Changes ramp up club's costs

Mark Simpson

The rock and the hard place Whangarei Racing Club is between has become even tighter due to the escalating price of a Whangarei District Council plan change.

The club is facing a massive blowout in the cost of a private plan change for its coastal site, from the original $30,000 it would now cost $123,000, and rising.

The question of where some of the costs should fall was debated by both parties at the council's Exemptions and Objections Committee meeting yesterday.

The racing club has asked for a reduction of about $30,000 off the $122,940 total bill. Arguing that some costs almost amounted to double-dipping on the council's part, the club has questioned its latest $72,745 bill.

The committee looks set to accept, in part, the club's objection and recommend a reduction of $12,388. Its decision will be referred to the council's powerful planning committee.

Racing club past president John Fairley and WDC chief executive Mark Simpson signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in June 2010 regarding a plan change that would re-zone 56 hectares of the club's land for residential lifestyle development.

That would allow the club to on-sell the proposal to a developer, the return future-proofing the racing facility which was losing the race for economic viability.

The MoU stated WDC would be responsible for all costs associated with preparing the plan change, and estimated them at $150,000.

The club was advised its cost would be $30,000, but the asset rich, cash poor club has had to borrow $250,000 from the NZ Racing Board to see the plan through.

At yesterday's meeting, Mr Fairley and the club's financial officer Karen Houlihan said the costs to both parties had been bumped up because the council "changed the game".

WDC's decision for independent commissioners to hear Plan Change 113 greatly increased costs, for instance. Part of the cost to the club was a $2356 payment to Councillor John Williamson for sitting in on the two-commissioner hearing.

Policy and monitoring manager Paul Wanders said the situation was "very unique" because staff had worked on the plan change before it was re-designated a private plan change.

The "interchangeability" of the words adopt and accept had led to confusion about who was responsible for costs, Mr Wanders suggested.