Tag Archives: 2GP

Dunedin’s second generation district plan (2GP) —notes on Natural Hazards

Received from Neil Johnstone
Wed, 3 May 2017 at 7:19 p.m.

Message: Last Thursday (27 April) I presented the remainder of my submission on Natural Hazards. Notes attached in case they might help anybody’s further efforts.

{The notes from Mr Johnstone are public domain by virtue of the consultative 2GP hearing process. -Eds}

****

2GP PRESENTATION NOTES: LANDSLIDES
Neil Johnstone

I have no property interest in any landslide hazard area (although I did previously), nor in the Water of Leith catchment, nor in South Dunedin. My main purpose in appearing at this stage is to bring to the panel’s attention that the expert (so-called) opinions received from Otago Regional Council’s (ORC) natural hazard analysts are often deficient to the detriment of the 2GP process and the city’s residents.

I am a long-term resident of Dunedin and am highly experienced in flood control issues and solutions. I am appearing here on my own behalf, therefore not strictly as an Expert Witness in this instance, although I have done so in past years both in both the High Court and the Environment Court. I also acted as lead technical advisor to the NZ Govt investigation into the massive 1999 Clutha flood. My detailed investigations have ranged from simple issues such as the Water of Leith (as Investigations Engineer at Otago Catchment Board and ORC) to the entire Clutha catchment (in varying roles). These investigations have often incorporated the construction and operation of accurate, properly verified models.

I am now semi-retired MIPENZ, but still running my own consultancy on a reduced basis. I am a highly experienced expert in flood issues, I am much less so wrt landslide identification and mitigation (but I know a nonsensical report when I read one). ORC hazard analysts responsible for the landslide buffer zones originally imposed across my former property (and many others) need to accept that their approach was seriously flawed, and far from expert. Paul Freeland has mentioned to me in a recent phone conversation that Dunedin City Council (DCC) should be able to have confidence that ORC hazard analysts are expert. I have no strong criticism of Mr Freeland, but those days have passed – in this region at least – when expertise was based on proven performance, and not on a position’s title. A property previously owned by my wife and me in Porterfield Street, Macandrew Bay was quite ridiculously misrepresented in ORC’s landslide report of September 2015. The landslide hazard zone on that property has apparently now been removed, but uncaring damage has been done to us, and no doubt to many others. The Hazard 2 zone was reportedly imposed without site inspection, or without anybody properly reviewing output or checking accuracy of references.

[Reason for submitting: Natural Hazards section of 2GP dominated (undermined) by ORC hazards staff input and DCC failure to verify/review; DCC presumption that ORC “experts” do/should have appropriate expertise. We appear to be witnessing a proliferation of Hazard Analysts in NZ Local Government with little relevant experience or skill.]

****

2GP PRESENTATION NOTES: SOUTH DUNEDIN
Neil Johnstone

The comments re South Dunedin flood hazard contained in my original written submission were written prior to DCC’s producing its inaccurate flood reports in respect of the South Dunedin flooding of early June 2015 in which high groundwater levels were held to blame. These DCC reports were eventually released in late November 2015 and April 2016 respectively. My analyses (well after my original submission) demonstrated that the prime cause of widespread flooding in South Dunedin was DCC’s failure (in order of probable significance) to utilise the bypass facility at Tahuna Wastewater Treatment Plant, to fully utilise its stormwater pumping capacity at Portobello Road, and to maintain its stormwater infrastructure (mudtanks etc). Inflow of “foreign” water from the St Clair catchment added to the depth of inundation in some areas. All these can be remedied by a diligent Council. Some have already been remedied, as positively demonstrated in the admittedly rather over-hyped rain event of the subtropical cyclone remnant around this past Easter.

ORC natural hazard analysts were probably responsible for the origin of the groundwater myth as a cause of the South Dunedin flooding in their Coastal Otago Flood Event 3 June 2015 report. Reference was made there to “elevated” ground water levels. They followed up with a contentious report (The Natural Hazards of South Dunedin, July 2016). This opens by stating that the June 2015 flooding was caused by heavy rainfall and high groundwater levels, with no mention of mudtanks, or pumping failures (plural). Such reporting cannot be treated as balanced, nor its authors credible. Elsewhere, ORC essentially conceded the groundwater myth in Rebecca Macfie’s excellent NZ Listener article entitled Flood Fiasco (June 11, 2016).

Shortly after, however, ORC produced the aforementioned South Dunedin Hazards report (backed up by an embarrassingly inaccurate video presentation) that seems to reflect a desire to preach doom rather than convey a balanced defendable scientific analysis of South Dunedin realities and solutions where needed.

One of the worst features of the report and subsequent video was the depiction of projected permanently inundated areas of South Dunedin based on ORC modelling of rising sea level effects. These depictions made front page news in the Otago Daily Times with flow-on reporting nationally. The mapped areas of inundation are actually taken from an earlier ORC report entitled The South Dunedin Coastal Aquifer and Effect of Sea Level Fluctuations (October 2012). The modelling was based on limited information, and the findings would therefore be expected to be of limited reliability. The 2012 report essentially confirms this, noting that modelling of existing conditions overestimates actual groundwater levels (by the order of half a metre in places). Figure 2 (Scenario 0) of that report shows significant permanent ponding for current conditions. None exists in reality. Almost lost (in Section 3.8) are the following (abbreviated, and amongst other) concessions:

• Uncertainty of input data
• Potential inaccuracy of model predictions
• High level of uncertainty
• Groundwater system is poorly to moderately well characterised
• Aquifer properties are poorly understood or quantified
• Each of these uncertainties could have the effect of overestimating the groundwater ponding in the current setting.

The reader is advised to read the full Section 3.8 to ensure contextual accuracy. In my view (as an experienced modeller), a study that cannot even replicate known existing relationships is imperfectly calibrated and unverified. It cannot therefore be relied on. Strictly speaking, it does not qualify as a model. The relationship between possible sea level rise and consequent groundwater impact remains highly uncertain.

Unfortunately, the 2016 ORC South Dunedin Hazards report (and video) chose to reproduce the 2012 ponding predictions using more recent data (but without any better appreciation of aquifer characteristics), but the predictions are similar. It is noted that no Scenario 0 mapping is included in the latter report, nor are the model’s inherent weaknesses described. No admission of the potential modelling inaccuracies is presented other than the following note in Section 4.1: “Further discussion of the original model parameters, model calibration and potential pitfalls is included in the ORC (2012a) report, which can be accessed on the ORC website”. I believe that all parties were entitled to know unequivocally that the modelling was unreliable and unverified.

The 2016 report also makes reference to the fact that dry-weather ground water levels at the Culling Park recorder are at or below mean sea level. This is attributed by the authors to leakage of ground water into the stormwater and wastewater sewers. If that is correct (I would reserve judgement as to whether there may be other factors), then we are witnessing just one example of how an engineered solution could be utilised to dissipate increasing depth of groundwater. Such solutions are canvassed in the BECA report commissioned by DCC several years back.

To summarise, South Dunedin’s exposure to flood (current or future) is poorly described by ORC hazard analysts. The 2GP process seems to have seen these analysts “adopted” by DCC planners as their experts. I consider that to be an inappropriate approach to the detriment of our citizens.

The proposal to require relocatable housing in South Dunedin seems premature, and based on highly questionable information. The proposal for relocatable housing in South Dunedin also rather pre-empts the currently-planned DCC study of overseas approaches to sea level rise solutions.

Requiring relocatable houses will likely simply mean that aged houses that should in time be replaced will be repaired instead. Who is going to build a new relocatable house if they have nowhere to relocate to and probably insufficient money to acquire the requisite land? The proposal to require relocatable housing is ill-considered and premature in my opinion.

With respect to ground water issues across South Dunedin, the 2016 Hazard Report presents –

The reason for my pointing out these facts is to encourage Commissioners to take a step back from the current hysteria surrounding South Dunedin. Had the 2015 flooding extent been restricted (as it should have been) to that which occurred in a slightly larger rainfall event in March 1968, the event would have already been forgotten. Seemingly, at least partly as a result of that hysteria, the proposal to require relocatable housing in South Dunedin seems premature, and based on highly questionable information. Just as ORC floodplain mapping contradicts its in-place flood protection philosophy, so does the proposal for relocatable housing in South Dunedin also rather pre-empt the currently planned DCC study of overseas approaches to sea level rise.

Requiring relocatable houses will simply mean that aged houses that should in time be replaced will be repaired instead. Who is going to build a new relocatable house if they have nowhere to relocate to and probably no money to acquire the requisite land? The proposal for relocatable housing is ill-considered and premature in my opinion.

****

2GP PRESENTATION: URBAN STREAM HAZARDS
Neil Johnstone

Urban Stream Comment re Leith and Lindsay Streams:

ORC’s mapping is said to be of residual flooding (post-flood protection works of the past 80-plus years), but actually represents what might have been envisaged many decades back in something considerably greater than the record 1929 flood with none of the very significant channel works of the 1930s, 1940s and 1960s; or even those lesser improvement of the 2010s in place. The ORC 2GP mapping includes areas that didn’t get flooded in 1923 or 1929. I agree with some potential dangers of stream blockage (especially in Lindsay Creek, and to a lesser extent at Clyde Street and Rockside Road), but one can only consider locations of feasible blockage in today’s conditions. Furthermore, accepted professional practice for flood plain mapping requires detailed hydrology, probability analyses, climate change allowance, hydrograph routing, in-channel modelling (allowing for stream capacity variability), and overland flow modelling. ORC’s flood mapping incorporates none of these fundamentals; instead, it reads as little more than a colouring-in exercise, when a professionally researched technical document is required. In short, ORC’s hazard analysts have carried out no fit-for-purpose analysis for a District Plan process.

Interestingly, the concerns expressed by ORC hazard analysts re channel blockage are entirely inconsistent with ORC’s own design philosophy and consent application evidence for the recent Flood protection scheme (so called). Design Philosophy minimises the issue.

Very briefly, the mapping is challenged for the following reasons (inter alia):

No descriptions of the effective flood protection initiatives (OHB -1920s and 1930s, DCC -1940s, OCB -1960s) are included. These works have ensured that overtopping is practically impossible in the George Street to Cumberland Street reach, the Clock Tower reach and Forth Street to Harbour reaches. Flood protection in these areas are all built to a much higher hydraulic standard than the so-called ORC scheme of the past decade, and to a far, far higher standard than existed pre-1929.

It is further noted that ORC’s own Design Philosophy Report (OPUS for ORC, 2005) for the proposed Leith/Lindsay flood protection scheme is adamant that debris traps recently (then) constructed at Malvern Street and Bethunes Gully would further mitigate any debris problems. Refer paras 7.7 and 10.6 of that document.

Ponding is mapped where water couldn’t even reach in 1929 (peak flood currently estimated at 220 cumecs, and predating flood protection measures) in the wider CBD area. Flows along George Street in the 1920s only occurred south as far as about Howe Street, then re-entered the river. Nowadays, the accelerating weir above George Street and the structural high velocity channel immediately downstream provide much more clearance than existed in 1929. [Most outflow then from the river occurred much further downstream.] In those downstream reaches, many of the bridges have been replaced or upgraded. Possible remaining points of interest are the hydraulically insignificant extension (circa 2015) of the St David Street footbridge, the historic Union Street arch footbridge, and the widened (circa 2012) Clyde Street road bridge. The flimsy St David Street bridge would not survive any hydraulic heading up so there would likely be of little flood consequence, and backing up upstream of Union St would be largely inconsequential because of the height of the Clock Tower reach banks immediately upstream. The Clyde Street bridge is acknowledged as being lower than optimum, but it has not created any issues in its half century existence. Any overtopping there could only impact on a limited area between the bridge and the railway line.

Overland lows beyond (east of) the rail line remain highly improbable because of the ongoing blocking effect of road and rail embankments. Flows as far as the railway station to the west of the rail line are also highly improbable nowadays as only the Clyde Street area could conceivably contribute.

The 1923 photograph showing ponding along Harrow Street is presented by ORC with an unfortunate caption stating that the water is sourced from the Leith. Some undoubtedly was, but the whole of the city was subject to “internal” stormwater flooding from Caversham tunnel, across South Dunedin to the CBD and beyond. To illustrate further, a NIWA April 1923 flood summary (accessible online) provides a summary of some of the information more fully described in technical reports and newspaper accounts, including:

• Portions of Caversham, South Dunedin, St Kilda, the lower portions of central and northern areas of the City and North East Valley were completely inundated.
• Water in South Dunedin was waist deep.
• The Water of Leith rose considerably and burst its banks in many places, causing extensive damage along its banks and flooding low-lying areas.

Today’s stormwater infrastructure is rather more extensive and effective (when maintained), and DCC has a continuing legal obligation to provide to maintain that service.

The levels plotted across Lindsay Creek seem highly pessimistic. Levels are shown to be of the order of 2 metres above North Road in some locations at least. I have [no] knowledge of any such levels ever having been approached. Care must be taken not to include unfloodable areas in the mapping. I don’t however discount localised channel blockage, and the channel capacity is substandard in many areas. The valley slope ensures that overland flow will achieve damaging velocities. Such velocities are noted in the NIWA summary.

Of greater concern to me, however, is that ORC’s mapping appears to have seriously underestimated the significance of potential Woodhaugh flood issues:-

The river channel through here is both steep and confined. The influences of Pine Hill Creek (immediately upstream) and Ross Creek (immediately downstream) add to turbulence and bank attack. The area was ravaged in 1923 and 1929, and there have been evacuations in some much lesser events in later decades. These areas are at considerable risk in a 50- to 100-year plus event. Hardin Street, Malvern Street had houses evacuated in the 1960s flood. High velocity, rock laden flows and mudslides can all be anticipated, and difficult to counter. Area below camping ground / Woodhaugh was overwhelmed in floods of the 1920s – a focus for flooding depth and velocity.

If the 2GP process is to include urban flood maps, these should be diligently derived, based on historical record and appropriate modelling. The mapping should reflect the real flood risks (including likelihood, velocity and depth). The decreasing flood risk from Woodhaugh (potentially high impact) through North East Valley (moderate impact) through to the main urban area south of the Leith waterway (localised and of little-to-zero impact) should be reflected in the mapping.

[ends]

2GP Hearing Topic: Natural Hazards
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/hearings-schedule/natural-hazards.html

█ For more, enter the terms *johnstone*, *flood* and *south dunedin* in the search box at right.

Related Posts and Comments
6.6.16 Listener June 11-17 2016 : Revisiting distress and mismanagement #SouthDunedinFlood
10.6.16 “Civic administration” reacts to hard hitting Listener article

[DCC Map differs from what was notified]

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

8 Comments

Filed under DCC, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Education, Geography, Health & Safety, Housing, Infrastructure, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, South Dunedin, Town planning, Urban design

No protection for Dunedin’s DARK Skies —Otago Peninsula subdivision decision #GrievouslySucks

Commissioner Colin Weatherall said the amended application was expected to have fewer adverse effects on the environment. He treated “with caution” some of the evidence received by submitters opposing the consent.
ODT: Peninsula subdivision approved (7.4.17)

Opponents of a plan to allow residential development on land designated an outstanding natural landscape area on the Otago Peninsula have labelled the decision “terrible” and “a travesty”.
ODT: Project by inlets ‘travesty’ (8.4.17)

****

Dunedin City Council
78 Cape Saunders Road, Portobello, Dunedin (LUC-2006-370881/B)
Letter of decision (PDF, 3.3 MB) 57 pages all inclusive

More about the application at this DCC webpage.

Whatiffers, consider lending support to any organised submitters (opposing the decision on points of law) who decide to take this to Environment Court.

Meanwhile At Twitter:

Related Post and Comments:
8.3.17 Ancestral landscape, natural heritage, dark skies & the district plan #respect ● [more Dunedin dark sky images from the Peninsula]

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

11 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Education, Geography, Heritage, Housing, Infrastructure, Media, Name, New Zealand, NZPI, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Perversion, Pics, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, Technology, Tourism, Town planning, Travesty, What stadium

Ancestral landscape, natural heritage, dark skies & the district plan #respect

[penguin.au.com]

Peninsula: Exploring the Otago Peninsula | Paul Sorrell
Rich in recreational opportunities and with a strong sense of culture and community, the peninsula is a place like no other. Author Paul Sorrell and photographer Graham Warman discover the sweeping landscapes, unique mix of wildlife and engaging local personalities found on this special slice of New Zealand’s southern coast…. Penguin promotion

### ODT Online Sat, 7 Sep 2013
People and place portrayed
By Helen Speirs – ODT books editor
PENINSULA: Exploring the Otago Peninsula by Paul Sorrell and Graham Warman (Penguin)
From its volcanic formation, to early Maori settlement and the first European visitors, the book traces the influences of humans on the land, examining fishing and farming practices and architectural landmarks including the Mason and Wales “White House”, Larnach Castle, Fletcher House, Otakou marae, Portobello Aquarium and Marine Studies Centre, and the Armstrong Disappearing Gun. […] The rich diversity of the “wildlife capital of New Zealand” is a highlight, with information about the area’s jewelled gecko, its multitude of birdlife – including Taiaroa Head’s northern royal albatross, New Zealand sea lions and yellow-eyed penguins. […] The book’s design and layout is simple and reader-friendly, the writing informative and accessible, and the photography stunning – the sweeping vistas of the peninsula land and seascapes, with the light playing on the water and shadows in the folds of the land are particularly evocative.
Read more

[teara.govt.nz]

Otago Peninsula by Colin McCahon [tepapa.govt.nz]

****

P A P A N U I ● I N L E T ● W A K A ● F I N D

### ODT Online Tue, 14 Oct 2014
Historic waka find excites as peninsula gives up secret
By Hamish McNeilly
The discovery of a historic waka unearthed from Papanui Inlet is a “significant find”, a local kaumatua says. A waka – believed to be a fishing waka (waka hi ika) – measuring 6.17m was excavated from the edge of the inlet over the weekend, and is now in storage. Otakou runanga kaumatua Edward Ellison said the “exciting” discovery “sheds new light [on] the historical use and occupation of the Papanui Inlet and surrounds”. It was likely the vessel dated from the Ngati Mamoe occupation of that part of the Otago Peninsula, before “Ngai Tahu came down and pushed some of them further south”.
Read more

### ODT Online Thu, 16 Oct 2014
‘I knew it was something significant’
By John Lewis
If it were not for changing tidal flows, the fishing waka unearthed from Papanui Inlet on Otago Peninsula at the weekend might never have been discovered, Department of Conservation historic technical adviser Shar Briden said. The 6.17m waka was under 1.6m of sand and was discovered by chance in August by Ms Briden. She said the channel flow had changed, with the estuary water now cutting over the top of the waka. […] The waka was excavated and refloated using whale pontoons at the weekend, and moved across the estuary at high tide to where it could be retrieved. The waka is believed to be the only one found in Otago, and has archaeologists around the country buzzing.
Read more

### ODT Online Sun, 28 Dec 2014
Waka remnants give glimpse into past
By Shawn McAvinue
A waka submerged in a locked wooden tank at the Otakou marae in Dunedin continues to reveal the past to archaeologists. Te Runanga o Otakou manager Rachel Wesley said the fishing waka, unearthed from Papanui inlet on Otago Peninsula in October, was on the marae and submerged in fresh water in a locked wooden tank. […] The waka was moved to the marae in early December […] Samples of the waka had been sent to Auckland and Dunedin to determine its age. The waka conservation work would take more than two years […] Department of Conservation historic technical adviser Shar Briden said other wooden artefacts were found before the waka was discovered and they revealed some more about it.
Read more

### ODT Online Fri, 6 Feb 2015
Waka believed from the 1500s
By Hamish McNeilly
The historic waka unearthed from Papanui Inlet was used in the 1500s, it has been revealed. Dilys John, of Auckland University’s anthropology department, has dated the worked waka and the prepared fibres from inside the hull at being between 440 and 463 years old. Otakou runanga elder Edward Ellison said the waka remained in water at the marae, and the salt would slowly be removed out of the timber over the next two years. The waka would be preserved and then possibly be put on display […] It was believed the waka was used by Waitaha – the first occupants of the site – or Ngati Mamoe […] “The mere thought that the hands that made and used the hand-woven fibres belonged to ancestors who lived at Papanui Inlet at least 20 generations ago is quite breathtaking.” Dating the waka helped with comparisons with other sites around New Zealand and confirmed “the specialness of the Papanui Inlet”.
Read more

█ Anyone who found an object should leave the item in situ and report the find to the Department of Conservation. (ODT)

****

D A R K ● S K I E S ● O T A G O ● P E N I N S U L A

### ODT Online Wed, 15 Apr 2015
Seeking dark sky city status
By Vaughan Elder
The Dunedin City Council is to investigate ways of limiting light pollution, after councillors were told Dunedin could become the world’s largest “dark sky city”. Otago Museum director Ian Griffin spoke about the issue of light pollution at yesterday’s planning and regulatory committee meeting when he discussed the museum’s planetarium development, which is to open later this year. “We see the planetarium as not just a brilliant educational tool [but also] potentially an anchor for a new strand of tourism in this city.” There was a massive potential for growth in night sky tourism in the city and the council could support that by acting to limit light pollution in areas such as Otago Peninsula, where viewing conditions were best, Dr Griffin said.
Read more

Downloads:
Evidence from Dr Ian Griffin 1.3.17
Evidence from Dr Ian Griffin Graphic supplement
Dr Ian Griffin Submitter Legal Counsel’s tabled submission 8.3.17

****

P R O B L E M ● C H I L D R E N

### ODT Online Fri, 10 Apr 2015
Quarry operator faces hearing over breach
By Chris Morris
An Otago Peninsula quarry operator found to be digging beyond his boundary faces a public hearing to determine the future shape of the operation. The Papanui Inlet quarry operation, headed by Peninsula resident Steve Clearwater, was found to be in breach of its existing consent following an inspection by council staff early last year.
Read more

### ODT Online Fri, 31 Jul 2015
May need new consent, quarry hearing told
By John Gibb
A “catch-22” legal problem involving a quarry on Otago Peninsula means all parties, including the applicant and many submitters, may have been wasting their time attending a consent hearing. […] The hearing involves a quarry, which had operated as a smaller farm quarry before a consent allowed it to expand in 2007. Steve Clearwater Contracting, headed by peninsula resident Steve Clearwater, has been accused by council staff of not complying with rules designed to restrict his quarry’s operation. […] Council officials say the quarry was found to be operating beyond its boundary early last year, by extracting rock from further up Geary’s Hill than was permitted. The applicant, Peninsula Holdings Trust, is seeking a variation on its existing consent, to legalise what has been done, but it is also seeking to expand its footprint for future operations. The application has prompted 40 submissions, including 32 from neighbours, many opposing it.
Read more

### ODT Online Sat, 1 Aug 2015
Quarry hearing adjourned
By John Gibb
Independant commissioner Andrew Henderson has adjourned a Dunedin consent hearing to consider legal issues linked to a quarry overlooking Papanui Inlet in a “treasured ancestral landscape”. Mr Henderson, of Christchurch, said yesterday he would consider legal issues over how to proceed with an application, on behalf of the quarry operator, to vary conditions in an earlier 2007 consent, involving the quarry on Otago Peninsula.
Read more

Neighbours are fighting plans to expand a quarry overlooking Papanui Inlet, after it was found to be in breach of 10 resource consent conditions. (ODT)

### ODT Online Fri, 28 Aug 2015
Fears for Otago Peninsula hill
By Chris Morris
A quarry operator accused of flouting rules on Otago Peninsula could seek to remove a hill overlooking Papanui Inlet, neighbours fear. Steve Clearwater Contracting, headed by peninsula resident Steve Clearwater, has been accused by Dunedin City Council staff of showing “contempt” for rules designed to restrict his quarry’s operation. […] “Geary’s Hill, at the head of Papanui Inlet, is an integral part of a wider wahi tupuna [ancestral landscape]” […] The Otakou runanga was concerned about the “incremental carving away at the basic elements of this ancestral landscape leading to greater and irreversible changes”.
Read more

### ODT Online Wed, 23 Sep 2015
Quarry expansion plans scuttled
By Craig Borley
Controversial expansion plans for an Otago Peninsula quarry have been declined by an independent commissioner, but quarrying will continue on the site. The Geary’s Hill quarry, overlooking Papanui Inlet, was last year found to have breached many of its 2007 resource consent conditions. It had extended further up and across Geary’s Hill than consented, while a paddock consented to receive fill to a depth of 1m had since received considerably more than that. Dunedin City Council staff concluded it was in breach of at least 10 consent conditions, while compliance with another five was questionable. Quarry operator Steve Clearwater Contracting, headed by peninsula resident Steve Clearwater, had been forced to seek a variation on its existing consent to legalise what it had done, while also seeking to expand its footprint for future operations. Neighbours feared the variation, if accepted, could eventually lead to the complete removal of the hill. But that variation was declined last week and was now subject to a 15-working-day appeal period. […] The council had accepted it had been deficient in monitoring the 2007 consent.
Read more

### ODT Online Mon, 6 Feb 2017
Subdivision bid opposed
By David Loughrey
A plan to subdivide 260ha of rural Otago Peninsula land in an outstanding natural landscape area has run into serious opposition, as a resource consent bid heads for a March hearing. Groups from Forest and Bird to Save the Otago Peninsula (Stop), and individuals from peninsula tourism and accommodation businesses, as well as astronomers and archaeologists, have lined up to oppose the project. Land owner Steven Clearwater described opposition from property owners in the area as “nimbyism”. He said the farm on which the subdivision was planned had been dotted with farmhouses a century ago, and he wanted to protect his right to build there again. The project is the work of the Peninsula Holdings Trust, made up of property owners Steven and Jacqueline Clearwater and Brian Hailes. The trust has applied to the Dunedin City Council to subdivide the rural zoned land at 78 Cape Saunders Rd. The land has a capital value of almost $1.9million.
Read more

“Allowing property owners to subdivide small parcels for residential use scattered around a large farm property is not in accordance with the expectations of either the district plan or proposed plan.” –Lianne Darby

### ODT Online Mon, 13 Feb 2017
City planner opposes subdivision
By Margot Taylor
An application to subdivide 260ha of Otago Peninsula land in an outstanding natural landscape has hit another hurdle with a planner’s report recommending the application be declined. Dunedin City Council planner Lianne Darby recommended the council decline the bid to subdivide a property at 78 Cape Saunders Rd, citing negative effects on the environment and the potential  “undesirable” precedents it could set for rural zoning if approved. […] If such a proposal  were approved, there could be a “major change” to the appearance and character of the land, she found. The subdivision, on an isthmus of land between Hoopers Inlet and Papanui Inlet and the northern slopes of Mt Charles, was also inconsistent with aspects of the district plan relating to sustainability, land fragmentation, rural productive worth, roading and landscape, the report found. She did not believe the proposal, which would create 10 new sites, on which consent was sought for residential activity on eight, was a sustainable use of the city’s physical and natural resources. The proposed sites would be between 2ha and 194ha.
Read more

Downloads:
DCC Planner’s Report Pages 1-44
DCC Planner’s Report Pages 45-88

### ODT Online Wed, 8 Mar 2017
Papanui developer reduces sites plan
By David Loughrey
The developer of a subdivision on an Otago Peninsula isthmus has halved the number of houses planned for the site, surprising opponents ready to argue against the plan. Peninsula Holdings Trust came to a resource consent hearing in Dunedin yesterday with a proposal that reduced the number of houses in the outstanding natural landscape area from eight to four. Landowner Steven Clearwater told the hearing he had recently signed a conditional sale agreement for some of the land involved to nearby farmer. Plans for a covenanted area of wetland and a public walking track were withdrawn, after the buyer of the land made it “very clear” they were not to be offered. The change led hearing commissioner Colin Weatherall to adjourn the meeting after the trust made its submissions, allowing opponents time overnight to modify theirs.
Read more

****

S U B D I V I S I O N ● A P P L I C A T I O N

Dunedin City Council
Non complying activity – 78 Cape Saunders Road – SUB-2016-58 & LUC-2016-336

Closed: 09/12/2016

Notification of Application for a Resource Consent – Under Section 93(2) of the Resource Management Act 1991.
The Dunedin City Council has received and notified the following application for Resource Consent:

Application description
Council has received an application to subdivide the above nine titles of 78 Cape Saunders Road into eleven lots and a balance parcel. The subdivision will create ten new sites of 2.0ha to 194ha. Eight of the new sites will be smaller than 15.0ha and are therefore considered to be undersized.
Land use consent is sought for new residential activity within proposed Landscape Building Platforms on Lots 1 to 2, 4 to 6, and 8 to 10. Lot 3 (38ha) has an existing quarry operation with an established dwelling. The amalgamated site of Lot 7 and 12 (194ha) will be a farming block with no dwelling, and will be subject to a covenant restricting all residential development of this site. The balance land of Part Lot 54 Papanui Maori Reserve Blk (residue CFR OT205/103) will be amalgamated with Lot 10.
The quarry operation will need to be reauthorised as it will be contained within a smaller site. It will be a discretionary (unrestricted) activity pursuant to Rule 6.5.6(v).
The subject sites are zoned Rural in the Dunedin City District Plan, and are within the Peninsula Coast Outstanding Landscape Area (Visually Recessive and Visually Prominent Areas). The general area is identified as being subject to land stability risks, and parts of the subject sites are potentially at risk to liquefaction.
Subdivision of a Rural-zoned site into lots smaller than 15.0ha is a non-complying activity pursuant to Rule 18.5.2 of the Dunedin City District Plan. The construction of buildings (dwellings) within a Landscape Building Platform is considered to be a controlled activity pursuant to Rule 14.6.1(a)(i). The proposed residential activity on those lots smaller than 15.0ha is also considered to be a non-complying activity pursuant to Rule 6.5.7(i).
The Proposed Second Generation District Plan (“the Proposed Plan”) was notified on 26 September 2016. Rules 16.7.4 (minimum site size for rural zones) and 16.9.5.5 (assessment of subdivision performance standard contraventions – minimum site size) were given immediate legal effect pursuant to section 86D of the Resource Management Act 1991 at the time of notification. Accordingly, the Proposed Plan rules also need to be considered alongside the Dunedin City District Plan rules.
The subject sites are zoned Rural – Peninsula Coast in the Proposed Second Generation Plan, and are within the Peninsula Coast Outstanding Natural Landscape. There are land stability risks identified for this site. Parts of the subject sites are shown as Hazard 2 – Land Instability, and Hazard 3 – Coastal. The coastal edges of the property are shown as Coastal Environment and Archaeological Alert Layer. There is a Wahi Tupuna Site 36 – Poatiri (Mt Charles) on-site.
Rule 16.7.4 specifies a minimum site size of 40.0ha for lots created by subdivision in the Rural – Peninsula Coast zone. The proposed subdivision is therefore a non-complying activity pursuant to Rule 16.7.4.3. The land use rules for the Rural zones are not yet in effect or operative.
The application is accompanied by Ecology, Landscape, Heritage, and Geotechnical Reports.

The submission period for this application has closed, and a hearing/decision is pending.

Consent number: Non complying activity – 78 Cape Saunders Road – SUB-2016-58 & LUC-2016-336
Name of applicant: The Peninsula Holding Trust
Location of site: 78 Cape Saunders Road, being that land held in Computer Freehold Registers 207075 (43.3047ha), 95918 (34.0552ha), 95919 (2004m2), OT15C/195 (20.5432ha), OT45/181 (5741m2), OT254/294 (18.2058ha), OT254/295 (20.8768ha), OT205/103 (102.9627ha), and OT11B/1033 (16.9917ha)
Address for service: The Peninsula Holding Trust, C/O Cubitt Consulting Ltd, 11 Bedford Street, Dunedin 9012

RELATED DOCUMENTS AT DCC WEBSITE:
● Evidence tabled at the hearing
● Submitter Pre-Hearing Evidence
● Applicant’s Pre-Hearing Evidence
● Agenda
● Application documents
● Submissions
Go to http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/council-online/notified-resource-consents/notified-applications-pending/sub-2016-58-and-luc-2016-336

Download: Applicant’s Photographs

[screenshots – click to enlarge] *see Clearwater’s quarry at Lot 3

Site plans

Applicant’s tabled site plan which includes covenants

Applicant’s tabled revised plan for Lot 4

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

10 Comments

Filed under Agriculture, Architecture, Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Housing, Infrastructure, Media, Name, New Zealand, Ngai Tahu, People, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Travesty

Presentations available —a) 4 July USA —b) 20 June SDAG

Link received.
Mon, 4 Jul 2016 at 12:29 p.m.

Sam Eagle Uploaded on Jun 27, 2008
Stars & Stripes FOREVER!
I, Sam the Eagle, present a musical salute to America.
(c) 2009 The Muppets Studio, LLC

From: [Dunedin City Council]
Sent: Monday, 4 July 2016 11:55 a.m.
To: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Response to Information Request

Dear Ms Kerr,

Official information request for CEO SPEECH SOUTH DUNEDIN

I refer to your official information request dated 27-June-2016 for “a full copy of DCC Chief Executive Sue Bidrose’s speech and overhead slides presented to the public meeting hosted by the South Dunedin Action Group on 20 June at Nations Church, King Edward St.”

The information you have requested is available on our website at:

Click to access SC2200115516062812500.pdf

If you wish to discuss this further with us, please feel free to contact the chief executive and request an appointment.

Yours sincerely

[Dunedin City Council]

Download: Sue Bidrose – South Dunedin and stormwater June 20 2016
(PDF, 1 MB)

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Election Year. This post is offered in the public interest.

4 Comments

Filed under Business, Climate change, DCC, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Finance, Geography, Health, Heritage, Housing, Infrastructure, Name, New Zealand, Ombudsman, People, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, South Dunedin, Sport, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Travesty, Urban design, What stadium

Ray Macleod, letter to editor

ODT 2.7.16 (page 30)

ODT 2.7.16 Letter to editor Macleod p30

****

Received from Lyndon Weggery
Tue, 21 June 2016 at 7:29 p.m.

Message: In the light of concerns last night [South Dunedin public meeting] about the effects of the Proposed 2GP on South Dunedin, suggest you extract the Hazard Zone portion and post it on What if?

South Dunedin Hazard Zone (PDF, 2 MB)

The following report by Anna Johnson shows that very little was done [public consultation] in 2014. In fact only 17 people turned up to the DCC workshop in South Dunedin and their Appendices show that less than 10 people commented on their draft natural hazard policy.

Preferred Options Report (1) (PDF, 2 MB)

Related Posts and Comments:
● 28.6.16 The Star and RNZ on raised flood levels #SouthDunedin
● 27.6.16 CULL commingled #AGWbullsfeatherartists
● 23.6.16 Sa pièce de résistance @ #DUD
● 21.6.16 Mayoral Statement to South Dunedin
● 20.6.16 Public Meeting: South Dunedin Action Group #tonight
18.6.16 South Dunedin stormwater pipes —getting past the desktop ICMP
● 17.6.16 So we’re going to play it this way #SouthDunedinFlood
● 16.6.16 Public Meeting: South Dunedin Action Group #AllWelcome
● 6.6.16 Listener June 11-17 2016 : Revisiting distress and mismanagement
6.5.16 South Dunedin Action Group: Notes of meeting with DCC (3 May 2016)
14.4.16 South Dunedin flood risk boosters #ClimateChangeCrap #PissOffPCE
26.2.16 Mudtanks and drains + Notice of Public Meeting #SouthDunedinFlood
● 31.12.15 2016, have mercy !@$#%^&*
10.4.15 DCC: Natural Hazards

*Bullet points indicate comments entered after the public meeting 20 June.

█ For more, enter the terms *flood*, *sea level rise*, *climate change*, *pce*, *stormwater*, *hazard*, *johnstone*, *hendry*, *south dunedin action group*, *debriefing notes* or *listener* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Election Year. This post is offered on the public interest.

19 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Climate change, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Finance, Geography, Health, Heritage, Housing, Infrastructure, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Perversion, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, South Dunedin, Structural engineering, Town planning, Transportation, Travesty, Urban design, What stadium

DCC extends 2GP further submissions period

Dunedin City Council has extended the Further Submissions period for the second generation district plan (2GP) to Thursday, 3 March 2016 at 5pm.

All members of the public are eligible to make submissions on the Summary of Decisions Requested to the proposed 2GP.

[screenshot – click to enlarge]

DCC 2GP Update 17.2.16 - Further submissions period extended to 3 March 2016

██ DCC 2GP Index Page at https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

██ Have Your Say at https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/submissions.html

██ Search for Summaries of Decisions Requested and Submissions at https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/submit/PublicSubmissionSearch.aspx

Related Posts and Comments:
● 16.2.16 DCC: 2GP further submissions [consultation software with bug?]
8.2.16 DCC 2GP further submissions [update]
4.2.16 2GP commissioner appears to tell Council outcome before hearings…
3.2.16 DCC 2GP Hearings Panel
22.12.15 DCC consultation warped | inaccessible Proposed 2GP ‘eplan’
9.12.15 Otago Regional Council hammers DCC’s proposed 2GP
19.11.15 DCC Conditions: Extensions for public submissions (2GP)
19.11.15 DCC Proposed 2GP ridiculousness: formatting + plan content
16.11.15 DCC operating deficit $1M worse than budget
11.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re extension for public submissions…
9.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re Proposed 2GP hearings panel
24.10.15 DCC and the AWFUL 2GP ‘threat of THREATS’
12.10.15 DCC Proposed 2GP (district plan) —DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY
3.10.15 DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”
3.10.15 DCC appointees to draft 2GP panel #greenasgrass #infatuation
2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
30.10.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

13 Comments

Filed under Business, Climate change, DCC, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Infrastructure, New Zealand, People, Politics, Project management, Proposed 2GP, Resource management, Town planning, Travesty, Urban design

DCC: 2GP further submissions [consultation software with bug?]

Copy of DCC internal correspondence received.
Tue, 16 Feb 2016 at 7:01 a.m.

On 12/02/16 4:53 pm, “Simon Pickford” wrote:

Good afternoon,

A quick update on the 2GP: we have found a technical issue with the reports that were produced in response to the submissions on the 2GP. As a result the reports need to be reissued and this means that we are outside the 10 day minimum statutory period of the current consultation and will have to re-notify.

We are assessing whether there will be an impact on the timing of the 2GP hearings and the remaining consultation process, but it will require us to re-advertise our consultation period. We are updating the website and making sure the necessary adverts are in place.

Regards

Simon

Simon Pickford
General Manager Services and Development
Dunedin City Council

****

I forwarded this yesterday without knowledge of Mr Pickford’s email:

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Monday, 15 February 2016 10:51 p.m.
To: Simon Pickford; Sandy Graham; Sue Bidrose
Subject: FW: Public Notice for the Summary of Decisions Requested

Dear All

I received the below DCC email on 5 February, and was prepared to make a further submission before the closing date of 26 February 2016.

Today, confusion at the DCC website with regards to further submissions – given two updates provided.

The first said, in effect, that the closing date for further submissions would be put back [because of an internal stuff up] and the new closing date was going to be publicly notified. [I didn’t make a screenshot of the message]

This was followed by another, replacing the first, which said:

Error in Summary of Decisions Requested reports
12/02/2016
The Summary of Decisions Requested reports have been temporarily withdrawn from the website due to a technical error in exporting data. In the interim please use the search function on the Search the Submissions page to view the correct Summary of Decisions Requested. Updated Summary of Decisions Requested reports will be distributed online and to libraries as soon as practically possible.

This last made no reference to public notification of an extended closing date for further submissions.

Given the date of issue was 12/02/2016 this suggests that by now all submitters should have been emailed individually about something having gone wrong with the process and to await further information from DCC.

I hope the technical error which affects all those making further submissions is properly recognised and a public notice will be issued that extends the closing date for submissions.

Otherwise I imagine the Council will leave itself open to challenge.

Please could someone clarify how the process is to presume, and accurately.

Kind regards

Elizabeth Kerr

From: Teresa Gutteridge
Sent: Friday, 5 February 2016 3:28 p.m.
To: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Public Notice for the Summary of Decisions Requested

Dear Elizabeth Kerr
Dear Submitter,
Please see the public notice for the Summary of Decisions Requested for the Proposed Second Generation Dunedin City District Plan below.
It would be appreciated if you contacted the 2GP Team at the times and through the options laid out in the public notice rather than by responding to this email.
Yours Sincerely

Anna Johnson
City Development Manager

DCC Summary of Decisions Requested 5.2.16 Public Notice

[ends]

██ DCC 2GP Index Page at https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

Related Posts and Comments:
8.2.16 DCC 2GP further submissions [update]
4.2.16 2GP commissioner appears to tell Council outcome before hearings…
3.2.16 DCC 2GP Hearings Panel
22.12.15 DCC consultation warped | inaccessible Proposed 2GP ‘eplan’
9.12.15 Otago Regional Council hammers DCC’s proposed 2GP
19.11.15 DCC Conditions: Extensions for public submissions (2GP)
19.11.15 DCC Proposed 2GP ridiculousness: formatting + plan content
16.11.15 DCC operating deficit $1M worse than budget
11.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re extension for public submissions…
9.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re Proposed 2GP hearings panel
24.10.15 DCC and the AWFUL 2GP ‘threat of THREATS’
12.10.15 DCC Proposed 2GP (district plan) —DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY
3.10.15 DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”
3.10.15 DCC appointees to draft 2GP panel #greenasgrass #infatuation
2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
30.10.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

7 Comments

Filed under Business, DCC, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Name, New Zealand, People, Politics, Project management, Proposed 2GP, Resource management, Town planning, Travesty, Urban design

Douglas Field counters DCC climate change bunkum

Received.
Mon, 8 Feb 2016 at 5:19 pm (GMT+12:00)

Douglas Field Published on Feb 7, 2016
Dr John Christy testimony US House Committee 2 Feb 2016
Comparison between local politicians’ opinions on climate and Professor John Christy’s testimony at US senate committee hearing.

The full text of Christy’s testimony to the Senate Science committee. It really reinforces the little clip above and is so clear and easy to comprehend.

[begins] I am John R. Christy, Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science, Alabama’s State Climatologist and Director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. I have served as Lead Author, Contributing Author and Reviewer of United Nations IPCC assessments, have been awarded NASA’s Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement, and in 2002 was elected a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society.
It is a privilege for me to offer my analysis of the current situation regarding (1) the temperature datasets used to study climate, (2) our basic understanding of climate change and (3) the effect that regulations, such as the Paris agreement, might have on climate. I have also attached an extract from my Senate Testimony last December in which I address (1) the popular notion that extreme climate events are increasing due to humaninduced climate change (they are not), and (2) the unfortunate direction research in this area has taken.
My research area might be best described as building datasets from scratch to advance our understanding of what the climate is doing and why. Cont/

█ Download: https://science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/HHRG-114-SY-WState-JChristy-20160202.pdf

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

8 Comments

Filed under Business, Climate change, Construction, Corruption, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Infrastructure, Inspiration, Leading edge, Media, Name, New Zealand, People, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, South Dunedin, Town planning, Travesty, Urban design

DCC 2GP further submissions [update]

Updated post
Mon, 15 Feb 2016 at 5:36 p.m. Last updated 10:59 p.m.

Two updates were issued today by DCC on the 2GP further submission process.

In the first, DCC said it had withdrawn the 2GP Summary of Decisions, and the closing date for further submissions would be put back and publicly notified.

The second update made no reference to the closing date or public notification:

DCC says: Error in Summary of Decisions Requested reports
12/02/2016
The Summary of Decisions Requested reports have been temporarily withdrawn from the website due to a technical error in exporting data. In the interim please use the search function on the Search the Submissions page to view the correct Summary of Decisions Requested. Updated Summary of Decisions Requested reports will be distributed online and to libraries as soon as practically possible.

Awaiting clarification and advice from DCC.

2GP logo 2Have your say
IGNORE THIS DATE – The Further submission period is open from Wednesday, 10 February to Friday, 26 February.

What can a further submission cover?
A further submission can only be made in support or opposition to a point raised in an original submission on the 2GP.

Who can make a further submission?
The RMA limits who can make further submissions to:
● any person representing a relevant aspect of the public interest
● any person that has an interest in the proposed plan greater than the interest that the general public has
● the local authority (the Dunedin City Council).

It provides an opportunity for people who may be affected by an original submission to have their views considered. You do not have to have made an original submission to participate. If you have made an original submission you do not need to repeat submission points made in that submission as they will already be considered.

Summary of decisions requested
The Summaries of Decisions Requested are a concise summary of the decisions requested in the submissions on the 2GP which closed on 24 November 2015. It is not the full or exact content of submissions. It is prepared to enable the further submission process which is set out in Schedule 1 of the RMA.

█ The Summary of Decisions Requested and copies of all submissions will be available from midday Tuesday, 9 February.

Hard copies of the Summary of Decisions Requested reports will also be available for inspection at:
● 2GP drop-in centre, 11 George Street, Dunedin, 10am to 3pm, Monday to Friday
● public libraries and/or service centres at Dunedin, Middlemarch, Mosgiel, Port Chalmers, Blueskin Bay (Waitati) and Waikouaiti.

Submissions Map
The submissions map indicates the spatial location of submissions seeking a change to the proposed zoning (management zones only not overlay zones), new heritage precincts, or changes to scheduled items. It reflects the information in the submission point address field of the Summary of Decisions Requested reports. Through pop-ups, the map provides links to relevant submissions.

DISCLAIMER: This map has been prepared as an aid for people wanting to understand the scope of submissions related to an area. The accuracy and completeness of this information is not guaranteed and people should read original submissions. In some cases, the information contained in submissions was not detailed enough to accurately map the scope of the submission. In these cases, the mapping has been either omitted or approximated where possible.

How do I make a further submission?

Online submissions
The RMA requires further submissions to be in a prescribed form (Form 6). An easy way to make a submission is using the 2GP on-line submission system, which ensures submissions are in the prescribed form and allows you to link to specific submission points

Other ways to make a submission
Hard copies of the submission form and submission guidelines can be downloaded below or paper copies can be picked up at the 2GP drop-in centre or from the DCC Customer Services Agency located on the ground floor of the Civic Centre at 50 The Octagon, Dunedin.

For written submissions
Post to: Further submission on Proposed Second Generation Dunedin City District Plan, Dunedin City Council, PO Box 5045, Dunedin 9058

Deliver to: Customer Services Agency, Dunedin City Council, Ground Floor, 50 The Octagon, Dunedin

Email to: districtplan @ dcc.govt.nz

Serving a copy of further submissions on submitters
IMPORTANT: Any person making a further submission must serve a copy of that further submission on the person who made the original submission no later than five working days after lodging the further submission with the DCC. A copy of the addresses for service for all submitters is provided in the Submitter Details Report.

DCC 2GP Have Your Say Page
DCC 2GP Index Page

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

█ For more at What if? Dunedin, enter the term *2gp* in the search box at right.

10 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Climate change, Construction, Cycle network, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Infrastructure, New Zealand, NZTA, People, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Resource management, Site, South Dunedin, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Urban design

DCC consultation warped | inaccessible Proposed 2GP ‘eplan’

ODT Online 9.12.15 [screenshot] Link

Hilary Calvert - Sharing fair and expert information among all (ODT 9.12.15)

ODT 21.12.15 (page 8)

ODT 21.12.15 Letter to editor Pope p8 (1)

RECENT CORRESPONDENCE

From: Simon Pickford
Sent: Friday, 18 December 2015 5:40 p.m.
To: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: RE: Proposed 2GP – closing date for submissions

Hello Elizabeth,

Sue has asked me to email you with regard to the eplan format concerns you raise below. Apologies for the delay – we thought a response had already been sent to you have realised now this is not the case.

The eplan is effectively no different from a plan produced in word processing software (like Microsoft Word which was used for the current District Plan). It has the same ability to be printed and annotated by users.. While we do not offer print out of the whole plan, we are providing hard copies of sections on request.

The strength of the eplan format is making it easier to allow cross linking between plan provisions to locational information (e.g. search plan from property address), which will be added after the plan is finalised. It does not diminish its usability in print form.

The software used to produce our 2GP in the same system that has been used for the Auckland and Christchurch plans and is being used other councils who are currently working on their 2GPs. It is the new ‘norm’ for plan writing in New Zealand.

We have reviewed other District Plans and have found the 2GP is not longer than average. For example, Queenstown’s Residential Section has 68 pages, Christchurch’s has 180 and Dunedin’s has 87.

Much of the increased length from the current district plan is due to better cross-referencing between sections. The plan easier to use because it reduces the need to search through the whole plan to see what is relevant to a particular proposal in a particular location (which has involved more repetition of content rather than new content). This means that most people will need to look at fewer parts of the plan.

We have received positive feedback from planning professionals who work across several Council’s plans. The feedback is that the 2GP is well structured and easy to use. However, we accept it does take some time to get used to.

In additional to providing detailed help information on the website (see guide to the structure of the plan and how to videos) we provide one –on-one assistance to people to help them understand the new plan and most people seem very pleased with the level of help we are offering. We have helped over 1100 people in this way (often with multiple contacts). We invite you to come and see us for more help if you still require it.

Regards

Simon

[Simon Pickford, DCC General Manager Services and Development]

———————————————

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Thursday, 19 November 2015 5:12 p.m.
To: Vivienne Harvey; Simon Pickford; Sue Bidrose
Cc: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: FW: Proposed 2GP – closing date for submissions

Dear Vivienne, Simon and Sue

Thanks for reply in advance of the public notice at the DCC website today, also appearing Saturday in the local newspaper.

For your information I’m not representing anyone other than myself in addressing letters to the Chief Executive on matters to do with the Proposed 2GP. In my letter (below) I reference need for extension as would apply to “the community” (meaning interested public) as a whole.

The RMA does not mention an ePlan.

The DCC ePLan (1600 pages) launched at us, as we’re well aware, is a horror to deal with for many.

In this regard the RMA requirement of 40 working days scarcely seems fair or practical. Months ahead of ‘back and forth’ through appeals with some parties will, I suggest, place ‘workability’ in sharper relief for the city council. I look forward to what unfolds.

I appreciate your clarification provided for submitters around extensions. This is proactive.

Sincere regards

Elizabeth Kerr

———————————————

From: Vivienne Harvey
Sent: Thursday, 19 November 2015 3:32 p.m.
To: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: RE: Proposed 2GP – closing date for submissions

Dear Elizabeth

Please find attached a response to your email to the CEO.

Regards
Vivienne

Vivienne Harvey
PA to the Chief Executive Officer
Dunedin City Council

———————————————

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: 11 November 2015 5:41 p.m.
To: Sue Bidrose
Cc: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Proposed 2GP – closing date for submissions

Attention:

Sue Bidrose
Chief Executive, Dunedin City Council

Dear Sue

RE Extension for submissions on Proposed 2GP

I note the closing date for public submissions has been set as Tuesday, 24 November 2015.

Due to the length (1600 pages) and comprehensive nature of the planning document (by ePlan), in that it no longer resembles the current Dunedin City District Plan at all, I request that the closing date for public submissions is extended into the 2016 new year.

This will allow the community to consult itself, the city council, and experts where need, more fairly and comprehensively than has been possible in the time since notification on Saturday, 26 September 2015.

It’s of collective mutual interest to enhance and facilitate the public’s understanding of the document and its likely effect(s) on physical, cultural and political determinants for sustainable management of our environment and resources. This means allowing more time for initial submissions.

Sincere regards

Elizabeth Kerr

█ For more enter the term *2gp* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

2 Comments

Filed under Business, Climate change, Construction, Cycle network, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Infrastructure, LGNZ, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Resource management, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Urban design, What stadium

Otago Regional Council hammers DCC’s proposed 2GP

Congratulations Dunedin! You made over ONE THOUSAND submissions on Dunedin City Council’s proposed second generation district plan (2GP).

Amongst these is a cracker from ORC, can’t wait to read.

### dunedintv.co.nz Wed, 9 Dec 2015
Council discord over district plan
The Otago Regional Council is taking aim at its district counterpart, by opposing a draft plan for the wider city area. The ORC has prepared two submissions on the Dunedin City Council’s second generation district plan. As a landowner, the ORC says the plan doesn’t represent sound resource management practice. It says the plan won’t promote efficient use or development of local resources, and is contrary to parts of the relevant government legislation. The ORC’s submission as an authority includes almost 50 separate requests for changes. But it also highlights the ORC’s support for other sections of the plan.
The DCC has received over 1000 submissions on its draft plan.
Ch39 Link

39 Dunedin Television Published on Dec 8, 2015
Council discord over district plan

****

But flawed consultation can be worse than no consultation at all.

### ODT Online Wed, 9 Dec 2015
Sharing fair and expert information among all
By Hilary Calvert
OPINION Consultation has grown like topsy in New Zealand for the best of reasons – a choice of governance once every three years will clearly not on its own provide democracy. […] If we (the council members) get it wrong, consultation can leave people disenchanted and disenfranchised, with a sense of outrage that their time was wasted involving themselves in a process which did not provide fair and accurate feedback.
Read more

To The Councillor

Y E S ● I’ M ● A N G R Y

You’re too fricking late – where were you Cr Hilary Calvert when the 2GP was being formulated, formatted and its timeline set, ie well before 24 November this year ??? Where were your ideas and protests then ???
NOT TO BE SEEN. Other than fences….
As for your behaviour lately – in “consultation” – when serving as a commissioner for the Jetty Street restricted access application…. you remain unrepentant. GOD SAVE US.

Nup, don’t do the johnny-come-lately ACT with us.
Con? Look in the mirror why not. And sharpen up at council meetings, learn to speak con-cise plain English when putting a question. Raise your game, but not after everyone’s gone home and you have your pen out to the editor. Talent means timing.

2GP Dave green monsters

Related Posts and Comments:
19.11.15 DCC Conditions: Extensions for public submissions (2GP)
● 19.11.15 DCC Proposed 2GP ridiculousness: formatting + plan content
● 16.11.15 DCC operating deficit $1M worse than budget
● 11.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re extension for public submissions…
● 9.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re Proposed 2GP hearings panel
24.10.15 DCC and the AWFUL 2GP ‘threat of THREATS’
12.10.15 DCC Proposed 2GP (district plan) —DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY
3.10.15 DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”
3.10.15 DCC appointees to draft 2GP panel #greenasgrass #infatuation
● 2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
30.10.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
● 28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: 2GP Dave green monsters – whatifdunedin

1 Comment

Filed under Business, DCC, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, ORC, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Resource management, Site, Town planning, Transportation, Urban design

DCC Conditions: Extensions for public submissions (2GP)

Received.
Thu, 19 Nov 2015 at 3:32 p.m.

Letter from Simon Pickford 19.11.15 - 2GP extensions

DCC Public Notice 2GP extensions 19.11.15

Downloads:
Letter from Simon Pickford 19.11.15
2GP Close of Submissions ODT CL 18 x 4

████ DCC Public Notice
Submissions on the Second Generation Dunedin City District Plan (2GP) close at 5pm, Tuesday 24 November.

REPLY

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Thursday, 19 November 2015 5:13 p.m.
To: Vivienne Harvey; Simon Pickford; Sue Bidrose
Cc: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Proposed 2GP – closing date for submissions

Dear Vivienne, Simon and Sue

Thanks for reply in advance of the public notice at the DCC website today, also appearing Saturday in the local newspaper.

For your information I’m not representing anyone other than myself in addressing letters to the Chief Executive on matters to do with the Proposed 2GP. In my letter (below) I reference need for extension as would apply to “the community” (meaning interested public) as a whole.

The RMA does not mention an ePlan.

The DCC ePLan (1600 pages) launched at us, as we’re well aware, is a horror to deal with for many.

In this regard the RMA requirement of 40 working days scarcely seems fair or practical. Months ahead of ‘back and forth’ through appeals with some parties will, I suggest, place ‘workability’ in sharper relief for the city council. I look forward to what unfolds.

I appreciate your clarification provided for submitters around extensions. This is proactive.

Sincere regards

Elizabeth Kerr

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Wednesday, 11 November 2015 5:41 p.m.
To: Sue Bidrose
Cc: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Proposed 2GP – closing date for submissions

Attention:
Sue Bidrose
Chief Executive, Dunedin City Council

Dear Sue

RE Extension for submissions on Proposed 2GP

I note the closing date for public submissions has been set as Tuesday, 24 November 2015.

Due to the length (1600 pages) and comprehensive nature of the planning document (by ePlan), in that it no longer resembles the current Dunedin City District Plan at all, I request that the closing date for public submissions is extended into the 2016 new year.

This will allow the community to consult itself, the city council, and experts where need, more fairly and comprehensively than has been possible in the time since notification on Saturday, 26 September 2015.

It’s of collective mutual interest to enhance and facilitate the public’s understanding of the document and its likely effect(s) on physical, cultural and political determinants for sustainable management of our environment and resources. This means allowing more time for initial submissions.

Sincere regards

Elizabeth Kerr

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

2GP extension (1)

█ Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

Related Posts and Comments:
● 19.11.15 DCC Proposed 2GP ridiculousness: formatting + plan content
16.11.15 DCC operating deficit $1M worse than budget
● 11.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re extension for public submissions…
● 9.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re Proposed 2GP hearings panel
24.10.15 DCC and the AWFUL 2GP ‘threat of THREATS’
12.10.15 DCC Proposed 2GP (district plan) —DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY
3.10.15 DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”
3.10.15 DCC appointees to draft 2GP panel #greenasgrass #infatuation
● 2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
30.10.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
● 28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

11 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Construction, Cycle network, DCC, Democracy, Design, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Hotel, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Pools, Project management, Property, Site, Structural engineering, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, University of Otago, Urban design, What stadium

DCC Proposed 2GP ridiculousness: formatting + plan content

An OVERWHELMING observation….

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Thursday, 19 November 2015 4:14 a.m.
To: Sue Bidrose
Cc: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Proposed 2GP – difficulty with ePlan document tracking

Attention:
Sue Bidrose
Chief Executive, Dunedin City Council

Dear Sue

RE Proposed 2GP – difficulty with ePlan document tracking

In thinking through the public’s approach to carrying through on their submissions, further submissions, and within mediation and hearing processes, or indeed formal appeal processes via Environment Court – how will individual and group submitters and their experts contend with ePlan document tracking in these settings.

● Not all members of the public have access to laptop computers or the ability to use them efficiently in a formal meeting or hearing setting;
● In any case, participants will be disadvantaged if there are inadequate numbers of chairs and tables provided to facilitate safe (ergonomic) use of laptop computers – this also applies for those actively listening from the public gallery;
● Due to the unwieldy size of the (draft) ePlan at 1600 pages it is highly unlikely individuals will want to request print editions in order to ‘keep up’ with business in whichever forum.

This perceived lack of accessibility and usability of the 1600-page ePlan in the delivery of written and oral submissions as well as the giving of expert evidence raises serious questions around fairness and justness – ultimately, a concern to all Dunedin ratepayers and residents, and the city council.

● I have absolutely no idea how submitters, experts, news media, council staff or commissioners will technically follow specific mention of ePlan sections and references, or achieve cross referencing swiftly and successfully, be it with or without laptops or printed copy.

Here looms a logistical and bureaucratic nightmare for all.

To be frank, I see no ready solution.

However, I invite council explanation if through media statement(s) or council website guides that might practically assist or calm the resolve of the interested public wanting to critically engage with the proposed second generation district plan in the coming months.

I look forward to your reply by email.

Sincere regards

Elizabeth Kerr

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

█ The public has until November 24 to make submissions.

2GP banner

█ Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

Watch your property values drop….
ODT 18.11.15 (page 14)

ODT 18.11.15 Letter to editor Vandervis p14 (1)

As for the notional concept of growth….
ODT 17.11.15 (page 6)

ODT 17.11.15 Letter to editor Oaten p6

Further to Calvin Oaten’s mention of school rolls dropping….

Roll figures for 2015 show the city’s secondary schools have capacity for 9252 pupils, but 1513 spaces are not used in Dunedin – the equivalent of two secondary school rolls. ODT 18.11.15

Related posts and Comments:

● 16.11.15 DCC operating deficit $1M worse than budget
● 11.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re extension for public submissions…
● 9.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re Proposed 2GP hearings panel
24.10.15 DCC and the AWFUL 2GP ‘threat of THREATS’
12.10.15 DCC Proposed 2GP (district plan) —DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY
3.10.15 DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”
3.10.15 DCC appointees to draft 2GP panel #greenasgrass #infatuation
● 2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
30.10.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
● 28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

27 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Construction, Cycle network, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, LGNZ, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, University of Otago, Urban design, What stadium

SAVE Sammy’s (former His Majesty’s Theatre & Agricultural Hall)

Agricultural Hall. Burton Brothers studio. Te Papa Archives [C.012324]

His Majesty's Theatre, Dunedin [render via realestate.co.nz]His Majesty’s Theatre, Dunedin [render via realestate.co.nz]

Sammy's on Crawford [dunedinmusic.com]Sammy’s portico to Crawford Street [dunedinmusic.com]

REAL ESTATE BLURB | Built 1896 Agricultural Hall 1902 Renamed His Majesty’s Theatre 1983 Sammy’s Cabaret & Restaurant
Time for someone else to take over the reins – with fresh enthusiasm and ideas for this iconic Dunedin property. Located in the heart of Dunedin’s rapidly developing ‘Warehouse Precinct’ it lends itself to a multitude of uses. Building 1500m with frontages to both Crawford & Vogel Streets. http://www.remax.co.nz/10395003

█ SOUL DESTROYING LACK OF DISTRICT PLAN SCHEDULING
‘An offer pending consent for Sammy’s would more likely mean plans to considerably alter or demolish the building.’ –Glen Hazelton, DCC Policy Planner (Heritage)

█ SHINING LIGHTS
“It’s already protected under our Act, that’s the main thing.” –Matthew Schmidt, HNZ Otago Southland regional archaeologist

### ODT Online Wed, 18 Nov 2015
Uncertain future for venue
By Craig Borley
Demolition could be an option for Sammy’s, one of Dunedin’s most loved live music venues and one of the warehouse precinct’s largest buildings. On the market for “a few months” and with a list price of $240,000, the 1896 building had attracted attention from several potential buyers, owner Sam Chin said yesterday. Interest from one of those potential buyers was contingent on gaining a resource consent, Mr Chin said. He could not name the potential buyer and did not know what that resource consent was for.
Read more

BIG QUEST TO FIND THE RIGHT NEW OWNER – MEANWHILE, CITIZEN DUTY TO PROTECT THE BUILDING AS AN ICONIC PRESENCE IN VOGEL STREET HERITAGE PRECINCT AND WAREHOUSE PRECINCT

Sammy's Dunedin, NZ 7.9.12 [Sola Rosa via staticflickr.com]Sammy’s Dunedin NZ 7.9.12 [Sola Rosa via staticflickr.com]

Sammy's [alizarinlizard.blogspot.co.nz]Sammy’s (2011) [alizarinlizard.blogspot.co.nz]

“….we got back to Dunedin by lunchtime and unloaded the P.A gear into Sammys then went home an slept the rest of the day till we had to come back an sound check..
but yeah, played later on that night and had a blast. Sammys looks absolutely amazing now days if you havent seen it already.”
–Alizarin Lizard, Dunedin psych-pop quartet

But what looked good at night under lights in 2011 was profoundly “trouble” due to lack of diligent building repair and maintenance, or any appreciation for fire safety…. and more words from Mr Chin….

[via comments at What if? Dunedin]

Elizabeth
June 1, 2011 at 2:58 am
### D Scene 1-6-11
Future of Sammy’s uncertain after eviction (page 3)
The future of notable Dunedin music venue Sammy’s is uncertain, after the eviction earlier this week of the operators of the Crawford St business. Building owner Sam Chin told D Scene yesterday that he had moved into the venue on Monday night and changed the locks. “The venue is closed for now and we’re just cleaning things up.”
{continues} #bookmark [search required]

Elizabeth
June 2, 2011 at 8:40 pm
Tweet:
(2 June, 8:32pm) @DunedinTV Sammy’s closed down due to being in a complete state of disrepair http://tinyurl.com/43dprnf #channel9 #dunedin #tv #nz

Elizabeth
June 23, 2011 at 2:33 pm
### ODT Online Thu, 23 Jun 2011
Nightclub owner angry over damage at venue
By Nigel Benson
Sammy’s owner Sam Chin has experienced some wild nights at the nightclub over the years. But he was not prepared for the sight which greeted him when he changed the locks on the building three weeks ago, after not receiving rent from the lessee since November. […] The venue opened in 1896 as the Agricultural Hall, before being renamed His Majesty’s Theatre, and has a long history as a hall, theatre and live music venue. Mr Chin said he wanted to maintain that tradition and reopen it for concerts next month.
Read more

Elizabeth
August 7, 2011 at 11:36 am
### ODT Online Sun, 7 Aug 2011
Sammy’s set to reopen this month
By Nigel Benson
Sammy’s will reopen this month after being closed in June for refurbishment. Owner Sam Chin shut the venue after the building fell into disrepair. He said yesterday demand had led to him taking bookings again. […] “We had a lot of inquiries about when we were going to reopen. It’s such a good space with plenty of room for 500-plus people. We’ve already got three or four university graduation dinners booked in over the next couple of weeks.”
Read more

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

34 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Concerts, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, Dunedin, Economics, Heritage, Heritage NZ, Inspiration, Media, Name, New Zealand, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Tourism, Town planning, Urban design, What stadium

Letter to DCC chief executive re extension for public submissions (2GP)

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Wednesday, 11 November 2015 5:41 p.m.
To: Sue Bidrose
Cc: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Proposed 2GP – closing date for submissions

Attention:
Sue Bidrose
Chief Executive, Dunedin City Council

Dear Sue

RE Extension for submissions on Proposed 2GP

I note the closing date for public submissions has been set as Tuesday, 24 November 2015.

Due to the length (1600 pages) and comprehensive nature of the planning document (by ePlan), in that it no longer resembles the current Dunedin City District Plan at all, I request that the closing date for public submissions is extended into the 2016 new year.

This will allow the community to consult itself, the city council, and experts where need, more fairly and comprehensively than has been possible in the time since notification on Saturday, 26 September 2015.

It’s of collective mutual interest to enhance and facilitate the public’s understanding of the document and its likely effect(s) on physical, cultural and political determinants for sustainable management of our environment and resources. This means allowing more time for initial submissions.

Sincere regards

Elizabeth Kerr

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

█ The public has until November 24 to make submissions.

2GP banner

█ Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

Related Posts and Comments:
● 9.11.15 Letter to DCC chief executive re Proposed 2GP hearings panel
24.10.15 DCC and the AWFUL 2GP ‘threat of THREATS’
12.10.15 DCC Proposed 2GP (district plan) —DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY
3.10.15 DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”
3.10.15 DCC appointees to draft 2GP panel #greenasgrass #infatuation
● 2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
30.10.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

19 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Urban design, What stadium

Letter to DCC chief executive re Proposed 2GP hearings panel

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Thursday, 5 November 2015 4:58 p.m.
To: Sue Bidrose
Subject: Proposed 2GP – hearings panel appointments

Attention:
Sue Bidrose
Chief Executive, Dunedin City Council

Dear Sue

RE Independence of the 2GP Hearings Panel

It came to my attention on Friday, 2 October 2015, via the ODT article, Green perceptions spark row
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/357922/green-perceptions-spark-row

that the makeup of the panel selected to hear public submissions on the proposed second generation district plan (2GP) lacks independence due to both the number and selection of city councillors “with appropriate Resource Management Act training” – namely, Kate Wilson, David Benson-Pope, Jinty MacTavish and Aaron Hawkins;

and further,

the lack of independence still pertains given the ‘internal’ appointments will be accompanied by selection and appointment of up to three Only external independent commissioners – see DCC’s advertisement at ODT 3.10.15 (page 5): 2GP Hearings Panel – Expressions of Interest Sought. The notice is no longer available online at the DCC website; I attach a photograph.

20151003_184533

39 Dunedin Television also featured an item (12.10.15), Outsiders sought for DCC’s district plan hearings panel
http://www.dunedintv.co.nz/news/outsiders-sought-dccs-district-plan-hearings-panel

Given these numbers, there is potential for the ‘councillor-commissioners’ to vote in a bloc should they choose.
voting bloc

I strongly believe public submitters on the Proposed 2GP should be able to trust in a just and fair process; a process without bias and political taint.

I don’t believe this is possible under current arrangements and selections for the hearings panel.

Furthermore,

One or more of the ‘councillor-commissioners’ – or indeed the external commissioners – may have previously ruled on resource consent applications, notices of requirement (for a designation), proposed plan changes and the like within the greater Dunedin area, which may have significant bearing on how they receive, decide and recommend on the content of public submissions in regards to the Proposed 2GP and the resulting plan document, whether or not sections are formally appealed to the Court(s).

It is simply not enough for Mayor Dave Cull to deny bias (or perception of bias) in panel choices, as he has done through the media, see ODT (3.10.15): Cull denies bias in panel choices
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/358051/cull-denies-bias-panel-choices

In my opinion, for a fair and just process all those appointed to the 2GP hearings panel should not be city councillors; they should all be experienced independent commissioners sourced from outside Dunedin City Council’s geographic boundary area.

Sincere regards

Elizabeth Kerr

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

█ The public has until November 24 to make submissions.

2GP banner

█ Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

Related Posts and Comments:
24.10.15 DCC and the AWFUL 2GP ‘threat of THREATS’
12.10.15 DCC Proposed 2GP (district plan) —DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY
3.10.15 DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”
3.10.15 DCC appointees to draft 2GP panel #greenasgrass #infatuation
● 2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
30.10.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

16 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, Site, Town planning, Urban design, What stadium

DCC: South Dunedin flood | higher learning for chief executive

ODT health reporter Eileen Goodwin looks at the welfare of those adversely affected and speaks to health authorities about what they are doing to help.

### ODT Online Tue, 27 Oct 2015
It’s been ‘a constant battle’ since flood
By Eileen Goodwin
Months of stress and insurance hassles are taking a heavy toll on some people long after most have moved on from the June flood. […] The flood response lacked co-ordination, and [Aurora Health Centre GP Dr Jill McIlraith] says the likes of the health board and city council should have considered appointing a flood ombudsman or similar position as a central clearance point for three to six months.
Read more

****

Dr Bidrose said she had also faced a “pretty rough” first year in the role, grappling with the fallout from the Citifleet fraud.

### ODT Online Tue, 27 Oct 2015
Council boss’ UK trips supported
By Chris Morris
The Dunedin City Council has spent $36,000 sending chief executive Dr Sue Bidrose to leadership training courses at England’s prestigious Oxford University. Details of the four trips, which were supported by Mayor Dave Cull, were confirmed by Dr Bidrose last week, in response to Otago Daily Times questions.
Read more

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

2 Comments

Filed under Business, Citifleet, CST, Cycle network, DCC, Delta, Democracy, DIA, Dunedin, DVL, DVML, Economics, Enterprise Dunedin, Hot air, LGNZ, Media, Name, New Zealand, NZTA, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Police, Politics, Pools, Project management, Property, SFO, Site, Stadiums, Town planning, Transportation, Urban design

DCC: Full Council meeting Tue, 27 Oct 2015 at 1pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Municipal Chambers, The Octagon

Agenda – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 51.3 KB)

Public Forum
a) Legal High Retail Location Policy – Carl Lapham, Cupid Shop
b) Work Opportunities within the Council – Anneloes de Groot
c) Oil and Gas Block Offers – Siana Fitzjohn, Annabeth Cohen, Rosemary Penwarden – Oil Free Otago
d) Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement and Council’s Previous Resolution – Jenny Olsen
e) Safety of Roads – Neil Burrow

Item of interest on the main agenda, apart from annual reports:

● 25 Delegations to Officers to mediate on the 2GP Dunedin District Plan
Report from Corporate Services. Refer to pages 25.1 – 25.5.

The general public should be wary of Proposed 2GP mediation processes and how they are to be conducted. Mediation processes could segment (playing to like interests) planning direction and rules to such an extent the public will lose the ‘big picture’ which includes, if needed, having the Proposed 2GP set aside and sections fully redrafted (!!) for community ownership; and, of course, the public not recognising or becoming oblivious to cumulative adverse effects promoted within the Proposed 2GP, and these not being dealt to with sufficient weight.
If in doubt at mediation, positively strive to be heard at hearing – slow the process down until you have individual clarity as a submitter. Do not be pressured by DCC staff and management to agree anything without your taking time and effort to carefully deliberate potential cumulative adverse and knock-on effects.
The current district plan took YEARS to become operational —note well, there is NO RUSH to settle the Proposed 2GP if it is inequitable.

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 255.8 KB)
Block Offer 2016 Submission

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 613.2 KB)
Legal High Retail Location Policy

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 224.8 KB)
Regional Policy Statement Further Submission

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 2.7 MB)
Dunedin City Council 2015 Annual Report

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 66.0 KB)
2015 Annual Reports of Dunedin City Holdings Limited, its Subsidiaries and Associate Companies

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 63.9 KB)
2015 Annual Reports from Dunedin Venues Management Limited and Dunedin Venues Limited

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 391.9 KB)
Waipori Fund – Report for Quarter Ending September 2015

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 540.7 KB)
Review of the Food Safety Bylaw

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 139.5 KB)
Boundary Backflow Prevention

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 97.0 KB)
Delegations to Officers to Mediate on the 2GP Dunedin District Plan

Report – Council – 27/10/2015 (PDF, 86.7 KB)
Theomin Gallery Management Committee – Appointment of Committee Members

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

48 Comments

Filed under Business, DCC, DCHL, Democracy, Dunedin, DVL, DVML, Economics, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Stadiums, Town planning, What stadium

DCC and the AWFUL 2GP ‘threat of THREATS’

THREATS TO YOUR PROPERTY, NEIGHBOURHOOD OR DISTRICT CONTAINED IN PROPOSED 2GP (Second Generation District Plan)

Natural hazards ● Medium density zones ● Heritage ● Rural zones ● Transition zones ● Warehouse precinct —and much much more.

Proposed 2GP graphic [ODT files - tweaked by whatifdunedin]Composite no-go image | whatifdunedin

### ODT Online Sat, 24 Oct 2015
Planning for the city’s future (Part I)
By Chris Morris
Property owners face new rules but the city’s heritage is in for a boost, as the Dunedin City Council pushes ahead with a new district plan for the city. Thousands of properties across Dunedin will be covered by new rules designed to protect against natural hazards. But, according to Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull, the city needs to face up to the threats. Doing nothing is not an option. […] The [proposed] plan has already ruffled feathers from the Taieri to the inner city, amid concerns about the impact on property prices, insurance premiums and future development plans.
Read more

█ The public has until November 24 to make submissions.

2GP banner

Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

‘2GP’ feeds Cull’s fairytale of doom, with help from Coldplay

Coldplay Official Uploaded on May 30, 2011
Coldplay – Strawberry Swing (Google Play • iTunes)

Coldplay Official Uploaded on May 30, 2011
Coldplay – Trouble (Google Play • iTunes)

Coldplay Official Uploaded on May 27, 2011
Coldplay – In My Place (Google Play • iTunes)

Related Posts and Comments:
12.10.15 DCC Proposed 2GP (district plan) —DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY
3.10.15 DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”
3.10.15 DCC appointees to draft 2GP panel #greenasgrass #infatuation
2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
30.10.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

38 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Events, Resource management

DCC Proposed 2GP (district plan) —DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY

2GP banner

Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

ODT hasn’t treated the following “Opinion piece” with due deference, it’s something to miss —no link at ODT Online. Mr Pickford probably forgot to ask that his propaganda be broadcast. Ah well.

ODT 12.10.15 (page 7)

ODT 12.10.15 Opinion Pickford p7 (1)

The PROPOSED 2GP at 1600 pages is the biggest TURN OFF in Dunedin Planning History, ever.

The 2GP is the second generation district plan; and YOU, THE COMMUNITY, OWN this regulatory document once it is fully operational. Unfortunately, City Planning thinks THEY own it for your own good. Forget that. Eyeball the bastards and be prepared to defend your realms. Expect to meet with senior management of DCC, get past the desk staff. Most important —go straight to the top: group and general managers, and the chief executive. Avoid lower pond life. Cut to the chase.

Make no mistake, your property if it lies in the City Rise will be GREATLY AFFECTED. There’s very serious stuff going on if you live in a natural hazards zone. But what about your business, read very carefully. Buy a Resource Management specialist if you want to truly defend your property, its use and its value – or if you seek something different, time to stop writing invective just DEAL to the 1600 pages before the submission deadline in November. Write further submissions. Appeal the 2GP to Glory at Environment Court. Go to the High Court if you must. Etc. Etc.

Start your submission with the fact that the hearings panel is not INDEPENDENT and you protest this – councillors should not be sitting on the panel – at the moment Cull’s followers have a voting majority to push their green agendas through. STOP THE ROT. Already, you haven’t been served natural justice. Demand experienced independent commissioners from out of district that DCC hasn’t got to.

The DANGER is, if you’re a Ratepayer and you think you can deal with the 2GP through a DCC-produced summary you are BARKING MAD, you will sign your life away immediately. Wise up.

Related Posts and Comments:
3.10.15 DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”
3.10.15 DCC appointees to draft 2GP panel #greenasgrass #infatuation
2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
30.10.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

54 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, Otago Polytechnic, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, University of Otago, Urban design, What stadium

DCC: Public Notice Draft 2GP + “Community Presentations”

2GP banner

Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

If you’re struggling with the Proposed 2GP webpages and how they tie together, whatifdunedin STRONGLY ADVISES you sight a paper copy of the full document at the DCC 2GP drop-in centre (11 George Street), DCC service centres or public libraries before setting out to write your individual or group submissions. Note you may also submit further submissions in discovery, utilise this opportunity fully.

DCC in providing the online Proposed 2GP “eplan” is depending on you The Public to ‘give up’ on the district plan document – to drive through the DEVELOPMENT CHANGE in effect, unopposed. Nothing could be clearer. Don’t let this happen. Talk to family, friends, colleagues, lawyers, planners, RMA professionals, anyone (!!) and hard grill the DCC chief executive, group and general managers, and City Planning officers as soon as possible to help frame your response(s).

Useful 3.10.15 banner 2

Received.

Diane Yeldon
Submitted on 2015/10/03 at 6:54 pm

I have come to the sad conclusion that city planning is now just broken and unfixable. 2GP depends conceptually on the Spatial Plan and here are the Strategic Directions from the Spatial Plan (quoting):

The Spatial Plan is based on six key Strategic Directions: 1) A liveable city and 2) An environmentally sustainable and resilient city, (which) are supported by four strategic directions: 3) A memorable and distinctive city; 4) A vibrant and exciting city; 5) An accessible and connected city; and 6) A city that enables a prosperous and diverse economy. (ends)

Just as people say about using computers: GIGO (garbage in, garbage out), if you start a plan with GARBAGE, you can’t possibly end up with anything but garbage. 2GP just lifts this ‘vibrant’ and ‘exciting’ woolliness from the Spatial Plan and will give specific Rules supposedly derived from it the force of law in the new District Plan.

And no longer are explanations for District Plan Policies and, more critically, Rules required by law. So the local authority doesn’t have to justify the existence of a Rule at all, let alone in any accountable way. Rules can now exist just because they say so. (Definitely more authoritarian.)

If anyone wanted to understand what kind of city 2GP is likely to result in when operative, then a useful approach might be to work backwards from the Rules. I am quite certain that the Rules will not result in these green Utopian, ‘affluence and fun-for-all’ Strategic Directions becoming anything like a reality. Especially when you take into account how little money is likely to be around in both the private and public sectors to make some of these wish-list items happen.

More likely, there will be plenty of business for planning professionals and lawyers to try to clarify and argue how Rules etc might be applied to a specific site and proposed use. All trying to make sense (for a fee!) of what will appear to the vast majority of people as a chaotic and incomprehensible mess.

[ends]

█ For related posts and comments on the Proposed 2GP enter the term *2gp* in the search box at right.

Dunedin City Council
Public Notification of Proposed Second Generation Dunedin City District Plan

This item was published on 26 Sep 2015

The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requires the Dunedin City Council (DCC) to prepare a district plan to manage Dunedin’s natural and physical resources to meet the needs of Dunedin’s current and future generations and to provide for their social, economic and cultural wellbeing. The DCC has prepared the Proposed Second Generation Dunedin City District Plan (2GP), which is proposed to replace the current and operative Dunedin City District Plan. The DCC is now notifying the Proposed 2GP for public submission pursuant to clause 5, schedule 1 of the RMA.

█ Submissions must be lodged before 5pm on Tuesday, 24 November 2015.

There are many differences between the current District Plan and the Proposed 2GP. The Proposed 2GP affects all properties in the DCC area and may change what you and your neighbours can do with your properties. We encourage you to take a look to see what it means for you.

In summary, here are some of the key changes. The Proposed 2GP:
● includes a new strategic directions section that sets out key issues for the city, ‘big picture’ outcomes to be achieved, and sets up the plan’s zoning and other methods
● includes new hazard management areas, where it is proposed to manage development to better protect people and property from natural hazard events
● identifies some new coastal and other landscape management areas where limitations on new buildings are proposed
● strengthens the rules for indigenous vegetation clearance
● increases the number of rural and rural residential zones, and increases the minimum site size for subdivision in most of the rural zones
● includes nine new medium density areas, where development density can be increased
● proposes a more enabling approach to earthquake strengthening and additions and alterations necessary for the re-use of heritage buildings
● includes two new residential heritage precincts (Queen Street and Arthur Street areas) and a reduction in the area of commercial heritage precincts
● makes it easier to build family flats in most zones to provide more housing options for extended families, particularly in response to an ageing population
● includes new rules related to public amenities and temporary activities, to enable smaller events to be held, and some public amenities to be built, without the need for resource consent
● manages the height of fences along the boundaries with roads and reserves to maintain a visual connection with these spaces, to improve safety and maintain amenity values
● reduces some on-site car parking requirements for residential properties and other activities to enable people to have more choice in deciding how much car parking is needed
● allows garages and carports to be built in the front yards of houses, with some limitations, rather than always requiring a resource consent.

█ WHERE TO GO FOR MORE INFORMATION

To understand in more detail how the Proposed 2GP affects you, we encourage you to check out the full version. The Proposed 2GP has been prepared as an electronic plan (eplan) and is most easily viewed online at http://www.2gp.dunedin.govt.nz.

A list of the material incorporated in the Proposed 2GP by reference, and details of where this material can be purchased, are also available at http://www.2gp.dunedin.govt.nz and form part of this public notice. This material is available for inspection at the 2GP drop-in centre, 11 George Street, Dunedin.

Printed copies of the Proposed 2GP and reports prepared under section 32 of the RMA are available for inspection until 5pm, Tuesday 24 November at:
● the 2GP drop-in centre, 11 George Street, Dunedin, 8.30am to 5pm, Monday to Friday.
● public libraries and service centres at Dunedin, Middlemarch, Mosgiel, Port Chalmers, Blueskin Bay (Waitati) and Waikouaiti.

At our drop-in centre, DCC staff will be available to answer questions about the Proposed 2GP and help you understand how to make a submission. Alternatively, you can call 477 4000.

Community presentations will also be held as follows:

MOSGIEL: Tuesday, 13 October, 7 – 9pm
Lounge Room, Mosgiel Coronation Hall, 97 Gordon Road

MIDDLEMARCH: Thursday, 15 October, 7 – 9pm
Strath Taieri Community Centre, 11 Swansea Street, Middlemarch

PORTOBELLO: Tuesday, 20 October, 7 – 9pm
Portobello Hall, Portobello Road (Latham Park)

PORT CHALMERS: Thursday, 22 October, 7 – 9pm
Port Chalmers Town Hall, Grey Street

BRIGHTON: Tuesday, 27 October, 7 – 9pm
Ocean View Hall, 812 Brighton Road, Dunedin

WAIKOUAITI: Thursday, 29 October, 7-9pm
East Otago Events Centre, Main Road, Waikouaiti.

█ LEGAL EFFECT

The Environment Court has ordered that the rules listed in Table 1 below have immediate legal effect from notification of this proposed plan ([2015] NZEnvC 165). As part of this order the Court has stated that any person affected by it may apply to the Environment Court to have this order set aside in respect of part or all of any of the rules in Table 1. Any application to have the order set aside is required by the Environment Court to be supported by a full explanatory affidavit and sent to the Environment Court in Christchurch and to the DCC.

Table 1: Rules that have immediate legal effect (RMA s86D)
Proposed 2GP - Table 1 Rules that have immediate legal effect (RMA s86D)[click to enlarge]

There are some rules that the RMA deems to have legal effect when the proposed plan is notified (s86B(3)). These rules protect or relate to water, air, or soil (for soil conservation); or protect areas of significant indigenous vegetation; or protect areas of significant habitats of indigenous fauna; or protect historic heritage; or provide for or relate to aquaculture activities. The Council has resolved that they will only have legal effect once the Proposed 2GP is made operative. The rules are listed at http://www.2gp.dunedin.govt.nz and form part of this public notice. The rules are also identified in the 2GP. The remainder of the rules in the Proposed 2GP will not have legal effect when the plan is notified. These rules will have legal effect when decisions have been made on submissions, unless the RMA deems any rules to be operative earlier.

█ SUBMISSIONS

Any person may make a submission on the Proposed 2GP (subject to clause 6(4), schedule 1 of the RMA, which limits submissions relating to trade competition).

To make a submission please go to http://www.2gp.dunedin.govt.nz. We encourage you to make an online submission using the form and guidelines on the website. Submissions may also be made in hard copy. Submissions must be made in the prescribed form (see Form 5, Schedule 1 RMA (Forms, Fees and Procedure) Regulations 2003) and state whether or not you wish to be heard. Submission forms can be downloaded, filled out and submitted at the above website or picked up in hard copy from the drop-in centre.

For written submissions:

POST TO: Dunedin City Council, PO Box 5045, Moray Place, Dunedin 9058 – Attention Submission on 2GP

DELIVER TO: DCC Customer Services Agency, Ground floor, Civic Centre, 50 The Octagon, Dunedin – Attention Submission on Proposed 2GP

EMAIL TO: planning @dcc.govt.nz

█ Submissions must be lodged before 5pm, Tuesday, 24 November 2015.

After submissions have closed, the DCC will prepare a summary of submissions and publicly notify the availability of that summary.

There will be an opportunity for:
● any person representing a relevant aspect of the public interest;
● any person that has an interest that is greater than that of the general public; and
● the DCC

to make a further submission either supporting or opposing a submission or submissions already made.

If any person making a submission asks to be heard in support of his or her submission, a hearing must be held.

The Council will give its decision on the Proposed 2GP (including its reasons for accepting or rejecting submissions). People that have made a submission on a provision have the right to appeal any decision related to that provision, except for if a submission seeks to withdraw the whole proposed plan.

Public Notice (PDF, 39.5 KB)
A copy of the public notice as a pdf document

Contact DCC on 477 4000.
DCC Link

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

14 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, LGNZ, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, SFO, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Urban design, What stadium

DCC appointees to draft 2GP panel #greenasgrass #infatuation

Received from Douglas Field
Fri, 2 Oct 2015 at 8:57 p.m.

DCC appointees to district plan [Douglas Field]

Related Posts and Comments:
2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
1.10.15 Dunedin mayoralty —tiny debate, no quality prospects as yet
30.9.15 DCC liability? South Dunedin Flood (June 2015) #LGOIMA
30.9.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers…
1.7.15 DCC: 2GP – Notification Pre-Approval #secondgenerationdistrictplan

2GP banner

Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

10 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, Cycle network, DCC, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, LGNZ, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Pics, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, SFO, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Urban design, What stadium

DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE

This is a legal matter.
Not merely an RMA matter, this is about Ratepayers’ equity.

█ The membership of the Draft 2GP hearings panel should not include ANY Councillors. NONE.

All on the Draft 2GP hearings panel should be sage experienced Independent Commissioners – this is possible to achieve !!

█ All Councillors have direct (real and perceived) conflicts of interest where the Draft 2GP is concerned.

In the public interest, Dunedin City Council should be legally challenged on the selection process for, and the membership of the Draft 2GP hearings panel.

The Council has an exceptionally glowing reputation for fraud and corruption. It is very far from being squeaky clean – and now, an inappropriate relationship at Council is distorting democracy.

You were warned.

### ODT Online Fri, 2 Oct 2015
Green perceptions spark row
By Chris Morris
Claims a panel that will shape the future of Dunedin has been stacked with a “green tinge” have sparked a political row within the Dunedin City Council. The criticism came from Crs Andrew Whiley, Hilary Calvert and Lee Vandervis yesterday, as they attacked the makeup of the panel selected to hear public submissions on the second generation district plan (2GP). Their views have been blasted by other councillors, who accused them of failing to raise any objections during a council debate on the panel’s membership.
Read more

2GP banner

Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

Related Posts and Comments:
1.10.15 Dunedin mayoralty —tiny debate, no quality prospects as yet
30.9.15 DCC liability? South Dunedin Flood (June 2015) #LGOIMA
30.9.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers…
1.7.15 DCC: 2GP – Notification Pre-Approval #secondgenerationdistrictplan

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

9 Comments

Filed under Business, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Media, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, Site, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Urban design, What stadium

DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)

TWO MONTHS FOR CONSULTATION WAS NEVER ENOUGH FOR THIS MUCH CHANGE, FORFEIT AND IMPOSITION

2GP banner

Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

Received from Anonymous [not a city councillor]

█ Message: It looks like they have pushed the panic button.

From: Simon Pickford
Sent: Wednesday, 30 September 2015 11:54 a.m.
To: Council 2013-2016 (Elected Members); Community Board – Chalmers 2013-2016; Community Board – Mosgiel Taieri 2013-2016; Community Board – Otago Peninsula 2013-2016; Community Board – Saddle Hill 2013-2016; Community Board – Strath Taieri 2013-2016; Community Board – Waikouaiti Coast 2013-2016
Cc: Executive Leadership Team (ELT); Anna Johnson; Nicola Pinfold
Subject: 2GP update

Dear Councillors and Community Board members,

I just wanted to give you a brief update on the 2GP and public enquiries. As of the end of day 2 since the 2GP was notified we have had approximately 100 people through the drop-in centre on George Street whom we have answered questions for. We have also had just over 80 phone enquiries, and many emails. Staff are working overtime to return phone calls and get back to people as quickly as possible. However, with a small team of planners and a few on long overdue leave, some calls may take a day or 2 to clear. We have also received a large number of people through the DCC libraries and service centres.

Any District Plan is a difficult document for people to get their heads around and many people will need assistance. We are working hard to provide first class customer service on this project, but the first few days are always the most challenging as both the public and the planners work through this process.

We estimate around 90% of calls are related to natural hazards provisions. The natural hazard questions have related to both what the 2GP provisions are and also questions related to how things have been mapped which we have referred to the Otago Regional Council where appropriate, as they (and their consultants) undertook the scientific analysis.

We hope to get to you a list of frequently asked questions and their answers in the next couple of days so you know what people are asking and what the answers are.

We would really appreciate your support in helping your communities to be involved in this process, by encouraging people to seek advice and get involved but also help them to understand that the first few days may require some patience with the flood of enquiries and as we learn better what people are interested in so we can streamline and provide additional information around those questions.

Please also encourage them to come to the community meetings. Some suggestions provided by you that staff are responding to are trying to resource a staff member to go to the Mosgiel service centre to help with enquiries and to provide people with another option than the George Street centre. They will also look to add an additional meeting at Macandrew Bay. If you have any other suggestions or concerns please contact Anna Johnson directly so she can look to improve our service where we can.

Thank you for your support.

Best regards

Simon

Simon Pickford
General Manager Services and Development
Dunedin City Council

Related Post:
28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Leave a comment

Filed under Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Hot air, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, Site, Town planning, Transportation, University of Otago, Urban design, What stadium

Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation and lack of printed maps

THEY ARE (today, already) RAISING THEIR HANDS IN DESPAIR AND WALKING AWAY

Council service centres have no printed maps for people to view.

Not all people are computer literate or have a computer that allows easy viewing – given their properties and districts may have (in MANY cases) substantial zoning change – GET MULTIPLE COPIES OF THE COLOUR MAPS PRINTED AND DISTRIBUTED

…. and stop obfuscating.

Dunce = DCC [via cliparts.co]
Otherwise, Democracy and Natural Justice are not being served.

And you, DCC, know what that means.
A mother of a clean up exercise on your heads.

D for DCC = Dunce
2GP banner

Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html

Related Post:
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers #FIGHTDIRTY

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: cliparts.co – dunce

26 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, SFO, Site, Town planning, Transportation, Urban design, What stadium