Pakawau Beach Park development: both sides to take their cases to the Environment Court
The longstanding conflict over the development of the Pakawau Beach Park doesn’t seem to be close to resolution anytime soon. Both sides are taking their cases to the Environment Court.
Local resident and would-be developer Landon Carter (applying as Sustainable Ventures Ltd) is taking issue with many conditions imposed on him by TDC in its resource consent decision delivered on 15 July, which allows him to develop the 1.6 hectare property and build a 20-unit-title condominium complex.
In his 12-page Notice of Appeal, Landon is seeking changes to eight TDC-imposed conditions which would require him to remove the cottage on Lot 1, certify landscaping works at Stage 1, relocate existing power poles underground, and have Reserve Fund Contributions apply to all 20 units (he wants it only applied to the 19 new titles that were created). One major challenge relates to TDC’s condition for the adoption of a Coast Care approach to dune management, which would involve removing the remains of the current rock wall and restoring the sand dunes to their natural state (which would be planted out in sand vegetation), and with the option now or in the future, to create a buried rock revetment at a minimum setback of 20 metres inland (from the mean high water point).
Landon’s appeal against this condition is on the grounds of its likely failure to prevent permanent erosion in favour of his preferred reinstatement and upgrading of the existing rock wall, which he argues has “worked well for many years”.
In the meantime, the newly formed Pakawau Community Care Group (PCCG) is gathering support and has filed its own appeal against the development, arguing that it is not in keeping with the character of the area, that the economic benefits for the community have been overstated, and that aspects of the development are inappropriate, given the natural character of the coastline.
The group would like to see the development fit better within the site by a reduction in the size of units and/or car parks; the inclusion of a public footpath; community involvement with the amenity planting to help screen the development better; and a guarantee that the Coast Care programme is not removed from the consent conditions, as it will help preserve a more natural coastline and control erosion along the camp’s 230-metre-long beach frontage.
PCCG spokesperson Stephanie Wilson says that the campground has been an integral part of Pakawau for over 60 years.
“We want to ensure that generations to come can enjoy the same level of local amenity and character that this place has become known for. Of particular importance to our group is ensuring that the council’s condition of consent for a Coast Care programme is not lost. Sustainable Ventures wants to simply re-rock the coast. This approach would create scouring of the beach, exacerbate erosion on neighbouring properties and result in the loss of access to the beach at high tide, as explained by a number of experts at the hearing. Development shouldn’t be at the expense of amenity or public access to the coast. Then there’s the question of access along the road for pedestrians, which there’s no clear provision for. The whole development appears to be bulging on its boundaries, affecting amenity.”
TDC’s May decision on the case (which is the subject of these appeals) is the third time Landon has applied to redevelop the camp into what he calls “Pakawau Village”. His first two applications were withdrawn. In October 2007, he withdrew plans for a multilevel holiday resort of 48 apartments—which involved a gym, café, conference centre and attached restaurant—after it attracted 175 submissions in opposition from Golden Bay residents. He then applied in August 2008 to build 30 units on the site, but withdrew his application just a week before it was due to go to hearing because of continuing opposition.
His third application earlier this year, prepared by planners Staig and Smith of Nelson, was redesigned and cut the number of units down to 20, ensuring not only that they maintained a five-metre height restriction but also that they were set back 30 metres from the coast as required by normal coastal regulations.
The three-day resource hearing in May for the latest application, held at the Pohara Boat Club, attracted 86 submissions; 43 in support, 35 against and eight neutral.
Gerard Hindmarsh
