Saddle Hill, with the upper quarry on Jaffray's Hill on the right, and the arrow designating the lower quarry.
The co-owner of a quarry cutting into Dunedin landmark Saddle
Hill has appeared in court documents making what appears to
be an ominous threat to mine ''the entirety of Jaffray's
An affidavit describes a ''tense'' meeting between Kim Taylor
and Dunedin City Council staff during a site visit. Mr Taylor
has denied making the comments, and said the council was
''getting personal'' and using ratepayers' money to do it.
''This is just about crushing down not rock, but people, with
ignorant bureaucrats who don't have any expertise ... just
swinging the lead, and don't mind which heads it cracks,'' he
The tension between the council and the quarry owners came
after the latter agreed to stop efforts to expand a second
site below Jaffray's Hill, the smaller of the two hills that
make up Saddle Hill.
Work was planned to extend the ''lower quarry'', and its
developers were adamant it needed no resource consent.
But an interim ruling was released yesterday after the
council took the issue to the Environment Court, meaning
while work was not stopped, it could only occur within a set
area, the already quarried space within the lower quarry.
The council wants the work to cease altogether, as it says
there is no resource consent.
The issue follows years of court action and public complaints
about the upper quarry.
A 2012 interim enforcement order required quarry operator
Saddle Views Estate Ltd to stop earthworks outside a specific
area on the upper quarry.
The court has already declared no consent to quarry the hill
exists and says it is not satisfied, at this stage, there are
any existing use rights for quarrying.
Saddle Views Estate has appealed that decision and a hearing
is due on July 28.
In his affidavit about the lower quarry, council senior
planner Phillip Marshall said on the March 21 site visit Mr
Taylor was ''strident in his views'' the council had no
business in stopping mining, and ''vehement in his
denunciation'' of its attempts to do so in the upper quarry.
''He was of the view that once court action was resolved in
his favour that the company would be mining the entirety of
Council resource consents manager Alan Worthington said the
council became aware of the work at the lower quarry about
seven months ago.
''The rate of removal accelerated, and that concerned us.
''Their plans concerned us, so we are asking the court to
constrain what they're doing for now.''
He said the previous court action affected only the main
quarry, not the lower quarry.
Quarry co-owner Calvin Fisher said the council was doing a
''re-run'' of what was soon to be decided by the High Court.
''We're certainly not accepting the council's position,
that's for sure.''
His position was the lease on the land covered the whole
operation, in both quarries.
''It's the same case, but they're duplicating it, in our
Mr Taylor said the court case would make the issue clear.
''We're looking forward to it.''
And he said the work the company did was important to the
''Without aggregate, this town cannot produce concrete,
roading materials of any sort. The Southern Motorway couldn't
Mr Fisher said he and Mr Taylor had discussed the
''They're simply whipping up public opinion on what's a
''Kim may well have vented his spleen in retaliation to this,
what we consider to be this provocative on-site behaviour.''