AGENDA
Ordinary meeting of the
Nelson City Council
Thursday 11 June 2015
Commencing at 9.00am
Council Chamber
Civic House
110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
Membership: Her Worship the Mayor Rachel Reese (Chairperson), Councillors Luke Acland, Ian Barker, Ruth Copeland, Eric Davy, Kate Fulton, Matt Lawrey, Paul Matheson (Deputy Mayor), Brian McGurk, Gaile Noonan, Pete Rainey, Tim Skinner and Mike Ward
Nelson City Council
11 June 2015
Opening Prayer
Nil
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
3.1 Updates to the Interests Register
3.2 Identify any conflicts of interest in the agenda
4.1 Christopher St Johanser and Moira Bauer - Brook Valley Community Group
Christopher St Johanser and Moira Bauer of the Brook Valley Community Group will speak about the Brook Recreation Reserve Management Plan.
4.2 Nigel Gibbs - Nelson Society of Modellers
Nigel Gibbs of the Nelson Society of Modellers will speak about the Modellers’ Pond at Tahunanui.
4.3 Gayle Petch - Keep Victory Safe
Gayle Petch of Keep Victory Safe will speak about the Local Alcohol Policy.
Document number M1237
Recommendation
THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 30 April 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record.
6. Status Report - Council - 11 June 2015 28 - 31
Document number R4364
Recommendation
THAT the Status Report Council 11 June 2015 (R4364) and its attachment (A1168168) be received.
8. Draft Brook Recreation Reserve Management Plan 32 - 38
Document number R4135
Recommendation
THAT the report Draft Brook Recreation Reserve Management Plan (R4135) and its attachments (A1340667 and A1365018) be received;
AND THAT vision 1/vision 2/neither vision (of report R4135) is stated as Council’s preferred vision in the draft Brook Recreation Reserve Management Plan;
AND THAT the Draft Brook Recreation Reserve Management Plan (A1365018) be released for consultation;
AND THAT a hearing panel consisting of an independent chair (Peter Reaburn) and Councillors _____ and _____ hear submissions and make recommendations to Council.
Note: Due to the size of the attachments to the above report, these have been circulated separately.
Document number R4250
Recommendation
THAT the report Housing Accord (R4250) and its attachments (A1303852, A1314265) be received;
AND THAT the Nelson City Council confirm that the revised wording for the attached (A1314265) Housing Accord with the Minister of Building and Housing can be signed;
AND THAT Mayor Reese signs the Housing Accord on behalf of Nelson City Council with the Minister of Building and Housing.
10. Bringing Expenditure Forward for the Nelson School of Music 65 - 68
Document number R4152
Recommendation
THAT the report Bringing Expenditure Forward for the Nelson School of Music (R4152) be received;
AND THAT Council allocate $235,000, understood to be 50% of the cost of detailed design and preparation of tender documents for the Nelson School of Music Renovation and Reopening project;
AND THAT up to $150,000 be brought forward from 2015/16 to contribute to work on detailed designs undertaken in June 2015.
11. Business Case Approach for 2015/16 Projects - Revised Projects Listing 69 - 75
Document number R4354
Recommendation
THAT the report Business Case Approach for 2015/16 Projects - Revised Projects Listing (R4354) and its attachment (A1331113) be received;
AND THAT the projects highlighted yellow in document A1331113 follow a business case approach.
12. Modellers' Pond - Detailed Assessment of Options 76 - 115
Document number R4199
Recommendation
THAT the report Modellers' Pond - Detailed Assessment of Options (R4199) and its attachment (A1340871) be received;
AND THAT Council note the strong expressions of support for the Modellers’ Pond from users and community groups, and the stated interest of the Modellers’ Pond supporters to contribute to upgrading this facility;
AND THAT based on this interest to assist, that Council adopt Option 3 – Modify Pond (in report R4199) as the preferred option in order to better quantify the proposed works;
AND THAT detailed design commence on this preferred option;
AND THAT the detailed design of Option 3 – Modify Pond (in report R4199) be consulted on with the appropriate users and community groups to confirm their specific commitment and contribution to its implementation;
AND THAT it be noted that this preferred option may need a separate resource consent or consents;
AND THAT the outcome of this work be included in a report, by way of a Business Case, and reported back to the Community Services Committee to determine a final course of action;
AND THAT it be noted that $1 Million (for capital works) has been provided in Year 1 (2015/16) of the Long Term Plan 2015 - 25 for this work, and $60,000 (annual maintenance and operations) has been provided in Year 1 (2015/16) of the Long Term Plan 2015 - 25 but no budget is included for annual maintenance and operations in Years 2-10.
13. Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting 116 - 118
Document number R4370
Recommendation
THAT the report Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting (R4370) be received;
AND THAT the following constitute Council representation at the 2015 Annual General Meeting:
Presiding Delegate: Her Worship the Mayor
Other Delegates: Councillor McGurk
Councillor Lawrey
Or if Her Worship the Mayor is unavailable
Presiding Delegate: Councillor McGurk
Other Delegates: Councillor Lawrey
Chief Executive
14. Administrative Matters 119 - 135
Document number R4315
Recommendation
THAT the report Administrative Matters (R4315) and its attachments (A1365398, A1103850, A1366044, A1364263, and A1364221) be received;
AND THAT the leave of absence requested by Her Worship the Mayor, from 25 July 2015 to 22 August 2015 inclusive, be granted;
AND THAT Council confirms its approval of the documents and warrants in the Schedule of Documents (A1364221), and the affixing of the seal to those documents and warrants.
15. Planning and Regulatory Committee to deliberate on submissions to the draft Reserves Bylaw - 8 May 2014 136 - 139
Document number M1239
Recommendation
THAT the confirmed minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee to deliberate on submissions to the draft Reserves Bylaw, held on 8 May 2014, be received.
Note: During the transition to Infocouncil software, an audit of received and confirmed minutes was undertaken. It was found that the above minutes had not been received by Council.
16. Resource Management Act Procedures Committee - 3 October 2014 140 - 142
Document number M1213
Recommendation
THAT the confirmed minutes of a meeting of the Resource Management Act Procedures Committee, held on 3 October 2014, be received.
Note: During the transition to Infocouncil software, an audit of received and confirmed minutes was undertaken. It was found that the above minutes had not been received by Council.
17. Works and Infrastructure Committee - 5 May 2015 143 - 150
Document number M1200
Recommendation
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Works and Infrastructure Committee, held on 5 May 2015, be received.
18. Planning and Regulatory Committee - 14 May 2015 151 - 158
Document number M1219
Recommendation
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee, held on 14 May 2015, be received.
19. Community Services Committee - 22 May 2015 159 - 165
Document number M1230
Recommendation
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Community Services Committee, held on 22 May 2015, be received.
20. Hearings Panel - Other - 22 May 2015 166 - 166
Document number M1242
Recommendation
THAT the minutes of a meeting of the Hearings Panel - Other, held on 22 May 2015, be received.
21. Governance Committee - 28 May 2015 167 - 174
Document number M1233
Recommendation
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Governance Committee, held on 28 May 2015, be received.
21.1 Appointment of Trustee to the Nelson Municipal Band Trust
Recommendation to Council
THAT pursuant to the terms of the Trust Deed dated 14th July 2008, the Council hereby appoints David Todd to act as a Trustee for the administration of the Fund.
21.2 Business case approach for 2015/16 projects - Further Information
Recommendation to Council
THAT projects highlighted yellow in document A1331113 follow a business case approach subject to the following amendments:
· Clarification of Neighbourhood Reserve
· Completion of schedule with missing additional information requested from the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee including criteria discussed
· Indications of projects that are subject to separate reporting processes
· Addition of Rutherford Playground
21.3 Events Resource Consent Charging Regime for RM125012
Item from Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee meeting - 5/05/2015
Recommendation to Council
THAT Council consider the options for the charging regime for the use of Council’s Resource Consent RM125012, as detailed in report R4177, and increase the charge to $500 and apply it only to commercial ticketed events.
21.4 Corporate Report for the Period Ending 31 March 2015
Item from Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee meeting - 5/05/2015
Recommendation to Council
THAT Council note that ongoing costs of approximately $11,250 pa will need to be included in the Long Term Plan 2015-25 for live streaming of Council meetings;
AND THAT a cost benefit review be undertaken 12 months after commencement of the live streaming of Council meetings.
Public Excluded Business
Recommendation
THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
|
Item |
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interests protected (where applicable) |
|
1 |
Council Meeting - Public Excluded - 30 April 2015 |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7. |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
2 |
Status Report - Council - 11 June 2015
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
3 |
Environmental Inspections Ltd Contract Renewal for period 2015 - 2018
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
4 |
Resource Management Act Procedures Committee Meeting - Public Excluded - 3 October 2014 |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7. |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
5 |
Works and Infrastructure Committee Meeting - Public Excluded - 5 May 2015 |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7. |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. |
|
6 |
Community Services Committee Meeting - Public Excluded - 22 May 2015 These minutes contain information regarding: Community Leases |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7. |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(j) To prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage. · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations). |
|
7 |
Governance Committee Meeting - Public Excluded - 28 May 2015 These minutes contain information regarding: Bishop Suter Trust Negotiations Property Assets Review |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7. |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person. · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations). |
23. Re-admittance of the public
Recommendation
THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting.
Note:
· This meeting is expected to continue beyond lunchtime.
· Lunch will be provided at 12.30pm.
· Youth Councillors Hannah Malpas and Bronte Shaw will be in attendance at this meeting. (delete as appropriate)
· Nelson City Youth Councillors will join the meeting for morning tea.
Minutes of a meeting of the Nelson City Council
Held in Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Thursday, 30 April 2015, commencing at 9.04am
Present: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors L Acland, I Barker, R Copeland, E Davy, K Fulton, M Lawrey, P Matheson (Deputy Mayor), B McGurk, G Noonan, P Rainey, T Skinner, and M Ward
In Attendance: Youth Councillors R McManus and K Phipps, Chief Executive (C Hadley), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Community Services (C Ward), Group Manager Strategy and Environment (C Barton), Senior Strategic Adviser (N McDonald), Manager Communications (P Shattock), Manager Administration (P Langley), and Administration Adviser (S McLean)
Apology: Councillor K Fulton for lateness
Opening Prayer
Councillor Davy gave the opening prayer.
1. Apology
Resolved
THAT the apology be received and accepted from Councillor Fulton for lateness.
Her Worship the Mayor/Matheson Carried
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
Late Item Memo A1349596 refers.
2.1 Governance Committee – 16 April 2015
Resolved
THAT the item regarding Governance Committee – 16 April 2015 be considered at this meeting as a major item not on the agenda, pursuant to Section 46A(7)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, to enable timely consideration of recommendations to Council.
Davy/Acland Carried
2.2 Governance Committee – 16 April 2015 – Public Excluded
Resolved
THAT the public excluded item regarding Governance Committee – 16 April 2015 be considered at this meeting as a major item not on the agenda, pursuant to Section 46A(7)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, to enable timely consideration of recommendations to Council.
Barker/Noonan Carried
3. Interests
There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no interests with items on the agenda were declared.
4. Public Forum
There was no public forum.
5. Confirmation of Minutes
5.1 19 March 2015
Document number A1332453, agenda pages 9-30 refer.
Resolved
THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Nelson City Council, held on 19 March 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record.
Ward/McGurk Carried
5.2 23 March 2015
Document number A1334062, agenda pages 31-44 refer.
An error was highlighted on page 7 of the minutes, with the word ‘uptake’ to replace ‘update’.
Resolved
THAT the amended minutes of the meeting of the Nelson City Council, held on 23 March 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record.
Noonan/Rainey Carried
6. Status Report
Document number A1168168, agenda pages 45-46 refer.
In response to a question, the Chief Executive, Clare Hadley, advised the campground review would likely be reported to the Community Services Committee by the end of the financial year.
In response to a question on the Local Alcohol Policy, Mrs Hadley advised the relevant cases had been heard and were not under appeal. She said further work on the Policy would be prioritised accordingly.
There was discussion on the gondola proposal. Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward, advised the proposal was waiting on the Recreation Reserve Management Plan, which would be presented to Council on 14 May 2015. It was confirmed Cycle Lift Society Inc had been involved in the Recreation Reserve Management Plan development.
It was suggested that a further action resolution on the gondola had been missed from the status report. Officers agreed to look into this and add further detail if necessary.
Resolved
THAT the Status Report (A1168168) be received.
Davy/Matheson Carried
7. Mayor’s Report
Document number A1342324, agenda pages 47-49 refer.
Resolved
THAT the Mayor’s Report (A1342324) be received.
Her Worship the Mayor/Ward Carried
8. Trafalgar Centre Reopening – Update
Document number A1343770, agenda pages 50-55 refer.
Consulting Engineer, Richard Kirby, presented the report.
In response to concerns, Mr Kirby advised the timeline for the Trafalgar Centre Reopening was tight but achievable. He said there had been no damage to the Centre from the recent earthquake.
Attendance: Councillor Fulton joined the meeting at 9.30am.
In response to a question, the Chief Executive, Clare Hadley, advised that officers were currently working on a contract for marketing Council venues, to ensure Council was ready to work with organisations wishing to book the Centre.
The Deputy Mayor complimented Mr Kirby and his team on public involvement and communications on the project to date.
Resolved
THAT the report Trafalgar Centre Reopening – Update (A1343770) be received.
Her Worship the Mayor/Matheson Carried
9. Rutherford Park Upgrade – Roading and Carparking
Document number A1344077, agenda pages 56-63 refer.
Consulting Engineer, Richard Kirby, and Parks and Facilities Asset Planner, Andrew Petheram, presented the report.
There was discussion on Rutherford Park parking design and the consultation which had been carried out to date. It was noted that a balance was needed between parking at the Trafalgar Centre and parking at Rutherford Park.
It was confirmed the reference to roading in the staff recommendation included relevant footpaths. It was also advised that if minor design changes were required, which did not impact the overall intention of the approved design, these could be addressed without further consultation.
In response to a question, it was advised the Trafalgar Centre roading and carpark budget in the Long Term Plan 2015-25 was $1.9 million, which included cost savings from the use of the existing carpark at Rutherford Park. It was confirmed that this budget was less than the original budget proposed, and included a 30% contingency allowance.
Mr Kirby advised that a detailed budget for roading and carparking would be reported to Council in June 2015.
There was discussion on community buildings at the Park. It was confirmed that relevant groups had been advised of the provision for the buildings to remain at this time.
In response to questions, Mr Petheram advised there was no budget allowance to prepare grass at the Park for overflow carparking. He confirmed that use of the old tennis courts for carparking was a temporary measure, and this land would be used for recreation in the future. Mr Petheram said turning the courts into recreation area was not included in the $1.9 million budget, but would only be a minor modification.
In response to a question about the reference to lawns at section 7.1 of the officer’s report, Mr Kirby advised this was only lawns associated with material removed during roading and carparking works. He clarified that any material dug out would be redistributed, levelled and grassed.
It was confirmed that a section on Rutherford Park would be included in Long Term Plan 2015-25 deliberations reporting.
It was suggested that improvements could be made in articulating the timeline for Rutherford Park development to community groups.
Resolved
THAT the report Rutherford Park Upgrade – Roading and Carparking and its attachments A1205436 and A1344245 be received;
AND THAT the roading and carparking amendments to the Concept Plan July 2013 (A1205436) as outlined in Amended Concept Plan April 2015 (A1344245) be approved;
AND THAT approval be given to initiate detailed design and consenting work for the roading and carpark components of the Concept Plan April 2015, with the intention of completing the detailed design and the physical works concurrently with the Trafalgar Centre Project as part of the Early Contractor Involvement process;
AND THAT some of the budget allocated in the Long Term Plan 2015/25 be brought forward to cover costs associated with progressing this project in 2014/15.
Matheson/Her Worship the Mayor Carried
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES
10. Planning and Regulatory Committee to hear submissions to the draft Urban Environments Bylaw – 12 March 2015
Document number A1333233, agenda pages 64-67 refer.
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey left the meeting at 10.08am.
Resolved
THAT the minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee to hear submissions to the draft Urban Environments Bylaw, held on 12 March 2015, be received.
McGurk/Fulton Carried
11. Works and Infrastructure Committee – 26 March 2015
Document number A1335846, agenda pages 68-75 refer.
Resolved
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Works and Infrastructure Committee, held on 26 March 2015, be received.
Davy/Copeland Carried
12. Planning and Regulatory Committee – 2 April 2015
Document number A1339761, agenda pages 76-80 refer.
Resolved
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee, held on 2 April 2015, be received.
McGurk/Barker Carried
12.1 Fees and Charges: Consents and Compliance (non RMA) 2015 - 2016
Resolved
THAT
the Dog Control Fees and Charges for 2015 - 2016 be adopted as detailed in
Attachment 1 to Report A1318731;
AND THAT the Environmental Health and other activities fees and charges for 2015-2016 be adopted as detailed in Attachment 2 to Report A1318731;
AND THAT the Provision of Property Information Fees and Charges for 2015-2016 be adopted as detailed in Attachment 3 to Report A1318731;
AND THAT the charges for Dog Control, Environmental Health and Provision of Property Information activities apply as from 1 July 2015 until such time as they are varied or amended by Council;
AND THAT the Dog Control charges be publicly advertised in accordance with Section 37(6) of the Dog Control Act 1996.
McGurk/Davy Carried
13. Planning and Regulatory Committee to deliberate on submissions to the draft Urban Environments Bylaw – 2 April 2015
Document number A1340037, agenda pages 81-85 refer.
Resolved
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee to deliberate on submissions to the draft Urban Environments Bylaw, held on 2 April 2015, be received.
McGurk/Fulton Carried
13.1 Analysis of Submissions on the draft Urban Environments Bylaw
Her Worship the Mayor raised concerns that the Planning and Regulatory Committee had made a decision on sandwich boards which was not consistent with feedback from submitters.
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey returned to the meeting at 10.15am.
It was suggested by several members of the Committee that the decision on sandwich boards was in line with submitter feedback as it resulted in a clear footpath, with boards being moved to the kerb to join other obstructions.
Attendance: Councillor Rainey left the meeting at 10.19am.
It was pointed out that moving sandwich boards to the kerbside created an additional hazard for vehicles. It was also suggested that sandwich board placement was currently adhoc and the current bylaw was ineffective.
Attendance: Councillor Rainey returned to the meeting at 10.21am.
The Chairperson of the Planning and Regulatory Committee advised there had been differences in the Blind Citizens Association’s written and verbal submissions, in relation to placement of sandwich boards.
It was suggested the placement of sandwich boards along the kerb may create resource consent issues, and the Planning and Regulatory Committee may wish to consider the matter further. It was highlighted that the Committee may also wish to assess the costs and benefits associated with its decision on sandwich boards.
A view was expressed that the boards should be removed entirely to promote clear pathways and a cleaner look to the inner city.
A motion was moved by Councillor McGurk and seconded by Councillor Fulton.
THAT the amended draft Urban Environments Bylaw reflecting the Planning and Regulatory Committee’s decisions on submissions, be adopted, taking effect from 2 June 2015.
In response to a question, Manager Planning, Matt Heale, advised that if a section of the draft Urban Environments Bylaw was sent back to the Planning and Regulatory Committee for further consideration, the remainder of the Bylaw should be adopted due to the expiry date of several parts of the Bylaw.
Further concern was raised about taking into account community views, and potential unintended consequences resulting from altering legislation.
An amendment was proposed and moved by Her Worship the Mayor and seconded by the Deputy Mayor.
THAT the amended draft Urban Environments Bylaw (excepting provisions 5.14-5.16 relating to sandwich boards), reflecting the Planning and Regulatory Committee’s decisions on submissions on 2 April 2015, be adopted, taking effect from 2 June 2015;
AND THAT sections 5.14-5.16 of the amended draft Urban Environments Bylaw relating to sandwich boards be referred back to the Planning and Regulatory Committee for further consideration.
The amendment was put and a division was called.
|
Councillor Acland |
Aye |
|
Councillor Barker |
Aye |
|
Councillor Copeland |
No |
|
Councillor Davy |
No |
|
Councillor Fulton |
No |
|
Councillor Lawrey |
No |
|
Councillor Matheson |
Aye |
|
Councillor McGurk |
Aye |
|
Councillor Noonan |
Aye |
|
Councillor Rainey |
No |
|
Councillor Skinner |
Aye |
|
Councillor Ward |
No |
|
Her Worship the Mayor |
Aye |
The amendment was carried 7-6 and became the substantive motion.
Resolved
THAT the amended draft Urban Environments Bylaw (excepting provisions 5.14-5.16 relating to sandwich boards), reflecting the Planning and Regulatory Committee’s decisions on submissions on 2 April 2015, be adopted, taking effect from 2 June 2015;
AND THAT sections 5.14-5.16 of the amended draft Urban Environments Bylaw relating to sandwich boards be referred back to the Planning and Regulatory Committee for further consideration.
Her Worship the Mayor/Matheson Carried
14. Governance Committee – 16 April 2015
Document number A1345178, late item memo A1349596 refers.
Attendance: Councillor Matheson declared an interest and left the meeting at 11.05am.
Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward, provided a correction on the item Nelson Events Strategy Funding Application South Island Masters Game. He advised that only $20,000 of the stated $65,000 had been secured from the Canterbury Community Trust, with the balance yet to be secured from other applications.
In response to concerns raised, Mr Ward advised the original officer recommendation would not have changed if this information had been provided earlier, as the reputation of the event and previous funding made it a secure sponsorship opportunity.
It was agreed that if officers had any future reason to be concerned on the matter, it would be discussed with the Governance Committee Chairperson.
Resolved
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Governance Committee, held on 16 April 2015, be received.
Barker/Davy Carried
Attendance: Councillor Matheson returned to the meeting at 11.11am.
14.1 Procurement Policy and Debt Management Process
Attendance: Councillor Rainey declared an interest and left the meeting at 11.11am.
Resolved
THAT the Nelson City Council Procurement Policy January 2015 (A1293789) be approved.
Barker/McGurk Carried
Attendance: Councillor Rainey returned to the meeting at 11.12am.
14.2 The Bishop Suter Trust draft Statement of Intent 2015/2016 and Half Yearly Report
Resolved
THAT the draft Bishop Suter Trust Statement of Intent 2015/16 (A1327762) be approved as the final version.
Barker/Acland Carried
14.3 Corporate Report for the Period Ending 31 January 2015
Resolved
THAT the landfill charges be increased from $114 per tonnes (inclusive of GST) to $121 (inclusive of GST) effective 15 May 2015;
AND THAT landfill users be given two weeks notice of the increase in landfill charges;
AND THAT approval is given for a transfer of all capital expenditure and debt relating to the Maitai Walkway to be made from the Inner City Enhancement account to the Unsubsidised Roading account in order to properly account for interest and debt in future years.
Barker/Acland Carried
14.4 Liability Management and Investment Policies
Resolved
THAT the Liability Management Policy (A1261456) and Investment Policy (A1261457), with amendments from the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee, be adopted.
Barker/McGurk Carried
14.5 Tourism Nelson Tasman Ltd draft Statement of Intent 2015/16 and Half Yearly Report
Attendance: Councillor Fulton left the meeting at 11.16am.
Resolved
AND THAT the Governance Committee refer back to Council the draft Statement of Intent (A1325267) for consideration.
Barker/McGurk Carried
Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward, tabled a recommendation regarding the Tourism Nelson Tasman Ltd draft Statement of Intent 2015/16 (A1351389).
Councillors discussed the officer recommendation and made changes to align direction to the Tourism Nelson Tasman Board with Council’s expectations.
It was agreed that activities should be prioritised based on return on investment, and the focus should be on what can be achieved instead of what will no longer be included.
In response to a question, Mr Ward advised the review of Nelson Tasman Tourism, along with other economic service providers, would be reported to the Governance Committee at its meeting on 28 May 2015. He advised that Council needed to provide feedback on the draft Statement of Intent prior to the outcome of the review due to the 30 June legislative deadline.
It was suggested that information on the value of the Boards proposed activities for the coming year would be beneficial.
Resolved
THAT the Tourism Nelson Tasman Board be asked to make the following changes to the draft Statement of Intent (A1325267):
· Add an objective, performance measure and target in relation to leveraging tourism opportunities from events, both programmed and unprogrammed
· Provide separate reporting and financial information on Nelson City and Tasman District Council funding
· Provide increased information on trends, how Nelson Tasman Tourism will respond to them
· Include a work stream in relation to marketing of Nelson within New Zealand to campervans and independent travellers
· Prioritise activities by return on investment focussing on the areas that will deliver greatest benefit.
Barker/Acland Carried
Attendance: Councillor Noonan left the meeting at 11.41am.
14.6 The Nelson Regional Economic Development Agency draft Statement of Intent 2015/16 and Half Yearly Report
Attendance: Councillor Noonan returned to the meeting at 11.44am.
Resolved
THAT the draft Nelson Regional Economic Development Agency Statement of Intent (A1323928) be approved with the following amendments:
· Removal of Horoirangi from table 4.3;
· Removal of the reference to the convention centre on page 163 under Physical Infrastructure.
Barker/Davy Carried
15. Joint Shareholders Committee 17 April 2015
Document number A1345011, agenda pages 86-91 refer.
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey left the meeting at 11.47am.
Resolved
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Nelson City Council Tasman District Council Joint Shareholders Committee, held on 17 April 2015, be received.
Davy/Barker Carried
16.
Civil Defence Emergency Management Group –
17 April 2015
Document number A1344996, agenda pages 92-93 refer.
Resolved
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Nelson Tasman Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, held on 17 April 2015, be received.
Matheson/Ward Carried
17. Exclusion of the Public
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey returned to the meeting at 11.49am.
Resolved
THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
|
Item |
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interests protected (where applicable) |
|
1 |
Council Minutes – Public Excluded – 19 March 2015
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege
· Section 7(2)(i) To carry out negotiations |
|
2 |
Status Report – Council 30 April 2015 This report contains information regarding: · Plan Change 18 Appeals · Rugby Opportunity |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
· The withholding of the information is necessary: Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege · Section 7(2)(i) To carry out negotiations
|
|
3 |
Trafalgar Centre Reopening - Update This report contains information regarding: · Tender Assessments |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To carry out negotiations
|
|
4 |
Joint Shareholders Committee - Public Excluded Minutes – 17 April 2015
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To carry out commercial activities · Section 7(2)(i) To carry out negotiations |
|
5 |
Governance Committee – Public Excluded Minutes – 16 April 2015 These minutes contain information regarding: · Nelmac Limited draft Statement of Intent 2015/16 and Half Yearly Report · Nelson Airport Limited – Airport Land · Nelson Airport Limited Proposed Constitutional Changes |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To carry out commercial activities · Section 7(2)(i) To carry out negotiations
|
Her Worship the Mayor/Skinner Carried
Attendance: Councillor Skinner left the meeting at 11.50am.
The meeting went into public excluded session at 11.51am and resumed in public session at 12.50pm, during which time Councillors Skinner and Fulton returned to the meeting.
1. Re-admittance of the Public
Resolved
THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting.
Her Worship the Mayor/Matheson Carried
There being no further business the meeting ended at 12.50pm.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
|
|
Council 11 June 2015 |
REPORT R4364
Status Report - Council - 11 June 2015
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To provide an update on the status of actions requested and pending.
2. Recommendation
|
THAT the Status Report Council 11 June 2015 (R4364) and its attachment (A1168168) be received.
|
Shailey McLean
Administration Adviser
Attachments
Attachment 1: Status Report - Council - June 2015
|
Date of meeting/Item |
Action Resolution |
Officer |
Status |
|
2/4/2013 - Council Nelson Gondola and Adventure Park: Feasibility Study |
THAT the Nelson Cycle Lift Society Incorporated be granted $15,000 towards a feasibility study for the establishment of a gondola and adventure park, subject to the Cycle Lift Society: · funding the remaining costs of the feasibility study; · undertaking to provide Council with the results of the feasibility study by 31 December 2013;
AND THAT it be noted that Council has neither considered nor taken a position on, the proposal for a gondola and adventure park in either of its roles as landowner and/or regulator. |
Chris Ward |
11/06/15 Council has signalled support in principle for the gondola concept through its LTP consultation document. The Society is developing a detailed business case and has given feedback to the Brook Recreation Reserve Management Plan process. The outcomes from those processes will inform the Society’s next steps. Note: No further action resolutions have been made since 2/4/13. Ongoing |
|
19/6/2014 – Council Trafalgar Centre – Way Forward to Reopening |
AND THAT Council approve up to $450,000 to appoint a project manager, who will drive the investigation process necessary to inform the preparation of concept design and deliver first iteration plans to Council; |
Alec Louverdis |
11/06/15 Council recently, as part of the Chief Executives report tabled at the May 2015 LTP deliberation meeting, approved the bringing forward of $250,000 from 2015/16 to 2014/15 to cover work required under the Early Contractor Involvement process. A follow up report will be tabled at an upcoming Council meeting detailing progress and costs to re-open the Centre. Ongoing
|
|
11/12/2014 – Council Solid Waste: Regional Landfill Implementation
|
AND THAT the binding deed be brought back to Council before signing for ratification; AND THAT in line with the 20 November 2014 resolution, further work be undertaken in 2015 to determine whether the effectiveness and efficiency of solid waste management activities can be improved across the two districts, and if so to undertake a more fundamental review of the activities;
|
Alec Louverdis |
11/06/15 Following the recent decision by TDC not to sign any regional landfill deed with NCC, officers, the Mayor and Councillor Acland continue to work with TDC to allow a deed to be signed. Those discussions have now agreed further work to be done by Deloitte. The timeframe for that will be advised at a future meeting. NCC budgets have however been amended accordingly for 2015/16. Ongoing |
|
19/3/2015 1. Acquisition of Land for the Maitai/Mahitahi Walkway
|
THAT Council approve the issue of a Notice of Intention to take the freehold interest in 45m2 of land comprised in Computer Freehold Register NL18/19 for a shared cycleway and pedestrian walkway, and requests the Governor General execute a proclamation taking the land and vesting it in Council for such purpose, pursuant to the Public Works Act 1981; AND THAT Council, by resolution, declares the land to be a reserve within the meaning of the Reserves Act 1977 to be held for local purpose (esplanade) reserve following the completion of the compulsory acquisition process.
|
Michael Homan |
11/6/15 Work scheduled, but not yet commenced. Scheduled |
|
30/4/2015 – Council 2. Rutherford Park Upgrade – Roading and Carparking
|
AND THAT approval be given to initiate detailed design and consenting work for the roading and carpark components of the Concept Plan April 2015, with the intention of completing the detailed design and the physical works concurrently with the Trafalgar Centre Project as part of the Early Contractor Involvement process;
|
Richard Kirby/Andrew Petheram |
11/6/15 The detailed design of the roading and carparking aspects of the concept plan has commenced as part of the Early Contractor Involvement phase of the Trafalgar Centre. The final design and costs will be completed by the end of July 2015. Note: As a result of Long Term Plan deliberations, a report on the development of Rutherford Park together with an update on the Trafalgar Centre is in preparation for the 23 July Council Meeting. Ongoing |
|
30/4/2015 – Council 3. Analysis of Submissions on the draft Urban Environments Bylaw
|
AND THAT sections 5.14-5.16 of the amended draft Urban Environments Bylaw relating to sandwich boards be referred back to the Planning and Regulatory Committee for further consideration.
|
Matt Heale |
11/6/15 Report being presented to the Planning and Regulatory Committee at its meeting on 25 June. Referred |
|
|
Council 11 June 2015 |
REPORT R4135
Draft Brook Recreation Reserve Management Plan
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To approve the draft Brook Recreation Reserve Management Plan for consultation.
1.2 To consider indicating a preferred vision.
2. Delegations
2.1 The Community Services Committee referred this matter back to Council due to the level of public interest.
3. Recommendation
4. Background
4.1 Council has previously signalled its intention to develop a Reserve Management Plan (RMP) for the area that includes the Brook Motor Camp.
4.2 The process for adoption of an RMP is prescribed by section 41 of the Reserves Act (1977). Briefly, the steps are as follows:
4.3 A public notice of Council’s intention to develop a RMP is published
· Written suggestions are invited
· A draft RMP is prepared, giving consideration to the written comments received
· Public notice of the draft RMP is given, and objections or suggestions are invited over a two month period
· An opportunity is given for any person asking to be heard in support of his or her objection or comment
· The RMP can then be amended in light of submissions and is then approved.
4.4 Written suggestions were invited between 24 November 2014 and 16 January 2015. In addition, one-on-one meetings took place with key stakeholders, several meetings were held with Brook Camp residents and a public meeting was held in the Council Chamber on 17 February 2015.
4.5 A copy of all the suggestions and comments received through this process is attached (Attachment 1).
4.6 Feedback included reference to the following issues:
· Maintain and upgrade provision for casual camping within the Reserve,
· Maintain provision for long-term accommodation for residential campers,
· Support the work and activities of the Brook Waimarama Sanctuary,
· Maintain the site as relatively undeveloped and ‘natural’,
· Limit commercial activities on site to only camping,
· Protect, maintain and enhance the Brook Stream,
· Include provision for local day-use of the site and provide better casual access to the Brook Stream and other park-style picnic facilities,
· Gazette the land as recreation reserve under the Reserves Act,
· Develop the Eureka Park concept on the Reserve to honour Nelson’s sister city relationship with Eureka,
· Support a wide range of outdoor activities, including biking, walking, tramping and nature appreciation,
· Support and opposition for providing for a cycle lift – a gondola – and other associated services and facilities within the Reserve,
· Support and opposition for relocating the Brook Conservation Education Centre to within the Reserve,
· Concern over adverse traffic effects on Brook Valley residents if additional development occurs within the Reserve, such as an education facility and a gondola.
4.7 The draft Reserve Management Plan has been developed taking into account these suggestions.
4.8 Concern was also raised about the legality of preparing a single management plan for an area with land administered as recreation reserve under the Reserves Act as well as freehold land administered under the Local Government Act. This is not an issue, as discussed in section 2 (page 8) of the draft Reserve Management Plan.
5. Discussion
5.1 There are several key issues that need to be addressed in the management plan. These are discussed in detail in the following sections.
Vision for the reserve area
5.2 One of the key tasks for Council is to articulate its vision for the area. This should then drive the policies and objectives. Two possible visions have been included in the draft Plan:
5.2.1 Vision 1: ‘The Brook Recreation Reserve is a significant destination for domestic and international visitors to Nelson and Tasman and operates as a tourism hub, while also serving the local community as an environmental education, outdoor recreation and conservation landmark.’
5.2.2 This vision drives policies and objectives that develop the Reserve as a tourism hub as well as for community use.
5.2.3 Vision 2: ‘The Brook Recreation Reserve provides environmental education, outdoor recreation and conservation services for the regional community, supporting the work of the Brook Waimarama Sanctuary Trust and providing a camping opportunity.’
5.3 This vision drives policies and objectives that develop the Reserve as a place primarily for community use.
5.4 Whilst Council could decide not to state a preference at this stage, it is recommended that a preference is stated in order to inform the consultation.
Camping and Residential Camping
5.5 The provision of a camp ground for visitors has been identified as being an important role for the reserve. The draft Plan makes provision for 55-65 camp sites and suggests that open space area is allocated adjacent to the Brook Stream for casual recreation and as a picnic area for campers and Nelson residents.
5.6 The draft Plan has also considered the issue of residential camping. A relocatable home park could be created in the area of the camp known as Fantail Glade. The right to stay there could be restricted by a sunset clause reviewed every five years. i.e. no new residential camping would be permitted but those already present in the camp would have the right to stay there.
5.7 If Council supports this option it would need to define the area as a relocatable home park and ensure compliance in relation to the provision of services and the NRMP.
5.8 In order to comply with the legislation and district plan, residents would need to make their homes truly relocatable; this is likely to impose costs on those residents. However, in meeting these requirements, the residents would have more certainty over their future living arrangements. The consequences of not meeting requirements would need to be made clear and enforced.
Land Status and Management
5.9 The area occupied by the Brook Motor Camp comprises land with different zonings under the NRMP and different legal status. The draft Plan recommends consolidating the entire area as a gazetted recreation reserve and stopping the road that runs through the camp. This would simplify administration of the reserve in the longer term.
5.10 The draft Plan recognises that one administering body is required to oversee the implementation of the Reserve Management Plan. The administering body could be Council, or it could be a Reserve Board. In either case, a Comprehensive Development Plan is required to ensure the policies and objectives of the Reserve Management Plan are implemented in a coherent manner.
5.11 A Reserve Board is recommended because there is likely to be an ongoing tension between different users of the area (draft Plan, section 7.9.1). Whilst Council could manage these through its lease arrangements with the different parties, it would seem easier to ensure co-ordination of development and management of leaseholders if a Reserve Board is formed.
5.12 Effectively, Council would delegate responsibility for implementation of the Reserve Management Plan to the Board. However, it could retain some decision making powers as it saw fit e.g. in relation to fees and charges for any permanent residents.
Existing development proposals
5.13 The land leased by the Brook (Waimarama) Sanctuary Trust is not included in this draft Plan. However, it is recognised that part of the function of the area covered by the Plan will be to support the Brook Sanctuary. Provision is therefore made under both visions for structures related to the Sanctuary.
5.14 Similarly, the Brook Conservation Education Centre has previously been provided for in the Brook (although not in the area covered by this Management Plan). Provision for the Centre has also been made.
5.15 The Eureka Park concept has been identified previously in Council’s Parks Activity Management Plans and in LTP’s to recognise the Sister City Relationship with Eureka, USA.
New development proposals
5.16 The Nelson Cycle Lift Society has proposed the construction of a gondola to lift cycles and people to the top of Fringed Hill. This or a similar tourism development would only be compatible with Vision 1. If a tourism development was to be supported, the draft Plan seeks to restrict its footprint to avoid over development of the Reserve, particularly in relation to car parks. Off site car parking may need to be considered, depending on the development.
5.17 The draft plan notes that many of the large-scale development proposals for use of the Reserve would require resource consent under the NRMP, and that while the management plan can state that some developments may be appropriate or desired, it cannot be the final word in approving their construction.
5.18 One option in the draft Plan is to provide for a generic tourism-activity hub without prescribing specific development (section 7.6.3). This would support vision 1 but would give more development options if the Gondola proposal does not proceed in the reserve area.
Hearing of Submissions
5.19 There is significant public interest in this piece of work and officers recommend that a hearing panel is convened to hear submissions on the draft plan, and that the Panel consist of an independent chair and two Councillors. The Panel would hear submissions and make recommendations to Council on any changes to the draft Plan.
5.20 Peter Reaburn has been identified as the Chair. He is a Director and Planning Manager based in Cato Bolam’s Henderson office, and manages the company’s planning services. He is an accredited Hearings Commissioner and has more than 30 years’ experience in strategic and statutory planning.
5.21 It is recommended that two Councillors be appointed to sit on the hearings panel.
5.22 Council would receive and consider the recommendations from the Panel before finally adopting the Plan.
6. Options
6.1 The Council can either release the draft Reserve Management Plan for consultation as is, or with amendments, or it could signal at this stage its own preference in relation to the proposed vision.
6.2 Officers recommend that Council release the draft Plan for consultation and that it states its preference in relation to the Vision. This would give some guidance to the community and help shape the consultation response.
6.3 The nature and make up of a hearing panel is not prescribed under the Reserves Act. Council could decide on a different composition than that recommended. However, it is believed that a smaller Panel, chaired by an independent chair, is the most efficient and effective model given the high level of public interest and the range of views likely to be expressed through the submissions process.
7. Alignment with relevant Council policy
7.1 The draft Reserve Management Plan has been developed following Council direction, and is not inconsistent with Council policy. Once the final Plan is adopted there will need to be provision made for its implementation. The level of provision will depend on the decisions following the public consultation period.
7.2 As noted in the draft Plan, the draft supports several of the Nelson 2060 goals, including:
· We are all able to be involved in decisions
· Our natural environment - air, land, rivers and sea - is protected and healthy
· We are able to rapidly adapt to change
· Our economy thrives and contributes to a vibrant and sustainable Nelson
· Nelson is a centre of learning and practice in Kaitiakitanga and sustainable development
· Everyone in our community has their essential needs met.
8. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy
8.1 This is not a significant decision for Council. However, previous decisions relating to the Brook Camp have generated widespread public interest and it is likely that the draft Reserve Management Plan will do likewise. It is believed that the level of engagement prescribed in the Reserves Act is appropriate.
9. Consultation
9.1 Once released, the draft Plan will be open for submissions for a period of 2 calendar months, as required under the Reserves Act. Following that there is an opportunity for submitters to be heard prior to final recommendations being made to Council.
10. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process
10.1 Maori will have an opportunity to submit through the consultation process. Iwi have also had the opportunity to provide early comments on what the Plan should cover.
11. Conclusion
11.1 A draft Brook Recreation Reserve Management Plan has been prepared following an initial feedback process. Officers recommend that this is released for public consultation, and that submissions are heard by a Panel consisting of an independent chair and two Councillors.
Chris Ward
Group Manager Community Services
Attachments
Attachment 1: Public suggestions for the development of Brook Recreation Reserve Management Plan (A1340667) (Circulated separately)
Attachment 2: Brook Reserve Management Plan draft for Consultation ver 1 (A1365018) (Circulated separately)
|
|
Council 11 June 2015 |
REPORT R4250
Housing Accord
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 This report is in response to a resolution by Council on 26 February 2015, where Council agreed in principle to entering into the Housing Accord.
1.2 Council officers were asked to negotiate with the Minister of Building and Housing’s office over the final form of the Housing Accord in collaboration with Tasman District Council. Council officers have done this and now bring the revised Housing Accord back to Council for signing.
2. Delegations
2.1 The Housing Accord is provided for under the Housing Accord and Special Housing Areas Act 2013. No committee of Council has delegations for this piece of legislation and therefore the matter needs to be considered by the full Council.
3. Recommendation
4. Background
4.1 The Hon Dr Nick Smith, Minister of Building and Housing, has asked both Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council to enter into a Housing Accord which is provided for in the Housing Accord and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 (HASHA). The purpose of the HASHA is to: "Enhance housing affordability by facilitating an increase in land and housing supply in certain regions or districts identified as having housing supply and affordability issues" (s.4).
4.2 Both Councils have been added to Schedule 1 of HASHA as areas experiencing housing supply and affordability issues.
4.3 Report A1303852 in Attachment 1 was received by Council on 26 February 2015 and included a draft Housing Accord. Council agreed in principle to entering into the Housing Accord, but sought that officers bring back the final wording of the Accord to Council for approval following negotiations with the Minister of Building and Housing.
4.4 Officers from Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council have worked together with staff from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment to draft separate but aligned Housing Accords. The draft of Nelson City Council’s Accord has been approved by the Minister’s office for signing. The Minister and Mayor Richard Kempthorne signed Tasman District Councils Housing Accord on 15 May 2015.
4.5 The Housing Accords and Special Housing Act has repeal dates included within it: the provisions relating to Special Housing Areas are repealed effective 16 September 2016; the remainder of the Act is repealed effective 16 September 2018.
5. Discussion
Housing Accord
5.1 The Government seeks to facilitate land supply for housing and considers that increased land supply will result in greater housing choice and affordability.
5.2 The Accord will provide the basis for collaboration between the Government and Council to support an increase in housing and improve housing affordability in Nelson. The Accord recognises that by working collaboratively the Government and the Council can achieve better housing outcomes for the Nelson. The Accord provides targets in section 14 for the number of serviced residential lots issued with title and the number of building consents issued per year.
5.3 Housing Accords can identify Special Housing Areas (SHA) which are eligible for progression under the powers of the Act, however neither the Tasman nor the Nelson City Council Accords identify SHA’s. It is not necessary to include SHA’s in the Accord at the point of signing, as they can be added at a future date once engagement with the community, including developers, is undertaken.
5.4 The signing of an Accord establishes a Joint Housing Steering Group for governance of the Accord, which includes the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, Minister and Associate Minister of Building and Housing. The Steering Group can amend the Accord, including the targets. The Steering Group establish an Officials Working Group who advance implementation of the Accord and report to the Steering Group on progress (monitoring is required). The Officials Working Group consists of up to two Nelson City Council officers, staff from the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment, and staff from the New Zealand Transport Agency, who report annually to the Steering Group.
5.5 To align with disestablishment clauses in the Act, the Accord will terminate on 16 September 2016 if not already terminated by either party.
6. Options
6.1 Council resolved on 26 February to enter into a Housing Accord with the Minister of Building and Housing. Officers have drafted the Accord with Tasman District Council officers and staff from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Housing. The draft Accord has been approved in principle by the Ministers office who have advised that the Minster wishes to sign the Accord at the Council meeting on 11 June 2015.
6.2 The Council has no obligation to enter into a Housing Accord. However, if the Council does not, then the Minister of Building and Housing may, at his discretion, declare Special Housing Areas and the Chief Executive of the Ministry and Business, Innovation and Employment will be empowered to process resource consents. If the Council enters into an Accord, the Council can recommend Special Housing Areas to the Minister of Building and Housing for declaration through an Order in Council.
7. Alignment with relevant Council policy
7.1 Signing an Accord is not inconsistent with Council policy. If special housing areas are identified it would have an impact on the Nelson Resource Management Plan, however this would be addressed in a future report.
8. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy
8.1 The signing of a Housing Accord is not a significant decision for Council. Albeit the outcomes that have the potential to be delivered through the actions agreed to in the Accord and through any future identification of SHA’s have the potential to deliver more affordable housing.
9. Consultation
9.1 No structured consultation has occurred regarding Council signing an Accord. Signing an Accord only directly impacts on the operations of Council. It is not until areas are considered as Special Housing Areas (SHA’s) that there is a direct impact. The process of identifying SHA’s will require extensive consultation to be undertaken. This is a future stage of work.
10. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process
10.1 No specific consultation has taken place with Maori.
11. Conclusion
11.1 The Government has the expectation that Nelson City Council will enter into the attached Housing Accord. There is merit in working towards an outcome of more affordable housing in Nelson.
1.1 Clare Barton
Group Manager Strategy and Environment
Attachments
Attachment 1: Report A1303852 Housing Accord 26 February 2015
Attachment 2: Final Housing Accord A1314265 showing tracked changes
|
|
Council 11 June 2015 |
REPORT R4152
Bringing Expenditure Forward for the Nelson School of Music
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To consider bringing forward funding from 2015/16 to the current financial year for detailed designs for Nelson School of Music (NSOM) redevelopment.
2. Delegations
2.1 This is a decision for Council.
3. Recommendation
4. Background
4.1 Council has funding of $150,000 in its 2014/15 Annual Plan for NSOM to progress earthquake strengthening and refurbishment, and has signalled partnership funding to a maximum of $3 million in the draft Long Term Plan 2015/25 for this.
4.2 In July/August last year, Council ran a tender process for a project manager for NSOM concurrently with the Trafalgar Centre project, as this provided the opportunity for cost efficiencies. Opus Consultants were appointed project managers.
4.3 The NSOM Board has been working with the project managers on establishing design concepts and making application for resource consent.
5. Discussion
Progress with Redevelopment Project
5.1 There has been significant progress made with this project to reopen the School. The Board of NSOM is now constituted. Preliminary drawings have been completed; consultation with affected parties has been undertaken, and the resource consent application has been filed. The Chair of the Board recently updated the Mayor and Chief Executive on progress with fundraising. In short, the project is moving apace.
5.2 In order to keep the project moving, the Board seeks to commission detailed design work in this financial year. This will incur costs which it does not have funding available for at this time.
Further work
5.3 The NSOM is working on reopening the building in December 2016. This is another project with a tight timeframe.
5.4 Whilst the resource consent application is being processed, the Board would like to commission final drawings. This is work that is necessary in order to put the construction project out to tender.
5.5 NSOM seek support from Council for the total costs of completing the process of resource consent and detailed design. In considering this request, it is appropriate to look at the way in which Council supported the Suter Trust. In that instance, up to $6 million partnership funding was agreed, with the costs of resource consent and detailed design being part funded by Council before the Suter Trust had all its funds raised. In this instance, the NSOM Board advise that they have some funds in hand, and a fundraising programme is soon to commence.
5.6 NSOM Board advise the total costs of final design and preparation of tender documents will be in the order of $470,000. This has been funded in part by:
5.6.1 School Trust 91,000 (costs up to filing of resource consent)
5.6.2 School Trust 75,000 (in new financial year)
5.6.3 Sought from Council 235,000 (of which, up to $150,000 is to be brought forward to current year)
5.7 An amount of $70,000 remains unfunded at this time. The NSOM Board has advised that this can be funded by accessing funds from external funders once the resource consent is granted.
5.8 This work needs to continue if the reopening date of December 2016 is to be met.
6. Options
6.1 The options considered do not include not funding the NSOM. That decision has already been made by Council’s inclusion of up to $3m in partnership funding for the earthquake strengthening and refurbishment of the School’s building in its Long Term Plan.
6.2 Council could decline the NSOM Board’s request to part fund the detailed design work, and to bring some of this funding forward into the current financial year. However, this should be seen in light of the need to keep the project moving; the recognition that detailed design work does need to be undertaken, and will be important in attracting contributions to the total cost; and in light of the way Council supported the Bishop Suter Trust project.
6.3 Council could approve the NSOM Board’s request. This puts up to $235,000 at risk (50% of total cost of final design and preparation of tender documents) if the project does not proceed at this time. Indications from the Board have been positive that progress is being made with their project. The risk seems small.
7. Alignment with relevant Council policy
7.1 The decision to make this funding available, and to bring some of this funding into the current financial year, is not inconsistent with any Council policy. The Annual Plan has funding of $150,000 for project management of this NSOM project, and the draft Long Term Plan makes up to $3 million available in capital funding.
7.2 The refurbishment of NSOM – particularly in a timely manner - contributes to Goal 7 of Nelson 2060 –Our economy thrives and contributes to a vibrant and sustainable Nelson.
8. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy
8.1 The bringing forward of funding from Year 1 of the LTP to the current financial year is not a significant decision, nor is the decision to release up to 50% of the costs of detailed design and preparation of tender documents.
9. Consultation
9.1 The decisions sought in this report do not require consultation. The decision to include financial contribution to the NSOM for the refurbishment project was included in the Annual Plan 2014/15 and Long Term Plan 2015/25, and has been consulted on.
10. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process
10.1 There has been no separate consultation with Māori on this issue.
11. Conclusion
11.1 NSOM Renovation and Reopening project is moving apace.
11.2 The Board has updated Mayor and Chief Executive on progress in the resource consent process, fundraising, and the need to keep things moving with preparation of detailed design documents.
11.3 This requires some additional funding. On the basis that Council supported the Bishop Suter Trust with some funding for this activity before it confirmed it had raised all funds, it is appropriate to do so for NSOM.
11.4 $235,000 is 50% of the cost of detailed designs and tender documentation. UP to $150,000 is required in the current financial year, which will be brought forward from Year 1 of the LTP.
Clare Hadley
Chief Executive
Attachments
|
|
Council 11 June 2015 |
REPORT R4354
Business Case Approach for 2015/16 Projects - Revised Projects Listing
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To provide a revised list of projects incorporating additional information as requested at the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee on 05 May 2015, and at the subsequent Governance Committee on 28 May 2015.
2. Delegations
2.1 This is a matter for Council. The information in this report relates to a recommendation, which appears on the agenda for this meeting of Council, from the Governance Committee held on 28 May 2015.
3. Recommendation
4. Background
4.1 An external review of decisions and actions relating to the southern extension of the Trafalgar Centre was conducted in 2014 by Alan Bickers, of Jayal Enterprises Ltd. The final report to Council in June 2014 carried a recommendation that “for every significant capital project NCC should consider a policy requiring the preparation and approval of a business case”. After receiving that report, Council resolved on 5 June 2014:
AND THAT through the Long Term Plan/Annual Plan development, Council will give consideration to the projects that will follow a business case approach.
4.2 To action this resolution, a list of capital funded infrastructure projects included in the draft Long Term Plan 2015/25 with a total year 1 to 3 budget of $250,000 was presented to the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee on 05 May 2015. A suggested set of projects to follow a business case approach was pre-selected by officers and highlighted yellow in the list, for the Committee’s consideration. The Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee requested that the list be reviewed and revised by Committee Chairs and Deputy Chairs.
4.3 An updated list was subsequently provided to the Governance Committee on 28 May 2015. It was noted that the instruction from the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee had not been fulfilled in its entirety, and the Governance Committee requested amendments to the list.
4.4 Councillor McGurk as Chair of the Planning and Regulatory Committee did not have the opportunity to review the list prior to the Governance Committee held on 28 May 2015. This review has now been completed.
5. Discussion
5.1 Committee Chairs and Deputy Chairs for the Works and Infrastructure, Community Services, and Planning and Regulatory Committees have reviewed the list with the relevant Group Manager, and selected projects to follow a business case approach. The rationale used when considering which projects to select were:
5.1.1 Did the project have a clear outcome?
5.1.2 Was the project well defined?
5.1.3 Did the project have a large value assigned to it?
5.1.4 Was there potentially a high degree of political interest in the project?
5.1.5 Was there potentially a high degree of ratepayers interest in the project?
5.2 The revised list presents: projects selected by Committee Chairs and Deputy Chairs; the rationale (see 5.1.1 to 5.1.5 above) used by Committee Chairs and Deputy Chairs to select those projects; which Committee each project is aligned with; a clarification to the project definition for “Neighbourhood parks upgrade program” at row 20; a correction to highlight the project “Rutherford playground” at row 21; a comment where projects are subject to existing governance or reporting arrangements and are therefore not selected; comment on projects that have not been selected as they are multi-year projects which are in progress.
5.3 Consideration should be given to the recommendation by Alan Bickers, which intended a business case approach to focus attention on projects with characteristics such as significant cost, high public or political profile, and/or high risk.
5.4 The remaining projects that are not highlighted and that do not contain a comment on governance or reporting arrangements, and that do not contain a comment as being a multi-year project which is in progress, were not selected by Committee Chairs and Deputy Chairs. These unselected projects are subject to a business case approach and controls within the management structure.
5.5 Subsequent reports to the appropriate Committees containing the outline business cases for the selected projects have been scheduled. Each report will contain the outline business case for one or more projects. The outline business case will describe: the problem or opportunity to be addressed; a description of the “do nothing” option, and a description of the planned “do something” option, the planned investment, and, where possible, a net present value statement.
6. Alignment with relevant Council policy
6.1 This matter is not in contradiction to any Council policy or strategic document.
7. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy
7.1 This matter is not significant in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
8. Consultation
8.1 The public have not been consulted on this matter.
9. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process
9.1 Maori have not been consulted on this matter
10. Conclusion
10.1 This report provides the revised project listing including the additional information requested by the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee on 05 May 2015, and by the Governance Committee on 28 May 2015.
Arlene Akhlaq
Senior Projects Adviser
Attachments
Attachment 1: A1331113 - Capital funded infrastructure projects included for year 1 of the draft Long Term Plan 2015/25 with Committee Chair and Deputy Chair selections
|
|
Council 11 June 2015 |
REPORT R4199
Modellers' Pond - Detailed Assessment of Options
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To outline the option assessments for the Modellers’ Pond and recommend a process towards a final decision on the Modellers’ Pond.
2. Delegations
2.1 The Council has authority to make the decisions on the Modellers’ Pond.
3. Recommendation
4. Background
4.1 At its 18 December 2014 meeting Council passed the following resolution (NCC Minutes, Item 15.1, A1295075):
THAT Council note that the option to utilise fish to control the weed and algae in the Modellers’ Pond is no longer considered a viable solution;
AND THAT a detailed assessment at an estimated cost of $30,000 on the environmental impacts, capital investment and associated long-term, operational and maintenance costs be undertaken on three options, namely:
1. Continue to manually clean into the future; or
2. Fill in the Modellers’ Pond, landscape and maintain into the future; or
3. Modify the Modellers’ Pond to minimise ongoing operational and maintenance costs;
AND THAT Council approve this additional cost as unbudgeted operational expenditure;
AND THAT staff engage with Pond users and a Tahunanui community representative and seek their contributions in assessing the options;
AND THAT results of this detailed assessment be reported back to Council to be able to guide deliberations on the Long-Term Plan.
4.2 In January 2015, Council Officers met with Modellers’ Society (Nigel and Tracey Gibbs) and the representative of the Tahuna Community (John Gilbertson) to review the three options. The outcome of this meeting was that continuing with the current maintenance regime (status quo) was considered not to be a realistic option. Alternatively the users were adamant that the decommissioning option (fill in the pond) was not an option in their view. The modify option comprising the installation of a concrete base was considered by the users to be the most cost-effective and long-term option. There was considerable discussion around other upgrade alternatives. However the group felt that most of the other alternatives had been considered on numerous occasions in the past and that the concrete base option always came out as being the most cost-effective long-term option.
4.3 Council Officers then worked with CGW to assess the three options in more detail. CGW produced a draft report in March 2015 and a further meeting was held with the Modellers’ Society (Nigel and Tracey Gibbs, Rosemary Dyer) and the representative of the Tahuna Community (John Gilbertson) to give an overview of the outcomes of the report. The group indicated that they would be aiming to present their views to Council directly.
4.4 The CGW Report 8 April 2015 was issued (Attachment 1). This report outlines in considerable detail the various assessments that have been undertaken for the three options.
5. Options
Option 1 – Status Quo
5.1 This option essentially retains the pond as is and continues with the current maintenance regime.
Water Quality
5.2 There are several factors that affect the quality of the water in the pond. These are:
· Stormwater runoff from surrounding surfaces and from adjacent roadway and carpark.
· Stormwater and seawater discharges from Centennial Park pump station (primarily due to larger rainfall events and high tides).
· During summer months the stormwater in the discharge pipe remains stagnant and the initial flush into the pond is this stagnated water.
· Its sandy base and shallow depth encourages the growth of rupia and algae.
· Its water level fluctuates and is almost entirely dependent on rainfall, tides, evaporation and stormwater runoff.
· It becomes a collecting point for rubbish including bottles, cans and discarded packaging.
· At high tides the pond is inundated in sea water often over filling the pond and covering the surrounding footpath.
Maintenance Regime
5.3 The current maintenance regime is not fully effective and is very expensive. It is a manual task, with personnel wading through the pond raking up rupia and algae and lifting it into receptacles to be disposed of.
Environmental Impacts
5.4 The current maintenance regime has a minimal environmental impact.
Resource Consents
5.5 Currently resource consents are held for diverting stormwater, discharge of contaminants to coastal marine area, construction of a structure and activities near the coast. The consents (9852327) were originally issued on 24 August 1998 and subsequent variation decisions on 21 March 2001 and in July 2003. The variations were primarily related to the monitoring requirements of the original consent. The consent and subsequent variations have 35-year term with expiry 24 August 2033.
5.6 The status quo option as outlined would not require any additional consent or any variations to the current consents.
Cost Estimates
5.7 The annual costs of the maintenance regime are summarised as follows:
|
Weed Clearing |
$114,000 |
|
Annual Clean |
$ 14,000 |
|
Total per year |
$128,000 |
5.8 The Net Present Value (NPV) over 30 years with an annual expenditure of $128,000 is $1,680,000. (NPV = the value of 30 years expenditure in today’s dollars.)
Modifications
5.9 If the status quo option was adopted there is an opportunity to implement some physical modifications to try and reduce the maintenance required.
5.10 Currently the pond has fluctuating water levels. A water level control device could be installed to maintain a constant level. Top up water could be provided from the Council water reticulation. Currently there is a flanged connection on a 100mm diameter pipe at the eastern end of the pond. This could be modified with a control device such as a float valve housed in an appropriate chamber. This would also require the installation of a backflow prevention device. The estimated cost of this modification is $18,000.
5.11 The net amount of top-up water needed has been assessed at 19,000 m3 per year. This is the net deficit after considering rainfall, stormwater flows and high tides into the pond, plus the losses via evaporation and seepage through the sandy base. At the current rates charged for water this equates to approximately $50,000 per year.
5.12 It is difficult to assess the savings in weed clearing with the water level maintained at a consistent level. We have assumed up to 10% savings though this may not eventuate.
5.13 The estimated costs of these modifications are summarised as follows:
|
Install Flow Control |
$ 18,000 |
|
Weed Clearing |
$102,000 |
|
Annual Clean |
$ 14,000 |
|
Top-up Water |
$ 50,000 |
|
Total per year |
$166,000 |
5.14 The Net Present Value (NPV) over 30 years with a first year expenditure of $18,000 and an annual expenditure of $166,000 is $2,180,000. (NPV = the value of 30 years expenditure in today’s dollars.)
Option 2 – Decommission Pond
5.15 This option decommissions the pond as a modellers’ pond. The decommissioning can be undertaken in one of two ways; fill it in or return it to an estuarine environment.
‘Fill It In’
The pond would be filled in with the exception of a small area near the Centennial Park pump station outlet. This will need to remain as a ‘pond’ for the discharge of stormwater. The concrete footpath and other structures within and adjacent to the pond would be removed. It is proposed that the fill level be higher than the current footpath to prevent inundation during high tides. The filled area will be left level and sown with grass.
‘Reinstate Estuarine Environment’
5.16 The concrete footpath and other structures within and adjacent to the pond would be removed. Potentially the weir could also be removed. The exact layout and design of the estuarine option needs further consideration. It is likely that some fill would be required to establish as varying coastal fringe as opposed to utilising the current pond’s oval geometry.
Water Quality
5.17 Water quality would not be a significant issue if the pond was decommissioned. The ‘fill it in’ option will still require a discharge pond at the stormwater outlet so there may be associated water quality aspects with this. This discharge area does not necessarily need to be a pond. It could be more of a wetland or discharge area that contains the stormwater sediment and contaminants as expected from the original consents.
Maintenance Regime
5.18 The ‘fill it in’ option will require mowing and standard park type maintenance into the future.
5.19 The ‘return to estuarine environment’ option may not need very much maintenance at all, especially if it is designed and implemented appropriately.
Environmental Impacts
5.20 It is intended that the decommissioning options will be undertaken to enhance the environment. Therefore the environmental impacts of the final outcome are likely to be positive.
5.21 The design of the discharge area around the stormwater outlets will need to be such that the original intentions of the resource consents are not compromised.
Resource Consents
5.22 The current resource consents are outlined in clause 5.5.
5.23 The pond is located in the ‘open space and recreation zone’ in Council’s District Plan. It is also within the liquefaction study area and in the Coastal Environment Overlay. The pond is a scheduled site (CR7 – Tahunanui Beach reserve) and is identified as a HAIL site.
5.24 The works associated with the ‘fill it in’ option would normally be a permitted activity, however they would constitute earthworks. The current rule on earthworks permits fill up to 1.2 metre in depth providing the works do not take place within 20m of the Coastal Marine Area (CMA). The modellers’ pond is likely to be within 20m so a resource consent would be needed.
5.25 The works are unlikely to have any consequence on the liquefaction overlay nor in respect of the National Environmental Standards (NES) for contaminated soil. However should the works require removal of contaminated material then Council would need to comply with the permitted standards of the NES or operate within the parameters of the existing resource consents. The removal of contaminated material is not likely to be undertaken in the ‘fill it in’ option.
5.26 The works associated with the ‘return to estuarine environment’ would involve some earthworks so a resource consent would be required (the same as outlined for the ‘fill it in option’). In this option the contaminated soil may not be covered as in the ‘fill it in’ option. Potentially some of the contaminated material within the upper layers may need to be removed and replaced with other appropriate material. If this were to occur then Council would need to comply with the permitted standards of the NES or operate within the parameters of the existing resource consents.
Cost Estimates
5.27 The capital costs of the ‘fill it in’ option are estimated at $680,000. This includes $60,000 should there be a need to apply for a new consent of for variations to current resource consents. The capital costs for the ‘return to estuarine environment option’ have not been determined. However it is likely that they would be less than the ‘fill it in’ option.
5.28 The annual costs of maintenance, which primarily covers mowing of grass, is estimated at $9,600. The annual costs of the ‘return to estuarine environment’ would be very minimal if any.
5.29 With an initial capital cost of $680,000 and an annual maintenance cost of $9,600 the Net Present Value (NPV) over 30 years is $760,000. (NPV = the value of 30 years expenditure in today’s dollars.)
Option 3 – Modify Pond
Description
5.30 This modify option is based on installing a permanent liner in the base of the pond. Of the lining options considered, concrete was the preferred material as it is cost-effective over the long term compared with other lining options. It is proposed to implement more frequent flushing of sea water through the pond. The frequent flushing of seawater combined with the permanent lining should reduce but not eliminate the need for ongoing maintenance.
5.31 It is proposed that the pipework at the Centennial Park pump station be modified and automated to allow the intrusion of seawater during high tides. This sea water would then be pumped to the pond in sufficient quantities to replenish the pond. Although the frequency of pumping has not been finalised it has been assumed that this will occur 2-3 times per week. The excess pond water will flow over the weir into the estuary.
5.32 Correspondingly it is proposed that the pond weir is also automated so that the pond can emptied during low tides.
5.33 This option will also require some flow modifications within the pond to prevent sea water short-circuiting to the overflow weir. The aim would be to direct incoming seawater around the pond so that there is adequate mixing and flushing. This may involve modifying the current stormwater inlet structure as well as the automation as described in 5.31.
Water Quality
5.34 The factors that affect the quality of the water in the pond are outlined in clause 5.2. The frequent flushing of seawater combined with the concrete base should have the following positive impacts on water quality in the pond:
· Eliminate the growth of rupia (rupia requires a sand base to grow).
· Reduce the opportunity for algae to grow in the pond. The extent of this reduction in growth is difficult to assess, although given the intended frequency of seawater pumping and pond emptying there is a chance that it could be eliminated completely.
· Dilute stormwater runoff from surrounding surfaces and from adjacent roadway and carpark and decrease nutrient concentrations.
· The increased frequency of seawater discharges into the pond from Centennial Park pump station will eliminate the occurrence of stagnated water in the discharge mains.
· Maintain water levels within the pond.
5.35 In its report to Council February 2013, Parklink Ltd indicated that when sea water is flushed into the pond there is temporary relief in the build up of algae. The report goes on to state that as the water temperature rises it becomes more conducive to algae growth. The implication of this commentary is that if there was constant flushing of seawater then the temporary relief would become permanent. The water temperature would not have time to rise and the pond water would be kept fresh thereby reduce if not eliminate algae growth.
Maintenance Regime
5.36 It is envisaged that the maintenance regime could be significantly less in quantum compared to the current practices – largely because a concrete base removes the media needed for growth of ruppia and a potential reduction in algae growth. The frequent flushing of seawater and pond emptying should reduce the chance of algae growth. A concrete base should make this much easier and more cost-effective. It has been assessed that this ‘one-off’ clean be undertaken annually, however its frequency will depend on the degree of siltation and sand intrusion from the surrounding marine environment.
5.37 In its Report November 2010, NIWA recommended “regular flushing (every two months) in the summer to reduce algal biomass and to help maintain water quality”. Although NIWA suggested this as an interim measure, the proposal outlined in this report would make this a permanent measure.
5.38 In the same report NIWA also recommends that “in the longer term bottom lining of the pond would greatly facilitate pond management by controlling the R megacarpa (ruppia) reducing sediment re-suspension, stop pond seepage and facilitate regular flushing and bottom cleaning. It would deter macro-algal growth and greatly reduce the oxygen demands of the pond system.”
5.39 On 22 April 2015, NIWA confirmed that “the concept is very likely to be a good solution to the problem growths in Modellers Pond. The concrete lining will prevent the Ruppia growths and flushing as described will prevent sediment accumulation for future growths. The algal growths were non-attached so regular flushing would keep their abundance to a minimum. Pond emptying and refilling in the past has been successful in providing temporary relief from algae even though the pond could not be emptied completely and could only be done infrequently with refilling possible only on a spring tide. This proposal would seem to provide all the answers.” This is a positive endorsement of this option from a biological perspective.
Environmental Impacts
5.40 The decommissioning of a sandy base and the installation of a concrete liner in the base of the pond is a step away from the natural coastal environment. However once the modifications have been completed it is likely that the environmental impacts would be similar to what exists currently.
5.41 The construction phase of this option would need to be managed to minimise environmental impacts.
5.42 The pumping of seawater from the Centennial Park pump station and the corresponding emptying of the pond into the estuary at low tides may have an environmental impact. However given the intended frequency of seawater input it is likely that the emptying and/or overflow will be predominantly seawater.
Resource Consents
5.43 The current resource consents are outlined in clause 5.5.
5.44 The works associated with this modification would involve some earthworks therefore a resource consent would be required. In this option the contaminated material would be covered by the concrete base. Potentially some of the contaminated material within the upper layers may need to be removed to make room for compacted basecourse on the underside of the concrete slab. If this were to occur then Council would need to comply with the permitted standards of the NES or operate within the parameters of the existing resource consents.
5.45 The modifications to the pipework at the Centennial Park pumpstation and at the pond weir would trigger the requirement for a resource consent. It is intended that the modification to the both structures will include automation. The key imperative to the consideration of either compliance with the permitted standards or the effects of an activity needing resource consent will be an understanding of the quality of the water being discharged, and the concentration/dilution of contaminants. This will have to be evaluated during the detailed design phase when the operating and maintenance regime is established.
Cost Estimates
5.46 The capital cost of the ‘modify pond’ option is estimated at $1,160,000. This includes $60,000 should there be a need to apply for a new consent for variations to current resource consents.
5.47 Based on the comments from Parklink Ltd and NIWA, the annual costs of maintenance have been assessed as follows:
|
Pumping (Electricity) |
$ 1,000 |
|
Pumping (Maintenance) |
$ 10,000 |
|
Cleaning (Weed/detritus) |
$ 20,000 |
|
Annual Clean |
$ 14,000 |
|
Total per year |
$ 45,000 |
5.48 With an initial capital cost of $1,160,000 and an annual maintenance cost of $45,000 the Net Present Value (NPV) over 30 years is $1,640,000. (NPV = the value of 30 years expenditure in today’s dollars.)
5.49 The CGW Report 8 April 2015 did not assess the proposal of frequently flushing the pond with seawater in detail. It therefore assesses much higher annual maintenance costs. Although the report refers to pumping seawater as an option it was not proposed as the option. The upgrade option it proposes adopts a similar maintenance regime as status quo.
5.50 The higher maintenance costs in the CGW report are primarily due to the uncertainty around what impact the concrete base and use of Council top-up water will have on the growth of algae. Nelmac provided advice to the CGW Report and indicated that in this scenario it believes the maintenance will only decrease around 20% compared to status quo. Consequently the CGW Report outlines the annual maintenance costs as $123,000 per year.
5.51 The CGW Report outlines the capital cost at $1,120,000 but has not allowed for the resource consent costs. With the capital cost estimate of $1,120,000 and an annual maintenance cost estimate of $123,000 the NPV is calculated as $2,540,000.
5.52 It could therefore be stated that the NPV for the modify pond option could range between $1,640,000 and $2,540,000. It is more likely to be at the lower end of this range based on the commentary of ParkLink Ltd and NIWA around potentially much reduced maintenance of algae and ruppia.
Summary of NPVs
5.53 The NPV for each of the three options are summarised as follows:
|
Option |
Net Present Value |
|
Option 1 – Status Quo |
$2,180,000 |
|
Option 2 – Decommission Pond |
$ 760,000 |
|
Option 3 – Modify Pond |
$1,640,000 to $2,540,000 |
6. Discussion
6.1 The Net Present Value analysis shows that Option 2 – Decommission Pond is the least cost option at $760,000 over the next 30 years. The next least cost option is more likely to be Option 3 – Modify pond with an NPV of likely to be closer to $1,640,000 than the $2,540,000. The highest cost option is likely to be Option 1 – Status quo with a NPV of $2,180,000.
6.2 From a purely economic perspective the status quo is not the most cost-effective option long-term.
6.3 There is community value in this facility. Although the economics suggest that decommissioning is the most cost-effective option, this economic analysis does not account for community value. Parts of the community would see sufficient value precluding decommissioning as an option.
6.4 As indicated earlier in this report Council officers have been consulting with the Modellers’ Society and the Tahunanui Community. We understand that there is also interest from other community groups to get involved in this project. We understand that potential sponsors have been canvassed to help facilitate the implementation of Option 3 – Modify Pond. At this stage the lack of certainty around the detailed design and direction from Council has curtailed commitments to this option.
6.5 If Council were to decide to decommission the pond based on the economic analysis in this report then there is likely to be and negative response from users and sections of the community.
6.6 There is community interest in progressing with Option 3 – Modify the Pond, Council should consider adopting this as the preferred option at this stage. This would then allow Council to complete the detailed design and assess the resource consent requirements in more detail. This would bring more certainty allowing users and community groups to assess and confirm their input and/or contributions. Once this has been completed, the details and final costs should be referred back to Council for further consideration. At that point Council could decide whether to progress with what has been developed. If council is not comfortable with the outcome it could either retain the status quo or adopt the decommissioning option.
7. Alignment with relevant Council policy
7.1 Improvements to the pond align with the intent of the Annual Plan 2014/15 and with the intent of the Draft Long-term Plan 2015-25. The Annual Plan 2014/15 has a budget of $143,000 of which $80,000 has been spent on pond cleaning and option assessment. The Draft Long Term Plan 2015-25 included $1,000,000 for work on the modellers’ pond.
8. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy
8.1 This is not a significant decision.
9. Consultation
9.1 The Council has met twice with the Modellers’ Society and a representative of the Tahunanui Community to review the options and obtain their input and advice. There have also been ongoing informal discussions between the parties on specific ideas and options.
9.2 The Modellers’ Society and the Tahunanui Community intend presenting their own views to Council. However it is clear from these discussions that they strongly prefer Option 3 – Modify the Pond. They are opposed to Option 2 – Decommission the Pond. They also indicated that in their view Option 1 – status quo was not sustainable.
9.3 The Modellers’ Pond is located within the Coastal Marine Area, so it is necessary that the Department of Consultation is briefed on the proposal. Their comments can be incorporated into the detailed design as appropriate.
10. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process
10.1 There has been no consultation with Maori, outside of the Annual Plan processes. Consultation will be undertaken with Maori around the proposal and incorporate their feedback into the proposal as appropriate.
Richard Kirby
Consulting Engineer
Attachments
|
|
Council 11 June 2015 |
REPORT R4370
Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To consider Council’s representation at the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) 2014 Annual General Meeting (AGM).
2. Delegations
2.1 This is a decision for Council.
3. Recommendation
4. Background
4.1 The 28th AGM of LGNZ is to be held in Rotorua on 19 July 2015 as part of the LGNZ Conference.
4.2 As Council is a member of LGNZ, it is entitled to representation at the 2015 AGM.
4.3 The maximum number of delegates for each local authority at the AGM is determined by that local authority’s population and subscription levels. Council is entitled to be represented by three delegates at the 2015 AGM.
4.4 Please note that the number of representatives at the AGM does not affect the number of delegates able to attend the conference.
4.5 The representation of each member authority is determined by the Mayor or Chair of each local authority. Representation is made up of members which include elected members and staff of all fully financial local authorities.
4.6 The AGM is open to members only and delegates must register by 19 June 2015.
4.7 Councillors McGurk and Lawrey are currently booked to attend the conference, as is the Chief Executive.
5. Discussion
5.1 Representation at the AGM is made up of a presiding delegate, other delegates and observers.
5.2 Council should consider who is best to fill these roles.
Presiding delegate
5.3 A presiding delegate is the person responsible for voting on behalf of the authority at the AGM. One presiding delegate must be appointed.
5.4 It would be usual for the presiding delegate to be the Mayor. However, if the Mayor is unavailable to attend, it is proposed that Councillor McGurk as Chair of the Planning and Regulatory Committee be appointed as the presiding delegate.
Other delegates
5.5 Council may be represented by up to two other delegates. According to the LGNZ Constitution a delegate can include officers of local authorities.
5.6 If the presiding delegate is absent from the AGM, ‘other delegates’ may vote on behalf of the local authority.
5.7 It is proposed that Councillor Lawrey be appointed as the other delegate in attendance.
Observers
5.8 Persons attending the AGM as observers will have no speaking or voting rights and will be seated separately from the main delegation. Based on the numbers attending the AGM this year, no observers are proposed.
Remit process
5.9 The remit process was outlined in the Mayor’s Report of 19 March 2015.
5.10 The deadline for lodging remits with LGNZ has now passed, it was 22 May 2015.
Obituaries
5.11 LGNZ request obituary notices for inclusion in the AGM proceedings for the period from 20 July 2014 onwards. These should be advised in writing no later than Wednesday 15 July 2015.
6. Options
6.1 Council can either appoint attendees as delegates for the purposes of voting at the 2015 LGNZ AGM or not.
7. Alignment with relevant Council policy
7.1 The decision to appoint delegates to vote at the LGNZ AGM is not inconsistent with any previous decisions of Council.
8. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy
8.1 This decision is not considered to be significant in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
9. Consultation
9.1 No consultation has been undertaken on this matter.
10. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process
10.1 No consultation with Maori has been undertaken on this matter.
11. Conclusion
11.1 That the appropriate delegates represent Council at the 2015 LGNZ AGM as presiding and other delegates respectively.
Penny Langley
Manager Administration
Attachments
|
|
Council 11 June 2015 |
REPORT R4315
Administrative Matters
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To report on a number of administrative matters in order to keep Council up to date.
2. Delegations
2.1 This is a report for consideration by full Council.
3. Recommendation
4. Elected Members Travel and Training Expenditure
4.1 At the 12 November 2013 Council meeting it was resolved to take a whole of triennium based approach to budgeting for elected members travel and training.
4.2 It was agreed that expenditure would be reported back to every alternate Council meeting.
4.3 It was also agreed that following attendance at an event, elected members would provide a report back to the Chief Executive for sharing with fellow councillors via the Councillors Newsletter. Councillors are reminded to ensure a report back from any training is provided in a timely manner.
4.4 At the 24 March 2015 Council meeting, it was resolved that the costs of Resource Management Act (RMA) Making Good Decisions training be funded from the additional funding pool rather than the individual elected members training budgets for the current triennium.
4.5 All Making Good Decisions training costs originally funded from individual councillor training budgets in the current triennium have been reassigned to the additional training pool. These transfers were completed in May, and will be reflected in the next quarterly report.
4.6 Attachment 1 is a table showing expenditure to 30 April 2015. Attachment 2 is the agreed criteria for elected members’ travel and training.
5. Meeting attendance
5.1 Elected members’ meeting attendance is recorded for purposes such as official information requests.
5.2 In order to improve transparency on this matter and in line with good practice it seems prudent to routinely report meeting attendance. Providing it this way also allows elected members an opportunity to ensure the record is correct.
5.3 Attachment 3 is a table showing meeting attendance from 1 March 2015 to 31 May 2015.
6. Interests Register
6.1 At the start of the triennium all elected members were requested to declare their interests.
6.2 There is a standing item on each Council and committee meeting agenda asking for updates to the Interests Register and for elected members to identify any conflicts of interest in the agenda. The Interests Register is included as Attachment 4.
6.3 In order to improve transparency and in line with good practice it seems prudent to routinely report on elected members interests. This allows elected members an opportunity to ensure the Register is correct.
7. Leaves of Absence
7.1 Her Worship the Mayor has requested a leave of absence from 25 July 2015 to 22 August 2015 inclusive, Standing Order 3.6.1 refers.
8. Schedule of Documents Sealed
8.1 Attachment 5 is the Schedule of Documents Sealed.
9. Other Matters
Delegations Register
9.1 At its meeting on 5 May 2015 the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee was advised that the liquidation of the Kahurangi Employment Trust was complete. Accordingly, the Trust has been removed from the Delegations Register (Schedule Four – Council Organisations (COs)).
Linda Canton
Administration Adviser
Attachments
Attachment 1: A1365398 - Elected Members Travel and Training 1 March 2015–30 April 2015
Attachment 2: A1103850 - Elected Members' Travel and Training Criteria 2013-2016
Attachment 3: A1366044 - Elected Members Meeting Attendance 1 March 2015-31 May 2015
Attachment 4: A1364263 - Elected Members Interests Register 2013-2016
Attachment 5: A1364221 - Schedule of Documents Sealed 1 March 2015-21 May 2015
Set out below are the criteria agreed by Council for the expenditure of individual travel and training budgets allocated to elected members, and of the travel and training budget pool for one-off opportunities.
When selected training, meeting or event opportunities (events), individual members are responsible for ensuring and demonstrating that their selected options align with these criteria.
Councillors must be able to demonstrate that:
1. The event is held in New Zealand.
2. The event is relevant to local government.
3. The event is preferably, but not exclusively, supported by Local Government New Zealand or aligned organisations.
4. The event supports the member in contributing effectively and appropriately, in their governance role, to present and anticipated future needs of Nelson City Council.
5. The event is the most cost effective option to achieve the identified outcomes and if not, why it is preferred over more cost effective options.
6. The event is within the remaining available budget.
7. Their travel and training meets with the criteria outlined in 1-6, in response to any public or media enquiries about their travel and training, which will be directed to the individual member.
Minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Regulatory to deliberate on submissions to the draft Reserves Bylaw
Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Friday, 8 May 2014, commencing at 9.02am
Present: Councillor B McGurk (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor (R Reese), Councillors R Copeland, E Davy, K Fulton (Deputy Chairperson), M Lawrey and M Ward
In Attendance: Councillors L Acland, P Matheson and G Noonan, Manager Environmental Programmes (C Ward), Kaihautū/Acting Manager Community Partnerships (G Mullen), Manager Communications (A Ricker), Manager Administration (P Langley), and Administration Adviser (E-J Ruthven)
Apology: Councillor I Barker, and Councillor K Fulton for lateness
1. Apologies
Resolved
THAT apologies be received and accepted from Councillors Barker, and Councillor Fulton for lateness.
McGurk/Davy Carried
2. Interests
There were no updates to the interests register, and no conflicts of interest with agenda items were declared.
3. Confirmation of Order of Business
There was no change to the order of business.
4. Confirmation of Minutes – 20 March 2014
Document number A1161166, agenda pages 5-8 refer.
Resolved
THAT the minutes of a meeting of the Nelson City Council – Planning and Regulatory Committee, to hear submissions to the draft Reserves Bylaw, held on 20 March 2014, be confirmed as a true and correct record.
Davy/Ward Carried
Attendance: Councillor Fulton joined the meeting at 9.04am.
5. Deliberations on the draft Reserves Bylaw
Document number A1151054, agenda pages 9-35 refer.
Manager Environmental Programmes, Chris Ward, presented the report.
5.1 Use of Tracks in Reserves
Councillors discussed issues of shared track usage raised by submitters, and whether it was appropriate to include within the bylaw guidelines for appropriate signage on tracks, and a schedule of ‘shared tracks’ and tracks for ‘walking only’.
In response to a question, Mr Ward explained that the intent of the draft bylaw was to address issues that were most suitable to be addressed through a bylaw. He said that it was open to the committee to include provisions within the bylaw addressing issues such as signage, and managing shared use of tracks by walkers and cyclists.
However, he added that matters should only be placed within a bylaw if Council was prepared to be able to enforce them. He said that there were a number of non-regulatory ways in which issues could be appropriately addressed, for example through signage, track design and education and messaging about respect for other users of tracks.
With regards to the potential for a schedule of ‘shared tracks’ and ‘walking only’ tracks, Mr Ward advised that these issues had not been considered through the consultation process, and it would be appropriate to take legal advice regarding whether a change of this nature would require the consultation process to be re-opened.
Committee members discussed whether any further information should be placed in the draft bylaw regarding signage and specifying tracks as ‘shared tracks’ or ‘walking only’. Several committee members expressed support for identifying specific tracks as ‘shared tracks’ or ‘walking only’, whereas other committee members expressed a preference for the bylaw to be silent on this matter, and to encourage education regarding the need to have respect for all users.
It was agreed that it would be useful to prepare:
· a draft schedule of tracks that could potentially be classed as ‘shared tracks’ and those that could be classified as ‘walking only’;
· advice regarding whether consultation would need to be re-opened if the committee were of a mind to include such a schedule in the draft bylaw; and
· further information regarding non-regulatory methods of encouraging and monitoring appropriate behaviour by all users of tracks.
Suggestions for how to increase safety on shared tracks outside of the scope of the bylaw included encouraging cyclists to install and use bells on their bikes, increased signage and clearly marked ‘slow zones’. In response to a question, Mr Ward confirmed that it was also possible to utilise track design to alter the behaviour of cyclists, for example by using chicanes to slow speeds, and to encourage clear visual sight lines.
5.2 Other Issues in the Draft Bylaw
Councillors discussed the draft bylaw provision regarding playing golf in reserves. In response to a question, Mr Ward explained that the original draft proposal had included a provision regarding playing golf in reserves, but that this had been removed at the Planning and Regulatory Committee’s request prior to the Statement of Proposal being released for consultation. He added that consultation had revealed community concerns regarding golf being practised in reserves, and as a result, it was suggested that this provision be put back into the draft bylaw.
There was a further discussion regarding placing or erecting memorials in reserves. In response to questions, Mr Ward noted that this had been suggested through the submission made by the Friends of Nelson Haven. He said that he was not aware of any requirement for written permission to be obtained prior to placing memorials in the city outside of reserves, and said that the provisions relating to the granting of such permission would need to be developed.
A suggestion was made that the words in the ‘Activities Requiring Permission’ section of the draft bylaw be expanded to clarify that in appropriate circumstances, there may be an obligation to publicly consult.
Resolved
THAT the deliberations on the draft Reserves Bylaw be adjourned;
AND THAT Councillors McGurk and Fulton meet with relevant officers to formulate appropriate amendments to the draft Reserves Bylaw following on from deliberations at the Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting of 8 May 2014;
AND THAT an updated draft Reserves Bylaw be brought back to the next Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting.
Fulton/McGurk Carried
There being no further business the meeting ended at 10.03am.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
Chairperson
Date
Minutes of a meeting of the Resource Management Act Procedures Committee
Held in Ruma Mārama, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On 3 October 2014, commencing at 9.03am
Present: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese and Councillor Paul Matheson
In Attendance: Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Principal Planner (M Heale), Senior Engineering Officer (J Large), and Administration Adviser (E Farrell)
1. Apologies
There were no apologies.
2. Interests
There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no conflicts with items on the agenda were declared.
3. Confirmation of Order of Business
There was no change to the order of business.
4. Confirmation of Minutes
4.1 Resource Management Act Procedures Committee
Document number A1212833, agenda pages 6-7 refer.
Resolved
THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Nelson City Council – Resource Management Act Procedures Committee, held on 1 July 2014, be confirmed as a true and correct record.
Matheson/Her Worship the Mayor Carried
5. Submission to Lee Valley Dam Resource Consent
Document number A1251191, agenda pages 8-11 refer.
Resolved
THAT the report Submission to Lee Valley Dam Resource Consent (A1251191) and its attachment (A1251293) be received;
AND THAT the Resource Management Act Procedures Committee adopt the attached submission (A1251293).
Her Worship the Mayor/Matheson Carried
6. Exclusion of the Public
Recommendation
THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
|
Item |
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interests protected (where applicable) |
|
1 |
Resource Management Act Procedures Committee Minutes – Public Excluded – 1 July 2014 |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The
withholding of the information is necessary:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
Plan 18 Change Appeals This report contains information regarding progress of the appeals to Plan Change 18 and the strategy to be followed for Environment Court appeals. |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary:
· Section 7(2)(i) To carry out negotiations (delete as appropriate) |
Matheson/Her Worship the Mayor Carried
The meeting went into public excluded session at 9.10am and resumed in public session at 9.52am.
7. Re-admittance of the Public
Resolved
THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting.
Matheson/Her Worship the Mayor Carried
There being no further business the meeting ended at 9.52am.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
Minutes of a meeting of the Works and Infrastructure Committee
Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Tuesday 5 May 2015, commencing at 9.03am
Present: Councillor E Davy (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors I Barker, R Copeland, M Lawrey (Deputy Chairperson), G Noonan, and T Skinner
In Attendance: Councillors B McGurk and M Ward, Nelson Youth Councillors E Ngawhika-Elliott and J Lankshear, Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Senior Asset Engineer – Transport and Roading (R Palmer), Asset Engineer – Transport (C Pawson), Manager Administration (P Langley), and Administration Adviser (S McLean)
Apologies: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese for lateness, Councillor L Acland for attendance
1. Apologies
|
Resolved WI/2015/001 THAT apologies be received and accepted from Councillor Acland for attendance, and Her Worship the Mayor for lateness. Barker / Noonan Carried |
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
There was no change to the order of business.
3. Interests
There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no interests with items on the agenda were declared.
4. Public Forum
4.1 David Ayre, Friends of the Maitai
David Ayre and Tom Kennedy tabled a handout on the Maitai Shared Pathway Project: Collingwood Street to Nile Street and presented this to the Committee.
Attendance: Her Worship the Mayor joined the meeting at 9.06am.
In response to questions, Mr Ayre spoke about areas along the Maitai walkway having different characteristics and uses. He said wider paths in some areas would change the character of that area and encroach on grassed areas used for leisure activities. Mr Ayre advised that Friends of the Maitai had not been contacted by Council officers about the Maitai Shared Pathway Project.
In response to further questions, Mr Ayre said Friends of the Maitai were not opposed to any change, but were concerned the public were not aware of what was being proposed. He said there was also concern that the proposal was for a path much wider than 2.5 metres in some areas, which was different to what had been described in a recent annual plan.
In response to a question about the intention of the Maitai Shared Path being part of a main arterial network, Mr Ayre said information about that had not been provided to the public.
|
Attachments 1 Friends of the Maitai Public Forum Handout 5May2015 A1351367 |
5. Confirmation of Minutes
5.1 26 March 2015
Document number M999, agenda pages 7 - 14 refer.
|
Resolved WI/2015/003 THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Works and Infrastructure Committee, held on 26 March 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record. Lawrey / Barker Carried |
6. Status Report - Works and Infrastructure - 5 May 2015
Document number R4202, agenda pages 15 - 16 refer.
In response to questions, Senior Asset Engineer – Transport and Roading, Rhys Palmer, advised that the delay in New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) subsidised funding for the Brook Area Walking and Cycling Improvements Project was due to a change to the NZTA funding category after the project scope was reduced. He confirmed the resolution made on 28 November 2013 was after the reduction in project scope.
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey left the meeting at 9.36am.
In response to a question, Group Manager Infrastructure, Alec Louverdis, confirmed that information on discussions held with building owners about enhancing street frontages on Bridge Street would be included in the status report for the 18 June Committee meeting.
There was discussion on the Highland Pipe Band Hall lease and demolition. Mr Louverdis advised that negotiations were ongoing and it was unlikely that the hall would be demolished by the end of June.
In response to a question, Mr Louverdis said it was his understanding the Band had secured a temporary alternative location. He said there was further discussion to be had about long term accommodation, which was linked to vacating the current premises.
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey returned to the meeting at 9.39am.
In response to a question, Mr Louverdis offered to provide the completion date of the Haven Road stormwater culvert works through the regular councillors newsletter.
|
Resolved WI/2015/004 THAT the Status Report Works and Infrastructure Committee 5 May 2015 (R4202) and its attachment (A1150321) be received. Lawrey / Skinner Carried |
Transport and Roading
7. Beatson Road Trial Closure - Investigation Results
Document number R4112, agenda pages 17 - 24 refer.
Senior Asset Engineer – Transport and Roading, Rhys Palmer, and Asset Engineer – Transport, Chris Pawson, presented the report and displayed the map in Attachment 1 (A1343631) on the screen.
Mr Palmer provided detail on the method of data collection for the Beatson Road trial closure investigation. Concern was raised that the data was not adequate to enable a decision on the matter.
In response to questions, Mr Palmer advised that a previous survey on Beatson Road had not been used to inform the officer’s report provided. He said the budget confirmed at the Works and Infrastructure Committee meeting in October 2014 had proven too low to enable the originally planned data collection to take place.
It was noted that the Turning Movements table in the attachment to the report should say ‘left turn movements to Waimea Road’ instead of ‘right turn...’.
Concern was raised that closing Beatson Road could result in a number of unintended consequences.
In response to a question, Mr Palmer said information from the Southern Link investigation would create a transport model for the area, but funding would still be required to investigate Beatson Road further if required.
In response to concerns about baseline data, Mr Palmer said the nature of the route was variable and he felt the baseline data obtained over two weeks was adequate. He added that officers were aware the dates in November included NCEA leave days for students, and this had minimal impact on the data collected.
It was suggested that officers should have reported back to the Committee if they had required additional resource to undertake the investigation.
Mr Palmer confirmed that officers had not yet assessed options for closing Beatson Road and the impacts of this, as it would involve considerable resource.
Councillor Davy, seconded by Councillor Barker, moved to receive the report:
THAT the report Beatson Road Trial Closure - Investigation Results (R4112) and its attachment (A1343631) be received;
There was discussion on the original intention of the study, which was to gather data before and after a temporary closure of Beatson Road, to determine whether a permanent closure would improve travel time on Waimea Road.
It was suggested that a sign could be installed to deter through traffic coming off the Beatson/Waimea/Whakatu roundabout and using Beatson Road as a shortcut.
There were opposing views on whether the study should or should not be redone, and what the repercussions would be if Beatson Road was closed.
Attendance: The meeting adjourned for morning tea from 10.31am to 10.45am.
An amendment to the motion to receive the report was made with the approval of the mover and seconder.
THAT the report Beatson Road Trial Closure - Investigation Results (R4112) and its attachment (A1343631) be received;
AND THAT a regulatory sign with appropriate wording be installed to prohibit non residential through traffic exiting from the Waimea/Whakatu/Beatson roundabout into Beatson Road between 7am-9am Monday to Friday;
AND THAT a letter be sent to the New Zealand Police urging them to enforce this.
In response to concerns about policing this, and the ability to install a sign of this nature, it was agreed the matter would be reported back to the Committee if it could not be resolved or if there were any issues. Mr Palmer added that discussions would be had with the New Zealand Transport Agency and New Zealand Police regarding the wording of the sign.
The amended motion was put and carried.
|
Resolved WI/2015/005 THAT the report Beatson Road Trial Closure - Investigation Results (R4112) and its attachment (A1343631) be received; AND THAT a regulatory sign with appropriate wording be installed to prohibit non residential through traffic exiting from the Waimea/Whakatu/Beatson roundabout into Beatson Road between 7am-9am Monday to Friday; AND THAT a letter be sent to the New Zealand Police urging them to enforce this. Davy / Barker Carried |
8. Licences for Street Stalls and Outdoor Dining
Document number R4132, agenda pages 25 - 33 refer.
Property and Facilities Asset Manager, Michael Homan, presented the report.
In response to questions, Mr Homan advised that going to market for street stall licenses would provide an opportunity to assess the balance of stalls and allow other members of the community to submit applications. He clarified that increasing the number of street stall sites had not been canvassed in the officer report.
In response to further questions, Mr Homan advised that several parts of the officer recommendation enabled the Nelson Parking Strategy 2014-2024 to run its course.
There was support for the removal of the moratorium on using any additional parking spaces for outdoor dining. It was advised that this could not be done at present as there was no policy under which officers could assess new applications.
In response to questions, Mr Homan advised there had been no requests from stall holders to relocate, and there were minimal requests on using parking spaces for outdoor dining. He confirmed that six years ago Council had rolled over the stall holder licenses, creating new licenses for a further six years.
It was suggested that the street stall licenses could be extended for twelve months instead of six months. It was also suggested that the number of stalls and carpark dining spaces be allowed to increase during winter.
Councillor Noonan, seconded by Councillor Lawrey, moved to receive the report:
THAT the report Licences for Street Stalls and Outdoor Dining (R4132) and its attachment (A1341408) be received;
There was support for allowing greater flexibility for stall holders, such as being able to transfer the license if they sold their cart.
A suggestion was made that the number of stall holder sites should be increased.
There was support for rolling over the current licenses for six years as the stall holders had proven to be good tenants.
Concern was raised that stall holders had not been made aware of the officer report and its implications.
Attendance: Councillor Barker left the meeting at 11.38am and returned at 11.39am.
Her Worship the Mayor highlighted the need to provide assurance to members of the community involved in street stalls.
Attendance: The meeting adjourned from 11.46am to 11.54am.
An amendment to the motion to receive the report was made with the approval of the mover and seconder:
THAT the report Licences for Street Stalls and Outdoor Dining (R4132) and its attachment (A1341408) be received;
AND THAT an extension of the current street stall and outdoor dining licences for six years be offered to licensees from 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2021;
AND THAT the policy on Licenses for Street Stalls and Outdoor Dining, including the moratorium on public parking spaces, be reviewed by this Committee;
AND THAT a formal review of the rents for both street stall occupations and outdoor dining be undertaken.
The amended motion was put and carried.
|
Resolved WI/2015/006 THAT the report Licences for Street Stalls and Outdoor Dining (R4132) and its attachment (A1341408) be received; AND THAT an extension of the current street stall and outdoor dining licences for six years be offered to licensees from 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2021; AND THAT the policy on Licenses for Street Stalls and Outdoor Dining, including the moratorium on public parking spaces, be reviewed by this Committee; AND THAT a formal review of the rents for both street stall occupations and outdoor dining be undertaken. Noonan / Lawrey Carried |
9. Exclusion of the Public
|
Resolved WI/2015/007 THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows: Davy / Lawrey Carried |
|
Item |
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interests protected (where applicable) |
|
1 |
Council Owned Earthquake Prone Building Earthquake Assessment Update #4
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities |
Attendance: Councillor Barker left the meeting at 12.10pm.
The meeting went into public excluded session at 12.11pm and resumed in public session at 1.00pm, during which time Councillor Barker returned to the meeting and Councillor Copeland left the meeting.
10. Re-admittance of the Public
|
Resolved WI/2015/008 THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting. Davy / Lawrey Carried |
There being no further business the meeting ended at 1.00pm.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
Chairperson
Date
Minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee
Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Thursday 14 May 2015, commencing at 9.00am
Present: Councillor B McGurk (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors R Copeland, E Davy, K Fulton (Deputy Chairperson), M Lawrey, and M Ward and Ms G Paine
In Attendance: Nelson Youth Councillor Taylah Shuker, Group Manager Strategy and Environment (C Barton), Manager Communications (P Shattock), Senior Strategic Adviser (N McDonald), Administration Adviser (S McLean)
Apologies: Councillor I Barker for attendance and Her Worship the Mayor R Reese for lateness
1. Apologies
|
Resolved PR/2015/001 THAT apologies be received and accepted from Councillor Barker for attendance and Her Worship the Mayor for lateness. McGurk / Davy Carried |
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
There was no change to the order of business.
3. Interests
There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no interests with items on the agenda were declared.
4. Public Forum
There was no public forum.
5. Confirmation of Minutes
5.1 2 April 2015
Document number M1002, agenda pages 6 - 10 refer.
It was noted that further information was called for under items 4.1 and 7, and this would be added to the minutes.
|
Resolved PR/2015/002 THAT the amended minutes of the meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee, held on 2 April 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record. McGurk / Paine Carried |
5.2 2 April 2015
Document number M1003, agenda pages 11 - 15 refer.
Attendance: The meeting adjourned from 9.04am to 9.07am during which time Her Worship the Mayor joined the meeting.
At the request of Councillor Fulton, it was agreed that the sentence at the top of page 4 of the minutes would be expanded to ‘After discussion on sandwich boards and relevant submissions,...’
|
Resolved PR/2015/003 THAT the amended minutes of the meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee to deliberate on submissions to the draft Urban Environments Bylaw, held on 2 April 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record. McGurk / Ward Carried |
6. Status Report - Planning and
Regulatory Committee
- 14 May 2015
Document number R4253, agenda pages 16 - 17 refer.
It was agreed that the communications plan for the Urban Environments Bylaw should commence after deliberations on the Long Term Plan 2015-25.
In response to a question, Group Manager Strategy and Environment, Clare Barton, confirmed that sandwich boards would be considered at the 25 June 2015 Committee meeting, and that no new information would be presented.
|
Resolved PR/2015/004 THAT the Status Report Planning and Regulatory Committee 14 May 2015 (R4253) and its attachment (A1155974) be received. Davy / Lawrey Carried |
7. Chairperson's Report
Document number R4252, agenda pages 18 - 19 refer.
The Chairperson provided a verbal update on a proposed Nelson Resource Management Plan 101 workshop. It was agreed that a workshop on 23 June 2015 was appropriate.
Attendance: Councillor Fulton left the meeting at 9.20am.
The Chairperson advised that an officer report on the use of glyphosate would be reported to the 25 June 2015 Committee meeting.
|
Resolved PR/2015/005 THAT the Chairperson’s Report (R4252) be received and the contents noted. McGurk / Lawrey Carried |
Regulatory
8. Submission on Proposals for Regulations under the Food Act 2014
Document number R4115, agenda pages 20 - 46 refer.
Manager Consents and Compliance, Mandy Bishop, and Manager Environmental Inspections Limited, Stephen Lawrence, presented the report.
In response to a question on the implication of the Food Act 2014 (the Act), Mr Lawrence said he believed the Act would open up more possibilities for home kitchens, as opposed to current food hygiene regulations.
Attendance: Councillor Fulton returned to the meeting at 9.23am
In response to further questions on the impact of the Act, Ms Bishop advised the industry was shifting from a regulation focus to an education focus to help operators achieve standards under the Act. Mr Lawrence added that the onus would be on food operators to take ownership of their systems, which may result in additional paperwork. He said premises in Nelson which had been involved in the Voluntary Implementation Programme had provided positive feedback.
In response to a question, it was advised that the regulations may be available by the end of 2015, unless a further round of consultation was undertaken by the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI).
Attendance: Councillor Ward left the meeting at 9.36am.
Councillor Davy, seconded by Councillor McGurk, moved the officer recommendation.
THAT the report Submission on Proposals for Regulations under the Food Act 2014 (R4115) and its attachments (A1325172 and A1335703) be received;
AND THAT the submission in Attachment 1 of this report (A1325172) be confirmed by the Committee as the position of the Council on the proposals for regulations under the Food Act 2014.
Concern was raised that the Act could result in Council undertaking regulatory functions which it had not done previously, and this could result in further cost to the ratepayer.
Attendance: Councillor Ward returned to the meeting, and Councillor Fulton left the meeting at 9.38am.
In response to a question, Ms Bishop advised that when the Act came into force, Environment Inspections Limited would be able to continue providing services until November 2017. She said after this time, there may be new requirements for contractors.
Attendance: Councillor Fulton returned to the meeting at 9.46am.
Concern was raised that Council would be taking on an educative function if MPI did not adequately liaise with affected parties.
It was agreed that a further submission would be presented to MPI, reaffirming Council’s stand that costs should be fair and reasonable.
With the approval of the mover and seconder, a third clause was added to the officer recommendation.
|
Resolved PR/2015/006 THAT the report Submission on Proposals for Regulations under the Food Act 2014 (R4115) and its attachments (A1325172 and A1335703) be received;
AND THAT the submission in Attachment 1 of this report (A1325172) be confirmed by the Committee as the position of the Council on the proposals for regulations under the Food Act 2014; AND THAT the Chairperson lodge a late submission focusing on the costs of regulation and the costs of implementation. Davy / McGurk Carried |
9. Strategy and Environment Report for 1 January 2015 to 31 March 2015
Document number R4114, agenda pages 47 - 65 refer.
Manager Planning, Matt Heale, Manager Consents and Compliance, Mandy Bishop, Manager Building, Martin Brown, Environmental Programmes Officer, Mary Curnow, and Manager Environmental Programmes, Dean Evans, presented the report.
In response to questions on waste minimisation, Ms Curnow advised that work was being done on YouTube clips, workshops and library demonstrations.
In response to a question, Mr Evans said he understood the king tide inanga spawning event had been a success.
In response to questions, Mr Heale spoke about the feedback from developers on their need for accurate flood modelling data. He added that officers were working on a practise note to provide more certainty, and more information would be provided at the upcoming Nelson Plan Hazards workshop.
In response to a question on earthquake prone buildings owned by Council, Mr Brown agreed to provide to interested councillors the number of detailed seismic assessments passed to his team for assessment.
In response to a question about resource consents for Council developments, Ms Bishop advised that commissioners with appropriate expertise were chosen to assess consents for Council.
In response to questions, Ms Curnow advised that initiatives had resulted in a 25% reduction in construction waste for building sites that had implemented different methods. She confirmed that officers worked closely with the Nelson Environment Centre.
After questions on recent changes to the Resource Management Act, it was asked that information on resulting amendments to Council processes be presented to the Committee in future reports.
In response to a question on iwi liaison, Group Manager Strategy and Environment, Clare Barton, advised that officers were working on a tender document for comment from iwi. Ms Barton agreed to provide further information on this at the following Committee meeting.
Officers undertook to include trend data on resource consents in future reports. It was confirmed that subdivision and land use consent data would be separated.
|
Resolved PR/2015/007 THAT the report Strategy and Environment Report for 1 January 2015 to 31 March 2015 (R4114) and its attachments (A1352532 and A1335080) be received. Davy / Ward Carried |
Attendance: The meeting adjourned for morning tea from 10.35am to 10.47am.
Environment
10. Ecofest 2015
Document number R4137, agenda pages 66 - 107 refer.
Environmental Programmes Officer, Mary Curnow, and Manager Environmental Programmes, Dean Evans, presented the report.
In response to a question, Ms Curnow advised that the officer recommendation was not related to the temporary closure of the Trafalgar Centre.
In response to a question, Ms Curnow confirmed key messages would be delivered through schools, and in particular Enviroschools. It was highlighted that Council’s emphasis should be on engaging the younger generation.
Councillor Copeland, seconded by Councillor Fulton, moved a motion:
THAT the report Ecofest 2015 and its attachments (A915145, A1120552, A1137528 and A1329058) be received;
AND THAT the Nelson Ecofest event is cancelled;
AND THAT budget and resources from the Nelson Ecofest event be reallocated to support the delivery of the Nelson 2060 strategy including targeted sustainability information and educational initiatives throughout the year.
There was some support for the Ecofest event to continue in a format that recognised leaders and celebrated success.
Councillor Ward, seconded by Councillor Davy, moved an amendment to the motion on the table:
THAT the report Ecofest 2015 and its attachments (A915145, A1120552, A1137528 and A1329058) be received;
AND THAT the Nelson Ecofest event become a flagship event;
AND THAT budget and resources from the Nelson Ecofest event be reallocated to support the delivery of the Nelson 2060 strategy including targeted sustainability information and educational initiatives throughout the year.
Concerns were raised that current resources could not include both an Ecofest event and targeted sustainability initiatives. It was suggested that event fatigue was also a factor to be considered.
The amendment was put and lost.
A suggestion was made that the essence of Ecofest could be incorporated into the reopening of the Trafalgar Centre, but there was no further support for this.
An additional clause regarding Council communications about the cancellation of Ecofest was proposed by Councillor Lawrey. This was accepted by the mover and seconder of the original motion.
|
Resolved PR/2015/008 THAT the report Ecofest 2015 and its attachments (A915145, A1120552, A1137528 and A1329058) be received; AND THAT the Nelson Ecofest event is cancelled; AND THAT budget and resources from the Nelson Ecofest event be reallocated to support the delivery of the Nelson 2060 strategy including targeted sustainability information and educational initiatives throughout the year; AND THAT Council promotes through Live Nelson and letters to previous exhibiters how Council is redirecting its funds and energy. Copeland / Fulton Carried |
There being no further business the meeting ended at 11.27am.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
Chairperson
Date
Minutes of a meeting of the Community Services Committee
Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Friday 22 May 2015, commencing at 9.01am
Present: Councillor P Rainey (Chairperson), Councillors R Copeland, M Lawrey, P Matheson, G Noonan (Deputy Chairperson), T Skinner and M Ward
In Attendance: Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Community Services (C Ward), Manager Administration (P Langley), Administration Advisers (G Brown and J Young), and Youth Councillors Emily Thomas and Daniel Leaper
Apology: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese for attendance, and Councillor Noonan for early departure
1. Apologies
|
Resolved CS/2015/001 THAT apologies be received and accepted from Her Worship the Mayor for attendance and Councillor Noonan for early departure. Rainey / Copeland Carried |
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
The Chairperson advised that since the distribution of the agenda, Elizabeth Dooley would not be speaking at public forum.
There was no other change to the order of business.
3. Interests
There were no updates to the Interests Register and no conflicts with items on the agenda were declared.
4. Public Forum
There was no public forum.
5. Confirmation of Minutes
5.1 26 February 2015
Document number M1217, agenda pages 7 - 13 refer.
|
Resolved CS/2015/002 THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Community Services Committee, held on 26 February 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record. Ward / Lawrey Carried |
Attendance: Councillor Skinner arrived at 9.03am.
6. Status Report - Community Services Committee - 22 May 2015
Document number R4285, agenda pages 14 - 15 refer.
In response to a question, Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward advised that consultants had been appointed to conduct the external review of the three campgrounds, and the final report would be received in July.
In response to a question, Manager Community Partnerships, Shanine Hermsen, said the Arts and Heritage Adviser, Debbie Daniell-Smith was dealing with progressing the interpretation panel for the Maitai Walkway.
|
Resolved CS/2015/003 THAT the Status Report Community Services Committee 22 May 2015 (R4285) and its attachment (A1157454) be received. Rainey / Noonan Carried |
Arts, Festivals and Events
7. Arts Fund - Approval of Concepts
Document number R4133, agenda pages 16 - 22 refer.
Manager Community Partnerships, Shanine Hermsen, presented the report.
There was a discussion regarding not being able to visually review the artworks which made it difficult to approve or decline the six concepts. It was highlighted that it was the Committees responsibility to consider the nature of the works and not their artistic merit.
In response to a question, Ms Hermsen said the funding for these artworks had already been approved as part of the 2014/15 budgets and due to a tight timeframe these needed to be approved or declined.
There was a concern raised about the process for artworks and it was suggested that other funding providers should be considered as well as working in partnership with other organisations.
Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward, advised that projects would be allocated some funding through the Arts Panel. He added that officers would not be taking a proactive approach to engage with other funders and that officers would be working with Arts Council Nelson for opportunities in relation to artworks.
In response to a question, Ms Hermsen indicated that the majority of the artists were local and that Council’s Arts Selection Panel consisted of Andrew Petheram, Nic Foster, Caroline Marshall and Julie Catchpole.
There was a concern raised about costs and instalment, and it was suggested that for kinetic artworks, noise and glare needed to be considered.
In response to a question, Ms Hermsen confirmed the artworks still had to be consulted on and would go through the normal resource consent process.
It was discussed that the Arts Panel had the necessary expertise to progress with the proposed projects as they saw fit.
|
Resolved CS/2015/004 THAT the report Arts Fund - Approval of Concepts (R4133) and its attachments (A1338048) be received; AND THAT the following concepts for possible artwork are approved; · Hinake · Rock Hoppers · Rocks in the Sky · Sails · Stack · Welcome Cloak AND THAT the approved concepts are further considered by Council’s Arts Selection Panel for commissioning from the Arts Fund. Ward / Copeland Carried |
Community Development
8. Council CCTV Provision
Document number R4130, agenda pages 23 - 25 refer.
Manager Community Partnerships, Shanine Hermsen, presented the report.
There was a discussion in relation to having mobile Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) cameras which could be placed at a number of locations and not restricted to only Victory Square.
Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward, advised that the rationale behind installing cameras was that they were connected directly to the Police Station. He added that if the cameras were mobile technical issues would likely incur.
In response to a question, Ms Hermsen advised the $3,500 related to the annual lease and maintenance costs for the cameras.
It was noted that in section 1.1 of the Officer’s report the date was incorrect and should be 2014 instead of 2015.
|
Resolved CS/2015/005 THAT the report Council CCTV Provision (R4130) be received; AND THAT the Committee endorse the provision of $3,500 in each of 2016/17 and 2017/18 for the ongoing operational costs of the CCTV cameras installed at Victory Square; AND THAT any subsequent requests for CCTV cameras are considered on a case by case basis and should meet the criteria as set out in this report (R4130). Noonan / Matheson Carried |
9. Nelson Youth Council Update
Youth Councillors Daniel Leaper and Emily Thomas provided an update on Youth Council activities.
Mr Leaper advised that three youth councillors had resigned half way through the year and three new youth councillors had joined.
Mr Leaper said the youth councillors spoke at the Urban Environments Bylaw hearings and advised that youth councillors were interested in some of the topics raised including busking, alcohol ban and the keeping of animals.
He provided a summary of the topics discussed at the recent Youth Council meeting which covered the Tahunanui Postcard project and sugary drinks.
Emily Thomas spoke about the footpaths at Saxton field, the proposed gondola and Rockquest.
Ms Thomas added that youth councillors were speaking with Viv Rounce from the Elma Turner Library in relation to setting up a study area in the activities room. She also said Youth Week was approaching.
It was suggested that the Youth Council consider ways to celebrate the 175th anniversary of Nelson in 2017.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES
10. Nelson Youth Council - 1 April 2015
Document number R4281 refer, agenda pages 26 - 30 refer
|
Resolved CS/2015/006 THAT the confirmed minutes of a meeting of the Nelson Youth Council, held on 1 April 2015, be received. Noonan / Lawrey Carried |
11. Exclusion of the Public
|
Resolved CS/2015/007 THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows: Rainey / Ward Carried |
|
Item |
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interests protected (where applicable) |
|
1 |
Community Services – Public Excluded Minutes – 26 February 2015 These minutes contain information regarding: Terms of a community lease |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
2 |
Status Report - Community Services Committee - 22 May 2015 The status report contains information regarding: Property Purchase Stoke Community and Sports Facility |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
3 |
Community Leases - Omnibus Report This report contains information regarding: Community Leases |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
The meeting went into public excluded session at 9.50am and resumed in public session at 10.04am.
12. Re-admittance of the Public
|
Resolved CS/2015/008 THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting. Rainey / Noonan Carried |
There being no further business the meeting ended at 10.04am.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
Chairperson
Date
Minutes of a meeting of the Hearings Panel - Other
Held in Ruma Marama, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Friday 22 May 2015, commencing at 10.09am
Present: Deputy Mayor P Matheson (Chairperson) and Councillor M Ward
In Attendance: Investigator/Contracts Supervisor (M Hollows), Manager Administration (P Langley), and Administration Adviser (G Brown and J Young)
1. Temporary Road Closures (Crusaders vs Hurricanes Super 15 Rugby Match)
Document number A1357413, agenda pages 3-8 refer.
Investigator/Contracts Supervisor, Mark Hollows advised that there were no objectors to the proposed road closure.
Resolved
THAT the report Temporary Road Closures (Crusaders vs Hurricanes Super 15 Rugby Match) (A1357413) and its attachment (A1357417) be received;
AND THAT the Hearings Panel - Other approve the application for the Super 15 temporary road closure of Trafalgar Street, Halifax Street and Hathaway Terrace on Friday 29 May 2015.
Matheson/Ward Carried
There being no further business the meeting ended at 10.11am.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
Minutes of a meeting of the Governance Committee
Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Thursday 28 May 2015, commencing 11.52am
Present: Councillor I Barker (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors L Acland (Deputy Chairperson), E Davy, P Matheson, B McGurk, G Noonan, and Mr J Peters and Mr J Murray
In Attendance: Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Community Services (C Ward), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Manager Communications (P Shattock), Manager Administration (P Langley), and Administration Adviser (G Brown)
Apologies: Councillors K Fulton and P Rainey
1. Apologies
|
Resolved GOV/2015/001 THAT apologies be received and accepted from Councillors Fulton and Rainey. McGurk / Matheson Carried |
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
The Chairperson advised the meeting would adjourn at 12.45pm and resume at 2.00pm.
3. Interests
There were no updates to the Interests Register and no interests with agenda items were declared.
4. Public Forum
There was no public forum.
5. Confirmation of Minutes
5.1 16 April 2015
Document number M1225, agenda pages 9 - 21 refer.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/002 THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Governance Committee, held on 16 April 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record. Davy / McGurk Carried |
6. Status Report - Governance Committee - 28 May
Document number R4310, agenda pages 22 - 23 refer.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/003 THAT the Status Report Governance Committee 28 May 2015 (R4310) and its attachment (A1160658) be received. Davy / Peters Carried |
Governance
7. Appointment of Trustee to the Nelson Municipal Band Trust
Document number R4249, agenda pages 24 - 26 refer.
Group Manager Corporate Services, Nikki Harrison, presented the report.
In response to a question, Ms Harrison said the Policy for the appointment of directors to Council Controlled Organisations and Council Controlled Trading Organisations could be varied and it was appropriate in this case, for the Board to recommend a Trustee.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/004 THAT the report Appointment of Trustee to the Nelson Municipal Band Trust (R4249) be received. Acland / Murray Carried |
|
Recommendation to Council GOV/2015/005 THAT pursuant to the terms of the Trust Deed dated 14th July 2008, the Council hereby appoints David Todd to act as a Trustee for the administration of the Fund. Acland / Murray Carried |
8. Sister Cities Update 2015
Document number R4272, agenda pages 27 - 33 refer.
Sister Cities Coordinator, Gail Collingwood, presented the report.
Mrs Collingwood tabled a document (A1363932). She advised that if anyone had an idea for a new Sister Cities logo they should get in contact with her.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/006 THAT the report Sister Cities Update 2015 (R4272) and its attachment (A1354036) be received. Noonan / Matheson Carried |
|
Attachments 1 A1363932 - Sister Cities Promoting People to People Exchanges Tabled Document |
9. Business case approach for 2015/16 projects - Further Information
Document number R4309, agenda pages 34 - 45 refer.
Group Manager Infrastructure, Alec Louverdis, and Senior Projects Adviser, Arlene Akhlaq, presented the report.
In response to a question, Mr Louverdis said discussions had been held with the deputies and chairs of committees in relation to the projects highlighted yellow in attachment 1 of the officer’s report. He said the defining criteria were:
1. Did the project have a clear outcome?
2. Was the project well defined?
3. Did the project have a large value assigned to it?
4. Was there potentially a high degree of political interest in the project?, and
5. Was there potentially a high degree of ratepayers interest in the project?.
In response to a further question, Mr Louverdis said there would be a business case template for all projects going forward which would be dependent on size, complexity and the risks involved.
It was discussed that various items were requested at the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee to clarify why projects were highlighted and that additional information was to be added to the schedule to illustrate the criteria used to select these projects. It was suggested this information would be beneficial and should be provided to the Audit Risk and Finance Subcommittee.
There were concerns raised that not all deputies attended the meeting to discuss the criteria and selection process of these projects, and a whole of Council business case approach was required.
In response to a question, Mr Louverdis advised there was urgency around some projects and if not resolved there would be a delay in progress which would affect next year’s capital works programme. He added that projects could be added to the list but would depend on available resource.
It was discussed that it was imperative to progress with these projects as there were project management controls in place and issues such as gravel extraction would not be postponed because it was remediation work.
It was noted that large projects were already progressing under their own work programme.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/007 THAT the report Business case approach for 2015/16 projects - Further Information (R4309) and its attachments (A1331113 and A1329251) be received. Noonan / Peters Carried |
|
Recommendation to Council GOV/2015/008 THAT projects highlighted yellow in document A1331113 follow a business case approach subject to the following amendments: · Clarification of Neighbourhood Reserve · Completion of schedule with missing additional information requested from the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee including criteria discussed · Indications of projects that are subject to separate reporting processes · Addition of Rutherford Playground Noonan / Peters Carried |
Attendance: The meeting adjourned at 12.49pm until 2.09pm. During this time Councillors L Acland, E Davy and P Matheson left the meeting.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES
10. Commercial Subcommittee - 5 May 2015
Document number R4308 refer, agenda pages 46-49 refer.
External appointee, Mr John Murray provided a summary of the items discussed at the Commercial Subcommittee meeting.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/009 THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Commercial Subcommittee, held on 5 May 2015, be received. Murray / Noonan Carried |
11. Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee - 5 May 2015
Document number R4320 refer, agenda pages 50-57 refer.
External appointee, Mr John Peters provided a summary of the items discussed at the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee meeting.
Attendance: Councillor Acland returned to the meeting at 2.13pm.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/010 THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee, held on 5 May 2015, be received. Murray / Peters Carried |
11.1 Events Resource Consent Charging Regime for RM125012
|
Recommendation to Council GOV/2015/011 THAT Council consider the options for the charging regime for the use of Council’s Resource Consent RM125012, as detailed in report R4177, and increase the charge to $500 and apply it only to commercial ticketed events. Murray / Peters Carried |
11.2 Business Case Approach for 2015/16 Projects
Please note this recommendation to the Governance Committee was superseded by the decision made in Item 9 of these minutes.
11.3 Corporate Report for the Period Ending 31 March 2015
In response to a question, Manager Administration, Penny Langley, advised that the live streaming of Council meetings would be available through the Nelson City Council website and would be recorded. She clarified that there was no intention for the recording to be televised.
Councillor Noonan moved the following amendment, seconded by Her Worship the Mayor
AND THAT a cost benefit review be undertaken 12 months after commencement of the live streaming of Council meetings.
The amendment was put and carried and became the substantive motion.
|
Recommendation to Council GOV/2015/012 THAT Council note that ongoing costs of approximately $11,250 pa will need to be included in the Long Term Plan 2015-25 for live streaming of Council meetings; AND THAT a cost benefit review be undertaken 12 months after commencement of the live streaming of Council meetings. Peters / Murray Carried |
12. Exclusion of the Public
|
Resolved GOV/2015/013 THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows: Noonan / McGurk Carried |
|
Item |
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interests protected (where applicable) |
|
1 |
Governance Committee – Public Excluded Minutes – 16 April 2015 These minutes contain information regarding: Nelmac Limited draft Statement of Intent Nelson Airport Limited Proposed Constitutional Changes |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
2 |
Review of Economic Development Services This report contain information regarding: Review of Economic Development Services
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
3 |
Bishop Suter Trust Negotiations This report contains information regarding: Bishop Suter Trust negotiations |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
4 |
Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
5 |
Commercial Subcommittee Meeting - Public Excluded - 5 May 2015 These minutes contain information regarding: A Property Assets Review |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. |
The meeting went into public excluded session at 2.21pm and resumed in public session at 3.04pm.
13. Re-admittance of the Public
|
Resolved GOV/2015/014 THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting. Barker / Acland Carried |
There being no further business the meeting ended at 3.04pm.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
