Footpath corruption to be found under every stone

The basalt kerb stones, hewn out of Mt Eden by the prisoners of the past, continues to be ripped out of the streets of Auckland - stolen. Is the looting authorised? The ugly patchwork of footpath surfaces is escalating into an ugly patchwork of kerbing under the council. They are ripping up one of the the most recognisible heritage traits of the city and destroying community character. Who is making on this? Where are the stones going?

I once queried the man connected with the big Queen Street upgrade and asked why rock (granite) from China was being used when the old kerbstones were perfectly fine. I asked where all of the stones would be used now they have been replaced by imported stone. He said Mayoral Drive. I intimidated I didn't believe him, and he got very hostile.

That's the next twist in the Auckland City footpath corruption scandal brewing away and being pursued by the NZ Herald's Bernard Orsman:

Auckland City Mayor John Banks has ordered an inquiry after it was revealed that the council has been paying twice for some footpath work. It will be the second inquiry into the council's footpath contracts.

Last week, the Auditor-General announced an inquiry into the management of the council's footpath contracts after a series of revelations by the Herald.

Yesterday, the Herald reported that a flaw in the council's footpath contracts, had resulted in overpayments to John Fillmore Contractors since 2004. The company has been paid twice for footpath and kerb-and-channel work that overlaps.

The council does not know how much the error has cost ratepayers.

"This is so serious and so damaging to the reputation of the council, its officers and my stewardship of this public business that urgency is required," Mr Banks said.

Follow the stones. It is certainly a design crime at the very least.

The official ACC policy is not being adhered to from the inconsistencies I've seen about the town. See the default on main roads is to remove the stones - it is not designated as normal or standard anymore, but "special." - this is a removal of the historic, local and natural in favour of the modern, generic and artificial. Why would you ruin the established urban environment like that?

Note the ownership clause:
ACC policy:Appendix 1 - Bluestone recycling process decision chart

1. Is the existing kerb material basalt bluestone?
No - no basalt bluestone recycling
Yes - continue to question 2.

2. Is the replacement kerb material basalt bluestone?
Yes - Reuse existing basalt bluestone at site.
No - Contractor to carefully remove all bluestone and deliver to Sylvia Park yard to hand over to contract manager. All recovered basalt bluestone kerb stones and pitching stones shall remain the property of Auckland City.

So at Sylvia Park yard sits about two kilometre's worth of bluestone kerbing (approx. 4,500 kerbstones) from both sides of Queen Street. Will that be used to replace the concrete Mayoral Drive kerbing anytime soon? They have the nerve to talk about the Queen St upgrade "Heritage"
The use of hand-made basalt kerbs (many of them products of early 'hard labour' sessions in the Mount Eden prison yards) has always been a key signature of Queen Street.
- but that is what they have destroyed - leaving one or two here and there is a mockery to heritage. No word on what replaces it either.

Newmarket used Timaru bluestone for their pavers. They mention that they chose against Chinese granite - nothing I can find on the Queen St upgrade from the council mentions it - but that's what it appears to be.

The other issue is the craftsmanship in working stone from the 19th and early 20th century has not survived. The contractors often put the battered side-street blocks in instead of the main road and better cut blocks that were there originally - so it doesn't look right. Same with the mortar - if they followed how it was done originally they would have no problems, but I've seen some poor jobs with thick lips of concrete bulging out over the edges that people trip on because it is deliberately raised - stupid. Ugly. Even when they are supposedly following the policy it's ugly.

Combined footpath and lines undergrounding:

And as for the policy of the council - certainly the ACC - to not co-ordinate the footpath improvements with the undergrounding of the overhead wires; don't get me started... When will all the lines in Auckland be put underground? The current answer based on their plans is: NEVER. That is unacceptable. When they put in new footpaths through a neighbourhood and leave all the lines up (as they do now in every situation I have seen) it condemns them to having those ugly wires for the lifespan of the footpath - 40 years. The councillors keep telling me it's not their problem - that Telecom and Vector are to blame - but they are liars. It's their job to do this and to care - it's not the corporations' job. The Councillors don't care about undergrounding and they don't mind that the place looks like shit. Why? They can't be fucked doing anything about it because: they have low expectations and they are distracted by their pet issues - one of which will never be the aesthetic development of the suburbs. The attitude of the councillors on this issue is appalling. If they need a local bill through parliament to force the co-operation between council and corporations then lobby for it! I've argued that above-ground wires should be rated as an incentive to get them underground... but don't get me started.