiciouspracticesinNepal accordingtoGray (2011) are clearlypresentwhen
buildinghousesinthe mostappropriate ‘place’andatthe mostsuitable ‘time’,basedonspiritual
beliefsandrituals(Gray,2011, pp. 76-77). A communities’ spatial conditionsare determinedby
‘sacredgeography’,whichis verysimilartoMaori geomancy.There are eightgeographical directions
(North/Southetc.) thathave cultural andreligiousworshippingpractices attributedtoeachlocation,
representing‘directionalorientation’of aperson’sbody,particularlywhentakingpartinan activity.
Therefore,inthe processof buildingahouse,there are five keystages whichare done slowlyand
carefully,andif successfullydone,the communitywillbe filledwith‘well-being,happinessand
prosperity’(Gray,2011, pp. 77-78).
Parts B & C
The three types of GeomancyI have examinedare examplesof Geomancyasanoverall planning
theory - Hong-KeyYoon’s‘ChosanPibo’,Gray’sAuspiciousNepalcommunity,andMark & Lyons
Maori Spirituality - canall be appliedinthe Waimakariri RedZone areastoa large degree,asshown
by the provisionsbelow.
In AreaA,the keyproposal istoconstruct a large hill,whichistobe named‘Memorial Hill’in
memoryof all the victimsof the devastating2011 ChristchurchEarthquake.Thiswill providesome
visual comfortforthe victim’sfamiliesinthe Christchurchenvironmentwhere there isalackof hills.
The designsinthisarea reflectthe geomancytheoriesof GrayandHon-Key Yoon.Asshownon Maps
1 and 2 (‘hill zone’),thesehillswillbe constructedinthe areasof Kaiapoi Eastand Kaiapoi South.The
constructionzone of the hill will be ata widthof fortymetreswide,have anaverage heightof fifty
metres,andrise to a maximumheightof eightymetersinthe areasof Kaiapoi South.A keyfactor is
the divertingof the Kaiapoi Riverfromthe view of the village inachievingthe ‘ChosanPibo’because
the site of waterwaysare spirituallydesirable,asmentionedinrule 1.6. A tunnel will be constructed
so that there isaccessibilitytothe village areafromthe outside of it. Inreality,the constructionof
thishill wouldhave asignificantlylarge amountof detrimentalenvironmentaleffects.Thisincludes
pollutedrunoff intothe nearbyKaiapoi RiverandCourtenayStreamthatleadintothe Waimakariri
River,whichisa keywatersource in the CanterburyRegion.The hill still leavesplentyof space for
twocommunitiesinthe residential zonesof KaiapoiEast,andinKaiapoi South,where each
communitywill have dwellings for450 residents.Asshownbythe AreaA provisions,geomancyis
appliedtoplanningbydevelopinglandandinfrastructure largelybasedonspiritual andreligious
activitieswhichplayalarge role inthe land’sconstruction.The spiritual activitiesandritualstobe
carriedout inthese areasare to be in memoryof the victimsof the CanterburyEarthquake,whichis
the overall theme of thisdevelopmentareainbecomingauspicious.
AreaB (refertoMap 3) is predominantlyaMaori areain whichisto be appliedtothe Waimakariri
redzone landof Kairaki,whichfocusesonrepresentingeightMaori values,suchasthe Octopus
analogy.The Octopus’headrepresentsfamily,andthe eighttentaclesthatrepresentMaori
independence.Foreachtentacle,aproposedstructure orlandscape representsthe eightvaluesas
mentionedonthe plan.‘Spiritual Tohu’isrepresentedbythe locationof the nearbystreamthatruns
throughthe east of the area. ‘Whanau’will be representedbythe residential area,inwhichthere
will be 40 four sideddwellings.‘Mauri’istobe representedbythe large Maori tombsand sculptures
of famousancestors.Large Rongoatreeswill representphysical health,asthese treescanbe seenas
a medicine thatcanimprove communityhealth.‘Matauranga’will be signifiedbyeducationfacilities
such as a Maori school and university.‘Wairuatanga’(spirituality)issymbolisedbythe cemeteries
3
6. and marae areas nearbythe stream.Similarly,‘Whatumanawa’(emotional) isreflectedbythe
cemeteryareasaswell.Lastly,aMaori art galleryincludingfamouscultural artworksrepresents
‘Mana Ake’(unique identity).
Plan 1 (Geomancy)
Overall Objective/Need:
1.1. To developandmodify ‘auspicious’ landscapesbyremedyinginadequacies(‘ChosanPibo’)
whichwill allowforthe communitytohave peace,good community health, andaharmonious
relationship withlands thatwill leadtothe avoidance of suffering andevil,while:
(a) Avoiding,mitigatingandremedyinganyadverse effectson:
(i) Nearby waterways.
(ii) Atmosphericpollution.
(iii) Soundpollution.
Advisory Note:
AreaA islocated inthe landscapesof the redzone areasof Kaiapoi South (Map2) and Kaiapoi East
(Map 1). AreaB islocatedinthe Kairaki RedZone area.
Policies
Area A (Referto Maps 1 and 2)
2.1. Develop acommunityvillage thatwillbe surroundedby ‘memorial hills’,aswell asother
symbolicandspiritual gestures,throughundertakingreligiousandspiritual ritualsthatwill serve asa
‘remembrance’of those wholosttheirlivesin the 2011 CanterburyEarthquake.
Area B (Referto Map 3):
2.2. Develop aMaori village whichemphasisesMaori’sindependence andvaluesbyincorporating
the ‘eighttentacle octopus’thatrepresenttraditional andspiritual Maori natural charactervalues
of:
(a) Spiritual Tohu(RiversandTrees).
(b) Whanau (Family).
(c) Mauri (Life force).
(d) Taha Tinana (Physical Health).
(e) Matauranga (Education).
(f) Wairuatanga(Spirituality).
(g) Whatumanawa(Emotional).
(h) Mana Ake (Unique Identity).
Area A Rules
1.1. All dwellings inthe ‘Whanau’ musthave fourcorners.
1.2. The earth shall notbe disturbed fordevelopment of acommunity village,unless:
(a) A ‘blessing’ of prosperitytakesplace,honouringthe CanterburyEarthquakevictims.
(b) Developmentof adwellingisnegotiatedandapprovedbythe ownerof the land,whowill
identifylandwhere there are no‘inauspiciousorspirituallydangerous’landscapes.
4
7. 1.3. Where itbecomesimpossible tofindanauspiciousplace tobuildon,the ‘inauspiciousness’land
inadequaciesmust be remedied by:
(a) A completeddwelling whichwillhave twoholes,one onone side of the house,andone on
the otherside to allow‘spiritualgods’toenterandleave the home.
1.4. While constructingall infrastructure,there mustbe regularprayersandworshippingfor the
CanterburyEarthquake victims andthose wholosthomesinthe Kaiapoi area.
1.5. At the endof anyinfrastructure construction, andpriortobeinglivedinoroccupiedbyhumans,
evil spiritsandsufferingsare eliminatedfromadwellingorcommunitybuilding bybeing
inaugurated, by:
(a) A spiritual andreligious ritual (rite) beingperformed inmemoryof the Canterbury
Earthquake victims.
(b) A small sheetisencircled aroundthe fourcornersof the dwelling withspiritual significance
and remembrance of the ChristchurchEarthquake victims.
1.6. The community livelihood mustbe surroundedbyasacredhill,whichblocksoff waterways.
1.7. The constructionof hills(‘ChosanPibo’) mustnotexceedawidthof fortymetresorexceed a
heightof eightymetersabove the landscape.
1.8. Constructionwill be undertakenwithstones andconcrete.
1.9. The effectsof the construction mustnot:
(a) Pollute local waterwaysthatmaybe of natural character.
(b) Cause excessivenoisethatwill adverselyaffectnearbyhouses.
(c) Pollute the air.
Advisory Note:
The above activity(Rule 1.6) has the potential forsignificantlydetrimental environmental effects,
and shall be assessed forenvironmental effectsunderschedule 4of the RMA 1991.
Area B Rules(referto Map 3)
1.10. All residential ‘whanau’dwellingsin‘Area2’ are foursided(asquare shape) andwell away
fromnatural character valuessuchaswaterways,traditional Taonga(trees),andmonuments.
1.11. Land developmentisavoided inareasof :
(a) Wairuatanga(Spirituality).
(b) Mauri (Life Principle andObjects).
(c) Spiritual Tohu(River/waterways).
1.12. Water qualitymonitoringshall be undertakenbythe communityforthe riverbehind the
village onaregularbasis,such as:
(a) Water qualitytesting.
(b) RiparianPlantingaroundthe riverbanks.
1.13. All Taha Tinana(treesasphysical health) shall be fencedoff.
The ideasof Howard and McHarg’s jointplanningapproachof designingcommunitiesalongside
greenspacessuchas gardensand nature,can be verymuch appliedtothe redzone areas inKaiapoi
Southand Kaiapoi East,as shownbythe setof provisionsbelow.Map4 illustratesthe positioningof
foursmall ‘neighbourhood’communities(indicatedby‘neighbourhoodzone’ onmap),witha
dimensionof 200 metresby142 metres.Ineachof Kaiapoi East and Kaiapoi South,there will be a
‘greenbeltzone’surroundingthese small communities,whichhave the capabilityforagricultural
use.Kaiapoi Easthas foursmall communitieswhicheachcontainthe core ideasandprinciplesof
5
8. Howard andMcHarg’s joint‘greenspaces’approachtoplanning,includinghealthyliving,safety,and
educationareas,reflectedbypolicy1.3.There isa consistentstructure toeach communitywith
these three keytraitsshowninMap 6, alongwiththe dwellingsizes.Map6 also showshow nature
will be boughtintothe city,where the areabetweeneachdwellingwill be agarden.Thispromotes
positive mentalhealthforthe communitythatMcHarg and Howardemphasise intheirtheories.
Map 5 of Kaiapoi Southhasone small community,andishome tothe ‘civic’centre,whichis
proposedforrecreational facilitiesthatwillcontributegreatlytothe healthof these five
communities.The locationof the ‘civiccentre’onMap 5 forrecreational use hasbeenlocatedina
positionthatiswithinan800 metre radiusto all parts of the five communities,allowingeverybodyin
the entire five communitieseasyaccesstothisrecreational centre.There will be aroadand walking
track that leadintothe greenbeltswhichwill connectthe small communitiestogetherthatallows
for the publictoaccess thisciviccentre.Since the locationof thisrecreationzone isonKaiapoi
South,a bridge overKaiapoi Riverwillbe constructedinordertobringtogetherthe twoareas for
access to thisrecreationarea.
Because McHarg and Howardadvocate for communitiestobe veryhealthyandsafe,phone boxes
(witha lock) will be locatedthroughoutthe streetsof the communities,soif one personisalone or
lost,theyare alwayswithinreachof a phone to call for help,ora place to hide to protectthemselves
ina worstcase situation.The aspectof safetyisfurthermentionedinrule 1.5throughthe
requirementof all communityhavingdisasterevacuation plans,andisrepresentedbyCivil Defence
buildingshownonmap6.
It isveryimportantto note that inthisplan,there isno plan writtenyetforthe Kairaki area.There
are roughthoughtsof the constructionof a highwaythatwill potentiallylinkup tothe Kairaki red
zone area to Kaiapoi Eastand South.Atthe presenttime,there isaLandUse Capabilityassessment
underwaytofindan appropriate partof the landscape tobuildoninorderto findthe bestlocation.
Therefore,nodesignof Kairaki will be proposeduntil the resultof the processof findingan
appropriate areaof the land fora highway isfinalised.
Plan 2 (Green Spaces)
Area A (referto Maps 4, 5 & 6)
Overall Objective/Need:
Developmentandimplementationof alandscape containing five small low densityandattractive
communities (‘Residential Zone’) surroundedbygreenbelts (‘GreenBeltZone) thatbringtownand
countrytogether,thatultimatelyprovide forhealthyandsafe livingaswell aseducation,by:
(a) Recognisingandmanagingthe effectsof the keyinfrastructures thatare plannedtobe built
on this landscape development.
(b) Undertakinga ‘LandUse Capability’assessmenttoidentifylandsof natural characterthat
are culturallysignificanttoMaori andnot to be disturbed.
Policies- Land Development(LD)
1.1. Developfiveresidential zones (seemaps4,5, 6) withinthe landscape areaconsistingof twenty-
five tothirtydwellings thatwill containuptofive peoplemaximumeach,while ensuringthat:
(a) Anyadverse effectson the environmentthatmayoccur as resultof the constructionof
dwellingsmustbe avoided,remediedormitigated.
(b) All housesare to be the appropriate scale anddensityof the landscape space itison
6
9. 1.2. Promote the developmentof recreational facilities,takingintoaccountthe positive benefitsof:
(a) Active andhealthyliving.
(b) A significantlyimprovedcommunitywell-being.
(c) Social opportunitieswithinthe community.
1.3. Recognise the needfor,andpromote the developmentof facilities foreducational activities,
such as:
(a) Schools.
(b) Libraries.
(c) Museum.
(d) TownHall.
1.4. Combine the landscape designwithelementsof townandcountry, representedby:
(a) Promoting‘greenbelts’ (‘seeGreenBeltZone’ onMaps4 & 5) that wouldsurroundall five
communities.
(b) Riparianplantingzonesplantedaroundthe riverbanksof nearbywaterways.
(c) Each house sectionhaving itsowngarden.
1.5. Prioritise andensure eachcommunityhasitsownhealthandsafetyfacilities asfollows:
(a) Medical centres(free of charge).
(b) Four phone boxesineveryone of the five smallcommunities.
(c) Local Civil DefenceEmergency organisationwhichincludes informationguidefor
appropriate disasterrecoveryprocedures.
Rules
RulesLD Policy 1.1:
1. Each of the five communitiesshall notexceedagrowthof more than 720 people
2. Dwellingsshall notbe lessthantenmetersapart.
3. Developmentof residential areasistobe avoidedinareasof Maori cultural and spiritual
areas suchas:
(a) Mahinga Kai.
(b) Native Tapu.
4. A representative community companywill be the landlordof all dwellings,setting
housingpricesandrentcosts,in whichall profitthe community companygains will be
put back intothe communityto improve andupgrade publicbuildings suchasrecreation
facilities.
5. All five communitieswillhave individual watersupplyandpowersupply.
RulesLD Policies1.2& 1.3:
1. All constructionanddevelopmentof infrastructure attributedtorecreationand education
musthave measurestoavoidor mitigate adverse effects of itsconstructionon:
(a) Ecologyand biodiversityvalues.
(b) Nearbywaterways.
(c) Air.
(d) Groundwaterinfiltration.
2. Accessto the recreationfacilities zone forthe entire five communitiesdoesnotexceeda
distance of 800 meters.
RulesLD Policy1.4:
7
10. 1. Treesand gardensthatare situatedonfootpathsshall notbe placedwhere itblocks
people’sviews fromtheirwindowsinside the home.
2. Greenbeltareas(‘GreenBeltZone’) canbe usedforsome small agricultural activity,but
ownersof thisland must provide amanagementplanwhichexplainshow the effectsof the
potential agricultural activitywill be managed,anddependingonthisplan,the activitymay
require aresource consent.
RulesLD Policy1.5:
1. All familiesorownersof propertymustsubmitanemergencymanagementplantothe
community’s local CivilDefence organisation,explainingtheirfamily’spropertyplans.
13. NOTE: Map 6 is the map above – the ‘NeighbourhoodArea’.Unfortunatelyattachedtitlewaslost
for this.BlackindicatesHouses,greenareasrepresentgreenbackyards.Othercoloursrepresent
otherservicessuchas libraries,hospitals,conveniencestores
