Contrasting reactions to Lovelock Ave consent

The Dunedin Botanic Garden looks set for a major expansion, after an announcement yesterday consent had been granted for the long-debated realignment of Lovelock Ave.

While a final resolution of the issue has to await a 15-day appeal period, the decision has delighted Friends of the Botanic Garden president Frank Buddingh, who yesterday said from Lawrence his organisation would plan further fundraising once plans were approved.

It has disappointed opponents of the realignment, who yesterday said the consent hearings committee had not given enough weight to their evidence, and an appeal has not been ruled out.

Almost $1.4 million has been either spent or set aside in the Dunedin City Council's budget for planning, consultants and roading, and a further $5.5 million is included in the budget between next year and 2013 for the rest of the development.

Hearings were held last October and reconvened in March for further evidence.

There were 79 submissions on the issue, with 23 in support, one conditionally in support and 55 opposed.

There was passionate and apparently widespread opposition from Opoho residents and others at the hearings to the proposed loss of Lovelock Ave.

Opponents disagreed with arguments a new road would be safer, questioned the need for the project, and said it would add to the ongoing nuisance boy racers caused in the suburb.

Local residents told the hearings committee the area of the proposed new road would be both too steep and badly affected by frost and ice, and they bemoaned the loss of both the scenic Lovelock Ave, and the path next to the Northern Cemetery, where the new road would go.

The committee's decision approved the realignment with only minor conditions, including that a cycle lane be provided on one side of the new road, and a pedestrian path on the other.

It said there were "two polarised views" heard, and little common ground.

"The committee determined that a number of adverse effects identified were more perceived than real, or somewhat overstated," it said.

"Having regard to the evidence presented on specific issues from qualified and experienced persons in support of the application, and observations by the committee during its site visits, the committee [members] were not convinced that the actual or potential adverse effects were more than minor."

Opoho resident Antony Wood, who helped organise a petition of residents opposing the realignment, yesterday said the committee listened to consultants hired by the council, but not to those who lived there and used the road.

Mr Wood was also concerned about what he said would be the destruction of wetlands and a flax collection.

Civil engineer and Opoho resident Errol Chave was more philosophical.

Mr Chave said the matter had received due process, even though he disagreed with the result.

He was still concerned the new road would be unsafe in winter because of ice and frost, and while he would not initiate an appeal, he might become involved if others initiated one.

One area of concern at the hearings was the level of public consultation.

Cr Paul Hudson said yesterday the council had formed a community consultation committee of himself, deputy mayor Syd Brown and Cr John Bezett, which would consider how to progress the project, and how to involve the community in consultation.

It had met Opoho Bowling Club representatives, and public meetings would be held.

The decision

What: Plan to realign Lovelock Ave approved.

Who: Resource consent hearings committee: Commissioners Roger Tasker and Allan Cubitt, and city councillor Colin Weatherall.

Why: The Dunedin Botanic Garden wants to realign the road to link 28ha of land above it with the rest of the garden, relocate propagation and administration facilities, and construct a new entry.

What next: Expected approval by Dunedin City Council on August 17. Road construction following that, more public consultation and designs for garden work to be finalised.

The committee determined that a number of adverse effects identified were more perceived than real, or somewhat overstated

Add a Comment

 

Advertisement