Skip to content

THE MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT’S PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AT 31 NGONGOTAHĀ ROAD

REPORT BY THE ROTORUA DISTRICT RESIDENTS AND RATEPAYERS

7 April 2023

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This second and final report by the Rotorua District Residents and Ratepayers (RDRR) evaluates the extent to which questions asked at the First Public Meeting about the proposed development at 31 Ngongotahā Road were answered at the Second Public Meeting, the extent to which assurances given have been honoured, and other issues of concern raised subsequently by the RDRR Working Party. The report was refined and endorsed by RDRR’s Committee on 5 April 2023.

The report discusses the responses and implications of questions asked of MHUD’s DCE Place Ben Dalton, Developer Marcus Jacobson, Engineer James Dufty, and RLC’s DCE Jean-Paul Gaston. The report additionally identifies issues of continuing concern, including inadequate stormwater and wastewater infrastructure, potential social impacts, unoccupied houses, the need for greater democratic governance in the Ngongotahā Village, the lack of 2D and 3D modelling, the need for greater use of geographic science, local knowledge and communication technologies, and the need for further authentic community consultation.

The report calls for a justification for the scale of MHUD’s Ngongotahā project, the projection of the impact of an additional 1,000 people on the Ngongotahā Village, and the development of agreements between MHUD and RLC regarding the provision of new housing in Ngongotahā.

The report also urges the Engineer to publish flood plain limits, flood mitigation plans, and geo-tech evaluations for the site. Additionally, the report highlights the need for Kiwibuild provisions to moderate the anti-social effects of concentrating families associated with crime, poor school attendance, and acute multiple needs, and urges the Developer to engage highly respected local citizens and local iwi representatives to help make placement decisions in the short term.

The report further emphasizes the need for democratic representation from the Ngongotahā Village, the development of liaison services not specified in the Memorandum of Understanding between MHUD and Watchman Residential, the use of large graphics and 3D models, and the need for further authentic community consultation.

Finally, the report provides the RDRR’s recommendations to assist MHUD’s DCE Place Ben Dalton, Developer Marcus Jacobson, Engineer James Dufty, RLC’s DCE Jean-Paul Gaston, and the Ngongotahā community with the further refinement of proposals to develop housing on 31 Ngongotahā Road.

BACKGROUND

The Rotorua District Residents and Ratepayers (RDRR) organised and chaired the First Public Meeting held 26 January 2023 at the Ngongotahā Hall. It provided this service at the request of many members in the area who lack a representative Ngongotahā Village Committee. They are dismayed by the low level of interest of elected members on the Rotorua Lakes Council (RLC), with the notable exception of Cr Don Patterson who was raised locally, widely respected and attended the Second Public Meeting held on 15 March.

The first meeting was organised to give residents and ratepayers a voice about the housing development being planned for the 15.9ha (39.29 acre) site at 31 Ngongotahā Road. Over 400 attended. The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MHUD) released a preliminary description of the 350-home project that coincided with the beginning of this first public meeting.[1]

RDRR’s Working Party on the proposed development met 1 February to document the verbal assurances given to the First Public Meeting, to enable public feedback on draft development proposals, and to monitor implementation. The Working Party confirmed that most of the attendees were Ngongotahā residents. The Working Party’s report on the assurances given and questions yet to be addressed was provided to MHUD, their contracted Developer, Marcus Jacobson of Watchman Residential, and their contracted Engineer, James Dufty, to the RLC on 23 February, and posted into the public domain.[2]

RDRR’s Chairman, Dr. Reynold Macpherson, was invited by MHUD to facilitate the Second Public Meeting held 15 March. A report of the meeting was published on 16 March in the Rotorua Daily Post.[3]  The Working Party met again on 17 March and confirmed that, once again, most of the audience estimated at about 350 were from the Ngongotahā community.

The Working Party also recognised that the effectiveness of the meeting was impaired by the late installation and poor quality of the data projection technology used. Despite access being provided an hour before the start time, installation started when the meeting was scheduled to begin. The projected images could not be seen clearly, despite the use of new equipment. It is understood that the contractor has apologized and withdrawn his invoice from MHUD.

One result is that, despite careful preparation by MHUD’s contracted Developer and contracted Engineer, the Ngongotahā community is yet to see detailed plans of the proposed site, with contour lines showing the high-water limits of the 2008 and 2018 floods above and below the proposed site. It is understood from the Engineer’s comments that responsibility for projecting, managing and mitigating flooding downstream from the Waiteti Bridge to Lake Rotorua, including the area of housing below (i.e. to the East of) the Ngongotahā Road, is shared between the RLC and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC). This response regarding responsibility misses the point that residents below the Waiteti Bridge, including the Waiteti marae, could be potentially affected by accelerated run off from the proposed MHUD development but are yet to have their interests taken into account by the planning and engineering processes.

Another result is that public concerns over potential flooding remain paramount, especially in the light of Cyclone Gabrielle. The Working Party believes that it was the main factor explaining the show of hands at the end of the meeting. Although under 10 per cent of the audience left early, apparently disappointed with the presentations by the Developer and Engineer, about 10 per cent of the remainder indicated that they were in favour of the proposals, 25-30 per cent were undecided, but that 55-60 percent were against.

This second report summarises the extent to which questions asked at the First Public Meeting about the proposed were answered at the Second Public Meeting, discusses the extent to which assurances given have been honoured, and identifies other issues of concern subsequently raised by the Working Party. This report was endorsed by RDRR’s Committee on 5 April 2023.

QUESTIONS REFERRED TO MHUD’S DCE PLACE BEN DALTON

Responses to date and implications are now discussed in turn:

  1. How is the scale of MHUD’s Ngongotahā project justified when Stats NZ has estimated that Rotorua’s resident population grew by 8,400 between 2013 and 2022, that is 840 pa, and require about 210 homes (assuming an average of four persons per household), prior to a more recent downturn in population? The scale of the 31 Ngongotahā Road project is yet to be publicly justified. The proposal adopts the projections made by the RLC some years ago and could well be significantly obsolete. An update is warranted.
  2. What does MHUD project will be the impact of an additional 1,000 people on the fundamental character of the Ngongotahā Village? No projections have been provided to date. A task for a new representative Village Committee?
  3. If there were the equivalent of a Cyclone Gabrielle in the Waiteti and Ngongotahā valleys, and some of the proposed new homes had to be yellow or red stickered, who would ‘pick up the tab’? Neither the Developer, Engineer, MHUD nor RLC will be liable. Insurance is unlikely for homes built on or near a flood prone area. MHUD, Developer and BOPRC need to publish the boundaries of the Waiteti flood plain and the highwater limits of the 2008 and 2018 floods.
  4. To what extent has Cyclone Gabrielle triggered a policy review of MHUD’s housing strategy and revised plans for 31 Ngongotahā Road No response to date. A review by MHUD is advised to enable local adaptations in any new national policy framework.
  5. What other plans does MHUD have for housing in Ngongotahā? No response to date. Is a LGOIMA warranted?
  6. What agreements have MHUD developed with RLC regarding the provision of new housing in Ngongotahā? No response to date. Is a LGOIMA warranted?
  7. While recognising the need to ‘fast track’ the provision of housing, how will MHUD consult with the Ngongotahā community in the future over their housing plans for Ngongotahā? ‘Drop in’ public consultations will be provided when draft plans are ready. It would be helpful of MHUD publicly explained the fast-track covid legislation process for phase 1 and a proposed private plan change process for phase 2, to clarify public consultation opportunities. MHUD is encouraged to adopt Kainga Ora’s provision of large-scale maps of proposed developments with contour lines for the ‘drop in’ sessions, overlaid with flood plain limits and the reach of the 2008 and 2018 floods above and below the Waiteti Bridge to Lake Rotorua. MHUD is also advised to extend the hours of ‘drop in’ sessions from 2.30 pm into the evening, so that employed residents can attend after work, and to designate trained recorder to collect feedback systematically.

QUESTIONS REFERRED TO DEVELOPER MARCUS JACOBSON

Responses to date and implications are now discussed in turn:

  1. How will the presence of wāhitapu and the tapu Waiteti Awa be respected in the layout of the site? Draft plans to be shared when ready. MHUD and the Developer are advised to seek, accept and respond to advice by mana whenua, Ngati Ngararanui.
  2. How is the proposed scale and profile of housing provisions justified? Provisions were proposed without a systematic justification. The Developer is advised to schedule and publish phased provisions with justifications.
  3. How will parking and recreational needs be accommodated at the site? Some homes will have parking. Draft plans to be shared. The Developer is advised to publish parking and recreational plans.
  4. How will the proposed site be connected to Ngongotahā Village? The proposed footpath link was clarified verbally. The Developer should address this question more comprehensively to clarify links to educational, health, roading, medical and social services.
  5. How can the proposed public ‘drop-in’ session, to clarify draft plans by MHUD, sister ministries, BOPRC and RLC, provide authentic public consultations – where there is a real possibility of critical feedback resulting in significant and negotiated change? ‘Drop in’ public consultations will be provided when draft plans are available. MHUD and the Developer are advised to provided authentic consultations as opposed to symbolic consultations that seek to ‘socialise’ predetermined decisions.

QUESTIONS REFERRED TO ENGINEER JAMES DUFTY

Responses to date and implications are now discussed in turn:

  1. What is the quantified level of flooding risk and potential impact at the site? Verbal responses regarding risks and impacts insist that peer reviews is sufficient and assert that “homes will not be built on the flood plain.” The Engineer is encouraged to publish flood plain limits and quantified high-water levels of the 2008 and 2018 floods to site maps to demonstrate that there will be “no risk and no potential impact”.
  2. What is the quantified level of flood hazard to downstream properties and potential impact? Verbal assurances only to date of no hazard due to flood retention plans. The Engineer, the RLC and the BOPRC are urged to publish maps of the downstream flood plain with quantified high-water levels of 2008 and 2018 floods overlaid to demonstrate that there will be “no hazard and no potential impact”.
  3. What flood mitigation has been planned at the site and downstream? Verbal claims only to date that mitigation responses to evaluations for the site and downstream have been peer reviewed and approved. The Engineer is advised to develop and publish plans for site and downstream adaptations.
  4. What are the findings and implications of the geo-tech evaluations of the site? Verbal claims only to date that site geo-tech responses to evaluations have been peer reviewed and approved. The Engineer is advised to develop and publish geo-tech evaluations for the site, with implications.

QUESTIONS REFERRED TO DCE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT JEAN-PAUL GASTON

Responses to date and implications are now discussed in turn:

  1. What components of the draft plans will be the responsibility of RLC to deliver?  Developer will pay contributions or connection costs for infrastructure and make financial contributions under the RMA for reserve development. RLC is responsible for providing wastewater and water connections to the site boundary. Costings to follow formal application for resource consent. RLC is asked to clarify if rates will be collected from Kainga Ora homes.
  2. What are the costs of these components?  They are not calculable until an application has been received.
  3. What development contributions will be paid to RLC by MHUD?  They are not calculable until an application has been received.
  4. Will potentially affected parties be consulted through a plan change process, as suggested by the Minister in 2018?  RLC has confirmed that a plan change was the only option available in 2018. The Developer will use the fast-track covid legislation for phase 1 and a private plan change for phase 2. RLC is not a decision maker for the fast-track legislation. The Developer is urged to publicly clarify the process and criteria for phase 1 and 2 decision making, most especially to identify opportunities affected parties to be consulted prior to decision making.

OTHER CONCERNS OF THE WORKING PARTY

Inadequate Storm Water and Wastewater Infrastructure. There is a history of stormwater floods mixing with untreated sewage below the proposed site and incremental erosion and silting in the meandering Waiteti Stream. Residents are deeply concerned that nothing substantial has been done since 29 April 2018 to prevent a repeat of sewage coming up from manhole covers and contaminating flood waters flowing into Lake Rotorua.[4]

Lake Rotorua and the Waiteti Awa have been constantly at very high levels this Summer due to increased rainfall, even with the Okere barrier remaining open. The raised water level under the Ngongotahā bridge on 18 March is evident in the attached video.[5]  The proposed strategy of retaining flood waters in wetlands in the Waiteti catchment, without managed slow release or erosion controls, appears inadequate given the potential volume of flood water and sediment run off, and the limited capacity of the Stream and Lake Rotorua to accept additional flood water.

Two assurances were given by the Engineer at the First Public Meeting about the proposed development, specifically that “Hydraulic modelling has been completed as well as geotechnical, quantity surveying and infrastructure investigations,” and “There will be no effect on downstream properties.” The Engineer is advised that these assurances now need to be modelled and published to be plausible and to convince the Ngongaotahā community that they will not be adversely affected, most especially the residents living below the Waiteti Bridge.

Potential Social Impacts. MHUD’s rebranding of Emergency Housing as Community Housing will not mitigate the predictable and adverse social and cultural impacts of the proposed development on the Village. There is a strong preference for Kiwibuild provisions to moderate the anti-social effects of concentrating families associated with crime, poor school attendance and acute multiple needs. The Developer insurged engage highly respected local citizens on the committee, alongside local iwi representatives, to help make placement decisions in the short term. In the longer term, the RLC is urged to develop a democratically elected Ngongotahā Village Committee to provide advice on the development of the village community.

Unoccupied Houses. The 2018 Census found that there were 96 unoccupied private dwellings in Ngongotahā East, 63 in Ngongotahā South and 54 in Ngongotahā West, a total of 213 compared to the 2,022 private dwellings occupied in Ngongotahā.  The Working Party confirmed that although some dwellings are occasionally rented through AirBnB, it appears that about 10 per cent of owners have become very wary of the legal and policy constraints on how they can manage their assets, which significantly impacts housing availability. The RLC, MHUD and MSD are urged to review their policies in this area.

The Need for Democratic Governance. The Ngongotahā members of the RDRR are deeply concerned about the potential impact that an additional 1,000 residents will have on the Village and their relative powerlessness in local government. They call on the RLC to formally devolve responsibility for coordinating development to a democratically elected Village Committee with democratic representation structured to engage the major interest groups in the Ngongotahā community.

RDRR also advises RLC and MHUD to disregard the announcement by Tura Ngati Te Ngakau me Ngati Whakaue ki Ngongotaha that they and Progress Ngongotahā will henceforth alone represent the interests of the Ngongotahā community. The former group apparently seek to position themselves as archaeological assessors instead of Ngati Ngararanui which has held statutory authority over the Waiteti Awa since their Treaty settlement that gave them exclusive status as mana whenua. The latter group, Progress Ngongotahā, is a small group primarily comprising local housing developers and would have a conflict of interest if empowered to speak for the Ngongotahā community. Ngati Ngararanui appreciates its ongoing consultations with MHUD over wāhitapu and Waiteti Awa and yet remains unconvinced by verbal assurances about resolving traffic congestion, noise and surface pollution, pedestrian safety, police presence, educational services and social services, medical support, etc.

Until formal and direct democratic representation from the Ngongotahā Village is provided, the elected members and officials of RLC are invited to actively represent the interests of the Ngongotahā community in discussions with MHUD and the Developer. Key concerns are about collating, projecting and responding to the educational needs of new residents from pre-school to tertiary levels, medical and health services, social services, green spaces and recreational areas, roading projects to ease congestion, public transport options and the co-management of the Waiteti Stream. The RLC is invited to allocate responsibility for, and coordinate delivery of, the liaison services not specified in the Memorandum of Understanding between MHUD and Watchman Residential.

2D and 3D Modelling Needed. It is difficult for the Ngongotahā community to imagine what amenities each family will have in the new development as well as being safely distanced from potential flooding. A model of the estate showing washing lines, parking, garden and fruit tree areas, and the limits of flooding in 2008 and 2018 would be very helpful. Similarly, it is difficult for the public to understand water and wastewater connections, and storm water infrastructure, both within and below the development site, with only verbal explanations being provided. MHUD and RLC officials, the Developer and Engineer are all urged to develop large graphics and 3D models that will enable informed and hopefully reassuring discussions about the effectiveness and long-term sustainability of development proposals.

The Greater Use of Geographic Science, Local Knowledge and Communication Technologies. MHUD has promised‘drop in’sessions to sharedraft plans, site models and applied planning and engineering knowledge. Conversely, community feedback anticipates that MHUD will warmly accept feedback based on local geographic research, and respect local experience and knowledge. For example, the history of river management and remediation strategies trialled, and their outcomes, needs to be appreciated and added to lessons learned from Cyclone Gabrielle. On the other hand, it is accepted that a great deal of the research and analysis conducted by the Engineer was not effectively communicated at the Second Public Meeting, implying the need for more effective communication technologies.

The Need for Further Authentic Community Consultation. Ngongotahā community members appreciated RDRR’s facilitation of the two public meetings, the latter at MHUD’s invitation, and, similarly, the willingness of MHUD DCE Place Ben Dalton, Developer Marcus Jacobson, Engineer James Dufty and RLC’s DCE Jean-Paul Gaston to present preliminary plans and engage openly in conversations with the public.

Given the acknowledged limitations of communication technologies used to date, it is very important to the Ngongotahā community that they be invited to respond at their leisure at ‘drop in’ sessions to draft large-scale plans and models, complimented by explanations from officials, the Developer and the Engineer, and with their feedback being collected systematically and processed with respect.

CONCLUDING NOTE

This report has been endorsed by the RDRR Committee. It is now provided in good faith to assist MHUD’s DCE Place Ben Dalton, Developer Marcus Jacobson, Engineer James Dufty, RLC’s DCE Jean-Paul Gaston, local elected members, RDRR’s members, associates and friends, RDRR’s sister organisations, the Press and the Ngongotahā community with the further refinement of proposals to develop housing on 31 Ngongotahā Road.

Inquiries: Reynold Macpherson, RDRR Chairman, 07 346 8553 021 725 708 reynold@reynoldmacpherson.ac.nz

[1] https://www.nzherald.co.nz/rotorua-daily-post/news/embargo-530pm-thurs-ngongotahas-350-home-development-will-help-housing-shortage-in-rotorua/MAFEHNHL55FV3O7FQFK7O6WLR4/

[2] https://rdrr.nz/assurances-and-questions-about-mhuds-housing-development-at-31-ngongotaha-road/

[3] https://www.nzherald.co.nz/rotorua-daily-post/news/rotoruas-ngongotaha-development-heated-second-public-meeting-held/3YQUVTCDXVHDFLM4IP7DOVIFJA/?fbclid=IwAR0GfP-dHPEfmnEeJRsgkFV6-j5AHLSzA1Cv2luJo1zV3hBn3TkGY6Jjo2k

[4] Video contributed by Paulie Khan, https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=392887024545044&ref=sharing

[5] Video contributed by Paulie Khan, https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=392872317879848