Controversial Maraekākaho quarry granted fast-track consent despite ongoing opposition

An independent panel has granted resource consent to a controversial quarry to be established in Maraekākaho. Photo / Warren Buckland

An independent panel has granted resource consent to a controversial quarry to be established in Maraekākaho days after an iwi authority expressed concern about the possibility of its approval.

RW and MC Gale Family Trust, the owners of Tūpore Infrastructure - formerly Russell Roads - applied to the Environmental Protection Authority on December 6 last year under the fast-tracking consenting process implemented during the Covid-19 response, to establish a quarry adjacent to an existing processing site.

Maraekākaho residents have fought against the quarry in their backyard for about 15 years without success.

Several parties, including owners of affected land, iwi and hapū organisations, the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, and Hastings District Council, were invited to comment on the application.

After the feedback, the scope of the application was revised by RW and MC Gale Family Trust.

Initially, the plan was to extract 3.06 million cu m of subsurface gravel aggregate from a 17.26ha area up to a maximum depth of 30m below ground level, within groundwater and gradually create two artificial water bodies.

The revised figures mean 2.1 million cu m of aggregate will be extracted, the maximum extraction depth has been reduced to 23m and one lake will be created instead of two.

According to the panel’s decision, these changes and others made through the process could reduce potential noise; cut the risk of piercing a confined or semi-confined aquifer; lower the amount of water diverted; minimise the risk of algal blooms, evaporative loss or depletion effects on the Ngāruroro River, water race, Heretaunga aquifer and nearby wells; and reduce the risk of aquatic species getting trapped in the artificial lake during floods.

According to the authority, the project includes land remediation after quarrying ends.

“The Environmental Protection Authority is not involved in the decision-making. We provide procedural advice and administrative support to the panel convenor, Judge Laurie Newhook, and the expert consenting panel he appoints,” an EPA statement said.

The most recent comment provided by Te Taiwhenua o Heretaunga to the panel, dated July 31, expressed strong opposition to the draft consent conditions, days before the application was granted.

“Engaging with the panel in commentary on proffered conditions speaks to one narrative only – a Western science narrative – where there are two equally valid narratives contextualising the Tūpore fast-track resource consent application, with the Tangata Whenua narrative being given no weight by the EPA panel,” Marei Apatu, Te Kaihautu of Te Taiwhenua o Heretaunga, wrote in a letter addressed to the independent panel chairwoman Kristen Gunnell.

“The very fact that you are asking for conditions pre-assume consent approval, an outcome that we have repeatedly made clear, is not a viable option.”

Apatu wrote that Te Taiwhenua o Heretaunga “absolutely reject” the proposed gravel extraction until their claims concerning the sovereignty of the water and gravel had been heard by the Waitangi Tribunal.

The panel decision report, dated August 5, said the panel was satisfied that the amended application and the proposed conditions it had implemented addressed mana whenua concerns.