|
This paper uses Whitianga Waterways
as a case study of coastal development and was delivered by Bain Cross to the Coasts and Ports Australasian
Conference in 2003. This paper is also available to
download (109Kb PDF)
Setting: Coromandel Peninsula
- Proximity to one-third NZ population
- Constant development pressure last 30 years
- Development pressure & land values increasing
- Coastal land at a premium
Policy Context
District Plan strategy:
- Concentrate development in 7 main towns, and strongly limit other coastal development
- Fully service those towns
- Identify future development areas
- Rezone areas when appropriate
Future Development areas
Exclude:
- Capital intensive activities (forestry, glasshouses, etc.)
- Land modification (quarries, earthworks etc.)
- Subdivision of land
Whitianga:
- One of 7 main towns on the Coromandel Peninsula
- Identified for growth potential for last 30 years
- Fully serviced, but with stormwater disposal problems
- Infrastructure developed
Whitianga Waterways Concept
- 1500 lot canal housing project, on 220 hectares of land
- Access by 1500m harbour channel
- Canals for vessels drawing 1.5m
- Relocate State highway to bypass town centre
- Design residential neighbourhoods
- Identify four different housing areas
- Public access along all canals (private frontage)
- Local commercial centre, access by canal and road
- About 1500 properties when finished
- Permanent population of 5,200
- About 28 years to complete
District Plan Provisions
- Flexibility to deal with changing markets, political situation
- Certainty to satisfy environmental, community concerns
- Durable to transcend at least 7 changes of Council and two District Plan reviews
- Must work in practice
Anticipated status of the canals
Same model as Pauanui:
- Public ownership
- Vested in Council as reserve
- Available to all, subject to reserve management plan
Final status of canals
- Private ownership
- Vested in body corporate
- Central part available to public, administered by body corporate, Regional and District Councils
Analysis of application process
- Total time concept to approval 4 years 9 months
- Concept development & research 2 years, 42% of total
- “Waiting” time 26.25 months, 46% total, all within final 2 years 9 months
- Remaining 12% hearings time, deliberations, etc.
Conclusions
- Plan provisions must anticipate market and political changes over very long period (probably 28 years)
- Resource Management Act deals poorly with land/water jurisdiction
- Change from public to private ownership of canals significant; private status of canals yet to be proven
- Long delays “waiting” unacceptable
- Contest between iwi needs Central Government resolution
Purpose of RM Act
Sustainable management of resources:
- Tools for assessing information not available
- Purpose difficult if not impossible to monitor
Sustainable management v sustainable development:
- Can demonstrate that Whitianga Waterways is a sustainable development
- Difficult/impossible to demonstrate that this growth in Whitianga is sustainable management
|
