National Park Village housing crisis

This is the general area of the National Park ward, part of the Ruaepehu district. Most of the population is rural, with the main population centres all being small with permanent populations of around 200 each in National Prk, Raurimu and Owhango. The ward is unusual in the it also represents the interests of the population of Whakapapa Village at the base of Mt Ruapehu.

National Park Village is the major population and business centre in the National Park ward. It has a permanent population of around 200 but commercial beds for over 1000 visitors and a disproportionately large number of businesses for its size. It enjoys the distintinction of being New Zealand’s highest town @825 metres above sea level.

Tongariro Alpine Crossing

National Park Village is the gateway to Tongariro National Park, including:

  • the Tongariro Alpine Crossing, one of New Zealand’s best day walks.
  • The Northern Circuit, one of New Zealand’s Great Walks, that skirts Mt Tongariro and circumnavigates Mt Ngauruhoe.
  • The Round the Mountain trail, around Mt Ruapehu.
  • Whakapapa Skifield, one of the most popular, if not the most popular, snow tourism attractions in New Zealand.
  • A range of shorter day walks including Tama Lakes, Taranaki Falls, Silica Rapids and Tupapakurua Falls.
  • Nodes on the Te Aroroa Trail and National Cycle Way that run the length of New Zealand.

While COVID-19 is having an obviously effect on tourism around New Zealand, smaller centres like National Park are more likely to come out of this crisis better than larger tourism-oriented centres like Queenstown and Rotorua.Things will change but most businesses here will endure and will still need staff in numbers greater than the local supply.

National Park Village has a crisis, a housing crisis. A large number of businesses mean staff numbers out of proportion to the village’s size and permanent population. It’s alpine environment means that winter commuting from other centres like Turangi, Taumarunui, Raetihi or Ohakune (each 40-50km away) can be problematic assuming that staff have vehicles in the first place.

Staff may or may not have their own vehicle and those that do not have no public transport service to rely on for daily travel to/from work or even for shopping/life support/sanity. It is understood – and has been for a long time – that staff working in National Park businesses need accommodation in the Village.

The rise of Bookabach and AirBnB over the last decade mean that there are no incentives for local home owners to offer long term accommodation that can be used by staff. The rewards and flexibility of short term rentals simply outweigh any perceived advantages of longer term relationships:

  • Short term rental rates approximate weekly rates for lon term rental.
  • Properties remain availbale for owner’s use.
  • High turnover and rewards mean less incentives to invest in healthy homes compliance for heating and insulation.
  • Short term rentals offer less perceived risk of dodgy tenants.

The Department of Conservation maintains its own staff accommodation estates in Whakapapa and National Park Village. Traditionally, surplus accommodation in these estates has been available to staff from other local businesses. However, the primary purpose of that accommodation is for DOC staff and as local Treaty resolutions firm up, there is a possibility that these estates were be part of the resolutiuon package.

Whakapapa Village

The work around for many businesses in National Park and Whakapapa Villages is simply to provide accommodation for its staff. The four major employers in Whakapapa Village all provide staff accommodation as do the larger proportion of businesses in National Park Village. This is usually in the form of a house or houses owned by the business and available to staff as a flatting environment; or accommodation providers putting aside for staff a proportion of what would otherwise be income earning accommodation. Either way, this is a considerable overhead cost for each of these businesses.

In the last three years there has been increasing pressure on seasonal accommodation for winter ski field staff. That has been mitigated to some extent this year with borders being closed and RAL et al having to depend more on locals for staff. As economic recovery continues, so will the need for full-time and seasonal staff drawn from outside the ward and the district.To its credit, RAL provides transport for its staff: ultimately though, this overhead will cap out as staff are forced to live further and further afield.

These issues are not new nor are they unknown. Last year, community leaders expreseed their concerns at the detrimental effects of the lack of long term rental accommodation in the National Park ward, especially National Park and Raurimu Villages. Not only does the lack of accommodation directly affect local businesses but it also ripples out into reduced school rolls; smaller recruiting pools for local emergency services and reduced coverage where members may be forced to live out of reasonable response times; and reduced domestic business.

The Ruapehu District Council has recently received approval for Government seed funding for housing projects in the Ruapehu district. This has been the result of various internal studies looking at both district needs and the potential for the district to benefit from COVID recovery initiatives. I’ve attended a number of those internal council workshops and community board meetings and raised these concerns. It was quite clear from the most recent workshop that having received this approval, the council didn’t actually have the faintest idea what to do wit it or where to apply it.

In an attempt to remedy this, the Council has conducted housing huis in Taumarunui, Raetihi and Ohakune – nothing in the National Park ward. The Council’s response to challenges on this is that residents of the ward can submit directly to the council if they want to make their views known.

National Park Community Board meeting 13 October 2020

From the brief to the Community Board on Tuesday evening, it would appear that the Ruapehu District Counmcil has decided that its contribution to the housing initiaive will be land ie land that it owns. That’s not much good to National Park where the council doesn’t own any significant land but where arguably the need is greatest – if anyone is serious about maintaining and fostering economic development in the district.

The council has been clear that it is looking for a low risk options for its housing initiative. Investing in long term rental accommodation in National Park IS LOW RISK. These are tenants that don’t need assistance or subsidisation: they are all in jobs and receiving wages. Further, most if not all of them, bring skills and experience to the district. Historically, many of them put down roots here and eventually buy their own home, start families and contribute to the community in many ways. They are assets.

They are also assets that are declining jobs here because they can not find accommodation, especially for couples and families. One family spent a year living in a single room accommodation in one of the lodges until they were able to secure a rental home; there are couples sharing a room in flalting arrangements because long term rental accommodation is so hard to find.

Privately run rental accommodation offers little security to individuals, couples or families because the incentives for owners to sell are so great. I ended up buying a head of my schedule when my rented home was sold last last – ironically, its new owners contacted me this week after I raised this issue on local Facebook pages and they confirmed their intention to make it availbale for mlong temr rentals once the current refurbishment is complete.

There is a clear need for DOC-style estate in National Park Village. By this I mean a mix of one or two bedroom apartments and three bedroom houses similar to the current DOC estate. To avoid the attractions of short term commercail rentals, this estate needs to be run by central or local government – or in partnership with business agencies where the provision of long-term rental accommodation is protected.

If the Ruapehu District Council’s contribution is to be land only, there is land suitable for such an estate on the market in National Park Village as I write. It won’t be there for long.

The need in National Park Village has been articulated to the Council on many occasions, from both perspectives of welfare and economic development. What this requires is that the Council move with speed that is greater then that which it is accustomed to. Not just wisely-nodding heads that then go off and do whatever they want to to do.

I’m proposing that that Ruapehu District Council:

  • acqiure land in or close to National Park Village specifically for the development of a housing estate for staff employed in local businesses (including agencies like National Park Primary School).
  • Independently or in partnership with a government or private agency construct a rental housing estate for couples and families employed with the ward.
  • Consider opportunities to boost availbale renayl accommodation during peak seasons pending the outcome of COVID recovery. This may include establishing transport conenctions to housing in Owhango, and other centres north of National Park (south of the Village may be challenging in winter).
  • Adopt a strategy and polciies to ensure that accommodation remains available to meet the need in National Park i.e. to restrain the temptation for greater ROI through short term rentals.

This is the low risk option for the Ruapehu District Council.

It contributes to economic development in the district.

It addresses social and welfare issues arising from the lack of long term rental accommodation in National Park Village.

It operates at market rates, reducing risk and outlay for the Council.

Ruapehu District Council Social and Affordable Housing


Ski road access facts 2020

Why skiing is like religion

Here are some facts:

My rights are being violated.

Unless you have a Platinum Pass, your season or life pass provides you no more guarantee of access of parking than it has any other year. Your Fair Trading or Consumer Guarantee rights have not been violated. Perceived inconvenience due to change is not a violation.

While we’re on the subject, your season or life pass doesn’t give you any special rights at all. Further you’re not contributing nearly as usefully as your average casual snow tourist.

Be nice

The rights that you are guaranteed are in the NZ Bill of Rights. In essence, they say be nice to other people.

The staff at the ski fields, working on the roads, in the I-Sites and the Visitors’ Centre, in other local businesses and on social media are just doing their jobs. 17 generations of skiing on Ruapehu, season/life pass ownership, and/or an enhanced sense of entitlement do not give you any right or privilege to be rude, abusive or threatening.

It’s a public road – you can’t stop us.

The Bruce Road is not a public road. It is a special purpose road, managed under law by DOC, sub-delegated to TPP for operational management. Like Mangatepopo Road, it can be closed or otherwise controlled for any number of reasons, safety concerns are the most common reason.

We’ll walk up then

Attempting to walk up the Bruce Road from the barrier would probably deemed a safety issue when the snow berms obstructs the shoulder and vehicles are driving on ice and snow. Darwin will appreciate the validation though…

There’s no real problem

Everyone who has been saying there’s not really a problem is either in lala land or is a first time visitor. Since at least 2014, traffic congestion on SH48 and the Bruce Road has blocked access for visitors, commercial traffic and emergency services.

The ‘first in’ approach to parking has become less and less effective over the same period. As a result, more and more visitors have been departing overnight locations earlier and earlier to try to get a park. This means increasing number of vehicles on the roads above 900 metres where ice is most common and at the times it is most likely…just trying to get in for a park.

The sightseers are spoiling it for everyone.

The sightseers are now representative of ‘everyone’. The market has changed since Happy Valley was upgraded and the Snow Factory commissioned in 2017, and the Sky Waka was launched in 2019. Snow tourism and snow play are now more significant parts of the market – they are also better behaved and less rude.

We pay for parking already

Not yet you don’t. It costs DOC and RAL to maintain the car parks and the Bruce Road for non-commercial visitor traffic. Visitors to the ski fields only contribute to this indirectly via tax and passes.

Introducing a car park booking system was not the only option. It would have been as easy to close the Bruce Road to all but commercial vehicles and rerole the car parks for more profitable purposes eg skating, and require all visitors to catch commercial transport. This would have the side effect of reducing transport costs due to economies of bulk – when you bitch about the costs of transport services, be careful what you wish for.

You can’t stop us parking on the roadside.

Neither SH48 nor the Bruce Road have a road reserve. if you park off the road, you are technically parking inside the Park outside a designated parking area. DOC can and has enforced this in the past. For bonus points, if parking off the road, and if you are too tight to put your pets into a motel you will get zapped twice.

Tukino, here we come

How long do you think it will be before the management at Tukino starts to adopt similar practices to control numbers..? For the same reasons…

RAL is blocking access to the Park for hikers (and swimmers)

Access to Scoria Flat is not being blocked. However, such access has been abused by elements of the ski community previously. You do get that license plate numbers are being tracked this year? It’s not a big leap that vehicles that abuse this access will be restricted.

This will hurt locals

Most locals and local businesses favour the changes. I work and live here and yesterday’s statement from our Mayor Don Cameron sums up local sentiment:

Ruapehu Mayor Don Cameron said that the new Whakapapa and Turoa ski area car park booking system is part of the commitment to giving visitors the best possible experience while helping to manage other critical issues such as road safety, the environment and maintaining Kaitiakitanga (guardianship) and Manaakitanga (host) responsibilities.

If you’re going to claim that these changes will adversely affect local communities and businesses, be specific. State your sources. Identify which businesses you claim to be representing. I speak to dozens of locals and visitors every day. Your views are not the majority view, not by a good country kilometre…

Just book out all the parks, then don’t use them

You can free your booked parked if for some reason you cannot use it. There will probably be those that try to sabotage the system with false bookings. The Crimes Act covers this kind of offence. Abuse may lead to a requirement for a credit card to be register for purposes of identification. RAL hasn’t made any statement one way or another but it would be a reasonable assumption that frequent no-show offenders may be subject to some form of restriction.

Your choice

RAL had a less than stellar 2019. The Sky Waka construction prevented summer 18/19 being business as usual, a five week weather system caused an unusually long close period, and various issues and teething problems affected the later part of the season. Planning for the winter season was underway in February and March, just in time for all of the to be knocked back by COVID-19 and the lockdown. It’s a fair assumption that RAL is currently heavily influenced by its financiers, hindering its ability to make experience-based decisions.

COVID has affected all of us here on the Volcanic Plateau and we don’t really know what the future will bring. Visitor numbers in levels 3 and 4 have probably been better than expected but with no indication whether this is the new normal or just a slowly deflating bubble as new financial realities hit home.

The constant carping from the entitled and ignorant minority only undermines what we are doing in Ruapehu. If you don’t like it and feel that strongly, then don’t come…a small bitter minority will not be missed…

Joining the Rescue Helicopter dots…

This Ministry of Health image illustrates the 95 percent coverage from bases that currently provide services. PHOTO/SUPPLIED

Following on from yesterday’s post on the planned demise of the vital Taupo rescue helicopter service

This image is taken from the NZ Herald story this morning confirming NASO plans to discontinue rescue helicopter services from Taupo and Rotorua. It is credited “This Ministry of Health image illustrates the 95 percent coverage from bases that currently provide services.”

It is misleading, perhaps deliberately so…It implies that this coverage is provided from the bases (red dots) shown on the map but omits the two bases in the central North Island at Taupo and Rotorua. Only the blindest of the blind could not see the bright smudge in the centre of the North Island that represents that Taupo rescue helicopter’s main operating area i.e. Tongariro National Park, Tongariro Forest Park and the Desert Road.

The NASO web page has provides some limited background on its new model for air ambulance services…apparently it will all be wonderful…further information is available on the government tenders page…

NASO.JPG

…but you have to be a registered supplier to actually access the tender documents…so much for open government…

More and more, this reeks of a bureaucrat-driven efficiency plan under the guise of ‘government’…

Rescue helicopters based in Tauranga, Palmerston North, New Plymouth and Hamilton cannot adequately service the Taupo and Ruapehu dependencies as well as their own.

  • They are already busy enough
  • Their response times, assuming availability, are too long.
  • They lack the intimate knowledge of the Ruapehu area that makes the Taupo rescue helicopter so successful.

Any presentation to the contrary is misleading and dishonest. Even if the numbers of helicopters at those more remote base locations are doubled, that does not address the issues of response times and local knowledge.

The Herald reports the following rescue helicopters stats from 2017:

Hamilton – 654
Palmerston North -286
Taupo – 237
Rotorua – 229
Tauranga – 203

Does NASO seriously expect Hamilton, Palmerston North, and Tauranga to absorb another 450+ flights each year…? Seriously…?

Visit the petition page. Read some of the comments. See how many lives have been touched by this vital and proven life-saving service.

When someone dies because there is no rescue helicopter, who carries the can? Not some faceless gnome in NASO, that’s for sure…

Keep the Taupo Rescue Helicopter

The Greenlea rescue helicopter at work on Mt Ruapehu. Photo / Supplied

Image (c) Greenlea rescue Helicopter

It never stops…the National Ambulance Service Office (NASO) is operated by the Ministry of Health (MoH) and the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC). We learned this morning that the Taupo rescue helicopter has been excluded from the list of air ambulance services to be provided by NASO from November 2018.  The Rotorua rescue helicopter is, apparently, also off the list.

This means that air ambulance services for the Central North Island will now be dependent on helicopters based in Hamilton, Palmerston North, or New Plymouth; in extreme cases, support may be available on a longer notice to move from 3 Squadron, RNZAF, based at Ohakea.

Even cross-country, and assuming they are not already tasked in their own districts, there response time is considerable longer than that of the Taupo rescue helicopter. The crews of these other helicopters, no matter how capable, lack the same intimate knowledge of this district that enables the Taupo crews to slip in under the weather to pluck off the injured and infirm.

In some cases, this local knowledge means that the Taupo helicopter will be the first responding ‘appliance’ on the scene in isolated areas with challenging road access…often providing the confirmed location that allows those other services to navigate their way to the scene.

I could not count the number of emergency responses that I have been involved in over the four plus years since I started to work here where the Greenlea rescue helicopter has provided critical support and saved lives.

To protect this vital and proven life-saving capability, we need to reshape perceptions in the capital. At the moment, one of the lost effective ways to do this is to contact the Members of Parliament in the affected districts:

Louise Upston is the MP for Taupo

louise.upstonmp@parliament.govt.nz

@LouiseUpston

https://www.facebook.com/louiseupstonmp/

Ian McKelvie is our MP here in the Rangitikei district

ian.mckelvie@parliament.govt.nz

@ianmckelviemp

https://www.facebook.com/IanMcKelvieMP/

Submissions don’t need to be long and certainly not emotional (doesn’t help – trust me!). Keep it simple, something like:

I am writing to you with regard to this article in the Herald http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?objectid=12025346&ref=twitter yesterday.

It pretty much speaks for itself. It looks like some efficiency-driven initiative that will have a massive impact on the Ruapehu and Taupo districts – I also understand that the intention is to no longer support the Rotorua rescue helicopter as well.

The Taupo rescue helicopter provides and vital and proven life-saving capability in the Ruapehu and Taupo districts. Helicopters from other areas like Palmerston North, New Plymouth and Hamilton are already very busy and their crews lack the intimate local knowledge necessary to operate in and around Tongariro National Park. Gone are the days when we could rely on a timely intervention from a RNZAF Huey, when civilian rescue helicopters are not available or cannot operate due to the weather.

It would be much appreciated if you could express the views of this community to colleagues in the Ministry of Health and Accident Compensation Corporation and promote the retention of this vital resource.

No one else will fight this battle for us. Email, Facebook, Twitter etc all give us the tools to stand up for ourselves. The loss of the Taupo rescue helicopter doesn’t just affect us who live here, it has negative implications for everyone who passes through Ruapehu and Taupo.

Let’s keep this flying…

Edit: Just in from Phillips Search and Rescue Trust, that operates that Greenlea Taupo rescue helicopter:

“Thank you for your expression of support for the Greenlea Rescue Helicopter.

Philips Search and Rescue Trust, operators of the Greenlea Rescue Helicopter, intend to fight to retain the base for the people of, and visitors to, the Taupo and Central Plateau region.

Taupo’s local MP is Louise Upston and you may like to write directly to her in support of retaining the Taupo based rescue helicopter service. As this is a Central Government issue you may also like to write to the Minister for ACC, the Honourable Iain Lees-Galloway.”

There you go, folks, the ball is in your court if this impending loss affects or concerns you…

iain.lees-galloway@parliament.govt.nz

@IainLG

https://www.facebook.com/ileesgalloway/