DCC media release – Harbourside

Dunedin City Council
Media release

Harbourside Progress

Dunedin (Thursday 1 April 2010) – The Council has been advised by the Chair of its Hearings Committee, Cr Colin Weatherall, as its negotiator, that a broad understanding, as a basis for resolving outstanding differences with the appellants to the Harbourside Plan Change 7 proposal, exists final details of which are still being negotiated.

Cr Weatherall has been engaged in discussions with all parties on a ‘confidential without prejudice’ basis in accordance with best practice while, for its part, the Council has maintained a position of not commenting while the appeals process is in train, relying instead on Cr Weatherall’s delegated authority.

At its meeting this Monday 29 March 2010 Cr Weatherall was authorised by the Council to continue to progress the Harbourside negotiations with all the appellants under a confidential protocol until such time as there is a consent order, agreed to by all parties, in place before the Environment Court for its approval.

The purpose of these negotiations is to minimise the matters brought before the Court for its consideration.

The chair of the Council’s Hearings Committee has delegated authority to authorise the negotiation and resolution of appeals under the Resource Management Act.

Given that this process is both on-going and sensitive it is inappropriate for anyone other than the Chair of the Council’s Hearings Committee to make any public comment on how the process is proceeding until such negotiations are completed.

A chronological background, outlining the time-line for realising the Harbourside vision and the resulting Plan Change, follows.

BACKGROUND

The following outlines the time line in developing the harbourside vision and the resulting plan change:

2001:
Consultation on options for Dunedin’s future through “Choices for the Future” in 2001, the community expressed a desire for improved harbour access for both people and vehicles to get to the water, and to enhance harbour amenity.

June 2002:
The Planning and Environment Committee approved a variation to the then Proposed District Plan to provide for the harbourside area.

July 2005:
Draft long term vision for Dunedin’s harbourside launched for public consultation. The vision was refined, options considered and a plan change initiated to facilitate development.

October 2006:
A revised vision and a draft consultation document summarising the principles to be embodied in the plan change were agreed for informal consultation.

October 2007:
The Council resolved to publicly notify Proposed Plan Change 7 and the Notices of Requirement, along with a private plan change to the Regional Plan: Coast.

January 2008:
Proposed District Plan Change 7: Dunedin harbourside was notified alongside six Notices of Requirement to designate land for public squares, walkways and a road alignment included in the Harbourside vision. A decision was subsequently taken, prior to the hearings and in light of concerns raised by submitters, to withdraw three of the designations (No’s 2-4) and to limit the extent of the designation relating to 41 Wharf Street.

The objectives of Plan Change 7 include a Dunedin harbourside that:
• is easily accessible with strong visual and safe physical connections to the city centre, harbour and surrounding areas.
• is a vibrant and attractive place to visit, work and live, with public open spaces along the harbour edge creating a high quality waterfront environment.
• supports a range of compatible land uses that enable the continued operation of Dunedin Port and complement, but do not compete with the vibrancy and vitality of the city centre.
• built form of development creates a liveable environment that reflects and enhances the industrial, maritime and port heritage.

July 2008:
The hearings on Proposed Plan Change 7: Dunedin harbourside and three Notices of Requirement (Fairley Street walkway – northern and southern sections, and 41 Wharf Street roading improvement) were held.

January 2009:
Decisions were released by the Commissioners confirming Plan Change 7 (both Stage 1 and 2) and the designation of the Fairley Street walkway, with modifications. A decision on 41 Wharf Street is yet to be made.

April 2009:
Eight appeals were received on Plan Change 7, two appeals on the Fairley Street walkway – southern section and one appeal on the Fairley Street walkway – northern section. There are also a number of section 274 parties to the proceedings.

PLEASE NOTE: Any further comment on this media statement will be available from the Mayor, Peter Chin, only.



DCC Website Link

Post by Elizabeth Kerr

3 Comments

Filed under Economics, Geography, Politics, Project management, Site, Town planning, Urban design

3 responses to “DCC media release – Harbourside

  1. Elizabeth

    ### ODT Online Sat, 3 Apr 2010
    Chamber awaits DCC harbourside position
    By David Loughrey
    A settlement may be in sight in the dispute between the Dunedin City Council and harbourside industries, after fears of business closures and job losses threatened to result in an Environment Court clash. While meetings in the next week should clarify the outcome, the council is keeping its bargaining position to itself.
    Read more

  2. Elizabeth

    Sorry, late with this one – backtracked through ODTs to grab the Otago Chamber of Commerce 2-pager protesting the harbourside plan change.

    ### ODT Thursday 25 March 2009 (pages 30-31)
    [Advertisement]
    Harbourside Rezoning – Loses Jobs, Prevents Job Opportunities

    The Otago Chamber of Commerce and supporters featured over these two pages believe the City Council’s rezoning of the Harbourside into mixed residential and industrial zones will cause job losses and undermine reinvestment opportunity in the area because of:

    1. Increased operational difficulty and escalating costs to meet “reverse sensitivity” complaints from the public. What is normal industrial activity now is not acceptable in a residential area.

    2. Increased rental costs – residential land is more valuable than industrial land.

    3. Increased compliance costs for non-complying activities – again, what is acceptable now will no longer meet the new rules.

    The companies and organisations supporting this page request that Council:

    – Carefully review the expert independent advice, provided by both the Council itself and by the Otago Chamber of Commerce, that states both local and regional skilled jobs will be lost if Harbourside rezoning goes ahead.

    – Rejects advice that new jobs can be created in Harbourside by relocation of hospitality facilities from the centre of the City.

    – Does not undermine the opportunity for significant job creation that offshore oil and gas discoveries would bring to the City.

    – Reviews the additional information that the Council Mediator has collected over this year-long investigation into the serious consequences of proceeding with Harbourside.

    The supporters then ask Council to formally resolve that:

    1. The Council will not take any decisions that risk the further loss of jobs in Dunedin.

    2. The Council will take all possible steps to facilitate the creation of new jobs in Dunedin.

    3. And to this end the Council will immediately withdraw the proposed Harbourside Plan Change and save those jobs under threat.

    The businesses featured on these two pages are some of the businesses in support of the stance the Otago Chamber of Commerce is taking on the harbourside rezoning.

    Available in print and digital edition of the Otago Daily Times.

    Facebook: Otago Chamber of Commerce

    • Elizabeth

      Does the loss of ‘potential’ housing development on the Harbourside explain why sections of DCC are perturbed about *where* housing development should go? Say, within the central city area bounded by the Town Belt, and or sprawl on the Taieri where the lovely Dippies et al are set to make unconscionable changes – and or sprawl on the Otago Peninsula???

      So how many houses are needed for an oil base at Dunedin?
      Is the existing housing stock sufficient to absorb such a thing?

      Why aren’t we sustainably upgrading the existing housing stock to keep the ‘character city’ looking roses? [OMG what if Cadbury’s doesn’t survive the Kraft enslaught, and Rose’s chocolates have to go, along with local employment.]

      Or maybe Jim is planning something we have yet to discover, as a spur to Dunedin population growth.

      The bluster of an Autumn day.

Leave a 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