Mandeville Development

Andrew from Swannanoa - Ohoka

I’ve just finished reading the Commissioner’s decision in granting consent and have a few observations to make.

But before that. If you are of the mind that this development is on the up-and-up, again – please avert your eyes as what follows will irritate you somewhat. Don’t feel compelled to comment unless you are prepared to stay on topic – if you go off topic I may choose to reply and likely more than just irritate you, ok? I’m not in the mood for yahoos - grownups speaking only.

I have also noticed that there are a few individuals out there that I can only describe as pro-dev hacks who attempt to undermine objective discussion on this subject (why?), even going so far as to deleting my posts and kicking me off our community Facebook page. I can still see you – and I know who you are.

Just to remind everyone, we #3’s are of the position that 99% of the development plan is nothing more than “window dressing” (a means to an end) so as to smooth the way for establishing a Truck Stop on the site.

The only thing viable in the plan is the (desperately looking) unmanned petrol/diesel station.

The Commissioner's report reads “… it will be efficient to adopt all of Ms Styles’ report, and it should be read as part of this decision”. Styles’ was brought in as a consultant to basically ratify WDC’s planning decision - which makes the development plan possible.

The Commissioner goes on to say “…there is some dispute about the likely effects on the environment (as widely defined in the Act) of the proposal, but I concur with her analysis of these and adopt it”. This is an important bit – because if he didn’t concur then the non-complying Resource Consent Application would automatically have become “Publically Notifiable”. I have to assume here that Styles’ has never had one of her recommendations re ‘environmental impacts’ challenged in a court – she must have a bullet proof resume – well done if true.

Legal stuff – “Section 104(3)(d) of the Resource Management Act provides that an application for a resource consent cannot be granted if the application should have been notified and was not. The courts have criticized councils when there has been inadequate consideration of whether a proposal should be notified.” A big shout-out to the courts, woohoo!!

It is un-usual for a non-complying resource consent application to go non-notified – in other words this development plan of ours is an odd-ball in the legal sense. And to get it remained non-notified has called upon a lot of ‘experts’ to fall in to line – much effort has been made. I get the feeling that from an ‘establishment’ perspective ‘us’ chattering classes are best kept well away from decisions on important matters that affect us. Sigh, sad.

On the whole the Commissioner's assessment is pretty compelling and importantly independent – with an exception! Mr Bennet – I do not agree with the Commissioner when he says “I am not persuaded that the effect of slowing traffic a few metres nearer his boundary would add significantly to the effects of the existing high speed road”. I believe the Commissioner has missed the point – Trucks slowing down to pull in to a Truck Stop make a lot more noise than a Truck cruising – re engine braking.

The Commissioner then goes on to finally granting the application - subject to conditions. One of the conditions (#36) relates to upgrades to road access and work to road reserves being at the consent holder’s cost.

It is not clear to me in the reading of it that this also covers costs of repairing damage and/or changes to the Tram/McHughs and to the McHughs/Mandeville intersections. These are tight narrow turns to negotiate for east bound Trucks on Tram Rd entering the Truck Stop. Case in point – the right hand turn to get on to the access ramp of SH1 at the end of Tram Rd. Trucks are destroying the median – it’s just too tight a turn for big Trucks.

I hope the consent holder is also going to bear all future road work costs associated with repairs to these two intersections that will sustain heavy damage caused by big Trucks entering our nice brand new truck DEPOT(!!!!!!).

Rate payers shouldn’t be made to shell out to keep our Truck-unfriendly intersections looking respectable.