DOCSLIB.ORG

Central Plains Water Trust

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Central Plains Water Trust APPLICATION TO CHANGE CONSENT CONDITIONS WATER PERMIT CRC062685 CENTRAL PLAINS WATER TRUST May 2020 Page 1 of 22 Table 1: Common Abbreviations Abbreviation Description AEE Assessment of Environmental Effects CPW Central Plains Water Trust and Central Plains Water Limited CPWES Central Plains Water Enhancement Scheme CPWL Central Plains Water Limited CPWT Central Plains Water Trust CRC Canterbury Regional Council CRPS Canterbury Regional Policy Statement ECan Canterbury Regional Council (Environment Canterbury) LWRP Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan RMA (the Act) The Resource Management Act 1991 Page 2 of 22 APPLICATION TO CHANGE CONDITIONS IN CONSENT CRC062685 UNDER SECTION 127, RESOUCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991 To Consents Manager – Environment Canterbury Address Environment Canterbury PO Box 345 Christchurch, 8140 CENTRAL PLAINS WATER TRUST (CPWT) applies to change consent condition 1 and 14 of CRC062685. 1. The site that the resource consent relates to is: The true left bank of the Rakaia River, between map references NZMS L36:1503- 3122 and L36:1505-3109, and about reference Topo50 BX21:990-759 / NZMS 260 K36 090-375. 2. The proposed changes are as follows: Amend condition 1 as follows, or by words to similar effect (additions underlined): 1 Water shall only be taken via: (a) up to five galleries installed in the active bed of the Rakaia River, as shown on attached Plans CRC062685A, CRC062685B and CRC062685C, between map references NZMS L36:1503-3122 and L36:1505-3109.or (b) From the Rakaia River at about reference Topo50 BX21:990-759 / NZMS 260 K36 090-375 and labelled "Take Point" on attached Plan CRC167218. Amend condition 14(a) as follows, or by words to similar effect (additions underlined): 14 (a) The consent holder shall install, operate and maintain a fish screen in accordance with the NIWA publication Fish Screening: Good Practice Guidelines for Canterbury, October 2007, NIWA Client Report CHC2007-092 at the intake between approximate map references NZMS L36:15033122 and L36:1503-3109 if water is taken from that location; or if water is taken from the location specified in condition 1(b) the fish barrier shall be on the main CPWL intake as per CRC167218 (or any variation). 3. There are no other activities that are part of the proposal to which this application relates. 4. CPWT [CPWL] attaches an assessment of the proposed changes’ effects on the environment and other matters in accordance with Section 127 of the Act. Page 3 of 22 Address for service of applicant (including invoicing): Central Plains Water Trust c/o CPWL, Fiona Crombie, Environmental Manager PO Box 9424, Tower Junction, Christchurch 8149 Telephone: 03 928 2960 Mobile: 027 207 6499 Email: [email protected] Contact Person: Fiona Crombie Signature of applicant (or person authorised to sign on behalf of applicant). Mark Pizey, General Manager 7th May 2020 Page 4 of 22 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 6 1.1 Purpose of this application 6 1.2 Consent CRC062685 Background 6 1.3 The applicant 6 2.0 Background 6 2.1 Central Plains Water Enhancement Scheme 6 2.2 Existing relevant consents 7 3.0 Proposed Change of Conditions 8 3.1 Overview 8 3.2 Proposed changes 9 3.3 Reasons for proposed changes 9 4.0 Description of the Environment 10 4.1 General overview 10 4.2 Existing activities and uses 11 5.0 Assessment of Effects on the Environment 12 5.1 Positive effects 12 5.2 Effects on surface water quantity 12 5.3 Effects on drinking water supplies 13 5.4 Effects on fish 14 5.5 Effects on birdlife 14 5.6 Archaeological and heritage sites 14 5.7 Effects on cultural and historic values 14 6.0 Statutory Assessment 15 6.1 National Environmental Standards 15 6.2 National Policy Statements 15 6.3 National Water Conservation (Rakaia River) Order 1988 15 6.4 Canterbury Regional Policy Statement 15 6.5 Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan (LWRP) 16 6.6 RMA Part 2 Assessment 17 7.0 Consultation 18 8.0 Notification 20 8.1 Public or limited Notification 20 9.0 Conclusions 20 10.0 Appendix A A Page 5 of 22 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose of this application 1. Central Plains Water Trust is lodging this application pursuant to Section 127 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). This application and Assessment of Effects on the Environment (AEE) by Central Plains Water (the applicant), seeks to amend conditions 1 and 14 of resource consent CRC062685. 1.2 Consent CRC062685 background 2. CRC062685 authorises the taking of up to 6 m3/sec surface water from the Rakaia River. Consent CRC062685 is one of four consents that authorises the development of an irrigation scheme on land adjacent to the Rakaia River. 3. The applicant applied to take and use water that had already been allocated for out of river use, in accordance with the National Water Conservation Order Rakaia River (1990) but was not currently authorised to be taken by any resource consents. 4. The consent was originally granted with the intention to construct a small irrigation scheme at Steeles Road. 1.3 The applicant 5. Central Plains Water Trust was formally constituted in March 2003 by the Christchurch City and Selwyn District Councils to facilitate sustainable development of Central Canterbury’s water resource. The Trust led the applications for resource consents for the original scheme and is the applicant for this current application. 6. Central Plains Water Limited (CPWL) is a shareholder-owned company set up by CPWT to raise funding and take responsibility for the detailed design, implementation and operation of the Scheme in accordance with CPWT’s consents. In the remainder of this report, CPWL and CPWT are collectively referred to as CPW. 7. The Scheme has been developed by CPWL, a co-operative of 380 farmer shareholders and managed by a staff of 15, plus contractors. The Scheme, which currently supplies irrigation to approximately 45,000 hectares, has the consented potential to deliver sustainable irrigation to 63,000 hectares of land between the Rakaia and Waimakariri Rivers. 2.0 Background 2.1 Central Plains Water Enhancement Scheme 8. The primary RMA approvals required to establish the Central Plains Water Enhancement Scheme (CPWES) were confirmed by the Environment Court in July 2012. These approvals authorise the construction and operation of an irrigation scheme over an area of approximately 63,000 hectares of mid Canterbury between the Rakaia and Waimakariri Rivers. The approvals authorise all key activities and their associated environmental effects, including: - Abstraction of water from the Rakaia and Waimakariri Rivers and associated intakes, Page 6 of 22 - A headrace canal and distribution network, - All temporary construction activities (including earthworks and contractor facilities) associated with establishing the scheme, and - Use and discharge of water for irrigation purposes. 9. The design and operation of the CPWES has changed significantly since the resource consents were granted in 2012. Most notably, and of particular relevance to this application, there is no longer any intention to construct a headrace canal to link the Rakaia and Waimakariri Rivers. 10. The Scheme was constructed in three stages between 2014 and 2018 and is now fully operational. The Scheme has utilised state of the art materials, construction techniques and control systems, all designed to meet an 80-year life with an expectation that 100 years of service will be achieved. 11. The application described in this report relates to taking of water from the Rakaia River for Stage 1 and 2 under CRC062685. 2.2 Existing relevant consents 12. All other activities associated with Stage 1 and 2 are already authorised by existing resource consents held by CPWT or are permitted by the various Regional Plans. Therefore, these activities and their environmental effects are outside the scope of this application. In summary, the existing consented activities are: - Works within a wetland and the banks of the Rakaia River. - Take, Diversion and Discharge of water to the Rakaia River. - Installation of an underground pipeline network within the boundaries of the Central Plains Water Enhancement Scheme area; and - End use of the water for irrigation and nutrient discharge. Page 7 of 22 3.0 Proposed Change of Conditions 3.1 Overview 13. In 2014 the main take consent CRC137417 (now CRC167218) was amended to enable water to be taken approximately 1km upstream from the original consented location. Unfortunately, consent CRC062685 was not amended at the same time to also allow for the take location to be changed to the main intake point. 14. CPW apply to vary water take consent CRC062685 to provide the option for water to be taken via the existing CPWL intake infrastructure to bring it into line with the change made in 2014 to the location of the man water take for the Scheme. That will enable the water authorised to be taken under CRC062685 to be utilised via the existing CPWL infrastructure. 15. The location of consent CRC062685 take point and the location of the existing CPWL intake infrastructure take point is shown in Figure 1. 16. No other changes to the consent are proposed. Figure 1. Current consented location (yellow star) and additional proposed consented location (red star) CPWL’s current take point. Page 8 of 22 3.2 Proposed changes 17. The proposed amendments are track changed below (proposed addition): 1 (a) Water shall only be taken via up to five galleries installed in the active bed of the Rakaia River, as shown on attached Plans CRC062685A, CRC062685B and CRC062685C, between map references NZMS L36:1503-3122 and L36:1505- 3109.; and (b) From the Rakaia River at about reference Topo50 BX21:990-759 / NZMS 260 K36 090-375 and labelled "Take Point" on attached Plan CRC167218.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Health Impact Assessment of Central Plains Water Scheme
    Health Impact Assessment of Central Plains Water Scheme April 2008 Lead agency: Community and Public Health, Canterbury District Health Board HIA lead: Alistair Humphrey Report prepared by: Humphrey A, Walker M, Porteous A, Pink R, Quigley R, and Thornley L Acknowledgements This rapid health impact assessment (HIA) has benefited from the knowledge, experience and skills of many people. A steering group of Alistair Humphrey, Malcolm Walker, Ramon Pink, Andrew Porteous, Louise Thornley and Robert Quigley provided direction and insight into the process. An initial scoping meeting was held and stakeholders were invited to set the boundaries for the HIA. A list of invited members and participants is attached as Appendix 1. A number of people provided valuable advice to the steering group beyond attendance at the meetings; Martin Ward, Margaret Leonard, Carl Hansen, Richard English, Geoff Fougere, Miria Lange, Professors Tony Blakely, Valerie Brown, Peter Crampton, Paul Dalziel, and Karen Witten. Finally, Gina Erceg and others in the administration team of Community & Public Health provided valuable support in word processing and administration, often at short notice at a difficult time of year. 2 Table of contents Acknowledgements................................................................................. 2 Executive Summary ................................................................................ 4 1. Introduction......................................................................................... 6 2. Methodology....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping the Environmental Footprint of the Central Plains Water Irrigation Scheme a Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Masters of Design
    Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without the permission of the Author. Mapping the Environmental Footprint of the Central Plains Water Irrigation Scheme A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the Masters of Design Mapping the Environmental Footprint of the Central Plains Water Irrigation Scheme at the Institute of Communication Design Massey University, Wellington, NZ. Dean Ivamy 2009 Acknowledgements This thesis is greatly indebted to the following people who individually have assisted throughout this year of study. Firstly, my partner Katie Wood for all her time, love and attention. My parents David and Jill, for always providing an interested listening ear, the drive, motivation, and financial support to get me through. Academic support and advice from Donald Preston, Jacquie Naismith, Patricia Thomas, Tulia Moss, Annette O’Sullivan, and Kate Gilliam. For the assistance of data collection and statistical information, Anna Thorburn (MAF), Christine Dean (Statistics New Zealand), Kevin Hackwell (Forest & Bird), all the Councils, Government agencies, and the environmental and dairy industry groups who so openly provided information and knowledge. Steffen Kreft, Tania Marriott, and Rachael Linton (my fellow masters students) for sharing in this year of discovery. Technical support and problem solving from John Clemens, Stuart Foster, Julian Allom, and Nicola and Simon George. Thank you all. A final decision on the proposed Central Plains Water (CPW) scheme needs to be left to the consent-granting authorities, according to Christchurch City Mayor Bob Parker.
    [Show full text]
  • New Public Management and Collaboration in Canterbury, New Zealand’S Freshwater Management MARK ⁎ Nicholas Kirk , Ann Brower, Ronlyn Duncan
    Land Use Policy 65 (2017) 53–61 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Land Use Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landusepol New public management and collaboration in canterbury, New Zealand’s freshwater management MARK ⁎ Nicholas Kirk , Ann Brower, Ronlyn Duncan Department of Environmental Management, Lincoln University, Ellesmere Junction Road, Lincoln 7647, New Zealand ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Reconciling often-conflicting economic and environmental values, uses, and interests for freshwater is a policy Collaborative governance challenge worldwide. Examining the Canterbury region of New Zealand’s South Island between 1999 and 2010, New public management this paper focuses on the outcome of neoliberal reforms intended to achieve the political-economic imperative of Freshwater management environmental protection alongside economic prosperity. Linking the literature of multiple clientelism with New Local government Public Management, we use the concepts of ‘authority’ and ‘autonomy’ to evaluate the challenges faced by local government to implement its decisions to manage freshwater in this neoliberal context. The case study shows that local government struggled to attain authority and autonomy over freshwater under a New Public Management regime, which has resulted in the degradation of freshwater quality and quantity in the region. The paper concludes that the adoption of collaborative governance in response to the failures of New Public Management has the potential to entrench the problems it seeks to resolve. 1. Introduction post-NPM collaborative governance, and freshwater management in New Zealand? The paper proceeds as follows: Part 2 describes the This paper examines freshwater management in New Zealand’s methods. Part 3 constructs a conceptual framework through which to South Island region of Canterbury where New Public Management evaluate the empirical resources we draw on.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Plains Water Limited Dpr-0454
    DPR-0454 1 | P a g e CENTRAL PLAINS WATER LIMITED SUBMISSION ON PROPOSED SELWYN DISTRICT PLAN Form 5: Submissions on a Publicly Notified Proposed Policy Statement or Plan under Clause 6 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 By email: [email protected] Full Name: Robyn Fitchett Organisation: Central Plains Water Limited Postal Address: PO Box 9424, Tower Junction, Christchurch 8149 Email: [email protected] Phone (DDI): 03 928 2916 Trade Competition Pursuant to Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991, a person who could gain an advantage in trade competition through the submission may make a submission only if directly affected by an effect of the proposed policy statement or plan that: a) adversely affects the environment; and b) does not relate to trade competition or the effects of trade competition. Please tick the sentence that applies to you: ☒ I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission; or ☐ I could gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission. If you have ticked this box please select one of the following: ☐ I am directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission ☐ I am not directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission Signature: Date: 10 December 2020 (Signature of person making submission or person authorised to sign on behalf of person making the submission) Please note: (1) all information contained in a submission under the Resource Management Act 1991, including names and addresses for service, becomes public information. ☒ I do not wish to be heard in support of my submission; or ☐ I do wish to be heard in support of my submission; and ☐ I would be prepared to consider presenting my submission in a joint case with others making a similar submission at any hearing “Providing reliable and cost-effective water to achieve sustainable value” 2 | P a g e Submission A.
    [Show full text]
  • CPW Newsletter No 2
    May-June Update Central Plains Water was set up by Christchurch City and Selwyn District Councils in March 2000 to investigate ways to improve the security and prosperity of the Central Canterbury region through water management schemes that enhance ecological and recreational values while providing opportunity for agricultural and horticultural diversity. Further information can be obtained from the Central Plains Water website http://www.cpw.org.nz/ Central Plains Water project manager is Eddie Thomas, based at the Selwyn District Council, tel (03) 324 5859. Requests for further copies, previous issues and all other enquiries about the content of this newsletter should be directed to him. Wairiri Valley site selected for further study Wairiri Valley has been identified as the best site for a 1,000- hectare storage reservoir to serve a large irrigation scheme for the central Canterbury Plains. This site scored best from a technical point of view and also ranked well against alternatives considered by community representatives involved in the selection process. Based on initial studies, Wairiri appears to have a sound geological base, gives options for the transportation of water from the Rakaia River or Lake Coleridge and has a very small natural catchment, minimising the risk of the reservoir overflowing during heavy rain. Construction of a scheme is currently estimated at about $100 million. Detailed work on options for raising this money from stakeholders and others will be undertaken later this year. This is just one of the many questions to be answered before a scheme could go ahead. Glentunnel, Coalgate, Whitecliffs and surrounding communities have identified issues in relation to a large body of water sitting in their neighbourhood, Wairiri Valley landowners will require compensation, and many geological, environmental and cultural considerations will need thorough investigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Evidence of Susan Goodfellow
    under: the Resource Management Act 1991 in the matter of: Proposed Plan Change 5 to the Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan (PC 5) and: Central Plains Water Limited (Central Plains) Submitter C16C/30981 Further submitter C16C/72309 Statement of evidence of Susan Goodfellow Dated: 22 July 2016 REFERENCE: BG Williams ([email protected]) ADW Brent ([email protected]) 2 STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF SUSAN GOODFELLOW 1 My name is Susan Goodfellow. 2 I am the General Manager Environmental at Central Plains (Central Plains). 3 I have been involved with the development of the Central Plains Water Enhancement Scheme (the CPW Scheme) since early 2011. My roles have included: 3.1 leading the implementation of the resource consents, environmental compliance, and the stakeholder engagement processes for the CPW Scheme; and 3.2 overseeing the establishment and implementation of the farmer compliance regime (as required by inter alia the CPW Scheme’s resource consents to use and discharge water). This includes preparing Farm Management Plans and ensuring compliance with the CPW Scheme nutrient management regime. 4 In terms of my wider environmental experience, I have a Masters of Landscape Architecture and have over 20 years’ professional experience – 10 years of which was dedicated to working in an environmental consultancy on large scale infrastructure projects based in Asia. 5 Of direct relevance to this evidence I note that I project managed Central Plains’ submission for proposed Variation 1 (now Plan Change 1 (PC 1)) to the now operative Canterbury Land & Water Regional Plan (LWRP). I have also been responsible for Central Plains’ involvement in plan change 5 (PC5).
    [Show full text]
  • The Benefits of Water Storage to Irrigation
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Lincoln University Research Archive The Benefits of Water Storage to Irrigation Tim Cookson 2009 For Kellogg Rural Leaders Programme Acknowledgements: • My wife Lucy who has helped out by "creating some time" for me to do this project. Also my father who has had to take a bit more time on the tractor when he could have been skiing during the winter. • Irrigation New Zealand provided me with some great photo's • Dr John Bright - AquaJinc helped to steer me in the right direction and provided a great source of information on where to start. • Lincoln University Library • CPW - directors, engineers, consultants, expert witnesses. All provided information. Contents Page 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Early attempts to obtain water 1 1.2 Canterbury's climate and water problem 1 1.3 Irrigation in New Zealand 2 2. Why Water Storage is required, a background 3 2.1 Global Level 3 2.2 National Level 3 2.3 Local/Regional Level 3 2.3.1 Financial Performance - Opuha Dam Study. Regional Economy Effects 5 2.4 An on Farm Level 5 2.4.1 Financial Performance - ex Opuha Dam Study. A survey of 32 irrigated and 20 dryland properties. 6 3. The Benefits of Water Storage To Irrigation 8 3.1 Financial 8 3.1.1 On Farm Level 8 3.1.2 Regional Level 8 3.1.3 National Level- GDP Effects 9 3.2 Water Storage Costs 10 3.3 Reliability 12 3.3.1 A case study ofthe costs of having low water reliability 12 3.4 Environmental 13 3.4.1 Wind Erosion 13 3.4.2 Nitrogen & Leaching - putting things into
    [Show full text]
  • ANZSOG Case Program the Canterbury Water Management Strategy: ‘Smart Management’ of Collaborative Processes (A) 2016-186.1
    ANZSOG Case Program The Canterbury Water Management Strategy: ‘Smart management’ of collaborative processes (A) 2016-186.1 ‘You are poisoning our grandchildren!’ The woman confronted Dame Margaret Bazley in a Wellington restaurant. It was May 2010; the woman was from Christchurch, her anger an indication of the strength of feelings about the future management of Canterbury’s rivers, lakes and waterways. As the chair of a seven-person commission newly appointed to oversee the task, the high level of hostility came as no surprise to Bazley. The Canterbury community was vociferously divided over the ongoing management of what had once been seen as a limitless regional resource. Farmers wanted irrigation to expand their business, fishers and recreational river users were aghast at reduced and polluted water flows, Māori iwi1 were furious that traditionally important food sources were being treated like a drain. There was further outrage at the appointment of the Commissioners which followed the dismissal of all 14 elected members of the Canterbury Regional Council (usually known as Environment Canterbury or ECan). People marched in Christchurch carrying a coffin, mourning the Death of Democracy. This case study was written for Professor Brad Jackson, Victoria University of Wellington (VUW), by Dr Elizabeth Eppel, VUW, and Janet Tyson, Australia and New Zealand School of Government. It has been prepared from field research as a basis for class discussion rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a managerial situation. A major source of material is Elizabeth Eppel, ‘Canterbury Water Strategy: a better way?’, Policy Quarterly Vol 11 No 4 2015, pp49-57.
    [Show full text]
  • Primitive Accumulation and the New Zealand Dairy Industry, 1814–2018
    he past three-and-a-half decades of neoliberal Torthodoxy in New Zealand have been marked by the rapid expansion and intensification of the New Zealand dairy industry. In the years since direct agricultural subsidies and supports were removed in the mid-1980s, the national dairy herd has more than doubled and the area given over to dairying has increased by some 750,000 hectares. This relentless drive to intensify has come at a simply enormous environmental cost: New Zealanders, present and future, are being systematically dispossessed of cherished freshwater ecosystems and endemic biodiversity. In this paper, I argue that this is but the latest episode in a long history of often-violent dispossession that has been crucial to the historical development of capitalist agriculture in New Zealand. In so doing, I draw on Marx’s theory of primitive accumulation. | 11 Dairying, Dispossession, Devastation: Primitive Accumulation and the New Zealand Dairy Industry, 1814–2018 MATTHEW WYNYARD New Zealand has long enjoyed an enviable, if largely undeserved, reputation as being somehow pristine or unspoilt, or, in now-threadbare marketing jargon, ‘clean, green and 100 percent pure’. Such myths have become increasingly difficult to sustain in recent years in light of the rapid expansion and intensification of the dairy sector and the unfolding ecological catastrophe that has followed. This period has also been marked by a groundswell of public concern about the health of New Zealand’s freshwater ecosystems; indeed, a nationwide poll conducted by Colmar Brunton in December 2018 found that freshwater pollution was the principal concern of those surveyed, outstripping concerns over the cost of living, housing, child poverty, the health system, and climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Water Strategy for Canterbury, New Zealand International Association of Impact Assessment 2018 (ID 281) Bryan Jenkins S
    IAIA18 Conference Proceedings | Environmental Justice in Societies in Transition 38th Annual Conference of the International Association for Impact Assessment 16-19 May 2018 | Durban Intl. Convention Center | Durban | South Africa | www.iaia.org Regional Water Strategy for Canterbury, New Zealand International Association of Impact Assessment 2018 (ID 281) Bryan Jenkins Sustainability Strategist, Adelaide, Australia Abstract Irrigation expansion in Canterbury New Zealand resulted in cumulative effects of water extraction reaching sustainability limits, and land use intensification compromising water quality. Analysis of future requirements indicated that weekly demand from run-of-river irrigation schemes could not be met from available flows. Annual demand could be met but required storage. However, there were concerns about impacts of dams on rivers. Groundwater depletion was reducing flows in groundwater-fed streams degrading ecological health. Environmental flows in rivers were being compromised by water extraction. Modelling of nitrate leaching from land use intensification predicted groundwater nitrate levels exceeding drinking water standards. Lake modelling indicated catchment contaminant loads exceeding water quality criteria. A regional sustainability strategy process was developed based on collaborative governance and nested adaptive systems requiring new approaches to consultation, strategy development and sustainability appraisal. Strategic thinking shifted from water for irrigation to ten water management issues reflecting
    [Show full text]
  • The Malvern Hills Protection Society and an Irrigation Scheme Proposal
    Lincoln Planning Review, 7 (1-2) (2015) 16-22 Whose interests count? The Malvern Hills Protection Society and an irrigation scheme proposal Nicola SNOYINK Masters of Environmental Policy student, Lincoln University, New Zealand 1. INTRODUCTION in Canterbury (MAF, 2009). They recommend “any intervention to facilitate the delivery of irrigation The Malvern Hills area, located at the western edge of development in Canterbury should address the following the Canterbury Plains, became the subject of a proposed three key blockages”, these being “the uncertain irrigation scheme in 2000 (see Figure 1). The scheme planning framework governing the management of proposed to take water from the Rakaia and Waimakariri water in Canterbury, the controls set by existing and Rivers to store in a reservoir located in the Malvern proposed Water Conservation Orders (WCO) and the Hills, then irrigate 60,000 hectares of land on the central conditions attached to existing resource consents which Canterbury Plains. A trust, established by Selwyn District have been developed in the context of the above and Council (SDC) and Christchurch City Council (CCC), would therefore lock in suboptimal outcomes” (MAF, 2009, p. make an application for more than 30 resource consents. 4). The Ministry recommends “two broad options for Later the trust would establish a company which was government intervention”: first, to grant itself power to granted requiring authority status by the then Minister establish a panel to review WCOs and “halt the current for the Environment. This allowed the company to use process on a Hurunui WCO”; second, “to enhance the the Public Works Act 1981 to apply to place designations existing intervention powers of the Minister for the over private land for a dam and a reservoir (CPWT 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • Council Agenda 12 July 2007
    MINUTES MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL HELD AT 9.30AM ON THURSDAY 5 JULY 2007 PRESENT: The Mayor, Garry Moore (Chairperson). Councillors Helen Broughton, Sally Buck, Graham Condon, Barry Corbett, David Cox, Anna Crighton, Carole Evans, Pat Harrow, Bob Parker, Bob Shearing, Gail Sheriff, Sue Wells and Norm Withers. 1. APOLOGIES Nil. 2. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES COUNCIL MEETING OF 28 JUNE 2007 Resolved: That minutes of the Council meeting held on Thursday 28 June 2007 with the public present be confirmed. 3. DEPUTATIONS BY APPOINTMENT WAIRAKEI ROAD KERB AND DISH CHANNEL RENEWAL (STAGE 1) MANOR PLACE TO PITCAIRN CRESCENT Submissions regarding the recommendations contained in the staff report regarding this project were made by the Chair (Mike Wall) and Deputy Chair (Val Carter) of the Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board. The submitters requested that no restrictions be imposed at the present time in respect of traffic movements through the Aorangi Road/Wairakei Road intersection, and that the present layout of the intersection be retained. It was resolved that the submissions be considered in conjunction with the staff report on this project. 4. PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS Nil. 5. CORRESPONDENCE Nil. 6. WAIRAKEI ROAD KERB AND DISH CHANNEL RENEWAL (STAGE 1) MANOR PLACE TO PITCAIRN CRESCENT This report was dealt with later in the meeting. 7. REPORT OF THE ZERO WASTE WORKING PARTY It was resolved that the working party’s recommendation be adopted. 5. 7. 2007 - 2 - 8. POSTER BOLLARDS INSTALLATION It was noted that at its meeting on 7 February 2007 the Burwood/Pegasus Community Board had decided to recommend that the Council decline approval for the installation of a poster bollard in Marshland Road outside The Palms shopping centre.
    [Show full text]