#freedomcamping not enforced at Warrington, summer 2016/17

ODT 21.6.17 (page 12)

Reply to letter to editor (snippet):

█ For more, enter the terms *warrington* and *freedom camping* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

Leave a comment

Filed under DCC, DCC Bylaws, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Education, Freedom camping, Geography, Health & Safety, Hot air, Infrastructure, Media, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Travesty

123 Vogel St, an action about council process?

123 Vogel St before external building changes [Google Street View]

At Facebook:

****

Where to start. Here we have an award winning redevelopment of a substantial old warehouse for new commercial use. Reading the Otago Daily Times today we learn a local businessman questions council process on consenting grounds – apparently, there was an ‘administrative error’ with a set(s) of drawings, and a condition of the resource consent issued for 123 Vogel St was neither correctly tracked or enforced.

Rightly, the businessman doesn’t wish to litigate the matter through the newspaper.

The building owner to his credit has made a large and worthy investment in the building structure and its upgrade for commercial occupancy, revitalising a large segment of the block running between Vogel and Cumberland streets.

Why then would an ungenerous attack by one party not closely involved in the proposed warehouse precinct, be lobbed at this one building owner in such negative and disastrous fashion.

What is at stake. More importantly, what does bringing the action do to enhance the historic built environment, commercial property development, and council processes – if ad hocism (planning rules enforced here, and not there?) is argued as ‘state of play’. Is there any good in an Environment Court challenge – is it ‘vexatious’.

Impartiality, transparency, technical proficiency and fairmindedness is the hoped-for collective quality to be seen in any council operation, particularly in regards to planning matters. How far can ‘the managers’ of the District Plan, a community owned living document, seek room to breathe —or indeed, treat every resource consent application on its individual merits ….for positive precinct and in-zone outcomes, for the avoidance of new (adverse) precedents or laxity of interpretation where the rules go swimming. Where does the line bite.

In practical terms we read that what was built (window-wise at second floor level) does not accord with what was granted by resource consent.

We see minorly dropped sills (pretty? hmm) and a small extra pane of glass added for greater daylighting and liveability, done in such a way that the original scale and depth of the windows remains readable. The intervention isn’t screaming. It is very quiet, and reasonable? Why then did someone fudge the option to be consented. Who did not enforce the agreed design solution? Were affected parties given all proper information as the application processed to decision? Does the error set a precedent for destruction of protected facades and heritage townscape? This most certainly can be argued and tested generally and legally – but probably not with 123 Vogel St hauled to centre stage, pointing up administrative error or wilful and confused intention at DCC if that could be shown…. The second generation district plan public consultation process is perhaps the best place to locate the discussion. Not here, unless there is something else forming the agenda for the current challenge.

Recently, there has been another example of ‘sill dropping’ in the precinct (TH13) at the corner of Rattray and Cumberland Sts. Most people – heritage advocates included – would view the degree of change to sill height as rather subtle in the context of the overall historic heritage ‘Save’. But these details niggle aesthetes and the conscientious.

Is the effect (of design subtleties – a broad tradition….) to cumulatively – with more than minor effect – destroy ‘old’ townscape in the Vogel Street Heritage Precinct, other heritage and townscape precincts, and more widely across the central city —the ‘sense of place’ (held by ‘original’ built fabric) that District Plan policy and rules are designed to constrain, curbing overt changes to external building appearance?

How on earth did this happen at the council? Perhaps the challenge and subsequent ruling (win or lose) will ensure that all comers receive the same level of service in the adminstration of consents and conditions, and the intent of District Plan rules is more strictly adhered to by council planners.

Everyone is entitled to their day in court. The other hope is that DCC is meeting all of Mr Barnes’ legal costs.

If that was the fight advertised on page 1 today.

****

OPTION ONE STAYED IN THE CONSENT DECISION …. Option one would have had a new sash and two panes of glass, instead of what was built.

### ODT Online Tue, 20 Jun 2017
Building owner baffled over court action
By David Loughrey
The owner of an award-winning Dunedin warehouse precinct building has been called to face the Environment Court in a case he described yesterday as “vexatious”. The court action calls on 123 Vogel St owner Chris Barnes to remove windows on the second floor and replace them with a design applicant Dunedin businessman John Evans says should have been built under the building’s resource consent. Court documents from Mr Barnes’ counsel describe the action as “utterly baffling”. Mr Barnes has questioned the intentions of Mr Evans, and the court documents ask who Mr Evans is representing, and whether he is “receiving funds from a third party”. Some people involved would not speak on the record but one claimed property interests in “the big end of town” were behind what they saw as an attack on the precinct. […] Mr Evans’ application referred to a condition in the resource consent.
Read more

Related Posts and Comments:
19.6.17 Vogel Street parking on a quiet Sunday afternoon #petroltheft
1.6.17 Oh noes! One adverse slip of the pen and it’s Over Rover #warehouseprecinct
3.2.17 MORE DCC bull dust and poor investment #Sammy’s
18.12.16 DCC set to take away CBD car parks without Economic Impact research
9.10.16 Vogel Street Party 2016 #randoms
3.10.16 Vogel Street Party 2016 #Dunedin
10.4.16 spilt milk, tears, Unnecessary
23.1.16 Zoning issues: Vogel Street activities
16.12.15 DCC: Restriction of Vehicles from Parts of Jetty Street DECLARED
18.11.15 SAVE Sammy’s (former His Majesty’s Theatre & Agricultural Hall)
24.10.15 DCC and the AWFUL 2GP ‘threat of THREATS’
7.10.15 Vogel Street Party —Sat, 10 October
17.3.15 Dunedin Heritage Re-use Awards
13.3.15 Making heritage work | Dunedin New Zealand
28.10.14 Dunedin’s “period architecture”, not so quaintly….
19.10.14 Dunedin: Randoms from inside warehouse precinct 18.10.14
15.10.14 Vogel St. Street Party | Saturday 18 Oct 3pm – 11pm [2014]
5.8.14 DCC staff-led CBD projects that impact ratepayers | consolidated council debt
22.6.14 Vogel Street Heritage Precinct (TH13)
13.7.13 Cities: Organic renewal3.3.11 Dunedin can provide vacant buildings, warehouses and offices #eqnz
8.3.13 Stupid bid for two-way highway ditched for now #DCC
31.10.12 Cull’s council takes business away from retailers
21.2.11 Dunedin Heritage: Central government should be contributing
19.2.11 Dunedin, are you ‘of a mind’ to protect Historic Heritage?
19.2.11 Reed Building, 75 Crawford Street for demolition?
7.4.10 DScene alerts commercial building owners to responsibilities
24.3.10 DScene features heritage/issues!

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

10 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, Dunedin, Economics, Education, Finance, Heritage, Heritage NZ, Media, Name, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, Structural engineering, Town planning, Urban design

Vogel Street parking on a quiet Sunday afternoon #petroltheft

A colleague and I decided to go to the ‘street’ kitchen on Sunday afternoon. We parked in front of the back doors to Sammy’s. At the kitchen we ordered tea and coffee and talked for a couple of hours. In that time someone unseen by us siphoned off about half of what remained in the petrol tank of my companion’s specially modified vehicle. Whoever did the job didn’t put the fuel flap down carefully before exit.

Naturally, some dusting to do…. was it an opportunistic one-off, or ?

We shall see. A few weird things going on lately. The driver and owner of the vehicle has only had it for about 6 days; they’re monitoring fuel consumption as well as other things in their daily life quite carefully just now.

Then too, there’s someone acting weirdly about town, who has an expired licence (not talking driver’s licence). Check this out at the Justice website. They coffee at Marbecks (Wall Street mall) despite protestations they do not.

Just putting it out there.

Small world.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

5 Comments

Filed under Business, Corruption, Crime, Democracy, Dunedin, Events, Fun, Hot air, Other, People, Perversion, Police, Public interest

Site Notice : post(s) removal

Late this afternoon, Chapman Tripp, the commercial law firm, acting on behalf of their client Stephen Richard Thompson, requested the removal of two posts from the What if? Dunedin website.

Both posts have been removed.

The website owner unreservedly apologises to Mr Thompson for publication of this material in previous weeks.

An apology with account of steps taken to remove the material will be forwarded to Mr Thompson via the solicitors.

Elizabeth Kerr
Site Owner

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

The What if? Dunedin website https://dunedinstadium.wordpress.com/ is a blog about the social and built environment of Dunedin New Zealand.

31 Comments

Filed under Aurora Energy, Electricity, Infrastructure

RNZ Morning Report: Damning indictment of Aurora Energy #Listen

Aurora Energy has not maintained the lines utility because for years the company passed over lines profits in the form of dividends to DCC and subvention payments to cover Stadium debt servicing. Central Otago power users faced silly-huge increases in their lines charges. Otago power users, generally, having already paid for upgrades and renewals through their lines charges, have regrettably lost their safe and secure supply of electricity, and must now pay twice. The people responsible for this critical state of affairs need to explain and face the consequences.

How does this stack up for the Commerce Commission, the industry regulator ?

### rnz.co.nz Mon 12 Jun 2017
Morning Report with Guyon Espiner and Susie Ferguson
8:47 AM Many electric lines companies have outdated equipment -ComCom Link
A report by the Commerce Commission says many electric lines companies have outdated equipment that should have been replaced years ago. Our reporter Eric Frykberg has been looking into it.
Audio | Download: Ogg MP3 (3′29″)

****

Commerce Commission New Zealand
Media Release 9 June 2017

The Commerce Commission has published one-page summaries of key performance measures for each of New Zealand’s 29 electricity lines companies.
The summaries are designed to promote a better understanding of each lines company’s performance by providing high-level statistics such as profitability, capital and operating expenditure, asset condition, revenue and network reliability.
Commissioner Dr Stephen Gale said that the Commission has pulled together the data to make it easily accessible for industry, Government agencies and consumers, and to enable comparison across lines companies. The statistics are sourced from more detailed public disclosures.
“Electricity companies reach every New Zealand household and business so over time we want to make it easier for consumers to understand how their own lines company is performing year-on-year. The information in the summaries is still quite technical in nature, but we expect this kind of exposure will in itself help improve lines companies’ overall performance,” Dr Gale said.
“The summaries are a high-level snapshot of the lines companies and are not intended to represent a thoroughly detailed picture of performance. However, they suggest some differences between the performances of different lines companies, such as the health of assets including poles, lines and substation equipment. In cases of apparent poor performance, we will follow up with the companies to better understand their circumstances. We will also undertake further analysis in the future.”
The performance summaries are available on the Commission’s website.

****

Performance summaries for electricity distributors
Under Part 4 of the Commerce Act these 29 electricity distributors are required to publicly disclose information to help people better understand how the sector is performing.

Click areas on the [interactive map at the ComCom website] to download the distributors’ 2016 performance summaries.

[screenshot only]

The performance summaries provide high level statistics on each lines companies’ performance, including measures such as profitability, capital and operating expenditure, asset condition, line charge revenue and network reliability.

See more details in the documents below.
← Back to Performance analysis and data for distributors

Documents
Explanatory notes for electricity distributors’ performance summaries – May 2017
(PDF, 464 KB) Published on 31 May 2017

Total electricity distribution 2016 – June 2017
(PDF, 488 KB) Published on 06 June 2017

Performance summaries for electricity distributors – May 2017
(MS Excel Spreadsheet, 2.1 MB) Published on 31 May 2017

****

[screenshot, details]

Aurora Energy 2016 One Page summary

█ View Online: http://www.comcom.govt.nz/assets/Downloads/Aurora-Energy-2016-one-page-summary.pdf

█ For more, enter the terms *aurora*, delta*, *poles*, *healey* or *dchl* in the search box at right.

Disclaimer. The site owner is not responsible for the currency or accuracy of content of contributed comments; and the inclusion of the information provided does not imply endorsement by the site owner.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

17 Comments

Filed under Aurora Energy, Business, Central Otago, Commerce Commission, Construction, DCC, DCHL, Delta, Democracy, Design, Dunedin, Economics, Education, Electricity, Finance, Geography, Health & Safety, Hot air, Infrastructure, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Perversion, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Public interest, Queenstown Lakes, Resource management, SFO, Stadiums, Structural engineering, Technology, Tourism, Town planning, Travesty, Urban design

Greater South Dunedin : Public Meeting, Monday 12 June 6.30pm

Public Meeting South Dunedin: It’s your future!
Monday 12 June 6.30pm Nations Church. Please come!

It’s almost two years since the devastating 2015 floods which hit the suburbs of Greater South Dunedin, affecting more than a thousand homes, businesses, community organisations and schools.

It is timely to hold another public meeting in order to give you a voice and to provide an opportunity for some information sharing and discussion about the priorities for our community.
We hope you will attend.

Ray Macleod, Chair
The Greater South Dunedin Action Group

Background Information:

There’s been a lot of talk about the future of Greater South Dunedin.

Some of that talk has been muddled by poor quality information collected and published around the extent and causes of the flooding on our community. Eventually the Dunedin City Council acknowledged that its lack of maintenance of the mud tanks and its lack of oversight of the performance of the Portobello Pumping Station contributed 200mm to the flooding that occurred.

Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Jan Wright, warned earlier in 2016 that South Dunedin presented the “most troubling example” of high groundwater in the country.

The DCC and the Otago Regional Council have produced reports on the flooding and the issues facing Greater South Dunedin due to rising groundwater and the impact of climate change. Their reports are largely based on predictions and modelling assumptions.

There have been reports by GNS Science and the University of Otago’s School of Surveying of potential subsidence in South Dunedin and other parts of the city. At the time, GNS cautioned against reading too much into the subsidence data, as more work was required.

The DCC has finally announced a temporary community hub will open at Cargill Enterprises on Hillside Road mid-year.
After much public outcry, the South Dunedin Work and Income and Police station re-opened their doors.

The DCC formed a stakeholder group of organisations and government agencies, some of whom have a presence in South Dunedin, which meets every month or so.

Heavy rainfall over Easter demonstrated that the City’s civil defence preparedness and response has improved, although local people are yet to be fully informed about how they can be better prepared and understand how a civil defence emergency may affect them.

The DCC’s Second Generation Plan has held hearings into the Hazard 3 (Coastal) Overlay which covers the area bounded by Forbury Rd to the west, Victoria Road to the south, the Caversham bypass motorway to the North and Portsmouth drive to the east. This includes a provision to require new residential dwellings to be “relocatable”.

The DCC also recently announced new “minimum floor” levels for new buildings in South Dunedin of 500 mm for those not affected by the 2015 floods and 400mm above the floodwaters for those affected by the 2015 floods. This will result in some new houses having to be a metre above ground level in order to get a building consent. GIVEN THE DCC CONTRIBUTED 200MM TO THE 2015 FLOOD LEVEL THIS RAISES A QUESTION REGARDING THE NEED FOR ANY MINIMUM FLOOR LEVEL REQUIREMENT OR A CASE BY CASE EVALUATION AS THE NEED ARISES.

If you live or work in the Greater South Dunedin area, all of these proposed changes and approaches affect you. Put together they provide a confusing picture of an important community which is receiving mixed messages about its future and doesn’t yet feel it has a strong voice and a plan.

In all of the discussions about the future of Greater South Dunedin, the people who call these suburbs (of South Dunedin, St Kilda, St Clair, Forbury, Caversham, Caledonian, Portsmouth Drive, parts of Musselburgh and Tainui) home or work are not yet part of the discussions.

You may have attended a public meeting after the floods which resulted in the formation of the Greater South Dunedin Action Group. We consider you to be an important part of this group as it aims to:

• Facilitating effective communication between the community and the city and regional councils
• Advocating, representing and promoting the present and future interests of the community
• Ensuring the area is well serviced by Council in terms of social and infrastructure services as a foundation for a vibrant community
• Exploring the opportunities for the area including inner city redevelopment, renewal, and support for new job opportunities & enterprise
• Developing a sustainable plan for the future of the Greater South Dunedin area and its community

[ends]

****

Greater South Dunedin Action Group

Public Meeting
6:30pm Monday 12 June 2017
Nations Church
334 King Edward Street South Dunedin

Agenda
Meeting Chair: Hon Stan Rodger

1. Welcome: Hon Stan Rodger

2. Apologies

3. Dunedin City Council & Otago Regional Council on what has been achieved over the past two years. Response to questions submitted to DCC copies are which will be circulated to the meeting. (15 Minutes)

4. Dr Simon Cox: A geoscientist’s perspective on the problem at hand.
(15 minutes)

5. Mr Geoff Thomas: Property Council of NZ. Impact on property values.
(10 minutes)

6. Questions from the floor (if wishing to ask questions please try to write these down and direct them through the Hon Stan Rodger).

7. Proposed resolutions:
a) That the meeting provide a mandate to the Greater South Dunedin Action Group to act as an advocate for the community interests.
b) That the DCC are requested to provide an initial engineering plan and response by 1 December 2017 with the intention of providing protection and support to people, homes and businesses in the Greater South Dunedin area.
c) The DCC be requested to commence the establishment of a community board to represent the interests of the Greater South Dunedin Community.

8. Any other business.

9. A wrap up and thank you from the Chair of the Greater South Dunedin Action Group. (5 minutes)

10. Final words from the Hon Stan Rodger.

█ Download: SDAG Public Meeting Agenda (DOCX, 25 KB)

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

24 Comments

Filed under Business, Climate change, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Education, Finance, Geography, Health & Safety, Housing, Infrastructure, New Zealand, People, Politics, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, South Dunedin, Structural engineering, Technology, Tourism, Town planning, Urban design

Draft bylaw and ADVERSE EFFECTS of freedom camping at Dunedin parks and reserves will be Consulted

FREEDOM CAMPING IS YOUR COUNCIL DELIBERATELY SETTING ITSELF UP TO COMPETE WITH COMMERCIAL CAMPSITE PROVIDERS

WHAT BENEFITS – THERE ARE NONE

We take it Mr Mayor does not live next door to a freedom camping site and does not lease out the council owned Santa Fe on his driveway to roofless young strangers with bad toilet and littering habits passing through the peninsula area.

Dunedin City Council – Media Release
Community’s views to be sought on freedom camping

This item was published on 09 Jun 2017

The Dunedin City Council will seek the community’s views on issues related to freedom camping, says Mayor of Dunedin Dave Cull. Council discussion on a report to its 30 May 2017 meeting which recommended public consultation to amend the current Camping Control Bylaw, was delayed pending information from a national freedom camping forum and new guidelines on self-contained vehicles. The proposed bylaw amendments were to allow for further sites to be considered for vehicles that are not self-contained. Mr Cull says that given the wide range of views expressed both formally and informally by the community and Community Board members in relation to the report, and on wider issues related to freedom camping over the last season, it was appropriate to revisit the DCC’s approach.

“Freedom camping is an extremely complex issue which draws impassioned comments from both sides of the debate. It is therefore appropriate to take this opportunity to formally engage with the public on the wider issues around freedom camping; looking at all the pros and cons, costs and benefits.”

A staff report would be presented to the 27 June Council meeting recommending a special consultative process on whether the current bylaw should be amended to restrict freedom camping to certified self-contained vehicles only, or whether it should continue to make provisions for vehicles not certified as self-contained and look at adding a range of further sites where these vehicles could be accommodated.

Mr Cull says the DCC’s current Camping Control Bylaw adopted in 2015 is a very good bylaw.

“At a national level it is regarded as a best practice bylaw by the National Responsible Camping Forum. However, overcrowding has been a major issue at the two unrestricted sites at Warrington and Ocean View, resulting in widespread concern in the community. We therefore need to understand from the community whether, firstly, they think the city should continue to make provisions for non self-contained freedom campers at all, and, if so, at what other sites around the city could these types of freedom campers be accommodated to ease the pressure at Warrington and Ocean View.”

Subject to Council approval on 27 June, staff would complete the public consultation, including hearings if required, and then report back to Council prior to the start of the 2017/18 camping season with a recommendation for further consideration. The current Bylaw will remain in force until that process is completed.

Contact DCC on 03 477 4000. DCC Link

****

### ODT Online Sat, 10 Jun 2017
Petition against freedom camping proposal
By David Loughrey
Residents living beside Rotary Park in Dunedin are the latest up in arms over a council proposal to provide three new freedom camping sites. The residents say the park could be “taken away from the locals”, and become the realm of freedom campers instead of local children. They have also raised concerns about noise from campers parking close to their homes, and potential damage to reservoirs, a pumping station, and telecommunications equipment at the park. In response to opposition to proposed camps at Rotary Park, Puddle Alley, near Invermay on the Taieri, and outside the Brighton Surf Life Saving Club, Mayor Dave Cull yesterday promised to consult the public before the council made any decisions. […] Waverley resident Sharon Weir said a meeting was held on Wednesday night with about 15 residents, and a petition to oppose the proposal had been started.
Read more

****

The only reason “Overcrowding had been a major issue at Warrington and Ocean View, resulting in widespread concern.” is because the Dunedin City Council decided to NOT manage the Warrington Domain. This to take away problems from ‘metropolitan’ areas.

DISGUSTING COUNCIL TREATMENT OF RURAL COMMUNITIES AND THEIR PUBLIC GREEN SPACE.

Warrington residents have had to deal with this:

Wrecked, the state of the domain after the camping season closed:

A Warrington resident worked out that, in the season, Dunedin Ratepayers had been subsidising the roughly 85–100+ freedom campers at the Domain each night at $10 per head.

CONSIDER A BAN ON FREEDOM CAMPING AT DUNEDIN

Related Post and Comments:
● 9.6.17 Council says “bag it” —we can help with that
● 30.5.17 The Boil Over : DCC and Freedom Camping, Reserves and Beaches bylaws
● 13.5.17 Condition of Warrington Domain screwed by DCC lack of enforcement #CampingControlBylaw23
● 1.2.17 “Fake news” from DCC boffins & Community Board re freedom camping at Warrington Domain #TheBlight

█ For more, enter the terms *warrington* and *freedom camping* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

Leave a comment

Filed under Business, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Education, Finance, Freedom camping, Geography, Health & Safety, Hot air, Infrastructure, Media, New Zealand, People, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Travesty, Urban design, What stadium