Wednesday, Sept 24, 2014
Since Sept 27, 1879
Retail $1.50 Home delivered from 95c
THE INDEPENDENT VOICE OF MID CANTERBURY
www.guardianonline.co.nz
GUTTED A Lowcliffe farm worker escaped unscathed when his home went up in flames yesterday morning. FULL STORY P3 PHOTO TETSURO MITOMO 230914-TM-016
Court battle costly BY SUE NEWMAN
SUE.N@THEGUARDIAN.CO.NZ
The Ashburton District Council could be looking at a legal bill of more than $100,000 to fight five homeowners who want a residents’ only parking zone outside their properties. To break an impasse between council and the residents over a construction management plan for the district’s new art gallery and museum, council staff and mayor Angus McKay signed a document known as the side agreement. This stipulated that the street outside their Wills and Cameron street properties would be designated resident only parking when events were held at the
new heritage complex. The council cannot enforce a resident only parking zone without reviewing its transportation and parking bylaw. Council staff undertook a review of the bylaw and included the resident only parking clause. The new bylaw was publicly notified, submissions were called for and two hearings held. Several people spoke against the change saying it would set a precedent. Councillors opted not to accept the bylaw review, in spite of the residents’ threat of legal action if the residents only parking clause was not enacted. That threat now looks likely to be actioned, said council chief
executive Andrew Dalziel. Peter Whiteside QC has been instructed to act for the five residents and the cost of High Court action will depend on how Mr Whiteside goes about his litigation, Mr Dalziel said. “If it is a full blown judicial review the potential costs could be well over $100,000 for the council. In addition Mr Whiteside says if his clients are successful they would seek costs against the council,” he said. Defending a challenge in court was always more expensive than bringing the challenge as the council would have to carry the costs of pulling together a raft of material and documents, Mr Dalziel said.
At the lower end if some form of injunctive relief was sought, the council’s costs could be around $30,000. Council staff estimate that delays caused by negotiations with neighbours that have been running since 2008, have pumped up the cost of the project by around $700,000. This was made up of amendments to construction plans, additional fees, increases in the cost of building and the impact of building code changes in the wake of the Canterbury earthquakes ($224,000). They contributed to what has been a $3 million blowout on the project. It was tendered at $6.1 million but has an all-up com-
pleted cost of $9.7 million. The side agreement also includes a clause that could stifle any development in or around the West Street building for another 10 years. If the council wants to amend any conditions of its resource consent or if it wants to apply for a new consent, it cannot do so without the neighbours’ approval. Any changes could also be hamstrung for a further five years. The council has commissioned an independent review of the project from start to finish because of the budget blowout and lengthy delays and this is likely to come at a cost of $30,000. Ph 03 307 7900 to subscribe!
Weather: High 20˚ - Overnight 4˚ Page 26
Puzzles: Page 25
Television: Page 27
Family Notices: Page 26
www.guardianonline.co.nz