Some meeting of the minds, and controversy, as PC78 hearing reconvenes

JULIA WADE

Water supply, massive reticulation tanks, housing numbers and surprising comments querying locals’ right to influence the future of Mangawhai, were all part of the reconvened hearing for Mangawhai Central’s proposed plan change, PC78, on February 3.

Mangawhai Village’s Library Hall was packed for the first part of the hearing with a large crowd of interested residents and members of community watchdog organisation, Mangawhai Matters Society Inc (MM).

All eyes were on Kaipara District Council (KDC) officers and Mangawhai Central (MC) representatives as they presented answers to requests from the November 2020 three-day meeting by KDC appointed independent commissioner panel, Greg Hill (chair), David Hill and councillor/deputy mayor Anna Kurnow.

The reconvened hearing was to allow MC’s supplementary expert evidence and KDC’s report on infrastructure planning and funding to be heard, as well as for council officers and MC representatives to make any additional comments.

Water supply conditions

MM chair Doug Lloyd says that while KDC officers were still in agreement with most of MC’s proposals, the community group were ‘quite happy’ with council’s change in attitude relating to water supply and dismissing a secondary access route to MC via Old Waipu Road.

“That was on the original plan but scrapped at this stage due to the streets residents not receiving enough information to make submissions. Council also said MC has to have a reticulated water supply in place and they came back with some design guidelines which they said they didn’t need before,” he says. “We know the commissioners will also come back with some stringent conditions though.”

On January 8, Northland Regional Council (NRC) granted resource consent for MC ‘to take water from an unnamed tributary (stream) of the Mangawhai Harbour’. The water is to fill the developer’s answer to the reliable water supply question – the construction of a 100,000 cubic metre reservoir which aims to service a reticulated area of approximately 420 homes, 200 retirement units as well as retail in MC subzones 3a and 1. Location of the onsite holding tank has yet to be confirmed although MC’s experts reports identify it being on the northern boundary of the development.

Due to MM only finding out about the consent on the day of the hearing, Lloyd says they do not fully understand the details as yet.

“It does sound a bit crazy… the streams only have a high-flow in winter which is when MC are allowed to take the water to fill the tank, and they need to get enough to last

through summer for all the houses in the subzone,” he says. “They need to settle the tank high enough to get pressure, and treat the water… the expense will be huge. Who is going to pay for that wasn’t made clear, although suggestions were made that it would have to be council or privately funded.”

Supplementary rainwater tanks, varying from 500 – 5000 litres, are also being proposed to supply the toilets and laundries in the reticulated area.

Gasps from the gallery

The idea from one MC expert that section size has been matched to existing Mangawhai lots ‘so to not appear alien’ and an extra 1000 houses is not ‘game changing’, did not go down well with the audience. However, it was the closing statements by MC’s lawyer, Ian Gordon, which grabbed people’s attention and even drew a collective gasp from the crowd.

On his closing legal submission, Gordon states that changes necessary to provide economic and residential growth is ‘opposed by… largely existing residents who seek the retention of Mangawhai’s existing character’, but will be appreciated in particular by future locals choosing to reside in MC… ‘the views of existing residents who resist change… should not predominate over the views of future residents for whom change will be a positive’.

One local resident says she felt the lawyer was insinuating that current residents had no right to stop changes which may benefit others who choose to live in Mangawhai in the coming years. Comments on local social media also reflect people’s anger and outrage.

“He seemed to be saying that the future of Mangawhai shouldn’t be influenced by current residents… so who is going to do it? Mangawhai Central?” Lloyd says. “We don’t know what the future is going to be, but we know how we would like it to be.”

Lloyd says that the lawyer’s comments that MM expert witnesses – co-founder/committee member and longtime holiday local Dr Joel Cayford, and resident Dr Philip McDermott, who also submitted as citizens – were not independent witnesses as they lived in Mangawhai and had an invested interest, was ‘nonsensical’.

Gordon stated that ‘although to their credit they have been upfront regarding their personal involvement… their role… has blurred with the role of an advocate. It was clear… that they felt strongly about the issues they were speaking to and which they had earlier submitted on. We therefore submit that their evidence should be given reduced weight’.

“Just because they live here it doesn’t make any difference,” Lloyd says. “It’s like saying if you live in Auckland you can’t submit against something going on there.”

Scheduled to run till 5pm, the hearing concluded after 1pm, the community now in limbo for a couple of months while commissioners deliberate and decide on their recommendations to Kaipara Council.

“If the commissioners come back with something we violently object to we could then take a look at the environmental court,” Lloyd says. “However, at this stage I think we’ll be fairly comfortable with what comes back as they’ve gone down the track that we’ve wanted to go down, but you never know… just a waiting game now.”

All eyes of interested residents and Mangawhai Matters members were on Kaipara District Council officers and Mangawhai Central representatives and experts as they made their case at the recent reconvened commissioner hearing. PHOTO/JULIA WADE

“We don’t know what the future is going to be, but we know how we would like it to be.”

-Doug Lloyd, Mangawhai Matters