Backdown not enough to ease tensions

Sandra Goudie. Photo / Supplied

Thames Coromandel District Council's backtracking over putting restrictions on private land deemed as being a significant natural area is being met with cynicism.

But the Coromandel landowners opposing the council still believe the move does not give them enough certainty of freedom on land use and fear they could later be slapped with rules and restrictions.

In November, the council sent out letters to 3600 owners telling them their land had been assessed as significant natural areas according to the criteria set out in the regional policy statement. This could lead to rules around how it could be used.

The council has since changed its mind about including the maps in its draft district plan and apologised for incorrectly including some residential land in the maps.

It is recommending that the district plan review committee vote against including the maps outlining significant natural areas (SNA) in the draft district plan.

The council's district plan manager, Leigh Robcke, has said the maps would instead sit outside the plan and be used as a tool for developers looking to subdivide or applying for resource consents. He said SNAs would not be included in the district plan before it was tested and residents had given their feedback.

The maps could be later added to an edited district plan once the information was deemed more precise for individual properties.

However, a spokeswoman for the group of landowners opposing the move, former MP Sandra Goudie, said they did not trust the district council or the Waikato Regional Council.

The group was concerned any reference to the maps could make them operative in the district plan or they could appear later on and was calling on the council to withdraw the letters and confirm their land was not classed as an SNA.

"When they [council staff] said 'trust me', everybody laughed. Nobody trusts what is going on at the regional and district councils."

Ms Goudie argued that the Department of Conservation land in the Coromandel represented enough of the significant natural areas that it did not need to extend to private property.

"They [landowners] are angry and upset. They don't trust the councils. They want the letters withdrawn and they want to be consulted - that's a biggy. In a way, it is misleading because people need to know what they are doing in regards to their property."

The regional council is holding hearings on the regional policy statement, which sets out 11 criteria about what significant natural areas and outstanding natural features and landscapes are.

The final policy feeds into the district plan, which the council is encouraged to manage. Under the proposed regional policy statement, a large area of the Coromandel falls under this requirement.

RULE CHANGE
* Thames Coromandel District Council has backed down on proposed private land restrictions.
* 3600 letters were sent out in November to affected landowners saying their land had been included as a significant natural area.
* This meant there could be rules around how it is used.