Agenda of Council - 25 August 2022

Nelson City Council

25 August 2022

Page No.

Karakia and Mihi Timatanga

1. Apologies

Nil

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

3. Interests

3.1 Updates to the Interests Register

3.2 Identify any conflicts of interest in the agenda

4. Public Forum

4.1 Tahunanui Business and Citizens Association - Waka Kotahi’s Nelson Future Access Roading Plans Through Tahunanui

Jac Stevenson and Paul Matheson, from the Tahunanui Business and Citizens Association, will speak about the Waka Kotahi’s Nelson Future Access roading plans through Tahunanui.

4.2 Rachel Boyack - Waka Kotahi’s Nelson Future Access roading plans through Tahunanui

Rachel Boyack, MP for Nelson, will speak about the Waka Kotahi’s Nelson Future Access roading plans through Tahunanui.

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 12 July 2022 13 - 35

Document number M19632

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 12 July 2022, as a true and correct record.

5.2 28 July 2022 36 - 40

Document number M19681

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 28 July 2022, as a true and correct record.

6. Confirmation of Minutes - 05 July 2022 41 - 43

Document number R27139

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 05 July 2022, as a true and correct record.

7. Recommendations from Committees

7.1 Infrastructure Committee - 4 August 2022

7.1.1 Adoption of Parking Strategy 2022 and Parking Management Plans

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Adopts the Parking Strategy and associated Parking Management Plans ; and

2. Delegates responsibility for any minor amendments of the Strategy and Parking Management plans to the Chair of the Infrastructure Committee and the Group Manager Infrastructure.

8. Mayor's Report

Document number R27141

To be tabled.

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Mayor's Report (R27141) and its attachment (839498445-2501).

9. Outdoor Dining Structure on Hardy Street 44 - 51

Document number R27101

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Request for Outdoor Dining Structure on Hardy Street (R26987) and its attachment (A2910349); and

2. Approves the application for an outdoor dining structure outside 274-278 Hardy Street (Parts & Services and Urban), subject to the applicant securing all consents and all necessary Council signoffs; and

3. Approves an outdoor dining structure outside 280 Hardy Street (Sprig and Fern) should an application be received, subject to the applicant securing all consents and all necessary Council signoffs; and

4. Delegates all future approvals for outdoor dining structures to the Chief Executive.

10. Tahunanui off-street parking 52 - 72

Document number R27100

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Tahunanui off-street parking (R27100) and its attachments (A2906154 and A2909737); and

2. Notes the work undertaken to explore off-street parking options pending the reinstatement of the Tahunanui southbound merge lanes by Waka Kotahi; and

3. Notes that no reasonably practical proposal option to replace off-street parking when Waka Kotahi reinstates the southbound Tahunanui Drive merge lanes has been identified at this stage; and

4. Notes that officers will continue to explore options and report any opportunities back to Council; and

5. Notes that officers will continue to work and liaise with Waka Kotahi to ensure that safety matters are addressed for all users prior to the reinstatement of the Tahunanui southbound merge lanes.

11. Report from Urban Development Subcommittee Chair – Housing Reserve Phase Two 73 - 87

Document number R27160

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Housing Reserve Phase 2 (R27160) and its attachment (Housing Reserve Phase One Criteria and Process Sep2021 A2748972);

2. Approves Housing Reserve Phase Two as set out in this Report (R27160) including its proposed value of $2 million as grant funding;

3. Notes that $2 million has been provided for Phase Two of the Housing Reserve in the 2022/23 Annual Plan.

4. Approves $1 million in funding to the Nelson Tasman Housing Trust from the Housing Reserve for the development of 76 Dodson Valley Road.

5. Approves $1 million in funding to Habitat for Humanity (Nelson) Ltd from the Housing Reserve for the development of 181 Rutherford Street.

6. Delegates the confirmation of the grant funding agreements to the Chief Executive.

12. Approval of the Nelson Tasman Regeneration Plan 88 - 142

Document number R26941

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Approval of the Nelson Tasman Regeneration Plan (R26941) and its attachments (A291652, A2921653 and A2921651); and

2. Approves the Nelson Tasman Regeneration Plan (attachment A2921652);

13. Adoption of the Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy 143 - 182

Document number R27033

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Adoption of the Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy (R27033) and its attachments (839498445-7391, 839498445-7387); and

2. Adopts He Tātai Whetū, the final Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy (839498445-7391); and

3. Mandates that the Arts Strategy Working Group Chair and the Group Manager Strategy and Communications to approve any minor editorial amendments required to finalise the Strategy; and

4. Notes that a further report outlining the operation and membership of a He Tātai Whetū Steering Group will be brought to Council for approval.

14. Three Waters Reform - Better Off Funding Proposal 183 - 196

Document number R27048

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Three Waters Reform - Better Off Funding Proposal (R27048) and its attachments (839498445-5560, 839498445-5279); and

2. Agrees that staff prepare a draft funding proposal to the Department of Internal Affairs for Better Off Funding for the following projects;

a. Te Ara Ō Whakatū City Centre Playspace

b. Railway Reserve Lighting from Annesbrook to Saxton Field

c. Arts and Creativity Strategy

d. Iwi Capacity Building

e. Community Car Sharing

f. Whai Oranga Wellbeing Centre

to be approved by Council at a meeting in September 2022.

3. Agrees that staff also include a rebuild of the ItsOn events website in the funding proposal, to use any funds not used by the six priority projects.

Confidential Business

15. Exclusion of the Public

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Confirms, in accordance with sections 48(5) and 48(6) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, that Sophie Kelly remain after the public has been excluded, for Item 6 of the Confidential agenda (Event funding - Adam Chamber Music Festival 2024), as she hasknowledge that will assist the meeting.

Recommendation

That the Council

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

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

Item	General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Particular interests protected (where applicable)
1.1	Council Meeting - Confidential Minutes - 12 July 2022	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
1.2	Council Meeting - Confidential Minutes - 28 July 2022	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
2	Confirmation of Minutes - Confidential - 05 July 2022	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person
3	Confirmation of Highly Confidential minutes 26 May 2022 and 07 June 2022	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person
4	Recommendations from Committees
4.1.1	Strategic Development and Property Subcommittee - 28 July 2022 Brook Valley Holiday Park Relocatable Home Park	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person
4.1.2	Strategic Development and Property Subcommittee - 28 July 2022 Anchor Building - Responses to Request for Expressions of Interest for lease or sale	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
5	Event funding - Adam Chamber Music Festival 2024	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
6	Proposed acquisition of land for reserve in Nelson	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
7	Recruitment of a Chief Executive	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(b)(ii) To protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
8	Nelmac Limited director remuneration 2022	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Karakia Whakamutanga

Nelson City Council Minutes - 12 July 2022

Minutes of a meeting of the

Nelson City Council

Te Kaunihera o Whakatū

Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson on Tuesday 12 July 2022, commencing at 9.02a.m.

Present: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese (Chairperson), Councillors Y Bowater, T Brand, M Courtney, J Edgar (Deputy Mayor), K Fulton, R O'Neill-Stevens, B McGurk, G Noonan, P Rainey, R Sanson and T Skinner

In Attendance: Chief Executive (P Dougherty), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Environmental Management (C Barton), Group Manager Community Services (A White), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Group Manager Strategy and Communications (N McDonald), Team Leader Governance (R Byrne) and Assistant Governance Adviser (A Bryce-Neumann)

Apology: An apology has been received from Councillor M Lawrey

Karakia and Mihi Timatanga

1. Apologies

Resolved CL/2022/118

That the Council

1. Receives and accepts an apology from Councillor M Lawrey.

Her Worship the Mayor/Edgar Carried

Attendance: Councillor Fulton joined the meeting 9.09a.m.

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

Her Worship the Mayor advised that Item 9: Supplementary information - Holding Company decision would be considered at 10.00a.m. to allow for representatives of Port Nelson Ltd to attend.

3. Interests

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

4. Public Forum

4.1. Steve Cross - Proposed Holding Company for Port Nelson/Nelson Airport

Mr Cross spoke about the proposed Holding Company for Port Nelson/Nelson Airport and tabled his speaking notes (A2921954).

Attendance: Councillor Skinner joined the meeting at 9.14a.m.

Attachments

1 A2921954 Tabled speaking notes Steve Cross

4.2. The Aotearoa Collective for Public Transport Equity - Remit from Porirua City Council to LGNZ Conference

Document number R27024

Lovinia Pluck and Pippa Sussex, from The Aotearoa Collective for Public Transport Equity, spoke in support of the Remit from Porirua City Council to the Local Government New Zealand Conference and tabled their speaking notes.

Attachments

1 1982984479-28 Lovinia Pluck and Pippa Sussex Speaking Notes

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 10 May 2022

Document number M19450, agenda pages 20 - 34 refer.

Resolved CL/2022/119

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 10 May 2022, as a true and correct record.

Courtney/McGurk Carried

5.2 19 May 2022

Document number M19472, agenda pages 35 - 45 refer.

Resolved CL/2022/120

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 19 May 2022, as a true and correct record.

Her Worship the Mayor/McGurk Carried

5.3 26 May 2022 - Extraordinary Meeting , agenda pages 46 - 48 refer.

Resolved CL/2022/121

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the extraordinary meeting of the Council, held on 26 May 2022, as a true and correct record.

O'Neill-Stevens/Edgar Carried

5.4 7 June 2022, agenda pages 49 - 51 refer.

Resolved CL/2022/122

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 7 June 2022, as a true and correct record.

Edgar/Bowater Carried

5.5 14 June 2022

Document number M19544, agenda pages 52 - 66 refer.

Resolved CL/2022/123

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 14 June 2022, as a true and correct record.

McGurk/O'Neill-Stevens Carried

5.6 23 June 2022

Document number M19586, agenda pages 67 - 69 refer.

Resolved CL/2022/124

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 23 June 2022, as a true and correct record.

Edgar/Courtney Carried

6. Recommendations from Committees

6.1 Infrastructure Committee - 23 June 2022

6.1.1 Infrastructure Quarterly Report

Group Manager Infrastructure, Alec Louverdis confirmed that coal tar found at the Washington Valley site was significant, it was likely to have been from the gasworks and used for fill in the 1970’s, that the requested budget was for removal and disposal and any savings would not be diverted to other projects.
Recommendation to Council CL/2022/125
	*That the Council* 2. Approves unbudgeted additional capital funding of $2 million in 2022/23 for the Washington Valley Infrastructure Upgrade project to cover the cost of previously unidentified and unknown coal tar, a hazardous material, to be disposed of at York Valley Landfill.
McGurk/O'Neill-Stevens Carried

6.2 Community and Recreation Committee - 30 June 2022

6.2.1 Joint Regional Cemetery – Memorandum of Understanding and draft Site Selection Criteria

Recommendation to Council CL/2022/126

That the Council

1. Approves the Memorandum of Understanding between Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council for the development of a joint regional cemetery (A2876360) for signing; and

2. Delegates responsibility for agreeing to any minor changes to the Memorandum of Understanding (A2876360) to the Nelson City Councillor who is Co-Chairperson of the Joint Regional Cemetery Working Group, in consultation with the Co-Chairperson counterpart from Tasman District Council.

Skinner/Brand Carried

6.2.2 Adoption of the Out and About - On Tracks Strategy 2022

Recommendation to Council CL/2022/127

That the Council

1. Adopts the Out and About – On Tracks Strategy 2022 (A2471811); and

2. Delegates responsibility for agreeing to any minor amendments to the Out and About – On Tracks Strategy 2022 (A2471811) to the Chair of the Community and Recreation Committee and the Group Manager Community Services.

Skinner/Brand Carried

6.2.3 Follow Up Review on the Nelson Centre of Musical Arts

Recommendation to Council CL/2022/128

That the Council

1. Revokes the decision CL/2019/261 made at the Council meeting on 12 December 2019:

That the Council

Agrees to provide business advice to support the Nelson Centre of Musical Arts over January - June 2019/20 up to the value of $10,000 in unbudgeted expenditure, on the understanding that the Nelson Centre of Musical Arts will contribute $5,000 (up to a total value of $15,000).

Skinner/Brand Carried

The meeting adjourned from 10.00a.m. until 10.10a.m.

7. Supplementary information - Holding Company decision (Agenda Item 9)

Document number R26983, agenda pages 136 - 213 refer.

Group Manager Corporate Services, Nikki Harrison presented the report and addressed questions raised by the Public Forum presenter, noting that the matter of uncalled capital was raised by submitters and considered in the deliberation report; this was the formalisation of the current arrangement and not material to risk that Council already held in relation to the strategic assets. She advised that, with regard to credit rating assumptions, Standard and Poor’s took into account Council’s 50% share of debt in the Airport and Port, and that Council would not let those entities fail.

Ms Harrison answered questions on:

· The stability of debt within the entities and the authorisation process for additional borrowing

· 10 year forecasting

· The composition and term of the interim and operational board

· Benefits of the 1% reduction in the interest rate

· Confirmed the assumption that the runway extension for the airport would happen within the first 10 years of the plan

Her Worship the Mayor welcomed Chief Executive Officer, Hugh Morrison, and Chief Financial Officer, Daryl Wehner, from Port Nelson Limited.

Mr Morrison answered questions on Port Nelson’s strong relationship with Westpac and the revolving credit facility it worked with, diversification with investment in the Science and Technology Precinct, the lease swap in Marlborough which would provide a better strategic position and confirmed a 1% reduction in interest would equate to an approximate increase of $500,000 (after tax) annually in dividend to the two councils.

Port Nelson Ltd had provided confidential supplementary information and the meeting excluded the public to consider this.

Exclusion of the Public
Resolved CL/2022/129
	That the Council 1. Confirms, in accordance with sections 48(5) and 48(6) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, that Hugh Morrison and Daryl Wehner from Port Nelson Limited remain after the public has been excluded, for the Confidential agenda, as they have knowledge relating to Item 4: Confidential Attachment to Report 26950 that will assist the meeting. *2. Excludes the public from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.* 3. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
Her Worship the Mayor/McGurk Carried

Item	General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Particular interests protected (where applicable)
8	Confidential Attachment to Report R26950: Supplementary information - Holding Company decision	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities

Item

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interests protected (where applicable)

Confidential Attachment to Report R26950: Supplementary information - Holding Company decision

Section 48(1)(a)

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

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(h)

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

The meeting moved in to confidential session at 11.04a.m. and returned at 10.40a.m.

The recommendation was moved by Councillor McGurk, seconded by Her Worship the Mayor Reese.

Ms Harrison answered further questions on:

· Council’s contribution to the Science and Technology Precinct in the Long Term Plan, confirming it was an economic decision for the city.

· The Statement of Expectation (SOE) process, noting if shareholding councils were not happy with the Statement of Intent (SOI) they had the ability to go back to the underlying subsidiary and force changes required. The SOE would go to the IHL Board and would cover specific issues the councils had with the underlying subsidiaries.

· Reporting on the SOI and clear accountability lines

· Confirmed the benefit to the community was in interest savings and the potential for an increased dividend which would reduce the rates Council had to collect

· Confirmed that Tasman District Council had confirmed the resolution on 30 June 2022.

The meeting adjourned from 12.22p.m. and reconvened at 1.09p.m.

Clause 1 was taken separately and a division was called on the remainder of the motion.

Resolved CL/2022/130

That the Council

1. Receives the report Supplementary information - Holding Company decision (R26983) and its attachments (A2907846 DLA Piper signoff incl 7 June JSC changes to constitution and SHA, and A2904604 Summary of constitution - changes incl 7 Jun JSC).

Her Worship the Mayor/McGurk Carried

Recommendaton to Council

Recommendation from the Joint Shareholders Committee:

The Council notes that:

Purpose

A. The purpose of these resolutions is to seek the Council’s approval of the documents and transactions necessary to approve the:

a) Restructuring Proposals (including the Initial Share Issue); and

b) Financing Proposals (including the New Share Issue).

B. The Restructuring Proposals, Initial Share Issue, Financing Proposals and New Share Issue are explained below.

A new holding company for Port Nelson Limited and Nelson Airport Limited

C. Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council (together, the Shareholders) have together been investigating the incorporation of a holding company which they will own in equal shares. The holding company will hold and administer investments in entities in which the Shareholders have a substantial interest for the benefit of the Nelson and Tasman regions, being Port Nelson Limited (PNL) and Nelson Airport Limited (NAL).

D. Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council through their Long Term Plan process and Joint Shareholders Committee (JSC), have each received and reviewed advice from Deloitte about operational synergies of holding investments, being PNL and NAL, in a holding company, and tax structure options.

E. The name agreed for the holding company is Infrastructure Holdings Limited (IHL).

F. The initial directors approved for IHL are Catherine Taylor, Paul Steere, Gerrard Wilson and Paul Zealand and an independent chairperson is being recruited.

Restructuring Proposals

G. As part of the proposal to incorporate IHL, it is proposed that each of the Shareholders transfer all their shares in PNL and NAL to IHL (Share Sale) for $8,446,000 in total (Purchase Price). The Purchase Price will be owed to the Shareholders in equal portions (being $4,223,000 each). The Crown holds, and will continue to hold, one special “Kiwi Share” in NAL.

H. The Purchase Price allocation is:

a) $2,400,000 for the shares in NAL; and

b) $6,046,000 for the shares in PNL.

I. Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council will each subscribe for 42,230 ordinary shares in IHL (being 84,460 ordinary shares in total) (Initial Shares), at an issue price of $100.00 per share (Initial Share Issue). The total subscription amount for the Initial Shares is therefore $8,446,000 (Initial Subscription Amount), which is equal to the Purchase Price.

J. Accordingly, the Purchase Price will be satisfied on a cashless basis by set-off against the Initial Subscription Amount.

K. The sale of shares in PNL and NAL and the subscription for the Initial Shares will be referred to in these resolutions as the “Restructuring Proposals”.

Financing Proposals

L. The New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency Limited (LGFA) is a limited liability company owned by central government and local authorities. It was established to borrow funds and then on-lend those funds to local authorities and (now) council-controlled trading organisations (CCTOs) at lower margins than those local authorities and council-controlled organisations would otherwise pay.

M. Currently, PNL and NAL service their debt requirements through ordinary bank borrowing from Westpac New Zealand Limited (Westpac). However, it is projected that PNL’s and NAL’s debt requirements and financing costs may increase over the next 10+ years to meet infrastructure-upgrade demands.

N. Given the projected increase in PNL’s and NAL’s debt requirements and financing costs, IHL’s primary purpose is to operate as a treasury vehicle for PNL and NAL. To achieve this purpose, it is further proposed that (Financing Proposals) IHL will:

a) join the LGFA borrowing programme (LGFA Accession) as a CCTO, following which, IHL will be able to borrow funds directly from LGFA by issuing securities to LGFA;

b) enter into borrowing and risk hedging facilities with Westpac, which is PNL’s and NAL’s current bank; and

c) on-lend amounts borrowed from the LGFA borrowing programme and Westpac to PNL and NAL under intra-group funding arrangements.

O. Joining the LGFA borrowing programme will enable IHL to access cheaper core debt on behalf of PNL and NAL. As a “port company” under the Port Companies Act 1988, PNL is not permitted to join LGFA and NAL does not have the scale to make joining LGFA economical. It is considered that, once implemented, the Financing Proposals will deliver considerable financial benefits, including savings in financing costs for PNL and NAL and, consequently, increased dividend return to Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council (as the ultimate owners of PNL and NAL). Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council through their Long Term Plan process and the JSC have each received and reviewed advice from Deloitte about LGFA funding benefits.

P. PNL and NAL will continue to require the flexibility offered by Westpac’s transactional banking products. IHL will also enter into borrowing and risk hedging facilities with Westpac for working capital requirements and risk-management (such as interest-rate hedging).

The LGFA Accession and Westpac facilities

Q. LGFA and Westpac will require certain credit support as conditions to the LGFA Accession and the availability of the Westpac facilities. Such credit support will include:

a) a subscription from the Shareholders for an agreed amount of uncalled and unpaid equity capital in IHL (further details are described below);

b) IHL, PNL and NAL will each cross-guarantee each other’s obligations to LGFA, Westpac as lender under borrowing facilities and Westpac as counter-party to risk-management facilities (together, the Finance Parties); and

c) IHL, PNL and NAL will each grant general security over all of their personal property in favour of the Finance Parties. In the case of IHL, this will include security over its right to call for uncalled and unpaid equity capital.

R. As mentioned above, it will be a condition to the LGFA Accession and the availability of the Westpac facilities that the Shareholders subscribe for, and IHL issues to the Shareholders (New Share Issue), a further 1,165,000 ordinary shares each (totalling 2,330,000 ordinary shares) in IHL (New Shares) for an issue price of $100.00 per share. The total amount payable for the New Shares will therefore be $233,000,000 (Issue Amount). The Issue Amount will remain uncalled and unpaid until such time as the directors of IHL make a call on the New Shares for the Issue Amount.

Shareholder approvals

S. The Restructuring Proposals and the Financing Proposals will require the approval of the Shareholders as:

a) the proposals are, or may be, “major transactions” (as defined in section 129 of the Companies Act 1993 (Act));

b) the Initial Share Issue and the New Share Issue require the agreement of IHL’s entitled persons (as that term is defined in the Act) for the purposes of section 107(2) of the Act. The only entitled persons of IHL will be the Shareholders; and

c) Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council (as the shareholders of IHL) must consent, for the purposes of section 50 of the Act and for all other purposes, to becoming the holder of the Initial Shares and the New Shares.

T. Accordingly, IHL’s board of directors will, at the relevant times, separately request that Tasman District Council and Nelson City Council (as shareholders and entitled persons of IHL) confirm and approve IHL’s entry into, execution and performance, of the:

a) Restructuring Proposals (including the Initial Share Issue); and

b) Financing Proposals (including the New Share Issue),

by separate unanimous resolutions and entitled persons’ agreements. The unanimous resolutions and entitled persons’ agreements for the Restructuring Proposals and the Financing Proposals are together referred to as the “Unanimous Shareholder Resolutions and Entitled Persons’ Agreements”.

Next steps

U. In order to incorporate IHL and give effect to the Restructuring Proposals, the Shareholders will need to:

a) register IHL as a limited liability company on the New Zealand Companies Office and each complete the Companies Office requirements in relation to the incorporation of IHL (such as shareholder consent forms) (Companies Office Forms);

b) appoint directors to the board of IHL (including an independent chairperson);

c) cause IHL to adopt the constitution in the form attached (the Constitution);

d) enter into a shareholders’ agreement (which will include the subscription provisions for the Initial Shares) with IHL, in the form attached (the Shareholders’ Agreement);

e) enter into a sale and purchase agreement with IHL relating to the transfer of shares in PNL and NAL in the form attached (the Sale and Purchase Agreement);

f) execute and deliver the share transfer forms (in the form attached) in relation to the Sale and Purchase Agreement (the Share Transfer Forms); and

g) any other documents necessary or desirable in connection with the Restructuring Proposals.

The Companies Office Forms, Shareholders’ Agreement, Sale and Purchase Agreement, Share Transfer Forms and any other documents captured by paragraph U.g) above, are together referred to as the “Restructuring Documents”, and the transactions contemplated by the Restructuring Documents are referred to as the “Restructuring Transactions”.

V. In order to give effect to the Financing Proposals, each of the Shareholders will need to enter into:

a) a subscription agreement (in the form attached) with IHL, under which the Shareholders will subscribe for the New Shares (Subscription Agreement);

b) (as part of the LGFA Accession) accession deeds to the multi-issuer deed and notes subscription agreement (which Tasman District Council and Nelson City Council are each already a party to) (Accession Deeds); and

c) any other documents necessary or desirable in connection with the Financing Proposals.

The Subscription Agreement, the Accession Deeds and any other documents captured by paragraph 0 are together referred to as the “Financing Documents” and the transactions contemplated by the Financing Documents are referred to as the “Financing Transactions”.

Documents

W. The Council tables the most recent drafts of the Restructuring Documents, the Subscription Agreement and the Unanimous Shareholder Resolutions and Entitled Persons’ Agreements.

X. The Council has not tabled copies of the Accession Deeds because they are not yet available for the Council to review and approve. However, the Accession Deeds will be based on the standard form for accession deeds scheduled to the LGFA Multi-Issuer Deed and Notes Subscription Agreement respectively.

That the Council resolves:

1. the Council consents, for the purposes of section 50 of the Act and for all other purposes, to being the joint owner in equal shares of the Initial Shares and the New Shares;

2. the form of the Constitution be approved, and the Shareholders will cause IHL to adopt the Constitution;

3. the Restructuring Documents and the Restructuring Transactions (including, specifically, the Initial Share Issue) are approved, and any pre-emptive rights available to the Shareholders in relation to the Share Sale are to be waived in the Sale and Purchase Agreement;

4. the Financing Documents and the Financing Transactions (including, specifically, the New Share Issue) are approved;

5. the forms of the Unanimous Shareholder Resolutions and Entitled Persons’ Agreements are approved;

6. the Council enters into and, following execution, delivers and performs its obligations under, each of the Restructuring Documents and the Financing Documents and that these documents may be executed by:

a) (in the case of agreements) the Chief Executive; and

b) (in the case of deeds) two elected members,

on behalf of the Council, subject to any minor amendments cleared by both Tasman District Council’s and Nelson City Council’s legal advisors;

7. when requested to do so by the board of IHL, the Chief Executive is authorised to sign the Unanimous Shareholder Resolutions and Entitled Persons’ Agreements on behalf of the Council, subject to any minor amendments cleared by both TDC’s and NCC’s legal advisors;

8. the Chief Executive is authorised on behalf of the Council to, subject to clearance by both Tasman District Council’s and Nelson City Council’s legal advisors:

a) approve any further minor amendments to the Restructuring Documents, the Financing Documents and the Unanimous Shareholder Resolutions and Entitled Persons’ Agreements prior to their execution; ands

b) enter into, execute, and deliver such other agreements, instruments, notices, communications, and other documents; and

c) do such other things, in connection with the Restructuring Documents and the Restructuring Transactions, the Financing Documents and the Financing Transactions, and the Unanimous Shareholder Resolutions and Entitled Persons’ Agreements, as the Chief Executive may consider necessary.

The motion was put and a division was called:

For

Cr Edgar

Cr Fulton

Cr McGurk

Cr Noonan

Her Worship the Mayor Reese (Chairperson)

Against

Cr Bowater

Cr Brand

Cr Courtney

Cr O'Neill-Stevens

Cr Rainey

Cr Sanson

Cr Skinner

Apology

Cr Lawrey

The motion was lost 5 - 7.

Her Worship the Mayor/McGurk Lost

The meeting adjourned from 2.01p.m. until 2.15p.m. at which time Councillor Fulton left the meeting.

8. Water Services Entities Bill Submission (Agenda Item 10)

Document number R27006, agenda pages 214 - 221 refer.

Group Manager Infrastructure, Alec Louverdis, presented the report and noted that 87% of the feedback received was against the Water Services Entities Bill, reasons given were loss of ownership, control, accountability and lack of strategic oversight.

Mr Louverdis answered questions on Te tai Ihu representation and Her Worship the Mayor Reese advised that she had received an indication that neighbouring councils did not support the split of boundaries, which did not follow local government boundaries. She noted that this had been a decision of Cabinet which followed Ngai Tahu rohe (entity D). Tasman District Council had advised it supported the boundaries associated with the Health reform as it amalgamated all of the South Island. She noted that there was the opportunity for Council to provide comment on the boundary split and it was agreed to reference this in the motion.

Attendance: Councillor Edgar left the meeting at 2.40p.m.

The meeting adjourned from 2.50p.m. until 2.56p.m.

Following discussion on the Water Services Entities objective, Agenda Attachments page 499 (proposed change to 11c) it was agreed that the document should reflect that ‘enable’ should be driven by councils’ planning documents. It was agreed to change the submission for 11(c) from ‘Support and enable housing and urban development’ to ‘Support and enable housing and urban development in accordance with overarching planning documents.”

Attendance: Councillor Edgar returned to the meeting at 3.10p.m.

The motion was taken in parts and a division was called on clause 2.

Resolved CL/2022/131

That the Council

1. Receives the report Water Services Entities Bill Submission (R27006) and its attachments the Engagement Summary (A2919612) and Complete Feedback (A2919617).

McGurk/Her Worship the Mayor Carried

Councillors Courtney and Skinner requested their vote against the motion be recorded in the minutes.

Resolved CL/2022/132

That the Council

2. Approves the draft Council submission (A2918988) to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee on the Water Services Entities Bill, subject to the Mayor seeking the views of iwi, Marlborough District Council and confirming the position with elected members with respect to either remaining in Entity C or moving to Entity D and including that feedback in Council’s submission; and

The motion was put and a division was called:

For

Cr Bowater

Cr Edgar

Cr O'Neill-Stevens

Cr McGurk

Cr Noonan

Cr Rainey

Cr Sanson

Her Worship the Mayor Reese (Chairperson)

Against

Cr Brand

Cr Courtney

Cr Skinner

Apologies

Cr Lawrey

Absent

Cr Fulton

The motion was carried 8 - 3.

McGurk/Her Worship the Mayor Carried

Resolved CL/2022/133

That the Council

3. Agrees that the Mayor, Infrastructure Committee Chair and Chief Executive be delegated authority to approve minor editorial amendments to the Council submission (A2918988).

McGurk/Her Worship the Mayor Carried

Councillors Courtney and Skinner requested their vote against the motion be recorded in the minutes.

Extension of Meeting Time
Resolved CL/2022/134
	*That the Council* 1. *Extends the meeting time beyond six hours, pursuant to Standing Order 4.2.*
Courtney/Her Worship the Mayor Carried

9. Status Report (Agenda Item 7)

Document number R26688, agenda pages 70 - 109 refer.

Attendance: Councillor Rainey left the meeting at 3.35p.m.

Resolved CL/2022/135

That the Council

1. Receives the report Status Report (R26688) and its attachment (A1168168).

Noonan/Courtney Carried

10. Acting Mayor's Report (Agenda Item 8)

Document number R26978, agenda pages 110 - 135 refer.

Members reviewed the Remits to the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) conference and provided input on whether to support or otherwise. It was agreed to ask LGNZ for further information on Remit 3: Illegal street racing, clarifying whether this was the role of Waka Kotahi or local government.

Resolved CL/2022/136

That the Council

1. Receives the report Acting Mayor's Report (R26978) and its attachment (A2909891 and A2913709); and

2. Supports the proposed Remits to the Local Government New Zealand AGM 2022, as discussed:

a. Remit 1 – support

b. Remit 2 - support

c. Remit 3 – to be confirmed at the AGM

d. Remit 4 - support

e. Remit 5 - support

f. Remit 6 - not support

3. Approves, Council’s submission to the Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Legislation Bill.

Edgar/Her Worship the Mayor Carried

11. Tahunanui off-street parking

Document number R26497, agenda pages 222 - 242 refer.

Defer item to another meeting
Resolved CL/2022/137
	*That the Council* 1. Defers the item Tahunanui off-street parking to be considered at the Council meeting to be held on 25 August at 9.00a.m. in the Council Chamber.
Her Worship the Mayor/McGurk Carried

12. Outdoor Dining Structure on Hardy Street

Document number R26987, agenda pages 243 - 250 refer.

Defer item to another meeting
Resolved CL/2022/138
	*That the Council* 1. Defers the item Outdoor Dining Structure on Hardy Street to be considered at the Council meeting to be held on 25 August at 9.00a.m. in the Council Chamber.
Her Worship the Mayor/Courtney Carried

13. Exclusion of the Public

Resolved CL/2022/139

That the Council

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

Skinner/Bowater Carried

Item	General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Particular interests protected (where applicable)
1	Council Meeting - Confidential Minutes - 10 May 2022	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities · Section 7(2)(g) To maintain legal professional privilege · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations
2	Council Meeting - Confidential Minutes - 19 May 2022	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities · Section 7(2)(c)(ii) To protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely otherwise to damage the public interest
3	Extraordinary Council Meeting - Confidential Minutes - 26 May 2022	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person
4	Council Meeting - Confidential Minutes - 7 June 2022	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
5	Council Meeting - Confidential Minutes - 14 June 2022	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person
6	Recommendations from Committees Environment and Climate Committee - 16 June 2022 Harbourmaster vessel	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
7	Status Report - Confidential	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
9	Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit Iwi Representative Reappointment	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person

The meeting went into confidential session at 4.02p.m. and Councillor Rainey joined the meeting at 4.12p.m. The meeting resumed in public session at 4.14p.m.

Karakia Whakamutanga

14. Restatements

It was resolved while the public was excluded:

Recommendation from Committee:

Harbourmaster vessel

Agrees that Report (R26944), Attachments (A2895733, A2895734) and the decision remain confidential at this time, until negotiations for the purchase of the replacement vessel have been concluded.

5	Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit Iwi Representative Reappointment
	Agrees that the report and decision be made public once the representative has been advised of both councils’ decision.

There being no further business the meeting ended at 4.16p.m.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings by resolution on (date)

Resolved

Nelson City Council Minutes - 28 July 2022

Minutes of a meeting of the

Nelson City Council

Te Kaunihera o Whakatū

Held via Zoom on Thursday 28 July 2022, commencing at 1.04p.m.

Present: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese (Chairperson), Councillors T Brand, M Courtney, K Fulton, M Lawrey, R O'Neill-Stevens, B McGurk, P Rainey and R Sanson.

In Attendance: Acting Chief Executive (N McDonald) Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Environmental Management (C Barton), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Team Leader Governance (R Byrne) and Senior Governance Adviser (M Macfarlane)

Apology: An apology has been received from Councillor G Noonan for attendance and Councillors J Edgar, Y Bowater and T Skinner for lateness.

Karakia and Mihi Timatanga

1. Apologies

Resolved CL/2022/151

That the Council

1. Receives and accepts an apology from Councillor G Noonan for attendance and Councillors J Edgar, Y Bowater, and T Skinner for lateness.

Her Worship the Mayor/Lawrey Carried

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

Her Worship the Mayor Reese advised that the order of business would be adjusted to accommodate presentations from external organisations.

3. Exclusion of the Public

Julia Campbell (Regional Director), Russell Allen (Senior Development Manager) and Paul Commons (Deputy Chief Executive) of Kāinga Ora remain for Item 2 of the Confidential agenda to answer questions and, accordingly, the following resolution is required to be passed:

Exclusion of the Public
Resolved CL/2022/152
	*That the Council* 1. Confirms, in accordance with sections 48(5) and 48(6) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, that Julia Campbell (Regional Director, Kāinga Ora), Russell Allen (Senior Development Manager, Kāinga Ora) and Paul Commons (Deputy Chief Executive, Kāinga Ora) remain after the public has been excluded, for Item 2 of the Confidential agenda (Kāinga Ora Housing Development Update), as they have knowledge relating to that item that will assist the meeting.
McGurk/Brand Carried

Exclusion of the Public
Resolved CL/2022/153
	*That the Council* *1. Excludes the public from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.* 2. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
McGurk/Brand Carried

Item

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interests protected (where applicable)

Kāinga Ora Housing Development Update

Section 48(1)(a)

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

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(g)

To maintain legal professional privilege

· Section 7(2)(h)

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

· Section 7(2)(i)

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

The meeting went into confidential session at 1.07p.m. and resumed in public session at 2.19p.m.

4. Interests (agenda item 3)

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

Councillor Bowater subsequently declared an interest in Agenda Item 2 Infrastructure Acceleration Fund Update and Next steps and took no part in the decision making.

5. Public Forum (Agenda item 4)

5.1. Nelson Tasman Housing Trust & Habitat for Humanity - Near-term Housing Solutions (Agenda items 4.1 & 4.2)

Document number R27071

Carrie Mozena, Director of Nelson Tasman Housing Trust, and Nick Clarke, General Manager Habitat for Humanity, presented some near-term housing solutions to the current challenges faced in Whakatu.

They noted there were potential partnership opportunities and answered questions on

· potential shovel ready projects

· the reasoning behind limiting funding request to 1 million dollars per entity

· what else the housing funding reserves could be used for

· the potential for rent to buy options

· potential options for use of the housing reserve fund

· ability to deliver affordable housing in the city centre in the next two years

Attachments

1 1982984479-86 Carrie Mozena, Nelson Tasman Housing Trust, and Nick Clarke, Habitat for Humanity, Presentation

6. Mayor's Report (agenda item 5)

There was no Mayor’s report

7. Exclusion of the Public (agenda item 6)

Resolved CL/2022/154

That the Council

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

Her Worship the Mayor/Skinner Carried

Item

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interests protected (where applicable)

Infrastructure Acceleration Fund
Update and Next steps

Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Section 48(1)(a)

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

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(i)

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

The meeting went into confidential session at 3.11p.m. and resumed in public session at 4.47p.m.

Karakia Whakamutanga

8. Restatements (agenda item 7)

It was resolved while the public was excluded:

2	Kāinga Ora Housing Development Update
	4. Agrees that Report (R26867) and the decision be made publicly available following completion of commercial negotiations.

3	Infrastructure Acceleration Fund Update and Next steps
	9. Agrees that the decision be made public following a decision by Council on the matters in this report (R26527).

There being no further business the meeting ended at 4.47p.m.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings by resolution on (date)

Resolved

Item 9: Outdoor Dining Structure on Hardy Street

Council

25 August 2022

REPORT R27101

Outdoor Dining Structure on Hardy Street

This item was deferred from the Council meeting on 12 July 2022

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider the application received by the owner of 274-278 Hardy Street (hospitality premises known as Parts & Service, and Urban), for installation of a structure in road reserve to provide covered outdoor seating.

1.2 To consider the future extension of outdoor dining structures for the owner of 280 Hardy Street (hospitality premises known as Sprig & Fern).

2. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Request for Outdoor Dining Structure on Hardy Street (R26987) and its attachment (A2910349); and

4. Delegates all future approvals for outdoor dining structures to the Chief Executive.

3. Background

3.1 Officers have been approached by the owner and operator of both Parts & Service, and Urban with an application for the installation of a structure, over the area currently leased by these businesses as outdoor dining licenses on road reserve.

3.2 This central city location has approval for outdoor dining, however under the Outdoor Dining Policy 2000 (clause 25), the License holder cannot make any structural changes or alteration to the footpath without prior written approval from the Chief Executive. Due to the change in urban design, the precedent it will set, and the higher public impact than just tables and chairs, the Acting Chief Executive has referred this issue to Council for decision.

3.3 Installing a structure of this significance will be a first for the outdoor dining areas in Nelson. Officers seek Council approval for this structure, and following any Council decision on this matter, will assess all future applications on a case-by-case basis with approval delegated to the Chief Executive.

4. Discussion

Proposed Structure

4.1 The proposal is to erect a pergola type structure to cover the leased outdoor dining areas for Urban and Parts & Service restaurants at 274 – 278 Hardy Street. Refer to Attachment 1.

4.2 The structure is considered to be a financial investment for the business and will enable a more viable and attractive setting for outdoor dining all year round. The proposed structure will also eliminate intermittent use of umbrellas and will be able to provide warmth for patrons during the winter.

4.3 The proposed structure would be free standing, supported by concrete footings which would be secured and sit flush with the pavement and have blinds that will only be used to provide shelter from bad weather. The blinds will be tucked away for an open feel during warmer summer months. Officers have met with the applicant and have outlined that having the area open all year round is desireable to enhance the activation of our streets by pedestrians.

4.4 The roof would be permanent and constructed in a clear roofing product which provides 99.9% UV protection and enables a safe outside seating space in terms of exposure to sun.

4.5 The Sprig and Fern Hardy Street (280 Hardy Street) intends to match the design for consistency, but is waiting to see if Council approves this concept first.

4.6 The structure would be regularly maintained by the licensee.

4.7 The structure will not impact pedestrian thoroughfare of the Hardy Street footpath, and designs will incorporate column placement to reduce hazards to those walking to and from the dining area.

4.8 The structure proposed is in addition to what is currently leased as outdoor dining space. This area is not usable or available to surrounding business, and for this reason, the applicant has been in discussion with directly affected businesses about this proposal. Feedback is being gathered from directly adjacent businesses and will be presented to Council during the meeting.

4.9 Construction would be completed offsite, and the structure would be delivered and installed with minimal disruption to the city centre users. This proposal is supported by the City Development Team. Council’s City Centre Development Programme Lead has met with the applicant on site and offered advice on how this can enhance a more positive outdoor dining experience. Councils Transportation, Utility, and Parks teams all support the concept in principle, noting the points below.

4.10 The initiative supports Nelson’s great hospitality in Te Ara ō Whakatū (City Centre Spatial Plan) by enhancing Hardy Street as Nelson’s Arts and Eats Street.

Consents /Approvals

4.11 Should Council approve the ‘outdoor dining structure application, the applicant will be required to obtain a resource consent, building consent and provide detailed plans for Infrastructure approval. Should all the above be approved, Council would enter a new, or updated license to occupy with the applicant to outline maintenance obligations, ownership, and future modification/removal requirements.

4.12 Given the significant investment required and time involved in obtaining the necessary approvals, completing the detailed designs and installing such a structure, the applicant first seeks approval from Council to progress the concept.

Services

4.13 In order for this structure to be installed in its proposed location, an existing streetlight would need to be relocated. The applicant has asked that the cost of relocation for this streetlight be split with Council. Officers believe that a cost share in this matter is appropriate and could provide $7,500 toward the cost (total $11,000) from existing operational budgets. This contribution would be made acknowledging the significant investment required by the applicant in installing such a structure, which benefits the wider hospitality sector and city centre by inviting more people into Nelson’s city centre during all times of the year.

4.14 During the detailed design phase, underground services will be located and incorporated into the design. This will ensure the structure does not impede access for the operation and maintenance of both Council and third-party utility operators. During this phase, these entities will be consulted regarding the proposal. It shall be noted that the nearby street tree will not be impacted by this proposal.

5. Options

5.1 Two options exist. Either to approve the application for an outdoor dining structure (subject to further consents and license to occupy agreements) or decline approval of the concept of the outdoor dining structure halting further work.

Option 1: Approve the application for the outdoor dining structure (recommended option)
Advantages	· Council supporting local hospitality businesses. · Creating and encouraging a lively, prospering city centre. · Provides the hospitality operators with some confidence to invest further in design and consent
Risks and Disadvantages	· Cost of relocating existing infrastructure · Semi-permanent structure
Option 2: Decline the application for the outdoor dining structure
Advantages	· No further staff time/resource required · No relocation of services
Risks and Disadvantages	· Negative reputational risk with retailers and hospitality owners. · Limited outdoor dining options within the city centre during winter.

Author: Rebecca Van Orden, Manager Property Services

Attachments

Attachment 1: A2910349 - Plans and Sketches for 274-278 Hardy Street ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The matter of this report sits within Councils outdoor dining policy, which aligns well with the purpose of local government in that it enables and supports a vibrant city centre, contributing to the social and economic wellbeing of the community.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

1. The matter of approving an outdoor dining structure will contribute to the following community outcomes:

“Our communities are healthy, safe, inclusive and resilient”; “Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy”.

3. Risk

The matter of approving an outdoor dining structure on Hardy Street poses little risk to Council given the procedures and approvals required of the applicant to ensure such a structure is installed safely and efficiently.

4. Financial impact

There is a small amount of funding that officers have identified from existing operational budgets that can support this application, and the costs associated with the relocation of Council assets.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

Directly affected businesses (applicant) and surrounding businesses have been involved in the preparation of this application.

6. Climate Impact

The impact of climate change as not been assessed in this report.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

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

8. Delegations

As the delegations for this matter fall within the Infrastructure Committee and Urban Development Subcommittee, therefore are cross-committee and to be considered by Council.

Item 10: Tahunanui off-street parking

Council

25 August 2022

REPORT R27100

Tahunanui off-street parking

This item was deferred from the Council meeting on 12 July 2022

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To note the options considered to provide for off-street parking at Tahunanui to replace on-street carparks that will be lost when the southbound merge lanes are reinstated by Waka Kotahi.

1.2 To note that no reasonably practical viable options explored by Council have emerged to address this issue.

2. Summary

2.1 Council endorsed the Nelson Future Access Business Case (NFA) on 28 October 2021 and the Waka Kotahi Board approved the Business Case at its meeting of 16 December 2021.

2.2 The permanent reinstatement of the southbound merge lane by Waka Kotahi (initially scheduled for late 2022, but now planned for early 2023) is included in the approved Business Case and the responsibility to assess options for short to medium term off-street parking rests with Council.

2.3 No single proposal has support and therefore no solution, either temporary or long-term, is emerging as feasible.

2.4 Waka Kotahi remains committed to ensuring safety to all property owners.

2.5 This report presents options explored by officers and highlights work undertaken by officers to date in trying to find a workable solution.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Tahunanui off-street parking (R27100) and its attachments (A2906154 and A2909737); and

2. Notes the work undertaken to explore off-street parking options pending the reinstatement of the Tahunanui southbound merge lanes by Waka Kotahi; and

3. Notes that no reasonably practical proposal option to replace off-street parking when Waka Kotahi reinstates the southbound Tahunanui Drive merge lanes has been identified at this stage; and

4. Notes that officers will continue to explore options and report any opportunities back to Council; and

5. Notes that officers will continue to work and liaise with Waka Kotahi to ensure that safety matters are addressed for all users prior to the reinstatement of the Tahunanui southbound merge lanes.

4. Background

4.1 The background can be accessed via the link to the 28 October 2020 Council report. For ease of reading the relevant section from that report in relation to the southbound lane and parking is copied below.

“11. Bisley/Tahunanui southbound merge

11.1 The Business Case recommends that the southbound merge lane be made permanent following a safety review and considerable concern about safety by the community. Making the merge lane permanent will:

11.1.1 Provide significant additional people and freight moving capacity through the intersection;

11.1.2 Result in a corresponding drop in rat running through the Port Hills;

11.1.3 Will make enforcement easier; and

11.1.4 Will ensure safe and visible access to the local residents and businesses.

11.2 This is an emotive issue and was not supported by the Tahunanui community or businesses. It is recognised that the chemist, doctor’s rooms and medlab are essential local services and that removing on-street parking outside of these businesses will make it more difficult for the community to access these services.

11.3 To move this forward, officers propose to commence work on assessing options for any short to medium term off-street parking. This work will be co-ordinated with Waka Kotahi’s timing of their planned southbound merge scheduled for 2022/23. Any solution would be funded fully by NCC”.

4.2 Council, in the matter of the southbound lanes, resolved as follows (the full resolution is appended as Attachment 1):

“Notes that officers will progress with assessing off-street parking options in Tahunanui, pending the permanent reinstatement of the southbound lane at Bisley signals, and will report back to Council on this matter.

Notes that a safe state highway network through Tahunanui remains a priority for Nelson City Council and its community.”

4.3 Waka Kotahi have advised that reinstatement of the southbound lanes will most likely be undertaken by the end of this calendar year, and that they are still committed to ensuring that safety for all property owners is addressed.

5. Survey data

5.1 The assessment of proposals is focussed on options that would assist less able customers (those that cannot walk long distances or struggle to cross SH6) accessing the three health care providers, namely:

· Tāhunanui Pharmacy at 11 Tāhunanui Drive;

· Tāhunanui Medical Centre at 23 Tāhunanui Drive; and

· Medlab at 25 Tāhunanui Drive.

5.2 Council recently surveyed parking occupancy in Tāhunanui. This was a snapshot on a typical Thursday and Saturday in May 2021 (not the summer peak). The survey shows that for the ten on street parking spaces on the left hand side of Tāhunanui Drive (travelling south) between Bisley Avenue and the pedestrian refuge near the Medlab building that the average occupancy rates were:

· For a Thursday between 9am and 4:30pm – approximately 40%;

· For a Thursday peak - 70% (7 vehicles);

· For the Saturday between 9am and 2pm – approximately 20%;

· For the Saturday peak - 50% (5 vehicles) – it was also observed that Saturday had a poor compliance with the posted time restrictions.

6. Options

6.1 A total of 11 options were initially developed to replace the nine short term on-street carparks that will be lost through the re instatement of the southbound lane on SH6 at the Bisley Avenue signals. Refer to Attachment 2 for details of the assessment.

6.2 There were four options that ranked highly in the desktop analysis and were further investigated. These were:

6.2.1 Option 1 within the car yard;

6.2.2 Option 2 over number 7 Tahunanui Drive; and

6.2.3 Options 4 and 5 on the ROW between the pharmacy and the medical centre.

7. Engagement

7.1 Engagement on the options was undertaken with all the businesses (Tāhunanui Pharmacy, Tāhunanui Medical Centre and Medlab) and adjacent commercial and residential landowners.

7.2 The health care providers prefer option 4 or 5 which involved carparks over the stormwater drain on the ROW between the pharmacy and the medical centre. However not all owners of the ROW are prepared to have a lease/easement or property sale over a portion of the right of way to enable this to happen.

7.3 Engagement with the landowners associated with options 1 and 2, the car yard and number 7 Tahunanui Drive was also undertaken. Neither landowners wish to sell or lease their properties and buildings and again neither option is feasible.

7.4 An additional option was suggested by landowners during the engagement over the pharmacy property. This was investigated with the owner of the pharmacy but is not viable.

8. Discussion

8.1 Officers have undertaken a comprehensive analysis of all options to provide easy access and off-street parking in close proximity to the businesses. All feasible options pursued with landowners, businesses and residents have not been able to be progressed.

8.2 Whilst those customers that do not require assistance are able to find parking elsewhere and make their way safely to those businesses, there are no viable options for those with mobility issues, apart from the off street carparks associated with the three medical facilities.

8.3 Waka Kotahi will need to work with the businesses to ensure that when the southbound lanes are made permanent that all health and safety issues are considered and mitigated.

9. Financials

9.1 No funding exists in the budget to undertake any option.

10. Options

10.1 There are no options to be considered in this report. This report is providing Council with feedback.

11. Conclusion

11.1 Officers have undertaken a full assessment of options to provide off-street parking to accommodate the loss of on-street parking that when the southbound merge lanes are made permanent by Waka Kotahi. No options are feasible.

Author: Alec Louverdis, Group Manager Infrastructure

Attachments

Attachment 1: A2906154 - Resolution from 28Oct2021 meeting ⇩

Attachment 2: A2909737 - Tahunanui Options Assessment Report Version 5 ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The matter of this report sits within the NFA Business Case, which aligns very well with the purpose of local government in that it enables democratic local decision-making and progresses a programme that promotes the social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing of communities for the future.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

1. The matter of making the southbound lanes permanent and consideration of off-street parking will contribute to the following community outcomes:

2. “Our infrastructure is efficient, cost effective and meets current and future needs”; “Our communities are healthy, safe, inclusive and resilient”; “Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy”.

3. Risk

The matter of making the southbound lanes permanent and consideration of off-street is a contentious issue as noted in the October 2021 report to Council. The fact that there are no feasible off-street parking options will likely increase the risk of a negative response from those Tahunanui residents that are unhappy with the decision to make the southbound lanes permanent. However, extensive engagement with affected parties has been undertaken.

4. Financial impact

There is no funding available to give effect to any of the options presented in this report. However, as no options are feasible there are no budget implications for Council.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

All off-street parking potential solutions involve adjacent commercial and residential landowners and targeted engagement with these parties has been undertaken.

6. Climate Impact

The impact of climate change as not been assessed in this report, but the NFA did consider matters relating to impact on climate.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

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

8. Delegations

As the delegations for this matter fall within the Regional Transport Committee and Infrastructure Committee, therefore are cross-committee and to be considered by Council. This matter was previously considered by Council.

Item 11: Report from Urban Development Subcommittee Chair – Housing Reserve Phase Two

Council

25 August 2022

REPORT R27160

Report from Urban Development Subcommittee Chair – Housing Reserve Phase Two

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 The purpose of this paper is to seek approval for the allocation of Housing Reserve funding to support the development of affordable rental houses.

2. Summary

2.1 Housing Minister, Dr Megan Woods announced the release of the Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) on 19 July 2022. The first round of the $350 million AHF is for not-for-profit groups looking to develop new rental homes for households on lower incomes that stay affordable over the long-term. Six areas of high need for affordable rentals were selected including Nelson Tasman to access the $50 million available in round one. Expressions of interest close 24 August. To support local registered Community Housing Providers to access this Fund, co-funding has been sought through Council’s Housing Reserve.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Housing Reserve Phase 2 (R27160) and its attachment (Housing Reserve Phase One Criteria and Process Sep2021 A2748972);

2. Approves Housing Reserve Phase Two as set out in this Report (R27160) including its proposed value of $2 million as grant funding;

3. Notes that $2 million has been provided for Phase Two of the Housing Reserve in the 2022/23 Annual Plan.

4. Approves $1 million in funding to the Nelson Tasman Housing Trust from the Housing Reserve for the development of 76 Dodson Valley Road.

5. Approves $1 million in funding to Habitat for Humanity (Nelson) Ltd from the Housing Reserve for the development of 181 Rutherford Street.

6. Delegates the confirmation of the grant funding agreements to the Chief Executive.

4. Background

4.1 The Council divested its community housing portfolio (142 bedsits and units) to Kāinga Ora with final settlement in March 2021. As a result of this process, Council agreed to establish a Housing Reserve using part of the proceeds ($12 million). The Reserve has been established on the basis that its purpose would be ‘to work with and support partners who have the ability to deliver social and affordable housing solutions for the community’.

4.2 Consultation on the use of divestment proceeds and the establishment of what is now known as the Housing Reserve has been undertaken with the community over the several years that the divestment process spanned. This includes as part of the Annual Plan 2019-20, Annual Plan 2020-21, and Long Term Plan 2021-31, where intensification and affordability of housing was also raised. In general, there is wide support for the Housing Reserve and its purpose (noted in 4.1 above).

4.3 At the beginning of this triennium, Council also decided that affordable housing and intensification would be one of its top three priority issues.

4.4 At the Council meeting of 5 October 2021, Council approved Phase One of the Housing Reserve (R26236) including process, objectives and outcomes. Following a public application process, Council approved $850,000 to Nelson Tasman Housing Trust and $1 million to Habitat for Humanity (Nelson) Ltd to provide enduring, affordable housing at specific identified sites.

5. Discussion

5.1 Ministry of Social Development public housing register figures in Nelson and Tasman have almost doubled in the past three years to 426 households. Research undertaken by Nelson Tasman Housing Trust indicates that an additional 485 households don't qualify for public housing but are in need of affordable housing.

5.2 The phased approach to the Housing Reserve was designed to test the application process, outcomes and deliverability of the Reserve. For an investment of $1.85 million Council achieved a return on investment of 700% - 27 affordable homes being built in Nelson with a total value of $14 million.

5.3 With increasing materials prices and raising inflation, the value of the remaining Housing Reserve funds is decreasing in real terms. Local Community Housing Providers (CHPs) have appealed to Council to allocate the funds as quickly as possible to preserve its value and to help reduce the growing housing crisis.

5.4 On 19 July 2022 Housing Minister, Dr Megan Woods announced the release of the AHF. The first round of the $350 million Fund is for not-for-profit groups looking to develop new rental homes for households on lower incomes that stay affordable over the long-term. Six areas of high need for affordable rentals were selected including Nelson Tasman.

5.5 Registrations of Interest for the AHF are due 24 August. The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) will then select providers to make full proposals which will be due 21 January 2023.

5.6 To support applications by Nelson Tasman Housing Trust and Habitat for Humanity (Nelson) Ltd, and to ensure that money from the Fund comes to Nelson, they have requested the sum of $1 million each from the Housing Reserve. $2 million for Housing Reserve grants has been allocated in the 2022/23 financial year.

Nelson Tasman Housing Trust

5.7 Nelson Tasman Housing Trust (NTHT) is a government-registered Community Housing Provider (#RA017) and a Charitable Trust approved by Charities Services (CC21439). NTHT has a strong track record of delivering both affordable rental and public housing. NTHT currently has 50 rental homes, with a further 21 in development. They have 5 homes under construction at 99 Muritai St; 6 more are planned at 6 and 8 Totara St; and 10 are proposed at Dodson Valley Road. NTHT have an active waiting list of at least 70 households.

5.8 NTHT have acquired 76 Dodson Valley Rd to redevelop for intensified housing. It is a large brownfield site in an established residential zone; 2700m2 is developable; Lot 2 DP 302941; LINZ identifier number 11498.

5.9 NTHT provide compact, energy-efficient homes with double-glazing, full insulation, good ventilation, heat pumps and solar hot water or photovoltaic panels.

5.10 NTHT has a strong track record of delivering both affordable rental and public housing. NTHT has established systems to assess applicants, check income levels and confirm appropriate tenants. They have a professional staff team of 5 who provide tenancy management, all aspects of property and asset management, financial management, communications, and development.

5.11 10 affordable rental homes (with rents at 80% of market rent) are proposed on the site, a mix of 2, 3, and 4-bed homes for working families on low incomes, as well as older adults. NTHT have requested AHF funding of approximately $2.5 million to complete this development in addition to a prospective $1 million from Nelson City Council and bank finance of $2.5 million. NTHT’s philanthropic donor has already contributed $1.115 million for this project. The total project cost is $7.1 million.

Habitat for Humanity (Nelson) Ltd

5.12 Habitat for Humanity (Nelson) Ltd (HfH) is a government-registered Community Housing Provider (RA011) and a Charitable Trust approved by Charities Services (CC28026). HfH has delivered a mix of rental, rent-to-buy and emergency housing in the Nelson Tasman region. Over the past 26 years HfH have delivered 29 homes in the Nelson Tasman region. They have an additional 27 homes in their current construction programme, and approximately 20 more in early stages of project planning.

5.13 HfH are working in partnership with Unite Church to redevelop 181 Rutherford Street for intensified housing. The two organisations have signed an MOU to work together on the planning, construction and management of quality homes and the delivery of support services for tenants or households. The project is currently at design concept stage. It is intended that HfH will lead the design and build of the project and Unite Church will be involved in providing any wrap around support services required by tenants. It is a large brownfield site close to the central city, schools, facilities and services.

5.14 HfH have requested funding of $5 million from the AHF to undertake this development along with $1 million from Nelson City Council and philanthropic and bank financing for the balance. The total project development is anticipated to be $10 million.

5.15 At least 15 affordable rental units are proposed on the site with a mix of townhouses and apartments with communal open space that integrates with Unite’s café, play area and community meeting spaces. The concept plan includes a combination of 1, 2, and 3-bedroom units. It is anticipated this development could accommodate in the order of 120 residents.

5.16 HfH aims to provide for a diverse mix of households in the development including vulnerable families, couples, single people, those with disabilities and the elderly, and the housing will be accompanied by wrap-around services and pro-active support delivered through Unite Church.

5.17 HfH’s development will, as a minimum, meet the NZ Green Building Council’s HomeStar 6 or equivalent rating for all homes. In addition, the site’s design and location will facilitate sustainable transport, and sharing of communal spaces and resources.

Housing Reserve Phase One

5.18 The current Housing Reserve criteria (Attachment 1) was approved specifically for Phase One, however, the objectives were developed based on discussions with different housing experts and specialists, have been agreed by Council, and align with the consultation undertaken with the community (refer 4.2 above).

5.19 The objectives are:

5.19.1 Enduring in this context means housing (including the recycling of funding for housing) that is retained for affordable housing over its natural lifetime (50 years).

5.19.2 Affordable means housing for low-moderate income households that is provided at the cost of no more than 30% of the household’s income.

5.20 The assessment criteria were:

5.20.1 Ability to deliver – experience, capacity, and track record in delivery of affordable housing; project readiness and timeline; and property management, maintenance and tenancy management experience.

5.20.2 Fit for purpose – site and design; social/community; environmental; and affordable to run.

5.20.3 Financial viability – organisational financial position; co-investment; and project budget.

Registered Community Housing Providers

5.21 Both NTHT and HfH are registered CHPs.

5.22 Registration as CHPs means that NTHT and HfH have both been assessed by the Community Housing Regulatory Authority (CHRA) as meeting the performance standards set out in the Schedule of the Public and Community Housing Management (Community Housing Provider) Regulations 2014. CHP’s capacity and performance are assessed and monitored for: governance; management; financial viability; tenancy management; and property and asset management.

5.23 Once approved, CHPs must provide comprehensive annual reporting to enable monitoring by the CHRA. The main mechanism for monitoring is the Annual Regulatory Report process which requires information in three key areas:

5.23.1 Response to areas of improvement – Evaluation Report; Annual Regulatory Assessment Report; Disclosure and Change reporting.

5.23.2 General compliance with the Performance Standards – 12 months’ Board minutes; Audited Financial Accounts; current insurance schedules; updated Business and/or Strategic Plans; and summary of new capital expenditure (planned or undertaken) not already captured in audited financial accounts or budget forecasts.

5.23.3 Focus on one area of the Performance Standards - Each year CHRA focus on one area of the Performance Standards, to assess how policies and procedures are being implemented. In 2021/22 the focus was on the Tenancy Management Performance Standard.

Ministry of Housing and Urban Development Affordable Housing Fund

5.24 The first round of the AHF, the Affordable rental pathway, offers $50 million of grant funding to not-for-profit organisations to deliver newly built affordable rental housing in six areas with high need which includes Nelson Tasman.

5.25 To be eligible to apply, organisations must be able to identify a specific project in one of the target areas, where they:

5.25.1 intend to create new supply of privately-owned rental housing, including by developing new homes, purchasing turnkey homes off the plans, or completing commercial conversions or redeveloping homes to an as-new standard;

5.25.2 have identified a specific parcel of land, and have a pathway to owning, leasing or occupying the land, including whenua Māori; and

5.25.3 intend to offer rents that are affordable for their target cohort, which they will need to demonstrate.

5.26 Eligible organisations must complete an online Registration of Interest, where they will be asked to provide:

5.26.1 details about their organisation and any previous funding they’ve received from HUD

5.26.2 confirmation that the organisation meets the eligibility criteria

5.26.3 their capability to deliver affordable rentals and manage tenants

5.26.4 a summary of their proposed affordable rental development.

5.27 Registrations of Interest for the AHF are due 24 August 2022. Following the Registrations of Interest, successful applicants will be asked to submit a Request for Proposal, which will be open from 14 September 2022 to 21 January 2023.

5.28 A detailed proposal must include:

5.28.1 how their proposal is aligned with housing need, including who they’re targeting and how they will make sure rents will remain affordable for their community for a minimum of 15 years.

5.28.2 specific plans relating to their housing development, including the expected scale and housing typologies, how they will be developed, and development finance.

5.28.3 a description of how their affordable rental development will support social, economic, cultural and environmental wellbeing of their community.

5.28.4 the cost and risk to the Crown, and any contributions by other organisations or entities.

6. Options

6.1 The following options have been identified in relation to the Housing Reserve at this juncture.

Option 1: Approve Housing Reserve Phase Two - grant funding to NTHT and HfH

6.2 This option involves a decision to provide funding from the Housing Reserve to support the development of approximately 25 affordable rental properties and to support applications to the AHF. This approach is responsive to immediate housing needs in Whakatū Nelson, the readiness of organisations to meet that need, and to unlock co-funding from central government. It recognises that there is no better time to assist given the continuing increase in housing costs (construction and land). Additionally, grants are easier for officers to administer. It is noted that by being registered CHPs, that NTHT and HfH are meeting all of Council’s criteria as established in Phase One of the Housing Reserve, and both are experienced delivery partners having previously been assessed and awarded funding as part of Phase One. Council has also approved a streamlined contract process recognising the need to eliminate any delays, to support deliverability of projects, and to try and curtail escalating costs.

Option 2: Status quo (for officers to continue to work on the Housing Reserve criteria).

6.3 This option involves Council successfully appointing a new staff member. It is noted that this position has been vacant for approximately 8 months. This vacancy has resulted in the cessation of all work on the Housing Reserve. This could ultimately still result in a phased approach to funding, and it is noted that the allocation of $2 million in the 2022/23 annual plan indicates that Council was prepared to continue, at least for this financial year, using a phased approach. Discussions with HUD have indicated that co-funding from Council would be considered very favourably by the AHF. Conversely, maintaining the status quo may put the two CHP applications to the AHF at risk and hamper the delivery of these housing projects. The primary advantage of the status quo approach is that all the different options by which the Reserve might be used can be considered by Council together.

Option 1: Approve Housing Reserve Phase Two - grant funding to NTHT and HfH
Advantages	· Responsive to immediate housing needs and the readiness of NTHT and HfH to meet that need. · Provides the opportunity to unlock central government co-funding. · Recognises that there is no better time to assist given the continuing increase in housing costs (construction and land). · Supports registered Community Housing Providers with a track record of affordable, enduring housing delivery. · Saves officer time as applications are being assessed through the AHF process.
Risks and Disadvantages	· The Housing Reserve is partly reduced without a full analysis of options. · May impact on ability to fund potential future projects. · May be some concerns raised that an open contestable process was not used for this Phase.
Option 2: Status quo (for officers to continue to work on the Housing Reserve criteria).
Advantages	· Enables Council to revise the objectives, criteria and process. · Enables Council to consider all options and funding mechanisms at the same time.
Risks and Disadvantages	· NTHT and HfH applications may be at financial risk negatively impacting their ability to provide affordable additional rental housing. · NTHT and HfH applications may be declined due to an absence of Council co-funding. · It is likely that the final criteria may still recommend grants for affordable and enduring housing and that this would be a wasted opportunity. · Likely to attract additional spend generated from escalated housing costs and inflation.

7. Conclusion

7.1 This report proposes a continuation of the phased approach to the Housing Reserve with grants being provided to NTHT and HfH to support their applications to the AHF to address some immediate housing needs.

8. Next Steps

8.1 If the Council approves the approach recommended in this report, officers will prepare grant funding agreements with NTHT and HfH.

Author: Judene Edgar, Chairperson

Attachments

Attachment 1: Housing Reserve Phase One Criteria and Process Sep2021 A2748972 ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The intent of the Housing Reserve is to support the wellbeing of the community by working with and supporting others to provide adequate social and affordable housing in Whakatū Nelson.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

During divestment of its community housing portfolio, Council has consulted with the community on the use of divestment proceeds and the establishment of what is now known as the Housing Reserve through the Annual Plan 2019-20, Annual Plan 2020-21, and Long Term Plan 2021-31, where intensification and affordability of housing was also raised.

The recommendations in this report are also consistent with Council’s affordable housing and intensification objectives, which have been identified as a priority issue for Council.

3. Risk

There is a risk that some parties may not agree with the approach recommended in this report. This includes entities with other ideas about its use or who have not approached Council. Additionally, there is potential for challenge on the basis Council has not yet fully developed the objective, process, and criteria for the full Reserve.

These risks have been partly mitigated through the ongoing engagement with experts and stakeholders on the use of the Housing Reserve. Additionally, the existing criteria and outcomes that Council and the community have supported are further supported through this approach.

4. Financial impact

This report recommends $2 million of the Housing Reserve is made available. $2 million has been allocated within the 2022/23 financial year for the Housing Reserve. The Housing Reserve has been established through the divestment of Council’s community housing, therefore, this decision has no further financial/funding impact. There is no staffing or consultancy impact due to the approach recommended.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

While there is a high degree of community interest in housing affordability in the region generally, this proposal has been assessed against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy as being of low significance overall.

No new funding is required, it does not involve any transfer of strategic assets, and will have no impact on debt levels or Council’s financial capability. Additionally, Council has already undertaken considerable consultation on the establishment of the Reserve with the local community, and its possible use with experts and stakeholders.

Establishing the Reserve was viewed favourably by the community and the objectives are the same as Phase One which are consistent with the overarching objectives outlined in earlier consultation. For that reason, it is considered that Council is already adequately informed of community views in relation to this proposal.

6. Climate Impact

Council has opportunities to demonstrate leadership arising from this decision by supporting the delivery of sustainable and enduring housing.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Engagement with iwi on the Housing Reserve, including the proposal for Phase One, was undertaken at the 28 September 2021 Iwi Managers Forum.

8. Delegations

The Urban Development Subcommittee has delegations to consider the Housing Reserve. However, in accordance with section 5.2.2 of the Delegations Register, matters within the area of responsibility of a particular committee, subcommittee or subordinate decision-making body may be considered directly by Council with the agreement of the Chair of the subcommittee and the Mayor. This has occurred in this case.

Item 13: Adoption of the Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy

Council

25 August 2022

REPORT R27033

Adoption of the Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider public feedback on the draft Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy and adopt the final Strategy.

2. Summary

2.1 Council approved the draft Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy, for public feedback on 23 June 2022. This followed extensive
pre-engagement in the development of the draft.

2.2 The great majority of feedback on the draft Strategy was positive. This report recommends some changes be made to the Strategy (see Attachment 1) before adoption, to respond to feedback, and also proposes that the Strategy now be known by the name gifted by iwi Chairs – He Tātai Whetū.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Adoption of the Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy (R27033) and its attachments (839498445-7391, 839498445-7387); and

2. Adopts He Tātai Whetū, the final Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy (839498445-7391); and

3. Mandates that the Arts Strategy Working Group Chair and the Group Manager Strategy and Communications to approve any minor editorial amendments required to finalise the Strategy; and

4. Notes that a further report outlining the operation and membership of a He Tātai Whetū Steering Group will be brought to Council for approval.

4. Background

4.1 Nelson’s creative sector has been hard hit by COVID-19. But even before the pandemic there were signs that our reputation as a centre for the arts was waning, that practitioners were leaving the region and a collective effort to revitalise the arts in Nelson was needed. Council agreed to work with the community to develop a new arts strategy to tackle these issues and, with a contribution of $30,000 from Creative New Zealand, that work began in December 2021.

4.2 Johny O’Donnell and Ali Boswijk of OD&Co were contracted to develop the Strategy and conducted a wide-ranging pre-engagement, meeting with approximately 200 people between February and May 2022. Strong themes emerged from the engagement and these shaped the content of the draft Strategy.

4.3 A Working Group consisting of the Deputy Mayor, the Chair of the Community and Recreation Committee, Councillor Skinner, and Councillor Rainey, met regularly throughout the development of the Strategy, providing guidance and direction to staff and the consultants.

4.4 The draft Strategy sets out a vision for the arts in Nelson and a series of key moves and actions to guide its achievement. The Strategy seeks to realise the economic, social and cultural benefits a thriving arts and creative sector can provide for our community. It is intended to be a community Strategy involving Council, government agencies, iwi, business, groups and individuals working together to realise the vision.

Engagement with iwi

4.5 Iwi have been engaged throughout the Strategy development process. An iwi engagement approach was approved by Te Ohu Whakahaere, a management group including Council’s Chief Executive and eight Te Tauihu iwi chief executives and general managers, in August 2021.

4.6 On the 21^st of June 2022 the draft Strategy was presented to Te Waka a Māui Iwi Chairs Forum for endorsement and received unanimous support. During this meeting, iwi gifted Council a te reo name for the Strategy – He Tātai Whetū, meaning adornment of the stars. This encapsulates the aim of the Strategy in celebrating and supporting creativity.

Public feedback process

4.7 At its meeting on 23 June 2022, Council approved the draft Strategy public feedback document and engagement approach (R26803). The public feedback period ran for four weeks, ending 26 July 2022.

4.8 The opportunity to provide feedback was promoted through Council’s website, social media, local newspapers, radio, and Our Nelson. A short feedback form was provided, which could be completed online. Hard copies were available at the Customer Services Centre and libraries.

4.9 One hundred responses were received on the draft Strategy (see attachment 2). 72 of these were forms completed online and 29 were via email or provided to customer service. 76% were broadly supportive of the direction of the Strategy and 8% were opposed. 16% didn’t indicate but were mostly focussed on providing suggestions for implementation.

5. Themes of the feedback

5.1 The feedback contained a wealth of commentary, suggestions, ideas for new actions and offers of support. The Strategy has been updated to respond to feedback (see Attachment 1) and other ideas provided are being collated by staff to consider in the implementation phase.

5.2 Some of the main themes to emerge from feedback include:

5.2.1 The importance of the Strategy in connecting arts and creativity with wellbeing and the important role it can play in the social fabric of our community was strongly endorsed.

5.2.2 Strong support for lifting the presence of Toi Māori in Nelson.

5.2.3 General support for the creative tourism event in winter though one response preferred a summer timing and another felt it might reduce the focus on existing successful winter events.

5.2.4 A number of respondents wanted the Strategy to celebrate Nelson’s ethnic diversity and to honour the many arts and cultural traditions present in our city.

5.2.5 Council policies and procedures seen as presenting constraints and barriers to creative projects (to be addressed by the Positive Policies Initiative).

6. Responding to the feedback

6.1 Outlined below are the main changes to the draft Strategy in response to feedback. These are highlighted in the attached revised draft.

6.1.1 Stronger acknowledgement at the beginning of the Strategy of the significant commitment and many achievements already delivered by the arts sector in Nelson.

6.1.2 Stronger reflection of Nelson’s diversity under the Whakaurunga – Participation pillar. This includes reference to the Shared Communities Consortium work to use creative and traditional arts to drive engagement with migrants and former refugees.

6.1.3 Change the title of the first key move from Arts Relief Fund to Arts Relief Package to better reflect the nature of the projects proposed to provide immediate relief to the sector and avoid any impression of a bureaucratic and time-consuming administrative process.

6.1.4 Add the action “Improve marketing and awareness of opportunities to participate in and enjoy the arts in Nelson” to the Whakaurunga – Participation pillar.

6.1.5 Include wording on education as an enabler for the arts, in response to iwi feedback.

7. Strategy Implementation

7.1 Establishment of a Steering Group. A report on membership and operation of a community Steering Group, to provide input on and monitor implementation of the Strategy, will be brought to a future meeting of Council. This will include a terms of reference.

7.2 Securing additional funding. The report on the Three Waters Better Off Funding, also on today’s agenda, suggests $1million of Tranche 1 funding be used to drive immediate action on the Strategy. Staff are also exploring options for funding through the Ministry of Culture and Heritage Cultural Sector Regeneration Fund in partnership with iwi. Consideration of funding for implementation of the Strategy would also be included in the development of the next Long Term Plan.

8. Options

8.1 Staff recommend Option 1.

Option 1: Approve He Tātai Whetū, the Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy, for adoption (recommended option)
Advantages	· The final Strategy will reflect public feedback and generate a greater sense of ownership by the wider community. · Nelson will have a clear direction and vision for supporting arts and creativity, with key moves and actions to activate and deliver the Strategy objectives. · Implementation of the Strategy could begin immediately.
Risks and Disadvantages	· None obvious.
Option 2: Do not approve the final Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy – He Tātai Whetū for adoption
Advantages	· None obvious.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Lost opportunity to set a vision and direction for arts and creativity in Nelson and realise the economic, social and cultural benefits a thriving arts and creative sector can provide for the community. · Resource and funding invested in the development of the Strategy would be lost. · Not reflecting the public feedback process, in which the majority expressed support for the direction of the Strategy.

9. Conclusion

9.1 The Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy received a high level of support through the public feedback process. Staff recommend Council approve the updated Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy – He Tātai Whetū for adoption.

10. Next Steps

10.1 If Council approves the final Strategy for adoption, the next steps would be to finalise the design version of the Strategy for public release and respond to all of those who provided feedback during the public feedback process. Much of the implementation of the Strategy will come within the remit of the Community and Recreation Committee and there will be opportunities to integrate this with other workstreams already underway.

Author: Nicky McDonald, Group Manager Strategy and Communications

Attachments

Attachment 1: 839498445-7391 - Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy ⇩

Attachment 2: 839498445-7387 Combined public feedback on the draft Whakatū Nelson Arts and Creativity Strategy (Circulated separately) ⇨

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Adopting an Arts and Creativity Strategy fits with the purpose of local government by supporting a sector that contributes to a strong community, a strong economy and improved wellbeing outcomes for the entire community.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The recommendation supports the following Community Outcomes:

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

· Our communities have access to a range of social, educational and recreational facilities and activities

· Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy.

3. Risk

There is a risk that some in the community will object to the effort and resources proposed to be invested in the arts and creative sector. This can be mitigated by pointing to the intensive engagement and strong community support for the Strategy.

4. Financial impact

No additional funding is sought in this report. The new Strategy would guide Council funding decisions.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of high significance to arts and creative sector in Nelson and of low to medium significance for the wider the community. Engagement included extensive pre-engagement and a four week period for the public to provide feedback on the draft Strategy.

6. Climate Impact

The decisions in this report will have no impact on the ability of Council to proactively respond to the impacts of climate change now or in the future.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Iwi were engaged throughout the Strategy development process. Te Waka a Māui Iwi Chairs Forum endorsed the draft Strategy in June 2022. During that meeting, iwi gifted Council the te reo name “He Tātai Whetū” for the Strategy.

8. Delegations

The recommendations in this report include Council’s economic development and COVID-19 response areas of responsibility which was a significant factor in receiving Creative New Zealand funding and the Community and Recreation Committee’s arts, culture and heritage areas of responsibility. As this is cross committee it is a decision for Council.

Item 14: Three Waters Reform - Better Off Funding Proposal

Council

25 August 2022

REPORT R27048

Three Waters Reform - Better Off Funding Proposal

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To seek approval for the projects to be included in the funding proposal to the Department of Internal Affairs [DIA] for Council’s allocated Tranche 1 Better Off funding.

2. Summary

2.1 To access Council’s allocated $5.18 million Tranche 1 Better Off funding, a funding proposal must be submitted no later than 30 September 2022, or the funding will be carried over to the second tranche. Six projects are recommended for inclusion in the funding proposal (see Attachment 1), being those that best fit Council and DIA criteria.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Three Waters Reform - Better Off Funding Proposal (R27048) and its attachments (839498445-5560, 839498445-5279); and

2. Agrees that staff prepare a draft funding proposal to the Department of Internal Affairs for Better Off Funding for the following projects;

a. Te Ara Ō Whakatū City Centre Playspace

b. Railway Reserve Lighting from Annesbrook to Saxton Field

c. Arts and Creativity Strategy

d. Iwi Capacity Building

e. Community Car Sharing

f. Whai Oranga Wellbeing Centre

to be approved by Council at a meeting in September 2022.

3. Agrees that staff also include a rebuild of the ItsOn events website in the funding proposal, to use any funds not used by the six priority projects.

4. Background

4.1 The Government has provided a Better Off Funding package to local authorities in recognition of the significance to the local authorities and the communities they serve, of the transfer of responsibility for water services delivery.

4.2 The $2 billion package is pre-allocated to councils using a nationally consistent formula and is available in two tranches. The first $500 million was made available from 1 July 2022 and the remaining $1.5 billion will be available from 1 July 2024. Unspent funds not accessed in Tranche 1 can be carried forward to Tranche 2 in July 2024. Council has access to $5.18 million in the first tranche and funding approved must be spent by 20 June 2027.

4.3 The funding criteria is outlined below, and projects submitted for funding must meet one or more of the criteria:

4.3.1 Supporting communities to transition to a sustainable and low emissions economy, including by building resilience to climate change and natural hazards

4.3.2 Delivery of infrastructure and/or services that enable housing development and growth, with a focus on brownfield and infill development opportunities where those are available

4.3.3 Delivery of infrastructure and/or services that support local place-making and improvements in community wellbeing

4.4 Funding proposals must be for new initiatives or projects, and/or to accelerate, scale up or enhance the quality of planned investment.

4.5 Council has undertaken two workshops, on 23 May and 7 July 2022, to consider the DIA funding criteria, Council criteria and suitable projects.

4.6 The priority criteria identified by Council are:

4.6.1 Projects with enduring value

4.6.2 Projects that would benefit the maximum number of people in the community, particularly the more vulnerable, using a wellbeing lens

4.6.3 Value for money and confidence in the project budget estimates

4.6.4 Impact on the four community wellbeings

4.6.5 A climate change lens as a priority

4.6.6 Social and natural infrastructure

4.6.7 Deliverability, meaning having already been consulted with the community on, and being able to be completed in a timely way within resources available

4.6.8 Transformational

5. Iwi Engagement

5.1 A hui of the Te Tauihu councils and iwi General Managers was held on 27 June 2022 to hear iwi views and to seek their feedback on potential projects. Iwi feedback included a focus on shared aspirations to address housing concerns and projects that would improve environmental management and resilience. There was also interest in councils devolving delivery of activities to allow for meaningful partnership or co-governance. Iwi suggested the Te Tauihu Intergenerational Strategy could be a source of appropriate projects, and that capability and capacity building across iwi was a priority. Another priority was the Whai Oranga Wellbeing Centre (Attachment 2 provides more information from the Te Kotahi o Te Tauihu Charitable Trust on the concept).

5.2 Iwi also asked for a timeline that identified initiatives and their implementation dates from across the three councils, which will be developed once projects and funding is confirmed. One to one meetings were requested between each council and General Managers of each iwi to discuss these opportunities further. Staff have contacted all iwi to offer these meetings and have had discussions with three. Feedback from these meetings on the package of six projects has been very positive.

6. Funding Package

6.1 The six projects outlined in Attachment 1 are those recommended to form the package to submit to DIA. The projects total $5.18m (Tranche 1 funding).

6.2 Iwi proposed project four and project six but these have not had wider community consultation at this stage. The projects are, however, consistent with Council’s statement on fostering Māori participation in Council decision making adopted in the Long Term Plan 2021-31 and the Te Tauihu Intergenerational Strategy. Both projects have been discussed with staff from the other Te Tauihu councils and they are supportive of the projects.

6.3 Provision for project management has been raised in discussion with other councils and from feedback with the DIA. A percentage per project (relative to project complexity, readiness, and length) will be included in the package submitted to DIA.

6.4 A breakdown of recommended project allocation:

6.4.1 City Centre 52%

6.4.2 Sustainable Transport 21%

6.4.3 Arts and Creativity 20%

6.4.4 Iwi-Maori specific 7% (17% inclusive of Toi Maori art project)

6.5 Input on criteria and projects has been provided by elected members at workshops on 23 May and 7 July 2022. At the 7 July workshop staff were requested to circulate the details of the proposed package as well as those not recommended to progress in tranche one, so that elected members could review and provide further input. Feedback was received from four elected members.

6.6 Three of those four elected members providing feedback raised concerns about the Whai Oranga Wellness Centre including that Council should not be funding the health/wellness area, that it was not in the Nelson district, and that it has not been socialised in the wider community. Staff have left the project in the package as iwi reinforced it was a high priority and saw it as a project that Nelson City and Tasman District Councils could provide combined support for. However, if it was not supported Council has the option of transferring that $75k to iwi capacity building or to the ItsOn upgrade (covered below).

6.7 Once Council has agreed on the projects to be included in the package staff will gather the detailed information required by DIA for submitting the package. That will include project costs, general management oversight/administrative costs, iwi engagement undertaken, project timelines and milestones, and expected wellbeing outcomes.

ItsOn events calendar

6.8 There is an additional project for Council to consider including in the funding proposal, that has not been raised at previous workshops. ItsOn is a website promoting events in the Nelson Tasman region and it is in urgent need of an upgrade.

6.9 ItsOn was developed in 2008 by Nelson City and Tasman District Councils to support the Events Strategy. The website administration, moderation and marketing are managed by the Nelson Regional Development Agency [NRDA] and is funded by Council and by Tasman District Council.

6.10 A review of ItsOn was undertaken 2019 by the NRDA. The report showed the current platform was well used but dated in terms of design, content, and functionality which was leading to some disengagement and a decline in visitation. Based on the strength of the feedback received about the value and brand equity of ItsOn, the report recommended investment be made to rebuild the ItsOn website platform to extend the reach and capabilities of the website. Unfortunately, this coincided with the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and as a result, could not be prioritised as resources were directed elsewhere.

6.11 In 2022 the Nelson Regional Development Agency commissioned a discussion memo, drawing on and updating the earlier review, as the platform was becoming more vulnerable and there were increasing concerns about the usability of the site. It reported that functionality is increasingly challenged, causing problems for users and additional work for administrators of the platform. For example, the platform is unable to be used to collate information for the annual Council Summer Events Guide.

6.12 Finalised costs for the work would not be available until a request for proposal process has been completed, however, based on initial costings it is anticipated to be in the region of $300K. A funding application to Waka Kotahi is currently being considered for one of the six projects, Railway Reserve Lighting. If the application is successful, the unused funding from Better Off could be used for an upgrade of the regional events database ItsOn. Feedback from DIA indicates that this level of flexibility in moving funding between projects would not be a problem. Funding support from TDC would also be sought for the project.

7. Options

7.1 Council can approve the six projects as the funding proposal for DIA, choose an alternative mix of projects totalling $5.18 million to go forward, or leave some or all of the Tranche 1 funding to be amalgamated in Tranche 2.

Option 1: Approve the projects to be included in the Funding Proposal to the DIA (recommended)
Advantages	· The recommended projects are closely aligned with the priority criteria agreed by Council. · The recommended projects meet the DIA’s set criteria and increase the likelihood Council’s proposal would be accepted by the DIA.
Risks and Disadvantages	· None obvious.
Option 2: Amend the projects to be included in the funding proposal to the DIA
Advantages	· Council would have the opportunity to include other projects it may prefer.
Risks and Disadvantages	· This could delay the decision-making process and risk Council needing to roll over funds to Tranche 2.
Option 3: Do not approve the projects to be included in the funding proposal to the DIA
Advantages	· None obvious.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Council misses the DIA’s deadline to submit the Funding Proposal and loses the opportunity to secure immediate Government funding to progress projects for the community. · If there are changes to government’s approach to Three Waters in the period before 2024 this may put access to the $5.18 million at risk.

8. Conclusion

8.1 Council has considered the DIA criteria, and its own priorities, and staff recommend the six projects outlined in this report be included in the funding proposal to the DIA. It is also recommended that the rebuild of the ItsOn database be included in the funding proposal to use any underspending on the six priority projects.

9. Next Steps

9.1 Council’s funding proposal to the DIA will be submitted no later than 30 September 2022.

Author: Nicky McDonald, Group Manager Strategy and Communications

Attachments

Attachment 1: 839498445-5560 - Attachment 1: Better Off Funding Tranche 1 Projects ⇩

Attachment 2: 839498445-5279 - Attachment 2: Whai Oranga Wellbeing Centre Project Description ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The package of projects recommended would collectively promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing of the community.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The package of projects recommended align with the following Community Outcomes:

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

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

Our communities have access to a range of social, educational and recreational facilities and activities

Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy

3. Risk

Approving a package of projects to submit for government funding is low risk as Council has five years to deliver the projects and can use a portion of the funding for project management and administration.

4. Financial impact

There is a positive financial impact of $5.18 million in submitting this funding proposal. Should the projects in the funding proposal be approved the financial impacts will be positive to Council budgets .

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

The matter of Three Waters Reform is of significance because there is a wide range of interest from community members and groups. However, this report is of low significance as it is limited to seeking a decision on which projects should be included in the funding proposal to the DIA. Engagement has already taken place on Council projects included in the package.

6. Climate Impact

There will be a positive climate impact from supporting active transport by lighting the Railway Reserve and supporting the community car sharing project.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

8. A hui was held on 27 June 2022 with the three councils and iwi General Managers to hear iwi views and to seek feedback on potential projects. One to one meetings were offered to all iwi General Managers to discuss further opportunities for their involvement in this process and have been held with three.

9. Delegations

This is a matter for Council.

Option 1: Approve the draft Nelson Tasman Regeneration Plan (Project Kōkiri 2)
Advantages	· Guides agencies in delivering long term regional economic development · Allows the NRDA to use the Plan to attract external funding investment
Risks and Disadvantages	· No risks identified
Option 2: Not approve the draft Nelson Tasman Regeneration Plan (Project Kōkiri 2)
Advantages	· Council could have further input into the details of the draft plan
Risks and Disadvantages	· Less ability to attract external funding · Lack of direction for key agencies including the NRDA