UPDATE on Kellet Street Housing Developement ~ Speech and Petitions delivered to Council by Ron Cook

Wording of Ron's speech to Council as below:-

Tena koe Mr Carter kia ora koutou nga hoa ma/

I am Ron Cooke a resident of Opua for 40 years and former member of the old Kawakawa community Board…before many of you were chickens.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I need to state right away that we are entirely dependent on your good will in this case .

As a small community almost completely owned by a Commercial company, the only way we can challenge the commercial decisions they make that affect our lives is through you their parent body .

So with the best of goodwill on my part I have to say that your planning consultants have made a very poor and possibly expensive job of advising you about the requirement to publicly notify the consents sought in FNHLs application to develop the Opua Headland with 16 town houses and associated – and I must say very dramatic earthworks.

Briefly, in the case of Murray v Whakatane District Council the court found for the plaintiff citing Public interest in the project as a Special circumstance requiring the council to notify.

In Urban Auckland v Auckland Council  regarding the extension of the wharf into Waitemata harbour the court found for the Plaintiffs citing Public interest as  a special circumstance requiring the council to notify.

We now show you with these 292 unsolicited names and with 120 on going conversations on the Opua noticeboard Facebook page and in a community of 600 people there exists extremely significant and deeply passionate public interest. 220 of these names were from our online petition – which for privacy reasons can’t print addresses. Some of these people are following the outcome from Auckland and overseas .

How much public interest would sway a court I cannot say and despite the depth of feeling about this in Opua, I trust  we will not have to test that – it would certainly put a dent in any good will.

So all we ask is that you put a stay on the consents so they can be publicly notified. Or more cheaply and for an obviously highly desired community outcome simply can the project and go back to the community to do what your company has never done. Find out what they want. A simple questionnaire with options for choice would be a rare experience for our community but it has happened. You can do this and this petition urges it.

It seems obvious that at a hearing the sheer number of objections would convince any honest Commissioner that the application for earthwork and for this condo housing would be denied.

What is most disappointing is that your CCO has chosen to ignore public interest and sought only commercial gain from our piece of public land .  The Opua headland is a rough piece of land - but it’s green.  It’s iconic, it’s ours and it’s all we have left after losing our access to the wharf, to most of our waterfront , our scenic railway and there being no quid pro quo for any of this.  We are constantly fobbed off by false promises of playgrounds, walking tracks and gardens. The worm has turned.

People have expressed shock and dismay at the inhumanity, the callous disregard for community and the arrogance of  company developers.  

By an amazing Catch 22 we were asked to consider this development only at the concept stage and even then it was given only one airing before a small audience of gardening enthusiasts. How were we to know that the Franklin St ridge was to be lowered by 10 metres amongst other massive earthworks. How could we respond to something that was never presented to us?

How were we to know that the school was to lose essential parking. How were we to know an 85 year old resident was possibly going to lose half her lawn and a big slice of her view. How did we know a stand of totara were going to be cut down. How were the residents to know that their one road in and out of town was going to be even more congested?

In the notification statement by the consultant planner (under section 95a) we read ‘I observe that the proposal will result in substantial change and relatively high levels of impact upon both adjacent neighbours and the wider setting’  and yet this was not made public nor under the RMA does it constitute a ‘special circumstance’.

It staggers me that the Planner (quite correctly) states under the conditions of section 96c  that the only affected  person in this development is the far north district council  roading department!!. The RMA just does not cater to concepts such as identity, local culture, community pride and neither do Far North Holdings executives. These human concepts are not to be found in their statement of intent.  

We look forward to a prompt and favourable outcome so that we can build our lookout and our park.

No reira, kia kaha, kia manawanui. Nga mihi nui

kia koutou.