Month: March 2015

Council Replies to Kauri Issue + Counter Argument to Situation

· 2 Comments ·

Also be a good idea for people to be more proactive next time

 

Council first replies then I am going to throw something in there to balance the debate out a bit:

Council statement on Titirangi kauri trees

10/03/2015

Auckland Council acknowledges decisions such as the one involving the kauri tree in Titirangi can be challenging says Chief Operating Officer Dean Kimpton.

The council has granted two separate resource consents for construction of two houses on adjoining sites in Paturoa Rd which means the removal of some trees.

Like all such applications, this one was assessed under the Resource Management Act and the District Plan.

“We consulted with the local board and iwi and the final decision to grant the application was made by independent commissioners and we are very aware of the challenging aspects of the decision,” says Mr Kimpton.

“The council followed due process by considering the effects of the tree removal, the ecological value of the sites and the effects of the development itself. An ecologist, arborists, and other experts were involved.”

As part of the process, a range of alternatives was considered and the decision is a balance between minimising the environmental effects with the developer’s expectation he could build on his own property.

The developers have elected to build close to the road which minimises the number of trees that needs to be removed because there will be no long driveways.

“Auckland Council understands people’s desire to protect our natural environment however the zoning on these two sites recognises the right to build while taking the environment into consideration,” says Mr Kimpton.

“Auckland Council has no mandate to revoke the consent and so for this tree nothing can be done.

“However we would strongly urge any person or community group with any concerns about another particular tree or group of trees to check out the Auckland Council website to see if it is ‘scheduled’.

If it is scheduled, the tree is protected and cannot be removed.

If it isn’t scheduled, any member of the public or group can nominate that it be scheduled and go through the robust scheduling process.”

—ends—-

 

Now I am going through my Resource Management Act material and so far from I can see a consent if it is so challenged after it is given must be appealed to the Courts. The Consenting Authority CAN NOT revoke a consent already given as it will play havoc on anyone trying to do a project.

A reason to go to the Courts to appeal a consent would be on Points of Law. That is new evidence, the Consenting Authority overlooking something in reaching its decision, or the Consenting Authority acting in a dodgy manner. The Courts can not revoke a consent on the whim of someone does not want a tree cut down after the fact.

 

In further developments I was passed the following which in effect could make a few people including a particular Local Board look rather stupid (if proven this was the case). The information being:

There’s a lot of people wondering why I’m not chained to a kauri up the road at the moment. The main reason is I don’t like bullshit or misinformation or NIMBYism being dressed up as caring for the environment. There is a lot of rubbish being spoken about a tree, which if it really is as old as is claimed then should’ve been nominated for scheduling by the neighbours now clamoring to have it protected.
There were lots of chances to do this, well advertised by many of us over several recent years, but they didn’t bother. Nor did they bother to buy the sections in question which have been for sale for the last 16 years to my certain knowledge – and would’ve been dirt cheap back then & covenant them, nor did they lobby Council to buy the land & turn it into a reserve.
In fact they have done nothing at all until someone finally bought the land & applied to build a house on it (as is their right). Now all of a sudden it is a corrupt process & a dodgy developer doing what every single person who has ever built a house in Titirangi has had to do – clear some of the native trees for a building platform, while following the rules.
Far be it for me of all people to suggest that anyone should not protest about the felling of a magnificent kauri – go for it & I hope you win. But it should be done with truth and honesty about the real situation. Yes Council should’ve notified the consent. Waitakere Ranges Protection Society and others tried to get them to do so. The Waitakere Ranges Protection Society had been working on it for 18 months by that stage, but they relied on their independent commissioner’s decision not to – as they generally do.
If they had not then it could be argued that political interference in the planning process (for whatever reason) is ok – and that is very dangerous territory to enter. Those of you who have applied for & paid for consents I am sure would not be in favour of politicians interfering in that process & overturning decisions just because someone else thinks they should.
The actual issue at the nub of this – should anyone really care – is that the National Government has taken away the rights of communities to have a say on consent applications with their “simplifying & streamlining” of the RMA. They have also directly prevented Councils from protecting trees by changing the RMA a second time. I don’t actually think that having a say would’ve saved these trees (it never has in all the consents I’ve submitted on) but if the trees had been scheduled by those neighbours then I know that I and many organisations with a lot of experience & resources would now be in court fighting for them – and I’d be putting my money on the trees. Unfortunately that is not where it’s at. Learn the lesson – if you want to protect significant trees GET THEM SCHEDULED.

 

——

 

Now I have also become aware that while no Court filing on reviewing the consent to remove the Kauri has been lodged yet, people are reviewing things to see if there is a case for the Courts to answer to. That is were all proper due processes carried out by the Consenting Authority before such consent was given.

 

The Auckland Development Committee will consider the situation around the Kauri as an extraordinary item this Thursday. That should make the Committee a tad more exciting from what was going to be a routine day with routine items.