Mission Bay development
We have been fighting a proposal to build a complex of up to 8 storeys and 28m high on the corner of Tamaki Drive and Patteson Ave. This is completely out of line with the Unitary Plan rules which envision 4 storeys or 16 m height, but it is also totally inappropriate for the Mission Bay environment.
After the resource consent for the proposed 8 storey development at Mission Bay was declined last year, everything went quiet for a while, but it is now coming back to life. The developer has appealed the decision to the Environment Court, and so we are now embarking on another battle to help the Council defend their decision.
Since the Council’s Hearing Panel made the decision to reject the application, the appeal is directed against the Council. The Council will be defending their decision, but we are concerned that they may not do so with all the vigour that we would like, or that they might agree to a compromise that we would not like. We have therefore registered as a party to the appeal, along with several others, so that we can be represented throughout the process.
The process starts with mediation between all the parties; the developer, Auckland Council, Mission Bay Kohimarama Residents Association, Support Mission Bay, and two individual residents. This is set down for 2 separate days, the first on 5 February, and then a second, if required, on 16 March. The developer has indicated that they do not intend to change their proposal at this stage, and so we see little to talk about until such time as they do. Nevertheless, we will be attending the mediation to hear what they have to say.
The outcome of mediation could be no change, or the developer might reach some form of agreement with one or more of the parties to withdraw their opposition, presumably based on some compromises to the design. If there is no agreement with all parties, then the appeal will proceed to the Environment Court. A court hearing would be scheduled, probably late this year.
If there is agreement with some parties but not all, then the same situation prevails. The appeal would then proceed to the Environment Court, but without any parties who have withdrawn their opposition.
If all parties were to agree to a compromise during mediation, then a resource consent would be issued subject to any changes or conditions agreed, and that would be the end of the matter.
The Environment Court is a far more formal setting than the Council Hearings last year. There is much less scope for members of the public to present their views, with evidence being presented by calling witnesses, and an opportunity for each party to cross-examine witnesses. Even more so than for the Hearings, it will be critical for our case to be presented by barristers, with expert witnesses on planning and urban design.
We have applied for funding from a government fund but it will be a few months before we know whether we have been successful or to what extent. If we have a shortfall, then we may need to ask for further donations from our members and the public at that time.
Mission Bay Kohimarama Residents Association
Submissions to Hearings
Gill Chapell - Legal
David Wren - Planning
Don Stock - written evidence
Don Stock - graphics
Support Mission Bay graphics
All evidence - Council website