Category: General

Everything else

Auckland Council Correcting a Resolutions Error

·

Whoops – bit too quick off the mark there

 

From Auckland Council

Auckland Council correcting minor issue on rates resolution – no change to rates bills

 

 

Auckland Council is correcting a minor technical issue in the setting of this year’s rates.

 

At the 26 June Governing Body meeting, the Council voted to set its rates immediately prior to adopting the Annual Plan, rather than immediately after as required by the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.

 

To remove any potential ambiguity created by this issue, Auckland Council’s Governing Body will be asked to repeat its 2014-15 rates resolutions as part of its ordinary meeting on 14 August.

 

The resolution will not change rates as set on 26 June, and there will be no change to what appears on people’s rates bills.

 

A Council spokesperson said:

 

“Unfortunately the ordering of the agenda was not strictly in line with what is required by the Act. This resolution will remove any potential ambiguity this may have created. It will have no impact on the rates that were set by Council.”

 

Auckland Council will publish a notice in the New Zealand Herald tomorrow, pursuant to section 119 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.

—ends—

 

First Unitary Plan Pre-Hearing to get Under-Way

·

Ironically on Further Submissions

 

Okay this one is more for your Unitary Plan wonks (like me) but it pays to keep an eye on Unitary Plan Hearing Panel proceedings to gauge the debate and reactions on the Proposed Unitary Plan.

Last night I saw from the Unitary Plan Page (the one the Hearings Panel runs) a Procedural Minute from the Chair – Judge Kirkpatrick in regards to the Further Submission process recently completed.

Before I embed the material just a note on the Hearings Panel and relevant information:

 

From the Unitary Plan Independent Panel Procedures Page:

Some of the important things to note about the hearing process are listed here.

  • You will only be contacted about pre-hearing meetings and hearing sessions if you have said on your submission that you wish to be heard, or if you have contacted the panel office to let us know that you wish to be heard.
  • If you are a submitter but do not wish to be heard, your submission will still be considered by the Panel when making their recommendations on the Plan.
  • Hearing sessions and pre-hearing meetings are open to the public and the media as observers. Only submitters or their representative and their witnesses are allowed to speak.
  • Expert conferences and mediations are not open to the public. This is because discussions at those meetings should encourage an open exchange of views and may need to be on a “without prejudice” basis. Panel decisions do not get made at these meetings.
  • The Panel will expect all submitters who wish to be heard, or their representative and any witnesses they call, to attend in person. In some circumstances the Panel may agree to other arrangements, but that will need to be arranged in advance of a hearing session.
  • Because of the large number of submissions and the limited time available, submitters will be given a fixed amount of time at the hearing to make their main points. There will generally not be time to read in full your submission or evidence to the Panel.
  • If you are required by the Panel to attend any pre-hearing meeting it is important that you do attend. If you do not have a reasonable excuse for not attending, the Panel may exclude you from the rest of the hearing process.
  • The Panel’s hearing rooms at 205 Queen Street have limited capacity. Pre-hearing meetings and hearing sessions that have a large number of submitters and a high level of expected public interest may be held in other locations. Please check this website for details.
  • If the number of people at the hearing exceeds the maximum allowed for building safety, priority will be given to the people who need to be there for that part of the hearing to proceed.
  • All records of hearing and pre-hearing processes will be available on the IHP website, unless there is good reason for withholding any particular information under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
  • All publicly available documents for the hearing sessions will be placed on this website. Parties involved in a hearing session will be sent a link to the website so they can go direct to the documents relating to their hearing session. Other arrangements will be made if you cannot access the website.
  • The hearings will not be transcribed. The hearings will be recorded digitally and a copy of the audio record can be provided on request.

Source: http://www.aupihp.govt.nz/procedures/

—–

Meaning anything I post in regards to the pre hearings or hearings is public information unless stated otherwise.

 

The “Procedural Minute” that was recently issued in regards to Further Submissions (that recently closed)

 

The Letter of the upcoming Pre Hearing Conference

 

From what I can gather the Memorandum of Counsel is on the Further Submission process, the complexity of the Unitary Plan, and Auckland Council’s large submission to the Unitary Plan. The applicants have asked the Hearings Panel in this case for an IT expert and independent planning consultant to assist people through both the Unitary Plan and the Unitary Plan website. While the pre hearing is to go ahead it seems the Panel will decline this request by the applicants (hmm I could have done that for them having waded through all 7,000 pages of that cumbersome document a few too many times).

However, it is to note that we could see the Hearings grind down if pre hearings and hearings get stuck on the complexity of the Unitary Plan let alone anything else including rezoning at site specific level.

 

As for my submission I had five oppose it and one in support. Going to be fun times ahead

 

Holiday Highway to where?

·

Certainly isn’t to Northland that is for sure

 

I will let the others talk about the Holiday Highway and so on.

But I shall leave you with this straight out of the USA; home of abandoned malls, abandoned strip malls and now this

 

A shame I and my children have to carry this can from my parents’* generation who seemed not quite having a grasp on transport, planning and social economics…

*not all from the Baby Boomer generation are bad with their economics. Sadly though they get tarred by the bad decisions made by their associates…

Council Consolidating Buildings

·

From Seven to Three

 

From Auckland Council

Council accommodation moves to save $100m

 

Auckland Council is in the process of reducing the number of its council buildings in the central city from seven to three to save money and create more efficient and productive work spaces.

The council purchased the former ASB Tower at 135 Albert Street in July 2012 for $104m and staff are presently moving in. The move to 135 Albert Street results in savings of about $2.7m a year over the next 10 years. Over the next 20 years, the savings will be over $100m. 

 A decision on future accommodation had to be made as leases on rented buildings were coming up for renewal.

Purchasing 135 Albert Street was the cheapest of all options examined, which included staying in existing buildings, building a new building or purchasing an alternative existing building.

Savings are being realised through exiting leases on rented offices, operational efficiencies, better utilisation of space and reduced time travelling between offices. Staff productivity and effectiveness are also expected to improve as teams and groups work more closely together.

In the long term, approximately 2400 staff will be accommodated in 135 Albert Street, including space for elected members.

Some departments that were in Bledisloe House have already moved to 135 Albert Street, enabling staff in rented office space, such as on Hereford Street, to move to Bledisloe House or Albert Street.

As part of the current work to upgrade Bledisloe Lane, the customer services centre and reception presently in the ground floor area of the Civic Administration Building will be moved into the ground level of Bledisloe House.

These works sit within existing renewal budgets.

—ends—

 

 

 

Speculation Second Harbour Crossing (as Road only) Could Be Accelerated

·

Labour questions Government on leaked document that states Prime Minister is set to announce advancing second harbour crossing in August (on the campaign)

 

I caught this from Labour’s Phil Twyford and thought that was the joke rather than Minister of Transport Gerry Brownlee offering up his resignation:

 

As expected Twitter lit up with a lot of people Tweeting their displeasure over this apparent upcoming announcement.

Road Only Auckland Harbour Crossing “Makes No Sense”

The Campaign for Better Transport said today that the Government’s idea of an additional road only Waitemata Harbour Crossing hasn’t been thought through.

“We all know that the Northern Motorway and approaches are notoriously congested at peak times, so local support probably stems from the belief that this congestion will somehow be solved,” said spokesperson Cameron Pitches.

“However, the net effect of a road only crossing will be that in the morning peak, the Auckland CBD will be flooded with thousands of extra single occupant cars looking for a car park. The Central Motorway Junction will also be a bottleneck without more lanes, but there is no room for more.

“And in the evening peak the already congested Northern Motorway will grind to a halt, as six lanes converge into three.”

Mr Pitches says a far better solution would be a rail only crossing that would extend from the City Rail Link to Albany on the North Shore.

“The Northern Busway is enormously popular and is a great example of a system that can carry far more people at peak times than single occupant cars. High capacity rail would be the logical next step.”

Mr Pitches said that a recent report identified that the cost of a rail link connecting the City Rail Link to Albany on the North Shore would be about $2.5bn.

“It is clear that the Government’s proposal and any alternatives have not been through Treasury’s better business case process.  There is no urgency with the project either as the yet to be completed Western Ring Route is designed to reduce traffic volumes on the bridge,” said Mr Pitches.

The Government is yet to make an official announcement on how a new crossing would be funded, but Mr Pitches suspects it would have to be tolled due to the multi-billion dollar cost of the project.

“The Government also needs to be honest and reveal how much the toll will be for the new crossing, and if the current Harbour Bridge will be tolled as well.”

“It just makes no sense.  The Government has just been caught out not doing a comprehensive assessment of alternatives for the Basin Reserve.  You would think they would want to avoid making the same mistake twice,” concludes Mr Pitches.

For more analysis of the proposed Harbour Crossing, visit transportblog.co.nz: http://bit.ly/1niNuZq

—ends—

 

And of course I picked up this from Councillor George Wood: This will mean that the SkyPath will now not be required Keith. Savings all around.

I am also not particularly amused that all the millions spent on revitalising the City Centre and surrounds to turn it from its car dominated past into a more humanised place will be wasted with the City Centre to be turned back into a car sewer rat run thanks to the second crossing funnelling all the cars from the North Shore back into the City Centre…

 

Our New Electric Trains Breaking Down in Peak Services? [Updated]

· 3 Comments ·

I thought tests were meant to eliminate this?

 

I caught this Tweet last evening during the PM peak services:

 

I do expect faults to come up during electric train testing. I somewhat expect maybe one spitting the dummy in the peak services. But I do not expect two EMU’s to break down with apparently similar faults inside Britomart during the peak evening services (or morning if it was morning) causing the issues that happened (cancellations and apparent bus replacements).

 

So the question is Auckland Transport what will be done to prevent this kind of failure again. Especially as such failings or near failings have been noted as seen here: http://www.bettertransport.org.nz/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2460&start=2760

The last thing you want is two EMU 6-car sets fully loaded with 750 passengers each breaking down with that same traction fault but this time on the Southern Line (the busiest of all lines) during the peak services…

 

Come on Auckland Transport let’s get this sorted while the EMU’s are still on the Onehunga Line

 

[Update] Diesel Unit (and ADL Class) Replacing Electric Train for Onehunga Service tonight

It seems we are still beset with issues with the electric trains that should have been sorted in testing.

This from earlier this evening:

Looking at the replies to the Tweet it seems an ADL diesel unit (the predecessor unit that plied the Onehunga Line before the Electrics went into service late April) has been replacing the EMU’s on Onehunga runs owing to no Electric unit available.

September is when the Manukau Line is meant to get the electric trains running revenue services. I hope by then the issues are sorted…