Resource consent madness for sports clubrooms

Dunedin City Council is going through a lengthy hearing process as part of implementing it’s ‘second generation’ district plan.

There’s a number of contentious issues. One in particular affects me, as the Council wants to severely limit what sort of building I can erect on some of my land simply because it is over 1o00 meters altitude and some people don’t want to see buildings on hills.

Another issue was highlighted this week. Sports clubs are complaining that the new plan would require them to hire out their facilities.

The council has said this is because functions in clubrooms can affect neighbouring property owners.

Does this mean if someone wants to have a fiftieth birthday function an elderly neighbour could oppose resource consent because rock music might be played? Ok, that’s probably a silly example, but it seems to be a very silly new limitation on people doing what they want with their property.

The ODT reported: Rugby clubs fear for viability

Dunedin rugby clubs fear changes mooted in the city’s next-generation plan could put their and other sports clubs’ financial futures in doubt.

Representatives from Kaikorai and Dunedin rugby clubs yesterday told the six-member 2GP district plan hearings panel they were worried the plan would limit their ability to hire out their facilities for events, which was an important source of income for some sports clubs.

The changes were proposed as part of the introduction of recreational zoning in the Dunedin City Council’s 2GP.

The changes could require sports clubs to apply for resource consent when they hire out their facilities for events not related to sport.

So a sports function doesn’t need consent but a children’s Christmas party would?

In response to the clubs’ concerns, council policy planner Jacinda Baker suggested in a report tabled at the hearing that hiring out sports and recreation facilities for conference, meetings and functions could be relaxed from a non-complying to discretionary activity.

Ms Baker argued against making such events a permitted activity.

“While I recognise that clubs do hire out their clubrooms for these types of activities, I consider that these are only appropriate where they are a minor component of the club’s activities and, if occurring at a commercial scale or frequency, I consider that they are more appropriate to be located within the commercial and mixed-use zones.”

Allowing clubs to hire their facilities had the potential to affect neighbours.

We can’t have neighbours affected, can we. That would be a diabolical development in a city.

She said her position was supported by the 39 noise complaints received by the council between 2000 and 2015 relating to five rugby and football clubs having late-night functions.

That’s about two and a half complaints per year, and it doesn’t say whether it involved multiple complaints about one function.

And it doesn’t say if those were non-sports related events when the complaints were made, so it’s not clear if there is any problem with hiring out facilities for non-sports uses.

I have some local knowledge here, back in the day I played rugby for Kaikorai and attended many sports events at their facilities. I was involved in running some of them.

The last event I attended there was the club’s centenary a few years ago. I presume they needed resource consent to put up the marquee.

If council clampdowns ruin the viability of sports clubs that are already struggling for members, players and funds then there may be no more anniversaries.

This looks like local body bureaucracy gone mad. Nanny city stupidity, where everyone is able to dictate what other citizens can’t do.

 

Leave a comment

12 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  19th June 2016

    As ever, the proper solution is universal tradeable property rights including noise and pollution standards for neighbours. Then fire all the planning paper pushers.

    Reply
    • Peter Kane

       /  19th June 2016

      ” Then fire all the planning paper pushers.”
      Hard to see how we could be any worse off from what I’ve seen, Regrettably the RMA has (as has for many years) become a self serving (self enriching) bureaucracy. Officers leaving councils to form their own business to harness this monster.
      Wonder what Sir Geoffrey and Simon Upton think of their work now. Actually, the Treat provisions in the RMA are just one example as to where it was all heading (despite, probably some good intention).

      .

      Reply
  2. David

     /  19th June 2016

    “That’s about two and a half complaints per year, and it doesn’t say whether it involved multiple complaints about one function.”

    Or one person complaining 39 times…..

    Reply
  3. duperez

     /  19th June 2016

    I’m sure the good folk of Kaikorai would have the wit when hiring out their clubrooms for a five year old’s birthday party to insist the application says it’s an occasion to get kids together to play games, i.e. sports.
    When it’s a golden wedding function I assume it’s actually a gathering for wheelchair rugby.

    If the applicants then don’t actually do the activities detailed I’m sure the Council officials sitting in their cold cars, binoculars around their necks, on racing in to stop proceedings, will be told that what they have observed are the pre-match rituals. Not observing some main wheelchair event just means they haven’t got to that point yet.

    Reply
    • Beautiful: Lie to get around bureaucratic stupidity run riot…

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  19th June 2016

        It’s not really lying if they have an egg & spoon race.

        Reply
        • Peter Kane

           /  19th June 2016

          It’s Sunday morning – go to Church like a proper Christian.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  19th June 2016

            I’m an agnostic. I just set aside 5 minutes on a Sunday to wonder about it.

            Reply
      • duperez

         /  19th June 2016

        Is lying better or worse than bureaucratic stupidity run riot? Is there differentiation between who is doing the lying and the quality and level of acceptance of it.

        Reply
  4. -D

     /  19th June 2016

    This appears to be Dunedin’s approach to limiting immigration.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Alan Wilkinson Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: