|
Resolution number KT/2014/251
MOVED
by Chairperson K McIntyre, seconded by Member L Waugh:
That the Kaipātiki Local Board:
a)
provide the following feedback on the Interim Open Space
Provision Guidelines:
i. note
that not all open space should be developed, and therefore that the
importance of passive recreation should be recognised in the guidelines
ii. request
that ‘pocket parks’ are included in the key open space experiences identified
in the guidelines. Pocket parks are considered to play a critical role in
local neighbourhoods, whether or not the space is developed.
iii. suggest
that the 400m recommended distance to neighbourhood parks may be too far for
some residents (e.g. families with small children, older people). Pocket
parks do often meet this very localised gap in more significant parks
provision, emphasising the need for these to be recognised as an additional
‘key open space experience’
iv. question
the identification of shorter recommended distances to parks and open spaces
within high density as compared to low density areas.
v. support
as a priority for the guidelines ensuring that everyone has a neighbourhood
parks within a short walk of their home.
vi. express
concern that ownership and maintenance of ‘small amenity areas in
developments, such as gardens and pocket parks, would remain in private
ownership (such as with body corporates). The board’s principle concern is
around the long term security of these spaces as public open space and the
potential for cumulative loss of open space in communities over time.
vii. express
concern at the identified desirable ‘configuration of open space’ and the
implication that open space without extensive street frontage is not
desirable for council acquisition as parkland. Whilst sightlines and passive
surveillance are important considerations when developing parks, the council
and local boards must be cognisant that opportunities for acquisition in
brown-field areas are not always ideally configured as parks, but may provide
the basis for future development as a park and therefore should be secured
for future generations.
viii. do
not support the guidelines’ direction that council should not provide open
space in industrial areas. Industrial areas are often significant areas of
employment and there should therefore be the possibility of development of
space for employees to enjoy as part of the working day.
ix. note
that it is understood that open spaces which primarily function as stormwater
assets are not included when considering local need for open space (i.e. the
footprint of this open space does not ‘count towards’ calculations of distribution
of open space).
x. challenge
the omission of coastal reserves from the six key open space experiences
identified in the guidelines and request that all accessible beaches are
included as open space to provide a realistic basis for calculating the need for
future open space provision.
xi. note
concern that the development of these guidelines appears disconnected from
the status of the current acquisitions budget and the likely future of this
budget going forward into the 2015-2025 LTP. The delivery of the guidelines
is reliant on the availability of acquisition budget to support development
and will therefore met significant challenges in operationalisation in the
short and medium term.
CARRIED
|
