Notice of the ordinary meeting of

Nelson City Council

Te Kaunihera o Whakatū

Date:		Wednesday 3 June 2020
Time:		9.00a.m.
Location:		Council Chamber
			Civic House
			110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson

Agenda

Rārangi take

Mayor               Her Worship the Mayor Rachel Reese

Deputy Mayor  Cr Judene Edgar

Members          Cr Yvonne Bowater

                         Cr Trudie Brand

                         Cr Mel Courtney

                         Cr Kate Fulton

Cr Matt Lawrey

Cr Brian McGurk

Cr Gaile Noonan

                         Cr Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

                         Cr Pete Rainey

                         Cr Rachel Sanson

                         Cr Tim Skinner

Quorum          7                                                     Pat Dougherty                                                                                             Chief Executive Officer

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. For enquiries call (03) 5460436.


 

Council Values

Following are the values agreed during the 2016 – 2019 term:

A. Whakautetanga: respect

B. Kōrero Pono: integrity

C. Māiatanga: courage

D. Whakamanatanga: effectiveness

E. Whakamōwaitanga: humility

F. Kaitiakitanga: stewardship

G. Manaakitanga: generosity of spirit


 

 

N-logotype-black-wideNelson City Council

3 June 2020

 

 

Page No.

Opening Karakia

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.         Confirmation of Minutes

            The minutes of the 14 May 2020 Council meeting for the Hearing of submissions to the Draft Annual Plan 2020/21 will be tabled for confirmation at the meeting.

6.         Mayor's Report

The Mayor’s report will be presented at the meeting to provide an update on current issues.  

7.         Deliberations on Annual Plan Consultation Document 2020/21                                                                 8 - 60

Document number R15930

Recommendation

That the Council

1.     Receives the report Deliberations on Annual Plan Consultation Document 2020/21 (R15930) and its attachment (A2394034).

Nelson Regional Development Agency

That the Council

2.     Makes provision for additional funding of up to $350,000 for the Nelson Regional Development Agency to support the development and implementation of Project Kōkiri.

Crown Infrastructure Fund Projects

That the Council

3.     Notes that approval for funding from the central government Crown Infrastructure Fund for capital expenditure works is still being sought; and if approvals are received then these projects will be included in the Council’s work programme.

Mahitahi/Bayview

That the Council

4.     Notes that approval for funding from the central government Crown Infrastructure Fund to upgrade Council infrastructure which will support the Mahitahi/Bayview development, has been sought; but if approval is not received prior to the Annual Plan being finalised then a report will come back to Council requesting funding for design work for the project.  

Provincial Growth Fund

That the Council

5.     Notes an increase of $780,000 for Council capital expenditure works by way of grants from the Provincial Growth Fund; and

6.     Notes an increase of $100,000 for Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit capital expenditure works by way of grants from the Provincial Growth Fund; and

7.     Notes an increase of $350,000 for Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit capital expenditure works by way of grants from the Provincial Growth Fund.

Public Transport COVID-19 Implications

That the Council

8.     Notes that the public transport revenue has been reduced by 50% to $374,000 for the 2020/21 Annual Plan.

Funding of the Nelson Plan

That the Council

9.     Confirms its intent to fund $1.122 million of the 2020/21 Nelson Plan costs by loan.

City Centre Development

That the Council

10.  Approves inclusion in the Annual Plan 2020/21 of a capital budget of $3.1 million, subject to the outcome of the public feedback process and NZTA funding applications; and

11.  Notes that the balance of $1.9 million of funding will be included in the draft budget for 2021/2022, this being year 1 of the Long Term Plan.

Arts Council

That the Council

12.  Approves the carry forward of $47,500 from the Arts Council’s allocated budget for the current financial year to 2020/21.

Nelson Festivals Trust

That the Council

13.  Agrees to the Nelson Festivals Trust’s request to vary the current funding agreement and reduce the funding in 2020/21 to $305,000, which will be used for core operations and Festival 2021 planning, as well as the delivery of a programme of collaborative events in the 2020/21 year.

Events Fund

That the Council

14.  Approves the Events Fund for 2020/21 as follows:
        - Event Fund Economic - $200,000

    - Event Fund Community - $76,000

    - Venue Hire Fund - $30,000.

Brook Waimarama Sanctuary

That the Council

15.  Agrees to make provision for $40,000 in 2020/21 to offer support to the Brook Waimarama Sanctuary Trust by way of a contract for a business manager to provide advice; and

16.  Notes the grant would be contingent on agreement that the business manager report to Council at the conclusion of their work on the future opportunities and challenges in the Trust business model.

Nelson Mountain Bike Club

That the Council

17.  Agrees to the carry forward to 2020/21 of $326,000 of contract funding for the Nelson Mountain Bike Club for trail construction services.

Marina

That the Council

18.  Agrees to increase the budget for the Marina review from $20,000 to $50,000, funded from the Marina account.

Community Housing

That the Council

19.  Confirms its intent to set aside the full proceeds of any divestment of its community housing assets as a Housing Reserve. 

Millers Acre

That the Council

20.  Approves a budget of up to $850,000 for remedial work at the Millers Acre site.

Capital Expenditure

That the Council

21.  Approves the changes to the draft 2020/21 capital expenditure budget, as set out in Attachment 1.

Rating recommendations

That the Council

22.  Confirms, in accordance with the Long Term Plan 2018-28, that the percent of total rates collected as commercial rates reduces from 24.1% in 2019/20 to 23.6% in 2020/21; and

23.  Confirms its intent to have a net zero percent rates increase in 2020/21; and

24.  Agrees to drawdown the net rating income shortfall from COVID-19 from the Disaster Recovery Fund for the Annual Plan 2020/21.

 

  

 

 

 

  


 

Item 6: Deliberations on Annual Plan Consultation Document 2020/21

 

Council

3 June 2020

 

 

REPORT R15930

Deliberations on Annual Plan Consultation Document 2020/21

     

 

1.       Purpose of Report

1.1       To provide supporting information and officer recommendations to assist with deliberations on the Annual Plan 2020/21 Consultation Document.

2.       Summary

2.1       Council has heard submissions on the Annual Plan 2020/21 Consultation Document and must now consider matters raised by submitters as well as any new issues which have arisen that may impact on the Annual Plan. Context and background on the COVID-19 emergency and impacts is provided as well as a proposed financial strategy to respond to the first twelve months of Nelson’s social and economic recovery.

 

 

3.       Recommendation

 

That the Council

1.     Receives the report Deliberations on Annual Plan Consultation Document 2020/21 (R15930) and its attachment (A2394034).

Nelson Regional Development Agency

That the Council

2.     Makes provision for additional funding of up to $350,000 for the Nelson Regional Development Agency to support the development and implementation of Project Kōkiri.

Crown Infrastructure Fund Projects

That the Council

3.     Notes that approval for funding from the central government Crown Infrastructure Fund for capital expenditure works is still being sought; and if approvals are received then these projects will be included in the Council’s work programme.

Mahitahi/Bayview

That the Council

4.     Notes that approval for funding from the central government Crown Infrastructure Fund to upgrade Council infrastructure which will support the Mahitahi/Bayview development, has been sought; but if approval is not received prior to the Annual Plan being finalised then a report will come back to Council requesting funding for design work for the project.  

Provincial Growth Fund

That the Council

5.     Notes an increase of $780,000 for Council capital expenditure works by way of grants from the Provincial Growth Fund; and

6.     Notes an increase of $100,000 for Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit capital expenditure works by way of grants from the Provincial Growth Fund; and

7.     Notes an increase of $350,000 for Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit capital expenditure works by way of grants from the Provincial Growth Fund.

Public Transport COVID-19 Implications

That the Council

8.     Notes that the public transport revenue has been reduced by 50% to $374,000 for the 2020/21 Annual Plan.

Funding of the Nelson Plan

That the Council

9.     Confirms its intent to fund $1.122 million of the 2020/21 Nelson Plan costs by loan.

City Centre Development

That the Council

10.  Approves inclusion in the Annual Plan 2020/21 of a capital budget of $3.1 million, subject to the outcome of the public feedback process and NZTA funding applications; and

11.  Notes that the balance of $1.9 million of funding will be included in the draft budget for 2021/2022, this being year 1 of the Long Term Plan.

Arts Council

That the Council

12.  Approves the carry forward of $47,500 from the Arts Council’s allocated budget for the current financial year to 2020/21.

Nelson Festivals Trust

That the Council

13.  Agrees to the Nelson Festivals Trust’s request to vary the current funding agreement and reduce the funding in 2020/21 to $305,000, which will be used for core operations and Festival 2021 planning, as well as the delivery of a programme of collaborative events in the 2020/21 year.

Events Fund

That the Council

14.  Approves the Events Fund for 2020/21 as follows:
        - Event Fund Economic - $200,000

    - Event Fund Community - $76,000

    - Venue Hire Fund - $30,000.

Brook Waimarama Sanctuary

That the Council

15.  Agrees to make provision for $40,000 in 2020/21 to offer support to the Brook Waimarama Sanctuary Trust by way of a contract for a business manager to provide advice; and

16.  Notes the grant would be contingent on agreement that the business manager report to Council at the conclusion of their work on the future opportunities and challenges in the Trust business model.

Nelson Mountain Bike Club

That the Council

17.  Agrees to the carry forward to 2020/21 of $326,000 of contract funding for the Nelson Mountain Bike Club for trail construction services.

Marina

That the Council

18.  Agrees to increase the budget for the Marina review from $20,000 to $50,000, funded from the Marina account.

Community Housing

That the Council

19.  Confirms its intent to set aside the full proceeds of any divestment of its community housing assets as a Housing Reserve. 

Millers Acre

That the Council

20.  Approves a budget of up to $850,000 for remedial work at the Millers Acre site.

Capital Expenditure

That the Council

21.  Approves the changes to the draft 2020/21 capital expenditure budget, as set out in Attachment 1.

Rating recommendations

That the Council

22.  Confirms, in accordance with the Long Term Plan 2018-28, that the percent of total rates collected as commercial rates reduces from 24.1% in 2019/20 to 23.6% in 2020/21; and

23.  Confirms its intent to have a net zero percent rates increase in 2020/21; and

24.  Agrees to drawdown the net rating income shortfall from COVID-19 from the Disaster Recovery Fund for the Annual Plan 2020/21.

 

 

 

 

4.             Background

4.1           The Annual Plan consultation and deliberations on submissions are being undertaken during one of the greatest economic shocks seen in New Zealand and globally for 100 years. The full extent of the shock on New Zealand is still uncertain and depends on the effectiveness of both the health and economic stimulus measures implemented around the world.

4.2           It is clear that the economy will be significantly changed by this pandemic, with some sectors being much more severely affected than others.  The Nelson Tasman economy is forecast to contract by almost 8% in the year to March 2021.  A recent Infometrics report forecast unemployment in Nelson to rise to 8.6%. Others have found that to be an optimistic projection with suggestions that 1 in 10 people could lose their job, with this hitting younger workers more severely. The full effects of the pandemic on the community have not yet occurred, and economic recovery will take several years.

4.3           The Council decision on 9 April 2020, to seek public input on a proposal to set rates at a net zero increase and, extend the consultation process to 6 May 2020, reflects the importance of the 2020/21 Annual Plan and Council decisions which will assist with social and economic recovery.  Other early actions in response to the economic shock were also covered in reports to Council dated 9 and 23 April 2020. 

4.4           Decisions made on points raised by submitters will be influenced by the current situation.  Further information on the impact of COVID-19 is included in the relevant sections in this report.

4.5           Staff have worked closely with the Her Worship the Mayor to develop responses to submissions in this report, in line with the role of mayors set out in section 41A of the Local Government Act 2002 to lead the development of a territorial authority’s plans, including the Long Term Plan and Annual Plan. However, the report reflects officers’ best advice and the Mayor wants this advice tested by elected members as a critical part of the deliberations process. This is the purpose of the Deliberations meetings.

5.             Impact of COVID-19

Impact of COVID-19 on the National Economy

5.1           The 2020 ‘Rebuilding Together’ central government Budget established a $50 billion COVID-19 Recovery and Response Fund which will increase net core crown debt from 30% to 50% of GDP from now to 2023. This spend includes $13.9 billion of previous commitments made, such as the wage subsidy scheme and support to Small and Medium Sized Enterprises, and an additional $15.9 billion spending for 2021.

5.2           Support to business will come through an extension of the Wage Subsidy until 1 September 2020, support for research and development, enhanced digital commerce and trade.  A $3 billion Infrastructure Fund has been announced on top of the $12 billion Upgrade Programme announced earlier this year to support regional projects.

5.3           It is expected that additional funding for infrastructure will be allocated for areas such as the Three Waters Programme.  Reform of the Resource Management Act has been included as part of the COVID-19 response to streamline project implementation.  Support has been announced to bolster education and training to support people getting back into work through a $1.6 billion Trades and Apprentice Package, alongside $1 billion for Environmental Jobs.  With tourism being the hardest hit sector, the $400m Tourism Recovery Package will support the first stages of a recovery action plan.  $20 billion of the COVID-19 Fund is yet to be allocated.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Regional Economy

5.4           The full effects of COVID-19 on the regional economy will not be known for some time and the recovery will take several years.  Immediate business support and advice is being provided by Nelson City Council owned Nelson Regional Development Agency (NRDA) that provides economic  services for the region, including on contract for Tasman District Council, as well as the Nelson Tasman Chamber of Commerce, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and other organisations.

5.5           Although many businesses are now able to get back up and running under Level 2, it remains a very uncertain environment with most businesses surveyed by the NRDA expecting revenue to continue to decrease over the next three months.  Many local businesses are concerned about what will happen after the wage subsidy ends as they face a potential extended period of low revenue due to lack of tourism, supply chain disruption, less income circulating in the economy, and decreased consumer confidence.

Project Kōkiri and funding of NRDA

5.6           An economic recovery plan, Project Kōkiri, is being developed and has a governance group which includes the Nelson and Tasman Mayors, business leaders and iwi.  The Project is being managed by the NRDA. 

5.7           The initial response phase of six months is focused on supporting businesses to get through the crisis period, identifying projects to prioritise for central government funding, and determining a framework for medium to long term sustainable economic recovery.  The work programme will operate from individual business through to sector level in areas such as targeted business needs analysis and support, skills and workforce development and redeployment, ‘buy local’ campaigns, tourism sector recovery, and local government infrastructure investment.

5.8           The role of the NRDA and Council support for Project Kōkiri is aligned with the principles relating to local authorities set out in the Local Government Act 2002.  These principles include that a local authority should take into account the “social, economic and cultural interests of people and communities”.  The proposed support also fits with several of our Community Outcomes, including “Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy” and “Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and community engagement.” 

5.9           Implementation of Project Kōkiri will require additional resources and skills.  NRDA also relies on obtaining a significant portion of its operating revenue from tourism operators and this income will largely disappear under current conditions.  NRDA has indicated that it is exploring additional revenue sources for the resulting operating deficit but that additional Council funding is likely to be needed to implement Project Kōkiri.

5.10        The cost of developing and implementing this project over the next 12 months is estimated at $700,000, however fully funding this from non-Council sources, including central government is not considered achievable at this time. The mayors are advocating to ministers for additional regional economic support and this may be forthcoming but officers consider it prudent to make a provision of $350,000 towards the costs of implementing this project to ensure NRDA can fulfil its critical role.

 Recommendation

That the Council

2.   Makes provision for additional funding of up to $350,000 for the Nelson Regional Development Agency to support the development and implementation of Project Kōkiri.

Crown Infrastructure Fund projects

5.11        Central government has called for applications from the regions for “shovel-ready’ projects, through the Crown Infrastructure Partners Fund (CIF), which would assist with stimulating economic activity. Proposals from this Council (in collaboration with TDC for some packages) with a combined value of $217 million (Note this excludes Mahitahi/Bayview) were coordinated through Project Kōkiri and have been submitted for consideration. The applications have requested funding assistance in some from (through either grants or long-term interest free loans) of around $83 million. Thirteen Nelson/Tasman applications have been forwarded to Ministers for consideration, with three so far referred to the Provincial Growth Fund for consideration.

5.12        Notwithstanding central government funding for any approved projects, Council would also need to contribute to some degree. The difficulty for planning purposes is that Council does not know at this stage which projects will receive central government funding and what form that assistance may take.   If funding is approved by central government before the Annual Plan budgets are finalised then these projects will be included in the final Plan. 

5.13        Spending an increased budget, will be a challenge. However, Officers are fully committed to doing whatever is necessary to be part of rejuvenating the City and region. The 7 May 2020 COVID-19 Infrastructure committee report commented 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”.

5.14        Additional resource may be required over and above these two additional project managers depending upon the level of government support. Costs would be capitalised to the capital project.

 

Recommendation

That the Council

3.     Notes that approval for funding from the central government Crown Infrastructure Fund for capital expenditure works is still being sought; and if approvals are received, subject to favourable terms, then these projects will be included in the Council’s work programme.

            Mahitahi/Bayview

5.15        As part of the Mahitahi/Bayview proposed development Council has made an application to central government for $25 million to replace and upgrade existing critical infrastructure affecting the Nelson East, Maitai and Bayview catchment area. The proposed upgrades will provide enough capacity and resilience for the development of up to 700 new dwellings to be consented and built in the Maitai and Bayview catchment area.

5.16        The funding application has been made to the Crown Infrastructure Partners Fund set up to commence ‘shovel ready’ infrastructure projects as a way of kick-starting the economy as the country recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic.

5.17        The project involves co-operation between a group of experienced local developers and iwi, and Council. The land in question has been identified in the Nelson/Tasman Future Development Strategy as having potential for residential development and there has been ongoing communication between officers and landowners on the best way to plan for future development in this area. The land is situated 2.2km from the City Centre, and development plans include enhanced environmental outcomes for waterways and the river bank, along with expanded walking and cycling links allowing new residents to choose to leave their car at home when travelling to work, leisure or school.

5.18        This work will bring considerable economic benefits to Nelson at a time when the region needs a vital boost and will also provide a catchment close to the City Centre, and relieve pressure on our limited housing stock.

5.19        If funding from central government is received, it is anticipated that as a condition of funding, that work will need to be fast tracked with the aim of commencing work on site towards the end of the calendar year. To achieve this, it is proposed that work will commence on the upgrade of the wastewater and water supply infrastructure with an anticipated spend of $1.7 million for wastewater and $1 million for water in the 2020/21 financial year.

5.20        If central government funding is not received then a report will come back to Council requesting loan funding to undertake design work on this project.  As the project is required for growth the costs would be recovered from development contributions over time.

Recommendation

That the Council

4.     Notes that approval for funding from the central government Crown Infrastructure Fund to upgrade Council infrastructure which will support the Mahitahi/Bayview development, has been sought; but if approval is not received prior to the Annual Plan being finalised then a report will come back to Council requesting funding for design work for the project.


 

Provincial Growth Fund

5.21        In addition to the CIF funding, application was made to the Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) for various projects. Council’s application to the PGF, which included around 85 separate projects, has been successful with funding for five roading projects secured as shown below.

Project

Estimated Total Cost (plus GST)

NCC - Beach Road Raised Table

$180,000

NCC -Maitai pathway improvement (Collingwood to Bridge)

$600,000

Sub-total NCC

$780,000

 

 

NRSBU - Bullivant road cycleway -

$100,000

 

 

NTRLBU - York road resurfacing

$250,000

NTRLBU - Planting & Tracks Eves Valley

$100,000

Sub-total NTRLBU

$350,000

 

 

Total

$1,230,000

5.22        Council as administering authority for the Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit (NRSBU) and Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit (NTRLBU) co-ordinated applications for these resulting in the success of three projects – two for the NTRLBU and one for the NRSBU.

5.23        Discussions with MBIE are progressing with plans to implement these underway. One of the conditions of funding includes providing MBIE with regular monthly progress updates and commencement of works within two months of COVID-19 Alert Level 2 been lifted – i.e. two months from 14 May 2020.

 


 

Recommendation

That the Council

5.     Notes an increase of $780,000 for Council capital expenditure works by way of grants from the Provincial Growth Fund; and

6.     Notes an increase of $100,000 for Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit capital expenditure works by way of grants from the Provincial Growth Fund; and

7.     Notes an increase of $350,000 for Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit capital expenditure works by way of grants from the Provincial Growth Fund.

Employment funding

5.24        One of the actions already underway to provide employment opportunities in Nelson are applications or central government funding to assist with several environmental projects with positive employment outcomes.  These include pest control, planting and working with private land owners on biodiversity projects.  A number of agencies may be involved in the funding and support of these projects, including the Department of Conservation.  The outcome of these applications will be reported back to Council in due course.  

Impact of COVID-19 on Council budget estimates and proposed strategy

5.25        Since the Draft Annual Plan was approved with a 3.7% increase in the rates requirement, pre-COVID-19, Council asked for officers to present information on how a net zero rates rise could be achieved in response to the economic impact on the community and noted that the final decision will be made during Annual Plan deliberations. 

5.26        It is important to understand that COVID-19 has resulted in a reduction in projected revenue of $3.9 million across a range of sources including dividends from CCTOs, rental income, resource and building consent fees, public transport and parking and infringement income.

5.27        Officers were asked to find savings to offset the loss of revenue and to minimise rates increases.  Savings have been identified of $3.4 million, mainly in staff costs and travel and training $1.3 million, interest and depreciation, consultants and other work programs.

5.28        In addition to the shortfall of $0.5 million as a result of these projected income and expenditure changes, to undertake work streams as proposed in the draft Annual Plan requires funding of $2.9 million as provided for by the originally proposed 3.7% rates increase. Much of this work is critical to achieving Council’s priorities and key elements of the Long Term Plan.  The work also supports economic stimulus. Where savings or re-phasing opportunities can be made at this point in time they are identified in this report.  Therefore, delivering the Draft Annual Plan and bringing the rates increase to zero will at this stage require approximately  $3.4m to be drawn down (borrowed) from the Disaster Recovery Fund taking the projected balance at 30 June 2021 to a $3.9m deficit.

5.29        Economic advice from economic advisory organisations such as Infometrics and Economic Development NZ, as well as from central government is that now is not the time for councils to introduce strict austerity measures.  Reductions in local government spending would compound the negative economic impact of COVID-19 including a rise in unemployment.

5.30        Officers are recommending a 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 despite consistent repayment the fund is overdrawn as a result of Nelson experiencing several emergencies in 2016, 2018 and 2019.  The balance of the Fund as at 30 June 2021 was projected to be $659,000 overdrawn.

5.31        It will likely take a three to four year period to fully recover from the impacts of COVID-19, which will require ongoing use of the Disaster Recovery Fund and expenditure savings to offset lower revenue – both rating and from other sources. This will ensure Council can maintain levels of service and capital spending to support the economic recovery in our region.  Council has a strong balance sheet position which can absorb responding to the emergency through borrowing.

5.32        These revenue and expense changes and the potential scenarios were presented in detail to the Audit and Risk Subcommittee on 21 May.  

5.33        All areas of Council have been assessed to find savings, but the organisation still needs to be spending money where it will make a difference to the local economy, and to maintain service levels and infrastructure renewals. It is important to find a balance between Council providing stimulus to the region and being realistic about the impacts of the COVID-19 crisis. Council plans to recover from the impact of the crisis over a three to four year period, ensuring that it can maintain services and continue with vital infrastructure projects which will have a very positive impact on Nelson’s economy.

5.34        There is still a level of uncertainty on the effects of COVID-19 on Council activities and budgets including; Council’s capital work programme (see discussion below on Crown Infrastructure Fund and Provincial Growth Fund projects); rental, fee, services and dividend income lines; and event and facilities income and expenditure.  Officers will continue to report back to Council and committees during 2020/21 on variances.

Council Depreciation

5.35        There has been a question raised about whether Council could choose to not rate fund a portion of the depreciation for the Annual Plan as a response to the financial impact of COVID-19 on Council.

5.35.1    Council’s Revenue and Financing Policy in the Long Term Plan 2018-28 states that Council fully funds depreciation except the NZTA portion of transport assets and other specific assets which Council is unlikely to replace.

5.35.2    Council has budgeted to rate fund $22 million in 2020/21 – 70% of this is for infrastructure assets (three waters and transport) and the depreciation collected as rates is used to fund renewals in these activities. If a decision was made to not fully rate fund depreciation, Council would need to borrow to fund the shortfall in the activities.

5.35.3    Officers consider it is more transparent and prudent to continue to fund depreciation in line with the Policy and borrow through the Disaster Recovery Fund to cover the effects of the Covid-19 crisis.

Commercial Differential

5.36        The commercial differential recognises the additional Council services that businesses receive, such as extra rubbish collection, street sweeping, and events to attract visitors. In the Long Term Plan, Council consulted on reducing the commercial differential by 0.5% each year for five years, to be reviewed annually.  Reducing the commercial differential reduces the rates collected from the City Centre and Stoke and allows a re-balancing of the relative rating contributions from commercial and residential properties. It also keeps our Central Business District competitive relative to other centres that do not have such a charge.

5.37        The principle for the adjustment remains valid and COVID-19 has created additional financial pressure on the commercial sector.

5.38        Thirteen submitters commented on the commercial rates, with the majority of submissions made by commercial property owners requesting that the proportion of rates collected from commercial properties be reduced.  Several commented on the effect of COVID-19 on businesses, with others requesting a broader review of how commercial rates are calculated.  One submitter (22920) proposed that commercial ratepayers pay a higher proportion of total rates.

5.39        This will mean that the City Centre and Stoke City Centre rates will increase by less than they would have without this change. Residential rates will increase slightly more as a result of this change.

Rates, Debt and Affordability

5.40        Several submitters (including 22842, 22849) raised concerns, prior to the proposed zero rates rise, about the impact of proposed rates increase in the draft Annual Plan. The concerns included that the increase was higher than the increase in household incomes. 

5.40.1    Forty one submitters took the opportunity to register their views on the proposed zero rates increase, following the extension of the consultation process, with others providing written comments.  The majority of submitters supported the proposal. The most common reasons for supporting the zero rates increase included the impact of COVID-19 on household and business incomes, and the cumulative effects of previous years increases compared to income increases.

5.40.2    A few submitters did not support the zero rates increase proposal and commented rates increases should be approved. These submitters highlighted that Council spending could be used to stimulate the economic recovery or that the money is required to support needed infrastructure. Alternatives proposed included extending the rates rebate scheme (23117). One submitter (24172) raised concerns that future generations may face higher rate payments as a result of the zero rates rise, and that the disaster fund may be needed for future climatic events.

5.40.3    A few submitters (22863, 22864 and 22867) proposed that other Council charges also be decreased or kept at a zero increase, e.g. water rates and rubbish charges.

5.40.4    Some submitters supported the zero rates increase, but did not support funding this from the Disaster Recovery Fund.  Instead they proposed that savings be made from reducing other expenditure, for example not spending money on sculptures (23120).

5.40.5    One submitter (24313) requested reduction of rates for Airbnb properties.

6.             Consultation Process

6.1           Council’s Annual Plan 2020/21 Consultation Document was initially open for submissions from 17 March to 17 April 2020, and was made available on Council’s website, at Nelson Public Libraries and the Customer Service Centre. A summary was delivered to all Nelson households through a special edition of Our Nelson.

6.2           Council made the decision to extend the consultation period until 6 May 2020 to seek public input on a proposed zero rates increase as a response to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and to debt fund the rating income shortfall. As the constraints of Alert Level 4 prevented face-to-face public engagement Council took a number of steps to make the community aware of the extended opportunity and make the submission process as accessible as possible. Additional radio and newspaper advertising was commissioned to publicise the zero rates rise proposal and the extended consultation and Council’s website and social media were also used. Council also, for the first time ever, allowed submission by phone and dedicated staff to receive and transcribe those.

6.3           282 submissions were received in total, including three late submissions. 74 submissions were spoken to at the hearings on 14, 19 and 20 May, held via Zoom.

6.4           255 submissions were made by residents or organisations based in Nelson, and 19 by residents of Tasman, with the remainder outside the Nelson/Tasman region. 83% of submissions were made online (an increase from 64% in the previous year), 16% by email, and the remainder by other methods.

6.5           Councillors have received and read all submissions. At this meeting, Council will deliberate on the submissions, ensuring that the reasons for decisions are made clear so that this can be conveyed to submitters as per the Local Government Act 2002, Section 82(1)(f): ‘that persons who present views to the local authority should have access to a clear record or description of relevant decisions made by the local authority and explanatory material relating to the decisions’.

7.             Discussion

7.1           This report covers the main issues raised in the submissions, ordered by activity category.

7.2           There is also a section on additional decisions, covering changes that have occurred since the Consultation Document was written and therefore require direction from Council as to any adjustment to the Annual Plan budgets and Council’s work programme.

7.3           Where a change is proposed to a matter that has undergone consultation, officer recommendations have been provided.  If there is no recommendation, the programme or project will remain as set out in the Long Term Plan 2018-28 or the Annual Plan Consultation Document and supporting documents.  If a matter is not covered in the report or attachment, then there is no proposed funding change sought, or it is within existing work streams or outside the scope of the Annual Plan.

7.4           Following Council’s final decisions, response letters to submitters will be signed by the Chair of the relevant Committee or the Mayor/Deputy Mayor.

            Transport

Public Transport COVID19 implications

7.5           Public transport services have continued under the COVID-19 shutdown however, use has drastically reduced. Under Alert Level 4, Nbus buses carried around 5% of usual patronage, which was very consistent with other regions. Under Alert Level 3, patronage was around 10 % of usual numbers. 

7.6           Service operators and Council continue to follow national guidance regarding extra cleaning, contact tracing, physical distancing on buses, and avoiding driver customer interaction.  To support this bus fares are free to the end of June 2020 and NZTA has signalled it would provide additional funding to 30 June to meet demand.

7.7           However, predicting Alert Level 2 bus patronage is more complicated and extremely hard to predict, especially with the social distancing limitations.  It is very unlikely to be higher than 30% of usual patronage. This assumption is supported by independent research, which concludes that even with an early containment and recovery scenario (such as what appears to have been achieved in New Zealand) patronage could be down to anywhere between 30% and 60% on the previous year by the end of 2020.

7.8           Should this become the reality council income will be greatly reduced (compared to 100% of usual patronage) as shown in the table below:

 

Patronage level

30% normal patronage

50% normal patronage

60% normal patronage

100% patronage (based on previous year) and what current AP reflects

Income from NBUS passenger fares

$224,000

$374,000

$448,000

$748,000

7.9           NZTA latest advice is that they are urgently working on 2020/21 funding advice. The challenge is uncertainty on National Land Transport Fund (NLTF) revenue and what central government will do in relation to it.

7.10        This means that there is a risk that the revenue short-fall could become a matter for Council to resolve if public transport services continue. The options may be to fund any shortfall from rates revenue (noting this will mean borrowing through the Disaster Recovery Fund if a zero percent rates increase is confirmed) or reduce services.

7.11        Council and NZTA will be in a position to better estimate options once patronage data is received but, it is anticipated that the reintroduction of fares from 1 July 2020 could also negatively affect patronage.

7.12        Whilst officers have requested free travel be extended to 4 August, which would coincide with the confirmed date for electronic ticketing going live locally, NZTA has a strong expectation that fares will be recovered in a contactless environment with no driver interaction i.e. using tag on/tag off.

7.13        Officers are monitoring bus patronage under Alert Level 2.

Recommendation

That the Council

8.     Notes that the public transport revenue has been reduced by 50% to $374,000 for the 2020/21 Annual Plan 

Sustainable Transport Culture

7.14        There was strong support for the Sustainable Transport Culture priority, commonly because it would contribute to climate change goals. Submitters made suggestions on how this could be achieved, and these will be considered as work programmes and strategies are developed and implemented. Proposals from the public included:

7.14.1    Public transport - buses made more frequent, the use of electric buses, provision of smaller loop buses and provision of a bus lane on Waimea Road

7.14.2    Cycleways - more off-road cycleways. A number of submitters made specific improvement requests and these will be covered in the responses to submitters.

7.14.3    Vehicles – a reduction in the number of vehicles on the road, fewer carparks, the creation of park and ride facilities, and support for carpooling.

7.15        Some submitters commented on the difficulties with implementing a sustainable transport culture, including that Nelson’s terrain may make efficient public transport services difficult to implement, as well as low population density effecting affordability.

Parking Strategy

7.16        The Annual Plan Consultation Document proposed that $100,000 operating expenditure be included in the 2020/21 budget to develop a Parking Strategy. Most submitters who commented on parking supported reduced or restricted parking as a means of developing a Sustainable Transport Culture.

7.17        A submitter (23106) was concerned about the effect on businesses if there was a reduction of carparks. A number of submitters (23093, 24146) supported continuation of free parking, for at least the first hour, to assist business recovery.  Four submitters (23016, 24299, 24172 and 24128) commented on the benefits of car parking buildings, including freeing up the parking squares for alternative uses.

7.18        A great deal of work is being carried out to inform Council's next Long Term Plan including a review of the public transport system, the walking and cycling policies and the planned parking strategy.  An initial workshop has been held with elected members to determine the proposed content of these policies and submitters comments will help inform this work stream along with further specific consultation.

Total Mobility Cap

7.19        Age Concern Nelson Tasman (24336) and Blind Citizens New Zealand Nelson (24336) requested that Council raise the cap on the total mobility scheme from the current limit of $20 per trip. At the hearings Blind Citizens NZ Nelson discussed issues of travel accessibility in the communities they support, both financial and logistical, which flow on to affecting many people’s participation in other aspects of life in Nelson Tasman.

7.20        Changes to the Total Mobility subsidy can be considered in the next Long Term Plan. Analysis of fares used shows approximately 70% are beneath the current $20 capped fare level, but it is acknowledged that the relatively low cap may suppress demand for the service.  Any increase to the cap in the next financial year will require NZTA and TDC support and it is highly unlikely that existing budgets will support this. The Total Mobility Cap has not been reviewed since prior to 2005.

7.21        Officers are currently conducting a major review of Council’s public transport, in partnership with Tasman District Council. This review will inform the next Public Transport Plan. Upcoming work also includes a speed limit review, parking strategy, and cycle network review. The New Zealand Transport Agency is working with Council officers to develop a detailed package of improvements to address transport issues in Nelson over the next 30 years. This work aims to achieve the goals of the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport, which places a greater focus on sustainability, active modes of transport, and recognises how the transport system can improve access to economic and social opportunities. Submissions received on transport will be considered in the above projects and engagement will include with Accessibility for All (A4A) and the Positive Ageing Forum.

Pedestrian concerns

7.22        A number of submitters commented on the importance of pedestrian safety and raised matters such as cyclists on footpaths, shared pathway etiquette, and the idea of separated pathways. There is support for cycleways, and some suggestions for their improvement.

Cyclists on footpaths

7.23        Four submitters (22849, 23011, 24285 and 22849) commented that they have been impacted negatively by cyclists using footpaths. There is significant concern for the safety of vulnerable persons waking on the path, including children and the elderly, the stress of confronting cyclists on the footpath, and the need for walker vigilance to avoid collisions. Submitter 23011 was concerned that the rise in popularity of e-bike increases the risks of an accident due to higher speeds. Submitter 24285 stated “Our footpath are now dangerous for pedestrians.”

7.24        Out of the context of cycling, Age Concern (24188) submitted asking Council to ensure wheelchair and mobility scooter friendly footpaths and pavements.

7.25        Cycling on footpaths is not currently controlled by a bylaw. Cycling on footpaths is currently illegal under the Land Transport Road User rule and responsibility for enforcement sits with police nationally. The Associate Minister of Transport is proposing a collection of rule changes known as the Accessible Streets Regulatory Package that may change this and allow cycles to ride on the footpath, but with a much clearer and stronger hierarchy of use demanding pedestrian priority and imposing stronger rules, including speed limits.

7.26        Council submitted to the proposals and largely supported them, but was strong in the call that safety is paramount, that pedestrians must be top priority, and that a robust national education campaign backed by enforcement is required if these changes are to go forward. Council’s submission expressed concern that there will be an increase in the number of transport devices and cyclists on footpaths and that it will be challenging to enforce the proposed speed, width and behavioural requirements.

7.27        Footpaths are already busy places and the aim should be to provide alternate safe places for transport devices and cyclists. Council also supported the proposal that it has the ability to restrict cycle and device use on footpaths in certain areas and felt this provision would alleviate some concerns about conflict on shared paths if the package progresses.

Shared pathway etiquette

7.28        Some submitters, including those above, mentioned that they do not feel safe walking on shared paths with cyclists. It is a concern that cyclists have the priority over walkers in these areas, with intimidation, near-misses and a need for constant vigilance by walkers reported (23011). Submitter 23011 commented “I've given up trying to walk in many areas due to the intimidation that I feel when sharing walkways” and “As walkers we must now have eyes at the back of their heads.”

7.29        Several submitters requested an increase in designated walking only areas without bikes or scooters, for the safety and enjoyment of walkers (24274, 24197, 22849 and 23011). Specific areas mentioned where shared pathway issues are occurring were the Maitai Valley (24181, 23011), Saxton Reserve (23011), and the Centre of New Zealand (22849). Submitter 24197 stated that “Walkers need enjoyable areas to walk in, not just the left over, easy to access walks.”

7.30        With regard to cycling on Council reserve tracks, Council has carried out local education and placed signage on shared pathways encouraging courtesy and appropriate etiquette from both parties. Officers agree the increasing popularity of mountain biking and walking has led to pressure on our paths and reserves, and has developed the ‘Out and About - On Tracks Strategy’ to try to resolve some of the issues this creates (currently under review). While the recreation trend has changed, counter data still shows strong numbers of walkers in popular mountain biking areas such as Codgers, and the small number of complaints suggests people appear generally happy to share the trails. Other reserves such as the Grampians, Botanical Hill and Sir Stanley Whitehead Reserve have few bikers for the majority of the time. Much of the Nelson recreation open space is not owned by Council including the Maitai Side of Tantragee Saddle and the Sharlands catchment.

Support for separated cycleways

7.31        The Nelson Transport Strategy Group (24350) supported the idea of separated ‘protected paths’ as opposed to shared paths, so that walkers are not nervous of collision with cyclists, and would like to see budget for this in the Annual Plan.

7.32        Submitter 24277 did not agree with the suggested focus on shared lanes, suggesting it is not optimal for either party. They suggest the development of a network of protected separate cycle lanes and pedestrian paths.

7.33        St Vincent Street and Muritai Street are Council’s first ventures into separated paths. It is likely that more will be considered for development as part of the next Transport Activity Management Plan.

Cycleway Support, Safety and Improvements

7.34        16 submitters supported cycleways and asked for improvements to them. Rocks Road in particular was identified as a major danger to cyclists. Resilienz (24292) “strongly support the clear separation of cars from cycles on key routes.”

7.35        Nelson City Council is working with Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency to develop a detailed package of improvements to address transport issues in Nelson over the next 30 years. The Nelson Future Access study aims towards achieving the goals of the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport, which places greater focus on safety, accessibility, resilient and liveable cities, the environment, mode neutrality, reducing dependency on non-commercial private vehicles, and recognising how the transport system can improve access to economic and social opportunities. Included in the study is consideration of how and when changes are made to Rocks Road to realise its world class waterfront potential and to make walking and cycling there safer.

7.36        Safety and practicality issues with cycleways on Waimea Road and Vanguard Street were reported by multiple submitters (22845, 22875, 22975 and 23423). Other areas were identified by individuals. These issues will be responded to in letters to submitters, with advice on work that is being completed and/or suggestions for suitable cycling routes.

7.37        Submitter 24316 suggested that wider footpaths and cycle ways are needed as e-bikes become more popular. They suggested that where footpaths are being upgraded existing grass strips should be replaced with road seal for this purpose.

7.38        Council is investing over $1.5 million in new and improved footpaths each year. These improvements often include widening to accommodate a mixture of users. Songer Street from the Railway Reserve up to Neale Avenue is a recent example.

8.             Water supply

8.1           This topic received 22 submissions.

8.2           A property development company stated that Council needs to have an independent review conducted of all key infrastructure, particularly storm water, sewage, and water supply (24291).

Council is currently awaiting Central Government decisions on the future of the various water services, any interest in an independent review would need to be addressed after this occurs.

8.3           Several submitters asked Council to facilitate the use of residential rain water harvesting tanks (24216, 24207, 23037, 24274, 24189, 24182 and 24236). There was support from some submitters for making this a requirement, for all homes or new builds.

8.4           Submitter Tim’s Garden Services requested Council funding, for a subsidy for a proposed 100 household rainwater collection tank pilot scheme. The business anticipated an estimated cost of $750,000 for 50 small and 50 large tanks, with 50% paid as a subsidy from Council and the 50% remaining paid by customers. The cost to Council would be $375,000.

8.5           Council supports the use of rainwater tanks to water urban gardens and capture some stormwater run-off from new developments. Advice and education to support this is provided on Council’s website and in the Tasman-Nelson Land Development Manual. Tanks are also of great importance in the rural sector and for households without reticulated supply. Council strongly encourages their use to reduce the pressure on our rivers and streams in times of drought.

8.6           A subsidy or grant for rainwater tanks would provide significant private benefit to those who received this support and, is unlikely to be affordable as a general rates cost on a large scale.  However, as part of the LTP preparation Officers will prepare information on how an interest free loan scheme might deliver many of the same benefits.

8.7           One submitter was strongly against Council spending on the Waimea Dam, citing high cost and low value to Nelson residents, and project risks (23035). They asked that Council invest in infrastructure to supply water to all residents within its territory, withdraw the $5 million dam contribution, and assess its ability to supply water to Tasman.

8.8           The decision to support the construction of the Waimea Community Dam was made after extensive consultation with the community and was primarily on the basis of the regional economic benefits, including increased business opportunities, employment, and productivity in the region and there is an agreement with TDC to support the Dam.  The independent drought security advice received by Council was based on an analysis of actual water demand in the city and the likely future demands using the population projections of the day. Council has supplied water to Richmond during the 2018-19 summer drought and remains in a strong position to offer such help again when requested.

8.9           A submitter suggested that the pandemic will be causing an increase in water use for hygiene purposes, and that raising the water quantity able to be used or lowering water charges may help residents financially (22863).

8.10        Council is considering a 0% rates rise to provide financial assistance to ratepayers. Officers do not propose to reduce water charges as this would mean reducing the service provided to the community. Council needs to maintain such a critically important service to the highest standards possible.

8.11        Two submitters stated that they do not want Nelson’s water supply to contain chlorine or fluoride (24218, 24186).

8.12        Council does not add fluoride to the city’s water supply. Disinfection of the water is required to protect the community from waterborne disease, with chlorine being an effective and economical choice that is considered to be industry best practice.

8.13        A submission was received suggesting how water demand could be met with housing intensification.

8.14        Council is considering this as part of the development of the proposed Nelson Plan. Water reticulation will be closely matched to demand and must also take into account fire requirements for different development options.

9.             Wastewater

9.1           The Wastewater topic received 13 submissions, with several submitters expressing support for Council’s work in this area.

9.2           Others expressed concern about overflows (23069, 24175).

9.3           The current wastewater work programme is prioritising work on the reduction of overflows through the Inflow and Infiltration and System Performance Improvements programmes. These are long term pieces of work. $400,000 for the Wastewater Hydraulic Model Upgrade project is proposed in this Annual Plan, which will support these key programmes – this was supported by Nelson Marlborough Health in its submission (23022). The upcoming National Environmental Standard for Wastewater Discharges and Overflows from central government will give further guidance on how operators should manage this issue

9.4           Two submitters commented on odour issues along QEII/Atawhai Drive (24212), and supporting Council’s proposal for an allocation of $160,000 in the Annual Plan to reduce odours from the Neale Park pump station (24128).

10.         Stormwater and Flood Protection

10.1        Stormwater and Flood Protection is a discrete activity, but many submissions in the climate change category also mentioned flooding as a major issue for planning in Nelson.

10.2        A submitter noted that the functioning of Nelson’s stormwater network needs to improve to support population growth, as storm events are becoming more common due to climate change (23016).

10.3        The design standard for new stormwater pipes is set in the Land Development Manual 2019. They are to be sized to convey a 1 in 15 year stormwater flow, with allowance made for climate warming to 2090, assuming a conservative emissions scenario. Council aims to progressively upgrade the stormwater reticulation across the city to deliver that level of service, taking into consideration intensification of development associated with a growing population.   

10.4        A property development group noted the prevention of overflows into the ocean as a priority. They added that stormwater and sewage infrastructure upgrades (with particular emphasis on Tahunanui) should be urgently prioritised (24291).

10.5        Council is currently progressing a number of network upgrades in the Tahunanui Hills as a priority. Under the Long Term Plan 2018-28, funding has already been allocated to development of a Stormwater Strategy for Tahunanui, which will be informed by stormwater network modelling.

10.6        A submitter expressed concern about weeds in Orphanage Stream not being cleared regularly, contributing to sediment build-up and flooding in the area (23071).

10.7        Two new aquatic weeds, Vietnamese Parsley and Water Celery, have recently emerged in our waterways. These weeds are significantly harming the health of the streams and creating a risk of blocking downstream culverts. Both species are spread within streams by water movement and colonisation by plant fragments.

10.8        Officers are aware of the invasive weed problem in our streams, and have been undertaking localised clearance of stream channels by hand. However a big disadvantage of mechanical removal is the spread of plant fragments (and water celery seed) to new locations, making the problem worse. Advice received from the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) is that application of herbicide is likely the most successful control technique and may offer the potential of eradication over time.

10.9        Officers are trialling the effectiveness of glyphosate for the problem of weeds in streams and looking into other herbicides recommended by NIWA. It is noted that a number of submitters did raise concerns over the safety of glyphosate and suggested that its use should be banned.  Use of glyphosate and other herbicides are used only in accordance with advice from the New Zealand Environmental Protection Agency, as part of a wider strategy to manage weeds, and can be carried out within existing budgets.

10.10     One submitter supported the Little Go Stream Upgrade and noted that allowing groundwater to enter stormwater pipes may alleviate issues for nearby residents (23034).

10.11     Officers note that under the Nelson Tasman Land Development Manual 2019 stormwater pipes are required to be water tight as they occasionally operate under pressure. Other elements are incorporated into stormwater system design to improve sub-surface drainage. Landowners may install sub-soil drains on their own property where high groundwater levels are a problem.

11.         Solid waste

11.1        The Solid Waste activity received the highest number of submissions – 112, mainly around the food waste collection trial.

Food Waste Collection Trial

11.2        There was a lot of interest in the proposed food waste collection trial – 93 submissions mentioned the topic. The vast majority of these submissions were supportive of the trial and the idea of composting food waste.  Community Compost also made a submission supporting the trial and outlining their services (24301).

11.3        Council has been engaging with a number of potential service providers, and will shortly be proceeding to procure the service through a competitive process.

11.4        One submitter did not support the trial for hygiene reasons, and would prefer Council to encourage the use of garden compost bins and the reduction of food waste (23037).

11.5        These concerns have been noted - part of the trial is to assess potential risks associated with kerbside food waste collection and what can be done to mitigate them.

11.6        Spending on the trial and the cost to ratepayers of expanding the service was questioned as being potentially unwise in the current economic climate (24335). The submitter acknowledged that reducing landfill emissions is a worthy goal but that Council should look for a less expensive option.

11.7        Officers note that a trial involves a different work structure to a full service and consequently the cost per household is disproportionately high when compared against a normal collection service. It is estimated that the cost per household for collecting food waste would be slightly less than the cost per household of Council’s kerbside recycling service.  Data from the trial will help Council choose the most appropriate and cost-effective option to process the material if the decision is made to upscale. It is noted that the trial is being funded from the Climate Reserve so does not have a rating impact.

11.8        Some submitters requested that Council also look to reduce food waste at the source - suggesting education programmes and offering some examples (24154, 24189, 24209, 24227, 24247, 24290 and 24318).

11.9        Council agrees that it is important to reduce the creation of food waste. Officers focus on education programmes such as Love Food Hate Waste and support the delivery of Enviroschools, in order to support the development of a culture where less food is wasted.

11.10     A submitter asked if Council could incentivise improved green waste disposal, as opposed to it being taken to landfill (22875).

11.11     Officers agree that it is preferable for green waste to be correctly disposed of rather than going to landfill. As refuse collection is a commercial function, Council relies on messaging and education promoting a good range of local solutions for green waste, including recycling at the transfer station. Council will continue to encourage residents to use these options as well as home composting.

11.12     Some submitters requested that Council sets up a contestable grant scheme to fund community delivery of projects that meet the goals of the Joint Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, section 10 (23117, 24318).

11.13     Council is interested in encouraging local grassroots waste minimisation projects, and contestable funding is being considered for next year.

11.14     It was suggested that all plastic that is not recyclable should be baled and land banked as a valuable future resource.

11.15     ‘Banking’ of plastic has been considered by officers in the past. Within the considerations were the costs of sorting, storage, environmental risk, and the parameters for releasing the plastic from storage. This is uneconomical and storage also poses an unnecessary fire risk.

11.16     Submitter 23034 noted that that the city's bus stops are places where people tend to drop litter. They suggested revitalising the issue of littering and the source of waste with an education programme, and recommend the involvement of the Be a Tidy Kiwi organisation, which is currently trialling a bus stop specific education programme in Auckland.

11.17     Council will continue to provide education and engagement on litter and officers will investigate the suggestion made for reducing litter at bus stops through the Be a Tidy Kiwi programme.

11.18     Submissions were received asking Council to make a reduction in construction waste going to landfill, through recycling materials and reusing buildings in preference to demolishing them.

11.19     Council’s goals for waste minimisation are included in the Joint Nelson Tasman Waste Minimization and Management Plan, which was consulted on and reviewed last year.  Prior to COVID-19 officers had commenced work to better understand waste generated from the construction sector and support the diversion of deconstruction and demolition waste in the future and will continue this work.

11.20     Submitters (24182, 24297, 24227 and 24318) urged Council to review the Joint Waste Minimisation and Management Plan (JWMMP) to set a more ambitious target than 10% reduction of all waste by 2030.

11.21     The JWMMP was reviewed in 2019 and accepted by both Councils after public consultation and will be reviewed again six years after adoption, in 2025.

11.22     Individuals from the Nelson Tasman Climate Forum (not representing the group) requested, among other points, that Council initiate a Solid Waste Analysis Protocol (SWAP) audit of the waste going to the York Valley landfill (24318).

11.23     Targets for minimisation of waste to landfill were set in the shared Waste Management and Minimisation Plan when the mandatory review was completed in 2019. Officers are continually working towards reducing waste going to landfill and the NTRLBU will be undertaking an annual assessment of the composition of incoming waste commencing December 2020.

11.24     Updates on waste minimisation work will be included in the quarterly Infrastructure reports.

11.25     One submitter supported encouraging businesses to take responsibility for reducing waste, such as the Council supported reusable coffee cup initiative, and asked what more could be done like this (24329).

11.26     Officers note the support for activities and innovation focusing on avoiding the creation of waste, including business involvement. This will remain a priority for Council in the waste minimisation programmes it delivers.

Solid waste charges

11.27     The Consultation Document included a proposal by the Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit (NTRLBU) to increase landfill fees by 5% from $163/tonne (including GST) in 2019/20 to $171/tonne (including GST) in 2020/21. NTRLBU has delegated responsibility for setting fees.  The proposed increase reflects the work required to run the regional landfill, including: work on stormwater systems, mitigation of potential groundwater contamination and increased costs for the Emission Trading Scheme. 

11.28     Two submissions commented on the proposed increase. The submissions have been sent to the NTRLBU to consider at its meeting in June.   Officers will report back on the NTRLBU decision in due course.

12.         Environment

Climate Change

12.1        The Annual Plan consultation document included a feature on climate change and the work undertaken by Council over the last 12 months, as well as proposed actions for 2020/21.  This subject was the second most commented on, with 70 submitters.  The majority of submitters supported Council’s work in this activity and, many submissions included further proposals for Council to consider. 

12.2        The proposed actions outlined in the consultation document included for 2020/21 were:

12.2.1    There was good support for the proposed Nelson Taman Climate Forum funding ($62,500) which was included in the Consultation Document. This funding is to support the administration and facilitation of the Forum.

12.2.2    The kerbside food waste collection trial ($120,000)

12.2.3    Work on developing a Climate Taskforce

12.2.4    Work to identify coastal areas that could be impacted by coastal erosion and flooding in the future.

12.2.5    Continuing work on developing the Spatial Plan, City Centre Programme plan and reviewing the Infrastructure Strategy and Nelson Plan

12.2.6    Changes to the recycling of plastics.

12.3        Work in 2020/21 will also include; adoption of an emissions reduction target (report scheduled to come to the Environment Committee 23 July 2020); working with the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority to improve Council’s energy efficiency; inclusion of sustainability objectives in CCTO Statements of Intent (environmental impacts, climate change leadership, adaptation and mitigation in their operations) and; consideration of Climate Change on Council’s activities as part of the development of Activity Management Plans and as preparation of business cases.   Council is also investigating our eligibility for carbon credits from Council owned indigenous forests.

12.4        Additional suggestions made by submitters included:

12.4.1       Incentives to property owners for installing solar panels (22871)

12.4.2       Investing in community wind farms (22871)

12.4.3       Investing in sea water permaculture (22871)

12.4.4       Provision of more information to the public on the effects of sea level rise

12.4.5    Funding the Climate Emergency Fund so that the balance remains at $500,000). 

12.5        A few submitters disagreed with Council’s work in this area and considered that climate change is not an activity that Council should be responsible for.

12.6        Council supports the scientific consensus and overwhelming evidence in responding to climate change, and is committed to both reducing our emissions and planning to adapt to the expected impacts.

Funding of the Nelson Plan

12.7        The Whakamahere Whakatū Nelson Plan is Council’s statutory resource management plan and sets out the framework for sustainable management of the city. Legislation requires us to review the Plan every 10 years. Council sees the content of the Plan as crucial to enabling our Smart Little City, providing for growth whilst managing our natural environment. The draft Plan brings all of Nelson’s resource management plans together into one integrated document including the Regional Policy Statement and Nelson Air Quality Plan.

12.8        Work on the Plan will continue into 2021/22 when it will be publicly notified, at which point the public will be able to formally make a submission on it. 2020/21 will see an increase in costs from $379,000 in the LTP to $1.60 million to account for the changes to Government directives such as in the areas of freshwater management, and urban development, National Planning Standards and changes to the resource management legislation. The Nelson Plan has multiple year benefits, and therefore the Consultation Document included a proposal to loan fund the remaining spend. In 2020/21 $1.122 million has been budgeted to be loan funded.  This is in line with Council’s Revenue and Financing Policy.   One submitter preferred that the costs be funded from rates.   If Council decided to fund the $1.122 million from rates this would add 1.45% to rates.  

Recommendation

That the Council

9.     Confirms its intent to fund $1.122 million of the 2020/21 Nelson Plan costs by loan.

 Maitai Forestry Forum

12.9        The Maitai Forestry Forum is currently investigating ways to mitigate erosion from Nelson’s pine plantations. Later in 2020, a list of mitigation activities will be proposed by the Forum. These activities will need to be resourced, and several submitters (Friends of the Maitai 24181, a number of individuals (24227, 24182, and 24207) have asked for Council to fund these activities directly, or to access Government funding for the activities.

12.10     Officers recommend that these requests are deferred for consideration in the Long Term Plan 2021-31. Council has been granted $1.6 million over four years from the Ministry of Primary Industry's Hill Country Erosion Fund, to support Council in understanding and addressing potential erosion in the region, with a specific focus on harvested forestry land.

City Centre Development.

12.11     The CBD is one of the four priorities in the LTP and was highlighted as such in the Annual Plan by describing the City Centre Programme Plan and the six key moves.  47 submissions were received on the city centre, there was significant support for the City Centre Programme, with submission referencing support for the six key moves and a focus on a more walkable city centre.  Submissions will be used to inform the detail of the program and spatial plan as it is developed and can be considered by the City Centre Working Group in providing direction on those projects.

12.12     Due to COVID-19 there have been some delays to the construction works scheduled for Upper Trafalgar Street (multi-function light poles) and the Pop-Up Park at 29 Halifax Street (adjoining the library).  Construction of those projects has now recommenced, however the delay has meant that capital works budget of $314K has been carried forward into 2020/21 to enable them to be completed.

12.13     At its meeting 23 April Council approved in principle a capital budget of up to $5 million for inclusion in the Annual Plan subject to the outcome of a public feedback process on options for medium term tactical initiatives to enable safer pedestrian movement in the city centre.   The public feedback process opened on 2 June and Council will not a make decision on which option, if any, to proceed with until early July 2020.

12.14     Subsequent to Councils resolution on 23 April, officers now propose that the funding allocated should be spread over two financial years to enable a staged roll out subject to the outcome of the public feedback process.  The funding is a mixture of NZTA subsidised and Council unsubsidised transport budgets and are pending NZTA funding decisions not known at the time of report writing. The preliminarily split is $1million with 90% subsidised Innovative Streets subsidy , $1 million at a 51% subsidy and the remainder $1.1 million unsubsidised)

Recommendation

That the Council

10.  Approves inclusion in the Annual Plan 2020/21 of a capital budget of $3.1 million, subject to the outcome of the public feedback process and NZTA funding applications; and

11.  Notes that the balance of $1.9 million of funding will be included in the draft budget for 2021/2022, this being year 1 of the Long Term Plan.

Nelson Environment Centre 

12.15     The Nelson Environment Centre (24293) requested that Council provide funding of $70,000 to support a Community Urban Farm. The Centre outlined the expected benefits of the Urban Farm including: increased local food, community resilience and engagement; reduced transport miles and provision of low cost fresh food to vulnerable members of the community.

12.16     The Centre has also requested that Council consider $40,000 towards commercial lease costs to enable the community hub to be relocated from its current site in Vanguard Street.  The current site has reached its capacity and has become increasingly expensive to lease.  The Centre is continuing to explore options.

12.17     While the Council is supportive of the work undertaken by the Nelson Environment Centre and projects such as the proposed Community Urban Farm, funding for this project, would be more appropriately considered as part of the LTP process.

Nelson Biodiversity Forum

12.18     A submitter asked Council to financially support the work of the Nelson Biodiversity Forum, by supporting proposals for actions in the marine area that are being presented over the coming months (24204).

12.19     Officers are beginning work with key partners, including the Nelson Biodiversity Forum members, to develop an environmental monitoring and implementation programme related to Council's jurisdiction in Tasman Bay. Resourcing to implement the programme will be proposed by officers through the Long Term Plan process.

Good Food City declaration

12.20     Thirty submitters requested that Council sign up to the C40 Good Food Cities declaration and take actions including encouraging residents to move to a plant-based diet, reducing food waste and developing a community strategy and action plan.

12.21     The C40 is a group of megacities that have joined together to combat climate change. The Good Food Cities Declaration has been signed by 14 member cities to date and aims to ensure a sustainable diet with reduced meat and dairy consumption, 50% reduction in food waste (from 2015 volumes) and an increase in organic food sources.  It is noted that the Declaration leads with a statement on food procurement, which is more relevant to other local government systems which are responsible for functions for example education/school meals.

12.22     In order to sign up to the Declaration a commitment is required that within two years a community strategy will be developed to achieve the above aims. A detailed inventory of current consumption is also required (as a baseline) outlining a range of metrics such as tonnes of food served/sold in Nelson per year by food group (vegetables, dairy, fish etc.); calorie consumption per capita; tonnes of food waste generated per year by household/retail/hospitality. Officers note that Auckland City Council, a C40 member city, has been interested in signing the Good Food Cities Declaration but considers some of the provisions around dietary intake very prescriptive.

12.23     The objectives of the Declaration are a good match with Council’s work on reducing emissions. As submitters noted, food is a major contributor to emissions from cities. However it is likely that many residents would question the appropriateness of Council leading a campaign to change their eating habits and may question Council’s expertise in sustainable diets.

12.24     Nelson Marlborough Health (NMH) spoke enthusiastically about this proposal and offered to partner in the programme of work required. NMH would be a more credible lead in gathering community leaders to develop a strategy and action plan. Council could contribute to the work, particularly through its already proposed trial of food waste collection, but also its other programmes such as the support for the Love Food Hate Waste campaign and home composting.

12.25     Officers can liaise with NMH and indicate Council’s willingness to explore this work and a possible partnership further.

5G Technology

12.26     Two submitters raised concerns regarding the safety and processes for 5G rollout.

12.27     A workshop was held with interested parties on 5G earlier in the year and no further action is proposed.

13.         Social/Cultural

Housing Intensification and Affordability

13.1        63 submissions were received on housing intensification and affordability. The majority were in support of Council undertaking work in this area, including inner city living, reducing urban sprawl and use of Council land for affordable housing.

13.2        A number of submitters encouraged Council to work on this priority with the community and suggested housing trusts, businesses and iwi as possible partners.  Some submitters also linked this priority with Council’s Climate Change objectives for example zero carbon buildings and a possible reduction in vehicles if more people lived in the Central City.

13.3        Seven submitters requested that Council support or set aside land for tiny home developments.

13.4        Issues raised by submitters for consideration included noise and traffic in the inner city, which might conflict with inner city living, as well as the cost of subdividing sections, the importance of ensuring that residents have access to sunlight and privacy.

13.5        The ideas raised by these submissions will be considered by officers as policies and strategies are developed and brought to Council, including the Nelson Plan.

            Suter Depreciation

13.6        One submitter (23035) questioned the depreciation funding for the Suter Art Gallery.

13.7        Separate to the Revenue and Financing Policy, Council agreed as part of the Suter redevelopment project, to rate fund half of the Suter depreciation on the new building – reflecting the $6 million contribution from Council to the $12 million project.  This decision acknowledges that arts facilities struggle to raise enough funding for renewals. Council agreed to this on the condition that the funds were held by Council in a reserve and the Suter commissioned an Asset Management Plan and signalled renewal funding requests through the Statement of Intent process.

Nelson 100th Aviation Anniversary

13.8        The committee (24308) for this commemoration requested $15,000 towards the $85,000 budget for the Nelson based components of this event.

13.9        This request will be referred to the Events Development Committee to consider for funding from the Events Fund.

Establishment of a Not-for Profit Sector agency

13.10     Neighbourhood Support Nelson (23116) requested that Council support the establishment of a new agency to support the not-for-profit-sector. The example that was used was an agency equivalent to the Nelson Regional Development Agency. The functions of the proposed agency could include:

13.10.1 Being a single point of contact for, and into, the sector

13.10.2 Provide leadership at a regional strategic level

13.10.3 Support improvements in the resourcing of the sector.

13.10.4 Develop sector leaders

13.11     Broad support from the community would be needed to implement this idea. The proposed Agency has also been raised as a possible project within the Te Tauihu Intergenerational Strategy structure, given its benefits would be for the wider region.  This is considered the most appropriate structure for progressing this suggestion. 

Nelson Youth Choir

13.12     The Nelson Youth Choir made a submission to Council requesting funding in 2020/21 (23021). The Choir has been auditioning and is expected to start its first rehearsals once COVID-19 restrictions allow. The submitters requested that Council be the main funding source for the Choir, proposing funding of $14,000 in 2020/21 ($5,000 start-up costs and $9,000 for operating costs), and consideration of ongoing annual funding for operating costs. The Choir also requests that Council authorise the use of the city’s crest as their emblem.

13.13     The submitters should be congratulated for their work establishing a Youth Choir, but officers note that Auckland, Wellington, and Christchurch Youth Choirs, and others around the country are supported via external community funds. The Choir can be encouraged to explore funding opportunities across the community and working with the NCMA.

New Zealand Chinese Language Week Charitable Trust

13.14     The New Zealand Chinese Language Week Charitable Trust (24173) asked Council to assist with funding a Chinese Language Week event in Nelson in September 2020, through the Annual Plan. Chinese Language Week has been celebrated in many areas of New Zealand since 2015, with events for all ages designed to enhance New Zealanders’ understanding of Chinese language and culture. The request is for $5,000.

13.15     Officers recommend that the Trust contacts the Nelson Regional Development Agency (NRDA) to see whether the initiative would be eligible for the Community Events Fund. An alternative would be to approach China Week organisers, a biennial event already supported by Council, to discuss a potential collaboration.

Arts Council

13.16     Due to COVID-19 the Arts Council’s allocated budget for 2019/20 was not used for the agreed purpose: lease of alternate premises, moving costs, and relocation of the Fringe Festival. Officers seek approval to carry this budget forward to use in the 2020/21 financial year. 

13.17     Officers have assessed that an indicative budget of $77,500 will be sufficient to meet the needs of the Arts Council at an alternative location, and recommend that a budget for the 2020/21 year is set at $77,500 inclusive of the $47,500 carry over. This will mean a net increase in the 2020/21 budget of $30,000

    Recommendation

    That the Council

12.  Approves the carry forward of $47,500 from the Arts Council’s allocated budget for the current financial year to 2020/21.

Nelson Festivals Trust

13.18     The Nelson Festivals Trust (24216) has a three year agreement with Council to deliver the Nelson Arts Festival annually, valued at $565,000 per annum.

13.18.1       The Trust has decided to cancel the 2020 event and work towards planning the delivery of the 2021 Festival, as well as work collaboratively with other arts partner organisations in the community, in partnership with Council, to deliver a collaborative programme of events when COVID-19 restrictions allow.

13.18.2       The Trust has received funding of $75,000 from Creative New Zealand towards the delivery of the 2021 Festival. Creative New Zealand has informed the Trust that it is able to use the funding for this year, provided it delivers specific events with the funding. The funding is to go towards artists rather than production costs.

13.18.3       The Trust has requested funding of $305,000 for the 2020/21 financial year – a reduction of 47% for Council. This funding is broken into two parts, the first for the core operations and planning of the 2021 Festival ($194,000), with the second part towards delivery of events as part of the collaborative 2020/21 programme of events ($111,000). This will allow leverage of the $75,000 funding from Creative New Zealand and essentially ‘unlock’ this funding to be used in the community for the delivery of arts events. Having a programme of events in the community when COVID-19 restrictions allow will help to build community social connectedness and wellbeing and allow for a celebration of arts and community.

13.19     It is recommended to vary the current funding agreement and reduce the funding from $565,000 to $305,000 for 2020/21, as per the submission from the Festivals Trust.

Recommendation

That the Council

13.  Agrees to the Nelson Festivals Trust’s request to vary the current funding agreement and reduce the funding in 2020/21 to $305,000, which will be used for core operations and Festival 2021 planning, as well as the delivery of a programme of collaborative events in the 2020/21 year.

Events Fund

13.20     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. The report to Council dated 23 April 2020 on the Effects of Setting the 2020/21 Rates Increase to Zero, proposed that the following budgets be set for:

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

13.20.2           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.  However, if New Zealand moves to an Alert Level that provides for large scale events, and an opportunity to host an appropriate event is presented, but outside of this budget, then officers will refer this to Council.

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

13.20.4       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.

13.20.5       Venue Hire Fund – In the 23 April COVID-19 report this fund was proposed to reduce from $30,000 to $15,000 for the 2020/21 year.  Given the government has increased the size of permissible gatherings from 10 people to 100 people, and the possibility of this figure being further increased, it is now recommended that the Venue Hire Fund remain at $30,000.  

Recommendation

That the Council

14.  Approves the Events Fund for 2020/21 as follows:

            - Event Fund Economic - $200,000

- Event Fund Community - $76,000

- Venue Hire Fund - $30,000

14.         Parks and active recreation

Stoke Memorial Hall

14.1        Eight submitters discussed Stoke Memorial Hall. The draft Annual Plan 2020/21 budgets include $120,000 for design for a strengthening solution for the building. A report will be coming to the Community Services Committee to seek direction on the level of remediation.

14.1.1    Nelson Badminton Association (23086) supports strengthening and retaining the Hall, as it is well used, a big part of the Stoke Community, and the only suitable space for the group to play badminton.

14.1.2    Other submitters questioned the utility of increased spending on the Hall in light of the Greenmeadows Centre now being available (22908, 23051, 24128, and 24326).

14.1.3    One person advocated that a simple replacement hall be constructed if the current one cannot be economically brought up to standard (24294).

14.1.4    A submitter expressed the need for planning and consultation with a wide range of Stoke residents if the site were to be used for another purpose (23051).

14.1.5    Others voiced concern over cost estimates provided for strengthening the Hall (24302, 24146).

Koata Park

14.2        Two submitters commented on the proposed Koata Park development (22874, 24197). The submitters expressed concerns that in the current economic climate it is not the time for Council to spend money on this project, and that the facility would be underutilised.

14.3        This project could provide positive economic, environmental and social benefits to Nelson.  Council’s commitment to the project for 2020/21 is $30,000 and support for Ngāti Koata and other partners advance the project. There would be engagement with the public in due course on the project, which also has the potential to attract Government and external funding.

Brook Waimarama Sanctuary

14.4        The Brook Sanctuary’s submission (23053) outlined the Trust’s challenges in becoming a key visitor destination.  In its submission the Trust requested that Council support the Sanctuary through confirmation of the current $150,000 p.a. funding and requested additional funding and/or resources.  The additional funding is to assist the Trust to: increase its revenue base; provide staff to maximise revenue generation; and backfill roles that have previously been undertaken by volunteers but, who are classified as “at risk” from COVID-19. (However it is noted that the Trust’s presentation at hearings noted that, contrary to the concerns expressed above, the number of volunteers actually increased during the COVID-19 lockdown period.) 

14.5        The options proposed by the Trust are:

14.5.1    An additional $165,000 p.a. for two years. This includes: $95,000 for roles that the Trust considers are key to achieve success including marketing, volunteer and visitor experience coordination and fund raising.  The balance of $70,000 is a request for visitor centre hosts, professional trap monitors and bench track maintenance staff (bench tracks are the tracks formed as part of a ledge carved into steep hillsides); or  

14.5.2    An additional $95,000 p.a. for two years, to fund the three key roles described above only; or

14.5.3    Use of shared/Council staff to deliver the key roles.

14.6        The Trust’s submission outlined the environmental outcomes and Council priorities that the Sanctuary activities support.

14.7        Given the impact that COVID-19 will have on the number of visitors coming to Nelson over the next few years there is a high risk that the Trust will face financial stress. It is further noted that the Trust was experiencing financial pressures prior to COVID-19.  Given the pressure on Council’s operational budgets in 2020/21 it is not recommended that an increase be made to the $150,000 grant. However, officers recommend that a business manager be funded by Council to work alongside the Trust to build more resilience into its business model.  The position would be a short term contract and $40,000 funding is recommended for this work.

Recommendation

That the Council

15.  Agrees to make provision for $40,000 in 2020/21 to offer support to the Brook Waimarama Sanctuary Trust by way of a contract for a business manager to provide advice; and

16.  Notes the grant would be contingent on agreement that the business manager report to Council at the conclusion of their work, on the future opportunities and challenges in the Trust business model.

Top of the South Athletics Charitable Trust 

14.8        The Trust (24260) requested a number of improvements to the athletic facilities at Saxton Field, divided between those that it wishes to be undertaken in 2020/21 and others for consideration as part of the 2021-2031 Long Term Plan.  Immediate requests included: provision of shade facilities; additional sand turf and improvements to the discus cage net.

14.9        Officers will have the condition of the discus cage net assessed and refer the matter to the Saxon Field Committee.  Other requests from the Trust are not supported and additional funding through the Annual Plan is not recommended. These items are more appropriate to be addressed and prioritised through the Long Term Plan in discussions with Tasman District Council. The trees that have been planted around the perimeter will provide shade as they mature.

Nelson Basketball Association

14.10     The Nelson Basketball Association (24194) seeks funding of $33,527 in 2020/21 to cover an 80% share of the cost of four new game clocks at Saxton Stadium. These were purchased in 2018 and 2019 to meet national standards for the hosting of tournaments. Since the new clocks were installed, the Association has hosted five tournaments with 165 teams, bringing economic benefits to the city, and the clocks are regularly utilised by local players.

14.11     Officers have discussed the request with Tasman District Council and the costs are being shared from existing 2019/20 budgets.

Nelson Tasman Cycle Trail Trust

14.12     The Trust expressed support for Council’s continued improvement of cycling infrastructure in the Annual Plan 2020/21, but noted that the completion of construction of the Jenkins Creek Bridge at Nelson Airport will require additional Council funding in 2020/21.

14.13     Officers are working with the Trust and the Nelson Airport on proposals for the Jenkins Creek Bridge and Council’s contribution is included in existing budgets.

Nelson Mountain Bike Club

14.14     The Nelson Mountain Bike Club (NMTBC) submission requested a carry forward of its contract funding for trail construction services. As well as COVID-19, delays to the project have included time taken for a thorough global resource consent process. The NMTBC is progressing to the construction phase of the project, with a number of new mountain bike trail types and grades planned over the next 14 months (24196).

14.15     At the hearings on 14 May, the Club noted that it wished to change the requested variance figure from what was written in its submission. The updated figures are below:

 

Year

Total (LTP)

Proposed

(updated at the hearings on 14 May)

Proposed carryover

(updated at the hearings on 14 May)

2019/20

$370,000

$44,000

 

2020/21

$170,000

$496,000

($326,000)

Total contract cost

$540,000

$540,000

 

14.16     This carryover request is supported by Council officers for inclusion in the Annual Plan.

Recommendation

That the Council

17.  Agrees to the carry forward to 2020/21 of $326,000 of contract funding for the Nelson Mountain Bike Club for trail construction services.

Maitai Hub

14.17     Two submitters (23024, 24230) supported development of a recreation/sports hub located up the Maitai.  Submitters outlined benefits from the proposed hub, including supporting the increasing popularity of the area with mountain bikers and other sports.

14.18     Much of the land used for recreation in the Maitai Valley is privately owned (by Koata Ltd).  Ngati Koata is currently developing a recreation management plan which it is hoped will inform future options around recreation on its land. The development of a hub in this area, is on hold pending the outcome of the management plan. 

 

Marina 

14.19     A number of submitters requested that additional work be undertaken to improve the facilities at the marina, including work on the hardstand, which is a consent condition.  Submitter (23035) requested a review of the marina operations and noted that any improvements at the marina should be user pays.  They also proposed that berth fees should be increased in line with similar marinas to cover all capital and operational costs. 

14.20     The 2020/21 budget includes $20,000 for a financial review of the marina.  Officers are recommending that this be increased to $50,000 to enable a fuller review of the governance, management and operations of marina.  This would be funded from the Marina closed account. A report proposing the scope of the review would be brought to the Sports and Recreation Committee.

Recommendation

That the Council

18.  Agrees to increase the budget for the comprehensive Marina review from $20,000 to $50,000, funded from the Marina account. 

Modellers Pond

14.21     Six submissions were received on the Modellers Pond. Opinions on solutions ranged from wanting to fill in the pond (23043), convert most of the area to wetlands to consider the environment (22875, Zero Carbon Nelson Tasman 24149), add a liner (23043), and retaining the pond (24302). Nelson Youth Council (24127) supported a more natural option for the area and the relocation of model boating elsewhere.

14.22     A report on the Pond is being prepared for presentation to the Sports and Recreation Committee on June 18 2020.  

Nelson Volunteer Coastguard

14.23     Nelson Volunteer Coastguard Incorporated (NCG) submitted seeking further funding of $20,000 towards a replacement regional rescue vessel (23045) in addition to funding approved in the Long Term Plan 2018/28. At the time of the Long Term Plan the possibility of making a contribution from the marina account was considered as it seemed the most appropriate source. However consultation with the Marina Advisory Group (MAG) indicated there was no support.  Although Council considered that it was more appropriate for funding to come from users of the service than ratepayers, it did allocate $20,000 towards the project. The Marina Advisory Group was asked to encourage support for the appeal amongst marina users.

14.24     It was noted at the Annual Plan hearings that neither Tasman District Council nor Marlborough District Council have contributed to this project, and NCG has not made a formal funding application to these councils to date.  However, Sealords has recently announced that it has committed $215,000 towards to the project

14.25     Officers consider the $20,000 already allocated to this project as an appropriate contribution from ratepayers. The NCG could be encouraged to pursue the other funding sources.   The Mayor will write to the other Te Tauihu councils and to the Marina Advisory Group to encourage support for the project.  

Nelson Surf Lifesaving Club

14.26     The Nelson Surf Lifesaving Club (23125) is a registered charity run by volunteers. It requested that Council fund part of the $50,000 it requires for operational expenses in 2020/21 through the Annual Plan. Due to COVID-19, funding from other sources is not as available as in past years.

14.27     Council normally considers capital funding support to organisations such as the Lifesaving Club, for example a new building is required for surf lifesaving services.  However, provision of operational funding is not supported.

Community Housing

14.28     The Consultation Document included a proposal that the Housing Reserve, which would be established from any divestment of Council’s community housing assets, be increased from the community housing book value of $8.382 million to include all of the proceeds.  The proposal recognised that housing affordability is a critical issue for Nelson and that a larger reserve would allow council to work with and support partners who have the ability to deliver social and affordable housing solutions for the community.

14.29     The Nelson Tasman Housing Trust (24185) requested Council to transfer its community housing stock to the Trust, adding that Queenstown District Council was transferring its stock to a local community housing provider at nil cost. Officers note that in Queenstown the Council is proposing to retain ownership of both the stock and the underlying land, and in that scenario the leveraging against the asset for redevelopment funding, which the Trust referenced at hearings, would not be possible.

14.30     Community Action Nelson (24195) urged the sale of Council’s community housing to the Nelson Tasman Housing Trust. Both organisations agree that all proceeds from the planned sale of community housing should go back into community housing. Nelson Grey Power reiterated its opposition to the sale of community housing (24206). 

14.31     The Trust also requested Council consider inclusionary zoning. 

14.32     Inclusionary zoning has not been included in the Draft Nelson Plan, as the Draft Plan includes a range of alternative provisions to improve land supply and broaden housing options in Nelson. Public consultation on the Draft Nelson Plan will enable opportunities for the community to consider the proposed provisions and give feedback on these.  The Queenstown experience with Inclusionary Zoning shows that a range of associated actions of Council are needed to support such zoning, such as a Housing Strategy, potentially changes to the Development Contributions Policy, potential development of legal structures or entities for administration and finance. 

14.33     A late report will prepared for 9 June to update Council on community housing matters.

Recommendation

That the Council

19.  Confirms its intent to set aside the full proceeds of any divestment of its community housing assets as a Housing Reserve. 

15.         Economic

15.1        A number of submitters commented on Council’s role in supporting economic recovery (23088) with many of these linked to the proposal to keep the rates rise at zero.

Nelson Tasman Business Trust (24187)

15.2        The Trust has noted an increase in demand for its services as a result of COVID-19 and has requested an increase for 2020/21 of $5,000 to deliver increased and changed services. The Trust provides valuable advice and mentoring to the business community which will be particularly helpful in the current economic situation. It has applied for assistance to Council’s Emergency Fund and support will be considered through that avenue.

Maitai River Precinct (includes the new library development)

15.3        The Maitai River Precinct was highlighted in the Consultation Document as a priority for the current triennium of Council and, is one of three key areas that need more governance oversight to ensure it delivers outcomes for the community. Early engagement with the community about the library area of the Precinct started last year, and a theme that came through many times was that development of this area would provide significant benefits for residents and visitors.

15.4        A report on the building at 23 Halifax Street (formally the Mediterranean Food Warehouse) is coming to Council 25 June.

15.5        33 submitters commented on the proposed Maitai River Precinct. Those in favour commented on the opportunities for improving this area for public use.  Whereas submitters that did not support the work were concerned about the cost, climate change, or considered that the existing library met current users’ needs.

15.6        Zero Carbon Nelson Tasman (24149) asked Council to consider the impact of climate change on the longevity of its investments in the CBD and surrounds, as flooding is going to become a major issue in years to come. The group stated that Council can make “an enduring, intergenerational decision to relocate essential services from low lying and vulnerable locations”, making reference to Elma Turner Library and Civic House. Zero Carbon Nelson Tasman does not support the development of permanent infrastructure in the Maitai River Precinct due to the future impacts of flooding (24149). The National Council of Women stated that managing tidal effects on the Maitai River Precinct and Elma Turner Library area should be a priority (24172).

15.7        Wakatū Incorporation (24330) supported Council’s Maitai River Precinct developments and provided an update on their own developments in this area.  They noted that they have a 500-year strategy and considered that any buildings in this area could be adequately designed to adapt to sea level rise and flooding concerns.

15.8        The Future Development Strategy identified that further investigation is required for areas that may be exposed to future sea level rise and the issues raised by the submitters are best addressed through an adaptation strategy for these areas. Maitai River flood investigations are well underway, and a wide range of options to manage the flood risk into the future are being identified. Consultation with the community on this will be progressed in 2020/21 under the Maitai River Flood Management project and the Nelson Plan.

Millers Acre

15.9        Water damage was identified in the building at Millers Acre with some parts having stachybotrys present. Mould testing in the affected sites found a strain of Stachybotrys chartarum in air and wall samples taken from the iSite. Mould was also found at three other sites, Datacom, Simply New Zealand and the New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Office.

15.10     Work to remediate, disinfect and remove the mould occurred during level 3 lockdown.

15.11     Budget was originally included for $100,000 to design and consent a solution to the buildings weather-tightness issues, but it is now recommended that the full budget be provided for the work of $850,000 in 2020/21

15.12     The preferred solution has not yet been confirmed, but this budget will enable design, consent, construction of the preferred solution, and provides for a level of contingency.

Recommendation

That the Council

20.  Approves a budget of up to $850,000 for remedial work at the Millers Acre site.

Te Matatini Kapa Haka

15.13     Iwi General Managers of Te Tau Ihu (Ngāti Tama, Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Koata, Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō and Ngāti Kuia) requested that their support of the inclusion of funding for Te Matatini in the 2020/21 Annual Plan be included in this report (24327).

Funding to assist with project management of Te Matatini was included in the draft budgets and updated to reflect possible delays in this event.

Business support

15.14     One submitter (24170) urged Council to invest in helping businesses in Stoe and Tahunanui, as well as in Nelson’s CBD. Uniquely Nelson is engaging with business centres beyond the CBD and has had conversations with the Tahuna Business Association.

16.         Summary of Capital expenditure changes

16.1        The COVID-19 shutdown which lasted for Alert Levels 4 and 3 (total of seven weeks from 25 March to 13 May) resulted, in the case of capital projects stopping of all physical works on site and in the case of operational and maintenance contracts the continuation only of essential services.

16.2        All capital works are back on site and operational aspects are back to business-as-usual.

16.3        As noted in several updates to Committees and Council previously, officers are currently processing a number of claims from contractors for both capital and operational contracts. These include time extension claims for the period of the shut-down, claims relating to new safety social distancing protocols (which have slowed productivity on site) and claims for additional costs resulting from work now entering the wet seasons and changing site conditions.

16.4        Operational claims have now been received and will be met from existing budgets in 2019/20.  However, it is expected that capital claims will still take some time to resolve and that not all will be resolved before the end of the current financial year (30 June 2020). As a result of this, the forecast spend to the end of 30 June 2020 and the 2020/21 Annual Plan budgets do not include those claims.

16.5        Once these claims are quantified, a report will be prepared for Council to approve any additional funding.

16.6        Information on the proposed capital works programme for 2020/21 was included as supplementary information for the consultation process.  Proposed changes, including proposed carry overs since the Annual Plan Consultation Document was adopted are included in Attachment 1.  Carry over lines are shaded in grey in the attachment.

16.7        Activity managers will be available to answer questions on these changes.

Recommendation

That the Council

21.  Approves the changes to the draft 2020/21 capital expenditure budget, as set out in Attachment 1. 

17.         Proposed responses to submitters

17.1        All submitters will either be e-mailed or posted a response to their submission. This will follow deliberations and the adoption of the Annual Plan 2020/21 by Council.

17.2        Committee chairs and the Mayor/Deputy Mayor will be responsible for signing out letters to submitters. For any matters not covered in the deliberations report, those replies will be consistent with existing Council decisions/policy direction.   

18.         Options

18.1        Council is required to adopt an Annual Plan for 2020/21 by 30 June 2020. It has options for each decision it makes in relation to submissions, however it needs to determine the 12 month work programme in time for adoption at the end of the current financial year.

19.         Rating recommendations

19.1        Having reviewed comments and proposals from submitters Council needs to resolve those recommendations that relate to those submissions and adopt the financial recommendations to enable the final Annual Plan and the rating recommendation to be prepared.  The financial recommendations are set out below:

Recommendation

That the Council

22.  Confirms, in accordance with the Long Term Plan 2018-28, that the percent of total rates collected as commercial rates reduces from 24.1% in 2019/20 to 23.6% in 2020/21; and

23.  Confirms its intent to have a net zero percent rates increase in 2020/21; and

24.  Agrees to drawdown the net rating income shortfall from COVID-19 from the Disaster Recovery Fund for the Annual Plan 2020/21.

 

20.         Conclusion

20.1        The submission period for the Annual Plan 2020/21 was 17 March to 6 May 2020. Council received and read 282 submissions and heard from submitters on the 14, 19 and, 20 May. At this meeting, Council will deliberate on the changes to be included in preparing the final Annual Plan for 2020/21.  The deliberation meetings are the final opportunity that any changes can be made to the draft Annual Plan. The Annual Plan 2020/21 will be updated accordingly before going to a Council meeting on 30 June 2020 to meet the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002.

21.         Next steps

21.1        Following Council deliberations and decisions the Mayor and officers will prepare the Annual Plan and Rating Resolution for Council adoption on 30 June.

 

 

Author:           Mark Tregurtha, Manager Strategy

Attachments

Attachment 1:    A2394034 - Annual Plan 2020/21 Capex update for deliberations

 

 

Important considerations for decision making

1.   Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The adoption of the Annual Plan is required under the Local Government Act 2002 and deliberating on submissions assists Council to determine the changes to make to the Plan following consultation.

2.   Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

Making decisions to respond to feedback from submissions supports all the community outcomes outlined in Council’s strategic documents.

3.   Risk

Consultation has been carried out to determine the community’s views of the services, projects, funding and policies contained within the Annual Plan.  There is a risk that Council will make decisions as part of the deliberations that are not supported by some stakeholders, however the thorough consultation mitigates this risk.

There is also a risk that as the full impacts of COVID-19 emerge, that the work programme will need to change. Council will need to assess changes to the work programme against its Significance and Engagement Policy and consult as necessary with the community

 

4.   Financial impact

Decisions on submissions will determine the financial impact of the Annual Plan.

5.   Degree of significance and level of engagement

The Annual Plan is of high significance and has been consulted on with the community. 

6.   Climate Impact

The decisions made in this report will impact on Council’s ability to reduce emissions and respond to the effects of climate change. The draft work programme includes progressing emissions reductions for Council’s activities, investigating our eligibility for carbon credits from Council owned forests, collaborative work with the community, establishing an advisory Taskforce and ensuring climate change is given full consideration in the development of the Long Term Plan 2021-31.

 

7.   Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

The following submissions were made by iwi or iwi owned organisations:  Wakatu Incorporation (24330), and Iwi General Managers (24327).

8.   Delegations

The Council has the responsibility for considering and adopting the Annual Plan.

 


Item 6: Deliberations on Annual Plan Consultation Document 2020/21: Attachment 1

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator