This page is not a current Christchurch City Council document. Please read our disclaimer.
27. 11. 96
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE
10. PRIMARY PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED - RESOURCE CONSENT DECISION - DISCHARGE TO THE WAIMAKARIRI RIVER
This subject is referred to in clause 3 of the Environmental Committee's report to today's Council meeting.
The Sub-Committee appointed to report direct to the Council on this issue met on Thursday 21 November 1996 to consider whether an appeal should be lodged on behalf of the City Council against the Canterbury Regional Council's decision in respect of the Primary Producers Co-Operative Society Limited's discharge to the Waimakariri River.
It was reported that a notice of appeal has been lodged with the Environment Court on behalf of the Council, stating as its grounds the failure to note the concerns of the Christchurch City Council regarding the levels of chromium applied for in the consent, given the results of a previous hearing and the evidence of other submitters. The relief sought is a return to the conditions of the previous consent or a reduction in the quantity of chromium released.
The Sub-Committee had before it notes prepared by Isobel Smith, Environmental Health Officer, which detailed five options, being:
(i) Obtain expert evidence as to the harmful environmental effects being caused by the current higher level of chromium discharge into the Waimakariri River and fully defend the appeal.
(ii) Withdraw the City Council appeal and support the appeal of the Waimakariri River Protection Association and their expert witness, Professor Clark, especially on the issue of chromium.
(iii) Withdraw the City Council appeal and support the appeal of the Waimakariri District Council.
(iv) Withdraw the appeal and support both appellants.
(v) Withdraw the appeal.
It was pointed out that the appeal has no legal standing until it receives the confirmation of the Council.
The various options presented were discussed, including that of:
The ability of the company in question being able to meet any more stringent conditions.
That there has been a considerable improvement in the condition of the river over a period of years.
Some of the nuisance (odour) was not related to the "discharge" application, but other operations of the plant.
The difficulty of obtaining scientific evidence to support any view that the discharge was harming the environment.
The fact that the operation in five years time was to utilise the Bromley Treatment Works.
The possibility of joining with the other organisations appealing the Regional Council's decision was suggested, although given that the appeal content of each differed, each appeal might have to stand, but with the parties providing common evidence.
Recommendation: 1. That the Christchurch City Council confirm the appeal lodged against the Canterbury Regional Council's decision in respect of Primary Producers Co-Operative Society Limited's discharge to the Waimakariri River.
2. That the Council seek to join with other parties appealing the decision (Waimakariri District Council and Waimakariri River Protection Association) in presenting the appeal case.
CONSIDERED THIS 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 1996
MAYOR