Rural residential development

Most people saw residential and rural residential development as good for Twizel (19 responses in support while 3 responses opposed the development), as long as it was managed well. There were 19 responses stating that Council should restrict development only to the west of Twizel. The most common view was that development to the east would be detrimental, however 2 responses did support some level of development to the east of the state highway.

A common view was that Council should look at amending the plan to incorporate a rural residential development zone for Twizel (16 responses) and that the size for rural residential should be 2-6 hectares (15 responses) with 4 hectares the common figure. There were 5 responses stating that the rural residential zone should be less than 1 hectare.

A lesser theme that came through was that the developments should be high quality (4 responses), well planned and vistas and landscape views protected (3 responses).

Market Place and greenbelt enhancement

There was a large response to the topics in the questionnaire and the views expressed were mixed. However, some very strong themes did emerge from the exercise.

There was overwhelming support for the retention and enhancement of Twizel greenways, with 25 responses in support of this. People want to see new plantings and provision for better walkways (9 support enhanced walkways) in the greenways. There was reasonable support for Council to fix fences in the greenways (7 responses), have rubbish collected on a more regular basis (6 responses) and enhance the views (4 responses). There were three responses in support of retaining and enhancing the townbelt around Twizel.

Redevelopment of the Mall in Market Place was highly variable. Some themes that did emerge were that people would like to see the total revamp of the Mall (12 responses) and 6 responses supported the idea of better seating for cafés. There were 7 responses supporting the idea of enhancing the entranceway to Twizel from the State Highway and along Ruataniwha Road. Two people mentioned the idea of closing Two Thumb Road.

There was support (11 responses) to the concept of moving the playground to the old hall site. However, some people felt it was a good idea to advocate that the 4 Square should go on this site (4 responses). Obviously, the majority of support being 11 responses, supported the 4 Square being located at the existing playground location. There were 4 responses supporting the location of the 4 square near the Events Centre.

Conclusion

While some strong themes emerged from the "have your say" consultation document, there is still a bit of work required to refine the views of the Twizel community. It is fair to say that the views of the rural residential development issues and options is more straightforward than the redevelopment of Market Place and enhancement of Twizel greenways and townbelt. Further in-depth analysis of this information is required.