Agenda of Council - 30 April 2019

Notice of Meeting:

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Dunedin City Council will be held on:

Date: Tuesday 30 April 2019

Time: 1.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Top Floor, Municipal Chambers,

The Octagon, Dunedin

Sue Bidrose

Chief Executive Officer

Council

PUBLIC AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

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

Senior Officer Sue Bidrose, Chief Executive Officer

Governance Support Officer Lynne Adamson

Lynne Adamson

Governance Support Officer

Telephone: 03 477 4000

Lynne.Adamson@dcc.govt.nz

www.dunedin.govt.nz

Note: Reports and recommendations contained in this agenda are not to be considered as Council policy until adopted.

Council

30 April 2019

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Opening 4

2 Public Forum 4

2.1 Public Forum - Diane Yeldon 4

2.2 Public Forum - Eleanor Doig 4

3 Apologies 4

4 Confirmation of Agenda 4

5 Declaration of Interest 5

6 Confirmation of Minutes 21

6.1 Ordinary Council meeting - 26 March 2019 21

6.2 Extraordinary Council meeting - 16 April 2019 22

Minutes of Committees

7 Finance and Council Controlled Organisations Committee - 19 March 2019 23

8 Economic Development Committee - 19 March 2019 24

9 Infrastructure Services and Networks Committee - 15 April 2019 25

Minutes of Community Boards

10 Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board - 5 February 2019 26

11 Saddle Hill Community Board - 7 February 2019 27

12 West Harbour Community Board - 30 January 2019 28

Reports

13 Extraordinary Water Connection at 261 Tomahawk Road 29

14 Waste Futures Project - Update #3 35

15 Proposed parking changes 40

16 Naming of a New Road off Irwin Logan Drive, Mosgiel 62

17 Thornly Park Classification and Naming of Recreation Reserve, 10 Windermere Drive, Mosgiel 69

18 Fairfield Tavern Reserve part proposed classification and naming to William Martin Recreation Reserve, 48 Main Road, Fairfield 77

19 ORC annual plan 2019/20 submission 85

20 Election matters 2019 - order of candidate names 91

21 Request for Support of a Remit to the LGNZ Annual General Meeting 95

Notice of Motion

22 Notice of Motion - Unitary Authority Investigations 99

23 Notice of Motion - Proposed Rule Change for LGNZ 2019 Annual General Meeting 101

Resolution to Exclude the Public 103

Council

30 April 2019

Reports

Extraordinary Water Connection at 261 Tomahawk Road

Department: 3 Waters

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report recommends the Council declines the application for an extraordinary (out of zone) water connection at 261 Tomahawk Road.

2 While feasible, an extraordinary water connection at 261 Tomahawk Road is not beneficial as it does not meet the Dunedin City Council’s strategic direction and poses the risk of setting a precedent and having a cumulative impact.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Declines the application for an extraordinary water connection at 261 Tomahawk Road.

BACKGROUND

Property history

3 The property at 261 Tomahawk Road has rural zoning, is located outside the water supply area boundary, and does not pay any water charges.

4 The neighbouring property at 257 Tomahawk Road has residential zoning, is located within the water supply area boundary, and has a connection to the DCC water supply.

5 The dwelling at 261 Tomahawk Road has reportedly been receiving water for domestic use from 257 Tomahawk Road. The owners of 257 Tomahawk Road recently removed the private plumbing enabling this supply.

6 Until February 2009, 257 and 261 Tomahawk Road were amalgamated, i.e. they were two distinct parcels of land under a single certificate of title. In 2009 an application was made to the DCC for a certificate under section 226 of the Resource Management Act (RMA), to confirm District Plan requirements were met. Granting of this certification enabled the Registrar-General of Land to issue a separate record of title for 257 Tomahawk Road.

7 The certification process only considers matters relating to the subject lot, being 257 Tomahawk Road, and not the balance lot, being 261 Tomahawk Road, so any water supply arrangement between the two properties was not considered at that time.

8 In 2016, 261 Tomahawk Road was put on the market and the advertising material stated water supply was from a good natural spring and creek. The Land Information Memorandum (LIM) indicated the property was unserviced and not entitled to reticulated servicing from the Dunedin City Council (DCC).

9 In May 2018, a land use consent application was made to establish a wedding venue at 261 Tomahawk Road, for up to 150 people (LUC-2018-219). The application stated the site was entirely self-serviced for water supply.

10 How the site was serviced was not considered critical to the use of the property as a wedding venue. The DCC Planner’s report concluded “The sale of the subject site has brought about the need for independent infrastructure to service the existing cottage and barn. This is not considered to be critical to any consideration of the application as the policy directive for any rural properties is towards being self-sufficient in water supply…”.

11 The Hearing Committee’s decision was released on 29 January 2019, and it is a condition of consent that: “Prior to operation, the applicant must demonstrate that the property is self-sufficient in terms of provision of adequate water and fire-fighting water supplies to support the activity”.

12 On 2 February 2019 the owner of 257 Tomahawk Road altered their private plumbing, ceasing supply to 261 Tomahawk Road. The owner of 261 Tomahawk Rd contacted the DCC about the lack of water, and the DCC installed a temporary water supply, via a hosepipe from another household, as there is no nearby DCC pipeline to make a temporary connection to the DCC network.

13 On 5 February 2019 the owner of 261 Tomahawk Road requested a water supply connection for both their existing domestic use, and for the new commercial venture.

Relevant legislation, policies and processes

14 It is a breach of the Water Bylaw 2011 (the Bylaw) to supply water to another party without the approval of the Council, and a prosecutable offence. It is also an offence under section 225 of the Local Government Act (2002) to take water from the supply provided to another person without having entered into an agreement to be supplied with water, and to supply water to another person who has not entered into an agreement to be supplied.

15 The Bylaw allows for existing connections outside the water scheme boundaries to be approved or declined by the Council:

Water supply areas Section 2: Where a connection has been installed or located outside these water scheme boundaries, prior to 1 April 2011, being the date of adoption of amendments to this Water Bylaw, the Council at its discretion, may approve the connection as an “Extraordinary Supply”. … If Council does not approve an Extraordinary Supply it is required to be disconnected.

16 On 26 July 2011 the Infrastructure Services Committee adopted a process to allow formalisation of existing and consideration of new out of zone connections.

17 For new applications, the feasibility and benefit to the city are considered for the following key factors:

a) Strategic

b) Cumulative Impact

c) Technical

d) Commercial

18 For formalisation of existing connections, only technical and commercial factors are considered.

19 Between 2010 and 2014 the Council considered over 30 individual applications for out of zone extraordinary water connections. The majority sought to formalise existing supplies, all of which were approved. Ten applications for new connections were also made, and two were declined.

DISCUSSION

20 This application is for formalisation of an existing connection. However, there is significant new water use proposed with the approved commercial use of the site, therefore, the factors relating to new connections are considered relevant. Each factor is considered under the headings below.

Strategic

21 A new connection at 261 Tomahawk Road is not of strategic benefit to Dunedin.

22 The District Plan Rural zone requirements seek to protect rural productivity and amenity. No connection to the DCC’s water or wastewater infrastructure is required or necessary as self-servicing is appropriate in the rural environment. Provision of a reticulated water supply can lead to intensification of development and expectations for additional services such as wastewater, street lighting or kerb and channelling, and an associated loss of rural land and amenity.

23 The District Plan zone approach ensures the DCC’s investment in infrastructure is concentrated into specific areas, enabling a cost-effective and sustainable approach to managing infrastructure while curbing inappropriate expansion. Fringe development puts unplanned pressure on existing infrastructure and diverts capacity allocated for development on appropriately zoned land.

Cumulative Impact

24 A new connection at 261 Tomahawk Road will contribute to cumulative impact.

25 Approval of an extraordinary connection for a rural zone property sets a perceived precedent that may increase expectations from other property owners for water supply. This could have a cumulative impact.

Technical

26 A new connection at 261 Tomahawk Road is technically feasible.

27 There is available capacity in the network to supply water to the property. However, the DCC would have to install a 180 metre pipeline in an unformed road reserve to enable a compliant point of supply at a cost of around $100,000 to the DCC.

Commercial

28 A new connection at 261 Tomahawk Road is able to be managed commercially.

29 The customer would be required to pay a development contribution fee for the water connection, and the cost of installing the infrastructure required to service an extraordinary connection to their property.

OPTIONS

30 The Council must determine whether to approve or decline the application for an extraordinary water connection at 261 Tomahawk Road.

Option One – Decline the application (Recommended Option)

31 Decline the application for an extraordinary water connection at 261 Tomahawk Road and provide a period of up to two months to enable the landowners to arrange an alternative water supply.

32 This decision would be made on the basis that the connection is not beneficial on strategic and cumulative grounds as detailed in the discussion section of this report.

Advantages

· Supports the DCC’s strategic objectives.

· Avoids any cumulative impacts on the water supply network.

Disadvantages

· The applicant is unlikely to be satisfied with the decision.

· The applicant will be responsible for managing their own water supply needs to their home and commercial venture.

· The decision may be considered inconsistent with previous decisions of Council.

Option Two – Approve the application

33 Approve the application for an extraordinary water connection to 261 Tomahawk Road, subject to the terms and conditions of the Water Bylaw, including that the customer will pay the required fees and charges, and will install a reduced pressure zone (RPZ) backflow prevention device.

Advantages

· The applicant will receive a reticulated drinking water supply, and supply for their commercial activities.

· The DCC will receive payment for services provided.

Disadvantages

· Inconsistent with the DCC’s strategic objectives and may result in cumulative impacts on the water supply network.

· Cost impact of $100,000 to DCC to install infrastructure to enable a connection.

NEXT STEPS

34 The applicant will be informed of the Council’s decision.

35 Should the Council decline the application, the applicant will be provided reasonable time to establish an alternative water supply (up to 2 months). Once alternative supply is established, the temporary water connection will be removed.

36 Should the Council approve the application, subject to payment of the appropriate fees and charges by the applicant, the DCC will need to undertake works to enable a compliant point of supply and establish an appropriate means of annual charging for the water connection.

37 Extraordinary out of zone connections are being considered as part of the current Bylaw review. If necessary, an interim approach will be proposed to address issues and risk while this review is underway.

38 It is noted that the adequacy of the DCC’s water services will be considered under the Water and Sanitary Services Assessment. Dunedin’s 10 Year Plan 2018-28 indicates a review of the Water and Sanitary Services Assessment is expected during the period 2018-21.

Signatories

Author:

Karen Sannazzaro - Regulation and Policy Team Leader

Authoriser:

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Tom Dyer - Group Manager 3 Waters

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision relates to providing local infrastructure.

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	☐	☐	☒

Declining the application contributes to the objectives of the 3 Waters Strategy and Spatial Plan.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

Cumulatively, allowing unplanned out of zone connections to the water supply network have long-term implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

Cumulatively, allowing unplanned out of zone connections to the water supply network may have implications on the long-term Infrastructure Strategy.

Financial considerations

There will be financial implications should a connection to 261 Tomahawk Road be approved, as the DCC will need to install around 180 metres of new water pipeline in the road reserve to enable a point of supply. This would cost approximately $100,000 to the DCC, which is unbudgeted.

Significance

The matter is considered to be low in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement.

Engagement - internal

There has been internal engagement with City Development and the Legal team.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no particular risks

Conflict of Interest

No conflicts of interest have been identified.

Community Boards

There are no known implications for Community Boards.

Council

30 April 2019

Waste Futures Project - Update #3

Department: Waste and Environmental Solutions

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The purpose of this report is to update Council on the progress of the Waste Futures project.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes the Waste Futures Project update 3 report.

BACKGROUND

2 The establishment of the Waste Futures project was reported to Council on 26 June 2018 and that report included a high-level overview of the project including project phases, governance, and reporting mechanisms. The first progress report was presented to the Infrastructure Network and Services Committee (INSCOM) on 15 October 2018, and a second progress report was included in the Waste and Environmental Solutions Quarterly Report to INSCOM on 11 February 2019.

DISCUSSION

3 Phase One of this project is now complete. This Phase focused on the Strategic Case and Programme Business Case (PBC) for a future waste and diverted materials system for Dunedin. It also included feasibility studies for operating Green Island landfill until an alternative landfill is available, and investigated the technical feasibility of a new landfill facility at the designated Smooth Hill site.

4 Phase One also included engagement with key stakeholders and was closely aligned to the completion of the 2018 waste assessment and the review of the 2013 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. The outcome reports from Phase One of the project were included in the update to INSCOM on 11 February 2019.

5 The PBC has concluded that the optimal future operating model is to transition towards a ‘circular economy’ approach. This approach best meets the Council’s investment objectives, including influence of the waste system, reduced carbon emissions, and ensuring quality of service for the people of the Dunedin area.

6 In practice, a circular economy approach would involve the Council having a greater level of influence and a more targeted approach in managing the solid waste system. This approach would focus on material streams and sources with the biggest impact with respect to waste and carbon reduction (e.g. organics and construction and demolition material from domestic, commercial and industrial sources) and diverted materials with low contamination and local (NZ) end markets. The practical detail of this approach will be developed through the Detailed Business Case (DBC) phase of the project (Waste Futures Project Phase Two).

7 The PBC phase also confirmed that Council requires secure access to a local waste disposal facility in both the short and long term.

8 The DBC phase of the project (Phase Two) has five interlinked Workstreams as outlined and updated below:

a) Workstream 1: Detailed Business Case to confirm options, costs, levels of service and procurement models for future kerbside collections and diverted materials systems. Public consultation on kerbside collections services is programmed in August / September 2019.

UPDATE: Consultancy services have been engaged via the Long-Term Engineering Support (LTES) Panel and this work is underway. A report on the kerbside collection options for consultation and overview of consultation information is scheduled to be presented to Council on 25 June 2019.

b) Workstream 2: Preserve or Extend capacity at Green Island landfill. Investigate options to preserve or extend the capacity of Green Island landfill, plus develop contingency plans for managing waste if Green Island landfill capacity is exhausted before Smooth Hill landfill is operational.

UPDATE: This work began in early March 2019 and is progressing well. A short-list of options, key actions, and implementation timeframes to preserve or extend the capacity of Green Island landfill are under evaluation and a summary report is expected to be presented to staff at the end of April 2019. A further update will be provided to the Infrastructure Services and Networks Committee.

c) Workstream 3: Enable development of Smooth Hill. Confirm the technical suitability of the Smooth Hill site for a Class 1 waste facility, including site investigations and gathering necessary information to support a consent application.

UPDATE: Consultancy services have been engaged via the LTES Panel and this work is underway and expected to be completed by March 2020.

d) Workstream 4: Service continuity. Extend the timeframes of current collection contracts to ensure service continuity.

UPDATE: Negotiations have been completed for the extension of all existing refuse and recyclables collection contracts so that the expiry of these contracts aligns with the future waste and diverted materials system.

e) Workstream 5: project management, communications and engagement

UPDATE: Preferred suppliers have been engaged.

OPTIONS

9 As this is an update report there are no options.

NEXT STEPS

10 A report on the kerbside collection options for consultation and overview of consultation information is scheduled to be presented to Council on 25 June 2019.

Signatories

Author:	Chris Henderson - Group Manager Waste and Environmental Solutions
Authoriser:	Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This report relates to providing local infrastructure that 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	☒	☐	☐

The Waste Futures 2023 Project contributes to the Environment Strategy by enabling a robust evaluation of potential options for Dunedin City Council to continue to ensure effective reduction and management of solid waste to achieve the goals set out in its Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, with appropriate regard given to the goals of the Emissions Management and Reduction Plan.

Māori Impact Statement

Iwi have been identified as a stakeholder and have been engaged during the Better Business Case options development phase.

Sustainability

The Waste Futures 2023 Project may have significant economic and environmental implications depending on the preferred option identified.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The Waste Futures 2023 Project will be publicly consulted on during 2019 and 2020.

Financial considerations

Will be reported on once further details are known.

Significance

The decision is considered low in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

External engagement has been undertaken with stakeholders including Ngai Tahu; ORC; Ministry for the Environment; Otago Chamber of Commerce; Eunomia; Stantec and Dunedin Airport for the development of potential future operating models.

Engagement - internal

Internal engagement is underway for the development of potential future operating models with the Water Futures Steering Group.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

A risk register has been developed which will allow the Project Control Group and Project Steering Group to actively manage risk associated with the Waste Futures project.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Both the current site at Green Island and proposed site at Smooth Hill are of particular interest to the Saddle Hill and Mosgiel Taieri Community Boards. They will each be consulted in the relevant parts in the process.

Council

30 April 2019

Proposed parking changes

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 On 27 March 2019 the Bylaws Subcommittee considered minor proposed changes to parking controls. This report attaches the findings of the Bylaws Subcommittee on the proposed changes and seeks a Council decision on the changes.

2 This report also outlines further proposed changes to the Council’s parking controls and seeks Council approval to release these for public consultation. The proposed changes support the achievement of a safe and efficient transport network for all modes.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the changes to parking controls that are shown in the Dunedin City Council's traffic and parking controls database, 27 March 2019 update, https://tinyurl.com/ParkingMarch2019

b) Notes that all parking controls previously approved by Council and not shown as a change on the 27 March 2019 traffic and parking controls database, remain unchanged.

c) Approves the further proposed parking changes described in this report for public consultation.

BACKGROUND

3 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.

4 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.

5 Approximately 100 changes to parking controls are currently made annually. Most arise from public requests or internal review. The vast majority are minor and respond to changes in adjacent land use. Recommended parking changes are periodically brought before the Bylaws Subcommittee and Council for consideration and approval.

6 The parking changes approved by Council on 11 December 2018 are currently being implemented.

DISCUSSION - Minor changes – March Bylaws Subcommittee

7 On 27 March the Bylaws Subcommittee considered minor proposed changes to parking controls. Recommended changes to parking are shown in the database https://tinyurl.com/ParkingMarch2019.

8 Minor parking changes proposed are detailed in Attachment A and include:

· Parking changes to improve safety, efficiency or access, where appropriate engagement has been carried out with affected parties. Many of the changes are made as a consequence of the new bus hub and resulting route changes. Redundant bus stops are proposed to be changed to a mixture of short stay parking, mobility spaces, authorised vehicles only spaces and parklets.

· Adjusting the database to correct a mapping error.

9 Suggested clarifications to the database are detailed in Attachment B and include:

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

· 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). These clarifications 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.

10 Attachment C provides the findings of the Bylaws Subcommittee and Attachment D provides the minutes of the Bylaws Subcommittee hearings.

OPTIONS – MInor changes -march bylaws subcommittee

Option One – Approve the minor proposed changes to the traffic and parking controls database (Recommended Option)

Advantages

· Improves safety, efficiency and access on the transport network:

i) Improving access in the central city for those with mobility difficulties, by installing new mobility parks, with safety and location considered in the design. Parks will be marked with solid blue infill so will be much more visible and easier to find.

ii) Providing appropriately located bus stops to enable bus services, including the bus hub and new routes. Changing parking to enable buses to safely enter and exit bus stops.

iii) Providing appropriate short stay parking to provide for surrounding land uses in the central city and near Baldwin Street.

iv) Improving safety and enabling property access by prohibiting obstructive parking, making existing parking controls clearer, and providing for access to new driveways.

· May encourage people to use public transport, through enabling better provision of this service.

· Improves the amenity value of the central city by creating parklets (small seating areas or green spaces) in some redundant bus stops. This will provide more space for people to sit, relax and enjoy the city.

Disadvantages

· Some people may be initially confused about the changed and new locations of parking in the central city - mobility spaces, P5s, authorised vehicles only spaces, taxi stands.

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

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

Advantages

· Funding associated with parking changes can be redirected elsewhere.

Disadvantages

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

· Planned bus routes will not properly operate without bus stops correctly allocated. Redundant bus stops will not be used efficiently, and safety for buses accessing bus stops will not be improved.

· Does not improve access for those with mobility difficulties, improve the amenity value of the central city, or provide more short stay parking for surrounding land uses in the central city and near Baldwin Street.

DISCUSSION - Proposed public consultations

11 After investigation, Council staff propose the following changes to parking are released for public consultation:

· TPC10 – Changes to paid parking in the Tertiary Precinct. The purpose is to try new approaches to parking management, encourage parking turnover, and better provide for visitors to the University of Otago and Otago Polytechnic.

· TPC11 - Changes to paid parking in the Vogel Street area to encourage parking turnover, and better provide for visitors and customers to the area. These changes build on parking changes approved in the area in December 2018.

12 These proposed changes will support the achievement of a safe and efficient transport network for all modes. The consultation material in attachments E and F describe the proposed changes in more detail.

13 If approved for public consultation these changes will be publicly advertised in the Otago Daily Times, on the Council website, and information will be delivered to properties in the affected areas. Fifteen working days will be given for public feedback.

14 The proposals (including any amendments made after public feedback), and the public feedback will then be considered by the Bylaws Subcommittee. Approved changes will be implemented through signs and road markings.

15 The Bylaws Subcommittee will also consider minor parking changes that either do not require public consultation, or for which sufficient consultation has already been undertaken.

OPTIONS – Proposed public consultations

Option One – Approve proposed changes for public consultation (Recommended Option)

Advantages

· Provides the opportunity to improve the safety and efficiency of the transport network.

· Improved outcome through public input.

· Transparent Council decision making process.

Disadvantages

· Public may become disengaged by ongoing and multiple consultations.

· Cost and time to Council.

Option Two – Do not approve proposed changes for public consultation

Advantages

· Public would not experience ongoing and multiple consultations.

· Reduced cost and time to Council.

Disadvantages

· Lost opportunity to improve the safety and efficiency of the transport network.

NEXT STEPS

16 If the Council approves the minor proposed changes to parking controls, the next step will be to implement approved changes through signs and road markings.

17 If approved, the further proposed parking changes will be released for public consultation.

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	Minor Changes - March Bylaws Subcommittee	48
⇩b	Clarifications - March Bylaws Subcommittee	52
⇩c	Findings report - March Bylaws Subcommittee	54
⇩d	Minutes - March Bylaws Subcommittee	56
⇩e	TPC10 - Tertiary Precinct	58
⇩f	TPC11 - Vogel Crawford Bond	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 and efficient 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 considered of low significance under the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

Engagement has been undertaken on the minor proposed changes as appropriate. If approved, public consultation for the further proposed changes will be undertaken as described in paragraphs 12 - 16.

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

There are no implications for Community Boards for the minor proposed changes. Community Boards with proposed changes for public consultation within their boundary will be notified of the proposed changes at the start of the consultation period.

Council

30 April 2019

Traffic and parking controls – minor changes

Reference: TPC-8

The following minor changes to parking are proposed. Note that nsl = no stopping lines.

Name	Details
1 Fryatt Street – install nsl	In response to a request from the business operating out of 220 Fryatt Street (Turners and Growers), 7m and 9m of nsl will be installed adjacent to two driveways at the site to allow better and safer truck and trailer access to the yard. Vehicles currently parking in these spaces obstruct safe access to entranceways.
2 Kaikorai Valley Road – install nsl	In response to a request from the business at 365 Kaikorai Rd (Meateor Foods), 7m of nsl will be installed adjacent to the driveway at 365 Kaikorai Valley Road to allow safe exit of truck and trailer units from Meateor Foods onto Kaikorai Valley Rd. Vehicles currently parking in these spaces obstruct safe exit from the driveway.
3 Strathallan Street – install nsl	In response to a request from the business at 19 Strathallan St (Port Otago), 5m nsl will be installed adjacent to the entrance to Port Otago Depot, 19 Strathallan Street to allow safe exit of truck and trailer units. Vehicles currently parking in these spaces obstruct safe exit from the driveway.
4 Lawrence Street – install nsl	In response to a request from a resident, nsl will be installed in front of 42 and 44 Lawrence Street to improve safety for two-way vehicular movement through a narrow bend in the road. A map of the parking changes has been sent to the affected properties.
5 Wakari Road – install nsl	In response to a request from a resident, nsl will be installed around the intersection of Wakari Road and Kohu Place to improve the sightlines and safety of vehicular movements. A map of the parking changes has been sent to the affected properties.
6 Forfar Street – install nsl	In response to a request from a resident, nsl will be installed in front of 215 Forfar Street (on the south side of Forfar Street near the intersection with Glenpark Avenue). This will improve the visibility and safety of vehicles exiting Glenpark Avenue (south of Forfar Street). A map of the parking changes has been sent to the affected property.

7 North Road and Calder Avenue parking

In response to a request from the business owner of Steep café, parking will be changed on North Road and Calder Avenue. This will relieve parking pressures for those wanting to visit the café, hospice, Valley Baptist Church and Baldwin Street. On Calder Avenue, 6 metres of nsl will be changed to unrestricted parking. On North Road, 11m of nsl will be changed to P10 parking. Existing P10 beside these parks will be changed to P30 parking. The business owner of Steep café was consulted about the changes and was supportive.

8 Variable parking sign – database correction

The database does not currently correctly show a variable parking space in Moray Place outside First Church. This was installed in September 2017 to give Council the ability to provide for cruise ship buses, and other special events. On a standard day the parking control is paid parking at a charge of $2.00 per hour, with a time restriction of P60. It is currently showing as paid parking on the parking database map. The database map should be corrected to include this variable parking space as is currently shown on the ground with signage.

9 St Andrew Street – provide mobility parking by Meridian Mall south entrance

There are ongoing safety and access issues with mobility taxis that pick up and drop customers at the St Andrew Street pedestrian entrance to the Meridian Mall. Wheeled pedestrians are currently using a vehicle ramp to access the footpath from the road. The following solution is proposed:

1. A dedicated pick up and drop off mobility space that can be used by mobility taxis and the general public. This will include a built out kerb which is suitable for rear mounted wheelchair hoists and which provides protection from vehicles traveling along St Andrews Street.

2. A mobility time restricted park.

3. A P5 space at the front of the mobility parking.

4. Relocate the taxi rank currently in this space to the P5 spaces currently on St Andrew Street (north side between George Street and Great King Street).

Consultation has been undertaken with mobility groups.

10 Hillside Road – move bus stop	Flood control work at the Radius Fulton care centre has resulted in the existing bus shelter having to be relocated from private land onto a wide section of footpath, further along Hillside Rd. The bus stop also needs to be moved and the parking rearranged. There is no overall loss of parking, and consultation has been undertaken with Radius Fulton (the adjoining land occupier), who are happy with the changes.
11 Corrie Street – remove nsl in bus stop	An existing, unmarked but signed, bus stop on Corrie St, above the intersection with Royal Tce, currently has nsl installed. The nsl need to be removed to enable buses to legally stop.
12 Midland Street – create bus stop	A temporary bus stop is in operation on Midland Street near the entrance to the Edgar centre, which needs to be made permanent. Consultation has been undertaken by the ORC.
13 Somerville Street - create bus stops	Two temporary bus stops are in operation on Somerville Street near Musselburgh Rise and need to be made permanent. Consultation has been undertaken by the ORC.
14 Victoria Road – relocate bus stop	At the request of ORC, a bus stop on Victoria Road (near the intersection with Freyberg Street) will be relocated away from driveways. Bus stops at driveways are becoming an issue for bus services. The restricted access to properties and difficulty for passengers to access the bus due to low kerbs means ORC would prefer to move bus stops to better suited locations whenever possible. Consultation has been undertaken by the ORC.
15 Kaikorai Valley Road – adjust bus box and install nsl	In response to a request from GoBus, changes will be made to the bus stop on Kaikorai Valley Road near the intersection with Greenock Street. This will allow buses to safely enter and exit the bus stop. Currently buses can sometimes only partially enter the bus stop, partially remaining in the live traffic lane. An unrestricted parking space behind the bus stop will be removed and the bus box moved back to the existing no stopping lines. New no stopping lines will be installed in front of the new bus box. The adjacent property owner has been notified.

Bus hub - consequential changes

The following parking changes are required as a consequence of the bus hub opening and the resulting route changes. Consultation was undertaken by the ORC on Regional Passenger Transport Plan which foreshadowed the bus hub. The bus hub itself was confirmed through a Notice of Requirement Process. In order that the bus hub can operate effectively other consequential changes are required. In some cases where appropriate, directly affected parties have been engaged, including adjoining landowners.

16 George Street, Meridian Mall frontage – move bus stop and adjust parking

Due to the bus hub and route changes the existing bus stop near the George Street/St Andrews Street intersection is no longer fit for purpose. A new bus stop (double length) is being installed near the Golden Centre frontage, replacing five paid parking spaces. The old bus stop will be replaced with three P30 unpaid parking spaces, to be installed when the bus stop is relocated.

To help mitigate the parking loss from the Meridian frontage two new P30 unpaid parking spaces are to be installed at the front of the existing bus stop opposite the Meridian Mall on George Street. This will reduce the length of the existing bus stop, but buses will still safely be able to operate.

17 Hanover Street, Meridian car park entrance – convert paid parking

At busy times queuing traffic awaiting entry into the Meridian Mall car park can block Hanover St. Converting the three paid parking spaces adjacent to the car park entrance into Variable SMART sign controlled spaces and one P5 space will help to alleviate this and help keep the adjoining intersection flowing, including buses from the bus hub.

18 Reallocate redundant bus stops

· George Street – Hanover Street to Frederick Street

· George Street – Moray Place to St Andrews Street

· George Street – The Octagon to Moray Place

· The Octagon – south west quadrant

· Princes Street – Moray Place to The Octagon

Several bus stops will be made redundant due to bus route changes. These bus stops are being reallocated to a mixture of short stay parking, mobility spaces, and no stopping areas and authorised vehicles only spaces. Parklets are planned for parts of some of the redundant bus stops. No stopping lines will need to be installed until the parklets are put in place.

Where possible, a consistent layout is planned for all the redundant bus stops. There is some variation in layout to allocate mobility and parklet spaces on the flatter sections of street.

Total spaces gained are eleven P30, seven P5s, five authorised vehicles only spaces, five mobility spaces, and five parklets.

19 Great King Street – new bus stops near the hospital

New bus routes to and from the bus hub require a new bus stop for each direction on Great King Street. The bus stops will replace nine paid parking spaces (four on the northbound side five on the southbound side) .The new stops are convenient for pedestrian access to the hospital and near an existing crossing point. Consultation has been undertaken jointly with ORC, with the University and the SDHB.

20 Hanover Street Cumberland Street intersection – reallocate redundant bus stop and install paid parking

The redundant bus stop outside the physio pool will be reallocated to four P120 paid parking spaces and three P120 time restricted mobility parking spaces. This will help to accommodate physio pool users. The paid parking will be $1 per hour in line with the surrounding parking zone fee.

21 Hanover Street – database correction

The database does not currently correctly show the parking spaces outside the old Urgent Doctors. It is currently showing as P240 unmetered on the parking database map. The map should be corrected to be paid parking with a P60 time restriction at a cost of $3 per hour as is currently shown on the ground with signage.

Council

30 April 2019

Tertiary Precinct parking – extension of $1/hr zone

Reference: TPC 10

Location: Union Street East between Union Place and Anzac Ave, Harbour Terrace between Union St and St David St, Forth St between Union St and Leithbank, Clyde St between Union St and Albany St, and Albany St between Clyde St and Hyde St

Proposal: That unrestricted parking in this area be changed to $1.00 per hour with no time restriction (maximum $9.00) Monday – Friday 9am – 6pm). Also make seven unrestricted parking spaces into residents only parking

Submissions Closing date: Subject to Council approval

Current parking and issues

DCC on-street parking in the Tertiary Precinct mainly consists of time restricted parking (P5, P10, P30, P120) and unrestricted parking. There is currently no on-street paid parking in the Tertiary Precinct beyond SH1 and the intersection Hyde St/Albany St.

In a recent DCC public survey about parking in the city, parking availability in the streets around the University and Polytechnic was one of the main issues raised. Parking occupancy is high with conflicting demands. Commuters usually want to park all day, while visitors/students want to park for shorter timeframes. The age and style of many residential properties means there is limited off-street parking for residents, who must also use on-street parking.

The University and Polytechnic have put in some measures to address parking issues. These including promoting Smart Travel (a ride sharing platform), offering a free park and ride service for staff and students permit holders, and providing new off-street paid parking.

However, casual parking is still difficult to find due to the unrestricted nature of the parking. The purpose and duration of visits to the University of Otago and Otago Polytechnic require flexible parking management, to enable people to stay as long as their visit requires.

Proposed changes – paid parking

Council officers propose to change unrestricted parking in the area to paid parking, as shown on the map below. This would result in an extension of the charging zone that currently ends at the Albany St/ Hyde St corner.

New metered parking will be charged at $1.00 per hour Monday – Friday between 9am and 6pm, with no time restriction. Implementation will take place after 1^st July 2019.

This will help to manage the high demand for commuter parking and balance the conflicting needs of long-term and short-term parking. Commuters will be deterred from parking in these streets but still can if they are willing to pay. Alternatively, they can park on one of the nearby streets that still have unrestricted parking available. Having no time restriction will enable flexibility and options for everybody. Use of the DCC’s Pay My Park app will be further promoted and enable people to top up parking meters, as required.

The effect of the changes will be monitored using the Council’s parking sensors.

Council is also looking at increasing parking fees generally. This is being done through the current Annual Plan process. If increases are implemented as proposed, fees for the proposed parking in the Tertiary Precinct would be $1.50 per hour.

Proposed changes - residents only parking

Unrestricted parking outside residential houses on Union Street near Clyde Street is proposed to be changed to residents only parking to provide for those living in the area. There is an ability to create more residents spaces upon application should more be required.

Tertiary Precinct parking

The proposed changes map only reflects those parking controls proposed to be changed – parking controls in surrounding streets are unchanged.

Council

30 April 2019

Naming of a New Road off Irwin Logan Drive, Mosgiel

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The purpose of this report is to present the options for the naming of a new road off Irwin Logan Drive, Mosgiel.

2 The road name proposed by the developer does not fully comply with the Dunedin City Council Road Naming Policy as it is named after a living person. It is, however, recommended for approval as it follows an established theme within this residential development.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves naming the new private way off Irwin Logan Drive as “Jocelyn Way”.

BACKGROUND

3 A new residential subdivision has been approved for the land at 60 Irwin Logan Drive, Mosgiel. The subdivision, named Gladstone Heights, is an extension of the Gladstone Oaks residential development.

4 Infrastructure within Stage 1 of the development has been constructed, and the developer wishes to name a new road for this stage. The new road comes off the newly constructed extension to Irwin Logan Drive which is also part of Stage 1 of the development.

DISCUSSION

5 The developer has proposed “Jocelyn Way" as their preferred name, and “McIndoe Crescent” as an alternative name.

6 The name “Jocelyn” is for a daughter of the original landowner of the development site.

7 The name “Jocelyn” does not comply with the appropriateness criteria of the Road Naming Procedure insofar as “Naming after persons living or recently deceased should be avoided”, and this person is alive.

8 However, the name “Jocelyn” follows an established theme of roads being named after living family members of the developer, which is supported within the appropriateness criteria of the Procedure.

9 There is precedent for the (then named) Infrastructure Services Committee approving names of living family members of the developer within this residential development. Specifically, at their meeting on 8 February 2012 the Committee approved a similar request to deviate from the Road Naming Policy and name a road and a walkway within the development after living family members of the developer.

10 As was noted by the Committee in 2012, it was acknowledged that the developer had a long-standing intention to use family names. Formal requests for these names had come after changes to the road naming policy in 2011, which made these names non-compliant.

11 Given the previous Committee decision to support the use of family names within the residential development, and the use of names of living family members of the developer being an established theme, the name “Jocelyn” is recommended for approval.

12 The developer has proposed the name “McIndoe Crescent” as an alternative name for the new road. The name is after Archibald McIndoe who proved to be a brilliant surgeon with the Royal Air Force during World War II, pioneering many new plastic surgery techniques.

13 The proposed name “McIndoe” is a pre-approved name on the Council’s road name register and therefore fully complies with the Road Naming Policy. There is no specific ‘appropriate locality’ listed for the name.

OPTIONS

Option One – The Council approves naming of the new road off Irwin Logan Drive as “Jocelyn Way” (Recommended Option)

Advantages

· The name follows an established road naming theme within the residential development.

· The name is proposed by the developer and complies with the Road Naming Procedure, except for being named after a living person.

Disadvantages

· The name does not comply with part of the appropriateness criteria of the Road Naming Procedure, as it is named after a living person.

Option Two – The Council approves naming of the new road off Irwin Logan Drive as “McIndoe Crescent” (Alternative Option)

Advantages

· The name is on the list of pre-approved names contained within Council’s road name register, with no specific ‘appropriate locality’ listed.

· The name is proposed by the developer as an alternative and complies with the Road Naming Policy.

Disadvantages

· The proposed name does not follow the established road naming theme within this residential development.

Option Three – The Council rejects the proposed names (Alternative Option)

Advantages

· Staff can be directed to request alternative road names from the developer that may better suit the Council’s preferences.

Disadvantages

· The road will not have a name which will inconvenience new property owners within the subdivision.

NEXT STEPS

14 If the recommended name is approved, staff will process the required documentation and advise the developer and Land Information New Zealand of the new road name.

Signatories

Author:

Grant Fisher - Transport Planner/Engineer

Authoriser:

Richard Saunders - Group Manager Transport

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Subdivision & Staging Plan - Gladstone Heights	68

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision 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	☒	☐	☐

This is an administrative function.

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 for the LTP.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications.

Significance

The significance of the decision is deemed to be low in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

There has been engagement with the developer.

Engagement - internal

There has been no internal engagement.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The site is located within the Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board area. The Community Board was consulted as part of the process.

Council

30 April 2019

Thornly Park Classification and Naming of Recreation Reserve, 10 Windermere Drive, Mosgiel

Department: Property

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 An area of land in Mosgiel has recently been subdivided and is known as the Highland Park subdivision. Part of the subdivision development included the vesting in Council of a Recreation Reserve at 10 Windermere Drive, Mosgiel.

2 The purpose of this report is to classify the reserve for recreation purposes and name it Thornly Park Recreation Reserve under Sections 16(1) and 16(10) of the Reserves Act 1977 respectively.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Resolves that under Section 16(1) of the Reserves Act 1977, the reserve at 10 Windermere Drive, Mosgiel described as 6672m² more or less being Lot 700, Deposited Plan 482487 all Computer Freehold Register 726393 be classified as Recreation Reserve.

b) Resolves to exercise the power conferred on it under Instrument of Delegation dated 12 June 2013 from the Minister of Conservation to classify the reserve at 10 Windermere Drive, Mosgiel described as 6672m² more or less being Lot 700, Deposited Plan 482487 all Computer Freehold Register 726393 be classified as Recreation Reserve.

c) Resolves that under Section 16(10) of the Reserves Act 1977, the reserve at 10 Windermere Drive, Mosgiel described as 6672m² more or less being Lot 700, Deposited Plan 482487 all Computer Freehold Register 726393 be named Thornly Park Recreation Reserve.

d) Notes that public notification is not required for the classification as under Section 16(5) of the Reserves Act 1977, the classification proposed is a condition subject to which the land was acquired for reserve purposes; There is no public notification required under the Reserves Act 1977 for the naming of reserves.

BACKGROUND

3 Attachment A provides the statement of proposal issued regarding the naming of the reserve including an aerial photograph of the land proposed to be classified as Recreation and named Thornly Park Recreation Reserve.

4 As part of the Highland Park subdivision in Mosgiel, upon the deposit of Deposited Plan 482487, Lot 700 being 10 Windermere Drive vested in Council as Recreation Reserve.

5 As part of the reserve vesting, under Section 16(1)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977 (the “Act”) the Reserve is required to be classified according to its principal or primary purpose which is recreation.

6 In addition, the developer of the subdivision, Cranbrook Properties Limited (“Cranbrook”) has formally requested that the Reserve be named Thornly Park. Cranbrook did not undertake any public consultation; however, some consultation has been actioned by Council.

DISCUSSION

Classification of the Reserve

7 Under the Act all reserves shall be classified to ensure the control, management, development, use, maintenance and preservation of the Reserve. For reserves that are vested in the Council, it is the classification of the reserve that empowers Council to undertake the day-to-day detail of management.

Naming of the Reserve

8 The names of the roads within the subdivision development by Cranbrook have Scottish themes and were sourced from Mossgiel, in the County of East Ayrshire. The road names were adopted by the Infrastructure Services Committee in 2013. Thornly Park Avenue is one of the road names and as the Recreation Reserve abuts this road Cranbrook has submitted that the name of Thornly Park is both logical and appropriate.

9 In addition, Cranbrook proposes to build two feature walls at the eastern frontage of the Recreation Reserve and offers to arrange and meet the cost of fabrication and installation of “Thornly Park” signage onto these walls. This ensures consistency with signage throughout the development. Liaison with Cranbrook would be undertaken if the recommendations are resolved.

Statutory Information and Advice

The Reserves Act 1977 and applicable Management Plan

10 The Reserve has no specific management plan therefore the Dunedin City Council's Reserve Management Plan – General Policies, March 2005 (“General Policies”) is referred to. Section 41(3) of the Act advises that Management plans should provide for and ensure the use, enjoyment, maintenance, protection and preservation and development as appropriate of the reserve for the purpose for which it is classified.

Classification

11 Section 16(1) of the Act allows for the control, management, development, use, maintenance and preservation of Reserves for their appropriate purpose.

12 Section 17 of the Act advises on reserves classified as recreation for the purpose of providing areas for the recreation and sporting activities and the physical welfare and enjoyment of the public, and for the protection of the natural environment and beauty of the countryside, with emphasis on the retention of open spaces and on outdoor recreational activities, including recreational tracks in the countryside.

13 Section 16(4) of the Act requires that before classifying any reserve under subsection (1) that public notification is required. There is an exemption under Section 16(5)(c) where the classification proposed is a condition subject to which the land was acquired for reserve purposes. For all new reserves the classification process must be followed. Accordingly, public notification is not necessary.

Naming of Reserves

14 Section 2.5 of the General Policies advises on the naming of reserves as follows:

· The Act is one of the Acts contained in the First Schedule to the Conservation Act 1987. Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 requires that the Acts should be interpreted and administered so as to give effect to the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

· Names for reserves will be established after consultation with donors, user groups, community groups in the vicinity of the reserve, the community board, iwi or hapu, and other interested parties.

15 Local Iwi, Te Runanga o Otakou, were consulted, and there were no objections to the proposed name with no traditional name or association suggested by the Runaka.

16 Public notification is not required for the naming of Reserves. However, the local community and other interested parties were notified of the proposed name and given the chance to submit their feedback. The proposal was submitted to the Saddle Hill and Mosgiel - Taieri Community Boards, who published the proposal in their local community newspapers. Two people submitted their approval of the name, and there were no objections.

17 Consultation with the New Zealand Geographic Board was initiated, and they advised that they need only be consulted in relation to naming on Crown Protected Areas. They advised that authority for naming reserves in Dunedin would fall to the Dunedin City Council.

Minister’s Delegation – Council Resolution for Classification and Naming

18 The Council is the administering body of the Reserve. As the Minister of Conservation’s delegate, the Council has a supervisory role in ensuring that the resolution of the classification of the Reserve has been arrived at in compliance with the Act.

19 In particular, the Council needs to be satisfied that:

· The status of the Reserve has been correctly identified;

· There is a statutory power to pass the resolution to classify the Reserve;

· The necessary statutory processes have been followed; and

· The decision is a reasonable one.

Resolution

20 Upon the passing of the resolution to classify the Reserve as Recreation and name it Thornly Park Recreation Reserve, a Copy of a Resolution document will be prepared for signing and sealing by Council. The Resolution will be registered against the Computer Freehold Register 726393 for Thornly Park advising of the classification and naming.

OPTIONS

21 This report identifies and assesses the following options for assessing the matter as required by section 77 of the Local Government Act 2002:

Option One – Recommended Option

22 That Council resolves to classify the Reserve for the purpose of recreation and name it Thornly Park Recreation Reserve under Sections 16(1) and 16(10) of the Act respectively.

Advantages

· The classification ensures the control, management, development, use, maintenance and preservation of the reserve for the appropriate purpose of recreation.

· The classification gives a high level of protection for managing the Reserve for recreation.

· Endorsing Thornly Park as the favoured name provides the recreation reserve with a 'sense of place' and geographic reference, in relation to the Scottish-themed subdivision it is part of.

· The consultation process shows support.

· Council complies with the requirement of the Reserves Act 1977 and its own policies for the classification and naming of reserve land.

Disadvantages

· There are no identifiable disadvantages

Option Two – Status Quo

23 That Council does not resolve to classify the Reserve for the purpose of recreation and name it Thornly Park Recreation Reserve under Sections 16(1) and 16(10) respectively.

Advantages

· No identifiable advantages

Disadvantages

· Does not ensure the control, management, development, use maintenance and preservation of the reserve for the appropriate purpose of recreation.

· Does not allow for the high level of protection afforded by the Reserves Act 1977 for managing the reserve.

· Not endorsing Thornly Park as the favoured name does not provide the recreation reserve with a ‘sense of place’ and geographic reference, in relation to the Scottish-themed subdivision it is part of.

· Consultation shows public support for the name Thornly Park Recreation Reserve.

· Council does not comply with the requirement of the Reserves Act 1977 and its own policies for the classification and naming of the reserve land.

NEXT STEPS

24 If the resolution to classify and name the Reserve is approved, Resolution documentation will be prepared for registration against Computer Freehold Register 726393.

Signatories

Author:

Maria Sleeman - Property Officer - Community and Civic

David Bainbridge - Group Manager Property Services

Authoriser:

Robert West - Group Manager Parks and Recreation

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	The statement of proposal issued regarding the naming of the reserve including an aerial photograph of the land proposed to be classified as Recreation and named Thornly Park Recreation Reserve	77

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

The decision is consistent with Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002 it 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	☐	☐	☒

The classification and identification of a recreation reserve through naming it contributes to the Connected People, Vibrant and Cohesive Communities People strategic direction of the Social Wellbeing Strategy, the outcome of the Spatial Plan by contributing to a liveable city, and the Parks and Recreation Strategy by enabling recreation activities.

Māori Impact Statement

Local iwi, Te Rūnaka o Ōtākou, were consulted as required under the Reserves Act 1977. They had no objection to the proposed name of Thornly Park.

Sustainability

The classification and naming of the reserve ensures the protection of specific management and identity for the reserve into the future.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no anticipated implications for the LTP/ Annual Plan/ Financial Strategy/ Infrastructure Strategy.

Financial considerations

There are no identifiable financial implications.

Significance

This decision is considered to have low significance with regard to Council's Significance and Engagement Policy

Engagement – external

Engagement with local iwi, NZ Geographic Board, community boards and local community was conducted, as required under the Reserves Act 1977.

Engagement - internal

Various members of the Parks and Recreation Services were consulted in the drafting of this report.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

No legal or health and safety risks identified.

Conflict of Interest

No identified conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The Saddle Hill and Mosgiel-Taieri Community Boards were consulted, and each advertised the proposal in their local community papers, and some submissions were received based on this action.

Council

30 April 2019

Fairfield Tavern Reserve part proposed classification and naming to William Martin Recreation Reserve, 48 Main Road, Fairfield

Department: Property

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 In 1989 a large area of land was vested in the Council as Local Purpose (Recreation) Reserve. The land adjoined the property on which the former Fairfield Tavern was situated and is known as the Fairfield Tavern Reserve but not formally named. The land was subsequently classified as Recreation.

2 The Fairfield Tavern was later demolished, and the land subdivided. As a result, in 2007 a small area adjoining the larger reserve was also vested in Council. This land was never classified.

3 The purpose of this report is to classify the small area of reserve for recreation purposes and name the whole area William Martin Recreation Reserve under Sections 16(1) and 16(10) of the Reserves Act 1977 respectively.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Resolves that under Section 16(1) of the Reserves Act 1977, the reserve at 48 Main Road, Fairfield described as 306 square metres more or less being Lot 2, Deposited Plan 381869, all Computer Freehold Register 384264 be classified as Local Purpose (Recreation) Reserve.

b) Resolves to exercise the power conferred on it under Instrument of Delegation dated 12 June 2013 from the Minister of Conservation to classify the reserve at 48 Main Road, Fairfield described as 306 square metres more or less being Lot 2, Deposited Plan 381869, all Computer Freehold Register 384264 be classified as Local Purpose (Recreation) Reserve.

c) Resolves that under Section 16(10) of the Reserves Act 1977, the reserve at 48 Main Road, Fairfield described as 0.7532 hectares more or less being Lot 1, Deposited Plan 20031, no registration and 306 square metres more or less being Lot 2 Deposited Plan 381869 all Computer Freehold Register 384264 be named William Martin Recreation Reserve.

BACKGROUND

4 Attachment A provides the statement of proposal issued regarding the naming of the reserve including an aerial photograph of the small area of land proposed to be classified as Recreation with the whole area named William Martin Recreation Reserve.

5 As part of the reserve vesting of the smaller parcel, under Section 16(1)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977 (the “Act”) the Reserve is required to be classified according to its principal or primary purpose which is recreation.

6 In addition, members of the Fairfield community wish to name all of the reserve William Martin Recreation Reserve. Presently the reserve is known as the Fairfield Tavern Reserve although it has never been officially named.

DISCUSSION

Classification of the Reserve

Naming of the Reserve

8 The proposal by members of the Fairfield Community to name the Reserve William Martin Reserve is in honour of the famed horticulturalist who is credited as the founding father of modern-day Fairfield. Remnants of the nursery he established are found in the Reserve. The Saddle Hill Community Board has planted three Marquis of Lothian Rhododendrons (hybrid by William Martin) at the entrance to the Reserve and, if approved, relevant signage will be placed nearby relating to the association with the reserve naming . A further three Rhododendrons have been planted within the Reserve. William Martin Recreation Reserve is deemed an appropriate name for the Reserve.

Statutory Information and Advice

The Reserves Act 1977 and applicable Management Plan

9 The Reserve has no specific management plan therefore the Dunedin City Council’s Reserve Management Plan – General Policies, March 2005 (“General Policies”) is referred to. Section 41(3) of the Act advises that Management Plans should provide for and ensure the use, enjoyment, maintenance, protection and preservation and development as appropriate of the reserve for the purpose for which it is classified.

Classification

10 Section 16(1) of the Act allows for the control, management, development, use, maintenance and preservation of Reserves for their appropriate purpose.

11 Section 17 of the Act advises on reserves classified as recreation for the purpose of providing areas for the recreation and sporting activities and the physical welfare and enjoyment of the public, and for protection of the natural environment and beauty of the countryside, with emphasis on the retention of open spaces and on outdoor recreational activities, including recreational tracks in the countryside.

12 Section 16(4) of the Act requires that before classifying any reserve under subsection (1) that public notification is required. There is an exemption under Section 16(5)(c) where the classification proposed is a condition subject to which the land was acquired for reserve purposes. For all new reserves the classification process must be followed. Accordingly, public notification is not required.

Naming of Reserves

13 Section 2.5 of the General Policies advises on the naming of reserves as follows:

· The Act is one of the Acts contained in the First Schedule to the Conservation Act 1987. Section 4 of the Conservation Act requires that the Acts should be interpreted and administered so as to give effect to the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

· Names for reserves will be established after consultation with donors, user groups, community groups in the vicinity of the reserve, the community board, iwi or hapu, and other interested parties.

14 Local Iwi, Te Runanga o Otakou, were consulted with, and there were no objections to the proposed name with no traditional name or association suggested by the Runaka.

15 Public notification is not required for the naming of Reserves. However, the local community and other interested parties were notified of the proposed name. It was published in the local Saddle Hill Community newspaper asking for submissions. Two people submitted their approval of the name, and there were no objections.

16 Consultation with the New Zealand Geographic Board was initiated, and they advised that they need only be consulted in relation to naming on Crown Protected Areas. They advised that authority for naming reserves in Dunedin would fall to the Dunedin City Council.

Minister’s Delegation – Council Resolution for Classification and Naming

17 The Council is the administering body of the Reserve. As the Minister of Conservation’s delegate, the Council has a supervisory role in ensuring that the resolution of the classification of the Reserve has been arrived at in compliance with the Act.

18 In particular, the Council needs to be satisfied that:

· The status of the Reserve has been correctly identified;

· There is a statutory power to pass the resolution to classify the Reserve;

· The necessary statutory processes have been followed; and

· The decision is a reasonable one.

Resolution

19 If the resolution to classify the small area of the reserve as Recreation is passed, a copy of the Resolution document will be prepared for signing and sealing by Council. The resolution will be registered against Computer Freehold Register 384264 advising of the classification.

20 As set out in Section 16(10) of the Act, if the resolution is passed by Council to name all the reserve William Martin Recreation Reserve, a Gazette Notice will be prepared and published recording the resolution.

OPTIONS

21 This report identifies and assesses the following practicable options for assessing the matter as required by section 77 of the Local Government Act 2002:

Option One – Recommended Option

22 That Council resolves to classify the small part of the reserve for the purpose of recreation and name the whole reserve William Martin Recreation Reserve under Sections 16(1) and 16(10) of the Act respectively.

Advantages

· The classification ensures the control, management, development, use, maintenance and preservation of the reserve for the appropriate purpose of recreation.

· The classification gives a high level of protection for managing the reserve for recreation.

· Endorsing the naming of William Martin Recreation Reserve will give the reserve a link to its origins, a 'sense of place' and geographic reference.

· The public notification process shows support.

· Council complies with the requirement of the Reserves Act 1977 and its own policies for the classification and naming of reserve land.

Disadvantages

· The sign at the reserve denoting the Fairfield Tavern Reserve will need to be changed.

Option Two – Status Quo

23 That Council does not resolve to classify the small part of the reserve for the purpose of recreation and name all the reserve William Martin Recreation Reserve under Sections 16(1) and 16(10) respectively.

Advantages

· The sign at the reserve denoting the Fairfield Tavern Reserve will not need to be changed.

Disadvantages

· Absence of a classification will not allow for the control, management, development, use, maintenance and preservation of the reserve for the appropriate purpose of recreation.

· Absence of a classification will not provide protection for managing the reserve for recreation.

· Not endorsing the naming of William Martin Recreation Reserve will not give the reserve a link to its origins, a 'sense of place' and geographic reference.

· Does not align with community wishes.

· Council does not comply with the requirement of the Reserves Act 1977 and its own policies for the classification and naming of reserve land.

NEXT STEPS

24 Following the resolution to classify the small area of reserve, a resolution will be prepared for signing by the Chief Executive Officer. A gazette notice advising of the naming will be published in the NZ Gazette. Both records will be formally registered.

Signatories

Author:

Maria Sleeman - Property Officer - Community and Civic

Authoriser:

Robert West - Group Manager Parks and Recreation

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	The statement of proposal issued regarding the naming of the small part of the reserve including an aerial photograph of all the land proposed to be classified as Recreation and named William Martin Recreation Reserve	85

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

The decision is consistent with Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002 it 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	☐	☐	☒

Māori Impact Statement

Local iwi, Te Runanga o Otakou, were consulted as required under the Reserves Act 1977. They had no objection to the proposed name of William Martin Recreation Reserve.

Sustainability

The classification and naming of the reserve ensures the protection of specific management and identity for the reserve into the future.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no anticipated implications for the LTP/ Annual Plan/ Financial Strategy/ Infrastructure Strategy.

Financial considerations

There only identifiable financial implication is the cost in replacing existing signage.

Significance

This decision is considered to have low significance with regard to Council's Significance and Engagement Policy

Engagement – external

Engagement with local iwi, NZ Geographic Board, community boards and local community was conducted, as required under the Reserves Act 1977.

Engagement - internal

Various members of the Parks and Recreation Department were consulted in the drafting of this report.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

No legal or health and safety risks identified.

Conflict of Interest

No identified conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The Saddle Hill and Mosgiel-Taieri Community Boards were consulted, and each advertised the proposal in their local community papers. Some submissions were received based on this action.

Council

30 April 2019

ORC annual plan 2019/20 submission

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval for a Dunedin City Council (DCC) submission to the Otago Regional Council (ORC) on its draft Annual Plan 2019/20.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves a DCC submission to the Otago Regional Council (ORC) on the proposed ORC Annual Plan 2019/20.

BACKGROUND

2 The ORC is seeking feedback on its draft Annual Plan 2019/20 (annual plan) by 5 May 2019. No formal consultation or hearings are being undertaken.

3 The key topics feedback is sought on are: water issues, biodiversity, climate change, and, urban development.

4 The ORC has also signalled a general rate increase that equates to around a $10-$25 extra per household, per year in Otago for a property of mid-range value. The reasons identified for the rates rise include:

a) climate change: fast-tracking South Dunedin project to gather data required to inform local council;

b) urban development strategy: putting policies in place to ensure environment flourishes alongside Otago’s growing population; and,

c) a reduced Port Otago dividend: special payments to offset rate increases have come to an end.

OPTIONS

Option One – Submit on the ORC Annual Plan 2019/20

5 Approve the DCC submission to the Otago Regional Council (ORC) on the proposed ORC annual plan.

Advantages

· Opportunity to show support and highlight pathways for collaboration with the ORC, one of the DCC’s major strategic partners.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Do not submit on the ORC Annual Plan 2019/20

6 Do not submit on the annual plan.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

· Missed opportunity to show support and highlight pathways for collaboration with the ORC, one of the DCC’s major strategic partners.

NEXT STEPS

7 If the Council approves the draft submission it will be sent to the ORC for consideration.

Signatories

Author:

Hoani Yates - Policy Advisor

Authoriser:

Maria Ioannou - Corporate Policy Manager

Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Draft Submission to the Otago Regional Council	90

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	☒	☐	☐

The draft submission has been developed in line with the goals and objectives of the strategic framework.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known specific impacts for tangata whenua resulting from a decision to approve the draft DCC submission.

Sustainability

There are no known specific impacts for sustainability resulting from a decision to approve the draft DCC submission.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no known impacts for current levels of service and/or performance measures resulting from a decision to approve the draft DCC submission.

Financial considerations

There are no known financial implications resulting from a decision to approve the draft DCC submission.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There was no external engagement required

Engagement - internal

Staff from Corporate Policy, City Planning, 3 Waters, and Transport developed the draft submission.

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 known implications for Community Boards.

Council

30 April 2019

Election matters 2019 - order of candidate names

Department: Civic

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The purpose of this report is to outline three options available for ordering candidate names on voting documents for the October 2019 election, being random, pseudo-random and alphabetical. In the past two elections, Council used random order without any issues.

2 Council is asked to approve the use of random order for ordering candidate names on voting papers for the 2019 election.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the continued use of random order for ordering candidate names on voting papers for the 2019 election.

BACKGROUND

3 The Local Electoral Act and Regulations allow the Council to make a decision on matters relating to election processes. A decision on the order of candidate names on voting documents is an option open to it under the Local Electoral Regulations 2001.

DISCUSSION

4 Regulation 31 of the Local Electoral Regulations 2001 allows the Council to decide whether the names are to be arranged on the voting documents in random order of surname, pseudo-random order, or alphabetical order. In the absence of any Council resolution approving another arrangement, the candidates' names must be arranged in alphabetical order of surname.

5 Under random order, the names of the candidates for each issue, i.e., Council and Community Boards, are shown in a different order on each voting document, utilising software which permits the names of the candidates to be printed in a different order on each paper.

6 Under pseudo-random order, the candidate names for each issue are drawn at random then placed on all voting documents in the order in which they are drawn.

7 Under alphabetical order, the names of candidates for each issue appear in alphabetical order of surname.

8 The Council adopted random order for its voting documents for the last election.

9 The matter of name-order effect on voting documents was discussed with Associate Professor Janine Hayward of the University of Otago's Department of Politics prior to the 2016 election. She commented at that time that there was general agreement among experts that there is a name-order effect on ballot papers but there was less agreement on what causes this effect and what to do about it. A study entitled "Ballot Order Positional Effects in British Local Elections, 1973-2011"^{^[1]} identified that "comparing votes cast for last and first placed candidates in the ballot order demonstrated a clear advantage to those placed first. This increased in size as both the number of seats and competing candidates increased. Those located in the top half of the ballot paper were more likely to finish in the top half of the vote order."

10 Associate Professor Hayward noted that if it is accepted from the literature that name-order effect exists, then pseudo-random order will not address this problem.

OPTIONS

11 It should be noted that regardless of which option is chosen, the candidate information booklet will still list the candidates in alphabetical order for reasons of ease of finding the candidate profiles and the cost of personalising each of the candidate information booklets.

12 There is no difference between the three options in the cost of printing the voting papers themselves.

Option One – Random Order (Preferred Option)

13 Under this arrangement, the names of the candidates for each issue, i.e., Council and Community Boards, are shown in a different order on each voting document. This was the option used at the previous election.

Advantages

· No candidates are disadvantaged by the name order effect.

Disadvantages

· In a long list of candidates, it can be difficult for voters to find the names of the candidates for whom they wish to vote.

Option Two – Pseudo Random Order

14 Under this arrangement, the candidate names for each issue are drawn at random then placed on all voting documents in the order in which they are drawn.

15 The Regulations provide that if a local authority has determined that pseudo-random order is to be used, the Electoral Officer must state, in a public notice required to be given, the date, time and place at which the order of the candidates' names will be arranged. Any person is entitled to attend while the order of the candidates' names is determined.

Advantages

· Candidates who have names later in the alphabet have an opportunity to draw a position higher in the list, but this may result in a corresponding disadvantage for other candidates.

Disadvantages

· In a long list of candidates, it can be difficult for voters to find the names of the candidates for whom they wish to vote.

· Candidates who draw a position at the top of the ballot are likely to have an advantage over those further down the list.

· It is administratively more complex (tight timeframes after the close of nominations) and more expensive with additional public notices than the other options.

Option Three – Alphabetical Order

16 The names of candidates for each issue appear in alphabetical order of surname.

Advantages

· It is easy for voters to find the names of the candidates for whom they wish to vote.

Disadvantages

· Research has shown that the name order effect provides advantages for some candidates and disadvantages for others.

NEXT STEPS

17 The order of candidate names decided upon will be used on the 2019 voting papers for the Council and Community Board elections.

Signatories

Author:	Sharon Bodeker – Deputy Electoral Officer
Authoriser:	Sue Bidrose - Chief Executive Officer

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision 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	☒	☐	☐

There are no inconsistencies with the Strategic Framework.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

There are no known impacts for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications.

Significance

This decision is considered low in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement.

Engagement - internal

There has been no internal engagement.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The order of names for Community Board elections on the voting document will also be determined by this decision.

Council

30 April 2019

Request for Support of a Remit to the LGNZ Annual General Meeting

Department: Civic

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) 2019 Annual General Meeting (AGM) is to be held on Sunday 7 July 2019, in Wellington. Proposed remits to be considered at the AGM must have formal support from five councils, or at least one zone or sector group meeting prior to being submitted.

2 The Mayor of Thames-Coromandel District Council, Sandra Goudie, is seeking the support of five councils for a proposed remit as follows:

“That LGNZ request the Government to amend the Camping - Ground Regulations to allow councils to approve remote camp facilities on private property, subject to any such conditions as deemed required by a council, including the condition that any approved campground is x distance away from an existing campground, unless the existing campground operator agrees to waive this condition in writing.”

3 A copy of a report on the proposed remit is at Attachment A.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Decides if it will provide formal support for the proposed remit.

BACKGROUND

4 LGNZ’s Remits Screening Policy requires that the following criteria must be met:

a) Remits must be relevant to local government as a whole rather than exclusively relevant to a single zone or sector group or an individual council;

b) Remits should be of a major policy nature (constitutional and substantive policy) rather than matters that can be dealt with by administrative action;

c) Remits must have formal support from at least one zone or sector group meeting, or five councils, prior to being submitted, in order for the proposer to assess support and achieve clarity about the ambit of the proposal;

d) Remits defeated at the AGM in two successive years will not be permitted to go forward;

e) Remits will be assessed to determine whether the matters raised can be actioned by alternative, and equally valid, means to achieve the desired outcome;

f) Remits that deal with issues or matters currently being actioned by LGNZ may also be declined on the grounds that the matters raised are ‘in hand’. This does not included remits that deal with the same issue but from a different point of view; and

NEXT STEPS

5 If Council decides to support the proposed remit, Mayor Goudie will be notified of the decision.

Signatories

Author:	Sharon Bodeker - Team Leader Civic
Authoriser:	Sue Bidrose - Chief Executive Officer

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Proposed Remit from Thames Coromandel District Council	99

Council

30 April 2019

Resolution to Exclude the Public

That the Council excludes the public from the following part of the proceedings of this meeting (pursuant to the provisions of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987) namely:

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 March 2019 - Public Excluded	S7(2)(a) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person. S7(2)(b)(ii) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information. S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. 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). S7(2)(g) The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege.	.
C2 Confirmation of the Confidential Minutes of Extraordinary Council meeting - 16 April 2019 - Public Excluded	S7(2)(b)(ii) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information. S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. 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).	.
C3 Confirmation of the Confidential Minutes of Economic Development Committee - 19 March 2019 - Public Excluded		.
C4 DCC Branding	S7(2)(j) The withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage.	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.	To protect the trade mark until approved..
C5 Centre of Digital Excellence	S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. 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.

This resolution is made in reliance on Section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, and the particular interest or interests protected by Section 6 or Section 7 of that Act, or Section 6 or Section 7 or Section 9 of the Official Information Act 1982, as the case may require, which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public are as shown above after each item.

[1] "Ballot Order Positional Effects in British Local Elections, 1973-2011", Richard Webber, Colin Rallings, Galina Borisyuk and Michael Thrasher, Oxford University Press, 2012

Name	Details
22 Vogel Street – install nsl	In response to a request from the Council’s parking enforcement team, 3m of nsl will be installed between driveways at 297 Vogel Street. This will ensure vehicles do not park in the space between driveways, impeding property access. Clarification of Rule 6.9 Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
23 Leith Street – remove nsl over driveway	In response to a request from the business owner at 120 Leith Street, 9m of nsl will be removed from across the driveway frontage.
24 Law Street - provide for new vehicle crossing	5m of nsl will be installed between driveways outside 17 Law Street to enable a new vehicle crossing.
25 Mitchell Avenue - provide for new vehicle crossing	3m and 5m of nsl have been installed between driveways to enable a new vehicle crossing at 12 Mitchell Avenue.
26 Queens Drive – install nsl	In response to a request from the resident at 34 Queens Dr 3m of nsl will be installed between a driveway and a fire hydrant outside 34 Queens Drive. This will ensure vehicles do not park in this space, impeding property access and obstructing access to the fire hydrant. Clarification of Rule 6.9 Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
27 Elm Row - provide for new vehicle crossing	Four residents only parking spaces have been removed to allow for a new driveway outside 19 Elm Row. The residents only parks were not allocated, and there is no current requests for residents only parks in the area.
28 Macandrew Rd- install nsl	In response to a request from a resident, one nsl will be installed at the driveways to 133 A-E (driveway used by 5 properties). Nsl will be used to tie in with existing markings in the area (as opposed to an L bar). Clarification of Rule 6.9 Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
29 Ravensbourne Rd – install nsl	In reponse to safety concerns, 18 m of nsl have been installed near location. This will deter people from parking in an area where they cannot legally do so without parking on the footpath or encroaching into the traffic lane. Letters have been sent to adjacent land occupiers advising them of the changes.

	Title	Page
⇨a	Minutes of Ordinary Council meeting held on 26 March 2019 (Under Separate Cover)