The second of two developers proposing to build new
subdivisions in Outram will have its application to change
the district plan heard this week.
Like Two Note Ltd, which is awaiting a decision after the
Dunedin City Council's hearings committee heard its
application last year, Balmoral Developments (Outram) Ltd
also faces initial opposition to its plans from council
The developers both want rural land rezoned for residential
use, together allowing up to 52 new homes to be built in the
small rural township, which consisted of just 249 houses in
total at the last census.
Two Note's plans involve rezoning 7.7ha of rural land in
Formby St to allow the company to apply for consent for 28
houses to be built.
There were 28 submissions on the plans, 23 of them opposed,
including a group submission by nine worried residents.
Balmoral Developments and an adjoining landowner, who want to
build 24 homes on 6.7ha of rural land beside State Highway
87, Holyhead Rd and Mountfort St, will have their application
heard by the Dunedin City Council hearings committee tomorrow
and on Thursday. Their plans attracted 15 submissions, and
two further submissions in response, including opposition
from the Otago Regional Council, which cited issues such as
water quality concerns and seismic risks that made the site
''unsuitable for development''.
The subdivision would be near the North Taieri fault, and the
site's underlying soil composition meant it was ''possibly
susceptible'' to liquefaction and settlement in an
earthquake, it warned. Of the original submissions, 10 were
opposed, three were neutral and two were in support.
Neighbours expressed concern about stormwater run-off,
flooding, traffic congestion, building height, the amenity of
the township's entrance and pressure on existing
The New Zealand Historic Places Trust did not object to the
plans, which included preservation of the historic Balmoral
homestead on site, built in 1857, and its outbuildings.
In a report to the hearings committee, council planner Emma
Christmas recommended the committee reject the application to
rezone the site.
Among other reasons, the proposal was generally inconsistent
with the objectives and policies of the sustainability
section of the district plan, and the spatial plan, and did
not represent an efficient use of the land, she said.
It would potentially affect the water supply to existing
houses in Outram, and increase the storm-water run-off.
The site was also on high-class soils, and, should it be
developed, the soils could not be used productively either by
current or future generations, she said.
Council planners also initially recommended the plan change
application of Two Note be rejected, but partway through that
hearing did an about-turn and recommended the committee
support the application, because Two Note had addressed most
of the planners' concerns, particularly those about
infrastructure and amenity.