Safety concerns with camping site

KiwiRail not told of plans for parking area

KIWIRAIL says it wants to speak to the Dunedin City Council about plans for a innercity freedom camping site next to the city’s railway tracks.

For six months, the trial site in Thomas Burns St will be open to nonselfcontained vehicles as part of an effort to take pressure off other sites in Warrington and Ocean View.

KiwiRail South Island operations manager Jeanine Benson said the company had not been informed of the trial in advance, but did expect to have been.

The company’s top priority was safety and to ensure there were adequate measures to keep people and trains separate.

No other activities should impede the safe operation of trains or the safety of people on the site, Ms Benson said.

KiwiRail would contact the council to discuss those con cerns at an appropriate time, she said.

Council parks and recreation group manager Robert West said while he was unaware of any concerns the rail operator had, the council had endeavoured to contact as many neighbouring busi nesses as possible.

Apart from a query about resource consents from a nearby business owner, the feedback had been largely positive, Mr West said.

But Leith Valley Holiday Park and Motels owner John Aubrey said he estimated the trial site could cost him up to $100 a night.

The council was setting up a competing business which charged nothing and was paid for with ratepayer and taxpayer money, Mr Aubrey said.

‘‘I’m still struggling to find out why they think they need to do it. I mean, who the hell gave them the mandate to do it?’’ he said.

Businesses and the community told the council last year they did not want freedom camping sites in the city.

Mr West said it was important to note at the end of April the trial site would revert back to casual car parking only.

The council would evaluate the success of the trial site as part of its planning for the 201920 freedom camping season, he said.

While there needed to be a resource consent to operate a car park on the site, information from the council’s planning department and legal opinion suggested the camping trial did not need one.

❛ I’m still struggling to find out why they think they need to do it. I mean, who the hell gave them the mandate to do it?