Porirua City Council refuse to install a post to ensure safe driveway access
D Dahya made this Official Information request to Porirua City Council
The request was partially successful.
From: D Dahya
Dear Porirua City Council,
I recently logged the following matter with PCC(Porirua city Council) regarding the shared driveway on Mungavin Ave(Porirua /Reference CRD1326/21) - the entrance has been prone to incoming vehicles cutting the corner to the point where a small section of grass berm has now been turned into bare dirt.
The real problem is that there has been the continuous practice of corner cutting which allows drivers to enter at speed, at an angle(reducing visibility for the driver and exiting residents) closer to the corner of the fence bordering the driveway.
The tendency to cut this corner leaves the possibility of risk to pedestrians and vehicles exiting the driveway. I have asked the council to install a concrete post at the side of the entrance to prevent corner cutting.
I believe a concrete post would be a simple cost effective solution and would prevent further continued corner cutting to eliminate potential accidents on this corner. It would serve not only as a deterrent but as a buffer between it and the fence should the worse happen.
The continuous practice of corner cutting which has(and will) allow drivers to enter & exit at speed increasing the likelihood of a collision with the fence -which was recently discovered to conceal a power and telecom post (no more than 2 feet high). It was recently discovered due to a vehicle collision with the fence -a result of careless driving 2 weeks ago wiping out the corner of the fence narrowly missing the power & telecom posts which would have left residents without power as well as telecommunications
The Porirua City Council's response to this(I have added my reply to those responses below them):
After providing detailed key points I was surprised to hear of the council's response where they have advised;
1. 'they are not comfortable with placing any type of post or pole there as it would create a new hazard for road users.'
Firstly, the term 'road users' infers ALL drivers on the road.
Secondly, the concrete post would serve as a deterrent for only the driveway users NOT all 'road users'.
The post would resolve a several existing hazards and of course it would be considered a hazard but only to drivers who do not access the driveway correctly- isn't that the purpose of a deterrent?
Thirdly, there is an existing lamppost on the opposite side of the driveway entrance -so if the post is considered an additional 'hazard' by the council then shouldn't the lamppost be considered an existing hazard also?
So based on the councils response above the council either has to remove this lamppost ie the 'hazard' or install a post-which wouldn't be a hazard because the lamppost is'nt.
PCC can't jump on both sides of the argument at the same time.
I would like to know which option will council take based on their own view - will they consider the lamppost a 'hazard' and remove it and, if not, will they install a post?
2. 'to have a conversation with people who use the driveway and ask them to not cut the corner'
What makes the council think I can talk to everyone who uses the driveway(not all of them are known to me) and what guarantee is there that they would listen?
Wouldn't that pose a hazard(to me) from those who may not take too kindly to that advice?
And who's jurisdiction is it to ensure this happens because, the way I see it is that the residents are the ones who will be effected by the council's inaction on the matter?
But, more importantly, isn't that the same as asking speeding drivers not to speed- without deterrents such as the Police,speed cameras & speed bumps?
3. By the way- I was specifically referred to by the police officer attending the accident at the time as an 'informant' (for some reason this has concerning connotations)- if this means that I was the only person concerned enough to report the accident to the police asap then, yes, despite not being the first person to witness or attend the accident site- a neighbour had recorded the collision and provided the video to the police.
4. 'to rebuild the fence with an angle to cater for drivers who cut the corner'
How does catering for corner cutting prevent drivers cutting the corner?
The solution is NOT to allow drivers to cut the corner it is to stop them from doing so.
The point of stopping 'corner cutting' is not only to protect the fence-which in turn protects the power and telecommunications post- but to force incoming drivers to enter the driveway correctly,with maximum visibility, and therefore safely(for everyone).
Coincidentally, when drivers enter the driveway correctly(square on) they are forced to do so slowly or significantly scrape the front of their vehicles on the gutter- a design trait that I have praised for so many years and still wonder if it was intentional- if not, it should be, for all yet to be built driveways! A commonsense solution -perhaps the council should pay heed to this point.
5. 'Alternatively, put reflective tape on the fence if that would help, but unfortunately we will not be installing a new post'.
The reflective tape is only effective for the post, not the fence, as it does not prevent cutting the corner when entering the driveway.
6. By installing a post you;
- Prevent a longtime practice of corner cutting.
- By preventing corner cutting you ensure a clear view PRIOR to entering the driveway and so less likely to put at risk exiting residents/children from the driveway.
- Ensure incoming drivers enter the driveway in a safe manner ie forcing them to slow down.
-By placing reflective tape on the post (not the fence) you ensure the post is visible which, in turn, ensures (rather than warns) that no vehicle collides with the fence on entering the driveway
The absence of a post allows;
- Drivers to enter the driveway at speed and without a clear view
- Does not prevent another collision with the fence which has occurred recently putting people and the power & telecommunications supply at risk.
7. For the council to decide that the post will present another hazard is not one made with reason and clear understanding of the issue.
The reason why drivers cut the corner is to avoid slowing down when entering the driveway- a point the council should have considered before making its decision- it is the council's responsibility to ensure that appropriate measures are in place to ensure they do slow down and, in this case, I have offered a simple, practical, cost effective solution. I was not questioned by the decision maker on any aspect of the situation and their decision is an indication of how connected /thoughtful the council is on the issue.
8. I was advised by council of affordability concerns on another recently related matter regarding maintenance issues.
I'm not surprised considering they have to repay a significant amount of wage subsidy all because they tried to 'cut corners' to claim for more subsidies than they were entitled to, ironically, they are not prepared to spend money on preventing cutting this particular corner- because they were more interested filling their own bellies (than address such issues/hazards out in the community) because now they can not afford it(?).
- If it is about priorities, then this is a priority!
- If it is to do with affordability, then the 'corner cutting' by the council leading to the repayment of unentitled wage subsidy has impacted on its ability to resolve relatively simple 'safety' issues with clear and reasonable decision making.
9. It appears the council are engaging in cost cutting because of shortcuts in corner cutting.
Please answer all questions listed below.
10. Questions.
1. Does the council believe the the solution is to allow drivers cutting the corners or to stop it?
2. Does the council still believe that the fence should allow for drivers to continue cutting the corner?
3. And if so, how would it force them to do so slowly?
4. How does catering for corner cutting prevent drivers cutting the corner?
5. What solution can the council provide to prevent cutting the corner?
6. There is an existing lamppost on the opposite side of the entrance way -so if the post is considered a 'hazard' by the council then does the council consider the lamppost a hazard also?
7. And, if not, why not? and will they then install a post on the mentioned area?
8. Can you tell me what is more of a hazard? A concrete post that would prevent the tendency to cut corners or the continuous practice of entering driveway at speed, without clear view, and incorrectly, increasing likelihood of colliding with fence again putting the power & telecommunications at risk?
9. How can the post present an additional hazard - it would be positioned on the berm section which is NOT part of the driveway or road?
10. Regarding the council's response 'to have a conversation with people who use the driveway and ask them to not cut the corner' - isn't that the same as asking speeding drivers not speed- without deterrents such as Police,speed cameras,speed bumps?
11. The council continues to maintain berms that are already maintained by residents instead of maintaining those that aren't. Is the Porirua City Council known for making commonsense decision?
Yours faithfully,
D Dahya
From: Porirua City Council Enquiries
Kia ora,
Thanks for your email.
Your request will be logged the next business day, one of our customer
service staff will then be in touch with a reference number or response.
If your matter is urgent please phone us anytime on 04 237 5089.
You can also contact us using the Antenno app which allows you to easily
report an issue, send photos and advise location details.
Ngā mihi
Customer Services Officer (Contact Centre)
Kaiarahi Ratonga Kiritaki (Pokapa Whakapa)
Tel:
04 237 5089 I [1]poriruacity.govt.nz
Did you know you can report issues direct to us Using Antenno. Learn more
[2]here
References
Visible links
1. https://poriruacity.govt.nz/
2. https://%20https//poriruacity.govt.nz/se...
From: Records Management
Porirua City Council
image001.png
2K
Download
OIA Acknowledgement Request Questions relating to reference CRD1326 21.pdf
91K
Download
View as HTML
Dear David
Thank you for your request below.
Please find attached our Acknowledgement letter.
Ngā mihi,
Marcella Ropu
Records & Scanning Officer
Kaiārahi Pūkete me te Karapa
[1]Email Sig1 resized
From: [2][FOI #17291 email]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 1:07 PM
To: [3][Porirua City Council request email]
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Official Information request - Porirua City Council
refuse to install a post to ensure safe driveway access
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Porirua City Council,
I recently logged the following matter with PCC(Porirua city Council)
regarding the shared driveway on Mungavin Ave(Porirua /Reference
CRD1326/21) - the entrance has been prone to incoming vehicles cutting the
corner to the point where a small section of grass berm has now been
turned into bare dirt.
The real problem is that there has been the continuous practice of corner
cutting which allows drivers to enter at speed, at an angle(reducing
visibility for the driver and exiting residents) closer to the corner of
the fence bordering the driveway.
The tendency to cut this corner leaves the possibility of risk to
pedestrians and vehicles exiting the driveway. I have asked the council to
install a concrete post at the side of the entrance to prevent corner
cutting.
I believe a concrete post would be a simple cost effective solution and
would prevent further continued corner cutting to eliminate potential
accidents on this corner. It would serve not only as a deterrent but as a
buffer between it and the fence should the worse happen.
The continuous practice of corner cutting which has(and will) allow
drivers to enter & exit at speed increasing the likelihood of a collision
with the fence -which was recently discovered to conceal a power and
telecom post (no more than 2 feet high). It was recently discovered due to
a vehicle collision with the fence -a result of careless driving 2 weeks
ago wiping out the corner of the fence narrowly missing the power &
telecom posts which would have left residents without power as well as
telecommunications
The Porirua City Council's response to this(I have added my reply to those
responses below them):
After providing detailed key points I was surprised to hear of the
council's response where they have advised;
1. 'they are not comfortable with placing any type of post or pole there
as it would create a new hazard for road users.'
Firstly, the term 'road users' infers ALL drivers on the road.
Secondly, the concrete post would serve as a deterrent for only the
driveway users NOT all 'road users'.
The post would resolve a several existing hazards and of course it would
be considered a hazard but only to drivers who do not access the driveway
correctly- isn't that the purpose of a deterrent?
Thirdly, there is an existing lamppost on the opposite side of the
driveway entrance -so if the post is considered an additional 'hazard' by
the council then shouldn't the lamppost be considered an existing hazard
also?
So based on the councils response above the council either has to remove
this lamppost ie the 'hazard' or install a post-which wouldn't be a hazard
because the lamppost is'nt.
PCC can't jump on both sides of the argument at the same time.
I would like to know which option will council take based on their own
view - will they consider the lamppost a 'hazard' and remove it and, if
not, will they install a post?
2. 'to have a conversation with people who use the driveway and ask them
to not cut the corner'
What makes the council think I can talk to everyone who uses the
driveway(not all of them are known to me) and what guarantee is there that
they would listen?
Wouldn't that pose a hazard(to me) from those who may not take too kindly
to that advice?
And who's jurisdiction is it to ensure this happens because, the way I see
it is that the residents are the ones who will be effected by the
council's inaction on the matter?
But, more importantly, isn't that the same as asking speeding drivers not
to speed- without deterrents such as the Police,speed cameras & speed
bumps?
3. By the way- I was specifically referred to by the police officer
attending the accident at the time as an 'informant' (for some reason this
has concerning connotations)- if this means that I was the only person
concerned enough to report the accident to the police asap then, yes,
despite not being the first person to witness or attend the accident site-
a neighbour had recorded the collision and provided the video to the
police.
4. 'to rebuild the fence with an angle to cater for drivers who cut the
corner'
How does catering for corner cutting prevent drivers cutting the corner?
The solution is NOT to allow drivers to cut the corner it is to stop them
from doing so.
The point of stopping 'corner cutting' is not only to protect the
fence-which in turn protects the power and telecommunications post- but to
force incoming drivers to enter the driveway correctly,with maximum
visibility, and therefore safely(for everyone).
Coincidentally, when drivers enter the driveway correctly(square on) they
are forced to do so slowly or significantly scrape the front of their
vehicles on the gutter- a design trait that I have praised for so many
years and still wonder if it was intentional- if not, it should be, for
all yet to be built driveways! A commonsense solution -perhaps the council
should pay heed to this point.
5. 'Alternatively, put reflective tape on the fence if that would help,
but unfortunately we will not be installing a new post'.
The reflective tape is only effective for the post, not the fence, as it
does not prevent cutting the corner when entering the driveway.
6. By installing a post you;
- Prevent a longtime practice of corner cutting.
- By preventing corner cutting you ensure a clear view PRIOR to entering
the driveway and so less likely to put at risk exiting residents/children
from the driveway.
- Ensure incoming drivers enter the driveway in a safe manner ie forcing
them to slow down.
-By placing reflective tape on the post (not the fence) you ensure the
post is visible which, in turn, ensures (rather than warns) that no
vehicle collides with the fence on entering the driveway
The absence of a post allows;
- Drivers to enter the driveway at speed and without a clear view
- Does not prevent another collision with the fence which has occurred
recently putting people and the power & telecommunications supply at risk.
7. For the council to decide that the post will present another hazard is
not one made with reason and clear understanding of the issue.
The reason why drivers cut the corner is to avoid slowing down when
entering the driveway- a point the council should have considered before
making its decision- it is the council's responsibility to ensure that
appropriate measures are in place to ensure they do slow down and, in this
case, I have offered a simple, practical, cost effective solution. I was
not questioned by the decision maker on any aspect of the situation and
their decision is an indication of how connected /thoughtful the council
is on the issue.
8. I was advised by council of affordability concerns on another recently
related matter regarding maintenance issues.
I'm not surprised considering they have to repay a significant amount of
wage subsidy all because they tried to 'cut corners' to claim for more
subsidies than they were entitled to, ironically, they are not prepared to
spend money on preventing cutting this particular corner- because they
were more interested filling their own bellies (than address such
issues/hazards out in the community) because now they can not afford
it(?).
- If it is about priorities, then this is a priority!
- If it is to do with affordability, then the 'corner cutting' by the
council leading to the repayment of unentitled wage subsidy has impacted
on its ability to resolve relatively simple 'safety' issues with clear and
reasonable decision making.
9. It appears the council are engaging in cost cutting because of
shortcuts in corner cutting.
Please answer all questions listed below.
10. Questions.
1. Does the council believe the the solution is to allow drivers cutting
the corners or to stop it?
2. Does the council still believe that the fence should allow for drivers
to continue cutting the corner?
3. And if so, how would it force them to do so slowly?
4. How does catering for corner cutting prevent drivers cutting the
corner?
5. What solution can the council provide to prevent cutting the corner?
6. There is an existing lamppost on the opposite side of the entrance way
-so if the post is considered a 'hazard' by the council then does the
council consider the lamppost a hazard also?
7. And, if not, why not? and will they then install a post on the
mentioned area?
8. Can you tell me what is more of a hazard? A concrete post that would
prevent the tendency to cut corners or the continuous practice of entering
driveway at speed, without clear view, and incorrectly, increasing
likelihood of colliding with fence again putting the power &
telecommunications at risk?
9. How can the post present an additional hazard - it would be positioned
on the berm section which is NOT part of the driveway or road?
10. Regarding the council's response 'to have a conversation with people
who use the driveway and ask them to not cut the corner' - isn't that the
same as asking speeding drivers not speed- without deterrents such as
Police,speed cameras,speed bumps?
11. The council continues to maintain berms that are already maintained by
residents instead of maintaining those that aren't. Is the Porirua City
Council known for making commonsense decision?
Yours faithfully,
D Dahya
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an Official Information request made via the FYI website.
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[4][FOI #17291 email]
Is [5][Porirua City Council request email] the wrong address for Official
Information requests to Porirua City Council? If so, please contact us
using this form:
[6]https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[7]https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
If you find this service useful as an Official Information officer, please
ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's OIA or LGOIMA
page.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer
---
The content of this email is confidential, may be legally privileged and
is intended only for the person named above. If this email is not
addressed to you, you must not use, disclose or distribute any of the
content. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the
sender by return email and delete the email. Thank you.
---
.
Disclaimer
---
The content of this email is confidential, may be legally privileged and
is intended only for the person named above. If this email is not
addressed to you, you must not use, disclose or distribute any of the
content. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the
sender by return email and delete the email. Thank you.
--- .
References
Visible links
2. mailto:[FOI #17291 email]
3. mailto:[Porirua City Council request email]
4. mailto:[FOI #17291 email]
5. mailto:[Porirua City Council request email]
6. https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
7. https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
hide quoted sections
From: Moana Wyatt
Porirua City Council
Kia ora David
Please find attached a reply to your recent Local Government Official
Information and Meetings Act request relating to the installation of a
post to prevent drivers corner cutting.
Ngā mihi,
Moana Wyatt (she/her)
Principal Advisor (Information)
Kaitohutohu Matua (Pārongo)
Tel: 04 237 1411 I [mobile number]
[1]poriruacity.govt.nz
Please note: I work Monday, Tuesday and Thursday and may not respond on
unscheduled work days.
Disclaimer
---
The content of this email is confidential, may be legally privileged and
is intended only for the person named above. If this email is not
addressed to you, you must not use, disclose or distribute any of the
content. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the
sender by return email and delete the email. Thank you.
--- .
References
Visible links
1. https://poriruacity.govt.nz/
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this request
D Dahya left an annotation ()
I will respond to all of the answers Porirua City council have offered to my initial questions soon but here is my repsonse to 3 of their answers denoted by an asterix.
2. Does the council still believe that the fence should allow for drivers to continue cutting the
corner?
The suggestion to change the angle of the fence was offered to protect the fence from further damage.
Any possible change to the fence would have to be made by Kainga Ora (as the property owner).
*The solution is not to move the fence but to install a post to prevent cutting corners- this is the council's responsibility.
3. And if so, how would it force them to do so slowly?
Inconsiderate/poor driving is an individual’s choice.
*If that is the council's view then why have road markings at all? Wouldnt it be an individual's choice to drive safey or to drive on the correct side of the road(without road markings or speed signs etc)?
5. What solution can the council provide to prevent cutting the corner?
As previously advised verbally, we will be writing to the residents in the cul de sac and ask them to
refrain from driving over the berm and to encourage people visiting their homes to be more considerate.
This communication will be copied to Kainga Ora (as the property owner).
* It is not so much the immediate residents that are likely to cut corners but those that visit the residents that are.
Link to this