Fight against land’s ‘contaminated’ tag
A Christchurch property developer is angry Environment Canterbury (ECan) won’t clear the name of a ‘‘potentially contaminated’’ subdivision.
John Shivas, whose company Lake Bryndwr Developments created the Westpark subdivison on Wairakei Rd, said the process was ‘‘bureaucratic idiocy’’.
But an ECan official said there remained a question over the ‘‘uncommon’’ method used to check the suitability of the soil.
Landowners in the subdivision were among 11,000 in the city that ECan notified of potential contamination in May 2014.
ECan flagged the land because of its past use as a shingle pit and a landfill, but Shivas said it was remediated long before the notifications were posted.
He said it wasn’t fair on those residents who were living on certifiably
"I don't think there's a piece of land in Christchurch that's been through such rigorous testing by independent contractors." John Shivas
clean property but had a question mark hanging over their heads.
‘‘I’ve had a lot of phone calls from people in there saying ‘What’s wrong with my property?’ ‘‘I don’t agree that people should be exposed to anything that’s going to be damaging to their health, but let’s get this in perspective.’’
Properties cannot be removed from the Listed Land Use Register (LLUR), which is a record of past uses, testing and remediation. Instead, said ECan scientist Davina McNickel, properties are recategorised to show the most up-to-date information.
‘‘People can then understand what the land was previously used for and any work that’s been done to clean it up.’’
The company spent over $200,000 on testing the land, and around $4 million remediating it when Westpark was developed. In some areas, the land was excavated to 5 metres deep to remove contaminants.
‘‘I don’t think there’s a piece of land in Christchurch that’s been through such rigorous testing by independent contractors,’’ said Shivas. ’’You think you’ve done a good job and then someone comes and throws cold water all over it.’’
Detailed site investigations were carried out, and Christchurch City Council issued resource consents and building consents accordingly, a fact Shivas said ECan did not take into account. ‘‘The council and ECan seem to be running at loggerheads over every single thing that’s happening in the city.’’