Sign In / Register
The Rodney Local Board has also expressed opposition to Waste Management’s proposal for a landfill in the Dome Valley.
Rodney Local Board has voted to oppose Waste Management’s private plan change application to turn 1000 hectares of land in the Dome Valley into a special landfill precinct.
Members agreed that landfill activity was inappropriate for the location and for the ecology of the area and threatened species there, and that it would cause significant traffic issues.
The issue was discussed at the Board’s August monthly meeting, which was conducted via Skype due to Level 3 Covid-19 restrictions.
Waste Management NZ has made two applications for the farm and forestry land south of Wayby Valley — one for resource consent to develop a new regional landfill for Auckland and one to change the land designation in the Unitary Plan from rural production to a special landfill precinct.
Auckland Council principal planner Ryan Bradley told the Local Board the waste company did not have to apply for a plan change, but having one would increase its options.
“They don’t have to do this private plan change. Because landfill is a non-complying activity, they can just apply for resource consent,” he said. “They’re doing a private plan change because they want to set up a framework so if the resource consent application is rejected and the private plan change is permitted, it’s an easier avenue to then get consent.”
Some members voiced concerns that they were being consulted on such a complex strategic planning issue. Deputy chair Beth Houlbrooke said it put the Board in a difficult position.
“This particular request seems unfair on all parties, in that the Auckland Unitary Plan does not provide any land use zone that is already set up to enable landfill,” she said.
Dairy Flat’s Louise Johnston agreed, and said she thought Council should be more responsible for waste disposal.
“I feel uncomfortable that it’s left to private companies, rather than Council handling it in a strategic place with Council providing the service,” she said. “Why outsource to private companies? That should have been thought about, rather than plan changes being submitted by private companies. Reviewing this application is a big ask and should have been covered strategically in the Unitary Plan.”
Regarding any alternative sites for the proposed landfill, Ryan Bradley was unable to offer much clarity.
“They have looked at all sorts of sites, but unfortunately it’s hard for us to review how robust that process was, because they kept all the other sites confidential,” he said.
Members voted to submit 13 separate views and comments to Council, including that a landfill would increase carbon emissions and elevate climate risks; it would cause the loss of streams, which are home to highly endangered Hochstetter frogs; it would cause adverse traffic effects; and that planners should consider the significant number of submissions opposing the plan change from affected parties.
Three members – Colin Smith from Wellsford and Warkworth’s Steven Garner and Tim Holdgate – abstained from voting as they had previously made public their opposition to the landfill. Board chair Phelan Pirrie said this could potentially jeopardise the Board’s submission, as they could be viewed as having a predetermined position, which the procedure did not permit.
“It’s not about people doing anything wrong, or personal integrity, it’s just the process we follow as a Board,” he said.
Unlike a private plan change application, Local Boards have limited input to resource consent applications. They can provide feedback on whether an application should be notified, but otherwise can only submit on certain conditions, rather than the application as a whole, which is why the landfill resource consent application had not previously been discussed at a Board meeting, Mr Pirrie said after the meeting.
