Tag Archives: High Court

Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Association Inc wins at High Court

v Kaipara District Council

Brilliant ~!!!

Case webpage:
http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/cases/mangawhai-ratepayers-and-residents-association-inc-v-kaipara-district-council

The decision (date of judgment 28 May 2014):
http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/cases/mangawhai-ratepayers-and-residents-association-inc-v-kaipara-district-council/at_download/fileDecision
(PDF, 332 KB)

● Decision is not sealed.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

18 Comments

Filed under Business, Democracy, Economics, Events, Inspiration, Name, New Zealand, People, Politics, Project management

SH88 realignment: decision to Environment Court?

Updated Post 3.9.13 at 1:30pm

SH88 realignment [ODT Graphic]### ODT Online Mon, 2 Sep 2013
Decision on SH88 looms
By Debbie Porteous
The Dunedin City Council has until Friday to determine whether it will make a decision on the controversial designation of land for the realignment of State Highway 88 near Dunedin’s Forsyth Barr Stadium – or hand the responsibility for the decision to the Environment Court.
To opt for the latter would be a first for the council, which is both the authority requesting the land be designated, and the authority that would require it to be designated. It publicly notified the requirement for the land last month, after a previous non-notified designation was quashed by the court following the council’s admission it had not followed the proper consultation process. The new road has been built, but final measures including traffic lights have been in limbo while the designation issue is resolved.

Mr Hall has already indicated publicly he would ”fight” the proposed designation as notified because it still did not provide safe access to his property.

Doug Hall 1One of the affected landowners, Doug Hall, who is running for the DCC, took the council to court to argue the original designation was illegal because he was not notified as an affected party, and sought an injunction stopping the traffic lights from being switched on until the resolution of safety issues at that intersection and around access to his property as a result of the realigned road. Affected parties, including Mr Hall, were consulted on the new designation late last year, and again earlier this year after the notification of the requirement was delayed while negotiations with Mr Hall continued.
The council had received 13 submissions by Friday, the end of the submission period. Submitters included the University of Otago, Port Otago Ltd, the NZ Transport Agency, the Otago Regional Council and several heavy transport companies among others, but not Mr Hall, or his representatives.
Read more

ODT Correction 3.9.13 (page 3):

Submissions from companies owned by Doug Hall, one of the parties affected by the realignment of State Highway 88 in Dunedin, were received by the Dunedin City Council within the statutory timeframe and will be included in the process for designating the land for realignment. The submissions from Anzide Properties Ltd, Hall Brothers Transport Ltd, and Dunedin Crane Hire (2005) Ltd were received by deadline on Friday, but were not processed until yesterday.

Related Posts and Comments:
3.8.13 SH88 notice of requirement [more maps]
30.4.13 DCC governance = management ?
20.11.12 DCC vs Anzide Properties decision: The road “has no legal basis”
27.5.12 SH88 realignment – information
25.5.12 SH88 realignment costs (injunction)
27.2.12 Bringing DCC, related entities and individuals to account…
23.8.11 Stadium project tangles
4.11.10 SH88 realignment for stadium disrupts traffic
21.7.10 SH88 realignment – update
7.7.10 Goodbye to great store buildings in Parry St
21.4.10 SH88 realignment – update
31.3.10 SH88 realignment
24.2.10 SH88 realignment: Are ratepayers buying the land twice?
20.11.09 Interesting. SH88 realignment.
2.9.09 SH88 realignment past stadium

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

45 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, CST, DCC, Democracy, Design, Economics, Geography, Media, Name, New Zealand, People, Pics, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Sport, Stadiums, Town planning, Urban design, What stadium

SH88 notice of requirement

DIS-2013-1 Location Map 1

DIS-2013-1 Fredrick St - Ravensbourne Rd (detail)Affected Party: Anzide Properties Ltd

Doug Hall, who was informed about the designation process on Thursday, said he was going to fight the issue. ”I have no choice. It is a safety issue. Someone is going to get killed on that road.”

### ODT Online Sat, 3 Aug 2013
Hall to oppose designation
By Hamish McNeilly
Dunedin businessman Doug Hall remains defiant after the Dunedin City Council confirmed it was revisiting the designation process for an affected area of State Highway 88. Yesterday, the council announced it had lodged a notice of requirement to restart the designation process, after negotiations stalled following a botched handling of the original process.
DCC general manager infrastructure and networks Tony Avery said the section of road had not been legally designated and the council acknowledged it had made process mistakes when trying to designate it earlier.
Last year, the Otago Daily Times reported the council had spent $485,000 over 18 months to try to find a solution, and it was too early to say how much the designation process would add to the final tally.
Read more

● Submissions on the notice of requirement, which is publicly notified today, close on August 30.

Dunedin City Council – Media Release
Designation Process for Part of State Highway 88

This item was published on 02 Aug 2013.

The Dunedin City Council has lodged a Notice of Requirement to start afresh the designation process for the section of State Highway 88 near Anzac Avenue.
The Notice of Requirement is a formal process to have land designated as road. It will be publicly notified tomorrow.
DCC General Manager Infrastructure and Networks Tony Avery says the new section of SH88 has been in use since July 2011, but has not been legally designated. The DCC has previously acknowledged that it made process mistakes during an earlier attempt to designate the road.
Temporary traffic controls have been in place since the new section of road was opened, while the DCC negotiated with an adjacent landowner over access arrangements.
“Those negotiations were ultimately unsuccessful, despite the best intentions of all parties, so we are now proceeding with the formal legal process to have the road designated.”
Once the designation proposed is approved, traffic lights at the intersection of Anzac Avenue and Frederick Street would be activated, and the Ward Street bridge ramp would be re-opened to provide much-needed access to the Harbourside area, Mr Avery says. Access to the adjacent properties is to be provided as well, consistent with acceptable standards and in a safe manner.
The DCC is confident the changes are in the best interests of the public.
Submissions on the Notice of Requirement will close on 30 August.

Contact General Manager Infrastructure and Networks on 477 4000.
DCC Link

DIS-2013-1 Layout PlanDIS-2013-1 Fredrick St – Ravensbourne Rd Layout Plan

Territorial Authority’s Requirement for Two Designations
DIS-2013-1 Fredrick Street – Ravensbourne Road

The requirement is for:
The Notice of Requirement seeks to designate two areas of land. Designation 1 is for part of the Dunedin Harbourside Arterial and will link Anzac Avenue (D465) with Ravensbourne Road (D845) to the south of Parry Street West. Designation 2 is for the Dunedin Harbourside Arterial – Access Road which will provide access from the Designation 1 area to the site at 80 Anzac Avenue.
Read more + Official Documents/Maps

### stuff.co.nz Last updated 18:04 20/11/2012
Dunedin City Council fined for road botch up
By Wilma McCorkindale – DScene
A High Court decision has slammed Dunedin City Council’s (DCC) handling of a roading realignment in the city, ordering the cash -strapped authority to pay affected parties more than $185,000 in costs. Justice Alan Mackenzie indicated in a written decision the legality of the stretch of State Highways 1 and 88 through the city remained in question because of the council’s botch up.
Read more

Judgment-221310 (PDF, 109 KB)

Related Post and Comments:
30.4.13 DCC governance = management ?
20.11.12 DCC vs Anzide Properties decision: The road “has no legal basis”
27.5.12 SH88 realignment – information
25.5.12 SH88 realignment costs (injunction)
27.2.12 Bringing DCC, related entities and individuals to account…
23.8.11 Stadium project tangles
4.11.10 SH88 realignment for stadium disrupts traffic
21.7.10 SH88 realignment – update
7.7.10 Goodbye to great store buildings in Parry St
21.4.10 SH88 realignment – update
31.3.10 SH88 realignment
24.2.10 SH88 realignment: Are ratepayers buying the land twice?
20.11.09 Interesting. SH88 realignment.
2.9.09 SH88 realignment past stadium

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Leave a comment

Filed under Business, Construction, CST, DCC, Democracy, Design, Economics, Media, Name, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Stadiums, Town planning, Urban design

Dunedin City Council vs Anzide Properties decision: The road “has no legal basis”

Concerning the State Highway 88 realignment, skirting the new stadium.

Judgment-221310 (PDF, 109 KB)

DScene breaks the news at Stuff:

Dunedin City Council fined for road botch up
A High Court decision has slammed Dunedin City Council’s (DCC) handling of a roading realignment in the city, ordering the cash-strapped authority to pay affected parties more than $185,000 in costs. Justice Alan Mackenzie indicated in a written decision the legality of the stretch of State Highways 1 and 88 through the city remained in question because of the council’s botch up.

Related Posts:
9.6.12 City Property to compete more obviously in the market
27.5.12 SH88 realignment – information
25.5.12 SH88 realignment costs (injunction)
27.2.12 Bringing DCC councillors, staff, related entities and individuals to account
23.8.11 Stadium project tangles
24.11.10 SH88 realignment for stadium disrupts traffic
29.10.10 DCC Chief Executive resigns – timing is everything!
21.7.10 SH88 realignment – update
7.7.10 Goodbye to great store buildings in Parry St
21.4.10 SH88 realignment – update
31.3.10 SH88 realignment
24.2.10 SH88 realignment: Are ratepayers buying the land twice?
20.11.09 Interesting. SH88 realignment.
2.9.09 SH88 realignment past stadium
27.8.09 $294.8m investment for Otago region
19.5.09 There’s more, really?
12.2.09 DCC, and the right to ask?

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

72 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, DCC, Geography, People, Project management, Property, Site, Stadiums, Town planning, Urban design

DCC comments ahead of court action, why?

DCC admits mistake as case back to court
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/206000/dcc-admits-mistake-case-back-court

Local businessman Doug Hall obtained a High Court injunction in August last year, upset at the impact the highway realignment was having on access to his property on Anzac Ave. Mr Hall shall have his day in court which is the only proper place to settle matters of this import against the council’s historic actions.

DCC have been playing silly beggars to date; the council’s comments in the Otago Daily Times today are further proof. The council has accepted it erred by failing to notify Mr Hall, as an affected party, during the land designation process undertaken prior to the highway realignment’s construction.

“We said, when looking at it after a bit of a discussion, we should have involved him. We’ve said we’ll re-do the designation process.” -Tony Avery

The second designation will mean extra legal, planning and staff costs for the council, “although Messrs Hamilton and Avery could not say how much the council had spent to date on the dispute”.

‘Could not say’ or ‘would not say’?
What else isn’t Dunedin City Council saying.

Related Post and Comments:
23.8.11 Stadium project tangles

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

32 Comments

Filed under Business, DCC, Economics, Geography, Media, People, Project management, Property, Site, Stadiums, Town planning, Urban design

Stadium project tangles

### ODT Online Tue, 23 Aug 2011
Injunction snuffs out stadium traffic lights
By Matthew Haggart
A High Court injunction obtained by an Anzac Ave landowner will not allow the Dunedin City Council to operate traffic lights at the Frederick St intersection with State Highway 88 near Forsyth Barr Stadium.

The directors of two companies, which are listed as ratepayers on Anzac Ave, sharing an access opposite the Frederick St intersection, Hall Bros Transport and A.J. Allen Ltd, declined to comment about the traffic lights. Council transportation operations programme engineer Mike Harrison said the lights were unlikely to be operational until after the four Rugby World Cup games at the stadium.

Read more

Related posts:
27.8.09 $294.8m investment for Otago region
2.9.09 SH88 realignment past stadium
20.11.09 Interesting. SH88 realignment.
24.2.10 SH88 realignment: Are ratepayers buying the land twice?
31.3.2010 SH88 realignment
21.4.2010 SH88 realignment – update
29.5.10 Stadium site purchases
7.7.10 Goodbye to great store buildings in Parry St
21.7.10 SH88 realignment – update

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

26 Comments

Filed under Construction, Design, Politics, Project management, Site, Stadiums, Town planning, Urban design

STS meanders to justify calling special meeting

Copy of Stop The Stadium group email as received:

From: Stop the Stadium Announcement list
Date: 11 October 2009 4:55:45 PM NZDT
To: sts mailout
Subject: [sts] Notice of special meeting, to be held at Pioneer Women’s Hall, 362, Moray Place. (near Dick Smith’s), on Sunday, 18th October, at 3:00 pm.
Reply-To: bevkiwi@hotmail.com

Notice of special meeting, to be held at Pioneer Women’s Hall, 362, Moray Place. (near Dick Smith’s), on Sunday, 18th October, at 3:00 pm.

Dear Members,

As you will be aware, STS has lost its recent appeal on the High Court decision concerning the legality of the DCC’s handling of its stadium activities. The point of our legal action, you may remember, hinged upon whether or not the stadium proposal had changed “significantly” in the year preceding the Council’s signing of the final contracts. If these changes were genuinely significant then the council was legally obligated to take account of submissions to its 2009 city plan – which the council refused to do, despite intense public interest and a very large volume of submissions.
The facts were not really obscure: between 2008 and 2009 the stadium cost had gone up by more than $10million; the private funding had all disappeared, and the risk to the ratepayers had increased exponentially – significant changes by any measure.

The High Court hearing was a farce. The DCC misled (in other words lied to) the judge, thereby papering-over a gap of some $15million, and the judge, after admitting that he had not actually understood the evidence in front of him, sided with the Council. Score one for New Zealand “justice”!

At the subsequent appeal the same dismal standards applied. The Appeal Court judges – all three of them – simply rubber-stamped the decision of the High Court – even while acknowledging that the DCC had misled the judge at the earlier hearing. This was perfectly acceptable, apparently, because, having realized that its first story was no longer believable, the DCC had cooked up a new one, and was now pretending that, although the up-front expenditure on the stadium had greatly increased, the long-term cost remained the same.

“We are satisfied”, concluded the learned justices, “that the capital contribution to be made by the Council to the stadium is greater than that projected in the 2008 long-term plan”. (In other words there had, as STS had argued, been significant changes) “But we are also satisfied that the total cost to the Council is not significantly increased from that projected in the 2008 long-term plan, nor is the average cost per ratepayer”. (Translation: “never mind the Council’s previous lies – we’re willing to swallow its new ones”).

No-one, having followed the stadium saga, would accept this cock-and-bull story. But the judges did. They accepted, as gospel, the DCC’s prediction that interest rates in the month of April, 2015, would be exactly 7.47% – and would remain so, without change, till April 2030. (7.47% being the minimum figure required for the DCC’s bogus projections to work).

Interest rates, as everyone knows, are notoriously fickle – even six months ahead, never mind twenty years. They have ranged from 2.5% to 20% within the past two decades – and these swings were never predicted. Yet the gentlemen of the bench saw fit to base their judgment on the DCC’s assurance that, twenty years from now, the prevailing interest rate would be 7.47%, no more, no less. And the people of Dunedin were denied their rights on this contemptible fiction.

We no longer have a justice system. We have an injustice system, rotten at every level, in which incompetent judges back each other up irrespective of the evidence. Honesty and morality have become irrelevant – a circumstance now locally embellished by the reinstatement of the disgraced lawyer, Michael Guest, on the astonishing basis that an even more culpable crook was allowed back on board some years earlier!

The justice system is dead, and so, it seems, is normal democratic practice. Real-estate agents are now permitted to sit on our Regional Council, making decisions on the future of communal land that their private firms are engaged in selling. The DCC staggers from blunder to blunder, and ever deeper into debt, as it squeezes our publicly-owned enterprises closer and closer to bankruptcy. The “international” airport – promoted and lauded by Cr Richard Walls – has become an economic black hole. And now the council is squandering further millions in barricading itself from an irate public it is nominally supposed to serve.

The stadium, of course, remains in its own league of stratospheric imbecility. It has all the attributes of a primitive cargo cult – an infallible totem to be invested with the pathetic hopes of its dwindling band of believers. The ORFU, its original “anchor tenant” (alas, an anchor tenant no longer) may not be in business a season or so from now – it may not even need Carisbrook. But that’s just a minor setback, because the Otago Boys High School might use the stadium in 2013 for its 150thReunion (with a re-booking, possibly, in 2163). Then we have the bright new idea – the Dunedin Tattoo, which is going to rival Edinburgh’s, and fill the rugby pitch to the rafters every couple of weeks or so. And if all else fails we can send for Elton John.

We live in a time of ignominy – or, to use Auden’s perfect phrase “a low, dishonest decade”. And the temptation, as always in such times, is to walk away, to pronounce a curse upon this clique of parasites and all their shoddy houses, and to retreat into the satisfactions of our own private lives. That is the choice that faces us now, individually and together.

The Courts, in their malevolence, have awarded costs of almost $10,000 against STS. We need hardly repeat the injustice of this, but we must address the issue and decide where we are to go from now. There are really only two alternatives: we can fold up (as we are obviously expected to), or we can refuse to be put out of action by this legal intimidation.

The STS committee, having considered the options carefully, is strongly of the view that quitting now would be a dereliction of our duty as citizens. Together we have done our best to bring our City and Regional councillors to their senses, yet all our submissions, demonstrations, and protests have been ignored, and the DCC/ORC continue to behave as though immune from the voice of the electorate. For the future good of our city we must rid ourselves of these puppets. If they, or any substantial proportion of them, survive the next elections, this city will be bankrupt. Your committee recommends, therefore, that STS remain in being, with a new mission statement (and possibly a change of title) reflecting the reality of what we now need to do.

You, the members, have supported us throughout this long and disillusioning struggle. We cannot blame you in the least if you now decide that further sacrifice and effort are too much. Our future course is in your hands, and will be decided at a special meeting, to be held at Pioneer Women’s Hall, 362, Moray Place, on Sunday, 18th October, at 3:00pm.

More than three-quarters of Dunedin people have repudiated the burden of this stadium. Their submissions and reasoned arguments have been brushed aside, and their legal rights extinguished. But people have the ultimate sanction: they still have votes – and an urgent need to be honestly informed as we approach the next elections. You, as the fifteen hundred members of STS, are at present the most potent force to do this, and to ensure the return of integrity to our once well-governed city. Please attend the meeting.

Dave Witherow (President). Pat Johnston (Treasurer). Carol Sawyer (Secretary). Rolf Feitscher, Gavin MacDonald. Darryl Ostrer. Lyndon Weggery (Committee).

Post by Elizabeth Kerr

5 Comments

Filed under Hot air, Politics, STS