Proposed development stuns resident

A Bethlehem family believe a proposed housing development on their back doorstep is 'environmentally risky” and nothing more than profiteering on new housing legislation.

Council last week announced a developer is looking to develop 118 properties on the 12.5 hectare site at the northern end of Bethlehem road, opposite O'Connor Road, under Tauranga's Housing Accord.


Bethlehem resident Greg Brown with Tauranga City Council's information pamphlet on the proposed development backing on to his property in the background. Photo: Tracy Hardy.

The houses will have a price range between $360,000 and $500,000 and an average section size of 420m2.

But Greg Brown, who backs on to the proposed site, believes the general consensus among the neighbouring community is a firm ‘no'.

The family purchased their 11 hectare property three years ago after relocating from Auckland, and moved into the newly-built house a year ago.

'To be honest it just smack of profiteering off new legislation and rail roading of residents because the opportunity presents itself,” Greg says.

'The site, if approved, will be problematic because it is low lying and environmentally risky.

'The bulk of the land it's proposed to be built on is 1-2m above sea level and is on wetlands.”

According to council the site is within the West Bethlehem Urban Growth Area and has spilt zoning. Area A, closest to the road, will be zoned residential while Area B will be rural-residential with the development introducing a greater density of houses.

An initial infrastructure assessment shows sufficient capacity within the existing stormwater, wastewater, water and transportation network to accommodate the demands of the proposal.

But Greg is questioning a Bay of Plenty Regional Council notice received about four months ago advising their property is 'environmentally significant” because it borders the Wairoa River.

'This [housing accord proposal] is a direct contradiction,” he says.

SunLive is currently awaiting a response from the regional council on this statement.

In August the Tauranga Housing Accord was signed by Tauranga City Council and the Government to help address housing issues in the city.

One of the ways this will be done is by identifying specific sites in the city that are deemed suitable for new housing.

Greg says the family isn't opposed to development, just poorly thought-out choices that will negatively impact on the community – highlighting pockets of land in Bellevue as more suitable.

'We understand there is a requirement for additional housing but we think there is an enormous amount of land around Tauranga,” he adds 'We don't have a shortage.

'We are not opposed to strategic, well considered development, we just don't want someone shoving it down our throats.”

Tauranga City Council and Bay of Plenty Regional Council are yet to respond with comment regarding Greg's accusations and information regarding the Wairoa River.

You may also like....

11 comments

Greg's on to it!

Posted on 18-11-2014 14:45 | By Murray.Guy

'To be honest it just smack of profiteering off new legislation and rail roading of residents because the opportunity presents itself,” Greg says. ... Bang on Greg. Nothing more, nothing less. It's all about smaller lots to mitigate land price increases BUT greater profits and more rates collected. Absolutely NOTHING whatsoever to do with the hopes and aspirations of the Government in regards more cost efficient housing, more affordable new homes as proposed by Bob Clarkson and rejected by the Mayor and majority of Councillors!


A bit of a change

Posted on 18-11-2014 16:14 | By How about this view!

from what looks like idyllic "Happy valley" to what will likely become "Nappy valley". I think that I would be of exactly the same opinion to Greg if this sort of high density housing was over my back fence. Small sections jammed in one on top of the other can lead to community issues around noise, right of way, domestic disputes and neighbourly conflict. But then what other options do we have?


Price range between $360,000 and $500,000

Posted on 18-11-2014 16:33 | By YOGI BEAR

That looks a bit high for "low cost affordable housing"? Looks more like profiteering to me, the bottom end falls just below the average Tauranga price that QV publish, so there is no "low cost" factor here that benefits home owners in anyway.


Not in my backyard

Posted on 18-11-2014 16:43 | By BullShtAlert

How can you build a house on rural land, then object when other people want to build more houses? Perhaps it should be affordable housing and that would then be ok.


$$$$$$$$$

Posted on 18-11-2014 18:28 | By Johnney

Special housing area's to make housing more affordable. Yeah right.


Bullshit again

Posted on 18-11-2014 23:15 | By Murray.Guy

The ratepayer / resident is rightly concerned that the rural residential zone into which his family invested is having it's amenity eroded, zone changed with NO meaningful community consultation. BullShtAlert needs to understand that for many with concerns in regards TCC processes and outcomes, it is often the failure of TCC to apply any integrity to the process that is the primary concern, more so than the outcome. the Local Government Act, the Resource Management Act, meaningful democracy is about giving communities greater input rather than less which is the trend.


I'm confused, Murray Guy

Posted on 19-11-2014 11:02 | By BullShtAlert

So if there's concern about integrity and processes here, with what seems to be an opportunity for cheaper housing, then what about the Clarkson rural to residential land proposal? No consultation as far as I've seen? What community input into that one? Or does it depend on who the developer is? Both this and the Clarkson proposal would turn green rural space into housing, or am I missing something? How could you support the Clarkson development but not this one? I am actually trying to understand the real and actual differences here.


bulls**t question

Posted on 19-11-2014 11:29 | By Murray.Guy

I am not opposed to either, just the processes. Some are suggesting Bethlehem resident Greg Brown has a NIMBY attitude when his concern is a lack of consultation. I agree with him and it is a constant cry from many affected in our city. In regards the Tauriko land, or ANY other, I reject the processes that bypass meaningful consultation with affected parties. Bob Clarkson first approached TCC fully expecting and comfortable with all recourse consent and consultation requirements. He sought from Council NOTHING MORE than an assurance that provided he ticked all the boxes, the City Council would not unreasonably put up fences, mindful they have a conflict of interest being in partnership with developer Carrus and associates 25 kms to the east (Papamoa). No favours expected or sought, unlike what appears to be taking place elsewhere! PS: There is NO guarantee homes will be more cost efficient!


No wonder houses so expensive

Posted on 19-11-2014 13:12 | By BullShtAlert

With all the BS and endless consultation and reports and keeping everyone from one end of the city to the other happy, it's no wonder housing is expensive in this city. And if there is consultation and it doesn't go your way you can say it wasn't "meaningful consultation." Looks to me like you can't even build houses in a rural residential zone, let alone a real rural zone. One thing's sure with all the consultation going on there should be plenty of jobs for bureaucrats, but probably not builders. Tauranga - process and consultation city.


No wanted, not affordable

Posted on 19-11-2014 13:47 | By marshamaxw

The price ranges don't look affordable to me. It is not fair at all for him, he bought a the section because it is rural. This reflects the rush through process of Tauranga Council.Bob Clarkson has right to expect to because he checked all the boxes that automatically procures a green light.The council doesn't have to do anything.It would be fair to speculate that the council is playing favourites now, Bob has become identified with 'greedy development'ugly tract development for high end payers.TCC wants to distance itself from this image whilst not stopping the practice. There a plenty of other developers like Bob wanting to do the same they can work with, they can approve with a huge public resistance.


@ Bulls**talert

Posted on 19-11-2014 14:25 | By YOGI BEAR

The idea of cheaper housing is a delusion, it is just a way to bypass the public consultation process. S this guy will have no opportunity to say a thing about it ... the developer can just do what he wants to. The only aspect where "cheaper" comes into it is for the developer, everyone else misses out. End result: the developer makes more money sooner.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.