Sports park clears final hurdle | Hawkes Bay News | Local News in Hawkes Bay

The Environment Court has ruled the Hastings District Council can build the $56.8 million Hawke's Bay Regional Sports Park on Percival Rd, on the outskirts of the city.

The plan for the park had been challenged by the Hawke's Bay Land Protection Society, which today said it was disappointed with the ruling.

Chairman Allan Baldock said the court had backed the council's plan to build a park on highly productive agricultural land.

``The decision is a hollow victory for the council and in many ways I feel Hastings District and its ratepayers will be the losers.''

Hastings Mayor Lawrence Yule said the court decision this week was ``the last legal hurdle'' and it would open the doors for funding opportunities, allowing the park plan to go ahead.

He said the sports park trust would meet next week and over the next two months announce ``some substantial funding'' and the likely sequence of the park's development.

Potential sponsors for the park had been waiting for the court decision.

Stage one of the park, the athletics track and grandstand, was being built and stage two was the soccer and netball fields, and tennis courts. The trust had earlier said it would think about advancing stage three, the velodrome, ahead of stage two.

Mr Yule said: ``All of those decision are yet to be made. There is a very real prospect the velodrome will be considered next.

``That's not to say soccer and netball will be left out. They have real needs and they won't be dismissed.''

He wanted to invite the society to talk with the council on its Heretaunga Plains study.

``I hope now with the decision out, there will be a chance for this to happen.''

Mr Baldock said continuing to protect the Heretaunga plains land would be achieved by preserving a finite resource of soils rather than an irreversible conversion to non-productive use.

The plains land was unique to New Zealand, and although recreation was also an important part of life, it was sad ``these issues are involved in a trade-off''.

The council spent $150,000 on legal advice and expert evidence during the court hearing.

Mr Baldock said his group was looking at a $50,000 bill for court costs, but described the council's spending on the appeals as an ``absolute overkill''. ``Ratepayers should be horrified at the waste of ratepayers' money.''

Mr Yule said he understood the Environment Court had reserved its decision on whether to award costs.

The council and the trust had not yet made a decision whether to seek costs. It would take legal advice on that matter over the next few weeks.