Item 12: Draft Car
Share Operation Policy
|
|
Council
7 March 2024
|
Report
Title: Draft
Car Share Operation Policy
Report
Author: David Measures -
Manager Climate Change
Report
Authoriser: Nicky McDonald - Group Manager Strategy and Communications
Report
Number: R28382
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To adopt a Car Share
Operation Policy to support the establishment of car share services in Nelson.
2. Summary
2.1 The Draft Car Share
Operation Policy sets out the criteria and process for car share providers to
be allocated parking spaces and other parking concessions. Such a policy will
support the establishment of carsharing services and help reduce carbon
emissions and effectively manage parking resources.
3. Recommendation
|
That
the Council
1. Receives the report Draft Car
Share Operation Policy (R28382) and its attachment (789843239-2767); and
2. Adopts the Draft Car
Share Operation Policy (789843239-2767); and
3. Delegates to the Chief Executive the ability to
negotiate with car share organisations to allow vehicles with internal
combustion engines as part of their fleet during the first two years of the
operation of the policy, noting that this is inconsistent with the Car Share
Operation Policy but is a temporary measure with no intention to amend the
policy; and
4. Agrees His Workshop Mayor Hon
Dr Smith and the Chief Executive be delegated authority to approve any minor
amendments to the Car Share Operation Policy before it is made available to
the public.
|
4. Background
4.1 The Climate Action
Plan, adopted by the Council on 17 November 2021, outlines resources allocated
for climate change projects over the 2021-31 Long Term Plan, including a car
sharing scheme to reduce carbon emissions. As a result, staff have been
progressing work on car share options.
4.2 The Nelson City
Parking Strategy adopted on 25 August 2022, includes provisions for car share
spaces as a medium priority. The Traffic and Parking Bylaw, adopted 17th August
2023, includes carpark designation for car sharing.
4.3 Two Council workshops
(16 February 2023 and 22 February 2024) and a briefing for elected members (25
August 2023) have covered progress on the car sharing issue.
5. Discussion
Purpose of this Policy
5.1 The policy outlines
the criteria and process for organisations applying to become approved car
share providers, in alignment with the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2023. This
Bylaw requires Council approval for organisations, that wish to provide
"car share vehicles".
5.2 The Traffic and
Parking Bylaw defines “car share vehicle” as:
… a motor vehicle
operated by an organisation approved by the Council to provide its members
access to a fleet of shared motor vehicles which they may reserve for use on an
hourly or daily basis, and does not include a wheeled recreational device.
5.3 Once approval is given
to an organisation, Council can provide designated parking spaces and grant
other parking concessions for car share vehicles. The policy guides Council in
decisions regarding designated parking spaces and parking concessions under the
Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2023.
Operations and Future Demand
5.4 Car share
organisations will often choose to start with a limited fleet of vehicles as
they evaluate the market and develop their business model. If demand increases,
organisations expand their fleet and coverage accordingly.
5.5 In Nelson, car share
organisations may well initially focus on the city centre, leveraging high
exposure and demand. As membership grows, they can strategically expand to
surrounding areas, adapting to and supporting wider community needs and
transportation patterns.
Vehicle Type
5.6 The draft policy
allows for low emission vehicles, classed as having a threshold of less than or
equal to 105 g/kg of CO₂. These vehicles may be EVs or hybrids, as long
as they meet the definition of low emission (as set out in the Land Transport
Rule: Vehicle Efficiency and Emission Data).
5.7 The draft policy
reflects elected member preference to exclude ICE (internal combustion engine)
vehicles. However, such an exclusion will make it unlikely that a car share
service will establish itself in Nelson, given the lack of EV charging
infrastructure. For this reason, staff propose that for the first two years of
the policy’s operation that the Chief Executive is able to negotiate with
car share organisations to allow ICE vehicles as part of the fleet on a case by
case basis. Lower emission ICE vehicles will be preferenced in such
negotiations. It is expected that the availability of EV charging
infrastructure will increase in Nelson, and across the region, over the next
two years and the situation can be re-evaluated in two years’ time.
5.8 A decision to allow
this flexibility for car share organisations in the first two years of the
policy will be inconsistent with the Car Share Operation Policy. Section 80 of
the Local Government Act 2002 requires that when Council is taking a decision
that is significantly inconsistent with a policy the reasons for the
inconsistency must be identified, along with any intention to amend the policy
to accommodate the decision. In this case the inconsistency will improve the
likelihood of car sharing schemes being able to start up in Nelson with the
benefits and efficiencies they bring but there is no intention to amend the
policy.
Car
Share Parking Fees
5.9 As approved
organisations expand their fleet and coverage, they may request additional
designated parking and permits for authorised vehicles. These requests will be
assessed and determined in accordance with the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2023,
and additional space requests will be assessed on a performance basis and
approved by a hearing panel.
5.10 Car share organisations with
allocated designated parking will be exempt from paying parking fees for the
first two years, in order to support the growth and expansion of the sector. After
this time, the fees incurred will be based on the greenhouse gas emissions
profile of the vehicle, as shown in the following table.
|
Vehicle carbon
emissions
(grams per kilometre)
|
Reserved parking permit
(annual fees)
|
Authorised vehicle permit (annual fees)
|
|
0 (zero emissions)
|
$0
|
$300
|
|
1 to 60
|
$1,760
|
$910
|
|
61 to 105
|
$2,200
|
$1,600
|
Financial Implications
5.11 Car parks yield revenue ranging
from $520 to $1,700 per parking space, annually. The capital value of these
parking spaces is estimated at between $10,804 (based on rateable value) and
$11,100 (based on the annual revenue per space and an aim of a return on
investment over a ten-year period).
5.12 The opportunity cost of
dedicating spaces to car sharing for free involves potential revenue loss,
ranging from $520 to $1,700 per space annually. However, this is offset by the benefits
of supporting the uptake of a car share scheme and the subsequent reduction in
emissions, aligning with long-term climate change objectives.
6. Options
6.1 Council can either
adopt the policy or not.
6.2 Option
1 is the recommended option.
|
|
|
Advantages
|
· Encourages
the establishment of car share services in Nelson, contributing to reduced
vehicle ownership rates, decreased traffic congestion, and lower emissions.
· Supports
the Council's climate action goals by promoting the use of low-emission and
electric vehicles within the city.
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· Requires
the allocation of Council resources for policy implementation and ongoing
management.
· Potential
resistance from existing parking space users due to the reallocation of
parking spaces for car share vehicles.
|
|
|
|
Advantages
|
· No
financial or administrative burden on the Council.
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· There
is no mechanism to approve car share organisations, necessary for providing
'car share vehicles' under the Bylaw.
· Car
share organisations do not locate their business to Nelson.
· Missed
opportunity to provide community transport choices, access and equality,
complementing public transport, walking and cycling.
· May be
seen to undermine Council's previously demonstrated commitment to climate
action and sustainable transportation solutions
|
7. Conclusion
7.1 By establishing a
framework for car share operations, including the approval of organisations and
the allocation of designated parking spaces, the draft policy aims to enhance
urban mobility, reduce carbon emissions, and align with the city's
environmental goals. Officers recommend the policy be adopted.
Attachments
Attachment 1: 789843239-2767
- Draft Car Share Operation Policy ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making
|
|
Fit with Purpose of Local Government
Adopting a car share operations policy supports the
environmental, social and economic wellbeing of the community.
|
|
Consistency with Community Outcomes
and Council Policy
The decisions in this report support the following
community outcomes:
· Our
unique natural environment is healthy and protected
· Our
urban and rural environments are people friendly, well planned and
sustainably managed
· Our
Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective
and community engagement
|
|
Risk
Adoption of the policy is low risk as this approach
has been successfully implemented in other cities in New Zealand and the risk
of establishing the services is carried by private companies. There is a risk
that some residents will object to car parks being allocated to car sharing,
but this can be mitigated by clear messaging around the benefits.
|
|
Financial impact
Council will forgo revenue during the two year
exemption for parking fees.
|
|
Degree of significance and level of
engagement
This matter is of low significance given it is
simply providing an opportunity for private companies to establish a service
in Nelson and no engagement with the wider community is planned. Engagement
with some potential car share service providers has informed the policy
development.
|
|
Climate Impact
Adoption of a policy has the
potential to reduce car ownership in Nelson and contribute to carbon emission
reductions.
|
|
Inclusion of Māori in the
decision making process
No engagement with Māori has been
undertaken in preparing this report.
|
|
Legal
context
Council has power to make this decision under its power
of general competence (Local Government Act 2002 s12(2)). The general
decision-making requirements of sections 76 to 82 of Part 6 of the Local
Government Act 2002 apply to this decision of Council. The report
demonstrates that these general requirements have been met by assessing
significance and necessary consultation and identifying the reasonably
practicable options and assessing their advantages and disadvantages.
|
|
Delegations
This decision is a matter for Council.
|
Item 16: Consent for
Easements - Wastney Terrace and Railway Reserve
|
|
Council
7 March 2024
|
Report
Title: Consent
for Easements - Wastney Terrace and Railway Reserve
Report
Author: Susan Mathieson
- Senior Property Officer
Report
Authoriser: Nikki Harrison - Group Manager Corporate
Services
Report
Number: R28403
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To approve consents
for easements over reserves at Part of Wastney Terrace Road Reserve and Railway
Reserve via Browning Crescent Local Purpose Reserve (Esplanade).
2. Recommendation
|
That
the Council
1. Receives the report Consent
for Easements - Wastney Terrace and Railway Reserve (R28402) and its
attachments (714127617-20601 and 714127617-20604); and
2. Approves easements over Part
of Wastney Terrace Road Reserve (Lot 9 Deposited Plan 15070) in favour of
Part Section 12 District of Suburban North (NL1A/974) and consents to
easements for right of way, retaining wall, right to drain sewage, right to
drain water, right to convey water, right to convey electricity and
telecommunications under section 48(1) of the Reserves Act 1977, acting
pursuant to delegation from the Minister of Conservation.
3. Approves easements at Railway
Reserve via Browning Crescent Local Purpose Reserve (Esplanade) and consents
to right to convey electricity and telecommunications under section 48(1) of
the Reserves Act 1977, acting pursuant to a delegation from the Minister of
Conservation.
4. Notes that all costs
associated with the easements are to be met by the applicants.
|
3. Background
3.1 The Reserves Act 1977
(RA) sets out a two-step process to grant such easements. As the
administering body of the reserve, Council makes the initial decision on
whether to grant an easement. This role has been delegated to the
Hearings Panel.
3.2 Final consent of the
Minister of Conservation is then also required. The Minister has
delegated that final consent role to Council, and it cannot be
sub-delegated. Hence the requirement for the Hearings Panel to make an
initial decision to grant the easement and then for the matter to be referred
to Council for final consent.
3.3 The Hearing Panel of 9
February 2024 granted the proposed easements over Part of Wastney Terrace Road
Reserve and Railway Reserve via Browning Crescent Local Purpose Reserves
(Esplanade).
3.4 It was resolved at the
Hearing Panel meeting for the Wastney Terrace proposed easements:
Resolved
HEA/2024/001
That the
Hearing Panel
1. Receives the report Proposed
Easements over Part of Wastney Terrace Road Reserve (R28284) and its attachment
(714127617-20601); and
2. Grants the easements for right of
way, retaining wall, right to drain sewage, right to drain water, right to
convey water, right to convey electricity and telecommunications, over Part of
Wastney Terrace Road Reserve (Lot 9 Deposited Plan 15070) in favour of Part
Section 12 District of Suburban North (NL1A/974) subject to public notice under
section 48 (2) of the Reserves Act 1977 resulting in no objections or
submissions and with all costs associated with the easements to be met by the
applicant, subject to final consent of the Council (acting as the Minister of
Conservation’s delegate).
3. Notes that if any objections to
the proposed easement are received, a further report will be brought to the
Hearings Panel to enable consideration and decision on those objections.
4. Notes that if no objections or
submissions to the proposed easements are received, a report will be taken to
Council for consent to the easements pursuant to delegation from the Minister
of Conservation under section 48(1) of the Reserves Act 1977.
3.5 It was resolved at the
Hearing Panel for the Proposed Easements over Railway Reserve via Browning
Crescent Local Purpose Reserve (Esplanade):
Resolved HEA/2024/002
That the Hearing Panel
1. Receives the report Proposed
Easements over Railway Reserve via Browning Crescent Local Purpose Reserve
(Esplanade) (R28287) and its attachment (714127617-20604); and
2. Grants an easement for right
to convey electricity and telecommunications over Local Purpose Reserve
(Esplanade) (Section 150 SO 12047 and Lot 1 DP 16994) in favour of Network
Tasman with all costs associated with the easements to be met by the applicant,
subject to final consent of the Council (acting as the Minister of
Conservation’s delegate).
3. Notes that under section 48
(1) Reserves Act 1977 that public notice is not required.
4. Discussion
4.1 During 1-29 February
2024, public notification was undertaken for the proposed easements over Part
of Wastney Terrace Road Reserve (Lot 9 Deposited Plan 15070) in favour of Part
Section 12 District of Suburban North (NL1A/974) as required under section 48 (2)
of the RA with no objections received.
4.2 As the proposed
easement at Railway Reserve via Browning Crescent Local Purpose Reserve
(Esplanade) would not materially alter or permanently damage the reserve there
is no requirement to undertake public notification.
4.3 Delegation is with
Council under the Reserves Act to consent to the easements.
5. Options
5.1 Council
could decide to consent or not consent to the Wastney Terrace proposed
easements. Consent to the easements is the recommended option.
|
|
|
Advantages
|
· The
land is road reserve, consistent with its land use
· Provides
services to adjoining section
· Provides
security of services for subdivision
· Supports
building and resource consent requirements for applicant
· Ownership,
access installation and maintenance of services are applicant’s
responsibility
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· None
|
|
|
|
Advantages
|
· None
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· Development
is compromised with lack of services to applicant’s land.
· Council
not supportive of subdivision that has benefit for applicant and
Wastney Terrace road network
|
5.2 The
Council could decide to grant or not grant the proposed easements over Railway
Reserve via Browning Crescent Local Purpose Reserve (Esplanade). Granting
the easements is the recommended option.
|
|
|
Advantages
|
· Network
Tasman’s 800 affected customers and businesses have security of
upgraded HV cables
· Supports
provision of power supply and telecommunications upgrade for the area
· Services
are underground
· No
visible impact on profile above ground
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· Initial
disruption to Railway Reserve users while work is being undertaken
|
|
|
|
Advantages
|
· None
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· 800
affected households including businesses in the Stoke semi-industrial area
could have compromised power and telecommunications connections.
|
6. Conclusion
6.1 It is recommended that
Council consents to the easements over reserves at Part of Wastney Terrace Road
Reserve and Railway Reserve via Browning Crescent Local Purpose Reserve
(Esplanade).
7. Next Steps
7.1 If the recommendations
are approved by Council, the easement instruments will be produced, and once
construction is complete the applicant will survey the area of easement over of
the Reserves and register the easements.
Attachments
Attachment 1: 714127617-20601
R28284 Easements - Wastney Terrace Road Reserve - Proposed ROW ⇩
Attachment 2: 714127617-20604
R28287 Easements - Railway Reserve via Browning Crescent Cable Duct Rout to
Poets Park ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making
|
|
Fit with Purpose of Local Government
The recommendation in this report is aligned with
the purpose of Local Government in enabling “democratic
decision-making and action by, and on behalf of, communities” as it
enabled the community the opportunity to consider and comment on the granting
of a right of way over Council administrated Reserves.
|
|
Consistency with Community Outcomes
and Council Policy
Supports community outcomes –
Our infrastructure is
efficient, cost effective and meets current and future needs.
|
|
Risk
All costs are borne by the applicants.
|
|
Financial impact
This decision will have no impact on the ability of
the Council or District to proactively respond to the impacts of climate
change now or in the future
|
|
Degree of significance and level of engagement
This matter is of low significance according to the
Signficance and Engagement Policy because it is a standard Local Body
transaction, following the process set out under Section 48(1) of the
Reserves Act 1977.
|
|
Climate Impact
This decision will have no
impact on the ability of the Council or District to proactively respond to
the impacts of climate change now or in the future.
|
|
Inclusion of Māori in the
decision making process
No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in
preparing this report.
|
|
Legal
context
Council has power to make
this decision under the Reserves Act 1977, Section 48 (1). The legal process
that Council must follow to make this decision is via Hearings Panel to
recommend to Council to consent to easements
|
|
Delegations
The Council has the delegated authority to grant
easements under Section 48 (1) of the Reserves Act 1977.
The administering body functions have been delegated
to the Hearing Panel.
The Ministers final consent role has been delegated
to Council (and cannot be sub-delegated).
|
