Our thanks to local resident, Richard Brabant, for attending last week’s meeting of the Rodney Local Board to speak on behalf of the Omaha community in general (and OBC and the Omaha Beach Golf Club in particular) in opposition to the Council’s recently-released draft Auckland Golf Investment Plan (which can be viewed here).
The excerpt below from the meeting minutes nicely summarises our (and the Board’s) concerns about the plan:
Minutes of a meeting of the Rodney Local Board held via Microsoft Teams on Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 3.00pm.
17 Draft Auckland Golf Investment Plan
Carole Canler – Senior Policy Manager was in attendance for this item.
Documents were tabled in support of the item. Copies have been placed on the official minutes and are available on the Auckland Council website as minutes attachments.
Resolution number RD/2022/83
MOVED by Deputy Chairperson B Houlbrooke, seconded by Chairperson P Pirrie:
That the Rodney Local Board:
a) does not support the Draft Golf Investment Plan in its current form for the following reasons:
i) poor consultation with the golfing sector
ii) outdated data was used in the plan and included in consultation material that went out to the public
iii) contains assumptions such as stating decisions of legacy councils were ‘ad hoc’ when this is incorrect
iv) appears to be disingenuously termed an ‘investment’ plan when no council investment is quantified or planned
v) omits to recognise the investment made by course developers, residents’ societies, and golf club members
vi) does not mention the social benefits and value to the wider community that golf club facilities provide, as community hubs
vii) does not provide strategies or support for golf clubs to increase participation through improvements to things such as bathroom facilities to cater to women and disabled, but instead makes suggestions such as reducing some courses to nine holes when nine holes (or in fact any number) can already be played on any course if that is the player’s preference
viii) does not recognise the function of some golf courses as wetland protection areas, stormwater retention and wastewater dispersal fields
ix) appears to single out golf courses as being an “exclusive use of public land” without comparison or context to other sporting facilities owned by council
x) there was no engagement with Golf New Zealand or NZ Māori Golf
xi) does not recognise that clubs are self-funding of all maintenance and improvements
xii) uses the phrase “robust investment framework” without explanation of what that means or looks like
b) express concern that the decision-making framework in the draft Auckland Golf Investment Plan is unclear and could be inconsistent with the allocation of decisions to local boards and local boards’ governance responsibility for provision of active recreation activity, community leases and local parks/open space
c) seek further clarity on decision making outlined in page 21 of the draft Auckland Golf Investment Plan with a clear decision tree between the
Governing Body and local boards on individual golf courses that are being assessed as part of this draft Plan
d) request further work to be completed on a regional provision standard for golf and access to golf facilities prior to adopting the draft Auckland Golf
Investment Plan, so access to these facilities is considered across Auckland, including in areas without existing golf courses on public land
e) request that Auckland Council take a regional approach to reviewing golfing facilities including both public and private provision
f) request that the plan be withdrawn and there be a restart of the process, partnering with Golf New Zealand, Auckland Golf, and North Golf in its
development.
CARRIED
