After six years of uncertainty, the Westland District Council yesterday dropped the controversial "fault rupture avoidance zone" that divided Franz Josef Glacier township.
The council had faced an Environment Court battle over the zone, which effectively rendered any new buildings or extensions non-compliant either side of the Alpine Fault, whichslices through the heart of the resort.
Appellants, including Scenic Circle Hotel Group, moteliers and owners of the Four Square supermarket - all of whom have properties inside the zone - met with the council behind closed doors for an informal 45-minute mediation yesterday before the council formally moved to abandon the plan change.
Supermarket co-owner Cushla Jones said they had not been prepared to drop their appeal.
"Going to court is a no-win for everyone but that's our only trump card. If that's what we have to do, that's what we will do," Mrs Jones said.
She said the mediation had been positive in finally finding a way forward from the "limbo" businesses had been in for the past six years.
Mayor Bruce Smith said they had been advised by the appellants' solicitor that they had no intention of dropping the appeal and a decision was sought from the table "once and for all" whether to drop the plan change or fight it in court.
The Franz Josef Glacier on the West Coast with village in the foreground. Photo / File
"As these people told us today it's been six years of trauma, six years of waiting, six years of investment held up, and that's a compelling reason to give them our views now." Councillor Des Routhan, who farms at Whataroa, said the quake avoidance zone should never have been put there in the first place.
"I don't think there's any point in going to court. It's not the threat of going to court that worries me I just don't think we need to be dealing with it. Let people make their own decision and get on with their lives. It's got my support in being removed."
However, Councillor David Carruthers, a solicitor, said he was "nervous" about doing so.
"To some degree people have to be protected from themselves and that's what planning is all about . . . Local government, whether we like it or not, has a statutory obligation to have plans for the benefit of the ratepayers and occupiers in the district. In this instance, clear and obvious risk has been identified and I think as a local body taking a responsible stance we've got to do whatever we can to some degree to keep people from themselves," Caruthers said.
"It worries me that people ... are considering building substantial commercial buildings on what's really a slip zone, commercial buildings that once they're built will have no commercial value whatsoever ... and one day in the future may well be uninsurable," he said.
Councillor Jane Neale questioned the obligations of the council under the Resource Management Act to mitigate the risk.
Planning community and environment group manager Jim Ebenhoh said if the plan change was removed the council had no mechanism under the RMA to deal with the Alpine Fault hazard in any way.
"Under the Building Act we can not specify anything other than building to the Building Code, which doesn't do a lot if you're on top of the Alpine Fault."
Councillor Graeme Olson said people were all well aware of the hazard, with or without the zone.
Councillor Durham Havill agreed and said he was firmly behind it being withdrawn: "All around the world we see catastrophes happen. You can't plan for everything ... and this is one place where it's unfortunate the fault line is there, but there are fault lines all around the country. I'm certainly against imposing restrictions on those people down there, because a few metres away there's none and that's not the way the earthquake is going to work."
