From: Bonnie O`Keefe [[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday

From: Bonnie O'Keefe [[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2014 08:49:11
To: TCDC General Mail Address
Subject: Submission on Proposed Thames-Coromandel District Plan
Submission 193
Proposed Thames-Coromandel District Plan
Name
Bonnie O'Keefe
Address
21 Puriri Valley Rd
Puriri, Thames 3578
New Zealand
Map It
Email
[email protected]
My submission is:
Given the outstanding landscapes and ecology of the Coromandel Peninsula and for the benefit of communities and future generations, we
need much stronger planning regulations to protect our environment from Mining Activities. The PDP does not articulate the special
Qualities, Values and Natural Character of the Coromandel Peninsula, therefore:
I oppose any part of the Proposed District Plan (PDP) which allows Mining Activities, including underground mining, in the District,
especially in CONSERVATION, COASTAL, RURAL and RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
• I require the PDP to uphold biodiversity values expressed in the RMA Section 6. I require the Plan to Prohibit all Mining Activities in
Outstanding Natural Landscape, Natural Character and Amenity Landscape Overlays in the Section 32 Rules.
• The Objectives and Policies in Section 14 do not reflect community and biodiversity values required by the Waikato Regional Policy
Statement (RPS), the Resource Management Act (RMA) and Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act (HGMPA).
• I require the Plan to specifically protect our coastal environment from mining. The Coastal Zone has been removed without giving
adequate protection to coastal biodiversity from adverse impacts of mining. I require the Coastal Environment Overlay to include a rule
prohibiting all mining activities.
• The TCDC has failed to translate the ‘High Value Conservation Areas’ identified in Schedule 4 into ‘Outstanding Natural
Landscapes’ (ONL). I require the Plan to accurately protect Schedule 4 land on the Coromandel Peninsula from all Mining Activities by
including all identified Schedule 4 land as part of the Outstanding Landscape Overlay.
• I am concerned that Newmont’s Mining Activity in Waihi, including broken promises and mining expansion under people’s homes without
their consent, is a threat to our small coastal communities. I want the Plan to Prohibit Mining Activities under people’s homes.
• I need to be confident that the TCDC has recognised the views of tangata whenua on mining in the PDP.
I oppose Section 37 - Mining Activities.
• Section 37.4 Note 1 fails to provide any rules for Underground Mining Activities in affected Zones outside the access zone.
• I want the TCDC to amend Section 37.4 Table 1 of the PDP to state that all Mining Activities are Prohibited in all Zones, including
prospecting and exploration, or other such relief that has the same effect.
• I support Quarrying activities to be separated from Mining Activities to avoid confusion.
I oppose Section 14 - Mining Activities.
• I want the language of in Section 14.1 (Mining Activities) to clearly state how future mining activities will have a major adverse impact on
the unique Conservation Values and Natural Character of the Coromandel. We must acknowledge the adverse impacts of the modern
Mining Industry on small communities.
• I want the TCDC to remove the sentence: “The District has a long history of mining for gold and other minerals.” (p73), and instead
acknowledge that the Gold Mining boom lasted only 70 years, between 1860 and 1930, and was a small scale industry compared to the
Mining Activities of today.
• I want the Plan to acknowledge the long term economic, social and environmental legacy of historical mining in the District and it's
detrimental effects.
• Of particular concern to me is the statement “The Plan includes provisions to enable the Council to take the presence of mineral resources
into account when assessing proposals for the subdivision, use and development of land.” (p73) Along with Section 14.2.2 this gives mining
priority over other forms of development. I oppose Mining Activities having such a priority. I completely disagree with the intention of Section
14.2.2 and require this to be removed as it is unrepresentative of community values.
• The Coromandel Peninsula Blueprint, where community values were assessed, has not been fully translated into the Plan and sustainable
and development and biodiversity growth are not prioritised. I support the council to change the wording in the PDP to uphold these
Pagevalues
751
expressed by Coromandel communities.
Submission
193
• There is no acknowledgment of the fact that a large number of Coromandel residents are opposed to mining, TCDC must
acknowledge
this, and that the 40 year history of the ‘No Mining’ campaign in Coromandel has contributed significantly to our Natural Character.
In summary: I require the plan to be amended so that all mining activities are prohibitied in all zones and overlays, or other such relief that
has the same effect, and the language amended in Section 14 to accurately represent the history of mining and the opposition to it.
The special nature of the Coromandel warrants robust protection especially as there is so much economic revenue and employment
dependent on our reputation as a clean green holiday destination. It is vital we do not allow mining into the Peninsula, as this is contrary to
the existing Natural Character of the Thames-Coromandel District.
I would like to speak to my submission.

No
I would consider presenting a joint case with others who have made a similar submission.

No
I would like to thank the Council for this opportunity to submit on the PDP.
Yours sincerely,
Bonnie O'Keefe
Date
11/03/2014
Page 752
Submission 194
Page 753
Submission 194
Page 754
Submission 194
Page 755
Submission 195
Proposed Thames Coromandel District Plan
Submission by
/
I
Address:
Phone'
.-
Email.
Given the outstanding landscapes and ecology of the C o r o m n d e l Peninsula, w e need
much stronger planning regulations to protect our environment from Industrial Mining
Activities, for the benefit of communities and future generations. The PDP d o e s not
articulate the special Qualities, Values and Natural Character o f the Coromandel Peninsula,
therefore:
I o p p o s e any part of the Proposed District Plan j DP) which allows Mining
Activities. includinci underaround mmmci. in the District. esDeciallv in
n d RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
•
I require the PDP to uphold biodiversity values expressed in the RMA Section 6. I require the Plan to Prohibit
all Mining Activities in Outstanding Natural Landscape, Natural Character and Amenity Landscape
Overlays in the Section 32 Rules.
•
The Objectives and Policies in Section 14 do not reflect community and biodiversity values required by the
Waikato Regional Policy Statement (RPS), the Resource Management Act (RMA) and Hauraki Gulf Marine
Park Act (HGMPA),
•
I require the Plan to specifically protect our coastal environment from mining. The Coastal Zone has been
removed without giving adequate protection to coastal biodiversity from adverse impacts of mining. I require
the Coastal Environment Overlay to include a rule prohibiting all mining activities.
•
The TCDC has failed to translate the 'High Value Conservation Areas' identified in Schedule 4 into
'Outstanding Natural Landscapes' (ONL). I require the Plan to accurately protect Schedule 4 land on the
Coromandel Peninsula from all Mining Activities by including all identified Schedule 4 land within the
Conservation Zone and classifying mining activities as prohibited activities.
•
I am concerned that Newmont's Mining Activity in Waihi, including broken promises and mining expansion
under people's homes without their consent, is a threat to our small coastal communities. I want the Plan to
Prohibit Mining Activities under people's homes.
I need to be confident that the TCDC has recognised the views of tangata whenua on mining in the PDP.
I o p p o s e Section 37 - Mining Activities.
•
Section 37.4 Note 1 fails to provide any rules for Underground Mining Activities in affected Zones outside the
access zone.
•
I want the TCDC to amend Section 37.4 Table 1 of the PDP to state that all Mining Activities are Prohibited
in all Zones, including prospecting and exploration, or other such relief that has the same effect.
•
1 support Quarrying activities to be separated from Mining Activities to avoid confusion.
Page 756
Submission 195
I o p p o s e Section 14 * Mining Activities.
•
I want the language of in Section 14.1 (Mining Activities) to clearly state how future mining activities will have
a major adverse impact on the unique Conservation Values and Natural Character of the Coromandel. We
must acknowledge the adverse impacts of the modern Mining Industry on small communities.
•
I want the TCDC to remove the sentence: 'The District has a long history of mining for gold and other
minerals." (p73), and instead acknowledge that the Gold Mining boom lasted only 70 years, between 1860
and 1930, and was a small scale industry compared to the Mining Activities of today.
•
I want the Plan to acknowledge the long term economic, social and environmental legacy and the detrimental
effects of historical mining in the District.
•
Of particular concern to me is the statement "The Plan includes provisions to enable the Council to take the
presence of mineral resources into account when assessing proposals for the subdivision, use and
development of land." (p73) Along with Section 14.2.2 this gives mining priority over other forms of
development. I oppose Mining Activities having such a priority. I completely disagree with the intention of
Section 14,2,2 and require this to be removed as it is unrepresentative of community values.
•
The Coromandel Peninsula Blueprint, where community values were assessed, has not been fully translated
into the Plan and sustainable and development and biodiversity growth are not prioritised. I support the
council to change the wording in the PDP to uphold these values expressed by Coromandel communities.
•
There is no acknowledgment of the fact that a large number of Coromandel residents are opposed to mining,
TCDC must acknowledge this, and that the 40 year history of the 'No Mining' campaign in Coromandel has
contributed significantly to our Natural Character.
In summary: I require the plan to be amended so that all mining activities are prohibitied in all zones and
overlays, or other such relief that has the same effect, and the language amended in Section 14 to accurately
represent the history of mining and the opposition to it.
The special nature of the Coromandel warrants robust protection especially a s there is so
much economic revenue and employment dependent o n our reputation a s a clean green
holiday destination. It is vital w e do not allow mining into the Peninsula, a s this is contrary
to the existing Natural Character of the Thames-Coromandel District.
Nlv
further comments:
C
/
•
I would like to speak to my submission.
I would consider presenting a joint case with others who have made a similar submission.
I v.ould like to thank the Council for this opportunity to submit on the PDP.
Y irs sincerely,
Signare:
Date:
/
.
Page 757
Submission 196
Page 758
Submission 196
Page 759
Submission 196
Page 760
Submission 197
Proposed Thames Coromandel District Plan
Submission by
Narr3:
iT
AddresE
Poe:
-
>E•;."
Email:---TJ4T
Given the outstanding landscapes and ecology of the Coromandel Peninsula, we need
much stronger planning regulations to protect our environment from Industrial Mining
Activities, for the benefit o f communities and future generations. The PDP d o e s not
articulate the special Qualities, Values and Natural Character o f the Coromandel Peninsula,
therefore:
I oppose any part of the Proposed District Plan (PDP) which allows Mninq
Activities, including underground mining, in the District, especially in
CONSERVATION, COASTAL, RURAL and RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
•
I require the PDP to uphold biodiversity values expressed in the RMA Section 6. I require the Plan to Prohibit
all Mining Activities in Outstanding Natural Landscape, Natural Character and Amenity Landscape
Overlays in the Section 32 Rules.
•
The Objectives and Policies in Section 14 do not reflect community and biodiversity values required by the
Waikato Regional Policy Statement (RPS), the Resource Management Act (RMA) and Hauraki Gulf Marine
Park Act (HGMPA).
•
I require the Plan to specifically protect our coastal environment from mining. The Coastal Zone has been
removed without giving adequate protection to coastal biodiversity from adverse impacts of mining. I require
the Coastal Environment Overlay to include a rule prohibiting all mining activities.
•
The TCDC has failed to translate the 'High Value Conservation Areas' identified in Schedule 4 into
'Outstanding Natural Landscapes' (ONL). I require the Plan to accurately protect Schedule 4 land on the
Coromandel Peninsula from all Mining Activities by including all identified Schedule 4 land within the
Conservation Zone and classifying mining activities as prohibited activities.
•
I am concerned that Newmont's Mining Activity in Waihi, including broken promises and mining expansion
under people's homes without their consent, is a threat to our small coastal communities. I want the Plan to
Prohibit Mining Activities under people's homes.
•
I need to be confident that the TCDC has recognised the views of tangata whenua on mining in the PDP,
LQppose Section 37 - Mining Activities.
•
Section 37.4 Note I fails to provide any rules for Underground Mining Activities in affected Zones outside the
access zone.
•
I want the TCDC to amend Section 37.4 Table 1 of the PDP to state that all Mining Activities are Prohibited
in all Zones, including prospecting and exploration, or other such relief that has the same effect.
•
1 support Quarrying activities to be separated from Mining Activities to avoid confusion.
Page 761
Submission 197
l o p p p s e Section 14 - Mining Activities.
•
I want the language of in Section 14.1 (Mining Activities) to clearly state how future mining activities v'L have
a major adverse impact on the unique Conservation Values and Natural Character of the Coromandel. We
must acknowledge the adverse impacts of the modern Mining Industry on small communities.
•
I want the TCDC to remove the sentence: 'The District has a long history of mining for gold and other
minerals." (p73), and instead acknowledge that the Gold Mining boom lasted only 70 years, between 1860
and 1930, and was a small scale industry compared to the Mining Activities of today.
•
I want the Plan to acknowledge the long term economic, social and environmental legacy and the detrimental
effects of historical mining in the District.
•
Of particular concern to me is the statement "The Plan includes provisions to enable the Council to take the
presence of mineral resources into account when assessing proposals for the subdivision, use and
development of land." (p73) Along with Section 14.2.2 this gives mining priority over other forms of
development. I oppose Mining Activities having such a priority. I completely disagree with the intention of
Section 14.2.2 and require this to be removed as it is unrepresentative of community values.
•
The Coromandel Peninsula Blueprint, where community values were assessed, has not been fully translated
into the Plan and sustainable and development and biodiversity growth are not prioritised. I support the
council to change the wording in the PDP to uphold these values expressed by Coromandel communities.
•
There is no acknowledgment of the fact that a large number of Coromandel residents are opposed to mining,
TCDC must acknowledge this, and that the 40 year history of the 'No Mining' campaign in Coromandel has
contributed significantly to our Natural Character.
In summary: I require the plan to be amended so that all mining activities are prohibitied in all zones and
overlays, or other such relief that has the same effect, and the language amended in Section 14 to accurately
represent the history of mining and the opposition to it
The special nature o f the Coromandel warrants robust protection especially a s there is so
much economic revenue and employment dependent on our reputation a s a clean green
holiday destination. it is vital w e do not allow mining into the Peninsula, a s this is contrary
to the existing Natural Character of the Thames-Coromandel District.
My further comments:
I ,'.ould hke to speak to my submission.
I vould consider presenting a joint case with others who have made a similar submission.
I would like to thank the Council for this opportunity to submit on the PDP.
Yours sincerel.,
Signatu e:
>.
Date:
Page 762
Submission 198
Proposed Thames-Coromandel
THAMES
COROMANDEL
District Plan
DISTRICT COUNCIL
N
Your s u b m i s s i o n can be:
Online:
wwwtcdc.govtnz/dpr
Using o u r online s u b m i s s i o n s form
P o r t e d (0:
Thames-Coromandel District Council
Proposed Thames-Coromandel District Plan
Private Bag, T h a m e s 3,540
Attention: District Plan Manager
E m a i l 10:
customer. servicesgstcdc.govt.nz
Delivered to:
Thames- Coromandel District Council, 515 Mackay Street, Thames
Attention: District Plan Manager (or to the Area Offices in Coromandel, Whangarnuta or lVhitiungu)
-
-
no.
Its a n e a t :
mr a riCing space. / u t attach additional pages to this form.
PR!VACY ACT 1993
nci
a a : ,
I
117anrrr
II
' c ;n''
a , , a ' a ' d Sr
I, €'
,r C
. e , ' SC,,,
e
.
:
,., S
''
S
Vi'
AA
Page 763
Submission 198
-
The specific prOVISiOnS o f the Proposed District Plan that m y submission relates to are:
O b a w q w d Q t h e ( t h i o t i w , Police, Rule, Map or other Ielorence your s u b m i W o n relates to
7
p
;or SsiOfl is:
c hetner r - at Pt
! o u r vi
f
ppuit
My
R f or(OPPOSE s p e t i f u parts of the Proposed District Plan or wish to W e amendments no
the above plan provision.
oppose
Reasons for m y jews:
The decision I seek from the Council is that the provision above be:
Retained
Amended
Deleted
as follows:
I wish to be heard in support o f m y submission.
-
Y
N
I f others m a k e a similar submission, I will consider presenting a joint case with them a t a hearing.
0
/
1
Signature o f s u b m i t t e r
1.
10111
uP
d o c
Y
D a t e '
n an Y O U
an a
O n
101, l i i i i i a
t
k i g the
>
l)ini-ci P.
U
con
& 0
0
1
i
n
I could gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission.
'i
i. o r
N
Y
it y o u 1ett4i g a i n a n a d v a n t a g e in t r a d e c o m p e t i t i o n t h r o u g h this s u b m i s s i o n p l e a s e c o m p l e t e h e todoo. M:
I a m directly affected by an effect o f the subject matter o f the submission that
d'1\P0.
:1
itaffect's
the
icironm out; and
b, dons t it rulote to t - l e competition or the effecru of trade competition.
Q u N w y A w
-
,
,i1tOe1 t t c
.
Y
-
iV
rotation abort ± e P o i p o s e i i o i I r i c t P l a n p / c o s e v s i t the Conrcil—o,,ebsi;c www.tcdc.govt.nz/dpr
,
0
), '.10-0)
1,11)101'
P0m 0,1 o
I
Page 764
Submission 198
-
-
-
F-'-
ea
-.
C - : -
-
--
--
- -
-
_i - - - - --- - - I ---
--
- - : - p - . - -
-
--1
- ,
-
--
----
Page 765
Submission 198
--4
4.
4
-
-
1
:
:
:
i
:
:
y
-----
-
I
,3and4i
--)
Page 766
Submission 198
I
-
-
T
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
r
-
-
_*_
Page 767
Submission 199
Dan iela Suess
1024 Thames Coast Road
R D5
Thames 3575
Thames Coromandel District Council
515 Mackay St,
Thames 3500
Attention: District Plan Manager
March 9, 2014
P r o p o s e d Thames Coromandel District Plan
Given the outstanding landscapes and ecology of the Coromandel Peninsula and for the
benefit of communities and future generations, we need much stronger planning regulations
to protect our environment from Mining Activities. The PDP does not articulate the special
Qualities, Values and Natural Character of the Coromandel Peninsula, therefore:
oppose any part of the Proposed District Plan (PDP) which allows Mining
Activities, including underground mining, in the District, especially in
CONSERVATION, COASTAL, RURAL a n d RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
nod
fty
I r e o u r e ccc PDP t o
Mining Activities in Outstandine N a t u '
the Se:tion 32 Rules,
expressed in the RMA Section 6.1 require the Plan t o Prohibit all
Landscape, Natural Character and Amenity Landscape Overlays in
The Objectives and Policies in Section 1 4 d o not reflect community and biodiversity values required by the
Vvaikaco Regional Policy Statement (RPS), the Resource Management Act (RMA) and Hauraki Gulf, Marine Park
Act iHMPA,
spechcs .ii y protect our coasta a
1 cequ -e
nnnent from mucing. The coastal Zone has been
- coastal
dversity from ac. erse impacts of mining. I require
vithout
giving
aoeauate protection t o
removec
t h e Coascai Envrcnment Overlay to include a rule prohibiting ab mining a
The TCDC has failed t o translate ccc High Value Conservation 4reas be ntuled in Schedule 4 into 'Outstanding
Nature Lanoscapes' (ONL). i r e c u r e t h e Plan t o accurate pro:ecc Scncdue 4 land on the Coromandel
Peninsu[a from all Mining Activities by including all identified Schedue 4 land within the Conservation Zone and
classifying mining activities as prohibited activities.
I am concerned t h a t Newmont's Mining Activity in Waihi, including broken promises and mining expansion
under peo pie's homes without their consent, is a threat to our small coastal communities. I want t h e Plan to
Prohibit Miring Acci. 'ties under people's homes.
I need t o be confiban: -.-.---:he TCDC has recognised tne aiews of tangata whenua on mining in the PDP.
Page 768
Submission 199
I o p p o s e Section 3 7 - Mining Activities.
Section 37.4 Note 1 fails t o provide any rules for Underground Mining Activities in affected Zones outside the
access zone.
I want the TCDC t o amend Section 37.4 Table 1 of the PDP t o state that a 1 Mining Activities are Prohibited in
all Zones, including prospecting and exploration, or other such relief that has t h e same eftect.
I support Quarrying activities t o be separated from Mining Activities t o avoid confusion.
o p p o s e Section 14 - Mining Activities
I want the language of in Section 14.1 (Mining Activities) to clearly state how future mining activities will have a
major adverse impact on the unique Conservation Values and Natural Character of the Coromandel. "A'e must
acknowledge the adverse impacts of the modern Mining Industry on small communities.
I want the TCDC t o remove the sentence: "The District has a long history of mining for gold and other
minerals." (p73), and instead acknowledge t h a t t h e Gold Mining boom lasted only 70 years, between 1860 and
1930, and was a small scale industry compared t o t h e N1ning Activities of today.
I want the Plan t o acknowledge the long term economic, social and environmental legacy and the detrimental
effects of historical mining in the District.
Of particularconcernto me is t i e s t a t e e n t "The Plan includes rrcvisionsto enable the Council t o take the
oresence of m:nerai resources lntc account when assessing cruposals for the suddivisfon, use and development
(p73) ,Suong with Section 14.2.2 t n s gives mirkng priority over other Sorms of development. I 0000se
Acovities
having such a prority, completely disagree with the ntencion of Section 14.2.2 and equre
g
:
unreoresentatcce of comrnunnv values
- - - o o removed
Tn Coromandel Peninsula B u e print, where community values svem assessed, has not been fully translated
nto the P a n ano sustainable a r c development a r c clodiversity g : ..th are not prioritised. I support the
council to change the wording in the PDP t o uphold these values ex,cressed by Coromandel communities.
There is no acknowledgment of the fact that a large number of Coromandel residents are opposed t o mining,
TCDC must acknowledge this, and that the 40 year history of t h e 'No Mining' campaign in Coromandel has
contributed significa ntly t o our Natural Character.
In summary: I require t h e plan to be a m e n d e d so that all mining activities are prohibited in all zones and
overlays, or other such relief that has the same effect, and the language amended in Section 14 to accurately
represent the history of mining and the opposition to it.
The special nature of the Coromandel warrants robust protection especially as there is so
much economic revenue and employment dependent on our reputation as a clean green
holiday destination, it is vital we do not allow mining into the Peninsula, as this is contrary to
the existing Natural Character of the Thames-Coromandel District.
Yours sincerely,
D a r e a Suess
Page 769
Submission 200
Page 770
Submission 200
Page 771
Submission 200
Page 772