Lizards, church bring U-turn
A number of complaints from a ‘‘shocked’’ community have prompted the Tekapo Community Board to backtrack on its support for a shared concrete pathway around the lakefront, suggesting more aesthetically pleasing alternatives.
The Mackenzie District Council’s proposal for a shared concrete track to replace the existing gravel track from the corner of State Highway 8 and Pioneer Drive to join the existing concrete pathway on Lakeside Drive was tabled at the community board’s meeting on February 3.
Funding for 49 per cent of the project had been secured from the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) but work needed to be complete by the end of April. Despite approving the proposal a month ago, the board has rescinded its support of the track design in its current form. ‘‘On reflection and with the benefit of hindsight, we are now aware that the report as presented to that meeting did not sufficiently address considerations to the heritage values of the Church of Good Shepherd and surrounding area which are paramount to the conversation,’’ board chairman Steve Howes says in a report to be tabled at the board meeting tomorrow. ‘‘We also note that the project leader was not present to speak to questions raised in regards to the proposed concrete surface.’’ The board has received feedback from the community expressing concerns about section 1 of the proposal, the part around Pioneer Drive and Church of Good Shepherd, including that it does not appropriately consider the special heritage value of the area; may not comply with the requirements of the District Plan regarding preservation of the lakeside and views; and the impact on a population of rare lizards in the rocks between the road and lakeshore.
According to the report, the board has no objection to section 2 of the track and agrees that upgrade work is needed but that the track must ‘‘not detract from the natural aesthetics of the lakefront surroundings, complies with the provisions of the District Plan in respect of the Special Heritage Zone and addresses/ mitigates other potential negative impacts on resident wildlife’’.
It also disagrees with the proposed design of a reinforced concrete finish at 2.5 metres wide.
‘‘We would like to acknowledge the work done by council staff to date on this project,’’ Howes says.
‘‘The board understands the importance of balancing public safety, health and safety compliance and long-term planning in any major capital asset development.’’
The report recommends three alternative designs.
The preferred design is a compacted crushed stone path sourced from local materials at 1.8 metre wide, which the board says is wide enough for shared use, is aesthetically more pleasing than concrete and, if built correctly, meets disability access requirements.
The second option is a mix of compacted crushed stone path sourced from local materials and exposed aggregate with a natural finish, while the least preferred option would be exposed aggregate with a natural finish for the full length of the path.