Neighbours see more than crematorium at stake

If funeral director Francis Day sees the Tasman District Council as flying in the face of the evidence with its refusal to allow his Gardens of the World project to go ahead, neighbours who have fought his plan think the public should be singing the council's praises.

The plan for the gardens was strongly opposed within the rural neighbourhood surrounding the property, on the corner of Paton and Clover roads in Hope.

Many of the opponents joined under an umbrella group, Living in Hope, which told the hearing considering Day's plan that of the 36 submissions in opposition, 29 came from people living nearby; of the 47 supporting submissions, only one came from somebody living within 2km of the site.

While the opponents' arguments won through, their patience is apparently running short with the string of others who have written to the Nelson Mail to side with Francis Day. One of the objectors, Andrew Greenhough, whose vineyard and winery is one of the gardens' nearest neighbours, says the letters are "misinformed", reflecting what he thinks is the one-sided reporting and public awareness of the issue.

For one thing, there was much more to the plan than a crematorium. Day also proposed building a reception area and cafe, and promoting the place both to casual visitors and for larger functions. He wanted to establish a memorial garden, with commemorative plaques for the deceased, under the long-term management of his company. And, of course, he wanted to build the crematorium.

The prospect of a crematorium in their community was prominent among the objections. The Living in Hope members took to describing the plan as "the garden of emissions".

Greenhough himself said in his evidence to the hearing that not only did he fear the effect of toxic emissions from the crematorium on his grape crop (the emissions were a common concern raised through the hearing), but he also spoke of the "potential for negative perceptions should it be revealed that one of the neighbouring buildings is a crematorium".

Still, as Greenhough points out, it wasn't any one argument or "knock-out" piece of evidence which convinced the council hearing panel to turn the Day proposal down.

In fact, the council's decision did not place significant weight on arguments about the merits of having a crematorium in the area, focusing instead on issues such as the loss of valuable, fertile rural land; the fact that Day's plan would lead to the site being fragmented, further reducing its availability for future use; concerns about traffic and the ability of the roads to cope; the disruption from gatherings at the gardens, including at night; the emissions from the crematorium; and the fear that the regular presence of funeral parties at the gardens would inevitably lead to pressure on neighbours to restrict their own activities for fear of causing offence.

Greenhough and his partner, Jenny Wheeler, and another objector, Russell Aubrey, see the council's protection of the productive soils as particularly significant. That, Greenhough says, deserves praise, not criticism.

He wonders why Day took the risk of buying the Gardens of the World before he had resource consent lined up. He sees Day's motives as commercial, "designed to create a market edge", which should be taken to a more appropriate site. Aubrey suggests the Day-owned Waimea Funeral Services site in Richmond.

- © Fairfax NZ News