In a Facebook post this morning, Tasman District Council proudly declared that “wine makes way for water”, revealing that 10 hectares of productive vineyard land in Appleby have been cleared for a future stormwater detention area — part of the Richmond South Stormwater Programme, one of the region’s largest planned infrastructure projects over the next two decades.
It’s presented as progress — but this is yet another example of the financial illiteracy behind our current growth model.
This land, once part of Waimea Estates, was valuable viticultural land, located near the overbridge at Three Brothers Corner — and downstream of the $198 million Waimea Dam. That dam was justified in part on the assumption that this land and others like it would continue to be irrigated and productive.
Now? It’s being stripped for stormwater management to support an urban expansion that hasn’t even been formally approved.
Is This What “Protecting Productive Land” Looks Like?
Back in July 2023, in response to my article “Are we getting Richmond South by Stealth?“, Councillors Kit Maling and Stuart Bryant published a reply titled “Richmond South, a place of community voices”, in which they accused me of spreading misinformation. They insisted that Council was valuing and protecting our productive land.
But here we are — again — watching TDC pave the way for more urban sprawl by removing productive land, clearly going against public consultation feedback.
And this isn’t an isolated decision.
Take the costly replacement of the Borck Creek bridge on Lower Queen Street — another expensive infrastructure upgrade most likely required to increase stormwater capacity for Richmond West and the speculative Richmond South expansion.
These are big-ticket projects, and they are being driven by a strategy of dispersed growth that locks us into the perpetual increase of infrastructure maintenance costs.
A Financial Model That Just Doesn’t Add Up
Let’s follow the money:
- Land purchase and vine removal — capital already spent.
- Major stormwater detention infrastructure — more capital to be spent.
- Ongoing operational and maintenance costs — locked in forever.
- Meanwhile, existing urban areas still wait for essential infrastructure upgrades.
All of this, in a region with ballooning debt and no comprehensive cost-benefit analysis made public.
And to make matters worse, this development actively undermines the financial feasibility of the Waimea Dam. The fewer irrigators there are to share the cost, the higher the burden on each — and, ultimately, on ratepayers. Productive land is being taken out of circulation while irrigators and TDC ask the Government to help cover an ever-widening dam funding shortfall.
There Might Be Ecological or Recreational Value — But At What Cost?
Detention areas can offer some ecological and recreational benefit. But in a time of financial constraint, our first priority should be infrastructure that makes our towns more efficient, not more expensive, infrastructure that supports our growers and doesn’t work against them.
That means focusing investment on well-designed intensification, not continuing to pour public money into projects that push us further apart — and deeper into debt.
This Is What Sprawl Costs
Every time we commit millions to fringe developments, we’re choosing not to invest in stormwater resilience in Richmond, water supply in Motueka, or upgrades in Takaka.
Tasman needs leadership that can see the bigger picture — that understands infrastructure as a long-term cost, not just a ribbon-cutting opportunity.
We need joined-up thinking, not scattered sprawl dressed up as progress.