Rudman's City: Lifestyles of rich and famous sink council pool plan

by BRIAN RUDMAN

If the Parnell Baths filter system breaks down over summer, grumpy bathers shouldn't blame the city council. Instead, they should point the finger at four rich lawyer-neighbours who have taken court action to delay the planned $3.84 million renovation of the harbourside institution.

Why have they done it? Well, so far they're refusing to say, but as far as I can work out it's a case of spitting the dummy because the city council has refused to build new "traffic-calming" devices outside their luxury homes in Judges Bay Rd.

The council says the protest could delay the upgrade of the 87-year-old pool by up to 18 months and cost ratepayers up to $50,000 to fight.

The main objectors are Derek Quigley, a former National Party and Act MP - and, ironically, since August Auckland City's mayoral complaints commissioner - Michael Reed, QC, a recent migrant from Wellington, and his wife, Auckland District Court judge Nicola Mathers, and another lawyer, Bernie Clark.

All have homes on Judges Bay Rd, the main access to the baths, although Mr Quigley is yet to live in the street.

A resource consent hearing for the renovations was held on August 6.

Initially the council had proposed to include, as part of the project, additional car-parking by cutting into the cliff below the Parnell Rose Gardens. In the face of widespread local opposition, this idea was dropped before the hearing began.

At the hearing, Mr Reed's submission on behalf of the grandiloquently named Judges Bay Residents Action Group focused on issues of traffic safety and parking. In his written submission he was concerned that the improvements at the baths would cause overcrowding in his street.

The planning commissioner, Leigh McGregor, rejected these concerns. She also noted that "considerable evidence was given regarding serious disturbances and antisocial behaviour being experienced by the residents of Judges Bay Rd as a result of congregations in the street by 'hoons' and their vehicles.

"These activities are not generated by the Parnell Baths, and will not be caused or exacerbated by the proposed upgrading and renovation works."

Miss McGregor pinpointed the key obsession of the lawyer-protesters. Like Quay St and the Domain, this road has fallen victim to the antics of the boy-racers.

Under pressure from Mr Quigley and others, various official attempts have been made to deal with the problem. Some success has been achieved, but not enough to make these lawyers happy.

Mr Quigley got architect Simon Carnachan to draw up new traffic-calming plans for the street, claiming the city's efforts were "unsafe".

He presented them to Mayor Christine Fletcher (who had just made him her complaints commissioner) and to council officials. The officials rejected them, saying there was "no valid reason why further traffic-calming measures should be installed ... "

In a document last August, Mr Quigley outlined several reasons why "local residents are adamant that [these] landscaping/engineering proposals are an essential part of the pool upgrade."

The last item in the list was a threatening promise. Accepting his proposals would "enable the pool upgrade to proceed without protracted appeals".

On September 13, the Quigley group made good the threat and lodged an appeal on the broad-brush grounds that the decision was "wrong in fact and law".

Last Monday Judge John Bollard summoned Mr Reed and the other parties to a hearing to demand further details of the appeal. It was, from all accounts, an extraordinary affair. For starters, Mr Reed did not turn up.

Judge Bollard was unamused by this and adjourned the hearing so court staff could track him down. He was traced to Auckland Airport on his way south to a Wellington High Court appearance.

Undaunted by this, the judge ordered the QC to please explain to the court by cellphone from the airport's Koru Lounge. Over a hastily arranged speaker system, the disembodied voice apologised that his absence was the result of a communications breakdown.

Judge Bollard tartly observed that everyone else had made it.

Mr Reed was asked to elaborate on the basis for his appeal. When he didn't, the judge gave him until November 9 to give detailed reasons for the action.

He was also ordered to produce the names and addresses of his expert witnesses and members of his mysterious residents' action group if he planned to continue the action.

Amazingly, Mr Reed then asked that if he produced the names, they be kept confidential because of alleged threats that had been made.

His wife was a judge and hoons with scanners had been monitoring their phone calls, he said.

It all seemed miles away from a case about a swimming pool renovation.

Judge Bollard directed the court to reconvene on November 12 to consider Mr Reed's expanded case.

It is to be hoped that by then the rich lawyers will have thought better of their extraordinary behaviour and withdrawn their appeal.

However bad their hoon problem, trying to bully the council to do their bidding by blocking another unrelated project is an appalling abuse of power and money.