Newspaper Article 1994 – Lyndhurst land in for more debate

Lyndhurst land in for more debate

The Hastings District Council is likely to reconsider its decision not to allow more houses in the Lyndhurst Rd area.

Mayor Jeremy Dwyer was moving today to complete legal paperwork for another debate. He requires the signatures of at least five councillors to have the matter heard again.

Inquiries by the Herald-Tribune show he should not have a problem. Six councillors have confirmed they want another debate. They are Harry Romanes, Colin Shanley, Judith Baxter, Trevor Baker, Terry Coxon and Mike Donnelly.

When the issue of houses at Lyndhurst was debated in March, the vote was lost 8-7. A change of heart next time by one councillor will see the proponents win.

The key appears to be Cr Baxter, who originally opposed the use of Lyndhurst.

“In hindsight I have doubts about whether I did the right thing. I’m not terribly comfortable with my decision, but I’m not sure why. It was a very thin line for me,” she said.

“It never really hurts to have an issue redebated if there is room for more consultation, but I’m not sure whether there is really. I don’t know if this is the right time.”

Indications have been made privately that Cr Baxter could come under intense lobbying.

There is strong feeling within the Hastings business community and sectors of the council that the refusal to rezone Lyndhurst could have a severe long-term impact on the city especially in the wake of the hailstorm.

Mr Dwyer believes the ramifications have already begun to surface.

He said last month’s issue of a building industry publication reported: “In Hastings there is a shortage of sections as the city bangs heads with the horticultural industries that surround it. There is no such problem in Napier, and the strong housing demand is supplemented by the art deco renaissance in the commercial district.”

Mr Dwyer said people looking at Hawke’s Bay as a place to live and work would discount Hastings as an option.

“We have got the right to grow too. Hastings deserves a kick start. There is a compromise available for Lyndhurst.”

He said the debate would not be held until all councillors were present.

Hastings stifled

Target Homes director Robin Bell said Hastings was being stifled. There was poor retail turnover and empty shops as a result of a lack of residents in the city.

“I would like to see another debate. I think the economic benefits to Hastings outweigh the loss of the land. We are going to see the effects of the hailstorm. If there is an active building industry, it will be a shot in the arm,” Mr Bell said.

He said he recognised that Hastings district had to be careful about encroaching on productive land.

The Hawke’s Bay Chamber of Commerce also wants Lyndhurst rezoned.

President Peter Barnes said another debate should be held and a compromise found.

The general manager of the central region for Carter Holt Building Supplies, Edwin Brown, said a decision on the development of Lyndhurst should be made through the planning process.

Mr Brown said if land were not made available, there would be a move toward more houses in Napier.

Some could be used

Hawke’s Bay Fruitgrowers’ Association president David Marden [Mardon] said he would be annoyed if another debate put the majority of Lyndhurst at risk.

Mr Mardon said the only compromise he could tolerate was one that retained the “usable, farmable area”. There were small portions that could be used for houses because they were uneconomic blocks.

The association would like a regional study on the future of urbanisiation [urbanisation].

However, the chance of that is remote. The Napier City Council would not support a Hawke’s Bay study, planning manager Alastair Thompson said.

Mr Thompson said both Hastings and Napier councils had done urban growth studies and worked with each other, so another report was not necessary.

Photo caption – Mr Dwyer…Hastings stifled.

Councillors split over review

Hastings district councillors are split over whether to debate again the decision not to rezone the Lyndhurst area for houses.

Six councillors and mayor Jeremy Dwyer want another debate. Seven do not. The 14th councillor, Ralph Beamish, could not be reached for comment because he was on holiday overseas.

Those against another debate are Crs Harvey Boyden, Maraekakaho ward; Terry Lynn, Flaxmere; Tim Tinker, Tutira; John Campbell, Poukawa; David Law, Clive; Megan Williams, Hastings; Norm Speers, Hastings.

Those in favour are Crs Harry Romanes, Havelock North; Judith Baxter, Flaxmere; Colin Shanley, Havelock North; Trevor Baker, Hastings; Terry Coxon, Hastings; Mike Donnelly, Heretaunga.

Cr Coxon said there was a lot of concern in the community about the decision in March to not go ahead with the rezoning.

“We are not even letting it go through the planning process. That is a failing to allow the wider interests to have a say. It also seems to me some of the user groups are a little less certain than they used to be,” he said.

‘Residents being lost’

Cr Coxon said there needed to be a Havelock North equivalent in Hastings. Too many potential residents were being lost to other suburbs, especially Greenmeadows.

He said people should realise there could be problems with Irongate Rd – York Rd as a housing area because the motorway was planned to go through it. This could result in low-cost houses, and that was not what the council wanted.

Cr Campbell said he was “very, very comfortable” with the original decision. It was not necessary to have a review.

Cr Baker said that if there were another debate, all councillors should be present. That would not happen for at least a couple of months because some had commitments taking them out of the district.

Cr Law said he was strongly opposed to any move to have another debate. Lyndhurst had to be protected.

“We really have to save that land. It’s absolutely crazy to reduce the operable land we have,” he said.

Engineering considerations

Cr Boyden said the council should be investigating the options it decided to pursue, such as Irongate Rd – York Rd, rather than covering old ground.

Cr Williams said another hearing of the issue should be held in a few years if a need were perceived.

Cr Donnelly disagreed. He said there were many engineering aspects that needed closer examination before a final decision was made.