Councils Holding the Country to Ransom

[Davo36]

Airspace Charges

I keep saying I won't post any more council stories, but they just keep coming and I know a bit about this! With Auckland Transport trying it on with me!

So Wellington Council is doing this now. Which sucks for owners, but at least they're taking a much much simpler approach to it than Auckland Transport were. They wanted me to have leases drawn up (cost of around $10k), and much higher annual rentals etc.

From Stuff:

Council plucks $100,000 out of thin air

KATIE CHAPMAN Last updated 05:00 04/10/2012

Share

CRAIG SIMCOX/Fairfax NZ
STANDING OUT: Helene Ritchie sits on the tiled strip of her apartment which incurs a $100 annual fee for encroaching into council airspace.

Rental fees for thin air are adding more than $100,000 a year to Wellington city coffers.
Wellington apartment and commercial building owners who have balconies or building features jutting over city streets and footpaths are being charged for the right to occupy the airspace, Wellington City Council figures show.
Under council policy, airspace encroachments occur when a building has a "balcony, facade, dwelling, conservatory or eaves that encroaches into airspace above legal road".
Records show there are 519 airspace encroachments in Wellington, of which 467 are by apartment balconies.
The council receives $109,674 a year from airspace rentals, more than half of which comes from commercial buildings with larger encroachments from features such as balconies and some shop canopies.

Rest of Article

[Wayne]

and some shop canopies.

Balconies I can see some logic (I said some so don't flame) but canopies? Building owners should be charging the council for th service the canopies provide (shelter) to their rate payers and citizens.

[Davo36]

Oh hey, I can see the logic too.

If you have a district plan in place that says anything sticking out over the footpath can attract airspace charges, then fine you can charge for them.

They say the difference between a verandah (or canopy ) and a balcony are that the verandahs are there for the public benefit, and in fact you have to put one up in most CBD type areas. But the balconies are for personal benefit, because only the tenant or owner can walk on them.

So then you are using public space for a private benefit. I can even get on board with all of that.

But what I can't agree to is either of these situations:

1) The district plan says you can build a balcony over the footpath, give design consideration etc. and then later they come back and say you can't - and that you'll have to pay.
2) They apply these rules retrospectively. So one year there's no airspace issue, you build your building, then they change this district plan so that you have to pay. Seems unfair as you built under one set of rules, and get hammered under another.

[Perry]

So one year there's no airspace issue, you build your building, then they change
this district plan so that you have to pay. Seems unfair as you built under one
set of rules, and get hammered under another.

Not just unfair, but . . . .
Under the "protected use" provisions of the RMA,
I thought that would be illegal.

[eri]

^
which is why they backed off when Davo got the lawyers to send them a letter say they would contest it

and the council would lose because of ..........

but you shouldn't need to pay a lawyer $400/hr? to stop your council from trying to screw you

[Perry]

Actually, despite David's protestations, (about not posting more
examples on PT of Council arrogance and malfeasance), I do hope
that he is maintaining (adding to) an extensive e-file of all these
egregious examples of abuse of authority. It could prove a useful
resource, one day.

[Maccachic]

Improving efficiencies in local government

Author:
Linda O’Reilly, Partner: Resource Management & Local Government, Brookfields Lawyers


Associated Event:
Local Government Reform


The local government efficiency taskforce is to address issues regarding streamlining and reducing costs of local government planning, consultation, and reporting. This paper explores the challenges these key areas present for local government and potential methods for improving efficiencies.
Key points include:

• Statutes both governing and duplicating reporting requirements
• The impact of reform on current council plans including LTPs

http://www.conferenz.co.nz/whitepape...=Videos-Papers

[Davo36]

Another taskforce? Who will produce another report?

Which the government will ignore?

[Maccachic]

CONFERENCE TO EXAMINE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES
In the midst of Auckland’s current housing crisis, our Auckland Branch is holding a one day conference to review the challenges and opportunities in the residential property sector and to help facilitate development.
Issues to be addressed at the upcoming Residential Development Conference will include resource management and consenting challenges developers currently face, funding availability, ideal design, the real estate market and legal roadblocks.
Presentations will be given by:
 Auckland Council chief executive, Doug McKay
 Martin Udale, director of Essentia Consulting
 Paul Bendall, national partner of development finance at BNZ
 Alan McMahon, Colliers International
 Evan Davies, Todd Property
 Debra Dorrington, partner, Alexander Dorrington Lawyers
 Sue Simons, partner, Berry Simons Law
 Pete Bossley, Bossley Architects
This conference will be held on Wednesday 24 October at SkyCity Convention Centre in Auckland. For more information, or to register for the conference, please visit www.propertynz.co.nz

[Perry]

Another taskforce? Which will produce another report?

Which the government will ignore?

Maybe not, David. Especially if it recommends
more / newer national taxes of some sort.

[Davo36]

Maccachic, that sounds quite interesting. Pity it's over $600 to attend.

Also, I bet money Doug McKay doesn't front up. No way will he have the balls to do that.

[eri]

something that comes to my mind everytime i think of council's new building codes

All government recommendations for best practice in health, education, and other aspects of intervention in our lives should be viewed through the filter of what a minimum wage worker could afford. If its not affordable, admit that and put it on a list of 'nice to have in the future'.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/...forced-to-save

[eri]

interesting

at 1 end of the country the elected councillors seem to be saying continual rates increases are unsustainable

However, the discussion turned into a more general debate about rates increases, which some councillors said were unsustainable.

Rates increased by 4.7 per cent for the 2012-13 financial year, having risen 4.6 per cent in 2011-12.

Councillor Ian Pottinger said he supported the idea of the open day but wanted to see a forensic examination of expenditure to see where savings could be made.

"A lot of people want us to do that," he said.

Cr Boniface said big rates rises had to stop. "There have been heavy rates increases for the last eight years and they have got to come down."

Councillor Carolyn Dean said savings needed to be ramped up. "The rates increases are not sustainable."

http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-tim...w-what-it-does



but at the other end of the country the deputy major seems to have quite different priorities

Hulse, speaking this morning at an event to mark World Homeless Day in Auckland's Aotea Square, said social housing should be the top priority.

"We need to make sure we don't lose our focus on social housing," she said.

"It's wrong to sell social housing, it's wrong to say councils shouldn't be in the business of social housing, it's one of the most important things we can do."

.... - supporting our community with mental health issues and funding for drug addiction services.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/loca...-housing-first


i don't seem to remember brown's team running on that ticket

"send us your druggies, send us your crazies

we will house and treat them all for free

no matter what it costs our rate payers"

[Bob Kane]

Hulse, speaking this morning at an event to mark World Homeless Day in Auckland's Aotea Square, said social housing should be the top priority.

"We need to make sure we don't lose our focus on social housing," she said.

"It's wrong to sell social housing, it's wrong to say councils shouldn't be in the business of social housing, it's one of the most important things we can do."

.... - supporting our community with mental health issues and funding for drug addiction services.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/loca...-housing-first

Councils should never provide social housing.
They just aren't equipped to do that job.
Leave it for central government.
Councils should stick to their knitting - providing services for their ratepayers (property owners).

[speights boy]

Councils should stick to their knitting - providing services for their ratepayers (property owners).

Parks surrounded by security so that only property owners are admitted.
How novel.