Council broke own rules when approving Bella Vista
Tauranga City Council broke its own rules when granting resource consent to the failed Bella Vista Homes development.
Some of the Bella Vista homes now declared too dangerous to inhabit were awarded code-of-compliance certification by Tauranga City Council.
After the March 9 evacuation made as Cyclone Hola approached, however, the Bella Vista homeowners were told their homes had problems from the foundations to the ceilings. The few allowed access to their homes have been told to never have more than two people on the second storey. Even the ground the subdivision sits on is scoured and potentially dangerous.
A council-commissioned expert report into the subdivision said problems began with the Bella Vista resource application.
Tauranga City Council, as the Building Consent Authority (BCA), had ultimate responsibility. It now faces liability for the handling of the resource consent process, where the failures started to accrue. Stuff can reveal the documents Bella Vista Homes (BVH) submitted for resource consent lacked key information, breaching council’s infrastructure development code (IDC).
Despite this, the subdivision was awarded resource consent.
Further, the council has also admitted to an over-reliance on producer statements for code-compliance assessment, something leaky home report writers specifically warn against. In other words, it accepted other people’s ticks of approval at face value. A legal ruling showed facevalue reliance on producer statements was a major contributor to the leaky homes debacle, affecting homes built between 1994 and 2004.
According to the Tauranga council-commissioned report by multinational engineering firm AECOM and obtained by Stuff, the council failed to request a second geotechnical report on the proposed subdivision, breaching its own IDC.
BVH director Danny Cancian uses the mismanagement of the resource consent to mitigate his role in the subdivision’s failure.
‘‘It all started with council,’’ he said. ‘‘Those houses should never have existed.
‘‘If the council had said to do another geotechnical report, I would have done one and if that showed up extensive land works needed to be done, I might have walked away from it.’’
AECOM slams the geotechnical assessment of the Bella Vista development and the engineers Bella Vista hired to create producer statements, but also reveals Tauranga council’s failure during the resource consent and building consent stages.
‘‘The Coffey [Geotechnics (NZ) Ltd] geotechnical completion report for The Lakes Stages 3A and 3B was used in support of the development,’’ the AECOM report said. ‘‘This use was out of context.’’
The Coffey report, titled The Lakes Stage 3A and 3B, was an overall geotechnical examination of the wider development of Pyes Pa¯, of which the 21 Bella Vista homes were a part.
When Bella Vista director Danny Cancian applied for resource consent from Tauranga City Council planning department for his part of the Pyes Pa¯ development, he relied on the Coffey report.
Paragraph 10a of Bella Vista’s resource consent determination reads, ‘‘All development within these lots shall be undertaken in accordance with the Geotechnical Competition Report for The Lakes Subdivision – 3AB prepared by Coffey Geotechnics (NZ) Ltd.’’ But Tauranga council’s IDC says any infill subdivision, which Bella Vista became when it doubled the houses on the sections, must engage a second geotechnical professional in the same category as the original to assess the implications of increased density. This did not happen.
Subsequently, the AECOM report concluded, there were ‘‘widespread non-compliances with Clauses B1 and B2 of the New Zealand Building Code’’. AECOM also points to stability and soil condition problems. Further, the development did not adhere to the district plan.
‘‘In our opinion, BVH provided insufficient detail at the resource consent stage to show how the development would comply with the Tauranga District Plan,’’ the AECOM report reads.
The report issued by council regarding the BVH resource consent application, however, was satisfied the information provided was ‘‘sufficiently comprehensive and reliable for the purposes of making this assessment in an informed basis’’.
The final resource consent, granted by consultant planner James Darby and senior environmental planner Lee Dove, regarded the application as ‘‘consistent with the inherent provisions of the Tauranga Council District Plan’’.
Council general manager CE Group Kirsty Downey confirmed her department never received nor requested a second geotechnical assessment from Bella Vista Homes, as required under the IDC. When asked specific questions about the issuing of the resource consent and breaches to the IDC, Tauranga City Council declined to comment.
‘‘As you are aware, the investigation is now under way,’’ Downey said in response to the questions. ‘‘The information you have requested is part of that investigation. It is inappropriate for us to comment on these matters at the present time.’’
‘‘It all started with council. Those houses should never have existed.’’ Danny Cancian,
Bella Vista Homes director