Exploration, Ecology, and Education
To: The Chief Executive Officer
Variation Submission
North Shore City Council
Private Bag 93500, Takapuna
North Shore City, New Zealand
Submisssion: re Proposed Variation 64, Long Bay Structure Plan, and further to the attached Form 3A:
I am a registered voter in the Albany electorate of North Shore City, a New Zealand-born citizen, and a permanent resident of Japan.
My submission relates to the specific provisions listed below. In Part I, my own original comments are offered with regard to 17B.2.4 “the economic and social benefits that growth brings to the community”. In the conclusion to these comments, I qualify my support for further comments on provisions (a) to (i) in Part II of the submission.
In the first Part, I also comment on 17B.3.6.2 “managing development so that archaeological sites and waahi tapu are retained, where possible, within reserves and open spaces”. The comments in Part II are those suggested by the Great Park Society in a recent newsletter.
Part I - Original comments
re 17B.2.4 "The Economic and Social Benefits that Growth Brings to the Community"
Growth in itself can be good or bad, depending what in fact is growing, and where it leads. As a region, Auckland requires growth in natural and social amenities, to better support the existing population and to balance the industrial and urban growth that may be associated with future population growth. Such amenities can only be acquired by foresight, before suitable areas have been permanently taken over by other uses. Much has been said about the natural amenities that a greater Long Bay-Okura Park will provide (as proposed by the Great Park Society). As a member of the Society, I also support the proposal to link the park with Sir Peter Blake, as a memorial to an explorer, ecologist, and educator. Here I would like to recommend exploration, ecology, and education as key words for economic and social development associated with the park. I will elaborate:
Exploration: the proposed great park has much easier gradients than many other parks in the vicinity of Auckland, by virtue of the fact that most parks are associated with steep and rugged lands that are unfit for large-scale farming or urban development. The larger Long Bay-Okura Park will provide much more accessible areas for exploration by foot, by wheelchair, by bicycle, by horse, by boat - and perhaps even by air, if certain areas are found to be suitable for hang-gliding activities. These various forms of exploration should not all be squeezed into one narrow coastal strip. In my own life, exploration of the Long Bay-Okura area as a child had a major influence in the direction of my interests at school, university and my subsequent career as an anthropologist and botanist. Exploration of the same area by other people has undoubtedly had many different outcomes. I am sure that for all of us who have had the privilege of intimate contact with the park area, the opportunity for exploration in childhood and throughout life has been important for our physical and intellectual development. The importance of a park thus goes beyond being merely recreational, for individuals and for society, although providing opportunities for recreation is of course a major reason for developing and using a park. For me, the park area has been an important as a place for exploration, as well as for recreation.
Ecology: the proposed park will complement not just the existing marine reserve, but also the Albany Reserve, with which it is almost contiguous. It would be very worthwhile to consider ways in which a continuous green belt could be created from sea to sea, from the Hauraki Gulf to the inner Waitemata harbour, via Albany Centre with its emphasis on education, sports, and business. Walking and other non-motorised routes along this axis could form the basis for longer distance sports training within the green lung, providing athletes with the fresh air needed for intensive physical training. This is the human-ecological view; the natural ecological benefits of a green belt are perhaps more obvious, so I will not say anything more about them here.
Education: the Great Park Society has rightly emphasised the provision of marine education as a natural role for the park and marine reserve, and I support the Society’s suggestion of forming a Peter Blake Memorial Park, though not necessarily as a park embracing the entire area proposed for a greater park. By all standards, local and international, MERC is an outstanding example of how outdoor education can be provided. A greater park could be developed with the long term aim of providing other kinds of outdoor education, and I envisage a larger educational zone (with accompanying intensive development of accommodation and service facilities) being created in the vicinity of Long Bay College and the existing highway extension of East Coast Bays road - i.e. far back from the coast behind both Long Bay and Okura. The close proximity to Albany means that such a zone would have natural synergies with the Massey University campus in Albany and the sports stadium. It would also provide North Shore businesses, entrepreneurs, and residents generally the benefits of close links with a diverse educational community, and it would also help to minimise infrastructure development costs because roading and sewage provision could be concentrated within the zone.
The special education development zone should also include already-existing residential areas so as to avoid excessive expansion of residential development within the area required for the greater park. Creating a special zone for education and intensive (but low-rise) residential development linked to the educational project might also help to compensate current land owners for their perceived loss of expected development rights in the larger part of the Long Bay-Okura area - although this would not be the primary reason for creating such a zone.
Any other areas designated for large-lot, low-density residential development should be developed using permaculture principles, or with close attention to these principles. Their development could also be incorporated into the educational process as part of the special educational zone. Within large-lot, low-density residential development, there could also be legal provision for compatible business development, such as the provision of home-stay accommodation for tourists, and the development of food services (e.g. restaurants, food processing, and food storage). These would complement the larger educational and permacultural project, and would enhance enjoyment of the Great Park. There may be considerable community interest and support for an urban-rural education project aimed at supporting organic farming and eco-tourism in New Zealand. The North Shore could benefit in many ways if it could take a lead in this - perhaps with support from Massey University or other public and private institutions, and from regional or national governing bodies.
Conclusion
At present, it may be legally difficult or impossible for City, Regional, and National authorities to control development in the manner suggested above. It may appear easier to be to let development proceed (1) by the default principle of maximum-private-profit at maximum-public-cost, or (2) only according to conventional modes of development and resource management.
IF SO, THEN I FULLY SUPPORT ALL POINTS MADE IN THE ATTACHED NOTES PROVIDED BY THE GREAT PARK SOCIETY (a to i, below). Only by following these suggestions will options remain open for long-term development of the sort suggested here - if the community and region ever see merit in what I have suggested.
Archaeology (re 17B.3.6.2 “managing development so that archaeological sites and waahi tapu are retained, where possible, within reserves and open spaces”)
All archaeological surveys conducted in the Long Bay and Okura area so far have been based almost entirely on surface evidence. There has been no attempt to investigate wetland deposits to learn about long-term environmental change since before the earliest possible human occupation of the area, hundreds and perhaps as much as one or two thousand years, depending on when Polynesian ancestors first reached New Zealand. Investigating human impacts on environmental indicators are a routine approach in archaeological research, but has not been carried out here. Until such work has been carried out, archaeological understanding of this region will remain superficial, and management of the archaeological landscape will be poorly informed.
A substantial palaeo-environmental study is also required in order to understand the ecological history of terrestial and marine environments, locally and in the region. Whether or not they are of archaeological significance, the wetland areas at Long Bay and Okura should be managed with greater consideration for their potential scientific significance. There are few if any other locations on the eastern coast of Auckland city where substantial wetlands remain.
Part II.
Submission points here were those suggested by the Great Park Society, and further supported by myself, as noted in the conclusion of Part I above.
Variation Submission
North Shore City Council
Private Bag 93500, Takapuna
North Shore City, New Zealand
Submisssion: re Proposed Variation 64, Long Bay Structure Plan, and further to the attached Form 3A:
I am a registered voter in the Albany electorate of North Shore City, a New Zealand-born citizen, and a permanent resident of Japan.
My submission relates to the specific provisions listed below. In Part I, my own original comments are offered with regard to 17B.2.4 “the economic and social benefits that growth brings to the community”. In the conclusion to these comments, I qualify my support for further comments on provisions (a) to (i) in Part II of the submission.
In the first Part, I also comment on 17B.3.6.2 “managing development so that archaeological sites and waahi tapu are retained, where possible, within reserves and open spaces”. The comments in Part II are those suggested by the Great Park Society in a recent newsletter.
Part I - Original comments
re 17B.2.4 "The Economic and Social Benefits that Growth Brings to the Community"
Growth in itself can be good or bad, depending what in fact is growing, and where it leads. As a region, Auckland requires growth in natural and social amenities, to better support the existing population and to balance the industrial and urban growth that may be associated with future population growth. Such amenities can only be acquired by foresight, before suitable areas have been permanently taken over by other uses. Much has been said about the natural amenities that a greater Long Bay-Okura Park will provide (as proposed by the Great Park Society). As a member of the Society, I also support the proposal to link the park with Sir Peter Blake, as a memorial to an explorer, ecologist, and educator. Here I would like to recommend exploration, ecology, and education as key words for economic and social development associated with the park. I will elaborate:
Exploration: the proposed great park has much easier gradients than many other parks in the vicinity of Auckland, by virtue of the fact that most parks are associated with steep and rugged lands that are unfit for large-scale farming or urban development. The larger Long Bay-Okura Park will provide much more accessible areas for exploration by foot, by wheelchair, by bicycle, by horse, by boat - and perhaps even by air, if certain areas are found to be suitable for hang-gliding activities. These various forms of exploration should not all be squeezed into one narrow coastal strip. In my own life, exploration of the Long Bay-Okura area as a child had a major influence in the direction of my interests at school, university and my subsequent career as an anthropologist and botanist. Exploration of the same area by other people has undoubtedly had many different outcomes. I am sure that for all of us who have had the privilege of intimate contact with the park area, the opportunity for exploration in childhood and throughout life has been important for our physical and intellectual development. The importance of a park thus goes beyond being merely recreational, for individuals and for society, although providing opportunities for recreation is of course a major reason for developing and using a park. For me, the park area has been an important as a place for exploration, as well as for recreation.
Ecology: the proposed park will complement not just the existing marine reserve, but also the Albany Reserve, with which it is almost contiguous. It would be very worthwhile to consider ways in which a continuous green belt could be created from sea to sea, from the Hauraki Gulf to the inner Waitemata harbour, via Albany Centre with its emphasis on education, sports, and business. Walking and other non-motorised routes along this axis could form the basis for longer distance sports training within the green lung, providing athletes with the fresh air needed for intensive physical training. This is the human-ecological view; the natural ecological benefits of a green belt are perhaps more obvious, so I will not say anything more about them here.
Education: the Great Park Society has rightly emphasised the provision of marine education as a natural role for the park and marine reserve, and I support the Society’s suggestion of forming a Peter Blake Memorial Park, though not necessarily as a park embracing the entire area proposed for a greater park. By all standards, local and international, MERC is an outstanding example of how outdoor education can be provided. A greater park could be developed with the long term aim of providing other kinds of outdoor education, and I envisage a larger educational zone (with accompanying intensive development of accommodation and service facilities) being created in the vicinity of Long Bay College and the existing highway extension of East Coast Bays road - i.e. far back from the coast behind both Long Bay and Okura. The close proximity to Albany means that such a zone would have natural synergies with the Massey University campus in Albany and the sports stadium. It would also provide North Shore businesses, entrepreneurs, and residents generally the benefits of close links with a diverse educational community, and it would also help to minimise infrastructure development costs because roading and sewage provision could be concentrated within the zone.
The special education development zone should also include already-existing residential areas so as to avoid excessive expansion of residential development within the area required for the greater park. Creating a special zone for education and intensive (but low-rise) residential development linked to the educational project might also help to compensate current land owners for their perceived loss of expected development rights in the larger part of the Long Bay-Okura area - although this would not be the primary reason for creating such a zone.
Any other areas designated for large-lot, low-density residential development should be developed using permaculture principles, or with close attention to these principles. Their development could also be incorporated into the educational process as part of the special educational zone. Within large-lot, low-density residential development, there could also be legal provision for compatible business development, such as the provision of home-stay accommodation for tourists, and the development of food services (e.g. restaurants, food processing, and food storage). These would complement the larger educational and permacultural project, and would enhance enjoyment of the Great Park. There may be considerable community interest and support for an urban-rural education project aimed at supporting organic farming and eco-tourism in New Zealand. The North Shore could benefit in many ways if it could take a lead in this - perhaps with support from Massey University or other public and private institutions, and from regional or national governing bodies.
Conclusion
At present, it may be legally difficult or impossible for City, Regional, and National authorities to control development in the manner suggested above. It may appear easier to be to let development proceed (1) by the default principle of maximum-private-profit at maximum-public-cost, or (2) only according to conventional modes of development and resource management.
IF SO, THEN I FULLY SUPPORT ALL POINTS MADE IN THE ATTACHED NOTES PROVIDED BY THE GREAT PARK SOCIETY (a to i, below). Only by following these suggestions will options remain open for long-term development of the sort suggested here - if the community and region ever see merit in what I have suggested.
Archaeology (re 17B.3.6.2 “managing development so that archaeological sites and waahi tapu are retained, where possible, within reserves and open spaces”)
All archaeological surveys conducted in the Long Bay and Okura area so far have been based almost entirely on surface evidence. There has been no attempt to investigate wetland deposits to learn about long-term environmental change since before the earliest possible human occupation of the area, hundreds and perhaps as much as one or two thousand years, depending on when Polynesian ancestors first reached New Zealand. Investigating human impacts on environmental indicators are a routine approach in archaeological research, but has not been carried out here. Until such work has been carried out, archaeological understanding of this region will remain superficial, and management of the archaeological landscape will be poorly informed.
A substantial palaeo-environmental study is also required in order to understand the ecological history of terrestial and marine environments, locally and in the region. Whether or not they are of archaeological significance, the wetland areas at Long Bay and Okura should be managed with greater consideration for their potential scientific significance. There are few if any other locations on the eastern coast of Auckland city where substantial wetlands remain.
Part II.
Submission points here were those suggested by the Great Park Society, and further supported by myself, as noted in the conclusion of Part I above.
posted by Peter Matthews at
4:28 AM
|
0 comments
