• The process for selecting the Keepa Road site for the proposed harbour site was flawed, writes Catrina Jones

RECENTLY a former Whakatāne councillor reminded myself and others that the proposed boat harbour site was selected from all the other proposed sites, through a robust process.

I found a 142-page online report prepared by Veros Property Services, which Whakatāne District Council had engaged. This was part of the Whakatāne Regeneration Plan.

Veros had a disclaimer that the report was given to the council on the condition it make its own enquiries and obtain independent advice in order to verify the accuracy, correctness or completeness of the information presented.

• Business Case & Provincial Growth Fund application

Ultimately the decision to choose the Keepa Road site lies with the council.

At the time of preparing this report, it was generally indicated to the wider community that the Keepa Road site was clean fill, dumped there in 1990s (which is not the case) .

From the six proposed sites presented, and by following Multi Criteria Decision Analysis, Veros  found two suitable contenders.

Contender one was in town, west of the yacht club and Contender two was Keepa Road.

Veros said: “These two options did not raise any flaws during due diligence and therefore progressed on to Multi Criteria Analysis.”

The due diligence details on this website were blanked out and I do not know what due care and diligence was involved

It appears to me, a grave oversight regarding the Keepa Road site suitability has occurred. There were plenty of dump sites and online reports of other addresses in Keepa Road ‘s vicinity that had contamination and alarms bells should have been ringing.

According to Vero’s report:

Option 1: In town, west of the yacht club

Advantages: Marine activity stays in town. Extra berths provided are more consistent with existing plan.

Disadvantages: Building a structure on the river is not in line with Ngāti Awa aspirations for the awa and there is cultural risk given the location directly adjoins to Ngāti Awa site of significance – He Matapuna Paru (this is the accepted site of the canoe’s landfall, 700 years ago.) Poor land side capacity with no hard stand boat lifting infrastructure or truck unloading facilities at this location.”

Option 2: Keepa Road

Advantages: Does align with Ngāti Awa aspirations. Excavation can be carried out on land.

Relocation of hard stand and vessel unloading away from town wharf will reduce conflicting uses and health and safety’

Disadvantages: It removes some marine activity away from town. Less consistent with existing planning framework, however, locating entrance to the far south has potential to reduce consenting risk. Requires 25 minutes  motoring to reach the  bar entrance from the planned boat harbour.

There was no mention of the unsuitableness of the site for  development because it was a dump site for the former board mill’s wood waste.

The land is geo-technically compromised due to degradation of wood waste and soft, spongy properties. This should have been included as a disadvantage.

Many more disadvantages could/should have been included, some were well known but seem to be overlooked.

If these disadvantages had been included /acknowledged, I feel the yacht club option would have been the preferred option. However, the consent for the yacht club site would likely be difficult to obtain due to cultural sensitivities.

I feel Keepa Road was selected unfairly due to insufficient information and undisclosed information of contamination.  I feel the selection process was flawed and it was not a suitable site. I feel the district council was well aware of the perils of waste wood sites from the board mill and it should not have been a contender.

As a result from the 23 criteria categories that Veros applied, the Keepa Road harbour site scored the highest and was first choice.

Veros quoted: “Keepa Road provides more capacity, opens new vistas for iwi, creates options to further develop cultural and tourism offering to turn the town around.

“It (Keepa Road site) appears able to be consented and offers improved environmental resiliency.”

This is a loaded statement. It appears able to be consented is highly questionable. So, this is the process of how Keepa Road site was selected. Unbalanced and insufficient information or acknowledgment of several potential and majorly environmental drawbacks were not considered.

It is not a suitable site. There has been an unacceptable amount of misinformation and subterfuge that has been dealt to the public regarding the lab results (or lack of) and environmental safety aspects of the Keepa Road site.

I fully understand and appreciate the best of intentions of all parties to provide a better future for Whakatāne.

In essence, this re-vitalisation plan is a wonderful vision. I applaud all the planning, sentiment and goals that Whakatāne wants to achieve.  

However, at what cost to the environment and ratepayers of Whakatāne (future cost of council obligations as a partner). The Keepa Road site has a mighty big  ($30 million) carrot  dangling in front of their nose and it is understandable they want it to go ahead. They want their land remediated. They thought it was pragmatic to have the waste dumped and got payment from the Board Mills to help pay the rates. In hindsight it, was a detrimental action. This whole debacle has divided the town for long enough. Carting away 286,000m3 of unsuitable soil is an extraordinary undertaking.  I calculated 28,600 trucks loads with 10m3  capacity per truck. That is preposterous.

What an inconvenience to Keepa Road and Coastlands residents and the Hub traffic – and the carbon footprint and damage to roading. There is 132,00m3 of fill required, that is 13,200 truckloads. That is 41,600 truckloads in total. No project should go ahead under those conditions.

The inevitable potential for blow-out costs and unknown degree of contamination is huge concern.

We need the safest, best outcome for all of Whakatāne.  It is heartening to read in the Beacon of the Ōpōtiki Harbour success.It is a pity Whakatāne has not been able to achieve this.

The choice of Keepa Road should not have happened and it was decided by the council.

Surely an alternative project could be found for Keepa Road land that does not involve any excavation and the PGF funding could be transferred to it.

A decision is needed to settle all the uncertainty and discontent.

We need to sort this out.