A Queenstown councillor’s questioning why the resort’s ‘wider CBD’ — including residents — should pick up the majority of the tab for the now infamous ‘road to nowhere’.
Included in Queenstown council’s draft long-term plan, out for consultation till July 28, are options ‘1A’ and ‘1B’ to recoup the costs of the CBD upgrade and arterial road projects.
Both ‘‘preferred’’ options are for the wider CBD — essentially bounded by Suburb St, Hallenstein St, Industrial Pl, upper Brecon St, Thompson St and One Mile — to pay 65% of the costs of both projects, through targeted rates over the next 30 years.
Under that scenario, the ‘‘wider CBD share’’ of the $69 million street upgrade would be almost $13m, and for the arterial route it’d be almost $23m.
The alternative is to spread the load across the entire ward.
Councillor Matt Wong, who also owns CBD business iFly and is on the Queenstown Business Chamber of Commerce board, believes it’ll come as a ‘‘massive shock’’ to all CBD ratepayers, and the economic timing ‘‘is just shockingly terrible’’.
‘‘We’ve had four years of a horrible run, now we’re in, basically, a recession, tourism’s tanking, and they’re going to lump this on us for 30 years.’’
While businesses may be prepared to ‘‘take the hit’’ on the CBD upgrades, he questions why they, and residents, should shoulder the burden of the budget-blown arterial road, which is fundamentally designed as a CBD bypass.
‘‘You’ve got residents there, who I’ve heard from, who had a beautiful backyard and now it’s a retaining wall.
‘‘They’ve lost property value … and they’ve had so much stress on them it’s not funny — same with the commercial accommodation operators on that arterial route.
‘‘They’ve been in tears and now we’re going to target them with a 65% rate … for this arterial [because] they’re saying that 65% of the users are going to be CBD people.’’
He believes that’s ‘‘very disproportionate’’ given the primary users of the ‘‘future state highway’’ will likely be residents and businesses from other parts of the Basin.
The proposals lead Chamber boss Sharon Fifield to questioning what the council’s doing to support CBD businesses, noting ‘Survive to ’25’ is ‘‘certainly’’ at play.
‘‘I think in this climate, [what’s proposed] is a huge burden on CBD businesses at a time when business confidence is low, operating costs are at a record high, and they’re doing all they can to cut costs and survive.’’
She notes promised replacement CBD parking’s still not been provided, making the area less accessible.
Further, ‘‘it feels like council are quite actively discouraging people visiting the CBD with their over-zealous CCTV parking ticketing’’.
Wong reckons CBD businesses are suffering more now than they were during Covid, and some are now questioning if they can afford to operate in the CBD any more, asking ‘‘how much more’’ they can absorb.
While Fifield agrees businesses may be prepared to swallow the ‘Queenstown CBD Transport Improvement Rate’ as it relates to the street
upgrades, asking them to do the same for the arterials is ‘‘a step too far’’.
Wong says while it’s still in draft form, the council wants to hear what ratepayers want.
‘‘If we don’t hear their voices, it’s just going to slide through, which concerns the shit out of me, really.’’
