Submission
9 year plan feedback
Should we remove 231 Stuart Street (formerly the Fortune Theatre) from the list of strategic assets in the DCC Significance and Engagement policy?
No, keep 231 Stuart Street as a strategic asset
Do you have any comments about 231 Stuart Street?
I'm unsure the consequences of removing it from the strategic assets list. I was not aware the building was owned by DCC. Why is this your "preferred option"? A link to this topic within the LTP would have been useful
Should we charge an entry fee of $20 (incl. GST) for international visitors aged 16 and over, at Toitū and Dunedin Public Art Gallery?
Yes, introduce an entry fee of $20 (incl. GST) (this is our preferred option)
Do you have any comments about the entry fee for international visitors?
TePapa is doing this. Would make sense to fo follow suit. I do think there needs to be something extra offered in return for the entrance fee, such as complimentary 15 minute guided museum tours offered at designated times, perhaps this could be a paid role (gateway students getting work experience) or instead inhouse by existing museum staff if possible.
Is there anything else you would like to tell us?
I'm very disappointed to find out the Mosgiel to Caversham Tunnels cycleway has been taken out of the LTP! Just because the current government has pulled funding should not warrant such a backwards move. One of the biggest traffic bottlenecks in Dunedin is the Mosgiel offramp. Having an easy, safe and enjoyable cycling option for commuters is a no brainer for this city link. Investment will pay off immediately once open, and well into the future with better overall community health and well-being, directly from cycling exercise as well the environmental benefit of less emissions from those that switch from cars to bikes.
On top of this is the opportunity to link Dunedin directly to Queenstown via cycleway, with Queenstown Trails and the Waitaki Alps to Ocean being two of the fastest growing tourism areas in the country. Dunedin could really boost it's tourism visitation by linking to these significant cycle trails through the Caversham Tunnels to Waihola, and a northern Cycleway via Port Chalmers, Orokonui, Waitati, Karitane continuing along the coast to Oamaru. This is an investment that makes sense economically and will future proof our tourism industry should fossil fuel transport fail in the medium term. Even now tourists are starting seek out more carbon zero activities to reduce their carbon footprint while on holiday here.
On this topic I am very pleased to hear the DCC has voted to complete the Otago Peninsula cycleway through to Otakou. I would very much hope that there is still scope in the future to continue this cycleway all the way out to Taiaroa Heads so cyclists can reach this amazing tourism asset safely on bikes, especially the last section from Harrington Point onwards is a very narrow road. Look at what they did in Cromwell with the lake Dunstan trail suspended board walk. Something similar should be considered for Harrington Point to Pilots Beach.
My final point on cycleway is with the Taieri Gorge Train. The train is an essential part of Dunedin's tourism industry, it fits with the heritage aspect and there are so few passenger trains in the South Island, yet demand is growing, especially for authentic experiences. The TGL is a proven tourism product that was dented by Covid 19. It is a product that is attractive to a variety of fit tourists as well as travel agents looking to include mid priced items on customers package tours. Unedin needs the TGL to stay on the tourist map. Cyclists used to put their bikes in the freight carriage and enjoy the scenic train ride to Middlemarch where a number of cycle tour operators picked them up to start the Rail Trail journey. These same companies took them by road transport from Clyde to Queenstown at the end of their ride. There is no need to stop the train and convert to a bike trail, especially since the Caversham tunnels can do a far better job of connecting true cycle tourists to Queenstown. Consider the jobs, Tours, hospitality and accommodation providers that's benefiting from this, yet Dunedin is set to miss out on without the TGL providing that first or last connecting leg.
Local Water Done Well feedback
Which water services delivery model do you support?
The Council’s preferred option: an in-house delivery model
Why did you choose this option?
The council has extensive water assets which need to remain in Council ownership. I'm not sure the 3 waters model supported this. However I am concerned that leaving water entiredly in the control of council (and ORC for that matter) will produce the best outcome for the environment. I want to know that monitoring of water quality is ongoing and that there's a rapid response plane in place for all areas of Dunedin. And that water supply is able to keep up with development, especially in places like Mosgiel where water sources are also required for agriculture. Same goes for wastewater/sewerage infrastructure. We are marketing our city on pristine coastal areas, surfing and wildlife. We must ensure our marine environment is protected now and in the future.
Do you have any other feedback related to the proposed water services delivery models?
Supporting information
No associated documents with this submission.
Submitter
Submission id number: 1130185
Submitter name:
Kim Hayward
Organisation
Iconic Tours NZ Limited