The only certain things are death, taxes, and council budget blow-outs. Why does this always happen? Here is a typical example to explain why.
Hamilton City Council is planning several new roads to open up farm land south of the city for a new suburb. Nobody questions the need, but the location of at least one of the roads is contentious. You would expect a consultation process with local landowners to ease the tension.
Council staff claim that consultation took place in 2007. After some digging, I found this to be misleading. The council’s District Plan from 2009 records the outcome of this consultation and states that infrastructure (such as roads) was never considered.
Ten years of road planning followed, without the landowners being informed of the details. Vague regional maps were shown, but these kept changing. The landowners didn’t sit idly by — they asked for details repeatedly and were told that the design had not been done.
Then in 2017, they were told the land had been selected and were given plans of what they had apparently already agreed to. I have obtained council plans that show the road positions had changed multiple times over the years, none of which had been shown to the owners.
One owner was particularly surprised. A proposed road passed through his property. As he had owned it for thirty years, he knew it well. There is a large gully and a swamp in the way. When he pointed out this blatantly obvious problem to council, he was told it was the optimal route despite a route with no gully being close by.
You’d think that the optimal route would take into account the contour and stability of the land. You’d think that the design would start with basic site information such as geotechnical reports for the foundations of roads and bridges.
It was another three years before geotechnical reports were started, which happened last month. I did an Official Information Act request to obtain the geotechnical test results. Here is the council reply:
“Engineering reports based on the geotechnical testing are anticipated to be completed towards the end of the design phase, expected to be between June and December 2021.”
Here is the reason for cost blow-outs. The critical information to start the design, and to determine the most basic decision of where to put the road, is planned to be obtained at the end of the process.
The business case was concluded in 2017 in order to access a government loan. The council didn’t want pesky details getting in the way. The “optimal” route had nothing to do with the road — it was following the money.
It should also be noted that the council has spent the last three years telling the landowner that the road cannot be moved because the design has been completed, but costings cannot be given because the design hasn’t been started. I tracked down the business case. The 2.3 km stretch of road is estimated at $7.5 million including $2.4m for the bridge. Remember these figures because a comparison with other roading projects across the country tells me that the actual cost is going to be at least double and I intend to follow up on this. Council staff need to be held to account.
If you enjoyed this BFD article please share it.
