N-logotype-black-wide

 

 

 

 

When calling

please ask for:

 

Governance Advisers

Phone:

03 546 0200

Email

governance.advisers@ncc.govt.nz

21 April 2020

Memo to:              Mayor and Councillors

Memo from:          Governance Advisers

Subject:              Council 23 April 2020 – LATE ITEM

 

 

9.       Late Item: Effects of setting the 2020/21 rates increase to zero      3 - 13

Document R16966

A report titled Effects of setting the 2020/21 rates increase to zero is attached and to be considered as a major late item at this meeting.  This report was listed as item 9 on the public agenda for the Council meeting on 23 April 2020 to ensure elected members were aware that it would be presented to this meeting.

In accordance with section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and Standing Order 9.12, a procedural resolution is required before a major item that is not on the agenda for the meeting may be dealt with.

In accordance with section 46A(7)(b)(i) the reason why the item was not on the agenda is because it came to hand after the agenda had been distributed.

In accordance with section 46A(7)(b)(ii) the reason why discussion of this item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting is because the matter need to be considered with urgency as part of Council’s response to the COVID-19 emergency.

 

 

 

Recommendation

That the Council

1.    Considers the item regarding Effects of setting the 2020/21 rates increase to zero at this meeting as a major item not on the agenda, pursuant to Section 46A(7)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, to enable a timely decision to be made.

 

10.     Late Item: City Centre Programme: COVID19 Response                         14 - 37

Document R16965

A report titled City Centre Programme: COVID19 Response is attached and to be considered as a major late item at this meeting.  This report was listed as item 10 on the public agenda for the Council meeting on 23 April 2020 to ensure elected members were aware that it would be presented to this meeting.

In accordance with section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and Standing Order 9.12, a procedural resolution is required before a major item that is not on the agenda for the meeting may be dealt with.

In accordance with section 46A(7)(b)(i) the reason why the item was not on the agenda is because it came to hand after the agenda had been distributed.

In accordance with section 46A(7)(b)(ii) the reason why discussion of this item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting is because the matter needs to be considered urgently as part of Council’s response to the COVID-19 emergency

 

 

Recommendation

That the Council

1.    Considers the item regarding City Centre Programme: COVID19 Response at this meeting as a major item not on the agenda, pursuant to Section 46A(7)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, to enable a timely decision to be made.

 

 

 

 


 

Item 15: Effects of setting the 2020/21 rates increase to zero

 

Council

23 April 2020

 

 

REPORT R16966

Effects of setting the 2020/21 rates increase to zero

     

 

1.       Purpose of Report

1.1      To provide information on the rating scenario of a zero percent increase in 2020/21.

1.2      To provide an update on the criteria for the Emergency Fund for community organisations.

2.       Summary

2.1      At the Extraordinary Council Meeting on 9 April the impact of COVID-19 and Council’s response was considered. Two matters required a report back from officers.

 

 

3.       Recommendation

 

That the Council

1.    Receives the report Effects of setting the 2020/21 rates increase to zero (R16966) and its attachments (A2372220 and A2372381); and

2.    Notes the information on how a zero rates rise could be achieved and that a final decision will be made during Annual Plan deliberations ; and

3.    Notes the criteria for the Emergency Fund for community organisations.

 

 

 

4.       Background

4.1      The Annual Plan 2020/21 Consultation Document was released for public consultation on 17 March 2020, with an original end date for feedback of 17 April. It proposed a 3.7% rates increase, operational expenditure of $125.1 million, and capital expenditure of $41.2 million.

4.2      An Extraordinary Council Meeting on 9 April 2020 was held to discuss the impacts of COVID-19 on Council business and the community. With the economic hardship brought by the COVID 19 lockdown Council recognised it that a rates rise of 3.7% was no longer appropriate. Therefore Council resolved the following:

Notes that officers will report back to the next Council meeting, on a rating scenarios of 0% for 2020/21;

4.3      In addition Council decided to establish a fund to be able to provide assistance to community organisations that will need some help if they are to be able to continue providing social and cultural outcomes for the community. Council resolved as follows:

Approves an Emergency Fund of $200,000 to support community organisations impacted by COVID-19; and

Delegates the setting of criteria and distribution of funds to support community       organisations from the Emergency Fund to the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and the Chair of the Community Services Committee, with the criteria to be reported to the next Council meeting; and

Notes that the criteria for granting funds from the Emergency Fund will include that the organisation has applied for any applicable Central Government support, for example wage subsidies; and

4.3      This report provides an update on the two matters covered by these resolutions.

5.       Discussion

Rates impact/zero percent rates rise

5.1      Subsequent to the 9 April Extraordinary Meeting, officers have reviewed the following areas with a view to estimating the potential impacts of COVID 19 on the Draft Annual Plan 2020/21 and considering how a zero percent rates rise might be achieved. A summary of the movements in rates is included in Attachment 1.

5.2      Whatever is included in the Draft Annual Plan, the reality is that the results across a number of areas are almost certain to be different – it is still too early to understand the COVID-19 impacts and how this will affect our budgets. Staff are currently working on the potential impacts on work programmes and any further budget implications will be brought to the Annual Plan deliberations.

5.3      The intention is to use the Disaster Recovery Fund as a last resort balancing factor when funding the actual result throughout 2020/21. This will require very close monitoring and flexibility to respond to the changing environment.

5.4      The following outlines where rates impacts are expected to be felt and how a zero percent rates rise could be achieved.

           Capital Expenditure

5.5      As discussed at the Extraordinary Council Meeting on 9 April the lockdown has temporarily slowed Council’s capital delivery programme. That aside, staff and consultants are still working from home on the delivery of the capital works programme.

5.6      Notwithstanding this adjustment, the anticipated forecast expected to the end of June 2020 will not be achieved. Again, assuming that physical works will only by fully underway by the end of May, the forecast spend is $29.4 million.  The interest and depreciation savings in 2020/21 resulting from this anticipated underspend is $220,000.

5.7      The implication of the lock down will result in a carry-over of around $7.4m putting the capital spend for 2020/21 at around $48.6m.

5.8      This budget excludes any work that may come Nelson’s way from the Provincial Growth Fund or the Crown Infrastructure Fund initiative to which we have made application.  It also excludes the capital expenditure of $3.1m for footpath widening also on this agenda.

5.9      It is acknowledged that getting works underway and spending on projects is critical to Nelson’s economic recovery. In this matter, officers are well advanced on amending Council’s Procurement Policy that will allow a streamlined procurement process to award work to local contractors and an expansion of the consultants’ panel to fast track design work. 

5.10    However spending an increased budget, under trying times, will be a challenge. Notwithstanding this, officers are fully committed to doing whatever is necessary to be part of rejuvenating our City and our region.

5.11    In this matter officers have identified that at least two additional project managers are needed to manage the workload. Work is underway to secure that resource, the costs of which will be charged to the capital works programme. 

           Staff costs

5.12    As discussed at the Extraordinary Council Meeting on 9 April the Chief Executive is proposing a wage freeze, subject to PSA negotiations. The rating impact of this is $640,000 ($93,000 additional savings is included as capital staff time).  Due to the likely practicalities of recruiting over the next few months, it is envisaged that a number of new positions proposed in the Draft Annual Plan ($213,000) will occur later in the financial year.  An increase in projected vacancies of $150,000 takes total rates savings from staff costs to just over $1 million.

5.13    It is proposed to reduce staff training and travel budgets by 50% as there will be limited travel being undertaken / more webinar style training in the medium term – this will result in a budget saving of $300,000 across the organisation. It is also proposed to reduce elected members travel and training and catering for meetings by 50% - resulting in a $33,000 saving.

Resource Consent and Building Consent Fees

5.14    The volume of resource consent are estimated to drop by 20% resulting in reduced net income of $202,000 from the Draft Annual Plan.  Building consent volumes are also estimated to reduce by 20% and together with an assumption of deferring the proposed fee increase (currently out for consultation) until 1 January 2021 this reduces net income by $539,000.

Parking and Infringement Income

5.15    Currently parking fees in the CBD have been suspended to the end of June 2020.  Any decision on extending this or not would need consultation with Uniquely Nelson.

5.16     Based on moving to COVID-19 Alert Level 3 sometime in the near future which will allow contractors to resume physical works, it is anticipated that installing the new meters will still be on track by the end of June. Officers will also need to consider the best placement of the meters in relation to the Innovative Streets work planned for the CBD (Trafalgar/Bridge/Hardy).

5.17     However should there be delays, installation would then extend into July. Council changed the way parking is paid for from Pay and Display to Pay by Plate under the new Parking and Vehicle Control Bylaw that takes effect from July 1 2020.  In the event of delay in the installation of the new Pay by Plate parking machines, and to enable continuation of charging under the old parking meters, change to the method of payment in Schedule 11 of the new Bylaw will be required.  This will require a report to the Hearing Panel – Other. Officers will be keeping a close watch on this timeline to ascertain if this report is required.

5.18     Even with reintroducing parking fees, there is an expectation that there will be ongoing subdued CBD activity and the anticipated shortfall in parking revenue is $329,000 – about 50% of the budgeted income. 

5.19    The volume of enforcement activity is estimated to drop by 50% resulting in reduced infringement income of $290,000. There will be offsets in reduced expenditure (contractors, towing and court processing costs) will reduce the net budget by $112,000.

           Council’s commercial revenue

5.20    Council earns revenue from leases and licenses and dividends from Council Controlled Trading Organisations (CCTOs).

5.21    It is likely that there will be an ongoing impact to Council’s leases and licenses income due to the economic downturn – through businesses not continuing after the lockdown finishes and surrendering their leases or where the lease income is tied to turnover.  

5.22    Dividends are received from Council Controlled Trading Organisations and used to offset rates, with the Annual Plan 2020/21 including budgeted income of $3.8 million.

5.23    It is too early to forecast the potential impact on Council’s commercial revenue and a provision of $2.1 million has been made as a reduction in overall commercial revenue. Officers will be working on refining the potential impacts prior to the deliberations meeting.

Events Budgets

5.24    Restrictions on travel and public gatherings will have a considerable impact on events with Government suggesting level 2 restrictions could be in place for many months. This means that indoor events are restricted to 100 people, outdoor events 500 people, a requirement for contact tracing and non-essential travel is restricted. Revised estimates below are based on an assumption at the time of writing this report that there will be few events held during 2020, and local events only between January and June 2021.

           Council supported and administered events 

5.25    Proposed funding adjustments for Council supported events are a reduction in the 2020/21 budgets from $1.04m to $491,000 resulting in estimated savings of $549,000. This includes activities such as the Arts Festival, Council delivered events and major events such as Light Nelson but does not include events funded via the Events Fund and Venue Hire Fund (see below).

           Events Fund and Venue Hire Fund

5.26    The Events Fund has an economic and a community component. There is also a separate Venue Hire Fund and specific funding for the Enduro World Series. It is recommended that these be reduced by a total of $245,000, as follows:

5.26.1  Events Fund: economic – reduce from $430,000 to $200,000

           The remaining $200,000 would enable support for events that may be expected to recommence in due course if the “infrastructure” supporting those events is maintained and consideration of new proposals if restrictions are reduced by the end of 2020.  The funding would also enable support and seed funding for any proposed events proposed for the 2021/21 financial year.

5.26.2  Events Fund: community – retain at $76,000

5.26.3  If the level of restrictions are relaxed by the end of 2020, then smaller neighbourhood events in the second half of the financial year could be considered. It is proposed to retain the fund at its current level as delivering small events that support community wellbeing may well be particularly important at this time.

5.26.4  Venue Hire Fund – reduce from $30,000 to $15,000

5.26.5  Retaining a balance in this account would enable Council to respond to any requests for support in the second half of 2020/21.

                     Enduro World Series event – April 2021

5.26.6  Council has previously approved separate funding of up to $230,000 for this event, including underwriting of $150,000.  Officers have been seeking information from the Nelson hosts on the status of the event as a result of COVID-19.  However, the international organisers have not considered changes to events as far out as next year.  Notwithstanding this the Nelson Mountain Biking Club (NMTBC) is discussing whether the Nelson fixture, and a linked event in Tasmania, can be shifted to October 2021.  It is also pursuing additional non-council underwriting in case the event work and expenses which will be incurred in planning a future event cannot be recovered.  

5.26.7  To assist with the planning work the NMTBC has requested that $15,000 of the funds been released to enable an event manager to be engaged.  The manager would undertake a range of planning work that would be needed, including licensing, permit and consent activities, logistics planning and site planning and managing the budget.  Further funds may need to be released as the planning work proceeds.  Expenses would be kept to a minimum and only incurred as necessary to keep the possibility of the event current.  If the Enduro event cannot proceed in 2021 it is hoped that Nelson could host at a later date and therefore some portion of the event manager’s work would still be of value.

5.26.8  The Event Development Committee has approved this request and will keep Council informed on developments for this event.

            

Other potential items identified to date to remove from the work programme post-COVID-19

5.27    Other proposed changes to Council’s work programme that will reduce operating expenditure include:

5.27.1  $70,000 for a parking survey which was scheduled for December 2020/January 2021

5.27.2  $23,000 for freedom camping initiatives

5.27.3  $70,000 Wastewater (the main proposed change is for the Atawhai Rising Main - $50,000. Work on this project will be managed as part of Council’s current operational 2020/21 budgets as significant work was undertaken in 2019/20 on the rising main.

5.27.4  $20,000 Stormwater (freshwater compliance - this work can be undertaken within existing budgets with effecting future work programmes)

5.27.5  $50,000 Water supply ($10,000 for sponsorship of annual awards which will not be held in 2020/21 and $15,000 for the water loss programme – good work has been undertaken in 2019/20 and Council is well placed for 2020/21)

5.28    More work is being done across the organisation to identify additional savings with the view to bring these back to the deliberations meeting.

Growth in the rating base

5.29    The Draft Annual Plan assumed the growth in the rating base to be 0.8% i.e. there would be an additional 179 rating units to pay the rates, a total of 22,610 rating units.  Having looked at the pipeline of subdivisions it is likely that the growth in the rate base is more likely to be 0.6% i.e. there would only be an additional 134 rating units (total of 22,565).

                Disaster Recovery Fund

5.30    To bring the proposed overall increase in rates revenue down to zero it is proposed to not rates fund and instead draw down against the Disaster Recovery Fund. The proposed contribution to the Disaster Fund in 2020/21 was $1.150m.  Drawing down against the Fund would require borrowing, as the fund is overdrawn as a result of Nelson experiencing several emergencies in recent years. The projected balance of the Fund as at 30 June 2021 was projected to be $659,000 overdrawn.  

5.31    To bring the rates increase to zero will at this stage require an additional $3.9m to be drawn down (borrowed) from the Disaster Recovery Fund taking the projected balance at 30 June 2021 to $4.6m deficit. 

5.32    Prior to the Covid-19 event, the Disaster Recovery Fund was planned to be in credit in 2021/22. With the proposed drawdown and assuming no further drawdowns and ongoing contributions consistent with the Long Term Plan 2018-28, the Fund is projected to be in credit in 2024/25 – an additional three years.

5.33    This will have an overall impact on Council debt of $3.9m taking the projected debt at 30 June 2021 to $112.8m (compared to the Long Term Plan 2018-28 of $139.0m).

5.34    Projected debt includes movements required to bring the increase in rates revenue down to zero only. It does not account for any rating deficit in the current year, which if it occurred would be debt funded.

5.35    Prior to the Covid-19 event, the Draft Annual Plan did not met the balanced budget benchmark (at 97%) due to the Waimea Dam contribution and loan funding the Nelson Plan. Due to the potential impact on other revenue sources (dividends, leases and licenses, building and resource consent and parking/enforcement revenue) offset by proposed savings, the balanced budget benchmark is estimated to be 94%.  

Emergency Fund for Community Groups

5.1      The other matter that the Extraordinary Council Meeting of 9 April requested an update on was the criteria for the Emergency Fund for community groups. Funding decisions will be made by the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Chair of the Community Services Committee.

5.2      At the 9 April meeting Council approved $200,000 for the Fund to be used in the current financial year. Further funding for 2020/21 can be considered during the Annual Plan deliberations.

The proposed purpose of the fund is, "To ensure that community organisations are supported to maintain their existing and continuing services for the benefit of the Nelson community”. The additional financial support being provided is to help organisations to continue to operate in the response/recovery phase of the pandemic."

5.3      A copy of the scope of the Fund, including criteria, is attached as Attachment 2. In summary the criteria are that organisations must:

·      Benefit the Nelson community

·      Be not for profit

·      Provide verified accounts

·      Demonstrate a budgetary shortfall/service demand related to COVID -19

·      Have applied for any applicable Central Government support.

Impact of COVID 19 on councils

5.4      Local Government New Zealand, working with the Society of Local Government Managers, Treasury and others, has done some analysis of COVID 19 impacts on councils. Its report notes that in council districts with a high degree of non-essential service industries, the impacts of COVID-19 will mean that a greater proportion of households and businesses may face financial hardship.

5.5      These councils will likely see greater reductions in revenue from fees and charges and impact on rate collections in the short-term. With 48% of GDP attributable to non-essential services Nelson is in the top 14 councils at risk in this way (with TDC not far behind at 46%). The report also notes that councils and businesses in districts heavily reliant on revenue derived from tourism activities are expected to be under significant financial stress for an extended period. We understand ten councils, including Nelson, have announced they are considering a rates freeze.

 

 

6.       Conclusion

6.1      Total operating savings outlined in this report and proposed for inclusion in the final Annual Plan is estimated at $2.6 million.

6.2         Offsets for these savings include, the reductions in income estimated as $3.3 million, the Emergency Fund for community groups of $200,000 and the cost of servicing any increase in capital expenditure which may be approved as part of an economic stimulus package in the Annual Plan.  This is not an austerity budget – but is a balance between Council continuing to spend in the region and being realistic about the impacts on the Council’s other revenue sources. 

 

Author:          Nikki Harrison, Group Manager Corporate Services

Attachments

Attachment 1:   A2372220 - Rates movement reconcilation - DAP 2020/21

Attachment 2:   A2372381 - Emergency Fund Criteria

 

 


Item 15: Effects of setting the 2020/21 rates increase to zero: Attachment 1

PDF Creator


Item 15: Effects of setting the 2020/21 rates increase to zero: Attachment 2

PDF Creator


Item 14: City Centre Programme: COVID19 Response: Attachment 1

 

Council

23 April 2020

 

 

REPORT R16965

City Centre Programme: COVID19 Response

     

 

1.       Purpose of Report

1.1      To consider tactical options to enable rejuvenation and safe pedestrian circulation post COVID19 level 4 lockdown in the city centre.

1.2      To approve short term stage 1 actions and how they are to be funded.

1.3      To support a funding application to be made to the NZTA Innovating Streets for People fund.

1.4      To approve undertaking a public feedback process on four options for stage 2 medium term works, and delegate approval of the details of the public feedback process and consultation documents to the City Centre Working Group.

2.       Summary

2.1      Post COVID19 Level 4 lockdown the city centre needs to function well to allow people to move and maintain physical distance.  There are many areas around the city centre where footpaths are narrow but it is necessary to focus on the main thoroughfares for expediency and budget reasons. To that end this report proposes ‘temporarily moving to more permanent’ widening of footpaths on Trafalgar Street and the southern side of Hardy Street.

2.2      A staged approach is proposed.  Stage 1 includes immediate measures to provide additional space for city centre pedestrians to safely move with physical distancing, such as road cones and delineating marker posts. Stage 2 involves more medium term tactical treatments such as pedestrian graphic ground plane treatments and modular footpath edge extension elements.

2.3      A decision is sought from Council to enable stage 1 tactical measures to be implemented immediately after COVID19 level 4 lockdown is lifted, and to support the NZTA funding application and the options for medium term treatments to be implemented next financial year subject to a public feedback process.

 

 

3.       Recommendation

That the Council

1.    Receives the report City Centre Programme: COVID19 Response (R16965) and its attachment; and

2.    Approves stage 1 short term tactical initiatives to enable safe pedestrian movement in the city centre post COVID19 lockdown from existing unspent Transport budget; and

3.    Approves undertaking a public feedback process on the four options for medium term tactical initiatives to enable safe pedestrian movement in the city centre; and

4.    Delegates approval of the public feedback process, documents and method to the City Centre Working Group; and

5.    Notes that officers will report the results of public consultation back to Council for a decision on which option to proceed with for stage 2; and

6.    Supports an Innovative Streets funding application to be submitted to NZTA; and

7.    Approves in principle capital budget expenditure of up to $3.1M for inclusion in the Annual Plan 2020/21, subject to the outcome of the public feedback process and the Innovative Streets funding application.

 

 

 

4.       Background

4.1      The City Centre Programme Plan adopted by Council in September 2019 is people-focused. The plan identifies six key moves including a “Walkable Nelson” move. 

4.2      The Government has announced that it will be helping council’s extend footpaths to help people keep 2 metres apart after level 4 lockdown is lifted (see Government media release 12 April 2020). Funding will come from the Innovating Streets for People fund (see NZTA Application Form), which supports projects using “tactical urbanism” techniques such as pilots and pop-ups, or interim treatments that make it safer and easier for people walking and cycling in the city.

5.       Discussion

The Driver for Change

5.1      COVID19 has changed how people interact with social distancing set to be the new norm.  Business within the city centre will also look different post lockdown.  There may be some businesses that do not re-open.

5.2      Other world cities, communities and people are adapting their life amidst COVID19 (See COVID19 Liveable Streets Response Strategies). As a Smart Little City, actions are required.

           Social Distancing

5.3      This report has been written prior to the Government’s announcement (anticipated on 20 April) about whether level 4 lockdown will be lifted and what any new level of COVID19 response might be.  It has been assumed that whether or not level 4 is lifted social distancing will likely be a requirement for 1 to 2 years until a vaccine can be created and provided to New Zealanders.

5.4      The Government released its Treasury Report Economic Scenarios on 13 April 2020, the key assumptions of which involve 5 scenarios over the four COVID levels for up to 12 months at either of, or a combination of, levels 1 to 4. The report emphasises the uncertainty in economic outlook is affected by how, or whether, movement restrictions and distancing measures imposed under each level enable economic activity.

5.5      Any physical changes to the city centre that increase the ability for business to operate and people to move in and around the city centre will also affect Nelson’s ability to recover both economically and socially from COVID19.

           COVID Response Tactical Urbanism Programme

5.6      The approved city centre programme provides for prioritising people spaces, and there is a panel of approved tactical urbanism suppliers which will enable fast procurement.  Options for how Council can respond to the need for physical distancing in the city centre include:

Short Term immediately following removal of Level 4 – Stage 1

5.6.1   It is proposed that immediately following the lifting of level 4 lockdown temporary traffic management measures comprising cones and delineating marker posts are put in place to widen footpaths to 6m (total width) with parallel parking provided on both sides of Trafalgar Street (from Halifax to Hardy Streets).

5.6.2   On Hardy Street the footpath extensions (comprising cones and delineating marker posts) would only occur on the southern (sunny side) of the street and would remove parallel parking on that side of the street. With 36 restaurants/cafes on Hardy St, prioritising spaces for food pickup/delivery activity on north side of Hardy Street is being considered in the COVID response to help those businesses for both Stage 1 and 2 measures.

5.6.3   These stage 1 works would be implemented while Council carries out a public feedback process on Stage 2 medium term options. Stage 1 will be a trial of some medium term tactical measures and provides time for the public to give feedback from their experience with stage 1.  Stage 1 works will all be temporary and reversible.

5.6.4   Council has the general power to carry out these Stage 1 works as road controlling authority including under the Local Government Act 1974.

Medium Term following public feedback process – Stage 2

5.6.5   It is proposed that a public feedback process, in accordance with section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002(LGA), is undertaken to gauge the level of support for more medium term tactical responses to provide for social distancing in the city centre.  Four options are considered below and it is proposed that all four are consulted on. 

5.6.6   Given that there is a need to act quickly in this space it is proposed that the detail of the public feedback process, documents and method be delegated for approval to the City Centre Working Group.  The results of feedback will be brought back to Council for a decision on which medium term option to proceed with, potentially as part of the Annual Plan deliberations process.  Depending upon the option selected, a further formal consultation process may be required.

5.6.7   All options considered involve partial or full reallocation of selected parking spaces and/or lanes closest to the kerb edge to create a larger area for people to walk, cycle or use micro-mobility.  Currently Trafalgar Street between Halifax and Hardy Streets provides 134 angle car parks.  Hardy Street provides 25 in parallel on the southern side.  The amount of carparks lost differs between the three options below.  All options are conceptual at this stage and require further exploration through more detailed design.  The advantages and disadvantages of each option are discussed in the options section 6 of this report.

5.6.8   Officers have spoken with Simon Duffy from Uniquely Nelson who has advised that he supports the approach and that retailers are wanting Council to assist in any way to help bring business back into the city centre.  Officers will be attending a zoom retailers meeting before this report goes to Council and can provide a verbal update on 23 April.

5.7      Three options for stage 2 medium term tactical responses have been considered, and a fourth option is to do nothing:

           Option 1: 6m footpaths (total width) both sides of Trafalgar Street (from Halifax to Hardy Streets) with parallel parking both sides, and 6m footpath (total width) Hardy and Bridge Streets south side only – refer Attachment 1

5.8      This option provides for safe pedestrian movement but changes permanent angle car parking to parallel parking on both sides of Trafalgar Street, and reduces parallel parking on Hardy and Bridge Streets to one side only.  Outdoor dining along Hardy Street will need to be accommodated within the design.

5.9      Allowing for a 2.0m ‘bubble’, a maximum of 350 pedestrians can feasibly walk along Trafalgar Street at any one time between Hardy & Bridge Streets (exceeding peak summer pedestrian activity). Pedestrians could walk bi-directionally.  This would be achieved by a combination of tactical measures including road painting, planters and/or wooden raised modular footpath extensions.

           Option 2: 8.5m footpaths (total width) both sides of Trafalgar Street (from Halifax to Hardy Streets) with no parking and 6m footpaths (total width) Hardy and Bridge Streets south side only – see attachment 1

5.10    This option provides for safe pedestrian movement but removes all car parking form Trafalgar Street and, as for Option 1, reduces parallel parking on Hardy and Bridge Streets to one side only.  Outdoor dining along Hardy Street will need to be accommodated within the design.

5.11    Allowing for a 2.0m ‘bubble’, a maximum of 525 pedestrians can feasibly walk at any one time along Trafalgar Street between Hardy & Bridge Streets (exceeding peak summer activity). Pedestrians could move bi-directionally.  This would be achieved by a combination of tactical measures including road painting, planters and/or wooden raised modular footpath extensions.

5.12    The extra widths provides opportunity for larger safe waiting/resting areas outside shops and businesses.  Removal of all parking in Trafalgar Street removes any parking/pedestrian conflicts.

5.13    By removing all parking in Trafalgar Street there is opportunity to narrow the width of Trafalgar Street traffic lanes as they are extra wide due to the reversing required to be provided for angle parking.  This would slow traffic speeds in Trafalgar Street.

           Option 3: Close Trafalgar Street to vehicles (from Halifax to Hardy Streets) and 6m footpaths (total width) Hardy and Bridge Streets south side only – see attachment 1.

5.14    This option provides for Trafalgar Street to be closed to vehicles, which could occur during the week or for weekends only. As for Option 1, reduces parallel parking on Hardy and Bridge Streets to one side only.  Outdoor dining along Hardy Street will need to be accommodated within the design.

5.15    Allowing for a 2.0m ‘bubble’ and ‘inter bubble’ relationships pedestrians could move unfettered by vehicles at any one time between Hardy & Bridge Streets (exceeding peak summer activity). Pedestrians could move bi-directionally.  This would be achieved by a combination of tactical measures including road painting, planters and/or wooden raised modular footpath extensions and tactical treatments similar to Upper Trafalgar Street.

5.16    This option makes it possible for a smaller linear Saturday Market to occur with physical distancing by making use of the whole of Trafalgar Street.

5.17    Depending on what statutory instrument is selected to achieve this option, it may require a formal consultation process (in addition to the public feedback process on options sought to be approved in this report), similar to that undertaken for Upper Trafalgar Street before vehicles can be prevented from using Trafalgar Street.  There would also need to be pedestrian treatments at the intersections of Trafalgar, Hardy and Bridge Streets to ensure pedestrian priority as vehicles cross the city.

Other considerations

5.18    As with all concepts the devil is in the detail.  There are a number of other considerations that officers would need to resolve to implement any of the above options discussed.  These can be addressed in the next report to Council following public feedback and include:

5.18.1  Any further statutory processes required to fully implement any of the options for example, following any required statutory processes to close Trafalgar Street to vehicle traffic (as referred to above) or change any bylaws.

5.18.2  Trafalgar Street has a very high crown relative to the footpath level and detailed design is required to ensure modular footpath extensions are physically practical.

5.18.3  Management of construction effects on businesses.

5.18.4  Treatment of the lanes within the city centre (especially Bank Lane, City Centre Arcade and Fiddle Lane) to ensure physical distancing

5.18.5  All of the options may affect the placement of new pay by plate parking meters due to start construction in July 2020.

5.18.6  The NZ Transport Agency advises that a road controlling agency can set an emergency speed limit in a number of situations including epidemic. Officers propose to lower the inner city speed limit (within the ring road) to 30kmph to support the temporary traffic management in place to facilitate physical distancing. The emergency limit can stay in place for up to 12 months, by which time the process for a permanent bylaw change to the speed limit will be completed. It is proposed to be used for both Stage 1 and 2.

5.18.7  There are maintenance issues and costs to be considered including sweeping autumn leaf fall and existing outdoor dining areas/leases to be considered.

           Current City Centre Tactical Initiatives

5.19    Council is currently implementing a programme of tactical works at Upper Trafalgar Street and 29 Halifax Street (Youth Pop-up Park).  Both of these projects are planned to resume as soon as Level 4 Lockdown is lifted.  There is a need to consider physical distancing within these projects as they are implemented, but also in terms of how people can move to and from these activations in a safe way along the city centre streets.

           Funding

5.20    Currently all options are unbudgeted expenditure. However there are some budgets unspent due to COVID19 lockdown which can be reallocated.  Unspent budgets for transport operational work amounts to $440K from this financial year and $205K could be allocated to this project for stage 1.  51% of that funding is the NZTA subsidy and would need to be approved to be redirected by the NZTA.

5.21    Officers intend to seek a further $1million funding from the Innovative Streets Fund through NZTA. Successful applications to this fund will attract a 90% financial assistance rate so any project would require 10% local share commitment from Council.

5.22    The funding application to the Innovative Streets fund is due to be submitted by 8 May, but can be received earlier.

5.23    As a placeholder, it is proposed that $3.1 million of capital funding be included (in principle) in the Annual Plan 2020/21 for Stage 2 medium term works, subject to the outcome of the public feedback process, detailed design and NZTA funding.

           Costs stage 1 – Temporary traffic management

5.24    Using temporary traffic management for 6 months for Trafalgar Street (both Sides from Halifax to Hardy Streets), Hardy and Bridge Streets (Southern side only) is estimated at $205,000.

           Costs Stage 2 – with $1M sought from NZTA

5.25    Costs for all of the Stage 2 options are indicative at this stage and subject to detailed design.

           Option 1: $3.1M for 6m footpaths both sides of Trafalgar Street (from Halifax to Hardy Streets) with parallel parking, and 6m footpath Hardy and Bridge Streets south side only.

           Option 2: $4.7M for 8.5m footpaths both sides of Trafalgar Street (from Halifax to Hardy Streets) with no parking, and 6m footpaths Hardy and Bridge Streets south side only.

           Option 3: $800K to $12M Close Trafalgar Street to vehicles (from Halifax to Hardy Streets) and 6m footpath Hardy and Bridge Streets southern side only.  The range in costs reflects a range in design options, one end of the scale being use of bollards to prevent vehicle access and retaining the current street formation.  The other end of the scale would involve physical changes to the whole pavement to make a permanent pedestrian mall.

           Loss of parking

5.26    All of the options proposed result in a reconfiguration and loss of carparking, numbers are subject to detailed design.

5.27    There are currently 134 angled parks (68 west side and 66 east side, including 7 mobility spaces) along Trafalgar Street between Halifax and Hardy Streets affected.

5.28    There are 25 parallel parks along the southern side of Hardy Street between the ring roads, 2 taxi and 2 loading spaces affected.

5.29    Nelson has an ageing population and there needs to be parking available proximal to popular destinations.  The need for accessible parks will be consulted on as part of the feedback process.

6.       Options

6.1      Council has several staged options to consider:

(i)          To approve Stage 1 temporary traffic management measures immediately following lifting of Level 4 COVID19 lockdown, or do nothing.

and

(ii)          To approve Stage 2 Medium Term Tactical Options for a public feedback process, or to do nothing and retain Stage 1 temporary measures.

6.2      Officers recommend that Council approve the Stage 1 temporary traffic management measures.  Officers consider that doing nothing is not a viable option as Council has a health and safety obligation to ensure pedestrians can safely move around the city centre post COVID19 lockdown.  Under various levels of COVID19 response business owners may also need to utilise their shop entrances and footpaths differently in order to comply with the rules of each level. 

6.3      It has only been possible for limited consultation to occur on stage 1 measures.  It is noted however that these measures are temporary and reversible.  There will be a Communications Plan developed and implemented to assist with the roll out of stage 1 measures.  Officers propose that Uniquely Nelson monitors the effects of stage 1 measures with city centre businesses, and this feedback can be reported back to the Group Managers Infrastructure and Environmental Management for consideration of any changes required.

6.4      If the ‘do nothing option’ was adopted for stage 1 it would make social distancing in Trafalgar Street difficult and may result in pedestrian safety issues.  It may also make it very difficult for the hospitality businesses in Hardy Street to operate.  Officers recommend stage 1 temporary measures are implemented as soon as COVID level 4 lockdown is lifted.

6.5      In relation to Stage 2 medium term tactical measures, the risks, disadvantages and advantages of each of the options proposed for public feedback are outlined in the table below.  A decision is sought for these options to be included as part of a public consultation process.

 

Option 1: 6m footpaths both sides of Trafalgar Street (from Halifax to Hardy Streets) with parallel parking, and 6m footpaths Hardy and Bridge Streets south side only

Advantages

·   Provides for pedestrians to use the city centre with physical distancing in a low risk high amenity manner on Trafalgar and Hardy Streets.

·   Provides for parallel parking both sides of Trafalgar Street.

·   Provides for physical distancing for outdoor dining areas along Hardy Street and takeaway pick up zones.

·   Provides for physical distancing for pedestrians along Bridge Street.

Risks and Disadvantages

·   Results in the removal of angle parking in Trafalgar Street and parallel parking one side of Hardy and Bridge Streets and resulting loss of parking revenue.

·   May result in pedestrian and parallel parking conflicts in Trafalgar Street which will need to be managed.

·   Doesn’t address footpaths elsewhere in the city centre including those in the parking squares.

·   Disruption to business from construction needs to be managed.

Option 2: 8.5m footpaths both sides of Trafalgar Street (from Halifax to Hardy Streets) with no parking, and 6m footpaths Hardy and Bridge Streets south side only

Advantages

·    Provides a trial through tactical urbanism of removing parking from Trafalgar Street and widening the public realm.

·    Provides for the narrowing of traffic lanes to reduce speeds in Trafalgar Street.

·    There is no need to manage pay and display parking in Trafalgar Street.

·   Provides for physical distancing for outdoor dining areas along Hardy Street and takeaway pick up zones.

·    Provides for physical distancing for pedestrians along Bridge Street.

Risks and Disadvantages

·    Removes all parking from Trafalgar Street and associated parking revenue.

·   Results in the removal of parallel parking on one side of Hardy Street

·    May not be supported by business owners in Trafalgar Street who consider it beneficial for customers to drive to and park close to the shop door.

·    Accessible parking drop off areas will need to be provided close to Trafalgar Street (i.e. on Hardy, Bridge and Halifax Streets)

·    Doesn’t address footpaths elsewhere in the city centre including those in the parking squares

·    Disruption to business from construction needs to be managed.

Option 3: Close Trafalgar Street to vehicles (from Halifax to Hardy Streets) and 6m footpaths Bridge and Hardy Streets southern side only

Advantages

·    Results in cost savings as the need to use tactical treatments to avoid conflicts between cars and people throughout the length of Trafalgar Street is reduced.

·    Results in less construction disruption to business than other options.

·    Is an option that had a level of support during the Upper Trafalgar Street Pedestrian Mall declaration consultation.

·    There is no need to manage pay and display parking in Trafalgar Street.

·   Provides for physical distancing for outdoor dining areas along Hardy Street and takeaway pick up zones.

·    Provides for physical distancing for pedestrians along Bridge Street.

Risks and Disadvantages

·    Requires a temporary road closure or pedestrian mall declaration process, a further consultation process adds time and cost.

·    Removes all parking from Trafalgar Street and associated parking revenue.

·    May not be supported by business owners in Trafalgar Street who consider it beneficial for customers to drive to and park close to the shop door.

·    Doesn’t provide for accessible parking spaces down Trafalgar Street.

·    Doesn’t address footpaths elsewhere in the city centre including those in the parking squares

·    Disruption from construction to business needs to be managed.

Option 4: Do nothing – retain Stage 1 temporary measures

Advantages

·    Reduced costs, additional budget only needed for longer term use of temporary traffic management measures

·    No public feedback process required

·    Avoids any construction disruption to businesses.

Risks and Disadvantages

·    Lower level support for safe and low risk re-entry to the city centre following COVID19 lockdown

·    Doesn’t meet the level of amenity expected by the community for the city centre

·    Doesn’t make use of NZTA Innovative Streets for People funding programme

·    Doesn’t address footpaths elsewhere in the city centre including those in the parking squares

 

6.6      Public consultation on the above options will enable Council to understand the views of the wider community, along with the views of businesses in the city centre.  Officers recommend that all four options are consulted on.

7.       Conclusion

7.1      Before COVID19 lockdown there were 6000 people who worked in the city centre, and an average of 50,000 winter pedestrian movements per day.  Businesses need to feel confident that employees and customers can get to offices, shops and restaurants in a manner that is safe, complies with the various COVID19 level requirements, and minimises the risk. 

7.2      This report seeks approval of:

7.2.1   Stage 1 temporary traffic management measures immediately following lifting of Level 4 COVID19 lockdown; and

7.2.2   A public feedback process on four options for Stage 2 medium term tactical initiatives; and

7.2.3   The detail of the public feedback process and material to be approved by the City Centre Working Group; and

7.2.4   The submission of an Innovative Streets for People funding application to NZTA; and

7.3      Preliminary approval of funding of up to $3.1 million to be included in the Annual Plan 2020/21 subject to public feedback process.

8.       Next Steps

8.1      If recommendations are approved in this report the following would be the next steps:

8.1.1   Design and commission stage 1 temporary traffic management measures

8.1.2   Prepare public feedback material for Stage 2 medium term tactical options for approval of the City Centre Working Group.

8.1.3   Submit funding application to NZTA.

 

Author:      Lisa Gibellini, Team Leader City Development

                  Alan Gray City Centre Development Programme Lead

                         Sue McAuley Team Leader Transport Activity Management

                   Marg Parfitt Manager Transport and Solid Waste

 

           Attachments

           Attachment 1:     A2373306 - COVID-19 Streets Response Options 1 to 3 

 

 

 

Important considerations for decision making

1.   Fit with Purpose of Local Government

This report provides options for Council to consider to promote the social, cultural and economic wellbeing of the community post COVID19 lockdown now and in the future.

2.   Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The City Centre Programme Plan supports the Long Term Plan 2018-28 (LTP) which makes the City Centre one of the Council’s top four priorities to support the Council’s vision of a Smart Little City. 

The LTP CBD (City Centre) Development priority states “Our aim for Nelson’s central business district is for it to be attractive to businesses, residents and visitors, with an exceptional mix of events, civic facilities and retail. We are working to build an environment that supports commerce, encourages inner city living and is a catalyst for private sector investment. The top of the South, Te Tau Ihu, needs a strong commercial centre to thrive. We want our city centre to enrich and build our local culture - the bustling meeting place for everyone who lives, works and visits here”

The options proposed in this report enable Council to give effect to the community outcomes and Council’s LTP and strategic priorities post COVD19 lockdown.

3.   Risk

The risk of not acting post COVID19 lockdown are that there is further economic and social downturn in the city centre due to the public’s perception that it is no longer safe to visit, work and shop in.

The risks associated with the stage 2 medium term options can be managed and assessed after the public feedback process.  There is a risk of judicial review proceedings however this can be mitigated by undertaking the public feedback process prior to deciding which Stage 2 option to proceed with. 

4.   Financial impact

Financial impacts are assessed in the body of the report.  The current recommendations only result in a re allocation of an existing unspent transport budget for stage 1.  Costs for stage 2 medium term measures are sought to be allocated in principle in the Annual Plan and will be decided upon by Council after the results of public feedback.

5.   Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low-medium significance because of the COVID19 pandemic and because it involves a decision only on stage 1 temporary measures which can be reversed.

In relation to Stage 2, the community may be expecting Council to undertake works to enable business, workers and hospitality seekers to operate safely as part of a COVID19 response, other members of the community may be concerned with the loss of parking proposed.  For this reason it is proposed that a public feedback process be undertaken on the stage 2 medium term options while the stage 1 short term temporary traffic management measures are in place.  Council will then be able to consider the views of those affected prior to making any decisions on stage 2 medium term tactical options.

6.   Climate Impact

Climate change impact has not been specifically considered as part of this report.  The decision sought in this report is for temporary traffic measures.  Consideration of climate change in each of the stage 2 medium term tactical measures can be undertaken via the next Council report.

7.   Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

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

8.   Delegations

The relevant extract from the delegations register is in section 5.1.1 as follows:

       Council retains all responsibilities, powers, functions and duties in relation      to governance matters for the following items: 

•      City Centre Programme Plan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                        


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF CreatorPDF Creator


PDF CreatorPDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF CreatorPDF CreatorPDF Creator


PDF Creator