Agenda of Hearings Panel - Other

N-logotype-black-wide Hearings Panel - Other

5 June 2018

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. Street naming application - Grampian Oaks Subdivision 6 - 9

Document number R9250

Recommendation

That the Hearings Panel:

Receives the report Street naming application - Grampian Oaks Subdivision and its attachment (A1950218); and

Approves the name of “Crathie Place” for the roads shown as Road A and Lane B, and ”Grampian Oaks Lane” for the road shown as Lane C, on the scheme plan for RM065251V1, attached as Attachment 1 (A1950218) to this report (R9250).

5. Naming of Te Manu Reserve 10 - 16

Document number R8657

Recommendation

That the Hearings Panel - Other

Receives the report Naming of Te Manu Reserve (R8657) and its attachment (A1906976), and

Approves the name “Te Manu Reserve” for the reserve (being title NL10B/1065, legal description Lot 1 DP4341).

6. Network Tasman Easement - Annesbrook 17 - 22

Document number R9306

Recommendation

That the Hearings Panel - Other

Receives the report Network Tasman Easement - Annesbrook (R9306) and its attachment (A1933063); and

Grants the easement in gross in favour of Network Tasman Limited over the area of Recreation Reserve shown on Attachment 1 (A1933063) with all legal and survey costs associated with the easement to be met by Network Tasman Limited as the party benefitted by the easement, subject to the consent of Council.

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

Grants consent for the easement in gross in favour of Network Tasman Limited over the area of Recreation Reserve shown on Attachment 1 (A1933063) with all legal and survey costs associated with the easement to be met by Network Tasman Limited as the party benefitted by the easement.

7. Road Closures - AM Show and Light Nelson 23 - 29

Document number R9248

Recommendation

That the Hearings Panel - Other

Receives the report Road Closures - AM Show and Light Nelson (R9248) and its attachments (A1970052 and A1971667); and

Approves the applications for the temporary road closures for Light Nelson for the period 5 July to 11 July 2018 and for the AM Show from 3 July to 6 July 2018.

Item 6: Street naming application - Grampian Oaks Subdivision

Hearings Panel - Other

5 June 2018

REPORT R9250

Street naming application - Grampian Oaks Subdivision

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To approve or decline an application for the name of “Crathie Place” for the roads shown as Road A and Lane B, and the name of “Grampian Oaks Lane” for the road shown as Lane C, on the Scheme Plan for Resource Consent RM065251V1 (Attachment 1).

2. Recommendation

That the Hearings Panel:

Receives the report Street naming application - Grampian Oaks Subdivision and its attachment (A1950218); and

3. Background

3.1 The applicant, Grampian Oaks Partnership, has requested the name of “Crathie Place” for the roads shown as Road A and Lane B (to be named as one road), and the name of “Grampian Oaks Lane” for the road shown as Lane C, on the attached scheme plan (Attachment 1).

3.2 The Council has the authority to name roads, pursuant to Section 319(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

3.3 Each proposed road name is assessed according to the criteria in the Road Naming Guidelines, as follows:

3.3.1 The name should not be the same as or similar to any other street in the Nelson and Tasman Regions.

3.3.2 Where appropriate, due regard should be given to historical associations within the City.

3.3.3 Where possible, the name should be consistent with other names in the area, or consistent with a theme in the area/subdivision.

3.3.4 The name should not be likely to give offence.

3.3.5 The name should not be commercially based.

3.3.6 The length of the name should be appropriate to the length of the street (i.e. short names for short streets - for mapping purposes).

3.3.7 The name should not be likely to cause semantic difficulties, i.e. spelling, pronunciation, or general understanding.

3.3.8 As a general rule, the proposed name should not be that of a living person, except in exceptional circumstances.

4. Evaluation

4.1 There are no similar road names in the Nelson or Tasman Regions that are likely to cause confusion with this name.

4.1.1 The name “Crathie” has been proposed by the applicant as Crathie is a village name from the Grampians area in Scotland.

4.1.2 The name “Grampian Oaks Lane” has been proposed as it references both the adjoining hillside reserves and the protected oak trees on the site.

4.1.3 The proposed names do not conflict with the criteria of the Road Naming Guidelines.

5. Options

5.1 The Hearings Panel has two options:

5.1.1 To approve the names; or

5.1.2 To decline the names and to ask the applicant to submit alternative names.

Kathy Mardon

Consents Administration Coordinator

Attachments

Attachment 1: A1950218 Scheme Plan - Grampian Oaks Subdivision - RM065251V1

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The Council has the authority to name roads, pursuant to s.319 of the Local Government Act 1974.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

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

· The Council works with stakeholders to find appropriate names for roads to vest in Council.

3. Risk

Checks are carried out to ensure that the proposed road names will not cause confusion to the public or to emergency services, if there are existing similar names.

4. Financial impact

No additional resources are required

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

The recommendations outlined in this report are not considered significant in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Māori have not been consulted in this application for the naming of two roads.

7. Delegations

Under paragraph 6.18.3 of the Nelson City Council’s Delegations Register, the Hearings Panel has the following specific delegation:

“The Hearings Panel has the power to name all features within the city requiring naming including roads, streets, service lanes, plazas, parking areas, parks, reserves, gardens and all public facilities or infrastructure”

Item 7: Naming of Te Manu Reserve

Hearings Panel - Other

5 June 2018

REPORT R8657

Naming of Te Manu Reserve

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider formally naming Te Manu Reserve (currently known informally as Emano East Reserve).

2. Summary

2.1 Following Council's decision not to sell an area of reserve land at the top of Emano Street, members of the local community have requested the reserve be named to reflect the correct name of the Māori Chief, Te Manu. The reserve has not previously been formally named.

3. Recommendation

That the Hearings Panel - Other

Receives the report Naming of Te Manu Reserve (R8657) and its attachment (A1906976), and

Approves the name “Te Manu Reserve” for the reserve (being title NL10B/1065, legal description Lot 1 DP4341).

4. Discussion

Existing informal name

4.1 The subject land (refer Attachment 1) was first set aside under the Land Act 1948 and at the same time vested in the Council as reserve under the Reserves and Domains Act 1953 for recreation purposes. This was Gazetted on 2 July 1954 using the legal description, with no name included.

4.2 The name Emano East Reserve was allocated informally by Parks officers in the 1990s. The main purpose of needing a name at the time was for identification purposes in the Council’s GIS system. This name was based on the street name, and the fact there was already an existing Emano Reserve across the road (now subsumed within Pipers Reserve). To date there has been no signage erected at the reserve to indicate a name.

4.3 The reserve has not been formally named by Council nor formally classified under the Reserves Act 1977. While it is generally considered best practice to classify a reserve prior to undertaking formal steps such as naming, this is not a legal requirement and the risks of not following best practice in this case are very low. In reality reserves are commonly given names prior to a formal classification process and a number of reserves in Nelson have not yet been formally classified. Officers are presently undertaking work to identify these reserves with a view to classifying them together and the subject land will be recommended for classification through this process.

4.4 The Certificate of Title (18 Feb 1993) states “NELSON CITY COUNCIL in trust as a reserve for recreational purposes”. The land is therefore a reserve administered under section 16(6) of the Reserves Act 1977, as if it were classified as recreation reserve.

Proposal to revoke reserve status (2017) and request from community for naming

4.5 In 2017 Council advertised its intention to ask the Minister of Conservation to remove the reserve status of the land.

4.6 Following the engagement process the Sport and Recreation Committee recommended on 9 May 2017 that Council retain the reserve, and on 23 May 2017 Council adopted this recommendation.

4.7 130 submissions were received and the proposal motivated the creation of a community group of around 30 people who, after meeting with local Iwi, have subsequently requested the reserve be named Te Manu Reserve.

4.8 Te Manu is the commonly known name of Wi Katene Te Puoho, the Māori chief of Wakapuaka that Emano St was incorrectly named after. Te Manu was the chief of Wakapuaka, and the son of Te Puoho ki Te Rangi, the Ngāti Tama ariki (paramount chief) and warrior.

4.9 This is described in the book Street Names of Nelson by B.E. Dickinson, which notes that the name Emano St was "thought to be derived from Manu, a Māori chief who received compensation for land from Wakefield in 1842 but the first letter in his name is now held to be wrong" (it is now evident that the last letter also appears wrong).

4.10 Detailed information on Te Puoho whānau is included in Chapter 1 of Volume IV of Te Tau Ihu o Te Waka: A History of Nelson and Marlborough, by John and Hilary Mitchell (pages 16-29).

5. Discussion

Naming the reserve

Local Government Act and Reserves Act Considerations

5.1 Council must comply with the decision making requirements of Part 6 of the Local Government Act 2002 and consider whether any consultation is required under that Act. No further consultation is required in this case because, following the proposal to revoke the reserve status, considerable community support has been voiced for the correct name ‘Te Manu’ to be used. This name has been confirmed and published by local historians.

5.2 Section 16(10) of the Reserves Act 1977 states:

16(10) The … territorial authority … may, from time to time, by notice in the Gazette, declare that a reserve shall be known by such name as is specified in the notice, and the … territorial authority … may in like manner change the name of any reserve.

5.3 It is proposed that the name and classification be published in the same gazette notice, following the outcome of the wider investigation work described in paragraph 4.3.

6. Options

Option 1: name the reserve Te Manu Reserve
Advantages	· Correct Te Reo Māori name is used · Relevant name for a reserve acknowledging a significant individual of Ngāti Tama ancestry · Aligns with local community wishes
Risks and Disadvantages	· Internal administration to change name in GIS, asset register etc · Some risk of challenge by other members of community unhappy with naming (considered low risk) · Will be inconsistent with Emano St naming · Best practice not followed in terms of Reserves Act, however classification is proposed in the short to medium term
Option 2: Do not formally name the reserve
Advantages	· There is some familiarity with the informal name · No internal administration required to make change
Risks and Disadvantages	· Lost or delayed opportunity to correct to the original Māori name · Risk of eroded goodwill with Iwi partners · Some members of the local community dissatisfied

7. Conclusion

7.1 Officers support the formal naming of Te Manu Reserve, and recommend this be formalised by way of Gazette notice (once classified).

7.2 Should the naming to Te Manu Reserve proceed it is proposed that signage and an interpretation board be erected (this would be funded from the existing signage budget).

Paul Harrington

Property, Parks and Facilities Asset Planner

Attachments

Attachment 1: Reserve location (A1906976) ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Renaming the reserve to Te Manu is an example of Council acting on behalf of the community in a cost effective way.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

Our communities have opportunities to celebrate and explore their heritage, identity and creativity.

· Use of the correct name recognises our heritage appropriately.

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

· This is a request from residents, and changing the reserve name serves to help empower the community.

3. Risk

There is no signage at the reserve and consequently a low knowledge of the current “Emano East Reserve” name, which is largely used for asset management and contract purposes. While the name will now be more familiar following the proposal to revoke the reserve status, the community has voiced a strong desire for it to be named Te Manu Reserve, which is supported by Ngāti Tama (Te Manu was of Ngāti Tama decent). There is a low risk that some community members will disagree.

4. Financial impact

There are no additional immediate or long term costs associated with the naming, other than the potential installation of an interpretation board (achievable within current budgets). The reserve currently has no entry signage therefore this would be required regardless of the outcome of this decision.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because:

· the current informal name is not widely known

· the proposed name is primarily a correction

· the request has arisen out of earlier engagement with the community.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

The recommendation seeks to correct a currently used name rather than propose a new name. It is well known to local Iwi that ‘Emano’ is an error and that the appropriate name is ‘Te Manu’. It was not considered necessary to engage all Te Tau Ihu Iwi.

Officers have consulted with Ngāti Tama (Te Manu was of Ngāti Tama decent), Archdeacon Harvey Whakaruru and historians John and Hilary Mitchell, who are supportive and have confirmed the name Te Manu is appropriate.

In addition representatives of the community group encouraging the change have met with Moetu Tuuta (a direct descendant of Te Puoho ki Te Rangi), Harvey Whakaruru and Teresa Foster who both whakapapa to Te Puoho ki Te Rangi. All have expressed support for the naming.

7. Delegations

Under paragraph 6.18.3 of the NCC Delegations Register the Hearings Panel (Other) has the following specific delegation: “The power to name all features within the city requiring naming including roads, streets, service lanes, plazas, parking areas, parks, reserves, gardens and all public facilities or infrastructure”.

Item 8: Network Tasman Easement - Annesbrook

Hearings Panel - Other

5 June 2018

REPORT R9306

Network Tasman Easement - Annesbrook

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To approve the granting of an easement to Network Tasman Limited over Council Recreation Reserve for the supply of electricity to the Tahunanui industrial area from the Network Tasman Annesbrook Substation, subject to Council consent.

2. Recommendation

That the Hearings Panel - Other

Receives the report Network Tasman Easement - Annesbrook (R9306) and its attachment (A1933063); and

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

3. Background

3.1 Network Tasman Limited wishes to increase their capability to service industrial developments in Tahunanui by installing an additional supply cable from their Annesbrook Substation to Tahunanui.

3.2 The proposed route is along the Railway Reserve and across Council administered Recreation Reserve to Whakatu Drive/SH 6 (Attachment 1).

3.3 Network Tasman has existing infrastructure in an easement along this section of the Railway Reserve. To reduce the risk of supply interruptions Network Tasman wish to keep the new cable separate from their existing infrastructure. They therefore require a new easement for the additional cable.

3.4 The proposed easement crosses both Council freehold land and Council administered recreation reserve. Easements formalise the occupation of land by parties other than the landowners.

3.5 Officers have the delegation to agree easements on Council freehold land. Easements on reserve land require initial approval from the Hearings Panel – Other, subject to final consent from Council.

4. Discussion

4.1 In the case of reserves vested in Council as the administrating body, the Reserves Act enables the Council to grant an easement for specified purposes, including an electrical installation or work, subject to the consent of the Minister of Conservation. The Minister’s powers to grant consent have been delegated to Council.

4.2 The Hearings Panel – Other has been delegated the powers of Council as the administrating body. The Ministerial powers to grant final consent remain with the Council. The Hearings Panel – Other is therefore required to decide whether or not to give public notice in accordance with the tests set out in section 48 (3) of the Reserves Act 1977, consider any submissions if public notice is given, and determine whether to grant the easement. If it is determined to grant the easement, consent of the Council is then required.

4.3 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, as is the case with this project, then public notice is not required under the Reserves Act 1977.

4.4 This section of reserve land is crossed by a shared pathway branching off the Railway Reserve. The cable would be located underground and the installation, and future maintenance, of Network Tasman’s infrastructure would not materially alter or permanently damage the reserve land or permanently affect the rights of the public.

4.5 Network Tasman has committed to fully reinstating the pathway and other land to its current condition on completion of the works. They have also committed to causing the minimum amount of disruption to the public use of the pathway during construction.

4.6 The easement would be in gross, meaning that it would give rights to Network Tasman Limited rather than to a property.

5. Options

5.1 The Hearings Panel - Other has the options of approving or declining the easement. Approving the easement is the recommended option.

Option 1: Approve the easement to Network Tasman Limited
Advantages	· Electricity supply to Tahunanui improved · Facilitates further development in the industrial area
Risks and Disadvantages	· Disruption to public use of the reserve during construction
Option 2: Decline the easement to Network Tasman Limited
Advantages	· No disruption to public use of the reserve · Shared path surface remains intact
Risks and Disadvantages	· Delays Network Tasman’s supply upgrade to Tahunanui · Other routes more expensive for Network Tasman · Delays or restricts development in the Tahunanui industrial area

6. Conclusion

6.1 The easement Network Tasman Limited has requested will help the future development of the Tahunanui industrial area and would not materially alter or permanently damage the Reserve or permanently affect the rights of the public. Public notification of the easement is not required. This is a matter that the Hearings Panel – Other can make a decision on.

6.2 It is also recommended that the easement be granted. This is a decision that the Hearings Panel – Other can make, subject to Council consent.

Peter Hunter

Team Leader Property

Attachments

Attachment 1: A1933063 - Network Tasman - Merton Place Proposed Feeder Route ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The decision facilitates electricity infrastructure to the Nelson community.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

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

Low risk of adverse consequences.

4. Financial impact

The costs of securing the easements will be met by Network Tasman Limited as the beneficiaries of the easement.

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 1977:

• 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 Hearings Panel - Other has the following delegation -

· The power to administer the administering body functions under section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977 on proposed rights of way and other easements on reserves vested in Council (6.18.3 of the Council’s Delegations Register)

Item 9: Road Closures - AM Show and Light Nelson

Hearings Panel - Other

5 June 2018

REPORT R9248

Road Closures - AM Show and Light Nelson

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider and decide on the temporary road closure applications for the following events:

· AM Show from 3 July to 6 July 2018.

· Light Nelson from 5 July to 11 July 2018.

2. Recommendation

That the Hearings Panel - Other

Receives the report Road Closures - AM Show and Light Nelson (R9248) and its attachments (A1970052 and A1971667); and

Approves the applications for the temporary road closures for Light Nelson for the period 5 July to 11 July 2018 and for the AM Show from 3 July to 6 July 2018.

3. Background

3.1 It is a requirement that temporary road closures made under Schedule 10 Clause 11(e) of the Local Government Act 1974 come to the Hearings Panel - Other for approval.

4. Discussion

AM Show

4.1 Council has received a request from Mediaworks to bring the AM Show to Nelson and they would like to close the top of Trafalgar Street to live broadcast the show.

4.2 The AM Show is a breakfast show on RadioLIVE and TV Three, and broadcast online at theamshow.co.nz and newshub.co.nz. They plan to interview a local chef, discuss issues with locals, business owners and community leaders.

4.3 The dates requested by Mediaworks for the closure which include time to establish the marquee and studio setup is Tuesday 3 July to Friday 6 July 2018.

4.4 Uniquely Nelson has visited businesses at the top of Trafalgar Street regarding this event and received no objection. Council placed an advertisement in the Nelson Mail on Saturday 19 May 2018 to notify of the applicant’s intention to close these roads, asking the public for feedback by Thursday 31 May 2018. Any feedback received will be presented at the meeting.

4.5 Council are still waiting to receive evidence of adequate public liability insurance.

4.6 Council officers are working with the applicant regarding traffic management.

4.7 Council officers recommend that this application be approved.

Light Nelson

4.8 On 19 April 2018, the Light Nelson Charitable Trust applied for closures of Hardy Street and Alton Street for the Light Nelson Festival. Specifically, the application requested:

4.8.1 The closure of the following section of road continuously from 8am Thursday 5 July until 3am Wednesday 11 July 2018, (all day and night): Hardy Street from Albion Square to Alton Street.

This closure will not stop vehicular access to Albion Square.

This closure will enable containers and equipment used for temporary shops and the event hub to remain on the street permanently during the event period.

4.8.2 The closure of the following roads from 5pm until midnight from Thursday 5 July until Tuesday 10 July 2018:

· Hardy Street from Harley Street to Tasman Street.

· Alton Street from Hardy Street to Nile Street.

These roads will be fully open during the day.

These closures provide a safe zone for people attending the festival to flow from Queens Gardens to NMIT and the event hub.

4.9 Light Nelson is a collaboration of art, science, design and technology in works that respond to darkness through illuminated installations. It offers a spectacular outdoor gallery of works set in the historic Queens Gardens, Albion Square, NMIT and surrounds.

4.10 Council placed an advertisement in the Nelson Mail on Saturday 19 May 2018 to notify of the applicant’s intention to close these roads, asking the public for feedback by Thursday 31 May 2018. The advertisement was also delivered directly to affected businesses and residents. Any feedback received will be presented at the meeting.

4.11 Hardy Street carries 1,600 vehicles per day. It is expected that this traffic will find adequate passage around the road closure adjacent NMIT via Tasman Street, Bridge Street and Nile Street East.

4.12 The area around NMIT has high parking demand from students at NMIT. During the day, some parking on Hardy Street and Alton Street will be available with the roads to be closed at night. Those who have parked cars on these roads when the roads are closed will be permitted to leave through the closures in a slow and safe manner.

4.13 Similarly, residents on the closed sections of road who wish to exit their premises when the roads are closed will be permitted to do so in a slow and safe manner.

4.14 This event does not require a resource consent for noise.

4.15 Council are still waiting to receive evidence of adequate public liability insurance.

4.16 Council officers are working with the applicant about the required traffic management.

4.17 Council officers recommend that this application be approved.

Options

4.18 The Hearings Panel has two options, either to approve or decline the temporary road closure applications. Officers recommend approving both temporary road closures.

Melissa Ramsay

Roading Network Coordinator

Attachments

Attachment 1: AM Show road closure letter - A1970052 ⇩

Attachment 2: Light Nelson road closure letter to residents - A1971667 ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

· The following are applicable:

· The Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 10, Temporary Prohibition of Traffic;

· The Local Government Act 2002, Clause 78, Community Views in Relation to Decisions;

· The temporary road closures fit with the purpose of local government.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

These events contribute to our community outcomes by assisting our community to celebrate their identity and community.

3. Risk

Enabling these events to proceed requires temporary road closures. If the temporary road closures are not approved, these community events are at risk of not going ahead.

4. Financial impact

Council contributes significant grants to the Light Nelson Trust to run the Light Nelson Festival.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low to medium significance because of the small number or people affected and the short duration of the events. A request for feedback was advertised in the Nelson Mail, on the Council’s website and distributed to affected businesses for feedback.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Māori have not been consulted on this matter.

7. Delegations

The Hearings Panel Other has the responsibility:

“to consider and determine applications for temporary road closures made under Schedule 10 Clause 11(e) of the Local Government Act 1974”.