KCDC Letter confirms Shand Report failed to comply with MfE requirements The KCDC has confirmed that Dr Shand's report did not comply with the Ministry for the Environment's 2008 requirement that "a base value sea-level rise of 0.5 m relative to the 1980-1999 average should be used, along with" a higher value that Dr Shand did use. (Emphasis added.) The KCDC's letter explains that it considered that the 0.5 m figure should not be used "since it would not meet the precautionary requirements" of the Department of Conservation's New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement, 2010.
The letter cites the Department's policy 3
statement. This is reproduced below.
How the KCDC can justify the unnecessary economic loss it seems to be hell-bent on imposing on the community? IT IS FAILING TO APPLY THE Policy directive clause 2(a) to take into account economic loss. It is leading to deprival of private property rights. The letter also states that the KCDC required Dr Shand to adopt "a worst case scenario in relation to storm activity" in addition to using a speculative 0.9 m figure for sea level rise. It is becoming increasing clear that the KCDC's and Shand Report's 100-year 'prediction lines' are fanciful 'what-if' speculations that do not to predict the most likely future position for the shoreline. The Council has also failed to take into account Policy 2 (see)