Agenda of Planning and Regulatory Committee

Minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee

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

On Thursday 25 May 2017, commencing at 9.01am

Present: Councillor B McGurk (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese (Chairperson), Councillors L Acland, I Barker, B Dahlberg, K Fulton, S Walker and Ms G Paine

In Attendance: Councillor P Matheson, Group Manager Strategy and Environment (C Barton), Senior Strategic Adviser (N McDonald), Administration Adviser (S Burgess) and Nelson Youth Councillors (E Rais and C Hagan)

1. Apologies

There were no apologies.

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

The Chairperson advised that item 12, Small-Scale Management Programme for Mediterranean fanworm, would be considered after the morning tea break.

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 Kerry Neal

Mr Neal provided a handout (A1764488) and spoke about consultation on natural hazards, changes to property titles, tsunami flooding solutions, financing flood protection and the risk of certain building constructions failing in an earthquake.

Attachments

1 A1764488 - Kerry Neal Handout

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 13 April 2017

Document number M2503, agenda pages 8 - 11 refer.

Resolved PR/2017/019

That the Committee

Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee, held on 13 April 2017, as a true and correct record.

Barker/Acland Carried

6. Status Report - Planning and Regulatory Committee 25 May 2017

Document number R7689, agenda pages 12 - 15 refer.

Resolved PR/2017/021

That the Committee

Receives the Status Report Planning and Regulatory Committee 25 May 2017 (R7689) and its attachment (A1736802).

Barker/Walker Carried

7. Chairperson's Report

The Chairperson advised he would be attending the Local Government New Zealand Freshwater Symposium along with several officers and other elected members.

8. Timing of the Navigation Safety Bylaw review

Document number R7331, agenda pages 16 - 20 refer.

Manager Consents and Compliance, Mandy Bishop, presented the report and responded to questions.

Resolved PR/2017/022

That the Committee

Receives the report Timing of the Navigation Safety Bylaw review (R7331); and

Decides to commence the review of Navigation Safety Bylaw 218, noting it will be completed by 1 December 2019.

Paine/Acland Carried

9. Speed Limit Bylaw Amendment - Main Road Stoke

Document number R7710, agenda pages 21 - 24 refer.

Asset Engineer Transport, Kayleen Goldthorpe, presented the report.

Resolved PR/2017/023

That the Committee

Receives the report Speed Limit Bylaw Amendment - Main Road Stoke (R7710); and its attachment (A1758273): and

Approves amendments detailed in report R7710 to the following schedules of the Bylaw No 210, Speed Limits (2011):

- Schedule I: 80km/h

- Schedule G: 60km/h

- Schedule A: Urban Traffic Areas Map 6.

Barker/Walker Carried

10. Strategy and Environment Report for 1 January - 31 March 2017

Document number R7433, agenda pages 25 - 40 refer.

Manager Consents and Compliance, Mandy Bishop, Manager Planning, Matt Heale, Manager Building, Chris Wood, Interim Environmental Programmes Manager, Jo Martin, and Environmental Programmes Adviser, Richard Frizzell, presented the report and responded to questions.

Resolved PR/2017/024

That the Committee

Receives the report Strategy and Environment Report for 1 January - 31 March 2017 (R7433) and its attachment (A1737726).

Fulton/Walker Carried

Recommendation to Council PR/2017/025

That the Council

Approves that the following amounts in the Nelson Nature budget are being carried forward to the 2017/18 Financial Year:

- $60,000 for Dun Mountain wilding conifer control

- $20,000 for the Department of Conservation animal and plant pest advisor

- $10,000 for the Taiwan Cherry feasibility study.

Fulton/Walker Carried

11. Marine Biosecurity

Document number R7408, agenda pages 41 - 87 refer.

Peter Lawless, Facilitator for Top of the South Marine Biosecurity Partnership, and Environmental Programmes Adviser, Richard Frizzell, presented the report and responded to questions.

Resolved PR/2017/026

That the Committee

Receives and notes the report Marine Biosecurity (R7408) and its attachment (A1735275).

Paine/Dahlberg Carried

12. Options for Extending Smokefree Policy

Document number R7725, agenda pages 121 - 131 refer.

Senior Strategic Adviser, Nicky McDonald, presented the report. She advised that officers proposed a change to the recommendation to refer to ‘Council-run’ events instead of ‘Council-funded’ events as this was more appropriate.

Resolved PR/2017/027

That the Committee

Receives the report Options for Extending Smokefree Policy (R7725) and its attachment (A1741198).

Her Worship the Mayor/Fulton Carried

Recommendation to Council PR/2017/028

That the Council

Approves extending its smokefree policy to include Council-run events, and working with partners to promote a smokefree message; and

Approves an allocation of $3,500 unbudgeted operational funding in 2017/18 to the New Zealand Cancer Society Nelson Centre in support of a trial of smokefree outdoor dining in the city centre.

Her Worship the Mayor/Fulton Carried

Attendance: The meeting adjourned for morning tea from 10.27am to 10.41am, during which time Councillor Dahlberg, Glenice Paine and Her Worship the Mayor left the meeting.

13. Small-Scale Management Programme for Mediterranean fanworm

Document number R7409, agenda pages 88 - 120 refer.

Peter Lawless, Facilitator for Top of the South Marine Biosecurity Partnership, Environmental Programmes Adviser, Richard Frizzell, and Tasman District Council Coordinator – Biosecurity and Biodiversity, Paul Sheldon, presented the report and responded to questions.

Attendance: Councillor Dahlberg returned to the meeting at 10.42am, Glenice Paine returned to the meeting at 10.43am.

Resolved PR/2017/029

That the Committee

Receives the report Small-Scale Management Programme for Mediterranean fanworm (R7409) and its attachment (A1753714); and

Approves the notification of a Small-Scale Management Programme for Mediterranean fanworm (Sabella spallanzanii) within the entire coastal area of Nelson City and coming into force on 1 July 2017.

Dahlberg/Fulton Carried

Recommendation to Council PR/2017/030

That the Council

Approves $36,000 per year for a three year period, commencing 2017/18 to fund the operational implementation of a Small-Scale Management Programme for Sabella.

Dahlberg/Fulton Carried

There being no further business the meeting ended at 11.00am.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Planning and Regulatory Committee

27 July 2017

REPORT R7917

Strategy and Environment Report for 1 April - 30 June 2017

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To provide a quarterly update on activity and performance for the Council’s planning, regulatory, science and environment functions.

1.2 To provide an annual summary on Strategy & Environment Group activities.

2. Summary

Activity	Level of service needed	Achievement
Building	Achieve and maintain International Accreditation New Zealand (IANZ) accreditation. Compliance with statutory timeframes.	The Building Control Authority (BCA) gained re-accreditation with no corrective actions in June 2017. Statutory time limits continue to be met. The alignment of the BCA to industry standards continues through the GoShift initiative and collaboration with Tasman District Council.
Consents and Compliance	Delivery of all statutory regulatory functions. Compliance with statutory timeframes.	98% compliance with resource consent timeframes. There has been an increase in resource consent numbers which are 53% higher than the last five year average.
Science and Environment	Delivery of all non-regulatory programmes. Compliance and reporting against relevant policy statements and standards.	Non-regulatory programmes have been successfully delivered on time and within budget for the 2016/17 year. Environmental monitoring programmes are on track, and are reported on Land and Water Aotearoa (LAWA).
Planning	Resource management plans are current and meet all legislative requirements.	The Nelson Plan review is on track with six of the 11 Council workshops completed to date. Community consultation continues. Iwi Working Group and Freshwater Management Group meetings continue.
Development	Coordinated growth with infrastructure. A well planned city that meets the community’s current and future needs.	The Housing Accord has been extended until 2019. 10 new SHAs have been recommended to the Minister of Building and Construction. Residential and Business land capacity assessments are underway.

3. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Strategy and Environment Report for 1 April - 30 June 2017 (R7917) and its attachments (A1774079, A1786088, A1784621, A1791943, A1777407 and A1791962); and

Approves the Nelson City Council Dog Control Activity Report 2016-2017 in Attachment 1 to Report R7917 (A1786088) to be submitted to the Secretary for Local Government; and

Approves the Nelson District Licensing Committee Annual Report 2016-2017 in Attachment 2 to Report R7917 (A1784621) to be submitted to the Department of Justice – Alcohol; and

Accepts the Nelson Plan Overview of Workshop Recommendations and Direction in Attachment 5 to Report R7917 (A 1777407).

4. Background

4.1 The report and attachments detail the performance monitoring of the Council’s regulatory and non-regulatory activities, how these activities have changed over time and identifies their strategic direction.

4.2 The Dog Control Activity Report is required to be sent to the Secretary for Local Government under the Dog Control Act 1996 section 10A(3) and (4).

4.3 The Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 section 199(1) requires every territorial authority to send an annual report to the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority.

5. Discussion - Building

Achievements

5.1 The Nelson City Council BCA was assessed against the Building (Accreditation of Building Consent Authorities) Regulations 2006 by International Accreditation New Zealand (IANZ) in June. IANZ found that all requirements were being met and issued no corrective actions.

5.2 The Nelson City Council BCA is working with the Tasman District Council to align processes.

5.3 Both councils are collaborating on ‘Let’s Get it Right’ seminars with local designers, architects and builders.

5.4 The GoShift electronic building consents submission portal commenced on the 1st of July.

5.5 Implementation of new and revised processes and procedures to satisfy the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016.

Trends

5.6 Building Consent applications have continued to increase for the final quarter (Attachment 1) with 128 domestic alterations and 58 new domestic structures. Building consent inspections have increased by 377 over the last quarter.

5.7 Building Consent applications are up by 21.1% on the previous financial year.

Strategic direction and focus

5.8 Continued participation with the GoShift initiative to align practice with 21 other BCAs.

5.9 Work is in progress in collaboration with Tasman District Council to review and procure a complete digital solution for building consent processing and inspecting.

5.10 Works to align with the Ministry of Building Innovation and Employment’s (MBIE) 2017 ‘regulatory guidance on the BCA accreditation scheme’.

Risks

5.11 The BCA continues to manage its risks daily through processing, inspecting and issuing Code Compliance Certificates on building consents.

5.12 If building consent activity levels remain high resourcing will need to be reviewed.

5.13 The anticipated increase in consenting activity relating to the Housing Accord and Special Housing Areas (HASHA) has not manifested, but resource consenting for special housing areas is ongoing therefore increasing the likelihood of an increase in workload.

Annual summary for 2016/17

5.14 The BCA has been successfully re-accredited as a Building Consent Authority (BCA).

5.15 The Manager Building was seconded to the Capital Projects business unit for 11 months reducing the BCA’s resources by one FTE. This has enabled staff to perform higher duties and further develop skills. A depth of succession planning within the business unit has resulted.

5.16 Electronic processes have continued to develop with the successful implementation of an extension to ‘GoGet’ being added to manage the scheduling and carrying out of building Inspections. This was previously undertaken within the MagiQ environment.

6. Discussion – Consents and Compliance

Achievements

6.1 Permitted standard checks for hazardous substance storage and stormwater management for industrial sites in the Tahunanui area have commenced. Most premises welcomed the assistance provided by Council to improve on-site practices with many stormwater sumps overdue for a clean out and maintenance by the landowners. The sites will be revisited to ensure actions have been carried out.

6.2 The ability to register dogs online has resulted in around 40% of registrations occurring online with triple the number of registrations completed in June compared to last year.

6.3 A variety of development will soon commence with regional consents being granted for the Airport redevelopment, the Port obtained consent for stage 2 of their large warehouse development, a new Night N Day store in Tahunanui and a 57 lot subdivision was approved in Exeter Street, Stoke.

6.4 The Council obtained resource consent for the Roding River structures and water take.

Trends

6.5 Reliance on external consultants is still needed for resource consent processing but at a slightly lower level than last quarter (20% of decisions were processed externally this quarter compared to 22% last quarter).

Strategic direction and focus

6.6 The Resource Legislation Amendment Act has resulted in the need to adapt some procedures.

6.7 More Special Housing Areas has resulted in increased Urban Design Panel and pre-application meetings.

Risks

6.8 There is currently a review being undertaken of the need for additional consent processing and monitoring staff.

Annual summary for 2016/17

6.9 Resource consent processing for the year is 53% higher than the previous five year average and 2% higher than last year. The number of notified or limited notified consents has increased by 22% from last year. Objections or appeals on decisions or costs for the year remains low at 1.5% of decisions issued. The use of consultants tripled compared to last year.

6.10 Navigation safety activities received a $30,000 grant from Maritime New Zealand to support existing campaigns and enhance programmes in the Top of the South. Around 760 equipment safety checks were carried out on recreational motorised and non-motorised water craft, enhanced communication and co-ordination with clubs commenced and upskilling of skippers has been supported by the harbourmaster’s office through boating education courses.

6.11 Improvements to our streams will likely follow hazardous substance storage and stormwater management checks conducted at industrial sites in the city and Tahunanui areas.

6.12 Registering dogs is now able to be done online.

6.13 All food premises required to transition to a Food Control Plan in year one of the three year transition under the Food Act 2014 have done so.

6.14 The use of body cameras by parking and dog control officers has led to a de-escalation of situations that would otherwise potentially result in threatening or abusive behaviour towards officers. A regulatory environmental officer has led difficult customer training with various groups within the organisation.

7. Discussion – Science and Environment

Achievements

7.1 On 18 May 2017 a new air quality monitoring site was established in Dodson Valley Road to help understand air quality levels within Airshed C, and inform a review of the airshed boundary and/or rules as part of the Nelson Plan development.

7.2 New monitoring equipment has been purchased to replace an ageing monitor at St Vincent Street.

7.3 Twenty applications were received for the 2017/18 round of the Heritage Project Fund, seeking over $355,000. Twelve applications were successful, and a total of $100,000 has been allocated for works including earthquake strengthening (6 buildings), reroofing (3 buildings), timber/heritage feature repairs (2 buildings), and treating cracked cob walls (1 building).

7.4 Nelson Nature and Parks and Reserves have controlled wilding conifers across more than 300 hectares of the unique mineral belt ecosystem in the headwaters of the Roding Water Reserve. Wilding conifers are the key threat to the nationally recognised Dun Mountain mineral belt ecosystem because of their risk of shading out or replacing the rare and/or vulnerable native plant communities present.

7.5 In the Tantragee Reserve, contractors, the Mountain Bike Club, and schools have planted over 3000 plants in the area immediately around the Brook and its tributary.

7.6 Nelson Nature and the Parks and Reserves team have increased the areas under sustained control for Old Mans Beard and other environmental weeds to help protect the native forests of the Maitai and Roding Water Reserves.

7.7 The Groom Creek Wetland Project has gone out for tender via tenderlink. It is intended that the wetland will be constructed before the end of 2017, and in preparation for this 1500 plants have been planted this season to provide a buffer for the wetland and to enhance the surrounding area. This is in addition to the 300 plants that have been planted by volunteers in this same area.

7.8 An application to the Ministry for the Environment Freshwater Improvement Fund was made. The project aims to restore the health of the Wakapuaka catchment through restoring riparian margins and engaging landowners and the surrounding community in caring for their river. The result of the application should be known later this month.

7.9 Nelson Nature has supported private landowners who manage significant natural areas by providing over 6000 plants to help manage areas where biodiversity values are high, or where land is being restored to enhance biodiversity in the Nelson Region. All plants are eco-sourced plants that are local to the Nelson Region and includes some rare and threatened species.

7.10 A workshop focused on the health and safety of volunteers was held jointly between Nelson Nature and the Department of Conservation. Volunteers have been supported to obtain Growsafe Certification which ensures the safety of volunteers is better protected and potential impacts on plant communities are considered.

7.11 Nelson Nature has been supporting Nelson Forest and Bird with staff support for applications for community funding to increase resourcing to control wilding conifers and other threats to the Dun Mountain mineral belt ecosystem.

7.12 During this last quarter, seven of Nelson’s urban streams were surveyed for fish barriers. In six of these streams all fish barriers have been remediated to better enable migratory native fish to make their way from the estuarine mouths of these streams, where they spawn, to the upper reaches where they live their adult life. This work will eventually result in greater numbers and diversity of native fish in our urban streams.

7.13 In other work to support our native fish populations, spawning habitat has been protected and enhanced in Oldham Stream, Orchards Stream and Jenkins Creek. These are locations where better spawning can be encouraged by improved planting and management. To compliment this work, signage has been produced for each site that will emphasise the importance of these sites to our fish populations.

7.14 Fish surveys and research to locate threatened fish species and spawning habitat resulted in the recent discovery of Koaro (a whitebait species) spawning in the Brook Stream – this was a significant find because it is the first confirmed spawning record for a migratory Koaro population in NZ and has redefined their spawning habitat requirements.

7.15 An environmental artwork has been installed in the window of the Nelson Provincial Museum using water temperature monitors in the York Stream, connected wirelessly to the display in the museum, showing variations in water temperature and the impact that has on fish life. Students from Auckland Point School, Victory Primary School, Nelson Intermediate School and Nelson College for Girls were involved in making both the art work and the water temperature sensors and the schools will be able to use the water temperature data in their science programmes.

Strategic direction and focus

7.16 The Science and Environment team strategic direction for the next quarter includes development of the draft Environment Activity Management Plan 2018; team recruitment and work planning; and development of a science roadmap to guide the monitoring and research programme in the light of national level changes and new information.

7.17 The key focus for this quarter will be on initiating delivery of the 2017/18 non-regulatory and science work programmes. There will also be an increased focus on participation in regional scale environmental programmes such as the Waimea Inlet Forum, the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Alliance, the Mt Richmond Forest Park Wilding Conifer Control Programme; and the Sustainable Seas National Science Challenge based in Tasman Bay.

7.18 The Nelson Biodiversity Strategy is currently under review and this year has seen five workshops tackling the broad areas of: Freshwater; Coastal; Terrestrial; Engagement; and Surveying and Monitoring. The results of this review will be reported to Council and will help to guide priorities in the Nelson Nature Programme.

7.19 The joint Regional Pest Management Committee reviewing the Tasman-Nelson Regional Pest Management Strategy has met twice. Its next meeting is on 2 August 2017 to consider the Draft Plan to enable public notification of the Plan Proposal in early October 2017.

Risks

7.20 The Science and Environment team has had three key vacancies throughout the May-June quarter, however two of these have now been filled and planning is underway for the recruitment of the third.

Annual summary for 2016/17

Air quality

7.21 In 2016/17 there was an exceedance of the National Air Quality Standards for air quality (NES) of no more than 50µg/m³in Airshed A (51µg/m³recorded at St Vincent St site on 2 July 2016) and in Airshed B1 (116µg/m³recorded at Blackwood Street site on 20 March 2017). However, the NES requirement of no more than one breach per year in any airshed has been met.

7.22 A programme to improve woodburner operation started last winter and continued throughout the year, including checking excessively smoky flues and advice on getting the best heat/least smoke from burners over winter; promoting early purchase/collection of Good Wood, running a Best Little Woodshed competition for wood storage and advice on burner maintenance/flue cleaning before winter.

7.23 Since Air Plan Change A3 allowed the installation of up to 1000 Ultra-Low Emission Burners (ULEBs) into Airshed B2 (Stoke) and 600 into Airshed C (Brook/Atawhai), applications to install 64 ULEBs have been received for Airshed B2 and 75 for Airshed C.

Marine Biosecurity

7.24 The focus of the Top of the South Marine Biosecurity Partnership has been the development of a three year Small-Scale Management Programme to control the unwanted organism and marine pest Mediterranean fanworm (Sabella spallanzii) which will take effect from 1 July 2017.

7.25 Work with Parks & Facilities staff to improve compliance with marine biosecurity provisions of the Nelson Marina Berth Holders’ Agreement has resulted in 56 berth holders being required to anti-foul their vessels.

Heritage

7.26 150 heritage building owners received a total of $68,273 in Rates Remission for Heritage Maintenance.

Water Quality

7.27 All required water quality monitoring has been completed and reported according to national protocols. This year state of the environment scorecards will not be produced because they have been replaced by national reporting via the LAWA website www.lawa.org.nz

7.28 The 2016/17 recreation monitoring programme was completed at the end of March, with 6 of the 10 recreation sites maintaining good water quality standards (<5% Red alert bacteria exceedances). The exceptions were Wakapuaka at Hira Reserve, Wakapuaka at Paremata Flats Reserve, Collingwood St Bridge, and Nelson Haven at Atawhai. All recreation sites except Cable Bay had at least one Red Alert bacteria exceedance, mainly attributed to water samples taken during rainfall events, when samples were contaminated by stormwater land runoff. The bacteria grades and % of Red Alert exceedances calculated for LAWA are based on the last three years summer monitoring (n=61 samples).

7.29 New dashboard reporting for toxic algae on the Nelson City Council website was developed in time for the summer season http://nelson.govt.nz/environment/water-3/toxic-algae/toxic-algae-alerts/

7.30 A new 10 year state of the environment estuarine health monitoring programme was scoped and developed for delivery beginning in the 2017/18 year.

Water Quantity

7.31 A new water quantity scientist role was established and filled in March 2017. The key focus of the role to date has been on reviewing the Nelson hydrology network and planning for renewals and maintenance.

Warmer Healthier Homes

7.32 Stage Three of the Warmer Healthier Homes programme, July 2016 to June 2017, has insulated 128 homes to date (original target 125).

Nelson Nature

7.33 The Nelson Nature Programme has this year delivered on some high priority projects, most notably an increased focus on the removal of wilding conifers in the Dun Mountain Ultramafic Zone. Due to the incremental increase in costs for removal of wildings for every year that they are left to grow (30% per annum), transferring funding from less urgent projects to the Dun Mountain Project will be more cost effective in the long term, helping to ensure the preservation of this nationally significant landscape.

7.34 This increased focus on the Dun Mountain, has meant that less work has been undertaken on Significant Natural Areas on private land, however, support to landowners has continued where agreements were already in place. Weed control has also been undertaken in the wider Maitai-Roding area.

7.35 The volunteer community is an integral part of the Nelson Nature programme. To support our volunteers working on environmental projects, Nelson Nature has facilitated workshops on Health and Safety for Volunteers, and a practical workshop on dealing with the regions worst weeds. Volunteers have been celebrated through Nature’s Hero awards, and through an event on Poorman Valley Stream which thanked a range of volunteer groups working along this important urban stream, and also connected groups together which has resulted in more joint efforts taking place this second half of the year.

Project Maitai/Mahitahi

7.36 Year three of Project Maitai/Mahitahi was successfully delivered, although some initiatives were delayed or reduced in scope due to reduced staff capacity. Key highlights included the removal of the Almond Tree Flat Ford; the NZ River Award for long term macroinvertebrate improvements; the stormwater drain painting at the Countdown supermarkets; the planting of 15 sites alongside the river and its tributaries; the design and resource consent for the Groom Creek Wetland; and the involvement of nine Nelson schools in one or more projects.

7.37 The Maitai catchment is showing meaningful trend improvement on the LAWA website in Macroinvertebrate Index (Maitai at Groom); E.coli (Maitai at Riverside, Brook at Manuka St, Sharland at Matai confluence); Black Disc – Clarity (Maitai at Riverside, Maitai at Groom, Brook at Manuka St, Sharland at Maitai); and Turbidity (Maitai at Riverside, Maitai at Groom, Maitai South Branch at Intake, Brook at Manuka St, Brook at Motor Camp, Sharland at Maitai, Groom at Maitai)

7.38 There were no known toxic algae incidents this year and toxic algae levels remained below the alert level, no doubt helped by the wetter summer weather.

Waste and Environmental Education.

7.39 The Environmental Education Adviser role has been vacant for the 2016/17 year, with a contractor working part time to respond to community requests for information and ensure continued delivery of high priority programmes such as Enviroschools, and waste minimisation initiatives. Recruitment for this role is a priority for the next quarter.

8. Discussion - Planning

Achievements

8.1 Three Nelson Plan workshops have been held with Councillors in the quarter covering coastal provisions, infrastructure and open space provisions, proposed changes to the Nelson Tasman Land Development Manual, air, zoning and transport provisions.

Natural hazards engagement complete

8.2 From 1 April to 16 June, Officers sought feedback from the community on new flood modelling, liquefaction, and fault hazards. Letters were sent to over 7,700 landowners and new website pages were published: http://nelson.govt.nz/environment/nelson-plan/natural-hazards/ Four community information sessions were held in early May which were well attended. Over 400 responses have been received detailing site specific issues, or responding to a general questionnaire on how these hazards should be managed through a risk based approach in the Nelson Plan. At the time of writing, staff are currently summarising this feedback. The majority of comments were in relation to the robustness of the flood hazard modelling and the extent of flood risk across the region in an extreme flood event (Q100), impact on property prices, insurance and Land Information Memoranda (LIMs). Detailed feedback will be reported to Councillors at two Nelson Plan natural hazards workshops on 5 and 12 September 2017. Technical work is ongoing in relation to coastal erosion and slope instability currently.

Freshwater work

8.3 Officers are continuing to work with iwi, the three freshwater working groups and other stakeholders in the development of the freshwater section of the Nelson Plan. Meetings were held in early June with the iwi and freshwater working groups to discuss three emerging technical reports in relation to water quality objectives and limits setting, water quantity allocation limits and minimum flows, and groundwater. A draft freshwater management framework will be workshopped with iwi and freshwater working groups in two parts, in late June and mid-July, prior to being presented at a Councillor workshop on 19 September.

Heritage engagement

8.4 For four weeks in March, owners of built heritage were asked for their feedback on possible changes to inventories and rules regarding heritage in the current Plan. Over 400 letters were sent out in relation to built heritage, including to heritage building owners, owners of proposed listings and owners of non-heritage buildings in heritage precincts.

8.5 Potential permitted activities that were raised as possibilities were adaptive reuse (using a building for something other than what it was designed for), earthquake strengthening and “sustainable additions” such as insulation, double-glazing, heat-pumps and solar hot water. One additional heritage precinct was proposed, in Wolfe St, and one was proposed to be removed, at Fountain Place. Fifty-five feedback forms regarding built heritage were returned.

8.6 For four weeks in April, notable tree owners were asked about possible approaches to notable trees in the plan. Around 170 tree owners were contacted regarding around 1060 trees. Potential permitted activities that were raised with tree owners were to allow light penetration, end-weight reduction to reduce the likelihood of limb failure, remedial work up after storm damage and maintaining distances from houses, power lines etc. Fifty-three feedback forms were returned regarding notable trees.

8.7 An overview of feedback received to date is provided below with a full summary attached at Attachment 4 (A1791943).

8.8 Approximately 60 letters have been sent out regarding potential changes to archaeological rules. Owners of land relevant to archaeological sites have been asked for feedback. The resulting feedback for archaeology will be shared with Councillors at a later date.

8.9 Feedback from landowners on notable trees has been processed with a number of themes emerging.

· Support for proposed exemptions, such as end-weight reduction, allowing light penetration and remedial work following storm damage;

· Apprehension about Council potentially withdrawing support in terms of regular assessment and maintenance;

· Concern about the cost of maintenance and the restriction on owners’ ability to maintain the trees themselves;

· Concern about liability and the ability to undertake works to correct or prevent root damage.

8.10 Feedback has also been summarised from built heritage with a number of themes emerging.

· Support for earthquake strengthening and sustainable additions, although several people commented that additions should be unobtrusive or entirely out of sight from public space;

· Mixed support for adaptive reuse as a permitted activity. Those with reservations wanted to ensure that the primary use of the site was for residential purposes;

· Requests for the removal of unreinforced brick chimneys to be a permitted activity;

· Requests for zero cost consent fees for those consent applications required only due to a heritage listing;

· Requests to increase the size of the Heritage Fund;

· The heritage expert’s initial recommendation was to remove the precinct listing for Fountain Place and rely on individual heritage listings. Fourteen of the 18 building owners in the Fountain Place Precinct were opposed to the removal of the precinct listing, including 6 owners of non-heritage buildings. Two were in favour of removing the precinct listing and two did not comment;

· Discussions are still underway with owners of Wolfe St, a section of which was recommended to be adopted as a new precinct. This is yet to be finalised, but signs are positive for this potential new precinct.

8.11 Heritage and notable tree engagement will inform draft plan provisions that will be presented to the Council workshop scheduled for 8 August 2017. Follow-up consultation will occur with those owners that have raised particular issues.

Designations

8.12 There are 17 Requiring Authorities in Nelson. The majority of Requiring Authorities are seeking roll overs of their existing designations.

8.13 The following Requiring Authorities are modifying boundaries for some of their designations:

· Network Tasman

· New Zealand Transport Agency

· Nelson City Council

· Airways

· Ministry of Education

So far, schedules and plans have been received from the first two of these.

Strategic direction and focus

8.14 We are currently over half way through the schedule for Nelson Plan Council workshops. Attached at Attachment 5 (A1777407) is an overview of key changes that Officers have recommended on the topics workshopped to date and general direction provided at the workshops. Officer recommendations have generally been supported.

8.15 The focus of Council workshops for the next quarter (July-September) will be on Iwi, Heritage, Financial contributions, Freshwater and Hazards. Officers are also currently working to report the Working Draft Regional Policy Statement to the Planning and Regulatory Committee on 3 October 2017.

8.16 It is proposed to report draft Nelson Plan provisions to the 27 November 2017 Planning and Regulatory Committee ahead of release for public feedback in early 2018. Officers are currently undertaking detailed project planning for the 2017/2018 financial year and will provide an update on timeframes in due course.

8.17 Officers are also preparing for a workshop with developers and professionals in early August on possible changes to planning requirements signalled by key draft Nelson Plan workshop content presented to Council between February and the end of June (including residential, rural, industrial, inner city, air, noise, biodiversity and landscape provisions.

8.18 The Minister for Primary Industries and Minister for the Environment have started consultation on a proposed National Environmental Standard for Marine Aquaculture. There is a consultation period running through until 8 August. Officers will look to support Marlborough and Tasman Districts who have current marine aquaculture farms.

Risks

8.19 Recruitment for key positions is occurring.

8.20 The Resource Legislation Amendment Act came into force on 18 April 2017. A summary of key changes is attached at A1783008. One key change affecting the Nelson Plan is a new national plan standard. It appears that a draft standard will be released in April 2018 with the intention of this being gazetted in April 2019. While the gazetted standards will not be available at the time of Nelson Plan notification we will be able to consider the draft Standards on the basis that the Ministry for the Environment timelines do not slip.

8.21 The timing of Proposed National Environmental Standards (NES) for Plantation Forestry and changes to the NES Air Quality will potentially impact the Nelson Plan.

Annual summary for 2016/17

8.22 The Planning team has had a busy and productive year while carrying a number of staff vacancies.

8.23 There has been a range of national policy changes including the introduction of the Resource Legislation Amendment Act (April 2017).

8.24 There have been delays with the release of the National Environmental Standards for Plantation Forestry and Air Quality which has caused issues with the finalisation of forestry and air quality provisions for the Nelson Plan.

8.25 The key highlights for the year are listed below:

· Woodburner Plan Change to allow 1600 Ultra Low Emission Burners in Stoke and Brook/Atawhai was made operative

· Feeback on Draft RPS used to inform review – Briefing of new Council at workshops in November/December 2016

· Significant technical work completed to inform Nelson Plan workstreams

· Engagement with key stakeholders including Iwi, Freshwater groups, requiring authorities, Port, developers and professionals, landowners with heritage, landscape and biodiversity values

· Flood modelling and engagement on natural hazards

· Delaware Estuary boat launch technical work complete

· Six out of 11 workshops to discuss draft District and Regional Plan provisions

· The Planning and Environmental Programmes teams have been combined into the Environment team and the Manager and Team Leaders are now in place.

9. Discussion –Development

Achievements

9.1 The Housing Accord under the Housing Accord and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 was amended and extended by the Mayor and Minister of Building and Construction until 16 September 2021.

9.2 Twelve Special Housing Areas (SHAs) have been recommended to the Minister of Building and Construction in the last quarter. A further two SHAs are anticipated to be recommended to the Minister in the first half of July, this is likely to include Saxton SHA to provide for Summerset Retirement Village. All SHAs recommended to the Minister will go before Cabinet for gazettal prior to the national election.

9.3 Tasman District Council released the decision on Plan Change 62 Progressives Enterprises Ltd (Countdown on the corner of Champion and Salisbury Roads) on 17 June. The decision provides a rule framework in the Tasman Resource Management Plan that requires the upgrade of the roundabout at Champion Road prior to the operation of the supermarket.

9.4 On the 20th June a Joint Nelson City and Tasman District Council workshop was held on the National Policy Statement – Urban Development Capacity (NPS-UDC). Officers provided Council with an overview of residential and business capacity work to date, and gained direction from both councils on the extent of alignment, analysis and infrastructure prioritisation across the territorial authority boundaries.

9.5 Work on the draft aligned Land Development Manual continues, with its completion awaiting direction from the Nelson Plan in terms of stormwater discharges and minimum ground and floor levels aligned with the risk based approach to hazards.

Strategic Direction and Focus

9.6 Expressions of Interest for SHAs will be accepted on a quarterly basis, the next round closes on 31 August and will be reported to Council on 22 September. There continues to be strong interest from developers in pursuing SHAs.

9.7 Officers have started implementing a number of policies as required by the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity (NPS-UDC). This includes an initial assessment of the demand for housing and business land and estimates of development capacity, and an initial monitoring report. This work has been done in conjunction with TDC staff as the NPS-UDC strongly encourages local authorities with a shared urban area to work together on this work. The estimates will inform the development of both councils’ Long Term Plans, as well as the Nelson Plan, to ensure sufficient development capacity is provided

9.8 Housing demand has initially been based on Statistics New Zealand medium projection scenarios but is being reviewed to inform the growth assumptions for the Long Term Plan. Business land demand has been based on a forecasting model developed by Property Economics but will also be updated if Council assumes a different growth trajectory.

9.9 Capacity estimates indicate there is sufficient capacity of serviced and zoned land to meet housing and business land demand over the 10 years of the 2018 LTP but this is dependent on several key infrastructure projects. The NPS-UDC also requires development capacity to be commercially feasible which staff will be assessing as the next stage of work. This will include engagement with developers and landowners to inform the feasibility, yield and timing of capacity estimates.

Risks

9.10 Progress on growth and infrastructure prioritisation and planning input into key Council work streams such as the Nelson Plan, Asset Management Plans, Infrastructure Strategy, Development Contributions Policy and Long Term Plan have been affected by the significant amount of resourcing required to work with developers seeking Special Housing Areas and to administer documentation required under HASHAA.

Annual Summary for 2016/17

9.12 This Annual Summary includes the progress in the first half of Year Two of the original Nelson Housing Accord. It reports on building consents granted for new dwellings, the yield of serviced residential lots from residential zoned land, and special housing areas, for the year since the Housing Accord was signed - July 2016 up to the month ended December 2016.

Consenting Numbers:

· Halfway through Year Two of the Nelson Housing Accord, 129 new dwellings have been consented and 76 new sections approved by resource consent and issued with titles.

· At this rate, the current Year Two targets of 240 dwellings and 100 serviced residential sections are both likely to be achieved.

· Subdivision consent rates have varied since the start of the Accord. Between 0 and 31 lots have been consented per month, with an average of 18 a month.

· Building consent rates show more consistency on a monthly basis, resulting in between 10 and 29 consents for dwellings issued per month and an average of 17 per month.

Special Housing Areas:

· Thirteen Special Housing Areas (SHAs) were approved by Council and gazetted by Cabinet. Consent applications were received for eleven of these.

· The eleven SHAs being processed under HASHAA have significant capacity for residential growth and are expected to yield approximately 469 residential units.

· All Nelson SHAs have been in place for less than 12 months, and new housing supply from these will come on-stream in the next 1-2 years.

· A further twelve SHAs are currently in process to be gazetted prior to the national elections.

Land capacity for residential development:

· Current estimated residential development capacity (that is feasible, serviced and zoned) is 2,300 residential units. Demand is projected at 2,810 out to 2028.

· There is current residential zoned capacity which is currently unserviced, and has not been evaluated for feasibility, for a further 3,400 residential units. Residential household demand is projected at 5,680 by 2048.

10. Options

10.1 The Planning and Regulatory Committee has the option of receiving the report or seeking further information.

Mandy Bishop

Manager Consents and Compliance

Attachments

Attachment 1: A1786088 Dog Control Activity Report 2016-17 ⇩

Attachment 2: A1784621 Nelson District Licensing Committee Annual Report 2016-17 ⇩

Attachment 3: A1774079 Building and Consents and Compliance statistics ⇩

Attachment 4: A1791943 Nelson Plan - Heritage Buildings, Heritage Precincts & Notable Trees - Feedback Summary ⇩

Attachment 5: A1777407 Nelson Plan - Overview of Workshop Recommendations and Direction ⇩

Attachment 6: A1791962 Resource Management Amendment Act 2017 - Summary of Main Changes ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Section 10 of LGA 2002 requires local government to perform regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses. This quarterly report identifies the performance levels of regulatory and non-regulatory functions.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The Council’s Long Term Plan includes performance measures for various activities and this report enables the Council to monitor progress towards achieving these measures.

The Environment work programme addresses a number of community outcomes by protecting our environment and our heritage, sustainably managing our urban and rural environments, co-ordinating our growth and infrastructure planning, keeping our community safe through statutory compliance and making people aware of hazard risk, engaging with iwi and our community and establishing key partnerships, and taking a business friendly approach while promoting environmental management best practice.

3. Risk

The high level of building and resource consent application numbers continues to put pressure on meeting statutory timeframes. Vacancies in these teams and in the Science and Environment Team have the potential to impact work programmes.

4. Financial impact

No additional resources have been requested.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

No consultation with Māori has been undertaken.

7. Delegations

The Planning and Regulatory Committee has the responsibility for performance monitoring of Council’s Regulatory activities.

Planning and Regulatory Committee

27 July 2017

REPORT R7743

Draft Terms of Reference for the Co-ordination Group for the Waimea Inlet

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider the Terms of Reference for the Co-ordination Group for the Waimea Inlet, including a consideration of what is the appropriate level of representation on the Group.

2. Summary

2.1 Nelson City Council is a signatory to the Waimea Inlet Management Strategy (WIMS) and a member of the Waimea Inlet Working Party, a cross agency, technical advisory group seeking to align environmental work in this nationally significant eco-system. Approval of the attached Terms of Reference will allow an action plan to be developed.

3. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Draft Terms of Reference for the Co-ordination Group for the Waimea Inlet (R7743) and its attachment (A1779297).

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

Agrees to adopt the terms of reference (A1779297) for the Co-ordination Group for the Waimea Inlet; and

Appoints Councillor ____________ as Nelson City Council’s representative on the Co-ordination Group for the Waimea Inlet.

4. Background

4.1 The Waimea Inlet is the largest semi enclosed inlet in the South Island, and has international and national importance as a site for migratory birds. Nelson City Council works with the community in caring for the inlet through the Nelson Nature Programme, and in partnership with other agencies through the Nelson Biodiversity Strategy.

4.2 The Waimea Inlet Management Strategy (WIMS) was developed in 2010 to pull together a cross-regional approach to the care of the inlet. As shown in the attached map (Attachment 2), the Waimea Inlet lies within both Nelson and Tasman Regions.

4.3 Nelson City Council is a signatory to the WIMS, and a member of the Waimea Inlet Working Party which is a technical advisory group comprised of staff representatives of various parties focused on the care of the Waimea Inlet (Nelson City Council, Tasman District Council, Department of Conservation, Fish & Game, Waimea Inlet Forum, Tasman Environmental Trust).

4.4 The vision for the Strategy is of:

A vibrant place, richly appreciated by the community for its open space, natural and ecological values; happily remembered by generations for their activities, adventures and discoveries; a place where tangata whenua hold mana as kaitiaki of taonga; and a place to be shared with increasing respect.

4.5 The role of the Waimea Inlet Working Party is to develop an Action Plan Document, and has recommended that a Co-ordination Group for the Waimea Inlet (Co-ordination Group) be established to oversee, identify, prioritise, integrate and co-ordinate, actions aimed at achieving the vision of the WIMS. The relationship between the WIMS, the Working Party, and the proposed Co-ordination Group is part of the Terms of Reference attached to this report.

5. Discussion

5.1 In December 2016, Officers from both Tasman District Council and Nelson City Council, discussed the Terms of Reference for the Co-ordination Group.

5.2 Section 2 of the Terms of Reference relates to membership of the Co-ordination Group. It is proposed that representatives may be “elected members, staff members, or have some other affiliation with the organisation they are representing”. It is noted that the recommendation being put to Tasman District Council, is that representation on the Co-ordination Group be at the level of Councillor, with relevant staff attending as appropriate.

5.3 It is recommended that Nelson City Council also nominate an elected member to be part of the Co-ordination Group, supported by relevant staff as appropriate.

5.4 Regardless of representation on the Co-ordination Group, it is proposed that decisions would be made by the elected members of each signatory to the WIMS, and that the Co-Ordination group itself would not be a decision making body.

5.5 It is recommended that Nelson City Council formally adopt the Terms of Reference, and structure diagram, as attached to this report, and decide on the appropriate level of representation on the Co-ordination Group.

5.6 Over the next few months, three workshops have been planned to prepare the draft Action Plan. Once completed, this Action Plan will be presented to each signatory agency for its consideration, including which actions it wishes to participate in or to lead.

6. Options

6.1 There are two options.

Option 1: Agree to the Terms of Reference for the Co-ordination Group for the Waimea Inlet and decide on the level of representation on behalf of NCC (recommended option)
Advantages	· Enable the co-ordination group to begin working on the next stage of work towards environmental gains in the Waimea Inlet with NCC taking a role in guiding actions in the Strategy.
Risks and Disadvantages	· None.
Option 2: Do not agree to the Terms of Reference for the Co-ordination Group for the Waimea Inlet or the level of representation on behalf of NCC
Advantages	· None
Risks and Disadvantages	· That the co-ordination group will not be able to progress from establishment of the group to environmental action with meaningful input from NCC.

Susan Moore-Lavo

Environmental Programmes Adviser

Attachments

Attachment 1: Waimea Inlet Co-ordination Group TOR A1779297 ⇩

Attachment 2: Waimea Inlet Values A1787684 ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

This recommendation supports work that directly benefits the Nelson Region, providing environmental services in a cost effective manner by collaborating with partner organisations.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

This recommendation is consistent with strategies such as the Nelson Biodiversity Strategy, and the goals set out in Nelson Nature. It meets the following community outcomes:

· Our unique natural environment is healthy and protected

· Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and community engagement.

3. Risk

The terms of reference do not commit Nelson City Council to any specific action, as it is agreed that any decisions will be made at a Governance level.

4. Financial impact

There are no financial implications in agreeing to the Terms of Reference for the Co-ordination group. Any decisions, or actions, that arise from the Action Plan will need to be brought back to Council for a decision, at which point consideration can be given to any associated costs.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because it does not alter any decision made by Council, but rather supports the delivery of Council activities previously agreed to in the Long Term Plan. Therefore it is recommended that the community is advised of this action rather than consulted with.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Iwi are to be invited to be part of the Co-ordination Group for the Waimea Inlet. No other specific consultation with Maori has occurred.

7. Delegations

The Planning and Regulatory Committee has the responsibility for considering environmental matters. The Planning and Regulatory Committee has the power to make a recommendation to Council on the development of strategies relating to this area of responsibility.

Planning and Regulatory Committee

27 July 2017

REPORT R7765

Proposal for Top of the South Conservation Partnership: Memorandum of Understanding

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider the proposed draft Memorandum of Understanding and Terms of Reference for a proposal for a Top of the South Conservation Partnership.

2. Summary

2.1 Council has the opportunity to work collaboratively across the region through a new conservation partnership, potentially accessing new funding and achieving efficiencies through aligned work programmes.

3. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Proposal for Top of the South Conservation Partnership: Memorandum of Understanding (R7765) and its attachment (A1777693).

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

Approves that Nelson City Council signs the Memorandum of Understanding (A1777693) between partners in the Kotahitanga mō te Taio Alliance; and that Her Worship the Mayor be delegated the authority to sign on Council’s behalf.

4. Background

4.1 The Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Alliance grew from a concept involving collaboration in delivering landscape scale conservation projects across the Nelson and Tasman Regions. The first meeting of this group (then known as Te Tau Ihu Alliance), was held on 30 September 2016, and was focused on leveraging off Nelson Nature and Project Janszoon.

4.2 Since that first meeting, the project has grown to the point that it now involves discussion between four Councils, nine iwi, and the Department of Conservation. The organisations involved in the Alliance are:

· Nelson City Council

· Tasman District Council

· Marlborough District Council

· Buller District Council

· Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō Trust

· Te Pātaka a Ngāti Kōata Trust

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Kuia Trust

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Rārua

· Ngāti Tama ki Te Waipounamu Trust

· Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira Inc

· Te Atiawa o Te Waka-a-Māui Trust

· Rangitāne o Wairau Settlement Trust

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Waewae

· Department of Conservation – Te Papa Atawhai

4.3 The underlying aim of the Alliance is that by working collaboratively across the region at a landscape scale, additional funding can be sought and efficiencies can be gained by aligning work.

4.4 It has been highlighted that the NEXT Foundation, and similarly placed philanthropic organisations, encourage big scale thinking when considering potential funding, for example Predator Free 2050 ($20 million over 4 years), NEXT Foundation ($100 million over 10 years), The Nature Conservancy ($1.4 billion), and MPI Wilding Conifer Fund ($16 million this year).

4.5 The timeframes for responding to funding opportunities are often very tight so one aim of the Alliance is to have “fund ready” projects. The types of projects that the Alliance discussed being involved in are: Predator Free 2050, freshwater issues via an integrated catchment management approach, and wilding conifer control. Marine focused projects are another possible area where shared goals can be aligned.

4.6 Iwi groups have also expressed a wish that the Alliance delivers social, cultural and economic outcomes for whanau. This relates to potentially increased opportunities for training and employment if a broader range and scope of conservation work is funded in the region.

5. Discussion

Naming of the Alliance

5.1 The name of the Alliance, Te Tau Ihu, was initially used as this referred to the geographic scope under consideration. Since that time, this scope has increased and with the inclusion of Buller District Council and Ngati Waewae, it was considered appropriate that an alternative name be found.

5.2 The current suggestion is that the work be under the name of “Kotahitanga mō te Taiao”, which refers to unity and collective action for our natural world. Ngai Tahu has been approached by the Department of Conservation, and at this point Ngai Tahu support its interests being represented through Ngati Waewae. If the geographic scope of the project changes again for instance with the inclusion of the Molesworth area, there will be additional parties included in the Alliance.

Draft Memorandum of Understanding and Terms of Reference

5.3 At an officer led meeting on 16 February, a draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Terms of Reference were discussed, with these documents being tabled at the 12 April 2017 meeting. Subsequently, the draft documents were circulated to participating agencies for feedback resulting in the revised draft now attached to this report.

5.4 The MOU and Terms of Reference is an agreement in principle on how the partner agencies might engage. The scope of the work involved requires further refinement, but it is intended that each partner organisation retains authority over its own values, policies, priorities and projects.

5.5 Participation in the Alliance is not intended to influence each organisations’ work, but to align work where this is possible, and to seek opportunities for collaboration and enhanced funding as these arise.

5.6 Clause 11 of Schedule 1 of the MOU refers to each party retaining dominion over its respective organisation, which makes explicit the autonomy in decision making.

Next steps

5.7 Once each of the parties has agreed to participation in the Alliance, and agreed to the content in the MOU and Terms of Reference, a final document will be circulated to each organisation. Each party is asked to sign a copy of the MOU, which will then be collated into a single document.

5.8 It is recommended that if Council agrees to the signing of the MOU, and that the Mayor be a signatory to the document on behalf of Nelson City Council.

6. Options

6.1 There are three options.

Option 1: Decline to participate in the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Alliance
Advantages	· None
Risks and Disadvantages	· Opportunities to access additional funding, or to achieve greater benefits across landscape scale projects by aligning with other organisations in the region, would be lost.
Option 2: Agree to participate in the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Alliance, but defer signing the MOU at this time
Advantages	· Would allow a “watch and see” approach with regards final tweaks to the MOU. It is unlikely that any significant changes will be made to the MOU at this time, and any that were made would require re-signing by parties to acknowledge these changes.
Risks and Disadvantages	· If agreement to participation is made, as this would delay progress being made by the Alliance in being able to apply for funding or to further discussions on alignment of work e.g. wilding conifer control or predator control initiatives
Option 3: Agree to participate in the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Alliance, and agree to sign the MOU
Advantages	· Enable this initial stage of the project to be completed (the agreement in principle to work together), and for the Alliance to proceed with discussing specific activity areas and to respond to any upcoming funding requests.
Risks and Disadvantages	· None.

7. Conclusion

7.1 It is recommended that the Planning and Regulatory Committee recommend to the Council, that the draft Memorandum of Understanding attached to this report be signed; and that the Mayor be the signatory to the final document once completed.

Susan Moore-Lavo

Environmental Programmes Adviser

Attachments

Attachment 1: Kotahitanga mo te Taio MOU and Terms of Reference ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

This recommendation seeks to achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness by aligning work with other agencies in areas where there are joint interests. The objective is to maximise returns on investments made eg wilding conifer control, and to leverage further funding.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

This recommendation is consistent with other Council documents including responsibilities outlined under the RMA to protect biodiversity, community outcomes relating to environmental protection, and the objectives of the Nelson Nature programme agreed to in the LTP.

The recommendation meets the following Community Outcomes:

· Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and community engagement;

· Our unique natural environment is healthy and protected

3. Risk

The actions recommended in this paper will enhance the likelihood of increased gains in the area of biodiversity protection. It will enable Nelson City Council to leverage off further funding opportunities and to participate in decision making in a wider regional scale. Risks are limited as the MOU does not obligate Council to participate in any programme or to any level, but Council retains autonomy over its own decision making.

4. Financial impact

There are no additional financial impacts on Council, but there may be financial benefits if further funding can be attracted through this Alliance for goals for environmental protection set out in the Nelson Nature programme.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because at this point this is an agreement to work together on goals already agreed to by the community. Therefore consultation or community engagement is not recommended, but that the community be informed of the decision and the work that the Alliance aims to achieve.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Nine iwi organisations are involved in the Alliance and are key partners in the proposal.

7. Delegations

Planning and Regulatory Committee

27 July 2017

REPORT R7967

NPS-UDC Quarterly Monitoring Report March 2017

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To ensure decision-makers are well-informed about urban development activity in both Nelson and Tasman, as required by the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity (NPS-UDC).

2. Summary

2.1 The NPS-UDC requires Council to monitor property market indicators on a quarterly basis, including prices, rents, resource and building consents, and housing affordability. The attached report for the March 2017 quarter is the first of these reports.

2.2 Data provided by the Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), shows that over the last two decades, Nelson and Tasman have generally had enough new housing to meet household growth. However, in the last few years, consents for new dwellings in Nelson do not appear to be keeping up with growth.

2.3 Commercial and industrial building activity in the Nelson Urban Area has been relatively stable since 2010 but has spiked recently in Nelson due to consents for two new large buildings.

3. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report NPS-UDC Quarterly Monitoring Report March 2017 (R7967); and its attachment (A1779576)

4. Background

4.1 The National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity (NPS-UDC) came into effect in December 2016. The NPS-UDC includes a policy (PB6) that requires local authorities to monitor a range of indicators on a quarterly basis including:

· Prices and rents for housing, residential land and business land by location and type; and changes in these prices over time;

· The number of resource consents and building consents granted for urban development relative to the growth in population; and

· Indicators of housing affordability.

4.2 This policy is to ensure that local authorities are well-informed about demand for housing and business development and applies to local authorities that have a medium or high growth urban area within their district or region. Nelson City has the Nelson Urban Area within its boundaries, and the Nelson Urban Area has been defined by the NPS-UDC as medium growth.

4.3 Local authorities are encouraged to publish the results of their monitoring.

4.4 The Ministry for the Environment have provided guidance on the monitoring requirements and, together with MBIE, have provided an online dashboard of data on local housing markets. The online dashboard was publicly released on the MBIE website on 7 July.

4.5 Further information has been provided from Nelson City Council resource and building consent data.

4.6 The report includes data for both Nelson and Tasman local authorities, recognising the connected, cross-boundary property market both councils share. The NPS-UDC also strongly encourages both councils to work together to implement the policies.

5. Discussion

Housing Market

5.1 Since mid-2014, consents for new dwellings have declined while estimated household numbers have increased, indicating an apparent under-supply of housing in Nelson. Although new dwellings have exceeded growth in Tasman households, an overall under-supply in the combined Nelson-Tasman market could be contributing to an increase in house prices in both districts.

5.1.1 The median sale price for Nelson houses increased 15% during the year ended March 2017, compared with annual growth of 8% in 2015/16 and 0% growth in 14/15.

5.1.2 The shortage of new housing is despite Nelson having an estimated ten years’ worth of dwelling capacity on land which is zoned, serviced and feasible for residential development. Other factors than can influence house and section prices include:

· land development and construction costs

· size and quality of new dwellings

· timing of release by developers

· ability for developers to obtain financing

· land banking

· increasing demand for visitor/non-resident accommodation.

5.1.3 MBIE’s housing affordability measure, although an experimental series at this time, suggests that, as at June 2015, 85% of first-home buyer households in Nelson could not comfortably afford a typical ‘first-home’ priced house. This is defined as the lower quartile price point of housing in the area.

5.1.4 Residential rents have generally been increasing over time, but at a slower rate than house prices. However, MBIE’s housing affordability suggests that, as at June 2015, 74% of rental households in Nelson could not comfortably afford typical rents.

5.1.5 Housing supply growth is occurring in Nelson with new dwelling consents increasing, a large number of new residential sections being created, and subdivision consents being granted for two apartment blocks in Special Housing Areas.

Commercial and Industrial Property Market

5.2 There is limited information at this stage on prices and rents for business land.

5.2.1 Commercial and industrial building activity in the Nelson Urban Area has been relatively stable since 2010 but has increased recently in Nelson due to consents for two new large buildings.

6. Options

6.1 Quarterly monitoring of property market indicators is a mandatory requirement under the NPS-UDC. Council may like to give feedback on the data and level of detail that this inaugural report has included, and whether additional information could be included.

Brylee Wayman

Strategy and Environment Analyst

Attachments

Attachment 1: A1779576 NPS UDC Monitoring Report March2017QTR ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Monitoring property market indicators informs Long Term Plan decision-making on infrastructure projects to ensure sufficient development capacity is provided to meet future demand for housing and business land.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

Monitoring joint indicators with Tasman demonstrates an understanding we need to collaborate to provide the best and most efficient service to our communities.

Being well-informed on property market indicators and urban growth helps achieve the community outcome of an urban environment that is well planned, including thinking and planning regionally and ensuring affordable housing. Monitoring the market for business land helps achieve the community outcome of a region which is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy.

3. Risk

The information contained in the report should inform Council about property market trends. There is some risk in using an experimental data series for housing affordability but other data sources, such as the Massey University affordability measure, also indicate the region is experiencing housing affordability pressures.

There is a risk that the business property market isn’t well understood at this stage and more work is planned to monitor prices for different types of business land.

4. Financial impact

MBIE data is provided at no cost. The purchase of other data is of minimal cost and is included in existing budgets.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because the recommendation is to receive the report and no other decisions are required.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Māori have not been specifically included in the preparation of this report.

7. Delegations

The Planning and Regulatory Committee has the responsibility for considering the District and Regional Plan, which must give effect to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity.

Option 1: Refer matter to Council
Advantages	· High profile matter is best determined by full Council. · Engagement with entire process by full Council
Risks and Disadvantages	· This matter was delegated to the Committee – more governance time required by full Council
Option 2: Do not refer matter to Council
Advantages	· Relevant aspects of the Council resolution rests with the appropriate committee as per delegations register
Risks and Disadvantages	· Limited number of members available to make a decision on the matter