Submissions for the 2021-2031 Long Term Plan Amendment and the Annual Plan 2022/2023 are now taking place. You can do this online by clicking on the following link COMPLETED AND CLOSED.
Long-term Plan 2021-31 Amendment - Tauranga City Council
This includes a section on Tsunami Sirens and also asks your opinion on
the City Centre Plan — Option 1 or Option 2 ( no chance to say let’s have Option 3)
Western Bay Transport System funding ( Any IFF funding will increase your rates nore than traditional funding)
Funding for Tauriko West ( Using IFF will levy properties higher than tarditional funding. Make developers pay full contribution on value of section.)
Commercial rates differential ( Good idea — ratepayers have taken the majority of the burden for too long)
Tsunami Preparedness ( implement the sirens again)
Any other views.
REMEMBER to use the TCC offices as your address ( 306 Cameron Rd). Why — in the previous online submissions about local democracy the commissioner disregarded survey responses from over 65 european men from papamoa. See video clip on front page of website.
Papamoa Residents and Ratepayers Association submission to LPTA April 2022.
PRRA Submission Form April 2022
Draft 2021-2031 Long Term Plan Amendment & Draft Annual Plan 2022/23
1. Which option do you prefer for the development of the civic precinct?
PRRA choice is Option 3 – see below
The redevelopment of the city centre is an opportunity to make the residents of Tauranga feel proud and involved. We all agree the regeneration of Tauranga downtown is required. But the residents have not been invited into the design process nor do they have any buy in to the two options presented. Yet they are being asked choose between Option 1 or Option 2 and on this “marble count” TCC will make the final decision.
PRRA has no opinion as there may be a better design. This would be Option 3 -- a non-binding architectural competition to develop a design for the whole of downtown which would inspire the community. The community deserves better than the rehashed plans currently being presented. The current schemes are watered down 10 year old plans which may now be irrelevant.
The plans as presented are not indicative of the community’s wishes. The concept of a downtown museum was comprehensively rejected in a referendum recently. There is no business case available/offered for a museum and as such an informed judgement is not possible. The library business case is not robust.
A museum may be better placed at historic Gate Pa or Papamoa, if the community decides it now wants a museum. But the community has not been asked again.
Separating the Council Chambers (now to be included in the new whare) from the Council building and staff (in Devonport Rd) is very inefficient and without any merit.
The costs of this project are founded on conceptual sketches and not based on any detailed design. We all expect a major blowout of the publicised cost and once again the ratepayers will be required to pick up the tab. Fancy funding does not hide the evergrowing debt. At what point/cost does it become unaffordable.
Rushing a major city centre redevelopment in such a piecemeal way in order to tick a box is not sensible progress or providing the most satisfying solution. The downtown development is larger than this token city centre precinct. Slow down and create an inspiring and functional downtown.
2. Which option do you prefer for funding the Western Bay of Plenty Transport System Plan.
PRRA choice is Option 2
In the TCC “Its Time” handout the summary of projects which will be affected by this funding ranks “Turret Rd/15th Ave” as the top billing yet in reading the background document (Western Bay of Plenty Transport System Plan) this is ranked at Priority 4 and still does not build a new bridge to alleviate traffic congestion. Is there some subterfuge here or misleading headlines?
The transport targeted rate should not be run through IFF. Private enterprise will only lend if there is a high return and once again you will be loading up the rates to pay the higher cost of borrowing. Reduce staffing numbers to free up money to pay debt.
3. Tauriko West Infrastructure:
PRRA choice is Option 2
Targetted levies may be an answer to funding the investment needed for Tauriko West. However even with targeted funding, where is the assurance and business case showing all the costs of this development will be met by the targeted properties and not added to the general rates bill.
Adding the true cost to the section at time of sale is an easier and quicker way of raising the funding, resulting in the money collected at the start and not at the end as now. Currently ratepayer is paying the borrowing cost.
Our advice is to not collect development contributions when the housing is built, but collect the contributions from the land developer at the front end of the project.
Our choice is Option 2 using the collection timetable as above.
Annual Plan 2022/2023
4. How quickly should we change the commercial differential on the general and transportation targeted rates.
PRRA choice is Option 1.
5. What is your preferred option for Tsunami Preparedness:
PRRA choice is Option 2 – Implement a tsunami siren project within the next six months. The money is allocated and TCC have been sitting on it for years. Many cities in NZ use this to good effect.
6. Do you have any other views:
On behalf of PRRA
Philip Brown
Chair Papamoa Residents and Ratepayers Association
chairprra@gmail.com