High fences and danger signs line the outskirts of many properties along the eastern end of Makorori Beach Rd. Photo / Zita Campbell
High fences and danger signs line the outskirts of many properties along the eastern end of Makorori Beach Rd. Photo / Zita Campbell
A Gisborne resident is fighting to overturn the council’s decision to red-sticker her family’s beachside property and deem it uninhabitable.
High fences and danger signs line the outskirts of many properties along the eastern end of Makorori Beach Rd, including Amy-Kelly Clark’s family bach, which she owns with her parents.
Gisborne District Council says it will remove red-stickered placards when a property owner can prove that the damage has been fixed and the home is safe again.
Clark said the family lived near the bach, which they used as a day house or to stay in during the summer.
“Maybe if it’s a cyclone, we won’t stay there ... or when it’s pouring with rain for two weeks in the winter.
Clark said the council did not list the house as category 3 until after a severe weather event in June 2023, four months after the cyclone.
The council has made voluntary buyout offers for all category 3 properties, which are paid 50/50 by the Government and the council.
Clark and her parents have refused the offer made to them.
Category 3 means there is “an intolerable risk to life at the property”, and that it is not possible to reduce the risk, the council says.
However, Clark believes, after reviewing some of the reports the council used in its risk assessment, that there are ways to mitigate the risks of potential land movement.
Local Democracy Reporting has seen a report from September 2023, commissioned by the council from GNS Science, that says a sudden, complete landslide is not expected.
The report recommends further investigations and monitoring the area around Clark’s home for further slope and dwelling movements, as well as consideration of conducting a mitigation assessment.
LDR has seen a copy of a council report from May this year on the landslide risk to Makorori Beach Rd, which says the eastern end has “a high future threat to life with an annual probability of between 32 and 48%”.
It says that probability takes into account the physical parameters of the site, the collective views of experts over a long period, the landslide-inducing rainfall recurrence interval, the proximity of the dwellings and the demographic profile of likely occupants.
The report has not been released to the public. A council spokesperson said the copy shared with LDR was not the most up-to-date version.
During a council meeting in December, councillor Teddy Thompson asked why the council was pulling down “perfectly good” properties because of the category 3 buyouts.
“Even if you spent $300k on a retaining wall and saved the million-dollar house, aren’t we better off doing that than spending $70k to pull it down?”
Council chief executive Nedine Thatcher Swann said each house had been fully assessed by engineers and the council building team.
“The qualification for being bought out was an intolerable risk to life.”
The council said it issued red stickers to properties in emergencies after doing a Rapid Building Assessment (RBA) on the immediate risk.
However, Clark says the council reapplied the red-sticker designation in January this year, when there was no emergency.
She has challenged the decision through the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE), which has yet to make a ruling.
In January, Clark used the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act to ask for reports on the bach.
“Show us how our house is a threat to life, and a danger, because trust me, it’s not,” she said.
The next day, a council staff member requested reports from the family’s insurance loss adjuster for the third version of the risk assessment, she said.
This assessment, which included private insurance information, was presented to a room of Makorori Beach residents.
The family has made a complaint to the Privacy Commissioner.
Council recovery manager Naomi Whitewood confirmed that another agency had advised the council that it may have disclosed personal information, in breach of the Privacy Act.
“Council was requested to delete the disclosed personal information, which it did immediately.”
The privacy concerns had been appropriately addressed, she said.
Of the latest red sticker, she said: “The council issues placards in emergencies after doing a Rapid Building Assessment to assess immediate risk.
“A red placard means there was an immediate high risk to the property at the time of the RBA.”
The council was aware of Clark’s concerns, including her belief that it had issued the stickers incorrectly, but it disagreed with this view.
The council would remove red stickers only when a property owner could prove that damage had been fixed and that the home was safe again, Whitewood said.
A red-stickered property on Makorori Beach Rd. Photo / Zita Campbell
The type of information needed varied according to the risk, but might include an engineering report showing no problem with slips, a structural engineering report showing the building was safe, or proof that a builder had fixed the problem.
“Until that determination has been resolved, it would be inappropriate for the council to comment further on those matters.”
Clark said the family’s next step would be to pay for a geotechnical engineer to rebut the council’s report, which was costly.
“If you don’t have the time, money and resources to fight this, you’re just going to get kicked out of your house.”
The family did not dispute that there was a head scarp (a steep exposed slope at the top of a landslide) above their property.
