Flooded families seek answers: what happens next and who pays

A group of family members living by a creek in Stanmore Bay, say they face an uncertain future after being flooded out of their homes on Anniversary Day.

Alethea Courtenay, her daughter Monique and son-in-law Troy Andreassen, are trying to move on from memories of washed out fences, inundated homes, cars written off and carrying the kids through waist-high smelly water to higher ground on the night of Friday, January 27.

“It’s six weeks ago but we are still stressed,” Monique says. “We think about it all the time and rain is very triggering for all of us.” “The first thing we do whenever it rains, is check whether it’s high tide,” Troy says.

Alethea has lived in Stanmore Bay for 61 years and, with neighbour Mike Pine, organised a community meeting on March 4 at the boat club. Around 70 people attended, and heard from Crs John Watson and Wayne Walker as well as local board members.

“Many were shocked to see the size of the catchment area and what feeds into it,” Alethea says.

Long-time resident Mike Pine has a background in civil construction and drainage. He says Auckland Council should have considered the effects on the catchment before planting the D’Oyly wetland, in 2018.

He says the primary purpose of the reserve was as a stormwater catchment.

“It’s nice to have it planted with natives but they shed debris which is washed down, blocking the inlet grill (or ‘bear trap’),” he says. “The overflow can’t exit via the stream below my property, because it has not been maintained for 16 years. It was planted with natives that restrict the flow of water, which directly caused the flooding of homes. The stream needs cleaning urgently to mitigate problems in future.”

Although improved maintenance of infrastructure is a big focus, residents like the Courtney family are wondering whether they have a future in their homes.

“Should we even be allowed to live here, or should it be taken back to wetland?” Monique asks. “If so, would we be paid what the properties are worth?”

“We need to raise the houses up above the flow, but insurance doesn’t pay for that, and we can’t afford it,” Troy says. “I would ask whether Council has liability, bearing in mind it consented all the development around here which now contributes to more siltation and runoff.”

At the meeting, Cr Watson said millions of dollars have been spent providing infrastructure and flood mitigation at D’Oyly Reserve but if it’s compromised by the build-up of debris and the grates block, there’s a major problem.

He said the plan of action includes clearing silted waterways and an urgent Healthy Waters (stormwater) audit.

“We have to make sure absolutely everything possible is done to ensure this isn’t repeated,” he said.

Cr Walker said most of the streams are on private property and the private landowner is responsible for maintenance of their section of the stream.

“In many ways this is impractical –property owners definitely have their part to play but the council needs to take the initiative in pulling it all together,” he said.

“It’s a situation duplicated right across Auckland but events of January 27 show that it’s no longer acceptable to leave things and hope for the best.”

Local board members Leanne Willis, Sam Mills and Gary Brown were also at the meeting and pledged to look at local maintenance contracts to see what can be done.

Council’s Healthy Waters head of operations, Andrew Skelton, says the D’Oyly Reserve project was created to naturalise the stream without increasing flood levels to the area, and was extensively modelled.

“Modelling considered the impact of climate change as well as future development within the catchment,” he says. “The rainfall on January 27 was unprecedented and exceeded the 1 percent AEP (annual exceedance probability), and consequently the floodplain extended to surrounding properties. The stormwater also washed down debris from the wider catchment to the weir. Even if the debris had not blocked the weir, the volume of water would have been similar. There was simply too much water to drain away before it overtopped the reserve.”

Regarding maintenance, he says Healthy Waters continues to maintain the wetland and planting and carries out quarterly inspections.

“The weir/grille is a critical hotspot and is regularly inspected and cleared, including before and after any forecast major storm event. Between January 26 and midFebruary, the grille has been cleared six times,” he says.

“Where the stream moves into private land council is not responsible for maintainance, however major blockages can be reported either online or by calling 09 301 0101 and we will carry out an inspection.”

The Hibiscus & Bays Local Board has asked for stormwater disposal constraints to be considered when resource consents are granted for development.

Currently Auckland Council’s Plan Change 78, which enables the Government’s urban density National Policy Statement, is before independent commissioners.

Local board deputy chair Julia Parfitt and chair Gary Brown took the issue to the commissioners on March 8.

Adequate water and wastewater provision has already been recognised as a potential ‘qualifying matter’, restricting where intense development can occur without resource consent. Member Parfitt says the board wants a stormwater disposal constraints control to be included as a qualifying matter where flooding issues are identified.

The proposal was put together before the recent flooding and cyclone events, but those weather events have put stormwater at the top of mind.

Parfitt says Council needs to look at historical documents about which areas had flooding issues, rather than rely on the zoning currently allowed under the Unitary Plan, which she says has upscaled zoning even on overland flow paths. “The former Rodney District Council catchment management plans were accurate, but those areas were up-zoned despite this,” she says. “Many had known stormwater issues.”

“We are seeking a site-specific approach to coastal hazards and inundation provisions. In this plan change, some of those provisions are looked at in a ‘blanket’ way but, for example, Ōrewa Beach is quite different from the inundation at Arkles Bay.”

The local board also asked that the provision of an adequate public transport network be a qualifying matter –something Auckland Transport chose not to put forward. Parfitt said they also looked at urban design, requesting that access to sunlight be considered as well as options for developers to apply best practice, which could result in things such as better open spaces and pedestrian access.

“My view is that Government needs to re-evaluate its urban density standards bearing in mind that a 100 -year storm could happen again as soon as tomorrow,” Parfitt says. “We’ve seen which areas are suitable to develop and we shouldn’t be intensifying everywhere.”