Introduction
The Guardians of Pauatahanui Inlet is an incorporated society, with about 190 financial members.
The Guardians was set up in 1991 to promote the recognition of the ecological, historic, recreational and cultural values of the Pauatahanui Inlet. The Inlet is identified in the Regional Coastal plan as a significant coastal environment and is registered as a site of National Significance in the SSWI database (Sites of Special Wildlife Interest).
Because of the enthusiasm of the membership, Guardians are able to conduct regular cockle surveys, a stream monitoring programme and organise and conduct an annual clean-up of the Inlet foreshore for the Keep Proriua Beautiful campaign. Guardians have produced an education kit for use in schools and a number of educational and promotional activities and make submissions on behalf of the Inlet in planning processes.
Guardians were instrumental in initiating, promoting and supporting the development of the Pauatahanui Inlet Action Plan. This plan is endorsed by the Guardians. The Action Plan also is endorsed, and its implementation supported, by the Porirua City Council, Greater Wellington Regional Council and Ngati Toa.
General Comment on the draft LTCCP
The Guardians interest in the LTCCP stems from this background and is concentrated on the provisions made in the draft plan for protection and enhancement of the natural values of the Inlet and for its use as a community resource. Guardians recognize that the Inlet is at a critical stage in its response to human influences and that the time frame for halting the degradation processes and for beginning the restoration phase is in the very near future while the results of actions that promote restoration are more generally long term. It is clear that the Porirua City Council is of a similar mind, since it endorses the Action Plan, provides support to the Pauatahanui Inlet Community Trust and has commissioned a Pauatahanui Inlet Restoration Plan.
The concept of an LTCCP seems ideally suited to permitting, even requiring, the Council to think and act long term in the interests of its communities. An adequate planning process thus is essential. The Council is committed to supporting the implementation of the Pauatahanui Action Plan but as yet an ‘implementation programme’ has not been devised.
Given this analysis, Guardians expected the draft LTCCP would include sufficient funds and other support to enable projects aimed at enhancing the health of the Inlet to be started soon and to be funded for the long term.
Unfortunately, Guardians opinion is that the draft LTCCP 2004-2014 does not meet these requirements, or even get close to them.
In partial mitigation, Guardians accept that Stage 2 of the Pauatahanui Inlet Restoration Plan - a vital document in the process of planning for implementation of the Action Plan - was not fully available to Council. Nevertheless, the broad outline of its recommendations were known by Council officers at least six months ago and it is Guardians opinion that some provision for implementation should have been included as a strategic project in the draft.
The draft LTCCP expresses some admirable sentiments about the Council’s view of the environment of the city:
· The City Vision requires that “the city is ....built on sound infrastructure, and with a vigorous and sustainable economy” (page 19).
· The City Developmental Strategy is “built on the twin pillars of economic growth and quality of life, for existing and future residents …. underpinned by a commitment to sustainable development that maintains environmental quality” (page 26).
· “Maintenance of environmental quality is an important part of city development. Our unique harbour, bush, and stream environments are a key attraction for residents and visitors” (page 27, Council Priority 4).
· The community requires that “The natural and physical environment is valued, clean, safe, attractive and sustainable” (page 22, Community Outcome 4).
· The quality of life for residents “will be underpinned by Council’s effective core services such as stormwater, sewerage, roads and waste management” and be “enhanced by the lifestyle opportunities provided by our beautiful natural environment, stunning harbour and coastal views” (page 27, Council Priority 2).
Unfortunately, Guardians believe that this vision will not be achieved by the strategies proposed in the draft plan.
While the draft LTCCP demonstrates that the Council is aware of the integrated nature of economic, social and environmental sustainability, it also demonstrates that it has not yet adopted an integrated approach to the long term planning of these interrelated variables.
The Guardians focus is the ongoing health of the Inlet, and in undertaking our role for the community we take an holistic approach because we are consulted on a variety of issues ranging from roading and subdivision and the effects thereof, to preservation and ecosystem management. Because the Council has to consult with stakeholders on all these issues and expects them to have a comprehensive understanding of matters facing the city, should it not also demonstrate its understanding of the interrelatedness of the issues it deals with by developing an LTCCP that contains projects that focus on long-term effects as well as solving an immediate problem? Including strategic prevention measures in projects at their inception will obviate the need for mitigation later.
Some specific issues
Paremata Boat Ramp
Guardians absolutely oppose this project unless it can be unequivocally demonstrated that it will have no adverse effect on the tidal flow characteristics and the flushing cycle of the Inlet.
The present unnatural rate of sediment accumulation in the Inlet due to human activities in its catchment is causing serious concern for its ecological health and amenity value. Any activity that reduces the ability of the Inlet to flush out sediment is potentially disastrous. Water flow through the entrance channel already is affected by bridge piers and abutments. Any further obstruction of the Inlet mouth is likely to make the situation worse.
Guardians also believe that doubling the capacity for boat launching at Paremata will increase the safety risk to boaties. There is a strong current through the Inlet entrance channel, and the launch area is small.
Implementation of the Pauatahanui Inlet Action Plan
For the Council’s sentiments on the environment to be meaningful, the LTCCP must include a commitment to implementing the Action Plan. The statement that “Council’s support for the Pauatahanui Inlet Action Plan will continue” (page 27, Council Priority 4) does not flow through in the draft to support for proposals for action and funding. Quite the contrary, as some of the projects initially proposed but not finally included in the draft have the potential for significant improvement of harbour water quality and environmental health.
A commitment of funds for the implementation of the Pauatahanui Inlet Restoration Plan, which currently is being costed, would be a good first step. Adopting this plan is fundamental to the realisation of the Action Plan.
Guardians request that an allocation of funds for a Strategic Project ‘Implementation of the Pauatahanui Inlet Action Plan’ be included in the LTCCP.
Maintaining the values of the Inlet
Enhancing water quality in the Inlet is the key to preventing further degradation of its environmental health and, eventually, its amenity value. The primary requirements for this are:
· Control of sediment input and maintenance of the natural flushing system of the Inlet.
· Control of stormwater discharge to the Inlet.
Control of sediment input
This requires adequate control on
· Erosion of rural land.
· The potential for sediment discharge from subdivision development, landscaping and building construction.
Guardians welcome the inclusion of an accelerated review of the District Plan in the draft LTCCP in the hope that this will lead to the Council’s active encouragement for developers and builders to adopt more ecofriendly practices. But the first of these problems also requires Council to develop policies and actions that encourage rural landowners to revegetate appropriately.
Guardians request that Council address these issues in formulating the final version of the LTCCP.
Control of stormwater discharge to the Inlet
The proposal to fit filters to the stormwater system at Mana Esplanade is welcomed but in the longer term of the LTCCP is an inadequate response to the damage to the aquatic environment caused by the sediment and chemical contaminants carried by stormwater. This is now well established by research and several NZ local authorities require developers, road builders, etc. to adopt ‘best practice’ stormwater treatment.
This should be a feature also of the revision of the District Plan, but the LTCCP also should equally include further provision for retrofitting the present stormwater drainage system with efficient sediment and chemical pollutant filters or other means of preventing less than ‘best practice’ treated stormwater being discharged to streams and the Inlet.
Guardians request that Council address these issues in formulating the final version of the LTCCP.
A strategy for growth and development
Guardians believe there is considerable value in adding a project to the LTCCP that allocates funds to create a ‘growth strategy master plan’. This plan would easily fit under the ‘Regional Strategy’, when it is launched in 2006, as a local plan to deal with the local issues associated with development. The plan could include (among others):
· Implementation of the Pauatahanui Inlet Restoration Plan.
· Defining of areas for development over the next 20 years – including where and how much residential, commercial, industrial and retail development will occur.
· The adoption of mixed use zones and medium density zoning to revitalise
existing urban villages and add new ones.
· The development of a corresponding infrastructure plan which would include roading, stormwater, sewerage, lighting, utilities etc.
· The adoption of techniques such as swales, recessed green islands down the centre of roads, mini wetlands for dealing with road run-off and stormwater (these have the added benefit of urban village beautification) and the mandatory inclusion of such techniques in all new developments.
· The designation of esplanade strips, preservation zones, recreation areas,
green belts.
· A review of the District Plan to regulate the amount of impermeable surfaces on each section in residential and commercial developments
The value in adopting such an approach is that it provides certainty for the city and its residents without breaching their human rights, it reduces the cumulative human impact on our "unique and valued environment" without breaching the RMA (which doesn't account for cumulative effects), it will probably result in lower maintenance, upgrade and incident costs relating to infrastructure due to the forward planning that will have been done. There may even be the ability to reduce the annual incremental rate increase, as developers will have incorporated the full cost of development into their plans up front rather than the ratepayer covering incremental infrastructure improvements as each twenty new houses are added to an area.
And what will be the benefit to the harbour and inlet? Guardians believe prevention to be the best cure. While development will continue to take place, the adoption of mitigating techniques and long-term planning will result in reduced impact and a greater understanding of the impacts of development. There are many examples internationally, and locally that PCC can refer to, including Kapiti Coast District Council, Waitakere City and North Shore City Councils, and the Lambton Harbour Chaffers development.
Summary
Guardians of Pauatahanui Inlet:
1. Do not believe that the draft LTCCP contains sufficient provision to satisfy Council Priority 4 of the City Development Strategy.
2. Absolutely oppose the construction of the proposed Paremata Boat Ramp.
3. Seek inclusion in the LTCCP of projects that aim to:
· Implement the Pauatahanui Inlet Action Plan
· Control sediment input to the Inlet
· Control the quality of stormwater discharged to the Inlet
4. Suggest that the LTCCP would be improved by the inclusion of a project to formulate a ‘growth strategy master plan’ as an overarching framework for city development on its widest sense.
