Agenda of Council - 11 December 2018

Council

11 December 2018

Reports

Dunedin Urban Cycleways Programme

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The purpose of this report is to seek approval to submit the Dunedin Urban Cycleways preferred programme to NZ Transport Agency for approval.

2 Implementation of Dunedin’s Strategic Cycle Network has been ongoing since it was adopted in 2011.

3 An updated Dunedin Urban Cycleways programme has been developed using New Zealand Transport Agency’s (NZTA) Business Case approach.

4 The preferred programme prioritises development of the Tunnels Trail (Dunedin to Mosgiel via Caversham and Wingatui tunnels), improvements along routes that are a natural extension to Dunedin’s currently completed cycle network, and addresses level of service gaps on the existing cycle network.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the Dunedin Urban Cycleways programme for submission to NZ Transport Agency.

BACKGROUND

5 At the Annual Plan deliberations in 2011, Council agreed priorities for cycling. At this time the priorities were:

a) the completion of the city to Port Chalmers cycleway/walkway (NZTA),

b) the extension of the Peninsula cycleway/walkway, and

c) opening of the Caversham Tunnel for cycling/walking purposes.

6 In 2015, an Urban Cycleways Programme for Dunedin was submitted to NZTA in response to Central Government announcing further funding to accelerate urban cycleway projects. The programme was made up of projects that could be delivered by Council/NZTA during the 2015/16 – 2017/18 period. It included enhancements in South Dunedin, the SH1/oneway pair cycle lanes project, Central City Cycle Network and Harbour Circuit, education via the South Dunedin Cycling Project and monitoring.

7 The programme also included an additional ‘West Dunedin’ project linking Dunedin and Mosgiel and wider NZ Cycle Trail network, via Abbotsford, Green Island and Fairfield using two disused rail tunnels. Stage 1 of this project involved securing Wingatui tunnel access, which has also been completed.

DISCUSSION

8 A programme of Dunedin Urban Cycleways is funded in the Council’s Long Term Plan 2018-21 with an indicative 10 year budget of $20M. It is included in the Otago Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-21, and in the National Land Transport Plan 2018-21 making it eligible for national co-funding.

9 To satisfy NZTA funding requirements, an updated Dunedin Urban Cycleways programme has been developed using NZ Transport Agency’s Business Case framework.

Programme Development

10 Identification of the cycling problem in, and the benefits for, Dunedin has involved workshops and direct discussions with key stakeholders with transport, health, education and commerce perspectives.

11 The two main problems for cycling in Dunedin relate to the real and perceived road safety risk for cyclists, and the lack of a coherent, accessible network. The benefits of addressing these problems are safe, healthier travel choices, greater transport equity for those who are unable to drive or own a vehicle, independence for young people, community cohesion and resilience, and economic growth, particularly through tourism.

12 Seven programme options were initially developed to address these problems and realise these benefits.

13 Key stakeholders with an interest in cycling, and who represent cyclists in Dunedin, were asked for input into the programme(s). Spokes Dunedin and Cycling Otago highlighted a preference for the Tunnels Trail component of the ‘additional project’ to be prioritised, together with routes that are a natural extension to the currently completed network from the central city and harbour circuit, and addressing low levels of service for cyclists where the current cycle network crosses main arterial roads. Opportunities to improve cycle tourist routes and connect to Dunedin’s mountain biking assets were also favoured. This preference was developed into Programme 8.

14 The following eight programmes were evaluated:

Programme 1

(Do Minimum)

Undertake minor upgrades and improvements to support cyclists through the Council’s ongoing Maintenance Programme and alongside currently planned Low Cost/Low Risk projects.

Programme 2

(Safety Focus)

Focus on parts of the Strategic Cycle Network that have a serious crash record and undertaking discrete safety improvements to address these.

Programme 3

(Central City Continued)

Continue to focus on primary and secondary routes within Dunedin’s Central City.

Programme 4

(Existing Network Extension)

Proceed with primary routes that are a natural extension of the currently completed network.

Programme 5

(West Dunedin)

Progress the ‘additional project’ in the current urban cycleways programme.

Programme 6

(Prioritisation Continued)

Proceed with primary routes identified through earlier prioritisation work.

Programme 7

(Level of Service Gaps)

Focus on current parts of the network where there are low levels of service, particularly highlighted through previous Annual Plan submissions and public feedback.

Programme 8

(Stakeholders preference)

Prioritise the Tunnels Trail, together with routes that are a natural extension to the current cycle network and level of service gaps (intersections and crossings of main arterial roads) on the existing network.

15 Options 3 - 8 are shown on maps in Appendix A-F. These programmes focus on cycle route. Options 1 and 2 are not mapped as they are subject to assessment through maintenance and safety programmes.

16 Options were evaluated against investment objectives and expected benefits. The investment objectives related to the degree to which the programmes were likely to improve road safety for cyclists, increase the number of people cycling to work and school, improve accessibility to safe, coherent cycling routes, and increase residents’ satisfaction of the road network for cyclists. Benefits related to the degree to which the programmes were likely to create economic opportunities and provide greater transport equity and improved community coherence.

17 Options were also considered in relation to deliverability. Deliverability considerations included estimated cost, delivery time, risks and opportunities, such as working in partnership to deliver projects.

18 The problems for cycling in Dunedin and alignment to local and national strategic directions were used to weight evaluation criteria. Safety and access are key strategic priorities in the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport Funding. Safety, travel choice and accessibility are focuses in DCC’s Integrated Transport Strategy.

Preferred Programme

19 The evaluation resulted in Programme 8 being the preferred programme. This programme is the most closely aligned with the strategic priorities of the investment partners and the most likely programme to achieve benefits directly relating to the investment objectives.

20 Additionally, the programme has the most extensive coverage, increasing accessibility and opportunities for people to cycle. The programme offers the greatest delivery flexibility, with significant parts of the programme being located away from major project sites within Central Dunedin.

21 Programme 8 is likely to increase economic opportunities primarily resulting from potential future connections to the NZ Cycle Trail.

22 The preferred programme is also likely to have a significant impact on safety, primarily because it addresses known safety issues or currently perceived level of service gaps.

23 The preferred programme will focus on:

a) Getting Dunedin’s cycle network ‘spine’ in place, primarily through working in partnership with the Dunedin Tunnel’s Trust. This will maximise accessibility, travel choice and economic opportunities.

b) Addressing Levels of Service gaps. This will address road safety (real and perceived).

c) Extending the network. This will avoid future issues of poor connectivity and coherence.

24 The preferred programme will prioritise:

a) Forming the Tunnels Trail connecting Mosgiel to Green Island and Kaikorai Valley.

b) Providing a safe connection from the existing cycle network, from the central city and harbour circuit, to St Clair.

c) Increasing the level of service through North East Valley.

d) Addressing level of service gaps at key points along the existing network, including Wharf Street/Thomas Burns and Portsmouth Drive/Portobello Road.

25 Routes within the Central City Plan and Tertiary Precinct Plan project boundaries are excluded from the programme, as they will be completed as part of other major projects.

26 Delivery of the preferred programme will be complimented by wayfinding signage, trip facilities such as drinking water and cycle parking, and promotion and education interventions.

27 NZTA has indicated ongoing funding support for cycling, however the timing and level of funding support is still to be confirmed. Submission of the programme business case to NZTA is required to enable access to funding.

OPTIONS

28 Three options are put forward for consideration.

Option One – Recommended Option

29 The Council approves the preferred option, Programme 8, for submission to NZTA for funding approval. The preferred option includes:

a) Forming the Tunnels Trail connecting Mosgiel to Green Island, with a future focus on extending the connections to Kaikorai Valley and the central city.

b) Providing a safe connection from the central city and harbour circuit to St Clair.

c) Increasing the level of service through North East Valley.

d) Addressing level of service gaps at key points along the existing network, including Wharf Street/Thomas Burns and Portsmouth Drive/Portobello Road.

e) Increasing the level of service on routes that are a natural extension to the current cycle network.

Advantages

· Enables timely submission of a Programme Business Case to NZTA for funding approval to proceed to concept design, consultation and implementation.

· Likely to result in Dunedin benefiting from a higher than normal co-funding rate from NZTA.

· Responds to previous consultation and stakeholder feedback in support of cycleways development in Dunedin.

Disadvantages

· Likely to result in changes to existing road layouts which may disadvantage some road users.

Option Two – Modification of the recommended option

30 The Council modifies the preferred option and approves it for submission to NZTA for approval.

Advantages

· Likely to result in Dunedin benefiting from a higher than normal co-funding rate from New Zealand Transport Agency.

· Will provide an increased level of service for cyclists in Dunedin.

Disadvantages

· Delays submission of a Business Case to New Zealand Transport Agency for funding approval to proceed to implementation.

· May present a risk to the project budget if changes result in a higher construction estimate.

· May result in changes to existing road layouts which may disadvantage some road users.

Option Three – Status Quo

31 The Council does not approve any option.

Advantages

· Will retain the existing level of service for road users with no changes to the road network.

· Council will not need to spend its local share.

Disadvantages

· Council will not benefit from NZ Transport Agency co-funding for cycleways development.

· Does not assist in achieving the strategic objectives set out in the Government Policy Statement and the DCC Integrated Transport Strategy.

· Unlikely to improve road safety for cyclists in Dunedin.

NEXT STEPS

32 Subject to approval of a preferred option by the Council, staff will submit a Programme Business Case to NZTA for consideration and approval.

33 Subject to NZTA approval of the programme business case, staff will provide a further report on the priority project (Mosgiel to Green Island), with expected timeframes and levels of funding support.

Signatories

Author:

Susan Lilley - Senior Transportation Planner

Authoriser:

Nick Sargent - Transport Strategy Manager

Richard Saunders - Group Manager Transport

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Programme 3 (Central City Continued)	32
⇩b	Programme 4 (Existing Network Extension)	33
⇩c	Programme 5 (West Dunedin)	34
⇩d	Programme 6 (Prioritisation Continued)	35
⇩e	Programme 7 (Level of Service Gaps)	36
⇩f	Programme 8 (Stakeholders Preference)	37

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision/report/proposal relates to providing local infrastructure 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	☐	☐	☒

Dunedin Urban Cycleways delivers on a number of DCC’s strategic objectives with a particular focus on safety and travel choice within the Integrated Transport Strategy.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua. Consultation will occur during project design.

Sustainability

Making cycling safer and more attractive can contribute to sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The project is included in the Long Term Plan.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications associated with this decision. Costs for the submission of the business case will be met from existing budgets.

Significance

This decision is considered to be of low significance under the Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

Staff have engaged with key stakeholders who are interested in cycling, or represent cyclist in Dunedin, during the development of the Dunedin Urban Cycleways programme. This includes SPOKES, Cycling Otago and Tunnels Trust. There has been support for the project from these stakeholders.

Engagement - internal

Feedback has been sought from within the Transport Group regarding aspects of delivery and programme risk.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Parts of the programme are within Community Board areas. Input will be sought from the relevant Community Boards during planning and implementation phases.

Council

11 December 2018

Proposed parking changes - November 2018

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report attaches the findings of the Bylaws Subcommittee on proposed changes to parking controls.

2 Consultation was carried out in November on some proposed changes to parking controls. On 29 November the Bylaws Subcommittee considered the proposed changes and feedback received, and heard submitters.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Considers the recommendations of the Bylaws Subcommittee on proposed changes to parking.

b) Approves the changes to parking controls that are shown in the Dunedin City Council's traffic and parking controls database, 11 December 2018 update, https://tinyurl.com/DCCParkingBylaw.

c) Notes that all parking controls previously approved by Council and not shown as a change on the 11 December 2018 traffic and parking controls database, remain unchanged.

BACKGROUND

3 Making parking controls contributes to achieving the objectives of the Dunedin Integrated Transport Strategy 2013, particularly by supporting the achievement of a safe, efficient and accessible transport network for all modes. Council is also moving towards consistency and simplicity in the parking control system. This should make parking easier for people to use and understand, and be more efficient to enforce. Opportunities for commuters to change the way they travel will be supported by Council as part of new sustainable travel initiatives to be introduced over the next two year period.

4 Council maintains a GIS map database of traffic and parking controls (the database) which reflects all on-street parking controls that are implemented with markings and/or signs.

5 Parking controls are made under the Traffic and Parking Bylaw. The Bylaws Subcommittee has the delegation to consider changes to parking controls, and to make recommendations to the Council, which can approve traffic and parking controls.

6 Recommended parking changes will be periodically brought before the Bylaws Subcommittee for consideration.

DISCUSSION

7 Recommended changes to parking are shown in the database https://tinyurl.com/DCCParkingBylaw. An overview map showing the locations of the recommended changes is included as Attachment A. A list of the recommended changes is included as Attachment B.

Consultations

8 At the Council meeting on 30 October 2018, five proposed changes to parking controls were approved for public consultation. Consultation was open for 15 working days from 5 November to 12pm 23 November 2018. Information was delivered to properties in the affected areas and was sent to the Saddle Hill Community Board (the only community board with proposed changes within its boundary). The proposed changes were publicly advertised in the Otago Daily Times on Wednesday 7 and Saturday 17 November 2018, and information was available on the Council website from 5 November 2018.

9 76 responses were received. A list of feedback grouped by subject is included in Attachment C. After considering the feedback, staff recommended to the Bylaws Subcommittee that three proposals be amended (SH1, Vogel Street and Fairfield School), and two proposals be approved as advertised (Buccleugh Street and Moray Place).

SH1

10 The proposal consulted on was to change parking to $1.00 and $2.00 per hour with no time restriction (maximum $9.00 or $18.00 per day), and provide two new residents parking spaces in St David Street. The proposal area was on Great King Street/SH1 (northbound) and Cumberland Street/SH1 (southbound) between Albany Street and Dundas Street, including blocks on Union Street, St David Street, and Dundas Street. The changes responded to issues raised in a recent public survey on parking. The purpose is to try new approaches to parking management, encourage parking turnover, and better provide for visitors to the Otago Museum, Dunedin Hospital and the University of Otago.

11 45 responses were received on this proposal, 10 in support, 35 in opposition. 30 people provided specific feedback on the proposed changes. The majority of feedback related to the introduction of paid parking, concerns about no time restrictions and the need for variation in the types of parking available. Most people who provided feedback emphasised that parking in the area is in very high demand. Most people who were opposed to the introduction of paid parking said that people could not afford to pay for parking. Others did not think the proposal would change parking behaviour in the area.

12 Based on feedback received, staff recommended the following changes:

· Apply a time restriction of 180 minutes to paid parking in the block of Union Street and St David Street between SH1, and on SH1/one way in the blocks adjacent to the Otago Museum (between Union St and Albany St) to further promote turn-over of parking spaces. The 180 minute duration is long enough to support most visitors to the area and short enough to further de-incentivise those who regularly move their vehicles to avoid time restrictions.

· Restrict the charging period for $1 per hour parks in the area to 9am to 6pm Monday – Friday, since commuter parking is not prevalent in evenings and at weekends.

· Install a P5 on the right-hand side of Cumberland Street south of Dundas Street, alongside an existing NZ Post box.

Vogel Street

13 The proposal consulted on was to change some parking to $1.00 per hour with no time restriction. The changes responded to issues raised in a recent public survey on parking. The purpose is to try new approaches to parking management, encourage parking turnover, and better provide for visitors and customers to the area.

14 41 responses were received on this proposal, 10 in support, 21 in opposition, 12 neutral. 16 people provided specific feedback on the proposed changes. The feedback on this proposal was mixed. Many supported the proposal in part but were concerned that people would use the parking spaces all day if there was no time restriction. The most commonly suggested time restriction was 2 hours. Feedback emphasised that parking in the area was in high demand. Some people requested that free all-day parking be available for workers.

15 Based on feedback received, staff recommended a time restriction of P120 be applied to paid parking in the area. This will provide flexibility for visitors while promoting turnover. It will also simplify the restrictions for visitors to the area and reduce street signage.

Fairfield School: on-street parking

16 The proposal consulted on was parking changes near Fairfield School to help lower congestion, improve safety, and complement proposed speed management changes. This included provision of a “pick-up/drop-off zone” on Sickels Street and the provision of additional angled parking on Main South Road.

17 42 responses were received on this proposal, 16 in support, 12 in opposition, 14 neutral. 16 people provided specific feedback on the proposed changes. The changes on Sickels Street were generally supported, however there were safety concerns expressed about the angled parking on Main South Road.

18 Based on the feedback received, staff recommend the angled parks not be installed, and a P5s be installed instead, to enable parents and buses picking up and dropping off pupils to Fairfield School to park for only a short amount of time. A full review of parking and safety along Main South Road will be undertaken as part of the variable speed change proposals.

Buccleugh Street

19 The proposal consulted on was the removal of one parking space on a bend on Buccleugh Street to improve visibility and safety.

20 34 responses were received on this proposal, 13 in support, 5 in opposition, 16 neutral. Some people agreed there are visibility issues on at the bend. General comments were made about wider safety issues along the street, and water drainage issues.

21 Based on the feedback received, staff recommend the changes proceed as proposed. The water drainage issues have been passed on to the relevant Council department.

Moray Place

22 The proposal consulted on was changes to parking due to the redesign of the intersection of Moray Place and Great King Street associated with the bus hub. The changes result in the loss of 14 paid parking spaces but an increase by one each of taxi, mobility, P5 and bus parking. The remaining lost spaces are from construction of the kerb build out at the intersection, a new vehicle entrance to the Community House car park, and no stopping lines to allow for bus movements.

23 32 responses were received on this proposal, 11 in support, 10 in opposition, 11 neutral. Mainly general comments were received. Some people opposed loss of parking generally, and some identified the importance of short term parking for business in the area.

24 Based on the feedback received, staff recommend the changes proceed as proposed.

Minor changes

25 A number of minor changes to parking controls are also proposed. These are detailed in Attachment D and include:

· Parking changes where consultation has been carried out with affected parties, and in some instances, are already marked and signed.

· Changes to parking that have been made to enable new vehicle crossings to driveways.

· Adjustment of the database to correct a mapping error or because minor variation from the approved controls was needed to enable sensible installation of markings and signs on the road.

Clarifications

26 Suggested clarifications to the database are detailed in Attachment E. These are changes to markings or signs intended to clarify parking controls which are already in place. Changes may make existing markings or signs clearer, or reinforce existing rules (for example installation of broken yellow lines to clarify that no vehicles may stop within 6 m of an intersection under Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, or signage to provide notice of citywide controls in the Traffic and Parking Bylaw). The clarifications in Attachment H are considered necessary for access or safety, and are an exception to Council’s general approach not to mark anything that is currently enforceable under existing rules.

Bylaws Subcommittee

27 The Bylaws Subcommittee considered all feedback and heard submitters in November.

28 See Attachment F for the findings of the Bylaws Subcommittee.

29 See Attachment G for the minutes of the Bylaws Subcommittee hearings.

OPTIONS

Option One – Approve the proposed changes to the traffic and parking controls database

Advantages

· Improves safety, efficiency and access on the transport network for all modes by:

i) Enabling visitors and customers to more easily find a park near destinations such as the Otago Museum, Dunedin Hospital and University of Otago, and businesses on Vogel Street.

ii) Reducing congestion and improving safety around Fairfield School.

iii) Enabling Moray Place intersection redesign for pedestrian safety and bus movement efficiency, and providing additional parks for taxi, mobility, P5 and buses to allow for better access to the central city.

iv) Improving safety and enabling property access by removing a park on Buccleugh Street, better positioning bus stops, providing for access to new driveways, and by making existing parking controls clearer.

· May encourage people to consider transport modes other than the private vehicle, through paid parking disincentive, and better provision for active modes and public transport.

Disadvantages

· More parking spaces charged for.

· Some people may need to change their parking and travel routines.

· Alternatives to private vehicle travel are not attractive for some people.

· Some people may find it more difficult to park close to their house.

Option Two – Retain the existing traffic and parking controls without amendment

30 Do nothing and retain the existing traffic and parking controls.

Advantages

· Council resources can be allocated to other transport projects.

· People do not need to change their parking and travel routines, or pay for parking in more spaces.

Disadvantages

· Does not improve safety, efficiency and access on the transport network for all modes.

· People are not encouraged to consider transport modes other than the private vehicle.

NEXT STEPS

31 If the Council decides to approve the proposed changes to parking controls, the next step will be to implement approved changes through signs and road markings.

Signatories

Author:

Anja McAlevey - Senior Transportation Planner

Authoriser:

Nick Sargent - Transport Strategy Manager

Richard Saunders - Group Manager Transport

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Overview map of proposed changes	46
⇩b	List of proposed changes	47
⇩c	List of feedback - grouped by proposed change	49
⇩d	Minor changes	52
⇩e	Clarifications	56
⇩f	Attachment G - Subcommittee findings report_1.pdf	58
⇩g	Bylaw Subcommittee Minutes - 29 November 2018	61

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This report enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities.

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	☐	☐	☒

Establishing traffic and parking controls contributes to the vision of the Integrated Transport Strategy that “Dunedin is one of the world’s great small cities, with a safe low-carbon transport system that supports a compact city with resilient centres, inclusive and healthy communities, and national and international connectivity.” Specifically, establishing and changing traffic and parking controls contributes towards this vision by supporting the achievement of a safe, efficient and accessible transport network for all modes.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

There are no implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications, costs for implementing the proposed changes are covered by existing budgets.

Significance

proposed changes are of low significance. They are generally minor and localised, with little impact on existing levels of service, and low community interest. There is high consistency with Council’s existing policy and strategy, and low impact on Council’s finances, capacity and capability.

Engagement – external

Engagement has been undertaken with residents and Community Boards in the affected areas. Public engagement was invited in the Otago Daily Times and on Council’s website. See paragraph 9.

Engagement - internal

Transport and parking services staff have been consulted.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Community Boards with proposed changes within their boundary were notified of the proposed changes at the start of the consultation period.

Council

11 December 2018

DCC submission: proposed Regional Pest Management Plan and Biosecurity Strategy

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval of the Dunedin City Council (DCC) submission to the Otago Regional Council (ORC) on the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) and Biosecurity Strategy.

2 The submission outlines the DCC’s roles and responsibilities in relation to biodiversity, pest management and biosecurity, and provides general comments and recommendations on the proposed documents.

3 The recommendations in the DCC submission aim to enhance pest management and biosecurity outcomes for the Otago region, including Dunedin City.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves a DCC submission on the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan and Biosecurity Strategy to the Otago Regional Council.

BACKGROUND

4 Regional Pest Management Plans (RPMP) are prepared under the Biosecurity Act 1993. A RPMP is a regulatory document that sets out the roles and requirements of the ORC and land occupiers to manage specified pests. The current Pest Management Strategy for Otago expires in 2019. The proposed RPMP covers the period 2019-2029. The proposed Biosecurity Strategy supports the proposed RPMP with higher-level guidance and integration.

5 Public consultation on the ORC’s proposed RPMP and Biosecurity Strategy opened on 1 November 2018. The consultation period will close on 14 December 2018.

6 The ORC consulted key stakeholders, including the DCC, in the preparation of the proposed RPMP and Biosecurity Strategy. DCC staff provided feedback on early drafts of the proposed RPMP.

DISCUSSION

Strategic context

7 This submission aligns strongly with Te Ao Tūroa – The Natural World – Dunedin’s Environment Strategy 2016-2026. The DCC adopted Te Ao Tūroa in 2016. The Strategy takes a partnership approach to delivering on the city’s environment ambitions, with everyone working together to facilitate and secure a healthy environment now and into the future. One of the Strategy’s aspirational goals is: Dunedin has a healthy environment – taking a landscape-scale approach to protecting ecosystems and increasing indigenous biodiversity.

DCC roles and responsibilities

8 The DCC has a role and responsibility to manage indigenous habitats and to control pest plant and animal species on DCC land, in the interest of protecting ecosystems and increasing indigenous biodiversity. The DCC works alongside the legislative roles and responsibilities of the ORC and the Department of Conservation (DOC) to manage pests within the Dunedin city boundary.

9 In the context of the DCC’s responsibilities and functions, the DCC has a role in contributing to implementation of the ORC’s Regional Pest Management Plan and Biosecurity Strategy.

Key points of DCC submission

10 In general, the DCC submission supports the proposed RPMP and Biosecurity Strategy. It recommends the RPMP take a forward-looking, preventative approach to pest management in the Otago region. The DCC submission recommends the addition of several plant and animal species to the lists of organisms declared as pests in the proposed RPMP, and suggests appropriate management programmes for those pests.

11 The DCC submission also recommends the addition of Predator Free Dunedin’s Urban Link area to the list of site-led pest management programmes identified in the proposed RPMP. The addition of the Urban Link site would complement the Otago Peninsula and West Harbour-Mt. Cargill sites already included in the proposed RPMP.

OPTIONS

Option One (Recommended option)– Submit on the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan and Biosecurity Strategy

12 Approve the submission, with any suggested amendments, to the ORC on the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan and Biosecurity Strategy.

Advantages

· Enhances pest management and biosecurity outcomes for Dunedin City

· Aligns strongly with DCC strategic framework

· Supports collaboration with the ORC on shared goals and responsibilities.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Do not submit on the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan and Biosecurity Strategy

13 Do not approve the submission to the ORC on the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan and Biosecurity Strategy.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

· Missed opportunity to enhance pest management and biosecurity outcomes for Dunedin City

· Missed opportunity to support collaboration with the ORC on shared goals and responsibilities.

NEXT STEPS

14 If the Council approves the submission it will be sent to the ORC for their consideration.

Signatories

Author:

Scott Campbell - Policy Advisor

Authoriser:

Maria Ioannou - Corporate Policy Manager

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Draft DCC submission to ORC	71
⇨b	Proposed ORC Regional Pest Management Plan (Under Separate Cover)
⇨c	Proposed ORC Biosecurity Strategy (Under Separate Cover)

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities.

This decision relates to providing a regulatory function and it is considered good-quality and cost-effective.

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	☐	☐	☒

This submission has been made in line with the goals and objectives of the DCC strategic framework above.

Māori Impact Statement

We are not aware of any impacts for tangata whenua resulting from a decision to approve the DCC submission.

Sustainability

This submission aims to enhance sustainable pest management and biosecurity outcomes for Dunedin City.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

This decision has no known implications for current levels of service and/or performance measures.

Financial considerations

This decision has no known financial implications.

Significance

This decision has been assessed under the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy as being of low significance.

Engagement – external

DCC staff provided feedback on early drafts of the ORC documents.

Engagement - internal

Staff from City Development, Parks and Recreation and Corporate Policy contributed to this submission.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks associated with this decision.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The Regional Pest Management Plan and Biosecurity Strategy are of interest to the Community Boards.

Mayor	Mayor Dave Cull
Deputy Mayor	Cr Chris Staynes
Members	Cr David Benson-Pope	Cr Rachel Elder
	Cr Christine Garey	Cr Doug Hall
	Cr Aaron Hawkins	Cr Marie Laufiso
	Cr Mike Lord	Cr Damian Newell
	Cr Jim O'Malley	Cr Conrad Stedman
	Cr Lee Vandervis	Cr Andrew Whiley
	Cr Kate Wilson

General subject of the matter to be considered	Reasons for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution	Reason for Confidentiality
C1 Confirmation of the Confidential Minutes of Ordinary Council meeting - 26 November 2018 - Public Excluded	S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.	.
C2 Confirmation of the Confidential Minutes of Economic Development Committee - 20 November 2018 - Public Excluded		.
C3 Dunedin City Holdings Group Appointments and Re-appointments	S7(2)(a) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.
C4 Arts Festival - Additional Funding Request	S7(2)(i) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

	Title	Page
⇨a	Minutes of Ordinary Council meeting held on 26 November 2018 (Under Separate Cover)

	Title	Page
⇩a	Executive Leadership Team Register of Interest	17