Ref: 0000117
11 February 2025
Ohakune Ratepayers and Residents' Society Inc
[FYI request #27868 email] Dear Ohakune Ratepayers and Residents' Society Inc
OFFICIAL INFORMATION REQUEST
I refer to your official information request dated 21 December 2024 for information related to SH49,
Teitei Drive intersection.
In response:
2./ The application for funding to MBIE for the "Regional Mid-sized Tourism Facilities Grant Fund"
(R - MFF-R2-004), RDC's application contained the following information for funding. Section 3.1.b
stated 2 options were available "Option 1 kept the access road on road reserve while Option 2
created a safer 90 degree "T" shaped intersection with SH49" ... "NZTA has been instrumental in the
final design option chosen" Which of the above Options was subject to approved funding?
Both options fitted funding criteria.
Q1.a) How has council completed the SH49 intersection over the Ohakune Domain under the guise
/ guidance of contractors such as PLATEAU SURVEYORS LTD & GHD NZ and any other parties
involved; to install an illegal option without Ruapehu Council picking up on this.
Q1.b) If a ratepayer bordered a reserve or park and submitted to council approvals to build a
driveway / access way over said reserve; which RDC departments would oversee the approvals and
note / decline said application for breach.
Q1.c) If a ratepayer bordered a reserve or park & installed a driveway (without submitting any
approvals / documentation) over a reserve, what ramifications would that ratepayer have and which
policies would they be in breach of.
Q1.a,b and c do not fit the criteria for a LGOIMA request.
Q1.d) Which RDC departments were involved in the SH49 intersection and were any approvals
sought for the SH49 intersection to be installed on SH49.
Page 2
Land Transport. A similar request was made by Ohakune Ratepayers and Residents' Society Inc
on 31 July 2024, 1) Please provide documents pertaining to Teitei Drive from 2014 through to 2019
relating to the conception, design, consent, approval & sign off from staff or contractors for Teitei
Drive intersection to the State Highway.
Council provided all information it had in response to this request, dated 20 September 2024 Ref
000055. Council has no new information to add.
We therefore have decided to refuse your request under section 17 (e) that the document alleged to
contain the information requested despite reasonable efforts to locate it, cannot be found.
Q1.e) Based on council having no documentation / approvals / signoff for SH49, and the design from
GHD / PLATEAU SURVEYORS LTD (or any other 3rd party) not questioned encroaching Ohakune
Domain, is this illegal formation of SH49 the fault of a 3rd party or Council? If the former, will Council
be seeking compensation for the third parties for the correction of SH49 physically or to legally
resolve the encroachment.
This does not fit the criteria for a LGOIMA request.
Q2.a) Councils application for funding stated "NZTA has been instrumental in the final design option
chosen", please provide copies of ALL communications & documentation and evidence as to NZTA's
involvement and assistance in the design of the intersection.
Q2.b) Was NZTA advised the intersection would be encroaching Ohakune Domain.
Q2.c) Did NZTA ever question the encroachment.
Council has, despite all reasonably practicable efforts been unable to locate documents relating to
Q2.a, b and c, we therefore have decided to refuse your request under section 17(e) of the LGOIMA
1987: that the document alleged to contain the information requested does not exist or, despite
reasonable efforts to locate it, cannot be found. Searches were conducted of the following sources:
multiple email archive accounts, and Council's current and legacy document management systems.
Q3.1)a) In the same application, point 3.4 (Regulatory and other matters) point a (Provide evidence
that you completed will meet all relevant local and national regulatory requirements) lacks any
information regarding the encroachment, nor does it provide any standards for the road or
intersection itself. It does however state that the Pavement will be constructed to TNZ B/02:2005
specification, that road signs will be to specification + footpath specifications. Was council asked to
provide any further information regarding the SH49 intersection and Road specifications?
Council has, despite all reasonably practicable efforts been unable to locate documents relating to
this question. Council has decided to refuse your request under section 17(e) of the LGOIMA 1987:
that despite all reasonable efforts to locate the information, it cannot be found. Searches were
conducted of the following sources: multiple email archive accounts, and Council's current and
legacy document management systems.
Q3.1)b) As this above specification is a "performance based specification" (as opposed to a method
type) does the road constructed cater for all those projected developments listed in Mr Furner's email
of 5 September 2016? If not then what category and usage does the road constructed cater for to
comply with this specification? Our questions must be answered by a Licensed Roading Engineer
involved in the project.
Please explain the reason and purpose of your request. This is to help identify the public interest
considerations that may favour disclosure of the information.
Page 3
Q3.2) In the same point 3.4 for Regulatory, sub point d (provide evidence that land access and other
necessary permissions required for the project (if any) have been obtained); it is stated "This project
is on road reserve as well as Public Land - Scenic Reserve / Local Purpose Reserve under the
current management of RDC" and that "There is no land access issue to be considered further".
Q4.1) Section 5 (Declaration) has many points around agreeing that "activity/project that is a lawful
activity" and "application is complete and correct and there have been no misleading statements,
omissions of any relevant facts nor any misrepresentations made". Please provide evidence that
RDC provided to MBIE or any other party / minister / agency, that council were to encroach on
Ohakune Domain; this differs from all communications and documentation we have seen to date that
always state the road will be moved to "Road Reserve" and never once mentions encroaching on
Ohakune Domain.
As per the Hon Tama Potaka, Minister of Conservation’s letter to you dated 23 January 2025 Ref:
OIAM-240 explaining Councils requirements related to Q4.1. It is not a requirement; we are therefore
refusing your request under section 17(e) of the LGOIMA 1987 as the documents alleged to contain
the information requested does not exist.
You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of this decision.
Information about how to make a complaint is available at
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or
freephone 0800 802 602.
Yours sincerely
Clive Manley
CHIEF EXECUTIVE mf:cm
