Debate continues over a proposed concept plan for Te Awamutu’s War Memorial Park. Photo: Mary Anne Gill.
Te Awamutu and Kihikihi Community Board chair Ange Holt remains on a collision course with council staff over plans for War Memorial Park.
Holt’s concerns were amplified in a regular column she wrote recently for the Te Awamutu News – and subsequently resulted in her acknowledging some errors.
But in her report to the board’s meeting this week she said legal advice she had received differed from what staff were saying.
Board members have been told the proposed concept plan for the Te Awamutu park is both compliant with the Reserves Act, and specifically provides for historic features to be managed and protected, not removed.
Debate over the concept plan has continued since it was approved two years ago.
Holt has previously indicated a lack of comfort over the plan, having argued the park lake and stonework were part of the memorial the council was charged with maintaining.
A crane on site to help install the bridge at War Memorial Park.
In May, when council staff presented a report regarding the ownership of the various parcels of land which make up the park, the board sought clarification about a specific clause of the act – what classifies a reserve.
Members had questions around council ownership of the various titles, and what the land use was.
Ange Holt
A response from Waipā District Council staff, which was part of chair Ange Holt’s chairperson’s report, was to be tabled at the board’s August meeting last night after The News went to print.
“Staff consider that the concept plan is compliant (with the clause)… it specifically recognises, and provides for, the management and protection of the features specified… as relevant to the site.
“However, it also seeks the right balance between such protection and management, while prioritising the overall purpose of the reserve,” the response said.
But Holt wrote in her report that she had received independent advice which differed from that view and she intended to investigate further.
In her column for The News, Holt wrote Waipā District Council owns the land and all parcels are deemed “recreation reserve”.
“That means under the Reserves Act 1977 this land can be used for any sort of recreational purpose,” she said.
“…however there is a clause in the act that states, where scenic, historic, archaeological, biological, geological, or other scientific features or indigenous flora or fauna or wildlife are present on the reserve, those features or that flora or fauna or wildlife shall be managed and protected to the extent compatible with the principal or primary purpose of the reserve”.
She believes that clause supports the view that historic features in the park “are to be managed and protected, not removed”.
In her chair report she said “…in a nutshell, council’s interpretation of this clause is that the purpose of the park is a recreation reserve.”
“I have sought independent advice and, as it differs, I am going to investigate further before laying this to rest.
“My advice stated that the law will look at the intent. In the case of the Te Awamutu War Memorial Park there is intent documented … that demonstrate that the purpose of this particular recreation reserve was to create a memorial to remember those who were lost during World War Two.
“That memorial was created as a park with linked stone features that were intended to be protected and maintained.”
Memorial park in Te Awamutu
