Beach houses draw record protests

New Chums Beach is one of the few undeveloped beaches left on the Coromandel. Photo / Alan Gibson

Plans to build houses on an unspoilt Coromandel beach have drawn more than 1000 submissions in protest.

It is understood to be a record number for a resource consent in the district.

Queenstown developer John Darby wants to build 20 houses in the area of New Chums Beach, a world-renowned beach north of Whitianga.

He has made many concessions in his plans, but locals and opponents worldwide say any development would ruin the beach's unique seclusion.

It is one of the few accessible yet undeveloped beaches left on the peninsula.

The Thames-Coromandel District Council yesterday said it had received 989 submissions by last month's deadline, both for and against the proposal.

But late submissions have also been posted on the council's website, taking the total to about 1300.

About six out of seven are formally marked as opposed to the development.

Tourism Coromandel chief executive Jim Archibald said in his submission that New Chums Beach was an international icon because it was undeveloped, and there was no shortage of coastal properties for sale elsewhere on the peninsula.

"The world is littered with burnt-out resorts that attempted to capitalise on what appeared to be a good thing, then found their clients being turned off by overdevelopment," Mr Archibald said.

The Coromandel was promoted as "good for your soul", and negative publicity could hurt tourism, he said.

Despite the strong turnout in submissions and a big following on Facebook, an online petition to Parliament has stalled, with just over 500 signatures. It needs 10,000 to reach its goal.

The petition seeks an "immediate establishment of a protected area" around the beach.

Meanwhile, the regional council has granted consent to build a bridge into the development site, drawing criticism from Green MP Catherine Delahunty.

Environment Waikato said it had been legally obliged to avoid public notification because the bridge was considered a "controlled activity" under the regional plan.

The rationale is to provide certainty to people that they can do certain things as of right, though subject to conditions.

But Ms Delahunty said this did not o take into account the environmental impact of the entire subdivision.

"Non-notification may be appropriate for bridges in some places. However, this bridge is part of the major subdivision of one of the top 20 wilderness beaches in the world," she said.

"The development has already caused waves of controversy. Excluding people from their democratic right to participate in local decision-making is not a good look for Environment Waikato."

It was disingenuous to treat the application for the bridge as separate from the overall application, she said.

"We need to love and protect one of the last and best wild beaches on the Coromandel," Ms Delahunty said.

"The Environment Waikato decision on this consent is unfair in context and they need to think again."

Environment Waikato granted the resource consent in July, and it was brought to public attention by Ms Delahunty yesterday. A date has not yet been set to hear oral submissions.