Agenda of Sports and Recreation Committee

N-logotype-black-wide Sports and Recreation Committee

21 February 2017

Page No.

1. Apologies

Nil

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

3. Interests

3.1 Updates to the Interests Register

3.2 Identify any conflicts of interest in the agenda

4. Public Forum

4.1 Tony Davies - Save the Maitai Track Group

Tony Davies, from Save the Maitai Track Group, will speak about future consultation processes for matters coming before the Committee with particular regard to any additions to the Out and About Strategy.

4.2 David Ayre - Friends of the Maitai

David Ayre, from Friends of the Maitai, will speak about a proposal on how we can identify the deeply valued area along the Maitai River which will provide a strong point of contact between the city and the river. It is about how we can enhance this area to give it a sense of formal identity.

4.3 Dave McLeod, Kohatu Board

Dave McLeod of the Kohatu Board will speak about the Kohatu Park Development.

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 24 November 2016 8 - 14

Document number M2216

Recommendation

That the Committee

Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Sports and Recreation Committee, held on 24 November 2016, as a true and correct record.

6. Status Report - Sports and Recreation Committee - 21 February 2017 15 - 19

Document number R7140

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the Status Report Sports and Recreation Committee 21 February 2017 (R7140) and its attachment (A1664423).

7. Chairperson's Report 20 - 22

Document number R7141

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Chairperson's Report (R7141); and

Appoints Councillor Rutledge to the Councillor Liaison role for Sport Tasman (Tasman Regional Sports Trust) for the 2016 – 2019 triennium.

Recreation and Leisure

8. Capital Expenditure Programme 2016-17 Quarter 2 Progress Report 23 - 26

Document number R6967

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Capital Expenditure Programme 2016-17 Quarter 2 Progress Report (R6967).

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

Approves, with respect to project 1175 Stoke Sports and Community Facility, that $1,300,000 be transferred from 2016/17 to 2017/18, to align with the scheduled construction programme.

9. Modellers Pond review of funding 27 - 34

Document number R7038

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Modellers Pond review of funding (R7038).

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

Notes that the Nelson Society of Modellers have been unable to secure the $600,000 funding required by Council and consequently, as previously resolved by Council (Resolution CL/2016/241) the pond will be converted back to estuarine environment at an estimated cost of $690,000 to be included in the 2017/18 Annual Plan.

10. Easements - Quail Rise subdivision 35 - 40

Document number R7132

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Easements - Quail Rise subdivision (R7132) and its attachment (A1707984).

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

Grants the easement in gross, in favour of Network Tasman Limited shown as area ‘CC’ on Title Plan LT 493128 (A1707984); and

Grants the easement in favour of Lot 34 DP 353023 shown as area ‘L’ on Title Plan LT 493128 (A1707984).

11. 2016-2017 Fees and Charges for the Trafalgar Centre 41 - 45

Document number R7143

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report 2016-2017 Fees and Charges for the Trafalgar Centre (R7143) and its attachment (A1709200); and

Approves the proposed fees and charges for the Trafalgar Centre, as detailed in report R7143, effective 1 March 2017.

Public Excluded Business

12. Exclusion of the Public

Recommendation

That the Committee

Excludes the public 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	Sports and Recreation Committee Meeting - Public Excluded Minutes - 24 November 2016	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	Management Contract for Waahi Taakaro Golf Course	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)

Item

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interests protected (where applicable)

Sports and Recreation Committee Meeting - Public Excluded Minutes - 24 November 2016

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).

Management Contract for Waahi Taakaro Golf Course

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)

13. Re-admittance of the public

Recommendation

That the Committee

Re-admits the public to the meeting.

Note:

· This meeting is expected to continue beyond lunchtime. (delete as appropriate)

· Lunch will be provided at 12.30pm. (delete as appropriate)

· Youth Councillors Alana James and Lilly-Joy Amos will be in attendance at this meeting. (delete as appropriate)

Minutes of a meeting of the Sports and Recreation Committee

Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson

On Thursday 24 November 2016, commencing at 9.03am

Present: Councillor T Skinner (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors I Barker, M Courtney, K Fulton, B McGurk, M Rutledge (Deputy Chairperson) and S Walker

In Attendance: Councillors L Acland, M Lawrey and G Noonan, Chief Executive (C Hadley), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Community Services (C Ward), Manager Communications (P Shattock), and Administration Advisers (L Canton and E-J Ruthven)

1. Apologies

There were no apologies.

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

The Chairperson advised that since the agenda had been issued, an additional public forum had been confirmed.

3. Public Forum

4.1 James Horan - Nelson Mountain Bike Club

James Horan, from the Nelson Mountain Bike Club, spoke about the Parks and Reserves Track Strategy and gave a PowerPoint presentation (A1667659). He tabled two documents which he spoke to (A1667669).

Mr Horan answered questions regarding the relationship between mountain bikers and residents of the Brook, and between mountain bikers and walkers.

Attachments

1 James Horan, Nelson Mountain Bike Club public forum presentation

2 James Horan, Nelson Mountain Bike Club public forum handout

4.2 Cynthia McConville – Nelson Walkers Unite

Cynthia McConville, from Nelson Walkers Unite, spoke about the Parks and Reserves Track Strategy. She tabled a document which she spoke to (A1667900) and referred to Map 3 of the officer report Parks and Reserves Tracks Strategy – Attachment 3 (A1595471).

Ms McConville answered questions relating to membership numbers for Nelson Walkers Unite and the Nelson Dog Owners Group.

Attachments

1 Cynthia McConville, Nelson Walkers Unite public forum handout

Attendance: Her Worship the Mayor left the meeting at 9.47am.

4. Interests

Councillor Rutledge declared an interest in agenda item 10 Natureland Capital Grant, and advised that he would leave the table for that item.

Attendance: Her Worship the Mayor returned to the meeting at 9.50am.

5. Chairperson's Report

The Chairperson tabled a report which he spoke to (A1667748).

Resolved SPO/2016/001

That the Committee

Receives the Chairperson’s Report (A1667748).

Skinner/Rutledge Carried

Attachments

1 Chairperson's Report, Sports and Recreation Committee 24Nov2016

6. Status Report - Sports and Recreation Committee - 24 November 2016

Document number R6809, agenda pages 7 - 8 refer.

Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward presented the report and answered questions relating to Fees and Charges for Golf Course and Trafalgar Centre.

Resolved SPO/2016/003

That the Committee

Receives the Status Report Sports and Recreation Committee 24 November 2016 (A1664423).

Skinner/McGurk Carried

Attendance: The meeting adjourned for morning tea from 10.02am to 10.20am.

Recreation and Leisure

7. Parks and Reserves Tracks Strategy

Document number R6380, agenda pages 9 - 51 refer.

Property Parks and Facilities Asset Manager, Andrew Petheram, introduced David Allen of GLG Strategy Planning Management who had assisted in the development of the Parks and Reserves Tracks Strategy. Mr Petheram presented the report.

Mr Allen gave a PowerPoint presentation (A1670875). He emphasised that the strategy aimed to achieve a balanced approach to the different and increasingly varied types of demand for track usage, and the range of user appetite for risk.

Mr Petheram presented the maps included as Attachment 3 to the report. He advised that some of the maps had been amended since the agenda had been issued, and confirmed that the amended maps were those displayed on screen.

In response to questions Mr Petheram explained the reasoning behind the proposed track changes and additions. He confirmed that Council had not been advised of any accidents on shared paths.

In response to further questions, Mr Allen said best practice was to prioritise investment to provide continuity and address blockages in the existing network before providing additional tracks. He added that perceived risk was real to those who perceived it, and could prevent usage.

Resolved SPO/2016/004

That the Committee

Receives the report Parks and Reserves Tracks Strategy (R6380) and its attachments (A1657732, A1575993 and A1595471).

Reese/McGurk Carried

Councillor Barker, seconded by Councillor McGurk moved the recommendation to Council

That the Council

Adopts the Parks and Reserves Tracks Strategy ‘Out and About – On Tracks’ (A1657732) and the ’Implementation Plan – Proposed Tracks and MTB Hubs’ (A1575993) and ‘Proposed Tracks Location Maps’ (A1595471) as otherwise corrected and amended.

A view was expressed that the usage of existing paths could be changed to provide a linked route for cyclists along the Maitai, as an alternative for the proposed walking only track P57.

Councillor Fulton, seconded by Councillor Rutledge, moved an amendment to add an additional clause

That the track on Map 3 running from Hardy Street to the Maitai Road and along the front of the Centre of New Zealand is designated a shared path.

Attendance: The meeting adjourned from 12.02pm until 12.09pm.

Councillor Fulton, with the agreement of Councillor Rutledge and the meeting, withdrew the amendment.

Her Worship the Mayor, seconded by Councillor McGurk, moved an amendment to add an additional clause

Requests that officers investigate establishing a continuous shared pathway from Nile Street East to Branford Park.

The amendment was put and carried and became the substantive motion.

Attendance: Paul Matheson left the meeting at 12.17pm.

Councillor Rutledge, seconded by Councillor Fulton moved an amendment to add an additional clause

Prioritises Track P60 (Branford North Side) over Marsden Track (P32 and 33) for construction using existing funding.

The Committee expressed views for and against the amendment.

The amendment was put and lost on a show of hands.

The meeting returned to discuss the substantive motion. A variety of views were expressed for and against the motion.

Recommendation to Council SPO/2016/005

That the Council

Adopts the Parks and Reserves Tracks Strategy ‘Out and About – On Tracks’ (A1657732) and the ’Implementation Plan – Proposed Tracks and MTB Hubs’ (A1575993) and corrected and amended ‘Proposed Tracks Location Maps’ (A1595471);

Requests that officers investigate establishing a continuous shared pathway from Nile Street East to Branford Park.

Barker/McGurk Carried

8. Brook Valley Holiday Park: Options to Re-open

Document number R6605, agenda pages 52 - 60 refer.

Attendance: Her Worship the Mayor left the meeting at 12.30pm and returned at 12.32pm.

It was noted that earthquake damage in Kaikoura had changed the situation with regard to the number of people travelling to Nelson. It was suggested that more time was required for officers to consider how this affected the matters dealt with in the report.

Resolved SPO/2016/006

That the Committee

Refers the item Brook Valley Holiday Park: Options to Re-open to the next meeting of the Nelson City Council scheduled to be held on 15 December 2016 at 9.00am.

Skinner/Her Worship the Mayor Carried

9. Natureland Capital Grant

Document number R6784, agenda pages 61 - 64 refer.

Attendance: Councillor Rutledge declared an interest and left the meeting at 12.35pm.

Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward, presented the report.

Resolved SPO/2016/007

That the Committee

Receives the report Natureland Capital Grant (R6784).

Her Worship the Mayor/Fulton Carried

Recommendation to Council SPO/2016/008

That the Council

Approves the request from Natureland Wildlife Trust to spend the remaining $35,000 capital

grant allocation towards projects in 2016/17, adjusting budgets accordingly.

Her Worship the Mayor/Fulton Carried

10. Exclusion of the Public

Resolved SPO/2016/009

That the Committee

Excludes the public from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

Skinner/Fulton 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	Status Report - Sports and Recreation Committee - 24 November 2016	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	Community Leases - Omnibus Report	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)

Item

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interests protected (where applicable)

Status Report - Sports and Recreation Committee - 24 November 2016

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)

Community Leases - Omnibus Report

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 12.38pm and resumed in public session at 12.43pm, during which time Councillor Rutledge returned to the meeting.

11. Re-admittance of the Public

Resolved SPO/2016/010

That the Committee

Re-admits the public to the meeting.

McGurk/Skinner Carried

There being no further business the meeting ended at 12.43pm.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Sports and Recreation Committee

21 February 2017

REPORT R6967

Capital Expenditure Programme 2016-17 Quarter 2 Progress Report

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To provide performance monitoring information to the Sports and Recreation Committee and to seek approval for changes to capital projects and/or expenditure.

2. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Capital Expenditure Programme 2016-17 Quarter 2 Progress Report (R6967).

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

Approves, with respect to project 1175 Stoke Sports and Community Facility, that $1,300,000 be transferred from 2016/17 to 2017/18, to align with the scheduled construction programme.

3. Background

3.1 This report represents a summary for the period October 2016 to December 2016 and provides:

· A summary of progress towards key performance indicators;

· Requests for approval for changes to the capital works programme;

· Summary of tenders awarded over $1,000,000 capital value.

3.2 Council set key performance indicators for the capital works programme for 2016-17, which relate to achievement of milestones for key projects, and to completion of physical works.

4. Progress Towards Key Performance Indicators

4.1 Key performance indicator “Projects within the capital works programme, for which business cases have been prepared, meet all milestones within the year” – Status: On track to achieve.

4.2 Key performance indicator “Greater than 85% of physical works of projects are completed by 30 June 2017” – Status: On track to achieve.

5. Requests for Change

Project 1175 Stoke Sports and Community Facility

5.1 This is a multi-year project to construct a community and sports facility at Greenmeadows sports field in Stoke.

5.2 Budget allocated to this project is $6,490,000 currently phased as follows (previous year shown for completeness of reporting):

(2015/16: $771,961)

2016/17: $5,718,449

5.3 The construction schedule has now been agreed and is scheduled for completion in August 2017, resulting in misalignment of the budget phasing.

5.4 Approval is sought to transfer $1,300,000 of current year budget to align with the construction and payment schedule.

5.5 If approved, the adjusted budget and project phasing would be:

2016/17: $4,418,449

2017/18: $1,300,000

6. Tenders awarded for contracts over $1,000,000

6.1 Following an open tender process, the contract was awarded to Watts and Hughes Construction for the construction of the Stoke Sports and Community Facility.

6.2 No other contracts over $1,000,000 that are within the Committee’s areas of responsibility were awarded during quarter 2.

7. Conclusion

7.1 The third quarter report for January to March 2017 is scheduled for the Sports and Recreation Committee meeting to be held 30 May 2017.

Arlene Akhlaq

Project Management Adviser

Attachments

Nil

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The proposed changes in phasing support efficient and effective delivery of infrastructure for the community.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The recommendations in this report amend the phasing of the Long Term Plan budget, and remain consistent with the community outcome “our communities have access to a range of social, educational and recreational facilities and activities”.

3. Risk

The recommendations in this report reduce risk by enabling construction and installation schedules to be achieved.

4. Financial impact

No additional budget is being requested.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

For the matters contained in this report, re-phasing of these budgets is of low significance as it is a change of timing to planned and approved expenditure, therefore no engagement is required.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Maori have not been consulted on the specifics in this report.

7. Delegations

The Sports and Recreation Committee has the responsibility for recreation and leisure facilities and services, and sports fields, and the power to make a recommendation to Council on matters relating to these areas of responsibility.

Sports and Recreation Committee

21 February 2017

REPORT R7038

Modellers Pond review of funding

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To update the Committee of the current situation with respect to the Modellers Pond and the current level of funding raised by the Nelson Society of Modellers.

2. Summary

2.1 The water quality in the Modellers Pond (pond) has been a problem for several decades. Since the chemical treatment stopped, the weed and algae have proliferated and the pond, by necessity, has been cleaned out manually. Considerable time and resources have been spent in an effort to find an alternative long term solution that will deal with the weed and algae.

2.2 Council previously approved the ‘modify’ pond option, as a method to control algal growth, subject to funding from the Nelson Society of Modellers (Society). This includes installing a concrete liner in the bottom of the pond and creating more frequent flushing of sea water through it.

2.3 The Society was given responsibility to fund any balance over and above the capped $600,000 that Nelson City Council (NCC) have committed to the project and were given until the end of February 2017 to do so.

2.4 This report provides an update of the current situation and a summary of the outcome of the Society’s fundraising.

3. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Modellers Pond review of funding (R7038).

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

4. Background

4.1 The pond water quality has been a long standing issue. Initially, whilst this was kept under control with the use of copper sulphate, this eventually lead to unacceptable levels of contamination in the pond and potentially to Tasman Bay so the treatment was terminated.

4.2 Numerous studies and reports over the years have failed to find a solution that gives remedy to the problem. The modification of the pond as approved is expected to provide the solution.

4.3 Council previously agreed to modify the pond which involves installing a concrete liner in the bottom of the pond, modifying the weirs and outfalls and the Centennial Road pump station. Sea water would then be pumped to the pond in sufficient quantities to replenish the pond which can be emptied on low tide as desired. This can occur several times per month.

4.4 Council resolved on 24 March 2016 as follows:

AND THAT Council confirm the Modify Pond option as its preferred option subject to the Nelson Society of Modellers raising all additional funding;

AND THAT Council accepts that this decision underpins its commitment to provide the Nelson Society of Modellers certainty surrounding their future fund raising campaign;

AND THAT The Nelson Society of Modellers be afforded the opportunity to finalise and confirm additional funding for the balance over and above the $600,000 committed by Council no later than the end of September 2016;

AND THAT if the funding is confirmed that the option to modify the pond be included in the 2017/18 Annual Plan;

AND THAT Council note and accept that this preferred option will require ongoing operational maintenance funding of $45,000/year in subsequent years;

AND THAT Council confirm that should the additional funding not be raised by the Nelson Society of Modellers by the end of September 2016, that it be agreed that the option to convert the pond back to estuarine environment at an estimated cost of $690,000 be its second option and included in the 2017/18 Annual Plan;

AND THAT in the interim and until such time as any decision is made to upgrade the Modellers Pond that it be noted that existing maintenance of the pond will continue.

4.5 Council further resolved on 8 September 2016 as follows (CL/2016/241):

Amends clauses 4 and 7 of the Council resolution passed on 24 March 2016 as follows:

AND THAT Council confirms that should the additional funding not be raised by the Nelson Society of Modellers by the end of ~~September 2016~~ February 2017, that it be agreed that the option to convert the pond back to estuarine environment at an estimated cost of $690,000 be its second option and included in the 2017/18 Annual Plan;

5. Discussion

Progress and Fundraising to date

5.1 The Society has been proactive in securing funding as detailed below:

Source	Amount
Rata Foundation grant	$100,000
Public cash donations and from the operation of the model train rides	$ 9,000
Confirmed funding from Nelson North Lions Club, provided the project goes ahead	$ 2,000
Industrial Marine Electrical Ltd	$ 7,000
Geofabrics NZ Ltd	$ 16,000
Total raised to date	$134,000

5.2 In June 2016 the Society expressed their frustration, claiming Opus had repeatedly amended their design making it very difficult to secure accurate pricing from potential suppliers. Officers have investigated this claim and confirm Opus had made amendments to their original design. Officers instructed Opus to adhere to their original design to allow prices from suppliers to be secured.

5.3 The Society have received anecdotal confirmation of intent from the following suppliers to supply materials/products toward the project, at a reduced rate or possibly free - Holcim Cement, Allied Concrete, Power Tech, Hynds Pipes and A1 Concrete Pumping. The actual final value of discounts has not been confirmed in writing.

5.4 The Society’s application to the Lotteries Commission (Lotteries) was withdrawn because Lotteries require a resource consent to be either in place or an application lodged. The next round of Lotteries applications for a grant runs from 25 January until 8 March with decisions made by mid-June. The Society intend to apply to Lotteries for between $250,000 and $300,000.

5.5 The next application round (if the January/March round is missed) is in the second part of the calendar year – around August.

5.6 The resource consent for the work has not been applied for as the feasibility of the project, in terms of Council funding and approval, has still not been determined. Having the resource consent in place will, however, ensure the Society is in a stronger position to secure Lotteries funding.

5.7 Whilst the Society has been given the task of funding the balance over and above the capped $600,000 that Council has committed to the project, they confirm that they are unable to fund anything other than the amounts raised, including potential monies from Lotteries.

5.8 The Society further confirms that after having spent considerable amounts of time and effort in fundraising, they will not carry out any further fundraising until the project has been approved by Council.

5.9 Whilst the amount from Lotteries is unknown (pending on the application from the Society), the total probable funding that can potentially be raised by the Society is between $384,000 and $434,000 made up as:

· $134,000 (see item 5.1)

· $250,000 to $300,000 (Lotteries Grant)

5.10 It should be noted that the Society have arranged to host an International Model Engineering Convention at the pond in January 2018. They anticipate 250 to 300 attendees both locally and from around the world. This event has been arranged without reference to Council.

Financial – Modify Pond Option

5.11 The option approved by Council on 24 March 2016 - modifying the pond, had an estimated physical works cost of $1,160,000 with annual maintenance of $45,000.

5.12 Officers expected that all aspects of the design were completed appropriately as part of the December 2015 Opus report that formed the basis of the 24 March 2016 Council report. Council used this advice to inform its decision to pursue the Modify Pond option. Further work undertaken by Opus, at their initiative, was not as a result of Council request and nor was it funded by Council.

5.13 The original design for this option proposes a concrete liner within the pond as part of the $1.16 million. Opus state the additional work they have undertaken at their own initiative suggests that if the proposed liner were strengthened, larger maintenance vehicles could access the pond when dry to clean debris from the bottom. This additional work is expected to add approximately $200,000 to the overall construction estimate and the resultant maintenance cost saving is expected to be very small. Officers do not recommend pursuing this additional cost.

5.14 The additional refinement with the design by Opus has led to possible total costs of $1.7 million and has eroded officer confidence in the details of the design and cost estimate. As a result officers will request design producer statements from Opus if the ‘Modify’ option progresses. At this stage, further investigation of the design is not supported.

5.15 Current market escalations in construction costs may impact the final costs. The current shortfall of funding, when compared to the Opus estimate, is summarised in the table below:

Total cost of project	$1,160,000
Less Council contribution	$ 600,000
Less Society funds raised to date	$ 134,000
Less further possible Lotteries grant	$ 250,000
Estimated Shortfall	$ 176,000

Financial – Return to estuarine Option

5.16 The return to estuarine option presented to Council on 24 March 2016, had a preliminary estimated physical works cost of $690,000 with annual maintenance of $10,600.

5.17 It is usual and reasonable to assume that a cost estimate at the preliminary stages of a design has an accuracy of +/- 30%. However, as detailed design has not been completed, cost efficiencies could be explored through the detailed design process.

5.18 The final design (and combination of estuary/green space) can be pursued as part of any detailed design.

6. Options

6.1 In order to move this project forward, several options are open to Council as detailed hereafter.

6.2 The ‘Do Nothing’ option has been discounted by Council as an option at this stage as Council has previously resolved to modify the pond, or if the Society could not raise the funds, convert to estuarine. Current annual cleaning expenditure is estimated to be $50,000 per annum and user complaints are still frequently received. To increase the level of maintenance to enable daily cleans is estimated to be in the region of $120,000 annually.

Option 1: Grant extension to Society to continue raising funds. This will include approval to pursue the resource consent to enable the Society to apply for a Lotteries grant.
Advantages	· Potentially, more funding is available. · Less cost to the ratepayer.
Risks and Disadvantages	· The Society has signalled they will not continue to raise funds until the pond upgrade is approved and they receive funding commitment from Council. · Some of the existing grants offered have time limits on their availability. · Funds may not be raised. · Council continues to fund ongoing annual cleaning
Option 2: Council to provide additional funds to implement the ‘Modify’ option.
Advantages	· Issues of pond water quality and maintenance are improved. · The Society and the public retain the use of a functional pond.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Additional funding from Council is required. · Any delay in starting the project may result in further cost escalations.
Option 3: Reduce scope of Modify Pond Option to reduce costs.
Advantages	· Lower overall cost to complete. · Less funds required from Society and Council.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Further costs in re-design will be incurred. · Revised scope may not be as successful in reducing the problem. · The approved design works effectively by integrating existing services, any reduced scope may not use these effectively. · Cost in maintenance may increase.
Option 4: Convert the Pond to estuarine As per previous Council resolution – preliminary estimate of $690,000.
Advantages	· Issues of pond water quality and maintenance are removed.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Loss of Modellers and public amenity. · The area only becomes wet under certain tides and may be unsightly. · Debris and flotsam will accumulate and will need to be cleared.

7. Conclusion

7.1 Council has previously resolved to proceed with the ‘Modify’ pond option to upgrade the pond, subject to the Society raising additional funding than that committed by Council.

7.2 Funding sought by the Society from Lotteries is dependent on securing the resource consent. Securing this grant will increase the Society’s funding but will still not reach the full amount required to achieve the ‘Modify’ option.

7.3 There have been revised estimates distributed among the community, relating to additional works that were not commissioned or sanctioned by Council.

7.4 The Society has indicated that they are unable to raise any further funds above what they have currently secured until Council provides certainty of its contribution to the project.

7.5 The operational cost of maintaining the pond without a long term solution is not sustainable.

Shane Davies

Manager Capital Projects

Attachments

Nil

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The decision required by this report involves Council balancing affordability with the need for good quality local infrastructure as required by section 10 (1) (b) of the Local Government Act 2002. This clause of the Act requires Council to meet the current and future needs of communities in a way that is most cost effective for households and businesses.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

Our Community Outcomes state - “Our communities should have access to a range of social, educational and recreational facilities and activities”. The facility is included in the current Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan, the 2014/15 Annual Plan and the 2015-25 LTP

3. Risk

There is every expectation that the designed scheme will resolve the ongoing problems of water quality in the pond. Maintenance will still be required but at a reduced cost.

4. Financial impact

The financial impact is that additional funding will be required to implement a solution to address the issues at the pond. Existing maintenance costs to the pond will be reduced significantly.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This is not a significant decision in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Consultation has been ongoing with the Society in terms of the detailed design. The Society and members of the Tahunanui Community presented their views to Council at its meeting 11 June 2015 and expressed strong preference to retain and modify the pond.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Consultation was undertaken with all Iwi as part of the Council commissioned Assessment of Cultural Effects and there are no objections.

7. Delegations

The Committee Functions and Delegations Register item 2.4.2 gives the Sports & Recreation Committee the powers to decide under: - Approval of specified business cases or projects referred by Council to the committee, and also included in the Annual Plan.

Sports and Recreation Committee

21 February 2017

REPORT R7132

Easements - Quail Rise subdivision

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To approve an easement for electrical purposes over esplanade reserve and also approve an easement to convey water over utility reserve.

2. Summary

2.1 Solitaire Investments are developing a subdivision in Marsden Valley adjacent to Marsden Valley Cemetery.

2.2 Network Tasman has cables crossing the Poorman Valley Stream Esplanade Reserve from Marsden Valley Road to the new subdivision.

2.3 The subdivision consent allows for a local purpose reserve to be created and vested in Council adjacent to Quail Rise. An easement to convey water over this reserve will allow the future development of the subdivision.

2.4 Easements are required to record and protect the infrastructure under both reserves. There will be no effect on the public enjoyment of the reserves by the granting of the easements.

3. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Easements - Quail Rise subdivision (R7132) and its attachment (A1707984).

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

Grants the easement in gross, in favour of Network Tasman Limited shown as area ‘CC’ on Title Plan LT 493128 (A1707984); and

Grants the easement in favour of Lot 34 DP 353023 shown as area ‘L’ on Title Plan LT 493128 (A1707984).

4. Background

4.1 Network Tasman Limited has installed infrastructure and cables through the Poorman Valley Stream Esplanade Reserve which help support electricity supply to the surrounding community.

4.2 Council was consulted on the preferred route and location for the cables and Network Tasman has complied with all requirements.

4.3 The cables are located underground and the esplanade reserve is not likely to be materially altered or permanently damaged. The rights of the public in respect of the reserve are not likely to be permanently affected.

4.4 Solitaire Investments has installed water infrastructure under the proposed local purpose reserve to service the future subdivision of Lot 34 DP 353023.

4.5 The pipes are located underground and the reserve is not likely to be materially altered or permanently damaged. The rights of the public in respect of the reserve are not likely to be permanently affected.

4.6 The subdivision plan has been approved with sections 223 and 224 issued. The developer has therefore met the conditions of the Resource Consent and can sell the sections.

5. Discussion

Requirement for Easement

5.1 As the Network Tasman infrastructure is located on Council administered reserve land, an easement is required to formalise its occupation of the land. Easements on reserve land require consent from Council.

5.2 The Reserves Act 1977 confers on Council the ability to grant an easement if it is for one of the specified purposes in section 48(1) of the Reserves Act 1977. Council, as the administering body, may grant an easement for the purpose of an electrical installation or work – section 48 (1)(d). For this reason a formal Council resolution for the electricity easement is required.

5.3 Council also has the power to grant an easement under section 48 (1)(f) providing or facilitating access or the supply of water to, or the drainage of, any other land not forming part of the reserve or for any other purpose connected with any such land.

5.4 Where the reserve is not likely to be materially altered or permanently damaged; and the rights of the public in respect of the reserve are not likely to be permanently affected, then public notice is not required under the Reserves Act 1977.

6. Options

6.1 The options are either to grant the easements (preferred option) or to not grant the easement.

6.2 Granting the easements enables Council to formalise the access to Network Tasman across the esplanade reserve while the easement to convey water is required for the future development of Lot 34 of the subdivision.

7. Conclusion

7.1 Approval of an easement in gross to Network Tasman to convey electricity, telecommunications and computer media across the esplanade reserve enables Council to formalise access to Network Tasman and ensures security of electricity supply for the new subdivision.

7.2 Approval of an easement to convey water over the proposed local purpose reserve will enable the future development of the subdivision.

Peter Hunter

Team Leader Property

Attachments

Attachment 1: A1707984 - Quail Rise Draft Title Plan ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Fits with the purpose of Local Government by providing good quality local infrastructure.

Electricity and water infrastructure is essential to the economic (and social) wellbeing of the Nelson community.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

Our urban and rural environments are people-friendly, well planned and sustainably managed

Our infrastructure is efficient, cost effective and meets current and future needs

The recommendation fits with Goal Nine – everyone in our community has their essential needs met.

3. Risk

Very likely the granting of the easements will achieve the goal it is aimed at achieving. Low risk of adverse consequences.

4. Financial impact

The costs of securing the easements will be met by Solitaire Investments.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because it does not materially affect or impact the public or Council’s use of the reserves. No consultation is required under section 48(2) of the Reserves Act because this easement proposal meets the criteria of sections 48(3)(a) and 48(3)(b) of the Reserves Act:

• Section 48(3)(a) the reserve is vested in an administering body and is not likely to be materially altered or permanently damaged; and

• Section 48(3)(b) the rights of the public in respect of the reserve are not likely to be permanently affected.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

No consultation with Māori has taken place.

7. Delegations

The Sports and Recreation Committee has the responsibility for considering parks and reserves including the acquisition, lease, sale or disposal, maintenance, management or development of any land or buildings. However under the Reserves Act 1977 this is a decision for full Council.

Sports and Recreation Committee

21 February 2017

REPORT R7143

2016-2017 Fees and Charges for the Trafalgar Centre

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To adopt fees and charges for the Trafalgar Centre as of 1 March 2017.

2. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report 2016-2017 Fees and Charges for the Trafalgar Centre (R7143) and its attachment (A1709200); and

Approves the proposed fees and charges for the Trafalgar Centre, as detailed in report R7143, effective 1 March 2017.

3. Background

3.1 The Trafalgar Centre has been the subject of earthquake strengthening, including various upgrade works. That work will be completed at the end of February 2017.

3.2 The fees and charges for the Centre have not been addressed or amended as this was put on hold pending completion of the works, including the Northern end development. It is now appropriate to consider fees and charges for the Centre.

3.3 The Trafalgar Centre is an important community facility that is capable of hosting regional and national events in addition to local community events. The Revenue and Financing Policy recognises that this is different from most other community facilities, with a higher level of private good.

3.4 The charging structure needs to recognise the different uses. The fee charging structure needs to allow access to the facility for community organisations whilst recognising that market rates are more appropriate for events and activities that result in commercial gain, particularly via a door charge or paid, ticketed entry.

4. Discussion

Types of events

4.1 The Trafalgar Centre is Nelson’s premier indoor charge facility for sports, entertainment and expos.

4.2 The management contractor is therefore currently using the previously set fees for event bookings at the Trafalgar Centre which have not been reviewed since the centre was closed.

4.3 In setting the fees and charges, officers have identified two different types of events that are likely to be hosted at the Centre:

4.3.1 Community events and bookings. These are events generally run by local groups that are targeted at local people. Examples include the use of the Trafalgar Centre by the Nelson Giants.

4.3.2 Commercial events – these are events that are run by a business or event organiser to make a profit.

5. Options

5.1 Council can either adopt the fees proposed, make further changes to the fee structure or maintain fees at current levels.

Option 1: Adopt fees proposed –Recommended option
Advantages	· New fees will be in place when the facility reopens from 1 March 2017. · Increase is based on comparable venue prices locally and nationally. · Reflects improvements in facilities available for users.
Risks and Disadvantages	· May discourage use of the facility if public, businesses and commercial event organisers resist increase in fees.
Option 2: Maintain existing fees
Advantages	· Consistent with historic pricing. · Possible positive response from users if existing fees are held.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Fees have not been updated since 2013. · Fees are out of date with comparable venues and don’t reflect the current commercial market. · Fees are not consistent with the associated upgrade in facilities. · May result in overuse of this facility compared to other facilities.

6. Conclusion

6.1 Officers recommend that the Sports and Recreation Committee approve the fees and charges as set out in Attachment 1 of this report.

Peter Anderson

Manager Roading and Utilities

Attachments

Attachment 1: A1709200 - Proposed 2016-2017 Trafalgar Centre Fees and Charges ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Purpose of local government is to provide good quality local infrastructure in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses. The recommendation in this report is appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

“Our communities should have access to a range of social, educational and recreational facilities and activities”. The reopening of the Trafalgar Centre provides these opportunities.

3. Risk

There is a low risk that any increase in fees may discourage use of the facility if public, businesses and commercial event organisers resist an increase.

4. Financial impact

No significant financial impact is foreseen and the fee is consistent with Councils revenue and financing policy.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because it will not impact levels of service significantly and will not greatly impact the community. Officers have consulted with key users who accept the proposed changes are reasonable.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

There has been no consultation with Māori on this issue.

7. Delegations

The Sports and Recreation Committee has the power to decide on fees and charges pertaining to recreational facilities. The Sports and Recreation Committee has the power to make a recommendation to Council on this matter.