Notice of the ordinary meeting of the
Hearings Panel - Other
Rōpū Rongonga – Aha atu anō
Agenda
Rārangi take
Chair Cr Brian McGurk
Members Cr Judene Edgar
Cr
Tim Skinner
Pat
Dougherty
Chief
Executive
Nelson
City Council Disclaimer
Please
note that the contents of these Council and Committee Agendas have yet to be
considered by Council and officer recommendations may be altered or changed by
the Council in the process of making the formal Council decision.
Functions:
·
To conduct
hearings and/or determine under delegated authority applications relating to
the Dog Control Act 1996, all matters relating to Temporary Road Closures
pursuant to Schedule 10 Clause 11(e) of the Local Government Act 1974, matters
relating to naming features within the city, and any other matters required for
determination by Council under legislation as determined by Council.
Membership:
·
All elected
members aside from the Mayor, in rotation. Each Hearings Panel-Other will
be made up of three members.
·
The Group Manager
Environmental Management may appoint one or more Independent Commissioners to
either assist the Hearings Panel - Other or to hear and determine any
particular application, such as when Council or a Council-Controlled Organisation
or Council-Controlled Trading Organisation is (or could be perceived to be) an
interested party, other than applications made for temporary road closure under
Schedule 10 Clause 11(e) of the Local Government Act 1974.
Powers to Decide:
·
The power to
appoint a panel to hear and determine with any other consent authority any
application requiring a joint hearing
·
The power to hear
and recommend appropriate actions from hearings of designations and heritage
orders
·
The power to hear,
consider and attempt to resolve contested road stopping procedures
·
The power to
consider and determine applications for temporary road closures made under
Schedule 10 Clause 11(e) of the Local Government Act 1974
·
The power to hear
and determine all matters arising from the administration of the Building Act
1991, and the Building Act 2004
·
The power to hear
and determine objections to the classification of dogs, and all other
procedural matters for which a right of objection and hearing is provided for
under the Dog Control Act, 1996
·
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, aside from those impacted by the Naming Rights
and Sponsorship Policy for Community Services Facilities
·
The power to
provide advice to applicants on appropriate names for private roads, rights of
way or other legal forms of private access to property
·
The power to make
changes to the schedules to the Parking and Vehicle Control Bylaw that do not
require public consultation
·
The power to hear
submissions and recommendations on proposed changes to the schedules to the
Parking and Vehicle Control Bylaw requiring public consultation
·
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
Hearings Panel - Other
3
December 2019
Page
No.
1. Apologies
Nil
2. Confirmation
of Order of Business
3. Interests
3.1 Updates
to the Interests Register
3.2 Identify
any conflicts of interest in the agenda
4. Public
Forum
5. Temporary Road
Closures - Crusaders Rugby Game and Weet-Bix Kids TRYathlon 6 - 15
Document number R12571
Recommendation
|
That
the Hearings Panel - Other
1. Receives
the report Temporary Road Closures - Crusaders Rugby Game and Weet-Bix Kids
TRYathlon (R12571) and its
attachments (A2282427, A2265090, A2292647); and
2. Approves the temporary
road closures for the Crusaders Rugby Game on 1 February 2020 and the
temporary road closures for the Sanitarium Weet-Bix Kids TRYathlon on 8 March
2020.
|
6. Right of Way
Easement - Findlay Place Local Purpose Reserve (Road) 16 - 24
Document number R12532
Recommendation
|
That
the Hearings Panel - Other
1. Receives
the report Right of Way Easement - Findlay Place Local Purpose Reserve (Road)
(R12532) and its attachment
(A2300467 and A2288406); and
2. Grants a Right
of Way Easement over the Local Purpose Reserve (Road) (Lot 17 DP 486996) in
favour of 51 Saxton Road (Lot 2 DP 366503) subject to public notice under
section 119 (1)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977 with all costs being met by the
applicant; and
3. Notes that if any
objections to the proposed easement are received, a further report will be
brought to the Hearings Panel - Other to enable consideration and decision on
those objections.
|
7. Application for
change of a private right of way - Peartree Park 25 - 29
Document number R13599
Recommendation
|
That
the Hearings Panel - Other
1. Receives
the report Application for change of a private right of way - Peartree Park
(R13599) and its attachment
(A2298629); and
2. Accepts the name of
“Vintners Way” for the right of way servicing Lots 33, 37-42, 131
and 132 on Land Transfer Plan LT 534240.
|
8. Application for
naming of a private right of way - Marsden Park 30 - 34
Document number R13607
Recommendation
|
That
the Hearings Panel - Other
1. Receives
the report Application for naming of a private right of way - Marsden
Park (R13607) and its
attachment (A2298629); and
2. Accepts the name of
“Falcon Ridge Way” for the right of way servicing Lots 133 and
future lots 78 and 79 on Land Transfer Plan LT 534240.
|
9. Parking and Vehicle
Control Bylaw (2011), No 207 Amendments to Schedules 35 - 49
Document number R13595
Recommendation
|
That
the Hearings Panel - Other
1. Receives
the report Parking and Vehicle Control Bylaw (2011), No 207 Amendments to
Schedules (13595) and its
attachments (A2297682 and A2298179); and
2. Approves amendments detailed
in the report R10158 to the following Schedules of the Bylaw, Parking and
Vehicle Control (2011), No 207:
· Schedule
4
· Schedule
7
· Schedule
8
· Schedule 9
|
Item 5: Temporary Road
Closures - Crusaders Rugby Game and Weet-Bix Kids TRYathlon
|
|
Hearings Panel - Other
3 December 2019
|
REPORT R12571
Temporary
Road Closures - Crusaders Rugby Game and Weet-Bix Kids TRYathlon
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To
approve the temporary road closure applications in this report.
2. Recommendation
|
That the Hearings Panel - Other
1. Receives
the report Temporary Road Closures - Crusaders Rugby Game and Weet-Bix Kids
TRYathlon (R12571) and its
attachments (A2282427, A2265090, A2292647); and
2. Approves the temporary road
closures for the Crusaders Rugby Game on 1 February 2020 and the temporary
road closures for the Sanitarium Weet-Bix Kids TRYathlon on 8 March 2020.
|
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.
3.2 It
is a requirement that consultation with the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA)
is undertaken to temporarily close any road under Schedule 10 Clause 11 of the
Local Government Act 1974. Nelson City Council (NCC) and NZTA have an agreement
that specific consultation is only required if the closure affects state
highway or their assigned detour routes.
4. Discussion
Crusaders Rugby
Game
4.1 Council
officers received an application on 10 October 2019 from Tasman Rugby to temporarily close the roads listed below on 1
February 2020 from 4.30pm until 11pm as per Attachment 1. This closure is to
ensure the safety of pedestrians entering and exiting Trafalgar Park for the
Crusaders Rugby Game.
4.1.1 Trafalgar
Street between Halifax Street and Wainui Street
4.1.2 Grove
Street between Trafalgar Street and Collingwood Street
4.1.3 Elliot
Street
4.1.4 Hathaway
Terrace
4.2 Consultation
with NZTA will be undertaken as part of the traffic management approval process
due to this closure affecting a State Highway detour route. Consultation with
Police has been undertaken and they have given their approval for this event.
4.3 As
per clause 11(e) of schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974, this proposed
road closure will not exceed the aggregate of 31 days for any year.
4.4 As
per clause 11A of schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974, Council placed
a notification in Our Nelson on 30 October 2019 to notify of the applicants
intention to close these roads and inviting feedback by 13 November 2019. The
advertisement was also placed on the council website and a letter drop was
undertaken to directly affected residents. No feedback from the public was
received.
4.5 The
applicant will be applying for a noise consent for this event and evidence of
public liability insurance has been provided. Council staff are working with
the applicant’s traffic management provider, Safe Traffic New Zealand
regarding traffic management for this event.
4.6 Council
officers are satisfied that the road closure will not unreasonably impede
traffic because alternative routes are available, there have not been issues
with similar closures in the past and the extent and duration is limited.
Council officers recommend that this application be approved.
Sanitarium
Weet-Bix Kids TRYathlon
4.7 Council
officers received an application on 30 August 2019 from SMC Events Ltd to close
the roads listed below on 8 March from 6am until 12.30pm for the annual
Sanitarium Weet-Bix Kids TRYathlon as per Attachment 2. The proposed wet
weather date is Sunday 5th April 2020.
4.7.1 Beach
Road from approximately no. 21 Beach Road to Golf Road
4.7.2 Golf
Road from Beach Road to Parkers Road
4.7.3 Hounsell
Circle
4.7.4 Bisley
Walk
4.8 Consultation
with NZTA has not been undertaken due to this event not having any impact on
the State Highway or its detour routes.
4.9 Consultation
with Police has been undertaken and they have given their approval for this
event.
4.10 As
per clause 11(e) of schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974, this proposed
road closure will not exceed the aggregate of 31 days for any year.
4.11 As
per clause 11A of schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974, Council placed
a notification in Our Nelson on 16 October 2019 to notify of the applicants
intention to close these roads and inviting feedback by 30 October 2019. The
advertisement was also placed on the council website. The following feedback
was received:
4.11.1 The
proposed closure of the above is completely unnecessary, seriously restricts
our legal rights to access our property and must be refused. We have lived in
and around Golf Road for some years and witnessed the traffic flows on the
Weet-Bix Sunday Event and can assure anybody that closing Golf Road has never
been necessary. Unless the plan is to use Golf Road as part of the course,
closure should not happen. I would appreciate feedback and an update of the
final decision on this matter.
· Officers
can confirm that the cycle section does use Golf Road as per Attachment 3 and
the road closure is required for safety reasons.
4.11.2 I
have a concern in that the road closure in Waikare Street is not being managed
properly, we live at number 6. Over a year or so I’ve spoken to
people who manage the Beach Road end for this event. It appeared to me they
have not grasped that they should have a person at the other end (Muritai
Street) to stop cars coming down our road as it’s blocked. What happens
then is we have a traffic jam, everybody follows the leader they all come to
stop, then they all have to back out to Muritai Street, even my grandson can
figure this puzzle out, so maybe you should look into this before the next
event???
· Council
staff are working with the applicant’s traffic management provider, Safe
Traffic New Zealand, regarding traffic management for this event. Feedback
received will be taken into account when formulating the traffic management for
this event to ensure concerns are mitigated e.g. ensuring signage provides
advanced warning from Muritai Street onto Waikare Street and other side
streets.
4.12 No
noise consent is required for this event and evidence of public liability
insurance has been provided.
4.13 Council
officers are satisfied that the road closure will not unreasonably impede
traffic because alternative routes are available and the extent and duration is
limited. Council officers recommend that this application be approved.
5. Options
5.1 The
Hearings Panel - Other has two options, either to approve or decline the
temporary road closure applications. Officers recommend approving the temporary
road closures for these events.
Author: Melissa
Ramsay, Roading Network Coordinator
Attachments
Attachment 1: Road
Closure - Crusaders Rugby - Map - A2282427 ⇩
Attachment 2: Road
Closure - Weet-Bix TRYathlon 2020 - A2265090 ⇩
Attachment 3: Weet-Bix
TRYathalon course and village map - A2292647 ⇩
|
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
If the temporary road closures are not approved,
these community events are at risk of not going ahead.
|
|
4. Financial
impact
There is no financial impact to Council for these
road closures.
|
|
5. Degree
of significance and level of engagement
This matter is of medium significance because of the
number of people affected and the short duration of the events. A request for
feedback was advertised in Our Nelson and on the Council’s website.
|
|
6. Climate
Impact
This decision will have no impact on the ability of
the Council or District to proactively respond to the impacts of climate
change now or in the future.
|
|
7. Inclusion
of Māori in the decision making process
No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in
preparing this report.
|
|
8. Delegations
The Hearings Panel - Other has the following
delegations to consider temporary road closures:
Functions:
· To
conduct hearings and/or determine under delegated authority applications
relating to the Dog Control Act 1996, all matters relating to Temporary Road
Closures pursuant to Schedule 10 clause 11(e) of the Local Government Act
1974, matters relating to naming features within the city, and any other
matters required for determination by Council under legislation as determined
by Council.
|
Item 5: Temporary Road Closures - Crusaders Rugby Game and Weet-Bix
Kids TRYathlon: Attachment 1
Item 5: Temporary Road Closures - Crusaders Rugby Game and Weet-Bix
Kids TRYathlon: Attachment 2
Item 5: Temporary Road Closures - Crusaders Rugby Game and Weet-Bix
Kids TRYathlon: Attachment 3
Item 6: Right of Way
Easement - Findlay Place Local Purpose Reserve (Road)
|
|
Hearings Panel - Other
3 December 2019
|
REPORT R12532
Right
of Way Easement - Findlay Place Local Purpose Reserve (Road)
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To
approve the granting of an easement to Wholesale Landscapes Limited over
Council Local Purpose Reserve (Road) for a right of way, subject to public
notice and Council consent.
2. Summary
2.1 For
reserves vested in Council as the administrating body, the Reserves Act (1977)
enables the Council to grant an easement for specified purposes, including a
right of way to any other land not forming part of the reserve, subject to the
consent of the Minister of Conservation. The Hearings Panel – Other has
been delegated the administering body powers. The Minister’s powers to
grant consent have been delegated to Council.
3. Recommendation
|
That the Hearings Panel - Other
1. Receives
the report Right of Way Easement - Findlay Place Local Purpose Reserve (Road)
(R12532) and its attachment
(A2300467 and A2288406); and
2. Grants a Right
of Way Easement over the Local Purpose Reserve (Road) (Lot 17 DP 486996) in
favour of 51 Saxton Road (Lot 2 DP 366503) subject to public notice under
section 119 (1)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977 with all costs being met by the
applicant; and
3. Notes that if any objections
to the proposed easement are received, a further report will be brought to
the Hearings Panel - Other to enable consideration and decision on those
objections.
|
4. Background
4.1 The
proprietors of Lot 2 DP 366503 wish to create
a second entrance from Findlay Place to their land at 51 Saxton Road. This will
allow them to develop a ‘one way’ system for delivery trucks.
Attachment One shows the relationship between Findlay Place and 51 Saxton Road;
attachment two indicates the position and extent of the proposed right of
way.
4.2 The
proposed route is across a Local Purpose Reserve (Road) at the end of Findlay
Place that was intended to become formed road when Lot 2 DP 366503 was
subdivided and developed.
4.3 Findlay
Place is within the Industrial – Nayland Road South Zone and services a
number of light industrial businesses. The road was built to a subcollector
road standard in anticipation of increased traffic numbers when Lot 2 DP 366503
is developed in the future.
4.4 Easements
formalise the occupation of land by parties other than the landowners. The
Easement instrument will stipulate the standard of the right of way formation.
It will also contain a restriction preventing the ROW being used for a future
subdivision of Lot 2 DP 366503 without being upgraded to full subcollector road
standard.
5. Discussion
5.1 The
Reserve comprises approximately 13 m2, slightly over 18 metres long
and less than 1 metre wide. It was created at the same time as Findlay Place
was formed and vested in Council.
5.2 The
intention of this was to ensure that Council could control access to Lot 2 DP
366503 with the intention that:
· the road could be
extended into 51 Saxton Road when further development occurred on the site;
· Council would not be
responsible for upgrading or forming the road extension to 51 Saxton Road prior
to that development occurring; and
· Findlay Place could be
extended through number 51 and connect to Saxton Road so that it does not
remain as a cul-de-sac.
5.3 Allowing
an access to Lot 2 DP 366503 to be formed over the Local Purpose Reserve (Road)
at this time is not in conflict with the intent of the Reserve.
5.4 The
Easement Instrument will include a number of conditions:
5.4.1 The
proprietors of Lot 2 DP 366503 agreeing that
the ROW can only be used for the existing consented activities at this site and
cannot be used for any future subdivision or development without approval from
the Divisional Manager Infrastructure;
5.4.2 They
agree to a mechanism which ensures that if they sell the land then the above
condition automatically transfers to the new landowner;
5.4.3 The
physical works of constructing the ROW are shown on detailed engineering plans
to the requirements of the Nelson Tasman Land Development Manual (NTLDM) and
approved by Council prior to starting the work;
5.4.4 The
works are constructed to the requirements of the NTLDM with as built engineering
plans provided to Council within 2 weeks of completion of the work.
5.5 The
proprietors of Lot 2 DP 366503 will be responsible
for all of the costs to develop the ROW and the easement.
5.6 It is hard to imagine members of the public, or Council,
currently utilising the Reserve due to its size and shape and proximity to the
boundary with Lot 2 DP 366503/51 Saxton Road. Allowing
the ROW to cross the Reserve would not impact on any potential users of the
Reserve.
5.7 Any future developer of Lot 2 DP 366503 will be required to
surrender the Easement and construct an extension to Findlay Place over the
Reserve land, to Council standards.
Legislation
5.8 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 “providing
or facilitating access…to…any other land not forming part of the
reserve…”. This approval is subject to the
consent of the Minister of Conservation who has delegated the power to grant
consent to Council.
5.9 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.
5.10 Where
a reserve is likely to be materially altered or permanently damaged due to the
granting of an easement public notice is required under section 119 of the
Reserves Act 1977. This proposal will materially alter the reserve as the
grassed area will be crossed by a paved accessway. This requires Council to
publish a plan and description of the proposal in a newspaper circulating in
the area in which the reserve is situated, allow one month for objections and
to consider those objections.
5.11 The
Reserves Act requires that where publication of the notice falls within the
period commencing with 10 December in any year and ending with
10 January in the next succeeding year, the date before which objections
and submissions shall be made shall be not earlier than 10 February next
following that period. In this instance officers intend to publish the notice
before 10 December but to give the public until 10 February 2010 to lodge an
objection with Ministerial approval of the easement to be considered at the
first full Council meeting of 2020.
Options
5.12 The
Hearings Panel - Other has the options of approving or declining the easement.
Approving the easement, subject to public notification, is the recommended
option.
|
Option 1: Approve the ROW
easement to Wholesale Landscapes Limited subject to
public notification
|
|
Advantages
|
· Enables
better traffic flow for the landowner
· Reduced
traffic congestion on Saxton Road thereby improving traffic safety
· Allows
the community to make their views known
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· Possible objections from the community
|
|
Option
2: Decline the ROW easement to Wholesale Landscapes Limited
|
|
Advantages
|
· Officer
time available for other matters
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· Council
seen as unsupportive
· Ongoing traffic
congestion on Saxton Road
|
6. Conclusion
6.1 The
easement Wholesale Landscapes Limited has requested will help with traffic flow
through to their property at 51 Saxton Road. As granting the easement will materially
alter the Local Purpose Reserve public notification of the easement is
required. This is a matter that the Hearings Panel – Other can make a
decision on.
7. Next
Steps
7.1 Lodge
the Public Notice in the Nelson Mail and on the Council website. Copies of the
proposal will also be sent to business operators and landowners in Findlay
Place. If objections are received officers will prepare a further Report to the
Hearings Panel – Other/Committee, or, if no objections are received, seek
the approval of Council acting under a delegation from the Minister of
Conservation.
7.2 Subject
to Council agreement, draft an Agreement to Grant Easement setting out the
conditions Wholesale Landscapes Limited must meet regarding the right of way
easement.
Author: Peter
Hunter, Team Leader Property
Attachments
Attachment 1: A2300467 - 51
Saxton Road and Findlay Place Diagram ⇩
Attachment 2: A2288406
- Findlay Place Indicative Area of ROW ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making
|
|
1. Fit
with Purpose of Local Government
The recommendation in this report is aligned with
the purpose of Local Government in enabling “democratic
decision-making and action by, and on behalf of, communities” as
it enables the community the opportunity to consider and comment on the
granting of a right of way over Council administrated Local Purpose Reserve.
Granting the right of way will allow the applicants to operate more
efficiently and to reduce traffic congestion thereby improving traffic
safety.
|
|
2. Consistency
with Community Outcomes and Council Policy
Supports community outcomes –
· Our infrastructure
is efficient, cost effective and meets current and future
needs
· Our communities are
healthy, safe, inclusive and resilient
|
|
3. Risk
This is a low risk decision as, if approved, the
easement will be controlled by an appropriate legal instrument, physical
construction of the right of way will be to the Nelson Tasman Land
development Manual standard and the community will have an opportunity to
consider and provide feedback on the impacts on the Reserve itself.
|
|
4. Financial
impact
The costs of securing the easement, and the physical
works, will be met by Wholesale Landscapes 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 impact the public or Council’s use of the reserve. However,
consultation is required under section 48(2) of the Reserves Act because this
easement proposal means that the reserve will be materially altered or
permanently damaged. The community will be given an opportunity to make their
views known under section 119 of the Act.
|
|
6. Climate
Impact
This decision will have no impact on the ability of
the Council or District to proactively respond to the impacts of climate
change now or in the future.
|
|
7. Inclusion
of Māori in the decision making process
No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in
preparing this report.
|
|
8. Delegations
The Hearings Panel – Other has the following
delegations to consider this matter –
· 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
|
Item 6: Right of Way Easement - Findlay Place Local Purpose Reserve
(Road): Attachment 1
Item 6: Right of Way Easement - Findlay Place Local Purpose Reserve
(Road): Attachment 2
Item 7: Application for
change of a private right of way - Peartree Park
|
|
Hearings Panel - Other
3 December 2019
|
REPORT R13599
Application
for change of a private right of way - Peartree Park
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To
accept or decline to accept an application to change the naming of a private
right of way from “Peartree Way” to “Vintners Way”.
2. Recommendation
|
That the Hearings Panel - Other
1. Receives
the report Application for change of a private right of way - Peartree Park
(R13599) and its attachment
(A2298629); and
2. Accepts the name of
“Vintners Way” for the right of way servicing Lots 33, 37-42, 131
and 132 on Land Transfer Plan LT 534240.
|
3. Background
3.1 The
name “Peartree Way” was approved by the Hearings Panel on 27 August
2014 under report number A1230645. The right of way is located in the Marsden
Park subdivision off Sanctuary Drive as shown in Attachment 1 (A2271180).
3.2 The
developer now wishes to change this name to “Vintners Way” as when
the subdivision started there were grapes growing in that area.
4. Discussion
4.1 The
Council has no authority to name private roads or ways, other than to accept a
name for inclusion in Council records.
Compliance with
Council road naming guidelines
4.2 In
considering an application for the naming of a private right of way, the
Council should consider the following relevant road naming guidelines:
4.2.1 Whether
the name is similar in sound or spelling to any road name in the Nelson City
Council and Tasman District Council area; and
4.2.2 Whether
the name is likely to cause any offence.
Evaluation of the proposed
name
4.3 There
is no similar name of Vintners Way in the Nelson City Council and Tasman
District Council areas.
4.4 The
name is not likely to cause any offence. In addition the name is consistent
with the horticultural theme of other Lanes in the area such as Plumtree and
Elderberry Lanes.
5. Options
5.1 The
preferred option is to accept the name “Vintners Way”. The
alternative option is for Council to decline to accept this name and keep the
existing Peartree Way name or ask the applicant to submit an alternative name.
Author: Mandy
Bishop, Manager Consents and Compliance
Attachments
Attachment 1: A2298629
Vintners Way location ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making
|
|
1. Fit
with Purpose of Local Government
The Council has the authority to name roads,
pursuant to s 319(j) of the Local Government Act 1974. The Council does
not have the authority to name private rights of way, but may accept and
record the name in Council systems and records.
|
|
2. Consistency
with Community Outcomes and Council Policy
The decision in this report supports the community
outcome that our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional
perspective and community engagement.
|
|
3. Risk
This is a low
risk decision as checks have been carried out to ensure that the proposed
name will not cause confusion to the public or to emergency services, if
there are existing similar names. The name will not cause offence.
|
|
4. Financial
impact
No additional resources are required.
|
|
5. Degree
of significance and level of engagement
This matter is of low significance because there is
no impact on any private person (no building on these lots has commenced). No
consultation is required.
|
|
6. Climate
Impact
No applicable for the change in name of a private
right of way in an existing subdivision.
|
|
7. Inclusion
of Māori in the decision making process
No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in
preparing this report.
|
|
8. Delegations
The Hearings Panel has the following delegations to
consider
Areas of Responsibility:
· Matters
relating to naming features within the city (6.18.1)
Powers to Decide:
· The
power to provide advice to applicants on appropriate names for private roads,
rights of way or other legal forms of private access to property (6.18.3)
|
Item 7: Application for change of a private right of way - Peartree
Park: Attachment 1
Item 8: Application for
naming of a private right of way - Marsden Park
|
|
Hearings Panel - Other
3 December 2019
|
REPORT R13607
Application
for naming of a private right of way - Marsden Park
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To
accept or decline to accept an application for the naming of a private right of
way servicing Lots 133 and future lots 78 and 79 on Land Transfer Plan LT
534240 as shown in Attachment 1 (A2298629).
2. Recommendation
|
That the Hearings Panel - Other
1. Receives
the report Application for naming of a private right of way - Marsden
Park (R13607) and its
attachment (A2298629); and
2. Accepts the name of
“Falcon Ridge Way” for the right of way servicing Lots 133 and
future lots 78 and 79 on Land Transfer Plan LT 534240.
|
3. Background
3.1 The
name “Falcon Ridge Way” was chosen as the name of the general area
has been referred to as Falcon Ridge for many years. A local falcon can often
be seen there. The right of way is located in the Marsden Park subdivision off
Sanctuary Drive as shown in Attachment 1 (A2298629).
4. Discussion
4.1 The
Council has no authority to name private roads or ways, other than to accept a
name for inclusion in Council records.
Compliance with
Council road naming guidelines
4.2 In
considering an application for the naming of a private right of way, the
Council should consider the following relevant road naming guidelines:
4.2.1 Whether
the name is similar in sound or spelling to any road name in the Nelson City Council
and Tasman District Council areas; and
4.2.2 Whether
the name is likely to cause any offence.
Evaluation of the proposed
name
4.3 There
is no similar road name of Falcon Ridge Way in the Nelson City Council and
Tasman District Council areas. There is a Falcon Ridge Estate in Higgins
Road, Spring Grove but a private right of way is unlikely to be confused with
the winery.
4.4 The
name is not likely to cause any offence.
5. Options
5.1 The
preferred option is to accept the name “Falcon Ridge Way”. The
alternative option is for Council to decline to accept this name and ask the
applicant to submit an alternative name.
Author: Mandy
Bishop, Manager Consents and Compliance
Attachments
Attachment 1: A2298629
Falcon Ridge Way location ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making
|
|
1. Fit
with Purpose of Local Government
The Council has the authority to name roads,
pursuant to s 319(j) of the Local Government Act 1974. The Council does
not have the authority to name private rights of way, but may accept and
record the name in Council systems and records.
|
|
2. Consistency
with Community Outcomes and Council Policy
The decision in this report supports the community
outcome that our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a
regional perspective and community engagement.
|
|
3. Risk
This is a low
risk decision as checks have been carried out to ensure that the proposed
name will not cause confusion to the public or to emergency services, if
there are existing similar names. The name will not cause offence.
|
|
4. Financial
impact
No additional resources are required.
|
|
5. Degree
of significance and level of engagement
This matter is of low significance because there is
no impact on any private person (no building on these lots has commenced). No
consultation is required.
|
|
6. Climate
Impact
Not applicable for the naming of a private right of
way in an existing subdivision.
|
|
7. Inclusion
of Māori in the decision making process
No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in
preparing this report.
|
|
8. Delegations
The Hearings Panel has the following delegations to
consider
Areas of Responsibility:
· Matters
relating to naming features within the city (6.18.1)
Powers to Decide:
· The
power to provide advice to applicants on appropriate names for private roads,
rights of way or other legal forms of private access to property (6.18.3)
|
Item 8: Application for naming of a private right of way - Marsden
Park: Attachment 1
Item 9: Parking and
Vehicle Control Bylaw (2011), No 207 Amendments to Schedules
|
|
Hearings Panel - Other
3 December 2019
|
REPORT R13595
Parking
and Vehicle Control Bylaw (2011), No 207 Amendments to Schedules
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To
approve proposed alterations to Schedules of the Parking and Vehicle Control
Bylaw (2011), No 207, to give effect to minor safety and parking improvements,
roading improvements carried out as part of the capital works programme and
changes from new subdivisions.
2. Recommendation
|
That the Hearings Panel - Other
1. Receives
the report Parking and Vehicle Control Bylaw (2011), No 207 Amendments to
Schedules (13595) and its
attachments (A2297682 and A2298179); and
2. Approves amendments detailed
in the report R10158 to the following Schedules of the Bylaw, Parking and
Vehicle Control (2011), No 207:
· Schedule
4
· Schedule
7
· Schedule
8
· Schedule
9
|
3. Background
3.1 The
Parking and Vehicle Control Bylaw 2011 allows for the Council by resolution, to
add, amend or delete specifications contained within the Schedules. The Council
has delegated this power to the Hearings Panel -Other. To ensure that the Bylaw
is enforceable it is important to ensure that the Schedules are updated on a
regular basis. The Bylaw Schedules were last updated in June 2019.
3.2 Minor
alterations and additions are proposed to Schedules 4, 7, 8, and 9 of the Bylaw
as detailed in section 4.
3.3 The
proposed alterations and additions are shown for indicative purposes only by
plans attached to this report. The purpose of these plans is to assist the
panel to easily and quickly understand the nature of the changes proposed.
These plans will not form part of the final bylaw. The actual changes as they
will be incorporated into the final Bylaw, and with the level of detail
required for enforcement purposes, are set out in the schedule of changes
appended as Attachment 2.
4. Discussion
Schedule
4 – Special Parking Areas
4.1 Muritai
Street Bus Stop Removal
4.1.1 As
a result of the proposed Nelson Petroleum Distribution (NPD) development at 142
Muritai Street, the current bus stop near the corner of Muritai Street and
Parkers Road needs to be removed. Officers have reviewed the number of bus
stops and their spacing along the route, and have concluded that removing this
bus stop is acceptable. The nearest inbound journey bus stops are situated only
220m south on Parkers Road, and 170m north on Muritai Street. The proximity of
these bus stops are less than 400m apart, and are therefore in line with best
practice for bus stop spacing. Officers also noted that safety concerns had
been raised in the past as a result of buses stopping near the intersection,
making it difficult for drivers to see when re-entering the traffic stream. The
bus stop proposed to be removed is shown in Attachment 1, titled 4.1
4.2 Relocation
of Bus Stop outside 134 Waimea Road
4.2.1 Following
feedback from Nelson Coachlines (operator of NBus), officers have recommended
making alterations to the bus stop on Waimea Road, north of Tukuka Street. As a
result of cars parking directly north and south of the bus stop, NBus drivers
find it difficult to safety and efficiently enter and exit this bus stop. It is
therefore proposed to shift the current bus stop north, thus allowing NBus to
use adjoining driveways to enter and exit the bus stop. The proposed location
is shown in Attachment 1, titled 4.2, and is the preferred option as there is
no net loss of on-street parking. A letter box drop was carried out with
directly affected residents but no feedback was received regarding this
proposal.
Schedule
7 – Resident Parking Spaces
4.3 219
Bridge Street (Resident Only park)
4.3.1 Council
Officers previously presented the request for a resident’s only park
outside 219 Bridge Street to the Hearings Panel – Other on 20 June 2019,
which was subsequently declined. Following this decision, further information
has come to light regarding the circumstances of the applicant. Officers wish
to present this further information to the Panel for consideration.
4.3.2 It
has been advised by the applicant that incorrect advice was provided in
relation to the future parking possibilities of the property by council’s
duty planners. This advice was provided at the time the applicant was in the
process of purchasing the property. The applicant was led to believe that
providing a driveway would be a simple process and would not require resource
consent. The transport team have reviewed the requirements for off-street
parking, and have confirmed that this would require a resource consent, and
would likely cost up to $15,000 for works within the road reserve alone.
4.3.3 The
applicant has also advised of her physical disability that makes walking long
distances difficult. For this reason, having a parking space in close proximity
to the house is advantageous.
4.3.4 The
resident has indicated that it remains her desire to create an off street
carpark on the property but that consent requirements and costs will delay this
work. The resident only carpark is sought as an interim measure (1 – 2
years) and would be revoked when the off street carpark is created.
4.3.5 The
proposed resident only park is shown in Attachment 1, titled 4.3. No
consultation was or has been undertaken with neighbouring properties due to the
unique nature of this application.
4.4 34
Tasman Street (Resident Only Park)
4.4.1 Council
have received an application for a resident only park at 34 Tasman Street.
Officers have confirmed that this application meets the requirements of the
resident parking policy. The Group Manager Infrastructure has recommended this
application to the Hearings Panel – Other. Neighbouring properties were
consulted and feedback was received from one property (36 Tasman Street) who
was in support of this proposal. The proposed resident only park is shown in
Attachment 1, titled 4.4
4.5 36
Tasman Street (Resident Only Park)
4.5.1 Council
have received an application for a resident only park at 36 Tasman Street.
Officers have confirmed that this application meets the requirements of the
resident parking policy. The Group Manager Infrastructure has recommended this
application to the Hearings Panel – Other. Neighbouring properties were
consulted and no feedback was received. The proposed resident only park is
shown in Attachment 1, titled 4.4.
Schedule
8 – Time Limited Parking Areas
4.6 575
Main Road Stoke P60 Parking
4.6.1 Following
the change of use at 575 Main Road Stoke from retail to a dentist, the current
P10 time limited parking is proposed to be altered to P60 to reflect the change
in use and average time customers spend at the new premise. The proposed
changes are shown in Attachment 1, titled 4.5. This development is subject to a
resource consent, and no consultation was undertaken due to the effects being
restricted only to the applicants business.
Schedule
9 – No Stopping and No Parking Areas
4.7 Tasman
Street / Grove Street Intersection
4.7.1 Following
concerns raised by multiple residents and road users, officers have reviewed
the need for no stopping at the intersection of Tasman Street and Grove Street.
As a result of historical intersection design, Bobby Franks Café and
high parking demand, visibility at this intersection is restricted by a number
of factors. Officers recommend installing no stopping as shown in Attachment 1,
titled 4.6 on safety grounds. The café is aware of the proposal and did
not object. Feedback was received from three nearby residents who were all in
support.
4.8 Tasman
Street Resident Only Parking No Stopping
4.8.1 Officers
have identified the need to install no stopping north of the Grove Street /
Tasman Street intersection to improve the sight lines to the north. The area
proposed for no stopping is 3m in length, and thus too small for a vehicle to
park legally. The extent of no stopping required is 8m in length, extending
over the existing driveway. Due to the restricted length, there is no loss in
on-street parking. The proposed no stopping is shown in Attachment 1, titled
4.4 and would be completed at the time of installing the resident only parks as
outlined in items 4.4 and 4.5, assuming these are approved. Irrespective of
that decision, officers recommend proceeding with the proposed no stopping.
Feedback was received by three nearby residents who were all in support of this
proposal.
4.9 71
Tasman Street No Stopping
4.9.1 Following
concerns raised by residents and road users, officers have reviewed the need
for no stopping around the corner of Tasman Street, near 71 Tasman Street.
Parking on the inside of this corner limits the visibility for road users and
restricts the safe and efficient access to and from driveways. Officers
recommend installing no stopping as shown in Attachment 1, titled 4.7 on safety
grounds. Feedback was received from three residents who were all in support of
the proposal.
5. Options
5.1 There
are limited options for the items presented in this report as the majority in
schedules 4, 7, 8, and 9 are proposed changes to improve safe and efficient
traffic movement. Option 1 is the preferred option.
|
Option 1: Adopt changes as
attached for Schedules 4, 7, 8 and 9 without
changes
|
|
Advantages
|
· Changes
to Schedules are designed to improve safety and efficiency
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· Nil
|
|
Option
2: Do not adopt changes as attached for Schedules 4, 7 8 and 9.
|
|
Advantages
|
· There
are no identified advantages
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· Failure
to approve changes could result in unsafe and inefficient use of the roading
network.
· Failure
to update Schedules will open enforcement to challenge.
· Failure
to approve changes will delay or prevent development under the Resource
Management Act (RMA).
|
Author: Matt
Bruce, Team Leader Transport and Solid Waste
Attachments
Attachment 1: A2297682
Proposed changes shown indicatively on aerials ⇩
Attachment 2: A2298179
Schedule of Changes to Parking and Vehicle Control Bylaw ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making
|
|
1. Fit
with Purpose of Local Government
The report recommendation meets current and future
needs of communities in contributing to the safe use of the roading and
parking network in the City.
|
|
2. Consistency
with Community Outcomes and Council Policy
The content and recommendations of this report are
consistent with Councils Community Outcomes – “Our Infrastructure
is efficient, cost effective and meets current and future needs”. In
particular that we have good quality, affordable and effective infrastructure
and transport networks. This report is directly aligned to the requirements
of the Parking Policy, the Parking and Vehicle Control Bylaw and with
Council’s strategic direction through the Regional Land Transport
Strategy.
|
|
3. Risk
To ensure that the Bylaw is enforceable, it is
important to ensure that the Schedules are updated on a regular basis.
Failure to update Schedules will open enforcement up to challenge.
|
|
4. Financial
impact
Costs are within allocated annual budgets for road
maintenance or capital projects.
|
|
5. Degree
of significance and level of engagement
This matter is of low significance. Nearby
businesses and residents that could be affected, have been consulted.
|
|
6. Climate
Impact
This decision will have no impact on the ability of
the Council or District to proactively respond to the impacts of climate
change now or in the future.
|
|
7. Inclusion
of Māori in the decision making process
No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in
preparing this report.
|
|
8. Delegations
The Hearings Panel - Other has the following delegations
to consider changes to the Parking and vehicle Control Bylaw.
Powers to Decide:
· The
power to make changes to the schedules to the Parking and Vehicle Control
Bylaw that do not require public consultation
· The
power to hear submissions and recommendations on proposed changes to the
schedules to the Parking and Vehicle Control Bylaw requiring public
consultation
|
Item 9: Parking and Vehicle Control Bylaw (2011), No 207 Amendments
to Schedules: Attachment 1
Item 9: Parking and
Vehicle Control Bylaw (2011), No 207 Amendments to Schedules: Attachment 2
