Culvert consent conditions raised with developer: Council lawyer

Thursday, 8 May 2025

An aerial view of The Showgrounds retail development and the State Highway 1/Evans St intersection where the controversial culvert sits.

Timaru council’s in-house lawyer said there should be no confusion over how a culvert issue outside a retail development would be resolved, as he had discussed consent conditions with the developer just weeks ago.

Raising the long-running community concern during Tuesday’s Timaru District Council meeting, councillor Stu Piddington described the culvert issue as his “favourite hobby horse” as he sought clarification over claims made by the developer.

“The developer, in this morning’s (Timaru) Herald was very magnanimous to say it’s nobody’s fault, including his own, so I’m just wondering where we are with the culvert, the intersection, and everything around that with NZTA (New Zealand Transport Agency),” Piddington asked.

In response, the council’s legal services manager Elliot Higbee said he had also read the article and had reviewed the resource consent conditions for The Showgrounds development.

Councillor Stu Piddington sought clarification over the culvert issue on Tuesday, and an assurance the second stage of The Showgrounds would not go ahead until it was resolved.

“I’m not really sure where the confusion has come for the developer,” Higbee said.

“The sequence is that we sign off on some detailed engineering design for the intersection, and that occurs before Stage 2 on-site works, not withstanding earthworks.

“And then after that, and before work on the State Highway, we, and NZTA, sign off on detailed designs for the intersection and detailed designs for the culvert extension.”

That condition was “actually requested by the developer in 2020”, Higbee said.

He said at a guess, the theory behind that was that the shape of the intersection would then have a flow-on impact on the structural and design requirements for the culvert.

“I have reached out to my NZTA colleague that perhaps this is an opportunity for us to jointly remind the developer of these clauses.”

The council’s in-house lawyer Elliot Higbee laid out the consent conditions and what work was required at the intersection of SH1/Evans St and The Showgrounds retail development during Tuesday’s meeting.

Earlier this week, developer Kerry Knight, of Equinox Group, a relative newcomer to the culvert issue, having taken over The Showgrounds project late last year when former developer Tony Gapes ran out of money, told The Timaru Herald there was some confusion of what was expected by each party involved.

Knight said neither the developer, the council or NZTA could be singled out for criticism due to the complicated nature of the problem and said he did not know how long it would take to be resolved.

He said confusion surrounded a consent, and who would rebuild the road once the culvert work had been completed.

“I don’t know how long (in distance) the road would be,” Knight said.

“It’s costing a lot of money with consultants. We’ve spent $2m to $3m over and above what we expected to do.

“Rooneys are looking at it, as well as consultants and the council; we’re scratching our heads.“

Last month, the council said it was waiting on NZTA to make a complaint over delays to work at the intersection before it tackled the issue with the developer who was required to replace the culvert by March 2024.

Piddington said he did not want to see the developer start the second stage of the retail centre without having met the contractual obligations “through some sort of back-handed extension”.

Councillor Allan Booth asked whether the culvert issue left the council exposed “cost wise” in any way during Tuesday’s meeting.

“The public are getting rather frustrated by it all.”

Higbee said he had “raised these conditions with the developer” a number of weeks ago.

“It is clear that the work on Stage 2 cannot begin until that first step of the actual engineering design for the intersection is signed off.”

Councillor Allan Booth then asked whether there was any liability for the council or if it was exposed in any way “cost wise”.

Higbee said the council was the consent authority, it was a State Highway asset and that the change was “coming about through the developer”.

“Not in any direct way from that deal, if that makes sense,” he said.

“We do have some infrastructure in the subsurface area, and I believe that we are getting on and dealing with that,.“

Higbee said the relaying of those pipes was at a depth where there shouldn’t be any future impact, but you “can’t really say with that subsurface stuff”.