Mayor Dave Cull shows prudence

### ODT Online Sat, 13 Nov 2010
New meeting schedule
By David Loughrey
Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull has introduced a new structure for the council’s community boards and committees that he hopes will be more efficient and allow councillors’ time to be better used. At an extraordinary council meeting on Monday, the council will vote on the proposal, which would mean more time to do what Mr Cull described as the “important work” of working parties and steering groups.
Read more


MONDAY, 15 NOVEMBER 2010, 2.00 PM
Fullwood Room, Level 3, Dunedin Centre

Agenda – PEC – 15/11/2010 (PDF, 28.8 kb, new window)

Report – PEC – 15/11/2010 (PDF, 98.9 kb, new window)
Marine and Coastal Area Bill Submission

Report – PEC – 15/11/2010 (PDF, 125.6 kb, new window)
Reconstitution of Working Parties

Report – PEC – 15/11/2010 (PDF, 318.6 kb, new window)
Review of Earthquake Prone Buildings Policy

Southern Cycleway Feasibility Study – no report from the Transportation Planning Manager (Acting) is available for download at the DCC website (see reference in Agenda to pages 6.1 – 6.119).


MONDAY, 15 NOVEMBER 2010, 2.30 PM
(or at the conclusion of the Planning and Environment Committee,
whichever is later)
Fullwood Room, Level 3, Dunedin Centre

Agenda – Council – 15/11/2010 (PDF, 36.3 kb, new window)
Extraordinary Meeting

Report – Council – 15/11/2010 (PDF, 37.9 kb, new window)
Appointments to Outside Organisations

Report – Council – 15/11/2010 (PDF, 184.7 kb, new window)
Meeting Schedule 2011

Report – Council – 15/11/2010 (PDF, 3.8 mb, new window)
Lovelock Avenue Project


TUESDAY, 16 NOVEMBER 2010, 2.00 PM
Fullwood Room, Level 3, Dunedin Centre

Agenda – CDC – 16/11/2010 (PDF, 49.8 kb, new window)

Report – CDC – 16/11/2010 (PDF, 177.9 kb, new window)
Annual Plan Submission Update – Karitane Foreshore Reserve Toilet Facilities

Report – CDC – 16/11/2010 (PDF, 64.8 kb, new window)
Development Plan Timeline for John Wilson Ocean Drive

Report – CDC – 16/11/2010 (PDF, 108.7 kb, new window)
Reconstitution of Working Parties

Report – CDC – 16/11/2010 (PDF, 452.7 kb, new window)
Mosgiel Memorial Gardens – Proposed Easements

Report – CDC – 16/11/2010 (PDF, 55.6 kb, new window)
Annual Plan Submission Update – Skateboard Facilities at Thomas Burns Street and Mornington Park

Post by Elizabeth Kerr


Filed under People, Politics

34 responses to “Mayor Dave Cull shows prudence

  1. Phil

    A fair bit of scare-mongering in the Lovelock Avenue report by the DCC GM, in my opinion. A lot of talk about how it will be more expensive to carve a stormwater pipe through to proposed new glasshouses, and a new access route through to the existing Rhododendron Dell. And a good fright factor about the cost of replacing water mains. Are we that stupid, Mr Hall ?

    Item One: DON’T build a new glasshouse !! Problem solved and more money saved. Alternatively, build the new glasshouses on the site of the existing building as recommended in a dusty dimly lit corner of the report. With no additional costs.

    Item Two: Can people not access the Rhododendron Dell today ? I rather think that they can. So that’s not a necessary item of work. Does a walking track justify an entire new road being built ? Way to over dramatise there, guys.

    Item Three: The water pipeline needs to be replaced anyway. That’s a Water and Waste problem. Presumably under Tony Avery’s budget. Absolutely nothing to do with Graeme Hall and his group. If it needs replaced, so be it. But it would have to be the first pipeline replacement in history to require that a brand new road over the top of it.

    Back your own Planner on this one, Councillors. He knows his stuff.

  2. ro

    I’ve tried to find the vote last time round – the new council, with Fliss off the case, may still support the realignment. Especially with the weasel justifications. So I hope, Phil, you have written to each of the councillors asking them very nicely to take not just the financial arguments against realignment into account, and to look at the current justifications with the skepticism they deserve.

    • Elizabeth

      ro, in reply:

      ODT 11 May 2010 Last-ditch vote keeps project alive

      “Mayor Peter Chin used his casting vote to ensure a motion to remove $1 million from the Dunedin City Council’s budget for the project was lost.”

      “Crs Butcher, Cull, Guest, Chris Staynes, Stevenson and Wilson voted for the amendment to remove the funding for the realignment, while Crs Acklin, Brown, Hudson, Walls, Andrew Noone and Mr Chin voted against, with the Mayor’s casting vote deciding it was lost.”


      Have a look at this link, I haven’t time to complete the download to check:

      Dunedin City Council Meeting
      10 May 2010
      Report – Council – 10/05/2010 (PDF, 3.1 mb, new window)
      Supplementary Information Requested during Annual Plan Deliberations

  3. Anne

    It is odd to me that the six points under discussion re Lovelock Avenue Project is entirely in the form of advocacy for the realignment of Lovelock Avenue. There are apparently no “pluses” in retaining the road as is.

  4. Anne Elliot

    I read through most of the appendices to the current Lovelock Avenue Project agenda. It appears to me that the road realignment really cannot be considered on its own. Surely, the $5.6 million (I think) Botanic Garden Development Plan has to be considered in its entirety or the integrity of the plan is compromised.

    Of course, there are various options suggested but the realignment is always the ultimate component for the total success of the project. However, the project does not entirely depend on the realignment.

    I suggest the whole project’s desired outcomes are re-evaluated in light of total cost of the Project, the current Council debt loading, opposition to the realignment and the DCC Planner’s recommendation.

    • Elizabeth

      Richard has pointed out a further report to the Council, see the Council meeting held on 31 May 2010 – the report has two attachments, and there is the minutes record of the resolutions adopted:

      Report – Council – 31/05/2010 (PDF, 37.4 kb, new window)
      Lovelock Avenue – Review Provision for Cycling

      Report – Council – 31/05/2010 (PDF, 170.5 kb, new window)
      Lovelock Avenue – Review Provision for Cycling – Attachment 1

      Report – Council – 31/05/2010 (PDF, 193.7 kb, new window)
      Lovelock Avenue – Review Provision for Cycling – Attachment 2


      Minutes – Council – 31/05/2010 (PDF, 190.2 kb, new window)

      b) Decision Sheet Annual Plan 2010/11
      2 Botanic Garden Redevelopment/Lovelock Avenue
      The following report requested by the Annual Plan Hearings Committee was received by the Council:
      “That staff prepare a report for consideration by the Council on the practicality of allowing cycling along the existing Lovelock Avenue alignment.”

      c) Lovelock Avenue – Review Provision for Cycling
      Councillor Weatherall withdrew from the meeting at this point.

      A report from the Community and Recreation Policy Team Leader (Lisa Wheeler) noted that the Council had requested a report that outlined the practicality of allowing cycling over the existing Lovelock Avenue alignment as part of its final consideration of the draft 2010/2011 Annual Plan in respect to the Botanic Garden Redevelopment.

      The Botanic Garden was managed under the provisions of the Botanic Garden Management Plan. Policies in the plan did not permit cycling in the Botanic Garden. The legal status of the road would be revoked and be replaced by recreation reserve status under the Reserves Act. The land would be added to the adjoining recreation reserve (Town Belt – Botanic Garden) as part of the next Management Plan review.

      The Council could, in the interim, permit cycling either uphill, downhill or both over the sealed former Lovelock Avenue alignment only where clearly marked by road markings and signage.

      It was moved (Stevenson/Cull):
      “That the Lovelock Avenue realignment is removed from the Annual Plan budget.”

      Following discussion the motion was put and lost on the Mayor’s casting vote after a division had resulted in an equality of votes 7:7.

      For: Councillors Butcher, Cull, Guest, Staynes, Stevenson, Walls, Wilson
      Against: Councillors Acklin, Bezett, Brown, Collins, Hudson, Noone, The Mayor

      Following further discussion it was moved (Hudson/Bezett):
      “1 That the report be received.

      2 That pedestrian access be maintained through the closed
      section of Lovelock Avenue.

      3 That the uphill cycle option be maintained through the closed section of Lovelock Avenue and cycling options on both routes be reviewed within 12 months of the new road being operational.”

      An amendment was moved (Cull/Walls):

      “3 That the uphill and downhill cycle options be maintained through the closed section of Lovelock Avenue and cycling options on both routes be reviewed within 12 months of the new road being operational.”

      Motion lost

      Resolution 1 was put and carried.
      Resolution 2 was put and carried.
      Resolution 3 was put and carried.

      Councillor Weatherall returned to the meeting at 2.34 pm.

  5. Phil

    The reason I support the DCC planner is that, of all the parties concerned, he is the only one with no personal bias or stake in the outcome. Every other shred of documentation, from the GM report downwards, has been prepared by someone who has something to lose or gain by their opinion being supported, and must be viewed accordingly.

  6. Richard

    Well that is a rather astonishing comment, Phil.

    Whether you – or I, or anyone else ‘agrees or not’ with the Planner, his report had the same status as that of anything else placed before the Hearings Committee by an expert witness.

    It is up to the Committee as to what ‘weighting’ it is given vis-a-vis what else is put before it. They must make their decision solely on what is put to them.

    In this case, the committee comprised two independent commissioners (both well experienced) and one councillor.

  7. Phil

    Normally I’d agree, Richard (and it’s great to see you here, by the way). I got annoyed when I read the GM’s latest report to Council which is so heavily biased with little, if any, attempt to support any option that does not favour his group. And his role should be better than that. Being “the bigger dog” in this situation, he is in a privileged position, with the voice most often heard the loudest. I believe that was shown up in the original ruling. This is a totally unnecessary project, with viable alternative solutions. The planner noted that, the submitters noted that, and yet, somehow, a minority (with a vested interest in the outcome) managed to get the decision they sought. If this was any other workplace, I think that you would question the bias in the decision.

    • Elizabeth

      Council will consider cycle lanes at today’s meeting – still no report to download…must be an oversight.

      ### ODT Online Mon, 15 Nov 2010
      Cycle options to test DCC
      By David Loughrey
      The Dunedin City Council today faces a decision on yet another multimillion-dollar project, at the same time as it grapples with ways to curtail mounting spending and debt. The latest project, though, opening the Caversham railway tunnel to create a cycle link with Mosgiel, has popular support, fits in with policies on sustainability, is environmentally sound, and could add to a valuable tourism resource.
      Read more

    • Elizabeth

      ### ODT Online Mon, 15 Nov 2010
      Legal advice clouds Lovelock Ave U-turn
      Changing its mind about realigning Lovelock Ave may not be a simple matter, the Dunedin City Council has been advised. The council is meeting today to discuss whether to proceed with the realignment, which would allow for rhododendron dell expansion, infrastructure upgrades and construction of new facilities at the Dunedin Botanic Garden.
      Read more

      • Elizabeth

        Have heard the results of today’s Council meeting, I couldn’t be present due to work.

        If I’m not sketching it properly here, someone will offer corrections I’m sure:

        Cycleways: Options B and C for further investigation. Community input requested to scope Option C.

        B= Reopen the Caversham Railway Tunnel, link to upgraded cycle lanes through Green Island to Mosgiel. Cost $3.3 million.
        C= Reopen Caversham and Chain Hills railway tunnels, link to off-road cycle track on railway alignment to Mosgiel north of State Highway 1. Cost $7.7 million.

        Lovelock Avenue Realignment: The Council has decided to withdraw from the project, requiring a special consultative process to remove funding from the Annual Plan documents. This process will happen in parallel with the 2010/11 Annual Plan consultation process.

  8. ro

    This was so the right decision. I gather Paul Hudson changed sides.

    • Elizabeth

      A little more about the cycleways…

      ### Mon, 15 Nov 2010 6:01p.m.
      Old rail tunnels could be re-opened for cyclists
      By Annabelle Jackman
      Dunedin cyclists may soon find themselves biking through some of the city’s many hills, rather than over them. The council is looking at reopening an old disused rail tunnel between Caversham and Kaikorai Valley and not surprisingly, cyclists think it’s a great idea.
      Read more + Video

      • Elizabeth

        ### November 15, 2010 – 6:54pm
        Lovelock Ave realignment will not proceed
        The realignment of Lovelock Avenue will not proceed, following a vote by the Dunedin City Counicl at an extraordinary council meeting this afternoon.

  9. Stu

    Some years ago a walking track beside the River Forth was constructed in my home village of Aberfoyle in Scotland. It took some months to extend a surface and edging 2 miles. The path is still there, 20 years on. It was done by forming working gangs of local youths with supervision.

    OSH would probably have a nightmare, but there should be no reason why a similar approach should not happen here. I doubt considerably that the cost would be anywhere near $7.7 million.

    Why do we hamstring and namby-pamby ourselves with massive compliance and safety costs to over-engineer against every possible scenario?

    • Elizabeth

      Given the approx. 800 Dunedin youths without work and training, a percentage of whom have no support, have learning disabilities, get into trouble or whatever – they have an opportunity to be fed, watered and housed and receive work experience by joining the construction exercise at points that increase their capabilities through teamwork and some great mentoring. I keep thinking if we could do it on the farm, then why can’t city project managers work harder to provide opportunities for those without. We don’t need Extreme Makeover exactly. Or do we, to raise community spirit.

      • Elizabeth

        Happenstance? Here’s a brilliant idea for NEV youth…

        ### ODT Online Tue, 16 Nov 2010
        Teenagers car club plan gains support of Polytech
        A plan to set up a car club for Northeast Valley teenagers has taken a step forward, with Otago Polytechnic agreeing in principle to the club using its automotive department workshops.
        Read more

        • Elizabeth

          ### ODT Online Wed, 17 Nov 2010
          Cutting reports criticised
          By Chris Morris
          Cutting reports from some Dunedin City Council meetings has stifled councillors’ ability to question one of the largest capital projects under way in the city, a city councillor says. Mayor Dave Cull signalled his intention to streamline the flow of information coming to council committees after his inauguration last month, with some regular activity reports to be cut from committee agendas.
          Read more

        • Elizabeth

          THE MISSING REPORT for Planning and Environment Committee as noted at the post above:

          Report – PEC – 15/11/2010 (PDF, 5.3 mb, new window)
          Southern Cycleway Feasibility Study

  10. Phil

    The tunnels are surely the only viable option. Presumably the aim of the exercise is to provide a route in and out of the city for people who currently do not cycle. To promote the use of bicycles and encourage healthier living. As well as providing a safer route for cyclists.

    I don’t cycle. And I’ll tell you why. It’s very simple. Hills. I like exercising, but it’s no fun dragging youself up a hill whenever you want to go anywhere. We quite often park our car at St Clair beach and then walk to North East Valley and back. No worries about the distance, I just don’t like hills. And I’m pretty sure I’m not alone in that view.

    The one thing that stops normal people from cycling to or from the South of the city is the thumping great hill. Take that out of the equation and it’s like cycling around Christchurch.

    In my opinion it’s just throwing precious money away to even contemplate putting a cycleway up the hill to Lookout Point. More people are likely to go and watch the Highlanders than will ever use a lemon like that.

    • Elizabeth

      I was an avid cyclist when I last lived in Dunedin… I love hills, going down! Now I’m more concerned about dangerous drivers and the lack of separate cycleways for ‘mainstreet’.

      • Elizabeth

        ### ODT Online Thu, 7 Apr 2011
        Otago Harbour cycleway funding confirmed
        By Chris Morris
        Funding of $1.3 million has been confirmed by the New Zealand Transport Agency for the next stage of the Otago Harbour cycleway to Port Chalmers. It also appears likely the cycle- way could be completed as far as Port Chalmers by 2015, providing an unbroken route from the township along the harbour’s edge to Dunedin’s central city for pedestrians and cyclists.
        Read more


        ### ODT Online Thu, 7 Apr 2011
        Opinion: Elevated views spur to musing on higher plane
        By Katie Kenny
        The first time I cycled the high road along the peninsula, I cried. Admittedly, it was because I had forgotten my sunglasses and my eyes were watering uncontrollably in the freezing wind.
        Read more
        -Katie Kenny studies English at the University of Otago.

        Related Posts:
        4.2.11 Otago Peninsula cycleway
        11.2.10 Southern cycleways go to feasibility stage

        • Elizabeth

          ### ODT Online Fri, 8 Apr 2011
          Joy and scepticism at cycleway news
          By Chris Morris
          Plans to extend the Otago Harbour cycleway to Port Chalmers by 2015 have been greeted with a mixture of delight and scepticism by the Chalmers Community Board. Board chairwoman Jan Tucker yesterday welcomed confirmation NZTA funding had been approved, saying it was “great news” and most residents would be pleased.
          Read more

        • Elizabeth

          ### ODT Online Sat, 16 Apr 2011
          Losing parking, gaining cycleway
          By Eileen Goodwin
          Up to nine free car parks will be sacrificed on Anzac Ave for 650m of cycle lanes, providing the “missing link” in the Otago Harbour cycleway, Dunedin City Council roading projects engineer Evan Matheson announced yesterday. At a joint media briefing, the city council and the New Zealand Transport Agency outlined a $350,000 cycle lane project, road resealing and pavement upgrade.
          Read more

        • Elizabeth

          Design is….

          26.5.11 ODT Online: Seawalls fail to keep big waves off cycleway

        • Elizabeth

          ### ODT Online Sat, 28 May 2011
          Peninsula cycleway funding fears
          By Eileen Goodwin
          A suggestion that an already-deferred Otago Peninsula cycleway project might mss out on future funding has upset Peninsula Community Board deputy chairwoman Christine Garey.
          Read more

  11. Phil

    What I rather liked in Europe was that, in many countries, cyclists are on the footpaths, not the roads. So that takes them out of the traffic equation altogether.

    The footpaths were probably about 1 metre wider than a standard Dunedin footpath, with a centreline down the middle of it denoting the walking path and the cycling path. Cyclists used pedestrian crossings at intersections with the only difference being that cyclists had to give way to cars when crossing at intersections, while pedestrians had the right of way.

  12. James

    In some places in France, the footpaths are not even wider than the footpaths here (or at least the ones not in hill suburbs). Also saw one I quite liked the other day, where cycle lane was between cars and footpath, but they’d put a concrete edge up to keep the cars from straying into the cycle lane. Hopefully less risk from passenger than driver side doors.

    On the document, it was interesting to see that the secondary cost-benefit analysis that showed the more expensive options were substantially more useful than the cheapest. The cheap option might be much cheaper, but it also has orders of magnitude less benefit.

    • Elizabeth

      ### ODT Online Fri, 19 Nov 2010
      Inlets easy on the eye and the legs
      The unsealed roads skirting the Otago Peninsula’s tidal inlets offer wonderful opportunities for bikers of all ages and stages. Their gentle gradient and infrequent traffic make them particularly suitable for beginners.
      Read more

    • Elizabeth

      ### ODT Online Wed, 15 Dec 2010
      Cyclists say spoke put in harbourside plans
      By John Lewis
      Dunedin cyclists are growing increasingly impatient at the length of time it is taking to establish the cycle-walkway between Maia and Port Chalmers, and some believe the Government may be back-pedalling on the project.

      New Zealand Transport Agency Otago-Southland acting regional director Bruce Richards said there were no plans to scrap the project. The agency was about to begin an investigation stage, subject to an internal funding application.

      Read more

  13. Calvin Oaten

    Funny how benefits always increase exponentially with increases in costs. All DCC projects do this, at least until approval is given. The classic example is that of the Dunedin Conference Centre Development. As the cost escalated from $14m, to $18m, to $29m, to $45-$52m, so too did the economic benefits, from $3.6m, to $17m, to $27m, to – wait for it – negative ($4.5m). Don’t quite know where the slip up there came from, but it got approval nonetheless. Weird eh?

    {The project, previously known as the Dunedin Centre Redevelopment, is now referred to by Council as the Town Hall Redevelopment. -Eds}

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s