An Upper Selwyn Huts home. Photo: RNZ / Nate McKinnon
Selwyn District Councillors have voted to review the deadline by which residents living in the Upper Selwyn Huts must leave.
In March, the council voted to evict the entire settlement near Lake Ellesmere by 2039, partly because of the risks of climate change.
About 100 people live in the Upper Selwyn Huts, which are on Crown land and managed by Selwyn District Council.
Residents were devastated by the decision, and said council consultation and communication was inadequate.
At a meeting on Wednesday, councillors voted to pause the current process to allow further consultation with residents on when and how they will leave.
A report by Selwyn District Council executive director enabling services Tim Harris recommended this option. He proposed the council "pauses the current USH (Upper Selwyn Huts) process that would have resulted in a deed of licence (DOL) being issued for a period of five years from 1 October 2024, with the conditional opportunity to renew the DOL for two further periods of five years up to a maximum total of 15 years".
Councillors agreed to engage with the hut community through to March next year, to develop a proposal concerning the future licensing arrangements for the settlement. This would involve a discussion around the appropriate level of financial contribution from the settlement to an upgraded wastewater pipeline.
As part of the current draft licence, hut owners will be expected to pay 30 percent of the new $4 million wastewater pipeline.
The lawyer representing Upper Selwyn Huts residents, Clare Lenihan, spoke at Wednesday's meeting, saying residents welcomed a full consultation process but still had a number of key concerns.
"The purpose and scope of the staff report is a concern, because it's described as to 'develop a proposal for the eventual removal of the Upper Selwyn Huts'. The residents consider this as premature, too narrowly focused and erroneously based on the council resolution in 2019 that hut licences and subsequent renewals are short-term and ultimately for a finite period.
"None of the reasons in the staff report justify a finite term and the recommendations leave this issue hanging over the residents' heads."
Residents wanted the Upper Selwyn Huts to remain on their current site, be entered into Heritage New Zealand as a historic area and be added to the Selwyn District Council's District Plan Heritage Schedule.
Kirrily Fea lives in the hut community and has been a spokesperson for residents. She said people did not want the "finite" decision to be in a deed of licence ever.
"We believe we should be able to stay here as long as it is safe to do so, and we personally don't believe they have the right to say we're 'finite' and terminate our time here," she said.
Fea said if climate change was going to affect the huts they should leave when it actually started to.
About 100 people live in the Upper Selwyn Huts. Photo: RNZ / Nate McKinnon
The council report said since the eviction notice in March, the council had received more than 200 individual queries and Local government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA) requests concerning the Upper Selwyn Huts.
Key themes of the feedback included that the community had "grave concerns" about the potential loss of their homes and the emotional and financial impact this would have. Residents also felt they were not given enough opportunity to engage on the options put before the council at the March meeting regarding their future.
At the meeting on Wednesday, councillor Shane Epiha apologised to the community.
"I want to acknowledge your hurt and the process that you've gone through because of the decisions that have been made. Today I hope that by adopting this, we begin again."
In 2019, the council determined the Upper Selwyn Hut licences would be for a finite period because of the risks and costs to people living there.
Harris' report said council decisions in relation to the hut community were originally based on this premise. It said they were made in the context of an uncertain wastewater system, but this uncertainty had now gone.
"From the investigations that were required to respond to the many questions and LGOIMA requests, it is apparent that elements of the USH community may have considered that this changed the basis of those decisions. It therefore may now be appropriate for the council to follow a fuller consultative process in relation to DOL decisions," the report said.