Subdivision Experience in West Auckland - sick of council bureaucracy

[donthatetheplayer]

The average sheep farm isn't much of a problem.

Except the sheep dip location which is potentially the absolute worst.

[Mint]

Mint, this is just the way it is I'm afraid. This is why we have a housing shortage in Auckland.

I had trouble with a development around 5-6 years ago. Search for a thread called Davo Tries Again on here and also on my blog (link at the bottom).

I will never deal with council again. Like many.

All the best with whatever you decide to do.

Thanks Davo, your story seems very interesting. It will be a good read for me.

[Wayne]

Except the sheep dip location which is potentially the absolute worst.

Or that factory over New Plymouth way!
But yes the sheep dip would not be good - need to put the house on top of that one.

[donthatetheplayer]

Concrete slab does the job well.

[Mint]

Need to find out how wide the stream is

I've convinced myself to keep trying (not sure if it's a good idea, but since I've already done so much...)

The two major obstacles appear to be,
1) the width of stream, if over 3m, esplanade reserve/strip required - then we need to apply for reduction from 20m to 7m same as riparian margin
2) building over flood plain

I managed to get another quote from a different engineer to do hydraulic modeling - $5500+ disb (modeling $2000+ reporting $3500). The total is similar to the other quote. However, they proposed if the modeling result come back to be over 3m, they could provide me a simple letter to confirm the result to present to the park specialist to proceed with reduction application. A full report is only required, to proof the stream is less than 3m wide. If it turns out to be less than 3m, I think I would be more than happy to pay, as I do not need to deal with the park specialist anymore.

So, I guess I can live with spending another $2000 + surveyor fee. But first, I need to talk to this park specialist if she will be happy with this arrangement. She could come back and say no, and wants to see a full report no matter what. That will be a nightmare.

As with the flood plain, I called the council stormwater unit today, hoping to see if they have any information regards to the stream width. No luck. However, I found out that they are doing a latest 1 in 100 years flood modeling through out west Auckland area. There modeling result for my site is 1m lower than our result. This might be useful later to support our application.

Note to myself, stay positive, stay positive.

[Mint]

Okay, so the story goes on...

For those who would like to know more~

So after changing to another consultant, we finally put all the reports together and lodged the land use& subdivision consent back in Sep 2016.

One month later, a planner is allocated to the job and processing starts. s92 more information request issued in Nov 2016. We submitted all the information requested just before Xmas last year.

Council back to work on 11 Jan 2017, and we were advised all the information has been sent to council development engineer team for comments.

After three weeks of waiting, we were advised the engineer in charged were on annual leave and only back on 31 Jan 2017. So we lost three weeks of processing time, just because of the engineering team leader was too busy to allocate another engineer to work on our job. Once again, very disappointed on Council's work efficiency.

Another two weeks passed, the development engineer comes back with request for more information, on the basis of a new internal policy that was just issued. This newly released policy makes subdivision within floodpain more difficult.

I've done a brief calculation, this application processing time has well passed 20 working days, and approaching 40. Obviously, if the Council hasn't been dragging this application process, we could have received a RC decision long before this new policy is in place.

I have been very patient and understanding throughout the process, right now, I strongly feel we have been penalized for the Council's lack of ability to cope with work load.

We raised our concerns to the Council, but the reply is not helpful at all, they kind of saying, too bad, that's life, just suck it up. Does anyone know if we can file a complaint against the time we lost and get back the justice we deserved?

From Sep 2016 to Feb 2017, almost 6 months, our RC is still being processed. This consenting system is pathetic. Can we please vote to have it replaced??!

[jappronz]

sorry to hear of your problems! keep the updates going

[prometheia]

You're not alone. We're doing a subdivision in Waitakere, with a stream (which we had to have measured - and it was well over 3m), SEA, the works. We submitted our RC in August, then two months later received a very long S92. Many new rules we're thrown at us thanks to the AUP:OIP. We've only this month submitted our S92 response (which was close to 100 pages). I don't want to spook you, however we've spent just over $50k so far, and expect to spend another $20k in the next few months. This is before even turning the first sod.

[Davo36]

For those who would like to know more~

So after changing to another consultant, we finally put all the reports together and lodged the land use& subdivision consent back in Sep 2016.

One month later, a planner is allocated to the job and processing starts. s92 more information request issued in Nov 2016. We submitted all the information requested just before Xmas last year.

Council back to work on 11 Jan 2017, and we were advised all the information has been sent to council development engineer team for comments.

After three weeks of waiting, we were advised the engineer in charged were on annual leave and only back on 31 Jan 2017. So we lost three weeks of processing time, just because of the engineering team leader was too busy to allocate another engineer to work on our job. Once again, very disappointed on Council's work efficiency.

Another two weeks passed, the development engineer comes back with request for more information, on the basis of a new internal policy that was just issued. This newly released policy makes subdivision within floodpain more difficult.

I've done a brief calculation, this application processing time has well passed 20 working days, and approaching 40. Obviously, if the Council hasn't been dragging this application process, we could have received a RC decision long before this new policy is in place.

I have been very patient and understanding throughout the process, right now, I strongly feel we have been penalized for the Council's lack of ability to cope with work load.

We raised our concerns to the Council, but the reply is not helpful at all, they kind of saying, too bad, that's life, just suck it up. Does anyone know if we can file a complaint against the time we lost and get back the justice we deserved?

From Sep 2016 to Feb 2017, almost 6 months, our RC is still being processed. This consenting system is pathetic. Can we please vote to have it replaced??!

This is all pretty normal unfortunately. This is just how councils work and there's not much you can do about it.

[Mint]

You're not alone. We're doing a subdivision in Waitakere, with a stream (which we had to have measured - and it was well over 3m), SEA, the works. We submitted our RC in August, then two months later received a very long S92. Many new rules we're thrown at us thanks to the AUP:OIP. We've only this month submitted our S92 response (which was close to 100 pages). I don't want to spook you, however we've spent just over $50k so far, and expect to spend another $20k in the next few months. This is before even turning the first sod.

That sounds familiar! We also spend over $50k. Now got to pay more for this new report. And hopefully no more drama next.

[Mint]

This is all pretty normal unfortunately.

Nice and effective summary. I am certain there must be a lot of people like us, sharing the similar experience. Disappointed in Council's performance.

Funny thing is we still have to pay the same rate, even not being satisfied with its service.

[Davo36]

Nice and effective summary. I am certain there must be a lot of people like us, sharing the similar experience. Disappointed in Council's performance.

Funny thing is we still have to pay the same rate, even not being satisfied with its service.

yes, there's nowhere else you can go for this sort of thing, and they know it.

And then of course once you've battled and battled with them, and finally got it done, they'll have double the rates coming in since it will be 2 properties.

So you have to fight them to create an extra income stream for them...

[Shalodge]

they'll have double the rates coming in since it will be 2 properties.

Davo ... you know better than that! .. That's not how Councils operate. They set their budgets, work out the amount of rates they need and divide it by ratable properties. All else being equal an extra property means everyone's rates will drop by a few cents..

Russell

[Davo36]

Davo ... you know better than that! .. That's not how Councils operate. They set their budgets, work out the amount of rates they need and divide it by ratable properties. All else being equal an extra property means everyone's rates will drop by a few cents..

Russell

Well yes, I do know that. It's a cost-plus system i.e. work out how much money you want and divide it up as you say.

So no incentive to save etc. Just ping the punters for a bit more year on year forever.

But, to get back to the point, surely having more houses allows for these cost increases to be spread over more properties, and therefore more people right? So then they can rake in a bit more without hurting each household quite as much...

And then there are the other income streams like traffic tickets for not having a rego, parking a bit long etc. etc. A very long list of ways the councils extract money from their communities.

If councils had their way, they'd also get a share of GST, introduce tolls on roads and a million other things.

All so we can live our lives the way they think we should.

[Bob Kane]

Well yes, I do know that. It's a cost-plus system i.e. work out how much money you want and divide it up as you say.

So no incentive to save etc. Just ping the punters for a bit more year on year forever.

It's occurred to me that the solution to the housing shortage is to change this method of generating revenue by the councils.
One suggestion: if you could somehow introduce a max amount a ratepayer could be charged in rates - say $3000 per year - then the councils would then be forced to increase the number of ratepayers if they want more revenue.
This would encourage them to work with developers to get more houses built in the shortest time possible - the opposite to what is happening now.