Agenda of Council - 20 June 2019

N-logotype-black-wide Nelson City Council

20 June 2019

Page No.

Opening Prayer

1. Apologies

Nil

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

3. Interests

3.1 Updates to the Interests Register

3.2 Identify any conflicts of interest in the agenda

4. Public Forum

4.1 Nelson Residents Association - Financial position of the Trafalgar Centre, factual information on storm events and tide records, and reference to recent public statements on perceived sea rise

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 29 April 2019

Document number R10285 16 - 18

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the extraordinary meeting of the Council, held on 29 April 2019, as a true and correct record.

5.2 2 May 2019 19 - 34

Document number M4196

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 2 May 2019, as a true and correct record.

6. Recommendations from Committees

6.1 Civil Defence Emergency Management Group - 22 May 2019

6.1.1 Civil Defence and Emergency Management Removal of Requirement for Annual Audit

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Agrees that a separate audit of the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Annual Report is not necessary and will not be required from the 30 June 2019 financial year onwards, subject to approval by Nelson City Council, Tasman District Council and Audit New Zealand.

2. Agrees that the operation of the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group should be included in the audit of the Administering Council and that any additional cost incurred as a result should be recovered from the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group.

6.2 Sports and Recreation Committee - 23 May 2019

6.2.1 Fees and Charges relating to Sports and Recreation 2019/20

Recommendation to Council – The Sports and Recreation Committee made the following recommendation to Council on this item:

That the Council

1. Approves the proposed fees and charges as per Attachment 1 (A2157708) of Report 10236, effective from 1 July 2019, with the exception of the fees and charges relating to the Brook Camp.

The Chief Executive requested officers to complete a further review and will present an alternative recommendation, which will be provided in a supplementary agenda.

6.3 Works and Infrastructure Committee - 23 May 2019

6.3.1 Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit 2019-20 Business Plan

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Approves the Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit 2019-2020 Business Plan (A2170038).

6.3.2 Infrastructure Fees and Charges 2019-2020

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Approves the proposed fees and charges as per Attachment (A2167740) of Report R9920, effective 1 July 2019.

6.3.3 Parking Meter Renewal - Referral of powers

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Considers the matter of the renewal of parking meters.

6.4 Planning and Regulatory Committee - 28 May 2019

6.4.1 Waimea Inlet Action Plan

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Approves Nelson City Council as lead or support agency to the specific targets identified in Report R9513 (highlighted in green in Attachment 2 A2178524); and

2. Approves that Nelson City Council supports, in principle, specific targets identified in Report R9513, subject to future funding decisions (highlighted in yellow in Attachment 2 A2178524); and

3. Adopts the Waimea Inlet Action Plan 2018-2021 (A2099296).

6.4.2 Nelson Tasman Land Development Manual - Hearing Panel Recommendation and Proposed Plan Change 27

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Adopts the Nelson Tasman Land Development Manual 2019 (A2184905) under the Local Government Act 2002, noting that it will take effect on 1 July 2019; and

2. Adopts the practice notes on Coastal and Freshwater Inundation (A2184904), Bioretention (A2184908) and Wetlands (A2184906) as guidance documents; and

3. Delegates the Chairperson of the Planning and Regulatory Committee and the Group Manager Environment authority to approve minor technical wording amendments, or correction of errors to the Nelson Tasman Land Development Manual 2019 and proposed Plan Change documents to improve readability and/or consistency prior to 1 July 2019.

6.4.3 Review of Building Unit fees and charges

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Approves the fees and charges as proposed in Attachment 1 (A2145308) of Report R10231 to be effective from 1 July 2019.

6.4.4 Navigation Safety Bylaw review

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Notes the review of the Navigation Safety Bylaw 2012 (No. 218); and

2. Determines amendments to the Navigation Safety Bylaw 2012 (No. 218) are the most appropriate way of addressing the navigation safety problems identified by the review; and

3. Determines the proposed amendments to the Navigation Safety Bylaw 2012 (No. 218) are the most appropriate form of bylaw and do not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990; and

4. Determines a summary of the Statement of Proposal Proposed Changes to the Navigation Safety Bylaw 2012 (No. 218) is not required; and

5. Adopts the Statement of Proposal Proposed Changes to the Navigation Safety Bylaw 2012 (No.218) (A2178235); and

6. Approves the commencement of the Special Consultative Procedure (A2178235), with the consultation period to run from 21 June to 24 July 2019; and

7. Approves the consultation approach (set out in paragraphs 5.9 and 5.10 of Report R10026) and agrees:

(a) the approach includes sufficient steps to ensure the Statement of Proposal will be reasonably accessible to the public and will be publicised in a manner appropriate to its purpose and significance; and

(b) the approach will result in the Statement of Proposal being as widely publicised as is reasonably practicable as a basis for consultation.

6.4.5 Planning and Regulatory Committee - Quarterly Report - 1 January-31 March 2019

Please note that recommendation 1. Below, regarding the adoption of the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy, will be covered in a separate report on this agenda.

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Adopts the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy (A2159046); and

2. Approves the Nelson Plan Vision (A2182016) as the working draft for the Nelson Plan.

6.5 Community Services Committee - 30 May 2019

6.5.1 Statement of Intent - Nelson Festivals Trust

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Approves the Nelson Festivals Trust draft Statement of Intent 2019/20, with minor amendments, as the final Statement of Intent for 2019/20.

6.5.2 Fees and Charges relating to Community Services 2019/20

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Approves the proposed fees and charges as per attachment (A2157289) of Report (R10060) effective from 1 July 2019.

6.6 Governance Committee - 13 June 2019

6.6.1 Uniquely Nelson Memorandum of Understanding 2019/2020

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Approves the Uniquely Nelson Memorandum of Understanding 2019/2020 (A2181631).

6.6.2 Communications and Engagement Strategy

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Adopts the Communications and Engagement Strategy, with amendments (A2196740).

7. Mayor's Report 35 - 122

Document number R10249

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Mayor's Report (R10249) and its attachments (A2197280 and A2197215); and

2. Supports ………. Council’s proposed remit to Local Government New Zealand as set out in Attachment 1 and asks the Mayor to advise ………. Council accordingly.

8. Council Status Report - 20 June 2019 123 - 124

Document number R10286

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Council Status Report - 20 June 2019 (R10286) and its attachment (A1168168).

9. Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy 125 - 174

Document number R10260

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy (R10260) and its attachment (A2203854); and

2. Adopts the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy (A2203854).

10. Statement of Proposal for Declaration of a Pedestrian Mall - Upper Trafalgar Street 175 - 200

Document number R10139

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Statement of Proposal for Declaration of a Pedestrian Mall - Upper Trafalgar Street (R10139) and its attachment(A2176520); and

2. Agrees that the Statement of Proposal for a Declaration of a Pedestrian Mall – Upper Trafalgar Street meets the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002; and

3. Adopts the Statement of Proposal for the Pedestrian Mall Declaration - Trafalgar Street – Nelson City(A2176520), amended as necessary; and

4. Agrees that a Summary of the Statement of Proposal for Declaration of a Pedestrian mall – Upper Trafalgar Street is not required, and

5. Approves the consultation approach (set out in section 6 of this report R10139) and agrees:

(b) the approach will result in the Statement of Proposal being as widely publicised as is reasonably practicable as a basis for consultation.

11. Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy - Authority for Joint Council Committee 201 - 203

Document number R10164

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy - Authority for Joint Council Committee (R10164); and

2. Delegates all decision-making powers in relation to adopting the Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy to the Joint Committee; and

3. Updates the Nelson City Council Delegations Register to reflect the above changes.

12. Order of candidates' names on 2019 Local Elections voting documents 204 - 207

Document number R9995

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Order of candidates' names on 2019 Local Elections voting documents (R9995); and

2. Approves, in accordance with Regulation 31(2) of the Local Electoral Regulations 2001, the candidates’ names on voting documents for the 2019 triennial local election be in computerised random order.

Public Excluded Business

13. Exclusion of the Public

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Confirms, in accordance with sections 48(5) and 48(6) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, that name and name remain after the public has been excluded, for Item# of the Public Excluded agenda (item title), as he/she/they has/have knowledge relating to (description) that will assist the meeting.

Recommendation

That the Council

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

2. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

Item	General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Particular interests protected (where applicable)
1	Council Meeting - Public Excluded Minutes - 2 May 2019	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(b)(ii) To protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information · Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
3	Recommendations from Committees Community Services Committee Community Investment Funding Panel Appointments Pet Cremations Activity Review Founders Park – property purchase Governance Committee Nelson Centre of Musical Arts	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
4	Council Public Excluded Status Report 20 June 2019	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
5	Confirmation of appointment of iwi representatives to Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit and Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person
6	Update on Provincial Growth Fund applications	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(b)(ii) To protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information
7	Bay Dreams Update and Next Steps	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Item

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interests protected (where applicable)

Council Meeting - Public Excluded Minutes - 2 May 2019

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(a)

To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person

· Section 7(2)(b)(ii)

To protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information

· Section 7(2)(g)

To maintain legal professional privilege

· Section 7(2)(h)

To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities

· Section 7(2)(i)

To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Recommendations from Committees

Community Services Committee

Community Investment Funding Panel Appointments

Pet Cremations Activity Review

Founders Park – property purchase

Governance Committee

Nelson Centre of Musical Arts

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(a)

To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person

· Section 7(2)(g)

To maintain legal professional privilege

· Section 7(2)(i)

To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Council Public Excluded Status Report 20 June 2019

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(a)

To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person

· Section 7(2)(g)

To maintain legal professional privilege

· Section 7(2)(h)

To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities

· Section 7(2)(i)

To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Confirmation of appointment of iwi representatives to Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit and Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(a)

To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person

Update on Provincial Growth Fund applications

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(b)(ii)

Bay Dreams Update and Next Steps

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(i)

To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Note:

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

· Lunch will be provided. (delete as appropriate)

· Youth Councillors Cassie Hagan and Ryan Martyn will be in attendance at this meeting. (delete as appropriate)

Nelson City Council Minutes - 2 May 2019

Minutes of a meeting of the Nelson City Council

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

On Thursday 2 May 2019, commencing at 9.00a.m.

Present: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese (Chairperson), Councillors L Acland, I Barker, M Courtney, B Dahlberg, K Fulton, M Lawrey, P Matheson, B McGurk, G Noonan, M Rutledge, T Skinner and S Walker

In Attendance: Acting Chief Executive (N Harrison), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Environmental Management (C Barton), Group Manager Community Services (R Ball), Group Manager Strategy and Communications (N McDonald) and Governance Advisers (E-J Ruthven and E Stephenson)

Apologies : Councillors K Fulton and S Walker (for lateness)

Opening Prayer

Councillor Noonan gave the opening prayer.

1. Apologies

Resolved CL/2019/043

That the Council

1. Receives and accepts the apologies from Councillors Fulton and Walker for lateness.

Her Worship the Mayor/Dahlberg Carried

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

There was no change to the order of business.

3. Interests

There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no interests with items on the agenda were declared.

4. Public Forum

4.1 Steven Grey – on behalf of Friends of the Maitai - Council's leadership on issues surrounding discussions on forestry in the Maitai.

Mr Grey spoke on behalf of Friends of the Maitai. He acknowledged the work undertaken over recent years to improve the health of the Maitai, but noted that plantation forestry continued to effect the Maitai catchment, particularly through sedimentation into the river.

Attendance: Councillor Fulton joined the meeting at 9.04a.m.

Mr Grey suggested that a forum be established by Council to facilitate regular meetings with partners and stakeholders in the Maitai catchment area, including Ngati Koata, Friends of the Maitai, forestry companies, Cawthron Institute, councillors, Council staff and landowners in the catchment area, to consider further remediation, and minimisation of the effects of plantation forestry on the river. Mr Grey suggested a timeline of six to nine months to develop changes to forestry practices in the catchment, and suggested the forum could be a model for other catchments in the area.

Mr Grey answered questions regarding the proposed forum membership, and forestry practices.

Attendance: Councillor Walker joined the meeting at 9.15a.m.

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 21 March 2019

Document number M4105, agenda pages 11 - 28 refer.

Resolved CL/2019/044

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 21 March 2019, as a true and correct record.

Barker/Fulton Carried

5.2 27 March 2019

Document number M4123, agenda pages 29 - 38 refer.

Resolved CL/2019/045

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 27 March 2019, as a true and correct record.

Courtney/McGurk Carried

6. Recommendations from Committees

6.1 Works and Infrastructure Committee - 28 March 2019

6.1.1 Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit Wastewater Asset Management Plan

Resolved CL/2019/046

That the Council

1. Approves the Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit Wastewater Asset Management Plan (A2151474) of report R9495.

Walker/Rutledge Carried

6.1.2 Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit Terms of Reference and Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit Memorandum of Understanding

Recommendation to Council CL/2019/047

That the Council

1. Approves the revised Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit Terms of Reference (A2144233), Attachment 1 of report R10053; and

2. Approves the Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit Memorandum of Understanding (A2144291), Attachment 2 of report R10053; and

3. Removes the requirement for a separate audit of the annual reports of the Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit and the Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit, subject to similar approval by Tasman District Council.

Walker/Barker Carried

6.2 Works and Infrastructure Committee - 28 March 2019

6.2.1 Waimea Road Speed Limit Review – Deliberations

Group Manager Infrastructure, Alec Louverdis, answered questions regarding implementation of changes to the speed limit on Waimea Road.

Recommendation to Council CL/2019/048

That the Council

1. Approves the changes to the Speed Limits Bylaw 2011 (No. 210) by removing the section of Waimea Road 240m south of Market Road (Market Road) through to 200m north of the Beatson Road roundabout (being the section of Waimea Road 300m north of its intersection with the northern end of Beatson Road to a point 130m west of Tuckett Place, as described in Schedule H of the Speed Limits Bylaw) from Schedule H (70kph speed limit zones) and adding it to Schedule F (50kph speed limit zones); and

2. Approves the changes to the Speed Limits Bylaw 2011 (No. 210) Schedule A, which includes the maps of the city’s speed limit zones; and

3. Approves the implementation of the new speed limit, to take effect four weeks after the Council approval.

Walker/Rutledge Carried

6.3 Planning and Regulatory Committee - 4 April 2019

6.3.1 Amendment to Parking Policy - Parking Permits

Resolved CL/2019/049

That the Council

1. Approves Part 3.3 of the Parking Policy be amended to include Jurors attending trials at the Nelson Courthouse as detailed in Attachment 1 (A2147652) to Report R9946; and

2. Approves amendments to the Parking Policy that update references to Council officer positions where required as included in Attachment 1 (A2147652) to Report R9946; and

3. Approves an amendment to the first bullet point in section 3.3.1 of the Parking Policy from ‘Nelson City Councillors’ to ‘Nelson City Council Elected and Appointed Members’; and

4. Delegates the Chief Executive the authority to amend the criteria in Part 3.3 of the Parking Policy when required to minimise any negative impacts of the parking permits on the users of the parking resource.

McGurk/Her Worship the Mayor Carried

6.3.2 Proposed Dog Control fees and charges

Recommendation to Council CL/2019/050

That the Council

1. Approves the Dog Control fees and charges as detailed in Attachment 1 (A2145361) to report R10031 to take effect from 1 July 2019.

McGurk/Fulton Carried

6.4 Regional Transport Committee - 15 April 2019

6.4.1 Nelson Future Access: Memorandum of Understanding

Recommendation to Council CL/2019/051

That the Council

1. Receives the report Nelson Future Access: Memorandum of Understanding (R10077) and its attachment (A2162709); and

2. Approves the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding (A2162709), by the Mayor on behalf of the Council, with the New Zealand Transport Agency.

Rutledge/Noonan Carried

6.5 Governance Committee - 18 April 2019

6.5.1 The Bishop Suter Trust Half Year Performance Report to 31 December 2018, Draft Statement of Intent 2019/2024 and Collection Policy

Resolved CL/2019/052

That the Council

1. Agrees that The Bishop Suter Trust Statement of Intent 2019/2024 (A2147853) meets Council’s expectations and is approved as the final Statement of Intent for 2019/20; and

2. Approves the Bishop Suter Trust Collection Policy (A2084139) subject to minor amendments.

Barker/Dahlberg Carried

6.5.2 Revised International Relationships Policy

Recommendation to Council CL/2019/053

That the Council

1. Adopts the International Relationships Policy (A2076807), as a draft to be consulted on with iwi;

2. Authorises Her Worship the Mayor and the Chair of the Governance Committee to approve alterations raised through this process.

Barker/Dahlberg Carried

7. Mayor's Report

Document number R10137, agenda pages 46 - 137 refer.

7.1 Local Government New Zealand Rule Changes

Her Worship the Mayor noted the proposed Local Government New Zealand rules changes. No feedback was provided.

7.2 Local Government New Zealand Conference Attendance

Her Worship the Mayor tabled an addendum regarding elected member attendance at the Local Government New Zealand Conference (A2183443).

Councillor Matheson, seconded by Councillor Walker, moved the recommendation in the tabled addendum:

That that Council

1. Notes the attendance of Councillor Skinner at the Local Government New Zealand Conference 2019; and

2. Confirms the attendance of Councillor Lawrey at the Local Government New Zealand Conference 2019.

Councillor Acland, seconded by Councillor Lawrey, moved an amendment to the second clause of the motion:

2. Confirms the attendance of Councillor Lawrey and Councillor Acland at the Local Government New Zealand Conference 2019.

The meeting adjourned from 9.34a.m to 9.36a.m.

It was agreed to leave this matter to lie until later in the meeting.

7.3 Remuneration Authority Proposed Policy regarding Childcare Allowance

Her Worship the Mayor Reese explained Council’s opportunity to provide feedback regarding the Remuneration Authority’s proposed policy for providing a childcare allowance for elected local government members.

The importance of councillor remuneration and allowances being clear prior to people making a decision as to whether to stand for Council was noted. It was further suggested that the Remuneration Authority’s proposed policy that childcare allowances be negotiated from the general remuneration pool following an election was difficult for newly-elected councillors, and unreasonable when considering child welfare. It was instead suggested that childcare allowances should be mandated across all local government authorities, and considered in the same manner as vehicle or travel allowances.

Her Worship the Mayor Reese, seconded by Councillor Lawrey, moved:

That the Council

1. Receives the report Mayor's Report (R10137) and its attachments (A2178702, A2178701, A2178700 and A2176965); and

2. Provides feedback to the Remuneration Authority on the proposed policy for providing a childcare allowance for elected local government members, supporting the overall objectives of the proposal, but emphasising the requirement for the policy to be fair, equitable and easily implemented across all Councils; and

3. Notes that standing for Council is a significant decision for members of the public, and even more so for people with childcare responsibilities, but that proposed allowance does not provide candidates certainty of access to funding before they put themselves forward for election; and

4. Notes that elected members with childcare responsibilities are still likely to be in the minority on Council following the policy change, but if the funding comes from the overall pool, they will be placed in challenging position of having to negotiate for the welfare of the young persons in their care soon after they are elected; and

5. Notes that the number of elected representatives who might utilise this funding would vary from Council to Council, from term to term, and possibly change during the triennium; similar to use of mileage allowance. Therefore, given the variability of access to the childcare allowance the most appropriate funding would be from a separate expenses account; and

6. Notes that for the reasons covered above that the funding rules should be mandatory across all local authorities, set by the Remuneration Authority; and funded externally to each Council’s Remuneration Pool.

Acting Chief Executive, Nikki Harrison, and Manager Strategy, Mark Tregurtha, answered questions regarding the childcare subsidy provided by Work and Income New Zealand, and whether childcare needed to be provided by a qualified childcare provider.

A further query was raised as to whether the childcare allowance would cover care for grandchildren in the care of grandparents, and it was agreed that if not, this point would be added to the submission.

Resolved CL/2019/054

That the Council

1. Receives the report Mayor's Report (R10137) and its attachments (A2178702, A2178701, A2178700 and A2176965); and

Her Worship the Mayor/Lawrey Carried

7.4 Local Government New Zealand Conference Attendance (continued)

The Acting Chief Executive, Nikki Harrison, and Manager Governance and Support Services, Mary Birch, answered questions regarding the cost of attending the Local Government New Zealand conference, including accommodation and travel.

There was a discussion regarding the Elected Member Travel and Training Policy (the Policy) criteria regarding conference attendance, and the process set out in the Policy.

Point of order: Councillor Lawrey raised a point of order against Councillor Matheson, that a misrepresentation had been made regarding a statement about the 2018 Council discussion regarding the Local Government Conference attendance. The point of order was upheld.

In response to a question, it was clarified that the two additional elected members who wished to attend the conference still had sufficient individual travel and training budget amounts remaining to attend the conference, however this would be outside of the Policy criteria that 50% of individual travel and training budgets be spent on conference attendance.

During discussion, it was noted that several other elected members had spent more than 50% of their individual travel and training budgets on conference attendance, Her Worship the Mayor clarified that permission had been sought in order to do so.

Point of order: Councillor Rutledge raised a point of order that a misrepresentation had been made by Councillor Acland regarding another councillor’s conference attendance. The point of order was upheld.

The amendment was put and a division was called:

For

Cr Acland

Cr Courtney

Cr Fulton

Cr Lawrey

Cr McGurk

Cr Skinner

Against

Her Worship the Mayor (Chairperson)

Cr Barker

Cr Dahlberg

Cr Matheson

Cr Noonan

Cr Rutledge

Cr Walker

Abstained/Interest

The amendment was lost 6 - 7.

The substantive motion was put.
Resolved CL/2019/055
	*That the Council* *1. Notes the attendance of Councillor Skinner at the Local Government New Zealand Conference 2019; and* *2. Confirms the attendance of Councillor Lawrey at the Local Government New Zealand Conference 2019.*
Matheson/Walker Carried
Attachments 1 A2183443 - Addendum to Mayor's Report - tabled document

8. Council Status Report - 2 May 2019

Document number R10170, agenda pages 138 - 139 refer.

Attendance: Councillors Acland, Lawrey and Rutledge left the meeting from 10.51a.m.

Resolved CL/2019/056

That the Council

1. Receives the report Council Status Report - 2 May 2019 (R10170) and its attachment (A1168168).

Her Worship the Mayor/Courtney Carried

9. Referral of Pet Cremations Review item

Document number R10171, agenda pages 140 - 141 refer.

Resolved CL/2019/057

That the Council

1. Receives the report Referral of Pet Cremations Review item (R10171); and

2. Refers the item Pet Cremations Review, which was left to lie on the table at the 21 March 2019 Council meeting, back to the 30 May 2019 Community Services Committee.

McGurk/Courtney Carried

10. Exclusion of the Public

Resolved CL/2019/058

That the Council

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

Her Worship the Mayor/Barker Carried

Item	General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Particular interests protected (where applicable)
1	Council Meeting - Public Excluded Minutes - 21 March 2019	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities
2	Recommendations from Committees Governance Committee – 18 April Nelmac Statement of Intent	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities
3	Tasman Bays Heritage Trust - Archive, Research and Collections Facility	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(b)(ii) To protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information
4	Council Public Excluded Status Report - 2 May 2019	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Item

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interests protected (where applicable)

Council Meeting - Public Excluded Minutes - 21 March 2019

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(h)

To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities

Recommendations from Committees

Governance Committee – 18 April

Nelmac Statement of Intent

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(h)

To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities

Tasman Bays Heritage Trust - Archive, Research and Collections Facility

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(b)(ii)

Council Public Excluded Status Report - 2 May 2019

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(a)

To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person

· Section 7(2)(g)

To maintain legal professional privilege

· Section 7(2)(h)

To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities

· Section 7(2)(i)

To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

The meeting went into public excluded session at 10.53a.m. and resumed in public session at 11.00a.m, during which time Councillors Lawrey, Acland and Rutledge returned to the meeting.

11 Exclusion of the Public

Her Worship the Mayor explained that a resolution was required to be carried during the public session, in order for representatives of Tasman Bays Heritage Trust to remain during the public excluded session.
Resolved CL/2019/059
	*That the Council* 1. Confirms, in accordance with sections 48(5) and 48(6) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, that Emma Thompson and Darren Mark, as representatives of Tasman Bays Heritage Trust, remain after the public has been excluded for Item 3 of the Public Excluded agenda (Tasman Bays Heritage Trust – Archive, Research and Collections Facility), as they have knowledge relating to Tasman Bays Heritage Trust that will assist the meeting.
Her Worship the Mayor/Barker Carried

Resolved CL/2019/060
		*That the Council* 1. Excludes the public from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. 2. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information *and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:*
Her Worship the Mayor/Barker Carried
Item	General subject of each matter to be considered		Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Particular interests protected (where applicable)
1	Council Meeting - Public Excluded Minutes - 21 March 2019		Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities
2	Recommendations from Committees Governance Committee – 18 April Nelmac Statement of Intent		Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities
3	Tasman Bays Heritage Trust - Archive, Research and Collections Facility		Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(b)(ii) To protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information
4	Council Public Excluded Status Report - 2 May 2019		Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

The meeting went into public excluded session at 11.01a.m. and resumed in public session at 11.33a.m.

12 Confirmation of Minutes (continued)

It was noted that the minutes of the Council meeting of 21 March 2019, confirmed earlier in the meeting, contained an error in that at item 13, Councillor Matheson was listed in the division table as being both for the motion, and absent from the meeting.

It was agreed that the error be corrected in the confirmed minutes.

Restatements

It was resolved while the public was excluded:

Recommendations from Committees

PUBLIC EXCLUDED: Tasman Bays Heritage Trust - Archive, Research and Collections Facility

That the Council

4. Agrees that Report (R10134) and the decision only be released from public excluded business once negotiations are concluded; and

5. Agrees that Attachments (A2028780, A2172095 and A2169975) be excluded from public release at this time.

PUBLIC EXCLUDED: Council Public Excluded Status Report - 2 May 2019

That the Council

2. Agrees that Report (R10174), Attachments (A1166633) and the decision (CL/2019/065) be excluded from public release at this time.

There being no further business the meeting ended at 11.34a.m.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Item 10: Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy

Council

20 June 2019

REPORT R10260

Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To provide background to the recommendation from the Planning and Regulatory Committee to adopt the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy (Strategy).

2. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy (R10260) and its attachment (A2203854); and

2. Adopts the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy (A2203854).

3. Background

3.1 Council joined the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Alliance (the Alliance) in September 2017. The Alliance is made up of all the Councils and some iwi in the top half of the South Island, led by the Department of Conservation (refer Appendix 2 of the Strategy). The focus of the Alliance is on landscape-scale conservation projects that also have social, economic and cultural benefits. The Alliance has supported a number of conservation projects throughout 2018 and has developed the Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy (Strategy) to help align efforts between Alliance members. The Strategy was developed in conjunction with a number of scientific organisations, interest groups and Alliance members (refer Appendix 1 of the Strategy).

3.2 Updates on the Strategy have been provided to the Planning and Regulatory Committee and the Draft Strategy was jointly workshopped with Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council (TDC) on 26 March 2019.

3.3 The Planning and Regulatory Committee recommended adoption of the Strategy at the 28 May 2019 meeting and requested that a paper accompany the recommendation to provide some context for the Council in making this decision.

4. Discussion

Overview of Strategy

4.1 The purpose of the Strategy is to align the efforts of the Alliance to enable the vision, mission, and outcomes to be achieved through collective action while attracting and securing investment and enabling system and behaviour changes.

4.2 The Strategy vision, mission and outcomes are outlined in Table 1 of the Strategy. The vision (or what we want to be like) seeks to have a flourishing natural heritage where people live in and care for our natural ecology. The mission will be achieved by aligning efforts through education and working together. The outcomes largely seek to integrate the wellbeing of nature and people.

4.3 The Strategy also identifies a number of values that outline how we work together and what we value. For example we want to protect the mauri (life force) of biodiversity by being kaitiaki (guardians) of our environs.

4.4 The Strategy recognises our treaty obligations and aligns with a Maori world view (Refer Matauranga Maori and Te Tiriti o Waitangi Section of the Strategy).

4.5 How the strategy will be implemented is through four key methods which are outlined in the Implementation section of the Strategy. The first three methods are about working together to guide strategies, policies, plans and future projects and programmes. The last method is about endorsement of funding applications for other organisations and a number of criteria are provided to help inform and streamline decision making. The better the alignment with these criteria the greater the likelihood of support from the Alliance.

4.6 The remainder of the Strategy (refer Top of the South as a Whole and areas 1-9 of the Strategy) outlines the values (character) vision (our shared future) and outcomes (what we want to achieve, what success looks like, and how we get there) across the area as a whole and for eleven defined areas (Places) within the Top of the South (see Figure 1 of the Strategy). These values and outcomes have been informed by the technical work that sits behind the Strategy and aligns with Council’s environmental planning documents and programmes such as the Biodiversity Strategy and Nelson Nature programme. The Strategy and Alliance provides an opportunity to enhance biodiversity outcomes while leveraging additional investment and resources from Alliance members and funding organisations.

Boundary Changes to exclude Ngāti Kuri Rohe

4.7 At the time of writing the report to the Planning and Regulatory Committee, the Strategy had been adopted by Tasman District Council, Marlborough District Council (MDC), West Coast Regional Council, Kaikoura District Council, Buller District Council, Ngati Kuia, Ngati Tama, and Ngati Waewae.

4.8 Following the May Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting Alliance members were advised that Ngāti Kuri do not wish to be part of the Strategy and do not approve the strategy providing direction over their rohe. Consequently the Strategy has been adjusted to provide direction as far east as Ngāti Kuri’s western boundary (refer Figure 1 of the Strategy) and removed the Kaikoura and Eastern Coast places. Ngāti Kuri are still welcome to join the Alliance and are keen to work together to develop a joint strategy for their rohe.

5. Options

5.1 Option 1, adopting the Strategy, is considered the most appropriate option as this will align decision making and conservation efforts across the top half of the South Island.

Option 1: Adopt the Strategy
Advantages	· Alignment of key stakeholders efforts · Shows the collective are investment ready for funding applications · Joint framework for decision making · Aligns with existing strategies and programmes
Risks and Disadvantages	· Nil
Option 2: Do not Adopt the Strategy
Advantages	· Nil
Risks and Disadvantages	· Less aligned decision making and conservation efforts

6. Next Steps

6.1 The launch of the Strategy is planned for Matariki, 28 June 2019. The Strategy will be used to guide future decision making around conservation programmes in the top half of the South Island.

Author: Matt Heale, Manager Environment

Attachments

Attachment 1: Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Strategy (A2203854) ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The Strategy will enable action on behalf of communities and stakeholders and promotes environmental well-being which aligns with the purpose of Local Government (refer LGA 2002 s10)

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The Strategy seeks to restore natural heritage and bolster natural ecology and the communities that live within these areas through aligning planning and programmes across Alliance members. The Strategy also reinforces a partnership approach and the Kaitikitanga role of tangata whenua and has been developed in conjunction with a range of key stakeholders. This approach aligns with the following community outcomes:

Our unique environment is healthy and protected.

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

The Strategy also aligns with Council’s vision where people feel deeply connected to our natural environment and the Environment priority that seeks to keep the environment well and strong and recognises that investing in the environment is essential.

The Strategy also aligns with the Nelson Biodiversity Strategy, Waimea Inlet Strategy, the NZ Biodiversity Strategy, and iwi management plans in that it seeks to protect, restore and enhance naturally functioning ecosystems and ecological connections.

3. Risk

It is considered that the Strategy will help mitigate risks to Nelson’s environment and enhance Councils relationship with iwi and partner organisations.

4. Financial impact

The implementation of the Strategy will require staff time which is accommodated within existing budgets. The involvement of Alliance partners and the potential future investment that the Strategy will attract may result in financial savings in the longer term.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because there is no significant change to Councils current levels of service and there has been extensive consultation with iwi and key stakeholders.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Iwi representatives have been involved in the development of the Strategy and the Strategy has been endorsed by relevant Iwi boards.

7. Delegations

The Planning and Regulatory has recommended that the Strategy is adopted in line with its delegation to recommend the development or review of policies and strategies relating to the areas of responsibility, which includes Biodiversity. Council has the power to adopt policies.

Item 11: Statement of Proposal for Declaration of a Pedestrian Mall - Upper Trafalgar Street

Council

20 June 2019

REPORT R10139

Statement of Proposal for Declaration of a Pedestrian Mall - Upper Trafalgar Street

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To enable Council to respond to support from the community for the continued closure of Upper Trafalgar Street to vehicle traffic.

1.2 To consider adoption of the Statement of Proposal for the Pedestrian Mall Declaration – Upper Trafalgar Street to provide for permanent closure to vehicle traffic for 365 days per year, subject to some specified exemptions.

1.3 To approve the undertaking of the Special Consultative Procedure on the Statement of Proposal to seek the views of those potentially affected by the proposal, prior to making any decision on the declaration of a pedestrian mall.

2. Summary

2.1 This report seeks Council approval to consult, via the Special Consultative Procedure, on the proposal to declare Trafalgar Street between Selwyn Place and Hardy Street (Upper Trafalgar Street) as a permanent pedestrian mall for 365 days per year, subject to some specified exemptions.

2.2 Feedback during previous trial summer closures and the recent Annual Plan process has been that the Nelson community generally supports some form of closure of Upper Trafalgar Street to vehicle traffic.

2.3 In preparing this report, Council officers have sought feedback from business owners/occupiers in Upper Trafalgar Street who are generally in support of a an ongoing closure but have concerns regarding the need to ensure the space is activated in the winter.

2.4 If the Council, after going through the Special Consultative Procedure, decides to make the pedestrian mall declaration, officers propose that, subject to any appeals, the start date of the prohibition of motor vehicles be aligned with the beginning of the Nelson Arts Festival on 18 October 2019.

2.5 The Statement of Proposal provides for Council to consider and respond to the views of the community and those potentially affected by the proposal in a formal process.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Statement of Proposal for Declaration of a Pedestrian Mall - Upper Trafalgar Street (R10139) and its attachment(A2176520); and

2. Agrees that the Statement of Proposal for a Declaration of a Pedestrian Mall – Upper Trafalgar Street meets the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002; and

3. Adopts the Statement of Proposal for the Pedestrian Mall Declaration - Trafalgar Street – Nelson City(A2176520), amended as necessary; and

4. Agrees that a Summary of the Statement of Proposal for Declaration of a Pedestrian mall – Upper Trafalgar Street is not required, and

5. Approves the consultation approach (set out in section 6 of this report R10139) and agrees:

(b) the approach will result in the Statement of Proposal being as widely publicised as is reasonably practicable as a basis for consultation.

4. Background

4.1 In response to requests from the community and event organisers during the Annual Plan and Long Term Plan processes over multiple years, the Council resolved in 2017 to trial the temporary closure of Upper Trafalgar Street. Upper Trafalgar Street was closed to traffic from 1 December 2017 until 31 March 2018.

4.2 Council undertook a public feedback process on the trial from 13 March 2018 to 27 March 2018 where a total of 321 submissions were received. Of the 314 positive submissions, 132 suggested that the street be closed to motor vehicles all year round and 25 suggested that the pedestrianised area should extend further down Trafalgar Street and along other streets such as Bridge, Hardy and Church Streets.

4.3 Council again trialled the temporary closure of Trafalgar Street between Hardy Street and Selwyn Place (Upper Trafalgar Street) to vehicle traffic over summer from 8 November 2018 to 30 April 2019. This trial resulted in the businesses extending their liquor licenses and resource consents along with paying the costs associated with that and license fees to occupy public space.

4.4 Council provided public tables and four new umbrellas and interactive games, along with operational infrastructure such as signage, planter boxes and provided for the securing of Council furniture each night.

4.5 Although there was previous supportive feedback from the community a permanent closure to motor vehicles was not considered by Council in 2018 because there was insufficient time to undertake the required consultation processes for either a pedestrian mall declaration or permanent road stopping.

4.6 The purpose of this report is to now enable Council to consider with sufficient lead in time, undertaking a Special Consultative Procedure to test the views of the community on the proposal to declare Upper Trafalgar Street a pedestrian mall prohibiting motor vehicles (subject to some specified exemptions) for 365 days per year.

5. Discussion

5.1 Upper Trafalgar Street is a popular location (combined with the 1903 Square) for public events. Historically temporary closures of the street have been provided for under Schedule 10, clause 11(e) of the Local Government Act 1974 which provides for a road to be closed for up to 31 days per year for the purpose of events and festivals. The 31 day maximum and restricted purposes are too limiting for the nature of public use now sought for Upper Trafalgar Street.

5.2 For the past two summers, temporary closure of Upper Trafalgar Street under section 342 and clause 11(d) of schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974 has occurred. This required the Council to undertake a feedback process and make a decision each year to provide for summer closures.

5.3 Public feedback to date strongly supports permanent closure of Upper Trafalgar Street to motor vehicles. There are two options available to the Council to achieve this. The first is Road Stopping under Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974, the second is to declare a Pedestrian Mall under section 336 of the Local Government Act 1974.

5.4 A Road Stopping process requires Council to reach the view that the public road is no longer required in that location. A public notification process that calls for objections is required. If objections are received, and the Council does not allow those objections, then the matter is referred to the Environment Court. In the event of a successful road stopping process the land would be vested as either a free hold title or as reserve, both preventing public vehicle access. The land would no longer be legal road. A different leasing and licensing regime and associated consents would be required than that which currently exists on legal road for businesses in the area to occupy the freehold or reserve space.

5.5 The second option is to use the pedestrian mall provisions in section 336 of the Local Government Act 1974. A pedestrian mall declaration allows the Council to prohibit or restrict the driving, riding or parking of any vehicle in the pedestrian mall and can include exemptions, such as for service vehicles in certain hours. A pedestrian mall declaration requires Council to undertake a Special Consultative Procedure, and provides for any person to appeal to the Environment Court against the declaration. The declaration cannot take effect until any appeals are resolved. A pedestrian mall is still road and the same system of leases, license and consents would be required for business to occupy public space.

5.6 Officers consider that a pedestrian mall declaration best suits the intended use of Upper Trafalgar Street in that it enables retention of the legal road status subject to specified prohibitions or restrictions on vehicle use and specified exemptions. It also has administrative efficiencies in that the same system of leasing and licensing can be continued with. The use of the Special Consultative Procedure also allows the Council to hear the views of the community on the proposal.

5.7 A declaration of road to be a pedestrian mall may be revoked or varied by a subsequent declaration following a further special consultative procedure.

Prohibiting motor vehicles for summer or 365 day per year

5.8 In preparing the draft Statement of Proposal, officers considered whether the prohibition on motor vehicles should be for summer only, or for 365 days per year. The following advantages and disadvantages of the two options were considered.

Declare a Pedestrian Mall prohibiting motor vehicles for the period 18 October to 31 April (summer) every year.
Advantages	Provides a public space in the city centre for community events and gatherings during the summer. Attracts people to the city centre and encourages them to linger longer and explore the city supporting local businesses. Aligns with the beginning of the Arts Festival. Assists with implementing Nelsons Smart Little City aspirations by recognising Upper Trafalgar Streets role as a people focused space. Can be revoked or varied by a subsequent declaration following a further special consultative procedure.
Disadvantages	There are significant costs to Council in staff and contractor time involved in processing the summer closure, and physically setting up and removing the closure each year. There is currently no budget allocated for summer closure 2019/20 or thereafter in the Long Term Plan. Summer closure doesn’t allow Council to invest in permanent robust and more efficient street furniture and closure barriers. New planter boxes are required for any additional summer closures as the current ones have reached their end of their lifecycle. Doesn’t respond to the significant public support for the permanent closure of Upper Trafalgar Street. Doesn’t provide a public space available for winter activation in the city centre or for the community, Uniquely Nelson or Museum groups to hold events without going through a temporary road closure process and its associated 10 week lead in and administration costs. Doesn’t provide an opportunity to improve the quality of the public space through permanent investment (i.e accessible parks, removal of bollards and parking meters, better crossing points to the Church steps, lighting investment). May draw hospitality customers away from other areas in the city centre every summer as the area becomes a summer novelty rather than permanent public space.
Declare a Pedestrian Mall prohibiting motor vehicles for 365 days a year.
Advantages	Provides a public space in the city centre for community events, festivals and gatherings all year round. Attracts people to the city centre and encourages them to linger longer and explore the city supporting local businesses. Assists with implementing Nelsons Smart Little City aspirations by recognising Upper Trafalgar Streets role as a people focused space. Responds to the public feedback to date supporting the trials and seeking that the area be pedestrianised all year round. Provides for Council to make a one off investment in upgrading the space for pedestrian use, to make it more user friendly and inviting. Enables investment in more permanent accessible parking, signage, street furniture, shading and heating, other urban elements and storage equipment thereby making them more robust and reducing ongoing costs associated with a summer only trial. Reduces officer time and contractor costs associated with establishing and disestablishing the closure each summer. Reduces uncertainty foS regular motor vehicle users in the city centre and allows for vehicle behaviour to adjust permanently. Provides future opportunities to improve the crossings and relationship between the Church steps and Upper Trafalgar Street active space. Provides for the opportunity for hospitality business to extend their outdoor dining areas and associate leases more permanently, enabling them certainty to invest in more robust furniture/ dining experience. All year round closure may make the area seem less of a novelty offer creating less of a pull away from other hospitality offers in the city centre. Enables investment decisions in properties in and around Upper Trafalgar Street to be made with certainty over how the space will be used. Can be revoked or varied by a subsequent declaration following a further special consultative procedure.
Disadvantages	There is currently no capital budget for the works required to restrict vehicle access to Upper Trafalgar Street in the Long Term Plan. There may be additional work required by Council officers/contractors and budget to ensure that the space is activated during the winter months. There will be a loss of 12 carparks. A small number of businesses would have to make use of the short term parking in Selwyn Place or other parking spaces, drop off and loading zones nearby for out of hour access and deliveries. There may be some tension between users of Park Street until driver behaviour is self-moderated. May lead to the need for Council to review the function and restrictions on Park Street in the future (i.e. may require reclassification as loading area, one way or special access lane).

Community Feedback and Consultation

5.9 There has been increasing public support for either summer or permanent closure of Upper Trafalgar Street to motor vehicles throughout the previous Annual Plans and feedback processes undertaken as part of previous trials. There has also been a lot of positive media and social media coverage of the trial.

5.10 During development of the Statement of Proposal, Council officers have endeavoured to speak face to face with all of the business owners that occupy properties on Trafalgar Street between Selwyn Place and Hardy Street.

5.11 Three questions were asked of each of the business owners as follows:

· Do you think the trial closures have been a success?

· What would you change, if anything?

· Would you prefer, no closure, a summer closure or permanent closure?

5.12 All those spoken to were supportive of the summer closure. All those, except the Nelson Women’s Club, were supportive of a permanent closure if a programme of regular organised activities and events was available to ensure the space is activated in winter.

5.13 The Nelson Women’s Club were generally opposed to the closure due to the accessibility issues it creates with the location of the club. The membership of the club is typically older with a number struggling with mobility issues that make accessing the club difficult. Officers consider that the issues they have raised can in part be mitigated by incorporating a drop-off area very close to the club on Selwyn Place.

5.14 Officers have talked to representatives from both the Nelson Regional Development Agency (NRDA) and Uniquely Nelson. Both support the prohibition of motor vehicles on Upper Trafalgar Street for 365 days per year.

5.15 There has also been feedback from hospitality providers outside the immediate area of Upper Trafalgar Street that the previous temporary closure has resulted in a loss of business for them. This is discussed further in the following section.

5.16 The above information is provided in this report as part of describing the background. The proposed Statement of Proposal will provide for Council to seek, consider and respond to the views of the community and those potentially affected by the proposal in a formal process prior to making any decisions.

Economic Effects

5.17 Feedback received from businesses outside Upper Trafalgar Street focused mainly around concerns that customers were being drawn away from their businesses to those on Upper Trafalgar Street.

5.18 Paymark data, which covers all card payments (credit and debit cards) in the New Zealand retail market, including international cards, shows that overall the hospitality sector in Nelson had a successful summer period in 2017/18 with spending up 9.1% compared to the same period the previous year. The 2018/19 summer also saw an increase in spending in the hospitality sector of 4.4% above the 2017/18 summer.

5.19 Spending in four hospitality areas (Upper Trafalgar Street, Collingwood-New Street, Hardy Street and the rest of Nelson) was measured during the period October 2017 to March 2018 and compared to the same period a year prior. The same spending was measured for the 2018/19 year. The results are shown in the table below.

AREA of growth in hospitality	2017-18 vs 2016-17	2018-19 vs 2016-17	2018-19 vs 2017-18
AREA of growth in hospitality	Year 1 closure vs pre-closure	Year 2 closure vs pre-closure	Year 2 closure vs year 1 closure
Collingwood Street	7.9%	8.4%	0.4%
Hardy Street	5.3%	-1.0%	-5.9%
Trafalgar Street	40.0%	10.9%	-20.8%
Rest of Nelson	3.5%	16.8%	12.8%
Total Nelson City	9.1%	13.8%	4.4%

5.20 While all measured areas experienced spending growth on the year prior, the most significant increase was experienced by the hospitality businesses in Upper Trafalgar Street (40%) during the first year of closure. However growth in spending dropped off significantly in the second year (10.9%) and is more comparable to all other areas measured except for Hardy Street.

5.21 The Centre City Programme Plan under development is intended to provide activation throughout the central city and spread Council investment. However the success of the Upper Trafalgar Street precinct is also due to the investment of those private businesses in the public space and their investment in business location being mutually beneficial to each other. City centre activation projects in other parts of the city are unlikely to diminish the area’s popularity and offer significantly.

Vehicular traffic

5.23 Traffic flows were measured during the weeks of 24 October 2018 and 9/15 April 2019. They were measured in similar locations to 2017/18 at four locations.

5.23.1 Selwyn Place west of Church St had a 7% drop in daily traffic in 2017/18, but little difference in average daily traffic in 2018/19.

5.23.2 Hardy St west of Church St had a 2% drop in 2017/18 but a 17% rise in 2018/19. This increase varied from day to day with average weekly traffic (AWT) ranging from 6457 vehicles per day (vpd) to 7450vpd.

5.23.3 Park St had a 165% increase in daily traffic in 2017/18 (122vpd) and a 93% rise (79vpd) in 2018/19 when Upper Trafalgar Street was closed.

5.23.4 Church St had a 34% increase in daily traffic in 2017/18, but an 8% decrease in average daily traffic in 2018/19.

5.24 There were significant variations in the daily “before and after” traffic flows at all four locations surveyed. This would indicate drivers are adapting to the road closure and adjusting their routes through the city centre accordingly.

5.25 The most significant traffic effect, while small in vehicle number involved and reducing between summers (122 to 79 vpd) occurs in the use of Park St. This public road is predominantly used for servicing the Upper Trafalgar St businesses. While reducing between summers there has been an increase in the use of this route by general traffic during the closure which has caused some conflicts between businesses, deliveries and through motorists. This is an operational issue which, given the overall low volumes which are reducing is able to be managed. The reduction in additional users of Park Street between summers is indicative of drivers moderating their behaviour and changing their expectations of this as an alternative through route.

5.26 In summary, the traffic effects of closing Upper Trafalgar Street are relatively minor with drivers ultimately able to navigate their way into the central city as they became used to not having Upper Trafalgar Street available.

5.27 Any closure of Upper Trafalgar Street to vehicle traffic needs to provide for emergency, maintenance and service delivery vehicles. This is able to be specified as an exclusion of the pedestrian mall declaration, and managed through the design of the physical closure works.

Pedestrian Counts

5.28 Pedestrian count data recorded between the summer trials of 2017/8 and 2018/19 have given some unexpected results in that they indicate a drop in pedestrian activity between the trials. They also indicate a drop between pedestrian activity while the road was opened compared to when the road was closed.

5.29 Due to the appointment of a new Data Collection contractor in November 2018 as the previous contractor no longer operates, the data was collected by two different methods. The “before” data collected in October 2018 (and all data for 2017/18) was collected manually. The “after” April 2019 data was collected by camera. Through interrogation of the differences between the pedestrian volumes, it has been found the camera collection of data covered pedestrians crossing a smaller section of Upper Trafalgar St than when collected manually.

5.30 The 2017 “before” data was also collected almost a month later in the year than in 2018, this is when the activity in the City Centre is increasing for both the summer months and for Christmas. The “before” data for both years was collected by the same contractor using the same methodology so are considered comparable.

5.31 The combination of these two factors is thought to explain the drop in recorded activity on Upper Trafalgar St. Officers consider the data sets are unable to be compared to determine pedestrian count differences between trials.

Leases for Outdoor Dining

5.32 During the 2018/19 temporary summer closure of Upper Trafalgar Street, the restaurants and cafes were given the opportunity to extend their outdoor dining areas to take full advantage of the closure.

5.33 Rent for the additional space was charged based on advice from a registered valuer. Of the 8 restaurant/cafes located in Upper Trafalgar Street 7 chose to extend their outdoor dining areas which provided a total additional income to Council for license fees of $27,357 plus GST for the summer, over and above the $44,157 plus GST generated without the closure.

5.34 At times during the closure period, the space was needed for public events such as the busker’s festival. During these periods, the businesses were refunded their rent to recognise that they did not have exclusive use of the additional area.

5.35 Declaring Upper Trafalgar Street to be a pedestrian mall prohibiting motor vehicles 365 days per year would give the option to these business owners to extend their outdoor dining leases all year round, or just seasonally.

Funding Implications

5.36 The budget associated with the temporary summer closure 2018/19 was $20k capital and $53k operational. To date the Council has incurred costs of $9K capital and $14k operational with some invoices still waiting to be received. It is noted that the planter boxes are now at the end of their life and replacement costs or provision of alternative temporary barrier costs are estimated to be $35k to $50K.

5.37 The costs of declaring Upper Trafalgar Street to be a pedestrian mall prohibiting motor vehicles 365 days per year are estimated to be $200k (including a 30% contingency) capital as a one off investment. This would provide for removal of parking meters and bollards, permanent signage, vehicle barriers, road marking, and more robust street furniture. This cost is currently unbudgeted and is a matter that Council can consider during deliberations following consultation. There are some existing budgets in transport and city development that this cost could be taken out of, but that would mean that other projects in the city centre would be delayed a year.

5.38 In the future the declaration would also allow for reorganisation of the pedestrian crossings to the Church steps, and potentially better treatment of the integration of the Church steps with Upper Trafalgar Street. Planning and budgeting for this can be staged over future years.

5.39 Prohibiting motor vehicles 365 days per year would eliminate the ongoing costs associated with administering and managing the summer closure periods, storing and replacing furniture and planter boxes, manual watering and the physical opening and closing of the street.

5.40 Officers consider that there is a need for a winter activation programme in the city centre. The programme needs to enable public events and foster partnerships with community organisations, the museum and Uniquely Nelson. Given that winter activation is an issue that has been raised in feedback received already, it is likely that this matter will again be raised during the consultation process which will provide Council with an opportunity to consider it during deliberations.

6. Consultation Process

6.1 Under section 78 of the Local Government Act 2002, a local authority must, in the course of its decision-making process give consideration to the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in, the matter.

6.2 Section 336 of the Local Government Act 1974 relates to pedestrian mall declarations and specifies that Council must use the Special Consultative Procedure for any declaration of a pedestrian mall.

6.3 In undertaking a Special Consultative Procedure the Local Government Act 2002 requires the territorial authority to give public notice, and such other notice as the local authority considers appropriate, of the Statement of Proposal and the consultation being undertaken.

6.4 Under s87(3) of the LGA a SOP must include:

a) the proposed changes;

b) the reasons for the changes;

c) what alternatives to the changes are reasonably available; and

d) any other information that the local authority identifies as relevant.

6.5 Section 83 of the LGA 2002 requires Council to consider whether a summary of the SOP “is necessary to enable public understanding of the proposal.” The proposed SOP is not unduly complicated and the community having been through two summer trials of the closure of Upper Trafalgar Street to vehicle traffic already have a good understanding of the proposal. Therefore, a summary is not considered necessary to assist with the public understanding of it.

6.6 The public consultation process provides an opportunity for the public and other stakeholders to engage in the process and a structured way in which Council can respond to any concerns that may be raised. The proposed timeframe is outlined below:

Proposed Consultation Process and Timeline
Draft Statement of Proposal to Council for approval	20 June 2019
Statement of Proposal publicly notified and open for submissions	24 June 2019
Consultation closes	24 July 2019
Hearings	6 August 2019
Deliberations and decision	27 August 2019
Appeal period opens	29 August 2019
Appeal period closes	29 September 2019

6.7 As part of the deliberations/decision on the proposed pedestrian mall declaration the impacts and timing of the next steps will be considered.

6.8 The following are the key methods proposed to raise public awareness of the consultation process, but these may be amended as the consultation process progresses:

6.8.1 A special edition of Our Nelson to be delivered to households. This is the main means of publicising the Statement of Proposal.

6.8.2 Copies of the Statement of Proposal will be available from the Customer Services Centre and Council libraries and also available on the Council website.

6.8.3 Copies of the Statement of Proposal will be available for Councillors to take to any community meetings that they attend during the consultation period.

6.8.4 Advertisements will be placed in local newspapers.

6.8.5 Social media and media releases will also be used to publicise the consultation.

7. Options

7.1 There are three options available to the Council in considering this report. A summary of the options is provided below before the table identifying the advantages, risks and disadvantages of each.

7.2 Option 1 is to approve the Statement of Proposal for a pedestrian mall declaration to prohibit motor vehicle access to Upper Trafalgar Street for 365 days per year and give approval to proceed with the Special Consultative Procedure. The pedestrian mall declaration would provide for exemptions for authorised vehicles (emergency and Council contractors) 24 hours per day and service delivery vehicles between 6am to 8am every day.

7.3 Option 2 is the status quo, whereby no pedestrian mall declaration is progressed and Upper Trafalgar Street is open to motor vehicle traffic all year round.

7.4 Option 3 is to direct officers to prepare an alternative Statement of Proposal for a pedestrian mall declaration to bring back to Council for approval.

Option 1: Approve the Statement of Proposal for a pedestrian mall declaration prohibiting motor vehicle access to Upper Trafalgar street for 365 days per year and give approval to proceed with the Special Consultative Procedure
Advantages	· Responds to the public requests for the closure of Upper Trafalgar Street to motor vehicles by allowing Council to formally seek and consider the community’s views on the proposal. · Provides an opportunity for the community to present their feedback on the options proposed to Council and highlight any other issues requiring consideration.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Providing a formal process for Council to receive and consider feedback on the proposal reduces risks and assists in ensuring Council meets its obligations under the Local Government Act.
Option 2: Do not give approval to proceed with the Special Consultative Procedure and no closure occurs
Advantages	· No officer time or funding implications.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Does not respond to the public requests for the closure of the Upper Trafalgar Street to motor vehicles. · Upper Trafalgar Street will not be closed and the benefits to the community and the city centre will be lost.
Option 3: Direct officers to prepare an alternative Statement of Proposal to bring back to Council for approval
Advantages	· Enables Council to prepare and seek views on a different Statement of Proposal (i.e. a pedestrian mall declaration to prohibit motor vehicles on Upper Trafalgar Street for a different time or seasonal period).
Risks and Disadvantages	· Would require a delayed consultation process than that set out in section 6 and may require an additional Council meeting for deliberations. · Would create a very tight timeline to get through and enable sufficient time to undertake any physical works required to implement a different proposal before summer.

8. Conclusion

8.1 This report seeks approval for a Statement of Proposal and associated Special Consultative Procedure to be undertaken between 24 June 2019 and 24 July 2019, to seek the views of the community on the proposal to declare Upper Trafalgar Street a pedestrian mall prohibiting motor vehicles for 365 days per year, subject to some exemptions.

9. Next Steps

9.1 If after considering the views of the community and those potentially affected by the proposal, Council decides to proceed with the pedestrian mall declaration for Upper Trafalgar Street the following next steps are required:

9.1.1 Work up a design for the physical works required to prohibit motor vehicle traffic to Upper Trafalgar Street.

9.1.2 Seek sign off of the design from the City Centre Programme Councillor Group (Mayor Reese, Councillor’s Noonan and Lawrey).

9.1.3 Undertake physical works.

Author: Lisa Gibellini, Team Leader City Development

Attachments

Attachment 1: A 2176520 Statement of Proposal Pedestrian Mall Declaration, Upper Trafalgar Street - Nelson City ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Consideration of the report will assist in meeting the current and future needs of the Nelson Community in a cost effect manner for the Ratepayers. Consideration of the community’s views on the proposal to declare Upper Trafalgar Street to be a pedestrian mall allows Council to meet its decision making responsibilities under the Local Government Act.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

A decision consult the community on the proposal to declare Upper Trafalgar Street to be a pedestrian mall aligns with the following Community Outcomes:

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

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

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

3. Risk

There is low risk associated with undertaking the consultation process which will assist in reducing risks associated with Council’s potential future decision making for Upper Trafalgar Street.

4. Financial impact

The decision to carry out consultation has a relatively limited financial impact that will be carried out within existing budgets. Any decision to pedestrianise Upper Trafalgar Street will have financial implications and these will need to be considered as part of the deliberations and decision making on the SOP. Financial implications of pedestrianising Upper Trafalgar Street are outlined in section 5 of this report.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This decision to declare Upper Trafalgar Street to be a pedestrian mall is a matter of high significance to the community, hospitality businesses in Upper Trafalgar Street and other parts of the city, and therefore a special consultative process is being undertaken.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

No consultation with Māori was undertaken for this report.

7. Delegations

The decision relates to City Centre enhancement, business, economic development and tourism, events, a road closure and loss of car parking. Responsibility for these areas does not fall clearly to a single Council committee. Therefore, the decision is referred to the Council.

Item 13: Order of candidates' names on 2019 Local Elections voting documents

Council

20 June 2019

REPORT R9995

Order of candidates' names on 2019 Local Elections voting documents

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To obtain a Council decision regarding the order of candidates’ names on voting documents for the 2019 Local Government Election.

2. Summary

2.1 Candidates’ names on voting documents can be organised in three ways; alphabetical order of surname, pseudo-random order or computerised random order. This report asks Council to resolve which of these is to be used for Nelson City Council in the 2019 Local Government Elections.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Order of candidates' names on 2019 Local Elections voting documents (R9995); and

4. Background

Candidates’ Names on Voting Documents

4.1 Regulation 31(1) of the Local Electoral Regulations 2001 provides that candidates’ names on the voting document may be arranged in one of three ways; alphabetical order of surname, pseudo-random order or computerised random order. Regulation 31(2) provides that Council may resolve which of these three ways is used. Regulation 31(3) provides that if there is no such resolution, the candidates’ names must be arranged in alphabetical order of surname.

4.2 In 2016 Council resolved that candidates’ names be arranged in computerised random order.

5. Discussion

5.1 There are advantages and disadvantages to each method, discussed below.

5.2 Computerised Random Order: Under this method, the order of candidates’ names is determined randomly by computer for each voting document, so that the order of names of candidates will vary from one voting document to another.

5.2.1 This is considered the fairest option, with no bias to any candidates and is therefore the recommended option.

5.2.2 There is however, the potential for confusion amongst voters whose voting papers look different when compared to another’s. This is considered a very minor risk, compared to the fairness for all candidates.

5.3 Pseudo-Random Order: Using this method, the names of candidates are listed in a random order, and all voting documents use the same order. If this method is used, the candidates’ names would be placed in a container, mixed together and then drawn out, with the candidates’ names being placed on all voting documents in the order in which they are drawn. If Council decides to use pseudo-random order, any person is entitled to attend the place where the order of candidates’ names will be arranged, and a public notice is required to be given of the date and time it will occur.

5.3.1 This is a considered to be a fair method and all voting papers look alike, avoiding any possible confusion upon comparison between voting documents.

5.3.2 However, there is possible bias for candidates appearing at the top of the list compared to those in the middle and the bottom of every voting paper.

5.4 Alphabetical Order of Surname: This method is self-explanatory.

5.4.1 This method favours candidates whose surnames begin with letters at the beginning of the alphabet as they are automatically at the top of the list. Likewise, it disadvantages candidates whose names begin with letters in the middle and end of the alphabet as they are automatically placed further down the list.

5.4.2 If no decision is made, this is the default order of candidates’ names.

6. Options

6.1 There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these methods. It is considered that the fairest option for all candidates is computerised random order. For this reason, option 1 is recommended.

Option 1: Computerised Random Order – Recommended option
Advantages	· This is considered the fairest option for all candidates · As the order of candidates’ names will vary from one document to another, there is no bias resulting from name order
Risks and Disadvantages	· There is the potential for confusion amongst voters whose papers look different when making a comparison with another person’s voting document.
Option 2: Pseudo-Random Order
Advantages	· This is considered a fair option · The order of candidates’ names is set · All voting papers look alike
Risks and Disadvantages	· There is an advantage for candidates whose names appear at the top of the list
Option 3: Alphabetical
Advantages	· The order of candidates’ names is set · All voting papers look alike · Finding the name of their preferred candidate is easy
Risks and Disadvantages	· There is a disadvantage to those whose surnames begin with letters at the middle and end of the alphabet, as their names would appear lower down the list

Author: Mary Birch, Manager Governance and Support Services

Attachments

Nil

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Choosing an appropriate format for documents supports compliance with regulation 31(2) of the Local Electoral Regulations 2001.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

This supports the community outcome “Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective and community engagement”.

3. Risk

If a decision is not made, the default order of candidates’ names will be alphabetical, which would advantage some candidates and could lead to negative feedback about the process.

4. Financial impact

Preparation of voting papers is part of the existing elections budget.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance and therefore no engagement is proposed.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in preparing this report.

7. Delegations

Election matters have not been delegated to a committee, therefore this is a decision for Council.

Option 1: Refer matter to Joint Council Committee
Advantages	· Decision making can occur in a coordinated manner with Tasman District Council and enables regional growth to be considered, and a strategy for the future to be adopted.
Risks and Disadvantages	· None
Option 2: Do not refer matter to Joint Council Committee
Advantages	· None.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Both Councils could make different decisions thereby affecting the coordination of growth across the boundaries, and undermining the purpose of the Nelson Tasman Future Development Strategy and the direction of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity.