Court restricts Matakana Island plan

The Environment Court has ruled against large-scale housing development taking place on Matakana Island.

The decision on a Western Bay of Plenty District Plan Change regarding the future development of Matakana Island was made in response to three large forestry landowners – TKC Holdings, Carrus Corporation and Blakely Pacific Limited. – seeking to undertake substantial housing development on the forested sand barrier of the island.

Matakana Island. Photo: File.

At present the forested sand barrier of 4300ha is predominantly under commercial forestry, while the western peninsula is mainly farmland and comprises multiple-owned Maori land used for farming or horticulture.

Council prepared a Plan Change to manage the future development, following significant research on the values of the island including cultural and social, ecological, natural hazards, and landscape.

Council acknowledged the current rights of the forested properties as rural land to be subdivided into blocks of 40ha, but provided for these titles to be moved into clusters of a more residential scale. This allows a maximum of 102 dwellings to be located in clusters in the forested area and leave the forestry largely in-tact.

The concept of clusters was chosen to reduce the impact of the footprint of any development.

Council also proposed rules to ensure new development did not affect the significant ecological and landscape values of the island. This means development needs to be well set back from the open coastline and harbour edge.

Two of the forestry landowners sought more flexible provisions to remove the cap of 102 dwellings, along with more relaxed provisions so that houses could be stretched out along the coastal margin.

Western Bay Mayor Ross Paterson is pleased with the Environment Court decision which fully supports council's position.

He is particularly supportive of the strong cap on the number of dwellings and the protection of the island's many values.

'It is one of the most complex land areas in the District and I am delighted that the court has supported our recognition of the special values and the need to protect them,” says Ross.

Although the decision does not state as such, Ross says the outcome also supports the position of Matakana islanders who wanted less, rather than more development.

Lawyer Paul Cooney, who acted for council, supports council's conservative stand on the protection of the island's values.

'The decision recognises Matakana Island and, in particular, the forested barrier as a unique place due to its significant ecological, landscape, cultural and archaeological values. The court saw these values as needing protection and therefore considered any development on the forested barrier should be limited and tightly controlled.”

He believes the decision reflects the long held appreciation the people of Western Bay have for the forested barrier, with its pristine white sandy beaches and unbuilt landscape dominating the Tauranga Harbour and open coast.

The island – situated in the Tauranga Harbour – comprises 6076 hectares, is 24 km long and 5 kilometres at its widest point.

It is made up of two distinct areas connected by a narrow isthmus and is the largest sand barrier island in New Zealand.

The Island's resident population is 244 of which 99 percent is Maori, the majority living on the farmland part.

2 comments

GREAT HOLIDAY HOMES !

Posted on 15-06-2015 21:02 | By The Caveman

Yeah Right. The bottom line is that the "farm" part of the island is reasonably stable behind the sand dunes that have pine trees on them. The pine trees are effectively on sand dunes held together by the trees.. Subdivide the sand dunes / pine trees, cut down the pines to get an ocean view, and the next thing, the sea will be rolling in!!!! Who is responsible - the council - they allowed the development.. Have a look at the northern end of the island. how many DEAD pine trees are there on the ocean/harbour side of the island. The whole island is a sand dune - it came from the sea and it will go back - not this year, not next year, but give it 50-100-150, the sea will have its say. NO holiday home development - the trees owners will cut and run!!!!!


Overit

Posted on 16-06-2015 19:13 | By overit

I am glad the plan was declined. More houses? Leave it pristine, and un=developed.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.