Montville questions value of decades of planning input

Comment by Doug Patterson, Secretary of the Montville History Group 

Since 2000, the Montville Village Association (MVA) has supported community calls to have a greater say in its future. 

It has conducted three extensive research projects to establish exactly what the Montville Community would like to prioritise for inclusion in future planning in Montville. 

These include the visionary 2000 Greater Montville 2020 Project; The Montville Futures Workshops - 2019 and The Montville Futures Forum – 2023-25. 

These studies have been led by highly qualified and experienced researchers and have produced quite detailed reports that identify what the community values for its future. 

Despite being conducted over 25 years with a generational population change, they have identified a number of common issues that the changing Montville community think are essential to enhance the community.

When the findings of the three future studies are compared, several priority issues were identified by all three. These include:

• Community health, social well-being and community connectivity through a variety of initiatives like ‘Welcome Packs’, Community Events and improved pathways and local transport options. 

• The recognition and support of arts and crafts to Montville’s identity as an Artisan Village through the provision of a Multipurpose Community Arts Centre. 

• Promoting community use of community assets like the Russell Family Park, The Montville Village Hall, The Montville Village Green and the Montville Village Sports and Recreation Grounds, which, by default, all fall under the auspices of the Montville Village Association.

Themes where there appeared to be a difference in priorities included:

• The importance of the natural environment to Montville future where Project 2020 recommended a range of specific actions Council could take to preserve a ‘green’ Montville and the 2025 survey calling for an Environment Information Centre to inform both residents and visitors how to enjoy and protect the environment, while the 2019 study focussed on the need to broaden land use and subdivision laws.

• Both Project 2020 and 2025 studies were also critical of poorly researched and often irrelevant commercial enterprises that failed while driving up rents.

• Both Project 2020 and 2019 studies produced detailed reports with clearly established priorities that were presented to Council, while, unfortunately, a final report for the 2025 research has not yet been presented to Council. 

Since the 2025 report, The MVA has prioritised Community Health, Community Engagement and Promoting Community Use of the Assets managed by it through a process of Community Partnerships. At the same time, it is working closely with the Montville Chamber of Commerce to encourage closer ties between the business and residential communities. 

However, it has had little success in influencing a coast-focussed Council to resource any of the assets the community has been calling for or improvements to community connectivity it has sought for the last three decades.

Council responses to these studies have been mixed. Councillors have supported them while Council staff seem to have ignored them. 

Council has created wildlife corridors linking reserves, has cleaned up a neglected wildlife reserve below Manley Drive and conducted weed elimination programs.But whether any of these initiatives are the result of MVA action is mute. 

Despite its best efforts, the MVA is still reacting to planning decisions by Council based on different regional priorities under budget constraints. 

This would suggest that the years of research led by highly qualified and experienced professionals has been a futile waste of time and democracy has been reduced to where the money and the votes are the real priority. 

Honouring historical commitments like building footpaths along Western Avenue and between Montville and Flaxton are happening at a snail’s pace while there appears to be little happening to complete the final community assets in Russell family Park. 

Unfortunately, the Council also seems to have little appetite to explore land use options that would facilitate affordable, shared residential developments like The Rangers – 30 acres of weeds still seems preferrable to 30 acres of communal living.

Council says it values community input into town planning, but if that input is ignored unless it suits Council’s existing priorities, consultation becomes political cover rather than genuine community participation.