The commissioners making a decision on
the future of the planned harbourside redevelopment have
plenty to think about after the first of two weeks of hearing
the matter.
And the Dunedin City Council, which is behind the project,
has been told in no uncertain terms of the extent of
opposition among businesses that occupy the area.
The council has made no secret of its ambitions for
development in Dunedin - from the harbourside to the roofed
stadium - and chief executive Jim Harland has said he would
like the city's population to grow to 160,000.
The harbourside hearings are showing just how difficult and
complicated putting that vision into action can be,
especially in a city with limited industrial land.
Don Anderson yesterday continued evidence for property
developer Tim Barnett, one of the many people with an
interest in the area who has found the harbourside plan
affecting his activities.
Mr Barnett received resource consent this month to build a
three-storeyed office and residential building at 41 Wharf
St.
Chalmers Properties, which owns much of the land at the
harbourside, has lodged an appeal with the Environment Court
against the decision.
Mr Anderson argued strongly the council had not put forward
any good reason for realignment of an on-ramp linking Wharf
St with a nearby overbridge, which would cut through Mr
Barnett's property.
The council has said the extra space created by the
realignment would be open space for the public, and the land
would be zoned recreational.
Mr Anderson said he had been advised minutes of a working
party that had decided to acquire Mr Barnett's land were not
available to the public.
Without such information, he could only guess as to why the
decision had been made.
The sort of data he would have expected would be a survey of
how the space was used, and a cost benefit analysis.
Farra Engineering chief executive John Whitaker said there
was "genuine optimism" of commercial oil discoveries in the
Southern Ocean.
Engineering and logistics support would have to be developed
somewhere.
There was not the space at Port Chalmers, and Lyttelton was
too far away.
"There would be huge economic benefits for the city if the
Dunedin harbourside is developed as that centre."
"Such a development is, however, completely incompatible with
the proposed harbourside plan."
Challenged by commissioner Roger Tasker to tell the hearing
why Dunedin would become the port of choice for the oil
industry, Mr Whitaker said either Dunedin or Bluff could be
chosen, depending on who developed the infrastructure.
"They will go where the facilities are."
Oil might not be found, but it would be "monumental risk" to
go ahead with the plan change and not have the opportunity.
Mr Whitaker said the plan change would be "crippling" to his
business, with inevitable complaints from, for instance, cafe
patrons.
The company had already had complaints from apartment
dwellers living up to 1km away.
On a cold, clear morning, when the company was punching holes
in 6mm steel, "they are going to hear it, and they will
complain".
New Zealand Historic Places Trust Otago-Southland area
manager Owen Graham said he wanted to make it "very clear"
the trust was not anti-development, and accepted time could
not stand still.
However, the trust was opposed to the plan change.
Instead, it wanted the council to continue to consult with
key parties and the trust to develop a revised, "truly
visionary" plan change.
Mr Graham said the trust believed there were vital gaps and
flaws in the plan change, the most crucial being a lack of
understanding and recognition for heritage values, the
failure to provide adequate heritage mechanisms, and a lack
of tools to encourage retention and re-use of heritage
buildings.
The hearing heard the harbourside was one of New Zealand's
best examples of an industrial landscape centred on a working
port.
Regional archaeologist Dr Matthew Schmidt said there were
early jetties still under Mason St.
Early survey maps showed permanent buildings, but did not
show temporary structures made of wood and corrugated iron.
Large structures, like ships, had been found during
excavations in other cities.
Dr Schmidt recommended a full archaeological assessment be
undertaken before the plan change was finalised, though that
did not necessarily mean "invasive" investigations, involving
digging.
Mr Tasker and John Lumsden indicated they would make site
visits in the next week.
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.