The future shape and size of Arrowtown, the subject of a discussion document circulated by the Queenstown Lakes District Council, has already prompted much debate in the community. This week's Queenstown Forum explores the arguments for and against extending the town's boundaries ...
Council is not promoting growth and further development in Arrowtown.
It is flagging potential future growth and asking Arrowtown: what does Arrowtown want to do about it?
Current rules would not stop or manage further growth of the town.
It is critical that people understand the issues facing Arrowtown and that they are well informed in considering the choices that are available.
That is the whole aim of the current process.
The options range from no growth to continuing to develop.
All options have implications for residents and visitors.
Arrowtown is an icon in our district.
It's unique.
The council has recognised the importance of Arrowtown's character.
Support in the development of an Arrowtown design guideline and the purchase and protection of the Postmaster's House (covenanted into perpetuity) and the miners' cottages all underline this.
However, preserving Arrowtown's character and accommodating growth are not necessarily mutually exclusive, if growth is managed.
Restricting Arrowtown growth can help to keep the settlement small and reduce impact on areas around its fringe. However, if there is still demand for growth this could result in more internal pressure for development.
Arrowtown needs to ask: what happens if we don't plan for growth?
The drivers for growth will not disappear if the council or the community ignores them.
Demographic change, lifestyle preferences, visitor numbers, economic diversity and a desire to have more local access to community facilities will all still exist.
If we ignore these factors it could give rise to problems:
• Pressure for housing, which in turn could drive up property prices.
• Urban sprawl developments that are not what the community wants or where they want them.
• In-fill which could change the character of Arrowtown.
• No room for local facilities, such as education and health care.
A growth boundary could help to direct where development could occur and where it must not.
The Arrowtown plan was developed by the local community in 2003.
This generally supported the existing district plan zones to define the boundary.
It also recognised potential for expansion at Manse Rd and Jopp St.
Other ideas have since arisen.
Arrowtown (like all other settlements within the district) does not have a growth boundary. It relies on the district plan.
But the plan gives no steer as to where growth should go.
The risk is ad hoc form in rural areas and around the fringe of settlements.
A boundary would strengthen controls on where development could or could not occur.
Projections tell us the town could be full by 2020 (infill).
The community now needs to consider how it wishes to manage future growth in and around Arrowtown.
Finally, I encourage people to read the discussion document and to come to a drop-in session to find out more. Drop-in sessions allow us to hear and capture everyone's view.
- Mark Rushworth is a Queenstown Lakes District Council senior planning analyst.
Concerned citizens' group - Mia Stafford-Bush
What sort of community do you want to live in? How big would you like to see Arrowtown grow? Is the formula that makes Arrowtown so special for residents and tourists alike now worth keeping? Or should it be replaced by a programme of expansion?
Earlier this year you may remember receiving a yellow questionnaire that asked if you wanted to see Arrowtown extend beyond its current residential boundary.
The response was exceptional with 35.8% of residents participating - a resounding 97% of people said that they did not want Arrowtown to extend beyond its current boundary. Those responses were all presented to the Queenstown Lakes District Council as submissions on their urban growth boundaries document.
However, the QLDC appears to have completely ignored the compelling evidence from the questionnaire that homeowners want Arrowtown to stay how it is.
The new discussion document is, I believe, unbalanced and biased towards growth and fails to adequately inform people of all the relevant facts.
It is flawed in its argument attempting to justify why growth is necessary.
It states the council's growth projection study estimates that by 2026 the current population will increase by 635 people and will require an additional 254 dwellings to house them. It then says there are already 312 sections within the current zoning that have been consented for building but not yet implemented.
So, why does the current residential boundary need to be extended if there are already more than sufficient sections to accommodate the expected population increase until 2026?
Phrases used to describe the implications of retaining Arrowtown's current size include "difficulties with affordability" and "limit the potential for new economic development and additional community services".
What additional community services are lacking and could only be provided in conjunction with an expended residential boundary?
In describing the potential implications of extending the current residential boundary the document uses phrases with positive spin such as "providing more certainty for the market" and "achieve a balanced sustainable community".
There appears to be no consideration given to the alternatives if the existing boundary is maintained.
The document also fails to properly inform residents of all the facts.
How can anyone reasonably decide if Arrowtown needs to grow if the QLDC refuses to tell us about what other growth is proposed around the rest of the Wakatipu?
I do believe the Wakatipu will need to accommodate future growth, but any growth needs to be appropriate and undertaken in a manner that does not destroy the very aspects of a community that make it a desirable place to live.
Therefore, the question is whether Arrowtown is the most appropriate place to absorb future growth in the Wakatipu area.
A large development proposal for around Lake Hayes is supported by the local residents, who will benefit from the development of new facilities such as a school and local dairy, which it does not have.
And what about the spare capacity of undeveloped sections in new subdivisions such as Jacks Point?
Arrowtown School appears close to its designed capacity. If Arrowtown's boundaries are extended, and the existing spare sections in Arrowtown are developed, where will the children of these new residents go to school? Is council proposing they travel into Queenstown?
I am puzzled by the discussion document which states that we will have to travel to get to community services if we stay the same size. However, if we grow would we not also need to travel to access community services, such as schooling, that have limited further capacity?
The QLDC is holding two drop-in sessions, on December 18 and January 14. In both cases the times are limited to between 3pm and 6pm. I asked if they could change one of those times until later in the evening but was told that they have already been published and it may get confusing if we change them.
The council did suggest people who couldn't make these drop-in sessions could go into the QLDC offices. But again, this is still during work hours, and is potentially an intimidating scenario for an individual.
Arrowtown is our community. It's up to us to have our say and tell the QLDC what sort of place we want to live in.
So, get a copy of the latest discussion document and make sure you get your submission in by February 13.
- Mia Stafford-Bush is spokeswoman for a group of concerned residents opposed to the expansion of Arrowtown.
• Discussion documents are available at www.qldc.govt.nz or at the Arrowtown Museum or Arrowtown Library.
