Monday, 2 July 2007

Re: FW: Final copy

The Waikouaiti Coast Community Board of the Dunedin City Council has
released the results of their "Your Community, Your Future, Your
Vision" survey of local residents. Their summary of comments follows.


1.1 What changes to the current bus service would encourage you to use
it more often?

This question was answered by 54 people.

Nineteen respondents suggested that frequency was the most significant
factor that would encourage them to use the bus service more often. Of
these people, four would like a shopping bus on one or two weekday
mornings and three would like a timetable more suited to the working
day (8am – 5.30pm).

More pick up and drop off points was the next most popular request:
eleven respondents said this would encourage them to use the bus more
often. Seven people would like the bus to go along the Coast Road to

Lower fares might persuade ten respondents to travel by bus more regularly.

Eight people consider the bus system to be fine as it is while four
will never use it - regardless of any changes made.

Other suggestions for change included: more readily accessible
timetable information, a train service, seatbelts for children, a
shorter journey, a more current model bus, concession cards with
discounts, and door-to-door service for the elderly.

1.2 What are your views regarding lower bus fares for school children
and elderly persons, if that meant a slight increase in fares for

This question was answered by 55 people

Twenty three of the respondents indicated their support for this. An
additional three people agree as long as fares for everyone continue
to be affordable.

Eight people believe that fares should stay as they are because age
should not be used as a price discriminant.

Five people responded that the fares should be lower for everybody,
four want lower fares for beneficiaries, two people think that fares
should be lower for Community Service Card holders, while another two
people suggested lower fares for low-wage earners. Another suggestion
was a fare reduction for frequent users. Four people felt that fares
should be lowered for the elderly but not for children as they have
access to the EOHS bus for free.

Other suggestions include: that the bus driver should decide, lower
fares for school children and the elderly but don't increase other
fares, decrease fares for children during the school week only, and
confusion – don't these groups already have concessions on fares?


2.1 There is currently a footpath upgrading programme underway. How do
you think footpath upgrades should be prioritised? What standard of
footpath should be provided – asphalt, gravel, concrete kerb, etc?

This question was answered by 69 people

Four respondents believe that footpath upgrades should be prioritised
according to safety; another four believe that it should be according
to usage. Two think they should be prioritised according to the most
densely populated areas.

Respondents identified many specific streets and places that they
would prioritise in regard to the footpath upgrading programme. Four
people identified Warrington; three people identified each of the
following: Karitane, McGregor Street, and Collins Street; two people
identified each of these areas: the main shopping area, Beach Street,
Thomas Street, and Doctors Point Road; and one respondent suggested
each of these streets: Stewart Street, Lower Kildare Street, Upper
Kildare Street, Pratt Street, Henry Street, and Ferguson Street.

Sixteen people would prefer asphalt footpaths. Another fourteen would
like asphalt footpaths but with a concrete kerb. Some of these
respondents gave reasons for their preference such as asphalt is
suitable for prams, bare feet, and other mobility devices. Some of
these respondents felt that gravel washes away in heavy rain, that it
is dangerous, and that it causes problems with lawn mowing.

Ten respondents would be happy with gravel footpaths. Two people
suggested asphalt for footpaths in high usage areas and gravel in
others. One person commented that they would add to the country style
of the place.

Other suggestions included concrete footpaths, concrete kerb with
bricks in the main shopping area, and no kerb. One person felt that
the footpaths are OK as they are, while another warned against
spending too much money on this project as there are hardly any
pedestrians in Warrington.


3.1 We continue to monitor road safety issues throughout the ward.
Please identify any sections of road you are concerned about, and
explain your particular areas of concern.

This question was answered by 69 respondents

Speed was the biggest issue for those who took part in this survey.
Twenty-eight people were concerned with speed in various parts of
Waikouaiti. Eight respondents felt that motorists drive far too fast
along Coast Road and of these people, three suggested that the speed
limit should be reduced. Five respondents were unhappy about the speed
along the Main Road in Waikouaiti; three felt that too many motorists
speed in each of the following areas: Sulisker Street (Karitane),
Beach Street (Karitane), and Waitati. Speed bumps and pedestrian
crossings were suggested to alleviate these situations. Other areas
where speed is a concern include Doctor's Point Road, SH1, Collins
Street, Henry Street, and Bourke Street.

The next most pressing issue for respondents was visibility. Sixteen
people identified this as an issue. Six people stated that the turn
from Mount Street into Collins Street was dangerous in terms of
visibility because of the trees. Five respondents felt that visibility
is an issue at various points along Coast Road, Karitane. Other places
that visibility is a problem include the turn from Jefferis Road onto
Highway 1; the Main Road south of Waikouaiti; the end of Quarry and
Ramrock Road; Edinburgh Street; and the corner of Geelong and Bourke

The third road safety issue, identified by seven respondents, was the
quality of the road. Three people would like Short Cut Road to be
resealed and two would like the same done for Henry Street. State
Highway 1 from Waikouaiti to Dunedin is also an issue as is McGregor

Five respondents found that the lack of footpaths in certain areas is
a road safety issue. Two people identified Doctor's Point Road and one
identified McGregor Street. Other areas of concern were the road from
Waikouaiti to Karitane, Waitati, and Warrington.

Narrow streets are also a road safety issue in the Waikouaiti area.
Three respondents think that Beach Street is too narrow especially
with the amount of heavy vehicles that frequent this stretch of road.
Coast Road was also identified as being too narrow.

Three respondents think that cycle tracks should be built in the
general area to keep a growing number of cyclists safe from other

Other issues include: Beach Street due to parking congestion; Main
road, Kildare Street, and the Evansdale turnoff due to "danger"; the
sharp bends after the bridge at Carey's Creek and at Waitati's
Blueskin Store; the road to Buckland's Crossing due to drivers on the
wrong side of the road; several railway crossings are dilapidated;
there are no "Children" signs around Warrington School; and the give
way signs at the corner of Hill and Station Road and at the corner of
Coast and Park road are both considered unsafe.

Other suggestions include: opening Thomas Street at the railway line;
having a roundabout at Waikouaiti school; and having a pedestrian
crossing outside the dairy on the main street of Waikouaiti.


With a steady increase in visitor numbers to the ward area, what are
your feelings regarding:

1. Promoting Coast Road as a scenic route, with increased
high-profile signage detailing attractions and services in our area?

This question was answered by 68 people

Thirty-seven people indicated that they are in favour of this idea.
Three would prefer the road to be upgraded first and two would rather
have low-profile than high-profile signage. Other suggestions include:
promote history with murals; have a sign in the Domain about Truby
King; plant topiary shrubs in planters on the main road; promote the
lagoon; make a map of the area available; and put 'Slow Down' signs
along Coast Road.

Thirteen people oppose this idea. Three respondents would rather keep
the traffic down while two believe that the signage equates to "visual
pollution" and another two think that the project will be too
expensive. Other issues include: the road is too narrow; it would be
better promoted as a cycle route; the road quality is too poor; the
river and beach are polluted; and Waikouaiti citizens would lose their

Sixteen respondents have reservations but did not have an entirely
negative response to the idea. Seven people commented that the road
would need to be improved first and three feel that the road is not
appropriate for heavy traffic. Another three respondents feel that the
idea is of low priority with the suggestion made that it would be
better to attract tourists to local businesses rather than to Coast
Road. Two people think that facilities such as the toilets at the
Domain would have to be improved before the project went ahead.
Another respondent thinks that the idea should be promoted for
cycling, walking, and riding only.

4.2 The potential for new businesses to develop in our area?

This question was answered by 56 people

Thirty people believe that the potential for growth in Waikouaiti is
good. Seven respondents would prefer small, local businesses that
serve the community and four people are only interested in economic
growth if the environment is not put at risk. Two comments related to
the idea broadband coverage is needed before businesses can flourish.
Other relevant issues to consider are government assistance, revamping
of the town centre, and safety.

Three people would like a supermarket. Other business suggestions
include: accommodation (an overflow area for Dunedin perhaps); cafes
and restaurants; eco-tourism; arts; historical tours; and a weekend
market at Waikouaiti.

Seven respondents do not think the area has much potential for growth
because it's a small seaside village; the water quality is poor;
Dunedin is too large a competitor; and the District Plan will not
allow development.

4.3 The overall effect of more visitors coming into our area?

This question was answered by 58 people

Twenty seven respondents think that the overall effect of more
visitors would be positive. Seven of these would like more visitors
because they bring income and opportunity for local businesses. Three
people prefer low-key visitors and suggested that motorbikes, boats,
and cars be restricted in certain areas.

A significant number of people believe that changes would have to be
made to Waikouaiti to accommodate an increasing number of tourists.
Nine respondents are concerned with rubbish and suggested more bins, a
skip, and more signage. Four people believe the public toilets would
need to be revamped and another four people suggested a facelift to
the area in general with one of these commenting specifically on the
environment. Other considerations included more parking; a camping
ground; footpaths; a decent bus service; more signage; and some means
of encouraging visitors to correctly pronounce "Waikouaiti."

Eight respondents believe the overall effect of more visitors would be
negative, while several others also had reservations. Four people
believe more visitors would spoil the peace and solitude of the area
and another four are concerned with road safety, which is already an
issue that would only escalate with more tourists. Other issues
included disturbance to wild/bird life; an increase in housing prices;
an increase in population (farmland may then become residential); a
dependence on tourism; and a loss of charm.


5.1 Dunedin City Council is currently reviewing the rural and
landscape sections of the District Plan. We would like to hear your
views regarding issues which may arise from this review.

This question was answered by 39 people

Thirteen respondents indicated that they believe that there should be
no change to current zoning. Four people want to keep the area rural
while three believe that development and subdivision spoils the scenic
landscape. Other respondents felt that housing development should stop
or be confined; housing should be built in keeping with the
surroundings; and cluster development around existing settlements is
preferable to changes in zoning.

Seven respondents felt they did not have enough information to comment.

Three people are in favour of development. One said if tourism is to
be encouraged, then the resource consent process should be made easier
and another would like to attract more residents to Waikouaiti.

Suggestions for improvement to the Waikouaiti landscape include: the
provision of adequate water and sewerage systems for what exists now;
an upgrade to the Beach St landscape; a clean up of the gorse in Main
St, opposite the school; and a removal of two containers on the street
boundary in Henry Street, that are ruining the view of a neighbour.

Other comments from this survey include that that committees need to
stop talking and start acting; that the Council should stick to the
District Plan and have the same rules for all; and that these types of
decisions should be done through City Planning.

5.2 Do you feel that the current Coastal Landscape Protection Area is
appropriate? Do you think that it should be extended to include
Blueskin Bay?

This question was answered by 54 people

Thirteen people responded to this question with a single "yes" answer
and it was therefore difficult to ascertain which part of the question
was being answered.

Twenty-four respondents feel that the current Coastal Landscape
Protection Area is appropriate while three people feel that it is not.
Of these people, one person felt that it is inappropriate because of
the 15-hectare lots along the coast and another that the CLPA is too
focussed on amenity rather than normal rural use.

At least twenty-three people advocate the extension of the CLPA to
include Blueskin Bay. One person commented that access could run along
a coastal footpath from Aramoana to Karitane and another urged the DCC
to take more consideration of Seacliff. 3 people do not think the CLPA
should extend to Blueskin Bay as 1 feels that Orokonui Sanctuary will
protect enough land and another feels that this would only impose more
rules and regulations on citizens of Waikouaiti.


6.1 The Board is looking at various environmental issues in our area
including coastal erosion, effects of climate change, protecting our
natural environment, etc. What are you concerns regarding these

This question was answered by 58 people

Twelve people are concerned with the effect that economic development
will have on the environment. Four people stated that the environment
should always come before development and tourism; three people are
concerned with Mainland Poultry – high water use, effluent discharge,
and smell; and two people would like to protect the coast and
foreshore from commercial development. Other comments about
development included: commercial cockle fishing should be monitored; a
mussel farm should not go ahead; and tourism and housing development
should be carefully controlled.

Twelve respondents are concerned with water pollution. Three people
would like the waterways protected from stock; perhaps farmers could
stop their animals from grazing at river edges. Another three people
are more worried about water pollution. Others worry about effluent
discharges near waterways; algae etc. in the creek on Stornoway
Street; the Waikouaiti landfill discharge to the Wetlands; rubbish
disposal that runs off to the bay; pollution at Waikouaiti bay; and
the state of Blueskin Bay (green with moss and aqua life).

Erosion in the area is a concern to ten of the respondents. There were
several suggestions about how to combat this: prohibit motorbikes from
the beach (three people advocate this); build a wooden retaining wall
along the beachfront; and planting initiatives. One respondent pointed
out that building should not be approved on these sites. Two
respondents identified the Spit at Warrington and Blueskin Bay as
problem areas.

Seven respondents have concerns about trees in the area. Four people
would like to see more native trees and one person would like hawthorn
hedges protected. Another respondent views the pine trees on
Waikouaiti beach as an eyesore while another would agree that the
spread of pest tree species is an issue.

Seven respondents commented generally that it is of the utmost
importance to protect the natural environment while five have no
concerns about the environment.

Wildlife is a concern for five people who answered this question. Old
Man's Beard is destroying native bush, home to the bird life; the bird
life on Warrington Spit is also at risk; possums need protecting and
paradoxically, controlling; and the swans at Blueskin Bay have been
driven from their natural environment due to effluent in the bay.

Four respondents feel that rubbish is an issue in the Waikouaiti area.
Three commented that it should be better controlled with more rubbish
bins. The fee for using the dump should perhaps be lowered and the car
bodies scattered about the town should be removed.

Four people are worried about rising sea levels and flooding. Again a
respondent warned that building on these sites should not be approved.

Lack of water supply concerns a total of four respondents. Drought
and, as mentioned, Mainland Poultry are the reasons supplied.

Three respondents commented on climate change. One person suggested
that through the promotion of public transport, local holidays, and
local food production this problem might be alleviated.

Two people are concerned with sewage disposal. One person suggested
that a plan is needed to continue the existing good practice as the
population grows and another advocates healthy septic tanks.

Two people would like a wind farm or solar energy production in the area.

Other comments from this survey include: preserve the views; remove
the sand from Sulisker Road; stop spraying the roadside; and protect
Rabbit Island as a reserve.


7.1 This encompasses such things as parks, playgrounds, reserves,
beaches, halls, libraries, community centres, etc. What improvements
would you like to see the Community Board advocating for?

This question was answered by 62 people

Twelve people indicated that they would like local libraries retained
and/or upgraded. Longer hours, more space, and library as an art
centre were suggested. Nine respondents are satisfied with facilities
as they are.

Eight people would like the town hall complex speeded up while eight
believe that the funding for this project would be better spent on
existing facilities that will get more use such as medical rooms.

Seven respondents would like to see changes in Warrington. Suggestions
included: planting, BBQs, and pleasant toilets at Warrington Domain;
an extension of Warrington hall; trees in Warrington playground; and a
cycle track from Warrington to Waitati.

The beach is an area that could be improved according to six
respondents. Three people would like vehicles banned from the beach.
Others would like to see more beach plantings, sheltered areas, and
the brown residue removed.

Six respondents would like work to be done on the current sporting
facilities. Two suggestions were: eradicate rabbits at Waikouaiti
sports ground and put down some more tar-seal.

Five people would like to see more rubbish bins around. Children's
playgrounds are a priority for another five respondents. Four people
are supportive of continued funding for Moana swimming pool. Three
people would like to see an improvement in public toilet facilities.
Other facilities that people would like are picnic areas on Matakana
Drive and elsewhere; a museum; a skate ramp; and an agency of leading
banks in Waikouaiti perhaps once a week.

Other alterations that respondents suggested include pruning the pine
trees on Matakana Drive; maintaining Waikouaiti gardens; and
installing a fire hydrant close to Waitati School.


8.1 The Board is disappointed about the delay in implementing the
Northern Water Schemes Upgrade. So do you have any comments regarding
the upgrade?

55 People answered this question

A large proportion (20 people) is desperate for the upgrade. Six of
these are appalled that they have to boil water. The local supply
should be upgraded at present according to four respondents while
another four believe that the local supply is the permanent solution.

Three people said they require more information about the scheme
and/or previous schemes with one commenting that all the information
received was biased in some way.

Two respondents believe that the community was only consulted as a
formality and that there was no actual listening involved.

Two of the respondents to this question believe that residents should
not be charged for water that they cannot drink and one of them
suggested that the DCC compensate residents for costs incurred.

Increased water taken from the Waikouaiti River is detrimental to the
current and future population according to two respondents. Another
two people mentioned that this is a serious health and safety problem.

One person is happy with the current water supply and one person
thinks the Northern Water Schemes Upgrade is a good idea.

Other suggestions included: put every water user on meters and charge
for using any water that goes over the allocated amount; extend the
water pipe from Dunedin; get more holding tanks; and encourage home
users to collect their own water; and keep residents informed of

Generally, residents hope that the quality of the water will vastly
improve and that the water pressure will also improve.

8.2 Do you have any comments regarding the concept of charging for
water based on the quantity used?

56 people answered this question

The largest proportion of respondents (one in five people) is against
the user pay system. Their arguments include that it will unfairly
disadvantage poor people, large families and people who stay at home
during the day. Some concerns are also expressed relating to the
implementation cost of the system, and whether these will outweigh the
benefits. Another concern among those who are against the concept is
that the quality of water is so low that it is unethical to charge for

Thirteen people indicated that they support the concept of charging
for water. They see the potential benefits of this, in particular the
way it will prevent water wastage. Another two people say they would
be in favour of this concept if they can be assured that the scheme
will never be privatised. Another person would be in favour if all of
the funds generated from this system will be put back into the

Six people said they would be willing to pay for water only if the
quality is improved significantly. One of these six people also wants
the water pressure to be better. Another five people suggested that
water should only be charged after a certain amount has been used.

Two people felt that people who do not have rain tanks should be
charged because they put more pressure on the water availability.
Another two people made the suggestion that the user pay system should
only be enforced when the available water reaches a certain level.

Nine people made references to rates. Five of these people consider
that the rates they pay should cover the water they use. Another two
suggest that they are willing to pay for their water usage as long as
other Dunedin ratepayers are charged accordingly. The remaining two
people would support the scheme as long as their rates will be

In addition to some of the suggestions made above, one person says
that only businesses should be charged. Another person points out that
they do not like to see water being taken from the Waikouaiti River
because it is environmentally damaging.

10. Waste Disposal

10.1 How do you think the Dunedin City Council could improve the
current waste disposal system, and how should they encourage people to
recycle more waste?

This question was answered by 55 people

Eleven people indicated that they are satisfied with the current
system, some of these mentioned that more encouragement of recycling
would be beneficial. Nineteen people explicitly stated that recycling
needs to be promoted, they suggested strategies such as education,
incentives, less restrictive recycling methods, giving businesses
recycle bins, and returning the skip to Waitati, having a recycling
unit at Karitane and opening the recycling bins seven days per week to
assist in higher levels of recycling.

Seven respondents commented on the quantity of waste that is produced.
There were suggestions of a zero-waste strategy, banning advertising
pamphlets, banning plastic disposable containers, and putting pressure
on waste producers such as supermarkets. Three of these seven people
recognise producers rather than consumers being the culprit of waste.

Two issues were raised concerning the dump. One that the dumping
charge is too high, the other concern about matter of leachate seeping
through to the lagoon area. These issues have already been raised and
the respondents questioned where the results were.

Some other suggestions of how to improve the waste disposal system
include: a once a quarter collection of 'other' rubbish, summer
collections for garden wastes, banning wheelie bins, having larger
recycling bins, increasing the price of rubbish bags, decreasing the
price of rubbish bags, free recycling bins and encouraging composting.

10.2 What are your views regarding the continued use of the Waikouaiti

Fifteen people are satisfied with the service it provides. They
suggest it assists in recycling. Some people do express concern at the
cost of using it, one person suggests a lower charge would discourage
the dumping of rubbish, which is currently an issue, another suggests
that green waste should be free.

Ten expressed their concern for the environment, recognising that it
is too close to a wetland, and questioning its sustainability. Eleven
people are concerned about non-local people using the landfill. Two
people suggesting that it should not be used as a money making scheme

Three people explicitly state they want the landfill to continue. One
person wants it open mid-week and in the weekend. Another questions
where their rubbish will go if the landfill gets closed.

Other suggestions relating to the landfill include that a recycle bin
should be placed at the entrance, another questions how rodents are
dealt with.

10.3 What are your views regarding the current free provision of
mega-skips three times a year for Blueskin bay residents to dispose of
bulky items?

Forty people commented that they feel this is a good service. One of
these people would like the dates on which this occurs more
publicised. Similarly, a few people were unaware that this happened
and would like to be informed of the dates.

Three people express concerns relating to the recyclability of
materials that are being put in the skips. Two suggest that a
recycling skip should be placed next to it. Two people are critical of
the provision suggesting that it is not needed, and that people should
have to pay for their own skips.

One person would like to see this initiative extended to include Waikouaiti.

10.4 What are your views regarding the most efficient disposal methods
for green waste

Thirty people indicated that is should be used to make compost. A
large number of these people would like to see the creation of a
community compost heap. Two people suggest that this could be sold,
and that it could provide at least three jobs.

Four people think that it should be free at the landfill. Another
person suggests that some sort of arrangement needs to be made with
the landfill.

Other suggestions include a once a month kerbside collection, bringing
in the mobile chipper that the DCC has and having additional skips
available for this type of waste.

11. Energy Conservation

11.1 How do you think that the board should get involved in advocating
for energy conservation measures and local power generation schemes?

This question was answered by 52 people

Five people do not think that the board should get involved,
suggesting that this is a DCC and ORC issue, and that the water
problem needs to be resolved first. Another two suggest that they
should only be involved in making the library and hall more energy

Seven people support the use of wind energy. Of these, two people
suggest that wind generation should only be on a minimal scale e.g.
small generator per household. One person explicitly states that they
do not want to see any windfarms.

Ten people want to see an increase in solar energy being used,
especially in new houses. Some people suggest that subsidies would be
required to get people to transfer to solar power.

Other suggestions include: turning the street lights off at night,
incentives for using less energy, subsidising housing
energy-efficiency assessments, holding education seminars on how to be
more energy efficient, having higher standards for new houses, and
promoting higher levels of insulation.

(Summary compiled by DCC staff)

"copyleft" by Blueskin Media - may be freely re-edited and
republished. If you want to credit the source it's "".

No comments: