Proposed Hauraki Gulf Islands District Plan
Check out the links section on this page for the link to the the recent proposed Hauaraki Gulf Islands District Plan. You can read the contents of the proposed plan online, and make submissions. Feel free to add comments about the proposed plan here for others to read.
posted by Tony Sears at 11:33 pm
1 Comments:
This is the text of my letter to Councillors asking for an extension to the closing date for submissions to the proposed District Plan.
Councillors
Auckland City Council
Unfortunately I am unable to attend the Council meeting on Thursday, due to another Council-related meeting on Waiheke Island. However I would like Councillors to know how disappointed I am that the Environment, Heritage and Urban Form committee voted against the requests of both Hauraki Gulf Island Community Boards to grant an extension to the time available for making submissions regarding the proposed Hauraki Gulf Islands District Plan.
Essentially there are two issues here:
1. The amount of time available for public to make submissions.
2. The role and relevance of local Community Boards.
1. The time available for public submissions.
I am aware that those who determined the length of time available for the public to make submissions regarding the proposed HGI District Plan granted more than the statutory 40 days. 60 days was deemed adequate. However there are a number of reasons why this time could and should have been increased.
a) It is acknowledged that a considerable amount of time and effort by Council officers and others went into the consultation process before the proposed District Plan was launched. However, given that the District Plan Working Party had no compulsion, nor probably any hope of synthesising or embedding in the District Plan all the diverse opinions and aspirations collected from the local community, the process of analysing what has been put in, and left out, is as important as all that has gone before.
b) The proposed Hauraki Gulf Islands District Plan is a very substantial document. Apparently, in its paper form, it amounts to five volumes. The text, without appendices, is some 420 pages long. It is a huge effort to read and analyse this document and, believe me, there are some on our islands who are doing just that. They have struggled to digest all the material and, as you know, the devil is in the detail. They want more time and they deserve it.
c) The proposed Hauraki Gulf Islands District Plan is not user friendly. The sheer size of it is such that most will read it on a computer from the CDs provided or from the Council website. Moreover it does not follow the same format as the current District Plan. This is significant because it makes comparison between the two plans difficult. There is no summary of the changes between the plans.
d) Locally important issues are scattered throughout the Plan. For example, a global search on just the two words ‘wastewater’ and ‘Matiatia’ yields respectively 161 and 78 references across 18 and 17 separate documents. For anyone interested in analysing in detail the implications of the Plan in just this these two significant areas, the task is extremely onerous.
e) Many ratepayers do not live on the islands. However they do come to the islands to enjoy their summer break. This is the time when they could have most chance of discussing the implications of the proposed Plan. This would be the time to have workshops to discuss the proposed District Plan. Moreover, whilst on the island, they are more likely to be considering the impact of any proposals on their properties.
f) It is precisely the traditional holiday period that residents and ratepayers will have the time to study the detail of the proposed Plan. Most have jobs and families and various other commitments. Although I can think of a thousand things that they could be doing beyond poring over a District Plan, this is the most accessible time for studying the Plan and then perhaps writing a submission.
2. The role and relevance of local Community Boards.
The two local Community Boards, Great Barrier and Waiheke, represent all of the residents and ratepayers in the area covered by this proposed District Plan. That both of these boards resolved to ask for an extension of time for submissions should be seen as highly significant. There are serious concerns when the views of both Community Boards are disregarded by a Council committee. It questions what standing local Community Boards actually have within Council.
a) Our local residents remind us how important it is that we as a Community Board listen to them and represent them in our Council work. They quote chapter and verse from the Local Government Act. We struggle at times to find consensus but we do our best. The Local Government Act is about empowering local communities; giving them a say. One has to ask how important is that say when it can be so easily disregarded by a Council committee.
b) Local ratepayers came to the Community Board and asked for an extension of time for submissions to the proposed District Plan. Our Community board voted to ask for an extension. i.e. We listened to their concerns, deemed them relevant and significant and acted accordingly in the only way we could, by asking EHUF for an extension.
c) The Environment, Heritage and Urban Form committee voted 5-3 to disregard our request. That our Councillor, Faye Storer voted in favour of an extension is both pleasing and salient. She is our elected Councillor. I am concerned that Councillor Christine Caughey, herself a member of the HGI District Plan working party, should vote against an extension.
d) At the last Council elections, the Mayor promised that he would look into the possibility of giving the Waiheke Community Board, and presumably the Great Barrier Community Board, greater delegated authority. This would be a fine thing. However we ask that the Council and its committees simply take greater notice of the delegated authority we already have. That, when both Community Boards independently ask for something as significant as an extension to their District Plan submissions, Council and Council committees listen and respond accordingly.
e) I am concerned that full Council appears unable to rescind a decision made by one of its Committees. We have been told that this is not possible by standing order 1.8.1: Appointment of committees, subcommittees and other subordinate decision-making bodies
" Nothing in this standing order entitles the council or a committee to rescind or amend a decision made under a delegation authorising the making of a decision by a committee, a subcommittee, or another subordinate decision-making body."
If this is the case, that Council cannot overturn a decision made by one its committees, surely Council must be able to censure that committee or perhaps in this case ask the committee to reconsider its decision.
I want Council to realise how demoralising it is for both Community Boards to be voted down on a request for an extension of submission date by a committee composed mostly of members who are not going to be affected by the new District Plan. We have to ask whether this Council, or this committee anyway, is seriously listening to the wishes of our local communities.
Our Community Board has already voted to have an extraordinary meeting to discuss what other avenues we have to address this issue. It is likely that this meeting will be held after Council meets. Certainly we would be looking at getting an extension until the 20th January, and allowing those who have rushed submissions to reach the December 11 deadline to have an opportunity to further expand their submissions.
At a time when there is much talk about a greater Auckland council, it is not surprising that residents of Waiheke and, I’m sure, Great Barrier watch with interest future developments. Many already feel that Auckland City Council does not appreciate the uniqueness of our islands, that a ‘one-size fits all’ attitude prevails. If this is the treatment that we get from Auckland City Council, we wonder what it will take to be heard by a greater authority.
Tony Sears
Waiheke Community Board
10 December 2006
Post a Comment
<< Home