|
Grants
Subcommittee
22 May 2017
|
|
Part A Reports
Dunedin Biodiversity Fund -
Applications to the April 2017 Funding Round
Department: Community and Planning
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 The
April 2017 round of the Dunedin Biodiversity Fund opened on 1 April 2017 with
applications closing on 30 April 2017.
2 A
total of ten applications were received. The total funding amount that has been
requested by the applicants ($42,097.17) is more than the funding available for
the funding round ($30,000).
3 All
applications have been assessed in relation to the fund criteria and the
prioritisation criteria.
4 The
purpose of this report is to assist the Committee in considering the
applications and allocation of funding by providing an assessment of the
applications against the fund criteria and prioritisation criteria.
|
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Committee:
a) Considers the
recommendations for the allocation of the Biodiversity Fund grants; and
b) Decides on
the allocation of the grants across the applications received to the April
2017 round of the Biodiversity Fund.
|
BACKGROUND
5 The
April 2017 round of the Dunedin Biodiversity Fund opened on 1 April 2017 with
applications closing on 30 April 2017. For this round of funding, $30,000
is available for allocation plus any savings from the previous funding
round. Ten applications were received, with six involving projects
adjoining or within Areas of Significant Conservation Value (ASCV), QE II
covenants or other protected land. Full copies of the applications are
included in Attachment A.
Funding Criteria
6 purpose: “To maintain a network of viable habitats and
ecosystems in Dunedin by encouraging and supporting those landowners who are
committed to protecting, enhancing and managing indigenous biodiversity.”
7 Funding is to be allocated on a cost sharing arrangement of 50:50,
with the Council funding up to half of the project cost and the applicant
making a contribution to the costs. The maximum total grant that can be
allocated under the fund is $5,000. Projects must be aimed at:
a) conserving
or protecting indigenous biodiversity by fencing and permanently protecting
areas through covenanting; and
b) management
of indigenous biodiversity for restoration and enhancement of biodiversity
values.
8 To be eligible for funding, applications should meet the following
criteria:
· have a protective covenant registered on the title of the land (or
be entered into as part of the funding application) and/or be identified as an
ASCV on Schedule 25.4 of the Dunedin City District Plan (or be entered into as
part of the funding application);
· meet the Area of Significant Conservation Value (ASCV) criteria
within the Dunedin City District Plan;
· not be planted with exotic vegetation once protected unless provided
for in an agreed management plan;
· exclude stock from the area to be protected unless provided for in
an agreed management plan; and
· be accompanied by a management plan.
DISCUSSION
9 Table
1 in the attached document assesses the eligibility of each application in
relation to the fund criteria outlined above.
Prioritisation Criteria
10 The April 2017 funding round is over subscribed. Provision has been made within the fund
in the event that the funding requested exceeds the amount available. In
the first instance, the fund gives priority to sites identified on Schedule 25.4 of the Dunedin City District Plan as ASCV’s over
non-scheduled sites. One project involves work in an ASCV and four involve work
in a QEII covenant.
11 The following criteria are provided to enable the Committee to
prioritise applications:
a) Significance
of the site. This will include consideration of the District Plan
criteria and the National Priorities for Biodiversity Protection
b) The
sustainability of the project, that it is long-term and enduring environmental
outcomes
c) Contribution
towards achieving the vision and goals of the Dunedin City Council Biodiversity
Strategy
d) The
natural values that will be protected by the project
e) The urgency of the project.
12 To assist with the
priorities outlined above the attached document provides a brief description of
the Biodiversity Strategy and the National Priorities for Biodiversity
Protection.
Conditions of Grants
13 All successful applications will be subject to conditions, which
will form part of an agreement between the landowner and the Council. It
is noted that the Committee may impose additional conditions where considered
appropriate.
GRANT FUNDING ASSESSMENTS (Recommendations)
14 Following consideration of the fund and prioritisation criteria
recommendations are made below for the applications.
Applications
that meet the funding criteria of: projects on sites within or
adjoining an existing covenant, ASCV or other protected area
15 Applications by Orokonui Ecosanctuary, Waitati Beach Society,
Yellow-eyed Penguin Trust, David and Rose Swete Kelly and the Otago
Peninsula Biodiversity Trust involve work carried
out on ASCVs or covenanted land. It is recommended
these applications receive funding in full:
a) The
application from Orokonui Ecosanctuary 2017-01 seeks funding for the
construction of a series of baiting stations designed by the staff at Orokonui
Ecosanctuary. The applicant has previously received funding from the Biodiversity
Fund.
b) The
application from Waitati Beach Society 2017-03 seeks funding for the
revegetation of sand dune at Doctors Point with 300 flax plants. The applicant
has previously received money from the Biodiversity Fund.
c) The
application from Yellow-eyed Penguin Trust 2017-05 seeks funding for
restoration targeted at improving nesting habitat for the yellow-eyed penguins
at Okia and Otopahi Reserves. The applicant has previously received money from
the Biodiversity Fund.
d) The
application from David and Rose Swete Kelly 2017-07 involves restoration
of a wetland adjacent to Hoopers Inlet. This is the last stage of a project
that has previously received money from the Biodiversity Fund.
e) The
application from the Landscape Connections Trust 2017-08 involves the
establishment of a buffer region around the Orokonui Ecosanctuary. This will be
achieved by assisting landholders with predator trapping on their properties.
The applicant has previously received funding from the Biodiversity Fund
f) The
application from the Otago Peninsula Biodiversity Trust 2017-09 seeks
funding to carry out an intensive trapping program in possum hotspots
identified in the south east of the Otago Peninsula. The applicant has
previously received funding from the Biodiversity Fund.
Applications
that meet the funding criteria in part
16 Applications by Quarantine Island/Kamau Taurua Community, Nicola
Taylor, Pacific View Limited and Nick and Steph Scott meet the fund
criteria in part. It is recommended that funding be granted in part or
whole to these projects:
a) The
application from Quarantine Island/Kamau Taurua Community 2017-02 seeks
funding for the control of pest plant species and revegetation around the
coastal margin of the island. The applicant has previously received money from
the Biodiversity Fund for pest animal control.
b) The
application from Nicola Taylor 2017-04 seeks funding for the control of
pest plant species and the revegetation of indigenous plant species in the
Purakaunui Estuary. This work will also involve a baseline survey of
vegetation, mammalian pests, soil invertebrates and birds, and on-going
monitoring of the revegetation.
c) The
application from Pacific View Limited 2017-06 seeks funding for the
revegetation of a steep bank along the riparian margin of the Waikouaiti River.
d) The
application from Nick and Steph Scott 2017-10 seeks funding to carry out
further revegetation along a stream that runs through their property and
directly into the Karitane Estuary. The applicants have been actively improving
biodiversity on their property for many years and have previously received
funding from the Biodiversity Fund.
OPTIONS
17 No
options are presented as this is an information report for committee
consideration and decision making.
NEXT STEPS
18 The
next funding round will be advertised in April 2017.
Signatories
|
Author:
|
Garreth Kyle - Research and Monitoring
Officer
|
|
Authoriser:
|
Anna Johnson - City Development Manager
Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community
and Planning
|
Attachments
|
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a
|
Biodiversity
Grants
|
15
|
|
SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS
|
|
Fit
with purpose of Local Government
This decision relates to providing a
public service and it is considered good-quality and cost-effective.
|
|
Fit
with strategic framework
|
|
Contributes
|
Detracts
|
Not applicable
|
|
Social Wellbeing Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Economic Development Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Environment Strategy
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Arts and Culture Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
3 Waters Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Spatial Plan
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Integrated Transport Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Parks and Recreation Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Other strategic projects/policies/plans
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
|
Māori
Impact Statement
There are no known implications for
tangata whenua.
|
|
Sustainability
The outcome of the projects carried
considered in this report will contribute positively to the long-term
sustainability of natural environment of Dunedin.
|
|
LTP/Annual
Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy
There are no implications.
|
|
Financial
considerations
A total of $42,097.17 has been requested
by the applicants. There is $30,000 allocated for funding in the April 2017
round of the Biodiversity Fund. The allocation of funding is decided by the
Grants Subcommittee and will be restricted to the funding available. Funds
available for allocation have been budgeted for.
|
|
Significance
This decision is considered to be of low
significance in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement
Policy.
|
|
Engagement
– external
There has been no external engagement.
|
|
Engagement
- internal
There has been on internal engagement.
|
|
Risks:
Legal / Health and Safety etc.
There are no known risks.
|
|
Conflict
of Interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
|
|
Community
Boards
A number of the grants relate to
Community Board areas – i.e. Peninsula and Waikouaiti Coast.
|
Dunedin Biodiversity Fund -
Final Reports on Completed Projects
Department: Community and Planning
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 This
report provides a summary of the grants that have been completed since the
September 2016 funding round.
2 Eight
project reports have been received from recipients of the previous funding
rounds of the Dunedin Biodiversity Fund. The final reports are presented
to satisfy the grant conditions and outline how the projects were completed.
There is no unclaimed funding from the eight projects completed since the
September 2016 subcommittee meeting.
|
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Committee:
a) Notes the
Dunedin Biodiversity Fund – final reports on completed projects.
|
BACKGROUND
3 All
successful applicants to the Dunedin Biodiversity Fund are required to enter
into a formal agreement with the Dunedin City Council on receipt of the grant
which specifies conditions that must be met in accepting the grant. The
conditions require applicants to provide a final report on completion of the
project to satisfy release of grant monies. Six final
reports have been received since September 2016.
4 The
Dunedin Biodiversity Fund was established in August 2007 with the following
purpose: “To maintain a network of viable habitats and ecosystems in
Dunedin by encouraging and supporting those landowners who are committed to
protecting, enhancing and managing indigenous biodiversity.”
DISCUSSION
5 The
September 2015, April 2016 and September 2016 funding rounds approved
grants for the following projects that have now been completed:
a) Rose
and David Swete-Kelly received $5000 towards wetland revegetation.
b) Katie
Barns received $2347.97 towards materials for a cattle proof fence.
c) Catherin
Stewart received $5000 towards the ecological restoration of a wetland.
d) The
Otago Peninsula Biodiversity Trust received $4450 towards possum control in
their city buffer region.
e) The
Orokonui Ecosanctuary received $5000 towards arborist costs.
f) The
Quarantine Island/Kamau Taurua Community received $3000.40 towards rat control
and monitoring.
g) Mac
Robertson and Helen Chitty received $668.72 towards the purchase of trapping
equipment.
h) W
B and D M Baguley received $5000 towards the fencing of a QE II covenant.
6 The
documents received indicate that all the above projects have been successfully
completed consistent with their applications. Invoices presented for the
projects are within the funding amounts requested and granted, with none less than
the grant amount.
Unclaimed Monies
7 Following
the release of grant money for the above projects there are no unclaimed
monies.
Conclusions
8 All
projects have been undertaken consistent with the approved applications and
have contributed to the purpose of the Dunedin Biodiversity Fund and the
protection, enhancement and management of biodiversity in Dunedin.
OPTIONS
9 Not
applicable as this report is for noting.
NEXT STEPS
10 There
are no unclaimed monies to be distributed through the next funding round.
Signatories
|
Author:
|
Garreth Kyle - Research and Monitoring
Officer
|
|
Authoriser:
|
Anna Johnson - City Development Manager
Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community
and Planning
|
Attachments
There are no
attachments for this report.
|
SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS
|
|
Fit
with purpose of Local Government
This report relates to providing a public
service and it is considered good-quality and cost-effective.
Biodiversity enhancement fits with the purpose of local government.
|
|
Fit
with strategic framework
|
|
Contributes
|
Detracts
|
Not applicable
|
|
Social Wellbeing Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Economic Development Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Environment Strategy
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Arts and Culture Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
3 Waters Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Spatial Plan
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Integrated Transport Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Parks and Recreation Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Other strategic projects/policies/plans
|
☐
|
☐
|
☐
|
The biodiversity fund contributes to
biodiversity enhancement which is a goal in the environment strategy and
spatial plan.
|
|
Māori
Impact Statement
There are no specific impacts for
tangata whenua.
|
|
Sustainability
Biodiversity enhancement contributes to sustainability
goals.
|
|
LTP/Annual
Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy
There are no implications.
|
|
Financial
considerations
There are no financial implications. The
grants are within the allocated budget.
|
|
Significance
This decision is considered to be of low
significance in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement
Policy.
|
|
Engagement
– external
There has been no external engagement on
this report.
|
|
Engagement
– internal
There has been no internal engagement.
Ongoing liaison with Council’s Biodiversity Officer in Parks and
Recreation.
|
|
Risks:
Legal / Health and Safety etc.
There are no known risks.
|
|
Conflict
of Interest
There are no known conflicts of interest.
|
|
Community
Boards
There are no implications for Community
Boards, although a number of the grants are within Community Board areas
(i.e. Peninsula and Waikouaiti Coast Community Boards).
|
