|
Resolution number OR/2014/54
MOVED
by Chairperson DEC Simpson, seconded by Member K Parkinson:
That the Orākei
Local Board:
a)
receives the Interim Open Space
Provision Guidelines report and provides the following feedback:
i.
express its concern that the timeframe
for responding to these guidelines, and the incomplete information provided
to the board, mean that it is not possible to obtain any community views.
ii.
requests that the guidelines include a
definition of “sub-regional”.
iii.
requests that the maps included in the
guidelines show open space owned by other organisations (such as sports
clubs, schools and the private sector) so as to provide a complete picture of
open space in each area.
iv.
recommends that the guidelines make it
clear that decisions on open space will be site specific rather than a “one
size fits all” approach being imposed.
v.
recommends that decisions regarding the
provision of open space need to take into account not only the distance to
and from a neighbourhood park or other open space, but also whether, for
example,
· the condition of the pavements makes for easy walking
· there are adequate road crossings
· public transport enables people to travel quickly and easily to
open space.
vi.
recommends that the guidelines include
a definition of “new development” to assist in making decisions about open
space in new developments.
vii.
notes that if Council requires the
provision of open space, then Council may need to accept the responsibility
for the maintenance of that space.
viii.
agrees that in some situations it may
be appropriate to amalgamate funds received through development contributions
and use those amalgamated funds to purchase one area of open space in the
same general area.
ix.
notes that, while the board has no local
experience on this element of the guidelines, the guidelines should allow for
the purchase and operation of recreational open space in industrial areas
because, for example, sports fields in industrial areas cause less disruption
than sports fields in residential areas.
x.
notes that while some open space
configuration options are presented as negative, they may, in some
situations, be the only option and may be satisfactory to the local community.
xi.
expects that the considerable amount of
local planning already undertaken by local boards needs to be taken into
consideration when considering the provision of open space in each local
board area.
CARRIED
|
