Tag Archives: Insurance

Ed Sheeran at Dunedin (3 concerts) March 2018

Ed Sheeran, oil painting by Belfast based artist Colin Davidson
[thesun.co.uk | press association]

### The Sun 3 May 2017, 12:25 AM Updated: 4 May 2017, 12:13 AM
Ed Ringer: Chart-topper Ed Sheeran immortalised in painting unveiled at the National Portrait Gallery
By Ben Leo
Chart-topping Ed Sheeran is top of the arts too as he stands next to the National Portrait Gallery’s new painting of him. The London venue already has a photograph of the music star on display and has now acquired his first portrait. Ed, 26, posed for three hours for sketches and photos for Colin Davidson’s oil painting after the Irish artist met the musician’s art historian dad John. The artist said : “When painting a portrait I am looking for the moment when the person is almost unaware of me being there and I feel I got it with Ed.
Read more

Ed Sheeran Published on Feb 23, 2017
Ed Sheeran – Castle On The Hill & Shape Of You feat. Stormzy [Live from the Brit Awards 2017]
Album ÷.

Ed Sheeran will play three concerts in Dunedin next year.

### ODT Online Mon, 5 Jun 2017
Legal risks in hosting fans, adviser warns
By Chris Morris
Dunedin homeowners hoping for an Airbnb windfall by hosting fans of Ed Sheeran and the British and Irish Lions are being urged to consider the legal risks. The city will throw its doors open to thousands of travelling fans when the Lions take on the Highlanders on June 13 and when pop superstar Ed Sheeran arrives for the first of three concerts in March next year. And, with Dunedin’s commercial accommodation already straining under the pressure, many of those visiting the city would turn to websites such as Airbnb to find a house or room to rent. But the peer-to-peer accommodation service’s rapid rise was not without legal risks, and homeowners needed to be aware of them […] Since the arrival of the new Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, anyone using a site such as Airbnb to rent out their property was considered a “PCBU” – a “person conducting a business or an undertaking”. That meant they had to comply with the requirements of the new legislation, or face a potential Worksafe prosecution if their negligence led to a guest being injured or killed…
Read more

Related Posts and Comments:
8.1.17 Ed and Elton, backroads
16.5.15 cool rough video —boy’s own

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

6 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, Concerts, Construction, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Education, Electricity, Events, Finance, Freedom camping, Health & Safety, Hotel, Housing, Infrastructure, Leading edge, Media, Museums, Music, Name, New Zealand, People, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, Stadiums, Structural engineering, Tourism, Town planning, Urban design

ODT updates mayoral vehicle serious injury crash information

### ODT Online Sat, 3 June 2017
Mayoress recovering
By Margot Taylor
The wife of Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull is slowly recovering after being seriously injured in a crash which wrecked a new mayoral car. Joan Wilson was driving a 2016 Hyundai Santa Fe when she crashed near Roxburgh in late December. Documents obtained under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA) by blog “What if? Dunedin” reveal the $55,659 vehicle had been in use for just five days before the crash. In a statement to the Otago Daily Times Mr Cull said his wife sustained “serious injuries” in the crash. “Joan was the sole occupant in the vehicle. Fortunately, she is making a gradual recovery and I would like to take this opportunity to thank the emergency services and members of the public who provided assistance at the scene,” Mr Cull said. The accident was a “private matter” and no further comment would be made, Mr Cull said. […] Mrs Wilson was an authorised driver. Insurers had not identified the cause of the accident, and no other vehicles were involved.
Read more

Comment at ODT:
Dakota Sat, 03/06/2017 – 9:34am #
If this has cost ratepayers three grand, how is it a private matter?

****

New Zealand Transport Agency
NZTA manages the Crash Analysis System (CAS) – New Zealand’s primary tool for capturing information on where, when and how road crashes occur. The system provides tools to analyse and map crashes and enables users to identify high-risk locations and monitor trends and crash sites. This information helps inform transport policy, design and prioritise road safety improvements and monitor their effectiveness. CAS is used by a range of organisations all with the broad aim of improving road safety. It is an essential tool in supporting Safer Journeys and its vision of a ‘safe road system increasingly free of death and serious injury’. It enables the transport sector, over the long term, to improve road safety through knowledge, research and the measurements of the effects of changes to the network and network user behaviour.
https://www.nzta.govt.nz/safety/safety-resources/crash-analysis-system/

Ministry of Transport
Motor vehicle crashes in New Zealand is an annual statistical statement on road crashes in New Zealand. The crash data are derived from Traffic Crash reports completed by Police who attend fatal and injury crashes. As well as road crash statistics, motor vehicle crashes in New Zealand includes national hospital, breath and blood alcohol, road user behaviour and comparative international statistics which relate to road crashes.
http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/roadcrashstatistics/motorvehiclecrashesinnewzealand/

NZTA road death statistics
New Zealand road death toll statistics covering road fatalities and fatal crashes, updated daily. Road fatalities update | Fatal crashes update | Update road deaths by local government region | More detailed data
https://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/road-deaths/toll.html

****

Postscript
The driver of the 2016 Hyundai Santa Fe is understood to have fallen asleep at the wheel resulting in the serious injury road crash as reported; their spouse was said to have been following in another vehicle at the time of the crash.

Related Post and Comments:
24.4.17 LGOIMA vehicle (DCC) : Hyundai Santa Fe (2016) written off Jan 2017

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

Hyundai NZ Published on Apr 8, 2016
Five seats, or seven? | Hyundai NZ

20 Comments

Filed under DCC, Democracy, Dunedin, Economics, Education, Finance, Health & Safety, Media, Name, New Zealand, NZTA, People, Police, Politics, Property, Public interest, Transportation

LGOIMA vehicle (DCC) : Hyundai Santa Fe (2016) written off Jan 2017

Received.

From: Sandy Graham [DCC General Manager Strategy and Governance]
Sent: Monday, 24 April 2017 5:03 p.m.
To: Elizabeth Kerr
Cc: [DCC Governance Support]
Subject: RE: Elizabeth Kerr Local Government Official Information request – 584807

Dear Elizabeth

Please see below a response to your LGOIMA request re Mayoral vehicles.

Request details:
LGOIMA request re mayoral vehicle (DCC)

1. I understand there is a DCC vehicle dedicated for use by the Mayor of Dunedin, is this correct? If so, is the vehicle owned by DCC, or is it leased?
Yes. It is owned by DCC

2. What are the terms and conditions of the Mayor’s use of this vehicle? (including DCC insurance cover in regards to who may drive the vehicle and for what purpose(s) to retain the cover)
The Mayor pays for full private use of the vehicle as per the determination set out by the independent Remuneration Authority. The insurance cover for the mayoral vehicle is as for all other fleet vehicles. Any authorised driver is covered.

3. What is the make, model, colour, year and registration of the mayoral vehicle? Please state for all vehicles designated for mayoral use in the period October 2010 to April 2017, if any.
Please see the attached spreadsheet. I have not provided registration plate details and these are withheld to protect the privacy of natural persons pursuant to section 7(2)(a) of LGOIMA.

4. What has been the annual mileage clocked for the mayoral vehicle on official business in the period October 2010 to April 2017?
Annual mileage is not recorded and so the information requested does not exist.

5. Does the mayor also retain the vehicle for his own casual use when not on official business? If so, is this mileage logged separately and what has been that annual mileage clocked in the period October 2010 to April 2017? Or please supply the annual mileage clocked for all use of the vehicle in the period October 2010 to April 2017?
The Mayor pays for full private use of the vehicle as per the determination set out by the independent Remuneration Authority. No records of annual mileage are kept.

6. Designated driver(s). Besides the mayor, are there other dedicated drivers specified for this vehicle? (see 2. above). Please identify the drivers – if for privacy reasons names cannot be supplied, state by position or role to include council staff, elected council representatives (councillors), or the mayor’s family.
The vehicle is able to be driven by any authorised driver.

7. See 4. above. How does this mileage compare with the annual mileage recorded for a mayoral vehicle (if any) used by previous mayors, where this is known? For example, for Richard Walls, Sukhi Turner and Peter Chin.
No mileage records are held.

8. In the period October 2010 to April 2017, have any vehicles assigned for mayoral use been badly damaged or written off? Please provide vehicle identification (make/model/colour/year/registration), date of vehicle crash or incident, crash site or incident location; and, where relevant identify whether this was an injury/serious injury/non injury crash (cross out whichever does not apply).
Yes. A Hyundai Santa Fe was written off in Jan 2017 following an accident involving serious injury near Roxburgh.

9. See 8. above. What was the official cause of each vehicle crash or incident as determined for DCC’s insurance claim (if any); and or as claimed in the official CAS report* involving a DCC vehicle, a copy of which may be held on DCC files? *The NZ Transport Agency manages the Crash Analysis System (CAS) – New Zealand’s primary tool for capturing information on where, when and how road crashes occur. CAS is used by a range of organisations all with the broad aim of improving road safety. https://www.nzta.govt.nz/safety/safety-resources/crash-analysis-system/
The insurers did not identify a cause of the accident.

10. See 6. above. Was the mayor or another officially designated driver identified for each vehicle crash or incident listed at 8. above?
Yes.

11. How recently was the mayoral vehicle replaced following a vehicle write-off? Did DCC’s insurance cover and budgets meet the full cost of vehicle replacement and other associated costs such as accident victim transfer to hospital? Please itemise all costs to DCC.
Refer to the attached spreadsheet. DCC received a full insurance pay-out.

12. Further to 3. above, please confirm the make, model, colour, year and registration number of the present mayoral vehicle and its date of purchase or commencement of lease by DCC. Please respond by email within 20 working days. Thanks.
Refer to the attached spreadsheet. I have not provided registration plate details and these are withheld to protect the privacy of natural persons pursuant to section 7(2)(a) of LGOIMA.

Given I have withheld information, you are entitled to a review of the decision by the Office of the Ombudsman.
I have cc’ed [DCC Governance Support] on the response for record keeping purposes.

Sandy [Graham]

Attachment: LGOIMA request vehicles (Excel spreadsheet)

[screenshot – click to enlarge]

Similar model ?

From: [DCC Governance Support]
Sent: Wednesday, 19 April 2017 9:28 a.m.
To: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Acknowledgement of request

19-Apr-2017

Elizabeth Kerr

Dear Ms Kerr,

Official information request for: 584807, KERR, MAYORAL VEHICLE

Reference Number: 306621

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your official information request dated 18-April-2017 for 584807, KERR, MAYORAL VEHICLE

We received your request on 18-April-2017. We will endeavour to respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no later than 17-May-2017, being 20 working days after the day your request was received. If we are unable to respond to your request by then, we will notify you of an extension of that timeframe.

Your request is being handled by Sandy Graham. If you have any queries, please feel free to contact her on 03 477 4000. If any additional factors come to light which are relevant to your request, please do not hesitate to contact us so that these can be taken into account.

Yours sincerely

Governance Support Officer
Dunedin City Council

[*My LGOIMA request is dated 16 April 2017]

From: officialinformation@dcc.govt.nz
Sent: Sunday, 16 April 2017 1:19 p.m.
To: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Confirmation of receipt of LGOIMA request – 584807

Dear Elizabeth

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your official information request dated 16 Apr 2017 1:19pm
We support public access to official information. Our obligation under the Local Government Official Information Act 1987 (the Act) is to provide you the information requested as soon as reasonably practicable unless there is a good reason for withholding it.

We will process information requests as below:

• We will let you know as soon as we can (and in any case within 20 working days) whether your request will be granted or declined, and if the request is declined why we have declined it.
• In some cases it may be necessary for our decision to be made after 20 working days. When this occurs we will advise you the anticipated delivery date together with the reason why it is necessary to extend that time within the 20 working days.
• If your request is complex or requires a large amount of collation and research, we may contact you with a view to either refining your request or discussing the possibility of charging for aspects of your request in line with the DCC charging policy.
• If we decide to release the information, we aim to provide it at the same time as we give our decision. If this is not possible we will provide the information as soon as reasonably practicable.

If you need to contact us about your request, please email officialinformation@dcc.govt.nz or call 03 477 4000. Please quote reference number: 584807

The timeliness of our decisions and the reasons for them are reviewable by the Office of the Ombudsman. You can view the Ombudsman’s guidelines for the processing of information requests at http://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or by calling freephone: 0800 802 602.

Yours sincerely,

Official Information Request Service

Below are the details of the request

Your request:

LGOIMA request re mayoral vehicle (DCC)

1. I understand there is a DCC vehicle dedicated for use by the Mayor of Dunedin, is this correct? If so, is the vehicle owned by DCC, or is it leased?

2. What are the terms and conditions of the Mayor’s use of this vehicle? (including DCC insurance cover in regards to who may drive the vehicle and for what purpose(s) to retain the cover)

3. What is the make, model, colour, year and registration of the mayoral vehicle? Please state for all vehicles designated for mayoral use in the period October 2010 to April 2017, if any.

4. What has been the annual mileage clocked for the mayoral vehicle on official business in the period October 2010 to April 2017?

5. Does the mayor also retain the vehicle for his own casual use when not on official business? If so, is this mileage logged separately and what has been that annual mileage clocked in the period October 2010 to April 2017? Or please supply the annual mileage clocked for all use of the vehicle in the period October 2010 to April 2017?

6. Designated driver(s). Besides the mayor, are there other dedicated drivers specified for this vehicle? (see 2. above). Please identify the drivers – if for privacy reasons names cannot be supplied, state by position or role to include council staff, elected council representatives (councillors), or the mayor’s family.

7. See 4. above. How does this mileage compare with the annual mileage recorded for a mayoral vehicle (if any) used by previous mayors, where this is known? For example, for Richard Walls, Sukhi Turner and Peter Chin.

8. In the period October 2010 to April 2017, have any vehicles assigned for mayoral use been badly damaged or written off? Please provide vehicle identification (make/model/colour/year/registration), date of vehicle crash or incident, crash site or incident location; and, where relevant identify whether this was an injury/serious injury/non injury crash (cross out whichever does not apply).

9. See 8. above. What was the official cause of each vehicle crash or incident as determined for DCC’s insurance claim (if any); and or as claimed in the official CAS report* involving a DCC vehicle, a copy of which may be held on DCC files?

*The NZ Transport Agency manages the Crash Analysis System (CAS) – New Zealand’s primary tool for capturing information on where, when and how road crashes occur. CAS is used by a range of organisations all with the broad aim of improving road safety. https://www.nzta.govt.nz/safety/safety-resources/crash-analysis-system/

10. See 6. above. Was the mayor or another officially designated driver identified for each vehicle crash or incident listed at 8. above?

11. How recently was the mayoral vehicle replaced following a vehicle write-off? Did DCC’s insurance cover and budgets meet the full cost of vehicle replacement and other associated costs such as accident victim transfer to hospital? Please itemise all costs to DCC.

12. Further to 3. above, please confirm the make, model, colour, year and registration number of the present mayoral vehicle and its date of purchase or commencement of lease by DCC.

Please respond by email within 20 working days. Thanks.

File attachment
No file uploaded

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

*Image: hyundaiusa.com – 2016 Hyundai Santa Fe Sport

21 Comments

Filed under DCC, Democracy, Dunedin, Economics, Education, Finance, Health & Safety, New Zealand, People, Politics, Property, Public interest, Transportation

Johnstone on ORC report : ‘The Natural Hazards of South Dunedin’ (July 2016)

The Natural Hazards of South Dunedin – July 2016 [read online]
Otago Regional Council
ISBN: 978-0-908324-35-4
Report writers:
Michael Goldsmith, ORC Natural Hazards Manager
Sharon Hornblow, ORC Natural Hazards Analyst
Reviewed by: Gavin Palmer, ORC Director Engineering, Hazards and Science
External review by: David Barrell, Simon Cox, GNS Science, Dunedin

Received from Neil Johnstone
Sun, 29 Aug 2016 at 8:17 p.m.

Message: Misinformation on the causes of the June 2015 South Dunedin flood have abounded since the event. As if the victimised residents haven’t suffered enough from others’ inactions (before and during the event), they are now being subjected to a hazards discovery process whose vigour appears to be exceeded only by its own recklessness. Following are a commentary of the hazards approach adopted by the Otago Regional Council (ORC), and a summary of my investigations into the flood event that I commenced after the publication of Dunedin City Council’s first flood report back in November 2015.

You can download Neil Johnstone’s report or read it below (formatted slightly differently to suit the WordPress template).

█ Download: A REVIEW OF ORC REPORT THE NATURAL HAZARDS OF SOUTH DUNEDIN (1) (PDF, 587 KB)

AN APPRAISAL OF RECENT REPORTING OF SOUTH DUNEDIN HAZARDS

N.P JOHNSTONE, BEng (Civil), MIPENZ

1. Introduction

There is some irony that DCC and ORC should be planning “drop in” sessions for residents in respect of South Dunedin hazard issues during September 2016, some 15 months after the major flood. The prime cause of flooding in June 2015 was DCC’s failure to maintain its infrastructure (not just mudtanks), and its failure to operate its pump stations to their intended capacities. The subsequent spread of misconceptions (i.e. groundwater levels, rainfall significance etc) surrounding the flood causes was at least partly due to inaccurate ORC analyses and reporting.

Repetitive and new doubtful information emanating from ORC via its latest report has been noted. Presentations and an over-simplistic video production have been observed. A footnote covering these observations is included at the end of this appraisal.

Long-delayed DCC reports on causes of the South Dunedin flooding have already been strongly criticised by the author. Specifically discredited are misrepresentations of sea level, groundwater and rainfall ranking. Accepted now by DCC as factors (somewhat grudgingly, and depending on the audience) are mudtank blockage and Portobello Road pump station failures (plural); still to be fully acknowledged are the failures at Musselburgh Pumping Station.

Attention is now turned to significant parts of hazard reports produced by the Otago Regional Council and utilised by DCC.

2. Coastal Otago Flood Event 3 June 2015 (ORC, published October 2015)

This report deals with a wider area than South Dunedin. It is apparent that ORC staff never visited the flooding areas of South Dunedin on 3 June, but took advantage of fine weather to take some water level readings the following day. The opportunity for useful progressive surface water level recording was thus lost. Levels were collected at some 150 points on 4 June. ORC’s main conclusion was that “localised variations in topography were probably the main driver of flood depth”. Or, put another way, water depth was deepest where the ground was lowest. This seems hardly surprising, and even trivial. No attempt was made to explain the photographic images presented of extensive ponding remaining well after the rains had ceased. The phenomena of blocked mudtanks and unutilised pumping capacity went seemingly unnoticed.

The report does usefully reference ORC’s four borehole recorders of groundwater, but makes the somewhat misleading assessment that groundwater levels were “elevated” prior to the rainstorm. This misinformation was seized upon by agencies such as DCC and the Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment to highlight climate change impacts.

Having obtained the actual groundwater level data from ORC via the LGOIMA process, the author was able to reveal this “groundwater fallacy” in reviews from February 2016, but it was not until the publication of NZ Listener’s article (June 11-17, 2016) entitled ‘FLOOD FIASCO’ that ORC admitted that pre-flood groundwater levels were in fact “just a little bit above average”. ORC now seems intent on resurrecting this fallacy.

The ORC report fails to address the real and key issues of pumping station failures (Portobello Road and Musselburgh), or comparisons with much lesser flood impacts in the larger rainfall event of March 8/9 1968.

The report states that the 2015 24-hour rainfall was the largest since 1923. This was patently incorrect, but again was utilised by DCC to divert blame from their role in the disaster.

3. The Natural Hazards of South Dunedin (ORC, published July 2016)

The report states unambiguously in its Opening Summary that the major flooding of June 2015 was “a result of heavy rainfall, surface runoff, and a corresponding rise in groundwater”. By now, most people are aware that the causes of the flooding’s disastrous impact were failure to optimally operate pumping stations, failure to clear mudtanks, and failure to deploy staff to key areas during the event. Again, none of these factors is addressed in ORC’s report.

The report presents a table on its second page entitled “Factors Which Can Influence Flood Hazard”. Examples of exaggerated negativity include:

1. Heavy Rainfall:
– Many recorded instances of rainfall leading to surface flooding.
– Heavy rainfall events have occurred frequently over the last decade.

Comment: These conclusions do not appear to be supported by the report’s text, and are vague, factually challengeable and alarmist. Prior to 2015, no major flooding had occurred in South Dunedin since 1968, and even that was minor by comparison.

2. Sea Level:
– Groundwater level fluctuates (by up to 0.5m near the coast) on a twice-daily cycle in response to normal ocean tides.

Comment: All of South Dunedin is near the coast; most of the area does not experience such large fluctuations. This should have been made clear by the inclusion of groundwater data from all 4 ORC sites across the plain, not just from Kennedy Street.

3. Seismic:
– Large earthquakes could result in increased flood hazard on the South Dunedin plain, due to liquefaction-related land subsidence or direct, sudden, changes in land elevation relative to sea level.

Comment: All areas of NZ have some susceptibility to earthquake damage. Dunedin is amongst the areas at lowest risk; no incidences of even minor liquefaction have ever been reported in South Dunedin, and little or no clearly liquefiable materials have been identified (Refer GNS, 2014*). Continue reading

27 Comments

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

South Dunedin: Fixing Council attitudes and badly maintained infrastructure

storm-ridden - wet cycling [n-tv.de]Council told storms will become more common and more severe [n-tv.de]

### ODT Online Mon, 9 May 2016
Flood’s ‘true’ cost $138 million
By Vaughan Elder
The “true” cost of last June’s Dunedin flood has been revealed as more than $138 million. Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull said the “sobering” figure, calculated by New Zealand’s largest insurance company, IAG, would sharpen the council’s resolve on investing in better infrastructure. […] IAG calculated the $138.4 million taking into account $28.2 million insurance pay out together with estimates of the economic and social impact of the event.
Read more

Economic costs took into account damage to uninsured properties, lost productivity, work to fix infrastructure and social costs included stress suffered by affected residents and business owners.

DCC Graphic - South Dunedin stormwater networkDCC Graphic: South Dunedin and adjacent stormwater catchments
Area approx 570ha, comprising 10-15% of Dunedin’s central urban area.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

33 Comments

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

South Dunedin Action Group: Notes of meeting with DCC (3 May 2016)

Received.
Friday, 6 May 2016 6:02 p.m.

From: Clare Curran [Dunedin South MP]
Subject: Notes from the Meeting with DCC on 3 May
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 00:31:05 +0000
To:

Dear everyone
Further to my last email here is the notes taken by office from the meeting with the Mayor and senior Council management on 3 May.
This is to keep you informed and for transparency purposes.

A new meeting date will be set up soon and I will keep you all informed

Kind regards

Clare Curran

[begins]

Notes from meeting 3 May 2016
South Dunedin Action Group (SDAG) and mayor + senior management

Mayor Cull
– acknowledged that there was collective concern, that they were pleased to meet with the group and that the meeting provided the best place to provide clarifications
– Acknowledged that the process had been lengthy and frustrating, and “sloppy”
– Council was now very sceptical about evidence relating to the flood and had been let down. He added that they would not make any changes to anything without evidence.
– If the event occurred again even with the proper maintenance there would have been severe flooding
– Determined to make the system we have work the best that it can
– Agreed need another mechanism other than the ODT to communicate with the community
– Will consider the discussion and come back with a proposal for the next meeting with a smaller group

Laura McElhone. Group Manager Water and Waste
– All mudtanks had been cleaned in South Dunedin (marked with green spray)
– Screen has been redesigned at pumping station, work about to go to tender, installation expected July/August
– Screen currently cleaned weekly by contract with photograph for proof
– Proposed screen modifications would see a 4 part screen to allow for safer and easier cleaning – could not confirm bar spacing
– Approx. 100 manholes had been lifted (Oct/Nov 2015) to identify any siltation – none identified as a problem – map can be provided of manholes checked – this exercise will be repeated in Oct/Nov 2016
– Confirmed that with the work carried out or in progress expected reduction in level of water would be about 200mm – however difficult to predict because too many variable to undertake modelling
– On issue of foul sewage infiltration confirmed that work being undertaken in Kaikorai Valley was to reduce the pressure on the system before it came through to Caversham
– On the issue of diverting foul sewage to Green Island treatment works stated that it was only able to handle a certain amount as it had been set up for a different type of sewage
– With regard to pumping out to sea, confirmed that they now know who to contact at the ORC and will maintain valves to enable this to happen if necessary
– Advised Musselburgh pumping capacity cannot run at maximum [this is disputed by Darrel]
– Forecast received on 2 June was for 1/3 less rain – only after midday on 3 June did they receive prediction on the size of the event
– Definitely had contractors and staff monitoring and out in South Dunedin, but did not have enough people to cover the scale of event
– Door-knocking by DCC did not record the number of flooded houses [DCC has not been back to check]
– 1968 flood had two peaks so had time to recover [disputed by Darrel]
– Too many variables to accurately measure topographical data
– Understand need to reassure and quantify but have to be careful not to give false impression
– Advised that 4/5 engineers employed in planning and 6/7 at the delivery end – acknowledged the identified lack of a storm water specialist – currently under recruitment

Ruth Stokes. Infrastructure and Networks General Manager
– Contractors have been asked to verify status of periphery areas
– Need to build resilience in the community – have recognised need to contact secondary schools and community groups and extend beyond the ‘What’s the plan Stan” initiative

Sue Bidrose. Chief Executive
– Unable to provide a figure on the number of roads closed by DCC as the water washed the cones away.
– Civil defence, Fire and Police all advised DCC that only 20-30 houses had been flooded – suggested that volunteers sandbagging were not part of the information loop and therefore message did not get through to emergency services

Kate Wilson. Councillor
– Have been advocating for a rain radar for a number of years on the Taieri

David B-P. Councillor
– Not just South Dunedin affected but other areas also, we need answers to give the community reassurance that the system is operating

[ends]

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

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

12 Comments

Filed under Business, DCC, Democracy, Dunedin, Economics, Housing, Infrastructure, Name, New Zealand, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, South Dunedin

DCC meeting and apology NOT Enough— #SouthDunedinFlood

Election Year : The following post is offered in the public interest. -Eds

Received today.

android-email-app [carleton.ca]From: Hilary Calvert
To: Dave Cull
Cc: Golds [Godfrey Dodd], All Elected Members, Vaughan Elder [ODT]
Subject: Re: Flooding

Thanks for copying us in.

May we know when you requested that the mudtanks were cleaned thoroughly?

I had thought that it was an initiative from Ruth Stokes, as part of the looking into and reporting back on the flood.

I am also interested in your “fact” that the stormwater system is not capable even at optimal condition and performance……. Do you mean that it was not then, or that it would not be even if we made adjustments and sorted out the mudtanks and fixed the screen/pump and made changes which we have signalled to the general stormwater system which flows through South Dunedin?

If council modelling showed the extent of the flooding would be precisely as it was in the event of that magnitude, what relevance had the problems with the screen/pump and the mudtanks? I guess all the problems in South Dunedin during the flood were localised problems and many of them as a result of water lying about, so did our modelling show that as well?

I understood that there was still more work to be done to understand what we could best do particularly about the interconnection between the water from various sources and what we could afford of the options available.

Do you see the governance part of the Council completely blameless in this process?
Since you have apparently arranged for the mudtanks to be cleared, surely you/we could have done something sooner.

Do we have a role at all in your view, apart from advising people they are wrong when it turns out we may have incomplete information?

As seems true for all of the information surrounding this horrible flood, the more information we receive the more questions we have.

Kind regards,

Hilary

_______________________________

On 26/04/2016, at 5:30 AM, Dave Cull wrote:

Dear Mr Dodd,
Thank you for your email. I am puzzled by the apparent assertion that I have blamed the 2015 June flooding on Climate Change. While that may be the root cause I don’t recall saying that. The cause of the flooding, as has finally been comprehensively reported (for a meeting today) was the fact that the stormwater system in South Dunedin is not capable, even at optimum condition and performance, of coping with the amount of rain that fell over that period. That is a simple calculation given the capacity of the system in both volume and pumping terms, and the severity of the event. The mudbank maintenance failure was reprehensible from both a contractor and staff oversight perspective, especially as exactly the same issue had been raised some four years ago and assurances given that it would not happen again. The fact that some mudbanks were not up to scratch may have caused some localised problems and perhaps prolonged the water lying, but they did not cause the extent of the flooding. That was exactly as Council’s modelling showed it would be in an event of that magnitude.
Six years ago Council received reports stating (among other conclusions) two things. First that more frequent and severe rain events were likely. Second that the stormwater system in South Dunedin was not capable of handling those. So flooding was very likely. Last year the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment issued a report showing that rising ground water, pushed up by sea level rise will increasingly afflict South Dunedin.
It’s most important to recognise that while stormwater and groundwater can each affect the other, they are different and have different causes.
The failure was operational and managerial as Council was repeatedly assured that maintenance was up to scratch.
Council’s challenge now is to address both stormwater and groundwater issues. We have already, at my request, ensured that the stormwater system is in the best shape possible as winter approaches, by having all the mudbanks cleaned properly. Additionally the screen at the Portobello Rd pumping station, which was blocked by debris carried by the overwhelming amount of water, will be replaced by July.
Council will consider that report which has taken such a frustratingly long time to get to us, and determine the next necessary steps.
At your request I have copied this to all elected members.

Dave Cull

_______________________________

From: Golds [Godfrey Dodd]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 7:07 PM
To: mayor @dcc.govt.nz
Subject: FW: Flooding

Dear Mayor
I am sending you this email in that it may make you understand how one ratepayer views your complete failure in the flooding in South Dunedin
WE all know that climate warming is a fact but your glib PR spin and articles in the paper does nothing for your credibility and your lack apology shows that you and the council do not except responsibility for this lack of governance
It is sad that only one of the council appears to have enough bottle to ask you to do in an old fashion way the decent thing
My wish is that you pass this email as part of an agenda item a the next council meeting on how one ratepayer views your lack of understanding in the way a Mayor should carry out his role
I would interested in your reply

Regards
Godfrey Dodd

_______________________________

From: Golds [Godfrey Dodd]
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 10:00 AM
To: Andrew Whiley [DCC]
Subject: Flooding

Hi Andrew
It is with disappointment reading the failure of governance by the council I was a chairman in those days that was the title of a high school board If the school had a problem which effected the community you had to stand up and take the blame
I do not expect the council elected members to clean mud tanks but when there is failure of this size then the expectation of the community that something is seriously wrong with the governance of the council The glib excuses as regards rise in sea level is the catch cry of the council which you as a member are part of
In my view the council members should of put on gumboots and gone out with the CEO and inspected the mud tanks instead of waiting a year for a report It saddens me to find that people in South Dunedin were not accorded this Instead we had articles written that showed how out of touch the council members were These articles were part of the green PR spin which now blights any decision that this particular council makes All that was needed was clean mud tanks and clear governance by the members of the council not excuses I hope that this is a lesson that you as a council member takes on board when making decisions in the future
Kindest Regards

Godfrey Dodd

ODT 25.4.16 (letter to the editor)

ODT 25.4.16  Letter to editor Vandervis p10

Tue, 26 Apr 2016
ODT: Vandervis forcing mud-tank issue [+ Letters]
A series of emails released by Dunedin city councillor Lee Vandervis show he was raising concerns about the state of Dunedin’s mud-tanks as long ago as 2011. Cr Vandervis said he released the emails because only publicity forced the council to change its ways. “This publicity is going to make sure it really is sorted once and for all this time.” The release of the emails follows a report released by the Dunedin City Council last week into last June’s flood, which found 75% of mud-tanks in South Dunedin were not properly maintained.

Tue, 26 Apr 2016
ODT: Staff apology for mud-tank failure
Council staff were responsible for not properly overseeing mud-tank maintenance in South Dunedin, not councillors or the mayor, a senior staff member says. Council infrastructure and networks general manager Ruth Stokes started today’s council infrastructure services committee meeting by apologising on behalf of council staff for the failings identified in a report on last June’s flood. Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull and Crs David Benson-Pope and Lee Vandervis were among those who had raised mud-tank performance prior to the South Dunedin floods, and been given incorrect information by staff. “For that I would like to, on behalf of the executive, apologise,” Ms Stokes. The failure was a management failure and not governance one, she said.

lee pushing head in mudtank words [Douglas Field 26.4.16] detailDouglas Field 26.4.16 (detail)

Comment at ODT Online:

Mayor Dave Cull outraged
Submitted by JimmyJones on Tue, 26/04/2016 – 1:49pm.

Mayor Cull says he is outraged at the failure of Fulton Hogan and council staff to adequately ensure that the mudtanks were in working condition. He should also be outraged at his own poor leadership and failure to respond to developing problems. Under his leadership the city continued to build up a backlog of worn-out stormwater pipes and equipment waiting for funding to be allocated. With this lack of funding we have seen the inevitable result of a deteriorating stormwater system. The poor state of the stormwater system was the primary cause of the severity of the flooding at Kaikorai, Mosgiel and South Dunedin last year.

This under-funding of the stormwater renewals is not an accident. Every year the DCC Mayor and councillors decide and vote on this spending – and every year they vote to under-fund the stormwater renewals because they think that a new stadium and a new swimming pool and more bicycle lanes are more important than a functioning stormwater system. The Annual Plan shows that the under-funding will continue next year. Expect the deterioration to continue.

Related Post and Comments:
20.4.16 DCC Politics : Release of Infrastructure Report #SouthDunedinFlood

█ For more, enter the term *flood* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Email image: carleton.ca – android-email-app

53 Comments

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