Ratepayers angry footpaths ripped up without consultation

A group of Epsom residents say they have been hit with big rates rises only to discover the council has come along and torn up the red-chip footpaths in their character neighbourhood without consulting them.

About 15 residents in Mountain Rd and Castle Drive said the big rates rises should have given them a say about what happened in the area with its volcanic stone walls, mature trees and heritage homes, along with red-chip footpaths and bluestone kerbing.

Instead, the council had ripped up the red-chip footpaths and replaced them with "grey concrete footpaths".

The residents, who wish to remain anonymous, have hired the law firm of Hesketh Henry to get the council to reinstate red-chip footpaths in accordance with the existing footpath policy.

In a letter to Mayor Dick Hubbard, chief executive David Rankin, councillors and community board members, Hesketh Henry partner Stuart Ryan said the rateable value of the properties in Mountain Rd was indicative of the quality of these properties in the eyes of residents and the council.

"The council has introduced significant rates increases over the past term. Therefore residents consider they have a financial interest in the character and amenity values of the area, particularly where policies that affect this amenity are implemented without consultation," Mr Ryan said.

Council chief executive David Rankin has admitted a botch-up led to 15 streets being laid in black concrete that were due for red chip, including Mountain Rd under a 2003 agreement with the Hobson Community Board.

Officers have spent about $170,000 at ratepayers' expense in compensation to Fillmore Contracting and on research since November 2004 when senior staff Dr Jill McPherson and Paul Sonderer, without reference to politicians, banned red chip because of perceived problems and inconsistent colour matches.

Acting chief executive Dr Stephen Rainbow yesterday said officers had no intention of consulting the Mountain Rd residents or anyone else for that matter about retaining red-chip footpaths.

Dr Rainbow said the public had been consulted during the council's 10-year plan this year. That document asked Aucklanders if they wanted to put another $83 million into footpaths over the next decade, which they said yes to. It made no mention of ditching red-chip footpaths.

Mr Ryan said the matter was:

Inconsistent with the council's consultation policy giving consideration to the views and preferences of people likely to be "affected or have an interest" in a matter.

The only consultation had been a focus group of 32 people that was not representative or a credible sample of public opinion.

A 2003 survey found 85 per cent support for the visual appearance of footpaths and red-chip the preferred option.

And "dispensing with proper consultation" was inconsistent with public consultation for Vulcan Lane.

"The footpath policy is exactly the sort of initiative that the public have a reasonable expectation to be consulted on," he said.

Furthermore, the staff recommendation was inconsistent with the council's heritage policy, particularly for character suburbs.

At the last footpath review in 2003 officers acknowledged that red-chip added "character which is unique to Auckland".

Papers released to the Herald under the Official Information Act show Mr Rankin told staff in May to drop the reference to the council "seeking to protect and enhance the city's unique character" in a draft report because it "undermines the fundamental proposition of this report, which is to promote consistent look and feel".

Royal Oak resident Stephen Alpe was also annoyed big rates increases were not going to fix basics like footpaths.

"Why do we have to put up with cracked footpaths and streets not being cleaned. My street has grass growing in the gutter. There is gravel there from four years ago when the street was resealed.

"When I contacted the council about this they said the work was contracted out and I have heard nothing since," said Mr Alpe.