You are invited to provide feedback by selecting a ‘Village Planning’ blog topic from the navigation menu to the right. Each blog offers a comments section at the bottom of its page.
About Village Planning (including Godley House site)
Village Planning was initiated in 2011 as part of revitalisation of community functions after the 2010-2012 earthquakes. SPRIG (Stoddart Point Regeneration Ideas Group) was established to support the post-earthquake recovery of our community. It was instrumental in gathering ideas into the document ‘Getting to the Point’ and for initiating summer concerts and sculpture.
View ‘Getting to the Point’ and other historic documents
The Diamond Harbour Community Association now hosts two community groups as ‘sub-committees’ that have taken over the work of SPRIG. One is implementing ‘Getting to the Point’ through a Village Planning collaboration with the Council. The other organises the summer concerts (Live at the Point). If you wish to support these projects then you are welcome to join the groups, or contact the Association to provide feedback.
Godley House site
This year (2019), following the demolition of Dark Star cafe, the City Council has started consultation on the future of the Godley House site. This involves both the Diamond Harbour Community Association and the Diamond Harbour Reserves Committee. View updates below (the most recent at the top).
This current plan doesn’t allow for parking outside The Dark Star Ale House but encourages visitors and locals to park outside Preserved and Harbour Real estate and encourages more congestion and parking near the rugby club as people don’t like to walk. The plan also is taking away our one designated disabled park outside our venue. It’s a bad plan as it excludes the needs of our business.
the road has no turning place! when the parks are full your going to have cars negotiating u turns ,others waiting for parks and others trying to leave parks its going to be bedlam ,diamond harbour’s first traffic jam and accident blackspot will be created ,i’d pay to watch that!…only sensible option is to carry the road around into the domain and back round, this would allow the road to be “one way” and narrower as a consequence, providing more room for pedestrian areas, seating etc outside of local cafe and bars….
the domain, how about some new facility’s, toilets, shower (pay for use) blocks, bbq’s , seats and more camp sites down in the domain , the current toilets are disgusting and encourage people to go bush, we should be encouraging campers to stay and use the domain and local business as opposed to camping on the roadside where there are no facility’s or business to benefit.
the godley site, is there a plan for using the site? if not how about a bandstand walled on diamond harbour side to project sound out, with power and a roof to offer bands shelter from the sun sprig seems to be a permanent fixture these days its enjoyed by many people who come from all over, and is also great for local business.
the warf boat moorings, the harbour has a long history of maritime activity, initiatives across the water in lyttleton are going to improve the attractiveness and practicality boat ownership, its highly likely there are going to be more people out there on the water than ever before, perhaps diamond harbour could consider a smaller but similarly designed floating pontoon moorings, such an idea could work in harmony with the project in lyttleton, and be a great boost for local cafe.
with a “build it and they will come” attitude , diamond harbour can move forward into a bright future,
The area currently looks unloved. This plan looks great, creating beautiful welcoming space for the locals to come together. We also desperately need some tree pruning done on some dangerous trees on the way down to the wharf.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback.
The link through the Godley site car park towards cemetery is fantastic and I would strongly support this to continue through as a loop. A one-way loop would allow:
• the village centre to focus on pedestrian space (reduce road to one lane, and expand central lawn/plaza space)
• It would give visitors arriving by car (and looking for a carpark) an opportunity to ‘be guided’ past each car park on Stoddart Point as they made the loop around the Point. Pulling cars through the village centre in one direction also reduces the congestion we see now when it is crowded and everyone is backing into each other!
• Coaches and trucks would have a pleasant means of turning around
The 17 Car parks at cemetery are unnecessary. There is very rarely 1 car here. When there is a burial/ceremony the cars are plentiful and spill out of the village centre anyway. Could this effort be put towards retaining the down-road and having a one-way loop road? It would be a shame to remove this link now when thinking to extend the road through this far.
Good to have the path behind the Memorial Hall, linking Village Centre with Library and Playground.
Two pedestrian crossings are proposed across Waipapa Ave, one near Preserved Café and one south of the turnoff to the library – could these 2 be rationalized to one crossing located just north of the turnoff to the library? While we do need to reduce the speed cars are traveling this part of Waipapa Ave (I live on this stretch and very rarely do cars travel 50km/h or less) perhaps a second raised table could be nearer the triangle?
It would be an efficient, pleasant walk along the footpath from the upper car park to the village centre, entering on the west side and up the GH steps… a great connection for us locals walking to/from the ferry, and it would become the pedestrian visitor’s Front Door to the village. It wouldn’t be necessary to form the path along the driveway though (from the red I symbol to beyond the orange A symbol, under the birch trees). There are many pedestrian ‘desire lines’ here being used and it seems to work. None of these paths would need to be sealed, nor the ones along the foreshore/to the beach; these are all too steep to be “accessible” and they do not lead into a public building (D1 Access Routes). The need for stormwater to infiltrate is too valuable on these hillsides. Expensive to seal too. The only exception to this – a continuous sealed route from the Godley House site, to the Memorial Hall, along north side of Hall and on to Stoddart Cottage would be valuable – one and all could then enjoy this circuit and the views it offers.
Site 2 would be a perfect spot for native re-vegetation, however I would not support a community garden or orchard here. This space is a valley at the bottom of a large watershed so it is cold and damp year-round. Windy too (the poplar shelter-belt is there for shelter). This space is behind our house and is a natural amphitheatre, even talking voices echo around the valley. There is a native plant nursery initiative on the school grounds. Native re-vegetation here focused on providing food and habitat for kereru, bellbirds and more would be great as it is already rich in bird life. Also native planting would enhance stormwater infiltration in this valley before it floods the library car park and gushes under the Memorial Hall.
Great to retain and encourage more wind-break planting to the north and east of Godley House site – this is absolutely critical for the comfort of visitors’ on the lawn over summer (blocks the prevailing NE wind)
Great work is being done by the RMC and I would encourage CCC to fulfill the objectives/tasks outlined in the SP Reserves Management Plan.
The circulation works better in this diagram than it currently does on the ground. Just a few reservations about the central space – I feel it is unresolved in many ways but appreciate it is difficult with the unknown future of the GH site… also difficult to resolve at this scale. It is another exercise. For now reducing the through-road to one lane and creating a one-way loop would be efficient and give ‘room to move’ in the future for a pedestrian/socializing space here. There is a significant grade change over this area with the front step of the Dark Star probably 2m below the level of the phone box. The circulation work this plan proposes will force this level change to be dealt with sooner rather than later so the central space will need to be looked at in more detail.
It is unclear if the tree in the centre of the current ‘island’ is retained or replaced? I would support removing this tree to allow a central plaza to be carefully designed with a new tree palette being critical to its design. I could be wrong, but don’t believe it has significant ecological or historic value, it was topped in the past and is missing it’s leader.
The 2 trees framing the entry into GH site are not necessary at this stage; it may be advantageous to wait and position trees in the future to frame views or architecture, or provide strategic shade in the village centre.
Totally agree with Nancy on everything, particularly making the road through the village centre one way, and the removal of the macrocarpa.
1. The initial plans included a one way loop from the road in front of the Dark Star Cafe via the Godley House parking place, the cemetery parking place down to the domain and back up to the town centre via Stoddart Point Road. The existing link between the cemetery parking place and Stoddart Point Road has been removed on the latest plan. The reason given that it is too steep. While it is currently not well constructed the gradient is comparable with the road leading up from the wharf to the town centre. It is vital that the one-way loop is retained. The road from the Dark Star Cafe to the cemetery is not wide enough to allow two-way traffic without congestion.
2. The plan does not specifically state if landmark trees like the macrocarpa in front of the Godley House site will be retained. I am strongly in favour of retaining specimen trees like the macrocarpa.
3. The latest plan proposes sealed pathways between the domain car park and the Godley House site and between the wharf and the beach/Mt Herbert Walkway. The pathway should have a porous (crusher dust) surface to allow rainwater/surface water to be absorbed. Sealed surfaces are far more expensive and given the Council’s financial situation not affordable.
4. It is not clear from the latest plan where buses and/or truck-trailer units can turn. It is necessary to designate such an area and to ensure that it cannot be easily obstructed by parking vehicles.
We strongly support the retaining of the landmark macrocapa tree in the centre of the existing loop road. It is a living sculptural feature that is a visual anchor and emphasizes the central nature of
I also agree on keeping the Macrocapa, it is part of the community and has been for over a hundred years.
I appreciate the work put toward making the village centre more pedestrian friendly. I fully support that mission. I would like to see a plan that will make things work better for those of us who live here, rather than trying to attract more visitors to our little slice of paradise. In that sense, I feel less is more and properly maintaining what we already have should be a priority.
The council’s finances are in dire straits and are going to get a lot worse. Rate increases are well above inflation and unsustainable. As a rate payer I feel that part of the plan is a luxury we don’t need and actually can’t afford.
I apologize in advance for this being a bit long winded, but there have been quite a few instances in Christchurch over the past few years where the council has implemented costly plans that simply do not work and now the community has to spend a lot of effort and rate payers’ money to get these corrected. In that spirit I rather speak up now.
Since I can’t attach pictures here, I include a link to my comments with pictures to illustrate some of the points: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B30fCm2sA9RdV1pJbVlDNkhEa2c
• Asphalting part of the path from the wharf road to the beach: It seems to be perfectly fine as it is and I just don’t see the cost justification. Where does the drive for this come from? There will be issues with drainage and erosion. It will also become slippery when covered with pine needles and leafs, just like the short path from the village centre to the wharf road. Please leave the beach path as it is. Enjoy nature, not asphalt.
• Building a walking path from the wharf to the beach seems costly overkill. Issues arise due to cars parked illegally on the yellow dashed lines and cars avoiding the pot holes. I would like to see these issues tackled first.
At the lower end of the wharf road there really isn’t much room to establish a path that will work at high tide. It would involve serious retaining walls at a high cost. This may very well cause long term erosion problems and will probably spoil the view we all enjoy. Fixing the road, addressing illegal parking, and reducing the speed limit to 30 km/h will go a long way here. I personally never felt unsafe walking on the road.
Also, let’s not forget that there is a path that cuts through the domain and links to the beach path und thus it is possible to walk to the beach by just crossing the road once.
• Activity area 1: The area is below grade of the waste water pipe (the red line in the picture below).
For a flush toilet this would mean an expensive sewer lift station. There is no control over what goes down a public toilet and frequent blockages (with associated smells) and very costly maintenance will be the result. This is fiscally irresponsible and will create an eye sore in the village centre. If the plan is for a long drop, than I would consider this highly inappropriate for this location. A flush toilet is better located near the Godley House parking site. Waste water pipes from there will be gravity fed and it would not take up such prime real estate. In general, we do have a suboptimal track record with public toilet facilities and I would much rather see better maintenance and better signage to what we already have than spending money on yet another facility that will be poorly maintained. The DHB domain and Purau toilets are currently shut down and replaced by a portaloo. The Camp bay toilet was in that state for a long time and is thankfully fully operational again.
The two commercial operators provide facilities for their costumers and during the busy summer weekends a couple of portaloos at the back of the Godley House parking lot might be all that is needed.
A Youth recreation area seems ill placed here. I think it will be much better located near the Rugby field. From what I see, folks just seem to enjoy sitting on the grass, having a picnic or ice cream. Some picnic tables are more suitable for this area. Less is more, keep it green.
• A strong component of this plan is to make the village centre more pedestrian friendly and I fully support this. At the meeting last year we had a discussion about a reduction of the speed limit. Have I missed a reference to that in the plan? Can we please make a 30 km/h zone for the area part of the plan (starting from the lower Waipapa Ave/Marine Dr triangle)?
• There have been ongoing concerns about the ability of large articulated trucks, busses, cars with trailers, and caravans to turn around. I feel these have not been adequately addressed. Every such vehicle would be forced to turn around in the Domain. However, with the realignment of the Wharf road turn off from Waipapa Ave to almost 90 degrees, any such vehicle would have to swing wide to even make this turn and some may still fall short. With pedestrian traffic and cars going in and out of parking spots we are creating a dangerous congestion point. Anyone who has seen people maneuvering around on busy weekends with the current layout should be able to imagine that this simply won’t work. It will create gridlock under the best of circumstances and someone will get hurt sooner or later. I do understand the motivation for the realignment (slow down traffic) but it will make the situation actually more dangerous.
Speed calming has gone somewhat out of fashion because it has been overdone and often has been implemented quite badly over too broad an area. However, I think in this particular situation it could work quite well. Speed calming on lower Waipapa Ave and the Wharf road is very localized. It works in shopping centre and supermarket parking lots with large number of pedestrians. Great care must be taken in designing the speed calming to not be hazardous for motorcycles and push bikes. The plastic speed bumps and slippery pavers of the past few decades are to be avoided; they are dangerous for two wheelers. Much better engineered solutions exist these days.
• At the community meeting last year I voiced my concern about my ability to get in and out of my driveway. Nobody has been in touch to address these concerns; instead the proposed crossing in this draft has narrowed the road even further. I will not be able to turn onto Waipapa Ave. It is too sharp of a turn for the diminished turning radius provided. The proposed planting would also mean that I can’t see approaching vehicles. Please keep in mind that there is a steep falloff and eye level on the driveway is lower than what it would be on Waipapa Ave level.
The proposed tree on the downhill side of the crossing will also be exactly under the power line with not much room to grow and further reducing visibility.
The point of the crossing seems to be to get people onto the established save pedestrian path on the left hand side of Waipapa Ave (when coming from the village centre). Why can’t we move the crossing to the other side of the community hall turn off? It would avoid all the problems and would save cost as it would be merged with the confusing semi crossing that is planned on this side anyway. It looks like there is a raised crossing planned for the community hall Rd already. There is much less traffic on the community hall road, certainly not at speed cars are travelling down Waipapa Ave.
• The foot path on the right hand side (from the village centre) that continues up part of lower Waipapa Ave does not align with what is actually there or with what would be possible based on the topography. There is a flat ground with room for a path up to about 2m below the power pole and from there it is a steep 2m – 2.5m drop off to an established path that forms access for 3 Waipapa Ave. Only way back to the road is via steep stairs from 3 Waipapa Ave. A picture with the established path and stairs marked in blue is attached. You will also see the topo lines, which clearly show the grade next to the road.
Any path would probably have to be rather narrow, right by the road. I do wonder why all that effort on the crossings to get pedestrians over to the save side, to then have them walk on the other side again. I would highly recommend a site visit to work out the problems with the path and the drive way access mentioned above.
• Cemetery parking: Some commenters were wondering why the road from the cemetery parking to the domain Rd is going to be taken out, as it doesn’t seem that steep. There is plenty of evidence that cars have made contact were the grade changes just were it meets the domain access rd. I understand that the council doesn’t want to be liable for any damage here. However, I think it is important to have a road leading from the cemetery parking to the domain to ease congestion at the Wharf Rd turnoff. What is marked as “Proposed Path” is already an established one way rd. The direction should be reversed so that cars can leave the cemetery parking lot to the domain rd. What is marked as “Road Removed” could become a walking path. This can be done just for the cost of signage, road markings and a barrier.
• My understanding is that the ferry service is highly subsidized and thus high passenger numbers are good for the long term health of this vital link to town. However, during the busy summer days it has happened that a large number of folks were left behind due to limited capacity. If we are aiming to increase the number of visitors, this is only to get worse. Is there a plan for Ferry capacity management or increased sailings during busy periods? If not, it should be as part of the big picture.
Hi Everyone, lots of comments about the situation.
Some are actually incorrect as to costings and estimated effects.
Lots of good ideas, and might I suggest that Public Meetings be held so everyone can present their proposals for discussion.
Personally, I see a need to have something that draws visitors on a daily basis, something that attracts visitors and that the local businesses are the service providers to them, such as required.
To my way of thinking you never get anything unless you get it yourself, and in regards to getting all the correct improvements to the entire area then what is needed is a locally owned “private” business that is owned by residents/business’s that are already here.
Equal shares offered to each individual, profit returned to them after investments required to develop a plan, long-term.
And the separate areas of the Business being run by Managers with the knowledge and experience to do so.
Think of the variety of Tourism related events, from walkways, farm tours, horse trekking, a stopover in the Banks Peninsular Cycleway Loop, golfing, sailing, paragliding, and all the local crafts and arts already here, for example.
Then you need food, accommodation, supplies, entertainment, and other related supply providers, such as transport via road and sea.
I cannot understand why the historic WW2 defence assets have never been made part of the actual Tourism Trail, as they are overseas.
There is even DOC Walkways linking them, and of course their is a massive demand for a “Diamond Harbour Holiday Park” which in my opinion, should be immediately opened at the Stoddard Reserve.
(minimal work required)
The very small amount of work required for this aspect of providing an accommodation venue, would immediately provide income.
All the Manager would need to do is advise the NZMCA that it was open, and offer the standard 15% discount to members, and start a promotional drive in the NZMCA magazine.
As I have indicated, the options now need to be discussed, the starting process agreed upon, and the wheels started to turn.
Nobody has ever done anything about nothing, because doing nothing is never doing anything.
And we all want something done.
So let’s do it.
I think we should reconsider those paths and areas (eg car parking) that are being asphalted. Asphalting should only be used on areas of high usage. Gravel is far preferable as it drains better and is less intrusive. It is probably cheaper too – the high costs quoted lead me to question the cost justification. We only experience high traffic on sunny weekends and school holidays and we are a village, not a town. But I do like the pedestrian path routes, especially those that take people off the road to the ferry and between the ferry and beach. I agree with Adrian re pedestrian area – can we ensure that people with a double buggy can avoid being forced onto the road as they are now; even with a single buggy. The priority for me is the footpaths not the roads.
Great result. Lots of good aspects. My biggest concern is the nature of the village centre which still seems to have parking in the middle and be elongated rather than walking and sitting focussed . This is the most urgent area to get right. Can the grass area where the present noticeboard is be incorporated in some way? We need safe and inviting meeting places without through traffic. For anything is to be a focus here I would prefer a relevant piece of sculpture ( Porirua Council did this in the individual villages with their special character)
Foot path links from the cafes to the Community Centre are so necessary.
The roading and sealed paths linking facilities look great. It would be so good to have an off road path to the jetty.
Great plan. I would like to see information panels or signage by all of the historical sites. If the paths could be formed enough to allow pushchairs to use them that would be great.
I’d also like to see better signage overall and a larger pedestrian area outside Preserved Cafe.
I like the road through to the cemetery car park idea and walking path off the road to the wharf.
It would be awesome if the area to the West of the Medical Centre could also include a large playground. This area is very protected from road traffic and has great walking and driving links.
Also, in the planting it would be great to see some natives that are naive to Banks Peninsula and less commonly used natives. We’ve got a great micro-climate that can support plans that chch can’t.
Plus, not too many Karaka due to their poisonous nature?
Hi Frances, great ideas.
So what has happened in the 5 years since you made this comment ?
Have the improvements been carried out that you and the others suggested ?
Plans for a community garden at school already underway so maybe that space could be an orchard instead rather than doubling up.
The track from beach to jetty off the road sounds excellent.
A bigger pedestrian only area between the two cafes would be good and people encouraged to park by hall if possible…
• can a bus turnaround in DH (eg – does it and can it turn around down in domain?)
• can cars easily turn around in Cemetery or GH parking areas if all carparks full?
• need to be clear about central raised area with existing macrocarpa in front of GH site/Dark Star – is this staying or going? Needs to be very clear
• if the central tree is going then I don’t think the entry to GH site or the town centre pedestrian space is still well enough resolved –
• should have path connecting GH site to Head to Head walkway via Cemetery/Stoddart Point reserve
Looks great, thanks to those who have worked on it. Can there be some extra space on the pavement in front of Preserved, so they can have their tables, and people can walk down the footpath to the point without having to go behind the parked cars? The road is the only option with a pushchair at the moment. I don’t support a road from Godley House carpark to the cemetery – it isn’t used regularly and what is there now is fine. Make a good footpath for access instead.
Diamond Harbour is a delightful place as it is. If this plan reaches fruition we will get more crowds, litter, vandalism, traffic and dodgy parking and this will ruin a lovely community. Few will benefit.
A road to the beach from the wharf doesn’t seem sufficient when it comes down to costs. I have walked the road for 30 + years and have never had any problems competing for road use with the cars, apart from when people park illegally on the yellow lines.
I also don’t agree with an adjoining road to the cemetery from the Godley House car park. The Graveyard already has a brand new efficient driveway that is hardly Baldwin Street ( Dunedin). I look forward to the great things about this plan that we don’t have and will add to Diamond Harbour’s Charm.
I would like to build a gazebo with a town clock about 2.5m x 1.8m x 1.8m on the little hexagon spot were the free cart used to be in the centre. I will build it for free and get other local trades such a painters to finish it. I can forward some sketches for your consideration, it desperately needs tidying up and it could also be an intersection little project to teach local kids some old school carpentry skills.