Future Development Strategy (FDS)
Future Development Strategy (FDS)
23 Sept 2024
This Future Development Strategy (FDS) is probably the most serious issue confronting our fertile soils on the Heretaunga Plains since the conception of the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy (HPUDS) document was created in 2010.
HPUDS was bad as it identified many areas on our Heretaunga Plains for Greenfield Development that is on LUC Class 1, 2 and 3 soils.
Many of these areas have been zoned for urban and industrial development and since conception in 2010, these areas have been destroyed forever with concrete and asphalt.
These areas include:
Hastings:
· Brookvale Rd / Romanes Dr. 36ha.
· Clive St. 4ha.
· Howard St (to Awahou St) 18ha.
· Lyndhurst. 28ha.
· Northwood. 4ha.
· Tomoana Food Hub. (on Elwood Rd) 11ha.
· Omahu Rd. (Industrial). 56ha.
· Whakatu. 49ha.
o Total: 206ha.
Napier:
· Bay View. 16ha.
· Parklands. 42ha.
· Te Awa. 100ha.
o Total: 158ha.
At the moment, the three councils, HDC, NCC and the HBRC are in the process of formulating a Future Development Strategy (FDS) which replaces the old and now defunct Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy (HPUDS) document.
HPUDS was set up in 2010 and had a 10 year life which expired 2020.
So this FDS paves the way for development that will be planned and proceeded with over the next 30 years.
This is a really important document that sets in concrete new Greenfield development areas that are in the most part on highly productive land; LUC Class 1, 2 and 3 soils on the Heretaunga Plains.
I have read the FDS Draft documents, which are extensive, and the bottom line is that the plan is to destroy forever 417ha (1030 acres) of our highly fertile soils on our amazing Heretaunga Plains.
Are we going to sit back and let this happen?
If I have anything to do with this outcome, I am sure as hell not going lie back and roll over and let these councils do this! And nor will the other members of the Save the Plains Group.
These policies are just the same old senseless behaviour patterns that successive councils have done over the last many decades; promoting this cancerous urban spread over our incredibly fertile soils, slowly killing off our Golden Goose and the Golden Eggs that we are blessed to sustain our economic growth. These soils are the powerhouse of our regional economy and we must preserve them, not only for ourselves but for the generations that are our future.
It has all been far to easy for successive councils to just tack on a little bit more highly fertile land here and there around our cities because it is easier and cheaper for them to do so.
“If we do it slowly enough and not all at once, nobody will notice. We need to do this!”
Well we do notice and this cannot continue. It has to stop and STOP NOW..!!
It is time to draw a line in the soil, and say enough is enough!
We as a group are not against growth; we applaud growth and we need to promote growth to sustain and grow our economy and in doing so have repeatedly given the councils options to develop urban and industrial growth on unproductive land rather than our highly fertile and productive land.
To date, these options have fallen on deaf ears despite the council’s rhetoric on saying “we must protect our fertile soils for food production”.
The Auckland consultants Barker & Associates, who are contracted by the three councils to draw up the FDS document, were given a terms of reference for this plan and item number 6 says: “The highly productive land of the Heretaunga Plains is protected for productive uses”.
Absolutely NO notice has been taken of this brief.
It is scandalous and needs to be stopped in its tracks NOW!!
As I see it, this FDS document is flawed for two reasons:
Firstly, many of the areas undeveloped in the HPUDS document are just being rolled over into this new FDS. These areas that were in HPUDS have expired and have no just cause to be part of the FDS.
HPUDS areas in Hastings:
· Kaiapo Rd. 74ha.
· Lyndhurst Extension. 31ha.
· Murdoch Rd. 11ha.
· Copeland Rd. 14ha.
HPUDS areas in Napier:
· The Loop. 23.5ha.
· Riverbend. 23.3ha.
· South Pirimai. 61.6ha.
Total: 238.4ha.
These areas are all on fertile LUC Class 1, 2 and 3 soils and have no legal right to be part of the FDS. There time as options for development has expired.
Another issue is that the FDS Draft says the FDS does not rezone land for Greenfield Development.
Yet these areas have been identified in the FDS Draft as new areas to be rezoned for Greenfield Development:
Hastings:
· Brookvale Rd. 9.1ha.
· Middle Rd. 21.14ha.
· Middle Rd Extension. 32.2ha.
· IR2 Irongate South. (Industrial). 48ha. IR3a.
· Irongate West. (Industrial). 52.5ha
Napier:
· Mission Estate. 9.05ha.
· SP Severn Precinct. (Commercial). 6ha.
Total area of rezoned land on LUC Class 1, 2 and 3 soils: 178ha.
The total area identified in the FDS Draft for Greenfield Development is 417ha (1030 acreas).
The second reason this FDS is flawed is that under the National Policy Statement on Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL) legislation this plan is in breach of the NPS-HPL.
In this legislation, under Clause 3.6, it says that the NPS-HPL restricts urban rezoning of highly productive land unless:
· there are no other reasonably practicable and feasible options for providing at least sufficient development capacity within the same locality and market while achieving a well-functioning urban environment; and
· councils must have first considered alternative options such as intensification in existing urban areas, rezoning of unproductive land as urban land and rezoning highly productive land with a lower productive capacity.
· Generally, councils are also required to avoid rezoning of highly productive land for rural lifestyle blocks.
So there was no brief to Barker & Associates to consider land for urban and industrial development on unproductive land.
Now isn’t that strange??
This is a travesty…
I am not going to stand by and see this happen and if need be, we will take legal action to prevent our best soils in the world from being destroyed forever with concrete and asphalt.
This is a complex issue and there are other threats associated with this FDS document.
These threats are:
1.. Water:
The TANK provisions a priority of water accessibility to urban and industrial uses over and above the provision of water for food production on our “best in the world” soils on these Heretaunga Plains.
While implementing these restrictions for the economic sustainability of our region, food producers are regulated on the amount of water they can use while urban users are not.
There are no regulatory measures in place to restrict the amount of water urban property owners can use.
There’s no penalty for leaving a tap/taps on continuously in an urban environment.
There’s no measure of the amount of water that is lost in the infrastructure structures from source to end user.
This is grossly unfair and threatens NZ’s ability to secure it’s own food security for domestic use and export earnings.
We already have horticultural companies moving to Canterbury because of the reliability of water supply and cheaper land than here in Hawke’s Bay.
2.. Reverse sensitivity:
Councils can be generally bad at planning for urban development and food production areas co-existing right next to one another.
When new greenfield spaces are created on fertile soils, the newbies in the block do not like all the activity associated with agricultural production which are just carrying on their normal business just as they have always done.
This leads to conflict and NIMBYism from urban dwellers, followed by agricultural activities being compromised and a devaluation of their food producing land.
This is a big reason why new greenfield development should be confined to unproductive land and not productive land.
3.. Wrongly classified highly productive land.
How do we classify “highly productive land”?
1. We assume that existing soils identification maps are correct and these are taken as read when classifying an area for future greenfield development. Sadly these classifications are not always correct so it is imperative that further investigations need to be done to identify correctly what classification of soils type is in a particular area before it is zoned for urban and industrial development purposes and destroyed forever.
· A vegetable grower has cropped an area in Napier for many years where the soil classification is Class 3. He produces wonderful vegetable crops in this area in soil. He says and I quote: “Though fitting into the LUC3 category, it definitely isn’t poor production, waterlogged soils. It is strong soil that produces a significant amount of high value fresh vegetables and fruit including neighbouring cherries, kiwifruit and apples”. This particular area has been identified in the FDS Draft as a future area for urban development…!
2. This National government indicated before and after the election that it will definitely protect LUC Class 1 and 2 soils but Class 3 soils was up for grabs for future greenfield development. “We need more houses!” was their cry! Well do we? We live in times when building companies are going into liquidation owing many millions of dollars and this is a useful statistic; just 24 sections were sold in the Hastings District last year; this year will be less… Now it seems like the government is softening its stance on Class 3 soils. It has come to realise that Class 3 soils, which take up 9% of NZ’s land mass, has a wide variety of soils types within that category. They vary from very fertile to not so fertile, so it is very wrong to lump all of Class 3 soils into unproductive land.
3. Under the NPS-HPL legislation, Regional Councils throughout NZ are charged with doing detailed mapping of soil types so that areas are correctly identified for their food producing capabilities. Sadly this has not been done by any regional council in NZ, probably due to a funding issue?
This is a serious issue and I would request that all food producers, whether they grow vegetables, apples, grapes or any other food crops as well as concerned citizens in our region, to rise up and stand with me on this issue.
We need to unite as one and put an end to this economic vandalism.
Please contact me if this resonates and I will share with you the issues that make this FDS a flawed process.
The FDS Joint Committee, which comprises of two members from each council, need to be contacted and voice our opposition to this proposal.
They say that we will be able to have our say when submissions open in November, but I don’t believe we should submit on a FDS document that is flawed from the outset.
Thank you.
Richard Gaddum.
Spokesperson for the “Save the Plains Group”.
021997097
Future Development Strategy (FDS)
Potential Opportunity Areas with full HBUDS