Dunedin residents Bev Butler and Russell Garbutt each sought an inquiry into the Carisbrook deals.
(see my comment and other comments received)
### ODT Online Tue, 28 May 2013
No Carisbrook inquiry, auditor says
By Chris Morris
The Dunedin City Council’s possible multimillion-dollar loss from the sale of Carisbrook does not warrant an investigation, the Office of the Auditor-general says.
”We do not regard the purchase and disposal as raising issues that relate to our Delta inquiry, which is focused on the property investment actions of a council subsidiary.”
OAG staff have confirmed that there will be no investigation of the council’s purchase, and pending sale, of Carisbrook properties, which could end up costing the council more than $4 million. That followed two separate requests received by the office in February, asking for the Carisbrook deal to be added to a wider OAG investigation of land purchases by council-owned company Delta. An OAG statement yesterday said the decision not to proceed came after reviewing council documents, which showed the issue ”does not warrant further inquiry”.
Related Post and Comments:
15.2.13 Carisbrook: Call for OAG investigation into DCC / ORFU deals
Posted by Elizabeth Kerr
Filed under Business, CST, DCC, DCHL, Economics, Heritage, Name, ORFU, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Sport, Stadiums, Tourism, Urban design, What stadium
Received from Rob Hamlin.
Monday, 27 May 2013 1:03 p.m.
Carisbrook on Sunday (26.5.13)
A picture of doomed dereliction – Innit? I tried to take photos of this last week, but the weather wasn’t good enough. I seem to recall that the comb lines in the manicured grass were going in a different direction then, indicating that further ratepayer-funded pampering has occurred this last week. What earthly reason can there be for the DCC to be spending money doing this on a structure that they claim they have a) sold and b) issued a demo permit for? Some seats are missing (but could be inside). The lights are gone, but Delta bought the last set anyway so why not ‘play it again Sam’?
Otago Regional Council – Leith Flood Protection Scheme
001 ‘Sad Sacking’
The results of the equally seawall-like doomed attempts by the ORC and their representatives to establish a million dollar[?] lawn in the middle of winter in the bottom of a drainage channel occupied by a major flood prone waterway (the Leith). An act of simply heroic lunacy. This is the aftermath of the minor flood last week. The proto-lawn is covered in sacking further up the river, except for the bit next to the water – that’s now wrapped around the post in the foreground. Luckily it did not end up in the harbour – although many tons of silt presumably did. No doubt the ORC will be able to issue itself with a retrospective resource consent for this uncontrolled discharge into the environment.
002, 004 ‘Washed away’
For weeks now and presumably at great expense to the ORC, the contractors (Lund if the site signs are to be believed) have been laying down what looks like micropore mat, hexagon reinforcement, and what looks like a very expensive chicken wire plastic mesh combo – stitched together. They then planted grass on it. This can be seen growing feebly on the slope in 002. Alas, the minor flood that dislodged the sacking also gently sluiced out the soil and grass from the expensively-laid reinforcements on the level parts of the lawn laid (lunacy) right up to the edge of the river.
000 gives a higher angle shot showing the artistry of this now exposed and empty (of soil) soil stabilisation system, along with the feeble grass above it. I am not sure how they will reposition the soil into this stuff short of ripping it up and starting again. Presumably if all this expensive stuff was intended to stop soil coming out, it will be equally good at resisting attempts to put it back in again by mechanical means. Oh dear!
003 ‘Mighty defences’
Here we have what is actually supposed to keep the Leith in the straight and narrow from now on. This is the concrete shuttering for an incomplete part of the bank (this shuttering is now filled with shyte from the flood). The wall when poured (one hopes after clearing out said shyte) will be a worthy successor to the St Clair seawall – it is about 12 inches tall and 8 inches thick. It is plastered onto the top of (rather than onto the front of as with the seawall) the remains of its more substantial predecessor. The lawn (in the areas where it used to be there) starts directly behind it…
005 ‘Classy concrete placing’
The mighty foot-high defences take an interesting course in the photograph taken looking up the left-hand bank from the Forth Street Bridge. I do not know if this feature-bulge in the mighty wall is the outcome of a molar-like architectural design feature to increase the organic appearance of the site or if it’s simply a concrete shuttering quality control issue. It’s your rates money – you decide.
Posted by Elizabeth Kerr
*Photos: Rob Hamlin (May 2013)
Filed under Construction, DCC, Design, Economics, ORC, People, Pics, Project management, Property, Site, Sport, Stadiums, Urban design