Social media – facebook – is being used to keep everyone up-to-date on progress reports for TRM’s cohousing apartment redevelopment.

This way Toe-paw District Council (TDC) officials can also see where we are up to… TDC admit they have a housing crisis – see newspaper article below – and have arranged a Housing Strategy Consultation Meeting in Taupo next month to consider new innovative affordable multi-unit housing options. As TRM’s proposal should fit right in we will attend.

To start their consultation this morning TDC advised they would set up a council discussion station in Turangi Town Centre (CBD). We were there at 10 am but the council office knew nothing about it... Typical…

This progress report may be of more interest to prospective purchasers of TRM’s cohousing apartment redevelopment and any other inmates interested. This is a relatively new concept in this region that needs further explanation for TDC to appreciate all the advantages over other types of multi-unit developments such as retirement villages.

How many TRM inmates and anglers and other Turangi residents remember when this Piri Road (x Link Road) frontage was developed ‘commercially’ for a tourist mini-putt golf course that was open to the public?

The stump removal machinery at work on 21 June is revealing all the old secrets. When the main highway (Now SH1) was moved from Taupahi Road to span across the back western boundary of TRM and a ‘link’ road (Now renamed ‘Piri’ Road) was formed to provide vehicular access, the large vacant site created off Piri Road was developed with a tourist style fun mini putt golf course for guests. The grinder revealed and uncovered much of the original concrete shape which is now removed.

Back then, before the development of the ‘modern’ Turangi town in the 1970’s, the motel facilities were more family-orientated including a swimming pool, two covered hot spa pools, swings and slides, plus the putting course. The golf mini putt was open to the general public but eventually was replaced by another similar development in town.

This is persuasive evidence for TRM as the resource consent application has been delayed for eight months as the residential zoning definition does not allow any ‘commercial’ use. This property was a commercial property before the Toe-paw Council was even formed. The photo above confirms the original motel property comprised a retail village shop selling Peter Pan ice cream with all grocery lines and surrounded by a caravan park. There was also a secure storeroom supplying the local prisons.

Somehow I survived in one of the caravans during various fishing trips back in the late 1950’s so we have enjoyed a long relationship with this property and witnessed the growth of Turangi. Even back then I knew where I was going to retire…

The council’s reluctance to support our application appears contradictory as the Council allowed commercial and retail use back then but now is trying to block the proposed cohousing apartment redevelopment from providing a residential community centre – aka a ‘common house’ for guests to socialise in. The common house is planned on this old mini putt golf site on Piri Road.

When the new town was developed a more challenging tourist mini-putt course was developed on Ohuanga Road in the town CBD. It is still operating beside the Supermarket car park access road.

The main SH1 being excavated across the western boundary of TRM over fifty years ago.

Further south on Taupahi Road there is a suitable precedent of a ‘common house’ on residential zoned land in an established time share accommodation, known as Kaimanawa Lodge, surrounded by horse paddocks which are also curiously zoned residential (?). Their development included a restaurant complex that used to be open to the public while TRM is not allowed to admit the public, which seems a bit strange…

There are other precedents where several other nearby motels have cafes or dining for the public – the nearest being Bridge Lodge, Parklands, and Creel. But – so far – TRM’s application has been refused.

It appears ironical that at the same time the Toe-paw Council are actively holding meetings to identify better new methods to address their housing shortage for ‘affordable multi-unit housing’ as indicated in the above local (TaupoTurangiHerald dated 22 June) newspaper. TRM still needs to convince Council that cohousing offers one of the best solutions to their ‘housing crisis’.

The Council planners must have combed through hundreds of pages of the RMA (Resource Management Act) regulations to identify other ways to delay progress. i.e. Back in January they refused to meet for us to explain the cohousing concept as they were “too busy”! Their advice was to refuse any further progress until after tribal written confirmation was received, that there were no Wahi Tapu (ancient burial sites) on the motel land. This was a classic example of council delaying tactics – too ridiculous to go into here. But after a couple of months of wrangling they waived that requirement.

The real problem, that they cannot acknowledge, is that their building codes and specifications were never ever designed to provide for ‘cohousing’ concepts.

It was not in their vocabulary or in their town planning dictionary. They had no idea of the growth of cohousing in Europe and North America. Their obsolete regulations restrict residential developers to build simple traditional family homes like those latest Turangi rental houses in the photo below… How imaginative! So attractive!

Perhaps it may be understandable that Toe-paw council are inconsistent with their rulings after declining a more commercial proposal on a large vacant corner site at the front of the Parklands Motel in 2018. That commercial development included a service station and fast food restaurant. Turangi residents were very divided over that proposal and it eventually went to a public hearing. NZTA (NZ Transport Authority which now has another strange name) declined to allow access from SH1 and that basically killed their project. That precedent or failure may be still in their minds when NZTA and Council planners objected to TRM providing a common house for inmates to mix and mingle in.

This revealing map above is interesting to show the Turangi-based submitters on the Parklands development [blue star] in 2018 to indicate the relative locations of where they supported or opposed the development. There was a cluster of residents who live near the site of the proposed service station who did want it to go ahead in Turangi. There were 103 submissions on the proposal, with 78 (75%) in support and 25 (25%) submissions in opposition. The opposition won.

As a result, TRM were anxious that some of the ‘red dots’ nearby may similarly maintain the same approach to a multi-unit development in the residential zone and oppose TRM’s redevelopment for ‘affordable’ cohousing apartments. So far, we are relieved to report that all those approached have given it their complete support! (except for one who decided to reserve their response pending access to the full resource consent application and the Taupo District Council response to it.) A HUGE thank you to those neighbours. (They were all bribed by SWMBO of course!)

The stump grinding monster above is removing the rotten remains of a huge Douglas Fir tree that was a central feature of the putting green and shaded the Piri Road northern boundary of the property – as indicated in the photo below.

Toe-paw Council and NZTA will appreciate there are still ample mature shelter-belt trees that survived the storm along the western boundary to effectively provide a high visual barrier to the main road. The plans provide for two rows of car parking to extend across the entire western side to further separate and absorb any main road impacts.

TRM were fortunate to escape the worst of the cyclone winds as other much bigger mature trees south on Taupahi Road and immediately opposite on the SH1 boundary of the Council park and old pine conifers adjoining the school were all blown over.

Meanwhile Council’s traffic specifications are impossible to comprehend or satisfy. i.e. They confirmed their lack of understanding of cohousing in their last communication in March when they required:

“The proposal will exceed the maximum vehicle movement limit for a residential site as such the traffic effects of the proposal (of those additional movements above what occur already) need to be assessed. The traffic assessment needs to cover off how each vehicle entrance is to be used i.e. which entrance will be used most often, how much through the day / week, which way will most vehicle turn when leaving / entering each exit, if there is sufficient manoeuvring onsite so that all vehicles can exit forward facing, and so on. There are no onsite parking space requirements anymore, however I’m sure you want to provide onsite parking for your co-housing people – as such any parking spaces that are provided need to be in accordance with the District Plan dimensions for width, depth, formation, marking and manoeuvring. 

Waka Kotahi will be interested in the effects of the additional vehicle movements particularly from the Piri Road entrance, as well as the building within the front 5m setback to SH1... etc.” 

Seriously, what a ridiculous request – to ask anyone which way future traffic will turn? It is “unanswerable” to request his before the units are even sold! How can anyone anticipate the traffic movements of future inmates? It depends more on where the trout are biting. Obviously it is impossible to advise council of residents and guests traffic habits when some may be permanent residents, some may be holiday homes, some may be rented out. It is called a “Catch22” situation?

The B&W aerial photo above is dated 22 March, 1956. The motel site is clearly evident on River Road in the tiny fishing hamlet of ‘Taupehi’ as it was known back then. The cleared site in the right foreground is now the school, located on the main road to Tokaanu.