Agenda of Council - 24 00 2020

Council

24 February 2020

Reports

Application for extraordinary water supply - 64 Scroggs Hill Road

Department: 3 Waters and City Development

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks the Council’s decision on an application for an ‘extraordinary’ water supply for 64 Scroggs Hill Road, Brighton.

2 Under the terms of the Dunedin City Council Water Bylaw 2011 (the Bylaw), 64 Scroggs Hill Road is not automatically entitled to a reticulated water supply because it is outside of the defined water supply area.

3 The analysis in this report found that providing an extraordinary water supply connection to 64 Scroggs Hill Road would not be consistent with the objectives of Dunedin’s strategic framework, the Bylaw and the DCC’s Second Generation District Plan (2GP), would have several technical disadvantages, and would risk setting a precedent and having a cumulative impact.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Declines the application for an ‘extraordinary’ water supply for 64 Scroggs Hill Road.

BACKGROUND

Water Bylaw 2011 and Council policies and processes

4 The Bylaw is the key regulatory tool for managing Dunedin’s water supply system. The Bylaw provides for reticulated water supply to properties within defined water supply areas, or beyond those areas to properties with residential zoning (where supply is possible). Clause 2 of the Bylaw provides for the Council, at its discretion and under certain conditions, to approve an existing or new water supply connection for a property outside the boundary of the water supply area as an ‘extraordinary supply’.

5 On 26 July 2011, after the Council adopted the Bylaw, the Infrastructure Services Committee (ISCOM) adopted a process for considering applications for new extraordinary (out of water supply area) water supply connections and to formalise existing extraordinary (out of water supply area) water connections to properties that had not previously been paying for water services. For new applications, the feasibility and benefit to the city must be considered in terms of the following key factors:

a) Strategic;

b) Technical;

c) Cumulative impact; and

d) Commercial.

Historical approaches

6 Water supply arrangements across Dunedin vary, due in part to different historical approaches to water infrastructure management by the DCC and previous local authorities within the present-day territorial boundaries of the DCC (for example, the Silverpeaks County Council). Some properties located outside of the water supply areas defined by the Bylaw have long-standing water supplies that were established by agreement with the relevant local authority at the time and subsequently paid for in accordance with the terms of that agreement.

Council decisions on new extraordinary water supply connections since 2011

7 Since 2011, the Council has considered nine applications for new extraordinary (out of water supply area) water connections. Several applications sought multiple connections. Out of 15 connections requested by applicants, the Council declined seven and approved eight.

8 Eight of the nine applications were made during the period 2011 to 2014. More recently, in October 2019, the Council declined an application to extend the water supply area boundary and provide an ‘extraordinary’ water supply to a property on Portobello Road. The staff assessment of the application found that approving the application would not meet the DCC’s strategic direction, would risk setting a precedent and having a cumulative impact, would not be technically feasible, and would not be commercially feasible and beneficial for Dunedin or the DCC.

Property and application

9 The property at 64 Scroggs Hill Road is zoned Rural Residential 1 under the 2GP, has an area of 2.0019ha and an existing dwelling. The 2GP does not provide for any additional residential units to be built on sites of this size when zoned Rural Residential 1.

10 The property is located adjacent to, but outside, the boundary of the water supply area defined in the Bylaw. The property does not receive a water supply from the DCC and is also self-servicing for wastewater treatment and disposal. The differential category ‘lifestyle’ is applied to the property for rating purposes. The DCC does not charge the property any rates for water supply or drainage.

11 A map showing the property, the boundary of the water supply area and water supply infrastructure is attached to this report as Attachment A. As shown on the map, a 200mm diameter water main for transporting bulk water (distribution main) runs past the property boundary in the road reserve. The map at Attachment B shows the 2GP zoning of the property.

12 On 22 November 2019, the property owner applied to the DCC for an extraordinary water supply for domestic purposes at 64 Scroggs Hill Road. The application outlines the current water supply system at 64 Scroggs Hill Road, which involves rainwater collection, a 25000-litre storage tank and an electric pump. Disadvantages of this system identified in the application include reliance on electricity, the cost of maintaining the system, and public health concerns arising from issues with quantity and quality of the water supplied by the private system.

Neighbouring properties

13 There are four existing extraordinary water supplies fed from direct connections to the distribution main in Scroggs Hill Road. These extraordinary supplies service properties with rural and rural residential zoning that are located outside of the water supply area. These connections were established before the introduction of the Bylaw.

14 In 2019, the DCC granted resource consent to subdivide 24B and 54 Scroggs Hill Road into 26 residential lots and roading (SUB-2019-84). Some of the lots will share boundaries with 64 Scroggs Hill Road. The subdivision is zoned Township and Settlement under the 2GP and is located within the boundary of the water supply area. Each residential lot will be entitled to a reticulated water supply.

DISCUSSION

15 This application is for a new extraordinary water supply connection to a rural residential property located outside of (but bordering) the water supply area defined in the Bylaw. The analysis in this report applies the four key factors considered for new connections.

Strategic considerations

16 Providing a new extraordinary connection for a rural residential property that would not otherwise be entitled to a reticulated water supply from the DCC does not align with the objectives of Dunedin’s strategic framework as outlined below.

Spatial Plan and 2GP

17 Ad-hoc connections of individual properties to reticulated services do not align with the overall urban form objective of Dunedin’s Spatial Plan or the zoning intent of the 2GP. The overall urban form objective of the Spatial Plan is a “compact city with resilient townships”. The 2GP endeavours to protect the environment while providing for the social, cultural and economic well-being of current and future generations. Land use is controlled through zoning. Zoning identifies suitable locations for different types of activities to be established subject to meeting appropriate performance standards, including infrastructure requirements.

18 Rural and Rural Residential zone requirements seek to protect rural productivity and amenity. No connection to the DCC’s water or wastewater infrastructure is required for properties in these zones as self-servicing is considered appropriate in the rural environment. In general, provision of a reticulated water supply can lead to intensification of development and expectations for additional services.

19 The zoning approach ensures the DCC’s investment in infrastructure is concentrated in 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.

20 Variation 2 to the 2GP was initiated by Council on 12 February 2019. Variation 2 is focused on the provision of additional urban development capacity areas (serviced land) to meet Dunedin’s future housing needs. This will require an infrastructure capacity assessment and the identification of future infrastructure works to enable urban development. Any expansion of residential zoned land, which would require the water supply area boundary to be extended will be considered through this process.

3 Waters Strategy

21 The 3 Waters Strategic Direction Statement 2010-2060 (3 Waters Strategy) identifies seven key strategic priorities, including: “We will meet the water needs of the city for the next 50 years from existing water sources.” The ability of the DCC to achieve this priority was based on forecast demand within the boundaries of the water supply areas defined in the Bylaw. New extraordinary water supplies are unanticipated and, cumulatively, may compromise the DCC’s ability to meet the city’s water needs from existing sources.

Other strategic considerations

22 A holistic, city-wide assessment of where the DCC might expand provision of 3 Waters services is the fairest and most appropriate way to address new requests for servicing, and supports the DCC to deliver services to communities in a cost-effective, sustainable and coordinated manner.

23 Scoping work has begun on a water and sanitary services assessment, the purpose of which is to strategically assess the adequacy of current servicing arrangements across the entire city. The assessment will include consideration of Government proposals emerging from water-related reform initiatives. In addition, extraordinary connections to properties outside the boundary of the water supply area are being considered as part of the review of the Water Bylaw 2011.

Technical considerations

24 Providing an extraordinary water supply to 64 Scroggs Hill Road would have technical disadvantages.

Availability of appropriate infrastructure to establish a connection

25 Water supply connections for individual properties are typically made to a DCC reticulation main located in road reserve adjacent to the property boundary. As 64 Scroggs Hill Road is outside of the water supply area, there is no DCC reticulation main adjacent to the property boundary.

26 However, a 200mm diameter distribution main passes the property boundary in Scroggs Hill Road. This distribution main supplies treated water to a reservoir and reticulation networks in Brighton.

27 Distribution mains are designed to transfer bulk water to reservoirs and reticulation systems and, as such, are assets of high strategic importance within the water supply system. Direct connections to distribution mains are not recommended as they place restraints on the DCC’s ability to operate the distribution main effectively.

28 It is acknowledged there are historical connections to the distribution main in Scroggs Hill Road. These connections service properties both inside the water supply area boundary and outside the water supply area boundary. However, it is not good practice to allow direct connections to strategic infrastructure. If the Council decided to provide an extraordinary water supply to 64 Scroggs Hill Road, the DCC would need to install approximately 50 metres of new reticulation main in Scroggs Hill Road.

Water pressure

29 Based on a hydraulic modelling simulation, the property at 64 Scroggs Hill Road cannot be supplied with water at pressure within the DCC’s target range. While the water pressure could be boosted through use of a private water pump, providing a water supply to the property would have impacts on the DCC’s ability to provide water pressure within the target range to other properties in the neighbourhood that are automatically entitled to a water supply under the Bylaw.

30 The DCC planner’s report on the subdivision consent application for 24B and 54 Scroggs Hill Road noted that the DCC would not be able to supply all the proposed lots with water pressure within the DCC’s target range, and that a water booster pump may be required in the design of the development.

Impact on on-site wastewater treatment and disposal system

31 Introduction of a reticulated water supply may increase wastewater volumes, with the potential to have adverse effects on the performance of a property’s on-site wastewater treatment and disposal system (septic tank and effluent disposal field).

32 Any changes to the on-site wastewater treatment and disposal system at 64 Scroggs Hill Road to accommodate higher wastewater volumes would be subject to relevant building and environmental regulations.

33 The DCC does not have a specific policy on the provision of reticulated water supply to properties serviced by private, on-site wastewater systems. The DCC supplies water to some parts of Dunedin, including Outram and Waitati, where it does not provide a wastewater service.

Cumulative impact

34 Providing a new extraordinary water supply connection to a property in a rural or rural residential zone sets a perceived precedent that may increase expectations from other property owners on Dunedin’s rural-urban fringes for water supply. Providing unplanned water supply connections on a case-by-case basis could have a cumulative impact, including on the DCC’s ability to supply the city from existing water sources (in accordance with objectives of the 3 Waters Strategy) and to supply existing water customers with water pressure within the DCC’s target range.

35 Making servicing decisions on a case-by-case basis is not a responsible approach to managing infrastructure. The fairest and most appropriate way to address new requests for servicing and associated infrastructure requirements is through a holistic, city-wide assessment of servicing arrangements that considers the needs of all Dunedin residents.

Commercial considerations

36 If the Council decided to provide an extraordinary water supply to 64 Scroggs Hill Road, the New Reticulated Utility Services (Water, Wastewater or Stormwater) Policy 2010 (Attachment C) would require the applicant to contribute part or all of the capital cost of installing new reticulation infrastructure necessary to provide a supply. Providing an extraordinary water supply to 64 Scroggs Hill Road would enable the DCC to collect revenue through volumetric charging and associated meter fees.

37 However, the cumulative impact of providing unplanned water supply connections on a case-by-case basis could lead to unbudgeted costs for the DCC in the long-term if, for example, network upgrades were required to maintain water pressure to nearby properties that are automatically entitled to a water supply.

OPTIONS

38 The Council must determine whether to approve or decline the application to provide an ‘extraordinary’ water supply to 64 Scroggs Hill Road.

Option One – Decline the application (Recommended Option)

39 Decline the application for an ‘extraordinary’ water supply connection for 64 Scroggs Hill Road, as providing an ‘extraordinary’ water supply connection to 64 Scroggs Hill Road would not be consistent with Dunedin’s strategic objectives, the Water Bylaw 2011 and the 2GP, would have technical disadvantages, and would risk setting a precedent and having a cumulative impact.

40 Continue to consider expansion of servicing through holistic, city-wide processes such as 2GP processes, a water and sanitary services assessment and review of the Water Bylaw 2011.

Advantages

· Supports Dunedin’s strategic objectives and a cost-effective, sustainable and coordinated approach to infrastructure management.

· Consistent with the intent of the Water Bylaw 2011 and the 2GP.

· Avoids contributing to cumulative impacts on Dunedin’s water supply system.

· Servicing needs are considered on a holistic, city-wide basis, in line with Dunedin’s strategic objectives and a cost-effective, sustainable and coordinated approach to infrastructure management.

Disadvantages

· The applicant is unlikely to be satisfied with the decision, as they will continue to be responsible for managing the water supply needs for their home.

· The decision may be considered inconsistent with previous decisions to approve new ‘extraordinary’ water supply connections.

Option Two – Approve the application

41 Approve provision of an extraordinary water supply to 64 Scroggs Hill Road, subject to:

a) payment (by the applicant) of a capital contribution towards the installation of new reticulation infrastructure in Scroggs Hill Road, as determined by 3 Waters staff through the New Reticulated Utility Services (Water, Wastewater or Stormwater) Policy 2010;

b) the terms and conditions of the Water Bylaw 2011, including that the supply will be metered and subject to volumetric charging;

c) payment (by the applicant) of other required fees and charges, including a network contribution fee of $5000; and

d) installation (by the applicant) of a reduced pressure zone (RPZ) backflow prevention device.

Advantages

· The applicant will be satisfied with the decision, as they will receive a reticulated water supply for use at their home.

Disadvantages

· Inconsistent with a holistic, city-wide approach to considering servicing needs, which is the fairest and most appropriate way to evaluate servicing issues.

· Inconsistent with Dunedin’s strategic objectives.

· Inconsistent with a cost-effective, sustainable and coordinated approach to infrastructure management.

· Inconsistent with the intent of the Water Bylaw 2011 and the 2GP.

· Sets a perceived precedent that may increase expectations from other property owners on Dunedin’s rural-urban fringes for water supply.

· Requires establishing a new connection to a distribution main, which is not recommended due to technical disadvantages in terms of infrastructure operability.

· Property cannot be supplied with water pressure within the DCC’s target range.

· Provision of a water supply to this property would have impacts on DCC’s ability to provide water pressure within the target range to other properties in the neighbourhood that are entitled to a water supply under the Bylaw.

· Contributes to cumulative impacts on the water supply network and may contribute to unbudgeted costs to the DCC in the long-term.

NEXT STEPS

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

43 Should the Council approve the application (Option Two), the DCC will work with the applicant to arrange for the property to be connected to the DCC water supply system (subject to the conditions mentioned above).

Signatories

Author:

Scott Campbell - Policy Analyst

Paul Freeland - Senior Planner

Authoriser:

Tom Dyer - Group Manager 3 Waters

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	64 Scroggs Hill Road - water supply area boundary and water supply infrastructure	39
⇩b	64 Scroggs Hill Road - Second Generation District Plan (2GP) zoning	41
⇩c	New Reticulated Utility Services (Water, Wastewater or Stormwater) Policy 2010	43

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

Declining the application promotes the economic, social and environmental well-being of communities in the present and for the future by supporting a cost-effective, sustainable and coordinated approach to infrastructure management, the objectives of Dunedin’s 3 Waters Strategy and Spatial Plan, and the zoning intent of the Second Generation District Plan (2GP).

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 is consistent with the objectives of the strategic framework above, including the 3 Waters Strategy and Spatial Plan, the Water Bylaw 2011 and the 2GP.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no identified impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

Declining the application supports the long-term sustainability of Dunedin’s water supply system.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

Declining the application has no implications for the Infrastructure Strategy, Annual Plan and 10 year plan.

Financial considerations

Declining the application has no implications for existing budgets.

Significance

The significance of 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

3 Waters and City Development staff contributed to the preparation of this report.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

No conflicts of interest have been identified.

Community Boards

The property at 64 Scroggs Hill Road is in the Saddle Hill Community Board area and staff have discussed the application with the Board Chair.

Council

24 February 2020

Application for extraordinary water supply - 16 Friends Hill Road

Department: 3 Waters and City Development

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks the Council’s decision on an application for an ‘extraordinary’ water supply for 16 Friends Hill Road, Wingatui.

2 Under the terms of the Dunedin City Council Water Bylaw 2011 (the Bylaw), 16 Friends Hill Road is not automatically entitled to a reticulated water supply because it is outside of the defined water supply area.

3 The analysis in this report found that providing an extraordinary water supply connection to 16 Friends Hill Road would not be consistent with the objectives of Dunedin’s strategic framework, the Bylaw and the DCC’s Second Generation District Plan (2GP), would have several technical disadvantages, and would risk setting a precedent and having a cumulative impact.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Declines the application for an ‘extraordinary’ water supply for 16 Friends Hill Road

BACKGROUND

Water Bylaw 2011 and Council policies and processes

a) Strategic;

b) Technical;

c) Cumulative impact; and

d) Commercial.

Historical approaches

Council decisions on new extraordinary water supply connections since 2011

Property and application

9 The property at 16 Friends Hill Road is zoned Hill Slopes Rural under the 2GP, has an area of 4.9711ha and an existing dwelling. The 2GP does not provide for any additional residential units to be built on sites of this size when zoned Hill Slopes Rural.

10 The property is located adjacent to, but outside, the boundary of the water supply area defined in the Bylaw. The property does not receive a water supply from the DCC and is self-servicing for wastewater treatment and disposal.

11 A map showing the property and the boundary of the water supply area is attached to this report as Attachment A. As shown on the map, two large water mains for transporting bulk water (distribution mains) run past the property boundary in the road reserve. The map at Attachment B shows the 2GP zoning of the property.

12 On 22 December 2017, the property owner applied for a land use consent to operate a commercial residential activity from the existing building on the property, to accommodate a maximum of 14 guests. The application stated, “The increase in bedrooms and resulting guest numbers will be catered for within the current footprint of the existing building… and by the existing infrastructure provided to the property plus the existing facilities within the property”. However, the application also noted “the applicant intends to apply to connect to the city water supply through its contractor.”

13 On 16 February 2018, the DCC granted the land use consent (LUC-2018-1). The consent decision certificate included an advice note stating that no reticulated water supply is available to the proposed development. It also referred to the process ISCOM adopted in 2011 for considering provision of ‘extraordinary’ water supplies to properties not provided for in the Bylaw.

14 The property is currently run as a bed and breakfast consisting eight bedrooms, eight bathrooms and two kitchen units, staffed by a live-in manager. The differential category ‘commercial’ is applied to the property for rating purposes. The DCC does not charge the property any rates for water supply or drainage.

15 On 27 November 2019, a representative of the property owner applied to the DCC for an extraordinary water supply for 16 Friends Hill Road. The application states that the property’s current water supply arrangements – a combination of rainwater collection and a bore – are unable to supply the bed and breakfast with sufficient potable water on an ongoing basis.

Neighbouring properties

16 Two other Friends Hill Road properties that are outside the boundary of the water supply area have water supply connections. One was approved by the Taieri County Council in 1977 and the other by the DCC in 1999. These connections are to a 225mm distribution main located in Friends Hill Road.

DISCUSSION

17 This application is for a new extraordinary water supply connection to a rural property located outside of (but bordering) the water supply area defined in the Bylaw. The analysis in this report applies the four key factors considered for new connections.

Strategic considerations

18 Providing a new extraordinary connection for a rural property that would not otherwise be entitled to a reticulated water supply from the DCC does not align with the objectives of Dunedin’s strategic framework.

Spatial Plan and 2GP

19 Ad-hoc connections of individual properties to reticulated services do not align with the overall urban form objective of Dunedin’s Spatial Plan or the zoning intent of the 2GP. The overall urban form objective of the Spatial Plan is a “compact city with resilient townships”. The 2GP endeavours to protect the environment while providing for the social, cultural and economic well-being of current and future generations. Land use is controlled through zoning. Zoning identifies suitable locations for different types of activities to be established subject to meeting appropriate performance standards, including infrastructure requirements.

20 Rural and Rural Residential zone requirements seek to protect rural productivity and amenity. No connection to the DCC’s water or wastewater infrastructure is required for properties in these zones as self-servicing is considered appropriate in the rural environment. In general, provision of a reticulated water supply can lead to intensification of development and expectations for additional services.

21 The zoning approach ensures the DCC’s investment in infrastructure is concentrated in 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.

22 Variation 2 to the 2GP was initiated by Council on 12 February 2019. Variation 2 is focused on the provision of additional urban development capacity areas (serviced land) to meet Dunedin’s future housing needs. This will require an infrastructure capacity assessment and the identification of future infrastructure works to enable urban development. Any expansion of residential zoned land, which would require the urban water supply boundary to be extended will be considered through this process.

3 Waters Strategy

23 The 3 Waters Strategic Direction Statement 2010-2060 (3 Waters Strategy) identifies seven key strategic priorities, including: “We will meet the water needs of the city for the next 50 years from existing water sources.” The ability of the DCC to achieve this priority was based on forecast demand within the boundaries of the water supply areas defined in the Bylaw. New extraordinary water supplies are unanticipated and, cumulatively, may compromise the DCC’s ability to meet the city’s water needs from existing sources.

Other strategic considerations

24 A holistic, city-wide assessment of where the DCC might expand provision of 3 Waters services is the fairest and most appropriate way to address new requests for servicing, and supports the DCC to deliver services to communities in a cost-effective, sustainable and coordinated manner.

25 Scoping work has begun on a water and sanitary services assessment, the purpose of which is to strategically assess the adequacy of current servicing arrangements across the entire city. The assessment will include consideration of Government proposals emerging from water-related reform initiatives. In addition, extraordinary connections to properties outside the boundary of the water supply area are being considered as part of the review of the Water Bylaw 2011.

Technical considerations

26 Providing an extraordinary water supply to 16 Friends Hill Road would have technical disadvantages.

Availability of appropriate infrastructure to establish a connection

27 Water supply connections for individual properties are typically made to a DCC reticulation main located in road reserve adjacent to the property boundary. As 16 Friends Hill Road is outside of the water supply area, there is no DCC reticulation main adjacent to the property boundary.

28 However, two distribution mains pass the property boundary in Friends Hill Road: a 225mm diameter main and a 300mm diameter main. These distribution mains transport bulk water from the Wingatui treated water reservoir to reticulation networks in Wingatui, and reservoirs and reticulation networks in Mosgiel, Kinmont and Braeside.

29 Distribution mains are designed to transfer bulk water to reservoirs and reticulation systems and, as such, are assets of high strategic importance within the water supply system. Direct connections to distribution mains are not recommended as they place restraints on the DCC’s ability to operate the distribution main effectively.

30 It is acknowledged there are historical connections to the 225mm distribution main in Friends Hill. These connections service properties both inside the water supply area boundary and outside the water supply area boundary. However, it is not good practice to allow direct connections to strategic infrastructure. If the Council decided to provide an extraordinary water supply to 16 Friends Hill Road, the DCC would need to install approximately 165 metres of new reticulation main in Friends Hill Road.

Water pressure

31 Based on a hydraulic modelling simulation, the property at 16 Friends Hill Road can be supplied with water at pressure within the DCC’s target range.

Impact on on-site wastewater treatment and disposal system

32 The land use consent decision certificate dated 16 February 2018 included an advice note stating that the existing septic tank and effluent disposal system at 16 Friends Hill Road may require upgrading to accommodate increased wastewater volumes resulting from the new activity. The wastewater effluent disposal system at 16 Friends Hill Road was subsequently extended in November 2018.

33 Introduction of a reticulated water supply may further increase wastewater volumes, with the potential to have adverse effects on the performance of the property’s on-site wastewater treatment and disposal system (septic tank and effluent disposal field). Any further changes to the wastewater treatment and disposal system at 16 Friends Hill Road would be subject to relevant building and environmental regulations.

34 The DCC does not have a specific policy on the provision of reticulated water supply to properties serviced by private, on-site wastewater systems. The DCC supplies water to some parts of Dunedin, including Outram and Waitati, where it does not provide a wastewater service.

Cumulative impact

35 Providing a new extraordinary water supply connection to a property in a rural or rural residential zone sets a perceived precedent that may increase expectations from other property owners on Dunedin’s rural-urban fringes for water supply. Providing unplanned water supply connections on a case-by-case basis could have a cumulative impact, including on the DCC’s ability to supply the city from existing water sources (in accordance with the objectives of the 3 Waters Strategy) and to supply existing water customers with water pressure within the DCC’s target range.

36 Making servicing decisions on a case-by-case basis is not a responsible approach to managing infrastructure. The fairest and most appropriate way to address new requests for servicing and associated infrastructure requirements is through a holistic, city-wide assessment of servicing arrangements that considers the needs of all Dunedin residents.

Commercial considerations

37 If the Council decided to provide an extraordinary water supply to 16 Friends Hill Road, the New Reticulated Utility Services (Water, Wastewater or Stormwater) Policy 2010 (Attachment C) would require the applicant to contribute part or all of the capital cost of installing new reticulation infrastructure necessary to provide a supply. Providing an extraordinary water supply to 16 Friends Hill Road would enable the DCC to collect revenue through volumetric charging and associated meter fees.

38 However, the cumulative impact of providing unplanned water supply connections on a case-by-case basis could lead to unbudgeted costs for the DCC in the long-term.

OPTIONS

39 The Council must determine whether to approve or decline the application to provide an ‘extraordinary’ water supply to 16 Friends Hill Road.

Option One – Decline the application (Recommended Option)

40 Decline the application for an ‘extraordinary’ water supply connection for 16 Friends Hill Road, as providing an ‘extraordinary’ water supply connection to 16 Friends Hill Road would not be consistent with Dunedin’s strategic objectives, the Water Bylaw 2011 and the 2GP, would have technical disadvantages, and would risk setting a precedent and having a cumulative impact.

41 Continue to consider expansion of servicing through holistic, city-wide processes such as 2GP processes, a water and sanitary services assessment and review of the Water Bylaw 2011.

Advantages

· Supports Dunedin’s strategic objectives.

· Consistent with the intent of the Water Bylaw 2011 and the 2GP.

· Avoids contributing to cumulative impacts on Dunedin’s water supply system.

Disadvantages

· The applicant is unlikely to be satisfied with the decision, as they will continue to be responsible for managing the water supply needs for their business.

· The decision may be considered inconsistent with previous decisions to approve new ‘extraordinary’ water supply connections.

Option Two – Approve the application

42 Approve provision of an extraordinary water supply to 16 Friends Hill Road, subject to:

a) payment (by the applicant) of a capital contribution towards the installation of new reticulation infrastructure in Friends Hill Road, as determined by 3 Waters staff through the New Reticulated Utility Services (Water, Wastewater or Stormwater) Policy 2010;

b) the terms and conditions of the Water Bylaw 2011, including that the supply will be metered and subject to volumetric charging;

c) payment (by the applicant) of other required fees and charges, including a network contribution fee of $5000; and

d) installation (by the applicant) of a reduced pressure zone (RPZ) backflow prevention device.

Advantages

· The applicant will be satisfied with the decision, as they will receive a reticulated water supply for use at their business.

Disadvantages

· Inconsistent with a holistic, city-wide approach to considering servicing needs, which is the fairest and most appropriate way to evaluate servicing issues.

· Inconsistent with Dunedin’s strategic objectives.

· Inconsistent with a cost-effective, sustainable and coordinated approach to infrastructure management.

· Inconsistent with the intent of the Water Bylaw 2011 and the 2GP.

· Sets a perceived precedent that may increase expectations from other property owners on Dunedin’s rural-urban fringes for water supply.

· Requires establishing a new connection to a distribution main, which is not recommended due to technical disadvantages in terms of infrastructure operability.

· Contributes to cumulative impacts on the water supply network and may contribute to unbudgeted costs to the DCC in the long-term.

NEXT STEPS

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

44 Should the Council approve the application (Option Two), the DCC will work with the applicant to arrange for the property to be connected to the DCC water supply system (subject to the conditions mentioned above).

Signatories

Author:

Scott Campbell - Policy Analyst

Paul Freeland - Senior Planner

Authoriser:

Tom Dyer - Group Manager 3 Waters

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	16 Friends Hill Road - water supply area boundary and water supply infrastructure	61
⇩b	16 Friends Hill Road - Second Generation District Plan (2GP) zoning	63
⇩c	New Reticulated Utility Services (Water, Wastewater or Stormwater) Policy 2010	64

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Economic Development Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Environment Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Arts and Culture Strategy	☐	☐	☒
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

Declining the application is consistent with the objectives of the strategic framework above, including the 3 Waters Strategy and Spatial Plan, the Water Bylaw 2011 and the 2GP.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no identified impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

Declining the application supports the long-term sustainability of Dunedin’s water supply system.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

Declining the application has no implications for the Infrastructure Strategy, Annual Plan and 10 year plan.

Financial considerations

Declining the application has no implications for existing budgets.

Significance

The significance of 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

3 Waters and City Development staff contributed to the preparation of this report.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

No conflicts of interest have been identified.

Community Boards

The property at 16 Friends Hill Road is in the Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board area and the application has been discussed with the Community Board Chair.

Council

24 February 2020

Review of Mobile Trading and Temporary Stall Bylaw

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval for a draft Trading in Public Places Bylaw and draft Statement of Proposal (SOP) to be used for consultation using the special consultative procedure.

2 A new bylaw is proposed as a result of reviewing the current Mobile Trading and Temporary Stall Bylaw (MTTS bylaw). New activities proposed in the new bylaw are rental scheme operations such as electric scooter (e-scooter) schemes, commercial use of footpaths, street fundraising, street performing and footpath art.

3 See Attachment A for the proposed Trading in Public Places Bylaw.

4 A statement of proposal outlines the proposed changes. See Attachment B for the proposed statement of proposal.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes that a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing mobile trading, other street trading, and electric scooter share scheme operator issues in Dunedin.

b) Agrees that the proposed draft Trading in Public Places Bylaw is the most appropriate form of bylaw.

c) Agrees that the proposed draft Trading in Public Places Bylaw does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill or Rights Act 1990.

d) Decides whether to include footpath art in the draft bylaw and draft statement of proposal

e) Approves the attached draft Statement of Proposal and draft Trading in Public Places Bylaw for consultation using the special consultative procedure.

BACKGROUND

Purposes of bylaws

5 Bylaws can be made, under the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act), for one of more of the following general purposes: protecting the public from nuisance; protecting, promoting, and maintaining public health and safety; and minimising the potential for offensive behaviour in public places (section 145).

6 Trading in public places is also a specific purpose allowed for under the Act as is protecting infrastructure from damage (section 146).

Bylaw review requirements

7 Under the Act, bylaws must be reviewed within five years of a new bylaw being made and, thereafter, within ten years of the last review.

Mobile Trading and Temporary Stall Bylaw

8 Dunedin City currently has a MTTS bylaw. This bylaw was made under sections 145 and 146 of the Act and has been in place for more than 30 years.

9 It was last reviewed in April 2014 and would be due for review again in 2024, except that the Council approved early review in March 2019.

10 The current bylaw regulates mobile trading licences, temporary stall permits, general conditions for trading, permissions for certain areas, permit and licence renewals, enforcement, offences, penalties and rights of appeal.

11 The purpose of the bylaw acknowledges that:

“trading in public places adds to character, vibrancy and visitor experience amongst other benefits. However, it is important to control trading activities to ensure appropriate standards of health, safety, pedestrian priority and amenity are maintained. The bylaw is to ensure that the public trading activities in Dunedin City make public places more safe, lively and attractive without inhibiting the safety and efficiency of pedestrian movement”.

Rental e-scooter schemes and other issues

12 The city’s population is growing and our public places are getting busier, for example with the advent of electric scooters (e-scooters) and increasing cruise ship visits. The purpose of the proposed draft bylaw is that the health and safety of the public is protected from issues arising from footpath congestion and nuisance behaviour.

March 2019 Council resolution

13 In March 2019, following the launch of an e-scooter rental scheme and a related report on e-scooters in Dunedin, the Council resolved to review the MTTS bylaw early with a view to require permits for commercial e-scooter and other vehicle/transport rental scheme operators.

14 This would allow for conditions and controls around issues such as safety, areas of operation, curfews, speed, maintenance and e-scooter numbers. Some other New Zealand cities have bylaws that require permits for rental scheme operators.

15 The resolution was:

That the Council:

a) Approves commencement of the first stage of the Mobile Trading and Temporary Stall Bylaw review

b) Writes to the Ministry of Transport and the New Zealand Transport Agency urging them to take a national approach to the use of helmets with e-scooters, use of cycleways and speed limits for e-scooters.

c) Notes that staff will continue to monitor e-scooter use and promote rider and pedestrian safety.

Division

The Council voted by division:

For: Crs David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Aaron Hawkins, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Damian Newell, Jim O’Malley, Chris Staynes, Conrad Stedman, Lee Vandervis, Andrew Whiley and Dave Cull (14)

Against: Nil Abstention: Cr Kate Wilson

The division was declared CARRIED by 14 votes to 0, with 1 abstention.

Motion carried (CNL/2019/060)

It was also moved and resolved, Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Aaron Hawkins):

That the Council:

d) Request staff report back urgently on further mechanisms to restrict or control e-scooter use on footpaths in busy pedestrian areas.

Division

The Council voted by division:

For: Crs David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Aaron Hawkins, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Damian Newell, Chris Staynes, Conrad Stedman, Lee Vandervis, Andrew Whiley and Dave Cull (13).

Against: Nil Abstention: Crs Jim O’Malley and Kate Wilson

The division was declared CARRIED by 13 votes to 0, with 2 abstentions.

Motion carried (CNL/2019/061)

July 2019 Council resolution

16 Following the March resolution, work began on the bylaw review and, in July 2019, it was resolved:

That the Council:

a) Agrees that a bylaw was the most appropriate way of addressing mobile trading, other street trading, and electric scooter share scheme operator issues in Dunedin.

b) Notes that a draft Statement of Proposal and draft Bylaw would be developed and presented to the Council prior to December 2019.

Moved (Cr Rachel Elder/Cr Jim O'Malley) Motion carried (CNL/2019/162)

17 The December timeframe was postponed to February 2020 due to the broad scope of the review.

DISCUSSION

18 This section outlines the general approach taken to the bylaw review and sets out key issues for each proposed trade activity.

Other Councils

19 Approaches of other councils to trading activities were considered when developing the draft bylaw. Most cities with e-scooter rental schemes have bylaws that require permits for their operation. A number of Councils also require permits for activities such as footpath art, street fundraising and street performing such as busking.

20 Some Councils include conditions for all trading activities within the bylaw itself, whereas others have shorter bylaws and separate conditions.

Development of draft bylaw

21 Following a review of other councils’ bylaws and internal engagement including in-house legal counsel, the approach has been to develop a short bylaw consisting of a wider definition of trading, requirement for traders to have permit to operate, requirement for operators to comply with permit conditions, penalties for breaches and enforcement. Permit conditions would sit separately from the bylaw.

22 This approach should be more accessible and simpler for the public. It should also provide greater flexibility should conditions need to be amended or updated, for example with the arrival of unforeseen types of trading.

23 The addition of a permissive clause is proposed so that the Council may from time to time resolve to add trading activities or add or restrict certain trading locations. This will allow flexibility as the city’s needs change, without having to review the entire bylaw. This means that any proposed changes to the bylaw would require a report to the Council and would be in accordance with the Council Significance and Engagement Policy.

24 If the current bylaw had included such a clause, it would have enabled the Council to react more quickly when the rental e-scooter share scheme arrived in Dunedin.

25 Any proposed amendments to conditions will be made either through Council resolution or by staff officers depending on the operational (or otherwise) nature of the amendment and in accordance with the DCC Significance and Engagement Policy.

Revoking old bylaw and making new bylaw

26 Since substantial changes are intended, it is proposed that the existing MTTS Bylaw be revoked and a new Trading in Public Places Bylaw made. A new bylaw is required to be reviewed within five years rather than the ten year review period specified for an existing bylaw.

27 The revised bylaw should be flexible enough to adapt to changing technology such as automated Segways, drone delivery and other e-vehicles and recreation devices that may develop in the future.

Mobile traders

General

28 There is increased demand from mobile traders to trade and this is expected to continue as the number of events increases and city growth is forecast. Currently, mobile traders must have permits to operate and must comply with certain conditions under the Mobile Trading and Temporary Stall Bylaw. While mobile traders may trade anywhere they are legally parked, there are also some specific trading sites around the city where they can apply for 12 month permits.

29 The location of new specific trading sites will be worked through in consultation with mobile traders. Any proposed new sites will be the subject of separate community engagement and a separate report to the Council as work is being developed in accordance with the central city and tertiary precinct upgrades as well as the city as a whole. Apart from the Octagon sites (see following paragraph), minimal changes are proposed, at this stage, to mobile trading and stall sites or conditions.

Octagon sites

30 Mobile trading is prohibited in the Octagon, except for two sites on the footpaths of the central carriageway, which are subject to permission. Because of infrastructure and increasing visitor numbers, these sites are no longer practicable or safe. The two sites have been moved to designated road space in the central carriageway of the Octagon – see schedule B, map 1B of the mobile shop trading conditions in Attachment C.

Commerce Act

31 During the last review of this bylaw and with the current review, several retailers have expressed concern about mobile traders trading near their premises and impacting their business. The Commerce Act does not allow local authorities to impose any exclusion areas around similar businesses, for example a food truck may trade near a restaurant.

Rental scheme operators

Permits to operate generally

32 Rental scheme operators, such as e-scooter companies, do not currently require permits or licences to operate and the Council and the public have safety concerns related to some of these operations.

33 It is proposed that the bylaw requires rental scheme operators to hold a permit before they may operate. The bylaw will require compliance with conditions and will allow for penalties should permit conditions be breached.

34 Inclusion within this bylaw would provide greater control over things such as safety, areas of operation, speed, device numbers and maintenance. It would also allow the Council to charge fees to recover any costs associated with the use of footpaths and roads, and enforcement.

35 A code of practice is proposed that would require all rental scheme operators to demonstrate in detail how their scheme would comply. The code of practice is in line with the code of practice Auckland Council has in place. The benefit of a general code of practice for rental scheme operators is that it should cater for any rental scheme that eventuates whether if be e-scooters, rental bike schemes, or whatever the future may hold.

36 The code of practice covers criteria such as safety, risk management, the number, location and placement of rental devices, reporting, device maintenance, customer service, education and safety awareness.

Rental e-scooter operational conditions

37 Specific conditions would then be established for each rental scheme operator. For example, the code of practice would provide the basis of a contract of conditions for an e-scooter company.

38 See Attachment C for rental scheme operator code of practice.

Busking, street performing, street fundraising & commercial use of footpaths

39 It is proposed that the bylaw provides regulation for busking, street performing, street fundraising and the commercial use of footpaths.

40 Although buskers, commercial users of footpath and street fundraisers do require permits or applications to operate, these activities are not currently covered by bylaw legislation.

41 Currently, buskers apply for a busking permit which has conditions attached. Street fundraisers also apply for permission. A booking system is used and conditions are specified in a street fundraising policy. The commercial use of footpaths is covered by a policy which requires permission.

42 Including these activities within a trading in public places bylaw will align requirements for trading activities in Dunedin and provide a regulatory framework should conditions be breached. It will provide greater ability to protect the public from nuisance, ensure public health and safety and prevent damage to footpaths.

43 Only minor administrative changes are proposed to current busking and street fundraising.

44 See Attachment C for conditions for these activities.

Smokefree outdoor dining

45 In line with the DCC Smokefree Dunedin Policy, it is proposed to investigate ways of promoting smokefree licenced outdoor dining in Dunedin.

46 Two options are proposed for public feedback through the draft SOP, either:

a) Providing an incentive for businesses to promote smokefree in their licenced outdoor dining areas by way of a discount to their commercial use of footpath fee i.e. businesses can choose, or

b) Making promotion of smokefree outdoor dining a condition of the commercial use of footpaths permit.

47 Many other local authorities have smokefree outdoor dining in place through policies and/or licence conditions. Generally, this would require businesses to provide smokefree signage and to prohibit ash trays. This approach usually depends on promotion of smokefree rather than active enforcement.

Touting and commercial tour operators

48 With commercial tour operators who promote tours on the street to city visitors, some issues that have been identified are footpath congestion and potential safety issues during cruise ship visits.

49 It is proposed that the bylaw requires those soliciting business in public places to hold a permit and comply with conditions. This would give greater ability to ensure public health and safety and to prevent nuisance to the public.

50 Preliminary engagement with tour operators on the proposal resulted in some feedback. Five of six emails were supportive.

Footpath art – guidance from the Council

51 There is currently no regulation around footpath art and guidance is sought from the Council about whether to include regulating footpath art as an option through this draft bylaw and draft statement of proposal.

52 Footpath art means temporary images or drawings which are put on the pavement either directly or via removable surfaces. Advertising on the footpath is not footpath art and is not covered here. Footpath advertising, public art and event promotion signs is regulated by the Dunedin City District Plan.

53 Including footpath art within this bylaw would require footpath artists to hold a permit and to comply with conditions. This will provide greater ability to ensure public health and safety, prevent nuisance to the public and prevent damage to footpaths.

54 This is currently included as an option for public feedback in the draft bylaw and draft statement of proposal and guidance is sought from the Council about whether to retain this.

Fees

55 Fees for current activities such as mobile shop trading are included in the fees and charges schedule of the Annual Plan.

56 At this stage, there is no intention to charge any fee for street fundraising, street performing, footpath art and touting.

57 Proposals for any new fees, such as for rental scheme operations, would be the subject of separate reports to the Council.

Relationship with other bylaws

58 Other bylaws related to Trading in Public Places are the Traffic and Parking Bylaw and Parks and Reserves Bylaw.

59 The Traffic and Parking Bylaw sets out the requirements for parking and control of vehicular or other traffic on any road in Dunedin City.

60 The Beaches and Reserves Bylaw aims to provide for public safety, and the management and control of reserves and beaches vested in, administered by or under the control of the Council.

Community and stakeholder engagement

61 Key stakeholders have been advised of the review of this bylaw and been asked for initial feedback. They will also be advised of opportunities to provide their views during the formal consultation period via submissions and at hearings. Key stakeholders are mobile traders, commercial users of footpaths, people with disabilities, commercial tour operators, New Zealand Transport Agency, micromobility operators, Southern District Health Board, the Chamber of Commerce and the general public.

62 Engagement of specific proposals has been carried out with commercial tour operators.

OPTIONS

Option One – Approve draft bylaw and statement of proposal (or amended) for consultation (Recommended)

Advantages

· Proposed options provide greater ability to ensure public health and safety and prevent nuisance

· Proposed options provide greater ability to control rental scheme operators in terms of health and safety

· Proposed options provide greater consistency and flexibility for trading activities

· Feedback will inform the options for trading activities in Dunedin.

Disadvantages

· There are no known disadvantages.

Option Two – Do not approve draft bylaw and statement of proposal for consultation

Advantages

· There are no known advantages.

Disadvantages

· Lost opportunities to protect public health and safety, prevent nuisance and control rental scheme operators

· Lost opportunity to provide greater consistency and flexibility for trading activities

· Lost opportunity to gain feedback on control of trading activities.

NEXT STEPS

63 If the Council approves the documents for consultation, the following next steps are proposed:

Action	Timeframe
Consultation – using special consultative procedure	Late April to late May (avoiding the Annual Plan consultation period of mid-March-mid-April)
Hearings	June 2020
Report to the Council with proposed final bylaw	July/August 2020

Signatories

Author:

Anne Gray - Policy Analyst

Authoriser:

Adrian Blair - Group Manager Customer and Regulatory Services

Simon Pickford - General Manager Community Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Attachment A: Draft Trading in Public Places Bylaw	82
⇩b	Attachment B: Draft statement of proposal for Trading in Public Places	89
⇩c	Attachment C: Conditions and code of practice for trading activities	102
⇩d	Attachment D: Mobile Trading and Temporary Stall Bylaw 2008	132

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

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

This decision promotes the social well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

This decision promotes the economic well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

This decision promotes the environmental well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

This decision promotes the cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

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 decision to approve the draft bylaw and draft statement of proposal for consultation contributes to most of the strategic framework as the bylaw purpose is “trading in public places adds to character, vibrancy and visitor experience amongst other benefits. However, it is important to control trading activities to ensure appropriate standards of health, safety, pedestrian priority and amenity are maintained. The bylaw is to ensure that the public trading activities in Dunedin City made public places more safe, lively and attractive without inhibiting the safety and efficiency of pedestrian movement”.

It proposes aligning other documents such as the Commercial use of footpaths policy, street fundraising policy and busking conditions.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known specific impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

There are no specific implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications for these documents.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications with the review of the MTTS bylaw.

Significance

The decision to approve the draft statement of proposal and draft bylaw for consultation is considered low in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

Key stakeholders have been advised of the review of this bylaw and been asked for initial feedback. They will also be advised of opportunities to provide their views i.e. via submissions and at hearings. Key stakeholders are: mobile traders, commercial users of footpaths, people with disabilities, commercial tour operators, New Zealand Transport Agency, Lime, Southern District Health Board and the Chamber of Commerce.

Engagement of specific proposals has been carried out with commercial tour operators and Lime.

Engagement - internal

There has been internal engagement with staff from Transport, City Development, Urban Design, Compliance Solutions, Animal and Parking Services and Environmental Health, Parks and Recreation, Corporate Policy, Governance, Enterprise Dunedin, Solid Waste, Events and Community Development and in-house legal services.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks with this decision.

Conflict of Interest

There is no known conflict of interest with this decision.

Community Boards

There are no specific implications for Community Boards.

Council

24 February 2020

Proposed continuation of the Roading Bylaw

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval for continuing the existing Roading Bylaw without amendment, except for the date of the bylaw.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Determines that continuing the Roading Bylaw is the most appropriate way to regulate the activities of road corridor users and their impact on the roading asset in Dunedin.

b) Determines that the Roading Bylaw is the most appropriate form of bylaw.

c) Determines that there are no inconsistencies with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

d) Notes that the special consultative procedure is not required for the proposed continuation of the Roading Bylaw.

e) Approves the ‘Proposed continuation of the Roading Bylaw – reasons for proposal’ document for community feedback (Attachment B).

BACKGROUND

2 The DCC has had a Roading Bylaw for the last 30 years. The Roading Bylaw 2008 was made under sections 145 and 146 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and section 22AB of the Land Transport Act 1998. The underlying purpose of the Roading Bylaw is to regulate the activities of road corridor users and their impact on the roading asset.

3 Bylaws are made under the LGA and need to be reviewed every ten years. Following a review, a bylaw may be amended, revoked, replaced or continued. If a bylaw is not reviewed, it is automatically revoked two years from the date the review was due. The Roading Bylaw will be automatically revoked on 30 June 2020 unless it is amended, revoked and replaced, or continued without change.

DISCUSSION

4 The Roading Bylaw currently addresses the following roading-related issues and associated problems:

a) Protecting and maintaining public safety and the health and safety of the Council staff;

b) Protecting the environment and enabling the Council to meet the requirements of the Resource Management Act 1991 and ensuring Council compliance with consent conditions for various occupations of road reserve;

c) Protecting the current and future roading network infrastructure and associated investment into this infrastructure;

d) Ensuring fair and equitable treatment of parties occupying or affecting the roading network.

5 A review of the Roading Bylaw has been undertaken and indicated that the Roading Bylaw is generally working well for the areas of operation and no substantive changes are needed. Therefore, it is proposed that the Roading Bylaw is continued without amendment, except for the date of the bylaw (Attachment A).

6 The review identified some opportunities to improve processes such as applications, licenses and fees, and policies related to the Roading Bylaw (eg. road encroachment, fees and charges, skips and containers). If the Roading Bylaw is adopted without amendment following community consultation, policy and process improvements could be developed and implemented.

Determinations

7 Sections 155 and 160 of the LGA require a territorial authority to determine whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem; whether it is the most appropriate form; and whether it is inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

8 A bylaw is considered necessary because non-regulatory methods (e.g. voluntary compliance and education) cannot be relied on entirely to address the roading-related issues. Some activities can affect a variety of aspects such as the safety of the general public and property or the environment. In such situations, it is important for the Council to have a greater ability to regulate and enforce policies and practices. Other regulations and legislation which apply to the roading network do not cover all the matters and situations dealt with in the current Roading Bylaw. The use of roading bylaws is a process used commonly throughout New Zealand. Therefore, the proposed continuation of the bylaw is still considered the most appropriate way to regulate the activities of road corridor users and their impact on the roading asset in Dunedin.

9 The proposed continuation of the Roading Bylaw has been reformatted using the DCC bylaw template and is considered to be in the most appropriate form.

10 The proposed continuation of the Roading Bylaw is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Consultation requirements

11 The Council needs to consult on the proposed continuation of a bylaw under section 160 of the LGA. The special consultative procedure is not required as there is no significant impact on the public due to no substantial changes to the bylaw.

12 The current Roading Bylaw has been in place since 2008, and the community and stakeholders directly affected or impacted by the Roading Bylaw are currently aware of their responsibilities and the regulations around use of the road corridor. There is no significant impact to the continuation of the Roading Bylaw on these users as the status quo would prevail.

13 Feedback would be sought from road corridor users and stakeholders such as the Automobile Association and NZTA on the proposed continuation of the Roading Bylaw, as well as general public notification through the DCC website and print media.

14 Reasons for the proposed continuation of the Bylaw as required under the LGA have been drafted (Attachment B) to support community feedback if the Council approves retaining the Roading Bylaw without amendment.

OPTIONS

Option One – Approve the continuation of the Roading Bylaw without amendment.

Advantages

· The Roading Bylaw is generally working well in addressing roading-related issues and associated problems.

· No change to responsibilities and regulations for road corridor activities.

Disadvantages

· Staff resources are required to undertake this work.

Option Two – Do not approve the continuation of the Roading Bylaw.

Advantages

· No staff resources are required.

Disadvantages

· The Roading Bylaw 2008 will automatically lapse on 30 June 2020.

· The Council will have limited control over activities of road corridor users and their impact on the roading asset.

NEXT STEPS

15 If the Council approves the proposed continuation of the Roading Bylaw without amendment and the attached reasons for proposal, feedback will be sought from users of the road corridor and general public.

16 Feedback will be provided to the Council to consider before formally continuing the Roading Bylaw without amendment.

Signatories

Author:

Michael Tannock - Transport Network Team Leader

Tami Sargeant - Team Leader Regulatory Management - Transport

Authoriser:

Merrin Dougherty - Asset and Commercial Manager, Transport

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Proposed Roading Bylaw 2020	148
⇩b	Proposed continuation of Roading Bylaw - reasons for proposal	152

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This Roading Bylaw promotes the social, economic and environmental well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

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 Roading Bylaw supports the above strategies.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known specific impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

There are no known implications for sustainability.

10 year plan /Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications for these documents.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

Community feedback will be sought from users of the road corridor and general public on the proposed continuation of the Roading Bylaw.

Engagement - internal

Internal engagement has occurred with Transport, Property and in-house legal services.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

If the Roading Bylaw is not retained, the Council will have limited control over activities of road corridor users and their impact on the roading asset.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no impacts for Community Boards.

Council

24 February 2020

Independent Review into Aurora Energy

Department: Executive Leadership Team

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 In October 2019 the Chief Executive commissioned an independent assessment of Aurora’s progress in implementing the recommendations of the 2016 Deloitte review, which had been commissioned after serious network safety concerns were raised. This is the second review of Aurora’s progress in implementing the recommendations of the Deloitte review; the first was carried out in November 2017.

2 Since the 2017 report on the progress to implement the 22 Deloitte recommendations, allegations about deficiencies in the company’s operations have continued to be made in public. The critiques involve several similar themes but include suggestions that the Chair of Aurora and Dunedin City Holdings Limited (DCHL) had not been entirely truthful with the public or Council. Some of the allegations, if based on current facts, would create real concern to Dunedin City Council (DCC) as ultimate owner of the company. For this reason, the Chief Executive decided to seek a follow-up review from a suitably qualified consultant who is independent of Deloitte, Council or any of our Council Controlled Organisations.

3 The current review does not go over the historical circumstances leading to the Deloitte review; these have been thoroughly canvassed both at Council and in public. This review looks at whether the subsequent actions of the new executive and board of Aurora reflects the urgency of the high-profile issues around asset condition, have established a path to compliant reliability, are establishing a culture that delivers a safe environment for workers and the public and are taking the most commercially effective pathway to do so.

4 The purpose of the review, therefore, is to determine whether DCC, as owner of DCHL which in turn owns Aurora, can have confidence the ongoing improvement work is being carried out by Aurora and overseen by DCHL. Aurora is a Council Controlled Trading Organisation. This review aims to give DCC information about whether the action being taken by Council’s executive and by DCHL are exercising sufficient ‘control’ over Aurora, and whether DCC can have confidence that the actions of the executive and board of Aurora are those that will ensure good outcomes and progress in Aurora are being delivered.

5 The review has been carried out by Toby Stevenson of Sapere. Mr Stevenson’s biography is attached as Attachment A. He is a highly respected expert in the electricity industry. He was invited to review the criticisms and investigate whether they had basis and what might need to be done if so. He was given a relatively open brief to expand his investigation, if necessary, as he interviewed the key people who were expressing concerns and making allegations.

6 In very brief summary, Mr Stevenson concludes “In my view Dunedin City Council can have confidence that by taking this step Council has taken control of its companies within the bounds of good governance practice”.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes the findings of the attached review of Aurora, by Toby Stevenson of Sapere.

BACKGROUND

7 In late September 2016, the board of Aurora discussed issues with the Aurora network, and sought a report outlining options for accelerating their pole replacement programme. In mid October 2016 a former employee of Delta/Aurora publicly raised concerns alleging safety risks on the Aurora network. In response to the allegations, DCHL commissioned an independent company, Deloitte, to report on Aurora’s:

· health and safety environment

· whistle-blower policy and related systems

· risk identified by its evolving asset management planning framework.

8 On 27 November 2017 DCHL reported back to Council on progress in following up the Deloitte recommendations. At that time, all bar three of the 22 recommendations were complete and embedded into business as usual, and work on the remaining three were underway.

9 Subsequently, the same former employee has continued to publicly criticise Aurora and its progress in driving the changes the company required in order to put right errors and poor performance of the past. This has been a reasonably consistent pattern. In October 2019, the employee and another anonymous whistleblower again raised a number of concerns publicly. In summary, these were related to lines charges, public messaging by both Aurora and DCHL, the pole replacement programme and Aurora staff morale.

10 At that point, the DCC Chief Executive decided to seek independent advice as to whether any of the allegations held true, or raised current concerns, or indicated issues where DCC and/or DCHL needed to be more directive towards Aurora’s business activities. She selected Toby Stevenson from Sapere as an independent consultant with extensive expertise in the electricity sector, as well as complete independence from Deloitte, from DCC, from DCHL and from Aurora or Delta, to carry out the review.

DISCUSSION

11 Mr Stevenson first conducted a document review, both of all the publicly expressed concerns, and the company documentation and evidence about its work since the Deloitte review. He then spoke with the former employee, the whistleblower, two city councillors who were expressing and repeating some of the concerns, senior Council and DCHL staff, DCHL and Aurora board members and key Aurora staff. His report is attached (Attachment B).

12 In summary, he found no basis for claims that the chairs of DCHL and Aurora made misleading claims to Council. He also concludes that while there are still issues remaining in Aurora and, in particular, risks relating to the network, Aurora is working to reduce critical risks, and the board, executive and staff of Aurora are working as hard as they can to get it right and are up to the task. Furthermore, he found that Aurora is developing the culture required to deliver a safe and reliable network and that this work is progressing. Finally, he concludes that he sees no basis for a claim that DCC is not ‘controlling’ Aurora, and that Dunedin City Council can have confidence that by taking this step Council has taken control of its companies within the bounds of good governance practice.

OPTIONS

13 There are no options as this report is for noting.

NEXT STEPS

14 DCHL and Aurora will continue to keep DCC informed as they continue their progress in developing Aurora the ongoing process to correct the issues that still exist in the company and network.

Signatories

Author:	Sue Bidrose - Chief Executive Officer
Authoriser:	Sue Bidrose - Chief Executive Officer

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Biography for Toby Stevenson	161
⇩b	2019 Review of Aurora by Sapere	162

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This report is a review into the performance of a CCTO which the Local Government Act allows councils to set up and own.

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 review has no impact on Council’s strategic framework.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no specific impacts for tangata whenua in this review.

Sustainability

There are no specific impacts on sustainability in this review.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no impacts.

Financial considerations

There are no financial considerations arising from this review.

Significance

This review has no impact relating to significance.

Engagement – external

Council did not engage externally around this review, although the reviewer engaged with relevant parties.

Engagement - internal

The reviewer engaged with relevant internal parties as he conducted his review.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There is no conflict of interest.

Community Boards

There are no implications for Community Boards.

Council

24 February 2020

Approval to Grant Drainage Easements over Part of Ferntree Recreation Reserve

Department: Parks and Recreation

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report discusses an application by Darlene Lynette Williams (the applicant), owner of 3B Ferntree Drive, Dunedin, for the grant of two drainage easements over part of the Ferntree Recreation Reserve adjoining 3B Ferntree Drive, Dunedin, and recommends the easements be granted. The applicant undertook a subdivision of 3 Ferntree Drive and the easements are to enable the applicant to connect their property (now Lot 2 DP 504816, Record of Title 760420) into existing private drainage pipelines that pass through the recreation reserve to Council’s drainage network located in Ferntree Drive. The easement requirements for the subdivision were discussed in the application for subdivision consent issued for the three-lot subdivision of 3 Ferntree Drive, Dunedin (SUB-2016-103) (see Attachments A and B).

2 The Council is making two decisions. First, a decision in its capacity as the administering body of part of the Ferntree Recreation Reserve which is a reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977 and second, a decision to exercise the Minister of Conservation’s delegation.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That Council:

a) Acting in its capacity as the administering body of part of the Ferntree Recreation Reserve pursuant to the Reserves Act 1977:

i) Grants easements to drain water and sewage over part of the Ferntree Recreation Reserve adjacent to 3B Ferntree Drive, Dunedin, being Lot 4 DP 19517, subject to the conditions outlined in this report.

ii) Approves waiving the annual rental for use of the reserve.

iii) Decides the criteria for exemption from public notification has been met.

b) Acting under delegation from the Minister of Conservation dated 12 June 2013, and pursuant to section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977, consents to the grant of easements to drain water and sewage over part of the Ferntree Recreation Reserve being Lot 4 DP 19517, adjacent to 3B Ferntree Drive, Dunedin, subject to the conditions outlined in this report.

BACKGROUND

3 Ferntree Recreation Reserve (the Reserve) was created during an earlier subdivision of adjoining land in 1985 and vested in the Dunedin City Council on deposit of Deposited Plan 19517. At that time the house located on the adjoining land at 3 Ferntree Drive relied on the use of ‘private’ pipelines through the Reserve land for drainage of its stormwater and sewage to Council mains located in Ferntree Drive.

4 The applicant, Darlene Lynette Williams, received subdivision consent on 26 January 2017 for the three-lot subdivision of 3 Ferntree Drive, Dunedin (SUB-2016-103). At that time, the option presented by the applicant of using the ‘private’ pipelines through the Reserve for providing stormwater and sewage drainage from the proposed Lot 2 were considered by the Council’s planning officers to be appropriate.

5 In 2017 these pipelines were checked by CCTV and found to be 100mm in diameter and of PVC material. They were certified by a qualified plumber as suitable for continued use associated with the proposed new development on Lot 2.

6 The applicant has proceeded to develop Lot 2 for disposal and has an Agreement for Sale. The potential purchaser has raised concerns about the security of using the ‘private’ pipelines through the Reserve, without the benefit of a formal easement.

7 The applicant supports seeking a formal easement as the best way to formally record the presence and use of these pipelines through the Reserve. A new LT Plan 545492 has been drawn to show the proposed easements for the drainage of sewage and water from Lot 2 (see Attachment C).

8 The applicant is to provide her written undertaking to register the easements without undue delay, in line with Council’s approval here.

9 To provide certainty, the applicant is seeking approval of the Council, as the administering body of the reserve and as the Minister of Conservation’s delegate, to the grant of easements to convey water and sewage pursuant to Section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977.

DISCUSSION

Reserves Act 1977

10 Section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977 provides the statutory authority for the grant of easements to convey water and sewage over reserves.

11 Section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977 requires public notification of the intention to grant an easement unless it can be demonstrated that:

a) the reserve is vested in an administering body and is not likely to be materially altered or permanently damaged; and

b) the rights of the public in respect of the reserve are not likely to be permanently affected by the establishment and lawful exercise of the easement.

12 The drainage pipeline through the Reserve is believed to have existed for at least the last 30 years. Its condition has been checked and it is suitable for re-use to provide drainage for water and sewage from Lot 2 DP 504816. The connection to the existing pipeline will not require any earthworks within the Reserve as only the connection to Lot 2 needs to be established. Any damage to the Reserve will be remediated. Public use of the Reserve is minimal and will be unaffected.

13 The effects on the Reserve of any future maintenance or repairs to the pipelines will be temporary and the costs will not be borne by Council.

14 Section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977 empowers the Reserve's administering body (the Council), to grant easements over reserve lands subject to the Resource Management Act and the consent of the Minister of Conservation. The Minister of Conservation has delegated powers of consent to the Council, without limitation under instrument of delegation, dated 12 June 2013.

Reserve Management Plan General Policies

15 The Reserve Management Plan General Policies (General Policies) provides for easements to be granted over reserves as long as they do not prevent the use of the reserve for its primary purpose, which in this instance is Recreation. They also require an assessment of alternative pipe locations and why these cannot be used.

a) The Ferntree Recreation Reserve is a triangular shaped area which is a remnant of a larger area subdivided over time. It was vested in Council as recreation reserve in 1985 following subdivision shown on DP 19517.

b) A planned subdivision of the adjoining property into three (3) new lots has been approved (SUB-2016-103) and during that process it was established that the middle lot (Lot 2 DP 504816) has previously had stormwater and sewage drainage through the Reserve via a private drain. The developer has investigated the condition and suitability of the private drain for use by Lot 2 and has satisfied themselves it is suitable.

c) No new pipeline installation is required; however, this proposal seeks for formalise both the location of the pipeline and the rights to use and to repair and maintain the pipeline. Re-use of the existing pipeline is seen as the most practical option available to the applicant to connect to the Council main stormwater and sewage lines in Ferntree Drive.

16 The General Policies recommend a maximum term equivalent to the useful life of the asset and state that easements in perpetuity “will not be granted”. The Council could grant the easement for the life expectancy of the pipes (c.60 years); however, given the pre-existence of the private pipeline in the reserve, use in perpetuity is recommended.

17 The General Policies provide for the owners of privately-owned underground facilities to pay a fee as a yearly rental to recognise the private benefit gained from use of a public reserve. If the facilities are owned by Council, the General Policies provide for the yearly rental to be waived on the recommendation of Council. To date, Council has not charged annual fees for other private connections to Council infrastructure.

Easement terms and conditions

18 The proposed key elements of the easement would include:

Statute Granted pursuant to section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977, on Council’s standard terms and conditions.

SCHEDULE OF PROPOSED EASEMENTS

PURPOSE

SHOWN

SERVIENT TENEMENT

(Burdened Land)

DOMINANT TENEMENT

(Benefitted Land)

Right to Drain Water

Right to Drain Sewage

A on CSD Plan-LT545492

Lot 4 DP 19517

Lot 2 LT 504816

(RT 760240)

Shown on LT Plan 545492 (Attachment B):

Term In perpetuity

Rental Nil

19 The terms and conditions of the easement are to be finalised by the Council’s solicitors.

Merits of proposed easements

20 It is considered that connection to the existing underground drainage pipeline through the Reserve will not cause any impact to the use of the recreation reserve; however, it would enable correct asset recording and formalise drainage services for Lot 2 DP 504816 as required by the resource consent for that subdivision.

21 The applicant is meeting the costs of connection to the pipeline, survey, and preparing, executing and registering the easement documentation. On-going maintenance of these private sewer and stormwater pipes within the Reserve will be the responsibility of the easement owners.

Council as the Minister of Conservation’s delegate

22 The Council, as the Minister of Conservation’s delegate, has a supervisory role in ensuring that the decision on whether or not to grant the easements has been arrived at in compliance with the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977. In particular, the Council, as the Minister’s delegate, needs to be satisfied that the status of the land has been correctly identified, that there is statutory power to grant the easements, that the necessary statutory processes have been followed, that the classification has been appropriately considered and the decision is a reasonable one.

OPTIONS (Acting as administering body of FERNTREE RECREATION RESERVE)

23 The Council, in its capacity as administering body of the Reserve, has the responsibility for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and to consider the merits of the request for a grant of easements.

Option One – Recommended Option

24 Council grant the easements, acting as the administering body for the Ferntree Recreation Reserve, grants easements for the drainage of water and sewage across part of the Reserve on the terms and conditions outlined in this report.

Advantages

· The proposed easements are unlikely to significantly impact the use of the Reserve

· Satisfies resource consent condition

· Facilitates asset management processes by formally identifying the pipeline.

Disadvantages

· There are no material disadvantages, particularly given that the pipeline already exists. The presence of the underground pipeline is not seen as being material given the shape, size and location of the Reserve.

Option Two – Status Quo

25 Council do not grant the easements to drain water and sewage across parts of the Ferntree Recreation Reserve.

Advantages

· No material advantages.

Disadvantages

· Does not satisfy the conditions contemplated in the approved resource consent

· Does not facilitate asset management.

OPTIONS (ACTING UNDER DELEGATION FROM THE MINISTER OF CONSERVATION)

Option One – Recommended Option (Grant the easement)

26 As Council exercising its delegated legislative power, consent to the grant of easements to drain water and sewage across part of the Ferntree Recreation Reserve upon the terms and conditions outlined in this report.

Advantages

· Confirms that the Council, as administering body of the reserve, has fully considered the merits of the proposed easements and has fully complied with the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977.

Disadvantages

· There are no material disadvantages.

Option Two – Status Quo (Do not grant the easement)

27 Do not consent to the grant of easements to drain water and sewage across part of the Ferntree Recreation Reserve.

Advantages

· No material advantages.

Disadvantages

· To take this option, the Council (as the Minister’s delegate) would need to determine the reasons that the Reserves Act 1977 has not been fully complied with and/or the decision to grant the easements is not a reasonable one.

NEXT STEPS

28 If Council consents to granting the easement to drain water and drain sewage across part of the Ferntree Recreation Reserve and is satisfied the legislative requirements are met, the connection to the existing pipelines will be arranged, and the survey of these pipelines completed to enable the easement documents to be prepared for execution.

29 The applicant will be requested to provide a written confirmation that these easements will be registered without undue delay in line with Council’s approval.

30 All costs associated with the survey and legal costs associated with the formalisation of the easements will be met by the applicant.

Signatories

Author:	Owen Graham - Senior Leasing and Land Advisor
Authoriser:	Robert West - Group Manager Parks and Recreation

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Aerial Photo showing approx. location of proposed drainage easement	217
⇩b	Services Plan for Lot 2 DP 504816 showing location of 'private' pipelines through Lot 4 DP	218
⇩c	Draft CSD Plan LT 545492	219

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision relates to utilising existing local infrastructure for a new dwelling and 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	☐	☐	☒

Ensuring the ability for access to existing public infrastructure assets is considered good asset management practice.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts to tangata whenua.

Sustainability

An appropriately developed and maintained sewage and stormwater system contributes to social, economic and environmental sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications for the LTP or the Annual Plan. There are no implications for current levels of service or performance measures.

The proposal is consistent with the Infrastructure Strategy.

Financial considerations

The applicant is meeting the costs of connection to the pipeline, survey, and preparing, executing and registering the easement documentation. On-going maintenance of the private sewer and stormwater pipes will be the responsibility of the easement owners.

Significance

The decision has been assessed as being of low significance being an administrative function.

Engagement – external

The original resource consent was not publicly notified. No other external consultation has been undertaken.

Engagement - internal

Water and Waste Services were consulted as part of the resource consent process. Parks and Recreation Services have provided advice on the easement requirements. The Council’s Chief Legal Officer has provided advice in relation to the Reserves Act requirements.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are considered to be no material risks associated with this decision.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no known implications for Community Boards.

Council

24 February 2020

Update on Growth Planning Work

Department: City Development

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 Dunedin has experienced high population growth over recent years and there is an identified shortage in housing capacity over the medium to long term, together with a current shortage of affordable and public housing. The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an overview and update of the growth planning work being undertaken in response to these issues.

2 The report discusses:

a) The background to the growth planning work, and what was addressed through the development of the 2GP;

b) Results from housing preferences research that has been completed;

c) Results from preliminary community engagement on Variation 2, including feedback from key stakeholder engagement and a housing survey;

d) Input from the 3 Waters and Transportation groups into the Growth work;

e) Population projections work; and

f) A summary of the some of the options being assessed for inclusion in Variation 2.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes the update provided in the report and the attached results from the housing preferences study (The Housing We’d Choose).

BACKGROUND

Spatial Plan

3 The DCC ‘Spatial Plan’ (Dunedin Towards 2050: A Spatial Plan for Dunedin) was adopted in September 2012 as one of the early parts of the DCC’s strategic framework. It sets a strategic direction for Dunedin’s growth and development for 30+ years to guide land-use planning and infrastructure servicing. It includes a broad set of principles, strategic directions, policies, and actions and visually illustrates how the city may develop in the future.

4 It has a vision of Dunedin as ‘one of the world’s great small cities’ and contains an urban form objective to achieve a ‘compact city with resilient townships’, by urban consolidation and the prioritisation of the use of existing capacity in urban areas prior to expanding urban limits.

Second Generation District Plan (2GP)

5 Following on from the Spatial Plan, DCC started a full review of its district plan (the 2GP) with community consultation on: issues and options (November 2012 - March 2013) and preferred options (August 2013 - September 2013 and June 2014 - September 2014 for natural hazard provisions).

6 The 2GP was notified in September 2015 followed by submissions and further submissions. Public hearings were held from May 2016 to December 2017, where the 2GP Hearings Panel heard from DCC planners (reporting officers), submitters, lawyers and technical experts. Decisions on the 2GP were notified in November 2018.

7 Only two appeals to the Environment Court were received on the 2GP’s strategic approach to growth and identification of future residential land: one appeal (Wyber) sought changes to a number of strategic policies governing this process, and one (Parata) was concerned with appropriate infrastructure provision for residential areas. The Parata appeal has been resolved; work is underway in association with the Variation 2 work to resolve the Wyber appeal.

8 The 2GP includes a set of Strategic Directions that underpin the Plan.

9 The six strategic directions are:

a) Dunedin is environmentally sustainable and resilient

b) Dunedin is economically and socially prosperous

c) Dunedin is a memorable city with a distinctive built and natural character

d) Dunedin is a city that gives effect to the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, protects Kai Tahu values, culture and traditions, and enables Kai Tahu to express kaitiakitaka

e) Dunedin has quality housing choice and adequate urban land supply

f) Dunedin has affordable and efficient public infrastructure

10 The approach to ensuring these strategic directions were achieved through the development of the 2GP, including provision of adequate urban land supply, involved an assessment of existing development capacity and comparing this to projected housing demand based on population projections. Providing for additional capacity was done using criteria for rezoning that required consideration of options against the plan’s objectives under the other strategic directions.

11 A significant amount of additional urban development capacity was included in the plan to meet the projected medium-term needs at the time of the Plan’s development. This additional capacity included:

a) 101 hectares of undeveloped land rezoned to residential from other zoning under the previous (operative) plan

b) 132 hectares of Residential Transition Overlay Zone which requires infrastructure upgrades to be completed before the land is ‘released’

c) New and extensions to medium density zones (Inner City Residential and General Residential 2 zones). New areas included areas at Opoho, Belleknowes, Andersons Bay, Waverley and parts of Caversham.

d) Greater provisions for supported living facilities (rest homes, retirement villages and student hostels)

e) New provisions for family flats (these were not provided for previously)

f) Reductions in on-site car parking requirements, with previous requirements often constraining medium density housing options.

12 The methodology used in the 2GP’s initial development has since been replaced by a methodology prescribed by the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UDC), including more detailed modelling of development feasibility. This new methodology has since been used as part of regular monitoring.

NPS-UDC

13 The NPS-UDC came into force on 1 December 2016. This was just over a year after the 2GP was notified, so it was not considered as part of plan development but was considered as part of deliberations and decisions on submissions.

14 At the time of plan development (between 2012 and mid 2015), the estimated population growth rate of Dunedin was low. The 2013 census results showed that earlier projections had been very optimistic, and consequently, projections made in 2016 were for a lower growth rate.

15 This situation was the same at the time of the release of the NPS-UDC (1 December 2016), when Dunedin was initially classified as a low-growth urban area. On 1 May 2017, MBIE confirmed that Dunedin had been re-classified as a medium-growth urban area, based on new population projections released by Statistics NZ. These showed a projected growth of 6.7% between 2013 and 2023, above the 5% required to be defined as a medium-growth urban area under the NPS-UDC.

16 The National Policy Statement for Urban Development Capacity (NPS-UDC) Policy PA1 requires that local authorities ensure that there is sufficient housing development capacity over the short, medium and long term. Capacity must be economically feasible and either serviced or funding for infrastructure identified in the Long Term Plan or Infrastructure Strategy (depending on the timeframe within which it is required). Capacity for the short and medium term must be zoned in the District Plan, and capacity for the long term must be identified in a relevant plan or strategy (for example, a Future Development Strategy).

17 A housing capacity assessment completed in January 2019^{^[1]} identified a shortfall in capacity (number of houses) over the medium and long terms, as shown in the table below.

	2021	2023	2028	2048
Demand	1,570	2,130	3,420	7,260
Capacity	2,180	2,180	2,400	2,570
Sufficiency	+610	+50	-1,020	-4,690

18 The housing capacity assessment is currently being updated to reflect:

· Updated population projections (currently being finalised)

· New housing preferences research (discussed below)

· Changes in housing market conditions (particularly land values and house prices)

· Development capacity that has been taken up

· Changes expected in a new NPS on Urban Development (see below)

· Improvements to the residential capacity model

19 The NPS-UDC requires that the DCC consider all practicable options to enable necessary housing capacity. This could include applying residential zoning to new areas (greenfield development), amending rules or other provisions to increase the density of housing enabled in existing urban zoned land, or using statutory tools and methods available under other legislation.

20 The NPS-UDC is expected to be replaced by a new NPS on Urban Development by mid-2020. While this document will have a greater focus on the functioning of urban areas, it is expected that the general requirements to provide sufficient feasible capacity over the short, medium and long term will not change. There will be changes to how capacity and demand need to be calculated and City Development is already working on incorporating expected changes into the relevant assessments.

21 Under the NPS-UDC, councils are required to monitor a range of indicators and use these to understand how well housing and business land markets are functioning, how planning may affect this, and when additional development capacity might be needed. The DCC has been giving effect to these requirements through the release of quarterly monitoring reports. However, these are currently in the process of being replaced with a new webpage with interactive graphs. This webpage will be kept up-to-date and make the underlying data freely available to the public. The graphs can be interrogated by adjusting the axes (to show more/less data), hovering over the content (to show exact values), and by using drop-down options. This will provide a quick and efficient way to present data on consented and constructed homes (by type and location), house prices, and rental costs.

Variation 2

22 Variation 2 (housing capacity) was initiated by Council on 12 February 2019. Its focus is on immediate and timely changes required to address the shortfall in medium-term housing capacity. The project is being led by City Development, but involves close collaboration with infrastructure teams, particularly 3 Waters, to ensure all options are assessed in terms of impacts on the 3 Waters infrastructure network (and identification of necessary infrastructure upgrade projects in the 10 year plan). All options are also being evaluated in terms of potential impacts on the transportation network.

23 The project also involves:

a) An update to population projections. This is almost complete and will inform future assessments of housing demand, as well as being incorporated into the key assumptions for the next 10 year plan.

b) Commissioned research on housing preferences which has been completed and shows a stronger demand for attached housing types (such as duplexes, townhouses, and apartments) than previous surveys. This will inform work on Variation 2.

c) Community engagement on future housing (an informal survey)

d) On-going discussions with key stakeholders including developers, surveyors, Housing New Zealand, ORC, Aukaha, Ministry of Education, Utility companies.

e) Ongoing monitoring as required by the NPS-UDC.

24 The work being done for Variation 2 will also eventually feed into a review of the Dunedin Spatial Plan and longer term growth planning (including identifying development capacity for the next 30 years), which may require future plan changes or variations to implement. However, Variation 2 will provide much of the groundwork for these changes.

25 The Variation 2 timetable is currently as follows:

1 March	Receive modelling results from 3 Waters consultants on possible zone changes (greenfield areas and new medium density areas)
March - April	Further engagement with other key stakeholders and statutory bodies (eg. ORC)
March - April	Engagement with greenfield landowners
April	Technical assessment / evidence collation as required
ongoing - June	s32 assessment and drafting of changes
August	Public notification
February / March 2021	Hearing

Housing Action Plan

26 The Mayor’s Taskforce for Housing ‘Housing Action Plan’ was released in April 2019 and includes a number of recommended actions. City Development’s involvement in achieving these recommendations is outlined below:

· 2.1 That Dunedin City Council completes a Housing Needs Assessment

City Development will work the Corporate Policy and Events and Community Development teams on this assessment. It will combine population and demographic projections with an analysis of 2018 Census data. It will also be informed by the housing capacity assessments, housing preferences survey (‘The Housing We’d Choose’), data on existing housing types and locations, and the regular monitoring of housing market and development trends.

· 2.3 That Council adopt a policy and develops tools to facilitate use of publicly owned land for affordable housing

The ability to use Council land for residential use depends on its zoning, as well as whether this is considered the most appropriate use for that land. City Development will assess any Council land identified for possible rezoning through Variation 2.

· 2.4 That Council adopt a policy and develops tools to ensure new developments help meet Dunedin’s social and affordable housing needs.

A number of changes have already been included in the 2GP to better provide for social housing in the form of supported living facilities, as well as providing for housing of family members at home in family flats. Variation 2 will continue to engage with social housing providers to see what further support can be included in the plan, including by way of considering more places to provide for medium density housing.

· 3.4 That Central Government, Council and other parties explore 10 year funding and procurement plans.

The urban growth and housing work will also feed into and coordinate with the development contributions policy review.

DISCUSSION

Summary of progress

External Engagement and research

27 A housing preferences study (The Housing We’d Choose) has recently been completed to estimate current and future levels of demand for different dwelling typologies and locations. Research First were commissioned and surveyed a representative sample of 770 respondents between 9 September and 23 October 2019, with quotas set to ensure age, gender and geographic coverage.

28 The survey had two key components. The first was a series of questions about the features that respondents would like if looking for a new home and the level of importance they placed on these features as part of the purchasing decision.

29 The second component was based on the trade-offs that households would make when faced with budget constraints. Based on their financial situation (household income, debts and assets), respondents were presented with a series of dwelling options that matched their affordability profile, living arrangements and housing preferences. At each stage the respondent was shown four options and they were asked to select their preference. At the end of four rounds, respondents were shown their four selected options in order to make a final selection.

30 Survey results were presented by household type and age so that they could be combined with population and demographic trends to calculate future housing preferences. Results of the housing preferences study show that there is still a predisposition towards standalone housing, particularly in younger couples and households with children. However, over 40% of older people living alone or with a partner would choose to live in an attached dwelling, such as a duplex, townhouse, or apartment. As these are the demographic groups that are projected to increase, it has a significant impact on future housing demand.

31 A comparison of preferred housing with Dunedin’s existing housing stock shows that even before considering future growth and demographic trends, there are too many standalone houses and too few attached homes than needed to align with the preferences of Dunedin’s current population.

	One person households (aged <65)	One person households (aged 65+)	Couple without children (aged <65)	Couple without children (aged 65+)	Parent(s) or caregiver(s) with children	Other multi-person household
Apartment	12%	7%	3%	7%	1%	4%
Terraced house	18%	14%	3%	11%	8%	8%
Duplex (aka semi-detached)	14%	21%	10%	25%	8%	12%
*Total attached*	*44%*	*43%*	*16%*	*43%*	*17%*	*24%*
Standalone house: 500m² section	54%	48%	54%	39%	52%	61%
Standalone house: 2,000m² (0.5 acre) section	0%	10%	23%	11%	28%	12%
Standalone house: 2ha (5 acre) section	2%	0%	7%	7%	3%	2%
*Total standalone*	*56%*	*57%*	*84%*	*57%*	*83%*	*76%*

Table 1: Preferred housing typology by household type

32 The housing preferences survey results also provide an indication of where people would like to live. Generally, existing suburban areas were seen as desirable. Interest in inner-city living came mainly from single person households.

	One person households (aged <65)	One person households (aged 65+)	Couple without children (aged <65)	Couple without children (aged 65+)	Parent(s) or caregiver(s) with children	Other multi-person household
Inner city	12%	12%	1%	4%	4%	6%
Inner suburbs	42%	33%	31%	25%	33%	43%
South Dunedin	2%	5%	1%	14%	2%	2%
Outer suburbs	36%	26%	34%	18%	37%	31%
Mosgiel	6%	21%	21%	29%	11%	12%
Outer Area	2%	2%	10%	11%	13%	6%

Table 2: Preferred housing location by household type

33 The housing preferences report is attached as Attachment A.

Housing survey

34 The Planning for Housing Survey, conducted by the Dunedin City Council in October 2019, provided the wider community with an opportunity to share their views on the provision of housing capacity in Dunedin.

35 Results from 252 individual respondents demonstrated general alignment with the strategic approach to providing housing capacity in the 2GP, especially regarding the focus on intensification in the existing urban areas of Dunedin, while also offering greenfield development opportunities to provide people a range of housing choices.

36 There was support for new greenfield zoning in a number of areas, including West Harbour, Concord, Brighton, Blackhead, Fairfield and Green Island. Areas that were more contentious included the Mosgiel/Taieri area, Halfway Bush and the Otago Peninsula, with both support and opposition received for these areas. Greenfield rezoning was generally opposed in areas of productive rural land, natural hazards, green space and natural landscapes.

37 Widespread support was received for enabling intensification within the existing urban area, with 90% of participants supporting some form of intensification.

38 Participants also provided suggestions on various ways housing development could be better enabled, and its effects managed. Planning-related suggestions included enabling infill development on larger suburban sections and changes to the density performance standards to enable various types of two-unit development across the city, such as duplexes. Other suggestions covered a wide range of topics relevant to a number of different Council departments. These included better integration of infrastructure planning with urban planning, improved consenting processes, and financial incentives to encourage preferred types of housing development.

Developers and surveyors

39 A number of meetings have been held with developers and surveyors, to identify constraints within the planning provisions. Common messages received are: the desire for more flexibility in suburban areas (number of units per site) particularly if used for social housing, removing restrictions on use of family flats, allow more flexibility in minimum site size, additional use of non-notification criteria, and allowing alternative wastewater options (e.g. on-site retention or treatment). The development community understands the need and demand for smaller units and wants the flexibility to be able to provide this.

3 Waters and Transportation Input

40 The project team is working closely with 3 Waters to ensure their models reflect the current 2GP zoning and the impact of potential changes to zoning and the cost of necessary upgrades is understood.

41 The 3 Waters Group has engaged an external consultant to:

· update the water, wastewater and stormwater models to accurately reflect the 2GP zoning and provisions

· identify existing constraints within the system

· assess the cost of upgrades to the networks to alleviate existing constraints and provide for additional growth anticipated over the next 30 years, for inclusion in the Long Term Plan 2021

· advise on the appropriateness of using alternative infrastructure systems to allow growth where networks are constrained, for example wastewater holding tanks, individual on-site sewerage systems and community sewerage systems.

42 The modelling work, including the broad costs of necessary upgrade work and advice on alternative infrastructure, is expected to be completed by 1 March.

43 The team is also engaging with the Transportation Group to assess the impact of potential rezoning on the roading network. Initial feedback is expected in mid February.

Population projections

44 As discussed above, the current population projections used by the DCC (included in the 2018 LTP) underestimated the amount of growth in Dunedin and are now out-of-date. To address this, a cross-council working group was established to commission new projections. After receiving tenders on the original request for proposals, it was decided to split the process into two projects. The first involved updating the existing projections based on new data, such as growth over the last five years and updated projections released by Statistics NZ. This work is almost complete. The new projections indicate higher population growth over the short-medium term compared to previous projections and will be incorporated into the next 10 year plan, as well as current growth planning projects.

45 The second project is commissioning the development of new projections, which will be developed from scratch. This will involve a more thorough and detailed assessment than the review of existing projections. The new set of projections will be used to inform a review of the Spatial Plan and development of a Future Development Strategy (FDS), as required by the NPS-UDC, that will be developed after Variation 2, as well as other council projects. It is noted, however, that the terminology and requirements around Spatial Plans are also in flux, with these being one of the key areas being explored through the RMA reforms (report to Council 31 January 2020).

2GP options being assessed as part of appeals and variation 2

46 All options to be included in a plan change or plan variation (a change to a plan that is not yet operative) must be assessed in accordance with section 32 of the RMA. This requires an evaluation of whether an option (compared to other options) is the most appropriate way of achieving the plan’s objectives, including by assessing its effectiveness and efficiency in achieving the objective and assessing the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects anticipated from the option.

47 At present, the potential options that are being assessed as part of the development of Variation 2 are listed below. Several of these options were consulted on in the Housing Survey discussed above. Some of the options are specifically focused on ways of providing capacity where there are existing 3 Waters network constraints that will take some time to resolve. Note that these options may or may not be included (and may be location specific) depending on the outcome of that evaluation.

· Additional zoning of greenfield land (locations not yet confirmed)

· Additional medium density zoning (locations not yet confirmed)

· Enabling two units per site in GR1 zones (e.g. duplexes and/or removal of restrictions of family flats)

· Increasing flexibility of development, for example allowing averaging of minimum sites sizes

· Reducing the minimum site size in GR1 zones

· Additional non-notification rules

· A new ‘greenfield zone’ method, which allows flexibility of site sizes

· Identification of future long term development areas through a Future Urban Zone overlay

· Providing for the use of alternative water and wastewater solutions

· Zoning areas suitable for general residential density but which currently cannot be connected to the Council’s wastewater network due to network constraints, initially to a large lot or lower density zone but with an overlay anticipating future zoning to a general residential 1 (GR1) zone. These areas would initially be required to be self-serviced as well as still have internal wastewater reticulation installed in anticipation of future connection to the network. There would also be rules managing the location of buildings on a site to ensure future subdivision and development could occur once the network constraints are resolved.

· Greater policy support for density breaches where this is for public housing or affordable housing

OPTIONS

48 As this is an update report, options have not been provided.

NEXT STEPS

49 It is proposed to have a workshop in late March with councillors on:

· Infrastructure issues in relation to providing for new housing capacity

· Further detail on the City Development Growth – Housing work outlined above

· Options being considered under Variation 2

Signatories

Author:

Anna Johnson - City Development Manager

Authoriser:

Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Housing Framework Predictions The Housing We'd Choose	236
⇩b	Planning for Housing Survey Questions	272

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This report promotes the social well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

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 Growth work is being undertaken in line with the strategic framework established by the indicated strategies.

Māori Impact Statement

Engagement with iwi on resource management issues and the district plan is primarily undertaken through Aukaha. Aukaha has been updated on Variation 2 and will continue to be engaged as options are narrowed. One of their key interests is having input into the assessment of options against the objectives that sit under Strategic Direction 2.5 (Dunedin is a City that Gives Effect to the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, Protects Kāi Tahu Values, Culture and Traditions, and Enables Kāi Tahu to Express Kaitiakitaka).

Sustainability

How Dunedin provides for growth has important implications for all aspects of sustainability. The concept of sustainability is strongly represented in the strategic directions of the 2GP, which are guiding this work.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The growth work will feed into the LTP.

Financial considerations

There are no financial considerations.

Significance

This update report is considered of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

External engagement has been summarised above (para 23 and 27 - 39).

Engagement - internal

3 Waters have contributed to this update report.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Issues associated with growth and housing are of interest to all areas of the city, including Community Board areas.

Council

24 February 2020

Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill submission

Department: Corporate Policy and Community and Planning

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval of a draft submission (Attachment A) supporting the Society of Local Government Managers (SOLGM) submission (Attachment B) on the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill (Attachment C) to Parliament’s Environment Committee.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the draft Dunedin City Council submission to the New Zealand Parliament on the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill.

BACKGROUND

2 New Zealand’s infrastructure funding and financing system presents a range of constraints on central and local governments ability to respond to urban pressures. The Bill establishes an alternative funding and financing model which aims to address these challenges and support the provision of infrastructure for housing and urban development.

3 Submissions close on 5 March 2020.

DISCUSSION

4 The DCC supports central government exploring new ways of funding and financing local infrastructure costs, as the availability of serviced land to provide affordable and high-quality housing is one of Dunedin’s most pressing issues.

5 The DCC supports the Society of Local Government Managers (SOLGM) submission on the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill, as SOLGMs submission aligns with the DCC view on the Bill.

OPTIONS

Option One (Recommended Option) – Submit on the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill

6 Approve the DCC submission on the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill, with any suggested amendments, to the Environment Committee.

Advantages

· Enables the DCC to support SOLGM at a national level on the debate on establishing new funding and financing models to support the provision of infrastructure for housing and urban development.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Do not submit

7 Do not submit a DCC submission on the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

· Missed opportunity to support SOLGM on the proposed alternative infrastructure funding and financing model.

NEXT STEPS

8 If the Council approves the draft submission it will be sent to the New Zealand Parliament for consideration by 5 March 2020.

Signatories

Author:

Hoani Yates - Policy Advisor

Suzie Ballantyne - Senior Policy Analyst

Authoriser:

Gavin Logie - Financial Controller

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	DCC Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill draft submission	281
⇩b	SOLGM Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill draft submission	282
⇩c	Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill	291

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	☒	☐	☐

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

There are no known specific impacts for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

This submission relates to an alternative funding and financing model for infrastructure. There are no impacts for the current Annual Plan or 10 year plan.

Financial considerations

There are no financial impacts of this report.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement. Consideration was given to the content of the draft submission from SOLGM.

Engagement - internal

Staff from Corporate Policy, Finance, City Development and 3 Waters have contributed to the development of this 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 direct implications for Community Boards.

Council

24 February 2020

DCC submission: Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill

Department: 3 Waters

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks the Council’s approval of a submission to Parliament’s Health Committee on Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill (the Bill). The draft submission is attached to this report as Attachment A. The Bill is attached as Attachment B. The closing date for submissions is 4 March 2020.

2 The Bill would implement the Government’s decision to create a new regulatory body to oversee, administer and enforce the regulatory system for drinking water. The Bill would establish Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator (Taumata Arowai) as a new Crown agent and provide for its objectives, functions, and operating principles. It would also provide for its governance arrangements, including the establishment of a board and a Māori Advisory Group.

3 In addition to its regulatory functions with respect to drinking water, Taumata Arowai would perform some national-level oversight and advisory functions relating to the environmental performance, management and regulation of wastewater and stormwater networks.

4 The establishment of Taumata Arowai is part of a broader package of reforms to the regulatory system for drinking water, wastewater and stormwater, which the Government is progressing through the Three Waters Review.

5 The draft DCC submission expresses the DCC’s support for the establishment of Taumata Arowai and comments on its proposed status, governance arrangements, and objectives, functions and operating principles.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the draft DCC submission to Parliament’s Health Committee on Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill at Attachment A.

BACKGROUND

Current regulatory arrangements for three waters services

6 At present, complex regulatory arrangements apply to the three waters (drinking water, wastewater and stormwater). Regulatory responsibilities are shared across central government agencies, District Health Boards and regional councils.

7 Provisions for regulating drinking water quality are set out in Part 2A of the Health Act 1956, and regulatory responsibilities lie with the Ministry of Health and District Health Boards. In Dunedin, regulatory functions relating to drinking water quality are performed by a Drinking Water Assessor (DWA), who is an employee of the Southern District Health Board. In addition, the National Environmental Standards for Sources of Human Drinking Water are overseen by the Ministry of the Environment and implemented by regional councils.

8 The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and regulations made under the RMA provide the regulatory approach to managing the environmental effects of wastewater and stormwater. Responsibilities lie with the Ministry for the Environment and regional councils. Regional councils are the primary regulators for the environmental effects of three waters activities.

Havelock North Drinking Water Inquiry, Three Waters Review and Essential Freshwater Programme

9 In 2016, contamination of Havelock North’s drinking water supply resulted in an outbreak of campylobacter. Up to 5500 people were ill as a result of the outbreak and up to four people are thought to have died from associated causes.

10 The Government Inquiry into the Havelock North water supply contamination recommended a suite of changes to prevent or minimise similar incidents in the future, including the establishment of a dedicated drinking water regulator with the following fundamental characteristics:

a) independence and freedom from conflicts of interest;

b) a sufficient level or resourcing; and

c) proper expertise in relation to all relevant disciplines necessary for the delivery of safe drinking water.

11 In 2017, the Government established the Three Waters Review, a cross-agency initiative led by the Minister of Local Government (Hon Nanaia Mahuta). Initial work on the Three Waters Review ran in parallel to the Havelock North Inquiry.

12 In July 2019, the Minister of Local Government submitted a paper to Cabinet titled ‘A Plan for Three Waters Reform’. This Cabinet paper outlined the Minister’s plan to roll out detailed policy proposals for three waters reforms in a series of three Cabinet papers:

a) ‘Strengthening the Regulation of Drinking Water, Wastewater and Stormwater’ (considered by Cabinet and released to the public in July 2019);

b) ‘Institutional Arrangements for a Drinking Water Regulator’ (considered by Cabinet in September 2019 and released to the public in October 2019); and

c) ‘Three waters service delivery and funding arrangements’ (not released as at 19 February 2020).

13 In 2018, the Government established the Essential Freshwater Programme. The aim of the Programme, which is led by the Minister for the Environment (Hon David Parker) and the Minister of Agriculture (Hon Damien O’Connor), is to deliver a noticeable improvement in freshwater quality in New Zealand within five years.

14 The Essential Freshwater Programme is separate to the Three Waters Review, but there are significant overlaps between the two work programmes, particularly in relation to environmental regulation of stormwater and wastewater, and protection of drinking water sources.

Three Waters Review: policy decisions in 2019

15 In the July 2019, Cabinet agreed to establish, through legislation, a new, dedicated regulator to oversee the entire regulatory system for drinking water. The new regulator would take over the regulatory functions for drinking water currently performed by the Ministry of Health and District Health Boards.

16 Cabinet also agreed system-wide reforms to the regulation of drinking water and source water, and targeted reforms to improve the regulation and performance of wastewater and stormwater networks. According to the July 2019 Cabinet paper, these reforms would be implemented through a separate Water Services Bill. The Government expects to introduce a Water Services Bill in 2020, and has indicated that it will repeal Part 2A (Drinking water) of the Health Act 1956 and provide for the new regulator’s detailed functions and powers.

17 The September 2019 Three Waters Review Cabinet paper provided more detail on the proposed new regulator. It set out the Government’s proposal to establish the new drinking water regulator as a new, standalone Crown agent with a regional presence. The regulator would be established through separate legislation that would identify statutory objectives for the new regulator. The Government estimated building the new regulator may take up to 18 months.

18 The Government has not yet announced detailed policy proposals relating to three waters service delivery arrangements and economic regulation of three waters services.

Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill

19 On 11 December 2019, the Minister of Local Government (Hon Nanaia Mahuta) introduced Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill to Parliament. On 17 December 2019, the Bill received its first reading in Parliament and was referred to the Health Committee for review.

20 The Bill would establish Taumata Arowai as a new Crown agent, a specific type of Crown entity for the purposes of the Crown Entities Act 2004. By definition, ‘Crown agents’ must give effect to government policy when directed by the responsible Minister. Other Crown agents include the Civil Aviation Authority, District Health Boards, the Environmental Protection Authority, the New Zealand Transport Agency and WorkSafe New Zealand. Other types of Crown entities include ‘Autonomous Crown entities’ (which must have regard to government policy when directed by the responsible Minister) and ‘Independent Crown entities’ (which are generally independent of government policy).

21 Taumata Arowai would be governed by a Board of five to seven members appointed by the responsible Minister. According to section 12 of the Bill, the responsible Minister must appoint members to the board who, collectively, have knowledge and experience of, and capability in:

a) the compliance, monitoring, and enforcement activities of regulatory agencies;

b) public health, particularly in relation to the objectives and functions of Taumata Arowai;

c) the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi) and its principles;

d) perspectives of Māori and tikanga Māori; and

e) performance monitoring and governance.

22 The Bill would also establish a Māori Advisory Group of five to seven members appointed by the responsible Minister. As per section 17 of the Bill, the Māori Advisory Group’s role would be to advise the board and Taumata Arowai on Māori interests and knowledge, as they relate to the objectives, functions, and operating principles of Taumata Arowai and the collective duties of the board.

23 According to section 10 of the Bill, Taumata Arowai’s objectives would be to:

a) protect and promote drinking water safety and public health outcomes;

b) effectively administer the drinking water regulatory system;

c) build and maintain capability among drinking water suppliers and across the wider industry;

d) give effect to Te Mana o te Wai, to the extent that Te Mana o te Wai applies to the functions and duties of Taumata Arowai;

e) provide oversight of and advice on, the regulation, management, and environmental performance of wastewater and stormwater networks; and

f) promote public understanding of the environmental performance of wastewater and stormwater networks.

24 The Bill also sets out functions (at section 11) and operating principles (at section 18) for Taumata Arowai.

25 Under the proposed new regulatory regime, regional councils would continue to regulate the environmental effects of activities such as water takes and wastewater and stormwater discharges under the RMA and relevant regulations. Taumata Arowai would not take over the responsibility for regulating environmental effects. Regional councils would also retain roles related to implementation of the National Environmental Standards for Sources of Human Drinking Water.

DISCUSSION

26 If Parliament passes the Bill in its current form, Taumata Arowai would replace the Ministry of Health and DWA as the regulator of the DCC’s activities as a drinking water supplier. The Otago Regional Council would continue to regulate the environmental effects of DCC’s three waters activities, including the taking of water (for water supply purposes), and discharges of wastewater and stormwater to the environment.

27 The draft DCC submission expresses the DCC’s support for the establishment of Taumata Arowai and comments on its proposed status, governance arrangements, and objectives, functions and operating principles. The draft DCC submission makes three specific recommendations to the Health Committee, which are outlined below.

28 Firstly, the draft submission recommends the Bill be amended to provide for Taumata Arowai’s statutory independence in respect of its regulatory compliance monitoring and enforcement functions. Independence, impartiality and freedom from the risk (perceived or otherwise) of interference is common for regulators and would ensure Taumata Arowai can be seen as credible by the regulated community and the wider New Zealand public.

29 Secondly, the draft submission recommends the Bill be amended to define how the government will provide policy direction to Taumata Arowai in respect of its broader leadership, capability-building and guidance/oversight functions. Clarity on the method, frequency and level of policy direction the government will provide to Taumata Arowai would give both the regulator and regulated parties a more certain basis for long-term strategic and financial planning, and could help to mitigate the risk of changes to Taumata Arowai’s policy direction leading to sunk costs or escalated costs that are passed on to customers.

30 Thirdly, the draft submission recommends the Health Committee considers the benefits of establishing, through the Bill, an additional advisory group made up of technical experts in the operation and management of drinking water supplies, stormwater networks and wastewater networks, and public health and environmental matters related to three waters activities. Establishment of a technical advisory group could enhance Taumata Arowai’s governance arrangements by providing the board with access to expert advice and by providing a formal mechanism for representation of the water sector and the regulated community.

OPTIONS

Option One (Recommended Option) – submit on Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill

31 Approve, with any suggested amendments, the draft submission to the Health Committee on the Bill.

Advantages

· Allows the DCC to highlight issues for the Health Committee’s consideration as it reviews the Bill.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – do not submit on Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill

32 Do not approve the draft submission to the Health Committee.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

· Missed opportunity to highlight issues for the Health Committee’s consideration as it reviews the Bill.

NEXT STEPS

33 If the Council approves the draft submission it will be sent to the Health Committee by the deadline (4 March 2020).

Signatories

Author:

Scott Campbell - Policy Analyst

Authoriser:

Tom Dyer - Group Manager 3 Waters

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Draft DCC submission: Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill	380
⇩b	Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill	384

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision promotes the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

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 prepared in line with the goals and objectives of Dunedin’s strategic framework.

Māori Impact Statement

Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill contains provisions that address the Treaty of Waitangi / te Tiriti o Waitangi and its principles, including provisions that would establish a Māori Advisory Group to advise the board and Taumata Arowai on Māori knowledge and perspectives.

Sustainability

There are no potential long-term implications for sustainability that are directly related to a DCC submission on Taumata Arowai-the Waters Services Regulator Bill.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications on these plans or strategies that are directly related to a DCC submission on Taumata Arowai-the Waters Services Regulator Bill.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications directly related to a DCC submission on Taumata Arowai-the Waters Services Regulator Bill.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement on the development of the draft DCC submission attached to this report.

Engagement - internal

3 Waters staff were involved in the preparation of this report.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks directly related to a DCC submission on Taumata Arowai-the Waters Services Regulator Bill.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest directly related to a DCC submission on Taumata Arowai-the Waters Services Regulator Bill.

Community Boards

Community Boards may be interested in Taumata Arowai-the Water Services Regulator Bill and the draft DCC submission.

Council

24 February 2020

DCC submission on Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity

Department: City Development

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval of the Dunedin City Council (DCC) submission (Attachment A) to the Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (Attachment B). Submissions are due to the Ministry for the Environment by 14 March 2020.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the DCC submission to the Ministry for the Environment on the Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity at Attachment A.

BACKGROUND

2 The Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (dNPS-IB) was developed initially by the stakeholder-led Biodiversity Collaborative Group (BCG), with a final draft completed by the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) and Department of Conservation (DOC) in consultation with Treaty partners, some councils and the BCG.

3 A copy of the dNPS-IB is available from:

https://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/biodiversity/draft-national-policy-statement-indigenous-biodiversity.

4 The dNPS-IB has been developed to better enable the maintenance of indigenous biodiversity on private land under the Resource Management Act (RMA). An NPS-IB is an essential instrument to protect remaining indigenous biodiversity, particularly areas supporting threatened ecosystems and species, where it is not protected through the Conservation or Reserves Acts.

5 Completion of an NPS-IB was identified as one of the system-shift actions in the 2019 Draft New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy - Te Koiroa o te Koiora.

6 A lack of national direction on the RMA’s biodiversity provisions has led to variable interpretations and applications of the RMA, uncertainty, and repeat litigations and costs across the country. Consequently, biodiversity has been undervalued in decision-making and loss of indigenous biodiversity and taonga has been ongoing, particularly on private and leasehold land, despite efforts to protect and restore them.

DISCUSSION

7 The dNPS-IB provides clarity and consistency around identifying significant natural areas (SNAs) and how the effects management hierarchy is to be applied. Key aspects of the dNPS-IB for Territorial Authorities include:

i. Increased engagement with iwi/Māori, recognition of te ao Māori and protection of taonga.

ii. Completion of a comprehensive schedule of SNAs (called ASBVs in 2GP) by 2026.

iii. Existing activities (e.g. grazing) in SNAs can continue provided the ecological integrity of those sites is not degraded.

iv. Plantation forestry is exempt from SNA provisions but must provide for the maintenance of threatened and at-risk flora and fauna.

8 The draft submission outlines the DCC’s roles and responsibilities in relation to safeguarding biodiversity and ecosystem health, and provides general comments and recommendations on the dNPS-IB.

9 The DCC is overall in support of the dNPS-IB. The recommendations in the submission aim to clarify and improve aspects of the document and its implementation. They also seek to minimise any undue burden on rate payers and landowners, while recognising that most councils in New Zealand, including Dunedin City, have work to do in this area to provide better protection for indigenous biodiversity.

10 The DCC is one of 15-20 local and regional authorities nationally providing feedback to MfE and DOC by ‘road testing’ the dNPS-IB. Road testing is an early stage impact assessment for councils of the implementation of the dNPS-IB. Road testing involves assessing the current status of DCC against the dNPS-IB provisions and gauging the likely impact for DCC of giving effect to the dNPS-IB. Road testing is being led by City Development and will be completed by 14 March 2020.

OPTIONS

Option One – Recommended Option – Submit on the Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity

11 Approve the DCC submission on the Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity, with any suggested amendments, to the Ministry for the Environment.

Advantages

· Enables the DCC to influence at a national level the policies, and implementation of, a key strategic document for councils for managing indigenous biodiversity.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Status Quo – Do not submit on the Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

· Missed opportunity for the DCC to influence at a national level the policies, and implementation of, a key strategic document for councils for managing indigenous biodiversity.

NEXT STEPS

12 If the Council approves the draft submission, a final submission will be sent to MfE ahead of 14 March 2020.

Signatories

Author:

Richard Ewans - Biodiversity Advisor

Authoriser:

Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	DCC submission on the Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity	408

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	☒	☐	☐

This submission is in line with the goals and objectives within the strategic framework above.

Māori Impact Statement

Staff are not aware of any impacts for tangata whenua from the DCC making this submission. It is noted that the bill provides for increased engagement with iwi/Māori, recognition of te ao Māori and protection of taonga.

Sustainability

The submission supports a sustainable approach to managing the natural environment.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no known implications from making this submission.

Financial considerations

There are no known implications from making this submission.

Significance

This decision has been assessed under the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy as

being of low significance.

Engagement – external

Staff from City Development engaged with staff from MfE and DOC on the Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity.

Engagement - internal

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

submission.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks associated with this decision.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity is likely to be of interest to the Community Boards.

Council

24 February 2020

DCC submission on Accelerating renewable energy and energy efficiency discussion paper

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval of the attached submission (Attachment A) to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment on the Discussion Document: Accelerating renewable energy and energy efficiency.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the Dunedin City Council submission to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment on the Discussion Document: Accelerating renewable energy and energy efficiency.

BACKGROUND

2 The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) has sought feedback on the Discussion Document: Accelerating renewable energy and energy efficiency that outlines the potential options, benefits and barriers for the uptake of increased renewable energy and energy efficiency in New Zealand.

3 Accelerating future development of renewable energy and energy efficiency supports the Government’s goal to “transform New Zealand into a more productive, sustainable and inclusive economy”. The proposals outlined in the discussion document are seen as part of a package of measures that support the Government’s goal to reach 100 per cent renewable electricity by 2035 and to transition to a carbon neutral economy by 2050.

4 While New Zealand generates a high proportion of electricity from hydro and geothermal sources, MBIE notes significant challenges in transitioning away from process heat and transport systems fuelled by fossil fuels. The discussion document presents options and proposals that aim to increase the future supply of renewable energy and energy efficiency with the aims of achieving energy security, affordability and environmental sustainability.

5 Submissions close on 28 February 2020.

DISCUSSION

6 The draft DCC submission supports MBIE’s proposals for greater transparency in the reporting of emissions, enhanced national guidance on local renewable energy projects, creating incentives for renewable energy uptake and support for commercialisation for renewable energy development.

7 The draft submission notes Dunedin’s goal to become a net carbon zero city by 2030, and the alignment of MBIE’s proposals as they relate to the Dunedin Energy Plan. A commitment to energy efficiency and investigating innovative renewable energy solutions are also key aspects of Te Ao Tūroa – The Natural World, Dunedin’s Environmental Strategy.

OPTIONS

Option One – Recommended Option – Submit on the Discussion Document: Accelerating renewable energy and energy efficiency

8 Approve the DCC submission on Accelerating renewable energy and energy efficiency, with any suggested amendments, to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.

Advantages

· Enables the DCC to contribute at a national level on the development of renewable energy and energy efficiency.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Status Quo – Do not submit on the Discussion Document: Accelerating renewable energy and energy efficiency

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

· Missed opportunity for the DCC to engage on the development of renewable energy and energy efficiency uptake in New Zealand.

NEXT STEPS

9 If the Council approves the draft submission, a final submission will be sent to MBIE ahead of 28 February 2020.

Signatories

Author:

Sean Jacobs - Senior Policy Analyst

Authoriser:

Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Draft submission on accelerating renewable energy and energy efficiency	419
⇩b	Discussion Document: Accelerating renewable energy and energy efficiency	421

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	☒	☐	☐

The submission has been developed in line with the goals and objectives of the strategic framework, in particular, the objectives of the Environment Strategy, the Economic Development Strategy and the Dunedin Energy Plan.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no particular impacts for Maori presented by this submission. The DCC works in partnership with mana whenua across a range of projects and activities and provides opportunities for all Māori to participate and contribute to decision-making processes.

Sustainability

Sustainability is an underlying principle of the DCC’s strategic framework. While there are no specific impacts for sustainability resulting from a decision to approve the draft DCC submission, the proposals note the significant potential for reduced emissions through enhanced renewable energy uptake and incentivisation.

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 financial impacts of the 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 has been no external engagement.

Engagement - internal

Staff from Corporate Policy, Resource Consents, City Development and Transport Strategy have contributed to the development of this submission.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The draft submission has no specific implications for Community Boards.

Council

24 February 2020

DCC submission on the Justice Committee Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections

Department: Civic and Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks consideration and approval of a draft submission (Attachment A) to the Justice Committee on the Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the draft Dunedin City Council submission, with or without amendments, to the Justice Committee on its Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections.

b) Authorises the Mayor to finalise the submission.

BACKGROUND

2 Following each local election, Government holds an inquiry into any matters arising from that election to investigate whether there are changes that need to be made to the law or administrative processes following the election. Any person or agency can make a submission.

3 The Justice Committee is now seeking feedback on its inquiry into the 2019 local elections.

4 The terms of reference for the inquiry include consulting stakeholders and the wider public about the recommendations in the Justice Committee’s report on the 2016 local elections, with particular reference to:

· The recommendation that the Government consider giving responsibility for running all aspects of local elections to the Electoral Commission;

· The recommendation that the Government consider encouraging or requiring the same voting system to be used in all local elections; and

· Feedback on the committee’s recommendations on foreign interference.

5 For information purposes, a copy of Chapter 2 of the Justice Committee’s report on the inquiry into the 2016 local elections is at Attachment B. Note is made that Chapter 1 discusses the 2017 General Election.

6 The closing date for submissions is 29 February 2020.

DISCUSSION

7 The DCC has an opportunity to input into the inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections by making a submission to the Justice Committee.

8 The DCC has also contributed to the development of the submission made by the Society of Local Government Managers (SOLGM).

9 The draft submission in Attachment A is focused primarily on the DCC’s position on the recommendations given in the Justice Committee’s report on the Inquiry into the 2017 General Election and 2016 Local Elections.

OPTIONS

Option One (Recommended Option) – Submit to the Justice Committee on its Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections

10 Approve the DCC submission to the Justice Committee on its Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections.

Advantages

· Enables the DCC to contribute to the conversation with Government about future responsibilities and roles in relation to running local elections.

· Represents an opportunity to engage with Government about the process which enables democratic local decision making, in alignment with the purpose of local government as outlined in the Local Government Act.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Do not submit to the Justice Committee on its Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections

11 Do not approve the DCC submission to the Justice Committee on its Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

· The DCC misses an opportunity to bring local perspective to the conversation with Government about future responsibilities and roles in relation to running local elections.

NEXT STEPS

12 If the Council approves the draft submission, with or without amendments, it will be sent to the Justice Committee for consideration by 29 February 2020.

Signatories

Author:

Sharon Bodeker - Team Leader Civic

Sophie Lascarides - Policy Analyst

Authoriser:

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Attachment A - Draft DCC submission to 2019 local elections inquiry	559
⇩b	Attachment B - Chapter 2, Inquiry into 2016 elections	561

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This proposal directly relates to 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 submission has been developed in line with the broader goals and objectives of the strategic framework.

Māori Impact Statement

The submission has no direct known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

The submission has no direct known impacts for sustainability

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 submission.

Financial considerations

There are no financial impacts on the DCC 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.

Engagement - internal

Staff from Civic and Corporate Policy have contributed to the development of this submission.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The submission may be of interest to Community Boards.

Council

24 February 2020

Triennial Agreement 2020-22

Department: Civic

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 Under Section 15 of the Local Government Act 2002, the six local authorities within the Otago region must enter into an agreement containing protocols for communication and coordination. Triennial Agreements enable local authorities to give better effect to their core purposes under the Local Government Act by adopting a regional approach where appropriate to deliver seamless local government service.

2 The new Triennial Agreement for the period 2020-2022 is required to be adopted by all the local authorities within Otago, in identical format no later than 1 March 2020. The Otago Local Authorities’ Triennial Agreement 2020-22 (the Triennial Agreement) is being presented to all the other local authorities in the region for their consideration and adoption.

3 This purpose of this report is to present the Triennial Agreement, at Attachment A, for adoption by Council, including terms of reference for the Otago Mayoral Forum, which is included as an Appendix to the Triennial Agreement.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the Otago Local Authorities’ Triennial Agreement 2020-22.

b) Authorises the Mayor to sign the Otago Local Authorities’ Triennial Agreement 2020-22 on behalf of the Dunedin City Council.

BACKGROUND

4 The Local Government Act 2002 (section 15) requires all local authorities within a region to enter into a triennial agreement not later than 1 March after each triennial election.

5 The purpose of a triennial agreement is to ensure that appropriate levels of communication, co-ordination and collaboration are maintained between local authorities within the region. Agreements must include:

· protocols for communication and co-ordination between councils,

· the process by which councils will comply with section 16 of the Act, which applies to significant new activities proposed by regional councils, and

· processes and protocols through which all councils can participate in identifying, delivering and funding facilities and services of significance to more than one district.

6 Triennial agreements may also include commitments to establish joint governance arrangements to give better effect to the matters set out in paragraph 5 above.

7 A triennial agreement may be varied by agreement between all the local authorities within a region and remains in force until local authorities ratify a new agreement.

DISCUSSION

8 The Triennial Agreement at Attachment A was adopted by the Otago Mayoral Forum on Friday 29 November 2019.

9 The Triennial Agreement includes terms of reference for the Otago Mayoral Forum and mandates it as the primary mechanism for implementing the Triennial Agreement in Otago (the Triennial Agreement, paragraph 9).

10 The Triennial Agreement (paragraph 11) also mandates the Chief Executives Forum.

11 While a non-statutory body, the Otago Mayoral Forum is the primary mechanism to give effect to the Triennial Agreement. The Otago Mayoral Forum’s terms of reference forms part of the Triennial Agreement and makes explicit that decisions of the Otago Mayoral Forum are not binding on member councils.

12 The Otago Mayoral Forum is supported by the Otago Chief Executives Forum, which is also mandated by the Triennial Agreement.

OPTIONS

13 As this report is for administrative purposes, no options are presented.

NEXT STEPS

14 The Triennial Agreement for the local authorities of the Otago region is signed by the Mayor on behalf of Council.

Signatories

Author:	Sharon Bodeker - Team Leader Civic
Authoriser:	Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Otago Triennial Agreement 2020-22	579

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	☐	☐	☒

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for Tangata Whenua.

Sustainability

There are no known implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications identified.

Financial considerations

There are no known financial implications.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

The Triennial Agreement has been discussed by the Mayors/Chair and Chief Executives of the Otago region.

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

There are no implications for Community Boards.

[1] See https://www.dunedin.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/704962/Housing-capacity-assessment-for-Dunedin-City.pdf

Mayor	Mayor Aaron Hawkins
Deputy Mayor	Cr Christine Garey
Members	Cr Sophie Barker	Cr David Benson-Pope
	Cr Rachel Elder	Cr Doug Hall
	Cr Carmen Houlahan	Cr Marie Laufiso
	Cr Mike Lord	Cr Jim O'Malley
	Cr Jules Radich	Cr Chris Staynes
	Cr Lee Vandervis	Cr Steve Walker
	Cr Andrew Whiley

	Title	Page
⇨a	Minutes of Ordinary Council meeting held on 10 December 2019 (Under Separate Cover 1)

	Title	Page
⇩a	Councillor Register of Intererst	7
⇩b	ELT Register of Interest	16