Source: http://meetings.nelson.govt.nz/Open/2016/06/CL_20160602_AGN_1156_AT.htm
Timestamp: 2018-08-16 09:46:32
Document Index: 792837810

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 2', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2']

Agenda of Council - 2 June 2016
4.1 Belinda Fletcher
Belinda will speak about the proposal to sell Bett Car Park for a special housing development.
4.2 Barbara Tanner
Barbara will speak about the proposal to sell Bett Car Park for a special housing development.
4.3 Andrew Stanger on behalf of Natalia Harrington - Hybrid Homes and Living Ltd
Andrew will be speaking on behalf of Natalia Harrington, of Hybrid Homes and Living Ltd, about Special Housing Areas (Dodson Valley).
4.4 Larry Rueter
Larry will speak about the proposal to sell Bett Car Park for a special housing development.
5.1 11 & 12 May 2016 17 - 46
Document number M1879
THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 11 and 12 May 2016, be confirmed as a true and correct record.
6. Mayor's Report 47
Document number R5994
THAT the Mayor's Report (R5994) be received.
7. Adoption of the Annual Plan 2016/17 48 - 71
Document number R5584
THAT the report Adoption of the Annual Plan 2016/17 (R5584) and its attachments (A1518261, A1551142 and A1551144) be received;
AND THAT the Annual Plan 2016/17 be adopted;
AND THAT the Mayor and Chief Executive be delegated to make any necessary minor editorial amendments prior to the Annual Plan 2016/17 being released to the public;
AND THAT the Nelson City Council sets the following rates under the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, on rating units in the district for the financial year commencing on 1 July 2016 and ending on 30 June 2017.
General Rate $35,678,248
Uniform Annual General Charge $8,371,750
Stormwater and Flood Protection Charge $4,897,421
Waste Water Charge $6,864,245
Water Annual Charge $3,518,255
Water Volumetric Charge $8,209,263
Clean Heat Warm Homes and Solar Saver $553,113
Rates and Charges (excluding GST) $68,092,295
(at the current rate) $10,213,844
Total Rates and Charges $78,306,139
· a rate of 0.67343 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “residential – single unit” category.
· a rate of 0.67343 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “residential empty section” category.
· a rate of 0.74077 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “single residential unit forming part of a parent valuation, the remainder of which is non-rateable” category. This represents a 10% differential on land value.
· a rate of 0.74077 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “multi residential” category. This represents a 10% differential on land value.
· a rate of 1.67415 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “commercial – excluding inner city and Stoke commercial” subject to 100% commercial and industrial (occupied and empty) category. This represents a 148.6% differential on land value.
· a rate of 1.42431 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “commercial – excluding inner city and Stoke commercial” subject to 25% residential and 75% commercial” category. This represents a 111.5% differential on land value.
· a rate of 1.17379 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “commercial – excluding inner city and Stoke commercial” subject to 50% residential and 50% commercial” category. This represents a 74.3% differential on land value.
· a rate of 0.92395 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “commercial – excluding inner city and Stoke commercial” subject to 75% residential and 25% commercial” category. This represents a 37.2% differential on land value.
· a rate of 2.41829 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “commercial inner city” subject to 100% commercial and industrial (occupied and empty) category. This represents a 259.1% differential on land value.
· a rate of 1.98191 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “commercial inner city subject to 25% residential and 75% commercial” category. This represents a 194.3% differential on land value.
· a rate of 1.54620 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “commercial inner city subject to 50% residential and 50% commercial” category. This represents a 129.6% differential on land value.
· a rate of 1.10981 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “commercial inner city subject to 75% residential and 25% commercial” category. This represents a 64.8% differential on land value.
· a rate of 2.30852 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “Stoke commercial subject to 100% commercial and industrial (occupied and empty)” category. This represents a 242.8% differential on land value.
· a rate of 1.89975 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “Stoke commercial subject to 25% residential and 75% commercial” category. This represents a 182.1% differential on land value.
· a rate of 1.49098 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “Stoke commercial subject to 50% residential and 50% commercial” category. This represents a 121.4% differential on land value.
· a rate of 1.08220 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “Stoke commercial subject to 75% residential and 25% commercial” category. This represents a 60.7% differential on land value.
· a rate of 0.43773 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “rural” category. This represents a minus 35% differential on land value.
· a rate of 0.60609 cents in the dollar of land value on every rating unit in the “small holding” category. This represents a minus 10% differential on land value.
A uniform annual general charge under section 15 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 of $413.27 per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit.
A targeted rate under section 16 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 of $271.47 per rating unit, (excluding rural category, small holding category and residential properties east of Gentle Annie saddle, Saxton’s Island and Nelson City Council’s storm water network).
· $389.54 per separately used or inhabited part of a residential, multi residential, rural and small holding rating units, that is connected either directly or through a private drain to a public waste water drain.
· For commercial rating units, a waste water charge of $97.39 per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit that is connected either directly or through a private drain to a public waste water drain. Note: a “trade” waste charge will also be levied.
Water charge (per connection) $194.99
Usage up to 10,000 cu.m/year $2.036 per m³
Usage from 10,001 to 100,000 cu.m/year $1.517 per m³
Usage over 100,000 cu.m/year
$1.198 per m³
Summer irrigation usage over 10,000 cu.m/year
$1.776 per m³
Completed prior to 30 Sept 2010
Commercial water volumetric rates: last date for payment will be the 20th of the month following the invoice date as shown on the water volumetric rate invoice. The penalty date will be the fourth business day after the Last Date for Payment.
· a charge of 10% will be added to any balance remaining outstanding from a previous rating year (including penalties previously charged) as at 31st December 2016 on 6 January 2017.
· a further additional charge of 10% will be added to any balance remaining outstanding from a previous rating year (including penalties previously charged) as at 30 June 2017 on 6 July 2017.
· a charge of 10% of the amount of each volumetric water rate account remaining unpaid on the penalty date as shown in the above table and also shown on each volumetric water rate account.
In accordance with Council’s rate remission policy, the Council will approve the remission of the penalty added on instalment one due to late payment provided the total annual rates are paid in full by 21 November 2016. If full payment of the annual rates is not paid by 21 November 2016 the penalties relating to the first instalment outlined above will apply.
Pursuant to Section 55 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, the Council will allow a discount of 2.0 percent of the total rates (excluding volumetric water rates) where a ratepayer pays the year’s rates in full on or before the due date for instalment one being 22 August 2016.
AND THAT the revised Nelson City Council Rates Postponement Policy (A1551144) and Rates Remissions Policy (A1551142) as attached be adopted.
8. Public Feedback on Proposal to Sell Bett Carpark 72 - 72
Document number R5772
THAT the report Public Feedback on Proposal to Sell Bett Carpark (R5772) and its attachments (A1544721 and A1554221) be received;
AND THAT Council use the public feedback received in considering whether or not to sell Bett Carpark for a qualifying development under the Housing Accord and Special Housing Areas Act 2013.
9. Special Housing Areas 72 - 72
Document number R5858
THAT the report Special Housing Areas (R5858) and its attachments (A1548015, A1548048, A1551280, and A1548018) be received;
AND THAT Council approve 1 & 5 Tahunanui Drive (A1548048) and 19 & 21 Beach Road (A1548015) as potential Special Housing Areas;
AND THAT Council approve the amendment to the qualifying development criteria for the number of storeys for the Ocean Lodge Special Housing Area (A1548018);
AND THAT Her Worship the Mayor recommend those potential areas (Tahunanui Drive and Beach Road) and the amendment to Ocean Lodge SHA to the Minister of Building and Housing for consideration as Special Housing Areas under the Housing Accord and Special Housing Areas Act 2013.
10. Elected Members' Reimbursement and Expenses Policy 2016-2019 72 - 72
Document number R5479
THAT the report Elected Members' Reimbursement and Expenses Policy 2016-2019 (R5479) and its attachments (A355751, A1538389, A1547293 and A1546381) be received;
AND THAT Council adopts the Elected Members’ Reimbursement and Expenses Policy (A1546381) as attached to report R5479, to be submitted to the Remuneration Authority for approval.
11. Administrative Matters 72 - 72
Document number R5993
THAT the report Administrative Matters (R5993) and its attachment (A1103850) be received;
AND THAT Council approves/declines approximately $924 of funding from the additional funding pool to enable Councillor Lawrey to attend the Local Government New Zealand Conference in 2016.
12. Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting 72 - 72
Document number R5965
THAT the report Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting (R5965) and its attachment (A1552098) be received;
AND THAT the following constitute Council representation at the 2016 Annual General Meeting:
Presiding Delegate: Her Worship the Mayor
Other Delegates: Councillor __________
Councillor __________ or Chief Executive
Or if Her Worship the Mayor is unavailable
Presiding Delegate: Councillor __________
Observers: Councillor __________
Councillor __________
Consideration of Bett Carpark Request for Proposals - Sale of Bett Carpark for Special Housing Area
· Youth Councillors Hayley Goldthorpe and Samuel Kuo will be in attendance at this meeting. (delete as appropriate)
On Wednesday 11 May 2016, commencing at 9.01am
Present: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese (Chairperson), Councillors L Acland, I Barker, R Copeland, K Fulton, M Lawrey, P Matheson (Deputy Mayor), B McGurk, G Noonan, P Rainey, T Skinner and M Ward
In Attendance: Chief Executive (C Hadley), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Strategy and Environment (C Barton), Group Manager Community Services (C Ward), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Senior Strategic Adviser (N McDonald), Manager Communications Acting Manager Libraries and Heritage Facilities (P Shattock), Asset Analyst (D Bartkowiak), Senior Accountant (T Hughes), Policy Coordinator (J Loughnan), and Administration Advisers (S Burgess and E-J Ruthven)
Resolved CL/2016/109
THAT the apology from Councillor Davy be received and accepted.
Attendance: Councillor Skinner joined the meeting at 9.02am, and Councillor Fulton joined the meeting at 9.03am
An ‘Additional Information’ document (A1544694) was tabled.
Her Worship the Mayor advised of one late item for the meeting, and that the following resolution needed to be passed for the item to be considered:
Resolved CL/2016/110
THAT the report regarding Deliberations on the draft Annual Plan 2016/17 – Part 2 be considered at this meeting as a major item not on the agenda, pursuant to Section 46A(7)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, to enable a timely decision to be made.
1 A1544694 - Tabled Document - Additional Information
Councillor Fulton declared an interest in the submission from Simon and Jane Murray.
There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no further interests with items on the agenda were declared.
4.1 3 and 4 May 2016
Document number M1866, agenda pages 4 - 25 refer.
Resolved CL/2016/111
THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 3 and 4 May 2016, be confirmed as a true and correct record.
5. Deliberations on the draft Annual Plan 2016/17 - Part 1
Document number R5730, agenda pages 26 - 61 refer.
Her Worship the Mayor summarised the officer reports. She advised that resolutions would be made in principle so that financial information could be updated and considered, before all decisions were then confirmed.
Her Worship the Mayor asked councillors to detail any matters that had not been included in the officer reports, which they wished to be included in the deliberations. Several matters were raised, to be considered in the appropriate activity area as the meeting progressed.
Resolved CL/2016/112
THAT the report Deliberations on the draft Annual Plan 2016/17 - Part 1 (R5730) and its attachments (A1532915, A1536482 and A1543604) be received;
AND THAT the spreadsheet in Attachment 1 (A1532915), as amended, be used as the basis of responses to submitters on matters raised and to amend the draft Annual Plan 2016/17 as necessary.
Resolved CL/2016/113
THAT the report Deliberations on the draft Annual Plan 2016/17 – Part 2 (R5884) and its attachment (A1543422) be received.
Attendance: Councillor Matheson left the meeting from 9.33am to 9.37am.
In response to a question, Senior Strategic Adviser, Nicky McDonald, explained the need to code projects to activity areas in Council’s general ledger, and how this was assessed.
5.1 Haven Precinct
Questions were asked about the Haven Precinct development regarding budget, concept plans, engagement and timing. The Chief Executive, Clare Hadley, clarified that no increase in budget was required for the Haven Precinct project. She explained that a project manager had been identified, and summarised the potential difficulties in consulting on a key Council project during an election campaign period.
Councillors expressed disappointment that the project may be delayed due to the timing of the election, and supported the continuation of the project over that time. It was suggested that a project plan timeline be presented to a future Council meeting. Mrs Hadley acknowledged the priority Councillors placed on the Haven Precinct project.
Resolved CL/2016/114
THAT Council appreciates the enthusiasm in the Haven Precinct development and indicates to submitters that this is a priority project for Council and there will be a public engagement process once concept plans are developed.
5.2 Nelson CBD
Attendance: Councillor Rainey left the meeting from 9.55am to 9.56am.
The meeting discussed the Nelson CBD and noted a report on the summer closure of the top of Trafalgar Street was scheduled for Council. It was suggested that Council should be flexible and allow small projects to be trialled with ease.
It was suggested that shade cover was needed in the 1903 Square for those watching performances. It was noted that shade cloth had been ordered for the performance stage at the 1903 Square, and it was suggested that funding for the additional shade cover could come from the CBD Enhancement budget.
Attendance: Councillor Ward left the meeting at 10.06am.
It was suggested the closure of the top of Trafalgar Street was not supported by businesses in that location, therefore Council should direct its attention to projects that had the support of local businesses.
Attendance: Councillor Ward returned to the meeting at 10.08am.
5.3 Smokefree CBD
In response to comments, Mrs Hadley clarified that existing signs in playgrounds and sportsfields were for ‘Smokefree’ areas.
There was support for a report to consider further options for a Smokefree CBD in line with the governments drive to be Smokefree by 2025, including regulatory approaches such as a bylaw. It was pointed out that a bylaw would require clarity around enforcement, which would require Council resources.
It was also suggested that Council find creative ways to support local businesses that were choosing to be Smokefree voluntarily.
Resolved CL/2016/115
5.4 Nelson’s walk/cycle network
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey left the meeting at 10.23am.
There was discussion regarding cycle safety in the northern state highway area. Senior Asset Engineer - Transport and Roading, Rhys Palmer, advised the volume of people using that area for cycling was not as significant as other areas of Nelson with gaps in cycling infrastructure, and that other areas would take higher priority.
In response to questions, Mr Palmer provided further detail on proposed cycle connections in Nelson. Concerns were raised about cycling near Clifton Terrace school, which had a 100km/hr speed limit.
It was suggested that the Regional Transport Committee could consider the matter of cycle safety in the northern state highway area.
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey returned to the meeting at 10.25am.
Resolved CL/2016/116
THAT provision of cycle safety signage on Cable Bay Road be considered following further investigation into its likely effectiveness and with any funding required to be sourced from existing budgets;
AND THAT the matter of cycle safety in the northern state highway area (Cable Bay) be referred to the Regional Transport Committee for further discussion.
5.5 Travel demand management
Councillors discussed the matter of travel demand management. Mr Palmer provided detail on current strategies and projects in this area. He highlighted the challenge of working within Council’s current Parking Policy, noting that significantly more work could not be done without changing this Policy.
It was noted that the Regional Transport Committee had a $20,000 annual budget per annum to develop strategies and studies. It was suggested this could be used to develop a travel demand management strategy, and investigate infrastructure optimisation options, including the feasibility of a bus service between Richmond and Nelson.
Mr Palmer noted that work in this area would usually be developed and included in Council’s Transport Asset Management Plan, as opposed to preparing a standalone strategy.
Attendance: The meeting adjourned for morning tea from 10.46am to 11.02am.
Mrs Hadley advised that if the suggested investigation and strategy development were to be carried out within Council’s resources, this would mean a current project would need to be delayed to make resource available.
Several councillors supported the recruitment of additional officer resource to support work on traffic congestion issues. It was highlighted that Council had seen successful results from encouraging active transport.
It was suggested that the Chair and members of the Regional Transport Committee could work in conjunction with the New Zealand Transport Agency to consider how stakeholders could work together and advocate to improve travel demand management.
Resolved CL/2016/117
THAT the Chair and members of the Regional Transport Committee engage with aligned stakeholder groups to provide feedback on priorities in Council’s travel demand activity areas, noting this will be externally facilitated.
5.6 Nelson Southern Link investigation
Officer comments in the report were noted.
5.7 Graffiti
Councillors discussed graffiti on government agency property and personal property. Concern was expressed that initiatives in this area would only deal with graffiti removal, and not the reasons for graffiti. It was pointed out that Nelmac was efficient at removing graffiti from Council property once notified, and took photos for use by the Police.
Resolved CL/2016/118
THAT officers discuss a more effective approach to graffiti removal with Network Tasman and the NZ Transport Agency.
Attendance: Councillor Noonan left the meeting from 11.32am to 11.34am.
A suggestion was made to ensure greenery was incorporated into smaller infrastructure projects such as roundabouts.
Councillor Copeland, seconded by Councillor Noonan, moved a motion:
THAT Council present to the Nelson Marlborough District Health Board (NMDHB) at its meeting on 24 May 2016 expressing concerns over plans to fluoridate Nelson water Supply. Points of Concern:
· The potential cost to ratepayers of water treatment product and required infrastructure improvements.
· Discharge of fluoride to the environment and the unknown long term effects on the catchment.
· Lack of opportunities for public interface with NMDHB process.
It was confirmed there was a forum opportunity at the Nelson Marlborough District Health Board meeting on 24 May 2016, although it was unclear if this was open to the general public.
The mover and seconder agreed to add the words ‘of submitters to the Council’s draft Annual Plan 2016/17’, after the word ‘concerns’.
It was emphasised that a resolution must have no ambiguity about the fact it was not Council’s position on the matter of water fluoridation.
Councillor Fulton, seconded by Her Worship the Mayor, moved an amendment to add an additional bullet to the motion:
· The type of fluoride added is non-nature equivalent.
It was suggested this amendment reflected a large number of submitters’ concerns about fluoride.
The amendment was put and lost. The meeting returned to the original motion.
Councillor Acland, seconded by Councillor Barker, moved an amendment to add after the words ‘water supply’, the words (noting this is not feedback on Council’s position). Councillors spoke for and against the amendment.
The amendment was put and carried, and became the substantive motion. The motion was left to lie on the table to be considered at a later point in the meeting.
5.9 Waimea Community Dam
5.10 Discoloured water
In response to questions, Senior Asset Engineer – Utilities, Phil Ruffell explained the likely causes of the discolouration of water currently being experienced by many residents. He confirmed it was linked to the current trial of solely using water from the Maitai Dam for Nelson’s water supply to test it as an option for ongoing use.
Mr Ruffell said he believed that once the trial ended, complaints from residents would abate.
Attendance: Councillor Copeland left the meeting at 12.00pm. Councillor Lawrey left the meeting at 12.02pm.
In response to a question, Mr Ruffell advised the discolouration of water was not linked to operations at the Water Treatment Plant and the water was leaving the plant at an appropriate standard. He said he anticipated the issue with discolouration would be able to be fixed in the medium term.
Attendance: Councillor Copeland returned to the meeting at 12.04pm, Councillor Lawrey returned to the meeting at 12.07pm, and Councillor Acland left the meeting at 12.07pm.
In response to further questions, Mr Ruffell advised the trial had been set for eight weeks, and worthwhile results had been achieved after four to five weeks. He said the discoloured water had not been anticipated.
Councillors agreed to return to this issue at a later point in the meeting.
Attendance: Councillor Ward left the meeting at 12.12pm.
5.11 Water leaks
In response to a question, Mr Ruffell explained how use of water through fire hydrants could be measured.
Attendance: Councillors Acland and Ward returned to the meeting at 12.14pm.
It was suggested the responses to submitters about water leaks should emphasise that environmental impacts, not costs, were the driver for addressing water leaks.
5.12 Gracefield Beheading
Resolved CL/2016/119
THAT the first year options report on the Gracefield beheading project be brought forward from 2018/19 to 2016/17 along with the required funding of $54,066.
Stormwater/Flood protection
5.13 Coleridge Place
5.14 Day’s Track
5.15 Arapiki Road
Resolved CL/2016/120
THAT the first year options report on the Arapiki Road project be brought forward from 2018/19 to 2016/17 along with the required funding of $50,000.
5.16 Atmore Terrace
The meeting discussed the Atmore Terrace stormwater request, comparing it to the Arapiki Road project. In response to questions, Mr Ruffell provided further detail on each project.
Attendance: Councillor Fulton left the meeting at 12.25pm.
5.17 Wakapuaka
Group Manager Strategy and Environment, Clare Barton, explained the current consent requirements for clearing gravel build up in streams and rivers. She further explained the challenges of drains, legally defined as water courses, running through to significant natural areas.
Attendance: Councillor Fulton returned to the meeting at 12.27pm.
Ms Barton advised the information on this matter would be reported back as part of the work on the Nelson Plan.
Attendance: The meeting adjourned for lunch from 12.40pm to 1.33pm, during which time Councillors Ward and Skinner left the meeting.
5.18 Fluoride (continued)
The meeting returned to consider the motion regarding fluoride, that had been left to lie on the table earlier in the day. With the agreement of the meeting, the mover and seconder withdrew the motion on the table.
Attendance: Councillor Ward returned to the meeting at 1.37pm.
Councillor Noonan, seconded by Her Worship the Mayor, moved an alternative motion:
THAT Council request to be heard at Nelson Marlborough District Health Board’s (NMDHB) meeting on 24 May 2016 to express concerns of submitters to the Council’s draft Annual Plan 2016/17 over plans to fluoridate Nelson water Supply (noting this is not feedback on Council’s position). The point of concern being the lack of opportunities for public interface with the NMDHB.
Councillors discussed the motion, and expressed views for and against the motion.
Councillors in support of the motion noted that it would enable Council to pass on submitters’ concerns regarding fluoride to the NMDHB. Councillors against the motion noted that the decision on introducing fluoride to the water supply had not yet passed to the NMDHB, nor had it had an opportunity to establish a process regarding the decision.
Resolved CL/2016/121
5.19 Discoloured water (continued)
In response to a question, Phil Ruffell, explained that the current trial of solely using the Maitai Dam for Nelson’s water supply could end on Sunday 15 May 2016. He said this would give officers six weeks’ information, and that discolouration should clear within one to two days following the end of the trial.
Attendance: Councillor Acland left the meeting at 1.57pm.
5.20 Argentine Ants
Officers’ comments in the additional information document regarding Argentine Ants were noted.
5.21 Monitoring of Nelson rivers and streams
5.22 Woodburners
In response to questions, Ms Barton explained how the proposed additional $60,000 budget would be used for increased monitoring and enforcement of residential woodburner use, and education/behaviour change programmes to achieve a 10% reduction in emissions within particular airsheds, subject to the outcome of the plan change process currently underway.
Attendance: Councillor Skinner returned to the meeting at 2.03pm. He declared an interest in relation to woodburners, and left the meeting at 2.05pm.
Resolved CL/2016/122
THAT allocation of an additional $60,000 be made in the Annual Plan for an enhanced behaviour change programme for woodburner operation, contingent on approval of Plan Change A3.
Attendance: Councillor Skinner returned to the meeting at 2.07pm.
5.23 Landfill
5.24 Freedom Camping
It was suggested that Council did not have a sufficient plan for freedom camping, and required better signage and facilities for non-self-contained vehicles camping overnight in Nelson City.
It was agreed that officers would consider what additional facilities could be achieved for freedom campers and report back to the Council meeting on Thursday 12 May 2016.
There was a further discussion regarding the necessity for a clear strategy regarding freedom camping, and a variety of views were expressed. It was suggested that development of a relevant strategy should proceed through the relevant committee over the course of the 2016/17 year.
THAT an allocation of $25,000 be provided in the Annual Plan 2016/17 to advance a Freedom Camping Strategy.
It was agreed that the motion be left to lie on the table until further information regarding freedom camping was available on Thursday 12 May 2016.
5.25 Freshwater Monitoring
It was noted that there were several submissions against the amounts budgeted for freshwater monitoring, but there was general agreement by councillors that the provision for freshwater monitoring was appropriate.
Attendance: The meeting adjourned from 2.26pm to 2.28pm.
In response to a question, it was clarified that the provision of $75,000 for freshwater monitoring would not increase year on year.
5.26 Regional Pest Management Strategy
In response to questions, Ms Barton clarified that Council should await the outcome of the Regional Pest Management Strategy review prior to considering whether any further resource in this area was required. She added that the Nelson Nature project included provision for community engagement in this area.
5.27 Library
Attendance: Councillors Matheson and Fulton left the meeting at 2.35pm.
Councillor Noonan, seconded by Her Worship the Mayor, moved:
THAT the existing riverside location of the Elma Turner Library be confirmed as the site for the library redevelopment in order to provide certainty on the timing for upgrade work at Civic House, and to allow for adaptive re-use of the State Advances Building;
AND THAT officers report to Council on any additional budget that might be required to realise the library's potential in that location with a view to any adjustments being made during development of the 2018/28 Long Term Plan.
Attendance: Councillor Matheson returned to the meeting at 2.36pm, and Councillor Fulton returned to the meeting at 2.37pm.
Councillors discussed the motion, and a variety of views were expressed. Those in support of the motion noted that there had been clear feedback that the library should remain in its present location, and that the motion provided certainty to allow consideration of alternative uses for the State Advances Building. Those against the motion noted that there had been insufficient detail within the draft Annual Plan regarding the proposal to move the library, and that Council should not preclude further investigation of whether the library was in the most appropriate location for the city.
During discussion, it was suggested that adaptive re-use of vacant space could allow some of the library functions to be located elsewhere.
A right of reply was given, during which a point of order was raised.
Point of Order: Councillor Rainey raised a point of order in accordance with Standing Order 3.13.4(e), noting that new material could not be introduced during a right of reply. Her Worship the Mayor accepted the point of order.
Resolved CL/2016/123
THAT the existing riverside location of the Elma Turner Library be confirmed as the site for the library redevelopment in order to provide certainty on the timing for upgrade work at Civic House, and to allow for adaptive re-use of the State Advances Building
5.28 Library wifi
Officers’ comments in the additional information document regarding the library wifi were noted.
5.29 MenzShed
Officers’ comments in the additional information document regarding the MenzShed were noted.
5.30 Youth Nelson
Officers’ comments in the additional information document regarding Youth Nelson were noted.
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey left the meeting at 2.53pm.
5.31 Volunteer Nelson
In response to a question, Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward, explained the Community Investment Funding application process that Volunteer Nelson was currently engaged in.
Ms McDonald added that a collective approach may be more appropriate than a programme run by one agency, and suggested that redirecting the request to the Community Investment Fund process would give officers extra time to work with Volunteer Nelson to broaden its approach.
Attendance: Councillor Acland left the meeting from 2.56pm to 2.57pm; Councillor Lawrey returned to the meeting at 2.56pm, and left the meeting at 2.57pm.
Resolved CL/2016/124
THAT Volunteer Nelson be advised that its request for additional funding should be made during the development of the Long Term Plan 2018/28 where it can be assessed against other ongoing social funding needs and in the interim it may wish to increase its application to the Community Investment Fund accordingly.
5.32 Commemorations
In response to a question, Ms McDonald noted that it would be possible to undertake work on the Cawthron Steps during the 2016/17 year, in preparation for the 175th commemoration of Nelson City, but that this project would likely absorb much of the budget provision for commemoration projects.
In response to further questions, Mr Ward explained that some maintenance work had recently taken place on the Cawthron Steps.
There was general agreement that the steps appeared dirty. Following discussion, it was agreed that this item should lie on the table until Thursday 12 May 2016, to allow officers sufficient time to consider the scope and budget required for further maintenance work on the steps.
Attendance: the meeting adjourned for afternoon tea from 3.04pm to 3.11pm, during which time Councillors Fulton and Skinner left the meeting, and Councillor Lawrey returned to the meeting.
5.32 Cricket training and target shooting facility at Saxton Field
Attendance: Councillor Skinner returned to the meeting at 3.12pm.
Councillor Matheson, seconded by Councillor Rainey, moved the recommendation in the officer report.
It was noted that the amount allocated in the officer recommendation did not allow for associated verandas or pathways to be constructed.
In response to a question, Parks and Facilities Asset Planner, Andrew Petheram, explained the breakdown of the proposed funding, and said that the sports groups had been advised to apply to Tasman District Council for associated funding.
Her Worship the Mayor, seconded by Councillor Rainey moved an amendment to include a second clause:
Resolved CL/2016/125
THAT $88,000 be allocated in the Annual Plan 2016/17 to the joint cricket/target shooting facility at Saxton Field to cover geotechnical excavations, Council levies and the fundraising shortfall;
Matheson/Rainey Carried
5.33 The Trafalgar Theatre
It was agreed that discussion on this item would be deferred until Thursday 12 May 2016.
Attendance: Councillor Fulton returned to the meeting at 3.18pm.
5.34 Hammer cage – Saxton Field
In response to questions, Mr Petheram explained that local use of the hammer cage at Saxton Field was low, but that the facility was also used for events such as the Masters Games. He said the current facilities were inadequate for regional competition, but the proposal was to upgrade the facilities to meet the standards for national level competitions, which would also provide an appropriate facility for athletes training for international competition.
Attendance: Councillor Copeland left the meeting from 3.24pm to 3.26pm
Councillors discussed the potential upgrade to the hammer throw facility. Issues considered during discussion included Council’s health and safety obligations; whether the hammer throwing facility at Saxton Field should be closed until it could be brought to an appropriate standard; whether improvement of the hammer throwing facility should be done at all, given that it had few local users; and if budget provision were to be included, whether the Regional Funding Forum should be involved in the funding decision, given the relatively low amount involved.
In response to a question, Mr Petheram confirmed that an upgraded facility could also be used by junior athletes for discus.
In response to further questions, he explained that developments at Saxton Field had previously been funded with a 20% contribution from the relevant sports group, with the Regional Funding Forum recommending a split of the remaining 80% between Nelson City (57%) and Tasman District (43%) Councils. He added that the populations of Nelson City and Tasman District Councils had altered since the last Regional Funding Forum meeting, and as a result, the proportion of the 80% split between the two councils may now be different.
Attendance: Councillor Matheson left the meeting from 3.32pm to 3.34pm.
It was agreed that this item be left to lie on the table until Thursday 12 May 2016, to allow time for officers to gather further information about the proposed hammer throw facility.
5.35 Marina access ramp
Ms McDonald explained that, since the agenda had been distributed, an engineer had confirmed that temporary solutions for the marina access ramp would not be possible.
It was further suggested that potential solutions for this issue could be advanced as part of the Marina Strategy, and a suggestion was made that officers liaise with affected groups to explore whether any operational changes may be helpful in the meantime.
5.36 Kitesurfing
There was a discussion regarding the officer recommendation that kitesurfers provide 50% funding towards the proposed washdown facility. During discussion, it was suggested that other beach users aside from kitesurfers would also utilise the washdown facility.
In response to questions, Mr Petheram explained that there was already a water line in the proposed location, and consequently the provision of a washdown facility should be relatively simple and cost-effective to install.
Attendance: Councillor McGurk left the meeting at 3.44pm.
Resolved CL/2016/126
THAT an allocation of up to $2,500 be included in the Annual Plan 2016/17 for the provision of washdown facilities for kitesurfing at Tahunanui beach.
5.37 Swing Moorings – the Haven
It was suggested that the provision of further swing moorings outside of the Haven could be considered during the development of the Marina Strategy.
5.38 One day international cricket matches
5.39 South Island Masters Games 2017
5.40 Wicked Campers – vehicles
There was a discussion regarding whether Council was able to, or should, take any action regarding offensive slogans and images on campervans.
Resolved CL/2016/127
THAT, in accordance with Standing Order 3.3.7, the meeting continue beyond six hours.
It was agreed that Her Worship the Mayor would write a letter to Wicked Campers, outlining Council’s concerns regarding offensive slogans and images on their campervans.
Attendance: Councillor Acland left the meeting from 3.56pm to 3.57pm.
5.41 Rates Remission Policy and Rates Postponement Policy
Resolved CL/2016/128
THAT Council note that no further changes are proposed to the Rates Remission Policy & Rates Postponement Policy as a result of the concurrent consultation process.
5.42 Brook Camp
There was a discussion regarding whether any budget provision was required for the Brook Camp.
In response to questions, Mr Ward explained that a report was being developed with recommendations regarding each of the Council-owned campgrounds.
It was agreed that no further budget allocation for the Brook Camp was required at this time.
Attendance: The meeting adjourned for the day at 4.09pm, to resume on Thursday 12 May 2016.
On Thursday 12 May 2016, commencing at 9.06am
In Attendance: Chief Executive (C Hadley), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Strategy and Environment (C Barton), Group Manager Community Services (C Ward), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Senior Strategic Adviser (N McDonald), Manager Communications Acting Manager Libraries and Heritage Facilities (P Shattock), Asset Analyst (D Bartkowiak), Senior Accountant (T Hughes), Policy Coordinator (J Loughnan), and Administration Adviser (E-J Ruthven)
Apology: Councillor L Acland (for early departure)
Deliberations on the draft Annual Plan 2016/17 - Part 2
Document number R5883, late item refers.
Her Worship the Mayor explained that the deliberations would include items in Part 2 of the officer report, as well as additional items that had been left to lie on the table during the meeting on Wednesday 11 May 2016.
6.1 Commemorations - Cawthron Steps (continued)
The meeting returned to consider budget provision for maintenance work on the Cawthron Steps, that had been left to lie on the table the previous day.
The Chief Executive, Clare Hadley, outlined the proposed maintenance work for the steps, and confirmed that budget provision of $50,000 would be sufficient.
Attendance: The meeting adjourned from 9.07am to 9.12am.
Resolved CL/2016/129
THAT $50,000 be included in the Annual Plan 2016/17 for the purposes of conservation of the Cawthron Steps.
6.2 Special Housing Area (SHA) Issues
In response to questions, Development Projects Planner, Lisa Gibellini, explained potential transport solutions for the Saxton Special Housing Area.
In response to further questions, Group Manager Strategy and Environment, Clare Barton, outlined the delays in relation to Stage Two of the Saxton Creek Upgrade.
Resolved CL/2016/130
THAT Council propose an amendment to its Long Term Plan (and consequently the Development Contributions Policy) and consult on this at the same time as the Annual Plan consultation in 2017, for the inclusion of Hill Street to Suffolk Road Link, Upgrade of Hill Street North, and the bridging of Saxton Stream from Hill Street North.
6.3 Mountain biking and Gondola
There was a discussion regarding the potential economic impact and tourism opportunities from further developing mountain biking in Nelson.
In response to questions, Parks and Facilities Asset Planner, Andrew Petheram, explained the proposals for new tracks to be built, and for a trail head hub to be established at the Andrews’ Farm in The Brook. He said that a portaloo and washdown facility could be placed at the Andrews Farm in the short term, which could alleviate congestion and the concerns of residents of The Brook regarding the current use of Betsy Eyre Park as a trail head hub, and allow for appropriate planning of long-term trail head facilities in the future.
In response to further questions, Mr Petheram advised that the Off Road Tracks and Trails Strategy currently in development would recognise the importance of developing walking tracks as well as mountain biking tracks. He outlined the general locations for proposed walking tracks, but explained that construction of these tracks would not be possible in 2016/17.
In response to further questions, Mr Petheram explained that a small portion of the $100,000 provision in the last clause of the officer recommendation related to extending the scope of the Off Road Tracks and Trails Strategy to consider the economic benefits of mountain biking in Nelson, with the majority of the additional provision focused on implementing the Strategy once adopted.
Attendance: Councillor Davy left the meeting from 9.41am to 9.42am.
In response to further questions, Mr Petheram outlined the general process and division of labour between Council and the Nelson Mountain Bike Club with regards to the construction of new tracks. He added that the conditions specified in the second clause of the officer recommendation should not be viewed as potential road blocks to the future construction of new mountain biking tracks. He explained further the rationale for the proposal to include ‘Grade Two’ family-style trails.
During discussion, councillors indicated that the importance of walking tracks should be formally recognised by Council, even though design and construction would not happen in the 2016/17 year. The importance of appropriate signage and making available information brochures was also noted.
Attendance: Councillor Ward left the meeting from 10.01am to 10.03am.
During discussion, a suggestion was made that the resolution should reflect officer advice that $50,000 allocated for progressing the gondola project should be delayed for one year, until the Off Road Tracks and Trails Strategy was in place.
Attendance: The meeting adjourned from 10.06am to 10.19am.
Councillor Davy, seconded by Councillor Noonan, moved a motion:
THAT unspent capital expenditure from the 2015/16 budget of $50,000 be carried forward to 2016/17 for a grade 2 mountain bike track in Marsden Valley;
AND THAT, subject to landowner approval, consultation with the Brook Valley community, any consent requirement and the outcomes of the Off Road Tracks and Trails Strategy, $5,000 capital expenditure be allocated to the provision of a track descending from Fringed Hill, with the remainder of the trail formation costs to be funded by the Nelson Mountain Bike Club;
AND THAT up to $8,000 operational expenditure is allocated in the Annual Plan 2016/17 to provide toilet facilities at the top of Fringed Hill once the new track is open;
AND THAT, subject to the outcomes of the Off Road Tracks and Trails Strategy and any resource consent matters, the Codgers Track be reinstated on the basis of $15,000 funding from Council and a matching contribution from the Nelson Mountain Bike Club;
AND THAT $20,000 opex be allocated to extend the scope of the Off Road Tracks and Trails Strategy to consider the potential economic benefits of developing mountain biking in the region and how to access these, with $80,000 capex being directed to implementation of the Strategy once it is approved;
AND THAT Council acknowledges the importance of also developing a good network of walking tracks and notes these will be identified concurrently with other off-road tracks and trails;
AND THAT the $50,000 proposed to be allocated for progressing the gondola project be deferred one year to be considered during development of the 2017/18 Annual Plan.
Councillor Lawrey, seconded by Councillor Acland, moved an amendment to replace the final clause of the motion with:
AND THAT $100,000 be allocated in the Annual Plan 2016/17 to assist the Nelson Cycle Lift Society to drive the gondola project to the next stage, including the employment of a project manager by the Nelson Cycle Lift Society, to seek funding from central government and other investors.
It was agreed that the clause relating to the gondola be taken separately, and prior to the remainder of the motion relating to mountain biking.
Attendance: Councillor Rainey declared an interest in relation to the gondola, and left the meeting at 10.30am.
Councillors discussed the amendment, and a variety of views were expressed.
Those in favour of the amendment noted that the gondola could provide a significant economic boost for Nelson, but that the volunteers who were working to advance the project may have run out of energy, and may not be able to sustain the project for a further year unless Council funding was made available in 2016/17. It was further suggested that funding of $50,000 was insufficient and at least $100,000 was required to develop the project further.
Councillors against the amendment noted that the most important action Council could take for advancing the gondola project could be to construct new tracks and develop mountain biking and walking resources further, to demonstrate the desire for a gondola and attract private investment to the project. It was further suggested that the Off Road Tracks and Trails Strategy should be completed before Council provide further funding to the gondola project.
The amendment was put, and a division was called:
The amendment was lost, 8-4.
Attendance: The meeting adjourned for morning tea from 10.59am to 11.21am.
Her Worship the Mayor reminded the meeting that the matter on the table was the final clause of the motion, relating to the gondola.
Her Worship the Mayor, seconded by Councillor Ward moved a further amendment to replace the final clause of the motion with:
AND THAT provision of $100,000 be made in the Annual Plan 2016/17, being
AND THAT the Governance Committee be delegated the authority to consider this matter and make recommendations to Council.
Attendance: Councillor Acland left the meeting from 11.28am to 11.29am.
Councillors discussed the amendment. Those in favour of the amendment emphasised the potential benefits of the gondola, and noted that it allowed for further development of the project, subject to Council receiving appropriate advice and match funding being made available. Those against the amendment emphasised that private investment could drive the project forward to the next stage, and noted that it could be inappropriate for Council to make further budget provision for the gondola at this stage.
Attendance: Councillor Ward left the meeting from 11.37am to 11.38am.
The amendment was passed, 9-3, and became the substantive motion.
Resolved CL/2016/131
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey left the meeting from 11.45am to 11.46am, Councillor Rainey returned to the meeting at 11.46am, and Councillor Matheson left the meeting at 11.47am.
The meeting returned to consider the remainder of the motion relating to mountain biking.
Discussion noted that the Nelson Mountain Bike Club was organised and ready to commence with track construction, and that effective engagement between Council, the mountain biking, walking and Brook communities had continued to take place during development of the Off Road Tracks and Trails Strategy.
Resolved CL/2016/132
AND THAT Council acknowledges the importance of also developing a good network of walking tracks and notes these will be identified concurrently with other off-road tracks and trails.
Attendance: Councillor Lawrey left the meeting from 11.52am to 11.56am, Councillor Acland left the meeting at 11.54am, Councillor Fulton left the meeting at 11.55am, and Councillor Matheson returned to the meeting at 11.56am.
6.4 Responses to submitters
The meeting considered the spreadsheet of responses to submitters page by page. It was noted that the responses to submitters would be updated based on discussions and decisions of Council at the meeting to deliberate on the Annual Plan. Further minor updates provided for responses to the following submissions:
· Other Transport Projects – Seymour Avenue;
· Walking and Cycling Projects – Tahunanui Business Association Inc;
· Wastewater – Gaire Thompson;
· Parks and Active Recreation – Rhys Jones;
· Parks and Active recreation – Tahunanui Business Asociation Inc; and
· Corporate – Graeme O’Brien
Attendance: Councillor Noonan left the meeting at 12.06pm to 12.09pm.
6.5 Tahunanui BMX Track
There was a discussion regarding the Tahunanui BMX track, and whether there were plans to retain the Tahunanui track once the BMX facility at Saxton Field had been developed.
In response to questions, Mr Petheram outlined the BMX Club’s vision for a national-standard facility at Saxton Field. He explained that the Tahunanui track could not be expanded, due to space limitations and erosion issues, but that it may be appropriate to retain the Tahunanui track in some form.
6.6 Hammer Throw Facility (continuation)
The meeting resumed discussion regarding the hammer throw facility at Saxton Field, that had been left to lie on the table the previous day.
The Chief Executive, Clare Hadley, advised that officers had reviewed Council’s health and safety obligations, and now recommended that the hammer throw facility be closed until its safety could be improved.
Mrs Hadley added that when estimates of the additional costs involved with upgrading the facility were included, officers’ recommendation was that Top of the South Athletics contribute $8,000 towards the facility, Council make a budget provision for $20,000, and apply to Tasman District Council to fund part of the facility in a similar manner to applications to the Regional Funding Forum.
In response to questions, Mrs Hadley explained that Tasman District Council had a budget provision for developments at Saxton Field. She added that Top of the South Athletics could be advised to apply to Tasman District Council’s Community Grants Fund.
Resolved CL/2016/133
THAT in light of safety concerns, Council withdraw the hammer throw facility at Saxton Field until appropriate provisions are made for safety;
AND THAT Council approach Tasman District Council for funding in a similar manner to the Regional Funding Forum;
AND THAT Council make provision of $20,000 in the Annual Plan 2016/17;
AND THAT Top of the South Athletics be advised that all establishment costs must be covered before the facility is reinstated.
Attendance: Councillor Copeland left the meeting at 12.25pm.
6.7 Freedom Camping (contined)
The meeting resumed the discussion regarding freedom camping that had been left to lie on the table the previous day.
Mrs Hadley advised that budget provision of $10,000 could be made to provide for two sinks in two locations, to allow freedom campers to wash dishes and clean their teeth. She added that appropriate signage could assist with ensuring that campers used public toilet basins for hand washing only. She said that officers had not yet had a chance to consider appropriate locations for sinks.
Attendance: Councillors Lawrey and Rainey left the meeting from 12.30pm to 12.33pm, and Councillor Davy left the meeting at 12.30pm.
There was further discussion regarding the motion relating to budget provision for a Freedom Camping Strategy, which had been left to lie on the table the previous day.
Resolved CL/2016/134
Resolved CL/2016/135
THAT provision of $10,000 capital expenditure be made in the Annual Plan 2016/17 for two sinks at two locations to meet the demands of freedom campers.
Attendance: Councillor Barker left the meeting from 12.39pm to 12.41pm.
6.8 The Trafalgar Theatre (continued)
It was noted that further information in relation to theatre acoustics may be required, but this information would not be available prior to the end of the meeting.
It was agreed that budget provision should be included for the Trafalgar Theatre at this stage.
Resolved CL/2016/136
THAT provision for $400,000 capital expenditure be confirmed in the Annual Plan 2016/17 for the Trafalgar Theatre.
6.9 Carry-Forwards
Group Manager Corporate Services, Nikki Harrison, and Manager Capital Programmes, Shane Davies, tabled a document outlining capital movements (A1545648).
In response to questions, Mr Davies explained the reasons for budget movements between financial years. He clarified that the adjustments in the tabled document reflected the items notified through the Corporate Report to the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee, and added that there may be further adjustments to make for multi-year project budgets following the end of the financial year.
In response to further questions, Mr Davies said he was confident that the KPI relating to capital projects would be met.
Resolved CL/2016/137
THAT the capital programme for 2015/16 and 2016/17, complete with phasing changes, corrections and other changes as set out in document A1545648 be received and approved.
1 A1545648 - Tabled Document - Capital Movements
Attendance: The meeting adjourned for lunch from 12.58pm to 1.19pm, during which time Councillor Fulton left the meeting.
6.10 Reconciliation
Group Manager Corporate Services, Nikki Harrison, explained that the proposed average rate rise, based on the decisions made over the course of the deliberations meeting, was 2.84%. She said that interest savings may lead to this amount moving by up to 0.02 percentage points in either direction, prior to the draft Annual Plan 2016/17 being adopted by Council on 2 June 2016.
In response to questions, Ms Harrison explained that the forecast debt level for the end of 2016/17 was $131 million, as against the forecast in the Long Term Plan 2015-25 for the same timeframe of $133.8 million. She explained how debt funding capital projects across a number of years achieved inter-generational equity.
6.11 Confirmation of Resolutions
Resolved CL/2016/138
THAT Council confirm all resolutions made in principle during the deliberations meeting of 11 and 12 May 2016.
Attendance: Councillor Fulton returned to the meeting at 1.21pm, and Councillor Rainey left the meeting at 1.23pm.
There being no further business the meeting ended at 1.37pm.
REPORT R5994
1.1 To provide an update on a potential Housing Strategy.
3.1 Council has previously discussed the need for further work on housing in Nelson to look at general areas such as affordability and choice alongside specific issues such as emergency housing and Council’s own community housing.
3.2 Councillor Ward has long championed the idea of a Strategy to bring together the various strands of work and in the last few months he has put on paper some of his thinking about a possible scope and vision. These ideas are complementary to the regulatory approach the Nelson Plan will be providing on housing.
3.3 Officers will use Councillor Ward’s work as a starting point for a position paper to inform the incoming Council and provide options for moving ahead on a Strategy. They will also be undertaking some pre-consultation over the coming months with key stakeholders in the community, including the Developers Advisory Group.
REPORT R5584
Adoption of the Annual Plan 2016/17
1.1 To adopt the Annual Plan 2016/17.
2.1 The adoption of an Annual Plan is a decision of Council.
Usage over 100,000 cu.m/year $1.198 per m³
4.1 Council consulted on its draft Annual Plan 2016/17 from 11 March to 11 April 2016 in accordance with Section 82 and 95 of the Local Government Act 2002.
4.2 Council received 605 submissions and met to hear 66 submitters on 3 and 4 May 2016. 15 late submissions were approved for consideration by Council on 3 May 2016. Council met to deliberate on submissions on 11 and 12 May 2016.
4.3 Consultation on changes to the Rates Remission Policy and Rates Postponement Policy was carried out concurrently with the consultation on the Annual Plan Consultation Document. No submissions were received to that process but one submission to the draft Annual Plan process is deemed to address these matters. No further changes were proposed during deliberations as a result of consultation. The policies are attached at Attachment 2 and Attachment 3.
5.1 The final Annual Plan 2016/17, Attachment 1, is presented for Council to adopt. A designed version of the document will be provided to Councillors on 2 June 2016 for information.
5.2 Contingent on the Annual Plan being adopted, Council will also need to set the rates for the 2016/17 financial year, as per the recommendations above.
5.3 After Council has adopted the Annual Plan 2016/17, submitters will receive responses to their submissions.
6.1 Council can adopt the Annual Plan 2016/17, as attached, or can make changes. Council is required under section 95 of the Local Government Act 2002 to adopt an Annual Plan for the 2016/17 year by 30 June 2016.
7.1 The Annual Plan 2016/17 outlines changes to projects, services and budgets from year two of the adopted Long Term Plan 2015-25.
8.1 The Annual Plan is a significant document guiding Council’s work programme and community engagement has been undertaken at an appropriate level.
9.1 The Consultation Document on the draft Annual Plan 2016/17 was open for consultation from 11 March to 11 April 2016. Council heard from submitters on 3 and 4 May.
10.1 Maori were consulted through the submission process on the Consultation Document.
11.1 Council must adopt a final Annual Plan 2016/17 by the end of June 2016. The Annual Plan 2016/17 has effect from 1 July 2016.
Attachment 1: Annual Plan 2016/17 (A1518261) (Circulated separately)
Attachment 2: Rates Remission Policy (A1551142)
Attachment 3: Rates Postponement Policy (A1551144)
REPORT R5772
Public Feedback on Proposal to Sell Bett Carpark
1.1 To receive and consider the public feedback on a proposal to sell Bett Carpark for development as a Special Housing Area. The public feedback can be used by Council when making a decision in relation to the future of Bett Carpark.
1.2 A report considering Bett Carpark Request for Proposals, which includes consideration of whether to sell Bett Carpark as part of the evaluation of proposals, will be considered during the public excluded part of the council meeting on 2 June 2016.
2.1 The Commercial Subcommittee normally has the area of responsibility to provide strategic governance, advice and direction to ensure the maximisation of Council’s property portfolio. However on 26 May 2016, the Commercial Subcommittee referred this matter to the Governance Committee, which subsequently referred this matter to Council for consideration.
4.1 A Strategic Property Review was undertaken of all Council owned properties in 2015. A report was received by Council in May 2015 which identified that Bett Carpark was an asset that was potentially underutilised and not maximising its contribution to community outcomes. It was recommended for further investigation with a view to a change of use or disposal.
4.2 In June 2015 Council entered into a Housing Accord with the Government. In February 2016 Bett Carpark was gazetted as a Special Housing Area (SHA) under the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 (HASHA).
4.3 On 3 March 2016 Council resolved to approve design controls to be included in a Request for Expressions of Interest (REOI) for the sale and development of Bett Carpark (343 Trafalgar Square) as a Special Housing Area.
4.4 At that meeting Council also expressed a preference for the sale of Bett Carpark (Pt Lot 2 DP 224) for development as a Special Housing Area.
4.5 Council then ran two concurrent processes:
· The Request for Expressions of Interest (REOI) process for the sale and development of Bett Carpark as a Special Housing Area.
· A public feedback process to seek community views in relation to the potential sale of Bett Carpark for a Special Housing Area development. The public were able to view the REOI document including the intended outcomes Council sought to achieve for a Special Housing Area development on the site.
4.6 In addition all those lease and license holders for carparks within Bett Carpark and adjoining landowners were sent a letter advising of both processes and the opportunity for them to provide Council with feedback.
5.1 Public feedback was received from 31 respondents. Of those, 12 were in support of the sale and development of the site for a Special Housing Area development, 8 opposed the proposal, and a further 12 respondents did not specify the decision they sought Council to make.
5.2 A summary of the feedback received is contained in Attachment 1 to this report.
6.1 In receiving the feedback Council can choose to use it to inform decision making on the future of Bett Carpark for development of a Special Housing Area (SHA). A report considering Bett Carpark Request for Proposals for development as a SHA, which includes consideration of whether to sell Bett Carpark as part of the evaluation of proposals, will be considered during the public excluded part of the council meeting on 2 June 2016.
6.2 The feedback process is not a Special Consultative Procedure under the Local Government Act, and therefore there is no right to be heard in relation to submissions. However the Council must provide the community with a reasonable opportunity to present their views in a manner appropriate to their preferences (section 82(1)(d) Local Government Act 2002). Officers understand that some respondents may choose to speak to their feedback through public forum.
7.1 This matter is not in contradiction with any Council policy or strategic document. The report seeks that Council receive the Bett Carpark feedback, no decisions in relation to the feedback are sought.
7.2 The recommendation fits with Nelson 2060 in that it aligns with Goal Two: we are all able to be involved in decisions and Goal Nine: Everyone in our community has their essential needs met. It also fits with Council’s community outcomes, in particular ‘Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and community engagement’.
8.1 The sale of Bett Carpark (not a strategic asset) was assessed under Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy as a matter of significance to some residents, particularly those living near the site or using the carpark, and of a more moderate interest to the community as a whole. The appropriate level of engagement was therefore considered to be a request for public feedback, to seek the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the matter. The results of the feedback process are included with this report. This process meets the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 sections 78 (community views in relation to decisions) and 82 (principles of consultation).
9.1 The purpose of this report is for Council to receive the results of public consultation on the proposal to sell Bett Carpark for development as a Special Housing Area. Section 5 of this report contains the details about the feedback received.
10.1 Maori have not been specifically consulted on this matter.
11.1 This report seeks that Council receive and consider the public feedback on a proposal to sell Bett Carpark for development as a Special Housing Area. Council is required to give consideration to the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by, or to have an interest in the matter. The public feedback can be used by Council when making a decision in relation to the future of Bett Carpark.
Attachment 1: A1544721 - Summary of public feedback on Proposal to Sell Bett carpark
Attachment 2: A1554221 - Public feedback on proposal to sell Bett Caprark
REPORT R5858
1.1 To approve two new Special Housing Areas (SHAs), and make an amendment to an existing gazetted SHA. To agree that Her Worship the Mayor recommend to the Minister of Building and Housing the SHAs and amendments for consideration under the Housing Accord and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 (HASHA).
4.3 On 17 December 2015 Council approved for recommendation to the Minister of Building and Housing the creation of 8 Special Housing Areas and an Order in Council was passed by Cabinet on 15 February 2016 declaring those 8 areas as SHAs.
4.4 On 3 March 2016 Council approved for recommendation to the Minister of Building and Housing the creation of an additional SHA at 45 & 47 Beach Road. This is scheduled to be approved by Order in Council on 11 May 2016.
4.5 Council has yet to receive any resource consent applications under HASHA, however advice from the majority of developers of SHA’s is that they are on track to submit an application before the September 2016 deadline.
5.1 Officers have received requests for further SHAs, and an amendment to the qualifying development criteria for an existing SHA (Ocean Lodge). Details of the SHA’s proposed qualifying development criteria and infrastructure requirements are provided in Attachments 1, 2, 3, and 4 and the proposals are summarised below.
Beach Apartments SHA
5.2 Officers have received a request from the landowner of 19 & 21 Beach Road that the property be considered as a SHA. This site is close to the Ocean Lodge and Beach Road SHA’s (all three being located on Beach Road) and the landowner seeks the similar qualifying development criteria for the site as that sought by Ocean Lodge following the amendment sought in this report. Further details of the proposed SHA are provided in Attachment 1.
Tahuna Lifestyle Apartments SHA
5.3 Officers have received a request from the landowner of 1 & 5 Tahunanui Drive that the property be considered as a SHA. Qualifying development criteria consistent with the Beach Road SHAs is sought for this site. Further details of the proposed SHA are provided in Attachment 2.
Farleigh SHA
5.4 Officers have received a request form Hybrid Homes who wish to have 35 Farleigh Street considered as a SHA. Qualifying development criteria and a map of this rural site in Dodson’s Valley are provided in Attachment 3.
Ocean Lodge SHA Amendment
5.5 Ocean Lodge SHA is currently preparing a resource consent application under HASHA and have recently had a pre application meeting with the Council’s Major Projects Team. Officers have received a request from Wakatu Inc for the amendment of the qualifying development criteria for this existing SHA. The amendment proposed is for an additional storey. The existing and proposed qualifying development criteria for Ocean Lodge are summarised in the table below:
5.6 Wakatu Inc seek that the maximum number of storeys be amended from 4 to 5, but that the maximum height be retained. The amended qualifying development criteria are proposed in Attachment 4. The reason for the amendment is that the initial plans were to have carparking underground, however geotechnical engineering advice gained does not support this due to the high water tables on the site. Therefore carparking will take up the first storey on the ground floor, pushing the design into 5 storeys instead of the intended 4.
6.1 The criteria used to evaluate SHA suitability and each sites assessment are detailed in Attachments 1 to 4, along with a map identifying each area. The criteria include the HASHA requirements that need to be satisfied (adequate infrastructure and demand for residential housing), consistency with the Accord, and alignment with the Nelson Resource Management Plan. A summary of the officers recommendation in relation to each SHA request is provided in the table below:
Tahuna Lifestyle Apartments
Ocean Lodge (amendment to qualifying criteria)
6.2 Some sites already have sufficient infrastructure connections. Other sites require additional connection and/or capacity to be provided. Where this isn’t already a project in the Long Term Plan the necessary infrastructure will need to be provided by the developer. Developers are also able to seek that projects be included in the LTP and Council can choose to consult with the community on their inclusion. The SHA’s will not result in any additional infrastructure costs on Council from that included in the current or future Long Term Plan(s).
6.3 Council has the option of approving these SHA’s and the SHA amendment for recommendation to the Minister, or declining to recommend them to the Minister. Council has committed through the Housing Accord to enhance housing supply.
6.4 The current likely yield from the ten gazetted SHA’s is 417 residential units and if Council approves the SHA’s in this report the likely total yield Council has enabled through the Housing Accord will be 500 residential units.
6.5 The SHA’s will assist Council to meet the Accord targets, and to enhance the supply and of sections and apartments in the Nelson market, thereby enabling a range of housing choice.
6.6 If Council decides not to recommend the additional SHA’s and SHA amendment, the development opportunity of those Tahuna sites will likely be lost as developers indicate the HASHA process enables them to overcome current economic viability barriers on these sites.
6.7 The Farleigh SHA is not supported by officers because it is a property that is zoned Rural and is not suitable for geotechnical reasons for intensive residential development consistent with the goals of HASHA. The development proposed by Hybrid Homes consists of a small cluster of seven residential sites (800m2 to 1,000m2 in size) set amongst seven larger rural lifestyle sites (4,000m2 to 60,000m2). The Nelson Housing Accord states that Council, in implementing the Accord, will have a particular focus on releasing supply in existing residential zoned areas.
6.8 Farleigh Street is zoned Rural, and the development that is planned for that site is rural small holdings in nature and scale. Officers consider that the Farleigh site is not suitable for intensive residential development that would be anticipated under the HASHA, and that the creation of a SHA on this site is inconsistent with the intent of the Accord. While limited development of the site by Hybrid Homes for sustainable housing may be appropriate through a Resource Management Act process, officers do not support its gazettal as a SHA.
7.1 The recommendations align with the direction set by Council for SHA’s at the 17 December 2015 and 3 March 2016 Council meetings and the Housing Accord.
8.1 This matter is not significant in terms of Council’s Significance an Engagement Policy.
9.1 The public has not been consulted on this matter. HASHA does not require that any consultation is undertaken in identifying SHAs. Time has not allowed for specific community consultation on the location of potential SHAs. Notification of adjacent landowners may occur when resource consents relating to qualifying developments are considered.
9.2 Officers have consulted with the Ministry of Education and NZ Transport Authority in relation to the potential new SHA’s. Formal responses have not been received at the time of writing this report.
It is now 11 months since Council entered into the Housing Accord with the Government. Following the approval of SHA’s by Council on 17 December 2015 and 3 March 2016, officers have received requests for three new SHA’s, and an amendment to a gazetted SHA. This report seeks Council approval for two new SHAs (Beach Apartments and Tahuna Lifestyle Development), and the amendment of Ocean Lodge SHA to include an additional storey.
Attachment 1: A1548015 - Beach Rd SHA
Attachment 2: A1548048 - Tahunanui Drive SHA
Attachment 3: A1551280 - Farleigh SHA
Attachment 4: A1548018 - Ocean Lodge SHA
REPORT R5479
Elected Members' Reimbursement and Expenses Policy 2016-2019
1.1 To adopt the Elected Members’ Reimbursement and Expenses Policy for the period 1 July 2016-30 June 2019, for submission to the Remuneration Authority for approval.
2.1 The recommendation to the Remuneration Authority on the Elected Members’ Reimbursement and Expenses Policy is a matter for full Council.
4.1 Council has had a policy regarding elected members expenses for a number of years. This policy must be approved by the Remuneration Authority. The policy for the current triennium is included as Attachment 1 for reference.
4.2 Council received a letter from the Remuneration Authority dated 20 April 2016 which outlined the changes to policies for the 2016-2019 triennium expected by the Authority. A copy of the letter is included as Attachment 2.
4.3 The Remuneration Authority indicated that the policy should align with the guidelines from the Office of the Auditor General regarding controlling sensitive expenditure. These guidelines can be found here: http://www.oag.govt.nz/2007/sensitive-expenditure/
4.4 The policy works in conjunction with the Local Government Elected Members (Certain Local Authorities) Determination issued by the Remuneration Authority each financial year. The most recent determination is included as Attachment 3 for reference purposes.
4.5 Council must provide a policy to the Remuneration Authority for approval by 10 June 2016.
5.1 In the past the policy has been a simple document which has largely replicated the content of the relevant sections of the determination. As the determination is reviewed each financial year but the policy is only approved once every three years, this has occasionally resulted in the information in the policy not matching the information in the determination. To mitigate this it is now proposed for the policy to refer to the determination rather than duplicate the information.
5.2 Further changes are proposed for the policy as the Office of the Auditor General’s guidelines cover a broader area of expenses and reimbursements and suggest a higher level of transparency around processes. It is good practice to follow these guidelines and with the greater detail in the proposed policy it should be easier for both elected members and officers to apply. It also allows greater clarity for ratepayers on the benefits and reimbursements a member might receive, and how they are processed.
5.3 For clarity, the changes to the expenses for mileage and travel time are outlined in the attached letter from the Remuneration Authority along with the rationale for these changes. The communications allowance remains unchanged.
5.4 The proposed policy is formed on the basis of including the changes from the Remuneration Authority and incorporating more detail on the processes used to apply the policy. For the most part, the additional information in the policy reflects how Council was already operating.
5.5 The proposed policy is included as Attachment 4.
6.1 Council may choose to adopt the policy or amend the policy. Council can however, only amend the parts of the policy that are not dictated by the Remuneration Authority.
7.1 The decision called for in this report is required by the Remuneration Authority. It is not inconsistent with any other previous Council decision.
8.1 This decision is of low significance in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
9.1 There has been no consultation on this matter.
10.1 No consultation has been undertaken with Maori on this matter.
11.1 The proposed policy takes into account the guidelines from the Office of the Auditor General and the requirements of the Remuneration Authority, it is therefore recommended for adoption and submission to the Remuneration Authority for approval.
Attachment 1: A355751 - Elected Members Expenses Policy 2013-2016
Attachment 2: A1538389 - Remuneration Authority letter dated 20 April 2016
Attachment 3: A1547293 - Local Government Elected Members 2015-2016 Determination
Attachment 4: A1546381 - Nelson City Council Expenses Policy for Elected Members 2016-2019
REPORT R5993
1.1 To consider an application for funding from the one-off opportunities pool for travel and training.
4. Application for funding from the one-off opportunities pool
4.2 Also at the 12 November 2013 Council meeting, a funding pool of $28,975 was set aside for one-off opportunities, for which full Council approval is required. This pool applies for the current triennium.
4.3 There is currently $14,610 remaining in the pool for one-off opportunities. Council must formally approve expenditure from this pool in advance, and in line with the agreed criteria set out in Attachment 1. Priority is to be given to opportunities that are open to, and will benefit, all elected members.
4.4 Councillor Lawrey wishes to attend the Local Government New Zealand conference in Dunedin in July this year. The remit Councillor Lawrey has proposed to investigate the relocation of more government services to regional centres (supported by Council on 5 May 2016) will likely be discussed at the Annual General Meeting.
4.5 Councillor Lawrey has $1649 remaining in his budget as of May 2016. The approximate costs of flights ($558), registration ($1445) and accommodation ($570), give a total of $2573 to attend the LGNZ conference. There is a shortfall of $924.
4.6 To that end, Councillor Lawrey has requested to access approximately $924 of funding from the additional funding pool.
4.7 Council needs to consider this request and pass a resolution accordingly.
Attachment 1: A1103850 - Elected Members Travel and Training Budget Criteria 2013-2016
REPORT R5965
1.1 To consider Council’s representation at the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) 2016 Annual General Meeting (AGM).
4.1 The 29th AGM of LGNZ is to be held in Dunedin on 24 July 2016 as part of the LGNZ Conference.
4.2 As Council is a member of LGNZ, it is entitled to representation at the 2016 AGM.
4.3 The maximum number of delegates for each local authority at the AGM is determined by that local authority’s population and subscription levels. Council is entitled to be represented by three delegates at the 2016 AGM.
4.4 Please note that the number of representatives at the AGM does not affect the number of delegates able to attend the conference.
4.5 The representation of each member authority is determined by the Mayor or Chair of each local authority. Representation is made up of members which include elected members and staff of all fully financial local authorities.
4.6 The AGM is open to members only and delegates must register by 17 June 2016. The registration form is attached for information.
4.7 The Mayor and Councillor Skinner are currently booked to attend the conference, as is the Chief Executive. Councillors Barker and Fulton have indicated their interest in attending the LGNZ Conference.
4.8 Councillor Lawrey also wishes to attend as it is likely Council’s remit (in which he has an interest) will be considered at the AGM. A request for funding from the elected members’ one-off opportunity funding pool to support Councillor Lawrey’s trip is also on the Council agenda for 2 June 2016.
5.1 Representation at the AGM is made up of a presiding delegate, other delegates and observers.
5.2 Council should consider who is best to fill these roles.
Presiding delegate
5.3 A presiding delegate is the person responsible for voting on behalf of the authority at the AGM. One presiding delegate must be appointed.
5.4 It would be usual for the presiding delegate to be the Mayor. However, if the Mayor is unavailable to attend, it is proposed that another Councillor be appointed as the alternate presiding delegate.
5.5 Council may be represented by up to two other delegates. According to the LGNZ Constitution a delegate can include officers of local authorities.
5.6 If the presiding delegate is absent from the AGM, ‘other delegates’ may vote on behalf of the local authority.
5.7 Debates at the AGM can prompt the need for advice. Attendance of the Chief Executive at the delegates table to provide this function if required is good practice.
5.8 Persons attending the AGM as observers will have no speaking or voting rights and will be seated separately from the main delegation.
Remit process
5.9 The remit process was outlined in the Mayor’s Report of 24 March 2016.
5.10 The deadline for lodging remits with LGNZ is 13 June 2016.
5.11 LGNZ request obituary notices for inclusion in the AGM proceedings for the period from 19 July 2015 onwards. These should be advised in writing no later than 13 July 2016.
6.1 Council can either appoint attendees as delegates for the purposes of voting at the 2016 LGNZ AGM or not.
7.1 The decision to appoint delegates to vote at the LGNZ AGM is not inconsistent with any previous decisions of Council.
10.1 No consultation with Maori has been undertaken on this matter.
Attachment 1: A1552098 - Local Government New Zealand AGM 2016 Registration Form and Information