{"id":403241,"date":"2026-04-29T12:32:11","date_gmt":"2026-04-29T12:32:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/403241\/"},"modified":"2026-04-29T12:32:11","modified_gmt":"2026-04-29T12:32:11","slug":"whakatane-urupa-housing-fight-trustees-vow-to-keep-challenging-ruling","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/403241\/","title":{"rendered":"Whakat\u0101ne urup\u0101 housing fight: Trustees vow to keep challenging ruling"},"content":{"rendered":"

Environment judges Jeff Smith and David Cauldwell have released their judgment from a hearing<\/a> held in Whakat\u0101ne on February 10 and 11 in which \u014cpihi Whanaungakore trustees appealed the authority.<\/p>\n

During that hearing the trustees\u2019 lawyer, Max Harris, pointed out errors in the way Heritage New Zealand \u2013 Pouhere Taonga (HNZPT) made the decision to grant the authority. He sought a reversal or remittance of the authority back to the M\u0101ori Heritage Council.<\/p>\n

\u014cpihi Whanaungakore trustee Hemi Hirime stated that the 22.6-hectare urup\u0101 boundary with the Whakat\u0101ne District Council-owned development site was \u201can arbitrary colonial line\u201d and the urup\u0101 extended west along Bunyan Rd, past where residential development had already taken place.<\/p>\n

\" Hemi Hireme takes the witness stand in the Environment Court with the support of fellow trustee Rapata Kopae.<\/p>\n

He wanted the M\u0101ori Heritage Council to hear the case.<\/p>\n

The judgment agreed Heritage NZ\u2019s decision had been \u201cdeeply flawed\u201d and had not complied with the statutory requirements of legislation or the organisation\u2019s own internal criteria.<\/p>\n

Heritage NZ failed to consider the opposition from Te R\u016bnanga o Ng\u0101ti Awa, Ng\u0101i Taiwhakaea and the trustees.<\/p>\n

A report said these parties approved the application but the judgment decided they had clearly been opposed to it.<\/p>\n

Heritage NZ had also determined that the expert opinion of the M\u0101ori Heritage Council was not necessary, when its own criteria made it clear that it was.<\/p>\n

However, the judgment stopped short of reversing or remitting the authority.<\/p>\n

The authority would be modified for a reduced area, with amended conditions \u201cto be finalised between the parties\u201d. <\/p>\n

\" A new proposal from developers MMS GP shows a reduced Archeological Authority area outlined in blue, compared to the original (red broken lines). A maximum of three beach access paths is marked to the north and a proposed offset wetland to the south in yellow, and an indicative stormwater detention area (in green) to the east. Image \/ Supplied<\/p>\n

During the hearing, the developer, MMS GP, had provided a revised proposal to reduce the size of the site to be developed which included a 300-metre buffer zone between the legally recognised urup\u0101 reserve and the development.<\/p>\n

The revised development area would take up less than half of the 26.9ha site.<\/p>\n

\u201cBy protecting the eastern end of the spit, this increases the apparent footprint of \u014cpihi Whanaungakore,\u201d the judgment said. <\/p>\n

The proposal was a compromise the developers had made during their previous mediations with Te R\u016bnanga o Ng\u0101ti Awa, which had since withdrawn from the appeal.<\/p>\n

As Ng\u0101i Taiwhakaea had been a party to the r\u016bnanga\u2019s appeal, the hap\u016b had been unable to testify at the hearing, but has voiced continued opposition to the proposal and has said it is intending to initiate a judicial review of the Heritage NZ decision.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe court deciding not to return the application to HNZPT for consideration by the M\u0101ori Heritage Council, and then granting a modified authority, was extremely disappointing,\u201d Hireme said.<\/p>\n

\u201cOur appeal was based on the trustees being ignored by HNZPT. The court found that, in 2022 when the Archaeological Authority was granted and the appeals filed, the r\u016bnanga and Ng\u0101i Taiwhakaea were also ignored. All we wanted was to be heard. It is what the law provides, and that is what we have been denied.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cM\u0101ori tikanga considers undisturbed land to be tapu [sacred\/forbidden] until the appropriate ceremonies are held to make it noa [ordinary].<\/p>\n

\u201cThe court has decided that the land is already noa. This is the danger of not listening to the M\u0101ori parties concerned and not seeking expert M\u0101ori opinion. It is the haunting shadow of colonialism \u2013 non-M\u0101ori determining M\u0101ori cultural futures.\u201d <\/p>\n

A timeline has been developed for new conditions for the authority to be mediated between all parties within 90 days of the judgment being released. At that time the panel will decide whether a further hearing is required.<\/p>\n

The court found it \u201cmay be appropriate\u201d for the appellants to apply for costs against Heritage NZ.<\/p>\n

It would reserve any decision on this until the final decision on wording of the authority was issued.<\/p>\n

Whakat\u0101ne District Council chief executive Steven Perdia said the council was legally bound by an Agreement for Sale and Purchase signed in 2017, which requires the land sale to proceed and access to be provided to enable development to commence. <\/p>\n

\u201cThe court\u2019s decision does not change those obligations.\u201d<\/p>\n

Heritage NZ did not wish to comment until it had reviewed the decision.<\/p>\n

\u2013 LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Environment judges Jeff Smith and David Cauldwell have released their judgment from a hearing held in Whakat\u0101ne on…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":403242,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[23159,15124,3339,809,111,43,139,69,29946,61,178105,207920,72808,2240],"class_list":["post-403241","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-new-zealand","tag-challenging","tag-fight","tag-housing","tag-keep","tag-new-zealand","tag-news","tag-newzealand","tag-nz","tag-ruling","tag-to","tag-trustees","tag-urup","tag-vow","tag-whakatne"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/403241","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=403241"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/403241\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/403242"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=403241"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=403241"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=403241"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}