My Account
Over 3500 people have signed a petition after developers gained consent to shift the Pacific Road carpark, which is about 3km north of Te Arai Point.
By George Driver
Thousands of people have signed a petition amid concerns that public access to Te Arai Beach is being curtailed in favour of private interests.
The beachside carpark on Pacific Road, one of two public access points to Te Arai Beach, is set to be moved about 300-400 metres back from the beach and behind a row of proposed housing.
Auckland Council approved the move in December, as part of a resource consent application to subdivide the land.
The consent was lodged by Te Arai North Limited, a joint venture between Darby Partners and Te Uri o Hau. The developers plan to build 46 houses on the 616-hectare of land as the result of a 2014 Environment Court decision, known as Plan Change 166.
Crucially, one of the recently consented lots transects a public easement which leads to the carpark, cutting off access.
In its current location, the carpark would sit in front of the houses to be developed. The developers want it moved behind the housing and provide pedestrian access down a 20-metre corridor running between two housing lots.
Council approved the consent as non-notified, meaning no consultation was required, after it assessed the impact of the changes as “less than minor”.
The move has resulted in a public outcry, with many concerned that moving the carpark will make it harder for people to access the beach.
A group called Save Te Arai formed after the community caught wind of the plans. It started an online petition calling on Council to revoke the resource consent and ensure public access to the existing carpark is retained. The petition had over 3500 signatures when Mahurangi Matters went to print, while the group’s Facebook page had over 1500 members.
The Rodney Local Board has thrown its weight behind the campaign, saying it will support the group when it presents to Council’s Parks Committee later this month.
The Te Arai Beach Preservation Society, Save Te Arai and the Surfbreak Protection Society presented to the Board on May 9.
Save Te Arai chair Aaron McConchie told the Local Board that moving the carpark would greatly affect public access.
“Many members of the community, including elderly, the less able and fishermen, say they will not be able to use the beach if they have to walk an extra 400 metres,” Mr McConchie said.
“It will semi-privatise that area of the beach.”
However, the developer says the carpark is being moved as a condition imposed by the Environment Court and will only mean people have to walk a further two minutes to the beach.
In a seven-page response to inquiries from Mahurangi Matters, Darby Partners representative David Lewis says the move is to protect the ecological values of the coastal reserve. Mr Lewis was speechwriter and press secretary for former Prime Minister Helen Clark and worked with Auckland Mayor Len Brown during the Bevan Chuang scandal. His communications company, Whiteboat, specialises in “crisis and issues management”, according to its website.
He says Council and Te Uri o Hau agreed to shift the carpark two years ago and the area has to be planted in native trees as a condition of PC166.
The developer plans to install public toilets, changing rooms, security cameras and picnic benches at the new carpark, which will be three times bigger than the existing carpark.
He says there have also been other issues with the existing carpark’s location.
“We and Council have received many complaints of trail bikes and other vehicles on the beach, drinking, drugs and toileting despite the absence of toilets. Theft and damage to vehicles in the carpark is also a problem.”
But, Mr McConchie says the environmental impact of the carpark was never raised as an issue during the Environment Court hearings, and the Court’s decision makes no reference to moving the carpark.
“If it was moved back 80 metres it would be well behind the dunes and would be in an area which has been subject to development. Why move it back a further 300 metres behind the houses?”
Mr McConchie speculates that the real reason for moving the carpark is to increase the value of the sections, by curtailing public access and keeping the carpark out of view.
The private houses being developed would also have private road access to an area close to the dunes, further undermining the environmental case, he says.
The Te Arai Beach Preservation Society and the NZ Fairy Tern Charitable Trust say the arguments for moving the carpark doesn’t stack up.
The trusts were notified of the application, as a condition of the Environment Court decision, and wrote to Council in a joint letter calling for the carpark to stay where it was.
The two groups also claimed the developer misrepresented their views in its resource application, which claimed the trusts’ supported moving the carpark.
“While we are aware of ecological issues, it is categorically not the case that we support the move of the carpark 450 metres inland especially as there are house sites closer to the beach,” the letter said. “We have been led to believe that the rationale for the move is on ecological grounds, but the carpark has been in its current location for many years and, from our experience, there has been little or no adverse effect on the NZ fairy tern or northern NZ dotterel.”
In a public letter responding to inquiries, Council northern resource consenting manager Ian Dobson and asset planning and community services manager Richard Hollier said it’s parks department was consulted as part of the consenting process and supports the proposal.
“It considered that the relocation of the car park was the most appropriate option to provide for ecological enhancement of the reserve, while retaining pedestrian and equestrian access to the foreshore area,” the letter said.
Council says it cannot review the decision, but a third party could seek a judicial review in the High Court.
Te Uri o Hau has also issued a press release, saying opponents have been misinforming the public.
Settlement trust chair Russell Kemp, said the carpark was being shifted because it was in the sensitive dune area which was part of the coastal reserve.
Mr McConchie says the proposal still has to be approved by the Government as a condition of making a variation to a forestry easement and the public will be able to have a say through this process.
“It isn’t a done deal,” Mr McConchie says. “There are lots of things that need to be in place before this can happen.”
Mr McConchie says the group hasn’t ruled out appealing the resource consent decision in the High Court.
